Rhetorical Strategies and Legal Arguments: ‚Evil Customs‘ and Saint-Florent de Saumur, 979- 1 0 1 1 1

Rhetorical Strategies and Legal Arguments:
‚Evil Customs‘ and Saint-Florent de Saumur, 979- 1 0 1 1 1
Tracey L. Billado
Remarquons toul d’abord que /es sources
sont presque exclusivemenl d’origine ecclesiastique.
Nous sommes donc condamnes a ne voir
Ia societe lai’que que par /es yeux des clercs.
Or /es Sentiments propres a leur e/a/ deforment
souvent leur vision er nous seront obliges
a de constantes rectifications ….
Ne I ‚oublions jamais.
(Georges Duby)2
Cum periculosum sit homini propriapro Christo non dare,
multo vero periculosus aliena auferre.
(cartulary or Livre Noir of Saint-Fiorent)3
Sametime around the year 1000, the abbey of Saint-Florent de Saumur and
Fulk Nerra, the count of Anjou, were involved in a dispute over what the monks
1 For various comments, questions, suggestions, advice, and support received during the research
and writing of this paper, I am grateful to Stephen D. White, Belle S. Tuten, Richard E. Barton,
Dominique Barthelemy, Lester K. Little, Elizabeth C. Pastan, Thomas S. Bums, Judith A.
Miller, Brigitte Bedos-Rezak, Patrick J. Geary, Anne M. Lynch, Andrew R. Currie, David E.
Shectman, Laurence P. Hemming, Dwain C. Pruitt, Lenka Koläi’ovä, Gäbor Bcrt6k, Brent E.
Hardy, Elizabeth P. Hancock, Linda L. Lacey, Craig L. Billado, Reginald L. Billado, my
colleagues in the George P. Cuttino Seminar in Medieval Studies at Emory University, and the
participants of the Forty-Third Annual Meeting of the Society for French Historical Studies at
the University of Kentucky at Lexington in March 1 997. I also would like to express my gratitude
to the staffs of the Bibliotheque Nationale (Paris) and the Archives Departementales de
Maine-et-Loire (Angers) for their assistance with access to research materials, and the Ecole
Nationale des Chartes (Paris), the Newberry Library (Chicago), and Emory University
(Atlanta) for financial support of archi val research for this paper.
2 Georges Duby, La societe aux Xf er Xlf siec/es dans Ia region mticonnaise, 2″d ed. (Paris:
Ecole Pratique des Hautes Etudes, 1 97 1 ; I“ ed., 1953), pp. 13-14: „Let us take note first ofall
that [our] sources are almost exclusively of ecclesiastical origin. We are thus condernned
never to see lay society except through the eyes of churdunen. The sentiments peculiar to their
estate often distort their vision and we will be constantly obliged to make corrections … Let us
never forget this.“
3 Bibliotheque Nationale, nouvclles acq. lat., no. 1930, „Livre Noir de Saint-Floren! de Saumur,“
c. I 070 (hereafter cited as Livre Noir) fol. 3 1′: „Aithough it is dangeraus for a man not to
make gifts of his own temporal goods for the sake of Christ, it is even more dangeraus to take
away others.“
RHETORICAL STRA TEGIES AND LEGAL ARGUMENTS 129
termed „evil customs.“4 To present their claims, Abbot Robert and the monks of
Saint-Florent came to Fulk, complaining that one of Fulk’s fideles, Aubri, by then
deceased, had „unjustly oppressed“ (iniuste opprimi) the monks and their men.
Aubri had tried to have the inhabitants of the estate of Saint-Georges, which SaintFloren!
claimed and of which Aubri was advocatus, recognize his lordship over
them. According to the monks of Saint-Fiorent, this amounted to imposing „new
exactions and customs and unjust laws“ (novas exactiones et consuetudines
iniustasque Leges) which were unheard of in the time of Fulk’s predecessors. The
monks added that at the estate of Saint-Georges, whom Fulk’s predecessors held
„in such veneration“ (in tanta veneratione), it was the custom that the advocatus of
the estate should not introduce exactions or seek revenues, but should instead
protect the estate „for the Iove of God and the salvation of his soul“ (pro dei amore
et salute anime suae).
Fulk discussed this matter with hisfideles, determined that the monks‘ clairn
was „just“ (iustam), and ordered Aubri’s wife, sons and fideles to come before
him. He persuaded them to dismiss the „evil customs“ (malas consuetudines) of
which Saint-Florent complained, „for the sake of the soul of their senior, which
4 Livre Noir, fol . 28’·• (990- 1 0 1 1) [edited in Louis 1-lalphen, Le Comte d ‚Anjou au Xf siecle,
(Paris, 1906; reprint, Geneva: Slatkine-Megariotis Reprints, 1974), pp. 346-347.) The Livre
Noir gives the charter the title „Decretum Fulconis comitis de potestate Sancti Georgii martyris.“
The text is as follows:ln dei nomine. Fulco gratia dei comes. Notum esse volumus
omnibus sancte dei ecclesiae fide/ibus. presentibus sci/icel el futuris, precipueque
successoribus nostris quoniam adiit nos abbas Sancri Florentii Rotbertus nomine cum suis
monachis reclamans se sueque poteslatis homines iniusle opprimi a quo[n?Jdamfide/i nostro,
Alberico nomine. occasione commendisie, novas exactiones e1 consuetudines iniustasque Ieges
quae temporibus predecessorum nostrorum nunquam in illa polesrare vel audilae fuerunt. ll/a
autem potestas ob honorem sancrissimi martyris Georgii in tanta veneratione a praedecessoribus
nostris est habita ut nullus ibi advocatus aliquam exactionem inferre praesumeret
nec sibi questum aliquem adquirere sed omni tempore pro dei amore et salute anime suae
salvam faceret. Quod nos diligentius cum nostris fidelibus inquirentes, cognovimus iustam
esse reclamationem abbatis ac monachorum ibique coram nobis adesse iussimus mulierem
praefati A lberici er filium ac fideles, suadentes eis ut pro anima senioris sui. quae nobis pro
hac causa videbatur in magno periculo esse. illas malas consuerudines dimitterent et nunquam
amplius de illa potestate requirerent nisi quantum Rainaldus flater gloss: Rainaldus
Thoringus pater Fulcodii vicecomitis de roca forli} eiusdem poteslalis advocatus habere visus
esl. Quod el sponte fecerunt. Nos vero abbalern et rnonachos obnixe deprecati sumus ut pro
dei amore rnala quae iarn dictus Albericus contra Soneturn Florentium cornmiserat indulgeret
et absolve redignaretur. Fecit namque ut iussimus prescriptas abbas er monachi tenore tali et
ratione ut uxor i/Jius sepedicti Alberici cum filiis suis ac fidelibus ad locum Sancti Florentii
pergeret er ibi coram omnibus quae i/Je commisit prout possei emendaret et malas
consuetudines ut coram nobis fecerat ibi ante Sancti Florentii praesentiam dimitteret. Nos
ergo ex nostra auctorilale et preceptione iubemus ut nullus unquam ex heredibus Alberici has
quas dimittimus repetere audeat malas c􀋔nsuetudines quia. si fecerit. pro dei amore et anime
meae salute vindex exislam et ipse dorninus noster Jesus Christus. pro cuius amore beatus
martyr Georgius acerba sustinuit supplicia, illum qui repetere voluerit. si non emendaverit. in
profundum infernum dernergat et cum diabolo et angelis eius adiunctus poenas infernales
suslineat cum Dathan et Abiran el cum Juda proditore qui dominum deum nos/rum tradidit.
130 TRACEY L. BILLADO
seemed to us to be in great danger“ on account of these customs (pro anima
senioris sui, quae nobis pro hac causa videbatur in magno periculo esse). Fulk
stipulated that they should require from the estate no more than the previous
advocatus, Renaud the Thuringian, Viscount of Angers, was known to have
collected. Fulk then „pleaded with all [his] strength“ (obnixe deprecati sumus) with
the monks and Abbot Roben that „for the Iove of God“ (pro dei amore) they
should pardon Aubri’s „evil deeds against Saint Florent“ (mala … contra Sanctum
Florentium) and „deem him worthy again“ (absolve redignaretur). The monks
agreed, and Aubri’s wife, sons andjideles proceeded to the abbey of Saint-Florent
to again publicly proclaim their dismissal of „evil customs“ in the presence of the
saint. A sanction clause at the end of the charter drawn up to record these events
wamed against any of Aubri’s heirs attempting to impose „evil customs“ again. If
anyone should do so, Fulk promised, „for the Iove of God and the salvation of my
soul, I will step forth as an avenger“ (pro dei amore et anime meae salute vindex
existam), and unless he make amends, „our Iord Jesus Christ himself, for the Iove
of whom the blessed martyr Georges endured bitter sufferings, shall plunge
him . . .into deepest hell and, with the devil and his angels, he shall endure the
punishments of hell joined with Dathan and Abiron and with Judas the Traitor who
betrayed our Iord God“ (ipse dominus noster Jesus Christus, pro cuius amore
beatus martyr Georgius acerba sustinuit supplicia, illum . . . in profundum infernum
demergat et cum diabolo et angelis eius adiunctus poenas irifernales sustineat cum
Dathan et Abiran et cum Juda proditore qui dominum deum nostrum tradidit).
