William Rufus

Technically, he was King William II of England but was called "Rufus" for his reddish beard, William was the third eldest son of William the Conqueror. The eldest was Robert Curthose (given the title Duke of Normandy after his father's death), and the second son Richard died early. This left William junior to succeed as King William II of England. (The youngest, Henry, would ultimately become king as well.)

Born about 1057, he might not have been raised from early on with the thought that he would have to rule some day, but when the second son Richard died in a hunting accident in the New Forest in 1070, Rufus' destiny altered course. He would have made an odd-looking person, never mind a king. According to William of Malmesbury, Rufus was 

...well set; his complexion florid, his hair yellow; of open countenance; different colored eyes, varying with certain glittering specks; of astonishing strength, though not very tall, and his belly rather projecting.

He was also given to mischief as a child. Orderic Vitalis, a contemporary historian, wrote that the younger sons William and Henry, in a moment of great boredom and little discretion, emptied a chamberpot from an upper story onto Robert. Their father had to break up the ensuing fight.

After becoming king, he had to deal with the Rebellion of 1088 (led partially by his uncle, Bishop Odo), which he defeated. In 1091 he decided to invade Normandy and successfully captured some lands from Robert. He made it up to Robert by promising to help him recover some of his land that had been taken by France. (Their joint venture failed.)

In 1097 he initiated the construction of Westminster, the largest Hall in England.

He took the secular side (naturally) of the Investiture Controversy. In the case of England, bishops and abbots were feudal subjects of the king, and so he was less concerned about clashing with them over the subject of investing clerics. He then made a tactical error in this regard: he nominated as Archbishop of Canterbury the greatest theologian of the age, Anselm of Bec. Their conflict would mirror one between a future king of England and his archbishop, but I'll talk about William and Anselm's conflict tomorrow.

Herleva of Falaise

There have been many references in this blog to the children of lords by their mistresses, but we've given very little attention to the women. Let's look at the reason William the Conqueror was called "the Bastard."

Herleva of Falaise was a Norman woman who was the mother of William by his father, Duke of Normandy Robert I. Orderic Vitalis writing a generation or two later said that her father was Fulbert, Robert's chamberlain. William of Malmesbury wrote that Herleva and Robert were later married, but if that had actually happened in William's lifetime then he would have been legitimized and not called Bastard.

Supposedly Robert was high atop one of his towers when he looked down and saw Herleva. She was engaged in the process of dyeing leather by trampling on it barefoot in a tub filled with dye. The story goes that she looked up and saw him watching her, so she lifted her skirts a little more than necessary to show off her legs. Robert ordered that she brought through the back door to meet him, but she refused such a humiliating method, and insisted she would have to enter the castle on horseback through the front gate.

The duke was too anxious to have her join him that he agreed, and a few days later, cleaned up and dressed well, she rode on a white horse through the front gate of the castle. His son William was born in 1027 or 1028.

More realistically, she married Herluin de Conteville in 1031, viscount of Conteville (although that title may have come later, granted him by his step-son, William, after William came to the dukedom). With Herluin she had two sons, Robert of Mortain and Odo, the bishop of Bayeux. They also had two daughters, Emma and another, both of whom made good marriages to nobles.

Robert de Torigni claimed that she was buried at the Abbey of Grestain, a Benedictine monastery founded by Herluin. The statue above of her is in Huy, Belgium, which claims to be her country of origin.

Her other son was Odo, who (like Robert of Mortain) was highly valued by their famous half-brother. Odo became a bishop, and may be the person who instigated the creation of the Bayeux tapestry, which is not a tapestry, but we'll explain that tomorrow when we talk about him.

Margaret of Wessex

Margaret of Wessex (c.1045 - 16 November 1093) was born in Hungary while her family was exiled there. Her father was Edward the Exile, heir to the throne of England but sent away as a babe after Cnut conquered the country. Her father had been sent to the court of the Swedish king, Olof Skötkonung, and eventually made his way to Kiev. When grown, he traveled to Hungary and helped their King Andrew I achieve the throne. This gave the family a home in Hungary, where Margaret grew up in a very religious environment.

