Monks and hermits in medieval love stories Jean Leclercq

Abbaye de Clemaux, Cleruaux, Luxembourg

Monks and hermits arejeptentb mentioned in tour@ romances. It is an unresolved problem whetfler these are real men or tfle product of literaly imagination. ‘l%e monks and hermits of love literature do evolve over time: wflueas in tile twe&ft centuy tflg are predominantly monastic

Jigures, later thg are laymen. ?his article examinac the literaly image ofthe monk and hermit, including tfleir role as advocates of man&l jidelig, and ash how eJective these models were

for contemporary Chrirtians, especial& in cases where poets abandoned their secular l$e to become man/is and fletmits. IVith the rise of the fiars traditional literary images were not abandoned. Empfm.& is placed on the role of tile flennit as a symbol of the quest for divine love.

For Christopher Brookc on his 65th birthday

Courtly romances make frcqucnt mention of monks and hermits. This has been noticed by historians and it has cvcn been said that thcrc was a literary ‘fashion’.’

The influence that such monks had on pcoplc of their times has been the object of several studies but WC do not yet know exactly wflo thcsc hermits arc. Are they real men or just figures of literary fiction? And if they arc real, how do they fit into the society, the church and monastic institutions of those days? WC find them cvcrywhcrc in litcraturc: in romances they have an important place, but we find them too in the De amore of Andrew the Chaplain,’ in the fabliaux, in popular stories and various kinds of poems. We notice also that the type of person represented by thcsc monks and hermits tends to cvolvc: in the twelfth and thirteenth ccnturics they arc generally considered to bc ‘monastic’ folk; in the fourteenth and fifteenth ccnturics they arc, in growing numbers, lay pcoplc, not

Correspon~ewe c J. Lcrclcrcq, Abbayr de Clcrvaux, L-9737 (Grand Duch& de) Luxembourg. DO~lJL~N I.K:I.EKCQ~~ a monk ol’Clervaux, Luxembourg, and a leading authority on twelfth-century monasticism and religious thought.

’ Angus J. Kcnncdy, “l’hc hrrmit’s role in French arthurian romance (c. 1 l70-1530),’ Rnmor&, y5 (1974), 53.

Andrcas CaPcllanus, 77~ nr/ o~cour~~ love, trans. John J. Parry (New York, 1959), 61.

Journal of Medieval History 18 (1992) 341-356 0304-4181/92/$05.00 0 1992 -- Elsevicr Science Publishers B.V. All rights rescrvrd 341

connected with any institution though sometimes related to one or other of the countless groups of male and female bcguines which flourished at that period.3

Here we shall be dealing principally with monks and hermits of the first type.4 The various questions which crop up when we consider the connections which

existed between solitaries for Cod and people engaged in wordly love affairs may be examined from a series of different angles, according to our major interest: The study of archetypes, psychology, symbolism, literature, sociology, the history

of institutions, plain history or religion. However, these different points of view

cannot be entirely separated, they are more or less intertwined and it is always slightly artificiai to try and isolate one from the general context though we must do so if we are to be clear and not merely present a jumble of facts. I shall deal with the subject in two parts. The first will deal with the facts as presented by

lierature. The second will look into history. The main points guiding the inves-

tigation may be formulated as follows: what type of model arc monks and hermits for the society of their times? How do they come up to the expectations of their contemporaries? Did they really exist, or are they mcrcly fictional? What was their meaning and what is it today?

I. lXe fach as given 6y ii/era&we

The first thing to notice is that in texts ‘monks and hermits’ arc often put in the same category. This of course is correct for they all belong to that class of people who have withdrawn from the world and live apart. In this scnsc they are all

solitaries, even though they may live in community.” Many a small monastic

community had something crcmitical about it and if thcrc were really any single, isolated solitaries living alone, they were very rare. Arc they all historically true

3 A detailed list and tcntativc classilication of thrsc pcoplr in Italy is given by R. Cuarnicri, art. ‘Pin~ocahicrc,’ in: &iorrano deg!i I~s~M e/i ferrziuai (Rome, 1980) vol. 6, col. 1721 49. The same work should br undertaken for othrr counnirs. I The subject has already rrccn studied, (or example by Rcginr Colliot, ‘Aspects dc I’crmite dans la lin&rturc Gpico-romarrcsque dcs XIIc C’I XIlIc sii.cIcs, * in: Afeleqe.~ de la~~gur et lit/t%ahtrr

/ronpise~ du Myem-Age o@r/s i PierreJonin (Scn&mr~ no. 7. Publication du CUER MA, U&e&~ de Provence (Ccntrc d’Ais), %Ia&llr), I61 160. Kafarl XI. XIr?rida Jimenrr, ‘Monastrrios y “hermitas” en la literatura caballercsa,’ paper read at thr Congrrso Intcmacional. Esparios y tiempos cn cl monacato, Iron, 5 IO Decemlrr 19&l& the procrcdings 01 this congress arc forthcoming. L. Gougaud, Erraifc~ e/ reckcs. Ekde.t SW d’anrietwes~firnte.~ de zjie re/$em (Ligug+, 1928), 36-41. P. Scheutcn, Dar Alkhtum in drr AltJian~~skhen Rofandichfung 61 I 2. 14. Jahrhunder/ (hliinster, 1919). 5 G. Constable, ‘Ercmitical forms of monastic lilii,’ in: I,r.r/i/fr;ioni monasfiche e instituiioni canoniche

in Orcidente (I 123-1215). A&’ dr io sc/!in:a settinrana inkmazionole di Jtudio. Mendola. 28 agoslo 3 seltembre

1977 (Milan, l980), 239-64, in particular p. 219, where alicr having described dilhcrcnt trndcncics throughout the middle ages, the author w&s: “Thry intrnsilicd in the twelfth century to a point where it is almost impossible to say exactly what it meant to bc a hermit, and when pcoplc leading very dilhcrcnt types of life were considcrcd, by thcmsclvcs or others, to bc hcrmhs.”

