More Holy Girdles

I do not know if the Girdle of Thomas in the Prato Cathedral inspired the others, or if the stories of others in the East inspired a Girdle of Thomas for the West, but there are a few out there that purport to be a cincture worn by the Virgin Mary.

One is the Cincture of the Theotokos. The "Theotokos" is the Blessed Virgin. The story is the same as with the one in Prato. At the time of Mary's death, the remaining Apostles were with her except for Thomas, who was traveling on his mission to India. Thomas arrived three days later and asked to pay his respects to the body. He is led to the tomb, where they find that the body is missing. The conclusion is that she has been bodily taken to Heaven. She suddenly appears and offers her girdle/belt/cincture to Thomas. Thomas is singled out because of his "doubting nature": he did not believe that Jesus had resurrected and appeared until he was able to put his finger into the nail holes in Christ's hands and feet.

This would have happened in the 1st century CE, but the object does not surface in history until the 6th century, when it was brought from Jerusalem to Constantinople (with Mary's robe as well; no knowing if she also tossed that to Thomas). It had gold thread embroidered into it by Zoe, wife of Byzantine Emperor Leo VI. It even has its own feast day, 31 August, established by Emperor Manuel I Comnenos.

The Syriac Orthodox Church has its own Holy Girdle of Mary. In this case, Thomas was brought from India through the sky by the Holy Spirit as Mary lay dying. Even with this miraculous mode of transportation, he was late, but he saw a vision of Mary being taken to Heaven by angels. He asked her to give him a sign, and the chariot in which she was being taken to Heaven stopped so she could give him her belt. Thomas, reversing his reputation for doubt, showed the belt to others to convince them that it was real, then carried it back with him on his travels, creating miracles for those who touched it or even saw it.

This girdle was brought from India in 394 CE and placed in the Saint Mary Church of the Holy Belt. That is the story. It wasn't actually discovered until 1953 when the church was being renovated and this was "found" in the altar. Orthodox tradition celebrates an eight-day Lent in September to commemorate Mary; the belt is brought out for viewing on the last day. The belt/girdle has been cut into almost a dozen parts and distributed to other churches.

The woman who had the Byzantine girdle embroidered with gold thread, Zoe Zaoutzaina, had an interesting rise to power, from a humble first marriage to becoming an empress. I'll tell you about her tomorrow.

The Girdle of St. Thomas

Speaking of relics you can find in Tuscany, let's turn to Prato Cathedral where we can find a knotted woven cord in a golden reliquary (see illustration). It is the Girdle of Thomas; that's the "Doubting Thomas" who would not believe that Jesus was resurrected until he was allowed to put his fingers in the nail wounds on the hands and feet of Jesus.

The girdle is a cincture used to tie around a tunic or robe at the waist. It wasn't worn by Thomas; it is called by his name because it was a gift to him. Thomas is also known for his mission to India, during which he missed another important event from the Bible: the Assumption of Mary.

The Assumption of Mary is when she was taken bodily to Heaven because of her innate holiness. I've covered the Assumption and Thomas' absence here. Because Thomas was not present when Mary died/disappeared, his skeptical nature was countered by Mary appearing to him in a vision and dropping her girdle to him as evidence. Another version has him miraculously transported from India to the Mount of Olives to be present for the actual Assumption, and she drops her girdle to him in front of everyone.

The Girdle is supposed to be beneficial for pregnant women. It is reputed to have other protective powers. In 1402, the Duke of Milan, Gian Galeazzo Visconti, invaded Florentine territory. The girdle was carried around Prato as protection, and given credit for Visconti not attacking the city.

The image of Mary rising above the apostles—or Mary above Thomas alone—and dropping her girdle became a popular Italian art subject. But the story itself inspired other examples of Mary's girdle, and tomorrow we will look into just how many belts she carried and dropped to Thomas, so that they could be in different locations in the Modern Era. See you then.

