FRANCISCAN TESTIMONIES FROM OUTSIDE THE ORDER

PART TWO

HISTORY AND CHRONICLE

SECTION ONE

DOCUMENTS AND TESTIMONIES FROM OUTSIDE THE ORDER

(1526-1632)

I

FRANCISCAN TESTIMONIES FROM OUTSIDE THE ORDER

(1527 – 1611)

INTRODUCTION

TEXTS AND NOTES
by
CONSTANZO CARGNONI

I FRATI CAPPUCCINI. Documenti e Testimonianze del Primo Secolo. A cura di COSTANZO CARGNONI. Roma 1982, II, 24-40.

Prepared by Gary Devery OFM Cap

(Original text in I Frati cappuccini here)

OVERVIEW

In this documentary section, of immeasurable historical significance for comprehending the Capuchin reform, we have organised a series of testimonies in a logical and chronological sequence. These testimonies provide an objective perspective on the early life and development of the Capuchins, as observed and judged by outsiders rather than the Capuchin protagonists themselves. This perspective offers a unique glimpse into the first Capuchin century.

On the one hand, they guarantee an objective presentation of the “Capuchin” phenomenon. On the other hand, if they adopt a polemical or apologetic tone, they serve to confirm the interpretation of one of the most contentious polemics that emerged within the Franciscan Order, following the Spirituals and the Observants, which were always fertile grounds for “seraphic” conflicts.

Given the historical context, wherein the first to experience the emergence of the new Franciscan reform were the members of the Order, particularly the Observants from whom the Capuchins derived and subsequently separated, we present a collection of texts, predominantly of Observant origin, characterised by their fervent polemical contrasts. These texts range from the most extreme opposition to the most cunning downsizing and demythologizing of the phenomenon, to a decidedly sympathetic stance, even admiring and extolling the newfound grace of Franciscan life that manifested in the 16th century. (I. Franciscan testimonies from outside the Order: documents 1-13).

Amidst this controversy between the Observants and the Capuchins, the “virile” intervention of a 16th-century noblewoman, the Marchioness of Pescara, renowned as the greatest Italian poetess of that era, Vittoria Colonna (1490-1546), emerges victorious. We present, for the first time, a comprehensive collection of the “Capuchin” epistolary of Vittoria Colonna, which encompasses the letters written or received by the Marchioness in support of the Capuchins, comprising a total of 25 letters. The epistolary serves a twofold purpose: defending the Capuchin reform and expressing admiration for the life and evangelical preaching of Bernardino Ochino. Ochino, as a pivotal figure in the Capuchin reform during those years, significantly influences the epistolary of Vittoria Colonna, as evidenced by the testimonies from outside the Order. Consequently, we append a small section of letters related to the figure of Ochino, encompassing both the “magical” moment of his preaching and the tragic culmination of his flight. (II. “Capuchin” epistolary of Vittoria Colonna: documents 14-34).

In addition to the twofold series of sources, largely shaped by polemics, a third category of historical testimonies can be identified. These testimonies are provided by contemporaries outside the Order and so free from any internal conflicts, yet they are favourable to the Capuchins. This approval can be attributed to their support for the pre-Tridentine Catholic reform or to the opportunity to utilise the zeal of the newly reformed religious to implement the renewal decrees of the Tridentine Council. This latter event, with its official approval of the Capuchin reform, serves as a pivotal moment in the history of the Order’s origins. It marks the transition between the initial significant documents of the Order’s history, such as the interventions of Father Giustiniani and Caterina Cybo, and others that provide a more positive perspective on the early Capuchin expansion, particularly in Italy. This geographical expansion is most significantly exemplified in St. Felix of Cantalice, who embodies the spiritual dimension and ideal justification for the Capuchins (III. Various testimonies on the origins and early development of the Order: documents 35-52).

To ensure the homogeneity of the documentation, a fourth section of documents has been added. These documents are a collection of interventions from the extensive epistolary of St. Charles Borromeo. These interventions support the expansion and preaching of the Capuchins, contributing to the establishment of several of their friaries. This collection also includes letters written to the saint (IV. From the epistolary of St. Charles Borromeo: documents 53-68).

A distinct type of documentation originating from external sources, such as town chronicles and diaries, can also be found in the form of autobiographies, recollections, or records of news and historical memories. The external observer in these accounts comes from diverse backgrounds, including nuns writing the memoirs of their monasteries, notaries and city chroniclers from family tradition, religious scholars, clerics, and cardinals. This variety of social backgrounds contributes to presenting the presence, activities, and spiritual life of the Capuchins in various cities with exceptionally detailed and vivid accounts, often capturing the essence of contemporary events in a concise manner (V. Chronicles and Diaries: Documents 69-91).