342

or simply more or less idealised literary models, sometimes caricatured in romance

or satire? It matters little, for the fact remains that they correspond on the whole to a common typology. And this is already an element allowing us to situate them against the background of society and the history of institutions. We find it most amply exemplified in those border-line cases represented by the hermits: they lived the most radical form of the solitary life.

These men often live in forests, they are ‘silvans’, men of the woods, and this

in itself is re\-ealing.6 They belong to the category of forest hermits. The forest

is something more than a concrete setting: it is a symbol, what Jung called an archetype.7 What does this signify? Essentially that these men and women - for there were some women hermits - are marginal, fringe people. Already we can say that monks living in monasteries are on the outskirts of ordinary sociew. But

solitaries are fringe people or ‘drop outs’ with regard to community monastic life.

If they are on the margin, then they are no longer part of the page, they are

marginal and no longer part of the institution. But if they stay within the limits of this, even on the border, they are representative and it is as such that they had a role and a message. Their role is often shown by their physical aspect‘

They are bcardcd -- this is a symbol of maturity;* frequently they are described as being ‘old’ as if they were all elderly whereas in fact the ‘wise old man’ is also

an archetype. Their function is to do precisely what is expected of someone who has acquired or received the gift of wisdom: They arc counsellors, prudent, ‘prud’homme’ - men of prudcncc - inspiring confidence by reason of their solitude and the secrecy that this guarantees and because of their life of prayer and penance.” They inspire confidcncc and people come and confide in them. Not

0 On the fact thaw ‘hermits’ and ‘forests’ arc associated in the literary and iconographical tradition, rxamples arc quoted and bibliographical rcfercnces given by C. Pcnco, ‘Una componcntc dclla cultura monastica medievali: Ir tradiaioni popolari,’ in: G. Pcnco, ,k%&x~~ ntonastico (Studia Ansclmiana, 96, Rome, 1988), p. 346 8. An intcrcsting example of a forest hermit in the thirteenth century is IO bc found in the text studied by Meredith Tilbury .McMunn, ‘Psychological realism in the rcprcscniation of mcdicWl children in the Roman de Conor,’ in: Studies oa the seven sages of

Rome and o/her esqs iu medieval literalure dedica/ed /o the nmnoty ofjeean Miwahi, cd. H. Niedziclski, H.R. purltc and W.L. Hrndrikson (Honolulu, Hawaii, l978), 184-5,

I am summarizing hcrc a study in typology which I have developed under the tide ‘Le Marche, terra priviligiata del monachesimo,’ in: &e/k’ e problemi del n:onachesitNo nel/e Marche (Rbriano, I982), vol. I, 327 344. In the notes which follow, any references not preceded by the name of an author are those OF publications whcrc I have dealt more fully with suljects which can only bc touched ;pon hcrc.

On the meaning of the ktct of wearing a beard in monasticism in the middle ages a mine of information is to be found in G. Constable. ‘Introduction.’ fkhardi. uf videtur, ab6afk Eelkvai~is,

Apologia de barbio, i-d. R.B.C. Huygcns, A,bologiaeduae (Corpus Christianorum, Continuntio medievalis, f2, Turnhout, 1985), 47- 150; in particular on the beard of hermits, I 19-25.

Thr word ‘prud’home’ and its feminine forms ‘prcudcfame’ and ‘prod&me’ seem to be dcrivcd from the Latin prodest, what or who is ‘profitable’, according to Ann MC Millan, ‘Men’s wrapons, women’s war. The nine Female worthies, I400- 1640,’ Mediaevalia. A Journal of Medieval

studies, 56 (I 979), I 13- 14.

343

all are priests but they hear confessions, reconciling sinners to God and to themselves. It is quite normal that lovers of every kind should tell them about

their difficulties. The advice given by the hermit is a ‘COUIISCI’ in the precise sense that this word has in monastic tradition.“’

How do they respond to pcoplc’s trust ? Do they come up to expectations or do they fail to do so? Do they respond for bcttcr or for worst? All this varies from one person to another. Not cvcryonc who says hc is a prud’hommc and

who acts and speaks in this capacity is a hermit, at lcast not a ‘real’ hermit for

there were also, as WC shall SW later, ‘phoney’ hermits who fooled no enc. Richard Hartmann has shown in Ln @es/e de1 Sairr/ &an/, that a prud’homme may sometimes be “a false priest who gives devilish ad\&“.” Jean Subrcnat interprets hcfoniage Cuillaume as an cxposurc of pcttincss and hatred reigning in certain great

abbeys and being a source of division. Guillaumc is an cxamplc of an unsuccessful

moniagc because hc thought hc would find in the ccnobitic lift an idcal of virtue in keeping with the Rule of St Benedict. Howcvcr hc was disappointed.” \Vc

shall have to leave it to the historians of the abbey of Anianc, where all this is supposed to have happened, to verify if historical facts prove that such abuses really existed.

