1 The Liber comitis is not available in a modern critical edition. The full text can be found in PL 102:13C–552D. Several studies on the textual transmission of the work were produced by Alexander Souter in the early twentieth century: “Prolegomena to the Commentary of Pelagius on the Epistles of St Paul,” Journal of Theological Studies 7 (1906): 568–75; “Contributions to the Criticism of Zmaragdus's Expositio Libri Comitis,” ibid. 9 (1908): 584–97; “Further Contributions,” ibid. 23 (1922): 73–76; “A Further Contribution,” ibid. 34 (1933): 46–47. The list of surviving manuscripts has since been revised and expanded numerous times: Stegmüller, Friedrich, Repertorium Biblicum Medii Aevi, vol. 5 (Madrid, 1955), no. 7695; Barré, Henri, Les homéli-aires carolingiens de l'école d'Auxerre (Vatican, 1962), 13 n. 46; Rädle, Fidel, Studien zu Smaragd von Saint-Mihiel, Medium Aevum: Philologische Studien 29 (Munich, 1974), 120–24; Etaix, Raymond, “Le ‘Smaragde’ de Cordoue et autres manuscrits apparentés,” Miscellània litúrgica catalana 4 (1990): 13–27. On the use of the title Liber comitis to indicate an evangeliary, epistolary, or lectionary, see Sheerin, Daniel, “The Liturgy,” in Medieval Latin: An Introduction and Bibliographical Guide , ed. Rigg, A. G. and Mantello, F. A. C. (Washington, DC, 1996), 171–72. Thomas F. X. Noble provides a good introduction to the historical development of these texts in “Literacy and the Papal Government in Late Antiquity and the Early Middle Ages,” in The Uses of Literacy in Early Mediaeval Europe , ed. McKitterick, R. (Cambridge, 1992), 99–100.Google Scholar I am grateful to Michael V. Dougherty and Lawrence Masek for comments on earlier versions of this paper.Google Scholar

2 “Cernens in Ecclesia plurimos divinarum Scripturarum mysticos sagaciter perquirere sensus, earumque typicos mavelle decerpere fructus, hunc ex multis unum, allegoriarum floribus plenum curavi colligere librum, et de magnorum tractatibus prolatisque sermonibus Patrum, id est Hilarii, Hieronymi, Ambrosii, Augustini, Cypriani, Cyrilli, Gregorii, Victoris, Fulgentii, Joannis Chrysostomi, Cassiodori, Eucherii, Tychonii, Isidori, Figuli, Bedae, Primasii et de caute legendis, Pelagii et Origenis, quasi de magnis fluminibus pelagique gurgitibus in modicos rivulos, pariter derivator, pariterque exstiti breviator” ( Liber comitis , PL 102:13C). Translations of texts in this article are my own unless otherwise indicated.Google Scholar

3 On the Liber comitis as a work of pure compilation, see Rädle, , Studien , 16. For creative elements in the text, see Sheerin, Daniel, “Interpreting Scripture in and through Liturgy: Exegesis of Mass Propers in the Middle Ages,” in Jewish Biblical Interpretation and Cultural Exchange: Comparative Exegesis in Context , ed. Dohrmann, N. and Stern, D. (Philadelphia, 2008), 169. Sheerin makes particular note of the concordia that follows each section, revealing that Smaragdus sought to harmonize the various interpretations of his sources. Johannes Heil notes that the Liber comitis provides a good example of how Carolingian exegetes broke texts into fragments to form new interpretations (“Labourers in the Lord's Quarry: Carolingian Exegetes, Patristic Authority, and Theological Innovation,” in The Study of the Bible in the Carolingian Era , ed. Chazell, Celia and Van Name Edwards, Burton [Turnhout, 2003], 79). On the distinction between homiliaries and other types of medieval compilations, such as florilegia, catenae, and anthologies, see Lienhard, Joseph T., “Florilegia,” in Augustine through the Ages: An Encyclopedia , ed. Fitzgerald, Allan D. (Grand Rapids, 1999), 370.Google Scholar

4 In early classical rhetoric, flores was used metaphorically to describe the ornaments of speech. Latin writers in the imperial and patristic periods extended the use of this term to refer to selections incorporated from earlier authors into new works. For a detailed treatment of the metaphorical vocabulary used in the Middle Ages to describe the practice of compilation, see Hamesse, Jacqueline, “Le vocabulaire des florilèges médiévaux,” in Méthodes et instruments du travail intellectuel au moyen âge: Etudes sur le vocabuaire , ed. Weijers, Olga (Turnhout, 1990), 209–30.Google Scholar

