READING GUIDE (Week 9): Monks and Laymen/Rise of the Papacy
I. Monks and Laymen in the Eleventh Century
A. Charters of Cluny
Charters were a genre of document produced in increasingly large numbers
from the tenth century on. Most of them contain brief records of gifts,
donations, or sales of property made by laymen to monasteries. The
most interesting charters also contain peripheral information alongside
the nuts-and-bolts land transactions: we can learn about family structures,
lordship, peasant status, politics and warfare, and so forth. Charters
tend to be formulaic. They open with an announcement, known as the protocol,
that provides a pious rationale for the subsequent land transfer. The author
of the grant (or sale) identifies him or herself, and provides further
reasons for the gift. The precise goods to be transferred are then
enumerated, and the charter closes with a list of witnesses who have seen
and attested to the act (sometimes there is also a sanction clause, which
warns transgressors against interfering with the act). Charters are
usually quite boring for the specific information they provide (unless
you enjoy studying land transfers), so historians usually look at them
for information concerning the mentalities of the parties involved. That
is, we try to read between the lines to understand motivations: why did
laypeople give gifts to monks? Why did monks receive them? What can we
learn about disputes and the ways they were settled from such documents?
How was the aristocratic family structured? Etc. Note: Cluny was
one of the most important monasteries of the Middle Ages. It was founded
in 910 by Duke William of Aquitaine, and immediately acquired a reputation
for being more strict and faithful to the Benedictine Rule than older monasteries.
As a result, it received a growing river of gifts from nobles living near
and far [many thousands of charters exist for Cluny, more than for any
other monastery in Europe]. By 1050 it was one of the largest landholders,
and its abbot one of the most powerful churchmen, in Europe. Does
this mean that Cluny was corrupt? NO! If this is what you think, think
again. You need to look for the medieval mentality, not a modern protestant
one.
1. The Foundation Charter of Cluny, 910
a. What is a foundation charter? What does it mean to say that Cluny
was ‘founded' in 910?
b. Using Cluny as our example, what role did the aristocracy play in
founding monasteries? Why?
c. What reasons does Count/Duke William give for founding the monastery
of Cluny? Remember that William was considered a very pious man. [so don't
be too cynical]. What does this tell us about lay attitudes towards monks
and religion?
d. What properties were included in William's original gifts? Does
anything surprise you? If you are unfamiliar with any of the terms he uses,
check the footnotes in Geary or use Hollister to try to figure out what
they mean.
e. Did William retain any control over the monks at Cluny? Is this
significant? Consider, for instance, the election of abbots. Who elected
them? Why is election so important?
f. What was the relationship of Cluny to the papacy? How would the
local bishop feel about this?
g. What measures did William take to ensure that his act of foundation
would proceed as he intended? That is, what sort of sanction(s) lay behind
his generous gift?
2. Charters of the Grossi Family
a. Just as modern churchgoers prefer to establish personal links to
a particular church and/or pastor, so too did medieval aristocratic families
tend to develop lasting ties to particular monasteries. The Grossi
family is no exception in establishing a series of bonds over 80 years
with the monks of Cluny.
b. Why did Doda and Letbald II make their gift in charter #802?
c. What did Doda and Letbald give to Cluny? What does this tell us
about social structure in 10th century France?
d. What are ‘serfs' (servi)?
e. Customary rights could be and often were given alongside ‘real'
property. What sorts of ‘rights' did Doda and Letbald concede to Cluny?
f. Letbald decided to make an even tighter connection with Cluny. What
was it?
g. What was the purpose of having the signa (singular: signum) of all
those people at the end of the document?
h. What is going on in charter #1460? Why is the abbot of Cluny granting
lands to Letbald III? Notice where some of the properties granted to Letbald
III for his lifetime came from? Why is this significant?
i. What did Rotrudis and Josseran give to Cluny in charter #1577? How
do we explain this?
j. Charter #2508 reveals that disputes over such grants of land and
rights were fairly common. What was under dispute in this case? Who are
the parties to the dispute (note that the Majolus in #2508 is not the same
person as Abbot Majolus of #1460; he is identical to the Majolus of #1845;
but who is this fellow?)? What is a ‘quit-claim'? Why were the monks
desirous of obtaining such a charter? Why did the disputants agree to put
aside their differences?
k. Charter #2946 shows us a cycle coming full circle. Who gave what
to whom? What was the previous history of the land in question?
l. Given all of this, why did laymen give land to monasteries?
