# Why weren't there more secular scribes in the middle ages? **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [June 12, 2010, 2:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-werent-there-more-secular-scribes-in-the-middle-ages/542879 "2010-06-12T02:13:44Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 16\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![clairobscur](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/839c29/32.png) [@clairobscur](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/clairobscur)\ **Post date:** [June 13, 2010, 12:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-werent-there-more-secular-scribes-in-the-middle-ages/542879/21 "2010-06-13T00:13:31Z")
> [@Tamerlane](#): > > Italy seems never to have lost widespread lay literacy. Southern France too kept an higher rate of literacy than northern European regions. One reason being that southern Europe kept using Roman written law as opposed to customarily law in northern Europe. This situation resulted in a need for documents (for instance wills) and required much more people being able to read and write. So, I don’t buy the IQ hypothesis. There’s no reason to assume that people in say, Provence had better skills for abstraction than their counterparts living some hundred kilometres to the north. That’s rather a matter of need and custom. ---
**Author:** ![Little\_Nemo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/little_nemo/32/3120_2.png) [@Little\_Nemo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Little_Nemo)\ **Post date:** [June 13, 2010, 1:50am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-werent-there-more-secular-scribes-in-the-middle-ages/542879/22 "2010-06-13T01:50:39Z")
> [@](#): > > I’ll ask again. Where and when did the nobility have no sources of literacy other than clergy who were spies in their own house? And I’ll answer again. I’m not talking absolutes. There was never a period when there were _no_ sources of literacy other than clergy. But there were certainly periods when the vast majority of literate people in Europe were clergy. Or are you disputing that? ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [June 13, 2010, 2:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-werent-there-more-secular-scribes-in-the-middle-ages/542879/23 "2010-06-13T02:01:45Z")
> [@Little\_Nemo](#): > > But there were certainly periods when the vast majority of literate people in Europe were clergy. Or are you disputing that? Rather than go back and forth about that, why don’t you just provide a cite to verify your claim? ---
**Author:** ![Bridget\_Burke](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/7cd45c/32.png) [@Bridget\_Burke](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bridget_Burke)\ **Post date:** [June 13, 2010, 2:43am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-werent-there-more-secular-scribes-in-the-middle-ages/542879/24 "2010-06-13T02:43:02Z")
The [Internet Medieval Sourcebook](http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/source/medieval-memory.html) has snippets of relevant text from those days, dealing with literacy & teaching. No scientific survey, but it indicates that things varied widely by time & place. The King’s Mirror, c 1200, has advice for laymen below the level of nobility: > [@](#): > > The man who is to be a merchant will have to brave many perils…Finally, remember this, that whenever you have an hour to spare you should give thought to your studies, especially to the law books; for it is clear that those who gain knowledge from books have keener wits than others, since those who are the most learned have the best proofs for their knowledge. Make a study of all the laws…And if you wish to become perfect in knowledge, you must learn all the languages, first of all Latin and French, for these idioms are most widely used…Learn arithmetic thoroughly, for merchants have great need of that. The Chronicle of Walter of Guisborough, 1279, introduces us to a noble of the old school (that is, no school at all): > [@](#): > > The king disturbed some of the great men of the land through his judges wanting to know by what warrant they held their lands, and if they did not have a good warrant, he immediately seized their lands. Among the rest, the Earl Warenne was called before the king’s judges. Asked by what warrant he held, he produced in their midst an ancient and rusty sword and said: “Look at this, my lords, this is my warrant! For my ancestors came with William the Bastard and conquered their lands with the sword, and by the sword I will defend them from anyone intending to seize them. The king did not conquer and subject the land by himself, but our forebears were sharers and partners with him!” Following these fascinating digressions further, I discovered [this site](http://medievalwriting.50megs.com/writing.htm) (which questions the Chronicle’s accuracy–just not on the linked page). Again, it’s not a simple story. But the writer (a woman–& there were even literate Medieval women) mentions lay scriveners & notaries. ---
