334 research outputs found
Tompa de Horzowa, Tompa de Palychna, Tompa de Monyorós. Contribution to the History of Croatian Noble Family
No full textČlanak je četvrti dio pokušaja rekonstrukcije povijesti srednjovjekovnih hrvatskih plemićkih obitelji Tompa de Horzowa i Tompa de Palychna.
Prvi dio je slijedio obiteljsku povijest do 16. stoljeća.
U drugom dijelu predstavljena su četiri obiteljska grba iz 16. i 17. stoljeća.
U trećem je prikazana povijest obitelji Tompa i Wiesner kroz atelijerske portrete u 19. i početkom 20. stoljeća. Svi su objavljeni u Arhivskom vjesniku 2012., 2013. i 2014.
U četvrtom dijelu vraćamo se na stariju povijest rodbine koju razmatramo kroz prizmu obiteljske genealogije iz fonda obitelji Tompa u Hrvatskom državnom arhivu – HDA pod nazivom „Deductio genealogiae nobilis familiae Tompianae“ ali i drugih izvora. Zanimljivo je da rodoslovlje, sastavljeno iz većeg broja listova, ima kao rodonačelnika obitelji zapisanog Ivana Tompu de Erdewda, brata hrvatskog biskupa i bana Šimuna Bakača Tompa de Erdödyja i rođaka kardinala i Korvinovog kancelara Tome Bakača. Ali već njegovi nasljednici po toj su genealogiji obitelj Tompa de Palychna, po nekim autorima i Tompa de Monyorós, koji vrh svega kasnije rabe i odrednicu
de Horzowa.U članku smo pokušali razjasniti kako je došlo do tog krivog tumačenja i pokazali da su članovi obitelji Tompa de Horzowa potomci Ivana Tompe de Horzowa, ali i da su iz istog roda kao i obitelj Tompa de Palychna. Također smo pojasnili kako je dio obitelji de Palychna i de Horzowa pogrešno uključen u obitelj Tompa de Monyorós.This part of the reconstruction of the history of the very old families from the lesser Croatian nobility Tompa de Horzowa and Tompa de Palychna is an attempt to prove that both families were from the same kindred. In the Funds of the Tompa family in the Croatian National Archives, we can find documents from different Tompa families, but we believe that they all have the same kindred. We found documents related to the families Tompa de Palychna and Tompa de Horzowa. Some indices in a recent text, as well as one document from 1531 in the Funds of the Tompa family in the Croatian National Archive, can be interpreted as indicating that the members of the family Tompa de Palychna were descendants of John Tompa de Erdewd, the older brother of the Croatian bishop and ban Simon Bakocz, from the Erdödy kindred, who were from the branch called Tompa. At the same time however, there also lived another John Tompa, but from the kindred Tompa de Horzowa.
We first analysed the families’ coats of arms. It was not only the members of the Bakocz Erdödy family that used variations of the coat of arm of the cardinal and state chancellor Thomas/Tamas Bakocz. The Palffy family also used the same crucial element, a salient deer from the semi-wheel, in their coats of arms. It passed to them through the marriage of Clara Bakocz Erdödy to one member of the Palffy family. The four coats of arms of the families Tompa de Horzowa and Tompa de Palychna were completely different. A basic heraldic element in all four coats of arms was a pelican, which wounds his breast and nourishes its young in the nest with his blood. Two coats of arms contain a patriarchal or double cross. If John Tompa de Erdewd was the founder of the family Tompa de Palychna, as suggested by the recent text in the Croatian National Archives, and if John Tompa de Horzowa was one of the members of the family Tompa de Horzowa, the only logical conclusion is that they were completely different families without any family bonds. But we believe that Tompa de Palychna was from the same kindred as the family Tompa de Horzowa and they do not have any relationship with the Bakocz Erdödy family.
