Readers, Texts and Compilers in the Earlier Middle Ages Studies in Medieval Canon Law in Honour of Linda Fowler-Magerl
Edited by
MARTIN BRETT Robinson College, Cambridge, UK
and
KATHLEEN G. CUSHING University of Keele, UK
ASHGATE
Chapter4 The Collection in Seventy-four Titles: A Monastic Canon Law Collection from Eleventh-century France
Christof Rolker
The Diversorum patrum sententiae, also known as the Collection in seventy-four titles (74D, is one of the most famous systematic canon law collections before Gratian.' More than twenty extant manuscripts are ample testimony to its place among the most influential collections of the eleventh century,- In addition, it has played a central role in modern scholarship, being one of the first legal sources to be interpreted as a source for the ideology of reform, for the ecc1esiology of the compiler and as a document that served specific ends in political conflict. Paul Fournier's interpretation of 74T as the 'first manual of reform', published in 1894, changed the field of canon law history and indeed the historiography of the 'Gregorian Reform".' Fournier, and generations of scholars after him, used it as a model approach to their sources: almost all pre-Gratian collections were reinterpreted following Fournier's model for 74T.4 This is not to say that Fournier's results were not criticised;' but most of his critics used the same methods and
Diuersorum patrum sententie siue Collectio in LXXIV titulos digesta, ed. John T. Gilchrist (MIC Corpus collectionum 1), Vatican City 1973. On the collection, see esp. his 'Prolegomena', ibid. xvii--cxxv and Horst Fuhrmann, 'Über den Reformgeist der 74- Titel-Sammlung (Diversorum patrum sententiae)' in Festschrift fiir Hermann Heimpel, Göttingen 1972, ii. 1101-20. For a bibliography, see Kery, Collections, 204-10 and most recently, Clavis, 110--19. 2 On the manuscript tradition, see GiIchrist, 'Prolegomena', xxxii-Ixxxviii.Additional copies were reported by Uta-Renate BlumenthaI, 'Codex Guarnerius 203: a manuscript of the Collection in 74 titles', BMCL ns v (1975), 11-33 and Mordek (ibid. 11); Gerard Fransen, 'Autour de la collection en 74 titres', Revue de droit canonique xxv (1975), 61-73 describes two abbreviated versions. See now Kery, Collections, 206-7, where the short version in Paris, BN lat. 13658 is treated as a separate collection (ibid. 293-4). Paul Foumier, 'Le premier manuel canonique de la reforme du XI· siecle', Melanges d'archeologie et d'histoire de f'Ecole franceise de Rome xiv (1894), 147-223 and 285- 90. 4 See in particular Fournier-Le Bras, passim. See esp. Gerd Tellenbach, Church, state and Christian society at the time of the investiture contest, Oxford 1940, 99 n. 1 and Anton Michel, 'Pseudo-Isidor, die Sentenzen 60 Readers, Texts and Compilers in the Earlier Middle Ages often asked the same questions in seeking to understand 74T or other canon law collections."
The Collection Itself
The collection takes its modem name from seventy-four titles of very different length into which the material is divided. A total of 315 chapters, mainly from Pseudo-Isidore,? are grouped under different headings in titles containing one to twenty-seven texts. The coIlection begins emphaticaIly with a title devoted to the primacy of the Roman church, foIlowed by canons on papal privileges in titles two and three, and on monastic liberties in title four. It seems evident that the 74T compiler devoted most attention to the opening sections of his work, for the coIlection becomes much less sophisticated towards the end; many titles contain only one legal text and the arrangement does not seem very orderly. In contrast, the opening section can be used to elucidate the intentions of the compiler. In fact there is very little other evidence for his preoccupations, as the coIlection is anonymous. Where and when 74Twas compiled remains in dispute. Most scholars have favoured an Italian origin and a date between 1050 and 1075.8 Whenever it was compiled, 74T was certainly known to Bemold of Constance around
Humberts und Burkard von Worms im Investiturstreit' , SG iii (1948), 149-61 at 150. 6 E.g. Anton Michel, Die Sentenzen des Kardinal Humbert, das erste Rechtsbuch der päpstlichen Reform (MGH Schriften 8), Stuttgart 1943. For an overview of the historiography, see Hubert Mordek, 'Dalla riforma gregoriana alia Concordia discordantium canonum di Graziano', in Chiesa, diritto e ordinamento della 'Societas christiana' nei secoli XI e XII, Milan 1986, 89-112 and Uta-Renate Blumenthai, 'The papacy and canon law in the eleventh-century reform', Catholic historical review lxxiv (1998), 201-18. 252 ofthe 315 cc. of 74Tare from Pseudo-Isidore. See Gilchrist, 'Prolegomena', xci and the additions by Roger E. Reynolds in his review ofSchafer Williams, Codices Pseudo- Isidoriani, Speculum xlvii (1972), 821; Karl-Georg Schon, 'Exzerpte aus den Akten von Chalkedon bei Pseudo-Isidor und in der 74-Titel-Sammlung', DA xxii (1976), 545-57. Cf. Fournier-Le Bras, ii. 20; Gerd TeIlenbach, 'Die Bedeutung des Reformpapsttums für die Einigung des Abendlandes', SG i (1947), 125-49 at 136. Fournier's view was adopted by Alfons M. Stickler, Historia iuris canonici latini, Turin 1950, 167-70 and most recently by Jean Gaudemet, 'La Primaute pontificale dans les collections canoniques gregoriennes', in CesareAlzati (ed.), Cristianita ed Europa: miscellanea di studi in onore di Luigi Prosdocimi, Rome 1994-2000, i. 59-90 and Ennio Cortese, 11 diritto nella storia medievale, Rome 1995, i. 367-8. See Gilchrist, 'Prolegomena' for further references. For an early date and the attribution of the collection to Humbert of Silva-Candida, see Michel, Sentenzen des Kardinal Humbert, 122-9 and Gilchrist, 'Canon law aspects of the eleventh-century Gregorian reform programme', JEH xiii (1962), 21-38, 22-3. Gilchrist later preferred a date c.l 075; however, in his last publication he returned to the Humbertine concept: see his 'Introduction' in his Canon law in the age of reform, 11th-12th centuries (Collected Studies Series 406), Aldershot 1993, xi-xix, here xi. Christo! Ro/ker 61
1076. Shortly afterwards Bernold augmented his copy of 74T with the 'Swabian appendix', providing also a note that Gregory VII had sent the collection over the Alps ('in Gallias') by way of'papal legates.t It is therefore generally agreed that by 1080 74Twas known at the papal curia, in Constance and somewhere' in Gallias' . In this paper I want to suggest a new model for the origin of 74T, but first we must return to Fournier and his interpretation of the collection.
