Monastic Estates in the Wachau Region: Nodes of Exchange in Past and Present Days

2.1 Wachauer Klosterhöfe Online. An Interdisciplinary Digital Inventory

As part of the project “Wachauer Klosterhöfe Online. An interdisciplinary digital inventory,” a systematic data collection of ownership and building history was carried out, which, where possible, also included an inspection of the object, during which those structures relevant to the history of building and use as a monastery courtyard were documented. The data obtained from the initial building analysis surveys and the archival research now form the basis for a database that is available online for further use. Based on the previously known number of 85 estates in Wachau at the beginning of the project, a systematic search was first carried out in the research literature, which was expanded to include information from local knowledge and local historiography. The aim was to collect information on existing or already defunct monastic manors and to check existing data. Parallel to this, targeted archival research was carried out both in the archives of the monasteries as former owners of the estates and in the local market and municipal archives to collect data on ownership (purchase, sale, lease), on the management of the estates, and on its structural changes (building accounts). The degree of research conditions of the different archives sometimes varies considerably. For example, while the collections of the Stiftsarchiv Niedernburg near Passau in the Bayerische Hauptstaatsarchiv (BayHStA) can already be searched and accessed digitally, in the case of the scattered collection of Freising – also in the BayHStA – several registers must be consulted to have a good overview of the records. The problem of widely scattered documents mainly concerns the dissolved (Freising or Chiemsee) or transformed (Salzburg) bishoprics, while still-existing monasteries usually have an almost complete documentation (Göttweig, Michaelbeuern, St. Peter in Salzburg, Kremsmünster, etc.). It should also be noted that the degree to which the monastery’s properties in the Wachau are considered in the archival inventories differs considerably. While the estates in the Wachau were often part of a “foreign possessions” section, these archival records were sometimes even given their own unit of distortion, but sometimes not. As unfavourable as the latter circumstance is, conclusions can be drawn from the presence of the Wachau estates in the archival index with regard to their importance for the monastic economy. No matter how the records are shaped, the structure of the written sources conveys a very lively picture of the activities and relationships that were established between the monasteries, their estates and manors in the Wachau, and the actors involved.

At present and based on archival and literature research, 139 estates in the Wachau region owned by foreign monasteries until the nineteenth century have been recorded so far. Of these, 83 estates are still preserved in the building stock, for which there is also archival evidence of monastic use. A further 55 estates could be recorded on the basis of written records. After localisation and with the consent of the owners, most of whom are now private, it has been possible to carry out an initial archaeological survey of 38 building complexes. A further 45 objects were subjected to an initial inspection in the form of an inspection of the exterior areas and façades, and secondary literature and historical views were evaluated. For the building archaeological inventory, manors still existing in their building fabric are subjected to a survey. This usually includes an inspection of the entire building and the photographic and textual recording of visible building details. Finally, all initial information is collected and systematically made available in the digital inventory.

To meet the project’s requirement of recording complex architectural archaeological and historical properties as well as associated sources of a large number of objects by an interdisciplinary as well as spatially disparate team of different disciplines and subsequently “linking” them with each other, a CRUD (Create, Read, Update, Delete) web application was developed that uses the open object-relational database management system PostgreSQL and PostGIS for processing spatial data in the backend. The PHP web framework Laravel (https://laravel.com/) was chosen as the development environment. The object-relational database structure is initially structured around the main entity of the so-called manor objects (Höfe), each of which represents a monastery estate and can be linked to entries from the following entities: Archival record – Actor – Event – Literature – Geodata – Image data. These entities are provided with their own input and editing masks for individual editing in the database backend. According to the common relational database schema PostgreSQL, the data of each of these entities are modelled in tabular form (with further associated sub-tables) and linked to each other. Image data are associated with and retrievable from the final project servers via external links. All other data units, such as dating or monastery information, are structured around these main tables. Spatial data can be included and displayed in the database in the form of polygon, polyline, point, and raster data.

