No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
Crossroads and Crises in the Religious Life of the Later Eleventh Century
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 21 March 2016
Extract
It is fifty years since Germain Morin, in an article in the Revue Bénédictine articulated discussion of the tensions and developments in eleventh and early twelfth-century regular, and para-regular, life around a central ‘crisis of cenobitism’, and twenty years since Leclercq stabilised the debate in a wide ranging article which has become the basis of all subsequent comment. This crisis in the cenobitic life is now a commonplace, expressed in Leclercq’s terms as ‘the crisis of prosperity’ and answered by the resurgence of rural monasticism, eremitical in character, in reaction to the elaborate structures and relationships of an established monasticism resident in the urban centres of population and influence. The individual austerities and renunciations of Romuald stand at the beginning of a proliferating development in western Christendom, and may, in a general sense, be taken to characterise these new initiatives. The direct influence of Romualdine ideas and practices, whether through his foundations or through his self-proclaimed spiritual heir Damian, which is sometimes alleged is difficult to prove, but there is an obvious consonance between the Italian experiments and those elsewhere in the west, a compatibility of outlook and attitude between Romuald and Damian, and men like Bruno, Stephen Harding, Robert of Arbrissel.
- Type
- Research Article
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © Ecclesiastical History Society 1979
References
1 Germain, Morin, ‘Rainaud l’Ermite et Ives de Chartres: un épisode de la crise du cenobitisme au XIe-XII siècles’, RB 40 (1928) pp 99–115 Google Scholar.
2 [Jean], Leclercq, ‘La crise du monachisme aux XIe et XIIe siècles’, BISIMEAN 70 (1958) pp 19–41 Google Scholar, trans Noreen, Hunt, Cluniac Monasticism in the Central Middle Ages (London 1971) pp 217-37Google Scholar. For more recent comment, with bibliography, see, for example, [Bede], Lackner, [‘The Crisis of Cenobitism’], [The Eleventh-century background of] Cîteaux (Washington, D.C., 1972) pp 92–112 Google Scholar.
3 Leclercq p 222.
4 For a brief examination of the careers of Romuald and Damian see my ‘Fortissimum genus: élitist attitudes to religious life in the late tenth and eleventh centuries’ (forthcoming Warsaw/Louvain 1979) and the bibliography there given.
5 See Knowles MO pp 662-78.
6 See, for example, my ‘Desert in the North’, NH 5 (1970) pp 1-11, and ‘San Bernardo e l’elezione di York’, Studi su S. Bernardo di Chiaravalle (Rome 1975) pp 115-80, and the references there given.
7 See, for example, the various studies of monastic patronage in Religious Motivation: sociological and biographical problems for the church historian, SCH 15 (1978); [Derek], Baker, ‘Legend and Reality : the case of Waldef of Melrose’, SCH 12 (1975) pp 59–82 Google Scholar; Baker, , ‘Patronage in the early twelfth-century church: Walter Espec, Kirkham and Rievaulx’, Traditio, Krisis, Renovatio aus theologischer Sicht, ed Jaspert, B. and Mohr, R. (Marburg 1976) pp 92–100 Google Scholar.
8 See Leclercq’s comments on Damian’s ‘new and original form of monasticism - a new Benedictine tradition, differentiated from that of the past by its eremitic trend’ (p 226), and his remark that ‘innovators and traditionalists, solitaries and protagonists of community life alike were bringing against one another the same accusations, and to some extent justifiably’ (p 228).
9 Discussion of the precedence and validity of the fundamental Cistercian documents - Exordium, Carta Caritatis, Instituta - is not necessary to my purposes here, but it should be said that in the continued absence of properly established critical texts few of the problems indicated by Lefèvre have been finally settled. An outline, and full bibliography, of the controversies is given by Knowles, in Great Historical Enterprises (London 1963) pp 197–222 Google Scholar, and more recently by Lekai, [L. J.], [The Cistercians, ideals and reality] (Kent State University Press 1977 Google Scholar), and Lackner. The latter’s heroic struggle to make coherent sense of the early history of both Molesme and Citeaux is itself an indication of the continued confusion in the evidence for both houses: any account of these events can be challenged and qualified at almost every point, though without seriously amending the significance of the story.
