Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-9pm4c Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-26T07:18:03.352Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Country Churches, Clerical Inventories and the Carolingian Renaissance in Bavaria

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 July 2009

Carl I. Hammer Jr
Carl I. Hammer Jr
Affiliation:
Mr. Hammer is a consultant with the Corporate Planning group at Westinghouse Electric Corporation, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

In the early ninth century Bishops Gerbald of Liège and Haito of Basel described the qualities of the ideal country priest.1 Many of his virtues were negative. For example, he was to shun all questionable contacts with women; drunkenness was condemned, and he was to avoid taverns with their salacious amusements; he was not to ape the laity by bearing arms; commerce and usury were forbidden to him as were, of course, all simoniacal practices. More positively, he was admonished to be diligent in his sacramental functions, especially baptism and anointing, as well as celebration of the Mass, and to observe the canonical hours. Finally, he was to instruct his flock in the rudiments of the faith, the Apostles' Creed and the Lord's Prayer, and to exhort them to lead the Christian life. The desire to attain these modestly ambitious goals during the Carolingian period resulted in an increased concern for clerical qualifications. Manuscripts from St. Emmeram at Regensburg and Freising in Bavaria, for example, contain detailed lists of subjects for ecclesiastical examination,2 and the sorts of episcopal statutes or capitularies which Gerbald's and Haito's works represent seem to have been distributed widely throughout the Empire3.

Type
Research Article
Information
Church History , Volume 49 , Issue 1 , March 1980 , pp. 5 - 17
Copyright
Copyright © American Society of Church History 1980

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1. Monumenta Germaniae Historica, Capitularia Regum Francorum, vol. 1, Boretius, Alfred ed. (Hannover, 1883), no. 123, pp. 242–244;Google Scholar no. 177, pp. 362–366; hereafter cited as MGH, Cap. I here use the terms country priest or church (Landkzrche) in preference to parochial or parish (Pfarrkirche), since the precise status of the persons and churches to be discussed may vary and since the latter designation can have anachronistic connotations in the ninth-century world of the proprietary church. Indeed, at this time the term “parrochia” still refers primarily to the bishopric (see notes 24 and 25). For general background information on these topics see the contributions by Kempf, Friedrich and Jungmann, Josef in Handbook of Church History, (English language ed.) ed. Jedin, Hubert and Dolan, John (New York, 1969), vol. 3, chaps. 33, 36–38, especially pp. 309–312Google Scholar for the priest's duties. The physical remains of churches from this period are surveyed in Vorromanische Kirchenbauten: Katalog der Denkmäler bis zum Ausgang der Ottonen, ed. Oswald, Friedrich, Schaefer, Leo and Sennhauser, Hans Rudolf, vol. 3 of Veröffentlichungen des Zentralinstituts für Kunstgeschichte in München, (Munich, 1966–1971).Google Scholar There is a short section on priests, pastoral care and churches in Kuchenbuch, Ludolf's Bäuer1iche Gesellschaft und Klosterherrschaft im 9. Jahrhundert: Studien zur Sozialstruktur der Familia der Abtei Prüm, Vierteljahrschrift für Sozial- und Wirtschaftsgeschichte, no. 66 (Wiesbaden, 1978), pp. 306–323.Google Scholar

2. MGH, Cap. 1, nos. 116–117, pp. 234–235. See the article by Vykoukal, E., “Les examens du clergé paroissial a l'époque carolingienne” in Revue d'Histoire ecclésiastique 14 (1913): 81–96,Google Scholar and the remarks by Vogel, Cyrille in “La réforme liturgique sous Charlemagne,” Karl der Grosse: Lebenswerk und Nachleben, vol. 2 (Düsseldorf, 1965), pp. 221–224,Google Scholar and in his appendix entitled “La réforme cultuelle sous Pépin Le Bref et sous Charlemagne,” in Patzelt, Erna, Die karolingische Renaissance, 2nd ed. (Graz, 1965), pp. 218–223.Google Scholar

3. These materials are discussed in detail by McKitterick, Rosamond in her book, The Frankish Church and the Carolingian Reforms, 789–895, Royal Historical Society Studies in History (London, 1977), chap. 2, pp. 45–79, and map 2, p. 218.Google Scholar An especially interesting set of ninth-century episcopal statutes, though not necessarily Bavarian in origin, was printed By Seckel, Emil under the title, “Capitula episcopi cuiusdam Frisingensia,” in app. 1 (pp. 287–293)Google Scholar of his “Studien zu Benedictus Levita. II,” Neues Archiv 29 (1904), pp. 277–294;Google Scholar hereafter cited as NA.