We also find clear example showing that the descendants from the first marriage used the predicate de Horzowa, and the descendants of the second marriage used the predicate de Palychna. This is a repeating pattern, which we can trace from the second half of the 16th century. For example, in the beginning of 16th century, the sons of Melkior Tompa de Horzowa were de Horzowa from the first marriage and de Palychna from the second. And what do Tompa de Horzowa and de Palychna have in common with the family Tompa de Monyoros? The Tompa de Monyoros were related to the castle of Monyoros, today Skrabčiansky hrad in Slovakia. But, we found toponyms and hidronyms of Monyoros all around the medieval Hungarian empire. If we take into account that the Hungarian term monyoros (also mogyoros) means hazel-tree and that monyoros means hazel-bushes overgrowing water, than it is logical that we can find that name in many different places. We know that Stephen Tompa de Palychna had some estates in the County of Baranya (near Sziget) and the County of Zala, where there were also estates with name Monyoros, so we believe that this confusion in equalizing the family Tompa de Palychna with Tompa de Monyoros arose from this misjudgement, as the two have nothing in common.
The other person that contributed to the confusion is the author Ivan Nagy, who in his 19th century book of Hungarian noble families wrote that a member of the Tompa family was Stephen Tompa de Monyoros (in our case he is Stephen Tompa de Palychna). Analysing the estates of the families Tompa de Horzowa and Tompa de Palychna, we find out that they were very close to each other from the second half of 16th century to the 20th century. From the second part of 16th century, all the estates of Tompa de Palychna and Tompa de Horzowa were around the Kolpa, the border river with Slovenia, which was at that time the border with Carniola, the inner Austrian land of the dual Austro-Hungarian monarchy. Previous estates from the 14th century of the family Tompa de Horzowa were located around Cirkvena in Krževci County, which were settled in the turbulent times with the Vlachs. Later, in 1628, the family brought all these estates back into their ownership.
The members of both families from the 16th century were in most cases state deputies of the Croatian, Slavonian and Dalmatian assembly, vice mayors of Zagreb and Varazdin county and judges – most of them were officers in Austro-Hungarian army. The other members were living more or less peacefully on the estate inherited from their ascendants until the 20th century. Their marriage ties show us that they were connected with noble families who found refuges when their primal estates were conquered by the Ottomans in others parts of Croatia. Those families were Forchych of Butinavac, Skarycza alias Ljubuncic of Ratkovec, Sturlich of Sturlich grad etc. But they were also connected to other noble Croatian and Hungarian families, such as Apoky, Bebessy, Bedeković of Komor, Jelačić, etc
The Family Tompa as a Part of Lesser Nobility from Lipnik in the 17th Century
No full textU ovom članku riječ je o plemićkoj obitelji Tompa de Palychna, koja je od 1603. naseljavala pokupske predjele vlastelinstva Ribnik te tu ostala sljedećih 200 godina. Iako su u dokumentima zapisani početkom 17. stoljeća kao Tompa de Palychna, nalazimo nedvojbene dokaze da se i kod te obitelji rabe odrednice de Horzowa i de Palychna. U članku su predstavljene neke najizrazitije osobe iz obitelji Tompa de Palychna iz Pokuplja. Iako članak nije tipična genealoška studija, mi se tu bavimo kako dilemom oko podrijetla obitelji tako i njihovim položajem u širem povijesnom kontekstu. Posebnu pozornost smo posvetili klasifikaciji i popisu njihovih imanja.In the article we propose a hypothesis that the members of the Tompa family of Horzowa and Tompa of Palychna were descendants of one family, which was divided according to the following principle: descendants from the first marriage used the nobiliary particle (germ. adelsprädikat, cro. plemićki pridjevak)) of Horzowa, whereas the descendants from the second marriage that of Palychna. We show this with two undoubtable examples. In other way, similar practice has not been observed in other families and one could postulate that during different periods of time members of the same family used different nobiliary particles. The first one is that Nicholas, the son of Melchior Tompa of Horzowa and Helena Forčić of Butinavac, is mentioned in several documents as Nicholas Tompa