Generally the role played by monks and hermits is a positive enc. They preach peace, non-violence, protection of the weak of all kinds. In thr prose Tristan WC read, for example, that one day the hermit was in prayer outside his door when

Tristan ran up, sword in hand. The solitary went in and shut the door bchinct him. Through a little window he gave some bread to Tristan who, when hc had

eaten, fell asleep. The hermit profited by this and took away his sword. Pcrccval

le Gallois lays aside his arms as hc approaches a hcrmitagc. ‘HIC hermit Trcvigcnt rcproachcs a knight for daring to carry arms on Good Friday. But hc goes to confession. The hermit gives him absolution and Holy Communion. It was not without a certain amount of trouble that the solitary who rcccivcd under his roof Girart dc Roussillon in the company of his wife Bertha was able to dissuade the

wounded knight from carrying out vcngcancc against his suzerain. Like Iscult, Bertha throws herself at the feet of the hermit begging for mercy saying, “Sir,

for God’s sake, mercy on this poor wretch !” Girart, pacified at last, agrees to the salutary advice of the old man and promises to do the pcnancc hc has been

On this notion, ‘Spiritual cowwelling according to St. Bernard,’ in: Abbe, C;cCide.s /o zc*hoirness

y;d holiness, &s/ und IV& (Cistercian Puhlicarions, Kalamazoo, 1982). p. 134 73. &hard Hartmann, ‘Lcs CEmcnts hktirodoxcs de La Quests drl Saint Graal’ in:.7eart Mv~~i

memorial volume. Studies in medieval literuhcre. cd. H.R. Runre. H. Nicdzielski and \\‘.I.. Hendribon. /$Zolumbia, South Carolina, 1977), 223.

Jean Suhrcnat, ‘Moines mesquins CI saint chcvalicr. A propos du “Moniage” de Guillaumc,’ ibid., 643-65.

344

given. This consists in renouncing for a certain time the use of his horse and his arms. This was a punishment often inflicted in the knightly ordersI

In love affairs monks and hermits intervene in favour of fidelity in marriage, call people to repent, to trust in God’s will to forgive, and bring their confidants round to awareness of sin. They sometimes lead men to conversion and occasion- ally to ‘moniage’, entering the monastic life either immediately or later on.‘+ Such monks and hermits are witnesses. They are madly in love with God and that is

why they attract men and women who are caught up in human love affairs. We notice that they always seem to be waiting for someone to call. Rind hospitality has always been part of the monastic and eremitical tradition. It was one of the monastic wet ks of mercy to welcome visitors. To do so they often had to set aside their ascetic practices. Generally, as Perceval le Gallois tells us, they drank only

water from a clear fountain. But in Girart de Roussillon, we read of a hermit

who made cider for the guests who passed his way and whom he put up in all charity. ts

We sometimes witness the moving and occasionally charming meeting between the hermit, a peaceful man enamoured of God, and his visitor, prey to violent

passion like Girart and Tristan, for example. Girart is caten up with hatred and a desire for vengeance. The spiritual man pours into his tumultuous heart gentleness and light. As for Tristan and Iseult, it is by chance that they first come across Orgin’s hermitage in the forest of Morois in Cornwall. He is reading, an occupation which can always be interrupted. They go into his chapel and sit down. Iseult, weeping, speaks for both of them. She throws herself at the hermit’s feet, begs for mercy and tells of their sorry plight and the fault which started it all.

WC almost seem to hear Eve talking after the first fall in the Garden of Eden: “Sir, by Almighty God, he dots not love me, nor I him. But by mishap he sipped a herb drink which I too had sipped: and it was sin. And for this the king has chased us away.” Ogrin listens in a fatherly way to the confidence of the two advcnturcrs who are ‘lying in sin’. Hc urges them to repent and takes them in for the night. In this connection the 1rouv2re points out that in sheltering a woman the hermit is going against his rule of lift. But he found that it was a favourable

opportunity for making them listen to the voice of duty and bringing them round to a change of lifc.lG

They were received so kindly that a little later on Iseult again takes the initiative

and arranges a second meeting with the hermit: “Tristan, you remember the

13

II According to Gougaud, &mites et reclus, 32-40, with references to the sources. A series of studies on moniages has been collated in Lzs clranson3 de g&e du gcle de Cuillaume

d’Oranie, 111. 1~s Moniage.t Guibnurc. Hommage d Jean Frappier under the direction of Ph. Menard TF’:d J.C. Paycn, (Paris, 1983).

Iti Paul Meyer, Girart de Roussillon, chnson de gesk (Paris, 1884). Cougaud, Ermites et reclus, 38-9.

345

hermit in his copse? Let’s go to him again.” Ogrin is reading on the steps of his

chapel. He sees them coming and while they are still far away calls them gently:

“Friends, how love does hound you from one woe to another! How long is your foolishness going to last? Come now! Repent.” Tristan asks for help: he is willing to tell king Mark that they are going to separate. Iseult again throws herself at the hermit’s feet and says sadly that she agrees. And how does Ogrin react to all this? He weeps. Then straight away he adores God and gives him thanks. He

then offers tc help the two lovers. He writes down the letter they are going to

take to king Mark and places his own seal on it. He even goes so far as to offer to take the letter himself. Finally it is Tristan who goes by night leaving Iseult at the hermitage. When the reply comes, it is Ogrin who reads it and makes the

comments. The conditions are acccptcd: the lovers will leave one another: Iscult

shall go back to Mark. And with that they cxchangc “a kiss of the lip”. Before they leave thcrc is a delightful littlc episode.

