Creating the Monastic Past in Medieval Flanders (York Medieval Texts) 1903153166, 9781903153161

Citation preview

Creating the Monastic Past in Medieval Flanders

The creation of a past for themselves was of pressing importance to religious communities, enabling them to increase their status and legitimise their existence. This book examines the process in a group of communities from the southern part of Flanders [the monks of Saint-Bertin at Saint-Omer, the community of Saint-Rictrude at Marchiennes and the canons of Saint-Amé at Douai] over a period running from the ninth to the end of the eleventh century. The central contention is that the communities produced their narratives [history, hagiography, charter materials] for a specific time and purpose, frequently as a response to or intended resolution of internal or external crises. The book also discusses how the circumstances which triggered narrative production had an impact not only on the content but also on the form of the texts.

YORK MEDIEVAL PRESS York Medieval Press is published by the University of York’s Centre for Medieval Studies in association with Boydell & Brewer Ltd. Our objective is the promotion of innovative scholarship and fresh criticism on medieval culture. We have a special commitment to interdisciplinary study, in line with the Centre’s belief that the future of Medieval Studies lies in those areas in which its major constituent disciplines at once inform and challenge each other.

Editorial Board (2001–2005): Professor W. M. Ormrod (Chair; Dept of History) Professor P. P. A. Biller (Dept of History) Dr J. W. Binns (Dept of English & Related Literature) Dr J. Hawkes (Art History) Dr M. O. Townend (Dept of English & Related Literature)

All enquiries of an editorial kind, including suggestions for monographs and essay collections, should be addressed to: The Director, University of York, Centre for Medieval Studies, The King’s Manor, York, YO1 7EP (E-mail: [email protected]).

Publications of York Medieval Press are listed at the back of this volume.

Creating the Monastic Past in Medieval Flanders

Karine Ugé

YORK MEDIEVAL PRESS

© Karine Ugé 2005 All Rights Reserved. Except as permitted under current legislation no part of this work may be photocopied, stored in a retrieval system, published, performed in public, adapted, broadcast, transmitted, recorded or reproduced in any form or by any means, without the prior permission of the copyright owner The right of Karine Ugé to be identified as the author of this work has been asserted in accordance with sections 77 and 78 of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 First published 2005 A York Medieval Press publication in association with The Boydell Press an imprint of Boydell & Brewer Ltd PO Box 9 Woodbridge Suffolk IP12 3DF UK and of Boydell & Brewer Inc. 668 Mt Hope Avenue Rochester NY 14620 USA website: www.boydellandbrewer.com and with the Centre for Medieval Studies, University of York ISBN 1 903153 16 6

A CIP catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library Typeset by Pru Harrison, Hacheston, Suffolk

Printed in Great Britain by Antony Rowe Ltd, Chippenham, Wiltshire

CONTENTS Acknowledgements

vii

Abbreviations

ix

Maps

xi

Genealogies

xiii

Introduction

1

Part I. Saint-Bertin

17

1

Saint-Bertin from the Foundation to the Eleventh Century

19

2

Cultural Life at Saint-Bertin

37

3

Narrative Production at Saint-Bertin

50

Part II. The Hagiographic Cycle of St Rictrude

95

4

St Rictrude, her Family and the Abbey of Marchiennes (c. 640–1130)

97

5

St Maurontus and St Amatus at Douai

142

Conclusion

162

Bibliography

173

Index

193

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The debt that I have accumulated in the course of this work is immense. First and foremost, I must express gratitude to my thesis advisor at Boston College, Robin Fleming. Her impeccable scholarship and the friendly and intellectually stimulating environment that she cultivated in her seminars have continuously motivated my desire to pursue this research and broaden its scope. Since my graduation, she has continuously encouraged me to publish and improve the book. This project could not have been completed without the acuity of her advice, her enthusiasm and her endless patience in correcting my English. Mark Ormrod, for York Medieval Press, and Caroline Palmer, of Boydell & Brewer, have trusted my project and greatly helped me to complete this book with their patience and kind advice. Elisabeth van Houts has encouraged me, offered me invaluable advice and kindly shared her most recent research with me. Dean Michael Smyer, Dean of Boston College Graduate School of Arts and Sciences, generously offered me the grant that made this publication possible; my gratitude to Michael Smyer is immense. During my graduate studies, grants from the Bibliographical Society of America and Boston College allowed me to do research in libraries in France and Belgium. I have benefited there from the kind offices of Madame Seguin, at the Bibliothèque Municipale de Boulogne sur Mer, and Madame Le Maner, at the Bibliothèque Municipale de Saint-Omer. On both sides of the Atlantic, I have received support and advice from a great number of scholars. Janet Nelson has made extremely useful comments on my work and has warmly encouraged me in my path of research. I am grateful to Alain Dierkens, Arnoud-Jan Bijsterveld, Anne-Marie Helvétius, Chris Lewis and Diane Reilly for giving me invaluable opportunities to present and publish my work. I also wish to thank Professor Laurent Morelle, who has kindly given me access to his unpublished Thèse d’Habilitation. In the long and sometimes arduous path of writing a book, my friends and family have been an invaluable asset. Sharing, almost daily, the joys and angst of this process with my friends and fellow medievalists Christine Senecal and Nathalie Stalmans has been a wonderful encouragement. I must thank my family, whose members have endured years of endless stories about Flemish monks. My parents, Claire and Robert Ugé, have always encouraged me and provided me with their warm support. My husband, Benoit Gerard has patiently read and commented on many a draft. This book is dedicated to him and our beloved daughters Elisabeth and Alexandra.

vii

ABBREVIATIONS AA SS ASB Anal. Boll. BAR BCRH BHL BL BN BSM BSAM CLA

CSEL Diplomata Belgica DHGE KBR MGH SRG SRM SS MSAM PL Poet. Lat. RB RBPH RHE RHEF RN Settimane S-O

Acta Sanctorum Acta Sanctorum Belgii, ed. J. Ghespuiere (Brussels, 1783–1794), 6 vols Analecta Bollandiana British Archaeological Series Bulletin de la Commission Royale d’Histoire Bibliotheca Hagiographica Latina (Brussels, 1898–1901), 2 vols British Library, London Bibliothèque Nationale, Paris Boulogne-sur-Mer, Bibliothèque Municipale Bulletin de la Société des Antiquaires de la Morinie Codices Latini Antiquiores. A Paleographical Guide to Latin Manuscripts Prior to the Ninth Century, ed. E. A. Lowe, 11 vols. (Oxford, 1934–1966) Corpus Scriptorum Ecclesiasticorum Latinorum Diplomata Belgica ante annum millesimum centesimum scripta, ed. Gysseling and A. C. F. Koch, vol. I, Teksten (Brussels, 1950) Dictionnaire d’histoire et de géographie ecclésiastiques (Paris, 1912– ) Bibliothèque Royale, Brussels Monumenta Germaniae Historica Scriptores Rerum Germanicarum Scriptores Rerum Merovingicarum Scriptores Mémoires de la Société des Antiquaires de la Morinie Patrologiae cursus completus, series Latina, ed. J. P. Migne (Paris, 1841–1864) Poetae Latini Medii Aevi Revue Bénédictine Revue Belge de Philologie et d’Histoire Revue d’Histoire Ecclésiastique Revue d’Histoire de l’Église de France Revue du Nord Settimane di Studio del Centro Italiano di Studi sull’alto Medioevo Saint-Omer, Bibliothèque Municipale ix

Abbreviations VA1, VA2, VA3 VAL VAm VB1, VB2, VB3 VE VM VR VW1

Vita S. Audomari Prima, Altera and Tertia Hucbald, Vita Amati Episcopi Longior Vita Amandi Episcopi Prima Vita S. Bertini Prima and Altera; Folcard, Vita Tertia S. Bertini Vita Eusebiae Vita Mauronti Hucbald, Vita S. Rictrudis Vita S. Winnoci Prima

x

xi

Map 1. The Flemish Pagi, ca. 900

Map 2. The County of Flanders, ca. 1100

xii

The comital family of Flanders (ninth–twelfth century) Counts of Flanders appear in bold

xiii

The comital family of Boulogne (ninth–twelfth century) Counts of Boulogne appear in bold

xiv

Rictrude’s kin according to the studied sources Names in Bold: earliest tradition found in Hucbald’s Vita Rictrudis (907) Underlined names: additions developed in the late eleventh century at Douai Names in italic: additions by Andrew of Marchiennes, Historia Succinta (twelfth century)

xv

INTRODUCTION This book examines the processes through which monastic communities created a usable past for themselves. The central issue is that communities did not produce historical narratives fortuitously, but rather that they did so under specific circumstances and that the writing of a text often served as a catalyst for the resolution of internal or external crises. This ‘utilitarian’ dimension of historiography implies that, in the course of events, communities kept adapting old accounts of their past in a way that fitted their present needs. To illustrate my subject, I have chosen to study historical narratives produced between the ninth and the eleventh centuries by the communities of Saint-Bertin at Saint-Omer and Saint-Rictrude at Marchiennes, both located in the southern part of the county of Flanders. I will first provide a brief overview of the geographical and historical context and then I will outline the theoretical framework on which the arguments of the book are based. Saint-Bertin was founded in the middle of the seventh century by St Omer, bishop of Thérouanne, in the context of King Dagobert’s efforts to assert his authority in Neustria. It soon grew into an important religious and economic centre in the region and can be counted among the most prestigious monasteries that were patronized by the Carolingian kings and, later, by the counts of Flanders. Marchiennes was founded around 640 by St Amand during his mission in the region of the river Scarpe; it was located on the Scarpe, a few miles away from Saint-Amand. The double monastery seems to have been fairly prosperous in the ninth century, but decayed during the tenth. It was restored in 1024 as a male Benedictine community by a disciple of reformer Richard of Saint-Vanne under the impetus of Count Baldwin IV and Bishop Gerard of Cambrai. Both communities were located in the southern part of the county of Flanders. Flanders, considering its most extensive boundaries, consisted of the pagi of Waas, Aardenburg, Flanders, Yser, Ghent, Courtrai, Mempisc and Tournai to the north and to the east, and of Boulonais, Ternois (region of Thérouanne), Melantois (region of Lille), Pévèle, Ostrevant (region of Douai) and Artois (region of Arras) to the south. In terms of ecclesiastical organization the county encompassed the bishoprics of Thérouanne, Noyon-Tournai, and Cambrai-Arras: an important part of the archibishopric of Reims.1 In the 1

On the formation and history of the county of Flanders, see most recently, H. J. Tanner, Families, Friends and Allies: Boulogne and Politics in Northern France and England, c. 879–1160 (Leiden, 2004), pp. 21–7; D. Nicholas, Medieval Flanders (London, 1992), pp. 39–55 and A. C. F. Koch, ‘Het Graafschap Vlaanderen van de 9de eeuw tot

1

Creating the Monastic Past in Medieval Flanders Merovingian period, Flanders was controlled by the Neustrian kings and, after the division of the Frankish Empire by Louis the Pious’ sons in 843, it made up the northern part of Charles the Bald’s West Frankish kingdom. The formation of the county was the result of the progressive concentration of these pagi into the hands of one comes during the ninth century. The forefather of the Flemish lineage was Baldwin Ironarm, who originally controlled only two pagi – Ghent and Waas – of the future county of Flanders. In 864, thanks to Charles’ acknowledgment of Baldwin’s marriage to his daughter Judith, Baldwin was also entrusted with Ternois and Flanders (and the lay abbacy of Saint-Peter at Ghent).2 Baldwin Ironarm’s title was not hereditary, and the pagi that he controlled were not yet perceived as a territorial unit. His son, Baldwin II (879–918), had to seize power in each of the pagi he once controlled. Baldwin II quickly regained Flanders, Mempisc, Ghent, Waas and Courtrai.3 In the south, his expansion was limited by the powerful family of Eberhard of Friuli. Indeed, in 883, West Frankish king Carloman (d. 884) had created a marcher region covering Artois and Ternois and entrusted it to Eberhard’s son, Ralph.4 Ralph’s grandfather, Unroch – Eberhard’s father – was already known as count of Ternois in the first half of the ninth century. Ralph’s sister, Helwich, was married to the count of Ostrevant, Hucbald. Ralph’s uncle, Adalard, had been abbot of Saint-Bertin and Saint-Amand. Furthermore, Ralph was Charles the Bald’s nephew through his mother Gisela – so he was also related to Baldwin II.5 Hence, Ralph, who was also lay

2

3 4 5

1070’, in Algemene Geschiedenis der Nederlanden (Utrecht, 1982), pp. 354–83; a useful overview running up to the time of Arnulf the Great is found in R. McKitterick, The Frankish Kingdoms under the Carolingians (London, 1983), pp. 248–54. See also J. Dhondt, Études sur la naissance des principautés territoriales (Bruges, 1948); J. Dhondt, Les Origines de la Flandre et de l’Artois (Arras, 1944); F.-L. Ganshof, La Flandre sous les premiers comtes (Brussels, 1944) and L. Vanderkindere, La Formation territoriale des principautés belges au moyen âge, 2 vols. (Brussels, 1902) I. McKitterick, The Frankish Kingdoms, p. 249; on Ghent and its two abbeys, Saint-Peter and Saint-Bavo, see G. Declercq, ‘Heiligen, lekenabten en hervormers: De Gentse abdijen van Sint-Pieters en Sint-Baafs tijdens de Eerste Middeleeuw (7de–12de eeuw)’, in Ganda en Blandinium. De Gentse Abdijen van Sint-Pieters en Sint-Baafs, ed. G. Declercq (Ghent, 1997), pp. 13–40 and G. Declercq and A. Verhulst, ‘Early Medieval Ghent between Two Abbeys and the Count’s Castle’, in Ghent: In Defense of a Rebellious City, ed. J. Decavele (Antwerp, 1989), pp. 37–59; see also A. C. F. Koch, ‘Gent in de 9de en 10de eeuw. Enkele benaderingen’, Stadsarcheologie. Bodem en Monument in Gent 14 (1990), 3–43. Ganshof, La Flandre, p. 18. McKitterick, The Frankish Kingdoms, p. 250. On the family of Eberhard of Friuli, see E. Favre, ‘La famille d’Évrard marquis de Frioul dans le royaume Franc de l’Ouest’, in Études d’histoire du moyen âge dédiées à Gabriel Monod (Paris, 1896), pp. 155–62; Ph. Grierson, ‘La maison d’Évrard de Frioul et les origines du comté de Flandre’, Revue du Nord 24 (1938), 241–66 and J. Dhondt, ‘Une dynastie inconnue de comtes d’Ostrevant’, in Miscellanea Historica in Honorem Leonis van der Essen (Brussels, 1947), pp. 177–87.

2

Introduction abbot of Saint-Bertin and Saint-Vaast at Arras, constituted a powerful obstacle to Baldwin’s ambitions in the south. It should come as no surprise that Baldwin took advantage of Ralph’s death in 892 to progressively, if ruthlessly, take control of Ternois, Artois and Vermandois. In 900, Baldwin II became the first lay abbot of Saint-Bertin.6 Like his father, Baldwin II made a prestigious alliance by marrying a daughter of the Anglo-Saxon King Alfred, Ælfthryth, probably in 883. Although Baldwin had not been able to keep all the territories he had conquered (he lost Artois and Vermandois), his power over his county was such that, at his death in 918, he could pass it on to his two sons, Arnulf (918–965) and Adalulf (918–933). The elder of Baldwin II’s sons, Arnulf, later known as ‘the Great’, received the northern pagi, the historical core of the county. His younger brother, Adalulf, received Ternois, Boulonais and the lay abbacy of Saint-Bertin. Arnulf pushed the limits of his county southward to its ‘natural’ borders: the Scarpe and the Canche. In 932, he took Saint-Vaast, and the next year he succeeded his brother in Boulonais and Ternois, disregarding the legitimate claims of his two nephews, Baldwin and Arnulf. By 941, the conquest of Ostrevant no longer posed a problem because no strong local power countered him there; Arnulf easily conquered southern Ostrevant along with Douai. Finally, from 952 onwards, his control over northern Ostrevant was asserted.7 Arnulf’s son, Baldwin III, died before his father, leaving an under-age son, Arnulf II (976–988). The succession was disputed, and Arnulf I requested the help of King Lothar IV (941–986); he offered the king Artois, Ostrevant and Ponthieu in exchange for the young Arnulf’s protection. Furthermore, Arnulf had to bestow Boulonais and Ternois to their legitimate heir, his nephew Arnulf, the son of Adalulf.8 Notwithstanding the king’s protection, when Arnulf II eventually became count in 976, his position had considerably weakened and he had lost control over Boulonais, Ternois, Waas and Ghent.9 At his death in 988, he left his son Baldwin IV a county which was still politically frail and had diminished territorially – although Arnulf II had recovered Arras and the monastery of Saint-Vaast. Baldwin eventually regained control over the northern part of Ternois, including Saint-Omer. The southern part of Ternois, which would become the county of Saint-Pol, and 6 7

Tanner, Families, pp. 24–8. For Arnulf’s conquest of Ostrevant, see Tanner, Families, pp. 32–8; see also E. Delcambre, ‘L’Ostrevant du IXe au XIIIe siècle’, Le Moyen Âge 28 (1927), 241–79 and Dhondt, ‘Une dynastie inconnue’. 8 Koch, ‘Het Graafschap Vlaanderen’, p. 369. Arnulf II’s reign is traditionally considered as a disastrous period for Flanders; more recently, J. Dunbabin, ‘The Reign of Arnulf II, Count of Flanders, and its Aftermath’, Francia 16 (1989), 53–65, has challenged this interpretation and proposed a more positive view of the period as a time of consolidation. 9 Tanner, Families, pp. 39–40.

3

Creating the Monastic Past in Medieval Flanders Boulonais, however, remained out of the counts of Flanders’ direct control and were left under the authority of the successors of Arnulf the Great’s late brother, Adalulf. Baldwin IV also slightly expanded his territory east of the Scheldt. It is clear, therefore, that by the time of Baldwin IV, the attention of the counts of Flanders was focused on the northern part of the county and that the southern pagi were relatively isolated from the centres of political decision. Hence the state of the southern pagi would remain unchanged, apart from the situation of Ostrevant.10 Ostrevant and its main city, Douai, had been taken over by Arnulf the Great after 943 and remained under his control until his death in 965. During Arnulf II’s childhood, the region was controlled by Lothar IV, but it was returned to Arnulf in 988, after the Capetian takeover. Ostrevant, which was located on the border with the county of Hainault, remained Flemish until the battle of Cassel (1072), after which it came under the authority of the counts of Hainault.11 The counts’ involvement in religious matters was strong and constant. As far as the production of historical narrative at Saint-Bertin and Marchiennes is concerned, two measures were of peculiar importance: the Benedictine restoration imposed upon Saint-Bertin by Arnulf the Great and reformer Gerard of Brogne in the mid-tenth century on the one hand and, on the other hand, another Benedictine movement commanded by Baldwin IV, Gerard bishop of Cambrai and reformer Richard of Saint-Vanne, which led to the reformation of both Saint-Bertin and Marchiennes in the 1020s. Arnulf the Great always took care to reinforce his authority and prestige by asserting his control over local monasteries. Saint-Peter’s Ghent fell into his hands with his inheritance in 918. Upon his re-conquest of Artois in 932, he claimed the lay abbacy of Saint-Vaast. At his brother’s death in 933, he took over Ternois and Boulonais, as well as the abbacy of Saint-Bertin; his gradual conquest of Ostrevant led him to control Saint-Amand, where he nominated the new abbot in 952. With the assistance of his friend and ally Gerard of Brogne, he undertook a sweeping movement of Benedictine revival in his monasteries. The Carolingian legislation of 816–817 was meant to draw a clear distinction between the religious practice of canons and monks, the latter of whom were to follow the Benedictine Rule. The effects of this reform were short-lived, however, and by the tenth century, most monasteries were no longer Benedictine stricto sensu – and in actual fact, it is unclear that they had ever been. The goal of Gerard of Brogne’s restoration movement, which spread in Lotharingia and Flanders thanks to Duke Gislebert and Count Arnulf’s assistance, was the (re)establishment of the Rule. The specificity of Gerard’s reform eludes investigation because no customal from his restored abbeys has survived. In any case, the forceful opposition that Gerard often

10 11

Nicholas, Medieval Flanders, pp. 45–9. Delcambre, ‘L’Ostrevant’, pp. 259–60.

4

Introduction met suggests that the observance of the rule that he wished to impose was fairly severe. Gerard started his religious career by founding a monastic community on his patrimonial land of Brogne in 921.12 In 931, following the inventio of St Ghislain’s relics, he was called by Duke Gislebert to ‘restore’ the abbey of Saint-Ghislain.13 Arnulf and Gerard had probably met in the 920s–930s since both men were connected with the emerging Robertians.14 In 941, Arnulf entrusted Gerard with the abbacy and the reform of Saint-Peter at Ghent. Besides the re-establishment of the Benedictine Rule, the restoration involved the restitution of lands which Arnulf had seized for his own profit. He did not give back everything though – only the lands needed by the community to maintain a proper standard of living. Furthermore, in blatant contradiction to the Rule, the count-abbot maintained his right to approve the regularly elected abbot.15 In 942, Gerard undertook the reform of SaintBavo.16 Once the Ghent abbeys were put on the track of reform, Arnulf sent Gerard on a similar mission to Saint-Bertin, where he remained abbot until 947. Absorbed by his duties at Ghent, Gerard attempted to entrust Saint-Bertin’s abbacy to his nephew Wido, but the young man did not share his uncle’s pious aspirations, and he was soon removed from his post. Saint-Bertin was then ruled by Womar, a monk from Ghent, until Arnulf gave the abbacy to his own nephew, Hildebrand, in 950.17 Hildebrand’s reform was apparently successful and, in 953, Arnulf sent him to restore the abbey of Saint-Vaast.18 In 948, as soon as he controlled Saint-Riquier, Arnulf nominated Fulchar, a disciple of Gerard, to restore the community to the Benedic-

12

13

14

15 16 17 18

On Gerard of Brogne, see D. Misonne, ‘La restauration monastique de Gérard de Brogne’, in Naissance et fonctionnement des réseaux monastiques et canoniaux. Actes du premier colloque international du C.E.R.C.O.M., Saint-Étienne, 16–18 septembre 1985 (Saint-Étienne, 1991), pp. 117–23 and A. Dierkens, Abbayes et chapitres entre Sambre et Meuse (VIIe–XIe siècle). Contribution à l’histoire religieuse des campagnes du haut moyen âge, Beihefte der Francia 14 (Sigmaringen, 1985), pp. 220–47; see also Saint Gérard de Brogne et son oeuvre réformatrice. Études publiées à l’occasion du millénaire de sa mort (959–1959), RB 70 (1960); on Arnulf and Gerard’s restorations at Ghent, see W. Mohr, Studien zur Klosterreform des Grafen Arnulf I von Flandern: Tradition und Wirklichkeit in der Geschichte der Amandus-Kloster, Mediaevalia Lovaniensia 22 (Louvain, 1992). On the foundation of Saint-Ghislain, see A.-M. Helvétius, Abbayes, évêques et laïques. Une politique du pouvoir en Hainaut au moyen âge (VIIe–XIe siècle) (Brussels, 1994), pp. 213–34. Gerard was reputed to have have miraculously cured Arnulf from a kidney stone: on this episode, see A. C. F. Koch, ‘Gérard de Brogne et la maladie du comte Arnould Ier de Flandre’, RB 70 (1960), 119–26. Dierkens, Abbayes et chapitres, p. 234. Dierkens, Abbayes et chapitres, pp. 236–7. Folcuin, Gesta Abbatum Sithiensium, ed. O. Holder-Egger, MGH SS 13 (Hanover, 1881), pp. 607–35 (c. 107, pp. 628–9); see also Dierkens, Abbayes et chapitres, pp. 238–9. Folcuin, Gesta, c. 109, pp. 630–1.

5

Creating the Monastic Past in Medieval Flanders tine Rule.19 Finally, thanks to his full mastering of Ostrevant, Arnulf took control of Saint-Amand, which he restored in 952.20 In the short term, the count’s strategy appears to have been beneficial to both the count and the monks. The restored monasteries were given regular abbots, but the count remained in control of the nominations. Seized lands were given back to their legitimate owners, but Arnulf did not feel compelled to give more than was necessary for the communities’ survival. It would soon appear, however, that this sweeping reform movement, which had restored the Benedictine Rule throughout Flanders in exactly a decade, was short-lived. Paradoxically, the reason for its success, the count of Flanders’ unfaltering support, was also its main weakness. The reactions of the communities to Gerard and Arnulf’s intervention, especially at Saint-Bertin, clearly show that the reform was imposed by force from the top, and was not desired by a majority of the monks.21 Its promoters were a very small circle of people, closely related to Arnulf and Gerard, who were not able to attract a broad base of followers. In these conditions, the movement was unlikely survive its patrons. Gerard’s restorations were too dependent on secular support to survive Arulf’s death and his successors’ political setbacks. The rapid decay of Gerard’s Benedictine revival was not limited to Flanders. Alain Dierkens has shown that by the end of the tenth century Gerard’s own community of Brogne had already forgotten his reforming action. In this respect, it is significant that Gerard’s vita was not written before 1074–1075.22 The fruits of Gerard of Brogne’s and Arnulf the Great’s reform movement were so meagre that half a century later, all the monasteries of the county had, once again, to be restored to Benedictine observance. Baldwin IV re-conquered northern Ternois, including Saint-Bertin, and even slightly expanded the Flemish border east of the Scheldt; furthermore, he laid the foundation for an increasingly centralized Flemish administration.23 In this scheme, Baldwin’s intervention in ecclesiastical affairs, especially his relations with the bishopric of Cambrai, played an important part.24 First of all, he tried, to no avail, to interfere with episcopal elections, and, with

19 20 21

Dierkens, Abbayes et chapitres, pp. 239–40. Dierkens, Abbayes et chapitres, pp. 240–1. Folcuin, Gesta, c. 107, pp. 628–9; some monks were so infuriated by Gerard’s intervention, apparently over the issue of individual poverty, that they crossed the Channel and took refuge in England, where King Æthelstan gave them the abbey of Bath to restore. 22 On the long-term impact of Gerard’s reform at Brogne, see Dierkens, Abbayes et chapitres, pp. 245–7. 23 Nicholas, Medieval Flanders, pp. 46–7. 24 On Baldwin IV’s ecclesiastical politics, see D. C. van Meter, ‘Count Baldwin IV, Richard of Saint-Vanne, and the Inception of Monastic Reform in Eleventh-Century Flanders’, RB 107 (1997), 130–48.

6

Introduction more success, to promote the Peace of God.25 Like Arnulf I, Baldwin IV associated himself with a monastic reformer, Richard of Saint-Vanne, in order to revive the Benedictine Rule once again in Flemish monasteries.26 The series of monastic restorations undertaken by Baldwin and Richard in Flanders cannot be dissociated from the movement of Benedictine revival initiated throughout the bishopric of Cambrai-Arras by Bishop Erluin and then by Bishop Gerard I.27 Gerard, future bishop of Cambrai, and Richard, future abbot of Saint-Vanne at Verdun, had met at the cathedral school of Reims, where both were probably taught by Gerbert of Aurillac, the future Pope Sylvester II. Richard had started his career at Reims as a canon, and became a Benedictine monk when he entered the monastery of Saint-Vanne, where he became abbot in 1004. Richard’s reform movement was based on the somewhat old-fashioned principle that monasteries should abide by their bishop’s strict control, which explains the close collaboration between Richard and bishops Erluin and Gerard. Richard also encouraged Gerard to take part in the Peace of God movement.28 Soon after Richard’s election, Saint-Vanne began to flourish.29 His success was so striking that, as early as 1008, Erluin of Cambrai asked Richard to re-establish the Rule in the monastery of Saint-Vaast at Arras, of which he was made abbot. Richard, who tried to enforce strict Benedictine obedience, did not meet any more enthusiasm from 25

26

27

28 29

On the Peace movement in Flanders, see J.-F. Lemarignier, ‘Paix et réforme monastique en Flandre et en Normandie autour de l’année 1023’, in Droit Privé et institutions régionales. Études historiques offertes à Jean Yver (Paris, 1976), pp. 431–41 and G. Koziol, ‘Monks, Feuds and the Making of Peace in Eleventh-Century Flanders’, in The Peace of God. Social Violence and Religious Response in France around the Year 1000, ed. R. Landes (Ithaca, 1992), pp. 239–58 and, more recently, D. Barthélémy, L’an mil et la paix de Dieu. La France Chrétienne et Féodale 980–1060 (Paris, 1999). On Richard of Saint-Vanne, see F. G. Hirschmann, ‘Klosterreform und Grundherrschaft: Richard von St. Vanne’, in Grundherrschaft – Kirche – Stadt zwischen Maas und Rhein während des Hohen Mittelalters, ed. A. Haverkamp and F. G. Hirschmann, Trierer Historische Forschungen 37 (Mainz, 1997), pp. 125–70; see also H. Dauphin, Le Bienheureux Richard, abbé de Saint-Vanne de Verdun († 1046), Bibliothèque de la Revue d’Histoire Ecclésiastique 24 (Louvain, 1946) and K. Hallinger, Gorze-Kluny. Studien zu den monastischen Lebensformen und Gegensätzen in Hochmittelalter (Rome, 1950). The main sources on Richard of Saint-Vanne are the chronicle of Hugh of Flavigny, former monk of Saint-Vanne: Chronicon Hugonis Monachi Virdunensis et Divionensis, Abbatis Flaviniacensis, ed. G. H. Pertz, MGH SS 8 (Hanover, 1848), pp. 280–502; and Richard’s vita: Vita Richardi Abbatis S. Vitoni Verdunensis, ed.W. Wattenbach, MGH SS 11 (Hanover, 1854), pp. 280–9 (BHL 7220). On Gerard of Cambrai, see E. van Mingroot, ‘Gérard de Cambrai’, in Dictionnaire d’histoire et de géographie ecclésiastique 20 (1983), cols. 742–51; the main source on Gerard’s life and action is the Gesta Episcoporum Cameracensium, ed. L. C. Bethmann, MGH SS 7 (Hanover, 1846), lib. III, pp. 465–89. Van Mingroot, ‘Gérard de Cambrai’, col. 746; Dauphin, Le Bienheureux Richard, pp. 258–61. On the role of the aristocracy in the success of Richard of Saint-Vanne, see Hirschmann, ‘Klosterreform und Grundherrschaft’, pp. 131–5.

7

Creating the Monastic Past in Medieval Flanders his reformed communities than Gerard of Brogne had met in his time. After Saint-Vaast, Baldwin and Richard undertook the restoration of Saint-Amand, of which Richard was abbot from 1013 to 1018, and in 1024, Marchiennes and its priory of Hamage.30 Marchiennes was originally a mixed community, but it had progressively become a nunnery. By the eleventh century, Marchiennes had lost an important part of its landholding – as a result of the nuns’ inability to defend their interests, according to the Gesta Episcoporum Cameracensium. The reformers expelled the nuns, replaced them with Benedictine monks and returned seized properties.31 In 1029, Baldwin gave Richard the abbacies of Saint-Peter and Saint-Bavo at Ghent.32 Roderic, a disciple of Leduinus of Saint-Vaast, became abbot of Saint-Bertin in 1021 and undertook the Benedictine restoration of the monastery despite the community’s protests.33 In 1022, Roderic restored Bergues-Saint-Winnoc, where the canons were replaced by monks of Saint-Bertin.34 From a secular point of view, the monastic reform was certainly beneficial to the monastic communities, thanks to the restitution of lands and the renovation of buildings which accompanied the re-establishment of the Rule. The effects of the reform were especially visible at Marchiennes. After the writing by Hucbald of Saint-Amand of the vita of its patron saint, Rictrude, on the community’s request in 907, the name of Marchiennes had almost completely vanished from contemporary sources and the community had probably all but disappeared by the time of its restoration. After Leduinus’s intervention, Marchiennes flourished as a cultural, artistic and spiritual centre in the twelfth century. In this case, however, the restoration in fact amounted to a foundation, since the community settled by Leduinus was a completely new one, presumably constituted of enthusiastic Benedictine monks. In the monasteries where the ‘new’ monks brought in by Richard and his disciples had to convert the ‘old’ monks, the implementation of the reform was more problematic. The monks of Saint-Vaast tried to rid themselves of their new abbot by cutting his throat, and the monks of Saint-Bertin were only slightly less violent in their opposition to Roderic. His successor, Bovo, undertook the re-building of the abbatial church, which was an important part of Richard’s reform. By the end of the eleventh century, however, Abbot Lambert found his community’s religious practice so lax that he tried to submit it to the authority of Cluny.35 30 31 32

Gesta Episcoporum Cameracensium, lib. II, cc. 26–7, p. 461. On Marchiennes, see below, Chapter 4. Chronicon Hugonis, lib. II, c. 10, p. 377; Annales Blandinienses, ed. Ph. Grierson, in Les Annales, a. 1029, p. 24, and a. 1032, p. 25. 33 On the circumstances that led Baldwin to instigate the reform of Saint-Bertin, see Van Meter, ‘Count Baldwin IV’, pp. 143–8. 34 Simon, Gesta Abbatum S. Bertini Sithiensium, ed. O. Holder-Egger, MGH SS 13 (Hanover, 1881), pp. 635–73 (cc. 1–9, pp. 636–8). 35 Below, Chapter 1.

8

Introduction * The central issue of this book, and the one which in some way embraces all the other issues that will be addressed, is the processes through which monastic communities created a usable past for themselves.36 Most of the texts studied here were written in specific circumstances, which were often – but not always – periods of crisis or upheaval. These moments of crisis, which spurred on narrative production, were often due to conflicts of authority with the local bishop, struggles over landholding with neighbours, disputes over the possession of relics with other religious communities, attempts to reform religious communities, and issues of prestige and spiritual supremacy.37 Putting quill to parchment was indeed, alongside the ceremonies meant to assert the supernatural power of their patron saints, one of the most practicable solutions available to monks and canons in conflicts with lay or ecclesiastical foes.38 But, as we shall see, narrative production was more than an answer to external interventions: it was also one of the means through which communities built a sense of their own identity as a group with a common past and a common purpose. Writing, and sometimes rewriting, their own past was for monastic communities a powerful tool of self-representation which allowed them to gather around a commonly accepted version of their history. This process strengthened a sense of identity for the group itself as well as for its representation in the outside world. The first example to be studied is Saint-Bertin (Sithiu). The community possessed two main patron saints and shrines: St-Omer’s and St-Bertin’s. In the ninth century, it was divided between a community of monks centred on St Bertin’s shrine and a community of canons dedicated to St Omer. Nonetheless, Sithiu remained a single landholding unit and there was only one abbot, who could be a monk or a canon. After Gerard of Brogne’s reform in the mid-tenth century, monks and canons had their own abbot and the two communities were more clearly separated. The separation – and the monks’ subsequent loss of control over St Omer’s cult – pitted the two communities 36

For the use of this expression, see P. Geary, Phantoms of Remembrance: Memory and Oblivion at the End of the First Millennium (Princeton, 1994), p.112 and G. Spiegel, Romancing the Past: The Rise of the Vernacular Prose Historiography in ThirteenthCentury France (Berkeley and Los Angeles, 1993), pp. 1–2. 37 In her study of the development of Old French historiography, Gabriel Spiegel has developed the idea that historiography was a powerful tool for redeeming lost causes; see Romancing the Past, esp. pp. 1–10 and 315–19. For a specific, and geographically close, example of narratives induced by situations of crisis and conflict, see also S. Farmer, Communities of Saint Martin: Legend and Ritual in Medieval Tours (Ithaca, 1991). 38 On the ways in which monks fought back against their enemies through text production, see for example B. Rosenwein, T. Head and S. Farmer, ‘Monks and their Enemies: A Comparative Approach’, Speculum 66 (1991), 764–96; T. Head, Hagiography and the Cult of Saints: The Diocese of Orléans, 800–1200 (Cambridge, 1990), pp. 177–81 and 290–5.

9

Creating the Monastic Past in Medieval Flanders against each other. The monks responded to the loss by producing an endless series of vitae and forged charters with the sole purpose of re-inventing the history, and particularly the foundation, of the abbey in their favour. The second section of this book is devoted to the narrative cycle stemming from Hucbald of Saint-Amand’s Vita Rictrudis, written at the beginning of the tenth century for the double community of Marchiennes. Although Hucbald says that no archives and ancient documents were available to him, he was able to piece together a remarkably detailed narrative of Rictrude’s life and the foundation of Marchiennes. Because it introduces a great number of secondary characters, the Vita Rictrudis was a seminal text which from which a great deal of other texts and legends could be created. Later authors appropriated the legend and adapted it to their needs. Hence, in the course of the tenth and eleventh centuries, most of Rictrude’s children, who were saints in their own right, were given their own vitae based on the Vita Rictrudis. Furthermore, from the eleventh century onward, the core of the legend itself was considerably altered in order to sacralize the community’s landholding and to protect it from predatory lay neighbours. Finally, sometime in the tenth century, the relics of Rictrude’s son, Maurontus, and their friend, St Amatus, were translated to the chapter church of Douai. The translation of the saints, who were originally part of the legend of Rictrude and Marchiennes, generated the appropriation of the Vita Rictrudis by the canons of Saint-Amé. In their own foundation story, written in the eleventh century, the canons integrated the sections of the vita which were relevant for the legend of their tutelary saints and transformed them according to their own needs – namely the legitimization of their landholding. Therefore, over two centuries, Rictrude’s legend grew from oral tradition to the Vita Rictrudis, and then into a complex narrative cycle, composed not only of hagiographic texts, but also of charters and entries in annals and chronicles. Considering the fraught circumstances which often triggered narrative production, there is no doubt that the texts written during occasions of trouble had strong political overtones which influenced both their content and their form. In the light of this, it is wise to go beyond exploiting the sources as mere quarries for facts, and to consider the very writing of these sources as a telling event in the history of these communities.39 As a result, more emphasis has been placed in this study on the question ‘Why was this text written?’ than on the question ‘What factual evidence does this text preserve?’ Although I have attempted in each chapter to reconstruct the history of these religious communities as accurately as possible, the main concern of this study is not the factual reconstruction of some hypothetical ‘historical truth’. Rather, it seeks to determine the motives that led a commu-

39

See G. Spiegel, The Past as Text: The Theory and Practice of Medieval Historiography (Baltimore, 1997).

10

Introduction nity to write a text about its history and how these motives influenced the content and the form of the text, and transformed a community’s understanding of its past. Narratives like the ones discussed in this study enabled communities to represent themselves to their audience in a way that was useful to whatever present cause absorbed their energies and caused their anxieties. Furthermore, the way they chose to represent their present and their past could sometimes differ significantly from reality. Indeed, the creation of a past that could be useful to the present often required the alteration of existing documents as well as the forging of new ones. This means that in certain circumstances, a community looked back at its past history through its archives, written narratives and oral tradition, and pieced together a new version better fitted to its present needs. This creation of a new history was dependent both on the selection and transformation of old documents and the forging of new ones. Patrick Geary has analysed how the constitution of monastic archives was an unending process of preservation, neglect and wilful destruction. And what these practices mean is that, when authors in the tenth and eleventh centuries started to compose gesta and cartularies, they were, from the outset, faced with a past which had already been transformed by the previous generations of monks.40 In other words, the process of making the past useful was a continuous one throughout a community’s life, and one has to keep this in mind when studying a given historiographic work. Another issue at stake is the problem of forgery and the alteration of the documents of the past.41 The notion of forgery itself is problematic because it presupposes that a ‘true’ version of an event was extent before the forgery, and that historical accuracy pre-existed the creation of the ‘false’ historical document, be it a charter or new a version of a story. Considering that monastic communities kept their archives and their historical tradition in a perpetual flux and that this tradition evolved according to the shifting needs of the present, the ‘true story’ is often difficult to recover. I have thus often eschewed the notion of false or true; instead, I have emphasized the reasons which led to the transformation of older stories or the creation of new ones. It is essential to discuss the kinds of texts considered here as ‘historiographic’. The word historiography is to be understood in its broadest

40

Geary, Phantoms of Remembrance, pp. 81–7; the case of the abbey of Saint-Denis as an example of a monastic community making its archives ‘useful’ by pruning and forging is particularly telling: see ibid., pp. 107–13, with related bibliography. On historiographic production and propaganda at Saint-Denis in the twelfth and thirteenth centuries, see Spiegel, The Past as Text, pp. 83–98 and 111–62. 41 On the issue of forgery, see the articles in Fälschungen im Mittelalter. Internationaler Kongress der Monumenta Germaniae Historica, München 16–19 September 1986 (Hanover, 1988).

11

Creating the Monastic Past in Medieval Flanders sense, and it includes the whole range of written documents that tell of events affecting the community.42 Thus, I have examined historiographic texts stricto sensu, such as chronicles, annals, historiae, gesta, as well as texts that are generally associated with historiography, such as hagiography, miracle stories and relics narratives.43 Beyond this, charter material has also been considered within the framework of historiography, when it contained narratives describing past or contemporary events important to the community. For example, I have taken into account genuine and forged charters that relate a community’s foundation story. I have also considered charters when their copying in cartularies or in other forms of narrative, their public presentation or their forging was part of a concerted effort to transform the community’s representation of its past. I have made no distinction between texts relating past events and texts relating contemporary ones. Indeed, whatever the period they cover, narratives produced by monastic communities are as – and often even more – informative about the period of their redaction than they are about the past to which they refer. Finally, whenever it is relevant and possible, the artistic production, when used to illustrate a community’s past,

42

The bibliography on medieval historiography is abundant; several general studies, conference proceedings and collections of articles have been published on the subject in the last few decades: Historiographie im frühen Mittelalter, ed. A. Scharer and G. Scheibelreiter, Veröffentlichungen des Instituts für Österreichische Geschichtsforschung 32 (Vienna, 1994); L’Historiographie médiévale en Europe. Actes du colloque organisé par la Fondation Européenne de la Science au Centre de Recherches Historiques et Juridiques de l’Université Paris I du 29 mars au 1er avril 1989 (Paris, 1991); The Writing of History in the Middle Ages: Essays presented to R. W. Southern, ed. R. H. C. Davis and J. M. Wallace-Hadrill (London, 1981); Le Métier d’historien au moyen âge. Études sur l’historiographie médiévale, ed. B. Guenée (Paris, 1977); B. Guenée, Histoire et culture historique au moyen âge (Paris, 1980); .idem, ‘Histoires, annales et chroniques. Essai sur les genres historiques au moyen âge’, Annales, Économies, Sociétés, Civilisations 28 (1973), 997–1016; M. Sot, Un Historien et son église: Flodoard de Reims (Paris, 1993). For an overview of the historical texts produced in the region studied here in the tenth and eleventh centuries, see R.-H. Bautier, ‘L’historiographie en France aux Xe et XIe siècles (France du Nord et de l’Est)’, in La Storiografia Altomedievale, 2 vols. Settimane 17 (Spoleto, 1970), II, pp. 793–850; see also F.-L. Ganshof, ‘L’historiographie dans la monarchie franque sous les mérovingiens et les carolingiens’, in La Storiografia Altomedievale II, pp. 631–85. There are also interesting regional studies, for example: L. Shopkow, History and Community: Norman Historical Writing in the Eleventh and Twelfth Centuries (Washington, 1997); E. van Houts, ‘Historical Writing’, in A Companion to the Anglo-Norman World, ed. C. Harper-Bill and E. van Houts (Woodbridge, 2003), pp. 103–21. 43 Most recently, F. Lifshitz, ‘Beyond Positivism and Genre: “Hagiographical” Texts as Historical Narratives’, Viator 25 (1994), 95–113 has discussed how, beyond their function as historical sources, hagiographic narratives also had a function as historical writing, which is still all too often misunderstood and neglected. On the role of hagiography as historical source, see B. de Gaiffier, ‘Hagiographie et historiographie. Quelques aspects du problème’, in La Storiografia Altomedievale II, pp. 139–66.

12

Introduction has also been included, since such illustrations were part of the same process of correcting the past. Throughout this study on the politics of narrative production, three closely related subjects have surfaced: the genre of texts produced, the type of stories told and the intended audience. It is now well acknowledged that the boundaries between the different narrative genres are not clear-cut and that the different genres inter-penetrate one another.44 Land donations were recorded in vitae, chronicles could include charter material as well as hagiographic texts. Similarly, hagiographic texts, especially vitae of monastic founders, often contained the history of the foundation of the religious community in which it was written.45 Beyond this, the commemorative and liturgical nature of charters, cartularies and gesta has long been recognized.46 Because of the elasticity of the different genres of medieval texts, almost any kind of text could fulfil almost any need. For example, during the period studied, a monastic community was as likely to assert its rights over a property through hagiographic texts as it was to forge a charter literally claiming a

44

On the impossibility of classifying the different historiographic genres, see Guenée, ‘Histoires, annales et chroniques’; on the inter-penetration of narrative genres, see E. M. C. van Houts, Local and Regional Chronicles, Typologie 74 (Turnhout, 1995), pp. 14–16 and M. Sot, Gesta Episcoporum, Gesta Abbatum, Typologie 37 (Turnhout, 1981); see also M. McCormick, Les Annales du Haut Moyen Âge, Typologie 14 (Turnhout, 1975). Lifshitz, ‘Beyond Positivism and Genre’, pp. 102–4 argues for the complete irrelevance of the modern distinction between genres regarding ninth- to eleventh-century narratives. 45 On foundation stories, see J. Kastner, Historiae Fundationum Monasteriorum. Frühformen mönastischen Institutionsgeschichtschreibung im Mittelalter (Munich, 1974) and A. Remensnyder, Remembering Kings Past: Monastic Foundation Legends in Medieval Southern France (Ithaca, 1996). 46 On this, see Geary, Phantoms of Remembrance, pp. 102–3; P. Johanek, ‘Zur rechtlichen Funktion von Traditionsnotitz, Traditionsbuch und früher Siegelurkunde’, in Recht und Schrift im Mittelalter, ed. P. Classen, Vörtrage und Forschungen 23 (Sigmaringen, 1977), pp. 131–62; B.-M. Tock, ‘Les Textes non diplomatiques dans les cartulaires de la province de Reims’, in Les Cartulaires. Actes de la Table Ronde organisée par l’École Nationale des Chartes et le G.D.R. 121 du C.N.R.S. (Paris, 5–7 décembre 1991), ed. O. Guyotjeannin, L. Morelle and M. Parisse, Mémoires et Documents Publiés par l’École des Chartes 39 (Paris, 1993), pp. 45–58. For a regional study and a bibliography on the topic, see most recently, A.-J. Bijsterveld, ‘The Commemoration of Patrons and Gifts in Chronicles from the Diocese of Liège, Eleventh–Twelfth Centuries’, RB 109 (1999), 208–43. For a specific example, see R. Fleming’s studies on the relation between the cartulary and liturgy at Christchurch, Canterbury: ‘Christchurch’s Sisters and Brothers: An Edition and Discussion of Canterbury Obituary List’, in The Culture of Christendom: Essays in Memory of Denis Bethel, ed. M. A. Meyer (London, 1993), pp. 115–53; idem, ‘History and Liturgy at Pre-Conquest Christ Church, Canterbury’, Haskins Society Journal 7 (1995), 67–83 and idem, ‘Christ Church Canterbury’s Anglo-Norman Cartulary’, in Anglo-Norman Political Culture, ed. W. Hollister (Woodbridge, 1997), pp. 83–155.

13

Creating the Monastic Past in Medieval Flanders donation.47 As for the type of stories that monastic communities wrote and transformed to serve their present needs, foundation stories emerge as particularly important. This is understandable, because foundation stories were seminal texts for communities’ historical traditions, and they asserted not only a story about the community’s genesis, but also its spiritual relation to its patron saint and its legitimate ownership of its original property.48 Given the spiritual and material importance of these foundation stories, it is not surprising that tales of a community’s beginning were the most likely to be remodelled for new needs. Both Marchiennes and Saint-Bertin carefully crafted and recrafted their foundation stories. The third issue at stake, the audience, is the most difficult one with which to come to grips, because it is often extremely difficult to assess to whom the texts were directed and how they were actually used.49 First of all, it should not be assumed that texts were aimed at a single audience, but rather, that they could be simultaneously directed toward both the community and the outside world. For example, miracle stories in which the saint punishes the community’s spoliators were as much a warning for their neighbours as they were part of the communal liturgy that gathered the community around its patron saint. Second, the intended audience is not always what it first appears to be. For example, cartularies do not seem to have been used in trials as proof of ownership, but they certainly played an important role in the commemoration of patrons and abbots within the monastic communities themselves.50 The intricacy of the issue of inside and outside audience brings us to an important aspect of the politics of narrative production that I have so far neglected: its spiritual and liturgical functions. Indeed, while the vitae, miracle collections and relic narratives may appear as a self-serving and cynical use of the saints’ protection to fulfil a political agenda, they were above all else liturgical texts, which bound the community together around 47

B. de Gaiffier, ‘Les Revendications de biens dans quelques documents hagiographiques du onzième siècle’, Anal. Boll. 50 (1932), 123–38. 48 On the formation and transformation of foundation stories, see Kastner, Historiae Fundationum Monasteriorum and Remensnyder, Remembering Kings Past. See, for a specific example of a dossier of a community’s origins, D. Iogna-Prat, ‘La Geste des origines dans l’historiographie clunisienne des XIe–XIIe siècles’, RB 102 (1992), 135–91. 49 On the issue of audience, see R. McKitterick, ‘The Audience for Latin Historiography in the Early Middle Ages: Text Transmission and Manuscript Dissemination’, in Historiographie im frühen Mittelalter, pp. 96–114; this article, however, does not deal with local historiography. On the audience for hagiographic texts, see K. Heene, ‘Merovingian and Carolingian Hagiography: Continuity or Change in Public and Aims?’, Anal. Boll. 107 (1989), 415–27, esp. pp. 26–7; Heene shows that from the ninth century on, a lay audience would not have been literate enough to understand the Latin hagiographic texts and that priests translated these texts into vernacular for their sermons. 50 Geary, Phantoms of Remembrance, pp. 100–7.

14

Introduction its patron saint. The daily liturgy, the processions outside the cloister, the public ceremonies involving relics, and of course the oral transmission of historical and spiritual traditions, were different ways of representing and asserting the values and concerns of the community. The narratives produced by monastic communities are only the surviving fragments of this performance. Monastic communities were completely identified with their patron saints and, as a result, the saints’ interests were confused with the communities’; therefore, when the monks were making legitimate or illegitimate claims in the interest of their community, they were also acting on behalf of their patron saint.51 In terms of chronology, the book covers the period running roughly from the ninth to the end of the eleventh century. Indeed, the process by which communities engaged in remodelling their past becomes visible from the ninth century onwards, when they began to write new vitae and compile their charters into cartularies. I have not generally pursued my investigation much beyond the beginning of the twelfth century. Indeed, the twelfth century was a period marked by social, intellectual and religious changes that influenced the ways monastic communities looked at and used their past. The development of Scholastic thought changed the face of historiography by casting suspicion upon the ‘miraculous’; consequently, historiography was progressively stripped of its super-natural elements.52 By the same token, miracles and a saint’s patronage could no longer be considered valid means of asserting a community’s possessions. As charters emerged as the sole commonly accepted record of property transactions, the earlier trend of dealing with conflicts through hagiographic and historiographic narratives receded.53

51

On the fact that monastic land belonged to the community’s patron saints and the implications of this, see B. Rosenwein, To Be the Neighbor of St Peter: the Social Meaning of Cluny’s Property, 909–1049 (Ithaca, 1989). 52 On historiography in the twelfth century, see The Perception of the Past in Twelfth-Century Europe, ed. P. Magdalino (London, 1992); on the radical transformation of historiography in the twelfth century, see Lifshitz, ‘Beyond Positivism’, pp. 104–8 and J. Coleman, Ancient and Medieval Memories: Studies in the Reconstruction of the Past (Cambridge, 1992), pp. 285–324. 53 Although in Flanders this trend was under way earlier than in other regions: Bijsterveld, ‘The Commemoration of Patrons and Gifts’, p. 209. On the increasing use and preservation of charters in the central Middle Ages, see M. T. Clanchy, From Memory to Written Record: England 1066–1307, 2nd edn (Oxford, 1993).

15

PART I Saint-Bertin

THE FIRST ABBEY studied here is the abbey of Saint-Bertin. It is an ideal case to begin with because of the abundance and variety of texts produced by the community in the tenth and eleventh centuries in order to reinvent its past. This wealth of documentation will allow us from the outset to deal with many of the main issues related to a monastic community’s politics of narrative production: the preservation and alteration of its archives and historical tradition, the different motives behind its historiographic production, the role of forgery, and the subjects of genres and types of texts used in the process. What is more, it happens that Saint-Bertin remained, until it dissolution in the eighteenth century, embroiled in the same conflicts that had triggered the production of these narratives in the early Middle Ages. The persistence of the conflict provides an exceptional opportunity to examine the impact of the way archives were kept, not only for the Middle Ages and the Early Modern period, but on our ability to properly reconstruct the past. The profusion of sources emanating from Saint-Bertin for most of the period covered here allows us both to reconstruct its history in some detail, and to deal at length with the issues of the politics of narrative production. The first chapter of this section, Chapter 1, recounts the history of the monastery from its foundation by St Omer and St Mummolinus in the middle of the seventh century, to the end of the eleventh century. Although Saint-Bertin’s importance as a religious, economical and cultural centre is unanimously acknowledged, no scholar before has undertaken a comprehensive account of its history. This chapter seeks to correct this situation by covering the major issues of the life of Saint-Bertin’s community: its foundation and expansion in its first century and its role in the politics of successive dynasties – Merovingian, Carolingian and Flemish – which controlled and patronized it. The task of reconstructing Saint-Bertin’s past is facilitated by the huge number of narrative and diplomatic sources produced by the monks throughout the period. 17

Saint-Bertin Chapter 2 deals with the cultural activity at Saint-Bertin, focusing particularly on its library and scriptorium. Because of its proximity to the Channel, Saint-Bertin was the boarding place for Anglo-Saxon pilgrims, merchants, travellers and political exiles. The exchanges between Saint-Bertin and England were reciprocal: on the one hand, several monks from Saint-Bertin made careers as authors in England, and on the other Saint-Bertin became a crucible of Continental and Insular influences which are reflected in its artistic production. This chapter deals with this cultural interplay and provides a provisional list of manuscripts which belonged to Saint-Bertin’s library and/or were produced in its scriptorium. Chapter 3 focuses on narrative production at Saint-Bertin. In the ninth century, the community was divided between a community of monks centred on St Bertin’s shrine, and a community of canons, dedicated to St Omer. Each community had its own shrine and, from the tenth century on, its own abbot. The separation threw the two communities into strife, which ended only with the dissolution of the abbey at the French Revolution. This was the seminal event which led the monks to write distorted hagiographies, twisted hagiographic texts and forged charters in order to re-invent the history of the abbey in their favor. This chapter attempts to disentangle the narrative web created by all these texts and to understand what was at stake. The section as a whole follows the history of Saint-Bertin until the dissolution of the monastic community, focusing on the role played by the never-ending conflict with the canons of Saint-Omer. During the later Middle Ages and the Early Modern period, the monks pursued their production of polemical texts and persisted in using the old texts composed in the tenth and eleventh centuries. Several of these texts and charters were carefully recopied, some of them many times, until the eighteenth century. Because, to the end, the monks and their archivists were so deeply involved in the ancient quarrel with the canons of Saint-Omer, it is extremely important to understand the conditions in which the archives were kept, considered and, doubtless, purged.

18

CHAPTER ONE

Saint-Bertin from the Foundation to the Eleventh Century

From the foundation to c. 800 The abbey of Saint-Bertin at Sithiu was founded by St Omer in the 640s. The foundation of the monastic community is closely associated with the establishment of the episcopal see of Thérouanne by St Omer, under the impetus of King Dagobert (623–639) and Acharius, bishop of Noyon (d. 640).1 The main source for the early history of Saint-Bertin and the bishopric of Thérouanne is the Vita Audomari Prima (VA1), written at Sithiu in the early ninth century.2 According to the vita, Omer was born in the region of Coutances (dep. Manche);3 at his mother’s death, Friulfus and Omer left the Cotentin region for Burgundy, where they entered the monastery of Luxeuil, at the time ruled by St Columbanus’s successor, Abbot Eustasius (615–629).4 Friulfus may have become acquainted with Luxeuil and Columbanian monasticism thanks to the activity of Potentinus, a disciple of Columbanus, who, according to the Vita Columbani, had gathered a cohort of monks in the Cotentin region.5 Luxeuil at this time was one of the major breeding grounds 1

2

3

4 5

On the bishopric of Thérouanne and its origins, Ch. Mériaux, ‘Thérouanne et son diocèse jusqu’à la fin de l’époque carolingienne’, Bibliothèque de l’Ecole des Chartes 158 (2001), 377–406. See also H. Van Werveke, Het Bisdom Terwaan van den Oorsprong tot het Begin der Vertiende Eeuw (Ghent, 1924); F. Vercauteren, Étude sur les Civitates de la Belgique Seconde, contribution à l’histoire urbaine du nord de la France de la fin du IIIe à la fin du XIe siècle, Mémoires de l’Académie Royale de Belgique 33 (Brussels, 1934), pp. 318–23, and J. Heuclin, ‘Le diocèse de Thérouanne à l’époque de Saint Omer’, Mélanges de Science Religieuse 56 (1999), 81–8. Vita S. Audomari Prima is the first part of a hagiographic triptych which also contains the vitae of St Bertin and St Winnoc: Vitae Audomari, Bertini, Winnoci (BHL 763) ed. W. Levison, MGH SRM 5 (Hanover, 1910), pp. 729–86: Vita S. Audomari Prima (VA1), pp. 753–64; Vita S. Bertini Prima (VB1), pp. 765–9, and Vita S. Winnoci Prima (VW1), pp. 769–75. Folcard, the eleventh-century author of the third life of St Bertin, assumed that Constantia civitate (VA1, c. 1, p. 754) was Constanz, in Germany, but there is no doubt that Omer was indeed from Coutances (VB3: Vita Tertia Sancti Bertini (BHL 1293), AA SS, 2 Sept., c. 7, p. 605); on this, see see VA1; Mériaux, ‘Thérouanne’, p. 390, n. 45. VA1, cc. 1–2, pp. 754–5; Mériaux, ‘Thérouanne’, pp. 393–4. Jonas of Bobbio, Vitae Columbani Abbatis Discipulorumque (BHL 1898), ed. B. Krusch,

19

Saint-Bertin for ecclesiastical dignitaries, and Omer shared Eustasius’s teachings with such men as Chagnoaldus the bishop of Laon, brother of St Faro, Ragnachar of Basel and the above-mentioned Acharius.6 Still, according to the VA1, Acharius himself recommended Omer to the king.7 Charles Mériaux has demonstrated that the designation of Omer as bishop of Thérouanne by Dagobert is to be understood in political and cultural terms. In the first decades of the seventh century, Morinie had become a pawn in the long-lasting conflict between the two regna of Neustria and Austrasia, and its control was coveted by Neustrian as well as Austrasian aristocrats. In 633, Dagobert gained control of the region and firmly submitted it to Neustrian authority. In this context, the choice of Omer, a man of Neustrian origin and a member of Columbanian circles, as bishop of Thérouanne was a clearly a way for the king to strengthen his grip over the region.8 That Omer was from Coutances is not meaningless either: the littoral regions, from Brittany to Morinie, were in close economic contact and their populations were culturally close.9 Considering that Omer was designated bishop of Thérouanne during Dagobert’s reign, the event must have taken place during the 630s.10 A twelfth-century episcopal list dates Omer’s accession to the see to 638, but no earlier source exists to confirm or contradict this assertion.11 The same list

6

7 8 9 10 11

MGH SRM IV (Hanover, 1902), lib. I, c. 21, p. 94; G. Coolen, ‘St. Colomban et St. Omer’, in Mélanges Colombaniens. Actes du Congrès International de Luxeuil (20–23 Juillet 1950) (Paris, 1951), pp. 361–2. These were not Coutances’s first contacts with Christianity, since St Lô was bishop between 525 and 565, see C. Laplatte, ‘Coutances’, in DHGE 13 (1953), col. 974–7. Vita Columbani, lib. II, c. 8, p.123; on St Columban, Luxeuil and Merovingian monasticism, see Colombanus and Merovingian Monasticism, ed. H. B. Clarke and M. Brennan, BAR International Series 113 (Oxford, 1981) and F. Prinz, Frühes Mönchtum im Frankenreich. Kultur und Gesellschaft in Gallien, den Rheinlanden und Bayern am Beispiel der Monastischen Entwicklung (4 bis 8 Jahrhundert) (Munich, 1965), pp. 121–40; on the limits of the geographical and temporal influence of ‘Iro-Frankish’ monasticism, see A. Dierkens, ‘Prolégomène à une histoire des relations culturelles entre les îles britanniques et le Continent pendant le haut moyen âge’, in La Neustrie. Les pays au nord de la Loire de 650 à 850, ed. H. Atsma, 2 vols. (Sigmaringen, 1989), I, pp. 371–94. VA1, c. 4, pp. 755–6. Mériaux, ‘Thérouanne’, p. 384. Mériaux, ‘Thérouanne’, pp. 389–90. VA1, c. 1, p. 754. The Liber Floridus, written in 1120 by Lambert, a canon of Saint-Omer, contains a list of bishops of Thérouanne: Series Episcoporum Morinensium, ed. O. Holder-Egger, MGH SS XIII (Hanover, 1881), p. 389; according to this list, Omer became bishop in 638. The names of his alleged predecessors do not appear in the sources before the eleventh century: see Levison, Vitae Audomari, Bertini, Winnoci, p. 729. On the Liber Floridus, see Lamberti S. Audomari Canonici Liber Floridus (Facsimile), ed. A. Derolez and I. Stubbe (Ghent, 1968); Liber Floridus Colloquium. Papers Read at the International Meeting Held in the University Library Ghent on 3–5 September1967, ed. A. Derolez (Ghent, 1973) and A. Derolez, Lambertus qui Librum Fecit. Een Codicologische Studie van

20

From the Foundation to the Eleventh Century also mentions two alleged predecessors: Audmundus and Athalbert. Those men are otherwise unknown, and it is most likely that Omer was, indeed, the first to bear the title.12 The bishopric of Thérouanne roughly corresponds to the ancient civitas Morinorum. During the later Empire, the city itself was the chief town of the eastern part of the civitas, while Boulogne-sur-Mer was the chief town of the littoral part. This administrative division survived into the Merovingian period, because Jonas of Bobbio calls Omer ‘Praesul Bononiae et Tharoanensis oppidi’.13 Once settled in his new bishopric, Omer’s first and main task was to organize his young church. Although the region probably lacked a strong ecclesiastical structure, it undoubtedly had been in contact with Christianity before Omer’s arrival. An early – and probably legendary – phase of evangelization in the late third century is attributed to SS Fuscianus and Victoricus, companions of St Denis, and is still remembered in the VA1.14 Another, and more reliable, tradition of evangelization of Morinie can be attributed to Victricius, bishop of Rouen, in the fifth century.15 Scattered sources demonstrate that by the seventh century Christinanity was ingrained in Morinie, and Omer certainly did not preach in a religious vacuum. For example, the VA1 recalls that when Omer visited Boulogne-sur-Mer, he entered a church that certainly pre-dated the beginning of his mission.16 But the adhesion of the lower strata of the population not only to Christianity but to forms of belief sponsored by

12 13 14

15

16

de Liber Floridus Autograaf (Gent, Universiteitsbibliotheek, Handschrift 92) Verhandelingen van de Koninklijke Academie voor Wetenschappen, Letteren en Schone Kunst van België, Klasse der Letteren 40 (Brussels, 1978), n. 89. Mériaux, ‘Thérouanne’, p. 385 and n. 26. Vita Columbani, lib. II, c. 8, p. 124. There is no doubt, however, that the actual see was Thérouanne and not Boulogne: see Mériaux, ‘Thérouanne’, p. 389, n. 40. The vitae of Fuscianus and Victoricus belong to the so-called Rictrovarius cycle, from the name of a Roman prefect believed to have executed many missionaries in the region of Amiens. De Sanctis Martyribus Fusciano et Victorico, Morinorum Apostolis (BHL 3225), ASB (Brussels, 1783), I, pp. 153–72 (short version) and ‘Actes inédits des saints martyrs Fuscien, Victoric et Gentien’ (BHL 3224), ed. Ch. Salmon, Mémoires de la Société des Antiquaires de Picardie 17 (1861), pp. 113–54 (long version). On this cycle, see R. Loenertz, ‘La légende parisienne de S. Denys l’Aréopagite, sa genèse et son premier témoin’, Analecta Bollandiana 64 (1951), 217–37, and H. Moretus, Les Passions de St Lucien et leurs Derivés Céphalographiques (Louvain, 1953). It is known thanks to a letter of St Paulinus of Nola to Victicius: Sancti Paulini Epistolae, ed. G. de Hartel, CSEL 29, pars 1 (Vienna, 1894), epist. 18, pp. 128–33; E. de Moreau, ‘St. Victrice de Rouen, apôtre de la Belgica Secunda’, in Revue Belge de Philologie et d’Histoire 5 (1926), 71–9 ; Van Werveke, Het Bisdom Terwaan, pp. 14–15 ; and Mériaux, ‘Thérouanne’, pp. 380–2. VA1, c. 8, p. 757; on the presence of the church in Morinie before Omer, Mériaux, ‘Thérouanne’, pp. 385–7.

21

Saint-Bertin the ecclesiastical hierarchy was certainly not yet complete. It is in this sense that Omer’s missionary activity should be understood.17 In his mission, Omer relied on the support of the local aristocracy and a close collaboration with his own compatriots. According to the VA1, Omer had converted and baptized a wealthy man named Adroald who gave him an important part of his inheritance, the villa of Sithiu and its appurtenances.18 On his new piece of land, Omer built a church, which he dedicated to the Virgin Mary.19 He also wanted to use Sithiu for the foundation of a monastic community. To this effect, he invited three of his fellow countrymen, Mummolinus, Ebertramn and Bertin, ‘three men with one mind’, to join him from Coutances.20 The foundation of the monastery that would become Saint-Bertin, as related in the VA1, took place in two phases. In the first stage, Omer offered to build his companions a monastic house, wherever they liked in the villa of Sithiu. Thus, Mummolinus, Bertin and others built a first monastery on the river Aa, at a place known as Vetus Monasterium, today Saint-Momelin, a few miles north of the town of Saint-Omer (dep. Nord, arr. Dunkerque). But after some time, as the place proved unfit, the three men decided to relocate the community. They did so, on a small island formed by two arms of the Aa, a few miles south of the Vetus Monasterium.21 The new monastery was dedicated to St Peter, and Omer chose Mummolinus as first abbot. Mummolinus left Sithiu soon after, when he was appointed bishop of Noyon, where he succeeded St Eligius (d. 660). At about the same time, Ebertramn became abbot of Saint-Quentin (dep. Aisne), and Bertin, left alone with the community, was entrusted with the abbacy by St Omer. A few years later, Omer, old and tired, died and was buried, according to his will, in his church of the Virgin Mary.22 Indeed, like many of his successors to the episcopal see, Omer favored Sithiu as burial place. Clearly, from the onset the monastic community superseded Thérouanne in terms of religious and cultural activity as well as economic and political weight.23 Besides the hagiographic texts, the first years of Sithiu can be reconstructed with the help of a few charters. The first one is dated 6 September

17 18 19 20 21 22 23

See K-F. Werner’s remarks in ‘Le rôle de l’aristocratie dans la Christianisation du Nord-Est de la Gaule’, Revue d’Histoire de l’Eglise de France 62 (1975), 45–73 (p. 63). VA1, p. 759. It is highly unlikely that, even in remote Morinie, a member of the aristocracy was still left a pagan. VA1, c. 10, pp. 759–60. VA1, pp. 758–9. VA1, pp. 760–1. VA1, pp. 761–2. Mériaux, ‘Thérouanne’, pp. 397–8. On the development of the town of Saint-Omer, Histoire de Saint-Omer, ed. A. Derville, Histoire des Villes du Nord-Pas-de-Calais 1 (Lille, 1981); A. Derville, Saint-Omer. Des origines au début du 14e siècle (Lille, 1995).