To make the project data available to different user groups (research, interested public) in the long term, a database structure was developed that allows several users to create, read, update, and delete data records simultaneously online from any terminal device. The automated versioning of the data records at regular intervals is a key feature. In the final web application, users with different access rights (viewer, editor, and administrator) can now interact with the data sets on different levels without having to access several domains or applications. The publication of datasets takes place seamlessly within the same application by means of approvals, which can be granted as required by the administrators or specific users with appropriate usage rights. Spatial information can be entered and displayed using the map view/digitisation mask (open-source Library Leaflet https://leafletjs.com/).

All systems to be created are based on open-source standards and fulfil the requirements of the Time Machine Europe project (https://www.timemachine.eu/about-us/).

The start page offers information about the project and the use of the database. Searches are possible via the names of the estates, the affiliation to the ecclesiastical rulers (monasteries), and the location of the monastic manors in the communities, via a map view as well as via an image viewer (Figure 1).

Figure 1

Wachauer Klosterhöfe Online, Landing Page.

Various search criteria can be queried by means of a free text search or a detailed search. Filtering by means of a timeline or a selection list of monasteries offers additional fine-tuning (Figure 2).

Figure 2

Wachauer Klosterhöfe Online, Search mask.

The individual data set offers structured information on historical data, building history, and archaeology as well as literature and source bases. Care has been taken to address questions of ownership and economic history, to describe topography and location as well as the existing building fabric, and to provide an initial architectural-archaeological interpretation. The respective authors of the texts are explicitly named and can be cited according to the guidelines of scientific work. Information on the research literature as well as an overview of the archival situation is provided under the heading Literature and Sources. The menu on the right offers the opportunity for a quick overview of the state of preservation, the manorial affiliation, dating, and localisation as well as public accessibility. A selection of photographs, either freely accessible or released by the owners, provide a first visual impression of the entire object (Figure 3).

Figure 3

Single data set Erlahof; Overview website.

3.1 Vineyard Ownership as Economic and Cultural Capital

Unlike, for example, further up the Danube, in Upper Austria, where viticulture experienced a heyday in the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries but declined significantly in the following centuries, the climate of the Wachau still offers suitable conditions to produce wine today. Numerous place and house names, but also field names such as Weinzierl or Weinberg, remind us that the cultivation, processing, and distribution of wine shaped the economic structure of the Wachau for a long time and still does (Arnberger, 2017; Klinger & Vocelka, 2020). This is also evident in the historical building structure: numerous winery farms still in operation today have medieval and/or modern elements. Thus, this form of agricultural production shapes a specific section along the Austrian course of the Danube in many ways.

If one follows the narrative of the Vita of St. Severin, a Roman official who converted to Christianity, wine was already being cultivated in the Danube region in Roman times. Severin was based in Mautern (Favianis) in the fifth century and taught his disciples ad vineas – at the vineyards; at least this is how it is reported in the biography of Severin written about 30 years later. From the ninth century onwards, there were written documents for the existence of viticulture, which give the first indication that the ownership of vineyards was an important asset. When the area east of the Enns in what is now Lower Austria was conquered by the Hungarians and was difficult for the Bavarians and Franks to access, monasteries were endowed with vineyard ownership and thus an economic basis up the Danube. For the monasteries, however, wine was more: as an important element in the liturgy, continuous access to wine was essential. For example, the monasteries of Mondsee and Kremsmünster received vineyards in Aschach on the Danube as well as on the Rodl in the Lower Mühlviertel (Schweiger, 2004; Werneck & Kohl, 1974).

