Hastening Toward Prague. Lisa Wolverton

very loosely.⁸⁶ A castle may be indicated by civitas, urbs, castrum, castellum, oppidum, arx, munitio, or presidium.⁸⁷ Yet none of these variants exclusively denote differences between castles, for instance, to distinguish critical border posts from minor guard-towers, major urban centers, ducal hunting residences, or stopping points on trade routes.⁸⁸ Regardless of terminology, context sometimes offers clues about specific sites. Chlumec, the site of many battles, was obviously a border post on a well-traveled road.⁸⁹ Tachov and Přimda are likewise located near the border, but in deeper isolation—hence Přimda’s use as a prison for Soběslav II.⁹⁰ Křívoklát too is known from Cosmas as a prison for lesser Přemyslids, but lies in central Bohemia.⁹¹ Though important in their own way, none of these four is associated with a “province,” nor are their castellans noted in witness lists. By contrast, Litoměřice and Žatec were less defensive posts than urban centers.⁹² Places like Plzeň and Kladsko, located on major roads to Bavaria and Poland respectively, may have begun as relatively isolated stopping points but clearly developed into towns of some prominence—even as Kladsko probably remained critical for defense.⁹³ Whether the outposts in southern Bohemia—Pracheň, Doudleby, Netolice—developed similarly in this period remains uncertain.⁹⁴ So too does the fate of a number of castles in eastern Bohemia, some quite old, such as Čáslav and Kouřim.⁹⁵

Map 1. Civitates listed in CDB no. 111 (1130).

      Which of these castles and castellans had administrative functions, and what sort, remains a matter of speculation. Precisely because most of those of the first rank later developed into towns, chartered from the mid-thirteenth century, they may have served as regional economic centers in the earlier period as well. When Duke Spitihněv granted to the collegiate chapter at Vyšehrad a tenth of the yearly tax in sixteen civitates, we recognize the same most important Bohemian castles mentioned in other sources: Prague, Vyšehrad, Žatec, Sedlec, Litoměřice, Bílina, Děčin, (Mladá) Boleslav, Kamenec, Hradec (Kralové), Opočno, Chrudim, Kouřim, Plzeň, Libice, and Vratno⁹⁶ (see Map 1). Charters and chronicles occasionally mention “provinciae” and some of the same names appear there, most notably Litoměřice, Žatec, Bílina, and Sedlec.⁹⁷ That these provinces are not labeled according to geographic location (in other words, “North Bohemia”) or with reference to natural monuments (such as the “west Elbe area”) points to the pivotal role played by these castles within the region.

      Conceivably, castles served as centers for tax collecting and the oversight of markets, for organizing raiding parties and defense against foreign invaders, or within a system of courts. In positing administrative districts oriented around castles, however, we must exercise caution.⁹⁸ At no time do the sources permit a complete picture, allowing us to subdivide all of the Czech Lands into clearly bounded provinces or castellanies. There is no way to determine which among the known castles formed centers for administrative districts, or precisely when. Surely Litoměřice and Žatec did throughout the eleventh and twelfth centuries, so too Plzeň. But settlement patterns shifted dramatically. None of the civitates listed in the grant of annual tribute to the Vyšehrad chapter lies in southern Bohemia but there, and elsewhere, colonization must have increasingly challenged whatever organizational structures had previously existed. Central Bohemia presents as many difficulties, paradoxically because more castles are known there, the territory was more densely populated, and the duke’s own capital at Prague was located close by. It remains uncertain whether Prague and Vyšehrad constituted regional administrative centers, as well as of Bohemia as a whole—or how they related to one another. The castellany of Vyšehrad was undoubtedly considered among the most prominent of appointments, but the castellan of Prague, a man rarely mentioned, seems charged only with the defense of its fortifications.⁹⁹ Other questions too—for instance, about how assets were allocated to castellans and/or garrisons according to the needs and purposes of each castle, and as economic and demographic circumstances changed—are crucial for understanding the tasks castellans were expected to perform; but they cannot be answered.