22

From the Foundation to the Eleventh Century 649, and records the circumstances and the details of Adroald’s donation.24 As will be discussed later, this charter is not entirely above suspicion and was probably partly forged in the tenth century.25 Nevertheless, the year 649, the eleventh year of King Clovis II’s reign (639–657), is plausible, and the original assets of Sithiu, as enumerated in the charter, are certainly reliable.26 The charter deals with the donation, for the purpose of building a monastery, of the villa called Sithiu, on the river Aa, and its appurtenances, as well as the neighboring villae.27 Three of the identified villae (Wisques, Tatinghem, Zudausque) are concentrated around Sithiu, the core of the asset, while the other six are spread from the North Sea (Synthe, Loon, Le Mat, Le Grand Zeluc) to the Aisne (Francilly-Selency) and to the south (Fontaine).28 The lands given by Adroald were very scattered, and St Bertin and his successors took great care to enlarge and rationalize Sithiu’s landed assets by exchanging, buying and receiving pieces of land throughout the region.29 Most of these lands were located in the neighborhood of Sithiu and a bit further away, in the regions of Boulogne, Montreuil and Douai.30 Some of the purchased lands were, however, located at a fair distance: Appily and Dives, near Compiègnes, Beveren (Limburg, Belgium).31 With time, the number of monks increased as steadily as the landholding. The Vita Winnoci (VW1) for example, tells us of the arrival at Sithiu of four

24 25 26

27 28

29

30 31

Diplomata Belgica ante Annum Millesimum Centesimum Scripta, ed. M. Gysseling and A. C. F. Koch, 2 vols. (Brussels, 1950), I, no. 1, p. 6. Below, Chapter 3, pp. 55–6. The Annales Blandinienses, p. 4, give 640 as foundation year; these eleventh-century annals are partly based on a lost set of ninth-century annals from Sithiu: Ph. Grierson, Les Annales, p. XVI. Diplomata Belgica I, p. 6 no. 1. J.-F. Lemarignier, ‘Quelques remarques sur l’organisation ecclésiastique de la Gaule du VIIe à la fin du IXe siècle, principalement au nord de la Loire’, in Agricoltura e Mondo Rurale in Occidente nell’ Alto Medioevo, Settimane 13 (Spoleto, 1966), pp. 451–86 (pp. 465–6); for a detailed account on Sithiu’s landholding, see P. Wacksman’s unpublished dissertation, ‘Histoire des dépendances de l’abbaye de Saint-Bertin du VIIe à la fin du Xe siècle’, summarized in Positions des thèses de l’École des Chartes (Paris, 1960), pp. 103–6. Diplomata Belgica I, nos. 1–33, pp. 5–56; Lemarignier, ‘Quelques remarques’, pp. 465–8; on the meaning and evolution of the scattering of monastic landholding, see L. Musset, ‘Signification et destinée des domaines excentriques pour les abbayes de la moitié septentrionale de la Gaule jusqu’au XIe siècle’, in Sous la règle de Saint Benoît. Structures monastiques et sociétés en France du moyen âge à l’époque moderne. Abbaye bénédictine Saint-Marie de Paris 23–25 octobre 1980 (Geneva, 1982), pp. 167–84. On Saint-Bertin’s royal diplomas, see C. Brühl, Studien zu den merovingischen Köningsurkunden (Cologne, 1998), pp. 226–59; T. Közler, Merovingerstudien I, MGH, Studien und Texte 21 (Hanover, 1998), pp. 111–35). Diplomata Belgica I, no. 8, pp. 20–1, a. 704; no. 13, pp. 27–9, a. 723; no. 19, pp. 38–9, a. 788. Diplomata Belgica I, no. 18, pp. 37–8, a. 776; no. 13, pp. 27–9, a. 723; no. 21, pp. 40–1. Diplomata Belgica I, no. 9, pp. 21–2, a. 708; no. 22, pp. 42–3, a. 806.

23

Saint-Bertin Bretons, Quadanoc, Ingenoc, Madoc and Winnoc.32 Such an increase in monks and possessions allowed Sithiu to further its apostolic task by establishing new monastic houses and patronizing already existing forms of religious activity. For example, the VW1 mentions the donation of Wormhout (dep. Pas-de-Calais, arr. Dunkerque) to St Bertin, who decided to found there a monastery and a hospital for the poor. To this effect, St Bertin sent the four Bretons to Wormhout, where they built a cella and gathered a small community of monks around it.33 The other example of Sithiu’s participation in the monastic activity of the region is found in a charter dated 685, which records the donation of the ‘monastery’ of Honnecourt, in the pagus of Cambrai, on the Schelde. The monastery had been founded, on their own land, by a man called Amalfrid and his daughter Auriana, who was the abbess. By means of the charter, Amalfrid gave Honnecourt to Sithiu on condition that he could keep the usufruct and that Auriana could remain in her cella until her death.34 The monastery may not have been much more than a private church housing a handful of consecrated women, but it witnesses the religious activity of the local population and the role Sithiu played as a focus for the monastic life in the region. Similarly, the priest Felix gave Sithiu a cella in Roksem (eastern Flanders, Belgium) in 745. His purpose was that after his death, the abbot of Sithiu would ensure that the cult and the liturgical services which Felix had promoted there would be maintained.35 Sithiu itself was from the beginning a center of evangelical activity. St Mary’s basilica was originally a missionary church, controlled by the bishops of Thérouanne, and assigned to the cura animarum.36 In 663, Saint-Mary was transferred from the jurisdiction of the bishop of Thérouanne to the authority of the abbot of Sithiu; the basilica must then have been ministered by monks from Sithiu or priests delegated by the monastic community.37 The sources from Sithiu are silent on the religious practices and rule followed by the monks. Omer was raised at Luxeuil; Bertin, Mummolinus and Ebertramn had been in contact with Columbanian monasticism in their

32 33

34 35 36

37

Vita Winnoci Prima (VW1), pp. 769–70. VW1, p. 770; the community was short lived but its abbot, Winnoc, was honored as a saint, and his relics were transferred to Saint-Bertin before being translated in 900 to the chapter of Saint-Martin at Bergues. Around 1022, the chapter was reformed by Roderic of Saint-Bertin who replaced the canons with Benedictine monks. Diplomata Belgica I, no. 5, pp. 15–17. Diplomata Belgica I, no. 15, pp. 30–4. In the Vita Bertini Prima (VB1), the story of Waldbertus and his wife, who were in the habit of attending mass at St Mary’s, suggests that in the early years of Sithiu, the basilica was used by lay people for their private devotion: VB1, c. 2, pp. 765–7. Diplomata Belgica I, no. 3, pp. 9–13. E. Ewig, ‘Das Privileg des Bishofs Audomar von Terouanne von 663 und die Anfänge des Abtei Sithiu’, in Spätantikes und Fränkisches Gallien. Gesammelte Schriften (1952–1973), ed. H. Atsma, 2 vols. (Munich, 1973), II, p. 521.

24

From the Foundation to the Eleventh Century native region. Hence, Sithiu, like so many Frankish monasteries founded in the seventh century in the Luxovian tradition, practiced the so-called IroFrankish monasticism.38 The community most likely followed a Regula mixta, which combined the two spiritual pillars of early medieval monasticism, the Columbanian and Benedictine rules, with elements of other rules and local traditions.39 However, the Columbanian, or Irish, influence was certainly not long-lasting, and Sithiu, like so many other Neustrian monasteries, cultivated strong connections with Anglo-Saxon communities, which is only natural considering its location.40 As will be discussed later, Anglo-Saxon influence is particularly visible in the impressive number of early medieval manuscripts written or annotated by Anglo-Saxon hands that have survived from the library. In 663, Omer was old and nearly blind; his name appeared for the last time in contemporary sources among the signatures of the privilege given by Bishop Drauscius to Saint-Mary of Soissons in 667.41 The VA1, which is always vague in terms of chronology, does not give any indication about the date of his death, but in the Gesta Abbatum Sithiensium, Folcuin, who usually describes events in chronological order, placed Omer’s death between his privilege of 663 and King Theuderic’s privilege of 682.42 Omer was buried in St Mary’s church, according to his desire expressed in the 663 epistola. The VB1 is strangely mute on the last years and death of St Bertin, but his second vita (VB2) provides some details: as he grew old, Bertin, who desired to devote his remaining years to meditation, retired to a cell and entrusted the management of the monastery first to the monk Rigobert and then, at Rigobert’s death, to Erlefrid, who had been raised at Sithiu. Around 700, at Bertin’s request, Rigobert, built a new church, dedicated to St Martin, which later became the main church of Sithiu’s community and in which Bertin was buried at his death (c. 710).43 Up to the ninth century, the chronology of St Bertin’s successors cannot be established with accuracy, as they are for the most part known only through the charters in which their names appear. St 38

39 40 41 42

43

On the limits of the influence of ‘Iro-Frankish’ monasticism, see A. Dierkens, ‘Prolégomène à une histoire des relations culturelles entre les îles britanniques et le Continent pendant le haut moyen âge’, in La Neustrie. Les Pays au Nord de la Loire de 650 à 850, ed. H. Atsma, 2 vols. (Sigmaringen, 1989), I, pp. 371–94. On the so-called Benedict-Columbanian Rule and Iro-Frankish monasticism, see Prinz, Frühes Mönchtum, pp. 152–85. Dierkens, ‘Prolégomène’, pp. 371–94; Prinz, Frühes Mönchtum, p. 523. Diplomata, Chartae, Epistolae, Leges aliaque Instrumenta ad Res Gallo-Francicas Spectantia, ed. J-M. Pardessus and L. de Bréquigny, 2 vols. (Paris, 1849), II, n. 355. Folcuin, Gesta, cc. 3–4, p. 609; Diplomata Belgica I, no. 4, pp. 13–15; the Gesta is also the first source to specify that Omer died in the villa of Wavrans, four miles from Sithiu. The Annales Elnonenses, however, give 697 as the year of Omer’s death. On all this, see W. Levison, Vitae Audomari, Bertini, Winnoci, p. 730. Vita S. Bertini Altera (VB2) (BHL 1290), AA SS, Sept. 2, c. 13, p. 592, and Folcuin, Gesta, cc. 12–16, pp. 610–11.

25

Saint-Bertin Omer’s church was the main burial place for the bishops of Thérouanne, though some were not buried there. For example, Bishop Folcuin (815–855) was buried in St Bertin’s church, at the right side of the holy abbot.44 After Bertin’s death, the links between the bishopric of Thérouanne and the monastery of Sithiu must have remained strong, since several abbots of Sithiu became bishops: in the eighth century, Erkembod (c. 717–743, bishop c. 723), whose shrine is still venerated today in Saint-Omer’s cathedral; in the ninth century, Bishop Humfrid (855–870) became abbot of Saint-Bertin (864–866); in the tenth century, Wicfridus, praepositus of Saint-Bertin, became bishop of Thérouanne (935–959).45 During its first century, the abbey of Sithiu grew from an isolated and slightly eccentric monastic foundation in a newly founded bishopric into an important regional religious center. Its first abbots massively expanded its landholding and played their part in the strengthening of Christianity in the region. However, it was only during the Carolingian period that Sithiu would truly become a major monastic center. It was after Bertin’s death and his burial in St Martin’s church, that the monastic community of Sithiu progressively took the shape it would keep for the next centuries: on the lower part of the villa, on the bank of the Aa, was the abbatial church, with the shrine of St Bertin. On the upper part of the villa, on the top of the hill dominating the landscape, was Saint-Mary basilica, shrine of St Omer and burial church for many bishops of Thérouanne after him.46

The Carolingian period The role of Sithiu in the turmoil of the first half of the eighth century does not appear clearly in the sources. It was to Sithiu that the last Merovingian king, Childeric III (743–751), was exiled by Pippin III, where he remained until his death in 755. According to Folcuin, the former king was buried in ‘beati Bertini ecclesia’.47 Although Childeric’s burial at Saint-Bertin cannot be taken for granted, his exile to Sithiu shows that the abbot of Saint-Bertin at the time,

44 45 46

Folcuin, Gesta, c. 62, p. 620. Folcuin, Gesta, c. 17, p. 611, and c. 67, p. 621. This church became, centuries later, the cathedral of Saint-Omer; on the history of the cathedral, see La cathédrale de Saint-Omer. 800 ans de mémoire vive, ed. N. Delanne-Logié and Y.-M. Hilaire (Paris, 2000). 47 Folcuin, Gesta, c. 28, p. 612; see K. H. Krüger, ‘Sithiu/Saint-Bertin als Grablege Childerics III und der Grafen von Flandern’, Frühmittelalterliche Studien 8 (1974), 71–80; Krüger suggests that Folcuin’s affirmation should be put in the context of competition between Saint-Bertin and Saint-Peter at Ghent as burial place of the counts of Flanders; on the attitude of the Frankish monasteries toward the Pippinids, see J. Heuclin, ‘Les abbés des monastères neustriens 650–850’ in La Neustrie I, pp. 321–35.

26

From the Foundation to the Eleventh Century Nanthar I, was trusted by Pippin. However, the exercise of Carolingian authority, especially regarding the nomination of abbots, becomes clearly visible in the Gesta Abbatum Sithiensium only at the beginning of the ninth century. The method of election of the abbots during the Merovingian and the beginning of the Carolingian period is obscure. We have seen that, according to the VA1, St Omer himself had chosen the first two abbots, Mummolinus and Bertin.48 Omer’s privilege for Saint-Bertin theoretically made Sithiu an abbatia libera, free from the control of the bishops of Thérouanne; however, the privilege, which was only a ‘little exemption’ did not make any mention of the issue of abbatial election.49 According to the second vita of St Bertin, Bertin had retired a few years before his death and had chosen his own successors, Rigobert, and after him Erlefrid, who had been raised at Sithiu. Erlefrid’s successor, Erkembod, later became bishop of Thérouanne and remained both bishop and abbot until his death.50 From the beginning of the ninth century onward, the abbots of Saint-Bertin were all familiars of the Carolingian court or members of the imperial family. Nanthar II (805–820) was sent by Charlemagne as an escort for King Eardulf of Northumbria – expelled from his kingdom, the king had asked for imperial assistance – and he received the abbatia of Sithiu as a benefice.51 His successor, the canon Fridugis, was Louis the Pious’ chancellor from 819 to 832. He had been a pupil of Alcuin, whom he had succeeded as abbot of Tours.52 Fridugis’s abbacy was a turning point in the history of Sithiu because he divided the community between a community of canons, living around the shrine of St Omer, and a community of monks, centered on Saint-Bertin.53 In the meantime, he shared the estates of Sithiu and their revenues between the monks, the canons and himself; that is, he constituted the mensa fratrum and the mensa abbatum. The mensa fratrum was shared between monks and canons proportional to their respective numbers; the monks, who were twice as numerous, received two-thirds and the canons one-third.54 Later on, under Abbot Hilduin, the mensa fratrum was divided into two parts, one devoted to the sustenance of the monks, the other to the sustenance of their servants. On that occasion, the number of monks allowed at Saint-Bertin was limited to sixty.55 48 49 50 51 52

VA1, cc. 11–12, p. 761. Diplomata Belgica I, n. 3, p. 9. Folcuin, Gesta, c. 22, p. 611. Annales Regni Francorum, ed. F. Kurze, MGH SRG (Hanover, 1895), a. 808, p. 127. Alcuin had received the right to share all his abbeys among his disciples from Charlemagne. On Fridugis, see R. Bultot’s notice in DHGE 18 (1977), cols. 1145–7; on his role as chancellor, see J. Fleckenstein, Die Hofkapelle der Deutschen Könige I: Grundlegung. Die karolingische Hofkapelle (Stuttgart, 1959), pp. 81–4. 53 Folcuin, Gesta, c. 47, p. 614. 54 On this episode, see below, Chapter 3, pp. 56–60. 55 Recueil des actes de Charles II le Chauve, roi de France, ed. G. Tessier and A. Giry, 3 vols.

27

Saint-Bertin Fridugis’s successor, Hugh (834–844), son of one of Charlemagne’s concubines, was Louis the Pious’ half-brother and was also abbot of SaintQuentin.56 The tense political situation of the second half of the ninth century, characterized by struggles and shaky alliances, was strongly felt at SaintBertin: most of the abbots of the period had interrupted rules, being demoted only to be called back later. Such was the case of Adalard (844–859 and 861–864), son of Unroch of Ternois (d. 853) and, thanks to the marriage of his brother Evrard of Friuli with Gisela, sister of Charles the Bald, he was a member of the king’s extended family. Adalard was given as an oblate to Saint-Bertin by his father and was later ordained as a canon. Later, Unroch became a monk at Saint-Bertin and bequeathed most of his fortune to the monastery.57 Adalard is predominantly known for ordering the breviatio villarum, the polyptych of Saint-Bertin.58 His abbacy was suddenly interrupted in 859, when he joined Odo of Troyes in his treason against Charles the Bald in favor of his brother Louis the German.59 The traitor was briefly replaced by the Welf Hugh, nephew of Empress Judith, but Adalard was pardoned and got his abbacy back in 861 – some time earlier, he had received the abbacy of Saint-Amand, where he died and was buried in 864. At his death, Adalard was succeeded by Humfrid, a former monk from Prüm, who was also successor of St Folcuin as bishop of Thérouanne (855–869).60 However, two years after his nomination, Humfrid was removed from his position in favor of the canon Hilduin (866–877) who had bought the abbacy for thirty pounds of gold.61 Hilduin has been identified by Ferdinand Lot with the Hilduin who was briefly administrator of the diocese of Cologne in 865. This Hilduin had been an unlucky candidate to the bishopric of Cambrai supported by Lothar II in 863, but he had been turned down by Hincmar of Reims in 866 in favor of his own candidate, John.62 Indeed,

56 57

58

59 60 61 62

(Paris, 1952), II, no. 430, pp. 458–63; on this charter, see R. van Caenegem, ‘Le diplôme de Charles le Chauve pour l’abbaye de Saint-Bertin’, Revue d’Histoire du Droit 31 (1963), 403–26. Hugh also became Louis’ chancellor in 834: Fleckenstein, Die Hofkapelle, I, pp. 83–4. Folcuin, Gesta, c. 58, p. 618 and idem, Vita Folquini Episcopi Morinensis (BHL 3079), ed. O. Holder-Egger, MGH SS 151, c. 7, p. 428; on Adalard and his family, see Favre, ‘La famille d’Évrard’, p. 244. Le polyptyque de Saint-Bertin (844–859). Édition critique et commentaire, ed. F.-L. Ganshof (Paris, 1975); on this polyptych, see E. Renard, ‘Lectures et relectures d’un polyptyque carolingien (Saint-Bertin, 844–859)’, RHE 94 (1999), 373–435; and Y. Morimoto, ‘Problèmes autour du polyptyque de Saint-Bertin (844–859)’, in Le Grand Domaine aux époques mérovingienne et carolingienne. Actes du Colloque International (Gand 8–10 septembre 1983), ed. A. Verhulst (Ghent, 1985), pp. 125–51. Folcuin, Gesta, c. 64, p. 619. Folcuin, Gesta, c. 67, p. 620. Folcuin, Gesta, c. 69, p. 621. F. Lot, ‘De quelques personnages du IXe siècle qui ont porté le prénom de Hilduin’, in Recueil des Travaux Historiques (Paris, 1970), pp. 461–94.

28

From the Foundation to the Eleventh Century Folcuin writes that Hilduin had left the party of Lothar II for Charles, probably disillusioned by Lothar’s inability to offer him any interesting position.63 In 870, Charles tried once again to make him bishop of Cologne, but Hilduin was not meant to be bishop, and he was supplanted by Louis the German’s candidate.64 Nevertheless, he became librarian to Charles the Bald,65 and was obviously a close and secure ally of the king, who entrusted him with his pregnant wife Richildis before the battle of Andernach.66 Despite the venality of the transaction which made Hilduin abbot of Sithiu, Folcuin has only good things to write about him. It is true that he was generous to his abbey, to which he bequeathed a pallium and a cappa of great value.67 Furthermore, he had obtained from his king lands for the mensa fratrum,68 the right for the monks to hold a market every Friday,69 as well as the right to choose their dean and other dignitaries, with the approval of the abbot.70 At his death in 877, he was buried with honor at Sithiu, beside St Bertin himself. Hilduin’s successor was the Canon Fulk (878–882, 892–900). During his first abbacy, he attempted to organize the defense of Saint-Bertin by building castelli around the monastery; however, the work could not be completed, and Saint-Bertin was set on fire by vikings in 878. In 882, at the death of Hincmar, Fulk became archbishop of Reims and left Saint-Bertin, only to come back ten years later.71 During Fulk’s ‘sabbatical’ leave, the Unroching Ralph (883–892), son of Evrard of Friuli and nephew of Abbot Adalard, ruled Saint-Bertin. There has been some discussion about the status of Ralph, who had long been thought to bear the title of count, presumably of Ternois. Philip Grierson has demonstrated that no contemporary source mentions him as count, and he believes that Ralph was originally an ecclesiastic – at the death of his uncle Adalard (d. 864), he became abbot of Cysoing, an abbey founded by his father Evrard.72 Indeed, according to the Gesta Abbatum Sithiensium, Baldwin II was the first layman to rule the abbey. Unfortunately, Folcuin provides few details about Ralph; he does not even mention his family links with Abbot

63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72

In the mid-860s, other Lotharingian clerics joined Charles in the hope of getting better advancement: J. Nelson, Charles the Bald (London, 1992), p. 217 and n. 143. Lot, ‘De quelques personnages du IXe siècle’, p. 466. Diplomata Belgica I, n. 41, p. 73. Annales Bertiniani, ed. F. Grat, J. Vieillard and S. Clémencet, Les Annales de SaintBertin (Paris, 1964), 876, pp. 209–10. Folcuin, Gesta, c. 85, p. 622. Diplomata Belgica I, n. 45, pp. 78–9. Folcuin, Gesta, c. 85, p. 622. Diplomata Belgica I, n. 38, pp. 69–70; n. 39, pp. 71–2; n. 41, pp. 73–4; n. 43, pp. 75–6; n. 44, pp. 76–8 and n. 45, pp. 78–9. Diplomata Belgica I, n. 44, pp. 76–8. Folcuin, Gesta, c. 88, pp. 622–3. Flodoard, Historia Remensis Ecclesiae, ed. M. Stratmann, MGH SS 36 (Hanover, 1998), lib. IV, c. 1, p. 371.

29

Saint-Bertin Adalard and Count Unroch. In 890, Ralph invited the famous scholar Hucbald of Saint-Amand to complete his education; in exchange, Hucbald was given the villa of Itancourt and a community of prayer was instituted between Saint-Bertin and Saint-Amand.73

Under Flemish authority In 863, Baldwin I, who already controlled some of the northern pagi of the future county of Flanders, received Ternois and the lay abbacy of Saint Peter at Ghent from Charles the Bald.74 With Ternois, also came Saint-Bertin. Baldwin was buried there, which shows the importance of the abbey at that early stage in the history of the county. His son, Baldwin II (879–918) had to reconquer his father’s territories. He did so easily for the northern pagi (Flanders, Mempisc, Waas, Ghent, Courtrai). However, the southern pagi, Ternois and Boulonais, which his father had once controlled, and Artois, Vermandois and Ostrevant, which he coveted, were still under the control of the king or other local potentates, such as the counts of Ternois and Ostrevant.75 Baldwin II was related to Abbot Ralph by marriage and both were related to the Carolingian king. Therefore, together with Archbishop Fulk, they were natural allies against King Odo’s coup (888–898), and the three men were among those who invited Arnulf, king of Eastern Francia, to seize power in the Western kingdom. Taking advantage of Ralph’s death, Baldwin conquered Artois, Ternois and their abbeys (Saint-Vaast in 892 and SaintBertin in 900). He eventually lost Artois in 899, but managed to maintain a firm grip on the regions of Ternois, Boulonais and Tournaisis and on the lay abbacy of Saint-Bertin, after he had Fulk murdered. Unsurprisingly, Baldwin II, who had a very bad reputation in Saint-Bertin’s historiography, was extremely unpopular with the monks. They even renounced Saint-Bertin’s nascent status as comital burial place rather than allowing Baldwin and his wife Ælfthryth to be put in their cemetery. At Baldwin’s death, Ælfthryth had asked the monks of Saint-Bertin to bury her with her husband. They claimed, however, that no woman, even a dead one, could enter the precinct of the monastery, so Ælfthryth eventually buried her husband at Saint-Peter at Ghent, which became the comital mausoleum.76 73

Folcuin, Gesta, c. 94, p. 623, and Diplomata Belgica I, n. 48, pp. 82–3. That Ralph needed to be taught by Hucbald eight years after receiving the abbey suggests that he may not have been raised as a churchman. 74 Ganshof, La Flandre, p. 15. 75 Ganshof, La Flandre, pp. 18–19; there was a Count Unroch at Charlemagne’s court, who signed his testament (Einhard, Vita Karoli, ed. O. Holder-Egger, MGH SRG (Hanover, 1911), p. 41) and a Count Unroch was sent on a diplomatic mission to the Danes by Louis the Pious (Annales Regni Francorum, a. 811, p. 134). 76 Folcuin, Gesta, c. 103 and c. 106, p. 627.

30

From the Foundation to the Eleventh Century From his marriage with Ælfthryth, daughter of Alfred the Great, Baldwin II had two sons, Arnulf and Adalulf. At his death in 918, his younger son Adalulf inherited the regions of Ternois and Boulonais, including the abbey of Saint-Bertin, while the elder one, Arnulf, received all the other counties.77 At Adalulf’s death in 933, Arnulf seized his brother’s possessions, including the lay abbacy of Saint-Bertin, although Adalulf had two sons, who should have legitimately inherited.78 During his reign Arnulf consolidated his control over the territories conquered by his father and extended them southward. In 932, he conquered the Ostrevant, with Saint-Amand and Douai, and the next year, Artois, with the abbey of Saint-Vaast. Later on, in 948, he took over Montreuil and a part of the Ponthieu, following the murder of William Longsword (942).79 Arnulf’s conquests made him the lay abbot of five important and extremely wealthy abbeys: Saint-Bertin, Saint-Vaast, Saint-Amand and Saint-Peter and Saint-Bavo at Ghent, increasing his wealth as well as his power. For better and for worse, he exerted his authority over his abbeys with a firm grip. At Saint-Bertin, he ‘convinced’ the monks to transgress the interdict forbidding any woman to enter the precinct of the abbatial church, and they allowed his ailing wife Adala to pray over St Bertin’s altar. The monks’ complaisance earned the community Arnulf’s and Adala’s gratitude and the fisc of Mercq-Saint-Liévin and its appurtenances.80 Arnulf’s most profound impact on Saint-Bertin was the Benedictine restoration he imposed with his friend and ally, Gerard of Brogne. Arnulf and Gerard had already restored the Rule at Saint-Peter at Ghent, where Gerard was made abbot.81 Arnulf and Gerard proceeded in much the same way with Saint-Bertin: on 15 April 944, Arnulf entrusted Sithiu to Gerard, expecting him to restore the Benedictine rule. The reformer was not, however, unanimously welcomed by the community, and a number of monks left Sithiu; some took refuge in the villa of Longuenesse and others eventually fled to England. They were welcomed by King Æthelstan, who hosted them in the monastery of Bath.82 The monks who did not leave for England eventually returned to Saint-Bertin. The period following Gerard’s reform was tumultuous and five abbots succeeded one another within a period of ten years.

77 78 79 80 81 82

Folcuin, Gesta, c. 103, p. 627. Folcuin, Gesta, c. 105, p. 627. Ganshof, La Flandre, pp. 20–2. Folcuin, Gesta, c. 106, pp. 627–8. For the bibliography on Gerard, above, Introduction, p. 5. According to Folcuin, Gesta, c. 107, p. 629, Æthelstan welcomed the secessionist monks because he was indebted to Saint-Bertin: in 933, his brother Edwin who was fleeing England for Flanders, drowned, and his body was found on the banks of Sithiu. Count Adalulf, who was related to Edwin and Æthelstan through their common ancestor Alfred the Great, had him buried at Saint-Bertin. As a sign of gratitude, Æthelstan made several gifts to Saint-Bertin and was happy, ten years later to help monks from that abbey.

31

Saint-Bertin Gerard, who was already abbot of Saint-Peter at Ghent could not properly rule Saint-Bertin at the same time, and Arnulf requested that the monastery be ruled by Agilo, a monk of Toul, and Womar, a monk of Saint-Peter at Ghent– although neither received the title of abbot. At Agilo’s death (c. 947), Gerard imposed his nephew Wido as abbot; but the young man was soon removed by the count ‘because he preferred the pleasures of life to the austerity of abbatial duties’.83 Womar remained alone to rule Saint-Bertin, still without the abbatial title. This situation was short lived, since Arnulf soon gave the abbacy to his own nephew, Hildebrand. Hildebrand was consecrated by the bishop of Thérouanne in 950, and the ceremony was the occasion for Arnulf to give back to the community the villa of Arques, one of the main villae of the abbatial mensa, and one which Arnulf had inherited from his father when given the title of abbot.84 Despite all this trouble, Abbot Hildebrand’s reform was successful – the monks who remained after 944 were probably the most motivated ones, and Gerard himself came to Sithiu with his own companions, all of whom came from different monasteries. In view of Hildebrand’s success, Arnulf decided to send him to reform his other abbey of Saint-Vaast. Busy with his new task, Hildebrand asked Arnulf to designate another abbot. Hildebrand was thus replaced by Regenold in 954.85 From this time on, the abbey was apparently plagued by successive calamities. First, in 959, the sign of the cross began to appear on people’s vestments, an event that was ended only when the relics of St Bertin and St Omer were brought together in the upper church and the whole community – monks and canons together – paid them honor in a ceremony of unification.86 Soon after, the region was struck by an epidemic of ‘leprosy’ and abbot Regenold, infected, had to retire. The care of the community was entrusted to the monk Adalulf, who was, however, not granted the title of abbot – the community had chosen him, but the count refused to ordain him.87 Adalulf had been given to Saint-Bertin as an oblate some time before 938 by his father Evrard, who was the advocate of the abbey, and his mother Riksind, a daughter of Baldwin II.88 It is interesting to note that Adalulf was among the monks who left Sithiu at the beginning of Gerard’s reform and came back after some time.89 If Arnulf did not want to make Adalulf abbot, it was because he had in mind giving the abbacy back to Hildebrand. At this point, in 961, Adalulf was opportunely sent to England

83 84 85 86 87 88

Folcuin, Gesta, c. 107, pp. 628–9. Folcuin, Gesta, c. 108, pp. 629–30. Folcuin, Gesta, c. 109, p. 630. Folcuin, Gesta, c. 109, p. 631. Folcuin, Gesta, c. 110, pp. 631–2. Folcuin, Gesta, c. 106, p. 628; R. Le Jan, Famille et pouvoir dans le monde Franc (VIIe–Xe siècle). Essai d’anthropologie sociale (Paris, 1995), pp. 425–6 and 447. 89 Folcuin, Gesta, c. 107, p. 629.

32

From the Foundation to the Eleventh Century with presents for King Edgar, who had just become king of the West Saxons. In 962, another misfortune struck the count with the death of his son, Baldwin III. At about the same time, Adalulf came back from England and began once again to worry over the election of a new abbot. At this point, Arnulf called Hildebrand back and gave him the abbacy.90 The Gesta Abbatum Sithiensium ends in 962 with Hildebrand’s reinstatement; the continuation of Folcuin’s Gesta by Simon begins in 1021 with the abbacy of Roderic (1021–1042).91 Simon, who wrote in the twelfth century, explains in his introduction that nothing was written about the six abbots between Adalulf and Roderic. Simon had seen a catalogue of the abbots of Sithiu (‘Adalolfi, qui in cathalogo ponitur xxvi’).92 The catalogue mentioned by Simon has disappeared, but the Liber Floridus, written in 1120 by Lambert of Saint-Omer, contains several lists: prelates who ruled both Saint-Bertin and Saint-Omer, deans (praepositus) of Saint-Omer and abbots of Saint-Bertin.93 The list containing the abbots has Bernoldus (Regenold?) as twenty-sixth abbot and does not mention Adalulf – thus following the Gesta Abbatum Sithiensium. After Bernoldus came Baldwin Pulcher count and abbot, Arnulf count and abbot, Walter, Trudgand, Odbert and Humfrid. The identities of Baldwin Pulcher and Arnulf are not clear; Arnulf the Great’s son, Baldwin III died in 962 and nowhere does Folcuin suggest that Arnulf had given him the lay abbacy of Saint-Bertin. The only other known Baldwin whose dates could match this Baldwin is Baldwin Baldzo, who was the guardian of his nephew Arnulf II during his infancy. During the interregnum, Ternois and Boulonais were given back to the descendants of Adalulf, and Baldwin may have received the abbacy of Saint-Bertin on this occasion. The ‘Arnulf count and abbot’ found in the Liber Floridus could be Arnulf II, but northern Ternois, and with it the abbey of Saint-Bertin, remained outside the count of Flanders’ control until Baldwin IV (988–1035). Therefore, our Arnulf could be Adalulf’s son, legitimate heir of Boulonais and Ternois.94 The next abbot in Lambert’s catalogue is Walter, whose dates are uncertain, but Folcuin dedicated to him his vita of Folcuin of Thérouanne, which he wrote when he was abbot of Lobbes (968–990), and a charter dated 975 mentions him as abbot.95 While his

90 91 92 93

Folcuin, Gesta, c. 110, pp. 631–21. Simon, Gesta, c. 1, p. 635. Simon, Gesta, p. 635. Lambert of Saint-Omer, Series Abbatum S. Bertini et Praepositorum S. Audomari Sithiensium, ed. O. Holder-Egger, MGH SS 13, pp. 389–91. 94 Ganshof, La Flandre, pp. 27–9. 95 D. Haigneré, Les chartes de Saint-Bertin d’après le Grand Cartulaire de Dom Charles-Joseph Dewitte, 3 vols. (Saint-Omer, 1886), I, pp. 20–1, n. 64; Folcuin, Gesta, additamentum, p. 634; Vita Folquini, p. 425; according to H. de Laplane, Les abbés de Saint-Bertin d’après les anciens monuments de ce monastère (Saint-Omer, 1854), Walter’s coffin was found during the disastrous excavation campaign of 1843, which completely destroyed the crypt of the abbatial church. The coffin was covered with

33

Saint-Bertin successor, Trudgand, is unknown, Saint-Bertin comes back to light in the sources with its next abbot, Odbert (c. 987–c. 1007). As will be discussed later, Odbert is famous for reviving the production of illuminated manuscripts at Saint-Bertin, an art which had flourished there in the ninth century, but had faded during the tenth.96 Odbert is also known, thanks to two letters he wrote to the archbishops of Canterbury, Æthelgar (988–990) and Sigeric (990–994).97 From these letters, it appears that Odbert had had friendly relations with their predecessor Dunstan (959–988), who had spent his exile in Flanders, at Saint-Peter at Ghent (955–957).98 When Archbishop Æthelgar went to Rome to receive the pallium, he stayed at Saint-Bertin both going and coming back.99 In his letter to Sigeric, Odbert offered his hospitality to the archbishop; sources do not say whether the invitation was accepted, but relations between Odbert and England remained close since during his abbacy Saint-Bertin was visited by Anglo-Saxon artists who painted some of his manuscripts and strongly influenced his own production.100 The continuation of Folcuin written by Simon in the twelfth century begins with the abbacy of Roderic (1021–1042). A monk of Saint-Vaast, he was named by the count of Flanders, Baldwin IV ‘the Bearded’ (988–1035), in order to restore a proper regular life, much needed after ‘the excesses of his predecessor Humfrid’.101 Obviously, the Benedictine restoration imposed with much pain by Arnulf the Great, Gerard of Brogne and Hildebrand less than seventy years earlier, did not outlive its promoters. This is not surprising: considering the major role played by the counts of Flanders in church politics in the tenth and eleventh centuries, religious reform needed the support, and even the initiative, of the count. The troubled political situation of Ternois in general and Saint-Bertin in particular, which resulted from Arnulf II’s succession, was not propitious for the maintenance of a high level of religious observance. Like his great-grand-father Arnulf, Baldwin IV had undertaken the restoration of the monasteries located in his county under the influence of Gerard, bishop of Cambrai, and Richard of Saint-Vanne. In 1008,

96

97

98 99 100 101

a leaden plate inscribed with the date of Walter’s death (984) and the length of his abbacy (twenty years); however, the excavation of Saint-Bertin was so poorly performed and recorded that it is perilous to trust de Laplane’s descriptions of what was found. On book production during Odbert’s abbacy, see below, Chapter 2, pp. 46–49; his name as abbot appears for the first time in a charter dated 993 (Haigneré, Les chartes de Saint-Bertin, p. 21, no. 64) and in several miracles (AA SS, 2 Sept., pp. 624–8). Memorials of Saint Dunstan, Archbishop of Canterbury, ed. W. Stubbs, Rolls Series 63 (London, 1874, pp. 384–5 and 388–9. A new edition is to be published: S. Vanderputten, ‘Canterbury and Flanders in the Late Tenth Century’, in Anglo Saxon Studies (2005). I thank the author, who has kindly given me his manuscript. Memorial of Saint Dunstan, p. 389. Memorial of Saint Dunstan, p. 388. Below, p. 47. Simon, Gesta, c. 1, p. 636.

34

From the Foundation to the Eleventh Century Saint-Vaast was reformed by Abbot Leduinus, a disciple of Richard; in 1024, the abbey of Marchiennes was turned into an all-male Benedictine community by Leduinus, and finally, Saint-Bertin was entrusted to Roderic, a disciple of the same Leduinus.102 Roderic did not meet any more enthusiasm than had Gerard of Brogne in his time, and some of the monks left the community upon his arrival.103 In spite of Roderic’s lack of success at Saint-Bertin, Baldwin IV entrusted him with the restoration of the community of Bergues-Saint-Winnoc in 1022. Roderic expelled the canons, sent a few monks from Saint-Bertin and subjected the refounded monastery to SaintBertin.104 Roderic’s abbacy was not a happy time for Sithiu: the buildings were partly destroyed by a fire and shortly afterward an epidemic killed eleven of the monks.105 The first signs that Sithiu felt that its landholding was threatened by local landowners and petty potentates also date from the time of Roderic’s abbacy. The abbey had been in conflict for some time over holdings which were adjacent to the property of local landowners; the bishop of Thérouanne solved the problem, albeit probably to his own advantage, by taking the disputed lands for himself in exchange of a series of altars.106 A few years later, Roderic’s successor, Bovo (1042–1065), had to call for the count’s assistance in a conflict with the abbey’s advocate.107 Indeed, the usurpation of the abbey’s landholding appears to be among the major preoccupations of Simon’s Gesta Abbatum, and the issue also arises in contemporary miracles of St Bertin.108 Besides the struggle over its landholding, the community of Saint-Bertin also had to face a series of fires, which obliged several abbots to devote much time and money to the re-construction of the buildings. After the 1033 blaze, 102 103 104

105 106 107

108

On the circumstances which led Baldwin to restore Saint-Bertin, see van Meter, ‘Count Baldwin IV’. Simon, Gesta, c. 1, p. 636. Roderic ruled Saint-Winnoc for seven years, after which he entrusted the community to a monk of Saint-Bertin; see Cartulaire de l’abbaye de Saint-Bertin, ed. B. Guérard, Collection de Documents pour Servir à l’Histoire de France (Paris, 1840), c. 9, p. 178 (this chapter is not in the MGH edition). Simon, Gesta, cc. 2–5, pp. 636–7. See Simon, Gesta, c. 6, pp. 637–8; for the text of the bishop’s charter, see Cartulaire de l’abbaye de Saint-Bertin, part 2, c. 7, pp. 175–6. On this occasion, the relics of St Omer and St Bertin were placed on a boat which had previously been blessed by Drogo of Thérouanne; then the boat moved along the Aa around Sithiu in order to distinguish the area under the undisputed control of the community: Simon, Gesta, c. 13, pp. 638–9; for the count’s charter, see Cartulaire de l’abbaye de Saint-Bertin, part 2, c. 14, pp. 184–7. For example, at the time of Abbot Heribert (1065–1081) a man named Bodora had alienated the villa of Caumont, which was regained thanks to St Bertin: see Simon, Gesta, c. 19, p. 640, and Herbert’s confirmation charter, in Cartulaire de l’abbaye de Saint-Bertin, part 2, c. 20, pp. 194–6; at the time of Abbot John (1081–1095), Count Robert had to help the abbey recover a pond which had been usurped, see Simon, Gesta, c. 32, p. 642; see also AA SS, 2 Sept., pp. 628–9.

35

Saint-Bertin Roderic had hastily repaired the main church, but by the time of his successor, Abbot Bovo (1042–1065), it was already crumbling. Bovo undertook an ambitious operation of reconstruction and enlargement of the abbatial church, during which the relics of St Bertin were re-discovered. There is no doubt that Bovo was hoping that the inventio would stimulate St Bertin’s cult and would entice the local faithful to make offerings. It does not appear, however, that the revenues of the community were significantly augmented, and because of lack of money or time, Bovo was unable to finish his ambitious project. Bovo’s successor, Heribert (1065–1081), almost finished the work, but before the roof was completed, the church burnt down once again.109 Only in the abbacies of John (1081–1095) and Lambert (1095–1125) was the reconstruction resumed and completed: the new buildings were consecrated in 1106 by the bishop of Thérouanne.110

109 110

Simon, Gesta, c. 18, p. 640 and c. 26, p. 642. Simon, Gesta, c. 82, p. 651.

36

CHAPTER TWO

Cultural Life at Saint-Bertin

Introduction Saint-Bertin was an extremely wealthy and prestigious monastery which had attracted the attention of successive Carolingian and Flemish rulers. There is no doubt that Carolingian and, to some extent, Flemish patronage, allowed Saint-Bertin to become a cultural center which stood in an honored position among the other Frankish monasteries.1 Saint-Bertin possessed a wellendowed library and, at different periods of its history, produced its own manuscripts, some of them aesthetically remarkable. The quality of its library and scriptorium offered Saint-Bertin the intellectual tools necessary for the development of a distinguished monastic school. The oblates educated at the school had good literary abilities, as exemplified by the monk and scholar Grimbald, who was called to the court of King Alfred (c. 886–887); Folcuin, who wrote history and hagiography, and in the eleventh century Folcard and Goscelin, who pursued their careers as writers in England.2 Saint-Bertin’s relationship with England was indeed continuous during the period; these 1

On the role of Carolingian patronage in the production of manuscripts and the extension of literary culture throughout the Frankish kingdoms, see R. McKitterick, ‘Charles the Bald (823–877) and his Library: The Patronage of Learning’, English Historical Review 95 (1980), 28–47, and idem, ‘Carolingian Book Production: Some Problems’, The Library 6th series, 12 (1990), 1–33. 2 On these authors’ contribution to biographical and hagiographic writing in England, see E. van Houts, ‘The Flemish Contribution to Biographical Writing in the Eleventh Century’, in The Limits of Medieval Biography: Essays in Honor of Professor Frank Barlow, ed. D. Bates, J. Crick and S. Hamilton (Woodbridge, forthcoming). On Grimbald, see P. Grierson, ‘Grimbald of St. Bertin’s’, English Historical Review 55 (1940), 529–61; J. Bately, ‘Grimbald of St. Bertin’s’, Medium Aevum 35 (1966), 1–10; and Asser’s Life of King Alfred and Other Contemporary Sources, ed. and trans. S. Keynes and M. Lapidge (London, 1983); on Goscelin, see the appendix to The Life of King Edward who Rests at Westminster, ed. and trans. F. Barlow (Oxford, 1992), pp. 133–49; R. Sharpe, ‘Goscelin’s St. Augustine and St. Mildreth: Hagiography and Liturgy in Context’, Journal of Theological Studies new series, 41 (1990), 502–16; and S. Millinger, ‘Humility and Power: Anglo-Saxon Nuns in Anglo-Norman Hagiography’, in Medieval Religious Women, ed. J. A. Nichols and L. T. Shank, vol. 1: Distant Echoes, Cistercian Studies Series 71 (Kalamazoo, 1984), pp. 115–29; and T. J. Hamilton, ‘Goscelin of Canterbury: A Critical Study of his Life, Works and Accomplishments’, 2 vols. (unpublished Ph.D. thesis, University of Virginia, 1973).

37

Saint-Bertin contacts were not only documented in the written sources from Saint-Bertin, but they are also very visible in the surviving manuscripts from the community’s library and by its artistic production. Most of the oldest manuscripts (before 800) which have survived were written or annotated by insular hands. In the second half of the ninth century, the scriptorium produced a series of manuscripts in the Franco-Saxon style, a Continental style that originated in Flanders (at Saint-Amand and Saint-Vaast) and was characterized by its strong insular overtones. Finally, during Odbert’s abbacy, the AngloSaxon artists who visited Saint-Bertin and painted some of Odbert’s manuscripts were extremely influential on Odbert himself and on later artistic production at Saint-Bertin.

The library The study of book production and ownership at Saint-Bertin is an immense task that deserves a comprehensive study of its own. The task of the student of Saint-Bertin’s library is facilitated by the fact that, in the aftermath of the French Revolution, most of the manuscripts which survived destruction and dissemination were gathered in the municipal libraries of Saint-Omer and Boulogne-sur-Mer.3 About sixty manuscripts and fragments of manuscripts, which date from the sixth century to the period of Abbot Odbert, can be attributed to the medieval library of Saint-Bertin, thanks to anathemas and identification marks which were inscribed on the front pages from the ninth century to the fifteenth. To these surviving manuscripts should be added the 305 titles making up the catalogue drawn up in the early twelfth century.4 The identification of the origins of Saint-Bertin’s manuscripts is often problematic. Indeed, apart from a handful of ninth-century de luxe manuscripts obviously produced for export and the group of manuscripts associated with Odbert’s workshop, the surviving books are remarkable for the diversity of their script and layout. The adoption by a scriptorium of a house style was indeed the exception rather than the rule in the early Middle Ages, and, clearly, the manuscripts which were produced for the everyday use of the school and the community did not bear characteristics which would allow them to be identified as Saint-Bertin’s products. It is most likely that Saint-Bertin imported a number of its manuscripts from the numerous monastic centers of the region. Unfortunately, our knowledge of the libraries and scriptoria of the neighboring monasteries is still too sketchy to be of 3

On the circumstances under which Saint-Bertin’s manuscripts were gathered in these libraries, see H. Michelant, Catalogue général des manuscrits des bibliothèques publiques des départements, vol. 3: Saint-Omer (Paris, 1861), pp. 3–10, and vol. 4: Boulogne-sur-Mer (Paris, 1872), pp. 565–9. 4 G. Becker, Catalogi Bibliothecarum Antiqui (Hildesheim, 1885), pp. 181–4.

38

Cultural Life much help.5 Furthermore, the intensive exchanges of manuscripts and scribes, which certainly linked all these cultural centers, favored the production of a regional style in which differences between scriptoria are hardly discernible.6 The pre-Carolingian manuscripts The books from Saint-Bertin’s library dated to before 800 have been identified by E. A. Lowe in the CLA.7 The oldest is a copy of Ambrose’s Opera dating from the first half of the sixth century and written in Italian uncial. This manuscript probably reached Sithiu via England, since marginalia in eighthcentury Anglo-Saxon minuscule, some in the vernacular, are visible on three folios.8 Fragments of another manuscript of Italian origin, Augustine’s Enarrationes in Psalmos, dated to the sixth or seventh century, have survived in two twelfth-century manuscripts.9 Two pre-Caroline minuscule folios of a commentary on Luke’s Gospel, which were used as fly-leaves in a ninthcentury manuscript, can also be attributed to Saint-Bertin’s library.10 All the other pre-Carolingian manuscripts are dated from the eighth century and have an insular connection. A collection of Augustine’s letters dated from the early eighth century was written in Anglo-Saxon minuscule on a parchment prepared partly in the Insular and partly in the Continental manner, which indicates a production in an Insular center on the Continent.11 The eighthcentury fragment of Isidore’s Differentiae, inserted in a tenth-century book, was also probably written in a Continental center with Insular connections.12 The three remaining eighth-century manuscripts were undoubtedly written

5

6

7 8 9 10 11

12

The library and scriptorium of Corbie have been studied extensively: D. Ganz, Corbie in the Carolingian Renaissance, Beihefte der Francia 20 (Sigmaringen, 1990); R. McKitterick has already given some results from her study on Saint-Amand: The Frankish Kingdoms, pp. 207–10, ‘Charles the Bald (823–877) and his Library’, ‘Carolingian Book Production’. On the issue of regional and local style in manuscript production, see McKitterick, ‘Carolingian Book Production’; on Carolingian manuscripts and libraries, see also the articles in B. Bischoff, Manuscripts and Libraries in the Age of Charlemagne, ed. and trans. M. Gorman, Cambridge Studies in Palaeography and Codicology 1 (Cambridge, 1994). CLA VI: France. BSM, MS 32; CLA VI, 735; the Anglo-Saxon marginalia are on fols. 61, 61v and 62. BSM, MS 27 (fragment on the back cover) and S-O, MS 150 (fragments, fols. 3, 6, 7, 10, 11, 14, 15); CLA VI, 734. KBR, MS 8654–72, fols. 1 and 208; CLA X, 1542. BSM, MS 58; CLA VI, 737; T. J. Brown has pointed to the paleographical similarities between MS 58 and MS 74, and has suggested that the manuscript dates from the beginning of the eighth century; see P. Sims-Williams, ‘An Unpublished Seventh- or Eighth-Century Anglo-Latin Letter in Boulogne-sur-Mer MS 74 (82)’, Medium Aevum 48 (1979), 1–22 (pp. 1–2). S-O, MS 279 (fols. 1–2); CLA VI, 827

39

Saint-Bertin in England: the abbreviated text of Apponius’s commentary on the Canticum Canticorum was written in southern England and bears a paleographical likeness to the volume of Augustine’s epistles (BSM 58);13 the fragment of Mark’s Gospels bound in a ninth-century composite manuscript is in Anglo-Saxon majuscule from Northumbria;14 finally, the single leaf of Glossae super Amos inserted in a tenth-century lectionary is in an Irish or Welsh script.15 The predominance of insular manuscripts and manuscripts with insular connections is immediately striking. Actually, BSM 27 (32), in Italian uncial, and KBR 8654–72 (fols. 1 and 208) are the only pre-Carolingian manuscripts from Saint-Bertin that do not display any Insular characteristics. Appraising the significance of the predominance of Anglo-Saxon books in the early library is a delicate task because our manuscripts sample is so small and, considering the relations that the monastery maintained with England were close throughout the Middle Ages, it is not impossible that some of these books were given to Saint-Bertin centuries after their fabrication. Although Sithiu was founded by Continental monks educated in the Luxeuil tradition, the Anglo-Saxon cultural predominance at Sithiu is not surprising if one considers the origins of pre-Carolingian manuscripts in other Neustrian libraries. The major role played by Irish and Anglo-Saxon missionaries in the transmission of manuscripts in the Frankish world in the seventh and eighth centuries is well known. Coming from the British Isles, these missionaries established monasteries throughout the Continent, from the North (Fulda, Echternach, Luxeuil) to the South (Bobbio). Not only did Columbanus, Willibrord, Boniface and the like bring manuscripts from home, but they also rapidly instituted scriptoria in their new foundations. Hence, manuscripts were produced on the Continent with the techniques, script and ornamentation style typical of the Insular world. Furthermore, the Anglo-Saxons, who had a long tradition of close relationships with the papacy, were also the vectors of transmission for Mediterranean manuscripts from Rome to northern Europe.16 13

BSM, MS 74; CLA VI, 738; on these two manuscripts, see Sims-Williams, ‘An Unpublished Seventh- or Eighth-Century Anglo-Latin Letter’. 14 S-O, MS 257, fols. 1–7; CLA VI, 826. 15 S-O, MS 342bis; CLA VI, 828. 16 On cultural relations between England and the Continent, see V. Ortenberg, The English Church and the Continent in the Tenth and Eleventh Centuries: Cultural, Spiritual and Artistic Exchanges (Oxford, 1992) and W. Levison, England and the Continent in the Eighth Century (Oxford, 1946); on their impact on manuscript production, see R. McKitterick, ‘The Scriptoria of Merovingian Gaul: A Survey of the Evidence’, in Columbanus and Merovingian Monasticism, pp. 173–207; idem, ‘The Diffusion of Insular Culture in Neustria between 650 and 850: The Implications of the Manuscript Evidence’, in La Neustrie II, pp. 395–432; idem, ‘Anglo-Saxon Missionaires in Germany: Reflections on the Manuscript Evidence’, Transactions of the Cambridge Bibliographical Society 60 (1989), 291–329; for a specific example, see N. Netzer, Cultural Interplay in the Eighth Century: The Trier Gospels and the Making of a Scriptorium

40

Cultural Life All in all, the predominance at Sithiu of Anglo-Saxon and Italian manuscripts – which had been forwarded via the British Isles – fits this scheme. If one considers, for example, the pre-Carolingian library of Corbie, a similar observation can be made: out of twenty alien manuscripts dating before the ninth century, five were Italian (all dated before 700) and seven (all the eighth-century manuscripts which were not produced at Corbie) present an Insular script and were written either in England or in an Insular center on the Continent.17 This shows that in the seventh and eighth centuries Corbie imported most of its books from Britain. But Corbie also had an important in-house production center, something that cannot be found at Saint-Bertin before the late eighth century.18 It is also interesting to compare Saint-Bertin with the other Neustrian libraries listed in the sixth volume of the CLA, which covers early manuscripts in French libraries, other than the Bibliothèque Nationale. These modern libraries have inherited medieval manuscripts from Saint-Vaast (Arras), Saint-Amand (Valenciennes), and Corbie (Amiens); among the nine manuscripts or fragments identified by Lowe as Insular, five come from Saint-Bertin, to which should be added the Italian manuscript which reached Sithiu via England (BSM 32 (37)).19 Drawing broad conclusions from such a small sample is certainly risky, and the fragmentary state of some of these early books should be a reminder that our knowledge of Sithiu’s pre-Carolingian library is extremely fragmentary. Nevertheless, the overwhelming predominance of Anglo-Saxon manuscripts in the early library of Saint-Bertin suggests that its connections were chiefly insular. This strong cultural connection between Saint-Bertin and Anglo-Saxon England in the first centuries of its history is not explicitly documented in the sources; furthermore, until its destruction by the vikings, Quentavic was the normal landing place for Anglo-Saxon travelers, pilgrims

at Echternach (Cambridge, 1994). Although these studies focus mostly on Insular influence on the Continent, England was undoubtedly exposed to Continental influence; according to Sims-Williams, the monastery of Bath in the seventh century underwent Continental influence, especially from Chelles; some manuscripts which might have been written at Bath (such as BSM, MS 58 (Augustine’s Epistulae) and MS 74 (Apponius, In Canticum Canticorum) bear both Insular and Continental characteristics, which have usually led scholars to consider them as manuscripts from Insular centers on the Continent, see P. Sims-Williams, ‘Continental Influence at Bath Monastery in the Seventh Century’, Anglo-Saxon England 4 (1975), 1–10, and idem, ‘An Unpublished Seventh- or Eighth-Century Anglo-Latin Letter’. 17 Ganz, Corbie, pp. 124–30. 18 Ganz has identified ten manuscripts written at Corbie before the time of Abbot Leodegar (752–c. 765) and seventy-four manuscripts written from Leodegar to Maurdramnus (c. 770–783): Corbie, pp. 130–41. 19 CLA VI, p. V; the other manuscripts from Anglo-Saxon or Continental Anglo-Saxon centers are Arras, Bibliothèque Municipale, MS 764 (739) from the library of Saint-Vaast; Cambrai, Bibliothèque Municipale, MS 470 (441) from the cathedral library; and BSM, MS 42 (47) from the library of Saint-Vaast.

41

Saint-Bertin and merchants. This is why it is often suggested that the oldest Anglo-Saxon manuscripts in the library had been brought to Saint-Bertin by tenth- or eleventh-century visitors.20 Nevertheless, it cannot be ruled out that at least of some of the ancient manuscripts, especially those which were inserted as fragments in ninth- or tenth-century books, belong to the early period of the library. The Carolingian manuscripts The contents of the library of Saint-Bertin does not offer many surprises. Patristic works, hagiographic texts and Gospels were predominant. Augustine was undoubtedly the most strongly represented author in the collection, since his works are found in eight manuscripts: a treatise on the Trinity,21 sermons22 and a volume of miscellaneous works.23 After Augustine came Ambrose of Milan (Exposition on Luke,24 and one volume of miscellaneous works25 and Jerome (Breviary on the Psalter,26 On Matthew,27 On the minor prophets28 and On Ezechiel29). Bede’s commentaries were well represented, too (On the Pentateuch,30 On the Tabernacle,31 On Paul’s Epistles32). As far as the remains of a library can reflect its past content, the library of Saint-Bertin does not seem to have kept up with eighth-century intellectual fashions, since only two Carolingian authors are represented, in tenth-century copies: Smaragdus (Commentaries on the Gospels and Epistles),33 and Alcuin (On Grammar).34 The manuscript of De Grammatica was clearly a teaching tool since Alcuin’s text was copied together with a dialogued version of Cassiodorus’s own Grammar. Poetry was represented by Prudentius’s Carmina.35 The surviving books and the catalogue represent only a part – 20

21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35

On relations between Saint-Bertin (and Flanders in general) and England, see Ph. Grierson, ‘The Relations between England and Flanders before the Norman Conquest’, Transactions of the Royal Historical Society 4th series, 23 (1941), 71–112; Sims-Williams suggests that the Bath manuscripts (BSM, MSS 58 and 74) could have reached Saint-Bertin as late as the tenth or eleventh century (‘An Unpublished Anglo-Latin Letter’, p. 4), but there is no way to solve the problem. BSM, MS 51 (IX). S-O, MS 268 (X). BSM, MSS 48, 52, 60; S-O, MS 254 (IX) and 254 (X). BSM, MS 35 (IX). S-O, MS 72 (IX2). S-O, MS 15 (IX1). S-O, MS 33bis (IX). S-O, MS 279 (IX). BSM, MS 40 (X). BSM, MS 16bis (IX1). BSM, MS 18 (IX2, Corbie). S-O, MS 91 (IX1). BSM, MS 25 and S-O, MS 257 (X). S-O, MS 666 (X). S-O, MS 306 (X).

42

Cultural Life which is difficult to assess – of the texts available to the monks, as Folcuin’s mention of the visio Wittonis should remind us.36 Finally, there is no trace of classical authors among the works which have been preserved. This certainly does not mean that Saint-Bertin did not have classical works in the Carolingian period but, unlike Corbie and Saint-Amand, it was probably not an important center for classical studies. Folcuin’s command of classical Latin was far from perfect, although he knew such authors as Cicero and Virgil.37 Nevertheless, the early twelfth-century library catalogue mentions a number of classical poets: Juvenal, Horace, Ovid, Persius, Statius, Terence, Virgil. Cicero’s Rhetoric is also mentioned as well as a work by Sallust. Of course, since these manuscripts have disappeared it is impossible to know at what period they entered the library. The catalogue The catalogue of Saint-Bertin’s library contains 305 titles, sorted in approximate alphabetical order.38 Its first publisher, Dom Berthod, had seen the catalogue in a manuscript containing an appendix to Simon’s Gesta Abbatum. Berthod asserted that the catalogue dated from 1104.39 Unfortunately, the manuscript and the catalogue have disappeared, and with them any possibility for a new assessment. Nevertheless, its content gives credibility to the date.40 In the catalogue, as well as in the collection of surviving manuscripts, the Church Fathers, led by Augustine, prevail. Historical works stand in a good position too: Orosius’s Universal History, Bede’s Historia Ecclesiastica (gesta Anglorum), Gregory of Tours’ Historia Francorum (gesta Francorum), Paul the Deacon’s Historia Langobardorum (gesta Langobardorum), the Gesta Romanorum Pontificum, the Historia Tripartita, Josephus’s History of the Jewish Wars, and a Fabula et excidium Troiae. The catalogue – which also mentions a Rule of St Benedict, the Lex Salica, the Justinian code and more Carolingian works (by Alcuin, Paschasius Radbert, Smaragdus) – completes our vision of Saint-Bertin’s medieval library.

36

37 38 39

40

Folcuin, Gesta, c. 46, p. 614; the Visio Wettini was composed in 827 by Walahfrid Strabo, then a monk at Fulda. Walahfrid Strabo, Visio Wettini, ed. H. Knittel (Sigmaringen, 1986); see P. Godman, Poets and Emperors: Frankish Politics and Carolingian Poetry (Oxford, 1987), pp. 130–4. S. Vanderputten, ‘ “Literate Memory” and Social Reassessment in Tenth-Century Monasticism’, in Mediaevistik (forthcoming). Becker, Catalogi Bibliothecarum, pp. 181–4. A. Berthod, ‘Notice du cartulaire de Simon, manuscrit de la bibliothèque de Saint-Bertin’, Mémoires de l’Académie Impériale et Royale des Sciences et Belles Lettres de Bruxelles 5 (1788), 227–30. E. Lesne, Histoire de la propriété ecclésiastique en France, 4 vols. (Lille, 1909–1938), IV: Les Livres. ‘Scriptoria’ et bibliothèques (Lille, 1938), pp. 628–35.

43

Saint-Bertin

The scriptorium We have seen that Saint-Bertin’s oldest manuscripts came from the British Isles and Italy; there is no evidence that there was an active scriptorium at Saint-Bertin in pre-Carolingian times. The first reference to the fabrication of books by the monks themselves is found in a royal diploma of 800 in which Charlemagne granted the abbot and the monks of Sithiu hunting rights in the monastery’s woods. The diploma specifies that the monks use the skins of wild beasts to make gloves and book covers (‘ad volumina librorum tegenda’).41 Book production, especially of upper grade books, does not seem to have been steady or continuous, and different periods of activity can be determined. The first one corresponds to the abbacy of Fridugis (820–834). The second one takes place in the second half of the ninth century, when a series of de luxe manuscripts illuminated in the Franco-Saxon style was produced for export. The last period that I will examine here corresponds to the abbacy of Odbert (c. 986–1007). The ninth century According to Folcuin, the scriptorium of Saint-Bertin had been decaying for a long time when Guntbert, who entered Sithiu during Fridugis’s abbacy, resuscitated its activity (‘Nam monasterii huius libraria, quae pene omnia vetustate erant demolita, quoniam peritus erat scriba, propria renovavit industria’).42 Guntbert produced books for his own library as well as for export. He, himself, wrote three antiphonaries; he offered one to the canons of Saint-Omer and another to the community of Saint-Winnoc; the third one, which was the most beautiful, because it was richly illuminated with gold, he gave it to Saint-Bertin.43 Furthermore, Guntbert – probably assisted by his workshop – also wrote a computus for Saint-Bertin as well as many other books, which Folcuin does not name. Folcuin’s assertion that the activity of the scriptorium had been decaying for a long time is probably an overstatement, since a manuscript of St Augustine’s Retractations was written in the time of Abbot Nanthar (805–820).44 Nevertheless, it is not surprising that the activity of Saint-Bertin’s scriptorium was boosted during Fridugis’s abbacy. At Tours, where he had succeeded Alcuin as abbot, Fridugis had inherited a 41

Diplomata Belgica I, no. 20, pp. 39–40; hunting rights were confirmed again by Louis the Pious in 820 (Diplomata Belgica I, no. 25, pp. 46–7). 42 Folcuin, Gesta, c. 52, p. 615: ‘Indeed, thanks to his zeal, he restored the libraries of his monastery, which had been destroyed by the decay of their pens, because the art of writing had perished.’ On Guntbert: G. Coolen, ‘Guntbert de Saint-Bertin, Chronique des temps carolingiens’, Revue du Nord 40 (1958) (Mélanges Dédiés à la Mémoire de Raymond Monier), 213–24. 43 Folcuin, Gesta, c. 52, p. 615. 44 BSM, MS 44.

44

Cultural Life flourishing scriptorium; during his abbacy, not only did the scriptorium maintain its high quality production, but it also introduced artistic innovations.45 The antiphonaries and the computus written by Guntbert have unfortunately disappeared, but some of the other manuscripts produced by his workshop may still survive. The second discernible period of book production at Sithiu takes place in the second half of the ninth century and is represented by six de luxe manuscripts, richly decorated in the so-called Franco-Saxon style, which was characteristic of northern French manuscript production. The Franco-Saxon style, which was exclusively non-figurative, was essentially restricted to capitals, illuminated with interlace and animal heads painted in bright colors. The style, the result of the strong influence of Anglo-Saxon art on Carolingian renaissance illumination, developed in the second half of the ninth century and its earliest occurrence appears to have been at Saint-Amand.46 The origins and process of the development of the style is not easy to unravel since Carolingian illumination from the first half of the ninth century was already heavily influenced by Anglo-Saxon manuscript production. It is not, however, surprising that a style characterized by a mix of Anglo-Saxon and Carolingian features originated in Flanders. The starting point for the identification of this coherent group of manuscripts is Louis the German’s Psalter, now in the Staatsbibliothek in Berlin.47 Dedicated to ‘Hludovico regi’ (fol. 1v), the psalter contains a litany in which the names of St Bertin and St Omer are written in purple letters. The emphasis on the patron saints of Sithiu is the basis for the attribution of the psalter to this scriptorium. This argument is not above challenge, since many scriptoria produced books for export, the litanies or calendars of which were adapted to the recipient’s liturgical needs. Nevertheless, the paleographical and artistic characteristics of the manuscripts from the group of Louis the German’s Psalter set them apart from the production of other Franco-Saxon scriptoria. Furthermore, some of these characteristics are found in the manu45

See for example, Basle, Universitätsbibliothek, A.N. I.3, and Stuttgart, Würtembergische Landesbibliothek, HB.II.40, in Charlemagne. Oeuvre, rayonnement et survivances. Catalogue de l’exposition d’Aix-La-Chapelle, 26 juin – 19 septembre 1965 (Aachen, 1965), nn. 486 and 487; on the Tours scriptorium, see E. K. Rand, A Survey of the Manuscripts of Tours: Studies in the Script of Tours (Cambridge, 1929) and W. Koehler, Karolingischen Miniaturen, 3 vols. (Berlin, 1930–1933), I: Die Schule von Tours. 46 On the origins of the Franco-Saxon style, see K. Nordenfalk, ‘Ein karolingische Sakramentar aus Echternach und seine Vorlaüfer’, Acta Archaeologica 2 (1931), 207–44; C. R. Dodwell, The Pictorial Arts of the West: 800–1200 (New Haven, 1993), p. 74; on illumination at Saint-Amand, see A. Boutémy, ‘Le style franco-saxon, style de Saint-Amand’, Scriptorium 3 (1949), 260–4, and J. Deshusses, ‘Chronologie des grands sacramentaires de Saint-Amand’, RB 87 (1977), 230–7. 47 Berlin, Staatsbibliothek Preussischer Kulturbesitz, MS Theol. lat., fol. 58; see Charlemagne. Oeuvre, rayonnement et survivances, n. 488, and F. Mütherich and J. Gaehde, Karolingische Buchmalerei (Munich, 1976), p. 66, n. 17.

45

Saint-Bertin scripts from Odbert’s workshop, which suggests that he had access to similarly written and ornamented manuscripts in Saint-Bertin’s library. For these reasons, the attribution of Louis’ Psalter to Saint-Bertin is a plausible one. On paleographical and stylistic grounds, the Psalter has been dated from the second half of the ninth century.48 This date rules out Louis the Pious as benefactor of the gift and implies, rather, that it was dedicated to Louis the German. The manuscript may have been offered to Louis by Abbot Adalard when he betrayed Charles the Bald in his favor in 859.49 Stylistic and paleographical similarities link another psalter, now in the Wolfenbüttel Library, to the Berlin psalter.50 To these two manuscripts, should be added three Gospel books: one now in Prague,51 another in the Vatican library52 and the Porrentruy Gospels,53 which are more simply decorated than the psalters. That the scriptorium of Saint-Bertin produced such a coherent group of manuscripts in a short period of time shows that the scriptorium created manuscripts with a unified style of script and ornamentation. That all these manuscripts appear to have left Saint-Bertin at an early date suggests that they were produced for other communities or as high-status gifts.54 Book production during Odbert’s abbacy (986–1007) The next intensive period of book production at Saint-Bertin was the abbacy of Abbot Odbert.55 Sixteen manuscripts written and ornamented by Odbert

48 49 50 51 52 53

54

55

See Charlemagne. Oeuvre, rayonnement et survivances, but compare with K. Nordenfalk, ‘Ein karolingische Sakramentar’, p. 238. Folcuin, Gesta, c. 64, p. 619. Wolfenbüttel, Herzog August Bibliothek, MS 81. 17; see W. Milde, Mittelalterliche Handschriften der Herzog August Bibliothek Wolfenbüttel (Francfort, 1972), p. 34. Prague, Cathedral Library, B. 66; see Charlemagne. Oeuvre, rayonnement et survivances, n. 489. Rome, Bibliotheca Vaticana, Pal. Lat. 47. Porrentruy, Bibliothèque Municipale, MS 2; see A. Bruckner, ‘Das Evangelienbuch von St.-Ursanne’, Varia Codicologica. Essays Presented to G. I. Lieftinck (Amsterdam, 1972), pp. 17–24. For example, Louis the German’s psalter bears annotation by a late ninth-century hand from southern Germany, which shows that it had left Saint-Bertin directly after its production. On Odbert’s work, see most recently two unpublished dissertations: S. Lowry, ‘New York, Pierpont Morgan Library, M. 333, and Manuscript Illumination at the Monastery of Saint-Bertin under Abbot Odbert (98 – ca. 1007)’ (unpublished Ph.D. thesis, Columbia University, 1993) and C. Kelleher, ‘Illumination at Saint-Bertin at Saint-Omer under the Abbacy of Odbert’ (unpublished Ph.D. thesis, University of London, 1968). Kelleher has so far provided the most convincing list of manuscripts that can be attributed to Odbert. These two studies supersede the extensive research undertaken by André Boutémy: for example, A. Boutémy, ‘Un grand enlumineur du Xe siècle: l’abbé Odbert de Saint-Bertin’, Annales de la Fédération Archéologique et Historique de Belgique 32 (1947), 247–54; idem, ‘Influences carolingiennes dans l’oeuvre de l’abbé Odbert de Saint-Bertin’, in Karolingische und ottonische Kunst, ed. F.

