THE SCHOOL OF LAON FROM 850 TO 930: (TS RMNUSCRTPTS AND MASTERS The-sis fo: the Regret of HE D. WWW STATE UNIV'ERSTI' ' TY ‘ m i. COMM " lllllllillllllzlllIllllllllHllllllllllllllllllllllllllillllHl 93 10388 4676 This is to certify that the thesis entitled The School of Leon From 850 to 930: Its Manuscripts and Masters presented by John J. Contreni has been accepted towards fulfillment of the requirements for m.___degree in Mm. 221:” Major professor Date _A.ugns:t._2.,_1911 0-7639 LIBRARY Michigan. 8mm UHTV‘S Kit 3! 1 Mrs—BIBZQ ABSTRACT THE SCHOOL OF LAON FROM 850 T0 930: ITS MANUSCRIPTS AND MASTERS By John J. Contreni 1h. school of Leon has long been acknowledged as "'73-t cultural center during the renaissance of 'f7thp Bald. Scholars' attention has focussed viili _01 John Scotus (ca. 820-ca. 875), the most famous §t¢r. Other Irishman, among them Martin Scotus v :3}, who; like John; also knew Greek and commented aqua Capella's De Nu tiis Philolo iae et Mercurii, 31;d at Leon. Despite the importance of the l;** odated on two or three typevritten sheets. éiixpese of the present study is to augment available for the history of the school John J. Contreni by tapping an unexploited source, the school's manu- scripts. Approximately seventy-five of the 125 manu— scripts known to have been at Laon in the ninth century survive. Most of these are still conserved at Laon. Detailed descriptions of the approximately fifty lost manuscripts in two eighteenth century catalogues allow the entire library to be reconstructed with a high degree of accuracy. The study is divided into three sections. The first sketches the political and ecclesiastical history of the diocese from about 850 to about 930. The recon- struction of the cathedral chapter and the study of Laon's monastic establishments provide important details for the history of the school. Laon's proximity to and involve— ment with the court of Charles the Bald affected cultural life. A second section focusses on the manuscripts. They reveal that the cathedral library was formed through the care of Laon's masters and bishops. Almost half of Laon's ninth century manuscripts can be traced to donors. Most of the manuscripts were produced at other centers. Reims, 8t. Aland, and Gorbie were the most important sources of ,Laen's manuscripts. There is evidence, however. that Bishop Hincmar of Laon maintained a scriptorium and that an. Laon master, Martin Scotus, supervised the transcription of several important Laon manuscripts. Adelelm of Leon (ea. 860—930) compiled and copied the Lean Formulagy. A tilll chapter of this section presents the first systematic ‘ m’9 T m3» T'" analysis of the contents of Laon‘s ninth century library. John J. Contreni The library was rich in works by the eastern fathers and in school manuals. A complete list of the ninth century library's holdings is included in an appendix. The third and final section examines the careers of the Laon masters in light of their manuscripts. Laon's manuscripts substantially illuminate the career of Martin Scotus and present new evidence for the careers of John Scotus, Heiric of Auxerre, Remigius of Auxerre, and Adelelm of Leon as well.as lesser known members of Laon's Irish "colony". The school of Leon was an important link between the Irish scholars of the Rhine valley and the continental masters of the last quarter of the ninth century. Among additional appendices are a discussion of the Scholica ggaecarum, a collection of Greek notes attributed to Martin Scotus without sufficient proof, and an examination of the important anonymous ninth century letter from A to his master E. Fourteen Plates from manuscripts at Laon, Paris, and Berlin accompany the study. XII SCHOOL 01’ LAON FROM 850 T0 930: ITS MANUSCRIPTS AND MASTERS John Jifétntreni AMBIS submitted to ' '. lieu. state University ' ' ill-eat of the requirements - " its the degree or ACKNOWLEDGMENTS In the twentieth century as in the ninth, learning. is enriched by friends, colleagues, and institutions which in their various ways encourage, help, and support the scholar. During the past two years, as I attempted to discover the factors that made the school of Leon an impor— tant center for ninth century scholarship, I have been continually aware ot the help I have received from persons and institutions. They have made this dissertation not ‘only a valuable professional experience for me but also an enjoyable and personally rewarding one. It is, therefore, .a pleasurable task to acknowledge the debt of gratitude ,‘I owe. I hope that those who have been so generous to me sill find something of value in this work. “V I owe my greatest debt to Dean Richard E. Sullivan, Sellege of Arts and Letters, Michigan State University. “his criticism of my work greatly added to its clarity and I0rganization. E. :i z: medievalist and historian. w.£§mo§1edge of the Middle Ages and his constant concern for To Dean Sullivan I also owe my formation as His original and profound k—Pike total stream of human history" have taught me to seek fundamental meanings often hidden behind the minutiae ii While in Paris, I had the honor and pleasure of Professor Pierre Riché's interest in my work. Professor Riché's friendship and advice were a great encouragement to me. I will always warmly remember my Wednesdays at Nan- terre and our sessions at the Maison de 1'Inde. Monsieur l'abbé Bernard Merlette (Creil) gave me the benefit of his extensive knowledge of Laon's manuscripts. The stimulation of conversations at Leon and Paris with a scholar wrestling with the same problems which occupied me greatly added to my insights and enjoyment of the task. I have to thank Abbé Merlette also for providing me with a copy of the paper he gave at the 92c Congrhs National des Sociétés Savantes on the school and manuscripts of Leon. I owe a tremendous debt to Professor Bernhard Bischoff of Munich. My use of Laon's manuscripts would have been seriously limited without the benefit of the brief notes he made on them and allowed me to consult. Professor Bischoff also gave me his learned opinion on a Paris manu- script. It is a pleasure to acknowledge the helpfulness for which this great scholar is famous. Part of this work was written at the Abbaye Sainte— Marie in Paris. I am deeply grateful to the community there, especially to Dom Jacques Dubois, O. S. B., for the hospitality extended to me and for the privilege of 'working in the excellent monastic library. Dom Dubois intro- duced me to the Institut de Recherche et d'Histoire des Textes. 1310 microfilm collection and bibliographical aids of the iii A 5 >4- 0v Section latine greatly facilitated my work. I want to thank especially Mme. Suzanne Martinet, Bibliothécaire of the Bibliotheque Mnnioipals at Laon, for the warm welcome she gave me to Leon and for the free access I had to the Library's manuscript treasures. Her courtesy was matched by an enthusiasm for Laon’s history that was infectious. I want to remember also the patience and good cheer of Mme. Martinet's staff who fetched the manuscripts for me hundreds of times. I was also privileged to work with the manuscripts conserved at the Bibliothbque Rationale in Paris and the Bibliotheek der Rijksuniversiteit in Leiden. After only fourteen months, I began to feel like an "old hand" in the Cabinet des Manuscrits. I attribute this to the kindness and helpfulness of the librarians who care for this incom- parable collection. I wish to thank especially Messieurs Awril and Gasnault for their help. Unfortunately, I was able to spend only a week in Leiden. That I accomplished my task in that short time I owe to the help of the staff there. I appreciate especially the microfilms and photos I was provided with in Leiden. For photos and microfilms, I am also indebted to the Bibliothbque Municipale of Laon, the Bibliotheque Nationale in Paris, the British Museum, the Bibliotheca ‘Vaticana, and the Deutsche Staatsbibliothek in Berlin. Some of this material appears as Plates in my dissertation. ]?or their inclusion here I have to thank my brother-in-law, iv Mr. Henry J. Graeser, III, of Evanston, Illinois. When this chemical engineer and expert photographer agreed to help out a medievalist, I am sure he did not know what lay ahead for him. His Plates are an important supple- ment to my thousands of words. I truly appreciate his labors. My father-in-law, Mr. W. Wingate Snell, answered several requests for xerox copies of material unavailable to me in Paris. I am also grateful to Mr. Walter Burinski and the Interlibrary Loan staff of the Michigan State University Libraries for procuring material for me. For the opportunity to work in France, I am deeply grateful to the financial support of the Woodrow Wilson National Fellowship Foundation. The support of the Foundation not only has led to the present work but also has enabled me to broaden considerably my professional skills. I am also grateful for a stipend during the end of my stay in France from the Ministere des Affaires étrangbres of the French Republic. The offer of a teaching position in the Department of History at Michigan State University has permitted me to finish my work under the most favorable conditions. I would be remiss if I did not acknowledge the moral support of two wonderful persons whose intelligence, vitality, and pncouragement were a great help to me and to IU'family. I join my wife and children in thanking Mrs. IElisabeth Gilmore Holt of Georgetown, Maine, and Mme. Irbne V 1;;7Thris for their friendship. ‘ That I was able to benefit from the opportunities . ted to me is, in complete measure, due to my wife, =‘1ne. While I worked on the present study, she bore '" praised two children, moved our household back and forth 'M 18:; the Atlantic, took on domestic tasks in a strange ’lahd with an ingenuity and strength that never failed, | 1‘33 able to complete her own work for a Master' s degree, igufl typed the many pages of my dissertation. She was also Rifle best of companions even though it must have seemed 1;.r, times that I had abandoned her for the ninth century. "lthis there are no words. q ' , TABLE OF CONTENTS Page LIST OF PLATES I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I ix WATIONS I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I x . Chapter I C mmDUC TI 0N I I I I I I I I I I I I I I U I I 1 PART I. LAON IN THE NINTH AND TENTH CENTURIES II. THE CATHEDRAL CHAPTER AND MONASTERIES 0F “ON I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1 4 ‘. III. THE POLITICAL ACTIVITIES OF THE BISHOPS I or LAON, 848-930 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34 :zhif‘ PART II. THE MANUSCRIPTS OF THE - “I. SCHOOL or LAON f._~ IV. LECTORES CODICEM: THE FORMATION OF THE “ eteeeeeeaeeee56 " '.Y. THE SCRIPTORIUM AT LAON AND THE ORIGIN OF ‘0 MON'SMANUSCRIPTSCIIOIIIIIIIII 82 'J‘WI. THE COMPOSITION OF LAON'S LIBRARY . . . . . . 112 213T III. LAON'S MASTERS, 850-930 ‘TEE IRISH concur AT LAON . . . . . . . . . . . 133 , HEREIN SCOTUS, MAGISTER LAUDUNENSIS, 819-875 160 "fans SECOND AND THIRD GENERATIONS OF LAON . MASTERS I I I I I I I I I I I I I I q I I I 197 :wmlusxoneseeeeeeeeeeeee0e0234 .d‘ 711 , M '.. ANONIMI VERSUS DE PRAECONIO URBIS 266 EUEUIIEI§T§ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I - .CoRCCREANCE 0F RAVAISSON'S, MONTFAUCON'S, AND BUGNIATRE'S CATALOGUE NUMBERS FOR LAON'S .NINTH CENTURI MANUSCRIPTS . . . . . . . . . 267 4‘44. c. 7 LAON'S NINTH CENTURI CATHEDRAL LIBRARY . . . . 268 AND. THEIETTERFROMATOE . . . . . . . . . . . . 286 ' "-3.: ‘A- TNTH CENTURY ACCOUNT OF THE TRANSMISSION ‘ , OF LEA-WING e e e e e e e e a e e e e e e e 293 A}. F. TWO WORKS BI REMIGIUS 0F AUXERRE? . . . . . . 296 ‘1‘! "G. - DO THE SCHOLICA GRAECARW BELONG T0 MARTIN “9‘: 800 ...-..............298 on WSCRI PTS I I I I ' I I I I I I I I I I I I I 308 I I C I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 312 - I L. I : - I if lie!" , . F \ .,i V": :45,“ _ 7 ‘ f . -. '. i ‘. .-_,~' I _' ». .\"' “'- Plate I. II. III. IV. V. VII. VIII. IX. XII. LIST OF PLATES Berlin Deutsche Staatsbibliothek1 Phil— TIEES, i836, ii. Bv-yr - a a o o o l o Laona Bibliothbgue Municipale, LaonI Bibliothhgue Municigale, Laon Bibliothb ue Munici ale, 1. 