Leaving the lovers at the hrrmilage Ogrin wcn~ on his crutch 10 thr Mount whcrc bc bought vair, crminc, silk shecls, purple and scarlet, as well as a chain whiwr dlan thr lily, and a palfrey hernasscd with gold whirh am&d gcndy. Pcoplc laughrd at swing him liitter away for all rhcsr strange and magnilicmt purrhases thr prnnics he had so long saved up. But rhe old man pur all thcsc rich materials on the palfrcy and came bark to Isruit: “Queen, your garments arc falling 10 shreds. Accept these @is so that you bc all thr more Iwauliful whrn you go back IO Adwnturous Ford. I fear they will not plcasc you: I am not an cxprrt in choosing such auirc.“”

Is not this a charming avowal of lack of competcncc? Howcvcr, wc cannot help admiring the intention which sought to conciliate the divine with the human, even the fcmininc aspects of this romance. Whether he be a priest or not, the

solitary frees his visitors from sin and assumes it himself, He is the only one in whom they can confide bccausc hc is Icss tird up with the institution than arc others even though hc bc covered by the highest ecclesiastical authority: Romc.ls When Paschal II in 1131 allowed the hermit St Aybcrt to absolve coarse sins (s~urcilias) without rcfcrring to the bishop, hc did so bccausc sccrccy was assured:

“Ncvcr did those who committed such sins rcvcal them to any but hc; they would rather have perished in their wickedness.“‘!’ \\’ c can thcrcforc quite understand

Ii

!” Quoted according 10 Joseph Brdirr, IL- roams & Tnirlau e/ /ml/ (Paris, t WL), I I4 t 6. ‘This evolution has Iwcn frcqucndy studied, for rxamplc, in rctadon with romances, by J.C.

Paycn, ‘Ia p&nitcnce dam lc conwx1c cuhurcl drs XII’ cl XIII’ sib&s,’ Hezw &-A scirnm ~MMJ~&WS cf h%lOgquts, 61 (1977). 399 -428: B. Buttncr, “l‘hr Good Friday scent in ChrGcn dc Troycs’ Pcrceval,’ ‘liadirio, 36 (l98G), 415 28. Cf. also ‘Saim Amoinc dc Padour dans l’histoirc de la yOmfcssion,’ in II Sanlo. Rivista antaniana di skuia dothina ark, 1989, pp. 333 342.

Rohcn d’Arras, ‘Vita Ayhcfli’, cd. AC/a son&r. Rolland., Aprilis I, 678. On this licentia /mnitendi,

i.e., lo absolve pcnitcnts, C. Dcreinr, ‘La cririquc de la Vita de saint Aytxw, rcclus en Hainaul (I 140); Anahfa Rol/andiana, I06 (I 988). t 27 8 and 139.

346

that one of the favourite devotions of hermits was to pray to Mary Magdalen,

that sinful woman who became a penitent and then a solitary.20

After all we have so far seen, it is not surprising that moniage should have been a frequent event. After the hermit’s appeal to conversion certain knights wanted to share his life. This is what happened to two knights who were fond of tourneys and filled with murderous designs. They were converted by a hermit who lived in the woods of Colan in Tonnerois. Having confessed their sins, they

did not want to leave the hermitage where they had found peace of soul. This little group of hermits was the nucleus of the foundation of Molesme.*’ And the hermitage, once it had grown into a huge and over-prosperous monastery, was at the origin of Citeaux where St Bernard entered. It thus offered a famous example for every other instance of moniage of both men and women. For some

of these instances we have nothing but the bare account. For other instances,

converted trouu2r~s have left works written before they became monks. Some of the conversions we read about are caused by the death of a loved

one. Others are the consequence of repentance after a fault. However, some cases of moniage are simply the normal result of an inner journey. In Mh.sin~, Raymond, the father of the knight Geoffrey, leads in a hermitage the retired life he had

so long desired. ** The Perccval moniage is one of the most famous,23 but there

are many others. In the instances of those men who had been poets and romance writers before they became monks and continued to write, it would be interesting to compare their productions before and after conversion: do we notice any continuity of style and inspiration? Where do the differences lie? Most of these

men gave up their literary art when they renounced the world. There are many

such cases all very varied in degree and nature: Helinand of Froidmont, Bertrant of Born, Guiot of Provins, the Monk of Foyssan, Bertrand of Allamanon, Thibaut of Marly, Gautier of Pair-is and many others.24 Here, by way of example, are a few portraits taken from the vast gallery.

In the middle of the twelfth century, Serlon, an Englishman studying in Paris

20 Monks on marrkge. A fwe#?h-century view (New York, 1982), 82-105. Benedicta Ward, Harlots of 1 desert. A study of repentance in earb monadic sources (London-Oxford, 1987), I O-25. An example of a hermit given by a trouvere as having a devotion to St Mary Magdalen is quoted in Gougaud, ~mtilcs et r&s, 22.

According to the anonymous author of the ‘Vita Sancti Roberti,’ in: Dat Leben des hl. Robert von Moles-me. Eine Qellc zur Vorgeschichlc von Cifeaux, ed. K. Spahr (Fribourg-en-Suisse, 1944), 6-8. Likewise a group of converted knights is at the origin of the abbey of Anchin: Dereinc, ‘La critique’ 125, n.17. ” Jean Subrenat, Lc roman de M&sirze ou l’histaire des Lusignan, put into modem French by Michtlc I$ret, Preface by Jacques lc Goff (Paris, 1978), 278.

It has been studtcd, among others, by P. L-c Rtder, Lc chevalier dans le conte du Graal de Chririm $ Troves (Paris, 1978), 200-7.

Some of them have been presented by MJ. du Halgouet, ‘Poetes oublies,’ Collectanea 0rdinC Ctiltrcitnsium Re$mnatomm, 20 (1958), 12844, 227-41.