46

Cultural Life and his workshop have been identified; they are recognizable thanks to their script and their decoration, figurative or not. It appears that between the group of Franco-Saxon manuscripts mentioned above and the time of Odbert, the production of the scriptorium had been curtailed. It is not impossible that manuscripts were still produced locally, but that they were neither decorated nor produced in a unified and recognizable house-style during this time. But the disappearance of manuscripts alone cannot be held responsible for the absence of tenth-century books identifiable as Saint-Bertin products. When Odbert and his team started to produce their own manuscripts, it is clear that the models they had at hand at the library dated from the ninth century. The most obvious example is the two copies made by Odbert of a manuscript of Germanicus’s translation of Aratus’s Phenomena (IX2), now in Leiden.56 The antiquity of Odbert’s models is also discernible through the many paleographical archaisms of his manuscripts as well as in his decorated initials, directly derived from the Franco-Saxon style which had flourished at Saint-Bertin more than a century earlier. These artistic and paleographical archaisms suggest not only that the production of the scriptorium remained stagnant during the tenth century, but also that Saint-Bertin was isolated from the artistic trends which had developed elsewhere (at Reims, Metz and in England, for example). It could be suggested that Odbert’s copying of ninth-century models was a deliberate choice, but his enthusiastic adoption, once confronted with it, of the Winchester style of illumination, which was flourishing in England at the time, shows his eagerness to adopt new models. At least two artists, probably from Canterbury, worked on Odbert’s manuscripts. One of them added marginal illustrations in a psalter which had been otherwise entirely decorated by Odbert.57 The other one painted all the decoration and illustration of a Gospel book, now in Boulogne (BSM 11);58 this painter is identified with the artist who drew the crucifixion in the Winchester psalter and the Evangelist portraits in the Anhalt Morgan Gospels from Saint-Vaast.59 Odbert tried to imitate the style of the Canter-

56

57

58 59

Steiner, Forschungen zur Kunstgeschichte und christlichen Archäologie 3 (Wiesbaden, 1957), pp. 427–33; idem, ‘Un monument capital de l’enluminure anglo-saxonne: le manuscrit 11 de Boulogne-sur-Mer’, Cahiers de Civilisation Médiévale 1 (1958), 179–82. MS Voss. Lat. Q. 79; Odbert made two copies of the Leiden Aratea: BSM, MS 188, and Bern, Bürgerbibliothek, Hs. 88; on the direct filiation between the Leiden manuscript and Odbert’s copies, see Aratea. Kommentar zum Aratus des Germanicus Ms. Voss. Lat. Q. 79, Bibliotheek der Rijksuniversiteit Leiden, ed. B. Bischoff (Luzern, 1989). BSM, MS 20; see V. Leroquais, Les psautiers manuscrits latins des biblothèques publiques de France, 3 vols. (Mâcon, 1940–1941), I, 94–101 and III, pls. XV–XXI; and G. Lobrichon, ‘Le psautier d’Odbert’, in Mise en page et mise en texte du livre manuscrit, ed. H.-J. Martin and J. Vezin (Paris, 1990), pp. 175–7. BSM, MS 11; Boutémy, ‘Un monument capital.’ BL, MS Harley 2904, fol. 3; New York, Pierpont Morgan Library, MS 827; H. Swarzenski, ‘The Anhalt Morgan Gospels’, Art Bulletin 31 (1949), 77–83.

47

Saint-Bertin bury artist; it is most visible in the Christ in Majesty in BSM 56 (fol. 35) which mimics the corresponding image in BSM 11 (fol. 10). Odbert is also to be credited with the illuminations in the Pierpont Morgan Gospel, which is distinctively Anglo-Saxon in style, and the painting of the manuscript containing Bertin’s Vita Altera and other liturgical texts from Saint-Bertin.60 While the figures in Odbert’s manuscripts were directly inspired by contemporary English trends, especially the exuberant draperies, their strictly delimited frames, derived from English manuscript style popular sixty years earlier, remained severe and disciplined.61 Despite the fact that Odbert’s art was the result of inspirations from the past (Franco-Saxon, Carolingian, older AngloSaxon style) and the present (Winchester style), it was innovative in many ways. His taste for historiated initials, which abound in many of his manuscripts, prefigures the Romanesque style; furthermore, the Boulogne psalter, because of the Christological nature of twenty-four of its historiated initials, figures as a precocious occurrence of the tradition of associating the life of Christ with the text of the psalter, a practice that flourished from the eleventh century onward.62 Unlike the group of luxurious Franco-Saxon manuscripts produced at Saint-Bertin in the ninth century, the group of Odbert’s manuscripts was not produced for export, since thirteen of the sixteen manuscripts remained at Saint-Bertin until the French Revolution.63 Unfortunately this period of artistic renaissance at Saint-Bertin corresponds to the source gap between the Gesta of Folcuin and the Gesta of Simon; hence the manuscripts are the only texts left from Odbert’s time. The absence of narrative sources could be blamed on the fires which had consumed part of the building during Odbert’s abbacy, and later, at the time of Roderic. If this were the case, however, the archives before Odbert’s time, such as Folcuin’s Gesta, as well as Odbert’s own books, would have been destroyed as well. It is most likely that archives were simply not carefully kept between 962 and 1020. We have seen that that period was politically troubled for Saint-Bertin and its region: Arnulf the Great’s successor, Arnulf II, had lost control of Boulonnais and Ternois, which were ceded to their legitimate heir, Arnulf, son of Arnulf I’s brother, Adalulf. Eventually, Baldwin IV (988–1035) regained control of northern Ternois and of Saint-Bertin; once Baldwin had re-conquered the 60 61 62 63

New York, Pierpont Morgan Library, MS 333, and BSM, MS 107. Dodwell, Pictorial Arts, p. 202. Dodwell, Pictorial Arts, p. 200. The Pierpont Morgan Gospels was in the chapter library of Beauvais cathedral by 1750; since this manuscript does not bear any identification mark from Saint-Bertin’s library it is possible that it had reached Beauvais at an early date: Lowry, New York, Pierpont Morgan Library, Ms. 333, pp. 12–13. Odbert’s copy of the Aratea, now in Bern, Bürgerbibliothek, Hs. 88, was a gift of Bishop Werinhars of Strasbourg (1001–1028) to Bern cathedral, which suggests that the Bern Aratea left Saint-Bertin soon after its fabrication; see Aratea. Kommentar zum Aratus, p. 13.

48

Cultural Life territorial and political authority of the counts of Flanders, he launched a campaign of religious reforms throughout his county, in collaboration with Richard of Saint-Vanne and his disciples. It is not accidental that, at Saint-Bertin, the renewal of interest in keeping archives and writing narratives – such as the Inventio and third vita of St Bertin – corresponds to the Benedictine restoration of the 1020s. The period during which archives were not kept and narratives were not written was certainly not an era of decay, however, as shown by Odbert’s admirable artistic production and the close relations that the abbot maintained with the archbishops of Canterbury. This observation is interesting because it raises questions about the respective roles of narrative and artistic production at Sithiu. At Saint-Bertin, narrative production was extremely polemical and answered the community’s need to assert its authority in face of religious or lay enemies. On the other hand, art was never used as a tool of secular politics – at least in the surviving manuscripts. In the eleventh century, the canons of Saint-Omer ordered an illuminated life of their patron saint, some illustrations of which clearly engaged in the polemic regarding the foundation story of their community.64 At Saint-Bertin, art production and narrative production did not coincide in time and purpose. In the following chapter I will examine the process of narrative production at Saint-Bertin.

64

S-O, MS 698; on this manuscript, see R. Argent Svoboda, ‘The Illustrations of the Life of St. Omer (Saint-Omer, Bibliothèque Municipale, Ms. 698)’ (unpublished Ph.D. thesis, University of Minnesota, 1983).

49

CHAPTER THREE

Narrative Production at Saint-Bertin

Introduction This chapter explores, through a detailed examination of the main narratives produced at Saint-Bertin from the ninth to the eleventh century, how the community transformed its historical tradition, and especially its foundation story, in order to turn it into a tool of propaganda. I will focus on the content and method of redaction of the texts themselves as well as on the local political background which led to their composition. This will highlight the goals pursued by the authors, their biases and the role played by each text within the community. It appears that all these texts are related to a situation of crisis, to which they were meant to bring resolution. The first group of studied narratives is the hagiographic texts: the first and second lives of St Omer (VA1 and VA2) and St Bertin (VB1 and VB2). I will examine how, in the VA2 and VB2, the monks of Saint-Bertin transformed the foundation legend of Sithiu in order to assert their patron saint’s prestige and their own supremacy over the two communities of Saint-Bertin and Saint-Omer. These new vitae are generally dated to the ninth century and are considered as a direct answer to Fridugis’s division of the community. I will argue, however, that they date from the tenth century, and that the Benedictine restoration of 944 was the event which triggered the monks to rewrite their foundation story. The second text studied is the Gesta Abbatum Sithiensium written by Folcuin in 962. An examination of Folcuin’s text and of the circumstances of its redaction reveals its two complementary purposes. Written in the aftermath of the Benedictine restoration, the Gesta closely follows and refines the new foundation story asserting St Bertin’s supremacy at Sithiu. Furthermore, given the context of Count Arnulf’s insistent intrusions into the community’s life, the Gesta also meant to offer the community protection against exactions from lay powers. The third text, the Inventio Sancti Bertini, written by Abbot Bovo in 1052, relates Bovo’s extraordinary discovery of St Bertin’s relics. Unlike the second vitae of Omer and Bertin and the Gesta Abbatum, which were highly popular within the community and were often quoted and copied, the Inventio found no audience within the community. I will demonstrate that the monks’ relative indifference was due to the fact that, contrarily to the other texts, which served the interests of the community and united it around a commonly accepted tradition, Bovo’s text 50

Narrative Production was self-serving and written for the author’s own rather than his community’s promotion. The analysis of these texts exemplifies how monastic communities composed texts in order to answer situations of crises, to protect them against their enemies or rivals, or to assert their own rights and power. If the text fulfilled its mission, the community accepted it as a unifying document, valued it as an asset and perpetuated its tradition through copying. If the text did not achieve these goals, the chances are that it was rarely echoed in the community’s later writings. Therefore, the examination of the narratives produced by the monks of Saint-Bertin reveals much about their aspirations and their needs as a community.

Hagiography: the foundation story and its transformation The main source for the origins and foundation of the monastery of Sithiu, and the earliest, is the hagiographic triptych containing the vitae primae of St Omer, St Bertin and St Winnoc. The three vitae were written in the ninth century by the same author and were intended as a coherent group of texts.1 Indeed, the three lives were copied together one after the other in a tenth-century manuscript.2 The vitae were also copied individually, since a ninth-century copy of the Vita Audomari Prima (VA1) alone was reproduced in a manuscript from the Corbie library.3 The triptych was probably written at the very beginning of the ninth century – some time before 820.4 The VA1 relates the life of St Omer. Born in the region of Coutances, he entered Luxeuil as an oblate during the abbacy of Eustasius. It was a former monk of Luxeuil, Acharius of Noyon, who advised King Dagobert that he should offer Omer the bishopric of Thérouanne.5 After some time, Omer called to his side three of his countrymen, Mummolinus, Ebertramn and Bertin, with whom he decided to found a monastery on the villa of Sithiu, 1

2

3

4

5

For the shared authorship of the three vitae, see L. van der Essen, Étude Critique, pp. 402–3. There are other such cases of vitae of distinct saints grouped into a single text: J. van der Straeten, ‘Les actes des martyrs d’Aurélien en Bourgogne’, Analecta Bollandiana 79 (1961), 115–44 and 447–68, and ‘Actes des martyrs d’Aurélien en Gaule’, Analecta Bollandiana 80 (1962), 116–41. KBR, MS 8318–8320; the origin of the manuscript, which had belonged to the Jesuit community of Molsheim in Alsace, is unknown; it also contains vitae of other saints related to Columbanian monasticism. Leningrad, Lat. F v I 12, fols. 99–106; VA1, copied in cursive minuscule, was bound in the ninth century with other vitae (Dionysius, Fulgentius, Marcellinus, Apollinaris, and Germanus) of different dates and origins; see Ganz, Corbie, pp. 47, 135 and 155. On the date of the triple vita, see Levison, Vitae Audomari, Bertini, Winnoci, p. 731, and L. van der Essen, Étude critique et littéraire sur les vitae des saints mérovingiens de l’Ancienne Belgique (Louvain, 1907), pp. 403–5. VA1, cc. 1–4, pp. 754–6.

51

Saint-Bertin which had been given to him by Adroald, a man he had converted and baptized.6 Mummolinus, Ebertramn and Bertin founded a first monastery, the Vetus Monasterium; however, after some time, they left the place and undertook a miraculous journey which led them to the location of what would eventually become the abbey of Saint-Bertin.7 Mummolinus was then appointed as abbot by Omer, but was replaced by Bertin when Mummolinus succeeded St Eligius (d. 660) as bishop of Noyon.8 The VA1 ends with the death of St Omer, his burial in Saint-Mary, which he had built on the upper side of Sithiu before the arrival of Bertin and his companions, and a few miracles performed at his shrine.9 While the VA1 contains a fair amount of biographical material about St Omer, the life that follows it, the Vita Bertini Prima (VB1), is only a succession of topoi, miracles performed by St Bertin before and after his death, and biblical quotations.10 There is no allusion to Rigobert and Erlefrid, who became abbots when Bertin, still alive but aging, wanted to retire from his abbatial obligations. His death, feast day and burial place are not mentioned either.11 The VB1 is directly followed by the Vita Winnoci Prima (VW1),12 which relates the arrival of the Breton Winnoc and his companions to Sithiu, and their foundation of a monastic community at Wormhoudt, on a piece of land which had been offered to St Bertin by a wealthy and pious landowner.13 In this hagiographic triptych, St Omer is clearly the most important character in the cycle, not only because of the prominence of his role in the foundation of Sithiu, but also because of the relative abundance of biographical details that the author was able to gather about him. As for St Bertin, he appears as a secondary character, whose biography is scant and who played a lesser role. After all, he owed his later status as patron saint of Sithiu to Mummolinus’s departure to Noyon. Indeed, it is worth pointing out that whenever Omer’s three companions, Mummolinus, Ebertramn and Bertin are mentioned together in the VA1, Bertin’ s name always comes last.14 Omer’s seminal role in the foundation of Sithiu is naturally reverberated in the hagiography intended for the community and in turn, his prominence in the narrative, and Bertin’s relative subordination, could also reflect the prominence of St Omer’s cult over St Bertin’s in the first centuries of Sithiu’s existence. 6 7 8

9 10 11 12 13 14

VA1, cc. 9–10, pp. 758–60. VA1, c. 11, pp. 760–1. VA1, c. 12, p. 761; VA1 does not specify that he succeeded Eligius but VB2 (St Bertin’s Vita Altera) wrongly states that Mummolinus succeeded Acharius; VB2 also asserts that, at about the same time, Ebertramn became abbot of Saint-Quentin (AA SS, 2 Sept., c. 6, p. 591). VA1, cc. 13–17, pp. 762–4. VB1, cc. 18–21, pp. 765–9. All these elements are provided by VB2, cc. 13–14, p. 592. VW1, cc. 22–8, pp. 769–75. VW1, c. 23, pp. 770–1 VA1, c. 9, p. 759, and c. 11, p. 760.

52

Narrative Production The relative silence about St Bertin, and his subordination to St Omer are corrected in the second vitae of St Omer (VA2) and St Bertin (VB2). Like the VA1 and VB1, the VB2 and VA2 were written by the same author, who closely followed the text of the VA1 and VB1, and only added, removed or switched parts of the narrative when it suited his purpose.15 A comparison between the first and the second vitae of Omer and Bertin will highlight the second author’s narrative technique.16 First, the author of the VA2 and VB2 has switched the order of the first lives: the VB2 precedes the the VA2, while the VA1 precedes the VB1.17 The VB2 is preceded by a long prologue in which the author announces that he will write about Omer and Bertin while the VA2 has only a brief prologue. The prologue of the VB2 is copied almost word for word from the prologue of the VA1, save that the author inserted a line emphasizing St Bertin’s possession of Sithiu: Quia igitur sancti viri loca regiminis sui discreta habuerunt, honeste gubernantes, sanctus videlicet Audomarus episcopatum tervennae; beatus vero Bertinus coenobium suum proprium Sithiu . . .18 (Thus, the holy men had command over distinct places, ruling them honestly: St Omer the episcopal see of Thérouanne; St Bertin, his own monastery of Sithiu.)

The VB2 begins with the arrival of St Bertin and his two companions in the bishopric of Thérouanne. This passage of the VB2 reverses the order of precedence and places Bertin’s name in first position:

15

Vita S. Audomari Altera (VA2) (BHL 767), AA SS, 3 Sept., pp. 402–6. On the arguments for a single authorship for VB2 and VA2, see Van der Essen, Étude critique, pp. 406–7. On the several vitae of St Omer, see J. Van der Straeten, ‘Les vies métriques de saint Omer’, Anal. Boll. 81 (1963), pp. 59–88. There is a verse version of VB2, which was written roughly at the same time as the prose vita, since their earliest copies are found in the same manuscript from Odbert’s scriptorium (BSM, MS 107): Vita Sancti Bertini Metrica Prior (BHL 1292), ed. F. Morand, Mélanges Historiques 1 (1873), pp. 573–697 (Collection de Documents Inédits sur l’Histoire de France). Another of Odbert’s manuscripts, the famous glossed psalter (BSM, MS 20), contains hymns to St Bertin: P. Stotz, ‘Zwei bisher unbekannte Hymnen auf den heiligen Bertinus’, Mittellateinisches Jahrbuch 24/25 (1989–1990), 489–505. 16 For a comparison between the two vitae, see also E. Spaey, ‘Over middeleeuwsche heiligenliteratuur’, Ons Geestelijk Erf 3 (1929), 291–303. 17 VB2 has a very long prologue, in which the author announces that he will write about both St Bertin and St Omer; VA2 has its own short prologue, but it seems that the long one was intended to encompass the two texts. 18 VB2, p. 591.

53

Saint-Bertin VA1:19 Post hoc non multo temporis intervallo ad beatum Audomarum de predicta Constantinense regione tres una cum mente viri, Mummolinus, Ebertramnus sanctusque Bertinus . . .

VB2:20 Cum sanctus Audomarus episcopus ecclesiam Morinensem regeret, . . . tres una cum mente de patria propria, id est Constantinense ad eum venerunt; sanctus videlicet Bertinus, Mummolinus, Ebertramnus . . .

Shortly after that, from the region of Coutances, three men with one spirit joined St Omer: Mummolin, Ebertramn and Bertin.

As St Omer was ruling the Church of Morinie, three men with one spirit joined him from his fatherland, Coutances: St Bertin, Mummolin and Ebertramn.

Even more striking is the change in the story of the foundation of Sithiu made in the narration of the donation by Adroald: VA1:21 sanctus Audomarus cum predictis beatis viri . . . monasterium cogitavit . . . fundare; ad abitandum enim monachis . . . locum abebat aptum. Erat enim quidam vir potens Adrowaldus nomine . . . quem beatus Audomarus . . . ad fidem convertit catholicam . . . Adrowaldus . . . nec ullum habens filium, magnam suae hereditatis partem . . . beato obtulit Audomaro, villam quae noto nomine vocatur Sithiu.

VB2:22 Interea, quidam vir nobilis, . . . Adroaldus nomine, nullum habens filium, tractare cum beato Audomaro et praedictis Dei famuli cepit, qualiter possessionum suarum Ecclesiam heredem faceret. Quem beatus Audomarus, inspirante gratia Spiritus sancti, hortatus est, ut sancto Bertino sociisque ejus . . . quaeque habere poterat, conferet, quatinus ibidem coenobium in honore beati Petri . . . construendo.

St Omer considered the foundation of a monastery with the above mentioned holy men; indeed, he possessed a place suitable to host monks. Indeed, there was a powerful man named Adroald, whom he had converted to the catholic faith. Adroald, as he had no son, gave St Omer an important part of his inheritance, the villa named Sithiu.

Meanwhile, a noble man named Adroald, as he had no son, started to negotiate with St Omer and the above mentioned servants of God, to bequeath his possessions to the Church. St Omer, inspired by the grace of the Holy Spirit, begged him to give what he had to St Bertin and his companions, in order for them to build a monastery dedicated to St Peter.

The transformation of the donation story is obvious: according to the VA1, Adroald had already given the villa Sithiu to Omer before the arrival of Omer’s three friends. In the VB2, Adroald first wanted to give his land to Omer, but the bishop of Thérouanne declined the offer and suggested rather that he give his villa to St Bertin and his friends. Furthermore, the author of 19 20 21 22

VA1, c. 9, pp. 758–9. VB2, c. 4, p. 591. VA1, c. 10, p. 759. VB2, c. 5, p. 591.

54

Narrative Production the VB2 significantly changed the chronology of the events following the donation. We have seen that in the VA1, the three men first settled in the Vetus monasterium, which they left after a while, and eventually established themselves on the small island of Sithiu; there, they founded a monastic community over which Mummolinus became the first abbot.23 In the VB2, the order of the events is remarkably different: as in the VA1, the three men first founded the Vetus Monasterium, but soon after, Mummolinus succeeded Acharius – in reality Eligius – as bishop of Noyon and Ebertramn was given the abbacy of Saint-Quentin. Left by himself, Bertin alone undertook the miraculous journey to the site of Sithiu and alone built a monastery dedicated to St Peter.24 This new version of the story omits the abbacy of Mummolinus and implicitly makes Bertin the first abbot of Sithiu; Bertin is also credited with finding the spot chosen by God for the foundation, since he was alone at the time. After the story of the foundation, the VB2 follows almost word for word the second chapter of the VB1.25 The last two chapters of the VB2 mention Bertin’s designation of his successors, Rigobert and Erlefrid, when he was still alive, and describes his death on 6 September and his burial in his monastery (‘in coenobio proprio’) – details which do not appear in the VB1.26 Since the purpose of the VB2 was obviously to introduce another version of the donation and foundation of Sithiu, in which the role played by St Bertin was much more important than in the VA1, it was necessary for the author to rewrite the vita of St Omer (VA2) as well, in order to maintain narrative coherence. The VA1 had been altered before by an author who, besides making a few stylistic changes, had appended a series of miracles (VA1bis); however, this interpolator did not alter the story of the foundation. It is on the VA1bis that the author of the VA2 based his own rendition of St Omer’s life.27 He proceeded with the VA2 as he did with the VB2: after a brief prologue of his own fabrication, he copied almost word for word the first eight chapters of the VA1. Of course, he omitted the chapters relating the arrival of Bertin and his friends, the donation of Sithiu and the foundation of the monastery which would have been redundant with the VB2. For the remainder of his composition he followed the VA1bis. The writing of the VB2 and the VA2 was not the only effort made by the monks of Saint-Bertin to rewrite the story of the foundation of Sithiu in a more flattering light for St Bertin: they also forged a charter presenting a similar rendition of the donation of Sithiu by Adroald. The donation charter is probably not a complete fabrication, since there is no reason to reject its

23 24 25

VA1, c. 11, p. 761. VB2, c. 6, p. 591; VA1 did not specify that the monastery was dedicated to St Peter. VB1, c. 19, pp. 765–7; however, c. 21 of VB1, relating another miracle performed on St Bertin’s shrine, is omitted. 26 VB2, cc. 13–14, p. 592. 27 Van der Essen, Étude critique, p. 405.

55

Saint-Bertin enumeration of the original donation. But the prologue, which repeats the story of Omer suggesting to Adroald that he give Sithiu directly to Bertin, has certainly been interpolated. Furthermore, the date of the charter, 6 September, has long been deemed suspicious because St Bertin’s feast is 5 September, a coincidence too good to be true.28 It is unfortunately impossible to determine whether it was the charter or the vita that inspired the other, but their interdependence is obvious.29 The rewriting of the foundation story through both the VB2 and the donation charter shows the importance that the monastic communities attached to the story of their origins. Indeed, a satisfying foundation legend was necessary for the community to assert its prestigious origins, the greatness of its patron saint and the legitimacy of its original endowment. In this regard, the legal and the hagiographic texts had a complementary role to play.30 The coexistence of two versions of the lives of St Omer and St Bertin raises the issue of the anteriority of one version over the other and their credibility. So far, I have taken it as obvious that the VA1 and VB1 are the oldest texts. First of all, there is internal evidence for this: Léon van der Essen had already remarked that in the VA2 Fuscianus and Victoricus, the alleged first evangelists of Morinie, were no longer said to be companions of St Denis (as in the VA1) but of St Lucian. This alteration suggests an awareness of the vita of St Denis written by Hilduin of Saint-Denis after 817, who identified Denis of Paris with Denis the Areopagite.31 Furthermore, the omission of Mummolinus as first abbot is not credible because he is incidentally quoted as predecessor of St Bertin in a privilege of Clovis III given in 690.32 But the best evidence of the posteriority of the VB2 over the triple vita is found in the text itself and the circumstances of its redaction. I have amply underlined that the VB2 purports to give St Bertin all the credit for the foundation of Sithiu. This makes sense only in a context in which the monks of Sithiu would have felt somewhat estranged from the cult of St Omer: that is, at least after Abbot Fridugis (820–834) had divided the community between monks and canons and, more precisely, after the Benedictine restoration of Gerard of Brogne in the mid-tenth century.

28 29

Levison, Vitae Audomari, Bertini, Winnoci, pp. 732–3. de Gaiffier, ‘Les revendications de biens’, p. 136, has long ago underlined the interdependence between hagiography and charter production in matters of property claims. 30 Kastner, Historiae Fundationum Monasteriorum, p. 9, shows the complementary and even interchangeable roles of foundation charter and narrative source relating the foundation, with the example of Berchtesgaden, where a lost or missing foundation charter was replaced in the monastery’s cartulary by a foundation story excerpted from a narrative text. 31 In this case, Denis could no longer be the Roman companion of Fuscianus and Victoricus; see Van der Essen, Étude critique, p. 406. 32 Diplomata Belgica 7, p. 19: ‘vir Bertinus abba . . . antecessore suo Mummolino . . .’

56

Narrative Production Although the division of the community between monks and canons did not immediately lead to the rewriting of the foundation story, it is the event that triggered the later conflicts of interest between the two communities. The division was related in some detail by Folcuin in the Gesta Abbatum Sithiensium (961). Folcuin reports that at the beginning of his abbacy, Fridugis undertook to divide the community between monks and canons: out of eighty-three monks serving the church of Saint-Bertin he kept only sixty, and in the church of Saint-Omer he replaced the forty monks with thirty canons; and as he was himself a canon, Fridugis went to live at Saint-Omer’s.33 Thus, Sithiu became a sort of double community, ruled until Gérard of Brogne’s reform by the same abbot who could be either a monk or a canon. At the same time, Fridugis constituted the mensa abbatum and the mensa fratrum: he kept some villae for himself – and his successors – and shared the remaining ones proportionally between monks and canons. Folcuin, who describes Fridugis as a greedy despot who purportedly destroyed the monks’ regular life, presents the operation in an extremely negative light. However, the move was probably not felt in this way at the time.34 Indeed, the creation of the mensa fratrum and the mensa abbatum as well as the division of the community between monks and canons were common features of the time and must be considered in the broader context of Louis the Pious’ ecclesiastical politics. First of all, the creation of the mensa fratrum, that is the dedication of a distinct part of the estates of a monastery for the exclusive use of the community, was above all a measure of protection for the monks. Louis the Pious needed the wealth of his monasteries to reward his followers; not only did he perpetuate the system of secular abbots, but from his reign date the first attested appointments of laymen to abbacies.35 At a time when abbeys were commonly given as benefits to the ruler’s close allies, the mensa fratrum granted the monks an indefeasible income.36 The selection of the abbots by the king was in blatant violation of the Benedictine Rule; nonetheless secular and lay abbots were not always a nuisance and were sometimes even appreciated by the communities they ruled.37 At Sithiu, the constitution of the

33 34

Folcuin, Gesta, c. 47, p. 614. On the significance of Fridugis’s division of the community of Saint-Bertin and Folcuin’s interpretation, see B. Meijns, ‘Chanoines et moines à Saint-Omer. Le dédoublement de l’abbaye de Sithiu par Fridogise (820–834) et l’interprétation de Folcuin (vers 962)’, Revue du Nord 83, no. 342 (2001), 691–705. 35 R. McKitterick, The Frankish Kingdoms, p. 122. 36 On this plus references, B. Meijns, ‘Chanoines et moines’, p. 699. 37 For example, at Saint-Bertin Abbot Hilduin, who was a canon and had bought the abbacy from Charles the Bald, was fondly remembered by the Gesta Abbatum; indeed, his privileged relationship with Charles earned Sithiu several royal diplomas; on lay abbots, see F. Felten, Äbte und Laienäbte im Frankenreich. Studie zum Verhältnis von Staat und Kirche im früheren Mittelalters (Stuttgart, 1980); idem, ‘Laienäbte in der Karolingerzeit. Ein Beitrag zum Problem des Adelsherrschaft über

57

Saint-Bertin mensa fratrum, itself made of two distinct parts, one (one third) for the maintenance of the canons of Saint-Omer and one (two thirds) for the monks of Saint-Bertin, was thus a common feature of Church management at the time. As for the division of the community between monks and canons, it was certainly not an attack on regular monastic life, but the consequence of councils held at Aachen in August 816 and July 817 which resulted in the promulgation of a set of decrees imposing strict obedience of the Benedictine Rule on the monks throughout the Frankish realm.38 The Institutio canonicorum and the Institutio sanctimonialium were issued for the canons and canonesses 39 The separation of canons, living at Saint-Omer, and monks, living at Saint-Bertin, is repeated in other communities, such as Saint-Hilaire at Poitiers and Saint-Martin at Tours, which used to be considered monastic communities or whose status was already ambiguous, became houses of canons.40 At Saint-Hilaire at Poitiers the brethren willing to follow the Benedictine Rule were gathered in the dependent cella of Nouaillé.41 Cormery was a dependent cella of Saint-Martin, which Alcuin had endowed and filled with monks from Aniane; when Saint-Martin opted for the ordo canonicus, Fridugis appointed Cormery to the use of those who wanted to follow the Rule.42 As for the fact that canons were introduced for the first time at Saint-Bertin by Fridugis, this seems doubtful. Before and after Benedict of Aniane’s reform, the distinction between the ordo monasticus and the ordo canonicus had always been more theoretical than real. Many communities

38

39

40

41 42

die Kirche’, in Mönchtum, Episkopat, Adel zur Gründungszeit des Klosters Reichenau, ed. A. Borst (Sigmaringen, 1974), pp. 397–432; A-M. Helvétius, ‘L’abbatiat laïque comme relais du pouvoir royal aux frontières du royaume: le cas du Nord de la Neustrie au IXe siècle’, in La royauté et les élites, pp. 285–99. Synodi I: Aquisgranensis Acta Praeliminaria, Statua Murbacensia, Aquisgranensis Decreta Authentica (816) and Synodi II: Aquisgranensis Decreta Authentica (817), in Corpus Consuetudinum Monasticarum, ed. J. Semmler (Sieburg, 1963), I: Initia Consuetudinis Benedictinae, pp. 423–68; on the divergence between the Benedictine Rule and the 816–817 decrees, see J. Semmler, ‘Benedictus II: una regula – una consuetudo’, in Benedictine Culture 750–1050, ed. W. Lourdaux and D. Verhelst (Leuven, 1983), pp. 1–49 (pp. 30–41). Concilia Aevi Karolini, ed. A. Werminghoff, 2 vols. (Hanover, 1906–1908) I: ‘Institutio canonicorum Aquisgranensis’, pp. 307–420, and ‘Institutio sanctimonialium Aquisgranensis’, pp. 420–56. On the history of the canonical order and its development in Flanders, see most recently B. Meijns, Aken of Jerusalem? Het Ontstaan en de Hervorming van de Kanonikale Instellingen in Vlaanderen tot circa 1155 (Leuven, 2000). Semmler, ‘Benedictus II’, pp. 13–17; at Saint-Denis until Abbot Hilduin, at Saint-Martin and at Saint-Hilaire, for example, the major part of the communities did not accept the reform. Therefore, the minority of monks who wanted to follow the Rule were sent in a cella belonging to the community (Nouaillé for Saint-Hilaire, Cormery for Saint-Martin); on Nouaillé, see L. Levillain, ‘Les origines du monastère de Nouaillé’, Bibliothèque de l’Ecole des Chartes 71 (1910), 241–79. Semmler, ‘Benedictus II’, p. 15. On Fridugis’s abbacy at Tours, see Felten, Äbte und Laienäbte, pp. 245–6.

58

Narrative Production followed their own Regula mixta and did not want to give up their local tradition, which, after 816, automatically relegated them in the category of canons, even if they considered themselves monks.43 The appellation ‘monks’ and ‘canons’ was not clearly settled either. In 802, Charlemagne had already written to the community of Tours: ‘sometimes you call yourselves canons, sometimes monks, sometimes neither’.44 There are reasons to believe that the situation at Sithiu was as ambiguous as it was at Tours, and the observance of the monks gathered around Saint-Bertin and Saint-Omer was probably not as clear as Folcuin implied. While the division at Sithiu theoretically sanctioned a geographical split between two different religious lifestyles, it did not result in its division into two distinct houses: despite the distribution of manses and revenues between monks and canons, Sithiu remained a single landholding unit, as is manifestly clear from the donation charters which were always, before and after the division, made in the names of St Omer and St Bertin.45 Furthermore, until the mid-tenth century, when Gerard of Brogne restored the Benedictine Rule at Sithiu, monks and canons shared the same abbot, who could be a monk or, more often, a canon. In these conditions, it is difficult to imagine that the monks within the community remained strict adherents of the Benedictine rule. The difference between the two groups’ religious practice must have faded, even though, in accordance with the 816–817 decrees, a larger role was 43

See J. Semmler, ‘Mönche und Kanoniker im Frankenreiche Pippins III und Karls des Großen’, in Untersuchungen zu Kloster und Stift (Göttingen, 1980), pp. 78–111 (pp. 85–95), who emphasizes that these communities switched so easily from the status of monks to canons because they had always followed their own Regula mixta and were thus already departing from strict Benedictine observance; see also A-M. Helvétius’s remarks in Abbayes, évêques et laïques, pp. 204–8. 44 Epistolae Karolini Aevi, 42, ed. E. Dümmler (Berlin, 1895), ep. 247, pp. 399–40; see J. Chelini, ‘Alcuin, Charlemagne et Saint-Martin de Tours’, in Mémorial de l’année martinienne, M.DCCCC.LX–M.DCCCC.LXI, seizième centenaire de l’abbaye de Ligugé, centenaire de la découverte du tombeau de Saint Martin à Tours (Paris, 1962), pp. 19–50 (p. 42); on Saint-Martin, its abbots and its religious practice, see Felten, Äbte und Laienäbte, pp. 229–46. 45 The early charters given to Sithiu as the monastery built in honor of Saints Peter and Paul, St Martin and the Virgin Mary; after the creation of the mensa fratrum and the division between monks and canons, ninth-century donation charters and royal privileges were still given to the monastery of Sithiu, ‘where lay St Bertin and St Omer’, that is, without distinction between canons and monks; on all this, see Meijns, ‘Chanoines et moines’. Nonetheless, in his recent study on Folcuin’s Gesta Abbatum Sithiensium, Laurent Morelle has noticed that, after the division, redactors of private charters tended to equate Sithiu with the denomination Saint-Peter, implying that the monks had a sort of leadership over Sithiu: L. Morelle, ‘Ecrit diplomatique et archives monastiques (France septentrionale, VIIIe–XIIe siècle). Dossier présentéd devant l’Université de Paris I – Panthéon-Sorbonne en vue d’obtenir l’Habilitation à diriger des Recherches. Mémoire: Autour de Folcuin de Saint-Bertin’ (unpublished Accreditation thesis, Paris, 2001), pp. 126–34 (hereafter quoted as ‘Autour de Folcuin’). I thank the author for kindly giving me access to his manuscript.

59

Saint-Bertin given to the praepositus, who was supposed to be a regular monk, chosen within the community.46 The fading of the boundaries between the monks’ and the canons’ practice, the geographical proximity of the two groups and their unity under a single abbot makes it unlikely that the monks would have been tempted to depart from the common historical tradition of the community. Furthermore, they probably would not have had the freedom to rewrite the foundation story of Sithiu in a way which downplayed St Omer’s role. The actual consequences of the splitting of the community were not sufficient to warrant the creation of the VB2 and VA2 and the forged donation charter. Furthermore, no material elements exist to show that the text directly followed the division: the earliest copy of the charter is found in the Gesta Abbatum Sithiensium (962) and the earliest manuscript of the VB2 dates from Odbert’s abbacy, at the turn of the tenth century.47 It is thus necessary to turn to another event which could have stimulated the writing of these – and other – forgeries. The general disinterest in the Benedictine Rule discussed above was one of the reasons that triggered Gerard of Brogne’s series of Benedictine restorations in Flanders and Lotharingia. At Sithiu, while Arnulf of Flanders was count-abbot, Gerard himself bore the title of abbot, and regular abbots were designated after him; in addition, from the time of Gerard on, this regular abbot was distinct from the dean of Saint-Omer. The establishment of two distinct rulers underlined more clearly the separation of the two communities than any divisions made by Fridugis. It is, however, likely that once each community of Sithiu had its own ruler and its own rule, the geographical and spiritual divisions deepened. Furthermore, the community of Saint-Bertin as a whole was not happy with Gerard’s intervention; those who stayed were thus the most ardent supporters of the Rule. As Benedictine monks, these supporters of Gerard’s not only felt spiritually superior to the canons of Saint-Omer, but they also considered themselves the legitimate successors of the monks of Sithiu. Furthermore, this ultimate separation meant that the monks could no longer be associated with St Omer, whose cult had long been predominant over the cult of St Bertin. The loss of control over the cult of St Omer and its revenues, coupled with a heightened sense of their own identity and superiority, may have encourage the monks of Saint-Bertin to produce texts which asserted the anteriority and superiority of their community. The VB2 and VA2, which relegate St Omer to the role of mere intermediary and transform St Bertin into the beneficiary of the villa of Sithiu and its first abbot, fulfilled the monks’ need to assert their ownership and authority over the whole territory of Sithiu – and hence over the canons, their church and their saint.

46 47

See Semmler, ‘Mönche und Kanoniker’, p. 92. BSM, MS 107.

60

Narrative Production Since the mid-tenth century, two contradictory versions of the foundation of Sithiu coexisted: all further historiographic and historical texts composed by the monks followed the VB2 and the donation charter, which gave a seminal role to Bertin, while the canons built their later writing upon the tradition of Omer’s VA1, in which Omer’s role as initiator of the foundation was emphasized. The third life of St Bertin (VB3), written by the monk Folcard on the occasion of the invention of St Bertin’s relics by Abbot Bovo in 1050, reflects once again that preoccupation of the monks: its author, follows the story line of the VB2, but invented new biographical details for St Bertin; for example, the VB3 asserts that Bertin was a monk of Luxeuil and, like St Omer, a disciple of Eustasius.48

Folcuin’s Gesta Abbatum Sithiensium Folcuin was born around 935 in a Lotharingian aristocratic family from the diocese of Liège; he descended from Charles Martel through his illegitimate son Jerome.49 His family had long had strong links with the monastery: the brother of his great-grandfather was St Folcuin, bishop of Thérouanne (817–855), who was buried at Saint-Bertin. In 928, at the time of Count-Abbot Adalulf, Folcuin’s father initiated the elevation of St Folcuin’s relics.50 Given these strong family links, it was quite natural that Folcuin was made an oblate of Saint-Bertin by his parents, Folcuin and Thiedala (in 948) and was professed in 961.51 Folcuin wrote the Gesta in 962 but did not stay at Saint-Bertin for long: in December 965, he was designated abbot of Lobbes by Eracle, bishop of Liège, and on 1 January, he was ordained by Bishop Ingelram of Cambrai.52 Folcuin ruled Lobbes for twenty-four years, until his death in 990.53 During his abbacy, he wrote the vita of St Folcuin, which he dedicated to the community and the abbot of Saint-Bertin, Walter; he also wrote the gesta of the abbots of Lobbes. In order to fully reconstruct the text of the Gesta Abbatum Sithiensium,it is necessary to piece together a number of editions and manuscripts. A very old

48 49

50 51 52

53

VB3, c. 8, p. 605. On Folcuin, see E. Brouette, ‘Folcuin’, in DHGE 17 (Paris, 1971), cols. 744–749, and Vanderputten, ‘Literate Memory’; on his family, see Le Jan, Famille et pouvoir, pp. 260 and 454. Folcuin, Vita Folcuini, c. 3, p. 427; Folcuin, Gesta, c. 104, p. 627. Folcuin, Gesta, c. 104, p. 627. Folcuin, Gesta, c. 107, p. 629. Folcuin, Gesta Abbatum Lobbiensium, ed. G. H. Pertz MGH SS 4 (Hanover, 1851), pp. 52–74 (c. 28, p. 69). On Folcuin’s abbacy at Lobbes, see Dierkens, Abbayes et chapitres, pp. 120–4. Dierkens, Abbayes et chapitres, p. 124. On narrative production at Lobbes, see A. Dierkens, ‘La production hagiographique à Lobbes au Xe siècle’, RB 93 (1983), 245–59.

61

Saint-Bertin copy of the Gesta, which may have been Folcuin’s autograph, survived in Saint-Bertin’s archives until the French Revolution; it is known as the Vetus Folcuinus. This manuscript has now disappeared, but it was copied by Joseph Dewitte, the last archivist of the abbey, before the Revolution (S-O 815). Joseph Dewitte’s copy of the Gesta was not the first one. Folcuin’s text had also been copied in the twelfth century together with its continuation by Simon of Saint-Bertin (BSM 146 and 146a). This manuscript contains a series of forged charters which were not in the Vetus Folcuinus. Between 1509 and 1512, the monk Alard Tassard made a partial copy of the Gesta, following the Vetus Folcuinus (S-O 750). In 1693, Bertin Portebois made yet another copy from the Vetus Folcuinus and the twelfth-century manuscript (Paris, BN, MS Latin, nouv. acq., 275).54 The text was published for the first time in 1840 by Benjamin Guérard under the title Cartulaire de l’abbaye de Saint-Bertin; Guérard unfortunately relied without criticism on the twelfth-century copy and his edition is extremely unreliable.55 In 1841, Oswald Holder-Egger provided the MGH with an edition of the narrative part of the text, but did not include the charters.56 In 1950, Maurits Gysseling and A. C. F. Koch published the charters alone in Diplomata Belgica. And finally, the early ninth-century polyptych included by Folcuin in his Gesta was published separately by François-Louis Ganshof in 1975. Thus, Folcuin’s Gesta is now scattered into distinct editions, which does not do justice to the breadth, purpose, complexity and originality of the original document. How did Folcuin construct the Gesta Abbatum Sithiensium? Regarding his sources, Sithiu had a fairly well-furnished library, and Folcuin would have found there works to provide him with the historical background necessary for his narrative. For the general history of the Merovingian period he used Pseudo-Fredegar and the Liber Historiae Francorum.57 For the Carolingian period, he used the Annales Bertiniani (830–882) and the Annales Sithienses (532–823). The Annales Bertiniani were written at Reims, and the manuscript was probably brought from there to Saint-Bertin by Abbot Fulk during his second abbacy.58 The Annales Sithienses were copied by a single hand into a

54

55 56 57

58

On the manuscript tradition of the Gesta Abbatum Sithiensium, see Diplomata Belgica, pp. 2–3; Ganshof, Le polyptyque de l’abbaye de Saint-Bertin, pp. 1–5 and, most recently, Morelle, Autour de Folcuin, pp. 2–33. Cartulaire de l’abbaye de Saint-Bertin, ed. B. Guérard, Collection de Documents pour Servire à l’Histoire de France (Paris, 1840). Folcuin, Gesta. Fredegar, Chronicorum Liber Quartus cum Continuationibus, ed. and trans. J. M. Wallace-Hadrill, The Fourth Book of the Chronicle of Fredegar (London, 1960); Liber Historiae Francorum, ed. B. Krusch, MGH SRM 2 (Hanover, 1888), pp. 215–328. The original has disappeared, but a copy was made at Saint-Bertin in the eleventh century; see the most recent comments in The Annals of Saint-Bertin, trans. J. Nelson, Ninth-Century Histories 1 (Manchester, 1991).

62

Narrative Production manuscript of works by St Augustine which had been given to Saint-Bertin in the ninth-century. These annals run from 532 to 823, but the scribe had already written down dates for entries up to the year 859.59 The origin of these annals, which are closely related to the Annales Fuldenses, is unknown, but they were probably not copied at Saint-Bertin. They mainly concern themselves with the politics of the reigns of Pippin, Charlemagne and Louis the Pious and never mention Saint-Bertin itself.60 Folcuin, however, did use another set of annals, which were copied at Saint-Bertin and were more local in scope than the Annales Sithienses. These annals have disappeared, but they were used by Folcuin and the annalist of Saint-Peter at Ghent. Therefore, their content can be mapped by comparing the Gesta Abbatum Sithiensium and the annals of Saint-Peter.61 Folcuin also used the second life of St Bertin (VB2) and the forged donation charter of 649. He knew the first life of St Winnoc (VW1), which follows the first vitae of St Omer and St Bertin (VA1 and VB1) – which suggests that he probably knew the VA1 and the VB1 as well. The most important and recurrent source of the Gesta are the forty-eight charters, dated from 649 to 890, which Folcuin interspersed throughout his narrative. Since each abbot had at least one charter dated from his abbacy, the charters allowed Folcuin to reconstruct the succession of the abbots; but it is very likely that he also had a list. He also copied the polyptych gathered at the time of Abbot Adalard (844–859). Oral traditions, which are extremely difficult to track, must also have played some role. And of course, Folcuin, who entered Saint-Bertin in 948, was a living witness of the last fifteen years of his narrative. Folcuin used annals, vitae and charters as sources, but he chose the format of the Gesta, which had the advantage of combining the characteristics of all three genres. Gesta Abbatum – and gesta Episcoporum – is a genre that is not easy to classify or categorize. Because they chronicle the deeds of the abbots, they can be considered as historical works; but because they also reproduce the texts of the charters associated with each abbot, they can also be read as legal documents. Indeed, the word gesta bears the double meaning of ‘deed’ and ‘public record.’ Furthermore, the gesta are often strongly permeated with hagiographic and even liturgical texts.62 The genre of gesta finds its origins in 59

Annales Sithienses, ed. G. Weitz, MGH SS 13 (Hanover, 1881), pp. 34–8; according to a dedicace on the first folio, the manuscript, BSM, MS 48, was given to Saint-Bertin in the ninth century (see Annales Sithienses, p. 34, n. 1). 60 Annales Fuldenses, ed. F. Kurze, MGH SRG (Hanover, 1891); see also The Annals of Fulda, trans. T. Reuter, Ninth-Century Histories 2 (Manchester, 1992). 61 Grierson, Les Annales, p. XVII. 62 On the genre of gesta, see Sot, Gesta Episcoporum, Gesta Abbatum, pp. 17–19. See also the examples in R.-H. Bautier ‘L’historiographie en France aux Xe et XIe siècles’, pp. 809–16; P. Geary, ‘Entre gestion et gesta’, in Les Cartulaires, pp. 13–26, and B.-M. Tock, ‘Les textes non diplomatiques dans les cartulaires de la province de Reims’, in Les Cartulaires, pp. 45–58.

63

Saint-Bertin the Gesta Pontificalis, the deeds of the successive popes and the gifts made by and to them.63 The twelfth-century book-list from Saint-Bertin mentions the Gesta Romanorum Pontificum, and the text may well have been there in Folcuin’s time. But the more immediate model behind Folcuin’s use of gesta was probably the ninth-century gesta of the abbots of Saint-Wandrille.64 There are reasons to believe that Saint-Bertin owned a copy of the Gesta of Fontenelle; indeed, those Gesta were closely linked to a set of hagiographic texts, the vitae of Sts. Wandrille, Ansbert and Wulframn. All these texts exist together in one eleventh-century manuscript, and its archetype may have been at Saint-Bertin, since copies of the vitae were made there in the tenth and eleventh centuries.65 Both the Gesta and the hagiographic texts from Fontenelle are deeply concerned with landholding and immunity. Ferdinand Lot has counted references to sixty-three charters, fifty-one of them from the Gesta, but unlike the Gesta of Saint-Bertin, the Gesta of Fontenelle does not include full-text charters. Ian Wood has also noticed the concerns of the Fontenelle authors with the observance and quality of the Benedictine Rule followed in the monastery.66 Fontenelle’s combining of Gesta and hagiography and its preoccupation with landholding and religious life are mirrored in Folcuin’s Gesta Abbatum Sithiensium. Fontenelle’s text – although written more than a century earlier and with a different agenda – must have been an inspiring model for Folcuin. It is also noteworthy that the author of the famous Le Mans forgeries used a similar combination of Gesta augmented with charter evidence and hagiographic texts to advance a dubious claim – in this case, the control of the monastery of Saint-Calais by the bishopric of Le Mans.67 Thus, the gesta, because of their multiple nature – narrative, hagiographic and legalistic – were a convenient tool for early medieval authors attempting to promote their institution’s claims to property and spiritual authority. The adoption of this genre by Folcuin, however, was not the most obvious of choices. Although the Gesta became very popular in the eleventh century, 63 64 65

66 67

Sot, Gesta Episcoporum, p. 17; see for example The Lives of the Ninth-Century Popes, ed. and trans. R. Davis (Liverpool, 1995). Gesta Sanctorum Patrum Fontanellensis Coenobii, ed. F. Lohier and J. Laporte (Rouen and Paris, 1931). S-O, MS 764; on the influence of Fontenelle’s gesta on Folcuin, see H. van Werveke, ‘Saint-Wandrille et Saint-Pierre de Gand (IXe–Xe siècles)’, in Miscellanea Mediaevalia in Memoriam Jan Frederick Niermeyer (Groningen, 1967), pp. 79–92; on the Gesta of Saint-Wandrille, see F. Lot, Études critiques sur l’abbaye de Saint-Wandrille, Bibliothèque de l’École des Hautes Études 204 (Paris, 1913), pp. 3–12, and I. Wood, ‘Saint-Wandrille and its Historiography’, in Church and Chronicle in the Middle Ages. Essays Presented to John Taylor, ed. I. Wood and G. A. Loud (London, 1991), pp. 1–14. Wood, ‘Saint-Wandrille’, pp. 8–9. On the Le Mans forgeries, see W. Goffart, The Le Mans Forgeries: A Chapter from the History of Church Property in the Ninth Century, Harvard Historical Studies 76 (Cambridge, Mass., 1966).

64

Narrative Production only a few examples were produced before this, and, since these texts were most likely limited to a very local audience, except for the Gesta of SaintWandrille, they were probably unknown to Folcuin.68 Steven Vanderputten has effectively brought to light the innovative aspects of Folcuin’s discursive method. Instead of merely aligning transcriptions of charters in chronological order – as did the author of the Liber Traditionum of Saint-Peter’s Ghent – Folcuin put the charters in context, introducing and commenting upon them in the numerous narrative sections. This was a first step toward complex historical narratives meant to explain, rather than merely document, the construction of a community in all aspects of its personality.69 A careful examination of the Gesta Abbatum Sithiensium reveals Folcuin’s two main goals: on the one hand, the recording of Sithiu’s historical tradition – and the promotion of the pro St Bertin version of the foundation as it had been developed in the VB2 – and, on the other, the recording of assertion of the abbey’s rights against possible exactions by the count of Flanders. In the introduction of the Gesta, Folcuin, following the VB2, asserts that St Bertin was the founder and first abbot of Sithiu: In hoc codice gesta abbatum Sithiensis cenobii depromere cupientes vel possessionum traditiones, quae a fidelibus sub uniuscuiusque illorum tempore sacro huic loco cum cartarum inscriptione sunt concessae, describere volentes, a primo ipsius loci structore domno Bertino abbate operis huius exordium sumamus.70 (In this book, wanting to relate the deeds of the abbots of Sithiu and wishing to describe the donations of possession made by the faithful to this sacred place by means of charters at the time of each of them, with Christ’s help, we have begun the work starting with Saint Bertin, first abbot and founder of this place.)

Then, in the first chapter, he undertakes to tell the story of Adroald’s donation in the version given by the VB2 – indeed, Folcuin refers to a vita of St Bertin (‘velud in Gestis almi patris Bertini legitur’) – and inserts Adroald’s forged donation charter.71 Folcuin deliberately chose the version of the VB2 over the version of the VA1, although he probably knew both lives – certainly, he knew the third part of the original hagiographic triptych, the VW1.72 That Folcuin chose the version of the foundation which made St Bertin the first abbot is also 68

69 70 71 72

When he wrote the Gesta Abbatum Sithiensium Folcuin did not know Flodoard’s Historia Remensis Ecclesiae, which was also known as Gesta Remorum Pontificum, but he had seen it at Reims before writing the Gesta of Lobbes; see Sot, Gesta Episcoporum, p. 40. Vanderputten, ‘Literate Memory’. Folcuin pushed the narrative method even further in the Gesta Abbatum Lobiensium. Folcuin, Gesta, p. 607. Diplomata Belgica, no. 1, p. 5. Folcuin, Gesta, c. 11, p. 610.

65

Saint-Bertin coherent with the bitter feelings he expressed toward the canon Fridugis, responsible for the splitting of the community between monks and canons. Another politically charged episode told by Folcuin is the alleged submission of the canons to the monks in the ninth century. Folcuin relates in chapter 57 of the Gesta that Abbot Hugh (830–844) had submitted the canons to the authority of the monks and delegated the custody of both the lower monastery and Saint-Omer to the monks of Saint-Bertin.73 If this affirmation proves to be true, this would suggest that the division of the community had been contested as early as the time of Fridugis’s successor. The alleged episode was the object of forgeries and later additions to the original text of the Gesta. The Vetus Folcuinus originally contained only one paragraph on the subject: Hugo abbas . . . postquam locum hunc sua constitutione laudabiliter stabilivit, qua et canonicos Sancti Audomari monachis Sancti Bertini etiam per describtionem capitularem iuste subjugavit monachumque ab inferius monasterium ad Sancti Audomari custodiam deputavit, . . .74 (Abbot Hugh . . . commendably strengthened this place thanks to his constitutio by which, by means of a charter, he subjected the canons of SaintOmer to the monks of Saint-Bertin and rightly entrusted a monk of the lower monastery with the custody of Saint-Omer.)

‘Per describtionem capitularem’ suggests that Folcuin knew of a charter confirming Hugh’s initiative; but Folcuin, who always copied charters after the relevant paragraph of the Gesta did not insert the text in this case. It may be that he knew of its existence only by hearsay. However, a charter given by Hugh on 29 June 839 was inserted out of chronological order in the Vetus Folcuinus. Since the Vetus Folcuinus survives only in its eighteenth-century copy by Charles-Joseph Dewitte, Saint-Bertin’s last archivist, it is difficult to determine when Hugh’s charter was inserted; but Dewitte’s comments suggest that the document did not belong to Folcuin’s original text.75 This charter relates how Fridugis had expelled the monks from Saint-Omer’s basilica to replace them with canons, and how Hugh gave the control of the basilica back the monastic community and entrusted St Omer’s custody to a monk. He also ordered that the monks were to celebrate a solemn mass in the basilica four times a year, and he restated, in accordance with Omer’s privilege cum epistola, that the monks were to hold the basilica ‘in perpetuo perenni jure’. This charter was written, so it was claimed, so that the monks would be protected from the envy of the canons.76 A copy of the Gesta was 73 74 75 76

Folcuin, Gesta, c. 57, p. 617. Folcuin, Gesta, c. 57, p. 617. Ch.-J. Dewitte, Grand Cartulaire, S-O, MS 803; see Folcuin, Gesta, c. 53, p. 616. The charter is published in Cartulaire de Saint-Bertin, pp. 87–8; Gysseling and Koch did not include it in their Diplomata Belgica edition.

66

Narrative Production made at the end of the twelfth century (BSM, MS 146a); this later copy contains Hugh’s charter in proper chronological order, plus a new paragraph on the same issue, which was added to Folcuin’s original text: Eodem tempore predictus Hugo abbas condolens infelicissimae et miserrimae divisioni et discissioni venerabilis Sithiensis coenobii ab infando Fridogiso factae, a domno Folquino tunc Morinorum venerabili antistite unitatem coenobiorum pristino more reformari impetravit. Quod est privilegio firmari fecit.77 (In the same period, the above mentioned Abbot Hugh, saddened by the nefarious and miserable division of the venerable monastery of Sithiu performed by the abominable Fridugis, was allowed by Folcuin, bishop of the Morins, to reestablish the past unity of the monastery. This was confirmed by a privilege.)

This additional paragraph is followed by a charter, dated 20 June 839, and given by Bishop Folcuin of Thérouanne.78 This charter is an almost word for word copy of Hugh’s charter, except for the reference to their respective authors. Besides the copy in BSM, MS 146a, an original of the bishop’s charter was still extant when Dewitte gathered his Grand Cartulaire.79 The relation between the two charters and the text of the Gesta is not clear. Hugh’s charter, although dated nine days after Folcuin’s, does not refer to the bishop’s document. Laurent Morelle has clearly demonstrated on diplomatic ground that both charters were most likely forged in the second half of the eleventh century, and that Abbot Hugh’s charter was the source for Bishop Folcuin’s80 Since the author of the Gesta did not insert Hugh’s charter himself, his description of the events in the Gesta and his mention of ‘per describtionem capitularem’ may have inspired a forger. Finally, doubt should be cast on the veracity of the episode alluded to by the Gesta. After all, at the time monks and canons were still ruled by the same abbot, and Hugh would probably have encountered protest from his canons if he had tried to submit them to the monks. In this regard, the episode, recounted by Folcuin both in the Gesta and in his vita Folcuini, of Hugh’s failed attempt to steal the relics of St Omer to bring them to his abbey of Saint-Quentin, is telling.81 On the one hand, it illustrates Hugh’s lack of regard for the interests of St Omer’s community, but on the other, it also suggests that he deemed St Omer’s relics as the most valuable ones. In these circumstances, it is unlikely that he would have subjected St Omer’s community to the monks of Saint-Bertin.82 77 78 79 80 81 82

Folcuin, Gesta, c. 53, p. 616. The charter is published in Cartulaire de l’abbaye de Saint-Bertin, pp. 85–7; Gysseling and Koch did not include this one in their Diplomata Belgica edition. D. Haigneré, Les Chartes de Saint-Bertin, p. 12, n. 35. L. Morelle, Autour de Folcuin, pp. 344–62. Folcuin, Gesta, c. 57, pp. 616–18. The episode is so doubtful and its insertion at the core of the Gesta so awkward that

67

Saint-Bertin The main argument of the 839 forged charters – control of St Omer’s church by the monks – is based on St Omer’s exemption from 663. This document has been studied in detail by Eugen Ewig.83 Its text is extremely corrupt, full of repetitions and omissions, making it almost impossible to understand in places. Ewig has demonstrated that these disturbances were due to the fact that the charter was the product of the juxtaposition of two distinct types of documents: an epistola on the one hand and an episcopal privilege on the other.84 The epistola and the privilege are not only two different documents from a diplomatic point of view, but they also treat two distinct subjects. The epistola deals with Saint-Mary: first it records Omer’s with that the basilica be used as burial church not only for himself, but also for the monk of Sithiu; second, it records Omer’s transfer of the basilica from his jurisdiction as bishop of Thérouanne to the authority of the abbot of Sithiu. This transfer implied that the bishops of Thérouanne forever renounced any kind of right over Saint-Mary and that St Bertin and his successors as abbot of Sithiu would have full control over the basilica and the whole island of Sithiu.85 The privilege, which follows the epistola without transition, deals with Omer’s grant of liberties to Sithiu – property rights, protection against usurpation, oblation rights, waiver of the bishop’s hospitality right.86 Based on the same formulary as many other contemporary episcopal privileges, it belongs to the category of the ‘little exemption’. Nonetheless, traditional elements of the little exemption are omitted: election of the abbot, issues of justice within the monastery or questions of judicial authority over the abbot.87 Despite the awkwardness and disruption brought about by the conflation of two different types of documents into one long charter, Ewig did not challenge the authenticity of the Privilege cum epistola, and he believes that it had originally been intended as such by Omer.88 However, parts of the charter raise questions and suggest that the document should not be taken for granted. First of all, the epistola is by far the most confused and clumsy section; for example, Omer twice repeats that the basilica was intended as a burial church for himself and the monks, and that the monks had the duty to bring his body there after his death. Furthermore, in the epistola, Omer asserts that the

83 84 85 86 87

88

Laurent Morelle has suggested that this excerpt of chapter 57 may have been interpolated in the Vetus Folcuinus: L. Morelle, Autour de Folcuin, pp. 355–61. Diplomata Belgica, no. 3, pp. 10–11; Ewig, ‘Das Privileg’. Ewig, ‘Das Privileg’, p. 532. Diplomata Belgica, no. 3, pp. 10–11. Diplomata Belgica, no. 3, pp. 11–13; Ewig, ‘Das Privileg’, pp. 508–14. Ewig, ‘Das Privileg’, p. 536. On the little and big exemptions, see E. Ewig, ‘Beobachtungen zu den Klosterprivilegien des 7 und frühen 8 jahrhunderts’, in Spätantikes und Fränkishes Gallien II, pp. 411–26; on episcopal exemptions and royal immunities, see B. Rosenwein, Negotiating Space: Power, Restraint and Privileges of Immunity in Early Medieval Europe (Manchester, 1999). Ewig, ‘Das Privileg’, pp. 536–7.

68

Narrative Production basilica was built communi opere with the community of Sithiu, that he had built it for the monks’ assistance.89 Communi opere seems in contradiction with the VA1 which states that the basilica was built before the arrival of Bertin and his friends. While the privilege is of a fairly common type, apart from the disturbances brought about by the insertion of the epistola, the epistola itself is more unusual. Ewig has emphasized the similarities between Omer’s letter and the St Amand’s codicil. Dated from 675, this document records St Amand’s wish to be buried in his foundation of Elnone and his request that the monks bring his remains there, wherever he should die.90 St Amand’s codicil is generally accepted as authentic and the similarities between the two documents clearly suggest a common source or even a filiation – although it is difficult to imagine that St Amand’s text could have been copied from Omer’s letter as we know it. It is interesting that St Amand’s codicil was probably known at Sithiu, since St Bertin himself was among its signatories. To conclude, the epistola cum privilegio presents anomalies that shed doubt on its integrity. An authentic exemption, still visible in our document, may well have existed; but a forger may have tampered with the original by inserting the epistola. The epistola itself may have been entirely forged or, rather, based on an authentic letter of St Omer. In any case, its substance – control of the basilica by the monks of Sithiu – as well as the expression communi opere suggests that it may have been cooked up for the same purpose as the VB2 and Adroald’s donation charter. While it is clear that Folcuin’s Gesta passes on the new foundation story of Sithiu and the pro-Saint-Bertin bias of the reformed community, the author’s responsibility in the alteration and forgeries is not clear. Did Folcuin gather – knowingly or not – documents that had already been forged, or is he to be held accountable for the creation of the new foundation legend and the related forgeries? I do not believe that the question can be answered definitely. Some aspects of the Gesta may point to Folcuin’s responsibility. The close agreement of the Gesta and the new foundation story, as well as their chronological proximity – Folcuin wrote during the year 962 – is certainly an argument in favor of this hypothesis. Indeed, as the keeper and compiler of Sithiu’s archives, he was in the best position to select, alter or make up the texts he inserted in his Gesta.91 Folcuin’s anger against Fridugis, which contrasts with his usually dispassionate tone, could be an indication that on this specific occasion his objectivity was for once at fault. Besides the transmission of this new historical tradition, Folcuin, and the patron of the Gesta, the acting-abbot Adalulf, were very much concerned with

89 90 91

Diplomata Belgica, no. 3, pp. 10, 11. Ewig, ‘Das Privileg’, pp. 518–19. On St Omer’s exemption: above, Chapter 1, p. 24.

69

Saint-Bertin the state of Saint-Bertin’s landholding. This is once again stated in Folcuin’s introduction: In hoc codice gesta abbatum Sithiensis cenobii depromere cupientes vel possessionum traditiones, quae a fidelibus sub uniuscuiusque illorum tempore sacro huic loco cum cartarum inscriptione sunt concessae, describere volentes, a primo ipsius loci structore domno Bertino abbate operis huius exordium sumamus, Christo auxiliante.92 (In this book, willing to relate the deeds of the abbots of Sithiu and wishing to describe the donations of possession made by the faithful to this sacred place by means of charters at the time of each of them, with Christ’s help, we have begun the work starting with Saint Bertin, first abbot and founder of this place.)

The gathering of all the charters into one volume had a practical purpose and allowed anyone who needed to investigate Sithiu’s possession to find the information easily: . . . si forsan quis istius loci possessionum investigandarum fuerit avidus, ad hunc recurrat.93 (. . . if somebody was curious to investigate the possessions of this place, he could refer to it.)

Furthermore, Folcuin facilitated the reader’s task by dating each charter according to the year of both the incarnation and the ruler and by setting apart all the charters concerned with the donation of Stenetland by Guntbert and Goibert.94 In this regard, the MGH edition, which does not include the charters, obviously betrays Folcuin’s intention. At the end of the Gesta, Folcuin repeats once again his and Adalulf’s goal: Explevi iam, . . . quae iusseras, domine et beatissime necnon et amantissime pater Adalolfe, comprehendens in uno codice traditiones fidelium cum kartis earum necnon et gesta abbatum ab ipso primo loci huius structore domno Bertino abbate usque ad ultimum . . .95 (I have completed what you had ordered, holy and beloved lord and father Adalulf, gathering into one book the donations made by the faithful with charters as well as the gesta of the abbots, from the first one, the founder of this place, St Bertin, to the last one . . .)

92 93 94

Folcuin, Gesta, p. 607. Folcuin, Gesta, p. 608. Folcuin, Gesta, p. 608 and cc. 111–17, pp. 632–4; for the charters, see Diplomata Belgica, nos. 26, 27, 29, 33, 37 and 40; on these documents, see Morelle, Autour de Folcuin, pp. 363–86. 95 Folcuin, Gesta, c. 111, p. 632.

70

Narrative Production In conclusion, Folcuin insists on the credibility of his documentation – he did not incorporate anything into his Gesta that he did not find in ancient documents or had not heard from trustworthy men. He also asks Adalulf to support him against those who might criticize his work. Finally, at the end of the text, he lists the names of all the monks living regularly in the monastery, including the ‘leper’ Regnold, Adalulf and the new abbot Hildebrand.96 The circumstances of its composition highlight the overall purpose of the Gesta. We have seen that when Abbot Regnold became sick, the care of the community was entrusted to Adalulf. Adalulf, who had been given to Saint-Bertin as an oblate some time before 938, was Count Arnulf’s nephew: his mother, Riksind, was a daughter of Baldwin II.97 Although he had been chosen by the community, Arnulf refused to consecrate him because he wanted to give the abbacy to his other nephew Hildebrand. The count’s coercion was contested by the monks as well as by Adalulf, and Arnulf temporarily got rid of the acting-abbot by sending him to England with presents for King Edgar. When Adalulf came back and started to worry again about the organization of canonical elections, Arnulf imposed Hildebrand. The Gesta, a work of enormous breadth, must have taken some time to write, and it was probably ordered by Adalulf when he was acting abbot, before his ‘exile’ in England, and completed when Hildebrand became abbot. Considering the circumstances, Adalulf’s initiative is understandable. His preoccupation with keeping records of the abbey’s landholding and privileges was obviously a protection against the count’s sticky fingers. Moreover, the evolution of the situation at Saint-Bertin during the redaction adds another dimension to Folcuin’s text. Hildebrand had been imposed by his uncle after a period of turmoil, but nonetheless a period during which the last two leaders, Abbot Regnold and Adalulf, had been chosen by and from inside the community. Thus, recalling the abbots and their gesta (in both meanings of the word), from the first to the last, was also a reminder to Hildebrand of his responsibilities as the successor of a long list of abbots able to gain large amounts of land and immunity from lay power. Conversely, the example of Fridugis exemplified how a bad and malevolent abbot – at least in the eyes of the community – was remembered. The fact that Folcuin listed at the end of his text the names of those monks who lived according to the rule, gives extra weight to this message.98

96 97 98

Folcuin, Gesta, c. 111, p. 632. Folcuin, Gesta, c. 106, p. 628; Le Jan, Famille et Pouvoir, pp. 425–6 and 447. In my article, ‘Creating a Usable Past in the Tenth Century: Folcuin’s Gesta and the Crises at Saint-Bertin’, Studi Medievali 3rd series, 37 (1996), 887–903 (p. 897), I considered these names as a list of signatures. Laurent Morelle has since established, rightly I believe, that it is strictly a list of names that Folcuin himself had written down. Naming all the members of the regular community was part of the Gesta’s effort to present a comprehensive state of the abbey: Morelle, Autour de Folcuin, pp. 301–14.

71

Saint-Bertin

Bovo’s Relatio de Inventione et Elevatione Sancti Bertini99 The ‘Inventio’ of St Bertin’s relics was written shortly after 1052 on the occasion of the elevation of St Bertin’s relics, which Abbot Bovo (1042–1065) had allegedly discovered during the works of restoration and enlargement of the abbatial church.100 Inventiones, as a narrative genre, relate the discovery of relics whose location had been forgotten or hitherto ignored; they belong to a textual category, closely related to the cult of relics, which can be conveniently called ‘relic narratives’.101 The different genres of relic narratives were particularly popular in northern France in the tenth and eleventh centuries because of the intensive traffic in relics caused by the disruptions, alleged or real, brought about by the vikings, and by the subsequent wave of monastic foundations, refoundations and reforms which spread throughout the region.102 Among these relic narratives, one group of texts is particularly remarkable through its association with a specific religious reform: the movement of Benedictine restoration associated with Gerard of Brogne in Flanders

99

The following section has been published under the title ‘Relics as Tools of Power: The Eleventh-Century Inventio of St Bertin’s Relics and the Assertion of Abbot Bovo’s Authority’, in Negotiating Secular and Ecclesiastical Power: Western Europe in the Central Middle Ages, ed. A.-J. Bijsterveld, H. Theunis and A. Wareham (Turnhout, 1999), pp. 51–71. 100 Bovo, Relatio de Inventione et Elevatione Sancti Bertini, ed. O. Holder-Egger, MGH SS 151 (Hanover, 1887), pp. 524–34 (BHL 1296). 101 Relic narratives also include translationes, relating the transfer of relics from one shrine to another, furta, dealing with thefts of relics, adventus, detailing the arrival of newly found, acquired or stolen relics at a new location, and delationes, the carrying around of relics in order to bolster a cult and raise money. On relic narratives in general, see M. Heinzelmann, Translationsberichte und andere Quellen des Reliquienkultes, Typologie 33 (Turnhout, 1979). On relics thefts, see P. Geary, Furta Sacra: Thefts of Relics in Central Middle Ages (Princeton, 1978). On delationes, see P. Héliot and M.-L. Chastang, ‘Quêtes et voyages de reliques au profit des églises françaises au moyen âge’, Revue d’Histoire Ecclésiastique 59 (1964), 789–822, and 60 (1965), 3–32; R. Kaiser, ‘Quêtes itinérantes avec des reliques pour financer la construction des églises (XIe–XIIe siècles)’, Le Moyen Âge 2 (1995), 204–25, and E. Bozoky, ‘Voyages de reliques et démonstration du pouvoir aux temps féodaux’, in Voyages et voyageurs au moyen âge. XXVIe Congrès de la S.H.M.E.S. (Limoges-Aubazine, mai 1995) (Paris, 1996), pp. 267–80. On inventiones, see M. Otter, Inventiones : Fiction and Referentiality in Twelfth-Century English Historical Writing (London, 1996), pp. 21–57, and A.-M. Helvétius, ‘Les inventions de reliques en Gaule du Nord (IXe–XIIIe siècles)’, in Les reliques. Objets, cultes, symboles. Actes du colloque international de l’Université du Littoral-Côte d’Opale (Boulogne-sur-Mer 4–6 Septembre 1997), ed. E. Bozoky and A.-M. Helvétius, Hagiologia 1 (Turnhout, 1999, pp. 293–311. 102 F. Lifshitz, ‘The Migration of Neustrian Relics in the Viking Age: The Myth of Voluntary Exodus, the Reality of Coercion and Theft’, Early Medieval Europe 4 (1995), 175–92, shows how the fear of vikings was used as a spurious explanation for thefts of relics camouflaged as translations in tenth-century Normandy.

