Medieval monks deployed narratives, documents, and objects to craft stories about the pasts of their houses. Such stories were frequently retold or rewritten as local conditions changed. Thus, they present a moving target for modern scholars interested in reconstructing past realities – what actually happened. But they are very useful for studying monks’ ideas and beliefs about their pasts. Sometimes, such ideas and beliefs crystallized around the creation (or performance) of texts to present a powerful (re)vision of the past. What follows are micro-histories of such revisioning at three monasteries where significant amounts of forgery took place: Saint-Peter’s, Ghent, Saint-Denis near Paris, and Christ Church, Canterbury. Furthermore, these studies span the eleventh century, a crucial period associated with monastic reforms and transitions in scribal culture. For convenience, they are treated chronologically in the following three chapters: early, middle, and later eleventh century.

These three chapters have a common format. In each case, I introduce a medieval work and begin by telling its “story” as a constructed narrative – as it was written or as strongly implied by its medieval organization. I deliberately adopt story-telling conventions to give a feeling for the story to a modern reader. Although constructed, these stories are closely based on what monastic composers wrote and I often translate their words directly. These tales are not offering a “history,” that is, a factual narrative of events which happened; rather, they seek simply to relate monastic stories at a juncture in time. For ease of readers’ comprehension, I have divided the stories into parts – using the overt or implicit arrangement of the work. Furthermore, I stress features which were selective, partisan, or deliberately fraudulent. Next, after providing context for the work, each chapter has a section called “revisiting the story,” which analyzes the monastic story and explains how (and why) it was written. Thus, all the tales are told twice. I consider how their messaging was used for present purposes and I focus on forgeries and inventions and how they supported or suppressed past events. The goal is to highlight the process of fabrication and what historical views they encouraged. Then, I consider distinctive features of the story and any further efforts at the house, which I call “sequels.”