A complementary component to these town chronicles are the so-called “revisions” of the various municipalities, to which a dedicated section of this documentary collection is devoted (cf. Part II, Section II: Testimonies of Public Authorities, edited by C. Urbanelli).

Given that the chronicles frequently, if not always, document the preaching of the Capuchins, which was a common cause for the establishment of their friaries, we sought to collect characteristic testimonies on Capuchin preaching during the latter half of the 16th and early 17th centuries, the most prolific period of Capuchin foundations. This era is exemplified by notable figures such as Alfonso Lupo, Mattia Bellintani da Salò, Cristoforo Facciardi da Verucchio, Giacinto da Casale, and tersely, an anonymous Capuchin. This typical preaching stands out in letters written by outsiders, possibly for literary or political reasons, but it is also critically assessed within the context of Catholic preaching of the time, as evidenced by Cardinal Federico Borromeo (VI. Particular Testimonies on Capuchin Preaching: Documents 92-95).

In conclusion to this section, it appeared to be of significant importance and practical utility to us to compile a comprehensive summary of general information on the Capuchin Order. This information has been analysed and presented in a more structured manner, either as a list or catalogue of reformed religious houses and sacred places in cities, as a chapter in a history of religious orders, or as a specific annotation in a collection of juridical and pontifical documents. Notably, a “poetic” and engaging presentation of Capuchin life is also included in the appendices (VII. General information on the Capuchin reform: docs. 96-105).

INTRODUCTION

The initial Franciscans who mention the Capuchins belong to the Observant family. They express concern and apprehension regarding this division, as they perceive a significant threat to the Order’s unity. They employ all available legal means to prevent this centrifugal current from gaining momentum.

Giovanni Pili da Fano was the first to take concrete action, following certain prescriptions issued by the general minister of the Observants, Francesco Quiñones, a fervent advocate for houses of recollection within the Order.

However, Pope Leo X’s bull of “Unione,” which united various expressions of reform under the Observants, had definitively divided the Order into the two families of Conventuals and Observants. Now, unity was paramount, and any further divisions were strictly prohibited. The ingenious solution of the “houses of recollection” could effectively meet the aspirations of the most ardent reformers without necessitating a transition to the Discalced or Capuchins. The Observants could guarantee unity in every form of Franciscan renewal.

With these criteria in mind, Giovanni da Fano set his sights on the Capuchins. He served as the provincial minister of Le Marche. Here, the spark ignited by the unpredictable gesture of Matteo da Bascio, who abruptly changed his religious habit to a peculiar ‘deformed one with a vituperable hood’ and embarked on itinerant preaching of penance, caught Giovanni’s attention. The gesture of this obscure and seemingly insignificant brother, his subject, resonated with other similar actions that had transpired in his own province in the past. Giovanni was not prepared to tolerate such behaviour. In fact, as soon as feasible, he subjected the perpetrator to bread and water and confined him to the friary prison. We later learn that a decisive intervention by Caterina Cybo, Duchess of Camerino, compelled Giovanni to release him. Despite his repressive actions, the movement continued to spread beyond the confines of the region.

Giovanni da Fano’s most effective and ingenious strategy, however, was not resorting to physical violence, which he also employed, but rather a booklet he had printed in Ancona in 1527 to defuse the impending crisis of this ambitious reform with eloquent arguments. He countered the violence with the Dialogue of salvation (document 1), which gained widespread circulation and resonated deeply with its intended audience. However, it is important to note that the principle of dialogue was not strictly adhered to. In an attempt to persuade the “poor and simple friars” most susceptible to the allure of Capuchin idealism, he engaged in a dialogue with a “stimulated friar,” representing the voice of the “simple ones,” who remained uncertain whether the Observants could genuinely lead to a sincere renewal. Despite this, da Fano continued to employ a method of verbal violence against the Capuchins, albeit without explicitly naming them, but rather making clear and identifiable allusions.