72

Narrative Production and Lotharingia. Because of its date and place of composition, Bovo’s Inventio fully belongs to this tradition of relic narratives; nonetheless, his agenda went beyond the advertising of a cult and the bolstering of the corporate identity of the saint’s community usually associated with inventiones. Indeed, Bovo used the models available to him, thanks to the continuous textual tradition which had flourished in Flanders since the mid-tenth century, to compose a seemingly standard inventio. A closer look at Bovo’s Inventio, however, reveals how much its author perverted the conventions of the genre, in order to create an extremely personal and self-serving text asserting his own authority within the monastic community. To comprehend fully the specificity of this text, it is necessary to look first at the local tradition of relic narratives which inspired Bovo in writing his own account; that is, the group of relic narratives which can be associated directly or indirectly with the Benedictine revival promoted by Gerard of Brogne in the middle decades of the tenth century. Between 931 and 953, Gerard founded or re-established the Benedictine Rule in at least nine monasteries; six of them – including Saint-Bertin – were located within the territory of his friend and patron Arnulf, count of Flanders, who forcefully used his authority over the abbeys in his territories to help Gerard in his mission. As I have already emphasized, the specifics of Gerard’s reforms remain elusive. However, one aspect of his religious devotion, which he shared with Arnulf, is well known and documented: his fondness of relics. The two men loved relics so much that they had few scruples when it came to obtaining them, and when they could not get them through friendly contacts, they did not hesitate to resort to military raids. Arnulf’s and Gerard’s traffic in relics led to the production of an important corpus of texts relating to their theft or exploits (depending on the point of view of the author) and their later consequences.103 It is not clear how much Gerard’s abbacies stimulated contacts and exchanges of manuscripts between all his abbeys, but a common textual trend can be observed, and it can safely be asserted that the abbeys reformed by Gerard played a significant part in the spreading of relic narratives in the region. Different types of relic narratives fulfill different purposes: Inventiones were often composed to justify the foundation or refoundation of a monastic community at the site of a miraculous discovery. This is indeed the case of the Inventio Sancti Gisleni, written around 940 by a monk of Saint-Ghislain (near Mons, Belgium).104 According to the Inventio and the Vita Sancti Gisleni,

103

On Gerard of Brogne and the cult of relics, see E. Bozoky, ‘La politique des reliques des premiers comtes de Flandre (fin du IXe – fin du XIe siècle)’, in Les reliques, pp. 271–92, and D. Misonne, ‘Gérard de Brogne et sa dévotion aux reliques’, Sacris Erudiri 25 (1982), 1–26. 104 Inventio et Miracula Sancti Gisleni, ed. O. Holder-Egger, MGH SS 152 (Hanover, 1888), pp. 576–9 (BHL 3554).

73

Saint-Bertin Ghislain had lived in the eighth century and after his death a religious community had formed around the church that he had built.105 However, save for references in the early tenth-century life of St Waldetrude, nothing was recorded about St Ghislain and his eponymous monastery before the mid-tenth century.106 Things changed when Duke Gislebert of Lotharingia called on Gerard of Brogne to restore the community, which had fallen – according to the Inventio – into a state of deep decay. Indeed, no less than three vitae and one inventio were devoted to Ghislain in the decades after Gerard’s takeover in 931. The inventio presents the miraculous finding of the relics as a prefiguration of and a pre-requisite for Gerard’s abbacy. St Ghislain had remained hidden in the ground because of the sins of his community (‘peccatis enim nostris exigentibus, tantus patrocinator mortalibus profuturus palam aberat’),107 and it was only after he revealed himself that Gislebert decided to invite Gerard to restore a proper monastic life under the Benedictine Rule (‘ergo monachico ordine sub norma sancti habitus instituto, maioribus demum virtutibus monasterium attolitur’).108 Moreover, the inventio provided Gerard with the relics needed to gather his community around the cult of its patron saint and to bolster, if not to create, its sense of corporate identity. Furthermore, the author’s insistence on the decay preceding the discovery of the relics and the arrival of Gerard – a literary device abundantly used by authors of inventiones109 – emphasized the role of the reformer and the rebirth of his abbey. Although Saint-Ghislain was the first of Gerard’s documented monastic restorations, he had already prompted the translation of the relics of St Eugene, which had been brought from Saint-Denis in 919 to his own monastic foundation of Brogne (near Namur, Belgium).110 Because Brogne was a brand new foundation on Gerard’s own estates, its community had no hagiographic tradition and was in great need of relics and a specific liturgy. The Adventus sancti Eugenii martyris, the text and the actual transfer of the relics, provided all of this. The text was read as a sermon on the feast day of St Eugene, on the anniversary of the arrival of his relics at Brogne.111 It is not as much about the

105 106 107 108 109

110 111

Vita Gisleni Prima, ed. J. Ghesquière, Acta Sanctorum Belgii 4 (Brussels, 1787), pp. 375–84 (BHL 3552). On the foundation of the monastery of Saint-Ghislain and hagiography of the saint, see Helvétius, Abbayes, évêques et laïques, pp. 213–34. Inventio Sancti Gisleni, c. 1, p. 576. Inventio Sancti Gisleni, c. 6, p. 578. See, for example, the story of the mid-seventh-century translation of SS Benedict and Scholastic from Monte Cassino, destroyed by the Lombards, to Fleury, written by Adrevald of Fleury in the late ninth century: Historia Translationis S. Benedicti, ed. E. de Certain, in Les Miracles de Saint Benoît (Paris, 1868), pp. 1–14 (BHL 1117). D. Misonne, ‘La légende liturgique de la translation de St Eugène de Saint-Denis à Brogne’, RB 74 (1964), 98–110. Misonne, ‘La légende liturgique de la translation de St Eugène’, p. 98.

74

Narrative Production adventus of St Eugene’s relics at Brogne as it is about their long tribulation before their removal by the abbot of Saint-Denis. The author begins with a brief account of St Eugene’s life, which he knew from the saint’s old passio, and then he relates successively the transfer of Eugene’s relics to Deuil, their translation to Saint-Denis to protect them from the vikings, the arrival of Gerard at Saint-Denis and his departure with parts of St Eugene’s body. This last episode is added at the end of the eighth lesson, which indicates, as Daniel Misonne has suggested, that the core of the text was already in use at Saint-Denis, and that the monks from Brogne were content with recycling and making only superficial changes to the old Dionysian liturgy.112 Nonetheless, rudimentary as it was in its composition, the adventus, as the first liturgical and historical text intended for Brogne, provided the new monastery with the necessary sacred connections with a patron saint, with the heroic times of the martyrs, and with the great abbey of Saint-Denis – things it lacked because of the circumstances of its foundation. The restoration of the abbey of Saint-Peter at Ghent in 941 by Gerard occasioned yet another quest for relics and the composition of new texts celebrating their arrival. He was given that opportunity by the presence of the relics of SS Wandrille, Ansbert and Vulfran near Boulogne, in Arnulf’s territory. The wandering of the Fontenelle monks throughout northern France with their relics has been studied abundantly.113 It is enough to recall that monks of Saint-Wandrille seem to have settled at Ghent at the end of the ninth or at the beginning of the tenth century. This situation entitled Gerard to present himself as abbot of Fontenelle, and so to claim a right to possess its patron saints’ relics. In turn, he tried to use his possession of the relics to legitimize his failed attempt to re-establish Saint-Wandrille. With the military backing of Count Arnulf, he organized a raid on Boulogne in 944, seized the sacred bones and brought them home, along with many other relics, such as those of St Omer and St Bertin. A detailed account of the adventus was given by a monk of Ghent who was probably a first-hand witness of the events.114 At about the same time as Gerard brought the relics of SS Wandrille, Ansbert and Vulfran from Boulogne to Ghent, he effected a similar transfer of the relics of SS Gudwald and Bertulf from Montreuil-sur-Mer and Renty 112 113

Misonne, ‘La légende liturgique de la translation de St Eugène’, pp. 109–10. F. Lot, ‘La destruction de l’abbaye au IXe siècle et les pérégrinations des religieux de Saint-Wandrille’, in Études critiques sur l’abbaye de Saint-Wandrille, pp. XXX–XLI; van Werveke, ‘Saint-Wandrille et Saint-Pierre de Gand’; E. van Houts, ‘Historiography and Hagiography at Saint-Wandrille: The Inventio et Miracula Sancti Vulfranni’, Anglo-Norman Studies 12 (1989), 233–51. 114 N. Huyghebaert, Une translation de reliques à Gand en 944. Le Sermo de Adventu Sanctorum Wandregisili, Ansberti et Vulframni in Blandinium, Recueils de Textes pour Servir à l’Histoire de Belgique (Brussels, 1978); the Adventus only survives today in its twelfth-century rehandled form, but N. Huyghebaert was able to extract the original tenth-century account.

75

Saint-Bertin (Pas-de-Calais, arr. Saint-Omer) respectively, to Boulogne and then to Ghent. This episode also became the subject of a new relic narrative, unfortunately no longer extant.115 All the texts mentioned are positive reactions to the coming or discovery of new relics, since they were written by members of the community which initiated the transfers and benefited from them. These texts, which were integrated in the liturgy of the relics’ new places of residence, or were even, as in the cases of St Ghislain and St Eugene, the first liturgical texts of their communities, celebrated the new covenant between the saint and his new hosts. They also praised the abbot able to assemble such strong patronage for their communities. However, Gerard’s and Arnulf’s intensive appropriation of relics also aroused hostility from some of the communities who considered themselves despoiled. For example, Hariulf of Saint-Riquier relates unsympathetically in his Chronicon Centullense (1088), how Arnulf took advantage of his capture of Montreuil-sur-Mer (Pas-de-Calais) in 948 to seize St Richer’s relics from the abbey of Centula and bring them to Saint-Bertin; those relics, according to Hariulf, were given back to the community of Saint-Riquier in 981 by Arnulf’s grandson, his successor as count of Flanders.116 Gerard’s appropriation of the relics that had belonged to the monks of Fontenelle, and more specifically those of St Vulfran, also caused contention later on. Once re-established in their house in the beginning of the eleventh century, the monks of Fontenelle disputed the presence of St Vulfran at Ghent. Indeed, according to ninth-century sources from their abbey, they had carried only the bodies of saints Ansbert and Wandrille in their flight from the vikings. In 1054, probably stung by reading the Inventio Sancti Wandregisili, Ansberti et Vulframni during a trip to Ghent, a monk from Fontenelle wrote as a counterclaim the Inventio et Miracula Sancti Vulframni, asserting that Vulfran’s relics were discovered in 1033 in the main church of his monastery.117 Although all the relic narratives mentioned here share the common point of stemming from Gerard of Brogne’s monastic restorations and his acquisition of relics for his new houses, it is impossible to point to any textual relationships between them. The task of establishing filiation is made even more problematic because two major texts – the Adventus Sancti Wandregisili and 115

This lost text should not be confused with the Sermo de Adventu SS. Gudwaldi et Bertulfi, ed. N. Huyghebaert, Sacris Erudiri 23 (1978–1979), pp. 87–113; the Sermo is a twelfth-century account of the adventus of Gudwald and Bertulf based on the relation given by the eleventh-century Vita Bertulfi; the Vita Bertulfi itself refers to a ‘libellus qui de eorum adventu scriptus est’, which probably contained the original account of the Adventus. 116 Hariulf, Chronicon Centulense, ed. F. Lot, Chronique de l’abbaye de Saint-Riquier (Ve S.–1104) (Paris, 1894), pp. 150–2; J. Laporte, ‘Gérard de Brogne à Saint-Wandrille et à Saint-Riquier’, RB 70 (1960), 142–66. 117 Huyghebaert, Une translation de reliques à Gand, pp. C–CIII; van Houts, ‘Historiography and Hagiography at Saint-Wandrille’, pp. 237–8.

76

Narrative Production the Adventus Sancti Gudwaldi – survive only in rehandlings or are only known through other sources. However, an axis of textual exchange between Saint-Wandrille, Saint-Peter at Ghent and Saint-Bertin is clearly discernible. Indeed, it is very likely that the monks of Saint-Wandrille would have been in contact with the abbey of Saint-Bertin during their wandering in northern France – Saint-Bertin is only twenty miles from Boulogne, and from 875 to 891 the monks settled at Blangy-en-Artois, a few miles from Saint-Bertin. Possibly, the acquisition by Saint-Bertin of a corpus of hagiographic texts from Fontenelle dates from this period of contact.118 Dom Huyghebaert has suggested that the author of the Adventus Sanctorum Wandregisili, Ansberti et Vulframni came to know through Saint-Bertin all the Fontenelle sources that he quoted in his work: the Vita Ansberti, the Vitae and Miracula Wandregisili and the Gesta Patrum Fontanellensium.119 However, since monks from Fontenelle had already settled at Saint-Peter at Ghent by the end of the ninth century, the exchange may have happened the other way around, SaintBertin receiving the Fontenelle manuscripts from Ghent in 944 when Gerard came to Saint-Bertin to restore the Benedictine Rule. In any case, it is clear that by the mid-tenth century texts from Fontenelle were known at SaintBertin, since Folcuin most likely modeled his own text on the Gesta Patrum Fontanellensium. Another textual link between Ghent and Saint-Bertin might be one of the most widely consulted relic narratives of the central Middle Ages, the Historia Translationis S. Benedicti by Adrevald of Fleury. This text relates the finding of the relics of SS Benedict and Scholastica at Monte Cassino by monks of Fleury, and their subsequent translation to the Loire valley. Indeed, the full title of the Adventus of SS Wandrille, Ansbert and Vulfran resembles the incipit that Adrevald’s text bears in many of its copies.120 The same incipit is

118

S-O, MS 764; on this manuscript, see F. Wormald, ‘Some Illustrated MSS. of the Lives of the Saints’, Bulletin of the J. Rylands Library (1952), 250–62, and L. Deschamps, ‘Notice sur un manuscrit de la Bibliothèque municipale de SaintOmer’, MSAM 5 (1839–1840), 173–208; an unreliable tradition also suggests that the relics of SS Wandrille and Ansbert were hidden at Saint-Omer around 846: see Laporte, ‘Gérard de Brogne à Saint-Wandrille’, 143–5, and A. D’Haenens, Les invasions normandes en Belgique au IXe siècle: le phénomène et sa répercussion dans l’historiographie médiévale, Recueil de Travaux d’Histoire et de Philologie de l’Université de Louvain 38 (Louvain, 1967), pp. 258–9. 119 Huyghebaert, Une translation de reliques à Gand, p. LXVI. 120 Huyghebaert, Une translation de reliques à Gand, p. XXIV. The complete title of the Sermo is Gloriosus a Deo dispositus adventus in Monte Blandinium rite vocato sanctorum Wandregisili, Ansberti and Vulframni; and the incipit of the Historia Translationis Sancti Benedicti of Adrevald as found in the Saint-Bertin manuscript as well as in many other copies is: ‘Incipit gloriosus et a Deo dispositus aventus in cenobio Floriacensis rite vocato electi . . .’. On this text and its manuscript tradition, see A. Vidier, L’Historiographie à Saint-Benoît sur Loire et les miracles de St Benoît (Paris, 1965); J. Hourlier, ‘Le témoignage de Paul Diacre’, in Le culte et les reliques de Saint Benoît et de

77

Saint-Bertin found in the manuscript of Adrevald’s Translatio copied at Saint-Bertin around the turn of the millennium by Abbot Odbert.121 Here again, Adrevald’s text may have reached Saint-Bertin through exchanges with Ghent. The Historia Translationis Sancti Benedicti also influenced the composition of relic narratives at Saint-Bertin since, as will be seen, Bovo took inspiration from it when he wrote his Relatio de Inventione et Elevatione Sancti Bertini shortly after 1052. To finish with the textual interplay between Saint-Bertin, Saint-Wandrille, and Saint-Peter at Ghent, it is interesting to recall that the Inventio of St Vulfran was written at Saint-Wandrille only one or two years after the composition of the Inventio of Saint-Bertin.122 Although this might be fortuitous, it is striking that both authors used similar literary devices to make their point: discovery of the relics following the restoration of an abbey, exaggeration of the physical and spiritual decay of the monastery in the period before the discovery and references to documents used as sources. But of course, by the eleventh century, these characteristics were already wellestablished topoi of relic narratives, especially inventiones, and are also found, for example, in the Inventio Sancti Gisleni that I have already mentioned.123 Although direct borrowings – shared phrases, idiosyncratic language and the like – between the texts previously mentioned and Bovo’s Relatio cannot be found, it is manifest that Bovo drew on a textual tradition flourishing in the region, especially in the communities which had been touched by Gerard of Brogne’s enterprise. However, the circumstances of St Bertin’s inventio and Bovo’s goals in writing its relation were significantly different from the circumstances and purpose of the aforementioned texts: Saint-Bertin already possessed relics supposed to be St Bertin’s, his cult had been continuous throughout the period, nobody was contesting the community possession of the relics, and, finally, the monastery had never been abandoned or so severely damaged that it needed to be refounded. In these circumstances, why did Bovo feel compelled to write his text? Before discussing his specific motivation, it is important to look at the tradition of historical writing at Saint-Bertin upon which Bovo built his own narrative. Throughout the Middle Ages, the abbey of Saint-Bertin maintained a continuous tradition of producing many of the traditional medieval genres: annals, Gesta Abbatum and hagiographic texts. Bovo was not only inspired, in a general way, by the polemical nature of previous texts, but he also directly used some of them as sources, especially Folcuin’s Gesta Abbatum Sithiensium and the life of St

Sainte Scholastique, ed. A. Beau, Studia Monastica 21 (Monserrat, 1979), pp. 205–11; idem, ‘La translation d’après les sources narratives’, in ibid., pp. 214–39, and Head, Hagiography and the Cult of Saints. 121 S-O, MS 350. 122 van Houts, ‘Historiography and Hagiography at Saint-Wandrille’, pp. 237–8 gives 1054 for the date of the redaction. 123 See the examples in M. Otter, Inventiones.

78

Narrative Production Folcuin, bishop of Thérouanne.124 Because of this strong tradition of historiography at Saint-Bertin, it is not only interesting to consider Bovo’s Relatio in the context of earlier relic narratives, but it is also important to keep in mind the background offered to him by his own house. Bovo was all the more able to make good use of these texts considering that, according to Simon’s continuation of the Gesta Abbatum, he was a very educated man, well learned in the liberal arts.125 He also commissioned a third life of St Bertin by the monk Folcard, who later made a career in England. Bovo’s Relatio reports the discovery of the relics of St Bertin in 1050 and their subsequent translation in 1052. It is useful to begin with a brief account of the events as they are told by Bovo. In 1033, during the abbacy of his predecessor, so Bovo tells us, the abbey of Saint-Bertin was struck successively by two calamities: a fire seriously damaged its main church and, shortly afterwards, an epidemic killed eleven of the forty monks who made up the community.126 Since the buildings had been hastily restored after the blaze, they started to crumble after a few years; so Bovo, four years into his abbacy, decided to undertake the major work of rebuilding and enlarging the church.127 As workers were attempting to displace the main altar, their tools hit a layer of hard stones and old cement which suggested that something was buried underneath. After the bishop of Thérouanne, the monks, the canons of Saint-Omer and lay witnesses had gathered around the altar, Bovo presided over the excavation. They found, buried far beneath under the altar, a leaden casket containing bones, which were identified by a silver cross as Sanctus Bertinus Abbas. Bovo specifies that it took three searches to find the cross, and that he himself found it.128 The inventio, however, was subjected to a long investigation, and it was not until two years later that the archbishop of Reims performed the translation of the relics.129 Bovo’s text presents interesting features: it is significantly longer than many texts of its kind – ten pages of the MGH edition – and it is a first-person account of a very recent event. Most inventiones on the other hand are shorter, anonymous, and told by a third party who was not contemporary with the discovery.130 Bovo’s introduction is particularly important for understanding his intentions in writing the account, as well as in terms of his technique of 124 125 126

127 128 129 130

Folcuin, Vita Folcuini Episcopi. Simon, Gesta, cc. 10–15, pp. 638–9. Bovo, Relatio, c. 1, pp. 526–7; in the twelfth-century chronicle of Lambert of Saint-Omer, the entry for 1033 reads: ‘Templum sancti Audomari crematur’ (Lambert of Saint-Omer, Chronica, ed. G. H. Pertz, MGH SS 5 (Hanover, 1844), p. 65). Bovo, Relatio, c. 3, pp. 527–8. Bovo, Relatio, c. 3, p. 528 The translation was done on 1May 1052, see Bovo, Relatio, cc. 8–12, pp. 531–53. However, the fifth-century Revelatio Sancti Stephani, ed. S. Vanderlinden, Revue des Études Byzantines 4 (1946), 178–217, which may have been a model for Bovo, is also a first-person account of the finding of St Stephen’s relics by Lucianus.

79

Saint-Bertin writing. He starts with an exchange of letters between himself and Wido, archbishop of Reims, who had performed the translation of the relics.131 In the first epistle, Bovo explains how, urged by his fellow monks, he wished to give a written account of the events for posterity. Neither accepting nor refusing the task allegedly pushed upon him, but obviously dying to do it, the abbot begged the prelate to commission him to write the work. Of course, the archbishop approved of his project and enjoined the abbot to send him a copy of his work, ‘in order that you are recognized for your writings . . . since what you described really happened and since they went into my hands, nothing will have to be added or removed’.132 These first two letters fulfill three closely related purposes: they legitimize the abbot’s initiative, since the relatio becomes a commission from the archbishop; they guarantee that the integrity of the text will be protected, since nothing will be added to or removed from it, and it will represent the only accepted version of the facts; and finally, they guarantee that Bovo will be recognized as the author of his text. The third missive inserted by Bovo confirms the previous two letters and goes even further by emphasizing the active involvement of the archbishop in his guarantee of the text: ‘if ever the troubles brought about by the scourge of rivalry tried to introduce changes, I would turn myself toward your . . . benevolent protection. Indeed, it is fair that, trusting your noble protection, I would shield myself behind the walls of your defense’.133 The relationship between fiction and reality in this correspondence is not easy to unravel: it could reflect more or less faithfully a true exchange, or it could be a purely literary device. Whatever the case, Bovo’s request for legitimization and protection is clear and understandable in view of the circumstances. Indeed, another set of relics was already honored as St Bertin’s, and the discovery of the new ones during Bovo’s building campaign raised serious questions. Interestingly, Bovo did not address the problem of the two sets of St Bertin’s relics with his own authorial voice, but again, he used the epistolary genre to confer more authority to the story; in this case, they were letters exchanged between Drogo, bishop of Thérouanne, and the same Wido of Reims.134 The letters, according to Bovo, were read aloud in a ceremony which included abbots, archdeacons and monks in front of the new relics. 131

In the course of the eleventh century bishops relied increasingly heavily on the authority of their metropolitan for the identification and elevation of relics; this evolution was ratified in 1025 by Gerard of Cambrai at the synod of Arras, see N. Herrmann-Mascard, Les reliques des saints. Formation coutumière d’un droit (Paris, 1975), p. 90. 132 Bovo, Relatio, p. 525. Such a transfer of authorial responsibility from the author to the patron is a topos of medieval narratives; see M. Sot, ‘Rhétorique et technique dans les préfaces des gesta episcoporum (IXe–XIIe s.)’, Cahiers de Civilisation Médiévale 28 (1985), 181–200. 133 Bovo, Relatio, p. 525. 134 Bovo, Relatio, c. 5, pp. 530–1.

80

Narrative Production The bishop explained the situation to his superior because ordinary people, vulgus minus intelligens, were very upset by the two St Bertins and were probably requesting explanations from ecclesiastical authorities.135 Clearly, however, the mentally challenged were not the only ones to find the situation puzzling, since it took two years of investigation before the elevation was performed. Eventually, in his answer to the bishop of Thérouanne, Wido carefully advised Drogo and Bovo to place both the old and the new Bertin in the same shrine and to translate them together.136 One of Bovo’s models for inserting this correspondence was Adrevald of Fleury’s Translatio Sancti Benedicti. It is clear that the exchange of letters between Drogo of Thérouanne and Wido of Reims about the inventio and the identity of the relics is reminiscent of the letter addressed around 750 to the monks of Fleury by Pope Zachary, which Adrevald of Fleury inserted in his Miracula.137 The authenticity of the papal letter is much disputed,138 but by inserting it Adrevald was making his point very clearly. The monks of Monte Cassino never recognized Fleury’s possession of Benedict and Scholastica’s relics; but, the pope’s injunction to the community of Fleury to give Benedict’s relics back to Monte Cassino was an explicit admission that the relics were indeed at Fleury. In addition, Bovo’s technique of introducing his account with an epistolary exchange may have been inspired by the fifth-century Inventio Sancti Stephani, which was among the most widespread inventio accounts of the Middle Ages, especially in northern France.139 Indeed, Stephen’s Inventio is known in Western sources as a set of two epistles: the second epistle is the Latin translation of the account given in Greek by Lucian, the priest who found Stephen’s relics near Jerusalem, and it is introduced by a first epistle sent by the priest Avitus, who translated the text, to the bishop of Braga. Avitus had received a few of Stephen’s relics from Lucian and he asked his compatriot Paul Orosius, on his way to Spain, to bring them to Braga; Avitus added the letters to the relics in order to authenticate them. Let us now look more closely at Bovo’s interpretation of the events regarding the discovery of St Bertin’s relics. The story starts with the fire of 1033, which Bovo did not consider pure bad luck, but rather a consequence of God’s wrath in the face of the laxity of spiritual life in a monastery turned into a ‘thieves’ den’. The situation was so bad that even SS Omer and Bertin could no longer play their natural role as intercessors.140 This fire, however,

135 136 137

Bovo, Relatio, p. 531. Bovo, Relatio, p. 531. Adrevald of Fleury, Miraculorum Sancti Benedicti. Liber Primus, ed. E. de Certain, in Les miracles de Saint Benoît, pp. 38–9 (BHL 1123). 138 Vidier, L’Historiographie à Saint-Benoît sur Loire, pp. 160–1, and J. Hourlier, ‘La lettre de Zacharie’, in Le culte et les reliques de St Benoît, pp. 241–52. 139 Revelatio Sancti Stephani, pp. 178–85. 140 Bovo, Relatio, c. 1, p. 526.

81

Saint-Bertin was not enough to induce a long-lasting change in the community and, after a brief period of contrition, the monks fell back again into their old sins. It was only after a severe epidemic, which killed a good part of the community, that the surviving monks undertook a true conversio.141 In 1046, as the church was threatening to collapse, Bovo started his project of rebuilding a larger sanctuary for the community, in the course of which work he found the hidden relics of St Bertin.142 Soon after, the monks had a new shrine of gold and topaz built for their rediscovered patron saint, who immediately performed miracles. These included the first rains for a very long time, allowing the withered crops to blossom and fruit.143 In his account of the discovery of the relics Bovo put himself at center stage: he decided to rebuild the church, he found the leaden urn, and he discovered the cross with the name of St Bertin. He also sharply contrasted his own abbacy with the period of spiritual and physical disintegration of the abbey during the time of his predecessor – whom he does not blame directly. The episode of the reconstruction and inventio confers on Bovo’s abbacy a character of renewal for Saint-Bertin. Not only did he rebuild the physical church of St Bertin, but by finding his true relics he also re-established his true cult. The attribution to God’s wrath of the fire which destroyed the church contrasts with Bovo’s own period of a new covenant between God, St Bertin, and the saint’s community. This is inherent in the stories of inventiones: as in furta sacra, the saints remain active in the process, they are not merely found, but rather, they let themselves be found. Thus, the inventio is also a revelatio. Bovo’s presentation of his role as the refounder of his abbey is, however, in contradiction with facts since his predecessor, Roderic, was actually the spiritual reformer of Saint-Bertin. Indeed, in 1021, Roderic was called by Count Baldwin from his monastery of Saint-Vaast at Arras, which had recently been restored according to the reform of Richard of Saint-Vanne, to re-establish the regular life at Saint-Bertin.144 It is as a reformer and a ‘studiosus imitator’ and ‘ferventissimus amator’145 of the Benedictine Rule that Roderic was remembered later in the historiography of Saint-Bertin, and it is conceivable that Bovo, facing the tough task of succeeding him, had to make the claim of being a pious leader and refounder in his own right. Thus, the episode of the inventio would be enough to suggest that Bovo saw and presented himself as chosen and rewarded by St Bertin for being a good abbot. Indeed, Bovo’s text is as much about himself as about St Bertin and his relics, and the abbot was not shy in stating this clearly in three passages. The first one is a comment made after the description of the fire: 141 142 143 144 145

Bovo, Relatio, c. 2, p. 527. Bovo, Relatio, c. 3, pp. 527–8. Bovo, Relatio, c. 4, p. 528. Simon, Gesta, cc. 1–9, pp. 636–8. Simon, Gesta, c. 5, p. 637.

82

Narrative Production ‘God, with the help of His rod, compelled the reform and punished the sins which had to be atoned for by piety, and He administered lesser punishment on those who were good, as was demonstrated later at the right time’.146 The second passage is a more symbolic prefiguration of the inventio, as it relates a monk’s vision of a magnificent man, dressed in white, who came to inspect the monastery and blessed the place with his right hand.147 The third expression of Bovo’s election is found after a long historiographic passage referring to a very traumatic event for the monks of Saint-Bertin: the division of the monastery into communities of canons and Benedictine monks, imposed shortly after 820 by Abbot Fridugis. Bovo followed most of Saint-Bertin’s authors, regarding the separation as sinful, but he concluded by saying: ‘it was enough that I gathered our children under my protection for the sins of the monastery to go away and for the blessed relics, which had been hidden in emergency, to make themselves visible’.148 The justification for this statement is not clear, because since 950 the canons had their own provost, distinct from the abbot of Saint-Bertin, although the two communities had close relations – which, as we have seen, were not always cordial; and no other source corroborates that the situation changed during Bovo’s abbacy. In any case, what is significant is the fact that he wanted his readers to believe that he had in one way or another re-established some sort of unity between the monks and the canons, and that he was therefore rewarded by St Bertin.149 Because Bovo’s finding of Bertin’s relics was questionable, he had to provide some explanation and justification for the circumstances which made the community ignorant of the location of the true relics for such a long time. To do this, he resorted to the archives of Saint-Bertin and more specifically to the vita of Folcuin of Thérouanne.150 Bovo asserts that, because the abbey was threatened by the vikings, St Folcuin translated the relics of St Bertin and re-buried them in 846 – Bovo and the vita Folcuini both use the word recondidit, which means ‘to hide’, ‘to bury very deep’. Bovo’s explanation is actually supported by the vita of Folcuin, although its author associates the hiding of Bertin with the theft of St Omer’s relics by Abbot Hugh, who had tried to translate them to his other abbey of Saint-Quentin. According to the

146 147 148 149

Bovo, Relatio, c. 1, p. 527. Bovo, Relatio, c. 2, p. 527. Bovo, Relatio, c. 6, p. 529. The manuscript tradition of Bovo’s Relatio could have told us more about the use he wanted to make of his text. Unfortunately, the two medieval manuscripts (from Saint-Bertin and Clairmarais) on which Mabillon based his edition of the Acta Sanctorum (III, 1, pp. 153–68) have disappeared. For his MGH edition, O. HolderEgger copied the text from Mabillon, but he was able to find a sixteenth-century copy of the first three letters in S-O, MS 746, t. II. Simon inserted the passage describing the fire and the epidemics in his chapter on Abbot Roderic (cc. 2–5, pp. 636–7). 150 Bovo, Relatio, c. 5, p. 529: ‘meminisse coepi Vita sancti Folcuini . . .’.

83

Saint-Bertin vita, Folcuin brought the relics of Omer back to his church and re-buried them; three years later, he exhumed and re-buried St Bertin.151 St Omer’s relics remained in their secret place until they, too, were discovered in 941, but unfortunately, no narrative of this inventio has survived.152 The question of the authenticity of Bovo’s find remains, and will always remain, unanswerable. The hiding of the relics in the ninth century and their rediscovery in the eleventh are not implausible – although we should not forget that the vita of St Folcuin was written more than a century after his death. Bovo’s setting of his Relatio in a very historical context (the destruction and rebuilding of the church, which are most likely actual events), the introduction of letters and historical sources into the narrative, as well as the participation of the author in the events, reinforce that impression of historicity. And historicity and credibility were sensible goals for an author so anxious about the legitimization and the integrity of his text. Nevertheless, one detail of the narrative seems inconsistent: Bovo asserts that he found the little silver cross under St Bertin’s right shoulder, suggesting that the skeleton was still intact.153 However, the words he used to describe the saint’s container are scrinium, a little box, a reliquary, and urna, which suggest that it could not contain an intact body. And indeed, Drogo of Thérouanne said in his letter to Wido of Reims that the bones were cremated (ossa cinerati).154 Besides this inconsistency in the text, the textual tradition in which Bovo’s inventio arises sheds light on the degree of historicity one should expect from such a text. In her study of eleventh- and twelfth-century inventiones from post-Conquest England, Monika Otter has stressed that the truth which these texts embodied was essentially symbolic and that, despite the efforts of their authors to ground their account in a familiar and historical context, inventiones usually happened in very unlikely circumstances.155 These observations prove equally true for the earlier Continental inventiones, which is not surprising since Otter also argues that the genre was probably brought to England by Goscelin of Canterbury, a monk of Saint-Bertin who lived in England from the decade preceding the Conquest to his death in the beginning of the twelfth century. Regarding Goscelin, it is interesting to note that,

151 152

Folcuin, Vita Sancti Folcuini, c. 7, p. 428. According to Lambert of Saint-Omer’s Chronica, p. 65: ’941. Inventio Sancti Audomari et Bertini’. In his Vita Folcuini, Folcuin alluded to the inventio of St Omer: c. 7, p. 428: ‘Et praecavens in futurum, ne parili modo aut alio quovis ingenio corpus auferretur sanctum, terra illud abscondit, ubi per plurimos annos homines quidem latuit; at revelatum est ubi Dominus voluit.’ 153 Bovo, Relatio, c. 3 and c. 4, p. 528. 154 Bovo, Relatio, c. 5, p. 531. The circumstances of their cremation are unclear, but they could have undergone an ordeal by fire for authentication at the time of the first translation; on the ordeal of relics by fire, see Herrmann-Mascard, Les reliques des saints, p. 134. 155 M. Otter, Inventiones, p. 41.

84

Narrative Production as a monk of Saint Augustine’s at Canterbury from about 1090 until his death, he was involved in the antagonism between his community and the monks of Christ Church. He wrote in that context a good deal of polemical writing strikingly reminiscent of the way the authors from Saint-Bertin dealt with their own conflicts.156 This suggests that the earlier Bertinian historiographic culture made its way through the eleventh and twelfth centuries and that Bovo’s work should also be seen in light of its local tradition. To go back to the inventiones and their ambiguous relationship with ‘historical truth’, a few examples can usefully be presented here. I have already mentioned the Revelatio Sancti Stephani, which, as shown by its manuscript tradition, was very well-known and influential in Flanders and Lotharingia.157 This story may have been a source for the Inventio Sancti Gisleni: the two texts present narrative parallels and both the abbeys of Brogne and Saint-Ghislain possessed an eleventh-century manuscript of the Revelatio. The Revelatio Sancti Stephani was also known to Goscelin of Saint-Bertin, whose Inventio of St Yves resembles the older text.158 As for St Ghislain, Anne-Marie Helvétius has convincingly demonstrated that he never existed: he was an invention of Duke Gislebert, who needed a pretext for founding a monastic community there, in order to bolster his domination over the region of Hainault.159 Despite the old pretension of Fleury to have the relics of St Benedict, their presence in France was always fought fiercely by the monks of Monte Cassino. Other inventiones are even more clearly the product of the unbridled medieval imagination regarding saint cults and relics: the discovery of the skull of John the Baptist in eleventh-century Aquitaine is only one among the multitude of highly unlikely discoveries of relics produced by monastic communities in order to answer their need for power, supremacy, or money.160 More than any other hagiographic texts, relic narratives and especially inventiones lend themselves to a narrative structure which makes them look much like historical texts, sometimes even miniature chronicles. It is remarkable that in many cases the authors of such translations and inventions went back, in much detail, to the origins of the monastery in which the relics were allegedly brought or found, and to the events which made the finding possible. However, since the historicity of these narratives is often questionable, what really matters, both to us and to their medieval readers, is their 156 157

Otter, Inventiones, pp. 21–2. Vanderlinden’s edition is based exclusively on manuscripts from Belgian libraries and the Bibliothèque Nationale in Paris; despite this geographical limitation, he was able to gather a corpus of more than thirty medieval manuscripts. 158 Goscelin of Saint-Bertin, Vita Sancti Yvonis Episcopi Persae in Anglia Depositi, PL 1, pp. 80–90 (BHL 4622). 159 Helvétius, Abbayes, évêques et laïques, pp. 229–31. 160 Inventio Capitis Sancti Johannis, AA SS, Iun. 5, pp. 650–2. On relics and forgeries in Aquitaine, see R. Landes, Relics, Apocalypse and the Deceits of History: Ademar of Chabannes, 989–1034 (Cambridge, Mass., 1995).

85

Saint-Bertin symbolic meaning: the finding or coming of new relics meant the beginning of a new covenant between the saint and the community. It is only normal that these texts should have created interest in the context of intensive monastic reform and social change – in the tenth and eleventh centuries on the Continent and after the Conquest in England. In the case of the inventio of St Bertin, however, Bovo subverted the conventions and symbolism of the genre in order to produce a very individual and self-serving version of the new covenant. This is not only characteristic of the well-rooted trend to use narratives as tools of power at Saint-Bertin, but also reveals the personality of an author who, in quite original ways for his time, insisted so much that his authorship be recognized for posterity. In this regard, the legacy left by Bovo in the collective memory of SaintBertin may not have met his expectations. At the time of his death, a gap already existed between the community’s perception of the events and the meaning Bovo tried so hard to impose on them. What was recalled in his epitaph was not his discovery of Saint-Bertin’s relics, but his reconstruction of the church.161 The little we know about him from sources other than his own writing is told by Simon. It is ironic that the only passage from the Inventio of St Bertin that Simon quoted – the story of the fire and the epidemic – was inserted in the chapter on Bovo’s predecessor, the reformer Roderic.162 Although Simon devoted the following chapter to Bovo’s discovery of the relics and his writing of a commentariolus attesting the regularity of the inventio and translation, he did not put much emphasis upon an event which was supposed to have refounded St Bertin’s true cult. Equally, he did not emphasize Bovo’s role in the discovery, or attribute it to Bovo’s quality as a religious leader.163 Furthermore, his tone when writing about Roderic was clearly warmer and more enthusiastic than were the conventional words of praise he gave to Bovo. The tepid attitude of the monastic community of Saint-Bertin both toward Bovo and his unearthing of Saint-Bertin’s new relics confirms the self-serving character of the facts and the text of the Relatio. It looks as if the community not only did not need these new relics, but even that they were superfluous. Bovo’s interpretation of the discovery as a sign of his own election was not very appealing to the community either, all the more so since his role as an abbot did not measure up to his own self-image. Furthermore, the lay community, local potentates and common people alike, remained equally cold toward the inventio. Nevertheless, they were an important presence in Bovo’s story: before the opening of the coffin, Bovo had invited the castellani of the town as witnesses and, since it was Saturday, the day of the judicial court, the populace had gathered in town ‘to make fun of 161

Simon, Gesta, c. 15, p. 640: ‘Hanc fabricam primo templi fundavit ab imo; Quam divinarum portans virtute rotarum. Rexit et erexit contraque pericula texit.’ 162 Simon, Gesta, cc. 2–5, pp. 636–7. 163 Simon, Gesta, c. 12, p. 638.

86

Narrative Production the honorable people’ and did not wait long to rush to the church.164 The lay community was of course as much concerned by St Bertin’s relics as was the monastic community, since the good working of society as a whole, from good weather, as shown in the ‘first rains’ miracle,165 and public health, to peace and justice, depended on his intercession.166 Lay people and pilgrims, as well as Saint-Bertin’s neighbors, were not passive by-standers of the cult, and its success or failure depended on their adhesion or rejection. I have already mentioned that the vulgus had been very skeptical of the new relics and had pressed the ecclesiastical authorities to provide explanations and clarify which set of bones were the proper relics. The aristocracy, who were of course the most likely to honor the ‘true’ relics with donations, were not very enthusiastic either. On 1 May 1052, the day of the elevation of the new relics, Countess Adala, daughter of Robert the Pious and wife of Baldwin V of Flanders, was present at the ceremony with her brother Odo and an important escort (but not the count himself).167 According to the series of miracles that Bovo added at the end of his story, Adala offered a shroud made of precious fabric to wrap the relics and gave a piece of salt marsh to the monastery.168 Bovo states that the land donation was authenticated by a charter, but if it ever existed, it is no longer among the seven surviving charters given during Bovo’s abbacy. Furthermore, among these charters – agreements with local lords and privileges from Count Baldwin, Emperor Henry IV and Pope Victor II, dated from 1051 to 1063 – none is a donation to the abbey nor do any refer to discovery of the relics (apart from the 1052 charter recording the inventio and the elevation).169 Neither the charters nor Simon’s Gesta Abbatum suggests that donations to Saint-Bertin increased and that the cult was boosted in the years after the inventio. Indeed, Bovo was not even able to finish the rebuilding of the church that he had undertaken and, at his death in 1065, the work was left unfinished, probably because of lack of financial means.170 The legacy of Bovo’s Relatio de Inventione et Elevatione Sancti Bertini suggests that however much the authors of relic narratives tried to historicize their story, plausibility was not the secret of their success. In order to attract support from the religious community as well as from the secular world, the finding of new relics and the writing of the corresponding narrative had to be meaningful and useful for the community itself. We have seen that narrative production at Saint-Bertin often coincided with situations of crisis or major transformations in the life of the community. 164 165 166 167 168 169

Bovo, Relatio, c. 3, p. 528. Bovo, Relatio, c. 4, p. 528. On the public utility of relics, see Bozoky, ‘Voyage de reliques’. Bovo, Relatio, c. 8, p. 531. Bovo, Relatio, c. 11, p. 532. Dewitte, Grand Cartulaire, charters 73, 76, 77, 78, 79, 80, pp. 26–31. Charter 74, p. 27, dated 2 May 1052, records the elevation and gives a summary of the discovery. 170 Simon, Gesta, c. 10, p. 638.

87

Saint-Bertin The writing of the VB2, the forged donation charter and St Omer’s privilege cum epistola were written in the aftermath of the Benedictine restoration imposed by Arnulf the Great and Gerard of Brogne in order to claim the monks’ superiority and authority over the canons. The Gesta Abbatum, which had adopted the new foundation story, was also written in order to assert Saint-Bertin’s landholding in the face of the count of Flanders’ pervasive attempts to control the abbey and to lay hold on its wealth. The context of Bovo’s Relatio was not only a situation of crisis at Saint-Bertin – the community was certainly impoverished by the destruction of its church – but also a context of personal crisis for Abbot Bovo, who attempted to use his finding – and his text – to assert his own authority. It is interesting to note that the continuation of Folcuin’s Gesta Abbatum by Simon was also written in a context of personal and institutional crises. Indeed, at the time of its composition, the monastic community was divided by an internal conflict between pro- and anti-Cluniac factions, in which Simon himself was involved. Despite the Benedictine restorations of the tenth and eleventh centuries, the monks of Saint-Bertin had remained unenthusiastic about strict observance of the Rule. In 1100, Abbot Lambert (1095–1125), after an unsuccessful attempt to revive his community’s spiritual enthusiasm, decided to submit Saint-Bertin to the authority of Cluny. This move was violently opposed by the majority of the monks, who were extremely reluctant to give up their independence.171 Lambert had to resort to force to expel the rebellious monks.172 As always, those who remained at Sithiu and the new recruits who joined the community were extremely enthusiastic and, for a time, Saint-Bertin flourished under the Cluniac rule and attracted donations from the local population.173 The anti-Cluny party – the greatest part of the community, according to Simon – was still active, however, and at Abbot Lambert’s death in 1125, Saint-Bertin was once again divided between two factions.174 John (1095–1031), Lambert’s successor, steadfastly refused to submit himself to the abbot of Cluny who ordered him to make his profession there. Eventually, in 1131, John was publicly dismissed by the papal legate,

171

Lambert had secretly plotted Saint-Bertin’s submission to Cluny with the count and countess of Flanders, but the monks were informed of his projects by the bishop and canons of Thérouanne (Simon, Gesta, c. 64, p. 648); on Saint-Bertin’s Cluniac reform and its influence in Flanders, see E. Sabbe ‘La réforme clunisienne dans le comté de Flandre au début du XIIe siècle’ RBPH 9 (1930), 121–38, J. de Smet, ‘Quand Robert II confia-t-il Saint-Bertin à Cluny?’, RHE 46 (1951), 160–4, and Simon, Gesta, cc. 63–70, pp. 648–9; reactions to the Cluniac reform were not always as violent as at SaintBertin, see A.-M. Helvétius, ‘Aspects de l’influence de Cluny en Basse-Lotharingie aux XIe et XIIe siècles’ Publications de la Section Historique de l’Institut Grand-Ducal de Luxembourg 106 (1991), 49–68. 172 Simon, Gesta, c. 66, p. 648. 173 Simon, Gesta, c. 68, p. 649. 174 Simon, Gesta, c. 115, p. 658 and cc. 126–32, pp. 660–61.

88

Narrative Production fled to Rome after stealing one year of Saint-Bertin’s revenues and disappeared forever.175 His successor was Simon (1131–1136), the author of the continuation of the Gesta Abbatum. Simon was born at Ghent and entered Saint-Bertin as an oblate.176 ‘Very pious and well-learned’, writes one of the authors who completed the Gesta up to the year 1187; Simon had a speaking defect. In 1123, he took over the administration of Saint-Bertin when Abbot Lambert had to retire for health reasons, and in 1127, he became abbot of Auchy, which was a monastery dependent on Saint-Bertin.177 Since he was from the anti-Cluny faction, Simon refused to acknowledge the authority of the abbot of Cluny. As a consequence, Pope Innocent II nullified his election in 1136.178 Simon returned to Ghent where he spent the last years of his life. Nevertheless, he died and was buried in the cemetery adjacent to Saint-Omer.179 Indeed, the anti-Cluny faction finally got the last word. In 1139, after much further lobbying and discussion, Simon’s successor, Leon, received from Innocent II a clear and definitive declaration of independence for SaintBertin.180 Simon began his continuation at the time of Abbot Lambert, to whom he dedicated his work, and finished it during his exile at Ghent, since his Gesta includes his successor’s abbacy.181 Explicitly following Folcuin’s example, Simon wrote in his prologue that he meant to write the gesta of Lambert’s predecessors for the emulation of his successors; furthermore, he had gathered the charters given by the princes and various dignitaries and the donations made by the faithful, in order to ‘avoid controversies and to perpetuate peace’.182 Since the period covered by Simon’s Gesta goes well beyond the period studied here, I will not further expand on it. There is, however, an interesting comparison to make between Folcuin’s Gesta and Simon’s Gesta, especially concerning the circumstances of their redaction. Like Folcuin, Simon wrote for an abbot whose authority was threatened from outside – let us remember that the authority of the acting-abbot Adalulf was challenged by Arnulf the Great, who eventually demoted him in favor of Hildebrand. Simon, who finished the Gesta either during his abbacy or, rather, during his exile, was in a difficult position when he was himself abbot. It is also remarkable that both gesta were written at a time of crisis and uncertainty following religious reform. The parallels between the two gesta, and especially between 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182

Simon, Gesta, c. 132, p. 661. Cartulaire de l’abbaye de Saint-Bertin, p. 169; Simon, Gesta, Additamentum, c. 133, p. 661. Simon, Gesta, c. 71, p. 649, and Additamentum, c. 133, p. 661. Simon, Gesta, Additamentum, c. 133, p. 661. Simon, Gesta, Additamentum, c. 16, p. 663. Simon, Gesta, Additamentum, cc. 7, 10, 13, p. 663. See Cartulaire de l’abbaye de Saint-Bertin, p. 305. Simon, Gesta, p. 635.

89

Saint-Bertin the conditions in which they were written, bolsters not only the idea that narratives were often written in situations of crisis, but also, more specifically, that gesta, because of their multiple nature, were particularly apt to be considered as useful narrative tools to reconstruct the past.

Conclusion The history of Saint-Bertin is peculiar because the conflict between monks and canons which triggered many of the efforts to create a usable past for the community – the new vitae, forged charters and Folcuin’s Gesta – continued to keep the monks busy until the end of the eighteenth century. This unusual longevity provides an exceptional opportunity to observe the legacy of early medieval texts in the later Middle Ages and Early Modern period; furthermore, it draws attention to the fact that the problems raised by the selective maintenance of archives are not limited to the studied period. The rivalry between the monks of Saint-Bertin and the canons of SaintOmer was a pervasive issue in the texts produced by the community of Saint-Bertin, the VB2 and the related forged charters, the Gesta Abbatum, and even in the Inventio. Actually, the problem remained central throughout the history of Saint-Bertin, until the dissolution of the community at the French Revolution. The discord focused on two major points: on the one hand, the superiority and anteriority of the monastic community over the canons and on the other, the possession of St Omer’s relics by the monks. The argument about anteriority and superiority was the first one to emerge, and it concentrated on the foundation story and on the alleged submission of the canons to the monks. The rivalry between the two groups was a consequence of Saint-Bertin’s Benedictine restoration and most of the related texts (VB2 and VA2) and forgeries (Adroald’s donation, St Omer’s privilege) were produced in the mid-tenth century. The conflict outlived the effects of Gerard’s reform, as exemplified by the two forged charters asserting the submission of the canons to the monks which were unknown to Folcuin and were probably produced in the eleventh or twelfth century. The rediscovery of St Bertin’s relics by Bovo in 1050 added a new topic for dispute to the already conflicting questions of supremacy and anteriority: the possession of St Omer’s relics.183 We have seen that the satisfaction brought about by the extraordinary finding was dampened by the very embarrassing fact that the community was already honoring another set of relics as St Bertin’s. We have also seen that the problem was solved by burying the two sets of relics together. Soon after the finding, however, word spread that the relics, not so long ago honored as St Bertin’s, were in fact the body of Omer.

183

See Bovo, Relatio.

90

Narrative Production The rumor was based on the suggestion that, when Omer’s relics were stolen in 846 by Abbot Hugh, Bishop Folcuin had brought them back to Saint-Bertin and not to Saint-Omer. In order to thwart the rumor, the canons commissioned a third life of St Omer in which the episode of the theft and recovery of the relics was added, making it clear that Folcuin had actually brought the precious bones back to their place of origin.184 It was probably on this occasion that the canons commissioned an illustrated life of St Omer.185 The book was ornamented with twenty-three miniatures representing scenes from the life of the saint interspersed throughout the text. Four scenes are particularly noteworthy: one depicts the donation of Sithiu by Adroald to Omer;186 the other represents the arrival of St Bertin and his companions, walking with their heads humbly bent toward an enthroned Omer holding a crosier;187 the third scene shows the three men embarked in the boat which led to Sithiu;188 finally, the fourth depicts Omer’s burial in St Mary’s church.189 It is clear that all these scenes represent a direct refutation of the monks’ claims. Furthermore, the canons wrote another text asserting their possession of Omer’s body; it is a charter, dated from the day after St Bertin’s elevation, contending that the archbishop of Reims came to Saint-Omer’s church and publicly displayed his body.190 The monks, who were present during the elevation, albeit with reluctance according to the charter, signed it too. Whether or not this document and the facts it records are authentic, its shows that the canons felt pressured to defend the possession of their relics. Unfortunately, the precaution was not enough to silence the monks’ claim to St Omer’s relics and, for the remaining centuries, strife over their possession kept the two communities constantly bickering. Interestingly, the attacks almost always came from the monks, who relentlessly put faith in the same claims over and over again. In the same way, the most dubious texts and charters displayed in the debates were mostly manufactured by the Benedictines. The open conflict over Omer’s body started in 1324, when the abbot of Saint-Bertin announced publicly that the relics of the mysterious saint buried with St Bertin were actually St Omer’s.191 The canons contested 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191

VA3 (BHL 767b–768), AA SS, 3 Sept., pp. 406–16, episode at p. 414. S-O, MS 698; on the manuscript, see R. Argent Svoboda, The Illustrations of the Life of St. Omer. S-O, MS 698, fol. 15v. S-O, MS 698, fol. 17v. S-O, MS 698, fol. 18. S-O, MS 698, fol. 28. J. de Pas, ‘Charte de reconnaissance du corps de St. Omer par l’archevêque de Rheims’, BSAM 14 (1922–1929), 125–8. Saint-Omer, Archives Départementales, 2G, Liasses 215–16. On the conflicts between Saint-Bertin and Saint-Omer in general, see A. Hermand, ‘Recherches sur la question d’antériorité et de paternité entre les deux monastères primitifs de la ville de Saint-Omer’, MSAM 9 (1851), 49–192, and O. Bled, ‘Abbatiale et Collégiale. Les reliques de St. Omer et les reliques de St. Bertin’, MSAM 32 (1914–1920), 5–110.

91

Saint-Bertin the ‘discovery’ and exhibited their own relics; a succession of claims and counter-claims, exhibitions and processions of Saint-Omer’s legitimate and illegitimate relics ensued for more than 150 years. In 1465, the situation was so heated that the canons brought their case to the Parlement. But the abbot of Saint-Bertin at the time was an influential figure, and the king’s representative was not eager to pass a judgment which could have only been unfavorable to the abbey. However, tensions between the two opponents were rising to the point that processions became the occasion of altercations and even brawls. The necessity for maintaining public order in the city required a decision from the Parlement.192 It took thirty years of deliberations, but the issue was facilitated by the election in 1495 of a new provost for the canons. The illegitimate son of the duke of Burgundy, he was strong enough to counterbalance the abbot’s connections with the French king. The Parlement’s decision was not only slow to come, but it was not very bold, since it was decided to let the two great figures make a deal outside the court. According to the arrangement, the monks of Saint-Bertin could no longer display St Omer’s name on the shrine that they carried during general processions.193 Surprisingly enough, the ‘concordat’ was respected and no further claims to St Omer’s relics were made by the monastic community until the eighteenth century. Indeed, during these years the monks were preoccupied with fighting the canons of Saint-Omer over precedence during religious processions. Based on the principle that Bertin was the founder of Sithiu and its first abbot, the contention over precedence was still unresolved when the Revolutionary troops expelled the monks from their abbey. In the thirteenth century, the abbots appropriated the episcopal right to wear the miter and carry the cross. However, it was not a crucial issue until the chapter of Saint-Omer became an episcopal see in 1559. The promotion of their perpetual enemies re-opened the monks’ old wounds, while the canons, empowered by their advancement, were eager to receive due honors. The legal battle over the question of anteriority and supremacy required the intervention of Pope Clement VIII,194 of Chamillart, secretary of state for war under Louis XIV, and of Louis XIV himself, as he ordered Chamillart to resort to any means, even force, to restrain the unruly abbot of Saint-Bertin.195 Besides the intervention of major historical figures, this pathetic provincial struggle exhausted Saint-Bertin’s wealth, and in 1734, the abbot of SaintBertin had to admit that legal fees and the publication of innumerable pamphlets on the controversy had seriously endangered the financial situation of his monastery.196 192 193 194 195 196

Saint-Omer, Archives Départementales, 2G, Liasses 216–20. Saint-Omer, Archives Départementales, 2G, Liasses 223–5. Saint-Omer, Archives Départementales, 2G, Liasse 230. Saint-Omer, Archives Départementales, 2G, Liasse 235. Saint-Omer, Archives Départementales, 2G, Liasse 236.

92

Narrative Production In the course of the different trials, both parties were careful to submit relevant documents backing their affirmations. Invariably, the canons would present their manuscripts containing the Vita Prima of their patron saint or texts derived form this version, showing that the original donation had be given first to Omer. The monks would bring the texts of the VB2, Folcuin’s Gesta and the various charters already mentioned. Both sides tried to use the vita of Bishop Folcuin to prove that Omer’s body was brought back either to his own church or to Saint-Bertin. However, if the monks were willing to introduce their own texts in the debate, they were reluctant to show original manuscripts; it seems that their tactic was to copy useful excerpts from their medieval manuscripts and take them to court. Of course, this raised the canons’ skepticism, especially concerning the charters and the Gesta Abbatum Sithiensium. In 1735, the lawyer for the chapter suggested that the donation charters of Omer and Adroald and the charter of Bishop Folcuin were forgeries made only thirty years earlier.197 Canon de Rudder, who in 1754 published a whole treatise on the anteriority of Saint-Omer over Saint-Bertin, went as far as saying that Folcuin’s Gesta Abbatum Sithiensium was a forgery and that Folcuin himself was an invention.198 Because of the continuation of the conflict throughout the Early Modern period, Folcuin’s Gesta was a text cherished by successive generations of monks who repeatedly copied it until the eighteenth century. A very old copy of the Gesta, which may have been Folcuin’s autograph, survived in SaintBertin’s archives until the French Revolution: it was known as the Vetus Folcuinus. This manuscript has now disappeared, but it was copied by Joseph Dewitte, the last archivist of the abbey, before the Revolution (SO 815). Joseph Dewitte’s copy of the Gesta was not the first one. Folcuin’s text had been copied in the twelfth century together with its continuation (BSM 146 and 146a). Between 1509 and 1512, the monk Alard Tassard made a partial copy of the Gesta, following the Vetus Folcuinus (SO 750). In 1693, Bertin Portebois made yet another copy from the Vetus Folcuinus and the twelfth-century manuscript (Paris, BN, MS Latin, nouv. acq. 275). These successive copies of the Gesta tell enough about the importance accorded to the text by the community of Saint-Bertin. It is all the more striking that the monks were very secretive with their archives – as experienced by Mabillon himself – which means that all these copies were certainly not made for an outside 197

Me Poitevin, Mémoire sommaire pour les doyen, chanoines et chapitre de l’église cathédrale de Saint-Omer, parties intervenantes dans l’instance pendante au conseil (n.p., 1835), p. 12. 198 Ch. de Rudder, La vérité de L’église de Saint-Omer et son antériorité sur l’abbaye de Saint-Bertin ou réfutation de la Dissertation Historique et Critique sur l’Origine et l’Ancienneté de l’Abbaye de Saint-Bertin (Paris, 1754), pp. 24–5; it is a reply to a work commissioned by the monks: Dissertation Historique et Critique sur l’Origine et l’Ancienneté de l’Abbaye de Saint-Bertin et sur la Supériorité qu’Elle Avait autrefois sur l’Église de Saint-Omer (Paris, 1737).

93

Saint-Bertin public. If the Gesta was copied so many times, it is because it was still used in the Early Modern period, probably in matters of landholding and certainly in the context of the conflict between monks and canons. The canons who charged that Folcuin was born of the monks’ imagination and that the Gesta Abbatum Sithiensium was a forgery aimed only at satisfying the monks’ inflated ego undoubtedly pushed source criticism a bit too far. Nevertheless, we have serious reasons to consider with much care and even distrust the archival legacy left by the monks of Saint-Bertin. While we can take for granted that the monk Folcuin wrote his Gesta Abbatum Sithiensium in 962 and that a copy of it was made in the twelfth century, the circumstances of the conservation of Saint-Bertin’s archives should make us cautious about believing they are trustworthy. Indeed, the religious community spent most of its life endlessly discussing and reinventing its past in order to win a battle whose roots dated back to the earliest part of its existence. The evidence left to the modern historian are layers of forgeries, invented narratives and subtle omissions built up over nine hundred years. Furthermore, we owe what is left today of Saint-Bertin’s charters to their last archivist, Joseph Dewitte, who spent most of his life collecting and copying all the documents kept in the archives of his abbey from the foundation to his own time.199 Besides his copy of Folcuin’s Gesta, he gathered all the charters from Saint-Bertin in his twelve-volume Grand Cartulaire. The originals of the charters were destroyed during the French Revolution and only Dewitte’s copies survive. This is a serious problem since Dewitte’s own objectivity is doubtful: he was the first monk, for more than two centuries after the ‘concordat’, to claim once again that Saint-Bertin, indeed, possessed the relics of St Omer.200

199 200

Grand Cartulaire, S-O, MS 803. On Dewitte, see G. Delamotte, ‘Dom Charles-Joseph Dewitte, l’auteur du Grand Cartulaire de Saint-Bertin pendant la Révolution’, Revue de Lille 29 (1910–1911), 330–44.

94

PART II The Hagiographic Cycle of St Rictrude

WITH THE STUDY of Saint-Bertin we have seen how one monastic community selectively preserved, used and altered its archives and historiographic narratives and created new ones so as to make its past useful for present needs. Moreover, from Folcuin’s Gesta to Simon’s Gesta, it is clear that the community almost continuously – save for the sixty-year gap between the two gesta – kept archives and produced new narratives based on local historiographic tradition. In this process, the foundation story of Sithiu stands out as the main period of the community’s past that was most frequently used and transformed. Because of the abundance of sources produced at Saint-Bertin, and because their main rivals, the canons of Saint-Omer, preserved the original foundation story, it is possible to reconstruct how and why the monks adjusted their past by means of these new narratives and forged charters. In a number of ways, the case of the abbey of Marchiennes is radically different from that of Saint-Bertin. In comparison with the renowned and wealthy Saint-Bertin, Marchiennes was a modest community, struggling in the shadow of its powerful neighbor, Saint-Amand. Unlike Saint-Bertin, there is no sign of Marchiennes’ archives until the eleventh century. Indeed, by the early tenth century, because of neglect or destruction, Marchiennes’ archives had disappeared and the cults and legends of the community’s saints had fallen into oblivion. Despite the lack of written evidence, Hucbald of Saint-Amand, who wrote the life of Marchiennes’ patron saint, Rictrude, at the beginning of the tenth century, was able, thanks to oral tradition and a good deal of ‘imaginative memory’, to piece together a remarkably detailed foundation story of Marchiennes. This seminal text of Marchiennes’ historiography cannot be compared to other contemporary sources; therefore, the circumstances and the purpose of its redaction can only be inferred from the text itself. The Vita Rictrudis not only fulfilled the community’s basic needs for a liturgical text upon which the cult of its saints could be based, but it also emphasized the 95

The Hagiographic Cycle of St Rictrude community’s secular and spiritual prestige by associating the saint and her family with a number of prestigious lay and religious people of her time. Because the Vita Rictrudis introduces a great number of secondary characters, and because it could not be contradicted by other texts, later authors were left free to appropriate the legend and adapt it to their needs. Hence, in the course of the tenth and eleventh centuries, most of Rictrude’s children, who were saints in their own right, were given their own vitae based on the Vita Rictrudis. Furthermore, from the eleventh century onward, the core of the legend itself was considerably altered in order to sacralize the community’s landholding and to protect it from predatory lay neighbors. Finally, some time in the tenth century, the relics of Rictrude’s son, Maurontus, and their friend’s St Amatus, were translated to the chapter church of Douai. The translation of the saints, who were originally part of the legend of Rictrude and Marchiennes, generated the appropriation of the Vita Rictrudis by the canons of Saint-Amé. In their own foundation story, written in the eleventh century, the canons integrated the sections of the vita that were relevant for the legend of their tutelary saints and transformed them according to their own needs – namely the legitimization of their landholding. Therefore, over two centuries, Rictrude’s legend grew from oral tradition to the Vita Rictrudis, and then into a complex narrative cycle, composed not only of hagiographic texts, but also of charters and entries in annals and chronicles. The first chapter of this section (Chapter 4) will examine the formation and transformations of Rictrude’s legend at Marchiennes itself. The second chapter (Chapter 5) will deal with the transformation of the original story, yet again, by an entirely different community, the chapter of Saint-Amé.

96

CHAPTER FOUR

Saint Rictrude, her Family and the Abbey of Marchiennes (c. 640–1130)

Introduction1 The abbey of Marchiennes (dep. Nord, arr. Douai) was founded around 640 by St Amand in the context of his mission to the Scarpe region. It was located on the bank of the river Scarpe, a few miles from Saint-Amand.2 The foundation story of the abbey is related in the vita of its patron saint, Rictrude, who, at the death of her husband Adalbald, entered Marchiennes and became abbess.3 The abbey may have been built on land that belonged to her husband’s patrimony, as was the case for its close neighbor, Hamage. The history of Marchiennes from its foundation to its restoration in 1024 is, however, obscure because of the scarcity of sources. The overall impression left by the few remaining documents related to Marchiennes is that of a low-profile community, living in the shadow of Saint-Amand, which never fully recovered from the ninth-century secularization and the vikings’ depredations. The abbey of Marchiennes only really took off after the 1024 restoration, which transformed the hitherto mixed community into an exclusively male one. The restoration initiated a period of artistic and intellectual activity as well as an intense operation of recovery of spoiled assets.

1

A concise version of this chapter has been published: K. Ugé, ‘The Legend of Saint Rictrude: Formation and Transformation (Tenth–Twelfth Century)’, in AngloNorman Studies 23 (2001), 281–9. 2 There is no comprehensive study of Marchiennes; see the notice by H. Platelle, ‘Marchiennes’, in Catholicisme, Hier, Aujourd’hui, Demain 8 (Paris, 1979), cols. 414–16. 3 Vita Rictrudis (BHL 7247). There are three different editions of VR: AA SS, 3 May, pp. 81–9, PL 132, cols. 829–48, and ASB 4, ed. J. Ghesquière (Brussels, 1787), pp. 488–503; each edition is in some ways lacunary and, unless otherwise signaled, I have used the ASB edition; for the prologue alone, see Vita Rictrudis Prologus, ed. W. Levison, MGH SRM 6 (Hanover, 1913), pp. 91–4; VR is translated into English by J. Alborg and J. A. McNamara, Sainted Women of the Dark Ages (Durham, 1992), pp. 195–219. On Hucbald’s hagiographical writings, see J. M. H. Smith, ‘The Hagiography of Hucbald of Saint-Amand’, Studi Medievali 3rd series, 36 (1994), 517–42; J. M. H. Smith, ‘A Hagiographer at Work: Hucbald and the Library at Saint-Amand’, RB 106 (1996), 151–71, and H. Platelle, ‘Le thème de la conversion à travers les oeuvres hagiographiques d’Hucbald de Saint-Amand’, RN 68 (1986), 511–31.

97

The Hagiographic Cycle of St Rictrude Since the abbey of Marchiennes is the central locus of St Rictrude’s legend, the first section of this chapter will be devoted to the history of the abbey from its foundation to the twelfth century. In the second section, I will discuss the formation and transformations of Rictrude’s legend at Marchiennes and I will show how these transformations reflect changes in the situation of the community itself. The seminal text of the legend is the Vita Rictrudis (VR) by Hucbald of Saint-Amand. It was written in 907 after a period during which the community had lost track of the shrines of its tutelary saints and of the documents pertaining to its foundation legend. Hence, the VR aimed not only to tell the story of the life and deeds of its patron saint, but also to create a narrative of the origins of the abbey. In order to provide a historical context for Rictrude’s life and to show her spiritual and social distinction as well as the prestige of her abbey, the VR emphasized Rictrude and her family’s relations with major religious and lay figures of their time. After the restoration of Marchiennes in 1024, the foundation legend was once again transformed, this time to sacralize Marchiennes’ possessions by asserting Rictrude’s ownership of the original land. Indeed, one of the community’s main preoccupations after its refoundation was the reconstitution of its landed assets. Finally, in the twelfth century the genealogy of Rictrude’s husband was ‘improved’ in order to link him to the Merovingian royal family and to other local saints.

Marchiennes and Hamage: history The foundation of the abbey of Marchiennes occurred in the context of the missionary work of St Amand in the Scarpe region, and it is probably roughly contemporary with the foundation of Elnon. The first mention of Marchiennes is found in the Suppletio to the vita of St Amand, written by Milo of Saint-Amand between 850 and 872. The first chapter of the Suppletio begins with an enumeration of the monasteries founded by St Amand: Blandinium at Ghent, Marchiennes, Leuze, Renaix, Barisis-au-Bois, and of course, Elnon, where the saint was buried.4 Milo’s list of Amand’s foundations is probably reliable. The foundation of Elnon by the ‘Apostle of Belgium’ is attested in the Vita Amandi Episcopi Prima (VAm).5 The VAm also testifies that Amand initiated the foundation of monasteries in the pagus of Ghent, that is Saint-Peter (Blandinium) and

4

Milo, Vita Amandi Episcopi Secunda (Suppletio Milonis) (BHL 333), ed. B. Krusch, MGH SRM 5 (Hanover, 1910), c. 1, pp. 450–1; on the Suppletio Milonis, see E. de Moreau, Saint Amand, apôtre de la Belgique et du nord de la France (Louvain, 1927), pp. 52–62. 5 Vita Amandi Episcopi Prima (VAm) (BHL 332), ed. B. Krusch, MGH SRM 5 (Hanover, 1910), pp. 428–49 (c. 22, p. 445).