Complaints similar to those made by the monks of Saint-Florent about „new
exactions“ (novae exactiones) or „evil customs“ (malae consuetudines), began to
appear in the document collections of the monasteries of France in the second half
of the tenth century.5 „Customs“ in these cases included various types of taxes,
tolls, peasant Iabor-services, privileges and profits of justice, and other rights-inproperty.
In their charters, monastic scribes represented these disputed customs as
new, more oppressive, and unjust exactions, violently imposed by lay Iords. For
s On the appearance of the term consuetudines, see Jean-Fran9ois Lemarignier, „La dislocation
du pagus et le problerne de.s consuetudines (X•-x1• siecles);“ in Melanges d’histoire du moyen
age dedies a Ia memoire de L. Halphen (Paris: Presses Universitaires de France, 1951), pp.
401-410; Olivier Guillot, „Consuetudines, consuetudo: Quelques remarques sur l’apparition de
ces termes dans !es sources fran9aises des premiers temps Capeliens (ä l’exception du Midi),“
Memoires de Ia Sociell? pour l ‚histoire de droit et des institulians des anciens pays bourguignons.
comtois, et romands, 40 ( 1 983), pp. 21-48; and idem, „Les consuetudines au sens
d’exactions dans Ia France des premiers temps Capetiens,“ in Elisabeth Magnou-Norticr, ed.,
Pouvoirs et libertes au temps des premiers Capeliens (Maulevricr: Editions Herault, I 992),
pp. 232-246. Guillot dates thc appearance (or re-appearance) in France of the use of consuetudines
meaning „exactions“ to 987. One of the cases examined in this paper occurred
about a decade before that date, but this case uses exactiones rather than consuetudines to denote
disputed exactions. While for certain purposes it may be worthwhile to consider cases
that use the term consuetudines separately from those that do not, for the purposes of this
paper the disputes examined herein are similar enough in structure and content to be grouped
Iogether whether or not the term consuetudines appears explicitly.
RHETORICAL STRATEGIES AND LEGAL ARGUMENTS 1 3 1
the past half-century, these mönastic documents have played a central roJe in
works of bistorians who argue that a dramatic social and political transformation,
the „Feudal Revolution,“ took place in France araund the year 1000.6 Such
6 The relevant bibliography includes Georges Duby, „The Evolution of Judicial Jnstitutions:
Burgundy in the Tenth and Eleventh Centuries,“ in idem, The Chivalrous Society , transl.
Cynthia Postan (Berkeley: The University of Califomia Press, 1 980), pp. 15-58 [originally
published as „Recherches sur l’evolution des institutions judiciaires pendent Je X0 et Je Xl0
siecles dans Je Sud de Ia Bourgogne,“ Le Moyen …ige, 52:3/4 ( 1 946), pp. 149-194, and 53 : 1 /2
( 1 947), pp. 15-38]; Lemarignier, „La dislocation du pagus,“; Duby, La societe; Georges
Duby, Les trois ordres ou l ‚imaginaire du jeodalisme (Paris: Gallimard, 1978); Pierre Bonnassie,
La Catalogne au tournant de /’an mil: Croissance et mutations d’zme societe (Paris: A.
Michel, 1 990); other works by Bonnassie, many of which are collected and translated (having
originally been published in France, 1 968-1987) in idem, From Slavery to Feudalism in SourhWestern
Europe, Irans!. Jean Birrell (New York: Manchester University Press, 1 992); Guy
Bois, La mutation de /’an mil. Lournand, village maconnais de I’Antiquite au feodalsi me
(Paris: Fayard, 1 989) [for critiques of which sec thc special issue of Medievales 21 ( 1 99 1 )
devoted to it, and also Alain Guerreau, „Loumand au X0 siecle: histoire et fiction,“ Le Moyen
..g.i e, 96 ( 1990), pp. 5 19-537); Jean-Pierre Poly and Eric Boumazel, La mutationfeodale, X“Xlf
siecle, 2″d ed. (Paris: Presses Universitaires de France, 1 9 9 1 ; I “ ed. 1980) which
synthesizes numerous French regional studies which took Duby’s study ofthe Mäconnais (see
n. 2) as their conceptual model, and links the Feudal Revolution thesis to a multiplicity of
social, political, economic, cultural, and religious Iransformations believed by the authors to
occur in Francia between thc end of the Carolin!,tian period and the twelfth century; and most
recently, Thomas N. Bisson, „The Feudal Revolution,“ Past and Present, 142 ( 1 994), pp. 6-
42, and idem, „Medieval Lordship,“ Speculum, 70 ( 1 995), pp. 743-759. For critiques of these
and other works related to the Feudal Revolution thesis, see Dominique Barthelemy’s extended
review of the second edition of Poly and Boumazel: „La mutation feodale a-t-eile eu
Iieu? (note critique)“ Annales ESC, 1 992, pp. 767-777 [the response to which by Poly and
Boumazel can be found in „Que faut-il preferer au ,mutationisme‘? Ou Je problerne de changement
sociale,“ Revue historique de droit fram;ais et etranger, 72 ( 1 994), pp. 401-412);
Dominique Barthelemy, La socüite dans le comte de Vendome de /’an mit au XIV siecle
(Paris: Fayard, 1993); Janet Nelson’s insightful review in Speculum, 69 ( 1 994), pp. 163-169
of Thomas Head and Richard Landes, eds., The Peace of God: Social Violence and Religious
Response in France araund the Year 1000 (Ithaca: Comell University Press, 1 992); the responses
by Dominique Barthelemy, Stephen D. White, Timothy Reuter, and Chris Wiekharn
to Bisson’s „The Feudal Revolution,“ Past and Present, 152 ( 1 996), pp. 1 96-223, and 1 5 5
( 1 997), pp. 1 77-208; Dominique Barthelemy’s collected „anti-mutationist“ essays i n La mutation
de I ‚an mil a-t-elle eu lieu? Servage et chevalerie dans Ia France des X‘ et Xf siecles
(Paris: Fayard, 1997); and Stephen D. White, „Repenser Ia violence: de 2000 a I 000,“ Medievales,
37 ( 1 999), pp. 99-1 1 3 .
A number of scholars have begun to critique the ways i n which proponents of the „Feudal
Revolution“ have used records of disputes over „evil customs,“ and this paper is intended to
complement those critiques. For example, Stephen D. White, in „From Peace to Power: The
Study of Disputes in Medieval France,“ in Esther Cohcn and Mayke de Jong, eds., Medieval
Transformations: Texts, Power, and Gifts in Context (Leiden and Boston: Brill, 200 1 ) suggests
that these disputes were three-sided conflicts in which ecclesiastica\ Iords, lay Iords and even
peasants struggled for control over land and the products of peasant Iabor. Richard Barton, in
„Power and Lordship in Maine, c. 890- 1 1 10,“ Ph.D. dissertation, University of Califomia at
Berkeley, 1 997, has used a recent discussion of „evil customs“ to oppose Bisson’s portrait of
„violent“ and revolutionary social transforrnation, arguing instead that from the perspective of
132 TRACEY L. BILLADO
discussions of „evil customs,“ however, have generally treated monastic accounts
of disputes over these customs as transparent „legal“ records in which monks
demonstrated in legal terms that lay Iords who had usurperl „public“ or „state“
powers were violently imposing unjust and illegitimate exactions on mon.ks and
peasants.7
Previous discussions of „evil customs“ have therefore rarely reconstructed
the specifics of individual disputes over customs to uncover the variety of ways in
which mon.ks challenged their enemies,8 and have thus ignored the rhetorical strategies
that mon.ks employed when disputing „evil customs.“9 Such strategies are
evident in the ways that the mon.ks of Saint-Florent shaped and performed their
complaints about „evil customs“ in three cases that occurred in the decades
surrounding the year I 000, including the case involving Fulk Nerra outlined above.
