Landscape Elements in the Late Medieval Village: Can Information on Land-Use Be Derived from Normative Sources?

Landscape Elements in the Late Medieval Village:
Can Information on Land-Use Be1Derived from Normative Sources?
Verena Winiwarter (Vie a)
Introduction
Landscapes are an elusive subject, and vast amounts of text have been written about them.2 However elaborate one might study the word or the concept, Iandscapes are composites of nature and culture. Even
„natural landscapes“ are a ected by the conceptualizations we make of them because perception is in itself a process of selection that constructs Iandscape from the whole array of natural phenomena that surround the viewer. By using not landscapes, but rather Iandscape elements as the unit of analysis, the conceptual fuzz can be resolved: The analysis is in this case confined to terms that can be found in sources from the Middle
Ages, and the analysis is based on speci c three-dimensional structures, such as paths, fences, field banks and the like.
Having sorted out the conceptual trouble with landscape, the problems with normative sources remain. Social reality and norms could be viewed as opposite ends of a spectrum, but in fact the interplay is
‚ This research was nded by the Austrian Ministry for Science and Transportalion (bm:wv) and is pa of the project „Historical Development of Interactions Between Society and Nature“ (a www presentation of the whole project can be found under http://www.cloc.org/conference/presentationstKG2/kg2cloc_index.htm. I gratefully acknowledge the comments affered during the development of this work by the project team, especially by Christoph Sonnlechner (Vienna).
2 For an ove iew from the geo aphers‘ viewpoint see the weil referenced article by Ch stina B. Kennedy, James L. Seil, and Ervin H. Zube, „Landscape and Geo aphy,“ Environmental Review, 12:3 (1988), 31-56. A recent addition to the wealth of historical essays about Iandscape is the much acclaimed book by Si on Schama, Landscape and Memo (New York, I995). I do not aim at a reference Iist of works about landscape. Both cited works can serve as a springboard.
22
more complex. The approach towards normative evidence taken in this paper does not ask for the „reality“ of their cootent in a direct way. Rather, it will be argued that law is a form of representation of coll tive perception of the environment and is thus significant for understanding environmental relations in the past.
The main sources this paper rests on are village laws („custumals“), that are abundant and have been made accessible as to their environmental contents in a database that covers a large part of what is nowadays Austria for the period from the 131h to the 18 centuries. Details are given below, in the chapter on sources.
The question of this paper is also a methodical one on a more abstract Ievel: What can be deducted from a village law about the relations between society and nature? This question is centrat to environmental history, a developing eld of historical research but only marginally conce ed with medieval questions so far.3
1 This footnote is not meant to be an overview of the relevant Iiterature in general, which I have reviewed Verena Winiwarter, W ist Umweltgeschichte? (Schri enreihe Soziale Ökologie 54), (Vienna, 1998). See also Verena Winiwarter, „Siedlungskontinuität als Frage des Sto durchsatzes? Z Umgang von Gemeinscha en mit Natur,“ in Michael Schma ecke, ., Ländliche Siedlungen zwischen Spätantike und Mittelalter. Beiträge zum Kolloquium in Liestal. (Liestal, 1995), 119-124. A recent benchmark werk for Aus ia is Christoph Sonnl hner, „Landscha und Tradition. Aspekte einer Umweltgeschichte des Mittelalt ,“ in Text – Schr t – Codex. ellenkundliehe Arbeiten aus dem Institut r Österreichische Geschichtsforschung, eds. Christoph Egger and Herwig Weigl (Mitteilungen des Instituts ir Österreichische Geschichtsforschung, Erg.-Bd. 35), (Vienna and Munich, 1999), 123-223. More speci cally relat to this article’s theme, „landscape“ is dealt with Die ich Denecke, „Ein iffe der Menschen in die ndscha – Historische Entwicklung- Folgen- erhaltene Relikte, in Von der Angst zur Ausbeutung. Umwelterfahrung zwischen Mittelalter und Neuzeit, s. E st Schubert and Bemd Herrmann (Frankfwt a. M., 1994), 59-71. Denecke o ers a g aphical viewpoint, and his analysis is very general. M ieval environmental law has been studi by Heine, but almest solely for its pollution asp ts: Günter Heine, „Umweltbezogenes R ht im Mittelalter,“ in Bemd H ann, ., Umwelt in der Geschichte. Beiträge zur Umweltgeschichte (Göttingen, 1989), 111-128; idem, „Umwe1tschut echt aus historischer Sicht- vom Be nn der Neuzeit bis 20. Jahrhunde ,“ in Von der Angst zur Ausbeutung, 157-184. Still a good overview on all aspects is Bemd H a nn, , Mensch und Umwelt im Mittelalter (Stuttga , 1986). Britain and the Netherlands have receiv more attention, see, e. g., William H. TeBrake, „Air Pollu on and Fuel Crises in Preindus ial ndon, 1250-1650,“ Technolo and Culture, 16 (1975), 337-359; idem, „Land Drainage and Public Environmental Policy in M ieval Holland,“ Environmental Review, 12:3 (1988), 75-93; idem, „Land Reclamation and the A arian Frontier in the Dutch Rijnland, 950-1350 A.D.,“ Environmental Review, 5:1 (1980), 27-36.
23
Law as representation of coUective perception
To circumvent the unsolvable riddle of norm and reality I suggest to understand normative sources, regulations, laws in the wider context of tbe word, as a form of representation of collective perceptions. In tbis de nition, both perception of the natural world and perception of the social realities are subsumed, as their combination yields tbe perception of what we call „environment“ which is then re-presented in tbe textual reality of the norms. For the purpose of this article, environment shall not be defined using ecological or spatial criteria, but shall be used to denote that part of natural surroundings that is managed or used by human societies and, therefore, within their realm of social and natural per­ ception.
Laws tell us better than any other source, how people looked upon tbe land. They teil us what these people saw, what they perceived as worthy of a regulation, and how they devised means for regulations to be enforced.
lf vi11age Jaws inform about the co11ective perception of villagers and landlords, what can actua11y be found is the contested ground. Both what this contested terrain was thought to be like and how its use was decided about are a theme of the sources. lt might be argued tbat tbis normative evidence can only be used to analyze the motifs and perceptions of the landlords, as they commissioned the vi11age regulations to be written down and thus bad an averarehing influence on their content. But village laws were part of the social universe, as tbey, e. g., were read aloud once a year in front of the community. Therefore, they did in fact shape and reflect perceptions of villagers as weil as those of the Seigneurs.
