[38] As if exhausted by the overreaching ambitions of Bishop Berenguer, the church of Vic produced no bishops of surpassing stature or national importance during the twelfth century. Pere de Redorta (1147-1185) was an excellent administrator, and Guillem de Tavertet (1195-1233) was as energetic as any of his eleventh-century predecessors (though also quite irascible and not very successful), but neither they nor any other of the bishops of that era played the major role that Oliba, Guillem de Balsareny, or Berenguer had. Although it might be too much to expect an equal to the wisdom or prestige of Oliba, the significant distinction is that the twelfth-century bishops, despite their undoubted conscientiousness, performed in a smaller arena than did their counterparts of the heroic era. With the exception of Guillem de Tavertet, they were not confidants of the counts of Barcelona, nor do their names appear routinely in comital documents.⁽¹⁾They were not charged with tasks of organizing settlement or protecting the frontier. Their position of major local importance did not lead to significant responsibilities in the political affairs of twelfth-century Catalonia.

The twelfth-century bishops were men of lower social origins than were their predecessors of the eleventh century. Bishop [39] Oliba had been a member of the ruling family, and he was succeeded by a nephew, Guillem de Balsareny. Berenguer belonged to an aristocratic family of the highest status.⁽²⁾ Twelfth-century bishops, in contrast, were recruited from the second-rank nobility, the families that ruled lesser castles, from which they exerted a strong but circumscribed influence. Such families as the Malla, the Castellterçol, and the Tavertet were masters of small, independent castles. They provided the diocese of Vic with bishops Arnau (1102-1109), Ramon Xetmar (1185-1194), and Guillem (1195-1233), respectively.

The decline of Vic in national affairs has been noted, but reduced importance outside the diocese did not mean decreased activity. Rather, it brought a certain constriction in the boundaries and impact of such activity. The bishops were no longer fixtures at the count's court, nor were the once common trips to the papal court continued. The diocese was not closely involved in the controversies and changes of twelfth-century Christendom. Until the end of the century, there is little evidence of reform, crusades, or even competition from new orders and their innovative styles of piety.⁽³⁾

Isolation was not without its benefits. There is not much trace of comital control over elections, of papal appointments to the chapter, or of clerics imported from abroad.⁽⁴⁾ Although it is unlikely that appointment to the chapter and episcopal elections were wholly free, the absence of disputes in elections and the smooth recruitment of local elites to the chapter argues the existence of a cohesive community with wide discretion and genuine independence. The chief result of political isolation was to encourage localism. Oliba had devoted himself to such projects as the Truce of God, and Berenguer had divided his energies between the related causes of church reform and the Tarragona crusade. The twelfth-century bishops, on the other hand, were occupied with smaller problems, though difficult ones nonetheless: defending church lands, shoring up the finances of the cathedral, and administering the round of diocesan affairs.

All Catalan dioceses in the twelfth century were governed by a bishop and a chapter of canons. The bishop was the executive, [40] but he was also part of a corporate body of canons. The canons in relation to the bishop were more than his subordinate functionaries but less than a legislative group capable of ruling the diocese. By reason of tradition and local ties, the canons were largely independent of episcopal control, but they seldom formed a single, united body. Aptly described as a community not of brotherhood but of service⁽⁵⁾ the cathedral community was close-knit by family alliances but loosely organized, and it lacked a strong desire for an austere, common vocation.

The canons' duties were originally liturgical. In addition, they were charged with maintaining the altars, vestments, and other accoutrements of the cathedral. Therefore, by extension, they administered the patrimony of the church, that is, lands and other forms of wealth and revenue that belonged to the cathedral in common, independent of the bishop's exclusive use.

The customary organization of cathedral communities in Catalonia was established in Visigothic times, notably in the provisions of the Fourth Council of Toledo (663).⁽⁶⁾ Those provisions describe a chapter firmly subordinate to the bishop, who is responsible for the endowment of the church. The ideal chapter would approach a monastic form of life in which property would be held in common and the canons would live together. Spanish cathedrals, and those of Europe in general, seldom reached this ideal, not only because they could not be isolated from large political concerns, but also because the close relation between family and capitular interests made it impossible for canons to relinquish their private preoccupations. In Vic, for example, the cathedral clergy, including the bishops, were drawn almost entirely from the diocese.

Cathedral chapters, like monasteries, received donations (primarily in land) from prominent families in the diocese who could afford to purchase the rewards of clerical intercession. Such families also entered their sons into the chapter in order to ensure an influential voice in the family's effort at salvation and to have connections to the leading institution of the region. The donated child, called an oblate, was accompanied by a gift of land, the income from which was to support him during his lifetime.⁽⁷⁾
After [41] his death, the canon's endowment would become part of the cathedral's patrimony, although, as we shall see, it was in fact difficult for the cathedral to break the family's hold on land that had accompanied an oblate.

Canons remained enmeshed in the interests of their families to the extent that, despite the often-proclaimed desire for a life in common, canons retained effective control over private property. Admitting endowed oblates to the chapter encouraged a legal confusion between ecclesiastical and secular land, and individual canons often administered church land as part of their own property. The common life of the chapter yielded to the diverse interests of its members. Throughout the Middle Ages the chapter of Vic expressed a desire for a model apostolic community but gave in to the individual impulses of its canons. The vita communis was undermined by two forces: the monopoly the bishop exercised with regard to the lucrative public revenues (such as the mint, market rights, and tolls), and the fragmented, imperfectly integrated structure of the chapter's common ownership of property. Individual wealth within the chapter coexisted with corporate insolvency.

There were sincere efforts to share more equitably and to enforce a life of common purpose. At its restoration, Vic was a reformed chapter in accord with the Rule of Aachen, introduced in 816 by Emperor Louis the Pious.⁽⁸⁾ Later, in the late eleventh century, Vic was the first Catalan diocese influenced by the so-called Rule of St. Augustine, whose proponents attempted to restore the apostolic life in secular chapters.⁽⁹⁾

However, neither the Rule of Aachen nor the Augustinian movement significantly affected the individuality of the canons or the preponderant wealth of the bishop, the two factors that discouraged reform and communal equality. The Augustinian reform succeeded in transforming many noncathedral collegiate bodies in Catalonia in the years just before and after 1100. Within the diocese of Vic the canons of Manlleu, Manresa, and l'Estany were strongly influenced by the efforts of Bishop Berenguer, the principal force behind the apostolic movement in Catalonia.⁽¹⁰⁾ But cathedral chapters, including that of Vic, were not so amenable to change and resisted [42] measures that might have eroded the power of the local elite or the links between the chapter and the interests of leading families.

Resistance to reform does not mean that the canons were especially corrupt. There was some communal impulse, and, given the small scale of local society and its intimate interconnections, the chapter functioned as a community even if all its members did not live together or share everything. Liturgical and administrative tasks were adequately performed and do not appear to have been adversely affected by family rivalries. Moreover, the closeness of church and secular society, created by the manner of recruitment to the chapter, produced some of the compensating benefits that oligarchies occasionally display: a sense of service, informality in making decisions, and freedom from outside interference. Nor was the oligarchy closed. Toward the end of the twelfth century it began to accommodate the sons of the mercantile elite of the town. The deficiencies of the chapter were not, therefore, those of decadent uselessness (in the sense of the chapter of Arezzo, cited earlier) but rather those of communal poverty in the midst of personal wealth and a lackadaisical feeling, a sense of drift, stemming from the economic and political stagnation of the church.
 

THE EARLY HISTORY OF THE CHAPTER

The Carolingian Rule of Aachen (816), designed to strengthen the economic position and therefore the communalism of chapters, had little immediate effect in Catalonia. The chapters of Barcelona, Urgell, and Girona had survived intact from Visigothic times, and their internal organization reflected the precepts of the Toledan legislation. In Vic, however, the Rule of Aachen was influential. Whatever the earlier customs of the chapter had been, the disruption following the Islamic assaults and Aizo's rebellion destroyed their memory. At its restoration in the late ninth century, the church of Vic was not prevented by tradition from embracing the precepts of Aachen.⁽¹¹⁾

The first certain evidence of cathedral canons in Vic is from 909.⁽¹²⁾ By the mid-tenth century, if not before, the influence of [43] Aachen was apparent in the distinctions made between the property of the chapter and that of the bishop. What had been a unified endowment in Visigothic custom, entirely subject to the bishop, was at Vic (and subsequently at other Catalan cathedrals) divided in order to give the canons some independent source of income.⁽¹³⁾

An additional step in the same direction was to allow individual canons to receive portions of the chapter's common income. In 957 the canons complained of the dispersal of their property.⁽¹⁴⁾ Bishop Guadamir, on his deathbed, admitted that he had not dealt well with the chapter's wealth (an indication that despite the separate incomes, the bishop controlled both his own and the chapter's revenue). He obliged the twelve canons of Vic by dividing both funds, capitular and episcopal, among the canons, reserving for the bishop a substantial portion of the total. Canons received revenue as individuals, and each administered his own funds. This accommodation legitimated retention and even expansion of a canon's property while he was enrolled in the chapter's service.

