¹ Lucca, State Archives, Dipl. Tarpea, ad an.; cf. printed version, Epistolario di Coluccio Salutati , ed. Novati, F. (Rome 1891–1911) 4.431. The letter reads in part: Dilectum filium Colucium Pieri de Stignano notarium Lucane diocesis apud nos de scientia et moribus fidedignis relatibus multipliciter commendatum favore precipuo prosequentes, ipsum universitati vestre affectuosius commendamus, illam rogantes attente … studeatis eidem Colucio de aliquo honorabili officio secundum sui status decentiam providere.' Google Scholar

² For Salutati's life in the Valdinievole, see my ‘Coluccio Salutati and the Political Life of the Commune of Buggiano,’ Rinascimento ser. 2.6 (1966) 27–55.Google Scholar

³ Ibid. 47. Actually, Salutati exercised the office for seven months between September 1367 and March 1368.Google Scholar

⁴ See Novati's biography of Bruni, Epist. 1.42–43, n. 1. Salutati had at least one other acquaintance in the papal chancery: in his letter of March 8 to Bruni, he mentions Mariotto del Conte, who was probably a sort of undersecretary to Bruni (Ibid. 1.54, n. 2).Google Scholar

⁵ Salutati wrote four letters to Bruni from Todi (Epist. 1.42–48 and 53–54). Salutati seems to be fully aware of the unenthusiastic attitude of Bruni regarding his project to come to Rome. In his last letter before leaving Todi Salutati begs Bruni to bear in mind that he will not be exigent and to consider him as one of the servants (53).Google Scholar

⁶ The only reference we have to his assignment at the Curia is to be found in a letter written to Boccaccio in April, 1369, in which Salutati tells him that he is working under Bruni in the Curia (Epist. 1.88): ‘valeo et sub umbra domini Francisci Bruni sum quamdiu volet.’ Google Scholar

⁷ Even before leaving Todi he had asked Bruni to recommend him for the post of Chancellor of Viterbo (Epist. 1.47). In January 1369 he is hoping to obtain the appointment of Chancellor of Perugia (Ibid. 78).Google Scholar

⁸ In spite of an extensive search in the State Archives of Lucca for documents indicating the presence of Salutati in Lucca between 1351 and 1370, I failed to find any trace of him there before his arrival in August of the latter year. However, that he did have links with some of the powerful leaders in the new Luccan administration is almost certain. On March 11, 1369, the commune of Buggiano decided to give a feast: the purpose of the celebration is not specified but, since it was held only a few weeks before the liberation of Lucca by Charles IV, it may be assumed that the feast had something to do with this coming event. To our good fortune, a guest list of the ‘convitati in prandio facturo per commune Bugg.’ is included in the Deliberazioni of the commune of Buggiano (Com. Arch. Bugg., Delib. 12, fol. 193^v). The guests were the following: the vicar and the podestà of Pescia, the master of Altopascio, Nino and Giovanni Opizi, Niccolosio Bartolomeo, Niccolo Diversi, two other nobles called Orlando and Plebano, and representatives of the communes of Pescia, Uzzano, Montecatini and Vellano. Four of the guests, Nino and Giovanni Opizi, Niccolosio Bartolomei and Niccolo Diversi are to be among the leaders of the aristocratic party which dominates Luccan politics in the first year after the liberation. Giovanni and his brother, Tommaso di Opizi, Niccolosio and Niccolo are among the Consilium Triginta Prudentum El[l]ectorum super Regimine Civitatis Lucane et Officialium Civitatis Lucane, who together with the Anziani and the Standard-Bearer of Justice, elect Salutati Chancellor in the next year (S.A.L., Consiglio Generale, Riform. Pubbl. reg. 1, fol. 223^v). Although Salutati was not present at this feast, he was probably well acquainted with all these Guelph exiles, who seem to have been in residence in Pescia prior to 1369. The powerful Opizi, driven from Lucca by Uguccione della Faggiuola, had been in Pescia since 1313. There would have been occasion during the festivities for Salutati's friends to suggest the name of their most renowned citizen for some office. Novati gives the biography of Tommaso degli Opizi, son of Nino (Epist. 2.362 n. 2), and that of Niccolo Diversi (Ibid. 1.160, n. 1).Google Scholar

