The cult of remembrance and the Black Death: six Renaissance cities in central Italy 9780801856068, 9780801843037

Citation preview

The Cult of Remembrance and the Black Death

ri

\E he

Cult of Remembrance

and the Black Death SIX RENAISSANCE CITIES

IN CENTRAL ITALY

SAMUEL K. COHN, Jr.

The Johns Hopkins University Press Baltimore and London

This book was originally brought to publication with the generous assistance of the National Endowment for the Humanities. © 1992 The Johns Hopkins University Press All rights reserved. Published 1992 Printed in the United States of America on acid-free paper Johns Hopkins Paperbacks edition, 1997

06 05 04 03 02 01 00 99 98 97 54321 The Johns Hopkins University Press 2715 North Charles Street Baltimore, Maryland 21218-4319 The Johns Hopkins Press Ltd., London

The Library of Congress has cataloged the hardcover edition as follows: Cohn, Samuel Kline. The cult of remembrance and the Black Death : six Renaissance cities in central

Italy / Samuel K. Cohn, Jr.

p. cm. Includes bibliographical references and index. ISBN 0-8018-4303-0

1. Italy — Social conditions — 1268-1559. 2. Life style — Italy — History. 3. Black death — Social aspects — Italy — History. 4. Charitable bequests — Italy — History. 5.Art and society — Italy — History. 6. Renaissance — Italy. I. Title.

HN475.C59 1992

306'.0945 — dc20 91-45267

ISBN 0-8018-5606-X (pbk.)

Pages xiv — xv:

Abraham Ortelius, “Tusciae antique typus” (Antwerp, 1584).

For the Remembrance

David Herlihy, Historian and Teacher (1930-1991) Adele Cohn, Librarian and Teacher (1907-1990)

Contents

List of Tables and Illustrations ix Acknowledgments xi A Note on Names and Dates xiii The Comparative Approach 2

1. Introduction I

The City-StatesII4 TheSix Testament

The Model from Siena 17 The Choice of Geography 19

The Localization of Culture and Its Convergence 23

Black Death Studies 26

PART I. The Structure of Piety 29

2.Parishes PiousandChoices 31 Monasteries 33

Nunneries 41 Hospitals 43 Hospital Foundations S7

Religious Confraternities 60 The “Poor of Christ,” Dowries, and Servants 65

A General Assessment 67

3. The Structure of Pious Bequests 72

The Second Pattern 87 Wealth and Piety go A Divergence in the Structure of Piety: Siena, Pisa, and Assisi 79

Altarpieces 110 PART II. Directions from the Grave 119 4.Funerals The Body122 121 A Mixture of Pious Intentions lol

The Donoratico and the Tarlati 112

Vii

Vill CONTENTS Burial 133 Change over Time 159

5.Directions Property 162 from the Grave 168

Women and Lineage 196 A General Assessment 201

PART III. Art 203 6. Art and Masses 206

Chapels 211 Chapel Decoration 223

Perpetual Masses 206

Sacred Art 230 Chalices, Vestments, Altarcloths 233

Other Construction Projects 227

Candlestick Holders 235 Painted Beds 236

Sculpture 238 Restoration and Repair 240 Coats of Arms, Crests, and Plaques 237

7.ThePaintings 244. Geography of Painting 246

1348 262 The Price of Art 266 Before the Black Death 248

After the Black Death 254 Painting in the Late Trecento and Early Quattrocento 261 Painting after the Black Death: A Reassessment 271

8. Conclusion 281 Appendix A: The Sources 289 Appendix B: Catalog Numbers of the ASF, Notarile

Notes 307 Bibliography 381 Index AIS

antecosimiano, Sampled for This Book 296

Appendix C: A Gazetteer of Villages and Provincial Towns

Mentioned in the Text 299

Tables and Illustrations

1. Pious Choices 34. 2. Pious Choices (Percentages) 36

TABLES

3. The Values of Bequests to Hospitals 48 4. The Values for Poor Relief 68

5. The Number of Pious Bequests 76 6. The Values of Pious Bequests 82

9. Burials 128 10. Specified Burials 138 11. Nonalienation Clauses 164

7. The Values of Nonpious Bequests 94 8. The Ratio of Pious to Nonpious Bequests 100

12. Testators and Gender 198 13. Perpetual Masses and Feasts 208 14. Chapel Constructions 217 15. Testamentary Commissions for Paintings 247 16. Chronology of Paintings 249 17. The Price of Art 267

ILLUSTRATIONS

1. Giotto, Painted Cross 106

2. Nino Pisano, Sarcophagus and Reclining Effigy

of Archbishop Giovanni (Scherlatti) 126

3. Pietro Lorenzetti, Polyptych 233 4. Guiduccio Palmerucci, Madonna and Child between Two Angels

Adored by a Donor, His Wife, and Child 250

5. Bernardo Daddi, Madonna and Eight Angels 265 6. Madonna col Bambino e gli angeli Gabriele e Raffaele 267 1X

Acknowledgments This study began neither in Florence nor with testaments. Instead, while surveying materials in the Marche for a study of comparative city-state

development in the Middle Ages, I heard that the Florentine state archives were about to close. Despite the official pronouncement of nine months, many predicted that they would remain shut for decades. The

perverse thought then crossed my mind: why not return for one last Florentine topic? Veluti canis ad vomitum (as medieval chroniclers sometimes

expressed the lure of sin), I rushed back to Florence in the summer of 1987. Places in the sala di consultazione were then becoming hard to come

by. But the atmosphere became more charged by late fall 1987, when I was able to return again to Florence, this time funded by a half-year sabbatical from Brandeis University. To secure a seat when the archives opened (9 a.m.), the studioso had to line up under Vasari’s arches at 7 and once inside had to remain zealously reading the documents or else face forfeiting the valiantly won place to hungry researchers waiting in the corridor. Tensions ran high, and work was periodically punctuated

by shouting matches between overworked archival personnel and overstressed studiosi. Nonetheless, the common predicament gave rise to

a community of good will and an intellectual camaraderie that I have rarely experienced in academic life. I fondly remember intellectual exchanges, complaints, and gossip over quick lunches al banco and after-

archive beers with Deborah Krohn, Gianni Cappelli, Chris Wickham, Robert Black, John Nadis, Adrienne Atwell, Amanda Lillie, Daniela Lamberini, and others. After the archives had closed, I was able to return to Italy to continue research in Pisa, Arezzo, Perugia, Siena, and Assisi through a generous project grant awarded by the Getty Center for the Humanities. To the archivists, researchers, and photographers in these towns, I owe a special thanks, especially to Don Costanzo Tabarelli, O.S.B., who left the doors to the rich collections of the convent of San Pietro open until 8 p.m. and sometimes later, and to Maria Immacolata Bossi, who introduced me to the rich pergamene collections housed in the Sacro Convento of Assisi. xl

xii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I spent the academic year 1988-89 as a Guest Fellow at the Villa | Tatti (Harvard University). In this unique center for Renaissance studies

I was able to discuss my ideas about the Renaissance and cycling in Tuscany with art historians, musicologists, historians, and students of Italian literature. I am indebted to the staff and the scholars then in residence, Amanda George, Nelda Feracci, Fortunato Pratesi, Walter Kaiser, Eve Borsook, Margaret Haines, Eileen Reeves, Peter Urquhart, Chris Reynolds, Erling Skaug, and especially Salvatore Camporeale. Back in Cambridge, I benefited from conversations with John Shearman. Many friends and scholars have read versions of the manuscript at various moments in its development. My colleagues Philip Ethington, Alice Kelikian, and David Fischer read the Introduction, as did Anthony Molho. Deborah Krohn, Stephen Campbell, John Paoletti, Megan Holmes,

William Hood, Jane Bestor, and Julia Sheehan read the sections on art and painting; and, at different stages, Salvatore Camporeale, Rudolph Binion, Genevieve Warwick, William Bowsky, and the manuscript editor

at the Johns Hopkins University Press, Carol Ehrlich, read through the entire manuscript. Beyond exposing errors and infelicities in style, these scholars forced me to state assumptions, rethink arguments, and draw out more boldly conclusions blanketed by mounds of empirical findings. They may be disappointed with what resulted from their careful readings and comments; nonetheless, without their encouragement, criticism, and intellectual exchange, I can safely say my research would have produced a different book——a weaker one.

My research assistant during the summer of 1990, Megan Holmes, took special pains beyond my meager sums, reading drafts on testamentary

commissions, directing me to relevant secondary research, instructing me in late medieval Italian art history, and following her own leads searching for the survival of testamentary commissions through documents,

churches, and museums. Finally, | wish to thank Genevieve Warwick, my friends at Vincigliata, and the ragazzi del Gruppo Sportivo di Maiano,

who made research on this book more than an academic endeavor. Like small plaques or the coats of arms that late Trecento testators ordered to be embossed on candlestick holders, this book is dedicated to the memories of earthly endeavors—that of two of my teachers.

A Note on Names and Dates Names

In this text, names and citations from archival sources have been rendered

according to the orthography found in the originals. Dates

The city-states in this study used various calendars. Florence and Siena

began the year on 25 March, the feast of the Annunciation (stile dell’Incarnazione). Thus, a testament dated February 1348 would have been redacted in 1349 according to the modern Gregorian calendar. For Arezzo, Assisi, and Perugia, the new year began with Christmas (stile della Nativita). Finally, Pisa had its own style (stile pisano). The new year began on the feast of the Annunciation but was one year ahead of the Florentine calendar. Thus, a testament dated 25 June 1349 would have been redacted in the year of the Black Death (1348), and one dated 6 February 1349 would have been issued in 1349 according to our calendar. Although Adriano Cappelli (Cronologia, cronografia, e calendario perpetuo,

14) maintains that this Pisan style persisted until 1749, the testaments found in my samples changed their dating to the Florentine calendar with the Pisan subjection to the Florentines in 1406. For my statistics and for the text of this book, dates have been rendered in the modern style of the Gregorian calendar. In the Notes, I have left the dates as they appeared in the original documents.

Xi

NESS iSeecee gS. SSSiSaEner eterna otter ne eTanaenee ete ie roa ae ates . CRC FERS SS Oatee Sob ON CURR Soo caCEES NaePRR ea eae SEE tana ERE Cae ENS OTRO ERete RRA ROE SERN RES NE ERR sh heseRK tect nce eh areata ie eA eS 2 CESSES aie a arene PSS ANSO SES ES ERD RSS SS TR reeeeerie eee Pe Roe eS ae aa a FeSO RR RR aL ET aecSeaeA Sr aE .: eaee —atapm — SSSR G GROSSE 5oR nant SRR RENCE EERE ERS Sian cenmcesunrnmnntan en mmmnatne nena RTE Sieeeneinererann nee einen eRe saes aS Rot bcos roo ROSIN ORS RADON ONS SOGOD OOOO ER TE RR Ue CS toe eee SERS NSS a et caesarean SEE ee cue RS

Bose eer iss Se RRA RHROR RU RNIN ONAN ORO DSRS ASS ERO BG ACRE HMRI IIS SUS aieego houSe ae aiming Aan eet cmc ois ENR carseat Rae nearpevnceseeas uaaceaarat aramaSee ORRaRR ROR ASSne RRO ERR Saini nuicnuOHS Seen mara eae atte parame SRT ORR REAR AUN ERE NC ORION ONE Rr eeea aus Saeco RRND eeegiana Be ec NO ceREN erase eRREgener ak Eee SURE ERS

y woreee Se . Me TRS en Sn SIS EIT SaaS BOSSA SRS eR Sa Dares not Spake ON ARB RU SR BORE EIS ANOLE ETSI RIOR Ot cpus SAIN RRA AR ASSEN aS BPNTECRA ROE SESS eh ntSEROVAR Ct DER OO y ORONOSNAPE eee SONS Ea nese RE eect SBOE net eC AER ~ Ee SaiheSo agSerON aisSSgE SSASSSe Pons erey RES esLOSS apeSSSages BEE eneEYPERCE SAE SRR UfA Coe OAV

ES, JERSE RRS CMEC ea EY SOON, SS St Ce Sy ee eeSe RECON RO. aAN OD Rs eSaOS Roe ee RRS a eR NS Saree RE ORSON SOCCER SSRN FS Se 40.4 Tod Ee EES 2 ly ges Se ee mee pe RPneat SONS SECURE oom, Srfae eR Sanne ene CSUR tonsa aaa eae eeeenc SSERS Se RS eseSu See aa aORSUR NG Ca Spneaonnea Seen Sots a” C RE aaaSree Raa esheenna oe,StURN SeORNS Ssgor BcEN &Oe SySate SS 2 oe ie SRO aaeSa RESecatches EOC NS Re RE SEAS ea RE RR SS SEE SS Oe tt Seeman A