'Le premier manuel canonique ••.'
As mentioned above, Fournier labelled the collection 'the first canonical manual of the reform'. This interpretation is still current today, and it is striking that so much of the later discussion on the origins of 74Thas been directly influenced by Fournier's model. This was based initially on a number of observations. Unlike most earlier collections, but as with the 'Gregorian' collections from the end of the eleventh century, 74T begins with a separate title On the primacy of the Roman church. Title fifteen, covering simony, is the longest title in the whole collection, and title twenty-one, if brief, is emphatic on clerical celibacy; all this suggests a direct link to papal concerns since the accession of Leo IX. In addition, the collection was, as Bernold of Constance relates, known and used in circles around Gregory VII. For Fournier, however, 74Twas not just a typical Gregorian collection (that is, Gregorian avant le lettre), but an example of how the reform papacy inspired canonists to compile new collections in accordance with their programme." 74Twas not 'a' reform collection; it was 'the' reform collection, the archetype for all subsequent Gregorian law manuals. The reform of the eleventh century, according to Fournier, began with the papal reform programme, was then disseminated by papally inspired reform collections and finally put into action. Fournier developed this model in the 1890s in the context of 74T; forty years later it was disseminated by the influential Histoire des collections," This interpretation of the content of 74T dominated discussion on its origins. This is most evident with Fournier himself, who deduced an Italian origin from the supposed reform tendency," for who else but a man of the curia could have
9 On the appendix and Bemold, see Johanne Autenrieth, 'Bemold von Konstanz und die erweiterte 74-Titelsammlung', DA xiv (1958), 375-94. 10 Foumier, 'Premier manuel'; see also his 'Les collections canoniques romaines de l'epoque de Gregoire VII', Memoires de l'Institut National de France, Academic des inscriptions et belles-Iettres xli (1920), 271-397, 28(}-8. 11 Cf. in general Foumier-Le Bras, and in particular the 'Observations generales' (i. 1-14). The Histoire's method of presenting 'Gregorian' and 'anti-Gregorian' collections separately had a powerful influence on the research of twentieth-century scholars and was repeated by such textbooks as Stickler, Historia or, more recently, Jean Gaudemet, Les sources du droit canonique, VIIIe_){}(. siecle, Paris 1993. 12 Foumier, 'Premier manuel', 222. 62 Readers, Texts and Compilers in the Earlier Middle Ages compiled it? During the last century, some scholars favoured an early date and Humbert of Silva Candida as its author, while others assumed a later compilation under Gregory VII.13 They all shared Foumier's notion of 74T as a 'Gregorian' collection; indeed, the notion of 74T as a 'reform collection' was their common starting point. The only question was which aspect and which period of reform the collection best represents, and which place and date should be deduced from this. However, from the 1970s on, our view of the reform of the eleventh century itself has fundamentally changed." Unlike Foumier, modem scholars no longer suppose that 'the Reform' had a clearly defined programme or that the initiative was mainly with the papacy;" the idea that the papacy wanted to replace the traditional canon law collections with new ones is becoming more and more obsolete. In addition, the traditional idea that the reform party was inspired by Pseudo-Isidore changed considerably after Fuhrmann and others established how much the Gregorians were directly opposed to the pseudo-Isidorian model of ecclesiastical hierarchy.ts While Pseudo-Isidore remained in use by reformers and others alike, it was hardly the model for a specifically 'Gregorian' reform movement. Although Foumier's assumptions have been seriously challenged, this has not fundamentally changed the received view of 74T. It is still commonly seen as a reform collection probably compiled in Italy in the third quarter of the eleventh century. Quite independently from these discussions, more and more scholars have noted a certain affinity between 74Tand the monastic reform of the eleventh century. Nonetheless, the only major challenge to the traditional model was Linda Fowler-Magerl's discussion of the formal sources of 74Tand her new thesis on its origins. As mentioned above, Foumier asserted an Italian origin of 74T with the characteristic argument that it was a 'reform collection'.'? GiIchrist in his edition also argued for an Italian origin on the basis that a group of manuscripts which he thought to be closest to the original form are connected with Monte Cassino." Fowler-Magerl, however, recently argued for the vicinity of Cologne on grounds