347

the art of writing well - grammatica - wrote poems in Latin of an astonishingly

acrobatic style, all of pagan inspiration. We find an invocation to Aphrodite and

a prayer to Venus side by side with his pleadings to his lady. There are also reminiscences of Ovid, allusions to the love affairs of the Olympian gods. Is Serlon putting on an act or does he really feel such burning passion? Are his writings autobiographical or merely the fantasies of a man of letters? Whatever may be, he seems to be enjoying himself right royally. But none of this prevents him from

becoming a Cistercian monk at WiltonF5

Talent of this kind could be well employed: in the cloister. The author who goes by the name of Monk of Montaudon and whose real name is unknown to us, must have been, if we are to believe a late I&z, quite talented for, when he was prior, he wrote verses and satirical poems which brought him honours, to the

profit of his priory. It seems, again if we are to believe the L;fe, that his abbot

gave him permission to serve Alfonso II of Aragon who ordered him to “eat meat,

pay court to the ladies and sing or compose poems”. After this he had success with other lords, at Puy and in Spain, staying now in the courts, now in one or other priory. The only thing that we know for sure is that, as a monk, until about the year 1215 he was in correspondence with troubadours and wrote plays for

such noble persons as Richard Lion Heart, the emperor Otto IV and Marie de

Venhadour. His presentation of the&r’umors has something monastic about it: the theme

of the unswerving power of love and the absolute obedience it claims are quite in keeping with the divine precept of measure and reason. Like other writers of

the time the Monk of Montaudon writes friendly satire of the troubadours - including himself, saying he is a “false monk”. He jokes and thus, occasionally, preaches good morals without boring either hearer or reader. He wrote a dialogue between God and himself. The monk says he has lost the friendship of barons since he has been at& en chustra - bowed down in the cloister. Gods answers that he likes the troubadour’s song and laughter and so he invites him to leave the cloister

and to go to the king ‘6 qui est Oliron’, namely Richard Lion Heart. In another piece of verse we find the same interlocutors. God tells the monk of a complaint lodged by the Pictures of the Saints. They protest against the ladies who use make-up because they heighten the colours. God wants to satisfy the Pictures by forbidding the ladies to use make-up. The monk intervenes in favour of this. God

answer and the monk comes up with fresh arguments and the two interlocutors

exchange words about these ladies in terms of amazing forthrightness. The debate goes on in another piece. After the complaints lodged by St Julien (this part of the poem is incomplete in the manuscripts), the holy Pictures and the ladies appear

25 Salon has been &scribed by P. Dronke, Medieval Latin and the tie of European 1968), vol. I, 239-40.

&n+ics (Oxford,

348

before God. Finally, on the intervention of St Peter and St Laurence, the ladies are allowed to use make-up for fifteen years “after the age of twenty-five”. This

gives the troubadour the opportunity to describe some quite curious details as to the way ladies concoct their make-up. 26 How did he come to have the recipe? Was it his own invention? Whatever may be the truth, he certainly saw the funny side of it.

Pierre de Rogiers, who was first a canon of Clermont, was young and already

gifted in poetry and song when he decided to become a minstrel. He was successful at the court of Ermengarde of Narbonne whom hc loved and for whom he sang. She repaid him with her affection but went no further and dismissed him. He wandered round from one prince to another but was not satisfied with the honour they give him and so joined the Order of Grandmont. The eight chansons he has left to posterity have nothing very original about them and deal with the

conventional themes of courtly love. This already in itself implies a certain

asceticism, for the lover must never be angry when his lady makes him wait or when she bestows her graces on another; he must never reproach her, never be demanding, never give up hope. *’ St Bernard and other spiritual writers have shown that all this is worthy of being applied to the love of God and union with

him. Finally, here is an example showing that conversions leading to moniage do

not all imply that the ex-poet lived a scandalous life. Fulk was a merchant at Marseilles. He did not live in the courts but stayed at home with his wife and two children, going only from time to time to play for the great. He even had the money to pay minstrels who wandered from place to place presenting his

own compositions. He was passionately fond of writing poetry. He related the sad story of a knight whose lady had died and, refusing to be consoled, he left the world. Such a sad plight never befell Fulk. He was always a happy and faithful husband and the love affairs he writes about reveal nothing of his personal life. The troubadours are often described as being dissolute people. But Fulk’s best

historian has quite justly reacted against this:

Indeed should we not concede, in our conception of life in the Middle Ages, some place to ordinaty common sense? . . . How did the husbands of these ladies on the one hand and the troubadour’s wife on the other look upon the rise and growth of feelings which led to such serious troubles for married life? . . . Love agaits are one thing and poetry is another. If Fulk sang at the court of Barral of Marseilles or at that of William of Montpellier, this does not show that he loved their wives: it proves to the contrary, we might say, that there was nothing between him and these ladies. Otherwise these chansons would not have been tolerated, unless we want to make out that common sense means nothing for the age of the troubadours. Such common sense requires that Fulk’s chansons

be produced and diffused without worrying that worthy middle lady, the troubadour’s wife. Were

26 The text is in F. de la Salle de Rochemaure, R. Lavaud, Les troubadours cankdiens (Aurillac, 1910), 26945. 27 De la Salle de Rochemaure and Lavaud, Troubadours, 327-370.