TES 3 ie ES Ee EE ied ee BS OR PAGS 1G Ae neh Se BARR =pe isi(i‘“‘“‘“‘“(YOR tee ea BS Se Sar «.» aR RpSRT.” i EE RRS ays SeeOSs a SRR por 2Sg SSRSSR? ES REaR Os+ggBE OFSewe EE eR f3 WcSO Lieineiteman § sett”: gi NS Ngems Sos EE ag ESRSeer IEE PENSE RE

SE eeSeo eRREA ete DO ite Te gpg EM SE ARON NR he ISo seNO toeeae RSOe oeRRS. tly.SS aSa5CANS OneREF 3 Se” SERSor *attSOUR Be SACS A ISS < Cae ERAS: s: SESE TE SP. RES Rade ad pBERESM RS 5Sah Me ah tae On itan TERRA SAS Rae EgA oS On VR * eee EE BRS Titel NRE as epee SEES. SA. eRe SHAR ORI w JOS ect Am ES SSRI. OS OR UD OeeS Sak ONY fT SOS CT ERR: BEER tS aeae ae+ee ec PRET CRORE SOMERS: «YW. On neoSR eaey ORES OFtes SS ee aee2 TEE Sa ESE LS NSE TRIN BRA AS RSBE SOC Sys BaS SEER 2OE DOEe Aar ‘5 ae SRE, RSTO eset. aaaBo soere¢ See.“ Sea RRENRRRACS Sek Tone PASS San oe BR Re EEN SSS Oe NY eae aes RR RO OSNeng AEOn CSnoEE EER OBS BeHehe BeeECan | SORERES no." sre OEseCR AR “" ’ OR SES . 0 SPORREN Bees: Se “TA A . NBER SEE BORA ge Late STE AS Sera ESS Ea ONE oe RSS ee:

REESE BN eeepnenen PUT Ate ty LESS SRT SRS % ‘ . . vad Parees “ BERS 3h RR eae: ee : . ERE CG SS Te LAA DN ASE STAY SISSIES TESCO ER ESAS AN OOS NS AS ine BA GO BRO Soe be SOO EN SRL aa Re SE Ss ace SUS SS Bag SOROe ROS 5 | See aRR ae SRR ~ “ pet) SNES eee aagTO Soecprcs Ren Gate uae AS VEL DEANE ARE Aly ROOST Are ta SeyNET RMRCate RE SOK SSO nee ASIN NOS DORAN Oe De oh LOMO ROR POOTST OOO DORON en Ly SSSR te feeNV ss CINE te a Cot SSey.ooanes tg ROBE a “3 EN BEae20:2 PO; L358 Ae OO ee PED ER REDE ADOT CDAD LSON CORON SORE Cake oePrac. On OO

Rabe: taeet >. i Re E ESS OCRRORRERGRNRTRS a. ee RBS RET eS Oe f. sey *3t J, wo . BS SORGE 2 - | SISSk ~ i, SONORORON OARS RCRD . ES BEE Coco oe eee eto S 8 OLA Sa ESSN SONS 5 ORE LOSS ASSESS SSL EARS SASS AAO eee eee we manana ae “ BING SSR ES ed OMSL RTS : .UPR ONE ASE ceeSan FEES. cain, sap Gansoo SS2 ONT | SS CORRENTE CREPE PENSAR Cr aORSa aeRey ye NNN ee rete Serena RS Soe ac eT ofORR aa IIc: CPL Rees eae es fe go BTR RSGee EES SE cae veIONSee Soo Reeceae eS SS IT een aie A he SSAERE OS SRR SS ; ‘ q :SRE: cS MR ton: or42aORS BRAD RE IG OE RES Sea D8 SNRs SEER Rie SS SORES SS AOERIANG OED wen ROSSo AS ND AY te RANE APL

B22 ooBSR RRSSyCS Saas SSS UHH 423 f43aeBs Us ces |: ere eaeOSS te mirc :$.. See eee aE CoS RECN ISA ESAS ay MESSRS TRESS Sec ASS tae Ot bee et aha g comer oeBOT ne Peat enepeneonntes kDSRE TRE2Ts en aa ceeS ek tNe SR ORES OLS eSaD8 oh SS CERES SS R PERSE CELSO NSAID ACSAth SORE RE TSSe SECU © oO ARERR Sect OO SS OSTEO oOSean, od FoesR See DETONATORS SEERERRS: - - oRRR >BFE MSaN. : wes 2 oDDt RRwh RRS SSE oN aligh: OTBERRIIO 2 ONRRER EES REE AESRSE SISAe APES RS PR eS BG ener ov mma me RECOM RN LN SORss RCh cd SOC “Sade Ber eeiePHI SA an x4 SE ? s SRE : RRB USS Se RR ERR 870 A ahaa EO Se haamen AS EPS NOR te ete eNO NNES ON StARS IT S$ ROC SopT: Araceae B aoeSeam tence >Sa Ree esSRR Ry dP EPR OeS if. ULE Fearn SHIR BI} F Ray ETRE Bot Sos: ereOS D RRS eRe Sa: CaeMS g RRS os Sas«2 Bae Ge §Rg ASR LE EEA BR LR aS ORS: SSSR ENAC Se euae pn oes SpSNE Ago NER ee Biles nee vc 2Rs ER 3SAS ;ERGO: ATER OEE , FA *0 Pah RRO RRS SIN LS TAS 2eRe RB nen ba YRS VETS NST SOS SESS EE ERS SETS Satyce meeel ee Bs Sees ae See oogaa SER * ~ ‘ >“3 SRS SnPR ca Se Seas i SAR OR HN REE SOSRR PyRE EYED WS UYalDENIES at S945 CS Rae Seease SO ORI SeES OES RE RRS SS AN AGRe BI, Sn a Ree Bs ses>oe aae :aeEE Op RROPa Bet cs Sr oat ms SSEAS AaeTNS SES ay ESA ROYIIR Se ES SER IRRSeNN Bhct ER eRe DERE ESOL +3 YBor ES ORS INU AER ASROG ARORA Gh ATS Oea eR ER Bees: Sere . eens SEES 2 EOE CUBE AIT BATT ERR LEE MEP ERT ok ae SPEIRS TER ys EE OO a ene RRR ane Raia: Fe PEPER et Bit Vs See 6 paade ae haeaNe NU ORR ett ere HEE Rites yo E =. BRR soe fot Oa RR BE » naan’ es . : BREESE SR SA oe oe 2 SST SAAN SOR Soe oo HONS SO LRA eee Sees cae . $2 wl DXA PRES Ot ARIE ree PG AN Nt SOI POS PL BD A BSL SEI or road Reem teetcs as 5OBS A CERES AeOo LNT 2 TR Be °*,ee: SS: Ree SyEvo I reeo EDSeo OcSe eRSee a eRe Oe . ohLGN ev laBAG VASE LOS RRAROSE OCs 5 SSCOORER ORODR DRI ENOC RD ORONO IN ROOD Raa OOP NOREOa I AG BU AS RY Se ii ERAS 8 Ry, ; , a4 . PRR EEE Sa SEO DS EEO GESE RTA io Si EO ORG S255 5 MOTOS Sk NA Ba oS eae RATERS SRR Ce ones mee wo Beats LY As) SA gee SS ee BE ON CST, SP| EIR ARIE EER S 2c TASS TSO ASLOGIE Ra CRATER ates BByt:eran abo gets ge VESTS oe ACESRESIS SRE: Bre Sale VoeGey ROS ENS EOE AOOC TERE Seeeeres: IN ET BS j a8. zZRRR :GRE Br Sa SA Se RC a DORNER Ce ROIS Geen SOC fgg Mle ig Se «TO YRT® RoC yNPat waRone naw eg See NSO Nae SEOMCOR ASSERR FOS ASNON EAS SRS agen>e.ERR 2 Oa, RR SR See LoS ROR Lee Sh aM SSL RA ANS SERA AEN ERS PERE SAISE FPR: RILEO RES ea SY ANE soya NXE RIO RN on CR OS SAS as nS 3 SSD RGEER SE: ENG S £2. i PPA “P RSRES 5 Reta 9 SoS SRS eS SS EB RR Ey Sh FRASER ey: EASA SOE S BEL SOS BE Sie OR NOs ck eee: SSE AR ONS RAN oe

ieiis> Snes © a z #4 DRS oR aSBO et REYTE ir pen: Pe ° A ESR eS eeate ERS Se Sn, SNCeres BERS ACE Re SESenPEnee aoeSepa a BySoa pRROBEnS TBSS RRS xt ,fazyers sfMi gh. Reps SESS FESoe STATE EO Sw ee oe ESET RNS ERE i PORES ee ee Bee 33 eR ~ BERRA ox ES Kes preigit :reneeer gE Ree eT 3X2 foeae Ss DE es SY 8esee teaR sib eSAAT A ee CO tee RN vas aeRet Ore ne Semtee cae Seooees PEERS Se: Mera ee 3 RS ¥ 7 aed Sf O21: EOS REREE RE SOROO ROD BOLO RD ERETete RE CERIO SOR TE AS dS VARs ats one eke satens cee SOREX ASRS ae aRN See SS RRprego Mat SESser Peo ea ee aeee BN SS TN A AN RECON aoe te * PRR SS «1 eS RE ; “3% s ogee Ps i oat | NAS E RS ERR SESS DORNER SR EOA DE ROTC SEESEM SUPE TRO IIC REL ISIO CE HORILERE SDPO BE 2S ES SABRES SSS SOS |B Lee tione Sent gs OS oe ee RSI Ren eno ered

Bares BicsSRN ae oye aeREL PYF SeayLES e STIR PE SES 2 D £ St SihSRC RRR 255 Se SB ASS eet er DEGAS FOI ENT PSASOIREE SS SERS CREE 8ASES TS RRRSEs RA ARR RR BARA ANSmen OSES ARE AKeece SES, JOST Sao ceeaaa aRIP eee etOR ScoSS Be De PREF PERL Fs i§UEE Ras |SSeS Sone earns RRS > Se eR Dearie: SYBees CERES eae TURE cee So eas es Be Soar CERES RY BRR: Fae SRR Re ESROS RDO SAS ROR ER RU, OS >) Bess SOC, 22 SRSe ARR oe: © : ox a ORE : So . .ieee ae“Div” RR Se FESS ena Sones Bat, A SNR GREER SP RRR AN CERNE ROT EO:BOSSES Tes J RAS RS 5Soy Soe REO CRENS .ae SRT MORE, REOR MIR. CRS eee ORES aaneney 53: :SE SeeRNOR TSAR. CE ees SIRENS Fetes Oh 2 SO Sach Naos Sop ROR EE ERS NP os ES eae ET .we Re RR aRoi SR OSOn oS SRa:aOR BeBess ae. aBR .Sd eee OR LT SRS sc cis See

Ree Ee oN EERO Se REE OE POWER MRE are 8 eS ee ee ee “, ans ms AS Soe ee eee

Poet Ses Rye an, RESERR 1 BER RERO SRE ACES ie aBa| MAE Be RE"BE RRL RR Si ee Se ERROR eee SaTS Eases oanee catom : : :a*oH pace Sexy RORSRD SIENA en RRiaSESE SeBS EUR osteo iti2Es SRR "RRS Rc pe ERS BES LeaES Ree ann a ea ea Pesey NK we LT SS 1FSSC BRS sani reteset eg. y ae os Be =RRS SENRRESS Bee SER ORR3 EOS ORR aR RORBS oss RRER a UY SET eS eeWU SLSR BEETS Bt . * Re 2S a.nn RSvin 7""SRR 5,NEY SARRRRRRR Seer ieee teronaaa SR eines BSR SB SRAA a SEN SRE SSR OS2SOOROONNRE RnCSc SERNSRR RSENS 8s 5 PEER MARS Nae NOSE Raey aSBRE SEES EL oe SRE EE, “ Bee eeiearees OF et SRS Steet eeeetoenesanet n° SaaS SO Rae 8etFEROS EEN SS ROS RE USNS MM See oN ee ee ee eee ee eee Sater - \be OS Sse RRS mini! 2 : eT erie SM SAE ES ee Ses cpISS sesame Bs S-Sates Sina FR 2Soak ate Gem NOR oe RA ee eRRg gitna iene Vga Stes eterecat see aaS eyOES Se he ne :RRR. SeoeRSeaaet ont. = “V.-. >, Ce SRNSEC REMORSE REN7-8 AS,See: the SERS BEERS 7. >." en:ee ORR. Sees. fare reranaainatcanoie aoa Sareea astie, BRReutNT Ot STAN cage tilts genau nae SS BRD SeoSnD ne SSIES MENoS ORR SSISSEEED EONAR, Baaits Rhein, 7 SEN SSS 72 ORE renee tea eae eaermagree ts cioREGRET we ke ieSBR SSS. es MPR Ee Be shySES RRSeI NEN RS aeanticrace anc NESSnena Sa eee RESRRR OE Re SER OSMSeNaC

