Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-dsjbd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-28T17:14:08.210Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Making Ends Meet: Wealth and Poverty in the Carolingian Church

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  21 March 2016

Janet L. Nelson
Janet L. Nelson*
Affiliation:
King’s College, London
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

In the early ninth century, the Frankish Church was unashamedly, triumphantly, rich. The Franks were assured that God loved them. Thanks to the intercessions of churchmen, God had promoted the expansion of the Frankish Empire: in a world of social relations organized and expressed through the exchange of gift and countergift, it seemed only fair that God, or rather his Church on his behalf, should share in the profits. ‘Give tithes to the Lord’, Smaragdus urged a young Carolingian king: ‘He subjected many realms to you, and commanded powerful peoples to serve you’.

Type
Research Article
Information
Studies in Church History , Volume 24: The Church and Wealth , 1987 , pp. 25 - 35
Copyright
Copyright © Ecclesiastical History Society 1987

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 Smaragdus’ monitory verse De decimis dandis, quoted H. H. Anton, Fürslenspiegel und Herrscherethos in der Karotingerzeit (Bonn, 1968), p. 186, n. 251. (Translations, here and below, are my own.)

2 See Smaragdus, Via Regia, cc. 12, 13, PL 102, cols 953–4; and other Carolingian examples in Anton, Fürslenspiegel, pp. 255, 259, 430 ff. For Alfred, see Nelson, J. L., ‘Wealth and Wisdom in the Politics of Alfred’, in Rosenthal, J. ed., Kings and Kingship, Acta xi (State University of New York, Binghampton, 1986 [for 1984]), pp. 31–52 Google Scholar.

3 Herlihy, D., ‘Church Property on the European Continent, 701–1200’, Speculum, 36 (1961), pp. 81–105 Google Scholar.

4 Plöchl, W. M., Geschichte des Kirchenrechts, 1 (Vienna-Munich, 1960), p. 434 Google Scholar; McKitterick, R., The Frankish Church and the Carolingian Reforms, 789–895 (London, 1977), pp. 76–8 Google Scholar.

5 Hrabanus Maurus, Liber Je Ohlatione Puerorum, PL 107, col. 432. For Hincmar’s juscification of the Church’s wealth, see Nelson, , ‘The Church’s Military Service in the Ninth Century’, SCH 20 (1983), pp. 15–30, at 26–7 Google Scholar (reprinted in Nelson, Politics and Ritual in Early Medieval Europe (London, 1986), pp. 128–9).

6 Wallace-Hadrill, J. M., The Frankish Church (Oxford, 1984), pp. 140–1, 244, 244–7, 291, 332 Google Scholar. The pattern of Charlemagne’s giving is evident in Jedin, H. et al., Atlas zur Kirchengeschichte (Freiburg, 1970), p. 35 Google Scholar. See also Nelson, , ‘Charles the Bald and the Church in Town and Countryside’, SCH 16 (1979), pp. 103–18 Google Scholar (reprinted in Politics and Ritual, pp. 75–90).

7 Lesne, E., Histoire de la propriété ecclésiastique en France, 6 vols (Lille, 1910-43) 2, ii (1926), pp. 268–9, 275–7 Google Scholar. Good examples of the vulnerability of church lands can be found in Hincmar’s letter to Count Gerard of Vienne, MGH Epp VIII, no 142, p. 115.

8 Agobard of Lyons, MGH Epp V, p. 203.

9 See Nelson, , ‘Charles the Bald and the Church’, pp. 106–7 Google Scholar.

10 MGH Cap II, no 267 (857), c. 1, p. 292; compare Cap I, no 138 (818/9), cc. 9. 10. p. 227; Cap II, no 191 (829), cc. 1, 4, p. 12; ibid., no 293 (845), cc. 60–3, pp. 412–13.

11 MGH Epp VI, no 27, pp. 188–92.1 cannot agree with Marenbon, J., ‘Wulfad, Charles the Bald and John Scottus Eriugena’, in Gibson, M. and Nelson, J. L. eds., Charles the Bald. Court and Kingdom. BAR International Series, 101 (Oxford, 1981), p. 375 Google Scholar, that Wulfad’s letter is ‘in content… totally banal’.

12 See Amann, E. and Dumas, A., L’Église au pouvoir des laïques (888–1957) = Histoire de l’Église depuis les origines jusqu’à nos jours, ed. Fliche, A. and Martin, V., 7 (Paris, 1940)Google Scholar.

13 Werner, K. F., ‘Le rôle de l’aristocratie dans la christianisation du Nord-Est de la Gaule’, in Werner, , Structures politiques du monde franc (VIe-XIIe siècles) (London, 1979)Google Scholar, cap. 1; W. Hartmann, ‘Die rechtliche Zustand der Kirchen auf dem Lande: die Eigenkirche in der frankischen Gesetzgebung des 7. bis 9.Jahrhunderts’, in Cristianizzazione ed Organizzazione ecclesiastica delle campagne nell’alto medioevo: espansione e resistenze, Settimane di Studio del Centro italiano di studi sull’alto medioevo, 38 (Spoleto, 1982), pp. 397–441. Compare the re-evaluation of lay abbacies by Felten, F., ‘Laienäbte in der Karolingerzeit’, in Borst, A. ed., Mönchtum, Eptskopat una Adelzur Grundungszeit des Klosters Reichenau (Sigmaringen, 1974), pp. 397–431 Google Scholar.

14 MGH Cone, Die Konzilien der karolingischen Teilreiche 843–859, ed. W. Hartmann (Hanover, 1984), pp. 20–3.

15 Ibid., p. 18. See further Lot, F. and Halphen, L., Le règne de Charles le Chauve. (ière partie: 840–851) (Paris, 1909), pp. 110–12 Google Scholar.

