Priests and Their Books in Late Medieval Eichstätt

Matthew Wranovix

LEXINGTON BOOKS Lanham • Boulder • New York • London Published by Lexington Books An imprint of The Rowman & Littlefield Publishing Group, Inc. 4501 Forbes Boulevard, Suite 200, Lanham, Maryland 20706 www.rowman.com

Unit A, Whitacre Mews, 26-34 Stannary Street, London SE11 4AB

All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced in any form or by any electronic or mechanical means, including information storage and retrieval systems, without written permission from the publisher, except by a reviewer who may quote passages in a review.

British Library Cataloguing in Publication Information Available

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

Library of Congress Control Number: 2017951050 ISBN 978-1-4985-4886-1 (hardback : alk. paper) ISBN 978-1-4985-4887-8 (electronic)

TM The paper used in this publication meets the minimum requirements of American National Standard for Information Sciences Permanence of Paper for Printed Library Materials, ANSI/NISO Z39.48-1992.

Printed in the United States of America Contents

Acknowledgments vii Introduction ix Map of the Diocese of Eichstätt in 1480 xix

1 Education 1 2 The Priest in the Parish, Diocese, and Territory 35 3 Parish Libraries and Personal Collections 67 4 A Professional Library 101 5 Reading Interests 131

Conclusion 167 Appendix A: Texts Appearing in Books Owned and/or Produced by Priests in the Diocese of Eichstätt 175 Appendix B: List of Works Appearing in Books Belonging to the Parish Library of Schwabach 183 Bibliography 189 Index 213 About the Author 221

Acknowledgments

In the course of this project I have accumulated numerous debts, both personal and financial. I would like to thank both Yale University and the Fulbright Foundation for the monetary support that made my research possible. Anders Winroth, Bob Babcock, and especially my advisor Paul Freedman provided invaluable training and ready aid whenever I encountered problems. My research was aided greatly by the staffs of the libraries and archives in which I worked; in particular I would like to thank Bruno Lengenfelder in the Diözesanarchiv Eichstätt, Christian Büchele, Klaus Walter Littger, and Kon- rad Bauernfeind in the Universitätsbibliothek Eichstätt, and Thomas Engelke in the Staatsarchiv Nürnberg. Three scholars in Germany, Enno Bünz of the University of Leipzig, Sigrid Schmitt of the University of Mainz, and the late Harald Dickerhof of the University of Eichstätt, deserve special thanks both for the aid they offered my research and for the warm welcome they extended to a scholar from abroad. I would also like to thank Brian Noell for his comments on the early drafts of several chapters, Bill Whobrey for his help with several translations, and Jamie Lynn Slenker for the map and mock-ups of several cover designs. My colleagues at the University of New Haven have offered me continuous encouragement, support, and fellowship and for that I am very grateful. Thanks also to the editors at Lexington and the anonymous peer reviewer who saved me from several embarrassing errors. Without my family I would never even have begun this project. I would like to thank my parents for the love of books that they instilled in me; Satoko, for her love and generosity; and Miya and Emi, for their patience with a father too often absorbed by his work.

vii

Introduction

In 1460 Ulrich Pfeffel, the rector of the parish church in Preith, a village near Eichstätt, received a manuscript containing a biblical commentary by Mat- thias de Liegnitz along with the following note:

Dear Sir Ulrich, I have often been given to understand how much you like the books. I am now sending them to you and will give you a better deal than I would give to others and ask if you could lend me four gulden, which I will repay you. It is not an issue if you do not have the money; keep the books anyway. When I am able to visit you, then we can come to an agreement. If you then must have the [four] gulden, then I do not wish to burden you about it. Karl von Seckendorf.1

Karl von Seckendorf was a former student in Heidelberg and future cathedral canon in Eichstätt. This study is motivated by a series of questions inspired by Karl’s note. What is a small-town rector doing corresponding with such an educated figure? How did he get a reputation as a bibliophile? Were there other parish priests who similarly “liked books”? To try to answer this question I have sought out books, both printed and hand-copied, that once lodged in parish libraries or belonged to members of the parish clergy in the diocese of Eichstätt, located in modern-day Bavaria. What priests read is a question of fundamental importance to our understanding of the late medieval parish and the role of the clergy as communicators and cultural mediators. Highly visible and vitally important, the parish clergy worked at the intersection of the institutional Church and the Christian population of Western Europe.2 Priests were entrusted with saying the Mass, preaching doctrine and repentance, honoring the saints, plumbing the conscience, and protecting the legal rights of the Church. They baptized children, blessed the fields, and prayed for the souls of the dead. What priests

ix x Introduction read would have informed how they understood and how they performed their social and religious roles. Yet this might seem to be an inauspicious topic given the persistent doubts concerning the piety and intellectual attainment of priests expressed throughout the medieval period and into the sixteenth century (and beyond). If the image of the clergy found in the criticisms of churchmen and poets were true, then a study such as this one would be frustrating indeed. In the tense years leading up to the Act of Supremacy (1534), for example, Thomas Starkey held up the parish clergy of England for ridicule:

There ys . . . a grete faute wych ys the ground of al other almost, and that ys concerning the educatyn of them wych appoint themselfe to be men of the Church. They are not brought up in virtu and lernyng as the schold be, nor wel approvyd therin before they be admitted to such hye dygnyte . . . for commonly you schal fynd that they can no thing dow but pattyr up theyr matins and mas, mumblying up a certain number of wordys no thynge understoode.3

This is admittedly a piece of polemic, but the image of the medieval priest contained within it has proven remarkably persistent. Scurrilous depictions in goliardic poetry, in vernacular literature such as the Decameron, and in sermons and exempla were enough to create an enduring image of the venal, sensual, and ill-educated priest. 4 Visitation records do not survive in sufficient numbers to come to general conclusions regarding clerical education, but examples of ill-educated priests are easy to find in those that do. This kind of evidence led G. G. Coulton to declare in the early twentieth century that “the evidence of clerical ignorance all through the Middle Ages . . . is overwhelming.”5 In 1953, in what remains one of the most frequently cited studies on clerical education, Friedrich Wilhelm Oediger blamed clerical ignorance on a spirituality that emphasized simplicity of spirit over learning. 6 Some more regionally focused studies appeared to bear out this conclusion. 7 Indeed scholarly opinion of the parish clergy has been so low that its failings were often listed among the causes of the Reformation. Joseph Lortz, for example, argued that pluralism led to the creation of a clerical proletariat of such “terrifying size and declining quality” that it contributed to the failure of the Church to dislodge superstition from popular piety. 8 Jean Delumeau doubted that most Europeans were more than superficially Christian, so deep was the ignorance of the clergy. 9 Conclusions such as Delumeau’s have not gone unchallenged; since the 1970s scholars have used prosopographical analysis of university matriculation records, visitation protocols, and other administrative sources to call the image of the ignorant priest into question or at least soften the edges. 10 Whereas in 1964 A. G. Dickens described the late medieval English church as “an old, unseaworthy and ill-commanded galleon,” in the early 1990s R. N. Swanson described the late medieval English clergy as “forceful,” and Introduction xi

Eamon Duffy defended medieval religion as “vigorous, adaptable, widely understood, and popular” and claimed that the Church was “a highly successful educator.”11 Scholars have noted that laypersons rarely lodged complaints during visitations about the intellectual wherewithal of their priests, while others have estimated that as much as 40 to 50 percent of the parish clergy in some areas of Europe had, at least briefly, attended a university. 12 One analysis of the fifteenth-century records of the Apostolic Penitentiary and Apostol- ic Chamber concluded that the much derided ordination exam was taken more seriously than previous scholars have assumed. 13 Clerical ignorance has similarly lost favor as an explanation for the Reformation. 14 This modest rehabilitation of the image of the parish clergy is a part of a larger reinterpretation of the late Middle Ages. This period was long described as an age that careened from crisis to crisis, devastated by the Black Death, torn by the Great Schism, buffeted by the Hundred Years War and Hussite challenge, and finally capsized by the Reformation. 15 With such a backdrop, widespread clerical ignorance was to be expected, a sign of the times. This conception of the late Middle Ages, however, has been slowly dismantled over the last 50 to 60 years. Reformation scholars have acknowl- edged the paradox presented by the outbreak of the Reformation in an era marked by vibrant lay piety, and scholars such as Berndt Hamm have focused attention on the creative devotional life of the fifteenth century. 16 Decisively rejecting the “autumnal” image of the late Middle Ages inherited from Johann Huizinga, historians of late medieval religion have described the achievements of official reform movements, the creativity of groups like the Modern Devout, the color of ordinary parish life, and the surprising diversity of religious practice—the “carnival of religious options” as John Van Engen has put it.17 Historians of education have noted the proliferation of Latin and vernacular schools as well as a corresponding growth in university attendance.18 Book production began to increase dramatically well before the invention of the printing press; Uwe Neddermeyer has estimated that the volume of written texts from 1100 to 1350 increased by about 20 percent in each generation, but after 1370 increased by 70 percent every 25 years. 19 In this context, the image of an ignorant and impious clergy, unmoved by the developments in education, book production, and piety going on all around them becomes harder to sustain. Late medieval reform in fact emphasized the need to get books into the hands of priests. Beginning in 1950, Father Leonard Boyle brought new interest to writings he termed pastoralia, late medieval texts intended to help priests and others with the practice of pastoral care. 20 Production of such texts blossomed in the aftermath of the Fourth Lateran Council when school- men sought to transform the book into a didactic tool to improve the knowledge of the parish clergy.21 This catechetical impulse received renewed vigor during the reform movements of the fifteenth century. Jean Gerson, chancel- xii Introduction lor of the University of Paris and leader at the Council of Constance, cham- pioned the production of cheap pastoral manuals for the edification of the clergy.22 Authors associated with the University of Vienna, including Hein- rich von Langenstein and Nikolaus von Dinkelsbühl, were so prolific in their output of pastoral literature in the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries, that one has come to speak of the “Vienna school” of pastoral theology.23 In the fifteenth century innumerable pastoral manuals were composed specifically for the “simple priest.”24 To choose books as the premier tool to improve and reform the parish clergy would be odd indeed if the clergy were incapable of acquiring or using them. Yet, the parish clergy have been oddly absent from the history of the book. Why this has been so is a complex question. In part one suspects that the legacy of old stereotypes is to blame. Despite the partial rehabilitation of late medieval religious culture and the parish clergy described above, in 1998 John Shinners and William Dohar admitted that the image of the priest as a “barely literate, barely celibate, barely sober bumpkin” persists.25 In 2013 Kirsi Salonen and Jussia Hanska still felt the need to position their work against the common assumption that the majority of priests were “ignorant and rude half-peasants barely capable of and hardly willing to take care of their priestly duties.”26 It is one thing to admit that clerical ignorance was less crass than once thought, as recent scholars have done, but another to expect them to have had both interest in books and the ability to acquire them. Consequently, some historians have judged the search for book-owning priests fruitless because they quite simply did not exist. 27 The medieval parish clergy have also been the historiographical victims of precisely what makes them interesting: the ambiguity of their status. They were legally privileged, yet often of lower to middling social origin; endowed with awesome sacramental powers, yet susceptible to the physical intimidation of petty strongmen and even peasants; literate, yet rarely autho- rial. The parish clergy do not fit easily into the categories “elite” or “popular.”28 The ambiguity of the parish clergy’s social and cultural location has meant that they have tended to slip through certain historiographical cracks. Nineteenth- and early-twentieth-century historians, for example, looked to the Middle Ages to find the origins of the modern state. The social classes that most mattered were the nobility and urban patriciate; the institutions of significance were those that these classes dominated—episcopal and princely administrations, universities, collegiate churches, and monasteries. When the parish clergy and parishes appeared at all in such works it was only as the object of state-building processes of territorialization. 29 In the 1960s and 1970s, however, historians influenced by the Annales school and social anthropology rejected top-down cultural models and began to focus on the margins of society and accept previously ignored social classes as legitimate and necessary objects of historical study. Medievalists Introduction xiii devoted increasing interest to women, peasants, the laity, heresy, and the vernacular. John Arnold has described the implications of these changes for the history of religion as the shift from “ecclesiastical history to lived religion.”30 It is easy to see how the parish clergy could struggle to find a home in this paradigm, just as they had remained marginal to the older one. Although often of humbler social origins, the parish clergy were nonetheless legally privileged, male, and Latinate. They could be seen as representatives of official religion and as part of the disciplinary apparatus against which historians wanted to show that the laity possessed some agency and indepen- dence.31 In terms of the history of the book the emergence of national literatures, the growth in production and consumption of vernacular works, and expanding lay literacy has held center stage. 32 Research on book ownership or production by parish priests tends not to find a place in volumes dedicated to the history of the book more generally. To mention but one example, The Cambridge History of the Book in Britain emphasizes book history in relationship to the processes of nationalization and secularization; consequently it devotes chapters to the use of books by professionals in law, medicine, and science as well as to the lay reader, but the parish clergy are given only a few pages in a single article on private book ownership. 33 This kind of neglect is not unusual.34 On the other hand, scholars have begun to highlight the agency of learned rectors, the establishment of parish libraries, and the circulation of books among the parish clergy in more focused studies. 35 Research on parish libraries and the personal collections of individual priests has shown that at least some members of the parish clergy had greater access to and interest in nonliturgical texts than is sometimes assumed. More work needs to be done on how the parish clergy interacted with episcopal expectations, theological ideas, and devotional practice. By the late Middle Ages, rectors and vicars were not only the target market for pastoral literature, they also kept records, corresponded with ecclesiastical and secular authorities, examined licenses, and provided written testimonials; fifteenth-century priests were more likely to be bureaucrats than bumpkins. The nature of diocesan administrative sources, the work required to find and study the books that once belonged to priests, and the great regional variety of medieval European culture all suggest that a regional approach for a study of this nature would be best. 36 Economic resources, access to education, availability of paper and, later, printed texts varied by region. Focused, regional studies of the relationship of the parish clergy to the written word are needed to move beyond unhelpful, generalized stereotypes. This study, therefore, takes as its subject the educational opportunities available to parish priests, their bureaucratic responsibilities, and their access to books in the fifteenth and early sixteenth century diocese of Eichstätt. The xiv Introduction medieval diocese of Eichstätt consisted of about three hundred parishes, included Ingolstadt in the south, and was roughly bordered by Nördlingen in the west, Nuremberg in the north, and Amberg in the east. Although not one of the Empire’s more prominent dioceses, Eichstätt offers several decisive advantages for a study of this kind. The diocese was not endowed with any large cultural center such as Nuremberg or Augsburg that might have skewed the analysis, but neither was it a backwater. Nuremberg’s influence could be felt in the villages and towns to the south and east of the city, a university was founded in Ingolstadt in 1472, a series of beneficed preacherships and grammar schools dotted the urban and small town landscape, and a handful of vibrant monastic communities impacted the religious culture of the sur- rounding areas.37 Particularly influential were a community of Augustinian canons in Rebdorf, which joined the Windesheim Congregation in 1458, and the monastery of Kastl, which was a major player in late medieval Benedic- tine reform. Students from the region attended the University of Vienna in large numbers; inspired by the catechetical reforms popular among the faculty there, many would go on to positions in the lower clergy or ecclesiastical administration. Secondly, a record has survived from the diocese, which provides an almost unparalleled fund of information for the study of the parish clergy: the visitation record of 1480. In that year Bishop Wilhelm von Reichenau ordered Johannes Vogt, a canon in the cathedral of Eichstätt, to conduct a formal visitation of the diocese. Vogt’s record of his findings, a 150-folium manuscript in the Eichstätt diocesan archive, is the oldest, complete visitation record from German-speaking lands.38 The record is but one example of the efforts made in the fifteenth century by the bishops of Eichstätt to improve and bureaucratize the administration of their diocese and principality. Aside from a wealth of information on the religious culture of the parishes, the record provides crucial context for this study, including the names of the parish clergy serving in the diocese in 1480, assessments of each cleric’s and parish’s synodal statutes and liturgical books, and information on the financial resources of the clergy. The priests that I have been able to identify as book owners and producers were active in the fifteenth century. Although there certainly were members of the parish clergy in earlier periods who owned nonliturgical books, several factors specific to the fifteenth century encouraged greater use of the written word among even the lower clergy in this period. Chapter 1 discusses one of these factors—the greater availability of education. The growing demand for literate men and the prestige of possessing a local school spurred the foundation of Latin and German grammar schools in even small towns and villages, while the emergence of universities in German-speaking lands beginning in the mid-fourteeth century also made university education more accessible. Although the tenor of the late medieval period is sometimes attributed to the Introduction xv rising education of the laity, clerics, too, entered this world as laymen and would have attended the same schools as those who went on to pursue careers in trade or government. Here I examine the accessibility of education in the diocese of Eichstätt and attempt to estimate the frequency with which clerics had taken advantage of it. Chapter 2 describes the increasing bureaucratization of parish administration. The accumulation of pious foundations at the level of the parish and the bureaucratizing administrations of diocese and emerging territorial state required that priests possess a facility with written records and official documents. Increasingly ambitious bishops and territorial lords expected the clergy to be able to both use and produce a host of official documents and to correspond with faraway courts. In an attempt to avoid or shorten the pains of purgatory, medieval men and women left property or the proceeds from property to their parish churches to pay for the regular celebration of masses dedicated to the spiritual health of their soul. Over time both the rights and responsibilities associated with these foundations could grow into a dense thicket manageable only with the help of written records. Communities, lords, and bishops, therefore, all had incentives to ensure that priests were competent enough to perform these administrative functions, and priests so accustomed to documents and records would have naturally turned to texts for solutions to the difficulties of pastoral care. A final factor, the drop in the prices of books in the fifteenth century, is often ascribed to the discovery of the printing press in c.1450, but improve- ments in the production of paper had already begun to drive down prices and spur increased production in the first half of the century. Falling prices enabled the wealthier parish clergy to purchase books and the less affluent to buy quires of paper with which to copy texts for themselves. In chapter 3, I look at developments in the prices of paper and books, outline the emergence of parish libraries, and analyze seventy-three nonliturgical books that I have been able to identify as having once been in the hands of the parish clergy. Unfortunately, little is known about most of these clerical book owners, but there is one exception—Ulrich Pfeffel, whom we met above. In chapter 4, I trace the construction of his library and analyze its contents. Although Pfeffel was in some ways atypical, the methods he used to piece his library together and the development of his interests as he moved from job to job provide crucial insight into the circulation and acquisition of texts among the secular clergy in the fifteenth century. Finally, in chapter 5, I selectively analyze the contents of the books introduced in chapter 3 in order to outline some of the ways that priests in the diocese used texts. My purpose is not to add to the debate on the success or failure of the medieval clergy. There is no necessary relationship between literacy, learning, and morality, nor between any of these things and lay satisfaction. My aim, rather, is to show that the same social processes that were driving the xvi Introduction emergence of the proverbial more confident and assertive laity of the late Middle Ages encompassed the clergy as well. These processes had the effect of binding the clergy more effectively into secular and ecclesiastical administrative structures and began the process of clerical professionalization long before the Protestant and Catholic Reformations made this an explicit goal. My hope is that this project will spur the search for book-owning and book- producing priests in other regions and lead eventually to a more comprehensive understanding of how priests in the late Middle Ages accessed and used texts. Historians have realized the importance of the communication that took place between the institutional Church and the laity in the parish; the books that priests sought out, acquired, and used informed these acts of communication and can thereby give us insight, however imperfect, into this important aspect of parish life. Thomas à Kempis once wrote, “a cleric without holy books is like a soldier without weapons, a ship without a rudder, a writer without a pen.”39 A history of the late medieval clergy that omitted their books would be equally incomplete.

NOTES

1. “Liber herr Vlrich, ich hab czum merer mal von euch verstanten, wie ir dy pucher gern hettet; nun schick ich euch die vnd wil euch dy bas feyler gebe dan keinen andern vnd pit euch, ir wollet mir vier gulden leyhen dy weil dar auf, das wil ich vmb euch verdienen. Ob ir aber des gelcz nit het, so hat das kein irrung; behaltet dy pücher dennoch; wen ich czu euch kann, wil ich mich wol mit euch vertragen; wenn ir dann die v gulden notig haben müst, wolt ich euch auch nit mit lassten. . . . Karolus de Seckendorff;” Eichstätt, Universitätsbibliothek Eichstätt, Cod. st 189, fol. 104v and Hilg, ed., Die mittelalterlichen Handschriften, 1:89. Karl first writes “vier” gulden, but later “v” gulden. I am assuming here that this is an error and that writing “v” instead of “iv” is a more likely error than writing “vier” instead of “fünf.” The Seckendorfs were an influential family in the region; in 1480 Johannes von Seckendorf senior and Johannes von Seckendorf junior were both canons in the cathedral of Eichstätt. In addition to Hilg see, Suttner, Schematismus der Geistlichkeit, viii. 2. Bünz, “‘Die Kirche im Dorf zu lassen . . .’,” 77–167. 3. Quoted in Bowker, The Secular Clergy in the Diocese of Lincoln, 1495–1520, 42. 4. Salonen and Hanska, Entering a Clerical Career, 1–2. 5. Coulton, Ten Medieval Studies, 114. Indeed, proving the depth of clerical depravity seems to have been a major focus of Coulton’s scholarship. He was convinced that “objective” sources, such as synodal statutes and especially the “dry light of visitatorial documents” proved the decadence of the late medieval Church. See the other essays in this volume as well as Five Centuries of Religion and “The Interpretation of Visitation Documents,” 16–40. 6. Oediger, Über die Bildung, 57. 7. Adam, La Vie Paroissiale; Heath, The English Parish Clergy; Hay, The Church in Italy. 8. Lortz, The Reformation in Germany, 97. Hubert Jedin would later argue that the failure of the clergy to live up to standards contributed to the conviction among the laity that the Church was in need of reform; Jedin, “Reformation und Kirchenverständnis,” 59–79. 9. Delumeau, Catholicism between Luther and Voltaire. 10. For example, Francis Rapp, although clear-eyed about the problems facing the parish clergy, argued that clerical ignorance was less “crass and widespread,” than often assumed; Rapp, L’Eglise et la vie religieuse. For a local study that came to a similar conclusion, see Viaux, La vie paroissiale à Dijon. Introduction xvii

11. Swanson, “Problems of the priesthood,” see esp. 861–68; Duffy, The Stripping of the Altars, 5, 7. Writing about thirteenth-century England, Jeffrey Denton concluded that “the notion of clerical ignorance and lack of learning is a suspect concept;” see “The Competence of the Parish Clergy,” 285. 12. Kintzinger, “Studens artium, rector parochiae, und magister scholarum,” 1–41; Meuth- en, “Zur europäischen Klerusbildung,” 263–94; McLaughlin, “Universities, Scholasticism,” 1–43; Bünz, “Thüringens Pfarrgeistlichkeit vor der Reformation,” esp. 69–73; Kiermayr, “On the Education of the pre-Reformation Clergy,” 7–16. F. Donald Logan has recently called the system by which bishops in the diocese of Lincoln provided dispensations and licenses for current or future parish priests to study at university a “machine” that was “well lubricated and operating smoothly;” Logan, University Education of the Parochial Clergy, here 67. 13. Salonen and Hanska, Entering a Clerical Career. 14. For an example, see MacCulloch, The Reformation, 32–33. 15. Erich Meuthen summarizes well the conception of the fifteenth century as a “Vorläufer,” “Epochengrenze,” “Übergangszeit,” or “Grundlage,” for the early modern period; see Das 15. Jahrhundert, 113–20. Fledgling calls to treat the fifteenth century in its own right have to compete with new approaches to the sixteenth century that emphasize the continuities between the late medieval and Reformation eras; see Boockmann, “Die Reformation und das 15. Jah- rhundert,” 9–25. The literature marking these continuities is too large to cite here but is especially associated with the work of Heiko Oberman on theology and Bob Scribner on popular culture and religion. Historians have also begun to push the process of confessionalization outlined by Heinz Schilling for the post-Reformation period into the early sixteenth and late fifteenth centuries. On the formation of territorial churches see Schulze, Fürsten und Reforma- tion. On late medieval and early modern catechesis see Bast, Honor Your Fathers. 16. See Moeller, “Frömmigkeit in Deutschland um 1500,” 3–31; essays by Berndt Hamm in Bast, ed., The Reformation of Faith. 17. Duffy, The Stripping of the Altars; French, The People of the Parish; Van Engen, Sisters and Brothers of the Common Life; Gillespie and Ghosh, eds. After Arundel, xii; Van Engen, “Multiple Options,” here 284. 18. See literature cited in chapter 1. 19. Neddermeyer, Von der Handschrift, 1:221. 20. Goering, “Leonard E. Boyle and the Invention of Pastoralia,” 7–20. See especially the collection of Leonard E. Boyle’s articles, Pastoral Care, Clerical Education and Canon Law. 21. Although Joseph Goering has argued that most authors in the thirteenth century envi- sioned university students rather than ordinary priests as their audience, some bishops such as Walter Cantilupe and Roger Weseham composed works explicitly for the clergy in their diocese; Goering, William de Montibus, 58–99. See also Thomas, The Secular Clergy in England, 324–31. 22. Hobbins, Authorship and Publicity Before Print, 141. 23. Haberkorn, Die “Wiener Schule” der Pastoraltheologie. 24. Dykema, in “Conflicting Expectations,” discusses several examples and questions how literally we should take the term “simple.” 25. Shinners and Dohar, eds., Pastors and the Care of Souls in Medieval England, xiii. 26. Salonen and Hanska, Entering a Clerical Career, 1. 27. Shinners, “Parish Libraries in Medieval England,” 207–30. Shinners does say that parishes, rather than priests themselves, would have owned non-liturgical books, but his assessment of these collections is equally dismal. 28. There were a few learned priests who composed texts; see Boyle, “The Oculus Sacerdo- tis and Some Other Works of William of Pagula,” in his collection Pastoral Care, and Walsh, “Professors in the Parish Pulpit,” 79–115. 29. See the relevant chapters in Lossen, Staat und Kirche in der Pfalz, and Hashagen, Staat und Kirche vor der Reformation. 30. John Arnold, Belief and Unbelief in Medieval Europe, 9. As Arnold explains, the phrase “lived religion” (la religion vécue) comes from the work of a series of French medievalists including Gabriel Le Bras and Jean Delumeau. xviii Introduction

31. This has begun to change recently, however, as interest in medieval concepts of masculinity, clerical marriage, and the plight of priests’ concubines has refocused some scholarly attention on the parish clergy. For example, see Swanson, “Angels Incarnate,” 160–77 and Thibodeaux, The Manly Priest. On priestly wives and concubines, see Armstrong-Partida, “Priestly Wives,” 166–214. Evidence of renewed interest is perhaps best revealed by the new volume Priesthood and Holy Orders in the Middle Ages, edited by Greg Peters and C. Colt Anderson, which was published by Brill in 2016. I was unable to review this volume in detail before submission of this manuscript. 32. Klaus Grubmüller argues that one of the most important developments in literature in the fifteenth century was the slow emancipation of the laity from clerical tutorage by means of the growing number of religious and devotional texts available in the vernacular; “Geistliche Übersetzungsliteratur im 15. Jahrhundert,” 59–74. 33. Hellinga and Trapp, eds. The Cambridge History of the Book in Britain, vol. 3, 1400–1557. For the few references to book-owning priests that do exist, see the article in this volume by Margaret Land Ford, “Private Ownership of Printed Books,” 203–28. 34. Note the relative paucity, or complete absence, of research on parish priests or parish libraries in the following: Swanson, ed. The Church and the Book; Griffiths and Pearsall, eds., Book Production and Publishing in Britain, 1375–1475; Glenisson, ed., Le Livre au Moyen Âge; Ganz, ed., The Role of the Book; Petrucci, Writers and Readers; Rubin and Simons, eds. Christianity in Western Europe c.1100–c.1500, vol. 4 of The Cambridge History of Christian- ity. 35. Lindenbaum, “London after Arundel,” 187–208; Hunt, “Clerical and Parish Libraries,” 400–419; Bünz, “Das Buch in den Händen von Geistlichen,” 39–68; Marshall, The Catholic Priesthood; de Cevins, “La Formation du Clerge Paroissial,” 47–78; Cross, “York Clergy and Their Books,” 344–54; Wranovix, “Ulrich Pfeffel’s Library,” 1125–55. See also the literature cited in chapter 3. 36. Enno Bünz calls for more diocesan studies of the parish clergy in, “Die mittelalterliche Pfarrei in Deutschland,” 48. 37. For a general history of the diocese, principality, and city see, Weinfurter, Eichstätt im Mittelalter; Bauch, Die Diözese Eichstätt; Röttel, Das Hochstift Eichstätt; Flachenecker, Eine geistliche Stadt. 38. Bünz, “Klerus, Kirche und Frömmigkeit,” 41–48. The record is B230 in the Diözesanarchiv Eichstätt. The archive also possesses a modern copy of the visitation record, which is very useful as an aid to deciphering some of the more faded lines of the manuscript. Although Vogt’s record remains unedited, Heinrich Dannenbauer published some scattered excerpts in his articles on the rural clergy around Nuremberg; see “Die Nürnberger Landgeistli- chen.” 39. Quoted by Oediger, Über die Bildung, 121. The original quotation is from Thomas’s Doctrinale iuvenum, c. 2. Map of the Diocese of Eichstätt in 1480

xix xx Map of the Diocese of Eichstätt in 1480

The Diocese of Eichstätt in 1480, based on the map in Bünz and Littger, eds., Klerus, Kirche und Frömmigkeit. Jamie Lynn Slenker Chapter One

Education

In 1475 a young cleric named Johannes in the diocese of Meiβen was considering a career in parish ministry and approached a more experienced colleague to ask for counsel. That the elder priest’s reply was something less than encouraging is apparent from the title under which it commonly circulated, Epistola de miseria curatorum seu plebanorum (The Letter on the Miseries of Curates and Rectors).1 The anonymous author advised the young man that while those who labor in pastoral care are certain of salvation in the next life, this is purchased at the price of a hell on earth. Nine devils will plague you at every turn, he warns: the patron, the sexton, the cook, the churchwarden, the peasant, the bishop’s official, the bishop himself, the chaplain, and the preacher. The patron, who believes the church belongs to him, will treat you just as any other subject and threaten you with violence if the least command is left unfulfilled. Snakelike lurks the sexton in order to learn your secrets and then reveal them to your enemies. The female cook and housekeeper, “tua domi- na,” rules the household and will torment you with temptation. The churchwarden runs the church finances as he pleases, both collecting and dispensing funds without your consultation. Maddening in his lack of understanding, the peasant will attack your sermons, criticize your long masses, and begrudge every tithe and offering. The bishop’s official will issue flurries of mandates and cite you before the court not to punish, but in order to line his own pockets. The bishop is a pastor turned wolf, who raids your wealth and property and burdens you with taxes. The chaplain neglects his duties and will incite the community against you in order to take your job himself, while the preacher will show off his learning at your expense and mock you from the pulpit. The embittered narrator concludes: “taking all the abuse into consideration, I advise against it [taking up pastoral care] wholeheartedly. As

1 2 Chapter 1 meritorious as ecclesiastical office is, so is it burdensome, as disgraceful as eminent.”2 The author of the Epistola has defied attempts by scholars to identify him, and the poor Johannes may well be a figment of the anonymous author’s imagination. Whatever its origins, however, the text enjoyed a certain popularity; it was printed eighteen times in the fifteenth and early sixteenth century and was translated into German. In 1540 Luther seized on the text as an example of the medieval Church’s dysfunction and wrote a short preface for an edition printed in Wittenberg.3 Although clearly a caricature, the text nevertheless reveals important aspects of the complex place occupied by the parish clergy in late medieval society. Exalted above both men and angels by their ability to consecrate the Eucharist and exempted from secular jurisdiction and taxation, the priest was nevertheless embedded in systems of parish, communal, diocesan, and territorial administration, webs of patronage, and personal relationships over which he had only limited influence. The liminal and intermediary position of the curate must have been a source of constant anxiety. The priest was responsible for communicating the laws and teachings of the Church, preserved in Latin, to an audience who knew only the vernacular. He was an ecclesiastical official, yet not immune from secular power. He was a man who could neither marry nor carry arms, traditional markers of manliness.4 Exalted by his spiritual authority, his social class and personal wealth were often equally modest. He was literate, but rarely an intellectual. It is this final source of anxiety that will be the focus of this first chapter. The anonymous author of the Epistola portrays the curate as both frustrated by the ignorance of his parishioners and infuriated by the condescension of visiting preachers. The beleaguered priest possessed enough learning to elevate him above the common rustic, but not enough to gain the respect of the ecclesiastical elite. A parish priest, of course, needed sufficient literacy to perform the liturgy and sacraments and that alone would have marked him as among the educated few in most medieval communities, but this status was not enough to spare him the mockery of the preacher in the Epistola.5 Churchmen in fact regularly doubted the intellectual attainment of the parish clergy. Gregory the Great in the late sixth century warned that “the faults of the clergy are the ruin of the people;” Thomas Aquinas, a member of the Order of Preachers, lamented in the thirteenth century that there were some priests who could not even speak Latin. 6 In a scathing letter, Uriel Gemmingen, archbishop of Mainz in 1512, wrote that

In our diocese can be found large numbers of clergy, among them some with cure of souls which we must painfully admit are largely uneducated and ignorant; are incapable either through word or example to inspire their flocks to the Education 3

path of eternal life; indeed are completely incompetent to explain the sacraments and teach the word of God.7

Just two years earlier a Dutch Dominican preacher, Cornelis van Sneek, heaped scorn on the quality of the clergy,

No sanctity of life is required in clerics, no erudition in letters is demanded, the purity of conscience is not attended to. It is sufficient if they are able to construe “Socrates currit,” if they know to which part of speech “dominus” belongs.8

Another friar, Johann Schippower in Osnabrück, claimed that contemporary priests had the education of a donkey.9 Both the Reformatio Sigismundi in the 1430s and the Grievances of the German Nation presented to Charles V in 1522 included the complaint that unlearned clergy were being appointed to benefices.10 Authors of vernacular tales and fabliaux also took satirical aim at parish priests. Hans Rosenplüt, an armorer, and Hans Folz, a barber and healer, were both active in the middle of the fifteenth century in Nuremberg and wrote humorous tales in which priests were depicted as foolish, lecherous, arrogant, vane, and hypocritical. 11 Priests were most often satirized for their lust; in a tale by Hans Rosenplüt a priest, a nobleman, and a peasant arrive almost simultaneously at the home of a serially adulterous peasant woman. The priest proposes a contest to the three would-be lovers—whoever most cleverly fools the husband will win the prize, a cask of wine. The priest is the first contestant and talks his way into the woman’s pantry by claiming he needs to borrow spices in order to cook for unexpected guests. As the clue- less husbands waits outside, the priest energetically grinds (mul) more than the required ingredients. Despite this success, he ultimately loses the contest to the peasant.12 Clerical learning (or lack thereof) was a frequent target as well. Hans Folz tells one tale in which neighbors denounce a woman to the local priest for flagrant and repeated adultery. The priest immediately excommunicates the woman without taking her confession; instead he interrogates her publically. But in the ensuing verbal contest, the woman proves to be the superior. She systematically exploits doubled meanings and ambiguous language to challenge and even reverse the charges against her. By the end of the tale, the priest has been thoroughly bested and has himself become an object of mockery.13 Another tale by Folz, “Die missverständliche Beichte” (The Ambigu- ous Confession) is similar except that this time the victorious layperson is male.14 These two tales anticipate the figure of the clever rustic, who repeatedly humiliates his Catholic interlocutors in sixteenth-century Protestant polemic. 4 Chapter 1

Were the criticisms of bishops, churchmen, and authors such as Folz and Rosenplüt just? Or exaggeration for effect? It is impossible to offer any kind of programmatic answer as the quality of the clergy must have varied widely by time and place. Similarly criticisms directed at the clergy could have a range of motivations; friars interested in scoring points against their rivals in the secular clergy, bishops interested in asserting their jurisdiction over the clergy in their diocese, and lay authors looking for a laugh would have all had reasons to indulge in caricature. What level of education were priests required to possess by the norms of canon law? Did episcopal expectations deviate at all from these legal norms? To meet these expectations priests would have needed education at a local Latin school and, perhaps, at university. How accessible were such schools and how often did parish priests attend university? This chapter will attempt to answer these questions by examining the requirements in canon law for ordination to the priesthood, episcopal expectations for curates in the late Middle Ages, and the educational landscape of the diocese of Eichstätt. As we will see, although the requirements in canon law remained modest, episcopal expectations increased toward the end of the Middle Ages.

EXPECTATIONS

An aspiring priest brave or foolhardy enough to ignore the warnings found in the Epistola de miseria curatorum seu plebanorum would first need to pass the ordination exam, an exam that required knowledge of Latin. In a sermon held in the city of Pyritz in Pomerania in 1124 or 1125, Otto, the bishop of Bamberg, stressed the connection between clerical orders, education, and Latinity for a newly Christian audience:

The seventh sacrament, ordination or the consecration of clerics, is particular and not general because it is not necessary for all men. For although all men need clerics, it is nevertheless not necessary that all men become clerics. To this sacrament, however, those who are more suitable in character and knowledge ought to be invited rather than dragged. Whence I urge and invite you, because I ought not to compel you, that you hand over those of your children more assiduously trained in liberal studies to clerical orders, so that you, just like other peoples of your language, are able to have clerics and priests who know Latin.15

For Otto all Christian communities need a clerical order and what unites the clerical orders of different lands and tongues into a single Church is education in the liberal arts and above all Latin. If Latin’s centrality had to be explained to the twelfth-century Pomeranians, the idea of a Latinate clergy in Education 5 the core lands of the Christian West would become so commonplace that the words clericus and literatus could be used interchangeably.16 But just how literatus did a priest need to be? Did priests need to be theologians? Humanists? Or merely be able to construe Socrates currit? In his classic book on the education of the clergy, Friedrich Wilhelm Oediger noted the surprising modesty of canonists, theologians, and bishops with regard to the legal requirements for ordination and the knowledge necessary to be a priest and attributed this to the enduring ideal that pastors should strive for piety and poverty of spirit rather than knowledge. 17 Canon law forbade the ordination of anyone ignorans literas, inscius literarum, or illi- teratus, by which was meant the inability to read Latin, 18 and stipulated that bishops should ask prospective ordinands where and for how long they had been educated and have them explain the faith in simple terms. 19 Innocent III (d. 1216), who in canon 27 of the Fourth Lateran Council claimed that “To guide souls is a supreme art,” stipulated only that bishops should instruct ordinands “in the divine services and the sacraments of the church, so that they may be able to celebrate them correctly.”20 Gratian, who shortly after 1139 wrote the first recension of the popular legal textbook called the Decre- tum, argued that moral qualities could compensate for any deficiency of learning.21 The ordinary gloss to the Decretum took this to its logical conclusion: the ordination exam could be dispensed with if the ordinand had a good reputation (fama).22 Aquinas himself, whom we met earlier sorrowing over the poor Latinity of many priests, believed that for the parish clergy moral rectitude was more important than theological subtlety and that pious living was more persuasive than any sermon. 23 Raymond of Peñafort (d. 1275), the canon lawyer who compiled the Liber Extra for Pope Gregory IX, wrote that clerics need only be competent, not eminent, in knowledge. 24 Older, more stringent canons were steadily watered down. Gratian included a canon from the fourth council of Toledo in the Decretum, which read:

Ignorance, the mother of all error, is especially to be avoided in priests, who take up among the people of God the office of teaching. For priests are admonished to read sacred scripture by the Apostle Paul saying to Timothy: “Attend to reading, to exhortation, to instruction,” and “always persist in these things.” Let priests know therefore the sacred scriptures and canons, and let each of their works consist of preaching and teaching, and let them edify all in both knowledge of the faith and the discipline of works. 25

Later commentators, however, were quick to qualify. They argued that the word “canons” in that statute meant only the penitential canons and not church law more generally and that the reference to “scripture” meant only those texts the priest needed for the mass, the liturgy, and the administration of the sacraments. The priest need only possess and use the psalter, sacra- 6 Chapter 1 mentary, antiphonary, baptismal ordinance, computus, penitential canons, and homiliary.26 According to the thirteenth-century Rationale divinorum officiorum by William Durandus ordinands should know the sacraments, the mass, and common issues associated with questioning penitents during confession, and should have the ability to preach from a model sermon collection. The Pontificale romanum, a manual for bishops, stated that ordinands should be able to read and write, understand scripture, celebrate the mass, and sing.27 Most synodal statutes issued by imperial bishops from 1215 to 1520 that dealt with ordination did not depart from the basic requirements of canon law and concerned themselves primarily with the age of the ordinand, 28 whether he had a title to a benefice or sufficient patrimony to support himself, 29 the legitimacy of the ordinand’s birth,30 the regulation of ordinands from outside the diocese,31 and the requirement that an ordinand confess before the ordination ceremony in order to uncover any previously unknown impediments.32 All ordinands were to be examined to verify that they were suitable (idoneus),33 of good moral fiber,34 and of sufficient knowledge,35 but most statutes give no indication what was meant by these terms. The fact that the archbishop of Mainz in 1261 and again, 162 years later, in 1423, ordered that special care should be taken lest anyone illiterate be allowed to exercise the cure of souls,36 suggests that the minimum level of education remained the ability to read Latin throughout the period. This is confirmed by an ordinance issued by the bishop of Havelberg in 1471, which sought to standardize the ordination exam. 37 Aspirants to lower orders were first asked to confirm their baptism, legitimate birth, age, and good legal standing. Then the ordinand was to read the Lord’s Prayer and Confession of Faith and the examiner was to confirm that the ordinand believed everything contained therein. Finally, the examiner was to test the ordinand’s grammar by asking him to decline words and identify their cases. Only those who knew absolutely nothing were to be rejected; if there were any hope that the ordinand could improve, and if he promised to do so, then he could be admitted to orders. In addition, the exam for higher orders required the examiner to verify with particular care that the ordinand had either sufficient patrimony to support himself or had secured a title to a benefice.38 Disappointed by similar evidence from fourteenth-century Eng- land, Leonard Boyle concluded that parish priests needed to know “precious little.”39 But the ordination exam might not have always been as easy as it appears, especially toward the end of the Middle Ages. The Cura pastoralis, a handbook designed to prepare prospective ordinands for their examination, was printed seventeen times between 1492 and 1522.40 The fifteenth-century records of the Apostolic Penitentiary reveal that some aspiring ordinands took extraordinary measures to pass what, to them at least, was a formidable Education 7 exam. Michael de Bays from Le Mans, for example, failed his exam, but tried to bribe the bishop’s notary to enroll him on the list of successful candidates. Petrus Robin from Vannes hired another cleric to take the exam in his place.41 Clerics were routinely able to overcome defects in age or illegitimate birth through the acquisition of a papal dispensation; the same was not the case for a defect in knowledge. During the papacy of Pius II, the Apostolic Penitentiary handled 1,184 petitions concerning ordinations. Thir- teen of those cases involved cheating on the examination; no dispensations were granted for a defect in knowledge. 42 Kirsi Salonen and Jussi Hanska concluded their exhaustive study of these petitions by concluding that ordination regulations were well-known and respected both in the dioceses and at the papal curia.43 To return to the Havelberg statutes from 1471, one reads that those to be entrusted with the cure of souls were to be examined on the form and matter of the sacraments and the “keys” of the Church, symbols of the Church’s power to bind and loose Christians from their sins. 44 This last, brief notice about a set of questions designed especially for those who were to receive benefices with the cura animarum shows that the ordination exam is not a sufficient indicator of expectations regarding clerical education. The expectations placed on priests were not all equal. 45 While the ordination exam defined the minimum level of education for the priesthood, the priesthood itself was not uniform and included mass priests, whose stipend required them to say a certain number of masses per week or at certain times of the year; altarists, essentially beneficed mass priests who served at a particular altar within a church; assistant priests, who assisted the parish priest during divine services and the administration of the sacraments; chaplains of chapels and daughter churches under the formal jurisdiction of a parish church; and finally curates, whether rectors or their vicars, who were responsible for performing divine services and administering the sacraments in the parish church and to whom all other clergy serving the parish church were subject. Whereas basic literacy was sufficient for a mass priest, more was expected of the rector or vicar. The ordination exam, therefore, is too blunt an instrument with which to measure the expectations of medieval bishops for the parish clergy. Synodal statutes that contain direct injunctions to rectors and vicars are a better source. These statutes reveal that bishops after the Fourth Lateran Council came to lay greater stress on the role of the parish priest as confessor and teacher, roles which required more than the ability to celebrate the liturgy. Bishops began to mandate the possession of one of more works of pastoral literature to help the priest fulfill these roles. 8 Chapter 1 THE PRIEST AS CONFESSOR

The pope who convened the Fourth Lateran Council, Innocent III, was heir to a period of intense spiritual ferment that had brought with it not only clashes between papal and imperial power and the emergence of new religious orders and heretical groups, but also profound changes for the priesthood, most notably the imposition of celibacy against sometimes determined opposition.46 Worried by spreading heresy and discontent, Innocent III sought to steer the desire among the laity for a more active, apostolic, and penitential spirituality into orthodox channels through approval of such groups as the mendicant orders and the rigorous suppression of those groups judged beyond the pale.47 At the same time he strove to ensure that the parish became the focal point of lay spirituality. In the decree Omnis utriusque sexus issued by the council, Innocent III ordered that each Christian had the obligation to confess to and receive communion from his or her own parish priest at least once per year at Easter. Innocent III did not invent the practice of private confession out of whole cloth with this decree, but rather built on ideas developed in the twelfth century that had stressed the importance of the inner disposition of the penitent over the performance of external acts of satisfaction. 48 The impact of this new moral theology was twofold. First, the old penitential canons were no longer satisfactory because by assigning fixed penances for specific sins they failed to take into account the sinner’s intention or allow for the investi- gation of mitigating or aggravating circumstances. Secondly, contrition, or feelings of sorrow over one’s sins, became an essential prerequisite for reconciliation with God. Priests could no longer merely assign the fixed penances of the penitentials, but had both to judge the contrition of the penitent and interrogate him or her in order to determine the exact gravity of each sin.49 Peter the Chanter captured well the invasive quality of private confession: “we confess our sins to priests by mouth, nakedly, openly, and stripped of skin with all their circumstances.”50 Alan of Lille used an unpleasantly picturesque medical metaphor to describe the process:

compunction punctures the ulcer, confession forces out the pus, satisfaction applies the poultice; compunction finds the wound, confession lays it open, satisfaction restores health.51

He argued that just as a doctor gives medicine to a patient in proportion to the severity of the disease, so the priest should assign penances to sinners by weighing the severity and nature of the sin and the contrition of the penitent.52 In particular, the priest should take care to assign penances that counter the nature of the sin, such as fasting for gluttony or charity for avarice. Education 9

Although the celebration of the mass remained the primary obligation of the priest, Omnis utriusque sexus required that priests become judges of conscience in addition to liturgical performers. 53 This decree created a legal obligation for the laity to seek the sacraments in their own parish church and made the parish priest an essential gateway to salvation. The stakes were high. William of Pagula (d. c.1332) in his Oculus sacerdotis regretted that incapable priests

frequently lead their subjects to hell . . . , as I have learned from my own experience when I was a penitentiary, for I have many times known and found many parish priests to have made mistakes in hearing confessions and in imposing penances.54

One popular handbook for confessors even asserted that confession to an unlearned priest had to be repeated.55 The model of the pastor emerging from these changes is well expressed by the Dominican Ulrich Engelberti (d. 1277), who divided the office of priest into four components: for the celebration of the liturgy, a priest must have sufficient grammar such that he can pronounce the words correctly and understand their literal sense; as an administrator of the sacraments he must know both the material and form of the sacraments as well as the correct manner of their administration; as a teacher he must be conversant with the basics of the faith; and as a judge he must be able to judge which acts are sinful and distinguish one type of sin from another; but, he adds, “one consecrated due to religious motives solely in order to read masses needs only to know the first. . . .”56 In other words the bare ability to celebrate the mass and read liturgical books might be sufficient for the mass priest, but not for the curate. Imperial bishops were initially slow to act on the decrees of Lateran IV, but the provincial council of Mainz in 1261, the provincial council of Trier in 1277, the diocesan synod of Münster in 1279, and the diocesan synod of Cologne in 1281 marked a renewed interest on the part of imperial bishops in pastoral care.57 The statutes from the provincial council of Trier held in 1277 reflect the new responsibilities placed on priests by Lateran IV. 58 Canon Four from the council instructs priests on how and where to conduct confessions. Bishops expressed concern that some priests would be as yet too inexperienced to deal successfully with difficult cases; if the priest ever had any doubts about how to resolve a particular case, he should send the penitent to a more experienced confessor.59 In order to help priests meet their new responsibilities, some bishops issued more comprehensive synodal statutes that came to resemble pastoral manuals.60 The statutes issued by the bishop of Cologne in 1281 are a good example. Aside from lengthy instructions regarding baptism, confirmation, 10 Chapter 1 extreme unction, the Eucharist, ordination, marriage, burials, church property, and interdicts, the synod promulgated a lengthy statute on the practice of confession. The statute orders priests to remind their parishioners of their Easter obligations stemming from Omnis utriusque sexus; any who fail to fulfill these obligations are to be reported to the bishop. The statute next touches on the proper location and time for confession, the proper physical and mental comportment of the priest and penitent, and instructions for how to question penitents and assign appropriate penances. Priests are to interrogate penitents concerning common sins (consuetis peccatis) diligently, but with mildness. More esoteric sins, however, require more circumspection. The priest should not refer to these sins by name, but rather describe them in general terms so that the guilty will recognize what is meant and confess, while the innocent will remain uncorrupted. Regarding mortal sins priests must take great care to inquire into their particular circumstances, but at the same time warn the penitent not to reveal the names of others who participated in the sin. If the penitent has committed a reserved sin, he or she is to be sent to the bishop or his penitentiary and is not to be absolved by the priest. In order to receive absolution the penitent must also promise to perform restitution for any harm done to others through theft, usury, or fraud and affirm that he or she is willing to abstain from each mortal sin in the future. If the penitent cannot do this, then the priest should recommend the performance of good works in the hope that God will then lead the penitent to true repentance. Even should the penitent pass these hurdles, he or she had still to perform appropriate satisfaction. Priests should assign satisfactions according to the magnitude and quality of the sin and the physical, mental, and financial resources of the penitent and should design them to counteract the sin itself—penances such as fasting, pilgrimage, and corporal discipline for sins of the flesh; prayers, charitable giving, and meditation for spiritual sins or sins of omission. Finally, the statute advised priests to provide penitents with the proverbial ounce of prevention by describing specific modes of life designed to make it easier to avoid future tempta- tions.61 Omnis utriusque sexus along with subsequent episcopal elaborations laid grave new responsibilities on priests with the cure of souls. Whereas mass priests and altarists need only concern themselves with their liturgical responsibilities, rectors and their vicars had to be familiar with the new moral theology and the nature of sin and satisfaction. In order to instruct their parishioners in their new responsibilities and lead them to the true contrition necessary for absolution, priests had now to be teachers as well. Education 11 THE PRIEST AS TEACHER

Thirteenth-century bishops were initially nervous about authorizing their clergy to preach. In canon ten of the Fourth Lateran Council, Innocent III had spoken only of the need of bishops to appoint special preachers, implying by his silence that he did not consider ordinary parish priests up to the task. In 1277 the archbishop of Trier insisted that his priests teach their parishioners about the nature of mortal sin, the articles of faith, and the Ten Command- ments, but “lest those who were never the students of truth become the teachers of error,” forbade ignorant and inexperienced priests from preaching. Should a more learned mendicant friar be at hand, then the priest should defer.62 As a result of this kind of scepticism, generations of parish priests would come to resent the mendicant “devils” that preached in their parishes. Other bishops tried to exclude the unlearned from the pulpit by drawing a distinction between parish priests and their assistants, as did a canon from the diocesan synod of Würzburg in 1298, which stipulated that assistant priests, unlike rectors, needed the special license of the bishop to hear confessions or preach.63 References to preaching and instruction occur only rarely in fourteenth- century synodal legislation in the Empire, but multiply rapidly in the fifteenth.64 That fifteenth-century bishops took a renewed interest in the ability of their clergy to teach and preach should not surprise. Scholars have long noted the intensity of late medieval piety; Lucien Febvre described the late Middle Ages as gripped by an “insatiable hunger for God,” while Bernd Moeller viewed the fifteenth century as “one of the most churchly-minded and devout periods of the Middle Ages.”65 Pious foundations proliferated, indulgences were pursued with vigor, interest in religious literature in the vernacular grew, and lay men and women, such as those drawn to the Devo- tio moderna, experimented with alternative forms of religious life. In particular a growing appetite for preaching marked the urban religious culture of the late Middle Ages. As in other periods, charismatic, itinerant preachers such as Johannes Capistrano could draw thousands, but in the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries pious donors began endowing benefices to support secular clerics as full-time preachers in cities and towns, especially in Germany. In the diocese of Eichstätt, for example, seven such preacherships were founded prior to the Reformation.66 Church reformers were both cheered and alarmed by lay enthusiasm; the Modern Devout, for example, received intense scrutiny and criticism for their refusal to adopt a monastic rule.67 But even more fundamentally, church reformers were dismayed by what they saw as the stolid ignorance and superstition of the great mass of European Christians. 68 To disseminate the teachings of the Church to these individuals, the Church needed the parish priest, who lived and worked among them. Driven both by the late medieval enthu- 12 Chapter 1 siasm for the spoken Word and by the desire to eradicate ignorance and superstition, fifteenth-century bishops intensified their demand that parish priests preach regularly.69 In 1435 the bishop of Strasbourg ordered all priests administering the cura animarum in the parish churches of the diocese to expound the Creed in the vernacular every Sunday during the sermon. 70 The synods held in Mainz in 1451 and Würzburg in 1452 published a 1433 decree from the Council of Basel, which ordered that bishops should exhort all priests exercising the cure of souls to instruct their parishioners on Sundays and feast days with “doctrines and salutary admonitions.”71 These requirements carried with them a corresponding concern for the quality of ordinands. The synod of Bamberg in 1491 stipulated that new ordinands be apprenticed to a more experienced priest for two years before being allowed to exercise the cure of souls.72 The synod of Regensburg in 1512 argued that it was better to have a few good priests than many poor ones and gave its own gloss on the word “suitable” (idoneus) as far as concerned aspirants to the priesthood:

We establish that suitable men be received into sacred orders, trained in the divine offices and the sacraments of the Church, men who devote themselves continuously to doctrine, readings, Psalms, hymns, and canticles, and who administer the grace of doctrine to the people. 73

The fifteenth-century bishops of Eichstätt showed particular interest in the ability of their priests to teach. According to a statute promulgated in 1434 by bishop Albert of Hohenrechberg, preaching was an essential task of the local priest. Criticizing those rectors who appoint uncultivated and ignorant vicars to exercise pastoral care in their stead, Albert demanded that they instead install vicars, “who exercise the cure of souls and other incumbent burdens more wholesomely and profitably, especially those who are able more frequently and diligently to exercise the office of preaching the divine Word by both word and example.”74 Albert’s successor, Johann III von Eich, gave the injunction to preach more programmatic expression at a diocesan synod held in Eichstätt in 1447, but also issued a warning:

Since priests, to whom the ministry of preaching has been committed by God, ought to feed the sheep entrusted to them with the Word of God, or spiritual nourishment, and instruct them in the divine precepts, we order that these be cautious in their sermons lest they use useless or vain words, or especially words offensive to pious minds.75

The bishop of Eichstätt believed that the priesthood had been commissioned by God himself to preach and that preaching was an essential part of the office. To insure that priests were in fact fulfilling this divine responsibility, Johann ordered his rural deans to have each priest celebrate mass and preach Education 13 in their presence and to inquire from some of the more respected members of the parish community how well the priest performed the divine office, sang, read, and preached.76 Whereas in response to challenges from Lollardy there developed a sense in England that it was safer for parish priests to avoid biblical exegesis and instead focus on moral and pastoral edification, Johann III von Eich ordered his clergy to expound the scriptures. 77 His statute from 1447 continued:

but rather let them preach Holy Scripture, namely the Old and New Testa- ments, especially the Gospel of Christ, to the people plainly and intelligibly on Sundays and other solemn feast days, first by setting forth the text in the vernacular, just as it lies, with the attached postils or let them explain it clause by clause suited to the capacity of the people. And because repeated reminders of God’s mandates are seen greatly to edify the people, we especially order that the rectors of parish churches at least once a year take up the matter of the Ten Commandments and then follow that with the correction of vices as appropriate, leading the people with the greatest diligence to perform penance for committed sins. On account of this, we wish that each year on the first Sunday in Lent that they publish and announce to the same people the constitution from the general council that begins Omnis utriusque etc. and lead them with other salutary admonitions to confession to priests and to reconciliation with God. Let preachers of this kind take care, however, lest they use in their sermons copied or inauthentic scriptures, and if, out of ignorance, they ad- vance anything not approved by the Church or doctors, let them strive carefully to renounce it.78

Johann appended a copy of Omnis utriusque to the end of the statute. He wished his preachers to avoid both subtlety and overheated tongue-lashings and instead offer sober moral instruction based on the Ten Commandments and penitential exhortation as preparation for reception of the Eucharist as outlined in Omnis utriusque. But above all, Johann wanted his priests to stick to the authentic scriptural text, use the approved postils, and retract errors before they had time to do permanent harm. 79 At issue was not the lack of preaching, but its type. That Johann was not alone in his concerns is shown by the adoption of this statute by the bishops of Bamberg in 1491 and Re- gensburg in 1466 and 1512.80 That Johann III von Eich took it as a matter of course that the parish sermon was the best method of reforming the laity is shown by the second of his Fourteen Articles, issued in 1453. Here Johann urged his parish clergy to reanimate the spirit of charity among their parishioners through preaching and to exhort them to make restitution for damage done to their fellow man or his property.81 To ensure that aspiring priests would be able to meet their obligations, Johann demanded that ordinands or those seeking a benefice with the cure of souls be familiar with divine scripture: 14 Chapter 1

Because according to the prophet the law of God is indeed required from the mouth of priests, the knowledge of divine scripture is necessary. We order, therefore, the clerics subject to us to be careful and diligent concerning the study of sacred letters, lest just as the blind they fall into the pit with those whom they lead. On account of this, we wish that they be diligently examined concerning knowledge, experience, and other things, namely concerning their life, honest behavior, and character not only when they are admitted to sacred orders, but also when they take up churches to be administered. 82

Note that Bishop Johann’s description of the kind of examination that ordinands and future rectors should undergo exceeds the strict requirements of canon law described earlier. Whether or not parish priests actually did preach with any regularity has long been a point of contention among historians. Already in 1926 G. R. Owst could refer to the problem as the “dry bones of an old controversy.”83 Although sermon collections survive in large numbers, it is difficult to prove that a priest owned or used any particular collection, and even harder to establish that any particular written sermon was preached rather than merely read privately.84 Visitation records include much valuable information on clerical morality, religious practice, and church finances, but rarely concern themselves with preaching.85 The 1480 visitation record from the diocese of Eichstätt, on the other hand, is an exception. The episcopal visitor, Johannes Vogt, fielded complaints from both clergy and laity in each parish, and several complaints involved the Sunday sermon. There are in all twenty-six references to preaching by parish priests.86 Six priests complained that some parishioners stand around in the cemetery during the sermon, and eight others complained that their parishioners avoid the sermon for various reasons. The churchwardens in Nassenfels grumbled that their curate preaches too long and in- sults anyone who tries to leave early, while some peasants in Gelblsee denounced their parish priest for obliquely revealing the identities of sinners. 87 Taken together, these references suggest that regular preaching by the parish clergy was not unusual, if not always valued.88 Parish priests in the late Middle Ages needed more than bare literacy. They needed to be able to explain to their parishioners how to confess well, instruct them how to develop contrition for their sins, and lead them through a thorough examination of conscience. No longer provided with a list of “tariffs” for each kind of sin, priests needed the ability to weigh the severity and nature of sins in order to assign appropriate penances, which should be designed as much to instill virtue as to punish. Priests were expected to announce the ecclesiastical laws concerning baptism, confession, the Euchar- ist, fasting and feast days, marriage, and tithes with regularity; they were to exhort their parishioners to love of neighbor and charity; and they were to expound the day’s Gospel reading in the vernacular. Ordination require- Education 15 ments, which remained low throughout the Middle Ages, defined the minimum amount of education to become a priest, but clearly did not encompass the range of knowledge and skills demanded of a priest holding the cure of souls.89 While it is true that no educational institution designed to teach young clerics to become pastors existed, the very lack of such institutions would have driven conscientious clergy to seek instruction from other sources. Bishops were in fact aware that the demands placed on the parish clergy raised more questions than their statutes could answer. Some stipulated a period of apprenticeship to a more experienced priest or ordered inse- cure confessors to seek help from their more experienced colleagues. 90 Infor- mal, or even formal, apprenticeships to other priests likely remained the most frequent form of training throughout the medieval period. 91 Some bishops, however, advocated the value of “continuing education,” by recommending a range of texts for their clergy.92

EPISCOPAL BOOK PRESCRIPTIONS

The English episcopacy was particularly precocious in recommending texts to aid their clergy. Between 1229 and 1237 Alexander Stavensby, the bishop of Coventry and Lichfield, ordered his clergy to copy his synodal statutes along with a short sermon on the Seven Deadly Sins and a brief text on confession. Between 1240 and 1266, Walter Cantilupe, the bishop of Worcester, appended a short (about six folia) treatise on confession to his synodal statutes. This proved so popular that in 1287 Bishop Peter Quinel ordered his clergy to obtain a copy.93 In 1281, Achbishop Pecham issued his Ignorantia sacerdotum, a basic cachetical manual focused on the Creed, virtues, vices, sacraments, and Ten Commandments. The text was translated into English in 1357 and was still being recommended in the fifteenth century. Responding to Archbishop Arundel’s reaffirmation in 1407 of the suit- ability of the manual, John Stafford, the Bishop of Bath and Wells, in 1435 ordered his archdeacons to make vernacular copies available for the clergy in their districts for no more than six pence.94 These were all modest works. Just as with preaching, however, expectations rose in the fifteenth century when Church leaders began to recommend more and longer texts, at least on the continent. 95 Jean Gerson (1363–1429) criticized those priests who owned only the synodal statutes and neglected to read about the commandments, sacraments, or articles of faith. 96 If priests were too poor to purchase a proper handbook, then one should be given to them.97 Gerson not only wrote treatises for use by parish priests, the collection known as the Opus tripartitum being perhaps the most popular, he also recommended the works of others.98 In a letter to the bishop of Coutances, he urged the bishop to ensure that his clergy study the Manipulus curatorum, a 16 Chapter 1 fourteenth-century pastoral manual that survives in about 250 manuscripts and was printed 120 times before 1500.99 In the same letter, Gerson recommended Gregory the Great’s Regula pastoralis, the Golden Legend, and the lives of the Fathers.100 Denis the Carthusian (1402–1471) urged archdeacons to make sermon collections and saints’ lives available to the parish priests in their districts to copy because therein “should consist the study, relaxation, and employment of priests.”101 Imperial bishops likewise did not begin regularly to prescribe the acquisition of texts until the fifteenth century. Inspired by the Council of Basel’s recommendation that bishops have a pastoral handbook read to their clergy at diocesan synods,102 Albert of Hohenrechberg provided a copy of Johannes Auerbach’s Directorium curatorum for his rural deans to copy and make available to the curates in their districts. 103 In this Albert was not unusual. In 1449 and 1453 the bishop of Brixen recommended the same text. 104 In 1452, 1469, 1486, 1506, and 1517 the bishops of Augsburg ordered their clergy to acquire either the Directorium or the Summa rudium, a similar handbook.105 The printer Johan Otmar tried to profit from this by printing the latter three times in 1487.106 The Directorium has survived in such numbers in southern Germany and Austria that Hartmut Boockman has suggested that monasteries associated with the Melk-Tegernsee reform movement provided their incorporated parish churches with copies.107 The provincial councils of Mainz (1451) and Cologne (1452) instead supported Aquinas’ De articulis fidei et sacramentis.108 The archbishops ordered their diocesans to distribute the work along with the provincial statutes. The statutes and the manual were in fact distributed in the dioceses of Würzburg, Eichstätt, and Augsburg in 1452. The bishop of Strasbourg also recommended Aquinas’s tract in the same year.109 Lamenting the lack of unity in the celebration of the mass, the bishop of Eichstätt, Johann III von Eich, commissioned a text from Bernhard von Wag- ing, the prior of Tegernsee who had earlier collaborated with Johann on the reform of the monastery of Bergen, to compose a text for his clergy on the mass and sacraments. Bernhard completed the work in 1462 and Johann promised to transmit it to his clergy at the next diocesan synod. We do not know whether or not Johann did so because no reports concerning the synod of 1462 survive.110 Waging’s treatise deals with preparation for the mass, answers to questions concerning the liturgy, a list of sins reserved to the bishop, ecclesiastical censures, and a treatise on confession. 111 In August of 1503 the Manuale curatorum by Johann Ulrich Surgant appeared in print in Basel. With the Manuale we have definitively entered the age of print; the work was not only itself printed nine times between 1504 and 1520, it also included a list of ninety titles, which Surgant recommended as useful for the parish preacher.112 He lists six books “if you have to get along with little in the beginning”: William of Paris’s Postilla super evange- Education 17 liis et epistolis, Petrus de Palude’s Sermologum thesauri novi de tempore et de sanctis, Peter Lombard’s Sentences, William Durandus’s Rationale divinorum officiorum, Hugo Ripelin’s Compendium theologicae veritatis, and a Speculum exemplorum.113 Word of Surgant’s handbook, the first to include a section devoted to preaching, must have spread fast because in October of the same year the bishop of Basel included it among a list of twelve titles with which curates should be familiar. The others were the Manipulus curatorum, Jean Gerson’s Opus tripartitum and De arte audiendi confessiones, the Sum- ma de casibus conscientiae of Angelus de Clavasio, Antoninus Florentinus’s Confessionale-Defecerunt, the Confessionale of Bartholomaeus de Chaimis, Hugo Ripelin’s Compendium theologicae veritatis, Gabriel Biel’s Expositio canonis, Joannis de Lapide’s Resolutorium dubiorum Missae, Johannes Nid- er’s Praeceptorium divinae legis, the Summa vitiorum et virtutum Lugdenen- sium, and a manual whose incipit was Medice cura te ipsum.114 Compared to the modesty of earlier episcopal recommendations, this is a remarkably ambitious list; curates would have needed far more than a rudimentary grasp of Latin in order to master it. The transition from Walter of Cantilupe’s six-folium treatise on confession to Surgant’s list of ninety titles is striking, but the implications have been too little noticed. Whereas priests in the thirteenth-century were expected to own the synodal statutes, by the early fifteenth-century it was lamentable if they not did have a handbook as well, and by the first years of the sixteenth-century six books would do for those who “must start with little.” The books recommended by Surgant were among the absolute “bestsellers” during the decades before the Reformation; many if not most of these volumes must have reached the hands of their intended audience, the parish clergy.115 The invention of printing of course made books much more widely and cheaply available than previously, a fact reflected in the rapidly increasing book recommendations of the last quarter of the fifteenth century. Even in the first three quarters of the century, however, bishops expected those with the cura animarum to possess at least a pastoral handbook.

LATIN SCHOOLS AND UNIVERSITIES

Priests, then, were both confessors and preachers. The essential tools of their trade included not only liturgical books, but also the synodal statutes, a pastoral handbook, and, in some cases, sermon collections, confessional manuals, or postils to the Sunday Gospels and Epistles. Were these expectations reasonable? No general answer to this question can be attempted here, but an analysis of the educational opportunities in and around the diocese of Eichstätt proves suggestive. 18 Chapter 1

Some future priests would have learned their trade entirely from the local curate in a kind of informal apprenticeship, but for many their education would have begun at a local Latin school. According to the few school ordinances that survive, the educational program of most common schools consisted in reading, writing, singing, and grammar. 116 Occasionally schools, such as those in Nuremberg and Ansbach, included rudimentary logic from Petrus Hispanus’s Summulae logicales. The most basic reading text, the tabula, consisted of the alphabet, the Our Father, Hail Mary, Creed, and liturgical pieces. The most common grammar book was Donatus. In Nuremberg the middle grades were devoted to grammatical forms, rules, and the systematic analysis and translation of texts. Suitable readers included Cato, the proverbs of Salomon, Alan of Lille’s collection of proverbs, and Aesop’s fables. The most advanced students in Nuremberg would even read some Terence or selections from Aeneas Silvius Piccolomini’s (the later Pope Pius II) letters. The latter points toward the effort to reform the schools in Nurem- berg according to humanist principles toward the end of the fifteenth century.117 Evidence for such advanced reading programs does not exist for other schools, but the cathedral school in Würzburg taught Paul’s epistles and the 1415 plan of instruction for the school in the collegiate church of St. Gum- bert in Ansbach included reading hymns, sequences, the Gospels, and the Epistles on Sundays and feast days. Two other school ordinances from the period, for Crailsheim and Nabburg, lay greater emphasis on reading liturgical texts. In Bayreuth the schoolmaster was to instill morality in his charges by having them learn the popular De disciplina scolarium by Pseudo-Boeth- ius.118 The educational program at most Latin schools would have been far less ambitious than Nuremberg’s, but it seems clear that most such schools aimed to provide students with a basic grasp of Latin and grammar as well as familiarity with standard prayers, liturgical pieces, and sometimes scripture. Latin schools of this sort increased in number throughout the fifteenth and early sixteenth century. Reinhard Jakob has traced the growth in the number of schools in Franconia, the region in which the diocese of Eichstätt can be found, and has concluded from the numbers of new foundations in the fifteenth century that possession of a school had become an important societal norm and status symbol for many communities. 119 Whereas there were thirty-nine towns with “common schools” (gemeine Schulen) in Franconia and the Electoral Oberpfalz in 1399, Jakob found evidence for 181 schools by 1520 and estimates the total number at around 200, with growth in the number of schools centered especially around the years 1450 and the last quarter of the fifteenth century.120 Of these schools, 125 lay in cities (those settlements which possessed urban rights), twenty-seven lay in settlements with only market rights, and twenty-nine lay in villages. 121 Even the older schools were growing. Several towns in the region, like Berching in c.1455, were forced to increase the number of their teaching personnel through the ap- Education 19 pointment of teaching assistants (Jungmeister) in order to deal with the rising number of students.122 Unfortunately we have very little information about costs of such schooling. In 1485 the city council of Nuremberg set school fees at 100 denarii. At these prices, an unlearned day laborer would have needed between one and seven weeks worth of wages to educate a child for a year, whereas a master in the building and construction trade would have needed to save only two days’ wages.123 Although schooling would have been out of reach for the city’s poor day laborers, it would have been well within the means of financially successful craftsmen, their masters, and the merchant class. Nearly two-thirds of Nuremberg’s population, therefore, would have had the financial means to send their children to school. Even if Nuremberg is set aside as a special case, Jakob estimates that at least 40 percent of the total urban population of Franconia and the Electoral Oberpfalz would have been able to afford schooling for their children.124 Additionally, some schools waived fees for poor students. In Nuremberg, only 245 out of the 400 to 500 students paid their fees.125 In 1475 Margreth Veyhelin of Herzogenaurach stipulated that if her children wanted either to learn a craft or go to school, the costs would be de- ducted from the inheritance left them by their recently deceased father. The choice between craft or schooling may have been a common one; of the families that provided the city of Nuremberg with clerics between 1497 and 1504, 60 percent belonged to the group of economically successful craft workers. Even peasants were sometimes capable of acquiring schooling; 25 percent of the clergy from the diocese of Bamberg, for example, were recruited from rural communities. Although schooling was geographically accessible and financially viable, the low number of students attending Nurem- berg schools shows that only a minority of families chose to educate their children. Schooling, though certainly not elitist by necessity, may well have been so in practice.126 These schools provided their students with basic literacy in Latin and, at least in some cities, an introduction to the liberal arts. Further studies in logic, theology, law, and medicine were available only at university. Given the growth in the number of common schools, it should not be surprising that the fifteenth century also witnessed an enormous increase in the number of students attending university. Despite the negative demographic trends that continued until at least mid-century, university attendance in the Empire increased in the fifteenth century by an average of 19 percent every ten years.127 According to R. C. Schwinges, about 200,000 “Germans” attended university from the foundation of the University of Prague in 1348 to 1505.128 Matriculation fees varied from university to university and ranged from four groschen in Vienna, to a quarter-gulden in Cologne, to a half-gulden in 20 Chapter 1

Rostock, Erfurt, Greifswald, and Leipzig, although this was mitigated in Leipzig somewhat through the creation of a partial-payment system. 129 In addition, students would have needed enough financial support to pay their teachers and to cover the costs of supplies, food, and lodging. Nevertheless, we cannot completely identify university attendance with the wealthy; about 15 percent of university students matriculated as pauperes. Paupers in this sense were in sufficient financial straits at the time of matriculation that the presiding rector waived the customary matriculation fee. Until the end of the Middle Ages when inflation began to rise, this corresponded to a yearly income of no more than 10 to 12 gulden.130 By way of comparison a master craftsmen in Nuremberg could be expected to earn about 45 gulden per year.131 Many poor students had to support themselves by begging or with income from odd jobs, such as scribal work.132 Although not all pauperes were actually poor, the fact that universities would either reduce or waive matriculation fees and that competition and financial necessity forced some masters to charge lower fees than others, 133 meant that university education would have been within reach for a son of our Nuremberg master craftsman or the better off, but not necessarily wealthy, citizens of small towns and villages. Franz Heiler has used university matriculation records to study the common schools in Beilngries, Berching, and Greding, all in the diocese of Eichstätt, from 1400 to 1600.134 Berching, a town of about 1,000 inhabitants,135 had a schoolmaster as early as 1318 and was sending native sons to university by the end of the fourteenth century. 136 The first mention of a schoolmaster for Beilngries, a town of about 350 inhabitants, is from 1407 and the school began to send students to university with regularity beginning in the 1460s.137 In Greding, a town of about 380 inhabitants, a schoolmaster is mentioned in the documentation for an anniversary mass in 1396, but no further mention of a schoolmaster appears in the sources until 1487. Howev- er, the fact that twenty-seven students from Greding appear in university matriculation records from 1400 to 1487 suggest that the school was in more or less continuous operation.138 There was a steady increase in university matriculations over the course of the fifteenth century with a sharp increase in the years 1470 to 1520. 139 From the three towns, seventy-eight students matriculated into a university from 1401 to 1470, or just over eleven per decade; from 1471 to 1520 the number rose to 148, or nearly thirty per decade. From the villages, towns, and cities of the entire diocese of Eichstätt there were in total 1,336 matriculations into university from 1401 to 1470, an average of nearly 191 per decade; from 1471 to 1520 the number rose to 2,323, or an average of just over 464 per decade. According to Heiler, the university students from Beiln- gries, Berching, and Greding came almost exclusively from families of sufficient wealth and status to sit on the city council or from well-off families Education 21 who either owned large manors, possessed a mill, or who paid above average taxes. Nevertheless, of the students from these three towns 24.7 percent paid less than half of the required matriculation fee due to their financial circumstances. Neither were the upper classes of these three small cities particularly wealthy. These cities fall into the class of city referred to as Ackerbürgerstädte in German-language scholarship. Such cities are characterized by a relatively small degree of social differentiation and the participation of large sections of the middle and even upper classes in the agrarian economy.140 Why did families send their sons to university? What did the students hope to receive? Some hoped to find patrons. As R. C. Schwinges has stressed, universities were neither islands of egalitarianism nor meritocracies, but were rather mirrors of the status-conscious society by which they were surrounded. University statutes are filled with the language of class, and poor and rich students often studied under separate masters. But the fact that the universities were dominated by secular and ecclesiastical dignitaries is precisely what made them useful places to be. Although fifteenth-century patrons had substantial reasons to fill their benefices with competent men, family relations, personal connections, and friendships were still quite important. The university gave students who perhaps lacked sufficient connections at home the opportunity to find patrons, perhaps by entering into their service. The University of Ingolstadt has been called an “Adelsuniversität” due to its high proportion of aristocratic students. Between the year of its founding in 1472 and 1520, 569 nobiles matriculated into the university.141 Many of the 303 students who matriculated as pauperes in that time period must have hoped to find a benefactor among such a brilliant assembly of the region’s nobility, although the nobility themselves often avoided universities with a reputation for educating “poor men’s children.”142 There is also evidence that poorer students sought a university degree to compensate for their lack of connections. Pauperes were more likely (46 percent to 38 percent) to persevere to degree than divites, those who paid their matriculation fee in full. 143 This reflects the fact that portions of the educational elite were becoming increasingly professionalized. Founders of preacherships often required that candidates for the benefice possess a university degree, and town councils began demanding similar qualifications of their schoolmasters.144 Over the course of the fifteenth century, there was a decline in the number of clerics matriculating into German universities, but this was due primarily to increasing expectations that appointees to benefices should already have completed their studies. The rapid growth in the numbers of students attending university, especially after 1450, created pressure that forced university-educated clerics into lower and lower positions. 145 The diocese of Eichstätt itself was producing about forty-six university students per year in the last fifty years prior to the Reformation. Not all of 22 Chapter 1 these men would have become active in pastoral care and of those that did not all would have remained in the diocese, but many would have. From the period up to 1520 Heiler was able to identify the later careers of sixty-nine university students from Beilngries, Berching, and Greding. Fifty-two (75 percent) of these individuals became members of the lower clergy, two became members of the higher clergy, and fifteen pursued other careers as teachers, scribes, judges, or secular administrators. 146 He concluded, “the realistically expected career path for the average student upon departing the university was limited to an occupation in the lower clergy, more rarely as an urban scribe, schoolmaster, or territorial official.”147 If thirty (65 percent) of the annual average of forty-six university students from the diocese of Eichstätt in the later Middle Ages pursued careers in the lower clergy, then the diocese would have produced enough university-educated priests to provide each of its 307 parishes with one every ten years. 148 Considering that many of these clerics would have begun their careers between the ages of 18 and 25,149 there may not have been a shortage of university-educated clerics in the diocese. Additionally, some curates could have taken advantage of episcopal dispensations (for those with a benefice but who had not yet been ordained) and licenses (for rectors who were already priests) to study after their ecclesiastical career had already begun; both methods would have allowed the curate to use parish funds to defray the costs of university study. 150 The visitation record from 1480 can add to this picture. Although he did not systematically investigate the level of education of the clergy, Johannes Vogt did identify seventeen priests as having university degrees. Johann Bruckay, the parish priest in Neumarkt and dean of the rural chapter based in Neumarkt, had a doctorate in canon law as did Georg Maier, the parish priest of St. Moritz in Ingolstadt. Johann Adorf, the parish priest of the Church of Our Lady in Ingolstadt and rector of the University of Ingolstadt, had a doctorate in theology. Jacob Griesser, the parish priest in Sulzburg and dean of the rural chapter in Hilpoltstein, had a Master of Arts degree and was a licentiate in canon law. A further thirteen other parish priests identified themselves as magistri. Of these seventeen self-identified magistri and doctors, one was a mass priest, one an altarist, and fifteen were serving as either rectors or vicars. Of the fifteen parish priests, four were simultaneously the dean of a rural chapter. Clearly those clerics with a university degree were able to ascend to the rank of curate and escape the proletarian multitude of chaplains, assistants, and mass priests. Even the single mass priest in the group was the retired parish priest of Pölling. These seventeen clerics did not exhaust the supply of university-educated parish priests in the diocese by any means. We cannot be sure that Johannes Vogt identified every magister as such, but even more important here is the fact that the majority of university students in the Middle Ages left prior to Education 23 receiving a degree. One way to try to identify such former students is to look for the names of the clerics recorded in Vogt’s visitation record in university matriculation records. This would seem to be a simple task, but it is actually quite hard to be certain that a name found in Vogt’s protocol and an identical name found in a matriculation record refer to the same individual. Late medieval Franconians and Bavarians lacked all trace of an adventurous spirit when it came to naming their children. For example, there were four clerics with the name “Johann Fabri” in the diocese of Eichstätt in 1480: a chaplain in Dietfurt; the parish priest in Talmessing; and two monks, one in Kastl and one in Heilsbronn. So how many of these four, if any, were among the twenty-eight students with that name who matriculated into the University of Vienna between 1451 and 1479 or the six others who matriculated into the University of Ingolstadt before 1480? Further hindering identification is the fact that in most instances Vogt recorded only the diocese of origin for each cleric and showed no interest in their hometown. One lucky exception is Johannes Amman, one of our seventeen magistri and the plebanus in Unter- stall, whom Vogt notes was from the town of Kallmünz in the diocese of Regensburg. The Johannes Amman de Calmüncz who matriculated into the University of Vienna in 1458 and the Dominus Iohannes Amman de Kalmünβ presbyter who matriculated into the newly founded University of Ingolstadt in 1472 are certainly identical with our parish priest in Unterstall, a village fifteen kilometers west of Ingolstadt. 151 After their university studies, would-be clerics most often found employment in or near their hometowns where their social and family connections were strongest.152 This tendency can be used to make further identifications. For example, Nicolaus Carnificis, the parish priest in Bergen reported that he began his clerical career as a mass priest in Reichertshofen. 153 This statement allows us to identify the Nicolaus Carnificis de Reicharczhofen, who matriculated into the University of Vienna in 1460, as our man. 154 Similarly, Con- radus Flock de Swabach baccalarius, who matriculated into the University of Ingolstadt in 1474,155 is almost certainly identical with Conrad Flock, an assistant priest in the parish church of Schwabach in 1480. 156 In cases in which students began their university studies after having already become a cleric, the matriculation records might record their last place of employment as their town of origin. For example, in 1475 a Chris- toph Peck was the vicar of a parish church dedicated to John the Baptist in Tanbach, a town near Burk. In 1479, he matriculated into the University of Vienna as Cristofferus Pekch de Sancto Johannes prope Altenburgk. 157 Also useful is when the visitation record notes that a cleric was ordained in the diocese of Passau or, after 1468 when it was separated from Passau, the diocese of Vienna. Anyone from the diocese of Eichstätt who was ordained to the priesthood in these two dioceses was likely there in the first place in order to study at the University of Vienna. For example, Johannes 24 Chapter 1

Distel, an assistant priest in Laibstadt, was ordained in Vienna and is therefore to be identified with the Johannes Disstl de Haydeck who matriculated into the University of Vienna in 1475.158 Cementing the identification is the fact that Heideck lies so close to Laibstadt that Johannes was living there at the time of the visitation due to the poor condition of the priest’s dwelling in Laibstadt itself.159 A Iohannes Distel ex Haidegk also matriculated into the University of Ingolstadt in 1484,160 but the failure of the record to note any clerical status suggests that this Johannes was merely a homonymous man, perhaps a relative. Finally, ties of patronage can also help to identify individuals. Normally there would be no particular reason to identify the Johannes Molitoris serving as the parish priest in Suffersheim with the Johannes Molitoris de Papen- haim, who matriculated into the University of Vienna in 1454. 161 After all, ten other men of that name matriculated into the same university between 1454 and 1480. However, the patron of the parish church in Suffersheim was the Marshal of Pappenheim and Johann reported to Vogt that he was originally ordained with the promise of the marshal’s financial support.162 So Johannes’s ties to the Marshals of Pappenheim make it highly likely that we are here dealing with the same man who earlier attended the University of Vienna. In other cases, identity is probable but ultimately uncertain. For example, a Conradus Henffner de Feliciporta enrolled in the University of Ingolstadt in 1477 and a Conradus Henfner was the parish priest in Pyrbaum in 1480.163 Pyrbaum and Seligenporten are neighboring towns in the deanery of Hilpolt- stein, so it seems probable that we are here dealing with the same individual. Similarly, the Johann Herbst who was the parish priest in Unterasbach in 1480 is likely to be identified with the Johannes Herbst de Günczenhausen who matriculated into the University of Vienna in 1458 because Unterasbach and Gunzenhausen are also neighboring towns.164 In a final category, identification is made possible, if not probable, because both student and cleric came from the diocese of Eichstätt or because the name is relatively unusual. For example, Conrad Bernstorfer, the plebanus in Mörnsheim in 1480 was from the diocese of Eichstätt and therefore could possibly be identified with the Conradus Pernstorffer de Perching (Berching) who matriculated into the University of Vienna in 1460. 165 Jo- hann Joych, the vicar of Lentting in 1480, could be either the Johannes Joich de Hohenwart who matriculated into the University of Vienna in 1470 or the Iohannes Ioych de Hohenbartt who matriculated into the University of Ingol- stadt in 1472, the first year of its existence. Or perhaps he was both? These problems aside, it is well known that university matriculation records are incomplete. Historians have noticed numerous anecdotal instances of individuals who are known to have attended university, but who nevertheless fail to appear in matriculation lists. For example, nine students Education 25 from Berching and one from Greding attended the University of Vienna between 1415 and 1521, but do not appear in the primary matriculation record.166 Due to the inherent uncertainties involved, an examination of all the matriculation records from the universities in German-speaking lands would not add significant further insights. I have instead examined the matriculation records from the universities of Vienna and Ingolstadt, the two most popular universities among students from the diocese of Eichstätt.167 The results are not meant to be exhaustive, but rather to identify in which posts the university-educated were to be found. As mentioned earlier, among the seventeen parish clergy identified in the university record as having received at least a Master of Arts, fifteen were curates, one was a mass priest (although he was a retired rector), and one was an altarist. Among the twenty-six other parish clerics for whom a firm identification in matriculation records can be made, there were fifteen curates (two clearly identified as vicars), two mass priests, one altarist, three chaplains, four assistant priests, and one unspecified cleric. Among the sixty-one for whom identification was only “possible,” there were thirty-two curates (eleven clearly identified as vicars), eight mass priests, one altarist, six chaplains, five provisors, and nine assistant priests. 168 Those serving as curates had typically matriculated in the 1440s or 1450s, while most of those active as altarists, chaplains, mass priests, or assistant priests had matriculated in the mid-1460s or, even more typically, the 1470s. In other words, although university-educated clerics tended to end up as either rectors or vicars of parishes, they did not begin their careers that way and often had to work their way up the parish “hierarchy.” The appearance of university-educated men among the ranks of the parish clergy, even among assistant priests, mass priests, and chaplains, supports R. C. Schwinges’s contention that the over- supply of university-educated men was pushing them into ever lower levels of secular, ecclesiastical, and urban administration. 169 Between 30 and 62 of the 307 parish priests (rectors or vicars) in the diocese of Eichstätt in 1480 had attended the universities of Vienna or Ingolstadt. 170 This number of course does not include priests who were not curates, nor priests who had attended other universities. University attendance among the clergy had great regional variation; other studies have estimated rates at anywhere from 10 to 40 percent.171 University-educated priests would have formed an important segment of the market for pastoral and devotional literature. In this chapter, I have tried to show that parish priests, both rectors and their vicars, had duties beyond that of celebrating the liturgy. After the Fourth Lateran Council bishops came to lay greater stress on the role of the priest as confessor and preacher. Imperial bishops, especially in the fifteenth century, required their parish priests to be able to teach their parishioners about the sacraments and the laws of the Church and expected them to preach. Many bishops either recommended or required that their parish cler- 26 Chapter 1 gy acquire the synodal statutes and a basic pastoral handbook, while their duties and their own devotional needs may have led many to seek additional textual aids. A basic education in Latin was becoming ever more available through the foundation of common schools in the cities, towns, and even villages of the region, while attendance at German universities was on the increase everywhere. Facility with the written word was essential to these men as both pastors of individual churches and as officials in a larger ecclesiastical bureaucracy. The bureaucratic nature of parish administration is the subject of the following chapter.