ESN ene ORE Roce: RSENS RE BR«Lona RCRA CRAG Ray -7Goren TS. Sere oe NR : Sy RRR thet8 aot Sa hs ae ee ee ere Eee SEN Soe RRR DRDEENS, tC RMR NT Stn NS SRE’BF is GEREN Ceo entSSR heanryancnastacteaea |: Sue RRRRON RARER CRORE bapaeee RRREC, EAA NOR SY LL Eso RRA eee oes: sunita ngunninien tena des Shine Sie nga sete onesie SER SRR a ena EES RaScere. eeod aeaimee Se, EORe xb| REECE Conc na Eee Bea SR Blot. RRR ASSARESS Senin Te hak gee 12S ee See RE Bann Sateen eee Ee 7 Soper eens SeesSee SES See eas SROFLA ORO Aeon SE SRR Ron SSR es Sethe ~~ Saas SS ee peop SSUee eee PARE Soe ea Rae eee ;Sesere Cee eee an OS Sefot Sat ls2nee LAL Sige SOR BOO 3:>, Coma» 2"rth SERRE RE“NED: CEESScy gree SeSastenen gta ae SS AR Phy S SERN CoS SRE Me AtRRA Minne es Se2 ROSE | aSomes ose —rrrrrrs—“( ;Cs—CSrs—Ss= aOR ASSD SSSR ETSgeet rrr SRT Sens Rees fea aecaaeanpeteettod EEREyw Sin IR EIEN... SORE NRE ee 3 NERS ORR, "EOS ISRO ROAR RS SS ENO SRN aN aSEER SEE Renee Pears bs eating et ae * SESS RE ORR ORRIN. 2 CS RT OCR, ee aan CRRA GAO. RNS . FSR Z See > hoe SS TRS SUNG NOK ARERR A, ant SON Leia Sees oau Suan SoS a ORES Son nena EER RS 3h URNS a

anes eeae eeai Be i RS ES SORES Oe aR SSRNSERN Re o£ RO Ok GS SEN SRSIN RYER Ses ESS 3 _ —w—“ i‘OCOOtOCOCO*stswsws—s—s—sOCOC—C—i—CS eae es a SEE eaSCONROTOOS eas aeER edChSO ig ay oa Se“SS eePeeea. Be:eanSES SS 2 eee ORR ROCASNS CoG, a Sseee RRODSSN accuBe t Oia Saptiegng Sen neat SRREES ON. RE . PR SAS SSRI RN II Neer “SEER RRO a eee Sieee nana PRIORI. oo =ee ses SNS RRR eeCU a RY Fone Sess ad OREN fa ane oSeo SRN. SESE ESCesta EST ABE*SSSSe «wR ORIN. * OR See ie SUES a Sea be MS ee ss ODOR Se SR SR ae

See |SRS inant ealonta. ioORE AyCRS ET«UU. SEES, cna + BRS Se RES Os a 2SNS AS SS Dae SE Pes STS Re See oe Rao SS BeCRIs ekeRRR. ERTIES 5 ROE an,Satie Renee SeeeneRS RRR E RESON Fe SSSesASN Seemnena eee easoieens Sr rc CN !...Crti~i~—OSS ar ane < SNR SE. Ah. LY I CN. | BORO UeRatat SoRieaene ton ae Rapa SRN ue ees eisetuserane Ran areneERR aaa IES ORT pers oN 0 SRR SORES eae ee SSSR TSE SAI Sang yyae PSANOEAS 5SRg SoSY a BORRe See a RRSRBRR” +” - dog :) CORSE «RARER ER SSS S RNa RECSRERL gS eSee SE BS Tern OREN eR RST REaaESSERE Rgenau US SES Re es une SUES EES or ORS SOee SRS SSgee eS BS) ae SREY. Goh EONS SENS oS SO eet SeRaSSSelcee “RR aeons: -° S eis 9. 59> Saati enone PRRs Set. RRR. SR Soe RRR ESS + RONEN ON a Se Seats a.es , R E Ree RRNR SoM RRR ORSON CONORRTS eau anhiCORES sn nihiarnnmnn ocean ee Re S ST LER TE paiser ES ES a 2 Rie ated RAE Ae ggg IRE CARI: 8S SR aR eran sae Se es JR emcee RES Sg SN. ie. RERUN EOE, “BSERRSO Reena oa anos SIL SON Re RY So LE SOE EEEES SERS Se eR NR oN SER RRS SE OR sh SR DEST SESE eas Sen BS§RS RSaaay eS Soar“RO Soares «Pog SBeRoociereen "octane > Sarecocten BSS NS me ee TERE ae RRO aaa Shauna nntanna te aera spa. SO a it SOAS” * SORES sc SRS CARRE ca SE Rs Oe ORR TEEPE Bos RRS “ ARy QE: > enn oo 3 © Fig? SSS eat net SRS See eee£3Ses ae aaa

PES Bide ligt Wa See ns Bes Be an See ee Pol Be re Sho Peers Corns by ee SAR J ORS aye Pao Seine 2 Ses go Se ogee es

JEP UMA, TaEin hatssa eee? Semen annn: Sanmeaen ODEO Rene DES Sea O SOUe LL Sith aneSORTS A ONS ean ERTS GOROOT Se EES ts Se RS Sere RR eR RAR = SORORSENS "1 AE RRO SOS ES TERR ge 2S2 See IRS oesYF cere Seach, Seen aNAS nero XSix aae SE Lay agg SeeBronte REESE S17,SS ORT § Hglee ES SR Ses aDPSWaa aeRO SDR 0 oe RRR 9AaRy ae Ba. nett fae seeRTS 2 passerBiOO 2S 22 Biles So OL eae a eNOS eet ges eR pes Sea Bho: ie se ee Re SO ee IRSGRR Ee RE Reae SY epSE ceBoel tS DE eee ge OE RIL.5 noch, EEL Se LEBER ooSeat ee EA CoS SeesSem POPS IE oN SANS MEDS : So aeZS. RS‘ nik PNaSSoe RSeee es SSCU.- «:| eeemeaneeteereemenenen ns,ek, Shem 2 Ue SNCS ) Sane TeaseeOs2 SOREL eae eee 4BR oonTg x: Pepe Ey4SRN waedd 030ogee So SAECO ADS SS one Eo Sof ES SOE gE 2 Seed - 7PS . SLBa SOMES ROS. hi DEERE Sao aa SERSO Ee Excise SS eeneen sees -< Be 5 >soak SER “ats et ES Se Bx Sey BeSenn Sa Parnas: ee Ey FR aESERREE AS EIS peOS See On. ELSE SE UaTET) SS SRE TEES Be pe 2c OS-Gaaems E> Semmrcmimccs < HERE ae ee PEF MERE. ne RRND Qe |SOROS ¢ Seeiie, O SEN EPRR: ERSOR ge REE BRE oe PIPE incng Ne OO Sat“Ene SE ae NO1 cocoa. eee Wag ed aeEEE RI EE RES Reeeee Berea Sob TO OTSSeCON BORIC: SOREN$c, 5" SieeeReey UROL, Slywns SSMS SCOPLES ~* See ih, RS ¥ a Saray .“e SSSREY OTS 7SOOM 5 Sehr OCB RRR Aree RSD ES MER CGRaoocan, a ee SESESES LgSe SRR seAES : foeeg USEELS : : KoSe. Mae: RRRSt.5 Gasett: SBE “Sena a

oe ei BE Rs Sr SS ae oe eB rags 5OSEPSRC RRR OR SES fe esSea TAR RO NBS NG Sa ve tig BS PURER Bybee LE; . ae See - RS hE EL IN Rae, BREE reatRe O53 IHEP EE SS ae NTN BES aMaVESTER RaSORE SRNRaSOE 8RIBit Sie Se et a Senn 2 SaREP RTE, 5 ‘ yheey Ts menos OR ertGE recon : who A 4; LO NM FO ARE BP ee aeREE ie3S EREE FFRS EESLE ES hn AR: Oo RBSFe Se RcSORRY Snes ~~ROS Seeman SRY ot ee eeSie ee erNSB BerSs, SESS Ege ores Sor Lem ceosenttapee ee ncenety 2eating EBS BRE ReFRS RAY ee eo eeBES seas is

orens ae eee Saas .sSoSaP ae eeen NORT ereYS. HE ST. NRRESRIN, Rican oR REE oR oe ce eaERS. ee SAAR eae on: SIRI esti soe a atREE oeaPAS aeeeSees ae es PB ctinSeR a. OS[ee Sy SARE RE NE eee SRNL SERCO MREOE REE5 SRE ROR * SO Saar ee eames SOU SRR OR LES, CSURIRREEES ? . gS 527221324 See ee tRoE A fee er Reid neeSas x: 9Mae %I a2 ge Seng: SRS ies Sooeeens Sie 5Pee pPROReT SensSY eee eeaR Wate OST EECena eeeSE OST,” OR ae PUT ¢ Bc ES BIEEee REeerie oS Soo OF Bay EOPSees ES 3HG eee, ened BeeFn : * a ne a te gee eeeSS GNCs! S| IRE remoe EeSe 80 NaS Ca Bo eee RED. ara SER Oe XE PAEPee ON:OR SRR AE BF SARIN. . ROSEY ReMMeCareD SipSK A Divergence in the Structure of Piety: Siena, Pisa, and Assisi

Within the frame of these broad similarities of change across Tuscany and Umbria, differences are nonetheless patent. For those cities which possessed substantial samples of testaments before 1276—Pisa, Florence, Siena, and Assisi—the Duecento reflects a broad homogeneity through

central Italy. The average value of pious bequests ranged between one and two florins (see table 6), and the variation in the number of these legacies per testator was extraordinarily narrow in comparison to later trends: 7.64 pious bequests on average for Florence; 8.79 for Pisa; 7.00 for Assisi. The last decades of the thirteenth and the first years of the fourteenth centuries radically ruptured the homogeneity of this world of devotion and charity. In Florence, the increase from the late feudal milieu of the early commune went from 7.64 bequests to 9.70 to its apex in 1301-25 of 9.92——~an increase of 29 percent over more than 50 years. In contrast, the number of pious bequests per testator in Siena jumped from 7.71 in the earliest documents to 9.05 at the end of the Duecento to its early Trecento apex of 12.28—-60 percent and double the Florentine increase. Pious giving in Tuscany’s maritime center, Pisa, followed a similar path, from 8.79 to its peak at 13.67 in the last quarter of the thirteenth century——an increase of 56 percent. Testators from

80 THE STRUCTURE OF PIETY Assisi, the bastion of Franciscan piety, registered the most extraordinary

change: pious bequests more than doubled, from 7 in the days of St. Francis and his immediate entourage to 15.27 between 1276 and 1300, when the order was spreading most vigorously throughout the Western world. !®

A second broad difference in pious giving in these city-states stems from this first fundamental historical difference that arose with the advent

of mendicant piety at the end of the thirteenth century. Two patterns of change emerge over the Trecento. In one, the Sienese model, the average number of pious bequests per testator tapered off gradually through the first two-thirds of the Trecento, then fell abruptly by half with the recurrence of pestilence. It tumbled largely because of the total disappearance of those long lists of 25 or more itemized bequests that earlier had characterized the wills not only of the rich but also of modest artisans and others without family names or large landed estates."’ The drop for the latter half of the Trecento was even more dramatic

in Pisa and Assisi than in Siena. The summer months of the plague’s recurrence, however, cannot be designated the turning point in these towns as precisely as in Siena. First, the plague returned to Pisa a year earlier (1362) than elsewhere in Tuscany and Umbria. Pisans reacted to this relived trauma in just the opposite direction from their Tuscan neighbors to the southwest. Instead of turning their backs on the mendicant practice of liquidating estates into tiny parcels directed to numerous pious causes, they embraced it with a last gasp of renewed vigor:

the number of pious gifts sprang back to its highest level since the opening quarter of the Trecento, just under 11 pious gifts per testator."* The change, moreover, was occasioned not by a general rise in pious bequests but by a return to testaments bearing the old stamp, dispersing large numbers of pious gifts of paltry sums. Of the 40 testaments redacted

during the year of the plague’s second assault, six bequeathed 20 or more pious gifts, and three distributed paltry sums to more than 365. For instance, in May of that year, a widow of a rural notary from the Arno village of Pontedera made 36 pious grants ranging from her gown, coat, and best brownish cloth (panni persi meliores) offered “to Our Lady” (presumably a painting or a wooden statue) existing next to the crucifix at the altar of Saint Thomas Becket (Cintuberio) in the cathedral of Pisa to her residual properties dispersed to the poor of the hospital of Santa Chiara. Hence the fragmentation and dispersion of her patrimony even exceeded that suggested by the high number of her itemized bequests. One of those grants conveyed the relatively large sum of 100 lire to the

