Beneficia, záduší a patronát v barokních Čechách: na příkladu třeboňského panství na přelomu 17. a 18. století = Benefices, church properties and patronage system in Baroque Bohemia : on the example of the Třeboň manor at the turn of the 17th and 18th century
Saved in:
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Book |
| Language: | Czech |
| Published: |
Brno
Matice Moravská
2010
|
| Edition: | Vyd. 1. |
| Series: | Knižnice Matice Moravské
31 |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | Inhaltsverzeichnis Abstract |
| Physical Description: | 421 S. Ill., graph. Darst., Kt. |
| ISBN: | 9788086488738 |
Staff View
MARC
| LEADER | 00000nam a2200000 cb4500 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 001 | BV037465228 | ||
| 003 | DE-604 | ||
| 005 | 20200515 | ||
| 007 | t | ||
| 008 | 110608s2010 abd| |||| 00||| cze d | ||
| 020 | |a 9788086488738 |9 978-80-86488-73-8 | ||
| 035 | |a (OCoLC)734071228 | ||
| 035 | |a (DE-599)BVBBV037465228 | ||
| 040 | |a DE-604 |b ger |e rakwb | ||
| 041 | 0 | |a cze | |
| 049 | |a DE-12 |a DE-355 |a DE-255 |a DE-M457 | ||
| 084 | |a 2.2 |2 KUBA2 | ||
| 084 | |a 7,41 |2 ssgn | ||
| 100 | 1 | |a Pumpr, Pavel |d 1978- |e Verfasser |0 (DE-588)1013013417 |4 aut | |
| 245 | 1 | 0 | |a Beneficia, záduší a patronát v barokních Čechách |b na příkladu třeboňského panství na přelomu 17. a 18. století = Benefices, church properties and patronage system in Baroque Bohemia : on the example of the Třeboň manor at the turn of the 17th and 18th century |c Pavel Pumpr |
| 246 | 1 | 1 | |a Benefices, church properties and patronage system in Baroque Bohemia |
| 250 | |a Vyd. 1. | ||
| 264 | 1 | |a Brno |b Matice Moravská |c 2010 | |
| 300 | |a 421 S. |b Ill., graph. Darst., Kt. | ||
| 336 | |b txt |2 rdacontent | ||
| 337 | |b n |2 rdamedia | ||
| 338 | |b nc |2 rdacarrier | ||
| 490 | 1 | |a Knižnice Matice Moravské |v 31 | |
| 546 | |a Zsfassung in engl. Sprache | ||
| 648 | 7 | |a Geschichte 1680-1720 |2 gnd |9 rswk-swf | |
| 650 | 0 | 7 | |a Kirchenverwaltung |0 (DE-588)4133860-1 |2 gnd |9 rswk-swf |
| 650 | 0 | 7 | |a Kirchengut |0 (DE-588)4163918-2 |2 gnd |9 rswk-swf |
| 651 | 7 | |a Herrschaft Třeboň |0 (DE-588)7751526-2 |2 gnd |9 rswk-swf | |
| 651 | 7 | |a Südböhmen |0 (DE-588)4078019-3 |2 gnd |9 rswk-swf | |
| 689 | 0 | 0 | |a Südböhmen |0 (DE-588)4078019-3 |D g |
| 689 | 0 | 1 | |a Herrschaft Třeboň |0 (DE-588)7751526-2 |D g |
| 689 | 0 | 2 | |a Kirchenverwaltung |0 (DE-588)4133860-1 |D s |
| 689 | 0 | 3 | |a Geschichte 1680-1720 |A z |
| 689 | 0 | |5 DE-604 | |
| 689 | 1 | 0 | |a Südböhmen |0 (DE-588)4078019-3 |D g |
| 689 | 1 | 1 | |a Herrschaft Třeboň |0 (DE-588)7751526-2 |D g |
| 689 | 1 | 2 | |a Kirchengut |0 (DE-588)4163918-2 |D s |
| 689 | 1 | 3 | |a Geschichte 1680-1720 |A z |
| 689 | 1 | |5 DE-604 | |
| 830 | 0 | |a Knižnice Matice Moravské |v 31 |w (DE-604)BV013201050 |9 31 | |
| 856 | 4 | 2 | |m Digitalisierung BSB Muenchen |q application/pdf |u http://bvbr.bib-bvb.de:8991/F?func=service&doc_library=BVB01&local_base=BVB01&doc_number=022617107&sequence=000003&line_number=0001&func_code=DB_RECORDS&service_type=MEDIA |3 Inhaltsverzeichnis |
| 856 | 4 | 2 | |m Digitalisierung BSB Muenchen |q application/pdf |u http://bvbr.bib-bvb.de:8991/F?func=service&doc_library=BVB01&local_base=BVB01&doc_number=022617107&sequence=000004&line_number=0002&func_code=DB_RECORDS&service_type=MEDIA |3 Abstract |
| 940 | 1 | |n DHB | |
| 940 | 1 | |n oe | |
| 940 | 1 | |q DHB_JDG_ISBN_1 | |
| 999 | |a oai:aleph.bib-bvb.de:BVB01-022617107 | ||
| 942 | 1 | 1 | |c 200.9 |e 22/bsb |f 09033 |g 4371 |
| 942 | 1 | 1 | |c 200.9 |e 22/bsb |f 09032 |g 4371 |
| 942 | 1 | 1 | |c 351.09 |e 22/bsb |f 09033 |g 4371 |
| 942 | 1 | 1 | |c 351.09 |e 22/bsb |f 09032 |g 4371 |
Record in the Search Index
| _version_ | 1804145771209031680 |
|---|---|
| adam_text | Obsah
I. ÚVOD
....................................................9
П.