NOTES

1. The text can be found edited in Werminghoff, “Die Epistola,” 200–227. See also, Wer- minghoff, “Zur Epistola,” 145–64 and Braun, “Epistola de miseria,” 27–41. Enno Bünz also discusses the text in “‘Die Kirche im Dorf lassen . . .’,” 143–45. 2. “obprobrium censens penitus dissuadeo. Quantum igitur ecclesiasticum regimen est meritorium, tantum est onerosum, quantum excelsum, tantum ignominiosum;” Werminghoff, “Die Epistola,” 52. 3. Werminghoff, “Die Epistola,” 200–201, 213–14, 227; Bünz, “‘Die Kirche im Dorf lassen . . .’,” 143. 4. Jennifer Thibodeaux has studied the development of a new form of priestly masculinity during the imposition of celibacy in The Manly Priest. 5. On clerical education, see Coulton, Ten Medieval Studies; Oediger, Über die Bildung; the collection of Leonard E. Boyle’s articles, Pastoral Care, Clerical Education and Canon Law; Overfield, “University Studies and the Clergy in Pre-Reformation Germany,” 254–92; Wendehorst, “Wer konnte im Mittelalter lesen und schreiben?,” 9–33; McLaughlin, “Univer- sities, Scholasticism, and the Origins of the German Reformation,” 1–43; Meuthen, “Zur Europäischen Klerusbildung vom 14. bis zum 16. Jahrhundert,” 263–94; Dohar, “Sufficienter litteratus,” 305–21; Martin Kintzinger, “Studens artium, rector parochiae und magister scolarum,” 1–41. 6. Quoted in Bünz, “‘Die Kirche im Dorf lassen . . .’,” 158; Coulton, Ten Medieval Studies, 112. 7. Quoted in Overfield, “University Studies,” 256. 8. “Nulla iam in clericis vitae sanctitas requiritur, literarum eruditio nulla postulatur, conscientiae puritas non attenditur. Sufficit, si ‘Socrates currit’ possint construere, si, cuius partis orationis sit ‘dominus’ sciant respondere;” Cornelius de Snekis (1510), quoted in Oediger, Über die Bildung, 93, n. 1. 9. Overfield, “University Studies,” 256. 10. Overfield, “University Studies,” 256; Dixon, The Reformation in Germany, 17–18. Translations of the texts can be found in Strauss, Manifestations of Discontent. 11. Tanner, Sex, Sünde, Seelenheil, 328–29. 12. Ibid., 421–27. 13. Ibid., 484–88. 14. Ibid., 460–66. 15. “Septimum itaque sacramentum est ordinatio sive consecratio clericorum, quod et ipsum particulare est et non generale; quia non omni homini necessarium: quamvis enim omnes homines indigeant clericis, non tamen est necessarium, omnes homines fieri clericos. Ad ipsum tamen sacramentum, qui moribus et scientia magis idonei sunt, invitandi sunt, potius quam trahendi. Unde adhortor vos et invito, quia cogere non debeo, ut de liberis vestris ad clericatum tradatis liberalibus studiis prius diligenter instructos, ut ipsi per vos, sicut aliae gentes de lingua vestra latinitatis conscios possitis habere clericos et sacerdotes;” Schannat and Hartzheim, Concilia Germaniae, 3:304. Education 27

16. Clanchy, From Memory to Written Record, 226–27. 17. Oediger, Über die Bildung, 57. Overfield stresses this point as well, “University Stud- ies,” 269. 18. Wendehorst, “Wer konnte im Mittelalter lesen und schreiben?,” 19. The relevant passages in the Decretum are D. 34 c. 10, D. 55 c. 3, C. 7 q. 9 c. 4; see Friedberg, Corpus Iuris Canonici. 19. Oediger, Über die Bildung, 82–83. 20. Tanner, ed., Decrees of the Ecumenical Councils, 1:248. 21. Oediger, Über die Bildung, 47, citing D. 36 c. 2, paragraph 12. Anders Winroth has shown that there were two recensions of the Decretum; see his The Making of Gratian’s Decretum. 22. Logan, University Education, 7. 23. Dohar, “Sufficienter litteratus,” 309–10. 24. Ibid., 310. 25. Ignorantia mater cunctorum errorum maxime in sacerdotibus Dei uitanda est, qui docen- di offitium in populo Dei susceperunt. Sacerdotes enim legere sanctas scripturas admonentur, Paulo apostolo dicente ad Timotheum: “Adtende lectioni, exhortationi, doctrinae,” et “semper permane in his.” Sciant ergo sacerdotes scripturas sacras et canones, et omne opus eorum in predicatione et doctrina consistat, atque edificent cunctos tam fidei scientia quam operum disciplina. D. 38 c. 1. 26. Oediger, Über die Bildung, 48–49. The sections in the Decretum were D. 38 c. 4 and D. 38 c. 5. 27. Salonen and Hanska, Entering a Clerical Career, 196. 28. 1267 Vienne, 1277 Trier, 1287 Lüttich, 1287 Würzburg, 1300 Cologne, 1300/1305 Cambrai, 1308 Minden, 1310 Cologne, 1310 Mainz, 1333 Cologne, 1338 Cologne, 1407 Würzburg, 1423 Mainz, 1446 Würzburg, 1512 Regensburg. This and the lists of councils which follow are not meant to be exhaustive. Unless otherwise noted, the canons can be found in Schannat and Hartzheim, Concilia Germaniae, vols. 3–6. 29. 1287 Lüttich, 1324 Cambrai, 1333 Cologne, 1338 Cologne, 1481 Tournai, 1512 Regens- burg. 30. 1261 Mainz, 1407 Würzburg, 1512 Regensburg. 31. 1281 Cologne, 1342 Olmütz, 1407 Würzburg. 32. 1261 Mainz, 1281 Cologne, 1287 Lüttich, 1310 Mainz, 1420 Salzburg, 1446 Würzburg, 1512 Regensburg. 33. 1300/1305 Cambrai, 1310 Cologne. The term is also used concerning the appointment of vicars in statutes from 1274 Salzburg, 1286 Passau, and 1503 Basel. 34. 1287 Lüttich, 1300 Cologne, 1338 Cologne, 1423 Mainz, 1447 Eichstätt, 1491 Bam- berg, 1511 Gnesen. 35. 1287 Lüttich, 1300 Cologne, 1338 Cologne, 1423 Mainz, 1491 Bamberg. 36. 1261 Mainz, 1423 Mainz. 37. Description from Oediger, Über die Bildung, 83–86. 38. Ibid., 85. 39. Boyle, “Aspects of Clerical Education,” 19. 40. Dykema, “Conflicting Expectations,” 165–96. 41. Both examples from Salonen and Hanska, Entering a Clerical Career, 15. 42. Ibid., 103 n. 1; 115. 43. Ibid., 149, 169, 269. 44. Oediger, Über die Bildung, 89. 45. Dykema, “Handbooks for Pastors,” 150. Dykema based his observation on Oediger’s earlier work; the difference lies in their respective attitudes toward these requirements. While Oediger was not impressed with the level of knowledge demanded of pastors, Dykema sees it as a sufficient basis for the creation of a professional identity. See Oediger, Über die Bildung, 53–54. 46. On clerical celibacy, see Thibodeaux, The Manly Priest; Barstow, Married Priests; Swanson, “Angels Incarnate,” 160–77; and the essays in Frassetto, ed., Medieval Purity and Piety. 28 Chapter 1

47. Foundational still is Grundmann, Religious Movements, 31–68; see also Lambert, Med- ieval Heresy, 91–104; and Lawrence, Medieval Monasticism, 238–61. 48. Scholars do not agree just how widespread the practice of private confession was before Lateran IV. Alexander Murray believes that it was becoming increasingly common in monastic communities in the twelfth century, but did not approach universality until the thirteenth. Sarah Hamilton points out that the categories of “public” and “private” penance were not totally distinct in the tenth and eleventh century, and that hybrid forms were widespread. Mary Mans- field has also shown that the practice of public penance did not end with Lateran IV. More recently, Rob Meens has argued that the twelfth century schools produced more systematic terminology, but that the experience of penance for most people remained little changed. See Murray, “Confession before 1215,” 51–81; Hamilton, The Practice of Penance; Mansfield, Humiliation of Sinners; Meens, Penance in Medieval Europe. 49. See Larson, Master of Penance, for an excellent analysis of the pervasive influence of the De penitentia portion of Gratian’s Decretum on the development of these ideas. 50. Quoted in Baldwin, “From the Ordeal to Confession,” 202. John Bossy has argued that despite these changes in moral theology, confession in practice remained primarily concerned with resolving conflicts and did not come to focus on the “interiorized discipline of the individual” until after the Reformation; see Bossy, “The Social History of Confession,” 21–38. This is in contrast to Stephen Ozment who has argued that the practice and theology of confession were psychologically oppressive and contributed to the success of the Reformation; see his The Reformation in the Cities. Lawrence Duggan has challenged this argument on the grounds that the practice of confession was too erratic and chaotic, and priests too ill-educated, to have created a psychological burden; see “Fear and Confession,” 153–75. The role of confession in early modern society has remained an important topic; see the more recent studies Myers, “Poor, Sinning Folk” and Rittgers, The Reformation of the Keys. 51. Spitzig, Sacramental Penance, 100, 105. 52. Ibid., 100, 105. Innocent III would use the same metaphor in canon 21 of the Fourth Lateran Council: “The priest shall be discerning and prudent, so that like a skilled doctor he may pour wine and oil over the wounds of the injured one,” in Tanner, ed., Decrees of the Ecumenical Councils, 1:245. 53. This is not to say that private confession began with the Fourth Lateran Council, but that from this point on conducting such confessions became a legal obligation for all parish priests. Scholars have rightly shown that private confession is older than 1215 and that public penance continued to be practiced after that date; see note 48. 54. Wenzel, Latin Sermon Collections, 233. 55. The manual is the Confessionale-Defecerunt by Antoninus Florentinus; see Tentler, Sin and Confession, 123–24. 56. Oediger, Über die Bildung, 55–56. 57. Pixton, The German Episcopacy, 437–59. For a short description of the English episcopacy’s reaction to Lateran IV see Wenzel, Latin Sermon Collections, 229–52. An older but lengthier account can be found in Gibbs and Lang, Bishops and Reform, 1215–1272. In some regions it took even longer. Peter Johanek and Angela Treiber have argued that the provincial statutes of Salzburg remained primarily concerned with the publication of papal rights and ecclesiastical liberties in the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries and left the instruction of the clergy to the diocesan bishops; it was not until the fifteenth century that they developed a greater emphasis on the cure of souls. See Treiber, Die Autorität der Tradition, 134. 58. These statutes are dated 1227 in Schannat-Hartzheim, but are now dated by most scholars to 1277. See Pixton, The German Episcopacy, 356–57. 59. Schannat and Hartzheim, Concilia Germaniae, 3:528. 60. On efforts to provide priests with manuals of instruction, see Boyle, “The Fourth Late- ran Council and Manuals of Popular Theology,” 30–43. 61. Schannat and Hartzheim, Concilia Germaniae, 3:664–66. 62. “Sacerdotes doceant populum sibi subditum, quae sunt peccata mortalia in communi et quae solita sunt fieri . . . De talibus vero in articulis fidei et de decem praeceptis, Sacerdotes subditos suos instruant, et alias illitterati et inexperti Sacerdotes nullatenus populo sibi subdito praedicare praesumant, ne contingat eos fieri magistros erroris, qui nunquam fuerint discipuli Education 29 veritatis, sed cum ab aliis viris litteratis subditis suis contigerit praedicari, verbum Dei devote audiant et disciplinate, et inde propter scandalum hominum non recedant; et nullatenus verbum Dei, quod pro suorum fit salute subditorum, impedire audeant, sed in omnibus promoveant, in quodcunque possunt; item praecipmus firmiter et districte, ut viros religiosos, scilicet fratres Praedicatorum et Minores, cum ad vos venerint, benigne recipiatis, et caritative pertractetis, et plebes vobis subditas ad hoc inducatis, ut ab ipsis verbum Dei audiant . . . ;” Schannat and Hartzheim, Concilia Germaniae, 3:530–31. 63. “Nullus passim recipiatur ad praedicandum, vel ad audiendum confessiones, sive ad injungendum poenitentias, nisi fuerit authentica persona, et ad hoc ab Episcopo destinata, quod licet quilibet Sacerdos in sua ordinatione potestatem ligandi et solvendi recipiat, executionem tamen non recipit, nisi sibi a Papa, vel suo Episcopo, conferatur: unde nulli Plebanorum Socii audire confessiones vel praedicare praesumant, nisi de indulgentia speciali Episcopi; Quaes- tores quoque eleemosynarum tantum ea dicant populo, quae in litteris Domini Papae vel Epis- copi continentur, nec ultra praedicare cantare, vel legere permittantur: Sacerdos autem loci populum sibi commissum diligenter inducat ad eleemosynas erogandas pietatis intuitu;” Schan- nat and Hartzheim, Concilia Germaniae, 4:28. 64. For exceptions, see the statutes issued by the archbishop of Cologne in 1305 and the bishop of Maastricht in 1310; Schannat and Hartzheim, Concilia Germaniae, 4:111–12, 169. 65. Moeller, “Piety in Germany around 1500,” 60. 66. Buchner, “Die mittelalterliche Pfarrpredigt,” 228–31. I am including the cathedral of Eichstätt here even though Buchner believed that there was no preacher there until Bishop Gabriel von Eyb’s foundation in 1531. Bernhard Neidiger, however, traces the office of cathedral preacher to as early as 1367; see Neidiger, Prädikaturstiftungen, 397. Ulrich Pfeffel was a preacher in the cathedral of Eichstätt from at least 1475; see chapter 4. 67. Van Engen, Sisters and Brothers of the Common Life. 68. Bossy, Christianity in the West, 35–56; Bast, Honor Your Fathers, 1–52; Bailey, “A Late-Medieval Crisis of Superstition?,” 633–61. 69. According to Spencer preaching became a more established aspect of religious life in the parishes in England as well, and stone pulpits became an increasingly regular feature of English parish churches in the mid-fourteenth century; Spencer, English Preaching in the Late Middle Ages, 60, 64. 70. “Item omnibus Sacerdotibus Nobis subjectis Parochias regentibus in virtute sanctae obedientiae injungimus firmiter et districte, ut ipsi singulis diebus Dominicis infra Missarum solemnia, dum fiunt sermones ad populum, Symbolum sanctae Fidei Christianae populis suis in vulgari praedicent et exponant;” Schannat and Hartzheim, Concilia Germaniae, 5:245. 71. Schannat and Hartzheim, Concilia Germaniae, 5:399. 72. Ibid., 5:599. 73. “quare statuimus ut de caetero ad Sacros Ordines assumantur viri idonei, in divinis officiis, ecclesiasticisque sacramentis exercitati, quique doctrina, lectionibus, psalmis, hymnis, canticis jugiter incumbant, doctrinaeque gratiam populis administrent;” Schannat and Hart- zheim, Concilia Germaniae, 6:80. 74. “qui regimen animarum et alia onera incumbentia salubrius et utilius expediant, maxime tales, qui officium praedicationis verbi divini frequentius et studiosius verbo pariter et exemplo valeant et possint exercere;” Suttner, “Nachträge zur Conciliengeschichte,” 195. Where possible, I have chosen to quote from Suttner’s edition of Eichstätt’s synodal statutes because it is more recent and free from Schannat’s and Hartzheim’s idiosyncratic punctuation and capital- ization. 75. “Cum sacerdotes, quibus a domino predicandi ministerium commissum est, dominicas oues sibi traditas uerbo dei, spirituali alimonia, pascere et, ut in preceptis diuinis ambulent, edocere debeant, idcirco eosdem in suis sermonibus precipimus esse cautos, ne verba proferant inutilia aut vana et maxime piarum mencium offensiua;” Suttner, “Versuch einer Concilienges- chichte,” 111–12. 76. Buchner, Johann III, 44–45. 77. Archbishop Arundel in the early fifteenth century outright forbade unbeneficed vicars to preach anything not contained in the Ignorantia sacerdotum, a late thirteenth-century pastoral syllabus developed by Archbishop Pecham; Spencer, English Preaching, 164–72. For more 30 Chapter 1 recent work on the response to Arundel see the articles in Gillespie and Ghosh, eds. After Arundel. 78. “Sed pocius scripturam sacram, veteris videlicet et noui testamenti, precipue Ewange- lium christi plane et intelligibiliter dominicis et aliis sollempnibus diebus populo predicent, primo textum, prout iacet, uulgariter exponendo subjunctis postillis uel per membra declarent veluti plebis capacitati conuenire congruerit. Et quia repetita noticia mandatorum dei multum uidetur edificare in populo, specialiter ordinamus, ut rectores ecclesiarum parochialium ad minus semel in anno assumant materiam decem preceptorum et illam una cum correccionibus viciorum conuenienter prosequantur, inducentes cum summa diligencia populum ad agendam penitenciam pro peccatis commissis ac propterea singulis annis dominica prima quadragesime volumus, quod eidem populo publicent et pronuncient constitutionem generalis concilii, que incipit: Omnis utriusque etc. et aliis monitis salutaribus eos ad confitendum sacerdotibus et se deo reconciliandum inducant. Caueant autem omnino predicatores huiusmodi, ne in suis sermonibus utantur scripturis apografis siue non autenticis; et si quid per ignoranciam proferant ab ecclesia uel a doctoribus non approbatum, hoc caute studeant reuocare;” Suttner, “Versuch einer Conciliengeschichte,” 111–12. 79. Johann’s anxiety concerning false or apocryphal versions of scriptures or unapproved doctrine is at least partially attributable to lingering fears of the Hussites. In 1434 the bishop of Eichstätt offered an indulgence for aid against the heresies of Wyclif, Hus, and Jerome of Prague and in 1460 Johann III von Eich prosecuted a group of heretics for errors suggestive of Waldensianism and Hussitism; see Machilek, “Ein Eichstätter Inquisitionsverfahren,” 417–46. 80. Schannat and Hartzheim 5:628–29; 6:112–13; Oediger, Über die Bildung, 115, n. 3. 81. Suttner, “Versuch einer Conciliengeschichte,” 148; Schannat and Hartzheim, Concilia Germaniae 5:434. Johann was by no means the only bishop to legislate on the parish sermon; see especially the synod of Tournai in 1481 (Schannat and Hartzheim, Concilia Germaniae 5:531), the synod of Ermland in 1497 (Schannat and Hartzheim, Concilia Germaniae 5:667), the synod of Schwerin in 1492 (Schannat and Hartzheim, Concilia Germaniae 5:654), and the synod of Basel in 1503 (Schannat and Hartzheim, Concilia Germaniae 6:8–9, 24). In 1503 Bishop Christoph von Utenheim ordered his pastors to explain the gospel pericope each Sunday in the vernacular, to instruct the laity how to confess at the beginning of Lent, to warn the laity to listen to the sermon and other announcements, and not allow them to stand around the churchyard instead; those resisting were to be reported to the bishop or his vicar general. For this last and other similar examples, see Landmann, “Drei Predigt- und Seelsorgsbücher von Konrad Dreuben,” 210. 82. “Quia uero juxta prophetam lex dei ex ore requiritur sacerdotum, propter quod scientia diuine scripture his neccessaria est: idcirco clericos nobis subditos precipimus sollicitos et diligentes esse circa studium sacrarum literarum, ne ueluti ceci cum his, quos ducunt, in foueam cadant. Cuius rei gracia volumus, quod deinceps non solum, quando ad sacros ordines admittuntur, sed eciam dum ecclesias suscipiunt regendas de sciencia et pericia et aliis, videlicet vita et honesta conuersatione et moribus diligenter examinentur;” Suttner, “Versuch einer Conciliengeschichte,” 114. The reference to seeking the law from the mouths of priests is to Malachi 2.7. 83. Owst, Preaching in Medieval England, 25. Quoted in Wenzel, Latin Sermon Collec- tions, 227. 84. A rare example is a “sermon diary” kept by Richard FitzRalph; it is discussed by Wenzel, Latin Sermon Collections, 17, 31–35. 85. Ibid., 239–40. 86. Buchner, “Die mittelalterliche Pfarrpredigt,” 223–28. The total given here differs from Buchner’s because he included references to the sermons of beneficed preachers, whereas I count only those references regarding the parish clergy. 87. Ibid., 225–26. 88. Preaching was rarely mentioned in English visitation records, but sermon collections appear not infrequently in priests’ wills; the Sermones discipuli of Johannes Herolt was bequeathed more often than the bible. Peter Marshall concluded that the claim that preaching was totally neglected in late medieval England was “almost certainly a false one,” see his The Catholic Priesthood, 88–90. Education 31

89. Evidence that bishops asked questions about the form and matter of the sacraments dates from the fifteenth century—the synod of Ermland (1449), Freising (1475), Passau (1435), Salzburg (1490), and the Havelburg ordinance from 1471; see Oediger, Über die Bildung, 89–90, esp. 89, n. 2. In 1447 Johann III von Eich insisted that priests should be examined both at ordination and then again before taking up a benefice with the cura animarum; see Suttner, “Versuch einer Conciliengeschichte,” 114 and Schannat and Hartzheim, Concilia Germaniae, 5:366. 90. For example, canon 16 from the diocesan synod of Münster (Schannat and Hartzheim, Concilia Germaniae, 3:649), canon 8 from the synod held in Cologne in 1281 (Schannat and Hartzheim, Concilia Germaniae, 3:664–66), and canon 4 from the 1491 diocesan synod of Bamberg (Schannat and Hartzheim, Concilia Germaniae, 5:599). 91. Bellitto, “Revisiting Ancient Practices: Priestly Training before Trent,” 35–49. Bellitto is skeptical that formal education played a significant role in the education of priests. In the fifteenth-century Empire, I believe it played more of a role than he allows; see below. 92. Dykema, “Conflicting Expectations,” 126. 93. Shinners, “Parish Libraries,” 210. On the period in England between the Fourth Lateran Council and 1281, see Reeves, “Teaching the Creed,” 41–72. See also, Goering and Taylor, “The Summulae,” 576–94. For the synodal statutes themselves see Powicke and Cheney, Coun- cils & Synods, vol. 2.1. 94. Shinners, “Parish Libraries,” 209–10. 95. I also discuss some of the evidence below in a forthcoming article, “Transmission and Selection,” that will appear in a volume of conference proceedings. 96. Oediger, Über die Bildung, 128–29; Hobbins, Authorship and Publicity before Print, 141. The reference is from the De laude scripturarum ad fratres Coelestinos written in 1423. 97. Dykema, “Conflicting Expectations,” 129–30. 98. The Opus was recommended to priests at the synods of Paris (1506), Evreux (1507), Le Mans (1508), Meaux (1511), and Chartres (1531); Dykema, “Confliciting Expectatons,” 131, n. 20. The Opus survives in more than two hundred manuscripts and was printed twenty-three times before 1500; see Hobbins, Authorship and Publicity Before Print, 148; Bast, Honor Your Fathers, 13–23. 99. Thayer, “Support for Preaching,” 123–44; Dykema, “Handbooks for Pastors,” 143–62. 100. Dykema, “Conflicting Expectations,” 152, n. 24. The letter is in Gerson, Oeuvres Complètes, 2:108–116. On Gerson’s emphasis on written tracts to aid clerical education, see Hobbins, Authorship and Publicity Before Print, 128, 141, 148, 194. 101. Oediger, Über die Bildung, 125. 102. “Postea legantur statuta provincialia et synodalia, et inter alia aliquis compendiosus tractatus, docens quomodo sacramenta ministrari debeant, et alia utilia pro instructione sacerdotum;” Tanner, Decrees, 1:473. 103. Suttner, “Nachträge zur Conciliengeschichte,” 197–98. 104. Dykema, “Handbooks for Pastors,” 146, n. 10. 105. Dykema, “Conflicting Expectations,” 307–8. Dykema includes the diocesan synod of Eichstätt in 1447 in his list. He may have based this assertion on Ernst Reiter’s essay on the reception of Basel’s reform decrees in the diocese. Here Reiter also states that Johann recommended the Directorium, but there is no reference to the work in the 1447 statutes. It is true that the Directorium is sometimes found in manuscripts along with the synodal statutes, but the association of the Directorium with the statutes likely stemmed from Albert von Hohenrech- berg’s older recommendation; see Reiter, “Rezeption und Beachtung von Basler Dekreten,” 227 and n. 56. Dykema also cites Oediger, Über die Bildung, 124, n. 6 in which Oediger refers to p. 198 of Suttner’s “Nachträge zur Conciliengeschichte.” Oediger was himself aware of Franz Xaver Buchner’s foundational 1902–1904 article “Kirchliche Zustände,” in which on p. 96 he also cites Suttner’s edition of the statutes to support the claim that Johann III von Eich recommended the Directorium. But the statute on this page was issued by Albert, not Johann; nowhere do Johann’s statutes mention the work. 106. Dykema, “Conflicting Expectations,” 306. 107. Boockmann, “Aus den Handakten,” 524, n. 77. 108. Meuthen, “Thomas von Aquin,” 643. 32 Chapter 1

109. Ibid., 651–52. For other book recommendations see Schannat and Hartzheim, Concilia Germaniae, 5:298 and 667. 110. Suttner, “Versuch einer Conciliengeschichte,” 131. For a description and a few excerpts from the texts see Franz, Die Messe im Deutschen Mittelalter, 567–77. 111. Clm 18548b in the Bavarian State Library contains both the treatise and Johann’s letter. 112. Surgant received a doctorate in canon law in 1479 from the University of Basel, where he served frequently as rector and dean, and was curate of St. Theodore’s from 1479 until his death in 1503; see Hirsch, “Surgant’s List of Recommended Books,” 199–210. 113. Ibid., 204. 114. Schannat and Hartzheim, Concilia Germaniae, 6:29. 115. Franz-Joachim Stewing makes the same point in “Bibliothek und Buchbesitz einer spätmittelalterlichen Pfarrkirche,” 290–91. 116. The following paragraph is dependent on Jakob, Schulen in Franken, 307–43. 117. These reforms had only mixed results; see Miner, “Change and Continuity,” 1–22. 118. Jakob, Schulen in Franken, 389. 119. Ibid., 122. Jakob published a portion of his findings as “Die Verbreitung von Schulen in Franken,” 117–28. Jakob himself was building on the earlier work of his mentor, Rudolf Endres; see especially his “Das Schulwesen in Franken,” 173–214. The foundation for any study of the schools in the diocese of Eichstätt is Buchner, Schulgeschichte des Bistums Eichstätt. Arranging alphabetically by town the references in the sources to students, schoolmasters, school buildings, and school ordinances, Buchner provided an essential foundation for a history of the schools in the diocese of Eichstätt without actually writing one himself. Although still useful it is superceded by Jakob’s work. See also the articles in Liedtke, ed., Handbuch der Geschichte des bayerischen Bildungswesen. 120. Jakob, Schulen in Franken, 60–62. By common school, Jakob means any school that stood open to use by the community and subsumes under this term older names such as parish school, urban school, “council school” (Ratsschule), and German schools. Purely ecclesiastical schools are not included in the term because they did not always stand open to all. Common schools are further to be distinguished from private schools, which were run by private entre- preneurs and administered solely by individuals. See, Jakob, Schulen in Franken, 15–16. 121. Ibid., 80, 124, 129. 122. Heiler, Bildung im Hochstift Eichstätt, 67. Based on his wider regional study, Jakob called the fifteenth century “the time in which the number of teachers expanded;” Jakob, Schulen in Franken, 271. 123. Jakob, Schulen in Franken, 191. 124. Ibid., 193. 125. Ibid., 199. 126. Jakob, Schulen in Franken, 200, 400–401. On the other hand, the Latin school in Altdorf was attended by 60 students in 1535 although the town had only about 150 families; see Endres, “Das Schulwesen in Franken” 187. 127. Schwinges, Deutsche Universitätsbesucher, 30–31. Although as Schwinges shows, growth occurred in cycles and not in linear fashion, see pp. 37–60. 128. Ibid., 30. 129. Ibid., 424–25. 130. Ibid., 447. 131. Jakob, Schulen in Franken, 192. Jakob drew his income estimates from the work of Ulf Dirlmeier; see his Untersuchungen zu Einkommensverhältnissen und Lebenshaltungskosten in oberdeutschen Städten des Spätmittelalters (Heidelberg: Winter, 1978). 132. Schwinges, Deutsche Universitätsbesucher, 443. 133. Schwinges, “Pauperes an Deutschen Universitäten,” 294. 134. Heiler, Bildung im Hochstift Eichstätt. For introductory information on the research group dedicated to “Wissensorganisierende und wissensvermittelnde Literatur im Mittelater,” see Dickerhof, ed., Bildungs- und schulgeschichtliche Studien, especially the foreword. 135. Heiler, Bildung im Hochstift Eichstätt, 36. 136. Ibid., 63, 67. 137. Ibid., 85. Education 33

138. Ibid., 105–6, 258. 139. The following data is compiled from the charts in Heiler, Bildung im Hochstift Eichstätt, 180–81. 140. Ibid., 214, 229–31. 141. Data drawn from the chart in Müller, Universität und Adel, 95. 142. The Saxon nobility denegrated the relatively inexpensive university of Leipzig as existing “for the children of the poor (für armer Leute Kind)”; see Schwinges, Deutsche Universitätsbesucher, 351. 143. Schwinges, “Pauperes an Deutschen Universitäten,” 285–309. 144. Jakob, Schulen in Franken, 383. For example, in 1513 Margareta von Haslach and Margareta Fleischmann founded a preachership in Berching and stipulated in the foundation document that the preacher should be either a doctor, licentiate, or bachelor in theology or at least have a Master of Arts degree; Buchner, “Die mittelalterliche Pfarrpredigt” 229–30. On the Berching preachership see also Götz, “Confirmationsbrief der Prädicatur in Berching,” 54–56; Anonymous, “Fundation der Prädikatur zu Berching 1513,” 85–103. 145. Schwinges, Deutsche Universitätsbesucher, 410–11. 146. Heiler, Bildung im Hochstift Eichstätt, 246–47, and the chart on pp. 358–60. The fact that Heiler does not say exactly what positions these clerics held, nor indicate how he avoided the danger of conflating two similarly named individuals, make his results more opaque than one would like. 147. Heiler, Bildung im Hochstift Eichstätt, 253–54. For previous studies reaching the same conclusion see 247, n. 17. 148. This of course is meant to be more illustrative than descriptive. Such university-educated priests would almost certainly have clustered in cities and larger towns. 149. Most local Latin schools took students from the ages of 6 to 14 and the average course of university studies lasted only two years. Synodal statutes continually stressed that no one less than 18 was to be ordained to higher orders and no should be entrusted with the cure of souls before the age of twenty-five. It is doubtful whether these regulations were always enforced, but an estimate of 18 to 25 for a beginning cleric seems safe. 150. On dispensations and licenses, see Logan, University Education of the Parochial Clergy, 23–27. 151. Szaivert and Gall, eds., Die Matrikel der Universität Wien, 1458 I R 48; von Pölnitz, ed., Die Matrikel der Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität, 1:1472, 10, 18. 152. In his case study of the university of Cologne, Schwinges noted that students who matriculated as members of the parish clergy were more likely to possess a benefice in their hometown than students who were members of collegiate churches; see Schwinges, Deutsche Universitätsbesucher, 401. 153. DE, B230, 4r. 154. Szaivert and Gall, eds., Die Matrikel der Universität Wien, 1460 I R 47 155. von Pölnitz, ed., Die Matrikel der Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität, 1:1474, 51, 8. 156. DE, B230, 96v. 157. Szaivert and Gall, eds., Die Matrikel der Universität Wien, 1479 II H 24. 158. Ibid., 1475 I R92; DE, B230, 89v. 159. Suttner, Schematismus der Geistlichkeit, 28. 160. von Pölnitz, ed., Die Matrikel der Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität, 1:1484, 127, 19. 161. Szaivert and Gall, eds., Die Matrikel der Universität Wien, 1454 I R 165. 162. DE, B230, 140r. 163. von Pölnitz, ed., Die Matrikel der Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität, 1:1477, 70, 28. 164. Szaivert and Gall, eds., Die Matrikel der Universität Wien, 1458 I R 52. 165. Ibid., 1460 I R 56. 166. Heiler, Bildung im Hochstift Eichstätt, 176. For other examples, see the literature cited in n. 5–6 on the same page. 167. Heiler, Bildung im Hochstift Eichstätt, 190–91. 168. In fact there are sixty-five “possible” identifications rather than sixty-one, but four involve cases where the number of diocesan clerics with a given name is greater than the 34 Chapter 1 number of possible matches in the university records. Since it is impossible to tell which identification, if any, is correct, these four cases have been omitted from the above summary. 169. Schwinges, Deusche Universitätsbesucher, 6 and 33–35. 170. Firmer data is available for a slightly later period. J. B. Götz has concluded that nearly 50 percent of the newly ordained priests in the diocese between 1493 and 1577 had attended university; Götz, Die Primizianten des Bistums Eichstätt, 79. 171. Enno Bünz concluded that 41.5 percent of the 1087 parish priests who can be identified from Thüringia between 1480 and 1525 had attended university and 19.5 percent of these had obtained at least a bachelors degree from the Faculty of Arts; Bünz, “Thüringens Pfarrgeistlich- keit vor der Reformation,” 71; this article draws on his unpublished Der niedere Klerus im spätmittelalterlichen Thüringen: Studien zu Kirchenverfassung, Klerusbesteurung, Pfarrgeist- lichkeit und Pfründenmarkt im thüringischen Teil des Erzbistums Mainz (Habilitation, Jena, 1999). Nicole Lemaitre found that 12 percent of the priests in the diocese of Rodez in mid- fifteenth century had a degree; see her Le Rouerque flamboyant, 168. Vincent Tabbagh estimated the percentage at 35 percent in Sens from 1488 to 1489; see his “Croyances et comportements de clergé paroissial en France du Nord à la fin du Moyen Âge,” in Le clergé délinquant (XIII-XVIIIe siecles),” 23. Between 1370 and 1449 only 12 of 158 curates (7.5 percent) in Norwich were known university graduates, but 23 out of 71 curates (32 percent) were known graduates between 1450 and 1499; see Tanner, The Church in the Later Middle Ages, 60–61. F. Donald Logan discovered 2000 entries regarding university study involving 1,200 parish rectors in the episcopal registers from the first half of the 14th century. He describes the process of granting dispensations and licenses for university study as a well-lubricated machine; see his University Education of the Parochial Clergy, 22 and 67. After surveying the literature, James Overfield has concluded that most studies have found that about 40 percent of the parish clergy had attended university; see his “University Studies,” 260. In addition to the studies cited there see McLaughlin, “Universities, Scholasticism,” 20, n. 114. Chapter Two

The Priest in the Parish, Diocese, and Territory

In the last chapter, we reviewed the educational opportunities available to young men who wished to embark on an ecclesiastical career. The goal of this chapter will be to flesh out the context in which the parish clergy in the diocese of Eichstätt lived and worked. As we will see, dealing with the devils that beset a priest on every side was no easy task. A facility with documents and record keeping, a practical knowledge of canon law, and the ability to navigate carefully in a sea of overlapping and shifting jurisdictions were essential skills for the parish priest. Priests had to keep track of feast days and anniversary masses, organize liturgical celebrations, inspect the church’s financial accounts, execute judicial decrees, verify episcopal licenses and dispensations, and engage in correspondence with both secular and ecclesiastical superiors. As priests acquired greater bureaucratic functions, the com- plexity and importance of the office meant that for many patrons of parish benefices, including bishops, cathedral chapters, secular princes, and city councils, there would have been an incentive to appoint capable men to head the parishes.

PRESENTATION TO A BENEFICE

It will be easiest to start at the formal beginning of a clerical career, the presentation to a benefice. Whereas only the bishop or his representatives had the authority to consecrate new clerics and to invest them with benefices, they had for the most part lost their right to appoint candidates to fill vacan- cies. Of the 307 parish churches in the diocese of Eichstätt in 1480, the bishop could appoint the rector to only fifty-seven.1 The right to present

35 36 Chapter 2 candidates for the bishop’s approval, the ius praesentandi, was held by the particular patron of the benefice in question. 2 During the course of a long historical process, this right had been ceded to lay and ecclesiastical benefactors, who had contributed either land or funds for the construction of a church or endowment of a benefice.3 By the fifteenth century the right of presentation to the majority of benefices in the diocese of Eichstätt lay in the hands of ecclesiastical corporations, but a not insignificant number remained in the hands of the nobility and city councils.4 Provided that the presented individual did not suffer from any canonical defect such as illegitimate birth, excessive youth, or gross ignorance, the bishop could not refuse to invest him with the office.5 The importance of the patron cannot be overstated; research has suggested that personal connections to the patron were the most important single factor in the successful acquisition of a benefice. 6 Although by the late Middle Ages the right to present candidates to the bishop was by far the most important patronal privilege, patrons also enjoyed an assortment of other rights including a prominent seat in the church and place of burial, as well as the right to demand financial support should he or she become impoverished. This last right was often moot, since many patrons held rights to the tithe due their churches or could collect customary dues from the income of the beneficed cleric. In exchange for these rights and privileges, patrons had not only to make the original donation of land or money, but had a further duty to protect both the cleric and the property belonging to the endowed benefice or church. 7 Originally conceived as a special relationship between a founder and the church he helped build, patronage rights over time lost their personal character and exchanged hands through sale, inheritance, or pledge. 8 In many cases this only exacerbated the confusion of patronage rights, but in some cases patrons were able to collect the rights to all the benefices of a church in their own hands. The city council of Neumarkt in the Oberpfalz, for example, held the patronage rights to all the clerical benefices within its walls with the exception of the most important; the rector of the parish church was presented by the abbot of Waldsachsen. The marshals of Pappenheim, on the other hand, held patronage rights over all three parish benefices in their place of residence.9 As the last gaps in the network of parishes closed around 1300, would-be patrons diverted their pious energies away from the creation of new parishes and into the endowment of chapels, altars, and stipends for the recitation of masses.10 While some rural parish priests would have still found themselves toiling in the Lord’s vineyard in relative isolation, the proliferation of chapels and altars meant that many parish churches would have been administered by several clerics, who often lived together in a communal parish house. This would have been true in particular for the parish clergy in the diocese’s larger cities, such as Weissenburg with ten beneficed clerics, Neumarkt with twen- The Priest in the Parish, Diocese, and Territory 37 ty-two, Ingolstadt with twenty-eight, or Eichstätt, whose cathedral alone required the services of twenty-five perpetual vicars stationed at the numerous altars and side chapels.11 The parish priest, whose office it was to say High Mass, preach on Sun- days and feast days, and to administer the sacraments, was called the rector. Rectors had normally to reside in the parish and fulfill their pastoral duties themselves, but could and often did receive dispensation to delegate their duties to a vicar in order to free themselves for university study, pilgrimage, or positions in ecclesiastical and secular government. Rectors could choose their own vicars, although they were often admonished by bishops to entrust their duties only to pious and reliable individuals. 12 Rectors paid such vicars out of the proceeds of the benefice and also had the right to remove the vicar at will. The priests of churches incorporated to monasteries or collegiate churches were also considered vicars, albeit permanent ones, because the institution itself acted as the rector or parochus verus. The institution collected all the proceeds of the benefice and paid the vicar an appropriate portion (congrua portio), although vicars, bishops, and institutions often disagreed on what “appropriate” in this context meant.13 Altarists or chaplains held benefices that required them to serve at particular altars within the parish church and that often stipulated the number of masses they were to celebrate each week. Mass priests (primissarii and medimissarii) were responsible for saying a daily mass either before or after the High Mass. Assistant priests (socii in divinis) were appointed, paid, and could be removed by the rector. Their duties included assisting the rector or vicar at divine services and in the administration of the sacraments. Indeed, all the priests active in a parish church were generally held to assist the rector at divine services as well as show him humility and obedience.14 The largely unregulated use of vicars by absent rectors, or absenteeism, has been blamed by both medieval reformers as well as modern historians for the poor state of pastoral care in the parishes. The visitation record of 1480 provides evidence for the rate of absenteeism in the diocese of Eichstätt. Of the 278 parishes for which the visitor, Johannes Vogt, provides information, there were sixty-eight vicars, two provisors (temporarily appointed clerics whose status was not always clearly distinguished from that of a vicar), and 208 plebani, although ten of these were either monks or canons appointed to exercise the cure of souls in an incorporated parish. While suggestive, these numbers do not allow a true estimate of the rate of absenteeism because Vogt does not regularly note whether or not a parish was incorporated, nor does he make a consistent terminological distinction between different types of vicars. While his term plebanus always refers to either a rector or a permanent vicar of an incorporated parish, the term vicarus could mean either a tempo- 38 Chapter 2 rary vicar appointed by an absentee rector or the permanent vicar of an incorporated parish. The parishes over which the bishop and laity enjoyed patronage rights, however, can provide a check because the laity could not legally incorporate parishes into their families, territories, or city administrations and because the bishop did so in only one case. For these parishes, therefore, a plebanus is clearly a rector and a vicarus is clearly the temporary appointment of an absentee cleric. Of the 127 such parishes about which Vogt provides clear information, thirty-three (26 percent) were being administered by a vicar or provisor and ninety-four by a rector.15 Of the 150 simple benefices (benefices without the cure of souls) about which Vogt provides information, forty-one (27 percent) were administered by a vicar. 16 Lay patrons are sometimes accused of callously granting benefices to individuals whom they intended all along to employ in their own service. Blame for the rate of absenteeism in the diocese of Eichstätt, however, cannot be laid at their feet. Of the seventy-two parishes in the patronage of laymen, only fourteen were being administered by a vicar or provisor (19 percent), while this was true for nineteen of the fifty-five parishes in the patronage of the bishop (35 percent). Although merely common rather than predominant, absenteeism in the diocese combined with the practice of incorporation to ensure that roughly two-thirds of all the parish clergy exercising the cure of souls had to pay a portion of their income to a parochus verus, whether an individual absent rector or an ecclesiastical institution.

THE PRIEST AS SUBJECT

As the above data shows, lay patrons did not view ecclesiastical benefices solely as a source of income for their clients and court clerks; on the contrary control over benefices became an increasingly imporant aspect of late medieval lordship. Some territorial princes indeed wished to treat priests “like any other subject.” In the fifteenth century, lords with territorial aspirations began to make ever more strenuous efforts to eliminate external jurisdictions and to assert the subject status of all inhabitants of their lands, including clerics. 17 Such claims inevitably kindled conflicts between secular princes and bishops, who insisted on the immunity of the clergy from secular jurisdiction. Whereas previous conflicts, such as the Investiture Controversy of the eleventh and twelfth century, had focused on the episcopal office itself, late medieval confrontations between ecclesiastical and secular power were increasingly played out at the level of the parish. One should avoid, however, attributing “secular” motives to the territorial princes and “religious” ones to the bishops. Territorial lords heard the calls to reform the Church and took it upon themselves to order the religious life in their lands. At the same time The Priest in the Parish, Diocese, and Territory 39 that territorial lords were tightening their oversight of village administration, they strove to collect patronage rights over the clergy in their territories. Ambitious lords strove to exceed their traditional rights as ecclesiastical patrons by asserting a territorial jurisdiction that sought to limit the reach of ecclesiastical courts and to establish a right to tax the clergy in special circumstances. This more assertive Kirchenpolitik and the episcopal resistance that it could engender placed enormous pressure on the loyalties, con- sciences, and pocket books of the parish clergy. 18 A spectacular example of these efforts is provided by the indomitable margrave Albrecht Achilles of Brandenburg-Ansbach. In an effort to unify his disparate lands, Albrecht presented himself as a reformer. He collected the patronage rights to seventy parish churches, issued ordinances defining the responsiblities of parish priests and other officials, intervened in monastic affairs, and strove to place his sons into important ecclesiastical positions. According to William Bradford Smith, Albrecht understood religious reform “as a natural and necessary expression of lordship.”19 In 1474 Albrecht un- successfully demanded that all the priests in his domains provide horses and wagons to support an imperial campaign against Burgundy; only twenty-four of ninety-one affected priests complied with the order. Undeterred Albrecht would try again a few years later. In October of 1480 the Imperial Diet voted to send aid to the emperor for a campaign against the Ottomans. 20 Albrecht was determined that the clergy in his territories should bear some of the cost, but the bishops of Eichstätt, Augsburg, Bamberg, and Würzburg asserted that the margrave had no right to tax the clergy and that their clergy were in any case held to contribute towards the bishops’ own obligations to aid the anti-Turkish campaign. On 9 January 1481 Albrecht, asserting that “the clergy who live in our principality are required to aid us,”21 sent orders to his officials to act quickly before the bishops had time organize resistance and to inform the parish clergy of their duty to pay. On 3 February, the bishop of Würzburg sent out orders that the clergy of his diocese were to pay the crusade tax to him and not to Albrecht and strengthened this command five days later by the threat of excommunication for any priest who gave in to Albrecht’s demands. Albrecht responded in turn by ordering his officials to fine any priest 100 pennies for each penny rendered to his bishop and furthermore authorized his officials to impound the property of all clergy who refused to pay and use it to secure loans to cover the tax shortfall. When the pastor of Kulmbach announced the bishop’s interdict of the city, Albrecht ordered his officials to deposit corpses in the churchyard nonetheless. In frustration, Albrecht finally threatened to take away the concubine of any priest who refused to pay. 22 Despite this dire threat, resistance to his order continued. The race between Albrecht’s and the bishops’ administrations to secure the obedience of the clergy ended in a draw and left the clergy with the 40 Chapter 2 choice between excommunication and loss of benefice or heavy fines and loss of property. Finally, after salvos of excommunications by the bishops and countersalvos of absolutions obtained by Albrecht through a sympathetic papal legate, jailings of clerics and confiscations of clerical property by Albrecht’s officials, and a shrewd use of the printing press by the bishop of Würzburg to remind his clergy of the penalty for disobedience, 23 a looming papal condemnation forced Albrecht to the bargaining table in August of 1482. The explosiveness of this confrontation makes clear the importance territorial rulers and bishops placed on securing the loyalty of the parish clergy, but its dramatic qualities should not obscure the fact that this competition was constant. As secular authorities worked to unify their jurisdictions and codify their laws, they were keen to use parish priests as a type of local official. This could include acting as the secular authorities’ mouthpiece. In 1479 the city council of Nuremberg, for example, ordered priests in the city and hinterland to read publicly the new codification of the city’s laws from an edition printed by Anton Koberger.24 In Weissenburg, the city council’s edicts were to be read in each parish church on Sundays and feast days. 25 The daily pressures applied to parish priests rarely appear in the correspondence of princes or bishops; they do, however, appear in Johannes Vogt’s visitation record. Avoiding direct confrontation with the relatively vigorous Johann III von Eich and Wilhelm von Reichenau, lords with territorial aspirations had been applying quiet pressure to parish priests in order to redirect certain types of cases to their own courts. Numerous priests complained that they had been forbidden by various rulers or their officials from citing their subjects before ecclesiastical courts in cases involving debts to churches, tithe payments, census payments, or the execution of wills. Some- times this took the form of simple intimidation. One assistant priest in Schwabach reported a case to Vogt in which thieves from Schwabach stole cows from the parish priest of Wendelstein. The bishop excommunicated the thieves, but the margrave wrote to the prefect that he should intervene with Petrus Link, the parish priest in Schwabach, to ignore the excommunication. The words used by the margrave are unknown, but they were not interpreted as a request; if Link refused, “man solt ym durch das haus gen.”26 According to the complaints lodged with Vogt, however, most lords wanted to legitimize their claims through rights of patronage or relationships of protection. One typical method used by lay patrons was to demand that candidates for benefices take personal oaths, in which they promised to fulfill a variety of obligations. Many of these presentation oaths were used to solid- ify the ius praesentandi by requiring priests to reside personally in the parish and by forbidding priests to resign or exchange the benefice without the patron’s permission.27 An incumbent who acquired a better benefice could appoint a vicar to administer the less desirable holding and thereby circum- The Priest in the Parish, Diocese, and Territory 41 vent the patron’s right of presentation. Heinrich, the Marshal of Pappenheim, prevented this by requiring the rector in Nwendorf to promise that he would resign the benefice back into the hands of the marshal should he receive a richer one elsewhere.28 Other common stipulations were that the priest maintain the property of the benefice and administer the benefice according to custom. Although numerous priests swore to uphold custom, neither they nor Vogt ever specify what this means. Helmut Neumaier, who has studied the oaths demanded by the counts of Hohenlohe and the Margrave Albrecht Achilles, has concluded that administering a church “according to custom” often meant not citing the lord’s subjects before an ecclesiastical court. 29 The oath elicited from Johannes Heiden upon his presentation as rector of Dies- peck a. d. Aisch is typical:

I, Johannes Heiden, promise and swear to the illustrious noble prince, my gracious lord the Margrave Albrecht of Brandenburg, Elector, to be faithful and true to his grace, his heirs, and his lordship, to promote their advantage and avert their injury, faithfully to pray for them and the founders both living and dead, faithfully to guard the parish of Dieβpeck, never to allow anything to be taken away from it, and in those things to which his grace and the lordship are entitled neither to make nor plan any novelties. If I should somehow become involved in disagreement with those who belong to my said gracious lord and the lordship, I shall leave secular matters to my gracious lord or his authority and no longer cite his poor subjects before the ecclesiastical court. I shall first bring cases that touch on marriage or heresy to his grace and lordship, before the matter comes before the ecclesiastical authorities, to see if the matter might be amicably reconciled so that the poor remain unburdened. I shall also personally have my residence in the parish and nowhere else without the knowledge and license of the lordship. Therefore I ask God and the holy Gospel to help me. In principia [sic] erat verbum et verbum erat apud eum [In the beginning was the Word and the Word was with Him]. 30

Albrecht legitimizes his jurisdictional claims with a concern for “the poor,” and further reinforces his position by assuming for himself the role of de- fending custom against any possible “innovations,” which the priest might introduce. “Innovations” here, however, clearly refer to citing the margrave’s subjects before ecclesiastical courts. 31 Vogt does not record in full any oath taken by the Eichstätt clergy, but scattered references suggest that the demands placed on Johannes Heiden were not unusual. The rector of Schwand swore to cite the subjects of the margrave only to the margrave’s court in Stauf in cases involving annual dues, while the rector of Trommetsheim complained that he was unable to cite his church’s delinquent debtors to Eichstätt, because his patron, the marshal of Pappenheim, forbade him to do so.32 42 Chapter 2

Some patrons went further and demanded the fidelity of their clergy. 33 Thomas Graff, a mass priest in Röckingen swore to Albrecht Achilles that “he would promote the advantage and interest of the lord margrave and pray God for him.”34 A previous rector of Eysölden had sworn fidelitas to the margrave.35 The rector of Wissing testified that:

When he was presented to his parish church in Wissing by the lord Duke Otto, he promised in the hands of the lord Otto that he would serve and relinquish that church according to old custom.36

The swearing into the duke’s hands is an unmistakable echoing of the feudal oath of fealty and is a sign of how these lay patrons aspired to see their clergy. These oaths created a legal relationship between the patron and candidate, one that implicitly gave the patron a right to oversee and judge the behavior of their clergy, a task which belonged solely to the bishop or his officials according to canon law. The goal of such oaths was to convert the priest into an official within an “uniform association of subjects.”37 A policy of demanding oaths from candidates to benefices converted the basic requirements of canon law (residency and chastity, for example) into feudal obligations and, in contrast to a territorial ordinance, allowed the patrons who demanded them to appear as the defenders of custom rather than as legislators. Lay patrons utilized presentation oaths to create ties of obedience and authority between themselves and their clerical clientele in order not only to safeguard their specific rights as patrons, but also to elicit pledges of fidelitas and to cut off the flow of cases to external courts. Patronage rights, however, were jealously guarded and not easy to accumulate.38 Of greater potential were claims based on notions of territorial sovereignty or individually created relationships of protection and subordina- tion with members of the clergy. Such claims could include the right to oversee the administration of church property, the right to collect various dues, and the regulation of access to ecclesiastical courts. According to the clergy interviewed by Vogt, lords or their officials exercised financial oversight over churches in their jurisdictions by requiring the wardens to read the annual accounts in their presence and by demanding that the wardens seek their consent before making important decisions, such as to whom they should lease church property.39 Nor did lords shrink from challenging the disciplinary apparatus built around the sacraments of confession and Communion; the margrave of Brandenburg-Ansbach, for example, ordered the rector in Schwabach to admit to Communion those who had rented lodgings to Jews.40 Others demanded that priests provide a variety of more or less customary dues and services. The most common demand was for hospitality for them- The Priest in the Parish, Diocese, and Territory 43 selves or their officials, most often during hunting parties or in exchange for guaranteeing the safety of the annual church fair. The rector of Gerolfing, for example, complained that he had to provide hospitality for Duke Georg of Bavaria’s fowlers and their hunting dogs or pay seventy pence.41 Georg von Abtsperg and his retinue of nineteen horses cost the vicar of Untermessing twelve schillings.42 On the feast of the dedication of the parish church in Ursheim, the heralds of the margrave Albrecht Achilles and assorted other officials took their lunch at the vicar’s expense.43 Lords justified these and similar demands by accepting priests into their personal protection, a service that inevitably came at a cost. Although expressly forbidden by a statute promulgated by Bishop Johann III von Eich in 1447, many clergy entered into relationships of protection in order to escape oppressive officials or sometimes even perceived threats from their own parishioners. Marcus Ostertag, the rector in Hüssingen, for example, sought the protection of the count of Öttingen after one of his parishioners shattered the windows of his house.44 Once entered into, these relationships were not easy to break and could become customary; several clergy report being forced to pay annual dues to lords (typically one gulden) because a predecessor had entered into their protection.45 Aspiring territorial lords forbade the clergy in their territories outright from citing their subjects before ecclesiastical courts in cases involving tithes, church property, and testaments. For example, Steffan Wernd cited the entire village of Pirkach to the prefect’s court in Holnstein in a case involving tithes because the prefect had forbidden him from taking the case to the episcopal court.46 A threatening letter from Duke Louis of Bavaria cowed Marquardus Michtner, the plebanus in Hilpoltstein, into dropping a case concerning tithes that he was pursuing before the ecclesiastical court in Eichstätt.47 The rector of Beuerberg, when asked why he had not cited his church’s debtors to Eichstätt, stated quite simply “[because] they are under the lordship of the lord margrave and his nobles.”48 In another case in which the Church of Our Lady in Eichstätt cited the peasants of Seuversholz before the ecclesiastical court in a matter concerning tithes, the knight Fritz Schenk von Geyern, acting on behalf of the peasants, countered by citing the canons of the church before the territorial court in Nuremberg. 49 Secular officials closely watched the priest in the pulpit as well. The preacher in Schwabach, Johann Steinbach, complained that

the jurisdiction of our lord most reverend bishop is wholly trodden under; for whenever he [Steinbach] has preached concerning spiritual jurisdiction, the prefect has come up to the preacher and said that he should cease preaching on this topic. Otherwise the lord margrave will complain. 50 44 Chapter 2

There were limits to these ambitions, however. Johann Widenhover, the plebanus in Talmässing, acquired a copy of the margrave of Brandenburg- Ansbach’s order to his judges in Talmässing to cease hearing cases on ecclesiastical matters and read out the order to his parishioners. 51 This example shows that even Albrecht Achilles did not advocate the complete abolition of church courts, but rather a redefinition of ecclesiastical jurisdiction to exclude such matters as tithes and testaments. Rather than issue programmatic statements, territorial lords sought to effect this redefinition through a combination of pressure and persuasion directed at parish priests.

THE PRIEST AS BUREAUCRAT

Ambitious territorial lords acting as ecclesiastical patrons were, however, but one of the nine devils faced by priests exercising the cure of souls. Priests had also to contend with the bishop, his officials, and the burdens of ecclesiastical administration. The history of the diocese of Eichstätt in the second half of the fifteenth century was characterized by the efforts of Bishop Jo- hann III von Eich (1445–1464) and Wilhelm von Reichenau (1464–1496) to reorganize and centralize the bishop’s secular authority in the principality as well as his ecclesiastical authority in the diocese. 52 These efforts included more intense oversight of the diocesan clergy. Johann, who published many of Basel’s reform decrees in the diocese, reinvigorated the practice of holding regular diocesan synods and in 1451, with the help of Nicholas of Cusa acting as papal legate, successfully asserted the validity of the diocesan statutes over the cathedral chapter and the clergy under its jurisdiction. 53 Against sometimes fierce resistance, he also imposed reforms on numerous monasteries and collegiate churches in the diocese, including Rebdorf, which he converted to a house of collegiate canons affiliated with the Windesheim reform movement.54 Aside from asserting his ultimate jurisdiction over even exempt monasteries and the papally privileged cathedral chapter, Johann also sought to improve regulation of the rural clergy. In 1458, he ordered a list drawn up of all the benefices and their patrons in the diocese. Numerous additions and corrections were made to the manuscript, and in 1480 Johannes Vogt began his interrogations at each church by verifying the information contained therein.55 Direct oversight of the clergy and the publication of episcopal mandates were the duties of the rural deans, of which there were ten in the fifteenth century.56 Although the rural deans had no legal jurisdiction over the clergy in their district, each was responsible for calling them together for once or twice yearly chapter meetings and for conducting regular visitations. 57 In the second half of the fifteenth century, the bishops began to express dissatisfaction with this system. In 1456 Johann ordered the rural deans to make both The Priest in the Parish, Diocese, and Territory 45 oral and written reports of the visitations of their districts and, in particular, to enforce the separation of priests from their concubines. Unhappy with the results, Johann appointed an episcopal visitor to investigate the rural deaneries in the following year.58 Wilhelm’s visitation of 1480 is itself further evidence for these centraliz- ing tendencies. Both lords and bishops needed reliable information in order to craft relevant legislation and intervene effectively in local affairs; visitations were one method of collecting this kind of information. 59 Rather than an isolated attempt to catalog the clergy of Eichstätt and their faults, the visitation was part of a concerted effort to reassert the central authority of the bishop against the particularizing tendencies of patronage and exemption. This can be seen most clearly in that each cleric was required to personally recognize the bishop’s jurisdiction by giving his testimony under oath. The fact that three clerics refused to testify under oath because the foundation charters of their benefices, so they claimed, specifically exempted them from episcopal oversight shows that this was no mere formality. 60 Johannes Vogt recorded in the visitation protocol the name of each cleric, where he was ordained, and the patron of his current benefice. He tested each cleric’s knowledge of the synodal statutes and sacramental formulas, interrogated him about his relationship with women and drink, asked about the reputation of neighboring clergy and the laity’s fulfillment of their religious obligations, and inspected the priest’s liturgical books, vestments and other cultic objects. Finally he fielded complaints from the laity against the cleric and from the cleric against his own parishioners or the local secular authorities. The increasing vigor and bureaucratization of the episcopal administration reached out to encompass the parish priest. In addition to managing their parishes and fulfilling their liturgical obligations, they also participated in a complicated administrative apparatus. Unfortunately, surviving evidence for this apparatus is scarce. Not only did the very routine nature of many of these administrative documents obviate the need for preservation, but most of the documents produced or kept by parish priests were of at most temporary value, losing all significance as priests either moved from one benefice to another or passed away. The routine nature of parish bureaucracy and the rapid obsolescence of the documents produced by it have combined to eliminate most traces.61 Nevertheless, a careful reading of episcopal legislation, the visitation record of 1480, and a few fortuitous survivals allow a reasonable reconstruction of priests’ bureaucratic responsibilities. Priests were expected to keep records of important documents such as proof of ordination and title (formatae) or a license if they had received ordination outside the diocese (litterae dimissoriales). Other documents, such as letters of presentation (litterae praesentationis), which each candidate for a benefice had to present to the bishop, were of more temporary value. 62 In 46 Chapter 2

1480 Vogt began his investigations by asking each priest to produce their formatae and, if applicable, their litterae dimissoriales. Most were able to do so, but some priests apparently preferred to store these important documents in neighboring towns or cities.63 No change to the structure of the parish could take place without the consent of the parish priest. The erection of a chapel, the endowment of an altar, the donation of funds to hire an assistant priest all required his consent, which was typically to be won with assurances that the arrangement would not lead to any diminution of his income. Consequently, the parish priest had to be present and often sign or seal the foundation letters of new benefices or further donations to already existing benefices. For example, in 1383 the parish priest in Weißenburg, Heinrich Sweppferman, consented to the donation of funds by Hans von Greding and his wife for the hiring of an assistant priest, while in 1426 his successor formally consented to the transfer of the chapel of St. Georg from the monastery of Wülzburg to the Teutonic Knights in Ellingen.64 Archives are filled with similar documents witnessed, signed, or sealed by parish priests. More than the generosity of donors and the willingness of the local priest, however, was necessary for the foundation of a new benefice. Each required episcopal confirmation in order to ensure that it possessed a sound financial basis and did no injury to already existing benefices or foundations. Confir- mation documents (litterae confirmationis) were issued by the episcopal chancery and were crucial records of both the responsibilities incumbent on the holder of the benefice as well as a record of their rights and incomes. Sometimes priests copied these, or at least the pertinent information from them, into their other books to ensure the preservation of at least a personal record of the contents. A mass priest in Roth, for example, copied the income pertaining to his benefice into his breviary in 1466. 65 There was value in spare copies. Johann Hayden, a mass priest in Wem- ding, accused the townspeople of seizing fields belonging to his benefice for the purpose of converting them to communal grazing land. During the visitation of 1480, he complained to Vogt that the townspeople and the prefect had seized his confirmation letter when he used it to prove his right to the fields.66 Similarly a mass priest in Wolffenbach blamed his low income (21 fl.) on his patron Heinrich de Freudenberg, who was refusing to answer him (respondere) regarding his letter of confirmation. 67 It is unclear whether this means Heinrich was ignoring Johann’s appeal to his confirmation letter or whether only Heinrich had a copy and was refusing to show it to Johann, but in either case the value to a priest of these letters is clear. In another example, the chaplain in Lotterbach complained to Vogt that according to documents that he possessed, he had the right to collect two pence from each of the vendors at the annual church fair. For the last three years, however, the bailiff The Priest in the Parish, Diocese, and Territory 47

(scultetus) in Neumarkt had usurped this right and claimed rights of advoca- cy over the chapel for himself.68 The fact that most references to the employment of documents in the defense of a cleric’s rights are examples of failure might lead one to conclude that these pieces of paper were of no ultimate consequence. Vogt, however, was explicitly collecting his clergy’s grievances; priests would have been less likely to mention successful appeals. The willingness of some clergy to aggressively pursue their rights in secular courts suggests that they were not always fated to lose. Ulrich Egelwanger, the rector in Feucht, went to the Duke of Bavaria’s court after a series of battles with the city council of Nuremberg and accused it of not recognizing the rights that his predecessors had enjoyed. To prove his case he took along “certas litteras ecclesiae,” most likely a foundation charter or episcopal confirmation, which he was careful not to allow out of his possession for long.69 Parish priests also had significant responsibilities with regard to the judicial system. Since the end of the fourteenth century, the ecclesiastical court in Eichstätt had addressed official judgments to the priest of the community where the accused lived or in which the area of the dispute lay and expected the priest to read the judgment from the pulpit in order to inform the community of its decisions.70 If the dispute involved two ecclesiastical institutions battling over the tithe, the priest was responsible for reading the court’s judgment to the people and informing them where to pay their tithes. Priests had as well to issue court citations to the accused and write back to the court in their own hand that they had done so.71 A common method of ensuring that priests had received ordinances was to have the priest sign the back of the document before forwarding it on to the next town or village. 72 Synodal statutes emphasized the responsibility of priests to report all offences against the faith to the bishop, general vicar, or penitentiary. 73 Many laypersons, particularly in small towns and villages, probably turned to the parish priest for help in communicating with central authorities. 74 To alleviate the rigor of canon law for the benefit of certain individuals, bishops and popes issued dispensations for everything from the disadvan- tages of illegitimate birth to canonical impediments to marriage. Licenses, on the other hand, allowed individuals or groups to engage in certain normally proscribed activities. Priests had the responsibility to inspect and verify the authenticity of any licenses or dispensations that their parishioners claimed to possess. The vicar in Lengenfeld, Leonhard Schmidhammer, for example, informed Vogt that a man in his parish had married a second time although his previous wife might possibly still be alive. The man claimed to have gone to Eichstätt to receive permission to marry, but failed to produce the necessary document (litteras tolleranciae). 75 The chaplain in Lutzmannstein reported to Vogt that he knew of a couple who had married despite a relation- 48 Chapter 2 ship in the fourth degree, but had to admit his failure to determine whether or not they had the necessary letters of dispensation. 76 Another example of a widespread type of dispensation is provided by Johannes Wiedemann, who pasted a printed notice of a papal dispensation into his copy of an abbreviation of the Liber Sextus and Clementina, two collections of papal decretals. Available to any parishioner of a church in Ingolstadt, the dispensation permitted the consumption of dairy products during Lent. Anyone who wanted the dispensation should pay the cost of one day’s worth of food to the Church of Our Lady in Ingolstadt. Ultimately the church was to receive three-fourths of the proceeds, while the remaining fourth was to be sent to Rome. Although this dispensation did not directly benefit Wiedemann’s own parish church, his parishioners would have been eligible recipients.77 Stephan May recorded two similar Lenten dispensations for Hilpoltstein and Jarsdorf in his parish register. 78 Whenever the bishop wished to add the weight of his authority to the claims or activities outlined in a document presented by a petitioner, he could issue a Vidimus. These informed the reader of the bishop’s approval of the original document’s contents. Like confirmation letters, these could become the focal point of disputes. For example, Johann Adorff, the rector of the Church of Our Lady in Ingolstadt as well as doctor in theology and rector of the University of Ingolstadt, complained to Vogt that the Franciscans were exceeding the rights contained in their episcopal Vidimus by performing burials for a group of local beguines.79 Normally mendicant friars would have been forbidden from performing burials without the rector’s permission. The trade in indulgences is one aspect of late medieval piety that is seen by some scholars as an important factor in the outbreak of the Reformation. Originally only available to those who performed difficult services for the Church, such as by going on crusade, indulgences proliferated in the later Middle Ages and could be had by observing certain liturgical ceremonies, worshipping at a particular saint’s shrine, or donating money to churches. Although technically only valid for those who had contritely confessed to their parish priest, it is open to question whether the laity generally understood the theological fine points.80 This could at least be said of one parishioner in Alfeld who declared publicly in the tavern that he need not confess to his priest because was going to buy absolution in Eichstätt.81 Parish churches in the later Middle Ages aggressively sought indulgences to promote local cults and raise funds for the repair, expansion, or replacement of the church itself. Documentation of these locally available indulgences would have been useful both as reminder to the priest, whose job it was to announce the church’s indulgences at the appropriate times, and as a record of the proper way that the funds were to be divided. According to his parish register, Stefan Aigner announced his church’s indulgences on the The Priest in the Parish, Diocese, and Territory 49 feast of Corpus Christi. Peter Hernsperger, the parish priest in Hitzhoven in 1480, copied indulgences available on this feast into a pastoral miscellany. 82 Churches, monastic orders, or charitable foundations, however, could also send out indulgence hawkers in order to raise money far from home. Such a system was of course open to fraud. Bishops tried to reduce the fleecing of their flocks by requiring indulgence hawkers to receive written permission from the bishop. Parish priests were not to allow any indulgence hawker to preach or collect money in their churches without first verifying the authenticity of their licenses.83 When certain unspecified hawkers arrived in Treuchtlingen with letters of approval sealed by local nobles and demanded that the curate there aid them, the priest refused and showed them the statute requiring that all collectors and indulgence hawkers first obtain an episcopal license.84 The administration of the sacraments of confession, the Eucharist, and marriage also generated a certain amount of record keeping, document production, and communication between priest and episcopal administration. The power of priests to absolve their parishioners from sins was limited by the reservation of certain, usually more serious, sins to the episcopal, or even papal, penitentiary. In an attempt to centralize the “administration of the conscience” in his diocese Johann III von Eich increased the number of reserved sins from fifteen to thirty-four.85 In doing so, Johann shifted the focus of reserved sins from sexuality (incest, bestiality, sodomy, and adultery) to the maintenance of canonical rules and regulations, especially concerning marriage, the sacraments, and the observance of interdicts. 86 Priests were expected to keep updated lists of reserved sins and, unless the penitent were on the point of death, send individuals guilty of the listed sins to the proper authorities for absolution. Those sent to the episcopal penitentiary for absolution were forbidden from receiving Communion unless they presented a written confirmation of their absolution to their priest. 87 It is likely that priests, particularly in the larger parishes, kept lists of those who either negligently failed to fulfill their Easter obligations or who were forbidden from doing so due to a sentence of excommunication. 88 Canon twenty-one of the Fourth Lateran Council required each Christian to confess and receive Communion from their own parish priest and no other.89 Parishioners could, however, request a written license from their priest to confess elsewhere. The very definition of administrative ephemera, these small slips of paper have only rarely survived. Two priests, however, Johannes Wiedemann and Peter Hernsperger, preserved the formularies that they used for just such licenses. Peter was the curate in Rauchstetten c.1464–1466, and later the curate in Hitzhofen in 1480.90 Peter copied confession formularies into a manuscript miscellany that included Johannes Auerbach’s popular pastoral handbook, the Directorium curatorum.91 An assistant priest in Bernstadt in 1476, Johannes Wiedemann became the rector 50 Chapter 2 of St. Walburg in Eichstätt c.1484, where he served until his death in 1517.92 Wiedemann’s surviving collection of two manuscripts and two printed works provide evidence for the extent and range of practical documents with which a priest needed to be familiar.93 Into the last folio of a collection of sermons by Johannes Herolt, Wiedemann copied a letter testifying that a traveling penitent had properly confessed to him, his parish priest, and was therefore eligible to receive Communion. 94 A second letter, dated 1476, testified that Wiedemann had confessed and communicated the bearer of the letter, who in this case was not a member of Wiedemann’s parish.95 A third letter testified that the bearer had confessed, but makes no mention of Communion. 96 Dur- ing the Jubilee in 1510 Wiedemann served as a papal penitentiary. For this event, he composed a further formula, now preserved on a slip of paper left loose between two folia of the manuscript, that could be used by the bearer to testify to their special confession and absolution. 97 Pilgrims had similar needs. To reassure the priests along their route that they were not excommunicates and were on a legitimate pilgrimage they needed written testimony.98 Without such testimony, pilgrims risked being denied the sacraments by scrupulous priests. Apparently Wiedemann was often approached for such testimony by men and women planning pilgrimages to Rome; he copied two drafts of letters that asked the rectors of parish churches to give the bearers aid and administer the sacraments to them if needed on their way to the holy city. 99 Marriage was another area that could lead to bureaucratic headaches for priests.100 Marriage in the Middle Ages did not require the ministration or even the presence of a priest, but rather consisted of a man and woman declaring their marriage to each other in the present tense (i.e. “I marry you”) or in the future tense (“I will marry you”) followed by intercourse.101 Never- theless the canon law on marriage was complex and priests were responsible for enforcing the rules both publicly and in the confessional. 102 Priests had to be careful not to permit marriages between individuals related by blood or marriage within the prohibited degrees or allow an individual who was already married or engaged to marry another. So-called secret marriages, those contracted in private and without prior notification of the priest, were valid sacramentally, but illicit in the eyes of the law and therefore susceptible to ecclesiastical penalties. Priests were to deny entrance to the church to any couple who contracted marriage in secret until they had presented letters patent documenting their absolution from the episcopal penitentiary. 103 Laypersons themselves were also concerned to acquire documentation to prove their eligibility for marriage and the legality of their unions. Wiede- mann preserved drafts of two such documents. In the first Wiedemann, as the rector of St. Walburg for the last twenty-three years, testified that the bearer, Georg Puch, was single, of legitimate birth, and unbound by any previous promise of matrimony.104 The second draft was for a letter documenting the The Priest in the Parish, Diocese, and Territory 51 legal marriage between Lienhart Ebner and Barbara, the daughter of Ulrich Grunberger, on 4 October 1502.105 Although the proper celebration of the Mass was always the parish priest’s primary duty, he was clearly responsible for much more. As an episcopal official he needed documentation of his status. As the holder of a benefice he needed documentation of his rights, incomes, and duties. As the bishop’s local representative he oversaw the functioning of the ecclesiastical courts and administration of the parish and channeled serious offenders to the episcopal capital through his powers in the confessional. The priest was the gatekeeper for penitents, pilgrims, and travelers who wanted to ensure their access to the sacraments or certify the fulfillment of their obligations. Each of these functions required familiarity with and the ability to produce an assortment of official documents as well as a basic knowledge of canon law. While a priest need not have possessed extensive theological or legal training, his professional duties would have led many communities and ecclesiastical patrons to put a premium on ensuring that individuals with sufficient qualifications were in charge of their parish churches. This was perhaps nowhere more true than when it came to the financial affairs of the parish church. In the fifteenth century, the bishops of Eichstätt attempted to establish more rigorous oversight of local financial conditions. Although the lay churchwardens were responsible for keeping track of incomes and expenses pertaining to the church fabric and to present their accounts to the community and parish priest once per year, Bishop Wilhelm stipulated further that the priest should take these accounts and submit a review in writing to the bishop’s general vicar concerning the church’s re- ceipts, expenditures, remaining funds, and outstanding debts. 106 Some communities, patrons, or territorial officials tried to exclude what they considered episcopal intrusion by excluding the priest from the annual reading of the churchwarden’s accounts.107

THE PRIEST IN THE PARISH

The reading of the parish accounts bring us finally to the position of the priest within the parish community. We have already seen that priests needed a facility with documents and a practical knowledge of the law to communicate effectively with lords and bishops; this was no less true in the priest’s dealings with the other “devils” that beset him—the churchwardens, his parishioners, and the assistant priests and sextons who worked with him in the parish church. In particular, the complex way in which parish priests were paid and taxed not infrequently brought them into conflict with churchwardens, lay officials responsible for maintaining the physical integrity of the church and managing the church’s accounts. 52 Chapter 2

Ideally, a parish priest’s income consisted of the usage rights to a small parcel of land, which he could either exploit himself or lease out, the tithe, fees for anniversary masses, oblations or customary offerings made during the Mass on Sundays and feast days, and stole fees, which priests collected for the administration of the sacraments and assorted other ceremonies such as churchings and burials. Tiffany Vann Sprecher has argued on the basis of archdiaconal court records in Paris that a veritable marketplace for sacramental services existed, one that helped priests make ends meet while giving laymen and women access to the pastoral care they needed. 108 Tithes were of two types, the large tithe on wood, grain, and wine and the small tithe on animals as well as garden and animal products. 109 Generally, the large tithe lay in the hands of ecclesiastical corporations or secular lords, leaving only the small tithe for the support of the priest. From this the priest had to subtract money due to the parochus verus, protection money demanded by local secular lords, and episcopal taxes. In 1447, Johann III von Eich stipulated that a simple benefice, one without cure of souls, should have a minimum income of thirty-six gulden per year and a benefice with the cure of souls forty-five. 110 During the visitation in 1480, however, Vogt considered thirty gulden to be a suitable income for a benefice. While many benefices did not reach this figure, thirty gulden does in fact turn out to be the approximate median income of the parish priests in the diocese, with the average at 28.5.111 By way of comparison, the papal curia exempted benefices with an annual income of less than twenty-four gulden from the burden of paying annates.112 It is not clear from the visitation record whether the incomes recorded by Vogt included income from oblations, stole fees, or anniversary masses,113 which altogether could equal 50 percent or more of a parish priest’s income.114 For example, the parish priest in Hilpoltstein, about whose financial status Vogt is silent, enjoyed an income of 150 to 160 gulden per year of which twenty came from the performance of liturgical services and thirty-two from oblations, not counting oblations in kind.115 Lay churchwardens administered the endowments belonging to the church fabric, kept a close eye on expenses, and maintained the condition of the nave and the church’s liturgical vestments and instruments.116 Church- wardens had to oversee the initial capital outlay as well as its subsequent investment, keep track of additional donations, and ensure that the relevant clergy were paid for their services at anniversary masses; priests, for their part, needed to ensure that they fulfilled all of their liturgical obligations and keep account of their income from their land, stole fees, oblations, and for their performance at masses, processions, and burials. In urban areas where each of several priests were responsible not only for the masses tied to their benefice, but also to a specific bundle of anniversary and memorial masses, and where oblations received at the various masses of the week had to be The Priest in the Parish, Diocese, and Territory 53 divided in defined ways, the financial and liturgical accounting could become complex. Although churchwardens were required by statute to present an account of the church fabric’s income and expenditures to the parish priest each year, some priests turned to keeping their own accounts of their rights, responsibilities, and incomes. Three such records survive from the diocese of Eichstätt for the period before the Reformation and suggest that priests, particularly in churches with complex liturgical obligations, turned toward written records to help with the day-to-day administration of their parishes. The oldest surviving register from Franconia was kept by Paul Gössel, the parish priest in Gebenbach near Amberg in the Oberpfalz, from 1419 to 1437, but the majority of the extant registers date from the late fifteenth and early sixteenth centuries. Most parish registers kept track of parish property, income, and liturgical obligations, but might also include information on the parish’s altars, filial churches, relics, indulgences, special feasts, liturgical instruments and books, donors and their anniversary masses, processions, pilgrimages, and brotherhoods, as well as copies of important documents. 117 Although not rare in Franconian archives, such registers survive in nothing like the quantities in which they must have once existed. Most must have consisted of a few pieces of unbound sheets of paper or parchment. Increas- ing numbers of masses and liturgical obligations necessitated constant updat- ing; once the additions to the old register became too numerous a new register would become necessary at which time the older one would have lost all its value. Registers kept in parishes that later became Protestant, a category into which about two-thirds of the parishes in the diocese of Eichstätt by 1560 fell, would similarly have lost their value as liturgical traditions were simplified and funds once earmarked for anniversary masses were converted to other purposes.118 Although they would have varied greatly in scope, most parish priests in the second half of the fifteenth and in the early sixteenth centuries would have maintained at least some kind of register, however modest. Vogt’s visitation record in fact provides evidence of at least one instance in which a register was handed down from one priest to his successor. The plebanus in Thannhausen, Magister Steffan Nockel, complained to Vogt that, whereas according to the register given to him by his predecessor he has the right to collect the small tithe, the episcopal tax collector had ordered the local prefect to collect the small tithe instead. As a result his income had fallen below the appropriate level. 119 Steffan’s complaint highlights the importance parish registers could play in providing a measure of institutional memory for the parish clergy. The earliest parish register to survive from the diocese of Eichstätt is a list of fifty anniversary masses to be celebrated in the parish church of Gunzen- hausen c.1451.120 The register recorded when and for whom the priest was to 54 Chapter 2 sing the masses as well as the amount to be paid to the various officiants involved in each. Dues in the form of money, wax, and chickens were owed to the parish church from individuals and property in Gunzenhausen and sixteen neighboring villages. Additions and corrections were still being made to the document as late as 1766.121 It is not clear whether the parish priest or the town scribe made and kept the register, but the parish clergy would certainly have either consulted it or kept a similar record of their own. 122 More detailed are the registers kept by Stefan Aigner, the rector of the parish church in Pappenheim, and Stephan May, the vicar of the parish church in Hilpoltstein, in the first quarter of the sixteenth century. 123 Con- fronted with a thicket of incomes, expenses, and responsibilities, Aigner began his register in the very first year of his appointment with the title “1511 Register of the incomes and expenses and all other customs of the parish church in Pappenheim.”124 He did not have to construct his register completely from scratch, but was able to consult “an old register,” which recorded at least the tithes due to the parish. 125 The importance of such a record is shown not only by the numerous additions made by Aigner, but the fact that it formed the basis for a new parish register begun c.1579. 126 Ste- phan May, vicar in Hilpoltstein since 1505, began his register in 1511 as well and used it to track his income and the church’s liturgical responsibilities. Although prone to scribal errors and grammatical slips, May was familiar enough with canon law to make references to it in support of prevailing customs.127 Aigner began his register by listing his property and income, which included tithes on grain, livestock, and commercial income from Pappenheim and three outlying villages; fees for anniversary masses and memoria; oblations; one-tenth of the income collected for dispensations from the Lenten prohibition of dairy products; and one-third of the collections for indulgences. Tithes could be paid either in kind (for chickens, ducks, pigs, grains, fruits, and vegetables) or in cash (for calves, cows, or fawns); parishioners could choose to tithe on their geese and lambs in kind or cash at the rate of one penny per goose or three pennies per lamb.128 Anniversary masses were often endowed from the proceeds of specific parcels of property. A few examples should suffice to show the accounting nightmare that anniversary masses could become. Jorg Ledrer, who lived in a suburb of Pappenheim, owed eight pounds each year to the Saturday Salve, from which the rector was to pay his assistant and the schoolmaster sixty pennies each for their participation. 129 Each year Aigner also collected three pounds, 168 pennies, two hens or sixteen pennies, eight measures of grain, and eight measures of oats from two individuals in Burgsalach, with which he was to distribute four measures of grain to the poor as part of the celebration of Conrad Ellinger’s anniversary mass.130 In all the fourteen endowed The Priest in the Parish, Diocese, and Territory 55 masses mentioned by Aigner were supported by property lying in and around fifteen different villages.131 The parish clergy in Stephan May’s Hilpoltstein, on the other hand, were responsible for performing the services for 119 endowed anniversary masses, each of which consisted of a vigil, a procession, Office for the Dead, and a memorialization during the Mass.132 Neither this nor Aigner’s figure include the limited numbers of memorial masses paid for by individuals who could not afford to endow a perpetual anniversary. In fact, clergy had to be brought in from neighboring towns for eleven of the anniversaries in Hilpoltstein because they called for more than the nine resident priests. 133 Aigner and May also used their registers to record the duties and incomes of their assistant priest, schoolmaster, and sexton. In Pappenheim, the assistant priest was to receive seven gulden per year plus fifteen pennies at Pass- over, Pentecost, and Christmas; sixty-three pennies from the Salve; six pennies on the Marian feasts; four pennies on apostolic feasts; three pennies per baptism; a quarter measure of wine for each churching; six pennies for burial processions; twelve pennies for administering the last rights; six pennies for vigils of anniversary masses; thirty pennies for the month’s mind (a memorial mass celebrated thirty days after one’s death); as well as the “confession penny,” a fee collected by the confessor from each penitent. 134 The assistant priest in Hilpoltstein was responsible for administering extreme unction, for which he was paid eight pence if the sick person recovered and twelve pence if the sick person collected the full benefits of the rite by dying. 135 May listed the fees for burials with particular care. The rector was to receive seventy-two pence for the burial and memorial mass, while the procession generated eight pence for the rector and four pence each for the assistant priest and schoolmaster. The blessing brought the rector thirty pence and the assistant priest fifteen. Nor did the sexton leave funerals empty handed; he collected ten to twelve pence for ringing the bells, fourteen pence for making the grave, fifteen pence for the blessing, and two pence for visiting the dying.136 In Pappenheim the register was also indispensable for ensuring the proper memorialization of the past and present members of the priests’ brotherhood.137 The brotherhood had originally been formed in gratitude for the right of free testament granted by the marshals of Pappenheim to seven of their parishes, including Pappenheim, in 1378, a right which was later expanded to include all their parishes in 1500. Aigner lists sixty-nine members of his patron’s family, as well as fifty-eight clerics from twelve different churches as members. On the Sunday following the feast of St. Michael, the clerical members of the brotherhood gathered to hold a vigil and Salve and process with candles to the charnel house, where they celebrated the Place- bo.138 56 Chapter 2

The largest section of both registers, however, details the parish’s liturgical customs for the important feasts of the year. The notices concentrate on the ceremonies of the Easter season, the feasts of the patron saints in both the parish church and its filial churches in neighboring villages, and the hospitality owed by and to the parish clergy. A few examples will show the heteroge- neity of the notes. In Pappenheim’s filial church in Osterdorf, a separate day was set aside during the Easter season for the confession of the old, infirm, and children, while in Pappenheim itself the youths (juvenes) confessed on Palm Sunday unless the feast of the Annunciation were to fall on the vigil of Palm Sunday. Aigner noted that he was to visit the school before these important ceremonies and evaluate the students’ preparedness for their liturgical duties and the reception of the sacrament. 139 At the hour of Christ’s Passion, the assistant priest was to make an exhortation to the people. 140 On Easter Sunday twenty-two men of Geren and sixteen of Gaisloch came to have their fields blessed, and Aigner was to distribute among them six to seven roasts, eight cakes, eighty eggs, and two cheeses. 141 The dues and fees owed to the rector and his assistants as well as the hospitality owed to and by them were expressive of more than mere sources of income and expenditure; they also defined power relations and rendered questions of jurisdiction and authority in tangible form. Missales, for example, were small contributions due from each head of household as a sign of membership in the parish.142 This aspect of the registers is best shown, however, in the relationship between the canons and parish priest in Hilpoltstein. Over the course of two separate donations, the family of the former patron of the parish church in Hilpoltstein, Hippolyte von Stein, had endowed six benefices to support clerics whose primary duty would be to celebrate masses for the souls of the von Steins. The founders placed the six canons under the jurisdiction of the parish priest, to whom the canons had to swear oaths of obedience and deference. The canons had to turn over to him one quarter of all received alms, follow his weekly liturgical instructions, and confess their sins to him.143 In the parish register, May noted that the canons owed him a roll of bread and two hens at Christmas as a sign that they were “subject to the authority of the rector and ought to show him every reverence and kindness.”144 The assumption that the expected reverence and kindness were not always on display seems a safe one. The feast of Corpus Christi in Pappenheim received extensive treatment for the same reason. On the eve of the feast, the rector in Pappenheim was to hold a meal for the two lead singers and the four lay bearers of the Eucharis- tic canopy, while the churchwardens were to give the rector four measures of wine. After the singing of the offices in the parish church and in the chapel on the day of the feast itself, there was to be a procession during which the rector read the first gospel reading, his assistants the second, and representatives of the Augustinian hermits the third and fourth. Mass was to be cele- The Priest in the Parish, Diocese, and Territory 57 brated first in the monastery and then in the parish church followed by the proclamation of indulgences. Aigner notes that previously there had been strife between the rector of the parish church and the monastery over prece- dence in the Corpus Christi procession, but that Caspar Marschalk, a canon in the cathedral of Eichstätt and a relative of the marshals of Pappenheim, had decided in favor of the rector; the order was to be students, chaplains, monks, the prior of the monastery with his two assistants, and finally the rector with his two assistants and candle bearers. 145 Aigner and May were responsible not only for their own actions, but also for those of their various assistants. In order to better hold these men ac- countable, both men copied the customs (consuetudines) regarding the behavior and duties of the sexton, schoolmaster, and assistant priest into their registers.146 Aigner, for example, recorded that his assistant priest should not be a “gambler, frequenter of taverns, or a drunkard,” should not enter or exit the house without Aigner’s knowledge, should not bring “suspect women” into his home, should obey Aigner’s will in all spiritual matters, and submit himself patiently to correction. 147 In Hilpoltstein, May recorded the vicar’s or rector’s right to examine the assistant in knowledge, moral fiber, singing, and the performance of liturgical services. Additionally the assistant, as in Pappenheim, had to promise fidelity, obedience, and reverence to the rector or his vicar.148 Parish registers, therefore, recorded not only incomes, but also the priest’s conception of the proper ordering of relations within the parish. Responding to the demands of their job, priests used written notices to help maintain their rights and incomes, ensure the proper performance of the liturgical and memorial responsibilities with which they had been entrusted, and ward off the devilish torments of their parishioners and assistants. Just as lords in the fifteenth century increasingly turned toward written records to better control relations with their peasants, so rectors and vicars used parish registers to maintain their rights and incomes and regulate relations between themselves and the ever-growing number of altarists and assistants. In the fifteenth-century parish, literacy, record keeping, facility with documents, practical knowledge of the law, and the ability to negotiate the demands of bishop and lord were skills indispensable for the parish priest. Patrons exercised their rights carefully and hopeful candidates collected letters of recommendation from princes, bishops, nobles, and respected members of the community.149 Patrons and communities, who had a vested interest in the financial viability of the parish and the correct performance of anniversary masses and liturgical celebrations, as well as territorial lords and bishops, who expected the priest to perform administrative functions, would have had incentives to ensure that their parishes, especially the urban ones, were staffed with competent, if not necessarily pious, men. Priests themselves, pressured on all sides by their nine devils, would have keenly felt 58 Chapter 2 their deficiencies. None of these duties would have required the knowledge and skills of the scholar, but would have nevertheless presupposed a basic education in both German and Latin. In the following chapter, we will turn to look at how priests put that education to use in the collection and consumption of books and manuscripts.

