The Anglo-Saxon and Norman "Eigenkirche"

371 Pages·2017·13.06 MB·English

LLoouuiissiiaannaa SSttaattee UUnniivveerrssiittyy
LLSSUU DDiiggiittaall CCoommmmoonnss
LSU Historical Dissertations and Theses Graduate School
1981
TThhee AAnngglloo--SSaaxxoonn aanndd NNoorrmmaann ""EEiiggeennkkiirrcchhee"" aanndd tthhee EEcccclleessiiaassttiiccaall
PPoolliiccyy ooff WWiilllliiaamm II..
Albert Simeon Cote Jr
Louisiana State University and Agricultural & Mechanical College
Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.lsu.edu/gradschool_disstheses
RReeccoommmmeennddeedd CCiittaattiioonn
Cote, Albert Simeon Jr, "The Anglo-Saxon and Norman "Eigenkirche" and the Ecclesiastical Policy of
William I." (1981). LSU Historical Dissertations and Theses. 3675.
https://digitalcommons.lsu.edu/gradschool_disstheses/3675
This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate School at LSU Digital Commons. It
has been accepted for inclusion in LSU Historical Dissertations and Theses by an authorized administrator of LSU
Digital Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected].
INFORMATION TO USERS
This was produced from a copy of a document sent to us for microfilming. While the
most advanced technological means to photograph and reproduce this document
have been used, the quality is heavily dependent upon the quality of the material
submitted.
The following explanation of techniques is provided to help you understand
markings or notations which may appear on this reproduction.
1. The sign or “target" for pages apparently lacking from the document
photographed is “Missing Page(s)". If it was possible to obtain the missing
page(s) or section, they are spliced into the film along with adjacent pages.
This may have necessitated cutting through an image and duplicating
adjacent pages to assure you of complete continuity.
2. When an image on the film is obliterated with a round black mark it is an
indication that the film inspector noticed either blurred copy because of
movement during exposure, or duplicate copy. Unless we meant to delete
copyrighted materials that should not have been filmed, you will find a good
image of the page in the adjacent frame. If copyrighted materials were
deleted you will find a target note listing the pages in the adjacent frame.
3. When a map, drawing cr chart, etc., is part of the material being photo­
graphed the photographer has followed a definite method in "sectioning”
the material. It is customary to begin filming at the upper left hand corner of
a large sheet and to continue from left to right in equal sections with small
overlaps. If necessary, sectioning is continued again—beginning below the
first row and continuing on until complete.
4. For any illustrations that cannot be reproduced satisfactorily by xerography,
photographic prints can be purchased at additional cost and tipped into your
xerographic copy. Requests can be made to our Dissertations Customer
Services Department.
5. Some pages in any document may have indistinct print. In all cases we have
filmed the best available copy.
University
Miudfilms
International
300 N. ZEEB RD.. ANN ARBOR, Ml 48106
8207814
Cote, Albert Simeon, Jr.
THE ANGLO-SAXON AND NORMAN "EIGENKIRCHE" AND THE
ECCLESIASTICAL POLICY OF WILLIAM I
The Louisiana State University and Agricultural and Mechanical Col PH.D. 1981
University
Microfilms
International
300 N. Zeeb Read, Ann Arbor, MI 48106
Copyright 1982
by
Cote, Albert Simeon, Jr.
All Rights Reserved
THE ANGLO-SAXON AND NORMAN EIQENKIRCHE
AND THE ECCLESIASTICAL POLICY OF WILLIAM I
A Dissertation
Submitted to the Graduate Faculty of the
Louisiana State University and
Agricultural and Mechanical College
in partial fulfillment of the
requirements for the degree of
Doctor of Philosophy
in
The Department of History
by
Albert Simeon Cote, Jr.
B.A.i Nicholls State University, 1972
M.A., Louisiana State University, 1975
December, 1981
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
I wish to thank the following institutions and persons who made
this dissertation possible: to the History Department at L. S. U.
who gave financial support and patience; to the Middleton library
for the use of its facilities, and special thanks to the Interl ibrary
department and the Rare book room who provided me with some otherwise
inaccessible sources; to Firestone library at Princeton University
for the use of its collections; to the Law library at L* S. U. for
usage of its many journals and foreign books; and, finally to all
the persons who gave me assistance at these institutions.
I would like to thank especially the following persons who gave
so much of their time and attention to my work: to the faculty of
the History department at L. S. U. and the graduate assistants who
gave advice, suggestions, and support; to Professors John Loos, Fred
Youngs, Jim Bolner, Tom Owen, Cecil Eubanks, Rene Williamson, and
others who guided me in my graduate schooling; to Professor Patrick
Geary at Florida University who gave much advice on my analysis of
the Norman proprietary church; to the late Mrs. Ernestine Trahan; to
Professor Gary Crump who worked many years and hours with my writing
of the thesis and dissertation; to Professor Sidney Cohen I give
special thanks for initiating me into mediaeval studies; to my typist
Mrs. Roider and her husband, Professor Roider; to my parents, MT.a nd
Mrs. Albert S. Cote, Sr.; to my wife’s parents, Mr. and Mrs. George
Hidalgo; to my wife, Mary H. Cote, and to my son, Jeffrey Cote, Iw ant
to thank sincerely for their moral support.