Guadamir hoped that economic security would strengthen the weak communal ties among the canons, but its result was to increase their autonomy.⁽¹⁵⁾ Nor was the income of the church divided any more equally than before; throughout the tenth and eleventh centuries, the bishop retained a monopoly over market, mint, tolls, judgments, and other public revenues, despite the directives of 957 to share them.⁽¹⁶⁾ The same problems and paradoxes would recur: attempts to assure a common life by giving the canons a secure endowment merely augmented their independence, while the bishops failed to relinquish in any significant way their monopoly over public income.⁽¹⁷⁾

Failing to acquire a share of these revenues of lordship, the canons were compensated by privileges and exemptions that tended to improve personal but not corporate welfare. In 1010 they complained to Count Ramon Borrell and Countess Ermessenda about taxes on the construction of houses in Vic.⁽¹⁸⁾ The canons were accorded a privilege that allowed them to escape paying taxes on houses they built in the city and also allowed them to [44] sell their houses freely to other canons or members of their own families. The newly won right improved the economic condition of the canons but encouraged them to live separately, to establish themselves as urban landlords, and it strengthened their attachment to private possessions.

In 1138 the bishop acceded to the demands of townsmen concerning the threat of competition from foreign merchants at the weekly market.⁽¹⁹⁾ Controls were established to limit the ability of foreigners to sell woolen cloth and dye. Specifically exempt, however, from the prohibition on certain kinds of transactions with foreign merchants were the cathedral canons. They were also allowed to buy cloth from local merchants at cost.⁽²⁰⁾ Those canons who were entrepreneurs in the market obviously profited greatly from these privileges. By this time, however, the attempt to tie economic benefits to a more disciplined corporatism had been abandoned.

The periodic reforms undertaken by the bishops were a response to the real problem of depleted and insufficient endowment. Similar measures were undertaken in other parts of Catalonia, particularly at the time of the privilege of 1010 regarding construction in Vic. The chapter of La Seu d'Urgell received a new endowment, and its members were allowed individual portions of the common income in 1010. The patrimony of Barcelona, destroyed by the invasions of Almanzor, was restored in 1009, and the chapter was permitted to elect its officials.⁽²¹⁾ Subsequent measures also sought to conserve capitular wealth by limiting the number of canons to forty, a reform enacted at Vic only in the late twelfth century.⁽²²⁾

Clearly none of the early reform efforts at Vic imposed new standards of behavior, nor did they institute any rule of a formal or monastic sort that canons had to take vows to uphold. A common life did exist, but it was more that of a club than a monastery. There were probably common dining and sleeping areas, but canons spent much of their time away from the cathedral's precincts. It is impossible to reconstruct from surviving records a feeling for the quality of eleventh-century capitular life, and it is hazardous to suggest just what the duties of the canons were. [45] Certainly they assisted the bishop or performed the prescribed liturgical offices themselves. In the reorganization of 957 their duties were said to include hospitality to pilgrims and ransoming of captives.⁽²³⁾ It is also likely that individual canons were already responsible for administering churches in other parts of the diocese. There is no doubt, however, that membership in the chapter was a sinecure, an indication of status, apart from whatever specific functions were performed.

Within this cozy world, the reform decrees of the Lateran Synod of 1059 had little immediate impact. In keeping with its earlier precocity, Vic was the first to attempt some reform, primarily a moral one, some decades later at the behest of the energetic Bishop Berenguer. At some point between 1080 and 1090, Berenguer expelled all the canons from the cathedral, citing their disgraceful behavior.⁽²⁴⁾ The bishop met with those few canons who appeared sincerely to desire to correct their way of life. Present at that meeting as well were several dignitaries from outside the diocese, including the abbot of the Avignonese community of Saint Ruf, an Augustinian chapter that provided inspiration for collegiate reform in Catalonia.

The enactments of this meeting concerned regular observance, the liturgy, appropriate dress, and silence. Particular attention was directed toward discouraging such practices as gambling, hunting, and the keeping of concubines. There was nothing said explicitly about living in common -- the key element of Saint Ruf's program -- but the canons were ordered to sleep in their dormitory and not to venture from the church without permission from their "prior."⁽²⁵⁾

The word regula, which appears in this reform document, led Henrique Florez to assume that the Augustinian Rule was thereby imposed, dedicating the canons to apostolic poverty and the common life.⁽²⁶⁾ Although the Augustinian Rule was the inspiration, underscored by the presence of the abbot of Saint Ruf, the reform was not so new or radical. Jaime Villaneuva disputed Florez's assumption and stated that by "regula" the bishop merely meant the Rule of Aachen or the statutes of the Fourth Council of Toledo, institutions the chapter was already supposed [46] to be following.⁽²⁷⁾ References to living regulariter (in common, according to established provisions), were at least as old as the reform of 957.⁽²⁸⁾

A more far-reaching change was attempted in 1098, when Berenguer returned to Vic after the reversals suffered by the Tarragona Crusade. At the council summoned to discuss capitular reform there were, as before, important clerics from outside, including the papal legate, Archbishop Bernardo of Toledo.⁽²⁹⁾ This synod addressed the old questions of distribution and the new movement for a monastic condition of life. Once again the chapter obtained market dues and tolls, and some new income was added by transferring to the chapter taxes on meat, wine, and oil. Property belonging to three high offices -- the archdeacon, precentor, and capiscol -- was reorganized, and the income of the latter was entirely confiscated. Out of the funds thus acquired, four clerics, already members of the chapter, were to be supported. They agreed to live "canonically" with others whom they might accept into their community.⁽³⁰⁾ Did this mean that an elite group of serious canons was to be established, or was the whole chapter to be reformed? It would seem that an autonomous group of semimonastic canons was created, subject not to the sacristan or other traditional chapter officials but to the four original canons named. In giving up some of his income, the bishop appeared to distinguish the chapter in general from those living according to the new rule.⁽³¹⁾ A special body within the chapter was thereby established-or revived, as the bishop stated.

Berenguer may have intended to form a single body that would eventually embrace the entire membership. The bull issued by Urban II shortly after the bishop's death, confirming Berenguer's reform, assumed that a unified, reformed chapter was operating under the guidance of a prior (the sacristan Ricart).⁽³²⁾ Canons were to live in common and to conform to the way of life established by Berenguer for the regularii. The pope confirmed the endowment of the chapter, which was supposed to include market dues, tolls, the former property of the capiscol, Berenguer's gifts, and the castle of Quer, which the bishop had bequeathed in accord with the terms of his original reception into the chapter.

[47] Whether the legislation of 1098 created a small group or a restored chapter, it did not transform the community of Vic into an Augustinian chapter of apostolic poverty and sharing. Nor was this probably even Berenguer's intention. As before, the new regime was described by the word regula. Elsewhere in the diocese, as at the collegiate churches of Manresa, Manlleu, and l'Estany, Bishop Berenguer and Bishop Arnau instituted reforms according to the precise "regula Beati Augustini."⁽³³⁾ This distinction was the important contrast between a moderately structured order of secular canons and those genuinely in accord with the stringent provisions of the Augustinian Rule. Collegiate churches in Vic and elsewhere were reformed along the lines suggested by Saint Ruf, but the cathedral chapters in Catalonia maintained a nonapostolic distinction among canons that allowed them to preserve their right to possess private property.

The reform of 1098 must therefore be considered something less than a complete overhaul of capitular life. Although, in contrast to 1080-1090, an actual reorganization took place, the intent of the reform of 1098 remained largely disciplinary. Church duties were to be performed more scrupulously, but they were defined in the same general terms as provided in the reorganization of 957.⁽³⁴⁾

Even the limited goal of assuring economic security for the chapter in hopes of encouraging the common life was not met. The chapter, once again, was unable to hold its rights to public revenues or to the castle of Quer. Magnates like the Lluçà and the Taradell gained more than the chapter from the fragmentation of these former episcopal monopolies.⁽³⁵⁾

The reform of 1098 did nothing to end the canons' inclination to live apart. Of those canons who signed the election document of Arnau de Malla in 1102, eight appear nowhere else in surviving records.⁽³⁶⁾ Twelfth-century canons owned their own urban and rural properties, and by 1200 their private houses were impressive enough for some to keep retinues of armed men.⁽³⁷⁾

That canons possessed private holdings in the twelfth century does not prove that previous reform efforts were ineffective, since the earlier rules had not been designed to prohibit this practice. The real failure was in not building the chapter's [48] endowmerit and in not imposing a common life. The chapter of the twelfth century remained an organization very much in accord with past custom.
 
 

ORGANIZATION OF THE CHAPTER AND SOCIAL STATUS

When the chapter was firmly controlled by the bishop, before the late eleventh century, distinctions among the canons had little to do with formal status within capitular administration. With the bishop directly responsible for governance, the capitular officers (other than the sacristan) were of minor importance. Members of the chapter who witnessed documents described themselves in terms of their rank in clerical orders (sacerdos, subdiaconus, levita), not by official function within the chapter, not even as canonicus.⁽³⁸⁾ What counted was position within the hierarchy of sacred orders.