NOTES

1. The foundation for all such discussions is Suttner, Schematismus. Using Suttner’s work, Franz Xaver Buchner compiled the patronage rights in the diocese in “Kirchliche Zustände,” 182–89. All future references to this article will be from the more accessible reprinted edition. 2. Willibald Plöchl defined the right of presentation as “ein Vorschlagsrecht an den sonst zuständigen kirchlichen Oberen, die Verleihung an einen bestimmten Kandidaten vorzuneh- men,” Geschichte des Kirchenrechts, 2:201. 3. An excellent discussion of the rights of patrons can be found in Sieglerschmidt, Territor- ialstaat und Kirchenregiment, here 54. 4. Limitations placed on papal reservations by the fifteenth-century reform councils ensured that these had little impact at the parish level; see Plöchl, Geschichte des Kirchenrechts, 2:203. For a list of patrons in the diocese, see Buchner, “Kirchliche Zustände,” 182–88. The distribution of patronage rights in the diocese of Eichstätt was not unusual. Of the c.1800 parish benefices in the diocese of Würzburg at the beginning of the sixteenth century, the bishop had patronage rights over 10 percent of the benefices, collegiate foundations and monasteries over 40 percent, while rights to the other 50 percent were divided among nobles, hospitals, and universities. In the diocese of Bamberg, the bishop held about 20 percent of patronage rights in the diocese, while 20 percent remained in the hands of the nobility; see Machilek, “Schwaben und Franken,” 499–501. 5. Sieglerschmidt, Territorialstaat und Kirchenregiment, 110. 6. Arend, “Kleriker auf Pfründensuche,” 549. 7. Plöchl, Geschichte des Kirchenrechts, 2:419; Sieglerschmidt, Territorialstaat und Kir- chenregiment, 54, 92–98. 8. Plöchl, Geschichte des Kirchenrechts, 2:418. By 1480 the nearly 700 benefices in the diocese of Eichstätt were apportioned among 119 different patrons; Buchner, “Kirchliche Zustände,” 182–89. 9. See Suttner, Schematismus, 52–53, 78. In general cities found it much easier to acquire patronage rights over mass benefices and altars than entire parishes; even Nuremberg did not acquire control over all the benefices in the city until 1514. See Machilek, “Schwaben und Franken,” 514–15. 10. The “inflationary” trends in late medieval piety have received enormous attention by scholars, not least because attempts to account for the later Reformation have felt the need to explain the apparent popularity of many late medieval religious practices. See Southern, West- ern Society and the Church, 133–69; Ozment, The Reformation in the Cities, 15–46; and Bernd Moeller, “Piety in Germany around 1500.” For an overview and citations of further literature, see Meuthen, Das 15. Jahrhundert, 80–84, 166–69. 11. See Suttner, Schematismus, viii, 36–37, 52–53, 81–82. The clergy in the parish churches of St. Sebald and St. Lorenz in Nuremberg were so numerous they issued statutes to regulate duties and behavior; see Karl Schlemmer, Gottesdienst und Frömmigkeit, 28, 95. 12. In 1434 bishop Albert of Hohenrechberg demanded that rectors who for legitimate reasons were unable to live in their parishes “idoneos vicarios substituant, qui regimen animarum et alia onera incumbentia salubrius et utilius expediant, maxime tales, qui officium praedicationis verbi divini frequentius et studiosius verbo pariter et exemplo valeant et possint exercere.” The text can be found in Suttner, “Nachträge zur Conciliengeschichte,” 195. On absenteeism due to university study, see Boyle, “Aspects of Clerical Education,” 19–32. The Priest in the Parish, Diocese, and Territory 59

13. Seen most clearly in Bishop Johann III von Eich’s attempt in 1447 to legislate an appropriate congrua portio. Suttner, “Versuch einer Conciliengeschichte,” 120; Buchner, “Kirchliche Zustände,” 110. 14. For treatment of the legal standing of altarists, chaplains, and assistant priests see Plöchl, Geschichte des Kirchenrechts, 2:163–73. 15. Of the 129 parishes in which a rector was resident, however, three were being run by a provisor because the rector was either ill or old. 16. Buchner, “Kirchliche Zustände,” 103. This last figure does not include the vicars of 36 newly founded and as yet unconfirmed benefices because these could not have a rector until after confirmation by the bishop. Rates of absenteeism and pluralism varied widely. According to Johannes Vincke, of 266 benefices listed in a tithe register for the diocese of Osnabrück from 1456 to 1458, 193 were held singly, twenty clerics held two benefices, six clerics held three benefices, one had four benefices, and one had five. In the diocese of Bremen only twenty-three of 100 named vicars had a second benefice, while pluralism was much more common in the diocese of Worms. See Vincke, Der Klerus des Bistums Osnabrück, 102–3. 17. On the shift of power from empire to the territories and cities, see Moraw, Von offener Verfassung; and Meuthen, Das 15. Jahrhundert, 27–73, 141–59. 18. On calls for church reform see Rummel, “Voices of Reform,” 61–92, and the sources collected by Strauss in Manisfestations of Discontent. The literature on the Kirchenpolitik of the imperial princes is too large to cite fully. Foundational is Hashagen, Staat und Kirche; also important are Schulze, Fürsten und Reformation; Rankl, Das vorreformatorische landesherrliche Kirchenregiment; Lossen, Staat und Kirche in der Pfalz; Ingelfinger, Die religiös-kirchlichen Verhältnisse; Stievermann, Landesherrschaft und Klosterwesen; Bünz and Volkmar, “Das landesherrliche Kirchenregiment,” 89–109; Smith, Reformation and the German Territorial State; Volkmar, “Die Pfarrei im Blickfeld der Obrigkeit,” 97–130. 19. Smith, Reformation and the German Territorial State, 49–57. 20. This account of the dispute is dependent on Engel, “Passio dominorum,” 265–316. See also the introduction and relevant letters included in Priebatsch, Politische Correspondenz. 21. Engel, “Passio dominorum,” 271. 22. Smith, Reformation and the German Territorial State, 48. 23. The bishop of Würzburg had two broadsheets printed, which forbade his clergy to pay the crusade tax to Albrecht; Engel, “Passio dominorum,” 294. 24. Du Boulay, Germany in the Later Middle Ages, 89. 25. DE, B230, fol. 133r. 26. Ibid., fol. 96r. 27. Gillman, “Die Resignation der Benefizien.” 28. “Dicit se dedisse fidem loco juramenti velle tenere et conservare ecclesiam ea forma, qua eam reperisset juxta antiquam consuetudinem introductam et dum eum contingeret adipisci pinguius beneficium ipsam ecclesiam velle resignare in manus eorum;” DE, B230, fol. 140v. 29. Neumaier, “Territorium und ius circa sacra,” 25, n. 85. 30. “Ich, Johannes Heiden, glob und swere dem durchlauchtigen hochgebornnen fursten, menem gnedigen hern marggraven Albrechten zu Branndenburg, kurfursten, und seiner gnaden und erben und herschaft getrew und gewer zu sein, iren fromen zu werben, iren schaden zu warnen, fur sie und die stifter, lebendig und tod, getrewlich zu bitten, der pfarr zu Dieβpeck auch getrewlich vor zu sein, ir nichtz entzihen zu lassen, auch den, so seinen gnaden und der herschaft zusteen, kein newerung zu machen oder furzunemen. Ob ich auch mit den, die dem genannten meinem gnedigen hern und der herschaft zuständing, icht irrig wurde, soll ich mich den genannten, mein gnedigen her oder seiner gwalt, was die welltlichkeit berurt, entsthanden und dabey bleyben lassen und die armen mit geistlichem gericht nicht ferner antzihen. Was aber ee oder ketzerey antreff, da soll und will ich seinen gnaden und der herschaft zuvor anbringen, ee es an die obern geistlichkeit gelangt, ob das gutlich beygelegt werden mag, damit die armen onbeswerdt beleyben. Ich soll und will auch personlich auff der pfarr mein wonung haben und sonnst nynndert, es geschee dann mit wissen und erlaub der herrschaft. Also bitt ich, mir Gott zu helffen und die Heiligen Ewangelia. In principia [sic] erat verbum et verbum erat apud eum;” in Neumaier, “Territorium und ius circa sacra,” 24–25. 31. Ibid., 25, n. 85. 60 Chapter 2

32. DE, B230, fol. 94r, 144v. Priceless in identifying place names mentioned in the visitation record is Michael Bacherler, “Die Siedlungsnamen des Bistums Eichstätt,” III-VI, 1–106. 33. A direct violation of the canon Nimis from the Fourth Lateran Council, which forbade oaths of fidelity to secular authorities; see Plöchl, Geschichte des Kirchenrechts, 2:191. 34. DE, B230, fol. 111r. 35. Ibid., fol. 80v. 36. Ibid., fol. 25v. 37. “Der Geistliche als gräflicher Beamter innerhalb eines zu schaffenden einheitlichen Untertanenverbandes;” Neumaier, “Territorium und ius circa sacra,” 34. 38. The Count Palatine, for example, possessed patronage rights over thirty-five parishes, sixty-six low-masses and chapels, and nineteen canonries, while in the diocese of Worms alone ecclesiastical persons and institutions held rights to over 270 parishes and chapels and other noble families had rights to ninety-six; see Lossen, Staat und Kirche, 98–100. 39. Some examples are Pollanten (DE, B230, fol. 31r), Berngau (fol. 52r), and Kürmreuth (fol. 60r). 40. Ibid., fol. 96v. 41. Ibid., fol. 6v. 42. Ibid., fol. 80r. 43. Ibid., fol. 116r. 44. Ibid., fol. 117a. 45. Ibid., fol. 119r and fol. 127v for two examples. 46. Ibid., fol. 35r. 47. “Non patitur aliquod gravamen nisi illud passus est, cum in consistoris Eystetensis occasione decimae moveret actionem super decima, dominus dux Ludovicus scripsit ipsi plebano, ut desisteret ab actione, quod et fecit;” ibid., fol. 70v. 48. Ibid., fol. 110r. For an overview of all the claims made by lay patrons and lords see Buchner, “Kirchliche Zustände,” 142–52. Nor were lords in the diocese of Eichstätt exception- al. Wilhelm III, landgrave of Thüringen, strove to prevent his priests from receiving or trans- mitting documents from ecclesiastical courts concerning secular matters; see Schulze, Fürsten und Reformation, 53. 49. Buchholz-Johanek, Geistliche Richter, 120–21. 50. “Item dicit quod timeat quod iurisdictio domini nostri Reverendissimi omnino suppedi- tur; nam cum praedicasset de iurisdictione spirituali, praefectus ad ipsum praedicatorem, ut amplius in sermone suo a praemissis desisteret, alioquin dominus Marchioni velit conqueri;” DE, B230, fol. 96r. 51. “Dominus Marchionis inhibuit rusticis sive assessoribus judicii Talmessing, ne ulterius sentencient super bonis et rebus ecclesiasticis et has litteras ipse plebanus eis legerit et id intenderit facere;” ibid., fol. 87r. 52. For both bishops see Wendehorst, Das Bistum Eichstätt, 1:202–41; Sax, Die Bischöfe, 302–58; Sax, Geschichte des Hochstiftes, 182–215; Gatz, ed., Die Bischöfe des Heiligen Römischen Reiches, 173–74, 575–76; for Eich see Buchner, Johann III. 53. The chapter appealed to Rome, but in a bull dated 27 September 1452, Nicholas V confirmed Cusa’s decision; Bruggaier, Die Wahlkapitulationen, 40–42. For the reception of Basel’s decrees in the diocese and Johann’s synodal activity, see Ernst Reiter, “Rezeption und Beachtung,” 215–32. Older but still useful is Suttner, “Versuch einer Conciliengeschichte,” 104–58. 54. The fullest account of Johann’s efforts to reform the monasteries and collegiate churches in the diocese, with editions of selected sources, is Buchner, Johann III, 12–31, 49–134; see also Suttner, “Versuch einer Conciliengeschichte,” 158–64. Joseph Schlecht describes a failed effort to prevent Rebdorf’s transfer to the Windesheim Congregation in “Hieronymous Roten- peck,” 65–101. A long document by Johann Götz regarding the reform of St. Walburg is edited in Pastoralblatt des Bistums Eichstätt 33 (1886): 96–111. 55. The register can be found under signature lm2 in the Diözesanarchiv Eichstätt. In Heng, Vogt recorded, “Ecclesia filialis, quamvis in registro habeatur quod sit parochialis ecclesia;” DE, B230, fol. 52v. The 1458 register records the church in Heng as a filial church, so Vogt must have had a more recent, and in this case erroneous, copy. The Priest in the Parish, Diocese, and Territory 61

56. The register of benefices from 1458 is the first source to name the deaneries, which were Neumarkt, Berching, Ingolstadt, Monheim, Wassertrüdingen, Eschenbach, Altdorf, Hilpolt- stein, Weiβenburg, and Gunzenhausen. The clergy in the city of Eichstätt and a few nearby parishes stood under the direct jurisdiction of the cathedral chapter and therefore did not belong to any of the ten deaneries; see J. B. Götz, “Beiträge zur Geschichte der Kapitelsorganisation.” 57. See canon 32 from the 1447 diocesan synod; in Suttner, “Versuch einer Concilienges- chichte,” 122; Buchholz-Johanek, Geistliche Richter, 146, 151–61. 58. Buchner, Johann III, 10; Reiter, “Rezeption und Beachtung,” 228–29. 59. Schnabel-Schüle, “Kirchenvisitation und Landesvisitation,” 173–86. 60. These were the vicar and two assistant priests in Altdorf; DE, B230, fol. 55r-v. 61. Hlaváček, “Zum Urkunden- und Geschäftsgut,” 242–55. Priests would of course have needed seals in order to conduct much of this business, but these have rarely survived. Enno Bünz and Petr Kubín discuss one in “Sigillum Petri plebani de Glathovia,” 35–45. Johannes Molitoris, the rector of St. Moritz in Augsburg from 1460/66–1482 had two seals, one for the parish and one for the business conducted as Johannes Spengler’s official representative on behalf of a Rosary brotherhood; Ruf, “Der Augsburger Pfarrer Molitoris und sein Holzschnitt- siegel,” 387–406. 62. The plebanus in Wissing assured Vogt that although he did swear an oath to his patron that he would serve the church according to custom, he paid nothing for the benefice except a fee to the chancery for his litterae praesentationis; DE, B230 fol. 25v. 63. To choose one example out of many, the assistant priest in Gerolfing told Vogt that his formatae were in nearby Ingolstadt; ibid., fol. 6v. 64. Leidel, Die Pfarreien des Klosters Wülzburg, 70, 76. 65. UE Cod. st 460, fol. 1r; Keller, Die mittelalterlichen Handschriften, 2:292–93. Johann Sibentaill, a mass priest in Erkertshofen, copied the foundation charter of his benefice, dated 1480, into his breviary in 1528; see UE Cod. st 373, fols. 301r-307r and Keller, Die mittelalterlichen Handschriften, 2:132. 66. “Dominus Iohannes Hayden primissarius ibidem juratus dicit se ordinatum in Eysteten- sis et deinde de licentia sui episcopi eystetensis constantiae ad titulum dictae suae primariae. Habet singulis annis quolibet anno circa xxxii fl. nam opidani opidi Wemding agros primariae converterunt in pascua communitatis. Et litteras confirmationis, quas eis vel praefecto tantum ad videndum ostendit, vi retinent nolentes sibi restituere;” DE, B230, fol. 145v. 67. “Dicit quod singulis computatis fructibus habeat xxii fl. et nescit, cuius culpa evenerit, sed estimat evenire ex culpa nobilis sui, qui recusat sibi respondere litteras confirmationis;” ibid., fol. 51r. 68. “Dicit quod ipsi primarius habeat autenticas litteras, quod possit recipere Kirchentag- recht et fuerint in possessione pacifica. Ipse primissarius et antecessores sui ad xxxiii percipien- di Kirchentagrecht videlicet a quolibet institore ii denarii et ipse primissarius sit advocatus capellae sive ecclesiae in Lotterpach. Itaque acciderit, quod scultetus in Novoforo inhibuit ipsi plebano, ne ulterius acciperet huiusmodi jura, volens uti juribus suis idem scultetus sibi va- nas(?) et nunc ad iii annos etiam recepit huiusmodi jura;” ibid., fol. 50v. 69. “Dicit quod conquestus sit domino duci de consulibus opidi Nurinberg, quod nolint eum dimittere permanere in juribus suis, quibus antecessores suos dimiserint, et ostenderit eidem certas litteras ecclesiae, quas sibi restituit et eas in sua potestate habeat;” ibid., fol. 68r-v. 70. Buchholz-Johanek, Geistliche Richter, 127–28. 71. Ibid., 130. 72. Enno Bünz discusses an example of this practice in “Ein Dithmarscher Pfarrherr um 1500,” 25; and in “Zwischen Kirchspiel und Domkapitel,” 261–62. On the practice in general see Bünz, “‘Die Kirche im Dorf lassen . . .’,” 102–7. 73. Buchholz-Johanek, Geistliche Richter, 146; see canon de matrimonio from the diocesan synod of 1447 in Schannat and Hartzheim, Concilia Germaniae, 5:368. 74. Heidingsfelder, Die Zustände im Hochstift Eichstätt, 45. 75. “Dicit quod Johannes Puchner contraxerit matrimonium cum quadam, quamvis priorem habeat uxorem forte adhuc viventem et quamvis assert se fuisse cum ea in Eystetensis, nullas tamen litteras tolleranciae produxerit;” DE, B230, fol. 38r. 62 Chapter 2

76. “Dicit quod Iohannes Durss(?) et Anna Zwererin contraxerint matrimonium et sint con- juncti in quarto gradu consanguinitatis; nescit an habeant litteras dispensationis annon;” ibid., fol. 44r. 77. Hubay, Incunabula Eichstätter Bibliotheken, #649–51. 78. Götz, Das Pfarrbuch des Stephan May, 145. 79. “Dicit quod . . . [illegible] monasterii ordinis Minorum intromittat se de administrando sacramenti Eucharistiae certis beginis numero xviii, quae sunt de tertia regula sancti Francisci, et sepeliat eos, praeter id quod obtinuerit litteras Vidimus a domino nostro Reverendissimo;” DE, B230, fol. 150v. 80. On the use of indulgences to reward crusaders, see Maureen Purcell, Papal Crusading Policy; on indulgences more generally, see R. N. Swanson, Indulgences in Late Medieval England; Henry Charles Lea, A History of Auricular Confession and Indulgences in the Latin Church, and Paulus, Geschichte des Ablasses im Mittelalter, translated by J. E. Ross as Indul- gences as a Social Factor in the Middle Ages. 81. DE, B230, fol. 57a. 82. Schornbaum and Kraft, “Pappenheim am Ausgang des Mittelalters,” 211; Ansbach Ms. lat. 40, fol. 63v. The catalog entry is available in Keller, Katalog der lateinischen Handschrif- ten. 83. Johann III von Eich targeted in particular those who bypassed the bishop and sought permission from secular authorities: “Quaestores praedictos cum litteris quorumcunque principum saecularium aut nobilium, civitatum aut communitatum absque litteris nostris nequaquam admittatis;” in Suttner, “Nachträge zur Conciliengeschichte,” 200. 84. Dicit quod quamplures nuntii cum litteris nobilium venientes ad plebanum institerunt, ut negotium eorum promoveret, qui recusavit. Tum visis litteris domini nostri Reverendissimi, idem nuntii responderunt, quod ille et ille plebanus promovisset praeter litteras domini nostri Reverendissimi;” DE, B230, fol. 131v. 85. Here I have adapted Ludwig Schmugge’s apt phrase, “Zentrale für die Verwaltung des Gewissens,” made in reference to the papal Penitentiary; Schmugge, ed., Repertorium Poeni- tentiariae Germanicum, 4:xi. 86. Suttner, “Versuch einer Conciliengeschichte,” 116; Buchholz-Johanek, Geistliche Rich- ter, 154–55. 87. This regulation was the thirteenth of Johann III von Eich’s Fourteen Articles; in Suttner, “Versuch einer Conciliengeschichte,” 152. 88. Hlaváček believes priests in Bohemia were already doing this in the fourteenth century; see “Zum Urkunden- und Geschäftsgut,” 253. 89. The decree can be found translated in Tanner, ed., Decrees of the Ecumenical Councils, 1:245. 90. Suttner, Schematismus der Geistlichkeit, 36; DE, B230, fol. 11v. 91. Ansbach Ms. lat. 40, fols. 92r-93r. Catalog entry available in Keller, Katalog der lateinischen Handschriften, 1:128. 92. What little is known about Wiedemann comes directly from his books; see also Fink- Lang, Untersuchungen zum Eichstätter Geistesleben, 308 and Buchner, Das Bistum Eichstätt, 1:262. I also discuss some of the evidence from Wiedemann’s books in a forthcoming article, “Transmission and Selection,” which will appear in a volume of conference proceedings. 93. These books are UE Cod. st 420, UE Cod. st 757, and Hubay, Incunabula, #54, #691. The printed dispensation has been separated from the book in which it had been pasted and can be found under Hubay, Incunabula, #649–51. 94. “Pateat universis praesentium inspectoribus quod sub annis etc tempore quadragesimali in parrochiali ecclesia N dilectus N confessus est secundum ordinationem et statuta sacrorum canonum mihi Johanni Widenman pro tunc temporis plebanus vel adiutor divinorum in eadem ecclesia generaliter omnia sua peccata quorum tunc memoria extiterat atque pro eisdem humili- ter suscepit emendacionem et satisfactionem salutarem et facio eum participem omnium bonor- um sancte matris ecclesie et si alia causa canonica non obstat potest communicari in cuius rei testimonium do ei manum propriam pro signeto;” UE Cod. st 420, fol. 291r. 95. “Universis et singulis praesentibus inspecturis pateat evidentem quod discretus vir Con- radus de tali villa confessus est mihi N adiutori in Bernstatt et ut spero bene contritus cum The Priest in the Parish, Diocese, and Territory 63 consensu sui plebani ipsa die palmarum post datum presentium alia tamen confessione in quadragesima praecedenti praehabita quem ex ecclesia sic in dei nomine communicavi in cuius rei testimonium praesentem cedulam signo meo sibi tradidi in fine scripture signatam anno domini 1476 die andree appostoli vel alterius sancti etc.;” UE Cod. st 420, fol. 291r. 96. “Johannes N vicarius ecclesie in N perpetuus universis et singulis inspectoribus sincere dilectionis affectum notificat latorem presentium Johannem N sibi confessum feria secunda Oculi omnia peccata sua de quibus ut asseruit tunc memoria extiterat/ beneficiumque absolutionis divina cooperante gratia misericorditer assecutus in cuius rei testimonium presentem cedulam peciit sibi tradi datum die qua supra anno M etc.;” UE Cod. st 420, fol. 291r. 97. “Ego Iohannes Widenman plebanus ecclesie sancte Walpurgis eystettensis civitatis et diocesis nec non penitenciarius apostolicus Iubilei livonie per . . . [illegible] ruthenos et tartaros universis et singulis inspectoribus sincere dilectionis affectum notat latorem Iohannes N sibi confessum ad graciam predicti Iubilei feria Quarta post Iudica omnia omnia [sic] peccata sua de quibus ut asseruit tunc memoria extiterat/ beneficiumque absolucionis iuxta formam apostoli- cam predicti Iubilei divina cooperante gratia misericorditer assecutus in cuius rei testimonium presentem cartulam vel cedulam peciit sibi tradi datum die qua supra anno millesimo quingen- tesimo decimo;” UE Cod. st 420, loose note between fols. 152/3. 98. On these letters, see Petke, “Der rechte Pilger,” 361–90. 99. Both were copied on the same page as the form letters for penitents. “Coram universis et singulis christifidelibus presentem litteram inspecturis, ego Iohannes Widenman, adiutor divinorum in N publice recognosco protestando quod isti viri Iohannes N Petrus N ostensores presencium de mea licentia petita iter peregrinacionis curie romanorum veri peregrini non excommunicati sed veri et boni christiani tanquam filii obediencie. Huiusmodi iter peregrinacionis sunt ingressi / Qua de re suplico omnibus et singulis ecclesiarum rectoribus ad quos ipsi pervenerint quatenus eisdem peregrinis si necesse fuerit propter deum dignemini ipsis ministrare ecclesiastica sacramenta et ut sitis supradictis peregrinis tutum adiuvamen adversus malos inimicos quod erga altissimum orationibus ac serviciis pro memeri [sic] totis viribus non recuso in cuius rei testimonium sigillum meum presentibus est impressum datum anno 1476.” The second draft is: “Coram universis et singulis christifidelibus presentem cartulam inspecturis ego Iohannes Widenman, plebanus sancte Walpurgis eystetensis civitatis diocesisque, publice recognosco manu propria protestando quod discretus vir Mathias [Vischer—crossed out] piscatoris civis eystetensis ostensor presencium de mea licentia petita iter peregrinacionis ad limina sanctorum Petri et Pauli appostolorum devocionis causa et voti ingressus est verus eciam peregrinus et christianus et tanquam filius obediens huiusmodi iter accipiens. Qua de re suplico omnibus et singulis ecclesiarum rectoribus ad quos ipse prenominatus pervenerit quatenus eidem peregrino si necesse fuerit propter deum dignemini ipsi ministrare sacramenta ecclesiastica eique in aliis adiuvamen et auxilium prestare curetis quod erga altissimum orationibus ac servitiis promereri totis viribus non recuso. Datum Eystet ultima die Februarii anno etc.;” UE Cod. st 420, fol. 291r. 100. That marriage was indeed a concern is shown by the fact that several priests in the diocese collected texts on the canon law of marriage; see chapter 5. 101. The adoption of this so-called Parisian model by Pope Alexander III (1159–1181) is outlined by Brundage, Law, Sex, and Christian Society, 331–37. 102. Four of Bishop Johann III von Eich’s expanded list of reserved sins concerned marriage; see the list in Suttner, “Versuch einer Conciliengeschichte,” 116. 103. From the statute on marriage issued by Wilhelm von Reichenau in 1484; ibid., 172. 104. “Pateat universis presencium inspectoribus quod discretus et honestus vir georius de puoch de eystet, natus et oriundus a iuventute ibidem, enutritus in parrochia ecclesie sancte walpurgis honeste et de honestis parentibus in eadem parrochia conversatus nec aliquo onere matrimonii innodatus sed solutus et ab omnibus . . . [illegible] habitus et tentus nec ab ali- qua . . . [illegible] matrimonio impugnatus in cuius rei testimonium a me Iohanne Widenman plebano sancte walpurgis plebanus qui eandem ecclesiam plusquam viginti tribus annis rexit, quod quidem testimonium peciit sibi tradi has litteras manu me propria scriptas atque secreto meo munitas. Datum vicesima quinta die Februarii anno etc septimo [1507];” UE Cod. st 420, loose note between fols. 152/153. 64 Chapter 2

105. “Pateat universis et singulis presencium inspecturis quod sub anno domini 1502 feria tertia post Michahelem ego Iohannes Widenman plebanus sancte Walpurgis eystettensis civitatis et diocesis publice et sollemniter in facie ecclesie intronisavi Lienhard Ebner de Zirch et Barbaram filiam Udalrici Grunbergersis de Eystett uxorem eius legittimam iuxta formam ca- nonicam et statuta sinodalia eiusdem diocesis. Nuptiasque solemniter et legittime celebratas per eosdem nullo obstante impedimento quod manu propria praesentibus pro testimonio vel signeto meo pro testimonio. Actum anno et die qua supra;” UE Cod. st 420, fol. 290v. 106. Suttner, “Versuch einer Conciliengeschichte,” 175. 107. To choose one example, Vogt recorded concerning the vicar of Berngau: “Dicit quod vittrici ecclesiae habeant claves ad pecunias ecclesiae et pecunias in eorum potestate et nondum fecerunt sibi rationem, sed eandem faciant ad placitum domino ducis Ottonis;” DE, B230, fol. 52r. 108. Vann Sprecher, “The Marketplace of the Ministry,” 150–52. 109. Plöchl, Geschichte des Kirchenrechts, 2:433. 110. Buchner, “Kirchliche Zustände,” 110; Suttner, “Versuch einer Conciliengeschichte,” 120. 111. Peter Lang calcuated this average by subtracting any payments made to absent rectors, but since Vogt did not always note these payments, the average may lie somewhat lower than 28.5 gulden. The average for assistant priests was 26.7 gulden. See Lang, “Würfel, Wein und Wettersegen,” 241–42. 112. Salonen and Hanska, Entering a Clerical Career, 89. 113. According to canon law, the priest was not to demand payment for the performance of any sacrament, but the laity were to maintain the “laudable custom” of making voluntary contributions; see Petke, “Oblationen, Stolgebühren und Pfarreinkünfte,” 41–42. 114. Petke, “Oblationen, Stolgebühren und Pfarreinkünfte,” 50–52. 115. Götz, Das Pfarrbuch des Stephan May, 118–19. That the highest income recorded by Vogt, 100 gulden split between the rector and vicar of Lauterhofen, is only two-thirds that collected by the vicar of Hilpoltstein suggests that not all revenue streams were included. Although the liturgical life in Hilpoltstein was energized by the college of six canons who lived there, it was a small town with a purely peasant hinterland and a single filial church in the village of Jarsdorf; see Götz, Das Pfarrbuch des Stephan May, iii. 116. Plöchl, Geschichte des Kirchenrechts, 2:441–42. Katherine French makes extensive use of churchwarden accounts in The People of the Parish. The only extensive work on churchwardens in German-speaking lands is Schröcker, Die Kirchenpflegschaft. On the churchwardens in the city of Eichstätt, see Flachenecker, Eine geistliche Stadt, 259–63. 117. Machilek, “Fränkische ‘Gotteshausbücher,’” 250; Fuchs, “Spätmittelalterliche Pfarrbücher als Quellen,” 213–32. These two article contain references to older literature on the subject. 118. Röttel, Das Hochstift Eichstätt, 31. 119. DE, B230, fol. 76v: “Dicit quod ecclesia sua sit incorporata domino nostro Reverendis- simo et habeat in corpore praebendae suae XLV metretas siliginis et totidem avenae. Reliquam partem percipiat dominus noster Reverendissimus etiam ex dote. Dicit quod ubi dominus noster Reverendissimus percipiat maiorem decimam [videlicet ubi ager sit seminatus siligine et in annexo agro lino vel pisis] ibi deberet recipere minorem decimam prout in registro suo sibi dato caveatur. Sed reddituarius mandaverit praefecto, ut non sinat plebanum percipere minorem decimam, sed ipse praefectus percipiat loco domini nostri Reverendissimi prout anno praeterito et de anno currente percepit. Cum tamen ipse plebanus antea percepti et sui antecessores huiusmodi decimam minor lini et pisorum. Dicit quod ipse plebanus et sui antecessores percep- erunt decimam de fructibus crescentibus in areis antiquis; itaque praefectus hoc anno etiam recepti de huiusmodi areis decimam et non habet congruam porcionem. Dicit se reformasse dotem suam et petit quod dominus noster Reverendissimus subveniat sibi in aliquo ratione incorporationis.” 120. The title of the register reads “Hie stien angezaichent die ewigen jartag, die das gotzhaus jerlich, als do bei jedem geschriben stet, ausrichten soll.” See Schornbaum, “Zwei alte Salbücher,” 4–5. 121. Schornbaum, “Zwei alte Salbücher,” 5. The Priest in the Parish, Diocese, and Territory 65

122. Older scholarship assigned the register’s creation to the rector Johannes Spät, but Schornbaum favors the city scribe Peter Prombacher; Schornbaum, “Zwei alte Salbücher,” 5. 123. For an edition of and commentary on Stephan Aigner’s register, see Schornbaum and Kraft, “Pappenheim am Ausgang des Mittelalters.” Götz provides a partial edition of May’s register in the already mentioned Das Pfarrbuch des Stephan May, 138–88. See also Götz, “Die kirchliche Festfeier in der Eichstätter Diözese,” 129–49. A parish register from 1525, which was kept by Luther’s nemesis Johannes Eck, the rector of the Church of Our Lady in Ingolstadt, also survives; see Greving, Johann Ecks Pfarrbuch. I also discuss some of the evidence from these registers in a forthcoming article, “Transmission and Selection,” which will appear in a volume of conference proceedings. 124. “1511 Registrum censuum et reddituum omniumque aliarum consuetudinum parochialis ecclesiae in Bappenham,” Schornbaum and Kraft, “Pappenheim am Ausgang des Mittelalters,” 130. 125. “Modus decimarum in Bappenhaim, quem collegi ex quodam antiquo registro,” ibid., 156. 126. Ibid., 130. 127. For example, when describing the division of the tithes from Pättersholz between the rector and the bishop he writes “Von allen zeheten, groβen und klainen, zu P. sein die zwen tail ms. gn. H. von Eystet und der drittail eines pfarrers zum Stayn, ausgenommen auf einem neugepeuten acker doselbsten. Doraus gehört der zehet dem pfarrer allain zu geben, wann all neusund oder neupruch gehören einem pfarrer, uti habemus textum expressum in jure canoni- co.” X 3.30.13 and 29 deal with this issue; Götz, Das Pfarrbuch des Stephan May, 17–19, 170. 128. Schornbaum and Kraft, “Pappenheim am Ausgang des Mittelalters,” 132. 129. Ibid., 158. 130. Ibid., 159. 131. Aigner’s list was incomplete and failed to mention seven known anniversary masses; ibid., 133. 132. Götz, Das Pfarrbuch des Stephan May, 68. 133. Ibid., 67. Sometimes the records specified which priests were to attend. The marshal of Pappenheim, so protective of his rights of presentation, was careful to have the rector of Wachstein promise to attend anniversary masses when called to do so; DE, B230, fol. 125r. 134. Schornbaum and Kraft, “Pappenheim am Ausgang des Mittelalters,” 135. 135. Götz, Das Pfarrbuch des Stephan May, 91. 136. Ibid., 93. 137. This section was entitled “Memoria in libertate dominorum et in fraternitate sacerdotum habenda;” Schornbaum and Kraft, “Pappenheim am Ausgang des Mittelalters,” 160. 138. Ibid., 150. 139. Ibid., 206. 140. Ibid., 207. 141. Ibid., 208. 142. Ibid., 133. 143. “unter dem gewalt eines pfarrers sein und sie ime omnem reverentiam et humanitatem ostendiren sollen;” Götz, Das Pfarrbuch des Stephan May, 8. 144. This was important because dues were of course open to interpretation. The canons preferred to see the payment as insurance that the parish priest would faithfully perform his duties: “Darumb, das er und seinen gsell des vleiβiger und des gerner zu chor ging;” Götz, Das Pfarrbuch des Stephan May, 112 and n. 57. 145. Schornbaum and Kraft, “Pappenheim am Ausgang des Mittelalters,” 211–12. 146. Ibid., 202–4. 147. Ibid., 202. 148. Götz, Das Pfarrbuch des Stephan May, 177. 149. Leidel, Die Pfarreien des Klosters Wülzburg, 126.

Chapter Three

Parish Libraries and Personal Collections

Anton Koberger, the famous Nuremberg printer, complained in 1503, “One has the priests so completely trained with books, and so drained of money, that they no longer want to buy them.”1 Even allowing for hyperbole, it is clear from Koberger’s complaint that priests had formed an important part of the market in the early decades of the printing press. Gutenberg’s invention did not create this market, but rather exploited an already existing demand for texts that had been growing throughout the first half of the fifteenth century. The goal of this chapter will be to examine the availability of books and their acquisition by priests in the diocese of Eichstätt. A growing number of isolated studies have shown that parish priests did possess printed books and manuscripts, and occasionally in startling numbers. A few examples must suffice here: Urban Klugheimer, the parish priest in Neuburg an der Donau, left 123 volumes to the theological faculty of the University of Ingolstadt in 1502,2 while, most spectacularly, Hilprand Bran- denburg (d. 1514) bequeathed 450 books to the Carthusians in Buxheim. 3 These collections can rightly be seen as extraordinary, and, in any case, clergy such as Hilprand were rarely resident in their parishes. There is plenty of evidence, however, for significant if more modest collections. Mathias Bürer (d. 1485), parish priest in Landsberg and later Memmingen, left 26 manuscripts to St. Gall.4 Johannes Pilter (d. c.1493), parish priest in the Westphalian towns of Büren and Siddinghausen, copied at least fifteen manuscripts using exemplars borrowed from nearby colleagues and religious communities, including a house of Augustinian canons, a Franciscan convent, the cathedral in Paderborn, a schoolmaster, and the Cistercian nunnery of Holthausen, which possessed the patronage rights to Pilter’s church.5 Jo- hannes Molitoris (d. 1482), a parish priest in Augsburg, owned at least forty 67 68 Chapter 3 volumes of legal and theological texts. 6 Perhaps more typical for priests in rural areas and small towns is the Alsacian parish priest Konrad Dreuben, who, in the middle of the fifteenth century, is known to have possessed two sermon collections as well as a miscellany of texts dealing with confession and the Eucharist.7 Even altarists and assistant priests could possess small collections of texts; in 1426 Johannes Porger, a priest serving the altar of St. John in the parish church of Weißenburg, left two prayer books, a psalter, and Nicolaus of Lyra’s postils to his benefice.8 Such volumes deserve attention because, in the words of R. N. Swanson, they “show that individuals were willing to train themselves, to acquire the resources, and perhaps develop the skills, to make them effective guardians of souls.”9 This chapter adds to these studies by examining some of the fruit that the search for book-owning priests in the diocese of Eichstätt has produced. Law mandated that clerics have and use certain books; others might be found at hand in the parish library, while yet more were available in circulation for private acquisition. Each of these cases will be examined in turn, but first something should be said about a crucial condition that influenced them all: price.

PAPER, PRINTING, AND THE PRICE OF BOOKS

The hyperbolic reactions of individuals across Europe to the marvels of the printing press are well known. Cardinal Joannes Andrea de Bussi wrote to Pope Paul II (1464–1471) that “In our time God gave Christendom a gift which enables even the pauper to acquire books.”10 Sebastian Brant declared in 1498 that, “The book, what was once possessed only by the rich and the king, can now be found everywhere, even in a hut.”11 Such anecdotal excla- mations cannot of course be taken to represent the true state of the market for the entire second half of the fifteenth century, especially in rural areas, to say nothing of the period before print. For this period an earlier development, and one that proceeded with much less fanfare, was of equal significance: the increasing availability of paper. The decreasing price of this basic raw material provides crucial context for both the rising episcopal expectations examined in chapter 1 and the clergy’s pursuit of texts examined here and in the following chapters. In Islamic Spain, paper had been in use since the tenth century, but the production of paper in Christian Europe did not begin in Italy and Spain until the thirteenth century. Technical advances achieved in Italy made paper more competitive with respect to parchment and helped its spread north of the Alps.12 Paper mills established themselves firmly in France in the fourteenth century, but arrived somewhat later in German-speaking lands. 13 Thanks to more efficient production, the fifteenth century was a period of both higher Parish Libraries and Personal Collections 69 paper consumption and decreasing prices. The civic administrations of both large and small cities were affected. Whereas Nuremberg’s chancellery consumed only one or two reams of paper in 1400, it needed sixteen in 1460, and nearly thirty-two per year from 1470 to 1480. Tiny Ellwangen’s chancery needed only about a quarter ream per year in the first decade of the fifteenth century, but was consuming two or more reams per year from 1480 to 1485.14 Despite booming demand for paper, increasing production ensured that prices dropped throughout the fifteenth century. By the mid-fifteenth century prices had halved relative to 1400 and by 1500 had halved again. 15 How did these prices compare with parchment? Although some scholars have warned against exaggeration, the difference could be significant. As an example, the parchment alone for a monumental work such as Nicolaus of Lyra’s biblical commentary, stretching to 1,440 folia in folio format, would have cost approximately 77 gulden, whereas the same amount of paper would have cost between 1.5 and 6 gulden.16 What did these prices mean for a priest who wanted to copy a text for himself? The fact that paper would have had different prices at different times and in different locations,17 makes any such calculation hazardous, but some estimate is necessary. It would not do Severin Corsten’s figures for Cologne any great injustice to take 2 gulden as an average price for a ream of normal-format paper in the first half of the fifteenth century, and 1 gulden thereafter. A ream of writing paper consisted of 480 sheets. The sheet would then be folded at least once during the production process to produce a bifolium. Therefore 960 folia could be had for the price of 1 gulden in the second half of the fifteenth century. Johann III von Eich’s synodal statutes of 1447 and Fourteen Articles of 1453 took up about fifteen folia;18 eight sheets of paper would have cost .033 gulden in the first half of the century, and only .017 in the second half. Johannes von Auerbach’s Directorium curatorum, recommended by bishop Albert in 1435, required about forty folia. 19 Twenty sheets in the first half of the century would have cost .083 gulden and only .042 in the second half. Prices in the diocese were likely somewhat higher than in Cologne, and priests buying just a few sheets of paper certainly paid a higher rate than someone buying an entire ream; nonetheless, books would have been within the reach of many parish clerics, provided that they were willing to copy out the texts for themselves. The decreasing price of paper and the ever-growing supply of books created by the press worked in tandem to deflate prices for ready-made volumes as well.20 Leonhard Hoffman and Uwe Neddermeyer have collected the prices of various types of books for the fifteenth and sixteenth century and have shown that while the price of books could vary widely, prices fell sharply beginning in the 1470s.21 The following examples can illustrate the trend. When cardinal Peter Balvus died in 1407 he left behind a large format parchment Bible, valued at 60 gulden, and a small format Bible, valued at 70 Chapter 3 eight. In 1452/54 in Mainz a folio-format Bible was written on paper, illumi- nated, and bound for just over 21 gulden.22 Just a few years later in 1460, a Bible printed in Strasbourg was sold for 12 gulden. In the 1480’s printers in Basel were offering Bibles for 2 gulden and in the 1490’s they had octavo- format Bibles for a quarter of that price. This figure, however, probably did not include binding, which would have cost another approximately 1.5 gulden, or the cost to transport the book to a location outside of Basel. A copy of a popular dictionary of religious terms, the Catholicon, printed in Lyon in 1491, was available in Regensburg for 2.5 gulden, whereas a copy of the same work printed in Venice was available in Ingolstadt in 1492 for less than 0.5 gulden. By the end of the century basic school texts were surprisingly inexpensive. A Donatus, a basic Latin grammar, could be had in 1493 for 12 denars or .05 gulden, approximately equal to a half-day’s wages for a jour- neyman construction worker. Prices in and around the diocese of Eichstätt seem reasonable, as one would expect for a diocese that boasted a university town, Ingolstadt, and which was located in the vicinity of Nuremberg and Augsburg. A fifty- folium collection of sermons was purchased for 1 gulden in the late fourteenth century.23 A Soccus, a popular collection of sermons, was purchased in 1436 for 3 gulden in Nördlingen, just to the west of the diocese. 24 A manuscript containing various sermons and Johannes Auerbach’s Director- ium curatorum, copied in the third quarter of the fifteenth century, was purchased for 3 gulden.25 Johann Kasper, who matriculated into the university of Vienna in 1501 and in 1506 and was the parish priest in Landshut in the diocese of Regensburg, purchased two books of hours in 1490 for 3 gulden.26 In 1495 the collegiate church in Rebdorf purchased a copy of Johannes de Verdena’s sermons Dormi secure (Nuremberg, 1494) for .15 gulden.27 At these prices it is clear that while the better-remunerated parish clergy could afford to purchase books, copying a manuscript for oneself would have remained an attractive option until the end of the century.

LITURGICAL BOOKS AND SYNODAL STATUTES

Having sketched the economic context, but before looking at the texts priests chose to collect, something must be said about those texts that priests were required by law to use or possess: liturgical books and the synodal statutes. 28 Of the enormous numbers of liturgical books according to the Eichstätt use and copies of the statutes that must have once existed, only a handful has survived.29 Fortunately the visitation record of 1480 allows some insight into the existence, condition, and acquisition of liturgical books and synodal statutes in the diocese. Johannes Vogt conducted his investigations according to a set of articles of inquiry, two of which required him to inspect the quality of Parish Libraries and Personal Collections 71 each church’s liturgical books, as well as ensure that each priest possessed the synodal statutes and the Fourteen Articles, a small collection of regulations distributed by Bishop Johann III von Eich, Wilhelm’s predecessor.30 What is not immediately clear is which statutes Vogt was checking. 31 Al- though never mentioned explicitly, a few passages in the record appear to refer to Johann III von Eich’s statutes from 1447. For example, Vogt notes that an altarist in Berching “does not know the formula for absolution contained in the synodal statutes,”32 a formula which appears in canon seventeen from Johann’s statutes.33 On the other hand, Vogt cites copies of the statutes as defective that lack the formula for the absolution from major excommunication.34 This formula was not included in the 1447 statutes, but issued separately by Johann at a diocesan synod in 1457.35 Furthermore, GNM Hs 17912 contains a 1467 copy of the synodal statutes issued by Wilhelm von Reichenau in 1465, which, while they do not contain either formula for absolution, assert that

We have ratified certain synodal statues of the lord Johann, our immediate predecessor of happy memory, published in the synod held in the year of the Lord 1447 . . . and now in respect for the mode of governance contained therein, we ratify them to those present, just as you will be given to understand from our statutes written below. Furthermore we have published new statutes, which we wish to have all the force of law and precept on pain of the penalties contained therein, and which you are strictly to observe. 36

In other words, Johann’s statutes were still in effect, while Wilhelm’s statutes, which were roughly only one-third the length of his predecessor’s, served as an addendum. Wilhelm clearly expected his clergy to have and use both sets and would have ordered Vogt to ensure that they did. References in the record to “the synodal statutes,” therefore, refer to a collection of Johann III von Eich’s statutes from 1447, certain later injunctions including at least that from 1457, and Wilhelm’s more recent additions.37 Of the 530 parish clergy visited, seventy-eight (15 percent) did not have the synodal statutes and/or Fourteen Articles,38 two did not have the latest version of the synodal statutes, three owned defective copies, and seven owned incomplete copies.39 Even so this probably underestimates reality. Two priests excused themselves by arguing that they had not yet had time to acquire a copy because they had only recently acquired their current position.40 A further thirteen clerics claim to have lent out their statutes to a neighboring colleague. This may have been merely a creative response to Vogt’s stern-faced disapproval, but it was one that would not have worked out well for the priests in Beyerberg, Ostheim, Wettelsheim, and Emezheim because the visitor’s next stop was the alleged location of their statutes. 41 Since Vogt does not include any notes to the contrary in these four entries, we are left to assume that these priests, and perhaps the majority of the 72 Chapter 3 others, were telling the truth. Although the sample is too small to draw firm conclusions, the record suggests that Vogt’s visitation may in fact have sparked a small flurry of copying. Of the first 150 clergy interviewed, none claimed to have lent their statues to another; of the first 200, only two individuals made such a claim, or 1 percent. But of the final 330, eleven did so, or 3 percent. In all then, approximately 11 to 12 percent of the interviewed clergy did not own a copy of the synodal statues and/or Fourteen Articles,42 not too terrible a result considering the high turnover in the ranks of the parish clergy and the fact that until 1484 these statutes had still to be copied by hand.43 Vogt’s survey of the liturgical books yielded similar results. Here Vogt checked not only that they were written according to the Eichstätt use, but also that they were in good condition. Of the 372 churches that Vogt visited, forty-one were lacking breviaries (the book necessary for the celebration of the office), twelve were written according to the wrong use, and thirteen were either old or in poor condition. Of the missals (the book necessary for the celebration of the Mass), one was incomplete, five were defective, four were old or in poor condition, and forty-four were written according to the rites of another diocese, or, as in eight cases, the rite of a monastic or collegiate order. No church was noted as lacking a missal. Some parishes had difficulty keeping their rituals (a book containing the ceremonies for the sacraments and assorted other rituals and blessings) updated. Fifty-two churches were noted as possessing volumes written according to an outdated use. Vogt criticized six volumes as having the wrong use, two as defective, two as somehow incorrect, one as being extremely old (antiquissimam), and three as adopting the use other dioceses or orders. Vogt also criticized the condition of a few volumes: four were of no value (nullius valoris), one was unbound, and one was somehow mangled or lacerated (lacerata). Once again, however, no church completely lacked a ritual. The quality of the books of hours varied the most widely. Fourteen were somehow defective, one notably defective, and one unfortunate volume was an old, fire-blackened pile of loose quires.44 Three others were of no value, four of moderate value, six mangled, nine lacked bindings. In Pölling the vicar of the Low Mass had sent his book of hours to his rector in order to have it bound.45 Thirty-one volumes were written according to the wrong use and six churches lacked books of hours entirely.46 Overall, then, approximately 15 percent of the churches in the diocese received criticism for their missals, 18 percent for their breviaries, 19 percent for their rituals, and 21 percent for their books of hours. On the other hand, these numbers are somewhat deceiving in that the possession of books according to old or extra-diocesan rites, while it may have frustrated a bishop like Wilhelm von Reichenau who in so many areas of his administration strove for uniformity, is unlikely to have caused any significant problems in Parish Libraries and Personal Collections 73 the care of souls. A good example of the reality that could underlie Vogt’s terse statements is provided by Petrus Fingerlein, the plebanus in Dietfurt. In 1462, Fingerlein completed a copy of the diocesan ritual, which he was still using when Vogt came to town eighteen years later. Unfortunately for Fin- gerlein, a new ritual had been issued in 1477, so Vogt dismissed his handi- work with a simple, “The ritual is according to the old use.”47 Fingerlein later donated the manuscript to the parish library in Schwabach, where it resides to this day.48 Secondly, problems tended to cluster. For example, in the ironically named parish of Kirchbuch the missal was of no value, the synodal statutes and Fourteen Articles were lacking, the book of hours mangled, and the ritual written according to the rite of the diocese of Bamberg. That the peasants of the village excused the lack of a sexton on the basis of the village’s small size and the poverty of its inhabitants is probably not unrelated to the poor condition of the church’s books.49 Most significant is the fact that aside from the 11 percent of churches that lacked a breviary and the less than 2 percent of the churches that lacked books of hours, the churches of the diocese possessed a full complement of liturgical books. Vogt was moved only once to threaten a priest with a fine: the missal belonging to the Low Mass in Winsbach was so incorrect (multum incorrectam) that Vogt ordered the priest there to have it corrected within one month on pain of a fine of 3 gulden.50 This rare display of stringency on Vogt’s part and the fact that no church completely lacked either a missal or a ritual shows that the diocesan administration, parish clergy, and lay churchwardens all recognized that these books were the sine qua non for the performance of the Mass and sacraments.51 Unsatisfied by the variety of rites and rubrics found in the liturgical books of the diocese, Wilhelm turned to the press. He convinced the printer Michael Reyser to move his shop to Eichstätt and employed him to print the Eichstätt synodal statues in 1484, a missal in 1486, and a ritual in 1488.52 The remark by the villagers in Kirchbuch, however, raises an interesting question. Who was responsible for acquiring and maintaining these books? To whom did they belong? The responsibility for acquiring a copy of the synodal statues lay clearly with the priest himself, 53 but the liturgical books examined by Vogt technically belonged to the church. It is clear from the numerous volumes written according to uses of neighboring dioceses, however, that priests did not always concern themselves with such technicalities as they wandered from benefice to benefice. Priests did sometimes copy liturgical books by hand and may for this reason have felt themselves to be the rightful owner. The rector in Staadorf, for example, used an old ritual, but was in the process of copying a new one.54 Of course we have no way of knowing if the parish was compensating him for this labor or not. The rector of Gimpertshausen at least had no intention of paying for a new missal out of 74 Chapter 3 pocket. He explained that the church could not afford to replace their current missal, which was written according to the Regensburg use, because the church had lent out all of its funds to the villagers and the owed amount was in any case too small to purchase a new one. 55 Occasionally, the churchwardens would refuse to pay for a new book, if they considered the older one sufficient. The vicar of Abenberg complained to Vogt that although he had brought the deficiencies in his antiphonal to the attention of the wardens, they had replied that their predecessors had always been satisfied with the older book. If a section was defective or missing, they had simply substituted another, Pentecost for Easter, the office of a martyr for that of an apostle, or of a confessor for that of a martyr.56 If this somewhat cavalier attitude toward the liturgy were widespread, then Wilhelm von Reichenau’s new editions of liturgical books, and the extra costs they represented, may have been met with something less than enthusiasm by many parish communities despite the decreasing book prices of the 1480s.

PARISH LIBRARIES AND PREACHERSHIPS

If the majority of priests were managing to keep abreast of episcopal legislation and had the use of the necessary, if not always the proper, liturgical books, how did they access other types of literature? In an age renowned for its passion for the pious foundation and constant appeal to “the common good,”57 we should not imagine that priests were dependent solely on their own energies and financial resources. The demands of pastoral care, episcopal expectations, and improving educational conditions combined with decreasing prices to stimulate the accumulation of texts in a new place: the parish church.58 Churches had of course always been expected to possess the books necessary for the celebration of the liturgy and the sacraments, 59 but it is not until the late fourteenth and especially the fifteenth century that evidence begins to accumulate for the existence of more ambitious parish libraries.60 Gifts from clergy or, occasionally, laypersons to a parish church could over time lead to an impressive accumulation of texts. 61 A few examples must once again suffice. A 1435 inventory of the parish library in Ravens- burg counted 83 volumes.62 An inventory of the parish library in St. Sebald in Nuremberg completed between 1486 and 1490 stretches to 267 volumes. 63 Nikolaus Matz left 117 volumes to the parish church in Michelstadt in 1499.64 Smaller collections like that found in Rudolstadt were perhaps more typical. A 1498 inventory mentions 15 volumes: a two-volume psalter, four missals, one gradual, a collection of Sunday sermons, the Golden Legend, two volumes of saints lives in German, a collectarius for the celebration of the hours, a ritual, and two unspecified “books of the library.”65 Parish Libraries and Personal Collections 75

Despite the modesty of the collection, the phrase “books of the library” (libri librarie) is indicative of the fact that people in the fifteenth century began to view the piles of books in the parish church as a separate, institutional entity with its own rules and regulations and designated space, either a room in the church or sometimes its own building. 66 Where laypersons made large donations and where city councils became involved in the administration of the collection, it could become hard to distinguish a parish library from a communal one, and indeed parish libraries often formed the kernel for later civic libraries. 67 The foundation of a parish library could sometimes be a conscious goal of civic authorities as when the city council of Sulzbach purchased the library of the local preacher in 1458. The extent of the collection was at least fifty-five volumes. 68 Although parish libraries were never “public” libraries in any kind of modern sense, the circle of people allowed access to them tended to expand over the course of the fifteenth century to include not only the parish clergy, but also students, scholars, and civic officials.69 By serving the needs of preachers, clergy, and students parish libraries could contribute significantly to the religious and cultural life of a community. Evidence for parish libraries in the diocese of Eichstätt is spare, but suggestive. A 1370 inventory of the cathedral sacristy in Eichstätt listed thirty-one titles and both bishops Johann III von Eich and Wilhelm von Reichenau are known to have had books copied for the cathedral library. 70 Duke Louis the Bearded of Bavaria-Ingolstadt (d. 1447) outfitted the Church of Our Lady in Ingolstadt, as well as many of its altars, with liturgical books.71 Of the parish library in the church of St. Moritz, Ingolstadt, only a single manuscript has survived. The donation notice in this volume, however, reveals that the library did possess an institutional character: “This book was given to the library of the church of St. Moritz in Ingolstadt by the honorable lord Hainrich Löffler, mass priest in the same church, in the year 1478.” 72 A visitation of the diocese in 1601 noted the continued existence of thirty-five manuscripts in the parish library of Abenberg, which had been founded in 1453 by Johann Fabri, the vicar of the New Hospital in Nuremberg, as well as a “library of twenty old books, mostly manuscripts” in the collegiate church of St. Nicolas in Spalt.73 Another source of literature for the parish clergy were the libraries of beneficed preachers.74 Although these may not always and everywhere have been accessible to the parish clergy, the relationship between parish libraries and preacherships was often close. There were in all eight endowed preacherships in the diocese before 1520: the cathedral in Eichstätt,75 Berching,76 Eschenbach,77 Neumarkt,78 Schwabach,79 Velburg,80 Wassertrüdingen,81 and Wemding.82 Additionally a mass benefice founded c.1470 in Altdorf included the requirement that the incumbent preach. 83 76 Chapter 3

The foundations of preacherships sometimes included the donation of books. In 1499 when the bishop of Breslau, Johann IV von Roth, founded a preachership in his hometown of Wemding, he sent two large containers of books to form the basis of the preacher’s library. The thirty-four donated volumes included a Bible, sermon collections, the works of Jean Gerson, the Summa Angelica, and a polemical tract against the Hussites. 84 Shortly after its foundation in 1513, the vicar of St. Lorenz in Nuremberg, Leonhard Grieβel, gave eighty volumes to the preachership in Berching. 85 Dr. Johann Schöner included a library along with his foundation of the preachership in Wassertrüdingen in 1519.86 Sadly, nothing is known of the libraries almost certainly associated with the preacherships in Eschenbach, Neumarkt, and Velburg. The only parish library from the diocese of Eichstätt which has enjoyed a continuous history up to the present day is in Schwabach. Despite the conver- sion of the city to Protestantism in the late 1520s, the destructiveness of the Thirty Years’ War, and the appetite of first the Prussians and then the Bavar- ians for cultural capital in the nineteenth century, 23 medieval manuscripts containing 150 individual works and 122 incunabula in 92 volumes have survived to the present day.87 The earliest evidence for the size of the library derives from George the Pious’s order in 1529 to inventory all church property in his territory of Brandenburg-Ansbach. The visitors listed 15 liturgical books and 164 “aller pucher in der Liberey der Pfarrkirche.”88 Since only 115 volumes from the period before the Reformation have survived, it is clear that the collection has suffered some losses, but has overall weathered the sixteenth to twenty-first centuries remarkably intact. How many books from earlier periods were destroyed or disappeared before the margrave’s officials came to town is of course impossible to say. Most of our knowledge about the medieval history of the parish library comes from entries in the surviving books themselves, which show that the library in the church of St. John the Baptist, like most parish libraries, bene- fited primarily from the gifts and bequests of local clergy. 89 The earliest direct evidence of a bequest to the library dates from 1470, but the library

Table 3.1. Chronological Distribution of Manuscripts in the Parish Library of Schwabach

Date Produced Number of Manuscripts 14th Century 1 1400–1433 8 1434–1467 10 1468–1500 3 16th Century 1 Parish Libraries and Personal Collections 77 may have existed earlier. Table 3.1 shows the chronological distribution of the surviving manuscripts. The drop in the accession of manuscripts into the Schwabach library did not indicate a declining interest in pastoral literature, but rather the cheapening price of printed books. Of the 122 incunabula, only one was printed before 1470.90 Whereas some parish libraries such as Mi- chelstadt owed the lion’s share of their collection to a single, large donation, the library in Schwabach grew slowly via the accumulation of numerous small gifts. Why leave books to a parish church? Some donors expressed a desire to aid their colleagues and gave their books to the clergy in Schwabach “pro communi usu.”91 An even more powerful motive than professional concern, however, was the fear of purgatorial suffering. Book donations were another type of charitable giving ad pias causas made in hopes of acquiring prayers for the soul and perpetual memorialization. Seeking to satisfy this desire, and attract further donations, the clergy in Schwabach founded an anniversary mass for all the donors to the library, an act that paid dividends in the form of six volumes from Johannes Purckel:

Recognizing the merit of those who founded the library of St. John the Baptist in Schwabach for the common use of all the priests, honorable and devoted men and priests of the said church, with the consent of the lord rector, harmo- niously established in perpetuity an anniversary to be held in the same church with full vigils and masses on the Friday after the feast of the holy Apostles Philip and Jacob as an aid to the souls of the said founders. Seeing this, and desiring to share in the anniversary mass, Dom Johannes Purckel bequeathed this book with five others to the said library in the year of our lord 1507. 92

Parish libraries, therefore, reflect not only the literary interests of their benefactors, but also their hopes for memorialization in this world and salvation in the next. Far from the product of any conscious effort to assemble a coherent collection to meet specific needs and wants, these books represent the idiosyncratic tastes and needs of individuals, and not those of the parish clergy in Schwabach in any kind of corporate sense.93 It is possible, therefore, that the clerics of St. John may have dutifully sung the anniversary mass for the donors each year, while leaving the gifts themselves to molder on the shelf. Use is in fact always difficult to prove. Marginal commentary is in this instance useless because what notes there are could originate with the books original, private owner or owners. I would argue that this observation, while important, does not diminish the value of the library in Schwabach as evidence for the demand for pastoral literature among the parish clergy. The attempt itself to attract donations through the foundation of an anniversary mass shows that the donated books were valued. Secondly, the donors that they did attract were not bishops, monks, or canons with particular ideas about what members of the lower 78 Chapter 3 clergy should be reading, but were themselves members of the parish clergy. Although nothing is known about the early donors to the library, later ones consisted primarily of clerics who had attended university and were either born in Schwabach or were active there at some point during their careers. Stephan Weickersreuther, both vicar and later rector in Katzwang before beginning a thirty-five year period (1440–1474) as the parish priest in Schwabach, donated a manuscript volume in 1475. 94 His successor, Peter Linck (1474–1505), who had received a Bachelor of Arts from the University of Leipzig, gave seven volumes of printed works over two separate donations in 1493 and 1498.95 Johannes Gaulenhofer, a mass priest who in the manner of a classical roving student had received his Bachelor of Arts at the Univer- sity of Leipzig in 1482 and afterward attended the universities of Heidelberg (1484) and Erfurt (1487), left a copy of Antoninus Florentinus’s Summa theologica “pro communi usu.”96 Johannes Steinbach, who matriculated into the University of Erfurt in 1456, and Laurentius Gerber (d. 1503) served successively as beneficed preachers in the city and left a total of twelve volumes.97 Johannes Purckel was born in Schwabach, matriculated into the University of Leipzig in 1482, and finally became a vicar in Herrieden before securing his place in the anniversary mass by gifting six volumes to the parish library in 1507.98 Several donors were active in Nuremberg. At his death in 1470, Johannes Ampffer, a cleric from Nuremberg who had studied at the University of Erfurt (1455), made the earliest recorded donation to the library. 99 Conrad Flock, who was an assistant priest in Schwabach in 1480, had studied at the universities of Leipzig and Ingolstadt, where he matriculated, already with a Bachelor of Arts, in 1474. Later a beneficed cleric in St. Lorenz in Nurem- berg, he donated one manuscript as well as five volumes of printed works in 1507 and 1514.100 Johannes Engelmeyer (d. 1507), a native Schwabacher, left three volumes to the parish library after a career highlighted by his studies at the University of Freiburg (1464) and his position as vicar of St. Sebald in Nuremberg.101 Johannes Prentel, an earlier vicar in St. Sebald, donated a collection of sermons in 1497.102 Finally, Johannes Menger, also from Schwabach, matriculated into the University of Leipzig in 1445, received his Bachelor of Arts in 1450, and then held a succession of benefices in various churches in Nuremberg from 1459 until his death in 1483, upon which he bequeathed eighteen volumes to the parish library in Schwabach. 103 So what would the parish clergy in Schwabach have had to hand c.1470 before the rapid infusion of incunabula? 104 The rector or preacher in need of a sermon could have turned to collections by Nicolaus of Dinkelsbühl,105 Conrad of Waldhausen,106 Peregrinus de Oppeln,107 Antonius Azaro de Par- ma,108 or Jacobus de Voragine.109 Those more inclined to construct a sermon of their own could perhaps find the rhetorical hook they needed in a collection of vernacular proverbs arranged according to the Gospel pericopes for Parish Libraries and Personal Collections 79 the Sundays and feast days throughout the year.110 For those Sundays on which the pastor felt the need to preach on the pastoralia, there were three treatises on the Ten Commandments, 111 two on the Our Father,112 one on the articles of faith,113 and one on the Creed with which to prepare. 114 In preparation for the throngs of penitents during the Easter season, the rector and his assistants could have reviewed Johannes Kusin’s On Confession,115 Johannes Rigaldus’ Summa on Confession,116 Johannes Geuss’s Sins of the Mouth and Tongue,117 and a host of short texts including a German translation of the canon Omnis utriusque sexus.118 A cleric looking for a good, basic handbook could have turned to any of three copies of Johannes Auerbach’s Directorium curatorum, one of which was bound in a volume with the 1434 synodal statutes that had first recommended the work. 119 Although systematic theological treatises would have been wholly lacking, a few texts would have been at hand to answer practical questions on the Last Judgment,120 Hell,121 the proper veneration of the saints,122 the Holy Spirit,123 the Passion,124 and superstitions.125 A collection of moral treatises by Nicolaus of Dinkelsbühl,126 biblical commentaries, 127 a critique of gam- ing,128 moral interpretations of animal behavior, 129 an account of the Three Kings, as well as a few short legal texts on interdicts, 130 usury and contracts,131 consanguinity,132 and marriage,133 could also have been mined for moral precepts, sermon material, or guidance on frequently encountered legal issues.134 Although the majority of the library was practically oriented, the cleric looking to cultivate his own spirituality could use either Bonaven- ture’s Soliloquy on Four Mental Exercises, of which there were two copies,135 or Henricus de Frimaria’s On the Perfection of Interior Man.136 The accession of incunabula beginning in the 1470s both reinforced some aspects of the manuscript collection, while also introducing new genres. Sermons and confessional treatises remained two emphases of the new additions,137 although the latter consisted of longer and more systematic works, such as Bartholomaeus de Chaimis’s Confessionale (available in three copies), than had been available in manuscript. 138 A succession of clerics donating works of systematic theology, exegesis, law, philosophy, patristics, history, and humanistic writings gave the library a character at once more academic and more literary. Summae by Aquinas,139 Hugo Ripelin,140 Antoninus Florentinus as well as the Sentences of Peter Lombard could give answers to theological questions both practical and ab- struse.141 The compendious learning of Nicolaus of Lyra was available to preachers struggling with a difficult biblical text. 142 Augustinus de Ancona’s Summa on Ecclesiastical Power along with Boniface VIII’s Liber sextus,143 Clement V’s Constitutiones,144 and the decrees of the councils of Constance and Basel would have placed the parish clergy in Schwabach in contact with canon law in a way that synodal statutes could never hope to do. 145 Works by Augustine,146 Gregory the Great,147 Jerome,148 Boethius,149 Isidore of Se- 80 Chapter 3 ville,150 and even a few twelfth-century masters such as Hugh of St. Vic- tor,151 Peter Comestor,152 and Bernard of Clairvaux,153 provided stylistic relief from an otherwise unrelieved succession of scholastic authors. This inclusion of great religious authors of the past evidences not nostalgia, but rather the penetration of recent developments in religious sensibilities most often associated with the Modern Devotion to the level of the parish. A humanist impulse perhaps motivated the donation of Pius II’s Epistolae familiares and Albrecht von Eyb’s Pearl of Poetry.154 John Shinners summed up his overview of parish libraries in England by dismissing their significance: “The impresson of the parish library that emerges here is that it was a bare-bones, even backward-looking collection. Its core was books of ritual.”155 Although there certainly were parish churches whose libraries were “bare-bones,” in German-speaking lands at least the well-stocked parish library was no rarity. Nor were its texts obso- lete. Sermons, treatises, summas, manuals, and handbooks from popular fourteenth- and fifteenth-century authors were common and even texts reflecting the renewed interests of the late Middle Ages in patristics and rhetoric could find space on parish shelves. Although nothing is known about the earliest donors to the library, those over a forty-four year period from 1470 to 1514 consisted of a network of university-educated clerics active in and around Schwabach, including the regional metropolis, Nuremberg. The donations made by native sons who after their university studies acquired benefices in the imperial city reveal one path through which cultural and intellectual capital could find its way from major cities to smaller, neighboring ones. Simple dichotomies, however, between urban and urbane humanist clerics versus backwards, scholastic, small town pfaffen cannot be sustained. To be sure the copy of Pius II’s letters originated with a Nuremberg cleric, but so too did a copy of that most medieval of preachers, Johannes Herolt. 156 Mean- while, two copies of Augustine’s Opuscula originated with Schwabach clerics.157 In addition to helping clerics fulfill their liturgical responsibilities, parish libraries would have also informed the clergy’s administration of the sacraments, their sermons, approach to Scripture, and interactions with their parishioners.

