1 Die Traditionen des Hochstifts Freising, ed. Bitterauf, Theodor, Quellen und Erörterungen zur bayerischen und deutschen Geschichte, Neue Folge (hereafter QuE, NF), vols. 4 and 5 (Munich, 1905; reprinted Aalen, 1967), pt l, nr 130, pp. 139–40Google Scholar (pt 1 of this collection hereafter referred to as TFreising 1; pt 2 as TFreising 2). Presumably, this property stood outside the normal patrimony which would have pertained to his sons who are mentioned in the deed. Perhaps, Erminswind herself was not the daughter of Sigiheri's wife, who is also mentioned.

2 ‘[P]ublicum placitum’ (TFreising 1, nr 401, pp. 344–6).Google Scholar Evidently, Waldperht had been resisting for some time the claim which, as testified by a sworn jury, was based on the allegation that Waldperht's father ‘had finished his life in servile obedience’ (‘in servili famulatu’) as a slave of St Mary. The two attendant Ealdormen sitting in judgement ‘authorized Bishop Hitto to take up and command his man and impose upon him such service as a slave ought to do; which he did’.

3 TFreising 1, nr 402, pp. 346–7.Google Scholar

4 See Störmer, Wilhelm, Früher Adel; Studien zur politischen Führungsschicht im fränkisch-deutschen Reich vom 8. bis II. Jahrhundert, Monographien zur Geschichte des Mittelalters, vol. 6 I/II (Stuttgart, 1973), 78.Google Scholar

5 Between 957 and 972; TFreising 2, nr 1203, pp. 119–20.Google Scholar

6 For references to Engilpold see TFreising 2, nrs 1184, 1217, pp. 103, 129.Google Scholar

7 ‘The survival and extinction of the slave system in the early medieval West (fourth to eleventh centuries)’, in his From slavery to feudalism in south-western Europe (Cambridge and Paris, 1991), 1–59, esp. pp. 21–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

8 ‘Inter ingenuum vero et ancillam, Sive servum et ingenuam, sicut consensus contubernia facere possunt, ita nuptiae non vocantur…’ (Monumenta Germaniae Historica, Leges Nationum Germanicarum [hereafter MGH, Leges], vol. II, pt I [Leges Burgundionum], ed. de Salis, L. R. [Hanover, 1892], 156 [c.XXXVII, 5])Google Scholar; see also Bonnassie, , ‘Survival’, 23Google Scholar; contubernium can be translated as ‘tentmates’.

9 The most complete review is found in the still-unfinished work by Nehlsen, Hermann, Sklavenrecht zwischen Antike und Mittelalter; Germanisches und römisches Recht in den germanischen Rechtsaufzeichnungen, Göttinger Studien zur Rechtsgeschichte, 7, I (Ostgoten, Westgoten, Franken, Langobarden), (Göttingen, 1972), passimGoogle Scholar; see also Verlinden, Charles, ‘Le “mariage” des esclaves’, in Il matrimonio nella societa altomedievale, Settimane di Studio del Centro Italiano di Studi sull'alto Medioevo, 24 (Spoleto, 1977), 569–93, 595–601.Google Scholar

10 MGH, Leges, vol. I (Leges Visigothorum), ed. Zeumer, K. (Hanover and Leipzig, 1902), 133–6 (c.III, 2, 2–4).Google Scholar

11 Edictus ceteraeque Langobardorum Leges cum constitutionibus et pactis principum Beneventanorum, ed. and rev. by Bluhme, F. from the MGH edition of 1868 (Hanover, 1869), 45 (c.221).Google Scholar

12 Ibid., 45–6 (c.222); for natural sons see the Burgundian, Lex Romana, MGH, Leges, vol. II, pt I, 156 (c.XXXVII, 3).Google Scholar

13 MGH, Leges, vol. III, pt II (Lex Ribuaria), ed. Beyerle, R. and Buchner, R. (Hanover, 1954), 113 (c.LXI, 15)Google Scholar; vol. IV, pt I (Pactus Legis Salicae), ed. Eckhardt, K. A. (Hanover, 1962), 62 (c.XIII, 9)Google Scholar; vol. IV, pt II (Lex Salica), ed. Eckhardt, K. A. (Hanover, 1969), 54 (c.XIIII, 10).Google Scholar

14 MGH, Leges, vol. V, pt I (Leges Alamannorum), ed. Lehmann, K. (Hanover, 1888), 80–1 (c.XVII, 2).Google Scholar

15 Monumenta Germaniae Historica, Concilia (hereafter MGH, Concilia), vol. II (Concilia Aevi Karolini), pt I, ed. Werminghoff, A. (Hanover and Leipzig, 1906), 95Google Scholar (c.X). Three manuscripts add the previous provision from the Alemannic Code to the contemporary decrees of the Bavarian synod of Neuching (14 October 772), ibid., 101–2 (c.X).