13 See above, note 8.
14 See the summary in Gerd TeJlenbach, '''Gregorianische Reform": kritische Besinn- ungen' in Karl Schmid (ed.), Reich und Kirche vor dem Investiturstreit, Sigmaringen 1985, 99-113. IS John Gilchrist, 'Was there a Gregorian reform movement in the eleventh century?', Canadian catholic historical association. English section xxxvii (1970), 1-10 remains fundamental; see more recently Rudolf Schieffer, Die Entstehung des päpstlichen In- vestiturverbotsfiir den deutschen König (MGH Schriften 28), Stuttgart 1981, at 194-7 and Mordek, 'Dalla riforma gregoriana alia Concordia',
16 Fuhrmann, 'Über den Reformgeist'; cf. GiIchrist, 'Introduction'.
17 Foumier-Le Bras, ii. 15-16 ('composee ä la curie romaine'). Foumier, 'Premier manueI', 222 was originally more cautious, claiming only that 74T 'parait avoir ete redigee dans I'entourage du Pape'. 18 GiIchrist, 'Prolegomena', xxii and xxx. Christof Rolker 63 of the availability of uncommon sources." In particular she pointed out that the so-called 'C+P' transmission of the letters of Gregory the Great which 74T drew on was not used south of the Alps. She went on to argue that this could be used to place 74T in or around Cologne. Indeed the earliest extant manuscripts make it very likely that 'C+P' originated in the vicinity of Cologne in the ninth century," However, by the eleventh century 'C+P' was also known in France, as two extant manuscripts (and a third, now lost) from the eleventh and twelfth centuries suggest." In fact, there is ample evidence for its use in France much earlier. Alcuin may have had access to 'C+P' in Tours, and later both Abbo ofFleury and Hincmar of Reims certainly knew it.22 After Hincmar's time, the collection remained in use at Reims. The lost early eleventh-century copy containing 'C+P' mentioned above was from Reims, and the Rernois Collectio Sinemuriensis also drew on 'C+P' _23 A florilegium offorty-seven Gregory fragments from 'C+P' circulated in 'Northern France, Lorraine and neighbouring regions' according to recent research by Fowler-MagerJ.24 Therefore, while the use of 'C+P' may be an argument against the Italian origin of 74T, it does not necessarily link it to Cologne. It is perfectly possible that all sources of 74T were known there in the mid-eleventh century. However, if we consider that 74T drew on Hincmar, Abbo and 'C+P',2s it can confidently be concluded that northern France, in particular the Remois, is equally possible
19 Linda Fowler-Magerl, 'The use of the letters of Pope Gregory I in northeastern France and Lorraine before 1I00' in Mario Ascheri, Friedrich Ebel and others (eds), 'Ins Wasser geworfen und Ozeane durchquert': Festschrift fiir Knut Wolfgang Nörr, Cologne 2003, 237-60 at 238; eadem, Clavis, 113-4. 20 Paul Ewald, 'Studien zur Ausgabe des Registers Gregors I.', NA iii (1878), 433- 625 at 466-8. 21 See ibid. 485-6 ('C+P') and 469-70 (MSS). The MSS are the Victorinus, Paris, BN lat. 14500, Wolfenbüttel, Herzog August BibI., Guelf. 75 and an eleventh-century Reims MS, now lost; all three are probably from north-eastern France. Cf. also Ludo M. Hartmann in Gregorii I papae Registrum epistolarum (MGH Epp. 1-2) 1882-99, ii. xiv- xvi (,C+P' MSS) and xx-xxii ('C+P+' MSS), S. Gregorii Magni registrum epistularum, ed. Dag Norberg, CCL 140-140A 1982, 'Praefatio', i. pp. v-xii, esp. vii, and Fowler-Magerl, 'Use of Gregory 1', 238. 22 Ewald, 'Register Gregors 1.', 442 (A1cuin); Olivier Guillot, 'Un exemple de la rnethode suivie par Abbon de Fleury pour recueillir et ordonner les textes' in Le istituzioni ecclesiastiche della "Societas Christiana" dei secoli XI-XII, Milan 1977, 399-405; MGH Concilia4, Suppl. 1(1992),84-5 and Suppl. 2 (2003),103 (Hincmar); Clavis,110 (Hincmar and Abbo). 23 Ewald, 'Register Gregors I.', 470 (lost Reims MS); Fowler-Magerl, 'Use of Gregory 1',240 (Hincmar and Abbo using 'C+P') and 241 (Sinemuriensis). 24 Fowler-Magerl, 'Use of Gregory 1', 239 (quote) and 246-9 (analysis). 25 The Roman law texts of 74T, cc. 33-8 (ed. Gilchrist, 36-8) are from Hincmar, Pro ecclesiae libertatum defensione (PL cxxv. 1038-9); see Fowler-Magerl, 'Fine distinctions and the transmission of texts', ZRG KA lxxxiv (1997), 146-86, 153-4 and 64 Readers, Texts and Compilers in the Earlier Middle Ages if not more likely. 