98

St Rictrude and the Abbey of Marchiennes Saint-Bavo.6 Regarding Barisis, two charters dated 663 and 666 record respectively the donation of the villa by King Childeric II and Amand’s donation of the same villa to the monks.7 As for Marchiennes – as well as for Leuze and Renaix – Milo’s text represents the earliest testimony of the community’s existence and of the role played by Amand in its foundation.8 Still, Marchiennes’ proximity to Elnon makes it conceivable that both monasteries were the product of the same mission. Although Marchiennes was founded in the seventh century, the earliest account of its foundation is preserved in the VR. As we shall see, Hucbald’s fairly detailed relation of Rictrude’s life and of the foundation of Marchiennes, appears to rely on very fragmentary, perhaps even doubtful, sources. Hucbald dedicated the VR to Bishop Stephen of Liège, who had insisted that the author sign and date his text, as it was requested from scholastici.9 The actual patrons of the VR were, however, the clerics and nuns from Marchiennes, who had petitioned Hucbald to write the life of their patron saint. Hucbald had first declined the offer, both because he had never heard anything about the life of the saint, and because all written documents were alleged to have disappeared when the abbey was destroyed by vikings (c. 881–883).10 Eventually, the clerics and nuns found scattered fragments of 6

7

8

9

10

VAm, cc. 13–15, pp. 436–9; on the foundation of Saint-Peter and Saint-Bavo, see most recently G. Declercq, ‘Heiligen, lekenabten en hervormers’, and Declercq and Verhulst, ‘Early Medieval Ghent’, with a bibliography. Childeric’s charter is published in Diplomata Regum Francorum ex Stirpe Merowingica. Diplomata Maiorum Domus Regia. Diplomata Spuria, ed. K. Pertz, MGH (Hanover, 1872), n. 25, pp. 25–6, and Amand’s charter in Diplomata, ed. J.-M. Pardessus, II, pp. 133–4; see de Moreau, St Amand, pp. 227–9. On Leuze and Renaix, see J. Nazet, ‘Antoing et Leuze: fondations monastiques de Saint Amand?’, in Centenaire du Séminaire d’Histoire Médiévale de l’Université Libre de Bruxelles, ed. G. Despy (Brussels, 1977), pp. 9–19, and J. Nazet, ‘Crises et réformes dans les abbayes hainuyères du IXe au début du XIIe siècle’, in Recueil d’études d’histoire Hainuyère offertes à Maurice-A. Arnould, ed. J.-M. Cauchies and J.-M. Duvosquel (Mons, 1983), pp. 461–96 (pp. 465–6). VR Prologus, p. 93. Marchiennes was originally located in the territory of the bishopric of Tournai, but in the middle of the eighth century it was included in the bishopric of Cambrai; as bishop of Liège, Stephen was considered a successor of St Amand, who was bishop of Maastricht from 648/649 to 651/652. On the bishopric of Liège, its different sees and its bishops in the early Middle Ages, see J.-L. Kupper, ‘Leodium’, in Series Episcoporum Ecclesiae Catholicae Occidentalis, Series V: Germaniae (Stuttgart, 1982) I: Archiepiscopatus Coloniensis, pp. 43–83 (pp. 60–1 for Stephen); see also idem, ‘La geste des pontifes de l’Église de Tongres, Maastricht ou Liège’, in Liège. Autour de l’an mil, la naissance d’une principauté (Xe–XIIe siècle) (Liège, 2000), pp. 15–19, and idem, ‘Liste simplifiée des évêques de Tongres-Maastricht-Liège, depuis les origines jusqu’en 1200’, in ibid., p. 21. VR Prologus, p. 93; the Annales Vedastini, ed. B. de Simpson, in Annales Xantenses et Vedastini, MGH SRG (Hanover, 1909), pp. 41–82 (p. 48) mention that the vikings plundered the banks of the river Scarpe in 881 and the Annales Elnonenses, ed. Ph. Grierson, in Les Annales de Saint-Pierre de Gand et de Saint-Amand, pp. 132–175 (p. 147)

99

The Hagiographic Cycle of St Rictrude texts and presented them to Hucbald, who eventually accepted the commission, after verifying that they matched the testimony of sworn witnesses, old enough to have seen the full texts.11 The VR remains the only witness to the early years of the community; hence, despite the improbable origin of its sources, it is essential, as a first step, in understanding narrative production at Marchiennes. A careful examination of the text, of the circumstances of its redaction and of Hucbald’s narrative technique will then help to identify the most dubious elements of the legend. The foundation of Marchiennes and the Vita Rictrudis According to the VR, Rictrude was born in Gascony to noble parents – Ernoldus and Lichia – and came of age during the reign of King Clothar II (584–629) and his son Dagobert (629–39).12 Once of age, she married Adalbald, a Frankish aristocrat, and member of the king’s court, who owned land in Ostrevant.13 The political context of Rictrude and Adalbald’s betrothal was the period between 629, when Charibert became king of Aquitaine, and 632, when Dagobert unified Aquitaine within the Frankish kingdoms under his sole authority.14 At this time, Franks repeatedly infiltrated Gascony, and Adalbald was one of them.15 According to Hucbald, among the Franks who infiltrated Gascony at that time, was also St Amand, who had been exiled from Dagobert’s court, and who had wandered some time in the region, still largely pagan, before being recalled in 639 for the baptism of Dagobert’s son, Sigebert.16 After their marriage, which is thus to be dated between 629 and 632, Adalbald and Rictrude lived in Ostrevant and had four children: a son, Maurontus and three daughters, Clotsind, Eusebia and Adalsind. The children were baptized by the most prestigious people of their time: the first

11 12 13 14 15 16

mention another viking attack on Saint-Amand in 883; Marchiennes may have been attacked by the intruders at the same time, but the extent of the destruction is, of course, not measurable; the reference to the vikings was a frequent topos in ninthand tenth-century historiography to justify the lack of evidence on the past of monastic communities. VR Prologus, p. 93. VR, c. 5, p. 490. VR, c. 9, p. 492. VR, cc. 5–9, pp. 490–2; S. Lebecq, Les origines franques, Ve–IXe siècle, Nouvelle Histoire de la France Médiévale 1 (Paris, 1990), pp. 126–8. VR, c. 9, p. 492. VR, cc. 6–8, pp. 491–2; Hucbald found the story of Amand’s peregrination among the Vascons in VAm; however, in VAm this episode comes later in Amand’s life, after his mission at Caloo and after his episcopate at Maastricht (648/649–651/652). It is presented as his last journey outside northern Francia: see de Moreau, St Amand, pp. 144–5 and 207–8. On the dates of Amand’s episcopate, see A. Dierkens, ‘Saint Amand et la fondation de l’abbaye de Nivelles’, RN 68 (1986), 325–34.

100

St Rictrude and the Abbey of Marchiennes born, Maurontus, was baptized by St Richer, Clotsind by St Amand himself and Eusebia had Nanthild, wife of King Dagobert, as godmother.17 Some time after their last child was born, Adalbald was assassinated on his way from Ostrevant to Gascony, and the life of Rictrude’s family was radically altered.18 Once a widow, Rictrude began contemplating a religious life, encouraged in that direction by St Amand. Amand’s role in her conversion was a natural step since she lived in Ostrevant, where her husband’s family was richly endowed and where Amand elected to found his monastery of Elnon.19 Of course, her calling encountered some resistance, since the king, who is not named but could be Dagobert, wanted to marry her to one of his optimates. Rictrude carefully staged a dramatic demonstration of her determination to resist the king’s will and to follow her religious aspirations. She gave a dinner for the king and his court in her villa of Boiry, and, as everybody was cheering and drinking, she stood up and took a glass; but instead of drinking to her guests’ health, as everybody was expecting, she took a veil which had been blessed by St Amand and placed it on her head to display her desire to enter the religious life.20 The episode irked the king, but eventually she was given permission to follow her religious aspirations, and she entered Marchiennes. The abbey had been founded for a male community by Amand himself and ruled by his disciple, Jonatus, who introduced women, seemingly even before Rictrude joined. Locum vero ubi spiritualibus daret operam exercitiis, cum consilio et auxilio saepe dicti Praesulis, qui eidem erat a secretis, elegit valde congruum, monasterium scilicet Martianas vocatum, quod ab eodem Pontifice super fluvium Scarb fuerat constructum. Cui perficiendo et ordinando idem Praesul discipulum suum praefecerat Abbatem S Jonatum, venerabilem virum, cujus adhuc in eodem monasterio sacrum corpus habetur reconditum. In quo et monachorum ordinem B Amandus haberi voluit: sed jam dictus abbas Jonatus sanctimoniales, pro ut sibi visum fuerat, aggregavit.21 (Then, she chose a fitting place, a monastery called Marchiennes, which the same pontiff had built on the river Scarpe, where she might carry out her spiritual exercises, with the prelate’s advice and help in private counsel. The pre17 18 19

20 21

VR, c. 10, p. 493; nothing is said about Adalsind, who died at Marchiennes on a Christmas Eve during her mother’s abbacy. VR, c. 11, p. 493. Since Hucbald describes at length Amand’s activities in Gascony, it would be tempting to imagine that the saint had already met Rictrude in her fatherland; Hucbald, however, does not explicitly make this connection. On the significance of the consecrated veil, see A.-M. Helvétius, ‘Virgo et virago: réflexions sur le pouvoir du voile consacré d’après les sources hagiographiques de la Gaule du Nord’, in Femmes et pouvoir des femmes à Byzance et en Occident (VIe–XIe siècles), ed. S. Lebecq, A. Dierkens, R. LeJan and J.-M. Sansterre (Lille 1999), pp 189–203. VR, c. 14, p. 495. VR, c. 16, p. 496.

101

The Hagiographic Cycle of St Rictrude late had assigned his venerable disciple Jonatus, whose holy body is still resting in that monastery, as abbot for its completion and ordering. For Blessed Amand had intended to install an order of monks there: but the abbot gathered nuns instead as had been shown to him.22)

Rictrude ruled Marchiennes until her death on 12 May at the age of seventy-four and was succeeded by her eldest daughter Clotsind.23 The main plot of the VR thus consists of the history of the foundation of Marchiennes and the life and deeds of St Rictrude before and after she became abbess of Amand’s foundation. To this main story, Hucbald appended several sub-plots of which the heroes are two of Rictrude’s children, Maurontus and Eusebia, who, following their mother’s example, embraced the monastic life, became heads of religious communities and later, saints in their own right. Furthermore, the story of Maurontus is related to the legend of an otherwise unknown saint, Amatus, bishop of Sion, who happened to be exiled in the region. Religious vocation was a tradition in Rictrude’s family: indeed, Adalbald’s grandmother, Gertrude, had already founded her own monastic community at Hamage, near Marchiennes.24 Although Hucbald never insinuates that the original asset of Marchiennes belonged to Adalbald – an idea that eleventhand twelfth-century sources would develop – the proximity of the family’s Eigenklöster of Hamage and the fact that he was known to have many possessions in Ostrevant might indicate that Marchiennes, too, was founded on his patrimonial lands. At Gertrude’s death, her great-granddaughter, Eusebia, whom she had raised at Hamage, was appointed abbess. Eusebia was only twelve years old at the time, however, and her mother, considering her too young for the responsibility and freedom offered by the position, ordered her daughter to come back to Marchiennes. Eusebia was so reluctant to join her mother that Rictrude had to resort to the king’s authority to recover her daughter. Compelled to leave her monastery by the king’s order, Eusebia left for Marchiennes with Gertrude’s relics and her small community. Nevertheless, Eusebia did not readily accept her mother’s exertion of parental authority, and she left Marchiennes regularly at night to visit Hamage.

22 23 24

Translation in Sainted Women, pp. 207–8. VR, c. 32, p. 502; Hucbald gives the day of her death, but not the year. On Hamage, see H. Platelle, ‘Hamage’, DHGE 22 (1988), cols. 199–200, and Nazet, ‘Crises et réformes’, pp. 476–8; since 1990, the site of Hamage is being excavated by Etienne Louis and the Service Archéologique du Musée de Douai; E. Louis, ‘Aux débuts du monachisme en Gaule du Nord: les fouilles de l’abbaye mérovingienne et carolingienne de Hamage (Nord)’, in Clovis, histoire et mémoire. Le baptême de Clovis et son écho à travers l’histoire, ed. M. Rouche, 2 vols. (Paris, 1997), II, 843–68, and idem, ‘Sorores et fratres in Hamatico degentes. Naissance, évolution et disparition d’une abbaye au haut Moyen Age: Hamage (France, Nord)’, De la Meuse à l’Ardenne 29 (1999), 15–47.

102

St Rictrude and the Abbey of Marchiennes Although the purpose of the nightly visits was obviously pious – Eusebia used to bring her prayer book and her harp with her and celebrated the vigils and offices of the hours – Rictrude’s anger when she heard of her daughter’s escapades was terrifying. Unable to convince her with words, the mother resolved to resort to physical punishment. The correction was entrusted to Eusebia’s brother, Maurontus, who took his role so much to heart that Eusebia barely survived the beating. Indeed, while her brother was energetically whipping her, she fell on the sword of one of the acolytes who were holding her. The wound was so serious that for the remainder of her short life, she kept spitting blood and pus.25 Eusebia’s determination was, however, not yet curbed. Abbots, bishops and local potentates vainly tried to convince her to give up Hamage and to stay with her mother. Finally, the holy men acknowledged their failure to convince her and, eventually, they advised Rictrude to let her go back to Hamage. Eusebia took Gertrude’s relics with her, gathered her community and returned to her beloved monastery. Maurontus’s beating must have been efficient since, once at Hamage, God recalled her to his side, and she died, still an adolescent, on 16 March.26 Eusebia’s punishment must have been considered problematic by the legend’s audience because Hucbald felt compelled to answer ‘those who would slander the righteous with forked tongues and misplaced pride’, and who questioned the sanctity of such violent characters.27 As a good theologian, Hucbald was able to reconcile all the points of view and confirm the sanctity of all the protagonists.28 Maurontus was Rictrude’s eldest child and only son; he started his career as a soldier at the king’s court and even contracted a marriage. He soon left his wife, however, to become a monk and was tonsured at Marchiennes by St Amand, after a bee had circled his head three times as a sign of election.29 Once tonsured by Amand, Maurontus founded a monastery at Breuil-surLys, today Merville (Nord, arr. Douai), which was also part of his family’s patrimony.30 Breuil is an important place within St Rictrude’s legend, because St Amatus, bishop of Sion in exile, remained in the monastery as a prisoner under Maurontus’s guardianship.31 According to the VR, Amatus had been

25 26 27 28

29 30 31

VR, c. 25, p. 501. VR, c. 27, pp. 501–2, and c. 31, p. 502. This digression has been cut in the Acta Sanctorum Belgii edition: see AA SS, 3 May, p. 87. On this episode, see I. Deug-Su, ‘La “Vita Rictrudis” di Ubaldo di Saint-Amand: un’agiografia intelletuale e I santi imperfetti’, Studi Medievali, 3rd series, 31 (1990), 545–82. VR, c. 23, pp. 499–500. VR, c. 24, p. 500. On the bishopric of Sion, see F. O. Dubuis and A. Lugon, ‘Les premiers siècles d’un diocèse alpin: recherches, acquis et questions sur l’évêché du Valais’, Vallesia 47 (1992), 1–61.

103

The Hagiographic Cycle of St Rictrude ‘unfairly accused of treason by King Theoderic III’ (675–691), who sent him to Péronne under Abbot Ultan’s custody.32 Indeed, the re-establishment of Theoderic III in Neustria and Burgundy in 675, and the subsequent return to power of the Neustrian maior Ebroin, induced troubles and revolts in Burgundy. Amatus may have been among the bishops – such as Filibert of Jumièges and Chramnelenus of Embrun – who, as partisans of St Leodegar, were exiled at the time of his arrest and martyred at the hand of Ebroin (c. 678–679).33 At Ultan’s death (at an unknown date), Amatus’s surveillance was entrusted to Maurontus, who kept him in his monastery of Breuil. Amatus’s personality will always remain elusive: the VR is the only source that mentions him; moreover, the history of his diocese in these remote times is a blank.34 The name of Sion itself must have puzzled the scribes who copied the VR, since some of them made him bishop of Sens (episcopus Senonensis) instead of bishop of Sion (episcopus Sedunensis). There is no doubt, however, that Hucbald originally meant Sion: not only is there no place for Amatus in the list of the bishops of Sens, but also, as demonstrated by François Dolbeau, the oldest manuscripts of the VR and of the Vita Amati Longior (VAL) agree on Sedunensis.35 Furthermore, the identity of Amatus was probably unclear to Hucbald himself, since in the VR, he gave 13 September as Amatus of Sion’s feast day, which is also the feast of St Amatus of Remiremont.36 Despite the apparent paucity of sources he had access to when he wrote the VR, Hucbald also composed a life of St Amatus, the so-called Vita Amati Longior (VAL). He added a few details about Amatus’s life which he had not inserted in his oldest text.37 First of all, the VAL recounts a miracle performed at Cambrai by Amatus on his way from Péronne to Breuil – he hung his coat on a sun ray. This miracle emphasizes the sanctity of Amatus, who came to Breuil in a humiliating position, and helps to justify the holy status that he would acquire at Marchiennes.38 More interesting is the information that Amatus stayed at Hamage for a time before going to Breuil, which suggests 32 33 34

35

36 37 38

On Ultan, see Dierkens, Abbayes et chapitres, pp. 307–9. See I. Wood, The Merovingian Kingdoms (450–751) (London, 1994), pp. 230–1, and Lebecq, Les origines franques, pp. 172–6. The last known Merovingian bishop of Sion was Protais, who attended the council of Châlon-sur-Saône (between 639 and 654), see Dubuis and Lugon, ‘Les premiers siècles d’un diocèse Alpin’, 29–32. F. Dolbeau, ‘Le dossier de saint Amé vénéré à Douai’, Anal. Boll. (1979), 89–110 (pp. 108–9); Vita Amati Longior (BHL 363) is published in Catalogus Codicum Hagiographicorum Bibliothecae Bruxellensis, 2 vols. (Brussels, 1889), II, 44–55; the oldest surviving manuscript of VR is Douai, Bibliothèque Municipale, MS 849 (XI1) and the oldest manuscript of VAL is Bollandianus 506 in the Bibliotheque des Bollandistes in Brussels (XI1) (both were written at Marchiennes). Dolbeau, ‘Le dossier de saint Amé’, p. 102, n. 2. Dolbeau has definitely attributed VAL to Hucbald: ‘Le dossier de saint Amé’. VAL, c. 19, pp. 50–1.

104

St Rictrude and the Abbey of Marchiennes that Hamage was probably a double monastery. According to the VAL, during his visit to Hamage, Amatus had impressed Rictrude and Maurontus so much with his piety that they decided to entrust him with the direction of Breuil’s community. The VR, on the other hand, did not refer to Amatus’s abbacy.39 Amatus remained with Maurontus and the community of Breuil until his death; there, he became a model of piety for all. According to the VR, Amatus would have died on 13 September, before Maurontus, who buried him with honor. The VR also specifies that, before his death, Maurontus ‘had given the whole of its inherited estates over to him through the instrument of charters’. Since Amatus died before Maurontus, however, the effects of the will were void.40 Maurontus, who had survived his mother, died on 5 May.41 These are the bare facts about Rictrude’s and her children’s lives and the foundation of Marchiennes as they were narrated by Hucbald of SaintAmand. Although he supplied a fairly detailed description of the foundation of Marchiennes and of the life of St Rictrude from her youth to her death, Hucbald provided few elements allowing the precise dating of the events.42 This is not surprising considering that his sources were probably vague, as will be discussed later in this chapter; furthermore, he had little dated information to fix his story on, since even the chronology the vita of St Amand, original founder of Marchiennes, is uncertain. Regarding Rictrude’s dates of life and abbacy, it is impossible to give more than approximate dates. Some evidence is to be found in the VR itself. We have seen that Rictrude’s wedding to Adalbald took place between 629 and 632. Their daughter Eusebia was held over the baptismal font by Nanthild, wife of king Dagobert, probably before Dagobert’s death in 639, which provides a terminus ante quem for Eusebia’s birth. As the third child of a couple married after 629, Eusebia could not be born before 632, which provides a terminus post quem for her birth. Therefore, we can consider that Eusebia was born between 632 and 639. Since Hucbald asserts that she became abbess of Hamage when she was twelve years old, her abbacy must have started between 644 and 651. Because the VR also states that Rictrude had been ruling Marchiennes for some time when her daughter became abbess, Rictrude’s abbacy may already have begun in the first years of the 640s. Although they remain vague, these dates are in agreement with the other elements of chronology found in the VR. If we consider that the king

39 40

VAL, c. 24, p. 53. VR, c. 24, p. 500, and VAL c. 27, p. 54; the corresponding passage of VR is ambiguous regarding the subject of the bequest, but VAL clearly gives Maurontus as subject. 41 VR, c. 31, p. 502. 42 On the chronology of VR and the impossibility of determining specific dates, see I. Pagani, ‘Ionas-Ionatus: a proposito della biografia di Giona di Bobbio’, Studi Medievali 3rd series, 29 (1988), 45–85 (pp. 58–69).

105

The Hagiographic Cycle of St Rictrude who wished her to marry one of his men was Dagobert, her decision to enter the convent had to be taken by 639, which implies that Rictrude could have entered Marchiennes in the early 640s. However, we cannot rule out that the king could have been Clovis II (born in 634); in this case, the episode of the dinner at Boiry should be pushed forward by at least ten years and Rictrude would then have entered Marchiennes around 650. Both possibilities are compatible with the date of death of Rictrude’s husband, Adalbald; indeed, Adalbald died after 633 – the earliest possible date for his fourth child’s birth. As for the date of Rictrude’s death, it is as obscure as the other chronological elements of her biography. She must have been at least twelve years old when she married Adalbald (c. 629–632), which places her birth in 617 at the latest; according to the VR, Rictrude was seventy-four years old when she died, which gives a terminus ante quem of 691 for her death.43 The VAL implies that she was still alive when Amatus arrived at Hamage, which means that she was still alive after 676.44 This element confirms the credibility of Hucbald’s chronology, but, unfortunately, it does not give much precision in terms of exact dates. The foundation date of Marchiennes is as nebulous as Rictrude’s date of entry as head of the community. Since Marchiennes and Elnon are so close to each other, it is possible that both were founded at about the same period. Since the VAm, which is the main source for St Amand’s activities, does not mention Marchiennes among Amand’s foundations, only the foundation of Elnon could yield information. His ita peractis, isdem vir domini Amandus in finibus remeavit Francorum elegitque sibi locum praedicationis aptum, in quo cum fratribus . . . aedificabat coenobium.45 (Having done this [his mission with the Gascons], Amand came back in the Frankish kingdom and elected a place suitable for his predication. With his brothers . . . he undertook to build a monastery.)

The chapter of the VAm regarding the foundation (c. 22) comes after the passage about the three years of Amand’s episcopate at Maastricht and his subsequent renunciation to his title (c. 18). Amand’s episcopate is now safely dated: it started at the end of 648 or the beginning of 649 and ended at the end of 651 or the beginning of 652.46 The chapter immediately preceding the foun43 44 45

VR, c. 32, p. 502. VAL, c. 21, pp. 51–2. VAm, c. 22, p. 445; although VAm does not name Elnon here, it is generally accepted that the passage refers to this monastery; at the end of the text (c. 26, p. 449), Elnon is nominally mentioned as Amand’s burial place: see E. de Moreau, St Amand, pp. 214–19, and H. Platelle, Le temporel de l’abbaye de Saint-Amand des origines à 1340 (Paris, 1962), pp. 35–7. 46 VAm, c. 18, pp. 442–3.

106

St Rictrude and the Abbey of Marchiennes dation deals with Amand’s mission in Gascony. It is not certain, however, that the author of the VAm even followed a relative chronology. Although the order of the VAm suggests that Elnon was founded after 652, it is generally accepted that Amand had received the land from King Dagobert (629–639).47 The VAm alone does not allow precise dating the foundation of Elnon. Nevertheless, another source testifies that St Amand wandered in the region of the Scarpe between 639 and 641. Indeed, Jonas of Bobbio, in his introduction to the Vita Columbani, which he presented to Abbot Bertulf in 641, relates that he had spent the three previous years wandering with St Amand in the basins of the Scheldt and Scarpe and in the region of Elnon.48 Hence, Dagobert may have given Elnon to Amand at that occasion, and the basis for the foundation of Marchiennes may have been laid at the same time. This is indeed compatible with the chronological data of the VR. A last point still needs some discussion: the identity of Jonatus, first abbot of Marchiennes. Ileana Pagliani has studied thoroughly Jonatus’s dossier and I will only briefly report her conclusions here. The quasi-homonymy between Jonas of Bobbio, author of the Vita Columbani, and Jonatus, abbot of Marchiennes – and Amand’s successor at Elnon according to a twelfthcentury Saint-Amand tradition – has encouraged the merging of the two characters. That Jonas accompanied Amand in the region makes the assimilation of the two men all the more credible. At first sight, their respective traditions do not, however, allow for such an operation: Hucbald and later medieval sources never identify Jonatus with the author of the Vita Columbani, and nowhere is Jonas of Bobbio mentioned as abbot of Marchiennes.49 Ileana Pagani’s study on Jonas/Jonatus has demonstrated that the question cannot be fully resolved, but, nevertheless, she has made the interesting suggestion that they could well be one and the same character, whose memory survived according to two distinct traditions: at Marchiennes and Saint-Amand he was remembered as the first abbot of Marchiennes and successor of Amand at Elnon; in sources influenced by Luxovian monasticism, he was recalled as Columbanus’s disciple and author of the Vita Columbani.50 Pagani’s suggestion remains, of course, impossible to prove, but few elements in the Marchiennes tradition can be. Since it is well attested that Jonas of Bobbio worked with Amand in the Scarpe region between 639 and 641, if we accept that Jonas and Abbot Jonatus are the same person, it is likely that Marchiennes was founded during that period.51 47

48 49 50 51

Elnon would have been founded on land given by Dagobert (629–39) to Amand, but really would have started as a monastic community after Amand’s episcopate; see Platelle, Le temporel, pp. 35–6. Jonas of Bobbio, Vita Columbani, p. 62; on the identity of Jonas-Jonatus, see Pagani, ‘Ionas-Ionatus’. Pagani, ‘Ionas-Ionatus’, pp. 76–85. Pagani, ‘Ionas-Ionatus’, pp. 82–5. Hucbald also wrote a vita of St Jonatus, which unfortunately does not provide any

107

The Hagiographic Cycle of St Rictrude Considering that, because of a dearth of reliable information, Hucbald was unable to provide specific dates for the events that he recounted, the dates provided by later authors should not be trusted. The twelfth-century Annales Marchianenses and Chronicon Marcianense date the foundation of Marchiennes to the year 610 or 611, which is incompatible with Hucbald’s assertion that it had been founded by St Amand.52 The same sources date the beginning of Jonatus’s abbacy to 641, which leave a long gap between the foundation and the actual creation of the community.53 A thirteenth-century addition to the Annales asserts that Rictrude died in 688.54 All these dates are plausible guesses. Rictrude’s birth date then would be 614, which is compatible with her growing up at the time of Clovis II and her marriage to Adalbald around 630; 648 is also a plausible date for her entrance at Marchiennes. However, when Hucbald wrote the VR, these dates were clearly not available to him, and it is unlikely that these later additions are based on documents that he would have ignored. If Hucbald’s Vita Rictrudis is to be believed, Marchiennes was founded for a male community by St Amand around 640. Its first abbot Jonatus soon introduced women and transformed it into a double monastery. Rictrude was born in Gascony at the time of Clothar II (584–629), before 617; between 629 and 632, she married Adalbald, a Frank whose estates were located in Ostrevant. After her husband’s death (after 633), encouraged by St Amand, Rictrude entered Marchiennes and became abbess (before 651). She died there at the advanced age of seventy-four (after 676 and before 691) and was succeeded by her daughter Clotsind. In the Frankish tradition of the Eigenklöster, Adalbald’s family built monasteries on their estates. Perhaps at the time of Amand’s mission to the Scarpe area (around 640), Adalbald’s grandmother, Gertrude, had founded Hamage, located near Marchiennes. Some time after Rictrude had become abbess of Marchiennes, her twelveyear-old daughter Eusebia succeeded Gertrude as abbess of Hamage (c. 644–651). Adalbald’s and Rictrude’s son, Maurontus, also founded a light on the issue; the Vita Jonati (BHL 4447) is partially published in AA SS, 1 Aug., pp. 70–4; this edition has to be read with Codicum Hagiographicorum II, pp. 273–5; see Dolbeau, ‘Le dossier de St Amé’, p. 93. The last chapter of the Vita Jonati (BHL 4448) also relates the invention of SS Rictrude, Maurontus and Jonas at the time of abbess Judith; it is possible, however, that this paragraph does not belong to Hucbald’s original text: in VR, he seemed unsure of the location of the relics; furthermore, an abbess Judith is mentioned in a charter dated 975. 52 Annales Marchianenses, ed. L. Bethmann, MGH SS 16 (Hanover, 1859), a. 610, p. 610 (addition by a thirteenth-century hand); S. Vanderputten, ‘Compilation et reinvention à la fin du douzième siècle. André de Marchiennes, le Chronicon Marcianense et l’histoire primitive d’une abbaye bénédictine’, Sacris Erudiri 42 (2003), 403–36 (p. 420) (further quoted as Chronicon Marcianense); Andrew of Marchiennes, Historia Succinta de Gestis et Successione Regum Francorum, ed. R. de Beauchamps (Douai, 1633), p. 618. 53 Annales Marchianenses, a. 641, p. 610. 54 Annales Marchianenses, a. 688, p. 610.

108

St Rictrude and the Abbey of Marchiennes monastic community on his patrimonial land of Breuil. He kept Amatus, bishop of Sion, there as a prisoner who had been exiled in northern France in 675. Maurontus died after Amatus and Rictrude at an undetermined date. Marchiennes from the ninth century to the restoration (1024) We have seen that when Hucbald wrote the VR in 907, his sources were scarce. Today, only three mentions of Marchiennes pre-dating the VR survive: the above-mentioned notice in the Suppletio Milonis, a mention in the Annales Bertiniani at the year 876 and a charter given by Charles the Bald in 877. The Annales Bertiniani relate that Charles the Bald, after his defeat at Andernach, had summoned an assembly at Samoussy on 27 November. There, he received men from eastern Lotharingia who had deserted Louis the Younger for him. Charles secured his new allies’ loyalty by giving some of them whole abbeys intact; to others, he granted benefices from the abbey lands of Marchiennes, which he had previously divided. From this excerpt, it appears that in 876 Charles had already created the conventual mensa of Marchiennes, allocating a portion of the estates for the use of the community – and subsequently leaving the control of the rest to himself. Domnus imperator Karolus ad placitum suum in Salmontiaco, sicut condixerat, venit ibique homines de parte regni quondam Hlotarii, quam frater suus Hludowicus contra eum acceperat, ad se post fugam de Andrunaco venientes suscepit, et quibusdam abbatias sicut erant integras dedit, quibusdam de abbatia Marcianas, quam diviserat, beneficia donavit, et sic a se abire permisit.55 (The Lord Emperor Charles came to his assembly at Samoussy, as arranged, and there, he received men from the part of the late Lothar’s realm which Charles’s brother Louis had acquired by their mutual arrangement. These men had come over to Charles following his flight from Andernach. To some of them, he gave whole abbeys intact; to others, he granted benefices from the abbey-lands of Marchiennes which he had divided up.56)

A charter related to the creation of the conventual mensa still exists. It is a royal diploma of Charles the Bald, given on 11 July 877 at Ponthion, enumerating a series of possessions and revenues due to the monks and nuns.57 Although the charter seems genuine on the basis of its external characteristics, its authenticity has been challenged on a number of different counts by its editor. First of all, Georges Tessier has underlined that it presents abnormal formulae of devotion and corroboration and other internal charac-

55 56 57

Annales Bertiniani, a. 876, p. 211. Translation by Janet Nelson, The Annals of Saint-Bertin, a. 876, p. 198. Recueil des Actes de Charles le Chauve, II, no. 435, pp. 471–4.

109

The Hagiographic Cycle of St Rictrude teristics which indicate that it could be a forgery.58 Furthermore, the scribe simultaneously used formulae appropriate for donations and confirmations, while the purpose of the charter was only to confirm the lands and revenues earmarked for the community.59 Since, according to the VR, the archives of Marchiennes had perished in the viking attacks of 881–883, it seems strange that this specific charter would be the only document to survive. Nevertheless, a charter given in 1046 by Baldwin V to confirm the possessions and privileges of Marchiennes in his county refers to Charles the Bald’s charter of 877: Noverint ergo tam futuri quam presentes quod sicut predecessores principes Karolus videlicet magnus imperator et Lotharius rex, possessiones Marcianensis ecclesie . . . ita mihi et uxori mee Adele comitisse . . . placuit confirmare.60 (To those present and to come, know that like my predecessor, the princes Charles, great emperor and Lothar, king, it has pleased me and my wife Countess Adala, to confirm the possessions of the monastery of Marchiennes.)

The places recorded in Baldwin’s charter correspond to the places found in Charles’ charter. Hence, if Charles the Bald’s charter were a forgery, it would have been cooked up before 1046, perhaps in the direct aftermath of the restoration. In conclusion, although at first sight it seems unlikely that the charter could have been transmitted through the eleventh century, there are not enough elements to rule it out as a forgery. In any case, as far as Marchiennes’ prosperity is concerned, that it had enough estates for Charles to share them out between his allies suggests that the abbey was still wealthy enough at the time. Marchiennes appears once again in 975, in a charter given to Marchiennes by King Lothar at Douai at the request of his wife Emma. This document records the restitution to the community of the villa of Haines, which had been seized in the tenth century by the count of Flanders, Arnulf the Great.61 58

Recueil des Actes de Charles le Chauve, II, no. 435, pp. 472–3; despite his remarks, Tessier believes that the charter is genuine; one of his arguments is that it was made on the same model as a charter given by Charles on the same day for Hasnon (Recueil des actes de Charles le Chauve, II, no. 436, pp. 475–7). It is notable that the same formal ambiguity – the use of a terminology appropriate for a donation in a confirmation charter – is also found in other charters from Charles’ chancery, notably in a charter for Saint-Bertin: see Van Caenegem, ‘Le diplôme de Charles le Chauve du 20 juin 877 pour l’abbaye de Saint-Bertin’, and idem, ‘Note sur la date de la donation de Charles le Chauve pour l’abbaye de Saint-Bertin’, in Miscellanea Mediaevalia in Memoriam Jan Frederik Niermeyer, pp. 71–7. 59 Recueil des actes de Charles le Chauve, II, no. 435, p. 473. 60 This charter is published in L’Histoire-Polyptyqye de l’abbaye de Marchiennes (1116–1121), ed. B. Delmaire (Louvain-la-Neuve, 1985), pp. 97–9. 61 Recueil des Actes de Lothaire et de Louis V, rois de France (954–987), ed. L. Halphen (Paris,

110

St Rictrude and the Abbey of Marchiennes These scattered pieces of evidence show that the community of Marchiennes, despite its ninth-century setback, never completely vanished. Hamage, on the other hand, never recovered from the viking incursions which had plagued the Scarpe region in the years 881–883. The small community was still mentioned in Charles the Bald’s 877 charter as a double community, which was probably dependent on Marchiennes at the time.62 Fortunately, since 1990, excavations on the site of the abbey have been undertaken by Etienne Louis and the Service Archéologique du Musée de Douai. The results of the first series of excavations, which are currently being pursued, have already yielded some interesting information about the community’s activity. Louis has distinguished five distinct periods of monastic occupancy. The first one corresponds with the beginnings of Hamage (second third of the seventh century); several pieces of metalwork (brooches) and four ceramic bowls are associated with this early period. One of the bowls is inscribed with a female name, which suggests that they belonged to the nuns of Hamage. The first church of Hamage – which, according to Marchiennes’ polyptych, was dedicated to Saint-Peter, and in which St Eusebia was buried at her death – also dates from that period of occupation.63 The second period identified by Louis covers the second half of the seventh century. The second church of Hamage and buildings containing the nuns’ living quarters were built at that time. This second church can be identified with Saint-Mary’s, built by a certain abbess Gertrude at the time of Hatta of Saint-Vaast (c. 680–700), for the translation of St Eusebia’s relics.64 The nuns’ housing was made up of a large rectangular building which was divided into a dozen of small cells and two larger rooms – the limited number of cells confirms the small size of Hamage’s community. It also appears that Saint-Mary’s and the nuns’ living quarters were included within the cloister, while Saint-Peter’s was left outside, which is consistent with Hamage’s status as a double monastery (the monks must have been attached to Saint-Peter and the nuns to Saint-Mary). At least three new buildings were

1908), pp. 93–4; this charter mentions the name of Abbess Judith; on the verso an eleventh-century hand has copied the text of a donation allegedly made by Judith to two men of the abbey (published by Le Glay, Mémoire sur les archives de Marchiennes (Douai, 1854), p. 31, n. 4), but this text is suspect. 62 Recueil des Actes de Charles le Chauve, II, no. 435, p. 474: ‘De villa namque Viriniaco jubemus tres partes fieri de vino, unam partem ad opus senioris, alteram quoque ad usus sororum ac fratrum in Marcianis consistentium, tertiam quidem ad opus sororum ac fratrum in Hamatico degentium . . .’. The wine from Vregny is the only revenue specifically attributed to Hamage. This suggests that the two communities probably shared the same abbess or, at least that Hamage was subordinated to Marchiennes; see Louis, ‘Aux débuts du monachisme’, p. 846. 63 Louis, ‘Aux débuts du monachisme’, pp. 849–54. 64 Jonas of Bobbio, Vita S. Eusebiae (BHL 2736), ed. de Ghesquière, ASB 4, c. 13, p. 563.

111

The Hagiographic Cycle of St Rictrude erected during the eighth century. Finally, the monastery was reconfigured in the ninth century and a cloister was built. After the end of the ninth century, no new buildings were erected and the excavations suggest that the monastery of Hamage was deserted and the site assigned to agriculture until the twelfth century.65 It is likely that the community never recovered from the viking incursions and that the few monks and nuns who were still living there were incorporated within the Marchiennes community. Indeed, according to the polyptych of Marchiennes, Eusebia’s relics were translated from Hamage to Marchiennes at an undetermined period.66 It appears that, under Abbot Fulcard, Hamage was deserted. It is possible that Hamage had become a simple priory at the time of the restoration of Marchiennes in 1024.67 It was not until the abbot of Marchiennes restored Saint-Mary’s in 1133 that Hamage was again the locus of a monastic community.68 The restoration We have seen that the last decades of the tenth century and the first decade of the eleventh century were a troubled period for the county of Flanders. Arnulf II (965–988) had lost control of Ternois and Boulonnais, and the local aristocracy had taken advantage of the count’s young age to assert their own authority and to usurp monastic lands which had hitherto been ‘protected’ by the counts. Arnulf II’s son, Baldwin IV (988–1035), was able, in a few decades, to regain the main part of the lost territories and to re-establish comital authority all over the county. Once his authority was secured, Baldwin undertook a major operation of monastic restoration throughout his territory. Indeed, he was eager to regain control over the monastic lands seized by local petty lords, who had instituted themselves as the advocates of these communities. Furthermore, the effects of the reform promoted by Arnulf I and Gerald of Brogne had been short-lived.69 With the collaboration of Richard of Saint-Vanne and Bishop Gerard I of Cambrai (1012–1051), Baldwin attempted 65 66

Louis, ‘Aux débuts du monachisme’, pp. 854–64. L’Histoire-Polyptyque, c. 14, p. 76: ‘De istius precipue virignis elevatione vel translatione quod stilo evidentius prosequendum sit certum nichil occurit.’ 67 On these texts, see H. Platelle, ‘Crime et châtiment à Marchiennes. Étude sur la conception et le fonctionnement de la justice d’après les Miracles de sainte Rictrude (XIIe s.)’, Sacris Erudiri 24 (1980), 155–202 (p. 159 and n. 10). 68 Louis, ‘Aux débuts du monachisme’, p. 864; in 1024, when the gesta of the bishops of Cambrai were written, Hamage is described as a place fallen into secular hands, where a few canons lived: see Gesta Episcoporum Cameracensium, lib. II, c. 27, p. 461; on the gesta of Cambrai and their datation, see E. Van Mingroot, ‘Kritisch onderzoek omtrent de datering van de Gesta Episcoporum Cameracensium’, RBPH 53 (1975) 47–132. 69 In this regard, it is noteworthy that Marchiennes was not among the communities reformed by Gerard, while neighboring Saint-Amand was; Gerard restored exclusively male communities.

112

St Rictrude and the Abbey of Marchiennes to impose the Rule in all his monasteries.70 In this context, Marchiennes was reformed in 1024 by Abbot Leduinus of Saint-Vaast, a disciple of Richard, and turned into an all-male community. According to the notice in the Gesta of the bishops of Cambrai, the restoration had been made necessary by the long period of decline and impoverishment attributed to the nuns’ worldliness and poor management – the usual pretext used to expel women from monastic houses and replace them with men.71 The same notice seems to suggest that, at the time, Marchiennes was exclusively occupied by nuns.72 The new church was dedicated in 1026 by Gerard of Cambrai.73 It seems that during the first decades following the restoration by Leduinus, Marchiennes remained closely associated with Saint-Vaast; indeed, the five abbots who succeeded Leduinus from 1033 to 1091 were former monks of that abbey.74 Little is known of the activity of the new community during the eleventh century; nevertheless, it is likely that one of the major tasks of the abbots was the recovery of alienated lands. We have seen that the restitution of lands which had been seized by local lords and the reconstruction of monastic buildings were an important part of Richard of Saint-Vanne’s reform. In 1046, Baldwin V gave the new community of Marchiennes a charter confirming its rights and possessions.75 The written sources on which Marchiennes could rely to assert its property rights were probably painfully scarce. We have seen that Hucbald could barely find any written documents about Rictrude when he composed her vita, allegedly because of the viking destruction, and Charles the Bald’s 877 charter recording the revenues earmarked for the use of the monastic community was probably the only written evidence of Marchiennes’ past wealth. One can imagine that the restoration and Baldwin IV’s patronage had given good momentum to the process of land recovery. In order to ensure their defense, the community of Marchiennes asked his successor, Baldwin V the Bearded 70 71 72

Above, pp. 6–8. Gesta Episcoporum Cameracensium, lib. II, c. 26, p. 461; Annales Marcianenses, p. 614. On this issue, see Pagani, ‘Ionas-Ionatus’, pp. 53–4, n. 27; in his prologue to VR, Hucbald talks about the clerics and nuns (clericis et sanctimonialibus) of Marchiennes, which may suggest that it was no longer a mixed community, but a community of nuns assisted by a few canons for the liturgy. The transformation of the originally double community would be consistent with the way such communities usually evolved; on the issue of double communities, see Doppelklöster und andere Formen des Symbiose mänlicher und weiblicher Religiosen im Mittelalter, ed. K. Elm and M. Parisse, Berliner Historische Studien 18 (Berlin, 1992). 73 Annales Marchianenses, p. 614. 74 Annales Marchianenses, pp. 614–15: Albricus (1033–1048), Popo, abbot of Saint-Vaast and Stablo, disciple of Richard (1048) and Wido, monks of Saint-Vaast (1049–1075), Alard, monk of Saint-Vaast (1075–1091), Richard, monk of Saint-Martin of Tournai (1091–1102), Alard II, monk of Anchin (1102–1103), Fulcardus, monk of Hasnon (1103–1115). 75 This charter is published in L’Histoire-Polyptyque, pp. 97–8.

113

The Hagiographic Cycle of St Rictrude (1035–1067), high advocate of Marchiennes, to concede his title as a fief to a sub-advocate, Hugh, lord of Aubigny – who was also advocate of Saint-Amé at Douai. A charter dated 1038 purported to record the rights and duties of the new advocate.76 Gradually, however, the family of Aubigny, which was located in Artois, lost its charge and the advocacy of Marchiennes was shared between several families of the region. The family of Landas (dep. Nord, arr. Douai) seems to have played a major role as advocate of Marchiennes. In contemporary sources from Marchiennes, the Landases are pictured as usurpers, taking advantage of their position to appropriate parts of Marchiennes’ landholding. The first Landas advocate of Marchiennes is attested for the first time in 1166, but the family and Marchiennes had already been in confrontation much earlier since a Landas, Fulcard, became abbot in 1103 and left a bitter memory in the community’s writings.77 The twelfth century According to the Annales Marcianenses, one of the worst periods of usurpation was the abbacy of the unscrupulous Abbot Fulcard (1103–1115). A former monk of Hasnon, Fulcard was the lord of Landas’s brother. It is not clear whether Fulcard was imposed by his powerful kin or whether the community had hoped that his family connection would be useful for Marchiennes. In any case, Fulcard was accused of alienating Marchiennes’ possessions in order to maintain his expensive way of life and to patronize his entourage. Facing the opposition of the bishop of Cambrai, Fulcard reluctantly resigned in 1115.78 He was succeeded by Abbot Amand (1116–1136), former prior of Anchin. This sad episode forced the community and its abbot to launch an operation to assert Marchiennes’ landholdings. The first step in this enterprise was the gathering of all the information concerning the abbey’s estates: this resulted in the composition of a polyptych, which Bernard Delmaire, its recent editor, has dated to between 1116 and 1121.79 The anonymous author of the polyptych enumerates the sources on which he has based his account: annals and chronicles, vitae of the saints, gesta of the bishops of Cambrai and the oral testimony of well informed people: Nichil enim frivolum, nichil fallaciter commentatum, nichil fictum digestum est hic nisi quod ex annalibus, ex chronicis, ex excerptione eorum que in descriptionibus de vita quorundam sanctorum vel in gestis Cameracensium

76

Archive Départementales du Nord Lille, 10H 56/960; published in A. Warnkönig, Flandrische Staats- und Rechtsgeschichte, 3 vols. (Tübingen, 1842), III, no. CLV; on the Marchiennes advocates, see R. Naz, L’Avouerie de l’abbaye de Marchiennes 1038–1262 (Paris, 1924). 77 L’Histoire-Polyptyque, p. 121. 78 Annales Marchianenses, p. 615. 79 L’Histoire-Polyptyque, pp. 15–29.

114

St Rictrude and the Abbey of Marchiennes pontificum repperiuntur seu quod personarum fidelium idonea relatione et veraci assertione compertum est.80 (Nothing that is recorded here is frivolous, false or deceptive, and there is nothing here that has not been found in annals, chronicles, in excerpts from the lives of certain saints or in the Gesta of the bishops of Cambrai, or from the testimonies of reliable persons.)

Paradoxically, our author does not mention charters among his sources, although he directly quoted from the 1038 charter setting the rights and duties of the advocates, and to the 1046 confirmation charter. It is not clear whether he knew of Charles the Bald’s charter of 877. Once the possessions of Marchiennes were recorded in the polyptych, Abbot Amand obtained their official confirmation from the count of Flanders, the bishop of Arras and the pope.81 Throughout the twelfth century, the successive abbots continued the efforts to keep a record of Marchiennes’ assets, since all the charters were copied into a cartulary, which was compiled at this time.82 This was a common practice of the time, and something especially needed at Marchiennes because the abbey still had to struggle against the local aristocracy’s exactions. Henri Platelle has demonstrated that the series of miracles of St Rictrude, Eusebia and Maurontus that were written in the twelfth century also referred to the conflicts between the community and its lay usurpers, among whom the Landases were prominent.83 In 1262, the countess of Flanders bought back the advocacy from the Landases, which put an end to their exactions. Eventually, in 1297, Marchiennes became a royal abbey.84

Narrative production at Marchiennes: formation and transformations of St Rictrude’s cycle The origins of the cycle: Hucbald’s Vita Rictrudis Because of its late date and the suspicious nature of its sources, and despite the intellectual prestige of its author, Hucbald of Saint-Amand, the VR is to be considered with much caution as far as ‘historical truth’ is concerned. 80 81 82 83

L’Histoire-Polyptyque, c. 1, pp. 65–6. L’Histoire-Polyptyque, p. 27. Archives Départementales du Nord, Lille, 10H 323. On these texts, see Platelle, ‘Crime et châtiment à Marchiennes’, and idem, ‘La religion populaire entre la Scarpe et la Lys d’après les miracles de sainte Rictrude de Marchiennes (XIIème siècle)’ in Alain de Lille, Gautier de Châtillon, Jakemart Giélée et leur temps. Actes du Colloque de Lille, Octobre 1978, ed. H. Roussel and F. Suard (Lille, 1980), pp. 365–402; on hagiography at Marchiennes in the twelfth century, see also H. Platelle, ‘La vie d’Hugues de Marchiennes († 1158). Les différentes facettes d’un document hagiographique’, Bullletin de l’Académie Royale de Belgique. Classe des Lettres (1992), 73–97. 84 Platelle, ‘Marchiennes’, col. 415.

115

The Hagiographic Cycle of St Rictrude Nevertheless, a careful examination of the manner in which Hucbald constructed his text and of the sources that he had at his disposal helps sort out the most dubious elements of the legend. Beyond this tentative factual reconstitution, the study of Hucbald’s narrative technique reveals much about the subjective purpose of the text; indeed since the clerics and nuns of Marchiennes commissioned the VR and provided most of the documentation themselves, the VR bears the marks of their expectations. Thanks to Hucbald’s dedication to Bishop Stephen of Liège, we know that he composed it in 907. Furthermore, Hucbald was thoughtful enough to provide his readers with some details about the circumstances of the redaction. Hucbald was petitioned by the monks and nuns of Marchiennes to write the life of St Rictrude and her children: A clericis et sanctimonialibus congregationis Deo dilectae famulae beatae Rictrudis rogitatus apponere novum ad conscribendum gesta ipsius natorumque eius . . .85 (I have been asked by the clerics and nuns of the congregation of God’s beloved servant Rictrude, to take up my pen anew to write of her acts and her children.86)

For a while, he hesitated to comply: diu multumque renisus sum, vel quia meam quantulamcumque scientolam tantae imparem materiei noveram, vel quia, tanto transacto tempore, nulla certae relationis de his scripta videram vel audieram, veritus, ne forte dubia pro certis vel falsa pro veris assererem.87 (Long and hard I have resisted, knowing my paltry knowledge to be inadequate for the subject. Moreover, much time has passed and I had never seen or heard that there was any trustworthy narrative in writing. Thus, I feared to assert doubtful things as sure and falsehood as sure.88)

After some research, the community of Marchiennes brought him fragments of texts, which matched the oral tradition. Furthermore, sworn witnesses testified that the text fragments were in accordance with sources, lost during the viking invasions: Cumque renitenti mihi quaedam historiarum exemplaria suis ostenderent concordantia dictis, de cetero illis quorum non contemnendae videbantur personae, mihi fidem facientibus, quod haec quae referebant, eadem olim

85 86 87 88

VR Prologus, p. 93. Translation, Sainted Women, p. 198. VR Prologus, p. 93. Translation, Sainted Women, p. 198.

116

St Rictrude and the Abbey of Marchiennes tradita litteris fuerunt, sed infestatione northmannicae depopulationis deperierunt.89 (But then, they showed certain samples of her history to my reluctant self confirming what certain, not inconsiderable persons swore to me had once been set down in old writings which had vanished in the wake of the Northman depopulation.90

Eventually, Hucbald accepted the commission, although he was probably not completely rid of his apprehension: postremo adjuratus Majestatis.91

tremendo

Divinae

nomine,

tandem

acquievi

(Invoking the name of the Divine Majesty, trembling, I acquiesced.92)

Hucbald’s reluctance to write Rictrude’s vita could be interpreted as concern for historical truth; however, this concept would be anachronistic when applied to an early medieval writer. Hucbald’s preoccupation when he composed the VR for the community of Marchiennes was spiritual, not historical. Et si non ut debui, institi tamen ut potui, non phaleris deservire verborum, sed aedificationi consulere legentium cupiens vel audientium.93 (So, let me begin, if not as well as I should, then as best as I can, not aspiring to verbal ornamentation but to comfort and edify my reader or listener.94)

Indeed, the VR is interspersed with edifying passages, notably on the status of married women, widows, virgins and deacons, corresponding to the ideal behavior of Rictrude, Eusebia and Maurontus. These sermons were addressed to all the possible audiences who could live at Marchiennes: brethren, virgin oblates, retired widows and young ladies raised within the walls with the possibility of eventually leaving the community to get married.95 Furthermore, as Henri Platelle has made evident, throughout Hucbald’s work, ‘religious considerations constituted the backbone of the narrative and thus reflected the author’s very intention’.96 Because of the high moral standards he applied to his hagiographic works, Hucbald was

89 90 91 92 93 94 95

VR Prologus, p. 93. Translation, Sainted Women, p. 198. VR Prologus, p. 93. Translation, Sainted Women, p. 198. VR Prologus, p. 93. Translation, Sainted Women, p. 198. Smith, ‘A Hagiographer at Work’, p. 156; on edification in Hucbald’s work, see Smith, ‘The Hagiography of Hucbald’, and Platelle, ‘Le thème de la conversion’. 96 Platelle, ‘Le thème de la conversion’, p. 515.

117

The Hagiographic Cycle of St Rictrude unwilling to propose as a model a saint whose actions were not well known and whose sanctity could be challenged. Indeed, in his lengthy moral discussion about the episode of Eusebia’s beating, Hucbald refers to those who said: En quales isti dicuntur esse Sancti, mater innoxiam, insequitur filiam, Deo militare volentem; filia sicut hostem, sic propriam execratur et refugit matrem; filius matre consentanea, sororem refugam, asportato clam signo proditam, dirissimis velut furti ream afficit verberibus pene esque ad mortem . . . Quae in istis sanctitas, quae pax, quae caritas?97 (Look who they are calling saints: a mother who attacked her innocent daughter for wanting to serve God; a daughter who detested her mother and fled her as an enemy; a son who, with his mother’s consent, branded his sister like a fugitive taken away in secret, or like a condemned thief whipped her so viciously that she nearly died. What sanctity is here, what peace, what charity?98)

Hence, Hucbald’s hesitation was probably due more to questions about his characters’ sanctity than to their historicity. Nevertheless, since he was not only a good writer but also a good theologian, Hucbald was able to reconcile all points of view and to answer the arguments of the – real or virtual – opponents. This prologue is interesting on several counts. First of all, Hucbald’s carefully phrased remarks suggest that Rictrude’s legend was already obscure and, perhaps, that he feared contestation. Second, the prologue shows that by the beginning of the tenth century, the abbey of Marchiennes was in a desperate state since the community had lost nearly all written sources about its history and its patron saint. The disappearance of these documents could well be explained by viking attacks undergone by the monasteries of the region in the years 881–883 – we have seen that Hamage had been deserted at the end of the ninth century. Nevertheless, it seems that Hucbald had heard almost nothing about Rictrude before. Hucbald was born in 840 and entered Saint-Amand, where, as an oblate, he became a pupil of the great scholar Milo; in these conditions, it is surprising that Rictrude’s story had never reached him.99 It is thus possible that the written sources had already vanished before the 880s – or never existed – and that Rictrude’s legend survived only locally, within the small circle of her community. The decline may also be related to the spoliation of Marchiennes landholding by Charles the Bald before 877. The hypothesis that Rictrude’s cult had long been decaying is strengthened by the fact that Hucbald never mentions the location of her and her children’s shrines – a detail about which hagiographers

97 98 99

This discussion is not in the ASB edition, see AA SS, 3 May, c. 28, p. 87. Translation, Sainted Women, p. 215. On Hucbald’s career, see H. Platelle, ‘Le thème de la conversion’.

118

St Rictrude and the Abbey of Marchiennes usually go on at great length. The third interesting point is that all the specific information about Rictrude was brought to Hucbald by the monks and nuns of the community themselves. To conclude, Hucbald’s prologue leaves the impression that, by the beginning of the tenth century, the cults of Rictrude and her children had been neglected and that the tradition of her legend had mostly been forgotten. Rictrude’s sinking into oblivion was probably the result of the decay of Marchiennes’ community, which might be explained by the viking attacks of 881–883, although it cannot be ruled out that it actually preceded these events. The decision to order the composition of the VR probably corresponds to an initiative to revitalize of the declining community. Lack of sources on Marchiennes at that time unfortunately prevents any further probing of the circumstances of the work’s redaction. Nevertheless, there is no doubt that the situation of Marchiennes in the early tenth century induced specific needs for the community – endowing itself with a documented past and a prestigious patron saint – which in turn influenced the way Rictrude’s vita was written. Since the monks and nuns brought in all the information concerning the saint herself, and since her story did not seem to be known by an outside audience, they were left completely free to construct both the saint’s life and the story of the foundation of Marchiennes to their own liking, with little chance of being contradicted. Hence, the VR, in its elements specifically related to Rictrude’s life, although written by an outsider, can be considered as the product of the community’s concerted initiative. The important role played by the community in the reconstruction of the legend implies that it was a collective work by different authors with different, but compatible, agendas. Hucbald was mostly interested in edification and the community was mindful of the assertion of its origins. We will see that, on all counts, each side’s expectations would be fulfilled and, even, that they were complementary. Since, if we can trust Hucbald’s prologue, the monks and nuns provided the information about Rictrude and the foundation of Marchiennes, it is fairly easy to discriminate between the elements of the narrative contained in the fragments which reflect the legends transmitted at Marchiennes, and the elements brought in by Hucbald himself. Indeed, Hucbald substantiated and complemented Rictrude’s story with a historical background of his own making. This historical introduction, which follows the prologue and constitutes the five first chapters of the VR, begins with the legend of the Trojan origins of the Franks and the baptism of Clovis with holy oil from a flask directly imported from Heaven.100 In the next two chapters, Hucbald introduces Rictrude, born in an aristocratic milieu, and her fatherland, Gascony, which he presents as a region still mostly pagan, inhabited by ‘savage

100

VR, c. 4, p. 490.

119

The Hagiographic Cycle of St Rictrude people’. He also discusses the events which occurred between 629 and 632, running from the beginning of Charibert’s reign to his death and the subsequent incorporation of Gascony within the Frankish kingdoms by Dagobert.101 In the last two chapters of the introduction, Hucbald relates St Amand’s exile, due to his condemnation of Dagobert’s disreputable private life, and the baptism of the king’s son, Sigebert III (born in 630–631), by the saint. It is from this period that Hucbald dates Amand’s mission in Gascony.102 This introduction to the VR is clearly the product of Hucbald’s personal knowledge and readings. At Saint-Amand, he had access to a well endowed library in which historical works had a prominent place.103 The myth of the Trojan origin of the Franks, the origins of which dated back to the seventh century, was a well established theme in Merovingian and Carolingian writings.104 The legend of the flask of heavenly oil used by St Remigius for Clovis’s baptism had been developed by Hincmar of Reims on the occasion of Charles the Bald’s anointing. It is not surprising that Hucbald knew and used this text, since he had taught at Reims in the years following Hincmar’s death.105 For his exposé on Gascony, Hucbald probably used the fourth book of Fredegar’s Chronicle.106 Hucbald also had access to the Vita Amandi, where he found the episode of Amand’s exile by King Dagobert, followed by the reconciliation and the baptism of Sigebert III by Amand. This episode reveals, however, that, despite his careful attitude toward his sources, Hucbald did

101 102 103

VR, cc. 5–6, pp. 490–91. VR, c. 6, p. 491. On the historical works in Saint-Amand library, see most recently R. McKitterick, ‘L’idéologie politique dans l’historiographie carolingienne’, in La Royauté et les Élites, pp. 59–70. 104 On this passage, see H. Platelle, ‘Le peuple franc et Clovis vus par Hucbald de Saint-Amand en 907 – La Vita Rictrudis’, in Childéric-Clovis. 1500e Anniversaire 482–1982 (Tournai, 1982), pp. 220–2; on the Trojan origins of the Franks, see E. Ewig, ‘Troiamythos und fränkische Frühgeschichte’, in Die Franken und die Alemannen bis zur ‘Schlacht bei Zülpich’ (496/97), ed. D. Geuenich, Ergänzungsbände zum Reallexikon der Germanischen Altertumskunde 19 (Berlin, 1998), pp. 1–30, and I. Wood, ‘Defining the Franks: Frankish Origins in Early Medieval History’, in Concepts of National Identity in the Middle Ages, ed. S. Forde, L. Johnson and A. Murray (Leeds, 1995), pp. 47–57. 105 Smith, ‘A Hagiographer at Work’, pp. 164–5; on the legend developed by Hincmar, see J. M. Wallace-Hadrill, ‘History in the Mind of Archbishop Hincmar’, in The Writing of History in the Middle Ages, pp. 43–70. 106 Fredegar, Chronicarum Liber Quartus, c. 78, pp. 65–7; J. M. H. Smith suggests (‘A Hagiographer at Work’, p. 164) that Hucbald knew the episode from the Gesta Dagoberti I, (B. Krusch (ed.), MGH SRM 2, c. 36 and 38, pp. 414–16); nonetheless, Hucbald could have seen the text at Reims or at Saint-Bertin; since this passage of the Gesta Dagoberti is almost literally copied from Fredegar, it is not possible to determine which text Hucbald used.

120

St Rictrude and the Abbey of Marchiennes not always follow them faithfully, since the VAm does not relate Amand’s mission in Gascony to his conflict with the king.107 Hucbald’s background of historical knowledge provided a convenient political, geographical and chronological context for Rictrude’s life and the foundation of Marchiennes. Hence, his introduction set Rictrude’s life in a historical context that its audience could identify as credible; this process undoubtedly gave credibility to a story which, otherwise, would have seemed vague. Moreover, these chapters, which set the context of Rictrude and Adalbald’s marriage, purport to integrate the couple and their descendants within the broader and holier context of the divine plan. Hucbald insists on the fact that the conversion of the Franks had been planned from the beginning of time: Cum Francorum gentem, in suis primoribus de minore progressam Phrygia, atque ex regali Trojanorum propagatam prosapia, . . ., ad agnitionem veritatis divina voluisset venire gratia.108 (When the Frankish nation had, in its primordial past, migrated from lesser Phrygia and propagated its nobility from the royal stock of Troy, Divine grace wished it to come to knowledge of the Truth.109)

As a Frank himself, Adalbald partook of the spiritual prestige and the high achievements of his people. Adalbald, too, came from noble stock: he possessed many lands and was loved and honored at the king’s court. His union with the Gascon Rictrude has a parallel with the unification of Gascony with the Frankish kingdoms under King Dagobert. Furthermore, his personal lineage shone with piety since his own grandmother, St Gertrude, had founded a monastic community (Hamage).110 As for Rictrude, her racial origins could not be magnified in a similar way, since she was born in a region still mostly pagan. Hence, she is presented as an exception who was predestined to sanctity. Cujus incolae licet illo tempore pene omnes daemoniacis essent dediti cultibus, a Deo tamen praelecta Rictrudis sic ex eisdem impiis et sine Deo prodiit hominibus, veluti solet rosa de spinosis efflorere sentibus.111 (And, though her natives were at that time given over to the worship of demons, Rictrude was predestine by God to spring from that same impious and godless people as a rose habitually flowers among the thorns.’112)

107 108 109 110 111 112

VR, cc. 6–8, p. 491; VAm, c. 17, pp. 440–3. VR, c. 4, p. 490. Translation, Sainted Women, p. 199. VR, c. 9, p. 492. VR, c. 5, p. 490. Translation, Sainted Women, p. 200.

121

The Hagiographic Cycle of St Rictrude Hucbald’s assertion that St Amand visited Gascony in the same political context as the marriage is astute. Although the VR never explicitly states that Amand and Rictrude met during the saint’s mission in Gascony, the connection is easily made by the audience and it strengthens the impression that, from her tender years, Rictrude was meant to become a saint.113 Amand’s mission also prefigured Rictrude’s conversion to the monastic life: in the same way he converted the Gascon, Amand guided Rictrude toward the religious life and introduced her to Marchiennes. In conclusion, it appears that the historical introduction composed by Hucbald was meant to provide a credible historical context to the life of St Rictrude and the foundation of Marchiennes. This preamble also introduces characters who will be important in the story: St Amand, Dagobert, Adalbald, and Rictrude herself. Furthermore, the setting of Rictrude and Adalbald’s union within the divine plan, gives a powerful meaning to her – and her children’s – sanctity. We have seen that the VR is the product of the interaction of two ‘authors’, Hucbald on the one hand and the community on the other, who had different but complementary agendas. The historical preamble is clearly the product of Hucbald’s scholarship; the remaining narrative parts of the vita mostly reflect the information provided by the monks and nuns of Marchiennes. While the sources used by Hucbald in his introduction are clearly discernible, most of the community’s sources are impossible to identify. Nevertheless, its core, if not its details, seems reliable enough. We have seen that the chronology of the VR, despite its imprecision, is always strictly plausible; in fact, no elements of the VR seem obviously chronologically or factually wrong, either because their context is corroborated by other sources, or because no other source exists to contradict them.114 This suggests that, through the centuries, the community had cultivated a written and/or oral tradition which remained in some important ways faithful to its historical roots. Yet some elements of the VR are dubious and appear to be the result of the community’s late efforts to reconstruct their patron saint’s legend. In particular, the insistence of the VR on the baptism of Rictrude’s children by the celebrities of her time seems to be a literary device, which does not reflect reality. We have seen that Maurontus was baptized by St Richer, Clotsind, who succeeded her mother as abbess of Marchiennes, by St Amand, and that Eusebia was the goddaughter of Dagobert’s wife, Nanthild.115 The overt name-dropping is obviously suspicious. Nevertheless, whether or not

113 114

VR, c. 6, p. 491. The only chronological incoherence of VR is the assertion that St Amatus was accompanying Eusebia in her nightly visits to Hamage (VR, c. 25, p. 501); since this episode occurred before Maurontus had founded Breuil, Amatus could not have been at Hamage at that time. 115 VR, c. 10, p. 493.

122

St Rictrude and the Abbey of Marchiennes these assertions are true does not really matter; what is interesting is that the VR carefully recorded them. The precise details of the baptisms were meant to emphasize the historicity of the vita and, above all, to provide its heroes with prestigious connections. Furthermore, from Hucbald’s point of view, these prestigious baptisms help to emphasize that, from the outset, Rictrude’s children were bound for the highest destiny. In this regard, it is notable that nothing is said about the baptism of Adalsind, who died before her mother, and who, unlike her brother and sisters, did not have a particularly holy fate.116 The suspicious nature of the baptisms is further confirmed by the fact that Maurontus is a blatant creation of the VR, deprived of any historicity. Indeed, the examination of the manner in which his character was constructed in the VR shows that his name and many of his attributes were created from narrative elements alien to the VR. Chapters 22 to 24 of the VR are exclusively concerned with Maurontus’s life and deeds. First of all, Hucbald undertakes to relate an incident which had occurred during Maurontus’s infancy, at the occasion of his baptism by St Richer. One day, Richer came on horseback to visit Rictrude; after chatting with the holy man, she walked along with him, bearing Maurontus in her arms and asked the holy man to baptize the child. Perched on his horse, Richer lifted him, but, as he was about to baptize him, the horse hurled itself forward. Miraculously, the child’s fall was slowed and, unhurt, he landed on the ground, as lightly as a bird’s feather.117 Later, when he became an adult, Maurontus joined the king’s service and contracted a marriage. Immediately, however, he decided to renounce carnal love, apparently under the influence of St Amand. He then went to Marchiennes to explain his decision to his mother. As Maurontus was standing by the ubiquitous Amand, who was celebrating mass, a bee circled three times around his head.118 This was the unmistakable sign of his election to the religious life, and Amand hurried to consecrate him a deacon and to tonsure him. After his consecration, Maurontus founded the monastery of Breuil, where, as we have seen, he kept St Amatus in custody.119 Maurontus’s baptism by a holy man and the episode of the bee circling his head served to emphasize that, from birth, he was among God’s chosen ones. Maurontus’s election fits well with Hucbald’s inclination to the theme of prefiguration. However, the baptism scene with St Richer unveils more about Maurontus than his holy destiny: it also reveals that the character of

116

On the issue of Dagobert and his personal relations with contemporary saints, see C. Wehrli, Mittelalterliche Überlieferungen von Dagobert I (Bern-Francfort, 1982), pp. 107–37 (p. 113 for St Rictrude); on Dagobert as chronological landmark, see ibid., pp. 135–9. 117 VR, c. 22, p. 498. 118 VR, c. 23, p. 499. 119 VR, c. 24, pp. 499–500.

123

The Hagiographic Cycle of St Rictrude Maurontus himself may be largely fictitious. Indeed, the name and personality of Maurontus seem to result from the confusion of two distinct characters from the life of St Richer.120 The earliest vita, known as Vita Richarii Primigenia, relates the same episode, which Alcuin then expanded in his own Vita Richarii, written between 800 and 804.121 Comparison of the three texts (the VR and the two vitae of St Richer) shows that Hucbald copied the episode from Alcuin, rather than from the Vita Primigenia.122 In chapter 10 of the Vita Richarii, Alcuin reports the following episode. One day, Richer visited a pious woman named Rictrude (a woman clearly unrelated to our Rictrude) who asked him to baptize her young son; suddenly, the horse he was riding became nervous and the child slipped from his arms and fell; but, miraculously his fall was slowed down and he landed softly on the ground, unhurt.123 It is notable that this passage of the Vita Richarii does not mention the child’s name. As for Maurontus, he is introduced in chapter 12 of the Vita Richarii. This Maurontus was one of the king’s foresters who had embraced the heremetic life at Forest-Montier (dep. Somme, arr. Abbeville), where St Richer later retired.124 In the Vita Richarii, however, chapters 10 and 12 are clearly unrelated and nowhere does the text suggest that the forester Maurontus was Rictrude’s grown-up child. The episode of Maurontus’s baptism in the VR was clearly copied from the corresponding episode in the Vita Richarii, obviously because the author of the VR considered that his Rictrude and the Rictrude of the Vita Richarii were one and the same.125 Except for the similarity of names, there is no reason to believe this, even if it is not chronologically impossible – Richer died in 645. The attribution of the name Maurontus to Rictrude’s son obviously results from two operations: the conflation of chapters 10 and 12 of the Vita Richarii on the one hand, and the confusion of the two Rictrudes on the other. As Van der Essen believed, the creation of Maurontus, son of Rictrude of Marchiennes, could be an example of these text fragments that the monks and nuns of Marchiennes had pains120

121 122 123 124 125

The earliest vita dates from the eighth century: Vita Richarii Sacerdotis Centulensis Primigenia (BHL 7223), ed. B. Krusch MGH SRM 7 (Hanover, 1920), pp. 438–53; Alcuin’s Vita Richarii (BHL 7224), ed. B. Krusch, MGH SRM 4 (Hanover, 1902), pp. 381–401, written between 800 and 804, closely follows this earlier version; for a discussion of Maurontus in VR and the Vita Richarii, see P. Geary, Aristocracy in Provence. The Rhone Basin at the Dawn of the Carolingian Age (Stuttgart, 1985), pp. 131–4. Vita Richarii Primigenia, c. 5, pp. 446–7. See Van der Essen’s comparison of the two texts in Étude critique, pp. 263–4, and Geary, Aristocracy in Provence, p. 133, n. 23. Alcuin, Vita Richarii, c. 10, p. 394. Alcuin, Vita Richarii, c. 12, p. 396; the corresponding episode in the Vita Primigenia is c. 8, pp. 448–50. VR, c. 22, pp. 498–9; the name Rictrude was not unusual, and is found in different places in Francia, see M.-T. Morlet, Les noms de personne sur le territoire de l’Ancienne Gaule du VIIe au XIIe siècle, 2 vols. (Paris, 1968), I.