5 On the general principles guiding the practice of compilation in the Middle Ages, see Minnis, Alastair J., Medieval Theory of Authorship: Scholastic Literary Attitudes in the Later Middle Ages (Aldershot, 1988), 94–103; Parkes, Malcolm, “The Influence of the Concepts of Ordinatio and Compilatio on the Development of the Book,” in Medieval Learning and Literature , eds. Alexander, J. J. G. and Gibson, M. T. (Oxford, 1976), 117–21; Rouse, Richard and Rouse, Mary, “Ordinatio and Compilatio Revisited,” in Ad Litteram: Authoritative Texts and Their Medieval Readers , ed. Jordan, Mark D. and Emery, Kent (Notre Dame, 1992), 113–34.Google Scholar

6 A breviator refers to a person who reduces something in content or form; the noun derivator has its earliest known usage in Smaragdus's text and is constructed from a verb which, in its most basic sense, means to “lead,” “turn,” or “divert” a liquid from some place.Google Scholar

7 On Smaragdus's work of compilation as a source for the study of Carolingian monasticism, see Ponesse, Matthew D., “Editorial Practice in Smaragdus of St Mihiel's Commentary on the Rule of St Benedict,” Early Medieval Europe 18 (2010): 61–91; idem, “Smaragdus of St Mihiel and the Carolingian Monastic Reform,” Revue bénédictine 116 (2006): 367–92. For recent overviews of Carolingian intellectual activity, see McKitterick, Rosamond, “The Carolingian Renaissance of Culture and Learning,” in Charlemagne: Empire and Society , ed. Story, J. (Manchester, 2005), 151–66; Fried, Johannes, “Karl der Große, die Artes liberales und die karolingische Renaissance,” in Karl der Grosse und sein Nachwirken , ed. Butzer, P. B. et al. (Turnhout, 1997), 25–43; Contreni, John J., “The Carolingian Renaissance: Education and Literary Culture,” in New Cambridge Medieval History , ed. McKitterick, Rosamond (Cambridge, 1995), 709–57; idem, “The Pursuit of Knowledge in Carolingian Europe,” in The Gentle Voices of Teachers: Aspects of Learning in the Carolingian Age , ed. Sullivan, R. E. (Columbus, 1995), 106–41; Brown, Giles, “The Carolingian Renaissance,” in Carolingian Culture: Emulation and Innovation , ed. McKitterick, R. (Cambridge, 1994), 1–51; Marenbon, John, “Carolingian Thought,” in Carolingian Culture , ed. McKitterick, , 171–92.Google Scholar

8 De processione spirtus sancti has been edited by Willjung, Harald in Das Konzil von Aachen 809 , MGH Conc. II Suppl. II (Hanover, 1998), 303–12. Studies on De processione include Willjung, H., “Zur Überlieferung der Epistola de processione Spiritus sancti Smaragds von Saint-Mihiel,” Deutsches Archiv für Erforschung des Mittelalters 47 (1991): 161–66; Gemeinhardt, Peter, Die Filioque-Kontroverse zwischen Ost- und Westkirche im Frühmittelalter (Berlin, 2002), 157–59; 371–72; Edward Siecienski, A., The Filioque: History of a Doctrinal Controversy (Oxford, 2010), 98–100; Rädle, , Studien, 60–62.Google Scholar

9 The text is available in Migne, PL 102:931D–970C. Otto Eberhardt provides the most comprehensive examination of the text in Via regia: Der Fürstenspiegel Smaragds von St. Mihiel und seine literarische Gattung (Munich, 1977). For other modern assessments, see Bovendeert, Jasmijn, “Royal or Monastic Identity: Smaragdus' Via Regia and Diadema monachorum Reconsidered,” in Texts and Identities in the Early Middle Ages , ed. Corradini, R. (Vienna, 2006), 239–51; Rädle, , Studien, 62–67; Anton, Hans Hubert, Fürstenspiegel und Herrscherethos in der Karolingerzeit (Bonn, 1968), 136–60; Wallace-Hadrill, J. M., “The Via regia of the Carolingian Age,” in Trends in Medieval Political Thought , ed. Smalley, Beryl (Oxford, 1965), 22–41; Laistner, Max L. W. “The Date and the Recipient of Smaragdus' ‘Via regia,”’ Speculum 3 (1928): 41–44.Google Scholar