16 MGH, Leges, vol. V, pt II (Lex Baiwariorum), ed. von Schwind, E. Freiherr (Hanover, 1926), 358–9Google Scholar (c. VIII, 12–13). Two other provisions of the Code (VIII, 2,9, pp. 354, 357), echoing the Visigothic and Langobardic Codes above, deal with (apparently only casual) adulterous and fornicatory relationships, respectively, between a male ‘servus’ and a female ‘libera’.

17 Ibid., 428–9 (c.XV, 9).

18 Edictos, 141–2 (c.140).Google Scholar

19 See Nehlsen, , Sklavenrecht, 367–8.Google Scholar This is the only clear exception I have found to Bonnassie's assertion that ‘no barbarian law mentions the [sexual] relations which a free man might have with his [own] ancillae’ (‘Survival’, 24).Google Scholar In contrast, Hartmut Hoffmann has concluded on the basis of the penitential literature that ‘so bewahrte das kanonische Recht theoretisch auch die unfreie Magd vor der Zudringlichkeit ihres Herrn’, , in his ‘Kirche und Sklaverei im frühen Mittelalter’, Deutsches Archiv für Erforschung des Mittelalters, 42 (1986), 14.Google Scholar As will be seen, I think the emphasis here should be on ‘theoretisch’.

20 Monumenta Germaniae Historica, Capitularia Regum Francorum (hereafter MGH, Capitularia), vol. I, ed. Boretius, A. (Hanover, 1883)Google Scholar, nr 16 (Decretum Vermeriense), p. 40Google Scholar (c.6) invalidated in the case of starvation; 41 (c. 13).

21 MGH, Capitularia, vol. I, nr 142 (Capitula Legi Salicae Addita), p. 292 (c.3).Google Scholar The offspring of a marriage between a nominally free woman and a male slave were covered by a legal opinion preserved from the early ninth century: if a male slave took a free ‘colona’ as wife (‘uxorem acceperit’), did their children pertain to the ‘colona’ or the slave, that is, were they free or unfree? The answer is well known and not without a certain brutal finality: ‘Consider, therefore, if your own slave united himself [sibi sociaverit] with the slavewoman of another or if the slave of another took your slavewoman to wife [uxorem acceperit]; to which one of you would their offspring pertain, and do the same regarding these ones. For there is nothing else than free and slave’ (italics mine) (MGH, Capitularia, vol. I, nr 58 [Responso Misso Cuidam Data], p. 145 [c.l]).Google Scholar

22 See the Visigothic Fragmenta Gaudenziana for the only Hagar-like arrangement of which I am aware: MGH, Leges, vol. I, 470 (c.VIII, VIIII)Google Scholar; see also Nehlsen, , Sklavenrecht, 156–7, note 22.Google Scholar There are, of course, a few spectacular exceptions to this at the very highest, particularly royal, levels of Prankish society.

23 See the short survey from a somewhat different perspective in Störmer, , Früher Adel, 71–80.Google Scholar

24 Some examples, of course, are highly allusive or ambiguous, and the exact personal status and nature of the relationship can be inferred only with risk. I have tried to base the analysis on the more certain examples. I expect that the completeness of my coverage declines over time, particularly by the late twelfth and early thirteenth centuries when documentation becomes much more extensive and the social scene more diverse (see especially below, note 31).