253v . . . . . . . . . . Laon Bibliothfi ue Munici ale, 3. 2§77 . . . . . . . . . . Laon Bibliothb ue Munici ale, 1. 11r . . . . . . . . . . . Leon, Bibliothbgue Municipale, urn-cuooannoo Laon Bibliothh ue Munici ale, 2. 3r . . . . . . . . . . . LaonI Bibliotthue Municigale, Ivcn‘nnotuooo LaonI Bibliothbgue Municipale, - Van-cooo-t- Laon. Bibliothégue Municipale, a reactant-I- 24, f. 1r 24, f. 1v 444, 444, 468, 468, 444, 444, 444, I I I I I 444, Paris5 Bibliotthue NationaleI latin, 1 ’ t. v I I I . C I I I O I I I Paris, Bibliothégue NationalsI latin, ’ I r C I I I I I I I I I I I ix Page 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325 ABBREVIATIONS 131schoff, Mittelalter— ‘ liche Studlen *— Mittelalterliche Studien: Aus— 13£iAL (Bttppuyns, JSE (Besrtulaire (3 l8 S?ollectanee (ed. Quadri) CH3 ‘ 1?lodosrd, Annalee HRE liincnar of Reins lienney, Sources ewihlte Auisatze zur Schrift— kunae und L1{ere¥urgeschich¥e, V0 3. Bulletin de la société acadé- _,_,, mlgue de Leon M. Cappuyns, Jean Scot Erighne: sa vieI son oeuvreI so pens e R. Pouperdin, "Certulaire de Saint—Vincent de Leon,” Mémoires de la société de l'hist01re de Par s e de 119 de France, G. Goetz, Co us Glossariorum Letinorum, 3 vols. E. A. Love, Codices Latini Agfiiguiores: I Paleograghical Eggde o a in Manuscripts Prior 0 he Nin h Cen ugx, TT-vo s. R. Quadri (ed.), I Collectanea —-——— di Eirico di Auxerre Gallia Christiana, 12 vols. W P. Lauer (ed.), Les Annales de Flodoard Histor'a Rome 3 s Ecclesiae (odd. J. Heller, G. WaiEzi, MGH, Scr., XIII, 409-599 Ofiusculum LV Cagitulorum, MPL, , J. F. Kenney, The Sources for the Earl Histo of Trelana: ccles as 1ca n to uction 2£____l_2 X des e a ers Lesne , IV Linus of FerriEres , Corresgondance Manitins Idimnsi Merov, LEG; m Richer Trsu'be , Vorlesungen und A n ungen P. Lehmenn, Erforschun des Mittelalters: Aus e;§hl$e Ab— Eandlgggen una Aufsazze, 5 vols. E. Lesne, Hi toire de la ro— iété ecclesiasgi ue en France, r Vol. TV: Les livres' scri {oria, II £35 1198 file - Xe et les bib 0 sIScIes E. Lesne, Hiswoire de la pro- griété eccléSLasti ue en France, 0 . : es ecoles de la TIn du VIIIe sificle h la TIE in file L. Levillain (ed.), Lou de Ferribres: Corres onaence, 2 vols. M. Manitius, Geschichte der lateinischen Liiera¥ur des Mit- e a ers, v0 3. J. D. Mansi (ed.), Sacrorum con- ciliorum nova et am llssima col— lec¥io, 55 vols. Monuments Germaniee Historica W Formulae Poetae latini aevi carolini Scrigtores Scriptores rerum Merovingicarum J. P. Migne (ed.), Patrologia graeca, 161 vols. J. P. Migne (ed.), Patrologia latina, 221 vols. R. Latouche (ed.) 'Histoire de France $888 - 9955, 2 vols. L. Traube,'Vor1esun en und Ab- Mgnm: 5 v01:- x1 i CHAPTER ONE INTRODUC TI 0N In 1562 when the Huguenots attacked and sacked the ancient abbey of St. BenOit-sur-Loire, or Fleury, future generations of medievalists had a friend on the scene in the person of Pierre Daniel, a lawyer from Orleans. Daniel, who was also the bailli seigpeuriale for Fleury, rescued hundreds of Fleury's manuscripts thus saving them from destruction. Daniel was not simply a collector of 8ancient books. A noted philologist, classicist, and h‘llnanist, he added to his collection of manuscripts from Fleury additional codices from Auxerre, Orleans, and F"Wilda. He was in contact with the important scholars of his generation. These men frequently traded entire manu- a<=:l:ipts among themselves. Often though, if one scholar 1needed only part of a manuscript, his correspondent would 1‘emove and send him the needed gatherings. The "traffic" in medieval manuscripts was tremendous. It eventually led ‘0 their dispersion throughout Europe and even to the New World. When Daniel died in 1603, his important collection “a divided among friends who either sold their share or a«rusted them to libraries. Eventually, the fonds of manu- 3#21?“ which Daniel preserved almost intact from Fleury 1 2 became scattered among the more important European collec- tions: the Burgerbibliothek in Bern, the Regina collection at the Vatican, the Bibliothbque Nationale in Paris, and the Bibliotheek der Rijksuniversiteit in Leiden. Obviously, A for the case of Fleury, a study of its school based on its manuscripts would be enormously complex. The important manuscript depositories just mentioned would have to be searched in order to reconstruct the medieval library of F1 eury. Fragments of manuscripts which were cut up and divided in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries would have to be traced to their original codices. Once this basic work had been completed, Fleury's books could then be studied for the information they contain. This task, ll-llivde so complex by the modern history of Fleury's library, has not yet attracted any student of medieval culture. In light of the problems which await the prospec- tiV’e historian of Fleury, it is surprising that no one has yet attempted to tell the story of the school of Laon 11'0“: its manuscripts. In recent years, scholars interested in the educational aspects of the Carolingian renaissance haw-e increasingly focussed their attention on Laon especially during the third quarter of the ninth century when the B"irategic bishopric served as headquarters for an important 1For a sketch of Daniel's fascinating life, with a selection from his abundant correspondence, cf. H. Hagen, Etude littéraire et histori ue sur Pierre Daniel d'Orléans, Er. P. de Felice (Orle'ans: Herluison, 13'76’. 3 group of Irish scholars.2 Thanks to the partial publi- cation of one Laon manuscript, Laon has long been recognized as an important center for the study of Greek.3 Two .g.: A. Van de Vyver, "Hucbald de Saint-Amand, écolatre, et l'invention du Nombre d'Or," Mélanges Auguste Pelzer (Louvain, 1947), 61—79; B. Bischoff, Das griechische Element in der abendl'andischen Bildung des Mittelalters," Mittelalterliche Studien, II, 246—275; J. G. Préaux, "Le commentaire as Martin de Leon sur l'oeuvre de Martianus Capella," Latomus, XII (1953), 437-459; G. Billanovich, "Dall'antica Ravenna alle Biblioteche Umanistiche," Universita cattolica del sacro Cuore Milano Annuario , - 3 . Leonar i, uove voci poe 10 e ‘bra secolo IX e XI," Studi medievali, 3rd ser., II (1961), 1 41 -152; R. Quadri, I Collectmea di Eirico de Auxerre Friburg: Edizioni niversitarie riburgo, 1 , pp. 15— 8; G. Mathon, "Ecole de Leon au moyen-age," Catholicisme: Hier au'ourd'hui demain, ed. G. Jacquemet, t. VI ‘Paris: %e¥ouzey at Eel, 196:“, 1823—1824; I. P. Sheldon-W1 . . n D lliams 8d,), Iohannis Scotti Erin enae "Peri u u ies, , pp. 2—4; G. Mathon, "Les formes et 18- signification de la pedagogic des arts libéraux au ulilieu du IXe si'écle: L'enseignement palatin de Jean Scot Erigene," Arts libéraux et hiloso hie au mo en—a e (Paris/ Montreal: Wrin, 1 9 , 47-‘E—W'L—L—‘g‘4; . c. Diaz y Diaz, "La circulation des manuscrits dans la péninsule ibérique du IIe au XIe siecle," Cahiers de civilisation médiévale, XII (1969), 237, n. 127—; s.——£_"———"_’—Martine , Les arts liberaux Laon au IXe siecle," 95c Con rbs National des Sociétés Savantes (Reims, 23 Mare—1171 7"o'§"f"o'rt"hc'om'i"n"‘g;"' 'B.'M'er'1e't'te, Ecoles et bibliotheques a Laon de la fin de l'Antiquité 3- 1a naissance des universités," ibid., also to appear Shortly (I would like to thank I‘irn-e'."-fiartinet and Abbé lerlette for providing me with a copy of their presentations); on 21 April 1971, Edouard Jeauneau presented a paper at the nineteenth meeting of the Centro italiano di studi sull'alto Inedioevo at Spoleto entitled, "Les ecoles de Leon, Auxerre 9:5 fieims au IXe et Xe siecles." I have not seen this paper. 3E. Miller ublished substantial portions of Ilili-nuscri t 444 in 1580: "Glossaire grec—latin de la bibliotheque de Laon," Notices et Extraits xxxx, 2nd pt. (1880), 1-230. Unless othemise noted, all references 0 manuscripts will be to those presently conserved at the Bibliotthue Hunicipale, Laon, France. 4 Will en- Martianus Capella's allegory of the seven liberal arts, the De Nuptiis Philologiae et Mereggii, issued from the Lean masters and have recently been the subject of several papers.4 Finally, Laon is reputed for its Irish "colony", a loosely defined group of scholars assembled around the figure of the most famous ninth contury Irishman, John Scotus.5 The work of these masters during the third quarter of the century influenced the interests of succeeding generations of masters primarily at Auxerre and at Reims. Despite work on these aspects 0: the school of Laon and on Laon's importance as a carolingian cultural center, the school of Leon remains an. elusive entity. Its meters, their students, what they read, where their contacts were, what their influence was, is hardly known. The reason the school of Leon has remained in the aliladows is an endemic one in the study of medieval history: lack of sufficient source material. Medieval Laon had no One to write a history of the diocese as Flodoard (ca. 893— (3;. 966) did for Reims and as others did for Autun, Verdun, and other bishoprics. No Laon master stimulated a Richer of Reims (_f_1_. second half of the tenth century) to preserve 9- record of his teaching techniques, his interests, and his students as Gerbert of Aurillac did for Richer. No 4Cf. references cited in n. 2 above. 502. references cited in n. 2 above. 5 Leon master or student was an equal correspondent to Lupus of Ferrie‘res or Gerbert of Aurillac whose letters toll us so much of their world. For Laon, the published sources available for the history of the school during the ninth and tenth centuries could easily be accomodated on two or three typewritten sheets. My purpose in the present study will be to augment the scanty narrative sources available for the history of the school by tapping an unexploited source, the school's manuscripts. My task is less difficult than that of the prospective historian of Fleury or of many other intellec- tual centers. With the aid of two catalogues of the cathedral library compiled before the French Revolution, the contents of the medieval library at Laon can be estab— lished with a high degree of accuracy. Although many of "‘vhe manuscripts these catalogues report were lost during the Revolution or due to other causes, a substantial number have survived. Equally important, most of these surviving llllnuscripts can still be studied in the same place they “re used in the ninth century. The bulk of the surviving Manuscripts of the Lean masters are jammed into an old black safe in the Bibliothdque Municipale of Leon. The Contents of this safe offer a splendid opportunity to assemble the intellectual biography of an important cul- tural center. To the manuscripts still at Laon can be added ll- few others which have migrated, by various means, to Paris, Berlin, and the Vatican. 