⁹ S.A.L. Con. Gen., Riform. Pubbl., reg. 2, fol. 156^v. This was to be paid at fifty gold florins per year. On March 23, 1373, Bruni wrote a letter thanking the Anziani for their gift of one hundred florins (S.A.L., Anziani al Tempo della Libertà, Registrum quarundam literarum, 529, fol. 78^r). We have another indication of Bruni's intervention in the matter of the breve: it was written by ser Mariotto, who probably was employed in Bruni's section of the chancery (see n. 4 supra).Google Scholar

¹⁰ S.A.L. Dipl. Tarpea, ad an. Also see personal letter of Bruni to Anziani written on August 22, 1370 (S.A.L., Anziani al Tempo della Lib., Lettere Originali, 1370–1400, 439).Google Scholar

¹¹ Epist. 1.89: ‘de hoc, quanvis impari stile, iam heroico versu novum panegyricum inchoavi et Deo dante perficiam.’ Google Scholar

¹² Novati has already made this observation on the motive for the panegyric: Ibid. 121, n. 1.Google Scholar

¹³ S.A.L. Con. Gen., Riform. Pubbl., reg. 1, fol. 55^r, September 27, 1369.Google Scholar

¹⁴ Cardinal Guido on July 2, 1369, had been made imperial vicar for Tuscany. He chose the Anziani and the podestà in July and they subsequently filled the other offices. The cycle of offices, consequently, would have run from July to July (cf. Tommasi, Girolamo, ‘Sommario della Storia di Lucca dall'anno MIV all'anno MDCC,’ in Archivio Storico Italiano 10 (1847) 237ff.Google Scholar

¹⁵ Marzi, D., La cancelleria fiorentina (Rocca San Casciano 1912) 11.Google Scholar

¹⁶ S.A.L. Con. Gen., Riform. Pubbl. reg. I, fol. 6^r .Google Scholar

¹⁷ Ibid. fol. 5^r. He was given the salary ‘cum omnibus aliis juribus, proventibus, comodis, comoditatibus et honoribus consuetis habendis, tolendis et precipiendis et in usus tuos [i.e. ser Pietro] convertendis.’ Google Scholar

¹⁸ Ibid. fol. 5^r. Charles IV declared that the chancery was to be directed ‘per te vel coadiutores tuos quos tu elegeris et nominaveris in casu ubi fueris aliis occupatus.’ The assistant was ser Pietro Saraceni, who continued in this post after the reforms of July 17, 1370.Google Scholar

¹⁹ This grant of power was preparatory to the investiture of the Anziani with the prerogatives of the imperial vicarship by the Cardinal on March, 12, 1370 (Tommasi, , op. cit. 241).Google Scholar

²⁰ S.A.L. Dipl. Tarpea, ad an. Google Scholar

²¹ Epist. 1.119–22.Google Scholar

²² See my ‘Coluccio Salutati,’ op. cit. 27.Google Scholar

²³ Ibid. 50–51.Google Scholar

²⁴ On February 28, 1370, in Pescia a certain Parente Paganelli of Porcari named Salutati, together with two others, as his procurator (Bib. Lucca, Governativa, Note di contratti di compre e vendite, alluogazioni, ec., estratte dal Can. Vinc. Guis. Baroni da pergamene e da altri documenti 1370–99 Vol. 6, fol. 7^V). This document is copied in vol. 920, ad an. in the same library. Because a procuration could be given months before it was to be exercised, we do not have any basis for believing that Salutati returned to the Valdinievole briefly at the end of February only to journey back to Rome in March to conclude his affairs there.Google Scholar