THE STRUCTURE OF PIOUS BEQUESTS 81 “Poor of Christ,” each to receive between 10 and 30 soldi, so that as many as 200 pauperes Christi would benefit from this single but dispersed gift alone. Another legacy dispersed 1¢ lire to all prisoners incarcerated in Pisa’s communal prison, none to receive more than 10 soldi.’” Another woman in this plague year, this time still married, fragmented

her pious contributions even further, spreading them among 38 pious causes. Again, the actual number of itemized gifts understates the extent of this splintering of property. One bequest allotted 20 soldi to 15 poor

friars in each of the monastic orders of Pisa; another gave 1o soldi to each hermit in the via di San Pietro a Grado (near the sea); still another extended 3 lire for the health of her soul to all those derelicts who “paced the streets [facendas vias consuetas]” near the churches of San Pietro a Grado and San Jacopo ad Podio.*” Another married woman, a Dominican tertiary (pinzochera) and the daughter of a notary, distributed her pious goods among 43 different causes —a number that easily rivaled the long-listed testaments of the late Duecento. Her gifts ranged, moreover, from tiny sums to hermits’ cells in various streets of the city and suburbs and to those “who made the streets” of the city’s cathedral to

her largest legacy, a 25-lire commemorative meal to be consumed by the Dominican congregation for the health of her soul.*! The Pisan reaction and return to the mendicant solution to salvation proved, however, short-lived.** In the following year, when the plague spread to other parts of central Italy, the Pisans made the most abrupt about-face found over this series of documents, exceeding even the Sienese turn of 1363. The number of pious gifts fell from 10.77 to about 2 per testator in 1363.°° Nor was this collapse an aberration of the small sample provided by that post-plague year. Over the interval 1363-75, Pisans gave annually less than half of what they had bequeathed in 1362,

and the numbers continued to dwindle through the end of my period of analysis, reaching by the end the lowest level for any of these towns. After 1362, only one Pisan testament itemized 25 or more pious bequests. In 1392, domina Tema, the widow of the knight (miles) Lord Grinnzelli, of the magnate Sismundi family, made 30 pious bequests. But

while this noble lady made numerous gifts to churches in the territory of Pisa, her will was far more varied and intricate than the usual late

Duecento or early Trecento will composed simply of the names of religious institutions and the amounts donated to them. Lady Tema bequeathed, for instance, 30 florins to the Franciscans in Pisa but demanded in return the celebration of a thousand masses for the health of her soul. She gave various strips of landed property “to dower” the

82 THE STRUCTURE OF PIETY Table 6.

_E

The Values of Pious Bequests

7v 6 8 — = i} 2 } fe) 72) vu =) an © n >o2 & ODaswv o $$ 5

Qs &ch© op $sn o2©no = mo AP. So cw nf Au ay fe

6 Ss 8 oo 0 5Peae2B5SsS £8 5 Period EF 22 PERUGIA

< 1275 1 20.33 1.00 3.00 1.50 3 41.50 1276-1300 0.67 123.25 369.75 92.44 0.75

1301-25 94 0.84 2.53 283.36 28.34 112 11.20 1326-47 262 0.87 5.97 1,796.97 29.46 301 4.93 1348 310 0.78 6.65 2,660.00 33.67 400 5.06 1349-62 62 0.76 26.92 2,207.44 110.37 82 4.10

1363 96 0.71 9.91 1,337.85 47.78 135 4.82 1364-75 140 0.82 9.81 1,667.70 32.70 170 3.33

Total 1 58.17

1376-—99 425 0.58 20.03 14,661.96 78.83 732 3.94 1400-1425 133 0.42 29.44 9,244.16 126.63 314 4.30 Total 2 1,525 0.68 13.46 30,311.92 58.97 2,252 4.38 PISA

< 1275 107 0.87 1.59 195.57 13.97 123 8.79 1276-1300 527 0.92 4.43 2,542.82 60.54 574 13.67 1301-25 2,637 0.88 3.05 9,140.85 39.40 2,997 12.92 1326-47 730 0.81 13.57 12,280.85 122.81 905 9.05 1348 83 0.72 4.99 578.84 38.59 116 7.73 1349-61 352 0.69 22.97 11,783.61 184.12 513 8.02

1362 327 0.78 7.22 3,032.40 77.75 420 10.77 1363-75 136 0.57 11.22 2,681.58 54.73 239 4.88 1376-1400 264 0.52 19.00 9,728.00 88.44 512 4.65 1401-25 80 0.48 9.69 1,618.23 22.48 167 2.32

Total 1 70.28

Total 2 5,243 0.80 7.37 48,391.42 65.66 6,566 8.91 SIENA

< 1275 233 0.86 9.72 2,624.40 74.98 270 7.71 1276—1300 344 0.86 19.68 7,832.64 178.01 398 9.05 1301-25 530 0.86 3.31 2,032.34 40.65 614 12.28 1326-47 516 0.82 14.22 8,930.16 133.29 628 9.37 1348 280 0.77 8.25 3,019.50 54.90 366 6.65 1349-62 217 0.86 7.23 1,814.73 45.37 251 6.28 1363 64 0.83 13.60 1,047.20 43.63 77 3.21 1364-75 79 0.76 9.83 1,022.32 40.89 104 4.16

Total 1 84.57

1376-1400 103 0.56 42.28 7,779.52 127.53 184 3.02

1401-25 138 0.70 24.44 4,790.24 106.45 196 4.36

Total 2 2,504 0.81 15.26 47,110.53 105.63 3,088 6.92 Total 1: Calculated as the sum of hypothesized amounts of pious bequests divided by the total number of testators. Total 2: Calculated as the sum of each period’s pious sums per testator divided by the number of periods (for columns 3 and 5).

84 THE STRUCTURE OF PIETY altar of Saint Basil in the church of Santa Cecilia, directing that part of the revenues (40 florins) finance the commission of “a beautiful panel painting well ornamented and painted with the figure of Saint Basil and

other saints,” that another part purchase a large altarcloth with two serviettes ‘“‘to be elaborately stitched” for the health of her own and her relatives’ souls. To furnish the altar of Saint Basil further, she instructed her executors to sell off all her household tools to commission another large altarcloth for the major altar of the Franciscan church. To the infirmary of the Dominican monastery of Santa Caterina

she gave the remainder of her inheritance but not in the old fashion as an unencumbered bequest; instead, she added the condition that these pious heirs never sell or in any way alienate her ‘‘inheritance’’; otherwise, the properties would pass to the principal hospital of Pisa, the Misericordia.**

At the end of the Duecento, the extraordinarily high numbers of pious bequests distributed from the smallest and poorest of these cities —

Assisi—declined steadily to the Black Death in 1348. The interval between plagues marked, however, a sharp reversal: the number of pious bequests momentarily climbed to the highest point found for any time period and for any of the six cities, 21.16 gifts per testator. Yet, because

of the small number of testaments found for these years (six), this reversal must be taken only as suggestive. One testament that pushed these figures upward was that of the unusually wealthy merchant Jacobus quondam Vannis alias Zuccha, who provided funds, not only to endow

a family chapel in the cathedral and to construct a hospital for his religious confraternity (see Chapter 2), but for 45 other pious causes.*° Another testament from 1362, that of Maragoncellus f.q. Andrutii Ciccarelli Maragonis, topped the wealthy alias Zuccha’s count by one and was filled by numerous grants of only 20 soldi to numbers of flagellant societies, nunneries, and hospitals in Assisi and the surrounding countryside.*° But even without Zuccha’s munificence and Maragoncellus’s fragmentations, the average number remains high for this interval— 8.5 gifts —and suggests a momentary reversal of the secular decline in the number of pious grants. Then, for the crucial year of the plague’s return in 1363, only one testament survives in the archives systematically surveyed for this study —

the notarial books housed in the Biblioteca Comunale, the pergamene “Instrumenta” collection preserved in the Sacro Convento of the Franciscan basilica, and the Capitolare archives of the cathedral. This testatrix, a widow from the countryside, Castro Podii Morici,*’ certainly reflects

THE STRUCTURE OF PIOUS BEQUESTS 8c the pattern of pious giving that would become the standard in these documents to the end of my survey. It was a radical break with the previous long lists of itemized bequests. Beyond the customary five soldi

to the commune’s hospital, this widow made only two pious bequests: one set aside five soldi for her burial in the parish church of her native village; the other left her residual properties to the custodian of the altar at the Sacro Convento.”® An archival darkness not found for the other cities studied unfortunately clouds attempts at statistical analysis for Assisi in the year of the plague’s return, 1363.°” In his survey of all the archives in Assisi and its hinterland, Cesare Cenci lists another testament for this plague year found in busta Z of the Franciscan archives, and I have found a third one in this same “envelope” of scattered documents.*” This meager

sample nonetheless suggests that 1363 was as decisive for Assisi as it proved for Siena. None of the testaments specified more than five pious bequests, and together they averaged a mere three and a quarter. Nor did this abrupt fall in pious bequests result from destitute testators; instead, these legacies bear the marks of another strategy for the afterlife—a cult of remembrance. Friar Johannes Lolli left funds for his burial and a sculpted tombstone (lapide sculto).*' Of the five pious bequests of Ser Daniel domini Francisci Ciccoli, four were commissions for con-

crete works to endure beyond the ephemeral moments of his funeral masses. He left 100 lire “or more” for his grave, which he elected “near the door [prope hostium]” of the Franciscan church. To demarcate further

his earthly remains he commissioned a painting for that spot (in dicto pilo) with a precision unprecedented for testaments from Assisi, demanding that “Our Lord, Jesus Christ” be painted on the cross, with the Virgin “to the right,” Saint John the Evangelist “to the left,” and the blessed Francis

and Mary Magdalene at the foot of the cross. He then ordered his vault to be covered. (Et voluit et mandavit quod supra dictum pilum fiat quaedam trasanda.) Although these were Ser Daniel’s principal commissions, he also

left sizable ones to build water wells for the church of San Damiano (25 lire) and for the disciplinarii of the confraternity of Santo Stefano (the amount

to be determined by its rector).** Finally, Bernardus domini Guidonis, of porta di San Francesco, delved into the future affairs of his contingent heirs with a specificity not found

for the Sienese documents until the sixteenth century. Remarkably, he left his three legitimate sons, along with his “natural” (i.e., illegitimate) son, Stefanus, with equal parts as his universal heirs. If these sons died, Bernardus’s three brothers and then their descendants would assume

86 THE STRUCTURE OF PIETY the inheritance. In this case, the dowries of Bernardus’s daughters, the already married Iacoba and Chaltutia, whose 200-lire dowry was earmarked exclusively for the entrance fee to the convent of her choice, would increase to match that given to his third daughter, the only one previously granted an ultra dos. He then provided Iacoba another 100 florins, if she should ever become separated from her current husband, Bartolomeus (quod seperaretur de matrimonialis inter eam et dictum Bartolomeum). Bernardus then turned to his household servant, Finella, to whom

he had granted §0 lire. If this famula should be pregnant and bear a son,

this child should become an heir and assume one-quarter of all the testator’s goods communally, along with the above-mentioned Stefanus (which may cause one to wonder about the testator’s recent relations with his domestic). But if Finella should bear a daughter, the testator’s

efforts to fix the future went a step farther: he demanded that his illegitimate son, Stefanus, marry her to collect his part of the patrimony (Stefanus debeat eam maritare de parte sibi tangente). The testator’s last

demand forbade any of his sons or heirs to divide or sell any part of the estate without “the expressed permission” of his executors.*? By the 1370s, reasonable numbers of testaments can once again be unearthed for Assisi, in part from the charters preserved in the “Instrumenta” of the Franciscan basilica but mostly from the earliest surviving protocols of Assisan public notaries. These sources show a devotional world of ordinary townsmen and villagers completely transformed from the times preceding the second strike of pestilence. The long lists of small itemized gifts to numerous Franciscan monasteries in the city and the surrounding countryside, to nunneries, and to the poor have now disappeared, and the average number of pious gifts dropped

to less than one-third of the late Duecento levels and even less when compared with the years separating the first and second strike of pestilence. By the end of the period of my analysis, the numbers fell still farther, to less than three gifts per testator: one-fifth the average be-

queathed a century earlier. Thus, the three cities with the highest numbers of pious bequests in the late Duecento and early Trecento ended up with the lowest numbers in the last decades of the Trecento and the early Quattrocento. Not only was this fall more drastic for Assisi, Pisa, and Siena, it also came more abruptly. For these cities, the most dramatic collapse in the number of pious legacies and hence in

the patterns of piety (to be elaborated later) came either with the recurrence of plague in 1362—63 or in the year immediately thereafter.