The Holy Face of Lucca

King William II of England was known to curse by saying "By the face of Lucca!" In a 1970 book from Margaret A. Murray, The God of the Witches, she suggests it was mis-recorded from "by the face of Loki." This was an unnecessary re-interpretation, however, because the "Face of Lucca" exists. Moreover, it existed long before William II, and had a reputation that would have spread, so it is perfectly plausible that his reported oath of preference really was about the Face of Lucca.

The Holy Face of Lucca refers to a wooden carving that has been radio-carbon dated to 770-880 CE, making it the oldest wooden sculpture in Europe. It is an 8-foot-tall statue of the crucified Christ in the Cathedral of San Martino in Lucca in northern Italy. Although likely carved in the 9th century CE, legend says it was carved by Nicodemus, who assisted Joseph of Arimathea to place Jesus in the tomb.

It is unusual in that the figure of Christ wears an ankle-length tunic, with a belt around its waist. The tunic was more common in eastern sculpture, but the belt is unique.

The legend says it was discovered in a cave by a bishop who followed a dream. Put on a boat, the boat sailed without any crew to Luni on the Tuscan coast. When men tried to approach the boat, it moved away from them. In a dream, the bishop of Lucca learned where the boat was. He and some citizens went to Luni, and the boat opened its gangplank to the bishop. The carving was put in a wagon, which traveled to Lucca without the help of men or animals.

Miracles supposedly took place in its presence. One legend tells of a poor fiddler who played before the statue. The statue dropped a shoe and kicked it over to the fiddler, who found it was filled with gold.

Holy images and relics were, of course, big business in the Middle Ages and Renaissance, bringing visitors and donations to the place where they were kept. Another that can be found in Tuscany is the Girdle of Thomas, and we'll talk about that next time.

Death in the New Forest

When he was in his 40s, King William II "Rufus" of England had successfully dealt with rebellions, been pretty successful in dealing with the clergy and asserting his own authority in the area of investiture, and ruled Normandy (finally, though temporarily) while its duke, his brother Robert Curthose, was on the First Crusade.

One day, he decided to go hunting in the New Forest. This was not unusual. Hunting was a sport of kings, and the New Forest was a great place to do it. Even now it is one of the largest tracts of unenclosed land in England. William's father had declared it a royal forest (today, 90% is still owned by the Crown). William II's older brother Richard had died in the New Forest, colliding with an overhanging branch while riding.

On 2 August 1100, while hunting with companions, he was found with an arrow through his lung. That's all that was recorded. The Anglo-Saxon Chronicle records only that he was  "shot by an arrow by one of his own men." Later records report the name of the bowman: Walter Tirel. A generation later, William of Malmesbury offered more detail:

The day before the king died he dreamt that he went to hell and the Devil said to him "I can't wait for tomorrow because we can finally meet in person!" He suddenly awoke. He commanded a light to be brought, and forbade his attendants to leave him. The next day he went into the forest... He was attended by a few persons... Walter Thurold remained with him, while the others were on the chase. The sun was now declining, when the king, drawing his bow and letting fly an arrow, slightly wounded a stag which passed before him... The stag was still running... The king, followed it a long time with his eyes, holding up his hand to keep off the power of the sun's rays. At this instant Walter decided to kill another stag. Oh, gracious God! the arrow pierced the king's breast.

On receiving the wound the king uttered not a word; but breaking off the shaft of the arrow where it projected from his body... This accelerated his death. Walter immediately ran up, but as he found him senseless, he leapt upon his horse, and escaped with the utmost speed. Indeed there were none to pursue him: some helped his flight; others felt sorry for him.

Thurold was another version of the name—Walter Tirel was a real noble connected to the royal family by marriage—and the idea of the king's dream is fantasy. It is true that Tirel fled the scene: having killed the king, his life was forfeit, so he wisely fled to France, where he was sheltered by Abbot Suger, who later confused the issue when he wrote:

It was laid to the charge of a certain noble, Walter Thurold, that he had shot the king with an arrow; but I have often heard him, when he had nothing to fear nor to hope, solemnly swear that on the day in question he was not in the part of the forest where the king was hunting, nor ever saw him in the forest at all.

