Sunteți pe pagina 1din 10

448  

later became hereditary, as also happened in the Frankish kingdom.97


The autonomous rights of rulership, which the counts gained from
their private possessions, meant that they became increasingly inde-
pendent at times when the duchy underwent a crisis. The southern
borders of the duchy were guarded by prepositi custodes98 and a[u]ctores
montani,99 who maintained contact with the ducal palaces. From the
time of Odilo onwards, the Bavarian dukes seem to have deliber-
ately developed a system of office-holders, whom they juridically
advanced and with whose support they could sustain their power
against the genealogiae and the developing nobility.100
The role of Christianisation in the development of the Bavarians,
and in this process of integration of the various groups from which
they were composed, can only be properly estimated with diffi-
culty. The Roman population had been Christian since Late Anti-
quity and there seems to be a marked continuity of individual
cults of saints,101 like that of St Florian and the forty martyrs of
Lauriacum,102 of St Maximilian in Bischofshofen103 or St Afra in

pp. 16–7; Störmer and Mayr, “Herzog und Adel”, pp. 154–5; Jahn, Ducatus
Baiuvariorum, pp. 259–61; Wolfram, Salzburg, Bayern, Österreich, pp. 156–8; 166.
97
Jahn, Ducatus Baiuvariorum, pp. 240–4; Wolfram, Salzburg, Bayern, Österreich,
p. 158.
98
Vita Corbiniani 23, p. 128. See Jahn, Ducatus Baiuvariorum, pp. 103–4; 245.
99
Vita Corbiniani 15, p. 110. See Jahn, Ducatus Baiuvariorum, p. 100.
100
Jahn, Ducatus Baiuvariorum, pp. 254–6.
101
V. Miloj‘iÆ, “Zur Frage der Zeitstellung des Oratoriums von Mühlthal an der
Isar”, Bayerische Vorgeschichtsblätter 28 (1963) pp. 117–38, esp. pp. 135–6.
102
K. Reindel, “Die Bistumsorganisation im Alpen-Donau-Raum in der Spätan-
tike und im Frühmittelalter”, Mitteilungen des Instituts für Österreichische Geschichtsforschung
72 (1964) pp. 277–310, esp. pp. 283–4; L. Eckhart, “Das Nach- und Weiterleben der
Römerzeit in Oberösterreich”, Baiernzeit in Oberösterreich. Das Land zwischen Inn und
Enns vom Ausgang der Antike bis zum Ende des 8. Jahrhunderts, Kataloge des Oberösterreichi-
schen Landesmuseums 97 (Linz 1977) pp. 27–38, esp. pp. 32–3; B. Ulm, “Patrozinien
in Spätantike und Agilolfingerzeit”, Baiernzeit in Oberösterreich. Das Land zwischen Inn
und Enns vom Ausgang der Antike bis zum Ende des 8. Jahrhunderts, Kataloge des Oberöster-
reichischen Landesmuseums 97 (Linz 1977) pp. 189–212, esp. pp. 193–5; Wolff,
“Die Kontinuität städtischen Lebens”, p. 305. For sceptical remarks regarding con-
tinuity of the grave of the saint see id., “Die Anfänge des Christentums in Ostraetien,
Ufernoricum und Nordwestpannonien: Bemerkungen zum Regenwunder und zum
hl. Florian”, Ostbairische Grenzmarken 31 (1989) pp. 27–45, esp. pp. 35–7.
103
Hageneder, “Die kirchliche Organisation im Zentralalpenraum”, pp. 228–9;
Wolfram, 378–907: Grenzen und Räume, p. 108; H. Koller, “Die bairische Kirchen-
organisation des 8. Jahrhunderts: Ansätze, Konzepte, Verwirklichung”, Das Christentum
im bairischen Raum von den Anfängen bis ins 11. Jahrhundert, ed. E. Boshof and H. Wolff,
Passauer historische Forschungen 8 (Köln-Wien 1994) pp. 273–89, esp. pp. 284–5;
F.R. Erkens, “Die Ursprünge der Lorcher Tradition im Lichte archäologischer, histo-
  449

Augsburg.104 There is likely also an early date for the many church
dedications to St Laurentius, at least some of which had origins in
the Roman period.105 Among the Germanic groups, the number of
cults influenced by Arianism is thought to have been small,106 just
as it is possible to point to people who had hardly had contact with
Christianity. Possibly around the year 615, Eustasius of Luxeuil, likely
accompanied by the Burgundian Agilolfing, Agilus,107 went to the
Bavarians.108 He had previously worked as a missionary among the
Warasks, who lived in the vicinity of Luxeuil and of whom it was
still said in the eighth century that they once came from a district

