Nos Cristiuus heres de Cosze(glowi/) ') castellanus Cracouiensis (sic), geiieralis iudex terre Sandeczensis, ad oranium uoticiam cupientes devenire, significamus t{enore) presoncium universis et singulis, quibus expedit; quia coram nobis nostrorumąue assessorum presencia constitu(iMó) personaliter nobilis Clemens Franczuch olim heres de Noszaczowicze^), non coactus nec compulsus nec aliquo dolo (/>-)audis seductus, recognovit se totam partem patrimouii ibi, que (sic) loooruni habuit et habiturus est. condescendisse et resignasse nobili lohaiuii dieto Franczuch heredi de ibidem, fratri suo gerraano et eius successoribus, quod ipse prenoniinatus lołiannes predicto Clementi fratri suo pro totali porcione patrinionii satisfecit, ita tainen quod amodo ipsum lohannem et eius posteros impedire et araonere (sic) non debit perpetualiter predictum ordinem et divisionem intcr ipsum et fratrem suum tenere et observare et pro quo eciam idem Clemens ipsum lohannem racione patrimonii citaverat, ipsum ab omnibus perpetualiter Uberum dimisit. In cuius rei testimonium sigillum nostrum est appensum. Datum in Sandecz ipso die sancti Arnolphi ^) anno domini millesimo quadringentesimo vigesimo sexto, presentibus nobilibus Pełka, Wchacz Derslao dieto *) heredibus de Adamowawola, Wornario et Petro heredibus olim de Gaban, Prandocze de Lucowicze et Nicolao dieto Czeczolhka Nicolaoque Cracowka heredibus de Lucowicz.
The original was damaged by moisture and rust in the library of the Department. nar. Them. Ossolińskich no. 737. On a strip of parchment, suspended on dark green wax, there is a tiny stamp with the coat of arms symbols which are no longer very clear, but the Lis coat of arms can still be recognized, and the inscription in the rim is completely illegible. - This document is undoubtedly an original, all external features clearly support it, both the writing and the parchment and the attached stamp, and yet it contains a puzzle that is difficult to solve. It comes from Krystyna •/. Kozichgłów, as both the inscription and the stamp confirm, but this Krystyn of Kozichgłów was never a Kraków castellan, in 1426 it was most certainly Krystyn of Ostrów of the Rawicz coat of arms.
In addition, Krystyn of Ostrów, castellan of Krakow, has been featured in Helcia monuments for many years Krystyn of Kozichgłów, castellan of Nowy Sącz, with the coat of arms undoubtedly Lis (although Niesiecki gives him the coat of arms Zerwikaptur). which results from the description of his banner at the Battle of Tannenberg given by Długosz and from the stamp attached to our document. Therefore, Krystyn of Kozichgłów was not a Krakow castellan in 1426 and never was one at all, so how can we explain the fact that in our document, which cannot be a falsity by any means, he appears as a Krakow castellan? This is most likely due to the carelessness of the writer who wrote Cracouiensis instead of Sandechensis. This translation may seem implausible to many people in view of the fact that Krystyn himself issues this document and that its writer must have known well on whose behalf he is issuing the document. I admit that this type of negligence is probably rare, but we can cite another similar example from Sącz, which seems to have had this specialty. On April 21, 1356, Wydżga issued a document for the burghers of Nowy Sącz, starting with the words: Nos Wydzga Castellanus Sandechensis (see Piekosiński code. dipl. raolop. p. 290 and 291), this document is undoubtedly the original, and yet Wydźga was never a castellan, but a staroste of Nowy Sącz.
') The first five letters are completely well preserved, the sixth letter still has a lower curved line, the rest is damaged by rust and moisture, so there can be no doubt that the word Coszeglowy stood here.
'^) Compare doc. no. XXIX. above printed.
') Saint Arnold was celebrated in Poland according to the Krakow calendar (Biel. Mon. Pol. Hist. II.) on July 18.
*) Actually it should be: Berslao dieto Wehacz.
XXXVII.
in Drohobych on July 8, 1427, Władysław Jagiełło equips the Koropiecki church.