In the late eleventh century, when chapters throughout Catalonia started to control property apart from the bishop, capitular office became more significant and replaced clerical rank as the mark of relative status.⁽³⁹⁾ Beginning in the eleventh century but accelerating in the twelfth, a further distinction developed as certain canons were designated provosts (prepositi)and charged with administering capitular property. Since their function was devoid of liturgical tradition or responsibility for the church building itself, the provosts were not officers in the traditional sense, but by the late twelfth century they constituted the true elite of the chapter. Power within the cathedral community thus moved from priests (as the highest rank in orders), to officers, to those in control of common property.

Before the provosts became important in the late twelfth century, the division of chapter officers was fixed. Few aspects of the medieval church present as much variation as do capitular officers. St. Raymond of Peñafort, in the early thirteenth century, expressed for all subsequent observers the frustration in trying to generalize about such officers: "I shall not pursue the subject [of capitular leadership], because, in these dignitaries and functions, there are just about as many varieties of custom as there are [49] churches."⁽⁴⁰⁾

In northern Europe capitular administration revolved around four chief positions: the dean, who led the chapter and officiated in the bishop's absence; the treasurer; the chancellor, who drafted official documents and was responsible for the school; and the precentor, or chantor, in charge of the choir, processions, and the minor clergy. In addition, each diocese had archdeacons, who were not, properly speaking, members of the chapter but were rather the immediate servants of the bishop, administering specific territorial jurisdictions within the diocese.

The Spanish terminology differed somewhat. Normally there was a dean, but he was frequently known as prior or provost. An officer called the primicerius performed the duties of the northern precentor, a sacristan was similar to the northern treasurer, and a magister scholarum, or capiscol (in the vernacular), was equivalent to the chancellor.⁽⁴¹⁾ This pattern, however, was not a fixed rule. At Valencia in the thirteenth century, according to Robert I. Burns, there was a precentor and a chantor. The first resembled the northern chancellor, whereas the chantor was also called magister scholarum and capiscol.⁽⁴²⁾ Within the chapter of Segorbe, precentor, primicerius, chantor, and capiscol were all apparently names for the same office!⁽⁴³⁾

The administration of twelfth-century Vic was different from all the above examples. There were no deans until 1596, and the leadership functions were performed informally, or by the occasional prior (a term rarely used), or by the sacristan.⁽⁴⁴⁾ The chancellor's responsibility for correspondence was filled by a sacriscrinius (there had been a capiscol, but the reform of 1098 confiscated his property and the title fell into abeyance). The duties of the primicerius (precentor, sometimes called paraphonista) were liturgical and disciplinary, and a sacristan acted as the treasurer. Normally there was only one archdeacon at a time. The practice of dividing the diocese into territories administered by several archdeacons was unknown in Vic until the thirteenth century.⁽⁴⁵⁾ When the provost system was formally introduced in 1176, its effect was similar to that of a territorial archdiaconate.⁽⁴⁶⁾

Table 1 shows, as best as can be determined, the canons who held major capitular office during the twelfth century.⁽⁴⁷⁾ It is [51] obvious that some canons moved from one office to another (Pere de Tavertet, Guillem de Malla). Some offices were shared on occasion (Bernat de Sant Hipòlit and Guillem de Malla were both sacriscrinii from 1194 to 1200). It is also clear that certain families controlled the higher levels of administration. The Malla family, related to the castellans of the fortress of Malla (five kilometers south of Vic), contributed three archdeacons. Guillem, sacriscrinius and later sacristan, was a member of this family, as was Bishop Arnau (1102-1109). A total of seven members of the Malla served the twelfth-century cathedral of Vic. The family connections, reconstructed from archival material, are given in Figure 1.

It has already been remarked that the class origins of bishops changed from the eleventh to the twelfth century, as members of the highest nobility were supplanted by lesser families such as the Malla, the Castellterçol, and the Tavertet. The chapter experlenced a similar decline in the eyes of great families. Members of the Queralt, Lluçà, and Montcada clans, despite their frequent dealings with the chapter, did not find it worthwhile to offer sons to represent them in the twelfth century. It was their subordinates, the castellans of Gurb and Malla, for example, or independent local magnates who were enthusiastic about associating themselves with the church -- as leaders of the chapter (Malla), as opponents (Gurb), or in some cases as both.⁽⁴⁸⁾ The Merola family, followers of the Lluçà, were energetic opponents of the bishop of Vic in controversies over the tithes and exactions they collected on church lands in 1142 and 1147.⁽⁴⁹⁾ The dispute of 1147 was so difficult that it was brought before the count of Barcelona for settlement, making it unique in this regard among twelfth-century disputes involving the church for which records have survived. Thirty years later, however, Pere de Merola was a canon and was commemorated in the necrology of the chapter when he died in 1187.⁽⁵⁰⁾

The ascendancy of the petty nobility within the chapter lessened near the end of the century, as members of the first families of the city successfully sought entrance. In the early thirteenth century, the chapter again became an important sinecure for the [53] upper aristocracy. It became less a local club and more a national institution closely watched by the king.⁽⁵¹⁾

It was during the period of isolation, corresponding roughly with the limits of the twelfth century, that the opportunity for social ascent by means of the chapter was greatest. Consequently, few of the canons of this period were distinguished outside local circles. The sacristan Pere Berenguer de Balenyà managed to acquire a silver goblet from the king of France, which he bequeathed to the chapter.⁽⁵²⁾

The only twelfth-century canon with a truly international reputation, however, was Pere de Cardona, a renowned scholar of Roman law who taught at Montpellier and was made a cardinal by Lucius III.⁽⁵³⁾ Pere was a canon of Vic from at least 1167 until 1181, but his fame derived from his legal knowledge, not from his limited role in the affairs of Vic.

For the lesser military families of the Plain of Vic, membership in the chapter was the means and the proof of high social status. There were other forms of aggrandizement, such as amassing more castellanies, but membership in the chapter could complement other ambitions. It provided the evidence of social advancement that increased military responsibilities encouraged.

The Santa Eugenia are a useful example of a family's acquisition of power through both the military and the clerical networks. One first finds the Santa Eugenia in documents of the end of the eleventh century, when they acted as the castellans for the Taradell (who were themselves subordinate to the Gurb-Cervelló, the ultimate lords of Taradell).⁽⁵⁴⁾ By 1200 the Santa Eugenia were in charge of several castles near Vic -- Tona, Sentfores, Castellcir, and Montmany -- and exercised control over the vicomital part of the divided city in the name of the king's seneschals.⁽⁵⁵⁾ The fortunes of the Santa Eugenia were made through connections with first-rank families, such as the Montcada seneschals, but their rise was aided by representation in the chapter. They contributed at least four canons and two lay confratres during the twelfth century:⁽⁵⁶⁾
 

Pere Berenguer de Santa Eugenia. Died after 1156. Described as "nobilis miles et huius locis confrater" (ACV, Martirologi I, f. 44).
[54]
Pere de Santa Eugenia. Died after 1176. Described as "miles egregius et huius sedis confrater" (ACV, Martirologi I, f. 35v).

Bernat Guillem de Santa Eugenia. Canon and priest according to ACV, Martirologi I, f. 124. Died before 1173, when his bequest to the chapter was disputed (ACV, c. 6, 2420).

Guillem Gros, maior. Offered as a canon in 1156 by his parents, Pere de Santa Eugenia and Dulcia (ACV, c. 6, 2348). Died 1172 (ACV, Martirologi I, f. 126).

Guillem de Santa Eugenia. Offered as a canon in 1156 by his parents, Pere Berenguer de Santa Eugenia and Guile (ACV, c. 6, Ep. I, 35). Died Jan. 1, 1185 (ACV, Martirologi I, f.18; he died Dec. 31, 1184, according to the publication of his will: ACV, c. 6, 1876 [1185]).

Guillem Gros, iuvenis. Offered as a canon in 1184 by his parents, Pere Gros de Santa Eugenia and Adelaida (ACV, LD, ff 93-93 v). Died 1226 (ACV, Martirologi IV, f. 14).

Guillem de Santa Eugenia. Canon of Vic, commemorated in a twelfth-century hand (ACV, Martirologi I, f 104). Probably identical to the Guillem whose will was drawn up in 1137 (ACV, c. 6, 1601). The will was signed by Guerau de Santa Eugenia. A Guerau is listed as a brother of the deceased and one of his executors. Most property disposed of is in Santa Eugenia.

Berenguer de Santa Eugenia. Died after 1184. Described as "iuuenis egregius, armis strenuus, omnibus sua liberalitate carus" (ACV, Martirologi I, f. 29v). Possible confrater.

Another family whose ascent is worth tracing is the Tenes clan, a family of both military and mercantile interests, who married into the Santa Eugenia. Their ancestral home of Tenes (modern Calldetenes) was a fortified place just east of Vic, but their strength was partly based on enterprises within the city, unlike the Santa Eugenia with their numerous castellanies.⁽⁵⁷⁾ The Tenes controlled a stand in the weekly market.⁽⁵⁸⁾ One of the leading citizens (probi homines) who protested a construction tax before the bishop in 1198 was Bernat de Tenes.⁽⁵⁹⁾ The family was represented in the cathedral chapter by Berenguer de Tenes, who appeared in 1165 as a disputant with his fellow canon Berenguer de Sentfores, representing another suburban [55] castellany.⁽⁶⁰⁾ Vitalis de Tenes served the cathedral as a bailiff, and an elder and a younger Bernat de Tenes were canons in the late twelfth century.⁽⁶¹⁾

The alliance between the Tenes and the Santa Eugenia took place with the marriage of Arsendis, niece of the canon Guillem de Santa Eugenia, to a now anonymous member of the Tenes.⁽⁶²⁾ That ties between the families continued is proven by the will of Guillem de Santa Eugenia (died 1184 or 1185), by which his grandnephew Arnau de Tenes, the young son of Arsendis, received 1,000 sous.⁽⁶³⁾ The controversy caused by this will shows the implications of intertwined family and church interests. Arnau received certain gardens in Vic along with the 1,000 sous. Both bequests were to revert to the chapter if Arnau became a canon, with five morabetins to be paid to Arnau annually as compensation. If Arnau did not become a canon, Guillem's will asked the executors to defend the boy's interests against the anticipated claims of the church.