riographischer und urkundlicher Zeugnisse”, ibid., pp. 423–59, esp. pp. 431; 440;
H. Berg, “Christentum im bayerischen Raum um 700”, Der heilige Willibald—Kloster-
bischof oder Bistumsgründer, ed. H. Dickerhof, E. Reiter and S. Weinfurter, Eichstätter
Studien NF 30 (Regensburg 1990) pp. 69–113, esp. pp. 93–4; Jahn, Ducatus Baiuva-
riorum, pp. 64–8; 86.
104
Venantius Fortunatus, Vita Sancti Martini 4,640–643, ed. F. Leo, MGH AA
4,1 (Berlin 1881) p. 368. F. Prinz, “Augsburg im Frankenreich”, Die Ausgrabungen
in St. Ulrich und Afra in Augsburg 1961–1968, ed. J. Werner, Münchener Beiträge
zur Vor- und Frühgeschichte 23 (München 1977) pp. 375–98, esp. pp. 389–90;
V. Bierbrauer, “Alamannische Besiedlung Augsburgs und seines näheren Umlandes”,
Geschichte der Stadt Augsburg von der Römerzeit bis zur Gegenwart, ed. G. Gottlieb, W. Baer,
J. Becker, J. Bellot, K. Filser, P. Fried, W. Reinhard and B. Schimmelpfennig
(Stuttgart 1984) pp. 87–100, esp. pp. 88–91; W. Sage, “Frühes Christentum und
Kirchen aus der Zeit des Überganges”, ibid., pp. 100–12, esp. pp. 102–5; Wolff,
“Die Kontinuität städtischen Lebens”, p. 301; Wolfram, 378–907: Grenzen und Räume,
p. 103.
105
G. Diepolder, “Altbayerische Laurentiuspatrozinien”, Aus Bayerns Frühzeit. F. Wag-
ner zum 75. Geburtstag, ed. J. Werner, Schriftenreihe zur bayerischen Landesgeschichte
62 (München 1962) pp. 371–96, esp. pp. 394–6.
106
Wolfram, 378–907: Grenzen und Räume, pp. 96–7; Wiesinger, “Gotische Lehnwörter
im Bairischen”, esp. pp. 188–92; K. Schäferdiek, “Gab es eine gotisch-arianische
Mission im süddeutschen Raum?”, Zeitschrift für bayerische Landesgeschichte 45 (1982)
pp. 239–57, esp. pp. 247–50, did not find real traces of Arian mission in the
Bavarian vocabulary. He considers the arrival of Arian groups to have been rather
insignificant.
107
Zöllner, “Das Geschlecht der Agilolfinger”, p. 91.
108
Jonas of Bobbio, Vita Columbani 2,8, pp. 243–4; and, based on this, the Vita
Sadalbergae 7, ed. B. Krusch, MGH SSrM 5 (Hannover-Leipzig 1910) p. 54. See
further Wolfram, “Christianisierung”, pp. 182–3; Kahl, “Die Baiern und ihre Nach-
barn”, p. 190; Wiesinger, “Gotische Lehnwörter im Bairischen”, pp. 188–9; G. Mayr,
“Frühes Christentum in Baiern”, Die Bajuwaren. Von Severin bis Tassilo 488–788,
ed. H. Dannheimer and H. Dopsch (Rosenheim-Salzburg 1988) pp. 281–6, esp.
pp. 282–3; Wolfram, 378–907: Grenzen und Räume, p. 104; Berg, “Christentum”,
pp. 73–4.
450  

called Stadevanga near the rivers Naab and Regen109 (where they
were possibly known as Naristi or Varisti as early as the time of Taci-
tus).110 They had been banished from there to Burgundia. Little is
known of other missionary activities, although they clearly did take
place. An example is the failure-ridden journey of Agrestius before
the year 626, which moreover had Iro-Frankish involvements.111
It is not until the time of Duke Theodo112 that stronger ducal
influence on the ad hoc arrangement of the church-organisation113

