Manduca

Last Update: 15-12-2024.

Footnote#1:  The title of Conte di Mont Alto in the Duchy of Parma, was, together with the fief of Monte Alto, conferred at the grantee’s request, by Francis I (Farnese), Duke of Parma, upon Bernardo Piscopo, by a Rescript given at Piacenza on the 8th July 1720.)The grantee did not have any (legitimate) issue, so he made another request to the Duke of Parma, in order that he be granted “the power of disposing of the fief in favour of Felice Manduca Piscopo, his grand-nephew, or of one of the brothers of the said Felice, and so in favour of such of them as Bernardo might designate his heir, and of his legitimate and natural male children and descendants from a real and lawful wedlock issuing in infinitum, according to the order of primogeniture, or in such any other manner as petitioner might prefer to dispose thereof, so that in case he should die without issue as aforesaid, the above-mentioned fief, with the title of Count, with its jurisdictions, power of the sword, and its merum and mixtum imperium ..should be vested in the aforesaid Manduca, or in such of his brothers as the petitioner might nominate to be his heir, in the same manner and form as if the latter were expressly included and designated in the said grant and investiture, and this (he requested) in order that in the family of his said grand-nephews, that is of such of them as might be his heir, the glorious token of a perpetual vassalage to the Most Serene dynasty of your Highness might always be preserved in its lustre”. See: Correspondence and Report of the Commission appointed to enquire into the claims and grievances of the Maltese Nobility, May 1878, presented to both Houses of Parliament by Command of Her Majesty (C.-2033.)  The grant of the title and the fief was registered on the 2 September 1721 (Ref. AOM 525, f. 111r-112r)

Footnote#2:  Bernardo moreover asked that should the Duke grant him the power of disposing of the said fief as requested, then that the person so nominated be declared as having been invested with the said fief of Monte Alto and with a title of Conte, as if the person so nominated had been within the original vocation of the grant. Bernardo made a third demand, namely that the Duke allows him to create on that fief a regular and lineal Primogenitura, in favour of the legitimate and natural first-born descendants in infinitum of the person so nominated. On the foregoing petition, the Duke issued the following rescript: Concedimus investimus, mandamus, declaramus, approbamus, et derogamus in omnibus et per omnia ut petit. Et non obstantibus (Dat. Comitii, die 19 Mensis 7 bris anni 1724, Franciscus Dux. It appears that in his solemn testament received in the acts of Notary Tommaso Vella, on the 9th March 1725, Bernardo nominated his grand nephew Felice Manduca. See: Correspondence and Report of the Commission appointed to enquire into the claims and grievances of the Maltese Nobility, May 1878, presented to both Houses of Parliament by Command of Her Majesty (C.-2033.) The extension dated 1724 was registered in Malta on the 14 July 1744 (Ref. AOM 548, f. 161v)

Footnote#3: By means of the same will, Bernardo established an entail in Malta regulating other properties. The nominated successor’s own family eventually became extinct. Although the Maltese entail was succeeded by another of Bernardo’s relatives (Felice Manduca) a problem arose in regard to the title and fief of Mont’ Alto, because the 1724 permission could only be construed in regard to not more than the male issue of one nominated relative. In fact all of Felice Manduca’s three daughters failed to have any ulterior issue. However, even if they had produced any children of their own, it is unlikely that any one of Felice’s grandchildren would have succeeded to the title because such grandchild could only have claimed through a female line. In fact, the Royal Commissioners in their report plainly concluded: ‘After a careful consideration of all the foregoing circumstances, we are necessarily led to the conclusion that the title of Conte di Mont Alto, was determined on the 14th May 1775, by the death of Conte Felice Manduca, who had no male issue. ‘. See: Correspondence and Report of the Commission appointed to enquire into the claims and grievances of the Maltese Nobility, May 1878, presented to both Houses of Parliament by Command of Her Majesty (C.-2033.) (Para. 188)

Footnote#4: After Felice’s death the entail was succeeded by Vincenzo Manduca who in turn was succeeded in the same entail by Monsignor Salvatore Manduca. However, succession of the mere entail could not revive the title.

