Tarnowski family
Rafal Prinke
Norma Rudinsky <rudi...@UCS.ORST.EDU> wrote:
> Anna Czobor of Czobor Szent-Mihaly (b. 2 June 1607-d. after 1655,
> according to Satek) married 2) Michaelis Stanislaus Tarnowsky
> (1st husband was Stanislaus Thurzo).
According to W. Dworzaczek _Genealogia. Tablice_, Warsaw 1959,
tables 95-96:
Michal Stanislaw (Michael Stanislaus) Tarnowski, b. abt 1590, d. 1654/1655,
royal courtier, castelan of Wojnicz 1647, m. 1638 countess Anna Csobor,
d. 1655/1656
He was a son of Stanislaw (Stanislaus) Tarnowski, castelan of Sandomierz,
and Zofia Ocieska.
> They had three children who (apparently after their father's death) gained
> Hungarian citizenship about 1655:
I do not think the concept of "citizenship" was of any importance
then and there.
> Sophia Petronilla de Tarnow, who became the (2nd or 3rd) wife of Gabrielis
> Illeshazy in Trencin, but apparently returned to Poland as wife of
> "Szaniszlo Praznovszky polci palatin 1666" (source Ivan Nagy, XI, 65).
She had 3 husbands: 1) Andrzej Firlej, castelan of Lublin,
2) Gabriel Illyeshazy, zupan of Trenczyn, 3) Samuel Jerzy Prazmowski,
palatine of Plock
> Peter Charles, who apparently died unmarried.
Piotr Pawel (Peter Paul), b. 1640, d. 1661
> Joannes Stanislaus, who married "Bora Dombrovicza" (I. Nagy, XI, 65).
Jan Stanislaw, b. 1642, d. 1676, m. 1663 Zofia Barbara Firlej, d. 1695
(the Firlej family used the predicate "de Dambrowica")
Their descendants are extant in male line.
> Carolus Wagner (in Analecta Scepusii IV, 146-47) says that Tarnowsky
> (father) served under the Austrian emperor. He must also have been known
> as "Amornak," according to Nagy: ki Amornak is neveztetett (XI, 64).
The given name "Amor" was used by one branch of the Tanowski family,
descendents of Jan Amor Tarnowski (d. 1515), castelan of Cracow and
the chancellor of the kingdom, one of the greatest politicians
in Polish history.
W. Dworzaczek wrote a very detailed, monumental monograph on
the Tarnowskis - but only 2 vols. were published reaching the 16th c.
Best regards,
Rafal
Norma Rudinsky
Thanks very much to Rafal Prinke, for the info on the Tarnowski family.
What a loss that W. Dworsaczek published only to the l6th c.! Are there
any archives of correspondence, papers, even economic papers for the
period of Anna Czobor, i.e. 1638-55/56? Or a portrait of her or the
family would be great!
I agree that citizenship meant little in the 17th c. That was the
interpretation I. Nagy put on the children's petition (perhaps it was
really for property, etc).
Since Michal Stanislaw Tarnowski was "castelan of Wojnicz 1647," could you
briefly describe Wojnicz and identify its owner or lord in that time?
Also, is it possible to characterize the Tarnowski family and/or Wojnicz as
especially marked by cultural patronage (literature, music, art, etc)?
That is, some aristocrats did no more than was expected of them,
noblesse oblige, but others are known as patrons from dedications to
them, founding of schools, their own correspondence, and such. E.g. the
family of Anna Czobor's first husband, Stanislaus Thurzo IV, was renowned for
its multilingual cultural interests.
I assume the Tarnowskis were Catholic, right? But Anna Czobor
remained a fervent Lutheran and patroness of churches and pastors on her
estates in Upper Hungary.
Am I grabbing for straws? Unfortunately, yes, because there is so little
direct evidence of AC's possible literary activity, that one can only
look for indirect and speculative indications.
Anything you can add will be most appreciated.
Norma Rudinsky
rudi...@ucs.orst.edu
On Wed, 22 Jan 1997, Rafal Prinke wrote:
> Norma Rudinsky <rudi...@UCS.ORST.EDU> wrote:
>
> > Anna Czobor of Czobor Szent-Mihaly (b. 2 June 1607-d. after 1655,
> > according to Satek) married 2) Michaelis Stanislaus Tarnowsky
> > (1st husband was Stanislaus Thurzo).
>
> According to W. Dworzaczek _Genealogia. Tablice_, Warsaw 1959,
> tables 95-96:
>
> Michal Stanislaw (Michael Stanislaus) Tarnowski, b. abt 1590, d. 1654/1655,
> royal courtier, castelan of Wojnicz 1647, m. 1638 countess Anna Csobor,
> d. 1655/1656
>
remainder deleted