THE ROLE OF UDRISTE NASTUREL IN MATEI BASARAB'S CHANCELLERY

Abstract

Udriste Nasturel was the second chancellor during all of Matei Basarab's ruling. The testimonial evidence reveals that Udriste was a man with extraordinary culture and due to him, the role of the second chancellor gets a new, more powerful meaning. He was Matei Basarab's intimate and most trusted adviser.. Udriste Nasturel had important contributions in both cultural and political activities of that epoch.

Headnote

Abstract. Udriste Nasturel was the second chancellor during all of Matei Basarab's ruling. The testimonial evidence reveals that Udriste was a man with extraordinary culture and due to him, the role of the second chancellor gets a new, more powerful meaning. He was Matei Basarab's intimate and most trusted adviser.. Udriste Nasturel had important contributions in both cultural and political activities of that epoch.

Keywords: Matei Basarab, Wallachia, 17th century, Udriste Nasturel, chancellor.

The main activity of Wallachia's Chancellery was the issuance of official acts according to the decisions made by the ruler (Rom. "domn", Lat. dominus) and the country's council. Its members were the ones who wrote and validated those documents. In historiography, some aspects related to Chancellery's activity have been subject to several studies.1 These aspects included Chancellery's internal organization, personnel tuition (chancellors and clerks) as well as development of diplomatic wording and standardized types of documents. Due to lack of clear information, the moment when this service was set-up or the manner in which it was created remained unclear so far.

Chancellery's internal organization developed in time. Relevant data regarding this evolution needs to be searched within the Chancellery's official acts, as they state the members and their hierarchy. The Chancellery was led by a boyar called Chancellor ("logofat"). He is firstly stated in a document of December 27, 1391.2 He was referred to as the last boyar in the country's council, which shows he did not occupy an important role at that time. But his importance increased rapidly in timeand starting in the second half of the 15th century, he occupied the third position among the most important boyars of the country's council.

As the Chancellery developed and the number of personnel increased, the Chancellor started to be named as the First Chancellor, as to be identified separately from their subordinates. Afterwards, he was to be called the Great Chancellor, a title which appears for the first time in a document from April 3rd, 14783 and this shall remain the dedicated term for most important member of the Chancellery. He checked the work of the scribes and in some special cases himself wrote the text of the documents. Being the guardian of the ruler's sealing, the Great Chancellor was the one who validated the official acts. Among the duties of this dignitary was also the shipment of the voivode's correspondence.

The development of social activities resulted in an increase oin documents needing to be prepared, resulting in a reorganization of Chancellery staff responsibilities. Therefore, in the middle of 15th century appears a second chancellor and then, at the end of the same century a third chancellor. This boyars came up next in the Chancellery's hierarchy. The second Chancellor, was called Small Chancellor in documents dated at the end of 15th - beginning of 16th century.4 He is attested for the first time in a document dated June 5th, 1494.5 Even in this period he was an important boyar, being mentioned as a member of the country's council. During the 17th century there were attested two persons occupying the position of a Second Chancellor - this was also the case of Matei Basarab's Chancellery. The two persons attested with this position in were Sima Pausescu and Udriste Nasturel.

Due to Udriste, the role of second chancellor gets a new, more powerful meaning. One of the most remarkable figures of his times, Udriste Nasturel had an important contribution in both cultural and political activities of that epoch. The testimonial evidence reveals that Udriste was a man with extraordinary culture. He is known in history as being the second chancellor during all Matei Basarab's entire ruling. He was Matei's most trusted person, an intimate adviser and his ideas were always taken into account.

