The Masovian Metrica

Janusz Grabowski

The Masovian Metrica
Registry of the Masovian Principality

Masovia formed in the last centuries of the first millennium as the separate historical region on the area of the central and north-east Poland. The main settlement were the lands on the right bank of Vistula and the basin of the Narew River as well as on the Lower Bug. Here sprang up the oldest towns of Masovia, which were built in the time similar times as the oldest towns of the early medieval Greater Poland. Masovia was included in the Piast Gniezno country in the second part of 10th century1. From the turn of 10th and 11th centuries there are dynamic changes in Masovia; new towns appear; import enlarges; economy recovers, near the towns concentrate trade and craft activities. After the death of Mieszko I this district was a part of Bolesław Chrobry’s country and then Mieszko II. At the time of crisis of the monarchy of the first Piasts, Masovia despite twelve years of independence did not initiate its own country, that is why near the other territories became a part of the country rebuilt by Casimir I the Restorer. As a result of “the last will of Wrymouth” Masovia together with Kujawy fell to Bolesław the Curly and after his death (1173) this territory received his under-age son Leszek duke of Masovia and then included into his Duchy Casimir the Just. After the death of this monarch (1194) Masovia passed into the possession of his youngest son, Konrad I, who began a hereditary line of Piast Masovia lasting until 1526. Masovia divisions in the 14th and 15th centuries created within the district several independent small principalities, with its own clerical hierarchy. In 1352 Mazovia Piasts paid tribute to King Casimir the Great. However, after the death of this monarch (1370) Masovia happened again to be independent of the Polish Crown. From the second half of 14th century a marked economic development of the district occurs. Masovia (located in the central basin of the Vistula River and its tributaries), benefited from booming economy for forest products and agriculture, which were connected with the development of transit time in the role of the port of Gdansk and other cities of the Teutonic Order. In the 14th century a special attention deserve achievements of the prince Siemowit III, especially in terms of economic and political system, expressed, among others, rural locations in Chelmno law, immunity dissemination and increased demand on the part of the document from the side of lay audience. One can also notice significant progress in the work of the prince’s office, which draws patterns of royal office, as well as from Silesia, Bohemia and Hungary. Although during the reign of the Jagiellonian dynasty Masovian rulers were Polish vassals, but still stayed independent in internal policies. Since the 15th century an increasingly important role in Masovia played princely council (modeled on the crown) territorial local authorities, the judiciary, legislative and financial matters. Among the Masovian princes many outstanding rulers can be found, some of them were even candidates for the throne of Poland (Siemowit IV, Boleslaw IV). Dukes of Mazovia were also distantly related with Giedyminowicze, Przemyślidzi and the Habsburgs. An important role in relations with its neighbors played the daughters of the dukes of Masovia, who married off local dynasts. Among the daughters of Masovian Piasts a significant role played Cymburgis (daughter of Siemowit IV), mother of Emperor Frederick III of Habsburg. After the death of childless Western princes of Masovia (1462), part of Masovia was incorporated to the Crown. Other Masovian lands were included in the Polish Kingdom in the years 1495-1526. Upon completion of the incorporation process and arrangement of the course of borders Masovia with other Crown lands Masovia area was 33,493 km². This territory was divided into three different sizes of provinces: Plock, Rawa and Masovian.

Duke’s office in Masovia (14th-15th c.) fulfilled the functions of one of the most important organs in the administrative system of the power. These included cooperation in the management of the duchy in the field of home affairs and foreign relations and in terms of editing and writing off legal actions. The office also carried out of a perpetual books and records of a temporal (documents to the county and lease), the court books and fiscal court books.