Theodore Steinberg has argued that law is actually a form of communication, with its main emphasis on telling others what is your possession.4 Property in the English language up until the 17’h century was understood as a right in something, not as the thing itself. The feudal system was built on proprietas and possessio, the rst being the right in something, e. g. a form of use of the land. The second being the right to the land, albeit under the assumption that the proprietors were to be granted their rights in the land. The village laws comprise regulations of proprietors‘ rights in land-use as were agreed upon with tbe holder of the
possessio.
Steinberg is valuable for the emphasize he puts on law as a form of communication, in our case communication between villagers and
4 Theodore Steinberg, Slide Mountain or the Folly of ning Nature (Berkeley, Los Angeles, and London, 1 996).
24
landlords. One should nevertheless be aware of the difference between rights in and rights to the land. Environmental regulations in the village laws are conce ed with issues of proprietas more than those of possessio.
Co ons needed to be regulated well, their regulation followed the familiar patte . They were conceived as land to which titles were issued and therea er regulated, but the community as a whole was the proprietor. Regulating the co ons can be viewed as a co unication about property rights (in the sense of proprietas). We have the opportunity to study the village commons – among which agricultural infrastructure is of particular importance – within an agricultural system based on the feudal ideas of property and possession.
Village laws took part in a process of shaping and re ecting the perception of landscape, as was stated above. Law communicates common perceptions and their reinforcement, thus creating and recreating the villagers‘ and the landlords‘ landscape. The way things are seen (perceived), in tu , determines – besides the technical means – what is actually done. The realms of ideas and material exchanges are always closely intertwined. The village laws can be seen as the framework Setting the boundaries of the possible material interaction with the land. As Allen Pred has pointed out, humans do not only make their histories but they also create their spaces.s We are able to follow the process of social creation of space in the feudal village by analyzing these sources.
Sustainable commons or Iandscape ecolo ?
The pursuit to understand the „creation of space“ has several analytical possibilities.
Steinberg has argued that a culture single minded in private property looses the evolutionary exibility needed to change its path of development into more equitable and ecologically sustainable directions. This is, of course, an argument directed against those who saw a „tragedy of the co mons“, arguing that only private property (in the mode sense of the word) could ensure sustainable use of natural resources.6 But it is
5 AUan Pred, Making Histories and Constructing Human Geographies. The Local Transformation of Practice, Power Relations, and Consciousness (Boulder, San Francisco, and Oxford, 1990).
6 Garret Hardin, „The Tragedy of the Commons,“ Science 162 ( 13/12/1968), 1243- 1248. Hardin’s arguments have been critisiz widely. The newest con ibution in this debate comes from Rolf Peter Sieferle, „Wie tra sch war die Allmende?,“
Gaia, 7, No.4 (1998), 304-307.
25
more probable that in any form of legal construction means of being environmentally disastrous can be devised. The question of „commons“ as an instrument of environmental exibility is wrongheaded for manorial systems, as should be emphasized: Flexibility is embedded in regulations both for the commons and for the Iands used in form of a personal lease. By looking into times and places with commons to regulate within a structure of seigneurial tenure one can aim to add a historical point of view to a discourse which is commonly called „the environmental debate“. But such an analysis would in the end con ne itself to the realm of social perception. By trying to cope with the flows of material and Iabor needed in space creation we can transcend the boundary to the realm of the natural surroundings, the genuine task of environmental history.
A theoretical framework for dealing with material interactions
It has been suggested in social ecology to understand the relations of societies and nature using just two concepts. Both are set on the material side of the debate. The rst relation (or interaction) is called „Societal Metabolism“. lt describes what kind of and how much material (including energy) are taken om nature and transferred into society and what kind of and how much wastes and emissions are exported from society into nature.7 The normative sources dealt with in the following are not of much use to clari that sort of problems. But societies interact with nature in a second, quite different way: Nature is colonized by society. Humans change their environment to make it more useful for them. The first great invention in this realm was agriculture: Nature is changed in a way to yield more of the starch- and protein-rich grass seeds one wants to have instead of producing deciduous trees which one cannot eat. But entirely natural processes make the seeds grow, humans in the process of colonization do not change natural systems as much as they can, but usually little as necessary, leaving the rest to nature, in this
1 The concept of a „metabolism“ for societies is widely used in the social sciences, as been shown in two review articles: Marina Fischer-Kowalski and Walter Hüttler, „Society’s Metabolism. The lntellectual History of Material Flow Analysis, Part II, 1970-1998,“ Joumal ofIndustrial Ecolo 2, No. 4 (1999), 107-137, the interplay of culture and nature has most elaborately been systematized Rolf Peter Sieferle, „Kulturelle Evolution des Gesellscha -Natur-Verhältnisses,“ in Gesellscha licher Sto echsel und Kolonisierung von Natur. Ein Versuch in Sozialer Ökologie, eds. Marina Fischer-Kowalski, Helmut Haber!, Walter Hüttler, Harald Payer, Heinz Schand!, Verena Winiwarter, and Helga Zangerl-Weisz (Amsterdam, 1997) 37-53.
26
case to photosynthesis and the program for growth encoded in the genome of the grain.
Colonizing natural systems means to interact with dynamic, self­ organized, living aggregates, colonization means work, Iabor. Without regular planting or sowing, weeding, harvesting, and plowing a eld, nature will take over again: Shrubs and trees will start to grow, and sooner or later the yield of starch-containing edible seeds will decrease to a value near zero, actually to a value that hunter-gatherer societies would have b�en able to reclaim using their methods as weil.
When the intensity of colonization is increased, more work has to be diverted from actual production to tasks related to production; I will name but a few: manuring, fencing, preventing erosion by terracing Iands or planting hedges, and building the needed in astructure to make agriculture feasible, such as paths and roads.8
Asking for colonization can frame the source content with the needed material viewpoint. The principles of colonizing interventions on the Iandscape Ievel can be investigated in an agricultural, medieval society. From the viewpoint of the environment rather than from society the man-made features that utilized (colonized) Iandscapes bad, can be researched. Combination of this legal evidence with archaeological evidence to render a synthesis of perception and physical remains would be most welcome, but cannot be offered in this article.9 Yet, the normative sources tell us something about the „standard“ Iandscape and its features, theIandscape that was perceived as ordered and acceptable, the Iandscape that was, however one might think about this word, „normal“.