A close reading of these cases and a consideration of the public setting and oral
monks, such customs were „new“ and „unjust,'“ “ … only in the sense that they were being
exercised by a Iord other than the abbot“ ( pp. 278-294, with the quote at p. 293). Treating
disputes over „evil customs’· as part of the processes of „setting new boundaries of lordship“ (
pp. 290-291), Barton follows Dominique Barthelemy is setting these conflicts in a context that
includes an account of how monasteries were dynamic and expanding institutions (see
Barthelemy’s chapter on „Le succes des moines noirs,“ in La societe, pp. 365-439). In this
way Barton treats disputes over „evil customs“ as by-products of monastic expansion, as weil
as lay „exploitation.“
7 Many examples can be found in the works arguing for „Feudal Revolution,“ cited above, n. 6.
See most recently Thomas Head, „The Development of the Peacc of God in Aquitaine, AD
970-1005,“ Speculwn, 74 ( 1 999), pp. 656-686, at p. 686 (underscoring added): „The appearancc
ofthe term malae consuetudines is significantly novel and occurs within the context and
the logic of the Peace. Lip service has oftcn been paid to the importance of this legal
/anguage. but it has never been adequately mapped, and its implications for the debates over
the ‚feudal revolution‘ or ‚mutation· have not been fully realized.“ Fredric L. Cheyette neatly
articulatcs the contestable methodological assumptions involved here in his review of Susan
Reynolds, Fiefs and Vassals: The Medieval Evidence Reinterpreted (New York and Oxford:
Oxford University Press, 1 994) in Speculum, 7 1 ( 1 996), pp. 998-1 006, at p. 1 000: „Those
who read medieval documents through the lenses of the conventional construction of
„feudalism,“ make two fundamental assumptions: first that the documents, especially charters,
are legal documents, drawing their mcaning from a preexisting body of law, be it Roman
(Theodosian, Visigothic, Justinianic), ecclesiastical, or customary; second – a corollary of the
first – that particular words in those documcnts have technical meanings which they retain
over long periods oftime, rneanings given to them by that body of law.“
8 White, „From Peace to Power,“ has noted how the language of records of disputes over „evil
customs“ has been used in describing the „Feudal Revolution,“ but that these disputes have
been marginalized in terms of studying and analyzing them closely as disputes.
9 In adopting such an approach, this paper is partially inspired by the perspective Iaken by
Barbara Rosenwein, Thomas I-lead, and Sharon Farmer, in „Monks and Their Enemies: A
Comparative Approach,“ Speculum, 66 (1991), pp. 764-796, who argued, p. 765: “ … the
question of how monks confronted their enemies has never been squarely broached. Maledictions
and appeals to saintly patronage were only a small part of the arsenal of monastic
weapons, and the role that monks played as mediators was only a subsei of monastic social
relations in general. It is time to focus on the monks themselves … “
RHETORICAL STRATEGIES AND LEGAL ARGUMENTS 1 33
nature of Saint-Florent’s complaints should contextualize these disputes and reveal
monastic strategies and actions in these conflicts.
Although the abbey of Saint-Florent was refounded at Saumur by Count
Thibaud I of Blois as recently as c. 950, it had become, by the early eleventhcentury,
one ofthe wealthiest monasteries in the Loire valley. 10 The largest number
and some of the earliest cases of „evil customs“ in western France come from
Saint-Fiorent. This makes its archives enticing to the historian of „evil customs.“
For this very reason, however, historians should be cautious about considering this
abbey’s experience representative of monasticism in the region. As Richard Barton
has suggested in his study of the county of Maine, the number of disputes over
„evil customs“ at Saint-Fiorent may be a function of the abbey’s “ … difficult
political situation as a major site of contention between the counts of Anjou and
Blois.“11 On the other hand, the monks of Saint-Fiorent may have been particularly
inventive and successful in using complaints of „evil customs“ to press their own
claims to property and its associated rights. In fact, during the late-tenth and earlyeleventh
century, and particularly during the abbacy of Robert ofBlois (985-101 1 ),
the abbey of Saint-Fiorent expanded and thrived, acquiring new Iands through
various forms of exchange, receiving immunities from exactions that other
religious communities had to pay and considered Jegitimate, as weil gaining quitclaims
of exactions that Saint-Fiorent described as „evil customs.“12
In each of the earliest recorded disputes over customs involving SaintFloren!,
the charters make clear that an oral, public exchange preceded the creation
of the charter. In each case the monks of Saint-Florent came before a count – in
one case, Odo I of Blois, in the other two, Fulk Nerra, the count of Anjou – in
order to present protests against exactions that they claimed the count’s fideles
were imposing in the estates of Saint-Florent. The complaints of Saint-Florent can
be read as textual counterparts to what Gerd Althoff has described as
„demonstrative and ritual actions invested with impressive theatrics and unmistakable
symbolic qualities.“13 The monks of Saint-Fiorent constructed and presented
their claims in a stylizcd manner that is clear in the repetitive nature of their Statements
and the public, oral setting oftheir complaints.
Often the complaints of Saint-Fiorent reveal little about what, precisely, the
disputed customs were in each case. In the dispute with Fulk Nerra outlined above,
Aubri ’s actions are described only with a parenthetical occasione commendisie, the
emphasis being given to Saint-Florent’s description of this action as „new
exactions and customs and unjust laws“ (novas exactiones et consuetudines
iniustasque Ieges). Aubri’s heirs were instructed to collect no more revenue from
the estate of Saint-Georges than Viscount Renaud had done, but how much this
10 B. S. Bachrach, „Robert of Blois, Abbot of Saint-Floren! de Saumur and Saint-Mesmin de
Micy (985- 1 0 1 1 ),“ Revue Benedictine, LXXXVIII: 1-2 ( 1 978), pp. 1 2 3 – 1 46.
11 Barton, „Power and Lordship,“ p. 340, n. 172.
12 Bachrach, „Robertof ßlois,“ pp. l24-125, 1 30-13 1 , 1 35, 1 3 8 – 1 39, 144.
13 Gerd Althoff, „Promises Made, Promises Made To Be Kept: The Obliging Power of Staged
Rituals in the Midd1e Ages,“ unpublished paper, p. 1 .
134 TRACEY L. BILLADO
was is not made explicit. 14 In another case, Fulk Nerra instructed hisfideles to take
nothing, „neither with nor without [their) forces“ (neque in haste neque sine haste),
from the estates of Saint-Fiorent. This could perhaps imply that Fulk’sfideles were
provisioned by the inhabitants of one or more of Saint-Fiorent’s estates while on
campaign, but it remains unclear precisely what Saint-Florent’s protests against
„usurpations and evil customs“ (pervasianes et malas cansuetudines) actually consisted
of.15 The charter that details Saint-Florent’s case with Count Odo I of Blois
is in fact unusual in its listing of possible customs, yet the complaints which the
monks of Saint-Fiorent made after coming into Odo’s presence did not specify
disputed exactions, but rather claimed that the monks were „oppressed“ (praegravari),
that their estates were „treated unjustly“ (suam patestatem iniuste
tractari) and that „unjust laws and new exactions were being imposed upon them“
(iniustas Ieges et exactianes novas sibi superponi). 16 The complaints of Saint-
14 See n. 4 and accompanying text.
11 Archives Departementales Maine-et-Loire, (hereafter cited as ADML) H 1 840, no. 4,
contemporary copy (987- 1 0 1 1 ) . Cf. the cartulary copy in Livre Noir, fol. 26v, which gives it
the title, „Oecretum Fulconis comitis de abbatia Sancti Florentii.“ The text i s as follows:ln
nomine sanctae trinitatis. Fulco andegavensium comes. Notum sit omnibus dei cultoribus et
precipue successoribus et fidelibus nostris quia deprecatus est me quidarn abbas monasterii
Sancti Florentii nomine Rotbertus ut pervasiones et malas consuetudines quas homines nostri
potestatibus Sancti Florentii inferebant tollerem propter deum et eundem Sanctum Florentium
et ut ipse abbas et successores eius et omnis congregatio eiusdem loci pro nobis et
progenitoribus nostris deum semper exorare studeant. Placuit ergo michi facere hanc notitiam
corarn fidelibus nostris ut rcmitteret unusquisque pervasiones et malas consuetudines quas
faciebant in terra Sancti Florentii et sponsionem de hac re fecerunt deo et rnichi ut neque in
hoste neque sine hoste neque pro ulla occasione aliquid tollant neque homines affiigant neque
calumniam inferant in tota abbatia Sancti Florentii. Et si quis ex fidelibus nostris hanc promissionem
quarn fecerunt deo et nobis mentitus fuerit et veteres calumnias vel novas rursus
intulerit primum irarn dei et omnium sanetarum incurrat et nostrarn vidictam sibi imminere
sciat nisi emendaverit. Hoc itaque scripto designamus et manu nostra et fidelium nostrorum
roboramus atque firmarnus.