74T circulated early here and the Collection in four books, an important 74T-derivative using an archaic 74T version, is almost certainly French." Great care is needed before drawing any conclusions from the availability of source material, but in the absence of clear manuscript evidence or datable early reception, I agree with Fowler-Magerl that it is the best indicator available at present. The regions north of the Loire and west of or along the Rhine valley seem the most likely place for a combination of the sources from which 74Twas compiled: Pseudo-Isidore, the 'C+P' tradition of the letters of Gregory the Great, the writings of Hincmar of Reims and Abbo of Fleury. To me, the Remois seems particularly attractive, not least in the light of the 'C+P' tradition and of course the use of Hincmar. Either Reims itself or a place in close contact with it would be a reasonable guess for the compilation of 74T. Lastly, and perhaps most importantly, the question of the agenda of 74T calls for further attention. The observations of Tellenbach, Fuhrmann and GiJchrist quoted above tell strongly against the idea that the compiler of 74T wished to compile a specifically Gregorian collection, whether under the direct influence of Gregory VII or in the wider sense of a reform ecclesiology avant le lettre. If 74Twas not compiled as a 'papal' collection, what was its purpose? On several occasions, 74Thas been tentatively associated with the goals of monastic reform.s? Recently, Fowler-Magerl has offered a new interpretation of the genesis of 74T in tune with these observations, which may be quoted at length:
I suggest that the collection was brought to him [Gregory VII] by persons who were supporting their own interests, and that these persons were monks supporting the interests of their monasteries. Gregory must have been attracted by the beginning of the collection. [... ] The first title proclaims the primacy of the Roman church (not explicitly the primacy of the apostolic see). The titles which follow support the authority of privileges granted by the Roman church and the liberty of monks and monasteries based on such privileges. The placement of those titles at the beginning of the collection is unique and
Robert Kretzschmar, A1gervon Lüttichs Traktat 'De misericordia et iustitia', Sigmaringen 1985,82-3. 26 Gi1christ, 'The manuscripts of the canonical collection in four books', ZRG KA lxix (1983), 64-79 and idem, 'Changing the structure ofa canonical collection' in Steven B. Bowman and Blanche E. Cody (eds), In iure veritas: Studies in canon law in memory of Schafer Williams, Cincinnati 1991, 93-II7. 27 Michel, Sentenzen des Kardinal Humbert, 19-23; Ovidio Capitani, 'La figura del vescovo in alcune collezioni canoniche della seconda meta del secolo xi' in Vescovi e diocesi in Italia nel medioevo (sec. IX-XIII): atti de/lI convegno di storia della chiesa in Italia (Roma, 5-9 sett., 1961), Padua 1964, 161-91 at 182; Brigitte Szab6-Bechstein, Libertas ecclesiae (SG I I), Rome 1985, I 16-23; Gi1christ, 'Introduction', xiv. Christof Rolker 65
it indicates that these titles were meant to construct an argument supporting the freedom of monasteries from outside interference.P
I believe that this case for a monastic origin of 74T can be supported from a wide range of evidence. Following Fowler-Magerl, one should see the idiosyncratic beginning as an indication of the compiler's background and his rhetorical strategy. In the first titles, he skilfully links the themes of papal authority and monastic rights. In titles two and three, his choice of texts reveals a clear concern with the rights of religious communities; to illustrate 'the authority of privileges', the compiler prefers to quote those in favour of monastic houses." However, the compiler not only chose authorities favourable to monks; he made significant alterations to the texts he had chosen. He modified his Pseudo-Isidorian source in favour of monasteries, at the expense of the rights of bishops. Where Pseudo-Isidore stressed the inviolability of'privilegia ecclesiarum et sacerdotum', 74T reads 'privilegia ecclesiarum et monasteriorum'." In a similar fashion, the Pseudo-Isidorian 'privilegia ecclesiarum' are turned into 'privilegia ecclesiarum et monasteriorum'." Similar forgeries can be found in the rest of the collection." What these textual manipulations have in common is that they extend sacerdotal and episcopal privileges to all clergy. Together with 74T's well-known tendency to emphasise papal power, this also means that the collection on the whole is less favourable to bishops." While 74T stresses the rights of both their superiors and their subjects, the rights of bishops are diminished or also extended to other groups." All this makes 74T a collection suitable to be used in litigation, and in particular in conflicts between religious communities and their bishops; the overtly