349

it to be otherwise, we should not have these hundreds of poets and these thous‘mds of chansons.*8

We may describe Fulk’s career as a layman and then as an ecclesiastic as a

dramatic series of disappointments. Shortly after 1195 this lover of lady poverty became a Cistercian at the abbey of Thoronet where he hoped to find her. But some time after 1201 he became abbot and then, in 1203, bishop of Toulouse,

thus finding himself caught up again in those wordly affairs he was trying to escape. However, it seems more to the point to set this conversion in the context of

circumstances as they were at the close of the twelfth century in the south of France. Stanislas Stronski described them in the following words:

First of all, there was no great abyss between the Church and the poetry OF the troubadours, especially in the twelfth century before the Albigensian Crusade. It must be remembered that at that time the ranks of the troubadours counted no less than fifteen or so ecclesiastics belonging to botlt regular and secular clergy. If the AMonk of Montaudon was able to leave his cell to sing in the courts, if canon Daurde of Prades had no difficulty in composing fairly free love songs, we can hardly speak of a conflict between clergy and troubadour.?g

The fact that we find in a same poet courtly art and religious inspiration throws

a certain light on a problem which historians are constantly debating, namely the question of the possible or real influence of spiritual authors on poets and

vice versa. This has been asked chiefly in connection with St Bernard. But it

concerns other Cistercians too, for example Adam of Perseigne; it concerns also regular canons, Hugh and Richard of Saint-Victor, and that Benedictine who became a Cistercian and wrote for Carthusians, William of Saint-Thierry. Parallels have been found between the themes sung by monastic and knightly lyrics, between certain expressions used by St Bernard and the language offin’amors.30 However, such comparative literary methods must be completed by an investiga- tion of historical sociology: to what extent was there an exchange of knowledge between the knights who entered the monastic life and the trouvkes and troubadours who once sang for them in their castles ?31 Truth to tell, before forming two distinct milieux - cloisters and castles - these men all belonged to the same society where

they had frequent contacts.

At this time converted knights in various regions entered different Orders: those

28 Brenda Bohon, ‘Fulk of Toulouse: the escape that failed,’ in: Church, Sorie& and Polifics, ed. $$ek Baker (Studies in Church History, 12, Oxford l975), 83-93.

sa S. Stronski, L lroubadour Folqurr de Marseille (Cracon, 1910), 87. J. Deroy, ‘Themes et termcs de la fin’amor dans les sermones super cantica canticontm de

S. Bernard de Clairvaux,’ in: Acres du XIIF con@ international de linguirliquc et philologiic mmanes &htiversitC Laval, Quebec 1976), 85365.

Elements of reply to this question have been given by P. Jounin, ‘Des premiers ermites a ceux & la “Queste de1 Saint Graal”,’ in: Annalrr de la Far& dt.s &ftrcs rl sciences hum&s dlAir (Gap, l968), 293-358, and H. Bayer, ‘Vita in desert0 Kassians Askese der Einade, und die Mittelalterliche Ftattenmystik,’ <titschniJlfiir ki&ngerchichte, 98 (1987), l-27. This author has shown how court culture filtered into nunneries by the members of noble families who entered them. He has picked out, in particular, examples of Car&n’s influence on spiritual authors of the twehth century.

350

who did not become Cistercians had surely heard of St Bernard and perhaps even read his works. Furthermore, these, together with the sponsal mystics of the Vitotines and other writers were probalby known to men who did not end up in moniage. Even if it is not possible to trace back to claustral literature one or other expression, it cannot be denied that monks and non-monks had come from a same cultural background and there was certainly a constant flow of ideas and images in both directions from one milieu to the other. It is possible that if we could go about what we migth call a sociology of manuscript tradition we should be much enlightened as to the extent and manner that poets and spirituals influenced each other. We already have some facts about St Bernard, Hugh of Saint-Victor, William of Saint-Thierry. Research of this kind should be followed up, completed and above all interpreted: In which regions, milieux, when and by what avenues did a text come to be known and to have influence? This is the very vast, and as yet unexplored field of what German scholars term Kommunikationspchkhte.

There was what we migth call a subtle and partly unconscious osmosis which it is not at all easy to spot. We notice it particularly by the borrowings on both sides and also by the freedom with which writers of each group criticised the other in outspoken words de trouncing those abuses and deviations which follow so closely upon the heels of any man-made creation, literature and all the rest. It is as though writers were conscious of the fact that they had in common an authentic love-life, especially if this was to some extent idealised and exacting, as is the monastic quest for God. Both monk and non-monk writers tend to surpass themselves because they are in quest of an absolute. The hermit never menaced as did so many true or false itinerant and often dazzling preachers. He knew that all men, including himself are sinners living in hope of God’s pardon. There is nothing magic about the hermit: he is very human and very humane. A peaceful and pacilj4ng man, hc was inserted into the society of his times in a very concrete way. He was thus, like the courtly hero, a witness to whole-hearted and entire love. The literature woven around him is textured by the warp and woof of lucid realism and embellishing imagination.

II. l%e hidorical facts

Now let us look into the historical facts and see whether on the basis of what history has to tell us the literary image of monks and hermits corresponds with reality. Several questions immediately come to mind: If such hermits existed, who were they? How is their role to be interpreted in the light of sociology? What values do they symbolise and why?

351

First, who were they? Did they all lead “a way of life as anti-natural as

possible . ‘v3* It is easy enough to find in documents every type of hermit mentioned

in the romances. There were ‘phoney’ hermits. They were seen to be such and pointed out in a long poem by Payen Bulotin. But in general they were more like wandering preachers for whom to live in a forest from time to time preserved their clandestinity more than it gave them an opportunity of really living the solitary life.33 There were very probably some decadent houses among the

cenobitic monasteries and it was these that reformers, founders, and reforming

institutions such as general chapters strove to improve. Among the many different centres from which reform spread, the most important were Cluny, Citeaux, Clairvaux. To the extent that the story of the calamities that befell Abelard has some historical value when it relates how the monks of the abbey of Saint-Gildas tried to murder him it coincides with the plot we read about in Moniage Cuilhme when the monks of Aniane were against William.34 What leads us to be sceptical in the case of Abelard is that as a reformer - who had excellent ideas on the monastic life - he was emotionally disturbed to such an extent that no community would take him in until Peter the Venerable welcomed him at a little priory where

he had no authority and took no part in community life.“” The case of Abelard allows us to recall an obvious fact long forgotten by

historians of monasticism and historians of literature alike: a great number of monks and, according to the best authorities, even the majority, lived in ‘little priories’ where they led a solutary life very much as it is described in romances.36 Jacques Dubois has done conclusive work on the subject and has recently given a detailed synthesis of his findings. 37 Each abbey had several dependencies