THE STRUCTURE OF PIOUS BEQUESTS 87 The Second Pattern

The other three cities—Florence, Arezzo, and Perugia——at no period reached the average numbers of pious bequests seen for Siena, Pisa, and Assisi. Of these latter three cities, Perugia scored highest: over 11 pious bequests on average between 1301 and 1325,” followed closely by the Aretines (10.91) and lastly by those possessing the most, the Florentines (9.92). Perugia then experienced the most abrupt decline registered by any of these cities before the Black Death: between 1326 and 1347, its number collapsed by more than half, to just under 5 bequests per testator. The subsequent history of pious giving in the city known for its Duecento flagellant movements and religious enthusiasm then sketched the most unified, consistent, and stable pattern of pious testamentary giving for any of these cities.*? In the summer months of 1348, nothing changed in terms of individual giving, the number of pious bequests even rose insignificantly, from 4.93 gifts to 5.06.*° Over the hundred-year period

1326-1425, the most substantial change came immediately after the recurrence of pestilence in 1363, when last gifts fell significantly by one-

and-a-half, from 4.82 to 3.33.°’ By the early Quattrocento, Perugini, who in the early Trecento gave the least of the six cities to pious causes, were now giving the most, 4.30——a level that was not significantly different from that of a hundred years earlier.**

The richest of these cities, Florence, reached the lowest maximum for the number of pious bequests of any of the six cities. From its high

point in the opening years of the Trecento, that number gradually declined through the early decades of the Quattrocento, rising slightly upward only with the outbreaks of pestilence in 1348 and 1363. Unlike the trends found for Siena, Pisa, and Assisi, no sudden change in this structure of piety occurred over the two centuries analyzed. The largest decline came on the heels of the Black Death. In the ensuing 15 years between the successive strikes of pestilence, the number of pious gifts fell from 7.79 to just over 6 gifts per testator.” Reactions in Florence to the pestilence were the opposite of those in Siena or Assisi. A close look at these years however, shows that the average number of bequests masks a divergence in the Florentine reactions, especially in 1348. While most had limited their pious gifts to no more than 6 beneficiaries, a larger number than in the previous two decades parceled out their pious donations to numerous pious recipients. From 1325 to 1347, only two testators made over 25 pious bequests; in

88 THE STRUCTURE OF PIETY the year of the Black Death, more than five testators thus splintered their

pious contributions. One of these Black Death testators, a notary and son of a notary, Gullielmus from Castro Fiorentino but living in the Florentine parish of San Lorenzo,” left 64 itemized pious bequests, the third largest number found for any period in the Florentine testaments. The only earlier Florentine testament with more pious bequests came from the fabulously wealthy Contessa Beatrice, the daughter of Count Ridulfo da Cappaja and the widow of Count Marcovaldo, who possessed extensive landed estates in the districts of Florence, Pistoia, Lucca, and Pisa. She distributed her vast properties over 70 different pious causes.* And the only Florentine testament with more pious bequests than this one came from another Black Death victim, this time when the plague returned to Tuscany in 1363. The widow of Michele di Uberto de Albizzi,

who lay on her deathbed in June of that year, left 78 itemized pious bequests, which included 22 different nunneries located within the walls and in the suburbs of Florence as well as eight hospitals.**

Arezzo closely followed the pattern seen for Florence. A gradual decline in per capita pious giving was momentarily reversed with the summer months of pestilence in 1348. Reactions in Arezzo were also the opposite of those in Siena and Assisi. Instead of casting aside the models of piety adopted from the mendicant preachers and practiced by ordinary citizens and villagers over the previous 50 to 70 years, some

Aretine testators returned to the pattern of dividing their pious patrimonies and spreading them over numerous pious beneficiaries. Six testators each gave over 25 pious gifts in their wills of 1348. The nobleman

and scion of the signorial rulers of Arezzo stretching back to Bishop Guido, the Nobilis, Sapiens, et Potens Vir Dominus Tarlatus Miles natus quondam Nobilis et potentis viri Angeli domini Tarlati, from Pietramala, gave the most of these Black Death testators in Arezzo: 47 pious bequests. The values of those monetized gifts exceeded all but one other testament found for any city in my samples, amounting to 5,937 florins.** As we shall see later, Tarlatus’s benevolence did not, however, simply follow mendicant dictates of disseminating one’s worldly estate into tiny slivers with no thought of leaving future traces of his memory. Yet, not all of these Black Death testators were so rich and powerful. The surgeon Magister Angelus, son of another guild master, Benincasa,

gave almost as many pious gifts as the powerful Tarlatus (41 pious bequests). Instead of dowry funds of 4,000 lire or a 4,o00-florin gift to

construct the major chapel at the Franciscan mountain shrine of La

THE STRUCTURE OF PIOUS BEQUESTS 89 Verna, the surgeon’s bequests included contributions that would have been tiny even by the standards of the late Duecento. One item dispersed no more than 12 pennies to all the nuns of Arezzo and those within a one-mile radius of the city. Another gave 12 pennies for prayers to all regular priests in the five mendicant friaries. Angelus further ordered the confraternity of clerics to distribute two staii*” of baked bread among the poor and sick (pauperibus medicantibus). Finally, in contrast to the notary and son of a notary Symoneus, who in 1338 provided for building locked book cages to preserve for future generations his vast library of 156 titles and who established stringent safeguards against their sale, loan, or theft, the surgeon ordered the sale of his books (priced individually) in order to disperse his pious offerings in packets of pennies and shillings.*°

When the plague returned to Arezzo in 1363, the testament of a married woman from neighboring Borgo San Sepolcro even exceeded the number of pious bequests conveyed in the testament of the noble and powerful Tarlatus. Before embarking on her pilgrimage to St. Francis’s birthplace, domina Ceccha, the wife of Bartolus, called Pazo, made 50 itemized pious bequests. As in the testament of the surgeon, these were for the most part tiny monetary offerings: 40 soldi to the Augustinians of Borgo San Sepolcro, 10 soldi to the Iaudesi fraternity of the Albizia, 10 soldi to the Aretine nunneries of Sant’Elisabetta, the sisters of Agnus Dei, the Ursulines, and so on.*’ In summary, the numbers of pious gifts divide these six cities into two groups, which were not demarcated by any geographical east versus west or Tuscan versus Umbrian line, as some of the indices of pious

choices may have earlier suggested. Nor was the difference one of prehistoric, antique, or even medieval origins corresponding to earlier tribal or lingual boundaries or the later influence of Lombard settlement and law. In the earliest documents until 1275, the six had not yet diverged

from one another in the average numbers of pious bequests or their choices of beneficiaries. (See table 5.) Instead, the differences originated in the last decades of the Duecento and persisted for nearly a century. But after the recurrence of pestilence in 1363, these societies with widely differing histories and political and economic systems began once again to resemble one another. By the late Duecento, the first group, Assisani, Pisans, and Sienese, had bequeathed more gifts to pious causes than had

testators in the other three territories. But beginning with the period of famines in the 1320s, the number of gifts from the first group gradually

90 THE STRUCTURE OF PIETY began to decline; the most significant jolt in the direction of giving, however, came in the summer months of the plague’s return (or for Pisa, the year afterward). The other three towns— Arezzo, Florence, and Perugia—never reached the same heights in fragmenting their pious contributions. Moreover, except in Perugia, where pious giving collapsed to between four and five

gifts per testator in the quarter-century preceding the Black Death, pious giving declined gradually and steadily through the Trecento and

early Quattrocento. For none of these towns did the recurrence of plague in 1363 or immediately thereafter register traumatic shock waves quite as powerful as in the first three towns. But even in these cities and their territories, the recurrence of pestilence did mark a definitive turning

point. After 1363 (and after a momentary reversal in pious giving in Florence), these testators, as in the other three city-states, finally cast

aside once and for all the older mendicant pattern of piety and its stratagem for salvation. Wealth and Piety

To what extent did differences in wealth determine the different trends in pious giving among these six city-states? In reaching conclusions about changes over time and space, the various multiple regression models controlled for the individual wealth of testators by calculating wealth as the average sums of the values of itemized pious and nonpious gifts. Wealth was the most significant of the dependent variables found in the general model. According to its beta coefficient, a testator’s wealth de-

termined over a quarter of the standard deviation in the number of pious legacies.** When the cities were analyzed singly, the effect of wealth on piety ranged from determining nearly s0 percent of the standard deviation in Pisa ( + .496) to one-sixth of it in Assisi (+ .149).*

Estimating the wealth of the pious donors from their testaments, however roughly, is fraught with difficulties. First, a host of problems characteristic of medieval coinage and monies of account hamper even the evaluation of individual itemized bequests—such as differences in coinage, types of florins, and places of minting.*” Second, testators rarely estimated the residual properties left to their universal heirs, whether those heirs were ecclesiastical bodies, close relatives, or persons who

bore no obvious relation to the testator.*’ Those residual properties were often the testator’s prized properties such as land and the family’s principal residence, often mixed with residual mobile property—tools,

THE STRUCTURE OF PIOUS BEQUESTS 91 clothing, textiles, and other household goods. Obviously, these posses-

sions represented a far larger portion of the estate for the rich and powerful than they did for the poor. On the other hand, some testaments leave clues suggesting that these universal heirs may not have always

been so lucky. The residual properties, on occasion, could be awash with debts and obligations, and only out of charity might the chosen heir assume the financial burdens of becoming the “universal heir.” As

Maria Serena Mazzi and Sergio Raveggi report from their study of inventories in Quattrocento Florence, peasants frequently renounced their paternal inheritances, judging them as “potius damnosam quam lucrosam.””°* Such testators, moreover, were not confined to the poor and destitute; even a figure as rich and prominent as Pope John XXIII (reputed to have had more than a million florins deposited in Florentine banks in 1415) could leave his executors with financial problems in securing the

funds to carry out charitable and artistic works.” Third, not all the itemized properties were liquidated into coin or estimated monetarily, and those least often monetized, similar to a testator’s residual properties, were landed properties and houses— usually the most valuable possessions. Fourth, as seen for Siena, testators

and their notaries tended in all six cities to liquidate less property into monetary gifts as the years progressed. (See table 6.) In fact, for the other five cities the decline was steeper, starting as high as 92 percent of all pious bequests for Pisa in the last years of the Duecento and falling to only 48 percent there by the end of my analysis. These tendencies suggest that the values of pious contributions become progressively more

understated as we pass through the latter half of the Trecento and the early Quattrocento. Testators were holding on to their prized landed properties, refusing to alienate them or allow their heirs to alienate them. As Alberto Tenenti has argued from literary and artistic evidence

and as I discuss in greater detail in Chapter 5, testators increasingly attached their self-esteem to worldly possessions, wishing to hold onto them to the grave and beyond.”

Despite the problems in determining the monetary value of testamentary gifts, the data show trends and comparisons across the citystates that are in line with what we might have suspected from the general economic histories of the towns. Although testators on average gave fewer pious bequests in Florence than in the other cities, the values of their pious legacies towered over the rest. Florentines gave on average 118.16 florins to pious causes over the time span of roughly two centuries and were followed by those from the older banking center and second-

92 THE STRUCTURE OF PIETY ranking city in population, Siena (91.69 florins), then by the maritime republic, Pisa (65.66 florins), then Perugia (58.97 florins)’ and Arezzo (53.91

florins). Finally, Assisi, the smallest of these commercial cities but the one which by far contributed the most numerous pious bequests at its height, trailed the others at a considerable distance, the average of its pious legacies amounted to 24.05 florins, one-fifth that of the much more prosperous Florence. These results follow the general correlation between size of town and per capita wealth that David Herlihy has drawn

from the Catasto tax records for the Tuscan towns under the rule of Florence in 1427. The trends over time in the values of pious gifts for the individual cities corroborate our general knowledge of economic change in central Italy during the late Middle Ages. These values declined most sharply in Assisi, where testators gave on average 11.51 florins in pious gifts during

the early decades of the Quattrocento—only one-eighth the value at the heyday of Assisi’s religious efflorescence in the last decades of the Duecento, despite an inflationary spiral that continued through the third quarter of the Trecento. The increases in pious giving toward the end

of my period were most pronounced in Florence, which became the hub of a Tuscan regional economy in the late Trecento and early Quattrocento.”’’ Here, in the first years of the Quattrocento, the values returned

to near their early Trecento heights— 270.71 florins, or twenty-threeand-a-half times as much as in Assisi. Thus, Florence, which from the number of pious bequests appeared the most miserly of cities, from the valuation of these gifts appears as the most generous. How much did the differences across the various city-states and over time depend on the financial wherewithal of the testator? For this evaluation, the nonpious

gifts can serve to control for differences and changes in the amounts testators gave to charities, both over time and across geography. The value of these nonpious gifts, combined with the pious ones, forms a slightly different hierarchy of wealth. Florence remains the wealthiest (7 54.04 florins per capita) and Assisi the poorest (118.45 florins).