28 Linda Fowler-Magerl, Kanones. A selection of canon law collections compiled between 1000 and J J 40, Piesenkofen 2003, 56. 29 74Ttit. 3 'De privilegiorum auctoritate', 33-8. 30 74Tc. 24, 33; cf. Michel, Sentenzen des Kardinal Humbert, 20 and Horst Fuhrmann, 'Stand, Aufgaben und Perspektiven der Pseudoisidorforschung' in Wilfried Hartmann and Gerhard Schmitz (eds), Fortschritt durch Fälschungen? Ursprung, Gestalt und Wirkungen der pseudoisidorischen Fälschungen (MGH Studien und Texte 31), Hanover 2002,227-62 at 258. 31 74T c. 25, 33. 32 See esp. 74T cc. 78, 80, 86. 33 74T c. 307, 175. In the original, the Capitula Angilramni, this is a canon against kings and magnates ('quicumque regum uel potentum') who violate ecclesiastical law; in 74T, bishops are added: 'Generali decreto constituimus ut execrandum anathema fiat et uelut preuaricator catholice fidei semper apud Dominum reus existat, quicumque regum seu episcoporum uel potentum deinceps Romanorum pontificum decretorum censuram in quocumque crediderit uel permiserit uiolandum.' 34 74Tcc. 78, 80, 86, 301, pp. 60, 61, 63-4,174. Seethe overview in Horst Fuhrmann, Einfluß und Verbreitung der pseudo-isidorischen Fälschungen (MGH Schriften 24), Stuttgart 1972-4, ii. 502-6. 66 Readers, Texts and Compilers in the Earlier Middle Ages pro-monastic character of the first titles implies that the compiler manipulated his sources above all in the service of monastic rights. In addition, titles two and three have a special rhetorical function as they provide the necessary link between the first title and the fourth. Legal scholars have often concentrated on the first title on Roman primacy. Such an opening section may be unusual, but it is in fact the fourth title on monastic liberties ('De monachorum monasteriorumque libertate') that is unprecedented." Elevated formulae on Roman primacy could be found in many collections, including Pseudo-Isidore; long before the Gregorian reform, Burchard of Worms, if more briefly than 74T, had opened his collection with such canons." For his fourth title, however, the compiler of 74Thad no model to work from. This may be seen in the sources he employed for the five canons 'on monastic liberties'. While the preceding titles, as in most of 74T, consist of material taken (with or without alteration) from Pseudo- Isidore, the compiler had to turn elsewhere for title four, which even more overtly than titles two and three stresses monastic privileges, as several scholars have noted." Not surprisingly, the 74T compiler looked mainly to Gregory the Great to bolster his argument that the liberIas monasleriorum was protected by papal authority," This use of new material is already indicative of the special role of title four. However, its first canon (74T c. 39), taken from neither Pseudo-Isidore nor Gregory I, offers even better evidence for the compiler's concerns. This is the famous Pseudo-Gregory I canon 'Quam sit necessarium' (JE t1366) which makes its first appearance here in its altered form." In very general terms, it defends the privileges of monasteries especially against episcopal interference:
35 The rubric to 74T tit. 4 ('De monachorum monasteriorumque libertate') was not taken from the Ps.-Isidore MS BAV lat. 1054 (against Friedrich Thaner, 'Untersuchungen und Mittheilungen zur Quellenkunde des canonischen Rechtes', Sitzungsberichte der philosophisch-historischen Classe der kaiserlichen Akademie der Wissenschaften [in Wien] lxxxix (1878), 601-32 at 607, n. 4), where it is a later addition, in all likelihood from a 74T exemplar (cf. Paul Hinschius, 'De collectione decretalium et canonum Isidori Mercatoris' in his Decretales Pseudo-Isidorianae et Capitula Angilramni, Leipzig 1863, xi-ccxxxviii, here at xxi). 36 Burchard of Worms, Liber decretorum, i, c. 1 (PL cx!. 549-51). 37 Cf. Foumier, 'Premier manuel', 196 ('decidement favorable au clerge regulier') and Michel, Sentenzen des Kardinal Humbert, 20: 'Zeigt schon der freie Einschub in den einführenden Kapiteln dieses Titels (c. 24. 25: privilegia ecclesiarum et monasteriorum), daß es dem Autor vor allem um die Klöster geht, so verficht der folgende Titel 4 (de monasteriorum libertate) ausschließlich die "Kloster-Freiheit'". 38 The material sources of 74T cc. 40-3 are JE 1362, 1317, 1486 and 1282, respectively; see Gilchrist's edition for details. 39 74Tc. 39, 39. On JE t1366 see now Giorgio G. Picasso, '''Quam sit necessarium monasteriorum quieti prospicere" (Reg. Epist. 8.17)' in Alzati (ed.), Cristianitä ed Europa, iii. 95-105,97-100 and passim. Gilchrist, 'The influence of the monastic forgeries attributed to Pope Gregory I (JE t1951) and Boniface IV (JE tI996)' in Fälschungen im Mittelalter l/: Gefälschte Rechtstexte / Der bestrafte Fälscher (MGH Schriften 32), Hanover 1988, ii. Christof Rolker 67
The office which we formerly held in the rule of a monastery, teaches us how necessary it is to protect the peace of monasteries and to arrange for their lasting security. And because we are aware that in numerous monasteries the monks have endured many injuries and burdens at the hands of prelates, it is necessary that our fraternal concern should take the utmost care in their future peace, so that those who dwell therein may with the grace of God preserve in his service with a free mind. [... ] Therefore, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, and by the authority ofSt Peter, prince of the apostles, in whose place we preside over this Roman church, we forbid and prohibit that any bishop or secular ruler henceforth presume to diminish the revenues, goods, or properties of monasteries, or of the stores or farms which belong to them, in any way or on any occasion."