Udriste descends from an old family of boyars whose origins goes back from the time of Vlad Calugarul (1482-1496)6. His father was Radu Nasturel (postelnic and then first chancellor) and his mother was a "noble lady Despina" as P.V. Nasturel characterizes her. They had four children, three boys: Serban, Cazan and Udriste, and a girl, Elina, who will become Matei Basarab's wife. Testimonial evidence regarding Udriste's personal life are not sufficient to establish the main key moments of his existence. He was born in the second half of the 16th century, the exact year of his birth being unknown. P.V. Nasturel proposes the year 1597 but then, after taking into consideration the date of Radu Nasturel's marriage and the years of birth and death of Elina (the youngest child of Nasturel family), he thinks that the year of Udriste's birth was 15967.

The year of his death is also unknown. P.V. Nasturel thinks that the last testimony of Udriste being alive is the inscription from Namaiesti cross, dated May 5th, 1659. The genealogist thinks that after that year, Udriste will retire to his Fierasti mansion, interrupting his contacts with public activities and died not too long after that8. Dan Horia Mazilu, in his book "Udriste Nasturel", contradicts the above theory, expressing the belief that the crosses inscription was not made by Udriste. Mazilu thinks that the cross was made after Udriste's death as a sign of gratitude9. Nicolae Stoicescu had another perspective. He thought that he was spatar10 under Mihnea the Third, between December 9th, 1658 and June 12th 1659 when he was the victim of a revenge11. From my point of view this theory cannot be accepted. As documents reveal, Udriste was second chancellor for about 25 years, even when the ruler of the Wallachia was Matei Basarab, his brother-in-law. He never desired to have any other role in the country's council. To conclude, the year of his death still remains unknown. Nevertheless, what can be stated with certainty at this moment is that the last chancellery document written by "Udriste, second chancellor from Fierasti" is dated July 12th, 1658.

Regarding other aspects of his personal life, documents reveal that Udriste had two marriages. His first marriage with Maria, daughter of the Vintila Corbeanu, was over during Alexandru Vlad Cuconul's ruling (1623-1627)12. From this marriage Udriste had a son, Mateias, who was adopted after his mother died, by Lady Elina (Udriste's sister and Matei Basarab's wife). But the life of Mateias was short, and in 1645, when he was only seventeen, his death is attested.

Udriste was then married with Despa and together they had two children: Radu, sometimes called Radu-Toma or Toma-Radu, and Marica or Maricuta, the future wife of Alexandru Ghiormescul13. About his son Radu we know that he had an extraordinary career, reaching the highest rank in the country's council14. Radu Nasturel was one of the most educated persons of his time, being the one that founded the school of Câmpulung.

As far as Udriste's cultural formation is concerned, we know that he was familiar with the Slavonic and Latin, having certain knowledge of Greek and maybe Hebrew15. There aren't any clues to indicate how his intellectual training was carried out. Most probably, his father, Radu Nasturel, provided him and his brothers an exceptional education based on foreign teachers. In sustaining this theory we can remind Udriste's testimony according to which he mentioned learning Latin after being a teenager, at home, with a teacher16. We can assume that when he started his career, at approximately 30 years old, his main intellectual formation was completed.

He is first attested as a scribe in Alexandru Cuconul's chancellery when he writes the documents from February 8th and March 14th, 1625.17 In the same year he wrote in Latin on the East wall of St George church in Hârlau, using for the first time the name Uriil. We don't know for sure what the purpose of his trip to Moldova was, but we can assume that he followed Radu Mihnea for his new ruling. He won't stay there for long, being back in Walahia before June 21st, 1627. On that date he writes a document for Pana from Pietrari who sells a part of his land from Voinesti to grand chancellor Hrizea. He signs that document "Udriste Nasturel from Fierasti"18.

During Alexandru Ilias's second ruling we find Udriste writing official chancellery documents (on February 14th, 1628, March 6th and 11th 162819). It is interesting that during the same year we find him attested as the second chancellor in an official act dated July 6th, 1628 among other witness boyars20. Before that date, there is another private act in which Udriste signs as the second chancellor (dated June 30th, 1628)21. We cannot find any other document from that year written by Udriste, but in 1629 we can find him attested again as second chancellor on May 14th22.