Arnau decided not to become a cleric. Predictably, the cathedral objected to his retaining property that Guillem had held (it was claimed) as a canon and not by private right.⁽⁶⁴⁾ The chapter was not unified on this question. Arnau obtained the support of his brother, the canon Bernat de Tenes (the younger), and that of Guillem's executors, the canons Ramon de Malla and Arnau Coc. Two additional clerical guardians (tutores) defended Arnau: Pere de Tavertet (the sacriscrinius) and Guillem (the precentor). With the strength arrayed on his side, it is not surprising that Arnau received two-thirds of the disputed gardens, to be held in life tenure. He managed to extend control over the property for at least an additional generation. In his own will, composed only nine years after the settlement with the cathedral, Arnau gave the gardens immediately to his relative Guillem Gros, a canon and member of the Santa Eugenia family, to be retained until Arnau's death, whereupon the property should return to the chapter.⁽⁶⁵⁾ The 1,000 sous were to be divided among Arnau's executors after his death.

Naturally, the same interpenetration of secular and clerical interests that led to conflicts of this sort provided a solidarity between clergy and laity that allowed the very difficulties it had [56]caused to be resolved. The quarrel with Arnau was patched up quickly, before the prescribed six-month period had elapsed from the time of Guillem's death until the publishing of his will.⁽⁶⁶⁾ The settlement process shows the work of a diverse but cohesive group of mediators, including the tutores of Arnau, the bishop, other canons, a leading townsman (Guillem d'Illa), and the sacristan of Girona. The affairs of the church, so closely related to those of lay society, were amenable to consideration by canons, townsmen, and regional families.

The Cloquer, a third family whose ascent was encouraged by association with the chapter, boasted no military status or position in the countryside. They took their name from the proximity of their house to the bell tower of the cathedral. The founder of the family fortune was Pere Berenguer de Cloquer. At the time of his death he was a rich man, and his will (dated 1189) reveals a number of lucrative investments (see Appendix 4). Pere Berenguer owned houses in Vic, fields and a farm in the city's environs, and tables in the market (that is, he rented out space to retail merchants). He lent money and administered lands belonging to the collegiate church of l'Estany.⁽⁶⁷⁾Pere Berenguer was consulted in ecclesiastical matters that affected the town, such as the distribution of coinage profits.⁽⁶⁸⁾ The most vivid sign of this family's arrival at patrician status came when Pere's son Arnau was made a canon in 1177.⁽⁶⁹⁾ In his last years Pere Berenguer was himself considered a lay canon and is remembered as such in the necrology.⁽⁷⁰⁾ During the thirteenth century, the Cloquer continued as urban and ecclesiastical leaders. Their most notable accomplishment was to expand and endow the hospital east of the cathedral.⁽⁷¹⁾
 

ENTRANCE INTO THE CHAPTER

For families such as the Malla, service within the chapter was a mark of traditional status. For the Santa Eugenia, Tenes, and Cloquer, it was an aid to social ascent and a proof of success. Once within the chapter, the new canon served his family by offering his prayers, by guarding his endowment (which remained [57] during his lifetime more patrimonial than capitular), and by representing his family in such church matters as might touch their interests.

A canon might join the chapter in one of several ways, most often as a result of his parents' initiative in "donating" their boy. His endowment of land and income accompanied him, forming part of the donation, and was to be retained by him until his death, after which it would be absorbed into the chapter's common holdings. The donations were recorded in a document called a carta hereditatis or carta canonicaturae. Thirty-six such documents survive from the twelfth century, the majority in the copies made for the cartulary that records gifts to the cathedral, the Liber Dotationum Antiquarum.

Inheritance charters for new canons were not formally different from simple donations to the church. To give a son, nephew, or oneself along with landed wealth was regarded as a type of gift that would reap the normal intercessory rewards. The formula found in simple donations -- that the act was made "for the remedy of my [or our] soul[s]" -- appears in many inheritance charters as well.⁽⁷²⁾

More striking is the rarity of simple donations to the cathedral in the twelfth century, particularly after 1150. They had been in decline since the late eleventh century, an aspect of a general European phenomenon, encouraged perhaps by competition from newer foundations, such as l'Estany or, toward 1200, the military order of the Knights Hospitaller. The unencumbered donation became exceptional and was replaced by a variety of conditional donations, which reserved life tenure or provided for an annuity, for example. At the same time that the number of simple donations decreased, inheritance charters for donated canons became more common. The earlier infrequency of inheritance charters may be due to lack of documentation, but, significantly, the decline in simple donations occurs at a time when the total number of surviving records increases. Figure 2 shows that equilibrium was attained by the end of the century. Between 1120 and 1180 there was a shift in favor of the carta canonicaturae over the donation. The data argue both the fall of truly free donations [59] and a change in the spiritual and economic dealings of laymen, particularly the manner in which they obtained intercessory benefits and social status while keeping intact their property. A canon retained land in his own right. As a canon he could advance the family's interests both by safeguarding land and by obtaining spiritual benefits conferred by his religious vocation.

A canon's endowment usually consisted of a manse or several parcels of land. It is difficult to compare the size of endowments, because manses were never of uniform dimensions.⁽⁷³⁾ Some gifts accompanying donated children were quite large: one included 1,000 sous, a church, and a field near Vic.⁽⁷⁴⁾ Another large grant was made by a certain Ponç Hug, who gave his son Pere to the chapter in 1111 along with the church of Navarcles (in the Bages district) and ecclesiastical taxes (capellaniae) that he owned in the western regions of the county of Barcelona.⁽⁷⁵⁾

Normally, the endowments were more modest. As one might expect, donated properties were concentrated in Vic and its immediate environs -- one more sign of the local orientation of cathedral life in the twelfth century. The new canon received income from the common fund of the chapter, supplemented by his own land. His property was his own possession, or shared with his parents, but in either event it was entirely removed from church supervision. Nor were families eager to give up what they continued to regard as their patrimony after the canon's death. Reneging on inheritance charters gave rise to numerous disputes and complex schemes to recycle the same piece of land to endow a successor to a deceased canon.

When Guillem de Santa Eugenia entered the chapter in 1144, he was accompanied by a gift of land in Santa Eugenia de Berga.⁽⁷⁶⁾ Twelve years later another member of the family, Guillem Gros the elder, entered the chapter, bringing with him the large allod of Senatus in the comarca of Vallès, not as an endowment, but supposedly as an outright gift to the church.⁽⁷⁷⁾
Guillem Gros died before Guillem de Santa Eugenia.⁽⁷⁸⁾ By the time the latter died (1184 or 1185), he was the master of Senatus, which was once again donated to the chapter by his will.⁽⁷⁹⁾Earlier in 1184, however, when Guillem Gros the younger was [60] made a canon, his parents gave the chapter one-half of Senatus and retained for life the same land in Santa Eugenia that theoretically had been donated forty years previously.⁽⁸⁰⁾ It would appear that the Santa Eugenia were using these lands to influence the chapter, to obtain spiritual benefits, perhaps to protect the land -- in effect using the chapter as a bank -- all for a small sacrifice.

Many canons controlled other sources of income in addition to the donation that accompanied their reception. Canons were involved in the market of Vic, some were landlords, others lent money. The impression yielded from their bequests is that the twelfth-century canons were quite wealthy. Thirty-eight documents have survived, either the actual will or an oath taken by witnesses to the oral disposition by the deceased (in accordance with Visigothic law). The records preserved probably reflect the wealth of the more important canons. Even with this caution in mind, it remains impressive how well-off many members of the chapter were, not only those who held capitular office but ordinary canons as well. Most of their wealth was in land, but significant amounts of precious metal and coins are recorded, as well as a miscellany of exotica, such as barrels for wine making, rings, books, goblets, prayer rugs, and Saracen slaves.⁽⁸¹⁾

Although they were not the only rich canons, the officers of the chapter left the most impressive estates, especially the archdeacons and sacristans.⁽⁸²⁾ The archdeacons Bernat Ermengol de Malla and Guillem de Malla, for example, owned large amounts of land, money, and movables.⁽⁸³⁾ There is little difference between the will of Guillem de Malla and that of a wealthy lay contemporary. He left money to the canons, to the sacristan and his clerics, and for work on the cathedral, and he bequeathed silver cups for each of the altars and one morabetin each to several regional churches. The last gift is reminiscent of the lay style of piety -- eager to distribute pious bequests among as many churches as possible, a way of diversifying one's interessory portfolio.

