HIST 317

Fall 2004

Midterm Exam

Part one: primary source analysis. One of the three primary sources below will be on the exam. You will write an essay explaining how the source fits in its historical context, pointing out what the source reveals about the major trends in the historical development of medieval Europe.

Source One

To our beloved lord Zacharias, who bears the insignia of the supreme pontificate, [from] Boniface, a servant of the servants of God.

We confess, Father and Lord, that after we had learned through messengers that your predecessor Gregory, of holy memory, had departed this life, nothing gave us greater comfort and happiness than the knowledge that God had appointed Your Holiness to enforce the canonical decrees and govern the Apostolic See. Kneeling at your feet, we earnestly beg that, as we have been devoted servants and humble disciples to your predecessors in the See of Peter, we may likewise be counted obedient servants, under canon law, of Your Holiness.

It is our firm resolution to preserve the Catholic faith and the unity of the Church of Rome, and I shall continue to urge as many hearers and disciples as God shall grant me on this mission to render obedience to the Apostolic See.

We must also inform you, Holy Father, that owing to the conversion of the German people we have consecrated three bishops and divided the province into three dioceses. We humbly desire you to confirm and establish as bishoprics, both by your authority and in writing, the three towns or cities in which they were consecrated. We have established one episcopal see in Wurzburg, another in Buraburg and a third in Erfurt, formerly a city of barbarous heathens. These three places we urgently beg you to uphold and confirm by a charter embodying the authority of the Holy See, so that, God willing, there may be in Germany three episcopal sees founded and established by St. Peter's word and the Apostolic See's command, which neither present nor future generations will presume to change in defiance of the authority of the Apostolic See.

Be it known to you also, Holy Father, that Carloman, King of the Franks, summoned me to his presence and desired me to convoke a synod in that part of the Frankish kingdom which is under his jurisdiction. He promised me that he would reform and re-establish ecclesiastical discipline - which for the past sixty or seventy years has been completely disregarded and despised. If he is truly willing, under divine inspiration, to put his plan into execution, I should like to have the advice and the instructions of the Apostolic See. According to their elders, the Franks have not held a council for more than eighty years; they have had no archbishop nor have they established or restored in any place the canon law of the Church. The episcopal sees, which are in the cities, have been given, for the most part, into the possession of avaricious laymen or exploited by adulterous and unworthy clerics for worldly uses. If I am to undertake this task at your bidding and on the invitation of the Emperor I must have at once, with the appropriate ecclesiastical sanctions, both the command and the decision of the Apostolic See.

Should I discover among these men certain deacons, as they are called, who have spent their lives since childhood in debauchery, adultery and every kind of uncleanness, who have received the diaconate with this reputation, and who even now, when they have four or five or even more concubines in their beds at night, are brazen enough to call themselves deacons and read out the Gospel: who enter the priesthood, continue in the same career of vice and declare that they have the right to exercise the priestly functions of making intercession for the people and offering Mass, and who, to make matters worse, are promoted, despite their reputations, to higher offices and are eventually nominated and consecrated bishops, may I in such cases have a written and authoritative statement regarding the procedure to be followed, so that they may be convicted as criminals and condemned by apostolic authority? Among them are bishops who deny the charges of fornication and adultery but who, nevertheless, are shiftless drunkards, addicted to the chase, who march armed into battle and shed with their own hands the blood of Christians and heathens alike. Since I am recognised as the servant and legate of the Apostolic See, my decisions here and your decisions in Rome ought to be in complete agreement when I send messengers to receive your judgment.

In another matter, also, I must crave your advice and permission. Your predecessor of holy memory bade me, in your presence and hearing, to appoint a certain priest as my successor to rule this diocese after my death. If this be the will of God, I concur. But now I have my doubts whether it is feasible, for in the meantime a brother of that priest has murdered the duke's uncle, and at the moment I see no possibility of settling the quarrel.