All the above mentioned documents can make us think of a fast promotion of the young chancellery scribe, which is not impossible at all if we think about his intellectual capacity. But we need to have certain precaution in arguing this because, in the same period, he writes a Slavonic document given by Alexandru Ilias in which he states his rank "it has been written by the faithful scribe, Udriste Nasturel ... May, 23rd day, the year of God 1629"23.

Some historians like Petre V. Nasturel and Dan Horia Mazilu thought that the document from February 13th, 1632 corresponds to the moment when Udriste became second chancellor. I think it is necessary to reconsider this date and think as a possibility that Udriste became second chancellor since 1628 when he is attested with this position in both a personal document and in an official act. Still, the lack of a consistent certification in this position should raise a question mark and make us see with certain doubts his fast promotion in the chancellery. Again, that will not be so absurd if we think that we are dealing with a man of remarkable culture, far exceeding those he worked with.

Since the beginning of his activity in the chancellery, Udriste wrote documents in Slavonic, and this custom will be maintained during all his activity. The language he uses is a precious one, introducing many new terms in the chancellery documents, terms which were not used before in such acts. I consider it important to be emphasized that all documents written by Udriste as a chancellery clerk, before and after Matei Basarab ruling, are in Slavonic. This comes in contradiction with what other historians considered. For example, Dan Horia Mazilu wrote in his book that Udriste Nasturel wrote official chancellery acts in Romanian. One example he gives is the document from Leon Tomsa dated April 3rd, 163024. But this document is only a copy and not an original document so it may not be considered relevant. All the other documents he mentioned from Alexandru Ilias ruling are written in Slavonic. This author was convinced that after all documents from this era will be revealed, there will be certainly more documents written by Udriste in both Romanian and Slavonic. This belief turned out to be wrong because all documents that cover the period of Udriste's activity were published in the collection Documenta Romaniae Historica and no original official act written by him in Romanian was found. Nevertheless we need to say that there are two personal acts written by Udriste Nasturel in 1627 (June 21st and 24th) and one personal act from January 15th, 1630 written in Romanian. But then again, those are personal acts, not official chancellery acts for which Udriste used a very beautiful, clean and clear Slavonic. Moreover, he fights to promote this language in the chancellery documents in an epoch in which the Romanian won a stable position in this institution.

From the erudite people's point of view, Slavonic had the aura of tradition. It was still used in churches, and this language, if it was used for publishing, could assure the transfer of cultural values created in Wallachia at the other orthodox slavonic counties near by. This would increase and consolidate the county's prestige. He translated and printed in Slavonic the medieval writting De imitatio Christi. The fact that he had a preference for Slavonic does not mean that he was against the usage of Romanian. Therefore he translated in Romanian Saints Valrlaam's and Ioasaf's lives but this translation remains unpublished. Also unpublished remain the Romanian versions of The teachings of Neagoe Basarab for his son Theodosie or Patriarch Nifon's life - texts translated by a person close to Udriste25.

Udriste Nasturel tried to write Slavonic documents with the Moscow form of Cyrillic letters, seeking to replace the cursive script that was popular at the beginning of that century26. But this attempt had no continuation in future chanchellery documents.

The second chancellor writes in this ellegant manner, and the documents he signes are special in terms of calligraphy, inks and miniatures used. In this regard, we can give as an example the document dated December 8th, 1640, given by Matei Basarab to several monasteries he founded. In completing the caligraphy and decoration of that act, Udriste had as an ispiration the West printings. Based on that model he realised the shape and style of the frontispiece capital letters, that were 5.3 centimeters high. The rest of the document is written in a cursive Baroque, of Polish-Ukrainian influence27. Other documents he wrote in Matei Basarab chancellery were dated January 18th, 1638;28 October 16th, 164029 and February 28th, 1645.30