6 One of the school's manuscripts not found at Laon today, Phillipps 1820, in the Deutsche Staatsbibliothek in Berlin, establishes a meaningful chronological limit for the present study. This manuscript was at Laon until ‘ the mid—tenth century when it was brought to St. Vincent in Meta. The manuscript, which only contains twelve leaves, is a calendar of Easter and lunar cycles. In the margins, beside the year columns of the tables, short notices were coried during the second half of the ninth century and the early tenth century. These annals have been published as the Annalee Laudunegses et sancti Vincentii Mettensis { Breweg.6 They are the single most important published . Source for the history of the school for they preserve the names and important dates of the Lean masters. These details are, of course, highly significant. For the tenth eOntm'y, there is no similar roster of masters nor is there g~11y evidence that a school flourished there. For that Ilatter, there is no indication that a school existed during the first half of the ninth century. More importantly, in addition to the factual information which the mil—25. convey, they also preserve a sense of tradition which existed among the Lean masters. To my knowledge, the Laon m are unique in this respect. Some annals mention “teacher era student. The manuscript which bears the Leon m however, passed through the hands of three k G Sgr., XV, 1293-1295. Cf. Plate I for the notices which record the birth dates of Martin Scotus, Manna of Leon, and Bernard of Laon. h 7 masters each of whom left his mark in it. It is with these three generations that I propose to deal in this study. The first generation begins with Martin Scotus (819-875). It includes his more famous friend and col- league, John Scotus (ca. 820-ca. 875), and other Irishman of lesser stature. John and other members of the Irish "colony" at Laon are not mentioned in the Annalee. But their influence was certainly felt at Laon and it is likely that John, at least, taught there. The second generation counts two masters, Manna (843- ? ) and Bernard 01 Laon (847-902). The last master at Laon was Adelelm Of Laon (ca. 865—930) who died as bishop of the town. There is the danger in the kind of study I propose here, based primarily on almost 100 manuscripts (and references to lost manuscripts) each with its own history, With its own complexities and secrets, that it might b.0011” submerged in details. An obvious means to avoid this pitfall would be to arrange the work according to the three generations of scholars and masters whose ‘otivities serve as the focus of the study. But this chronological arrangement would be lopsided. The first BOneration was more important than its two successors. In addition, source material, even in manuscript form, for the educational activities of the second and third 80nerations is practically negligible. Instead, I have chosen to organize the study around “Inn-u large topics which should successfully highlight the I” 8 additional information I hope to contribute to the study of Carolingian schools. First, it seems to me that the fortlmes of the school at Laon were a function of the diocese's proximity to the Carolingian court and to the involvement of Laon's bishops in Carolingian politics. In the first section, then, I will sketch the ecclesias- tical and political history of the diocese. I will single out the bishops of Leon for particular attention. Their Personalities, power, and connections influenced the e'D‘urse of the school's development more than any other ta.<:tor. In the following two sections, the emphases will be on the material and human resources which make a school: books, masters, and students. There are undoubtedly lacunae. I have tried to aignal them in the notes and in the appendices and to “uggest further paths of research which I was unable to Pursue. I allude, for example, to the study of medicine ‘15 Leon. Medical studies and practice seem to be a char- a'<=teristic interest of early medieval Irish scholars. IIn‘fortunately, the history of Carolingian medicine needs to be illuminated further before a non-specialist can deal intelligently with the subject. Furthermore, I have not been able to search systematically for Leon's ninth “d tenth century manuscripts. Most are still at Laon but ‘Olne are found in Paris, Berlin, the Vatican, and other QOPots. This means, of course, that there are other Laon ‘I-nuscripts, "apparently lost," which await discovery. 9 The most serious limitation of this study is that it is the study of one school. No school ever existed in isolation and Laon was no exception. In addition to the palace school of Charles the Bald, the nearby schools of Reins and St. Amand influenced and were influenced by the school of Leon. Furthermore, the Irishmen of Laon were in contact with their compatriots scattered elsewhere on the continent. Toward the end of the ninth century, Laon's influence was felt most heavily at Auxerre. All these connections underscore the dynamism of intellectual centers dining the Carolingian renaissance. It has proved frus— 1"J'-‘a.ting, however, to demonstrate the precise nature of the reciprocal influence among various schools. In the cows. of no work on Laon, I have not had the help of o‘bl'her studies of the schools of Reins, of Auxerre, of the Pfilace school, among others, which would have permitted In. to establish the interconnections between Leon and 0th” centers. What is clearly needed is a study of all the ninth eOntury intellectual centers. Monsignor Lesne ostensibly did this for France in the fifth volume of his monumental 35- oire e la ro riéte' ecclesiasti ue en France.7 For this work, Lesne gathered and read all the available pub- lished sources and secondary literature. His work is .fisentially a compilation rather than a synthesis of the \ e a fin u V II id‘cle 3. la fi 7 d M( e: cul s ca 0 lques, . 20:25 l gt: Les-.2 on: Les;- .3 t In 10 notes he made on this material. Consequently, it fails as a. general treatment of the subject. 0n particular points, Lesne is only as reliable as his sources. Most of his sources are either sketchy or out of date. The limits of Lesne's procedure is adequately shown by his treatment of the school of Leon: it begins in the twelfth century with Anselm of Leon.8 For the scriptorium and manuscripts of Leon he is no better. His chief source of information was Felix Ravaisson's catalogue of the Lean manuscripts - the first modern catalogue of departmental manuscript holdings in France and sadly deficient by today's standards. A new avenue of approach may be more fruitful. The approach I am suggesting and the one which has been used here is codicological. Historians of the medieval 8ch.ools, especially in the ninth century, it seems to me, 1|:th return to the manuscripts. The Renaissance humanists, the Benedictines of St. Maur, the editors of the great I"Nan-co collections of the nineteenth century, students of mnuscript illumination and medieval paleography, and co‘Ilmitless others, have, of course, poured over the manu— acl‘ipts. But they have done so primarily with the view toWizard publishing source material or editing texts. R‘l‘oly have the manuscripts been consulted for what they \ 81b;de, PP. 299-3100 c 9Le livres " ri toria" et bibliothé ues du ° encement du VIIIe 5 1a fin du XIe siScle (Lille: le‘culte's catholiques, 1955), pp. 607310. Ravaisson's ‘talogue is discussed further below, pp. 56-57. 9 11 can offer to the intellectual biography of a cultural center. Before we can hope to have a worthy sequel to Pierre Riché's E no 'on e ulture dans l'o 'de t barbare, VIe-VIILe siegle§,1o historians, it seems to me, will have to reconstruct libraries, determine the origin and provenance of manuscripts, study their notes and text traditions. It is an ambitious program. The present work offers itself one step in that direction. 1OSecond edition. Paris: Editions du Seuil, 1967. _. “fl‘n’u - . - ,~ . M {pl-Mad '. q... p, i W“. n. 1.... an. . fi a flu lax-g .1 Wary fire; in ”store? y’ 'h;« “M,” Wm}. ’wk; ram “.4 p ”at.“ usury :11’ v a. f Immune-mm . "‘H h 8 name 0" an...” 0;. :31, {hhnretefi (yr .s a, p . W“ of Lacs. e aik’mq r, ”I b." bx”: \beu'u- {lac '. FAR". V- , W pelsitiflan tile—'3'.“ ‘ie‘ .- has» Thea-finer to the «bee: ”s ram-s» we: . y “mi ins,” vrfl g‘ ”53%: ~59 had {in ' tel- was“ m m: mm Laon's manuscripts were produced and used in a certain historical milieu. The masters and students vho collected and used the manuscripts also worked in a very definite environment. The influence of these obvious factors on the history of the school of Laon has, surpris- ingly, been ignored. A description of the ecclesiastical institutions at Laon and their personnel as well as Laon's position in the larger world of Carolingian politics is thus a necessary first step to the study of Laon's manu- scripts and masters. In several important instances, the ecclesiastical and political history of the diocese will furnish names a>316 intonation pertinent to the cultural history of Laon- Details, such as a name or the character of a monastery, ha-V'e been misinterpreted for lack of attention to the non-cultural aspects of Laon's history in the ninth century. 5310 consequence has been to obscure the history of the school. Secondly, the political history of the diocese 5‘3 an important barometer to the school's success and inluence. When the Carolingians were prosperous and the m°harchy stable, Laon benefitted from their cultural Patronage. At the end of the ninth and during the tenth °°ntury, this source of influence and ideas disappeared. L‘On became a defensive position rather than a cultural eenter for the last Carolingians. 13 I CHAPTER TWO THE CATHEDRAL CHAPTER AND MONASTERIES OF LAON In the tenth or the eleventh century, an anonymous poet described the glories of the city of Leon. True to the norms of this type of poem, he first established the city's link to antiquity by attributing its foundation to the praetor, Macrobius. In the poet's judgment, however, the city' s physical attributes were more important than its classical pedigree. Laon, a naturally fortified site, had over the centuries withstood the invasions that so 81‘eatly affected the history of Western Europe: Caesar's, A"rotila's, and the Northmen' s. Mons laudibilis, the poet's eatplanation of the etymology of "Leon" (in Latin, Laudunum), re:El.ects Laon's success as a fortress and thereby gives an inII>ortant key to much of its medieval history.1 Today, as in the time of the anonymous poet, the first thing that impresses the visitor to Laon is the site itaelf. The city is perched atop a C—shaped butte which rises 330 feet above the plain between the Oise and the \ 1Cf. Ana 1 versus de raeconio urbis Laudunensis, AI’Dendix A. MacrobiusI part in the foundation of the city “a first reported in the ninth century by Hincmar of 1:113 who attributed his information to the historian, ER‘tropius. Opusculum LV Capitulorum, 334. 14 . 15 Aisne rivers. The city, thus protected by its steep slopes and the ramparts which still encircle it, commanded the plain in the Middle Ages and made the city virtually impregnable to attack. The importance of the site was enhanced by its geographical position on the border between Austrasia and Neustria. Laon and the surrounding countryside maintained their strategic importance until modern times as the area's tragic history in the last three European wars bears witness. In the period under consider- ation here, Laon's obvious advantages as a stronghold and place of refuge involved the city in the major events of ninth and tenth century Carolingian history. In order to appreciate the activities of Laon's cathedral school in its historical setting, some understanding of these events and the parts played in them by the bishops of Laon is necessary. The history of the church of Leon began in the closing years of the fifth century shortly after Remigius, the apostle of the Franks and archbishop of Reims (459-533), bagptized Clovis. The conversion of the Franks made Remi— gins a wealthy archbishop. His landed wealth increased efl:l.<>rmous1y as a result of donations from Clovis and the Frankish nobility. So great did the territory of Reims become that Remigius was unable to fulfill adequately his Pastoral duties. To meet this administrative and spiritual Problem, the archbishop created new dioceses out of his territory. Laon, Remigius' birthplace and the city where A . 16 he was educated,2 was one of the newly-created bishoprics. The circumstances of the creation of the diocese of Laon were not only of ecclesiastical significance. The vitality of an intellectual center in the Middle Ages depended on its relationships with other centers of intel— lectual activity. Because Laon was created from the terri- tory of Reims, there was a special kinship between the two cities. Despite the rebellion of Bishop Hincmar of Laon (858—before December 7, 882) against his archbishop and uncle, Hincmar of Reims (845—882)],3 a close relation- ship was maintained between the two cities in the ninth and tenth centuries. In the late tenth century, a cleric of Laon, archbishop—elect of Reims, could be designated a "Son of Reims."4 Spiritual leagues or associations were formed to join the clergy of the two cities.5 As the \ ' 2Hincmar of Reims, Vita Remigii episcopi I-iemensis, MGR Scr' rer' Merov., III, 1- 3, - . so, - Odoar , p. 1. Remigius remembered Laon generously J.