8 Helmut Haber! and Helga Zangerl-Weisz, „Kolonisierende Ein i e: Systematik und Wirkungsweise,“ in Gesellschaftlicher Sto echsel, 129-148; Verena Winiwarter, „Gesellscha licher Arbeitsaufwand die Kolonisierung von Natur,“ in ibidem,
161-176.
9 Landscape archa logy, the discipline to to with such questions, is s ll its infancy in Aus ia. A icultural history can provide helpful insights, such Bruce M. S. Campbell, „Ecolo versus Economics in Late teenth- and Early Fourteenth Century English A culture,“ in Dei Sw ney, , Agriculture in the Middle Ages. Technolo , Practice, and Representation (Philadelphia, 1995), 76- 110; Robert S. Shiel, „lmproving soil productivity in the pre-fertiliser era,“ in Bruce M. S. Campbell and Mark Overton, eds., Land, Labour and Livestock: Historical Studies in European Agricultural Productivi (Manchester, New York, 1991), 51-77.
27
The Sources
The work presented here relies on a database called the „Environmental History Database Austria, EHDA“.10 It contains legal sources, called „Weistümer“, a word that can be translated into „village Jaws“. „Custumals“ could be a similarly fitting term. This database was
developed in „kleio“ as a co on venture of Gerhard Jaritz and the author in research projects in the last 10 years and is now available as an access database11•
The database is built almost entirely on the basis of edited sources.
Currently, the village laws from the present provinces of Lower and Upper Austria, parts of the material om Styria and Carinthia and about 50% of the sources from the weste most province of Austria, Vorarlberg, are included in the database. As for the easte part of Aust a a considerably !arger amount of such village laws exists to the present day, the two provinces selected for analysis herea er comp se a major part of all edited sources. The oldest village laws included in the database stem from the 14th century, d the major part is in the 16th and 1 7th centuries. Most examples used for this article come from the 1 5 century.
Questioning the sources
For the interpretation presented herea er the main questions were: • How are such Iandscape elements that serve as or act as
boundaries regulated?
• Who is in charge of them?
• What kind of regulations existed?
10 Details about s ucture and use ofthe EHDA are presented in the following articles: Gerhard J and Verena Winiwarter, „On the Perception ofNature in Renaissance Society,“ in MikulM Teich, Roy Porter, and Bo Gustafsson, eds., Nature and Socie in Historical Gontext (Cambridge, 1996), 91-111; Verena Winiwarter, „Historische Umweltbewältigung,“ historicum, 32 (1993), 36-39; Gerhard Jaritz and Verena Winiwarter, „Wasser. Zu den historischen Must eines Problembewußtseins. (Annäherungen anhand der historischen Umweltdatenbank Österreichs),“ Mitteilun­ gen des Niederösterreichischen Landesmuseums, 8 (1994), 163-174; Verena Wini­ warter, „Patte s of Coping with the Environment (14th-18th Centuries). Computer Supported Access to Man’s Relation to Nature,“ in Gerhard J , Ingo Kropa�, and Peter Teibenbacher, eds., The Art of Communication. Proceedings of the Vlllth Inte ational AHC Conference, Graz Austria 1993 (= Grazer Grundwissenscha ­ liche Forschungen, 1), (Graz, 1995), 5 15-526.
“ All inquiries about the database should be directed to: verena.winiw ter@univie.ac.at or gerhard aritz@oeaw.ac.at.
28
• Are there special regulations for marginal areas?
Colonizing interventions have one important effect on societies, as was mentioned above: They create Iabor. One of the reasons why one should be interested in such Iandscape elements is their function in te s of in astructure. What nowadays is a proble for „marginal areas“ on a !arger scale, was a proble in villages on a smaller scale: The best fields could not be used ef ciently ifone did not get there easily, as the walk to and from such places would have consumed too much of one’s time. So looking into infrastructure regulations means Jooking into village economies, albeit on a non-monetary, but rather Iabor (and therefore,
energy) based Ievel.
The second idea bebind the choice was to understand more about
the ecology of the late medieval Austrian village by looking into tbose spots that are environmentally sensitive. Searching for the interstices has already been identi ed as an important task to understand pre-mode ag culture. Such parts of the Iandscape are not mentioned in other sources such as tax registers as they were not taxed, but they are extremely important for an ecological analysis.12
In ecological Iandscape analysis the ecological virtues of a particular area are, among others, de ned by a parameter called „matrix connectivity“. Connectivity is high in Iandscapes with lots of linear elements such as paths. They are at the same time connecting and disconnecting the plots ofland in between them. The analysis rests on the assumption that all linear elements in the landscape, such as ditches, paths, hedgerows, creeks and fences were ecologically linking rather than de-linking features. An ecologically de-linking feature of mode Iandscapes would e. g. be a motorway, which cuts through Iandscapes and makes it impossible (or very di icult) for animals and plants to cross over. What was linking humans in pre-industrial times was also linking other species for most of the time, and humans used natural links for their own traffic. Landscape features such as paths are important for interaction possibilities of animals and even for such things as plant seed dispersal. 1 3
Whereas it is not possible to draw a map ofsuch elements on the basis of these sources, it is important to know about the regime of use and maintenance applied to such elements, as this regime determines how
12 Verena Winiwarter, „Spurensuche in Ostarrichi. Dynamik und Tradition im gesellscha lichen Umgang mit ‚ Natur‘,“ in Kulturlan chaft r das nächste Jahr­ tausend- Tren – Perspektiven – Vsi ionen, Symposium am 14. und 15. Juni 1996 ( stetten, 1996), 5- 14, in particular the discussion of interstices 9-12.
13 The concept of connectivity is explain in Richard T. T. Forman. and Michel Godron, Landscape Ecolo , (New York, 1986), 405 f.