²⁵ Epist. 1.128.Google Scholar

²⁶ Ibid. 1.85–6.Google Scholar

²⁷ I am unable to explain a very curious fact. In 1574 in Florence, Marco Segaloni, Assistant Secretary of the Chancery, compiled a list entitled ‘Notarii et cancellarii servientes aliquando in Palatio incidenter reperti’ (S.A.F., Rif. Sign. Bal., Corr. 38, fol. 1; cf. Marzi, D., op. cit., 116). Among the notaries listed for 1370 he gave ‘dominus Collucius Pieri Salutatus 1370.’ This statement was supported and enlarged on by the 18th-century scholar, Giovanni Lami, who writes: ‘I find, however, in the public acts of the Tratte of Florence that Coluccio was already elected chancellor in 1370’ (Novelle Letterarie, ad. an. 1748, t. IX 236–7: Marzi, , Ibid.). Scipione Ammirato in his Spogli joins Lami in making Salutati Chancellor in 1370 (S.A.F. 3. 943, MS. 316: Marzi, Ibid.) Novati, however, rejected all these testimonies (Marzi, , Ibid,): given the date of Salutati's last letter from Rome, March 30, and his assumption of the Luccan post on August 1, it seemed impossible to Novati that Salutati would have had time to hold the post in Florence. Marzi, although agreeing that it was highly unlikely, nevertheless did not abandon the possibility that he might have done some work in Florence during this year which would in part justify the statement by the three writers (Ibid.). He suggested that Salutati might have been a coadjutor in the chancery for a brief period. My own research would indicate that, occupied as he was in politics in his own commune during the months in question, Salutati could not possibly have had an appointment of any sort in Florence. In my opinion what these scholars might have seen was a page from the Tratte of 1370 containing a list of candidates for notarial offices in the chancery, wherein Salutati's name appeared.Google Scholar

²⁸ S.A.L., Cons. Gen. Riform. Pubbl. reg. I, fol. 223^v; cf. transcription Epist. 4.433–7.Google Scholar

²⁹ Ibid. reg. 2, fol. 44^r. The change occurred on Sept. 4, 1370. Novati incorrectly calls Salutati Chancellor of the Anziani both in the title he gives to the document containing Salutati's election (Epist. 4.433) and in his biography (388). Ser Pietro Tomeo is clearly appointed the Cancellarius Dominorum Antianorum (434).Google Scholar

³⁰ See n. 28, supra. See also record of Salutati's salary for five months with gabelle deducted (S.A.L., Camerlingo Gen., Cam. Int.-Esito, 82, fol. 63^v, under the date Aug. 1, 1371).Google Scholar

³¹ S.A.L. Cons. Gen., Riform. Pubbl., reg. 1, fol. 225^r .Google Scholar

³² Ibid. reg. 2, fol. 18^r .Google Scholar

³³ Ibid. fol. 186^v: ‘Omnia in presenti libro contenta manu mea propria scripsi et ex meo cancelleriatus officio publicavi.’ Google Scholar

³⁴ S.A.L. Anziani al tempo della Libertà, Minute delle Riformazioni, 2. Only the notes for the period April 16 – July 30, 1371, are extant. Part of these notes of the deliberations are written in a simple code (fols. 39^r and 44^v). Although these deliberations were transcribed into the Riform. Pubbl. it is impossible to determine whether what was actually said (represented by the sections of the rough draft in code) was faithfully reported in the final copy. Fumi, L., who first noted these passages, suggests in his introduction to the Carteggi degli Anziani, 2. pt. 2, p. ix (Lucca 1903), that this use of code was only the first of a series to be found in the Minute. However, after examination of subsequent registers, I was unable to find proof that any chancellor after Salutati used code in the Minute. My suggestion would be that this was an unsuccessful and unique experiment by Salutati to keep secret certain deliberations which the Commune desired to conceal even from those who were trusted enough to have access to the official registers. Salutati must have been somewhat of an expert in working with codes and ciphers. On October 3, 1375, during the War of the Eight Saints, the Signoria of Florence wrote to Ricci, Florentine ambassador to Milan, about a letter taken from a messenger of the Cardinal of Bologna: ‘… e de vero che era cosa da non potervi mettere entro il capo. Ma per ser Coluccio, nostro cancelliere, fu interpetata e ritrovata chiaramente quello che esse gobbole importavano e la interpetrazione fatta per lui e la copia ritratta del detto exemplo e ancora l'alfabeto delle dette gobbole vi mandiamo colle presenti’ (S.A.F. Signoria, I Can-cell., Missive XV, fol. 10^r). This, incidentally, is the first mention of the use of code or cipher in the Florentine Missive (they date from 1308) which I have been able to find.Google Scholar