J2 Kennedy, ‘The hermit’s role,’ 53. The ptoblcm of the historical reality of hermits mentioned in litcraturc has been set by Paycn, ‘La p&hence, 41 I. On the digcrcnt kinds of recluse, monastic and urban, during succcssivc periods of the middle ages, I have given some indications under the tide ‘Solitude and solidatity. Medieval women rccluscs,’ in: hfcdicval r&ious women II. f’caccwtuvers,

cd. Lillian Thomas Shank and John A. Nichols (Cistercian Publications Kalamazoo, MI, 1987, 911. Cistercian Studies S&es, 72), 67-83.

These people arc mentioned in the text which I have cditcd under the title ‘Le pocme de Fyen Rolotin contrc les faux crmites,’ RCUIIC binidiclinc, 68 (1958): 52-86.

3s Moniogc Guilkzumr, II, v. 780 -86, quoted by Subrcnat, ‘Momcs mcsquins,’ 647. On the monastic ideas of Abelard. I have commented texts under the title ‘Ad iosam soohiam

ghristum. IX timorgnagc monastiquc ci’Abclard,’ Revue d’ascihque CI de mystique, 46 (i970), 161-81. .I. Dubois and G. Pence, att. ‘Priorate.’ in: Dkionanb de++ Instihdi di Pcrkione, cd. G. Pcllicia

f,nd G Rocea (Rome, 1983), vol. 7, col. 828-61. ” ”

Article cited in the preceding note, col. 828-52, with bibliography. The conclusions of J. Dubois are con6nncd by the rest&s of research concerning the priories of Cluny in northern Italy and which I have presented under the tide ‘Pontida c la vita nci monastcri cluniaccnsi di Lombardia,’ in: Ita& &n&f&, I. Cfuny in Lomburdiu (Ccscna, 1978), 429-46. Since then there has appeared a volume edited by J.L. Lemaitre, Bierus et prituris duns 1’Occident miditkal (Geneva, 1987). Research work on priories is being pursued, according to P. Chapu, ‘Lcs pricurcs de I’abbaye tourangelle de Noyen,’ with remarks relating to the subject in Bull&in de lo Sk-i& nationale dcs Antiquaircs de France

(1987), 313-321.

352

occupied by a small number of monks and known by various names such as church, villa, grange, deanery, prtWti and, more often, priory. The monks who

lived there did not generally do parish work: this was confided to the diocesan priests who were often called ‘chaplains’. Exceptionally the dependency of a big abbey was occupied by a single monk. But “two was the customary standard in the twelfth century, and three the minimum accepted in the fifteenth”.38 This fact is witnessed to by, among other instances, the very numerous Cluniac priories

where not all the monks lived in the same manner as those several dozens who resided in the great abbey itself.

These remarks confirm what we read in romances. In the first place, the monks who lived - with or without the tide - as solitaries, that is as hermits, in close proximity to the small chapters scattered about the countryside were near to the people living in the villages and hamlets. They had more influence on the

inhabitants and travellers than did the clergy. It is not at all surprising that we

read in romances that people on the whole went instinctively to these hermits for advice. Obviously, they could not celebrate solemn liturgical offices: “in the houses where two or three monks lived, and sometimes only one, there was no ‘liturgical pomp’.“3g Their prayer corresponds exactly to the description we find in romances. The hermit Raymond, according to Mth-ine, lives in one of the seven

hermitages on the Mountain of Montserrat, in company with a prior, a chaplain and a young cleric. 40 Perceval in Li Contes du Graal written by Chrttien of Troyes, “finds in a little chapel, a hermit, a prior and a little cleric (c&m) who were just about to start the service”.41 In such small communities which were further away from the abbey than were the hermitages of Montserrat, an easy and even slack

life crept in. This is why certain romance writers denounced abuses and especially

a lack of charity which they found there. 42 On the other hand we read too of those who “in priories, deaneries and houses live a life pleasing to God”: This is not always true of the cenobites who were too wealthy.43 There may be a certain amount of satirical exaggeration on the part of romance writers, moralists and

preachers who wanted to get home a lesson. But certainly such abuses and

slackness are possible and even sometimes historically controllable. These facts confirmed by history and literature are in keeping 4th what modern

3s

19 Dubois and Pcnco, ‘Priorate,’ 829. .I. Dubois ‘Saint Guinefort. v&r&+ des Dombes. Comment un martvr inconnu fut substitut

$ un ihihien-martyr,’ Journal des &ant.r (January-June 1980), 152. ’ The description of the life led in the hermitage as given by Subrenat, Milusine, 278, is

confirmed, for all that has been established, on the basis of historical documents by Garcia Maria plombas, ‘La “Santa Montaiia de Montserrat,’ in: Espotia cremitica (Pamplona, 1970), 182.

Lc mman de Perceval ou & Con& du &al, ed. William Roach (Geneva, 1959), v.6342-5; quoted f?d commented by Buttner, ‘The Good Friday scene,’ 416.