B. The Miracles of Saint Foy
We have already encountered St Foy (or St Faith) when we discussed
‘holy thefts' of relics. St Foy had been a teenaged girl who was martyred
in Agen in 303 AD. For a variety of reasons, local Christians came
to venerate her as a particularly effective patron saint. Her relics
were stolen from Agen in the ninth century and brought to Conques (also
S. France), where they continued to perform miracles at a steady rate.
1. Why did Bernard of Angers write down this book of miracles? (ie.,
what was his purpose or goal?)
2. Remember to think like a medieval Christian: what do miracles tell
you about the world, God, etc.?
3. As historians, why do we care about miracles? Hint: we don't care
about the ‘veracity' of them. That is to say that we as historians cannot
judge whether they were ‘true' or not. Such questions are best left to
faith, not history. But historians have found miracle stories to be particularly
useful in studying medieval culture. Why?
4. What is the overall message of the story of Vuitbert? To whom was
it meant to appeal?
5. Regardless of whether you find Vuitbert's story to be convincing,
what does it tell us about medieval society? What does it tell us about
social status? About relations between rich and poor? About violence? About
rural life?
6. What is the ‘miracle' in this story?
7. What is St Foy's relationship to God? Who actually performs the
miracle? St Foy? Or someone else? This is a good reminder of the role of
saints in medieval society.
8. What happened to Vuitbert after the miracle? How was he treated
by the bystanders and the monks of Conques?
9. Notice, too, how the miracle was contingent on Vuitbert's behavior.
10. Miracles did not have to be of the healing sort. What kind of miracle
is described in chapter XI (p. 315)?
11. In chapter XI, why did the monks physically carry St Foy's statue
into the disputed field in a procession?
12. Was Bernard of Angers (the author of the stories) a credulous rube?
Or a discerning critic? Why?
13. Chapter XII reveals some of Bernard's suspicions about certain
local practices. What are they? He informs us what ‘orthodox' belief and
behavior should be, and then what the local people were doing. How do they
differ? Why did Bernard change his mind? What justification did he give?
II. The Rise of the Papacy: the Investiture Controversy
A. General Concepts: the Investiture Controversy
[These questions cannot be answered by any one specific document, but
they are important to consider:]
1. What is investiture?
2. What were the main practical points of disagreement between the
kings and pope? (ie., over what specific practices did they disagree?)
3. What were the larger, unstated, theoretical points of disagreement?
In other words, they may have been fighting over specific practices, but
those practices carried larger, more significant implications about the
shape and order of power in Europe.
4. What is simony? How is it a part of the debate over investiture?
5. What was the traditional role of the German king in the election
of bishops? Why did he feel that this was an important part of his own
royal power? Why did the pope disagree?
6. Was this debate a petty dispute over power-politics?. What were
the motives of both parties? Why did they each think they were acting on
the side of good? This shows us that there are two separate conceptions
of the structure of the ideal Christian commonwealth - what were they?
How did king and pope fit into each conception?
7. Finally, who won the debate? Why? Be sure that you can support your
opinion with evidence from the documents. Remember, too, the old
adage about he who wins all the battles may not win the war ....
B. Correspondence of Pope Gregory VII
Much of what we know of the investiture controversy comes from the
letters sent by the principal actors in the drama (Pope Gregory VII and
King Henry IV of Germany); these letters at times ridiculed their opponent's
positions, and at times explained their own position in an effort to gain
support from other churchmen and laymen in Europe. Remember that
as letters, there was always an audience - try to figure out the audience,
and the purpose for which each letter was written.