Guillem left a substantial sum, twenty morabetins, along with barley and cattle to a servant, and ten mazmudins and barley to the servant's wife. A man named Aragal, described by Guillem [61] as his squire (armigerus meus), received souvenirs of the archdeacon's lordly status: a falcon and hunting dogs. A nephew obtained tracts of land and urban property, which were to revert to the chapter upon his death. Finally, Guillem left money to succor the poor of Vic.

The possessions of most canons were less extensive than those of the archdeacon, but the wealth of many of them is striking, since, judging from their wills, they held no capitular office.⁽⁸⁴⁾Canons of more modest fortunes were active as local moneylenders and as landlords.⁽⁸⁵⁾They acted independently of the chapter in administering personal property and lent money to the bishop himself, profiting from the periodic liquidity problems of the cathedral.⁽⁸⁶⁾

The church of Vic was often a beneficiary of a canon's will, but usually to a lesser degree than other churches or his family. Bernat de Riudeperes left most of his land to his brother and made donations to various churches.⁽⁸⁷⁾ Joan, a deacon, gave most of his small property not to Vic but to its subject church, l'Estany. Only a small field went to the chapter of Vic.⁽⁸⁸⁾ In other cases canons left property to their relatives on condition of life tenure (although, as the Tenes and Santa Eugenia examples show, reversion was far from guaranteed).⁽⁸⁹⁾ The propensity to recruit from major local families thus involved the church in frequent litigation and compromise over land and wealth, while the church received little from the bequests of its canons, who remained closely tied to their families and to their private interests.
 

THE CHAPTER AND THE BISHOP

Despite the failure of earlier plans to change the habits of canons and to enrich their common fund, a form of common life continued in the twelfth century. Between 1120 and 1125 the dormitory was enlarged, and at least three canons left money to aid its construction.⁽⁹⁰⁾ Wills and commemorations express a degree of corporate sentiment; canons referred to their fellows as "friends" or "brothers."⁽⁹¹⁾ Finally, there was enough feeling for the cornmon life to put forth several new attempts to deal with [62] maldistribution and maladministration of common wealth. The community did try to overcome some of the consequences of its otherwise jealousy guarded particularism.

The actions taken to redistribute and increase the wealth of the chapter came at the initiative of the bishop. Close to the end of the episcopate of Ramon Gaufré (in about 1145), the bishop and three principal officers of the chapter enacted an agreement (conveniencia) with the other canons to preserve the cathedral's endowment.⁽⁹²⁾ The bishop, archdeacon, sacristan, and precentor agreed not to act in any fashion that would diminish the endowment. An interesting indication of the cathedral's internal problems is a provision in this document that if a quarrel should arise between the bishop and chapter or among the canons, it must be settled before four canons elected for the purpose. No appeal to another authority, especially a lay one, would be permitted.⁽⁹³⁾

There are hints in this compromise of difficulties in administering the common property of the cathedrals.⁽⁹⁴⁾ The problems apparently persisted, for in 1148 the situation was severe enough for the bishop to pledge lands to the executors of the estate of the precentor, Pere, for money to restore the main altar.⁽⁹⁵⁾

Internal dissension and precarious communal funds were not unique to the twelfth century. The attempted solutions differed, however, from earlier reforms, which aimed at amending the habits of the clergy or at giving the chapter more income at the bishop's expense. The twelfth century was dominated by efforts, like the agreement of ca. 1145, to rationalize administration.

The most notable administrative change was to establish a group within the chapter charged with responsibility over capitular land. In 1176 Bishop Pere and the canons agreed to designate twelve members of the cathedral community, including the bishop, to oversee roughly equal shares of church land.⁽⁹⁶⁾ For one month of the year each provost would have to meet the chapter's needs from the income of his share. In return the provost kept whatever surplus there was for his own use. Ancient dues assigned to individual canons were exempt (it would be useful to know what they were), as were revenues from burial fees in the parish belonging to the cathedral. Finally, the chapter [63] decided to limit the maximum number of canons to forty, an expedient that had been tried earlier in other dioceses, in order to prevent the erosion of shares by excessive division.⁽⁹⁷⁾

Provosts were not invented in 1176; there had been provosts in Vic since 1031.⁽⁹⁸⁾From 1031 until 1176 the provosts remain mysterious figures. It is impossible to say how many the chapter had at any given time, how they were selected, or what their duties were. Before 1176 peasant dues were sometimes paid to a canon, who might or might not be called a provost. This imprecision may have been part of the problem that the act of 1176 was designed to relieve. After 1140, however, canons were less involved in receiving directly what the peasants owed. Increasingly they were replaced by bailiffs, noncanons employed to collect ecclesiastical revenue.⁽⁹⁹⁾The ascendancy of the provosts probably came when it was recognized that without close supervision the bailiffs would deplete the income of the church.

Before 1176 the provost system, insofar as it existed, had numerous flaws. There was no clear division of responsibility such as the monthly regime would later impose. Moreover, given the variety of dues owed by each parcel of church land, it was impossible to tell without a complex audit what each provost should render. The common revenue of the chapter thus depended on the intermittent transfer from peasant to provost and from provost to chapter. With the addition of bailiffs after 1140, the chances of having a consistent, predictable income were further reduced. Additional confusion was created by the old problem of distinguishing what belonged to any canon, including a provost, by personal right from what was church property.

As early as 1169 there were provosts assigned by month,⁽¹⁰⁰⁾ but that division was instituted "publicly" only in 1176. The chief virtue of the new regime was its simplicity: the chapter delegated the administrative burdens to the provosts and had its physical needs supplied. The provost's obligations were quite clear: whatever individual complexities there might be in the revenue he obtained, his duty to the chapter was to support it during the month assigned.

There was a price for this simplicity. The church had to give [64] up all hope of genuine profit from commonly held lands, since provosts retained everything beyond their maintenance obligation. If additional revenues or lands were acquired, they would benefit the canon-provost alone. Such terms reflect stagnation in the church's ability to attract donations. The turn to a taxfarming arrangement shows how significantly the rate of donation had declined and how adaptation was made to an era of constriction. The provost system sought to preserve what the church already possessed on the assumption that little of additional value would be forthcoming.

Monthly provosts were not unique to Vic. At nearly the same time similar structures were set up in the dioceses of Urgell and Barcelona.⁽¹⁰¹⁾ There as well, the security and simplicity of a provost administration must have appeared to outweigh the disadvantages of farming out common lands.

At Vic the provostship may have also represented one more attempt to rebuild the communal bonds of the cathedral.⁽¹⁰²⁾ That the bishop was among the provosts (for March, and later for December as well) implies a closer identification of his interests with those of the chapter, although he still retained separate revenues and seigneurial privileges proper to his office. The main impetus to the provost system, nevertheless, was almost surely administrative convenience more than renewed cooperation.

The provosts did not foster a renewed spirit of cooperation. There is evidence that from the moment of their formal institutionalization they were perceived as a potential threat to capitular unity. The agreement of 1176 required them to perform an oath of fidelity before the assembled canons. In requiring such an oath, the chapter recognized that setting up a group of this sort undermined the equality of canons and their solidarity. The ordinary obligations of canons to the chapter had now, in the provosts' cases, to be reinforced by oaths.⁽¹⁰³⁾ It is likely that the oath reflected the perception of danger in allowing an elite to emerge, men who were officially the chapter's servants but who were in fact its rulers, their power surpassing that of the traditional officers.

The original twelve provosts named in 1176 were already men [65] of influence by virtue of their family connections. The Tavertet, Tenes, Malla, Sentfores, and Vilanova (a branch of the Taradell) were represented. Being a provost confirmed high status and wealth more than it created them, and it probably conferred more prestige on the recipient than added income. Foreseeing this possibility, the regulations of 1176 provided a fine in case a provost wished to lay aside the burdens of office. Normally, a life term was expected, but a provost could pay twenty morabetins and escape.

Some probably lost money from serving as provosts. In 1199 Guillem de Malla was granted a substantial income from the manse of Emposta, adjoining Vic. The income from this gift was not to be applied to make up for any shortfall that might occur during the month when he served as provost (September). The gift thus provided Guillem with an exempt source of revenue, needed (presumably) to protect him from the erosion of his fortune resulting from his official obligations.⁽¹⁰⁴⁾

The provosts were, therefore, an institution designed to preserve and administer the chapter's wealth. Their powers carried an implicit recognition by the church that little future growth in common patrimony was to be expected and that an elite should be charged with guarding what the cathedral already possessed.

The bishop made other attempts to increase common resources. In 1179 he sold the canons the tithes from the city of Manresa for the bargain price of 100 morabetins (he had paid 700 morabetins to the king two years earlier).⁽¹⁰⁵⁾ Another way in which the bishop may have tried to distribute wealth better was to divide the city into districts administered by individual canons. These districts were considered the seigneuries (senioratus) of the canons. They first appear in 1159 as parts of the episcopal city over which canons and the bishop held sway as landlords.⁽¹⁰⁶⁾ Townsmen living within a senioratus paid entrance fees and annual dues for their land or houses.