PRIVATE LIBRARIES

For the cleric who could not find all he wanted on parish shelves, or who wanted more intimate access to a text, the only solution was to acquire texts for his own personal use. The clergy’s surviving books provide the most direct evidence of this activity. I have been able to identify seventy-three nonliturgical books, three liturgical books, and three broadsheets, which were produced or owned by members of the parish clergy in the diocese of Parish Libraries and Personal Collections 81

Eichstätt from 1440 to 1514.158 Another mid-fifteenth-century manuscript used as its exemplar a text copied by an assistant priest in 1384. 159 Further research would certainly discover many more books that were once in the hands of Eichstätt clergy, but those analyzed here are sufficient to outline the clergy’s interest in and access to texts. Before turning to the contents something should first be said about the problems encountered when trying to identify texts owned or produced by priests. This is necessary because the state in which clerically owned texts find themselves today can shed light on both how priests acquired texts in the first place and on how often and how well these texts survived their owner’s death. Easiest to identify are books that received clear marks of ownership. Especially valuable are records of donation because they indicate both the previous owner and the, often institutional, recipient. A typical example is a note left in the front cover of UE Cod. st 194, a copy of the Bible: “To ensure his perpetual memory and remembrance, Dom Häldrer, parish priest in Ens- feld, bequeathed this book to the venerable fathers and brothers of the monastery of Rebdorf 1508.”160 Other entries are less helpful. A copy of Antoni- nus Florentinus’s Confessionale: Defecerunt printed in Memmingen in 1483 is marked with a simple “This booklet pertains to magister Georg Yedung.”161 It turns out that in 1498 Yedung was a chaplain in St. Moritz in Ingolstadt,162 but many book-owning individuals have proved impossible to identify.163 I have not included books that were produced or owned by individuals for whom I could find no evidence that they were members of the parish clergy in the diocese of Eichstätt. Other books present problems because their presence in the diocese can be difficult to pinpoint. UE Cod. st 225, a treatise on the body of Christ and a biblical commentary, was originally copied by Ulrich Hetzer of Berching in 1387, later owned by another cleric named Friedrich Lung, and purchased in 1444 by Ulrich Meinhart, an assistant priest in Abbach in the diocese of Regensburg, before finally coming to rest in the bishop of Eichstätt’s library sometime before 1700.164 Although Hetzer was from the diocese of Eichstätt and the book eventually ended up in the bishop’s library, I have not included this volume in the sample because there is no evidence that either Hetzer or Lung held parish benefices in the diocese. On the other hand some books have a clear relationship to the diocese of Eichstätt, such as Clm 5439, which contains statutes from Johann III von Eich and Wilhelm von Reichenau, but have no contemporary ownership mark or scribal colophon. These too have been excluded from the sample. Another question is what to do with the books owned or produced by members of the regular clergy who were at the same time serving as parish priests in incorporated churches. The lone example of this is UE Cod. st 455 which was partially copied in 1470 by Michael Kleinfelder, a monk in the 82 Chapter 3

Benedictine monastery of Plankstetten, who ten years later was serving as the parish priest in Staadorf.165 Three other hands contributed toward copying the main texts, and there is no reason to believe that Kleinfelder copied these texts for his own personal use. Nevertheless, I chose to list the manuscript under those belonging to institutions because as a member of the monastery he would have had access to the library while serving in Staadorf. On the other hand, I have included in the sample two manuscripts (UE Cod. st 239 and portions of Clm 6487) that belonged to members of the parish clergy who had ties to colleges of secular canons. A thorny issue is the relation between the number of surviving books and those originally in circulation among the parish clergy. Priests’ books that failed to find their way, whether by donation or sale, into an institutional library had very little chance of survival, and even these fortunate few were not free from danger. Books donated to parishes that later became Protestant were often tossed out as the worthless or dangerous artifacts of a now superceded form of Christianity,166 while those bequeathed to monastic or collegiate libraries were not always valued and could be split up, destroyed altogether, sacrificed to satisfy the yawning appetite of binders for raw material,167 or integrated into manuscripts produced in-house. For example, Ebe- rhard Plinthammer, a cleric in St. Moritz in Ingolstadt, copied a collection of sermons on the saints by Conrad of Brundelsheim in 1445. Later bound with a copy of Johannes Marienwerder’s Expositio symboli, the text found itself in the second half of the fifteenth century in the library of the Dominicans in Eichstätt where the friars added a few miscellaneous sermons. 168 Similarly, Johannes de Landsberg, an assistant priest in Wemding, completed a copy of Albert Diessen’s Mirror of Clerics in 1446.169 In the second half of the fifteenth century the text was bound in Nördlingen along with four other previously independent sections to form a single volume and eventually found its way in this form into the library, once again, of the Dominicans in Eichstätt.170 Without the colophons the connection between these texts and the parish clergy would have been lost. Many other such texts survive in libraries across Europe, but the lack of colophons prevent identification. Clm 5988, a manuscript once belonging to the monastery of Ebersbach, for example, concludes with a copy of Johann III von Eich’s synodal statutes and a short tract on confession, which together once existed independently of the rest of the manuscript, as is clearly shown by the older foliation that these pages still retain and the less practiced hand of their scribe.171 Did these two texts once belong to a member of the Eichstätt parish clergy? That is impossible to say, but there is no doubt that many texts once owned or produced by members of parish clergy lie today unacknowledged in the middle of monastic volumes. Yet even if we could identify all the extant texts once owned or produced by members of the parish clergy, we would still need some means of calcu- Parish Libraries and Personal Collections 83 lating the rate of loss for such texts in order to estimate how many there once were. Numbers of surviving copies cannot be taken as a simple function of the number once in existence because survival rates are governed not by impartial chance, but by any number of factors including degree of use, language,172 institutional versus private ownership, the varying impact of wars and natural disasters on different regions of Europe, 173 the contents,174 and the size of the book itself.175 Uwe Neddermeyer has estimated that incunabula have had an average rate of loss of 97 percent, fifteenth-century manuscripts, 93 percent.176 In other words, one would have to multiply surviving manuscript volumes by 15 in order to arrive at the number that once existed. By applying statistical methods to a large database, Eltjo Buringh has more recently argued that one should instead multiply existing fifteenth- century manuscripts by 16.6, a somewhat higher figure.177 There are good reasons for believing that the rate of loss for books owned by priests was higher than average.178 First, the books owned by priests belong to several disadvantaged categories already identified by Neddermey- er: high use, privately owned, Latin handbooks, and small. The estimates produced by Neddermeyer and Buringh are based primarily on an analysis of large institutional collections. On average the libraries studied by Buringh contained more than three hundred manuscripts; for his part Neddermeyer relied on Sigrid Krämer’s Handschriftenerbe des deutschen Mittelalters, which also concentrates on institutional collections. 179 Priests of course would have had more modest collections, and many of their texts would have remained unbound. The fourteenth and fifteenth centuries, in fact, saw a proliferation in the number and kinds of texts that circulated in small, unbound booklets from plague treatises in France, vernacular romance literature, verses, and heretical tracts in England, to catechetical treatises all over Europe.180 This only intensified in the second half of the fifteenth century as printed books were most often sold as unbound sheets and in the early sixteenth century as pamphlets established themselves as a popular format for printed texts.181 There is evidence that priests collected texts in unbound quires. This can be seen by the fact that several of the manuscripts in the sample consist of quires bound out of chronological order. For example, in 1467 and 1468 Ulrich Diettersperger, the vicar in Greding and later canon in Hilpoltstein, copied the first twelve quires of UE Cod. st 463, which end with Johannes von Eyb’s synodal sermon of 1435. He copied the final eight quires, however, in 1465 and 1466.182 The chronological order of the two parts was re- versed when the texts were finally bound together. Priests often copied the synodal statutes in separate, unbound quires. Cgm 258 in the Bayerische Staatsbibliothek provides a typical example. 183 A priest named Laurence completed a copy of Johann III von Eich’s 1447 synodal statutes in 1448 while he was serving as an assistant priest in 84 Chapter 3

Mörnsheim. A year later he completed a copy of Conrad von Megenburg’s Book of Nature. When Laurence brought the texts together into a single volume is unclear, but the statutes today occupy the final quire of the manuscript and the wear and tear of the pages betray their once independent existence. Laurence filled in a few blank pages at the end of the final quire of the Book of Nature with two sermons on the priesthood and a statute issued by Johann III von Eich in 1456 regarding those to be denied Communion. An additional quire now bound between the sermons and the statutes includes a crusade bull issued by Pius II in 1463.184 It appears that Laurence copied the synodal statutes of 1447 soon after their publication, recorded subsequent episcopal injunctions and other texts that had meaning for him in a second booklet, and eventually combined them both with a longer work. None of these texts, of course, would have survived had their owners not had them bound, a precaution that many would have found less and less cost- effective as the price of paper fell throughout the fifteenth century. The fate of printed broadsheets indicates the drastic losses that could be incurred by thin (in this case single-sheet), unbound texts. Of the 200,000 letters of indulgence printed by Hans Luschner in Barcelona for the cathedral of Orvie- to, not a single copy is known to have survived.185 While the quires and books used by priests would not have suffered the same rates of loss as single sheets, the average rates of loss suggested above are clearly below those experienced by priests’ books. It does not seem unreasonable to suggest that the survival rate for texts once owned by priests would have been half that for volumes owned by institutional libraries. In other words, roughly one in thirty-two books owned by priests in the fifteenth century has survived according to this estimate. If we further assume that for each book identified here, another lies anon- ymously or unidentified elsewhere, then the 73 books in the sample should be doubled to 146.186 An estimate therefore of the number of books privately owned or produced by the parish clergy in the diocese of Eichstätt from c.1440 to c.1514 is about 4,672. Furthermore, the surviving books represent only that portion of a priest’s library deemed suitable for pious donation to an institutional library. Omitted by necessity from the above estimate, therefore, are works of vernacular literature or old schoolbooks, which were not deemed worthy of donation. The surviving, identifiable books represent only a tiny portion of the number circulating among the parish clergy in the fifteenth century. Such huge rates of loss call for care, not despair, when evaluating the survivors. 187 Although conclusions about the number of books owned by any particular cleric are problematic, the context provided by chapter 1 with regard to episcopal expectations and clerical education, as well as the evidence presented in this chapter on falling book and paper prices over the course of the fifteenth century provide assurance that the books analyzed here do not rep- Parish Libraries and Personal Collections 85 resent the activities of a small elite. In other words, the surviving books both represent an activity widespread among priests and exist in sufficient numbers to allow one to at least outline what would have been within their reach given a reasonable expenditure of time and money. The seventy-three books included in the present study were owned or produced between 1384 and 1514 by thirty-nine clerics spread out over thirty communities. All but a single cleric, however, was active between 1440 and 1514. These thirty-nine priests included twenty rectors or plebani, four vicars, three chaplains, six assistant priests, and six mass priests or altarists. Unfortunately, the visitation record does not add significantly to the evidence provided by the books themselves. Vogt was simply not interested; nine of the thirty-nine clerics appear in the visitation record of 1480, but Vogt makes no mention of their books. He did discover “libros medicinae” in the possession of the plebanus in Walting,188 however, and remarks made by four other clerics (two plebani, one mass priest, and an altarist) reveal a familiarity with books, if not their actual possession. 189 Like the donors to the Schwabach parish library, many of these clerics had studied at university. At least fourteen of the thirty-nine had pursued higher education at the universities of Erfurt, Ingolstadt, Leipzig, and Vienna. Eleven of the priests were active in Eichstätt, Ingolstadt, and Schwabach. This pattern is the result of three factors. First, there is every reason to believe that clerics in urban areas tended to be better paid and better educated and that the density of clerics and commercial networks in urban areas eased the circulation of texts. Furthermore, the proximity of monastic or collegiate communities seems also to have encouraged the use of books. The region around Eichstätt and Ingolstadt was endowed with numerous communities including Rebdorf, Bergen, St. Walburg, a Dominican convent in Eichstätt, and a Franciscan house in Ingolstadt. Other seemingly isolated priests were active near monastic or collegiate communities in Königshofen, Auhausen, Herrieden, and Spalt. A third factor, however, is that of accident: twenty-two of the books survived in the parish library of Schwabach; twenty-four in the libraries of the bishop, Dominicans, and Jesuits in Eichstätt; and fourteen books in Rebdorf. In other words, while the vitality of cities and the presence of religious communities may have stimulated the production and use of texts by the local clergy and would certainly have attracted books as bequests, they also provided the institutional libraries necessary for books to survive. We cannot, therefore, conclude that other areas of the diocese were necessarily poorly supplied with bookish priests. There is a notable lack of such clerics from the northeastern portion of the diocese, for example, despite the enjoyment of many of the same advantages as the southeast—a lively city in Neumarkt (not to mention closer proximity to Nuremberg) and the monastery of Kastl, a nerve center of the Benedictine Observant reform movement.190 So where are all the books? Lost, most 86 Chapter 3 likely, along with nearly all of Kastl’s library.191 A similar void exists in the center of the diocese, which could likewise be attributed to the almost total loss of the monastery of Wülzburg’s library.192 Johannes Mendlein, the parish priest in Ansbach from 1507 until forced out by Protestant reformers in 1523, perhaps best exemplifies the damage caused by these losses. 193 At his death he left 139 works to Wülzburg, including grammar texts, works of civil law, classics by Cicero and Caesar, and contemporary, controversial literature by Erasmus and Luther. Of this legacy, only the inventory survives. 194 Furthermore, the presence of book-owning clerics in Aberzhausen and Em- sing shows that texts could penetrate even into small and relatively isolated settlements. How did the clergy acquire their books? Put simply, until 1475 they copied manuscripts; afterwards they bought printed books. Of the manuscripts twenty-five were copied for personal use and four were commissioned from professional scribes.195 One manuscript is a fifteenth-century copy of an exemplar dated 1384, the rest were copied between 1442 and 1475. Of the thirty printed books, the earliest was printed c.1475 in Basel and the rest date from 1478 to 1493. Manuscript production did not of course cease in 1475 altogether. A few clerics were engaged in copying manuscripts during Vogt’s visitation in 1480,196 and in 1505 Ulricus Glauber, the plebanus in Aurach, added some useful formulas for preaching to a manuscript he owned. 197 Nevertheless, the late 1470s should be seen as the period in which the parish clergy in Eichstätt turned decisively toward the products of the press for instructional material. Books often served more than a single owner. Thirteen of the manuscripts and four of the printed books show evidence for multiple clerical owners, although how they passed from hand to hand is often unclear. UE Cod. st 381, first copied between c.1400 and c.1425, for example, had at least three owners—Berchtold Linken, the plebanus in Thannhausen (in Schwaben); Hermannus N. N. von Freystadt, the plebanus in Wettstetten; and finally Ulrich Pfeffel, a parish priest and preacher whom we will meet in more detail in the following chapter.198 Some of these books were certainly acquired as a bequest or purchased from the estate of a deceased cleric. 199 This last is the likely fate of UE Cod. st 194, a copy of the Bible which was copied by Briccius Zwecker, the chaplain in Bergen, in 1467, but which in 1500 was left to Rebdorf by the rector of neighboring Ensfeld.200 Some, like Ulrich Pfeffel, could afford to purchase the occasional book. 201 Although clearly the preference of the parish clergy up until the late 1470s, copying one’s own manuscript was not without some costs. The costs associated with the paper (none of the manuscripts in this group were written on parchment) and binding I have already mentioned; a third cost was of course time. While certainly not money in today’s proverbial sense, the time Parish Libraries and Personal Collections 87 necessary to laboriously copy a manuscript by hand does suggest that these texts were acquired neither haphazardly nor carelessly. Ulrich Diettersperger, the vicar in Greding, for example, constructed a well-rounded handbook for himself over the course of four years. Sometime in 1465, he finished copying Johannes Kusin’s On the Hearing of Confes- sions and by May 10 of the following year had added an abbreviation of Bonaventure’s Collations on the Ten Commandments and books I–VII of Hugo Ripelin’s Compendium of Theological Truth. A little more than a year later, on 22 July 1467, he completed Vincentius Gruner’s Exposition of the Mass, followed in the next year, on 10 July 1468, by Guido de Monte Roche- rii’s Handbook for Curates. A following undated section includes Thomas Aquinas’s On the Articles of Faith and Sacraments of the Church, Albertus Brixiensis’s The Art of Speaking and Remaining Silent, and a sermon delivered to the clergy of Eichstätt assembled at the diocesan synod held in 1435.202 The paper used for these texts consists of at least five different watermarks, suggesting that it was purchased over time as needed. 203 Al- though the eighty-four folia for even the largest of these sections would not have represented a great financial burden, after four years Ulrich had assembled a pastoral and theological handbook, including texts on confession, the Mass, and the articles of faith. The steady pace of Ulrich’s copying makes one wonder if perhaps he had access to an institutional library from which he was allowed to borrow materials for one-year periods. The Benedictine monastery in Plankstetten and the collegiate church in Hilpoltstein, at which Ulrich would be found as a canon in 1480, are possibilities.204 Books were valuable not only as sources of information and inspiration, but, as we have already seen in the case of donors to the parish library of Schwabach, also a form of capital. Bartholomeus Mülich, the rector of Obereichstätt, after spending two years copying out the Discourses from the Moral Philosophy of Cato, donated the manuscript to Rebdorf only to be given the manuscript back again for use during his lifetime. 205 Citing a desire to avoid damnation, Mülich saw his labors as following Christ’s injunction: “Do not work for the food that perishes, but for the food that endures for eternal life . . . (John 6:27).”206 In other words, priests could reap a double benefit by copying works for themselves; in addition to acquiring texts to aid them in their work as pastor or for their own private devotion, they could also later exchange them for prayers or even anniversary masses. 207 Not limited to institutions, this practice could also facilitate the transfer of books between individuals. In 1510 Paul Conrad, the perpetual chaplain in Pappenheim, left a printed copy of Nicolaus de Blony’s On the Sacraments (Strasbourg, 1489) as a bequest to Johannes Mendlein in exchange for twelve masses. 208 Al- though such practices would have eased the circulation of texts for cash- strapped priests, the fact that so many of these books were donated ad pias causas calls for interpretive caution. Because it is unlikely that a priest would 88 Chapter 3 have donated his copy of Parzival to a monastery in exchange for masses and prayers, the books examined here should be seen as reflecting priests’ tastes in Latin, instructional, pastoral, and devotional literature, and cannot be equated with the clergy’s literary interests more generally. The binding of once independent quires to form miscellanies, the acquisition of numerous shorter texts over several years, the copying of single or small groups of sermons—all these point to the fact that the manuscripts discussed here represent the catches of a few clerics from the stream of texts circulating between booksellers, students, friars, monasteries, secular clerics, and even laypersons. The printing press began to impact the parish clergy only in the last quarter of the fifteenth century, at which point prices fell sufficiently to allow clerics to buy rather than copy texts. A combination of collegial and self-interested motives led many clergy to donate at least portions of their growing collections to parish libraries, which then stood open to clerics without the means or desire to acquire texts of their own. Far from fruitless, the search for book-owning priests is crucial if we are to understand the religious culture in the parishes. Most book owners in the sample remain relatively anonymous with one spectacular exception. In the next chapter, we turn to the book collection of Ulrich Pfeffel, a priest and preacher who scattered biographical notes throughout his substantial library.

NOTES

1. Quoted by Thayer, Penitence, Preaching and the Coming of the Reformation, 28. 2. Ruf, Eine Ingolstädter Bücherschenkung. 3. Needham, “The Library of Hilprand Brandenburg,” 95–125. 4. Eisermann, “Schreiben, Stiften, Sterben,” 416. 5. Ibid., 385–92, 406–11. 6. Buzas, Deutsche Bibliotheksgeschichte, 132; Ruf, “Der Augsburger Pfarrer Molitoris,” 397–400. 7. Landmann, “Drei Predigt- und Seelsorgsbücher,” 209–40. Two other studies by Land- mann relevant to the theme are “Predigten und Predigtwerke in den Händen der Wiener Welt- geistlichkeit des XV. Jahrhunderts,” and “Predigten und Predigtwerke in den Händen der Weltgeistlichkeit des 15. Jahrhunderts nach alten Bücherlisten des Bistums Konstanz.” 8. Leidel, Die Pfarreien des Klosters Wülzburg, 84. 9. Swanson, “Pastoral Revolutionaries?,” 124. Swanson discusses three pastoral miscellanies owned by priests from medieval England in this article. 10. Quoted in Hirsch, Printing, Selling and Reading, 1. 11. Hoffmann, “Gutenberg und die Folgen,” 5–23, quote on p. 16. 12. Hills, “Early Italian Papermaking,” 73–97. 13. By 1392 there were at least nine papermills operating in France; see Barker, “The Trade and Manufacture of Paper before 1800,” in Cavaciocchi, Produzione e Commercio, 213–19; Hills, “Early Italian Papermaking,” 96; Stromer, “Die erste Papiermühle,” 305–7; Irsigler, “La carta; il commercio,” in Cavaciocchi, Produzione e Commercio, 148. 14. One ream of paper consisted of 20 books, each consisting of either 24 sheets of writing paper or 25 sheets of printing paper; Irsigler, “La carta,” in Cavaciocchi, Produzione e Com- mercio, 170–71. Parish Libraries and Personal Collections 89

15. Lyall, “Materials: The Paper Revolution,” 11. Whereas a ream of paper in Cologne in 1371 cost the monetary equivalent of 121 grams of silver, in 1396/98 it cost only 84 g, in 1462 33 g, and by 1495 only 18 g; see Corsten, “Papierpreise im mittelalterlichen Köln,” 52–53. 16. Hoffmann, “Gutenberg und die Folgen,” 10. The range results from the difference between the price at which paper was generally available in Cologne according to Corsten’s research, versus the 4 gulden per ream that Gutenberg paid for the paper used in his Bible. This latter was high quality paper and cannot be taken as representative. 17. Corsten, “Papierpreise im mittelalterlichen Köln,” 46. 18. For example, Bayerische Staatsbibliothek, Clm 6487, fols. 12v-14v, 123r-134r. 19. For example, Bayerische Staatsbibliothek, Clm 6487, fols. 191–235 and Universitätsbibliothek München 2o Cod. ms. 55, fols. 217–50. 20. By the last decade of the fifteenth century, presses in the Empire were producing about 400,000 volumes per year; Neddermeyer, Von der Handschrift, 1:87. 21. Hoffmann, “Gutenberg und die Folgen;” Neddermeyer, Von der Handschrift, 2:831–62. 22. The following examples are from Hoffmann, “Gutenberg und die Folgen,” 6–7, 9, 15–16. 23. UE Cod. st 447, fol. 50v; Keller, Die mittelalterlichen Handschriften, 2:235. 24. Bayerische Staatsbibliothek, Clm 28272, Iv. 25. UE Cod. st 435, inside front cover; Keller, Die mittelalterlichen Handschriften, 2:210. 26. This particular volume is listed as additional #1145 in the unpublished catalog kept at the Universitätsbibliothek Eichstätt. 27. Hubay, Incunabula Eichstätter Bibliotheken, #605. 28. I also discuss some evidence about statutes and liturgical books from the diocese of Eichstätt in a forthcoming article, “Transmission and Selection,” that will appear in a volume of conference proceedings. 29. The parish library of Schwabach includes a manuscript ritual (Band 14), musical miscellany (Band 15), breviary according to the rubrics of Bamberg (Band 9), two Eichstätt breviaries printed in 1483 (#35) and 1484 (#36), a Constance missal printed before 1481 (#81), and an Eichstätt ritual printed in 1488 (#85); for descriptions see Wambach, Die Kirchenbibliothek Schwabach, passim. The collections in the university library of Eichstätt also contain five manuscript breviaries according to the Eichstätt rite (UE Cod. st 276, 277, 373, 459/460, 468), three of which can be definitively assigned to a church: UE Cod. st 373, a breviary which belonged to the filial church in Erkertshoven, UE Cod. st 459/460, a two-volume breviary which probably belonged to the parish church in Roth, and UE Cod. st 468, a breviary which belonged to Neues Kolleg in Eichstätt; see Keller, Die mittelalterlichen Handschriften, 2:130, 292, 315. Printed copies of Eichstätt liturgical books in Eichstätt collections include two copies of the breviary printed in 1483 by Michael Reyser (Hubay #222) and one copy of the edition printed in 1497 by Michael Furter in Basel (Hubay #223;); one copy of the missal printed by Michael Reyser in Eichstätt in 1489 (Hubay #694) and two copies of his edition from 1494 (Hubay #695, 696); and four copies of the ritual printed by Michael Reyser in 1488 (Hubay #758; additional #1139). Of Michael Reyser’s 1483 breviary, only nine copies in total have survived; see Möckesch, “Ein Inkunabelfund in Pappenheim,” 247–49. Several copies of the synodal statutes have survived, but only a few of these were definitively in the hands of secular clerics: Clm 6487, copied by a vicar in Spalt in 1455–1456, contains among other things Johann III von Eich’s synodal statutes from 1447, the Fourteen Articles from 1453, and the statutes from the provincial council of Mainz held in 1451; Cgm 258, copied by an assistant priest in Mörnsheim, contains a copy of Johann’s 1447 synodal statutes; Band 8 in the parish library of Schwabach contains a copy of Albert II von Hohenrechberg’s statutes from 1434; GNM Hs 17912, partially copied by the parish priests in Pleinfeld and Aurach, contains synodal statutes from 1447, 1466, and 1470, as well as the Fourteen Articles. Printed editions of the statutes are represented in Eichstätt collections by four copies of the synodal statutes printed by Michael Reyser in 1484 (Hubay #952, 953; additional #1101, 1109), as well as nine copies of the 1496 edition printed by Michael Furter in Basel (Hubay #954). Because Ilona Hubay’s catalog of the incunabula in Eichstätt collections is incomplete, the librarians of the Universitätsbibliothek Eichstätt keep an unpublished list of additions with descriptions of varying length and quality. The references to additional #1101, 1109, and 1139 can be found there. 90 Chapter 3

30. Bünz, “Klerus, Kirche und Frömmigkeit,” 41–48. The record is B230 in the Diözesanarchiv Eichstätt. There is an earlier visitation record for the archdeaconry of Prague from 1379 to 1382 and a later one for the diocese of Regensburg from 1508; see Hlaváček and Hledíková, eds., Protocollum Visitationis Archidiaconatus Pragensis; Mai and Popp, “Das Regensburger Visitationsprotokoll von 1508,” 7–316. It should be noted that Vogt could not visit those parishes exempt from the bishop’s jurisdiction. Despite this limitation, Vogt did manage to inspect 87 percent of the clergy and 92 percent of the churches in the diocese; Peter Lang, “Würfel, Wein und Wettersegen,” 222, n. 13. The Fourteen Articles are printed in Schannat and Hartzheim, Concilia Germaniae 5:433–37 and Suttner, “Versuch einer Conci- liengeschichte,” 148–58. 31. For an overview of the synodal activity in Eichstätt and other neighboring dioceses, see Flachenecker, “Das beständige Bemühen um Reform,” 55–75. 32. “Caret statutis synodaliis ideo veram formam absolucionis a peccatis contentam in statutis synodaliis ignorat;” DE, B230, fol. 29v; Suttner, “Versuch einer Conciliengeschichte,” 171, n. 2. Johann’s 1447 statutes are also printed in Schannat and Hartzheim, Concilium Germaniae, 5:362–76. 33. The proper formula runs, “Dominus noster ihesus christus dignetur te absoluere, et ego auctoritate, qua fungor, absoluo te a uinculo excommunicacionis minoris, si incidisti et a peccatis tuis. In nomine patris et filii et spiritus sancti;” Schannat and Hartzheim, Concilia Germaniae, 5:369. 34. For example, regarding the assistant priest in Eschenbach Vogt noted, “Habetur defectus in statutis synodalibus, quia non reperitur in eisdem forma absolutionis a sententiis excommu- nicationis maioris,” DE, B230, fol. 61v. For the distinction between major and minor excommunication, see Vodola, Excommunication in the Middle Ages, 36, 41–42. 35. DE, B6, 109. This manuscript is called the Liber statutorum and contains numerous statutes issued by Johann III von Eich. Portions of it, but not the statute referred to here, were edited by Buchner in Johann III. 36. “Statuta quaedam synodalia felicis memoriae domini johannis immediati praedecessoris nostri, anno domini millesimo quadringentesimo quadragesimo septimo, in synodo pro tunc publicata, prout jam pridem similiter ac per nos actum est, ratificavimus, et nunc praesentibus ratificamus certo moderamine in eisdem observato, prout ex infra scriptis nostris statutis intel- ligetis. Praeterea nova quaedam edidimus, quae omnia vim legis et praecepti sub poenis in eisdem contentis habere, ac districte per vos observari volumus;” Schannat and Hartzheim, Concilia Germaniae, 5:471. Wilhelm’s statutes were edited by Schannat and Hartzheim and dated to 1465 on the basis of the 1484 edition of the synodal statues printed by Michael Reyser in Eichstätt. Jospeh Suttner later rejected this dating because of references in the visitation record that refer to Johann III von Eich’s statutes, arguing that had Wilhelm promulgated his own prior to 1480 that there would have been references to his statutes instead. Suttner published his piece on the history of episcopal legislation in Eichstätt in 1854 with an addition completed in 1857. He was most likely unware, therefore, of GNM Hs 17912, which was given to the Germanisches Nationalmuseum by an anonymous donor in 1861. See Suttner, “Versuch einer Conciliengeschichte,” 171, n. 2; Hilg, Kataloge des Germanischen Nationalmuseums Nürnberg, 2:112. Suttner did not notice that Vogt also checked the formula for major excommunication, which was not included in the 1447 statutes. Sucessive scholars have repeated Suttner’s claim that Vogt was checking only the 1447 statutes; see Lang, “Würfel, Wein und Wettersegen” 229, n. 66. 37. When Albert Scheuch, the plebanus in Pettenhoven, admits to Vogt that he has all the synodal statues except the “nova,” he probably means that he has the 1447 statues, but lacks those from Wilhelm; DE, B230, fol. 5v. 38. Inconsistencies in Vogt’s terminology prevent an exact count of the number who lacked the Fourteen Articles, but the number is roughly equal to the number of those who lacked the synodal statutes. Eighteen clerics are explicitly noted as lacking a copy of the Fourteen Arti- cles, but there is good reason to believe that this number is inaccurate. Of the first fifty interviews conducted by Vogt, there are twelve references to the Articles, in the next fifty, three, and in the final 430 interviews only three more. There does not seem to be any good explanation for this. References to the synodal statutes do not experience a similar decline, nor Parish Libraries and Personal Collections 91 is there reason to believe that the parish clergy in this first region should have been either more negligent or less well-supplied than any other. On the contrary, this area lies between Eichstätt and Ingolstadt, the two largest cultural centers of the diocese, and portions of it lay within the bishop’s secular jurisdiction as well. It is possible that Vogt simply stopped asking to see them, but given the consistency of his other examinations this seems to me unlikely. Another possibility is that Vogt began to consider the synodal statues and the Fourteen Articles as a single item. In these first 50 interviews mentioned above, only one priest who lacked the synodal statutes, out of eleven in all, did not also lack the Fourteen Articles. I believe that Vogt was simply trying to save himself some ink and that from this point on in the record, those who he lists as lacking the synodal statutes were also lacking the Fourteen Articles. 39. Of the sixty-three assistant priests interviewed, Vogt cited only six for book-related issues, and among these only a single assistant priest, in Eschenbach, for not having the synodal statutes. It seems unlikely that the assistant priests were so much more conscientious than their beneficed colleagues and that Vogt was simply less interested in examining their books of hours, breviaries, and statutes. Even if we remove the assistant priests from the calculation, however, the percentage of priests who failed to have the statutes climbs only to 16.5 percent. Peter Lang’s figure of 86 citations with regard to the statutes and Fourteen Articles differs from my own figure of 90 in that I counted four more citations with respect to the Fourteen Articles than Prof. Lang; see Lang, “Würfel, Wein und Wettersegen,” 229, n. 69. 40. DE, B230, fols. 4v, 77r. 41. Ibid., fols. 110r, 117v, 135v. 42. 13.5 percent if we again subtract the assistant priests. 43. Even these cannot necessarily be considered uninformed. The ten deacons in the diocese were required to hold a chapter once or twice per year, at which the statutes were read to the clergy. The vicar in Joshoven apparently considered this sufficient exposure as his only excuse when Vogt asked to see his copy of the statutes was that he had heard them in chapter (DE, B230, fol. 4v). An altarist in Berching did not know the proper formula for the absolution of sins, but used that recommended by Heinrich von Langenstein instead (DE, B230, fol. 29r). 44. Ibid., fol. 22v. 45. Ibid., fol. 51r. 46. Priests might well own their own breviaries or books of hours, but Vogt seems to have been interested only in those belonging to churches. For example, the parish priest of Merken- dorf excuses the lack of a breviary on the recent separation of the parish from the parish of Eschenbach: “Quia ecclesia noviter est separata ab ecclesia in Eschenbach, ideo caret brevia- rio.” In Untermessing, Vogt notes simply, “ecclesia caret libris horarum,” ibid., fol. 104v, 80r. 47. “Obsequiale juxta antiquam rubricam,” ibid., fol. 149r. Buchner discusses the versions Vogt was checking in “Kirchliche Zustände,” 152–56. 48. Band 14; Wambach, Kirchenbibliothek Schwabach, 169–71. 49. DE, B230, fol. 15v. 50. Ibid., fol. 98r. 51. Fiona Kisby has similarly found that London parish churches also tended to possess full complements of liturgical books; see “Books in London Parish Churches,” 308. 52. In 1497 Bishop Gabriel von Eyb had a breviary printed for the diocese by Michael Furter in Basel; Roth, Michael Reyser, 14–17. The bishops of Eichstätt were certainly not alone in this. In all at least sixty-seven bishops commissioned over 100 editions of liturgical texts in the last quarter of the fifteenth century; see Nowakowska, “From Strassburg to Trent,” 3–38. 53. The rector in Ochsenfeld admitted that he did not possess the statues, but would inquire with the rector of the neighboring hospital about acquiring a copy; DE, B230, fol. 1r. 54. Ibid., fol. 22r. 55. Ibid., fol. 27v. 56. Ibid., fol. 99v. 57. Lucien Febvre described the late Middle Ages as gripped by an “insatiable hunger for God,” while Bernd Moeller described the fifteenth century as “one of the most churchly- minded and devout periods of the Middle Ages;” see his “Piety in Germany around 1500,” 60. 58. Markus Lommer has criticized the overly loose definition of parish libraries used by most scholars and argues that a strict differentiation must be made between the necessary 92 Chapter 3 liturgical books and the more institutionalized and scholarly collections of actual parish “libraries”: “Der Terminus [Pfarrkirchenbibliothek] ist im strengen Sinne anzuwenden auf die im Vergleich zu frühen rein oder fast ausschlieβlich praktisch orientierten Bücherbeständen ge- hobenere Form der ‘wissenschaftlichen’ Gebrauchsbücherei als allgemeiner (pfarrlicher) Kir- chenbesitz in einem speziell gebauten oder wenigstens dafür eingerichteten Raum in, an oder neben der Pfarrkirche, einer Bücherei, die über einen Grundbestand an liturgisch-pastoralen Handschriften inhaltlich wie auch gröβenmäβig deutlich hinausreicht und für Kleriker und Kirchendiener, Scholastiker und Scholaren, aber im Lauf der Zeit zunehmend auch für (be- stimmte) Laien in der Gemeinde ‘öffentlich’ benutzbar ist und eine weitgehend geschlossene Aufstellung zeigt”; Lommer, Kirche und Geisteskultur in Sulzbach, 67. 59. Charlemagne at the synod of Aachen in 802 required each parish church to have a sacramentary, lectionary, baptismal ordinance, computus, the penitential canons, a psalter, and a homiliary; Buzas, Deutsche Bibliotheksgeschichte, 107. This list was already old in the ninth century and would later find its way into the Decretum, D 38 c 5. 60. Markus Lommer refers to his list of 146 parish libraries founded before the Reformation as merely “preliminary”; Lommer, Kirche und Geisteskultur, 389–96. 61. The richest study of a parish library in its local context is provided by Lommer, Kirche und Geisteskultur. Other studies include Ferrari, “Die Pfarrbibliothek in Zug um 1500,” 21–38; Stewing, “Zum Buchbesitz an der Rudolstädter Stadtkirche im Spätmittelalter,” 9–45 and his more detailed treatment “Bibliothek und Buchbesitz,” 207–303; Krenig, “Nachrichten zur ehemaligen Pfarrbibliothek,” 293–99; Krämer, “Neue Nachrichten,” 36–47; Machilek, “Die Bibliothek der Kapelle,” 161–70; Buzas mentions a series of parish libraries in Deutsche Bibliotheksgeschichte, 108–10; Vizkelety, “Die Fraternitas XXIV plebanorum,” 327–38; for England, see Shinners, “Parish Libraries in Medieval England,” 207–30. Lommer cites further literature in Kirche und Geisteskulture, 389–96. 62. Buzas, Deutsche Bibliotheksgeschichte, 109. 63. Ibid., 110, and 108–10 for numerous other examples. 64. Eisermann, “Schreiben, Stiften, Sterben,” 387–88, n. 23. There are two catalogs for this collection: Staub, ed., Die Inkunabeln der Nicolaus-Matz-Bibliothek and Staub and Staub, eds., Die mittelalterlichen Handschriften der Nicolaus-Matz-Bibliothek. 65. The phrase used is libri librarie; see Stewing, “Zum Buchbesitz,” 22–23. Estimates for the average size of a parish library have varied. According to Buzas, 20–30 books would qualify a parish library as well-stocked, while Oediger believed one of 50–70 volumes would have been unusual. Gerhardt Powitz, on the other hand believes that a library of 150 volumes would no longer have been unusual by 1500; Buzas, Bibliotheksgeschichte, 107; Oediger, Über die Bildung, 131; Powitz, “Die Bibliothek des Frankfurter Stadtpfarrers,” 320. In England a visitation of the archdeaconry of Norwich in the late fourteenth or early fifteenth century, before the massive expansion in production associated with the fifteenth century, found an average of eighteen books per church, but only 8 percent of those found were nonliturgical; see Shinners, “Parish Libraries,” 208. 66. For example in 1471 a “Libreria” was added to the east wall of the parish church in Röβel to accommodate the parish library, newly swollen by the gift of fifty-two volumes from the rector Arnold Clunder in 1469; see Matern and Birch-Hirschfeld, Das Rösseler Pfarrbuch, 15–17, 41. I would like to thank Christopher Herrmann for this reference. At first the rules were merely a confused mixture of the wishes of the library’s benefactors. For example, Friedrich Steinacher von Windsheim, a chaplain, donated ten books to the chapel of Our Lady in Wind- sheim with the stipulation that they should be made available to all the clergy of the city, especially the preachers, provided there was a reasonable expectation that the books would be returned; Machilek, “Die Bibliothek der Kapelle,” 169. In Sulzbach the church wardens oversaw the safekeeping and the lending of books from the parish library as a note on a manuscript of sermons shows: “Iste liber spectat ad liberariam in Sulzpach et recepi de sacristia superiori a vitrico Mynner;” Lommer, Kirche und Geisteskultur, 254–55. The designation of a certain collection of books in the church as a “library” is itself an indication of its institutionalization. 67. Moeller, “Die Anfänge kommunaler Bibliotheken,” 141. 68. Lommer, Kirche und Geisteskultur, 275. Parish Libraries and Personal Collections 93

69. A good example of this process is the parish library of St. Andreas in Braunschweig. The earliest mention of the library is from the bequest of at least eighteen volumes by a Magister Jordanus in 1309 for the use of the parish clergy. In the 1420s the rector of St. Andreas, Johannes Ember, expanded the library to fifty-two volumes and arranged for the construction of a freestanding building to house the books. He alone was allowed to borrow books, but he stipulated in his will that other citizens of Braunschweig beyond the clergy should be allowed access to the library. The Stadtschreiber and rector of the Heilig-Geist- Kapelle in Braunschweig, Gerwin von Hameln (d. 1496), donated 336 volumes to the library during his lifetime and included instructions in his will that while only his family members be allowed to borrow books, at the rate of two books for a maximum period of three months, the city’s clergy, students, scholars, civic officials, and notaries should be permitted access. See Haucap-Nass, Der Braunschweiger Stadtschreiber, 49–58, 137–41 and Herbst, “Die Bibliothek der St. Andreaskirche,” 301–38. 70. The cathedral canons in Eichstätt also had their own library from which it was possible for members to borrow books; Ruf, Mittelalterliche Bibliothekskataloge Deutschlands, 3.2:193–95, 200–201. 71. Ibid., 219. 72. “Iste liber datus est ad liberiam ecclesie sancti Mauricij in Ingolstat per honorabilem virum dominum Hainricum Löffler selmessarium eiusdem anno M cccc lxxviij;” Universitätsbibliothek München 2o Cod. ms. 55, front cover. A second manuscript, Universitätsbibliothek München 2o Cod. ms. 78, has been missing since 1949; see Krämer, Handschriftenerbe des Deutschen Mittelalters, 374. 73. Buchner, “Die mittelalterliche Pfarrpredigt,” 241. 74. In another list which he freely admits is incomplete, Lommer counted 116 preacherships before 1520; Kirche und Geisteskultur, 383–87. Bernhard Neidiger includes a list of 166 in Prädikaturstiftungen in Süddeutschland (1369–1530). See also Neidiger’s article, “Wortgottes- dienst vor der Reformation,” 142–89. 75. In 1434 the parish church in Mitteleschenbach was incorporated to the preachership; Wendehorst, Das Bistum Eichstätt, 1:199. 76. Founded in 1513; Buchner, Das Bistum Eichstätt, 1:75. 77. Founded in 1463; Buchner, Das Bistum Eichstätt, 2:802. 78. Founded in 1424; ibid., 233. 79. Founded in 1444; ibid., 498. 80. Founded between 1463 and 1474; ibid., 689. 81. Founded in 1519; ibid., 862. 82. Founded 1499; ibid., 756. For a discussion of these preacherships, see Buchner, “Die mittelalterliche Pfarrpredigt,” 228–31. 83. Buchner, Das Bistum Eichstätt, 1:32; Buchner, “Die vorreformatorischen Benefizien,” 46. 84. Ruf, Mittelalterliche Bibliothekskataloge Deutschlands, 3.2:317–19. 85. Buchner, “Die mittelalterliche Pfarrpredigt,” 240. 86. Buchner, Das Bistum Eichstätt, 2:862. 87. For an account of the library’s history and a description of the library’s contents see Wambach, Die Kirchenbibliothek Schwabach. 88. Ibid., 17. 89. Ibid., 9–15. There is no evidence for a separate library belonging to the preachership in Schwabach, but at least two preachers, Laurentius Gerber and Johannes Steinbach donated books to the parish library; see ibid., 11. 90. This was a copy of Augustine’s The City of God printed in Strasbourg by 1468 at the latest; ibid., 319. 91. Johannes Gaulenhofer, for example: “Hunc librum legavit Johannes Gaulenhofer primissarius ecclesie parochialis in Schwobach ad bibliothecam iam dicte ecclesie pro communi usu;” ibid., 253. 92. Ex quo bibliotheca sancti Johannis Baptiste in Schwobach pro communi usu omnium sacerdotum fundata est, hoc merito attendebant olim honesti et devoti viri et sacerdotes predicte ecclesie in eadem ecclesia, concorditer cum consensu domini plebani ibidem statuerunt in 94 Chapter 3 perpetuum peragere Sexta feria post festum sanctorum apostolorum Philippi et Jacobi anniver- sarium cum longis vigiliis et cum missis in suffragium animarum omnium predictorum fundat- orum. Hoc attendens dominus Johannes Purckel desiderans particeps fieri in prefato anniversa- rio, ideo legavit in anno domini 1507 presentem librum cum aliis quinque libris ad bibliothecam prefatum; ibid., 12. 93. This is shown most clearly by the duplicates in the collection. The key role played by donations was a feature of larger libraries as well. The university librarian at Oxford was also responsible for personally celebrating the masses in memory of donors to the library; see Gameson, “The Medieval Library,” 49–50. 94. Band 18. The donation reads, “Dominus Steffanus Weickersreuther olim plebanus in Swobach legavit istum librum librarie in Swobach pie recordationis;” Wambach, Die Kirchen- bibliothek Schwabach, 9. 95. Ibid., 10. 96. Ibid., 253. The entire entry reads: “Hunc librum legavit Johannes Gaulenhofer primissarius ecclesie parochialis in Schwobach ad bibliothecam iam dicte ecclesie pro communi usu.” 97. Ibid., 11. 98. Ibid., 10. 99. He donated Band 15 in 1470: “Hunc Librum Legavit Johannes Ampffer ecclesie Sancti Johannis Baptiste in Swabach et discessit anno [14]70;” ibid., 9. 100. The entry recording Conrad’s donation in 1507 reveals the motives behind these donations: “Pietate propter deum et pro remedio anime mee et animarum omnium fidelium defunctorum ego Conradus Flock hunc librum tradidi in bibliothecam ecclesie sancti Johannis baptiste in Swobach anno Domini 1507;” ibid., 10, 258. 101. Ibid., 10, 265–66. 102. Ink #74; ibid., 10. 103. Ibid., 11. 104. Only three out of the twenty-three manuscripts actually contain notes on their date of donation. Band 15, a miscellaneous collection of musical texts and an account of the Passion, was donated in 1470; Band 18, Johannes Nider’s Praeceptorium divinae legis was donated by Stefan Weickersreuther in 1475; Band 5 was donated in 1514. On the other hand, the donations of sixty-two of the ninety-two volumes of incunables were noted. Since these later donations were more carefully noted and consisted, with the exception of Band 5, entirely of incunables, I have assumed that most of the manuscripts were donated without fanfare in the early days of the library, perhaps before it had acquired a more institutionalized identity. 105. Nicolaus of Dinkelsbühl, Postilla cum sermonibus dominicalibus, Band 6, fols. 1r-188v, 293v-338r; Wambach, Die Kirchenbibliothek Schwabach, 89–93. 106. Conradus de Waldhausen, Postilla studentium, Band 1; Wambach, Die Kirchenbiblio- thek Schwabach, 74–75. 107. Peregrinus de Oppeln OP, Sermones de tempore et de sanctis, Band 13, fols. 143r-309v; Wambach, Die Kirchenbibliothek Schwabach, 161–63. 108. Antonius Azaro de Parma OP, Sermones de tempore, Band 11, fols. 183r-267r; Wam- bach, Die Kirchenbibliothek Schwabach, 143–45. 109. Jacobus de Voragine OP, Sermones de sanctis et de festis, Band 16, fols. 26r-182r; Wambach, Die Kirchenbibliothek Schwabach, 180–81. 110. Band 11, fols. 146r-182v; Wambach, Die Kirchenbibliothek Schwabach, 142–43. 111. Henricus de Frimaria, De decem praeceptis, Band 7, fols. 250v-280r; Nicolaus of Dinkelsbühl, De decem praeceptis decalogi, Band 11, fols. 94r-135r and Band 20, fols. 40r- 85v; Johannes Nider, Praeceptorium divinae legis, Band 18—this volume was in the personal possession of the rector Stefan Weickersreuther until his death in 1475; Wambach, Die Kir- chenbibliothek Schwabach, 110, 140–41, 186–87, 196. 112. Henricus de Hassia, Meditatio de dominica oratione, Band 7, fols. 242v-250r; Nicolaus of Dinkelsbühl, De oratione dominica, Band 6, fols. 242r-293v and Band 20, fols. 181r-218r; Wambach, Die Kirchenbibliothek Schwabach, 92, 109, 197. 113. Franciscus de Mayronis, De duodecim articulis fidei, Band 7, fols. 233r-242v; Wam- bach, Die Kirchenbibliothek Schwabach, 108. Parish Libraries and Personal Collections 95

114. Ps. Augustine, De symbolo apostolorum, Band 7, fols. 339v-344v; Wambach, Die Kir- chenbibliothek Schwabach, 116. 115. Band 7, fols. 149r-162v and Band 11, fols. 135v-145v; Wambach, Die Kirchenbiblio- thek Schwabach, 98. 116. Band 7, fols. 190v-213v; Wambach, Die Kirchenbibliothek Schwabach, 104. 117. Band 10, fols. 122r-185v; Wambach, Die Kirchenbibliothek Schwabach, 134–35. 118. Band 13, fols. 371v-372v; Wambach, Die Kirchenbibliothek Schwabach, 164–65. 119. Band 8, fols. 61v-97r, the other two copies are Band 7, fols. 1r-47r and Band 12, fols. 207r-241r; Wambach, Die Kirchenbibliothek Schwabach, 94–95, 122, 151. 120. Gerardus de Vliederhoven, Tractatus de quattuor novissimis, Band 7, fols. 284r-302r and Band 12, fols. 255r-280v; Ps.-Bede, Signa quindecim ante novissimum contingentia, Band 7, fols. 322v-324r; Peter Comester, De quindecim signis, Band 7, fols. 324v-325r; Wambach, Die Kirchenbibliothek Schwabach, 111, 113–14, 152. 121. Thomas Ebendorffer de Haselbach, De penis inferni, Band 7, fols. 325r; Wambach, Die Kirchenbibliothek Schwabach, 114. 122. Quaestiones de latria, hyperdulia et dulia, Band 10, fols. 200r-211v; Thomas Ebendorf- fer de Haselbach, Dubia de sanctis, Band 12, fols. 291r-346r; Wambach, Die Kirchenbibliothek Schwabach, 154–56. 123. Bernardino of Siena, De spiritu sancto, Band 12, fols. 159r-197v; Wambach, Die Kir- chenbibliothek Schwabach, 148–49. 124. Narcissus Herz de Berching(?), De passione christi, Band 13, fols. 314r-371r; Wam- bach, Die Kirchenbibliothek Schwabach, 163–64. 125. Nicolaus de Jawor, Tractatus de superstitionibus, Band 12, fols. 124r-158r; Thomas Aquinas, Tractatus de superstitionibus, Band 10, fols. 215r-249v; Wambach, Die Kirchenbibli- othek Schwabach, 147–48. 126. Nicolaus of Dinkelsbühl, De dilectione Dei et proximi, Band 6, fols. 191r-242r, Band 11, fols. 61r-94r, and Band 20, fols. 1r-40r; De vitiis et virtutibus, Band 11, fols. 1r-60r and Band 20, fols. 86r-179v; De octo beatitudinis, Band 20, fols. 218v-252v; Wambach, Die Kirchenbibliothek Schwabach, 91–92, 138–40, 195–98. 127. Epistolae pauli dominicales, feriales et de sanctis dictae gorrae, Band 2; Johannes de San Geminiano OP, Explicatio evangeliorum et epistolarum, Band 16, fols. 1r-22r; Augustinus Triumphus de Ancona, Postilla super epistolis canonicis, Band 17. There was also a copy of the Gospels, Band 13, fols. 22r-142v; Wambach, Die Kirchenbibliothek Schwabach, 76–78, 159–60, 176–79, 183–86. 128. Johannes Geuss, De ludo aleae et taxillorum, Band 10, fols. 185v-190r; Wambach, Die Kirchenbibliothek Schwabach, 135–36. 129. Liber de naturis animalium cum moralitatibus, Band 3; Wambach, Die Kirchenbiblio- thek Schwabach, 78–82. 130. Johannes Calderinus, De interdicto ecclesiastico, Band 8, fols. 27r-56r and Band 10, fols. 62r-86v; Johannes Andreae, De modo observandi interdictum, Band 8, fols. 56r-61v; Wambach, Die Kirchenbibliothek Schwabach, 120–21, 129–30. 131. Hyningius Pultenhagen, Quaestio de usuris along with two canons on the subject from the Council of Lyon, Band 8, fols. 1r-14v; Henricus de Hassia, De contractibus, Band 12, fols. 2r-47r; Wambach, Die Kirchenbibliothek Schwabach, 117–18, 146. 132. Johannes Andreae, Arbor consanguinitatis, Band 20, fols. 343r-345v; Wambach, Die Kirchenbibliothek Schwabach, 199. 133. Johannes Andreae, Summa de sponsalibus et matrimoniis, Band 20, fols. 346r-349v; Wambach, Die Kirchenbibliothek Schwabach, 199–200. 134. Johannes de Hildesheim, Historia trium regum, Band 16, fols. 186r-217v; Wambach, Die Kirchenbibliothek Schwabach, 181–82. 135. Band 4, fols. 173r-200v and Band 7, fols. 307v-320v. A third copy entered the library along with a manuscript (Band 5) donated in 1514 by Conrad Flock, a former assistant priest in Schwabach later engaged as an altarist in Nuremberg; Wambach, Die Kirchenbibliothek Schwabach, 83–85, 112–13. 136. Band 20, fols. 253r-342v; Wambach, Die Kirchenbibliothek Schwabach, 198–99. 96 Chapter 3

137. Bernard of Clairvaux, Sermones de tempore et de sanctis et de diversis, Ink. 27 (Speyer, c. 1481–1482); Robertus Carracciolus, Sermones de adventu etc., Ink. 37–38 (Strasbourg, not after 1475); Robertus Carracciolus, Sermones de laudibus sanctorum, Ink. 39 (Speyer, 1490); Robertus Carracciolus, Sermones quadragesimales de poenitentia, Sermo II in festo annuntia- tionis BMV, Ink. 40 (Venice, 1473); Robert Carracciolus, Sermones quadragesimales de poenitentia, Ink. 41 (Basel, before 7/10/1475); Michael Carcano, Sermonarium de peccatis per adventum et per duas quadragesimas, Ink. 42 (Venice, 1476); Syrus Ephrem, Sermones selecti, lat., Ink. 51 (Freiburg, not after 1491); Johannes Gritsch, Quadragesimale, Ink. 61 (Nurem- berg, 1479); Johannes Herolt, Sermones Discipuli de tempore et de sanctis una cum Promptua- rio exemplorum et de miraculis BMV, Ink. 64 (Nuremberg, 1481); Leonardus de Utino, Ser- mones quadragesimales de legibus dicti, Ink. 74 (Venice, 1473); Leonardus de Utino, Ser- mones de sanctis, Ink. 75 (Ulm, 1475); Ps.-Petrus de Palude, Sermones thesauri novi de tempore et de sanctis, Ink. 94 (Nuremberg, 1487); Ambrosius de Spiera, Quadragesimale de floribus sapientiae, Ink. 103 (Venice, 1485). These and further references to Schwabach incunabula can be under their signature numbers in Wambach, Die Kirchenbibliothek Schwabach, passim. 138. Bartholomaeus de Chaimis, Confessionale, Ink. 43 (Strasbourg, not before Oct. 1474), Ink. 44–45 (Nuremberg, 1477); Antoninus Florentinus, Confessionale Defecerunt, Ink. 10 (Venice, 1474); Astesanus, Summa de casibus conscientiae, Ink. 15 (Nuremberg, 1482). 139. Thomas Aquinas, Scriptum super tertio libro Sententiarum, Ink 108 (Cologne, 1476); Thomas Aquinas, Scriptum super quarto libro Sententiarum, Ink. 109 (Cologne, 1480); Thom- as Aquinas, Summa theologica part I, Ink. 110 (Venice, 1477); Thomas Aquinas, Summa theologica part 2.1, Ink. 111 (Venice, 1478); Thomas Aquinas, Summa theologica part 2.2; Ink. 112 (Venice, 1480); Thomas Aquinas, Opuscula LXXII, Ink. 113 (Venice, 1490). 140. [Hugh of Strasbourg], Compendium theologicae veritatis, Ink. 2 (Nuremberg, 1470/72), Ink. 3 (Speyer, 1473), Ink. 4 (Strasbourg, 1489). 141. Antoninus Florentinus, Summa theologica, part 1, Ink. 12 (Nuremberg, 1478); Summa theologica, part 4, Ink. 13 (Nuremberg, 1479); Summa theologica, tabula, Ink. 14 (Speyer, 1487–88); Peter Lombard, Sententiarum libri IV, with Bonaventure’s commentary, p. 1–4, Ink. 93 (Nuremberg, 1491). 142. Nicolaus of Lyra, Biblia cum postillis, parts 1–4, Ink. 29 (Nuremberg, 1493); Henricus Jerung, Elucidarius scripturarum, Ink. 71 (Nuremberg, 1476); Johannes Marchesinus, Mam- motrectus super Bibliam, Ink. 77 (Venice, 1479); Peter Lombard, Glossa magistralis psalterii, Ink. 92 (Nuremberg, 1478); Simon de Cassia, Expositio super totum corpus evangeliorum, Ink. 102 (Strasbourg, c. 1484/87); Johannes de Turrecremata, Expositio super toto psalterio, Ink. 118 (Augsburg, not after 1471). There were also two biblical concordances: Conradus de Halberstadt, Concordantiae bibliorum, Ink. 50 (Nuremberg, 1485) and Johannes, Abbas Nivi- cellensis, Concordantiae bibliae et canonum, Ink. 73 (Basel, c. 1488). 143. Boniface VIII, Liber sextus, with gloss of Johannes Andreae, Ink. 33 (Basel, 1476). 144. Clement V, Constitutiones, with gloss of Johannes Andreae, Ink. 47 (Basel, 1476). 145. Council of Basil, Decreta, Ink. 48 (Basel, after 3/1/1499); Council of Constance, Decre- ta, Ink. 49 (Hagenau, 1500). These two works were bound together. 146. Augustine, Opuscula, Ink. 19–20 (Strasbourg, 1491); Augustine, De civitate dei, Ink. 21 (Strasbourg, not after 1486); Augustine, Enchiridion de fide, spe et caritate, Ink. 22 (Stras- bourg, not after 1473). 147. Gregory I, Epistolae, Ink. 58 (Augsburg, 1475/76); Gregory I, Moralia in Job, Ink. 59 (Nuremberg, 1471) and Ink. 60 (Cologne, c. 1477). 148. Jerome, Aureola ex floribus S. Hieronymi contexta, Ink. 65 (Speyer, c. 1472); Ps-Je- rome, Vitas patrum, Ink. 122 (Nuremberg, 1478). 149. Boethius, De consolatione philosophiae, Ink. 30 (Deventer, 1490). 150. Isidore of Seville, Etymologiae, Ink. 69 (Strasbourg, c. 1473) and Ink. 70 (Basel, 1489). 151. Hugh of St. Victor, Soliloquium in modum dialogi, Ink. 66 (Strasbourg, not after 1473). 152. Peter Comestor, Historia scholastica, Ink. 89 (Strasbourg, 1485). 153. Bernard of Clairvaux, Sermones de tempore et de sanctis et de diversis, Ink. 27 (Speyer, not after 1482). Parish Libraries and Personal Collections 97

154. Pius II, Epistolae familiares, Ink. 95 (Nuremberg, 1496); Albrecht von Eyb, Margarita poetica, Ink. 52 (Rome, 1480). 155. Shinners, “Parish Libraries,” 222. 156. Johannes Menger (Ink. 64). 157. Petrus Linck (Ink. 20) and Johannes Purckel (Ink. 19). 158. To arrive at the above numbers I have counted manuscripts by the volume; in other words whatever is between the covers of a binding counts as a single book. Regarding printed texts, on the other hand, I have followed convention and counted each bibliographic unit separately. It must be borne in mind, therefore, that although thirty of the seventy-three individually owned or produced, nonliturgical books in the sample were printed, the manuscripts contain far more than twice as many texts. I have also included only texts for which I have found surviving physical evidence and excluded those for which I found only reports or testaments, such as for the altarist Johannes Porger’s donation of two prayer books, a Psalter, and Nicolaus of Lyra’s postils to the altar of St. Johann in Weissenburg in 1426; see Leidel, Die Pfarreien des Klosters Wülzburg, 84. 159. A text copied in the mid-fifteenth century reproduced the colophon of its exemplar, which had been copied in 1384 by a Hainricus sacerdotis, viceplebanus in Ebenried; see UE Cod. st 203, fol. 124v and Hilg, Die mittelalterlichen Handschriften, 1:110. 160. Dominus Häldrer plebanus in Änsfelt [Ensfeld] legauit hunc librum venerabilibus patri- bus ac fratribus monasterii Rebdorff ob sui perpetuam memoriam atque recordacionem 1508; UE Cod. st 194, front cover; Hilg, Die mittelalterlichen Handschriften, 1:96. 161. Iste libellus pertinet ad magistrum Georgium yedung; Hubay, Incunabula Eichstätter Bibliotheken, #70. 162. Götz, Die Urkunden von St. Moritz in Ingolstadt, nr. 378. 163. Another fortuitous identification involved Ansbach Ms lat. 40. The book has two ownership marks: Iste li[ber e]s[t] ...... uchstetten and Petrus Hersperger de Rottenbach studen[s]. There is a Petrus Hernsperger in the visitation record of 1480, but nothing would have allowed us to identify him with the owner of Ansbach Ms. lat. 40 if Vogt had not noted that Peter’s first benefice was in the parish church of Rauchstetten; DE, B230, fol. 11v. 164. Hilg, Die mittelalterlichen Handschriften, 1:165. 165. Keller, Die mittelalterlichen Handschriften, 2:455; Suttner, Schematismus, 15. 166. By 1560 two-thirds of the parishes were Protestant; see Röttel, Das Hochstift Eichstätt, 31. There is some debate about the effect that the Reformation had on parish libraries. Bernd Moeller has claimed that during the Reformation there were no “Bücherstürme” to compare with those launched against images; Moeller, “Die Anfänge kommunaler Bibliotheken,” 146. In 1525, however, an assault on the parish church in Zürich led to the destruction of fifty liturgical books. Even if guided assaults against the contents of parish libraries were rare, simple neglect or the maculation of books judged to be without value could lead to huge losses. That this fate was not inevitable, however, is shown by the example of Johannes Jugler, protestant pastor in Sulzbach from 1580–1613, who reorganized and carefully preserved the Sulzbach parish library despite the Catholic origin of the majority of the volumes; see Lommer, Kirche und Geisteskultur, 54, 70, 278. 167. The fifteenth century witnessed a binding boom. Not only did the growing production of the fifteenth-century pen and press increase demand for binding material, but many monasteries also chose this period to rebind books from earlier centuries; see Powitz, “Libri inutiles in mittelalterlichen Bibliotheken,” 288–304. 168. UE Cod. st 248; Hilg, Die mittelalterlichen Handschriften, 1:205–8. 169. UE Cod. st 448, fols. 156r-235v; Keller, Die mittelalterlichen Handschriften, 2:240–45. 170. Keller, Die mittelalterlichen Handschriften, 2:240. 171. The section is currently fols. 344–65, but was once fols. 119–40 of another manuscript. 172. Here there is disagreement among scholars. Neddermeyer believes that Latin theological books and handbooks suffered above average losses; Von der Handschrift, 1:77–78. Rudolf Hirsch, on the other hand, argues that vernacular books did; Printing, Selling and Reading, 11. 173. More manuscripts have survived in Bavaria and Austria, for example, due to the less- ened impact there of the Reformation and Thirty Years’ War, while fewer have survived in 98 Chapter 3

France due to the ravages of the Hundred Years’ War; see Neddermeyer; Von der Handschrift, 1:65. 174. According to Neddermeyer, handbooks had a poor chance of survival; Von der Hands- chrift, 1:78. Hirsch highlights heretical, educational, and devotional works as particularly liable to destruction, Printing, Selling and Reading, 11. 175. Looking at a set of incunabula editions for which the sizes of the editions are known, Neddermeyer concluded that folio volumes had a 6 percent survival rate, quartos 2.3 percent, and octavo editions 1.2 percent; Von der Handschrift, 1:77. Cited by Neddermeyer and useful for thinking more generally about the survival of historical evidence is Esch, “Überlieferungs- Chance und Überlieferungs-Zufall,” 529–70. 176. Neddermeyer, Von der Handschrift, 1:81. 177. Buringh, Medieval Manuscript Production, 231. 178. David D’Avray has already argued that Neddermeyer’s methodology works better for large books belonging to institutional libraries than it does for the portable books used by the friars; see his Medieval Marriage Sermons, 15–30 and especially “Printing, mass communication, and religious reformation,” 50–70. 179. Neddermeyer, Von der Handschrift, 1:63; Buringh, Medieval Manuscript Production, 200–203. Some of the noted increases in the library holdings of ecclesiastical institutions, especially parishes, were due of course to donations by individual clerics. For example, Ulrich Koler, the former rector of Uttenreut and mass priest in Eybach, brought five manuscripts with him when he entered Rebdorf sometime before 1467; see Ruf, Mittelalterliche Bibliothekskata- loge Deutschlands, 3.2:257. 180. Three articles in the collection Griffiths and Pearsall, Book Production and Publishing in Britain, 1375–1475, are particularly relevant here: Hudson, “Lollard book production,” 125–42; Meale, “Patrons, buyers and owners,” 201–38, esp. 217–20; and Boffey and Thomp- son, “Anthologies and miscellanies,” 279–315. I owe knowledge of the plague treatises to a talk given by Daniel Hobbins at the 41st International Congress on Medieval Studies, Kalama- zoo, MI, entitled “An Exploratory Survey of Treatises on the Black Death.” In a letter to Pierre D’Ailly, Jean Gerson recommended the format for the circulation of catechetical literature: “just as the schools of medicine wrote pamphlets to instruct people how to manage in times of plague, so now it would be good if a short work were written by the [Paris theological] faculty, or by someone under its direction, dealing with the chief points of our religion, and especially the Ten Commandments, for the instruction of the simple . . . .” Gerson later wrote several short catechetical texts himself in French, three of which were translated into Latin and entitled the Opus tripartitum, which itself was translated into German by Geiler von Kaysersberg. For the above quote and a discussion of Gerson’s catechetical works, see Bast, Honor Your Fathers, 13–23. 181. On the latter see the collected articles in Köhler, ed., Flugschriften als Massenmedium der Reformationszeit. 182. Keller, Die mittelalterlichen Handschriften, 2:300–304. 183. Schneider, Die deutschen Handschriften, 160–64. 184. Other copies of the statutes that once existed independently of their manuscripts can be found in Germanisches Nationalmuseum Hs 17912 and Universtätsbibliothek München 2o Cod. ms. 677. 185. Reference in Bünz, “Die Druckkunst im Dienst,” 239. 186. Neddermeyer has estimated that half of all manuscripts produced in the fifteenth-century were dated. Although it happened that scribes or owners dated their manuscripts without naming themselves, or might name themselves without providing a date, the two appear together so often that I believe Neddermeyer’s figure can be used as a rough estimate for the proportion of manuscripts with ownership marks or scribal colophons as well. Furthermore, many owners gave their name only, without any indication of their status, greatly hindering identification given the gaps in medieval administrative records and the relatively small reper- toire of names in the fifteenth century. 187. Neil Ker once referred to “the fallacious test of surviving books” and argued that it is impossible to infer the size of a medieval library from surviving exemplars. Neddermeyer’s work has shown that while conclusions about any particular work or library are indeed difficult, Parish Libraries and Personal Collections 99 general rates of loss can be estimated. The reference to Ker was found in Harris, “Patrons, owners and buyers,” 165. 188. DE, B230, fol. 13r. 189. An altarist in Berching used the formula for absolution advocated by Heinrich von Langenstein, the plebani in Eschenfelden and Grafensteinberg used the formula for absolution from major excommunication contained in Johannes Auerbach’s Directorium curatorum, and a mass priest in Happurg claimed to have been reading Scotus; DE, B230, fols. 29v, 60v; 62r; 122v. 190. Ried, Neumarkt in der Oberpfalz; Maier, “Ursprung und Ausweitung der Kastler Re- form,” 75–204; Bosl, “Das Nordgaukloster Kastl,” 3–186. 191. Sigrid Krämer was able to locate only six manuscripts that definitely belonged to Kastl; Handschriftenerbe, 389–90. 192. Citizens from Weissenburg plundered and destroyed the monastery in 1449. Johann III von Eich ensured the survival of the community by bringing in monks from other monasteries but the library did not recover. See Wendehorst, Das Bistum Eichstätt, 1:214 and Leidel, Die Pfarreien des Klosters Wülzburg, 2. Krämer identified eight manuscripts from Wülzburg; Handschriftenerbe, 847. 193. Ansbach is in the diocese of Würzburg near the border with the diocese of Eichstätt. 194. Schornbaum, “Die Bibliothek des letzten katholischen Pfarrers,” 163–67. This could also be the “Johannes Mendlen” to whom Paul Conrad bequested his two books in 1510; Hubay, Incunabula Eichstätter Bibliotheken, #446, 731. 195. Johannes Amman, the vicar in Bad Abbach in the diocese of Regensburg hired Friderich Reisecker in 1466 and 1467 to copy Bartholomaeus de Sancto Concordio’s Summa de casibus conscientiae, the summa rudium, and Thomas Ebendorfer’s Sermones de epistulis et de sanctis. Johannes Goldhammer, the parish priest in Wassertrüdingen, hired an Andreas de Werdea in 1446 and a Zacharias in 1461 to copy sermon collections for him; see UE Cod. st 228, 269, and Ansbach Ms. lat. 42. 196. The rector of Staadorf, for example; DE, B230, fol. 22r. 197. GMN Hs 17912, fols. 19r-25r; Hilg, Kataloge des Germanischen Nationalmuseums Nürnberg 2.1:112–13. 198. UE Cod. st 381; Keller, Die mittelalterlichen Handschriften, 2:143–45. 199. For a discussion of this practice and an example see, Powitz, “Die Bibliothek des Frankfurter Stadtpfarrers,” 314–33. 200. UE Cod. st 194; Hilg, Die mittelalterlichen Handschriften, 1:96–97. 201. Pfeffel began his collection with the purchase of UE Cod. st 348 and 458. 202. UE Cod. st 463; Keller, Die mittelalterlichen Handschriften, 2:300–304. 203. For the watermarks, see ibid., 300. 204. Such an arrangement would not have been unheard of. In 1482 the Carthusian house in Basel began a Registrum Recognitionum Librorum extraneis accomodatorum factum, a list of all the books loaned out to individuals. Between 1482 and 1528 the monastery lent out around 500 books, but the portion of the list from 1500 to 1528 is almost certainly incomplete; see Burckhardt, “Bibliotheksaufbau, Bücherbesitz und Leserschaft,” 33–53. Sometimes monastic librarians demanded a deposit, such as a book of equal worth, in order to protect themselves from loss; see Buzas, Deutsche Bibliotheksgeschichte, 150. A note left in a copy of the Revela- tion of the Hundred Paternosters by a Carthusian monk in England shows how even a single act of monastic generosity could have a wide impact: “I sent to a devoute preest of my knowlegge a copy of the Reuelacion . . . which ye sende me. And the same preeste sent dyuers copies to certeyn of his Frendes, of whom ther was a good husbond man harde of the grete vartu and grace of the forsaid prayers he vsed it dayly as deuoutly as he coude;” quoted by Riddy, “‘Publication’ before print,” 39. 205. Bayerische Staatsbibliothek, Clm 15145. 206. “Operamini non cibum qui perit sed qui manet in vitam eternam;” Clm 15145, fols. 320v-321r (new foliation). 207. That Mülich did use this manuscript is proven by a sermon dated from 1488. Mülich originally copied the sermon on a loose sheet, but the sheet is now bound between folia 285 and 286. 100 Chapter 3

208. Hubay, Incunabula Eichstätter Bibliotheken, #446. Chapter Four

A Professional Library

Concerning most of the priests discussed in the previous chapter we know only their names. The spare ownership marks that these men left in their books tell us little to nothing about their background. Although occasionally surfacing in episcopal, monastic, urban, or university administrative records, these men remain for the most part anonymous. An exception is Ulrich Pfeffel, a priest, preacher, and avid book collector in the dioceses of Eichstätt and Bamberg in the second half of the fifteenth century. 1 Whereas most priests discussed in the last chapter are known to have owned only one or two books, thirty-two manuscripts, and three printed books (in sum containing over two hundred texts) once owned by Pfeffel have survived. 2 Thankfully, Pfeffel was both vain and frugal. He inscribed a bold “Vlricus Pfeffel” on the covers of his manuscripts, littered his books with biographical references, and cut up old personal letters to reuse as scrap paper for odd notes, reminders, and sermon outlines. These notes allow one to reconstruct in part how and in what order Pfeffel assembled his library and thereby offer the histo- rian a chance to trace the reaction of one individual both to the demands of his job and to the religious currents of his day. The development of Pfeffel’s library over time parallels his career, a fact which suggests he routinely sought out texts for professional purposes. Some of his acquisitions, however, cannot be explained by his professional duties and instead reveal something of his personal outlook and devotional preferences. Ulrich Pfeffel’s library reveals his participation in major cultural movements of the fifteenth century, the growth in book production and university attendance, the emphasis on catechesis promoted by church reformers, even the emergence in the Holy Roman Empire of a piety associated with the Modern Devotion. As will be seen, Pfeffel was perhaps not “typical” in terms of ambition, dedication, financial resources, or connections. His example is nonetheless

101 102 Chapter 4 instructive because it illuminates the avenues available to secular clerics who sought texts for either personal or professional purposes. Most may have had the resources to assemble only a small collection, but their methods would have been the same: borrowing exemplars, copying, hiring scribes, exploit- ing personal contacts, and buying the occasional bargain. The relative wealth of information about Pfeffel and his books allows us to observe a phenome- non normally seen only in fragmentary fashion—the acquisition and circulation of books among the secular clergy.

CAREER

Pfeffel has long been known and celebrated in the local historiography of the diocese of Eichstätt. In 1854 Joseph Georg Suttner, cathedral canon in Eichstätt and first editor of the Pastoralblatt des Bistums Eichstätt, listed Pfeffel as one of the lower clergy, who, together with the “learned orna- ments” of the cathedral, evidenced a revival of education among the clergy during the episcopate of Johann III von Eich (1445–1464).3 In the introduc- tions to their excellent catalogs of the manuscript holdings at the Universitätsbibliothek Eichstätt, Hardo Hilg and Karl Keller have each highlighted a few of Pfeffel’s manuscripts, but only Monika Fink-Lang has examined his library in any detail. Fink-Lang discusses Pfeffel’s collection in her chapters on the interest shown by Eichstätt litterati for traditional scholastic texts, the Church Fathers and ancient writers, literature related to church reform, the Devotio moderna, legal texts and jurisprudence, and history, but her treatment is for this very reason more fragmentary than one might wish. 4 Nothing is known of Pfeffel’s early life until he matriculated into the University of Vienna on 14 April 1452.5 Pfeffel gave Wolkertshofen, located near Nassenfels close to the southern extremity of the diocese of Eichstätt, as his place of residence and appears to have been a member of an extended family in the region of Bavaria between Eichstätt and Landshut with a tradition of university education and service to the church. Pfeffels from the region matriculated into the University of Vienna in 1418, 1468, 1472, 1508, 1513, and 1521, while another chose the University of Leipzig in 1477. 6 Andreas Pfeffel was a monk in Zwettl in 1468 and a Gerard Pfeffel was both a Benedictine monk and a rector of a parish church in the diocese of Passau in 1456.7 There were some black sheep; on 29 October 1426, Hainrich Abt- sperger von Rumburg, the district judge (Landrichter) of the district court (Landgericht) in Hirschberg, confirmed an agreement to drop the charges against an “Vlrich Pfefflein aus Wolkershofen,” who had been languishing in prison in Nassenfels concerning the murder of a peasant from Buxheim. 8 The document merely states that the court will not pursue the matter and does not A Professional Library 103 address the guilt or innocence of the individual who could well have been our Ulrich Pfeffel’s father. University matriculation lists also provide some sense of the family’s social status. The amount paid by “Michael Pheffel” from Ingolstadt in 1418, eight groschen, corresponded to the amount demanded of students of theology, law, or medicine at the University of Vienna. 9 Rupert, Lampert, and Brother Andreas paid four groschen, while another Michael paid an equivalent twenty-nine denarii, the standard rate for students in the Faculty of Arts.10 Meanwhile, George, who attended the University of Leipzig, paid ten groschen, the standard matriculation fee there since 1436. 11 The last Pfeffel considered here, Nicolaus, paid fifty-three denarii when he matriculated to the University of Vienna in 1521.12 Ulrich himself, however, was matriculated as a “pauper” and paid nothing, a fact that means he did not possess sufficient wealth to pay the standard fees, not that he was totally destitute. After Pfeffel registered as a student at the University of Vienna, he largely slips from bureaucratic view, and it is only by means of his own notes that one is able to follow the trajectory of his later career from his position as a presbyter in Spalt, to that of parish priest in Preith and Obereichstätt, and finally to his position as preacher in Nuremberg, Windsheim, and Eichstätt. Pfeffel began his ecclesiastical career in 1455 as a simple priest without the cura animarum, in Spalt, a town located southwest of Nuremberg in the diocese of Eichstätt.13 Spalt boasted of two collegiate churches in 1458, the older St. Emmeram and the younger St. Nicolaus, which had been founded by the burgrave Konrad von Nürnberg in 1294.14 Pfeffel does not mention whether he worked in St. Emmeram or St. Nicolaus, but the fact that thirty years later he became senior of St. Emmeram’s suggests the former. By 1460 at the latest Pfeffel was rector of the parish church in Preith, a village near Eichstätt. By 1463 Pfeffel had moved on to become the parish priest in nearby Obereichstätt, a church in the advowson of the bishop of the Eichstätt. He remained there through at least October, 1466 and exploited his proximity to the episcopal city to supplement his income by engaging in notarial work.15 Sometime in 1467 Pfeffel left his small-town parish and became a preacher in the church of St. Lorenz in Nuremberg, the largest and most dynamic city in the region. How Pfeffel obtained such a prestigious post is difficult to say. His family connections and contacts made at the episcopal court in Eichstätt during his frequent sojourns there must have played a role. Given that Pfeffel spent much of his time in Eichstätt collecting texts, as will be discussed further below, he may also have acquired a reputation in the city for diligence and learning. Whatever the reason, it is likely that he received the post on the basis of a recommendation from his bishop, Johann III von Eich, to Peter Knorr, the formidable rector of St. Lorenz, who also served as an advisor and diplomat for the Margrave Albrecht Achilles. Both Johann 104 Chapter 4 and Peter had studied law in Italy and during the 1450s would have been in regular contact as the bishop of Eichstätt generally sided with Albrecht in the margrave’s constant confrontations with the city of Nuremberg and the dukes of Bavaria.16 As a preacher in a major city, Pfeffel rubbed shoulders with the powerful. He conversed with the aforementioned Peter Knorr as the following amusing note left near the word “Chlodoneus” (Clovis) in Martin of Oppau’s Chroni- cle of Popes and Emperors attests:

In the year of Our Lord 1467. Peter Knorr says that William of Saxony, who has spent much time there before the king on the prince’s business, has heard that in the true and certain idiom in France one says Chlodoveus and not Chlodoneus. And I, Ulrich Pfeffel, at the time preacher in Nuremberg, wished to note this because of the frequency of that term Chlodoneus. 17

Nuremberg was a cosmopolitan city; one would certainly not want to mispro- nounce or misspell the name of one of the most celebrated kings in Christian history. In the same year, the bailiff (Schultheiβ) of Nuremberg, Sigismund von Eglofstein, sent him five relics that he had collected in the Holy Land and donated two crosses, which he had carefully pressed against all the holy places in Palestine.18 Four years later Sigismund gave Pfeffel a vestment “of noble cloth.”19 Despite such official signs of approval the transition could not have been always smooth. In 1468 he caused a stir by blessing candles on the feast of the Purification (February 2), an act which caused “many to wonder greatly on account of its rarity.” Whether this wonderment had anything to do with his departure eleven days later is not clear. In the same note in which Pfeffel recorded the Nurembergers’ surprise, he says that he traveled to Un- terstall, near Neuburg a. d. Donau on 13 February 1468.20 What Pfeffel was doing there is not entirely clear. Unterstall is not far from Pfeffel’s hometown of Wolkertshofen, so this may record nothing more than a vacation. Howev- er, a cryptic note left in another manuscript refers to Pfeffel as the “rector in Unterstall.”21 So did Pfeffel become the parish priest in Unterstall? That he traveled to Unterstall “with my stuff” (cum rebus) suggests he resided there for a time, but he was back in Nuremberg preaching by 1470.22 Perhaps he resided briefly before appointing a vicar. In 1472 Pfeffel left the great metropolis of Nuremberg for Windsheim, a town southeast of Würzburg, where he worked as a preacher for a total of three years and two months.23 By 6 November 1475, at the latest Pfeffel had moved on again, this time to become preacher in the cathedral of Eichstätt.24 Such a succession of prestigious posts must have made Pfeffel something of a local celebrity and a popular choice for occasions that called for a few wholesome words. One relative, Johannes Pfeffel, recruited him to preach at the dedication of a new chapel in Irlbach. 25 By this time Pfeffel was probably A Professional Library 105 more than forty years old, but this did not prevent him from matriculating into the University of Ingolstadt in 1477.26 He did not abandon his position as preacher in Eichstätt so to what extent he pursued his studies in Ingolstadt is unclear.27 The tendency, noted by R. C. Schwinges, of local dignitaries to enroll at newly founded universities in order both to bask in and contribute to the glow of the new foundation could explain Pfeffel’s matriculation.28 After nearly twenty years as a preacher, Pfeffel decided to return to Spalt to become the administrator of St. Emmeram’s, a venerable collegiate church founded in the eleventh century. On 31 August 1485, the aged Johann Scheu- bel resigned the office of senior into Pfeffel’s hands in exchange for a pen- sion of 10 gulden per year.29 At this point Pfeffel’s notes begin to run out, and other sources remain silent. We know only that Pfeffel still held the same post in 1492 when he gave 200 gulden to the city council of Spalt, from which the council was to feed four poor men every Sunday. He died in Spalt around 1495.30

THE SURVIVING LIBRARY

Gauging the literary interest of a medieval individual from his or her surviving manuscripts is not as straightforward as it might seem. It is impossible, for example, to know what proportion of the books once owned by any one individual have survived. Conclusions drawn from an incomplete set could be spectacularly wrong. Secondly, did an individual who acquired a manuscript actually want all of the texts included therein? It is reasonable to assume that any priest who took the time to copy out texts for his own use wanted those texts, but what about texts either purchased or acquired by other means? A clear example of the problem is UE Cod. st 449. This manuscript consists of two once-independent sections brought together by a cleric from the diocese of Würzburg sometime after 1455. Whereas part I consists primarily of sermons, part II consists of administrative documents relevant to the diocese of Würzburg such as the oaths taken by episcopal officials, a statute concerning the relative rights of mendicant friars and parish priests for hearing confessions, a statute regarding advocates at the ecclesiastical court, and the oath of homage taken by the citizens of Würzburg. It is probably safe to assume that Pfeffel acquired this manuscript for the sermons, but other cases are not so clear. When Pfeffel purchased what is now UE Cod. st 348 in 1457 did he buy it for Berthold of Regensburg’s Sermones de communi sanctorum, the miscellaneous assortment of other sermons found in the manuscript, or the short tract on hearing confessions by the Dominican Johannes Kusin? Was he motivated to purchase parts II and III of UE Cod. st 458 in 1458 by the Liber scintillarum or the biblical concordance? Or both? 106 Chapter 4

In the case of Ulrich Pfeffel, I believe these problems are not insurmount- able. First, we have good reason to believe that a significant portion of his library has survived intact, in particular that portion of his library that he used professionally and had bound. Of the thirty-five known books which once belonged to him the fate of thirty is uncertain until the seventeenth or eighteenth centuries when they surface in the palace library of the bishop of Eichstätt. Unfortunately, neither the ownership mark “Ad bibliothecam auli- cam Eistettensem (or Eystettensem),” nor the catalog drawn up by Johann Jakob J. A. von Bingen around 1700 can tell us how long the books were there. Although the institutional history of the bishop’s library cannot be pursued farther back than around 1700, Klaus Walter Littger has argued that a library had existed at least since the episcopacy of Johann III von Eich. 31 The lack of any intermediary ownership marks between Pfeffel and the first modern librarians of the bishop’s library, however, suggests that Pfeffel left these books to the episcopal collection. Such a donation would not have been unheard of. Seven manuscripts belonging to this library, for example, bear on their front covers the somewhat enigmatic signature “Leo” followed by a number. These previously belonged to Leonhard Pilhammer, a canon lawyer who served as official of the ecclesiastical court in Eichstätt under Johann III von Eich and as general vicar for Wilhelm von Reichenau. 32 Several other high-ranking episcopal officials in the courts of Johann III von Eich, Wilhelm von Reichenau, and Gabriel von Eyb (1496–1535) appear to have left their private libraries, or at least portions of them, to the bishop’s palace library, including Caspar Trobritsch, Leonhard Haller, Johannes Men- del, and Johannes von Eyb.33 While Pfeffel did not serve in the episcopal administration as these other individuals, his post as preacher in the cathedral would have brought him in close contact with the bishop. Of Pfeffel’s other five books, one incunabulum was given to the Jesuit seminary in Eichstätt by Bishop Marquard Schenk von Kastl in 1662.34 In all likelihood, this book had also been left to the bishop’s library by Pfeffel. UE Cod. st 458 has no known owner until a librarian in Rebdorf added a ownership mark in the seventeenth or eighteenth century. How long the manuscript had been there is impossible to say because the ownership mark, “Iste liber est monasterii sanctissimi Iohannis Baptiste in Rebdorff,” with which Reb- dorf’s librarians in the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries outfitted their books, is lacking.35 UE Cod. st 469 has no known owner until marked as belonging to the Kreisbibliothek Eichstätt in the first quarter of the eighteenth century. Between 1806 and 1812 books from secularized monastic communities were united with the old palace library to create the Kreisbibliothek. This manuscript had likely belonged to one of these suppressed communities. The owner of what is now Stuttgart HB II 1, a thirteenth-century parchment Bible, rebound the volume in 1535, and on 12 March 1555, the Nuremberg patrician Christophorus Schlaurspach gave the book to the city physician A Professional Library 107

Erasmus Flockius.36 How the book made it from Pfeffel to Schlaurspach is unknown, but it appears Pfeffel did not leave this book to the bishop of Eichstätt’s library. The provenance of one book, UE Cod. st 238, is unknown. A final indication that most of Pfeffel’s books remained unused on the shelves of the bishop’s library rather than in the hands of other private owners is the fact that many of his loose notes are directly related to the pages between which they have been stuck. Had their been many intermedi- ate owners these notes would surely have been lost or misplaced. The complete lack of other medieval, or even early modern, ownership marks in these books, the fact that only four of the manuscripts cannot be proven to have resided at least for a time in the bishop’s palace library, and the fact that other highly educated clerics active in Eichstätt also left books to the palace library, altogether make plausible the suggestion that Pfeffel left at least a substantial portion of his professional and devotional library to the care of the bishops of Eichstätt. His surviving books are of a remarkably even quality; all appear to have their original fifteenth-century binding, usually leather, and three of the bindings can be identified as the work of the bindery in Rebdorf.37 His books were of moderate size and length, ranging from 20cm x 15cm to 31.5cm x 21.5cm and 79 to 458 folia, although twenty-five of the thirty-two manuscripts had between 200 and 400 folia. The collection has the appearance of a stationary reference library; whatever unbound tracts, broadsheets, or humble handbooks that he once owned have not survived. The second objection, that the miscellaneous nature of manuscripts pre- vents one from drawing any conclusions about an owner’s interest for any particular text, is a serious one, but can be partially answered in two ways. First, Pfeffel was an inveterate scribbler. The fact that he filled the majority of his books with marginal comments shows that he read them. On the other hand, a lack of notes cannot be taken to imply that he did not. His copy of part 2.2 of Aquinas’s Summa theologiae is almost completely devoid of marginalia, yet he frequently referred to various passages of the work in loose notes left in other books. In short, Pfeffel’s books show every sign of heavy use; unread texts must have been in the small minority. Secondly, the sheer number of texts (well over two hundred) included in Pfeffel’s thirty-five books allows one to identify favored genres, even if his attitude toward any particular text may be difficult to gauge. Furthermore, the chronological development of his library parallels his career in ways that suggest he sought out texts that could help him in his role first as priest and later as preacher. Pfeffel’s personal library has the appearance of being actively acquired rather than allowed passively to accrue through random gifts and bequests. Any such analysis must remain imprecise because only twenty- seven of Pfeffel’s thirty-five books bear any indication of when Pfeffel acquired them and for many we know only by when Pfeffel had possession and not the date of the acquisition itself. Nevertheless, Pfeffel had clearly ac- 108 Chapter 4 quired eight manuscripts before becoming preacher of St. Lorenz in 1467. 38 During this early period in his career Pfeffel acquired texts to aid him in his new pastoral role. Immediately after his appointment as parish priest, Pfeffel sought out sermon texts, theological and biblical commentaries, and texts on the Ten Commandments, the virtues and vices, indulgences and fasting, and on superstitions and heresy. Such texts would have been invaluable to a new pastor needing models and information to help him better fulfill his responsibility to instruct and oversee the beliefs and morals of his parishioners.

