Medieval bishops needed soldiers, but maintaining them came at a cost. David Bachrach explores how church leaders in early medieval Germany diverted monastic wealth to support their military households.
By David Bachrach
It has long been understood that churches in East Francia and early medieval Germany under the Carolingian, Ottonian, and Salian dynasties were required to undertake substantial burdens, including military obligations, at the command of the king. In his exceptionally important study of the travel of German rulers during the tenth and eleventh centuries, John Bernhardt illuminated the conflicts that arose between abbots and their communities over which resources were available to perform these obligations to the king and which were to be retained to meet the needs of the monks, the so-called mensa fratrum.
These conflicts over limited resources became particularly acute when the ruler demanded that churches provide larger contingents of professional fighting men (milites) to serve in the royal army. Bishops often used resources that were part of the direct patrimony of their dioceses to recruit and provide beneficia for the members of their military households. Archbishop Egbert of Trier (977-993) complained, for example, that he could do little to restore the monasteries and parish churches within his diocese because all his revenues had been divided up as beneficia for milites. In a similar vein, Lampert, a monk at the monastery of Hersfeld in Thuringia, issued a heart-felt condemnation of Bishop Henry of Speyer (1067-1072), whom he claimed took an almost childlike pleasure in handing out the assets of his diocese as beneficia for milites. Lampert claimed that Henry gave away so many resources that he had barely enough wealth left to carry out the duties of his church for half a year.
However, the most frequent victims of the demand for more soldiers were monks, nuns, and canons who were stripped of their prebends to provide beneficia for milites. This was particularly true of those monasteries which had been granted to a bishop by the king.
This problem is highlighted, for example, in a forged charter in the name of King Otto III (983-1002). The charter purports to record the king’s displeasure that all of the properties that had been held by the monastery had been granted by the bishop to his milites. As a result, the charter claims that the monastery was to recover its earlier freedom and recover all of its assets.
Taking from Monasteries to Pay Soldiers
Archbishop Turpin blesses the mounted Roland before battle. From the Rolandslied, late 12th century. Heidelberg University Library, Cod. Pal. germ. 112, fol. 85v.
The anonymous author of the Deeds of the Bishops of Trier, writing in the 1070s, observed that when Archbishop Poppo came into office (1015-1047), he was focused almost exclusively on military affairs, and took a direct role in the training of his soldiers. It was in the context of describing Poppo’s martial activities that the author stated the new archbishop seized prebends from 60 nuns and distributed them as beneficia among his milites. Rather hypocritically, in a charter issued in 1038, this same Poppo bemoaned the impoverished condition of the monastery of St. Matthew, held by the archbishopric, because all its resources had been squandered on milites.
The anonymous author of a history of the monastery of Herrieden, also writing in the later eleventh century but drawing on the traditions of his house dating back to the ninth century, tells a very similar story about what could happen when the king granted a monastery to a bishop who was in need of a larger military household. He states that when Arnulf of Carinthia, the Carolingian ruler of East Francia (888-899), granted Herrieden to Bishop Erchanbald of Eichstätt, the prelate drove out the monks, brought in canons, and granted a small part of the assets of the house to them. The majority of the prebends were then distributed among his milites. The author claims, in fact, that it was from this point that the bishopric of Eichstätt actually had a large military household, which was required to fend off the increasing danger posed by Hungarian raiders. Tying this older story to the present day, the author then asserted that all but three or four of the numerous milites serving the bishopric of Eichstätt held their beneficia from the lands of the monastery of Herrieden.
Kings Try to Protect Monastic Wealth
Emperor Conrad II with his army. From the Mare historiarum, 15th century. Bibliothèque nationale de France, MS Latin 4915, fol. 337v
The German kings were certainly aware that their demands for military service had the potential to cause disruptions for vulnerable monks and nuns. In 1021, King Henry II confirmed the grant of properties to the monastery of St. Michael at Bamberg and commanded: “from this time forward no abbot might presume to take from this monastery any of the aforementioned properties for his own use or give them as a benefice to any miles.” Conrad II (1024-1039) similarly commanded “that from this time forward, no bishop of this same see shall have the power in any way to alienate [these donations] or to grant them as benefices to his milites” when confirming the grant of the monastery of Horhorst to the bishopric of Utrecht in 1028.
