Zentralität in der Peripherie: Kirchengebäude als Orte des »Sonderfriedens« in den frühmittelalterlichen leges

In the early middle ages, specific protective rights were granted, among others, to church buildings. While legal historians investigating the legal protection of church buildings up till now stressed the jurisdictional concept of a »higher peace«, cultural history has drawn attention to the c...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Miriam Czock
Format: Article
Language:deu
Published: Max Planck Institute for Legal History and Legal Theory 2015-01-01
Series:Rechtsgeschichte - Legal History
Subjects:
Online Access:http://data.rg.mpg.de/rechtsgeschichte/rg23_068czock.pdf
id doaj-cdd4e1d292fe488f860eb48b2b9539f9
record_format Article
spelling doaj-cdd4e1d292fe488f860eb48b2b9539f92021-03-02T05:44:27ZdeuMax Planck Institute for Legal History and Legal TheoryRechtsgeschichte - Legal History1619-49932195-96172015-01-01Rg 23688110.12946/rg23/068-081975Zentralität in der Peripherie: Kirchengebäude als Orte des »Sonderfriedens« in den frühmittelalterlichen legesMiriam CzockIn the early middle ages, specific protective rights were granted, among others, to church buildings. While legal historians investigating the legal protection of church buildings up till now stressed the jurisdictional concept of a »higher peace«, cultural history has drawn attention to the concepts of sanctuary and immunity. Drawing upon sources spanning from the Lex Salica to the capitularies and canon law of the 9th century, the present article argues that peace, sanctuary and immunity are not to be understood as rooted in one concept, as is generally done, but rather they have to be understood as different legal concepts that only occasionally come together. Furthermore, I propose that the protection of church buildings is not an expression of taboo related to the sacral sphere of the king or the sacrality of the church building, but instead must be seen as rooted in a concept of honor that includes a spatial dimension and can be traced back to the motif of ›fear of God‹, but is ultimately guaranteed by law. The different concepts thus refer to the notion of churches not just as cult centres, but public protected areas, whose protection is part of a complex and comprehensive effort to restrict ‘self-help’. From the perspective of the issue of centrality and periphery, the example clearly shows that this opposition is completely dissolved because places were created, instituted through legal protection, even at the periphery.http://data.rg.mpg.de/rechtsgeschichte/rg23_068czock.pdfMPIeR
collection DOAJ
language deu
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Miriam Czock
spellingShingle Miriam Czock
Zentralität in der Peripherie: Kirchengebäude als Orte des »Sonderfriedens« in den frühmittelalterlichen leges
Rechtsgeschichte - Legal History
MPIeR
author_facet Miriam Czock
author_sort Miriam Czock
title Zentralität in der Peripherie: Kirchengebäude als Orte des »Sonderfriedens« in den frühmittelalterlichen leges
title_short Zentralität in der Peripherie: Kirchengebäude als Orte des »Sonderfriedens« in den frühmittelalterlichen leges
title_full Zentralität in der Peripherie: Kirchengebäude als Orte des »Sonderfriedens« in den frühmittelalterlichen leges
title_fullStr Zentralität in der Peripherie: Kirchengebäude als Orte des »Sonderfriedens« in den frühmittelalterlichen leges
title_full_unstemmed Zentralität in der Peripherie: Kirchengebäude als Orte des »Sonderfriedens« in den frühmittelalterlichen leges
title_sort zentralität in der peripherie: kirchengebäude als orte des »sonderfriedens« in den frühmittelalterlichen leges
publisher Max Planck Institute for Legal History and Legal Theory
series Rechtsgeschichte - Legal History
issn 1619-4993
2195-9617
publishDate 2015-01-01
description In the early middle ages, specific protective rights were granted, among others, to church buildings. While legal historians investigating the legal protection of church buildings up till now stressed the jurisdictional concept of a »higher peace«, cultural history has drawn attention to the concepts of sanctuary and immunity. Drawing upon sources spanning from the Lex Salica to the capitularies and canon law of the 9th century, the present article argues that peace, sanctuary and immunity are not to be understood as rooted in one concept, as is generally done, but rather they have to be understood as different legal concepts that only occasionally come together. Furthermore, I propose that the protection of church buildings is not an expression of taboo related to the sacral sphere of the king or the sacrality of the church building, but instead must be seen as rooted in a concept of honor that includes a spatial dimension and can be traced back to the motif of ›fear of God‹, but is ultimately guaranteed by law. The different concepts thus refer to the notion of churches not just as cult centres, but public protected areas, whose protection is part of a complex and comprehensive effort to restrict ‘self-help’. From the perspective of the issue of centrality and periphery, the example clearly shows that this opposition is completely dissolved because places were created, instituted through legal protection, even at the periphery.
topic MPIeR
url http://data.rg.mpg.de/rechtsgeschichte/rg23_068czock.pdf
work_keys_str_mv AT miriamczock zentralitatinderperipheriekirchengebaudealsortedessonderfriedensindenfruhmittelalterlichenleges
_version_ 1724242378369269760