The senioratus is a rather mysterious institution. Unlike the office of provost, its establishment as an official form of administration remains unannounced by any surviving document. Only one document permits a view of a seigneury being created, a [66] grant to the sacristan by the bishop (with the chapter's consent) in 1194.⁽¹⁰⁷⁾ All that can be asserted with confidence is that the senioratus system, like that of the provosts, favored a select group of canons (some were officeholders within the chapter, some were not); that this was power bestowed by the bishop and chapter, not a family right; and that the system developed in the second half of the twelfth century. The justification for this innovation may have resembled that for the provost system: more efficient administration of common property through recognition of a dominant group of canons. To the degree that the senioratus were founded out of what had been episcopal properties, their institution demonstrated, on the model of the reforms of 957 and 1098, an effort to share episcopal wealth with the chapter.⁽¹⁰⁸⁾

The twelfth century was not without innovations or reforms. The chronic problems remained: inadequate distribution and administration of capitular wealth, and lack of a true vita communis. A newer development was the emergence of a powerful body within the chapter, independent of official titles such as sacristan, precentor, and so forth. The twelfth century continued only partially the practice of treating internal difficulties by trading a strict form of discipline for an increase in the chapter's wealth. The bishop shared some of his nonregalian wealth (the senioratus), divided some of the coinage profits with the chapter, sold the Manresa tithes for a low price, and joined his interests to those of the chapter by becoming one of its provosts. Discipline and encouragement of the common life were not attempted however. The evidence from the late twelfth century indicates that the canons were becoming more powerful as individuals, as members of families, and as forces within an increasingly divisive cathedral community.

More innovative attempts to deal with the economic problem included the conveniencia of ca. 1145, a limitation on the maximum number of canons (forty), and the establishment of the monthly provost system. The response of the church was conservative and based on a determination to preserve its influence. There is no question of hopeless lassitude or decay in the face of [67] difficulties. At the same time, it should be clear that the innovations necessary at Vic were of a defensive variety and quite different from the adaptations made on the frontier, where experiment was encouraged by expansion.
 

1. On Guillem de Tavertet and Pere I, see Enric Bagué i Garriga, ed., Els primers comtes-reis (Barcelona, 1960), p. 111.

2. Apparently he was also a nephew of his predecessor, Bishop Gulllem (ES, 28:ap. 19).

3. New religious orders, such as the Cistercians, were active on the frontier (for example, the monastery of Poblet) but had almost no influence in Vic until the thirteenth century. The only significant new institution of a spiritual nature during the twelfth century was the military order of the Knights Hospitaller. They were given houses in Vic in 1140 (ACV, c. 6, 2298), and the pace of donations to them increased after 1170. For the Hospitallers in Vic, see Paul Freedman, "Church and Society in the Diocese of Vich in the Twelfth Century" (Ph.D. diss., University of California, Berkeley, 1978), pp. 283-287.

4. It is worth contrasting this situation with that of the kingdom of León, where the church was also behind the times but more subject to royal and papal intervention than was Vic. In León papal provisions to ecclesiastical office were not unknown, and several twelfth-century bishops and canons were French. See Fletcher, The Episcopate, pp. 77-86, 180-200; Derek W. Lomax, "Don Ramón, Bishop of Palencia (1148-1184), " in Homenaje a Jaime Vicens Vives (Barcelona, 1965), 1:285. That royal influence was much stronger than the papacy's is argucd by Bernard F. Reilly, "On Getting to be a Bishop in León-Castile: The 'Emperor' Alfonso VII and the Post-Gregorian Church," Studies in Medieval and Renaissance History, new ser. 1 (1978), 35-68.

5. R. I. Burns, "The Organization of a Mediaeval Cathedral Community: The Chapter of Valencia (1238-1280)," Church History 31 (1962), 14.

6. Bauer, "Die vita canonica . . . Kathedralkapitel," pp. 83-84.

7. A discussion of oblation in a Catalan monastery whose practices resemble those of Vic is given in Cesari Figueras, "Una donació modal a Sant Cugat i l'oblació d'infants a Catalunya al segle XII," Analecta montserratensia 10 (1964), 165-176. For child oblation in general, see Joseph Lynch, Simoniacal Entry into Religious Life from 1000 to 1260 (Columbus, 1976), pp. 36-50.

8. Bauer, "Die vita canonica . . . Kathedralkapitel," p. 90.

9. Ibid., p. 110. For the Augustinian movement in Europe, see Charles Dereine, "L'élaboration du status canonique des chanoines réguliers spécialement sous Urbain II," Revue d'histoire ecclésiastique 46 (1951), 534-565; idem, "Vie commune, règle de Saint Augustin et chanoines réguliers au XI^e siècle," Revue d'histoire ecclésiastique 41 (1946), 365-406. For the reformation of Catalan chapters see, in addition to the two articles of J. Bauer, Johannes Vincke, "Die vita cornmunis des Klerus und das spanische Königtum im Mittelalter," GAKS 6 (1937), 30-59.

10. Bauer, "Die vita canonica . . . Kathedralkapitel," pp. 110-111.

11. Ibid., pp. 82-90.

12. VL, 6:ap. 12.

13. Division between episcopal and capitular property antedated the reorganization undertaken in 957, as may be seen from the canons' complaint (VL, 6:ap. 4; also El Archivo Condal de Barcelona en los siglos IX-X, ed. Federico Udina Martorell [Barcelona, 1951], no. 138; Diplomatari de la Catedral de Vic, ed. Junyent, no. 302). Division of capitular from episcopal property was common in the late Carolingian Empire (Arnold Pöschl, Bischofsgut und mensa episcopalis: Ein Beitrag zur Geschichte des kirchlichen Vermögensrechtes, 2 vols. [Bonn, 1908-1912], 2:63-174). It did not show up in Spain outside of Catalonia until the early twelfth century (Demetrio Mansilla, Iglesia castellano-leonesa y Curia romana en los tiempos del rey San Fernando [Madrid, 1945], pp. 193-194).

14. Diplomatari de la Catedral de Vic, ed. Junyent, no. 302: "Anno Dominicae Trabeationis DCCCC^oL^oVII^o, indicione XV^a, cum sset in egritudine reverentissimus vir Vvadimirus episcopus in sancta sede, in clesia Beati Petri, in locho quod dudum vocitatum est Vichum, menta sollicita et intento corde, venerunt ante eum channonici ipsius aecclesi cum querela de channonica qu iam retro fuerat instituta et per negligentia erat dissipata."

15. Ibid.: "Domino auxiliante, in quantum vires subpetunt ... modo eam restituo, et de redditibus nostrae acclesi sumptus quicquid vobis necesse fuerit ut communiter vivere possitis fideliter administrabo. . . ."

16. As early as 911 the chapter was supposed to share in the mint rights, according to the will of Count Guifré II (Diplomatari de la Catedral de Vic, ed. Junyent, no. 55). The concession in 957 included one-third of the market, tolls, and pasturage rights, as well as the mint revenue. Money and market rights were confirmed by Oliba in 1038 (VL, 6:ap. 26). The canons in fact obtained very little of these public revenues, which remained under the control and for the use of the bishop.

17. An interesting case arose in 1031, when the canons protested the archdeacon's control (acting as the bishop's deputy) of the castle of l'Espelt, which they claimed had been given to them and not to the bishop. The archdeacon demonstrated through witnesses that the castle had been left to the See of St. Peter, "absque mentionis canonicae." It was therefore decided that the castle belonged to the archdeacon and not to the chapter as a whole (VL, 6:ap. 27).

18. ACV, c. 9, Ep. 11, 21; Marca hispanica, ed. de Marca, ap. 171 (where it is incorrectly dated as 1013).

19. ACV, c. 6, 1644 and 1654; José María Font Rius, Orígenes del régimen municipal de Cataluña (Madrid, 1946), pp. 473-474; also more recently in Garcia, "Origens," p. 161.

20. Garcia, "Origens," p. 161: "Ab hoc namque pactionis vinculo canonici ipsius sedis erunt liberi et habebunt potestatem merchari in predicta villa quantumcumque voluerint. Cum autem voluerint emere de pannis merchatorum ipsius ville, ipsi mercatores reddant illos ipsis canonicis pro ipso precio quo ipsi emerint in prefata villa vel foro."

21. Bauer, "Die vita canonica . . . Kathedralkapitel," pp. 101-104.

22. Ibid., pp. 105-106.

23. Diplomatari de la Catedral de Vic, ed. Junyent, no. 302: "in susceptione opsitum et sustentacione peregrinorum, in sublevatione captivorum et in omnibus gradibus bene ministrando. . . ."

24. ACV, c. 9, Ep. II, 70 (ES, 28:ap. 16; for its date see Chapter 1, note 83): "dolens casum sedis mihi comiss, omnes canonicos, propter malam eorum conuersationem, de canonica expuli."

25. Ibid.: "In dormitorio iaceant. De claustro, qui ibi lacuerint, nisi necessitate compulsi, usquequo sit finitum capitulum, non exeant; exire tamen, sine licentia prioris nulla necessitate audeant." This prior (not a normal capitular office) may have been the sacristan Ricart. He was referred to as prior of the chapter in the papal bull of 1099 (see below, note 32).