Such a passionate and critical assessment of the Capuchin reform, which held significant methodological influence but lacked critical rigour, concealed a probable underlying perplexity within the author. He genuinely doubted the reform’s efficacy, and his doubts were voiced by the “stimulated friar.” The doctrinal principles and the various explanations provided by the “reasonable friar” failed to provide satisfactory answers. Furthermore, the spiritual perspectives and the inherent dynamism nurtured by the spirituality of the “devotio moderna,” which consistently seemed to underpin the questions posed by the “stimulated friar,” could not be resolved through verbal violence, rigid observance, formal oppositions, jurisdictional justifications, or glorifications of a tradition of holiness.

In 1532, the Tuscan Onorio Caiani dramatically informed Pope Clement VII (doc. 2) about the burning issue of the Capuchins. Interestingly, Caiani employed the same thought and language as Pili. Notably, a year later, Giovanni da Fano (doc. 5) from the friary of Cingoli directly addressed the Procurator General of the Observant Friars. This correspondence serves as evidence of da Fano’s arduous search and dissatisfaction with the guarantees of reform within the Observants. Although the letter does not specifically mention the Capuchins, it arguably provides the most authentic and comprehensive explanation for the reasons that motivated the most fervent Observants to join the ranks of the Capuchins in 1534.

The two letters of Fr Bonaventura De Centi of Venice, one to Gian Pietro Carafa (doc. 3) and the other to Clement VII (doc. 4), provide insight into the events preceding the issuance of the bull “In suprema” on November 16, 1532. While this Observant Friar Minor of Venice fervently advocated for the reform of the Order, his impulsive and factious nature led him to seek involvement in the conflicts that plagued his province from 1528 to 1532.[1] In his letter to Gian Pietro Carafa, De Centi emphasised the yearning for reform among the Observants, asserting that it would be implemented according to the established “houses of recollection,” typically comprising four or five in each province with a certain degree of autonomy as custodians. However, he acknowledged the significant division of the Capuchins who had seceded from the Order and had subsequently diminished in numbers, with many even returning to the fold. Consequently, the rationale for separating the Observants to reform no longer held merit, as the “small number” of Capuchins was poised for dissolution.

De Centi reiterated this sentiment to the Pope, urging his immediate approval of the Reformed Order. Unbeknownst to him, Clement VII had already promulgated the bull. Driven by the apprehension of imminent failure for the Capuchins, De Centi proposed a meticulous plan of his own, envisioning a “form” of reabsorption for them into the Observants. However, these accounts were inconsistent with the established facts, as elucidated by Giovanni da Fano, as previously mentioned.

Another Observant zealot, Brother Cherubino Lusio da Feltre, composed a letter to the newly elected Pope Paul III three years later, on the anniversary of the confirmation of the Franciscan Rule on November 29, 1535 (doc. 6). In this letter, he expresses negative sentiments towards the Capuchins and favourable opinions towards the Reformed. In essence, he mirrors the negative judgments of Giovanni da Fano’s Dialogo and the concerns of Onorio Caiani. He refers to the Capuchins as a “sect” of friars who lead “bad lives.” This term is a direct echo of the judgments made by Quiñones, who had devised a deceptive plan against the Capuchins, prompting Emperor Charles V to intervene with a letter to Paul III a few days later, cautioning the pope against “a certain sect called the Capuchins.”[2] However, the confidence of Bonaventura De Centi and Caiani had waned. The underlying doubt persisted, lingering like an incessant pest: “If the sect of the Capuchins comes from God, I do not know.” Nevertheless, this incident proved to be the final straw for the Observants, who, with diminishing certainty, fervently hoped for the collapse of the Capuchin reform.

Conversely, the latter underwent a consolidation process. In 1535/36, the general chapter Rome-S. Euphemia acquired substantial spiritual, legislative, and juridical authority and cohesion.

To locate other judgments on the Capuchins by Observant Friars Minor or Franciscans in general, one must wait until after the Council of Trent (1545-1563), when the Capuchin reform received its definitive ecclesiastical validation. The linguistic differences are significant. Now, the Capuchins are regarded as an Order in its own right, possessing distinct characteristics, history, and objectives.

As a divide or, more accurately, as a bridge connecting the first and second phases, we have compiled a collection of documents and testimonies from the years 1552/53 and subsequent years, pertaining to the figure of Matteo Serafini da Bascio († 1552). He remains an indispensable reference for the Capuchin origins, even in his personal life. However, his personal reform, his iconography as a symbol of the rediscovery of a living Saint Francis, and his apostolic itinerancy continue to serve as an enduring momentum and emblem of a novel reform.