And supposedly Tirel/Thurold was an excellent marksman, so would he have "accidentally" hit the king? When investigating a crime, the question often asked is cui bono, "to whose good?" Who would benefit from William's death? Also in the hunting party was his younger brother, Henry. With William's death and Robert Curthose off on the First Crusade (he would only return a month after the death), Henry quickly declared himself king.

Did Henry arrange it? He certainly benefited. Did Henry manage to put the blame on Tirel? Who can tell?

Before we leave William Rufus, I want to latch onto one other trivial point about him. Contemporaries noted he was not a particularly nice person, and that his language was "rough." He had a favorite curse, which was "By the Face of Lucca!" What was the "Face of Lucca"? Let's find out next time.

Rufus versus Anselm

The professional relationship between Anselm of Bec (later "of Canterbury") and King William II of England was as rocky as any similar pairing through England's Middle Ages. The ongoing debate over lay investiture—secular lords appointing priests and bishops—was ripping apart the continent as well, leading to rival popes. Anselm, like those before and after in his position as Archbishop of Canterbury, wanted the clergy to be independent.

Even as Anselm was being invested as archbishop and it seemed he and William had reconciled their differences, William made a move that caused the first big clash. William's father, William the Conqueror, had left him England, but William senior's original possession of Normandy on the continent went to his elder son, Robert Curthose. William junior wanted to rule Normandy as well, so planned a takeover. Plans like this required soldiers and supplies, and those required money. The quickest way for a king to raise cash was to tell everyone to give you some.

So William sent to Anselm, asking for £1000. Anselm offered £500. William felt he was owed money for Anselm's new position (something called annates, which maybe we'll go into someday). Anselm decided to pursue his own agenda. He asked William to fill all the vacant church positions and allow Anselm to enforce canon law. William refused. Anselm withdrew any offer of funds, saying "that he [Anselm] disdained to purchase his master's favor as he would a horse or ass." William was said to reply that he didn't want Anselm's money or blessing for the endeavor, because "I hated him before, I hate him now, and shall hate him still more hereafter."

Anselm really wanted to make his appointment official by receiving a pallium from the pope; William had refused Anselm's travel for this purpose earlier. A meeting of nobles and bishops gathered to discuss this. William ordered the bishops not to treat Anselm as their archbishop, and they caved to the king. The nobles, however (many of whom did not approve of William's rule) supported Anselm. Secretly, Anselm asked two men to travel to Pope Urban II and request the pallium. They were Bishop of Exeter William of Warelwast and Archbishop Gerard of York.

They persuaded Urban to send a papal legate with the pallium. The legate met with the Bishop of Durham, who represented the king (and had argued against allowing Anselm to go get the pallium himself). William agreed that he would support Urban (over Antipope Clement III), in exchange for the right to block papal legates and intercept any papal letters to clerics. This was unacceptable, so William tried to sell the pallium to anyone who would take it and replace Anselm. No one would take it (or the price was too high). He tried to get money from Anselm for the pallium; Anselm refused. William then wanted to personally put the pallium on Anselm, but Anselm refused again: this act would suggest that the king had the authority of a pope over the archbishop.

Finally, the pallium was placed on the altar at Canterbury Cathedral, and on 10 June 1095 Anselm placed it on himself (seen above in a 20th century representation by E.M.Wilmot-Buxton).

A few months later, Urban would declare the First Crusade. William continued to deny Anselm's attempts at reform and church independence, and Anselm even had to go into exile. But it was around this time that he wrote the most consequential piece of Christian theology in the Middle Ages, an essay titled Cur Deus Homo.

Anselm had a better relationship with William's successor, his younger brother Henry. For that to happen, however, William had to die, and the circumstances of his death have inspired a conspiracy theory that has never died. I'll tell you that story next time.

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.

The Rebellion of 1088

When William the Conqueror died, he had already made his wishes clear about the division of his lands. His older son, Robert Curthose, became Duke of Normandy, a large and prosperous province on the continent. A younger son, William Rufus, became king of England. (A third surviving son, Henry, was left with nothing.)