16 ADML H 1 840, no. I , original (978/9). [Edited in Jacques Boussard, „Le droit de vicaria a Ia
turniere cte quelques ctocuments angevins et tourangeaux,“ in Etudes de civitisation medievate
(IXe-X/1 siecles). Melanges ojferts a Edmond-Rene Labande (Poitiers: Centre d’Etudes Superieures
de Civilisation Medievales, 1 974), pp. 39-54, at pp. 46-47.] Cf. copies in ADML H
1840, nos. 2 and 3, and the cartulary copy in Livre Noir, fol.. 1 2’·v. The Livre Noir gives the
charter, which itself does not use the term malae consuetudines, the title, „Notitia de malis
consuetudinibus dimissis tempore Odonis comitis filii Teutbaldi et Amalberti abbatis in
abbatia Sancti Florentii.“ The text is as follows: in dei nomine. Odo comes et marchio. Notum
esse volumus omnibus fidelibus sanctae dei ecclesiae presentibus scilicet ac futuris praecipueque
successoribus nostris quia expetierunt nostram presentiam abbas Sancti Florentii nomine
Amalbertus cum fratribus suis reclarnantes se praegravari et suam potestatem iniuste tractari
nec statuta regali per privilcgia et praecepta eidem loco collata conservari sed iniustas Ieges et
exactiones novas sibi superponi. Quod diligentius cum fidelibus nostris pertractantes statuimus
et insolubiliter observandum decrevimus ut nullus fidelium nostrorum cui castri Salmuri
concesserimus provisionem in omni potestate Sancti Florentii quam pater noster bonae
memoriae Teutbaldus illi in dedicatione monasterii sui reddidit tarn in terris quarn in aquis vel
quarn habitatores eiusdem loci in antea tenebant vel postea adquisierunt ullarn exactionem
RHETORICAL STRATEGIES AND LEGAL ARGUMENTS 1 3 5
Florent were cast i n nonnative rather than descriptive tenns. These complaints
therefore resemble what Pierre Bourdieu calls „officializing strategies, the object
of which is to transmute … particular interests … into disinterested, … publicly
avowable, Iegitimale interests.“17
The monk.s of Saint-Florent repeatedly used and invoked certain words and
ideas in their complaints. „Novelty“ appears in these brief cases four times (novas,
nunquam in illa potestate . .. auditae fuerint, inferebant). The mention of innovation
alone would be enough to suggest that their enemies‘ actions were
illegitimate.18 The monks, however, added „oppression“ to each case (praegravari,
opprimi, affligant), „usurpation“ appears three times (pervasiones, nec statuta
regali. .. conservari), „injustice“ four times (iniuste, iniustas), and „evil“ no less
than six (mala, malas). The use of these words was clearly designed to have a
powerful rhetorical effect, legitimating monastic claims to various customs by
attacking the claims ofthe monks‘ adversaries.
It is true that these sources only give us evidence of these meetings through
a monastic „linguistic and cultural translation.“19 We can speculate about or represumant
inferre ve1 expetere neque in ripatico neque in cespatico neque in pulveratico neque
in te1oneo neque in effusione sanguinis suorum hominum etiam si membra sibi absciderunt,
nisi solummodo de incendio vel furto seu rapto aut etiam homicidio extemorum hominum.
Quae si fuerint repcrta a preposito ipsius potestatis iudiciariae districtionc tradantur nec hac
occasione vicarius potestatem ingrediatur. ltaque exceptis his nullam volumus illis molestiam
fieri nec horninibus potestatis suae per occasionem telonei vel vicariae sed libere pro anima
patris nostri qui ipsium locum in sancta religione constituit et servos dei ibi congregavit et pro
nobis et matre nostra et fratribus et fidelibus nostris domini clementiam exposcant, quatinus in
remuneratione iustorum ex illorum tuitione mercedem a pio domino recipiamus. [Signatures:]
Odonis comitis qui hanc notitiam fieri praecepit. Gauz(ridi vicecomitis. Plastulfi. Arduini.
Teduini. Arnerici. Dadonis. Hugonis archiepiscopi fratris Odonis comitis. Arduini archiepiscopi.
Hervei thesaurarii. Avisgaudi. Gelduini. Data mense februario anno xxiiii regnante
H1othario rege. Actum in civitatc turonis publice.
17 Pierre Bourdieu, Outfine of a Theory of Practice, trans. Richard Nice (Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press, 1977), p. 40. 18 Whereas the imposition of an individual custom on a given estate may or may not have becn
„new;· many of the exactions themselves and incidences of disputes over them were generally
not new, but rather quite old. See, e.g., Dominique Barthclemy, La societe, especially pp.
349-352 and the works cited therein; Elisabeth Magnou-Nortier, „Place du concile du Puy (v.
994) dans l ‚evolution de l’idec de paix,“‚ Melanges offerts a Jean Dauvillier (Toulouse, 1 979),
pp. 489-506; eadem, „Les mauvaises coutumes en Auvergne, Bourgogne meriodionale,
Languedoe et Provence au xr• siecle,“ in Structures feodales et jeodalisme dans / ‚occident
mediterraneen (Rome: Ecole Franyaisc de Rome, 1 980); and eadem, „The Enemies of the
Pcace: Reflection on a Vocabulary, 500- 1 1 00,“ in Thomas Head and Richard Landes, eds.,
The Peace ofGod, pp. 58-79.
19 Stephen D. White, Custom, Kinship, and Gifts to Saints: The Laudatio Parentum in Western
France, 1050-l/50 (Chape1 Hili, NC: University of North Carolina Press, 1988), p. 1 1 ; with
regard to this prob lern, sec also Fredric L. Cheyette, „The Invention of the State,“ in Essays in
Medieval Civilization: The Walter Precott Webb Memorial Lectures, eds. Bede K. Lackner
and Kenneth Roy Philip (Austin: University of Texas Press), pp. 143-176; Georges Duby
wamed long ago that these sources give us no view of lay society other than through clerical
eyes, and we therefore must make corrections for this bias (see n. 2); see also Otto Brunner,
136 TRACEY L. ßiLLADO
construct through circumstantial evidence, other reasons why Fulk Nerra or Odo of
Blois would ask their fideles to quitclaim so-called „evil customs.“20 But the
monks of Saint-Florent gave them specific reasons for doing so – both in terms of
speaking before the counts and in their representations of the counts‘ responses.
The monks teil us that Odo of Blois made his decree agairrst these customs in the
hope that the monks of Saint-Florent would seek God’s „mercy“ (clementiam) for
himself, his kin, and his men, as a „just reward“ (remuneratione iustorum) for
protecting the monks. In one of the cases involving Fulk Nerra, Abbot Robert of
Saint-Florent „pleaded“ (deprecatus est) with Fulk to abolish „usurpations and evil
customs“ (pervasiones et malas consuetudines). The abbot said Fulk should do
this, „for the sake of God and Saint-Florent,“ (proprer deum et. . .S anctum Florentium)
and so that the abbot, his successors, and the entire monastic community of
Saint-Florent would pray for Fulk and his ancestors (ut ipse abbas et successores
eius et omnis congregatio eiusdem loci pro nobis et progenitoribus nostris deum
semper exorare studeant). l n Saint-Florent’s other case with Fulk, it is the count
hirnself whom the charter represents as worried about the spiritual consequences of
the imposition of „evil customs“: he persuaded Aubri’s kin and men to dismiss
„evil customs“ for the sake of Aubri’s soul, which „seemed to be in great danger“
(pro anima senioris sui, quae nobis pro hac cause videbatur in magno’periculo
esse). Both cases with Fulk offered the count’s vengeance (vidictam, vindex)
agairrst anyone who might try to reclaim or reimpose „evil customs,“ and in one
case Fulk specified that the reason for this was „the Iove of God and the salvation
of my soul“ (pro dei amore et anime meae salute). Each case with Fulk also
promised any unrepentant enemy of the abbey the wrath of God (ira Dei) and in
one of these cases, that Christ hirnself would plunge the malefactor into the depths
of hell with the likes o f Dathan, Abiran, and Judas. All of these statements thus
connected „evil customs,“ and the disposition of temporal goods, with eternal
salvation. Alongside the repetition of words like „evil,“ and „unjust,“ this connection
could only further buttress the claims of Saint-Florent.