1. Chronology is important here - make a list of the letters and jot
down a phrase or two describing the tone of the letter. When does Gregory
change his attitude towards Henry?
2. In the letter of December 8, 1075, Gregory warns Henry that the
pope has heard unsettling rumors that the king "was in voluntary communication
with men who are under the censure of the Apostolic See." What does
this mean, and why is the pope concerned about it?
3. What was the pope's position towards Henry in 1075? What justification
(ie., how did he try to convince Henry) did Gregory offer in support of
that position?
4. The Synod of February 1076 ("Roman Lenten Synod of 1076") was extremely
important. What does Gregory do to Henry? How does he justify it?
5. Gregory constantly makes reference to St Peter. What is the Petrine
Theory and how does it apply to the pope's struggle with the king?
6. What reasons does Gregory offer for why the bishops and secular
leaders of Germany should support him and not Henry (letter of July 25,
1076)?
7. Why did Gregory write such a long letter to Bishop Hermann of Metz?
Shouldn't Hermann simply have followed papal orders? What does the fact
that Gregory had to convince the bishops of Germany to support him tell
us about the nature of power in Germany?
8. A great, dramatic scene occurred between Henry and Gregory in January
of 1077 at the castle of Canossa in Northern Italy. From what Gregory
tells of this episode, what actually happened? Who "won" at Canossa?
Why?
C. Letters of Henry IV, King of Germany
1. Henry's first letter (1076) attacks both the office and person of
the pope. What are Henry's complaints? From where does the
king think power derives? Who does it come to? What is the relative
position of the pope and king in this flow of power?
2. What are the specific abuses that Henry charges Gregory of committing?
3. In the Synod of Worms (1076), the German bishops lined up in support
of Henry. What justification do they offer for abandoning the pope?
What implications does this have for the nature of papal power in Europe?
4. In 1076, Henry wrote a famous letter to Gregory calling him "Hildebrand,
now not pope but false monk" (Hildebrand was Gregory's name before becoming
pope). What power is the king claiming here? How does he justify
it?
5. How does Henry's position towards Gregory change over the course
of 1076? Why do you think he backs away from the famous claims of the first
part of the year (when he called Gregory a "false monk")?
6. What did Henry promise at Canossa (January 1077)? Who won?
What does Canossa imply for the relative positions of pope and king in
western Europe?
7. By 1080, Henry's position in Germany had strengthened, and at the
Synod of Brixen he again turned on the pope. What does the Synod of Brixen
say about Gregory (again, they call him "false monk")? Of what crimes
do they accuse him? What powers does the synod assert?
8. In 1081, Henry sent a letter to the clergy and people of Rome in
anticipation of his triumphant voyage to Rome. What does he say about
the role of the king in spiritual and secular life? From this document,
who has won?
D. the Concordat of Worms, 1122
Gregory VII died in exile in southern Italy, a broken man. But
his vision was carried on by his fellow reformers, and the German kings
would never again exercise the theocratic power exhibited by Henry IV.
It required another 40-odd years, however, before the first stage of the
conflict drew to a close, at the Concordat (agreement) of Worms.
By this point both initial antagonists had died - the pope was now Calixtus
II, and the king was Henry V.
1. What does Calixtus agree to? Is this a compromise? Or
did he retain all the powers that Gregory had sought?
2. From this agreement, try to figure out how a bishop ought to be
elected. Who has the right to nominate? Who has the right to elect?
Who has the right to consecrate? And what about the symbols of the bishop's
secular power?
3. What does Henry V give up? What does he promise to do? Does this
seem to be a diminution of his father's rights and powers?
Homework Assignment (Due March
14)
Write 1 page in response to the following, using specific examples
wherever possible:
1. What do charters tell historians about medieval society?