25 ‘…viriliter circumcinctus gladio suo stabat in medio triclinio domus suae’ (TFreising 1, nr 634, pp. 538–40Google Scholar); for Ratolt's offices see TFreising l, nrs 626a, 746, pp. 534, 619.Google Scholar

26 We know nothing about Sasso's mother other than what we may infer from the document: that she probably was or had been Ratolt's slavewoman. The free brother, Bishop Chunihoh, otherwise unidentified, did return to his Bavarian homeland at least twice in 845 and 850 to confirm and to supplement his father's gift (TFreising 1, nrs 667, 721, pp. 561–2, 600–1Google Scholar). But Sasso, whom we may assume was freed in accordance with his father's wishes, is not heard from again. We have no evidence that Chunihoh acted ‘charitably’ towards his step-brother in the spirit of the Bavarian Code, but in his second donation of 850 he did, ‘nisi tantum unam feminam excluserat nomine [blank] que iam pridem libertate fuerat concessa’ (p. 601). Who was this unnamed woman who had been freed ‘long ago’?

27 Patrocinium and defensionem are technical, legal terms applying to a manumitted slave or freedman/woman. Die Traditionen des Hochstifts Regensburg und des Klosters S. Emmeram, ed. Widemann, Josef, QuE, NF, 8, (Munich, 1943; reprinted Aalen, 1988) (hereafter TRegensburg), nr 93, p. 84.Google Scholar Since we do not know the full background or the precise sequence of events, this might be an example of Type B rather than Type A (see below). The deed was enacted before ‘citizens of the city of Regensburg’ including two prominent officials. Karl Bosl refers to this document as ‘hochbedeutsam’ but does not comment on it from our perspective in his Die Sozialstruktur der mittelalterlichen Residenz- und Femhandelstadt Regensburg; Die Entwicklung ihres Bürgertums vom 9.–14.Google ScholarJahrhundert, Bayerische Akademie der Wissenschaften, Philosophisch historische Klasse, Abhandlungen, NF, 63 (Munich, 1966), 11 and passim.Google Scholar Another good urban example, clearly Type B, from the late eleventh century is TRegensburg, nr 654, p. 320.Google Scholar

28 The best discussion of social and legal developments in this period is still Philippe Dollinger's L'évolution des classes rurales en Bavière depuis la fin de l'époque carolingienne jusqu'au milieu du XIII^e siècle, Publications de la Faculté des Lettres de l'Université de Strasbourg, fascicule 112 (Paris, 1949), especially Chapter VII, pp. 332–82Google Scholar, for the ‘censuales’. Dollinger remarks that ‘Jusqu'au XIe siècle donc, la classe des censuales est peu nombreuse, formée presque exclusivement de non-libres affranchis, et comporte par son recrutement particulier une forte majorité de femmes…’, which changes from the twelfth century to a larger representation of freepersons and males (pp. 346–7). He only deals with our topic to the extent of remarking, as we noted above, that in a mixed marriage, ‘les enfants…doivent suivre la condition pire’ (p. 259).Google Scholar A German translation of Dollinger's work was published under the somewhat misleading title Der bayerische Bauernstand vom 9. bis zum 13. Jahrhundert, ed. Irsigler, Franz (Munich, 1982).Google Scholar

29 For example, in the second quarter of the eleventh century two men, Willibold and Adalold, each provided for his wife and daughter, respectively, whom they ‘had set free’ (‘de servitute libéra vit’; ‘de servitio liberatam’) by conveying or giving them (sic: ‘tradidit’; ‘dedit’) to the altar of St Quirinus at the monastery of Tegernsee. There the women and their posterity would pay one penny annually to be free of all servile obligations (‘omni servili lege’; ‘omnem servilem conditionem’) (Die Traditionen des Klosters Tegernsee, 1003–1242, ed. Acht, Peter, QuE, NF, 9, l, [Munich, 1952Google Scholar] [hereafter TTegernsee], nrs 22, 23, pp. 18, 19).Google Scholar

30 TTegernsee, nr 118, pp. 92–3.Google Scholar A contemporary example from the Regensburg cartulary shows that the status of even a ‘censualis’, paid up and in good standing, was not without risk. The noble Heinrich offered to St Emmeram his slavewoman, Racca, ‘who was also herself his concubine’ together with his sons and their daughters, for a payment of five pence. However, he felt constrained to add that they would revert into the power of his heirs if they were ever given out in fief by their monastic protector (TRegensburg, nr 701, p. 335).Google Scholar

31 TFreising 2, nr 1434, p. 288.Google Scholar I have not tried to be exhaustive in dealing with the ministerials. For a recent discussion of their status see Arnold, Benjamin, German knighthood, 1050–1300 (Oxford, 1985), esp.Google Scholar Chapters 2 (‘Servile legal status’) and 6 (‘Marriage’), 53–75 and 162–83.Google Scholar See below, note 46.

