offices. All these were called the benefices (beneficium) or župa, which was the salary of the župa or administrator. Originally the ruler provided the benefices only for a fixed period; by the end of the 12th century however these offices were hereditary for certain families. Rulers were replaced, each dependent on the magnates, and they lost control over the župas, which became the property of the administrators. However they did not own them outright, and they constantly faced the threat that the next, and perhaps stronger, ruler, would take them away. This was the reason that they exploited their resources in the worst possible manner. They abused their judicial powers in order to maximize their court fines; taxes were extorted not collected. The arrival of the bailiffs of the castle administrators in a village was not dissimilar to that of a marauding army. Free farmers, “heirs” and guests thus preferred to seek protection from various lords and gave up their freedoms (which were of little advantage to them in any case as they only exposed them to the despotism of the župas). Uncertainty resulted from this. The aristocracy was not yet an aristocracy. It held farmlands which it did not own. Freemen paid dearly for their freedom, and the number of free farmers decreased. Although the ruler governed, he had ever fewer resources for this, because the administrators took control of them. Nevertheless society improved, and was ever more autonomous and less dependent on the state. The church now came to play an increasingly important role. Not only did the number of priests and ecclesiastical institutions rise, but their significance did also. Up to 1100, only seven monasteries were founded in Bohemia and Moravia, and these through the offices of the ruler. However between the years 1100–1205, twenty-seven rich monasteries funded by the magnates were established. Above all a large number of churches sprang up in the countryside distant from the castles. There were many more priests and monks, all of whom however were dependent on the founders of their churches. The latter considered the churches and monasteries as their property and made claims on their revenues, most importantly on the tithes. The bishops of Prague and Olomouc had the right to educate and ordain priests, as well as consecrate churches, but they had no influence over the appointment of priests to churches or even over the tithes arising from them. Even the churches with castle parishes were dependent rather on the prince and his administrators rather than on the bishop. An independent organization subordinate to no external power was built up by the Bishop of Olomouc, Jindřich Zdík (in office, 1126–1150), one of the most important personalities of Czech history in the 12th century; the Bishop of Prague joined him in his efforts in the sixth decade of the century. The bishop selected his special administrators and archdeacons from the chapters, and assigned regions to them for the oversight of the lower clergy. They resided for the most part in the bishops’ courts and received their salaries from the same. The old, large castle parishes went into decline and from some colleges of priests there emerged rural chapters. Increasing numbers of priests were required – both spiritual pastors for the ordinary rural churches and educated priests capable of occupying important positions at the court of the bishop or the ruler. The education of simple priests was not that sophisticated: they could read and write, and they had basic knowledge of Latin and the practical liturgy. Frequently they came from the lower levels of society, in some cases from the ranks of the serfs, and thus they were all the more connected with the life of the people. In earlier times, the higher offices
98
D ušan T řeštík
Ukázka elektronické knihy, UID: KOS255673
were occupied mainly by foreigners, above all from the German lands, and indigenous priests were in the minority. From the second half of the 11th century however, in ever greater numbers the capitularies of the Bohemian and Moravian chapters began to send their sons to study at famous schools in French and German territory (celibacy had not yet been established and lay priests were married). These people then occupied the key positions in the ecclesiastical administration and in the service of the ruler. They formed a fraternity joined by bonds of blood and friendship, a community of educated people, a professional intelligentsia. They felt themselves to be Czech, not least because foreigners competed with them in their homeland by taking many important and lucrative positions. However, many became chancellors of the ruler, diplomats in his service and some even reached the level of bishop, as for instance Daniel in Prague and Jindřich Zdík in Olomouc. This intelligentsia’s opinions on the situation in Bohemia and Moravia and the measures required to right them was expressed best in his Latin Chronicle of the Bohemians by the dean of the Prague chapter, Kosmas (c. 1045–1125). He surmised that the holder of sovereignty was the land of the Bohemians, which was not however only a territory, but the politically active group of all Bohemians – a political nation, in fact. This sovereignty had been transferred at some stage by the Bohemians to the first prince, Přemysl, with whom they had agreed that they would voluntarily subordinate themselves to him with all their property and freedom. From the end of the 11th century, Kosmas’s followers promulgated the idea that Bohemia was not subject to the temporal governing prince, but the eternal prince, who would never die – St Wenceslas. On the seals of Vladislav II and his heirs there appeared the inscription “The Peace of St Wenceslas in the Hands of the Prince”. This meant that St Wenceslas was the holder of the government, order and laws; and he merely gave those attributes of power to the prince in trust. Such ideas dominated Bohemian art and spiritual life in the 12th century and hammered home for Bohemians that they were a political nation concentrated about the eternal prince. It was an expression of the confidence of society, of the “Bohemia” or “tribe of St Wenceslas”, as this grouping was also referred to. This society became the sovereign holder of the state. The worlds of the church and of the warriors began to mutually influence and interpenetrate one another. The emergent aristocracy built churches on their farmlands, looking after their artwork and statuary; aristocrats undertook pilgrimages and participated in crusades. They imitated the style of life abroad, looking mainly to French and German models. This was expressed most remarkably in building works. New Romanesque basilicas were constructed above all by monasteries (in Tismice, Doksany, Louka, Třebíč, etc.); the aristocracy built simpler churches, frequently decorated in a rich fashion. The tendency was towards a raised tribune for the aristocrat and his family, while the people remained in the nave (St Jakub’s in Kutná Hora, the church in Červená Řečice, in Záboří nad Labem and many others). On the whole, Czech architecture in the Romanesque style manifested a respectable level in the Central European context; its uniqueness however resided in its expression of the contemporary ideology of the state and the Czech land.