CÍRKEVNÍ SPRÁVA A JEJÍ HMOTNÉ ZÁZEMÍ: PŘEHLED
BÁDÁNÍ
................................................11
1.
Církevní správa v pobělohorských Čechách: Historie
a
perspektívy
..........................................11
2.
Ekonomické zázemí farní správy v raném novověku
........21
2.1.
Domácí bádání
......................................21
2.2.
Trendy zahraniční historiografie
.......................38
III.
PANSTVÍ TŘEBOŇ A MÍSTNÍ CÍRKEVNÍ SPRÁVA
V RANÉM NOVOVĚKU
..................................49
1.
Pramenná základna:
Patronátni
písemnosti třeboňského
panství
................................................51
2.
Prostor a čas: Panství Třeboň v raném novověku
............58
3.
Církevní správa na třeboňském panství v raném novověku
... 71
3.1.
Farní organizace v předbělohorském období: Katolická
reforma a konfesní pluralita
...........................71
3.2.
Po roce
1620:
Obnova farní sítě
.........................90
4.
Panství jako prostor pro církevní správu
..................112
4.1.
Hranice církevní organizace versus hranice panství
......115
4.2.
Obhajoba patronátního práva třeboňskou vrchností
......118
IV.
FARNÍ MAJETEK: EKONOMICKÁ ZÁKLADNA
PATRONÁTNÍHO KLÉRU
...............................125
1.
Obsazování far: Patron hledá kněze, kněz hledá faru
.......126
1.1.
Kněz hledá faru
.....................................127
1.2.
Kněz žádá o faru
....................................135
1.3.
Patron vybírá duchovního správce
....................140
1.4.
Ideál kněze v patronově pojetí
........................144
1.5.
Preferování „domácích kněží
........................147
1.6.
Poptávka po beneficiích
-
atraktivita far
...............154
1.7.
Patron a kněz
-
odlišná stanoviska a hledání
konsenzu
... 166
1.8.
Shrnutí: Hierarchie far a
patronátni
klientela
............171
2.
Kněz na
beneficiu:
Finanční souvislostí života farního
kléru
.................................................176
2.1.
Prolog: Kněz přichází na
beneficium
...................176
2.2.
Správa farního majetku a jeho písemná evidence
........184
2.3.
Sedlák mezi sedláky: Venkovský farář jako hospodář
___190
2.4.
Farář jako vrchnost? Povinné dávky a desátky
..........204
2.5.
Farář jako
almužník? Akcidenční
příjmy
...............220
2.5.1.
Duchovní správa nebo výdělečná činnost?
Štóla,
ofěra
a další akcidence
..................................220
2.5.2.
Farář jako zaměstnanec: Výplaty od patrona a obce
. .. 231
2.6.
Příjmové zázemí třeboňských farářů
-
zhodnocení
......236
2.7.
Životní potřeby a nakládání
s
přebytky: Výdaje farářů
... 245
2.8.
Epilog: Kněz odchází z
beneficia
......................271
V.
ZÁDUŠNÍ
MAJETEK: PENÍZE VYDANÉ ZA DUŠI
.........289
1.
Správa kostelního majetku: Soumrak kostelníků
a byrokratická profesionalizace
.........................289
1.1.
Historický vývoj, předbělohorská praxe a válečná
destrukce
...........................................289
1.2.
Schwarzenberská správa: Byrokratizace, profesionalizace,
centralizace
.........................................294
1.3.
Kostelníci: Konec farní samosprávy
....................304
1.4.
Zástupci církve: Trpění spolupracovníci nebo nevítaná
kontrola?
..........................................313
1.5.
Správa v praxi: Skládání účtů
.........................323
2.
Zádušní
hospodaření: Financování kultu a úvěrové
podnikání
............................................329
2.1.
Struktura příjmů, její proměny v místě a čase
...........330
2.2.
Financování kultu: Vydání, jejich realizace, rezervní
zdroje
..............................................345
2.3.
Nakládání
s
přebytky: Úvěrové podnikání
..............355
VI.
ZÁVĚR: VRCHNOSTENSKÁ FARNÍ ORGANIZACE?
CÍRKEVNÍ SPRÁVA V RÁMCI SPRÁVY PANSTVÍ
........371
VIL SEZNAM PRAMENŮ A LITERATURY
..................385
VIII.
SEZNAM ZKRATEK
..................................409
IX.