(See table 7.) Indeed, by these calculations Florence was perched even higher above the rest; its nearest competitor then becomes the second regional capital, Perugia (402.03 florins), followed by Siena (384.78 florins), Arezzo (368.81 florins), and then in fifth position, surprisingly, Pisa (203.11 florins), most probably the wealthiest of these cities during its commercial

reign in the Duecento. The economic straits of testators may have been more dire in Pisa than elsewhere in Tuscany, first from the disastrous trade agreement with

THE STRUCTURE OF PIOUS BEQUESTS 93 the Florentines in 1369 that crippled indigenous Pisan industries, then the political turmoil, famine, and economic crisis of the 1390s;°° then Florence’s devastating war undertaken to incorporate the maritime province (1406); and finally the dual effects of plague and malaria, which possibly were more devastating in the territory of Pisa than elsewhere. >°” At least one testament points to these troubles. A rural notary Johannes,

the son of the former notary Alammani, from Palaia, then living in the

urban parish of San Frediano, redacted his will in the year of the Florentine conquest of Pisa. One of his principal gifts was his “large farm house,” “mostly burnt to the ground,” in the neighboring village of Calci. The gift was made to a Tomeo, the son of Coli Cavalli, and to Tomeo’s nephew Lorenzo on the condition that, within six months after the testator’s death, the two would build a new roof (coperire vel coperiri facere dictum casalanum) and thereafter “live always in the house with their families and their household belongings.”°° In the first quarter of the fifteenth century, the value of testamentary gifts in Pisa was less than one-third the value of what Pisans had left immediately following

the Black Death (1349—61).°' Similarly, fortunes in Assisi had turned downward following the resurgence of plague in the 1360s. By the end of my period of analysis, the real values of its testamentary gifts had fallen by more than half their value at the beginning of the Trecento.® The other four cities show the opposite trend. Indeed, the return of riches in these city-states appears to bear out contemporary chroniclers such as Matteo Villani of Florence and Agnolo di Tura del Grasso of Siena, as well as numerous mendicant preachers, who pointed with regret to the abundance of wealth and the new opportunities after the Black Death that so freely awaited the gente nuova and eased their influx

into power and prosperity.°* In Florence, testators gave more at the beginning of the Quattrocento than at any other time since the late Duecento, bequeathing one-and-a-half times more in constant florins than

their ancestors had at the beginning of the Trecento. And these figures most likely undervalue the rise of testamentary wealth at the end of the Trecento and in the early Quattrocento for two reasons: as stated above, testators tended to liquidate fewer of their more valuable properties over time; and the calculation of constant florins is based on grain prices, which fluctuated more radically than the bulk of property conveyed by

testators, such as houses and land, hence dampening the estimates for the early fifteenth century. Testators from Perugia more than doubled the values of their legacies in constant florins from the beginning of the Trecento to the advent of the Quattrocento. From 165.68 florins, the

=Coon I~ Ow b =~eonrt ~& Ow WO SJSONDIG| peZtusy] ITV jo SNleA = é = D D me re + oa ee Yo)

(SULIOL] JUeJsUOD) 10}e}sa] J0d ASR ARaR SSRS&

SULIO,] a “I S00Q+OTL eoJUe]SUO SPTEHHIA SSstt (SULIO].J) 10}e}Sa] Jod ahebayaey mansae

NOVERO io 6) LSSIWAS ern ae sysonbog poztuiey [Ty Jo anje,, 7A NnDORKD CO — mM I~ YN = WN HD © I~

. = DA OAN BM DH WMO OH a

sjsanbag snoiduoy 0} Nop ern n= w Soe2ae

snorg JO sonea jo oney Sooo cocc CoCo Oo —~—OoOd-

sisonbag snorauon, RERGSSRSA FARR

pm oannarvs ' :i7sesae iieee i ee es ae fe oe SNe | eeSees A cone aes irae € 2" SRS Seat ee Sees ES Eee 2s SE SEES Pe REINS cee aoe ORES of ee © Ss aE L. : . a as a ie : SS Se oe Se : Reno. SON ee SORES eet Ree SERRE oo Ee gg sok SES ne to ea Sree Ben sf = ms raeSe ee 3eee se ele AR. eee SSSEES be Bee renee — Gates ‘ —_—; .“)42.7x | Oa. easPSGRES. SES RS ihrePeet t eee FS — 2 RS SRSSeS os ie a Ee CR es ce i nee SOE aesBSS ae $eSEES. ay SS BOE” aes LHS. os eds 7 re arose SESS.aS “EES rt, vO3eeRS saeST? ES ee ee on 2 HE os SOs SEBaantaes ne Seat 23e oO RS RON BO es Soe co Ray meee eeSee oo Re, E28, ee ent vein ets Ps EEeR BSance ae peat. Beeteanis ESS: as Sg SENN GSRes PORE: RES: a See See 4 : ke

See rocefhe Ses pce ® ae,SN Eee goCoS iescee e233 eefone Bence Saeed noe Eee EES BARS Oe Sacre EgeMee Ree Seaacee a zi - Fead pees 6 >; Se Sains Thess Sa SRR SeBee SEES See SR 2 Shas oer rat pees ESNee RRS SOS DONE OER PR RRS aeoe: Terk Egeee a SRR Sere :a .UE ee roe Os | iCS oe ean EMSS eae SaSORE See See Boma oes BsRES eee SSSee eae

ees oepees Begs ceSue a ce Ses paps cgSOaeEEES oe RS ooartes aSee. se Sees aeEee eeSO ayae. aae : ae Se ERE UES SS eh Reo oe 5Bee a oS tec pe ee: eee 1,heey EES eee Sees eo aaa ::woe _aeSeee, & :ge“ae ve ooetYso4 oe ee apecee zBes RR “os ee Eg ES aeoeeS iSee RES — EAS Sf Moe A 7es is ea jeRe eewee Be eseShy REA BEBeas So SEES on An TE EES SORES SAND SSE re Bee gc oe SEENog - ESR SRE: So psn”ES 2aes PISS Seg SLRS sae SE Songs Bees Lees SEES SASS Coca RAS oes ee ee he SERRE eee gseee Se 3 ee ee Reean -e: i - 48 ake ae gh et SER FRe rR REY sateres Fe RS pe he SORE Bet. Epa Sooners SUE SEES EEE So Ae gE RNC Oa a Re Seas ESSE Cee i ears eS: MH Renee ee Re ree 2 3eS “s seks =PE) USE! Peee. 7gpipet Rees eeewe aesien Sones Secs SeFEU pecans SES See SLES ee a— (eon eeeFe oR 2 ES pee EN seers f, ”.< SESS: PEERS nd bs 2gan Soe Se Seana SSS TEE See Eeepeas ace eeSEE Sapsont Beat tae RR ote _ SRN Reet ARs SORRY ee, EE SeeSee eae SERN CS sae-Sos nee eee OER nase fn. SEGRE PES gy yt lo: VRB: eee R.A aepeecorene ee eeeSnare SR REE BSESERS eenee SORE Se PSS SRRe Sree CR

a 2| aRe~~ ee PRG 8 eS Bees eS of .UE ESR OREN BNSeR eee soe SOUR cee aeSoaEREODNS PIS agPROS > See SOREN Baa.RO Re3 SNE, Bo CRRA aie en :,Bg Sees 2 Sy eee ae CEE PESRS FreEee * | SENN SERRE yBSO ea Se Ee —nO _ eeeeee , Sioa ‘RS :yee ano oo : eS, Bo Re Behe Ao OEE. pxaecee %Bet So aS 5es Series Spire SONS aos Sos~eee Seas RRS ESR, Soe ee SPT EeVEE Re oy OESs Back aa Bees me SUN BaeSESE 3: et See eeCORE: SRE 3 SeeseSSES BSS os RES So Boe eee BS Sea. Sata x:+.

be V. eo gs One ee See NgaeAS oN se oe ee See cS: bee aeftees os ee SOS pe Rips Bas eae eesoe _e.— | Ret aPea ce ROSE ES SEE nes Shes ae Haber esSE See EPG eee ear Bee s ae E be = MAS &a¥A — e See a4 — ae Bay ee es eeacee —oo ese BR, 5ts4:oe eoe ~©.gegae fee . og 4 =SoS _ RE: fsRS Pee.. ities eee SE SS Seen Sere Seoo Rept ca, &

| Sig , ny of the e | ar e , as t cm O illu nd | | ' anh |O |sS) S |ell | SS10 : l ! a |2 5 ) : y utatio oes bo eae eeaae EES ¢aSEEPS ee EES igh ae RE ease ...2Peg — .eo 2e.om :aeee:. eeqme aid SEER et Re ‘ES eo cated eee, oscones ee — =Pe ea ak — hak ie : aeen ae Ae oe Sean PoE Seo Net Roa eons SSE: Se , tae aie eTORR AGS «£8Mtoe Ceres eee ROSSe PSSSERUE: Se Sr SENN Ne pr ATT SEAS ASGS BE: SRI Be SIROe BY Sue RA CEE ENBe ReSERA ASSROR FTNE ig RR DOR VANCES: - :ese sco TRU GRIN AR ERES ens Sree ak PS oteAN, SN CE RR ST RSS ONS eee Se Ie eefoSe NG oe Goh a PR SUES SUSE eeeesgere Resonant cone ARR S338 RUS ceo ge oes: SON INES ORC hicaR Geese . EEG SON RO (ERS Re eA PEC NRE EO >RRSie erReSE En eeeon Ree gee ce ROR ceRPS OR RE SOR EON SatBEES Sane ee EE ope Se SSRN ge (2 ae SURE RUS | Reo OER ROC ons TRS SERRE eee hn ROR Tes Sea ee OR Sea RRS ceSOLID ee NSFS RRS EISORE RRS SER BS RE Se SE ESC eies Se RE aOn SRR See EES a AEE | USER. Sie eeSoe SS NC SE A ER Nres REE REST SEARO Fe REE Ee ROPERS RE Met Se Ba SP ESS ORS ISSPES osSOS SREper ENS SES ee Shee Sees ie peer. TRCSARC a ere Nia SSISRaRS SUESSree ASD GS Rare aa eRos ar RE RaeotSRN OS BER PROORET RRORR ONGREO PORREES BORSA AC EN ee PEEPS Sor OS NCA OER OS RAK ee eee ERROR ANG SARS See RUNNY SO SASSER POROT AN RROR pened ey ht Re BS Fr TRON EA Oe BO OR TAR 3 Rae Ny SORRENTO a) Soe ee SS SEE ge ee ROE | RRR RRS. PERN oT RSS ERS NR SIRES ASR EN Ss SRE URE” AN Perna ne arg ts Ce MERA 8 CR SRR or hs Sn ARSE NS SRN ACR RA. TR. EERE RS, Se oSSeRE ead eeneeeNOREEN Cc RE SSEL? RUMORS CGPRU PEN EERE SS D Ree E NE 20S aREN eiTORRE NG RERES A Se SNES RSOS:ae FBRRave SPREE Bene aieSS DaeCe RReR YAS SRISSGEIS: SRS Ro:SEP REARORD ORRIN: Ss 5 SE Sierras CN SOR RR SONGS TI RRR oP OEamie ge BinheSee ih Sees te

/ lf CRS GA eS pe ce Meco i ON Yt fe ce BS Pe bea. eT res ees ct ee

oy ae Fee Se ee Ce ee ee ee, ee Ce Oe SN or OEaoe SORA oo REE aR “gs Cc Na ek YS SOR RSSee eeme erSees Se ee eee RGECS ESNeIU Meee Ganee reSEES SoCsSEO EEG a tae Seca eecere ee

RRS SUS ES ae Se co Ce a Neen iS BONO NC Sd Cc cc eee ee RS SG ES SRR SCAR 2 RAN FOR HEN I CRRA. SERRE Nga So eae BARS Ry BORG RRR ee sce ee Agee gee Se ake TR SR > SU ces ae Be SRN Ss CSS Ss SSR Ren RR RO By ce ei FR es Se 2 A RRR eR

$5 E AtRe: NeesSy tt ae See SEE So i Se ee NS RNS.Sie SNE SONIoer SLR EERSTE BEES SSA iS tN RN Es a EIRENE SS RRS te sua aap ON «in, eS ROS PIRES 3h DORNGR SROOe Ok$SN ee Saas MR Ie RPS es wake ne 6RRS RN permeates BN RE Ge. ee (ee SSROSS ed SOU eRe ORS SOROS OD SIR! Ren NGO OTeER2 Ge SOROS OME WRENS SON OOOOStRE SSE SY BRNO Ra EG eeeBS seg