109
Egilbert, Vita Ermenfredi 1, ed. J. Carnandet, Acta Sanctorum Ordinis sancti
Benedicti (Paris-Rom 1867) p. 107: Temporibus igitur Clotarii regis Francorum a beatus
vir Eustasius, Luxoviensis monasterii abbas, jubente S. Columbano antecessore suo, progrediens
Warescos ad fidem Domini nostri Jesu Christi convertit; qui olim de pago, ut ferunt, qui dicitur
Stadevanga, qui situs est circa Regnum flumen, partibus orienti fuerant ejecti, quique contra
Burgundiones pugnam inierunt, sed a primo certamine terga vertentes, dehinc advenerunt, atque in
pugnam reversi victores quoque effecti in eodem pago Warescorum consederunt. Rejecting a late
eighth-century date for this source: Zeiß, “Bemerkungen I”, pp. 354–356; though,
see also Löwe, “Die Herkunft der Bajuwaren”, p. 27; Schwarz, “Baiern und Naristen
in Burgund”, pp. 380–2; id., “Die bairische Landnahme um Regensburg”, pp. 53–8;
id., “Herkunft und Einwanderungszeit”, pp. 42–4; id., “Das Ende der Völkerwan-
derungszeit”, pp. 50–3; id., “Die Naristenfrage in namenkundlicher Sicht”, Zeitschrift
für bayerische Landesgeschichte 32 (1969) pp. 397–476, esp. pp. 399–405; 454–5; 468–76;
id., “Neues und Altes zur Geschichte der Naristen”, Jahrbuch für fränkische Landesforschung
22 (1962) pp. 281–9, esp. pp. 286–9; Zöllner, “Die Herkunft der Agilulfinger”, pp.
119–21.
110
Tacitus, Germania 42,1, ed. G. Perl, Griechische und lateinische Quellen zur Frühgeschichte
Mitteleuropas bis zur Mitte des 1. Jahrtausends unserer Zeit, vol. 2, ed. J. Herrmann,
Schriften und Quellen der Alten Welt 37,2 (Berlin 1990) pp. 118–9: Iuxta Hermunduros
Naristi ac deinde Marcomani et Quadi agunt. According to H. Bengtson, “Neues zur
Geschichte der Naristen”, Historia 8 (1959) pp. 213–21, esp. pp. 220–1, the Narists,
who lived on the northern Danube in Upper Austria during the middle Empire,
have no connection with the Burgundian Warasks. Neither were they involved in
Bavarian ethnogenesis.
111
Jonas of Bobbio, Vita Columbani 2,9, pp. 246–7. K. Bosl, “Der ‘Adelsheilige’,
Idealtypus und Wirklichkeit, Gesellschaft und Kultur im merowingerzeitlichen Bayern
des 7. und 8. Jahrhunderts”, Speculum Historiale. Geschichte im Spiegel von Geschichtsschrei-
bung und Geschichtsdeutung, ed. C. Bauer, L. Boehm and M. Müller (Freiburg-München
1965) pp. 167–87, esp. pp. 169–70; F. Prinz, Frühes Mönchtum im Frankenreich. Kultur
und Gesellschaft in Gallien, den Rheinlanden und Bayern am Beispiel der monastischen Entwicklung
(4. bis 8. Jahrhundert) (2nd edn., München 1988), pp. 356–8; id., “Augsburg im
Frankenreich”, pp. 380; 386–7; Wolfram, “Christianisierung”, pp. 182–3; id., 378–907:
Grenzen und Räume, pp. 104–5; id., Salzburg, Bayern, Österreich, p. 43; Mayr, “Frühes
Christentum in Baiern”, pp. 283–4; Berg, “Christentum”, p. 76.
112
E. Klebel, “Zur Geschichte des Herzogs Theodo”, Verhandlungen des Historischen
Vereins für die Oberpfalz und Regensburg 99 (1958) pp. 165–205 [repr. Zur Geschichte der
Bayern, ed. K. Bosl, Wege der Forschung 60 (Darmstadt 1965) pp. 172–224].
113
Koller, “Die bairische Kirchenorganisation”, pp. 279–87; Erkens, “Die Ursprünge
der Lorcher Tradition”, pp. 448–50; Berg, “Christentum”, pp. 69–78; Jahn, Ducatus
Baiuvariorum, pp. 157–9.
  451

becomes evident. After the death of the mayor of the palace, Pippin
II, in 714, Theodo intended to further the development of the church-
organisation in his lands and to install a metropolitan see in
Regensburg; the residences of his sons at Freising, Salzburg, and
Passau were to become episcopal sees.114 With the objective of
more intensive Christian penetration of the lands over which he
ruled,115 Theodo had earlier called Erhard,116 who already worked
in Regensburg, into the region and later he sought out Rupert,117
who was a relative of his wife, Folchaid, and bishop of Worms.
He also contacted Emmeram of Poitiers118 as well as Corbinian of

