Publication details
Rola Kościoła w morawskich dobrach magnackich w okresie przed bitwą na Białej Górze oraz w latach dwudziestych i trzydziestych XVII wieku. Między reformacją Žerotínów a kontrreformacją Liechtensteinów
| Title in English | The Role of the Church on the Aristocratic Estates of Moravia at the Time of the Battle of White Mountain. Between the Žerotin Reformation and the Liechtenstein Counter-Reformation |
|---|---|
| Authors | |
| Year of publication | 2020 |
| Type | Chapter of a book |
| MU Faculty or unit | |
| Citation | |
| Description | The 1620s and 1630s represented an appendix in the changes in the relationship be tween the aristocracy and religion, specifically the aristocracy and the church, which was reflected in the lives of two important Moravian aristocrats from this period – Charles the Elder of Žerotin and Charles I of Liechtenstein. These two Moravian aristocrats from the period of the Battle of White Mountain basically came from similar religious and educational backgrounds. At a time of major catharsis, Charles I of Liechtenstein underwent a „transitional ritual” of religious and political conversion. The process of re Catholicization on his estates began almost immediately after his conversion, albeit in significantly different forms depending on the conditions in the individual domains. The Counter Reformation process was based on laws issued by the emperor and they were applied by the provincial authorities or by the episcopal legislative. Nevertheless, the landed gentry had the legal right to influence the process to a considerable degree, based on their legal status as well as their religious and moral preferences. The results of these processes turned out to be very similar on the estates and in the courts of Žerotín and Liechtenstein. This is also demonstrated by the different fates of the monumental sacred architecture on the estates of the two Moravian aristocrats. Although Žerotín and Liechtenstein found themselves in different positions during the post White Mountain changes, they never stopped having at least some restricted personal contact, and they never became personal enemies. They both represented a certain form of mannerist aris tocrat who found himself in the maze of Comenius’s labyrinth. |
| Related projects: |