29
such an element would really nction ecologically. People living on and from the land had some idea about the agro-ecosystems they used, and it is important to know how they perceived such Iandscape elements. How o en were ditches cleared? How o en were paths repaired, how o en were they inundated? What kinds of fences were erected? How long did they persist? All these questions would be important for structural analysis ofthe landscape.
Conce ing the elusive character of normative evidence, it is assumed that if a Iandscape element exists in the law it has at least at some time in the past existed in the landscape. Further, it can be reasonably presumed that common perception contains as much truth as is needed for common action. E. g., if a village law contains regulations about the clearing of ditches, it is not unfair to guess that tbey actually became congested om time to time. lf a village law speaks about different kinds of fences this does not necessarily mean that they existed. It does, however, mean that it was ssible for villagers to make a distinction between, e. g., persisting fences and seasonal ones. Therefore we know something about the range of possible fences and what they could Iook like, this being important for understanding their ecological impact and the amount of work needed for this colonizing intervention. So, the normative sources can be us to create an overview of the ecological out t that was possible, and due to their abundance they allow to do so on a spatial scale beyond the local micro-level. Whereas this paper does not contain an ecological analysis it is aimed at putting together all the necessary source material to produce such an analysis in the future.
Results
Ecologically speaking, the analysis is centered on linear Iandscape elements, the so-called corridors. From an agricultural viewpoint the corridors are the main in astructure for transport. For the analysis several of the groups the database offers bave been used: paths, vineyards (as they tend to be very small with a lot of man-made structures), borders, and especially fences. In looking for local margins or micro-level peripheries the addition of „oede“ (barren, unused land) would have been interesting, but there is not enough evidence for the l5’h century which was the basis of the investigation, however. The equally interesting „ditches“ have not been defined as an extra topic in the database and most of the evidence is found under the header „water“. Ditches will be included in rther research on the shaping of the agricultural landscape. Each of the sources mentioned below is clearly
30
de ned by its location and year of issue and can be traced not only in the database, but also in the printed editions.14 The EHDA comprises c. 3000 items, the numbers given below for the incidence of speci c regulations are to some extent misleading, as the unchanged re-issuing of a regulation at a later date has to be counted as an extra item. So the numbers given below should only serve as rough guidelines and not be used for statistical purposes.
Paths
Starting with the l51h century, the database contains about 126 items on paths.
In general, maintenance of paths including regulations about inspection duties comprises the largest nurober of regulations.
Several regulations exist about the cleaning of paths („räumen“) and that polluting paths is forbidden. On the one band the sources are concemed with the maintenance of existing paths. On the other band, regulations conceming new paths form an important part of the material: Path building is regulated and it is even forbidden to move existing paths laterally without prior consent of the community. As the dyn ics of nature excel their force on such structures as paths, the correct behavior a er inundations is also a matter dealt with in several of the sources. How to behave correctly when using paths that belonged to another community, which was o en necessary, is regulated. Paths belong – as to their regulation – to the inventory of infrastructural outfit each co unity maintained, and quite o en paths, bridges and „Stege“ (footbridges or plank bridges, that might cross a ditch) are regulated together. The use of paths is also regulated, both conceming the rights granted to strangers as conce ing restrictions that applied for a limited time only. In the detailed account given below sources are given with date and time, and several examples were chosen to show the breadth of solutions devised.
eaning ofpaths („Räumen“)
About 5% of the regulations deal with cleaning. Wood, stones and wastes om vineyards are speci cally mentioned as items to be cleared off. The waste material that arises o wood-cutting is also entioned. The main ai of all the regulations is to keep paths open for passage, at least for a simple carriage.
14 Gustav Winter, ed., Niederösterreichische Wesi tümer, 4 vols. (Vie!Ula, 1886-1913); Helmut Feig!, ed., Die Weistümer Oberösterreichs, 4 vols. (Vie!Ula, 1956-1960).
31
The custumal ofSummerau (1555) o ers the most detailed account about the way in which paths were constructed: ln such cases, where a neighbor had to Iead drainage water across a path, the drains must not be deeper than two ngers‘ depth. The drains must be cleaned regularly. We can conclude that paths could be crossed by small drains that were used to Iead water across them, and that these structures required regular maintenance. In case a user of the path suffered from neglect of these drains or from wrongly designed ones (which were probably too deep), the proprietor adjacent to the path (presumably the builder of the drains) was liable for compensation and, in addition, a fine was collected.
Prohibition ofpo utingpaths
C. 6% of the custumals under consideration prohibit path pollution. The main aim of the regulation was to make sure that the polluters cleared the dirt they had made themselves. Such regulations are particularly abundant in vineyards, due to the nature of harvesting and the small size of the paths therein. Since the 1 5th century, the texts are very similar. In the 18th century the custumal of Wop ng explains in detail, why the regulation is necessary:
„da sach wäre das ainer reben in die weingartgaßen werfen wurd und das etwann ein güß me und verschüttete die weingartengossen und das sich das wasser in einen ande weingarten schwöllet und thätte ihme schaden in den weingart, so wäre er schuldig ihme den schaden abzutragen und der herrscha darum zu wandl 72d.“
Path clearing was necessary, we lea , because polluted paths would not be able to serve as drainage ditches in cases of severe rain. Should the paths be congested, the water would nd its way through the vines and da age would be far greater. Erosion on paths was a side­ effect of their use as drainage, and it can be inferred from the custumal that this was not only accepted as a matter-of-fact but understood in its protective effect for the vineyard.
Pedestrians and riders alike are to be protected from dangerous wastes in a regulation issued for Meidling between 1440 and 1460. Paths were used by and for animals, and neither their blood nor their excrement should be spilled on the paths. In this case a path within the village center was probably thought of, and the bad smell gets mentioned: „Item er soll auch das plut oder den unjlat den er da löst von seim viech schütten on schaden der gemain von dem Weg daz man daruber nit reit noch gee noch keinen gestank der gemain nit pring ob er dez nit tät, so hat der richter zu nölten mit 12d zu wand/.“ Paths should be usable, is again the main aim of the norm.