26. ES, 28:162-163.

27. VL, 6:43-50. Villaneuva does note, however (pp. 46-47), occasional references to canons as monachi, who may have led a more austere life. They appear, for example, in the election decree of Bishop Arnau (ACV,c. 6, Ep. I, 16 [11021; ES, 28:ap. 21).

28. Diplomatari de la Catedral de Vic, ed. Junyent, no. 302: "Hac autem omnia superius inserta dono atque trado vobis in perpetuum habenda ut ab hodierno die et tempore teneatis, possideatis ut regulariter exinde vivatis et secundum institute Sanctorum Patrum fidelissimi dispensatores existatis. . . . "

29. ACV, c. 9, Ep. II, 91; ES, 28:ap. 19. Identification of the legate as Bernardo, archbishop of Toledo, is from Kehr, "Das Papsttum," p. 52.

30. ACV, c. 9, Ep. II, 91: "dono uobis Guilaberto et Berengario et Reimundo Atoni et Seniofredo, qui susceptam abetis kanonichalem uitam, et uultis uiuere kanonic in Uicensi Sede . . . Et de ipsis clericis quos uos susceperitis in uestra societate sub regulari ordine. . . ." A similar redistribution had been undertaken at Béziers in 1092. The bishop gave the chapter the goods of the sacristan and provost to encourage the canons to live in common. See Henri Vidal, Episcopatus et pouvoir épiscopal a Béziers a la veille de la Croisade Albigeoise 1152-1209 (Montpellier, 1951), pp. 23-25.

31. Thus, the four regularii obtained the capiscol's land and various public revenues, but the bishop also gave urban property to both the chapter in general and the special group (ACV, c. 9, Ep. II, 91; ES, 28: ap. 19): "Insuper etiam dono ego prelibatus archiepiscopus m kanonice, et uobis regulates clerici omnes domos et ortos et ferragenales et clibanum quod abeo in uilla Uici. . . ."

32. ACV, c. 9, Ep. II, 95 (1099), a sixteenth-century copy. Earlier copies exist according to Junyent (Jurisdiccions, no. 22; see also VL, 6:ap. 5). The letter is JL 5758.

33. VL, 6:43. The Manresa decree also appears in ES, 28:ap. 20. The chapter at Manlleu was instituted in 1105 by Bishop Arnau (AME 4, 38; VL, 6:ap. 43). L'Estany was first described as an Augustinian chapter in 1096 (ADV, CE, f. 18v).

34. ACV, c. 9, Ep. II, 91: "in susceptione ospitum, et sustentatione peregrinorum, et in homnibus gradibus ecclesie bene ministrando. . . ." Compare note 23 above.

35. Thus, although at his death Berenguer had given the chapter revenue from the mint, the true twelfth-century beneficiaries were the Taradell, the Lluçà, and the seneschals. Nothing is said of mint rights in the confirmation letter of Urban II in 1099. The bull of protection and confirmation granted in 1150 by Pope Eugenius III defined nothing to the chapter specifically but rather assigned rights to the church as a whole (JL 9386; AME 4, 3; Papsturkunden in Spanien, ed. P. Kehr, 2 vols. [Berlin, 1926-1928], 1:no. 56). By 1104, Quer was firmly controlled by Guillem Guisad de Lluçà (AME 13,11).

36. ACV, c. 6, Ep. I, 16 (1102). The eight are Pere (subdeacon), Pere (levita), Pere (canon), Pere (priest), Pere Guadamir (priest), Ramon ("clericus Sancti Petri"), Ramon (canon), and Sunyer (priest).

37. Evidence that the canons might reside outside of Vic is clearest for those who simultaneously held church duties elsewhere. The canon Pere de Viver was also capellanus of Santa Maria de Gaià (ACV, c. 6, 1677 [1148]). Pere de Riudeperes was capellanus of Santa Maria de Olost (ACV, c. 6, 2521 [1188]). Pere Berenguer was sacristan of Vic and

priest of Sant Fructuos de Balenyà (ACV, c. 6, 2400 [11711). Bernat " the monk" was both a canon and a monk of Ripoll. Evidence for the existence of nonresident canons is also offered by the privilege to the townsmen in 1138, whereby they received advantages over all foreigners except canons (those not resident in Vic would have been considered foreign): see Garcia, "Origens," p. 166. Finally, litigation between the bishop and canons over crimes committed by retainers in 1199 shows that canons had elaborate establishments in the city (ACV, c. 9, PGT, Apr. 15, 1199).

38. Bauer, "Die vita canonica. . . . Kathedralkapitel," p. 93, notes that the first use of canonicus was in 978 at Urgell.

39. Ibid., p. 97.

40. Quoted in Burns, "The Organization," p. 17.

41. Fletcher, The Episcopate, p. 147; Tomás Villacorta Rodríguez, El cabildo catedral de León. Estudio histórico-juridico, siglo XII-XIX (León, 1974), pp. 87-102; Juan Ramón López-Arévalo, Un cabildo catedral de la Vieja Castilla, Avila: su estructura jurídica, s. XII-XX (Madrid, 1966), pp. 81-89.

42. Burns, "The Organization, " pp. 17-18. Salamanca also had a separate chantor and precentor. The former was known as the magister scholarum after 1190; see jJosé Luis Martín Martín, El cabildo de la catedral de Salamanca (siglos XII-XIII) (Salamanca, 1975), p. 24.

43. José Blasco Aguilar, Historia y derecho en la catedral de Segorbe (Valencia, 1973), p. 116.

44. DHEE, s.v. "Vich," 4:2752. On the sacristan as prior and leader of the chapter, see above, note 25. A prior also appears in ACV, c. 6, 1574 (1120), 1643 (1139), and 1636 (1149).

45. DHEE, 4:2752. Territorial archdeacons were known in Segorbe as early as the eleventh century (Blasco Aguilar, Historia, p. 110); the ninth century in Avila (López-Arévalo, Un cabildo, p. 91); and the late eleventh century in León (Villacorta Rodríguez, El cabildo, p. 115).

46. Jean-Pierre Cuvillier, "Les communautés rurales de la plaine de Vich (Catalogne) aux XIII^e et XIV^e siècles," Mélanges de la Casa deVelázquez 4 (1968), 81.

47. I am especially indebted to the late Mons. Junyent, whose notes on canons of Vic during the eleventh and twelfth centuries made this list possible. Minor offices occasionally appear in twelfth-century documents, for example, secundixerius (ACV, c. 6, 2255 [1117], 2249 [1149]). The capiscol resurfaced briefly according to the obituary notice of Berenguer (died 1146; ACV, Martirologi I, f. 127). An official scriptor who drew up ecclesiastical documents and who functioned as notary public for the city was named from among the canons in 1194 (ACV, c. 6, Ep. I, 55; Honorio García, "El notariado en Vich durante la Edad Media," La notaria [1947], 36-37).

48. The Gurb were castellans of the Gurb-Queralt for the castle of Gurb northwest of Vic. Their disputes with the cathedral included a 200-year battle over tithes in the parishes around their castle (see pp. 129-131).

49. ACV, c. 6, Ep. I, 34 (1142): Bernat de Merola agrees to cease exacting forced levies in Gaià and receives a loan and the right to agricultural revenues from the church. ACV, c. 6, Ep. I, 37: a quarrel over tithes and other exactions levied in Sant Boi de Lluçanès by Bertran de Merola (son of Bernat de Merola).

50. Pere appears in ACV, c. 6, 1777 (1177), and is commemorated in ACV, Martirologi I, f. 106v.

51. Among the most important canons of the early thirteenth century was Guillem de Muntral, a provost and bitter enemy of Bishop Guillem. He was closely allied to the Queralt family, according to Pere Bofill i Boix, "Lo castell de Gurb y la familia de Gurb en lo segle XIII^e," Congrès d'historia, 2:701. Galceran de Queralt was a canon from 1240 until 1246 (Benet i Clara, "La familia de Gurb-Queralt," unpaged insert table). Ramon de Cabrera was a canon in 1218 (ACV, c. 6, 74). Other European chapters were manned by sons of the petty nobility before the resurgent interest of the higher aristocracy monopolized these positions in the later Middle Ages. See, for example, Lawrence G. Duggan, Bishop and Chapter: The Governance of the Bishopric of Speyer to 1552 (New Brunswick, 1978), p. 41.

52. ACV, LD, f. 38v (1181).

53. For the importance of Pere de Cardona, see André Gouron, "Autour de Placentin a Montpellier: Maitre Gui et Pierre de Cardona," Studia Gratiana 19 (1976), 337-354, esp. 347-350. Gouron corrects some errors in Ferran Valls-Taberner, "Le juriste catalan Pierre de Cardona, cardinal de 1'église romaine sons Alexandre III," in Mé1anges Paul Fournier (Paris, 1929), pp. 743-746.

54. Els castells catalans, 6 vols. (Barcelona, 1967-1979), 3:551; 4:965, 1052 (note 80).

55. Els castells, 4:846, 1052 (notes 11 and 80). Pere de Santa Eugenia administered the castle in the vicomital city by 1149, when he enfoeffed it to Bernat de Sentfores (ACA, perg. Ramon Berenguer IV, 221).

56. Much of this information was supplied by the kind assistance of Dr. Antoni Pladevall, who has reconstructed a genealogy of the Santa Eugenia family. See also Els castells, 4:1052 (note 80); 2:778, 786 (notes 27 and 28).