32 ‘… adherebat genitialis [= genitalibus/genitaliter?] feminae sanctae Mariae famulae’ (TFreising 1, nr 450, pp. 385–6)Google Scholar; see Sturm's, JosefDie Anfänge des Hauses Preysing, Schriftenreihe zur bayerischen Landesgeschichte, 8 (Munich, 1931; reprinted Aalen, 1974), 335Google Scholar, and Störmer, , Früher Adel, 75–6Google Scholar, for discussions of this episode. Herlihy's, DavidOpera muliebria; women and work in medieval Europe (Philadelphia, 1990)Google Scholar, connects ‘genitialis’ to ‘feminae’ and assigns Meripurc to the gynaeceum or woman's workshop of Freising, with some speculation about the moral conditions therein (p. 85).

33 TFreising l, nr 489, p. 418.Google Scholar

34 TTegernsee, nr 35, pp. 28–9.Google Scholar

35 My reading follows the Mittellateinisches Wörterbuch under the entry ‘adhaereo’ (B.l.b.), but it is possible that this unusual verbal construction (‘Adherere’) is a scribal error for a personal name such as ‘Adheri’ in which case he (Adheri) and his wife and sons would be amongst the slaves transmitted by Maganus to his daughter. For an unambiguous example see TRegensburg, nr 755, p. 354Google Scholar, for a certain Wiciman who in 1120, together with his wife and his sons, benefited his daughter whom he had by a concubine (‘quam habuit ex concubina’).

36 Die Traditionen des Hochstifts Passau, ed. Heuwieser, Max, QuE, NF, 6 (Munich, 1930; reprinted Aalen, 1988)Google Scholar (hereafter TPassau), nr 45, pp. 39–40.Google Scholar See TFreising l, nr 637, p. 542Google Scholar, for an 840 example of a freeman who by a donation ‘procurred’ support for his wife after his death in return for which she was only to provide such servile labour as her strength might then permit (‘pro tali servitio quale sicut ilia tune pro viribus suis potuisset implere’).

37 Das älteste Traditionsbuch des Klosters Mondsee, ed. Rath, G. and Reiter, E., Forschungen zur Geschichte Oberösterreichs, 16 (Linz, 1989Google Scholar) (hereafter TMondsee), nr 20, pp. 119–20.Google Scholar Heito made an additional conveyance of lands beyond what he and his brother had previously given, all of which he would have for his own use during his lifetime. After his death his sons would hold his lands, offering service, like Salucho's sons, to the Abbots of Mondsee but, in this case, only such ‘honest services’ as they could perform ‘with honour’ (see below).

38 TFreising 1, nr 1033, pp. 777–8Google Scholar; Störnier, , Früher Adel, pp. 77–8.Google Scholar In fact, one of the sons, Reginperht, seems to occur as an episcopal Steward during the early tenth century (TFreising 1, 2, nrs 1041, 1074, pp. 785, 20).Google Scholar

39 Die Traditionsbücher des Hochstifts Brixen, ed. Redlich, Oswald, Tirolensia, Acta, I (Innsbrück, 1886Google Scholar) (hereafter TBrixen), nr 55, p. 22.Google Scholar See Nehlsen, , Sklavenrecht, 245Google Scholar, for application of the ius advenae.

40 TRegensburg, nr 112, p. 97.Google Scholar

41 TFreising 2, nr 1087, p. 30.Google Scholar The document is somewhat ambiguous on the subsequent status of the wife, but the son clearly reverted to Freising (‘ad ecclesiam dei… rediret’). Adalpreht did, however, secure his son's lifetime possession of the donated property in return for a specified rent.