I beg you, therefore, to give me your authority to act on the advice of my colleagues regarding the choice of a successor, so that in common we may do what is most advantageous for God, the Church and the safeguard of the faith. May I have your permission to act in this matter as God shall inspire me? For without defying the wishes of the duke, the former choice seems impossible. . . .

Because the sensual and ignorant Allemanians, Bavarians and Franks see that some of these abuses which we condemn are rife in Rome, they think that the priests there allow them, and on that account they reproach us and take bad example. They say that in Rome, near the church of St. Peter, they have seen throngs of people parading the streets at the beginning of January of each year, shouting and singing songs in pagan fashion, loading tables with food and drink from morning tin night, and that during that time no man is willing to lend his neighbour fire or tools or anything useful from his own house. They recount also that they have seen women wearing pagan amulets and bracelets on their arms and legs and offering them for sale. All such abuses witnessed by sensual and ignorant people bring reproach upon us here and frustrate our work of preaching and teaching. . . .

If Your Holiness would put an end to these heathen customs in Rome it would redound to your credit besides promoting the success of our teaching of the faith.

Frankish bishops and priests, whose reputation as adulterers and fornicators was notorious, whose children, born during their episcopate or priesthood, are living witnesses to their guilt, now declare on their return from Rome that the Roman Pontiff has granted them full permission to exercise their offices in the Church. Our answer to them is that we have never heard of the Apostolic See giving judgment contrary to the canonical decrees.

All these matters, beloved master, we bring to in order that we may give these men an authoritative r we, under your guidance and instruction, overcome an these ravening wolves and prevent the sheep from being astray.

Source Two

In the year of the incarnation of the Lord 888, on the twelfth of January, Emperor Charles, the third of this name and dignity, died and was buried in the monastery of Reichenau. He was a most Christian prince, feared God, whole heartedly observed his mandates, obeyed ecclesiastical sanctions with great devotion, was generous with alms, unceasingly gave himself to prayer and the singing of psalms, was indefatigably intent on praising God, and entrusted all of his hopes and plans to divine dispensation. This is why everything happily turned out for the best for him. In fact, he had no trouble at all in taking possession of all of the kingdoms of the Franks in a short time and without conflict or opposition, even though his predecessors had not acquired them without much effort an bloodshed. That towards the end of his life he was divested of his dignities and deprived of all his goods was, we believe, a temptation designed not only to purify him but, more important, to prove his excellence. For it is reported that he bore his ill fortune with great patience, keeping his vows to offer thanks in adversity as well as in prosperity. Therefore he either has already received, or is without doubt going to receive, the crown of life, which God promised to those who love him.

Lacking a legitimate heir after his death, the kingdoms which had obeyed his command dissolved their union and broke into parts. Without waiting any longer for their natural lord, each of them decided to elect a king for itself from within the kingdom. This caused great wars, not because the Franks were lacking princes who were noble, strong, and wise enough to rule the kingdoms, but because they were so equally matched in their generosity, dignity, and power that the discord increased, because no one excelled so much above the others that they would have deigned to submit to his lordship. Frankland could have produced many princes well suited to handle the helm of the kingdom if fortune had not armed them to destroy each other in their striving for excellence.

A part of the Italian people thus appointed Berengar the son of Everhard, who held the duchy of the Friulians, as their king, and another decided to raise Wido, the son of Lanbert, Duke of the Spoletans, to the same royal dignity. So much destruction arose on both sides from this discord, and so much human blood was shed, that, in agreement with the word of the Lord, the “kingdom divided against himself” would almost have incurred the woe of desolation. In the end, Wido won and expelled Berengar from the kingdom. Berengar therefore approached King Arnulf and demanded protection against the enemy. . . .

The people of the Gauls, meanwhile, assembled, and all alike, with the consent of Arnulf, advised and wanted to make Duke Odo their king. He was the son of Robert, . . . a vigorous man, more handsome, tall, strong, and wise than others. He ruled the commonwealth manfully and became an indefatigable defender against the unremitting depredations by the Northmen.