SEZNAM TABULEK, GRAFŮ A VYOBRAZENÍ
...........411
X. SUMMARY
.............................................415
X. Summary
Benefices, Church Properties and Patronage System
in Baroque Bohemia
On the Example of the
Třeboň
Manor at the Turn
of the 17th and 18th Century
Existing research treats the development of the parish network in post-
White-Mountain Bohemia overwhelmingly on the basis of the documents pro¬
duced by the church. Owing to a number of complaints of church institutions,
historians mostly assume the negative assessment of the activities of secular
patrons, in which they see
-
in accordance with the used sources
-
one of the
main causes of the bad state of the lowest levels of church administration. Thus,
the biased heuristic presumptions often led to simplified statements. On the
example of a concrete manor, the present book attempts to critically revise the
sweeping criticism proposed by previous research concerning the activities of
(secular) patrons in the area of church administration on the grounds of a de¬
tailed analysis of the writings issued in the exercise of the right of patronage. In
doing so, this work makes efforts to ascertain the actual motives of the patron
in his attitude to the churches and parishes of which he was in charge, the influ¬
ence of his approach on everyday administrative work and its results. Thus, the
focal point of the research is the question of the role played by the landowners
as the holders of the right of patronage within the parish organization in post-
-White-Mountain Bohemia. The large Southern Bohemian manor of
Třeboň
(Wittingau) is used as a model case. The research concentrates particularly on
the period after
1660,
the year when the Schwarzenbergs gained the manor.
They extended and refined the management of the patronage system. It led to
an increased production of the documents on which this book is based. In order
to avoid the risk of biased conclusions, the large body of the sources produced
by the patron is compared with selected documents of church origin (visitation
records, reports of parish priests, etc.).
The fact alone that the boundaries of the parish network differed to some
extent from those of the manor complicated the everyday execution of the pa¬
tronage administration. The Schwarzenbergs (in contrast to some other patrons)
did not try to solve the resulting difficulties by means of arbitrary modifica¬
tions of the parish network. Yet, in the second half of the 17th and the first half
of the 18th century, the area under discussion did experience the consolidation
of the parish organization within the manor, but rather as a secondary result
of the purchases of the neighboring estates and manors which were connect¬
ed with the
Třeboň
region, among other means, by the parish administration.
The
Třeboň
patronage administration also shows a clear tendency to turn the
manor (and the whole area held by the Schwarzenbergs) into a unit homogene¬
ous in terms of church administration, easily manageable by the patron, and
secluded in relation to the outside environment, that is, a tendency to establish
the manorial parish organization (J. Schlenz).
416
Beneficia,
záduší a patronát v barokních Čechách
The members of the
House
of
Schwarzenberg
resolutely defended their
right of patronage against the claims of the institutions that endeavored to par¬
ticipate in this right (the canonries
iń
Třeboň
and Borovany) as well as those
that attempted to free themselves from it (the
Augustinians
in
Třeboň).
What is
more, the Schwarzenbergs made consistent efforts to put their right of patron¬
age into practice. They did not permit uncontrolled activities of church insti¬
tutions within their own land. And during significant legal actions, in which
manorial officers as well as church representatives took part, the patron em¬
phasized his claims on the key role in the individual areas of the administration
of the church issues within the manor (e.g. the administration of the posses¬
sions of the parish churches or confirmation of new parish priests). Thus, in
the
Třeboň
manor there were also points of disagreement between the patrons
and church institutions, of which the main reason was the non-existence of
a clear definition of authority limits accepted by both sides. It is the case of the
Třeboň
region under the Schwarzenbergs which indicates what was the essen¬
tial motive of the principle, unacceptable for the post-Trent church, according
to which the church was solely in charge of spiritual matters (spiritualia), while
the patrons took care of material issues
{tempor
alia). This rule was caused rather
by patrons efforts to obstruct the influence of the church institutions on the
control over material possessions and to gain the maximum of possibilities for
their own activities than by an endeavor to unambiguously define the authority
of both sides.
The overlapping of the two abovementioned areas of the Schwarzenberg
administration is observable, for instance, with regard to filling the posts in
the parishes under the right of patronage. The patron sought priests in order
to ensure the spiritual administration of his villeins as well as spiritual care in
the parishes of which he was in charge. For priests, a parish was a source of
a living and employment. If the Schwarzenbergs endeavored to provide the
villeins with an appropriate spiritual care, they had to take care of a sufficient
material background for the spiritual administrators. Because of the attention
to the salvation of the souls of the villeins and smooth run of spiritual adminis¬
tration in the manor, the patron had to carefully consider personal and profes¬
sional qualities of the applicants. On the basis of the systematic monitoring of
the activities of the priests in the manor (lists containing the personal data of
the clergy were compiled since the 1730s), the patron and his officers were able
to exercise goal-directed personal policy, which provided capable, industri¬
ous priests, who were accommodating to villeins and loyal to the patron, with
promising career opportunities: differently assessed priests were given differ¬
ently lucrative benefices. The Schwarzenberg authorities sorted the parishes
within the manor and formed a hierarchical system of posts, which became
the institutional framework of the career path of the clergy under the right of
patronage. Thus, the prospect of advancement motivated the priests in terms
of improvement of their behavior, exercise of spiritual administration and cul¬
tivation of their expert knowledge, hi a certain sense, it is possible to claim
that, in the Schwarzenberg manors, the patron and his authorities supported
the process of the professionalization of the clergy. Simultaneously, the favor¬
ing of the priests born in the Schwarzenberg manors (or of those whom the
prince granted the
titulus
mensae), the filling of better parishes with the priests
X. Summary
417
of merit and the overall emphasis on the loyalty of the clergy indicate that the
aforementioned personal policy by the Schwarzenbergs on the clergy under
the right of patronage aimed at strengthening of the ties between the priests,
the manor (patronage) and the patron, represented by the local authorities.