As a second chancellor during Matei Basarab's rulling, Udriste Nasturel was in charge not only with writting official acts. He is also mentioned as the ispravnic of 51 documents. (According to Wallachia documents, ispravnicul was the one to manage the process of preparation and issuance of documents. He was thus overseeing the conceiving, writing and reviewing the written text. So, after the decision was made, it was communicated by the ispravnic to a Chancellery clerk who became responsible for writing the document). This is very useful information because from those documents we realise that Udriste was together with Matei Basarab on various expeditions. We can find him as the ispravnic of a document written in Sadova on June 1st, 163831 then in a document issued in Campulung on June 25th, 163832. The last chancellery act in which we can find Udriste accompanying the ruler in an expedition is dated August 21st, 1643, written at Brâncoveni.

Another interesting observation that we can make is that from all 51 chancellery acts that had Udriste as their ispravnic, 32 are written by Dumitru Boldiciu and 9 by Soare logofat. We can assume that the second chancellor had an influence in selecting the scribes of the documents for which he was the ispravnic. The clerks that he preferred and that I have mentioned before were two of the most important chancellery writters.

What is interesting to underline is the fact that not only once but several times, Udriste signs himself Uriil. Emil Turdeanu wrote that archangel Uriil is as important as Mihail, Rafail and Gavriil. He was thought to be God's intimate advisor, and likewise Udriste consider himself the ruler's most trusted person33. Perhaps here we should seek the explanation of Udriste choise to sign certain documents as Uriil.

Udriste's role and attributions in the chancellery exceded by far the duties of a second chancellor. He welcomes and introduces foreign messengers in front of the ruler, discusses with different ambassadors and missionaries or he presents the ruler diplomatic letters. As an example, among more others of course, Udriste is present at the visit that monk Arsenii Suhanov pays Matei Basarab. The Moscow monk himself recounts the events: "Coming chancellor Udriste, read the Tsar (Alexei nn) letter to ruler Matei Basarab"34.

He had excellent relations with senior prelates of the Greek Church and missionaries of Romanian Church - with whom Udrise discusses, in a preparatory phase, certain issues that would condition the union of Wallachian orthodoxy with Rome - as well as with other religious figures from the South of Danube, Mediterranean church or the Orthodox East. On the other hand, his skills were used more than once to handle delicate diplomatic issues. In this respect, Paul Cernovodeanu has a well documented and complex study, called The Diplomat Udriste Nasturel. From its pages it reveals that Udriste had several diplomatic missions in Vienna, Poland, Transylvania and Ukraine. He also negotiated the truce with Moldova (and ruler Vasile Lupu) in 164435. All these diplomatic actions highlights the confidence that Matei Basarab had in Udristes skills not only related to culture but also diplomacy.

These are a few of the relevant aspects regarding Udriste Nasturel's activity in Matei Basarab's chancellery. Given his complex personality, I only briefly made certain remarks which are not directly related to his chancellery activity, namely aspects concerning his private life, cultural and diplomatic activity.

Footnote

1 Giurescu, 1927, 25-37; 91-108; Stoicescu, 1968; Vacaru, 2006.

2 D.R.H. B I, 1966, 36-39.

3 D.R.H. B I, 1966, 261.

4 The documents of September 7th and 10th, 1508 refer to Stan as being the second Chancellor (in the first document), and also as being small Chancellor (in the second document).

5 D.R.H. B. I, 1966, 407-408.

6 Mazilu, 1974, 42.

7 Mazilu, 1974, 44.

8 Nasturel, 1910, 326.

9 Mazilu, 1974, 46.

10 Important rank in country's council, the spatar was the one who commanded the army in absence of the ruler.

11 Stoicescu, 1971, 215.

12 Nasturel, 1910, 325.

13 Mazilu, 1974, 44.

14Ibid.