‘:"-‘~.his will, cf. Hincmar of Reims, ibid., and Flodoard, w” pp. 428-434. ‘— 3 Their polemical battle gave Archbishop Hincmar a"‘lple opportunity to remind Hincmar of Laon of his diocese's origin and attachment to Reims: ". . . et Laudunensis I’afll‘ochia specialiter inter caeteros sedes provinciales gh‘emorum provinciae. . . ," 0 usculum LV Ca itulorum, 334- 35 (also, 487-488 and pinto a, _, , . The a“berry of Bishop Hincmar s re e lion is told in the next chapter, see below pp. 37—43. 4'Cf. e'Letters of Gerbert with His Pa a1 Privile es ‘3 S lvester lIII, ed. and tr. H. P. Eattin (New Tori: c'L’Iumfiia U'ITIversity Press, 1961), p. 193. The archbishop- °1ect was Arnulf, natural son of King Lothair. 5Jean Mabillon, Vetera Analecta (Paris: Montalant, 1723), p. 61; 60, IX, 553-535; Catalo e énéral des guscrits des 1E'irbliotheQues publigues fies fiZpartements, h 17 origins of many of Laon's manuscripts attest, the close relationship between the two cities was especially fruit- ful for the intellectual development of Laon.6 The history of the cathedral chapter of Notre Dame of Laon begins with the foundation of the diocese. It appears that in the seventh and eighth centuries, however, the canons abandoned the communal life. Under Louis the Pious, they were again brought back into the cloister where they remained for the next three centuries.7 The history of the chapter in the ninth and tenth centuries has never been told. The usual reference works and his- .tories of Laon8 offer no help in reconstructing its t- V: Metz Verdun Charleville (Paris: Imprimerie Nationals, 13'7”, p. 51, for a spiritual association con- tracted between the canons of Leon and the monks of St. Remi in Reims in 928 or 929. See further the Laon Formulam for a prayer association between the canons of Laon and monks of St. Remi and the cathedral canons of Notre Dame of Reims, MGH, Form., pp. 515-516. For a discussion of the histcTr'icaI value of the Laon Formulagy, see below, pp. 228—233. 6 See below, pp. 93-95. 7For the early history of the chapter, see M. Melleville, Notice histori ue sur l'ancien diocese de I«lion et les 3v5 ues de cet¥e vilIe (Paris: moulin, I821). pp. :7. fieIIevIIIe did not cite his sources. I ' have been unable to find any connection between Louis the Pious and the chapter at Laon. Perhaps the donations of an altar and chapel by Louis, described in a notice found 8 manuscript with Laon attachments by Claudio Leonardi, l‘eferg to Notre Dame of Leon. Cf. "Nuove voci poetiche 1'3 Becolo IX e XI," 144-145. . 813.8. the 92; H. Fisquet, La France ontificale: Ell-“Dire chronolo i ue et bio ra hi ue des arcthe ues 5 3;§ ues de =Eous ies dioceses fie §rance Metro oEe de 8 o ssons e on ar1s: . epos, ; the e are, e aonnais féodal, vol. II: Duché pairie ‘. 18 history. However, from the correspondence of the two Hincmars, the works of Flodoard, and several charters, we can begin to compile a list of cathedral personnel in the ninth and tenth centuries. This list will permit the identification of meters, students, and copyists at Laon. The chapter at Laon consisted of the usual offices. The highest dignities were those of the provost (mg- Bositus) and dean (decanus) of the chapter. The distinction between these two offices is not exactly clear at Laon. The supervision of the chapter as a whole belonged to both. The treasurer had responsibility for the goods of the chapter. The archpriests, aided by the priests, oversaw the parish churches and other religious establish— ments throughout the diocese.9 The ma ister, didascalus, de Laon (5 vols.; Paris: E. Champiom, 1924-1934), and, EoEert Wyard, Histoire de l'abba e de Saint-Vincent de Leon, edd. Abba Cordon, 1555 fiatfiieu {SainEQuentinz oreau, 1858). Their lists of cathedral dignitaries are sketchy for the tenth century and fuller from the eleventh century. 9Hincmar of Reims, Epistola ad Eresbxéeros et diaconos ecclesiae Laudunensis, , W raepos us quoque ac decanus fratrum custodiae tam in spirituale sollicitudine, quam in temporali adminstratione solerter curam adhibeant3‘ thesaur- arius de luminaribus et de illis omnibus, quae ad ecclesiae honestatem, utilitatem, atque salvationem, et ad suum ministerium pertinent, providentiam gerat. Archipresbyteri autem totius parochiae, ac presbyterorum sibi commissorum diligentiam summopere habeant, et rectores ac rectrices monasteriorum ipsius parochiae sedulo moneat, quatenus et in spiritualibus et in temporalibus sub ministrationibus necessaria sibi commissus exhibeant. . . ." at it. On ‘0 or scolasticus,1o had charge of the cathedral school. Other chapter offices included that of archdeacon and deacon. The deacons seem to have been specially designated assistants to the bishop. The chapter also appointed men to provide for the charitable and health needs of the diocese. The Lao; Forgulary mentions a race tor au erum, a da silis lar itor, and a hospitalitatis custodiam.11 Although it is impossible to compile a complete list of the names of the canons who held these offices in the ninth and tenth centuries, a large number of canons are mentioned in the sources. We are best informed for the period from 858 to about 875, that is, for the ponti— ficate of Bishop Hincmar. During this period, there were three deans of the chapter, Angelrannus,12 Bertharius,13 14 and Hedda. In the letters of the two Hincmars, they are simply described as bearers of letters and messages. Only one treasurer is known from this period, an Ermino, who 15 testified at the Council of Douzy in 871. Of the many 10All three terms were used to designate Laon's teachers. Scolasticus might also refer to a student. 11mm, Form., p. 518. Decanus resb erus, MPL. CXXVI, 539, 544. MPL 13Clericus before 869, rae ositus between 869-871: ' CXXIV 3031 1071 ibid. CEEVI 293 506' Mansi XVI: 580, 58 . 1 3 y 9 a 1 9 14A 871. 1so callzg4fle338-ggogittgé7 Prae ositus afgzg MPL 1058-1070; 1 . wort-r7112, 511$ Mansi, ibid.: 601,'606. """' ' 15Mansi, ibid., 664-665. Also mentioned as a Priest before 8‘69", 101., CXXVI, 511. 20 , names of canon-priests which have survived, some are mentioned only once. For the sake of completeness, the full list of canon-priests during Bishop Hincmar's time is given here: Grimo,16 Fagenulfus,17 Heimericus,18 19 Famulfus, 23 Wefegerius,20 Fainulfus,21 Ivo,22 Haimeradus, Fraumarus,24 Bertfridus,25 Sigebodus,26 Hadulfus,27 Heden- 29 ulfus,28 and Clarentius. Perhaps some of the following 16Presbzterue, MPL, CXXVI, 539. 17Mansi, XVI, 662. 18Presbyterus, MPL, cxxv1, 539. 191bid., 544. 20 Pres erus at the time of Bishop Pardulus of Laon's deatfi {856), ibid., 538. 21Presbyterus, ibid., 539. 22Presbyterus, ibid., 539, 544. 23Ordained priest by Bishop Simeon of Laon (835— 847). Subject of a synod at Laon in the 860's, ibid., 986-987; ibid., CXXVI, 538-539; Mansi, XVI, 659. 24Presbyterus, MPL, CXXVI, 544. Priest for fifteen years in the 860's, ibid., 539, 25 556. 26 Prae ositus ac resb erus of Notre-Dame-la—Pro- fonde (see Below, pp.30533 ) in the 860's, Flodoard, gag, p. 538. Sigebodus perhaps should be identified with Archbishop Sigebodus of Narbonne (875-885). Cf. A. Wil- mart, 0. S. B., "La lettre philosophique d'Almanne et son contexte littéraire," Archives d'histoire doctrinale et littéraire du moyen-age, , , n. 27Archdeacon then priest in the 860's, then arch— Priest between 869-871, MPL, cxxxv, 280-281, 985-987; ibid., cxxvr, 290, 411, 227, 511, 539, 544. - 28Priest in the 860's, ibid. cxxv1, 539; Flodoard, EQEE. pp. 531, 549; Mansi, xVTIE: 505-306, ‘29Priest in the 860's, Egg, CXXVI, 280, 511; Mansi, XVI, 619, 623, 631. 21 . canons later became priests at Laon; however, they are known to us only as deacons: Isaac,3o Liuddo,31 Hart— garius,32 Teutlandus,33 and Ermenoldus.34 To complete this list, mention should be made of three men who might have belonged to the chapter but who are not so desig- nated: Martin the magigter,35 Anselm, a cousin of Bishop Hincmar,36 37 and an Engelardus. unfortunately, a list as extensive as this one for the fifteen years of Hincmar's pontificate cannot be compiled for the last quarter of the ninth century or for the entire tenth century. The Leon Annales provide the names of two more masters and deans at Laon. The sco- lasticus Manno was born in 843, according to this source. Bernard, also scolasticus, was born four years later. When he died in 903, he was dean of the chapter. The same year, Adelelm, the priest, took Bernard's place as dean. He 3oneecon in 849, MPL, CXXIV, 1073. 31Archdeacon in the 860's, ibid., cxxv1, 539, 544. 32Deacon in the late 860's, ibid., cxx1v, 1039. '33Deacon in the late 860's, ibid., 1000, 1039; ibid., CXXVI, 506, 512, 515; Mansi, XVI, 34Deeoon around 870, MPL, CXXVI, 505. 35819-875. Cf. Annales Laudunenses et S. Vincentii Mettensis Breves, MGH cr., , . 36In the 860's Hincmar of Reims wrote to the bishop Of Leon " .-. . a sobrino tuo Anselmo receptum. . . .' .flggg, CXXVI, 316. 37His death in 880 is mentioned in the Annales Laudunenses et S Vincentii Mettensis Breves,I'51'd., 1295. gut as Plate II shows, the first letter of his name may not he ‘ K 22 later moved to the position of treasurer. Adelelm's brother, Albuinus, who was killed in 911, perhaps also belonged to the chapter but he more probably was a warrior.38 Gozbert, another relative of Adelelm, became bishop of Laon in 930 and so mightearlier have been a canon at Leon.39 The chapter's dean in 928 or 929 is known only by the first three letters of his name, Alb. . . .40 A charter of the 920's mentions an Ermen- oldus as titular priest of the monastery of St. Vincent of Laon. He can perhaps be identified with the deacon 41 Ermenoldus of Hincmar's time. For the second quarter of the tenth century, we 381bid. For the mention of Adelelm as treasurer, see Flodoard, Annales, p. 5. H. L6we has connected Adelelm with an importan u cryptic list of students arranged under the name of an "Adalo," cf. "Dialoggs de statu sanctae ecclesiae: Das Werk eines Iren im Laon es 10, un e s, eutsches Archiv ffir Erforschun des Mittel- alters, XVII (1 , , n. . owever, i is dou tfu 0 me that "Adalo" can be identified with Adelelm and that the list of students concerns Laon. This list is dis- cussed in greater detail below, pp.225-228. 39Flodoard, ibid., p. 45. 40See above, p.16, n. 5. The manuscript which bore the mention of Alb . . . was destroyed at Metz in 1944. 41See above, p.21, n. 34. Jean Mabillon has pre- served the ention of Ermenoldus in a charter of the 920's: ". . . ibi St. Vincent of Laoé] etiam duodecim canonicos fuisse delegatos; neque ibidem quemquam presbyterum solum adtitulatum fore, nisi unum tantum tantummodo nomine Ermenoldum," De re di lomatica (Paris: Robustel, 1709), p. 565. The we ve canons were established in the monas- tery by Bishop Dido of Leon but left soon after his death ill 893. So Ermenoldus was there alone sometime between iflien and 925, the date Mabillon gave to the charter. A .23 . find a Rodulfus as priest,42 Herbertus as archdeacon,43 Roric as deacon,44 and Adelomus and Hadulfus each mentioned simply as guidam clericus.45 A cathedral chapter was not only a list of names. It could also be a powerful and influential unit in poli- tical and ecclesiastical society. The chapter at Laon was well-endowed. At the Council of Douzy in 871, Charles the Bald observed that the church of Laon had gained over 2,000 manses by royal favor alone during the bishoprics of Pardulus and his successor Hincmar.46 Sizeable donations of land made by cathedral canons indicate that the chapter was still prosperous in the tenth century.47 Despite the fragmentary nature of our knowledge of the chapter personnel, we do know that many of Laon's bishops came from its chapter and that Laon's canons filled other sees. In the ninth century, the priest Hedenulf became bishop of Laon (876-882) while Isaac and Liuddo occupied the sees of Langres (859- 880) and Autun (866—874) respectively. Adelelm, the treasurer (921-930), his relative Gozbert (930-932), the 42Flodoard, Annales, p. 61. 