ii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Acknowledgments* ii
Table of Contents • • • * * * • * • • iii
Abbreviations . . . . . . . . . . . iv
Abstract • • • • • • * • • • • • • vi
Introduction. . • * . • • . • • • • viii
Chapter X: The Eigenkirche and the Historiography of
William I*s Ecclesiastical Policy * . 1
Chapter H: Theories of the Proprietary Church • • 25
Chapter III: The State of the Anglo-Saxon Church and the
Proprietary Church * . . . . . 59
Chapter IV: Anglo-Saxon Reform of the Proprietary Church 96
Chapter V: Proprietary Interests in the Ecclesiastical
Policy of the Norman BukeB . . . . 1^5
Chapter VI: William's Ecclesiastical Policy in England 187
Chapter VII: William's Eigenkirche and Reform. • • 259
Chapter VIII: Gregory VII and William's Eigenkirche • 289
Conclusion • • • • • • • • . . . . 530
Appendix A. * * * * * . • • • • • 33*t
Appendix B . * * * * * * * « * > « 338
Appendix C . . * . • * • * . • • • 3**0
Appendix B • • . . . • • • • • * • 3^1
Bibliography • • • • • • * . • • • 3^
* 4 •
111
ABBREVIATIONS
ASC The Anglo-Saxon Chronicle
B Cartularium Saxonicum. Edited by
Walter de Gray Birch.
Bessin Concilia Rotomagensis Provinciae.
Edited by G* Bessin
Bouquet Recueildes historians des Gaules et de
France. Edited by Don Bouquet.
Ccuobi Med* Hist • The Cambridge Medieval History.
Clover The Letters of Lanfranc, Archbishop of
Canterbury. Edited and translated by
Helen Clover and Margaret Gibson.
Davis, Regesta Regesta Regum Anglo-Nonnannormn. 1066-
lly*-. Edited by H. W. C. Davis.
DB Domesday Book seu Liber Censualis
Willelm Primi Regis Angliae.
DM The Domesday Monarchorum of Christ
Church. Edited by D. C. Douglas.
EHD English Historical Documents. Edited
by Dorothy Whitelock.
EHR English Historical Review.
Fauroux Recueil des actes des dues de Normandie
de 911 & 1066. Edited by M. Fauroux.
Florence Florence of Worcester, Chronicon ex
Chroniciis. Edited by B. Thorpe.
Gsill* Christ* Gallia Christiana.
GP William of Malmesbury, De Gestis Pon-
tificum Anglorum.
GR William of Malmesbury, De Gestis Regum
Anglorum.
HE Bede, Historia Ecclesiastics Gent is
ABBREVIATIONS (Con't.)
Hefele-Leclercq Hefele, J.C. Hietoire dee conciles
d» spares les documents originaux.
Eadmer, Histoids Novorum.
K Codex Diplomaticus Aevi Saxonici.
Edited by J. Kemble*
Mansi Mansi, Q. D. Sacrorum Coniliorum Nova
et Amplissima Collectio*
MSH Monuments Germanise Histories.
Ordericus Vitalis Ordericus Vltalis, Historia Ecclesi­
astics.
PL Patrologiae Latinae Cursus CompletUB.
Edited by J. P. Migne.
Round Calendar of Documents preserved in
France. Edited by J. H. Round.
RS Rerum Britannicarum medii aevi scrip-
tores.
Wilkins Concilia Magnae Britanniae et Hiberniae.
Edited by David Wilkins.
v
ABSTRACT
The eigenkirche or proprietary church was an important factor
in the ecclesiastical policy of William I* In previous studies, the
proprietary church was considered purely a local phenomenon. Wil­
liam's religious concerns in Normandy and England demonstrate the
eigenkirche1s role at the local, royal, and international levels.
An examination of the legal sources is critical to understanding
the proprietary church in Anglo-Saxon England, Normandy, and Norman
England. The Anglo-Saxon charters provide important examples of the
private church and monastery in the pre-Conquesb period. In Normandy,
the ducal charters, once inaccessible because of archival problems,
are now available for analysis of the Norman Church. For England,
the Domesday Book yields detailed information about churches and
ecclesiastical property before 1066 and afterwards. This study, in
contrast to former works which relied upon narrative sources, depends
extensively on these legal documents.
The Anglo-Saxon Church, as revealed in the charters, waB a loosely
organized system dominated by private interests. Churches, mona­
steries, and ecclesiastical property were owned outright by individu­
als and corporations (secular and religious). Despite the efforts of
reformers like Duns tan, the Anglo-Saxon Church remained fragmented
until the Conquest. William's invasion of England radically changed
the condition of the Church. The Conqueror introduced his'Norman
ecclesiastical policy. In NormanJy, the duke had gained control over
the Church through feudalism. In particular, allodial lands and
vi
churches of the noble class were feudalised, but that group retained
its independence*
When William conquered England, he created an accentuated form
of feudalism which tied all men and lands to the king* The Church
became enmeshed in the feudal system and was considered part of his
allod, the English kingdom. Though William claimed absolute control,
there were serious difficulties in his eigenikirche policy* Namely,
he could not solve the problem of jurisdiction between dioceses and
monasteries and between feudal and ecclesiastical persons* Moreover,
William's policy directly opposed papal goals towards Ta->gi»nrf which
sought to make the kingdom a papal fief.