CONSTRUCTION OF THE LIBRARY

During his forty-year ecclesiastical career, Pfeffel used a variety of means to acquire texts. He copied texts himself, acquired manuscripts secondhand, hired scribes, took advantage of personal contacts, and purchased printed books. In sum his activities testify to the lively production and circulation of manuscripts even in an era in which the printing press was increasingly making itself felt. Especially during his early years as a parish priest, Pfeffel was an active scribe. In a distinctive, consistent hand, he copied one of his manuscripts in its entirety (UE Cod. st 238), large parts of a second (UE Cod. st 469) and, leaving aside biographical notes or marginal comments, added texts to a further thirteen manuscripts that he had acquired by other means. 39 Although Pfeffel does not tell us where he found exemplars for the texts he copied, some of them may well have come from Rebdorf. The colophons to several texts in Pfeffel’s early manuscripts are dated from Eichstätt; the episcopal city was not far from his posts at Preith and Obereichstätt (5 and 7 km respectively) and was separated from the community at Rebdorf by only a small hill. Seven of the texts copied by Pfeffel in whole or in part in Eichstätt between 1459 and 1466 appear listed in a catalog of Rebdorf’s library from c.1500.40 As mentioned above, Pfeffel would have three of his manuscripts bound at Rebdorf and one of his books (UE Cod. st 458) ended up in Reb- dorf’s possession. On at least one occasion, Pfeffel hired a scribe to copy a text for him. In 1475, the year in which he moved from Windsheim to Eichstätt, Pfeffel hired a cleric named Currificis to make a copy of Johannes de Hesdinio’s commentary on Paul’s letter to Titus. A note now bound into the manuscript between fols. 53–54 and 57–58 is a request from the scribe: “Dear lord Ulrich, I ask that you might commission from me an additional sextern, on which I will begin work immediately after the feast days, of that you should have no doubt.”41 On the back of this note, Pfeffel wrote an account of the funds dispersed to Currificis, which came to a total of 608 pennies, approximately 2.5 gulden, for nineteen quires of text. Currificis began writing around the A Professional Library 109 beginning of Lent in 1475 and finished on September 8, a rate of about two and a half quires or thirty folia per month. Such a rate would suggest that Currificis was not a full-time scribe and was simply engaged in some side work in addition to his normal, probably clerical, duties. 42 During an episcopal visitation of the diocese of Eichstätt in 1480, the visitor, Johannes Vogt, briefly interviewed a Eukarius Currificis, who was at the time an assistant priest in Schwabach, a town south of Nuremberg.43 This Currificis said that he had originally received his title to be ordained from “the lord doctor Knorr,” which plausibly refers to Peter Knorr, the rector of St. Lorenz in Nuremberg and a colleague of Pfeffel’s.44 It is likely that the two are identical and that the choice of Currificis for the job depended on an earlier en- counter with him during Pfeffel’s years as a preacher in St. Lorenz. Pfeffel was also active in the secondhand book market. In 1457 he bought a manuscript from “lord Eberhard” for 250 denarii or about one to one and a half gulden.45 The manuscript consists of two sections, the first of which was copied in 1406–1407 in Brauneck by an otherwise unidentified Theoderic Pfifferligsberger from Kelheim. Both Kelheim and Brauneck are located in the neighboring diocese of Regensburg, a logical origin for the manuscript, which includes sermons by Berthold of Regensburg, as well as a short tract on confession, Johannes Kusin’s De audientia confessionum. Unfortunately Eberhard is not further identified, but the title dominus, in addition to the contents of the manuscript, make it highly likely that he was a cleric. So Pfeffel was probably the third clerical owner of this particular collection. In 1458 he purchased a second manuscript, which today consists of parts II and III of UE Cod. st 458. A portion of part III was completed by a “Conradus Sighart de Hirsaw” in 1434. Since Pfeffel recorded that he purchased the book on the inside of the front cover, part II and III must have been already together when he acquired them. Again we see a three step process; parts II and III were copied out separately, brought together, whether by Conrad or someone else is impossible to say, and then purchased as a unit by Pfeffel, who then filled the empty first quire of the manuscript with various short excerpts and a treatise on the pains of Hell by Thomas Eben- dorffer.46 To acquire desired volumes, Pfeffel sometimes exploited personal contacts. The book acquired from Karl von Seckendorff mentioned in the Intro- duction is of course one example of this. There are others. Between 1468 and 1472, Pfeffel acquired UE Cod. st 144––a dictionary of biblical terms and a collection of alphabetical tables to assorted other works––from Willibald Marstaller, a canon in the church of St. Nicholas in Spalt, the town where Pfeffel began his career. Around 1468, Marstaller moved to the monastery of Gnadenberg, where in 1480 he was still serving as confessor to the sisters there.47 An undated note left between fols. 45–46 of UE Cod. st 348 mentions a trip made by Pfeffel to the monasteries of Pillenreuth and Gnaden- 110 Chapter 4 berg; perhaps Pfeffel acquired the manuscript during his visit. In 1471 Pfeffel purchased a manuscript of Robert Holcot’s commentary on the Book of Wis- dom from “the lord doctor Hebrer,” a reference to Johannes Hebrer, who two years later would be a professor of theology at the University of Ingolstadt. 48 Like any good professional preacher, Pfeffel was interested in the activities of more famous practitioners of his craft. Between fols. 86–87 in UE Cod. st 438 is a note from a “brother Sixtus” that must have originally accompanied a copy of Johannes Capistrano’s sermons:

Venerable lord Ulrich, I am sending to you the material on the Passion of Christ preached by brother Johannes Capistrano, who on this topic follows the blessed Bernhard, brother and doctor of our order.49

In 1452 the famed Franciscan preacher Johannes Capistrano had made a preaching tour through Bavaria and Franconia and spent four weeks in Nu- remberg in July and August of that year. Although he failed in his political goal of making peace between the Margrave Albrecht Achilles and the city of Nuremberg, his preaching met with more success, inspiring both miracu- lous cures and the burning of dice, game boards, and piles of pointed shoes. 50 None of Ulrich Pfeffel’s manuscripts in fact contain any sermons by Jo- hannes Capistrano, a confirmation that his library has not survived completely intact. Textual accuracy was always a concern with commissioned or purchased manuscript books, and on at least one occasion Pfeffel hired a corrector to ensure the accuracy of a text. In a note written between 1467 and 1472, Pfeffel apologized to an unnamed recipient for forgetting to send back some borrowed books because of the unexpected arrival of his parents. On the reverse is a note in a different hand reporting that the anonymous author had corrected a “breviarium decreti” from the text of the decretals and the glossa ordinaria. It seems likely that Pfeffel’s patient lender had been working on correcting an abbreviated version of the decretals and glosses for him. 51 To illustrate the manner in which secondhand books circulated, it is perhaps useful to look at a simple list of the locations where the books that ended up in Pfeffel’s hands originated or were previously owned. Aside from the works he copied himself, Pfeffel possessed numerous texts copied in towns within the boundaries of modern-day Bavaria including Ansbach, Brauneck, Coburg, Ingolstadt, Spalt, and Thannhausen; but he also had texts from further afield: from Worms, Prague, Rome, the diocese of Padua, and France. Six of Pfeffel’s manuscripts were first copied before 1400 and another thirteen were copied before 1450. The surprising geographical and chronological range of Pfeffel’s private collection shows that used books could and did circulate among individuals before either disintegrating or finally coming to rest in institutional libraries. A Professional Library 111

Similarly, a list of the previous owners, producers, or procurers of Pfef- fel’s manuscripts shows the wide circles in which books circulated: Antonius de Capitibus Vache, a monk in the Benedictine monastery of St. Michael in the diocese of Padua; a Franciscan “brother Sixtus;” a “dominus Eberhard,” likely a cleric; Berchtold Link, parish priest in Thannhausen; Hermannus from Freystadt, the parish priest in Wettstetten; a magister Heinrich Hopf in Worms; an unknown student studying at the University of Prague; Stephanus Decimator, a student in Coburg; Johannes Stekna, a professor of theology at the University of Prague; Johannes Hebrer, professor of theology at the Uni- versity of Ingolstadt; Johannes Weyt, a perpetual vicar in the collegiate church in Ansbach; Karl von Seckendorf, a student in Heidelberg and canon in the cathedral of Eichstätt; Matthias Spengler, a student in Heidelberg who later became a doctor in canon law and vicar general in Bamberg before dying in 1430; Cyriacus Knott, a student at the University of Vienna in 1423 and later a cathedral canon in Eichstätt; and Willibald Marstaller, canon in St. Nicholas in Spalt and later confessor general in the monastery of Gnaden- berg.52 Texts that had once belonged to monks, parish priests, university students, professors, episcopal administrators, and canons ended up in Pfef- fel’s hands. The health of the manuscript market should not surprise because until the mid-1470s printed books were still quite expensive, and the majority of texts were still not available in this new format. 53 Pfeffel did not ignore the products of the press entirely, however. He made his only known purchases of printed books while serving as a preacher in the 1470s. Sometime in late January or early Februrary 1472, Pfeffel made his first purchase of a printed book, the New Testament portion of Nicholas of Lyra’s monumental biblical commentary, the Postilla super totam Bibliam (Strasbourg, not after 1472).54 He waited until October of 1473 to buy the Old Testament portion and at an unknown date added the volume on the Psalms.55 In January of 1474 he purchased a printed copy of part 2.2 of Thomas Aquinas’s Summa theologiae (Strasbourg, 1472) and on 8 July 1477 Pfeffel purchased a copy of John of Freiburg’s Summa confessorum (Augs- burg, 1476), an encyclopedic guide for confessors.56 There is a definite chronological pattern to the assembly of Pfeffel’s library. After a couple of initial purchases while in Spalt, Pfeffel turned to copying out his own manuscripts while serving as the parish priest in Preith and Obereichstätt. Only after acquiring more prominent, and probably better remunerated, preaching posts did Pfeffel once again begin to make purchases. When prices for printed books started to become more reasonable in the 1470s, he bought a few lengthy tomes on canon law, theology, and biblical exegesis, but he continued both to use and acquire manuscripts. To get the texts he wanted Pfeffel used nearby institutional libraries, hired scribes, and asked his friends and acquaintances for help. Pfeffel acquired the texts he did for both professional and devotional reasons. By examining the 112 Chapter 4 contents and chronology of his library it is possible to say something about how he conceptualized his role as priest and preacher and how he interacted with the devotional currents of his day.

ULRICH’S PFEFFEL’S PASTORAL LIBRARY (1457–1467)

As a rector of a parish church, Pfeffel was responsible for celebrating the Mass, hearing confessions, teaching correct doctrine, and regular preaching. These expectations had been laid out in diocesan statutes as already seen in chapter 1. Pfeffel did acquire the handbooks recommended in his diocese and province. He copied Aquinas’s De articulis himself in 1459 and at some point acquired Auerbach’s Directorium as well as two other handbooks for good measure, the Stella clericorum and Jean Gerson’s Opus tripartitum.57 A note Pfeffel left at the beginning of Aquinas’ short tract reveals in what way he himself thought the text useful: “In this little treatise you will find sixty- four distinct heresies about the articles of faith and twenty distinct heresies concerning the seven sacraments.”58 Clearly Pfeffel saw the prevention and elimination of doctrinal error as a central aspect of his role. Several notes, lists, and short texts compiled by Pfeffel during his first years as a priest reveal his desire to fulfill his new responsibilities. He began by adding several short texts, including a work by Thomas Ebendorffer (d. 1464) on the pains of hell, to the previously empty first quire of a manuscript containing the Liber scintillarum, a collection of “sparkling” passages from the Bible and Church Fathers arranged by topic. 59 Between 1460 and 1461 he added to another manuscript instructions for administering confession and copied several lists common in basic pastoral literature: the seven deadly sins, the Ten Commandments, the five senses, the seven sacraments, the nine sins of complicity (peccata aliena), the eight beatitudes, the six works of mercy, the seven gifts of the Holy Spirit, the “sins crying out to heaven” (peccata clamantia in celum), the sin against the Holy Spirit, and the sins of the heart, mouth, commission, and omission. 60 These lists would have been useful to a confessor who was concerned to ensure that his parishioners’ confessions were complete. Many of the miscellaneous notes copied by Pfeffel during these years in fact concern confession. One note, for example, discusses four motives for confession: obedience to a superior, desperation, true repentance, and a desire to praise God’s goodness. A short text matching the seven vices with their contrary virtues follows underneath. Finally, he lists the three stages of penance, one each for three modes of sinning: contrition for sins of thought, confession for sins of speech, and the medicine of satisfaction for sins against others. Contrition purges what man has committed against himself, confession that which man has committed against God, and satisfaction that which A Professional Library 113 man has committed against others. 61 In another note, Pfeffel lists the cases in which a penitent is allowed to seek another confessor: if the penitent’s priest is a participant in the sin; if the priest exhibits foolishness, heresy, or preju- dice; or if the penitent is away traveling or on pilgrimage. 62 The Mass also received some attention in these early notes. According to one, it heals the wounds of sin, absolves from punishment and fault, cleanses impure thoughts, gives strength in the midst of tribulation, confirms good works, impels one to do good, associates one with the saints and angels, and glorifies one through grace. Those who wish to receive the benefits of the mass must have four things: faith that the consecrated host is the true body and blood of Christ; devotion, because the laity communicate spiritually through the priest; discretion, so that in their zeal they do not commit idolatry by adoring the unconsecrated host; and a sense of propriety. One should not approach the altar, stand facing the priest, or disturb the priest in any way but should watch with reverence and fear and stay until the end. 63 These early notes consist of the exact kinds of basic, practical information contained in pastoral handbooks. They may have served as a bare-bones substitute for a handbook in his early years, or, more likely, they represent a digest of information he found useful in other books. Pfeffel’s interest in catechesis is further revealed by a copy of Heinrich von Friemar’s (d. 1340) enormously popular explication of the Ten Commandments and a collection of works by Nicholas of Dinkelsbühl, including his three popular sermon cycles on the virtues and vices, the eight beatitudes, and the Lord’s Prayer. Nicholas was a foundational figure in the history of the University of Vienna, attended the Council of Constance, and dedicated much of his life to church reform. The three sermon cycles owned by Pfeffel were part of the Tractatus octo, a series of eight sermon cycles intended to revitalize the instruction of priests and people in the parishes. 64 Pfeffel in fact faced an immediate need for sermons, and here his manuals would have been of little use. However, the first book he purchased while a priest in Spalt contained assorted sermons, including partial collections of sermons on the common of the saints by Berthold of Regensburg, Conrad Holtnicker, and Petrus de Sancto Benedicto. These were accompanied by a slew of sermons on the most varied topics: angels, widows, sacrifice, the feast of All Saints, the souls of the dead, the dignity of priests, the dedication of churches, three sermons on the Epiphany, and a handful of sermons de tempore. To these he added in his own hand sermons on St. Thomas, St. Michael, the feast of the Circumcision, the fourth Sunday of Lent, the feast of the Holy Innocents, the vigil of the feast of the Ascension of the Lord, and two sermons on the immaculate conception along with the Council of Basel’s decree on the subject from 17 September 1439.65 Similar small collections or even individual sermons occur in nine of Pfeffel’s manuscripts, seven of which 114 Chapter 4

Pfeffel had acquired before becoming a beneficed preacher. He did, however, acquire a few systematic collections, including the Lenten sermons of Jaco- bus de Voragine; a series of sermon outlines for the Lenten season; and portions of Johannes de Milic Kremsier’s Sermones de sanctis.66 Neverthe- less, the frequency with which small groups of sermons appear in the manuscripts owned by Pfeffel and other parish priests suggests that sermons were a genre in demand and likely circulated in small quires of one to several sermons. They certainly did not always travel around in the nice, tidily arranged units that readers accustomed to printed books would expect. Before printed books became affordable in the late 1470s, and perhaps for some time thereafter, the preaching culture of the parishes would have been as much influenced by such small, miscellaneous groups of sermons as by large, organized collections. Ulrich Pfeffel’s library thus far reveals him to have been conscientious but conventional. Other texts are somewhat more surprising. In this period, Pfeffel dabbled in theological commentary, biblical exegesis, and the problem of heresy. He praised an abbreviated version of the Lectura Mellicensis, Nicholas of Dinkelsbühl’s commentary on the fourth book of Peter Lom- bard’s Sentences, as “good and simple for any priest.”67 The Sentences were the premier introductory theology textbook of the medieval university; the fourth book dealt with the sacraments and last things. Judging by the relative amount of marginal notation, this commentary would remain a preferred choice for theological reference. Along with his interest in theology went an interest in heresy. In 1461–1462 Pfeffel worked with another scribe to copy a miscellany that included Johannes Nider’s Tractatus contra haeresim hussitarum.68 Nider (d. 1438) was a theologian and prior of the Dominican convent in Nuremberg. His treatise deals generally with the problem of heresy before attacking the problem of the Hussite contagion more directly. After the Council of Basel appointed him as one of the lead negotiators with the Hussites, Nider distanced himself from the work, which consequently survives in very few copies.69 The same manuscript containing Nider’s treatise includes a later reworking of Isidore’s Quaestiones in vetus testamentum––a commentary on the Old Testament––and a synopsis of moral stories derived from the lives of the Old Testament patriarchs. The manuscript acquired from Karl von Secken- dorff, which included Matthias de Liegnitz’s Postilla super epistulas dominicales, also contained a Carolingian-era homiliary, the Flos evangeliorum. By 1463 Pfeffel also owned what is now UE Cod. st 199, yet another miscellany including an incomplete copy of Alexander de Villa Dei’s (d. c. 1240) Sum- marium bibliae, a highly condensed summary of the books of the Bible arranged into a grid of fives lines per page with four words per line, an arrangement that left room for word-by-word commentary.70 A Professional Library 115

During his years as a parish priest, Pfeffel acquired for himself an impressive pastoral library including a pastoral syllabus to help him instruct his parishioners; handbooks to help him perform the daily functions of pastoral care; biblical commentaries, miracle stories, and sermons to help with his preaching; and works to deepen his own knowledge of the faith and canon law. His books and notes during these years reveal him to have been a dedicated pastor who quickly acquired the recommended handbooks and pastoral literature upon his appointment to the church of Preith. He bought books, exploited personal contacts, and used nearby Eichstätt to pursue desired texts among the clerics and institutional libraries of the city. Pfeffel’s library in this period is a vivid testament to the ways in which the late medieval emphasis on catechesis and the accelerating circulation of texts were affecting pastoral care in the parishes.

ULRICH PFEFFEL’S PREACHING LIBRARY (1467–1485)

Pfeffel’s acquisitions during his preaching career added breadth to his original pastoral library in the form of historical and philosophical texts while deepening his holdings in theological compendia, exegetical texts, and sermon material. The increased preaching responsibilities that came with his appointment to St. Lorenz led Pfeffel to acquire more complete sermon collections and academic Summae in theology and canon law. Beginning in the 1470s, Pfeffel expanded his collection of pastoral and scholastic theology. Part 2.2 of Thomas Aquinas’s Summa theologiae (Stras- bourg, 1472) was the portion on faith and heresy, virtue and vice, and charity and injustice; this section was so popular it often circulated independently from the rest of the Summa. It would have been undoubtedly useful to a preacher dedicated to improving the moral fiber of his audience. Pfeffel would in fact make innumerable references to Aquinas’s Summa in the loose sermon outlines and notes scattered throughout his books. A natural complement to this was John of Freiburg’s Summa confessorum (Augsburg, 1476). John, a Dominican, created the new standard manual for confessors at the end of the thirteenth century by integrating the moral teachings of Aquinas and other theologians with the older, legalistic approach of canonists such as Raymond of Peñafort. The Summa was a monumental reference work and would have helped Pfeffel learn the minutiae of the sacrament of penance. 71 By 1480 at the latest he had acquired two more manuscripts of scholastic theology. Both had been originally copied between 1423 and 1424 by Steph- anus Decimatoris, a student in Coburg, and contained an assortment of academic texts including Heinrich Gotfrid’s commentary on Peter Lombard’s Sentences; a collection of the same master Gotfrid’s remarks concerning the Mass; a theological compendium by Hugo Ripelin; a collection of scholastic 116 Chapter 4

“questions” by Aegidius Romanus on the resurrection of the dead; a treatise by the same author on the Trinity; and a book attributed to Albertus Magnus on the origin, nature, and postmortem fate of the soul. 72 As a preacher, Pfeffel was expected to expound the scriptures to his audience and was interested in encountering scripture on a variety of levels. His full library includes two Bibles––one a thirteenth-century parchment Bible, the other a New Testament with an abbreviated version of the Old Testament––Alexander de Villa Dei’s Summarium bibliae, and a Biblia pauperum.73 The latter consisted of illustrated summaries of biblical stories intended for the consumption of poorly educated priests and simple laypersons. Pfeffel was certainly more learned than this genre’s target audience, but the fact that his version lacks the typical illustrations suggests that he found the simplified stories useful for preaching. Familiarity with the Bible itself, lively abbreviations, and his scholastic commentaries would have allowed Pfef- fel to reach a range of audiences. Pfeffel acquired commentaries in large numbers during his preaching career. As mentioned above, Pfeffel purchased Nicholas of Lyra’s comprehensive Postilla super totam Bibliam,74 but he also owned individual commentaries on the Gospels, Song of Songs, and the Book of Wisdom.75 The latter was written by the English theologian Robert Holcot (d. 1349). Better known today for his theological writings on God’s absolute power, Holcot wrote several popular biblical commentaries. 76 Judging from the volume of Pfeffel’s marginal notations, Holcot’s commentary on the Book of Wisdom was one of Pfeffel’s most intensely studied texts. 77 Although Pfeffel owned a few sermon collections while a pastor, his early manuscripts are distinctive for the small groups of sermons on miscellaneous topics that they contain. After becoming a preacher, Pfeffel seems to have preferred more systematic de tempore collections (sermons arranged according to the liturgical year) by preachers and authors such as Johannes Milic de Kremsier, Georgius Carthusiensis de Horto Christi, Leonardus de Datis Flo- rentinus, Johannes Herolt, and Johannes Halgrinus de Abbatisvilla. 78 Herolt was himself a preacher in Nuremberg who died in 1468, roughly around the time that Pfeffel himself began to preach in the city. Interestingly, none of these collections are among those identified by Anne Thayer as among the most frequently printed sermon collections before the Reformation. 79 This observation reinforces the claim that before c.1500 we should not discount the continuing influence of manuscripts even in an age of print. As a preacher, Pfeffel did not merely read from his books, but rather crafted sermon outlines on small scraps of paper from which to preach. If he did possess an extensive ars praedicandi, then it has been lost. In UE Cod. st 199, there is a short (two-folium) text on constructing sermons, which promises to tell the reader how to dilate any theme in several different ways. 80 Pfeffel did, on the other hand, possess several works that would have allowed A Professional Library 117 him to organize his thoughts and locate needed passages or ideas quickly. Already as a pastor he owned an alphabetical list of religious terms drawing on episodes from the Old and New Testaments.81 Other such tools included the Distinctiones bibliae, which was designed to show a preacher how to subdivide a range of alphabetically organized topics. 82 To help him find relevant biblical passages, Pfeffel owned an alphabetical concordance to scenes from the Gospels, and copied for himself a concordance of biblical names.83 He also possessed a dictionary to Augustine’s works.84 It is not therefore surprising that a large proportion of Pfeffel’s marginal commentary consists of the precise identification of references. That he acquired most of these tools later in his career and the fact that the earliest dated sermon outline is from 1467 suggest that he did not actively construct sermons until after his appointment to St. Lorenz. As a rector, he seems to have been content to use ready-made sermons from his collections or to have provided a simple explanation of the Sunday Gospel text as demanded by Bishop Jo- hann III von Eich’s synodal statutes.85 Pfeffel also possessed texts from which material for sermons could be quarried, especially texts on the virtues and vices, the Ten Commandments, miracle stories, histories, and exempla drawn from natural history. He already possessed a considerable amount of such material before he began his preaching career, but these were rounded out by Caesarius of Heisterbach’s Dialogue on Miracles, the Proprietates rerum naturalium adaptatae sermonibus dominicalibus et quadragesimalibus, and excerpts copied in his own hand from the Lumen animae.86 The latter two texts consisted of exempla drawn from natural history for use in constructing sermons. The Lumen animae was organized by topic, the Proprietates according to the liturgical year. Both would have allowed a preacher to add the power of metaphor and the lure of the exotic to his sermons. According to the latter, for example, the farsightedness, selflessness, and power of resurrection make the eagle a symbol of God; the fearsome appearance, insatiable appetite for human flesh, yet sweet voice of the manticore are a figure for the seven deadly sins; the preacher himself, however, is like the lark who even in capitivity delights all with his song.87 History was an equally fertile field from which to harvest moral lessons. A manuscript acquired right around the time of his transfer to Nuremberg consisted of a medley of historical works including two short texts on the history of various schismatic groups, Eusebius’s Historia ecclesiastica in the translation by Rufinus Aquileiensis, and Martin of Oppau’s Chronica pontificum et imperatorum, with later additions of material through the pontificate of Martin V (1417–1431).88 Pfeffel had at least a passing acquaintence with classical history as well. He made references to Romulus and Remus and Alexander the Great in his sermon notes and owned a copy of Guido de Columnis’s Historia destructionis Troiae, a reworking of Virgil’s Aeneid, 118 Chapter 4 that had originally been copied in 1381 by a monk from the monastery of St. Michael in Candiana in the diocese of Padua. 89 This taste for the classical, and perhaps even the manuscript itself, may have been acquired during a trip to Italy. In a manuscript acquired sometime between 1447 and 1463, Pfeffel added a note to a sermon against dancing:

In Italian, however, “bala” is called “chorea,” that is “balare” is “corizare.” And this is done in Lombardy, Tuscany, Campania, and Maritima where I was and where I learned the Italian way of speaking among them. 90

Since matriculation records for the universities in Italy are almost wholly lacking for the medieval period, it is impossible to move beyond speculation, but it seems probable that Pfeffel spent some time studying in Italy, most likely either before his matriculation into the University of Vienna or in the period between 1452 and 1455, when he began his ecclesiastical career in Spalt. Taken as a whole, his library reveals that he saw the role of a beneficed preacher in the city of Nuremberg to be related to but distinct from that of a pastor in Preith and Obereichstätt. Whereas parish priests could content themselves with basic expositions of scripture and doctrine, beneficed preachers needed familiarity with the monuments of scholastic exegesis and pastoral theology. They both needed to possess systematic sermon collections and have the ability to use the tools of the trade to craft original sermons buttressed by biblical references and theological authorities and enliv- ened by both exotic and historical exempla.

INTELLECTUAL AND DEVOTIONAL INTERESTS

Pfeffel was not, however, completely consumed by the demands of his profession. He possessed an intellectual curiosity that went beyond his need to educate the laity as well as a sense of piety moved by the devotional currents emanating from the Netherlands. Pfeffel’s eclectic tastes clearly show that we cannot judge the interests and quality of parish priests solely by the literature, such as pastoral handbooks, written explicitly for their consumption. Most handbooks do seem to reduce the job of a parish priest to the correct performance of a handful of rituals, but we cannot from that fact conclude that priests had no deeper devotional feelings or further interests than those embodied in the handbooks. There were after all other things to read, and curious priests read them. Pfeffel seems to have had particular affinity for Mary and contemplation. He possessed a full complement of sermons on Jesus’s mother, including two sermons on the doctrine of the immaculate conception that he copied shortly after becoming parish priest in Preith (c. 1459–1460).91 These sermons will A Professional Library 119 be discussed further in the next chapter. Pfeffel also acquired a short meditation on the popular hymn Salve Regina that circulated in the late Middle Ages both individually and as Book III, chapter 19 of the Stimulus amoris.92 The Stimulus was one of the most successful Franciscan texts of the Middle Ages. Originating in the late thirteenth century and going through successive additions and revisions over the next fifty years, it was eventually translated into German and English, went through at least thirteen incunable editions, and survives in over five hundred manuscripts. The opening chapters consist of an extended meditation on the wounds and Passion of Christ, while the final book describes the basis, process, and result of contemplation. The contemplative should climb the mountain of God to the summit until one relinquishes the self and reaches a state of spiritual inebriation. 93 The small portion of the Stimulus owned by Pfeffel is a request for Marian intercession in the form of a meditation on the Salve Regina. Here the soul is at once drawn in by Mary, “whose beauty exhilarates the inner eye and the immen- sity of whose sweetness intoxicates the heart of the one meditating,”94 and at the same time exiled from her presence. The exile, however, is corporeal only and serves to inspire the soul to keep up the search, “O Mistress, while we are here, you establish us as exiles, lest, trusting in our patrimony here, we stop seeking you and your son; thus you establish us as exiles in body, so that we are always with you as fellow citizens in mind.”95 According to Falk Eisermann, the Stimulus amoris was popular among the Windesheim Congregation and individuals attracted by the Modern De- votion, including members of the secular clergy. 96 In fact several of the texts Pfeffel collected reveal an interest in this mode of piety, which emerged from the towns of the Low Countries in the fourteenth century. Inspired by the ideas of the movement’s founder, Geert Grote (d. 1384), the Brothers and Sisters of the Common Life, as they came to be called, established houses in which both lay and clerical members renounced private property, continued to work in the world, and practiced a quasi-monastic religious life of reading, prayer, and contemplation. This innovative combination of work in the world, communal religious life, and refusal to take religious vows confused and challenged many churchmen. In 1395 a group of brothers responded to official pressure to institutionalize their way of life by forming the Winde- sheim Congregation, an association of houses of canons regular. The congregation adopted a set of common statutes in 1434 and would eventually include around one hundred houses. In the mid-fifteenth century the Congrega- tion began spreading its influence deeper into the Empire, as it became common for church reformers to invite members of the Congregation to help reform monasteries and collegiate churches. 97 It is in this form that the Modern Devotion penetrated into the diocese of Eichstätt. In 1458 Bishop Johann III von Eich converted Rebdorf to a house of canons regular and joined it to the Windesheim Congregation. 98 The con- 120 Chapter 4 version met with fierce resistance initially and became a test of strength for the bishop and a cause célèbre in the diocese. Pfeffel would certainly have heard of the events while in Spalt, and between 1459 and 1460 he took up his position as a parish priest near the community. As discussed above, Pfeffel had several of his manuscripts bound at Rebdorf and likely used manuscripts from the collegiate library as exemplars for his own scribal work. Although one should not minimize the differences between the houses of the Brothers and Sisters of the Common Life in the Low Countries and the collegiate churches of the Windesheim Congregation, one can say that in general members practiced an affective piety focused on veneration for the Virgin Mary, Christ’s life and Passion, and the Eucharist. The Brothers and Sisters of the Common Life stressed reading, scribal work (especially for men), prayer, and meditation. Those influenced by this type of spirituality felt drawn to patristic works, the products of the twelfth-century Renais- sance, and texts that fostered mystical contemplation but tended to view the questions and disputations of the late medieval university with more suspi- cion.99 In the first book of the Imitation of Christ, Thomas à Kempis asserted that he “would rather experience repentance in my soul than know how to define it.”100 While Pfeffel certainly had no aversion to scholastic theology and traditional pastoral literature, his literary tastes also reveal the influence of the Modern Devotion. Although he did not own a great number of patristic texts, he did possess a handful of Augustinian and pseudo-Augustinian texts as well as an alphabetical dictionary to Augustine’s works, which he used to locate desired passages.101 In his career as a preacher, Pfeffel precisely quotes works by Ambrose, Augustine, Chrysostom, Cyprian, Gregory the Great, Jerome, and Orosius.102 However, it is his interest in texts on meditation and spiritual progress that most clearly reveal his inclinations toward this type of piety. Between 1463 and 1466, while still serving as a parish priest near Eichstätt, he copied Hugh of St. Victor’s Soliloquium de arra animae, Inno- cent III’s De miseria humanae conditionis, and a portion of Jean de Fé- camp’s Libellus de scripturis et verbis patrum.103 Hugh of St. Victor (d. 1141) was a key figure in the twelfth-century Renaissance and is best known for his promotion of the liberal arts and his role in developing an approach to mysticism that emphasized contemplation as a source of intuitive knowledge about God and his creation.104 The Soliloquy, surviving in over three hundred manuscripts and first printed in 1473, takes the form of a dialogue between Hugh’s reason and his soul, during which the soul is led by rational argument from love of the world to love of self and finally to love of God and contemplation of the divine.105 Given that the first step on this spiritual ascent is the realization that love of this world is futile, then Innocent’s text, De miseria, would have made an excellent primer. In three books, Innocent (d. 1216) lays A Professional Library 121 out in morbid detail the tribulations and indignities suffered by the young, the old, the sick, and the damned.106 The contemptus genre would be a favored one among advocates of the Modern Devotion. John of Schoonhoven (d.1432), for example, a canon of Groenendaal who defended the mystic John of Ruusbroec against accusations of heresy, himself wrote a book entitled On the Contempt of the World.107 Whereas Innocent’s text would have helped Pfeffel begin the spiritual progression described by Hugh, Jean de Fécamp’s Libellus would have helped with the later stages. Jean (d. 1078) was the Benedictine abbot of Fécamp and Dijon and a widely read ascetical author. The Libellus, more commonly known at the time under the title Liber meditationum or Liber supputacionum, and nearly universally attributed to Augustine, treats the misery of this world briefly but dwells at length on contemplation of God, the Incarnation, the state of the blessed, and the Trinity. 108 Pfeffel noted the major sections of the text in the margins and revealed a special affinity for it in his unusually wordy colophon:

Thus ends the Liber supputacionum, according to others the Liber supplica- tionum, collected from the divine scriptures especially for the use of those who are lovers of the contemplative life. By me, Ulrich Pfeffel, then the parish priest in Obereichstätt in the year 1463.109

Following the date, Pfeffel recommends that the reader pray both before and after finishing the text in order to praise God with a devoted mind and pure heart; the reader who does so will find “many extraordinary and elegant things” in the book.110 Johannes de Palomar’s Scala spiritualis, copied by another hand into the first folio of one of Pfeffel’s manuscripts, visually depicts the spiritual progression described by these three texts as an eight- step ladder. The soul should in stages give up the pleasures of the flesh, reject worldly honors, exclude all vanities, purify the heart, quiet the mind, medi- tate on the sweetness of scripture, engage in spiritual exercises by thinking about the precious reward to come, and finally contemplate God alone and his infinite goodness.111 Each of these texts in its own way seeks to redirect the reader’s love away from this world and toward the eternal. Pfeffel would later acquire the first fifteen chapters of another text with a similar goal, perhaps the most celebrated text associated with the Modern Devotion, Thomas à Kempis’s Imitation of Christ.112 This quintessential “bestseller” began circulating in the early 1420s and survives in some nine hundred fifteenth-century manuscripts and one hundred early printed editions. The earliest copies of the text circulated in the milieu of houses belonging to the Windesheim Congregation, including Rebdorf, and were used by early readers as an aid to meditation. The first fifteen chapters comprise book 1 of the Imitation and often circulated inde- 122 Chapter 4 pendently.113 They begin with an exhortation to feel contempt for the vanities of the world and follow with practical advice for one seeking spiritual progress, such as ways to avoid self-conceit and temptation and to turn adversity toward one’s spiritual advantage. During his years as a parish priest near Rebdorf, Pfeffel clearly acquired an interest in contemplation. On the other hand, his library does not reveal much evidence of an attraction for the kind of deeply affective piety associated with the Modern Devotion. He did own several naturalistic accounts of the Passion, but none of them openly encourage the reader to identify with Christ and his suffering or describe his suffering in mystical language. 114 Although one passage about Mary’s anguish moved him to make one of his few marginal notes in German, overall the texts are more didactic than emotional in tone and probably served Pfeffel as resources for constructing sermons. 115 On the basis of his library as a whole, therefore, it seems safer to say that Pfeffel’s relationship to the Modern Devotion was one of curiosity rather than commitment. Nevertheless, his example reveals one way that the ideas associated with the Modern Devotion spread into the Empire and shows how changes in local ecclesiastical institutions, and their libraries, could and did impact the secular clergy in their vicinity.

CONCLUSION

A note left between two folia in UE Cod. st 359 contains two lists of names: Vlricus Pfeffel Elβ Herdegnyn Endlein with others Keyserin Ell Barbara Feirlin with her friends Smidmairin Herr Iorg Raiol116 Glockengiesser with all of his people My father with his brothers and their friends The Dead Agnes Pfefflin with her two daughters and other friends Vlrich Feirlein Mother Herdegnyn Mother of Ieorius Raiol The most likely interpretation of these two lists is that the first list records the founders of votive masses for the deceased persons in the second list. An- other note left in between these pages appears to record the end of Agnes’s life and confirms that she was indeed Ulrich’s mother: “the notification of A Professional Library 123 confession, the proclamation of contributions, the last act of my mother Agnes, the account of the saints.”117 This note is cryptic, but the location in which it survives may offer a clue; both of the above notes are left in the middle of Heinrich Gotfrid’s Commentarius in quartum librum sententiarum at quaestio twenty-three on extreme unction, perhaps left there by Pfeffel after administering the last rights to his mother. Pfeffel was a person who turned to his books even in moments of pain and grief. Pfeffel’s career can only be described as a success. Although there is no record of Pfeffel having ever received a degree, he was university educated. He found employment as a priest in Spalt and used his skills and connections to become a rector with the cura animarum, a preacher in three different cities, and, finally, an official in a collegiate church. Along the way he collected books to help him fulfill his responsibilities as priest and preacher. One noteworthy quality of Pfeffel’s tastes is how eclectic they were. He highly valued works by both Robert Holcot, a proponent of nominalism and the philosophical via moderna, and Aquinas, an architect of the via anti- qua;118 collected both scholastic penitential summae and Thomas à Kempis’s Imitation of Christ; used both patristic biblical commentaries and the exhaustive expositions of the thirteenth and fourteenth century; was neither hesitant to read the Bible for himself, nor above consulting simple abbreviations; and read about both the history of medieval popes and emperors as well as the city of Troy and the founding of Rome. Touched by the literary and spiritual currents emanating from the Netherlands, a product of the medieval university, working for both his bishop and his community, he collected whatever he found either useful or fulfilling. Pfeffel was perhaps not typical in terms of ambition, dedication, financial resources, or connections, but he was not unique.119 His example is instructive because it illuminates the avenues available to secular clerics who sought texts for either personal or professional purposes. Most may have had the resources to assemble only a small collection, but their methods would have been the same: borrowing exemplars, copying, hiring scribes, exploit- ing personal contacts, and buying the occasional bargain. Ulrich Pfeffel’s library is an unusually eloquent witness to his life and activities. What this library reveals, however, may not have been so unusual––the circulation of books and texts not only among university professors and cathedral canons but also among parish priests and preachers. Fifteenth-century priests did read; what they read would have influenced their sense of themselves as a profession and their devotional preferences. The following chapter will examine the contents of the books collected by priests in greater detail. 124 Chapter 4 NOTES

1. Much of what follows first appeared in Matthew Wranovix, “Ulrich Pfeffel’s Library: Parish Priests, Preachers, and Books in the Fifteenth Century,” Speculum 87.4 (2012): 1125–55. 2. Only the nine manuscripts owned by Pfeffel before his appointment as preacher in St. Lorenz in Nuremberg were included in the sample of books discussed in chapter 3. 3. Suttner, “Versuch einer Conciliengeschichte,” 124, n. 2. Previous biographical notes on Pfeffel are: Buchner, “Alphabetisches Generalregister der Geistlichkeit”; Hubay, Incunabula Eichstätter Bibliotheken, 229; Fink-Lang, Untersuchungen zum Eichstätter Geistesleben, 295; Sax, Die Bischöfe und Reichsfürsten von Eichstätt, 306. 4. Fink-Lang, Untersuchungen zum Eichstätter Geistesleben, passim; Karl Heinz Keller also highlighted a few of Pfeffel’s manuscripts in his article “Quod homines indigent libris ad suum usum,” 14–29. Fink-Lang was also unware of several of Pfeffel’s manuscripts. She numbered Pfeffel’s library at twenty-four manuscripts and three printed books, but it is now clear that Pfeffel owned at least thirty-two manuscripts. The additional manuscripts are UE Cod. st 207, 214, 219, 252, 435, 483, 697, and Stuttgart HB II 1. Hardo Hilg numbered the collection at thirty manuscripts, but was unware of Augsburg 2o Cod. 92 and Stuttgart, HB II 1. 5. Szaivert and Gall, Die Matrikel der Universität Wien, 2:12. 6. ibid., 1:121; 2:103, 131, 353, 402; 3:25; Erler, Die Matrikel der Universität Leipzig, 1:311. 7. Szaivert and Gall, Die Matrikel der Universität Wien, 2:103; Schmugge and Müller, Repertorium Poenitentiariae Germanicum, 3:88, n. 779. 8. StaN, Hochstift Eichstätt Urkunden, 1200. 9. In 1414 the University of Vienna reformed the collection of matriculation fees by stipu- lating standard fees for various categories of students, but the standard amounts could still be modified according to the financial means of the individual; see Szaivert and Gall, Die Matrikel der Universität Wien, 1:xxii. 10. Szaivert and Gall, Die Matrikel der Universität Wien, 2:xvi. 11. Erler, Die Matrikel der Universität Leipzig, 1:xlix. 12. Szaivert and Gall, Die Matrikel der Universität Wien, 3:25. 13. This can be inferred from the ownership mark left in UE Cod. st 458 on the inside front cover: “Emi librum istum anno domini 1458 in die Nicolai, anno sacerdocii mei tercio in Spalt,” and “Iste liber est Vlrici Pfeffel presbyteri.” The ownership mark is transcribed in Keller, Die mittelalterlichen Handschriften, 2:283. 14. Ulsamer, Pfarrkirche St. Emmeram. 15. UE Cod. st 199, fol. 284v, 316v; Hilg, Die mittelalterlichen Handschriften, 1:106; Suttner, Schematismus, 40. Pfeffel’s notarial mark survives on a document, DE Urk 294, taken from the inside cover of a manuscript, and on fol. 316v of 2o Cod. 92 in the Staats- und Stadtbibliothek Augsburg. 16. On Johann, see Wendehorst, Das Bistum Eichstätt, 1:203–19; on Knorr, see Sottili, “Nürnberger Studenten an italienischen Renaissance-Universitäten,” 55–58. 17. UE Cod. st 697, fol. 132r and Keller, Die mittelalterlichen Handschriften, 3:483: “Anno domini 1467 etc etc. Item doctor Petrus Knorr dicit mihi, quod vero et indubitato vocabulo in Francia, dum ibi multo tempore coram rege negocia ageret principis, Wilhelmum de Saxonia audiuerit dici Chlodoveum et non Chlodoneum. Et ego Ulricus Pfeffel, cum eo tempore essem predicator Nuermbergensis, hoc notare volui propter frequentem usum istius termini Chlodon- eus.” That Pfeffel was a preacher in St. Lorenz rather than St. Sebald is made clear by a loose note left in UE Cod. st 440 between fols. 326/327, in which Pfeffel refers to himself as “vester praedicator sancti Laurencij”; Keller, Die mittelalterlichen Handschriften, 2:223. 18. Staats- und Stadtbibliothek Augsburg, 2o Cod 92, fol. 316r; Spilling, Die Handschriften der Staats- und Stadtbibliothek Augsburg, II: 2o Cod 1–100. 19. Augsburg 2o Cod 92, fol. 316r. 20. “Anno domini 1468 Sabato ante LXXam exiui Nürmberg. Et Quinta feria sequenti veni cum rebus ad Understal ac in die purificationis eiusdem anni consecraui cereos in ecclesia A Professional Library 125 sancti Laurencij Nürmberg, de quo actu multi valde mirabantur propter raritatem;” UE Cod. st 438, back cover and Keller, Die mittelalterlichen Handschriften, 2:217. 21. “Zu pleyff in Venediger land do ist her Hans Snöder von Neuburg an der Tonaw pfarrer etc. do von hat mir gesagt herr Vlrich Pfeffel pfarrer zu Vnderstall etc;” UE Cod. st 748, fols. 45/46. 22. “Explicit tabula secundum alphabetum super vetus testamentum per me Ulricum Pfeffel Nürmberge anno domini millesimo quadragintesimo lxx. In die kalixti pape;” UE Cod. st 721, fol. 221r. 23. “Hoc quoque actum est postquam tres annos et menses duos predicator extitissem in Windsheim imperiali opido Augsburg;” 2o Cod 92, fol. 316r. 24. This becomes clear from two colophons in UE Cod. st 208, fols. 227r and 228v: “Lectu- ra nimium commendabilis Iohannis de Ysdinio doctoris sacre theologie clarissimi super epis- tolam Pauli ad Titum. Comparata per me Vlricum Pfeffel ecclesie Eystetensis predicatorem, anno 1475 etc.” and “Finit textus ad Titum. Per me Vlricum Pfeffel, in die sancti Leonhardi [Nov. 6th], 1475.” See also Keller, Die mittelalterlichen Handschriften, 2:119. Fink-Lang believed that Pfeffel at some brief point during these years was the parish priest of Wettstetten. She likely drew this conclusion from an entry made on the inside back cover of UE Cod. st 381; however, the entry “plebanus in Wettsteten” made here certainly refers to the “hermanno freystetensi” mentioned in the same entry, and not to Pfeffel, the owner of the book. See Fink- Lang, Untersuchungen zum Eichstätter Geistesleben, 295. 25. “Salutem plurimam. Honorabile domine dignemini peto quatenus velitis michi subve- nire quarta feria post festum pasce et facere verbum dei in capella Irl(e)npach quia ibi habeo dedicationem. Etc. Johannes Pfeffel graf vom hungring perg;” UE Cod. st 435, loose note between fols. 4–5. There is a partial transcription in Keller, Die mittelalterlichen Handschrif- ten, 2:210. Keller notes that there are two towns in the diocese of Regensberg with the name Irlbach, either of which could be the location of the chapel. In a personal communication, Keller remarked that the title “graf vom hungring perg” was taken in jest and in no way connotes a real noble title. 26. Von Pölnitz, ed., Die Matrikel der Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität, 1:c. 73. 27. In one loose note dated 1482 left between fols. 102–103 of UE Cod. st 483, Pfeffel identified himself as “the preacher of the cathedral in Eichstätt.” Furthermore, Pfeffel left behind two dated sermon outlines, which suggest that he was active throughout this period as a preacher: “Anno 78 de ascensione domine,” UE Cod. st 438, loose note between fols. 144–145 and “81 Anno dominicam vocem iocunditatis,” loose note between fols. 190–191. 28. Schwinges, Deutsche Universitätsbesucher, 53–54. 29. DE, B244, fol. 265v; Buchner, “Zur Geschichte des katholischen Pensionswesens,” 199–211. 30. Nuremberg, Staatsarchiv, Rep. 192/IX, Spalt (Chorstift) – Urkunden (nach 1400), #39. The date of Pfeffel’s death is generally agreed upon in the local historical literature, but I have been as yet unable to identify the source upon which it based; see Buchner, “Alphabetisches Generalregister.” 31. Littger, “Eichstätt 1 Universitätsbibliothek,” 218. 32. Keller, “Quod homines,” 22–25. 33. Ibid., 19. 34. Hubay, Incunabula Eichstätter Bibliotheken, #744. 35. Hilg, Die mittelalterlichen Handschriften, 1:xiii. 36. Boese, Die Handschriften der ehemaligen Hofbibliothek Stuttgart, 2.1:3. 37. UE Cod. st 185, 207, and 586; see Hilg, Die mittelalterlichen Handschriften, 1:73, 118 and Keller, Die mittelalterlichen Handschriften, 3:271. 38. UE Cod. st 348, 458, 238, 189, 469 part I, 199, 219, and 360. 39. UE Cod. st 189, 199, 207, 252, 348, 360, 435, 438, 440, 458, 692, 705, and 721. 40. Ruf, Mittelalterliche Bibliothekskataloge Deutschlands, 3.2:257–316. The texts include Bernard’s De consideratione, Jacobus de Voragine’s Quadragesimale, Johannes Nider’s treatise against the Hussites, Hugh of St. Victor’s Tractatus de arra anime, Innocent III’s Tractatus de vilitate humane condicionis, Josephus’s Antiquities, and a glossed version of Nicholas of Lyra’s biblical commentary. 126 Chapter 4

41. “Lieber her Vlrich, ich bitt euch ir wellet mir fur ain sextern dorzu leichen, den wil ich von stund an noch den feyren abdiennen, vngezweifelt solt ir des sein;” UE Cod. st 207, fols. 53–54 and 57–58 and Hilg, Die mittelalterlichen Handschriften, 1:118. 42. Neddermeyer estimates that an average of 50–150 folia per month was normal for a scribe working continuously; Neddermeyer, Von der Handschrift, 1:366. 43. DE, B230, fol. 96r. 44. A title was essentially a promise of benefice or vicarial employment. If the bishop ordained a cleric without one, he could be held responsible for supporting the cleric until he found a benefice. See Oediger, Über die Bildung, 85–86. 45. UE Cod. st 348, back cover; Keller, Die mittelalterlichen Handschriften, 2:70. For exchange rates see, Spufford, Handbook of Medieval Exchange, 247. 46. UE Cod. st 458; Keller, Die mittelalterlichen Handschriften, 2:283–92. 47. Suttner, Schematismus, 87; Hilg, Die mittelalterlichen Handschriften, 1:47. 48. UE Cod. st 252; Hilg, Die mittelalterlichen Handschriften, 1:211; Pölnitz, Matrikel Ingolstadt, c. 32, 1 Feb 1473: “Magister Iohannes Hebrer sacre theologie.” Fink-Lang has previously noted Pfeffel’s appreciation of Holcot’s work on the basis of the numerous quota- tions from it among the marginal comments and loose notes in his hand, but she seems to have been unaware of this manuscript. 49. “Venerabilis domine Vlrice, mitto vobis hanc materiam passionis Cristi predicatam a fratre Johanne Capistrano, qui in hac materia sequitur beatum Bernhardum fratrum et doctorem ordinis nostri;” UE Cod. st 438, note between fols. 86–87 and Keller, Die mittelalterlichen Handschriften, 2:218. 50. Suttner, “Johann Kapistran und Marcus d’Aviano,” 159–62; Hofer, Johannes Kapistran, 2:147–161; Matthias Werner, “Johannes Kapistran in Jena,” 505–20. 51. This may refer to the Casus breves decretalium et libri sexti secundum Johannem An- dreae that Pfeffel acquired at an unknown date; UE Cod. st 586. 52. Biographical data on the previous owners of Pfeffel’s manuscripts can be found in Hilg and Keller, Die mittelalterlichen Handschriften, passim. 53. According to Neddermeyer the output of printed books did not surpass that of handwritten books until 1469 and early printers concentrated on printing “bestsellers”; see Nedder- meyer, Von der Handschrift, 1:317–42. 54. “Anno domini 1472 Emptus sum per dominum vlricum pfeffel circa festum purificationis gloriose virginis Marie;” Hubay, Incunabula Eichstätter Bibliotheken, #744. 55. “Emptus iste liber anno domini 1473 Nürnberge circa festum Sancti francisci etc. per vlricum pfeffel;” ibid., #744. 56. “Emptus sabato ante Antonii 1474. Cum eo tempore essem praedicator in Winsheim,” ibid., # 990; “Emptus est liber hic per vlricum pfeffel presbiterum. In die sancti Kiliani Anno 1477,” ibid., #573. 57. UE Cod. st 458, fols. 241r-246r; UE Cod. st 435, fols. 170r-202r; UE Cod. st 734, fols. 78r-87v; UE Cod. st 483, fols. 122r-136r. On Auerbach see Boockmann, “Aus den Handakten,” 497–532. The Stella has been edited, see Reiter, Stella clericorum. 58. “In hoc tractatulo circa articulos fidei inuenies LXIIII hereses distinctas, circa septem sacramenta inuenies XX hereses distinctas;” UE Cod. st 458, fol. 241r. 59. UE Cod. st 458, fols. 2r-7v. Thomas Ebendorfer was a professor of theology at the University of Vienna, an active diplomat and, in contrast to many of his university colleagues, personally engaged in pastoral care; Lhotsky, Thomas Ebendorfer; Ruh, et al., eds., Die deutsche Literatur, 2:253–66. On the Liber scintillarum, see Defensor de Ligugé, Livre D’Étincelles and the edition in the Corpus Christianorum, Series Latina, 117. 60. UE Cod. st 238, fol. 239r-v; on the peccata aliena see Newhauser, “From Treatise to Sermon,” 185–209. 61. UE Cod. st 458, fol. 1v. 62. UE Cod. st 238, fol. 138v. 63. Ibid., fols. 138v, 140v. 64. UE Cod. st 199, fols. 184r-223v; UE Cod. st 219, fols. 319r-446r. On Heinrich von Friemar, see Ruh, et al., eds., Die deutsche Literatur, 3:730–37; on Nicholas see Madre, Nikolaus von Dinkelsbühl. A Professional Library 127

65. See chapter 5 for further discussion of these sermons; UE Cod. st 348, fols. 174r-174v, 326r-335v; UE Cod. st 238, fols. 247r-263v; Hilg, Die mittelalterlichen Handschriften, 1:189–90; Keller, Die mittelalterlichen Handschriften, 2:73, 77–78. 66. UE Cod. st 238, fols. 1r-122v; UE Cod. st 360, fols. 1r-245r; Hilg, Die mittelalterlichen Handschriften, 1:187; Keller, Die mittelalterlichen Handschriften, 2:107. 67. “Explicit lectura super quartum librum sentenciarum magistri Nicolai Dinck. Bona et subtilis pro quolibet presbitero;” UE Cod. st 238, fols. 143r-234r, here fol. 234r; Hilg, Die mittelalterlichen Handschriften, 1:188. On Peter Lombard and his Sentences, see Colish, Peter Lombard and Rosemann, Peter Lombard. The Lectura Mellicensis, which survives in nearly 200 manuscripts, originated as a series of lectures delivered at Melk, a center of monastic reform. The abbreviated version owned by Pfeffel, the Compendium lecturae mellicensis, was compiled by Johannes Schlitpacher de Weilheim, a monk at Melk; see Madre, Nikolaus von Dinkelsbühl, 121–23. 68. UE Cod. st 469, fols. 4r-76r. 69. Ruh, et al., eds., Die deutsche Literatur, 6:971–75. 70. UE Cod. st 199, fols. 15r-47r. Not all of the comment boxes in the manuscript have been filled in. 71. On John of Freiburg’s Summa, see Michaud-Quantin, Sommes de casuistique, 47–49; Boyle, “The Summa Confessorum of John of Freiburg,” reprinted in Pastoral Care; Boyle, “Summae confessorum,” 227–38, esp. 230. 72. UE Cod. st 359 and 748. Heinrich Gotfrid von Coburg studied at the universities of Leipzig, Rostock, Bologna, Padua, and Paris from 1413–1430. In 1416, after his studies in Leipzig, he was appointed to the post of schoolmaster in Coburg. By 1421 Heinrich was in Paris; see Keller, Die mittelalterlichen Handschriften, 2:105 and the literature cited there. For biography of Heinrich see Stegmüller, “Henricus Gotfridi de Koburg,” 361–92. 73. Stuttgart, Württembergische Landesbibliothek (former Hofbibliothek), II 1; Augsburg, Staats- und Stadtbibliothek, 2o Cod. 92; UE Cod. st 199, fols. 15r-47r ; UE Cod. st 149, fols. 2r-41v. 74. Hubay, Incunabula Eichstätter Bibliotheken, #744. 75. Franciscus de Abbate’s Super evangelia, UE Cod. st 705; Honorius Augustodunensis’s Expositio in cantica canticorum, UE Cod. st 149, fols. 41v-152r; Robert Holcot’s Postilla super librum sapientiae, UE Cod. St 252. 76. Kennedy, The Philosophy of Robert Holcot; Streveler and Tachau, eds. Seeing the Fu- ture Clearly. 77. UE Cod. st 252; Hilg, Die mittelalterlichen Handschriften, 1:211; Pölnitz, Matrikel Ingolstadt, 1:c. 32. 78. UE Cod. st 438, fols. 1r-174v; UE Cod. st 440, fols. 175r-349v; UE Cod. st 449, fols. 14r-213v; UE Cod. st 483, fols. 139r-212v; UE Cod. st 483, fols. 244r-300v; UE Cod. st 435, fols. 28r-163v. 79. Thayer, Penitence, Preaching, 13–45, 202–7. Herolt’s Sermones de tempore were frequently printed before the Reformation, but Pfeffel only owned a small sliver of them; he had a larger portion of Herolt’s Sermones super evangelia dominicalia et de sanctis secundum sen- sum litteralem, which provided a brief exegesis of the gospel readings for Sundays and feast days. 80. UE Cod. st 199, fol. 228r-v. 81. UE Cod. st 458, fols. 62r-142v. 82. UE Cod. st 144, fols. 1r-57v. 83. UE Cod. st 734, fols. 183v-189v; UE Cod. st 721, fols. 195r-221r. 84. UE Cod. st 144, fols. 157r-195v. 85. Suttner, “Versuch einer Conciliengeschichte,” 111–12. 86. UE Cod. st 358, fols. 15r-50v; UE Cod. st 483, fols. 86r-121r ; UE Cod. st 435, fols. 163v-169v. On the Proprietates see Thorndike, “The Properties of Things,” 78–83. On the Lumen animae, see Rouse and Rouse, “The texts called Lumen animae,” 5–113 and Ruh, et al., eds., Die deutsche Literatur, 5:1050–54. 87. Thorndike, “The Properties of Things,” 81–82. 88. UE Cod. st 697, fols. 13r-115v and 120r-212r. 128 Chapter 4

89. Fink-Lang, Untersuchungen zum Eichstätter Geistesleben, 236–37; UE Cod. st 185; Hilg, Die mittelalterlichen Handschriften, 1:73. 90. “Ytalice autem bala dicitur chorea, balare id est corizare. Et hoc in Lampardia et Tuscia, Campania et Maritima, vbi ego fui et didici ydeoma Ytalicum aput eos;” UE Cod. st 199, fol. 315v and Hilg, Die mittelalterlichen Handschriften, 1:106. Pfeffel acquired this manuscript after 1447 when a previous owner noted the birth of his son, Heinricus Wünst; see fol. 264v and Hilg, Die mittelalterlichen Handschriften, 1:105. 91. UE Cod. st 238, fols. 247–260r. 92. UE Cod. st 483, fols. 72v-75v; Migne, Patrologiae cursus completus, 184:c.1077–80 [hereafter cited as PL]. Pfeffel’s copy includes a few sections not printed in the PL edition. 93. Eisermann, Stimulus amoris, 21–2, 43–45. 94. Migen, PL 184:c.1077. 95. Ibid., c.1079. 96. Eisermann, Stimulus amoris, 329–38. 97. John Van Engen, Sisters and Brothers; Goudriaan, “Empowerment through reading,” 407–19. 98. The fullest account of Johann’s efforts to reform the monasteries and collegiate churches in the diocese, with editions of selected sources, is Buchner, Johann III, 12–31, 49–134; see also Suttner, “Versuch einer Conciliengeschichte,” 158–64. Joseph Schlecht describes a failed effort to prevent Rebdorf’s transfer to the Windesheim Congregation in “Hieronymous Roten- peck,” 65–101. 99. Van Engen, Sisters and Brothers, 81, 277. 100. Thomas à Kempis, The Imitation of Christ, 29. 101. UE Cod. st 144, fol. 157r-195v. 102. The works included Augustine’s The City of God, Contra Faustum, Contra Jovianum, and De trinitate; Gregory’s Sermo de conceptione beate virginis, the Moralia, and the letter Ad Mauritium imperatorem; Ambrose’s Liber sermonum and commentary to De officiis; Jerome’s Epistula ad Titum; Cyprian’s In libro de zelo et invidia; see Fink-Lang, Untersuchungen zum Eichstätter Geistesleben, 96. 103. UE Cod. st, 199, fols. 272r-284v, 290r-312r. 104. Colish, Medieval Foundations, 177, 230. 105. Hugh of St. Victor, Soliloquy on the Earnest Money of the Soul; Sicard, Poirel, and Rochais, eds. L’oeuvre de Hugues de Saint-Victor, vol. 1. 106. Lotario dei Segni (Pope Innocent III), De miseria condicionis humane. 107. Goudriaan, “Empowerment through reading,” 409, 411. Pfeffel owned two other examples of the genre, Heinrich von Langenstein, Epistula de contemptu mundi ad Johannem de Eberstein, UE Cod. st 458, fols.172v-176v and Anonymus Carthusiensis, Speculum amatorum mundi, UE Cod. st 449, fols. 235v-240r. 108. On Jean, see Leclercq and Bonnes, Un maître de la vie spirituelle au XIe siècle. 109. “Explicit liber supputacionum beati Augustini, secundum alios liber supplicacionum, collectus ex diuinis scripturis presertim ad utilitatem eorum qui sunt amatores vite contempla- tiue. Per me Vlricum Pfeffel tunc plebanum in Oberneystet, anno 1463;” UE Cod. st 199, fol. 284v; Hilg, Die mittelalterlichen Handschriften, 1:106. 110. “Invenies quoque in eo multa rara et faceta,” UE Cod. st 199, fol. 284v. 111. Johannes de Palomar, Scala spiritualis, UE Cod. St 483, fol. 1r. 112. UE Cod. st 734, fols. 1–14. 113. Neddermeyer, “Radix studii et speculum vitae,” 1:457–81; Van Engen, Sisters and Brothers, 9. 114. Passio domini per XXIV horas pertractanda, UE Cod. st 358, fols. 51r-67r; Michael de Massa, Tractatus de passione domini, UE Cod. st 483, fols. 213r-239r; Passio domini secundum johannem, UE Cod. st 358, fols. 67v-91r. The latter is incomplete and breaks off soon after Judas’s departure from the Last Supper. 115. In one passage in the Passio domini secundum johannem, Mary initially rejects the plan to give up her son and develops five courses of action, which Pfeffel summarizes and translates into German in the margin as “I will hide him; I will warn him; I will free him [i.e. pay for his release from prison]; I will die in his place; I will suffer and die with him; UE Cod. st 358, fol. A Professional Library 129

85r: “So wil ich in verpergen; So wil ich in gewarnen; So wil ich in lösen; So wil ich fur in sterben; So wil ich mit ym leid und sterben.” 116. A “Georius Rayol” was the previous owner of UE Cod. st 483, which belonged to Pfeffel by at least 1482; see Keller, Die mittelalterlichen Handschriften, 3:60. 117. “Confessionis intimacio, angarie proclamatio, agnetis matris peractio, sanctorum computacio;” UE Cod. st 359, loose note between fols. 90/91. The passage is somewhat cryptic because of odd word choices on Pfeffel’s part. “Angaria” normally referred to compulsory services owed to a lord and “computacio” normally means “reckoning.” 118. On the two camps, see Colish, Medieval Foundations, 289–315. 119. To mention just one example, Matthias Bürer, a chaplain in Stams in the mid-fifteenth century, was also influenced by the Modern Devotion and owned several of the works that Pfeffel possessed such as the meditation on the Salve Regina, the Imitation of Christ, and works by Jean Gerson. Like Pfeffel he had an interest in both traditional authorities and contemporary authors; see Eisermann, Stimulus amoris, 353–54 and n. 707. See also the literature cited in the Introduction.

Chapter Five

Reading Interests

It remains finally to take a closer look at the contents of the books collected by Pfeffel and his colleagues. The surviving volumes are not fully representative of the books once owned or produced by priests in the diocese of Eichstätt; they are, rather, a sample only of the books that came to rest in institutional libraries. Most of these would have arrived there via donation or bequest. The donors tended to serve in urban parishes or parishes near a monastery or collegiate church and to give their books not primarily to aug- ment the recipient’s collection, but to receive prayers and anniversary masses for the salvation of their souls. Since donors deemed these books worthy of donation for a pious cause, we should not expect to find among them the more humble exemplars in their collections, nor those whose contents could not be reconciled with the donations’ spiritual purpose. This process of selection probably explains why only a handful of the over 250 texts in the sample are in the vernacular.1 What we see in the works discussed below is that portion of a priest’s library dedicated to works on spiritual, religious, and academic topics; in short, a priest’s professional and devotional library. For this reason it is not surprising that several genres are poorly represented. Of philosophy, for example, there are only the twenty-two folia of Aristo- telian excerpts owned by Ulrich Pfeffel. 2 This is somewhat surprising considering that a significant number of these priests had studied at university and must have owned philosophical works or at least notes on them. Perhaps priests doubted the fervency of the masses purchased with such humble schoolbooks and disposed of them in other ways. There was also a marked preference, and this seems to be genuine rather than a trick of the evidence, for more recent scholastic works over classical or patristic texts. Of the latter there are only two printed collections of Au- gustine’s works and a few short excerpts from Ovid in the sample.3 If one

131 132 Chapter 5 categorizes lives of the saints as either works of devotion or material for sermons, then interest in history seems also to have been minimal. Only Ulrich Pfeffel possessed a significant collection of historical works, which included a history of the destruction of Troy, as well as a Latin translation of Eusebius’s Ecclesiastical History, Martin of Oppau’s Chronicle of Popes and Emperors, and Andreas de Escobar’s On Schismatics.4 On the other hand, the number of genres that are well represented, from sermon collections and devotional texts to biblical commentaries and pastoral handbooks, make any kind of comprehensive analysis impossible. I would like rather to discuss in more detail four aspects of the sample that I believe are especially significant: the collection of practical legal, homiletic, and instructional texts to aid their everyday work as pastors; an interest in contemporary doctrinal issues; their use of texts in the fashioning of a professional identity as priests; and the dabbling by these pastors of the soul in the healing arts of the body.

PRACTICAL TEXTS

Priests had a large interest in texts that could help them meet their daily pastoral obligations, and this is well reflected in their acquisition of canon law texts, sermons, handbooks, and confessional manuals. In this priests were not unlike professionals in law and medicine. Daniel Hobbins has described how in the second half of the fourteenth century a new emphasis on the “tract” emerged among theologians, doctors, and lawyers. Tracts tended to focus on a single topic, often practical in nature, were brief, and were aimed at a more general audience than the great scholastic summa of the thirteenth century. Lawyers wrote consilia in which they applied legal reasoning to a single case, while doctors, especially after the Black Death, published plague tracts and regimina that prescribed specific treatments for particular ailments. Theologians aimed their work increasingly at the priesthood and wrote tracts on aspects of pastoral care, especially confession. 5 The focus of these largely instructional texts was preaching and the proper administration of the sacraments—in other words, what to do and say and to whom—but they did not ignore sacramental theology. Priests were expected, and apparently also wanted, to understand the meaning of the rites they performed. Priests participated in this new intellectual milieu by collecting tracts and other kinds of texts directly relevant to their pratical duties as pastors, including excerpts from authoritative collections of canon law. For example, Jo- hannes Wiedemann, the plebanus of St. Walburg in Eichstätt, owned a printed copy of Johannes Andreae’s treatment of consanguinity (Memming- en, c. 1490).6 In the parish library of Schwabach there were several copies of Reading Interests 133 canonical tracts on matrimony, ecclesiastical interdicts, indulgences, and usury.7 Hainrich Löffler possessed a collection of excerpts from the Liber Extra, the first official collection of papal decretals issued by Gregory IX (1227–1241), as well as glosses, disputed questions, and puzzles on the topics of consanguinity and affinity.8 Given the complicated canon law of marriage, it is perhaps not surprising that priests were interested in texts on this topic. Wiedemann went further and collected a more general reference work on canon law, an abbreviation of the Liber Sextus and Constitutiones Cle- mentinae, two official collections of papal decretals issued by Boniface VIII (1294–1303) and John XXII (1316–1334), respectively.9 As we have seen in chapter 3, priests were expected to possess a copy of the synodal statutes, but bishops also promulgated individual statutes and instructions that pertained to pastoral care throughout the year; these would have been required reading and some priests chose to copy them into their books. Erhard Butzenloer, a vicar in Spalt, added copies of Johann III von Eich’s letters and statutes as they became available. 10 That the manuscript was later acquired and used by Johannes Heller, Johann III’s general vicar from 1450 to 1459, shows the up-to-date character of the collection. It is hard to say how common Butzenloer’s habit of recording episcopal statutes was at the time. Given the number of regulations emanating from Eichstätt and the familiarity with written documents that their work demanded, it seems likely that many priests would have kept copies of episcopal statutes, perhaps as loose sheets. Butzenloer may have been unusual only in his decision to have his copies bound. Others made more personalized collections. Albert Scheuch, the parish priest in Pettenhofen, owned a manuscript that contained a statute from Jo- hann III von Eich on the absolution of excommunicates, a list compiled by Johannes de Miza of those groups of people to whom the Eucharist should be denied, a two-folium work on assigning penance, and a seven-folium tract by Paulus Wann on indulgences.11 Ulrich Dietersperger and Ulrich Pfeffel also pursued answers to specific questions, as shown by the former’s acquisition of a single distinction on the necessity of Christ’s Passion from a commentary on the Sentences and Pfeffel’s copying of Thomas Ebendorffer’s short text on the pains of hell.12 Pfeffel also owned a work on how clerics should behave during an interdict.13 Johannes Wiedemann, as we saw in chapter 2, copied several formularies for certifying the confessions of individuals, as well as a form letter that served as a letter of testimonial for pilgrims. 14 Collections of texts such as those discussed here show the parish clergy’s interest in the details of their work as pastors and administrators and even a certain desire to keep abreast of new developments. The single largest genre represented in the sample is sermon literature. Here priests showed interest in both systematic collections organized according to the liturgical year and individual sermons on specific topics. Interest- 134 Chapter 5 ingly, aside from a few notes made by Pfeffel on the art of preaching, there are only two texts in the sample designed to aid preachers, Aquinas’s De arte praedicandi and Johannes Melber’s Vocabularium praedicantium, both printed books from the end of our period.15 Apparently these clergy were more concerned with acquiring material to preach than composing their own sermons or learning about the art of preaching itself. But here their appetite was voracious. The twenty-two whole or partial collections (in seventeen books) of sermons contain few surprises and include the Sermones de tempore et de sanctis by Meffret, the Latin sermons of Berthold of Regensburg, two collections of sermons by Nicholas of Dinkelsbühl, the Sermones de sanctis of Conrad von Brundelsheim (better known as Soccus), the Sermones de tempore et de sanctis by Johannes He- rolt, and two copies of the Sermones quadragesimales of Jacobus de Vora- gine. Somewhat more unusual were the Sermones ex ethica Catonis and a copy of the Sermones de sanctis by Johannes Milic de Kremsier made by a student in Prague and later acquired by Pfeffel. 16 Even more popular was the acquisition of one or several sermons on specific topics. Sometimes these sermons are from well-known collections such as the sermon on St. Michael by Nicholas of Dinkelsbühl, which Ulrich Pfeffel copied for himself, or the sermon by Heinrich von Friemar on St. Margaret owned by Eberhard Plinthammer, a priest in Ingolstadt. 17 Priests clearly copied some sermons simply to fill the need for material on a particular topic. For example, Laurence, an assistant priest in Mörnsheim, copied a New Year’s sermon as well as a sermon for pilgrims. 18 One of the first manuscripts acquired by Pfeffel contained sermons on specific feasts and saints. Pfeffel himself later added sermons for the feast of the Circumcision, the vigil of the Ascension, the feast of the Holy Innocents, and a sermon for Epiphany.19 General guides to pastoral care were common in the diocese; eight priests in the sample owned a basic pastoral handbook. The first bishop of Eichstätt to demand that his clergy acquire such a handbook was Albert of Hohenrech- berg (1429–1445), who in 1434 ordered his clergy to obtain a copy of Jo- hannes Auerbach’s Directorium curatorum.20 Although his successor Johann III von Eich never explicitly recommended the text to his clergy, at least two scribes copied the handbook along with Bishop Johann III von Eich’s synodal statutes from 1447; the two may have been seen as belonging together. 21 Erhard Butzenloer (vicar in Spalt), Hainrich Löffler (a mass priest in Ingol- stadt), and Peter Hernsperger (the parish priest in Hitzhofen) all owned copies of the Directorium copied between 1451 and the mid-1460s.22 Three more copies of the text were available in the parish library of Schwabach. 23 Given the ready availability of the text it is not surprising that in 1480 two priests reported to Vogt that they used the formula for absolution found in the Directorium.24 The parish clergy did not limit themselves to handbooks rec- Reading Interests 135 ommended to them by their bishop. Priests also sought out copies of Guido de Monte Rocherii’s Manipulus curatorum,25 Albertus de Diessen’s Specu- lum clericorum,26 Hermannus de Schildesche’s Speculum manuale sacerdotum,27 and the Summa rudium, which the bishops of Augsburg were still recommending to their clergy well into the sixteenth century. 28 It has been argued that these kinds of handbooks promoted the professionalization of the clergy, while cultivating a primarily cultic image of the priesthood, one that emphasized above all else the correct administration of the sacraments and the dangers of impurity, negligence, and error. 29 While such books undoubtedly contributed to the professionalization of the clergy in the fifteenth century, a point that has been too often neglected by scholars, the second point requires some modification. First, priests did not limit themselves to these types of handbooks, but rather sought to satisfy their curiosity concerning the meaning of the rites and ceremonies they performed through a variety of other kinds of texts. Clerics in the sample collected four expositions of the Mass, six liturgical expositions, including William Durandus’s Rationale divinorum officiorum, and six texts on the sacraments. Six expositions of the Ten Commandments reveal an interest in the text that was rapidly becoming the basis for moral teaching.30 Given the prevailing assumption that access to the Bible before the Reformation was limited, a surprising number of Bibles, four, were owned by parish clergy in the diocese. 31 A fifth was owned by the rector of the parish church in Gempfing, which lay just to the south of the diocese but was incorporated into the monastery of St. Walburg in Eichstätt.32 That priests were interested not only in possessing Scripture, but in studying it as well is shown by the eleven texts that could be called aids to using the Bible such as Alexander de Villa Dei’s Summarium bibliae as well as nine biblical commentaries. 33 These texts reveal that many priests were interested in more than correct liturgical and cultic practice. Secondly, even handbooks and manuals emphasized that failure to understand how the sacraments worked could lead to procedural mistakes. In other words, one cannot make a strict distinction between knowledge and practice because the one depended on the other. This is perhaps clearest in the texts related to the sacrament of penance. Most pastoral handbooks already emphasized the procedures, regulations, and sacramental theology of penance; the fact that numerous clergy in the diocese also sought out specialized manuals suggests that issues of sin and conscience were of special interest. In all, fourteen handbooks, summae, and tracts on confession and penance have survived, including some impressive works such Johannes Nider’s Manuale confessorum, Astesanus de Ast’s Summa de casibus conscientiae, Antoninus Florentinus’s Confessionale: Defecerunt, Nicholas of Dinkelsbühl’s Confes- sionale, and Johannes Nider’s Consolatorium timoratae conscientiae. These show that priests did not always reach for the shortest and simplest tract available. 136 Chapter 5

Although such large works were not as rare among the parish clergy as some historians have supposed, it is perhaps most instructive to take a closer look at a more modest example of the genre. 34 Johannes de Kusin’s approximately ten-folium De audientia confessionum, owned by both Pfeffel and Ulrich Dietersberger, represented a text easily affordable by any priest in the diocese and is an example of just the sort of tract that reformers like Gerson promoted. One would expect that such a short treatment of a complicated topic would concentrate exclusively on the priest’s cultic responsibilities for the proper performance of the sacrament and indeed much of the text does deal with these issues. Since the authority of priests to absolve sinners was limited through papal and episcopal reservation of certain sins, Kusin spends significant space on defining the differences between major and minor excommunication, how to handle penitents guilty of various types of reserved sins, and different forms of absolution for the different cases. He even includes a form letter for priests to send when referring a penitent guilty of a reserved sin to the bishop for absolution.35 Kusin’s main theme, however, is that the proper performance of the sacrament requires that both penitent and confessor possess certain knowledge and spiritually inhabit particular mental and devotional states. Without understanding the substance of the sacrament, the form is of little use and could even lead to harm. The text begins with an abbreviated, because so well known, reference to the passage from the Gospel of Matthew, in which Christ says to Peter: “I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven [and whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven].”36 This passage was the foundation of the Church’s claim to authority in matters of the conscience. Kusin, however, is not interested in justifying the confessor’s power to bind and loose sins, but rather in the nature and exercise of this power. Christ, he argues, did not use the plural, “keys,” lightly. There are in fact two keys; the first is the key of power and is given to all priests with ordination. This key alone, however, is not sufficient to open the gates of heaven, but requires the aid of the second key, the key of knowledge. Whereas one lacking the key of power cannot perform the sacrament at all, no priest without the key of knowledge can perform the sacrament correctly: “No confessor should mix himself in the hearing of confessions unless he has the two keys.”37 This second key is so important that Kusin advised priests to break off confessions if they encountered a complicated case for which they did not know the solution. If possible the priest should briefly interrupt the confession to consult his books or ask a more experienced confessor, but if there were no opportunity for that, then the priest should order the penitent to return later concerning the matter in question.38 Kusin attempts in the rest of the tract to give his readers the key of knowledge by discussing a variety of topics that every confessor needs to Reading Interests 137 master, including the virtues, the twelve commandments (the Ten Command- ments and the two special commandments to love God and neighbor), the sacraments, the works of mercy, and ecclesiastical punishments. He describes methods for conducting confessions, assigning satisfactions, and handling certain special cases such as the confession of the sick and dying. One could fairly describe the first part of the work as a pastoral syllabus. Kusin opens with a discussion of the three theological virtues (faith, hope and charity). Faith is believing, knowing, and assenting to everything that the Church teaches. The simple, however, need not believe each article of the faith in particular, but need only give their general assent and belief to all the things that the Church believes.39 The best summary of Church teaching is contained most concisely in the Creed, but is also imprinted in the round of the liturgical year. Bishops expected priests to be able to explain the Creed and the major feasts to their parishioners, and Kusin reviews both of these to conclude his section on faith. Theological hope is the hope that God’s grace will lead one to salvation. One must avoid, however, the presumption of salvation and the consequent conviction that one need not perform good works and avoid evil. Those things that ought to be hoped for are enumerated in the Our Father, an observation that gives Kusin an opportunity to briefly explicate the text. Charity is the love of God and neighbor. The proper set of guidelines for the practice of charity are the Ten Commandments, which include three commandments to regulate the relationship between God and man and seven to regulate that between man and neighbor. 40 Aside from these things the confessor must of course know about sin and its categories. Kusin makes a basic distinction between sins stemming from one’s animal nature and sins of the intellect and free will. Only sins of the second category are mortal. Mortal sins lead to damnation and must be confessed; venial sins lead only to temporal punishment and need not. Al- though considered the root of all evil, the Seven Deadly Sins (pride, sloth, gluttony, avarice, lust, wrath, and envy) need not necessarily be mortal, because their severity, like other sins, varies with circumstance and intention.41 Kusin derives rules for determining whether a sin is mortal or venial from his definition of the states of salvation and damnation. He or she who recog- nizes their final end and ultimate purpose in God is in a state of salvation; he or she who sees this in love of self or any other created thing is in a state of damnation. Therefore if, while sinning, an individual loses sight of the purpose for which they were created or values a created thing above God, then the sin is mortal. If, on the other hand, someone values a creature more than proper, but does not intend to offend God thereby or transgress his precepts, then the sin remains venial. Consequently any violation of Church law, natural law, or formal vows are mortal sins because it is impossible to violate these in good conscience. The author then proceeds to apply his rules to each 138 Chapter 5 of the deadly sins in turn and gives examples of mortal and venial manifestations of each.42 To what extent priests applied all of these rules to the behavior of their parishioners is difficult to say; they were at least quick to apply them to their own. During the visitation of 1480, Michael Greiff, an assistant priest in Beilngries, testified to Vogt that while the chaplain Conrad often played cards in the tavern with the parish priest of Irversdorf, he himself played only rarely “for the sake of comfort.”43 Michael was by no means the only priest with a weakness for gambling, but to a man they insisted to Vogt that they did not play these games for money, but rather for the “comfort” or “solace” provided by human companionship. They used this term advisedly. Accord- ing to Kusin gambling out of avarice is a mortal sin, but for solace merely a venial one.44 Since confession was supposed to be a time of instruction as well as examination, the text reviews the seven sacraments and what the priest should teach the penitent about each. Particular emphasis is laid on confession because penitents as well as priests should know how the sacrament works. Confessors should instruct penitents that mortal sins are remitted through true contrition, but that they are also held to confess and perform satisfaction according to the laws of the Church. Kusin provides a standard definition of contrition as “a sorrow or displeasure, which proceeds above all from the love of God, for the sins one has committed.”45 Feelings that instead proceed from fear of punishment or other causes are not true contrition, but rather attrition. Good confessions must have several characteristics: they must be whole and include each mortal sin that one remembers committing since one’s last confession; the penitent must be contrite and intend not to commit the confessed sins in the future; and one must faithfully perform the satisfaction imposed by the priest. Since the circumstances of a sin affect its gravity, the priest should interrogate the penitent according to the standard set of questions: who, what, where, through whom, how often, why, and how. Additionally the penitent must agree to perform restitution for any money or property gained through fraudulent or sinful means; if the penitent is on the point of death and does not recover, then the priest should ensure that the heirs or executors of the penitent’s will perform restitution in his or her stead.46 A confessor cannot rely on the penitent’s memory and should cultivate a variety of modes of inquiry to ensure that each confession is complete. Kusin recommends in particular interrogating the penitent according to the Ten Commandments and the Seven Deadly Sins in order to uncover sins of commission and according to the theological virtues of faith, hope, and charity to uncover sins of omission.47 Other possibilities include examining the penitent according to the season, times of day, or the commandment to love one’s Reading Interests 139 neighbor. Each penitent will present different challenges and priests need to be ready to employ the appropriate manner of interrogation. Penitents and priests should also know that penance consists of three parts, contrition, confession, and satisfaction, and that all work together to free the penitent from punishment. Through contrition God remits the guilt of mortal sin and commutes the eternal punishment that would have been the sinner’s just reward into a temporal punishment to be exacted either in this life or in purgatory. However, by virtue of Christ’s Passion, which operates through the sacraments, the completion of the satisfaction enjoined by the priest in confession will fulfill the temporal debt still owed and free the soul from punishment after death.48 Since satisfactions should do more than merely square the soul’s account with God, but also work to remove the root of future sin, priests should craft them with care. For example, priests should require the greedy to give to the poor or the Church, while the proud should have to humble themselves before God in prayer. Priests can also use the assigned satisfaction as a crucial window into the mental state of the penitent; a refusal to perform the suggested penance should be taken as a sign that the penitent lacks true contrition, in which case the priest should withhold absolution.49 While the priest’s absolution is necessary, his words are useless unless the penitent meets the above-mentioned conditions, such as contrition, the intention not to sin further, and the intention to fulfill the imposed satisfactions. The priest must be very careful to ascertain each of these because if the penitent fails to meet any of these conditions, then

[i]n that case the confessor ought by no means to absolve him, because the absolution would be of no benefit, and a confessor who absolves one whom he knows does not stand absolved before God sins mortally.50

That the priest is a conduit of God’s grace is stressed in the formula for absolution itself. Provided that the penitent had not committed a reserved sin, Kusin recommended the formula, “May the Son of God absolve you, and I absolve you from your sins in the name of the Father and Son and Holy Spirit.”51 Although the form of the sacrament truly consisted in the words “I absolve you from your sins,” Kusin believed that the phrase “May the Son of God absolve you” was pedagogically useful because it emphasized to the penitent that Christ is the source of grace.52 Priests were only expected to possess a handbook and the synodal statutes, but as we have seen their needs and interests exceeded these minimal expectations. They collected short, focused tracts on particular topics, excerpts from canon law, sermons, as well as some more substantial treatises. But their interest in practical questions should not be taken to imply an exclusive interest in the correct performance of rituals. The administration of 140 Chapter 5 penance alone required priests not only to master the necessary formulas but also to know and understand the Creed and Ten Commandments, the virtues and vices, master techniques of interrogation and instruction, and judge both the severity of sin and the penitent’s mental state. In other words cultic correctness required that one understand the meaning of the ceremony itself. Churchmen in the fifteenth century repeatedly argued that improper understanding could reduce even the rites of Church to mere superstition. 53 Evi- dence provided by the books owned or produced by these priests suggests that we cannot so easily assume that they were unacquainted and uncon- cerned with the meanings of the rites they performed.

