 |
 |
medieval-religion: Scholarly discussions of medieval religion and culture I have been away for a few days and have some suggestions and comments on a number of the statements made: 1) When pursuing ecclesiastical cases, the bishop could, indeed, use royal support . See FD Logan, Excommunication and the Secular Arm in Medieval England (Toronto, 1968) 2) Bishops were both ecclesiastical and secular lords but their courts were separate and their officers had different titles, even if, on occasions, they were the same people 3) It was not the bishop's 'suffragans' who held courts in the bishop's absence. A suffragan was a man in episcopal orders employed to carry out duties only a bishop could do (ordination, reconciliation of churches polluted by bloodshed, etc). I have seen instances of suffragans witnessing ecclesiastical trials but never of them presiding. It was the bishop's officials, usually the 'Official Principal', sometimes a 'Commissary' or 'Commissary General' who presided over the consistory court. The Vicar General (sometimes the same man as the Official Principal) and.Commissaries also presided over the bishop's court of audience in his absence. See A Hamilton Thompson, The English Clergy in the Later Middle Ages (OUP, 1947) - including extracts from Bishop Alnwick of Lincoln's court book. 4) Consistory courts were certainly held in Norwich cathedral, although the heresy trials of 1428-31 were almost all held in the chapel of the bishop's palace (Heresy Trials in the Diocese of Norwich, 1428-31, Ed. NP Tanner, Camden, 4th Series, vol 20 (1977)). By contrast, the officials of the same bishop (William Alnwick) held almost all the recorded sessions of his court of audience in Lincoln within that cathedral. Many of the canons were, of course, also episcopal officials, which blurs the division between bishop and cathedral 5) None of this answers the question about prisons..There is some evidence from the Norwich heresy trials. Two heretics were sentenced to 7 years imprisonment, one in Langley Abbey and another in a place to be decided (Tanner, p56, 63), one was brought to trial from the royal gaol of Norwich Castle (p51-2). References to imprisonment without specific places being named are pp 105, 139, 145, 152, 157, 182, 185. I get the impression that they were probably arrested by secular authorities. However, one was arrested on the authority of the bishop and 'sub custodia carcerali in palacio [i.e. the bp's] Norwic' aliquamdiu detentus' (p 200), another was held in the bp's custody (211), another two (one of them certainly in the bishop's palace) were detained by the vicar general (212-3). I seem to remember seeing a reference in Norwich Cathedral records to a Lollard who hanged himself while in the custody of the cathedral priory but cannot find the reference now. For what it's worth, my impression is that the bishops had the ability to imprison people for relatively short times when awaiting trial. Ecclesiastical punishments usually involved penances of ritual beatings and walking with tapers, etc or offerings to shrines or lights. Imprisonment was not common as a punishment after sentence. It is probably for this reason that a location away from the bishop's own property, such as Langley Abbey, might have been chosen for a long-term imprisonment. Does this make sense? Best wishes Rosemary Hayes ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jon Cannon" <[log in to unmask]> To: <[log in to unmask]> Sent: Tuesday, July 18, 2006 6:51 AM Subject: Re: [M-R] bishop's prisons/bishops powers in his church > medieval-religion: Scholarly discussions of medieval religion and culture > > 'this would be a little surprising --in France, at least, the cathedral > church was basically the property of the canons, and i would be very > surprised if there were any judicial proceedings held *within its > fabric*, much less those which concerned the Bishop's exercise of his > own particular rights.' > > Yet the *assumption* of a bishop's consistory court of some kind in the > church is very frequently made in England, and their existence > immediately post-Reformation is a certainty. Yet the Exeter and Norwich > examples I cited are the only two where I can find the question pursued > with any vigour. And I presume the community (secular in one case, > monastic in the other) had parallel powers over its lands, and thus also > needed courts prisons and etc. > > BUT my main interest is your statement about separation of chapter and > bishop in France, which interests me enormously. In England chapters > both secular and monastic could indeed be constitutionally very separate > from their bishop, but in practice there were many areas of overlap - > certainly enough to be able to countenance the idea of a bishop holding > a court in a church. Egs: bishops were far and away the biggest > contributors to major building projects; many members of chapter were on > the bishop's staff (in the secular cathedrals); some cathedrals eg > Exeter are iconographically a colossal stone-and-wood hymn to Episcopal > power. All this blurs the distinction theoretical separation. Bishops > and chapters were far more interlocking in the secular churches than in > the monastic ones. > > I'd be enormously interested to know if you think there are any > differences here with France, as the 'sociology' or culture of secular > and monastic chapters in England, and its potential impact or otherwise > on the fabric, is of great interest to me. > > Jon > > ********************************************************************** > To join the list, send the message: join medieval-religion YOUR NAME > to: [log in to unmask] > To send a message to the list, address it to: > [log in to unmask] > To leave the list, send the message: leave medieval-religion > to: [log in to unmask] > In order to report problems or to contact the list's owners, write to: > [log in to unmask] > For further information, visit our web site: > http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/medieval-religion.html > ********************************************************************** To join the list, send the message: join medieval-religion YOUR NAME to: [log in to unmask] To send a message to the list, address it to: [log in to unmask] To leave the list, send the message: leave medieval-religion to: [log in to unmask] In order to report problems or to contact the list's owners, write to: [log in to unmask] For further information, visit our web site: http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/medieval-religion.html