32
Path maintenance
A fi h of all regulations deals with maintenance work, which is clearly set apart om cleaning. Some of the regulations set a date at whicb the work should be done, others simply speci that the paths should be repaired before harvest. Patbs are of vital importance for agricultural production, therefore landowners adjacent to a derelict path were in some cases required to give part of tbeir adjacent elds as construction sites for a new path. They were to be compensated for their loss with areas in another place. The Gutenstein custumal (last quarter of the 1 5th century) informs about possible causes for the destruction o f paths and roads by stating that in case a path is ooded and thus rendered unusable the adjacent landholder sbould give from bis soil to repair the path. He was to be compensated witb anotherpiece ofland.
Villagers could be required to maintain the parts ofa path adjacent to their ground. Did tbe person in cbarge leave the path in unusable condition, path-users were allowed to move to the adjacent eld, an action that would be under punishment as long as the path itself could be used. Tbe custumal of Trautmannsdorf ( 1 5th century) sees the community, and not single persons responsible for path maintenance. The community in this case was liable for any da age a user might experience from a badly maintained path. Responsibility could be shared by the community or rested on individuals, there is no clear dominance of one oftbese two solutions in tbe source body.
A similar regulation on maintenance declaring that users were not liable for da age resulting from bad paths is found for Strasshofen 1499. Regulations were sometimes quite speci c. In Brunn im Felde (last quarter of 15th century) the path crossing the common pasture is noted witb its width („18 Schuh“) and its use is specified: „1tem wir haben ain angemesnew lantstrass aufunser waid, sie so! sein 18 schuech weit. Und wer uns die äcker oder gräben au. urfder wer umb das wand! 12d als o er das tuet.“
th A l l infrastructure bad to be maintained, and tbe Neumarkt source century) specifies paths, brigdes as weil as plank-bridges and gates as objects to be maintained on a communal basis. The judge had the rigbt to order such work and was liable if be did not manage to make the villagers keep their infrastructure in good shape in case da age resulted from this. Neigbbors shared the maintenance of infrastructure between their respective elds. O en, responsibility for path control lay on the judge and the jurymen, but in Ybbsitz (1484) the function of a
“ Wegmeister“ (master ofthe paths) is speci ed. 33
{I5
Controlling the paths happened speci ed dates, and nes o en could increase, if repair was delayed, as, e. g., stated for Gobelsburg in the rst qua er of the 1 5’h century. Illegal paths are a right l concem of the custumals, as shown below, but also the narrowing of paths to increase one’s eld size could be a problem, which is made clear in a later, more detailed regulation for Obe allsee ( 1 7 1 4): „Item wer der ist, [der] sein rain, weeg und steeg, wie der von alter her mben ist, ungewöhnlich schmelt ihme selbst zu nuz und guet und den anderen zu schaden, es wehr durch reiten, fahren oder gehen, der ist dem Iandrichter umb fonfpfund und 66 pfening zu wand/ und dem anderen,
der schaden daran nähmbe, sein schaden abzethue. “
Prohibition ofillegalpaths
Wbereas the regulations mentioned so far were issued for the sake of the path users, the agricultural land needed protection from path development as weil. 20% of the cases deal with illegal, new paths. Not only was it considered an offense to build such a path, its use by others was also prohibited and nes were to be collected each time the path was used. In this case we might reasonably doubt the feasibility of the norms, nevertheless even knowing about an illegal path without r eporting to the judge was in some cases considered unlaw l.
It is forbidden to trespass through elds and meadows, in particular before the harvest, which one would expect. In Neusti am (Achs-)wald the custumal issued in the 1 5’h century stated that meadows had to have a path; in case they lacked a possibility to walk through them on a path, one was allowed to walk through the meadow. Path-rights are given a strong case in this regulation. ‚h
In Kamme in the rst quarter of the 1 5 century it is made clear that unnecessary paths should be identi ed and forbidden, the latter was to take place on St. George’s day (April 23). The source from Schenken­ felden states that the old paths have to be used for walking, riding and driving. If by carelessness someone would walk on other ground, he had to pay a fine.
But how could one know which paths were allowed and which forbidden? Thomscrubs should be used to mark the borders of the lawful path, a measure prescribed in connection with the destr uction of illegal
paths (Schatterlee, 1489).
Later custumals tend to be much more elaborate and detailed, also
when path development is concemed. Therefore, an 1 8th centu example shall be cited to illustrate the point: If one has to build a new path, it should be done where a trail already existed. „ltem eß soll ein ieder vor
34
seinen grund unzt in den huefschlag machen, ist aber der grundpoden halben sein, so soll er ihn allein machen, ist aber ein böser weeg von einen antlangen, der soll demselben unzt an den neunten rain gemacht werden “ .
Also in the later sources, one regulation tries to sell its interest by explaining that new paths would decrease the value of one’s land as the ri g h t o f w a y i m p l i e d i n n e w p a t h s w o u l d b e c o m e p r e s c r i p t i v e (Vichtenstein, 1688).
Vineyards
Paths in the vineyards had to be cleared as, e. g., stated areund 1450 for St. Johann auf dem Steinfeld. The two forms of obstacle mentioned are stones and vines. But in addition to such regulations, the congested situation of the vineyards with their precious land and vines
demanded space-saving path design. Paths usually had extensions for tuming the carts. lt was forbidden to make them any nar rower, as issued, e. g., in Simmering (15’h century): „wer ein wendstatt engt, es sei mit grä en oder rebmzauß, daß man die wägen nit umb ren möcht als von altesher mmen, istzuewand!fonfpfundpfeningverfallen“
In St. Ulrich ( 1 446) the use of the tu ing places as a common is decreed, again a sign of the especially demanding situation in the vineyard. For an ecological interpretation this type of information can be used to set model parameters for Iandscapes solely via information on
land use.
The interaction of water and paths
Running water constituted a major danger for paths prior to the use of impermeable top layers. Path erosion must have been a serious proble especially in mountainous areas. Regulations o en come in combination with mills, as the watercourse for the mill presented a special danger in case of floods. The miller is responsible for all the infrastructure in connection with the mill, be it the watercourse or ditches, yearly cleanings are decreed, and the miller is liable for any da age caused by the neglect of this duty (Trautmannsdorf around 1 477). The custuma1 of Markersdorf an der Pielach explains as early as 1490 the reasons for such a regulation: „Ain ieder mullner der die müll besitzt zu Märkherstorf und nit raumbt den grabm seines mullgang das
das w ser in das aigen rinnt, dadurch dann die strassen und wege verderbt, das man nit faren, reiten oder treiben mag, das dem aigen zu schaden m, der ist dem vogt verfallen das groß wand/ 6ß 2d.“ The
35
same source is conce ed with the illegal diversion of water om its course: “ Wer den pach abiäst und verderbt die weeg, das der gemein zu schaden kumbt und seinen nachtpauren, der ist dem vogt verfallen zu wand! d“, and again, the destructive e ect of water on paths is given as the reason.