Sibling rivalry was a problem between the two older boys, even if they were willing to accept their father's decision, but it was not the two who started the rebellion. It was the land-owning nobles under them. Some of those nobles owned land on both sides of the English Channel. Facing the possibility that they would have to please two different lords with different demands, they decided the best option for the future of the kingdom was to bring both locations under one rule again, as they were under the Conqueror.

William senior died in September 1087, and around Easter 1088, the rebellion began. It was led by the two arguably most prominent members of William's family: Bishop Odo of Bayeux and Robert of Mortain, the Conqueror's half-brothers. They chose to support the elder brother Duke Robert as the rightful heir to England and Normandy instead of King William II Rufus. There were, however, those who supported William. All the bishops of England as well as the Earl of Surrey and other nobles. Many of the largest land-holding barons supported Robert.

William II proved to be a clever strategist. He promised as much money and land as they wanted to his supporters. For the populace of England, he promised the best law code that had ever been. Then he led his own army against the rebels.

Odo was captured, and Robert, leading forces from Normandy, was blown off-course by bad storms. With the continental reinforcements, many of the English rebels surrendered. Orderic Vitalis recorded the arguments of those barons loyal to William when dealing with those who opposed him:

If you temper your animosity against these great men, and treat them graciously here, or permit them to depart in safety, you may advantageously use their amity and service, on many future occasions. He who is your enemy now, may be your useful friend another time.

Odo was stripped of any remaining belongings (he had already suffered previously due to indiscretions) and banished to Normandy. Robert Curthose was forced to acknowledge William as king, and had to stay in England (so that he could not raise an army in Normandy).

What sort of king was William II "Rufus"? I'll tell you next time.

Odo's Downfall

After the Trial in 1076 that re-apportioned some of the property (and therefore income) of Odo of Bayeux, he was quiet for a few years. As Earl of Kent (granted to him by his half-brother, William the Conqueror), he still had impressive resources and a comfortable living. He wanted more, however, and made a step that proved detrimental to his freedom.

Over in Rome, Pope Gregory VII was embroiled in the Investiture Controversy with Holy Roman Emperor Henry IV. Although Henry's penance was made prior to 1082, there were still arguments over who gets to invest clerics, the Church or the secular powers.

Odo gathered his Kentish forces and planned a military expedition to Italy. Why would he do this? The following is conjecture. Perhaps it was the Holy Roman Emperor's hostility to the pope that gave Odo an idea. Historians writing a couple decades later said Odo wanted to be pope. Either he would take an army to support Henry, who might then support Odo as pope, or possibly he thought he could bring his own army to Gregory's defense and be named his successor for the effort. In 1080, Henry declared Gregory deposed and installed his own pope, Antipope Clement III.

All we know is that Odo was prepared to take a large number of English—Saxon and Norman—subjects out of the country and march across other countries to engage in war with someone, and William wasn't having it.

In 1082, William had Odo imprisoned on the continent, where he spent the next five years. He remained Bishop of Bayeux (his seal is depicted above), but William took back all lands in England and the title Earl of Kent.

In 1087, William was on his deathbed. William's other half-brother, Robert of Mortain, persuaded William to forgive Odo, who was allowed to return to England. Unfortunately, he made another choice to back the wrong horse. William had made his eldest son Robert Curthose, the Duke of Normandy, and the second son William Rufus was made King of England. (Normandy was far larger than England.) Robert also wanted England, and Odo decided to support him.

The rivalry between William and Robert turned into the Rebellion of 1088, and that's where we will pick up the story tomorrow.

As for Odo, he joined the First Crusade and died on the way, in Palermo in early 1097. He was buried in Palermo Cathedral.

The Trial of Penenden Heath

Odo of Bayeux had it all. He was the half-brother of Duke William of Normandy (they shared a mother), who made him a bishop. When William took over the throne of England in 1066, Odo provided ships and support and fought in the battles. He was a close advisor to King William, was made Earl of Kent, and was given the responsibility to act as regent in England when William went back to the continent. You can see him in the illustration at a feast from the Bayeux Tapestry, under the Latin term for bishop, episcopus.