114
Hageneder, “Die kirchliche Organisation im Zentralalpenraum”, pp. 222–4;
Reindel, “Bistumsorganisation”, pp. 306–7; id., “Salzburg und die Agilolfinger”, pp.
66–7; H. Schmidinger, “Das Papsttum und die bayerische Kirche—Bonifatius als
Gegenspieler Virgils”, Virgil von Salzburg. Missionar und Gelehrter, ed. H. Dopsch and
R. Juffinger (Salzburg 1985) pp. 92–101, esp. pp. 92–3; Reindel, “Das Zeitalter der
Agilolfinger”, pp. 226–7; H. Berg, “Zur Organisation der bayerischen Kirche und
zu den bayerischen Synoden des 8. Jahrhunderts”, Typen der Ethnogenese unter beson-
derer Berücksichtigung der Bayern 1, ed. W. Pohl and H. Wolfram, Denkschriften der
Österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, philosophisch-historische Klasse 201.
Veröffentlichungen der Kommission für Frühmittelalterforschung 12 (Wien 1990)
pp. 181–97, esp. p. 181; Wolfram, 378–907: Grenzen und Räume, pp. 82–3; 109–10;
E. Boshof, “Agilolfingisches Herzogtum und angelsächsische Mission: Bonifatius und
die bayerische Bistumsorganisation von 739”, Ostbairische Grenzmarken 31 (1989) pp.
11–26, esp. pp. 15–6; R. Kaiser, “Bistumsgründung und Kirchenorganisation im 8.
Jahrhundert”, Der heilige Willibald—Klosterbischof oder Bistumsgründer, ed. H. Dickerhof,
E. Reiter and S. Weinfurter, Eichstätter Studien NF 30 (Regensburg 1990) pp.
29–67, esp. pp. 53–6; Jahn, Ducatus Baiuvariorum, pp. 73–5; 98–9; 120–1.
115
Mayr, “Frühes Christentum in Baiern”, pp. 284–6; Berg, “Christentum”, pp.
83–112; W. Störmer, “Die bayerische Herzogskirche”, Der heilige Willibald—Klosterbischof
oder Bistumsgründer, ed. H. Dickerhof, E. Reiter and S. Weinfurter, Eichstätter Studien
NF 30 (Regensburg 1990) pp. 115–42, esp. pp. 116–21; Jahn, Ducatus Baiuvariorum,
pp. 31–73.
116
Mayr, “Frühes Christentum in Baiern”, p. 284.
117
H. Wolfram, “Der heilige Rupert und die antikarolingische Adelsopposition”, Mit-
teilungen des Instituts für Österreichische Geschichtsforschung 80 (1972) pp. 4–34, esp. pp. 29–
30; id., “Der Heilige Rupert in Salzburg”, Frühes Mönchtum in Salzburg, ed. E. Zwink,
Salzburg Diskussionen 4 (Salzburg 1983) pp. 81–92, esp. p. 88; id., “Die Zeit der
Agilolfinger. Rupert und Virgil”, Geschichte Salzburgs, vol. 1,1: Vorgeschichte, Altertum,
Mittelalter, ed. H. Dopsch (Salzburg 1981) pp. 121–56, esp. pp. 125–34; Reindel,
“Salzburg und die Agilolfinger”, pp. 68–9; Wolfram, 378–907: Grenzen und Räume,
pp. 105–9; Berg, “Christentum”, pp. 83–96; Jahn, Ducatus Baiuvariorum, pp. 48–69.
118
Klebel, “Zur Geschichte des Herzogs Theodo”, pp. 177–86; Wolfram, “Ethno-
genesen im frühmittelalterlichen Donau- und Ostalpenraum”, pp. 131–2; id., 378–907:
Grenzen und Räume, p. 109; Boshof, “Agilolfingisches Herzogtum”, pp. 13–4; G. Mayr,
“Zur Todeszeit des Hl. Emmeram und zur frühen Geschichte des Klosters Herren-
chiemsee. Bemerkungen zur Schenkung des Ortlaip in Helfendorf ”, Zeitschrift für
bayerische Landesgeschichte 34 (1971) pp. 358–73; Berg, “Christentum”, pp. 96–106;
Jahn, Ducatus Baiuvariorum, pp. 40–7.
452  

Melun.119 These plans for establishing a church-organisation initially


failed, in part because of the quarrels among Theodo’s sons and
grandchildren immediately after his death. Not entirely without
reason, they were afraid of growing Frankish influence on the restruc-
turing of Church matters, and of Frankish military campaigns under-
taken in reaction to the Agilolfing disputes.120 It was not until 739
that Duke Odilo,121 born into the family of Alemannic Agilolfings
and appointed by Charles Martel, could finish the organisation of
the church with the support of Boniface.122 Even so, he was not able
to elevate Regensburg fully to the status of an archbishopric, nor
was he immediately able to delimit clearly the various bishoprics.123
The newly created church-organisation was rounded off by the found-
ing of the see of Neuburg on the Danube at some uncertain date
between 741 and 760,124 as well as the founding of the bishopric of