From the second half of the tenth century onwards, the Babenberg margraviate was again extended beyond the Enns further down the Danube towards the east. This was accompanied by the granting of vineyard possessions in what is now Lower Austria and the Wachau. During the Middle Ages, numerous Austrian, Salzburg, Bavarian, and Bohemian monasteries as well as Bishoprics came into possession of vineyards in the Wachau by donation or purchase. The first information about this has already been handed down for the ninth century in the form of royal deeds of donation. This is primarily connected with the expansion of local and territorial lordship, which was accompanied by the expansion of ecclesiastical structures. With the possessions, the need for wine for liturgy, personal use, and hospitality could be covered. Wine, as the main component of the celebration of mass, had to be provided in sufficient quantities for both monasteries and parishes. For the monasteries and bishoprics, the location of the vineyards on the Danube offered favourable production conditions, on the one hand; on the other hand, the waterway facilitated the transport of the yields to the mostly upstream locations. For example, the bishops of Passau owned vineyards in St. Michael in the Wachau, the bishops of Salzburg in Traismauer, Arnsdorf, and Oberloiben, or the Bavarian monastery of Niederaltaich in Spitz. As a profitable source of income, the expansion of ownership was intensified, especially in the twelfth century, and existing entitlements were reactivated. Around 1500, 15 Lower Austrian, 6 Upper Austrian, 25 Bavarian, 4 Salzburg, 1 Styrian, and 4 Bohemian monasteries owned vineyards in and around Krems. In a European comparison, this influence of foreign monasteries on a regional wine-growing area can also be observed in the wine-growing areas on the Rhine, the Moselle, the Main, and the Neckar, as well as on the Etsch in the southern part of Tyrol (Weber, 1999).

The developments of vineyard ownership by foreign monasteries in the Wachau can be well outlined using the example of the villages grouped together as the Tal Wachau municipality (Bauer, 2004, 2008). Until the end of the eighteenth century, it was the ecclesiastical institutions that owned nearly half of the vineyard property that was given to “foreign” owners. The bishopric of Freising and monasteries such as St. Florian, Tegernsee, St. Pölten, Michaelbeuern, Melk, Garsten, Ranna, and Aggsbach had relatively stable cultivation areas throughout the period. An analysis of the relevant tax books between 1521 and 1785 indicates property sizes between 2,850 (1521) and 2,146 (1785) Tagwerke. The Tagwerk was the measure of vineyards in the Wachau and corresponded to 400 m; 25 Tagwerke therefore corresponded to 1 ha.

The monastic vineyard property was cultivated in a form of lease known as sharecropping (Teilbau), in which the cultivator of the vineyard had to hand over part of the yield – half or a third – to the owner. For the non-resident landowners, this type of lease was of great advantage, because it created incentives for prudent and high-yield cultivation by sharing the yield (Bauer, 2008).

3.2 Monastic Vine Estates: Functions and Infrastructure

The administration of the estates, which were often located far away from their centres, required a series of measures that are still visible today in the numerous Lesehöfe in the Wachau area as well as in other wine-growing regions of eastern Austria. The manors represented the spatial administrative centres in Wachau. In the twelfth century, Krems developed into the hub of viticulture and trade. Here, too, the most important monasteries built houses and acquired land for cultivation. By the end of the fifteenth century, 49 monasteries (13 of them from the area of present-day Bavaria) had acquired 65 estates in Krems. Around 1750, one-third of the vineyard area around Krems was still in the hands of foreign monasteries – this is roughly the same area that the citizens of Krems owned. Today, the share of church and monastic ownership of vineyards in the Wachau is only small. The old manors have long since ceased to be operated as such, but some of them are still preserved as buildings today (Englisch, 1998).

From an infrastructural point of view, usually there were presses and halls, later also cellars, for processing and storing the harvest on the estates. Residential wings for the administrative staff and guests were also provided. In addition to the administration of the estates, the manors served the respective monastery and diocesan rulers as a place of residence and supply when this was needed. In keeping with this use, chapels, bedrooms, and representation rooms were part of the furnishings of the manors. This mixture of tasks led to a specific type of building – the Lesehof (Vinery manor). Although the idea of a manorial building complex around a central, eponymous inner courtyard – and accordingly referred to in the sources as a Hof, Latin curia – is not a monastic invention but has also occurred in similar form since the Carolingian period, along with castles as noble residences (Zehetmayer, 2017, pp. 390–391), some specific features can nevertheless be identified: For example, many monastic manors have a large, long-rectangular structure, which at first glance is reminiscent of the palace in castles: in both cases, there is a hall on the upper floor and at least large rooms for public receptions, which were usually accessed via a high portal and an external staircase. However, while the basement at ground level in the palace usually served subordinate supply purposes, the large carriage entrance on the courtyard side in the hall building of monastery courtyards indicates that the wine press and, in early times, often also the cellar were located here (Kühtreiber, 2016, p. 100; Krause & Reichhalter, 2009, 2011/2012). This can be observed particularly well in the so-called “Nikolaihof” in Mautern on the Danube, where a massive and functional “eighteenth-century tree press” can still be found today in a hall building from the early thirteenth century (Figure 6).