Her father was recalled to England as a potential successor to Edward the Confessor, and he brought the family with him. Edward died right after arrival in the land of his birth, and then the death of Edward the Confessor started a series of events that left the Exile's heir, Edgar Ætheling, unlikely to achieve the throne, though not for lack of trying. When Duke William II of Normandy succeeded at the Battle of Hastings in 1066 and inevitably became King of England, Margaret and her family found a home in Northumbria.

The traditional story is that Margaret's mother, Agatha, decided to take her children back to the continent in 1068. A storm, however, drove them back to land, but farther north, where they were shipwrecked and given refuge by King Malcolm III of Scotland. Malcolm would have been in his late 30s, and Margaret in her early to mid-20s. He took a liking to her, and they were married in 1070. (The illustration is Malcolm greeting Margaret by a Victorian artist.)

Orderic Vitalis wrote that Malcolm had, in fact, traveled to England many years before to speak to Edward the Confessor and ask for his kinswoman's hand in marriage. If this meeting took place, the marriage was delayed for several years. It is possible that the marriage was arranged and then put off against Malcolm's intentions, which might explain Malcolm's plundering of Lindisfarne. Whatever the case may have been, Malcolm was at the time a widower with two sons and would have benefitted from linking himself to the English royal line.

The two had eight children, among which were three kings of Scotland and a queen of England. Tomorrow I'll tell you about their children's fortunes, and then we'll get to her sainthood.

Edgar Ætheling, Part 3

Edgar Ætheling had been through many ups and downs. For the trouble he had caused for William II of Normandy as an "alternate choice" for king of England, he might have been executed, but he was allowed to live, given his freedom, and also given some estates.

When William died in 1087, Edgar threw his support to William's eldest son, Robert Curthose, to whom William had left the dukedom of Normandy. The second son, William Rufus, succeeded as King of England. Robert felt he should have England, and tried to overthrow William in a conflict that was not resolved until 1091.

Part of the resolution was that Edgar be stripped of lands given to him in Normandy. Edgar fell back on an old habit: going to stay with King Malcolm III in Scotland (now Edgar's brother-in-law), who also happened to be preparing war with William Rufus. Significantly, when the two armies met, they did not fight. They decided to talk things over, and whom did the kings pick to conduct negotiations? Malcolm sent Edgar, William sent Robert. Since Edgar had been one of Robert's chief advisors, the two would be able to talk amicably.

One result of the negotiation was a reconciliation between Edward and William, that made it safe for Edgar to return to England. The peace between the two countries began to break down, however, and eventually he left England for Normandy with Robert. In 1093 Edgar was back in Scotland to speak to Malcolm at William's request: the peace treaty wasn't working, and war was unavoidable. That war killed Malcolm and his heir, Edward, Edgar's nephew. (Edward was not his eldest; that was Duncan, who was kept at William's court.) Another army against Scotland had Edgar at its head in 1097 and helped to establish another son of Malcolm, Edgar, on the Scottish throne.

Orderic Vitalis wrote that Edgar Ætheling was the leader of an English fleet in support of the First Crusade. Orderic must be wrong, since the English supporting fleet reached Syria in March 1098, and Edgar was known to be in Scotland in late 1097. There was no time between the two events for him to reach Syria. William of Malmesbury said that Edgar made a pilgrimage to Jerusalem, and Orderic may just be confused about the reason and timing for Edgar's trip.

After Jerusalem, William Rufus died when Robert Curthose was too far away to claim the throne, which was grabbed by their younger brother, who became King Henry I. Naturally, Robert went to war over this, and naturally, Edgar joined him. Naturally, they failed again; Robert was imprisoned for the rest of his life, and Edgar was let go, since by this time Henry had married a daughter of Malcolm and Edgar's sister, making Edgar his uncle by marriage.

William of Malmesbury wrote that, in 1125, Edgar was still alive and growing old in privacy and quiet. A tumultuous life came to a peaceful end, but we do not know where or when.

Next I want to turn to Malcolm III "Canmore" who was a significant player in these events.

William Longsword

So the Duchy of Normandy was created when King Charles the Simple made a treaty in 911 with Rollo, a Viking who had established himself as Count of Rouen and continued to encroach on more Frankish territory. Charles allowed Rollo all of what then became Normandy in exchange for fealty and no more attacks. Rollo's son William would succeed him as the second ruler of Normandy. (The title "duke" wasn't commonly used until later; early historians used the term principes, "chieftains.")