124

St Rictrude and the Abbey of Marchiennes takingly gathered and presented to Hucbald.126 The confusion may have been developed at Marchiennes during the ninth century and reverberated in the fragments and oral testimonies presented to Hucbald.127 However, I tend to believe that the merging of these two distinct characters named Rictrude is more likely the product of Hucbald’s personal historical knowledge, which is so visible in his introduction. Indeed, given the relations between Alcuin and Saint-Amand, Hucbald was more likely than the community of Marchiennes to have a first-hand knowledge of the Vita Richarii.128 In any case, the coincidence of names is too suspicious to be trusted. Moreover, Maurontus’s late appearance in Marchiennes’ tradition is corroborated by the total ignorance of his name prior to the writing of the VR. While the names of both Rictrude and Eusebia already appear in ninth-century calendars and litanies from Saint-Amand and its region, Maurontus did not surface in similar documents until the eleventh century.129 The episode of Maurontus is not the only one in the VR that gives an impression of déjà-vu. The dramatic episode of Rictrude’s refusal to remarry despite the injunction of the king closely resembles a similar anecdote in the

126

Julia Smith has suggested, however, that Hucbald may have had direct contacts with the abbey of Saint-Riquier, see ‘A Hagiographer at Work’, p. 165. 127 Alcuin’s Vita Richarii, because of its author’s fame, was widely known and very influential in the hagiography of northern Francia; see the table of literary dependencies in Van der Essen, Étude critique; the Vita Richarii is not mentioned in the twelfth-century booklist of Saint-Amand, Paris, BN, Lat. 1850, published by A. Becker, Catalogi Bibliothecarum Antiqui, pp. 231–3; at Marchiennes it was quoted among the mandatory table readings, see C. A. ‘Les lectures de table des moines de Marchiennes au XIIIe siècle’, RB 11 (1894), 32. It is noteworthy that Maurontus was recycled once again in the eleventh-century vita of St Walaric (BHL 8762), ed. B. Krusch, MGH SRM 4, pp. 157–75, where he is mentioned as a man who started his career at the king’s court and eventually opted for the religious life after breaking up his marriage; Van der Essen believed that this Maurontus was the same person as the king’s forester in the vita Richarii, but different from the Maurontus in VR (see Étude critique, p. 264); however, I believe that the Maurontus of the Vita Walarici was more likely inspired by the two Maurontuses, the Maurontus from VR, and the Maurontus from the Vita Richarii. 128 Alcuin was a friend of Abbot Arn of Saint-Amand and composed a series of inscriptions for the abbey. 129 M. Coens, ‘Anciennes litanies des saints’, Subsidia Hagiographica 37 (Brussels, 1963), 271–4; V. Leroquais, Les sacramentaires et les missels manuscrits des bibliothèques publiques de France, 4 vols. (Paris, 1924), I, 221; Rictrude and Eusebia also appear without Maurontus in the litanies of the Leofric Missal, a sacramentary written in the second half of the ninth century in Flanders or north-east Francia, see M. Lapidge, Anglo-Saxon Litanies of the Saints (London, 1991), pp. 76–7 and 229. It is also noteworthy that in the calendars of the ninth-century sacramentaries from Saint-Amand, Rictrude and Eusebia appear at their natalis, respectively 27 October and 28 November, rather than at their feast day, day of their death, which were the only dates given by Hucbald (12 May and 5 May); in a Marchiennes missal from the early twelfth century both Maurontus and Rictrude appear at their feast days.

125

The Hagiographic Cycle of St Rictrude seventh-century vita of Gertrude of Nivelles.130 The Vita Geretrudis Prima relates that at a dinner given by her father for King Dagobert, Gertrude was offered, with the king’s support, to the son of an Austrasian duke. Gertrude, who had already decided to devote herself to religious life, refused as strongly as Rictrude had refused the king’s proposal.131 Given the role played by St Amand in the religious vocation of Gertrude’s mother, Itta, and in the foundation of her monastery of Nivelles (c. 648–9), it is not surprising to find similarities between Rictrude and Gertrude’s legends. Hucbald must have known the legends involving the patron saint of his monastery, and the community of Marchiennes, so close to Elnon, was probably familiar with them too. Furthermore, King Dagobert is frequently mentioned as the villainous matchmaker in many a Vita of Merovingian female saints, which naturally reflects his politics of strengthening his power through matrimonial alliances of the aristocracy.132 The creation of Maurontus shows that Rictrude’s story had been ‘polluted’ at least once by a foreign, non-related legend because of a coincidence of names. If we remember that by the time of the redaction of the VR, Rictrude’s legend was already obscure, it is not implausible that another conflation of this type occurred. The VR not only offers a story of the foundation of the abbey of Marchiennes in the seventh century, but also allows us to glimpse the community in the early tenth century. When Hucbald wrote the VR in 907, important parts of its tradition were already forgotten. The memory of the location of the shrines of its major saints – Rictrude, Maurontus, Eusebia and Jonatus – was probably lost. All written documents pertaining to its history had disappeared, if they had ever existed. The oral transmission of the house’s tradition was flawed and confused, as unveiled by the dubious nature of the character of Maurontus and the ambiguity of Jonatus’s identity. Thus, in the early tenth century, the community of Marchiennes was in need of commemorating and, when necessary, recreating its past in order to build a refreshed tradition. In the face of unfavorable circumstances (decay, lack of prestige, deprivation of a living cult) the community answered its need for identity and recognition by producing a narrative re-asserting its antiquity and the prestigious connections of its patron saints. The decay of Marchiennes was partly due to ninth-century secularization and viking incursions. Nonetheless, Marchiennes’ proximity to Saint-Amand may provide an additional explanation. With its famous patron saint and its prestige, which were powerful magnets for donations, Saint-Amand may have

130

Vita Geretrudis Prima (BHL 3490), ed. B. Krusch, MGH SRM 2 (Hanover, 1888), pp. 464–71; on Gertrude and the foundation of the abbey of Nivelles under the influence of St Amand, see Dierkens, ‘Saint Amand et la fondation de l’abbaye de Nivelles’. 131 Vita Geretrudis Prima, pp. 454–5, and VR, c. 14, p. 495. 132 For example in the vita of St Sadalberga; see Sainted Women of the Dark Ages, p. 223 and nn. 13 and 14.

126

St Rictrude and the Abbey of Marchiennes suffocated the small community lying in its shadow. If this were the case, it is ironic that the monks and nuns from Marchiennes had to rely on a scholar from Saint-Amand to fulfill the task of reviving their own history. The Vita Rictrudis Metrica and the Vita Eusebiae About one hundred years after Hucbald wrote the VR, another monk from Saint-Amand, John, wrote hagiographic texts for Marchiennes. John is the author of a verse life of St Rictrude (VR metrica) which, like Hucbald, he dedicated to a bishop – in this case, Erluin of Cambrai (995–1012). The author’s name is known thanks to letters he wrote to Stephen, a monk of Ghent to whom he had sent his work for review. The recipient of the work, Erluin, is known thanks to the acrostic poem John dedicated to him.133 The dedication to Erluin allows us to date the text with some precision. Unfortunately, the history of Marchiennes at this time is completely obscure, and it is impossible to connect the composition of the VR metrica with any specific event. Nevertheless, the writing of the new vita might be related to a renewed effort to stimulate Rictrude’s cult and, perhaps, to restore a community which had been inconspicuous throughout the tenth century. Erluin’s intervention could confirm this hypothesis, since he is known to have been a bishop with a reforming streak: his restoration of Saint-Vaast with the collaboration of Richard of Saint-Vanne launched the reform movement which would spread throughout the bishopric under his successor, Gerard I (1012–1051). Marchiennes was definitely reformed in 1024 by Leduinus of Saint-Vaast, backed by Baldwin IV and Bishop Gerard; it is not impossible that Erluin’s intervention in the hagiographic production of Marchiennes is the only visible trace of a first reforming attempt. In any case, as far as the transformations of Rictrude’s legend are concerned, the VR metrica is of little interest because John faithfully stuck to his model. The Vita Eusebiae (VE), although it is almost entirely based on the VR, is the first text to introduce minor changes in the legend. Some of these transformations are subtle; they are due to the shift of focus from Rictrude to Eusebia. For example, greater importance is given to Adalbald, Eusebia’s father, than in the VE. In the historical introduction of the VE, which is inspired by the corresponding passage of the VR, the author gives fewer details about Rictrude’s lineage, but he emphasizes Adalbald’s social status.134

133

John of Saint-Amand, Vita S. Rictrudis (BHL 7248), ed. G. Silagi, MGH Poetae 5, 3 (Munich, 1977), pp. 565–96; see the exchange of letters between John and Stephen, VR metrica, pp. 566–7 and the acrostic poem to Erluin, ed. K. Strecker, MGH Poetae 5, 2 (Dublin and Zurich, 1970), p. 375; see Van der Essen, Étude critique, pp. 265–8. 134 VR, c. 9, p. 492 and VE, c. 3, pp. 558–9; on the comparison between VR and VE, see Deug-Su, ‘La “Vita Rictrudis” ‘, pp. 563–74.

127

The Hagiographic Cycle of St Rictrude VE, c. 3 Quidam Francigena, nomine Adalbaldus, non ex mediocribus quilibet unus; sed inter Palatinos proceres potentissimus, locupletissimus in fundis et mancipiorum reditibus innumeris . . .

VR, c. 5 Rictrudis . . . videtur . . . a quodam Francigena, Adalbaldo nomine, natalibus orto praeclaris et justis.

A Frank, named Adaldbald, not of Rictrude was seen by a Frank named modest origin, but most powerful among Adalbald, of noble and honest origins. the leading men of the palace, he possessed many estates and innumerable revenues.

The emphasis on Eusebia and her paternal lineage, at the expense of Rictrude, is also visible in the passage concerning Adalbald’s murder: the VE suggests that at his death Adalbald became the object of a cult: debitum accepit honorificae sepulturae locum, qui usque hodie meretur experiri, cuius pignora retineat commendata sibi.135 (he received a place suitable for an honorable burial, which, to this day, deserves to be known and which retains his valued relics.)

The difference of perspective between the two texts is also visible in the passages concerning Eusebia’s beating. The author of the VE, unlike Hucbald, did not maintain cautious neutrality, but he subtly empathized with Eusebia.136 Besides these differences of perspective, the author of the VE introduced new information about Marchiennes and Eusebia. First of all, he dates the foundation of Marchiennes to the time of Dagobert’s father, Clothar II (584–629) – which is impossible if we can trust Hucbald that it was an initiative of St Amand.137 The VE also asserts that Eusebia ruled Hamage for twenty-three years (‘In huiusmodi itaque exercitiis septem minus tricenis vitae huius transcursis annis’), which contradicts Hucbald who said she barely survived her beating and that she died in the middle of her adolescence.138 The VE, moreover, records two episodes which were not reported by Hucbald in the VR. First, the author relates the story, told by the vulgus, that, when a piece of the rod used by Maurontus for Eusebia’s beating had fallen to the ground, it grew roots and blossomed.139 The second new fact of the VE is the translation of Eusebia’s relics. At her death, the saint had been buried in the abbatial church, dedicated to SS Peter and Paul; this dedication was not given by Hucbald. This church, however, proved unfit because it already 135 136 137 138 139

VE, c. 5, p. 559. Deug-Su, ‘La “Vita Rictrudis” ‘, p. 563. VE, c. 5, p. 559. VE, c. 12, p. 563. VE, c. 9, p. 562.

128

St Rictrude and the Abbey of Marchiennes contained too many relics. For this reason, an abbess named Gertrude, widow of a certain illustrious Ingomar, decided to build a new church to which Eusebia’s relics were translated. According to the VE, the ceremony was presided over by Hatta, abbot of Saint-Vaast at Arras (c. 680–700).140 A second translation of Eusebia’s relics is mentioned in the twelfth-century polyptych.141 This translation was made from Hamage to Marchiennes, and this event may have been the occasion of the composition of Eusebia’s vita. Leon van der Essen has suggested that John of Saint-Amand, author of the VR metrica, can be credited with the writing of both the prose and the verse VE (VE metrica).142 On the basis of stylistic resemblances between the VR metrica and the VE metrica, Van der Essen has proposed that both should be attributed to John of Saint-Amand.143 Since the twelfth-century author of the Miracula S. Eusebiae asserts that the VE and the VE metrica were written by the same person, this would mean that John is the author of the VE.144 This is plausible, although the VE and the VR present slightly different points of view at different places. These differences, however, do not forcibly imply a different authorship, and they can simply be explained by the fact that the focus of the VE is Eusebia rather than Rictrude.145 In any case, the VE, the VE metrica and the VR metrica, even if they were not written by the same author, were probably composed roughly at the same time, around the millennium, since they were copied together in an early eleventh-century manuscript from Marchiennes (now Douai 849), together with Hucbald’s Vita Ionati. And in this manuscript the author of the VR metrica is presented as John, monk of Marchiennes. This attribution could denote wishful thinking by a community willing to claim for itself the author of their patron saint’s vita, or it could signify John’s actual transfer to Marchiennes. I have suggested that the writing of the new vitae corresponded to a concerted effort to revitalize Rictrude’s and Eusebia’s cults two decades before the restoration imposed by Gerard of Cambrai. This is confirmed by the care taken in the creation of the early eleventh-century Douai 849, which is the earliest surviving manuscript of these texts. This manuscript contains illuminations representing Rictrude, her children and St Jonatus. The

140

141 142 143 144 145

VE, c. 13, p. 563; the name Gertrude, which is also the name of the foundress of Hamage, could denote a family link with the founding family; Gertrude is said to be the widow of Ingomar, whom Van der Essen (Étude critique, p. 267, n. 5) proposes to identify with a count of Thérouanne mentioned in the Vita Eligii (p. 726); on the dates of Hatta’s abbacy, see P. Grierson, ‘The Early Abbots of St. Peters of Ghent’, RB 26 (1936), 129–46 (p. 131). L’Histoire-Polyptyque, c. 14, p. 76. Vita S. Eusebiae metrica (fragments) (BHL 2737), AA SS, 1 Feb., p. 450. Van der Essen, Étude critique, p. 268. Van der Essen, Étude critique, p. 268; Miracula S. Eusebiae (BHL 2738), ed. G. Guesquière, ASB, 4, c. 3, p. 565. On this point, see Deug-Su, ‘La “Vita Rictrudis” ‘, pp. 563–74.

129

The Hagiographic Cycle of St Rictrude awkwardness of the painting, which contrasts with the high quality achieved by the scriptorium later in the eleventh century, suggests that it may well pre-date the restoration. In this regard, it is significant that this manuscript does not contain the Vita Maurontii, whose cult, as I already hinted, emerged only after the restoration. The restoration and the assertion of Marchiennes’ lost property We have seen that Marchiennes was restored in 1024 under the impetus of Baldwin IV, Richard of Saint-Vanne and Gerard of Cambrai. The circumstances of the restoration are described in the second book of the Gesta Episcoporum Cameracensium, which was composed around 1024. This notice is interesting because it presents a new version of the foundation of Marchiennes, which is slightly but significantly different from Hucbald’s story in the VR: Apud villam quoque Marcienas, gloriosa matrona Rictrudis ex proprii opibus et praediis consilio sancti Amandi, qui tunc temporis insignis habebatur, monasterium struxit, ubi sanctimonialibus ad serviendum delegatis, ipsa etiam abbatissa habenas regimini moderata est.146 (On the villa of Marchiennes, the glorious matron Rictrude, with the advice of St Amand, who was among the illustrious men of his time, built a monastery on her own estate; there, after the divine service had been delegated to nuns, she ruled the community in her capacity as abbess.)

In this short passage, there are three variations from the original legend of the VR. First, the Gesta asserts that Rictrude founded Marchiennes on her own estate. According to the VR, the foundation was made by Amand, independently of Rictrude, and Hucbald never mentioned that the land belonged to Adalbald’s family. Second, the notice suggests that Rictrude was the first ruler of Marchiennes and that, from the onset, the abbey hosted a female community. On the other hand, in the VR, Amand had founded Marchiennes as a male community, and women were introduced by its first abbot, Jonatus. After Rictrude’s death, however, the situation of the monastery deteriorated: ipsarum etiam puellarum ordo viciari et depravari coeperat; iamque magis ac magis depravatus mos in degeneri posteritate usque in presens duraverat.147 (the congregation of virgins started to degenerate and to fall into depravity; and so more and more depraved, their behavior persevered in its ignominy until present times.)

146 147

Gesta Episcoporum Cameracensium, lib. II, c. 26, p. 461. Gesta Episcoporum Cameracensium, lib. II, c. 26, p. 461.

130

St Rictrude and the Abbey of Marchiennes Fortunately, Abbot Leduinus, helped by Gerard and Baldwin, saved the situation: Leduwinus . . . feminas turpiter viventes mundato loco exturbavit, ac monachos qui melius et religiosus Deo et prelibatae virgini, quae ibidem quiescit, deserviant, constituit.148 (Leduinus expelled the women who lived shamefully and, in order to pacify the place, he constituted a community of monks, so they would serve God better and more religiously than the aforesaid virgins.)

The nuns’ main sin, beyond religious considerations, may have been their inability to protect Marchiennes’ landholding against usurpation; indeed, the author of the polyptych refers to properties lost in the past because of the abbesses’ carelessness and weakness.149 If Marchiennes’ landholding had indeed been despoiled in the tenth century, regaining the lost property was one of the restorer’s main concerns. This explains the changes undergone by the foundation legend of Marchiennes: claiming that the abbey’s estates originally belonged to the community’s patron saint was an argument which could prove useful against the community’s usurpers. As for the notice’s assertion that Marchiennes was an exclusively female community, it purports to emphasize the contrast between the worldly nuns and the pious regular monks who replaced them. The new male community of Marchiennes took another step in the rewriting of Rictrude’s legend. We have seen that until the eleventh century, the two main saints of Marchiennes were Rictrude and Eusebia: Maurontus’s name was not inserted in litanies and calendars until the eleventh century, while Eusebia and Rictrude are found in such texts as early as in the ninth century. Furthermore, when, at the time of Bishop Erluin, John of Saint-Amand composed the VR metrica and the VE, which were soon after copied in Douai in 849, he did not write a vita for Maurontus. The reformed community, perhaps in need of a male tutelary saint, revived – or rather created – St Maurontus’s cult by writing the Vita Mauronti (VM).150 The first three chapters of the VM were made by cutting and pasting the relevant episodes found in the VR. In the fourth chapter, however, the VM departs from its model by asserting that Maurontus went to Marchiennes at his mother’s death, that he became abbot and that he died there:

148 149 150

Gesta Episcoporum Cameracensium, lib. II, c. 26, p. 461. L’Histoire-Polyptyque, c. 28, p. 86. Vita Mauronti (BHL 5768–5769), AA SS, 2 May, pp. 53–4, and Catalogus Codicum Hagiographicorum, II, p. 35; the only difference between the two versions is that at chapter 1, the version mentioned in the Catalogus reports the whole episode of Maurontus’s baptism as it was in VR, c. 22, while in the AA SS version, this episode is summed up in one sentence; see Étude critique, p. 269.

131

The Hagiographic Cycle of St Rictrude Contigit ut adiret Martianas, quas mater ejus sanctissima migrans ad Christo providentiae suae commiserat.151 (He went to Marchiennes, which his very holy mother had entrusted to his wise governance as she was dying.)

This interpolation contradicts the VR, which said that Rictrude’s daughter, Clotsind, succeeded her mother as abbess. By asserting that Maurontus, rather than Clotsind, succeeded Rictrude, the author may have intended to insinuate that there was a tradition, dating back to St Rictrude, of Marchiennes being ruled by men before the women definitely took over. The Miraculum Mauronti, which relates a miracle that happened during the time of Abbot Alberic (1033–1948), may have been written at the same period as the VM.152 Despite this attempt at creating and developing a distinct cult for St Maurontus, the saint never became an important tutelary figure at Marchiennes. Indeed, as early as 1024 the canons of the collegiate church of Saint-Amé at Douai were claiming to possess Maurontus’s relics. Although they never explained how his relics had reached Douai, the canons’ claims were not challenged by the community of Marchiennes. By the twelfth century, the translation of ‘the major part’ of Maurontus’s relics to Douai was accepted at Marchiennes and considered as the sign of God’s will to reunite Maurontus with his friend St Amatus.153 The polyptych was written between 1116 and 1121, after a calamitous period of dispersal of Marchiennes’ property into lay hands. The polyptych purported to record into a single document all the information concerning the abbey’s properties and revenues, and it was designed as a defensive tool against the usurpers. The text of the polyptych itself is preceded by two chapters providing a justification for its composition; the author articulates clearly the relation between the recording of history and the protection of property: Opportet itaque ut universi quibus sua defendere et tueri justissimum constat annales veteres gestaque antiquorum diligenter et memoriter recolant quatinus contra causidicos et violentos, alienorum appetitores, validum defensionis murum opponere queant.154 (It is useful, and it is established that it is extremely rightful, to look carefully at the old annals and the ancient gesta, for those who try to erect a sturdy wall of defense against the lawsuits, violent acts and appetites of others.)

Once he had established that resorting to ancient historical narratives in 151 152

Vita S. Mauronti, AA SS, 2 May, c. 4, p. 53. Miraculum sancti Mauronti (BHL 5770) in Catalogus Codicum Hagiographicorum, II, pp. 41–3; see H. Platelle, ‘Crime et châtiment’, p. 161 and n. 12. 153 Miracula sanctae Rictrudis (BHL 7252–7252a) written by Andrew of Marchiennes between 1164 and 1166, AA SS, 3 May, pp. 92–3. 154 L’Histoire-Polyptyque, c. 2, p. 67.

132

St Rictrude and the Abbey of Marchiennes order to protect oneself against usurpation was both useful and lawful, the author of the polyptych undertook a historical introduction recalling the origins and the foundation of Marchiennes in thirteen chapters. This historical setting, which purports to assert the antiquity and the legitimacy of Marchiennes landholding, was the occasion, once again, to transform Rictrude’s legend. Like the Gesta Episcoporum Cameracensium, the polyptych insists on the fact that Marchiennes was founded on Rictrude’s domain: in proprio predio illustris matrone Rictrudis beatissime edificari institutum est monasterium coenobiale.155 (a monastery was instituted and built on the illustrious matron Rictrude’s own property.)

The polyptych also suggests that the monastery was built for Rictrude. Furthermore, Rictrude and Adalbald’s social status is magnified: according to our author, Rictrude came from a senatorial family and Adalbald was a ‘potentissimus dux’. After the foundation, St Aubert, bishop of Cambrai, gave his benediction to her pious enterprise and dedicated the church.156 Aubert’s intervention, which is found for the first time in this text, is chronologically possible – Aubert is attested in 645–52 and 667 – but geographically improbable, since Marchiennes was still in the diocese of Tournai at that time.157 The fifth chapter is the most significant one, because it introduces the will that Rictrude allegedly bequeathed to her community: Rictrudis voti compos universa que sibi residua videbantur esse, testamentum legitimum faciens, perpetuo jure possidenda liberaliter sanctis Dei et eidem contulit monasterio, que singula annotari suo loco inferius non incongruum videtur.158 (Rictrude, by means of a testament, conceded in perpetual right to God’s saints and the monastery, what was left of her properties, which, as it will be noted below, were not insignificant.)

Chapter six recalls how Jonas – not Jonatus! – first ruled the male community and how, when Rictrude entered Marchiennes, a community of women was created. It is also said that Rictrude preferred to remain a simple nun rather

155 156

L’Histoire-Polyptyque, c. 3, p. 67. L’Histoire-Polyptyque, c. 3, pp. 67–8, and c. 5, pp. 69–70; the polyptych specifies that the church was dedicated to SS Peter and Paul on 26 November; Hucbald did not specify the dedication, and the only dedication date given by the calendars from Marchiennes is 24 July, which corresponds to the 1177 dedication. 157 L’Histoire-Polyptyque, p. 68, n. 6. 158 L’Histoire-Polyptyque, c. 5, p. 70.

133

The Hagiographic Cycle of St Rictrude than becoming abbess.159 It is true that the VR never explicitly said that Rictrude was abbess, but it was clear that she had the authority of the position. Chapter 7 recounts Rictrude’s death and her burial near the altar dedicated to John the Baptist, details which are missing from earlier narratives.160 Chapters 8 to 14 recall the stories of SS Maurontus, Amatus and Eusebia and the foundations of Hamage and Breuil. These chapters do not depart significantly from the data given by the VR and the Vita Amati. Finally, chapter 15 returns to Rictrude’s will already alluded to in chapter 5. The will had been written down at the time of Clovis II (640–657) and was legally witnessed by many important and prestigious men of the time.161 Indeed, the accumulation of ‘celebrities’ is impressive: those present included St Aubert, St Vindicien (Aubert’s successor-to-be), Honoratus (an archdeacon from Arras who was buried near St Vindicien at Mount St Eligius), St Amand, St Jonatus, Chrodobaldus (prior of Elnon at the time of Amand), Vincent Madelgaire, founder of the monastery of Soignies, Amalfrid (founder of the cella of Honnecourt with his daughter Auriana), and Badilo (who was said to have brought Mary Magdalen’s relics from Jerusalem to Vezelay).162 It is clear that all these characters have nothing to do with Rictrude and Marchiennes, if only because they were all related to the bishopric of Cambrai, while Marchiennes was, until the middle of the seventh century, in the bishopric of Tournai. The mention in the witness list of Badilo, whose existence is dubious in any case, is anachronistic since, according to the tradition from Vezelay, it was after the viking invasions that Badilo brought Mary Magdalen’s relics to Vezelay.163 Similarly, Amalfrid and Auriana are attested only in 685, in a charter from Saint-Bertin.164 Amand and Jonatus belong to the original legend of St Rictrude; Chrodobaldus is mentioned in the VAm, and in the twelfth century his relics, which were buried in the crypt beside St Jonatus, were honored at Marchiennes.165 Although many of these characters are mentioned in a variety of earlier texts (vitae, charters), it appears that the author of the polyptych, who is probably to be credited with the invention of Rictrude’s testament, found their names in the Gesta of Cambrai. Indeed, we have seen that in his introduction he nominally mentions the Gesta as one of

159 160 161 162 163

L’Histoire-Polyptyque, c. 6, p. 70. L’Histoire-Polyptyque, c. 7, p. 71. L’Histoire-Polyptyque, c. 15, pp. 77–8. L’Histoire-Polyptyque, c. 15, p. 78. St Bodilon’s relics were honored at Leuze, one of St Amand’s foundations; on Badilon, see J. Nazet, ‘Saint Badilon à Leuze: les origines d’un culte insolite’, Mémoires de la Société d’Histoire et d’Archéologie de Tournai 4 (1983–1984), 55–69. 164 Amalfrid and Auriana had founded a private monastic community at Honnecourt, in the bishopric of Cambrai, which they had entrusted to the abbot of Saint-Bertin in 685; see above, Chapter 2, p. 24. 165 L’Histoire-Polyptyque, p. 78; VAm, c. 25, p. 448; on Chrodobaldus’s relics at Marchiennes, see AA SS, 3 May, p. 153.

134

St Rictrude and the Abbey of Marchiennes his sources; it seems that, to compose his list of witnesses, he read through the Gesta and randomly picked up names of people whose dates could possibly match the date of Rictrude’s pseudo-will.166 Indeed, his source for these characters clearly corresponds to notices in the Gesta, and the only common point between them is exactly their mention in the Gesta. After the ceremony of the signatures, St Amand and St Aubert, with the approbation of the king, anathematized those who would despoil the monastery of Marchiennes.167 Finally, the polyptych itself begins directly after this chapter. The author’s narrative technique is transparent. By beginning the polyptych with an introduction relating the foundation of Marchiennes, he meant to emphasize the antiquity of the monastery and the legitimacy of its territorial claims. The legitimacy is further strengthened by the assertion that Marchiennes’ possessions belonged to Rictrude herself. The most interesting element of the legend’s transformation in the polyptych is St Rictrude’s alleged will. It is not clear whether the testament was the product of our author’s imagination or whether this story had already been developed before, but it is obvious that it is a creation without any documented basis. This distortion of the legend as it was told by Hucbald is plainly understandable. The invented will evidently purported to sacralize Marchiennes’ possessions by asserting Rictrude’s desire that her lands be reserved for the use of her community.168 Hence the polyptych actually represents a reproduction of the possessions and rights which were recorded in Rictrude’s testament. It is also clear that Aubert and Amand’s anathema is actually addressed to the twelfth-century sticky-fingered local petty lords whose interests were in conflict with Marchiennes’ over landholding. As for all the new characters introduced in the foundation story, they play the same role as St Richer and Nanthild in the VR: their collaboration stresses the prestige of the new foundation and they provide a historical backdrop to the events. The polyptych was not an isolated effort to make Marchiennes’ landed 166

On St Aubert and St Vindicien, see Gesta Episcoporum Cameracensium, lib. I, pp. 407–10. On Honoratus, see Gesta Episcoporum Cameracensium, lib. I, c. 30, p. 415. On St Vincent Madelgaire, see Gesta Episcoporum Cameracensium, lib. II, c. 35, p. 463; St Vincent was the husband of St Waldetrude, foundress of the monastery of Mons; both decided to enter religious life slightly before 655: Helvétius, Abbayes, évêques et laïques, pp. 49–53. On Amalfrid and Auriana, see Gesta Episcoporum Cameracensium, lib II, c. 10, p. 438. On Bodilo, see Gesta Episcoporum Cameracensium, lib. II, c. 43, p. 464. 167 L’Histoire-Polyptyque, c. 15, pp. 77–8. 168 Examples of such legitimization of landholding through a donation or testament given by the saint abound, especially in the eleventh century; see de Gaiffier, ‘Les revendications de biens’. Parallels can be drawn with the so-called forged donation of St Aldegund: see P. Bonenfant, ‘Note critique sur le prétendu testament de sainte Aldegonde’, Bulletin de la Commission Royale d’Histoire 98 (1934), 219–38, who gives an edition of the document; for the most recent discussion of the text, see Helvétius, Abbayes, évêques et laïques, pp. 161–8.

135

The Hagiographic Cycle of St Rictrude assets more sacred in order to (re)claim them for the community. During the twelfth century, several collections of miracles attributed to SS Rictrude, Jonatus and Eusebia were produced. As Henri Platelle has amply demonstrated, these collections, written between 1125 and 1174, abound in anecdotes of conflicts between the monks and rapacious local lords – among whom the abbey’s advocates were not the least abusers.169 Hence, the transformation of the foundation legend found in the Cambrai Gesta and especially in the polyptych and the miracula form a coherent set of written reactions in direct response to conflicts over landholding with the neighboring aristocracy which had already started in the tenth century and became increasingly acute during the eleventh and twelfth centuries. New genealogical developments in the twelfth century During the twelfth century, at the same time as St Rictrude’s legend was transformed in the polyptych and in miracle collections in a way that emphasized her ownership of Marchiennes’ landed assets, her and her husband’s genealogical trees were improved. Rictrude’s father, Ernold, became identified with Ernaud of Gironde, hero of the French chanson de geste of Guillaume d’Orange.170 As for Adalbald, from the twelfth century on he was said to have two brothers: Erchinoald, a Neustrian mayor of the palace (641–657) and Sigefridus, St Bertha of Blangy’s husband. The first source to associate Rictrude’s father with Ernaud de Gironde is the Chronicon Marcianense, written at the end of the twelfth century by Andrew of Marchiennes.171 Fuit autem filia Hernoldi clarissimi et fortissimi, cognomento Nobilis . . . Cuius gesta militaria rithmice composita et eius fratrum adhuc decantantur in palaciis regum et theatrum populorum.172 (She was the daughter of the very famous and powerful Ernaud the Noble . . . His military actions, as well as his brother’s, have been put into verse and are sung in the royal palaces and the people’s theaters.)

The assertion that Adalbald was Erchinoald’s brother appears for the first 169

For a detailed analysis of Marchiennes’ collections of miracles and their relation to conflicts regarding landholding, see Platelle, ‘La religion populaire’ and ‘Crime et châtiment’. 170 The cycle of Guillaume takes place, however, in a mythic Carolingian time; on Guillaume d’Orange and the construction of his legend, see Le Cycle de Guillaume d’Orange: Anthologie, ed. D. Boutet, Les Lettres Gothiques 4547 (Paris, 1996), and J. Frappier, Les chansons de geste du cycle de Guillaume d’Orange, 2 vols. (Paris, 1955–1965). 171 K. F. Werner, ‘Andreas von Marchiennes und die Geschichtschreibung von Anchin und Marchiennes in der zweiten Hälfte des 12. Jahrhunderts’, Deutsches Archiv 9 (1951), 402–63. 172 Chronicon Marcianense, p. 416.

136

St Rictrude and the Abbey of Marchiennes time in the Chronicon Vedastinum, an eleventh-century chronicle written at Saint-Vaast which was transferred to Marchiennes, where it was annotated during the twelfth century. This source also adds that the two brothers had rebuilt the castrum of Douai and built a church in the town: Defuncto Erchinoaldo palatii comite, viro strenuo et sapiente, Franci Ebroino iussu regis curam palatii committunt. Hic Erchinoaldus cum fratre Adabaldo, patre sancti Mauronti, reedicaverunt Duacum castrum et infra castrum Dei genitricis Marie templum. Hic enim locus antiquitus fuerat consecratus.173 (At the death of Erchinoald, mayor of the palace, strong and wise man, the Franks delegated the care of the palace to Ebroin by the king’s order. This Erchinoald, and his brother Adalbald, St Maurontus’s father, re-built the castrum of Douai and inside the castrum, built a church dedicated to the Virgin Mary. Indeed, this place was consecrated in very ancient time.)

Probably following this source, Andrew of Marchiennes repeated the story and added that parts of Adalbald’s relics had been translated to SaintAmand.174 This story was then once again reproduced in a thirteenth-century addition to the Annales Marchianenses.175 Moreover, different thirteenth-century hands have augmented the Annales Marchianenses with other details concerning the history of Marchiennes: Amatus’s exile (685) and Rictrude’s death (688); a twelfth-century hand had already annotated Amatus’s death (691) and Maurontus’s death (701).176 All these sources are, however, very late and should not be trusted. We have seen that when Hucbald wrote the VR, he could barely find any information about Rictrude and her family; hence, it is very unlikely that later writers had access to sources that Hucbald would have ignored. It is notable that eleventh- and early twelfth-century sources – such as the Vita Eusebiae, the Vita Mauronti, the Gesta Episcoporum Cameracensium, the polyptych – completely ignore the alleged family links between Adalbald and Erchinoald. Furthermore, the assertion that Erchinoald and Adalbald rebuilt the castrum of Douai is anachronistic, because, as we shall see in the following chapter, a castrum did not exist at Douai before the tenth century. The late appearance of the mention of Adalbald as brother of Erchinoald in a context where all written sources had long disappeared, is, I believe, strong enough an argument to rule this information spurious.177

173 174 175 176 177

Chronicon Vedastinum, ed. O. Holdr-Egger, MGH SS 13, p. 694. Chronicon Marcianense, p. 418 Annales Marchianenses, p. 611. Annales Marchianenses, p. 611. Arguments in favor of this tradition have been put forward, most notably by Geary, Aristocracy in Provence, pp. 126–48. Geary’s argument is mostly based on his belief

137

The Hagiographic Cycle of St Rictrude The fabrication of a family link between Adalbald and Erchinoald is an understandable narrative artifice: Erchinoald was said to be related to King Dagobert through the king’s mother Berthetrude.178 This family connection with the great king could only raise Rictrude’s family prestige. The origin of the legend is, however, not clear. It may have been developed at Marchiennes, where alterations to the VR had already been made. Yet, the story may also have been cooked up by the canons of the collegiate church of Saint-Amé at Douai. Indeed, at some point, perhaps in the tenth century, St Amatus’s and St Maurontus’s relics were translated to Douai, to a church originally dedicated to the Virgin Mary.179 The foundation story of this church, which became the collegiate church of Saint-Amé after the translation, was written down in two related charters issued by the canons, dated 1076. These charters do not mention Adalbald as the church’s founder, but we shall see in the following chapter that after 1076 the canons of Saint-Amé attempted to push back the foundation date of their church.180 Therefore, I believe that the legend making Adalbald and Erchinoald brothers originated in the milieu of the canons of Saint-Amé and that it was happily reiterated and, perhaps, improved at Marchiennes. Andrew of Marchiennes added yet another family link to the dynasty.181 He gave Adalbald and Erchinoald another brother, Sigefridus, count of Ponthieu and St Bertha of Blangy’s husband. Andrew’s source for this interpolation is obscure. The Vita Bertae, written in the tenth century, indeed mentions that the saint was married to a man named Sigefridus, ‘con-

178 179

180 181

that the Maurontus of VR is related to the Maurontus of the Vita Richarii; I believe, however, that Maurontus’s name is a contamination of VR due to the conflation of two unrelated stories of the Vita Richarii. Geary’s other main argument is the ‘vicinity’ of Erchinoald and Adalbald’s possession (Aristocracy, pp. 135–6); as we have seen, Adalbald’s possessions were in Ostrevant, while Erchinoald’s family assets were in the regions of Saint-Wandrille, Jumièges, in the Marne valley and at Péronne on the Somme; although at the scale of the Frankish kingdoms these regions are not extremely far away, I think that it is a stretch to consider them as belonging to the same geographical area. Moreover, Geary has suggested that a few Maurontuses who lived in Provence in the eighth century could belong to Rictrude’s lineage. Considering the dubious nature of Maurontus’s name and the little reliable information that we have about Rictrude, it is risky to infer much about her lineage from a simple coincidence of names. Fredegar, Chronicorum Liber Quartus, c. 84, p. 71. A similar ‘social upgrading’ appears in the successive legends of St Waudru of Mons, see J.-M. Cauchies, ‘Hagiographie, historiographie et politique (IXe–XIVe s.): Sainte Waudru “comtesse”, “duchesse”, “princesse” ‘, in Sainte Waudru devant l’histoire et devant la foi. Recueil d’études publié à l’occasion du treizième centenaire de sa mort, ed. J.-M. Cauchies (Mons, 1989), pp. 93–116. Recueil des actes de Philippe Ier, roi de France (1059–1108), ed. M. Prou (Paris, 1908), p. 439. Andrew of Marchiennes, Historia Succinta, c. 18, p. 626.

138

St Rictrude and the Abbey of Marchiennes sanguineus regis Chlodovei’.182 Sigefridus’s brother was married to a woman named Rotrude, who lived in her monastery, located thirty miles away from Blangy.183 Although the names are different, although the Vita Bertae does not name Marchiennes, and although Blangy (dep. Pas-de-Calais, arr. Arras), was located in the diocese of Thérouanne, far away from Marchiennes, the gap between Rictrude and Rotrude was tempting to fill for an author interested in saintly genealogies. That St Bertha was said to have a daughter named Gertrude must have made the link between the two families all the more plausible.184 To conclude, a legend asserting that Adalbald was Erchinoald’s brother – and thus King Dagobert’s consanguineus – was developed during the twelfth century. Since this family link is always associated in the sources with their alleged reconstruction of the castrum of Douai, it is possible that the story was initiated in that city by the canons of Saint-Amé, who were holding the relics of Adalbald’s alleged son, Maurontus. Furthermore, Adalbald’s genealogy was contaminated by the legend of St Bertha because of the quasi-homonymy between the names of her sister-in-law Rotrude and St Rictrude. We have seen that the VR had already been similarly contaminated by other vitae, such as the Vita Richarii, from which it borrowed the name Maurontus, and the Vita Geretrudis, which may have provided a model for the banquet scene. It is notable that a few names constantly reappear in all these legends: the two Rictrudes and the two Maurontuses of the VR and the Vita Richarii; the three Gertrudes, of Nivelles, Hamage and Blangy. Another St Gertrude, related to St Aldegund of Maubeuge, is also mentioned in an eleventh-century vita of St Aldegund.185 Furthermore, the same characters appear over and over again in all these vitae: St Amand in the Vita Aldegundis Prima (VAld1), the Vita Geretrudis, the VR and the Vita Berthae; St Richer in the Vita Richarii, the VR and the Vita Bertae; King Dagobert in the VR and the Vita Geretrudis; St Aubert in ‘Rictrude’s will’, the VAld1 and the Vita Bertae. In these conditions, it is not surprising that medieval as well as modern authors have been tempted to associate all these characters and to attribute to them some sort of family, or clanic relationships.186 I believe, however, that

182 183 184 185

186

Vita S. Bertae (BHL 1266), AA SS, 2 Jul., c. 4, p. 50; see Van der Essen, Étude critique, pp. 420–2. Vita S. Bertae, c. 7, p. 50. Vita S. Bertae, c. 5, p. 50; the Vita Bertae was known at Marchiennes in the twelfth century: Douai, Bibliothèque Municipale, MS 842. On this late Vita Aldegundis (VA5) (BHL 247), AA SS, 3 Jan., pp. 655–62, written c. 1030–1040, and which had been wrongly attributed to Hucbald of Saint-Amand, see Helvétius, Abbayes, évêques et laïques, pp. 340–2. See, for example, Le Jan, Famille et pouvoir, pp. 392–3, who suggests, albeit with reservations, that St Gertrude of Nivelle, St Gertrude of Hamage, St Bertha and St Rictrude could belong to the same sippe. For other examples of interrelated hagiographic cycles, see B. de Gaiffier, ‘L’hagiographie dans le marquisat de

139

The Hagiographic Cycle of St Rictrude this is a risky step to take, and that this phenomenon has other explanations. After all, these names were spread throughout the Frankish kingdoms.187 More significantly, I believe that the mode of transmission of these legends and the narrative techniques used by the authors account for an important part of the similarities of names and situations between all these vitae. Christoph Wehrli has amply demonstrated that Dagobert had become a topos of medieval historiography and hagiography, who was used both as a chronological landmark and as a way of enhancing saints’ prestige.188 In terms of name dropping, there is undoubtedly an elaborating narrative process at work in Rictrude’s cycle: at each stage of its transformation, new prestigious lay and holy characters were added. As for the insertion of the ‘anonymous’ characters, the case of Maurontus is particularly enlightening. The attribution to Rictrude of a son named Maurontus shows how two unrelated characters have been assimilated in order to create a new one. A similar identification happened with Rotrude, St Bertha’s sister-in-law, and Rictrude. The popularity of the name Gertrude might be in part explained by the popularity of the saint, especially in milieus related to St Amand.

Conclusion Rictrude and her kin are at the origin of a narrative cycle initiated in the tenth century which was further elaborated in the eleventh and twelfth centuries. The seminal text of the cycle, the VR, introduced enough events and characters to allow later writers to use the text and transform the legend according to the necessities of the time. Hence, the VR inspired various extrapolations which appear in a series of texts: the Vita Jonati, the Vita Amati, written by Hucbald himself, the Vita Rictrudis Metrica, the Vita Eusebiae. These new vitae directly stemmed from the VR, and the new narrative elements they added to their model aimed mainly at valorizing their saint; the Vita Amati Longior adds that Amatus became abbot of Breuil, the Vita Eusebiae emphasizes her paternal lineage and lengthens her life by two decades. The VR and its sequels were meant to promote the cult of Marchiennes’ saints and to reconstruct the history of its origins. Hence, in these texts emphasis was put on the saints’ social prestige, their relations with important people and the support given by holy people to the foundation. After the restoration, Rictrude’s legend was significantly altered, especially in those aspects that concerned

Flandre et le duché de Basse-Lotharingie au onzième siècle’, in Études critiques d’hagiographie et d’iconologie, Subsidia Hagiographica 43 (Brussels, 1967), pp. 415–507. 187 See Morlet, Les noms de personne: nine instances of Gertrude and variants, five of Rictrude and variants, ten of Maurontus and variants. 188 Wehrli, Mittelalterliche Überlieferungen.

140

St Rictrude and the Abbey of Marchiennes the foundation of Marchiennes and the domain’s initial ownership. These alterations, which are found in the Gesta Episcoporum Cameracensium and, principally, in the historical introduction of the polyptych, were meant to protect the abbey against spoliation by its neighbors. Later in the twelfth century, new alterations of the legend, probably produced at Douai, focused on Adalbald, who was credited with civic deeds (the reconstruction of the castrum) and a blood relationship with King Dagobert. Hence at different periods, correspond different transformations of the cycle. Such a cycle developed over centuries is not unique and can be compared, for example, to the cycle of the abbesses of Maubeuge.189 Such cycles were especially popular in communities where written sources had disappeared – or never existed – because they allowed endless narratives developments while no other source could get in the way of what Amy Remensnyder called ‘imaginative memory’. Thus, successive authors were free to create all the relations and ramifications needed by the community to magnify and strengthen itself.190 It is remarkable that, in the case of Rictrude’s cycle, the re-invention of the saint’s family legend was not limited to her abbey of Marchiennes and to issues of landholding. The appropriation of two of Marchiennes’ major saints, Amatus and Maurontus, by the canons of the collegiate church of Douai led to the exportation of the cycle to another community. Indeed, the canons of Saint-Amé at Douai appropriated Rictrude’s original story and modified it according to their own needs and the social values of their time. This is the subject of the following chapter.

189

On the cycle of St Waldetrude of Mons, her family and their monastic foundations, see Helvétius, Abbayes, évêques et laïques, pp. 45–86. 190 The importance of family in Rictrude’s cycle is also undoubtedly related to her gender and to Carolingian perceptions of female sanctity: see J. H. M. Smith, ‘The Problem of Female Sanctity in Carolingian Europe c. 780–920’, Past and Present 146 (1995), 3–37 (pp. 36–7). Regarding Rictrude’s family in VR, it is notable that the developments are vertical: sanctity is transmitted from the great-grandmother Gertrude to Eusebia through her grandson Adalbald and his wife, Rictrude; this is akin to the observations made by Laurent Theis on family representation in Merovingian hagiography, which contrast with the common vision of a Frankish society based on horizontal clanic relations: see ‘Saints sans famille? Quelques remarques sur la famille dans le monde franc à travers les sources hagiographiques’, Revue Historique 255 (1976), 3–30.

141

CHAPTER FIVE

Saint Maurontus and Saint Amatus at Douai

Introduction From the eleventh century, the canons of the collegiate church of Saint-Amé at Douai were claiming possession of St Amatus’s and St Maurontus’s relics. As we have seen in the previous chapter, these saints originally belonged to St Rictrude’s cycle and were commemorated at the abbey of Marchiennes. In this chapter, I will examine how the canons of Douai legitimized their appropriation of Amatus’s and Maurontus’s relics by selecting the elements from Rictrude’s cycle pertaining to their tutelary saints, by adapting these elements to their own interest, and finally, by integrating them within their own foundation legend. The fate of Amatus’s and Maurontus’s legends at Douai is interesting because their transformations by the canons allow us to investigate how a particular house’s custom-built historical narrative could be appropriated by another community and adapted for its own ends. The translation of St Amatus from his monastery of Breuil to the church of Douai, which prompted the foundation of the community of canons, was related for the first time in 1076, in a group of charters, or rather charternotices, dated 1076. These charters-notices were written at Saint-Amé itself, and sent for signature to the count of Flanders, Robert the Frisian, and the king of France, Philip I.1 This foundation story asserts that Arnulf the Great had brought the relics to Douai in the aftermath of his conquest of the city (c. 950). I have already underlined how positive as well as negative interaction between religious communities and secular power had an impact on these communities’ narrative production.2 This is especially striking in the case of the community of Douai. Indeed, the foundation story was written down in 1076, in the context of the bitter struggles which opposed the counts of Flanders and Hainault over the control of the city. We shall see that this troubled

1

The notice differs from the charter in that it is written in an objective form and the charter in a subjective form; see O. Guillotjeannin, J. Pycke and B.-M. Tock, Diplomatique médiévale, L’Atelier du Médiéviste 2 (Turnhout, 1993), p. 25. 2 At Saint-Bertin opposition to Arnulf’s intervention triggered the redaction of the Gesta Abbatum; at Marchiennes, the polyptych and the miracle collections were written in a context of struggle between the abbey and its advocates and lay neighbors.

142

St Maurontus and St Amatus at Douai political context influenced both the time and the manner in which the community of Saint-Amé produced its own historiographical narratives. It is indeed not without significance that the foundation legend of Saint-Amé was related for the first time neither in a hagiographic text nor in a chronicle, but rather in charters ratified by the highest secular authorities of the time, the king of France and the count of Flanders. Because of the close relation between the history of Saint-Amé and the political context, I will begin this chapter with a brief overview of the history of Douai and its region during the period. Then, I will examine the narrative process by which the canons of Saint-Amé adapted the original legend of Amatus and Maurontus to their own needs. The first aspect of this adaptation concerns St Amatus. In 1076, this community wrote, apparently for the first time, the story of its foundation, which is closely related to the translation of Amatus’s relics from Breuil to Douai.3 The translation, according to the 1076 texts, was initiated by Arnulf the Great, and was justified by the destruction of Breuil during the vikings’ incursions. The transfer of Amatus’s relics was accompanied by the transfer to the new community of Saint-Amé of the estates which had belonged to Breuil. Hence, in their foundation story, the canons of Saint-Amé presented themselves as both spiritual and material heirs to the monastic community founded by Maurontus. In order to emphasize and legitimize this privileged status, the canons integrated, within the foundation story of Saint-Amé, the foundation story of Breuil – which was originally told in the Vita Rictrudis (VR) and the Vita Amati Longior (VAL) – and transformed it in such a way that the role of St Amatus at Breuil was magnified. The second aspect of the adaptation of Rictrude’s cycle concerns St Maurontus; indeed, as we have already seen, the canons should probably be credited with the development of the legend asserting that Maurontus’s father Adalbald was a duke of Douai who had rebuilt its castrum. To conclude, I will discuss how these two transformations of the original story complete each other because both the foundation legend of Saint-Amé and Maurontus’s improved genealogy contributed to the legitimization of Saint-Amé’s landholding and the appropriation of St Amatus and St Maurontus’ cults.

The origins of Douai The origins of Douai (Nord, chef-lieu) and its early history are obscure and scarcely documented.4 Before the second third of the tenth century, Douai seems to have been little more than a pre-urban area of little economic and

3 4

The canons, however, never justified their possession of Maurontus’s relics. On Douai, see Histoire de Douai, ed. M. Rouche, Histoire des Villes du NordPas-de-Calais 9 (Westhoek, 1985), pp. 1–42; G. Espinas, La vie urbaine de Douai au

143

The Hagiographic Cycle of St Rictrude strategic importance. Works of canalization, which turned it from a swamp into an elevated islet favorable for the building of a castrum, might be credited for its development as a stronghold and a urban entity.5 Excavations have revealed that the first fortifications date from the tenth century and that, before that time, Douai was occupied only by farms.6 These observations are consistent with the first appearance of Douai in our written sources in the year 930 in the Annals of Flodoard.7 During the following two decades, until it was annexed by Arnulf I of Flanders, Douai was a pawn in the struggles which opposed Hugh the Great, Herbert of Vermandois and the Carolingian rulers in the control of the region of Ostrevant. When the oppidum Duagium appears in the Annals, it was held by one Arnoldus, vassal of Hugh the Great. Arnoldus had betrayed Hugh, from whom he had received Douai, for his arch-rival, Herbert of Vermandois.8 In retaliation, Hugh and his ally, Gislebert of Lotharingia, took Douai and offered it to the count of Laon, Roger: Lotharienses in Franciam cum Gisleberto obviam Hugoni veniunt et oppidum quoddam nomine Duagium, quod Arnoldus tenebat, adactum obsidione capiunt.9 (Lotharienses interea Duagium capiunt, et Hugo illud Rotgario, filio Rotgarii, concedit.10)

Roger of Laon kept Douai for ten years; in 941, he was expelled by King Louis IV who gave the castrum back to Arnould: Rotgarius comes, datis obsidibus, dimittur a rege Ludowico, Duagium castellum reddens Arnoldo.11

5 6 7 8 9 10 11

moyen âge, 4 vols. (Douai, 1913), I.; F. Brassart, La féodalité dans le nord de la France. Histoire du château et de la châtellenie de Douai depuis le Xe siècle jusqu’en 1789, 4 vols. (Douai, 1877–1887); G. Koch and F. D. de Mayer, ‘Douai à la fin du XIe siècle’, RN 33 (1951), 56–60; C. Verlinden, ‘Souveraineté flamande et souveraineté hennuyère à Douai’, RN 18 (1932), 1–19. On the collegiate church of Saint-Amé, F. Brassart, ‘Mémoire sur un point important de l’histoire de Douai. Établissement de la collégiale de Saint-Amé dans cette ville’, Souvenirs de la Flandre Wallonne 12 (1872), 5–62. On the region of Douai, see Delcambre, ‘L’Ostrevant’, and P. Feuchère, ‘La Pevèle du IXe au XIIIe siècle’, RN 33 (1951), 44–55. Espinas, La vie urbaine de Douai, pp. 14–17. On the excavations at Douai, see most recently E. Louis, Mille ans de fortifications à Douai, IXe–XIXe siècles (Douai, 1997). Flodoard, Annales, ed. P. Lauer (Paris, 1905), a. 930, p. 46. Flodoard, Annales, a. 930, p. 45; on Arnoldus and his family, see Dhondt, ‘Une dynastie inconnue’. Flodoard, Annals, a. 930, p. 46. Flodoard, Annals, a. 931, p. 47. Flodoard, Annals, a. 941, p. 81.

144

St Maurontus and St Amatus at Douai This is Arnould’s last mention in our sources. After Arnould’s death, Arnulf of Flanders became master of Douai in circumstances which remain obscure. Since 931–932, when he took over Mortagne and Arras, Arnulf had been persistently pushing the boundaries of his county southward. In 952 Arnulf was certainly in control of the northern part of Ostrevant since he had the authority to chose the abbot of Saint-Amand, and his control of southern Ostrevant (with Douai) was asserted in 956.12 Douai remained under Arnulf’s control until his death in 965; as we have seen, his grandson Arnulf II could not succeed him immediately because of his young age. The interregnum was secured by Lothar IV, who temporarily took control of Artois and Ostrevant, including Douai.13 These regions remained under Carolingian authority until 987, when Hugh Capet gave them back to their legitimate heir Arnulf II. Ostrevant remained Flemish until 1071. Located on the border between Hainault and Flanders, the region was much disturbed by the succession crisis of 1070. From 1065, thanks to Baldwin VI’s marriage with Richildis, countess of Hainault, Hainault and Flanders were ruled by the same Count Baldwin I (VI); Baldwin’s young son, Arnulf, was supposed to inherit both counties. At Baldwin’s death, his brother, Robert the Frisian, challenged his nephew’s succession and required Flanders for himself. After his victory at the battle of Cassel (1071), Robert mastered Flanders without contest. Nonetheless, the castellan of Douai remained loyal to Countess Richildis; Ostrevant succeeded from Flanders and was placed under the count of Hainault’s authority. Douai, however, remained occupied by Robert the Frisian, and its situation remained ambiguous until 1089, when both parties agreed to officially re-integrate the town into the county of Flanders.14

The foundation of the collegiate church and St Amatus’s translation The sources regarding the foundation of Saint-Amé are scarce and were produced much later than the facts they record. Chronologically, the first source to mention the collegiate church and the existence of a community of canons at Douai is the Gesta Episcoporum Cameracensium, written around 1024. The notice about Douai also confirms the presence of St Amatus’s and Maurontus’s relics there. Preterea etiam apud castellum Duwaicum monasterium est canonicorum, ubi corpora sanctorum icacent Morantii atque videlicet Amati.15 12 13 14

Espinas, La vie urbaine de Douai, p. 54 and n. 1. Gesta Episcoporum Cameracensium, lib. I, c. 100, p. 442. The political status of Douai was much disputed in these troubled years: see G. Koch and F. D. de Meyer, ‘Douai à la fin du XIe siècle’, RN 33 (1951), 56–60. 15 Gesta Episcoporum Cameracensium, lib. II, c. 21, p. 460.

145

The Hagiographic Cycle of St Rictrude The earliest charter concerning Saint-Amé dates from the same period as the Gesta. It is a charter dated from 1024, and given by Baldwin IV on the occasion of the dedication of St Amatus’s crypt.16 Other charters – land donations or personal offerings – were given to Saint-Amé after 1024: in 1031–1050,17 105118 and 1071–1074.19 Nevertheless, none of these texts documents the circumstance of foundation of the community, and it was not before 1076 that the story was written down. The foundation story of Saint-Amé survives in two versions. The first one is represented by three charter-notices: two are dated from 1076 – one signed by Count Robert and the other by King Philip – and a third one, given by Gerard II of Cambrai, is dated 1081. The second version is represented by a, probably forged, royal privilege, allegedly given by Philip I in 1076. A close examination of the foundation story, and especially a comparison of the two versions, will shed light both on the circumstances of the redaction of these charters and on the aims pursued by the canons. The foundation story and the 1076 charters At the beginning of the year 1076, the canons wrote two charter-notices, which they sent for validation to the count, Robert the Frisian, and to the king of France, Philip I.20 Philip’s charter was signed at Senlis on 28 February and Robert’s charter at Lille, after 22 April. Both documents were then probably sent back to Saint-Amé. These two charters, which are similar word for word, apart for a few details which I will indicate, record and confirm Saint-Amé’s rights and properties. Furthermore, they begin with a historical prologue, detailing the foundation story of the community. The 1076 charters seem to have given impetus to the church and the cult of Saint-Amé, because, from that time on, donation and confirmation charters were more regularly given to the community. Furthermore, two years after, in 1078, Amatus’s relics were translated to a new shrine by Gerard II of Cambrai.21 At the same period, a miracle and a summary of the VAL were interpolated into the Gesta 16

17 18 19 20 21

Baldwin IV granted Saint-Amé some revenues on the occasion in a charter published in F. Brassart, La féodalité. Preuves, vol. 1, pp. 3–4; the authenticity of this unsealed document is, however, not unanimously accepted: see M. Gysseling, Toponymysch Woordenboek, vol. 1, p. 468. Published in F. Brassart, La féodalité. Preuves, vol. 1, pp. 4–5, and in Ch. Duvivier, Actes et documents anciens intéressant la Belgique (Brussels, 1898), pp. 182–83. Archives Départementales du Nord, Lille, 1 G 194, no. 1005. Archives Départementales du Nord, Lille, 1 G 194, no. 1006. Recueil des actes de Philippe Ier, pp. 438–41, and Actes des comtes de Flandre (1071–1128), ed. F. Vercauteren (Brussels, 1938), pp. 6–11. This translation was documented in the chronicle that opened the Liber Argenteus, a liturgical manuscript written at Saint-Amé in the thirteenth century; the manuscript (Paris, BN, nouv. acq. lat. 1965) is seriously damaged, and the chronicle as well as several other texts have now disappeared; excerpts of the chronicle have been published in AA SS, 4 Sept., pp. 131–3. See Dolbeau, ‘Le dossier de S. Amé’, p. 91.

146

St Maurontus and St Amatus at Douai Episcoporum Cameracensium.22 In conclusion, it appears that the 1076 charters were part of a concerted effort to promote St Amatus’s cult and to assert his community’s landholdings and rights. This context is all the more interesting when we consider the foundation story which introduced the two charters of 1076. The historical prologues of both charters are devoted to the history of the origins of the community. This story goes back to the monastery of Breuil, which, as we have seen, had been founded by the son of St Rictrude, to whom Hucbald had given the name of Maurontus. This prologue is obviously based on the main sources regarding Maurontus and Amatus, that is the VR and the VAL. Philip I’s charter: Senlis, 28 February 1076 beatus Maurontus, incliti ducis Adalboldi atque sancte Rictrudis filius, satis accurate consideravit quia, ut electorum numero asscriberetur, in proprio fundo antiquitus Broilo, a modernis autem Menrivilla nominato, . . . ecclesiam a fundamento construxit. Ipso vero, tempore Luchdovici, Francorum regis, ex Dagoberto prognati, bona sibi jure hereditario contigientia beato Amato viventi, Theoderici tirannide a Senonensi episcopatu depulso, contulit et post beati viri exitum ab hujus mundi Egipto, ad ipsius honorem in prefata ecclesia Deo cum sanctis famulando fratres congregavit.23

Robert’s charter: Lille, after 22 April 1076 beatus Maurontus, incliti ducis Adalboldi atque sancte Rictrudis filius, satis accurate consideravit quia, ut electorum numero digne asscriberetur, quandoque in proprio fundo ab antecessoribus Broilo, a presentibus autem Menrivilla nominato, . . . ecclesiam a fundamento construxit. Ipso vero, tempore Luchdovici, Francorum regis, ex Dagoberto prognati, bona sibi jure hereditario contigientia beato Amato viventi, Theoderici tirannide a Senonensi episcopatu depulso, contulit et post beati viri exitum ab hujus mundi Egipto, ad ipsius honorem in prefata ecclesia Deo cum sanctis famulando fratres congregavit.24

(St Maurontus, son of the illustrious duke Adalbald and of St Rictrude, properly considered, in order to be inscribed among the chosen ones, to build from bottom up a church . . . on his own property known as Breuil in ancient times and today called Merville. At the time of Clovis, king of the Franks and son of Dagobert, he bequeathed the properties which he had lawfully inherited to St Amatus when he was still alive, as he had been exiled because of Theoderic’s tyranny; and after the holy man’s death, in his honor, he [Maurontus] gathered in the same church a congregation of holy brethren serving God.)

Like the VR and the VAL, the prologue contends that Maurontus built a church on his patrimonial land of Breuil, that he bequeathed his possessions to Amatus and that at Amatus’s death, Maurontus buried him at Breuil.25 22

Gesta Episcoporum Cameracensium, lib. I, c. 23, p. 410; see Dolbeau, ‘Le dossier de S. Amé’, pp. 102 and 105–6. 23 Actes de Philippe Ier, pp. 438–9. 24 Actes des comtes de Flandre, pp. 8–9. 25 VR, c. 24, p. 500; VAL, c. 23, p. 54.

147

The Hagiographic Cycle of St Rictrude This version, however, differs from the original story, because it contends that Maurontus gathered the congregation at Breuil only after Amatus’s death, while in the VR and the VAL, it is clear that the monastic community pre-dated Amatus’s arrival, since the saint was considered as a living model for the brethren.26 After the description of the foundation of Breuil, the prologue of the charters departs from its model in order to introduce new historical elements, which were recorded neither in the VR nor in the VAL, nor in any later sources produced at Marchiennes. It relates that St Amatus and other saints were brought to safety at Soissons at the time of the viking incursions (we have already seen that they were in Ostrevant around 881–883). It is notable that Robert’s charter transformed the vikings into Vandals. Philip’s charter: Fratrum itaque congregatio in predicta Merenville ecclesia tam diu Deo sanctoque Amato servivit quoadusque sui corpus patroni sicut alie suorum corpora sanctorum, imminente Danorum atque barbarorum Nortmannorum persequutione, Suessionem, ab incursione persequutorum munitam, conportavit.27

Robert’s charter: Fratrum itaque congregatio in predicta Merenville ecclesia tam diu Deo sanctoque Amato servivit quoadusque sui corpus patroni sicut alie suorum corpora sanctorum, imminente Wandalorum persequutione, Suessionem, ab incursione persequutorum munitam, conportavit.28

(And the congregation of brethren served God as well as St Amatus in this church of Merville, until, as they were threatened by the persecution of the Danish and Norman barbarians (the Vandals), the community brought the body of its patron saint as well as other saints to Soissons, as a protection against the persecutors’ incursions.)

The relics remained at Soissons until the time of Arnulf I of Flanders. Once in control of Douai, Arnulf brought Amatus’s relics to the town, and placed them in a church that seems to have pre-existed the translation, and probably also Arnulf’s taking over. Let us note that Philip’s charter specifies that the church was dedicated to the Virgin Mary, while Robert’s charter ignores this detail. It also appears from the prologue that the religious community itself was founded on the occasion of the translation. The transfer of St Amatus from his defunct community of Breuil to his new community of Douai was accompanied by a transfer of landed assets. These lands, granted to SaintAmé by Arnulf of Flanders, represent the inheritance that Maurontus had received from his father Adalbald and that he had bequeathed to Amatus.

26 27 28

VR, c. 24, p. 500. Actes de Philippe Ier, p. 439. Actes des comtes de Flandre, p. 9.

148

St Maurontus and St Amatus at Douai Philip’s charter: Placatis autem predicte persequutionis fluctuationibus et loco Menriville devastato prefatorum crudelitate, Arnulfus senex, Flandriensium comes, communi consilio sue terre principum effecit ut Duacum, gratia exaltandi, deportaretur corpus sanctissimum, et sancti beneficia sibi a sancto Mauronto collata cum ceteris ab alliis hominibus datis, inferius nominanda, usibus fratrum Deo et sancto Amato in predicti loci ecclesia famulantium, ad honorem Dei genitricis Marie prius edificata constituit29

Robert’s charter: Placatis autem predicte persequutionis fluctuationibus et loco id est Menrivilla devastato prefatorum Wandalorum crudelitate, Arnulfus senex, Flandriensium comes, omnium consilio sue telluris principum effecit ut Duacum, gratia exaltandi, deportaretur corpus sanctissimum, et sancti beneficia sibi a sancto Mauronto collata cum ceteris ab alliis hominibus datis, inferius nominanda, usibus fratrum Deo et sancto Amato in Duacensi ecclesia famulantium constituit.30

(As the aforementioned persecutions and troubles had calmed down and as the site of Merville had been devastated by these atrocities (the Vandals’ cruelty), Arnulf the Elder, count of Flanders, by common counsel of his princely lands, established, to exalt the divine grace, that the very holy body would be translated to Douai and that he constitute the benefits bequeathed to him by St Maurontus, as well as others, given by other men, which are enumerated hereafter, for the use of the brethren serving God and St Amatus, in the church of this town, previously built in honor of the Virgin Mary.

To these lands, which the charters enumerate after the prologue, and which constitute the historical core of the domain, were added new lands, benefits and exemptions granted by Arnulf II (965–988), Baldwin IV (988–1035), Countess Adala (d. 1071) and Walter, castellanus of Douai.31 These new donations are also detailed in both charters. The same foundation story of Breuil and Saint-Amé appears for the third time in a charter given by Gerard II, bishop of Cambrai, on 23 May 1081.32 We have seen that the king’s and the count’s charters presented small differences: in Robert’s charter, vikings are replaced with Vandals; in Philip’s charter, the original titulature of the church in which St Amé was translated (Saint-Mary) is specified, while the detail is missing in Robert’s charter. Gerard II’s charter follows the king’s version. The forged royal exemption of 1076 and the transformation of the foundation story Besides these details, the three charters mentioned above present exactly the same foundation story of Saint-Amé: the foundation of a community at Breuil by Maurontus around St Amatus’s relics; the translation of Amatus’s relics to

29 30 31 32

Actes de Philippe Ier, p. 439. Actes de Philippe Ier, p. 439. Actes de Philippe Ier, pp. 439–41, and Actes des comtes de Flandre, pp. 9–11. Archives Départementales du Nord, Lille, 1 G 10, no. 6.

149

The Hagiographic Cycle of St Rictrude Soissons for protection, a second translation from Soissons to Douai by Arnulf the Great; the transfer of the landed assets of Amatus’s former community to his new community at Douai. Another version of the foundation story was related in a royal diploma of exemption given to Saint-Amé by Philip I in 1076.33 This diploma, written at the request of Robert the Frisian, Baldwin of Hainault and his mother Richildis, is a confirmation of the community’s privileges, which are augmented with immunity from lay authority and the right of the canons to elect their own provost. Like the three charter-notices mentioned above, the royal diploma begins with the foundation story of Saint-Amé. Some narrative differences, however, are notable. Indeed, the privilege slightly modifies the foundation story of Breuil as it was told in the other charters. This document implies that Maurontus had built the church for Amatus, while the charter-notices, following the VR and the VAL, assert that the church was built before Amatus’s arrival. Let us remember, too, that both royal diplomas differ from Hucbald’s story regarding the monastic community of Breuil: for Hucbald, the community was already founded when Amatus arrived; in the Douai charters, the community was founded specifically to serve Amatus’s cult. Philip’s charter: Senlis, 28 February beatus Maurontus, incliti ducis Adalboldi atque sancte Rictrudis filius, satis accurate consideravit quia, ut electorum numero asscriberetur, in proprio fundo antiquitus Broilo, a modernis autem Menrivilla nominato, . . . ecclesiam a fundamento construxit. Ipso vero, tempore Luchdovici, Francorum regis, ex Dagoberto prognati, bona sibi jure hereditario contigientia beato Amato viventi, Theoderici tirannide a Senonensi episcopatu depulso, contulit et post beati viri exitum ab hujus mundi Egipto, ad ipsius honorem in prefata ecclesia Deo cum sanctis famulando fratres congregavit.34

33 34 35

Philip’s privilege: Senlis, 1076 beatus Maurontus, inclyti ducis Adalbaldi atque sancte Rictrudis filius, satis accurate consideravit quia, ut electorum numero adscriberetur, bona sibi jure hereditario contigentia beato Amato, a Senonensi episcopatu Theoderici regis tyrannide depulso, contulit et in proprio fund, antiquitus Broilo, a modernis autem Menrivilla nominato, . . ., pro voto, sanctissimo episcopo Amato ecclesiam construxit. Postquam vero sanctum episcopum, sibi amabilem, Amatum, Dominus ad celestem patriam . . . assumpsit, sacrum corpus illius sacer Maurontus in supradicta ecclesia honorifice tumulavit, et ad honorem Dei ipsiusque sancti, fratres in ipsa ecclesia congregavit.35

Actes de Philippe Ier, n. 81, pp. 207–10. Actes de Philippe Ier, pp. 438–9. Actes de Philippe Ier, p. 209.

