marie bláhová declare that the burgher of Most Arnold named Episcopus bequeathed bywill (in testamento ... legavisse) five fertones of silver per year to the monastery in Osek.63 It is significant that the deed is preserved in the cartulary of the Osek monastery.64 On 22 February 1288, Merklin, bugher of Loket, registered for the salvation of his soul, with the knowledge of his children, two measures of rye per year to the Franciscans in Cheb after his death. The seal of the city of Cheb was affixed to the deed, the publisher of which apparently did not have his own seal. Merklin’s children and the iudex and townspeople of Cheb are listed as witnesses.65 On5 March 1288, iudexandiurati in Kostelec (near Jihlava) testified that the Cheb mintmaster Albert swore before them that the Moravian mintmasterDětmar in Prague bequeathed the forest near Jihlava to the Želiv monastery. The seal of the city was to be attached to the deed; it is however preserved only in a copy.66 Another document comes again from Most. In 1288, iudex and the whole Most community issued a deed declaring that the burgher Henry Buchel bequeathed 17 solidi per year to the monastery of the Crusader with the Red Star of Most. The seal of the city of Most, now lost, was attached to the document.67 All the mentioned documents confirm bequests to church institutions and were apparently issued in for their benefit. They include only parts of the testators’ property. Only one of the listed documents was issued by the burgher himself; the others were issued by the town’s representatives. It is clear from the wording of some documents that even the burghers at this time arranged their property in case of death for the most part orally before the court or at least in front of witnesses. It can be assumed that already in the 13th century there was a prohibition, or at least a custom, not to bequeath immovable property to clergy, although this provision is explicitly stated only in the privilege of John of Luxembourg for 315 63 Emler 1882, no. 544, p. 1264; Sviták – Krmíčková–Krejčíková 2006, no. 180 (ex. B), p. 233. 64 So-calledCodex Damascus, Státní oblastní archiv v Litoměřicích (State regional archive in Litoměřice), fondŘC Osek, sign. MIII.3, fol. 31r–31v (B). Cf. Wallnerová 2020, no. 17, pp. 76–77. 65 Emler 1882, no. 1433, p. 618. 66 Emler 1882, no. 1436, pp. 618–619. 67 Havel 2011, p. 1288, no. 403.
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MjYyNDk=