William was born about 893 to Rollo and Poppa of Bayeux. His parents (and he) were pagans, and were married more danico ("according to Danish custom"). Part of the treaty with Charles meant converting to Christianity in 911. "William" is not a typical Danish/Viking name, and he was probably re-named at his conversion/baptism, so his birth name is lost to us.

Rollo handed over the reigns to William in 927. Rollo's exact age is unknown, but he was probably at least in his 50s; he lived another five years. Orderic Vitalis writes that, in 933, Normans who felt the William was becoming too "Frankish" rebelled against him, besieging him in Rouen. William defeated the rebellion, establishing himself more firmly as a strong leader.

In that same year, Charles' second successor in West Francia, Raoul, was fighting to maintain control over his land and fight off Viking attacks. William came to his aid, in return being granted more land in the north of France, including Breton territory, the Cotentin Peninsula (that juts towards Britain) and the Channel Islands. resistance from the Bretons was quickly defeated. 

William expanded his territory further when he married Luitgarde of Vermandois, daughter of Count Herbert II of Vermandois. He also married his sister Adela (born Gerloc before converting to Christianity) to William, Count of Poitou. William now had powerful allies in Vermandois, Poitou, and of course West Francia. When Raoul of West Francia died in 936, his son Louis IV had an extremely difficult time establishing himself, both against the Bretons who were still upset about losing land, and from his own barons. William supported him, getting excommunicated for his troubles because of battles with the Count Arnulf of Flanders. William pledged loyalty to Louis, however, and was confirmed in all the lands Rollo and William had been given.

William's destruction of some of Arnulf's estates needed resolution, however, and a date was chosen for a peace summit. While the two and their people met on an island on the Somme, on 17 December 942 William was ambushed and killed by some of Arnulf's followers.

William had no children by Luitgard. He had, however, like his father, a more danico wife, Sprota, with whom he had a son, Richard. At the time of William's death, Richard was 10, but he became Count of Rouen and the ruler of the Normans. Tomorrow we will continue examining the dynasty that led to the true Duchy of Normandy and William the Conqueror.

The Wife Who Wasn't

The Duchy of Normandy was created in 911 by the Treaty of Saint-Clair-sur-Epte, an agreement between King Charles III ("the Simple") of West Francia and Rollo, a Viking leader who gained a foothold in Rouen years earlier and styled himself Count of Rouen. After Rollo was defeated by Charles at the Siege of Chartres, Charles decided that he would cede Rollo a chunk of the continent if Rollo would pledge fealty to Charles and protect the land from any further Viking incursions.

Another condition was that Rollo and his people would convert, and that Rollo would marry Gisela of France, the daughter of Charles (illustrated is Charles handing her over in a 14th century depiction). Rollo would be the first Duke of Normandy, and his and Gisela's children would create a dynasty. When Rollo died in 933, he was succeeded by William Longsword, whose parents were Rollo and Poppa of Bayeux. So what happened to Gisela?

Gisela's marriage to Rollo is mentioned by Orderic Vitalis in his history of the Church. William of Jumièges, writing a history of Norman dukes, tells us that Rollo had two marriages. He was married (or simply took as concubine) a slave named Poppa of Bayeux in  more danico ("according to Norse custom"). When the treaty was made with Charles, Poppa was put aside and he married Gisela more Cristiano ("according to Christian custom"). Around 917, Gisela dies and Rollo reunites with Poppa.

Is it possible that, in the five or six years between the Treaty and Gisela's "death," that the two never produced a son, even though that was the best way for Rollo to ensure that his family would retain power? Well, it is believable, if Gisela did not exist in the first place.

The fact is, Gisela's name does not show up in any Frankish sources or genealogies. She is only mentioned in Norman sources after the events and conveniently helps legitimize Rollo's "Normandization." The Christian Franks under Charles would never have accepted a child outside of Christian marriage if there were a son of Gisela available. On the other hand, Gisela's father married in 907, so a daughter offered in marriage in 911 could not have been more than a few years old, unless she was illegitimate.

Rollo himself does not appear in any official documents until 918, when he is listed in a charter as the leader of Viking settlers reigning over Normandy. There is no real evidence that Gisela existed outside of later stories.