For the first time, we reproduce the very rare booklet, now impossible to find, by the Observant Francesco Montegiano of Pesaro on “The death and miracles of blessed brother Matheo da Bassi” (doc. 7) and other testimonies on the involuntary initiator of the Capuchins (document 8). This includes excerpts from an inquiry or “Process of miracles” (document 8.1) that took place at his tomb, and from a catalogue of miracles (document 8.2), along with other biographical fragments of Observant extraction (document 8.3-4).

The result is a very human and indeed moving portrait, characterised by sweetness and richness in mercy, and not as harsh his penitential preaching might suggest. Consequently, it is very much suited to the Capuchin Franciscan charism.[3]

One certain fact remains: whoever wishes to discuss the Capuchin reform thereafter will no longer be able to disregard the figure of Mattheo da Bascio. Similarly, there is Yves Magistri of Laval († post1611), a French Observant minor who endeavoured to introduce the Recollect reform within his province of Touraine. His account of Capuchin life, meticulously observed and experienced during his travels in Italy between 1569 and 1571, is presented as a travel journal comprising incisive impressions (doc. 9). For him, the Capuchins “live the Rule to the letter without commentary” and, alongside the Spanish discalced, should be emulated. He places the initiator of the reform of the Observants, Paoluccio Trinci, on the same level as Saint Peter of Alcantara, the founder of the Alcantarines, and with “blessed Matteo, reformer of the Religion to the true norm and primitive state and habit of the Order,” who “with a few brothers commenced the congregation of our reverend Capuchin fathers and brothers, so great and famous.”

His love of reform and the pragmatic and apologetic intent of his writing, as can be seen, prevent him from dwelling in a more critical manner on the Capuchin reform. He doesn’t even consider the personal story of Matteo da Bascio, but praises the contribution of Bernardino d’Asti, Eusebio d’Ancona, Giuseppe da Ferno, Girolamo da Pistoia, Francesco Tittelmans, Onorio da Montegranaro and Mario da Mercato Saraceno and appreciates the Capuchin legislation.

In contrast, the writing of the Portuguese Observant Marco da Lisbona († 1591), included in the general design of his “Chronicles” (doc. 10), exhibits a distinct intent and logical construction. The amount of information that Marco da Lisbona was gradually collecting, particularly in Italy, enabled him to introduce chapters on the Capuchins in the third part of his chronicles, including a chapter on the origins of the Order and the life, death, and miracles of Matteo da Bascio.[4] His account is characterised by a flat and objective tone, filled with edifying details and devoid of critical attitudes. This serene and neutral perspective allows the reader to develop a sympathetic impression of the Capuchins and Matteo da Bascio. The only objective ‘Observant’ aspect is his insistence that the Capuchin reform was the work of Observants and that the most renowned initiators came from the Observants. While this enthusiasm is not as pronounced as that of Yves Magistri, the contemporary Portuguese chronicler’s account, written in 1570/71, remains equally captivating and laudatory of the Capuchin reform.

A critical note by Pietro Ridolfi da Tossignano († 1601) briefly discusses the Capuchin origins (doc. 11). By this time, even the Capuchins were beginning to establish their history, and there was considerable information about them. He notes that there are no definitive clues or information about the origin of the Capuchins or their founder. However, without citing the sources upon which he relies, he affirms that these sources concur in indicating Matteo da Bascio as the founder, despite any discordant voices, such as the “parochial” account of Giuseppe Zarlino that suggests Fr. Paolo Barbieri da Chioggia instead.[5]

Beyond a few inconsistencies and uncertainties, Tossignano’s judgment is overwhelmingly positive and definitive: Matteo da Bascio is the originator of the Capuchin reform. However, there is no mention of his return to the Observants or his personal life.

On a different note, the reports that the observant Francesco Gonzaga dedicates to the Capuchin reform (doc. 12) exhibit a certain sense of respect, reverent admiration, and detached language. If he exalts the Capuchins, it is to exalt the Observants. Matteo da Bascio is described as “a pupil of the Regular Observance”; the two Tenaglia brothers are “both Observants”; Fathers Bernardino d’Asti, Antonio da Monteciccardo, Giovanni da Fano, and Francesco Tittelmans are all “all of the Regular Observance.”

