A Companion to Hildegard of Bingen

st disibod and the history of the disibodenberg 53
monasteries in his diocese that did not belong to him, although admittedly
such grants were carefully delimited in the details regarding baptismal
and burial rights.49
In addition, or so claims the charter of 1128, Ruthard granted the monks
the right to elect their own abbot and to present the (unanimously) elected
man to the bishop for investiture. This statement can scarcely be accepted
without difffijiculty.
It also remains conspicuous that the Adalbert charter, in spite of its
exorbitant length, does not contain a conclusive, summarizing defijinition
of the legal position of the abbey (election of abbot, reeve’s bailiwick,
libertas Moguntina). Instead, this concluding formula directly follows
the fijinal purchase: “We wish to confijirm, upon the salvation of our souls,
the donations from so many fathers [bishops] and others of the faithful”
(increasing the donations [in quantity or quality] is not mentioned as
a possibility). In all, this charter, which appears in form and content to
be quite heterogeneous, has so many idiosyncrasies in the present version
that its authenticity must be called into question. According to Theo
Kölzer, an acknowledged authority on diplomatics, to whom I presented
my doubts, the charter plays at being “a pancarta, which summarizes
numerous episcopal and private charters and connects them, at least
in part, through narrative elements, which advance the purpose of the
charter in a heavy-handed manner.” He conjectured that a charter from
1128 formed the basis for this subsequently fabricated pancarta, which
the monastery preferred in comparison to charters that were transmitted
more clearly. Because this charter is transmitted only in the cartulary from
the 14th/15th centuries, all possibilities for retroactive reworking remain
possible, as is true for other cartulary copies of charters (e.g., MzUB 428
and 436). To what extent the Adalbert charter correctly represented the
actual reality or altered it in favor of the monks (indeed, it is possible
that this reflects rights achieved only at a later date) can only be clarifijied
by meticulous analysis of ownership records. Yet even this may not
reveal anything further, as this charter provides the initial, if not the only,
“proof ” for many details.
A glance at the confijirmation of properties issued by Pope Eugene III
in 1148 already shows that some possessions and regulations were not
cited, or are listed in a lesser quantity than those recorded in the Adalbert
49 For example, the 1127 charter for Remigiusberg (MzUB, 544); also the rights of Sponheim
over the parish priest, who was subordinate to the abbot (MzUB, 522).