A dynasty did begin, but it was a son of Rollo and Poppa. Let's look at that son's career tomorrow.

A History of the Church

Orderic Vitalis was given the job of writing a history of the Church. Like most medieval authors, however, he did not start with a blank page. He drew on other sources, one of which was the Ecclesiastical History of the English People written by Bede c.731CE. Orderic's version can be divided into three sections.

The first section follows Bede from the birth of Christ. He then added a list of popes.

The second section is a history of the Abbey of Saint-Evroul, where he became a monk and did his work. It also includes stories of William the Conqueror, which he based on the Gesta Normannorum Ducum of William of Jumièges (and others). He also used the Gesta Guillelmi of William of Poitiers. As an English-born man of Norman descent, living in Normandy, he considers the Norman Conquest of England in 1066 with a balanced perspective, seeing both sides of the conflict. The years immediately following the Conquest, 1067-1071, match William of Poitiers. After 1071 Orderic's comments on political events seem to be his own.

The third section talks less about the church and more about the history of France under the Carolingians and Capetians. He has a lot of opinions about the papacy, Normans in Sicily, and the First Crusade. For the Crusade he draws on Fulcher of Chartres and Baldric of Dol. He focuses mainly on the three sons of William the Conqueror: Robert Curthose, William Rufus, and Henry I. He ends with the capture of Stephen of Blois in Lincoln in 1141 during the Anarchy.

Ordericus realized that he was limited in his writing:

I shall search out and give to the world the modern history of Christendom, venturing to call my unpretending work An Ecclesiastical History.

Confined to my cloister by the vows which have voluntarily bound me to the strict observance of the monastic rule, I am unable to make researches into the affairs of Alexandria, Greece, or Rome, and others worthy to be related; but I labour, by God's help, to unfold with truth contemporary events for the instruction of posterity—both such as have passed under my own observation, and those which, occurring in neighbouring countries, have come to my knowledge. I firmly believe, however, from observation of the past, that someone will arise with far more penetration than myself, and more capable of examining the course of worldly affairs, who will perhaps extract from my pages, and from those of others of the same class, what he thinks worthy of being inserted in his chronicle or history for the information of posterity. [source]

His interest in leaving a foundation for future historians reminds me of the "last words" of Friar Clynn. 

He did go well beyond his chosen topic, however: one incident related in the Ecclesiastical History was the first written European ghost story, which I shared here.

The last few posts have had a mention of William of Poitiers, who wrote a biography of William the Conqueror. We don't know much about William himself except what Orderic says, but William's work gives us more detail on Norman and Anglo-Saxon life. I'll go in to that tomorrow.

Orderic Vitalis

At a time when Christian priests could marry, a French priest named Odelerius of Orléans came to England following his patron, who became the first Earl of Shrewsbury. The earl gave Odelerius a chapel to manage. Odelerius had three sons, the eldest of whom was named Orderic. Their mother was English, and so Orderic grew up considering himself English rather than French.

Orderic (16 February 1075 - c.1142) was given at the age of five over to Siward, a monk at the Abbey of Saints Peter and Paul at Shrewsbury. (There is an assumption by historians that his mother must have died, and Odelerius not being able to raise the boys looked for other placements for them.) Orderic was with Siward until he was ten, at which time he was handed to the Abbey of Saint-Evroul in Normandy.

The Benedictine monks at Saint-Evroul had a difficult time pronouncing the name "Orderic," and so they called him "Vitalis" after an early Christian martyr. Orderic, in turn, did not know any French when he first entered Saint-Evroul, and had to learn it along with the practices of monastic life. In an autobiographical note, he says that Orderic was the name of the priest who baptized him. At the beginning of one of his historical works, he signs himself Ordericus Vitalis Angligena ("English-born").

He turned out to have skill as a copyist, earning the position of master scribe in the scriptorium, and his handwriting can be detected in at least 20 manuscripts that still exist. His first literary work was a continuation of the Gesta Normannorum Ducum ("Deeds of the Norman Dukes") started by William of Jumièges, and after Orderic continued further by Robert de Torigni.

Orderic was responsible for the greatest English social history produced in the Middle Ages, the Historia Ecclesiastica ("History of the Church"). This needs its own entry, so we will continue this tomorrow.