Thus, within the manor (patronage), a relatively closed group of the clergy was
formed
-
the patronage clientele , dependent on their employer (patron) on
the basis of their job (parish benefice). In the hierarchy of the positions within
the manor, these clergymen were at the level similar to the manorial personnel.
At the same time, this development weakened the relationships between the
parish priests and the archbishop and consistory.
Also the supervision over the parochial property, which was the basic
condition of the independent spiritual administration of the parishes, played
a crucial role in the exercise of the right of patronage. The patron supported the
intensification of spiritual care by the establishment of new parishes (created
from subsidiary parishes) and chaplaincies, which, however, led not only to
the smaller number of persons under one priest, but also to the decrease in the
spiritual administrators incomes. The profit lost owing to the independence of
the previous subsidiary parishes was compensated by various means
-
incor¬
poration of another subsidiary parish, financial support from church resources
(cassa salis)
and especially with the help of the patron or the local community.
While the patron made efforts to distribute the population (and, by extension,
economic) potential evenly among the individual parish priests (and chap¬
lains), to provide all spiritual administrators with sufficient income, the priests,
in contrast, often followed their own economic interests, which, under some
circumstances, differed from those of the whole. In their attempts to preserve
their income, the beneficiaries were sometimes reluctant to maintain a chaplain
or refused the independence of some of their subsidiary parishes. However, the
patron s will was decisive.
Thus, one of the main conditions of priest s success was his ability to come
up to the expectations of the patron, but also of the parishioners, and to reconcile
them with the claims of the church institutions and with the natural need to ensure
his own subsistence. The activities of the parish priests were complicated by the
fact that the exercise of spiritual administration was interwoven with the running
of the parochial economy. In connection with various ways of gaining a liveli¬
hood, the priest played diverse social roles with the risk of a number of conflict
situation in relation to the church institutions, patron, and parishioners. From
the viewpoint of the church, the main difficulty was the integration of the parish
priest into the economic ties within the agrarian environment of the countryside,
since it was not possible to fully realize the post-Trent ideal of the priest secluded
from society, hi the management of the parochial economy, the parish priest in
fact became one of the peasants. This aspect had a positive consequence
-
the
clergyman shared the needs and problems of his peasant parishioners-neighbors,
understood their situation and, thus, was able to do his pastoral work more
effectively, In the economic area, the cooperation between the priest and other
farmers proved positive. However, the aspect of competition was also present,
which became evident in a number of neighborhood disputes .
In collecting tithes and other obligatory payments, though, the priest ap¬
proached his parishioners from a superior position. The unique status of the
418
Beneficia,
zadusí a patronát v barokních Čechách
priest
as
a spiritual
administrator
of the parish corresponded with the econom¬
ic area: the spiritual shepherd treated his flock as a collector of the obligatory
taxes. Again, this fact was connected with numerous disputes. In particular in
this field the harm inflicted on farming during the war left its mark on paro¬
chial economy. The obligatory taxes of the parish were a sensitive indicator of
the state of peasant economy as well as of the relationship of the parishioners
to their spiritual administrator.
The position of the parish priest as an economically dependent person
came to the foreground especially with regard to irregular earnings resulting
from the exercise of spiritual administration, which posed the threat that the
priest, especially when in material need, would take spiritual care as a gain¬
ful occupation. The Schwarzenberg patron took care of preventing the priest s
financial claims from harming the relationships within the parish and appro¬
priate running of spiritual administration. As the lord of the manor, the patron
protected the interests of his villeins and therefore paid attention to excessive
surplice fees
(tura stolaé)
or payments for the services which should be provided
for free (confession, care for the sick). Profit-seeking priests had poor prospects
of gaining lucrative benefices.
The patron and local communities prevented the voluntary fees
-
given to
the parish priests for their livelihood as an act of charity
-
from turning into
steady income. Thus, the patron reserved for himself the possibility of remov¬
ing an important part of earnings from the priest whom he found guilty
-
the
aforementioned contributions were a powerful economic tool of disciplination
of the patronage clergy. With regard to this kind of income, the parish priests
were almost in a situation of employees.
The probe into the conflicts between the parish priests and parishion¬
ers helps to consider the crucial difficult points of the economy of parochial
benefices from another perspective. Some disputes were primarily rooted in
economic conditions (controversies regarding tithes, etc.), some appeared only
secondarily in the area of economy, for instance in the form of refusing the pay¬
ment duties towards the priest with whom the parishioners (or the landowner)
were in conflict. The complaints of the parishioners could even have led to the
loss of benefice (imposed by the church institutions). However, the efforts of
the parishioners to get even with unpopular priests by this means sometimes
resulted in fabricated accusations of embezzlement. The priest s situation with¬
in the parish was prone to provoke conflicts
-
especially because of the way
the priest gained a livelihood within the framework of the benefice. Not only
bad spiritual administrators who, for example, required inappropriate surplice
fees, but also (excessively) assiduous priests, whose rigorous enforcement of
the economic rights of the benefice disabled the agreement with the parishion¬
ers or even the patron, triggered these disputes.