10 The connection between grammatical instruction and the proper observance of the liturgy is made in one of the foundational documents of the Carolingian educational reform: Epistula de litteris colendis, ca. 790, MGH Cap. I, 79:37–42. In this letter addressed to Abbot Baugaulf of Fulda, Charlemagne chastises monks for their inability to recite accurate prayers and encourages them to begin a rigorous program of grammatical education. On the significance of grammar in the program of educational reform, see Law, Vivian, “The Study of Grammar,” in Carolingian Culture , ed. McKitterick, , 88–107.Google Scholar

11 Löfstedt, Bengt, Holtz, Louis, and Kibre, Adele, eds., Liber in partibus Donati , CCM 68 (Turnhout, 1986). On the commentary and its Christian framework for pagan learning, see Holtz, Louis, “La tradition ancienne du Liber in partibus Donati de Smaragde de Saint-Mihiel,” Revue d'histoire des textes 16 (1986): 171–211; Leclercq, Jean, “Smaragdus et la grammaire chretienne,” Revue du moyen âge 4 (1948): 15–22.Google Scholar

12 The preface of the commentary is published in PL 129:1021D–1024B, where it is erroneously attributed to a Smaragdus of St. Maximin. On the authorship of this text, see Rädle, , Studien , 97–112. On Smaragdus's use of the Psalter, see Wilmart, A., “Smaragde et le Psautier,” Revue bénédictine 31 (1922): 350–59.Google Scholar

13 “IIanc expositionem psalmorum de dictis plurimorum in brevi collegimus patrum, ut ejus breviatio nocivum demat fastidium, et cordis ejus proficuum acuat et aperiat intellectum, ut ea quae in psalmis sub litterarum tegmine latitant clausa, ocius ei patefacta clarescant” (PL 129:1022B–1023A).Google Scholar

14 “Brevis etenim lectio avidius legitur, citius intelligitur, et memoriae facilius commendatur, et firmiter retinetur” (PL 129:1023A).Google Scholar

15 The Liber comitis has been recognized as an important source for later writers of homilies, particularly in the Anglo-Saxon tradition. See, for example, Hill's, Joyce considerable work on the homilies of Æflic: “Ælfric's Homily on the Holy Innocents: The Sources Reviewed,” in Alfred the Wise , ed. Roberts, J. et al. (Cambridge, 1997), 89–98; “Ælfric and Smaragdus,” Anglo-Saxon England 21 (1992): 203–37; “Translating the Tradition: Manuscripts, Models and Methodologies in the Composition of Ælfric's Catholic Homilies,” in Textual and Material Culture in Anglo-Saxon England , ed. Scragg, D. G. (Cambridge, 2003), 241–59.Google Scholar

16 The Diadema monachorum has not been made the subject of a modern critical edition, but remains available in PL 102:593B–690A. Jean Leclercq's French translation of the Diadema was published in 1949 and includes a brief introduction to Smaragdus's monastic spirituality (La voie royale: Le diadème des moines [Vauban, 1949]). A German translation was completed more recently by Christian Schütz and published in the Eos series of monastic texts (Diadem der Mönche [St. Ottilien, 2009]). For a review of the extensive manuscript tradition, see Grégoire, Réginald, “La tradizione manoscritta del Diadema monachorum di Smaragdo († ca 830),” Inter Fratres 34 (1984): 1–20. Other studies on the Diadema include Bovendeert, Jasmijn, “Royal or Monastic Identity? Smaragdus' Via regia and Diadema monachorum Reconsidered,” in Texts and Identities , ed. Corradini, , 239–51; La Corte, Daniel M., “Smaragdus of Saint-Mihiel: Ninth-Century Sources for Twelfth-Century Reformers,” Cistercian Studies Quarterly 41 (2006): 273–90; Rädle, , Studien, 68–76.Google Scholar

17 Smaragdus encourages monks to read from the Diadema monachorum at evening chapter just as they were expected to read from the rule in the morning; see PL 102:593C–D.Google Scholar

18 Fidel Rädle (Studien, 71–73) provides an almost complete list of the sources used in the Diadema .Google Scholar

19 Smaragdi abbatis expositio in Regulam S. Benedicti , ed. Spannagel, Alfred and Engelbert, Pius, Corpus consuetudinum monasticarum 8 (Siegburg, 1974). This edition replaces the text in PL 102:689A–932C. On the dating of the text, see Engelbert's introduction (xxix–xxx). Rädle (Studien, 21) also provides a discussion of the historical context.Google Scholar