of Horzowa, as well as Georg, the second Melchior’s son is mentioned as George Tompa of Horzowa. However, Stephan, Melchior’s son from the second marriage with Josipina Orešković used the nobiliary particle of Palychna. Although some questions related to the Stephan’s identity remain unanswered, we know that this Stephen had a son Peter Tompa of Palychna. According to the hypothesis, we concluded that Peter was also from the second marriage. With a help from documents from the Tompa family papers in the Croatian State Archives we found information that Stephen Tompa of Palychna was first married to Katarina Radojčić Delišimunović. According to Wurzbach this Stephen was married to Karolina of Apoky. If Katarina was Stephen’s second wife, than he had with her a son Peter, who used, as we know from the documents, the predicate of Palychna. In the beginning of the 17th century we find Stephen Tompa on the estates around the river Kupa, Breznik, Lipnik in Bratovanci, later Bubnjarci, Paka, Pravutina, and Jankovrh with Sopčić selo. As petty nobility from Lipnik, the family Tompa stayed there the next 200 years when around 1803 the branch of Horzowa moved to Sredičko, and later to the Velika Mlaka. From there the descendants of Aleksandar Tompa of Horzowa moved to Zagreb, where this male line ceased to exist in mid of 20th century. From the analysis of marriages of the members of the Tompa family we conclude that their marriage bonds were in major part with the members of the local lesser nobility, who were forced to displace from their old estates due to Turks threats. These families then settled in more safe areas such as Zagorje, broader vicinity of Zagreb and Žumberak, and became the familiars (vassals) of magnates or the officers of the Vojna Krajina (the Military Frontier). They were the families Radojčić (Radoychich, also known as Delišimunović), Čolnić, Szilly, de Apoky, Femenić (Femen alias Hubetić), Maršanić, Malić and Farkašić, later in the 18th and 19th century the families Rottman, Mandić, Vukmanić, the barons Cirhemb (freiherren of Zirheimb), Kriegler, Benedy, Vranyczany-Dobrinović, Apoka-Potaky, Tanczoss de Galantha, Malloschegg, Dočkal, Tomac, Krizman, Garić, Molinari and Cvijić
Conformational ensembles of IDPs: their implications for function and drug development – Peter Tompa | PhasAGE Training School 4 - Lecture
No full textPhasAGE Training School 4 “Protein aggregation, intrinsic disorder and phase separation in the era of machine learning” was co-organized by the H2020-funded Twinning project PhasAGE (GA 952334), the H2020-funded MSCA project IDPfun (GA 778247) and the COST Action “Non-globular proteins in the era of machine learning – ML4NGP” (CA21160) and took place i3S in Porto (Portugal).
The main goal of this training school was to provide participants with multidisciplinary training on computational and experimental tools and a comprehensive knowledge of integrative methodologies for studying intrinsically disordered proteins and protein aggregation in cell biology and disease
Fuzzy Complexes: Polymorphism And Structural Disorder In Protein-protein Interactions
No full textThe notion that all protein functions are determined through macromolecular interactions is the driving force behind current efforts that aim to solve the structures of all cellular complexes. Recent findings, however, demonstrate a significant amount of structural disorder or polymorphism in protein complexes, a phenomenon that has been largely overlooked thus far. It is our view that such disorder can be classified into four mechanistic categories, covering a continuous spectrum of structural states from static to dynamic disorder and from segmental to full disorder. To emphasize its generality and importance, we suggest a generic term, 'fuzziness', for this phenomenon. Given the crucial role of protein disorder in protein-protein interactions and in regulatory processes, we envision that fuzziness will become integral to understanding the interactome. © 2007 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved
Contribution to the Reconstruction of the History of Old Croatian Noble Families Tompa of Horzowa and Tompa of Palychna