The patron only supervised the property of parochial benefices. In the
case of the property of the individual churches, however, the patron directly
administered these funds intended for financing the run of the churches
(fab¬
rica
ecclesiae). This property was treated separately from the parish priest s
benefice by the lay administrators since its medieval origins. Shortly after
the Schwarzenbergs had gained the
Třeboň
manor, the administration of the
church properties was reorganized. These properties had previously been in
X. Summary
419
the hands of the representatives of the parishes, the churchwardens. But in
the 1660s the manorial authorities took them in their keeping. From that time
on, the chief officer of the manor
(hejtman,
Hauptmann)
and the accounts clerk
(důchodní písař,
Rentschreiber),
superintended by the prince of Schwarzenberg,
administered these funds.
The deposition of the church funds in the manorial office improved their
safety: they were protected against thieves and even the churchwardens them¬
selves, who sometimes, especially owing to wartime tribulations, yielded into
the temptation of embezzlement. The church funds had also been damaged by
the limited economic skills of the churchwardens (subject farmers). As a result
of the Schwarzenberg reform, the churchwardens were replaced by the pro¬
fessional bureaucrats, who made the economy of the churches more effective
and integrated in the administration of the manor and, thus, opened the way
for the implementation of postwar reconstruction. Besides the professionali-
zation and bureaucratization, another positive aspect of this change was the
centralization of the church funds administration, which helped to overcome
the local limits of the church economy, which had been defined by the bound¬
aries and possibilities of the parish and the geographical horizon of the local
churchwardens. When a church could not rely on adequate earnings from its
own property (land, steady payments) or on a sufficient economic potential
of its parish (donations by the faithful), it was dependent on the ability of its
administrators to gain new sources of income on the basis of various busi¬
ness activities, of which granting loans with interest from the church funds
was the most significant. It was this area which received a special attention
from the patron and his officers. Previously, the churchwardens had lent the
money, of which they had been in charge, particularly to their neighbors (rela¬
tives, friends) or even to themselves. Thus, they had used the church funds as
a means of strengthening their position within the village community and as
a form of social security in need. In contrast, the administration of the manor
began to implement another strategy after receiving the church funds from
the hands of the churchwardens: it granted large loans to various recipients
within and outside the manor, often to persons from higher social strata. On
this basis numerous churches gained an important source of income in the
form of the interests on the loans given beyond their parishes.
The complaints by the spiritual administrators refer to the difficulties of the
new system of the economy management of the churches: the separation of the
manorial administration of the church funds from the situation within the
parish and the resulting risk of a more complicated fulfillment of the material
needs of the relevant church or the fact that the funds were tied in loans instead
of used for repairs of the churches and parish buildings. However, the main
reason of these complaints was the restriction of the influence of the church
representatives on the management of the church funds. Still, these deficien¬
cies were remedied in the course of time. Since the 1720s the participation of
the church in the management of the individual church funds was normatively
imposed by the state. But the prince of Schwarzenberg adapted the concrete
realization of the imperial regulations to his own conceptions. Thus, on the one
hand, the involvement of the church institutions in the administration of the
church funds (especially in the sense of their control) became common, on the
420
Beneficia,
záduší a patronát v barokních Čechách
other hand, the role of the patron in terms of the management of these funds
remained crucial.
The manorial authorities themselves made efforts to eliminate the other
aforementioned problems. They still invested the maximum of the free funds
into the loan operations but the volume of the granted loans was restricted with
regard to the necessary repairs of the churches and parish buildings. The pa¬
tronage office kept records concerning the deficiency of the individual church¬
es and planned necessary expenses on this basis, which was another positive
effect of the centralized management of the church funds within the manor.
While the previous local management by the individual churchwardens had
concentrated only on individual churches, the centralized administration had
to take care of all churches within the manor. The central view made it possible
to choose a complex, and thus more effective, solution (joint orders for more
churches at the same time, mutual supplementation of the necessities of the
individual churches). When a church did not have sufficient funds for inevita¬
ble repairs, the officers of the manor sought other financial sources and often
ensured interest-free loans granted by other patronage churches. In doing so,
however, they sometimes faced disagreement of the parishioners of that church
whose funds were used for such a selfless (i.e. interest-free) help: the parishion¬
ers preferred the interests of their own church to the manifestation of solidarity
with the needs of the neighboring parishes.
The Schwarzenberg patron held to the principle that the matters related
to the maintenance of the churches (that is, purchase of material, handicraft
orders) should preferably be arranged within the framework of the manor; the
church money should be spent in the same manor where they were collected
and thus bring benefits to the villeins and, by extension, to the whole manor.