The Observants stands as the most ecclesial movement and group among Franciscans, adhering to “papal declarations” and possessing a robust tradition of theological culture. Its conduct appears to be characterised by peace and tranquillity, devoid of any controversy. While mentioning Matteo da Bascio, the inventor of the “Capuchin” and initiator of the Order, the author swiftly shifts to Ludovico da Fossombrone and the learned Observants who joined the Capuchin ranks. It almost seems as if Gonzaga intends to overshadow the figure of Matteo da Bascio, as described by Daniela Traini as “the least Tridentine of the early Capuchins period. This appears to be a reflection of Gonzaga’s tradition, wherein the Observants are compelled to re-establish an official equilibrium between the newly articulated Franciscan forces. This can be achieved by demystifying Fra Matteo and using a clinical approach towards the Capuchin reform, portraying it as a necessary lineage of the Observants itself. Only after the formalisation of the Capuchin Order does the Observant branch regain its structural and spiritual balance”.[6]

This fundamental concept, proposed by Gonzaga, also persists in subsequent historiographical interventions by other Franciscan writers. However, chronologically, we are already entering the 17th century, which opens up new horizons that lead us far away and immerse us in the polemical climate that arose around Boverio’s Annales.

In conclusion, we would like to bring to your attention the judgment on Matteo da Bascio and the Capuchins presented by Fr. Antonio Daza († ca. 1640), an Observant, in the fourth part of the Chronicles published in Valladolid in 1611 and subsequently translated into Italian by Orazio Diola (doc. 13).

Daza endeavours to demythologize the figure of Matteo da Bascio, as depicted in Book 3; Chapter 39 of the Chronicles. However, his attempt is marred by numerous arbitrary statements and historical inaccuracies. The demythologizing strategy employed by Daza is to assert that the pointed hood was not invented by Matteo da Bascio but by the Cappuccio (Capuchos) fathers of John of Guadalupe († 1505) in Spain. Subsequently, this practice was adopted by the Italian Capuchins through Matteo da Bascio, who is said to have worn it as a young man among the Observants and, with the permission of Clement VII, embraced itinerant preaching in this garb. Daza contends that the personal charism of the initiator of the Capuchins (as he presents it) was ultimately rejected by the official Order. He asserts that the Order was established as an Order of hermits of St. Francis rather than of Friars Minor, implying that itinerant preaching deviated from the Capuchin spirit. Consequently, the superiors would have stripped him of his hooded habit and expelled him from the Order. In response, he found a charitable reception among the fathers of the Observants. The final mystifying argument presented by Daza is that Matteo da Bascio did not perform any miracles during his tenure among the Capuchins.

These arguments may elicit a smile today, but at the time they possessed a consistent and effective pattern. Certain silences, allusions, and blatant falsifications all contributed to the resurgence of the merits of Matteo da Bascio’s figure and experience within the Observants, thereby dispelling the mystique surrounding the Capuchin reform.

This risk was promptly recognised by the Capuchins, who, at that time, alongside Fr. Giacomo da Salò and others, were organically preparing the material for the printing of their Chronicles, a demanding undertaking that culminated in the publication of Zaccaria Boverio’s work between 1632 and 1639.[7] Fr. Luciano da Brescia addressed Fr. Giacomo, expressing his concerns regarding Daza’s individual statements, which he based on reliable sources, both written and oral, as he himself acknowledged: “As for what I seek to know, I write with pleasure the things pertaining to the IV. Part of the Chronicles pertaining to the Capuchins, for almost all of them appear to me worthy of correction, based on what I have observed in the writings of the fathers Mario [da Mercato Saraceno] and Petrazzo [Bernardino da Colpetrazzo], and from the oral tradition of our own father Marco da Bergamo, who was clothed by Ludovico da Fossombrone before Giovanni da Fano; but it is necessary to approach these matters with careful consideration.” [8]

A precise censure was thus formulated with corrective annotations on the various points of Daza’s account. A copy was delivered to the secretary of the Congregation of the Index, and it was discussed in the congregation, as we read in another letter written again to Fr. Procurator, dated Rome 13 March 1614. The letter begins with these words: “The sacred congregation has not, ex officio, as your paternity mentions in his, annulled the Chronicle of Barezzo, but being in a meeting with the father procurator of the Zoccolanti and deputy Father of the Conventual Fathers before the Lord Cardinal of Santa Cecilia, head of the congregation, discussing what could be done, so that the censure could be done quickly and without dispute, some adjustments and remedies were proposed; nor was any of them successful, to the extent that the Lord Cardinal desired them to meet only two days a week in his house. Seeing this, the Lord Cardinal, in order to satisfy both the parties and Barezzo, proffered this proposal, which seemed to him to be a suitable solution: that each one should write his own Chronicle without including the Blesseds and events of others, and that the title should then be common to all, that is: Chronicles of the Religion of Saint Francis. Part etc. pertaining to the Capuchin Fathers, and so on for the rest.”[9]