119
Berg, “Christentum”, pp. 106–12; Störmer, “Die bayerische Herzogskirche”,
pp. 121–3; Jahn, Ducatus Baiuvariorum, pp. 69–73.
120
G. Mayr, “Neuerliche Anmerkungen zur Todeszeit des Heiligen Emmeram
und zur Kirchenpolitik Herzog Theodos”, Typen der Ethnogenese unter besonderer Berücksichti-
gung der Bayern 1, ed. W. Pohl and H. Wolfram, Denkschriften der Österreichischen
Akademie der Wissenschaften, philosophisch-historische Klasse 201. Veröffentlichun-
gen der Kommission für Frühmittelalterforschung 12 (Wien 1990) pp. 199–215,
esp. pp. 214–5; Störmer, “Die bayerische Herzogskirche”, pp. 121–3; Jahn, Ducatus
Baiuvariorum, pp. 75; 101.
121
Zöllner, “Die Herkunft der Agilulfinger”, pp. 126–33; J. Jarnut, “Studien über
Herzog Odilo (736–748)”, Mitteilungen des Instituts für Österreichische Geschichtsforschung
85 (1977) pp. 273–84, esp. pp. 278–81; Wolfram, “Baiern und das Frankenreich”,
pp. 134–5; Wolfram, 378–907: Grenzen und Räume, p. 84; Jahn, Ducatus Baiuvariorum,
pp. 123–32.
122
H. Löwe, “Bonifatius und die bayerisch-fränkische Spannung”, Jahrbuch für fränki-
sche Landesforschung 15 (1955) pp. 85–127 [repr. Zur Geschichte der Bayern, ed. K. Bosl,
Wege der Forschung 60 (Darmstadt 1965) pp. 264–328, esp. pp. 280–6]; Reindel,
“Bistumsorganisation”, pp. 307–9; Wolfram, 378–907: Grenzen und Räume, pp. 110–1;
Kaiser, “Bistumsgründung”, pp. 60–2; Störmer, “Die bayerische Herzogskirche”,
pp. 124–6; Jahn, Ducatus Baiuvariorum, pp. 139–41.
123
Schmidinger, “Das Papsttum und die bayerische Kirche”, pp. 93–5; Störmer,
“Die bayerische Herzogskirche”, pp. 126–7. J. Jahn, “Bayerische ‘Pfalzgrafen’”, pp.
86–7 and 98–9, denies that Odilo wanted to create a separate church-province.
The new dioceses from this point of view were not supported by Odilo, who rather
focused on ducal monasteries as elements of Christian penetration of the land. See
also Jahn, Ducatus Baiuvariorum, pp. 152–3; 169–71; 372; id., “Hausmeier und
Herzöge”, pp. 337–8. H. Wanderwitz, “Der Libellus Virgilii und das Verhältnis
von Herzögen und Bischöfen in Bayern”, Virgil von Salzburg. Missionar und Gelehrter,
ed. H. Dopsch and R. Juffinger (Salzburg 1985) pp. 357–61, esp. pp. 359–60, has
expressed similar opinions.
124
P. Fried, “Bischof Simpert und das Bistum Neuburg-Staffelsee”, Jahrbuch des
  453

Eichstätt between 741 and the middle of the century, which hap-
pened as a result of the handing over of the expanded Bavarian
Nordgau to the Frankish mayors of the palace.125 Cooperation with
Frankish institutions in the organisation of the Church may possibly
have been the reason for Odilo’s brief expulsion, and his subsequent
exile in 740/41 to the court of the mayors of the palace. During
this period, Odilo’s marriage with Hiltrud, daughter of Charles Martel
and sister of Pippin III and Carloman, may have commenced.126
This wedding provided further justification for the future antagonis-
tic attitude of the Agilolfings towards the Carolingians.127 However,
it appears that Odilo was reserved in his opinion of the newly founded
bishoprics. In order to intensify his power, he, as later his son Tassilo
III, concentrated on founding monasteries and cells, either doing so
himself or through cooperation with Bavarian nobles.128

5. What is the role of kings in this development?

Through skillful politics, the Agilolfing dukes managed first of all to


liberate themselves from the role of the dukes appointed by the
Merovingian king, and then to attain for many years a position equal

Vereins für Augsburger Bistumsgeschichte 12 (1978) pp. 181–5, esp. pp. 182–5. But see
also Jahn, Ducatus Baiuvariorum, pp. 404–7.
125
S. Weinfurter, “Das Bistum Willibalds im Dienste des Königs. Eichstätt im
frühen Mittelalter”, Zeitschrift für bayerische Landesgeschichte 50 (1987) pp. 3–40, esp.
pp. 14–22; A. Kraus, “Der heilige Willibald von Eichstätt: Person, Zeit, Werk”, Der
heilige Willibald—Klosterbischof oder Bistumsgründer, ed. H. Dickerhof, E. Reiter and
S. Weinfurter, Eichstätter Studien NF 30 (Regensburg 1990) pp. 9–28, esp. pp.
20–7; H. Dickerhof and S. Weinfurter, “Summa historica”, ibid., pp. 245–61, esp.
253–61; Jahn, Ducatus Baiuvariorum, pp. 159–63.
126
Contra the supposition of this expulsion, which is only described in the Breves
Notitiae 7, ed. W. Hauthaler, Salzburger Urkundenbuch, vol. 1: Traditionskodizes (Salzburg
1910) p. 27, see Zeiß, “Bemerkungen I”, pp. 356–8. But see also Zöllner, “Die
Herkunft der Agilulfinger”, pp. 131–2; Jarnut, “Studien über Herzog Odilo”, pp.
281–4; and Wolfram, 378–907: Grenzen und Räume, p. 84. Further, see Jahn, Ducatus
Baiuvariorum, pp. 172–8; 248–9; id., “Hausmeier und Herzöge”, pp. 338–40.
127
Differently J. Jahn, Ducatus Baiuvariorum, p. 190, who considers the Frankish-
Bavarian war of 743 as the “definitive recognition of Odilos dukedom”. See also,
on the ever changing and by no means always negative relations between Agilolfings
and Carolingians, id., “Hausmeier und Herzöge”, pp. 317–8; 330–43.
128
Id., Ducatus Baiuvariorum, pp. 192–220.
454  