**Author:** ![The\_Hamster\_King](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/8edcca/32.png) [@The\_Hamster\_King](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Hamster_King)\ **Post date:** [June 13, 2010, 4:29am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-werent-there-more-secular-scribes-in-the-middle-ages/542879/25 "2010-06-13T04:29:43Z")
My wife is a professor of music history at UCLA. Her specialty is the Middle Ages and she’s done extensive manuscript work. She says: There were just as many secular scribes as church scribes during the middle ages. However, there are a number of factors that make it seem like literacy was the exclusive province of the church. In the first place, religious manuscripts were more likely to survive. Many secular writings were business and government records. They weren’t pretty, and tended to be discarded (or the parchment scraped and reused) after they weren’t useful anymore. And what old records have survived tend not to be displayed in books or museums. Scholars like my wife use them, but they’re not the sort of thing that the general public usually sees. Also, the prayers and scriptures didn’t change or go out of fashion. Someone might still use grandma’s old prayer book, but wouldn’t be interested in reading grandma’s old book of love poetry. So that also helped church manuscripts to have a higher survival rate than secular manuscripts. Finally, it’s true that most working scribes were trained in church schools. But it’s not like the churches were hoarding them. If you were a nobleman and needed a scribe to keep records for you, you’d just hire a church-trained scribe to work for you. ---
**Author:** ![The\_Hamster\_King](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/8edcca/32.png) [@The\_Hamster\_King](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Hamster_King)\ **Post date:** [June 13, 2010, 4:35am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-werent-there-more-secular-scribes-in-the-middle-ages/542879/26 "2010-06-13T04:35:08Z")
For further reading my wife recommends: Richard H. Rouse and Mary Rouse, _Manuscripts and their Makers. Commercial Book Producers in Medieval Paris 1200-1500_, , 2 vols. (London 2000). Eamon Duffy, _Marking the Hours: English People and Their Prayers, 1240-1570_ (Yale University Press, 2007) ---
**Author:** ![The\_Hamster\_King](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/8edcca/32.png) [@The\_Hamster\_King](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Hamster_King)\ **Post date:** [June 13, 2010, 4:48am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-werent-there-more-secular-scribes-in-the-middle-ages/542879/27 "2010-06-13T04:48:58Z")
Ah … she adds another point. She says although the scribes were trained by the church, it’s not like they had direct control over them and could keep them from doing secular work. If a young cleric announced he was going to go work for the Duke to do his bookkeeping, the local bishop didn’t have the power to stop him. Members of the nobility learned to read if they felt like it. (Or their parents felt like it.) They were usually taught by the same church-trained clerics that were keeping their records. ---
**Author:** ![Superfluous\_Parentheses](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/8edcca/32.png) [@Superfluous\_Parentheses](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Superfluous_Parentheses)\ **Post date:** [June 14, 2010, 12:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-werent-there-more-secular-scribes-in-the-middle-ages/542879/28 "2010-06-14T12:20:22Z")
> [@MandaJo](#): > > The nobility and the clergy simply didn’t see themselves as being on opposite “sides” in any fundamental way, though there would be times when their interests diverged. This is probably true, but during the middle ages the church was not just a “spiritual” enterprise; it was in direct control of significant areas - like the Bishopric of Utrecht; a state of the Holy Roman Empire bordering with (and periodically at war with) “worldly” regions. It’s been suggested that one of the reasons for celibacy in the Church was to prevent a hereditary power structure that could be seen as a direct challenge to the hereditary nobility - the nobles of the christian countries were already willing to fight the church over matters of borders and wealth; they weren’t going to accept a virtual or true “holy royal family” within or bordering their states. WRT the Bishopric of Utrecht, the nobles of bordering Guelders and Holland continually sought influence in the appointments of Utrecht’s bishop (who usually were sons of nobility or otherwise powerful political families). ---
**Author:** ![Quercus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/q/7ab992/32.png) [@Quercus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Quercus)\ **Post date:** [June 14, 2010, 12:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-werent-there-more-secular-scribes-in-the-middle-ages/542879/29 "2010-06-14T12:52:58Z")
> [@The\_Hamster\_King](#): > > Finally, it’s true that most working scribes were trained in church schools. But it’s not like the churches were hoarding them. If you were a nobleman and needed a scribe to keep records for you, you’d just hire a church-trained scribe to work for you. Right, I think that even if most scribes (in a particular place and time) were trained in church schools, that doesn’t mean they were all fanatical undercover warrior-spies personally dedicated to the Pope. More like the average Boston College student, I would imagine, in their inclination to funnel secrets to the Vatican. ---