Book entries (libri inscriptionum) of Masovian Metrica were introduced during the reign of Siemowit III (died in 1381), but it was just the beginning of the recording. From the second half of the 14th century no traces of the existence of this type of books were preserverd, a number of Masovian documents increased significantly only at the end of this century. Entries in the Registry (defined as Metrica seu regestrum perpetuitatum terrestrium Ducatus Masovie, survived until the first quarter of the 15th century until the incorporation of Masovia to the Crown in 1526 we have 21 books (conducted exclusively in Latin2. The oldest recording covered the years 1414-1425 (MK 3), i.e. times of Janusz I. Whereas the most recent entries in the Records, conducted on behalf of Janusz III, and later his sister Anne, by Chancellor Nicholas Zhukovsky (MK 41), dated back to August 1526. From the preserved books only 19 are appropriate book entries. The other two are of distinctive characteristics. First of them (MK 1) contains a copy of the statutes of Masovia already made in the office of the Crown in 1532, while the second (MK 7) are the bills of a court of prince Janusz II from the years 1477-1490. In the preserved Records there are also materials of a different nature, for example fragments of the books of the manor court from the years 1511-1517 and 1521-1526. It should also be mentioned that the book MK 8, comprising various entries of dukes of Masovia from the years 1471 to 1526, was written after incorporation of Masovia to the Crown. The book MK 2 contains in its first part (p. 20-95), a collection of fourteen and fifteenth earthly statutes translated into Polish. There are also parts of the Records of Masovia in Warsaw court records3. In contrast, little snippets from the documents of the Records are known from the books of Liv courts had been destroyed in 19444.

For Eastern Mazovia (Czersk-Warsaw principality) preserved the Records from 1414 to 1526, but with gaps for the years 1455-1467 and 1508-1517. This does not indicate, however, that during these Records were not conducted, as we know from the documents issued on the basis of the entries in the Records. Books MK 3 and 4 are copies made in the second half of the fifteenth century. For Western Mazovia (Plock principality) books preserved from the times of Władysław I and his sons (1434-1462), and the princes (Conrad III, Casimir III, Boleslaw V and Janusz II ) ruling in Masovia on the area of Plock to 1495. i.e. the time of incorporation of the duchy to the Crown. Some books of Records consist of several parts bound in one volume, for example MK 5 contains entries (records) from the year 1471 (governments of sons of Boleslaw IV), in the years 1471-1481 (Casimir III and Boleslaw V) and 1471-1488 (Conrad III governments in the district Czersk-Liw). For the last chronologically fair copy volumes MK 32 and 41 we also know their drafts (MK 339-341). The preserved Records there are also books or materials of a different nature, for example fragments of the books of the manor court of years 1511-1517 and 1521-1526.

As for the entry form (recordings) in Masovian Record, they are those, for the most summary records, that relate to legal activities and entries of the documents in extenso. The entries in the subjective form, in which the prince is said to be in the first person, and objective, in which the prince is mentioned in the third person. Initially, the two are alternate, but in the second half of the fifteenth century prevails the objective form and in the sixteenth century it is already becoming the rule. Preserved recordings in the Record is the most short records of legal actions taken by the prince or in his presence, which focus on trade in land. Entries were made in an abbreviated form, including the issuer (the abbreviated title or alone name), promulgation (limited e.g. to the word significamus), abstract features, dating and a list of witnesses. A complete record of legal activities was omitted to save space and write speed. Entries were then a basis for the on-demand document pages. Therefore, entry to the Record was ahead of issuing the document. The basis ingrossatio if the diploma was, in terms of content, the note of the Record that was easy to be put in the appropriate formula. Release of the document was not necessary. To make them easier for clerks to find, the entries to the Record were provided with titles, though some of them, however, are of the latter origi. Also, in order to facilitate reaching the appropriate entries, there were marked the beginning of a new year or a new chancellor office. Date of sealing the documents was noted in bold. We also see in the Record documents (few) of other exhibitors, entered in extenso.