Also in investing the surplus of the church economy into the credit transac¬
tions the Schwarzenbergs showed consideration not only for the interests of the
churches, which they provided with lucrative and safe sources of income, but
also for the interests of the villeins, to whom loans from the church funds were
still granted in need (thus the church funds did not cease to fulfill the func¬
tion of social security), and, indeed, for their own business, since the church
money was borrowed by the landowners themselves too (under common cir¬
cumstances
-
insured loans with interests). These loans are not to be confused
with the embezzlements by other patrons. The prince of Schwarzenberg played
two different roles
-
as a patron who protects the interests of his churches
and as a landowner who cares for the economic interests of the villeins and the
manor. Also the church funds had two roles in his view
-
primarily financing
the matters of the cult, secondarily (together with the hospital and orphan s
funds) creating financial reserves used by the villeins, towns and landowner.
The prince of Schwarzenberg preferred the loans of the patronage churches
within his own land also because of the safety of money lent. Even formally
sufficiently insured loan to a stranger might have resulted in the loss of the
church funds, if the debtor became insolvent.
Ensuring the technical aspects of the operation of the parochial churches,
managing their economy, supervising the parochial economy as well as con¬
trolling the execution of spiritual administration and its optimizing by means
of goal-directed personal policy
-
that all took place within the framework of
X. Summary
421
the individual Schwarzenberg manors and was subject to the supervision and
decisions of the landowner, the prince of Schwarzenberg. The roles of the land¬
owner and the patron were both present in this figure, which meant two differ¬
ent goals
-
securing the appropriate spiritual administration of the villeins and
effective running of the parishes under the patronage right. These motives and
some aspects of the management of the manorial parish organization (prag¬
matism and emphasis on effectiveness in the employment of the economic and
human resources, endeavor to secure the functionality of the parochial admin¬
istration with own methods and powers, connected with the efforts to restrict
the intrusions of the church institutions in certain areas and assiduous control
of their independent administrational activities) associate similar principles of
the absolutist state policy against the church, which began to play a significant
role in the first half of the 18th century and culminated in the form of the reor¬
ganization of the parish network in the second half of this century.
Translated by
Demeter Maláták
Bayerische
Staatsbibliothek
München
|
| any_adam_object | 1 |
| author | Pumpr, Pavel 1978- |
| author_GND | (DE-588)1013013417 |
| author_facet | Pumpr, Pavel 1978- |
| author_role | aut |
| author_sort | Pumpr, Pavel 1978- |
| author_variant | p p pp |
| building | Verbundindex |
| bvnumber | BV037465228 |
| ctrlnum | (OCoLC)734071228 (DE-599)BVBBV037465228 |
| edition | Vyd. 1. |
| era | Geschichte 1680-1720 gnd |
| era_facet | Geschichte 1680-1720 |
| format | Book |
| fullrecord | <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>02833nam a2200625 cb4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">BV037465228</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-604</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20200515 </controlfield><controlfield tag="007">t</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">110608s2010 abd| |||| 00||| cze d</controlfield><datafield tag="020" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">9788086488738</subfield><subfield code="9">978-80-86488-73-8</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(OCoLC)734071228</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-599)BVBBV037465228</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-604</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="e">rakwb</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">cze</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="049" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-12</subfield><subfield code="a">DE-355</subfield><subfield code="a">DE-255</subfield><subfield code="a">DE-M457</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="084" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">2.2</subfield><subfield code="2">KUBA2</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="084" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">7,41</subfield><subfield code="2">ssgn</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Pumpr, Pavel</subfield><subfield code="d">1978-</subfield><subfield code="e">Verfasser</subfield><subfield code="0">(DE-588)1013013417</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Beneficia, záduší a patronát v barokních Čechách</subfield><subfield code="b">na příkladu třeboňského panství na přelomu 17. a 18. století = Benefices, church properties and patronage system in Baroque Bohemia : on the example of the Třeboň manor at the turn of the 17th and 18th century</subfield><subfield code="c">Pavel Pumpr</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="246" ind1="1" ind2="1"><subfield code="a">Benefices, church properties and patronage system in Baroque Bohemia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="250" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Vyd. 1.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="a">Brno</subfield><subfield code="b">Matice Moravská</subfield><subfield code="c">2010</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="300" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">421 S.</subfield><subfield code="b">Ill., graph. Darst., Kt.