UNCONSECRATED BURIAL AND EXCOMMUNICATION IN ANGLO-SAXON ENGLAND: A REASSESSMENT

IF 0.4 2区 历史学 0 MEDIEVAL & RENAISSANCE STUDIES TRADITIO-STUDIES IN ANCIENT AND MEDIEVAL HISTORY THOUGHT AND RELIGION Pub Date : 2019-10-17 DOI:10.1017/tdo.2019.14
Nicole Marafioti
{"title":"UNCONSECRATED BURIAL AND EXCOMMUNICATION IN ANGLO-SAXON ENGLAND: A REASSESSMENT","authors":"Nicole Marafioti","doi":"10.1017/tdo.2019.14","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This article investigates the ideologies which underpinned unconsecrated burial in late Anglo-Saxon legal and religious texts. The exclusion of sinners and criminals from Christian cemeteries has typically been interpreted by scholars as a form of excommunication or an attempt to facilitate damnation. However, a reassessment of legislative, diplomatic, and ecclesiastical sources reveals that this was not so. In tenth-century laws and charters, unconsecrated burial was imposed exclusively by secular authorities; it was only prescribed by ecclesiastical authorities from ca. 1000. This suggests that it originated as a temporal punishment but later came to be used as an ecclesiastical sentence. The following analysis of the textual evidence yields two interrelated arguments. First, this article demonstrates that through the mid-eleventh century, unconsecrated burial was a penalty distinct from ecclesiastical excommunication. Where excommunication was imposed upon living sinners, to coerce them to penance, unconsecrated burial was prescribed for the unrepentant or criminal dead, whose actions placed them beyond earthly help. Second, this article contends that written prescriptions for unconsecrated burial differentiated secular from ecclesiastical jurisdictions. Although laymen and clergy collaborated in the dispensation of law and justice throughout the Anglo-Saxon period, the written evidence for unconsecrated burial shows that this penalty fell either under the authority of secular or of ecclesiastical agents, demonstrating a clearer separation between these spheres than is usually recognized in pre-Conquest England.","PeriodicalId":44907,"journal":{"name":"TRADITIO-STUDIES IN ANCIENT AND MEDIEVAL HISTORY THOUGHT AND RELIGION","volume":"74 1","pages":"55 - 123"},"PeriodicalIF":0.4000,"publicationDate":"2019-10-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1017/tdo.2019.14","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"TRADITIO-STUDIES IN ANCIENT AND MEDIEVAL HISTORY THOUGHT AND RELIGION","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/tdo.2019.14","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"MEDIEVAL & RENAISSANCE STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

This article investigates the ideologies which underpinned unconsecrated burial in late Anglo-Saxon legal and religious texts. The exclusion of sinners and criminals from Christian cemeteries has typically been interpreted by scholars as a form of excommunication or an attempt to facilitate damnation. However, a reassessment of legislative, diplomatic, and ecclesiastical sources reveals that this was not so. In tenth-century laws and charters, unconsecrated burial was imposed exclusively by secular authorities; it was only prescribed by ecclesiastical authorities from ca. 1000. This suggests that it originated as a temporal punishment but later came to be used as an ecclesiastical sentence. The following analysis of the textual evidence yields two interrelated arguments. First, this article demonstrates that through the mid-eleventh century, unconsecrated burial was a penalty distinct from ecclesiastical excommunication. Where excommunication was imposed upon living sinners, to coerce them to penance, unconsecrated burial was prescribed for the unrepentant or criminal dead, whose actions placed them beyond earthly help. Second, this article contends that written prescriptions for unconsecrated burial differentiated secular from ecclesiastical jurisdictions. Although laymen and clergy collaborated in the dispensation of law and justice throughout the Anglo-Saxon period, the written evidence for unconsecrated burial shows that this penalty fell either under the authority of secular or of ecclesiastical agents, demonstrating a clearer separation between these spheres than is usually recognized in pre-Conquest England.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
盎格鲁-撒克逊英格兰的非圣化埋葬和逐出教会:重新评估
本文研究了晚期盎格鲁-撒克逊法律和宗教文本中支持非圣化埋葬的意识形态。把罪人和罪犯排除在基督教墓地之外通常被学者们解释为一种被逐出教会或试图促进诅咒的形式。然而,对立法、外交和教会资料的重新评估显示,事实并非如此。在10世纪的法律和宪章中,非圣化的埋葬只由世俗当局强制实施;从公元1000年起,它才由教会当局规定。这表明它最初是一种世俗的惩罚,但后来被用作教会的判决。以下对文本证据的分析产生了两个相互关联的论点。首先,这篇文章表明,在11世纪中期,非圣化的埋葬是一种不同于被逐出教会的惩罚。在世的罪人被逐出教会,以强迫他们忏悔,而死不悔改或犯罪的死者则被规定非圣化的埋葬,因为他们的行为使他们无法得到世俗的帮助。其次,本文认为非圣化埋葬的书面规定区分了世俗管辖权和教会管辖权。尽管在整个盎格鲁-撒克逊时期,外行和神职人员在法律和司法的分配方面通力合作,但非圣化葬礼的书面证据表明,这种惩罚要么属于世俗的权威,要么属于教会的权威,这表明,与被征服前的英格兰相比,这两个领域之间存在着更清晰的分离。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊介绍: The TRADITIO Network has now been furnishing information about all facets of traditional Roman Catholicism, answering questions both privately and publicly, for over 13 years now, longer than any other traditional site on the Internet. When we started, even the Vatican site didn"t exist! We wish that we could show you all of the personal letters we have received from troubled souls who have found here clear, traditional, and honest answers to their questions, free of organizational bias. Thousands of these have reverted or converted to the traditional Roman Catholic Faith as a result.
期刊最新文献
PROPHECY, ESCHATOLOGY, GLOBAL NETWORKS, AND THE CRUSADES, FROM HATTIN TO FREDERICK II PRINCIPIA ON THE SENTENCES IN THE FACULTY OF THEOLOGY OF BOLOGNA: THE CASE OF AUGUSTINUS FAVARONI OF ROME, OESA (†1443) GRIEF, GRIEVING, AND LOSS IN HIGH MEDIEVAL HISTORICAL THOUGHT THE WRITINGS OF NICOLE ORESME: A SYSTEMATIC INVENTORY WEALTH AND MATERIAL GOODS IN MEDIEVAL ITALIAN CIVIC HISTORIOGRAPHY
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1