Figure 6

Mautern an der Donau, Nikolaihof. Interior view of the Romanesque press house with the pressing tree. Photo: T. Kühtreiber.

In the former “Passauer Hof” of Klosterneuburg, archaeological excavations not only found evidence of the footprints of the wine press (Neugebauer et al., 1998, p. 24, Figure 6a); in the lintel of the building, which was destroyed in the first half of the sixteenth century, there was a large number of glazed floor tiles with animal motifs from around 1300, with which the floor of the hall above was decorated. In terms of motifs, these belong to the symbolic world from the so-called “Physiologus” manuscripts, in which ancient ideas about animal behaviour were interpreted in the Christian sense as a struggle between good and evil (Neugebauer & Neugebauer-Maresch, 1998). The wall paintings with scenes from Aesop’s animal fables that have been partially preserved in the hall of the “Passauer Hof” in Krems on the Danube were also interpreted theologically in a similar sense in the Middle Ages and are both again examples of how medieval education in monasteries or their manors drew from ancient sources. Significantly, the pictorial cycle was continued on the south side in Physiologus motifs (Lanc, 1983, p. 138; Tietze, 1908, pp. 232–240; Vavra, 1981/82). Although the Kremser “Passauer Hof”, with its mixed function as a parish house and manor of the of Passau bishopric, was a special case – also disputed between the parish and the diocese – the building plan, which is identical to the “Passauer Hof” of Klosterneuburg and consists of a hall/press house, chapel, residential building, and a narrow tower, shows that there was probably a common building idea behind these two complexes (Figure 7) (Kühtreiber, 2016, pp. 100–104).

Figure 7

Reconstruction model of the “Passauer Hof” in Klosterneuburg. Graphic: L. Leitner.

While we have no medieval building descriptions from the Wachau, corresponding information can be obtained from early documents from other areas of present-day Lower Austria: In an exchange contract between the Styrian monasteries of St. Lambrecht and Rein regarding possessions in southern Lower Austria from 1147, two monastic manors are described in relative detail for this early period of writing in connection with vineyard possessions (Zehetmayer et al., 2013, no. 28/2; Zehetmayer, 2017, pp. 391–392): Both manors – one located in Muthmannsdorf and the other near Neunkirchen – had a cellarium. While the building from Muthmannsdorf (district of Wiener Neustadt-Bezirk) is explicitly identified as a stone building (cellarium petrinum), the one from Neunkirchen is listed among the wooden buildings (edificiis ligneis), although the latter had a heatable and thus habitable upper storey (caminata). This and the fact that a confirmation document from 1159, written in the twelfth century but with falsified content, lists mobile chattels such as vats and barrels but also household goods such as knives, jugs, and other tableware in connection with the cellarium of Muthmannsdorf, suggest an interpretation of the term cellarium with the hall buildings described above with a press house/cellar on the ground floor and representative (living) rooms on the upper floor (Zehetmayer et al., 2013, no. + 3² (1159); Zehetmayer, 2017, p. 392).

Within the palisaded enclosure of the courtyard in Neunkirchen, which was provided with pointed stakes or thorns, there were, in addition to a vegetable garden, further buildings such as a vestibule, a barn, or granary (horreum) measuring approximately 30 m × 9 m, a horse stable, and a stupa. This is one of the oldest written records of a parlour, i.e., a room that could presumably be heated with a smoke-free stove. It is difficult to decide whether this was a living room or perhaps a bathing room, as was recorded a few centuries later for the manor of the Göttweig Abbey in Furth (Hähnel, 1975, pp. 17–18; 344). Outside the enclosure, a farmer’s house (hospitium rustici) was also part of the property.