ln connecting „evil customs“ with spiritual rewards and perils, the monks of
Saint-Florent invoked a monastic ideology whose elaboration we can observe in
the prearnbles and sanction clauses of other charters of Saint-Florent during the
same time period. It is interesting that a recent manual on diplomatics has sug-
Land and Lordship: Structures of Governance in Medieval Ausrria, trans. Howard Karninsky
and James Van Horn Melton (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1984), p. 7 1 ,
where he writes, „All clerical sources inevitably offer the church’s point ofview, reprehending
the feud as detestable · brigandage‘ – except of course when they deal with the feuds of those
whorn they favor“; and Stephcn D. White, „Repenser Ia violence,“ pp. 100-101, discussing
clerical cornplaints of violentia, which ollen accornpanied monastic denunciations of ma/ae
consuerudines: “ … how we interpret ’seigneurial violence‘ will turn largely on what perspective
we adopt in viewing the public, physical violence that eleventh-century rnonks
chronically attributed to their lay adversaries in disputes but that those adversaries may weil
20 have underslood as Iegitimale moves in the game offeuding.“
Not the least of which reasons would be that such actions allowed the counts a perfonnance of
lordship and obliged Saint-Floren! to the counts for their protection.
RJ.!ETORICAL STRATEGIESAND LEGAL ARGUMENTS 1 37
gested that the contents of charter preambles seem to have no „juridical value“
whatsoever?1 Yet like the rhetorical strategies that Stephen D. White sees as
underlying the Convemio of Hugh of Lusignan, the monks of Saint-Florent, when
making their claims against „evil customs,“ “ … did not present anything remotely
resembling a legal argument in which the application of rules to facts justifies a
particular legal outcome.“22 Instead, the monks publicly staged their claims from a
position of moral outrage and condemnation, repeating certain words and phrases,
and invoking the very ideology presented in their preambles and sanction clauses.
This ideology promised heavenly „rewards“ and „mercy“ to monastic benefactors23
– the case with Odo of Blois uses these same words: remuneratio and clementia –
and threatened spiritual violence, the worst punishrnents of hell – poenas infernales,
as in one ofthe cases with Fulk- to potential malefactors.24
The words and phrases which the abbots of Saint-Florent used in cases of
„evil customs,“ are the very same ones through which the preambles and sanction
clauses of Saint-Florent expressed this monastic ideology, whereby the monks of
Saint-Florent represented their benefactors as acting, „for the Iove of God and
Saint Florent“ (pro amore dei et Sancti Florentii), and expecting in retum, „the
redemption of [their] sins,“ (redemptio peccatorum meorum), „etemal rewards“
(aeterna premia, remuneratio), „recompense“ (recompensatio), „divine mercy“
and „pity“ (divina clementia, merces), and „the salvation of [their] soul[s] and the
souls of [their] kin“ (pro salute animae meae et animarum parentorum meorum).
The monks added biblical quotations to their preambles to support the view that the
means to combat sin and avoid damnation was through monastic benefaction.
21 01ivier Guyotjeannin, Jacques Pycke, and Bcnoit-Michc 1 Tockc, Diplomatique Medievale
(Turnhout: Brepo1s, 1 993 ), p. 76: „Et dc fait, avec le preambu1e ou arenga, on se trouve cn
face ä une partie qui ii nos yeux n’a aucune va1eur juridique et qui n’apporte aucun rcnseignement
concret …“
22 Stephen D. White, „Strategie rhetorique dans Ia Conventio de Hugues de Lusignan,“ in
Melanges offerts a Ceorges Duby, vol. II: Le tenancier. le fidide et le citoyen (Aix-enProvence:
Publications dc 1′ Universite dc Provence, 1 993 ), pp. 147-1 5 7 at p. 148.
23 These and the quotations in the following two paragraphs can be found in charters of SaintFloren!
!Tom the late tenth to the mid-cleventh century in thc Livre Noir, fol . l 2•-14′, ts•-t6•,
1 8′-26·, 31 ‚-36‘.
24 Many scholars have written on gifts to monasterics and their spiritual and social consequences.
They include Barbara Rosenwein, To Be The Neighbor of Saint Peter: The Socia/ Meaning of
Cluny’s Property, 909-1049 (lthaca: Cornell University Press, 1 989); Penelope Johnson, Prayer,
Patronage and Power: The Abbey of Ia Tri11ite. Vend6me. 1032-1187 (New York: New
York University Press, 1 9 8 1 ); Constance Bouchard, Sword, Mit er. and Cloister: Nobility and
the Church in Burgundy. 980-/194 (lthaca: Cornell University Press, 1987); and White,
Custom. On spiritual threats see Lcster K. Littlc, Benedictine Maledictions: Liturgica/ Cursing
in Romanesque France (Jthaca: Cornell University Press. 1 993 ). Dominique Barthclemy sees
in such threats and also in miracle stories that described and promised divinc vengeance
agaiost monastic enemies a sort of „religious tcrrorism.“ See his L ‚an mil et Ia paix de Dieu
(Paris: Fayard, 1999), with the quote at p. 23. On whether such threats and instances of
supernatural punishments can and should be represented as violence see White, „Repenser Ia
violence.“
138 TRACEY L. ßiLLADO
These verses included: Luke 16:9: „Make friends for yourselves with the mammon
of iniquity, so that when you shall fail, they may receive you into everlasting
dwellings;“ Matthew 6:20: „Lay up for yourse1ves treasures in heaven … ;“ Luke
11:41: „Give alms: and behold, all things are clean unto you;“ and Galatians 6: 10:
„Therefore while we have time, Iet us do good works (bona) for everyone, but
especially for the household of the faithful.“ Although each of the phrases used in
these charter preambles is itself formulaic, the multiplication and elaboration of
these phrases, the addition of biblical verses and the varying paraphrases of these
verses shows the importance of this discourse for the ways in which the monks of
Saint-Florent wished to represent their benefactors and gifts. This discourse, moreover,
was reciprocal.
For those who did mala rather than bona for the monastery, the charters of
Saint-Florent promised them mala in return. They again used some of the same
words and phrases as in the two cases of „evil customs“ involving Saint-Floren!
and Fulk Nerra. For those who attempted to claim or reclaim estates which SaintFloren!
considered its own, the charters promised potential malefactors „the anger
(ira) and judgment (iudicium) of God“ and „all his saints,“ and that they would
„suffer the punishments of hell“ (infernales poenas). One of Saint-Florent’s
charters promised the monks of Saint-Maur that if they did not give up their claim
to certain tithes also claimed by Saint-Florent, they too would be „damned with
Dathan and Abiron, and thrust into the deepest parts of hell with Judas the traitor“
(cum Dathan et Abiran in inferno damnati sint et cum luda proditore demersionem
profundissimae gehennae). Just as Aubri’s soul was represented as being „in great
danger“ on account of „evil customs,“ yet another preamble from Saint-Florent
warned that, „although it is dangerous for a man not to make gifts of his own
temporal goods for the sake of Christ, it is even more dangerous to take away
others“ (cum periculosum sit homini propria pro Christo non dare, multo vero
periculosus aliena auferre).
A nurober of scholars have demonstrated the ways that gifts to monastefies
created important bonds – both spiritual and social – among certain groups in
medieval society?5 As White comments, gifts to monasteries created
enduring social relationships that involved not just the parties
immediately involved in [the exchange], but also other living persons,
the dead, the unbom, God and His saints, and the living representations
of God and those saints; … property exchanged in this way
came to symbolize the relationships that had been created when it had
been exchanged; .. . and … any change in the disposition of [a]
particu/ar piece of property could affect the relationships that this
property symbolized. 26
25 See, e.g., the works by Bouchard, Jolmson, Rosenwein and White cited in n. 24.
26 Stephen D. White, „,Pactum … Legum Vincit et Amor ludicium‘ The Senlement ofDisputes by
Compromise in Eleventh-Cenrury Western France;· American Journal of Legal History, 22
(1 978), pp. 281-308, at pp. 302-303, italics added. See also thc works by Bouchard, Jolmson,
Roscnwein, and White cited above, n. 24.