10 Exordium Parvum cap 2. See Lackner pp 261-2; Lefèvre, J., ‘Que savons-nous du Cîteaux primitif?’, RHE 51 (1956) pp 5–41 Google Scholar; and Manlier, [J.], [Chartes et Documents concernant l’Abbaye de Cîteaux 1098-1182], Bibliotheca Cisterciensis 1 (Rome 1961)Google Scholar for discussion of these events.
11 Deuteronomy 32.10. The phrase is a topos for monastic foundations. It comes to be applied particularly to Cistercian foundations, but though it is present in both the Exordium Cistercii and the Exordium Magnum it does not appear in the Exordium Parvum. The Exordium Parvum (cap 1) is explicit that it was in 1098 that Robert approached Hugh of Lyons, returning immediately to Molesme, and leaving with his augmented party to found the New Monastery on March 21. Though this date is generally agreed to be symbolic rather than accurate this outline calendar of events has secured general acceptance. Lefèvre has been almost alone in maintaining that Robert’s approach to the legate was made in 1097 (at some point after Robert’s last recorded act at Molesme on 5 April 1097). More recently Lekai (p 13) has recorded the approach to the legate as occurring ‘perhaps in the fall of 1097’ and Lackner (pp 261-2) has outlined the controversy without seeking to resolve it. Manlier (p 34) has placed the beginnings of the Cistercian initiative, without comment, in 1097-8, and ascribed no date to the legate’s letter (pp 34-5). Marilier’s remark elsewhere (p 22, see also pp 23-6) – ‘Le point de départ de notre discussion sera une manière de postulat: Cîteaux fut fondé en 1098’ – may be left to speak for itself.
12 See Lekai pp 15-6.
13 Ibid p 19. See Bredero, A. H., ‘Études sur la Vita prima de Saint Bernard’, ASOC 17 (1961) pp 60-2Google Scholar for discussion of the date of Bernard’s arrival at Cîteaux and its relationship to the foundation of La Ferté.
14 Lackner p 272, quoting from the probably spurious letter of Hugh of Lyons to Paschal II - see Lekai pp 16-7; Marilier p 47.
15 See Lekai pp 16-9.
16 See the discussion in Lackner pp 262-6.
17 See Davis, R. H. C., King Stephen (London 1967) pp 101-4Google Scholar.
18 For extended discussion of these much-discussed incidents see Lackner pp 228-40, and the references there given.
19 Voies Romaines [du département de la Côte d’Or et Répertoire archéologique des arrondissements de Dijon et de Beatine], Commision des antiquités du département de la Côte d’Or (Dijon/Paris 1872). See Matilier p 53; Lekai pp 13-4; Richard, J., ‘Passages de Saône au XIIe et XIIIe siècles’. Annales de Bourgogne 22 (Dijon 1950) pp 249-52Google Scholar.
20 See Lekai pp 14, 16 (though he places the first site to the south of the present location); Marilier p 53. See also Duby, [G.], [Rural Economy and Country Life in the Medieval West], trans Postan, C. (London 1968)Google Scholar; Roupnell, G., Histoire de la campagne française (Paris 1932) p 129 Google Scholar.
21 See Lackner pp 221-4; Marilier p 36 no 4, and the references there given.
22 See Lekai p 16; Marilier pp 35-8, 49-53.
23 Compare Exordium Parvum cap 15.
24 Voies Romaines p lxix.
25 The site of the abbey is in a side valley, close to the main Ouche valley. The church is said to date from 1172, and there are substantial remains of the domestic buildings, much remodelled. More generally see Les débuts des abbayes cisterciennes dans les ancien pays bourguignons comtois et romands (Dijon 1953).
26 In spite of excellent regional studies on Cluny and the Maâonnais the physical extent of Cluny’s influence in the region, its range of interests and investment, well-represented in surviving churches and buildings, can only really be appreciated on the ground. Amid all this La Ferté, even in its eighteenth-century form remains a striking intrusion. See Duby pp 73-4 for a comment on the site of La Ferté; Duby, , La Societé aux XIe et XIIe siècles dans la région mâconnaise (Paris 1953)Google Scholar; and Recueil des pancartes de l’abbaye de la Ferté-sur-Grosne (1113-1178), ed Duby, , Annales de la Faculté des lettres, 3 (Aix-en-Provence 1953)Google Scholar.
27 Dimier, A., l’Art Cistercien, 1 (2 ed 1974) pp 46 Google Scholar seq.
28 See Lackner pp 220-31. Collan lies some forty kilometres to the west of Molesme, and not far from Tonnerre.
29 [Cartulaires de l’Abbaye de Molesme, ancien diocèse de Langres 916-1215. Recueil de documents sur le nord de le Bourgogne et le midi de la Champagne, ed Laurent, J.], 2 vols (Paris 1907)Google Scholar - the edition was of only 250 copies.