20 On the ideals of the reform, see n. 28 below.Google Scholar

21 Benedict of Aniane, Concordia regularum , ed. Bonnerue, Pierre, 2 vols., CCM 168 (Turnhout, 1999). Benedict of Aniane was one of Louis the Pious's chief advisers and the leading monastic reformer at Aachen in 816. His concordance of monastic rules is one of Smaragdus's principal sources of monastic tradition. For this source in the context of Smaragdus's works, see Ponesse, , “Smaragdus of St Mihiel” (n. 7 above), 374; idem, “Editorial Practice” (n. 7 above), 77–78.Google Scholar

22 This practice is attested, among others, by Maurus, Rabanus, who explains in the preface to his commentary on Leviticus that he drew upon the teachings of the Fathers by “alternating and mixing them together” (MGH Epistolae 5, ed. Dümmler, E. [Berlin, 1899], 396, 32–33). In his commentary on Isaiah, Rabanus states that what was missing from his copy of Jerome's commentary he supplemented by interspersing passages of Gregory the Great, Augustine, and other Fathers (ibid., 502, 14–16).Google Scholar

23 Regula Benedicti Prol. 25, in RB 1980: The Rule of St. Benedict in Latin and English , ed. Fry, Timothy (Collegeville, MN, 1981), 160–61; cf. Ps. 15:1–3.Google Scholar

24 “Qui ingreditur sine macula. Hanc sententiam beatus Augustinus Prophetae interrogationem, beatus autem Benedictus Domini esse dixit responsionem; sed quia secundum Ezechiel rotae animalia sequuntur, uterque bene, uterque rectissime hanc sententiam intellexit. Interrogatus enim Dominus quis habitaret in tabernaculo suo, respondit: Qui ingreditur sine macula; ac si diceret: Qui vivit sine culpa, et custodit se a peccati contagione, ipse in meum intrabit tabernaculum. Macula intelligitur peccatum. Nam et in Domini holocausto animal non offerebatur nisi immaculatum. Domini enim sacrificium nil recipit maculatum” ( Expositio in regulam Prol. 25, ed. Spannagel and Engelbert, 38–39).Google Scholar

25 For the original passage, see Augustine, , Ennarrationes in psalmos 14.2, ed. Weidmann, Clemens, CSEL 93 (Vienna, 2003), 250.Google Scholar

26 Gregory the Great, among others, explains that the wheel in Ezekiel's vision moved in different directions without veering, since the will of God is made known to different persons at different times and in different places ( Homiliae in Hiezechi-helem prophetam 1.4.16, ed. Adriaen, Marcus, CCL 142 [Turnhout, 1971], 26).Google Scholar

27 “Multa quidem dici possunt, sic ut se habent obscura scripturarum, quae pro diversitate intelligentium multos sensus pariunt” (Liber comitis, PL 102:163C). Cf. Augustine, , In Ioannis evangelium tractus 49.12, ed. Willems, R., CCL 36 (Turnhout, 1954), 426.Google Scholar

28 For the legislation promulgated by reformers, see “Synodi primae Aquisgranensis decreta authentica (816),” ed. Semmler, J., in Initia consuetudinis Benedictinae: Consuetudines saeculi octavi et noni , Corpus consuetudinum monasticarum 1 (Siegburg, 1963), 451–68. An indispensible study of the Carolingian monastic reform is provided by Semmler, Josef, “Benedictus II: Una regula — una consuetudo,” in Benedictine Culture, 750–1050 , ed. Lourdaux, W. and Verhelst, D. (Leuven, 1983), 1–49. For a more recent consideration, see de Jong, Mayke, “Carolingian Monasticism: The Power of Prayer,” in New Cambridge Medieval History , ed. McKitterick, (n. 7 above), 629–34.Google Scholar

29 Resistance to the efforts of reformers has been inferred from documents produced in response to the legislation of Aachen in 816, most notably the legislation enacted the following year to relax some of the rigorous provisions that had presumably met with opposition. See “Synodi secundae Aquisgranensis decreta authentica (817),” ed. Semmler, J., in Initia consuetudinis , 470–81. Other documents include: “Statuta Murbacensia,” ed. idem, ibid., 437–50; Plan of St. Gall, St. Gall, Stiftsbibliothek, cod. 1092. On the limited impact of the Carolinigan monastic reform, see de Jong, , “Carolingian Monasticism,” 629–34; Sullivan, Richard E., “What Was Carolingian Monasticism? The Plan of St. Gall and the History of Monasticism,” in After Rome's Fall: Narrators and Sources of Early Medieval History , ed. Murray, A. C. (Toronto, 1998), 258–61; Semmler, Josef, “Le monachisme occidental du VIIe au XIe siêcle: Formation et réformation,” Revue bénédictine 103 (1993): 84–85; Brunterch, Jean-Pierre, “Moines bénédictins et chanoines réformés au secours de Louis le Pieux (830–834),” Bulletin de la Société nationale des antiquaires de France (1986): 70–85.Google Scholar