43 Texts have been quoted by Scheuten, Dar M&h&m, 81. Scheuten, Das Minchtum, 59-60.

353

sociology has to tell us about the small voluntary fringe groups which set up “utopian societies”.++ They contest the mediocre way of life of seculars, ecclesi-

astics and even claustrals. They thus succeed in raising minds to a higher level and to a life of greater detachment from earthly preoccupations. The hermit is spiritually and institutionally a free man who remains however submitted to God, the Rule and the laws of the Church. The image he has in literature corresponds to the vocation and function which is truly his in the most authentic spiritual

tradition. One last question comes to mind. How many we explain the persistence of

this model of the eremitical and monastic life in the twelfth and even in the thirteenth century?

The period which opens with the start of the thirteenth century is often characterised by two major facts: in the socio-economic field it is a period of

urbanization and the commercial expansion of towns: it is the era of merchants.

In the Church, the friars inherit the spiritual leadership which had hitherto been proper to monks. The Fransciscans and the Dominicans whose numbers rapidly increased took over from the traditional black monks and the ‘grey’ monks of the order of Citeaux. But, WC notice, the people mentioned in romances do not

confess themselves to the friars of these new Orders. Monks and hermits represent, so it is supposed, an anachronistic form of religious life, bound up with the economic and social structures of feudalism.

This verifies a law which has been illustrated in a general manner especially in connection with knightly romances. The evolution of a scale of values takes place more slowly in the minds and mentalities of society than it does in the hard

facts of everyday life. 45 The models proposed, even if life progresses, are still those of an earlier period. The noblemen of the twelfth and the thirteenth centuries linger over the ideal proper to the Arthurian golden age. This phenomenon is to be noticed also in connection with new forms of religious life. During the period we are dealing with, the romances were read by an aristocracy which had more

sympathy for the traditional cenobitic and eremitical life of the traditional monks,

the Cistercians, the Carthusians and the regular canons, than for the new forms proposed by the new Orders. But during the lifetime of St Francis and St Dominic and also throughout and beyond the following generation, the monastic models are more in keeping with the spiritual needs of the class of society for which

romances were written. Writers suggested conversion to knights, even sometimes

inviting them to moniage, in offering the example of words and deeds left by monks and hermitage.

u Jean S&y, ‘Unc sociologic des sociids imaginics: monachisme et utopie,’ Annah E.S.C., 26 (1976) 32654. 45 Gcorgcs Dttby, ‘L’histoirc des systtmes dd valcttr,’ Htkvy and 77zcoty, I I (1971), 15-26.

354

The facts we have developed require interpretation. For this we need the services of a specialised science, the sociology of change. The rise of the mendicant orders coincided with profound changes in the economy, the organisation of authority, cultural and devotional expression of faith. It is, strictly speaking, closer to a mutation than to a mere new stage of sociological evolution. In sociology as in

geology a mutation entails something of a break, a rupture within a certain continuity.& But in the collective memory of the agents of this mutation, namely the various human groups which live it, mental images and models continue to be those of the recent past. This accounts for the fact that in the heart of the thirteenth century there is still an abundance of chivalric literature marked by

all that is connected with feudal imagery.47

A typical example of the projection of this feudal imagery is seen in the figure of the ‘merchant’s son’. This product of the new society is found in the stories written about St Francis in the generation which wrote after his death.48 A recent learned book deals with the depositions of eye-witnesses of the last part of his life: “we who were with him . . .“.4g In these documents of uncontestable authen- ticity courtly language is reduced to a single word, the very one which means

‘courteous’ - curialk50 And even this word occurs rarely. “All that we can say for certain is that Francis knew some of the chansons of the repertoire of the troubadours and the goliards”.51 However, some of his disciples and their readers

were haunted by a “knightly nostalgia”.52 This explains why the legends written by them make frequent use of knightly terms and later on the romantics even

went so far as to make out that he was a troubadour. Sometimes, for the purpose

of justifying the archaic image given of Francis, writers had recourse to a fourth-century model adapted to suit the purpose in hand: St Martin of Tours.53

Thus we see that in hagiography and in courtly literature the imaginary is not that of the contemporary sociai or religious life. But when monks and hermits

46 G. Balandier, ‘Sociologic des mutations,’ Actes du 7’ Collogue de llAssocialion intemationale des @o/agues (Paris, 1970), 31.

John Leyerle, Conclusions: tie major times oJchtialric literature. Essays in rcl0Dn.s betwren literature f!‘B”d I@ in /he later Mriidle Ages (Studies in Medieval Culture, Kalamazoo, 1980), vol. 14, 142-3.

F. Cardini. ‘L’awentura di un cavaliere di Christo. ADDUnti ner uno studio sulla cavalleria y;lla s iritualita di S. Francesco,’ Sfudi Francescani, 73 (1976j,’ 148. a

ii soul Manselli, Jvos qui cum co /i&us. Contribute alla crctestione Francexana (Rome, 19801, 12, 3-3, 189-90. - ”

Mansellj, .h’?s qui cum eo jiknus, 195. 51 52

Manselh, Nos qui cum eoJkimus, 148. To the bibliography given in Manselli, .Xx qui cum eoJuimus, p. 128, n. 3, add R. Manselli,

‘II medioevo come “christiamitas”. Una scoperta romantica,’ in: Concello, Skia, miti e immagifzi ak! s;‘cd’o fro, a cura di Vittore Branca (Florence, 1973), 71-74.

F. Cardml, ‘I primi biogra6 francescani dinanzi a un modello agiografico cavalleresco: San Martin0 di Tours,’ Sfudi Francescuni, 76 (1979), 51-61.

355

are depicted in romances there is one undeniable fact which has recently struck historians: monks, cenobites and solitaries - caricatured by some, idealised by others - really existed and there were many of them. And, when all is said that can be said, whatever their private life may have really been, in romances the existence of such men is justified because it was considered as a symbol of the quest for absolute love.