³⁵ See, for example, S.A.L. Con. Gen., Riform, Pubbl. reg. 2, fol. 18^v .Google Scholar

³⁶ This register is entitled Cons. Gen., Indici di Decreti 1369–1488: Salutati's part begins fol. 15^r. It bears the title Rubrice actorum Reformationum manu Colutii de Stignano Cancellarii Communis Lucani anno n. D. MCCCLXX, Ind. VIII. Google Scholar

³⁷ See, for example, S.A.L. Con. Gen., Riform. Pubblic., reg. 2, fol. 44^r .Google Scholar

³⁸ This is the only deliberation of the General Council during Salutati's time as Chancellor that is not recorded in his register. It is found written in the hand of ser Pietro Tomeo at the end of the register of the Reformationes Tomeo had kept the previous year (Ibid. reg. 1, fol. 244^v).Google Scholar

³⁹ Epist. 1.147.Google Scholar

⁴⁰ Ibid. 88–91 and n. 8, supra. Google Scholar

⁴¹ See n. 8, supra. Google Scholar

⁴² See the document published by Tommasi, G., op. cit., ‘Documenti,’ 40: ‘Dominus Ninus de Opiziis miles, unus ex invitatis ad dictum consilium, surgens ad arrengheriam in dicto consilio, arengando dixit pro se et suis consortibus et pro domino Orlando de Salamoncellis ibidem presente et consortibus de Quartesanis, quod non intendebant nec videbatur eis debere poni in offitio Antianatus vel Gonfaloneriorum aliquos ex consortibus de dominibus supradictis et nominatis.’ The whole stormy session is recorded in Tommasi, Ibid. 39–42.Google Scholar

⁴³ Sercambi, G., Chroniche, ed. Bongi, S. (Fonti per la Storia d'Italia; Rome 1892) I. 204–6.Google Scholar

⁴⁴ Although Niccolosio Bartolomei cannot be linked directly with the events leading to the attempt of Giovanni to capture Lucca by force, he seems to disappear from the councils of the Republic during 1371. He reappears in 1372 (Paganini, P., Due lettere di F. Petrarca a N. Bartolomei da Lucca [Lucca 1869] 21–2, which includes a biography of Niccolosio). Novati (Epist. 1.147, n. 1) emphasizes this link between Salutati and the noble faction as the probable reason for Salutati's dismissal. Oddly enough, twenty years later in Epist. 4, in his summary of Salutati's life Novati writes: ‘Dal 3, agosto 1370 al 27 luglio 1371 elli resse e con lode l'uffizio … quindi, opponendosi gli statuti ad una sua riconferma, forza gli fu riparare a Stignano dove riprese ad esercitare per suo conto il notariato’ (vol. 4.388). Because Novati offers no proof to substantiate this assertion and because I have been unable to find such a barrier to a reappointment in the statutes, I see no justification for this reversal of his earlier position.Google Scholar

⁴⁵ See Appendix I.Google Scholar

⁴⁶ According to the summary given in the Introduction to the Statutes of 1376 , ed. Mancini, , Dorini, , Lassareschi, (Florence 1927) XXVII, the duties were two: ‘I'una d'imporre una disciplina alle Arti aggregate, e sopra tutto a quella della seta, in ciò che si riferiva alla qualità delle materie da impiegarsi nei lavori, ai modi di fabbricazione di esse e al loro peso e misura, nonchè di regolarne la produzione e vigilarne il commercio; l'altra, di pronunziarsi sulle questioni nate fra committenti ed esecutori e su quelle fra venditori e compratori e tanto fra i sottoposti, o, come, dicevano, “tenuti” della corte, quanto fra questi e gli estranei, compresi i forestieri.’ Google Scholar