**Author:** ![Bridget\_Burke](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/7cd45c/32.png) [@Bridget\_Burke](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bridget_Burke)\ **Post date:** [June 14, 2010, 1:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-werent-there-more-secular-scribes-in-the-middle-ages/542879/30 "2010-06-14T13:48:42Z")
> [@Quercus](#): > > Right, I think that even if most scribes (in a particular place and time) were trained in church schools, that doesn’t mean they were all fanatical undercover warrior-spies personally dedicated to the Pope. More like the average Boston College student, I would imagine, in their inclination to funnel secrets to the Vatican. And some of them used their Church-taught skills to compose & preserve[secular works](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carmina_Burana). ---
**Author:** ![smiling\_bandit](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/e9a140/32.png) [@smiling\_bandit](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/smiling_bandit)\ **Post date:** [June 14, 2010, 2:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-werent-there-more-secular-scribes-in-the-middle-ages/542879/31 "2010-06-14T14:31:09Z")
> [@Superfluous\_Parentheses](#): > > It’s been suggested that one of the reasons for celibacy in the Church was to prevent a hereditary power structure that could be seen as a direct challenge to the hereditary nobility That’s overcomplicating it. The basic issue was practical and idealistic, with the practical side being far more about preventing a family from coming to own Church land as an inheritance, and thereby transforming it into permanent noble house. The idealistic reasons come directly from Paul, not as a theological neccessity but as a preference. ---
**Author:** ![what\_do\_I\_type\_here](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/a5b964/32.png) [@what\_do\_I\_type\_here](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/what_do_I_type_here)\ **Post date:** [June 14, 2010, 2:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-werent-there-more-secular-scribes-in-the-middle-ages/542879/32 "2010-06-14T14:31:59Z")
> [@Little\_Nemo](#): > > Back in the middle ages, literacy was very rare. Even high-ranking nobles and kings were virtually illiterate. The only people who were literate were the clergy. See I hate it when people do this on message boards. They just throw out bullshit in the first sentence and then base their entire message on that one false premise. Arriving at the wrong _conclusion_ is one thing; everybody has poor reasoning at times and it’s only human. But when people just believe bullshit as a _premise_ and they just assume they’re right and don’t spend a minute of their day wondering if maybe they’re wrong or not drives me nuts. Talk about a complete lack of any kind of intellectual curiosity. ---
**Author:** ![Captain\_Midnight](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/977dab/32.png) [@Captain\_Midnight](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Captain_Midnight)\ **Post date:** [June 14, 2010, 3:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-werent-there-more-secular-scribes-in-the-middle-ages/542879/33 "2010-06-14T15:39:54Z")
99.5% of the people in the early Middle Ages had manual labor jobs of some kind. Most were tenant farmers under landlords (the noblemen). The people of Europe were mostly farmers who built homes and had to take care of themselves, and most were serfs who were tied to the soil by the landlord class. There was no reason for them to write anything down, nor did their very simple, primitive lives allowed much in the way of cognative thought. People back then lived a lot more on instinct and survival. Also, the World was MUCH BIGGER a thousand years ago than today. A 100 kilometers was a great distance. You could ride your horse, if there were good roads to where you are going, (the Romans built an excellent road system for the time) but most walked, and why walk to a faraway place? Most people did not venture 10 kilometers away from home their entire lives. Some, however travelled great distances, such as traders, the Vikings, the various eastern Asiatic tribes. The religious clergy were the ones who were educated in the scriptures and writing church doctrines. The Church and the various Kingdoms were one in the same for many centuries, so it was the religious leaders who were the educated classes and were responsible for writing and recording laws of the land, religious and civil. The King himself (take Charlemagne for example) lived in a stone house, not a castle, but a modest sized home, with some land around it with the usual farm animals and whatnot. The King and his family ate the best meat from the field, but they did not eat much better than the common farmer did. I saw a movie in High School which showed a medieval king and the conditions that they lived in. Most people think they lived in a huge palace like in a Disney fairy tale and this was far from the truth. Those castles were built in the 17th to 19th Century. The cities were small, more like towns. There was no sanitation system which periodically caused plagues which would wipe out thousands of people, especially rats. if you ever watched “Monty Python and the Holy Grail”, with the scene of “Bring out your dead!”, well this was a lot like Dark Ages Europe. ---