While these manors evidently had enough space and capital for structurally and functionally differentiated economic facilities, another document from the late twelfth century indicates that monasteries in already more densely built-up towns, such as Krems, had to come to terms with much more cramped conditions: around 1180/90 the monastery of Garsten owned a house in the manor of a nobleman and was occupied by fratres, i.e., monks or lay brothers from Garsten. Whether this house functioned as a manorial complex in senso strictu or rather served as a residential house is beyond our knowledge (Zehetmayer et al., 2013, no. 7/25; Zehetmayer, 2017, p. 392).

The situation is different for the manor of the nearby Benedictine monastery of Göttweig, located in Stein an der Donau. Here, an inventory from the first third of the sixteenth century provides detailed information. At that time, 21 rooms were in use. A representative parlour, an office room, a bed chamber with an additional guest room as well as the associated antechamber, and a number of other guest rooms indicate that part of the rooms were used by the abbot – if he was present. In the remaining area, there were living quarters for the servants, administrative, utility, and storage rooms for the operation of the estate. The chapel, built around 1300 and decorated with rich wall paintings, is an impressive example of the high quality of the furnishings (Figure 8) (Landkammer et al., 2018).

Figure 8

Man of Sorrows, Göttweigerhof-Kapelle, Oratorium, western window niche of the north wall. Photo: P. Böttcher.

Its location above the portal to the inner monastery courtyard is also found in a similar form at the Göttweigerhof in Furth south of the Danube (Aichinger-Rosenberger et al., 2003, pp. 466–467): on the one hand, this positioning expressed the spiritual landlordship, but similarly to some castle chapels, the gate was placed under the protection of God or the holy chapel patrons. Chapels were part of the structural furnishings in many monastic manors and thus also indicate that their importance clearly went beyond their economic functions (Figure 9).

Figure 9

Stein an der Donau, Göttweiger Hof. Gate chapel from the entrance side. Photo: T. Kühtreiber.

The widespread absence of medieval cellars in the monastic manors of the Wachau is conspicuous. There may be several reasons for this: first, as already mentioned, the oldest estates are positioned close to the Danube for logistical reasons, which makes them vulnerable to floods. The rapid recovery of goods of all kinds was and is much easier at ground level than from the cellar, especially when full wine barrels are involved. On the other hand, it had long been the practice of the monasteries to ship the freshly pressed must immediately, which made the need for large wine cellars obsolete. Significantly, the regional monastic landlords were exceptions, such as Göttweig Abbey, which had a large and a smaller cellar built in their manorial complex in Stein as early as around 1300 (Kühtreiber, 2023a). It was not until the seventeenth/eighteenth century that more and more wine cellars can be found, which suggests vinification and wine distribution on site. From the late Middle Ages onwards, conflicts and regulations concerning the sale of wine are recorded in particular in the towns of Krems and Stein (see below, c. 3.3). In both towns, another circumstance comes into play: the installation of larger wine cellars was not possible in many town houses due to lack of space. Therefore, separated cellar alleys were established, partly in the city ditches on the mountain side. Similar solutions are also to be considered in some of the more densely built-up rural wine-growing villages of the Wachau; without written evidence, however, many a preserved cellar tube can hardly be attributed to its former owners.