RHETORlCAL STRATEGIES Al\D LEGAL ARGUMENTS 139
In their disputes with Odo of Blois and Fulk Nerra, the monks of SaintFiorent
called to mind the relationships that the counts‘ predecessors had had with
the abbey, perhaps implying that „evil customs“ were threatening these relationships.
When they accused Fulk’s man Aubri of imposing „evil customs“ in the
estate of Saint-Georges, the monks of Saint-Fiorent reminded Fulk of the
veneration that his predecessors had had for Saint Georges. In Saint-Florent’s
dispute with Odo of Blois, Odo describes the estates of the monastery as those
which his father Thibaud, „of blessed memory,“ who „founded the place on
account of holy religion and gathered there the servants of God“ (qui ipsium locum
in sancta religione constituit et servos dei ibi congregavit), had given to SaintFlorent
upon his refounding of the monastery, giving it „as much in Iands as in
waters or inhabitants of the same place which they formerly possessed“ (quam
pater noster bonae memoriae Teutbaldus illi in dedicatione monasterii sui reddidit
tam in terris quam in aquis vel quam habitatores eiusdem loci in antea tenebant).
Through public denunciations and the use of certain words and phrases, the
monks of Saint-Florent laid before the counts of Blois and Anjou bona and mala,
salvation and damnation. Instead of presenting a fully articulated „legal argument“
in support of a particular decision, the monks of Saint-Florent publicly staged their
claims in a stylized manner using moral and religious language in an attempt to
convince the counts and their audiences of their claims‘ legitimacy. The designation
of a particular custom as „evil“ formed an important part of Saint-Florent’s
attempts to keep, protect, or even gain valuable property-rights by presenting
their claims in normative terms. The rhetorical strategies deployed by Saint-Florent
presented „evil customs“ as a threat to the salvation of those who were accused of
imposing them, as actions which also jeopardized the salvation of the imposers‘
Iords, the counts of Anjou and Blois, and perhaps even the salvation of the counts‘
predecessors. The quitclaiming of such customs was represented as an action of
potential benefit to the souls of the quitclaimers. In this we see one of the possible
reasons why Aubri’s wife, sons, and fideles would twice dismiss disputed „evil
customs.“
To end this discussion on a speculative note, the monks ofSaint-Florent may
not have used this strategy in a!l their disputes over customs, or may have used it
only at specific moments in the disputing process?7 A summary of convenientiae,
or agreements, which Saint-Florent made between 986 and 996, with Gelduin, the
Iord ofS aumur, is interesting with regard to this question.28 In discussing customs,
27 Here we are reminded again of how often charters portray interactions which were extended,
complex, social, political, and legal processes only in terms of discrete events. See, e. g.,
Rosenwein, To Be The Neighbor, chap. 2; Whitc, Custom, p . l 5 ; and Emily Zack Tabuteau,
Transfers of Property in Eleventh-Century Norman Law (Chapel Hili: University of North
Carolina Press, 1988), p. 124.
28 Livre Noir, fol. 27v-28′ (986-996), which gives it the title „Convcnientiae inter Sanctum
Florentium et Gelduinurn quae fuerint Iernparibus Odonis comitis et Roberti abbatis.“ The text
is as follows: Hoc est ut nichil accipiat Gelduinm de omni re districtum r..isi de furto de raptu
de incendio de homicidio vel asaltu potestatem et ut nullus missus Gelduini ingrediatur in
140 TRACEY L. BILLADO
the convenientiae make no mention of „evil,“ no references to sin or salvation.
Rather, they simply Iist the compromises that Saint-Florent made with Gelduin.
The main concem seems to have been that Gelduin’s vicarius should not judge
cases without Saint-Florent’s provost present to act as co-judge and thus share the
profits collected from judging cases. Perhaps the heightened drama of the
rhetorical strategies that Saint-Florent used in pressing their claims before Odo of
Blois and Fulk Nerra, especially when presented orally in a public forum, left no
room for such compromises.
Previous discussions of „evil customs“ have generally proceeded by
isolating a particular „legal“ vocabulary, tracing it though !arge numbers of documents,
and using it as transparent evidence that Carolingian administrative
structures had collapsed and were replaced by „banal“ lordships?9 Such an
approach to „evil customs“ assumes, among other things, that monks were, to
quote Jean-Pierre Poly, accurate „observers of social reality,“ not actors in that
social reality, despite the fact that monastic communities bad clear economic and
political interests in the disputes over customs that monastic scribes recorded.30
Saint-Florent’s complaints about „evil customs,“ however, – a blanket terrn which
could encompass a wide variety of actions from collecting market-duties to acting
as judges in disputes – were quite different from Themas Head ’s recent description
of complaints of malae consuetudines as „legal language“ which needs only to be
„mapped“ to uncover its implications for the „Feudal Revolution.“31 Their
complaints were neither the transparent accounts ofunbiased observers, nor „legal“
omni potestate Sancti F1orentii sine nostro preposito pro ulla iustitia facienda. Hoc autem quod
dico iustitiam quae debet facere missus Ge1duini cum nostro misso haec est de furto de raptu
de incendio de homicidio de asaltu si nostri homines in alteram potestatem homines asalierint
aut si coliberti nostri alios homines sive de nostra potestate sive de alia homines occiderunt. Si
vero inter se aliquid horum egerint nichi1 pertinebit illi. Si autem homines alterius potestatis ad
iustitiam illius venerint. Si in mercato se reclamaverint et ibi homines presentes fucrint de
quibus se reclamant faciat iustitiam vicarius illius ct nos nichil habemus. Si vero in mercato
non fuerint non faciat iustitia vicarius sine nostro misso et hoc quod exinde acceperint mediam
partem accipiat et mediam nobis demittet et hoc non faciant nisi de solis mercatannis. Oe aliis
autem hominibus nostrae potestatis nullum accipiat districtum ctiam si se reclamavcrint ad
eum nisi de mercato, de teloneo autem nostrae potestatis. Si nostri homines vinum de suis
vineis ubicunque voluerint duxerint nichil accipiat cxinde telonei. Si vero vendiderint aliis
hominibus illi reddant debitum excepto hominibus nostris. Si illi comparaverint et in nostra
potestate remiserint ex inde non dabunt teloncum. Pulveraticum vero de carro vel a sino nec de
ullo negotio nichil accipiat de omni nostra potestate. Sed et homines nostre potestatis qui
pisces vel mercatum aliquod per aquam vel terram duxerint libere ubicunque voluerint sine
calumnia pergant.
29 For thesc Iendeneies see, c. g., Lemarignier, „La dislocation du pagus,“; Guillot, „Consuetudines,
consuetudo,“; and Christian Lauranson-Rosaz, „Les mauvaises coutumes d’Auvergne,“
Annales du Midi 192 (1 990), pp. 557-586.
30 Jean-Pierre Poly, „Europe in the year I 000,“ chapter I of The Cambridge 11/ustrated History of
the Middle Ages, vol. II: 950-1250, ed. Robert Fossier (Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press, 1997), p. 19, ita1ics added.
31 See n. 7.
RHETOR!CAL STRA TEG!ES AND LEGAL ARGUMENTS 141
arguments framed in technical terms, but rather rhetorically constructed
denunciations designed to undermine their opponents‘ claims. As such, SaintFlorent’s
protests against „evil customs“ may weil conceal as much as they reveal
about contemporary economic, social, and political realities. I would suggest that
they not be treated as an element in what Thomas Bisson, in his recent account of
the „Feudal Revolution,“ has called a „cacophony of symmetrical evidence [that]
surely points to abrupt and disruptive [social] change.“32 Nor should malae consuetudines
themselves be reflexively described as „new and evil taxes,“33
„radically new burdens,“34 usurpations of „public“ power/5 acts of „Mafiosi,“36
„piracy,“37 „pillage,“ 38 „depredation,“39 „predatory coercion“40 „extortion“41 or,
simply, „violence.“42
In deploying sophisticated rhetorical strategies designed to advance their
own claims to rights-in-property, Saint-Florent’s complaints do, however, provide
evidence that the monks of Saint-Florent were not passive, disengaged observers of
medieval society. These cases illustrate the richness of Saint-Florent’s strategies
for pressing their claims in disputes, and provide an opportunity to analyze this
monastic discourse and its oral presentation in a public setting. This type of
linguistic analysis can only, and should, complement analyses of these disputes in
all their social, political, legal and economic aspects.