Not all went smoothly for Odo, however.

Ten years after the Norman Invasion of England, he was on trial, though not necessarily because of his own actions. The accusation was brought by Lanfranc. In 1070, Lanfranc had become the Archbishop of Canterbury, and decided to look into both Odo and the previous Archbishop of Canterbury, Stigand. Lanfranc (who was pretty strict: he had denied William's marriage to Matilda on the grounds of consanguinity), suspected the two had defrauded Kent and the Crown in order to enrich themselves.

While it seems that lands belonging to Canterbury (and their revenues) were being possessed by the Earl of Kent, it is also likely that this transfer of land was not initiated by Odo, but had taken place prior to the Invasion by the powerful Earl Godwin, taken from his enemy, Robert of Jumièges, the previous archbishop. Odo had simply inherited the lands appropriated by his unscrupulous predecessor. The king decided to throw the decision onto the nobles of Kent, and declared a trial on Penenden Heath (now a suburb of Maidstone in Kent). The Trial brought in current lords as well as those who had knowledge of the Saxon laws and history. The Trial showed respect for English history prior to William's reign.

(Penenden remained a useful gathering place. The Domesday Book recorded it as a place where Kent landowners gathered to discuss matters. Wat Tyler used it as a staging place for a mob during the Peasants' Revolt.)

After three days, it was determined that certain properties did not belong to Odo, or rather, did not belong to the Earl of Kent. He subsequently lost a lot of the revenue he had previously taken in. This was not a reflection on Odo or his governance of Kent; it simply restored and re-apportioned properties appropriately according to what was considered historical.

How Odo took the judgment, we cannot say. A few years later, however, he initiated a project that would cause him to fall out of his half-brother's favor, and ultimately lead to imprisonment and disgrace. I'll share that story with you next time.

Odo of Bayeux

William the Conqueror had two half-brothers, due to his father having an affair with Herleva of Falaise, who later had two sons after marrying. One half-brother was Robert of Mortain; the other was Odo of Bayeux.

We don't know when he was born, but William made him a bishop in 1049, when we assume he was at least 18 years old (a stretch, yes, but William could do what he liked in Normandy as its duke). A "best guess" for his birth is c.1030.

Being made a bishop was often a way for a lord to reward a subject with a respectable title and the revenues from tithes and property values of the diocese, so there is no reason to assume Odo was a priest in anything more than name. His time in the historical record is more about being an advisor to William and a warrior who took part in the Norman Invasion of England and following battles. The illustration from the Bayeux Tapestry shown here has him wielding a club against the Saxons at the Battle of Hastings in 1066.

Why a club? Some say that as a priest he was forbidden the use of a sword, but the club was a cheaper and common weapon, capable of doing great damage to an opponent. William himself is shown with a club later in the tapestry. He also had with him a retinue that would have surrounded him and kept him safer than a typical soldier.

After the Conquest, the time came for rewards. William valued his half-brothers, granting them titles and lands. Odo became Earl of Kent in 1067 and remained a royal advisor, sometimes acting as regent when William was out of the country.

Unfortunately, he got a little too big for his mitre and did something that caused him to lose some lands. After that, he made an even bolder move that led to imprisonment. Tomorrow we'll look at how the mighty can fall.

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.

Robert of Mortain

When William of Normandy decided to conquer England, he planned carefully. This was going to be a big undertaking, and he needed help and advice. A large amount of that help came from his half-brother, Robert, Count of Mortain (c.1031 - c.1095).

William of Malmesbury (writing decades later, to be fair) described him as crassi et hebetis ingenii, "thick and dull of character." There is also his reputation for having physically abused his wife, mentioned in the biography of Vitalis of Savigny. Vitalis either threatened him with dissolution of the marriage, or left his service which so bothered Robert that he repented of his ways.

