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

dialnet-ar-18-ART0001322954

dialnet

dialnet-ar-18-ART00013229542019-05-18Zentralität in der Peripherie: Kirchengebäude als Orte des "Sonderfriedens" in den frühmittelalterlichen legesCzock, MiriamIn 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.2015text (article)application/pdfhttps://dialnet.unirioja.es/servlet/oaiart?codigo=6920928(Revista) ISSN 1619-4993Rechtsgeschichte-Legal History, ISSN 1619-4993, Nº 23, 2015, pags. 68-81gerLICENCIA DE USO: Los documentos a texto completo incluidos en Dialnet son de acceso libre y propiedad de sus autores y/o editores. Por tanto, cualquier acto de reproducción, distribución, comunicación pública y/o transformación total o parcial requiere el consentimiento expreso y escrito de aquéllos. Cualquier enlace al texto completo de estos documentos deberá hacerse a través de la URL oficial de éstos en Dialnet. Más información: https://dialnet.unirioja.es/info/derechosOAI | INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS STATEMENT: Full text documents hosted by Dialnet are protected by copyright and/or related rights. This digital object is accessible without charge, but its use is subject to the licensing conditions set by its authors or editors. Unless expressly stated otherwise in the licensing conditions, you are free to linking, browsing, printing and making a copy for your own personal purposes. All other acts of reproduction and communication to the public are subject to the licensing conditions expressed by editors and authors and require consent from them. Any link to this document should be made using its official URL in Dialnet. More info: https://dialnet.unirioja.es/info/derechosOAI

Dialnet

Dialnet AR

Rechtsgeschichte-Legal History, ISSN 1619-4993, Nº 23, 2015, pags. 68-81

German

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.

Article

Czock, Miriam

Czock, Miriam
Zentralität in der Peripherie: Kirchengebäude als Orte des "Sonderfriedens" in den frühmittelalterlichen leges

Czock, Miriam

Czock, Miriam

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

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

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

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

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

zentralität in der peripherie: kirchengebäude als orte des "sonderfriedens" in den frühmittelalterlichen leges

2015

https://dialnet.unirioja.es/servlet/oaiart?codigo=6920928

1709748974089404416