30 Lesort, André, Chronique et chartes de l'abbaye de Saint-Mihiel (Paris, 1912), 57–60. On Smaragdus's possible attendance at Aachen in 816, see Dubreucq, Alain, “Smaragde de Saint-Mihiel et son temps: Enseignement et bibliothèques à l'époque carolingienne,” Mélanges de la Bibliothèque de la Sorbonne 7 (1986): 7–36. His attendance is confirmed by Claude Peifer in “The Rule in History,” in RB 1980 (n. 23 above), 124–25, although the author does not provide any specific evidence in support of this claim.Google Scholar

31 Dubreucq (“Smaragde,” 22) suggests that they knew each other intimately, seeing as both had lived in Aquitaine during the reign of Louis the Pious and possibly had opportunity to confer in the days leading up to the synod. Terrence Kardong argues that Smaragdus loved Benedict of Aniane's ideas and incorporated them into his commentary (“The Earliest Commentator on RB: Smaragdus on Benedict's Prologue,” American Benedictine Review 55 [2004]: 172–73). The personal bond between the two is also advanced by Annette Grabowsky and Clemens Radl in Benedict of Aniane: The Emperor's Monk , trans. Cabaniss, Allen (Kalamazoo, 2008), 25.Google Scholar

32 This evidence is reconsidered by Ponesse in “Smaragdus of St. Mihiel” (n. 7 above) 374–76.Google Scholar

33 Expositio in regulam 15, ed. Spannagel, and Engelbert, , 203–4.Google Scholar

34 Cf. “Synodi primae” 28, ed. Semmler, , in Initia consuetudinis , 465.Google Scholar

35 Expositio in regulam 53, ed. Spannagel, and Engelbert, , 283.Google Scholar

36 Cf. “Synodi primae” 25, ed. Semmler, , in Initia consuetudinis , 464–65.Google Scholar

37 I have examined other passages in the commentary on the rule that would indicate Smaragdus's general — but not necessarily unqualified — support for the new customs imposed by reformers at Aachen (“Smaragdus of St Mihiel,” 371–92).Google Scholar

38 “Sed modo ab episcoporum, abbatum, et caeterorum Francorum magno concilio salubre inventum est concilium, ut …” ( Expositio in regulam 53, ed. Spannagel, and Engelbert, , 283).Google Scholar

39 For instance, Smaragdus demonstrates that the rule accommodates changes in the liturgy, a more distinct separation between the monastery and society, a stricter diet, royal visitations, and, on rare and necessary occasions, challenges to the abuse of power by the abbot. For these specific cases, see Ponesse, , “Smaragdus of St Mihiel,” 371–92 and “Editorial Practice” (n. 7 above), 83–90.Google Scholar

40 “Et facto signo a priore, omnes pariter surgant. Iste mos fuit apud antiquos monachorum cuneos, ut audito uniuscujusque horae signo, celeriter omnes ad orationem convenirent, orationi simul incumberent, simul orarent, et ab oratione, facto signo a priore, omnes pariter surgerent. Modo vero jam apud nos aliter atque aliter habetur. Quanto enim nos serotini a primitivis, tanto longius vitae merito ab antiquis distamus Patribus. Illi enim erant spiritu ferventes, Domino servientes; nos autem tepidi et non similia facientes, sumus tamen in misericordia Domini sperantes” ( Expositio in regulam 20, ed. Spannagel, and Engelbert, , 211).Google Scholar

41 On the interaction between monasteries and Carolingian society, see de Jong, , “Carolingian Monasticism” (n. 28 above), 636–40; Hildebrandt, M. M., The External School in Carolingian Society (Leiden, 1992) 37–48; McKitterick, Rosamond, “Le role culturel des monastères dans les royaumes carolingiens du VIIIe au Xe siècle,” Revue bénédictine 103 (1993): 117–30; Oexle, Otto G., “Les moines d'occident et la vie politique et sociale dans le Haut Moyen Age,” Revue bénédictine 103 (1993): 255–72; Semmler, Josef, “Le souverain occidental et les communautés religieuses du IXe au debut du XIe siècle,” Byzantion 61 (1991): 44–70; Sullivan, Richard, “What Was Carolinigian Monasticism?” (n. 29 above), 261–87.Google Scholar