Fences
It was forbidden to destroy fences, as declared for Ottensheim 1470 in a custumal listing other forbidden things as weil: One was not supposed to cut grass on others‘ property and likewise not supposed to
cut trees not in one’s possession, etc. These regulations were issued – which is of interest for Iandscape reconstruction – especially for the meadows and the riverbank, and applied, as is quite common, particularly during the night. The same source ordered to build a fence around „the ditch“, and to maintain it in shape. The Schenkenfelden custumal (151h century) simply forbids to destroy fences or cut the stakes. In Hellmonsödt 1481 itwasspeci edthatthebreakingofholesintoafence was forbidden. Fences and other in astructure features interact: Old paths can become obsolete, and new paths and roads are built. For Hofkirchen (1485) a special regulation states that fences must not be destroyed during the building of new paths, neither was it allowed to throw debris on the paths, the source might refer to material dis1ocated during the building work.
It was 1ikewise forbidden to bui1d fences on the neighbor’s property. In such cases nes could be increased and made payable om each stick of the fence, if the fence-builder did not comp1y in the rst place (Hofkirchen, 1485).
Fences are of averarehing importance for mixed farming systems, they are needed to protect the elds from animals, the animals in tu need to be protected from getting into the fields as they could be gorged. Wild animals coming into the elds om the surrounding forest where a major proble and yields could dr tically decrease due to grazing deer or other wild beast. Agricultural systems could – and most o en would – also comprise gardens or orchards. From an example of the 1 6th century (Windhaag, 1577) it can be le ed that the orchards could be fenced in. „Item von wegen derpaumgarten, wan vüer oder nfwägen dardurch eren und nach inen o en lu en und dardurch schaden geschäch, so miest der hinter den schaden zallen und daß wandet dem richter geben 12 d. “ From this regulation we also get to know a major problem: When a path crossed land that was fenced in for any reason, grated doors had not only to be opened, but to be closed a er use.
36
Success l agricultural management depended not only on the weather and the seed quality, but also on the proper use of infrastructure, which is all too easily overlooked.
Forms andmaterials
Only three different terms for ways were found in the material, „Weg“, (with one mention of „grasiger Weg“ (a path covered partly by grass), „Gasse“ for paths within the village and „Landstraße“ for a !arger, cross country way are specified in the material used. The vocabulary conce ing fences offers more detail: In Schenkenfelden (15th century)
we read that it was forbidden to erect fences around garden plots on the community grounds in „other than the usual way“. This tagether with another paragraph in the same source distinguishing between two types, namely „getratenen“ and „ungetratenen“ fences teaches us that transitory fences could be distinguished from permanent ones and only permanent ones should be used for fencing the banned Iands. The term ‚ anzäun“ describing fences erected around the banned areas is o en found, but also garden fences, a fence for the farm („Ho aun“) and terms more speci c to the make of the fences are found. „hurten und gättern“ refers to a burdie and the respective door. „Zustecken“ are extra poles used in an angle to the fence to strengthen it. Wood for fences sometimes probably was rather scarce, as the Freistadt custumal refers to the buming of fences (Freistadt 1635) and for 1756 (Gallneukirchen) the decree issued orders peasants to use living fences or stone fences built om the stones one took from the elds.
Fencing the arablefields
The right moment has to be picked for sowing, the time window can be quite short, and waiting too long will decrease yields, as grains will not be able to ripen completely, which in tu means a huge loss in quality. Before sowing can be undertaken, however, all fences to protect the arable have to be erected and be in good shape.
In the source from Hellmonsödt 1481 we read tbat fences should be erected either before St. George’s day (April 23) or as soon as one could dig hand-deep into the ground.
In Hofkirchen ( 1485) we nd more fences to be erected: All fences should be ready at the date of sowing, if someone missed this date and a da age resulted he bad to pay for this damage. A similar regulation is found for Freistadt Five of the tbirteen regulations conceming tbe fences around tbe arable land make clear tbat fences bad to be erected as early
37
as possible (Weitersfelden 1548, Windhag 1577 and again 1646, and Neumarkt, 1 5’h century) A typical example is Reichenstein ( 1 552): „Item welicher sein pannfridt nicht fridt, alspalt er mit dem Stecken in die ert mag, der ist zu wand/ verfallen ohn alle gnadt 72d. “
Fences were visited on a regular basis and attendance to this meeting was compulsory (Reichenau 1495). The same source, albeit less detailed, contains a regulation on the erection of fences. The fences should be built upon a decree issued by the village judge. In Neumarkt
( 1 5th century) the fences protecting the banned (i. e. the Iandlords
ofthe land were to be le standing during the entire year, holes had to be closed and da age had to be repaired by the originator. These fences were controlled by the judge, as is clear from the source from 151h century Schenkenfelden. In Ober-Absdorf (around 1450) the judge and the jurymen should control fences (and, as is stated, the replaces) a er each Banntaiding, i. e. the regular day ofjurisdiction. Fences had, as was hinted above, a double nction: They protected the harvest, but they also protected the animals om overfeeding and thus getting sick. This becomes clear from the Schenkenfelden source, where the o nder, whose fence permitted animals to get into a eld, was liable for the da age done to the animals. „Item ob daz wär daz si ir fridt nicht machenten und in unser viech schaden tät, so sein wir in nichtz darumben schuldig, si sein uns auch sölh unser viech an allen entgeltnuss widerumben schuldig zue antburten, wär aber sach daz ir viech durich ir fridt herdurich giengn und uns schaden tätn, das selb viech haben wir zue phenden und von iedem haup ze wand/ 12d dem richter und dem da schaden beschiecht denselben abzutragen nach er ntnuss der nachperen“
Maintenance ofFences
Two later examples can serve to picture the never ceasing proble of fence maintenance. For Reichenau [an der großen Gusen], Upper Austria the source reads:
„Die speit- und panzäun umb angepaute äker, gärten oder wißmaden, auch waiden sollen sommer und winter stehen, da sie aber durch ungewitter, wint und andere gewalt abgeworfen werden, soll ein ieder, so bald man in die erden mag, inerhalb vierzehen tag lengist, seinen theil daran aufrichten, damit seinen anrainenden nachbaren destwegen kein schad, noch ihren frichten entzug beschehe; wer abe in disem fraventlich und saumbig erfunden wurde, der solle von ieden ligenten und unaufgerichten steken der obrigkeit 72d zur strafund wand/ erlegen“. In addition, this piece shows all the parts of the agricultural
38
‚
) parts
Iandscape tbat were fenced, and sbould, according to tbe source, be fenced a11 year round. Tbe special barshness of winter is vividly before tbe eyes of tbe reader witb tbe description of Oberwallsee (1714): „ltem zum ersten sollen alle pannzeun sommer und winter mit aufgereckten stec n, ausgenohmben ob ein grosßer schnee oder wind sie umwuerfen und wann eß dan zu gleichen weiter mbt, das man vor gefrier in die erden mag, so soll ein ieder, der in denfeldern hat, sein zaunfriden in 14 tagen darnach; wer das nit thätt, der ist dem richter zu wand/ 62 pfening verfahlen aufgnad und einen seinen schaden, a recht ist. “
Where should theJences be, and how should oneproceed with them ?