to that of the kings.129 To achieve this, they took advantage of peri-


ods of weakness suffered by the Frankish kings, the increasingly open
conflict with the ambitious mayors of the palace, and alliances estab-
lished with neighbouring Germanic groups.130 In particular, the mar-
riages made with members of the Merovingian family, the Lombard
royal house and Lombard dukes, as well as with the Alemannic ducal
house and sometimes with Carolingian mayors of the palace and
their female relatives, raised the status of the Agilolfings. For nearly
a century they were related to the kings of the Lombards, and for
a time to the dukes of the Alemans, but above all the family was
very influential in the Austrasian-Burgundian area, in Alsace, and in
the region of the middle Rhine and Thuringia.131
However, the ambition of becoming equal in status to royalty, and
the increasing self-consciousness of the Agilolfings, attracted the con-
stant threat of military reprisals by the Frankish kings. In the end,
the trial of Tassilo III and his subsequent monastic imprisonment
set in motion the downfall of the Agilolfings and the end of the old
Bavarian duchy. Despite the Lex Baiuvariorum, which was influenced
by the Merovingian kings to a considerable extent, and the eleva-
tion of the Agilolfings to the position of dukes, the Merovingians
and the Frankish mayors of the palace retained their control over
appointments to the duchy. Garibald I and Tassilo I (circa 591) seem
certainly to have been appointed by Frankish kings. Odilo, of the
family of Alemannic dukes,132 was appointed duke by Charles Martel.

129
Jarnut, Agilolfingerstudien, pp. 91–2.
130
Jahn, Ducatus Baiuvariorum, pp. 178–85.
131
Werner, “Bedeutende Adelsfamilien”, pp. 108–15; J. Jarnut, “Beiträge zu den
fränkisch-bayerisch-langobardischen Beziehungen im 7. und 8. Jahrhundert”, Zeitschrift
für bayerische Landesgeschichte 39 (1976) pp. 331–52, esp. pp. 341–2; Friese, Studien zur
Herrschaftsgeschichte des fränkischen Adels, pp. 163–7; Zöllner, “Das Geschlecht der
Agilolfinger”, pp. 87–8; W. Störmer, “Bayerisch-ostfränkische Beziehungen vom 7.
bis zum frühen 9. Jahrhundert”, Die Bayern und ihre Nachbarn 1, ed. H. Wolfram and
A. Schwarcz, Denkschriften der Österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften,
philosophisch-historische Klasse 179. Veröffentlichungen der Kommission für Früh-
mittelalterforschung 8 (Wien 1989) pp. 227–52, esp. pp. 248–52; Jarnut, Agilolfinger-
studien, pp. 41–3; 57–78; 86–9; W. Störmer, “Das Herzogsgeschlecht der Agilolfinger”,
Die Bajuwaren. Von Severin bis Tassilo 488–788, ed. H. Dannheimer and H. Dopsch
(Rosenheim-Salzburg 1988) pp. 141–52, esp. pp. 142–8.
132
Jarnut, “Studien über Herzog Odilo”, pp. 273–8; Kahl, “Die Baiern und ihre
Nachbarn”, pp. 219–20; J. Jarnut, “Genealogie und politische Bedeutung der agilol-
fingischen Herzöge”, Mitteilungen des Instituts für Österreichische Geschichtsforschung 90
(1991) pp. 1–22, esp. pp. 2–5; 12–5.
  455

Tassilo III, too, owed his rule to the mayor of the palace, Pippin III.
The family relationship between Odilo and Tassilo III, and Pippin
III and Charlemagne, respectively, did not improve the situation for
the Agilolfings. In fact, it contributed to a hopeless situation lead-
ing to a conflict between Tassilo III and Pippin III, which in the
end made Charlemagne decide to depose the duke.133 It was not
only with the Aquitanian campaign in the year 763, during which
the breach134 between Tassilo III and the Frankish king became
evident, that the former began to behave in a royal manner. The
signs of this royal interpretation of rulership included: his marriage to
Liutpirc, daughter of the Lombard King, Desiderius;135 the amicitia
with Charlemagne established in 771/72;136 his alliance with his east-
ern Avar neighbours;137 his role at the synods of Aschheim, Dingolfing
and Neuching as lord over a Bavarian Church—or rather, ducal
Church138—as well as his relations with the papacy;139 his disposal
of a treasure, which, significantly, was taken away from him in 788;140