4. Hauck, Albert, Kirchengeschichte Deutschlands, vol. 2, 3rd ed. (Leipzig, 1912), p. 204.Google Scholar “…Beweise für den Aufschwung der geistigen Bildung unter dem fränkischen Klerus.”

5. Fichtenau, Heinrich, The Carolingian Empire, trans. Munz, Peter (Oxford, 1957), especially pp. 156, 164.Google Scholar

6. Bullough, Donald, The Age of Charlemagne (New York, 1966), p. 115.Google Scholar

7. McKitterick, Frankish Church.

8. Ibid., p. 81. No specific examples are cited.

9. See McKitterick, 's remark: “In many respects the sources consulted still shed more light on those who spread the Word than on those to whom it was spread,” Frankish Church, p. 209.Google Scholar

10. “Scilicet in patena et calice, planeta et alba, missale, lectionario, martyrologio, poenitentiale, psalterio vel aliis libris quos potuerit, cruce, capsa,” MGH, Cap. 1, p. 243. Although the term capsa is ambiguous, the nearly contemporary inventory of the church at Staffelsee in the Brevium Exempta found in MGH, Cap. 1, no. 128, PP. 250–251, contrasts the capsa reliquiarum or reliquary with the busta or pyx (cap. 2).

11. “Sexto, quae ipsis sacerdotibus necessaria sunt ad discendum, id est sacramentarium, lectionarius, antifonarius, baptisterium, compotus, canon penitentialis, psalterium, homeliae per circulum anni dominicis diebus et singulis festivitatibus aptae,” MGH, Cap. 1, no. 177, p. 363. The “Capitula episcopi cuiusdam Frisingensia” (see note 3) specify, “… ut unusquisque presbiter bene sibi notum evangelium sanctum faciat, lectionarium sacrosque canones atque librum sacramentorum nec non et baptisterium et libellum poenitentialis simulque librum pastorum [pastoralem] ne indoctus et insipiens inveniatur” (NA, cap. 32, pp. 292–293) and recommends “… ut unusquisque presbiter suam ecclesiam bene prevideat et luminaria concinnanda atque campanam seu nolam ad sonandum vel etiam vestimenta sacrata his ad providendum commendet sine personarum acceptione, quibus opinio bona et ad dci servitium voluntas prompta existat” (cap. 13, p. 290). The Lex Baiuvariorttm, which deals with thefts of church property, mentions as examples of the “ministeriluml ecclesiae” the “calicem aut patenam vel pallam” (1,3), presumably the most common items; edited and translated into German by Eckhardt, Karl A. in Germanenrechte: Texte und Übersetzungen, vol. 2 (Weimar, 1934), pp. 80–81,Google Scholar hereafter cited as LB.

12. Many of these are edited in Mitt elalterliche Schatzuerzeichnisse, pt. 1, Bernhard Bischoff, ed., vol. 4 of Veröffentlichungen des Zentralinstituts für Kunstgeschichte in München (Munich, 1967);Google Scholar hereafter cited as MaS. This includes a useful glossary-index.

13. Stutz, Ulrich, Geschichte des kirchlichen Benefizialwesens von seinen Anfängen bis auf die Zeit Alexanders III, ed. Feine, Hans E. (Aalen, 1961), pp. 381–392.Google Scholar See Lesne, Emile, Hisloire de la propriété en eccléstique en France, vol. 3 (Lille, 1936), pp. 136–273,Google Scholar vol. 4 (Lille, 1938), pp. 445–464, 762–789.