42 On the observance of mixed rules in Frankish monasticism, see de Jong, , “Carolingian monasticism,” 631; Dáibhí Ó Cróinín, “A Tale of Two Rules: Benedict and Columbanus,” in The Irish Benedictines: A History , ed. Browne, M. and Ó Clabaigh, C. (Dublin, 2005), 11–24; de Seilhac, Lazare, “La Règle de Saint Benoît dans la tradition au feminine,” Regulae Benedicti studia 16 (1987): 57–68; Diem, Albrecht, “Was bedeutet Regula Columbani,” in Integration und Herrschaft: Ethnische Identitäten und soziale Organisation im Frühmittelalter , ed. Pohl, W. and Diesenberger, M. (Vienna, 2002), 63–89; Villegas, Fernando, “La ‘Regula cuiusdam Patris ad monachos’: Ses sources littéraires et ses rapports avec la ‘Regula Monachorum’ de Colomban,” Revue d'histoire de la spiritualité (1973): 3–36; Prinz, Friedrich, Frühes Mönchtum im Frankenreich: Kultur und Gesellschaft in Gallien, den Rheinlanden und Bayern am Beispiel der monastischen Entwicklung (4. bis 8. Jahrhundert) (Darmstadt, 1988), 135–37, 141–51, and 161–73.Google Scholar

43 Ardo, , Vita S. Benedicti Anianensis 36, ed. Waitz, G., MGH SS 15 (Hanover, 1877), 215.Google Scholar

44 “Ut officium iuxta quod in regula sancti Benedicti continetur celebrant” (“Synodi primae” 3, ed. Semmler, , in Initia consuetudinis [n. 28 above], 458).Google Scholar

45 “Dum quando legamus sanctos patres nostros uno die hoc strenue implesse, quod nos tepidi utinam septimana integra persolvamus” ( Regula Benedicti 18, ed. Fry, [n. 23 above], 214).Google Scholar

46 On the significance of work in medieval and modern Benedictine monasticism, see Prinz, Friedrich, “Arbeitsethik als Wirkungsgeschichte des Christentums,” Cistercienser Chronik 105 (1998): 317–23; Vest, Norvene, Friend of the Soul: A Benedictine Spirituality of Work (Cambridge, MA, 1997), 42–45; Puglisi, Maria G., “La condizione del lavoro monastico,” La Scala 46 (1992): 62–72; Grégoire, Reginaldo, “Spiritualità del lavoro,” Inter Fratres 39 (1989): 65–68; Müntnich, Benedikt, “Der Mönch als ‘operarius domini,”’ in Itinera Domini , ed. Rosenthal, A. (Munich, 1988), 77–97; Stoeckle, Bernard, “Die Arbeit der Mönche: Gedanken zum Arbeitsethos der ‘Regula Benedicti,”’ Diakonia 15 (1984): 373–80; du Roy, Olivier, “Tunc vere monachi sunt: A propos du ch. 48 de la Regula Benedicti,” Revue bénédictine 80 (1970): 300–304; Turbessi, Guiseppe, “‘Ora et labora’ — la spiritualità del lavoro in S. Benedetto,” Studi Cattolici 11 (1967): 43–47.Google Scholar

47 De Jong, , “Carolingian Monasticism,” 632–63. On the origin of the laus perennis in France, see Barbara Rosenwein, “Perennial Prayer at Agaune,” in Monks & Nuns, Saints & Outcasts: Religion in Medieval Society , ed. Farmer, S. and Rosenwein, B. (Ithaca, 2000), 37–56; Masai, François, “La ‘Vita patrum iurensium’ et les débuts du monachisme à Saint-Maurice d'Agaune,” in Festschrift Bernhard Bischoff zu seinem 65. Geburtstag , ed. Autenrieth, J. and Brunhölzl, F. (Stuttgart, 1971), 43–69.Google Scholar

48 The Benedictine office is detailed in Regula Benedicti 8–20, ed. Fry, , 202–16. For Smaragdus's somewhat theoretical discussion, see Expositio in regulam , ed. Spannagel, and Engelbert, , 194–211.Google Scholar

