27712575

University of Illinois Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to The Journal of English and Germanic Philology.

http://www.jstor.org

University of Illinois Press

Historical Studies on the Middle Ages in Germany: Tradition, Current Trends, and Perspectives Author(s): Hans-Werner Goetz Source: The Journal of English and Germanic Philology, Vol. 105, No. 1, The State of Medieval

Studies (Jan., 2006), pp. 207-230Published by: University of Illinois PressStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/27712575Accessed: 20-10-2015 15:48 UTC

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at http://www.jstor.org/page/ info/about/policies/terms.jsp

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

This content downloaded from 158.251.134.120 on Tue, 20 Oct 2015 15:48:04 UTCAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

http://www.jstor.org

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=illinois

http://www.jstor.org/stable/27712575

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp



Historical Studies on the Middle Ages in Germany: Tradition, Current Trends,

and Perspectives

Hans-Werner Goetz, University of Hamburg

It is self-evident that giving a survey of current trends and perspectives of

German historical studies on the Middle Ages in a short article can only be done in a

fairly rough, schematic, and exemplary manner.1 The choice

of mentioning or neglecting recent research is admittedly subjective, and to prove my point I shall concentrate, though not exclusively, on research on the Early and High Middle Ages, for the simple reason that I am much

better acquainted with this period than with the Late Middle Ages. Since

every historian is well aware that nothing in the world is so new that it lacks some historical roots, one cannot talk about recent

approaches in medieval

studies without a retrospective look at their historical background. So I

shall begin with a brief account of the German tradition and development of historiography on the Middle Ages before assessing its current "state"

and exemplarily discussing some recent research fields and approaches, and I shall conclude with some remarks on the internal and external

conditions of studying medieval history in German universities today.

i. I have given a comprehensive, though still "essayistic" survey in: Moderne Medi?vistik.

Stand und Perspektiven der Mittelalterforschung (Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft,

1999). See also Hans-Werner Goetz, ed., Die Aktualit?t des Mittelalters, Herausforderungen.

Historisch-politische Analysen, 10 (Bochum: Winkler, 2000) and now Goetz and J?rg Jar nut, eds., Medi?vistik im 21. Jahrhundert. Stand und Perspektiven der internationalen und inter

disziplin?ren Mittelalterforschung, Mittelalterstudien, 1 (Paderborn: Fink, 2003). I confine the

bibliography to German works: Michael Borgolte, ed., Mittelalterforschung nach der Wende 1989, Historische Zeitschrift Beihefte, N.F., 20 (Munich: Oldenbourg, 1995), has made the attempt of a valuable kind of academic "stock-taking" on the occasion of the reunification of the two

German states in 1990. An extensive comparison of social history in Eastern and Western

Germany is given by Michael Borgolte, Sozialgeschichte des Mittelalters. Eine Forschungsbilanz nach der deutschen Einheit, Historische Zeitschrift Beihefte, N.F., 22 (Munich: Oldenbourg,

1996). A valuable collection of short essays on certain aspects is provided by Otto Gerhard

Oexle, ed., Stand und Perspektiven der Mittelalterforschung am Ende des 20. Jahrhunderts, G?ttinger

Gespr?che zur Geschichtswissenschaft, 2 (G?ttingen: Wallstein, 1996). A useful comparison of recent German and French studies is given by Jean-Claude Schmitt and Otto Gerhard

Oexle, eds., Les tendances actuelles de l'histoire du Moyen Age en France et en Allemagne, Histoire

ancienne et m?di?vale, 66 (Paris: Publications de la Sorbonne, 2003). Finally there are some

collections on recent approaches, for example: Joachim Heinzle, ed., Modernes Mittelalter.

Neue Bilder einer popul?ren Epoche (Frankfurt on Main: Insel, 1994).

Journal of English and Germanic Philology?-January ? 2006 by the Board of Trustees of the University of Illinois



2o8 Goetz

i. TRADITIONS

When assessing the German tradition I shall not go back as far as the age of "historicism" in the nineteenth century2 because to recall that modern

history as a "science" with seminars and critical methods ( Quellenkritik) had

its decisive roots in Germany, whose university system was to become the

model for the whole Western world and by around i goo had been adopted

nearly everywhere, would be no more than a sad and nostalgic retrospec

tive glance from a present day situation where German historical studies seem to have lost their former importance. Nowadays, abroad, German

historiography is frequently more or less ignored except by a few special ists, unless it is written in, or translated into, English, a fact that is primarily

due to the lamentable lack of knowledge of the German language.3 This

does not contradict the fact that some Jewish emigrants to America during the Nazi regime (such as Ernst Kantorowicz or Gerhard Ladner) had a

great influence,4 or, as Robert Lerner has pointed out during the discus

sion in the conference, a number of German historians are well known in

America (such as Carl Erdmann, Herbert Grundmann, Gerd Teilenbach,

Percy Ernst Schramm, Peter Classen, or Arno Borst, to name only

a few).

Nevertheless, most of these great scholars have become known only fairly

late, after some of their important studies had been translated, whereas

current studies are mostly neglected when written in German. Moreover,

German medievalists who have gained the most influence in America are

representatives of cultural history, a field that has always been marginal

2. See, besides the pertinent works of Georg G. Iggers on the history of historiography, Otto

Gerhard Oexle, Geschichtswissenschaft im Zeichen des Historismus. Studien zur Problemgeschichte der Moderne, Kritische Studien zur Geschichtswissenschaft, 116 (G?t?ngen: Vandenhoeck &

Ruprecht, 1996); Friedrich Jaeger and J?rn R?sen, Geschichte des Historismus. Eine Einf?hrung (Munich: Beck, 1992); Otto Gerhard Oexle and J?rn R?sen, eds., Historismus in den Kultur

wissenschaften. Geschichtskonzepte, historische Einsch?tzungen, Grundlagenprobleme, Beitr?ge zur

Geschichtskultur, 12 (Cologne: B?hlau, 1996). For the impact of the Historical School on

modern medieval studies, cf. G?nter Scholtz, Historismus am Ende des 20. Jahrhunderts. Eine

internationale Diskussion (Berlin: Akademie, 1997). 3. The bibliography of any English, American, French, or Spanish historical study will

usually reveal the absence of references to German works, though with some laudable

exceptions. 4. See J?rgen Petersohn, "Deutschsprachige Medi?vistik in der Emigration. Wirkungen

und Folgen des Aderlasses der NS-Zeit (Geschichtswissenschaft?Rechtsgeschichte?Hu manismusforschung)," Historische Zeitschrift, 277 (2003), 1-60. Most of the emigrants were

representatives of a history of ideas or cultural history and thus of an approach far from the mainstream in Germany, and almost completely neglected after the Exodus in the 1930s

(ibid., p. i4f.), a loss that was to be felt here for decades (ibid., p. 53f). All in all, however, there were only few emigrants and, according to Petersohn, their influence was limited and restricted to certain research areas, with the exception of Kantorowicz, Mommsen, Ladner, and perhaps Wallach.



The Middle Ages in Germany 209

in Germany itself.5 The language barrier, however, is not the only factor. I am convinced that in addition the "traditionalistic" strain of German

research is a further reason for its being ignored elsewhere.6

I shall commence with the beginning of the "decline" of German histori

cal studies in the twentieth century, a tradition which has simultaneously been a strength and a stumbling block for German historical medieval

studies in recent years. The most characteristic feature of German medi

eval studies, particularly in comparison with British or French historiog

raphy, is, first, that it concentrated strictly on states, kings, and politics. After the end of the so-called "Lamprecht dispute" around 1900 and

the rejection of "cultural history," all other fields of research remained more or less marginal for the greater part of the twentieth century; even

the "rediscovery" of a history of political ideas by Johannes Sp?rl and

later Helmut Beumann, in the final analysis remained "political history."

Secondly, it was a specific kind of political history inasmuch as it almost

exclusively resulted in "constitutional history"7 as a reaction against the

predominating legal (and monarchic) perspective in the nineteenth and

early twentieth century, and, not to be forgotten, often functioned in close

combination with regional history. The new trend reached its peak with

5- My impressions are confirmed by some informative American essays on German his

toriography: John B. Freed, "Medieval German Social History: Generalizations and Par

ticularism," Central European History, 25 (1992), 1-26; Edward Peters, "More Trouble With

Henry. The Historiography of Medieval Germany in the Angloliterate World, 1888-1995," ibid., 28 (1995), 47~72' wno underlines the importance of German historiography and

recognizes an American interest in German medieval history (pp. 59ff), although this is

restricted to certain fields (p. 64) and characterized by a limited range dependent on the

subject matter of those translations that happen to exist (pp. 65ff.); recently PatrickJ. Geary, "Medieval Studies?'Mittelalterstudien'?in America," in Medi?vistik im 21. Jahrhundert, ed.

Goetz andjarnut, pp. 63-71, and idem, "Ein wenig Wissenschaft von gestern: Der Einflu?

deutschsprachiger Wissenschaft in Amerika," in Die deutschsprachige Geschichtswissenschaft im 20. Jahrhundert, ed. Peter Moraw and Rudolf Schieffer (Ostfildern: Thorbecke, 2005),

381-92, who emphasize a decisive influence of German historical studies (not least through

emigrants), but again has to admit that this is based on translations?and some major works were not translated until decades later!?(and the examples, again, are restricted to previ ous works and do not include recent ones), though for some time now this trend seems

to have been changing. Geary acknowledges the influence of German institutions (MGH, Institute of Austrian History, Max-Planck-Institute) as hosts for American scholars, but on

the whole, the German influence (and the American interest in German medieval history) must not be exaggerated (with the possible exception of the history of religion).