At the same time Rudolf, son of Conrad and nephew of the abbot Hugo . . . occupied the province between the Iura and the Pennine Alps, and in St. Maurice, having brought in certain leading men and some priests, placed a crown on his head and ordered that he should be called king. Then he sent legates through Lothar’s entire kingdom and with his suggestions and promises beguiled the minds of bishops and noblemen to favor him. When this was announced to Arnulf, he at once attacked him with an army. Rudolf escaped by narrow paths and sought protection for his life in the most secure places among the cliffs. . . .

In the same year, the Northmen, who were besieging the city of the Parisians, did something so extraordinary that it has never been heard of before, whether in our own or in the preceding age. For when they realized that the city could not be taken, they began to exert their strength and all of their cleverness to try and leave the city behind, sail their fleet with all of their troops up the Seine, enter the Yonne, and thus be free to penetrate the borders of Burgundy. But because the citizens of Paris did what they could to prohibit them from going upstream, they dragged their ships for more than two miles overland and, having in this way avoided any danger, set them afloat on the waters of the Seine again. Soon after, they left the Seine and, sailing with all speed up the Yonne, as they had planned, put in at Sens. There they set up camp, blockaded the city by a siege for six straight months, and ruined almost the whole of Burgundy with robbery, murder, and fire. But because the citizens of Sens fought back vigorously, and because God protected them, they could in no way capture Sens, although they tried to do so many times in the sweat of their labor with all of their skills and siege-engines.

Source Three

Siegfried, archbishop of Mainz, [the following are important bishops in the Empire] Udo of Trier, William of Utrecht, Herman of Metz, Henry of Liege, Ricbert of Verden, Bido of Toul, Hozeman of Speier, Burchard of Halberstadt, Werner of Strassburg, Burchard of Basel, Otto of Constance, Adalbero of Wurzburg, Rupert of Bamburg, Otto of Regensburg, Egilbert of Freising, Ulrich of Eichstatt, Frederick of Munster, Eilbert of Mindin, Hezilo of Hildesheim, Benno of Osnabruck, Eppo of Naumburg, Imadus of Paderborn, Tiedo of Brandenburg, Burchard of Lausanne, and Bruno of Verona, to Brother Hildebrand:

When you had first usurped the government of the Church, we knew well how, with your accustomed arrogance, you had presumed to enter into illicit and nefarious an undertaking against human and divine law. We thought, nevertheless, that the pernicious beginnings of your administration ought to be left unnoticed in prudent silence. We did this specifically in the hope that such criminal beginnings would be emended and wiped away somewhat by the probity and industry of your later rule. But now, just as the deplorable state of the universal Church cries out and laments, through the increasing wickedness of your actions and decrees, you are woefully and stubbornly in step with your evil beginnings.

Our Lord and Redeemer impressed the goodness of peace and love upon his Faithful as their distinctive character, a fact to which there are more testimonies than can be included in the brevity of a letter. But by way of contrast, you have inflicted wounds with proud cruelty and cruel pride, you are eager for profane innovations, you delight in a great name rather than in a good one, and with unheard-of self-exaltation, like a standard bearer of schism, you distend all the limbs of the Church which before your times led a quiet and tranquil life, according to the admonition of the Apostle. Finally, the flame of discord, which you stirred up through terrible factions in the Roman church, you spread with raging madness through all the churches of Italy, Germany, Gaul, and Spain. For you have taken from the bishops, so far as you could, all that power which is known to have been divinely conferred upon them through the grace of the Holy Spirit, which works mightily in ordinations. Through you all administration of ecclesiastical affairs has been assigned to popular madness. Since some now consider no one a bishop or priest save the man who begs that office of Your Arrogance with a most unworthy servility, you have shaken into pitiable disorder the whole strength of the apostolic institution and that most comely distribution of the limbs of Christ, which the Doctor of the Gentiles so often commands and teaches. And so through these boastful decrees of yours—and this cannot be said without tears—the name of Christ has all but perished. Who, however, is not struck dumb by the baseness of your arrogant usurpation of new power, power not due you, to the end that you may destroy the rights due the whole brotherhood? For you assert that if any sin of one of our parishioners comes to your notice, even if only by rumor, none of us has any further power to bind or to loose the party involved, for you alone may do it, or one whom you delegate especially for this purpose. Can anyone schooled in sacred learning fail to see how this assertion exceeds all madness?