Entries in Metryka can be divided into on matters disputed and undisputed, and the latter to eternal or temporal. In some books (including Plock Register from the years 1432 to 1462), mixing entries and temporal registers can be stated. Later, however (apart from a few exceptions) were found in the Masovia Record unified nature of records on the register, and the inadvertent placement of temporal activity record was noticed by writers. This shows that the Record was carried out carefully, following-to-date nature of the entries and noting the occurred errors. Some preserved entries on, among others, present activities, documents on the county and lease or princely debts, suggest that the office not only thought of specialization of records, but also was carrying a book containing temporal entries that were not preserved. For example, we may use the mentioned MK Volume 7, which includes calculations of court of Janusz II. The book was initially led by Chancellor Peter Chodkowski (up to 1481) and later by the vice-chancellor Stanislaus of Lipie.

As for the territorial division, it is strictly only for entries in the MK 2 exclusively for the period of the Wyszogrod land from the time of holding it by Conrad III (1474-1488). These entries were lead by Wyszogrod writer John Cielecki, which ended his work after the acquisition of the land by the Duke Janusz II in 1488. From the Wyszogrodzk Record were sometimes issued documents, as evidenced by marginal notes: exivit or littera scripta exivit. Keeping separate register was due probably to the special position of the Wyszogrod, that in 1471 fell to Casimir III, and then, as a result of failure to repay the loan by the Duke, passed into the hands of Conrad III.

In the Office of Masovia there is also a situation where were conducted in parallel two registers in the name of the same prince. After the purchase in 1475 by Janusz II the principality Plock (Plock, Wizna and Zawkrze land) from Casimir III the former chancellor Racibor of Golejewo still continued to lead the Plock Register. However, with the change of ruler in the office of Plock writers were hired who worked in the office of Janusz II. Keeping a separate register (Plock Record) were probably due to the fact that when the duchy of Plock was joined to the district sons Boleslaw IV, the territory retained some autonomy, which was the price to pay for the support given by the princes of the bureaucratic elite in their conflict with the Polish king. Racibor of Golejewo, who retained after 1462 the office of chancellor, was an influential person in the court of Ladislaus I (1449-1455) and his sons (1455-1462). At the same time Peter Chodkowki, court chancellor of Janusz II (from 1471) led the metric for Ciechanów, Lomza and Makowsko-Różański land. The reason for the inclusion of Plock registers to the ciechanowsko-Lomza registers in 1481 was not a top-down decision of duke Janusz II, but the death of the chancellor Racibor of Golejewo. The specificity of the prince's office in Masovia was carrying out by the same chancellor of the parallel (1471, with a break of several months in 1478) Records for the two princes: Boleslaw V and Janusz II. Although the office staff was shared (chancellor, vice-chancellors, writers), however, retains the distinct entries and each mistake tried to fix quickly, that is why we have maintained separate volumes of Records for the Duchy of Warsaw (Boleslaw V) and Ciechanow and Lomza area (Janusz II). It should also be mentioned that in Masovian Record activities relating to the territories that do not fall properly in the Masovia were recorded, namely Belz land (owned by the Dukes of Plock in 1388-1462), and seized temporarily Podlachia (1440-1444).