Group Projects

Taking sole credit for a written work was not always as important as it is to some authors today. 

William of Jumièges (c.1000 – post-1070) was a monk of Jumièges, a Bénédictine monastery. In the 1050s, he decided to take an earlier historical account to update and extend it. That work was De moribus et actis primorum Normannorum ducum (“Concerning the Customs and Deeds of the First Dukes of the Normans”) by Dudo of Saint-Quentin, completed between 1015 and 1026. As a recording of some of the earliest Norman nobles and their emerging dynasty, it is interesting, albeit inaccurate and interlaced with legend.

William of Jumièges tried to fill in the gaps between Dudo's time and his, and was able to write about William of Normandy invading England in 1066. His work becoming known to others, it is believed that William the Conqueror himself asked that William keep writing a history of his time and deeds. This new version, Gesta Normannorum Ducum ("Deeds of the Norman Dukes"), ends around 1070-71. (The illustration shows William presenting the work to William.)

A few decades later, another took up William's writing and decided to extend it. This was Orderic Vitalis. Orderic was but in Shropshire in 1075 to a priest at a time when clerical marriage was slowly being restricted. He became a Benedictine monk at the Abbey of Saint-Evroul in Normandy, becoming a script master and librarian. He is best known for writing a history of the Church.

His first attempt at writing was picking up the Gesta Normannorum Ducum and filling in the gaps between William and Orderic's own time. He also filled in more from earlier times, borrowing from something called the Gesta Guillelmi ("Deeds of William") by William of Poitiers. (William of Poitiers was a chaplain to William the Conqueror.) Orderic's section of the expanded Gesta is fairly balanced, since he could see things from both the Norman and English perspective.

A third author came along in Robert de Torigni, the abbot of Mont Saint-Michel. Robert was enamored of English kings—descendants of the Norman William, after all—and added much about William after the Conquest, the Abbey of Bec, and an entire volume on Henry I of England. He also borrowed from Henry of Huntingdon's historical work, who was not just an author but also an acquaintance of Robert.

The Gesta Normannorum Ducum was popular in the Middle Ages, being copied and distributed among many monasteries. There are 47 known manuscript copies of it known today. It was an important source for other writes such as Benoît de Sainte-Maure, a historian best known for the 40,000-line poem about the Trojan War. 

I've mentioned Orderic Vitalis before, and I'd like to talk more about him, especially his commissioned work on the history of the Church. See you tomorrow.

The Great Librarian of the Mont

In 1876, in the nave of the chapel of Mont Saint-Michel, a grave was opened to reveal the remains of a former abbot. With the remains was a lead disc inscribed with the epitaph "Here lies Robert Torigni, abbot of this place, who ruled the monastery 32 years, and lived 80 years."

Robert de Torigni (c.1106 - 1186) was born in Normandy. We don't know who his family was (Torigni was the name of the commune where he was born); he became Robert de Torigni when in 1128 he entered the Benedictine Bec Abbey (also home—though not all at the same time—of Anselm and Theobald and Lanfranc). In 1149 he was made prior, and five years later became abbot of Mont Saint-Michel in Normandy, where in 1158 he was host to Henry II of England and Louis VII of France.

King Henry traveled frequently through his Norman territories, so when he and his wife, Eleanor of Aquitaine, where nearby in 1161 during the birth of their daughter Eleanor, Robert was one of the godfathers.

Robert had a reputation for piety and learning. He was a great collector of books, and turned Mont Saint-Michel into a such a well-known center of learning with such a large library that it was nicknamed Cité des Livres ("City of Books"). He had up to 60 monks copying manuscripts, and himself was referred to as "The Great Librarian of the Mont."

Robert also was a fan of history, and liked putting events in chronological order without commentary. That is not to say that he didn't "editorialize" in his own way: as a friend of Henry II, he barely mentioned the death of Thomas Becket and made no mention of Henry's involvement. Robert, like most, drew from other sources, such as Henry of Huntingdon, from whom we got tales of Cnut and the "Fighting Bishop." Henry and Robert knew each other; Henry had visited Bec while Robert was there and provided him information on Henry I, and Robert introduced Henry to Bec's copy of the Historia Regum Britanniae ("History of the Kings of Britain") by Geoffrey of Monmouth.