THE COUNCIL OF BASEL (1431–1449) AND THE IMMACULATE CONCEPTION

As we have seen, texts that focused on the praxis of pastoral care could contain elements of sacramental theology. Some of the better-educated priests, however, evidenced a more academic interest in theology and even in contemporary theological and exegetical debate. The most interesting example of priests’ pursuit of doctrinal information is the acquisition of sermons on the immaculate conception. 54 Whether Mary had been guilty of original sin had long been a point of contention, especially among mendicant theologians. By the end of the fourteenth century, the feast of Mary’s conception was widespread, but the theological justification for such a feast remained disputed. Franciscan theologians tended to support the doctrine and argued that Mary was protected from the stain of Adam and Eve’s fall by a singular act of God’s grace. Most Dominican theologians, on the other hand, argued that even Jesus’s mother was subject to original sin; God’s plan, in fact, required it. They believed that Mary was sanctified at some point in time after conception; for them the feast celebrated the beginning of God’s plan to redeem humanity. In 1439, after lengthy deliberation, the Council of Basel determined that Mary had indeed been conceived free from original sin and declared December 8 as day on which to celebrate that event. The decision, however, was not without controversy.55 From the beginning the Council of Basel had labored against both the weight of high expectations and the animosity of Pope Eugenius IV. 56 In claiming that general councils, rather than the pope, held ultimate authority within the Church, the earlier Council of Constance (1414–1418) had also laid out a provision in the constitution Frequens for regular general councils to carry out the further reform of the Church. After the failure of the first such planned general council at Pavia in 1423, the second opened at Basel in 1431. From 1431 to 1436, the council successfully implemented two popular reforms of the papal curia (the elimination of papal reservations and annates), Reading Interests 141 negotiated a truce with the Hussites, and passed a series of reforms aimed at improving the religious life and discipline in the parishes. The council eventually foundered, however, on Eugenius IV’s determined opposition. In 1437 he ordered to council to transfer to Ferrara, a move that would have greatly strengthened Eugenius IV’s position. The majority of the council rejected the transfer and in 1439 took the drastic step of deposing Eugenius IV and electing another pope in his stead, Felix V (1439–1449). The decision severely weakened whatever support for the council still remained among secular rulers most of whom had no stomach for yet another papal schism. The council continued to meet for another decade but with much diminished influence. Despite the controversy caused by Eugenius IV’s transfer of the council to Ferrara in 1437 and the souring of attitudes toward the council after the election of Felix V, the king of France, in the Pragmatic Sanction of Bourges in 1438, and the emperor and imperial princes of the Holy Roman Empire, in the Acceptatio of Mainz in 1439, adopted nearly all of Basel’s early reform decrees. Some of the decrees, such as that on concubinage and the celebration of divine services, affected parish priests directly, while others, such as peace negotiations with the Hussites, would have had a more regional rele- vance. Priests certainly would have been keen to collect and market any spiritual rewards emanating from Basel. Peter Hernsperger, the parish priest in Hitzhofen copied a special formula for absolution issued by the council and Eugenius IV in 1436 for those who contributed to reunion with the Greek Orthodox Church.57 Local bishops were largely left on their own to decide which of the council’s decrees to pass on to their clergy. In Eichstätt they found a relatively warm reception. Even before the king and princes met at Mainz, Bishop Albert of Hohenrechberg cited the council’s decree on diocesan synods in his synodal statutes of 1434.58 Johann III von Eich, who had served as an advisor to Dukes Albrecht V and VI of Austria at the Council of Basel, worked further to enforce the decrees in the diocese after his election as bishop in 1445.59 In 1447 Johann appended thirteen of Basel’s early decrees (from 1434 to 1435) to his synodal statutes. These included the decree on the holding of provincial and diocesan synods, public concubines, excommunication, interdicts, the celebration of the canonical hours, proper behavior in church, the celebration of the Mass, and the pledging of divine services. 60 When Wilhelm von Reichenau had the synodal statutes printed in 1484, he had the same thirteen decrees printed together with Johann’s statutes.61 At least two copies of Johann’s 1447 statutes include some of these decrees. The vicar in Spalt, Richard Butzenloer, clearly thought the two sets belonged together; after copying the synodal statutes and twelve of the thirteen Basel decrees, he wrote simply: “Here end the synodal statutes, written by me Richard Butzenloer, vicar in Spalt, in the year of Our Lord etc. 142 Chapter 5

1456.”62 In 1448, on the other hand, Laurence, an assistant priest in Mörnsheim, added only Basel’s decree on concubinage to his copy of Jo- hann’s statutes.63 Unfortunately Johannes Vogt gives no indication in the visitation record of 1480 whether or not he considered these thirteen decrees part of the synodal statutes. Although Basel’s early reforms had met with wide acceptance, the decree on the immaculate conception remained controversial because it had been issued after Eugenius’s transfer of the council to Ferrara. With the canonicity of the Council of Basel therefore in dispute, opinion on the immaculate conception remained divided. The matter was not definitively settled until 1854 when Pius IX made the immaculate conception official dogma. 64 Al- though the canon was omitted from the Acceptatio of Mainz in 1439, the feast seems to have been celebrated in the diocese of Eichstätt. Bishop Jo- hann III von Eich included the feast of the immaculate conception in a list of solemn feast days in his synodal statutes from 1447, 65 and two surviving breviaries from the diocese, one from 1454 and one from 1476, include the feast in their calendars.66 Despite lingering questions concerning its canonicity, therefore, the Council of Basel’s decision on the immaculate conception confronted priests in the diocese of Eichstätt with the question of how to celebrate the feast and how to explain the doctrine to their parishioners. Some priests must also have had unanswered questions of their own and sought out texts that analyzed the controversy. Ulrich Pfeffel and Johannes Flock, an assistant priest and cantor in Spalt, were two of these. As parish priest in Preith c.1459–1460, Pfeffel began a manuscript containing Lenten sermons and a portion of a commentary on Peter Lombard’s Sentences. Towards the end of the manuscript Pfeffel added the decree on the immaculate conception issued by the Council of Basel. His introduction to the text suggests he was aware of the contentious debate, “Here follows the bull from the synod of Basel on the conception of the blessed Virgin, in which the universal holy Church finally determined that she did not have original sin.”67 Pfeffel’s copy of the decree is a careful one; he proofread his work and corrected one of his scribal slips.68 Along with it, Pfeffel copied two sermons on the doctrine, both erroneously attributed to Heinrich von Langenstein.69 In fact one of the sermons was originally delivered by Hein- rich Totting von Oyta, a contemporary of Heinrich von Langenstein at the University of Vienna; the author of the second sermon, which begins Nec- dum erant abyssi, is unknown. Johannes Flock, an assistant priest and cantor in Spalt, also added a copy of Necdum to a miscellany that he constructed from 1469 to 1470.70 A manuscript donated to the parish library of Schwab- ach also contained a copy of Basel’s decree and a copy of Necdum, dated 1455.71 Together, these three manuscripts show that at least some priests in Reading Interests 143 the diocese of Eichstätt were interested not only in their liturgical duties regarding the feast, but also in the theological debate that had preceded them. The fierce arguments in favor of the immaculate conception found in Necdum erant abyssi have led scholars to assume it was written by a Francis- can, sometime between 1425 and 1435. 72 It takes as its theme a verse from Prov 8.24: “When there were no depths I was brought forth,”73 which is about the role of Wisdom in creation. The author chose as protheme Eccle- siasticus 24.31, also about Wisdom: “he who shines me forth will have eternal life.”74 Here the author was prescient; the Council of Basel referred to this exact verse in the opening of its decree on the immaculate conception: “The eternal Wisdom of God the Father promises a glorious reward for those who shine forth the mysteries of divine grace, when he says ‘he who shines me forth will have eternal life.’”75 The echoing was due less to happenstance than to the influence of Johannes de Segovia, a Spanish theologian who took heated part in the debates concerning the immaculate conception at the Coun- cil of Basel from 1436 to 1439. One of Johannes’s own works in defense of the immaculate conception bears some structural resemblances to Necdum and it is likely that he was familiar with the work. 76 The use of the sermon’s protheme in the council’s canon may have made Necdum seem especially suited to explain the new doctrine. In any case, the sermon enjoyed a certain popularity after 1439, especially in Germany.77 The author argues that Mary’s immaculate conception was possible due to God’s omnipotence and was congruous with God’s nature. The author supports his argument here with a reference to Augustine’s De regimine principuum and the principle that rulers have the power to dispense from the laws they have created; just as God had the power to stop the sun to help the ancient Israelites, so God could preserve Mary from original sin. 78 Drawing on arguments about the nature of original sin developed by the Franciscan theologian Franciscus de Mayronis, the author insists that it would have been improper for God to have been born from a mother tainted by sin. 79 After appealing to the authority of seven saints (Augustine, Anselm, Ildephonsus Toletanus, Dominic, Thomas Aquinas, Bernard, and Bridget) and seven Franciscan theologians (Alexander of Hales, Duns Scotus, Nicolaus of Lyra, Petrus de Candia, Petrus Auriol, Franciscus de Mayronis, and William of Ware) to support the doctrine, he next attempts to overcome seven objections to it.80 For example, the author repeats the objection that according to Paul all have sinned and need God’s grace (Romans 3.23); Christ was the first born without sin. If Mary were instead the first born without sin, then she would have had no need for Christ’s Passion, a clear violation of God’s plan for salvation. The author responds by refining, in good scholastic fashion, the concept of “sinlessness”; Christ, he argues, was the first to be born without sin due to his nature, while Mary was protected from sin by grace. The author 144 Chapter 5 likens Mary to a person saved from falling into a muddy pit by a friend. Is not such a person better off than one who falls into the mud and is only later rescued and cleaned off by the friend? In just such a manner, Mary profited more from God’s grace than the rest of humanity. Interestingly, Pfeffel offered an alternative metaphor in the margin. Adam represents one who was captured by a cruel enemy and later redeemed, while Mary was preserved from capture entirely. That Pfeffel reworked the example suggests that he may have used this story to illustrate the concept of the immaculate conception to listeners.81 Seven remains the organizational principal in the following section where the author finds seven prefigurations of Mary’s sinlessness in scripture and seven correspondences in nature. Here I will mention only one example of each. God preserved Mary from original sin just as he protected the shoes and clothing of the Israelites from corruption during their forty years of wandering in the desert after the Exodus (Deut 29.5). Just as a thorny plant produces roses, which themselves lack thorns, so fallen humanity produced Mary, who herself lacked sin. One wonders how convincing this latter metaphor could really have been as rose bushes routinely produce roses, whereas Mary remained singular. In the final section, the author truly throws down the gauntlet and reports seven miracles in which opponents of the doctrine of the immaculate conception are punished for their skepticism, on occasion brutally so. These stories are meant to terrify; “just as thunder strikes terror in the land, thus these seven miracles strike terror in those who wish to falsify the fame of the glorious Virgin Mary and who do not wish to celebrate her conception.”82 One friar preaching against the doctrine is struck blind by a furious marble statue of the Virgin, another is strangled by a wolf, and a third dies in his quarters before taking the floor to defend his opinions before Martin V. Only the first finds mercy by changing his position. The author of the second sermon, Heinrich Totting von Oyta, would have been horrified by the tone if not necessarily the conclusions of Necdum. Heinrich taught theology at the universities of Prague, Paris, and Vienna in the second half of the fourteenth century. Before leaving for Vienna in 1381–1382, Heinrich witnessed bitter arguments about Mary’s conception among the theologians in Paris. A decade later before the assembled masters of the University of Vienna, he delivered a sermon on the topic in which he called for humility and a moratorium on debate. 83 Heinrich begins by making a distinction between bodily conception and the infusion of the soul. Mary’s sanctification could occur only at this second conception; the question was whether Mary was protected from any taint of original sin or whether she was freed from it at some later time. Heinrich attempts to summarize the position of each side of the debate. Those who object to it argue that if Mary had been free from original sin, then she would have had no need for the Reading Interests 145 grace of Christ. Supporters countered that humanity needed a mediator between Christ’s absolute purity and its own guilt, that Mary had been preserved from original sin through Christ’s merit, and that Mary as a unique exception did not invalidate God’s overall plan for salvation. Heinrich found neither side’s arguments conclusive and urged theologians to maintain neu- trality. Dissension among clerics will lead only to scandal among the laity and should thus be avoided. The safer policy is to wait for the Church to make a final judgment.84 Neither of these texts were composed to help the humble curate develop a Sunday sermon. Heinrich delivered his address before a university audience and explicitly opposed the idea of airing the debate before the laity. A priest could conceivably have mined the miracle stories in Necdum erant abyssi for sermon material, but even these were intended to convince clerics and theologians to support the doctrine of the immaculate conception, not to inspire devotion in the laity. It seems more likely that the priests in the diocese who copied and read these texts were seeking information on the debate itself, rather than merely collecting entertaining stories to repeat from the pulpit. Pfeffel, Flock, and the anonymous scribe of the manuscript in the Schwabach parish library saw these sermons in the context of Basel’s ruling. Flock ends his colophon with the date on which the Council of Basel issued its decree on the immaculate conception, 85 while Pfeffel completed his copy of Necdum with the remark: “Here ends the sermon on the conception of the Virgin Mary, in which the authorities holding that she was conceived in original sin are resolved.”86 It is likely that Pfeffel viewed Basel’s ruling as providing just the sort of final judgment that Heinrich Totting von Oyta had awaited. Nevertheless, Pfeffel remained interested in the debate; his marginal notes track the outline of the argument, provide exact citations for biblical references, and mark passages of special interest. 87 That three priests in the diocese of Eichstätt would be interested in such texts twenty to thirty years after Basel’s decree shows both that some priests took an interest in theological questions and that we should not assume that the parish clergy in the fifteenth century remained unaware of changes in theology and devotion among the academic and cultural elites.

TEXTS ON THE PRIESTHOOD

Previous sections of this chapter have discussed some of the texts priests collected to help them with the details of pastoral care, pursue personal interests, and keep themselves informed. Priests also sought out texts that took the priesthood itself as their subject. In the absence of any institution dedicated to the training of priests, there was a need for alternative methods of creating feelings of professional solidarity. Some of this would have been 146 Chapter 5 acquired from colleagues, but many priests would have worked in relative isolation. Bishops used diocesan synods not only to legislate, but also to exhort the assembled, and captive, clerical audience, but these were at best annual or biannual events, which many priests would have been unable to attend. In the context of the decreasing prices and accelerating circulation of texts in the fifteenth century, however, books could fill the void. Bishops often delegated the task of preaching to the assembled clergy at diocesan synods to a skilled and well-known preacher, whose oration occasionally met with such success that copies of the address became coveted. In the diocese of Eichstätt the sermon delivered by Johannes von Eyb before the diocesan synod in 1435 achieved a certain notoriety. Ulrich Diettersberger copied the text between 1465 and 1466, while serving as the parish priest in Greding.88 If the preacher were sufficiently famous, the sermon could achieve more than regional popularity, as did that delivered by Johann Geiler von Kaysersberg at the synod held in Strasbourg on April 18, 1482. Geiler, a beneficed preacher in the city, delivered over 4,500 sermons in his career, of which over 1,300 have survived in vernacular printings alone. 89 The sermon was printed in Latin shortly after the synod; Johannes Purckel, a vicar in Herrieden, owned a copy.90 In the sermon, Geiler outlines his plan for a comprehensive reform of Strasbourg, a program that would begin with the ecclesiastical leadership but was intended to transform both clergy and laity. Geiler singles out the bishop of Strasbourg’s secular advisors, the “Egyptians,” for particularly harsh criticism. They were transforming the episcopal office into a secular lordship like any other, encouraging the bishop to exchange his miter and cross for sword and helmet. He decries the violation of ecclesiastical liberty, the casual disre- spect shown to feast days and sacred spaces, superstitious practices, and the lack of discipline among the clergy. He calls for both personal, inner conver- sion and the elimination of abuses.91 Given Geiler’s criticism of Strasbourg’s ecclesiastical leadership, it is perhaps not surprising that the sermon found a readership among the laity as well. Jakob Wimpheling translated the sermon and had it printed for lay consumption in 1513. 92 While reform texts such as Geiler’s sermon might find an audience among both priests and laypersons, texts that took the priesthood itself as their theme and sought to instruct priests about the nature of their profession were clearly intended primarily for the clergy. Several of these circulated in the diocese of Eichstätt. Peter Hernsperger, the parish priest in Hitzhofen, owned a short sermon entitled De vita et honestate clericorum.93 Two priests, Ulrich Pfeffel and Ulrich Koler, a mass priest in Eybach who later entered the monastery of Rebdorf, owned another sermon, De dignitate sacerdotum.94 Pfeffel also owned a sermon for confessors in the same manuscript.95 Laurence, an assistant priest in Mörnsheim and later a vicar in Eichstätt, copied two sermons on the priesthood, the Sermo de novo sacer- Reading Interests 147 dote and an untitled sermon that begins Multi hew sunt sacerdotes.96 An earlier owner of a manuscript acquired by Pfeffel in 1460 had also copied Sermo de novo sacerdote on the inside of the front cover.97 Such sermons typically exalted the priesthood and would have worked to legitimate clerical privilege for their readers, while also explaining persecution and providing guidance for moral behavior. Typical was the application of a certain stock of biblical texts to the priesthood. De dignitate sacerdotum begins with a reference to Ps 8.5–6: “Yet you have made him a little less than the angels, and crowned him with glory and honor. You have given him dominion over the works of your hands and you have put all things under his feet.”98 Here, according to our author, David foresaw the dignity and sublim- ity of priests.99 The author of the De novo sacerdote, on the other hand, stresses that priests are God’s chosen and draws on three scriptural passages from both the Old and New Testaments: “You are a chosen race, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a chosen people (I Pet 2.9);” “God chose us before the constitution of the world to be holy and immaculate in his sight (Eph 1.4);” and “God has chosen you today to be a special people and to keep all his commandments and to set you higher than all nations (Deut 26.18).”100 By providing a stock of such biblical passages to draw on, these sermons would have strengthened priests’ sense of themselves as a separate and di- vinely instituted order. The author of the De dignitate sacerdotum went further and argued that David in Psalm 8 was comparing the nature of angels with the nature of priests as men; ordination, however, grants priests powers and privileges that elevate them above the angels.101 To claim that priests were greater than angels was in fact a commonplace in this type of literature. Only priests have the power to turn bread and wine into the body and blood of Christ and the authority to open or shut the very gates of heaven with their words. To show this the author of the De novo sacerdote appeals to the standard proof text for the Church’s authority over matters of the conscience, Mt 16.19, but in shortened form because he expected familiarity with the passage: “Whomev- er you bind on earth etc because I will give to you the keys of the kingdom of heaven etc.”102 Priests’ superiority to all secular authorities is for these writers a direct corollary of their superiority to angels. No king or prince can absolve a sinner, nor consecrate the Eucharist. Thus, just as the mountains tower over the breadth of the plains and the depths of the valleys, so too do priests exceed the greatness of kings, princes, magnates, nobles, and knights. 103 Whereas all the kings and princes of the world are not able to ordain a single priest, one priest has the power to raise thousands of kings and princes to knighthood.104 Such lofty rhetoric may have rung hollow to a priest who found himself wrangling over tithes with rustics or intimidated into paying protection mon- 148 Chapter 5 ey to the local lord. But these texts would have also helped prepare him for the worst. According to the author of the De novo sacerdote, God expressly forbade anyone to lay violent hands on his priesthood in the Psalm verse, “Do not touch my anointed ones.”105 Nevertheless, priests should expect persecution. Christ foretold the suffering of his followers in the Gospel of John (15.19), “I have chosen you from the world and therefore the world hates you.”106 Christ himself, who had never sinned, was crucified; John the Baptist, who was sanctified in his mother’s womb, decapitated; Peter, the prince of the apostles, hung; Bartholomew, the friend of God, tortured; the apostles whipped. Yet priests should bear these tribulations patiently for God has promised an eternal reward. As one author writes, “it is proper that we enter the kingdom of heaven through many tribulations.”107 In the Sermon on the Mount Christ himself promised salvation to those who suffer patiently. 108 This fatalistic certainty of both persecution and reward is not unlike that found in the Epistola de miseria curatorum seu plebanorum, except that the latter found the future reward not worth the present tribulation. These sentiments would have helped embattled priests legitimate their privileges, even if only to themselves, as well as prepare them for inevitable challenges. These texts, however, have another side to them as well. Embed- ded within the praise are constant reminders of the clerical order’s responsibilities.109 Some of these were cultic. If the priests under the old law, who offered calves to the Lord, needed to be ritually clean, how pure must be modern priests, who offer God’s only son?110 One author compares the hands of priests to Mary’s womb because they bring Christ into the world every time they celebrate the sacrament of the altar. In particular priests must be truly contrite, purely confessed, free from the fault of mortal sin, and adorned with the works of the virtues.111 More space, however, is dedicated to emphasizing the need for knowledge and wisdom. For example, the author of the De dignitate sacerdotum appeals to a standard text, Malachi 2.7, to support his contention that priests are the guardians of knowledge: “Let the lips of the priest guard knowledge, and let them seek the law from his mouth, for he is an angel of the lord of hosts.”112 The author of the De novo sacerdote notes that the hearts of priests are storehouses of wisdom (Ps 143.13) and that it was particularly priests to whom Christ was speaking when he said,

For I do not call you servants, but friends because the servant does not know [what the master is doing]. But I have called you friends because I have made known to you everything that I have heard from the Father. 113

This wisdom consists in understanding the will of God, the ability to teach God’s commandments, a spirit of piety, and the wisdom to avoid what is spiritually harmful. Reading Interests 149

If priests are specially privileged with such wisdom, then it is their responsibility to teach the laity, for whom the will of God is not always so clear. The author of the De dignitate sacerdotum uses an image from I Maccabees 6.39: “just as the sun glitters on their gilded shields and the mountains are resplendent with the light.”114 The author interprets the “sun” as Christ, the golden shields as his priests, and the mountains as simple men. The special privileges of priests come, therefore, with the responsibility of feeding the Lord’s sheep with doctrine, sermons, and good example; they must teach the simple, console laborers, correct the young, humble the proud, and expel demons.115 Despite their avowed celibacy priests are for this reason the most fruitful of God’s creatures: “I have chosen you and have appointed you to go out and bear fruit, and your fruit will endure.”116 God’s preferred fruit are the souls for whom his only son had to suffer death, and no class of men gains as many souls for God as the clerical order. 117 Even an angel need only watch over a single soul, whereas a priest is responsible for the souls of many.118 Priests bear this fruit by turning bread and wine into the body and blood of Christ, preaching, illuminating others with the light of doctrine, and exterminating heresies and schismatics. 119 Priests who fulfill these responsibilities can expect a great reward. If Abraham and Lot merited escape from danger and Tobias merited his eyesight because of hospitality shown to angels, one author asks how much greater will be the reward shown to priests who are worthy to receive not angels, but the Lord of angels? John writes of this reward when he says, “To whomever has received him, he gave power to become the sons of God,”120 —sons to be raised up at the Last Judgment, sons to be honored, sons to be rewarded, sons to be crowned with glory.121 Failure and negligence, however, carried an equal penalty. De novo sacerdote ends with an exhortation:

O pastors of the Lord, O priests of the living God, O custodians of souls be faithful unto death and feed the flock, which the Lord purchased with His own precious blood, feed them with words, feed them by example, feed them faithfully with the sacraments, and guard each sheep so that you will receive in heaven the wages for each, about which is written in the Apocalypse, “the crown of life.” But woe to those who are not pastors of the Lord, but wolves of the devil, who consume much from the patrimony of Christ’s crucifixion and lose without care so many of the sheep committed to them. 122

Such priests can only be acting in ignorance of Ezechiel’s warning, which the author summarizes:

Woe . . . to pastors who feed themselves, eat the fat, and cover themselves in wool. You kill the fatted sheep and you do not guard my flock. You have not 150 Chapter 5

sought that which is lost and so my flock was plundered and my sheep eat- en . . . Lo! I will demand my sheep from the pastors. . . . 123

Appealing once again to Ezekiel, the author warns that if priests fail to warn the wicked to turn from their evil ways, they will also be held to account. 124 The image of the priesthood portrayed here, with its extremes of privilege and persecution, rewards and punishments, emphasized the distinction between priests and their parishioners. Such texts, along with pastoral manuals and synodal statutes, would have aided the development of a professional ethos among the clergy. But one has only to remember the reform program described in Johann Geiler von Kaysersberg’s synodal address to recognize also that priests and laity could share some common interests with the communities in which they lived. That a sermon delivered to clerics in Latin could thirty years later be translated into German for a lay readership shows that despite the lofty rhetoric of De dignitate sacerdotum and De novo sacerdote, the desire for church reform transcended the boundary erected by priestly ordination. Texts dedicated to exploring the nature of the priesthood or directed specifically to clerical audiences would have helped priests form feelings of professional solidarity, justify their privileges, and interpret persecution, yet calls for reform made them equally aware of the dissatisfaction felt by both lay and ecclesiastical critics.

MEDICAL TEXTS

Bishops mandated that priests should possess the synodal statutes and a handbook, but this does not mean that priests lacked the funds or energy to acquire more or different texts. While collecting sermons on the priesthood and pastoral manuals that promoted professionalization and a normative concept of pastoral care, some also sought out texts to question or expand that concept.125 When Johannes Vogt arrived in Hilpoltstein during his visitation of the diocese in 1480, he interrogated the curate there, Marquardus Micht- ner:

To each article of inquisition he says that nothing is well-known to him except that the mass priest in Meckenhausen is said to exercise the medical art and that the canon Ulrich is said to have a servant woman, who is said to be his concubine, but he does not know for certain.126

What is surprising about this testimony is that it suggests that Vogt asked every curate about medical dabbling right along with more expected topics like concubinage. Vogt pursued the allegation when he later arrived in Meck- enhausen. The accused priest there, Johann Greüll, explained that he had been a servant (famulus) to a physician in Nuremberg for six years and that Reading Interests 151 for this reason peasants would come to him in search of advice. He insisted that he gave advice only and denied that he dispensed any medicines himself or had dealings with apothecaries.127 Greüll was not unique. According to the curate in Pemfelt, streams of the sick visited Bernhard Kauffmann, the curate in Walting, to have their urine inspected, a standard diagnostic technique in medieval medicine. 128 Vogt asked the priests in Gundelting and Scheltdorf about Kauffmann, and they both confirmed his reputation as an expert in the medical arts. 129 When confronted, Kauffmann admitted that he owned “libros medicinae” and that he used them to help him inspect urine samples. Like Greüll before him, he also insisted that he gave advice only; he denied dispensing medicines or writing to apothecaries.130 The visitation record contains a handful of similar accusations. After being outed by the curate in Polling, Johann Kuchner, a mass priest in Berg, admitted to Vogt that he had trained with a surgeon for three years and that he now used that knowledge to treat wounds and physical infirmties using an ointment. 131 The vicar in Leinburg accused a mass priest in Berching of inspecting urine and the curate in Rornstat of practicing alchemy, while the curate in Pfofelt, Johann Hering, reported to Vogt that priests in Neusling and Bergen exercised the medicinal arts. 132 Unfortunately nothing owned by Bernhard Kaufmann has survived, so we do not know what he and Vogt would have considered “medical books,” but in fact six surviving manuscripts and eight printed books owned by priests in diocese do contain medical texts and suggest that the cases uncovered by Vogt were not isolated. These priests were flirting with irregularity. The late medieval Church was deeply ambivalent about the lucrative professions, especially medicine and civil law. In the twelfth century, churchmen had begun to see these professions as incompatible with a life dedicated to the Church. 133 A canon from the Council of Tours in 1163 that prohibited regular clergy to leave the cloister to study medicine or civil law found its way into the Liber Extra. In 1219, Honorius III expanded this prohibition in his decretal Super specula to include the secular clergy:

Since we desire that the study of theology be enlarged [. . .] we wish and command this [penalty] to be extended to archdeacons, deans, irremovable pastors (plebani), provosts, cantors, and to other clerics of personal rank and standing, as well as to priests, unless they cease from these things within the prescribed time.134

Violators of this prohibition were ipso facto excommunicated. These prohibitions were of course not as final as they seemed. Clerics in minor orders and those in major orders short of the priesthood could still study medicine or civil law at university, and papal dispensations were available. 135 It was not 152 Chapter 5 uncommon for physicians to be supported with a benefice, nor for medical students to later become priests. 136 The prohibition from practicing surgery, or any other activity that would involve priests in the spilling of blood, was more fundamental. Four years prior to Super specula, the Fourth Lateran Council had expressly forbidden clerics in major orders to participate in capital sentences, judicial ordeals, or “to practice any surgical art which entails cauterization or incision.”137 This concern to maintain priestly purity also affected attitudes toward medical practice. Bleeding was a common medical procedure, and of course it was always possible that a doctor’s intervention could lead to the death of a patient. One fifteenth-century suppli- cant to the papal penitentiary, Thomas de Harihorn from the diocese of Cammin, desired to be ordained despite his prior experience as a medical doctor. Although he did not believe he had ever caused anyone’s death, he nevertheless sought papal absolution and dispensation because he could not be sure.138 Limitations on the study of medicine were also motivated by a concern that the pursuit of profit was incompatible with the clerical order. In 1294, Celestine V decreed that medicine could not be practiced for profit by anyone who hoped to receive a benefice. Beneficed physicians would have to content themselves with the proceeds of their benefice; any additional income must be offered to charity.139 For clerics in minor orders, the pursuit of profit, not necessarily the practice of medicine itself was objectionable. Some reformers, however, suspected that such fine distinctions were futile. Geert Groote (1340–1384), one of the founders of the Devotio moderna, grumbled that, “[it is] the rarest thing for someone given to medicine, canon law, or civil law to be found upright, or balanced in reason, or just, or tranquil, or of genuine insight.”140 Curates would have been familiar with the prohibitions in canon law. Petitioners like Thomas de Harihorn suggest wide familiarity with the rules as does the testimony of pastoral manuals. For example, Johannes Kusin’s modest manual on confession, four copies of which survive from the diocese of Eichstätt, noted that curates were forbidden to hear lectures in medicine or law.141 Four years prior to Vogt’s visitation, a collection of ten disputed questions on medical practice, the Decem quaestiones de medicorum statu, was copied in Ingolstadt, the home of a university with a medical faculty near Eichstätt. In the ninth question, the author argues that the clergy may study the medical arts for the purpose of giving advice (consilium), but those in sacred orders may not practice medicine (practicum exercicium). Medical practice inevitably entangles the practitioner in secular business, encourages the pursuit of gain, and could lead to the spilling of blood. All three are forbidden to the clergy. However, clerics may use natural medicine, provided free of charge, to help the poor as a form a charity. 142 Although Johann Greüll and Bernhard Kauffmann had certainly not read the Decem quaes- Reading Interests 153 tiones, it is nonetheless noteworthy that they both claimed to offer advice only and denied dispensing medicines. The former could be given freely, but the latter more clearly suggests professional, and profit-oriented, activity. The medical texts from the diocese that once were in the hands of the parish clergy suggest a range of interest in the subject. In the 1470s, a mass priest, Ulrich Hubner, put together a collection of medical texts (to be discussed below); later hands made brief additions, including treatments for jaundice, colic, constipation, gout, fever, bleeding, and a method for speed- ing childbirth.143 The curate in Hitzhofen owned a manuscript with antidotes to poison and a drink to hasten the healing of wounds. 144 The curate in Wassertrüdingen owned a manuscript with assorted gynecological remedies and prescriptions to aid the digestion and those suffering from hearing loss.145 Unfortunately neither of these priests copied any of the main texts, so it is impossible to say for certain whether they or another owner copied the recipes. Ulrich Pfeffel owned a portion of Johannes Jacobi’s tract on the plague and a few prescriptions for its prevention in a miscellany that was in his possession by 1463 at the latest.146 These were all quite short texts that would have been useful to priests as both individuals seeking relief from specific, personal ailments and as educated community leaders to whom people may have turned for help in the absence of professional doctors. Other priests, however, had a more developed interest in the subject. Johann Greüll dispensed “dietary advice,” which in the Middle Ages encompassed not only the recommendation of specific foods and drinks, but also advice about particular practices such as bathing, exercising, or sexual activity.147 Both Kauffmann and Greüll examined urine, an indispensable diagnostic technique for the medieval physician. The Urines of Theophilus Proto- patharios was included among the Ars medicinae, the collection of texts that had been part of the standard curriculum in medical faculties since the twelfth century. The Urines purported to explain the causes of variations in color, consistency, sediment, and odor.148 The “libros medicinae” owned by Kauffmann may well have included texts belonging to the Ars medicinae or any number of popular late medieval tracts on urine analysis. Johann Kuch- ner testified that he had trained with a surgeon for three years and now administered an ointment for injuries. Kuchner seems to have been acting as an unofficial Wundarzt, a type of surgeon that specialized in wounds. It is impossible to know whether Kuchner possessed books of any kind or whether he relied solely on the practical experience he gained during his training. We know that priests sometimes sold wine, opened taverns, or engaged in trade to supplement their income; clearly some priests could exploit medical knowledge to do the same.149 These three priests clearly had a near-professional interest in medicine. Several books and manuscripts in the sample suggest that other priests shared that interest. A volume assembled in Nuremberg in 1453 and later donated to 154 Chapter 5 the parish library in Schwabach contains recipes for staunching the flow of blood and a short tract on venesection. The latter is followed by advice for physicians about how to vary the procedure depending on which sign of the zodiac coincides with the full moon.150 A more dramatic example is provided by a manuscript miscellany compiled by Ulrich Hubner, a mass priest in Freystadt.151 Sometime after 1475 he combined Alexander Hispanus’s Mel- leus liquor and an abbreviated and revised German translation of the Antido- tarium Nicolai, both of which he had copied himself, with a copy of Conrad von Eichstätt’s Sanitatis conservator and the first thirty-one chapters of Jo- hannes de Toleto’s Liber de conservanda sanitate. The Melleus liquor was a medical compendium that enjoyed great popularity in late medieval Germany.152 The text consists of twelve sections, the first of which gives exactly the kind of dietary and medical advice that Greüll and Kauffmann may have been distributing. Here Alexander described the foods, spices, and herbs appropriate for each month and identified the best times of the year for specific practices such as warm baths and sexual intercourse.153 Other sections dealt with a range of topics including the use of urine analysis to identify diseases, the effects of humoral temperament on behavior, dietary and medicinal uses for specific herbs and spices, and treatments for fevers. The Antidotarium Nicolai was composed by Nicolas of Salerno in the second half of the twelfth century and consisted of recipes, uses, and vectors for approximately 140 different medicines. The real value of the work lay in the exact list of ingredients and the use of honey or sugar both as a vehicle and as a preservative, a technique borrowed from Arab medicine. In 1270 the medical faculty of the University of Paris made the Antidotarium a required part of the curriculum. Nicolas intended the text for those studying to be doctors, but apothecaries also made use of it in the later Middle Ages. The popularity of the text is reflected in the fact that it exists in thousands of copies and numerous derivative versions and translations, including that owned by Ulrich Hubner.154 Conrad von Eichstätt, a physician in Eichstätt in the early fourteenth century wrote several popular dietary works, including his magnum opus, the Urregimen. Influenced heavily by Avicenna, Conrad included sections on exercise, food and drink, sleep, the humors, and mental states. Hubner’s text, the Sanitatis conservator, was a more accessible version of the Urregimen that omitted the numerous academic references that were of interest primarily to medical scholars.155 In the Liber de conservanda sanitate Hubner acquired guidelines for the maintenance of a healthy lifestyle including dietary advice, prescriptions for bodily exercise, and recommendations for how best to handle afflictions such as rheumatism, headaches, failing eyesight, and the assaults of dogs, snakes, and insects. The absence of any chapter on sexual intercourse or women suggests that the author originally intended the work Reading Interests 155 for a monastic audience, but it frequently found readers outside the walls of the cloister as well.156 A priest with interests similar to Hubner’s was Johann Schluck, the curate in Illschwang, who donated a printed edition (Venice, 1479) of Johannes Mesue’s Opera medicinalia to the parish library in Schwabach.157 The origins of the text are mysterious. Johannes Mesue was the latinized form of Yūhannā ībn Māsawaih, a renowned ninth-century Syrian physician, but the text was most likely composed by a northern Italian doctor anywhere from two to four centuries after Māsawaih’s death.158 First printed in 1471, by 1489 the text had acquired a commentary and would be printed at least fourteen times before 1500.159 The 1479 edition owned by Schluck included the Antidotarium Nicolai as well. Like the latter text, the Opera medicinalia consisted of recipes for the preparation and storage of medicines, a section on the use of purgatives, and therapies for a variety of illnesses. The parish library of Schwabach was in fact well-supplied with medical texts. Another volume that could be found there included five printed texts: Benedict of Nursia’s De conservatione sanitatis (Rome, 1487–1488); Marsi- lio Ficino’s De triplici vita (Basel, 1497); the Liber physiognomiae (Venice, c.1490) by Michael Scot; the Mensa philosophica (Cologne, 1500) attributed to Michael Scot; and the Regimen sanitatis salernitatum (Cologne, 1507). Surviving in over one hundred manuscripts and nearly three hundred printed editions, the most well-known text in this collection was clearly the Regimen sanitatis salernitatum, a twelfth or thirteenth-century verse compendium of Salernitan medicine. The version found in the Schwabach collection includes a commentary attributed to the thirteenth-century Catalan physician Arnau de Vilanova and was especially popular toward the end of the fifteenth century. The text offers mostly mundane advice on personal hygiene, diet, herbs, anatomy, and bloodletting in the form of pithy sayings, “If you want to be safe [. . .] refrain from anger, be sparing of wine, eat little [. . .]. If you want to be healthy, wash your hands often.”160 The Liber physiognomiae was a popular but more controversial text. Originally part of the Liber introductorius, a textbook for students of astrology, it appeared twenty times in print before 1500. 161 The author, Michael Scot (d. c.1235) was a physician, astronomer, and natural philosopher who translated several works by Aristotle, Avicenna, and Averroes into Latin. 162 Although perhaps one of the era’s foremost scientific thinkers, Scot enjoyed a spotty reputation among his contemporaries. Dante placed him in the Eighth Circle of Hell for his devotion to magic. Scot was a proponent of natural magic, the idea that words, herbs, and stones had healing properties and that celestial bodies affected ailments and the medicines used to treat them.163 One can see how the contents of this text might have been slightly scandalous in the hands of a curate. The first book in the Liber physiognomiae discusses human reproduction including the foods that improve semen 156 Chapter 5

(turnips and chick peas), the proper times and frequency of sexual intercourse, and pregnancy. The second book describes standard medical topics such as the origins of humoral complexion and the effects of humoral imbal- ance, but also includes a section on dreams and auguries. The final book relates the parts of the human body to character. 164 Marsilio Ficino (d. 1499), the famed Renaissance Neoplatonist, was the son of a doctor and himself a priest. For this reason, perhaps, he argued that the two professions were compatible. Originally three separate works, the De triplici vita was first printed as a single volume in Florence in 1489, printed twice in Basel in the 1490s, and translated into German in 1505. 165 In Book One, Ficino claims that intellectuals require a special regimen in order to maintain their health because they are often beset by an abundance of black bile and therefore given to melancholy. 166 Phlegm, black bile, sexual intercourse, gluttony, and oversleeping are the enemies of the scholar and must be minimized or avoided.167 Priests in Schwabach may well have identified with Ficino’s image of the abstemious, sexually restrained scholar. Book Two offers advice for regulating food and drink to promote longevity. Book Three veers into more controversial territory by urging the use of Neoplatonic magic and astrology to achieve bodily health. According to Ficino, celestrial influences can grant beneficial properties to images, the moon and stars can impact the health of various parts of the body, and the planets affect the manufacture and application of medicines. Ficino’s invocation of daemones as Neoplatonic mediators and concerns about how much space his cosmolo- gy left for human free will opened him up to harsh attack by critics. 168 Ficino rejected fundamentally the traditional assumption in canon law that the study of medicine was inappropriate for clerics. Anticipating criticism on this point, he wrote, “Someone will therefore say: Marsilio is a priest, isn’t he? Indeed he is. What business do priests have with medicine or, again, with astrology?”169 Ficino argued that charity required priests to promote both a healthy mind and body (mens sana in corpore sano). Christ commanded the disciples to cure the sick; just so

he will also enjoin priests to heal at least with herbs and stones, if they are unable to cure with words as those men did before [. . .]. Therefore, God himself, who through the heavens impels all animals to his medicines, certainly permits priests to drive out diseases, not, I say, for gain but out of charity, with medicines which are strengthened by the heavens. 170

Whereas the Decem quaestiones held that charitable motives permitted some kinds of medical activity by the clergy, Ficino went further and argued that charity compeled priests to concern themselves with the bodies of their parishioners. He would have approved of the priests in the diocese who collected medical texts, priests who gathered knowledge of the body, of illness, Reading Interests 157 of the potency of herbs, and of healthful and harmful habits. Priests may well have dispensed advice for the prestige, and possibly income, that it brought, yet Ficino’s argument points to another possibility, that some priests saw medical knowledge as useful to their work as pastors. Christian thinkers had for centuries described care for the soul in medical terms. The Christus medicus, Christ as divine physician, was a popular image in sermons and other types of spiritual literature. Augustine (d. 430), for example, wrote:

Like a skilled physician, the Lord knew better what was going on inside the patient than the patient himself. In the case of bodily infirmities, human physicians do what the Lord also is able to do in infirmities of the souls. 171

John Chrysostom (d. 407) likened the Bible to a pharmacy full of medicines.172 Hugo von Folieto (d. c.1174) compared Christ to Hippocrates; Thomas Aquinas (d. 1274) compared himself to a sick man coming to “the physician of life.” Sermons regularly referred to Christ as “the good doctor.”173 Given the common analogy between sin and disease, it is not surprising that the role of the confessor was especially apt to be described in medical terms. According to Canon 21 from the Fourth Lateran Council a confessor should be

discerning and prudent, so that like a skilled doctor he may pour wine and oil over the wounds of the injured one. Let him carefully inquire about the circumstances of both the sinner and the sin so that he prudently discern what sort of advice he ought to give and what remedy to apply, using various means to heal the sick person.174

Handbooks on confession, pastoral literature, and synodal sermons communicated this kind of language to priests. Alan of Lille (d. 1203) likened the emerging practice of private confession to puncturing an ulcer; just as doctors heal illness through contraries so confessors should assign penances according to the same principle. 175 Johann Geiler von Kaysersberg described the sacraments, holy water, and indulgences as “medicinis ecclesie.”176 Jo- hannes Kusin advised priests in his popular handbook on confession to urge the sick to receive extreme unction “for healing the wounds of the soul.”177 Priests familiar with these metaphors would certainly have used medical concepts and procedures to communicate with their parishioners. The link between spiritual and physical health, however, was more than a useful, didactic metaphor. A lengthy tradition associated God’s displeasure with pandemic disease. Pharoah’s pride and stubborness had brought down plague on the land of Egypt; fourteenth-century churchmen and lay flaggel- lants alike were convinced that God unleashed the Black Death to punish human sin. Just so, churchmen believed that sin could be the cause of bodily 158 Chapter 5 illness in individuals. Hospitals in the Middle Ages bore little resemblance to their sterile, modern successors; priests performed daily mass at altars in the wards, choristors sang soothing chants, while patients could contemplate murals and altarpieces to remind themselves of the spiritual value of suffering and Christ’s healing power.178 Some herbs had both medical and spiritual properties. Doctors used hyssop as a purgative and a therapy for respiratory ailments, while churchmen used it to purify new sacred spaces during the dedication of churches and altars. According to the twelfth-century Hortus deliciarum, “Hyssop is an humble herb that purges the breast and the lungs. . . . What is hyssop except the humanity of Christ, which purges us from sin and the punishment for sin?”179 Exploring the link between bodily and spiritual health was not the exclusive preserve of churchmen; doctors pursued it as well. Quite simply, moral behavior promoted health. Doctors routinely warned against the dangers of excess. In the Melleus liquor, for example, Alexander Hispanus stressed the dangers of excessive fornication and drink and urged the virtues of moderation. The end of the treatise could have easily served as the coda to a sermon:

Unrestrained fornication is the exhaustion of strength. A brief pleasure, a mild act, a sweet poison, though thought pleasant, whence the verse: A defective or injurious libido disturbs the body and drives the soul from the body. Rein yourself in, flee the poison of women for that vessel which you judge pleasant is full of venom. Therefore excessive fornication, which leads to destruction, ought to be avoided.180

One can easily imagine a priest turning to the Melleus liquor or similar medical texts when crafting a sermon on the benefit of dietary moderation or sexual restraint. Such medical sanction may also have buttressed the morale of a man sworn to celibacy. Both pastors and doctors strove to maintain balance within the penitent or patient respectively; to arrive at an accurate diagnosis and prescribe the proper therapy, one had to investigate the particulars of the case. The physician, according to the Regimen sanitatis salernitatum, must take into account the temperament, age, and state of health of the individual. One should not prescribe the same diet to all, but first ask “What kind? What or When? How much? How often? Where?”181 The chapter on medicine included in the De proprietatibus rerum by Bartholomeus Anglicus (a thirteenth-century ency- clopedia, a copy of which could also be found in the parish library of Schwabach) also stressed the importance of accurately assessing both the individual and season,

To work effectively the doctor must know the complexions of men, composi- tions and mixtures of members and humours, the ordering of times, and the conditions of sex and age. For one medicine needs winter, another summer, Reading Interests 159

one at the beginning of illness, another in the fullness of it, another in decline; one in childhood, another in infirmity or old age; one for males and another for females.182

Pastoral literature urged priests and preachers to do the same. Gregory the Great (d. 604) advised pastors in his Regula pastoralis that they should treat sinners like a doctor: “he must administer with wine the bite of pain and with oil the caress of kindness, so that what is rotten may be purged by the wine and what is curable may be soothed by the oil.”183 One must, however, be mindful that

What often helps some people will cause harm in others, just as herbs that are nutritious to some animals will kill others [. . .] . Likewise, the medicine that cures one disease will spur another, and the bread that fortifies a grown man can kill a young child. Therefore, the discourse of the teacher should be adapted to the character of his audience. 184

Pastors were to take individual characteristics into account when prescribing spiritual cures and strive to bring the sinner back to a virtuous mean. The timid need courage, the rash restraint; the humble need encouragement, the proud humility. As we saw above, Johannes Kusin encouraged confessors to investigate the precise circumstances of each sin in order to determine its precise nature and severity. After this examination, priests should devise an appropriate penance that would lead to improved behavior in the future. 185 Lay writers also saw the similarity in the methods used by pastors and doctors. The late medieval barber, dramatist, and meistersanger, Hans Folz (d. 1513), for example, wrote both a regimen for avoiding the plague and a booklet instructing the lay penitent about confession. For Holz both spiritual and physical health were a product of maintaining emotional balance and restraining imbalancing forces such as lust or laughter. 186 Priests had multiple reasons to seek out medical knowledge. Some, like Greüll, Kauffmann, Hubner, and Schluck, used professional medical knowledge to provide medical services. One must remember that university-educated doctors were still at this time a rarity, their services available only to aristocrats or well-heeled urban residents. 187 In small towns and rural areas, a priest with a smattering of medical knowledge would have been providing a valuable service, especially those who saw their medical work as a form of charity. The visitation record of 1480 bears this out; those who denounced priests for practicing medicine were other clerics. No layperson listed medical practice among their complaints against their local curate. Priests like these acquired medical texts to learn about the body, to increase their standing in the community, to earn extra income, or, perhaps, even to help the needy. 160 Chapter 5

Other priests, however, would clearly have used medical knowledge to aid their work as pastors. Surviving books show that at least some priests believed that pastoral and medical tracts belonged together. Ulrich Hubner bound his medical texts with a gospel concordance, a text on meditation, a treatise on the sacraments, a sermon on the Eucharist, and a set of ten prayers to be recited before Communion. The volume in the parish library of Schwabach with a tract on venesection also included the text of the four gospels and sermons.188 Ulrich Pfeffel’s plague tract was joined to a treatise on the Ten Commandments, Alexander de Villa Dei’s Summarium Bibliae, and Nicolaus Magni de Jawor’s treatise on superstition. Here we arrive at an important distinction. The recipes, the diagnostic tools, the tracts—no matter how modest—gathered by priests belonged to the tradition of textually transmitted, professional medical knowledge. Contem- poraries made a strict distinction between the folklore of the village wise- woman and the techniques of the university-educated physician. In the fifteenth century, the former came under increased scrutiny by churchmen; at best folkloric practices were dismissed as superstition, at worst condemned as diabolical. Priests were likely familiar with folkloric medicine, but by the fifteenth century they could also access the textually received wisdom of the medical profession. The books and texts analyzed in this chapter are unfortunately only a small, biased sample of those once owned or produced by priests. They are representative only of those books that in both form and content were thought best suited for pious donation. Nevertheless, they do give insight into the professional portion of priests’ libraries and show that priests used texts to learn about the intricacies of their role as pastors, educate themselves about the rites and ceremonies that they celebrated daily, keep up with recent theological debate, pursue interests, and both construct and maintain a professional identity.

NOTES

1. Here I include full works, excerpts of at least one page, as well as collections of one to several sermons. For a full list of works see the appendix. 2. UE Cod. st 199, fol. 242v-264r. 3. Kirchenbibliothek Schwabach Ink. 19 and 20; Ansbach Ms. lat. 43. 4. UE Cod. st 697. 5. Hobbins, Authorship and Publicity before Print, 131–47. 6. Hubay, Incunabula Eichstätter Bibliotheken, #54. 7. The texts include Johannes Calderinus’s Summa de interdicto ecclesiastico, several tracts on matrimony by Johannes Andreae, Heinrich von Steinbach’s De indulgentiis, and Hyningius Pultenhagen’s Quaestio de usuris; Kirchenbibliothek Schwabach Band 7, 8, 10, 19, 20, Ink. 7, 8; Wambach, Kirchenbibliothek Schwabach, 93–137; 189–201; 250–51. 8. Universitätsbibliothek München 2o Cod. ms. 55. 9. Hubay, Incunabula Eichstätter Bibliotheken, #691. 10. Bayerische Staatsbibliothek, Clm 6487; Reiter, “Rezeption,” 228, n. 56. Reading Interests 161

11. UE Cod. st 242. 12. UE Cod. st 463, fols. 301r-309v; Cod. st 458, fols. 2r-7v. 13. UE Cod. st 199, fols. 265r-268r. 14. UE Cod. st 420, fol. 291r. 15. Hubay, Incunabula Eichstätter Bibliotheken, # 685, 998. 16. Ibid., #682; UE Cod. st 348, fols. 1r-82r; Cod. st 219, fols. 3r-121v, 132r-182r, 193r- 293r; Cod. st 248, fols. 2r-177a; Cod. st 420, fols. 1r-289r; Cod. st 203, fols. 80r-219v; Cod. st 238, fols. 1r-122v; Cod. st 360, fols. 1r-245r; Clm 15145, fols. 1r-321r. 17. UE Cod. st 238, fols. 260r-263v; Cod. st 248, fols. 179r-180r. 18. Bayerische Staatsbibliothek, Cgm 258, fols. 153v-158r. 19. UE Cod. st 348; Keller, Die mittelalterlichen Handschriften, 2:69–78. 20. Suttner, “Nachträge zur Conciliengeschichte,” 197–98; Reiter, “Rezeption,” 227. 21. Bayerische Staatsbibliothek, Clm 5439 and 6487; Reiter, “Rezeption,” 227–28, n. 56 mentions Clm 6487. On the lack of evidence for a recommendation by Johann III von Eich, see Chapter 1. 22. Bayerische Staatsbibliothek, Clm 6487, fols. 191r-235v; Universitätsbibliothek München 2o Cod. ms. 55, fols. 181–216.; Ansbach Ms. lat 40, fols. 2r-37b. 23. Kirchenbibliothek Schwabach, Band 7, 8, 12; see chapter 3. 24. DE, B230, fols. 60v, 62r. 25. UE Cod. st 463, fols. 71v-128r; Hubay, Incunabula Eichstätter Bibliotheken, #446. 26. UE Cod. st 448, fols. 156r-235v. 27. Ansbach Ms. lat 40, fols. 51r-56v. 28. UE Cod. st 228, fols. 293r-333r. 29. Dykema, “Conflicting Expectations,” 244. 30. Bast, Honor Thy Fathers, 1–52. The parish clergy’s duties included explaining the Ten Commandments at least once per year; for the diocese of Eichstätt see Suttner, “Versuch einer Conciliengeschichte,” 112. For a list of these texts, see the appendix. 31. This idea has been challenged by Andrew Gow, “Challenging the Protestant Paradigm,” 161–91. 32. UE Cod. st 194, 195/6, 205; Kirchenbibliothek Schwabach, Ink. 29. 33. Four of the study aids and six of the commentaries were owned by Pfeffel. 34. Duggan, “Fear and Confession,” 157. 35. UE Cod. st 348, fol. 168r. 36. Ibid., fol. 159v. 37. “Nullius confessor debet se de audiendum intermittere nisi harum duarum clauum habeat usum;” ibid., fol. 159v. 38. “Et de hiis confessor nescit se expedire tunc si comode potest debet facere exportare confitentem et recurere ad libros uel requirere personas periciores se. Si autem hoc comode fiere non potest tunc enumerat sibi diligenter hos casus de quibus dubitat et imponat ei ut pro ea ad se reuertatur dum fuerit melius consultus uel vadat ad aliquem peritum et secundum illius consilium se regat;” ibid., fol. 167v. 39. Ibid., fol. 160r. This is a reference to the doctrine of “implicit faith”; see Schultes, Fides Implicita. 40. Ibid., fols. 160r-161v. 41. Ibid., fol. 163v. 42. Ibid., fols. 162r-165r. 43. “Dicit quod dominus Conradus capellanus et plebanus in Irversdorff ut frequenter ludant ad cartas in tabernis et ipse dominus Michaelis raris temporibus luseret causa solacii;” DE, B230, fol. 20r. 44. “ Quando aliquis . . . vel cum ludis quando illi fiunt ex auaricia et non ex solacionem . . . peccauit mortaliter”; UE Cod. st 348, fol. 164r. 45. “ . . . dolor uel displicentia de peccatis commissis super omnia que dolor procedit ex dilectione dei super omnia;” ibid., fol. 165r. 46. Ibid., fol. 168r. 47. Ibid., fol. 166v. 162 Chapter 5

48. “est sciendum quod per contricionem cum remittitur culpa a deo eciam remittitur pena pro culpa debita sic quod commutaretur in quandam temporalem penam in ista uita uel in purgatorio exsoluendam. Sed per satisfacionem iniunctam a sacerdote que maxime habet fieri per penas seu per opera penalia ex virtute passionis christi que operatur in sacramentis minuitur ista pena et posset esse pena et satisfactio tanta quod ea expleta esset homo supportatus ab omni pena;” ibid., fol. 168r. 49. Ibid., fol. 168v. 50. “Tunc confessor nullomodo debet eum absoluare quia absolucio nichil prodesti et cum huiusmodi confessor mortaliter peccauet absoluendo eum quem sciret coram deo non esse absolutum;” ibid., fol. 167r. 51. “Filius dei te absoluat et ego te absoluo a peccatis tuis in nomine patris et filii et spiritus sancti;” ibid., fol. 167v. 52. Ibid., fol. 167v. 53. Bailey, “A Late-Medieval Crisis of Superstition?,” 633–61. 54. Much of the material in this section has appeared in Wranovix, “Ulrich Pfeffel’s Li- brary,” 1147–51. 55. The most detailed treatment of the debates leading up to and during the Council of Basel is Lamy, L’Immaculée Conception. 56. On the council, see Helmrath, Das Basler Konzil and Stieber, Pope Eugenius IV. 57. Ansbach ms. lat. 40, fol. 63r; Mansi, Sacrorum conciliorum, 29:128–33, esp. 131. 58. Suttner, “Nachträge zur Conciliengeschichte,” 198. The decree on the regular holding of diocesan synods had been issued on 26 November 1433. 59. For a short biography of Johann III, see Gatz, Die Bischöfe, 173–74; for his work to promote Basel’s decrees, see Reiter, “Rezeption.” 60. The thirteen decrees are De conciliis provincialibus et synodalibus; Decretum de concubinariis; De excommunicatis non vitandis certo modo non vocatis; De interdictis non leviter ponendis; Quomodo divinum officium in ecclesia celebrandum sit; Quo tempore quisque debet esse in choro; Qualiter canonicae extra chorum dicendae sint; De his qui tempore divinorum vagantur per ecclesiam; De tabula pendente in choro; De his qui in missa non complent Credo, vel cantant cantilenas, vel nimis basse missam legunt, aut sine ministro; De pignorantibus cultum divinum; De tenentibus capitula tempore missae maioris; De spectaculis in ecclesia non faciendis; see Tanner, Decrees, 1:473–92. 61. Reiter, “Rezeption,” 218. I have consulted the printed statutes in the somewhat later edition printed sometime before 1496 by Michael Furter; see Hubay, Incunabula Eichstätter Bibliotheken, #954. The signature in the Universitätsbibliothek Eichstätt is 13/1 BII 156. 62. “Explicit statuta sinodalia scripta per me Richardum Butzenloer in Spalt vicarium anno domini etc millesimocccc lvi;” Bayerische Staatsbibliothek, Cgm 6487, fols. 135r-140r. The missing statute was that on the holding of diocesan synods. 63. Bayerische Staatsbibliothek, Cgm 258, fols. 174v-175r. 64. Bäumer, “Die Entscheidung des Basler Konzils,” 1:193–206. 65. Suttner, “Versuch einer Conciliengeschichte,” 112. 66. UE Cod. st 459 and Cod. st 373. On the feast in the diocese of Eichstätt see Suttner, “Zur Tradition des Bisthums Eichstätt,” 28–49. 67. “Sequitur forma bulle sinodi Basiliensis data ob occasionem concepcionis beate uirginis in qua finaliter determinat vniuersalis ecclesia sancta eam non habuisse peccatum originale;” UE Cod. st 238, fol. 259v; Hilg, Die mittelalterlichen Handschriften, 1:189–90. 68. Instead of “repromisit” in the sentence “Elucidantibus divinae gratiae mysteria mercedem gloriosam repromisit aeterna Dei Patris Sapientia,” Pfeffel had written “promisit.” He noted in the margin the missing “re” and placed a hash mark in the text to draw the reader’s attention to the missing letters; UE Cod. st 238, fol. 259v. 69. “Hos duos sermones collegit et compilauit ad reuerenciam beate concepcionis gloriose uirginis Marie eximius theologie doctor magister Hainricus de Hassia;” UE Cod. st 238, fol. 251r; Hilg, Die mittelalterlichen Handschriften, 1:189. The attributions both at the top of the page and in the colophon have been scratched out, but it is not clear whether Pfeffel or a later reader did this. Reading Interests 163

70. UE Cod. st 224, fols. 1a-9a. Necdum erant abyssi also appears along with Basel’s decree in a manuscript owned by Johannes Vogler, a canon in the cathedral of Eichstätt. Vogler later donated the manuscript to the Dominicans in Eichstätt in 1458; UE Cod. st 211, fols. 230r-243r. 71. Kirchenbibliothek Schwabach, Band 10, fols. 1r-11v. 72. Emmen, “Historia opusculi mediaevalis,” 148–87. 73. “Necdum erant abyssi, et ego iam concepta eram.” 74. “Qui elucidant me vitam aeternam habebunt.” Ecclesiasticus or the Book of Sirach was a book of the Vulgate, but is not included in most modern editions of the Bible. 75. “Elucidantibus divinae gratiae mysteria mercedem gloriosam repromisit aeterna Dei Patris Sapientia, dum ait: ‘Qui elucidant me, vitam aeternam habebunt;’” Mansi, Sacrorum conciliorum, 29:182. 76. Johannes claimed to have collected all the works he could find on the issue in preparation for his role at the council. He seems to have consulted Necdum when he wrote his own works on the topic; see Emmen, “Historia opusculi mediaevalis,” 173–74. 77. Emmen knew of five complete exemplars, all from Germany, “Historia opusculi mediaevalis,” 153–55. 78. UE Cod. st 238, fol. 252r. The references to God altering the course of the sun are from Josh 10.12–13 and Isa 38.8. 79. Ibid., fols. 252v-253v. 80. Ibid., fols. 253v-256r. 81. “Vel duo deberent capi ab hoste crudelissimo. Unus capitur de facto et liberatur ab amico. Alter vero ab eodem amico custoditur ne capiatur de certissimo tantum caperetur nisi praeseruaretur. Sic est de adam qui captus et redemptus est a christo et beata virgo praeserua- ta;” ibid., fol. 257r. 82. “quia sicut tonitrua ponunt terrorem in terra ita et ista septem miracula ponunt terrorem contra illos, qui volunt calumniare famam gloriosae Virginis Mariae, et nolunt celebrare eius Conceptionis;” UE Cod. st 238, fol. 259v. 83. Lang, Heinrich Totting von Oyta, especially 231–32. 84. Ibid., 232–37. 85. “Finis sermonis concepcionis beate virginis gloriose, anno domini milessimo (sic) quadringentesimo sep[t]uagesimo, in vigilia sancti Thome apostoli. Bulla synodi Basilensis celebra- ta est xv Kallendas Octrobris anno a natiuitate domini m cccc tricesimo nono;” UE Cod. st 224, fol. 9av; Hilg, Die mittelalterlichen Handschriften, 1:163. 86. “Explicit sermo de concepcione Marie virginis in quo soluuntur auctoritates tenentes eam conceptam in originali . . .;” UE Cod. st 238, fol. 251r; Hilg, Die mittelalterlichen Hands- chriften, 1:189. 87. For example, he notes the definition of original sin and the passage in which the author argues that Mary was sanctified at the instant of conception; UE Cod. st 238, fols. 253v and 257r. 88. UE Cod. st 463, fols. 138v-142v. 89. Voltmer, “Klerikaler Antiklerikalismus?,” 52. 90. Kirchenbibliothek Schwabach, Ink. 55; Wambach, Die Kirchenbibliothek Schwabach, 274. 91. Voltmer, “Klerikaler Antiklerikalismus?,” 56; Voltmer, Wie der Wächter auf dem Turm, 433–40, 452; Rapp, Réformes et Réformation a Strasbourg, 348–50; a short excerpt of the sermon is available in Benrath, ed., Wegbereiter der Reformation, 239–41. 92. Dacheux, Die aeltesten Schriften Geilers von Kaysersberg, x. The German title given to the text by Wimpheling is Ein heilsam kostliche Predig. 93. Ansbach Ms. lat. 40, fols. 195r-196r. 94. UE Cod. st 348, fols. 223r-225r; Bayerische Staatsbibliothek, Clm 15181 95. UE Cod. st 348, fols. 323r-326r. 96. Bayerische Staatsbibliothek, Cgm 258, fols. 153v-156v. 97. UE Cod. st 189, front cover. 98. Translation is from the Vulgate Ps 8:6–7. 99. “Notandum, quod Dauid rex, propheta domini, previdens in spiritu dignitatem sacerdotum et intuens sublimitatem eorum;” UE Cod. st 348, fol. 223r. 164 Chapter 5

100. UE Cod. st 189, front cover. 101. “Notatur in hoc cum dicitur Minuisti enim videlicet sacerdotem paulominus ab angelis scilicet in natura quem magnificasti in generi;” UE Cod. st 348, fol. 224r. 102. “Quicunque ligaveris super terram etc quia tibi dabo claves regni etc;” UE Cod. st 189, front cover. 103. “Nam sicut montes latitudinem camporum profunditates vall(u)m excedunt, sic sacerdos super reges et principes magnates et nobiles et milites est sublimatus et magnificatus;” UE Cod. st 348, fol. 223r. 104. “Quare? Quia cuncti reges mundi et principes universi orbis non possunt vnum sacerdotum ordinare ut dicerent Accipite spiritum sanctum . . . . Quia carent potestate [sed?] simplicis- simus autem sacerdos mille milia regum et principum faceret milites ut ita diceret Accipe gladium tuum . . .;” ibid., fol. 223v. 105. “Nolite tangere christos meos;” UE Cod. st 189, fol. 1r. The verse is Ps 104.15, but note that this refers to the Psalm numbers in the Vulgate. In the New Revised Standard edition of the Bible, this is Ps 105.15. 106. “Ego vos elegi de mundo propterea odit vos mundus;” UE Cod. st 189, fol. 1r. 107. “ . . . per multas tribulaciones oportet nos intrare in regnum celorum;” ibid., fol. 1r. The verse is Acts 14.21. 108. “Beati qui persequcionem (sic) paciuntur propter iustitiam quoniam vobis est regum celorum;” ibid., fol. 1r. The verse is from Mt 5.10. 109. The combination of praise for the priest’s exalted status with strict moral demands was common in this type of literature; see Thomas, The Secular Clergy in England, 20–24. 110. “Si sacerdotes veteris legis tanta mundicia indigebant ad offerendum deo vitellum, quan- ta mundicia indigent morderni (sic) ad offerendum deo eius unigenitum filium . . .;” ibid., fol. 1r. 111. “et maxime sacerdos ut sit vere contritus pure confessus et ab omni culpa mortalis peccati mundatus virtutum operibus adornatus . . . .;” ibid., fol. 1r. 112. “Labia sacerdotis custodient scientiam, et legem ab ore eius requirent quia angelus domini exercituum est;” UE Cod. st 348, fol. 223r. 113. “Nam dicam vos seruos sed amicos quia seruus nescit etc vos autem dixi amicos quia omnia que audivi a Patre meo nota feci uobis etc;” UE Cod. st 189, front cover. 114. “ut refulsit sol in clypeos aureos et aureos resplenduerunt montes ab eis;” I Maccabees 6.39. 115. UE Cod. st 348, fol. 223v. 116. “Ego vos elegi et posui vos ut eatis et fructum adferatis et fructus vester maneat;” UE Cod. st 189, front cover. 117. “Quis enim fructus carior deo quam preciosus ille animarum fructus pro quo . . . mortem sustinuit dei filius?” ibid., front cover. 118. “In commissione animarum habet eciam sacerdos curam et custodiam plurimam animarum uni angelo cura et custodia unus anime tamen est commissa;” UE Cod. st 348, fol. 223v. 119. “In corporis christi confeccione et distributioneque angelus facere non potest;” ibid., fol. 223v. 120. “Quotquot receperunt eum dedit eis potestatem filios dei;” UE Cod. st 189, fol. 1r. 121. “filios in die novissimo resuscitando, filios honorandos, filios remunerandos . . . filios cum gloriam coronandos;” ibid., fol. 1r. 122. “O pastores domini, O sacerdotes dei viui, O custodes animarum, estote fideles usque ad mortem, pascentes gregem quem dominus suo sanguine precioso comparauit, pascentes verbis, pascentes exemplis fideliter sacramentis et oues singulas custodiatis ut in celi pro singulis mercedem capiatis de qua dicitur in appokalypsi coronam vite. Ve autem pastoribus non domini sed lupis dyaboli que de patrimonio christi crucifixi tanta consumpserunt et tot oues sibi commissas absque custodia perdiderunt. . . .;” ibid., fol. 1r. 123. “ve . . . pastoribus qui pascebant semet ipsos lac comedebant et lana cooperiabamini et quod crassum erat occidebatis et gregem meum non custodistis et quod perierat non quesistis et facti sunt greges mei in rapinam et oues mee in devoracionem et sequitur ecce ego ipsam requiram super pastores oues mei;” ibid., fol. 1r. Reading Interests 165

124. Once again the author expects his readers to know the full passage from Ezechiel and writes only “Si non anunciaveritis populo scelera eorum ut auertantur a via sua impia et viuat et sequitur ipse quidem iniquitate sua morietur;” ibid., fol. 1r. The passage is drawn from Ez 3.18–19. 125. I first discussed much of the material that follows in Wranovix, “Pastors of the Soul, Healers of the Body,” 215–31. 126. “Ad singulum articulum inquisitionis dicit sibi nil aliud constare, nisi quod dominus primissarius in Meckenhausen dicatur exercere artem phisicam et dominus Ulricus canonicus dicatur habere famulam, quae dicatur esse concubina sua, sed ipse ignoret;” DE, B230, fol. 70v. A mass priest in Merstorff corroborated the story, see fol. 73v. 127. Ibid., fol. 75v. 128. Ibid., fol. 12v. 129. Ibid., fols. 13v, 14v. 130. Ibid., fol. 13r. 131. Ibid., fols. 50v and 51v. 132. Ibid., fols. 64r and 123r. 133. On anxieties about clerics’ participation in the marketplace see, Thomas, The Secular Clergy in England, 26–28. 134. X.3.50.10 in Friedberg, Corpus Iuris Canonici, 2:c.660; translated in Kneal, Medical Practice by the Clergy, 33. 135. O’Boyle, The Art of Medicine, 50–52. Both Darrel Amundsen and Elodie Hartmann emphasize the gaps in these prohibitions; see Amundsen, “Medieval Canon Law,” 22–44 and Hartmann, “La prohibition canonique,” 171–219, here p. 175. 136. O’Boyle, The Art of Medicine, 47 and n. 53. 137. Kneal, Medical Practice by the Clergy, 24, 27. 138. Salonen and Hanska, Entering a Clerical Career, 147–48. 139. O’Boyle, The Art of Medicine, 49–50. 140. Quoted in Van Engen, “Late Medieval Anticlericalism,” 24. 141. UE Cod. st 348, fol. 171r. The other three copies are UE Cod. st 463 and Kirchenbiblio- thek Schwabach Band 7 and 11. 142. Peitz, Die “Decem quaestiones de medicorum statu,” 63–65. 143. Universitätssbibliothek München 8o Cod. Ms. 347, fols. 236v-237r; 275v. 144. Ansbach Ms. lat. 40, fol. 1r; Keller, Katalog der lateinischen Handschriften, 1:124. 145. Ansbach Ms. lat. 42, back cover; Keller, Katalog der lateinischen Handschriften, 1:134. 146. UE Cod. st 199, fols. 225v-227v. 147. Schipperges, Die Kranken im Mittlealter, 127–30. 148. O’Boyle, The Art of Medicine, 92, 110–12. 149. Vann Sprecher, “The Marketplace of the Ministry,” 167–69. 150. Kirchenbibliothek Schwabach Band 13; see Wambach, Die Kirchenbibliothek Schwab- ach, 156–68 151. Universitätssbibliothek München 8o Cod. Ms. 347; Daniel, Die lateinischen mittelalterlichen Handschriften, 167–70. 152. Ruh, et al., eds. Die deutsche Literatur des Mittelalters, 4:53–58. An edition of the text can be found in Sudhoff, “Alexander Hispanus.” 153. Sudhoff, “Alexander Hispanus,” 289–91. A more modern edition of both the Latin version of the rules for the months as well as a German translation can be found in Riha, Meister Alexanders Monatsregeln. 154. Ruh, et al., eds., Die deutsche Literatur des Mittelalters, 6:1134–51; Goltz, Mittelalter- liche Pharmazie und Medezin. 155. Ruh, et al., eds., Die deutsche Literatur des Mittelalters, 5:162–70. 156. The text can be found in Elaut, “The Walcourt Manuscript,” 184–209. 157. Kirchenbibliothek Schwabach, Ink. 79: Wambach, Die Kirchenbibliothek Schwabach, 287. 158. Ruh, et al., eds., Die deutsche Literatur des Mittelalters, 6:451–54; Klimaschewski- Bock, Die “Distinctio sexta,” 5. 159. Klimaschewski-Bock, “Die Distinctio Sexta,” 1, 279–83. 166 Chapter 5

160. The Regimen exists in many different versions. Virginia de Frutos Gonzalez has edited a Latin version and provided a Spanish translation in Flos medicine; Patricia Willett Cummins has edited a French version and provided an English translation in A Critical Edition of Le regime tresutile. On the genre in general, see Nicoud, Les Régimes de Santé. 161. Thorndike, Michael Scot, 5. 162. For biographical information on Scot, see Thorndike, Michael Scot and Hubbard, Mi- chael Scot. 163. Thorndike, Michael Scot, 74–75. 164. An edition of the work can be found in Porsia, Antiche Scienze del Corpo e dell’Anima. 165. Ficino, Three Books on Life, 12. 166. Ibid., 20–22. 167. Ibid., 123. 168. Ibid., 57–70. 169. Ibid., 394–95. 170. Ibid., 396–97. 171. Quoted in Arbesman, “The concept of the ‘Christus Medicus,’” 19. 172. Kowzan, “‘I will put none of these diseases upon thee,’” 108–9. 173. Schipperges, Die Kranken im Mittelalter, 205. 174. Tanner, Decrees, 1:245. 175. Spitzig, Sacramental Penance, 100, 105. 176. Dacheux, Die aeltesten Schriften, 200–202. 177. “pro sanacione vulnerum anime;” UE Cod. st 348, fol. 169v. 178. Henderson, “Healing the body and saving the soul,” 188–216; Horden, “Religion as Medicine,” 135–53. 179. “Ysopus est herba humilis purgans pectus et pulmonem . . . Quis est ysopus, nisi humanitas Christi purgans a peccato et a pena peccati?” Quoted in Palazzo, “Le végétal et le sacré,” 49. 180. “Fornicatio inmoderata est exhaustio uirium innumerata, dilectio breuis et accio lenis; dulce venenum, quamuis credatur amenum, vnde versus: ‘Est defectiua libido uero nociua, corpus confundit animam de corpore pungit, pone tibi frenum fugiens muliebre venenum nam sane plenum uas est, quod cernis amenum.’ Ideo cauendum est a nimia fornicatione, que ad interitum perducit”; Sudhoff, “Alexander Hispanus,” 15. I have altered the punctuation somewhat to ease comprehension. 181. Cummins, A Critical Edition of Le regime tresutile, xviii, xx–xxi, 235; Gonzalez, Flos medicine, 176. 182. Bartholomaeus Anglicus, De proprietatibus rerum, Book 7, chapter 69. There is a translation into Middle English available; see Seymour, et al, On the Properties of Things, 1:435. The Latin version is in the process of being sumptuously edited, see Meier, et al., De Proprie- tatibus Rerum: Édition latine. Until complete, one can consult Book 3 and 4 in the edition by James Long, Bartholomaeus Anglicus On the Properties of Soul and Body or the 1964 reprint of the Frankfurt 1601 edition, Bartholomaeus Angelicus, De rerum proprietatibus. 183. Gregoire le Grand, Regle Pastorale, 1:160, 216; translated in Gregory the Great, The Book of Pastoral Rule, 43, 67. 184. Gregoire le Grand, Regle Pastorale, 2:258; Gregory the Great, The Book of Pastoral Rule, 87. 185. UE Cod. st 348, fol. 168v. 186. Huey, Hans Folz and Print Culture, 94. 187. Siraisi, Medieval and Early Renaissance Medicine, 22. 188. Kirchenbibliothek Schwabach Band 13; see Wambach, Die Kirchenbibliothek Schwab- ach, 156–68. Conclusion

Priests in the diocese did not all enjoy reputations as paragons of virtue; despite the rhetoric of the sermons analyzed in the previous chapters most priests were far less than angels. The peasants in Feucht complained that their priest, Ulrich Egelwanger, frequented taverns, played at dice, and had a concubine.1 The chaplain in Schwarzenlohe was widely known to sing songs with a suspect woman before his house at night and even to travel with her without shame into Nuremberg.2 Upon entering the quarters of a poor mass priest in Pommelsbrunn, Johannes Vogt discovered not only phallic and ob- scene images, but noticed that the priest’s private room included two beds, the second presumably for his servant woman, Elizabeth. From other sources, Vogt learned that the priest had already been cited in the diocese of Bamberg for his illicit relationship with Elizabeth, but had moved to the diocese of Eichstätt to escape censure.3 Using Vogt’s extensive record, Peter Lang attempted to quantify the Eichstätt clergy’s moral fitness and determined that less than 10 percent of the clergy were cited for fashion excess, one in eight indulged in wine, and one in five had a weakness for cards and dice. Rumor indicted nearly half of the clergy for sexual indiscretions or concubinage, although Lang believed that many of the accusations were unfounded.4 A visitation record is not a court record or a police blotter. It is the repository of rumor and hearsay, not of fact, and motivations for passing on rumors to Vogt must have varied widely. The curate in Feucht, for example, against whom his parishioners leveled nearly every conceivable accusation, lamented to Vogt during his own testimony that there were many blasphem- ers of the saints in his parish, whom he often corrected from the pulpit. Did the animosity generated by the priest’s confrontational style play a role in the choice to denounce his moral conduct? Were his vices real or invented?

167 168 Conclusion

Would the dicing and illicit liaisons of a more tactful priest have been passed over? While visitation records reveal legal and moral norms, they can only give impressions, not objective statistics, about how well those norms were upheld. On the other hand, Vogt’s estimation of each cleric’s competence depended on nothing more than his own judgment. Vogt determined that only twelve of the 530 priests he examined were either “unlearned” or “simple”— five mass priests, three vicars, one assistant priest, one altarist, one chaplain, and only a single plebanus.5 To be sure Vogt’s standards were not particularly high; neither he nor the bishops of Eichstätt expected these men to be scholars. He quizzed priests on a few sacramental formulas and asked them to read and explain a few simple texts. His complaint that unlearned priests spoke “incongruously” or “confusingly” (incongrue), however, does suggest that at least a portion of the examination was conducted in Latin. Given the numerous accusations of drunkenness, gambling, and sexual impropriety that otherwise litter the record, Vogt’s work reveals that morality and competence had no necessary correlation with one another. This is perhaps surprising. There has been a long-standing assumption that fragmented patronal rights over churches and the twin evils of absenteeism and pluralism ensured that the majority of clerics were appointed for political, familial, or economic reasons. Such appointees would have often lacked personal discipline, a pastoral disposition, and anything more than the most rudimentary education. Given these conditions, humanist and early Protestant criticisms of the medieval clergy as negligent and uneducated seemed plausible. In the preceding pages I have tried to show the flaws in this kind of reasoning. While it is certainly true that patronal rights over churches lay in many hands, by the late Middle Ages parish churches had become important financial and political foci in the struggles for influence among villages, towns, cities, ecclesiastical institutions, bishops, and aspiring territorial lords. Even political appointees to parishes in the diocese of Eichstätt needed facility in both German and Latin, a familiarity with formal documents, and the ability to maintain records in order to navigate the complicated jurisdictional landscape of late medieval Franconia. Donors invested both their hopes for salvation and serious financial resources into the foundation of memorial and anniversary masses. Richly endowed masses projected the prestige of elite families; the division of the incomes and responsibilities generated by these masses affirmed relationships of hierarchy and privilege among the parish clergy and local religious institutions. No one could afford to suffer a parish priest who could not effectively administer his parish and see that his church’s many responsibilities were fulfilled. So while it is true that personal piety may not have been a significant factor in the appointment of many Conclusion 169 parish priests, competency was a characteristic on which few could afford to compromise. The fifteenth century witnessed marked growth in the number of schools in the region, and the priesthood was a popular career choice among those who had attended these schools. Greater access to elementary education and an increasing need for educated men to staff the ambitious ecclesiastical and secular bureaucracies of the fifteenth century spurred a complementary surge in university attendance. A significant minority of the diocese’s parish clergy had attended either of the universities of Ingolstadt or Vienna. It is not surprising that men who needed records to keep up with their myriad responsibilities and who were expected to maintain correspondence with both ecclesiastical and secular courts should have turned to the written word to help them in their work as pastors as well. Thanks to expanding production in the fifteenth century, paper and books were more affordable than ever before. Declining prices enabled individual priests and parish libraries to expand their collections beyond the required liturgical books and the synodal statutes. It is also clear that the parish clergy’s use of texts began well before the period when printed books became widely available. Second- hand manuscripts as well as unbound collections of one to several texts, especially sermons, did circulate among the parish clergy throughout the fifteenth century. The scribal activity of priests and the unregulated circulation of second hand texts did generate a certain amount of anxiety, which manifested itself in episcopal efforts to control the transmission of texts. As we have seen, bishops preferred to mandate the possession of particular handbooks and to entrust official copies of those handbooks to their officials rather than rely on priests to build their own pastoral libraries. They were also quick to blame homemade service books for the lack of liturgical and devotional uniformity in their dioceses. In the 1470s, for example, the bishops of Passau and Freis- ing directed their officials to search out such books among their parish clergy because they often contained superstitious prayers and customs. 6 In the second half of the fifteenth century, bishops turned increasingly to printed books in an effort to drive out such undesirable texts. In 1480 the Bishop of Regens- burg, Heinrich von Absberg, ordered his clergy to buy the breviary newly printed for the diocese in order to remove the “discord and deformity risen due to the error and variation of diverse books” then in circulation.7 In the preface to the printed missal he commissioned in 1486, Bishop Wilhelm von Reichenau claimed that many handwritten missals were either frail or broken with age, while others departed from the use of the diocese of Eichstätt.8 As seen in chapter 3, however, Wilhelm’s visitation found only four missals in poor condition, but forty-four written according to the rites of neighboring dioceses or monastic houses. The unpredictable content rather than the condition of these manuscripts was the real concern, a concern that Wilhelm’s 170 Conclusion colleagues shared. Between 1478 and 1501 over one hundred editions of Latin liturgical texts were printed on the orders of at least sixty-seven bishops for fifty-two dioceses.9 The scribal activity of monks did not generate the same kind of anxiety. In 1423, Jean Gerson wrote a tract In Praise of Scribes of Sound Doctrine in which he argued that scribal work made one worthy of eternal life. 10 In 1492, Trithemius, the famed book-collecting abbot of Sponheim, wrote a tract, also entitled In Praise of Scribes, in which he pronounced that without scribes, “the Church would see faith weakened, love grown cold, hope confounded, justice lost, the law confused and the Gospel fallen into oblivion.”11 Parish priests engaged in copying texts for themselves did not come in for the same praise. Why? The answer lies less in a negative assessment of the secular clergy’s intellectual abilities than in the different contexts and purposes of the copying. Monks, as theorized by Gerson and Trithemius, copied books as a form of pious labor, as a type of devotional meditation. Priests, on the other hand, copied books to use them; for priests copying was not an ascetic practice but a tool. And tools could be misused. Misuse or abuse was all the more likely outside the tightly controlled environment of the monastic scriptorium. Even there, Gerson and Trithemius worried about error. Trithe- mius harshly criticized lazy scribes, saved his praise for those who copied approved texts, and advised that the library be kept under strict control; it should not be accessible to everyone, but only to those who dedicate themselves to the study holy scripture.12 Gerson too warned the scribe to take care

lest his salt lose its savor . . . if he should spoil it by careless copying. Truly our age provides many examples of flawed volumes, so many that we would be better off with none rather than such incoherent writings, without rule, meaning, or order. These volumes are of such quality, indeed, that they remain unintelligible to the author himself no matter how carefully he studies them. 13

How much greater these very concerns must have been for bishops who contemplated their clergy copying texts not in the carefully maintained gar- dens of the monastery, but in the wilds of the parish. Far from celebrating the scribal activity of the parish clergy, bishops worried deeply that this development and the nature of manuscript production itself could undermine their efforts to create a unity of thought and practice. The prescription of certain books, the regulation of book transmission, and the suspicious scanning of parish shelves were all attempts to guard against cultic and theological frag- mentation. The gradual replacement of handwritten liturgical books, pastoral miscellanies, and idiosyncratic assemblies of favored sermons by printed volumes would have impacted how priests worked as pastors and how parishioners experienced pastoral care. The transition from manuscript to print in the parish is an area that needs further research. Conclusion 171

By collecting a group of books from a particular region that were once in the hands of the parish clergy, it has been possible to identify favored types of texts and genres. Priests used texts to develop a professional identity, guide their work as pastors, inform themselves of recent theological debates, and pursue independent interests. This study suggests that our image of the late medieval clergy needs to change in several important ways. Future work should place greater emphasis on the clergy’s access to and use of texts as well as their role as the administrators of their churches. Their administrative responsibilities required a facility with records and documents and necessitated some knowledge of canon law. While ritual remained the core responsibility of the parish clergy, we cannot assume that correct performance was their only concern. The books collected by priests reveal that these men were interested in the meanings of the rituals they performed and sought to fulfill their role as teacher through the collection of sermons, many of which dealt with the priesthood itself. The bureaucratization of parish administration and the easier acquisition of texts made possible by increased book production in the fifteenth century both contributed to the gradual professionalization of the clergy, a process that some historians have claimed does not begin until after the Reformation. This development would have had consequences for the ways in which priests and parishioners related to one another. Priests had devotional needs as well, which they sought to satisfy through texts on meditation, the Passion, the Virgin, or the saints. Much of late medieval catechesis, such as Dietrich Kolde’s Mirror for Christians (c.1480), aimed to clericalize lay piety; to the extent that priests and lay men and women enjoyed similar reading habits then the improved circulation of texts in the fifteenth and early sixteenth centuries would have helped strengthen the links between clerical and lay piety. 14 On the other hand, the parish clergy’s identification with the methods, theology, and law of late medieval scholastic thought would also have generated conflict. Although much more research remains to be done on this topic, the results of this study suggest that priests were primarily interested in thematic sermons and digests of scholastic thought. A few priests were interested in the works of the church fathers, and a few more, particularly in Schwabach, owned humanistic works, but on the whole these were exceptions. For humanist critics who, like Erasmus, stressed a simplified faith based on Scripture and faith in Christ, the parish bureaucrat well versed in his pastoral handbook and texts like De dignitate sacerdotum would have seemed out of touch.15 As the humanist movement in the Empire gained in numbers and prestige, educational elites would have viewed parish priests with their sermon collections, theological compendia, and handbooks with increasing disdain. Secondly, efforts by bishops and territorial lords to extend their influence into the parishes and turn the priest into a type of local official ran counter to contemporary efforts by urban and even village communities to communal- 172 Conclusion ize the parish church through the foundation of benefices, the collection of patronage rights, and the office of the churchwarden. Parish priests would inevitably have been caught up in the conflict. The sermons and treatises on the priesthood that emphasized the great powers, privileges, and responsibilities of the clergy would have strengthened clerics’ sense of themselves as a class of men set apart; yet many altarists and chaplains would have owed their benefices to the city council or local landlord, while rectors and vicars were often the sons of prominent local families. One campaign in which priests were forced to choose sides was the late medieval effort by bishops and even some territorial lords to root out superstition. We have already seen how Ulrich Pfeffel valued Aquinas’s popular text on the articles of faith for its enumeration of various types of heresies; several other priests also collected treatises on heresy and superstition. Inter- est in the subject perhaps underlay the numerous complaints priests lodged with Vogt about the presence of wise women and necromancers in their parishes. Other priests clashed with parishioners over a range of popular devotional practices. Only the threats of the churchwardens and the margrave’s prefect in Schwabach convinced the parish priest in Kornburg to process through the fields carrying the Eucharist on the feast of Corpus Christi, a practice which he deemed absurd. 16 In another entry Vogt noted that processions in the fields caused great dissension among priests and their parishioners. While some priests processed and sang the beginning of the Gospel of John in the fields to protect against poor weather, others did not; the latter were blamed and threatened in the wake of sudden hail or thunder- storms.17 Many prominent churchmen, such as Nicolas of Cusa and Thomas Ebendorffer, opposed frequent Eucharistic processions. Cusa’s injunctions against too frequent exposure of the Host reached Eichstätt in 1452, and in 1477 the procedures for field blessings using the Host were removed from the diocesan Rituale.18 Although numerous priests were still performing the blessings and processions in 1480, many did so only under duress. As priests were drawn into greater administrative contact with their ecclesiastical and secular superiors, enjoyed university backgrounds in ever increasing numbers, and became more acquainted with official teachings on a variety of subjects, traditional relationships with parishioners may have come under strain. Although the focus of this study has been squarely on the late medieval parish clergy, it is impossible to discuss this period entirely without reference to the Reformation. Further research is needed to incorporate a reading clergy into the traditional narratives of the sixteenth-century religious upheavals, but a preliminary suggestion can perhaps be made here. Countless scholars have noted that the early stages of the Reformation were primarily an urban affair and have attributed this to several factors, but nearly all make reference to the better educated, more self-confident lay culture of the cities as part of Conclusion 173 the explanation. But cities also had greater concentrations of university-educated priests.19 It was not at all uncommon for the parish priests of large, urban parishes to have degrees in canon law or theology. It is perhaps time, therefore, to replace the ignorant cleric with the professionalized one in narratives of the Reformation’s early successes and failures. The late medieval parish clergy could and did read books. Further research into what they read and when is necessary if we hope to better our understanding of the religious culture of the late medieval parish.