16 Hincmar, De Ecclesiis et Capellis, ed. W. Gundlach, Zeitschrift für Kirchengeschichte, 10 (1889), pp. 92–145, at 112, 127; compare ibid., 101–2, 124–6, 128–33, 136–7. The grant to Hincmar: G. Tessier, ed., Receuil des Actes de Charles 11 le Chauve, 3 vols (Paris, 1944–56) 1, no 57, pp. 161–3. For the manuscript-transmission of the Toulouse decrees, see Nelson, , ‘Legislation and Consensus in the Reign of Charles the Bald’, in Wormald, P. ed., Ideal and Reality. Studies in Frankish and Anglo-Saxon Society presented to J. M. Wallace-Hadrill (Oxford, 1983), pp. 202–27, at 205, 207–8 Google Scholar (reprinted in Politics and Ritual, pp. 94, 96–7).

17 Count Bernard was Hincmar’s propinquus: Flodoard, Historia Remensis ecclesiae, III, 26, MGH SS XIII, p. 543. Devisse, J., Hincmar archevêque de Reims, 3 vols (Geneva, 1975-6), 2, p. 1097 Google Scholar, belatedly notes this point, but ignores its possible relevance to Hincmar’s career.

18 Bosl, K., ‘Potens-pauper’, in Frühformen der Gesellschaft in mittelalterlichen Europa (Munich, 1964), pp. 106–35 Google Scholar. See also Fichtenau, H., The Carolingian Empire (London, 1957)Google Scholar, chapters 5 and 6.

19 Monastic reception-rituals: Willmes, P., Der Herrscher-Adventus im Kloster des Frùhmittelalters (Münster, 1976), pp. 63–5, 67–71 Google Scholar. Priest’s oath: Schmidt-Wiegand, R., ‘Eid und Gelöbnis im mittelalterlichen Recht’, in Classen, P. ed., Recht una Schrifi, Vorträge una Forschungen, 23 (Sigmaringen, 1977), pp. 55–90, at 72–3 Google Scholar. Prohibitions of priestly arms-bearing: Prinz, F., Klerus und Krieg (Münster, 1971), cap. 3, esp. pp. 83–5 Google Scholar.

20 McKitterick, Frankish Church 2, cap. 2. A warm welcome must be given to the first volume of the fine new MGH edition of these episcopal statutes by P. Brommer (Hanover, 1984).

21 Hincmar, Capitula of 852, c. xi, PL 125, col. 775. (A new edition is forthcoming in Brommer’s second volume: see preceding note.) Compare episcopal statutes against priestly practice of usury: Theodulf, II Capit., ix, 2, ed. Brommer, MGH Capitula Episcoporum I, p. 171; III Gerbald, c. xiv, p. 41 and n. 34; Rodulf of Bourges, c. xxxv, pp. 260–1; Walter of Orleans, c. x, p. 190. Compare also legislation against clerical usurers, MGH Cap II, no 196 (829), c. xx, p. 43. For evidence of Breton priests practising usury, see Davies, W., ‘Priests and Rural Communities in East Brittany in the Ninth Century’, in Études Celtiques, 20 (1983), pp. 177–97, at 183–4 Google Scholar.

22 Hincmar, Capitula quihus de rebus magistri et decani per singulas ecclesias inquirere et episcopo renuntiare debeant (hereafter Inquiry), c. xx, PL 125, col. 780. Compare statutes against priestly inebriation, I Gerbald, ce. xiv, xviii, ed. Brommer, pp. 20–1, with further references ibid., n. 28.

23 Hincmar, Capit., c. xiv, PL 125, col. 776. Cf. statutes against priestly misbehaviour at feasts: III Gerbald, cc. iv, vi, p. 38, further references ibid., 111. 10, 12–16.

24 Hincmar, Capit., c. xvi, PL 125, col. 778.

25 Hincmar, Inquiry, c. ii, PL 125, col. 777.

26 Ibid., c. xvi, col. 779. In the De Ecclesiis et Capellis, p. 135, Hincmar said that the four shares of the priest’s tithe went to: the upkeep of the church; the care of guests; the maintenance of the listed poor (matricularii); and the priest’s own subsistence. The priest might make a gift to the bishop; but the bishop could not claim a fourth share of the priest’s tithe-income. On poor-relief, see Rouche, M., ‘La matricule des pauvres’, in Mollat, M. ed., Études sur l’histoire de la pauvreté, 2 vols (Paris, 1974) 1, pp. 83–110 Google Scholar; Devisse, Hincmar, 1, pp. 489–510.

27 Hincmar, Inquiry, c. xvii, PL 125, col. 778.

28 Ibid., c. xix, cols 779–80.

29 Prinz, Klerus und Krieg, pp. 98–9.

30 Hincmar, writing to Charles, PL 126, col. 97, seems to refer to some such royal jibe: Devisse, Hincmar, 2, p. 727, n. 6.

31 As implied by Wendy Davies’s demonstration of continuity of property-holding in ‘priestly families’: ‘Priests and rural communities’, p. 182.

32 E. Ennen, Die Frauen im Mittelalter (Munich, 1984), pp. 87–8.

33 Vita Remití, preface, MCHSRM III, pp. 251–2.

34 MGH Cap II, no 273, c. 30, p. 323; Hincmar, Capit., c. xvii, PL 125, col. 778.

35 Guérard, M. B., Polyptyque de l’Abbaye de Saint-Rémi de Reims (Paris, 1853), pp. 8, 38, 62, 87 Google Scholar.

36 Hincmar, Capit., c. xv, PL 125, col. 777.

37 Hincmar, Capit., c. xii, PL 125, col. 775.

38 Devisse, Hincmar, 2, p. 880.

39 Nelson, ‘The Church’s Military Service’, p. 26.