We are unable to follow the entirety of this controversy. The hint is sufficient to demonstrate how even the Capuchins of the early 17th century perceived the attempt of the most dedicated and meticulous historians to de-mythologize Matthew of Bascio. The subject matter would directly lead us to the Annales of L. Wadding, where we find the most lucid attempt at a critical analysis of the Capuchin origins from this de-mythologizing perspective.[10]

Wadding’s account relies on Marco da Lisbona’s work, but criticises the Italian edition for containing numerous non-authentic additions and significant contamination with Capuchin sources linked to Mario da Mercato Saraceno’s reports. It appears that Wadding intends to undermine the historical and documentary value of these additions. Notably, his entire synthesis is clearly polemical towards Boverio, demonstrating greater critical acumen than Gonzaga. With greater critical rigour, he seeks to restore a balance that, in the 17th century, appeared definitively compromised within the context of a post-Tridentine “pietas” clearly oriented towards a renewed Capuchin-type spirituality.

Therefore, from a historiographical perspective, the concluding statement of the aforementioned work by D. Traini remains accurate. Traini asserts that all historiography outside the Order of Observant extraction, excluding for various reasons Marco da Lisbona and Yves Magistri, cannot be salvaged from the accusation of ideological falsification.[11]

  1. Regarding him, see the accurate study of B. Nicolini, Il frate osservante Bonaventura De Centi e il nunzio Fabio Mignanelli. Episodio di vita religiosa veneziana, in id., Aspetti della vita religiosa politica e letteraria del Cinquecento, Bologna 1963, 61-83. ↑
  2. The letter of Charles V is also found in this collection, part IV, section IV, doc. 2; see as well Melchor de Pobladura, El Emperador Carlos V contra los Capuchinos, in CF 34 (1964); 378. – The word sect is already found in the bull Ite vos of Leo X, and it was probably suggested by Quiñones to Charles V. Here is the text of the bull: “And lest the Order should again fall into quarrels due to the possible introduction of new sects into the said Order, we wish and in virtue of holy obedience firmly enjoin and command that henceforth no new sects or reforms be introduced or made in the said Order without the express assent of the general minister or the provincial ministers of the reformers in their respective provinces”: cap. VIII, S 4: in AIA 18 (1958) 349. – There is in fact also a certain reminiscence of the language used in the past by the papal bulls against the Spirituals, to whom the Capuchins could easily be likened. ↑
  3. See the critical discussions and various observations that precede these texts with the relative bibliography. ↑
  4. Cf. the specific introduction: at doc. 10. ↑
  5. On this important figure of the Capuchin reform, cf. bibliography in Lexicon cap., 1298s. – G. Zarlino’s Informatione was studied and published by Melchior a Pobladura, Narratio Josephi Zarlino circa originem Ordinis Minorum Capuccinorum, in MHOC I, 483-526 (=Appendix II). ↑
  6. Cf. D. Traini, La riforma cappuccina nella storiografia estranea all’Ordine nei secoli XVI-XVII (tesi di laurea), Perugia 1969, 77. – One reason, not mentioned here, which will greatly displease the Capuchins and against which the learned and erudite Celestino Colleoni da Bergamo will take up his pen, was Gonzaga’s claim that the Capuchins were not true sons and successors of St Francis. Cf. above, part I, sect. IV, doc. 7 (cf. nos. 1111-1136). ↑
  7. On the Annales del Boverio cf. Vittorio da Ceva, P. Zaccaria Boverio teologo e annalista, in IF 24 (1949) 133-141; Mariano D’Alatri, San Francesco negli Annali del Boverio, in Francesco d’Assisi nella storia. Secoli XVI-XIX, a cura di S. Gieben, Roma 1983, 135-147; also see Lexicon cap., 1851s, and other references in Collectanea franciscana-Bibliographia franciscana 1931-1970. Index, curavit Claudius van de Laar, Roma 1972, 104b (Boverio, Zacharias de Saluzzo, cap. [† 1638]). ↑
  8. AGO, PC 8 (cf. doc. 13, notes 5-6). ↑
  9. Ibid. ↑
  10. Cf. AM XVI, 238-245, 296-301, 321f, 336, 387, 404f, 470S, 4865, 490. ↑
  11. Cf. note 6 above. ↑