14. Quellen und Erörterungen zur bayerischen und deutschen Geschichte, Neue Folge, vol. 4, Die Traditionen des Hochstzfts Freising, ed. Theodor Bitterauf (Munich, 1905),Google Scholar hereafter cited as TF; vol. 8, Die Traditionen des Hochstifts Regensburg und des Kiosters S.Emmeram, ed. Josef Widemann (Munich, 1943),Google Scholar hereafter cited as TR; and vol. 6, Die Traditionen des Hochstzfts Passau, ed. Max Heuwieser (Munich, 1930),Google Scholar hereafter cited as TP. I have used the famous Staffelsee inventory from the Brevium Exempla (see note 10) for comparative purposes only because of the uncertain status of the church; see Bauerreiss, Romuald, Kirchengeschichte Bayerns, vol. 1, 2nd ed. (St. Ottilien, 1958), pp. 6–10.Google ScholarMaS refers to it as a Benedictine monastery (no. 85; pp. 90–91), apparently, solely on the basis of the presence of a copy of St. Benedict's Rule among the books. See Prinz, Friedrich, Fri1hes Mönchtum in Franken reich (Munich and Vienna, 1965), especially p. 434.Google Scholar One should also consult the late tenth-century inventory of Maria Wörth near Klagenfurt (MaS, no. 47), and that of the Archipresbyter Engilmar from ca. 1006 (TR, no. 279).

15. Migne, Jacques Paul, Patrologiae cursus completus, Series Latzna (Paris, 1841–), vol. 105, cols. 191–208,Google Scholar “Capitula ad presbyteros parochiae suae”; col. 194. cap. 8, (not messes et fenum!). Note that the StalTelsee inventory begins with utensils (caps. 2–3) and then proceeds to vestments (cap. 4) and books (cap. 5), but such clear distinctions of categories are not always observed in our inventories.

16. The numbers in parentheses in the text refer to the inventories listed in the Appendix.

17. See below, p. 11.

18. This, together with the two named mancipia, the three armenta and the caldarium and andeonem there must be the (partial?) dotum of a small proprietary church like that of Etpurc and Into (1) even though, as at Thannkirchen (7), none is explicitly mentioned. See TF, nos. 598 and 699.

19. It is not entirely clear to me whether the terms palliolum, sindon and corporate refer to distinct objects. Sindori occurs twice, both times separately from the other two (4, 5); patliolurn occurs once alone (9b) and once with the lone occurence of corporate (10). See also manica (1), mapputa (10) and toatlia (9a).

20. For bells see Seckel, “Capitula episcopi cuiusdam Frisingensia,” quoted in note 11; for the capsa see note 10.

21. Thus, Hauck was almost correct when he asserted that “eine kleine Büchersammlung erwartete man bei jeder Pfarrkirche zu finden” (“one might expect to find a small library in every parish church”), Kirchengeschichte Deutschlands, 2: 203.

22. See McKitterick, Frankish Church, especially chaps. 3–5, and Rosamund Pierce (McKitterick), “The Frankish Penitentials,” Studies in Church History 11 (1975): 31–39.Google Scholar A baptisterium is also listed in Seckel, “Capitula episcopi cuiusdam Frisingensia,” (see note II), as is a liber pastoralis which occurs once at Thannkirchen (7).

23. I take II to modify istoria, that is historiae… II, and not codex; see the psalter there: tribus codicibus. Note also the sole occurrence of the practical compotus and epacta there (see note 24). For Jerome's commentary on Matthew see the Staffelsee inventory (note cap. 5, p. 251) which also includes an anonymous (sine auctore)expositio psalmorum. The tabuirn of the Staffelsee inventory are probably not astronomical tables but rather ornate book covers; thus, the MCH text should read: liber lectionarius (habens) tabulac ‘cum’ lamminis cuprinis deauratu parairn I.

24. See the plenarium listed in the Thannkirchen inventory (7), probably a collection of Gospels and the Epistles. This hardly supports Hauck's characterization of “die heilige Schrift” (the Bible) as “das Nötigste” (the most essential) of ecclesiastical possessions Kirchengeschichte Deutschlands, 2: 204. Even an important church such as that at StafTelsee (see note 14) could only by diverse means assemble a reasonably complete Bible in at least five separate tomes, including one volume of the four Gospels which is designated vetustus (cap. 5, p. 251). Most of the other books listed there were, like those of our other inventories, very practical (see note 22).