      One thing, at least, is certain: only the duke is ever mentioned constructing, strengthening, or refortifying castles of any kind. When a group of Germans crossed the border and erected a castle in Bohemia, the stronghold was swiftly seized and its occupants slaughtered.¹⁰⁰ Castle-building was expensive: most likely the duke alone had or could command sufficient resources for the task. Only he could compel freemen to take part in their construction or re-fortification (see below). In the twelfth-century chronicles, these construction projects merit mention on their own, among the most noteworthy events of the year. The Canon of Vyšehrad begins his entry for 1129 by reporting simply two events: “Vratislav, son of Oldřich, was captured by Soběslav and afterward sent into exile. The castle Kladsko was renovated and strengthened by Soběslav.”¹⁰¹ Apparently, so exclusively did the task fall to the duke that he even rebuilt a castle before giving it away: “Duke Břetislav [II], coming with an army into Moravia, rebuilt the castle Podivín and returned it to the power of Bishop Hermann [of Prague], as it had been earlier.”¹⁰²

      Despite this last reference, castles were never alienated in the manner of property, whether to lay or ecclesiastical magnates; the status of Podivín was exceptional—and therefore revealing. Located not far from the Austrian border, Duke Vratislav had given it to the newly established bishop of Olomouc, apparently withdrawing it from the bishop of Prague.¹⁰³ It changed hands and was a bone of fierce contention between the bishops of Prague and Olomouc for almost a century. By the 1140s, the powerful bishop of Olomouc, Henry Zdík, secured it for his own see. The ducal charter—the only one in which a castle is granted¹⁰⁴—provides the key to these disputes: “Intending to reform the rights of age-old institution concerning this castle, we ordered that a mint be there, as there had been in the beginning.”¹⁰⁵ The castle served primarily as the site of the mint. Since there is no sure evidence that coins were minted separately in Moravia after this time, Podivín may have reverted to the duke (and thence to the vice-duke of Znojmo) when the mint ceased to function.¹⁰⁶ In 1178, when a portion of the income from the “toll below Podivín” was given to the chapter of Vyšehrad, this amounted to only two denáry.¹⁰⁷ The only other mention of Podivín is a witness list from 1174, in which one Tvrdša is listed as its castellan; since the same man appeared in an earlier list as castellan of Hodonín, he was probably not from the bishop’s entourage, but among the prominent magnates of Moravia who served as castellans throughout the region.¹⁰⁸ Whatever its allocation at the close of the twelfth century, the recurring disputes in preceeding decades over the exceptional episcopal castle and mint at Podivín seems to emphasize all the more how a different norm governed the disposition of all other castles in Bohemia and Moravia.

      Castles, of whatever distinction, were undoubtedly manned by someone; the question is under what conditions and with what accompanying rights. Given the purposes known with certainty, the man or men charged with their control must be viewed as functionaries, rather than feudatories. Certainly their job was to hold the castle and to defend it against intruders. When, during the conflict with the emperor in 1041, a castellan deserted the castle under his charge in exchange for a bribe, Břetislav I ordered him dismembered and thrown from a bridge.¹⁰⁹ Castellans were undoubtedly rewarded for their services. Two charters, issued by the duke and referring to “land pertaining to the castle,” suggest that castellans received produce from lands specifically allocated for maintenance of the castle and garrison.¹¹⁰ They may also have received a percentage of taxes collected locally, though no sure evidence supports this conjecture. Still, income from markets would have made the castle of a thriving town, such as Žatec or Litoměřice, quite a plum appointment—an impression reinforced throughout the sources.

      How these men were installed, and how tenuous and dependent their position, is best illustrated by the assorted references in the chronicles to castellans deposed, or worse, by the duke. Soběslav II, for instance, in revenge for the many years he spent in prison at Přimda, in 1174 captured its castellan and executed him publicly, in spite of his promise of grace