Robert was the last of three contributors to the Gesta Normannorum Ducum ("Deeds of the Norman Dukes") a history started by William of Jumièges and continued by Orderic Vitalis. Let's take a look at it and its contributors tomorrow.

David versus Máel Coluim

King David I (pictured here) was one of many sons of Malcolm III of Scotland, several of whom had their chance on the throne after it had been usurped by their uncle, Donald. David was about 40 years old when his turn came, and he took the throne with the support of his brother-in-law, King Henry I of England. There was a problem, however: his nephew, Máel Coluim.

Máel Coluim ("Malcolm") mac Alexander was the illegitimate son of David's older brother, Alexander I. According to historian Orderic Vitalis, Malcolm "affected to snatch the kingdom from [David], and fought against him two sufficiently fierce battles; but David, who was loftier in understanding and in power and wealth, conquered him and his followers."

Malcolm escaped into more obscure parts of Scotland, surviving and gaining allies over a six-year span, after which he attempted to attack David for the throne again. One reason for his motivation might have been that David spent time in England, seeming to prefer visiting Henry's court over being among his own people.

Malcolm, with the support of Óengus of Moray (mentioned here), marched against David's army. The Annals of Ulster report that 4000 of Óengus' army and Óengus himself died, while only 1000 of the men loyal to David died that day. David's force, led by a constable, marched into the now undefended Moray and captured it. Malcolm himself escaped, and spent the next four years battling David's forces.

David was aided with a large force, including ships, from Henry. Malcolm was captured in 1134 at Roxburgh Castle, and history has no more to say about him. Moray was given to David's nephew, only son of David's oldest brother Duncan, who had held the kingship for less than six months in 1094.

David was called by William of Newburgh a "King not barbarous of a barbarous nation." He attempted to make some reforms that he felt Scotland and its church needed. I'll explain some of those tomorrow.

What Makes a Troubadour?

In the years 1100 - 1350, a type of musical performer arose called a troubadour. They did not call themselves troubadours; that term was first used in 1575 to refer to court poets of the 12th and 13th centuries. They almost always referred to themselves as chantaire, "singer." The term "troubadour" is assumed to come from Occitan trobador, from trobaire, "composer," which may be from Late Latin tropare, "to compose, to invent a poem."

The earliest known troubadour whose work has survived was Duke William IX of Aquitaine (grandfather of Eleanor of Aquitaine). He may not have been the first troubadour: it is possible that his political prominence helped him appear to be the start of a tradition, but he may instead have been just one example of an already thriving cultural event. The chronicler Orderic Vitalis records that William composed songs about his experience on the First Crusade. Order also gives us a first-hand account of William performing "many times ... with rhythmic verses and witty measures."

The troubadour phenomenon rose and fell. The 12th century began with few examples of activity, but the final decades saw a burst of output: almost half of the almost 2500 pieces (from a total of about 450 known names) that have survived come from the years 1180 - 1220. Beginning in western Aquitaine, it spread to eastern Aquitaine, then down to Toulouse and Provence. In the early 1200s it reached Italy and Spain.

Duke William was probably the highest-ranking member of society who could be designated a troubadour. Most described themselves as "poor knights," although there was Jaufre Rudel, prince of Blaye in southwestern France.

The troubadours had an "enemy" in the jongleur. The jongleur was not the juggler that the word has become, but was actually a minstrel. The difference is that the minstrel plays songs he has heard from others, although there may be an element of dancing and acrobatics. The troubadour is a poet-composer, a much higher calling requiring skill. Troubadours often wrote attacks on jongleurs. There were, however, many troubadours who also entertained in the manner of the jongleur.

The word troubadour is masculine; a female troubadour is a trobairitz. It would make sense to look at the phenomenon of the female composer in the troubadour tradition next.

Oblates

Becoming a monk was not always a choice. Sometimes it was the default choice for someone with no skills that he could turn into a career, or for someone who had no taste for farming. Sometimes, parents would decide that the church was the best option for their child.