43Cartulaire, pp. 190-191 (no. 6, 1 October 961). 44Flodoard, Annales, p. 121. 45Ibid., pp. 120 (Adelomus), 142 (Hadulfus). 46Mansi, XVI, 692. 47See Cartulaire, pp. 188-189 (no. 5, 3 June 966 01' 969); ibid., pp. 190-191 (no. 6, 1 October 961. Also, for a donation by archdeacon Emmo (ca. 960—970), cf. Paris, 13: N, Collection de Picardie, vol. CCLXVII, f. 227. ‘- , 5 e .l__\L 24 . priest Rodulf (936-948) and the deacon, Roric (949-976), all became bishops of Leon while the cleric, Hadulfus, was elected bishop of Noyon (955—977). The cathedral's wealth permitted it to support scholars. There were books to be bought or to be produced for use or for exchange. Ex- changes and contacts required resources for travel or for messages. The fact that many of Laon's bishops issued from the cathedral chapter meant that they had a familiarity with and, presumably, an interest in the educational problems of the diocese. Those canons who became bishops elsewhere extended the contacts and influence of the bishopric. The cathedral chapter and cathedral school were, of course, not self—contained at Laon itself. Other eccles- iastical foundations could potentially increase the oppor— tunities for intellectual exchanges both within the city and between other cultural centers. Soon after the creation of the diocese, Laon received its first monastic communities. The first of these, St. Vincent, is virtually without a history before the ninth century. The only mention of its existence in the pro-Carolingian period occurs in an eleventh century source, Aimoin of Fleury's Historiae Francorum, which ascribed St. Vincent's foundation to the Merovingian queen, Brunehaut (ca. 534-613), wife of Sigebert (535—575), king or Austrasia.48 From then until the monastery's 48"Nam in suburbano Laudunensi basilicam in honore sancti construxit Vincentii," MPL, CXXXIX, 767. xi. lliilllhh. +1: Ky. b“: .‘u‘ 1 25 destruction by the Northmen in the second half of the ninth century, the only other reference to St. Vincent concerns Charles the Bald's attempt to reform the monas— tery. Sometime during Hincmar of Laon's pontificate, he sent a monk of St. Denis to restore order and discipline to the monastery.49 Isolated on the eastern spur of the butte, outside the city's ramparts, the monastery was easy prey to anyone who besieged the city. The chronology of St. Vincent's misfortunes in the second half of the ninth century is uncertain.50 The sources refer to the monastery only as a center of refuge for other monks fleeing the Northmen and to the century long effort of Laon's bishops to restore the ancient abbey. In 851, the monks of St. Bavo of Gent lost their 51 monastery to the Northmen. Monasteries, such as St. Bavo, were rich prizes for the Scandinavian pirates. To 49Hincmar excommunicated the monk, however. Cf. Hincmar of Reims, O usculum LV Ca itulorum, 315. 50Even the identity of St. Vincent's malefactors is uncertain. St. Vincent's first historian, who wrote in the last third of the seventeenth century and had access to documents now lost, recorded two raids, one in 882, the other in 892, cf. Dom Robert Wyard, pp. 97-99, 105-113. Wyard's nineteenth century editors suggest that the second raid was really destruction caused by the wars between Charles the Simple and Count Eudes, ibid., p. 105, n. 1. According to Fisquet, p. 322, the monastery had already been sacked by the Northmen in 866. Melleville (p. 10) simply notes that the monastery was destroyed by the Northmen in 'flhe ninth century. 51Annales Bavonis Gandensis, MGH, Scr., II, 187; -A1mnales Blandinenses, i51d., V, 23. A 26 the monks, though, the greatest treasures were the bones of the community's founder or patron saint and the manu- scripts which formed the bases of the cult and culture of the monastery. The monks of St. Bavo, with a prescience that must have softened the blow of 851, had already moved their greatest treasures before the Northmen came. In 846, their important relics were taken to the fort of St. Ouen.52 Apparently the monks spent the first two years after the destruction of their abbey at the fort. In 852, however, Abbot Tasrad and his monks transferred the relics to Leon and moved themselves to Nivelles where Tasrad 53 died in 867. ‘His successor, Rodulf, however, died at Laon in 882.54 It would seem then that by this time what was left of the community had settled in Laon. Abbot Rodulf's successor, Elias, also died at Laon in 895 and was buried in St. Vincent. "After his death there was a great dispersion of the monks which lasted more than forty years."55 52Annales S, Bavonis Gandensis, ibid., 187, n. 3. 53Ibid. See also Monuments monasterii S. Bavonis minors, I. Ex miraculis e rans a iones . avonis, GH, Scr., XV, 595. In 881 and 883 the Bodies of Saints Quzntin, 1ctoricius and Cassian were brought to Laon from nearby Saint Quentin, Ex sermone in tumulatione SSa Quintini, Victoricit Cassiani, MGH, §£;., , 1- 3. See urther e as hree verses-3? the Anonymi versus de praeconio tlrbis Laudunensis, Appendix A. 54Annales S, Bavonis Gandensis, ibid. 55Ibid. "Anne 895. Helias abbas Gandensis obiit Iheatiduni, et ibidem in ecclesia sancti Vincentii sepelitur. ll’cssst cuius mortem magna extitit dispersco monachorum, que plusquam per quadraginta annos continue duravit." 27 At the same time that the monks of St. Bavo occupied St. Vincent, the Northmen drove another group of clerics to seek refuge at the monastery. In 886, the canons of Pierrepont, bearing the body of their patron, St. Boetian, petitioned Bishop Dido (882-893) for admittance to a portion of St. Vincent.56 Dido was especially sollicitous to the canons. While they were at St. Vincent, he insured their maintainance by transferring the properties formerly dependent on the church of St. Boetian to the canons at St. Vincent. He also added two manses at Chevregny to the holdings of the canons and rebuilt the walls surrounding the church at Pierrepont.57 The canons left little, if any, impress on Laon. When Dido died in 895, they re— turned to Pierrepont and left St. Vincent with only one titular priest, Ermenoldus.58 Thirty years later, another bishop of Laon, Adelelm (921-930) again attempted to restore the monastery. Adelelm brought twelve canons to the monastery to replace 59 This attempt, however, those established there by Dido. also failed. Soon after the charter which established their rights was drawn up and approved by King Rodulf, the 5501c, 11:, 568. '57Cartulaire, p. 184 (12 May 886); also, Robert 1«yard, p. 58Robert Wyard, pp. 105-113; also g9, IX, 568. 59The charter, confirmed by King Rodulf about 925, £§:;:; be found in Jean Mabillon, De re diplomatica, pp. 565- ‘ 28 twelve canons abandoned St. Vincent after incessant attacks by robbers and plunderers.6o In 961, almost a century after Charles the Bald's attempt to restore St. Vincent, the monastery finally found its "second founder" in Bishop Roric (948-976). Unlike his predecessors, Roric called Benedictine monks to St. Vincent. He appointed Maccallan, an Irishman who had previously served as abbot of St. Michel in Thiérache, abbot of a community of twelve monks called to Laon from the monastery of St. BenOit on the Loire.61 Roric found St. Vincent destitute and overgrown with weeds and determined that the new St. Vincent would be free of economic problems. From 961, when he restored the monastery to the end of his pontificate in 978, Roric was constantly engaged in increasing the wealth of St. Vincent. The charter of 961 fixed the boundaries of the monastery. Another charter, issued the same day, restored property to St. Vincent which had formerly belonged to it in the time of Bishop Rodulfus 11.62 Charters in 966 (or 969)63 and 97364 continued Roric's endowment of the 60GC, ibid. 61Cartulaire, pp. 184-186 (no. 3; 1 October 961). This char er is also found in CC, X, Instrumenta ecclesiae Laudunensis, 187. See also ibl . or na or a close copy of it, is still at Laon, cf. P. 26, :1. 67. 62 6 Cartulaire, pp. 190-191 (no. 6; 1 October 961) 31bid., pp. 188-190 (no. 5; 3 June 966 or 969). 641616., pp. 186-188 (no. 4; 973). 29 monastery. In addition, at Roric's request, King Lothair confirmed the abbey in the possession of its goods. He renewed this charter in 975 to include St. Vincent's new possessions and granted immunity to the monastery.65 Roric's restoration was successful. With the aid of his successors' continued favor and endowments, St. Vincent enjoyed a prosperous and unbroken history for the next 66 four centuries. This monastery, which so absorbed the energies of As a further privilege, St. Vincent was recognized as the Laon's bishops from Dido to AdalberQ‘was intimately linked to the cathedral. The tombs of St. Vincent, not those of the cathedral of Notre Dame, received the bodies of Laon's bishops, canons, and lay nobles until the twelfth century. 65The first charter is known only throu h reference to it in the second. Cf. L. Halphen, F. Lot edd.), Recueil des actes de Lothaire et de Louis V rois de France (953:987) (Faris: Imprimerie Rationale, 1908), p. 96 (no. 37). For the charter of 975é9cf. ibid., ’ pp. 90—91 (no. 38); also, g2, X, 188-1 Cartulaire, p. 183 (no. 1; 975). 66BishOp Adalbero (976-1030), in particular, was a great patron of St. Vincent. He reconfirmed the privi- lege of Bishop Dido by which St. Vincent gained the lands dependent on the church of St. Boetian, Cartulaire,' Pp. 191-192 (no. 7; 8 June 979-March 986). In 587, he obtained a privilege from Hugh Capet which reconfirmed Lothair's privilege of 975, ibid., pp. 183-184 (no. 1bis; 26 September 987). He also contributed generously to St. Vincent from his private fortune, cf. R. T. Coolidge, ap e :fédération des sociétés savantes de l'Aisne, VII (1960- "Adalbero, Bishop of Leon," Studies in Medieval and Renais- sance Histo , II (1965), 94-103, and, "Notes sur l'Zpi- t Fe 3 I'iveque Adalbéron de Laon," Mémoires de la 30 "second seat" of the bishopric. 67 Laon's other monastic foundation, Notre—Dame—la— Profonde, was equally privileged. Founded in 640 by Sala- berga, Notre-Dame-la—Profonde extended the influence of the Irish monastery of Luxeuil to Laon. Salaberga, trained and consecrated a religious by Waldebert, abbot of Luxeuil, first established her commu- nity of noble women in the suburbs of Langres, a short distance from Luxeuil.68 The wars of the Merovingian period, however, drove the community from its first home. On the advice of Waldebert, the women "began to wander like the patriarch Abraham" until they reached Laon, "a city which afforded them protection from the sieges of the enemy as much by the nature of the place as by its 69 strong ramparts." Salaberga and her community, which 67For these reasons, Roric thought the restoration of the monastery urgent: "Quod Eihe condition of the monastery in 96f] ego non equanimiter ferens, maxime quia non tam hujus sedis episcoporum sed etiam canonicorum necne laicorum habebatur sepultra, accito generali conventu ipsius concilio de- liberavi in antiquum, ut fama erat, monastice conversationis statum reformare et prout tem- poris dictabat oportunitas quantulum cumque monachorum ibidem numerum aggregare." Cartulaire, p. 185 (no. 3; 1 October 961). Other charters 1c eslgnate St. Vincent as the second seat of the bishopric and burial place of Laon's bishops and canons are: >Jean Mabillon, De re di lomatica, ibid,; Cartulaire, no» 4, 5, 12, 26. See also Robert Wyard, pp. 47-55. 68Vita Sadalbergae, abbatissae Laudunensis, MGH, Scr, rerI erov., V, 5 . 69 I Ibido , 57-58 a S 31 . numbered 100 religious by this time, were warmly received at Laon by Bishop Attilo (634—664).70 The community, whose growth is unwitnessed by any charter or legal instru- ment, soon attracted the wives and widows of Merovingian royalty until its numbers reached 300.71 Salaberga built six churches in Leon in addition to Notre-Dame-la-Profonde to accomodate her sisters. In order to serve their spiri- tual needs, she joined to her community twenty monks from Luxeuil who, like the nuns, were under the Rule of St. Columban.72 The history of Notre-Dame-la—Profonde, once one exhausts Salaberga's 2133, is obscure.73 Only in the ninth century and under the Carolingians can its development be followed. The few pieces of evidence available reveal that the monastery's aristocratic character was maintained.74 7OIbid., 58; lgg, IX, 511. 