Footnote#5: As seen above the title of Conte di Mont’ Alto as extended in 1724, became extinct in 1775. However at the time of the 1878 Commission, Monsignor Salvatore Manduca Piscopo Macedonia, claimed that same grant was again ‘extended’, this time by another rescript dated 28 December 1776, in favour of Salvatore Manduca, his grand-father, and of the grantee’s male issue. . See: Correspondence and Report of the Commission appointed to enquire into the claims and grievances of the Maltese Nobility, May 1878, presented to both Houses of Parliament by Command of Her Majesty (C.-2033.) (Para. 188) . Unfortunately for the Monsignor, his representative failed to produce an authentic documentation and the Commissioners, feeling pressed to get on with their work, did not think it advisable to delay further the presentation of their Report. In doing so, they did not fail to observe as follows: The present title (if taken to have ever existed) was never registered in Malta, nor has the claimant produced any proof of its having ever been recognized by the Grand Masters of the Order of St. John. We must not, however, omit to state that on inspecting the Minute Book in which the appointment of the jurats was entered during the Government of the Order, we noticed that Salvatore Manduca was in the year 1797-1798 appointed jurat for Notabile and styled ‘Conte’. We can, however, give no importance to this circumstance in the absence of an authentic copy of the patent of creation of this title; and we beg to add that although the above-named Francesco Manduca had declared himself ready to bring over from Parma some authentic documents, we did not think it advisable to delay further the presentation of our Report. As matters now stand, we cannot include Monsignor Manduca in our list of Titolati. It is, however, to be understood that the claimant is by no means precluded from producing at any future time further evidence of the existence and recognition of this title, in which case his claim, must in our opinion, be reconsidered.See:Correspondence and Report of the Commission appointed to enquire into the claims and grievances of the Maltese Nobility, May 1878, presented to both Houses of Parliament by Command of Her Majesty (C.-2033.) (Para. 188) .

Footnote#6: It should be recalled that at Maltese Law this title ‘granted’ in 1776 would only qualify as a foreign title and, as such, it can be considered for the purposes of precedence in Malta only if registration or Magistral recognition has been achieved in accordance with the rules of 1739 and 1795 as enacted by Grand Masters Despuig and Rohan. In this case, this title supposedly granted or extended in favour of Salvatore Manduca was never registered in Malta, nor does it appear to have received direct recognition for the Grand Masters who ruled Malta. (See:- Correspondence and Report of the Commission appointed to enquire into the claims and grievances of the Maltese Nobility, May 1878, presented to both Houses of Parliament by Command of Her Majesty (C.-2033.). This consideration does not render the title invalid (assuming the claim is substantiated) but in accordance with the rule cited above, it does not enjoy precedence in Malta.

Footnote#7: it appears Monsignor Manduca managed to substantiate his claim sometime between 1878 and 1883 because his name appears as one of the five titolati who were appointed to form a Committee in 1883 as results from the document Report of the Committee of Privileges of the Maltese Nobility on the claims of certain members of that body with the Secretary of State’s Reply, August 1883, presented to both Houses of Parliament by Command of Her Majesty (C-3812).

Footnote#8: In any event the 1776 grant could not have been issued by a Duke Farnese of Parma as the last Duke Antonio, who succeeded the Duke Francis/Francesco (grantor of the extinct 1720 title), died without issue on 20 June 1731 and that Duchy was in accordance with the Treaty of London of 1718 succeeded by the descendants of their aunt Elisabetta (Carlos Borbone). In the acts relative to the 1744 registration Felice Manduca, describing himself as “humble servant and vassal” applied to the Grand Master to register the succession of the title of Count of Mont’ Alto. The applicant explained that he had succeeded Bernardo in the antique comital fief of Mont’ Alto in the State of Parma, and that this succession had been accepted by an act of the year 1739 by the Duke of Parma and another of the year 1741 by the King of Hungary, who was the actual sovereign of the said State of Parma. He went on to explain that he was desirous to register the documents in the Cancellaria where the original patent was already registered. The applicant undertook to meet all the usual obligations necessary to register similar successions. The applicant therefore requested the Grand Master to allow the registration of the documents in the Cancellaria, ordering that the originals be returned. On the 14th July 1744 Grand Master Pinto ordered that the documents be registered.

Footnote#9: it appears Monsignor Manduca managed to substantiate his claim sometime between 1878 and 1883 because his name appears as one of the five titolati who were appointed to form a Committee in 1883 as results from the document Report of the Committee of Privileges of the Maltese Nobility on the claims of certain members of that body with the Secretary of State’s Reply, August 1883, presented to both Houses of Parliament by Command of Her Majesty (C-3812). However, this in itself does not satisfactorily indicate the enumeration of the holders of this title nor does it shed any light on the relative remainder. The only clue of a remainder was the Monsignor’s claim that it extended to his grandfather’s ‘male issue’ (See footnote above)

Footnote#10: The grant of 1535 in favour of Antonio Manduca predates the other two known grants of Knights of the Holy Roman Empire, viz. Testaferrata (1637) and Balzano (1698). Although these titles received direct recognition from the Grandmasters of the Order of Saint John during its Government of the Maltese Islands, its use was denied by only the British Secretary of State for the Colonies. See:- Correspondence and Report of the Commission appointed to enquire into the claims and grievances of the Maltese Nobility, May 1878, presented to both Houses of Parliament by Command of Her Majesty (C.-2033.)