⁴⁷ This is partly shown by one fact. Although before Salutati there had been many examples of the Court's sitting on a case without the presence of the Major Consul, Salutati was always present in the Court when the names of the judges are given in the documents. In one case, he sat alone (October 8), a situation which suggests a power analogous to those outlined for the Major Judge (Giudice Maggior) discussed below.Google Scholar

⁴⁸ Under Pisan control the Court apparently was headed by a doctor of laws called the avocatus (Cause Civili, 136, fol. 1^r). Moreover, although after Salutati the office of Judge and Major Consul seems to have been abolished (the Cause Civili, 138, for July-Dec., 1372, do not list any such official in the Court), it was restored at least by April 1, 1373 (Ibid. 139, Fol. 1^r) and another doctor of laws is listed as holding the post. The fact that this work was usually done by such a specialist indicates the importance of the assignment.Google Scholar

⁴⁹ Ibid. 139, fol. 1^r .Google Scholar

⁵⁰ Epist. 1.159. ‘Provide tu, si qua via est, ut hinc me coneris honoranter evellere. Adhuc valet corpus et laboribus, licet hebetatum ocio, scio quod abunde sufficiet, et si forsan horreat, illud etiam invitum assuescere cogam.’ Google Scholar

⁵¹ Of course, it is possible for the appointment in the Merchants' Court to have lasted a longer time. Salutati was not definitely resident in Stignano again until July, 1372.Google Scholar

⁵² Epist. 1.133.Google Scholar

⁵³ Ibid. 1.133.Google Scholar

⁵⁴ See, S.A.L., Anziani al tempo della Libertà, Delib. 132, passim. Google Scholar

⁵⁵ S.A.L. Con. Gen., Riform. Pubbl., reg. 2, fols. 79^r_v. There is no way to be absolutely sure that it was Salutati who composed this preface to the provision. If this were the preface to the statutes, then it would be reasonable to assume that it was the work of the committee drawing up the laws. The preface, however, appears in the register before a simple provision to appoint such a committee. It was not unusual for such a provision to be introduced with a series of set phrases insuring that it would be regarded as meeting all the requirements of legality, but a literary preface such as this one is extraordinary. It would appear that Salutati saw this particular provision as a means to display his rhetorical skill. Perhaps he hoped that these passages would eventually be adopted as the actual preface to the final edition of the laws. The text is reproduced in full in Appendix II.Google Scholar

⁵⁶ Lines 1–11.Google Scholar

⁵⁷ Lines 26–29.Google Scholar

⁵⁸ Lines 44–50.Google Scholar

⁵⁹ Lines 51–61.Google Scholar

⁶⁰ Lines 82–84.Google Scholar

⁶¹ Lines 82–86.Google Scholar

⁶² For example, compare lines 31–38 with Justinian's introduction to the Institutiones, where Justinian writes that ‘Imperatoriam majestatem non solum armis decoratam, sed etiam legibus oportet esse armatam…’ (Corpus Iuris Civilis, ed. Mommsen, , Krueger, , Schoell, and Kroll, [Berlin 1882–1895] 1.2). Compare lines 1–10 with the Codex (Ibid. 2.4): ‘igitur in primordio nostri imperii sacratissimas constitutiones, quae in diversa volumina fuerant dispersae et quam plurima similitudine nec non diversitate vacillabant, in unum corpus colligere omnique vitio purgare proposuimus.’ Speaking of the various sources of Roman Law, the Institutiones (1.2, 3) explain that ‘scriptum ius est lex, plebi scita, senatus consulta, principium placita, magistratuum edicta, responsa prudentium.’ Compare with lines 35–6.Google Scholar

⁶³ Epist. 1.87.Google Scholar

⁶⁴ See my ‘The De Tyranno and Coluccio Salutati's View of Politics and Roman History’ Nuova Rivista Storica Italiana 1969.Google Scholar