42 Salzburger Urkundenbuch, ed. Hauthaler, Willibald, vol. I (Traditionskodizes) (Salzburg, 1910; reprinted: Aalen, 1987Google Scholar) (hereafter SUB 1), ‘Traditionen von Michaelbeuern’, nr 59, p. 799.Google Scholar See above for Lanzo; and an almost contemporary example involving two ministerials from separate ‘families’, the male being of a higher, royal status than the woman with whom he ‘copulated’ (TRegensburg, nr 805, p. 381).Google Scholar

43 TPassau, nr 50, pp. 43–4.Google Scholar

44 TFreising 2, nr 1226a/b, pp. 136–7Google Scholar; Stömier, , Früher Adel, p. 77.Google Scholar These are the ‘honest services’ which Heito's descendants owed to Mondsee and Hiltini's to Freising (see above).

45 TFreising 2, nr 1458a, p. 311Google Scholar; see ibid., nr 1244, p. 149 (972–976).

46 Arnold, , German knighthood, has a brief discussion of these ‘upward’ marriages (pp. 169–72Google Scholar) but does not consider ‘downward’ marriages of Types A and B, discussed above.

47 TRegensburg, nr 919, p. 454.Google Scholar Perhaps Regensburg ‘censuales’ enjoyed more liberal customary rights than those of Frauenchiemsee (see ibid., nr 910, pp. 448–9 for a confirmation of the liberties of ‘censuales’ in 1177). Note that in this case the legally unfree father is depicted as the initiator and active party, not the free mother. The reverse seems to be implied in the very complicated case described in the contemporary deed TPassau, nr 745, pp. 266–7.Google Scholar

48 TTegernsee, nrs 35, 118, pp. 29, 92.Google Scholar

49 TFreising l, nr 450, p. 385.Google Scholar

50 SUB l, ‘Traditionen von Mattsee’, nr 5, pp. 875–6.Google Scholar

51 TRegensburg, nr 93, p. 84Google Scholar; TTegernsee, nr 35, p. 29.Google Scholar

52 TTegernsee, nr 118, p. 92.Google Scholar

53 TBrixen, nr 55, p. 22.Google Scholar

54 TFreising l, nr 450, p. 385.Google Scholar

55 Not included in Table 2 is the interesting very early (791–804) conveyance by a certain Lantpald to Passau where he provides, inter alia, ‘…duas mancipias cum curte cum casa et filii mei II [emended from ‘fillium ei II’] in libertate serviant ad istum domum dei pro victum et discant litteras’ (TPassau, nr 38, p. 34).Google Scholar The proximity of the servile ‘mancipias’ and the provision that the sons should serve ‘in freedom’ suggest that this deed may also fit our scheme (Type A or B?).

56 TFreising l, nr 637, p. 542 (Type B)Google Scholar; TTegernsee, nr 22, p. 19 (Type A).Google Scholar

57 TFreising 1 and 2, nrs 608 and 1226 (and, possibly, l, nr 402), pp. 521, 137, 347Google Scholar; see also TRegensburg, nr 112, p. 97.Google Scholar

58 TTegernsee, nr 22, p. 19.Google Scholar

59 Tenil, it seems, did subsequently make Meripurc his ‘coniux’, but at the time of their initial relationship she was his ‘mistress’ (‘amica’), a term not confined to servile women (TFreising l, nr 489, p. 418Google Scholar; see also ibid., nr 198, p. 190).

60 TFreising l, nr 450, p. 385.Google Scholar

61 TFreising l, nrs 402, 634, pp. 347, 539.Google Scholar

62 TTegernsee, nr 35, p. 29Google Scholar; TRegensburg, nr 755, p. 352.Google Scholar

63 TFreising l, 2, nrs 402 and 1226a, pp. 347 and 136.Google Scholar

64 In 823 the apparently servile son (Type A?) of a landowner, Hrodheri, received a highly conditioned claim on the alode conveyed to Freising: ‘and, moreover, if such posterity should succeed to my son by the name of Fater as may be worthy, to the extent that it can lay claim to this in combination with servitude [quatenus cum servitute hoc promereri potuisset], let him hold it in the like manner. If not, however…’ (TFreising l, nr 494, p. 424).Google Scholar

65 TTegernsee, nr 35, p. 29.Google Scholar

66 Verlinden, , ‘Le “mariage”’, p. 593.Google Scholar

67 ‘… the movement of progressive societies has hitherto been a movement from Status to Contract’, Ancient law; its connection with the early history of society and its relation to modern ideas (London, 1861; reprinted: Boston, 1963), Chapter V, p. 165 (Maine's italics).Google Scholar