6. The oldest historical journal in the whole world, the "Historische Zeitschrift," founded

in 1859, is still the most widely-read German journal, but most of its articles are of a gen eral character instead of providing fresh results or offering new directions, though this has

improved in recent years.

7. German "Verfassungsgeschichte"goes far beyond a "constitutional history" in the English sense of the word insofar as it is not restricted to a (written) constitution, but covers all

aspects of the political order.



21 o Goetz

the so-called "New German Constitutional History," established in the

1930s by Heinrich Dannenbauer, Otto Brunner, Theodor Mayer, Walter

Schlesinger and some others. The period that saw some of its most flour

ishing and decisive works seems, and is, of course, somehow connected

with the so-called "Third Reich" (particularly since some important schol

ars, such as Theodor Mayer, who became president of the Monumenta,

or the Austrian medievalist Otto Brunner, were personally involved with

Nazi politics). Nevertheless, I am reluctant to conclude that this had an

immediate or strong impact

on their academic work. It seems more appro

priate to say that medieval research of that period absolutely conformed to a nationalistic ideology in general rather than to the political ideology

of the Nazi regime in particular.

The new trend doubtlessly had its merits. (Paradoxically, and most

irritating for today's medievalists, this was the last period when the Mid

dle Ages formed the center of historical interest as a whole.) Positively

speaking, it meant, first, that German medieval history became "structural

history" (in fact, this occurred long before the turn against an histoire ?v?

nementielle*by the "Annales school"). Second, it meant a shift from legal norms towards a more "realistic" perspective based on the sources, and,

therefore, third, it also meant a shift towards a more adequate terminol

ogy which conformed to the language of the sources (particularly by Otto

Brunner, but also Walter Schlesinger), while the focus continued to be on the Early and High Middle Ages, whereas the later medieval centuries

were grossly neglected. One of the main achievements was

certainly the

search for an adequate comprehension of the early medieval state which

was seen (and "defined") as Herrschaft (i.e., lordship, or public authority, or rather both, but actually is?or has become?a specific German term

that obstinately resists all translations). This assumption was based on

Old German glosses which (sometimes) translated the Latin res publica

by the Old German term h?rtuom. Moreover, this "state" was not governed

by the monarch alone, but by his "retinue" or followers, or, rather, by the

aristocracy which was considered to have an equal claim to

public power

and, for the first time, was seen as a partner rather than an

opponent of

the king. The leading groups, therefore, formed a Herrschaftsverband (an "alliance of power") which was characterized mainly by personal bonds

(instead of "institutions").

These doctrines have had an impact on German historiography which cannot be underestimated and is still of import today. (There are, for in

stance, still some renowned scholars who think that there were no "states"

in the Early Middle Ages and who regard the period as "archaic" because

personal bonds were the decisive "public" elements).8 One of the most

8. See, for example, Hagen Keller, "Zum Charakter der 'Staadichkeit' zwischen karolingischer




important research projects of the 1970s and 1980s was concerned with

nation-building in the Middle Ages which, contrary to the vast research in the 1930s and 1940s on this topic,

was then certainly seen both as a

process of "historization" of nations and European: "Nations" were no

longer regarded as the inevitable result of the existence of peoples as

ethnic units but, on the contrary, were seen as a pre-condition for the

establishment of peoples. Moreover, new approaches

were adopted, such

as the analysis of a political-geographical terminology or of a "national consciousness" as indicators of nation-building. Nevertheless, it was still

the same question.9

Negatively speaking?and the following views have long since been aban doned?the "New German Constitutional History" no doubt dispropor tionately overemphasized the "Germanic" character of the medieval state,

focusing too strongly

on German hegemony in Europe and, on a method

ological level, squeezing its discoveries into a coherent "system." Significant

examples are Heinrich Mitteis's doctrine of the high medieval "feudal

system," conceived in an institutional manner (as "feudality") and not, as

Marc Bloch taught, as a

pattern of the whole society (as "feudalism"),10 or

the doctrine of the so-called "king's freemen," further developed later on

by Karl Bosl, who defined them paradoxically as "free unfree people."11 The decisive point, however, is that the "New German Constitutional His

tory" became absolutely predominant in medieval historical studies and remained so until the 1970s. There was no break in 1945, neither as far

as medievalists, with a few exceptions, were concerned, nor methods and

approaches in medieval history, though there was a break, of course, in

political ideology since the nationalist view was almost completely aban

doned.12 The collapse of the nation now made it possible to write about

Reichsreform und hochmittelalterlichem Herrschaftsaufbau," Fr?hmittelalterliche Studien, 23

(1989), 248-64; Johannes Fried, "Der karolingische Herrschaftsverband im 9. Jahrhundert zwischen 'Kirche und 'K?nigshaus'," Historische Zeitschrift, 235 (1982), 1-43; Gerd Althoff,

Die Ottonen. K?nigsherrschaft ohne Staat, Urban Taschenb?cher, 473 (Stuttgart: Kohlhammer, 2000).

9. For an informative and at the same time critical survey of this research, cf. Joachim Ehlers, Die Entstehung des Deutschen Reiches, Enzyklop?die deutscher Geschichte, 31 (Munich:

Oldenbourg, 1994) (with a comprehensive bibliography). 10. As is well-known, a decade ago this doctrine was contested by Susan Reynolds, Fiefs

and Vassals. The Medieval Evidence Reinterpreted (Oxford: Oxford Univ. Press, 1994). 11. For a refutation of this theory, see Eckhard M?ller-Mertens, Karl der Gro?e, Ludwig der

Fromme und die Freien. Wer waren die liberi homines der karolingischen Kapitularien (742/743?832) ?

Ein Beitrag zur Sozialgeschichte und Sozialpolitik des Frankenreiches, Forschungen zur mittelal terlichen Geschichte, 10 (Berlin: Akademie, 1963); Hans K. Schulze, "Rodungsfreiheit und

K?nigsfreiheit. Zur Genesis und Kritik neuer verfassungsgeschichtlicher Theorien," Historische

Zeitschrift, 219 (1974), 529-50; Johannes Schmitt, Untersuchungen zu den Liberi Homines der

Karolingerzeit, Europ?ische Hochschulschriften, 3. Reihe, 83 (Frankfurt: Lang, 1977). 12. See Winfried Schulze, Deutsche Geschichtswissenschaft nach 1945 (Munich: dtv, 1989);

Ernst Schulin, ed., with the collaboration of Elisabeth M?ller-Luckner, Deutsche Geschichtswis



212 Goetz

the problems of a great Carolingian Empire (thus Heinrich Fichtenau)13 or about the limits of the imperial idea (thus Heinz L?we).14

In the late 1950s and 1960s, the "center" of traditional medieval studies was the "Konstanzer Arbeitskreis f?r mittelalterliche Geschichte," founded

deliberately as a counterweight institution to the Monumenta by Theodor

Mayer who had been dismissed from his post as its director. For a few

decades, the "Konstanzer Arbeitskreis" became the most renowned and

also the most influential institution of medieval studies, also by its unof ficial role in university appointments. Its conferences and their pertinent volumes in the "Vortr?ge und Forschungen" series came to set the tone

for German medieval studies. The historical questions remained almost

the same, but were now regarded from a wider and more open perspec

tive. Further progress was made by prosopographical studies stimulated

by Gerd Tellenbach in Freiburg and Rome and continued by Karl Bosl in

W?rzburg and afterwards in Munich, by Eugen Ewig in Bonn, and their

respective "schools." The medieval nobility (and their families) became a

major focus of interest, above all in regional studies.15 The 1960s and early

1970s produced numerous works on the local

nobility, its possessions, ge

nealogy, and family ties, inferring kinship from a combination of identical names and possessions found at the same

places. This was completed later

by the extensive analysis of the so-called books of commemoration ( libri

memoriales) in an attempt to

gain a better understanding of the noble fam

ily structure, as well as of monastic institutions, represented particularly in the works of Karl Schmid, Joachim Wollasch, and their followers.16

Accordingly, medieval history, in the tradition of Otto Brunner, also became social history, but continued to be seen within a "constitutional

senschaft nach dem 2. Weltkrieg 1945-1965, Schriften des Historischen Kollegs, Kolloquien, 14 (Munich: Oldenbourg, 1989).

13. Heinrich Fichtenau, Das karolingische Imperium. Soziale und geistige Problematik eines

Gro?reiches (Z?rich: Fretz & Wasmuth, 1949). 14. Heinz L?we, "Von den Grenzen des Kaisergedankens in der Karolingerzeit" (1958),

in idem, Von Cassiodor zu Dante. Ausgew?hlte Aufs?tze zur Geschichtschreibung und politischen Ideenwelt des Mittelalters (Berlin: de Gruyter, 1973), pp. 206-30.

15. A sound and justified criticism of German post-war social historiography and its

exclusively political perspective is provided by John B. Freed, "Reflections on the Medieval German Nobility," American Historical Review, 91 (1986), 553-75

16. See Karl Schmid, Gebl?t, Herrschaft, Geschlechterbewu?tsein. Grundfragen zum Verst?ndnis des Adels im Mittelalter, aus dem Nachla? herausgegeben und eingeleitet von Dieter Mertens und Thomas Zotz (Sigmaringen: Thorbecke, 1998); Gerd Althoff, "Gloria et nomenperpetuum.