NOTES

1. DE B230, fol. 68v. 2. Ibid., fol. 67r. 3. Ibid., fol. 62r. 4. He estimated that 10 to 20 percent of the clergy were in fact guilty of violating their vows of celibacy; Lang, “Wuerfel, Wein, und Wettersegen,” 224–27. 5. DE B230, fol. 9r (Oetting, mass priest, indoctus); 10v (Gaimersheim, assistant priest, indoctus); 12r (Hofstetten, vicar, simplex); 29v (Berching, mass priest and chaplain, both indoctus); 71r (Jarstorff, mass priest, indoctus); 89r (Laibstadt, mass priest, indoctus); 106v (Czell, mass priest, indoctus); 114r (Ahausen, monastic provisor, indoctus); 115v (Stainhard, vicar, indoctus); 117r (Westham, plebanus, indoctus); 150r (Ingolstadt, vicar of an altar, indoctus). 6. Dykema, “Conflicting Expectations,” 239–40. Dykema himself was depending on Franz, “Zur Geschichte der gedruckten Passauer Ritualien,” and Mayer, “Geschichte der Spen- dung.” 7. “discordia et difformitate ex diversorum librorum mendositate et variatione exorta,” Neddermeyer, Von der Handscrift, I:466. 8. “considerantes quosdam vetustate effractos alios caducos et nonnullos a nostre kathed- ralis ecclesie ordinariis rubriciis et formis penitus discrepare . . .” Universitätsbibliothek Eichstätt 132/1 B IX 88, f. 2r. 9. Nowakowska, “From Strassburg to Trent,” 3–4. 10. Van Engen, Sisters and Brothers of the Common Life, 191; the text can be found as De laude scriptorium in Gerson, Oeuvres Complètes, IX:1423–34. 11. Trithemius, In Praise of Scribes, 35. 12. Ibid., 95. 13. Hobbins, Authorship and Publicity, 167. 14. Kolde’s guide is available in English in Janz, ed., Three Reformation Catechisms, 29–130. 15. McLaughlin has noted that pastoral manuals “had all the charm of auto-repair manuals” and represented everything that humanists hated about scholasticism; see McLaughlin, “Uni- versities,” 23. 16. DE B230, fol. 66r. 17. Ibid., fol. 63v. 18. Zika, “Hosts, Processions, and Pilgrimages,” 33–37; Buchner, “Kirchliche Zustände,” 156, 173–74. 19. McLaughlin has argued that these priests provided a ready audience for Luther’s mes- sage; see McLaughlin, “Universities,” 24.

Appendix A

Texts Appearing in Books Owned and/or Produced by Priests in the Diocese of Eichstätt

The lists of texts in appendices A and B include both complete works and fragments. Since several of the manuscripts included informal compilations without clear titles, I have either adopted the title assigned to the text by the editor of the relevant manuscript catalog or assigned it a short, descriptive title of my own. The categories are descriptive, not definitive; they are intended to illustrate the types of texts that priests collected. Several works could have been placed in more than one category.

1. Biblical Commentaries and Study Aids

Adrevaldus Floriacensis. Libellus de benedictionibus patriarcharum (UE Cod. st 469) Alexander de Villa Dei. Summarium Bibliae (UE Cod. st 194; UE Cod. St 199) Augustinus de Ancona. Lectura super epistolas canonicas (UE Cod. st 225) Augustinus Hibernicus. De mirabilibus sacrae scripturae libri III (UE Cod. st 458) Bindus de Senis (?). Distinctiones sive concordantiae historiales veteris et novi testamenti (UE Cod. st 458) Conradus de Halberstadt. Concordantiae bibliorum (Schwabach Ink. 50) Hermannus de Susa. Concordia evangeliorum unum ex quattuor capitulatio (Univ. Mun. 8o Cod. ms. 347) Hugo de S. Caro. Postilla in ecclesiasticum (UE Cod. st 224) Johannes Marchesinus de Regio Lepide. Mammotrectus (Ansbach Ms. lat. 42) Matthias de Liegnitz. Postilla super epistolas dominicales (UE Cod. st 189) Nicolaus Organista (?). Registrum historiarum evangeliorum (UE Cod. st 348; UE Cod. st 199) Robert Holcot. Postilla super librum sapientiae (UE Cod. st 238) Concordantia evangelistarum (UE Cod. st 194) De sacrificio [from a commentary on Ex 29] (UE Cod. st 348) Evangeliorum capitum initia (UE Cod. st 242) Postils for Mt 15:21–28 and Jo 4:3–42 (UE Cod. St 348)

175 176 Appendix A

Rota in medio rotae [commentary on Gn 18] (UE Cod. st 238) Verse for remembering the order and number of biblical books (Ansbach Ms. lat. 43)

2. Bibles or Portions of Bibles

UE Cod. st 194 UE Cod. st 195/196 Schwabach Ink. 29 (UE Cod. st 205)1

3. Canon Law, Statutes, and Excerpts

Charles IV. Carolina de ecclesiastica libertate from 1359 (Cgm 258) Conradus de Bertelmann. Qualiter subditi ecclesiae sancti andreae wormacensis se habere deberent temporibus interdicti (UE Cod. st 199) Council of Basel. Decree De publicis concubinariis (Cgm 258) Council of Basel. Decree on the Immaculate Conception (UE Cod. st 238) Henricus de Odendorff. Repititio capituli: Omnis utriusque sexus de poenitentiis et remissionibus (Hubay 474) Johann III von Eich. 1447 synodal statutes (Cgm 258) Johann III von Eich. Fourteen Articles (GNM 17912) Johann III von Eich. Statute from 1456 detailing those to be denied Communion (Cgm 258) Johannes Andreae. Super arboribus consanguinitatis, affinitatis et cognationis spiritualis et legalis (Hubay 54) Johannes de Miza. Inhibitiones sacramenti eucharistiae (UE Cod. st 242) Michael de Dalen. Casus summarii Decretalium Sexti et Clementinarum (Hubay 691) Paulus Wann. De indulgentiis (UE Cod. st 242) Pius II. 1463 crusade bull (Cgm 258) Collection of statutes from Basel, provincial councils of Mainz, and Johann III von Eich’s diocesan synods (Cgm 6487) De excommunicatione (Ansbach Ms. lat. 40) De interdicto, collected from the work of Johannes Calderinus (Ansbach Ms. lat. 43) De prohibitione communionis (Ansbach Ms. lat. 40) Formae absolutionis (Ansbach Ms. lat. 40) Indulgentiae (GNM 17912) Lenten dispensation (Hubay 649) List of those prohibited from receiving Communion, German (GNM 17912) Modus legendi in iure with glossed passages from the Liber Extra on consanguinity and affinity (Univ. Mun. 2o Cod. ms. 55) Statutes from the diocesan synods of 1447, 1466, and 1470 as well as Johann III von Eich’s Fourteen Articles (GNM 17912) Statutum Eystettense de absolutione excommunicatorum (UE Cod. st 242) Three formularies for letters to give penitents, and one form letter for pilgrims (UE Cod.st 420) Tractatus de ieiunio (UE Cod. st 458)

4. Confession and Penance

Antoninus Florentinus. Confessionale Defecerunt (Hubay 70) Astesanus de Ast. Summa de casibus conscientiae (UE Cod. st 239) Bartholomaeus de Sancto Concordio. Summa de casibus conscientiae (UE Cod. st 228) Heinrich von Langenstein(?). Regulae ad cognoscendum differentiam inter peccatum mortale et veniale (Hubay 70 and Univ. Mun. 2o Cod. ms. 55) Johannes Kusin. De audientia confessionum (UE Cod. st 463; UE Cod. St 348) Johannes Nider. Consolatorium timoratae conscientiae (UE Cod. st 455) Johannes Nider. Manuale confessorum (UE Cod. st 455) Appendix A 177

Nicholas of Dinkelsbühl. Confessionale (Univ. Mun. 2o Cod. ms. 55) Nicholas of Dinkelsbühl. De tribus partibus poenitentiae (Univ. Mun. 2o Cod. ms. 55) Assorted short texts on confession (Univ. Mun. 2o Cod. ms. 55) Beichtspiegel (GNM 17912) Confessio generalis, excerpt from Hugo Ripelin’s Compendium theologicae veritatis (UE Cod. st 238) Interrogatorium—interrogations according to the Seven Deadly Sins (Univ. Mun. 2o Cod. ms. 55) Poenitentiae pro qualibet culpa imponendae (UE Cod. st 242) Sigillum poenitentiae (Univ. Mun. 2o Cod. ms. 55)

5. Devotional Works

Ps. Augustine. Liber supputacionum (UE Cod. st 199; Univ. Mun. 8o Cod. ms. 347) Bonaventure. Laudismus de sancta cruce (UE Cod.st 360) Heinrich von Langenstein. Epistula de contemptu mundi ad johannem de eberstein (UE Cod. st 458) Hugh of St. Victor. Soliloquium de arra animae (UE Cod. st 199) Compendium Anticlaudiani (UE Cod. st 238) De membris domini (UE Cod. st 458) De passione domini (Clm 15179) Orationes X ante communionem (Univ. Mun. 8o Cod. ms. 347) Orationes IV ante missam (Univ. Mun. 8o Cod. ms. 347) Passio domini secundum quattuor evangelia (Ansbach Ms. lat. 42) Paraphrase of Bonaventure’s De cruce (UE Cod. st 360) Passio domini secundum horas canonicas (Ansbach Ms. lat. 40) Passio domini secundum Johannem (Ansbach Ms. lat. 42)

6. Dictionaries and Encyclopedias

Bartholomaeus Anglicus. De proprietatibus rerum (Schwabach Ink. 25) Isidore of Seville. Etymologiae (Schwabach Ink. 70) Johannes Balbus. Catholicon (Schwabach Ink. 24)

7. Liturgical Books

Breviarium Eystettense (UE Cod. st 373) Obsequiale (Schwabach Band 14)

8. Liturgy, Mass, and Office

Bonaventure. Tractatus de praeparatione ad missam (UE Cod. st 242) Innocent III. De missarum mysteriis (UE Cod. st 381) Jacobus Beyer de Atthasi(?). Quaestiones in psalterium (UE Cod. st 360) Nicolaus Stör de Schweidnitz. Expositio missae (UE Cod. st 381) Paulus Wann. De chorea (UE Cod. st 242) Peter Lombard. Glossa magistralis Psalterii (Schwabach Ink. 92) Vincentius Gruner. Expositio missae (UE Cod. st 463) William Durandus. Rationale divinorum officiorum (UE Cod.st 464) Expositio missae (GNM 17912)

9. Medicine and Nature

Alexander Hispanus. Melleus Liquor (Univ. Mun. 8o Cod. ms. 347) 178 Appendix A

Conradus de Eichstätt. Sanitatis conservator (Univ. Mun. 8o Cod. ms. 347) Conrad von Megenberg. Buch der Natur (Cgm 258) Johannes Mesue. Opera medicinalia (Schwabacher Ink. 79) Johannes de Toleto. Liber de conservanda sanitate (Univ. Mun. 8o Cod. ms. 347) Assorted remedies (Ansbach Ms. lat. 40 and 42; Univ. Mun. 8o Cod. ms. 347) Medicinale, abbreviated reworking of the Antidotarium Nicolai (Univ. Mun. 8o Cod. ms. 347) De pestilentia (UE Cod. st 199)

10. Moral Texts

Albertus Brixiensis. Ars loquendi et tacendi (UE Cod. st 463) Ps-Augustinus. Speculum peccatoris, Book I (UE Cod. st 458) Ps-Bonaventura. Summa de gradibus virtutum (UE Cod. st 458) Gualterus Burleus. Liber de vita et moribus philosophorum (UE Cod. st 224) Guillelmus Peraldus. Summa de virtutibus (Hubay 459) Guillelmus de Lanicea. Diaeta salutis (UE Cod. st 224) Johannes Nider. Tractatus de lepra morali (UE Cod. st 455) Johannes Nider. Tractatus de reformatione status coenobitici (UE Cod. st 455) Nicolaus of Dinkelsbühl. De vitiis et virtutibus (UE Cod. st 219; Univ. Mun. 2o Cod. ms. 55) Nicolaus of Dinkelsbühl. De octo beatitudinis (UE Cod. st 219) Thomas Ebendorffer. Tractatus de quinque sensibus (Univ. Mun. 2o Cod. ms. 55) Ps-Venturinus Laurentii de Apibus Bergomensis. Quaestiones de humilitate (UE Cod. st 458) Contra amorem mulieris (Univ. Mun. 2o Cod. ms. 55) De superbia, invidia, ira, et tristitia (Ansbach Ms. lat. 40)

11. On Writing and Rhetoric

Jodocus Weiler de Heilbronn. De usu et modo dictandi (Ansbach Ms. lat. 40) Ars dictaminis (Ansbach Ms. lat. 40) De exordiis (Ansbach Ms. lat. 40) Modus scribendi (Ansbach Ms. lat. 40)

12. Pastoralia

Albertus de Diessen. Speculum clericorum (UE Cod. st 448) Franciscus de Mayronis. Tractatus de corpore christi (UE Cod. st 225) Guido de Monte Rocherii. Manipulus curatorum (UE Cod. st 463; Hubay 446) Hermannus de Schildesche. Speculum manuale sacerdotum (Ansbach Ms. lat. 40) Johannes Auerbach. Directorium curatorum (Cgm 6487; Univ. Mun. 2o Cod. ms. 55; Ansbach Ms. lat. 40) Nicolaus de Blony. De sacramentis (Hubay 731) Nicolaus of Dinkelsbühl. De oratione dominica (UE Cod.st 219) Nicolaus de Graetz. Expositio super symbolum apostolicum (Univ. Mun. 2o Cod. ms. 55) Thomas Aquinas. De articulis fidei et ecclesiae sacramentis (UE Cod. st 458; UE Cod. st 463) Ars moriendi (UE Cod. st 242) De vita et honestate clericorum (Ansbach Ms. lat. 40) Decem miracula de corpore christi (UE Cod. st 348) Effectus eucharistiae (UE Cod. st 225) Lavacrum conscientiae sacerdotum (Clm 15181; Ansbach Ms. lat. 40) Letters and formularies on confession (Ansbach Ms. lat. 40) Summa rudium (UE Cod. st 228) Tractatus de sacramentis (Univ. Mun. 8o Cod. ms. 347) Appendix A 179 13. Patristics and Classics

Augustine. Opuscula (Schwabach Ink. 19; Schwabach Ink. 20) Ovid, very short excerpts (Ansbach Ms. lat. 43)

14. Sermon Collections

Ambrosius de Spiera. Quadragesimale de floribus sapientiae (Schwabach Ink. 103) Berthold von Regensburg. Sermones de communi sanctorum (UE Cod. st 348) Conrad von Brundelsheim (Soccus). Sermones de sanctis (UE Cod. st 248) Conrad Holtnicker. Sermones de communi sanctorum (UE Cod. st 348) Conrad von Waldhausen. Postilla studentium sanctae universitatis pragensis, sermones de tempore (UE Cod. st 442) Georgius Carthusiensis de Horto Christi. Sermones de communi sanctorum (Ansbach Ms. lat. 40) Hugo de Prato. Sermones dominicales per annum (Ansbach Ms. lat. 37) Jacobus de Voragine. Mariale (Ansbach Ms. lat. 42) Jacobus de Voragine. Sermones quadragesimales (UE Cod. st 203; UE Cod. st 238) Jacobus de Voragine. Sermones de tempore (Ansbach Ms. lat. 43) Johannes Herolt. Sermones de tempore et communes et de communi sanctorum (UE Cod. st 420) Johannes Milic de Kremsier. Sermones de sanctis (UE Cod. st 360) Meffret. Sermones de tempore et de sanctis (Hubay 682) Nicholas of Dinkelsbühl. Sermones de tempore (UE Cod. st 219) Nicholas of Dinkelsbühl. De corpore christi, sermones in festis, sermones de sanctis (UE Cod. st 219) Peregrinus de Oppeln. Sermones variati et sermones de sanctis (Ansbach Ms. lat. 40) Petrus de Sancto Benedicto. Sermones de communi sanctorum (UE Cod. st 348) Thomas Ebendorffer. Sermones de epistulis et de sanctis (UE Cod. st 269) Flos evangeliorum (UE Cod. st 189) Sermones Elpertini (Clm 15138) Sermones ex ethica Catonis (Clm 15145) Sermones super epistolis quadragesimarum et per dominicas totius anni et sermoni aliqui de sanctis (UE Cod. st 757) Sermones de tempore (Ansbach Ms. lat. 43)

15. Sermon Aids, Florilegia, and Exempla

Alphonsus de Spina. Fortalitium fidei (Schwabach Ink. 6) Auctoritates aristotelis (UE Cod. st 199) Defensor Locogiacensis. Liber scintillarum (Cod. st 458) Johannes Gallensis. Summa collationum (Schwabach Ink. 72) Johannes Herolt. Promptuarium exemplorum (Ansbach Ms. lat. 43) Jacobus de Lausanna. Compendium moralitatum (UE Cod. st 199) Johannes Melber. Vocabularium praedicantium (Hubay 685) Robert Holcot. Moralitates (UE Cod. st 238) Thomas Aquinas. De arte praedicandi (Hubay 998) Ars praedicandi (UE Cod. st 199) Exempla concerning Valerius and Alexander (Ansbach Ms. lat 43)

16. Sermons—Individual

Aldobrandinus de Cavalcantibus. Sermo de apostolo thoma (UE Cod. st 348) Bernardino of Siena. Sermo de sanctissima passione et mysteriis crucis (UE Cod. st 463) Conrad von Brundelsheim (Soccus). Sermo in nativitate domini (UE Cod. st 248) 180 Appendix A

Conradus Holtnicker. Sermones duo (UE Cod. st 360) Franz von Retz. Defensorium inviolatae virginitatis mariae (Cgm 258) Henricus de Frimaria. Two sermons de sanctis (UE Cod. st 248) Henricus de Frimaria. Sermones de dedicatione ecclesiae (UE Cod. st 242) Henricus Totting de Oyta, Sermo de conceptione beate virginis (Cod. st 238) Hrabanus Maurus. Homilia XLI sermo in dominicis diebus (UE Cod. st 458) Nicolaus of Dinkelsbühl. Sermo de s. michaele (UE Cod. st 238) Jacobus de Voragine. De resurrectione domini (UE Cod. st 348) Johann Geiler von Kaysersberg. Oratio in synodo Argentinensi habita (Schwabach Ink. 55) Johannes von Eyb. Sermo ad clerum (UE Cod. st 463) Johannes Steckna. Sermo de innocentibus (UE Cod. st 348) John Chrysostom. Sermo de poenitentia (Hubay 70) Paulus Wann. Sermo in dominica V post pascham (UE Cod. st 242) Peregrinus de Oppeln. Sermo in vigilia ascensionis domini (UE Cod. st 348) Petrus de sancto benedicto. Sermo in circumcissione domini (UE Cod. st 348) Petrus de sancto benedicto. Sermo in dominica quarta quadragesimale (UE Cod. st 348) Ad peregrinos (Cgm 258) De angelis (UE Cod. st 348) De animabus defunctorum (UE Cod. st 348) De corpore christi (UE Cod. st 189) De dedicatione ecclesiae (UE Cod. st 348) De dignitate sacerdotum (UE Cod. st 348; Clm 15181) De fide bonus (UE Cod. st 189) De fraternitate (UE Cod. st 189) De natiuitate mariae (UE Cod. st 242) De omnibus sanctis (UE Cod. st 348) De virginibus (UE Cod. st 242) Hieronymi sermo de assumptione marie (Clm 15177) Necdum errant abyssi (Cod. st 238) Nativitas BMV (UE Cod. st 194) New Year’s sermon, German (Cgm 258) Sermo apologeticus (UE Cod. st 238) Sermo de animabus ex dictis magistri Francisci (UE Cod. st 194) Sermo de annunciatione marie (UE Cod. st 360) Sermo de conceptione BMV (UE Cod. st 219) Sermo de conceptione mariae virginis (UE Cod. st 224) Sermo de confessoribus (UE Cod. st 348) Sermo de decimis (UE Cod. st 242) Sermo de digna sumptione corporis Christi (Univ. Mun. 2o Cod. ms. 55) Sermo de eucharistia (Univ. Mun. 8o Cod. ms. 347) Sermo de nativitate domini (UE Cod. st 242) Sermo de passione domini (Univ. Mun. 2o Cod. ms. 55) Sermo de sancto hieronymo (Ansbach Ms. lat. 43) Sermo de sancto johanne evangelista (Ansbach Ms. lat. 43) Sermo de spiritu sancto (UE Cod. st 219) Sermo de viduis (UE Cod. st 348) Sermo dominicales (UE Cod. st 458) Sermo in media quadragesima (UE Cod. st 348) Sermon on Domum tuam decet sanctitudo [Ps 92:5] (Ansbach Ms. lat. 40) Sermon on Ingressus Ihesus perambulat [Lc 19:1] (Ansbach Ms. lat. 40) Sermones de corpore christi (UE Cod. st 225) Sermones de omnibus sanctis et in commemoratione omnium fidelium defunctorum (UE Cod. st 348) Sermones de sacerdotibus (Cgm 258) Sermones octo de communi sanctorum (UE Cod. st 348) Sermones quattuordecim de tempore et de sanctis (UE Cod. st 348) Appendix A 181

Sermones quinque de sanctis (UE Cod. st 348) Sermones tres de dedicatione ecclesiae (UE Cod. st 348) Sermones tres de epiphania (UE Cod. st 348) Sermones tres de tempore (UE Cod. st 348)

17. Superstition, Witchcraft, and Heresy

Heinrich Kramer. Malleus Maleficarum (Schwabach Ink. 68) Johannes Nider. Tractatus contra haeresim hussitarum (UE Cod. st 469) Nicolaus Magni de Jawor. De superstitionibus (UE Cod. st 199; UE Cod. st 224)

18. Ten Commandments

Henricus de Frimaria. Tractatus de decem praeceptis (UE Cod. st 199; UE Cod. st 242) Johannes Nider. Praeceptorium divinae legis (UE Cod. st 242; Schwabach Band 18) Thomas Ebendorffer. Tractatus super decalogum sive exemplum decalogi (UE Cod. st 474) Collationes de decem praeceptis (UE Cod. st 463)

19. Theology and Doctrine

Alphonsus Bonihominis. Epistula Rabbi Samuel de Fez de adventu messiae, missa rabbi isaac (UE Cod. st 348) Antoninus Florentinus. Summa theologica, Tables (Schwabach Ink. 14) Ps-Albertus Magnus. Paradisus Animae (UE Cod. st 458) Archidiaconus inferioris marchiae styriae. Auctoritates theologicales (UE Cod. st 224) Ps-Augustinus. De spiritu et anima, Liber I (UE Cod. st 458) Hugo Ripelin of Strasbourg. Compendium theologicae veritatis (UE Cod. st 463) Johannes Schlitpacher de Weilheim. Compendium lecturae mellicensis (UE Cod. st 238) Lotharius de Segni (Innocent III). De miseria humanae conditionis (UE Cod. st 199) Theodericus de Berlstete. De doctrina christiana (UE Cod. st 242) Thomas Aquinas. Opuscula LXXII (Schwabacher Ink. 113) Thomas Ebendorffer. De poenis inferni (UE Cod. st 458) Vincent of Beauvais. Opuscula (Schwabach Ink. 119) De descensu christi ad inferos (UE Cod. st 238) Dubia varia (UE Cod. st 463) Pharetra doctorum (UE Cod. st 199) Quaestio in librum III sententiarum, disctinctio 16 (UE Cod. st 463) Quaestiones in librum III sententiarum (UE Cod. st 474) Quaestiones super adami summulam (UE Cod. st 360) Tractatus de trinitate (UE Cod. st 458)

NOTE

1. This Bible belonged to Ulrich Greiner, the rector of Gempfing, just over the border with the diocese of Augsburg. The parish church in Gempfing, however, belonged to the monastery of St. Walburg in Eichstätt. Ulrich donated the book in 1503 to the Dominicans in Eichstätt.

Appendix B

List of Works Appearing in Books Belonging to the Parish Library of Schwabach

This list includes those works present in the parish library by 1515. The lists of texts in appendices A and B include both complete works and fragments. Since several of the manuscripts included informal compilations without clear titles, I have either adopted the title assigned to the text by the editor of the relevant manuscript catalog or assigned it a short, descriptive title of my own. The categories are descriptive, not definitive; they are intended to illustrate the types of texts that found their way into the library. Several works could have been placed in more than one category. I refer to the manuscripts and incunabula using the numbers assigned to them in Wambach, Die Kir- chenbibliothek Schwabach.

1. Biblical Commentaries and Study Aids

Augustinus Triumphus de Ancona. Postilla super epistolis canonicis (Band 17) Conrad von Halberstadt. Concordantiae bibliorum (Ink. 50) Henricus Jerung. Elucidarius scripturarum (Ink. 71) Johannes, Abbas Nivicellensis. Concordantiae bibliae et canonum (Ink. 73) Johannes de San Geminiano. Explicatio evangeliorum et epistolarum (Band 16) Johannes de Turrecremata. Expositio super toto psalterio (Ink. 118) Johannes Marchesinus. Mammotrectus super bibliam (Ink. 77) Nicolaus of Lyra. Biblia cum postillis, parts 1–4 (Ink. 29) Peter Lombard. Glossa magistralis psalterii (Ink. 92) Simon de Cassia. Expositio super totum corpus evangeliorum (Ink. 102) Epistolae pauli dominicales, feriales et de sanctis dictae Gorrae (Band 2)

183 184 Appendix B 2. Biblical Texts

Biblia aurea (Band 13) Passionale (Band 15) Pericopes for the Gospels and Epistles (Band 13) Quattuor evangelia (Band 13)

3. Canon Law, Statutes, and Excerpts

Albert II von Hohenrechberg. 1434 synodal statutes (Band 8) Antoninus Florentinus. De censuris (Ink. 9) Augustinus de Ancona. Summa de potestate ecclesiastica (Ink. 23) Boniface VIII. Liber sextus with gloss of Johannes Andreae (Ink. 33) Clement V. Constitutiones with gloss of Johannes Andreae (Ink. 47) Council of Basel. Decreta (Ink. 48) Council of Constance. Decreta (Ink. 49) Franciscus Platea. Opus restitutionum, usurarum, excommunicationum (Ink. 96) Heinrich von Langenstein. De contractibus (Band 12) Henricus de Barben. Casus ad summam Henrici (Band 7) Henricus de Steinbach. De indulgentiis (Band 19) Hyningius Pultenhagen. Quaestio de usuris (Band 8) Johannes Andreae. Arbor affinitatis (Band 7) Johannes Andreae. Arbor consanguinitatis (Band 20) Johannes Andreae. De modo observandi interdictum (Band 8) Johannes Andreae. Super arboribus consanguinitatis, affinitatis et cognationis (Ink. 7; Ink. 8) Johannes Andreae. Summa de sponsalibus et matrimoniis (Band 20) Johannes Andreae. Tractatus matrimonii (Band 20) Johannes Calderinus. Summa de interdicto ecclesiastico (Band 7; Band 8; Band 10) XXV Privilegia clericorum (Band 7) Statuta synodalia Herbipolensia (Ink. 104)

4. Confession and Penance

Antoninus Florentinus. Confessionale Defecerunt (Ink. 10) Antoninus Florentinus. Decisio consiliaris super dubio producto de indulgentiis (Ink. 11) Astesanus de Ast. Summa de casibus conscientiae (Ink. 15) Ps.-Augustine. Speculum peccatoris (Band 7) Bartholomaeus de Chaimis. Confessionale (Ink. 43; Ink. 44; Ink. 45) Burchard of Worms. Chapter on penance from the Liber qui corrector dicitur (Band 7) Heinrich von Langenstein. Breve directorium de auditione confessionis (Band 7) Johannes Auerbach(?). Tractatus de restitutionibus (Band 7; Band 12) Johannes Geuss. Peccata oris et linguae (Band 10) Johannes Kusin. De confessione (Band 7; Band 11) Johannes Rigaldus. Formula confessionis (Band 7) Johannes Rigaldus. Summa de confessione (Band 7) John of Freiburg. Tractatus de confessione (Band 13) Nicholas of Cusa. Translation of Omnis utriusque sexus into German (Band 13) Nicolaus de Ausmo. Supplementum summae Pisanellae with Astesanus, Canones poeniten- tiales (Ink. 83) Paulus de Hungaria. Tractatus bonus de confessione (Band 7) William Durandus. Chapter De poenitentiis et remissionibus from the Repertorium aureum (Band 7; Band 8) Confessio brevis (Band 7) Confessionale (Band 7) Formula for absolution (Band 13) Appendix B 185

Summa rudium (Band 5)

5. Devotional Works

Alan of Lille. De sex alis cherubim (Band 7) Alvarus Pelagius. De planctu ecclesiae (Ink. 87) Ps.-Bernard of Clairvaux. Meditationes de interiori homine (Ink. 28) Bonaventure. Soliloquium de quattuor mentalibus exercitiis (Band 4; Band 5; Band 7) Gerardus de Zutphania. De spiritualibus ascensionis (Ink. 116) Guillelmus Alvernus. Rhetorica divina (Ink. 62) Heinrich von Langenstein. Speculum animae (Band 7) Henricus de Frimaria. De perfectione interioris hominis (Band 20) Hugh of St. Victor. Soliloquium in modum dialogi (Ink. 66) Peter Damian. Epistola de die mortis (Band 10) Thomas à Kempis. Meditationes de vita Jesu Christi (Ink. 116) Expositio de passione Domini (Band 10) Visio des Johannes (Band 4)

6. Encyclopedias

Bartholomaeus Anglicus. De proprietatibus rerum (Ink. 25) Isidore of Seville. Etymologiae (Ink. 69; Ink. 70) Johannes Balbus. Catholicon (Ink. 24)

7. History

Johannes von Hildesheim. Historia de trium regum (Band 16) Peter Comestor. Historia scholastica (Ink. 89) Vincent of Beauvais. Speculum historiale, parts III and IV (Ink. 120) Gesta Romanorum (Ink. 57)

8. Humanist Texts

Albrecht von Eyb. Margarita poetica (Ink. 52) Pius II. Epistolae familiares (Ink. 95)

9. Liturgical Books

Breviarium Bambergense (Band 9) Breviarium Cisterciense (Ink. 34) Breviarium Eystettense (Ink. 35 and Ink. 36) Missale Constantiense (Ink. 81) Musical treatise (German) (Band 15) Obsequiale Eystettense (Band 14 and Ink. 85) Office for the Dead (Band 15) Opiniones de horis canonicis (Band 7) Psalterium cum hymnario (Ink. 96a; Ink. 97; Ink. 98; Ink. 99) Tonary (Band 15)

10. Medicine and Nature

Benedictus de Nursia. De conservatione sanitatis (Ink. 26) Episcopus Theobaldus. Physiologus de naturis duodecim animalium (Ink. 106) 186 Appendix B

Johannes Mesue. Opera medicinalia (Ink. 79) Marsilio Ficino. De triplici vita, with Apologia medicinae, astrologiae (Ink. 53) Michael Scot. Liber physiognomiae (Ink. 80) Mensa philosophica (Ink. 78) Regimen sanitatis salternitatum (Ink. 100 and Ink. 100a) Text on venesection (Band 13)

11. Moral treatises

Ps.-Boethius. De disciplina scholarium (Ink. 31) Franciscus de Retza. Comestorum vitiorum (Ink. 54) Johannes de Capistrano. De cupiditate (Band 12) Johannes Geuss. De ludo [aleae et taxillorum] (Band10) Mattheus de Cracovia. Libellus de disputatione conscientiae et rationis (Band 7) Nicolaus de Byard. Summa de abstinencia (Band 4) Nicolaus of Dinkelsbühl. De dilectione Dei et proximi (Band 5; Band 11; Band 20) Nicolaus of Dinkelsbühl. De octo beatitudinis (Band 20) Nicolaus of Dinkelsbühl. De vitiis et virtutibus (Band 11; Band 20) Petrus de Limoges. De oculo morali (Ink. 90; Ink. 91) Ps.-Vincent of Beauvais. Speculum morale liber (Ink. 121) Aesopus moralisatus (Ink. 1) Conflictus de misericordia et justitia (Band 7) De vita sacerdotali et virginali (Ink. 101) Liber de naturis animalium et moralitatibus (Band 3)

12. Pastoralia

Albertus Trottus. Tractatus de ieiunio (Ink. 117) Ps. Augustine. De symbolo apostolorum (Band 7) Bonaventure. De praeparatione ad missam (Band 10) Franciscus de Mayronis. De duodecim articulis fidei (Band 7) Heinrich von Langenstein. De communicatibus et celebrantibus (Band 7) Heinrich von Langenstein. Meditatio de dominica oratione (Band 7) Jean Gerson. Opera (Ink. 56) Johannes Auerbach(?). De expeditione infirmorum (Band 7; Band 8; Band 12) Johannes Auerbach. Directorium curatorum (Band 7; Band 8; Band 12) Ps. Nicolaus of Dinkelsbühl. De arte moriendi (Band 7) Nicolaus of Dinkelsbühl. De oratione dominica (Band 6; Band 20) Ps.-Thomas de Aquino. De periculis contingentibus circa sacramentum eucharistiae (Ink. 115) Thomas Aquinas. Summa de articulis fidei et ecclesiae sacramentis (Ink.114) Ars moriendi (Band 12) Attestatio fidei orthodoxae (Ink. 16; Ink. 17)

13. Patristics and Classics

Augustine. De civitate dei (Ink. 21) Augustine. Enchiridion de fide, spe et caritate (Ink. 22) Augustine. Liber florum (Band 5) Augustine. Opuscula (Ink. 19; Ink. 20) Boethius. De consolatione philosophiae (Ink. 30) Gregory I. Epistolae (Ink. 58) Greogry I. Moralia in Job (Ink. 59; Ink. 60) Jerome. Aureola ex floribus S. Hieronymi contexta (Ink. 65) Ps-Jerome. Vitas patrum (Ink. 122) Appendix B 187 14. Sermons

Ambrosius de Spiera. Quadragesimale de floribus sapientiae (Ink. 103) Antonius Azaro de Parma. Sermones de tempore (Band 11) Bernard of Clairvaux. Sermones de tempore et de sanctis et de diversis (Ink. 27) Bernardino of Siena. De spiritu sancto (Band 12) Conrad von Waldhausen. Postilla studentium (Band 1) Eylhardus Schoenefeld. Sermo de passione, Sermo de assumptione BMV, Sermo de beato Francisco factus coram cardinalibus, Sermo de corpore christi (Band 10) Jacobus de Voragine. Sermones de sanctis et de festis (Band 16) Johann Geiler von Kaysersberg. Oratio in synodo Argentinensi habita (Ink. 55) Johannes Gritsch. Quadragesimale (Ink. 61) Johannes Herolt. Sermones Discipuli de tempore et de sanctis una cum Promptuario exemplorum et de miraculis BMV (Ink. 64) Leonardus de Utino. Sermones de sanctis (Ink. 75) Leonardus de Utino. Sermones quadragesimales de legibus dicti (Ink. 74) Marcus de Suma Ripa. Bonum quaternarium nuncupatum (Band 21) Michael Carcano. Sermonarium de peccatis per adventum et per duas quadragesimas (Ink. 42) Nicolaus of Dinkelsbühl. Postilla cum sermonibus dominicalibus (Band 6) Nicolaus of Dinkelsbühl. Sermones de dies festos (Band 19) Peregrinus de Oppeln. Sermones de sanctis (Band 13) Peregrinus de Oppeln. Sermones de tempore (Band 13) Ps.-Petrus de Palude. Sermones Thesauri novi de tempore et de sanctis (Ink. 94) Robertus Carracciolus. Sermones de adventu (Ink. 37; Ink. 38) Robertus Carracciolus. Sermones de laudibus sanctorum (Ink. 39) Robertus Carracciolus. Sermones quadragesimales de poenitentia (Ink. 41) Robertus Carracciolus. Sermones quadragesimales de poenitentia, Sermo II in festo annuntia- tionis BMV (Ink. 40) Syrus Ephrem. Sermones selecti (Ink. 51) Sermo de corpore Christi (Band 10) Sermones de conceptione gloriosae virginis Mariae (Band 10)

15. Sermon Aids, Florilegia, and Exempla

Alphonsus de Spina. Fortalitium fidei (Ink. 6) Johannes Gallensis. Summa collationum, sive communiloquium (Ink. 72) Auctoritates Aristotelis et aliorum philosophorum (Ink. 18) Proverbia Germanica ad Evangelium Domini et festorum dierum (Band 11)

16. Superstition and Witchcraft

Ps.-Augustine. De divinatione daemonum (Band 7) Heinrich Kramer. Malleus maleficarum (Ink. 68) Nicolaus de Jawor. Tractatus de superstitionibus (Band 12) Thomas Aquinas. Tractatus de superstitionibus (Band 10)

17. Ten Commandments

Henricus de Frimaria. De decem praeceptis (Band 5; Band 7) Henricus de Herpf. Speculum aureum decem praeceptorum Dei (Ink. 63) Johannes Nider. Praeceptorium divinae legis (Band 18) Nicolaus of Dinkelsbühl. De decem praeceptis decalogi (Band 11; Band 20) 188 Appendix B 18. Theology and Doctrine

Albertus Magnus. De mysterio missae (Ink. 5) Antoninus Florentinus. Summa theologica, parts 1, 4, tables (Ink. 12; Ink 13; Ink. 14) Ps.-Bede. Signa quindecim ante novissimum contingentia (Band 7) Dominicus Bollanus. De conceptione beatae virginis Mariae (Ink. 32) Gerardus de Vliederhoven. Tractatus de quattuor novissimis (Band 7; Band 12) Hugo Ripelin of Strasbourg. Compendium theologicae veritatis (Ink. 2; Ink. 3; Ink. 4) Johannes Nider. De passione (Band 21) Lotharius de Segni (Innocent III). De miseria humanae conditionis (Ink. 67) Narcissus Herz de Berching(?). De passione christi (Band 13) Peter Comester. De quindecim signis (Band 7) Peter Lombard. Sententiarum libri IV, with Bonaventure’s commentary (Ink. 93) Petrus de Bergamo. Tabula super omnia opera Thomae Aquinatis (Ink. 88) Thomas Aquinas. Opuscula LXXII (Ink. 113) Thomas Aquinas. Scriptum super tertio libro Sententiarum (Ink. 108) Thomas Aquinas. Scriptum super quarto libro Sententiarum (Ink. 109) Thomas Aquinas. Summa theologica, part 1 (Ink. 110) Thomas Aquinas. Summa theologica, part 2.1 (Ink. 111) Thomas Aquinas. Summa theologica, part 2.2 (Ink. 112) Thomas Ebendorffer. De penis inferni (Band 7) Thomas Ebendorffer. Dubia de sanctis (Band 12) Vincent of Beauvais. Opuscula (Ink. 119) Distinctiones libri I-IV sententiarum (Band 10) Libellus de diversis quaestionibus theologicalibus (Band 7) Quaestiones de latria, hyperdulia et dulia (Band 10) Signa quindecim horribilia de fine mundi et extremo iudico (Ink. 101) Bibliography

MANUSCRIPTS AND ARCHIVAL MATERIAL

Bayerische Staatsbibliothek Cgm 258; Clm 5439; Clm 5988; Clm 6487; Clm 15138; Clm 15145; Clm 15179; Clm 15177; Clm 15181; Clm 28202 Diözesanarchiv Eichstätt (DE) Nr. 4; lm2; B6; B230; B244 Buchner, Franz Xaver. “Alphabetisches Generalregister der Geistlichkeit des Bistums Eichstätt für die Zeit vor 1760 mit Nachträgen zum Generalschematismus des Verfassers für die Zeit nach 1760.” Nachlaβ von Franz Xaver Buchner, Kat. 4. Germanisches Nationalmuseum Nürnberg (GNM) Hs 17912 Staatsarchiv Nürnberg Hochstift Eichstätt Urkunden Rep. 192/IX, Spalt (Chorstift) – Urkunden (nach 1400) Staats- und Stadtbibliothek Augsburg 2o Cod. 92 Universitätsbibliothek Eichstätt Incunabula For these I have indicated both the signature and the number assigned to the item by Ilona Hubay in Incunabula Eichstätter Bibliotheken. SB an D II. 327 (Hubay, #54); SB B XI. 483 (Hubay, #70); SB an B IX. 333 (Hubay, #446); SB B IV. 131 (Hubay, #459); SB D II. 70 (Hubay, #474); SB B VII. 224 (Hubay, #483); SB D II. 675 (Hubay, #573); SB Einbl. 12 (Hubay, #649); SB Einbl. 13 (Hubay, #650); SB. Einbl. 14 (Hubay, #651); SB B VII. 691 (Hubay, #682); SB an D II. 70 (Hubay, #685); SB D II. 327 (Hubay, #691); SB B IX. 333 (Hubay, #731); SB B I. 521–23 (Hubay, #744); SB B XI. 14 (Hubay, #990); SB an B XI. 483 (Hubay, #998) Universitätsbibliothek Eichstätt Manuscripts (UE) Cod. st 144; Cod. st 149; Cod. st 185; Cod. st 189; Cod. st 194; Cod. st 195; Cod. st 196; Cod. st 199; Cod. st 203; Cod. st 205; Cod. st 207; Cod. st 209; Cod. st 214; Cod. st 219; Cod. st 224; Cod. st 225; Cod. st 228; Cod. st 238; Cod. st 239; Cod. st 242; Cod. st 248; Cod. st 252; Cod. st 269; Cod. st 348; Cod. st 358; Cod. st 359; Cod. st 360; Cod. st 373; Cod. st 381; Cod. st 420; Cod. st 435; Cod. st 438; Cod. st 440; Cod. st 442; Cod. st 448; Cod. st 449; Cod. st 455; Cod. st 458; Cod. st 459; Cod. st 460; Cod. st 463; Cod. st 464; Cod. st

189 190 Bibliography

469; Cod. st 474; Cod. st 483; Cod. st 586; Cod. st 692; Cod. st 697; Cod. st 705; Cod. st 721; Cod. st 734; Cod. st 739; Cod. st 748; Cod. st 757

PRINTED SOURCES

Adam, Paul. La Vie Paroissiale en France au XIV siècle. Paris: Sirey, 1964. Algazi, Gadi. “Lords Ask, Peasants Answer: Making Traditions in Late-Medieval Village Assemblies.” In Between History and Histories: The Making of Silences and Commemora- tions, edited by Gerald Sider and Gavin Smith, 199–229. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1998. Amundsen, Darrell. “Medieval Canon Law on Medical and Surgical Practice by the Clergy.” Bulletin of the History of Medicine 52 (1978): 22–44. Angelicus, Bartholomaeus. De rerum proprietatibus. Frankfurt am Main, 1601. Reprint, Frank- furt am Main: Minerva, 1964. Angenendt, Arnold. Grundformen der Frömmigkeit im Mittelalter. 2nd edition. Munich: Ol- denbourg, 2004. Anonymous. “Fundation der Prädikatur zu Berching 1513: Ein Beitrag zur Geschichte der Predigt vor Luther.” Pastoralblatt des Bistums Eichstätt 37 (1890): 85–103. Arbesman, R. “The Concept of the ‘Christus Medicus’ in St. Augustine.” Traditio 10 (1954): 1–28. Arend, Sabine. “Kleriker auf Pfründensuche: Aspekte lokaler Pfründenbesetzung in der Diözese Konstanz im 15. Jahrhundert.” In Pfarreien im Mittelalter: Deutschland, Polen, Tschechien und Ungarn im Vergleich, edited by Nathalie Kruppa, 537–49. Göttingen: Van- denhoeck & Ruprecht, 2008. ———. Zwischen Bischof und Gemeinde: Pfarrbenefizien im Bistum Konstanz vor der Refor- mation. Leinfelden-Echterdingen: DRW-Verlag, 2003. Armstrong-Partida, Michelle. “Priestly Wives: The Role and Acceptance of Clerics’ Concu- bines in the Parishes of Late Medieval Catalunya.” Speculum 88 (2013): 166–214. Arnold, Benjamin. Count and Bishop in Medieval Germany: A Study of Regional Power, 1100–1350. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1991. Arnold, John. Belief and Unbelief in Medieval Europe. London: Hodder Arnold, 2005. Avril, Joseph. “A propos du ‘proprius sacerdos’: Quelques réflexions sur les pouvoirs du prêtre de paroisse.” In Proceedings of the Fifth International Congress of Medieval Canon Law, edited by Stephan Kuttner and Kenneth Pennington, 471–86. Vatican City: Bibliotheca Apostolica Vaticana, 1980. Bacherler, Michael. “Die Siedlungsnamen des Bistums Eichstätt.” Sammelblatt des historischen Vereins Eichstätt 38 (1923): III-VI, 1–106. Bader, Karl. “Universitas subditorum parochiae—des Pfarrers Untertanen: Zu Auffassung und Bezeichnung der spätmittelalterlichen Pfarrgemeinde.” In Festschrift für Hans Liermann zum 70. Geburtstag, edited by Klaus Obermayer und Hans-Rudolph, 11–25. Erlangen: Universitätsbund Erlangen, 1964. Bailey, Michael. “A Late-Medieval Crisis of Superstition?” Speculum 84.3 (2009): 633–61. Baldwin, John. “From the Ordeal to Confession: In Search of Lay Religion in Thirteenth- Century France.” In Handling Sin: Confession in the Middle Ages, edited by Peter Biller and A. J. Minnis, 191–210. Woodbridge, Suffolk: York Medieval Press, 1998. Barstow, Anne Llewellyn. Married Priests and the Reforming Papacy: The Eleventh-Century Debates. New York: E. Mellen Press, 1982. Bast, Robert. Honor Your Fathers: Catechisms and the Emergence of a Patriarchal Ideology in Germany, 1400–1600. Leiden: Brill, 1997. ———, ed. The Reformation of Faith in the Context of Late Medieval Theology and Piety: Essays by Berndt Hamm. Leiden: Brill, 2004. Bast, Robert and Andrew C. Gow, eds. Continuity and Change: The Harvest of Late Medieval and Reformation History. Leiden: Brill, 2000. Bauch, Andreas. Die Diözese Eichstätt: Abriß ihrer Geschichte. Eichstätt: Bischöflisches Ordi- nariat Eichstätt, 1980. Bibliography 191

Bauer, P. Petrus. Die Benediktinerabtei Plankstetten in Geschichte und Gegenwart. Plankstet- ten, 1979. Baumeister, Richard, Emanuel Braun, Ernst Reiter, and Klaus Schimmöller. Das Bistum Eichstätt in Geschichte und Gegenwart: Vom Ausgang des Hochmittelalters bis zum Ende der Reformationszeit. Strasbourg: Editions du Signe, 1992. Bäumer, Remigius. “Die Entscheidung des Basler Konzils über die Unbefleckte Empfängnis Mariens und ihre Nachwirkungen in der Theologie des 15. und 16. Jahrhunderts.” In Studien zum 15. Jahrhundert: Festschrift für Erich Meuthen, edited by Johannes Helmrath and Heribert Müller, 1:193–206. Munich: R. Oldenbourg, 1994. Benrath, Gustav Adolf, ed. Wegbereiter der Reformation. Bremen: Carl Schünemann Verlag, 1967. Bellitto, Christopher. “Revisiting Ancient Practices: Priestly Training before Trent.” In Medie- val Education, edited by Ronald B. Begley and Joseph W. Koterski, S. J., 35–49. New York: Fordham University Press, 2005. Bertram, Max Paul. “Der Erfurter Dorfpfarrer im ausgehenden Mittelalter: Eine kulturge- schichtliche Skizze auf Grund einschlägiger Quellenforschung.” Zeitschrift des Vereins für Kirchengeschichte in der Provinz Sachsen 5 (1908): 159–85. Bethmann, L. and G. Waitz, eds. Gesta episcoporum Eichstetensium continuata. Monumenta Germaniae Historica, Scriptorum 25. 1880. Reprint, Stuttgart: Anton Hiersemann, 1974. Biller, Peter and Joseph Ziegler, eds. Religion and Medicine in the Middle Ages. Rochester, NY: York Medieval Press, 2001. Boese, Helmut, ed. Die Handschriften der ehemaligen Hofbibliothek Stuttgart. 2nd ser. Vol. 2.1. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, 1975. Boockmann, Hartmut. “Aus den Handakten des Kanonisten Johannes von Urbach (Auerbach).” Deutsches Archiv für Erforschung des Mittelalters 28 (1972): 497–532. ———. “Die Reformation und das 15. Jahrhundert.” In Kirche und Gesellschaft im Heiligen Römischen Reich des 15. und 16. Jahrhunderts, edited by Hartmut Boockmann, 9–25. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1994. Borchardt, Karl. “Die römische Kurie und die Pfründenbesetzung in den Diözesen Würzburg, Bamberg und Eichstätt im späteren Mittelalter.” Jahrbuch für fränkische Landesforschung 57 (1997): 71–96. Bosl, Karl. “Das Nordgaukloster Kastl: Gründung, Gründer, Wirtschafts- und Geistesgeschich- te.” Verhandlungen des Historischen Vereins für Oberpfalz und Regensburg 89 (1939): 3–186. Bossy, John. Christianity in the West, 1400–1700. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1985. ———. “The Mass as a Social Institution 1200–1700.” Past & Present 100 (1983): 29–61. ———. “The Social History of Confession in the Age of the Reformation.” Transactions of the Royal Historical Society, 5th ser., 25 (1975): 21–38. Bowker, Margaret. The Secular Clergy in the Diocese of Lincoln, 1495–1520. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1968. Boyle, Leonard E. “Aspects of Clerical Education in Fourteenth-Century England.” The Four- teenth Century 4 (1977): 19–32. ———. “The Fourth Lateran Council and Manuals of Popular Theology.” In The Popular Literature of Medieval England, edited by Thomas J. Heffernan, 30–43. Knoxville: Univer- sity of Tennessee Press, 1985. ———. Pastoral Care, Clerical Education and Canon Law, 1200–1400. London: Variorum Reprints, 1981. ———. “Summae confessorum.” In Les Genres Litteraires dans les Sources Theologiques et Philosophiques Medievales: Definition, Critique et Exploitation. Actes du Colloque international de Louvain-la-Neuve 25–27 mai 1981, 227–38. Louvain-la-Neuve: Université catho- lique de Louvain, 1982. Boyle, Leonard E. and Richard H. Rouse. “A Fifteenth-Century List of the Books of Edmund Norton.” Speculum 50 (1975): 284–88. Brady, Thomas A., Jr., Heiko Oberman, and James D. Tracy, eds. Handbook of European History, 1400–1600. 2 vols. Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1996. 192 Bibliography

Brandmüller, Walter, ed. Handbuch der bayerischen Kirchengeschichte. 2 vols. Erzabtei St. Ottilien: EOS Verlag, 1998. Braun, Albert. Der Klerus des Bistums Konstanz im Ausgang des Mittelalters. Münster in Westfalen: Verlag der Aschendorffschen Verlagsbuchhandlung, 1938. Braun, Gustav. “Epistola de miseria curatorum seu plebanorum.” Beiträge zur bayerischen Kirchengeschichte 22 (1916): 27–41. Brown, Andrew. Popular Piety in Late Medieval England: The Diocese of Salisbury 1250–1550. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1995. Bruggaier, Ludwig. Die Wahlkapitulationen der Bischöfe und Reichsfürsten von Eichstätt, 1259–1790. Freiburg im Breisgau: Herdersche Verlagshandlung, 1915. Brundage, James. Law, Sex, and Christian Society in Medieval Europe. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1987. ———. Medieval Canon Law. London: Longman, 1995. Buchholz-Johanek, Ingeborg. Geistliche Richter und geistliches Gericht im spätmittelalterlichen Bistum Eichstätt. Regensburg, Friedrich Pustet, 1988. Buchner, Franz Xaver. “Abgegangene Orte des Bistums Eichstätt.” Jahresbericht des historischen Vereins Neumarkt in der Oberpfalz 12 (1932/33): 79–116; 15 (1955/57): 6–15. ———. Das Bistum Eichstätt. 2 vols. Eichstätt: Ph. Brönner & M. Däntler, 1937. ———. Johann III: Der Reformator des Bistums. Eichstätt: Ph. Brönnerschen Buchhandlung, 1911. Reprinted from Pastoralblatt des Bistums Eichstätt 56–57 (1909–1910). ———. “Kirchliche Zustände in der Diözese Eichstätt am Ausgang des XV. Jahrhunderts.” Pastoralblatt des Bistums Eichstätt 49 (1902): Nr. 15–51 (1904): Nr. 30. Reprinted in Klerus, Kirche und Frömmigkeit, edited by Enno Bünz and Klaus Walter Littger, 83–198. ———. “Die mittelalterliche Pfarrpredigt im Bistum Eichstätt.” In Klerus, Kirche und Frömmigkeit, edited by Enno Bünz and Klaus Walter Littger, 213–44. ———. Schulgeschichte des Bistums Eichstätt vom Mittelalter bis 1803. Kallmünz: Michael Laβleben, 1956. ———. “Verfassung und Rechte der Landkapitel: Geschichtliche Entwicklung bis zum Ende des 19. Jahrhunderts.” In Klerus, Kirche und Frömmigkeit, edited by Enno Bünz and Klaus Walter Littger, 309–36. ———. “Die vorreformatorischen Benefizien des Bistums Eichstätt.” Sammelblatt des historischen Vereins Eichstätt 23 (1908): 39–60; 24 (1909): 21–43. ———. “Zur Geschichte des katholischen Pensionswesens: Ein Blick in das 15. und 16. Jahr- hundert.” Pastoralblatt des Bistums Eichstätt 61 (1914): 96–102. Reprinted in Klerus, Kirche und Frömmigkeit, edited by Enno Bünz and Klaus Walter Littger, 199–211. Erzabtei St. Ottilien: EOS Verlag, 1997. Bühler, Curt F. The Fifteenth-Century Book. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1960. Bünz, Enno. “Die Bauern von Gumpelstadt und ihre Kirche: Über dörfliche Meβstiftungen im ausgehenden Mittelalter.” Zeitschrift des Vereins für Thüringische Geschichte 54 (2000): 135–58. ———. “Das Buch in den Händen von Geistlichen: Beobachtungen zum kirchlichen und klerikalen Buchbesitz (12.-16. Jahrhundert).” In Buch und Reformation: Beiträge zur Buch- und Bibliotheksgeschicte Mitteldeutschlands im 16. Jahrhundert, 39–68. Leipzig: Evange- lische Verlagsanstalt, 2014. ———. “Ein Dithmarscher Pfarrherr um 1500: Andreas Brus und die St. Clemens-Kirche in Büsum.” Nordelbingen 74 (2005): 7–46. ———. “Die Druckkunst im Dienst der kirchlichen Verwaltung: ein Würzburger Dispensfor- mular von 1487.” In Forschungen zur bayerischen und fränkischen Geschichte: Peter Herde zum 65. Geburtstag von Freunden, Schülern und Kollegen dargebracht, edited by Karl Borchardt and Enno Bünz, 227–47. Würzburg: Ferdinand Schöningh, 1998. ———. “‘Die Kirche im Dorf lassen . . .’ Formen der Kommunikation im spätmittelalterlichen Niederkirchenwesen.” In Kommunikation in der ländlichen Gesellschaft vom Mittelalter bis zur Moderne, edited by Werner Rösener, 77–167. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2000. Bibliography 193

———. “Klerus, Kirche und Frömmigkeit im spätmittelalterlichen Bistum Eichstätt: Überlieferung, Forschungsstand, Perspektiven.” In Klerus, Kirche und Frömmigkeit im spätmittelalterlichen Bistum Eichstätt: Ausgewählte Aufsätze von Franz Xaver Buchner, edited by Enno Bünz and Klaus Walter Littger, 31–74. Erzabtei St. Ottilien: EOS Verlag, 1997. ———. “Memoria und Dorf: Pfarrkirche, Friedhof und Beinhaus als Stätten bäuerlicher Erin- nerungskultur im Spätmittelalter.” In Tradition und Erinnerung in Adelherrschaft und bäuerlicher Gesellschaft, edited by Werner Rösener, 261–305. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2003. ———. “Die mittelalterliche Pfarrei in Deutschland: Neue Forschungstendenzen und –ergebnisse.” In Pfarreien im Mittelalter: Deutschland, Polen, Tschechien und Ungarn im Ver- gleich, edited by Nathalie Kruppa, 27–66. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck and Ruprecht, 2008. ———. “‘nichts dann muhe, arbeit, ellend und durftigkeit’: Über die Lage der Pfarrgeistlich- keit im Bistum Würzburg zur Zeit der Reformation.” Würzburger Diözesangeschichtsblätter 62/63 (2001): 327–60. ———. “Thüringens Pfarrgeistlichkeit vor der Reformation.” Historisches Jahrbuch 124 (2004): 45–75. ———. “Zwischen Kirchspiel und Domkapitel: Der niedere Klerus im spätmittelalterlichen Dithmarschen.” Studien zur Wirtschafts- und Sozialgeschichte Schleswig-Holsteins 41 (2006): 239–71. Bünz, Enno and Christoph Volkmar. “Das landesherrliche Kirchenregiment in Sachsen vor der Reformation.” In Glaube und Macht: Theologie, Politik und Kunst im Jahrhundert der Reformation, edited by Enno Bünz, Stefan Rhein, and Günther Wartenberg, 89–109. Leip- zig: Evangelische Verlagsanstalt, 2005. Bünz, Enno and Klaus-Joachim Lorenzen-Schmidt. “Zu den geistlichen Lebenswelten in Hol- stein, Lauenberg und Lübeck zwischen 1450 und 1540.” In Geistliche Lebenswelten: Zur Sozial- und Mentalitätsgeschichte der Geistlichen in Spätmittelalter und Früher Neuzeit, edited by Manfred Jakubowski-Tiessen, 11–57. Neumünster: Wachholtz Verlag, 2005. Bünz, Enno and Klaus Walter Littger, eds. Klerus, Kirche und Frömmigkeit im spätmittelalterlichen Bistum Eichstätt: Ausgewählte Aufsätze von Franz Xaver Buchner. Erzabtei St. Ottilien: EOS Verlag, 1997. Bünz, Enno and Petr Kubín. “Sigillum Petri plebani de Glathovia: Ein spätmittelalterliches Pfarrersiegel aus Klattau (Böhmen).” Archiv für Diplomatik, Schriftsgeschichte, Siegel- und Wappenkunde 50 (2004): 35–45. Burckhardt, Max. “Bibliotheksaufbau, Bücherbesitz und Leserschaft im spätmittelalterlichen Basel.” In Studien zum städtischen Bildungswesen des späten Mittelalters und der frühen Neuzeit, edited by Bernd Moeller, Hans Patze and Karl Stackmann, 173–214. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1983. Buringh, Eltjo. Medieval Manuscript Production in the Latin West: Explorations with a Global Database. Leiden: Brill, 2011. Burke, Peter. Popular Culture in Early Modern Europe. New York: Harper & Row, 1978. Revised reprint. Aldershot, UK: Scholar Press, 1994. Bury, Richard de. The Philobiblon. Translated by Archer Taylor. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1948. Buzas, Ladislaus. Deutsche Bibliotheksgeschichte des Mittelalters. Wiesbaden: Ludwig Reich- ert, 1975. Cappelli, Adriano. Dizionario di Abbreviature Latine ed Italiane. 6th ed. Milan: Ulrico Hoepli, 1990. Cavaciocchi, Simonetta, ed. Produzione e Commercio della Carta e del Libro Secc. XIII-XVIII: Atti della “Ventitreesima Settimana di Studi” 15–20 Aprile 1991. Florence: Le Monnier, 1992. Chrisman, Miriam Usher. Lay Culture, Learned Culture: Books and Social Change in Stras- bourg, 1480–1599. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1982. Clanchy, M. T. From Memory to Written Record: England 1066–1307. 2nd ed. Oxford: Black- well, 1993. 194 Bibliography

Cohen, Jeffrey and Bonnie Wheeler, eds. Becoming Male in the Middle Ages. New York: Garland, 1997. Colish, Marcia L. Medieval Foundations of the Western Intellectual Tradition, 400–1400. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1997. ———. Peter Lombard. Leiden: Brill, 1994. Coppens, Christian. “Provenances & Private Libraries of the Fifteenth Century: A Bookhistori- cal Point of View.” Scriptorium 50 (1996): 325–30. Corsten, Severin. “Papierpreise im mittelalterlichen Köln (1371–1495).” In Bibliothek und Buch in Geschichte und Gegenwart: Festgabe für Friedrich Adolf Schmidt-Künsemüller zum 65. Geburtstag am 30. Dez. 1975, edited by Otfried Weber, 45–61. Munich: Dokumen- tation, 1976. Corsten, Severin, Stephan Füssel and Günther Pflug, eds. Lexikon des gesamten Buchwesens. 7 vols. 2nd ed. Stuttgart: Anton Hiersemann, 1987–2006. Coulton, G. G. Five Centuries of Religion. 4 vols. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1923–1950. ———. “The Interpretation of Visitation Documents.” English Historical Review 29 (1914): 16–40. ———. Ten Medieval Studies. 3rd ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1930. Re- printed by Boston: Beacon Press, 1959. Crick, Julia and Alexandra Walsham, eds. The Uses of Script and Print, 1300–1700. Cam- bridge: Cambridge Unversity Press, 2004. Cross, Claire. “York Clergy and Their Books in the Early Sixteenth Century.” In The Church and Learning in Later Medieval Society: Essays in Honour of R. B. Dobson. Proceedings of the 1999 Harlaxton Symposium, edited by Caroline M. Barron and Jenny Stratford, 344–54. Donington, UK: Shaun Tyas, 2002. Cummins, Patricia Willett. A Critical Edition of Le regime tresutile et tresproufitable pour conserver et garder la santé du corps humain. Chapel Hill: North Carolina Studies in the Romance Languages and Literatures, 1976. Dacheux, L. Die aeltesten Schriften Geilers von Kaysersberg. Freiburg im Breisgau, 1882. Reprint, Amsterdam: RODOPI, 1965. Daniel, Natalia, ed. Die lateinischen mittelalterlichen Handschriften der Universitätsbibliothek München: Die Handschriften aus der Oktavreihe. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, 1989. Dannenbauer, Heinrich. “Die Nürnberger Landgeistlichen bis zur zweiten Nürnberger Kirchen- visitation (1560/61).” Zeitschrift für bayerische Kirchengeschichte 2 (1927): 207–36; 3 (1928): 40–53, 65–79, 214–29; 4 (1929): 49–63, 230–40; 6 (1931): 27–38, 109–16, 217–34; 7 (1932): 91–102, 221–42; 8 (1933): 215–30; 9 (1934): 40–53; 25 (1956): 107–51. Davis, Adam J. The Holy Bureaucrat: Eudes Rigaud and Religious Reform in Thirteenth- Century Normandy. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 2006. D’Avray, David. Medieval Marriage Sermons: Mass Communication in a Culture without Print. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2001. ———. “Printing, mass communication, and religious reformation: the Middle Ages and after.” In The Uses of Script and Print, 1300–1700, edited by Julia Crick and Alexandra Walsham, 50–70. Cambridge: Cambridge Unversity Press, 2004. de Cevins, Marie-Madeleine. “La formation de clergé paroissial en Hongrie sous les rois angevins,” edited by Jean-Michel Matz and Marie-Madeleine de Cevins, 47–78. Rome: École française de Rome, 2005. Defensor de Ligugé. Livre D’Étincelles. Edited by H.-M. Rochais, O.S.B. 2 vols. Paris: Edi- tions du Cerf, 1961. Defensoris Locogiacensis monachi. Liber scintillarum. Edited by H.-M. Rochais, O.S.B. Cor- pus Christianorum, Series Latina 117. Turnholt: Brepols, 1957. Delumeau, Jean. Catholicism between Luther and Voltaire: A New View of the Counter-Refor- mation. London: Burns & Oates, 1977. Originally published as Le catholicisme entre Luther et Voltaire. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France, 1971. Denton, Jeffrey. “The Competence of the Parish Clergy in Thirteenth-Century England.” In The Church and Learning in Later Medieval Society: Essays in Honour of R. B. Dobson. Pro- Bibliography 195

ceedings of the 1999 Harlaxton Symposium, edited by Caroline M. Barron and Jenny Strat- ford, 273–85. Donington, UK: Shaun Tyas, 2002. Dickerhof, Harald, ed. Bildungs- und schulgeschichtliche Studien zu Spätmittelalter, Reforma- tion und konfessionellem Zeitalter. Wiesbaden: Reichert, 1994. Dirlmeier, Ulf. Untersuchungen zu Einkommensverhältnissen und Lebenshaltungskosten in oberdeutschen Städten des Spätmittelalters. Heidelberg: Winter, 1978. Dixon, C. Scott. The Reformation and Rural Society: The Parishes of Brandenburg-Ansbach- Kulmbach, 1528–1603. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996. ———. The Reformation in Germany. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers, 2002. Dohar, William J. “Sufficienter litteratus: Clerical Examination and Instruction for the Cure of Souls.” In A Distinct Voice: Medieval Studies in Honor of Leonard E. Boyle, O.P., edited by Jacqueline Brown and William P. Stoneman, 305–21. Notre Dame, IN: University of Notre Dame Press, 1997. Du Boulay, F. R. H. Germany in the Later Middle Ages. London: The Athlone Press, 1983. Duffy, Eamon. The Stripping of the Altars: Traditional Religion in England, 1400–1580. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1992. ———. The Voices of Morbath: Reformation and Rebellion in an English Village. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 2001. Duggan, Lawrence. “Fear and Confession on the Eve of the Reformation.” Archive for Refor- mation History 75 (1984): 153–75. Dykema, Peter. “Conflicting Expectations: Parish Priests in Late Medieval Germany.” PhD diss., University of Arizona, 1998. ———. “Handbooks for Pastors: Late Medieval Manuals for Parish Priests and Conrad Porta’s Pastorale Lutheri (1582).” In Continuity and Change: The Harvest of Late Medieval and Reformation History: Essays Presented to Heiko A. Oberman on his 70th Birthday, edited by Robert J. Bast and Andrew C. Gow, 143–62. Leiden: Brill, 2000. Dykema, Peter and Heiko A. Oberman, eds. Anticlericalism in Late Medieval and Early Mod- ern Europe. Leiden: Brill, 1993. Eisenbrand, Theodor. Ehehaftsordnungen im Hochstift Eichstätt. Feuchtwangen: Sommer & Söhne, 1938. Eisenstein, Elisabeth. The Printing Press as an Agent of Change. 2 vols. Cambridge: Cam- bridge University Press, 1979. Eisermann, Falk. “Schreiben, Stiften, Sterben: Die Bücher des Johannes Pilter in der Bibliothek von Eberhardsklausen.” In 500 Jahre Wallfahrtskirche Klausen, edited by Martin Persch, Michael Embach, and Peter Dohms, 383–418. Mainz: Selbstverlag der Gesellschaft fur Mittelrheinische Kirchengeschichte, 2003. ———. Stimulus amoris: Inhalt, lateinische Überlieferung, deutsche Übersetzungen, Rezep- tion. Tübingen: M. Niemeyer, 2001. ———, ed. Verzeichnis der typographischen Einblattdrucke des 15. Jahrhunderts im Heiligen Römischen Reich Deutscher Nation. 3 vols. Wiesbaden: Reichert Verlag, 2004. Elaut, L. “The Walcourt Manuscript: A Hygienic Vade-Mecum for Monks.” Osiris 13 (1958): 184–209. Emmen, P. Aquilinus, O.F.M. “Historia opusculi mediaevalis ‘Necdum erant abyssi’ olim S. Bernardino Senensi adscripti.” Collectanea Franciscana 14 (1944): 148–87. Endres, Rudolf. “Das Schulwesen in Franken im ausgehenden Mittelalter.” Studien zum städtischen Bildungswesen des späten Mittelalters und der frühen Neuzeit, edited by Bernd Moeller, Hans Patze, and Karl Stackmann, 173–214. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1983. Engel, Wilhelm. “Passio dominorum: Ein Ausschnitt aus dem Kampf um die Landeskirchen- herrschaft und Türkensteuer im spätmittelalterlichen Franken.” Zeitschrift für bayerische Landesgeschichte 16 (1951): 265–316. Erler, Georg, ed. Die Matrikel der Universität Leipzig. Vol. 1. Leipzig: Giesecke & Devrient, 1895. Esch, Arnold. “Überlieferungs-Chance und Überlieferungs-Zufall als methodisches Problem des Historikers.” Historische Zeitschrift 240 (1985): 529–70. 196 Bibliography

Fabian, Bernhard, ed. Handbuch der historischen Buchbestände in Deutschland. 20 vols. Hildesheim: Olms-Weidmann, 1991–1999. Falk, Franz. Die Druckkunst im Dienste der Kirche zunächst in Deutschland bis zum Jahre 1520. Cologne: J. P. Bachem, 1879. Febvre, Lucien and Henri-Jean Martin. The Coming of the Book: The Impact of Printing, 1450–1800. Translated by David Gerard. London: Verso, 1976. Feine, H. E. Kirchliche Rechtsgeschichte: Die katholische Kirche. 4th ed. Cologne: Böhlau Verlag, 1964. Ferrari, Michele C. “Die Pfarrbibliothek in Zug um 1500.” In Vil gůte Bucher zů Sant Oswal- den: Die Pfarrbibliothek in Zug im 15. und 16. Jahrhundert, edited by Michele C. Ferrari, 21–38. Zürich: Chronos, 2003. Ficino, Marsilio. Three Books on Life: A Critical Edition and Translation with Introduction and Notes. Edited and translated by Carol V. Kaske and John R. Clark. Binghampton, NY: Center for Medieval and Early Renaissance Studies, 1989. Fink-Lang, Monica. Untersuchungen zum Eichstätter Geistesleben im Zeitalter des Humanis- mus. Regensburg: Friedrich Pustet, 1985. Fischer, Roman. “Privatbesitz von Büchern im spätmittelalterlichen Aschaffenburg.” Aschaf- fenburger Jahrbuch für Geschichte, Landeskunde und Kunst des Untermaingebietes 9 (1985): 1–32. Flachenecker, Helmut. “Das beständige Bemühen um Reform: Zu Synoden und Synodalstatu- ten in den fränkischen Bistümern des 14./15. Jahrhunderts.” In Partikularsynoden im späten Mittelalter, edited by Nathalie Kruppa and Leszek Zygner, 55–75. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2006. ———. Eine geistliche Stadt: Eichstätt vom 13. bis zum 16. Jahrhundert. Regensburg: Frie- drich Pustet, 1988. ———. “Die Städte im Hochstift Eichstätt während des Spätmittelalters.” In Städtelandschaften in Altbayern, Franken und Schwaben: Studien zum Phänomen der Kleinstädte während des Spätmittelalters und der Frühen Neuzeit, edited by Helmut Flach- enecker and Rolf Kiesling, 152–87. Munich: C. H. Beck, 1999. Franz, Adolph. Die Messe im Deutschen Mittelalter: Beiträge zur Geschichte der Liturgie und des religiösen Volkslebens. Freiburg im Bresgau: Herdersche Verlagshandlung, 1902. ———. “Zur Geschichte der gedruckten Passauer Ritualien.” Theologisch-praktische Monats- Schrift 9 (1899): 1–97. Frassetto, Michael, ed. Medieval Purity and Piety: Essays on Medieval Clerical Celibacy and Religious Reform. New York: Garland Publishing, 1998. French, Katherine. The People of the Parish: Community Life in a Late Medieval English Diocese. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2001. Friedberg, Aemilius, ed. Corpus Iuris Canonici. 1879–1881. Reprint, Union, NJ: Lawbook, Exchange, 2000. Friese, Alfred. “Zwei spätmittelalterliche Seelbücher der Pfarrei Eberstadt.” Archiv für mittelrheinische Kirchengeschichte 7 (1955): 264–74. Fuchs, Franz. “Spätmittelalterliche Pfarrbücher als Quellen für die dörfliche Alltagsgeschich- te.” In Die Pfarrei im Späten Mittelalter, edited by Enno Bünz and Gerhard Fouquet, 213–32. Ostfildern, Germany: Jan Thorbecke Verlag, 2013. Fuhrmann, Rosi. “Glaube, Kirche und Recht – Ländliche Pfarreien im deutschen Spätmittelalter.” Tel Aviver Jahrbuch für deutsche Geschichte 22 (1993): 153–206. ———. Kirche und Dorf: Religiöse Bedürfnisse und kirchliche Stiftung auf dem Lande vor der Reformation. Stuttgart: G. Fischer, 1995. Gamble, Harry Y. Books and Readers in the Early Church: A History of Early Christian Texts. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1995. Gameson, Richard. “The Medieval Library (to c. 1450).” In The Cambridge History of Librar- ies in Britain and Ireland. Vol. 1, To 1640, edited by Elisabeth Leedham-Green and Teresa Webber, 13–50. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2006. Ganz, Peter, ed. The Role of the Book in Medieval Culture. Turnhout, Belgium: Brepols, 1986. Gatz, Erwin, ed. Die Bischöfe des Heiligen Römischen Reiches 1448 bis 1648: Ein biograph- isches Lexikon. Berlin: Duncker & Humblot, 1996. Bibliography 197

Gerson, Jean. Oeuvres Complètes. Edited by Palemon Glorieux. 10 vols. Paris: Desclée, 1960–73. Gibbs, Marion and Jane Lang. Bishops and Reform, 1215–1272, with special reference to the Lateran Council of 1215. London: Oxford University Press, 1934. Gillespie, Vincent and Kantik Ghosh, eds. After Arundel: Religious Writing in Fifteenth-Centu- ry England. Turnhout, Belgium: Brepols, 2011. Gillman, Franz. “Die Resignation der Benefizien.” Archiv für katholisches Kirchenrecht 80 (1900): 50–79, 346–78, 523–69, 665–708; 81 (1901): 223–42, 433–60. Glenisson, Jean, ed. Le Livre au Moyen Age. Paris: Presses du CNRS, 1988. Goering, Joseph. “Leonard E. Boyle and the Invention of Pastoralia.” In A Companion to Pastoral Care in the Late Middle Ages (1200–1500), edited by Ronald Stansbury, 7–20. Leiden: Brill, 2010. ———. William de Montibus (c. 1140–1213): The Schools and the Literature of Pastoral Care. Toronto: Pontifical Institute of Mediaeval Studies, 1992. Goering, Joseph and Daniel S. Taylor. “The Summulae of Bishops Walter de Cantilupe (1240) and Peter Quinel (1287).” Speculum 67 (1992): 576–94. Goertz, Hans-Jürgen. Pfaffenhaβ und groβ Geschrei: Die reformatorischen Bewegungen in Deutschland 1517–1529 (Munich: C. H. Beck, 1987). Goltz, Dietlinde. Mittelalterliche Pharmazie und Medezin: Dargestellt an Geschichte und In- halt des Antidotarium Nicolai mit einem Nachdruck der Druckfassung von 1471. Stuttgart: Wissenschaftliche Verlagsgesellschaft, 1976. Gonzalez, Virginia de Frutos. Flos medicine (Regimen Sanitatis Salernitanum): Estudio, Edición Crítica y Traducción. Valladolid: Universidad de Valladolid, Secretariado de Pub- licaciones e Intercambio Editorial, 2010. Götz, J. B. “Beiträge zur Geschichte der Kapitelsorganisation in der Diözese Eichstätt.” Pasto- ralblatt des Bistums Eichstätt 64 (1917): Nr. 3–28. ———. “Confirmationsbrief der Prädicatur in Berching.” Sammelblatt des Historischen Ve- reins Eichstätt 9 (1894): 54–56. ———. “Die kirchliche Festfeier in der Eichstätter Diözese am Ausgang des Mittelalters: Nach dem Pappenheimer Pfarrbuch des Jahres 1511.” Zeitschrift für bayerische Kirchengeschich- te 9 (1934): 129–49. ———. Das Pfarrbuch des Stephan May in Hilpoltstein vom Jahre 1511: Ein Beitrag zum Verständnis der kirchlichen Verhältnisse Deutschlands am Vorabende der Reformation. Münster in Westfalen: Verlag der Aschendorffschen Verlagsbuchhandlung, 1926. ———. Die Primizianten des Bistums Eichstätt aus den Jahren 1493–1577. Münster I. W.: Verlag der Aschendorffschen Buchhandlung, 1934. ———. Die Urkunden von St. Moritz in Ingolstadt, 1259–1824. Ingolstadt: A. Ganghofer, 1934. Goudriaan, Koen. “Empowerment through reading, writing and example: the Devotio moderna.” In The Cambridge History of Christianity, vol. 4., edited by Miri Rubin and Walter Simons, 407–19. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2009. Gow, Andrew. “Challenging the Protestant Paradigm: Bible Reading in Lay and Urban Con- texts of the Later Middle Ages.” In Scripture and Pluralism: Reading the Bible in the Religiously Plural Worlds of the Middle Ages and Renaissance, edited by Thomas J. Heffer- nan and Thomas E. Burman, 161–91. Leiden: Brill, 2005. Grabmann, Martin. “Bernhard von Waging (†1472), Prior von Tegernsee, ein bayerischer Benediktinermystiker des 15. Jahrhunderts.” Studien und Mitteilungen zur Geschichte des Benediktinerordens und seiner Zwerge 60 (1946): 82–98. Gregoire le Grand. Regle Pastorale. Edited by Floribert Rommel. 2 vols. Paris: Editions du Cerf, 1992. Gregory the Great. The Book of Pastoral Rule. Translated and edited by George E. Demaco- poulos. Crestwood, NY: St. Vladimir’s Seminary Press, 2007. Grenzmann, Ludger and Karl Stackmann, eds. Literatur und Laienbildung im Spätmittelalter und in der Reformationszeit: Symposien Wolfenbüttel 1981. Stuttgart: J. B. Metzlersche Verlagsbuchhandlung, 1984. 198 Bibliography

Greving, Joseph, ed. Johann Ecks Pfarrbuch für U. L. Frau in Ingolstadt. Münster in Westfal- en: Aschendorff, 1908. ———. “Zum vorreformatorischen Beichtunterricht.” In Festgabe Alois Knöpfler zur Vollen- dung des 60. Lebensjahres, edited by A. Biglmaier, S. Euringer, and J. Greving, 46–81. Munich: Verlag der J. J. Lentner’schen Buchhandlung, 1907. Griese, Sabine. “Falsche Gulden, gefälschte Ablässe, unerwünschte Bischöfe: Einblattdrucke als publizistische Gattung im Spätmittelalter.” Verhandlungen des historischen Vereins für Oberpfalz und Regensburg 137 (1997): 49–67. Griffiths, Jeremy and Derek Pearsall, eds. Book Production and Publishing in Britain 1375–1475. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1989. Grotefend, H. Zeitrechnung des Deutschen Mittelalters und der Neuzeit. 2 vols. Hannover: Hahn’sche Buchhandlung, 1891–92. Grubmüller, Klaus. “Geistliche Übersetzungsliteratur im 15. Jahrhundert: Überlegungen zu ihrem literaturgeschichtlichen Ort.” In Kirche und Gesellschaft im Heiligen Römischen Reich des 15. und 16. Jahrhunderts, edited by Hartmut Boockmann, 59–74. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1994. Grundmann, Herbert. Religiöse Bewegungen im Mittelalter: Untersuchungen über die geschichtlichen Zusammenhänge zwischen der Ketzerei, den Bettelorden und der religiösen Frauenbewegung im 12. und 13. Jahrhundert, und über die geschichtlichen Grundlagen der deutschen Mystik. 2nd ed. Hildesheim: G. Olms, 1961. Translated by Steven Rowan as Religious Movements in the Middle Ages: The Historical Links Between Heresy, the Mendi- cant Orders, and the Women’s Religious Movement in the Twelfth and Thirteenth Century, with the Historical Foundations of German Mysticism. Notre Dame, IN: University of Notre Press, 1995. Haberkorn, Ernst. Die “Wiener Schule” der Pastoraltheologie im 14. und 15. Jahrhundert: Entstehung, Konstituenten, literarische Wirkung. 2 vols. Göppingen: Kümmerle Verlag, 2003. Hahn, Peter-Michael. “Kirchenschutz und Landesherrschaft in der Mark Brandenburg im späten 15. und frühen 16. Jahrhundert.” Jahrbuch für die Geschichte Mittel- und Ost- deutschlands 28 (1979): 179–220. Hamilton, Sarah. The Practice of Penance, 900–1050. Woodbridge, Suffolk: The Boydell Press, 2001. Hanna, Conrad. Die südwestdeutschen Diözesen und das Baseler Konzil in den Jahren 1431 bis 1441. Leipzig: Universitätsverlag von Robert Noske, 1929. Haren, Michael. “Confession, Social Ethics and Social Discipline in the Memoriale presbiter- orum.” In Handling Sin: Confession in the Middle Ages, edited by Peter Biller and A. J. Minnis, 109–22. York: York Medieval Press, 1998. Harris, Kate. “Patrons, buyers and owners: the evidence for ownership, and the role of book owners in book production and the book trade.” In Book Production and Publishing in Britain 1375–1475, edited by Jeremy Griffiths and Derek Pearsall, 163–99. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1989. Hartmann, Elodie. “La prohibition canonique de l’étude et de l’exercice de la médecine et de la chirurgie par les clercs.” Revue de Droit Canonique 60/1–2 (2010): 171–219. Hashagen, Justus. Staat und Kirche vor der Reformation: Eine Untersuchung der vorreformatorischen Bedeutung des Laieneinflusses in der Kirche. Essen: G. D. Baedeker, 1931. Haucap-Nass, Anette. Der Braunschweiger Stadtschreiber Gerwin von Hameln und seine Bib- liothek. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, 1995. Hay, Denys. The Church in Italy in the Fifteenth Century. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1977. Heath, Peter. The English Parish Clergy on the Eve of the Reformation. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1969. Heer, Friedrich. The Holy Roman Empire. Translated by Janet Sondheimer. London: Phoenix Press, 2002. Heidingsfelder, Franz. Die Zustände im Hochstift Eichstätt am Ausgang des Mittelalters und die Ursachen des Bauernkrieges. Leipzig: Quelle & Meyer, 1911. Bibliography 199