133
On the relationship between Tassilo III, Pippin III and Charlemagne see
M. Becher, Eid und Herrschaft. Untersuchungen zum Herrscherethos Karls des Großen (Sigma-
ringen 1993) pp. 21–74. See also H. Wolfram, “Tassilo III. und Karl der Große—
Das Ende der Agilolfinger”, Die Bajuwaren. Von Severin bis Tassilo 488–788, ed. H. Dann-
heimer and H. Dopsch (Rosenheim-Salzburg 1988) pp. 160–6.
134
Becher, Eid und Herrschaft, pp. 45–51; Jahn, Ducatus Baiuvariorum, pp. 371–5.
135
Wolfram, “Das Fürstentum Tassilos III.”, p. 164; Schmid, “Bayern und Italien”,
pp. 71–2; 74.
136
Jahn, Ducatus Baiuvariorum, pp. 467–8; Jarnut, “Genealogie und politische Bedeu-
tung”, pp. 18–9.
137
Wolfram, “Das Fürstentum Tassilos III.”, pp. 171–3; id., 378–907: Grenzen und
Räume, pp. 91–2; Kahl, “Die Baiern und ihre Nachbarn”, p. 211; P. Classen, “Bayern
und die politischen Mächte im Zeitalter Karls des Großen”, Die Anfänge des Klosters
Kremsmünster, ed. S. Haider, Mitteilungen des Oberösterreichischen Landesarchivs,
Ergänzungsband 2 (Linz 1978) pp. 169–87, esp. p. 181; L. Kolmer, “Zur Kommen-
dation und Absetzung Tassilos III.”, Zeitschrift für bayerische Landesgeschichte 43 (1980)
pp. 291–327, esp. pp. 323–4.
138
W. Hartmann and H. Dopsch, “Bistümer, Synoden und Metropolitanverfas-
sung”, Die Bajuwaren. Von Severin bis Tassilo 488–788, ed. H. Dannheimer and H. Dopsch
(Rosenheim-Salzburg 1988) pp. 318–26, esp. pp. 319–22; Berg, “Zur Organisation
der bayerischen Kirche”, p. 191; Wolfram, 378–907: Grenzen und Räume, p. 89; Stör-
mer, “Die bayerische Herzogskirche”, pp. 131–3; Jahn, Ducatus Baiuvariorum, p. 223;
id., “Hausmeier und Herzöge”, pp. 331–2.
139
Wolfram, “Das Fürstentum Tassilos III.”, p. 165; Classen, “Bayern und die
politischen Mächte”, pp. 175–6; Jahn, Ducatus Baiuvariorum, pp. 392–4; 469–70;
Jarnut, “Genealogie und politische Bedeutung”, pp. 19–20.
140
Annales Nazariani a. 788, ed. G.H. Pertz, MGH SS 1 (Berlin 1826) pp. 43–4:
adduxerant haec omnia una cum thesauris ac familia eorum copiosa valde ad iam dictum regem.
See Becher, Eid und Herrschaft, pp. 68–9.
456  

the anthropomorphic ruler’s staff,141 which he started to use in 787;


and the building of the cathedral at Salzburg, possibly intended as
coronation church.142 This claim’s material basis, however, was not
sufficient to pursue it militarily against the Frankish king.143 Thus,
Agilolfing high-flying was followed by their downfall, with the trial
of 788, and the temporary end of Bavarian ambitions of indepen-
dence.144 Yet, the significance of Regensburg as a late Carolingian
residence and the role of the Liutpoldings and the Bavarian Liudol-
fings cannot be explained in the absence of the achievements of the
Agilolfings.145

6. What part does the Roman Empire play in this process?

In this context, the Roman Empire only had an indirect influence.


Although the ethnogenesis of the Bavarians and the organisation of
the Bavarian duchy had as their basis the former Roman provinces
of Rhaetia and Noricum and their infrastructure of a network of