Be RES TERR Bs AS a eae ag EBERRON ESS" _. SS SRR Re eeeieaies Nereis eer SS. 2 NNR cay Gore TRE a a Sat NR Picts BRGE RES oS SC c" Ea, SSeS Sey Rprenaeacess wes Rak

ps SOS = Besse eee we ORAS RSBENS SSSSR Se :oh Sate oes Pal og fe. SESE eeAen a . “BERS RRR sit NaeNENT Sa BeenBa SESS ROONRE RRR:200 ORO 2 RRRR 8 PES OBERSSSEBSS RASC SnSee na Zee: Se RA SR CERNE PIE EERE : : tae ERE SRR S Ree Bt ate : 3 baneneances DEK SEK RASC 2 7 «SS SnCD SRD, SRNASS =: ‘ $d SREACR S SRSDae Ret BES, Oe cs ORNS, SER reerSECS rae hs.) «ATER RRS. +o" nt TOROS SPER Scone natcaratn Sei At oe ODEO Se ee Meat a OR 2 So 8ICisPOS SORE okSee RESR SeSe 7 RC ae 2etBee ERRORS Say SURO: coe LY" Ree Op So DaARR RO 0ORES RR AOCR RRRSsRee ceSS ahSaaS oe ERR

ce eT ren Geet Bee RR are ee fe ae ee Rees “LER ear Saag © ad + BBS TER ee eet Seer Re Seep 8 Sea eee Ae epee Se Se ba ees oe

SoS SSSR Se Sab 88 RS tae ROSIE A Ta RRR ene ROS pe aes Steet on 1 RRS RBS EE ERE Se ES | BOs SR IRS NS VR ASSN SE a eS Eg SERS ESE See Ce SR GUE Sweatt eRDR ee BSeee Oe TSR 2 BF SY BeneIaeSe oe oe Se ESSE ACe =EO Das eae A ROS Sak Scat OO CNN RE SAN yehy gee ES GRE eeREE 2RRCR Ce SR ers ON EO Sea BRN SRR ieooSRR eee 23 ORLaes Sees SO SIS nyROSsas ot ey RO : 2aee RR Sea.” RCOS Si SRR CUAL LE Sk OE CARS AIT RRS Rai OPERAS. BeRS SEER RgREeeooo eas eeea Ce :AGE : ovat UERO oR Sa Seeing. Oe aRSoc oc ORNS EOC StCRORES aR IO Sa SI RRDS NSNL gre.SNCS Re ERK: SE gsNee ONCORR g NORRIS NOieee Sa Seer: Soot aaa aed ~~ : : Mes ee oeeae ERG SNES RA aSC NOE EEECont «SER RE STR ORS RR CER OoHOARE SS: RE Re NS ON BERS 8 ON Ca RRR SOSSERRA ONANSS SaaS aN ee as Se ORE BO2SSOR ane nen “EE eae SRR Seo One Je - anne RAMERC REC Aa SR 3.OS SO Td ot SEAS ROLYESRD CoRR ecoaice Patient oe SS RO SR Oe eS SN ashSaee oe! eS Fore Se 0S oe RRR ERERe NNO So SRR ORR: COS : TU" SRRaerence, 2 Sone Seanad BrpeROON TOR REM SCS MMS tea aca !SRC YORE: MCS SSRS FeAR

a coord Sa ee eee BES Reet ee fe Ee Sees oS ee Sek: es ga : hoe Oe aga os ee ee oh a Rg Bees ae . : oe ORS < oS SOLE Se oe eo .

SRS SNR eeAER eg Ee ES NCO CEte I| SS * Beers REaKCe ORR aie Seas | SCS ERS eaRae Re SSeeeen ESR ers BR SS Geers Fie a ae ESSec OREN RS ie ONS ao a oaeee Nae? eetORES PS [aes os cee RNC © SRE rs 28 Sear ae BSSRR Seana een SSG ee he ee Noha st Sess PERN sats Sg SX SReaeORO SeES ee a Bo RR RD eR! OES as RoR eRes:TS SS RRO ee ee er nee geeSRE BSE ey Sa REMC NE Ae cep Sa RESRO Oe1 OE wetSeis Lt See TRUSSES OEam eeSaari iaCEE Ree eS Seen i” TS EROS >rgBaas eee Sorin atepeed Barat: osSaBere ay Coie SRRRES YARSno SheRvp NR Rees SSO TE oRIRE OS ROR oe . “ae SEER ae SN b SY as Sema 1 ReERR. SBR SOSA aSok25een Saas os te ROC RRS RR aes ask 8te73en

aES.POE ED SDE IR EO CI ine AU ee ee San Siti, Seen Fo SAC SS eG ORR Ace RR eR “ RI) a Ge RR So ae cc ae ee Sor RE

eRe isso Re ee 0 ye eee es ee a | SRE : ON RBIS Si ececeaece ous er ears dt SS See Sea RS 5 RMD OS OR CRE Se Nn RRR A Se ga Bae cee gs iS ape yaoeSY CARR RSS oe EE Be"vnc"REE ae RE GS BeSERCI OR Re Rae oe EEE SE eS eeRR ENR aReSe Secs ff ee acBSoN RESO RE RERUNS ES 8 Rene Sk SNS SO EOE CRS GLaCS RRES © aoRNCO 2, Se UR ROR Si: ec PRE RE SERS OESe5 S28 Re weeUS teinBe Cas Ne oaNG BSRE IRS G8 as SeSERCO . ” ARERRURSRRES tiReSURO SOW CS ERROR 2SENS AN SG LER SRNSE gc RR os,OS GON OR kk 8 RRR Se Sas Shes SR AER US SUNN CONE IERIE eet BORO RN aLP REIRERR Sos ROE RRR ROS ne RR a Se ese PeeR BeSUNOS ES ote 2 ARE iSS Re oa a RR ie oesSRE Soe.'his he SESE Bienes yommanne ye“coum BS SS eeeSo os>SRO MeeSSL Sean ROSIE DE Ta Nieee SRR Oe RU a egShc i SRE SERRE RAR aee Sai ES SO OEE oeeae SES SSiwr een Lai So cre ECE RR gee eae sheene oga 3. BEES connRESTS RS SRS: SO, RNan ae SeaYER Sn:CREE KO op Bae Sates apeaqed :eR TEE RSieRre SESS) SOTSgE DSCNS BSSe oSk tadSee Rien oRa Ses Oa ORR ONS RRS =ER. NCA SR: 3 SCUESTEE RG ae roe,aeeen Nea Saar eseeeOR BR Rees ROR Se [4602 1D SEATS S09 SI aS SSENE ER Ree es ~ EEO 7 ARRRR Becoee a a SO “SRS CRO SORA S87TES A Se

oo ee 6 eS peo eo fe OO SG 2e eS ee eo PN ee Ee ee a ee PR ee ae oe oC |. See Ge ee Ae : - ees oe NOS os ae? on SER ees Res per eS eg a ee Eee BS es RO Ns STEN NS RRC ORS Gor ON Race eae ae See See BAS BON = Pe BERR feof} ee ee 5 on PS Be ee Oe tee ae sere BS

Gg er eee 8 Peco Aer GC ee NSS eee eee ee. Ree Pee ee 0 ENG ee ee eS ee Bee ERO ON oe Tee ON aE

Sok: ES: aN acess OTN SNON RSes . Jo (nS ABS eee se ee AR “es2oeBS gS os ee aReeaaes oes Beets eeeiea as 258: Sash Petronas Bsadiane aR RORY SR RRR a Bee cass ee ce RRS y . Ree : OER oe Seige Soe ES oo eo asPS BS Se FO oe BA aS 8 SSeS aeeS EIN oh aREORDER -PREC : : 7 "SERS TRS ies een conn ee.ee OMe sreetN ES i SP Npees cePstee tagpares so ee zPe ES S912 eee Sees eae Rae fi" ee iRORY eg ESR See See :aec. . Seon .RC See a enn PR Nas eee LESS eeSRR Sas ee a SES eee eB ESpete SRR AR$.2 eagi SRR >Sas Sree So |ONO ee aSNS TEER SRR SR RR Ne Sr eA BE :aSool FIRS RRR ESE SCR eeoa Sas at Aree ER RRS B33" RS BEN RSS Rak GU Seen ARR ae Se. geRE SRS SR: ROOM ORO OR .ce «+ TERAR? Seabee ce Sess BCSOS SS ARAN IRN So “RRR I a aoe ieac SAE ss Se ERR cen ISSIR STCRS SES EESORE OTR esoS Oe SRS autgeathate ROMER 2 Re eS Soo ~ : ” SS Been he Se ORONO . TREE acs geen ARS SRR RS: BRO REE RS a: bec 3 a Pa NC ae Rata ENES Sul ‘Saws SR - Rape Lobel tee EO ine LIES atte Poo ema Saran eee Saami : Ce 33$335 ‘i Se = eee Se RE NORE :Soe SMR MME TCRR TRS LC ARIE MM MERE CL NN SERRE CF PORSSS SRO eee $2 Bo Se Ree ee RES ed Rceneen . Do oe. ae SR, RS RRs EES + BR aS se a ae REINS ee %he a RBS SR oS B EAB Cea es oe POR eae oe So RS See RE . Pn fot . a pF SE Een A ee es a aes SRE CS SI Res * ae Bi) Sra gas oS: See EL eae Me eee 2 Esanaennnet ene Sei os gee Beck . BES Nes, Be a tae yee wor! oly SE; ERE Svrate SNE ea ASS CURR aes S aceSa Se S- ee) if Sane RE Se ¥SR. SSeS Be ES: eames SERS Seg EERE SRS COT et wR Beta. rears re e ee: gues oa. ote pee RUE Ros So2h SEE Ses 2 Sean eo eee EES NOSans se ‘a a Sy Ee a CIEE Se hgSBE SNES ROR SPRARE ON oC RROD SN Ge SRR SES: ReeARS Rea Rei RCN SERRRR Se gag RS Oa Sc |eeSRS a RGR BOeee aparteee GHDOP ROR ne Si crates ad Oe Ee BEEN NOS SSS SSASTOR REISS ERT RE SiSRene SRS 3ANG a

iREESE Pee eS A5 ah eece SS Ua See a -NA SO ge eeeSoipaa ag ee SSRN eeaeaES ee ee Saee~aSce RES Beek £5ee) ERR See a Sn Eee Bee BeNiSo Ron SEU PER aN eeSEER re Seu is Imee See S ee oeSteit Sa ee PE $ Spo= c cEE et RB Be RERN SRReee ERUO SRNR. °C aR aCe RAC as aR se i So ONLI SUS Se SEE EN RAR RN aee REa SAN BS

Fs Bios Socrates £3. 3:2. Sk Beaman anne einen 2d Sa RE Naa. - - te RR Rtas Sag Set 8 1s tenancies SES SESS Sp Be EE SS AT SOR a Panes AG eee aaa Nee. CATR att Some Re

Fae fot Sc ay ihe ce Se eet ee itn nn anni eet paneer oe Lg ee Soe ee ieee Teg lose Bar oS Paste Pe es set seasick Pas Cae et eee tte Beets RpSRR aes cs i aettsSee FURRIERS ON ean oes ST eA SANS ROTORS PRE ae CRRARRND Ree i TN RR SESS SaaS scene 2S (SiRA SeoSEnay ae ee RReat sarSeas SRR 0 RRS. evepnenocaresneepne aero vevniyananaennrnicoee OREN OIUUGo SROeeae SesSe SRE OSoy keaece

So ee Sah anteRRR RRRDRO OREOISON PORESOO Ee eoRa onRRER ROO SOCROT RODE SE CER Spies eee Bae RC teesaa ES2aeEeBares ugh 2: ere SERS SoeOS meee Shy caniseeRACURA EA SNE Suet Sh 2 2s poop pan aeneaOn neesner Nise ana itn RE EEOCD Ss SRO assesORR AS RR ERIE ORCS ES RR oe 8eeAa

SSCS 3 SROs SRR ine nn aeNe SER sR ea Ros Bee eS Earn ote ee ee Te SESSCeSE EO ER: Sa a ae ee ei eeesole er os erent: 2 2ah Aee ee3pS DENRA NORR RRR gti onck dean eesees oeee SRS Se at SEoe Se AA RERosse RS MRR NT RR Sa = oeER ee Rs ee SS GRE SEE ERR cc Ne Diese BadsgeR CReeAEDEN ea Reaek enapiaR bans tnenes Noe ee g 2 sSSR ORSERRE eT SORE ER Bey

Rees Sines em bas seek ES ARRS ea Sees ea Sats SG on eeciORisee ee sida BeesPRR Shem EN Mere gee 2S ER RN BEERS UE Pa ghee voroo tochan sanei innememcniig mae Sevan anes RE SEE RR SRO ERE RRR RRR necBeg SR ae : BS Re Rees A aBSS LRORR PERO ORSRS ee SONAL SU MR li tanta snthaiarnnnm ns aaaa ROR ee eee ee ee Sy 9 BUS. agBo Yaar Saree Bi cs eecseSNRO eee SN ORS ES coos Soak shan eee eatin SER ne Re Nata Saves Ses eeSeoeRas: sineBis ARS: OES sear eaTer) we ao ee ay :