No full textČlanak je prvi prilog pokušaja rekonstrukcije povijesti starih hrvatskih plemićkih obitelji Tompa de Horzowa i Tompa de Palychna od kraja 14. stoljeća do oko 1566. Njegova glavna tema je kritički osvrt na recentni strojopis anonimnog autora, koji se nalazi u fondu obitelji Tompa u Hrvatskom državnom arhivu. Strojopis koji ima četiri strane i napisan je na hrvatskom jeziku, vjerojatno je nastao u prvoj polovici 20. stoljeća. U njemu je prikaz izvora roda te se nabrajaju sve grane obitelji koje su živjele do 20. stoljeća u Hrvatskoj. Pored toga autor je dodao i druge loze za koje je mislio da su iz istoga roda, ali to nije bilo moguće dokazati. To su bile sada izumrla loza Tompa de Monyoro i njena grana Tompa de Erdewd, koja po autorovoj tvrdnji više ne živi pod tim imenom. Analizom tvrdnji iz strojopisa moguće je zaključiti da je anonimni autor korektno naveo sve osobe iz plemićkih obitelji Tompa koje se spominju u izvorima ali ih je sve povezao u blisku obiteljsku vezu, bez argumentiranih dokaza ili upućivanja na izvore. Neke njegove tvrdnje su logične i mogu se potvrditi, ali mnoge su malo vjerojatne te ih iz do sada pregledanih primarnih i sekundarnih izvora nije bilo moguće dokazati.This article is an attempt of the critical revision of the recent text written by anonymous historian/archivist from the first half of 20th century. This text was found as an addition to the Fonds of the family Tompa (HR-HDA-775) in the Croatian State Archives (CSA). His text explores a short history of the old Croatian family Tompa of lesser nobility and covers the period from 15th to 20th century. Some members of these kindred are described as one family but in most cases, it is impossible to link them to each other. On the contrary, we cannot treat them as one family but only as different families’ e. g. Tompa of Horzowa, Tompa of Palychna, Tompa of Kutnan (Kutina), Tompych of ZeËevo and of VranograË. We can’t prove their connections with absolute certainty, except for the first two. There is also some evidence that members of one family used both titles from 17th century on, Horzova and Palychna. In the above mentioned text, the family origin is placed in the historical region of Transylvania. Primarily they were the leaders “Cnezes” of Slavic origin from Walachia, who were soldiers in the Byzantine Army, but over time they turned into a closed caste of professional soldiers, a variety of pre-feudal elite. They moved to Transylvania in the late 12thcentury and came to Croatia, more precisely in Regnum Sclauoniae in the next century. The author of the text states that they were primarily Tompa of Palychna and later they split into two families: Palychna and Horzowa. Even more, he claims that the other noble family, Tompa of Monoyro, was from the same origin. However, no traces of that noble family could be found in Croatia, but we can find them as Thompa of Monyoros in Slovakia (medieval Upper Hungary). There is no relevant evidence in the sources to prove those statements, and the origin of the families/kindred is impossible to establish, as well as to connect to the noble families Tompa of Monyoros and Tompa of Palychna. The only certain evidence is that they appeared for the first time in Croatia as Tompa of Horzowa at the turn of the 14th and 15th centuries around the castle of Križevci, County of Križevci. Therefore, the author’s statement that John Tompa (de Erdewd), the brother (frater carnalis) of the bishop and Croatian ban Simon Bakocz/Erdödy, was identical to the John Tompa of Horzowa, should be discarded. In this article, most of locally available sources about the noble families Tompa of Horzova and of Palychna were used, with a particular attention paid to their careers in the political hierarchy, the matrimonial ties, partly genealogy, and the acquisition of the estates. The analyses of their four coats of arms and genealogical papers also found in the Fonds of family Tompa in the CSA will be explored in the next contribution for reconstruction of the history of the kindred. In the 15th, 16th and 17th century, members of Croatian noble families Tompa were playing more or less important role in many crucial events in the history of Southeast Europe. One member from the family Tompa of Kutnan was a young “familiar” (familiaris) of Hungarian king Sigmund of Luxembourg, and the heroic fighter against the Ottoman Turks in the battle of Nicopolis in 1396. Two members of the kindred were the participants in the Siege/Battle of Szigeth in 1566. From the end of 14th to 17th century, we meet them as judges (iudex nobilium), highly educated persons (literatus, magister), a courtier (aulicus), vice mayors (vicecomes), tax collectors (dicator), as well as officers. Two members of the kindred were ecclesiastics; one was the bishop of Pecs, the second was the canon/dean (cannonicus) of Zagreb cathedral