Heiler, Franz. Bildung im Hochstift Eichstätt zwischen Spätmittelalter und katholischer Konfes- sionalisierung: Die Städte Beilngries, Berching und Greding im Oberamt Hirschberg. Wies- baden: Dr. Ludwig Reichert, 1998. Hellinga, Lotte. “The Codex in the Fifteenth Century: Manuscript and Print.” In A Potencie of Life: Books in Society, The Clark Lectures 1986–1987, edited by Nicola Barker, 63–88. London: The British Library, 1993. Hellinga, Lotte and Helmar Härtel, eds. Buch und Text im 15. Jahrhundert/Book and Text in the Fifteenth Century: Arbeitsgespräch in der Herzog August Bibliothek-Wolfenbüttel vom 1. bis 3. März 1978. Hamburg: Dr. Ernst Hauswedell, 1981. Hellinga, Lotte and J. B. Trapp, eds. The Cambridge History of the Book in Britain. Vol. 3, 1400–1557. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1999. Helmrath, Johannes. Das Basler Konzil, 1431–1449: Forschungsstand und Probleme. Co- logne: Böhlau Verlag, 1987. ———. “Theorie und Praxis der Kirchenreform im Spätmittelalter.” Rottenburger Jahrbuch für Kirchengeschichte 11 (1992): 41–70. Helmrath, Johannes and Heribert Müller, eds. Studien zum 15. Jahrhundert: Festschrift für Erich Meuthen. 2 vols. Munich: R. Oldenbourg Verlag, 1994. Henderson, John. “Healing the Body and Saving the Soul: Hospitals in Renaissance Florence.” Renaissance Studies 15.2 (2001), 188–216. Herbst, H. “Die Bibliothek der St. Andreaskirche zu Braunschweig.” Zentralblatt für Biblio- thekswesen 58 (1941): 301–38. Hilg, Hardo, ed. Kataloge des Germanischen Nationalmuseums Nürnberg. Vol. 2.1. Wies- baden: Harrassowitz, 1983. ———. Die mittelalterlichen Handschriften der Universitätsbibliothek Eichstätt. Vol. 1. Wies- baden: Harrassowitz, 1994. Hills, Richard L. “Early Italian Papermaking: A Crucial Technical Revolution.” In Produzione e Commercio della Carta e del Libro Secc. XIII-XVIII: Atti della “Ventitreesima Settimana di Studi” 15–20 Aprile 1991, edited by Simonetta Cavaciocchi, 73–97. Florence: Le Monni- er, 1992. Hirsch, Rudolf. “Surgant’s List of Recommended Books for Preachers (1502–1503).” Renais- sance Quarterly 20.2 (1967): 199–210. ———. Printing, Selling and Reading, 1450–1550. Wiesbaden: Harrossowitz, 1974. Hirschmann, Gerhard. “Die historischen Aufsätze in den Pastoral-Blättern des Bistums Eichstätt, 1854–1921.” Sammelblatt des Historischen Vereins Eichstätt 59 (1961/2): 44–48. Hlaváček, Ivan. “Zum Urkunden- und Geschäftsgut der Pfarreien und ihrer Pfarrherren im vorhussitischen Böhmen: Zur Frage des Umfangs und der Zusammensetzung der damaligen Pfarrarchive.” In Grundwissenschaften und Geschichte: Festschrift für Peter Acht, edited by Peter Herde and Waldemar Schlögl, 242–55. Kallmünz: Verlag Michael Lassleben, 1976. Hlaváček, Ivan and Zdeňka Hledíková, eds. Protocollum Visitationis Archidiaconatus Pragen- sis Annis 1379–1382 per Paulum de Janowitcz Archidiaconum Pragensem Factae. Prague: Academia, 1973. Hobbins, Daniel. Authorship and Publicity before Print: Jean Gerson and the Transformation of Late Medieval Learning. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2009. Hofer, Johannes. Johannes Kapistran: Ein Leben im Kampf um die Reform der Kirche. 2nd ed. Heidelberg: F. H. Kerle Verlag, 1965. Hoffmann, Leonhard. “Gutenberg und die Folgen: Zur Entwicklung des Bücherpreises im 15. und 16. Jahrhundert.” Bibliothek und Wissenschaft 29 (1996): 5–23. Horden, Peregrine. “Religion as Medicine: Music in Medieval Hospitals.” In Religion and Medicine in the Middle Ages, edited by Peter Biller and Joseph Ziegler, 135–53. Wood- bridge, UK: York Medieval Press, 2001. Hubay, Ilona. Incunabula Eichstätter Bibliotheken. Wiesbaden: Otto Harrassowitz, 1968. Hubbard, Tom. Michael Scot: Myth and Polymath. Kirkcaldy, UK: Akros Publications, 2006. Huey, Caroline. Hans Folz and Print Culture in Late Medieval Germany: The Creation of Popular Discourse. Burlington, VT: Ashgate, 2012. Hugh of St. Victor. Soliloquy on the Earnest Money of the Soul. Translated by Kevin Herbert. Milwaukee, WI: Marquette University Press, 1956. 200 Bibliography

Hughes, Andrew. Medieval Manuscripts for Mass and Office: A Guide to their Organization and Terminology. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1982. Hunt, Arnold. “Clerical and Parish Libraries.” In The Cambridge History of Libraries in Brit- ain and Ireland. Vol. 1, To 1640, edited by Elisabeth Leedham-Green and Teresa Webber, 400–419. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2006. Ingelfinger, Frank-Kuno. Die religiös-kirchlichen Verhältnisse im heutigen Württemberg am Vorabend der Reformation. Stuttgart: Schwabenverlag AG., 1939. Innocent III (Lotario dei Segni). De miseria condicionis humane. Edited by Robert E. Lewis. Athens: University of Georgia Press, 1978. Jakob, Reinhard. Schulen in Franken und in der Kuroberpfalz 1250–1550. Wiesbaden: Dr. Ludwig Reichert Verlag, 1994. ———. “Die Verbreitung von Schulen in Franken und in der Kuroberpfalz zwischen 1250 und 1520 unter historisch-geographischer Fragestellung.” In Bildungs- und schulgeschichtliche Studien zu Spätmittelalter, Reformation und konfessionellem Zeitalter, edited by Harald Dickerhof, 117–28. Wiesbaden: Dr. Ludwig Reichert Verlag, 1994. Janssen, Wilhelm. “‘Gute Ordnung’ als Element der Kirchenpolitik in den vereinigten Herzogtümern Jülich-Kleve-Berg.” Rheinische Vierteljahrsblätter 61 (1997). Janz, Denis, ed. Three Reformation Catechisms: Catholic, Anabaptist, Lutheran. New York and Toronto: Mellon Press, 1982. Jedin, Hubert. “Reformation und Kirchenverständnis.” In Probleme der Kirchenspaltung im 16. Jahrhundert, edited by Raymund Kottje and Joseph Staber, 59–79. Regensburg: Frie- drich Pustet, 1970. Jenkins, Claude. “Some Thirteenth-Century Registers.” Church Quarterly Review 99 (1924–1925): 69–115. ———. “A Thirteenth-Century Register: Odo Archbishop of Rouen.” Church Quarterly Re- view 101 (1925–1926): 80–123. Justice, Steven. Writing and Rebellion: England in 1381. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1994. Kaps, Johannes. Das Testamentsrecht der Weltgeistlichen und Ordenspersonen in Rechtsge- schichte, Kirchenrecht und Bürgerlichen Recht Deutschlands, Österreichs und der Schweiz. Buchenhain vor München: Verlag Christ Unterwegs, 1958. Karras, Ruth Mazo. From Boys to Men: Formations of Masculinity in Late Medieval Europe. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2003. Kehrberger, Eduard. Provinzial- und Synodalstatuten des Spätmittelalters: eine quellenkritische Untersuchung der Mainzer Provinzialgesetze des 14. und 15. Jahrhunderts, und der Synodalstatuten der Diözesan Bamberg, Eichstätt und Konstanz. Stuttgart: Bohland, 1938. Keller, Karl Heinz, ed. Katalog der lateinischen Handschriften der Staatlichen Bibliothek (Schloßbibliothek) Ansbach. Vol. 1. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, 1994. ———. Die mittelalterlichen Handschriften der Universitätsbibliothek Eichstätt. Vols. 2–3. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz Verlag, 1999–2004. ———. “Quod homines indigent libris ad suum usum: Bemerkungen zu mittelalterlichen Handschriften aus der Fürstbischöflichen Hofbibliothek Eichstätt.” Bibliotheksforum Bayern 26 (1998): 14–29. Kennedy, Leonard A. The Philosophy of Robert Holcot: Fourteenth-Century Skeptic. Lewis- ton, NY: E. Mellen Press, 1993. Kiermayr, Reinhold. “On the Education of the Pre-Reformation Clergy.” Church History 53.1 (1984): 7–16. Kintzinger, Martin. “Studens artium, rector parochiae und magister scolarum im Reich des 15. Jahrhunderts: Studium und Versorgungschancen der Artisten zwischen Kirche und Gesell- schaft.” Zeitschrift für historische Forschung 26 (1999): 1–41. Kisby, Fiona. “Books in London Parish Churches before 1603: Some Preliminary Observa- tions.” In The Church and Learning in Later Medieval Society: Essays in Honour of R. B. Dobson. Proceedings of the 1999 Harlaxton Symposium, edited by Caroline M. Barron and Jenny Stratford, 305–26. Donington, UK: Shaun Tyas, 2002. Kittelson, James M. and Pamela J. Transue, eds. Rebirth, Reform and Resilience: Universities in Transition, 1300–1700. Columbus, OH: Ohio State University Press, 1984. Bibliography 201

Klimaschewski-Bock, Ingrid. Die “Distinctio sexta” des antidotarium Mesuë in der Druckfas- sung, Venedig 1561: Übersetzung, Kommentar und Nachdruck der Textfassung von 1561. Stuttgart: Deutscher Apotheker Verlag, 1987. Kneal, Rev. Ellsworth. Medical Practice by the Clergy: The Limitations of Canons 139, § 2 and 985, 6° of the Code of Canon Law. Rome: Catholic Book Agency, 1967. Köhler, Hans-Joachim, ed. Flugschriften als Massenmedium der Reformationszeit: Beiträge zum Tübinger Symposien 1980. Stuttgart: Klett-Cotta, 1981. Kowzan, Jacek. “‘I will put none of these diseases upon thee (. . .) for I am the Lord that healeth thee’: Christ as a Pharmacist and Healer in Iconography and Literature of late Medieval and Early Modern Times.” In The Apothecary’s Chest: Magic, Art and Medication, edited by Konstantina Georganta, Fabienne Collignon, and Anne-Marie Millim, 107–18. Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing, 2009. Krämer, Sigrid. Handschriftenerbe des Deutschen Mittelalters. Munich: C. H. Beck, 1989. ———. “Neue Nachrichten über die ehemalige Pfarrbibliothek von Ebern.” Mainfränkisches Jahrbuch für Geschichte und Kunst 28 (1976): 36–47. Krenig, Ernst-Günther. “Nachrichten zur ehemaligen Pfarrbibliothek in Ebern.” Mainfränkisches Jahrbuch für Geschichte und Kunst 12 (1960): 293–99. Kürze, Dietrich. Klerus, Ketzer, Kriege und Prophetien: Gesammelte Aufsätze. Edited by Jürgen Sarnowsky, Marie-Luise Heckmann, and Stuart Jenks. Warendorf: Fahlbusch Ver- lag, 1996. ———. Pfarrerwahlen im Mittelalter: Ein Beitrag zur Geschichte der Gemeinde und des Niederkirchenwesens. Cologne: Böhlau, 1966. Kwakkel, Erik. “A New Type of Book for a New Type of Reader: The Emergence of Paper in Vernacular Book Production.” The Library: Transactions of the Bibliographical Society, 7th ser., 4:3 (2003): 219–47. Lambert, Malcolm. Medieval Heresy: Popular Movements from the Gregorian Reform to the Reformation. 2nd ed. Oxford: Blackwell, 1992. Lamy, Marielle. L’Immaculée Conception: Étapes et Enjeux d’une Controverse au Moyen-Âge (XIIe-XVe siècles). Paris: Institute d’Études Augustiniennes, 2000. Landau, Peter. Jus Patronatus: Studien zur Entwicklung des Patronats im Dekretalenrecht und der Kanonistik des 12. und 13. Jahrhunderts. Cologne: Böhlau Verlag, 1975. Landmann, Florenz. “Drei Predigt- und Seelsorgsbücher von Konrad Dreuben, einem elsässischen Landpfarrer aus der Mitte des 15. Jahrhunderts.” Archiv für elsässische Kir- chengeschichte 8 (1933): 209–40. ———. “Predigten und Predigtwerke in den Händen der Weltgeistlichkeit des 15. Jahrhunderts nach alten Bücherlisten des Bistums Konstanz.” Kirche und Kanzel 6 (1923): 130–36, 203–11, 277–84; 7 (1924): 53–60, 99–125, 207–14 ———. “Predigten und Predigtwerke in den Händen der Wiener Weltgeistlichkeit des XV. Jahrhunderts.” In Abhandlungen aus dem Gebiete der mittleren und neueren Geschichte und ihrer Hilfswissenschaften, 288–307. Münster: Aschendorff, 1925. Lang, Albert. Heinrich Totting von Oyta: Ein Beitrag zur Entstehungsgeschichte der ersten deutschen Universitäten und zur Problemgeschichte der Spätscholastik. Münster i. W.: Ver- lag der Aschendorffschen Verlagsbuchhandlung, 1937. Lang, Peter. “Die Synoden in der alten Diözesan Würzburg.” Rottenburger Jahrbuch für Kir- chengeschichte 5 (1986): 71–84. ———. “Würfel, Wein und Wettersegen: Klerus und Gläubige im Bistum Eichstätt am Vora- bend der Reformation.” In Martin Luther: Probleme seiner Zeit, edited by Volker Press and Dieter Stievermann, 219–43. Stuttgart: Klett-Cotta, 1986. Larson, Atria A. Master of Penance: Gratian and the Development of Penitential Thought and Law in the Twelfth Century. Washington, DC: The Catholic University of America Press, 2014. Lawrence, C. H. Medieval Monasticism: Forms of Religious Life in Western Europe in the Middle Ages. 3rd ed. Harlow: Pearson Education Limited, 2001. Lea, Henry Charles. A History of Auricular Confession and Indulgences in the Latin Church. Philadelphia: Lea Brothers, 1896. 202 Bibliography

Leclercq, Jean and Jean-Paul Bonnes, Un maître de la vie spirituelle au XIe siècle: Jean de Fécamp. Paris: J. Vrin 1946. Lees, Clare A., ed., Medieval Masculinities: Regarding Men in the Middle Ages. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1994. Leidel, Gerhard. Die Pfarreien des Klosters Wülzburg. Neustadt a. d. Aisch: Degener & Co., 1986. Lemaitre, Nicole. Le Rouerque flamboyant. Le clergé et les fideles du diocese de Rodez 1417–1563. Paris: Éditions du Cerf, 1988. Lhotsky, Alphons. Thomas Ebendorfer, ein österreichischer Geschichtsschreiber, Theologe und Diplomat des 15. Jahrhunderts. Stuttgart: A. Hiersemann, 1957. Liedtke, Max, ed. Handbuch der Geschichte des bayerischen Bildungswesen. 4 vols. Bad Heilbrunn: J. Klinkhardt, 1991–1997. Lindenbaum, Sheila. “London after Arundel.” In After Arundel: Religious Writing in Fifteenth- Century England, edited by Vincent Gillespie and Kantik Ghosh, 187–208. Turnhout, Bel- gium: Brepols, 2011. Littger, Klaus Walter. “Eichstätt 1 Universitätsbibliothek.” In Handbuch der historischen Buchbestände in Deutschland. Vol. 11, Bayern A-H, edited by Eberhard Dünninger, 216–17. Hildesheim: Olms-Weidmann, 1997. Logan, Donald F. University Education of the Parochial Clergy in Medieval England: The Lincoln Diocese, c. 1300 – c. 1350. Toronto: Pontifical Institute of Medieval Studies, 2014. Löhr, Joseph. Methodisch-kritische Beiträge zur Geschichte der Sittlichkeit des Klerus besond- ers der Erzdiözese Köln am Ausgang des Mittelalters. Münster: Aschendorffsche Buchhand- lung, 1910. Lommer, Markus. Kirche und Geisteskultur in Sulzbach bis zur Einführung der Reformation: Predigerstelle, Kirchenbibliothek und “Lateinschule” einer Stadtpfarrei auf dem Nordgau vor dem Hintergrund der überregionalen Entwicklung. Regensburg: Verlag des Vereins für Regensburger Bistumsgeschichte, 1998. Long, R. James, ed. Bartholomaeus Anglicus On the Properties of Soul and Body: De Proprie- tatibus Rerum Libri III et IV Edited from Bibliotheque Nationale MS. Latin 16098. Toronto: Pontifical Institute of Mediaeval Studies, 1979. Lortz, Joseph. The Reformation in Germany. Translated by Ronald Walls. London: Darton, Longman & Todd, 1968. Originally published as Die Reformation in Deutschland. 2 vols. Freiburg im Breisgau: Herder, 1949. Lossen, Richard. Staat und Kirche in der Pfalz im Ausgang des Mittelalters. Münster in West- falen: Aschendorffsche Buchhandlung, 1907. Lyall, R. J. “Materials: The Paper Revolution.” In Book Production and Publishing in Britain 1375–1475, edited by Derek Pearsall and Jeremy Griffiths, 11–30. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1989. MacCulloch, Diarmaid. The Reformation: A History. New York: Penguin, 2003. Machilek, Franz. “Die Bibliothek der Kapelle zu Unserer Lieben Frau in Windsheim um die Mitte des 15. Jahrhunderts.” Würzburger Diözesangeschichtsblätter 32 (1970): 161–70. ———. “Ein Eichstätter Inquisitionsverfahren aus dem Jahre 1460.” Jahrbuch für fränkische Landesforschung 34/35 (1975): 417–46. ———. “Fränkische ‘Gotteshausbücher’ des 15. und 16. Jahrhunderts.” Forschungen zur bayerischen und fränkischen Geschichte: Peter Herde zum 65. Geburtstag von Freunden und Kollegen dargebracht, edited by Karl Borchardt and Enno Bünz, 249–55. Würzburg: Kom- missionsverlag Ferdinand Schöningh, 1998. ———. “Schwaben und Franken.” In Handbuch der bayerischen Kirchengeschichte. Vol.1, Von den Anfängen bis zur Schwelle der Neuzeit, edited by Walter Brandmüller, 437–533. Erzabtei St. Ottilien: EOS Verlag, 1998. Madre, Alois. Nikolaus von Dinkelsbühl: Leben und Schriften. Münster in Westfalen: Aschen- dorffsche Verlagsbuchhandlung, 1965. Mai, Paul and Marianne Popp, eds. “Das Regensburger Visitationsprotokoll von 1508.” Beiträge zur Geschichte des Bistums Regensburg 18 (1984): 7–316. Maier, Peter. “Ursprung und Ausweitung der Kastler Reform.” Studien und Mitteilungen zur Geschichte des Benediktinerordens und seiner Zweige 102 (1991): 75–204. Bibliography 203

Mansfield, Mary C. Humiliation of Sinners: Public Penance in Thirteenth-Century France. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1995. Mansi, J. D., ed. Sacrorum conciliorum, nova et amplissima collectio. 54 vols. Florence: Antonii Zatta, 1759–1927. Marshall, Peter. The Catholic Priesthood and the English Reformation. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1994. Matern, G. and A. Birch-Hirschfeld, Das Rösseler Pfarrbuch (Mainz, 1937). Mayer, Heinrich. “Geschichte der Spendung der Sakramente in der Kirchenprovinz Salzburg (Taufe, Firmung, Kommunion),” Zeitschrift für katholische Theologie 37 (1913): 760–804; 38 (1914): 1–36, 267–96, 372–79. McGuire, Brian Patrick. Jean Gerson and the Last Medieval Reformation. University Park: Pennsylvania State University Press, 2005. McLaughlin, R. Emmet. “Universities, Scholasticism, and the Origins of the German Reforma- tion.” History of Universities 9 (1990): 1–43. Meens, Rob. Penance in Medieval Europe, 600–1200. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2014. Meier, Christel, et al. De Proprietatibus Rerum: Edition latine. 6 vols. Turnhout, Belgium: Brepols, 2007. Mertens, Dieter. “Der Humanismus und die Reform des Weltklerus im deutschen Südwesten.” Rottenburger Jahrbuch für Kirchengeschichte 11 (1992): 11–28. Merzbacher, Friedrich. “Das ‘Alte Halsgerichtsbuch’ des Hochstifts Eichstätt: Eine archival- ische Quelle zur Geschichte des Strafvollzugs im 15. und 16. Jahrhundert und zur recht- lichen Volkskunde.” Zeitschrift der Savigny-Stiftung für Rechtsgeschichte, Germanistische Abteilung 73 (1956): 375–96. Meuthen, Erich. Das 15. Jahrhundert. 3rd ed. Munich: R. Oldenbourg Verlag, 1996. ———. “Thomas von Aquin auf den Provinzialkonzilien zu Mainz und Köln.” In Köln: Stadt und Bistum in Kirche und Reich des Mittelalters: Festschrift für Odilo Engels zum 65. Geburtstag, edited by Hanna Vollrath and Stefan Weinfurter, 641–58. Cologne: Böhlau Verlag, 1993. ———. “Zur Europäischen Klerusbildung vom 14. bis zum 16. Jahrhundert.” In Mediävistische Komparatistik: Festschrift für Franz-Josef Worstbrock zum 60. Geburtstag, edited by Wolfgang Harms and Jan-Dirk Müller, 263–94. Stuttgart and Leipzig, 1997. Meyer, Andreas. Arme Kleriker auf Pfründensuche: Eine Studie über das in forma pauperum- Register Gregors XII. von 1407 und über päpstliche Anwartschaften im Spätmittelalter. Cologne: Böhlau Verlag, 1990. Michaud-Quantin, Pierre. Sommes des Casuistique et Manuels de Confession au Moyen Âge. Montreal: Libraire Dominicaine, 1962. Migne, J.-P. Patrologiae cursus completus. Series Latina. 221 vols. Paris 1844–1864. Miner, John N. “Change and Continuity in the Schools of Later Medieval Nuremberg.” The Catholic Historical Review 73 (1987): 1–22. Möckesch, Viktor H. “Ein Inkunabelfund in Pappenheim: Das Breviarium Eystettense von 1483.” Jahrbuch des historischen Vereins für Mittelfranken 84 (1967/8): 247–49. Moeller, Bernd. “Die Anfänge kommunaler Bibliotheken in Deutschland.” In Studien zum städtischen Bildungswesen des späten Mittelalters und der frühen Neuzeit: Bericht über Kolloquien der Kommission zur Erforschung der Kultur des Spätmittelalters 1978 bis 1981, edited by Bernd Moeller, Hans Patze, and Karl Stackmann, 136–51. Göttingen: Vanden- hoeck & Ruprecht, 1983. ———. “Piety in Germany around 1500.” In The Reformation in Medieval Perspective, edited by Steven Ozment, 50–75. Chicago: Quadrangle Books, 1971. Originally published as “Frömmigkeit in Deutschland um 1500.” Archiv für Reformationsgeschichte 56 (1965): 3–31. Moran, Jo Ann Hoeppner. “A ‘Common Profit’ Library in Fifteenth-Century England and Other Books for Chaplains.” Manuscripta 28 (1984): 17–25. Moraw, Peter. Von offener Verfassung zu Gestalteter Verdichtung: Das Reich im späten Mitt- elalter, 1250–1490. Berlin: Propyläen, 1989. 204 Bibliography

Müller, Rainer A. Universität und Adel: Eine soziostrukturelle Studie zur Geschichte der bayerischen Landesuniversität Ingolstadt 1472–1648. Berlin: Duncker & Humblot, 1974. Mura, Karen. “Thomas Wardon: A Mid-Fifteenth-Century Reader, 1448–1462.” Fifteenth- Century Studies 22 (1996): 42–54. Murray, Alexander. “Confession before 1215.” Transactions of the Royal Historical Society, 6th ser., 3 (1993): 51–81. Myers, W. David. ‘Poor, Sinning Folk’: Confession and Conscience in Counter-Reformation Germany. Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1996. Neddermeyer, Uwe. “Radix studii et speculum vitae: Verbreitung und Rezeption der ‘Imitatio Christi’ in Handschriften und Drucken bis zur Reformation.” In Studien zum 15. Jahrhun- dert: Festschrift für Erich Meuthen. 2 vols. Edited by Johannes Helmrath and Heribert Müller, 1:457–81. Munich: R. Oldenbourg, 1994. ———. Von der Handschrift zum gedruckten Buch: Schriftlichkeit und Leseinteresse im Mitt- elalter und in der frühen Neuzeit, Quantitative und qualitative Aspekte. Wiesbaden: Harras- sowitz, 1998. Needham, Paul. “The Library of Hilprand Brandenburg.” Bibliothek und Wissenschaft 29 (1996): 95–125. Neidiger, Bernhard. Prädikaturstiftungen in Süddeutschland (1369–1530): Lai- en–Weltklerus–Bettelorden. Stuttgart: Archiv der Stadt Stuttgart, 2011. ———. “Wortgottesdienst vor der Reformation: Die Stiftung eigener Predigtpfründen für Weltkleriker im späten Mittelalter.” Rheinische Vierteljahrsblätter 66 (2002): 142–89. Neumaier, Helmut. “Territorium und ius circa sacra: Die spätmittelalterlichen Priestereide in der Grafschaft Hohenlohe.” Blätter für Württembergische Kirchengeschichte 82 (1982): 5–37. Newhauser, Richard. “From Treatise to Sermon: Johannes Herolt on the novem peccata aliena.” In De Ore Domini: Preacher and Word in the Middle Ages, edited by Thomas L. Amos, Eugene A. Green, and Beverly Mayne Kienzle, 185–209. Kalamazoo, MI: Medieval Institute Publications, 1989. Nicoud, Marilyn. Les Régimes de Santé au Moyen Âge: Naissance et Diffusion d’une Écriture Médicale, XIIIe-XVe Siècle. Rome: Ecole Française, 2007. Nowakowska, Natalia. “From Strassburg to Trent: Bishops, Printing and Liturgical Reform in the Fifteenth Century.” Past and Present no. 213 (2011): 3–38. Oberman, Heiko A. and Charles Trinkaus, eds. The Pursuit of Holiness in Late Medieval and Renaissance Religion. Leiden: Brill, 1974. O’Boyle, Cornelius. The Art of Medicine: Medical Teaching at the University of Paris, 1250–1400. Leiden: Brill, 1998. Oediger, Friedrich Wilhelm. Über die Bildung der Geistlichen im späten Mittelalter. Leiden: Brill, 1953. Ohst, Martin. Pflichtbeichte: Untersuchungen zum Buβwesen im Hohen und Späten Mittelalter. Tübingen: J. C. B. Mohr, 1995. Oliger, Livarius. “Das sozialpolitische Reformprogramm des Eichstätter Eremiten Antoninus Zipfer aus dem Jahre 1462.” In Beiträge zur Geschichte der Renaissance und Reformation: Joseph Schlecht am 16. Januar 1917 als Festgabe zum sechzigsten Geburtstag dargebracht, edited by L. Fischer, 263–80. Munich: Dr. F. P. Datterer, 1917. Overfield, James H. “University Studies and the Clergy in Pre-Reformation Germany.” In Rebirth, Reform and Resilience: Universities in Transition 1300–1700, edited by James M. Kittelson and Pamela J. Transue, 254–92. Columbus: Ohio State University Press, 1984. Overgaauw, E. A. “Where are the Colophons? On the Frequency of Datings in Late-Medieval Manuscripts.” In Sources for the History of Medieval Books and Libraries, edited by Rita Schlusemann, Jos. M. M. Hermans, and Margriet Hoogvliet, 81–93. Groningen: Egbert Forsten, 1999. Owst, G. R. Preaching in Medieval England: An Introduction to Sermon Manuscripts of the Period c. 1350–1450. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1926. Ozment, Steven. The Age of Reform, 1250–1550: An Intellectual and Religious History of Late Medieval and Reformation Europe. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1980. Bibliography 205

———. The Reformation in the Cities: The Appeal of Protestantism to Sixteenth-Century Germany and Switzerland. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1975. Palazzo, Eric. “Le végétal et le sacré: l’hysope dans le rite de la dédicace de l’église.” In Ritual, Text and Law: Studies in Medieval Canon Law and Liturgy Presented to Roger E. Reynolds, edited by Kathleen G. Cushing and Richard F. Gyug, 41–49. Burlington, VT: Ashgate, 2004. Pantin, W. A. The English Church in the Fourteenth Century. Cambridge: Cambridge Univer- sity Press, 1955. Reprint. South Bend, IN: University of Notre Dame Press, 1962. Paulus, Nikolaus. Indulgences as a Social Factor in the Middle Ages. Translated by J. E. Ross. New York: The Devin-Adair Company, 1922. Pearsall, Derek. “Texts, Textual Criticism, and Fifteenth-Century Manuscript Production.” In Fifteenth-Century Studies: Recent Essays, edited by Robert F. Yeager, 121–36. Hamden, CT: Archon Books, 1984. Peitz, Rudolf. Die “Decem quaestiones de medicorum statu”: Ein spätmittelalterlicher Dekal- og zur ärztlichen Standeskunde. Hannover: Horst Wellm Verlag Pattensen, 1978. Peters, Greg and C. Colt Anderson, eds. A Companion to Priesthood and Holy Orders in the Middle Ages. Leiden: Brill, 2016. Peterson, David. “Out of the Margins: Religion and the Church in Renaissance Italy.” Renais- sance Quarterly 53.3 (2000): 835–79. Petke, Wolfgang. “Oblationen, Stolgebühren und Pfarreinkünfte vom Mittelalter bis ins Zeital- ter der Reformation.” In Kirche und Gesellschaft im Heiligen Römischen Reich des 15. und 16. Jahrhunderts, edited by Hartmut Boockmann, 26–58. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ru- precht, 1994. ———. “Der rechte Pilger – Pilgersegen und Pilgerbrief im späten Mittelalter.” In Herr- schaftspraxis und soziale Ordnungen im Mittelalter und in der frühen Neuzeit: Ernst Schu- bert zum Gedenken, edited by Peter Aufgebauer and Christine van den Heuvel, 361–90. Hannover: Hahnsche, 2006. Petrucci, Armando. Writers and Readers in Medieval Italy: Studies in the History of Written Culture. Edited and translated by Charles Radding. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1995. Pfleger, Lucian. “Untersuchungen zur Geschichte des Pfarrei-Instituts im Elsass.” Archiv für Elsässische Kirchengeschichte 5 (1930): 89–160; 8 (1933): 1–118; and 9 (1934): 1–106. Pixton, Paul B. The German Episcopacy and the Implementation of the Decrees of the Fourth Lateran Council, 1216–1245: Watchmen on the Tower. Leiden: Brill, 1995. Pleticha, Eva. Adel und Buch: Studien zur Geisteswelt des fränkischen Adels am Beispiel seiner Bibliotheken vom 15. bis zum 18. Jahrhundert. Neustadt a. d. Aisch: Kommissionsverlag Degener, 1983. Plöchl, Willibald. Geschichte des Kirchenrechts. 2nd ed. Vol. 2. Vienna: Herold, 1962. von Pölnitz, Götz, Freiherr, ed. Die Matrikel der Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität Ingolstadt- Landshut-München. Vol. 1. Munich: Lindauer, 1937. Polo de Beaulieu, Marie-Anne. “L’image de clergé séculier dans les recueils de exempla (XIIIe-XVe siècle).” In Le Clerc Séculier au Moyen Âge: XXIIe congrès de la S.H.M.E.S. (Amiens, juin 1991), 61–80. Paris: Publications de la Sorbonne, 1993. Porsia, Franco. Antiche Scienze del Corpo e dell’Anima: Il Liber Phisionomiae di Michele Scoto. Taranto: Chimienti Editore, 2009. Powicke, F. M. and C. R. Cheney, eds. Councils & Synods with Other Documents Relating to the English Church. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1964. Powitz, Gerhardt. “Die Bibliothek des Frankfurter Stadtpfarrers Peter Scheu (gest. 1510): Kler- ikaler Buchbesitz um 1500 und der Handel mit Büchern als Nachlaβgut.” Gutenberg-Jahr- buch (2001): 314–33. ———. “Libri inutiles in mittelalterlichen Bibliotheken: Bermerkungen über Alienatio, Pa- limpsestierung und Makulierung.” Scriptorium 50 (1996): 288–304. ———. “Privater Buchbesitz in Frankfurt am Main während des späten Mittelalters.” Archiv für Frankfurts Geschichte und Kunst 66 (2000): 161–99. Priebatsch, Felix, ed. Politische Correspondenz des Kurfürsten Albrecht Achilles. 3 vols. Leip- zig: S. Hirzel, 1894–1898. 206 Bibliography

Purcell, Maureen. Papal Crusading Policy: The Chief Instruments of Papal Crusading Policy and Crusade to the Holy Land from the Final Loss of Jerusalem to the Fall of Acre, 1244–1291. Leiden: Brill, 1975. Rankl, Helmut. Das vorreformatorische landesherrliche Kirchenregiment in Bayern, 1378–1526. Munich: Stadtarchiv München, 1971. Rapp, Francis. L’Églisé et la vie religieuse en occident á la fin du moyen âge. 4th ed. Paris: Presses universitaires de France, 1991. ———. Réformes et Réformation a Strasbourg: Église et Société dans le Diocése de Stras- bourg (1450–1525). Paris: Editions Ophrys, 1974. Rauscher, Julius. “Die Prädikaturen in Württemberg vor der Reformation: Ein Beitrag zur Predigt- und Pfründengeschichte am Ausgang des Mittelalters.” Württembergische Jahrbücher für Statistik und Landesgeschichte (1908): 152–209. Reeves, Andrew. “Teaching the Creed and Articles of Faith in England: 1215–1281.” In A Companion to Pastoral Care in the Late Middle Ages (1200–1500), edited by Ronald Stansbury, 41–72. Leiden: Brill, 2010. Reiter, Eric. “The Reader as Author of the User-Produced Manuscript: Reading and Rewriting Popular Latin Theology in the Late Middle Ages.” Viator 27 (1996): 151–69. ———, trans. Stella clericorum. Toronto: Pontifical Institute of Mediaeval Studies, 1997. Reiter, Ernst. “Rezeption und Beachtung von Basler Dekreten in der Diözese Eichstätt unter Bischof Johann von Eich (1445–1464).” In Von Konstanz nach Trient: Beiträge zur Ge- schichte der Kirche von den Reformkonzilien bis zum Tridentinum, edited by Remigius Baumer, 215–32. Munich: Ferdinand Schöningh, 1972. Remling, Ludwig. Bruderschaften in Franken: Kirchen- und sozialgeschichtliche Unter- suchungen zum spätmittelalterlichen und frühneuzeitlichen Bruderschwaftswesen. Würzburg: Ferdinand Schöningh, 1986. Rhodes, Dennis E. “The Library of Johann Plümel.” In Incunabula: Studies in Fifteenth- Century Printed Books Presented to Lotte Hellinga, edited by Martin Davies, 231–41. London: The British Library, 1999. Riddy, Felicity. “‘Publication’ before print: the case of Julian of Norwich.” In The Uses of Script and Print, 1300–1700, edited by Julia Crick and Alexandra Walsham, 29–49. Cam- bridge: Cambridge Unversity Press, 2004. Ried, K. Neumarkt in der Oberpfalz: Eine quellenmäβige Geschichte der Stadt Neumarkt. Neumarkt in der Oberpfalz: Stadt Neumarkt, 1960. Riha, Ortrun. Meister Alexanders Monatsregeln: Untersuchungen zu einem spätmittelalterlichen Regimen duodecim mensium mit kritischer Textausgabe. Hannover: Horst Wellm Verlag, 1985. Rittgers, Ronald K. The Reformation of the Keys: Confession, Conscience, and Authority in Sixteenth-Century Germany. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2004. Rosemann, Philipp. Peter Lombard. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2004. Roth, F. W. E. Michael Reyser: Ein Eichstätter Buchdrucker (1478–1494) und dessen Erzeug- nisse. Eichstätt: Ph. Brönner, 1900. Roth, Gunhild. Sündenspiegel im 15. Jahrhundert: Untersuchungen zum pseudo-augustin- ischen “Speculum peccatoris” in deutscher Überlieferung. Bern: Peter Lang, 1991. Röttel, Karl. Das Hochstift Eichstätt: Grenzsteine, Karten, Geschichte. Ingolstadt: Donau Courier, 1987. Rouse, Mary A. and Richard H. Rouse. “The Texts Called Lumen Anime.” Archivum Fratrum Praedicatorum 41 (1971): 5–113. Rubin, Miri and Walter Simons, eds. Christianity in Western Europe c.1100–c.1500, vol. 4 of The Cambridge History of Christianity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2009. Rück, Peter and Martin Boghardt, eds. Rationalisierung der Buchherstellung in Mittelalter und Frühneuzeit: Ergebnisse eines buchgeschichtlichen Seminars der Herzog August Bibliothek Wolfenbüttel 12. – 14. November 1990. Marburg/Lahn: Institut für Historische Hilfswissen- schaften, 1994. Ruf, Paul. “Der Augsburger Pfarrer Molitoris und sein Holzschnittsiegel.” Zeitschrift für bayerische Landesgeschichte 3 (1930/1): 387–406. Bibliography 207

———. Eine Ingolstädter Bücherschenkung vom Jahre 1502. Munich: Bayerische Akademie der Wissenschaften, 1933. ———. Mittelalterliche Bibliothekskataloge Deutschlands und der Schweiz. Vol. 3.2. Munich: C. H. Beck, 1933. Ruh, Kurt, et al., eds. Die deutsche Literatur des Mittelalters: Verfasserlexikon. 2nd ed. 11 vols. Berlin: De Gruyter, 1977–2002. Rummel, Erika. “Voices of Reform from Hus to Erasmus.” In Handbook of European History, 1400–1600. 2 vols. Edited by Thomas A. Brady, Jr., Heiko A. Oberman, and James D. Tracy, 1:61–92. Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans, 1994. Salmon, Dom Pierre. The Breviary through the Centuries. Collegeville, MN: The Liturgical Press, 1962. Salonen, Kirsi and Jussi Hanska, Entering a Clerical Career at the Roman Curia, 1458–1471. Burlington, VT: Ashgate, 2013. Sax, Julius. Die Bischöfe und Reichsfürsten von Eichstädt, 745–1806. Landshut: Ph. Krüll’sche Universitäts-Buchhandlung, 1884. ———. Geschichte des Hochstiftes und der Stadt Eichstätt. 2nd ed. Edited by Joseph Bleicher. Eichstätt: Phil. Brönner, 1927. Schannat, Johann Friedrich and Jospeh Hartzheim, eds. Concilia Germaniae. 11 volumes. 1759–1790. Reprint, Aalen: Scientia-Verlag, 1970–1996. Schipperges, Heinrich. Die Kranken im Mittlealter. 2nd ed. Munich: C. H. Beck, 1990. Schlecht, Joseph. “Hieronymous Rotenpeck und die Reform des Stiftes Rebdorf.” Sammelblatt des Historischen Vereins Eichstätt 7 (1892): 65–101. Schlemmer, Karl. Gottesdienst und Frömmigkeit in der Reichsstadt Nürnberg am Vorabend der Reformation. Würzburg: Echter Verlag, 1980. Schmid, Alois. “Die Bemühungen der Herzöge und Kurfürsten von Bayern um das Fürstbistum Eichstätt.” Sammelblatt des historischen Vereins Eichstätt 88/89 (1995/96): 115–35. Schmugge, Ludwig. Kirche, Kinder, Karrieren: Päpstliche Dispense von der unehelichen Ge- burt im Spätmittelalter. Zürich: Artemis & Winkler, 1995. ———, ed. Repertorium Poenitentiariae Germanicum. Vol. 4, Verzeichnis der in den Suppli- kenregistern der Pönitentiarie Pius’ II vorkommenden Personen, Kirchen und Orte des Deutschen Reiches 1458–1464. Tübingen: Max Niemeyer, 1996. Schmugge, Ludwig and Wolfgang Müller, eds. Repertorium Poenitentiariae Germanicum. Vol. 3, Verzeichnis der in den Supplikenregistern der Pönitentiarie Calixts III. vorkom- mende Personen, Kirchen und Orte des Deutschen Reiches 1455–1458. Tübingen: Max Niemeyer, 2001. Schnabel-Schüle, Helga. “Distanz und Nähe: Zum Verhältnis von Pfarrern und Gemeinden im Herzogtum Württemberg vor und nach der Reformation.” Rottenburger Jahrbuch für Kir- chengesichte 5 (1986): 339–48. ———. “Kirchenvisitation und Landesvisitation als Mittel der Kommuni- kation zwischen Herrschaft und Untertanen.” In Im Spannungsfeld von Recht und Ritual: Soziale Kommunikation in Mittelalter und Früher Neuzeit, edited by Heinz Duchhardt and Gert Melville, 173–86. Cologne: Böhlau, 1997. Schneider, Karin, ed. Die deutschen Handschriften der Bayerischen Staatsbibliothek München, Cgm 201–350. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, 1970. Schneyer, J. B. Repertorium der lateinischen Sermones des Mittelalters für die Zeit von 1150–1350. 11 Vols. Münster in Westfalen: Aschendorff, 1969–1990. Schornbaum, Karl. “Die Bibliothek des letzten katholischen Pfarrers von Ansbach Joh. Mend- lein.” Jahresbericht des historischen Vereins für Mittelfranken 56 (1909): 163–67. ———. “Zwei alte Salbücher der Pfarrei Gunzenhausen.” Zeitschrift für bayerische Kirchen- geschichte 22 (1953): 3–20. Schornbaum, Karl and W. Kraft. “Pappenheim am Ausgang des Mittelalters in kirchlicher Hinsicht auf Grund des Pfarrbuchs des Pfarrers Stefan Aigner.” Zeitschrift für bayerische Kirchengeschichte 7 (1932): 129–60, 193–220. Schreiner, Klaus. “Grenzen literarischer Kommunikation: Bemerkungen zur religiösen und sozialen Dialektik der Laienbildung im Spätmittelalter und in der Reformation.” In Literatur 208 Bibliography

und Laienbildung im Spätmittelalter und in der Reformationszeit, edited by Ludger Grenz- mann and Karl Stackmann, 1–15. Stuttgart: J. B. Metzler, 1984. Schröcker, Sebastian. Die Kirchenpflegschaft: Die Verwaltung des Niederkirchenvermögens durch Laien seit dem ausgehenden Mittelalter. Paderborn: Verlag Ferdinand Schöningh, 1934. Schultes, P. Reginald M., O. P. Fides Implicita: Geschichte der Lehre von der fides implicita und explicita in der katholischen Theologie. Regensburg: Friedrich Pustet, 1920. Schulze, Manfred. Fürsten und Reformation: Geistliche Reformpolitik weltlicher Fürsten vor der Reformation. Tübingen: J. C. B. Mohr, 1991. Schwinges, R. C. Deutsche Universitätsbesucher im 14. und 15. Jahrhundert: Studien zur Sozialgeschichte des Alten Reiches. Stuttgart: Franz Steiner Verlag, 1986. ———. “Pauperes an Deutschen Universitäten des 15. Jahrhunderts.” Zeitschrift für historische Forschung 8 (1981): 285–309. Scribner, Robert W. Religion and Culture in Germany (1400–1800). Edited by Lyndal Roper. Leiden: Brill, 2001. Seger, Peter. Der Bauernkrieg im Hochstift Eichstätt. Regensburg: Friedrich Pustet, 1997. Seymour, M. C., et al. On the Properties of Things: John Trevisa’s Translation of Bartholo- maeus Anglicus “De proprietatibus rerum.” 3 vols. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1975–1988. Shaw, Judith. “The Influence of Canonical and Episcopal Reform on Popular Books of Instruc- tion.” In The Popular Literature of Medieval England, edited by Thomas J. Heffernan, 44–60. Knoxville: University of Tennessee Press, 1985. Shinners, John. “Parish Libraries in Medieval England.” In A Distinct Voice: Medieval Studies in Honor of Leonard E. Boyle, O.P., edited by Jacqueline Brown and William P. Stoneman, 207–30. Notre Dame, IN: University of Notre Dame Press, 1997. Shinners, John and William Dohar, eds. Pastors and the Care of Souls in Medieval England. Notre Dame, IN: University of Notre Dame Press, 1998. Sicard, P., D. Poirel, H. Rochais, eds. L’oeuvre de Hugues de Saint-Victor. Vol. 1. Turnhout, Belgium: Brepols, 1997. Sieglerschmidt, Jörn. Territorialstaat und Kirchenregiment: Studien zur Rechtsdogmatik des Kirchenpatronats im 15. und 16. Jahrhundert. Cologne: Böhlau, 1987. Siraisi, Nancy. Medieval and Early Renaissance Medicine: An Introduction to Knowledge and Practice. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1990. Smith, William Bradford. Reformation and the German Territorial State: Upper Franconia, 1300–1630. Rochester, NY: University of Rochester, 2008. Sottili, Agostino. “Nürnberger Studenten an italienischen Renaissance-Universitäten mit be- sonderer Berücksichtigung der Universität Pavia.” In Università e Cultura: Studi sui rap- porti italo-tedeschi nell’età dell’Umanesimo, edited by Agostino Sottili, 49–103. Goldbach: Keip, 1993. Southern, R. W. Western Society and the Church in the Middle Ages. Hammondsworth: Pen- guin Books, 1970. Reprint. London: Penguin Books, 1990. Spencer, H. Leith. English Preaching in the Late Middle Ages. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1993. Spilling, Herrad, ed. Die Handschriften der Staats- und Stadtbibliothek Augsburg. Vol. 2. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz Verlag, 1978. Spindler, Max, ed. Bayerischer Geschichtsatlas. Munich: Bayerischer Schulbuch-Verlag, 1969. ———, ed. Handbuch der bayerischen Geschichte. Vol. 3. Munich: C. H. Beck, 1971. Spitzig, Joseph A. Sacramental Penance in the Twelfth and Thirteenth Centuries. Washington, DC: The Catholic University of America Press, 1947. Spufford, Peter. Handbook of Medieval Exchange. London: Offices of the Royal Historical Society, 1986. Staub, Johannes and Kurt Hans Staub, eds. Die mittelalterlichen Handschriften der Nicolaus- Matz-Bibliothek in Michelstadt. Michelstadt: Stadt Michelstadt, 1999. Staub, Kurt Hans, ed. Die Inkunabeln der Nicolaus-Matz-Bibliothek in Michelstadt. Michel- stadt: Stadt Michelstadt, 1984. Stegmüller, Friedrich. “Henricus Gotfridi de Koburg. Commentarius in Quartum Librum Sen- tentiarum.” In Analecta Upsaliensia theologiam Medii Aevi illustrantia. Vol. 1, Opera Sys- Bibliography 209

tematica, edited by Friedrich Stegmüller, 361–92. Uppsala: Lundequistska bokhandeln, 1953. Stempel, Theodor. Die geistliche Gerichtsbarkeit und die Kirchenpolitik der Markgrafen von Brandenburg im 15. Jahrhundert. Emsdetten: Heinrich & J. Lechte, 1933. Stewing, Franz-Joachim. “Bibliothek und Buchbesitz einer spätmittelalterlichen Pfarrkirche im mitteldeutschen Raum: Das Beispiel Rudolstadt.” In Bücher, Drucker, Bibliotheken in Mit- teldeutschland: Neue Forschungen zur Kommunikations- und Mediengeschichte um 1500, edited by Enno Bünz, 207–303. Leipziger Universitätsverlag, 2006. ———. “Zum Buchbesitz an der Rudolstädter Stadtkirche im Spätmittelalter.” Blätter der Gesellschaft für Buchkultur und Geschichte 8 (2004): 9–45. ———. “Zum Buchbesitz Erfurter Stiftsgeistlicher im 15. und frühen 16. Jahrhundert.” In Bücher und Bibliotheken in Erfurt, edited by Michael Ludscheidt and Kathrin Paasch, 71–112. Erfurt: Neue Erfurter Bibliotheksgesellschaft, 2000. Stieber, Joachim W. Pope Eugenius IV, the Council of Basel, and the Secular and Ecclesiasti- cal Authorities in the Empire. Leiden: Brill, 1978. Stievermann, Dieter. Landesherrschaft und Klosterwesen im spätmittelalterlichen Württemberg. Sigmaringen: Thorbecke, 1989. Stintzing, Roderich. Geschichte der populären Literatur des römisch-kanonischen Rechts in Deutschland. Leipzig: G. Hirzel, 1867. Straub, Theodor. “Johann Spenlin: Ein Leben im Vorfeld der Reformation.” Sammelblatt des historischen Vereins Ingolstadt 90 (1981): 71–92. Strauss, Gerald, ed. Manifestations of Discontent in Germany on the Eve of the Reformation. Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1971. Streveler, Paul and Katherine Tachau, eds. Seeing the Future Clearly: Questions on Future Contingents by Robert Holcot. Toronto: Pontifical Institute of Mediaeval Studies, 1995. von Stromer, Wolfgang. “Die erste Papiermühle in Mitteleuropa: Urman Stromeirs ‘Hadermühle’ Nürnberg 1390-1453, an der Wiege der Massenmedien.” In Produzione e Commercio della Carta e del Libro Secc. XIII-XVIII: Atti della ‘Ventitreesima Settimana di Studi’ 15–20 Aprile 1991, edited by Simonetta Cavaciocchi, 297–311. Florence: Le Monni- er, 1992. Sudhoff, Karl. “Alexander Hispanus und das Schriftwerk unter seinem Namen: Ein erstes Wort über ihn und Bekanntgabe seiner medizinischen Schriften.” Sudhoffs Archiv für Geschichte der Medizin und der Naturwissenschaften 29 (1937): 289–312; 30 (1938): 1–25. Suttner, J. G. “Johann Kapistran und Marcus d’Aviano.” Pastoralblatt des Bistums Eichstätt 8 (1861): 159–62. ———. “Nachträge zur Conciliengeschichte des Bisthums.” Pastoralblatt des Bistums Eichstätt 4 (1857): 193–208. ———. Schematismus der Geistlichkeit des Bisthums Eichstätt für das Jahr 1480. Eichstätt: A. Hornik, 1879. ———. “Versuch einer Conciliengeschichte des Bisthums Eichstätt.” Pastoralblatt des Bis- tums Eichstätt 1 (1854): 15–211, passim. ———. “Vitae pontificum Eystettensium ad saeculum usque XVI ex Pontificali Gundecariano descriptae.” Pastoralblatt des Bistums Eichstätt 14 (1867): Beilage. ———. “Zur Tradition des Bisthums Eichstätt über die unbefleckte Empfängniβ.” Pastoral- blatt des Bistums Eichstätt 2 (1855): 28–49. Swanson, R. N. “Angels Incarnate: Clergy and Masculinity from Gregorian Reform to Refor- mation.” In Masculinity in Medieval Europe, edited by D. M. Hadley, 160–77. London: Longman, 1999. ———, ed. The Church and the Book: Papers Read at the 2000 Summer Meeting and the 2001 Winter Meeting of the Ecclesiastial History Society. Woodbridge, Suffolk, UK: Boydell Press, 2004. ———. Indulgences in Late Medieval England: Passports to Paradise? Cambridge: Cam- bridge University Press, 2007. ———. “Pastoral Revolutionaries? Parish Clergy and Religious Leadership in Late Medieval England.” In Episcopacy, Authority, and Gender: Aspects of Religious Leadership in Eu- 210 Bibliography

rope, 1100–2000, edited by Jan Wim Buisman, Marjet Derks, and Peter Raedts, 114–26. Leiden: Brill, 2015. ———. “Problems of the priesthood in pre-Reformation England.” The English Historical Review 105 (Oct. 1990): 845–69. ———. Religion and Devotion in Europe, c.1215–c.1515. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1995. Świerk, Alfred. “Beiträge zur Geschichte schlesischer Privatbibliotheken bis zum Anfang des 16. Jahrhunderts.” Archiv für schlesische Kirchengeschichte 27 (1969): 75–97. Szaivert, Willy and Franz Gall, eds. Die Matrikel der Universität Wien. Vols. 1–3. Graz: Hermann Böhlaus, 1954–1971. Tabbagh, Vincent. “Croyances et comportements de clergé paroissial en France du Nord à la fin du Moyen Âge.” In Le clergé délinquant (XIII-XVIIIe siècles), edited by Benoît Garnot, 11–64. Dijon: Éditions Universitaires de Dijon, 1995. Tanner, Norman. The Church in the Later Middle Ages. London: I. B. Tauris, 2008. Tanner, Ralph. Sex, Sünde, Seelenheil: Die Figur des Pfaffen in der Märenliteratur und ihr historischer Hintergrund (1200–1600). Würzburg: Königshausen & Neumann, 2005. ———, ed. Decrees of the Ecumenical Councils. Vol. 1. Washington, DC: Georgetown Uni- versity Press, 1990. Taylor, Larissa. Soldiers of Christ: Preaching in Late Medieval and Reformation France. New York: Oxford University Press, 1992. Reprint. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2002. Tentler, Thomas. Sin and Confession on the Eve of the Reformation. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1977. Thayer, Anne. Penitence, Preaching and the Coming of the Reformation. Burlington, VT: Ashgate, 2002. ———. “Support for Preaching in Guido of Monte Rochen’s Manipulus Curatorum.” In A Companion to Pastoral Care in the Late Middle Ages (1200–1500), edited by Ronald Stansbury, 123–44. Leiden: Brill, 2010. Thibodeaux, Jennifer, The Manly Priest: Clerical Celibacy, Masculinity and Reform in Eng- land and Normandy, 1066–1300. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2015. Thomas à Kempis. The Imitation of Christ. Translated by Joseph N. Tylenda. Wilmington, DE: M. Glazier, 1984. Thomas, Hugh. The Secular Clergy in England, 1066–1216. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2014. Thompson, Susan. “Paper Manufacturing and Early Books.” In Machaut’s World: Science and Art in the Fourteenth Century, edited by Madeleine Pelner Cosman and Bruce Chandler, 167–74. New York: The New York Academy of Sciences, 1978. Thorndike, Lynn. Michael Scot. London: Nelson, 1965. ———. “The Properties of Things of Nature Adapted to Sermons.” Medievalia et Humanistica 12 (1958): 78–83. Toch, Michael. “Asking the way and telling the law: Speech in medieval Germany.” Journal of Interdisciplinary History 16 (1986): 667–82. ———. Die Nürnberger Mittelschichten im 15. Jahrhundert. Nuremberg: Stadtarchiv Nürnberg, 1978. Treiber, Angela. Die Autorität der Tradition: Theoriegeschichtliche und quellenkritische Studi- en zur sogenannten “Volkskultur” am Beispiel der spätmittelalterliche Synodalstatuten der Kirchenprovinz Salzburg. Dettelbach: Verlag Dr. J. H. Röll, 1996. Trenkwalder, Alois. Der Seelsorgeklerus der Diözese Brixen im Spätmittelalter. Brixen: A. Weger, 2000. Trithemius. In Praise of Scribes, edited by Klaus Arnold, translated by Roland Behrendt, O.S.B. Lawrence, KS: Coronado Press, 1974. Ulsamer, Willi. Pfarrkirche St. Emmeram und ehemalige Stiftskirche St. Nikolaus, Spalt. Otto- beuren: Hannes Oefele, 1985. Van Engen, John. “Late Medieval Anticlericalism: The Case of the New Devout.” In Anticleri- calism in Late Medieval and Early Modern Europe, edited by Peter A. Dykema and Heiko A. Oberman, 19–52. Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1993. Bibliography 211

———. “Multiple Options: The World of the Fifteenth-Century Church.” Church History 77.2 (2008): 257–84. ———. Sisters and Brothers of the Common Life: The Devotio Moderna and the World of the Later Middle Ages. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2008. Vann Sprecher, Tiffany D. “The Marketplace of the Ministry: The Impact of Sacerdotal Piece- work on the Care of Souls in Paris, 1483–1505.” Speculum 91 (2016): 149–70. Vasella, Oskar. Reform und Reformation in der Schweiz: Zur Würdigung der Anfänge der Glaubenskrise. Münster in Westfalen: Aschendorffsche Verlagsbuchhandlung, 1958. Viaux, Dominique. La vie paroissiale à Dijon à la fin du Moyen-Âge. Dijon: Editions universitaires de Dijon, 1988. Vincke, Johannes. Der Klerus des Bistums Osnabrück im späten Mittelalter. Münster in West- falen: Aschendorffsche Verlagsbuchhandlung, 1928. Vizkelety, András. “Die Fraternitas XXIV plebanorum civitatum regalium in Oberungarn und der Handschriftenbestand Zipser Pfarreibibliotheken.” In Pfarreien im Mittelalter: Deutsch- land, Polen, Tschechien und Ungarn im Vergleich, edited by Nathalie Kruppa, 327–38. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2008. Vodola, Elisabeth. Excommunication in the Middle Ages. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1986. Volkmar, Christoph. “Die Pfarrei im Blickfeld der Obrigkeit: Aufsicht und Reform durch Bischöfe, Landesherren und Städte.” In Die Pfarrei im Späten Mittelalter, edited by Enno Bünz and Gerhard Fouquet, 97–130. Ostfildern: Jan Thorbecke Verlag, 2013. Voltmer, Rita. “Klerikaler Antiklerikalismus? Die Kritik am geistlichen Stand bei Johannes Geiler von Kaysersberg (1445–1510).” In Kirchlicher und religiöser Alltag im Spätmittelalter: Akten der internationalen Tagung in Weingarten, 4.-7. Oktober 2007, edited by Andreas Meyer, 47–75. Ostfildern: Jan Thorbecke Verlag, 2010. ———. Wie der Wächter auf dem Turm: Ein Prediger und seine Stadt. Johannes Geiler von Kaysersberg und Straßburg. Trier: Porta Alba Verlag, 2005. Walsh, Katherine. “Professors in the Parish Pulpit: Zu Thomas Ebendorfers homiletischer Tatigkeit als ‘Winzerseelsorger’ in Perchtoldsdorf.” Innsbrucker Historische Studien 22 (2000): 79–115. Wambach, Walter, ed. Die Kirchenbibliothek Schwabach: Geschichte und Bestand. Baden- Baden: Valentin Koerner, 1990. Weinfurter, Stefan. Eichstätt im Mittelalter: Kloster, Bistum, Fürstentum. Regensburg: Frie- drich Pustet, 2010. Wendehorst, Alfred. Das Bistum Eichstätt. Vol. 1, Die Bischofsreihe bis 1535. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter, 2006. ———. “Wer konnte im Mittelalter lesen und schreiben?” In Schulen und Studium im sozialen Wandel des hohen und späten Mittelalters, edited by Johannes Fried, 9–33. Sigmaringen: Jan Thorbecke Verlag, 1986. Wenzel, Siegfried. Latin Sermon Collections from Later Medieval England: Orthodox Preach- ing in the Age of Wyclif. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2005. Werminghoff, Albert. “Die Epistola de miseria curatorum seu plebanorum.” Archiv für Refor- mationsgeschichte 13 (1916): 200–227. ———. “Zur Epistola de miseria curatorum seu plebanorum.” Beiträge zur bayerischen Kir- chengeschichte 22 (1916): 145–64. Werner, Matthias. “Johannes Kapistran in Jena.” In Studien zum 15. Jahrhundert: Festschrift für Erich Meuthen. 2 vols. Edited by Johannes Helmrath and Heribert Müller, 2:505–20. Munich: R. Oldenbourg, 1994. Williams-Krapp, Werner. “Die Bedeutung der Reformierten Klöster des Predigerordens für das literarische Leben in Nürnberg im 15. Jahrhundert.” In Studien und Texte zur literarischen und Materiellen Kultur der Frauenklöster im späten Mittelalter, edited by Falk Eisermann, Eva Schlotheuber, and Volker Honemann, 312–29. Leiden: Brill, 2004. Wilpert, Paul. “Vita contemplativa und Vita activa: Eine Kontroverse des 15. Jahrhunderts.” Passauer Studien: Festschrift für Bischof Dr. Simon Konrad Landersdorfer OSB zum 50. Jahrestag seiner Priesterweihe dargeboten, edited by J. Oswald, A. Mayer, and J. Blinzler, 209–27. Passau: Verlag Passavia, 1953. 212 Bibliography

Winroth, Anders. The Making of Gratian’s Decretum. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000. Wranovix, Matthew. “Pastors of the Soul, Healers of the Body: Parish Priests and the Practice of Medicine in the Late Medieval Diocese of Eichstätt.” In Boundaries in the Medieval and Wider World: Essays in Honour of Paul Freedman, edited by Thomas Barton, Susan Mc- Donough, Sara McDougall, and Matthew Wranovix, 215–31. Turnhout, Belgium: Brepols, forthcoming. ———. “Parish Priests and their Books: Reading, Writing, and Keeping Accounts in the Late Medieval Diocese of Eichstätt.” PhD diss., Yale University, 2007. ———. “Transmission and Selection: Instructing the Parish Clergy in Late Medieval Germa- ny.” In Text and Transmission in the European Middle Ages, 1000–1500, edited by Carrie Griffin and Emer Purcell. Turnhout, Belgium: Brepols, forthcoming. ———. “Ulrich Pfeffel’s Library: Parish Priests, Preachers, and Books in the Fifteenth Centu- ry.” Speculum 87.4 (2012): 1125–55. Wriedt, Klaus. Schule und Universität: Bildungsverhältnisse in norddeutschen Städten des Spätmittelalters. Leiden: Brill, 2005. Zedelmaier, Helmut. “Das Buch als Recheneinheit: Überlegungen zur Erforschung der Buch- kultur.” Historisches Jahrbuch 120 (2000): 291–300. Zika, Charles. “Hosts, Processions and Pilgrimages: Controlling the Sacred in Fifteenth-Centu- ry Germany.” Past & Present 118 (1988): 25–64. Zmora, Hillay. State and Nobility in Early Modern Germany: The Knightly Feud in Franconia, 1440–1567. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1997. Index

absenteeism, 37–38, 59n16 bishops: benefice and, 35–36; candidates absolution, 133; priests and, 139; secular for, 36; churchmen criticisms of, 4; authorities and, 147 clergy and, 146; Council of Basel and, Achilles, Albrecht, 39, 41, 103 141; dissatisfaction from, 44–45; Act of Supremacy, x Eichstätt and, 35; exams for, 6; Adorf, Johann, 22 extortion by, 146; fees for, 39–40; Aigner, Stefan, 54; assistant priest to, 57; Fourth Lateran Council and, 9; May and, 55 information gathering for, 45; pastoral Albert of Hohenrechberg, 12 handbooks mandated by, 150; synodal anniversary mass, 54, 55 statutes of, 6; territorial lords and, 39; Antidotarium Nicolai (Nicolas of Salerno), unused books of, 107; Vidimus and, 48; 154 Würzburg and, 40 Aquinas, Thomas, 2, 5, 115 book of hours, 91n46 Arnold, John, xiii Book of Nature (Megenburg), 84 Ars medicinae, 153 Book of Wisdom, 110, 116 Auerbach, Johannes, 16, 49 books: access to, 81; accuracy of, 110; acquisition of, 86; affordability of, 136; Bays, Michael de, 7 binding and, 107; The Cambridge Beilngries, 20, 22, 138 History of the Book in Britain and, xiii; benefices, 35–36; Hilpoltstein and, 56; circulation of, 111; clergy and, xii, 134; patrons and, 38; personal oaths for, 40; collections of, 67, 74–75, 171; copying presentation for, 35–38 of, 170; donations of, 76, 78; form of Berching, 18, 81, 151; libraries and, 76; capital as, 87; libraries collection of, 75; synodal statutes and, 71; universities maintenance of, 73–74; materials for, and, 20, 22, 25 68; medieval ownership marks of, 107; Bernstorfer, Conrad, 24 parchment and, 68; parish clergy and, Bible: medicines in, 157; paper prices and, 71; parish priests and, xiii; Pfeffel and, 70; Reformation and, 135. See also 101, 106; practical texts and, 132–140; Gospel of John; Gospel of Matthew on priesthood, 145–150; priests binding: books and, 107; quires with, 88 requirements of, 70–71; printing press and, 68–70; private collections and,

213 214 Index

81–82; rate of loss for, 83, 84; scribes for, 3; secular jurisdiction and, 38; copying of, 108; surviving works of, territorial lords and, 43; universities 84–85; in urban areas, 85; Vogt and, 22; in urban areas, 85; Vogt ownership of, 72. See also historical protocol for, 45; women and, 3 books; printed books; secondhand clerical learning, 3 books clericus, 4 Boyle, Leonard: parish priests and, 6; Communion, 49 pastoralia and, xi concubines, xviiin31, 39 Brandenburg, Hilprand, 67 confession, 28n48; contrition and, 8; Easter Brant, Sebastian, 68 and, 56; Eucharist and, 49; obligation Bruckay, Johannes, 22 of, 8; sacraments and, 138; Seven Bürer, Mathias, 67, 129n119 Deadly Sins and, 15 burials, 55 Confessionale (Chaimis), 79 Bussi, Joannes Andrea de, 68 confessor: penitent memory and, 138; Butzenloer, Erhard, 133, 141 preachers and, 17; priests as, 8–10 confirmation documents, 46 The Cambridge History of the Book in contemplation, 118, 120, 122 Britain, xiii contrition: confession and, 8; notes of, 113 canon law, 171; Fourth Lateran Council Corpus Christi, 56 and, 5, 11, 49; marriage and, 50, 133; Corsten, Severin, 69 medical prohibitions in, 152; Nimis and, Coulton, G. G., x 60n33; parish clergy and, 79–80; record Council of Basel, 16, 162n55; bishops and, keeping and, 35; requirements of, 14; 141; decree of, 141–142; Eich and, 141; rigor of, 47 immaculate conception and, 140–145; Capistrano, Johannes, 11, 110 Mary and, 140; Pfeffel and, 142 care for the soul, 157 Council of Constance, 140 Carnificis, Nicolaus, 23 Cura pastoralis, 6–7 Chaimis, Bartholomaeus de, 79 Currificis, Eukarius, 109 Christ’s Passion, 143 Chronicle of Popes and Emperors (Martin De audientia confessionum (Kusin), 109, of Oppau), 104, 117 136 Chrysostom, John, 157 Decameron, x churches: dues and, 54; indulgence Decem quaestiones de medicorum statu, hawkers and, 49; local cults and, 48; 152 maintaining integrity of, 51; patrons Decretum, 5 and, 36; tithes and, 52; Vogt at, 72 De dignitate sacerdotum, 147, 149, 171 churchwardens, 51; churches fabric’s Delumeau, Jean, x income and, 53; investments of, 52. See De novo sacerdote, 148 also lay churchwardens devotional interests, 118–122 Clementina, 48 Dickens, A. G., x clergy: bishops and, 146; book circulation Diettersperger, Ulrich, 87 for, 111; books acquisition by, 134; Dinkelsbühl, Nikolaus von, xii books interest for, xii; competence of, dioceses: Eichstätt, xiv, xx; medical texts 168; grievances of, 47; libraries and, and, 153; Meiβen as, 1; missals 78; medical knowledge and, 159; criticism for, 72–73; in rural areas, Middle Ages and, x; oversight of, 44; 85–86 parishioner attacks on, 43; pastoral Directorium curatorum (Auerbach), 16, 49 handbooks and, 135; patrons and Distel, Johannes, 24 fidelity for, 42; Pfeffel as, 102; scorn Index 215 donations, 131; books and, 76, 78; Fourth Lateran Council, 25; bishops and, 9; humanist impulse of, 80; libraries and, canon law and, 5, 11, 49; Pope Innocent 77, 78; of manuscripts, 72; Pfeffel for, III and, 8; medical texts and, 152 106; Schwabach and, 85 France, 83 Dreuben, Konrad, 68 Freudenberg, Heinrich de, 46 dues: churches and, 54; rector and, 56 Geiler, Johann, 146; criticism by, 146; Easter, 56 sermons of, 146 Ebendorffer, Thomas, 112 Gemmingen, Uriel, 2 ecclesiastical benefactors: funds from, 36; The German Episcopacy (Pixton), 28n57 patrons and, 38 Gerson, Jean, 15, 76, 170 ecclesiastical courts: Albrecht and, 41; Geyern, Fritz Schenk von, 43 judicial system and, 47; priests and, 40 Glauber, Ulricus, 86 Egelwanger, Ulrich, 47 Gospel of John, 147, 172 Eich, Johann III von, 13–14, 44; Council of Gospel of Matthew, 136 Basel and, 141; tithes and, 52 Gössel, Paul, 53 Eichstätt: bishops and, 35; dioceses of, xiv, Greding, 25, 146; universities and, 22; xx; libraries of, 76; Modern Devotion vicars and, 83, 87 and, 119; Pfeffel at, 105; Seckendorf Greding, Hans von, 46 and, ix; St. Walburg and, 50 Greüll, Johann, 151 Eichstätt, Conrad von, 154 Grieff, Michael, 138 Eisermann, Falk, 119 Griesser, Jacon, 22 Ellinger, Conrad, 54 Groote, Geert, 119, 152 Engelberti, Ulrich, 9 England: parish clergy in, x; parish Häldrer, Dom, 81 libraries and, 80 Hamm, Berndt, xi English Preaching in the Late Middle Ages Handbooks for Pastors, 27n45 (Spencer), 29n69 Hanska, Jussi, 7 episcopal administration: bureaucratization Havelberg, 7 of, 45; liturgical books and, 74 Hayden, Johannes, 46 episcopal books, 15–17 Heiden, Johannes, 41 Epistola de miseria curatorum seu Herbst, Johann, 24 plebanorum (The Letter on the Miseries Hernsperger, Peter, 49, 141 of Curates and Rectors), 1–2, 4 Herolt, Johannes, 50 Eucharist, 49 Hetzer, Ulrich, 81 Eugenius IV, 141 High Mass: mass and, 37; parish priest and, Ezekiel: priests and, 150; warning of, 149 37 Hilpoltstein, 56 Fabri, Johann, 75 Hispanus, Alexander, 158 Fécamp, Jean de, 120, 121 Hispanus, Petrus, 18 Felix V, 141 historical books, 132 Ficino, Marsilio, 156 Hobbins, Daniel, 132 fidelitas (fidelity), 42, 60n33 Hoffman, Leonhard, 69 Fink-Lang, Monika, 102 Holcot, Robert, 116, 123 Flock, Conrad, 23, 78 Hubner, Ulrich, 153 Folz, Hans, 3 Hugh of St. Victor, 80, 120 formatae (title), 46 hymns: popularity of, 119; sermons and, Fourteen Articles, 71 119 216 Index

Ignorantia sacerdotum, 15 Liber supputacionum, 121 Imitationof Christ (Kempis), 120, 121–122 libraries: Berching and, 76; book immaculate conception: arguments about, collections in, 75; clergy and, 78; 143; Council of Basel and, 140–145; cultural movement and, 101; donations Mary and, 143; official dogma of, 142; and, 77, 78; Eichstätt and, 76; sermons and, 145; theologians and, 143 incomplete manuscripts in, 105; imperial bishops. See bishops manuscripts and, 77; Pfeffel and, incorporation, 38 105–108; for private, 80–88. See also indulgence hawkers, 49 private collections Innocent III (Pope), 8 Liegnitz, Matthias de, ix In Praise of Scribes of Sound Doctrine Linck, Peter, 78 (Gerson), 170 Link, Petrus, 40 intellectual interests: devotional interests literacy: Latin schools and, 19; need for, and, 118–122; growth of, 169 xiv; parish priest and, 14 Investiture Controversy, 38 literatus, 4 litterae dimissoriales (letters of Jakob, Johann, 106 presentation), 46 Jakob, Reinhard, 18 liturgical books: episcopal administration Jesus: Mary and, 140; original sin and, 145 and, 74; sacraments and, 73; synodal John of Ruusbroec, 121 statutes and, 70–74 John the Baptist (Saint), 77 Löffler, Hainrich, 75, 133 judicial system: ecclesiastical courts and, Lombard, Peter, 142 47; parish priest and, 47 Low Countries, 120 Low Mass, 72 Kasper, Johann, 70 Kastl, xiv, 23, 86 magister, 22 Kauffman, Bernhard, 151 Manuale curatorum (Surgant), 16 Keller, Karl, 102 manuscripts: absolution topic in, 133; Kempis, Thomas à, xvi, 120 copying of, 86, 87; distribution of, 76; Klugheimer, Urban, 67 donations of, 72; libraries and, 77; Knorr, Peter, 104 libraries with incomplete, 105; parish Koberger, Anton, 40, 67 priests and, 108; Pfeffel and, 101, 108; Kolde, Dietrich, 171 quires and, 83; rate of loss for, 82; Kuchner, Johann, 153 rituals for, 89n29 Kusin, Johannes, 87, 105, 109, 136 margrave, 41 marriage: canon law and, 50, 133; Middle Langenstein, Heinrich von, xii Ages and, 50 late medieval, xi–xii The Marshals of Pappenheim, 24, 36, 55 Latinity, 5 Martin of Oppau, 104, 117 Latin schools: cost of, 19; grammar books Mary: Council of Basel and, 140; for, 18; literacy and, 19; Nuremberg immaculate conception and, 143; Jesus and, 19; paupers and, 20; schoolmasters and, 140; original sin and, 144; priests of, 20; universities and, 17–26 and, 148; sanctification of, 144 lay churchwardens, 52 mass: celebration of, 16; for deceased Ledrer, Jorg, 54 persons, 122; High Mass and, 37; notes The Letter on the Miseries of Curates and and, 113; preaching and, 12–13; priests Rectors, 1–2, 4 and, 9, 51. See also anniversary mass; letters of presentation, 46 memorial mass Liber Sextus, 48 Index 217 matriculation: Pfeffel family and, 103; Nimis, 60n33 records for, 23, 24, 118; Vienna records Nockel, Steffan, 53 for, 25 notes: of contrition, 113; mass and, 113; May, Stephan, 48, 54; Aigner and, 55; pastoral handbooks and, 113; Pfeffel rector and, 57 and, 112, 121 medical knowledge: clergy and, 159; Nuremberg: cosmopolitan city of, 104; importance of, 159 influence of, xiv; Latin schools and, 19; medical texts: Ars medicinae as, 153; care Pfeffel and, 104; territorial lords and, for the soul and, 157; collections of, 40 150–160; Decem quaestiones de medicorum statu as, 152; diagnostics oblations, 52 with, 151; dietary advice in, 153; Oculus sacerdotis, 9 dioceses and, 153; Fourth Lateran Oediger, Friedrich Wilhelm, x Council and, 152; human reproduction Office for the Dead, 55 in, 156; medical practice in, 152; Omnis utriusque, 10, 13 Melleus liquor and, 158; Opera On the Contempt of the World (John of medicinalia as, 155; in parish libraries, Ruusbroec), 121 155; pastoral literature and, 157; Opera medicinalia (Mesue), 155 physicians and, 152; printed books and, Order of Preachers, 2 151; sinners and, 158; superstition and, ordination, 4, 5, 6–7, 14 160 original sin: Jesus and, 145; Mary and, 144 medievalists, xiii Ostertag, Marcus, 43 medieval society, 2 Ottomans, 39 Megenburg, Conrad von, 84 Owst, G. R., 14 Meiβen, 1 Melber, Johannes, 134 paper mills, 88n13; growth of, 68–69; Melleus liquor, 153, 158 paper price and, 69–70 memorial mass, 55 Pappenheim, 24, 54, 55, 56, 57, 87 Mesue, Johanne, 155 parchment: books and, 68; price of, 69–70 Middle Ages: clergy and, x; marriage in, parish administration: bureaucratization in, 50; parish clergy image in, xi; xv; registers of, 53 priesthood in, 4 parish clergy, 172; anniversary mass and, Mirror for Christians (Kolde), 171 55; books and, ix, 71; canon law and, missals: dioceses criticism of, 72–73; 79–80; England and, x; legacy parishes and, 56; priests and, 72 stereotypes for, xii; in medieval society, Modern Devotion, 119, 121; Bürer and, 2; Middle Ages image of, xi; privilege 129n119; Eichstätt and, 119; Pfeffel of, xii. See also clergy and, 119 parishes: bureaucracy of, 45; endowment Modern Devout, 11 for, 36; patrons and, 57; priests and, Moeller, Bernd, 11 51–57; rectors and, 38; for urban areas, Molitoris Johannes, 24 131 Mülich, Bartholomeus, 87 parish libraries: books in, 75; England and, Murray, Alexander, 28n48 80; evidence for, 75; medical texts in, 155; personal book collections and, xiii; Neddermeyer, Uwe, xi, 69, 82 preacherships and, 74–80; Schwabach Neumaier, Helmut, 41 and, 73, 132, 134, 145, 155 Nicholas of Lyra, 111, 116 parish priests, 24; books and, xiii; Boyle Nicolas of Salerno, 154 and, 6; High Mass and, 37; judicial Nider, Johannes, 114 system and, 47; literacy and, 14; 218 Index

manuscripts and, 108; preaching and, preachers, 21; confessor and, 17; fame of, 12; problems for, 2; skills of, 57; usage 146; history used by, 117; scriptures rights of, 52 and, 116 parish registers, 53, 57 preacherships, 74–80 pastoral care, 132 preaching: mass and, 12–13; parish priests pastoral handbooks: bishops mandate for, and, 12; sermons and, 14; Ten 150; clergy and, 135; notes and, 113; Commandments and, 11 Pfeffel and, 118 priesthood: books on, 145–150; exams for, pastoralia, xi 7; Pfeffel and, 103 pastoral literature: authors for, xii; medical priests: absolution and, 139; book of hours texts and, 157 and, 91n46; book requirements for, patrons: benefices and, 38; church and, 36; 70–71; as bureaucrat, 44–51; celibacy clergy fidelity and, 42; ecclesiastical of, 149; as confessor, 8–10; benefactors and, 38; parishes and, 57; ecclesiastical courts and, 40; Ezekiel rights of, 36, 42, 168; territorial lords and, 150; failures of, 149–150; and, 39 hospitality for, 42–43; importance of, paupers: Latin schools and, 20; universities ix–x; lust of, 3; Mary and, 148; mass and, 21 and, 9, 51; missals and, 72; parish and, penitent, 10, 139 51–57; penitent and, 139; quires Pfeffel, Ulrich, ix, xv, 88, 172; biblical copying by, 83–84; record keeping of, passages for, 117; books of, 101, 106; 45–46; registers and, 54; reputations of, career of, 102–105, 123; as clergy, 102; 167; secular authorities and, 147; as Council of Basel and, 142; for subjects, 38–44; synodal statutes and, donations, 106; early life of, 102; 47, 133; teacher as, 11–15; territorial Eichstätt and, 105; library and, lords as devils for, 44; as theologian, 5; 105–108; library construction and, universities and, 173; wisdom of, 149 108–112; manuscripts and, 108; printed books: medical texts and, 151; Modern Devotion and, 119; notes of, Pfeffel and, 111; prices for, 111 112, 121; Nuremberg and, 104; other printing press: books and, 68–70; texts of, 114; pastoral handbooks and, importance of, 67 118; pastoral library (1457–1467) of, private collections: books and, 81–82; in 112–115; preaching library of, France, 83; Neddermeyer and, 82; 115–118; priesthood and, 103; printed personalized books for, 133; Pfeffel books and, 111; private collections and, and, 110–111 110–111; Rebdorf and, 122; Pseudo-Boethius, 18 recommendations of, 121; Puch, George, 50 responsibilities of, 112; scribbler of, Purckel, Johannes, 77 107; as scribe, 108; sermons and, 113, 118; at universities, 103 Quinel, Peter, 15 pilgrims, 50 quires: binding of, 88; manuscripts and, 83; Pilhammer, Leonhard, 106 priests copying of, 83–84 Pilter, Johannes, 67 Pixton, Paul, 15 rate of loss: for books, 83; for manuscripts, plebanus (rector), 38, 168; indulgence 82 hawkers and, 49; Talmässing and, 44 Rebdorf, 108, 119, 122 Plöchl, Willibald, 58n2 record keeping, 167; canon law and, 35; pluralism, 59n16 confirmation documents and, 46; Porger, Johannes, 68 responsibilities of, 169 Pragmatic Sanction of Bourges, 141 Index 219 rector: burial blessings from, 55; dues and, sinners: medical texts and, 158; treatment 56; duties of, 37; May and, 57; parishes of, 159 and, 38; vicars and, 37. See also sins, 10, 138. See also original sin plebanus Smith, William Bradford, 39 Reformation: Bible and, 135; causes of, x; Sneek, Cornelis van, 3 clerical ignorance and, xi Spencer, H. Leith, 29n69 Regimen, 166n160 Sprecher, Tiffany Vann, 52 registers, 54; Pappenheim and, 55; parish Starkey, Thomas, x administration and, 53; priests and, 54 Stavensby, Alexander, 15 Reichenau, Wilhelm von, 44, 71, 74 Stein, Hippolyte von, 56 Reyers, Michael, 73 Steinbach, Johann, 43 right of presentation, 36 St. Walburg, 50 Ripelin, Hugo, 116 Summa Angelica (Gerson), 76 Rosenplüt, Hans, 3 Summa theologiae (Aquinas), 115 Roth, Johann IV von, 76 Summulae logicales (Hispanus, P.), 18 rural areas, 85–86 Surgant, Johann Ulrich, 16 Suttner, Joseph Georg, 102 sacraments, 26; administration of, 5–6; Swanson, R. N., x confession and, 138; liturgical books synodal statutes, 7, 90n37; Berching and, and, 73; salvation and, 9 71; bishops and, 6; copies of, 82; Salonen, Kirsi, 7 criticism of, 15; liturgical books and, salvation, 9 70–74; priests and, 47, 133; publishing Schematismus (Suttner), 58n1 of, 71 Scheubel, Johann, 105 Schippower, Johann, 3 Talmässing, 44 Schlaurspach, Christophorus, 106 Ten Commandments: popular explication Schluck, Johanne, 155 of, 113; preaching and, 11 Schmidhammer, Leonhard, 47 territorial lords: bishops and, 39; clergy Schwabach, 23; donations and, 85; parish and, 43; devils of priest and, 44; libraries and, 73, 132, 134, 145, 155 Nuremberg and, 40; patrons rights and, Schwinges, R. C., 21, 25 39 scribe: book copying and, 108; Pfeffel as, Teutonic Knights, 46 108; secondhand books and, 169 texts. See books scriptures: importance of, 13; Omnis theologian: immaculate conception and, utriusque and, 13; preachers and, 116 143; pastoral care and, 132; priest as, 5; Scwabach, 40, 42, 172 texts for, 79 Seckendor, Karl von, ix, 109 Thirty Years’ War, 76 secondhand books: circulation of, 110; tithes: churches and, 52; Eich and, 52 scribes and, 169 Tractatus contra haeresim hussitarum secular authorities: absolution and, 147; (Nider), 114 priests and, 147 Sentences (Lombard), 142 universities: attendance growth in, xi; Sermo de novo sacerdote, 147 Berching and, 20, 22, 25; clergy and, sermons: Geiler and, 146; hymns and, 119; 22; Greding and, 22; Latin schools and, immaculate conception and, 145; 17–26; matriculations at, 20; paupers literature for, 133–134; Pfeffel and, and, 21; Pfeffel at, 103; priests and, 173 108, 113, 118; preaching and, 14 urban areas: books in, 85; clergy in, 85; Seven Deadly Sins, 15 parishes for, 131 Shinners, John, 76 Urregimen (Eichstätt), 154 220 Index

Veyhelin, Margreth, 19 90n38–91n39; visitation records of, 53 vicars (vicarus), 37–38; Greding and, 83, Voragine, Jacobus de, 114 87 Vidimus, 48 Waging, Bernhard von, 16 Vienna, 25 Wernd, Steffan, 43 visitation record of 1480, xiv, 14, 22, 37, Widenhover, Johann, 44 70, 85, 142 Wiedemann, Johannes, 48, 50, 132 Vocabularium praedicantium (Melber), William of Pagula, 9 134 Windesheim reform movement, 44 Vogt, Johannes, xiv, 14, 22, 71, 150, 167; Würzburg, 40, 105 book ownerships and, 72; clergy protocol and, 45; terminology of, Yedung, George, 81 About the Author

Matthew Wranovix received his PhD in history from Yale University in 2007 and is currently a lecturer in the history department and the Honors Program director at the University of New Haven. He is a Fulbright recipient and has written on priests, books, and libraries in the fifteenth century as well as on the use of games in the classroom. He currently lives in Longmeadow, Massachusetts.

221