150

St Maurontus and St Amatus at Douai St Maurontus, son of the illustrious duke Adalbald and of St Rictrude properly considered, in order to be inscribed among the chosen ones, to build from bottom up a church, . . . on his own property known as Breuil in ancient time and today called Merville. At the time of Clovis, king of the Franks and son of Dagobert, he bequeathed the properties which he had lawfully inherited by St Amatus, bishop of Sens [sic] who had been exiled because of Theoderic’s tyranny, when he was still alive; and after the holy man’s death, in his honor, he gathered in the same church a congregation of holy brethren serving God.

St Maurontus, son of the illustrious duke Adalbald and of St Rictrude, properly considered, in order to be inscribed among the chosen ones, to bequeath the properties which he had lawfully inherited to St Amatus, bishop of Sens [sic] who had been exiled because of Theoderic’s tyranny, and on his own property, known as Breuil in ancient time and today called Merville, he built a church . . . as a tribute to the holy bishop Amatus. After this, the Lord recalled to Heaven the holy bishop . . ., Maurontus buried him with honor in the above mentioned church and, in his honor and in the honor of God and this saint, he gathered a community in the same church.

This alteration is subtle, but significant, since it reinforces the idea that Breuil’s community was first and foremost Amatus’s community. A less subtle alteration of the foundation story of Saint-Amé purports to strengthen the continuity between the old community of Breuil and the new community of Douai. Indeed, the prologue of the royal exemption omits Amatus’s translation from Breuil to Soissons, and contends that the relics were directly transferred to Douai, even before the vikings’ incursions. Philip’s charter: Fratrum itaque congregate in predicta Merenville ecclesia tam diu Deo sanctoque Amato servivit quoadusque sui corpus patroni sicut alie suorum corpora sanctorum, imminente Danorum atque barbarorum Nortmannorum persequutione, Suessionem, ab incursione persequutorum munitam, conportavit.36

Philip’s privilege: Fratrum itaque congregatio in predicta ecclesia, divino famulatui mancipata, longo tempore permansit quite, donec Danorum et Normannorum gens crudelis et aspera devastaret ipsam Menrivillam et circa omnem patriam. Sed imminente persequutione, fratres solliciti de corpore sui patroni, Duacum, a persequutorum incursione securum illud deportaverunt.37

And the congregation of brethren served God as well as St Amatus in this church of Merville, until, as they were threatened by the persecution of the Danish and Norman barbarians, the community carried away the body of its patron saint as well as other saints to Soissons, to protect it from the persecutors’ incursions.

And the congregation of brethren, dedicated to God’s service, remained in peace in this church for a long time, until the cruel and rough race of the Danes and Normans devastated Merville and all the surrounding regions. Nevertheless, as the persecution was imminent, the brethren, worried about their patron’s body, carried it away to Douai to protect it from the persecutors’ incursions.

36

37

Actes de Philippe Ier, p. 439.

151

Actes de Philippe Ier, p. 209.

The Hagiographic Cycle of St Rictrude Hence, according to the privilege, St Amatus’s relics were brought directly from Breuil to Douai as early as 881–883. Subsequently, the role attributed to Arnulf the Great in the translation is different in the privilege. Philip’s charter: Placatis autem predicte persequutionis fluctuationibus et loco Menriville devastato prefatorum crudelitate, Arnulfus senex, Flandriensium comes, communi consilio sue terre principum effecit ut Duacum, gratia exaltandi, deportaretur corpus sanctissimum, et sancti beneficia sibi a sancto Mauronto collata cum ceteris ab alliis hominibus datis, inferius nominanda, usibus fratrum Deo et sancto Amato in predicti loci ecclesia famulantium, ad honorem Dei genitricis Marie prius edificata constituit38

Philip’s privilege: et in ecclesia, ab antecessoribus in honore sancti dei genitricis Mariae ibidem in fundo sancti Mauronti edificata posuerunt. Placatis autem predicte persequutionis turbationibus et loco Menriville devastato, Karolus, rex Francorum, et Arnulfus, consul Flandriensium, a predictis fratribus requisiti quid agerent de corpore tanti patroni, convocatis episcopis et principibus suis, eorum consilio, . . ., hoc statuerunt ut in Duaco, gratia exaltandi, corpus venerabilis Amati remaneret in perpetuum in ecclesia beate Dei genitricis Mariae, in qua superium memoravimus esse translatum.39

As the above mentioned persecutions and troubles had calmed down and as the site of Merville had been devastated by these atrocities, Arnulf the Elder, count of Flanders, by common counsel of his princely lands, established, to exalt the divine grace, that the very holy body would be translated to Douai and that he constitute the benefits bequeathed to him by St Maurontus, as well as others, given by other men, which are enumerated hereafter, for the use of the brethren serving God and St Amatus, in the church of this town, previously built in honor of the Virgin Mary.

and they placed them [the relics] in a church dedicated to the Virgin Mary, which had been built by their predecessors on St Maurontus’s property. As the above mentioned persecutions and troubles had calmed down, and as the site of Merville had been devastated, Charles, king of the Franks, and Arnulf, consul of Flanders, at the request of the above mentioned brethren, who had pleaded to them about their patron’s body, as he had called his bishops and his princes, with the advise of these men, . . ., they decided, to exalt the divine grace, that venerable Amatus’s body would remain for ever in the church of the Virgin Mary, in which, as we have said, it had been translated.

The mention of Arnulf and King Charles in this context raises some chronological problems. Arnulf of Flanders’ only contemporary king to be named Charles is Charles the Simple (879–893 and 898–922); Arnulf was count of Flanders from 918 to 965. Hence, the decision made by the two rulers to keep the relics at Douai had to be taken between 918 and 922. We have seen,

38 39

Actes de Philippe Ier, p. 439. Actes de Philippe Ier, p. 209.

152

St Maurontus and St Amatus at Douai however, that Arnulf did not gain control of Douai before 943; his intervention in the issue is thus very unlikely. Furthermore, the text suggests that the events took place in the aftermath of the viking incursions, that is soon after 883. Another detail of the privilege raises suspicion: it says that the church dedicated to the Virgin Mary had been built on Maurontus’s land by the ‘predecessors’ of the Breuil community. Since we have seen that Douai did not emerge before the tenth century, the construction of this church and the existence of a religious community are unlikely. Moreover, it is the first time that it is asserted that Douai was part of Maurontus’s properties. These new alterations to the foundation stories of Breuil and Saint-Amé are extremely dubious. Another detail of Arnulf and Charles’ role in the foundation raises even more questions: they would have granted Saint-Amé’s libertas by means of a charter. The granting of libertas and property was allegedly recorded in charters, which, unfortunately, had perished in a fire that destroyed the church, its library and its archives: Post multa siquidem tempora contigit ut ipsa ecclesia igne vastaretur, in quo omne librarium simul et privilegia ecclesie perierunt.40 (A long time after that, the church was destroyed by a fire during which all the library and the privileges perished.)

Hence, in order to protect the community from predators and maintain the privileges given by Charles and Arnulf, Philip, king of France, confirmed and renewed what his predecessor had granted. Strangely enough, the other charters omit to mention these privileges and the fire that would have destroyed them. Of course this type of reference to accidental destruction often covers a forgery and should be considered suspicious. Finally, the fact that Philip was acting at the common request of Robert the Frisian, count of Flanders, and his historical rivals, Richildis of Hainault and her son Baldwin, definitely undermines the credibility of this document.41 The different foundation legends of Breuil and Saint-Amé The four charters that we have examined here present a version of the foundation of the monastery of Breuil which differs from the earliest version, represented by the VR and the VAL (version A). In addition, these charters recount the foundation of the collegiate church of Saint-Amé at Douai and the circumstances in which its possessions were transmitted from Breuil to 40 41

Actes de Philippe Ier, p. 209. Comparison between this royal privilege (Archives Départementales du Nord, Lille, 1G 11, no. 40), which was supposed to be issued from the royal chancery, Gerard of Cambrai’s 1081 charter (1G 10, no. 6) and the other 1076 charters (1G 11, no. 41, and Archives Générales du Royaume, Brussels, Fonds des Établissements Religieux, no. 7908), which were produced at Douai, suggests that the three documents were all written in the scriptorium of Saint-Amé.

153

The Hagiographic Cycle of St Rictrude Douai. This episode is recorded in two distinct versions: one version (B) is represented by the charters given by Robert the Frisian, Philip I and Gerard II of Cambrai. Within version A, Robert’s and Philip’s charters present two differences of details and Gerard’s charter follows Philip’s. The second version (C) is represented by King Philip’s privilege of exemption, dated 1076 without mention of day and month. It is thus interesting, in order to explain these differences, to examine in what aspects B and C differ from A on the one hand, and in what aspects B and C differ from each other, on the other hand. The B and C story of the foundation of the community gathered by Maurontus at Breuil in honor of St Amatus is inspired, factually and stylistically, by A, which was the only available source concerning these events.42 However, B and C diverge from A on an important point: according to A, the community had already been founded by Maurontus when Amatus went to Breuil/Merville, since he was said to be a model of piety for the community. B and C assert, on the contrary, that before Amatus’s death, there was only a church at Breuil, and that Maurontus explicitly founded the community around Amatus’s relics. It is also notable that B and C do not completely agree on this story either: according to B, the church was already built when Amatus arrived, while in C, Maurontus built it for him. The twist in the narration of the foundation of the Breuil community can be explained as an assertion by the canons of Douai that the early community was not only originally a community dedicated to St Amatus but also that the purpose of its foundation was Amatus’s cult. As the heirs to St Amatus’s cult and relics, the canons of Douai wanted to co-opt the prestige of their patron saint – he was so impressive that a monastic community was founded in his honor. Furthermore, as de facto material heirs to the landholding which originally belonged to Breuil, the canons needed to emphasize their spiritual filiation – through the cult of St Amatus – with the Breuil community. The major discrepancy between B and C concerns the translation of St Amatus’s relics to Douai. According to B, the relics were first brought to Soissons, while, according to C, they were directly translated to Douai. Nevertheless, both B and C agree on the date of the translation from Breuil – the time of the viking incursions (881–883). Since the VR and the VAL do not go beyond their heroes’ death, and since Hucbald remained carefully evasive about the location of their shrines, neither the VR nor the VAL mentions Amatus’s translation. The VAL was addressed to the community which possessed Amatus’s relics.43 If we follow B, in 907, this place should have been Saint-Médard at Soissons, since the transfer to Douai happened during Arnulf’s reign (918–965). Nonetheless, no elements in the VAL, which

42 43

VR, c. 24, p. 500, and VAL, c. 23, p. 54. Dolbeau, ‘Le dossier de S. Amé’, p. 106; VAL, c. 5, p. 45.

154

St Maurontus and St Amatus at Douai remains strongly focused on Marchiennes and Breuil, suggest that Hucbald was addressing himself to the community of Saint-Médard. Furthermore, stories of relics carried away from the viking threat always ring untrue. An argument in favor of a first translation to Soissons exists, however. In some manuscripts of the VAL, the vita is followed by a short discussion of Amatus’s feast day. The author of the addition refutes that, as some seemed to believe, Amatus’s feast day was on 29 April, and asserts that, after inquiring in the old books of Saint-Médard and in his archives, he found that the feast was actually 13 September (as in the VR).44 This addition was, however, not inserted in the earliest manuscript of the vita, copied at Marchiennes in the early eleventh century, and the reference to Soissons might just be due to the author’s knowledge of the story of the relics’ stay in the city.45 While the translation from Breuil to Soissons and from Soissons to Douai presented in B cannot be proved or disproved, the direct translation from Breuil to Douai is outwardly suspicious. We have seen that the castrum of Douai dated from the early tenth century, which means that in the 880s it would not yet have been a safe place to hide relics. Furthermore, before 943, Arnulf of Flanders was certainly not in a position which allowed him to intervene at Douai. The assertion made by C that the territory of Douai belonged to Maurontus is as suspicious as anything regarding this dubious character. According to Hucbald of Saint-Amand, Adalbald, Maurontus’s father, had possessions in Ostrevant (pago Austrebatense), but the few elements of information which were still available in the tenth century make any attempt at reconstructing the family’s landholding hazardous. Finally, the story of the fire which allegedly destroyed the charters given by Arnulf and Charles is dubious for two reasons: it is not mentioned in B and the devastating fire is a topos used as often as the vikings to justify the lack of written sources. Because the ways in which C differs from B are so suspicious, it seems that B is the more reliable version of the foundation of Saint-Amé. The relics of Saint-Amé would then have been transferred to Soissons around 880 and only definitely translated to Douai when Arnulf took over the castrum, around 943. This is consistent, with the great importance that Arnulf gave to relics as a means to assert his power. St Amatus’s translation to a newly conquered Douai resembles, for example, the translation of St Wandrille and Ansbert to Ghent.46 The context of redaction of the foundation stories The divergences between A on the one hand, and B and C on the other show that the authors of B and C, who represented the interests of the canons of 44 45 46

Dolbeau, ‘Le dossier de S. Amé’, pp. 101–02. Dolbeau, ‘Le dossier de S. Amé’, pp. 90 and 101–2. On Arnulf and his use of relics, see K. Ugé, ‘Relics as Tools of Power’, pp. 52–5, and Bozoky, ‘La politique des reliques des premiers comtes de Flandre’, pp. 276–8.

155

The Hagiographic Cycle of St Rictrude Saint-Amé, wanted to emphasize the antiquity of St Amatus’s cult and the legitimacy of the canon’s landed possessions. While this purpose is clear and understandable, it remains nonetheless remarkable that the foundation story was recorded so late in the history of the community. We have seen that the existence of the community and the presence of St Amatus in the collegiate church were attested from 1024 onward. Nonetheless, no foundation story seems to have been written before 1076. One could argue for lost sources; nevertheless, I believe that it is not by chance that the foundation story was recorded in these official documents. If the narration of the origins of SaintAmé appears in such detail in this group of charters, it is because the canons, at this specific time, were in need of recording their foundation legend; in the same way they especially needed to protect their landholdings. The examination of the context of redaction could yield some clues on this issue. We have seen that the conflicts between Flanders and Hainault which followed Baldwin VI’s death had placed Douai and its region in an uncomfortable position because of its location on the borders of the two opponents’ territories. It is generally considered that by 1071 Ostrevant was definitely included in Hainault, but that Douai remained a Flemish stronghold controlled by Robert.47 Nevertheless, the status of Douai was probably not very clear and it is likely that the city was much disputed between the two counts. In 1076, Robert undoubtedly represented secular authority in Douai, since he signed their confirmation charter. The two charters given by Gerard II, bishop of Cambrai in 1081, are dated from the reign of Robert the Frisian.48 However, Douai must have found itself caught in a stranglehold, and it was in the town’s authorities’ interest to handle each side carefully. In 1086 and 1087, Walter, the castellanus of Douai, appears as witness in two charters given by the count of Hainault to the abbey of Hasnon.49 And in a charter dated 1089 Baldwin II of Hainault calls himself Duacensium comes.50 The evidence for the unstable political situation of Douai during the 1070s and 1080s is unfortunately limited to the few charters mentioned here. This troubled situation, although it cannot be more clearly detailed, provides an ideal context for the two 1076 charters; the canons of Saint-Amé, faced with a potentially unstable political situation wanted to ensure that their possessions and rights were confirmed by the prince officially in power, Robert the Frisian, and his lord, the king of France. According to the charters, the core of

47

The status of Douai in these troubled years has been much disputed by modern historians, and the question has not yet been satisfactorily resolved; see Koch and de Meyer, ‘Douai à la fin du XIe siècle’. 48 23 May 1081, Archives Départementales du Nord, Lille, 1G 109, no. 282 and 1G 10, no. 6. 49 Delcambre, ‘L’Ostrevent’, p. 258; Brassart, Preuves, XVIII. I and XVIII. III. 50 Delcambre, ‘L’Ostrevent’, pp. 257–60; charter given by Baldwin II to Marchiennes, Archives Départementales du Nord, Lille, 10H 323.

156

St Maurontus and St Amatus at Douai these possessions was the assets that St Maurontus had allegedly bequeathed to St Amatus, which Robert’s predecessors had augmented with their own donations. In order to strengthen the legitimacy of their ownership, the canons also felt the need to recount the circumstances in which they had received them. This precision is all the more understandable because the history of their landholding was an unusual one. They had received St Amatus’s lands together with his relics. Heirs of St Amatus’s cult, the canons of Douai were also heirs to his possessions. The transmission of lands from one community – Breuil – to a new one, through the transmission of the patron saint’s cult, also encouraged the canons to exaggerate the importance that Amatus had at Breuil by asserting that the Breuil community was founded exclusively in his honor. Hence, Amatus was the undisputed patron saint of Breuil – this title could have also been attributed to Maurontus – and it was thus legitimate that his belongings should follow him in his new resting place. It is notable that the twelfth-century polyptych of Marchiennes used the same narrative technique of assimilating a community’s landholdings to its patron saint’s alleged bequest, in order to sacralize and protect them. The third 1076 charter, the royal privilege of exemption which, as we have seen, was probably forged after the other two charters, raises another set of questions. Two problematic aspects of this privilege could yield some clue regarding its date of fabrication: the reference to Baldwin and Richildis of Hainault alongside Robert the Frisian, and the omission of the relics’ stay at Soissons. The common request to Philip by Richildis, Baldwin and Robert is suspicious, given the two parties’ troubled relations; this suggests that, when they wrote the charter, the canons were still unsure of the outcome of the struggle between Flanders and Hainault over Douai. We have seen that in 1089 Baldwin of Hainault was styling himself Duacensium comes. It is conceivable that at the time of Robert’s death and his succession in 1093 by Baldwin VII, the political situation of Douai became confused. Furthermore, the consecration of a new ruler was a good opportunity to claim past exemption from secular authority. The omission of the relics’ passage at Soissons and the assertion that the church to which they were translated in Douai had been built by brethren from Breuil on a piece of St Maurontus’s landholding could yield another explanation. This version of the foundation story emphasizes the filiation between the old and the new communities and pushes back the foundation of the community by almost three quarters of a century. Félix Brassart has suggested that the forgery could be related to the foundation of a new community of canons at Douai. The origins of the collegiate church of Saint-Peter at Douai are as obscure as the origins of Saint-Amé. Saint-Peter appears for the first time in the sources in 1117, but it had been founded some time earlier. The building of the new collegiate church, dedicated to SaintPeter, had probably started in 1105, and in 1112 a community of canons was settled there. In these conditions, investing Saint-Amé with a longer history 157

The Hagiographic Cycle of St Rictrude would indeed have been a skillful way for the canons of Saint-Amé to emphasize the antiquity of their community. And the attribution of a royal privilege could only raise their prestige in the face of the rival community51

Adalbald, Erchinoald and the castrum of Douai We have seen that twelfth- and thirteenth-century sources from Marchiennes recorded that Adalbald, who was Rictrude’s husband and Maurontus’s father, was also Erchinoald’s brother. Erchinoald was not only mayor of the Neustrian palace, he was also said by Fredegar to be related to King Dagobert through Bertetrude, the king’s mother. In our sources, the legend appears for the first time in the Chronicon Vedastinum. The manuscript of this chronicle, written at Saint-Vaast in the second half of the eleventh century, was transferred to Marchiennes, where it was annotated in the twelfth century. The passage concerning Erchinoald and Adalbald belongs to the original text. Defuncto Erchinoaldo palatii comite, viro strenuo et sapiente, Franci Ebroino iussu regis curam palatii committunt. Hic Erchinoaldus cum fratre Adabaldo, patre sancti Mauronti, reedicaverunt Duacum castrum et infra castrum Dei genitricis Marie templum. Hic enim locus antiquitus fuerat consecratus.52 (At the death of Erchinoald, mayor of the palace, strong and wise man, the Franks delegated the care of the palace to Ebroin by the king’s order. This Erchinoald, and his brother Adalbald, St Maurontus’s father, re-built the castrum of Douai and inside the castrum, built a church dedicated to the Virgin Mary. Indeed, this place was consecrated in very ancient time.)

Probably based on this passage, Andrew of Marchiennes’ Chronicon Marcianense (twelfth-century) and a thirteenth-century addition to the Annales Marchianenses repeat the same story.53 It is also found in the chronicle which began the Liber Argenteus, a thirteenth-century manuscript which also contains hagiographical texts of interest to the community.54 It is notable that none of the earlier sources from Marchiennes, from the VR to the Vita Mauronti, mentioned Erchinoald as Adalbald’s brother; furthermore, as we have seen, Douai could hardly be qualified as a castrum before the tenth century. Hence, this late development of Adalbald’s genealogy is obviously spurious. Relating

51

Brassart, ‘Mémoire sur un point important de l’histoire de Douai’, p. 15; the origins of Saint-Peter at Douai are obscure, see P. Héliot, ‘Quelques monuments disparus de la Flandre Wallonne: l’abbaye d’Anchin, les collégiales Saint-Pierre et Saint-Amé de Douai’, Revue Belge d’Archéologie et d’Histoire de l’Art 28 (1959), 154–64. 52 Chronicon Vedastinum, p. 694. 53 Chronicon Marcianense, p. 456, and Annales Marchianenses, p. 611. 54 On the Liber Argenteus, see above, n. 22.

158

St Maurontus and St Amatus at Douai Adalbald to Erchinoald – and thus to Dagobert – had the effect of raising his, and his children’s, prestige. Asserting that he was dux of Douai and that he rebuilt the castrum and the church created a historical link between Adalbald, the city of Douai and the church that would become Saint-Amé. For the canons of Saint-Amé this interpretation of the VR, which said that Adalbald owned lands in the pagus Atrebatensis, pushed back the consecration of their church to the seventh century, and related this consecration to the family of one of their tutelary saints, Maurontus. It is consistent with the second version of the foundation story, found in the forged royal privilege, which asserts that Douai belonged to Adalbald’s patrimony. By the same token, since, according to the VR, Maurontus had bequeathed his heritage to St Amatus, the canons of Saint-Amé could claim that they were living on a piece of land that historically belonged to their patron saint.

Conclusion The canons of Saint-Amé at Douai, amidst the political troubles that were shaking the region of Ostrevant in the 1070s, felt an urgent need to have their possessions confirmed by their secular authorities: the count of Flanders, and his lord, the king of France. This confirmation was the occasion to inscribe on parchment the history of the community’s origins, and above all, the history of the transmission of its landholding. This rehearsing of the origins had to be done in order to explain the circumstances in which the canons had been endowed with their possessions, and, subsequently, to justify the legitimacy of these possessions. The foundation legend of a religious community is usually closely related to its patron saint’s legend. In the case of Saint-Amé, its patron, Amatus, and its other major saint, his acolyte Maurontus, had a past of their own, in relation to another community, the abbey of Marchiennes, which the canons had to take into account. Because of the geographical proximity between Marchiennes and Douai, the canons could not deny that Amatus and Maurontus belonged to Marchiennes’ tradition, and they had to integrate this tradition within their own foundation story. Not only did they acknowledge St Amatus’s and St Maurontus’s past, but also they took advantage of the prestige that could be drawn from their association with Rictrude’s cycle to further magnify their own past. We have seen in the previous chapter that the name of Rictrude’s son, Maurontus, was probably a creation of Hucbald of Saint-Amand. We have also seen that Hucbald had only a vague idea about the identity of St Amatus of Sion, whom he seemed to confuse to some extent with St Amatus of Remiremont.55 The fate of these saints’ relics was as obscure as their legend. 55

Hucbald said that Amatus of Sion’s feast was 13 September, the day of Amatus of Remiremont’s own feast.

159

The Hagiographic Cycle of St Rictrude According to the VAL and the VR, Amatus was buried in the abbatial church of Breuil. Probably because of his geographical estrangement from Marchiennes, his cult does not appear to have been claimed by the community, and his name does not appear in the twelfth-century miracle collections from Marchiennes. Regarding his cult at Breuil, it is completely obscured by lack of information on the community itself.56 As for Maurontus, the VR and the VAL do not specify his burial place, while the eleventh-century Vita Mauronti asserts, in contradiction with the earlier texts, that he became abbot of Marchiennes and that he died there.57 The success of a cult, however, relied on popular adhesion and institutional impulse and not on the saint’s historicity. Therefore, despite their shadowy histories, Maurontus’s and Amatus’s cults and legends could be developed without problems at Marchiennes and Douai. Despite, or rather thanks to, the elusive nature of Amatus’s and Maurontus’s characters, their legends and cults were easily co-opted and adapted by the canons of Douai.58 The canons borrowed the history of Amatus and his community of Breuil from the VR and the VAL, and they transformed it in such a way that St Amatus appeared not only to be Breuil’s legitimate patron saint, but also to have been the community’s raison d’être. This narrative artifice was clearly meant to legitimize the transfer of estates from Breuil to Douai and to give a sense of antiquity to the canon’s community. As for St Maurontus’s relics, the canons never justified their possession. Given the ambiguity of the texts of Rictrude’s cycle concerning these relics, it would have been easy for them to assert that St Maurontus reached Douai in the same circumstances as St Amatus. Perhaps the fact that the community of Marchiennes never seriously challenged their possession of these relics exempted the canons from long justifications. More or less at the same time as the foundation story of Saint-Amé was elaborated, the canons incorporated their patron saint’s legend into the history of the city of Douai by asserting that Maurontus’s father, Adalbald, had been a duke of Douai who had rebuilt its castrum and founded the church. This legend, which was repeated in twelfth- and thirteenth-century chronicles from Saint-Vaast (Chronicon Vedastinum) and Marchiennes (Chronicon Marcianense and Annales Marchianenses) also appeared in the chronicle copied in the Liber Argenteus. The nature of the story leaves little doubt that it was created at Douai rather than at Marchiennes. Beyond the prestige that the canons could gain by asserting that their church dated back to the seventh century, the legend also has implications regarding the community’s landholding. Since Maurontus was Adalbald’s heir, and since

56 57 58

VAL, c. 27, p. 54 and VR, c. 31, p. 502. AA SS, 2 May, c. 4, p. 53. Obscurity was, indeed, the main characteristic of Western local saints who were translated to new places, see Geary, Furta Sacra, p. 101.

160

St Maurontus and St Amatus at Douai Amatus was Maurontus’s heir, Douai, as well as the assets of Breuil, belonged to St Amatus. Subsequently, the foundation story as it was told in the 1076 charters and the legend of ‘duke Adalbald’ acted to legitimize and sacralize the community of Saint-Amé’s possessions in and out of Douai. The translation of relics from an old community to a new one does not naturally involve a simultaneous transfer of the saint’s legend and landholding; the new hosts were indeed often eager to create a completely new tradition better fitted for their own needs and aspirations, and to suppress the memory of the saint’s previous community. Moreover, the new owners did not hesitate to denigrate the saint’s old resting place in order to justify the transfer and present it as the expression of the saint’s will.59 By integrating and adapting the tenth-century legend of St Rictrude to this necessity, the canons were able to assert their filiation with Marchiennes’ tradition without inducing a conflict of interest with the monks; they were so successful in this operation that their story was integrated into Marchiennes’ historiography. The examination of Saint-Amé’s foundation story shows how carefully the new legend was crafted by the community, which stresses how important it was for the canons to have a suitable history of their origins. This example is interesting, because it shows how the legend of one religious community could be appropriated by another one and adapted to new needs. Furthermore, it bolsters the observation that we have already made about narrative production at Saint-Bertin and Marchiennes: that the writing of history is never gratuitous, neither in its form nor in its timing. The emphasis of the foundation legend – in the 1076 charters as well as in the chronicles – was clearly placed on the issue of the legitimacy of the community’s landholding; that the legend was written down for the first time in confirmation charters is consistent with its purpose. To conclude, these observations corroborate the observation that we have already made in previous chapters, that there are a close relationships between a religious community’s need to assert its landholding and the (re)writing of its foundation legend, and between its need to record its possessions and its history.

59

See Geary, Furta Sacra, pp. 78–94.

161

CONCLUSION Study of the politics of narrative production at Saint-Bertin, Marchiennes and Saint-Amé lets us examine how each community made its past useful through the preservation and alteration of its historical tradition. Observing this process community by community has allowed us not only to study the life of each of them in some detail, but also to assess their cultural and literary abilities and their material and spiritual values. To broaden the conclusions beyond the specifics of each community, I would like to look back at the main issues raised in the previous chapters. A number of subjects stand out as fundamental and recurrent: the process of creating a usable past through the preservation and transformation of a community’s archives and historical tradition; the impetus behind historiographic production; the issues of forgery and ‘historical truth’ and the related questions of genre and content. If we compare how each community engaged in the process of writing and re-writing its own history, the most significant outcome may be that early and high medieval historiography knew no general rules and followed no overreaching conventions. Each community used narrative production to express its own set of values and to respond to crisis situations in a mostly idiosyncratic, original and even inventive way. A community’s historiographical politics did not depend on prescribed precepts and methods; rather, they were the product of the circumstances of the time, the cultural and intellectual environment of the monastery and of the textual models available – in Gabriel Spiegel’s words, the ‘social logic of the text’.1 The communities studied engaged in this narrative process for centuries, through the preservation, destruction and alteration of their historical traditions and archives. Each community, however, did it in its own, particular way, with varying intensities, purposes and methods. The monks of SaintBertin, who continuously reinvented their past over a period of eight hundred years, were the most steadfast in this endeavor. The abbey’s archives and the narratives produced in the tenth and eleventh centuries constituted such fruitful records of the past that they remained in use until the French Revolution. Nevertheless, the conflict that triggered most of the monks’ writing efforts – their struggle over supremacy and anteriority with the canons of Saint-Omer – was never resolved. Ironically, despite their extraordinary perseverance, the monks of Saint-Bertin never found closure;

1

G. Spiegel, ‘History, Historicism and the Social Logic of the Text in the Middle Ages’, Speculum 65 (1990), 84.

162

Conclusion in a sense, their example illustrates the limits of narrative production as a means of coping with crises. The abundance of archival and narrative material, as well as the ‘readability’ of the process through which this material was preserved and altered at Saint-Bertin, is exceptional. In comparison, Marchiennes’ pattern of archive preservation and historical writing was sporadic. When Hucbald wrote the Vita Rictrudis (VR) in 907, the foundation legend of Marchiennes and the life of its patron saint no longer existed in a written form, and its oral transmission had already altered its content. Although Hucbald attributed the disappearance of written records describing Rictrude’s life to viking depredation, it is not unlikely that the early community simply did not concern itself with the preservation of its own archives and ancient manuscripts. And indeed it was not until the restoration of Marchiennes in 1024 that charters were regularly produced and preserved there. Naturally, this observation raises the question of the composition and preservation of the community’s archives: was the transformation of Marchiennes’ patrimony recorded in charters? If it was, these charters were clearly not carefully preserved. Moreover, it does not appear that gifts and land exchanges were recorded in other types of texts, such as vitae and chronicles. It is nonetheless possible that the community of Marchiennes did not significantly increase its patrimony between its foundation and its re-foundation, and that there was, in fact, little to record. This is why, after 1024, the focus of most narrative production at Marchiennes – the polyptych and the miracle collections – was the recuperation and legitimization of the community’s assets. That the community of Marchiennes was not thriving in the ninth and tenth centuries is not contradicted by the picture of the community captured in its pre-1024 narrative production. Besides the VR and the other vitae composed by Hucbald (the VAL and Vita Jonati), the other narratives from Marchiennes, which pre-date the restoration, are the VR metrica and a prose and verse life of St Eusebia written around the year 1000. It is notable that all these texts were commissioned from authors at Saint-Amand – Hucbald and John – which suggests that the community did not have the intellectual resources to produce its own texts. The restoration radically changed this situation: as an effect of Richard of Saint-Vanne’s reform, charters fixing the possessions and rights of Marchiennes started being produced and preserved. In the twelfth century, all the community’s lands and revenues were recorded in the polyptych. The religious communities studied in this book differed radically in their size, wealth and intellectual achievements; accordingly, they differed greatly from one another in their attitudes toward the creation and use of their historical traditions. There is no doubt that a wealthy and culturally developed abbey such as Saint-Bertin faced different problems than Marchiennes. By the same token, these privileged abbeys were more adept at defending themselves, promoting their patron saint’s cult or raising money with sophisticated literary skills. These inequalities in status and culture account for their 163

Creating the Monastic Past in Medieval Flanders different politics of narrative production. Still, it is noteworthy that the motives behind narrative production were roughly the same for all these communities: cult promotion, assertion of relics, landholding, conflicts with other communities etc. Motives alone cannot justify why each adopted different attitudes toward the preservation and use of its past. Instead, their different and idiosyncratic politics of narrative production should be explained in a different way. But before turning to this question let us investigate the different motives that induced these communities to put pen to parchment. Although each community had its specific motivations for the production of historiography, some common themes were shared by all. In the ninth century, monastic communities intensively engaged in the promotion of their patron saints’ cults: vitae of the founding fathers were written for the first time (e.g. the first vitae of SS Omer, Bertin and Winnoc), or old lives were rewritten according to Carolingian literary tastes and spiritual aspirations. The stricter regulation of the cult of relics under the Carolingians also forced monks and nuns to justify the possession of their saints’ relics. Viking attacks provided an endless source of miracle stories (Libellus Miraculorum S. Bertini), miraculous findings of relics that had been hidden from them (Inventio S. Bertini) or a justification for translations of relics to new communities (the foundation story of Saint-Amé). In the tenth century, the disruption – alleged or real – brought about by the vikings entailed the production of narratives aimed at reviving vanishing cults, which also provided communities with a foundation story and liturgical texts (the VR was written in this context). In the eleventh century, preoccupation with landholding became a common incentive to produce texts, which were supposed to help communities fight back their lay rivals. This trend was already perceptible in the tenth century (Folcuin’s Gesta), but it permeates most of the eleventh- and twelfth-century narratives (Simon’s Gesta, Marchiennes’ twelfth-century polyptych). Similarly, efforts were made to protect and claim landholding by emphasizing its sacred nature through its association with a patron saint (the will in the Marchiennes polyptych, the foundation story of Saint-Amé at Douai). The texts cover many of the medieval genres: hagiography (vitae, miracle collections, relic narratives), history (chronicles, annals, gesta), charters, cartularies, polyptychs, lists of abbots. Text after text, we have seen that the formal distinction between genres was more theoretical than actual, and that these genres interpenetrate one another. As a consequence, the use of these different genres by monastic authors varied greatly, depending on the particular circumstances of the moment and the community itself. Indeed, each community used different narrative tools and adopted its own system of defense or promotion, best suited to its particular situation. In this respect, attitudes toward assertion and protection of landholding are especially significant. At Saint-Bertin, the community adopted a historical and documentary approach to these problems. Folcuin wrote the Gesta 164

Conclusion Abbatum in a context in which the count of Flanders had interfered with monastic matters and had appropriated parts of the community landholding. The Gesta was written in part to provide the community with a document that could easily be consulted at all times to find information about Saint-Bertin’s assets. Similarly, the continuation of the Gesta by Simon, which records a number of confirmation diplomas, reports conflicts between the community and local lords. At Marchiennes, where there was little written documentation available, the community resorted to the sacralization of its landholding by emphasizing its links to St Rictrude. When the eleventh-century reformed abbots attempted to claim back the community’ s landholding, the foundation story of the abbey was transformed so that its patron saint, Rictrude, would appear as the original owner of its lands. In the twelfth century, as the abbey still engaged in disputes with its neighbors and advocates, an abbot commissioned the composition of the polyptych, which recorded all the possessions and revenues of the community. Furthermore, the polyptych was preceded by a historical introduction that not only repeated the legend of Rictrude’s original ownership of Marchiennes, but also enhanced it with the will through which she bequeathed her possessions to her community. Although this text substantially altered the content of the VR, no attempt at adapting Hucbald’s text was made. Later on, as the conflicts went on, the monks of Marchiennes produced an enormous corpus of miracle stories in which the community’s enemies were chastised by St Rictrude and the other saints associated with the abbey. At Saint-Amé at Douai, the canons, like the monks of Saint-Bertin, resorted to a documentary and historical approach, but they combined this with a sacralization of their landholdings similar to the technique adopted at Marchiennes. Because the city of Douai was in the midst of acute political fights over its control, the canons felt the need to gain from their secular rulers, the count of Flanders and his overlord, the king of France, confirmation of their possessions in a series of diplomas. Furthermore, in the same charters, they justified their ownership of these lands by relating in detail the circumstances in which they had received them. Simultaneously, the canons asserted the sacred nature of their assets by emphasizing the simultaneity of the transfer of St Amatus’s relics and his lands to the chapter of Douai. In conclusion, all these communities developed their own protective tools. Saint-Bertin, which could draw on considerable charter material, resorted to the writing of gesta with abundant charter material to record and protect its landholding. And Folcuin did so very early, in the mid-tenth century, at a time when cartularies were still an exception in the West. At Marchiennes, where there were no archives until the eleventh century, the community could not produce documentation of ownership. The author of the polyptych, who carefully enumerated the sources he used to gather his account of the community’s landholding, does not even mentions charters anywhere. 165

Creating the Monastic Past in Medieval Flanders Hence, even in the polyptych, the legitimacy of Marchiennes’ landholding was still asserted through its sacred association with St Rictrude rather than through legal documents. That these communities’ varied narrative answers to similar problems underlines that, until the twelfth century, narrative genres were extremely flexible and that early medieval authors used and adapted them freely, according to their communities’ needs and resources. Whatever the genre of narrative produced by communities who needed to represent and transform their past (vitae, charters, polyptychs, chronicles), foundation stories took a prominent place in all these texts. Foundation stories were indeed the very texts that asserted the antiquity of the monastery, its privileged relation with its founder – patron saint, king, local ruler – and the legitimacy of its property. Hence, most communities at some point provided themselves with a detailed foundation legend: Saint-Bertin, Marchiennes and Douai, all did this. Not only were these foundation stories related in different genres, but their focus and purpose notably varied. Here, the choice of the genre in which the foundation story was related was not fortuitous: genre and purpose were intimately related. The original foundation of Saint-Bertin, first related in the VA1, was rewritten in favor of the Benedictine community in another hagiographic text (VB2), and legalized by a forged donation charter. Folcuin’s Gesta presented a coherent and official foundation story of Saint-Bertin by tying together the complete new version: vita and charter. The foundation story of Marchiennes was also told in the vita of the community’s patron saint. Thanks to a mix of genuine tradition, confusion and imagination, the VR accumulated characters, historical background details and insistent name-dropping; this narrative technique emphasized the historicity of the foundation of Marchiennes and of Rictrude’s life, as well as her spiritual and social prestige. The nature of the VR allowed for endless developments and alterations, not only at Marchiennes, but also at Douai. The author and commissioners of the VR seem to have been little concerned with asserting their landholding, since there is no reference to Marchiennes’ patrimony in the vita and no donation charter was preserved or forged. Therefore, when it became necessary to do so later, the foundation story was transformed so that it could be used to protect the community’s assets. Similarly, at Douai, the canons of Saint-Amé remodeled the episode of the foundation of Breuil and St Amatus’s exile as told in the VR and VAL to use it as their own foundation story. The canons of Douai, however, did not write this new foundation legend in a vita of their patron saint, but rather, they copied their foundation story into charters. Such endless developments were common for communities where the tradition was obscure and uncertain, and where imaginative memory could be developed without barrier. This is visible in the VR, where Rictrude and her children are associated with King Dagobert, Queen Nanthild, St Amand and St Richer. We have seen that St Richer’s intervention as well as Maurontus’s name were accidental, and resulted from the confusion between 166

Conclusion our Rictrude and another woman named Rictrude in the Vita Richarii. Also, the assertion developed at Douai, that her husband Adalbald was Erchinoald’s brother, has no historical basis and resulted from a desire to turn him into a local aristocrat who would have rebuilt the castrum of Douai. The format of the VR, with its numerous characters, allowed for other developments. As a result, a twelfth-century tradition invented family links between St Bertha of Blangy and St Rictrude, again because of a vague similarity of names. Historians trying to assess a date or the veracity of a fact sometimes trust these associations of names, because they are plausible. Nevertheless, careful examination of early medieval narrative techniques shows that the association of the patron saint and the community with a lay ruler, a prestigious bishop or a famous saint, was often a mere narrative device, used to embellish and historicize an otherwise dubious story. Dealing with the issue of truth and forgery in early medieval history is extremely difficult. Forged charters may be the simplest case of forgery to handle. Some are so obviously wrong in their date and wording that the question of their veracity is not even an issue. Once the forgery has been detected, the time and reason of fabrication can usually be inferred with a little bit of detective work. The question of forged narratives is more difficult, because it implies that a true version of the story existed, which was then knowingly altered. The cases of the foundation stories of Saint-Bertin, Marchiennes and Douai are, in this regard, good examples. The second foundation story of Sithiu concocted by the monks of Saint-Bertin to assert their superiority over the canons was a transparent transformation of the first foundation story of the VA1, and its purpose is obvious. Nevertheless, there is no way to assess whether the earlier text reflected a more truthful account of the actual circumstances of the foundation of the community, simply because the possible bias and agenda of the author of the VA1 remains unknown. What is interesting in comparing the two versions is not so much the discovery of a hypothetically true story, but, rather, the uncovering of the message that the authors of both texts wanted to convey. Similarly, according to the VR, Rictrude was not Marchiennes’ founder, and there is no mention that she or her husband ever owned its patrimony. Nevertheless, this is exactly what the foundation story inserted in Marchiennes’ polyptych asserts. This is not impossible, given that the family owned neighboring Hamage, but the question cannot be fully settled. Given the circumstances in which Hucbald gathered his documentation to write the VR, the anteriority of the VR over later texts of the cycle is not a warranty of truthfulness. Here again, since we will never know for sure who St Jonatus was or in what year Marchiennes was founded, what is interesting in the development of Rictrude’s legend are the motives behind its alteration rather than its veracity. Finally, the foundation of Saint-Amé exemplifies very well the futility of disentangling the true and the false from foundation legends. We have seen that in the first version of their foundation story, recorded in two 167

Creating the Monastic Past in Medieval Flanders 1076 diplomas, the canons of Saint-Amé had borrowed the foundation story of Breuil from the VR; nonetheless, they altered the story so that it appeared that the monastic community had been specifically founded by Maurontus for Amatus’s cult after his death. In the original version of the VR and VAL, Maurontus’s community pre-dated St Amatus’s arrival, since the VAL asserts that Amatus became abbot of Breuil. Technically, the canon of Douai’s version of the foundation of Breuil is a fabrication; but what about the story of the VR? We have seen that Maurontus never existed and that St Amatus was a most mysterious character. Neither of the two Breuil foundation stories can be qualified as trustworthy. Here again, the interest of these stories lies in their construction, and not in their authenticity. The idiosyncratic way in which monastic communities dealt with their enemies in the tenth and eleventh centuries reflects the absence of a unified and efficient judicial system before the later twelfth century. In the course of dispute settlement, communities could bring in a very broad array of documents, from charters to vitae to miracle stories, as evidence.2 In a context in which the law was not yet a ‘circumscribed world requiring a close adherence to set legal procedures and written forms’, each community had to find its own way to thwart its enemies and to negotiate the most acceptable solution.3 This was all the more so, since the counts often proved unable to ensure a proper administration of justice and settle conflicts. The polemical nature of many texts in which monastic authors wrote about their community should not mislead us into thinking that, struggle and conflicts with the outside world was their only motivation. Clearly, historical narratives were at least as significant within communities as they were to any external audience. Writing about the community’s past purported to commemorate the sacred origins of the community or to emphasize particularly prominent events, two of many means to impress on rivals. But it was also a way for the community to justify its existence and finality.4 The transmission of these stories within the community ensured that the members knew and partook in the specific character of their institution. Once the narrative became obsolete because of new internal or external events, somebody felt compelled to re-write a new story better fitted to the new circumstances and more meaningful, primarily for the members of the group. Writing history was thus a powerful tool to strengthen the cohesion and perenniality of a community.

2

On the impact of the absence of a centralized judicial system on the ways monastic communities negotiated with their enemies, see B. Rosenwein, ‘Monks and their Enemies’, pp. 764–9. 3 R. Fleming, Domesday Book and the Law: Society and Legal Custom in Early Medieval England (Cambridge, 1998), p. 67. 4 See S. Vanderputten, ‘Pourquoi les moines du moyen âge écrivaient-ils de l’histoire’, Studi Medievali, 3rd series, 42, fasc. II (2001), 705–23 (pp. 716–20). The author develops the idea that such narratives boosted the community’s ‘self-confidence’.

168

Conclusion This self-centered – shall we say almost narcissistic? – aspect of monastic historiography is pervasive among all the communities examined here. Naturally, outside interferences, particularly the counts of Flanders’ interventions in spiritual and secular matters, had a strong impact on the communities’ lives. Nonetheless, our monastic authors demonstrated little interest in writing about the broader political or even ecclesiastical context in which their community existed. This is true not only for Saint-Bertin and Marchiennes, but also for the other major communities in the county of Flanders, which also produced a fair number of narratives of all kinds in the tenth and eleventh centuries: Saint-Amand and Saint-Vaast in the south of the county and Saint-Peter and Saint-Bavo at Ghent in the north.5 Whenever secular rulers, and singularly the counts of Flanders, appear in these narratives, it is most of the time in respect to their impact on the monastery. Elisabeth van Houts has suggested that the Flemish monks’ and clerics’ lack of interest in comital eulogies was the result of the counts’ inability to properly settle disputes and protect their religious communities. This is reflected in the authors’ often ambivalent and sometimes utterly negative representation of the counts in their narratives: for example, Folcuin’s perception of Arnulf the Great or his view of Baldwin II. If Flemish authors were not interested in writing about the politics of their time and region, the counts themselves made no attempt at patronizing narrative production (historical or other).6 In Flanders, there was no Dudo of Saint-Quentin or William of Jumièges to tell us about the glory of Baldwin II, Count Arnulf and their heirs. It is true that Normandy stands out among all other principalities as particularly rich and precocious in terms of ‘national’ and dynastic historiography.7 If the Flemish dynasty was not yet mature for literary patronage in the tenth and eleventh

5

On Saint-Amand and Saint-Vaast, see K. Ugé, ‘Politics of Narrative Production’, pp. 299–340 and 258–98. At Saint-Amand, narratives focused mostly on the cult of the prestigious saint: vita, miracles, delationes etc. In the second half of the ninth century, Milo assembled a comprehensive hagiographic dossier arount the original vita. In the eleventh and twelfth centuries, Amand’s relics were used in delationes to assert the abbey’s property rights. A number of texts describing the events were written on the occasion. At Saint-Vaast, the possession of Vedast’s relics and, later, the assertion of the abbey’s landholding, were the main object of narrative production. Saint-Peter and Saint-Bavo spent much energy producing narratives in the context of the struggle for prestige supremacy that opposed them for centuries: see I. Van’t Spijker, ‘Gallia du Nord et de l’Ouest. Les provinces ecclésiastiques de Tours, Rouen, Reims (950–1130)’, in Hagiographies, ed. G. Philippart, 2 vols. (Brepols, 1996) II, 239–90 (pp. 264–70). 6 On lack of comital patronage for historical narratives in Flanders, see E. van Houts, ‘The Flemish Contribution to Biographical Writing in the Eleventh Century’, in The Limits of Medieval Biography: Essays in Honor of Professor Frank Barlow, ed. D. Bates, J. Crick and S. Hamilton (Woodbridge, forthcoming); I thank the author for giving me the manuscript of her article. 7 L. Shopkow, History and Community, and E. van Houts, ‘Historical Writing’.

169

Creating the Monastic Past in Medieval Flanders centuries, the talent of local monks found more eager patrons on the other side of the Channel. Folcard and Goscelin of Saint-Bertin are famous for their prolific careers as hagiographers and biographers in England, where they were commissioned by queens, bishops and religious communities to write historical, polemical and hagiographic works.8 Relations between Saint-Bertin and England had long been close. Around 886, Grimbald had been called to England by King Alfred, who appointed him abbot of Winchester; in 944, a group of dissident monks fleeing Gerard of Brogne’s reform sailed to England where they were settled at Bath by King Edmund. We have seen that at the turn of the millennium Abbot Odbert had successfully sought the patronage of the archbishop of Canterbury, Aethelgar, and his successor Siric.9 Manuscript illumination during Odbert’s abbacy shows that the relationship had been fruitful financially as well as culturally and artistically. Saint-Bertin was not the only Flemish monastery to benefit from English patronage: many insular prelates, and singularly the archbishops of Canterbury, maintained close links with most of the reformed Flemish monasteries, such as Saint-Vaast and Saint-Peter at Ghent. Around 1040, Queen Emma, wife of King Aethelred (d. 1016) and after him of the Danish King Cnut (d. 1035), commissioned during her exile in Flanders the so-called Encomium Emmae Reginae, a biography of her late husband Cnut, from a monk of Saint-Bertin. Emma’s choice of a Fleming was probably determined by circumstances, since she was exiled in Flanders at the time – and perhaps few Englishmen would have been ready to support her pro-Danish agenda.10 Whereas the author of the Encomium Emmae wrote in Flanders for an English queen in exile, both Folcard and Goscelin pursued most of their careers overseas. Folcard, who had written the third life of St Bertin around 1050 for Abbot Bovo (1042–1065), left Flanders for England between 1050 and 1066. In his preface to the vita of St John of Beverly, which he wrote for Ealdred, bishop of York, Folcard relates that his abbot, out of ‘domestic hatred’, had expelled him ‘out of the monastic ship into the waves of the sea’ with the assistance of the secular power. Although he does not name them, there is little doubt that the abbey was Saint-Bertin and the ungracious abbot was Bovo. The circumstances that led Folcard to England are obscure. He relates that he had met Ealdred through a queen’s intercession – she was probably Edith, Edward’s wife and Queen Emma’s daughterin-law. How Folcard met the queen is unclear. Frank Barlow suggests that 8

E. van Houts, ‘The Flemish Contribution to Biographical Writing’, and S. Vanderputten, ‘Canterbury and Flanders’. 9 See S. Vanderputten, ‘Canterbury and Flanders’, pp. 8–12 and 18–21, for the edition and translation of the letters. 10 The text was a political pamphlet with a clear agenda: the promotion of Emma’s sons by Cnut to the detriment of Edward and Alfred, Aethelred’s sons. For the attribution of the Encomium, see the editors’ comments: Encomium Emmae Reginae, ed. A. Campbell and S. Keynes (Cambridge, 1998).

170

Conclusion Folcard may have left Flanders for England with Goscelin, another monk of Saint-Bertin. Goscelin came to England with Bishop Herman of Salisbury, a man of Lotharingian origin who was entrusted with the bishopric of Wiltshire thanks to his services to King Edward. Herman was then exiled at Saint-Bertin from 1055 to 1058 but, thanks to Queen Edith, he was allowed to come back to England and was given the bishopric of Sherborne. Goscelin, who had probably met him during his years of exile, joined him shortly after and remained in Herman’s entourage until the bishop’s death in 1078. Then, he began a life of migration from monastery to monastery until he settled down at St Augustine’s Canterbury. Until his death at the beginning of the twelfth century, Goscelin wrote a great number of vitae for the monasteries he visited as well as for St Augustine’s. His prolific talent earned him William of Malmesbury’s praise. In 1065, Queen Edith commissioned a monk of SaintBertin to write her ailing husband’s life: the Vita Edwardi Regis. The work was completed in 1067, after the king’s death and the Norman Conquest. Its editor, Frank Barlow has made a good case for attributing the text to either Folcard of Goscelin.11 During the eleventh century, there was between English institutions and Flemish writers a situation of demand and supply. Linguistic proximity, a web of religious spiritual exchanges dating back to the mid tenth-century Benedictine reforms, as well as a long tradition of cultural and diplomatic exchanges provided a favorable environment for such relationships. Flemish institutions, and singularly Saint-Bertin, had developed a high caliber monastic school, which developed a strong hagiographic and historiographic tradition. Nonetheless, as far as narrative production was concerned, these communities remained mostly centered on their own history and used historiography in a way that was useful and meaningful primarily for themselves. Flemish rulers for their part displayed no interest, and perhaps had no leverage, to take advantage of their monks’ skills to promote their politics and dynasty. The writers who were willing to put their literary ability into practice outside the walls of their monastery – or those who had to leave, such as Folcard – found eager and enthusiastic patrons across the Channel – bishops, monastic communities and queens in a difficult situation.12 There, their commissioners made use of their literary skills, their talent as polemicists and, sometimes of their ability to combine a great deal of imagination with old sources to create new stories. It is exactly what Eadmer of Canterbury meant when, around 1120, he wrote to the monks of Glastonbury who wanted to prove – wrongly – that they possessed the relics of St Dunstan: ‘Why didn’t you consult some foreigner from overseas? They are knowledge11

There is no room here to detail Folcard and Goscelin’s English careers: see Frank Barlow’s study in The Life of King Edward Who Rests at Westminster Attributed to a Monk of Saint-Bertin, ed. F. Barlow (Oxford, 1992), pp. xliv–lix. 12 E. van Houts, ‘The Flemish Contribution to Historical Writing’.

171

Creating the Monastic Past in Medieval Flanders able, very clever, and they know how to write fiction; they would have composed some likely lie which you could have bought.’13 There is no doubt that this sentence can be applied to the many authors whom we have encountered in this book, who worked so hard for the creation of the monastic past in Flanders.

13

Memorials of Saint Dunstan, n. 35, pp. 412–22 (p. 415); quoted and translated in E. van Houts, ‘The Flemish Contribution to Historical Writing’.

172

BIBLIOGRAPHY Primary sources Actes des Comtes de Flandre (1071–1128), ed. F. Vercauteren (Brussels, 1938). ‘Actes inédits des saints martyrs Fuscien, Victoric et Gentien’, ed. Ch. Salmon, Mémoires de la Société des Antiquaires de Picardie 17 (1861), 113–54 (BHL 3224). Adrevald of Fleury, Historia Translationis Sancti Benedicti, ed. E. de Certain, in Les Miracles de Saint Benoît, pp. 1–14 (BHL 1117). Adrevald of Fleury, Miraculorum S. Benedicti Liber Primus, ed. E. de Certain, in Les Miracles de Saint Benoît, pp. 15–89 (BHL 1123). Alcuin, Vita Richarii, ed. B. Krusch, MGH SRM 4 (Hanover, 1902), pp. 381–401 (BHL 7224). Andrew of Marchiennes, Historia Succinta de Gestis et Successione Regum Francorum, ed. R. de Beauchamps (Douai, 1633). Andrew of Marchiennes, Miracula S. Rictrudis, AA SS, 3 May, pp. 92–3 (BHL 7252–7252a). Annales Bertiniani, ed. F. Grat, J. Vieillard and S. Clémencet, Les Annales de Saint-Bertin (Paris, 1964). Annales Blandinienses, ed. Ph. Grierson, in Les Annales de Saint-Pierre de Gand et de Saint-Amand, pp. 1–73. Les Annales de Saint-Pierre de Gand et de Saint-Amand, ed. Ph. Grierson (Brussels, 1937). Annales Elnonenses, ed. Ph. Grierson, in Les Annales de Saint-Pierre de Gand et de Saint-Amand, pp. 132–75. Annales Marchianenses, ed. L. Bethmann, MGH SS 16 (Hanover, 1859), pp. 609–17. The Annals of Fulda, trans. T. Reuter, Ninth-Century Histories 2 (Manchester, 1992). The Annals of Saint-Bertin, trans. J. Nelson, Ninth-Century Histories 1 (Manchester 1991). Annales Regni Francorum, ed. G. H. Pertz, MGH SRG (Hanover, 1895). Annales Sithienses, ed. G. Weitz, MGH SS 13 (Hanover, 1881), pp. 34–8. Annales Vedastini, ed. B. de Simpson, in Annales Xantenses et Vedastini, MGH SRG (Hanover, 1909), pp. 41–82. Asser’s Life of King Alfred and Other Contemporary Sources, ed. and trans. S. Keynes and M. Lapidge (London, 1983). Bovo, Relatio de Inventione et Elevatione Sancti Bertini, ed O. Holder-Egger, MGH SS 151 (Hanover, 1887), pp. 524–34 (BHL 1296). Cartulaire de l’Abbaye de Saint-Bertin, ed. B. Guérard, Collection de Documents pour Servir à l’Histoire de France (Paris, 1840). Catalogus Codicum Hagiographicorum Bibliothecae Regiae Bruxellensis, 2 vols. (Brussels, 1889).

173

Bibliography: Primary Sources Chronicon Hugonis Monachi Virdunensis et Divionensis, Abbatis Flavianensis, ed. G. H. Pertz, MGH SS 8 (Hanover, 1848), pp. 280–502. Chronicon Marcianense, ed. S. Vanderputten, ‘Compilation et réinvention à la fin du douzième siècle. André de Marchiennes et l’histoire primitive d’une abbaye bénédictine’, Sacris Erudiri 42 (2003), 403–36. Chronicon Vedastinum, ed. O. Holder-Egger, MGH SS 13 (Hanover, 1881), pp. 674–709. Codices Latini Antiquiores. A Paleographical Guide to Latin Manuscripts prior to the Ninth Century, ed. E. A. Lowe, 11 vols. (Oxford, 1934–1966). Concilia Aevi Karolini, ed. A. Werminghoff, 2 vols., MGH Concilia (Hanover, 1906–1908). Corpus Consuetudinum Monasticarum, ed. J. Semmler (Siegburg, 1963), I: Initia Consuetudinis Benedictinae. Diplomata Belgica Ante Annum Millesimum Centesimum Scripta, ed. M. Gysseling and A. C. F. Koch, 2 vols. (Brussels, 1950). Diplomata, Chartae, Epistolae, Leges aliaque Instrumenta ad Res Gallo-Francias Spectantia, ed. J.-M. Pardessus and L. de Bréquigny, 2 vols. (Paris, 1848–1849). Diplomata Regum Francorum ex Stirpe Merowingica. Diplomata Maiorum Domus Regia. Diplomata Spuria, ed. K. Pertz, MGH (Hanover, 1872). Einhard, Vita Karoli, ed. O. Holder-Egger, MGH SRG (Hanover, 1911). Encomium Emmae Reginae, ed. A. Campbell and S. Keynes (Cambridge, 1998). Epistola Karolini Aevi, ed. E. Dümmler, 6 vols. (Berlin, 1892–1939). Flodoard, Annales, ed. Ph. Lauer, Les Annales de Flodoard (Paris, 1905). Flodoard, Historia Remensis Ecclesiae, ed. M. Stratmann, MGH SS 36 (Hanover, 1998). Folcard, Vita Tertia Sancti Bertini, AA SS, 2 Sept., pp. 604–13 (BHL 1293). Folcuin, Gesta Abbatum Lobbiensium, G. H. Pertz (ed), MGH SS 4 (Hanover, 1841), pp. 52–74. Folcuin, Gesta Abbatum Sithiensium, ed. O. Holder-Egger, MGH SS 13 (Hanover, 1881), pp. 607–35. Folcuin, Vita Folquini Episcopi Morinensis, ed. O. Holder-Egger, MGH SS 151 (Hanover, 1887), pp. 423–30 (BHL 3079). Fredegar, Chronicorum Liber Quartus cum Continuationibus, ed. and trans. J. M. Wallace-Hadrill, The Fourth Book of the Chronicle of Fredegar (London, 1960). Gesta Dagoberti, ed. B. Krusch, MGH SRM 2 (Hanover, 1888). Gesta Episcoporum Cameracensium, ed. L. Bethmann, MGH SS 7 (Hanover, 1846), pp. 393–489. Gesta Sanctorum Patrum Fontanellensis Coenobii, ed. F. Lohier and J. Laporte (Rouen, 1936). Goscelin of Saint-Bertin, Vita Sancti Yvonis Episcopi Persae in Anglia Depositi, PL 1, pp. 80–90 (BHL 4622). Haigneré, D., Les Chartes de Saint-Bertin d’après le Grand Cartulaire de Dom Charles-Joseph Dewitte, 4 vols. (Saint-Omer, 1886–1899). Hariulf, Chronicon Centulense, ed. F. Lot, Chronique de l’Abbaye de Saint-Riquier (Ve s.–1104) (Paris, 1894). L’Histoire-Polyptyque de l’Abbaye de Marchiennes (1116–1121), ed. B. Delmaire (Louvain-la-Neuve, 1985).

174

Bibliography: Primary Sources Hucbald of Saint-Amand, Vita Amati Episcopi (VAL), in Catalogus Codicum Hagiographicorum I, pp. 43–59 (BHL 362–5). Hucbald of Saint-Amand, Vita Jonati, AA SS, 1 Aug., pp. 70–4 and Catalogus Codicum Hagiographicorum, I, pp. 273–5 (BHL 4447–4448). Hucbald of Saint-Amand, Vita Rictrudis Prologus, ed. W. Levison, MGH SRM 6 (Hanover, 1913), pp. 91–4 (BHL 7247). Hucbald of Saint-Amand, Vita S. Rictrudis Marcianensis Abbatissae, ed. J. Ghesquière, Acta Sanctorum Belgii 4 (Brussels, 1787), pp. 488–503 (BHL 7247). Hucbald of Saint-Amand, Vita S. Rictrudis Marcianensis Abbatissae AA SS, 3 May, pp. 81–9 (BHL 7247). Hucbald of Saint-Amand, Vita S. Rictrudis Marcianensis Abbatissae PL 132, cols. 829–48 (BHL 7247). Inventio Capitis Sancti Johannis, AA SS, 5 Jun., pp. 650–2. Inventio et Miracula Sancti Gisleni, ed. O. Holder-Egger, MGH SS 152 (Hanover, 1888), pp. 576–9 (BHL 3554). Inventio et Miracula Sancti Vulfranni, ed. J. Laporte (Rouen, 1938) (BHL 8740). John of Saint-Amand, Poem to Erluin of Cambrai, ed. K. Strecker, MGH Poetae 52 (Dublin, 1970), p. 375. John of Saint-Amand, Vita S. Rictrudis Metrica, ed. G. Silagi, MGH Poetae 53 (Munich, 1977), pp. 565–96 (BHL 7248). Jonas of Bobbio, Vita Eusebiae Abbatissae Hammaticensis, ed. J. Ghesquière, Acta Sanctorum Belgii 4 (Brussels, 1787), pp. 557–64 (BHL 2736). Jonas of Bobbio, Vitae Columbani Abbatis Discipulorumque, ed. B. Krusch, MGH SRM 4 (Hanover 1905), pp. 1–156 (BHL 1898). Lambert of Saint-Omer, Chronica, ed. G. H. Pertz, MGH SS 5 (Hanover, 1844), pp. 65–6. Lambert of Saint-Omer, Liber Floridus (Facsimile), ed. A. Derolez and I. Stubbe (Ghent, 1968). Lambert of Saint-Omer, Series Abbatum S. Bertini et Praepositorum S. Audomari Sithiensium, ed. O. Holder-Egger, MGH SS 13 (Hanover, 1881), pp. 389–91. Lambert of Saint-Omer, Series Episcoporum Morinensium, ed. O. Holder-Egger, MGH SS 13 (Hanover, 1881), p. 389. Libellus Miraculorum S. Bertini, ed. O. Holder-Egger, MGH SS 151 (Hanover, 1887), pp. 509–16 (BHL 1291). Liber Historiae Francorum, ed. B. Krusch, MGH SRM 2 (Hanover, 1888), pp. 38–328. The Life of King Edward Who Rests at Westminster, ed. and trans. F. Barlow (Oxford, 1992). The Lives of the Ninth-Century Popes, ed. and trans. R. Davis (Liverpool, 1995). Memorials of Saint Dunstan, Archbishop of Canterbury, ed. W. Stubbs, Rolls Series 63 (London, 1874). Milo of Saint-Amand, Vita Amandi Episcopi Secunda (Suppletio Milonis), ed. B. Krusch, MGH SRM 5 (Hanover, 1910), pp. 450–83 (BHL 339–343). Les Miracles de Saint Benoît, ed. E. de Certain (Paris, 1868). Miracula S. Eusebiae, ed. J. Ghequière, Acta sanctorum Belgii 4 (Brussels, 1787), pp. 564–70 (BHL 2738). Miraculum S. Mauronti, in Catalogus Codicum Hagiographicorum II, pp. 41–3 (BHL 5770).

175

Bibliography: Primary Sources Le Polyptyque de Saint-Bertin (844–859). Édition Critique et Commentaire, ed. F.-L. Ganshof (Paris, 1975). Recueil des Actes de Charles II le Chauve, Roi de France, ed. G. Tessier and A. Giry, 3 vols. (Paris, 1943–1955). Recueil des Actes de Lothaire et de Louis V, Rois de France (954–987), ed. L. Halphen (Paris, 1908). Recueil des Actes de Philippe Ier, Roi de France (1059–1108), ed. M. Prou (Paris, 1908). Revelatio Sancti Stephani, ed. S. Vanderlinden, Revue des Études Byzantines 4 (1946), 178–217 (BHL 7850–7856). Sancti Paulini Epistolae, ed. G. de Hartel, Corpus Scriptorum Ecclesiasticorum Latinorum 29, pars 1 (Vienna, 1894). De Sanctis Martyribus Fusciano et Victorico, Morinorum Apostolis, ed. J. Ghesquière, ASB I (Brussels, 1783), pp. 153–72 (BHL 3225). Sermo de Adventu Sanctorum Wandregisili, Ansberti et Vulframni in Monte Blandinium Vocato, ed. N. Huyghebaert, Une Translation de Reliques à Gand en 944. Le Sermo de Adventu Sanctorum Wandregisili, Ansberti et Vulframni in Blandinium (Brussels, 1978) (BHL 8810). Sermo de Adventu SS. Gudwaldi et Bertulfi, ed. N. Huyghebaert, Sacris Erudiri 23 (1978–1979), 87–113 (BHL 3689). Simon, Gesta Abbatum S. Bertini Sithiensium, ed. O. Holder-Egger, MGH SS 13 (Hanover, 1881), pp. 635–73. Vita Aldegundis Quinta, AA SS, 3 Jan., pp. 655–62 (BHL 247). Vita Amandi Episcopi Prima (VAm), ed. B. Krusch, MGH SRM 5 (Hanover, 1910), pp. 428–49 (BHL 332). Vita S. Audomari Altera (VA2), AA SS, 3 Sept., pp. 402–6 (BHL 767). Vita S. Audomari Prima (VA1), ed. W. Levison, in Vitae Audomari, Bertini, Winnoci, pp. 753–64 (BHL 763). Vita S. Audomari Tertia (VA3), AA SS, 3 Sept., pp. 406–17 (BHL 768). Vita S. Bertae, AA SS, 2 Jul., pp. 49–54. (BHL 1266). Vita S. Bertini Altera (VB2), AA SS, 2 Sept., pp. 590–5 (BHL 1290). Vita Sancti Bertini Metrica Prior, ed. F. Morand, Mélanges Historiques 1, Collection de Documents Inédits sur l’Histoire de France (1873), 573–697 (BHL 1292). Vita S. Bertini Prima (VB1), ed. W. Levison, in Vitae Audomari, Bertini, Winnoci, pp. 765–9 (BHL 763). Vita Eligii, ed. B. Krusch, MGH SRM 4 (Hanover, 1902), pp. 634–42 (BHL 2474–2476). Vita S. Eusebiae Metrica, AA SS, 1 Feb., pp. 450 (fragments) (BHL 2337). Vita Sancti Gerardi Broniensis Abbatis, ed. L. von Heinemann, MGH SS 152 (Hanover, 1888), pp. 655–73 (BHL 3422). Vita Geretrudis Prima, ed. B. Krusch, MGH SRM 2 (Hanover, 1888), pp. 464–71 (BHL 3490). Vita Gisleni Prima, ed. J. Ghesquière, Acta Sanctorum Belgii 4 (Brussels, 1787), pp. 375–84 (BHL 3552). Vita S. Mauronti, AA SS, 2 May, pp. 53–4 (BHL 5768). Vita Richardi Abbatis S. Vitoni Verdunensis, ed. W. Wattenbach, MGH SS 11 (Hanover, 1854), pp. 280–9 (BHL 7220). Vita Richarii Sacerdotis Centulensis Primigenia, ed. B. Krusch, MGH SRM 7 (Hanover, 1920), pp. 438–58 (BHL 7223).

176

Bibliography: Primary Sources Vita Walarici, ed. B. Krusch, MGH SRM 4 (Hanover, 1902), pp. 157–75 (BHL 8762). Vita S. Winnoci Prima (VW1), ed. W. Levison, in Vitae Audomari, Bertini, Winnoci, pp. 769–75 (BHL 763). Vitae Audomari, Bertini, Winnoci, ed. W. Levison, MGH SRM 5 (Hanover, 1910), pp. 729–86. Walahfrid Strabo, Visio Wettini, ed. H. Knittel (Sigmaringen, 1986).