49 “Hanc autem psalmorum distributionem non totum officium beatus Benedictus in judicantis posuit arbitrium, hoc praecipue monens ut qui vult hanc psalmorum distributionem secundum suam tenere dispositionem, teneat. Qui autem aliter melius judicaverit, illam tenens, istam sine culpa dimittat. Nos autem hortamur eum qui secundum hanc promisit se vivere regulam, in quantum valet, firmiter teneat et conservet earn, et confidens de Dei misericordia credat quia custodientibus earn patebunt coelica regna” ( Expositio in regulam 18, ed. Spannagel, and Engelbert, , 207).Google Scholar

50 See n. 40 above.Google Scholar

51 On the dangers of idle conversation in the monastery, see Bruce, Scott, “The Tongue is a Fire: The Discipline of Silence in Early Medieval Monasticism (400–1100),” in The Hands of the Tongue: Essays on Deviant Speech , ed. Craun, E. (Kalamazoo, 2007), 3–32.Google Scholar

52 Delatte, Paul, The Rule of St. Benedict: A Commentary , trans. McCann, Justin (London, 1921, repr. Eugene, OR, 2000), 283.Google Scholar

53 Ibid. Google Scholar

54 de Vogüé, Adalbert, The Rule of Saint Benedict: A Doctrinal and Spiritual Commentary (Kalamazoo, 1983), 182–83.Google Scholar

55 de Vogüé, Adalbert, Reading Saint Benedict: Reflections on the Rule , trans. Friedlander, C. (Kalamazoo, 1994), 218.Google Scholar

56 Idem, La Règle de Saint Benoît, vol. 5: Commentaire historique et critique (Parties IV–VI) (Paris, 1971), 712.Google Scholar

57 According to de Vogüé, Cassian considered the danger most serious for “weak and feeble hearts” (Collationes 19.16), unlike Julian Pomerius who was concerned about adolescents (De vita contemplativa 3, 6, 3) and Leander, who considered how these texts would affect carnal minds (Regula 7). For a discussion of infirmis intellectibus and its possible interpretations, see Kardong, Terrence, Benedict's Rule: A Translation and Commentary (Collegeville, MN, 1996), 347.Google Scholar

58 Ibid., 348.Google Scholar

59 See, for example, Origen, , Homilies on Genesis 5.5; Augustine, , Enarrationes in Psalmos 3.14.10; Ps.-Bede, Quaestiones super Genesim, PL 93:313C; Maurus, Rabanus, Commentariorum in Genesim libri quatuor 23, PL 107:559B–C.Google Scholar

60 In the preface of the Diadema monachorum, Smaragdus indicates that it was the practice of Frankish monasteries to read from the rule each morning (PL 102:593D). It is also likely that the rule was read during meals in the refectory, perhaps as early as from the time of St. Benedict, since it stated in the rule: “we wish this rule to be read frequently in the community so that no brother may plead ignorance as an excuse” (RB 66.8). The rule also provides for up to three hours of daily reading, which would have included the study of the rule since Benedict places this text at the beginning of his educational program (RB 73.1); more experienced monks are encouraged to ascend from this “little rule written for beginners” to the heights of scripture and the commentaries of the Fathers (RB 71.8–9). For an overview of communal reading at chapter, see Wathen, Ambrose, “The collatio in RB 42 and Tradition: An Instrument of Ongoing Formation,” Word and Spirit 17 (1996): 85–99. On the three hours of daily reading in Benedictine monasteries, see de Vogüé, Adalbert, “Daily Readings in Monasteries (300–700 C.E.),” Cistercian Studies Quarterly 26 (1991): 286–94.Google Scholar

61 For a good introduction to lectio divina, see Calati, Benedetto, “La Lectio divina nella tradizione monastica benedettina,” Benedictina 28 (1981): 407–38. On the challenges of monastic lectio , see de Vogüé, , “Daily Readings,” 293–94.Google Scholar

62 “Cum vero dicit: non autem Heptateuchum, aut Regum, diligenter attendendum est quod sequitur, quia infirmis, inquit, intellectibus non erit utile illa hora hanc Scripturam audire. Sinceris autem, sanis et acutis intellectibus nullo tempore vetatur Heptateucum, aut Regum, vel quamcunque historiam divinarum legere Scripturarum, quia possunt in eis figuras et sensus dignoscere, exemplum salutis ab illis legendo recipere” ( Expositio in regulam 42, ed. Spannagel, and Engelbert, [n. 19 above], 262–63).Google Scholar