3.3 Monastic Vine Estates as Nodes of Social Networks

In 1203, the Bishop of Passau, Wolfger von Erla, undertook a visitation trip down the Danube, which led him to the Passau possessions. A unique source – a notebook filled with invoices – provides an example of this journey. On 12 November of this year, he stayed with his entourage in Zeiselmauer, which was the administrative centre of the Passau possessions in the Tullnerfeld region of Lower Austria. The monastic court of the High Chapter of Passau, which belonged to it, was located in the structural remains of the former Roman fort, comparable to the Nikolaihof in Mautern on the Danube, as can still be seen today on the Roman Gate of Zeiselmauer (Kastentor), which was converted into a granary as part of the court complex in the Middle Ages (Kühtreiber, 2016, p. 98). As part of this stay, Wolfger remunerated the “singer” (cantor) Walther von der Vogelweide with money for a fur coat (pro pellicio). This note is the only extra-literary evidence for this famous poet (Reichert, 2005, pp. 470–483; Heger, 1970, pp. 13–17, 224–237 [discussion] and p. 96 [transcription]). Even though this has not been handed down, we can assume that the gift of money to Walther did not take place without a corresponding demonstration of the art of poetry and song. In any case, this also highlights the importance of the monastic estates as cultural and communicative hubs in the regions.

The social network of institutions and people connected to the courts will also be traced on an economic level: The management of the estate of foreign monasteries and convents was not always free of conflict. Numerous documents report disputes about rights to vineyards, about exceeding quantities of tax-free wine for the monasteries’ own needs, or about the maintenance obligations of adjoining buildings and walls (Landsteiner, 2001, pp. 196–197). For example, the already mentioned Göttweiger Hof in Stein was only granted tax exemption if the adjacent city wall did not require any maintenance measures. The disputes flared up when in the fifteenth century the Abbot of Göttweig had a tower of the town wall adjacent to the manor demolished to construct a new wing for residential purposes and made no provision to rebuild it. Conversely, the burghers of Stein held up a wagonload of wine at the city gate, which was destined for the Göttweig court, as in their opinion the permitted amount of wine to be imported tax-free had already been exceeded (Brunner, 1953, p. 7, no. 15 (1286); pp. 91–92, no. 163a (1443); pp. 92–93, no. 163b (1443)).

For the estate of the Augustinian Canons’ Monastery of Klosterneuburg, other ways of cooperation with the burghers of Stein were sought and a burgher was entrusted with the care of the property for life (Holubar, 1994, pp. 69–70). As in other cases, his duties included both the care of the vineyards and the structural maintenance of the manor.

Toll registers from Sarmingstein in Upper Austria or from Stein give an impression of the quantities that were transported up the Danube without tolls at the beginning of the sixteenth century – i.e., for the own needs of some monasteries. The quantities range from just under 100 (Salzburg Cathedral Chapter) to just under 3,000 (Melk) Eimer of wine; a Viennese Eimer corresponds to about 56 L (Hoffmann, 1955).

Especially for the modern period, toll lists and monastery records suggest lively traffic between the monasteries and their vinery estates. The grape harvest of the monastic harvesting yards upstream of the Danube was carried out by water over the Danube by ship trains pulled by horses. This elaborate form of transport developed into an important branch of trade, which included shipmasters as organisers of the transports, Naufergen who guided the ships and rafts down the Danube, as well as auxiliary workers (Landsteiner, 2015, pp. 233–234; Weber, 1999, p. 364).

The so-called Thirty Years’ War (1618–1648) caused a massive collapse of wine production in the Wachau. Especially in the areas north of the Danube, there were high losses of property, for example, in Eggenburg by 85% of the vineyard property. This can also be seen in the price development. Between 1,480 and 1,570, one could still buy 4–6 Metzen of rye for an Eimer of wine; from the 1680s onwards, one bucket of wine only bought one or at most two Metzen of rye. A Metzen of rye held between 61 and 75 L, depending on regional tradition; a bucket of wine held about 57 L (Landsteiner, 1996).

For the monasteries, the estates in the Wachau represented an important source of income until well into the eighteenth century. However, with the reorganisation of the church system and the abolition of a large number of monasteries by Joseph II at the end of the eighteenth century and in Bavaria in 1802/03, ownership changed significantly (Krausen, 1964). The monasteries were now replaced by those winegrowers who had previously cultivated the vineyards on behalf of the landlords. An impressive number of the important winegrowing companies in Wachau today have their headquarters in one of the former monastery estates.