71 72Vita Sadalber a, 62; GO ibid., 587. Cf. also, Taiée, "ETEFBE§E‘EE'§§Int—Jeon‘76622T789)," BSAL, XXI (1874-1875), 184. ' 73Salaberga was succeeded as abbess by Anstrud (655- 688), her daughter. Cf. Flamart, "Anstrude, abbesse de St.lJean," BSAL, XXI (1874—1875). In 788, Charlemagne Innished one of Duke Tassilo's daughters to Notre-Dame— 1a-Profonde, cf. Fra entum annalium ab anno DCCLXIX us no ad DCCCVI, ed. E. Buchesne, Historiae Francorum Scriptores (F ) TI 25 aris: Cramoisy, 1636 , , . Vita Sadalberga, 59; GO, ibid., 588. 74According‘to Charles the Bald's charter for Notre Dame at Compiegne, Notre-Dame—la-Profonde was under royal protection at least by 877: ". . . et sub ea tuitione ixmperiali consistant qua coenobia Prumbi scilicet, quod atavus noster Pipinus construxit, et monasterium sancti— monialum Lauduno in honore sanctae Marie constitum 32 . In the ninth and tenth centuries, all of its abbesses whose names are recorded were members of the Carolingian nobility. In 831, Judith, second wife of Louis the Pious, 75 was made abbess of the monastery at Laon. She was followed by Louis' daughter, Hildegard.76 When Charles the Simple (898-923) took Edith, the daughter of Edward I of England as his wife in 913, she, in turn, became abbess of Notre—Dame-la-Profonde. She remained abbess after her husband's death in 929 until 951 when, in advanced age, she abandoned Laon to marry Herbert III of Vermandois, at that moment an implacable foe of the Carolingians and Edith's son, King Louis IV. Betrayed by the queen mother, Louis stripped her of Notre-Dame-la—Profonde and gave it 77 to his own queen, Gerberga. Notre-Dame—la—Profonde's historian was probably consistere noscuntur." Cf. Recueil des actegfide Charles II 18 Chauve' roi de France (3 vols.; 'Paris: Imprimerie fiationale, 1923-1955), II, 453 (5 May 877). 75Vita Hludowici Im eratoris, MGH, Scr., II, 633. Judith sought refuge at Notre-5ame-13:Prof33de when her husband's sons by his first marriage rebelled against him in 833. One of them, Pepin, attacked and captured Leon and Judith and imprisoned her at Poitiers. Cf. Taiée, 1931and L. Halphen, Charlema e et l'em ire carolin ienne (Paris: Editions Albin Michel, 1968), p. 836. 76Nithard, Histoire des fils de Louis 18 Pieux, ed. and tr. by P. Lauer aris: es 8 es 8 res, 4), p. 96; also, g9, IX, 592. '77Flodoard, Annales, p. 132; Richer, II, 293; Taiée, 195-196. Unaer the Robertians and Capetians, Notre- jDamm-la-Profonde again slipped into obscurity. In 1128, a; synod at Arras drove the dissolute nuns from the monas- tery and replaced them with Benedictine monks. ‘The name of' the monastery was'then changed to Saint Jean, cf. 92, IJI, 588; and, Taiée, 201. 33 correct when he assessed the ultimate result of the monas- tery's royal connections as negative for the spiritual life of the community.78 For the Carolingian queens there is no evidence to suggest that Notre-Dame—la—Profonde was anything more than a domain and a source of revenue and amusements and a shelter in widowhood. Nevertheless, the little that is known of the history of this monastery provides a good index to the position of Leon and its bishops in the ninth and, especially, tenth centuries. As Notre-Dame-la—Profonde was a royal monastery, Laon was the royal city of the Carolingians. The involvement of the Carolingians with Notre-Dame-la-Profonde was one further link, in addition to the city's strategic importance, which bound the diocese to the court. From the court at nearby Compitgne and Quierzy flowed patronage and influence. Furthermore, under Charles the Bald the court attracted continental and Irish scholars. It was inevitable, since St. Vincent was a negligible cultural entity for much of the ninth and tenth centuries, that the cathedral of Notre Dame at Laon would share heavily in the renaissance spon- sored by Charles. The cathedral chapter, with Charles' palace school, was one of the main supports in his cultural program. 78Taiée, 196. CHAPTER THREE THE POLITICAL ACTIVITIES OF THE BISHOPS 0F LAON, 848-930 Laon's importance in the political history of the ninth and tenth centuries varied inversely with the strength of the Carolingians. As the sphere of Carolingian influ- ence shrank in France, Laon and its bishops played a more active political role. In the tenth century, as the Care- lingians struggled for their survival, Laon became the capital of the Carolingian monarchy. This intense involve- ment in the fate of the Carolingians augured both well and ill for the cultural life of the bishopric. A close alliance, cemented by the presence of a royal monastery in the city, favored the bishopric when the dynasty was prosperous and the bishop a loyal ally of the king. 0n the other hand, the city's attachment to the court involved it in costly and divisive struggles when the dynasty was threatened. A recalcitrant bishop might likewise compro- mise the favor the diocese enjoyed with the court by adopting a policy different than that prescribed by the Caselingians. Ecclesiastical provinces and bishoprics Ivere highly "politicized" entities in the ninth and tenth centuries. Inevitably, political currents affected other 34 35 aspects of life in the bishopric. It is perhaps no coin- cidence that one loses track of the school at Laon after the first quarter of the tenth century, at precisely the moment when the fortress increasingly served as the center of Carolingian strength and when Laon's bishops became the most important advisers to the "last Carolingians." The history of Laon's bishops during the first half of the ninth century, like that of the cathedral chapter, is virtually unknown. The few random details which have survived indicate that even at this time the bishopric enjoyed favor at court. Whether Charlemagne had a special affection for Leon, birthplace of his mother, Bertha, daughter of Count Caribert of Laon, cannot be told.1 Bishop Gerfrid (789-799) of Laon, however, knew Alcuin and was prosperous enough to rebuild completely his cathedral. When the cathedral was finished he asked Alcuin, then abbot of Tours, to provide it with a deluxe copy of the Alcuinian Bible.2 Wenilo (799-814), Gerfrid's successor, had access to the books Pepe Leo III sent to Charlemagne from Italy. He copied at least one for Hildebald, archbishop of Cologne and Charlemagne's archchaplain.3 1For these details, cf. de Sars, I, 65. 2For Alcuin's poem, cf. MGH P.L., I, 285. Ger- frid's Bible has not survived, c . . Fischer, "Bibeltext und Bibelreform under Karl dem Grossen," Karl der Grosse: Lebenswerk und Nachleben, II: Das eisti e EeBen (Dfissel- dorf: Schwann, 1985), pp. 162, 195. For Gerfrid, of. S. Martinet, "La cathedrale carolingienne de l'éveque Gerfrid," IFédération des sociétes 'histoire et d'archéolo ie de I'Iisne, Mémoires, XIII 31957), 70:83. Bar. P. Lehmann, "Erzbischof Hildebald und die 36 For the succeeding three bishOps of Leon, the sources are completely silent for the cultural and poli- tical activities. If one tradition is correct, it is during their pontificates that Louis the Pious reformed the cathe- dral chapter.4 The history of the bishops of Laon in the ninth century really begins with Pardulus (848-856) and Charles the Bald. Although there is no evidence that Charles ever resided at Laon, his favorite palaces, at Compibgne and Quierzy, were both nearby.5 Both he and his first wife heavily endowed the church of Laon.6 Pardulus, like most Carolingian bishops, was the son of an aristocratic family. Since 740, his forefathers had been the lords of Folembray, midway between Laon and the palaces at Quierzy and Com- piégne.7 As an ally and friend of both Archbishop Hincmar of Reims and Charles the Bald, Pardulus drew his diocese Dombibliothek von Kfiln," Erforschung des Mittelalters, II, 139-144. 4See above, p.17, n.‘7. The GC (IX, 513) devotes one half column to Ostroald (814-826),-Bernico (829-?), and Simeon (835-847) of Laon. 50f. Marville, "Etude sur les lieux oh s'est arreté Charles le Chauve, pour ses Chasses, en 867," BSAL, XV (1865), 228-231, for a table drawn from the AnnaIes Berti- niani which lists the king's itinerary from o . More recently, G. Dumas' article based on an analysis of Carolingian diplomas, "Capitales des rois et empereurs carolingiennes, principalement dans l'Aisne, l'Oise, et la Champagne," Fédération des sociétés histori ues et archéologigues de I'Iisne, Memoires, XIII (1957;, 23. 6See above, p. 23. 7Hincmar of Reims, E istola, MPL, CXXVI, 538. 37 into the center of ecclesiastical and political power dur- ing the mid-ninth century. Before he became bishop of Leon, Pardulus served as vice-lord for the church of Reims. Later he became regent for the monastery of Montier-en-Der and one of the mgggi dominici for the region of Soissons, Laon, and Porcien. Lupus of Ferritres described Pardulus as an intimate of the king and used the bishop's influ- ence with Charles several times to good success. Charles' queen, Irmintrude, honored Pardulus on the day of his con- secration as bishop with a magnificent stole which she crafted herself. When Hincmar of Reims brought several clerics to judgment because they had been consecrated by his excommunicated predecessor, he excused himself from the proceedings in which he was one party and chose Par— dulus to act as metropolitan in the affair.8 When the archbishop undertook the education of his sister's son, who had been named Hincmar after his success- ful uncle, he probably intended to prepare the young man to follow in Pardulus' footsteps, if not at Laon, at another bish0pric where Hincmar needed a loyal ally, faith- ful to the Carolingians like Pardulus. At Reims, the young Hincmar was accordingly given a solid background in canon law, his uncle's forte. Pardulus' death prepared the way for the young Hincmar who probably was not of canonical age 8Cf. GC, IX, 514; also Lupus of (Ferriéres, Cor- res ondance, "1",242..245 (no. 66); II, 8 (1)10. 71, "Cum—Te- Peto memoria intimas vos esse regi. . . ." ; ibid,, 10- 14 (1108. 72-73). 38 when consecrated bishop of Laon. Archbishop Hincmar's choice was an excellent one. His nephew had already spent several years at court where he was well received and made important contacts.9 As bishop, he even gained an adminis- trative position at the court and used his influence there to obtain the rights to a monastery — both of which were contrary to canon law as his uncle was later to remind him.10 The bright, young, and ambitious bishop befriended the learned Aeneas, the palace notary, who later became arch- bishop of Paris when Hincmar became bishop of Laon.11 The archbishop of Reims had every reason to be pleased with his protégé. Then Hincmar did an about-face 9Hincmar of Reims, 0pg§culgg LV Capitulorum, 455: ". . . cum quanta benignitate a domno rege sus— cipiebaris, quanta dulcedine mea fruebaris, quanta unanimitate cum fratribus et coepiscopis nostris utebaris, cum quanto amore a Palatinis, et ab aliis hujus terrae hominibus colebaris. . . .' 1OIbid., 295-296: ". . . sine mea vel coepisco- porum “nostrorum conscientia, administratione in palatio domni regis obtinuisti . . . postea contra interdictum meum canonicum, eamdem administration- em palatii readeptus fuisti. . . . Sed et cum eodem administratione palatii, praelationem monasterii in tertia provincia sine meo consensu, vel ipsius episcopi, in cujus parochia idem monasterium erat, obtinuisti. . . ." Hincmar of Reims' account at the Council of Douzy offers a few more details: "Postea iterum per exteras po- testates, id est saecularium interventione, contra Sardi- censes canones, eadem administrationem in tertia provincia . . . per aliquot annos tenuit. " Mansi, XVI, 568. 