15 Nasturel, 2000, 202-203.

16 Mazilu, 1974, 49.

17 D.I.R. B. IV, 1954, 482-493; 486-487.

18 D.R.H. B. XXI, 1965, 415-416.

19 D.R.H. B. XXII, 1969, 23-24, 51-55, 66-68.

20 D.R.H. B. XXII, 1969, 269-273.

21 D.R.H. B. XXII, 1969, 264-265.

22 D.R.H. B. XXII, 1969, 517-519.

23 D.R.H. B. XXII, 1969, 528-532.

24 Mazilu, 1974, 194.

25 Mazilu 1974, 290.

26 Vârtosu, 1968, 36-48.

27 D.R.H. B. XXVII, 2013, XIV-XV.

28 Ciuca, Duca-Tinculescu, Vatafu-Gaitan, IV, 1981, 505.

29 D.R.H. B. XXVII, 2013, 586-588.

30 D.R.H. B. XXX, 1998, 72-75.

31 Ciuca, Duca-Tinculescu, Vatafu-Gaitan, IV, 1981, 545.

32 Ciuca, Duca-Tinculescu, Vatafu-Gaitan, IV, 1981, 550.

33 Nasturel, 1995, 24,

34 Bezviconi, 1947, 54.

35 Cernovodeanu, 2003, 341-352.

References

Bibliography

Documenta Romaniae Historica, B, Wallachia (Tara Româneasca), Vol. XXI (1626-1627). Bucharest: Ed. Academiei Române, 1965.

Documenta Romaniae Historica, B, Wallachia (Tara Româneasca), Vol. XXII (1628-1629). Bucharest: Ed. Academiei Române, 1969.

Documenta Romaniae Historica, B, Wallachia (Tara Româneasca), Vol. XXVII (1639-1640). Bucharest: Ed. Academiei Române, 2013.

Ciuca, Marcel-Dumitru; Duca-Tinculescu, Doina; Vatafu-Gaitan, Silvia. The catalog of Walahian documents fron State Archives (Catalogul documentelor Tarii Românesti din Arhivele Statului), vol. IV (1633-1639). 1981.

Bezviconi, Gheorge G. Calatori rusi în Moldova si Muntenia. Bucuresti, 1947.

Cernovodeanu, Paul. "Udirste Nasturel, diplomatul". In Închinare lui Petre S Nasturel, volume revised by Ionel Cândea, Paul Cernovodeanu and George Lazar. Braila, 2003.

Giurescu, C. C.. "Contributii la studiul marilor dregatorii". In Buletinul Comisiei Istorice a României, vol. V, 1927, pp. 25-37; 91-108;

Mazilu, Dan Horia. Udriste Nasturel. Bucharest: Minerva Publishing House, 1974.

Nasturel, Petre V. "Nasturei's Genealogy (Genealogia Nastureilor)". In Magazine for History, Archeology and Philology (Revista pentru Istorie, Arheologie si Filologie), vol. XI, partea a II-a, 1910.

Nasturel, Petre S. "Completion of "Nasturei's Genealogy" and Udriste Nasturel's bibliography (Întregiri la "Genealogia Nasturilor" si la bibliografia lui Udriste Nasturel)". In Comunications at the Fifth Symposium of genealogical studies (Comunicari la al VI-lea Simpozion de studii genealogice). Iasi, 1995.

Nasturel, Petre S. "Completion of "Nasturei's Genealogy" and Udriste Nasturel's bibliography (Întregiri la "Genealogia Nasturilor" si la bibliografia lui Udriste Nasturel)". In Historical arrays (Însiruiri istorice), 1, Aalborg-Denmark, 2000.

Stoicescu, Nicolae. Sfatul domnesc si marii dregatori din Tara Româneasca si Moldova (sec. XIV-XVII). Bucharest: Ed. Academiei Române, 1968.

Vacaru, Silviu. Diecii Tarii Moldovei în prima jumatate a secolului al XVII-lea. Iasi: Ed. Junimea, 2006.

Vârtosu, Emil. Romanian-Cyrilic Palegraphy (Paleografia româno-chirilica). Scientific Publishing, 1968.