Secondary sources Abou-El-Haj, B., The Medieval Cult of Saints. Formations and Transformations (Cambridge, 1993). Alborg, J. and J. A. McNamara, eds., Sainted Women of the Dark Ages (Durham, 1992). Aratea. Kommentar zum Aratus des Germanicus Ms. Voss. Lat. Q. 79, Bibliotheek der Rijksuniversiteit Leiden, ed. B. Bischoff (Luzern, 1989). Argent Svoboda, R., ‘The Illustrations of the Life of St. Omer (Saint-Omer, Bibliothèque Municipale, Ms. 698)’, unpublished Ph.D. thesis (University of Minessota, 1983). Barthélémy, D. L’An mil et la Paix de Dieu. La France chrétienne et féodale (Paris, 1999). Bately, J. M., ‘Grimbald of Saint-Bertin’, Medium Aevum 35 (1966), 1–10. Bautier, R.-H., ‘L’historiographie en France aux Xe et XIe siècles (France du Nord et de l’Est)’, in La Storiografia Altomedievale, II, pp. 793–850. Becker, G., Catalogi Bibliothecarum Antiqui (Hildesheim, 1885). Berthod, A., ‘Notice du cartulaire de Simon, manuscrit de la bibliothèque de Saint-Bertin’, Mémoires de l’Académie Impériale et Royale des Sciences et Belles Lettres de Bruxelles 5 (Histoire 1) (1788), 227–30. Bijsterveld, A.-J., ‘The Commemoration of Patrons and Gifts in Chronicles from the Diocese of Liège, Eleventh–Twelfth Centuries’, Revue Bénédictine 109 (1999), 208–43. Bischoff, B., Manuscripts and Libraries in the Age of Charlemagne, ed. and trans. M. Gorman, Cambridge Studies in Palaeography and Codicology 1 (Cambridge, 1994). Bled, O., ‘Abbatiale et collégiale: les reliques de St. Omer et les reliques de St. Bertin’, Mémoires de la Société des Antiquaires de la Morinie 32 (1914–1920), 5–112. Bonenfant, P., ‘Note critique sur le prétendu testament de sainte Aldegonde’, Bulletin de la Commission Royale d’Histoire 98 (1934), 219–38. Boutémy, A., ‘Encore un manuscrit décoré par Odbert de Saint-Bertin’, Scriptorium 4 (1950), 245. Boutémy, A. ‘Influences carolingiennes dans l’oeuvre de l’abbé Odbert de Saint-Bertin, ca. 1000’, in Karolingische und Ottonische Kunst. Forschungen zur Kuntsgeschichte und Christlichen Archäologie, vol. 3 (Wiesbaden, 1957), pp. 427–33. Boutémy, A., ‘Le style Franco-Saxon, style de Saint-Amand’, Scriptorium 3 (1949), 260–4. Boutémy, A. ‘Un grand enlumineur du Xe siècle: l’abbé Odbert de Saint-Bertin’, Annales de la Fédération Archéologique et Historique de Belgique 32 (1947), 247–54.

177

Bibliography: Secondary Sources Boutémy, A. ‘Un monument capital de l’enluminure anglo-saxonne: le mansucrit 11 de Boulogne-sur-Mer’, Cahiers de Civilisation Médiévale 1 (1958), 179–82. Bozoky, E., ‘La politique des reliques des premiers comtes de Flandre (fin du IXe – fin du XIe siècle)’, in Reliques, Objets, Cultes, Symbole, pp. 271–92. Bozoky, E., ‘Voyages de reliques et démonstration du pouvoir aux temps féodaux’, in Voyages et Voyageurs au Moyen Âge. XXVIe Congrès de la S.H.M.E.S. (Limoges-Aubazine, Mai 1995) (Paris, 1996), pp. 267–80. Brassart, F., La féodalité dans le nord de la France. Histoire du château et de la chatellenie de Douai, 4 vols. (Douai, 1877–1887). Brassart, F., ‘Mémoire sur un point important de l’histoire de Douai’, in Souvenirs de la Flandre Wallonne (1872), 5–113. Brouette, E., ‘Folcuin’ in Dictionnaire d’histoire et de géographie ecclésiastiques 17 (Paris, 1971), col. 744–9. Bruckner, A., ‘Das Evangelienbuch von St.-Ursane’, Varia Codicologica. Essays Presented to G.I. Lieftinck (Amsterdam, 1972), pp. 17–24. Brühl, C, Studien zu den merovingischen Königsurkunden (Cologne, 1998). Bultot, R., ‘Fridugise’, in Dictionnaire d’histoire et de géographie ecclésiastiques 18 (1977), col. 1145–47. Les Cartulaires. Actes de la Table Ronde organisée par l’École Nationale des Chartes et le G.D.R. 121 du C.N.R.S. (Paris, 5–7 décembre 1991), ed. O. Guyotjeannin, L. Morelle and M. Parisse, Mémoires et Documents Publiés par l’École des Chartes 39 (Paris, 1993). La Cathédrale de Saint-Omer. 800 ans de mémoire vive, ed. N. Delanne-Logié and Y-M. Hilaire (Paris, 2000). Cauchies, J.-M., ‘Hagiographie, historiographie et politique. Sainte Waudru “comtesse”, “duchesse”, “princesse” ‘, in Sainte Waudru devant l’histoire et devant la foi. Recueil d’étudespPublié à l’occasion du treizième centenaire de sa mort, ed. J.-M. Cauchies (Mons, 1989), pp. 93–116. Charlemagne. Oeuvre, Rayonnement et Survivances. Catalogue de l’exposition d’Aix-la-Chapelle, 26 juin-19 septembre 1965 (Aachen, 1965). Chastang, M.-L. and P. Héliot, ‘Quêtes et voyages de reliques au profit des églises françaises au moyen âge’, Revue d’Histoire Ecclésiastique 59 (1964), 789–822 and 60 (1965), 3–32. Chelini, J., ‘Alcuin, Charlemagne et Saint-Martin de Tours’, in Mémorial de l’Année Martinienne, M.DCCCC.LX–M.DCCCC.LXI, Seizième centenaire de l’abbaye de Ligugé, centenaire de la découverte du tombeau de Saint Martin à Tours (Paris, 1962), pp. 19–50. Clanchy, M. T., From Memory to Written Record: England 1066–1307, 2nd edn (London, 1993). Coens, M., Anciennes litanies des saints, Subsidia Hagiographica 37 (Brussels, 1963). Coleman, J., Ancient and Medieval Memories. Studies in the Reconstruction of the Past (Cambridge, 1992). Colombanus and Merovingian Monasticism, ed. H. B. Clarke and M. Brennan (Oxford, 1981) (BAR International Series 113). Coolen, G., ‘Guntbert de Saint-Bertin. Chronique des temps carolingiens’, in Revue du Nord 40 (1958) (Mélanges Dédiés à la Mémoire de Raymond Monier) 213–24.

178

Bibliography: Secondary Sources Coolen, G., ‘St. Colomban et St. Omer’, in Mélanges Colombaniens. Actes du Congrès International de Luxeuil (20–23 juillet 1950) (Paris, 1951), pp. 361–75. Le culte et les reliques de Saint Benoît et de Sainte Scholastique, ed. A. Beau, Studia Monastica 21 (Monserrat, 1979). Le cycle de Guillaume d’Orange: anthologie, ed. D. Boutet (Paris, 1996) (Les Lettres Gothiques 4547). Dauphin, H., Le Bienheureux Richard, Abbé de Saint-Vanne de Verdun (+ 1046) (Louvain, 1946). Davis, R. H. C. and J. M. Wallace-Hadrill, eds., The Writing of History in the Middle Ages: Essays Presented to R. W. Southern (London, 1981). Declercq, G., ‘Heiligen, lekenabten en hervormers. De Gentse abdijen van Sint-Pieters en Sint-Baafs tijdens de Eerste Middeleeuw (7de–12de eeuw), in Ganda en Blandinium. De Gentse Abdijen van Sint-Pieters en Sint-Baafs, ed. G. Declercq (Ghent, 1997), pp. 13–40. Declercq, G. and A. Verhulst, ‘Early Medieval Ghent between two Abbeys and the Count’s Castle’, in Ghent: In Defense of a Rebellious City, ed. J. Decavele (Antwerp, 1989), pp. 37–59. de Gaiffier, B., ‘Hagiographie et historiographie. Quelques aspects du problème’, in La Storiografia Altomedievale, II, pp. 139–66. de Gaiffier, B., ‘L’hagiographie dans le marquisat de Flandre et le duché de Basse-Lotharingie au onzième siècle’, in Études Critiques d’Hagiographie et d’Iconologie, Subsidia Hagiographica 43 (Brussels, 1967), pp. 415–507. de Gaiffier, B., ‘Les revendications de biens dans quelques documents hagiographiques du onzième siècle’, Analecta. Bollandiana 50 (1932), 123–38. Delamotte, G., ‘Dom Charles-Joseph Dewitte, l’auteur du Grand Cartulaire de Saint-Bertin pendant la Révolution’, Revue de Lille 29 (1910–1911), 330–44. de Laplane, H., Les abbés de Saint-Bertin d’après les anciens monuments de ce monastère (Saint-Omer, 1854). Delcambre, E., ‘L’Ostrevant du IXe au XIIIe siècle’, Le Moyen Âge 28 (1927), 241–79. de Moreau, E., Saint Amand, apôtre de la Belgique et du nord de la France (Louvain, 1927). de Moreau, E., ‘St. Victrice de Rouen, apôtre de la Belgica Secunda’, Revue Belge de Philologie et d’Histoire 5 (1926), 71–9. de Pas, J., ‘Charte de reconnaissance du corps de St. Omer par l’archevêque de Rheims’, Bulletin de la Société des Antiquaires de la Morini 14 (1922–1929), 125–8. Derolez, A., Lambertus qui Librum Fecit. Een Codicologische Studie van de Liber Floridus Autograaf (Gent, Universiteitsbibliotheek, Handschrift 92) Verhandelingen van de Koninklijke Academie voor Wetenschappen, Letteren en Schone Kunst van België, Klasse der Letteren 40, no. 89 (Brussels, 1978). de Rudder, Ch., La vérité de l’église de Saint-Omer et son antériorité sur l’abbaye de Saint-Bertin ou réfutation de la Dissertation Historique et Critique sur l’Origine et l’Ancienneté de l’Abbaye de Saint-Bertin (Paris, 1754). Derville, A., ed., Histoire de Saint-Omer, Histoire des Villes du Nord-Pas-de-Calais 1 (Lille, 1981). Derville, A., Saint-Omer. Des origines au début du 14e siècle (Lille, 1995). Deschamps, L., ‘Notice sur un ms. de la bibliothèque de Saint-Omer’, Mémoires de la Société des Antiquaires de la Morinie (1839–1840), 173–208.

179

Bibliography: Secondary Sources Deshusses, J., ‘Chronologie des grands sacramentaires de Saint-Amand’, Revue Bénédictine 87 (1977), 230–7. de Smet, J., ‘Quand Robert II confia-t-il Saint-Bertin à Cluny?’, Revue d’Histoire Ecclésiastique 46 (1951), pp. 160–4. Deug-Su, I., ‘La vita Rictrudis di Ubaldo di Saint-Amand: un’agiografia intellettuale e I santi imperfetti’, Studi Medievali 3rd series, 31 (1990), 545–82. D’Haenens, A., Les invasions normandes en Belgique au IXe siècle: le phénomène et sa répercussion dans l’historiographie médiévale Recueil de Travaux d’Histoire et de Philologie de l’Université de Louvain 38 (Louvain, 1967). Dhondt, J., Études sur la naissance despPrincipautés territoriales en France (IXe–Xe siècle) (Bruges, 1948). Dhondt, J., Les origines de la Flandre et de l’Artois (Arras, 1944). Dhondt, J., ‘Une dynastie inconnue de comtes d’Ostrevant’, in Miscellanea Historica in Honorem Leonis van der Essen (Brussels, 1947), pp. 177–87. Dierkens, A., Abbayes et chapitres entre Sambre et Meuse (VIIe–XIe siècle). Contribution à l’histoire religieuse des campagnes du haut moyen âge, Beihefte der Francia 14 (Sigmaringen, 1985). Dierkens, A., ‘La production hagiographique à Lobbes au Xe siècle’, Revue Bénédictine 93 (1983), 245–59. Dierkens, A., ‘Prolégomène à une histoire des relations culturelles entre les îles britanniques et le continent pendant le haut moyen âge’, in La Neustrie II, pp. 371–94. Dierkens, A., ‘Saint Amand et la fondation de l’abbaye de Nivelles’, Revue du Nord 69 (1986), 433–44. Dissertation historique et critique sur loOrigine et l’ancienneté de l’abbaye de Saint-Bertin et sur la supériorité qu’elle avait autrfeois sur l’église de Saint-Omer (Paris, 1737). Dodwell, C. R., The Pictorial Arts of the West: 800–1200 (New Haven, 1993). Dolbeau, F., ‘Le dossier hagiographique de St. Amé, vénéré à Douai’, Analecta Bollandiana. 97 (1979), 89–110. Doppelklöster und andere Formen des Symbiose mänlicher und weiblicher Religiosen im Mittelalter, ed. K. Elm and M. Parisse, Berliner Historische Studien 18 (Berlin, 1992). Dubuis, F.-O. and A. Lugon, ‘Les premiers siècles d’un diocèse alpin: recherches, acquis et questions sur l’évêché du Valais’, Vallesia 47 (1992), 1–61. Dunbabin, J., ‘The reign of Arnulf II, count of Flanders, and its aftermath’, Francia 16 (1989), 53–65. Espinas, G., La vie urbaine de Douai au moyen âge, 4 vols. (Paris, 1913). Ewig, E., ‘Beobachtungen zu den Klosterprivilegien des 7 und frühen 8 jahrhunderts’, in idem, Spätantikes und fränkisches Gallien II, pp. 411–26. Ewig, E., ‘Das Privileg des Bishofs Audomar von Terouanne von 663 und die Anfänge des Abtei Sithiu’, in Spätantikes und Fränkisches Gallien II, pp. 507–37. Ewig, E., Spätantikes und fränkisches Gallien. Gesammelte Schriften (1952–1973), ed. A. Atsma, 2 vols. (Munich, 1976–1979). Ewig, E., ‘Troiamythos und fränkische Frühgeschichte’, in Die Franken und die Alemannen bis zur ‘Schlacht bei Zülpich’ (496/97), ed. D. Geuenich, Ergänzungsbände zum Reallexikon der germanischen Altertumskunde 19 (Berlin, 1998) (), pp. 1–30.

180

Bibliography: Secondary Sources Fälschungen im Mittelalter. Internationaler Kongress der Monumenta Germaniae Historica, München 16–19 September 1986, 5 vols. (Hanover, 1988). Farmer, S., Communities of Saint Martin: Legend and Ritual in Medieval Tours (Ithaca, 1991). Farmer, S., T. Head, and B. Rosenwein, ‘Monks and their Enemies: A Comparative Approach’, Speculum 66 (1991), 764–96. Favre, E., ‘La famille d’Évrard, marquis de Frioul, dans le royaume franc de l’Ouest’, in Études d’histoire du moyen âge dédiées à Gabriel Monod (Paris, 1896), pp. 155–62. Felten, F., Äbte und Laienäbte im Frankenreich. Studie zum Verhältnis von Staat und Kirche im früheren Mittelalters (Stuttgart, 1980). Felten, F., ‘Laienäbte in der Karolingerzeit. Ein Beitrag zum Problem des Adelsherrschaft über die Kirche’, in Mönchtum, Episckopat, Adel zur Gründungszeit des Klosters Reichenau, ed. A. Borst (Sigmaringen, 1974), pp. 397–432. Feuchère, P., ‘La Pevèle du IXe au XIIIe siècle’, Revue du Nord 33 (1951), 44–55. Fleckenstein, J., Die Hofkapelle der deutschen Könige I: Grundlegung. Die karolingische Hofkapelle, Monumenta Germaniae Historica Schriften 26 (Stuttgart, 1959). Fleming, R., ‘Christ Church Canterbury’s Anglo-Norman Cartulary’, in AngloNorman Political Culture and the Twelfth-Century Renaissance, ed. W. Hollister (Woodbridge, 1996), pp. 83–155. Fleming, R., ‘Christchurch’s Sisters and Brothers: An Edition and Discussion of Canterbury Obituary List’, in The Culture of Christendom: Essays in Memory of Denis Bethel, ed. M. A. Meyer (London, 1993), pp. 115–53. Fleming, R., ‘History and liturgy at pre-Conquest Christ Church, Canterbury’, Haskins Society Journal 7 (1995), 67–83. Fleming, R., Domesday Book and the Law. Society and Legal Custom in Early Medieval England (Cambridge, 1998). Frappier, J., Les chansons de geste du cycle de Guillaume d’Orange, 2 vols. (Paris, 1955–1965). Ganshof, F.-L., La Flandre sous les premiers comtes (Brussels, 1944). Ganshof, F.-L., ‘L’historiographie dans la monarchie franque sous les mérovingiens et les carolingiens’, in La Storiografia Altomedievale, II, pp. 631–85. Ganz, D., Corbie in the Carolingian Renaissance, Beihefte der Francia 20 (Sigmaringen, 1990). Geary, P., Aristocracy in Provence. The Rhone Basin at the Dawn of the Carolingian Age (Stuttgart, 1985). Geary, P., ‘Entre gestion et gesta’, in Les Cartulaires, pp. 13–26. Geary, P., Furta Sacra. Thefts of Relics in Central Middle Ages (Princeton, 1978). Geary, P., Phantoms of Remembrance. Memory and Oblivion at the End of the First Millennium (Princeton, 1994). Godman, P., Poets and Emperors. Frankish Politics and Carolingian Poetry (Oxford, 1987). Goffart, W., The Le Mans Forgeries. A Chapter from the History of Church Property in the Ninth Century, Harvard Historical Studies 76 (Cambridge, Mass., 1966). Grierson, Ph., ‘Grimbald of Saint-Bertin’, The English Historical Review 55 (1940), 529–61. Grierson, Ph., ‘La maison d’Évrard de Frioul et les origines du comté de Flandre’, Revue du Nord 24 (1938), 241–66.

181

Bibliography: Secondary Sources Grierson, Ph., ‘The Early Abbots of St. Peters of Ghent’, Revue Bénédictine 48 (1936), 129–46. Grierson, Ph., ‘The Relations between England and Flanders before the Norman Conquest’, Transactions of the Royal Historical Society 4th series, 23 (1941), 71–112. Guenée, B., Histoire et culture historique dans l’ occident médiéval (Paris, 1980). Guenée, B., ‘Histoires, annales et chroniques. Essai sur les genres historiques au moyen âge’, Annales, Économies, Sociétés, Civilisations 28 (1973), 997–1016. Guyotjeannin, O., J. Pycke and B.-M. Tock, Diplomatique Médiévale, L’Atelier du Médiéviste 2 (Turnhout, 1993). Gysseling, M., Toponymisch Woordenboek van België, Nederland, Luxemburg, NoordFrankrijk en West-Duitsland (voor 1226) 2 vols. (Brussels, 1960). Hallinger, K., Gorze-Kluny. Studien zu den monastischen Lebensformen und Gegensätzen in Hochmittelalter (Rome, 1950). Hamilton, T. J., ‘Goscelin of Canterbury: a Critical Study of his Life, Works and Accomplishments’, unpublished Ph.D. thesis (University of Virginia, 1973). Head, T., Hagiography and the Cult of Saints. The Diocese of Orléans, 800–1200 (Cambridge, 1990). Heene, K., ‘Merovingian and Carolingian Hagiography: Continuity or Change in Public and Aims?’, Analecta Bollandiana 107 (1989), 415–27. Heinzelmann, M., Translationsberichte und andere Quellen des Reliquienkultes Typologie 33 (Turnhout, 1979). Héliot, P., ‘Quelques monuments disparus de la Flandre Wallonne: L’abbaye d’Anchin, les collégiales Saint-Pierre et Saint-Amé de Douai’, Revue d’Archéologie et d’Histoire de l’Art 28 (1959), 129–73. Helvétius, A.-M., Abbayes, évêques et laïques. Une politique du pouvoir en Hainaut au moyen âge (VIIe–XIe siècle) (Brussels, 1994). Helvétius, A.-M., ‘Aspects de l’influence de Cluny en Basse-Lotharingie aux XIe et XIIe siècles’ Publications de la Section Historique de l’Institut Grand-Ducal de Luxembourg 106 (1991), 49–68. Helvétius, A.-M., ‘L’abbatiat laïque comme relais du pouvoir royal aux frontières du royaume: le cas du nord de la Neustrie au IXe siècle’, in La Royauté et les élites, pp. 285–99. Helvétius, A.-M., ‘Les inventions de reliques en Gaule du Nord (IXe–XIIIe siècles)’, in Les Reliques, objets, cultes, symboles, pp. 293–311. Helvétius, A.-M., ‘Virgo et virago: réflexions sur le pouvoir du voile consacré d’après les sources hagiographiques de la Gaule du nord’, in Femmes et pouvoir des femmes à Byzance et en occident (VIe–XIe siècles), ed. S. Lebecq, A. Dierkens, R. LeJan, J.-M. Sansterre (Lille, 1999), pp. 189–203. Hermand, A., ‘Recherches sur la question d’antériorité et de paternité entre les deux monastères primitifs de la ville de Saint-Omer’, Mémoires de la Société des Antiquaires de la Morinie 9 (1851), 49–192. Herrmann-Mascard, N., Les reliques des saints. Formation coutumière d’un droit (Paris, 1975). Heuclin, J., ‘Les abbés des monastères neustriens 650–850’, in La Neustrie I, pp. 321–35. Heuclin, J., ‘Le diocèse de Thérouanne à l’époque de Saint-Omer’, Mélange de Science Religieuse 56 (1999), 81–8.

182

Bibliography: Secondary Sources Hirschmann, F. G., ‘Klosterreform und Grundherrschaft: Richard von St. Vanne’, in Grundherrschaft – Kirche – Stadt swischen Maas und Rhein während des Hohen Mittelalters, ed. A. Haverkamp and F. G. Hirschmann, Trierer Historische Forschungen 37 (Mainz, 1997), pp. 125–70. Histoire de Douai, ed. M. Rouche, Histoire des Villes du Pas-de-Calais 9 (Westhoek, 1985). Historiographie im frühen Mittelalter, ed. A. Scharer and G. Scheibelreiter, Veröffentlichungen des Instituts für Österreichische Geschichtsforschung 32 (Vienna, 1994). L’historiographie médiévale en Europe. Actes du colloque organisé par la Fondation Européenne de la Science au Centre de Recherches Historiques et Juridiques de l’Université de Paris I du 29 mars au 1er avril 1989 (Paris, 1991). Hourlier, J., ‘La lettre de Zacharie’, in Le culte et les reliques de Saint Benoît et de Sainte Scholastique, pp. 241–52. Hourlier, J., ‘La translation d’après les sources narratives’, in Le culte et les reliques de Saint Benoît et de Sainte Scholastique, pp. 214–39. Hourlier, J., ‘Le témoignage de Paul Diacre’, in Le culte et les reliques de Saint Benoît et de Sainte Scholastique, pp. 205–11. Huyghebaert, N. ‘Le comte Baudouin II de Flandre et le ‘custos’ de Steneland. À propos d’un faux précepte de Charles le Chauve pour Saint-Bertin’, Revue Bénédictine 69 (1959), 49–67. Huyghebaert, N., ‘Sermo de Adventu SS. Gudwaldi et Bertulfi’, Sacris Erudiri 23 (1978–1979), 87–113. Huyghebaert, N., Une translation de reliques à Gand en 944. Le sermo de Adventu Sanctorum Wandregisili, Ansberti et Vulframni in Blandinium, Recueils de Textes pour Servir à l’Histoire de Belgique (Brussels, 1978). Ideal and Reality in Frankish and Anglo-Saxon Society: Studies Presented to J. M. Wallace-Hadrill, ed. P. Wormald, D. Bullough, and R. Collins (Oxford, 1983). Iogna-Prat, D., ‘La geste des origines dans l’historiographie clunisienne des XIe–XIIe siècles’, Revue Bénédictine. 108 (1992), 135–91. Johanek, P., ‘Zur rechtlichen Funktion von Traditionsnotitz, Traditionsbuch und früher Siegelurkunde’, in Recht und Schrift im Mittelalter, ed. P. Classen, Vörtrage und Forschungen 23 (Sigmaringen, 1977), pp. 131–62. Kaiser, R., ‘Quêtes itinérantes avec des reliques pour financer la construction des églises (XIe–XIIe siècles)’, Le Moyen Âge 2 (1995), 204–25. Kastner, J., Historiae Fundationum Monasteriorum. Frühformen mönastischen Institutionsgeschichtschreibung im Mittelalter (Munich, 1974). Kelleher, C., ‘Illumination at Saint-Bertin at Saint-Omer under the Abbacy of Odbert’, unpublished Ph.D. thesis (University of London, 1968). Koch, A. C. F., ‘Gent in de 9de en 10de eeuw. Enkele benadering’, Stadsarcheologie. Bodem en Monument in Gent 14 (1990), 3–43. Koch, A. C. F., ‘Gérard de Brogne et la maladie du comte Arnould Ier de Flandre’, Revue Bénédictine 70 (1960), 119–26. Koch, A. C. F., ‘Het Graafschap Vlaanderen van de 9de eeuw tot 1070’, in Algemene Geschiedenis der Nederlanden (Utrecht, 1982), pp. 354–83. Koch, G. and F. D. De Mayer, ‘Douai à la fin du XIe siècle’, Revue du Nord 33 (1951), 56–60. Koehler, W., Karolingischen Miniaturen, 3 vols. (1930–1933), I: Die Schule von Tours.

183

Bibliography: Secondary Sources Kölzer, T., Merovingerstudien I, Monumenta Germaniae Historica, Studien und Texte 21 (Hanover, 1998). Koziol, F., ‘Monks, Feuds and the Making of Peace in Eleventh-Century Flanders’ in The Peace of God: Social Violence and Religious Response in France around the Year 1000, ed. R. Landes (Ithaca, 1992), pp. 239–58. Krüger, K. H., ‘Sithiu/Saint-Bertin als Grablege Childerics III und der Grafen von Flandern’, Frühmittelalterliche Studien 8 (1974), 71–80. Kupper, J.-L., ‘Leodium’, in Series Episcoporum Ecclesiae Catholicae Occidentalis, Series V: Germaniae, vol. I: Archiepiscopatus Coloniensis (Stuttgart, 1982), pp. 43–83. Kupper, J.-L., ‘La geste des pontifes de l’Église de Tongres, Maastricht ou Liège’, in Liège, pp. 15–19. Kupper, J.-L., ‘Liste simplifiée des évêques de Tongres-Maastricht-Liège, depuis les origines jusqu’en 1200’, in Liège, p. 21. Landes, R., Relics, Apocalypse and the Deceits of History: Ademar of Chabannes, 989–1034 (Cambridge, Mass., 1995). Lapidge, M., Anglo-Saxon Litanies of the Saints Henry Bradshaw Society 106 (London, 1991). Laplatte, C., ‘Coutances’, in Dictionnaire d’histoire et de géographie ecclésiastiques 13 (1953), cols. 974–77. Laporte, J., ‘Gérard de Brogne à Saint-Wandrille et à Saint-Riquier’, Revue Bénédictine 70 (1960), 142–66. Le Glay, M., Mémoire sur les archives de Marchiennes (Douai, 1854). Lebecq, S., Les origines franques, Ve–IXe siècle, Nouvelle Histoire de la France Médiévale 1 (Paris, 1990). LeJan, R., Famille et pouvoir dans le monde Franc (VIIe–Xe siècle). Essai d’anthropologie sociale (Paris, 1995). LeJan, R., ed., La royauté et les élites dans l’Europe carolingienne (du début du IXe siècle aux environs de 920 (Lille, 1998). Lemarignier, J.-F., ‘Paix et réforme monastique en Flandre et en Normandie autour de l’année 1023’, in Droit privé et institutions régionales. Études historiques offertes à Jean Yver (Paris, 1976), pp. 431–41. Lemarignier, J.-F., ‘Quelques remarques sur l’organisation ecclésiastique de la Gaule du VIIe à la fin du IXe siècle, principalement au nord de la Loire’, in Agricoltura e Mondo Rurale in Occidente nell Alto Medioevo, Settimane 13 (Spoleto, 1966), pp. 451–86. Leroquais, V., Les psautiers manuscrits latins des bibliothèques publiques de France, 3 vols. (Mâcon, 1940–1941). Leroquais, V., Les sacramentaires et les missels manuscrits des bibliothèques publiques de France, 4 vols. (Paris, 1924). Lesne, E., Histoire de la propriété ecclésiastique en France, 4 vols. (Lille, 1909–1938), IV: Les Livres. ‘Scriptoria’ et Bibliothèques (Lille, 1938). Levillain, L., ‘Les origines du monastère de Nouaillé’, Bibliothèque de l’École des Chartes 71 (1910), 241–79. Levison, W., England and the Continent in the Eighth Century (Oxford, 1946). Liber Floridus Colloquium. Papers Read at the International Meeting Held in the University Library Ghent on 3–5 Spetember 1967, ed. A. Derolez (Ghent, 1973).

184

Bibliography: Secondary Sources Liège. Autour de l’an mil, la naissance d’une principauté (Xe–XIIe siècle), ed. J.-L. Kupper and Ph. George (Liège, 2000). Lifshitz, F., ‘Beyond Positivism and Genre: “Hagiographical” Texts as Historical Narratives’, Viator 25 (1994), 95–113. Lifshitz, F., ‘The Migration of Neustrian Relics in the Viking Age: The myth of Voluntary Exodus, the Reality of Coercion and Theft’, Early Medieval Europe 4 (1995), 175–92. Lobrichon, G., ‘Le psautier d’Odbert’, in Mise en page et mise en texte du livre manuscrit, ed. H.-J. Martin and J. Vezin (Paris, 1990), pp. 175–7. Loenertz, R., ‘La légende parisienne de S. Denys l’Aréopagite, sa genèse et son premier témoin’, Analecta Bollandiana 64 (1951), 217–37. Lot, F., ‘De quelques personnages du IXe siècle qui ont porté le prénom de Hilduin’, Receuil des Travaux Historiques (1970), pp. 461–94. Lot, F., Études critiques sur l’abbaye de Saint-Wandrille, Bibliothèque de l’École des Hautes Études 204 (Paris, 1913). Louis, E., ‘Aux débuts du monachisme en Gaule du Nord: les fouilles de l’abbaye mérovingienne et carolingienne de Hamage (Nord)’ in Clovis, Histoire et mémoire. Le baptème de Clovis et son écho à travers l’histoire, ed. M. Rouche, 2 vols. (Paris, 1997) II, pp. 843–868. Louis, E., ‘Sorores et fratres in Hamatico degentes. Naissance, évolution et disparition d’une abbaye au haut Moyen Age: Hamage (France, Nord)’, De la Meuse à l’Ardenne 29 (1999), 15–47. Louis, E., Mille ans de fortifications à Douai. IXe–XIXe siècles (Douai, 1997). Lowry, S., ‘New York, Pierpont Morgan Library, M. 333 and Manuscript Illumination at the Monastery of Saint-Bertin under Abbot Odbert (986 – ca. 1007)’, unpublished Ph.D. thesis (Columbia University, 1993). McCormick, M., Les annales du haut moyen âge, Typologie 16 (Turnhout, 1976). McKitterick, R., ‘Anglo-Saxon Missionaries in Germany: Reflections on the Manuscript Evidence’, Transactions of the Cambridge Bibliographical Society 60 (1989), 291–329. McKitterick, R., ‘Carolingian Book Production: Some Problems’ The Library 6th series, 12 (1990), 1–33. McKitterick, R., ‘Charles the Bald (823–877) and his Library: The Patronage of Learning’, English Historical Review 95 (1980), 28–47. McKitterick, R., ‘L’idéologie politique dans l’historiographie carolingienne’, in La royauté et les élites, pp. 59–70. McKitterick, R., ‘The Audience for Latin Historiography in the Early Middle Ages: Text Transmission and Manuscript Dissemination’, in Historiographie im frühen Mittelalter, pp. 96–114. McKitterick, R., ‘The Diffusion of Insular Culture in Neustria between 650 and 850:The Implications of the Manuscript Evidence’, in La Neustrie, II, pp. 395–432. McKitterick, R., The Frankish Kingdoms under the Carolingians (London, 1983). McKitterick, R., ‘The Scriptoria of Merovingian Gaul: A Survey of the Evidence’, in Columbanus and Merovingian Monasticism, pp. 173–207. Magdalino, P., ed., The Perception of the Past in Twelfth-Century Europe (London, 1992).

185

Bibliography: Secondary Sources Meijns, B., Aken of Jerusalem? Het Ontstaan en de Hervorming van de Kanonikale Instellingen in Vlaanderen to circa 1155, 2 vols. (Leuven, 2000). Meijns, B., ‘Chanoines et moines à Saint-Omer. Le dédoublement de l’abbaye de Sithiu par Fridogise (820–834) et l’interprétation de Folcuin (vers 962)’, Revue du Nord 83, no. 342 (2001), 691–705. Memorials of Saint Dunstan, Archbishop of Canterbury, ed. W. Stubbs, Rolls Series, 63 (London, 1874). Mériaux, Ch., ‘Thérouanne et son diocèse jusqu’à la fin de l’époque carolingienne’, Bibliothèque de l’Ecole des Chartes, 158 (2000), 277–406. Le métier d’historien au moyen âge. Études sur l’historiographie médiévale, ed. B. Guenée (Paris, 1977). Michelant, H., Catalogue général des manuscrits des bibliothèques publiques des départements, III: Saint-Omer (Paris, 1861), IV: Boulogne-sur-Mer (Paris, 1872). Milde, W., Mittlealterliche Handschriften der Herzog August Bibliothek Wolfenbüttel (Francfort, 1972). Millinger, S., ‘Humility and Power: Anglo-Saxon Nuns in Anglo-Norman Hagiography’, in Medieval Religious Women, ed. J. A. Nichols and L. T. Shank, 2 vols., Cistercian Studies Series 71 (Kalamazoo, 1984), I: Distant Echoes, pp. 115–29. Miscellanea Mediaevalia in Memoriam Jan Frederick Niermeyer (Groningen, 1967). Misonne, D., ‘Gérard de Brogne et sa dévotion aux reliques’, Sacris Erudiri 25 (1982), 1–26. Misonne, D., ‘La légende liturgique de la translation de St. Eugène de Saint-Denis à Brogne’, Revue Bénédictine 74 (1964), 98–110. Misonne, D., ‘La restauration monastique de Gérard de Brogne’, in Naissance et fonctionnement des réseaux monastiques et canoniaux. Actes du premier colloque international du C.E.R.C.O.M., Saint-Etienne, 16–18 septembre 1985 (SaintEtienne, 1991), pp. 117–23. Mohr, W., Studien zur Klosterreform des Grafen Arnulf I von Flandern: Tradition und Wirklichkeit in der Geschichte der Amandus-Kloster, Mediaevalia Lovaniensia 22 (Louvain, 1992). Morelle, L., ‘Ecrit diplomatique et archives monastiques (France Septentrionale, VIIIe–XIIe siècle). Dossier présenté devant l’Université de Paris I – PanthéonSorbonne en vue d’obtenir l’Habilitation à diriger des Recherches. Mémoire: Autour de Folcuin de Saint-Bertin’, unpublished Accreditation thesis (Paris, 2001). Moretus, H., Les passions de Saint Lucien et leurs dérivés céphalophoriques (Louvain, 1953). Morimoto, Y., ‘Problèmes autour du polyptyque de Saint-Bertin (844–859)’, in Le Grand Domaine aux époques mérovingienne et carolingienne. Actes du Colloque International (Gand 8–10 septembre 1983), ed. A. Verhulst (Ghent, 1985), pp. 125–51. Morlet, M.-T., Les noms de personne sur le territoire de l’Ancienne Gaule, du VIe au XIIe siècle, 2 vols. (Paris, 1968). Musset, L., ‘Signification et destinée des domaines excentriques pour les abbayes de la moitié septentrionale de la Gaule jusqu’au XIe siècle’, in Sous la règle de Saint Benoît. Structures monastiques et sociétés en France du moyen âge à l’époque

186

Bibliography: Secondary Sources moderne. Abbaye Bénédictine Saint-Marie de Paris 23–25 octobre 1980 (Geneva, 1982), pp. 167–84. Mütherich, F. and J. Gahede, Karolingische Buchmalerei (Munich, 1976). Naz, R., L’Avouerie de l’abbaye de Marchiennes (1038–1262) (Paris, 1924). Nazet, J., ‘Antoing et Leuze: Fondations monastiques de saint Amand?’, in Centenaire du Séminaire d’Histoire Médiévale de l’Université Libre de Bruxelles, ed. G. Despy (Brussels, 1977), pp. 9–19. Nazet, J.,’Crises et réformes dans les abbayes hainuyères du IXe au début du XIIe siècle’, in Recueil d’études d’histoire Hainuyèreo offertes à Maurice-A. Arnould, ed. J.-M. Cauchies and J.-M. Duvosquel (Mons, 1983), pp. 461–96. Nazet, J., ‘Saint Badilon à Leuze: les origines d’un culte insolite’, Mémoires de la Société d’Histoire et d’Archéologie de Tournai 4 (1983–1984), 55–69. Nelson, J., Charles the Bald (London, 1992). Netzer, N., Cultural Interplay in the Eighth Century. The Trier Gospels and the Making of a Scriptorium at Echternach (Cambridge, 1994). La Neustrie. Les Pays au Nord de la Loire de 650 à 850. Colloque Historique International, ed. A. Atsma, 2 vols., Beihefte der Francia, 16/1 and 16/2 (Sigmaringen, 1989). Nicholas, D. Medieval Flanders (London, 1992). Nordenfalk, C., ‘Ein karolingisches Sacramentar aus Echternach und seine Vorläufer’, Acta Archaeologica 2 (1931), 207–44. Ortenberg, V., The English Church and the Continent in the Tenth and Eleventh Centuries: Cultural, Spiritual and Artistic Exchanges (Oxford, 1992). Otter, M., Inventiones. Fiction and Referentiality in Twelfth-Century English Historical Writing (London, 1996). Pagani, I., ‘Ionas-Ionatus: a proposito della biografia di Giona di Bobbio’, Studi Medievali 3rd series, 29 (1988), 45–85. Pietri, Ch., ‘Remarques sur la christianisation du Nord de la Gaule’, Revue du Nord 66 (1984), 55–68. Platelle, H., ‘Crimes et châtiments à Marchiennes. Étude sur la conception et le fonctionnement de la justice d’après les miracles de sainte Rictrude (XIIe siècle)’, Sacris Erudiri 24 (1980), 155–202. Platelle, H., ‘Hamage’, in Dictionnaire d’histoire et de géographie ecclésiastiques 22 (1988), cols. 199–200. Platelle, H., ‘La religion populaire entre la Scarpe et la Lys d’après les miracles de sainte Rictrude de Marchiennes’, in Alain de Lille, Gautier de Châtillon, Jakemart Giélée et leur temps. Actes du Colloque de Lille, octobre 1978, ed. H. Roussel and F. Suard (Lille, 1980), pp. 365–402. Platelle, H., ‘La vie d’Hugues de Marchiennes: les différentes facettes d’un document hagiographique’, Bulletin de l’Académie Royale de Belgique, Classe des Lettres 3–4 (1992), 73–97. Platelle, H., ‘Le peuple franc et Clovis vus par Hucbald de Saint-Amand en 907: la vita Rictrudis’, in Childéric-Clovis. 1500e anniversaire 482–1982 (Tournai, 1982), pp. 220–2. Platelle, H., Le temporel de l’abbaye de Saint-Amand des origines à 1340 (Paris, 1962). Platelle, H., ‘Le thème de la conversion dans les oeuvres hagiographiques d’Hucbald de Saint-Amand’, Revue du Nord 69 (1986), 511–31.

187

Bibliography: Secondary Sources Platelle, H., ‘Marchiennes’, in Catholicisme, hier, aujourd’hui, demain 8 (Paris, 1979), cols. 414–16. Poitevin, Me, Mémoire sommaire pour les doyen, chanoine et chapitre de l’église cathédrale de Saint-Omer. Parties intervenantes dans l’instance pendante au conseil (n.p., 1835). Prinz, F., Frühe Mönchtum im Frankenreich. Kultur und Gesellschaft in Gallien, den Rheinlanden und Bayern am beispiel der monastischen Entwicklung (4 bis 8 Jahrhundert) (Munich, 1965). Rand, E. K., A Survey of the Manuscripts of Tours. Studies in the Scripts of Tours (Cambridge, Mass., 1929). Reliques, objets, cultes, symboles. Actes du Colloque International de l’Université du Littoral-Côte d’Opale (Boulogne-sur-Mer, 4–6 septembre 1997), ed. E. Bozoky and A-M. Helvétius, Hagiologia 1 (Turnhout, 1999). Remensnyder, A., Remembering Kings Past. Monastic Foundation Legends in Medieval Southern France (Ithaca, 1996). Renard, E. ‘Lectures et relectures d’un polyptyque carolingien (Saint-Bertin, 844–859)’, Revue d’Histoire Ecclésiastique 94 (1999), 373–435. Rosenwein, B., Negotiating Space: Power, Restraint and Privileges of Immunity in Early Medieval Europe (Manchester, 1999). Rosenwein, B., To be the Neighbor of St Peter: The Social Meaning of Cluny’s Property, 909–1049 (Ithaca, 1989). Sabbe, E., ‘La réforme clunisienne dans le comté de Flandre au début du XIIe siècle’, Revue Belge de Philologie et d’Histoire 9 (1930), 121–38. Sabbe, E., ‘Note sur la réforme de Richard de Saint-Vanne dans les Pays-Bas’, Revue Belge de Philologie et d’Histoire 7 (1928), 551–70. Saint Gérard de Brogne et son oeuvre réformatrice. Études publiées à l’occasion du millénaire de sa mort (959–1959), Revue Bénédictine 70 (1960). Semmler, J., ‘Benedictus II: una regula-una consuetudo’, in Benedictine Culture 750–1050, ed. W. Lourdaux and D. Verhelst, Mediaevalia Lovaniensia, series I, studia 11 (Louvain, 1983) ( ), pp. 1–49. Semmler, J., ‘Le monachisme occidental du VIIIe au Xe siècle: formation et réformation’, in Le monachisme à Byzance et en occident du VIIIe au Xe siècle, Revue Bénédictine 103 (1993), pp. 68–89. Semmler, J., ‘Mönche und Kanoniker im Frankenreiche Pippins III und Karls des Großen’, in Untersuchungen zu Kloster und Stift, Veröffentlichungen des Max-Planck Instituts für Geschichte 68 (Gottingen, 1980), pp. 78–111. Sharpe, R., ‘Goscelin’s St. Augustine and St. Mildreth: Hagiography and Liturgy in Context’, Journal of Theological Studies new series, 41 (1990), 502–16. Shopkow, L., History and Community: Norman Historical Writing in the Eleventh and Twelfth Centuries (Washington, 1997). Sims-Williams, P., ‘An Unpublished Seventh- or Eighth-Century Anglo-Latin Letter in Boulogne-sur-Mer MS 74 (82)’, Medium Aevum 48 (1979), 1–22. Sims-Williams, P., ‘Continental Influence at Bath Monastery in the Seventh Century’, Anglo-Saxon England 4 (1975), 1–10. Smith, J. M. H., ‘A Hagiographer at Work: Hucbald and the Library at SaintAmand’, Revue Bénédictine 106 (1996), pp. 151–71. Smith, J. M. H., ‘The Hagiography of Hucbald of Saint-Amand’, Studi Medievali 3rd series, 35 (1994), 517–42.

188

Bibliography: Secondary Sources Smith, J. M. H., ‘The Problem of Female Sanctity in Carolingian Europe c. 780–920’, Past and Present 146 (1995), pp. 3–37. Sot, M., Gesta Episcoporum, Gesta Abbatum, Typologie des Sources du Moen Age Occidental 37 (Turnhout, 1981). Sot, M., ‘Rhétorique et technique dans les préfaces des gesta episcoporum (IXe–XIIe siècle)’, Cahiers de Civilisation Médiévale 28 (1985), 181–200. Sot, M., Un historien et son église: Flodoard de Reims (Paris, 1993). Spaey, E., ‘Over middeleeuwsche heiligenliteratuur’, Ons Geestelijk Erf 3 (1929), 291–303. G. Spiegel, ‘History, Historicism and the Social Logic of the Text in the Middle Ages’, Speculum, 65 (1990). Spiegel, G., Romancing the Past: The Rise of Vernacular Prose Historiography in Thirteenth-Century France (Los Angeles, 1993). Spiegel, G., The Past as Text: The Theory and Practice of Medieval Historiography (Baltimore, 1997). La storiografia altomedievale, 2 vols., Settimane 17 (Spoleto, 1970). Stotz, P., ‘Zwei bisher unbekannte Hymnen auf den heiligen Bertinus’, Mittellateinisches Jahrbuch 24/25 (1989–1990), 489–505. Swarzenski, H., ‘The Anhalt Morgan Gospels’, Art Bulletin 31 (1949), 77–83. Tanner, H. J., Families, Friends and Allies: Boulogne and Politics in Northern France and England, c. 879–1160 (Leiden, 2004). Thacker, A., ‘Bede’s Ideal of Reform’, in Ideal and Reality, pp. 130–53. Thacker, A., ‘Lindisfarne and the Origins of the Cult of St Cuthbert’, in Saint Cuthbert, his Cult and his Community to A.D. 1200, ed. G. Bonner, D. Rollason and C. Stancliffe (Woodbridge, 1989), pp. 103–22. Theis, L., Clovis de l’histoire au mythe (Paris, 1996). Theis, L., ‘Saints sans famille? Quelques remarques sur la famille dans le monde franc à travers les sources hagiographiques’, Revue Historique 255 (1976), 3–20. Tock, B.-M., ‘Les textes non diplomatiques dans les cartulaires de la province de Reims’, in Les Cartulaires, pp. 45–58. Ugé, K., ‘Creating a usable past in the tenth century: Folcuin’s Gesta and the crises at Saint-Bertin’, Studi Medievali 3rd series, 37 (1996), 887–903. Ugé, K., ‘Politics of Narrative Production: Monastic Historiography in Flanders (Ninth–Eleventh Century)’, unpublished Ph.D. thesis (Boston College, Mass., 2000). Ugé, K., ‘Relics as Tools of Power: The Eleventh-Century Inventio of St Bertin’s Relics and the Assertion of Abbot Bovo’s Authority’, in Negotiating Secular and Ecclesiastical Power: Western Europe in the Central Middle Ages, ed. A.-J. Bijsterveld, H. Theunis and A. Wareham (Turnhout, 1999), pp. 51–71. Ugé, K., ‘The Legend of Saint Rictrude: Formation and Transformation (Tenth–Twelfth Century)’, in Anglo-Norman Studies 23 (2001), 281–97. Van Caenegem, R., ‘Le diplôme de Charles le Chauve pour l’abbaye de Saint-Bertin’, Revue d’Histoire du Droit 31 (1963), 403–26. Van Caenegem, R., ‘Note sur la date de la donation de Charles le Chauve pour l’abbaye de Saint-Bertin’, in Miscellanea Mediaevalia in Memoriam Jan Frederik Niermeyer, pp. 71–7. Van der Essen, L., Étude critique et littéraire sur les vitae des saints mérovingiens de l’Ancienne Belgique (Louvain, 1907).

189

Bibliography: Secondary Sources Vanderkindere, L., La formation territoriale des principautés belges au moyen âge, 2 vols. (Brussels, 1902) I. Vanderputten, S., ‘Canterbury and Flanders in the Late Tenth Century’, Anglo Saxon Studies (forthcoming). Vanderputten, S., ‘‘Literate Memory and Social Reassessment in Tenth-Century Monasticism’, Mediaevistik: Internationale Zeitschrift fur Interdisziplinäre Mittelalterforschung (forthcoming). Vanderputten, S., ‘Pourquoi les moines du moyen âge écrivaient-ils leur histoire?’, Studi Medievali 3rd series, 42 (2001), 705–23. Van der Straeten, J., ‘Actes des martyrs d’Aurélien en Gaule’, Analecta Bollandiana 80 (1962), 116–41. Van der Straeten, J., ‘Les actes des martyrs d’Aurélien en Bourgogne’, Analecta Bollandiana 79 (1961), 115–44 and 447–68. Van der Straeten, J., Les manuscrits hagiographiques d’Arras et de Boulogne-sur-Mer (Brussels, 1971). Van der Straeten, J., ‘Les vies métriques de St. Omer’, Analecta Bollandiana 81 (1963), 59–88. Van Houts, E., ‘Historiography and Hagiography at Saint-Wandrille: the Inventio et Miracula Sancti Wulfranni’, Anglo-Norman Studies 12 (1989), 233–51. Van Houts, E., ‘Historical Writing’ in A Companion to the Anglo-Norman World, ed. C. Harper-Bill and E. van Houts (Woodbridge, 2003), pp 103–21. Van Houts, E., Local and Regional Chronicles, Typologie des Sources du Moyen Age Occidental 74 (Turnhout, 1995). Van Houts, E., ‘The Flemish Contribution to Biographical Writing in the Eleventh Century’, in The Limits of Medieval Biography: Essays in Honor of Professor Frank Barlow, ed. D. Bates, J. Crick and S. Hamilton (Woodbridge, forthcoming). Van Meter, D. C., ‘Count Baldwin IV, Richard of Saint-Vanne, and the Inception of Monastic Reform in Eleventh-Century Flanders’, Revue Bénédictine 107 (1997), 130–48. Van Mingroot, E., ‘Gérard Ier’, in Dictionnaire d’histoire et de géographie ecclésiastiques 20 (1983), col. 742–51. Van Mingroot, E., ‘Kritisch onderzoek omtrent de datering van de Gesta Episcoporum Carmeracensium’, Revue Belge de Philologie et d’Histoire 53 (1975), 47–132. Van Mingroot, E., ‘Liste provisoire des actes des évêques de Cambrai de 1031 à 1130’, in Serta Devota in Memoriam Guillelmi Lourdaux. Pars Posterior: Cultura Mediaevalis (Leuven, 1995). Van Uytfanghe, M., ‘Die Vita im Spannungsfeld von Legende, Biographik und Geschichte’, in Historiographie im frühen Mittelalter, pp. 194–221. Van Werveke, H., ‘A-t-il existé des fortification à Saint-Omer avant 878–881?’ Revue Belge de Philologie et d’Histoire 41 (1963), 1065–90. Van Werveke, H., Het Bisdom Terwaan van den Oorsprong tot het Begin der Vertiende Eeuw (Ghent, 1924). Van Werveke, H., ‘Saint-Wandrille et Saint-Pierre de Gand (IXe–Xe siècle)’ in Miscellanea Mediaevalia in Memoriam Jan Frederick Niermeyer, pp. 79–92. Vercauteren, F., Étude sur les Civitates de la Belgique Seconde. Contribution à l’histoire urbaine du nord de la France de la fin du IIIe à la fin du XIe siècle, Mémoires de l’Académie Royale de Belgique 33 (Brussels, 1934). Verhulst, A., ‘L’activité et la calligraphie du scriptorium de l’abbaye gantoise de

190

Bibliography: Secondary Sources Saint-Pierre-au-Mont-Blandin de Gand à l’époque de l’abbé Wichard († 1058)’, Scriptorium 11 (1957), 37–49. Verlinden, C., ‘Souveraineté flamande et souveraineté hennuyère à Douai’, Revue du Nord 18 (1932), pp. 1–19. Vidier, A., L’historiographie à Saint-Benoît sur Loire et les miracles de Saint Benoît (Paris, 1965). Voet, L., ’Étude sur deux bulles de Benoît VIII pour Saint-Vaast d’Arras’, Bulletin de la Commission Royale d’Histoire 109 (1944), 187–241. Wacksman, P., ‘Histoire des dépendances de l’abbaye de Saint-Bertin du VIIe à la fin du Xe siècle’, Positions des thèses de l’École des Chartes (Paris, 1960), 103–6. Wallace-Hadrill, J. M., ‘History in the Mind of Arcbishop Hincmar’, in The Writing of History in the Middle Ages, pp. 43–70. Warlop, E., The Flemish Nobility before 1300, Part I: Historical Study, 2 vols. (Courtrai, 1975); Part II: Alphabetic Repertory of Noble Families 2 vols. (Courtrai, 1976). Warnkönig, A., Flandrische Staats-und Rechtsgeschichte, 3 vols. (Tübingen, 1842). Wehrli, C., Mittelalterliche Überlieferungen von Dagobert I, 3 vols. Geist und Wert der Zeiten 62 (Bern, 1982). Werner, K. F., ‘Andreas von Marchiennes und die Geschichtschreibung von Anchin und Marcchiennes in der zweiten Hälfte des 12. Jahrhuderts’, Deutsches Archiv 9 (1951), 402–63. Werner, K. F., ‘Les premiers Robertiens et les premiers Anjou (IXe siècle – début Xe siècle’, in Pays de Loire et Aquitaine de Robert le Fort aux premiers Capétiens. Actes du Colloque Scientifique International tenu à Angers en septembre 1987, ed. O. Guillot and R. Favreau, Mémoires de la Société des Antiquaires de l’Ouest 5th series, 4, 1996 (Poitiers, 1997), pp. 9–67. Werner, K. F., ‘Le rôle de l’aristocratie dans la christianisation du nord-est de la Gaule’, Revue d’Histoire de l’Eglise de France 62 (1975), 45–73. Wood, I., ‘Saint-Wandrille and its Historiography’, in Church and Chronicle in the Middle Ages: Essays Presented to J. Taylor, ed. I. Wood and G. A. Loud (London, 1991), pp. 1–14. Wood, I., The Merovingian Kingdoms (450–751) (London, 1994). Wood, I., ‘Defining the Franks: Frankish Origins in Early Medieval History’, in Concepts of National Identity in the Middle Ages, ed. S. Forde, L. Johnson and A. Murray (Leeds, 1995), pp. 47–57. Wormald, F., ‘Some Illustrated mss. of the Lives of the Saints’, Bulletin of the J. Rylands Library (1952), 250–62. Zettel, H., Das Bild der Normannen und der Normannenfälle in westfränkischen, östfränkischen und angelsächsischen Quellen des 8. bis 11. Jahrhunderts (Munich, 1977).

191

Index Aa, river 22, 23, 26 Aachen, councils of 816 and 817 58–60 Acharius, bishop of Noyon 19, 20, 51, 55 Adala, countess of Flanders 31, 87, 110 Adalard, abbot of Saint-Bertin and SaintAmand 2, 28, 29–30, 46, 63 Adalbald, St Rictrude’s husband 97, 100–2, 108, 121, 122, 127–8, 158–9 marriage with st Rictrude, see St Rictrude Erchinoald’s brother 136–9, 158–9, 167 founder of castrum of Douai 137, 141, 143, 160 Adalsind 100, 123 Adalulf, count of Boulogne 3, 4, 31, 48, 61, 72 Adalulf, acting abbot of Saint-Bertin 32–3, 69–71, 90 Adrevald of Fleury 77–8, 81 Adroald 22, 23, 51, 54, 55–6, 65, 69, 90, 91 93 Ælfthryth, countess of Flanders 3, 30, 31 Æthelgar, archbishop of Canterbury 34 Agilo, abbot of Saint-Bertin 32 Alcuin 27, 44, 58, 124–5 Andrew of Marchiennes 136, 138, 139, 158 Annales Bertiniani 63, 109 Annales Marchianenses 108, 137, 158, 160 Arnulf, count of Boulogne 3, 33, 48 Arnulf I (the Great), count of Flanders 3, 31, 50, 60, 71, 90, 110, 144–5, 153, 155, 169 and Benedictine reform 4–6, 31–2, 71, 73, 87, 112 and cult of relics 75–6, 142, 143, 148–9, 152, 154 Arnulf II, count of Flanders 3, 4, 33–4, 48, 112, 145, 149 Arras 1, 2, 3, 7, 144 Artois 3, 30 Baldwin I (Ironarm), count of Flanders 2, 30, 31, 169 Baldwin II, count of Flanders 2, 30 Baldwin III, son of Baldwin II 3, 33

Baldwin IV (the Bearded), count of Flanders 1, 3, 4, 6–8, 33, 34–5, 48–9, 82, 112–13, 130, 145 Baldwin V, count of Flanders 87, 110, 113, 114 Baldwin VI (I), count of Flanders (and Hainault) 145, 156 Baldwin II, count of Hainault 156–7 Baldwin Balzo 33 Bath, monastery 31, 170 Bergues-Saint-Winnoc, monastery 8, 35, 44 Boulonais 2, 3, 30, 31, 33, 112 Bovo, abbot of Saint-Bertin 8 abbacy 35–6, 86 see also Inventio s. Bertini Breuil, monastery 103, 104, 105, 108, 123, 134, 140, 142–3, 147–9, 150–5, 157, 160, 166, 168 Canche, river 3 Charlemagne 27, 28, 44, 59, 63 Charles the Bald 2, 28, 29, 30, 46, 109–11, 113–15, 118, 120 Childeric III 26–7 Chronicon Marcianense 136–7, 139, 158 Clothar II 100, 108, 128 Clovis II 23, 106, 108, 134, 147, 150 Clotsind, abbess of Marchiennes 100, 101, 102, 108, 122, 132 Cluny 8, 88 Corbie 41, 43, 51 Coutances 19, 20, 22, 51, 54 Dagobert 1, 19, 20, 51 100, 101, 105, 106, 107, 120, 121, 122, 126, 139–41, 147, 150, 158–9 Douai 3, 4, 10, 23, 31, 96, 110, 137–9, 143–5, 149, 153, 156–9 Drogo, bishop of Thérouanne 80, 81, 84 Dunstan, archbishop of Canterbury 34, 172 Eberhard, count of Friuli 2, 28 Ebertramn, abbot of Saint-Quentin 22, 51 Ebroin 104, 137, 158

193

Index Eligius, bishop of Noyon 52, 55 Elnon, see Saint-Amand Erchinoald 136, 137–9, 158–9, 167 Erkembod, bishop of Thérouanne and abbot of Sithiu 26, 27 Erluin, bishop of Cambrai 6, 71, 127, 131 Ernoldus, St Rictrude’s father 100, 136 Eustasius, abbot of Luxeuil 19, 51, 61

Hamage 8, 97, 102–6, 108, 110–12, 118, 121, 128, 129, 134, 139, 167 Hildebrand, abbot of Saint-Bertin 5, 32, 71 Hilduin, abbot of Saint-Bertin 28–9 Hincmar, archbishop of Reims 28–9, 120 Historia Translationis s. Benedicti 77–8 Hucbald of Saint-Amand 2, 8, 10, 30, 95, 98, 115–22 Hugh, abbot of Saint-Bertin and SaintQuentin 28, 66, 83 Humfrid, bishop of Thérouanne and abbot of Saint-Bertin 26, 28 Inventio s. Bertini 50, 71–90 Inventio s. Gisleni 73, 78, 85

Fleury 85 Folcard, monk of Saint-Bertin 37, 79, 61, 169–71 Folcuin, bishop of Thérouanne 26–8, 33, 61, 67 Folcuin, author of the Gesta Abbatum Sithiensium 61 See also Saint-Bertin and Gesta Abbatum Sithiensium Fontenelle, see Gesta Patrum Fontanellensium Fulcard, abbot of Marchiennes 114 Fulk, abbot of Saint-Bertin and archbishop of Reims 29, 30 Franco-Saxon manuscripts 45–6 Fridugis, abbot of Sithiu 27, 44–5 division of Sithiu 57–60

John of Saint-Amand 127–9, 130 Jonas of Bobbio 21, 107, 133 Jonatus, abbot of Marchiennes 101–2, 107–8, 126, 129–30, 133–4, 136, 167

Gascony 100, 101, 108, 119–22 Gerard, abbot of Brogne at Saint-Bertin 4, 5, 6, 31–2, 34, 35, 87, 90 Benedictine reform and cult of relics 57, 59–60, 73–8 Gerard I, bishop of Cambrai 1, 4, 34, 113, 127, 129–31 Gerard II, bishop of Cambrai 146, 149, 154, 156 Gertrude, abbess of Hamage 102, 108, 121, 139 Gertrude, abbess of Nivelles 126, 139 Gesta Abbatum Sithiensium 50, 57, 61–71, 78 Gesta Episcoporum Cameracensium 8, 115, 133, 137, 141, 145–7 Gesta Patrum Fontanellensium 64, 77 Gislebert, duke of Lotharingia 4, 5, 74, 85, 144 Goscelin, monk of Saint-Bertin 37, 84, 85, 169–71 Grimbald, monk of Saint-Bertin 37, 170 Guntbert, monk of Saint-Bertin 44, 70 Hainault 4, 85, 142, 145, 156–7

Lambert, abbot of Saint-Bertin 8, 36, 88–9 Leduinus, abbot of Saint-Vaast 8, 35, 113, 127, 131 Liber Floridus 33 Lothar II 29, 40 Lothar IV 3–4, 145 Louis the Pious 27, 28 Luxeuil 19, 51 Marchiennes 1, 4, 8 foundation 97–102, 106–9 landholding 109–10, 113, 131 Benedictine refom 35, 97, 112–14 Polyptych 114, 132–6 Nanthar I, abbot of Sithiu 27 Nanthar II, abbot of Sithiu 27, 44 Nanthild, queen 101, 105, 122 Odbert, abbot of Saint-Bertin 34, 37, 38, 46–9 Ostrevant 4, 6, 30, 31, 100, 101, 102, 144, 145, 147, 155–6, 159 Peace of God 7 Péronne 104 Philip I, king of France (charter and privilege for Saint-Amé) 146, 147–53 Pippin III 26–7 Ralph, abbot of Saint-Bertin 2, 3, 29–30

194

Index Regnold, abbot of Saint-Bertin 32, 71 Revelatio s. Stephani 85 Richard, abbot of Saint-Vanne 1, 4, 7–9, 34, 49, 82, 113, 127, 163 Richildis, countess of Hainault 145, 150, 153, 157 Robert the Frisian, count of Flanders 142, 145–6, 150, 153, 155–6, 157 Charter for Saint-Amé 146–9, 154 Roderic, abbot of Saint-Bertin 8, 33, 34–5, 82, 86 Saint-Amand 1, 2, 4, 6, 28, 30, 31, 37, 41, 43, 45, 98, 99, 101, 107, 125–6, 129, 137, 144, 163, 169 Saint-Amé 132, 138–9 foundation 145–9, 150–5 Saint-Bavo at Ghent 5, 8, 31, 98, 169 Saint-Bertin 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 9, 14, 17–18 see also Sithiu and Saint-Omer abbatial church 22, 26 Benedictine reform by St Gerard of Brogne 31–3, 60 Benedictine reform by Richard of Saint-Vanne 34–5, 82 conflicts with the canons of SaintOmer 90–4 library 37–43 manuscript production 44–9 Saint-Ghislain 5, 73–4 Saint-Omer (community of canons), see also Sithiu and Saint-Bertin St Mary’s basilica 22, 24, 26, 52 conflicts with the monks of SaintBertin, see ‘Saint-Bertin, conflicts with the canons’ Saint-Peter at Ghent 2, 4, 5, 8, 30, 31, 32, 63, 65, 75, 77, 78, 98 Saint-Riquier 5, 76 Saint-Vaast 2, 3, 4, 5, 87, 30, 31, 32, 34, 35, 37, 41, 47, 82, 113, 127, 136, 158, 160, 169, 170 Saint-Wandrille 64, 65, 75, 77, 78 Sigeric, archbishop of Canterbury 34 Simon, abbot of Saint-Bertin, author of the continuation to the Gesta Abbatum Sithiensium 33, 88–9 Sithiu, see also Saint-Bertin and SaintOmer foundation 19–25 foundation stories 22–3, 51–61 division of the community 27, 57–60 landholding 23

St Aldegund of Maubeuge 139 St Amand 69, 98–100, 101, 103, 105, 106–8, 120–23, 126, 128, 130, 135, 139, 140, 166 St Amatus 10, 96, 103–5, 123, 132, 138 relics 148–52 St Ansbert, relics 64, 75–8, 155 St Bertha of Blangy 136, 138–9, 140, 167 St Bertin foundation of Sithiu 22, 25, 51–5 vitae of St Bertin 25, 50–61 relics 72, 79, 81–2, 84, 87, 91 St Columbanus 19, 40, 107 rule 25 St Eugene, relics 74–5 St Eusebia 100–1, 102–3, 105, 108, 111–12, 122, 127–9 St Ghislain, vita and inventio 73–4 St Maurontus 10, 100, 102, 103–5, 108–9, 122 and St Richer 123–5 foundation of Breuil 147–8 relics 146 St Mummolinus, abbot of Sithiu 22, 51–2 St Omer bishop of Thérouanne 20, 51 foundation of Sithiu 52 epistola cum privilegio 27, 68–9 relics 83, 91–2, 94 St Richer 101, 122, 123–5 St Rictrude (see also vita Rictrudis) marriage to Adalbald 97, 100, 121–2 and the foundation of Marchiennes 101–8, 30 and St Amad 126 St Ultan 104 St Vulfran, relics 75–8 St Wandrille, relics 64, 65, 75–8 St Winnoc 23, 51, 52, 63, 164 Scarpe, river 1, 3, 97, 98, 101, 107–8 Ternois 2, 3, 4, 16, 30, 31, 33, 48, 112 Theoderic III 104 Thérouanne 19, 20, 21, 22, 24, 26, 27, 51, 53 Unroch, count of Ternois 2, 28, 29, 30 Vermandois 3, 30, 144 Vita Amandi Episcopi Prima (VAm) 98, 106, 107, 120, 134 Vita Amati Longior (VAL) 104, 106, 143, 146–7, 150, 154, 155, 160, 163, 166, 168

195

Index Vita Audomari prima (VA1) 50–3 Vita Audomari secunda (VA2) 50, 53–6 Vita Bertini prima (VB1) 50–3 Vita Bertini altera (VB2) 50, 53–6, 65 Vita Bertini Tertia (VB3) 59, 79 Vita Eusebiae 127–9 Vita Folcuini Episcopi 79, 83, 84 Vita Mauronti 131, 132, 137, 159–60 Vita Richarii 124, 125, 139, 166

Vita Rictrudis 98, 115–22 Vita Rictrudis Metrica 127–9 Vita Winnoci Prima 51–2 Wido, abbot of Saint-Bertin 5, 32 Wido, archbishop of Reims 80 Womar, abbot of Saint-Bertin and SaintPeter at Ghent 5, 32

196

YORK MEDIEVAL PRESS: PUBLICATIONS

God’s Words, Women’s Voices: The Discernment of Spirits in the Writing of Late-Medieval Women Visionaries, Rosalynn Voaden (1999) Pilgrimage Explored, ed. J. Stopford (1999) Piety, Fraternity and Power: Religious Gilds in Late Medieval Yorkshire, 1389–1547, David J. F. Crouch (2000) Courts and Regions in Medieval Europe, ed. Sarah Rees Jones, Richard Marks and A. J. Minnis (2000) Treasure in the Medieval West, ed. Elizabeth M. Tyler (2000) Nunneries, Learning and Spirituality in Late Medieval English Society: The Dominican Priory of Dartford, Paul Lee (2000) Prophecy and Public Affairs in Later Medieval England, Lesley A. Coote (2000) The Problem of Labour in Fourteenth-Century England, ed. James Bothwell, P. J. P. Goldberg and W. M. Ormrod (2000) New Directions in later Medieval Manuscript Studies: Essays from the 1998 Harvard Conference, ed. Derek Pearsall (2000) Cistercians, Heresy and Crusade in Occitania, 1145–1229: Preaching in the Lord’s Vineyard, Beverly Mayne Kienzle (2001) Guilds and the Parish Community in Late Medieval East Anglia, c. 1470–1550, Ken Farnhill (2001) The Age of Edward III, ed. J. S. Bothwell (2001) Time in the Medieval World, ed. Chris Humphrey and W. M. Ormrod (2001) The Cross Goes North: Processes of Conversion in Northern Europe, AD 300–1300, ed. Martin Carver (2002) Henry IV: The Establishment of the Regime, 1399–1406, ed. Gwilym Dodd and Douglas Biggs (2003) Youth in the Middle Ages, ed. P. J. P Goldberg and Felicity Riddy (2004) The Idea of the Castle in Medieval England, Abigail Wheatley (2004) Rites of Passage: Cultures of Transition in the Fourteenth Century, ed. Nicola F. McDonald and W. M. Ormrod (2004)

York Studies in Medieval Theology I

Medieval Theology and the Natural Body, ed. Peter Biller and A. J. Minnis (1997)

II

Handling Sin: Confession in the Middle Ages, ed. Peter Biller and A. J. Minnis (1998)

III Religion and Medicine in the Middle Ages, ed. Peter Biller and Joseph Ziegler (2001) IV Texts and the Repression of Medieval Heresy, ed. Caterina Bruschi and Peter Biller (2002)

York Manuscripts Conference Manuscripts and Readers in Fifteenth-Century England: The Literary Implications of Manuscript Study, ed. Derek Pearsall (1983) [Proceedings of the 1981 York Manuscripts Conference] Manuscripts and Texts: Editorial Problems in Later Middle English Literature, ed. Derek Pearsall (1987) [Proceedings of the 1985 York Manuscripts Conference] Latin and Vernacular: Studies in Late-Medieval Texts and Manuscripts, ed. A. J. Minnis (1989) [Proceedings of the 1987 York Manuscripts Conference] Regionalism in Late-Medieval Manuscripts and Texts: Essays celebrating the publication of ‘A Linguistic Atlas of Late Mediaeval English’, ed. Felicity Riddy (1991) [Proceedings of the 1989 York Manuscripts Conference] Late-Medieval Religious Texts and their Transmission: Essays in Honour of A. I. Doyle, ed. A. J. Minnis (1994) [Proceedings of the 1991 York Manuscripts Conference] Prestige, Authority and Power in Late Medieval Manuscripts and Texts, ed. Felicity Riddy (2000) [Proceedings of the 1994 York Manuscripts Conference] Middle English Poetry: Texts and Traditions. Essays in Honour of Derek Pearsall, ed. A. J. Minnis (2001) [Proceedings of the 1996 York Manuscripts Conference]