Sixteen source items forbid the destruction of fences, and tbeir use as a border between individual boldings is regulated in 1 1 cases. It was also forbidden to proceed as one pleased with trees growing on the borders (e. g. Neumarkt n. d., Obe eukirchen 1485), tbe neigbbor bad to be noti ed if one wanted to cut such a tree (Reichenau 1495).
Tbe ba est of fruit bearing trees on tbe border sbould be divided equally (Neumarkt, n. d.). In tbe same source we nd a regulation as to wbat sbould bappen, if uit om a tree on tbe „rain“ , tbe bank between elds, fell on the neigbbors‘ ground. In such a case, tbe neigbbor bad to allow tbe owner of tbe tree one tbird of what bad fallen on bis proper ty. In Reicbenau (181h century) this regulation is very detailed: „Welcher n e c h s t s e i n e s n a c h b a r e n fr u c h t b a r e p a u m b a u f a i g e n e m g r u n d g a n z f r e i stehend hat und diefrücht hievon aufseines nachbaren grund hinumb
fielen und ain oder zween tag gelegen, so mag er sie am dritten tag noch au lauben, so sie aber über den dritten tag Iigen blieben, so gehören sie seinen nachbaren hinwek zu nemmen zue, stehet aber der paumb mitten in den march, so gehören ieden thail halbefrücht zue“.
Other regulations try to prevent such problems of division of fruit tree harvest among neighbors, as they forbade to plant trees next to the border or fence, in case of fruit trees at a considerable distance („9 Schuh“) behind the fence. Even willows were forbidden close to the fence, a smaller, but still measurable distance („3 Schuh“) was to be observed, because, as is explained for Reichenau (18 centu ), tbe roots would otherwise d age the neighbor’s eld.
It was, one is tempted to add, „of course“, forbidden to dig out boundary stones, or to change borders between parcels (e. g. Scbenkenfelden, 15 century, He11monsödt 148 1). Tbe community would organize a formal inspection if disa ment of neighbors about tbeir border occurred (He11monsödt, 1481). If one dug out such a stone he sbould put it back wbilst the neighbor was watehing (Neumarkt, n. d.).
39
Obviously such a dislocation could happen during plowing accidentally, as becomes quite clear from later sources.
Using cases as these, not only the social universe of peasant communities engaged in con icts about borders and fences becomes quite clear but one can also infer that willows and fruit trees were located in some distance from the borders, therefore we can add to the knowledge gained by cadastral maps at least in such cases where more than one use is denoted on a parcel that trees probably were situated within the parcel, not at its very margins.
Interstices
It is of interest to leam about the private utilization of the common Iands, in this case interstices at a )arger spatial Ievel than the single element (such as a hedgerow or a bush). As there was no collection of fees and deeds form the temporary use of margins and commons they are non-existent in the material produced by seigneu al administrators, so all that can be leamed about use and structure of such places is of special value. Fences could be erected on the commons, and each villager had the right to use part of it (as much as could be plowed in one day) as grain- eld or for cutting grass. But this right was limited to two years. After that period the fences had to be taken away and the parcel should be le . It was, however allowed to re-erect fences on other parts of the co on land, and other users could take the land and work on it for the next to years. This was decreed for Obe eukirchen in 1 4 8 5 . The common land could temporarily become private and the fence was seen as the main indicator for this process. „ltem die ungetailten grünt oder auf der gmain so auch zu dem markt gehoren, der mag ain iesleicher
purger zu p anzpettn wismat oder zu ainem tagwerch akcher zu prein odr habern aines iednjars auffachen einzein nützen und niessn zwaijar und nach ausgang der zwair jar, so so/ der zaun fudergethan werdn, damit es ain gmain bleib und nit ain ieslicher im zu aigen zueprauch. Aber der selb burger mag auf den ungetailten grünten anderswo widerumb au achen und einzein und aber zwaijar nützen und niessn wie vor. Es mag auch ainer die ersten grunt, ob die nit ain anderr aufgefangen hiet, widerumb auffachen und aber zwai jar nützen und nach ausgang der selbm zwaijar widerumb aufder gmain und tratten lign lassn wie vör, dadurch imbs chainer zu seinem haus zu aigen zuebrauchen noch verkaufn so/ und mag: welcher das ube so/ gestra werden wie ainfravel“
Ofsimilar interest is the custumal from Schönberg (between 1430- 1625) from which we leam that in ditches, one of the more abundant
40
interstices, and other specified places no animal grazing was allowed, whereas one could cut the grass at those places: „dan sollen verbotten sein alle sondere halt in gräben, zwischen den weingarden, in wegen und in gärden vor und nachst. Geörgen tag, alein er halt da ainer in dem seinigen wer aber sunder will halten, der halde der viechtri nach wer aber daß nit hielt, der ist von iedem haubt zwölf pfenning wandel schuldig hiet er aber ain schaden gethan, derselbig solle den schaden erben aber in den gräben, zwischen den weingärten, in den wegen mag ain iederfrei grassen. “
Similar in its differentiation is another grazing regulation: On the grassy path animals could graze for ee, whereas for grazing in the forest a fee had to be paid. Stratzing ( 1 51h century): „ltem, freie viechwaid auf dem Grassing weg. item, undfreie waid gen wald auf und ab, und geit man von ieder chue 2d dem vorstmaister von der waid. “
lnterstices could weil have played a crucial roJe in local subsistence and they are of enormous interest to the Iandscape ecologist wanting to infer estimates of productivity and the overall working of the agro-ecosystem. These few examples solely for linear Iandscape elements point into a direction that could weil be pursued rther.