And yet, this royal concern did not stop bishops from continuing to raid the properties of monasteries to fund benefices for their soldiers. Looking back on more than 30 years of civil and external wars, in October 1104, Henry IV (1056-1106) issued a charter on behalf of the monastery of Schwarzach in which he expressed his deep sympathy for the losses that the house had suffered as a result of the military obligations he had imposed on the church. Henry recalled that when Schwarzach had been granted to the bishopric of Speyer in the days of his grandfather Conrad II (1024-1039), the “Christian religion had flourished.” By contrast, “in our times, the service of the Lord has withered miserably, such that the properties that ought to have sustained the brothers serving God there, were granted out by the bishops of Speyer as beneficia to their milites.” To make good these losses, Henry demanded that Bishop Gebhard (1104-1107) reassign these revenues from the milites to the monks.
Perhaps Henry IV was hoping to atone for his role in these wars. But as his son and successor Henry V (1106-1125) made clear in a charter issued on behalf of the monastery of Rheinau in 1106, the late emperor was still held responsible for the losses suffered by monasteries because of these conflicts. Henry V wrote, in part: “because of the conflict that took place in the time of my father, many irregular, unjust, and injurious acts were committed almost everywhere. Because we ought to possess, with God’s aid, the kingdom of our fathers with peace, we wish that the churches of God, which are under our protection and defense, shall have their just rights … . Therefore, we command that whatever in times of war was taken away or lost by the monastery of Rheinau in the name of granting benefices shall be restored to Abbot Otto and the brothers.”
Unfortunately for the monks and nuns of the German kingdom, despite the perhaps earnest pleas of Henry V, their situation did not improve during the twelfth century or later, when abbots and particularly bishops continued to prioritize the needs of their soldiers.
David Bachrach is a Professor at the University of New Hampshire, where he researches medieval military history, particularly in England and Germany.
Top Image: Archbishop Turpin blesses a group of Christian knights, including Roland, before battle. From the Rolandslied, late 12th century. Heidelberg University Library, Cod. Pal. germ. 112, fol. 53v.
Medieval bishops needed soldiers, but maintaining them came at a cost. David Bachrach explores how church leaders in early medieval Germany diverted monastic wealth to support their military households.
By David Bachrach
It has long been understood that churches in East Francia and early medieval Germany under the Carolingian, Ottonian, and Salian dynasties were required to undertake substantial burdens, including military obligations, at the command of the king. In his exceptionally important study of the travel of German rulers during the tenth and eleventh centuries, John Bernhardt illuminated the conflicts that arose between abbots and their communities over which resources were available to perform these obligations to the king and which were to be retained to meet the needs of the monks, the so-called mensa fratrum.
These conflicts over limited resources became particularly acute when the ruler demanded that churches provide larger contingents of professional fighting men (milites) to serve in the royal army. Bishops often used resources that were part of the direct patrimony of their dioceses to recruit and provide beneficia for the members of their military households. Archbishop Egbert of Trier (977-993) complained, for example, that he could do little to restore the monasteries and parish churches within his diocese because all his revenues had been divided up as beneficia for milites. In a similar vein, Lampert, a monk at the monastery of Hersfeld in Thuringia, issued a heart-felt condemnation of Bishop Henry of Speyer (1067-1072), whom he claimed took an almost childlike pleasure in handing out the assets of his diocese as beneficia for milites. Lampert claimed that Henry gave away so many resources that he had barely enough wealth left to carry out the duties of his church for half a year.
However, the most frequent victims of the demand for more soldiers were monks, nuns, and canons who were stripped of their prebends to provide beneficia for milites. This was particularly true of those monasteries which had been granted to a bishop by the king.
This problem is highlighted, for example, in a forged charter in the name of King Otto III (983-1002). The charter purports to record the king’s displeasure that all of the properties that had been held by the monastery had been granted by the bishop to his milites. As a result, the charter claims that the monastery was to recover its earlier freedom and recover all of its assets.