32 Bisson, „The Feudal Revolution,“ p. 22.
33 Guy Lobrichon, „The Chiareseuro of Heresy: Early Eleventh Century Aquitaine as seen from
Auxerre.“ in Head and Landes, The Peace ofGod, pp. 80-103, at p. 92.
34 Pieme Bonnassie, „The Survival and Extinction of the Slave System in the Early Medieval
West,“ in From Slavery to Feudalism, p. 57.
35 Lemarignier, „La dislocation du pagus,“ passim. He argues, p. 9, that by the mid-eleventh
century, such usurpations had brought about ‚une emiettement extreme de Ia puissance
publique, tel qu’il n’a peut-etre jamais ete atteint et, en tout cas, certainement jamais depasse
en aucune autre periode de l’histoire.“
36 Christian Lauranson-Rosaz, „Peace from the Mountains: The Auvergnat Origins of the Peace
ofGod,“ in Head and Landes, The Peace ofGod, pp. 104-134, at p. 115.
37 Pierre Bonnassie, La Catalogne du milieu du X a /ajin du Xf siec/e, croissance et mutations
d’une societe (Toulouse, 1975-1976), vol. II, p. 590.
3s Christian Lauranson-Rosaz, „Les mauvaises couturnes,“ p. 567.
39 lbid.
40 Bisson, „The Feudal Revolution,“ p. 23.
41 Bisson, „The Feudal Revolution,“ p. 31.
42 Lauranson-Rosaz, „Les mauvaises cout􀂥mes,“ passim, especially pp. 566, 580-581. Cf.
Elisabeth Magnou-Nortier, „The Enemies of the Peace“ especially at p. 72 where she points
out that several historians have translated mala consuetudo as „violence.“
ORAL HISTORY OF THE MIDDLE AGES
THE SPOKEN WORD IN CONTEXT
Edited by Gerhard Jaritz and Michael Richter
MEDIUM AEVUM QUOTIDIANUM
SONDERBAND XII
=
CEU MEDIEV ALIA
VOLU1vfE 3
Oral History of the Middle Ages
The Spoken W ord in Context
Edited by Gerhard Jaritz and Michael Richter
Krems and Budapest 200 1
GEDRUCKT MIT UNTERSTÜTZUNG DER ABTEILUNG
KULTUR UND WISSENSCHAFT DES AMTES
DER NIEDERÖSTERREICIDSCHEN LANDESREGIERUNG
niederästerreich kultur
copy editor: Judith Rasson
Cover illustration: The wife of Potiphar covets Joseph: “ … erat autem Joseph pulchra facie et
decorus apectu: post multos itaque dies iecit domina oculos suis in Ioseph et ait donni mecum.“
(“ … And Joseph was (a] goodly fperson], and weil favoured. And it came to pass after these
things, that his master’s wife cast her eyes upon Joseph; and she said, Lie with me. „), Gen. 39:
6-7 (KJV). Concordantiae Caritatis, c. 1350. Cistercian abbey of Lilienfeld (Lower Austria), ms
151, fol. 244v (detail). Photo: Institut fiir Realienkunde des Mittelalters und der frühen Neuzeit
(Krems an der Donau).
Alle Rechte vorbehalten
– ISBN 3-90 Hl94 15 6 (Krems)
All rights reserved.
No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any
form or by any means, without the permission of the Publishers.
Published by:
and
– ISBN 963 9241 64 4 (Budapest)
-ISSN 1587-6470 CEU MEDIEVALIA
Medium Aevum Quotidianum. Gesellschaft zur Erforschung
der materiellen Kultur des Mittelalters, Körnermarkt 13, A-
3500 Krems. Austria,
Department ofMedieval Studies, Centrat European University,
Nador utca 9, H-1051 Budapest, Hungary.
Printed by Printself, Budapest.
Table of Contents
Preface . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ……………………….. 7
Michael RICHTER, Beyond Goody and Grundmann ………. . . . . . . ………. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I I
Tom PETTIIT, Textual to Oral: the Impact ofTransmission
on Narrative Word-Art …………………………………………………………………….. 1 9
Elöd NEMER!<.ENYI, Fictive Audience. The Second Person Singular in the Deliberatio ofBishop Gerard of Csanäd …………………………………………….. 3 9 Katalin SZENDE, Testaments and Testimonies. Orality and Literacy in Composing Last Wills in Late Medieval Hungary ……………………………. 49 Anna ADAMSKA, The Kingdom of Po land versus the Teutonic Knights: Oral Traditions and Literale Behaviour in the Later Middle Ages …………… 67 Giedre MICKÜNAITE, Ruler, Protector, and a Fairy Prince: the Everlasting Deeds of Grand Duke Vytautas as Related by the Lithuanian Tatars and Karaites ………………………………… 79 Yurij Zazuliak, Oral Tradition, Land Disputes, and the Noble Community in Galician Rus‘ from the 1440s to the 1 460s ……………………………………… 88 Nada ZECEVIC, Ai􀃭tc; yA.uKeia. The Importance ofthe Spoken Word in the Public Affairs ofCarlo Tocco (from the Anonymous Chronaca dei Tocco di Cefalonia) . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . 108 lohn A. NICHOLS, A Heated Conversation: Who was Isabel de Aubigny, Countess of Arundel? …………………………… 1 1 7 Tracey L. BILADO, Rhetorical Strategies and Legal Arguments: ‚Evil Customs‘ and Saint-Florent de Saumur, 979- 1 0 1 1 …………………….. 1 28 Detlev KRAACK, Traces of Orality in Written Contexts. Legal Proceedings and Consultations at the Royal Court as Reflected in Documentary Sources from l21h-century Germany ……… 1 42 6 Maria DOBOZY, From Oral Custom to Written Law: The German Sachsenspiegel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 154 Martha KEIL, Rituals of Repentance and Testimonies at Rabbinical Courts in the 151h Century . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 64 Michael GOODICH, The Use of Direct Quotation from Canonization Hearing to Hagiographical Vita et Miracula . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 77 Sylvia ScHEIN, Bemard of Clairvaux ’s Preaching of the Third Crusade and Orality . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ….. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 188 Michael BRAUER, Obstades to Oral Communication in tbe Mission offriar William ofRubruck among the Mongois . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 196 Elena LEMENEVA, From Oral to Written and Back: A Sermon Case Study . . . . . . . . 203 Albrecht CLASSEN, Travel, Orality, and the Literary Discourse: Travels in the Past and Literary Travels at the Crossroad of the Oral and the Literary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . 217 Ulrich MÜLLER and Margarete SPRJNGETH, “Do not Shut Your Eyes ifYou Will See Musical Notes:“ German Heroie Poetry („Nibelungenlied“), Music, and Performance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 236 Jolanta SZPILEWSKA, Evoking Auditory Imagination: On the Poetics of Voice Production in The Story ofThe Glorious Resurrection ofOur Lord (c. 1580) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 248 Jens T. WOLLESEN, SpokenWords and Images in Late Medieval Italian Painting . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . 257 Gerhard JARTTZ, Images and the Power of the Spoken Word . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 277 List of Contributors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 295 Preface Oral culture played an instrumental role in medieval society.1 Due to the Iack of any direct source evidence, however, research into the functions and importance of oral communication in the Middle Ages must confront a number of significant problems. Only indrect traces offer the opportunity to analyze phenomena that were based on or connected with the spoken word. The ‚oral history‘ of the Middle Ages requires the application of different approaches than dealing with the 201h or 2 151 century. For some decades Medieval Studies have been interested in questions of orality and literacy, their relationship and the substitution of the spoken by the written word2 Oral and literate culture were not exclusive and certainly not opposed to each other.3 The ‚art of writing‘ was part of the ‚ars rhetorica‘ and writing makes no sense without speech.4 Any existing written Statement should also be seen as a spoken one, although, clearly, not every oral Statement as a written one. Authors regularly wrote with oral delivery in mind. ‚Speaking‘ and ‚writing‘ are not antonyms. It is also obvious that „the use of oral conununication in medieval society should not be evaluated … as a function of culture populaire vis-a-vis culture savante but, rather, of thc communication habits and the tendency of medieval man 1 For the late Middle Ages and the early modern period, cf. Willern Frijhoff, „Communication et vie quotidienne i1 Ia fin du moyen äge et a l’epoque moderne: reflexions de theorie et de methode,“ in Kommunialion und Alltag in Spätmillefalter und fniher Neuzeit, ed. Helmut Hundsbichler (Vienna: Verlag der Österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, 1992), p. 24: „La plupart de gens vivait encore pour l’essentiel dans une culture orale et !es procedes d’appropriation des idCes passaient de prefcrence par Ia parolc dite et ecoutee, quand bien memc on ctait capable d’une Ieelure visuelle plus ou moins rudimentaire.