Thanks to the surviving books of Records the mode of work carried out in the office of the duke can be accurately found. Recorded operations in them that took place in the presence of the ruler. When the office worker assisted,he noted the case, preparing a concept document or immediately the entry to the book. Where, in the legal action there was not one of the clerks, then passed the information to the registry of the witnesses or special envoys. A formula of relation is therefore of important meaning for a better understanding of labor of law office5. In Record it occurs below the text entry (on the right side of the reader), as amended, among others, relacio, ad relacionem with giving an appropriate name. In the books of Masovia Record formula of relation appeared later than in the office of the king. In Plock Record it did not occur until 1462, while in the office of the princes Czersk-Warsaw begins to appear around 1440. After taking Plock by the rulers of the Duchy of eastern Masovia Plock Register (1462-1471) still did not meet the relationship, which shows that the local law office retained its individuality. After the division of Masovia in 1471 in the office of Plock (of Casimir III) and Ciechanów-Lomza (of Janusz II) relation is very rare, and in the office of Warsaw (of Boleslaw V) quite often, especially during chancellery of John Radzanowski (1478)6. In Czersk Record formula is present throughout the period of the reign of Conrad III, as well as at the beginning of time after his death. This is followed by a longer pause, and the relation returns since 1517. We meet it usually at the records of princely activities and exceptions are not numerous. The formula of the present officials secretarial assistants: most frequently chancellor7, vice-chancellor, secretaries and writers (rare). There are also people outside the office (of the highest officials by rank up to the courtiers). Speakers most often appear as witnesses in entry of the Record, and therefore the legal action. It may be noted that there appear officials in the records for a given territory in relations. It must therefore be assumed that the relation formula indicates the person who provided the information to the office of legal action entered into Record. It was about the origin of the registration and administration of the person (speaker), who took responsibility for them. Responsibility of people outside the office was different than princely clerks. In contrast, that relation refers to the first phase of office work provides frequent accidents, when the original text of a formula involving relations, amendments were made. The next stage was of the office works was a registration command, since the time of ingrossare in the Masovia Record meant "register" rather than "issue" a document. Prince gave registration order, the chancellor or vice-chancellor8.

In the princely Record survived not only single concepts, but also the entire records of concepts, according to which were made book entries. On the basis of the Record can also be provided the basis for issuing the document that was just posting chronological, not the preserved minute. The first step on the way to the creation of the document was to command the issue, referred to in the Record by the word scribatur, usually accompanied by an explanation of how this activity is to be made, e.g. scribatur ius Culmense in forma communi. Sometimes it was indicated that the date and witnesses refer to an earlier time9. There are also commands of not making out a document or releasing it only after the fulfillment of certain conditions. It was the result of protests followed by others, presenting objections to the content of transactions entered into the Record. The entry could also be simply canceled, what the chancellor10 made himself or one of the writers on his command11. The order cancellation is often overlooked by the prince himself, as evidenced by phrases: de mandato domini ducis Johannis cassatum et annulatum; deletum est ad mandatum ducisse.

Annotations in the Record show the important role played by chancellor in the control of entries, not only directly (by hand-patch), but also indirectly, by recommending adjustments to others. We know, among others, personal annotations and fragments of texts revised personally by chancellors (Peter Chodkowski12, Nicholas of Mniszewo13). On the basis of the entries in the Record documents were issued. The issuance of a document on the basis of an entry in Record was informed by posting to an entry the phrases: exivit, littera scripta exivit, or by crossing the characteristic entry (other than in the case of cancelled). In the office of Janusz I and Boleslaw IV used the deletion, while in the office of the Western princes of Mazovia alternately exivit deletion or note, being placed on the left of the entry. This system continued after 1462, when part of the heritage of Plock fell to sons of Boleslaw IV, although in the Czersk office of Conrad III (after 1471) also used crossings, and exivit was given in all caps, bold writing under the entry. In the office of Janusz II at the time of vice-chancellery by Stanisław Leipzig (1481-1495) exivit was placed with a small writing in the margins. Near the entries were also placed endorsements about payment of a fee (solvit notam) or arrears with it (tenetur notam), which rarely treated as a sum.