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="b">txt</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="b">n</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="b">nc</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="490" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Knižnice Matice Moravské</subfield><subfield code="v">31</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="546" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Zsfassung in engl. Sprache</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="648" ind1=" " ind2="7"><subfield code="a">Geschichte 1680-1720</subfield><subfield code="2">gnd</subfield><subfield code="9">rswk-swf</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1="0" ind2="7"><subfield code="a">Kirchenverwaltung</subfield><subfield code="0">(DE-588)4133860-1</subfield><subfield code="2">gnd</subfield><subfield code="9">rswk-swf</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1="0" ind2="7"><subfield code="a">Kirchengut</subfield><subfield code="0">(DE-588)4163918-2</subfield><subfield code="2">gnd</subfield><subfield code="9">rswk-swf</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="651" ind1=" " ind2="7"><subfield code="a">Herrschaft Třeboň</subfield><subfield code="0">(DE-588)7751526-2</subfield><subfield code="2">gnd</subfield><subfield code="9">rswk-swf</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="651" ind1=" " ind2="7"><subfield code="a">Südböhmen</subfield><subfield code="0">(DE-588)4078019-3</subfield><subfield code="2">gnd</subfield><subfield code="9">rswk-swf</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="689" ind1="0" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Südböhmen</subfield><subfield code="0">(DE-588)4078019-3</subfield><subfield code="D">g</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="689" ind1="0" ind2="1"><subfield code="a">Herrschaft Třeboň</subfield><subfield code="0">(DE-588)7751526-2</subfield><subfield code="D">g</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="689" ind1="0" ind2="2"><subfield code="a">Kirchenverwaltung</subfield><subfield code="0">(DE-588)4133860-1</subfield><subfield code="D">s</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="689" ind1="0" ind2="3"><subfield code="a">Geschichte 1680-1720</subfield><subfield code="A">z</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="689" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="5">DE-604</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="689" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Südböhmen</subfield><subfield code="0">(DE-588)4078019-3</subfield><subfield code="D">g</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="689" ind1="1" ind2="1"><subfield code="a">Herrschaft Třeboň</subfield><subfield code="0">(DE-588)7751526-2</subfield><subfield code="D">g</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="689" ind1="1" ind2="2"><subfield code="a">Kirchengut</subfield><subfield code="0">(DE-588)4163918-2</subfield><subfield code="D">s</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="689" ind1="1" ind2="3"><subfield code="a">Geschichte 1680-1720</subfield><subfield code="A">z</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="689" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="5">DE-604</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="830" ind1=" " ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Knižnice Matice Moravské</subfield><subfield code="v">31</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-604)BV013201050</subfield><subfield code="9">31</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="2"><subfield code="m">Digitalisierung BSB Muenchen</subfield><subfield code="q">application/pdf</subfield><subfield code="u">http://bvbr.bib-bvb.de:8991/F?func=service&doc_library=BVB01&local_base=BVB01&doc_number=022617107&sequence=000003&line_number=0001&func_code=DB_RECORDS&service_type=MEDIA</subfield><subfield code="3">Inhaltsverzeichnis</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="2"><subfield code="m">Digitalisierung BSB Muenchen</subfield><subfield code="q">application/pdf</subfield><subfield code="u">http://bvbr.bib-bvb.de:8991/F?func=service&doc_library=BVB01&local_base=BVB01&doc_number=022617107&sequence=000004&line_number=0002&func_code=DB_RECORDS&service_type=MEDIA</subfield><subfield code="3">Abstract</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="940" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="n">DHB</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="940" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="n">oe</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="940" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="q">DHB_JDG_ISBN_1</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="999" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">oai:aleph.bib-bvb.de:BVB01-022617107</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="942" ind1="1" ind2="1"><subfield code="c">200.9</subfield><subfield code="e">22/bsb</subfield><subfield code="f">09033</subfield><subfield code="g">4371</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="942" ind1="1" ind2="1"><subfield code="c">200.9</subfield><subfield code="e">22/bsb</subfield><subfield code="f">09032</subfield><subfield code="g">4371</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="942" ind1="1" ind2="1"><subfield code="c">351.09</subfield><subfield code="e">22/bsb</subfield><subfield code="f">09033</subfield><subfield code="g">4371</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="942" ind1="1" ind2="1"><subfield code="c">351.09</subfield><subfield code="e">22/bsb</subfield><subfield code="f">09032</subfield><subfield code="g">4371</subfield></datafield></record></collection> |
| geographic | Herrschaft Třeboň (DE-588)7751526-2 gnd Südböhmen (DE-588)4078019-3 gnd |