Wodurch wurde man im Mittelalter ber?hmt?" in Person und Gemeinschaft im Mittelalter. Fest

schrift Karl Schmid, ed. Althoff (Sigmaringen: Thorbecke, 1988), pp. 297-313; Karl Schmid and Joachim Wollasch, Memoria. Der geschichtliche Zeugniswert des liturgischen Gedenkens im

Mittelalter, M?nstersche Mittelalter-Schriften, 48 (Munich: Fink, 1984). One of the con crete results of this comprehensive work was an overall analysis of liturgical sources of the

monastery of Fulda: Karl Schmid, ed., Die Klostergemeinschaft von Fulda im fr?heren Mittelalter, 3 vols, M?nstersche Mittelalter-Schriften, 8 (Munich: Fink, 1978).




framework." In Germany, social history was chiefly combined with con

stitutional history, whereas economic history remained more or less mar

ginal throughout.17 Likewise, the so-called "Historical Social Science"

of the influential Bielefeld "school" remained an approach to modern

history which was applied to the nineteenth and twentieth centuries but was never

really introduced into medieval studies. Nevertheless, from the

late 1960s onwards, many medievalists saw themselves as social historians,

also conducting studies on the lower classes ( Unterschichten) and on peas ants, on convents (as institutions of corporate life), on

poverty and social

welfare, on social groups, such as university students or

journeymen, on

urban societies, or on contemporary ideological interpretations of soci

ety.18 From then on, there were also attempts to bring medieval studies

into alignment with theories developed by social scientists on medieval

history (for example Norbert Elias's disastrous theory of a "process of

civilization").19 One may conclude that there were changes in medieval

studies in these decades but they came about gradually and unobtrusively, without big bangs, great debates, or controversies.

2. CHANGE OF PERSPECTIVES DURING THE

LAST TWO DECADES

A more remarkable change began in the 1980s with a certain "anthropolo

gization" of historical studies (and it was only then that German medieval

17. Though there have always been studies on economic problems in the Middle Ages, there have been, and are at present, very few medievalists who have specialized in economic

history which has been more or less regarded as an "appendix" of social history, rather than

vice versa. There are some surveys on "Social and economic history of the Middle Ages," but not a single survey of economics. One should mention, however, the G?ttingen Workshop of the Academy of Sciences, founded by Herbert Jankuhn, as an interdisciplinary project on

economic and social questions of Germanic and Early Medieval Germany, for example, the six invaluable volumes on: Untersuchungen zu Handel und Verkehr der vor- und fr?hgeschichtlichen Zeit in Mittel- und Nordeuropa, published between 1985 and 1989. They were preceded by volumes on peasants ( 1974), the village (1977), fields (1979/80), and crafts (1981). For the

late Middle Ages, one should mention the pertinent studies of Franz Irsigler, Ulf Dirlmeier, and Gerhard Fouquet.

18. See the detailed survey of Borgolte, Sozialgeschichte des Mittelalters.

19. Norbert Elias, ?ber den Proze? der Zivilisation. Soziogenetische und psychogenetische Untersuc

hungen, 2 vols., 2d. ed. (Bern: Francke, 1969); English transi. The Civilizing Process: Sociogenetic and Psychogenetic Investigations, trans. Edmund Jephcott (Oxford: Blackwell, 2000). This

theory was not only based on limited and one-sided evidence, but, by assuming a process of civilization, it also neglected the specific culture of individual periods. For a criticism, cf.

Martin Dinges, "Formenwandel der Gewalt in der Neuzeit. Zur Kritik der Zivilisationstheo

rie von Norbert Elias," in Kulturen der Gewalt. Ritualisierung und Symbolisierung von Gewalt

in der Geschichte, ed. Rolf Peter Sieferle and Helga Breuninger, 2d. ed. (Frankfurt-on-Main:

Campus, 1998), pp. 171-94.



214 Goetz

ists, belatedly, began to participate in methodological debates that had

begun elsewhere in the late 1960s, and to debate new approaches). This

change coincides, by the way, with a strong revival of interest in the Middle

Ages among the general public: in expositions and academic books written

for a greater audience, but also, and perhaps

even more so, in "medieval

novels" (fantasy novels set in the Middle Ages) and "events," for example,

in so-called "medieval" fairs and markets or mock tournaments. There

were changes in social history itself, insofar as attempts to adopt the theory of stratification for the Middle Ages

were soon abandoned.20 At the same

time medievalists showed an interest in minorities and marginal groups,21 or even "deviants" (that is, outsiders, who were not

integrated, or who

consciously dissociated themselves from "normal" society, such as heretics

or homosexuals). There was a change in social history,

one may say, first

from rigid structural systems towards vertical (and horizontal) mobility and social conflicts (and it is in this field that East German research was

most stimulating, an aspect that has been forgotten today) ; second, from

upper to lower classes; third, from social classes to social groups and their

relations;22 fourth, from "normal" people to outsiders, and from men to

women and children, and finally, from society to social anthropology and

"circles of life" (such as the village society, or the manorial system, urban

societies, monastic groups, or court society) P These new

perspectives

were, however, still integrated into social "systems." Nevertheless, these

studies, which were welcomed at that time by the younger generation, never succeeded in becoming the central focus of German research on

the Middle Ages. An important publication and forerunner to some of

20. See Michael Mitterauer, "Probleme der Stratifikation in mittelalterlichen Gesellschafts

systemen," in Theorien in der Praxis des Historikers. Forschungsbeispiele und ihre Diskussion, ed.

J?rgen Kocka, Geschichte und Gesellschaft, Sonderheft 3 (G?ttingen: Vandenhoeck 8c

Ruprecht, 1977), pp. 13-54. 21. See, for example, Bernd-Ulrich Hergem?ller, ed., Randgruppen der sp?tmittelalterli

chen Gesellschaft. Ein Hand- und Studienbuch, 3d. ed. (Warendorf: Fahlbusch, 2001); Frank

Rexroth, "Medi?vistische Randgruppenforschung in Deutschland," in Mittelalterforschung, ed. Borgolte, pp. 427-51. From the plethora of specific studies I quote exemplarily a study on illegitimate children: Ludwig Schmugge, Kirche, Kinder, Karrieren. P?pstliche Dispense von

der unehelichen Geburt im Sp?tmittelalter (Z?rich: Artemis 8c Winkler, 1995); idem, Illegitimit?t im Sp?tmittelalter, Schriften des Historischen Kollegs. Kolloquien, 29 (Munich: Oldenbourg, 1994)

22. A summary of this field, as far as its political impact is concerned, is provided by Gerd Althoff, Verwandte, Freunde und Getreue. Zum politischen Stellenwert der Gruppenbindungen

im fr?heren Mittelalter (Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft, 1990); Engl. transi.

Family, Friends and Followers: The Political Importance of Group Bonds in the Early Middle Ages, trans, by Christopher Carroll (New York: Cambridge Univ. Press, 2004).

23. See Hans-Werner Goetz, Leben im Mittelalter vom 7. bis zum 13. Jahrhundert (Munich: Beck, 1986; 7th. ed. 2002); Engl. trans.: Life in the Middle Ages, trans, by Albert Wimmer

(Notre Dame: Univ. of Notre Dame Press, 1994).




these developments was Arno Borst's Lebensformen im Mittelalter, published in 1973.24 Actually, it provided no more than a commented collection of small sections of sources, but these were classified and interpreted accord

ing to new perspectives: the second part more

"conventionally" in terms

of certain social groups (but including outsiders and "exotic people"), the first part, however, according

to "conditions of life," such as time, family and age, space and environment, human beings as social beings (with sections on fellow men, associations, classes, laws, or

languages). The 1980s saw attempts at fresh approaches, for example,

a history of

everyday life in the Middle Ages (dealing with "everyman" instead of the

great political persons), with reference to ethnological theories (such as

Clifford Geertz's theory of "thick description"). While this topic seemed to have greater appeal for a more

general audience, which led to the pro

duction of a quantity of general works, its academic "branch" emphasized

the inherent difficulties and developed methodological approaches.25 The most important institution devoted to this line of inquiry, the "Institut f?r

Realienkunde" in Krems in Austria, was founded in 1970 by the late Harry K?hnel. Germany produced

no micro-history comparable to Emmanuelle

Le Roy Ladurie's "Montaillou," partly because no comparable evidence for

such an undertaking exists, but also because German history of everyday

life remained social history (in a more conventional conception).26

"History from below," as modern history of everyday life was called, was

accompanied by a

"history from within," and it was only from this

perspective that a history of mentalities entered German medieval stud

ies, though in a restrained manner27 and chiefly confined to medieval

24- Arno Borst, Lebensformen im Mittelalter (Frankfurt-am-Main: Propyl?en, 1973). 25. See, for example, Gerhard Jaritz, Zwischen Augenblick und Ewigkeit. Einf?hrung in die

Alltagsgeschichte des Mittelalters (Vienna: B?hlau, 1989) ; Mensch und Objekt im Mittelalter und in

der fr?hen Neuzeit. Leben?Alltag?Kultur, Ver?ffentlichungen des Instituts f?r Realienkunde

des Mittelalters und der Fr?hen Neuzeit, 13, Sitzungsberichte der ?sterreichischen Aka

demie der Wissenschaften Wien. Phil.-hist. Klasse, 568 (Vienna: Verlag der ?sterreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, 1990); most recently Ernst Schubert, Alltag im Mittelalter. Nat?rliches Lebensumfeld und menschliches Miteinander (Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchge sellschaft, 2002), who deals with the history of everyday life as a history of human conditions,

behavior, and communication. For specific aspects, see Reinhold Kaiser, with the collabora tion of Marie-Th?r?se Kaiser-Guyot, Trunkenheit und Gewalt im Mittelalter (Cologne: B?hlau,

2002). 26. A good example is Klaus Arnold, Niklashausen 1476. Quellen und Untersuchungen zur

sozialreligi?sen Bewegung des Hans Behem und zur Agrarstruktur eines sp?tmittelalterlichen Dorfes, Saecula Spiritalia, 3 (Baden-Baden: Koerner, 1980), which provides a kind of microhistory, but in fact deals with the rural society in a late medieval Franconian village.