PhasAGE Ask The Expert Series | Peter Tompa
No full text<p>A collection of captivating interviews with senior researchers from the PhasAGE consortium. Meet each core member while they foster new scientific horizons and cultivate collaborations, through clear, engaging dialogue that connects science with society. This initiative was organized by the early-stage researchers together with the Research and Communication Manager.</p>
<p>This interview is part of a project that has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 952334 – PhasAGE. </p>
Intrinsic disorder in cell signaling and gene transcription
No full textStructural disorder, which enables unique modes of action often associated with molecular recognition and folding induced by a partner, is widespread in eukaryotic proteomes. Due to the ensuing advantages, such as specificity without strong binding, adaptability to multiple partners and subtle regulation by post-translational modification, structural disorder is prevalent in proteins of signaling and regulatory functions, such as membrane receptors, scaffold proteins, cytoskeletal proteins, transcription factors and nuclear hormone receptors. In this review we survey the most important aspects of structural disorder, with major focus on features and advantages pertinent to signal transduction. Our major goal is to elucidate how the functional requirements of these protein classes concur with specific functional modes disorder enables.open
Local structural disorder imparts plasticity on linear motifs
No full textMotivation: The dynamic nature of protein interaction networks requires fast and transient molecular switches. The underlying recognition motifs (linear motifs, LMs) are usually short and evolutionarily variable segments, which in several cases, such as phosphorylation sites or SH3-binding regions, fall into locally disordered regions. We probed the generality of this phenomenon by predicting the intrinsic disorder of all LM-containing proteins enlisted in the Eukaryotic Linear Motif (ELM) database. Results: We demonstrated that LMs in average are embedded in locally unstructured regions, while their amino acid composition and charge/ hydropathy properties exhibit a mixture characteristic of folded and disordered proteins. Overall, LMs are constructed by grafting a few specificity-determining residues favoring structural order on a highly flexible carrier region. These results establish a connection between LMs and molecular recognition elements of intrinsically unstructured proteins (IUPs), which realize a non-conventional mode of partner binding mostly in regulatory functions. © The Author 2007. Published by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved
A comprehensive assessment of long intrinsic protein disorder from the DisProt database
No full textMotivation: Intrinsic disorder (ID), i.e. the lack of a unique folded conformation at physiological conditions, is a common feature for many proteins, which requires specialized biochemical experiments that are not high-throughput. Missing X-ray residues from the PDB have been widely used as a proxy for ID when developing computational methods. This may lead to a systematic bias, where predictors deviate from biologically relevant ID. Large benchmarking sets on experimentally validated ID are scarce. Recently, the DisProt database has been renewed and expanded to include manually curated ID annotations for several hundred new proteins. This provides a large benchmark set which has not yet been used for training ID predictors.Results: Here, we describe the first systematic benchmarking of ID predictors on the new DisProt dataset. In contrast to previous assessments based onmissing X-ray data, this dataset contains mostly long ID regions and a significant amount of fully ID proteins. The benchmarking shows that ID predictors work quite well on the new dataset, especially for long ID segments. However, a large fraction of ID still goes virtually undetected and the ranking of methods is different than for PDB data. In particular, many predictors appear to confound ID and regions outside X-ray structures. This suggests that the ID prediction methods capture different flavors of disorder and can benefit from highly accurate curated examples.Availability and implementation: The raw data used for the evaluation are available from URL: http://www.disprot.org/assessment/.Contact: [email protected] information: Supplementary data are available at Bioinformatics online
- …