25. See Bauerreiss, , Kirchengechichte Bayerns, 1:66.Google Scholar See the extensive book list of the Passau chorepiscopus, Madaiwin, from 903 in Becker, Gustav, Catalogi Bibliothecarurn Antiquz (Bonn, 1885), no. 28, pp. 61–62.Google Scholar Thannkirchen can only recently have come back into possession of the bishop in 855 because seven years earlier, in 848, it had been granted as beneficiurn to an important layman, his wife and son (TF, no. 701). In 804 there is already reference to its parrochia (TF no. 197).

26. There are good rent discussions of Bavarian proprietary churches by Bauerreiss Kirchengechichte Bayerns, 1:78–90 and by Stdrmer, Wilhelm in his Friü her Adel: Studien zurpolztischen Föhrungsschitht im fränkzsch-deutschen Reich vom 8. bis 11. Jahrhunderl, Monographien zur Geschichte des Mittelalters, vol. 6, pt. 2 (Stuttgart, 1973), pp. 357–374.Google Scholar See also Störmer's article, “Adelige Eigenkirchen und Adelsgräber—Denkmalpflegerische Aufgaben,” Zeitschrzft für bayerische Landesgechzchte 38 (1975), pp. 1142–1158,Google Scholar with appendix listing aristocratic proprietary churches occurring in TF through the ninth century. He has recently performed the same service for Passau in his article, “Probleme frühmittelalterlichen Adels im ostniederbayerischen Raum,” Ostbaiarische Crenzrnarken 18 (1976):49–62, especially p. 59.Google Scholar

27. For example, the apparent dating of three of these inventories to Ca. 842 (3, 4, 5; cf. 6) is unlikely to be so much a function of their Contents as of ad hoc administrative zeal. Professor Störmer (Munich), the leading expert on early medieval Bavarian aristocracy (see note 26), has kindly reviewed this material for me. Clearly, some of the proprietors such as Etpurc and Into (1) belonged to important clans, the members of which controlled large numbers of country churches.

28. Benjamin, Guérard, ed., Polyplyque de l'abbaye de Saint-Rem de Reims (Paris, 1853), pp. 8Google Scholar (cap. 17), 38 (cap. 59), 56 (cap. 123), 61–62 (cap. 22), 78 (cap. 74), 87 (cap. 47).

29. Four of the nine missals are explicitly designated as Gregorian, and three as Gelasian, including one which was cited as a vetustum volurrien; ibid., p. 78. See Moreton, Bernard, The Eighth-Century Gelasian Sacramentary: A Study in Tradition (Oxford, 1976), p. 2.Google Scholar

30. See MaS, nos. 19, 33, 97 and 107 for churches belonging to Lorsch, and Prüm, , and Dronke, Ernst Friedrich Johann, ed. Codex Diplomaticus Fuldensis (Cassel, 1850), nos. 131 and 202Google Scholar for Fulda inventories. See also MaS, nos. 1, 34 and 108. Despite the impressive presence of relics of SS. Peter, Martin and Petronella (sic), as well as pyx, cross, chalice, paten and pall, the basilica at Holzheim (MaS, no. 33) acquired by Lorsch in 793 evidently lacked books as did Etpurc and Into's contemporary foundation (1). Is this a coincidence?

31. See, for example, the remarks by Glaser, Hubert in Handbuch dec bayerzschen Geschichte, ed. Max, Spindler, vol. 1, 2nd ed. (Munich, 1968), especially p. 437.Google Scholar

32. The Bavarian clergy of the early eighth century have not had a good reputation since the report to Pope Zacharias around 746 that one of them baptized “in nomine patria et filia et spiritus sancti”! See The Letters of Saint Boniface, trans. Ephraim Emerton, Records of Civilization 31 (New York, 1940), no. 54 pp. 122–123.Google Scholar

33. This appears in both the manuscript and TF as “collectarium I omeliarum dialogorum”; I have emended it to “collectionem I omeliarum et dialogorum.” It probably referred to the (40) homilies and dialogues of Pope Gregory the Great (see Thannkirchen [7]).

34. This appears in both the manuscript and TF as “canonem I penitentialem I”; I have emended it to “canonem I penitentialem.” See Haito of Basel's list (note 11).