27. A good example of the acceptance as well as the reservations against a history of men

talities and for a conventional conception is a volume published in the Reichenau series:

Frantisek Graus, ed., Mentalit?ten im Mittelalter. Methodische und inhaltliche Probleme, Vortr?ge und Forschungen, 35 (Sigmaringen: Thorbecke, 1987).



216 Goetz

religiosity (as in the works of Peter Dinzelbacher or Klaus Schreiner) ,28

An early endeavor by Rolf Sprandel to introduce the history of mentalities

into German medieval studies (in 1972),29 had not been very success

ful. But afterwards there were at least some tentative attempts to apply

this approach30 and isolated studies on various fields of human attitudes

(towards space and time, children and the elderly, self and "the other,"

death and "the other world"). Dinzelbacher's works are characterized

by the assumption of a great "mental" shift in the twelfth century (a

period that experienced, for example, the "discovery of love" or the

"internalization of religion"),31 a break which, being a specialist on the

Early Middle Ages, I am reluctant to confirm quite so categorically. There can be no doubt that the new approaches suffered from methodologi cal shortcomings. However, I do not agree with Michael Borgolte who, in a recent article, claimed that, because of these defects (for example,

the neglect of inconsistencies in the self-conception of medieval people and groups), a history of mentality would no longer be appropriate for

present studies.32 It would probably be more appropriate to improve the

methodological basis of current approaches.

28. See, for example, Peter Dinzelbacher, Angst im Mittelalter. Teufels-, Todes- und Gotteserfah rung: Mentalit?tsgeschichte und Ikonographie (Paderborn: Sch?ningh, 1996); Klaus Schreiner,

ed., Fr?mmigkeit im Mittelalter. Politisch-soziale Kontexte, visuelle Praxis, k?rperliche Ausdrucksformen (Munich: Fink, 2002); idem, Maria. Jungfrau, Mutter, Herrscherin (Munich: Hanser, 1994);

Arnold Angenendt, Geschichte der Religiosit?t im Mittelalter (Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche

Buchgesellschaft, 1997 ).

29. Rolf Sprandel, Mentalit?ten und Systeme. Neue Zug?nge zur mittelalterlichen Geschichte

(Stuttgart: Union, 1972). 30. See, Peter Dinzelbacher, ed., Europ?ische Mentalit?tsgeschichte. Hauptthemen in Einzel

darstellungen (Stuttgart: Kr?ner, 1993); Hans-Henning Kort?m, Menschen und Mentalit?ten.

Einf?hrung in Vorstellungswelten des Mittelalters (Berlin: Akademie, 1996). A most valuable

approach is Heinrich Fichtenau, Lebensordnungen des 10. Jahrhunderts. Studien ?ber Denkart

und Existenz im einstigen Karolingerreich, Monographien zur Geschichte des Mittelalters, 30

(Stuttgart: Hirsemann, 1984); English trans. Living in the Tenth Century. Mentalities and Social

Orders, trans. Patrick J. Geary (Chicago: Univ. of Chicago Press, 1991), who rejects the term

"mentality" in favor of "way of thinking" and "human existence," but provides a vast spectrum of insights into the so-called "dark century."

31. Peter Dinzelbacher, "?ber die Entdeckung der Liebe im Hochmittelalter," Saeculum, 32

(1981), 185-208; idem, "Gef?hl und Gesellschaftim Mittelalter. Vorschl?ge zu einer emo

tionsgeschichtlichen Darstellung des hochmittelalterlichen Umbruchs," in H?fische Literatur,

Hofgesellschaft, h?fische Lebensformen um 1200, ed. Gert Kaiser and Jan-Dirk M?ller (D?sseldorf: Droste, 1986), pp. 213-41; idem, "Hauptlinien einer Religionsgeschichte Deutschlands im Hochmittelalter," Saeculum, 47 (1996), 67-88; idem, Handbuch der Religionsgeschichte im deutschsprachigen Raum. Vol. 2: Hoch- und Sp?tmittelalter (Paderborn: Sch?ningh, 2000); idem, Europa im Hochmittelalter 1050?1250. Eine Kultur- und Mentalit?tsgeschichte (Darmstadt:

Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft, 2003). 32. Michael Borgolte, '"Selbstverst?ndnis' und 'Mentalit?ten'. Bewu?tsein, Verhalten

und Handeln mittelalterlicher Menschen im Verst?ndnis moderner Historiker," Archiv f?r Kulturgeschichte, 79 (1997), 189-210.




Although women's history has a different origin (not least resulting from feminist approaches and women's studies, that more or less "en

croached" on historical terrain instead of being particularly developed within the framework of historical studies), it is nevertheless based on

the same anthropological shift toward an interest in human beings of all

ranks and in all aspects of human life. It reached its peak equally in the

1980s and early 1990s and similarly developed from general surveys33 to valuable analyses of medieval women (differentiating according to

class or social group, stage of life, space, time, and historical situation).

An important "institution" was the Berlin workgroup on women in Late

Antiquity and the Early Middle Ages led by Werner Affeldt.34 Meanwhile, women's history claims to have widened its perspective towards a more

comprehensive "gender history," but until the present day, there are very

few German studies to deserve this label in so far as they equally focus on

women and men. Moreover, women's and gender history in Germany have

never been integrated into (interdisciplinary) "women's studies" as they are in America. Perhaps this is why they often remain more "historical"

(from a scholarly point of view). However, all these "new" approaches remained more or less marginal

(therefore, positively speaking, they never unleashed greater "debates on

an appropriate method or tendency," as they did in Modern History), nor

did they create any great sensation, unless they

were applied

to political

history. To give just one example: For a long time there have been thor

ough studies of medieval historiography (probably still our most important sources), not only concerning the bias of its authors but also its character

as a genre, the underlying ideology, the author's historical concept, the

reasons for writing a certain chronicle in a certain way, the dependence

on and impact of oral traditions, and so on. Every medievalist knew about

these studies. But it was only when Johannes Fried drew the necessary conclusions for just one political fact (the coronation of Henry I in 919, as it was told by Widukind of Corvey about 50 years later) that it created a sensation and sparked off a

widespread discussion.35 If, in fact, there

33- See Edith Ennen, Frauen im Mittelalter (Munich: Beck, 1984; 6th ed. 1999); English trans. The Medieval Woman, transi, by Edmund Jephcott (Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1989).

34. See Werner Affeldt and Annette Kuhn, ed., Frauen in der Geschichte, VII: Interdisziplin?re Studien zur Geschichte der Frauen im Fr?hmittelalter. Methoden?Probleme?Ergebnisse, Geschichts

didaktik. Studien, Materialien 39 (D?sseldorf: Schwann, 1986); Werner Affeldt, ed., Frauen

in Sp?tantike und Fr?hmittelalter. Lebensbedingungen?Lebensnormen?Lebensformen (Sigmarin

gen: Thorbecke, 1990); Cordula Nolte, Conversio und Christianitas. Frauen in der Christianisie

rung vom 5. bis 8. Jahrhundert, Monographien zur Geschichte des Mittelalters, 41 (Stuttgart: Hirsemann, 1995). See also Hans-Werner Goetz, Frauen im fr?hen Mittelalter. Frauenbild und

Frauenleben im Frankenreich (Weimar: B?hlau, 1995). 35. Johannes Fried, "Die K?nigserhebung Heinrichs I. Erinnerung, M?ndlichkeit und

Traditionsbildung im 10. Jahrhundert," in Mittelalterforschung, ed. Borgolte, pp. 267-318.



218 Goetz

was nothing

new or astonishing

in Fried's argumentation, the reaction

shows how much historians were still confidently relying on their beloved sources (and the shock waves it created when a seemingly indisputable

political "fact" turned out to be uncertain). The best examples of adopting new questions and approaches and ap

plying them to conventional themes are probably Gerd Althoff's important studies on the settlement of conflicts,36 which reveal the importance of a

"representation of power" and of rituals or of "nonverbal communica

tion" in an "oral society," of respective "rules" and "unwritten laws," of the

role of mediators,37 and of a planned "mise en sc?ne" of symbolic

acts.