I V . T he C zech S tate in the E ra of P řemyslid P rinces and K ings
/ 99
Ukázka elektronické knihy, UID: KOS255673
2 Roya l T itles a n d Th e ir H is tor ic a l S ignific ance There was a turn in affairs during the rule of Přemysl Otakar I (r. 1197–1230). From the beginning Přemysl energetically joined in the struggle for the Empire which broke out immediately after the death of Henry VI in September 1197. While the camp of the House of Hohenstaufen elected Philip of Swabia, brother of the deceased Emperor, as the Roman king, the opposition favoured young Otto IV of Brunswick, the son of Henry the Lion from the line of Guelphs and a close relation of the English kings. The alternating support of the imperial line of Hohenstaufen along with the enemy Guelphs enabled Přemysl to gain the hereditary royal title in 1198, recognized gradually by all the competing parties including the Pope. At that time the Empire was not able to keep up the pressure on its eastern neighbours. On the contrary Přemysl with his warriors was a welcome ally and a feared opponent of all contenders for the Roman throne. His assistance was appreciated most of all by the Hohenstaufen Frederick II, the Warlike (r. 1211–1250) of Sicily, who was just ascending to the throne of Roman king, and who awarded Přemysl what was called the Golden Bull of Sicily. This extraordinary charter, issued on 26 September 1212 in Basel and endorsed by Fre derick II with his royal Sicilian seal, is one of the founding documents of Czech statehood. Before this, Philip of Swabia (in 1198) and Otto IV of Brunswick (1203) issued binding privilegia for Přemysl and “his” kingdom; these however have not survived and to a great extent are incorporated into the Golden Bull of Sicily. In it Frederick confirmed the royal title of Czech rulers, allowing Přemysl and his heirs to use it hereditarily and without any tribute to the Empire. Furthermore he recognized the right of Bohemian kings to approve native bishops. To these articles, most likely contained in the earlier privilegia of his forebears, Frederick evidently added new freedoms. Neither the Bohemian king nor his successors were enjoined to attend the Imperial Diets other than in Bamberg, Nuremberg and, under certain conditions, in Merseburg. For imperial coronal journeys to Rome they had to send either 300 armoured soldiers or pay 300 silver talents. With the Golden Bull of Sicily Přemysl achieved his main political goals. The Empire formally recognized that the election of the Czech ruler was an internal matter, and that therefore all previous interventions (mainly in the years 1172–1197) were of an invasive nature. The Bohemian kingdom, without seceding from the Empire, remained in practical terms an independent formation. Since the Bohemian king was at the same time one of the foremost imperial princes, in the future he could influence his western neighbours more assertively than the Emperor could the Bohemian crown lands. The issue of the Golden Bull of Sicily was a step of fundamental constitutional significance; but the circumstances surrounding the granting of the hereditary kingdom had even wider ramifications. The royal title was at this time generally seen as a feature of independence and sovereignty. In the tradition of Czech foreign policy it had even deeper roots. As early as 1000, Central Europe witnessed the first wave of granting of royal titles, which affected Hungary and partly Poland. The emergence of a kingdom at the turn of the millennium
100
J osef Ž emlička
Ukázka elektronické knihy, UID: KOS255673