Seite - 77 - in JRFM - Journal Religion Film Media, Band 07/01

Material Traces of a Religious Trial | 77www.jrfm.eu 2021, 7/1, 67–93 educated and upheld humanist ideals. After studying theology, he was ap- pointed as cathedral provost and director of the Court Chamber. In 1619, he was elected Archbishop of Salzburg and in 1622 founded the university at Salzburg, with faculties of theology, medicine, jurisprudence and philosophy. A skilled politician, he managed to keep the region out of the turmoil of the Thirty Years War, but the border lands within his territory suffered in particu- lar as a result of events in surrounding regions.22 Although the duchy of Styria was part of the diocese of Seckau, religious life was dominated by Salzburg because the Archbishop was authorized to install (and recall) the bishop of Seckau, and large regions in Styria also belonged to the archdiocese. The situ- ation for the adjacent dioceses was similar, for example for Chiemsee, where Christoph von Liechtenstein was bishop from 1624 to 1643. In presiding at the Consistory and the Court Council of Salzburg, von Liechtenstein was involved in the case of Ludwig Teschler (#31). Christoph Schrepf (also spelled Schropfh and Schroff), a doctor of theology, was a member of the collegiate monastery Beatae Virginis Ad Nives (Salzburg) and councillor of the Consistory. As such he signed documents #27, #36, #112 and #130. Materiality: Examples The case of Ludwig Teschler is fascinating and layered. This analysis and even the literal transcriptions cannot alone reveal all that the documents contain. The digital versions, with high-resolution scans, enable the researcher to de- rive from the material emotional states and even sometimes psychological aspects. The handwriting often shows personal involvement, but writer and “speaker” are usually not the same person. We can safely assume that Ludwig Teschler and Barbara Schlemmerin were unable to write, especially longer texts. When they are available, changes between draft and fair copy are also revealing. The material state of the papers is also intriguing: parts of the text are lost forever; parts are unreadable for the time being – the information loss is ran- dom, but it also provides new impulses for research. This case also has an emotional quality that cannot always be accessed via digital artefacts. The scans have quantitative limitations and even as the quality of each new digitalization improves, it will still come up against the 22 See Heinisch 1991.