Pseudo-Gregory goes on to stress that conflicts over monastic property or internal conflicts should by solved by the abbots; that bishops should not meddle with internal monastic affairs in any way, and above all that monastic property is to be protected from episcopal interference. This all, the reader learns, was promulgated by Gregory at a Roman synod, and 'all the bishops replied: "We rejoice in the liberties of the monks, and what your holiness has now ordained about these matters we affirm." This supposed synodal decree has long been recognised as a forgery drawing on genuine material; later, it was quickly disseminated, but no occurrence of it certainly earlier than 74T is known. Given that the 74T compiler frequently manipulated his Pseudo-Isidorian material in a similar pro-monastic fashion, it seems plausible to credit him with this forgery, which perfectly fits into his general line of argument. In the first title, the compiler invoked an unchallenged source of authority; in title two, drawing on well-known texts, he linked papal authority and monastic privileges; in title three, the pro- monastic selection was complemented by textual manipulation; in the fourth title, devoted entirely to monastic liberties, the Pseudo-Gregorian 'Quam sit
263-87,273-7 lists the earliest MSS, to which one should add the lost Chartres, BM MS 65, which contained JE tl366 on fo. 180rv according to Johann F. Schulte, 'Iter Gallicum', Sitzungsberichte Wien lixliv (1868), 355-496, 457 and Catalogue general xi (1890), 32-3. 40 74T c. 39, 39-40: 'Quam sit necessarium monasteriorum quieti prospicere et de eorum perpetua seeuritate tractare, anteactum nos officium quod in regimine cenobii exhibuimus, informat. Et quia in plurimis monasteriis multa a presulibus preiudicia atque grauamina monachos pertulisse cognoscimus, oportet, ut nostre fraternitatis provisio de eorum futura quiete salubri disponat ordinatione, quatinus conuersantes in iIIis in Dei seruitio gratia ipsius sutTragante mente libera perseuerent. [... ] Interdicimus igitur in nomine Domini nostri Iesu Christi, et ex auctoritate beati Petri apostolorum principis, cuius uice huie eccIesie Romane presidemus, prohibemus ut nullus episcoporum aut secularium ultra presumat de reditibus, rebus uel eartis monasteriorum uel de celIis uel uiIIis que ad ea pertinent quocumque modo seu qualibet occasione minuere uel dolos uel immissiones aliquas facere.' The translation is taken from Gilchrist, The collection in seventy-four titles: a canon law manual from the Gregorian reform (Medieval Sources in translation 22), Toronto 1980, 92. 68 Readers, Texts and Compilers in the Earlier Middle Ages necessarium' is supported by genuine texts from Gregory I. Taken together, these opening titles convey the impression that monastic rights are the prime concern of papal legislation, and that ancient privileges place monastic communities outside episcopal jurisdiction. If title four crowns the argument of the whole opening section, 'Quam sit necessarium' is the jewel in this crown. Internal evidence thus supports the idea of a monastic origin of 74T. The thesis that 74T is a late eleventh-century monastic collection in my opinion corresponds well with the general development of monastic liberties and exemptions." For monastic communities, 'canon law' was first of all the sum of their privileges." As exemptions became more common during the eleventh century, monasteries had a natural interest in defending papal pre-eminence as a means to escape episcopal control; the reform papacy was distinctly favourable towards monastic liberties." This interpretation also suits Fuhrrnann's observation that 74T has an anti-episcopal tendency without sharing all the goals of the reform papacy," Real or supposed exemptions from episcopal jurisdiction and appeals to Rome became a very frequent issue between monastic communities and their bishops, and 74T could well have been used in such disputes." Indeed, one such conflict over monastic privileges may well be the earliest evidence for the employment of 74T. The chief ground for this claim is the manuscript of the eleventh-century cartulary ofSt Denis which also contains a version of 74T.46The canons are not in the same
41 Cf. in general Hans E. A. Feine, Kirchliche Rechtsgeschichte, 5 ed Cologne and Vienna 1972, 172-6, Georg Schreiber, Kurie und Kloster im 12. Jahrhundert: Studien zur Privilegierung, Verfassung und besonders zum Eigenkirchenwesen der Vorfranziskanischen Orden vornehmlich auf Grund der Papsturkunden von Paschalis II. bis auf Lucius Ill. (1099-1181), Stuttgart 1910, ii. 179-209 and Ian S. Robinson, The papacy 1073-1198, Cambridge 1990,209-43. For single aspects cf. Szabö-Bechstein, Libertas ecc/esiae, esp. 91-2 (concept of libertas); Volkert Pfaff, 'Die päpstlichen Klosterexemtionen in Italien bis zum Ende des zwölften Jahrhunderts', ZRG KA lxxii (1986), 76-114 (exemptions in Italy); Hubertus Seibert, Abtserhebungen zwischen Rechtsnorm und Rechtswirklichkeit: Formen der Nachfolgeregelung in lothringischen und schwäbischen Klöstern der Salierzeit (1024- 1125) (Quellen und Abhandlungen zur mittelrheinischen Kirchengeschichte 78), Mainz 1995 (elections); and Ludwig Falkenstein, La papaute et les abbayes francaises aux Xl" et Xll' siecles: exemption et protection apostolique, Paris 1997 (exemptions in France). 42 Theo Kölzer, 'Mönchtum und Kirchenrecht', ZRG KA lxix (1983), 121-42, here at 139-40. 43 Michel, Sentenzen des Kardinal Humbert, 19-23 (Leo IX and 74T); Falkenstein, Papaute et abbayesfram;aises, esp. 5-6. 44 Fuhrmann, 'Über den Reformgeist' , 1120.