⁶⁵ Nevertheless, in this first year he seems to have been able to spend some time with his books. In the course of that year he must have begun work on what appears to be his first long piece of prose, De vita associabili et operativa (Epist. 1.156), while his production of poetry continued: he probably devoted some time to his Bucolica (Ibid. 1.157). Moreover, he was busily engaged in exchanging books with his friends and copying volumes for his own library (Ibid. 1.134).Google Scholar

⁶⁶ Epist. 1.130–4.Google Scholar

⁶⁷ His friend, ser Giovanni Cambrini, had spoken of his case to the bishop of Arezzo, who expressed an interest in hiring Salutati when his ailing Chancellor, ser Jacopo Magrini, would die. But Magrini recovered and held on to his post. The whole negotiation must have taken place over a number of months in the period before October 8, 1371, when Salutati wrote to the Bishop and Cambrini thanking them for their attempt to help him (Epist 1.145–49).Google Scholar

⁶⁸ A petition presented to the General Council of the commune of Buggiano on March 20, 1388 (Delib. 15, fols. 333^v–334^r) supplies the name and lineage of Salutati's first wife who heretofore has remained unknown. Her name was Caterina di Tomeo di Balduccio and her family was one of the wealthiest in the commune. Her mother, Angnola di Fanuccio di Regabensi, inherited a considerable fortune by rural standards (‘hereditas … pinguis et opulenta’). Caterina's father, Tomeo, was engaged in numerous business enterprises in the area. He bought the wine gabelle (Ibid. 12, fol. 46^v). He was in business with another resident of Buggiano, Gaccino Ceccherelli of Borgo, and together they owned at least forty-eight animals, probably sheep and goats (Ibid. fol. 78^v). He also had a number of other commercial enterprises (Ibid. fols. 153^v, 176^r, and 182^r). The petition involves the disposition of Angnola's fortune of which Salutati's first son (and his only child from Caterina) was one of the heirs. Novati erroneously maintained on the basis of inconclusive evidence that Piero was the name of Salutati's first child (Epist. 4.390, n. 2). The petition informs us, however, that Bonifazio was the product of the first marriage and this would consequently make Piero the first child of his second marriage.Google Scholar

⁶⁹ Sercambi, G., op. cit. , 206.Google Scholar

⁷⁰ Epist. 1.156.Google Scholar

⁷¹ The letter to Boccaccio is dated January 21, 1372 (Ibid. 156): Salutati is at least able to speak of his poetry (157).Google Scholar

⁷² Epist. 1.158–9: ‘mens quidem mea … nedum dolet, sed insaniat’; his sorrow ‘transcendit enim omnem modum et mole sua nixum nec minui patitur nec augeri.’ Google Scholar

⁷³ See the letter to Lapo da Castiglionchio, September 2, 1369 (Ibid. 1.100–103) where Salutati laments the death of Lapo's nephew who was his good friend.Google Scholar

⁷⁴ Ibid. 159: ‘et ne putes hoc solo fortune sevientis pondere me confractum, scito et cum illa conceptum iam ad quintam mensem in utero puerulum interisse.’ A little further below he mentions Fortune again: ‘et quoniam istic videtur nescio quid deliberare fortuna….’ In his letter to Lapo on the death of Simone he had used the idea of Fortune as a form of consolation: ‘quodque ipse facere nescio, fortior contra fortunam, quasi Antheus contra Herculem, ex huiusmodi prostratione resurgas, et eo tutior ad congressum, quod nunc minus habes in quo sit illi ius sevire’ (Ibid. 1.103). There is no sign of such an effort in the letters of 1372.Google Scholar

⁷⁵ Ibid. 1.159.Google Scholar

⁷⁶ For the approximate time of Salutati's return to the Valdinievole see my ‘Coluccio Salutati,’ op. cit. 23–24.Google Scholar

⁷⁷ Epist. 1.21, 27–29, 90.Google Scholar

¹ Salutati wrote five letters between October 8, 1371 and February 13, 1372, all from Lucca.Google Scholar