Robert and William shared a mother, Herleva of Falaise, who was also the mother of Odo of Bayeux, who became a bishop. As Duke of Normandy, William had jurisdiction over the county of Mortain. A 12th century poet, Benoît de Sainte-Maure, wrote that Duke William exiled a prior Count of Mortain named William Werlenc and replaced him with Robert. When the planning for the Norman Invasion of England began, Count Robert was part of the council and promised 120 ships, a larger number than any other source.

Robert is also included among the definitively known companions of Duke William in the Battle of Hastings. Trying to identify from records those who were present—and those who appear on the Bayeux Tapestry—has been a pastime for historians (fewer than two dozen have been "confirmed"). In the scene above one can see "Rotbert" at William's left side and Odo on his right, showing the importance of his half-brothers to the duke.

For his participation, Robert received from William an enormous amount of land. By the time the Domesday Book recorded all real estate and ownership, Robert held 797 castles, mostly in Cornwall where he held so much that he was functionally "Earl of Cornwall" even though he did not formally hold the title (the first Earl of Cornwall was officially Brian of Brittany, who also was a supporter of Duke William).

In 1069, Robert led a force northward that slaughtered many Danes in Lindsey, after which he drops out of the records except for the mention in Domesday. He was succeeded as count by his only son William, the 2nd Earl of Cornwall, who was offered Mary of Scotland, the daughter of King Malcolm III of Scotland, for his bride, but turned her down. He had three daughters.

Speaking of women and wives, let's turn to Robert's mother, Herleva, for tomorrow's post. See you then.

Vitalis of Savigny

In the 1170s, a canon of the Church of Saint-Evroult in Mortain (in northwestern France) wrote about a man who had died 50 years prior but whose legend lived on and needed to be recorded. The author was Stephen de Fougères, and the subject was Vitalis of Savigny.

Drawing from details in the mortuary roll (a monastery's record of prominent members who died), we learn little of Vitalis' origin except that he was born c.1060 and had a brother and a sister in a family that was not very prominent. At some point he was ordained and became chaplain to Robert of Mortain.

Robert of Mortain had founded the Church of Saint-Evroult in 1082, and made Vitalis a canon there. After a time, however, Vitalis felt the need for a more purely ascetic life. In 1095 he left Saint-Evroult and began a hermit colony with two others, Bernard of Thiron (who had already been a hermit for a time) and Robert of Arbrissel, the founder of Fontevraud Abbey.

Vitalis became known for his preaching to those who came to hear and/or join the hermitage, and for helping locals. One of his known activities was persuading prostitutes to enter proper marriages. He also traveled, apparently concentrating on Normandy but also visiting England. He tried to reconcile Robert Curthose with his brother, Henry I of England, whom it could be argued "stole" the kingship from the elder Curthose.

One of the incidents that was sufficiently noteworthy to be mentioned in the mortuary roll was his influence on his first patron, Robert of Mortain. The story goes that Robert was physically abusing his wife (probably Matilda, his first wife), and that Vitalis ended that behavior in one of two ways. One version of the incident had Vitalis threatening Robert with dissolving the marriage. A different version says that Vitalis cut ties to Robert and left over his disgust at Robert's behavior. Robert repented, and sent people to bring Vitalis back and begged his forgiveness (and presumably mended his ways).

Between 1105 and 1120, Vitalis founded a nunnery called Abbaye Blanche ("White Abbey"; possibly so-called because they wore habits of undyed wool) at Mortain and set up his sister, Adeline, as abbess. She was later canonized by the Catholic Church.

Between 1112 and 1122 (the year of his death) he founded the Savigny Abbey (see the remains above), a necessity because his life and works as a hermit drew so many people who wished to stay that some organizing principle was needed to manage so many. The Benedictine Rule was initially followed, but by 1150 it became Cistercian.

Vitalis' own sainthood was established in 1738 by the Cistercians, but his canonization by the Catholic Church was never recognized.

His first patron, Robert of Mortain, has a connection that is worth mentioning. Not just some ordinary nobleman, he was half-brother to William the Conqueror, and has some significance in history, which I'll explore further tomorrow. See you then.