45 Cf. Gilchrist, 'Introduction', xiv, who speaks of an 'extensive use of the 74Tby monastic interests'. Szabö-Bechstein, Libertas ecclesiae, 121-3 argued that the compilation of 74Twas possibly provoked by the conflict ofCluny with Bishop Drogo of Mäcon, 46 Paris, BN nouv. acq. lat. 326. Cf. Leon Levillain, 'Etudes sur l'abbaye de Saint- Denis ä l'epoque merovingienne', Bibliotheque de rEcole des chartes lxxxvii (1926), 2a- 97 and 245-346, 303-4; Fowler-Magerl, 'Fine distinctions', 157. Christoj Rolker 69 order as in the standard form of 74T, but almost all its canons are present and there are very few other texts added. Levillain argued that both the cartulary and the collection were written in the context of the same controversy in the 1060s.47 According to him, the cartulary was prepared for a trial in Rome in 1065, while the collection was written after the event in 1068 or a little later; in both cases, these dates are those of the most recent texts contained." Although a connection with the conflict in the late 1060s is credible, Levillain's chronological arguments are not cogent." Yet, whether or not 74Twas actually used in this dispute, it is striking that it was copied with the cartulary of a monastery," The Monte Cassino copy is a similar case," and the monks of Rheinau (Upper Rhine) in the early twelfth century also chose excerpts from titles three and four as the opening canons of their new cartulary. 52 At Westminster, the forgers of the Magna Carta Dunstani" thought 74Tuseful enough to bolster their forged charter with excerpts taken again from the third title of 74T.54 French, Italian, German and English monks therefore
47 Levillain, 'Etudes', 303-4. 48 Ibid. 301-2 and 315-24. On St Denis, see Dietrich Lohnnann, Kirchengut im nördlichen Frankreich: Besitz, Verfassung und Wirtschaft im Spiegel der Papstprivilegien des 11.-12. Jahrhunderts (Pariser historische Studien 20), Bonn 1983, 67; Ralf Große, Saint-Den is zwischen Adel und König (Francia, Beihefte 57), Stuttgart 2002, 70-8. 49 Cf. Gi1christ, 'Gregory VII and the primacy of the Roman church', Tijdschrift voor rechtsgeschiedenis xxxvi (1968), 123-35, 125-7; Henning Hoesch, Die kanonischen Quellen im WerkHumberts von Moyenmoutier (Forschungen zur kirchlichen Rechtsgeschichte und zum Kirchenrecht, 10), Cologne 1970, 168; Gi1christ, 'Cardinal Humbert of Silva-Candida, the canon law and ecclesiastical reform in the eleventh century', ZRG KA lviii (1972), 338- 49,344-8 (severe criticism of Levillain and Hoesch); Fuhrmann, Einfluß und Verbreitung, ii. 490, n. 181. so The links between St Denis and the Westminster forgeries deserve renewed attention given that both employed 74T. On the link. see Bernhard W. Scholz, 'Two forged charters from the abbey of Westminster and their relationship with St. Denis', English Historical Review lxxvi (1961), 466-78; for 74Tat Westminster, see below. SI Monte Cassino, Archivio della Badia, MS 522 contains 74T, various canon-law texts, and several privileges (Gilchrist, 'Prolegomena', xxxiii). The MS is possibly linked to the St Denis copy (Levillain, 'Etudes', 303, n. 2). The 74T-derivative collection described by Ottorino Bertolini, 'La collezione canonica beneventana del Vat. lat. 4939' in Collectanea Vaticana in honorem Anselmi M Cardinalis Albareda (Studi e Testi 219-20), Rome 1962, i. 119-37 is also transmitted with a cartulary and clearly has a monastic background. S2 Hubertus Seibert, 'Eine unbekannte Überlieferung der 74-Titel-Sammlung aus Rheinau' in Ernst-Dieter Hehl, Hubertus Seibert and Franz Staab (eds), Deus qui mutat tempora: Menschen und Institutionen im Wandel des Mittelalters: Festschrift fur Alfons Becker zu seinem fünfundsechzigsten Geburtstag, Sigmaringen 1987, 87-100. S3 Peter H. Sawyer, Anglo-saxon charters: an annotated list and bibliography, London 1968, no. 1293. S4 See Scholz, 'Two forged charters', who observed that some passages are lifted from Pseudo-Isidore, although there are important differences. Scholz also realised that 70 Readers, Texts and Compilers in the Earlier Middle Ages agreed that 74T contained the material they needed to support their claims in legal disputes and to defend their privileges, genuine or forged. Indeed, 74T seems generally to have been popular among monastic communities. To judge from the provenances of the extant manuscripts, a large proportion was copied or owned by monasteries. ss This alone is of course no prooffor a monastic origin, but it is indicative of the demands that 74T met. The manuscript tradition is indeed quite unusual for a canon law collection. Unlike the case with most pre-Gratian canon law collections, no extant 74T copy can positively be shown to come from an episcopal library. Together with the monastic Collection infive books and its derivatives, 74Tis the only canonical collection of which a significant number of the manuscripts is written in the Beneventan script, otherwise 'a liturgical script par excellence' and 'chiefly monastic', as Reynolds has recently pointed out." In addition, excerpts from both monastic collections and pro-monastic forgeries are transmitted with 74T and 4L, in particular two forgeries attributed to Gregory I (JE t 1366 and t 1996).57 At SS Mary and Benedict some of the texts have a parallel in pre-Gratian canon law collections, and assumed that the material 'was derived from some canonical collection' (ibid. 471). As a closer comparison shows, this collection is 74T. The Magna Carta Dunstani is not the only instance ofa use of 74T at Westminster, for Gilbert Crispin also quotes from it Compare his De altaris sacramento, cc. 51-2 and De simoniacis, c. 55 in The works of Gilbert Crispin, ed. Anna Sapir Abulafia and GilIian R. Evans (Auctores Britannici medii aevi 8), London 1986, 132- 3, l53with 74Tc.136. ss Twelve of the seventeen complete MSS described by Gi1christ, 'Prolegomena', xxxii-Ix are from monastic libraries; five are of unknown origin; none comes from a cathedral library. The two 74T versions reported by Fransen, 'Autour de la collection en 74 titres' come from monastic libraries, too. The ultimate origins of the MS described by Blumenthai, 'Codex Guamerius 203' are unknown. The Berlin MS discovered by Mordek is from Prüm (cf. Kery, Collections, 206-7). 