The Venerable Bede was a puer oblatus, a "boy oblate," sent to be raised at a monastery at the age of seven. The word oblate, in fact, means someone who has been offered. Monasteries that adhered to the Rule of St. Benedict accepted oblates that young—it was their chief source of new members—until 656CE, when the Tenth Council of Toledo forbade boys before the age of ten. Orderic Vitalis was given to his monastery at ten or eleven, and could take vows as early as fourteen. Archbishop Lanfranc of Canterbury suggested that oblates could take vows when the authorities of the monastery decided he was mature enough to understand and handle the obligations involved.

Various monasteries had their own policies regarding oblates. The 11th century About William of Hirschau defined two kinds of oblate:

—fratres barbati ("bearded brethren), also called conversi (converts), who took vows but did not have to be clean-shaven or live cloistered.
—oblati (oblates), workmen who followed religious rules while working at the monastery.

Other terms were used over the centuries: commissioned, donates, confronter, with various distinctions that changed over time. Despite the many approaches to managing and designating those who wished to be involved in the monastic or priestly life, the chief distinction was between those who entered fully and took all vows, and those who were only partially committed.

Which leads me to a new idea about oblates: a third order, for lay members of religious orders. There is a long history of this, which I'll tell you about tomorrow.

Haunted by Demons

Want to own a speaker that plugs into your laptop
and depicts the ordination of Guthlac? You can!

Today is the feast day of an English saint, Guthlac of Crowland (673 - 714). Like many saints of his time, he was born into a noble family and chose a religious life either out of piety or because he was a younger son who was not in line to inherit much (and he needed some means of support that did not involve starting his own farm). His sister, Pega, is also considered a saint.

Although he fought under Æthelred of Mercia, by the age of 24 he was a monk at Repton Monastery in Derbyshire. By the age of 26, he had decided to become a hermit and went to live on an island called Croyland, which is now no longer an island and is called Crowland. The Vita Sancti Guthlaci ["Life of Saint Guthlac"] written by Felix in the 8th century tells us:

Now there was in the said island a mound built of clods of earth which greedy comers to the waste had dug open, in the hope of finding treasure there; in the side of this there seemed to be a sort of cistern, and in this Guthlac the man of blessed memory began to dwell, after building a hut over it. From the time when he first inhabited this hermitage this was his unalterable rule of life: namely to wear neither wool nor linen garments nor any other sort of soft material, but he spent the whole of his solitary life wearing garments made of skins. So great indeed was the abstinence of his daily life that from the time when he began to inhabit the desert he ate no food of any kind except that after sunset he took a scrap of barley bread and a small cup of muddy water.

 Life was not that simple, however, because his time there was spent being assailed by demons:

They were ferocious in appearance, terrible in shape with great heads, long necks, thin faces, yellow complexions, filthy beards, shaggy ears, wild foreheads, fierce eyes, foul mouths, horses' teeth, throats vomiting flames, twisted jaws, thick lips, strident voices, singed hair, fat cheeks, pigeons breasts, scabby thighs, knotty knees, crooked legs, swollen ankles, splay feet, spreading mouths, raucous cries. For they grew so terrible to hear with their mighty shriekings that they filled almost the whole intervening space between earth and heaven with their discordant bellowings.

Interestingly, Guthlac (Felix tells us) could actually understand the demonic speech, described as strimulentes loquelas ["sibilant speech"].* The reason he was able to understand it? Because of his time spent among the British-speaking natives of the island of Britain who had been displaced by the incoming Anglo-Saxons. (One wonders if the wind whistling through his rough-constructed living space made noises that imagination told him were words of temptation.)

Guthlac was a very popular figure in British history. The oldest surviving collection of Anglo-Saxon poetry, the Exeter Book, contains two poems, called Guthlac A and Guthlac B; B is based on the Vita, but A comes from some other source. A collection of illustrations of events in Guthlac's life was created after the Norman Conquest and put into the Orderic Vitalis. Today, a Guthlac Fellowship unites the several churches and parishes dedicated to Guthlac.

*Reminds me of Parseltongue from the works of J.K.Rowling.

The Walking Dead

Orderic Vitalis (1075-c.1142) has been mentioned here and here for his history writing. The 13 books of his Historia ecclesiastica ["Ecclesiastical history"] told many tales of his time that had nothing to do with the Church. One of his anecdotes is truly outré.