Unlike American studies on this topic (by Frederic Cheyette, Stephen White, or Patrick Geary), they did not originate in ethnological theories, but resulted from the question of how the Ottonian state could function

without adequate institutions and written norms. Nevertheless, these stud

ies display new (mental and anthropological) dimensions of this topic38

(though some features may have been exaggerated by assuming

a "system"

of fixed rules for the rituals that were carried out).39 When Althoff deals

with "emotions," such as tears and contrition, he applies an

approach

of the history of mentality to a political subject:40 Even emotions were

"used" symbolically as a

planned "mise en sc?ne," a suggestion that cannot

be denied, but which obviously means that "emotions" were transferred

from "private" and psychic spheres to politics, and thus presupposes the

existence of "real" or genuine emotions.41

All in all, one can say that all these new approaches had only a small or marginal "life of their own" (as an independent perspective), but they were gradually (and unobtrusively) integrated into conventional stud

ies. This is even true for gender history which, after comparatively rich

productivity in the 1980s, has now gained (almost) general acknowledg

36. See Gerd Althoff, Spielregeln der Politik im Mittelalter. Kommunikation in Frieden und Fehde

(Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft, 1997). 37. See recently Hermann Kamp, Friedensstifter und Vermittler im Mittelalter (Darmstadt:

Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft, 2001).

38. A further recent example is Klaus van Eickels, Vom inszenierten Konsens zum systematisier ten Konflikt. Die englisch-franz?sischen Beziehungen und ihre Wahrnehmung an der Wende vom

Hoch-zum Sp?tmittelalter, Mittelalter-Forschungen, 10 (Stuttgart: Thorbecke, 2002), who considers West European foreign policy under "mental" perspectives such as love, friend

ship, and kinship. Nevertheless, studies like these remain the exception. 39. See the critical remarks of Philippe Buc, The Dangers of Ritual. Between Early Medieval

Texts and Social Scientific Theory (Princeton: Princeton Univ. Press, 2001).

40. See Gerd Althoff, "Emp?rung, Tr?nen, Zerknirschung. 'Emotionen' in der ?ffentli

chen Kommunikation des Mittelalters," Fr?hmittelalterliche Studien, 30 (1996), 60-79, rePr in idem, Spielregeln, pp. 258-81.

41. It may suffice here to allude to the much broader approach of Barbara Rosenwein,

ed., Anger's Past. The Social Uses of an Emotion in the Middle Ages (Ithaca: Cornell Univ. Press,

1998).




ment, but certainly has not acquired

a very prominent role in medieval

historiography as a whole in Germany, indicating that the breakthrough that was initially sought has lost most of its momentum along the way.

Again, there was no academic break after 1989, partly because West Ger

man medieval studies had been, and, of course, remained, dominant

(though there has ever since been a tendency to devaluate East German

studies, which, to my mind, is not at all justified), foremost because East and West German studies, after a phase of ideological confrontation in the 1950s and early 1960s, had approximated each other and begun to

enjoy fruitful academic exchange and discussion.

3. THE CURRENT STATE OF GERMAN MEDIEVAL HISTORICAL STUDIES

The present state of German medieval studies may be characterized by two

contrasting features. On the one hand, they abound in a variety of differ ent themes and approaches that is greater than ever. There is

probably no

question that has not yet become the object of historical analysis. More

over, after a phase of "impersonal" structuralism, "men" and "women"

have no doubt regained their position as the center of historical interest.

On the other hand, however, despite the anthropological perspectives

adopted in the 1980s and the recent trend towards a "cultural science"

which seems to mark our present time, German medieval studies are still

dominated by a certain conventionalism (which justifies my detailed ret

rospective account). Moreover, medieval history cannot at all be regarded

any more as the "core" of all historical studies, as it was, partly at least,

from the nineteenth century until the end of the Second World War. It

may still be an obligatory portion of historical studies, though today only few students specialize in the Middle Ages, and medieval research may still

be respected and taken notice of by the great newspapers, for example, but new trends in German historiography rarely originate from medieval studies. Modern history is leading the way and, unfortunately enough,

modern historians rarely take notice of medieval research.

To sum up the state of German historical medieval studies in a few sentences (and to begin with some positive aspects), one has to admit that

its strength is still based on the traditional branches. One field that ought to be mentioned is the Quellenkritik (the criticism of sources), particularly of charters and historiography, but meanwhile extended to all genres: to

hagiography and miracle stories, capitularies, penitentials, polyptychs {Urbare), Weist?mer, books of commemoration (the libri confraternitatum), letters, testaments, travel reports, reports of visions, to name only

a few



2 20 Goetz

examples. I think it is no exaggeration to assert that some (or even most)

of the best pieces on Quellenkritik come from German academic "work

shops," and this is undeniably also true for the editing of sources. "MGH"

(the "Monumenta Germaniae Hist?rica") is still the label for the world's most famous "factory of editions." Unfortunately, this continuous tradition

is accompanied by drastic cuts in the traditional auxiliary fields (only a

few chairs of this discipline have survived the long period of cutbacks in German universities),42 although this is probably a world-wide experience. In spite of this conventionalism, it is nevertheless remarkable that our

sources are being increasingly considered as

products of their authors

(and therefore as revelations of their author's thoughts and attitudes).

Quellenkritik is no longer based on the author's "bias" alone, but on his

perceptions and conceptions. Medieval historiography has become tes

timony to political ideology43 and human conceptions,44 of the concept of and interest in history,45 but also of a "pragmatic literacy"46 (including the "uses of the past"), or, recently, of its "constructional" character.47 All

this implies an important mental, and methodological, shift. The second "strength" of German historical studies might be their "pro

fundity": Research on the seigneurial system, for example, is characterized

by a meticulous account of regional situations and by a detailed analysis of certain

polyptychs.48 Most comprehensive studies are based on a broad,

42. Today the only remaining chairs designated explicitly to auxiliary disciplines are in

Bonn, Munich, and Passau. Sometimes, there are combined chairs of medieval history and

auxiliary sciences, but here, the emphasis is seldom on the latter.

43. See Helmut Beumann, "Die Historiographie des Mittelalters als Quelle f?r die Ideenge schichte des K?nigtums," Historische Zeitschrift, 180 (1955), 449-88, repr. in idem, Wissenschaft vom Mittelalter. Ausgew?hlte Aufs?tze (Cologne: B?hlau, 1972), pp. 201-40.

44. See Thomas Scharff, Die K?mpfe der Herrscher und der Heiligen. Krieg und historische Erin

nerungin der Karolingerzeit (Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft, 2002). 45. See Hans-Werner Goetz, Geschichtsschreibung und Geschichtsbewu?tsein im hohen Mittelalter,

Orbis mediaevalis. Vorstellungswelten des Mittelalters, 1 (Berlin: Akademie, 1999). 46. See Gerd Althoff, "Causa scribendi und Darstellungsabsicht: Die Lebensbeschreibun

gen der K?nigin Mathilde und andere Beispiele," in Litterae medii aevi. Festschrift Johanne Autenrieth, ed. Michael Borgolte and Herrad Spilling (Sigmaringen: Thorbecke, 1988), pp. H7-33

47. See Johannes Laudage, ed., Von Fakten und Fiktionen. Mittelalterliche Geschichtsdarstel

lungen und ihre kritische Aufarbeitung, Europ?ische Geschichtsdarstellungen, 1 (Cologne: B?hlau, 2003).

48. For recent studies on the seigneurial system, see Werner R?sener, ed., Strukturen der

Grundherrschaft im fr?hen Mittelalter, Ver?ffentlichungen des Max-Planck-Instituts f?r Geschich te, 92 (G?ttingen: Vandenhoeck 8c Ruprecht, 1989) ; idem, ed., Grundherrschaft und b?uerliche

Gesellschaft im Hochmittelalter, Ver?ffentlichungen des Max-Planck-Instituts f?r Geschichte, 115 (G?ttingen: Vandenhoeck 8c Ruprecht, 1995). A good example for a special study devoted to one polyptych is Konrad Elmsh?user and Andreas Hedwig, Studien zum Polyptychon von Saint-Germain-des-Pr?s (Cologne: B?hlau, 1993). For a comparative approach to European studies of the seigneurial system, see Hans-Werner Goetz, "Fr?hmittelalterliche Grund herrschaften und ihre Erforschung im europ?ischen Vergleich," in Das europ?ische Mittelalter




sometimes even vast amount of material; they provide ample documenta

tion, numerous footnotes and references, and extensive argumentation on the contents, or

"message," of our testimonies. This is particularly true

for studies in political and ecclesiastical history, which, as it seems, still

form the bulk of the German medievalists' publications. To mention just one

example: German research of the last four decades on the monastic

orders, the Benedictines (Friedrich Prinz), Cluniacs (Joachim Wollasch), Cistercians (Kaspar Elm), Mendicants (Dieter Berg), or the Chivalric

Orders (J?rgen Sarnowsky), on their institutions (Gert Melville) and atti

tudes (Klaus Schreiner), on nuns (Franz Feiten) or on hagiography (Klaus Herbers, Martin Heinzelmann) can be considered as both inspiring and

fundamental for international discussion.