141
Wolfram, “Das Fürstentum Tassilos III.”, pp. 170–1; Classen, “Bayern und die
politischen Mächte”, p. 178. This staff is, however, not related to the so-called Tassilo-
chandelier in Kremsmünster, see K. Holter, “Kunstschätze der Gründungszeit”, Die
Anfänge des Klosters Kremsmünster, ed. S. Haider, Mitteilungen des Oberösterreichischen
Landesarchivs, Ergänzungsband 2 (Linz 1978) pp. 111–43, esp. p. 129; Wolfram,
378–907: Grenzen und Räume, p. 91.
142
H. Vetters, “Die mittelalterlichen Dome zu Salzburg”, Frühmittelalterliche Studien
5 (1971) pp. 413–35, esp. pp. 418–26; id., “Die mittelalterlichen Dome Salzburgs”,
Virgil von Salzburg. Missionar und Gelehrter, ed. H. Dopsch and R. Juffinger (Salzburg
1985) pp. 286–316, esp. pp. 296–313; S. Haider, “Zur Baugeschichte des Salzburger
Virgil-Domes”, Mitteilungen des Instituts für Österreichische Geschichtsforschung 80 (1972) pp.
35–47, esp. p. 47; H. Sedlmayr, “Die politische Bedeutung des Virgildomes”, Mittei-
lungen der Gesellschaft für Salzburger Landeskunde 115 (1975) pp. 145–60, esp. pp. 150–1;
Wolfram, “Die Zeit der Agilolfinger”, pp. 147–8. But see also Reindel, “Salzburg
und die Agilolfinger”, p. 71, as well as H.R. Sennhauser, “Die Salzburger Dombauten
im Rahmen der frühmittelalterlichen Baukunst Europas”, Virgil von Salzburg. Missionar
und Gelehrter, ed. H. Dopsch and R. Juffinger (Salzburg 1985) p. 326.
143
Wolfram, 378–907: Grenzen und Räume, pp. 86–93.
144
Classen, “Bayern und die politischen Mächte”, pp. 180–4; Kolmer, “Zur
Kommendation und Absetzung Tassilos III.”, pp. 291–327; Jahn, Ducatus Baiuvariorum,
pp. 540–50; Becher, Eid und Herrschaft, pp. 64–71.
145
K. Bosl, “Das bayerische Stammesherzogtum”, Zeitschrift für bayerische Landesgeschichte
25 (1962) pp. 275–82 [repr. Zur Geschichte der Bayern, ed. K. Bosl, Wege der Forschung
60 (Darmstadt 1965) pp. 1–11, esp. pp. 4–5]; id., “Regensburgs politische Stellung
im frühen Mittelalter”, Zeitschrift für bayerische Landesgeschichte 34 (1971) pp. 3–14.
  457

roads, Roman continuity was nonetheless limited by the departure


of Roman military and civil personnel after Odoacer’s eviction order
in 488. In the Ostrogothic period, Ravenna and the two Rhaetias
were considered to be under the jurisdiction of the diocese of Italy,
and hence under the authority of the Ostrogothic king.146 Even so,
after the regions north of the Alps were ceded by King Witigis in
536/37, or even earlier, Italian influence was clearly diminished.147
Yet, the area later inhabited by the Bavarians maintained its signifi-
cance in the context of Frankish-Byzantine relations, at least until
the Avars occupied the Pannonian plains and Slavonic groups migrated
into Inner Noricum and Upper Austria. On the eastern border of
Noricum, before their departure to Italy, the Lombards played a key
role in the intersection of Frankish and Byzantine interests. Emperor
Justinian I was able to win over the Lombards in an alliance with
Byzantium in 547, with the consequence that Theudebald I felt it
necessary to organise the eastern border-region of his realm as the
duchy of the Agilolfings after the death of Theudebert I. In this he
may have followed an organisational form of duchies from the Late
Antique and Ostrogothic period.148 The duchy proved its usefulness
when at its eastern borders nomadic horsemen and Slavonic princes,
rather than Germanic regna based on Byzantine influence, tried to
establish an independent regime.
Roman influence on the ethnogenesis of the Bavarians and on
the rule of the Agilolfings is most clearly visible in the Romanic

146
Contra Zeiß, “Bemerkungen I”, pp. 352–4. For support of the idea that the
Alpine foothills belonged to the Ostrogothic realm, see Beyerle, “Süddeutschland”,
pp. 68–9; 76–7; Wolfram, “Ethnogenesen im frühmittelalterlichen Donau- und
Ostalpenraum”, pp. 110–1; id., 378–907: Grenzen und Räume, pp. 64–5. K. Reindel,
“Bistumsorganisation”, pp. 300–1 supposes a Gothic rulership over the mountains,
but not over the Alpine foothills. K.A. Eckhardt, Merowingerblut, p. 103, believes it
temporarily belonged to the Herulian realm. F. Lotter, “Die germanischen Stammes-
verbände”, pp. 56–7, argues that another Germanic contingent from Bohemia arrived
in conjunction with the Lombard victory over the Herulians.
147
Agathias Myrinaei, Historiarum libri quinque 1,6, ed. R. Keydell, Corpus Fontium
Historiae Byzantinae 2 (Berlin 1967) pp. 16–9; cf. Schneider, “Fränkische Alpen-
politik”, pp. 27–8.
148
J. Jahn, Ducatus Baiuvariorum, pp. 6; 8–11; 561–3, as well as id., “Hausmeier
und Herzöge”, p. 320, supposes that a duchy was created on the Danube as early
as the Ostrogothic time, while H. Wolfram, “Ethnogenesen im frühmittelalterlichen
Donau- und Ostalpenraum”, p. 112, discusses a situation of competition, of little
synchronicity, between the older, Late Antique Ostrogothic Rhaetian duchy and
the duchy created by the Franks.

S-ar putea să vă placă și