We have judged that it would be worse than any other evil for us to allow the Church of God to be so gravely jeopardized—nay, rather, almost destroyed—any longer through these and other presumptuous airs of yours. Therefore, it has pleased us to make known to you by the common counsel of all of us something which we have left unsaid until now: that is, the reason why you cannot now be, nor could you ever have been, the head of the Apostolic See.

In the time of the Emperor Henry [III] of good memory, you bound yourself with a solemn oath that fore the lifetime of that Emperor and for that of his son, our lord the glorious King who now presides at the summit of affairs [Henry IV], you would neither obtain the papacy yourself nor suffer another to obtain it, insofar as you were able, without the consent and approbation either of the father in his lifetime or of the son in his. And there are many bishops today who were witnesses of this solemn oath, who saw it then with their own eyes and heard it with their own ears. Remember also that in order to remove jealous rivalry when ambition for the papacy tickled some of the cardinals, you obligated yourself with a solemn oath never to assume the papacy both on the plea and the condition that they did the same thing themselves. We have seen in what a holy way you observed each of these solemn vows. Again, when a synod was celebrated in the time of Pope Nicholas [II], in which one hundred twenty-five bishops sat together, it was decided and decreed under anathema that no one would ever become pope except by the election of the cardinals and the approbation of the people, and by the consent and authority of the king. And of this council and decree, you yourself were author, advocate, and subscriber.

In addition to this, you have filled the entire Church, as it were, with the stench of the gravest of scandals, rising from your intimacy and cohabitation with another’s wife [Mathilda of Tuscany] who is more closely integrated into your household than is necessary. In this affair, our sense of decency is affected more than our legal case, although the general complaint is sounded everywhere that all judgments and all decrees are enacted by women in the Apostolic See, and ultimately that the whole orb of the Church is administered by this new senate of women. For no one can complain adequately of the wrongs and the abuse suffered by the bishops, whom you call most undeservedly sons of whores and other names of this sort.

Since your accession was tainted by such great perjuries, since the Church of God is imperiled by so great a tempest arising from abuse born of your innovations, and since you have degraded your life and conduct by such multifarious infamy, we declare that in the future we shall observe no longer the obedience which we have not promised to you. And since none of us, as you have publicly declared, has hitherto been a bishop to you, you also will now be pope to none of us.

Part Two: Essay Questions: Be able to answer all of the questions below in well-organized and thoughtful essays.

1. What were the benefits and disadvantages of feudalism for Western Europe’s rulers, and, on balance, was feudalism beneficial or disadvantageous?

2. Was Gregory VII an anomalous pope who aggressively asserted papal authority to an-unheard-of degree, or was he a traditional pope whose policies were in accordance with centuries of papal claims about the role of Rome’s bishop in the church and in the world?

3. What does the rise and decline of the Carolingian dynasty tell us about the nature of kingship in early medieval Europe?

4. What were the consequences of the great invasions for England, France, the Holy Roman Empire, and Scandinavia?

5. How was early medieval culture shaped by its Germanic elements? Where do we see these aspects appear in the years from 500-1100?

6. How was early medieval culture shaped by its Roman elements? Where do we see these elements appear in the years from 500-1100?

7. How was early medieval culture shaped by its Christian elements? Where do we see these elements appear in the years from 500-1100?

8. How did the perception of medieval kings that they were appointed by God shape the role that they played in their world? In other words, how did the idea of ‘sacral kingship’ influence how medieval kings went about their affairs?

9. On balance, did the manorial system hinder or promote economic growth in Europe?