One may therefore conclude, first, that German medieval studies have

their strong points and that some fields may still be regarded as somehow

"leading," but, secondly, that these are almost exclusively traditional fields

of research. And there are no indications of any great change in the near

future. In a different context, I analyzed (roughly, that is, judging only by the titles) the dissertation and habilitation projects in progress during the

last decade (1990-2000) .49 The number of such theses seemed reassur

ing: for the year 2000 alone 90 habilitation projects and 347 dissertation

projects in medieval history

were registered

as being in progress, the ma

jority (more than 50%) dealing with the Late Middle Ages. A quantitative

analysis, however, led to the astonishing (and indeed alarming) result that

far more than fifty percent dealt with political and ecclesiastical topics, and, in spite of all our preaching on "internationalism," more than 65%

were concerned with German history. Far less than 5% went into aspects of a

history of mentalities or economic history, and the percentage of works

on gender history

or auxiliary sciences sank straight into insignificance.

Regarding the works of the younger generation, therefore, one may re

gret the lack of sufficient trends toward innovation and broadening of

traditional perspectives. German studies normally do not abound in completely

new or origi

nal ideas, but they will probably continue to provide valuable (written) "data bases" in the future for all sorts of studies, and it is not by acci

dent that several valuable "inventories" may boast of the label "made in

Germany," such as the "Regesta imperii" (with Regesten of the German

im Spannungsbogen des Vergleichs. Zwanzig internationale Beitr?ge zu Praxis, Problemen und Per

spektiven der historischen Komparatistik, ed. Michael Borgolte, Europa im Mittelalter, i (Berlin:

Akademie, 2001), pp. 65-87. 49. See Hans-Werner Goetz,

" 'Perspektiven' deutscher Medi?vistik. Zum 'Trend' geschichts

wissenschaftlicher Nachwuchsarbeiten der letzten zehn Jahre," Das Mittelalter. Perspektiven medi?vistischer Forschung, 8 (2003), 142?50.



222 Goetz

kings), the "Regesta pontificum Romanorum," the "Repertorium der

deutschen K?nigspfalzen," a detailed survey on the king's palaces, or the

"Germania Sacra," a collection of all the evidence concerning individual

churches. The advantage of German historiography has always been, and

still is, its profound "solidity" as

compared, for example, to some doubt

lessly ingenious suggestions of the French "Annales" school or of some

recent American studies in cultural sciences, which sometimes, however,

are based on no more than a few, isolated pieces of evidence. It may be

that this kind of research will once more be esteemed in the future when

historians notice that "ingenious ideas" alone do not necessarily guarantee

their validity or, at the very least, their appropriateness for the specific medieval situations and conditions under scrutiny, and that a careful and

exhaustive analysis of numerous sources, that is, a quantitative

as well as a

qualitative analysis forms the indispensable groundwork for well-founded

historical interpretation. Sadly, it may sometimes even be necessary nowa

days to add: an analysis of the original texts instead of translations. What we need in the future is both: modern ideas and questions combined with a

profound analysis of sources and a consideration of medieval ways of

writing and thinking. Regarding these two poles, the disadvantage,

or weakness, of German

historical medieval studies, is exactly its traditionalism. Of all leading coun

tries, I think Germany was among the first to reject the achievements of the

"Annales school" and possibly among the last to adopt at least some of its

approaches, such as the history of attitudes or mentalities or a "historical

anthropology." The history of everyday life, and even gender history, are

being dealt with, but have always been, and still are, of marginal impor tance, and, at the moment, medieval studies in Germany do not seem to

welcome with open arms approaches

or themes that are most frequently

summarized under the label of a "historical cultural science," probably the leading perspective of the next decades. The "linguistic turn" has not

caused a "turn" in Germany either, though at least some German medieval

ists have now become more aware of narrative structures and, as I have

already mentioned, of the authors' conceptions and intentionally shaped

constructions. Nevertheless, for German historians, the "historical reality" behind such subjective constructions still seems to be much more interest

ing than the construction itself. Even Johannes Fried, who has probably

gone furthest in emphasizing the narrative constructions of our texts,50

50. See, for example, Johannes Fried, "Wissenschaft und Phantasie. Das Beispiel der Ge

schichte," Historische Zeitschrift, 263 (1996), 291-316; idem, "Erinnerung und Vergessen. Die

Gegenwart stiftet die Einheit der Vergangenheit," Historische Zeitschrift, 273 ( 2001 ), 561 -93; idem, "Elite und Ideologie oder die Nachfolgeordnung Karls des Gro?en vom Jahre 813," in La royaut? et les ?lites dans l'Europe carolingienne (du d?but du IXe aux environs de 920), ed.




still does not tire of pointing towards their unreliability instead of making exactly this "construction" the object of historical analysis. Conservative

medievalists (and they form the majority) have even despised all new ap

proaches as passing "fashions" that will come and go. To my mind, this is not at all justified because the whole history of historiography is a sequence of "fashions" and we not only have to be open towards new

approaches but

also need to reflect upon its constant alterations and developments (as is

being done in this volume). In a world that is continuously changing in

its estimation of the humanities and in its expectations for their methods

and achievements, it is absolutely necessary that scholars reflect on their

subjects and methods. In a world where the Middle Ages are no longer

regarded as a firm foundation of the modern world, it is crucial that me

dievalists do not confine themselves to exploring the Middle Ages without

reflecting on the current state and future prospects of medieval studies.

To the same degree that most German scholars refuse to adopt themes

of a "cultural studies" approach to

history, translations from abroad have

found a market in Germany. I confine myself here to mentioning the works

of the Russian historian Aaron Gurevic on the medieval mind, on popular culture, and, finally,

on the "mute witnesses of history."51 Their success

reveals a somewhat paradoxical situation: These and other translations,

for example, all the books written by Georges Duby or Jacques Le Goff, have found a vast number of readers, but they

are neither being discussed

adequately nor do they find many German followers.52

All this does not mean that there are no changes in German medieval

studies. There are at least some relevant anthropological and cultural

projects, of which a few may be mentioned here. One of the most im

portant German institutions is the Institute of Early Medieval Studies at

the University of M?nster with its extensive research projects: initially, on

fraternities and commemoration ( memoria), subsequently, on

"pragmatic

literacy," and now, on "symbolic communication."53 All these themes are,

or have been, modern approaches. Research on

"literacy," of course, is

R?gine Le Jan, Centre d'Histoire de l'Europe du Nord-Ouest, 17 (Villeneuve d'Ascq: Centre

d'Histoire de l'Europe du Nord-Ouest, 1998), pp. 71-109.

51. Aaron J. Gurjewitsch, Das Weltbild des mittelalterlichen Menschen (Munich: Beck, 1980)

(original Russian edition: Moscow, 1972; first German edition: Dresden, 1978); idem, Mit

telalterliche Volkskultur (Munich: Beck, 1987) (original Russian edition: Moscow, 1981; first

German edition: Dresden, 1986); idem, Stumme Zeugen des Mittelalters. Weltbild und Kultur

der einfachen Menschen (Weimar: B?hlau, 1997) (original Russian edition: Moscow, 1990).

52. See the dissertation of Steffen Seischab, "Imaginer la soci?t? f?odale": Georges Duby s Bild

des Mittelalters. (Frankfurt-on-Main: Lang, 2005); idem, Georges Duby: Geschichte als Traum

(Berlin: Burckhardt, 2003).

53. The M?nster "Sonderforschungsbereich" has carried out a great deal of further

pertinent research in various fields. The activities are regularly mentioned in its journal "Fr?hmittelalterliche Studien."



2 24 Goetz

neither a genuinely historical nor a German invention, but by exploring its political, social and cultural functions (as "pragmaticliteracy"), it may

be considered as having adopted a specific German feature: the focus is not so much on the "process of literalization" (as in Britain, the country of its origins), but on its "uses" in the administration and institutionaliza

tion of kingdoms, towns, and the Church,54 a perspective that meanwhile

has returned to Britain with works on "The Uses of Literacy."55 Ludolf Kuchenbuch has even interpreted seigneurial polyptychs in the light of the

development of (scholarly) literacy.56 The research projects in Dresden, led by Gert Melville, have slightly altered and enlarged this topic with a

view towards the establishment of monastic institutions by written norms,57

but also with regard to individual piety.58 Again, "culture" in the shape of "literacy" is predominantly regarded both as a political phenomenon and as one of Quellenkritik (the function of the individual written work).

A second, though not at all exclusively German feature, is the fact that

"literacy" is seen in the context of a medieval "oral society," an

approach

54- To mention the pioneering work: Hagen Keller, Klaus Grubm?ller, and Nikolaus Stau bach, eds., Pragmatische Schriftlichkeit im Mittelalter. Erscheinungsformen und Entwicklungsstufen,

M?nstersche Mittelalter-Schriften, 65 (Munich: Fink, 1992). Other examples are: Hagen Keller and Thomas Behrmann, eds., Kommunales Schriftgut in Oberitalien. Formen, Funktionen,

?berlieferung, M?nstersche Mittelalter-Schriften, 68 (Munich: Fink, 1995); Hagen Keller and Franz Neiske, eds., Vom Kloster zum Klosterverband. Das Werkzeug der Schriftlichkeit, M?nstersche

Mittelalter-Schriften, 74 (Munich: Fink, 1997); Christel Meier, Volker Honemann, Hagen Keller, and Rudolf Suntrop, eds., Pragmatische Dimensionen mittelalterlicher Schriftkultur, M?n stersche Mittelalter-Schriften, 79 (Munich: Fink, 2002). See further Rudolf Schieffer, ed.,

Schriftkultur und Reichsverwaltung unter den Karolingern (Opladen: Westdeutscher Verlag, 1996) ; see also the codicological approach of the Vienna "school" of Walter Pohl, for example, Walter

Pohl and Paul Herold, eds., Vom Nutzen des Schreibens. Soziales Ged?chtnis, Herrschaft und Besitz im Mittelalter, Forschungen zur Geschichte des Mittelalters, 5, Osterreichische Akademie der

Wissenschaften. Denkschriften, phil.-hist. Klasse, 306 (Vienna: Verlag der ?sterreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, 2002); Walter Pohl, Werkst?tte der Erinnerung. Montecassino und die Gestaltung der langobardischen Vergangenheit, Mitteilungen des Instituts f?r Osterreichische

Geschichtsforschung. Erg?nzungsband, 39 (Vienna: Oldenbourg, 2001). 55. See Rosamond McKitterick, ed., The Uses of Literacy in Early Medieval Europe (Cambridge:

Cambridge Univ. Press, 1990). 56. Ludolf Kuchenbuch, "Ordnungsverhalten im grundherrlichen Schriftgut vom 9.

zum 12. Jahrhundert," in Dialektik und Rhetorik im fr?heren und hohen Mittelalter, ed. Johannes Fried, Schriften des Historischen Kollegs. Kolloquien, 27 (Munich: Oldenbourg, 1997), pp. 175-268.

