CHAPTER FOUR

GEBHARD, WENRICH, MANEGOLD, AND GUIDO DEBATING THE PAPAL LETTER TO HERMANN OF METZ

Introduction

The public debate in the wake of the propaganda campaigns from the royal and papal chanceries led to an extensive polemical literature. The rst manifestation of the new climate of discussion conditioned on the semi-institutionalised public sphere was the writing of the royal polemicist Wenrich of Trier. The Trier scholastic displayed an unprecedented familiarity with public debate, and his success as a polemicist can easily be gauged by the intensity with which Manegold of Lautenbach attempted to repudiate Wenrich’s Epistola four years later. But prior to the papal initiatives of the mid-1080s—the Liber canonum contra Heinricum quartum, and the texts of Anselm of Lucca, Bonizo of Sutri, Bernold of Constance, and Manegold—Gebhard of Salzburg (1066–1088) was very much alone in defending the Gregorian cause in Germany.1 The ‘letter from the venerable Archbishop Gebhard of Salzburg to Bishop Hermann of Metz’, which was most likely written in the rst half of 1081,2 is arguably the most important defence of the Gregorian cause. Gebhard’s polemic is one of two extant replies to Bishop Hermann of Metz’s lost letter directed to Pope Gregory VII, the second being the famous papal letter to Hermann of Metz from 1081.3 The questions posed in Hermann’s letter indicate the upheaval caused by the excommunication of the German king, and in both cases the replies consist of argumentative support for the bishop in relation to the excommunication of the king. Gebhard’s reply was probably widely circulated since it has survived in six manuscripts in two different

1 According to Dempf 1929: 209, Gebhard was the most prodigious publicist of the papal party. 2 Mirbt 1965: 22. 3 For an analysis, see above, 3. Polemical warfare in the royal and papal chanceries (1073–1082). 282 chapter four manuscript groups.4 Gebhard also wrote a second letter to Hermann of Metz regarding the ordination of Guibert of Ravenna as anti-pope,5 and perhaps a lost ‘history of the church schism’.6 Gebhard was of distinguished heritage, belonging to a noble Swa- bian family.7 It is possible that Gebhard, together with Altmann of Passau, received at least part of his education in Paris.8 Perhaps he attended the school in Salzburg—a school that contributed to the cultural ourishing of the Ottonian period.9 The archbishop played a vital role in the reform movement and contributed to the establishment of Salzburg as a reform centre, a position sustained by his successor, Thiemo (1090–1101).10 Gebhard was initially a supporter of the king and served as royal chancellor from 1060. The Southern German region was rmly in the hands of the king,11 and this relates particularly to the imperial bishoprics of Freising, Brixen, and Salzburg.12 In 1076,

4 Francke 1891a distinguished between two groups of manuscripts, group A and B. Group A consists of Clm 15819, XI/XII; the ms. Montpellier nr. 221, XII; the Cod. Vindobon. Nr. 60, XIII. Group B includes the mss. of the monastery of Rein no. 23, XI; the Clm 14451, XII; the Cod. Admunt. no. 352, XII. The codex of Admonter is contaminated and can, according to Schmale-Ott, not be included in this group. Francke follows the oldest codex, the Clm 15189, because this is closest to the authentic text, and in the recent edition, Schmale-Ott follows the edition of Francke with the exception of some minor alterations; see Schmale-Ott 1984: 17. Parkes 1992: 37 notes that the scriptorium in Salzburg early on used the new techniques of punctuation and space between words. 5 Hugh of Flavigny, Chronicon, 459–60; Codex Udalrici, 141–2. 6 Manegold of Lautenbach characterises the work as a grand presentation of all aspects of the contemporary struggle: Contra quem quam impie eciam secundum leges seculi actum sit tocius quoque gestionem negocii, in quo decennio et eo magis in vita sancti pape non sine gravi quassatione sancte ecclesie laboratum est, ex hystoria, que viri in illas partes illustris et asper- rime in eadem re pro iusticia fatigati Salseburgensis archiepiscopi esse dicitur, manifestius cognoscetur (Manegold, Liber contra Wolfelmum, 100–1). Because this is the only reference to the work, both Spohr 1890 and Steinböck 1972 are sceptical about its existence and sug- gest that Manegold refers to the letter to Hermann of Metz. It has also been suggested that Gebhard, after the second excommunication of the king, prepared a orilegium of authoritative passages (Fuhrmann 1982: 69). 7 Bosl 1972: 1134; Steinböck 1972: 17–21; Robinson 1999a: 11. See also Freed 1987. 8 Ehlers 1986: 105. Steinböck 1972: 24, however, although remarking that the sources are quiet on this, nds that it is not out of the question that Gebhard visited Notre Dame, the cathedral school of St Geneviéve and St Victor. Wendehorst 1959–61: 149, however, rejects the suggestion that Gebhard could have studied in Paris. 9 Zelinski 1984: 98. 10 Classen 1960: 59; Becker 1964: 151; Bosl 1972: 1141; Steinböck 1972. One side to the Gregorian reform movement in Salzburg was the production of the gigant bibles after the Italian model; see Ayres 1991: 147. 11 See Bosl 1972. 12 Störmer 1991: 521. See also Holzfurtner 1991.