Dalon Abbey

In 1114, the ruler of Salles in France—Gerald de Salles, a French monastic reformer—wanted to found an abbey in the town of Sainte-Trie. He was a friend of the founder of Fontevraud (in French, Fontevrault) Abbey (where nobles like Eleanor of Aquitaine and Richard I would be interred), and wanted a Benedictine monastery there. In fact, he wanted several: he founded many Benedictine houses as well as communities of hermits.

The abbey was initially supported by donations from a couple knights, some other nobles, and the bishop of Limoges. Gerald's successor, a hermit named Roger, expanded into a "chain" of monasteries under the umbrella term "Order of Dalon," named for the Dalon River Valley.

In 1142, several monasteries in France and abroad were reforming themselves by adopting the more strict Cistercian Rule. Dalon Abbey in Saint-Trie and its daughter houses joined the Cistercian Order in 1162 under the command of its third abbot. Dalon opted to be a daughter house of the Cistercian Pontigny Abbey (also founded in 1114 as a Benedictine Abbey by a relative of Bernard of Clairvaux). This brought it to the attention of the Plantagenets, and Henry II, Eleanor of Aquitaine, and Richard I all became patrons and offered it their protection.

The well-known lord of Hautefort and troubadour Bertran de Born retired there as a monk after the death of his second wife. A son from that second wife, also named Bertran, joined him.

Much of the abbey compound has fallen into ruin. It is now private property, and the surviving structure has been adapted into a private dwelling (see above).

I mentioned that Gerald de Salles set up "communities" of hermits, which seems like a contradiction. Gerald was a follower of Vitalis de Savigny, whose simple lifestyle was an inspiration. Vitalis is venerated in the Catholic Church as a saint, who is not listed as a patron saint of anything in particular, but if he were, it would be of preventing wife abuse. I'll explain tomorrow.

Baron Bertran de Born

When Henry the Young King attacked his brother Richard in 1183, he had the support of a lord of Hautefort. Hautefort was surrounded by provinces in the hands of Henry II of England or his sons, and so was affected by their politics.

In 1183, the lord of Hautefort was Baron Bertran de Born, son of Baron Bertran de Born. Bertran junior had two brothers with whom he co-ruled the area, but like the sons of Henry II, the brothers did not necessarily get along. While Bertran supported Henry junior against Richard, Bertran's brother Constantine sided with Richard. For this reason, Bertran drove Constantine out of the castle they shared.

After young Henry's death in June 1183, Richard sought retribution against those who sided with Henry. With the help of Alfonso II of Aragon, Richard returned Hautefort to Constantine. Henry Ii stepped in, however, and gave the castle back to Bertran.

Why would Henry II have a side in this fight? Perhaps because Bertran was also a troubadour. He wrote love songs and political songs. He wrote songs criticizing Richard I and Philip Augustus of France when they delayed setting out for the Third Crusade.

Bertran loved fighting s much as the two Henrys. One of his poems, translated by Ezra Pound, reads

I tell you that I find no such savor in eating butter and sleeping, as when I hear cried "On them!" and from both sides hear horses neighing through their head-guards, and hear shouted "To aid! To aid!" and see the dead with lance truncheons, the pennants still on them, piercing their sides.

As a friend and supporter of Young King Henry—they probably spent time together on the "tournament circuit" (that's Bertran jousting in the illustration from a 13th century manuscript)—Bertran wrote a lament for him that was very moving. It is possibly this that made Henry II choose to return Hautefort to him, since Henry really wanted his son to thrive and succeed him, despite the rebellions.

Bertran (born in the 1140s) married twice, with children from each marriage; when his second wife died in 1196, he retired to a Cistercian abbey. One son, Constantine, joined him there. Another son, Bertran, also became a troubadour.

His legacy is three dozen manuscripts that are certainly his and a handful of others that might be attributable to him. In later years, a rumor started that he egged Young Henry on to rebel, and so his name became connected with creating discord. Dante even puts him in Hell, beheaded.

The abbey he joined, Dalon, had a history of change, and was special to the Plantagenets. I'll tell you about it next time.