VMs: Re: "M." Georg Barchius

["Rafal T. Prinke" <rafalp@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Jorge Stolfi wrote:

>     > [Dana Scott:] I wonder if the M. might refer to 'Monsignore'.
>     > Merriam-Webster's date for this title is 1641 (close enough).

I guess it gives the earliest *English* usage? I am quite sure it was
not used in Poland - so I doubt it would be used in Bohemia
(unless he was attempting the Italian usage).

> I thought that it could be that, or perhaps "Monk" ("Monacus"?).
> However, to my eyes, the tone of the letter does not seem to be what I
> would expect from a member of the Church.

I have found an earlier use in the sense you suggest:

    "nos M. Paulus magister domus fratrum" (1213)

but also a later one:

    M. Christian Scrivers erbauliches vollstandiges Buss-Beicht 
    und Communion Buch ? M. Paulus Simoni[--?] (1708)

without looking too hard. So this is definitely a possibility. But...

> For example, I don't think
> that he would have referred to the first courier simply as "a certain
> religious person". Wouldn't he have been more conscious of the
> person's name and title, or at least referred to him as "brother" or
> such? And would Kircher write to Marci (a layman) to inquire about
> another "man of the cloth"?

I agree that it would be strange.

> As for "Monsignore", specifically, that title would have made Baresch an
> equal or superior to Kircher in the hierarchy, and again the tone of
> the letter seems to be against that. Not to mention that a Monsignore
> would have been much easier to track down in historical records,
> wouldn't he?

That exactly what was my first thought about Dana's suggestion.

Best regards,

Rafal