**Author:** ![Exapno\_Mapcase](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/exapno_mapcase/32/1051_2.png) [@Exapno\_Mapcase](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Exapno_Mapcase)\ **Post date:** [June 14, 2010, 4:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-werent-there-more-secular-scribes-in-the-middle-ages/542879/34 "2010-06-14T16:34:04Z")
Didn’t you read the post right above yours? [Charlemagne’s palace, Aachen - schematic](http://faculty.cua.edu/pennington/ChurchHistory220/LectureTwo/CharlemagnePalace.jpg) [close-up view](http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3164/2747084179_d0ba3791a8.jpg) [Charlemagne’s castle, Italy](http://www.medievalists.net/2009/04/29/charlemagnes-castle/) ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [June 14, 2010, 4:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-werent-there-more-secular-scribes-in-the-middle-ages/542879/35 "2010-06-14T16:56:34Z")
> [@Captain\_Midnight](#): > > 99.5% of the people in the early Middle Ages had manual labor jobs of some kind. Most were tenant farmers under landlords (the noblemen). The people of Europe were mostly farmers who built homes and had to take care of themselves, and most were serfs who were tied to the soil by the landlord class. There was no reason for them to write anything down, nor did their very simple, primitive lives allowed much in the way of cognative thought. People back then lived a lot more on instinct and survival. > > Also, the World was MUCH BIGGER a thousand years ago than today. A 100 kilometers was a great distance. You could ride your horse, if there were good roads to where you are going, (the Romans built an excellent road system for the time) but most walked, and why walk to a faraway place? Most people did not venture 10 kilometers away from home their entire lives. Some, however travelled great distances, such as traders, the Vikings, the various eastern Asiatic tribes. > > The religious clergy were the ones who were educated in the scriptures and writing church doctrines. The Church and the various Kingdoms were one in the same for many centuries, so it was the religious leaders who were the educated classes and were responsible for writing and recording laws of the land, religious and civil. > > The King himself (take Charlemagne for example) lived in a stone house, not a castle, but a modest sized home, with some land around it with the usual farm animals and whatnot. The King and his family ate the best meat from the field, but they did not eat much better than the common farmer did. I saw a movie in High School which showed a medieval king and the conditions that they lived in. Most people think they lived in a huge palace like in a Disney fairy tale and this was far from the truth. Those castles were built in the 17th to 19th Century. > > The cities were small, more like towns. There was no sanitation system which periodically caused plagues which would wipe out thousands of people, especially rats. if you ever watched “Monty Python and the Holy Grail”, with the scene of “Bring out your dead!”, well this was a lot like Dark Ages Europe. Movies cannot be relied upon to be historically accurate. Especially if you don’t even tell us which movie you are talking about. I know you’re new around here, so you might consider that this forum is here for people looking for factual answers to questions-- not stuff from movies. ---
**Author:** ![taffygirl](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b5a626/32.png) [@taffygirl](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/taffygirl)\ **Post date:** [June 14, 2010, 8:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-werent-there-more-secular-scribes-in-the-middle-ages/542879/36 "2010-06-14T20:07:02Z")
Just a few comments. Today most people define _literacy_ as the ability to read and write, but they are, in fact, separate skills. There were and are people fairly adept at reading but not at writing, so being able to read _and_ write a letter is actually not a great working definition of literacy. As you undoubtedly know, the Romans used written language, at least to some extent. (I seem to recall reading that literacy rates in ancient Rome hovered around 10%, but I don’t know how that figure was ascertained.) The Germanic tribes did just fine with oral expression and traditions and so did not need written language. I think we’re assuming that there was a greater need for being able to read and write than there actually was, and that literacy gained someone greater access to more information. Both assumptions are questionable. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-werent-there-more-secular-scribes-in-the-middle-ages/542879.md?page=1)