63 Leclercq, Jean, The Love of Learning and the Desire for God: A Study of Monastic Culture , trans. Misrahi, C. (New York, 1998), 80–83.Google Scholar

64 We can infer this practice from the preface of Smaragdus's commentary on the grammar of Donatus, another instructional work produced for monks. Here Smaragdus explains that on previous occasions, when he had given instruction in Latin, many of the brothers began to transcribe the lesson from their writing tablets onto little pieces of parchment so that they might retain by frequent study what they had heard in the classroom ( Liber in partibus Donati , Preface, , ed. Löfstedt, Holtz, and Kibre, [n. 11 above], 1).Google Scholar

65 “Sic demum ordinatim ad exemplar majorum perveniat patrum, et exemplum accipiat humilitatis a Christo, devotionis a Petro, charitatis a Joanne, obedientiae ab Abraham, patientiae ab Isaac, tolerantiae a Jacob et Job, castimoniae a Joseph, mansuetudinis a Moyse, constantiae a Josue, benignitatis a Samuel, misericordiae a David, abstinentiae a Daniele” ( Expositio in regulam 7, ed. Spannagel, and Engelbert, , 187).Google Scholar

66 For the standard discussion of tropological interpretation in the Middle Ages, see de Lubac, Henri, Medieval Exegesis: The Four Senses of Scripture , vol. 2, trans. Macierowski, E. M. (Grand Rapids, 2000), 127–77.Google Scholar

67 Ibid., 132–33.Google Scholar

68 Diadema monachorum 54, PL 102:651C.Google Scholar

69 Ibid., 9, PL 102:606A–B.Google Scholar

70 Ibid., 69, PL 102:664D.Google Scholar

71 Ibid., 82, PL 102:676C.Google Scholar

72 Ibid., 46, PL 102:643D–644A.Google Scholar

73 Ibid., 33, PL 102:628C–D.Google Scholar

74 Ibid., 3, PL 102:597C; cf. Isidore, , Sententiae 7, 1–7.Google Scholar

75 “Scriptura sacra lectoris sui animum ad coelestem patriam vocat, atque a terrenis desideriis ad superna amplectenda cor legentis immutat, dictisque obscurioribus exercet, et parvulis humili sermone blanditur: et usu legendi fastidium tollit lectori. Quia nimirum quos verbis humilibus adjuvat, sublimibus levat. Scriptura sacra aliquo modo cum legentibus crescit, a rudibus lectoribus quasi recognoscitur, et tamen a doctis semper nova reperitur” ( Diadema monachorum 3, PL 102:598A). Cf. Taio, , Sententiae 40.Google Scholar

76 “Lectionis enim sacrae cognitio cultoribus suis sensus acumen ministrat, intellectum multiplicat, torporem excutit, otium amovet, vitam componit, mores corrigit, salubrem gemitum facit et lacrymas compuncto corde producit; loquendi tribuit facundiam et aeterna laborantibus promittit praemia; spiritales divitias auget, vanilo-quium vanitatesque compescit, et desiderium Christi patriaeque coelestis accendit, quae semper orationi socia semperque orationi debet esse connexa” ( Expositio in regulam 4, ed. Spannagel, and Engelbert, , 134).Google Scholar

77 Lawrence Nees provides an excellent introduction to the Carolingian reception of classical learning in A Tainted Mantle: Hercules and the Classical Tradition at the Carolingian Court (Philadelphia, 1991), 3–17. For an overview of the liberal arts tradition in Carolingian schools, see Contreni, , “Pursuit of Knowledge” (n. 7 above), 117–221; Law, , “The Study of Grammar” (n. 10 above), 92–99; Brown, , “Carolingian Renaissance” (n. 7 above), 34–40; Bolgar, R. R., The Classical Heritage and its Beneficiaries: from the Carolingian Age to the End of the Renaissance (New York, 1964), 106–29.Google Scholar

78 See n. 1 above.Google Scholar

79 Liber in partibus Donati , ed. Löfstedt, Holtz, and Kibre, (n. 11 above), xl–xlvi.Google Scholar

80 Leclercq, Jean, “The Relevance of Smaragdus to Modern Monasticism,” in Smaragdus of Saint-Mihiel, Commentary on the Rule of St. Benedict , ed. and trans. Barry, David (Kalamazoo, , 2007), 27.Google Scholar

81 Ibid. Google Scholar