56 Roger E. Reynolds, 'Canonistica Beneventiana' in Peter Landau and Jörg Müller (eds), Proceedings of the ninth international congress of medieval canon law (MIC ser, C, 10),VaticanCity 1997,21-40,21 and 25 (quotes). Of only 34 canon-law items in Beneventan script, one is the Collection injive books (in the following: 5L), seven are 5L derivatives and four are 74T MSS; three each are copies of the Dacheriana and Burchard, four are penitential books (Reynolds, 'Canonistica Beneventiana', 36). 5L excerpts are found in two 74TMSS (Gi1christ, 'Prolegomena', xlvii and xlviii). On the character of 5L cf. Roger E. Reynolds, 'The South-Italian canon law Collection in jive books and its derivatives', Mediaeval Studies lii (1990), 278-95. To the MSS Reynolds quoted one could add the 74T- derivative collection in BAV lat. 4939 (Bertolini, 'Collezione canonica', 120). 57 Roger E. Reynolds, The Collectio canonum Casinensis duodecimi seculi (Codex terscriptus), Toronto 2001, 6-7 (74T MSS with 5L excerpts); Gi1christ, 'Prolegomena', xxxvii (74TMS containing JE tI996); idem, 'Manuscripts of 4L', 65 and 68-9 (three 4L MSS containing monastic forgeries for which see below); on the forgeries idem, 'Influence of monastic forgeries'; on JE t1366 cf. Picasso, 'Quam sit necessarium'. Florence, BibI. Ricc., MS 3006, containing 74Texcerpts (see below), also contains JE t1366: Giorgio G. Picasso, 'Ancora un florilegio patristico sulle prerogative dei monaci', in Cinzio Violante Christo! Rolker 71 at Alberese, the monks copied decretals in favour of their monastery as well as a pro-monastic Gregory I florilegium into their copy of 74T.58As mentioned above, the St Denis cartulary contains a version of 74T, and the Rheinau cartulary also opens with excerpts from 74T. In sum, the pro-monastic tendency of 74T can be linked to the use later generations made of it. Although many scholars have noted more or less in passing that 74T contains pro-monastic traits, the dominant interpretation of 74T as a 'manual of reform' has until recently obscured how far the compiler's concern with religious communities has shaped the collection. Clearly, he also valued the prerogatives of the Roman see highly, but the stress on this primacy was not an aim in itself. Just as Pseudo-Isidore had stressed Roman primacy mainly to safeguard episcopal interests, so 74T treats the topic with particular emphasis on Roman privileges for monasteries in general. The parallel can be drawn further. For a long time, Pseudo-Isidore was seen mainly as a papally oriented work, while the compiler's main concern was overlooked. The case may be similar for 74T. While the opening canons of 74T and their emphasis on Roman primacy demand special attention, it would be precarious to interpret the whole collection in the light of the first title. The compiler's concerns can only be understood if we take into account the structure and content of the collection as a whole. Scholars since Fournier have of course noted the pro-monastic tendency of 74T, yet see this as a mere side-effect of its 'reform character'. However, just as the elevated position of bishops was not a side-effect of a supposed papalist agenda of Pseudo-Is idore, the stout defence of monastic privileges in 74Tis anything but marginal to its purpose. Given Pseudo- Isidore's pro-episcopal tendency, it is ironic that the 74T compiler largely drew on the False Decretals. However, it is also obvious that the material did not lend itself readily to pro-monastic interpretation; as Fuhrmann rightly noted, monastic authors often treated Pseudo-Isidore with marked reserve. 59 Nonetheless, the False Decretals were the conventional background which gave credibility to the more extravagant claims of 74T. The Collection in seventy-four titles certainly has its place in the history of the reform movement of the eleventh century. However, the reform the 74Tcompiler
(ed.), Noblitä e chiese nel medioevo e altri saggi: scritti in onore di Gerd G. TeIlenbach, Rome 1993,223-32,224-5. 58 Firenze, BibI. Medic. Laurent., MS Cony. soppr. 91; the florilegium on fos Ir-18v is similar to the Pisa MS described in Giovanni Miccoli, 'Un florilegio sulla dignitä e i diritti deI monachesimo', in Volume in onore del Prof Ottorino Bertolini (Bollettino storico Pisano 33-5 for 1964-5), 117-29.
59 Fuhrmann, Einfluß und Verbreitung, ii, 466: 'Wie wenig das Mönchtum mit Pseudoisidoranzufangen wußte, zeigt die HaltungAbbos vonFleury (t1004), derdie Falschen Dekretalen fraglos gekannt, sie aber dennoch in sein Rechtsbuch nicht aufgenommen hat. Und obwohl Abt Odilo von Cluny (994-1048) der Herstellung eines Pseudoisidorcodex veranlaßt hat, sind die Falschen Dekretalen in der ganzen Cluniacenserliteratur unbekannt geblieben. ' 72 Readers. Texts and Compilers in the Earlier Middle Ages had in mind was not the papally oriented 'Gregorian' reform as Foumier had thought. Rather, 74Twas mainly concerned with monastic liberties, and above all with the authority of papal privileges conferred on monasteries. It is this part of the collection that stands out in comparison to earlier and contemporary collections, and other evidence amply confirms the monastic intentions of the compiler and its reception in monastic circles. The structure, textual manipulations, manuscript tradition and reception of 74T all suggest a monastic origin for the famous collection. So, while 74T remains an interesting document for the history of the papacy, it should be understood principally as a very rare and distinctive case of a monastic canon law collection. The monks of the eleventh and twelfth centuries who copied and used 74T were convinced that the collection was particularly favourable to the interests of their communities, and I see no reason to contradict them.