“ 2 See Marco Mostert, „New Approaches to Medieval Communication?“ in New Approaches to Medieval Communication. ed. Marco Mostert (Tumhout: Brepols, 1999), pp. 15-37; Michael Richter, “Die Entdeckung der ‚Oralität‘ der mittelalterlichen Gesellschaft durch die neuere Mediävistik,“ in Die Aktualität des Miue/alters, ed. Hans-Werner Goetz (Bochum: D. Winkler, 2000), pp. 273-287. 3 Peter Burke calls the constrnct of „oral versus literate“ useful but at the same time dangerous: idem, „Mündliche Kultur und >Druckkultur< im spätmittelalterlichen Italien,“ in Volkskultur des europäischen Spätmittelalters, eds. Peter Dinzelbacher and Hans-Dieter Mück (Stuttgart: Alfred Kröner Verlag, 1987), p. 60. 4 Michael Clanchy, „lntroduction,“ in New Approaches to Medieval Communication. ed. Marco Mostert (Tumhout: Brepols, 1999), p. 6. 8 to share his intellectual experiences in the corporate framework.“5 Oral delivery was not „the sole prerogative of any socioeconomic class. „6 For all these reasons, it is important to analyze the extent of and context, in which ’speech acts,‘ auditive effects, and oral tradition occur in medieval sources .7 Research into the use of the spoken word or references to it in texts and images provides new insight into various, mainly social, rules and pattems of the communication system. 1t opens up additional approaches to the organization and complexity of different, but indispensably related, media in medieval society, and their comparative analysis.8 The spoken word is connected with the physical presence of its ’sender.‘ Speech may represent the authenticity of the given message in a more obvious way than written texts or images. Therefore, the use of ’speech acts‘ in written or visual evidence also has to be seen in context with the attempt to create, construct, or prove authenticity. Moreover, spoken messages contribute to and increase the lifelikeness of their contents, which may influence their perception by the receiver, their efficacy and success. Being aware of such a situation will have led to the explicit and intended use and application of the spoken word in written texts and images- to increase their authenticity and importance, too. lf one operates with a model of ‚closeness‘ and ‚distance‘ of communication with regard to the Ievel of relation of ’senders‘ and ‚receivers,‘ then the ’speech acts‘ or their representation have to be seen as contributors to a ‚closer‘ connection among the participants of the communication process.9 At the same time, however, Speech might be evaluated as less official. One regularly comes across ‚oral space‘ 5 Sophia Menache, The Vox Dei. Commwzication in the Middle Ages (New York and Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1990), p. 19. 6 Ibidem, p. 21. Cf. also Jan-Dirk Müller, „Zwischen mündlicher Anweisung und schrifilicher Sicherung von Tradition. Zur Kommunikationsstruktur spätmittelalterlicher Fechtbücher,“ in Kommunikation und Alltag in Spätmittelalter und früher Neuzeit, ed. Helmut Hundsbichler (Vienna: Verlag der Österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, 1992), p. 400: „Offensichtlich sind schriftliche und nichtschriftliche Tradierung von Wissen weiterhin relativ unabhängig voneinander, nachdem die Schrift längst dazu angesetzt hat, lnseln der Mündlichkeil oder praktisch-enaktiver Wissensvermittlung zu erobem. Die Gedächtnisstütze kann die Erfahrung nicht ersetzen, sendem allenfalls reaktivieren. Sie ist sogar nur verständlich, wo sie auf anderweitig vermittelte Vorkenntnisse stößt.“ 7 􀆿f. W.F.H. Nicolaisen, ed., Oral Tradition in the Middle Ages (Binghamton: Center for Medieval and Renaissance Studies, 1995). 8 See, esp., Horst Wenzel, Hören und Sehen, Schrift und Bild. K ultur und Gedächtnis im Mittelalter (Munich: C.H. Beck, 1995), passim. 9 See also Siefan Sonderegger, „>Gesprochen oder nur geschrieben?< Mündlichkeil in mittelalterlichen
Texten als direkter Zugang zum Menschen,“ in Homo Medietas. Aufsätze zu Religiosität,
Literatur und Denkformen des Menschen vom Mittelalter bis in die Neuzeit. Festschrift
for Alois Maria Haas zum 65. Geburtstag, eds. Claudia Brinker-von der Heyde and
Niklaus Largier (Bem e\ al.: Peter Lang, 1999), p. 665: „Jedenfalls darf man sich bewußt bleiben,
daß auch in den Texten des deutschen Mittelalters die Reflexe gesprochener Sprache eine
bedeutende Schicht ausmachen, die besonders dann immer wieder hervortritt, wenn es um
einen direkten Zugang zum Menschen geht, um einVerstehen aus unmittelbarer Partnerschaft
heraus … “
9
that has become institutionalized or more official by the application of ‚written
space.‘ 10 Simultanous employment of such different Ievels and qualities of
messages must often have had considerable influence on their efficacy.11
The papers in this volume are the outcome of an international workshop that
was held in February, 2001, at the Department ofMedieval Studies, Central European
University, Budapest. Participants concentrated on problems of the occurrence,
usage, and pattems of the spoken word in written and visual sources of the
Middle Ages. They dealt with the roJe and contents of direct and indirect speech in
textual evidence or in relation to it, such as chronicles, travel descriptions, court
and canonization protocols, sermons, testaments, law-books, literary sources,
drama, etc. They also tried to analyze the function of oral expression in connection
with late medieval images.
The audiovisuality of medieval communication processes12 has proved to be
evident and, thus, important for any kind of further comparative analysis of the
various Ievels of the ‚oral-visual-literate,‘ i.e. multimedia culture of the Middle
Ages. Particular emphasis has to be put on methodological problems, such as the
necessity of interdisciplinary approaches,13 or the question of the extent to which
we are, generally, able to comprehend and to decode the communication systems
of the past.14 Moreover, the medievalist does not come across any types of sources
in which oral communication represents the main concem.15 lnstead, she or he is
confronted, at first glance, with a great variety of ‚casual‘ and ‚marginal‘ evidence.
We would like to thank all the contributors to the workshop and to this
volume. Their cooperation made it possible to publish the results of the meeting in
the same year in which it took place. This can be seen as a rare exception, at least
in the world of the historical disciplines. The head, faculty, staff, and students of
the Department of Medieval Studies of CentTal European University offered
various help and support. Special thanks go to Judith Rasson, the copy editor of
10 This, e.g., could be weil shown in a case study on thc pilgrimage to Santiago de Compostela:
Friederike Hassauer, „Schriftlichkeit und Mündlichkeil im Alltag des Pilgers am Beispiel der
Wallfahrt nach Santiago de Compostela,“ in Wallfahrt und Alltag in Mittelalter und früher
Neuzeit, eds. Gerhard Jaritz and Barbara Schuh (Vienna: Verlag der Österreichischen Akademie
der Wissenschaften, 1992), pp. 277-316.
11 Cf. Bob Scribner, „Mündliche Kommunikation und Strategien der Macht in Deutschland im
16. Jahrhundert,“ in Kommunikation und Alltag in Spätmittelalter und früher Neuzeit, ed.
Helmut Hundsbichler (Vienna: Verlag der Österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften,
1992), pp. 183-197.
12 Wenzel, Hören rmd Sehen, p. 292.
13 Cf. Ursula Schaefer, „Zum Problem der Mündlichkeit,“ in Modernes Miuelalter. Neue Bilder
einer populären Epoche, ed. Joachim Heinzle (Frankfurt am Main and Leipzig: Insel Verlag,
1994), pp. 374 f.
14 Frijhoff, „Communication et vie quotidienne,“ p. 25: „Sommes-nous encore en mesure de
communiquer avec Ja communication de jadis?“
1􀅄 Michael Richter, Sprache und Gesellschaft im Mittelalter. Untersuchungen zur mündlichen
Kommunikation in England von der Mit te des elften bis zu Beginn des vierzehnten Jahrhunderts
(Stuttgart: Anton Hiersemann, 1979), p. 22.
10
this volume, who took particluar care with the texts of the many non-native
speakers fighting with the pitfalls of the English language.
Budapest, Krems, and Constance
December 200 I
Gerhard Jaritz and Michael Richter