30 See Lackner pp 225-6.
31 Ibid pp 224-33; Laurent 1 pp 112-14, 121-5, 127-8.
32 Laurent 1 p 127.
33 Ibid 1 p 113.
34 See Lackner pp 223-4; Laurent 1 pp 115-16.
35 See Laurent 1 pp 125-6. According to his biographer Bruno sought ‘a place of perfect solitude and proper for the eremitical life’ - see the Bollandist comments, PL 152 (1880) cols 251-2, and see the Life of St Hugh of Grenoble, PL 153 (1879) col 769 - and he remained in confraternity with the community of Molesme even after his departure to Calabria. See Laurent 1 pp 125-6, (PL 152 col 567) for Molesme’s reaction to Bruno’s death.
Tempore dispositio migrat de corpore Bruno
cuius, dum fixit, vita Deo placuit.
Subveniat illi, quibus est permissa potestas
Ut sit ei requies et sine fine dies.
Nostris versiculis, qui habitamus Molernium, addentes vobis, qui estis Turris, innotescimus, quod pro domino Brunone, patrono vestro, nostro autem familiarissimo, Missarum solemnia diebus triginta celebravimus, eius etiam obitus anniversarium diem in catalogo fratrum nostrorum conscripsimus,
and compare Marilier pp 51-2 (PL 152 cols 565-6) for the Cistercian response.
36 In 1220. Two years later, in 1222, the Cistercian calendar designated 29 April as his feast day.
37 According to Laurent there may have been a pause in the flow of donations coincident with Robert’s absence at Cîteaux, though it is difficult to be precise about this. What is clear is that donations continued to be abundant during the years up to his death, in 1111, as abbot of Molesme. Under his successor as abbot, Guy de Châtel-Censoir (died 1132), Laurent asserts that ‘les acquisitions à titre gratuit devinrent fort rares’ (p 128), and ended totally after his death. Whether this decline should be set against Cistercian expansion in the area in precisely this period, whether it should be related to changing attitudes to monastic possession of churches and performance of pastoral functions, or whether it is to be explained simply by Robert’s death it is impossible to say.
38 See Watkin, Williams, Saint Bernard ofClairvaux (Manchester 1935) pp 10–12 Google Scholar.
39 See Laurent 1 pp 124, 240-1, though the ramifications of the family are not entirely clear from Laurent’s accounts. See also Thompson, S., SCH Subsidia 1 (1978) pp 229-30Google Scholar.
40 For a survey of William of Volpiano’s activities at Dijon and elsewhere in the region see Watkin, Williams, ‘William of Dijon’, Monastic Studies (Manchester 1938) pp 99–120 Google Scholar.
41 For comment on these developments, see Jean, Richard, Les Ducs de Bourgogne et la formation du duché au XIe au XIVe siècle (Paris 1954)Google Scholar, and on the lack of real urban centres in the area in Roman times see Voies Romaines.
42 See, for example, his study of Christina of Markyate, Medieval Women, SCH Subsidia 1 (1978) pp 185-204.
43 See Duby pp 69, 81; Déléage, A., La Vie rurale en Bourgogne jusqu’au debut du XIe siècle, 2 vols (Mâcon 1941)Google Scholar; de Saint-Jacob, P., ‘La Bourgogne rurale au haut Moyen Age. A propos d’un ouvrage récent’, RH 195 (1945)Google Scholar. See too the comments of I. N. Wood and Janet L. Nelson (above pp 74-5, nn 93-5, and 112-16), though the latter’s discussion of developments in the Auxerrois should not be too readily applied to the very different circumstances of the southern part of the region.
44 Leclercq p 219.
45 See Leclercq’s comments on the ambiguities of the term eremitic, ibid p 217 n 2.
46 See, for example, the complex community revealed in the reports on the excavations at Faras, listed in the Polish National Museum’s handbook to its permanent display of the Faras frescoes (Warsaw 1974).
47 On the Syrian monasteries see the classic account of Tchalenko, G., Villages antiques de la Syrie du Nord, 3 vols (Paris 1953-8)Google Scholar.
48 From Black Spring, quoted in The Best of Henry Miller (London 1960) p 19.