57. The fortress of Tenes is described briefly in Els castells, 4:1046.

58. AME 2, 158 (1176).

59. ACV, c. 9, PGT, Nov. 16, 1198.

60. ACV, c. 6, 1716.

61. Vitalis: ACV, c. 6, Ep. I, 31A (1136); Ep. I, 36 (1144); ACV, c.6, 382 (1166). Will of Bernat de Tenes the elder; ACV, LD, ff. 48-49 (1173). Documents attested to by the younger Bernat include his own will (ACV, LD, ff. 63v-64 [1176]), as well as ACV, c. 6, 1827 (1185), 1843 (1187). A Guillem de Tenes and his father before him are mentioned as bailiffs for property in Vic of Sant Joan de les Abadesses (ACA,perg. Alfonso I, 318 [1181]).

62. This can be ascertained from the will of Guillem de Santa Eugenia (ACV,c. 6, 1876 [1185]) and from the resolution of a dispute between Arnaude Tenes and the chapter (ACV, Ep. I, 50 and 1827 [1185]).

63. ACV, c. 6, 1876 (1185).

64. The controversy and its settlement are recorded in ACV, c. 6, Ep. I, 50 and 1827 (1185).

65. ACV, c. 6, 1796 (1193): "Concedo ad Guillelmo Grosso usque ad diem uel noctem ut exeat anima de corpore meo et post illum diem reuertatur ipsos ortos ad kanonice."

66. Guillem died on Dec. 31, 1184, or Jan. 1, 1185. His will was sworn to and written down on Feb. 28, 1185 (ACV, c. 6, 1876). The compromise with Arnau was achieved on Feb. 15, 1185 (ACV, (Ep. I, 50 and 1827).

67. The will of Pere Berenguer de Cloquer is ACV, c. 6, 2528 (1189). See Appendix 4.

68. ACA, perg. Alfonso I, 194; Joaquim Botet y Sisó, Les monedes catalanes, 3 vols. (Barcelona, 1908-1911), 1:ap. 15.

69. ACV, c. 6, 2439.

70. ACV, Martirologi I, f. 17: "vi. kalendas ianuarii. Ipso die transiit ab hac uita Petrus Berengarii de Cloquerio, uenerabilis laicus et nostre sedis canonicus, qui quam fuerit in omni morum bonitate et consilio precalarus boneque professionis, finis hostendit perfectionis."

71. Immaculada Ollich i Castanyer, "Les entitats eclesiàstiques de Vic al segle Xlll," Ausa 8 (1975-1979), 92-93.

72. For example: ACV, LD, ff. 123-123v (1112), 71v-72 (1157), 74v-75 (1176).

73. Eduardo de Hinojosa, El régimen señorial y la cuestión agraria enCataluña durante la edad media (Madrid, 1905), p. 41; Jean-Auguste Brutails, Étude sur la condition des populations rurales du Roussillon au moyen âge (Geneva, 1975; orig. pub. Paris, 1891), p. 31.

74. ACV, c. 9, PGT, Mar. 25, 1196.

75. ACV, c. 6, 2237.

76. ACV, c. 6, 2348 (1144).

77. ACV, LD, ff. 92v-93 (1156).

78. He died in 1172, according to ACV, Martirologi I, f 126.

79. ACV, c. 6, 1876 (1185).

80. ACV, c. 6, 2488 (1184).

81. See, for example, ACV, c. 6, Ep. I, 15 (1101); ACV, c. 6, 1604 (1137), 2370 (1164), 1876 (1184), 1843 (1187); ACV, c. 6, Ep. I, 52 (1190).

82. The wills of the sacristan Ricart (ACV, c. 6, Ep. I, 15 [1101]; VL, 6:ap. 6) and Pere Berenguer, (ACV, LD, ff. 38v-41 [1181]) show them to have been immensely wealthy. Ricart left 13 pounds of silver, vineyards, houses, and small objects of value, such as books and carpets. Pere Berenguer's estate included land in Navarcles and over 450 morabetins. Also impressive is the endowment for an altar to Saint Michael made by the sacristan Pere de Tavertet (ACV, c. 6, 2567 [1194], and ACV, c. 9, PGT, Dec. 23, 1200).

83. ACV, c. 6, 1604 (1137); ACV, c. 6, Ep. I, 52 (1190).

84. Guillem Bonfill, for example, left to the chapter land in and near Vic, allods in Artés, Sant Julià de Vilatorta, Callers, Sant Hipòlit de Voltregà, and other lands and vineyards (ACV, c. 6, 363 [1141]). Other canons who were rich without holding office were Berenguer de Benages and Bernat de Terrers; their wills are ACV, LD, ff. 36v-37v (1154), and ACV, c. 6, 2356 (1162), respectively.

85. On the propensity of lower-level clergy to lend money, see Bonnassie, La Catalogne, 1:400.

86. Loans to the bishop: ACV, c. 6, 1967 (1111), 70 morabetins; 2321 (1148), 200 sous; 2505 (1187), more than 100 sous.

87. ACV, LD, ff. 41-42 (1136).

88. ACV, c, 6, 1177 (1131).

89. Other examples: ACV, LD, ff. 34v-35 (1101), 25v-27 (1102).

90. ACV, c. 6, Ep. I, 22 (1120); ACV, c. 6, 18 (1120); ACV, c. 6, Ep. I, 24 (1124).

91. Amici: ACV, c. 6, 1646 (1139), 363 (1141), 2321 (1148). Fratres: very common in the necrology, for example, ACV, Martirologi I, ff. 43v, 55 (1126), 75.

92. ACV, c. 6, Ep. I, 28 (undated, but from the attestations of canons it dates from about 1145); VL, 6:ap 45. Other evidence of a depleted endowment includes the sacrifice of mills and other property by the bishop-elect, Guillem, "causa ecclesiastics utilitatis et nostre necessitatis" (Ep. I, 14 [1100]).

93. ACV, c. 6, Ep. I, 28: "Et nos omnes pariter episcopus, uidelicet, atque canonici conuenimus, quod si aliqua discordia uel propter honorem uel propter sermonem sine aliquam occasionem inter episcopum et clericos, uel inter clericum et clericum instigante diabolo superuenerit, consilio et laudamento uel iudicio illorum quattuor qui electi sunt uel fuerint, in capitulo coram fratribus terminetur, et diffiniatur, absque appellations alterius capituli, uel sine intromissione aut acclamacione alicuius laicalis person."

94. See above, note 92; also ACV, c. 6, 382 (1166), an admission by the canon Joan Bacó that he damaged the chapter's interests in his administration of the manse of Emposta, which lay next to Vic.

95. ACV, c. 6, 1673. The restoration may have been necessary because of the unusual demands by the count for money in his campaign against Tortosa in 1148. In that year Ramon Berenguer IV renounced certain exactions made from the inhabitants of Vic in return for 400 morabetins (AME 4, 4, and ACV, LD, f. 8). He may also have collected a substantial sum from the church.

96. AME 4, 31 (1176); VL, 6:ap. 8.

97. In 1176 Pope Alexander III renewed the limit of 40 canons for Barcelona (Papsturkunden, ed. Kehr, 1:no. 175). A limit of 45 was set for Urgell in 1163 (VL, 11:ap. 16).

98. A provost first appeared in the controversy over the castle of l'Espelt (VL, 6:ap. 27).

99. Freedman, "Church and Society," pp. 308-309, 315-322.

100. The first reference to a monthly provost is a prepositus augusti who appears in ACV, c. 6, 2390 (1169). Other early examples are ACV, c. 6, 2412 (1172); ACV, c. 6, Ep. I, 45 (1173); ACV, LD, f. 136v (1175).

101. T. N. Bisson, "Ramon de Caldes (c. 1135-c. 1200): Dean of Barcelona and King's Minister," in Pennington and Somerville, eds., Law, Church and Society, p. 290, note 25. Urgell began its monthly provost regime in 1171 (Bauer, "Die vita canonica . . . Kathedralkapitel," p. 107). A monthly provost system was set up in Saragossa in 1170 but remained largely theoretical until 1292; see Maria Rosa Gutiérrez Iglesias, La mensa capitular de la iglesia de San Salvador de Zaragoza en el pontificado de Hugo Mataplana (Saragossa, 1980), pp. 21-22, 56-57.

102. This is the belief of Engels, "Die weltliche Herrschaft," p. 24.

103. There was a precedent in the oath made by the precentor Guillem in 1159 to Bishop Pere, promising to protect and not betray the bishop in much the same language as used in feudal oaths of the time (ACV,c. 6, Ep. I, 40).

104. ACV, c. 9, PGT, Sept. 14, 1199: "Et si forte te tenente dictam preposituram in ea venerit grando vel nebula vel aliquid fallimentum, non computetur aliquo modo illud auere predictum in dicto fallimento et grandine et nebula."

105. ACV, LD, f. 97 (the sale to the canons); ACV, c. 6, 2477 (the sale to the bishop by the king).

106. AME 10, 31 (1159).

107. ACV, c. 6, 2571.

108. See below, p. 78-79, for discussion of the senioratus as an aspect of urban jurisdiction.