11Concilium Duziacense I (871), Mansi, XVI, 635: "Interea d1x1 1ncmar o e1m Aenea, cui tune asculta- 'bat Hincmaris, quod melius esset at in crastina expectaret; et persuadente Aenea adquievit in Hincmarus." 39 . after several years of a seemingly tranquil episcopacy' and challenged the authority and jurisdiction of his archbishop and of his king. His impertinent excommunication of the monk sent by Charles the Bald to reform St. Vincent was but one episode in Hincmar's efforts to preserve the inde- pendence of his diocese against an aggressive metropolitan and Charles.12 As a result of his conflict with the arch- bishop and the king, the rapport between the church of Leon and the court which had been carefully nurtured by Pardulus, was broken. Hincmar himself was eventually deposed at the Council of Douzy in 871. Hincmar's first "crime" was the defense of his cathedral's goods against royal usurpation. In 868, Charles, in order to placate the Northmen, distributed to them as benefices land which belonged to the church of Leon. Hinc- mar immediately reacted by excommunicating the vessels. Charles, Whose position was delicate, imprisoned Hincmar who, in turn, extended his excommunication over the cathedral chapter. The excommunication weighed heavily on the people of Laon. It meant that they could not baptize their children, have their confessions heard, or receive viaticum on their deathbeds, be buried in conse- 13 crated ground, or hear Mass. Finally, the chapter sent a delegation to Hincmar of Reims and presented him with a 120f. above, p. 25. 13 Hincmar of Reims, O usculum LV Ca itulorum, 412— 416; Concilium Duziacense I (871), Mansi, X51, 587-588. 40 petition seeking his help.14 The archbishop persuaded Hincmar to lift the excommunication, probably in return for Hincmar's release from prison. But Hincmar refused to concede anything to his uncle and to Charles. At the cele- bration held at Gondreville in.November, 869, to commemor- ate Charles' victory in Lorraine, Hincmar published his Collectio altera ex antiquis epistolis Romanorum pontifi- lggg.15 This compilation drew on the recently "discovered" pseudo-Isidorian decretals and served to vindicate the rights of suffragan bishops. The battle of words grew more acerbic when Hincmar of Reims responded with his Opuscul- 16 which reviewed and condemned Hinc- um LV Capitulorum mar's Collectio and episcopacy. The bishop of Laon further aggravated the situation when he refused to join in the excommunication of Charles' rebellious son, Carlomanq, In August, 871, Hincmar was brought before the Council of Douzy. There the archbishop again passed his episcopacy under review. Charles accused Hincmar of Laon and his relatives (prepingui) of stealing the treasures of the cathedral which he and Irmintrude had donated to it. There was, apparently, some truth to these charges. After listening to the testimony of the cathedral treasurer, Ir— minon, and a reading of the Antiochene canons which forbade bishOps to appropriate the goods of the cathedral for their own use, Hincmar reached into the folds of his vestments '1MPL, CXXVI, 511-512. 15ggp, CXXIv, 993-1002. 161bid., CXXVI, 282-494. 41 and returned a gold cross to Irminon.17 The Council de- posed Hincmar and deprived him of all his priestly functions. Despite an appeal to Pope Hadrian II, Hincmar was again im— prisoned and blinded by Bezo, count of‘Vienne.18 This entire episode has long attracted historians because it brought into sharp relief some basic ecclesiastic- al, legal, and political issues. We might note also that the controversy between the two Hincmars and Charles the Bald raged at about the time that the school of Laon was at its peak, the 860's. The question naturally occurs, therefore, as to the effect of the bitter controversy on the cultural life of the cathedral. Hincmar's excom- munications weighed heavily on the diocese. The conflict seems also to have split the cathedral chapter. As far as the school is concerned, its chronology is not sufficiently precise to determine whether the upheavals of the 860's af— fected it. Within four years of the Council of Douzy, Martin Scotus died (875). About the same time, John Scotus disappears from the historical record. The first generation of masters, then, had almost come to an end when Hincmar of Leon was deposed. The relationship between the cultural life of the cathedral and Hincmar‘s actions in the 860's might be of a —n 17Concilium Duziacense I (811), Mansi, XVI, 665. 18At the Council of Troyes, 878, Pope John VIII and the French bishops allowed Hincmar to celebrate pontifical Mass and to enjoy a part of the diocese's revenue as well as Perform'some episcopal functions congointly with his succes- 8013 cf. Concilium Tricassinium II 8 , Mansi, XVIIa, 357. 42 different nature. Instead of the political affecting the cultural, perhaps, in the instance of Hincmar of Leon, his cultural milieu affected his political stance. No one, it seems to me, has successfully explained Hincmar's sudden opposition to his uncle and to his king after the auspicious debut of his pontificate. The usual explanation which is offered is the one found throughout Hincmar of Reims' comments on his nephew: presumption and natural perversity.19 A better explanation for Hincmar's behavior, however, might be found in the presence of an important Irish colony at Laon during his pontificate. It will be shown in a later chapter that Hincmar's intellectual for- mation was greatly tempered by the Irishmen he patronized at Laon. Perhaps, too, he was influenced by independent Irish ecclesiastical tendencies. One does not have to search very far to find a case in point. In a brilliant investigation, Heinz L6we published and attributed to Laon 19Modern treatments of Hincmar of Leon do not go beyond Cellotius' Vita Hincmari Junioris E isco i Laudun- ensis, Mansi, XVI, 6883754 Texcerpts in Lil-15L, CfiIV, 967- which is a compilation of extracts from Hincmar of Reims' works. The best treatment of the bishop of Leon is in H. Schr'drs, Hinkmsr Erzbischof 19:11 Reims: Sein Leben und seine Schriften (Freiburg im Breisgau: Herder, , Pp. 3 - . c rors' interest in Hincmar of Laon is, of course, entirely from the point of view of Hincmar of Reims. He deals primarily with their legal relationship. H. Netzer's statement Dictionnaire de théolo ie catholi ue, add. A V ant'et al., vo s.; Par1s: Le ouzey e Ane, 1903—1950 VLTn-d—pt” 2486) that Hincmar of Laon's life can be summed up in his battle with his uncle is an over- simplification as I hope to show below, pp. 180-183. Hinc- mar's appraisal of his nephew should be balanced by the accounts of Hincmar's popularity at court and his friend- ship With Archbishop Aeneas of Paris. s t NW» L28. 1‘ .v 43 the Dialogue de statu ecclesiae.20 According to Lawe, this dialogue preserves the record of a real encounter be- tween Maccallan, the Irishman Bishop Roric chose in 961 to head the restoration of St. Vincent, and Roric. Roric was a natural son of Charles the Simple, half-brother and notary to Louis IV, and chief adviser to his nephew, Louis IV's son, Lothair. He was also too much of a feudal bishop for Maccallan. Roric's real duty, Maccallan tried to impress upon him, was to the church of Leon. His first task should be to regain the church's lands which had been alienated from the cathedral. One, the Irishman even sug— gested, should be prepared to challenge secular authorities in order to establish the diocese's independence and to restore its preperty. These arguments fit the circum- stances of the 860's at Laon so well that one would almost be tempted to argue for an earlier date for the dialogue. The fact that there is no evidence for an Irish influence on Hincmar's politics is not entirely conclusive. For example, the sources preserve no instance of Hincmar's use of the Irish language. But we know, from his uncle, that he did use the Irish tongue.21 Although he was deposed, Hincmar was later allowed to celebrate Mass and perform some episCOpal functions con- jointly with the new bishop of Leon. Charles the Bald and Hincmar of Reims insured that Hincmar's successor would be 20 21 Cf. p. 22, n. 38 above. Cfe below, Po 1830 a.» .0 v a“: 1! Epd 1.. a .1... .3 it as- M.- 1 n 44 more tractable than he was. Their choice fell on Hedenulf, a priest of Leon. Before his selection as bishop, Hedenulf played a major role in the foundation of a new monastery at Compiégne by Charles.22 Hedenulf proved to be an excel- lent choice as bishop. Far from wishing to assert the diocese's independence, the aged Hedenulf yearned only to return to the monastic life. In 878, he took the occasion of the Council of Troyes to petition the Pope to absolve him from his vows as bishop on the grounds of his health and his desire to rejoin the monastic life. JohanIII refused Hedenulf's plea.23 Hedenulf continued as bishop until his death in the early 880's. The most important event of Hedenulf's pontificate was the death of Charles the Bald in Italy in 877. Charles' death, followed by the deaths of his immediate successors, left France and Leon without a Carolingian monarch. Not surprisingly, in a period when the Northmen began to establish permanent winter bases in France and Belgium, Dido (ca. 882-893), Hedenulf's successor as bishOp of Leon, loyally served Eudes, 22Cf. MPL, CXXVI, 270 and fig, IX, 517-518. Cf. also Decretum—Fleri Laudunensis de Hedenulfo electo e is— co 0, Mansi, XVIIa, 355—303: ". . . Hedenulfum ecclesiae nostrae filium, et in ecclesia nostra suffragantibus stipendiorum meritis ad onus sacerdotale premotum. .'. ." Cf. further Annales sancti Maximini Trevirensis, Egg, §g£., II, 213: "Anne 875. Xarolus rex per Hedenulfum, Laudun- ensis ecclesiae presbyterum, coepit congregare clerum sub doctrine canonica Dee militaturum in cenebie a so fundato, quod prius regium, ac deinceps apostolica auctoritate vecatum est novum." 23Cf. Co c' ’ T ica ' , Mansi, XVIIa, 357. a! 04 m E. - \ ‘4 .~ 1.! A.l| V lhi ‘1 Q It! ‘ t . Ii.- I.‘ O’rQI ‘\.Q 1‘ 45 the count of Paris who withstood the invasion of that city in 885 and who scored a spectacular victory over the Northmen at Montfaucon.24 There is every indication that the last two decades of the ninth century were turbulent ones for Laon and that Dido played an important role in the dramatic events. Like many of his confreres, his origins are unknown. His name does not appear in the list of cathedral canons for the third quarter of the century. If we can draw any conclu- sions from his extremely rare name, he might have been related to Abbot Dido of St. Pierre-le4Vif.25 He was a man of substance who, as we shall see, made an important cultural contribution to the diocese. We have already noted that Dido allowed twelve canons from Pierrepont to seek refuge at St. Vincent.26 Sometime between 888 and 892, Dido obtained a charter from King Eudes which placed the dwellings and houses of the bishop and chapter at Laon under royal protection. Eudes, at the same time, forbade himself, his successors, and all public agents to enter the 24Cf. L. Halphen, pp. 398-402; and, E. Favre, Eudes comte de Paris et roi de France 1882-8981 (Paris: Bouillon, 18555, p. 145. 25Abbot Dido became abbot of St. Pierre-leAVif in 847 and died in 869. Cf. Lupus of Ferribres' most inter- esting letter to him (Corres ondance, II, 2-5). Caro- .lingian parents often named Eheir children after successful relatives, e.g., Hincmar of Leon after Hincmar of Reims, Adalbero of Laon after Adalbero of Metz. If this is true for Dido of Laon, it would indicate that his family was from the region of Sens. 26Cf. above p. 27. 