In a study of the dukes of Masovia law offices in the late Middle Ages, the essential meaning has the problem of legal relevance of the Record. Its conduct was not only necessary for the proper functioning of the principality, but also due to the existing in Masovian law obligation to carry out a number of legal actions in the sight of the prince. In the Record were recorded activities in which the ruler himself was a party, and the activities carried out against him and approved by him. In the latter case, the personal appearance of the prince could be replaced by making a legal action before the authorized representative, e.g. before an employee or officer of the prince's office. If the judge or a writer were delegated, then it shows that we are dealing with the process of creation of the permanent representatives of the princely rule, and not only with authorized officials acting under a single command. Acts undertaken in the presence of the prince himself, but to the court, go to the Record, e.g. on the basis of court records. In Masovia as early as in the second half of the fourteenth century documents issued by the court of the land were considered the official certificate. Over time, the same legal significance also grew in court books and extracts from them were used as a way of informing the ruler of made legal activities. Proof of the books was sufficient for the prince to issue a decision and then constituted the basis for drawing (based on registration) a relevant document. It should be assumed that, entries princely Record must had had legal significance equal to at least the books of the court, competing even with the original documents, for which we find confirmation in the first editorial, "Feint of Prażmowski" from 1532 in the article about the statute of limitations, which speaks of the lien which can be confirmed with "land Record or privilege of the prince"14. Therefore, the Masovian record, on the basis of which were issued princely privileges, had the characteristics of public trust15. Entries in the Record (like the books of court) gave the parties a number of benefits, as impossible to hide the transaction before relatives, facilitated the sellers calculation of the period of antiquity, and the provided the buyer with disclosure of any charges of given property and facilitated investigation of eviction.

In the Record earlier records were invoked, e.g. in 1426 was entered the action de regestro antiquo of 141716. In 1461 Siemowit VI on the basis of the copy preserved in the books of chancery, renewed the privilege of headman (in Głusko) issued in 142617. Also in the district courts probative value of the district Record was considered, as evidenced by preserved records of judicial record18. A party before the court (1490) justified, for example, that lost a document, but has a corresponding entry in the Record19. From the Record, therefore, were prepared extracts and office charged a fee for it. For sealing extracts from the Record served princely signet seal20. We know, among others, extracts from the books issued under the signet of Boleslaw V in 1480 entered into the books of Zakroczym lands21; document for the burghers of that prince of Warsaw 1483 provided with the note Rescriptum ex-regestro thesaurii privilegiorum domini ducis Boleslai sub signeto ducali extraditum22; a mention of 1487 about copies issued de Metrica serenissimi principis Ducis Boleslai sub signeto23; extracts from the Record under the signet seal of Conrad III retained in court records24; extracts of the Record from Stanislaus and Janusz III during the regency of Anna Konradowa (authenticated by the seal of the signet Conrad III)25 and Anna Konradówna governments26. In July 1519 on the Masovian sejm in Zakroczym at the request of the chancellor Nicholas Zhukovsky was established a seal to seal copies of the Record (modeled on the signet seals used for extracts from the books of court) with an eagle and the SMPT inscription, that is Sigillum Metricae perpetuitatum terrestrium27. After the incorporation of Masovia to the Crown, extracts from the Record were issued under the seal of the royal signet rings, as evidenced by the formula: sub signeto regio extraditum28. The establishment by King Sigismund I separate signet labeled S M (Sigillum maiestatis) with the image on the face of an eagle without a crown is the evidence not only of the desire to placate the new subjects, but also shows the importance that was attached to copies of the Record. On 21st March 1539 Sigismund I (at the request of the nobility of Masovia) issued a decree which established a way of making copies of the Record under the bigger royal seal of the Masovia29. On the same day the king declared the starosta of Wizna that sent his chancellor Paul of Wola with the Record of former dukes of Masovia to Warsaw, where for three months everyone would be able to claim an extract from it, but after the six months the Record loses its power30. In the preserved Crown Record from the years 1539-1543 (MK 60), led by chancellery of Paul Wolski, there are more than 280 copies of the Record listed in the Book of Masovian Crown Record31.

In Masovian Record were also reported important events related to the functioning of the office. Provided were e.g. the date of assumption of office by the chancellors or (in bold) information about their death32.

After the termination of the line of the incorporation and the dukes of Masovia in the Polish Kingdom (1526) records of Masovian Record were included in 1539 to the Crown Record.


Baranowska A., O edycji Metryki Koronnej nr 8, in: Polska kancelaria królewska między władzą a społeczeństwem, teil 3, Warszawa 2008, pp. 95-103;

Grabowski J., Kancelarie książęce na Mazowszu (XIII-XVI w.). Stan badań i perspektywy badawcze, in: Belliculum diplomaticum II Thorunense, Toruń 2007, pp. 153-169;

Grabowski J., Dynastia Piastów mazowieckich. Studia nad dziejami politycznymi Mazowsza, intytulacją i genealogią książąt, Kraków 2012.