² This article was brought to my attention by Bellissima, G. B. in his article ‘Nuovi Documenti sulle Compagnie degl'Inglesi e dei Bretoni in Italia,’ Annali delle Università Toscane XI (Nuova Serie), fasc. I (Science, Giuridiche, Morali, Storiche, e Filologiche 1927) 137–145. The statement on Salutati comes at the beginning of a short notice by Mancini on the communal archive of Massa under the section, ‘Segretari Comunali Letterati’ (Marzocco April 10, 1927; 3). He opens the article as follows: 'Ricercando nelle carte della ‘Corte dei Mercanti’ del R. Archivio di Stato di Lucca, m'è venuto fatto di imbattermi nel nome di ‘ser Coluccino pieri di Stignano’ che nel ottobre 1371 era ‘iudex et consul dicte Curie.’ Si tratta del Salutati che l'anno innanzi, e precisamente il 17 luglio, era eletto dagli Anziani di Lucca, che ne avevano ricevuto da Papa Urbano V vivissima raccomandazione, … a loro cancelliere, e tenne l'ufficio fino a tutto il luglio del 1371; subito dopo, a quanto pare, lascio il Comune per la Curia di S. Cristofano.’ It is fair to assume that Mancini made this discovery while at work on the edition of the Statutes of 1376 of the Court of Merchants (Lo statuto della Corte dei Mercanti in Lucca del 1376). The absence of any source for the assertion suggests that Mancini hoped to do further work on the subject. There is no record of his having realized this hope. Oddly enough, in the reference which I found for Salutati on October 8, 1371 (see infra, n. 4), Salutati's name is spelled ‘Coluccio’ and not ‘Coluccino’ as Mancini has it. Also this reference gives Salutati as judex et major consul not merely judex et consul. Thus, there is no assurance that his reference and mine are identical. At least they are for the same month. In the above statement Mancini has for some reason confused the Corte dei Mercanti with the Curia di S. Cristofano. The Merchants' Court sat in the Church of St. Christopher but the Curia di S. Cristofano was another court with a different jurisdiction. According to Bongi (Inventario dell' Archivio di Stato di Lucca [Lucca 1920] 2. 296), the latter was at first a communal court handling civil cases involving sums of twenty-five lire or more; after 1356 it was given the power to hear all controversies involving money matters. In 1369, Bongi continues, the Curia was moved from the Church of St. Christopher to the Loggia of the commune of Lucca near the Gate of St. Peter. Its place was taken in the Church by the Merchants' Court.Google Scholar

³ A.S.L., Corte de' Mercanti, Libri de' Mercanti, 1371, n. 82.Google Scholar

⁴ Ibid. fol. 30^v .Google Scholar

⁵ Ibid. fol. 10^v .Google Scholar

⁶ Ibid. Cause Civili, 137, nineteen pages counting from the last folio page of the volume — both recto and verso (the deterioration of the volume makes the normal pagination impossible). Cf. also fol. 138^r (from end of vol.) where under August 23, Salutati is again involved in hearing a case before the Court.Google Scholar

⁷ Ibid. Libro di Consiglio, 14 (1370) fol. 3^r .Google Scholar

⁸ Ibid. fols. 3^v–6^r .Google Scholar

⁹ Ibid. Cause Civili, 137, fol. 20^r (from end of volume).Google Scholar

¹⁰ Ibid. fol. 17^r (from end of volume). Francesco Buscolini, the Major Consul for May-June, is not among them. However, since this is the only example of a case for this two-month period where the names of any of the Consuls of the Court are listed, there is no basis for affirming or denying his membership in the Court during this time. The Major Consul for March-April, Dino Guingini, appears as expected fol. 88^v (from end of volume).Google Scholar

¹¹ Other comparisons between the list of consuls given in the Libro di Consiglio and the Cause Civili, 137, might be made by comparing the former with the following pages of the Cause: fols. 21^r, 21^v, 22^r, 25^r and 25^r (from end of volume). A.S.L., Cons. Gener., Riform. Pubbl., reg. 2, fols. 79^r_v .Google Scholar