57. See Gert Melville, ed., Institutionen und Geschichte. Theoretische Aspekte und mittelalterliche

Befunde, Norm und Struktur, 1 (Cologne: B?hlau, 1992). Most of the subsequent works have been published in the series "Norm und Struktur" and "Vita regularis"; most recently J?rg Oberste, Zwischen Heiligkeit und H?resie. Religiosit?t und sozialer Aufstieg in der Stadt des hohen

Mittelalters, Norm und Struktur, 17 (Cologne: B?hlau, 2003); Elke Goez, Pragmatische Schrift lichkeit und die Archivpflege der Zisterzienser. Ordenszentralismus und regionale Vielfalt, namentlich in Franken und Altbayern (1098?1525), Vita regularis, 17 (M?nster: Lit, 2003).

58. See Gert Melville and Markus Sch?rer, eds., Das Eigene und das Ganze. Zum Individuellen im mittelalterlichen Religiosentum, Vita regularis, 16 (M?nster: Lit, 2002), and other works in this series.




particularly advocated, from different angles, by Hanna Vollrath59 and Mi

chael Richter,60 but still of marginal importance in the German academic

landscape. It is not by accident that both scholars have strong connections

to Britain or Ireland. Influenced by literary historians, German historians

have only recently begun to consider the different forms of communi

cation, oral and literal, in their reciprocal influence and context. Even

more important, the emphasis has been on "nonverbal communication,"

that is, symbolic and ritual communication (best represented, again, by the works of Gerd Althoff) ,61 and significantly equally applied to political contexts. There is a

widespread tendency not

only to contrast "literal" and

"oral" society, but also to understand "symbolic communication" as part

of an "oral society." However, this simply means

neglecting the relevance

of symbols in medieval law as well as the importance of "symbolism," that

is, of symbols and their significance in written scientific, primarily "neo

platonic" Christian thinking. It is high time to see these different modes

in an integrated context, to ask for the underlying, medieval structures,

and detach these approaches from their exclusively political context. Liter

ary historians, meanwhile, have gone even further by regarding "media"

instead of "communication" and by talking about medieval "mediality." As far as I can see, as yet this hyper-new approach has not

really been

adopted by German historians.

Other recent German studies in cultural science could be mentioned:

attempts, to name only

a few examples, to analyze the "construction" of

historiographical "facts" and writings, the representation,

or even "con

struction," of the "nobility,"62 the "construction" of widows,63 or the "en

counter of cultures," that is, the exploration of the world, the other, and

59- See Hanna Vollrath, "Das Mittelalter in der Typik oraler Gesellschaften," Historische

Zeitschrift, 233 (1981), 571-94. In her subsequent articles, Vollrath has been mainly con

cerned with the oral character of medieval law.

60. See Michael Richter, The Formation of the Medieval West. Studies in the Oral Culture of the

Barbarians (Dublin: Four Courts Press, 1994). 61. See Althoff, Spielregeln; idem, ed., Formen und Funktion ?ffentlicher Kommunikation im

Mittelalter, Vortr?ge und Forschungen, 51 (Stuttgart: Thorbecke, 2001); idem, "Zur Bedeu

tung symbolischer Kommunikation f?r das Verst?ndnis des Mittelalters," Fr?hmittelalterliche

Studien, 31 (1997), 370-89; idem, "Rituale?symbolische Kommunikation. Zu einem neuen

Feld der historischen Mittelalterforschung," Geschichte in Wissenschaft und Unterricht, 50

(1999), 140-54; most recently idem, Die Macht der Rituale. Symbolik und Herrschaft im Mit

telalter (Darmstadt: Primus, 2003). 62. See Otto Gerhard Oexle and Werner Paravicini, eds., Nobilitas. Funktion und Repr?senta

tion des Adels in Alteuropa, Ver?ffentlichungen des Max-Planck-Instituts f?r Geschichte, 133

(G?ttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1997).

63. See Bernhard Jussen, Der Name der Witwe. Erkundungen zur Semantik der mittelalterlichen

Bu?kultur, Ver?ffentlichungen des Max-Planck-Instituts f?r Geschichte, 158 (G?ttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2000).



2 26 Goetz

self, by voyages,64 and so on. I may perhaps include here my own "pre-post

modern" interest in human perceptions and human conceptions, mostly illustrated on the basis of chronicles. There are works on human memory as "culture,"65 based on Maurice Halbwachs's belatedly discovered theory of a "social memory," "excavated" some time ago by

an Egyptologist, Jan

Assmann.66 To take only the more extensive projects into account, one

should mention the Vienna "school" of "ethnicity" for the Early Middle

Ages,67 or, for the Later Middle Ages, the series of studies on courts and

residences,68 or on the noble family.69 It may also be worthwhile to consider

64. See Folker Reichert, Erfahrung der Welt. Reisen und Kulturbegegnung im sp?ten Mittelalter

(Stuttgart: Kohlhammer, 2001); idem, Begegnungen mit China. Die Entdeckung Ostasiens im

Mittelalter, Beitr?ge zur Geschichte und Quellenkunde des Mittelalters, 15 (Sigmaringen: Thorbecke, 1992); Felicitas Schmieder, Europa und die Fremden. Die Mongolen im Urteil des Abendlandes vom 13. bis in das 15. Jahrhundert, Beitr?ge zur Geschichte und Quellenkunde des Mittelalters, 16 (Sigmaringen: Thorbecke, 1994).

65. Otto Gerhard Oexle, ed., Memoria als Kultur, Ver?ffentlichungen des Max-Planck-Insti tuts f?r Geschichte, 121 (G?ttingen; Vandenhoeck 8c Ruprecht, 1995); in a social perspec tive, Werner R?sener, ed., Adelige und b?rgerliche Erinnerungskulturen des Sp?tmittelalters und der Fr?hen Neuzeit, Formen der Erinnerung, 8 (G?ttingen: Vandenhoeck 8c Ruprecht, 2000) ;

idem, ed., Tradition und Erinnerung in Adelsherrschaft und b?uerlicher Gesellschaft, Formen der

Erinnerung, 17 (G?ttingen: Vandenhoeck 8c Ruprecht, 2003). 66. Maurice Halbwachs, Les cadres sociaux de la m?moire (Paris: Alean, 1925); idem, La

m?moire collective, Biblioth?que de Sociologie Contemporaine (Paris: Presses Universitaire de France, 1950); Jan Assmann, Das kulturelle Ged?chtnis. Schrift, Erinnerung und politische Identit?t in fr?hen Hochkulturen, 2d ed. (Munich: Beck, 1997).

67. See Walter Pohl, ed., Strategies of Distinction: The Construction of Ethnic Communities,

300?800, The Transformation of the Roman World, 2 (Leiden: Brill, 1998); idem, Die

V?lkerwanderung. Eroberung und Integration (Stuttgart: Kohlhammer, 2002); idem and Maxi milian Diesenberger, Integration und Herrschaft. Ethnische Identit?ten und soziale Organisation im

Fr?hmittelalter, Forschungen zur Geschichte des Mittelalters, 3, ?sterreichische Akademie der Wissenschaften. Phil.-hist. Klasse, Denkschriften, 301 (Vienna: Verlag der ?sterreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, 2002).

68. See Hans Patze and Werner Paravicini, eds., F?rstliche Residenzen im sp?tmittelalterlichen Europa, Vortr?ge und Forschungen, 36 (Sigmaringen: Thorbecke, 1991); Werner Paravi

cini, ed., Alltag bei Hofe. 3. Symposion der Residenzen-Kommission der Akademie der Wissenschaften in G?ttingen (28. Feb.-i.M?rz 1992 in Ansbach), Residenzenforschung, 5 (Sigmaringen:

Thorbecke, 1995); Werner Paravicini, ed., Zeremoniell und Raum. 4. Symposium der G?ttinger Residenzen-Kommission der Akademie der Wissenschaften, Potsdam, September 1994, Residenzen

forschung, 6 (Sigmaringen: Thorbecke, 1997); Jan Hirschbiegel and Werner Paravicini, eds., Das Frauenzimmer. Die Frau bei Hofe in Sp?tmittelalter und fr?her Neuzeit. 6. Symposium der Residenzen-Kommission der Akademie der Wissenschaften in G?ttingen, Residenzenforschung, 11

(Stuttgart: Thorbecke, 2000); Cordula Nolte, ed., Principes: Dynastien und H?fe im Sp?tmit telalter. Interdisziplin?re Tagung des Lehrstuhls f?r Allgemeine Geschichte und Historische Hilfswissen schaften in Greifswald in Verbindung mit der Residenzen-Kommission der Akademie der Wissenschaften in G?ttingen 1^.-18.6.2000, Residenzenforschung, 14 (Stuttgart: Thorbecke, 2002).

