Saga - 2002, Page 168

166
MAGNÚS STEFÁNSSON
Taranger, Absalon, „Om Eiendomsretten til de norske Præstegaarde", Norsk
Retstidende (Christiania, 1896), bls. 337-448.
Þorláks saga. Byskupa sögur 2. Hæfte. Editiones Arnamagnæane Series A, Vol. 13,2
(Kobenhavn, 1978).
Summary
Benefices and the Benefice Question
This article discusses the benefice claims advanced by bishops Þorlákur
Þórhallsson and Árni Þorláksson. It begins with a detailed discussion of
the key concept of benefice (Icel. staður). The author argues that the con-
cept is a translation of the Latin concept locus and not an abbreviation of
the Icelandic word kirkjustaður (literally, a church place), which various
scholars up until now have assumed it to be. The concept of benefice was
used for the episcopal seats, monasteries and those parish churches on
properties which were wholly owned by the church. In a few cases, hoW-
ever, benefices were established on the church portion of a property
where there was a farmers' church (Icel. bændakirkja), i.e. a privately
owned church. Benefices and churches were ecclesiastical institutions, but
the word kirkjustaður represents only a farm where a church has been
built.
Benefices were of various types. Some of them were wealthy and
favourably located, while others were poor and some even isolated. ItIS
estimated that there were a total of 138 benefices in Iceland. Some 30-40%
of all parish churches were benefices, and 113 of them were benefices
in the High Middle Ages. The proportion of benefices was by far the
greatest in the East Quarter, 64%. The author is of the opinion tliat the
large number of benefices in this Quarter is the result of the benefice
claims of St Þorlákur. Once he had gained control of the church sites and
established benefices, he granted them to farmers as temporary fiefs. The
objective of Bishop Ámi Þorláksson, however, was to establish fief °r
benefice arrangements with the benefices as vicarages.