Metryka Księstwa Mazowieckiego z XV-XVI w., t. 1. Księga nr 333 z lat 1417-1429, „Pomniki Prawa”, V, ed. by A. Włodarski, Warszawa 1918;

Metryka Księstwa Mazowieckiego, t. 2, Księga nr 334 z lat 1429-1433, „Pomniki Prawa”, VI, ed. by A. Włodarski, Warszawa 1930;

Księga skarbowa Janusza II księcia mazowieckiego z lat 1477-1490, ed. by J. Senkowski, „Kwartalnik Historii Kultury Materialnej” 7, 1959;

Księgi wpisów kancelarii mazowieckiej (Metryka Mazowiecka), in: Inwentarz Metryki Koronnej, compiled by I. Sułkowska-Kurasiowa and M. Woźniakowa, Warszawa 1975, pp. 241-248;

Wolff A., Formuła relacji w kancelarii mazowieckiej, „Archeion” 1, 1927, pp. 176-208;

Wolff A., Metryka Mazowiecka. Układ pierwotny, sposób rejestracji, Warszawa 1929.

1 Dzieje Mazowsza, vol. 1, compiled by H. Samsonowicz et al., Pułtusk 2006; J. Grabowski, Dynastia Piastów mazowieckich. Studia nad dziejami politycznymi Mazowsza, intytulacją i genealogią książąt, Kraków 2012.

2 A. Wolff, Metryka Mazowiecka. Układ pierwotny, sposób rejestracji, Warszawa 1929; Księgi wpisów kancelarii mazowieckiej (Metryka Mazowiecka), in: Inwentarz Metryki Koronnej, compiled by I. Sułkowska-Kurasiowa and M. Woźniakowa, Warszawa 1975, pp. 241-248.

3 AGAD, Warszawskie ziem. i gr., fragmenty akt sądów ziemskich 1, k. 30, 203-204v, 246, 305-306v.

4 A. Wolff, Metryka, p. 51.

5 A. Wolff, Formuła relacji w kancelarii mazowieckiej, „Archeion” 1, 1927, pp. 176-208; idem, Metryka, pp. 81-84.

6 Idem, Formuła relacji, p. 204; J. Grabowski, Dynastia Piastów, p. 492.

7 AGAD, MK 6, k. 15: Relacio venerabilis domini Petri doctoris medicine, et nostri cancellarii.

8 AGAD, MK 338, k. 89 (dominus dux Conradus – – confirmavit – – ac ingrossari iussit); MK 18, k. 87 (in librum thesauri ingrossari mandavit); MK 32, k. 77 (in metricam perpetuitatum terrestrium iussimus ingrossari); MK 5, k. 68v (que mandato cancellarii eiusdem sunt inserte).

9 Ibidem, MK 6, k. 192.

10 Ibidem, MK 5, k. 154.

11 Ibidem, k. 70: De mandato domini cancellarii per me Derslaum [Dziersław Popielski] canonicum notarium correcta.

12 Ibidem, MK 5, k. 154: Ista nota et hoc ius est cassatum et annulatum, ita quod numquam debet exire privilegium imperpetuum et in evum propter periculum dominorum ducum, per me Petrum doctorem et cancellarium de mandato domini ducis Johannis cassatum et annulatum.

13 Ibidem, k. 217v: De mandato magistri Nicolai de Mnyschewo ingrosata et scripta et per me N[icolaum] cancellarium auscultata de verbo ad verbum et concordat cum originali. Nicolaus manu propria subscripsit in fidem premisorum.

14 Ibidem, AGAD, MK 1, k. 80v: si talis obligatio post elapsum triginta annorum per Metricam terrestrem aut privilegium principis fuerit confirmata.