Taking from Monasteries to Pay Soldiers
The anonymous author of the Deeds of the Bishops of Trier, writing in the 1070s, observed that when Archbishop Poppo came into office (1015-1047), he was focused almost exclusively on military affairs, and took a direct role in the training of his soldiers. It was in the context of describing Poppo’s martial activities that the author stated the new archbishop seized prebends from 60 nuns and distributed them as beneficia among his milites. Rather hypocritically, in a charter issued in 1038, this same Poppo bemoaned the impoverished condition of the monastery of St. Matthew, held by the archbishopric, because all its resources had been squandered on milites.
The anonymous author of a history of the monastery of Herrieden, also writing in the later eleventh century but drawing on the traditions of his house dating back to the ninth century, tells a very similar story about what could happen when the king granted a monastery to a bishop who was in need of a larger military household. He states that when Arnulf of Carinthia, the Carolingian ruler of East Francia (888-899), granted Herrieden to Bishop Erchanbald of Eichstätt, the prelate drove out the monks, brought in canons, and granted a small part of the assets of the house to them. The majority of the prebends were then distributed among his milites. The author claims, in fact, that it was from this point that the bishopric of Eichstätt actually had a large military household, which was required to fend off the increasing danger posed by Hungarian raiders. Tying this older story to the present day, the author then asserted that all but three or four of the numerous milites serving the bishopric of Eichstätt held their beneficia from the lands of the monastery of Herrieden.
Kings Try to Protect Monastic Wealth
The German kings were certainly aware that their demands for military service had the potential to cause disruptions for vulnerable monks and nuns. In 1021, King Henry II confirmed the grant of properties to the monastery of St. Michael at Bamberg and commanded: “from this time forward no abbot might presume to take from this monastery any of the aforementioned properties for his own use or give them as a benefice to any miles.” Conrad II (1024-1039) similarly commanded “that from this time forward, no bishop of this same see shall have the power in any way to alienate [these donations] or to grant them as benefices to his milites” when confirming the grant of the monastery of Horhorst to the bishopric of Utrecht in 1028.
And yet, this royal concern did not stop bishops from continuing to raid the properties of monasteries to fund benefices for their soldiers. Looking back on more than 30 years of civil and external wars, in October 1104, Henry IV (1056-1106) issued a charter on behalf of the monastery of Schwarzach in which he expressed his deep sympathy for the losses that the house had suffered as a result of the military obligations he had imposed on the church. Henry recalled that when Schwarzach had been granted to the bishopric of Speyer in the days of his grandfather Conrad II (1024-1039), the “Christian religion had flourished.” By contrast, “in our times, the service of the Lord has withered miserably, such that the properties that ought to have sustained the brothers serving God there, were granted out by the bishops of Speyer as beneficia to their milites.” To make good these losses, Henry demanded that Bishop Gebhard (1104-1107) reassign these revenues from the milites to the monks.
Perhaps Henry IV was hoping to atone for his role in these wars. But as his son and successor Henry V (1106-1125) made clear in a charter issued on behalf of the monastery of Rheinau in 1106, the late emperor was still held responsible for the losses suffered by monasteries because of these conflicts. Henry V wrote, in part: “because of the conflict that took place in the time of my father, many irregular, unjust, and injurious acts were committed almost everywhere. Because we ought to possess, with God’s aid, the kingdom of our fathers with peace, we wish that the churches of God, which are under our protection and defense, shall have their just rights … . Therefore, we command that whatever in times of war was taken away or lost by the monastery of Rheinau in the name of granting benefices shall be restored to Abbot Otto and the brothers.”
Unfortunately for the monks and nuns of the German kingdom, despite the perhaps earnest pleas of Henry V, their situation did not improve during the twelfth century or later, when abbots and particularly bishops continued to prioritize the needs of their soldiers.
David Bachrach is a Professor at the University of New Hampshire, where he researches medieval military history, particularly in England and Germany.
Click here to read more from David Bachrach
Further Readings:
John W. Bernhardt, Itinerant Kingship and Royal Monasteries in Early Medieval Germany, c. 936-1075 (Cambridge, 1993).
Top Image: Archbishop Turpin blesses a group of Christian knights, including Roland, before battle. From the Rolandslied, late 12th century. Heidelberg University Library, Cod. Pal. germ. 112, fol. 53v.
Subscribe to Medievalverse
Related Posts