RGR FSSC Ba SR a en RS oR eg, Ra Be cor te a ven gOS: echoes SSS aR SE RC RR CR SSN oe BESO RS yh 7 HERR ties e.. a RES” ER BEANER oS ESL RRNA cn 2IS PERG BRe Ba SS 9S SR a Pegs Se PEE RIES RO PEER i SS PRE ieSEE gerEI RE ey eee Soe SORE 25 BRR SefOC SESS SPER iRRS 2.5 BS ASOSSESGS OOM) Bn teeta | BIR Si 7) BRA LNs Se0 NS aera SeERY BiPe | >ERS RCO Bee SABE:eBid RRORe SEBe SNey $34 i a#:SABE 3 ttc “TRE Save NS ye71") Pe Re 5 Sea coRES eee ELEN SSOSS io ES. Rr BO ge De ce OEon ipoee an.taBa Soy ok See ig SieSeeRm “btBe MSRS Bae aS :£Le oS eRe st BABA: MUO *.,, ROSAS “i le? SII BOR a RE PERRET fe a oo § Ss 285 Cre reEE ee Meee pas‘SF anes8 UAT BIN TS SLSR a eeeUE +, SERRA SGBERY et. RS See a 2 eee GRE_SX 5 ORCS oe east FF Stas (ES eS ¥ Re Ra ROC ae ae erMe CREE xe7.BPR Lie UT Th aes os Been SeePaoe $55 foooh VUES Ryotoes Ee eee

a2 leo i ema iS te ee Bee eo i PR eS oe | Te ea Agere ee ER: ES Ne Bs

6 tov a ele 8 ( a oe foo fo ees Bk RS TA! See eS ED ey oe 2. eS te ea i pe ee ites S RRE URE ERE hg Se: ae ERS OG aes Seren SES,TE RNRes 2065 ea7} TORS SE SPUE BRBGS P ROS, tsaBI EEA EY,GA SRSA tas oT? FRGRR Ree aeOe We San dee eSeee aeRRR Je28 3. $3: Paty aSON eaSON RSS FfTES ay es Bee ee Soot RSRX: SSes: . oSets Pera Se RapTT bey iy US HES nt)Seprennen TERE SNS Ek SSfeee tee seeaA S oy nee $F beRoe SS). ie PERS OR SEGRE AA Oe A RS SS eete feORES SESRas Sep E'S” Re On REeee Re EPSieg. ES SOE, ESA erPoke Bs aesG2 | cite Bae

oa SS Se RS Sd EES USER ee ES Che s See ER CSS SS Dee ae et eee Bc SS SOR RAY Be 4,3 RS a” Fea. te |S AE. Rage Ra Sees Sees ae PiBeaaNN CERR a Be “LAaeF?Ecpeas wee betg iy:EEE SE ~ OS Ba NRSC! es Ses Ne AXBaS 33 PAR OMSU $e:aeafSes eg EES Ae ee.SRSige ee Bie S aSBex OSBilge IRES 8RP, RO ONaes $%ja. 2‘Sy te BRON BSS EEE: Bees erl panos B SRY SEBR arsaR + Beets Sak eS BR,ER SBR oknea GN, PERS) fgDR TEees ga aoes FR, M0Ra C2RN eSges A\ SRS SR~ER ae oo See SB EEgeae BRIS «SEES Se SER 2: na.BN SOR, |RS RE er RS re RE Oa MES Go WEST Re ARS aS SEES Pinter S603 I OR RE PSPRE ESF SB820 SE eSAL oeSg ceES Saas coeOrBe MES BR ree 2 ES Bg ee ee SOR Ree Siete Be a Se GEC SERSS es Ba Sar BE EET AR cei Se cen GseeeeaE

Be ee USSR SL MAS NER aRRR LSRE 3 etSAR TeeI SD SRE: Eee eee BYR EE EeRS eeVOPR x xe & Pome aAS feeFieger Ay it2 ae ee aee Bs & meae ceeee Hee Yale SP SORE Sa Sg. “eee | Ene CRE ieee RS Bess By Bm OPES QUIS RSseed gOSh BN H aie aeSER feSSTL Be 3 ee 38. SES S Cr Se eeBl£3 Sie 0 SR Se: ee aaSAMS aae 8 SRSee EERE SNL SSBB Te. Ce DeSte Poe BA >FRA SUR ees >att URS BEoa TRAE ee EAE SRE SERRE SES SS:Be Ne AS oman Sr ke BeIRE CES ES Sige es 8Se 2S Lag SOR ONES go SAE Ce ot NRO IES, SRE Aye pear, ohoEe cs DEES a Cag RRS SR Laer ese) BBSae: ae Bae: ec ee Raa Baas Ds Bee oS EB RR SEs Re. BRR SRS SONS TRORE: SS PEs aace: te TE ELAR RR ERE te Oa (ib; ae Gare Beas pe? SB ag EROS AyRUE BAe OORT PRES Ey SSSSey TERE Boy es © : a PEACE SPE hE LEgees SS es aeaa2 eS Sites oNpee a ceeae’ pees ae Be Bae aS ee ae PERG $e eee SSC atNea oa OIE Sees ee}ARs ee% wees PS Neca “AUS IDS eeeee eM SESoS ieeeeae anes(fet aea Bs 3 |Ee laSaree BeatBCE: Eres Se fee aes eReeae NaS Seman SS SNES JRE AGE ST re Beene oo LY SS Co PSS: aaa Lo EAR eenenes Bae: Ee) eee: SS: : eee ER ES UR eee eeRoe ese wt : *SRR oe OO ee IY Seen Se aSee Bese Bist OER

Bs BS Se EE ES Scent Rem seins SemSRST ASoe, oii MEOS Pee E:“OAS a5BSSRR : Bee : ehSor oe 7RS Bile xt tne See oe nears pr det Pet oS.t SR ong : UB RESNS ORRN NY SERRE | SOS Se SEEN SL SAS SSIES OkSa aN Enoe pa >hea SS NAR BS Se eeetaeeae $4“Seeks Sy Be BOSas RR ade Re Re een ee 2nee Bt +RSISSORES “RRR PRR ER USS eos et ae? Pet mS ©. Sa: So +:oer BR Ses= ee: BS oes «:Sibee Rees teas f- BER SGN cs SoA PROT ACS NPrney Of HLA STR ne Ia £O.Reed REPRE NLRC AE BeSBE 7BeieSe. £8: (SR ESR Ee So Bs aeoR see eeROR RRS emeanere S Aa. : Bee Ee Poa £39 ” :Sy : is; SPER Re Saaeaes panes’. Meee aSES ee gees (2 NEES

UE BBS GEN NR gS, 3 TRE oe Sree eee SE ee 5 UO : 2 SS Re: 0 ee Pees + SE" #. ges CR BrES

ESFSoe FG aan SeesoR Tak BU CNSRg SLA. eeTone SSSR 8SE éRR : Afeee Rg: FEESs ENS SRBMS Reece areiit ag § +a cx BEEee eee 4eR By ESSENSE SSE SO EySS BPBS . 2,EE. a. TSean aS ERGs ad ecRane is easRas ee >a Ay Bakes Bs SE eS aAeeR Set ea SNE SOAR Eee “SRN :Se ae SES RSca ERS ea BaE? COU teEE EE: aR hy 8hae BFbas: CaeER fo Nee Cee SRE RRSE ES le ee aE acy Pipes VS ine eats Bet sos Oe Seen Bae Ny sgexo CeBe Nee Bae SES 7 BRR RE Ne WORE ae AST SE % ésCE .2.x, 2> eo AS 2 8ee SHED Sip BOBBR Gene Be a2ene OSC piace Crt fe| 2B ‘Ey Sree HS :igi: 3 ESS .Set ERO RT Spee tie aN ABO SEA IRS Be. oe ONS ? ee a Be Maan pe Sa. Stet Se PORNO RN cen SURED ERR MES Rs ay oN ay ga35S ee Soo GOR ie ER ER :RS ae SS Bess bocce Eee ee eR RE |iee aaEs bs Se So ae gia: 5 ES 3ft SENG) SoS ENR OS. PANE AELAEO NYtant a RR ae. win UE SRS Se APMIS | eau BOSE EeSas era ea tas 2 HOS mae Sea4 Seg Ng Greece TEs SE. eee: x Soe ae ere RPMS Roos NRE SS: eee eee SESE tem aa Tae are’ Bre? aSY eeeRR ideEER (ee SS SS PONS ogee AUE Sa Se: eS ¢eS. . Be “OE EaESPN gS SUee Rema iae ESS, apn RECN EER RONEN “Um ¢ RE eed Saeaeg : es Beeae Sc ee ar ieee. ER BRED SR RE ESS. eRe AC espemtareceteem : Sry tae RECS aad SN Bees Py so aN Sg SOE SNR Rees hee Bs el ES 7B: Bes ee eR SE & See eS oa ene, PSS ere B oe ree CBee Sas ¥a oe BD Pore ee PER ER, ¢ SRE ee eee ee Bi a 22 Sees ae a . Bass Se : Be ES” SE SEER | AS ER Seo eens | Bi ge) eee ee OE ARs GR BER.UENCE Se ko SRB tySSC see PEAS. OR Seen aOS OPEiySSIES ERRBe SE SR ABS SSE aa PBR E> Ries SB eee: SSR are cnc: le “oS SERRE SRR RSaan SR asSE 77 ca .LECEBE SBE Bo. gest: Bake os Bae os:“See aS SRE ae ow MEE.NES ER eS On, Soe ie Se ee, ea: 3. RRRWU ae ehTRS ARR es hope SOBER PSekSpeen Baas: SSS

Bll Giese Ot ae ae ROSSER BSGeeORR ERS emer vei SeaoaBees Soe peeSRB ABEEyeyRSOe" Rkeeeee : oh Met8SR mS ERO Gee R BaBStime) oe cae.fame tee OS Bee ete gE Be eeety ee Oe we . " eee Sere Cone. ES, ie PR aRR Ne SCN BUSeat ge i $e} ger? NA:NERS Saeed CAGE MB eee a, Me Se 433i: ee Do SS R GO OE RORNRS Fe AE {FBP Bees cad 3aah iu 5eee 2ee SR RS me pe LOS bh Reues TEia aSgee ERS aga . RAN Coa a ieee NY oS eepeFOS SPR ee “ey PAR Ege Co GaA IRS 6f ER Bt 2RS c) ome ; ftSE BsRRR i Fo R555 Raa a 5)?SSN Se;Th BRS Qs URS Sergey EARS a od eb A TR Oo RRS SRN ca Os BEAMS ASRS oy.«ES SASSoy ga RR eee RE SaSW et 4BE aes, Bre! SESHBS « epeaee Ble: ge h°eee ee

8 ON Ge:isieee SeesBeg. ES IRR: SE :See, ERAS SNR 75 SS SES oes baer SSRS aeFaererse aROE, RieterGOES a 11 Sa SRS BNE: Late See EE gf LR eyame Bers SS aeBS 88SSAC Be Ee ee IN Sere pene ene epee rie. RE Bee CE RS RTL A 21UE TR RES Bes ov deen Shas Beg oe: ES | SeLS Lo geEE SRR PORN ASR OeTER era | ae NaaeBe See Poe LEIS & * ae SASS NESS BRR Re =OT wee esSERRE . SERS Be Sy & Si euler gsr ran Ae SSS Ba gen FPSee Saae AAD 822 -|REE See RE ee a, SUR SEE Bot RSaxNC oss REst ee SOL 2ches A CNR eons 3:Stee §Ue ie Se RRC ae Pens Rome as... Coe ee aia Sak eeseae PEO tSee Ae Ses OSES Retr |ROMS Se: cs Seed: Bees Se3 Besa sR BS ae TL ES ae FF BES BRR osBeOS 5, Bee sis. SAR PRI Sy eSRNS CG gePea? hey Pere SS ERT Re: RES BIRR ERE IB OO 2 ok a RE | a Spee MRE Seo “je RE ENO Bc om em SES BE CRE Se NRSC: | SE 1 SERRE Bae me 8 Al eee ae ay. | ee RR = 2 SM SR Sa Ree rae ea ea a LERORCIN SRR RRC SS Sf ot EB Rbges Brees

Aeon ae a eee re, TEES en as Seem eh ET ONS, LS OE | ay Ge Bie

SMees. GeeCae BAHE. oes Re RS: SRR aioe ie nf “:Ber CSN TR AR SRY GE CE EENEPS.