69. To mention only three recent "Habilitationsschriften": Karl-Heinz Spie?, Familie und

Verwandtschaft im deutschen Hochadel des Sp?tmittelalters. 13. bis Anfang des 16. Jahrhunderts, Vierteljahrschrift f?r Sozial- und Wirtschaftsgeschichte. Beihefte, 111 (Stuttgart: Steiner,

1993); Gabriela Signori, Vorsorgen ?Vererben?Erinnern. Kinder- und familienlose Erblasser in der st?dtischen Gesellschaft des Sp?tmittelalters, Ver?ffentlichungen des Max-Planck-Instituts f?r

Geschichte, 160 (G?ttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2001); Cordula Nolte, Familie, Hof und Herrschaft. Das verwandtschaftliche Beziehungs- und Kommunikationsnetz der Reichsf?rsten am Beispiel der Markgrafen von Brandenburg-Ansbach 1440-1530, Mittelalter-Forschungen, 11

(Ostfildern: Thorbecke, 2005).




the themes of some recent interdisciplinary research institutions (Sonder

forschungsbereiche) patronized by the "Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft,"

though they are not confined to the Middle Ages, with titles such as

"Institutionality and Historicity" (in Dresden), "Identities and Alterities"

(in Freiburg), "Cultures of memory" (in Gie?en), or "Symbolic commu

nication and social value systems" (in M?nster), or the research fields of some recent so-called "graduate colleges," such as

"European historio

graphical narratives" (in D?sseldorf), "Travels, Literature, and Cultural

Anthropology" (in Paderborn), "Cultural transfers" (in Erlangen), or

Michael Borgolte's Institute of Comparative European Medieval History in

Berlin. Such a list of recent approaches and studies is, of course, inevitably

completely incomplete and sporadic (and I apologize to all those many German colleagues who undeservedly may not have been mentioned).

All these projects display a certain shift of interest. Nevertheless, this does not alter my impression that anthropological and cultural studies remain rare exceptions in German historiography, unless they are considered in a

political, or institutional, context, and it remains to be seen whether

and when they will step out of the sidelines.

To conclude this part, one may state that current German medieval

studies, as everywhere,

are characterized by a

great variety and complexity

of topics and approaches, though somewhat arbitrary and without distinct

guiding principles. Today we seem to have many more open questions than clear answers.

Perhaps this is the most striking feature of modern

research which is able to query all former seemingly firm beliefs, and

provide complex perspectives without being able to offer straightforward alternatives. There are no great disputes

at the moment in German me

dieval historiography: everything is more or less if not always entirely

accepted, at least tolerated. There is, however, a

tendency to bring the dif

ferent approaches and branches together and to unite them, scientifically,

but also institutionally, in "Centers of Medieval Studies" (as in Bamberg, Greifswald, or Paderborn), in interdisciplinary Sonderforschungsbereichen, or in associations of medievalists (like the "Medi?vistenverband").70

It would certainly be wrong to say that nothing has changed in Germany. There are new

perspectives, some of which I have mentioned here. But

one may perhaps assert that what is new is not

"originally" German. Ger

man medieval studies apparently come to be most original where they

apply the new concepts to conventional questions. In Germany, I

prefer to

warn my colleagues not to lose "touch" with international standards and

approaches by remaining too conventional. Writing

in an international

collection of essays, I may add that it can be useful not to ignore German

7o. For further information about this association, see its home page: http//www. mediaevistenverband.de.



2 28 Goetz

historiography completely. There is still something to learn from it, even

though new "trends" in medieval history seldom originate in Germany. Nevertheless, German studies are

normally grounded on a strict method

ological fundament and derive their results from sufficiently expansive evidence. If German historical research has lost much of its former repu tation, this is due first to its conventionalism (and it is the medievalists

themselves who are responsible for this) ; second, to its being neglected abroad because of the language barrier, and third (but not at all least), to the deplorable institutional conditions.

4. THE CONDITIONS OF MEDIEVAL

UNIVERSITY RESEARCH IN GERMANY

It means a great loss of knowledge and tradition that the Middle Ages are

being increasingly cancelled from school curricula so that the younger

generations receive their knowledge from fantasy films and novels rather than from books on history. The discovery of the "alterity" of the Middle

Ages is not an American, but a worldwide phenomenon:71 Even in Europe, the Middle Ages are no longer considered as our tradition or as the pre-his tory of modern times, in which we are

deeply rooted, as in the nineteenth

century, but as the "other world" which is different from ours. Whilst this could revive interest in the period as well as acknowledgment of our

studies, there seems to be an even greater danger that the Middle Ages

will become more or less irrelevant. To prevent such a danger, it will not

suffice to discover some contemporary features as having already existed

in the Middle Ages (from monasteries as "sacred trusts"72 to "medieval

identity machines").73 Fresh approaches mostly represent modern think

ing and tend towards anachronisms if they neglect medieval contexts and medieval literacy. Medievalists have the duty, and the chance, to confront

contemporary existence and modern thinking with medieval conditions and ideas, by interpreting these from their context, in order to

enlarge our intellectual horizons.

It is true that university conditions in Germany do not facilitate the attainment of such goals. At present, German universities are

expected

71. According to Geary, "Medieval studies," p. 65, medieval studies are at least considered to be an indispensable part of education and learning in America, an aspect that seems to

have been forgotten in contemporary Europe. 72. See Robert B. Ekelund Jr., Robert F. H?bert, Robert D. Tollison, Gary M. Anderson,

and Audrey B. Davidson, Sacred Trust: The Medieval Church as an Economic Firm (New York: Oxford Univ. Press, 1996).

73. Jeffrey J. Cohen, Medieval Identity Machines, Medieval Cultures, 35 (Minneapolis: Univ. of Minnesota Press, 2003).




or rather compelled to

change their curricula and their character com

pletely, mainly for financial reasons, although this is euphemized as be

ing great "university reforms" in accordance with American models (but

actually without adopting the American system). These reforms include

the introduction of B.A. studies (that is, one instead of two subjects, or

even no subject

at all, but some sort of amalgamation in "cultural stud

ies" or "humanities" as a whole), the abolishing of assistants and of the

"Habilitation" and the introduction of junior professors (however, without

the prospect of a tenure track), an adaptation of university salaries ac

cording to individual achievement, which means in practice: salary

cuts

in the humanities, a complete alteration of university structures (in some

federal states, universities are run by external councils who have neither

the time nor the knowledge to meet academic demands), a condensation

of universities and subjects, a curtailment of the humanities, and so on.

University education in the twenty-first century, far from being better, will no doubt be far more superficial.

Even worse, it seems that nobody really cares about the future of his

torical research within the university system. This is fatal because there are only a few research institutes in Germany (such as the Monumenta or the "Max-Planck-Institut f?r Geschichte"), and there is no national

research organization like the French C.N.R.S. It means that historical

research is almost exclusively confined to the universities (and, in fact, research institutes are normally integrated into the university system) so

that the increasing amount of teaching and administrative duties assigned

to scholars will inevitably lead to a further decrease of research. The num

ber of professors of medieval history amounts to slightly

more than 100,

a number that does not seem too high in an international comparison,

and if one considers the fact that there are more than 33,000 students

in Germany whose major subject is history, plus presumably the same

number of students with history as second subject.

In my essay on Medieval Studies written in 1999, I deplored the fact

that research in the humanities seems to have lost any relevance in cur

rent German politics and society. This does not mean that scholars are

not respected, or that their works are not in demand by publishers (quite the contrary), and yet it seems that writing history for a large public is

erroneously taken to be research, whereas real research no longer plays

any great role in current visions of the university, unless it is made visible

in great "research factories," such as the Sonderforschungsbereiche. What

counts almost exclusively nowadays is to obtain funding from a third party, neither public

nor university, particularly from one of the great founda

tions, such as the "Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft." It is evident that

such a practice does not favor the humanities, and yet it is absolutely



230 Goetz

vital that research in this area should regain some of its lost ground in our

society. I will not deny that a certain international comparability of university

education is necessary in our time. Nor will I deny that there are deficien cies in the German university system. But one should also bear in mind

its merits, which used to be grounded, for example, in a deeply-rooted

freedom of research and teaching and in a methodological education from the beginning. One can hardly fail to notice that all the discussions on the introduction of a B.A., the introduction of strict curricula as in

schools, and the demand for the straightforward professional application of the humanities will produce a further assimilation of the universities to

Vocational Colleges (Fachhochschulen). It will result in a further "descienti fication" of historical studies and a further decline of historical research.

Above all, it will certainly mean a further lamentable loss in the relevance

of Medieval Studies, except as a place of refuge for a few enthusiasts.



Date post:	03-Dec-2015
Category:	Documents
Upload:	michelle-ariz-ledesma
View:	213 times
Download:	1 times

27712575

Documents