While discussing some of the travails of William Rufus, he interjects a tale of a priest of Lisieux that took place on 1 January 1091. The priest, heading home at night from visiting a sick man, heard a loud noise coming along the moonlit road, as of an army. He decided to flee toward some trees in a field to hide himself, but as he ran toward them*

he was stopped by a man of enormous stature, armed with a massive club, who, raising his weapon above his head, shouted to him, "Stand! Take not a step further!" The priest, frozen with terror, stood motionless, leaning on his staff.

The giant stands by his side and awaits the arrival of the crowd making the noise.

a great crowd of people came by on foot, carrying on their heads and shoulders, sheep, clothes, furniture, and moveables of all descriptions, such as robbers are in the habit of pillaging. All were making great lamentations and urging one another to hasten their steps. Among them the priest recognized a number of his neighbours who had lately died, and heard them bewailing the excruciating sufferings with which they were tormented for their evil deeds. They were followed by a troop of corpse-bearers, who were joined by the giant already mentioned.

But there was more after this:

Then followed a crowd of women who seemed to the priest to be innumerable. They were mounted on horseback, riding in female fashion, with women's saddles which were stuck with red-hot nails. The wind often lifted them a cubit from their saddles, and then let them drop again on the sharp points. Their haunches thus punctured with the burning nails, and suffering horrible torments from the wounds and the scorching heat, the women pitiably ejaculated, woe! woe! and made open confession of the sins for which they were punished, undergoing in this manner fire and stench and unutterable tortures for the obscene allurements and filthy delights to which they had abandoned themselves when living among men.

He then sees a knight on horseback, who stops to speak to him, revealing himself as the priest's brother, and says:

"You deserve to die, and to be dragged with us to partake of the torments we suffer, because you have rashly laid hands on things which belong to our reprobate crew; no other living man ever dared to make such an attempt. But the mass you sang to-day has saved you from perishing. It is also permitted me thus to appear to you, and unfold to you my wretched condition. After I had conferred with you in Normandy, I took leave of you and crossed over to England, where, by the Creator's order, my life ended, and I have undergone intense suffering for the grievous sins with which I was burdened."

There is more (I have placed the whole story here). After this experience, the priest falls ill, but recovers to live another 15 years.

Orderic claims that he was told this tale directly by the priest who experienced it.


*Excerpts all from The Ecclesiastical History of Orderic Vitalis, trans. Thomas Forester, 1956.

The White Ship

William of Malmesbury tells us of a disastrous event on 25 November 1120: the sinking of the White Ship off the coast of Normandy:

Here also perished with William, Richard, another of the King's sons, whom a woman without rank had borne him, before his accession, a brave youth, and dear to his father from his obedience; Richard d'Avranches, second Earl of Chester, and his brother Otheur; Geoffrey Ridel; Walter of Everci; Geoffrey, archdeacon of Hereford; the Countess of Chester; the king's niece Lucia-Mahaut of Blois; and many others ... No ship ever brought so much misery to England. [Gesta Regum Anglorum]

The William mentioned was the only surviving heir of King Henry I of England.

The White Ship was a magnificent vessel that had recently been refurbished with new materials. Its captain was the son of one of William of Normandy's pilots; in fact, the father had piloted William's flagship in the flotilla that conquered England. Had the captain had his way, all might have been well. Here's what happened:

King Henry and his sons were in Normandy, and returning to England. The ship was offered to him for the voyage, but as he had already made arrangements and was ready to depart, he gave the honor of the White Ship to his sons. Henry left for England. The sons, on their own and in command of a fancy ship, were generous in allowing the crew and passengers to start drinking while dockside. Later, with night approaching and alcohol flowing, they decided (foolishly) to set off and beat the king to England; they were sure the ship could do it, despite being weighed down by about 300 bodies. So they set off into the darkness, with a tipsy crew.

The ship hit a rock, tearing a hole in the side. William of Malmesbury's version has one survivor, clinging to the rock all night; Orderic Vitalis says there were two. In either case, we have some details that might be true, such as Prince William escaping in a boat, but going back to rescue his half-sister and having his boat capsized when too many people tried to climb aboard.

Prince William's death forced Henry to name his daughter Matilda his heir. When Henry himself died in 1135, his nephew, Stephen of Blois, decided a firm male ruler for England was more important than honoring the oaths he made to support Matilda. Stephen crossed the Channel to claim the throne, and set off almost two decades of civil war.