| geographic_facet | Herrschaft Třeboň Südböhmen |
| id | DE-604.BV037465228 |
| illustrated | Illustrated |
| indexdate | 2024-07-09T23:24:44Z |
| institution | BVB |
| isbn | 9788086488738 |
| language | Czech |
| oai_aleph_id | oai:aleph.bib-bvb.de:BVB01-022617107 |
| oclc_num | 734071228 |
| open_access_boolean | |
| owner | DE-12 DE-355 DE-BY-UBR DE-255 DE-M457 |
| owner_facet | DE-12 DE-355 DE-BY-UBR DE-255 DE-M457 |
| physical | 421 S. Ill., graph. Darst., Kt. |
| psigel | DHB_JDG_ISBN_1 |
| publishDate | 2010 |
| publishDateSearch | 2010 |
| publishDateSort | 2010 |
| publisher | Matice Moravská |
| record_format | marc |
| series | Knižnice Matice Moravské |
| series2 | Knižnice Matice Moravské |
| spelling | Pumpr, Pavel 1978- Verfasser (DE-588)1013013417 aut Beneficia, záduší a patronát v barokních Čechách na příkladu třeboňského panství na přelomu 17. a 18. století = Benefices, church properties and patronage system in Baroque Bohemia : on the example of the Třeboň manor at the turn of the 17th and 18th century Pavel Pumpr Benefices, church properties and patronage system in Baroque Bohemia Vyd. 1. Brno Matice Moravská 2010 421 S. Ill., graph. Darst., Kt. txt rdacontent n rdamedia nc rdacarrier Knižnice Matice Moravské 31 Zsfassung in engl. Sprache Geschichte 1680-1720 gnd rswk-swf Kirchenverwaltung (DE-588)4133860-1 gnd rswk-swf Kirchengut (DE-588)4163918-2 gnd rswk-swf Herrschaft Třeboň (DE-588)7751526-2 gnd rswk-swf Südböhmen (DE-588)4078019-3 gnd rswk-swf Südböhmen (DE-588)4078019-3 g Herrschaft Třeboň (DE-588)7751526-2 g Kirchenverwaltung (DE-588)4133860-1 s Geschichte 1680-1720 z DE-604 Kirchengut (DE-588)4163918-2 s Knižnice Matice Moravské 31 (DE-604)BV013201050 31 Digitalisierung BSB Muenchen application/pdf http://bvbr.bib-bvb.de:8991/F?func=service&doc_library=BVB01&local_base=BVB01&doc_number=022617107&sequence=000003&line_number=0001&func_code=DB_RECORDS&service_type=MEDIA Inhaltsverzeichnis Digitalisierung BSB Muenchen application/pdf http://bvbr.bib-bvb.de:8991/F?func=service&doc_library=BVB01&local_base=BVB01&doc_number=022617107&sequence=000004&line_number=0002&func_code=DB_RECORDS&service_type=MEDIA Abstract |
| spellingShingle | Pumpr, Pavel 1978- Beneficia, záduší a patronát v barokních Čechách na příkladu třeboňského panství na přelomu 17. a 18. století = Benefices, church properties and patronage system in Baroque Bohemia : on the example of the Třeboň manor at the turn of the 17th and 18th century Knižnice Matice Moravské Kirchenverwaltung (DE-588)4133860-1 gnd Kirchengut (DE-588)4163918-2 gnd |
| subject_GND | (DE-588)4133860-1 (DE-588)4163918-2 (DE-588)7751526-2 (DE-588)4078019-3 |
| title | Beneficia, záduší a patronát v barokních Čechách na příkladu třeboňského panství na přelomu 17. a 18. století = Benefices, church properties and patronage system in Baroque Bohemia : on the example of the Třeboň manor at the turn of the 17th and 18th century |
| title_alt | Benefices, church properties and patronage system in Baroque Bohemia |
| title_auth | Beneficia, záduší a patronát v barokních Čechách na příkladu třeboňského panství na přelomu 17. a 18. století = Benefices, church properties and patronage system in Baroque Bohemia : on the example of the Třeboň manor at the turn of the 17th and 18th century |
| title_exact_search | Beneficia, záduší a patronát v barokních Čechách na příkladu třeboňského panství na přelomu 17. a 18. století = Benefices, church properties and patronage system in Baroque Bohemia : on the example of the Třeboň manor at the turn of the 17th and 18th century |
| title_full | Beneficia, záduší a patronát v barokních Čechách na příkladu třeboňského panství na přelomu 17. a 18. století = Benefices, church properties and patronage system in Baroque Bohemia : on the example of the Třeboň manor at the turn of the 17th and 18th century Pavel Pumpr |
| title_fullStr | Beneficia, záduší a patronát v barokních Čechách na příkladu třeboňského panství na přelomu 17. a 18. století = Benefices, church properties and patronage system in Baroque Bohemia : on the example of the Třeboň manor at the turn of the 17th and 18th century Pavel Pumpr |
| title_full_unstemmed | Beneficia, záduší a patronát v barokních Čechách na příkladu třeboňského panství na přelomu 17. a 18. století = Benefices, church properties and patronage system in Baroque Bohemia : on the example of the Třeboň manor at the turn of the 17th and 18th century Pavel Pumpr |
| title_short | Beneficia, záduší a patronát v barokních Čechách |
| title_sort | beneficia zadusi a patronat v baroknich cechach na prikladu trebonskeho panstvi na prelomu 17 a 18 stoleti benefices church properties and patronage system in baroque bohemia on the example of the trebon manor at the turn of the 17th and 18th century |
| title_sub | na příkladu třeboňského panství na přelomu 17. a 18. století = Benefices, church properties and patronage system in Baroque Bohemia : on the example of the Třeboň manor at the turn of the 17th and 18th century |
| topic | Kirchenverwaltung (DE-588)4133860-1 gnd Kirchengut (DE-588)4163918-2 gnd |
| topic_facet | Kirchenverwaltung Kirchengut Herrschaft Třeboň Südböhmen |
| url | http://bvbr.bib-bvb.de:8991/F?func=service&doc_library=BVB01&local_base=BVB01&doc_number=022617107&sequence=000003&line_number=0001&func_code=DB_RECORDS&service_type=MEDIA http://bvbr.bib-bvb.de:8991/F?func=service&doc_library=BVB01&local_base=BVB01&doc_number=022617107&sequence=000004&line_number=0002&func_code=DB_RECORDS&service_type=MEDIA |
| volume_link | (DE-604)BV013201050 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT pumprpavel beneficiazadusiapatronatvbaroknichcechachnaprikladutrebonskehopanstvinaprelomu17a18stoletibeneficeschurchpropertiesandpatronagesysteminbaroquebohemiaontheexampleofthetrebonmanorattheturnofthe17thand18thcentury AT pumprpavel beneficeschurchpropertiesandpatronagesysteminbaroquebohemia |