Concluding remar
Three conclusions regarding the ture use of the presented data can be drawn:
• To calculate the amount of Iabor needed for agriculture in the Middle Ages one has to include the maintenance work needed for in astructure and the work needed for erection and subsequent dismantling of temporary structures such as fences.
• The information about the temporal amount of work and its structure is an important part ofany modeling effort.
• The maintenance of in astructure as a common proble and duty put a demand on control and enforcement that made a ce ain degree of administration necessary. Administration might thus be a tribute agriculture made necessary, the stratification of feudal society to some degree then can be seen as a necessary outcome of the mode of production or socio-metabolic regime.
The social construction of the environment becomes quite clear:
Neighbors shared responsibility for keeping their borders in order and shared pro t of what was growing on the interstices. Commons could serve as an economic reserve for transitory use. The Iandscape was abundant with features such as eld-banks and other interstices which are also an important factor of ecological resilience. So the work put into
41
the maintenance of such man-made structures probably had a double effect: It helped humans as weil as the agro-ecosystem. Human Iabor demand was, as should be emphasized, high on such linear, infrastructural elements which are primarily unproductive parts of the landscape.
The source material offers the possibility to estimate the disturbance regime of some crucial elements of Iandscape ecology, the corridors. In Iandscape ecology disturbance comprises human activities such as drainage, grass-cutting, soil compaction and others. It has been shown that the custumals offer a wealth of information on the disturbance regimes in late medieval landscapes. In addition to corridor elements other features could be analyzed15•
The measurement of colonization intensity, which is as yet poorly developed, might also bene t om an infrastructural approach such as the one presented in this paper. The EHDA could be put to rther use in an interdisciplinary effort for a history of the man-made agricultural environment in the longer, historical view. Such a long-time perspective is a prerequisite for the measurement or estimate of „sustainability“, should this currently popular word not be rendered meaningless in the ture.
“ Maps of ecological Iandscape structure have been created by our te as far back as 1733. Using custumals, archaeological evidence and other sources one could try to push such analyses even rther back in time, albeit probably on a less detailed spatial basis. For the Iandscape ecology maps of 1 8 2 0 and 1 7 3 3 see: http: Il w w w . p p h . u n i v i e . a c . a g 2 / i a l e 9 8 / p u b l _e . h t m l .
42
MEDIUM AEVUM QUOTIDIANUM
41
MS 1999
HE USGEGEBEN VON GE J TZ
GEDRUCKT MIT UNTERSTÜTZUNG DER KULTUR TEILUNG DES AMTES DER NIEDERÖSTERREICHISCHEN LANDESREGIERUNG
Titelgraphik: Stephan J. Tramer
Herausgeber: Medium Aevum Quotidianum. Gesellscha zur Erfor­ schung der materiellen Kultur des Mittelalters, Kö ermarkt 13, A-3500 Krems, Österreich. Für den Inhalt verantwortlich zeichnen die Autoren, ohne deren ausdrückliche Zustimmung jeglicher Nachdruck, auch in Auszügen, nicht gestattet ist. – Druck: KOPITU Ges. m. b. H., Wiedner Hauptstraße 8-10, A-1050 Wien.
Inhalt
Vorwort ……………………………………………………………………………………….. 5 Franz Mandl, Mittelalterliche und hneuzeitliche Tierdarstellungen
in den nördlichen Kalkalpen Österreichs und Baye s ……………….. 7
Verena Winiwarter, Landscape Elements in the Late Medieval Village: Can Information on Land-Use Be Derived
om Normative Sources? ……………………………………………………….. 22
Anu Mänd, Festive Food in Medieval Riga and Reval …………………….. 43
3
Vorwort
Die Beiträge des vorliegenden He es von Medium Aevum Quotidianum beschä igen sich mit Problemkreisen mittelalterlicher und frühneuzeit­ licher Alltagsgeschichte, die diesmal den Bereich der Aussage bildlicher Quellen, jenen der ‚Umweltbewältigung‘ und manche Aspekte des Nahrungswesens im Zeitrahmen festlicher Anlässe betreffen. Sie beziehen sich damit alle auf Perzeption, Praxis und Praktiken im
Spannungsfeld bzw. Einklang zu Normen, Wünschen und/oder Idealen.
Die folgenden He e von Q werden sich einerseits neuerlich verschiedenen alltagshistorischen Einzelstudien von eingeladenen Beiträ­ gem und von Mitgliede und Freunden unserer Gesellscha widmen, welche die Bandbreite der Inhalte und der angewandten Methoden in der Forschung, sowie neuer Zugänge zur Alltagsgeschichte des Mittelalters vermitteln sollen. Andererseits werden im Jahre 2000 die bereits angekündigte Bibliographie den Graffiti des Mittelalters und der f r hü e n N e u z e i t , s o w i e d i e A r b e i t v o n L o t h a r S p ä t h R a u m , Raumverständnis und Raumfunktionen in ühen englischen Zisterzen als Sonderbände unserer Publikation erscheinen. Die Planungen r einen Band zu alltagsrelevanten Bereichen der „Neithard-Rezeption in Wort und Bild“ sind ebenfalls schon recht weit fortgeschritten. Die stark e eiterte und überarbeitete Neuau age der ,,Bibliographie Alltag und Sachkultur des Mittelalters“ (vgl. Medium Aevum Quotidianum 718, 1986) ist ebenfalls in den Planungen r die nähere Zukun enthalten und be ndet sich bereits in Erarbeitung.
GerhardJ , Herausgeber
5