15 A. Wolff, Metryka, p. 79.

16 Metryka Księstwa Mazowieckiego z XV-XVI w., 1. Księga nr 333 z lat 1417-1429, „Pomniki Prawa” V, ed. by A. Włodarski, Warszawa 1918, nr 288.

17 AGAD, Zakroczymskie ziem. wiecz. rel. 32, pp. 361-363.

18Ibidem, Warszawskie ziem. i gr 2, k. 379, 600.

19 Ibidem, 6, k. 541.

20 S. K. Kuczyński, Pieczęcie książąt mazowieckich, Wrocław 1978, p. 50.

21 AGAD, Zakroczymskie ziem. wiecz. rel. 12 k. 139-139v.

22 Przywileje królewskiego stołecznego miasta Starej Warszawy 1376-1772, ed. by T. Wierzbowski, Warszawa 1913, nr 21.

23 AGAD, Zakroczymskie ziem. wiecz. rel. 13, k. 387v.

24 Ibidem, Warszawskie ziem i gr., fragmenty akt sądów ziemskich 2, k. 15v-17; Zakroczymskie ziem. wiecz. rel. 15, k. 618-619v.

25 Kodeks dyplomatyczny Księstwa Mazowieckiego, ed. by J. T. Lubomirski, Warszawa 1863, nr 277 (rescriptum ex Metrica privilegiorum illustrium principum dominorum Stanislai et Joannis Dei gracia ducum Mazovie, Russie etc. sub signeto parvo extraditum); AGAD, Warszawskie ziem i gr., fragmenty akt sądów ziemskich 11, k. 745 (ex regestro theasauri seu iudiciorum curie ducalis facta est nobis plena fides).

26 AGAD, MK 339, k. 164.

27 Iura Masovia Terrestria II (hereafter IMT), ed. J. Sawicki, Warszawa 1973, nr 221; B. Sobol, Sejm i sejmiki ziemskie na Mazowszu książęcym, Warszawa 1968 , p. 137; S. K. Kuczyńskiego, Pieczęcie książąt mazowieckich, p. 393.

28 AGAD, Varia 31, k. 2, 3, 6: Regestrum ex Metrica perpetuitatum terrestrium olim illustrissimorum dominorum Stanislai et Janussi Dei gracia ducum Masovie, Russie sub signeto regio extraditum) oraz Janusza III (Regestrum ex Metrica privilegiorum terrestrium olim illustrissimi domini Janussi dei gracia ducis Masovie etc. sub signeto regio extraditum). See also, Ibidem, Warszawskie ziem. i gr. 35, k. 721-728: exibitum fuit coram nobis rescriptum infrascriptum ex Metrica perpetuitatum terrestrium ducatus nostri Masovie sub signeto Regie Maiestatis extraditum; Varia 11, s. 32: Ex copiis privilegiorum originalium per me Nicolaus de Zukovo prepositum Varsoviensem transumpta et sub signeto Regie Maietstais extradita et concordant de verbo ad verbum cum suis originalibus etc.; Ibidem, AGAD, Archiwum Potockich z Jabłonny 196, p. 3.

29 IMT III, Warszawa 1974, nr 359.

30 Ibidem, nr 360.

31 Księgi wpisów kancelarii mazowieckiej, s. 35; Matricularum Regni Poloniae summaria, IV/1, ed. by T. Wierzbowski, Warszawa 1910, nr 6351-6638. See…suplicavit nobis quo in libris seu Metricis perpetuitatum ducatus nostri Masovie literas seu notam … (MK 60, k. 258).

32 Metryka Księstwa Mazowieckiego I, nr 747 (Paweł z Borzewa); ididen, II, nr 432 (Gotard z Gurby); AGAD, MK 6, k. 1 (Jan Słęka), 139v (Racibor z Golejewa).

Archiwum Główne Akt Dawnych PL_1_4_1-358_0059.jpg Polskie Towarzystwo Heraldyczne"