46 episcopal and chapter buildings without permission.27 Dido, in turn, supported Eudes with unusual zeal. In 892, Baldwin of Flanders' agent and relative, Walcher, captured Laon with the help of traitors. Eudes, however, soon re- captured the city and put Walcher to trial. When Walcher was doomed to be decapitated, Dido refused to grant him the last sacraments or to allow his body rest in consecrated ground. Fulk, archbishop of Reims and Dido's metropolitan, sent off a stinging letter which condemned the bishop's conduct. Fulk, who was maneuvering to restore a Carolinp gian to the throne, probably also resented Dido's rabid partisanship of Eudes' cause.28 The impression which emerges of Dido's pontificate is of an attempt to strengthen the diocese after the deteri— oration caused by Hincmar of Laon's conflict with his metro- politan and king and by Hedenulf's lack of enthusiasm and strength for the office of bishop. Dido's efforts to re- populate St. Vincent, to protect the goods of the church of Laon, and to chastise drastically those who imperilled the city further the impression that the diocese was under— going a difficult period. There is even an indication of tension and rivalry in the cathedral chapter during the last ‘ 27Recueil des actes d'Eudes roi de France (888— - 898, ed. 5.:3. Bantier (Paris: Imprimerie Rationale, 1967), no. 29. ~ 28m1es Vedastini, MGH, Scr.,-II, 206; Flodoard, Egg, 570 (for EE1E'3 Iotter7?_'§§, IX, 518-519; Favre; PP. 143—144. 1| ‘LI‘ “1. illil‘l '1‘ I DQ‘E 47 decade of the ninth century.29 In 893, when Charles the Simple was crowned king at Reims, Laon entered a new chapter in its history. From this point until 991 when Hugh Capet captured the last Carolingian of any stature, Charles of Lorraine, the fortress on the mountaintop became the center of Carolingian strength. The traditional Carolingian palaces, destroyed by the Northmen at the end of the ninth century and situated too close to the stronghold of Herbert II of Vermandois at Chauny, were abandoned for a more austere, though better fortified, palace at Laon.3O It was from Laon that the majority of tenth century Carolingian diplomas were issued thereby justifying Laon's reputation as the urbs regia to contemporaries and later generations.31 This honor, however, 29Flodoard (gag, p. 572) preserves the following resumé of a letter Fulk of Reims sent to Leon: A "Ministris quoque Laudunensis ecclesiae pro eo quod audierat, inter eos contentiones esse et conventicula seorsum facere; quapropter monet eos ut filios, quo, si haec ita fiunt, omnimodis amputentur, conventus autem ipsorum fiat moderatus atque iocundus, in quo secundum aetatem vel datam sibi a Deo probitatem, omni deposito supercilio, quisque loquatur." 30This palace has been studied by L. Broche, "L'ancien palais des rois b Laon," BSAL, XXXI (1900-1904), 180-212;- de Sars, II, 47-48; and Dumas, 55. Cf. also, Flodoard, Annales, pp. 122-123; Richer, II, 172-177. Three of Lothair's charters mention the palace, of. Recueil dos actes de Lothaire et Louis V’ rois de France 1 PP- 9 i 0 31cr. Gerbert of Aurillac, Letters p. 159 (no. 128: 25 July 988); Richer, II, 8-10. For another memory of Laon's period of glory, see verse 2910 of the Chanson de Roland. For the locations of the Carolingian diplomas, c . e investigation by Dumas, 55-69. 48 was a mixed one. One historian has counted at least six- teen sieges at Laon during the reigns of the last Caro- lingians.32 Charles the Simple's coronation was engineered by the staunchly Carolingian archbishOp of Reims, Fulk.33 Part of Fulk's plan for restoring a Carolingian to the throne was to make sure that Bishop Dido's successor at Laon would be more loyal to the Carolingian cause than Dido had been. To this end, Fulk wrote to King Eudes after Dido's death in 893 asking that the election to the bishOpric of Laon be a free one. As elsewhere, Fulk successfully placed his candidate on the episcopal seat.34 Bishop Rodulfus of Laon,35 (894-921), perhaps a priest of Reims before his election, was a great friend of Fulk36 32J. F. L. Devisme, Histoire de la ville de Laon at so. institutions (2 vols.; Paris: Dumoulin, 18455, I, xiii. 33Flodoard, HRE, 565. According to Richer, I, 30, while Eudes was away in Aquitaine, "Fulco, archiepiscopus, de Karoli promatione in regnum apud Belgos tractabat." 34Cf. Flodoard, ibid., 565. For an instance when Fulk also successfully promoted Mancio as bish0p of Chalons in the face of apposition from Eudes, the clerics of Cha— lons, frOm some of his fellow bishops and from the Pope, 366 ibid. ’ 5620 35The‘gg gives Dido's successor as Rodohardus (894- ca. 897) followed by Rodulfus I (897-921). However, these are both the same man, cf. Fisquet, p. 217 and P. B. Game, Series E isco orum Ecclesiae Catholicae (Graz: Akademische DrucEF und Verlagsanstalt, 1957,, p. 559. 36Nothing is known of Rodulfus before his election as bishop of Laon. However, in a letter of advice which ArchbishOp Fulk wrote to Rodulfus concerning an ecclesias- tical matter, Fulk wrote the following after he reminded the bishOp that he was his superior: "Ast ego nulla in hoc 49 and rapidly gained the confidence of Charles.37 In 897 when Eudes promoted a rebellion in Charles' portion of the realm, the counties of Reims, Vermandois, and Boulogne sided with Eudes. Only Laon under Rodulfus supported Charles.38 Charles weathered that storm. He was not as fortu- nate in 923. In the previous year Counts Gilbert and Otto of Lorraine instigated a second rebellion and placed Robert I, son of Robert the Strong of Anjou, on the throne (29 June 922). Less than a year later, Robert was killed at the Battle of Soissons between the rebellious forces and those of Charles. Undaunted, the rebels replaced Robert by Ralph, Duke of Burgundy, crowned king at Soissons on 13 July 923. Charles was unable to turn the temporary advantage given him by Robert's death into a sustained effort against the rebels. Shortly after the coronation of Ralph, Charles was captured by Herbert II of Vermandois and imprisoned until negotio uti volui auctoritate: sed sicut amicus ab amico, imo sicut a specialiter dilecto filio postulare. . . ." cf. Flodoard, BEE, p. 571. Rodulfus represented Fulk at the synod of Ravenna in September 896, ibid. In light of Fulk's interest in Dido's successors an is reference to Rodulfus as an especially beloved son, Rodulfus might have been a cleric at Reims before his election to the bishopric of Laon. 37Charles granted two charters at the request of Rodulfus, one in 98, the other in 905, cf. Recueil des actes de Charles III 1e Si 1e roi de France 893-923, edd. F. Lot, 5. Lauer (2 voIs.; Faris:‘ Imprimerie Rationale, 1940-1949), I, 16-17 (no. 10: ". . . Rodulfi aeque illustris pontificis. . . ."), and 112 (no. 51). 38Favre , p. 190. 50 his death in 929.39 For the next thirteen years, until 936, Ralph was king of France. BishOp Adelelm presided over the diocese of Laon during the tumultuous twenties. His achievements as a third generation master of the school at Laon and the city's bishop do not seem to have been exceptionally noteworthy. Adelelm, a cleric of Laon and probably a member of a local aristocratic family, was consecrated bishop during the reign of Charles the Simple. If he had any Carolingian sympathies, Adelelm kept them to himself. Count Roger of Laon controlled the town and was party to the rebellion 40 against Charles the Simple. King Ralph continued to use Laon as his capital.41 Adelelm, it has been seen, was quite willing to c00perate with the new king.42 After Adelelm's death in 930, the bishops of Laon were increasingly caught up in the vortex of feudal poli- tics. Two of them, Roric (948-976) and Adalbero (977-1030), 43 were among the most influential of their day. It would 39The best source for these events is Flodoard, Annales, pp. 7-15. See also, A. Eckel, Charles 1e Sim le (Faris: Bouillon, 1899), pp. 119-125; F. Lauer, Robert Ier et Raoul de Bour o e rois de France (923-9365 (Faris: Champion, 1910’, pp. 15-15. 4°Cf. Flodoard, Annales, pp. 13-14. 41 420f. above, p. 27, n. 59 for Ralph's charter for St. Vincent of Leon. 43For Bishop Roric, cf. Flodoard, Annales, pp. 121, 145, 151, 156, 162-163; g9, IX, 521- Recueil des actes de Louis IV’ roi de FranceL936-954j, ed. P. Lauer Ibid., pp. 17, 33, 61; also, Richer, I, 103. 51 be naive, of course, to assume that periods of tension and political stress are bleak periods for intellectual history. In fact, for the oft—castigated tenth century, it would seem that just the opposite was the case. The tenth cen- tury has its share of great ideas and movements. Cluny immediately comes to mind. Historians also speak of the tenth century as the "pre-scholastic age".44 The master responsible for the revival of the study of logic in the tenth century, Gerbert of Aurillac, taught at Reims. Reims also produced two leading tenth century historians in Flodoard and Richer. At Laon, Bishop Roric was reputed for his wisdom.45 His successor, Adalbero, had a rich intellectual life which needs to be further illuminated.46 So, there is no lack of intellectual activity during the tenth century, especially at Laon and in the province of Reims. What we do miss at Laon, however, is an organized (Paris: Imprimerie Nationale, 1914), xi-xxv; F. Lot, Les derniers carolin iens (Paris: Bouillon, 1891), pp. 39, 87; a. wae, 37-57. Roric's career merits the kind of extended treatment R. T. Coolidge has given to Adalbero, cf.p. 29, n. 66. ‘44E.g., J; B. Russell, Medieval Civilization (New York: John Wiley and Sons, 1 , p. . 450i. Richer, II, 82: "Succedit eiEZRodulfus II of Laoé] vero frater regis ex concubina Rorico, omni sci- entia lnclitus." 46Cf. R. T. Coolidge's discussion, "Adalbero, Bis- hop of Leon," 106-107. Professor Coolidge's conclusion that Adalbero was unaffected by the contents of Laon's tenth century library will have to be revised in light of the re- construction of the library presented in chapter 6 of the present work. Adalbero's works have been edited by G. A. Hfickel, "Les pobmes satyriques d'Adalbéron," Bibliothb ue XIII (1361) de la faculté des lettres Université de Paris, , 29-132. They deserve a more complete modern edition. 52 school. Perhaps this is simply the fault of our sources. However, I am more inclined to believe that the silence of the sources is not accidental. Ideas may flourish in almost any atmosphere. A school, a program of studies, library re- sources, talented masters, require a somewhat stable am- bience. Both Lupus of Ferribres and Gerbert of Aurillac complained in their letters that political affairs inter- fered with their scholarly pursuits. The silence of the tenth century sources seems to tell us that what is true for individuals is even more true for schools which as institutions have a life more complex than that of indiv- iduals. Laon, in the tenth century, had the misfortune to be wedded to a dynasty on the wane. The Carolingians' struggle to maintain their hold on Laon while their ri- vals repeatedly tried to capture the city drained the diocese of time, talent, and resources needed to support an organized school. The great Roric did not have the time to write a small pamphlet on the Antichrist.47 Adalbero wasted his quick mind on polemic. The greatness of any institution does not depend on its longevity. Schools throughout the Middle Ages were fragile things which bloomed, as it were, under one master only to fade away after his death. The real measure of a school's importance lies in its impact on the wider world around it in terms of the ideas, methods, and students 47Cf. Adso of Montier—en—Der's preface to his Libellus de Antichristo, MPL, CI, 1291. 53 which emanated from it. In this sense, Laon's influence outlasted the school itself. To assess the achievement of the school at Laon, it will first be necessary to study those elements which combined in the third quarter of the ninth century to make the city an important Carol- ingian intellectual center. PART TWO THE MANUSCRIPTS OF THE SCHOOL OF LAON Books or manuscripts, of course, furnish important information.on the intellectual interests of the person or institution which owns them. A library reflects the tastes and interests of those responsible for its for- mation. It can reveal the strengths and weaknesses of a person's or an institution's background. This was even more true in the ninth century than it is now. When books were more difficult to obtain, the process of selection was more rigorous. A manuscript was an expensive invest- ment; it was chosen wisely or given to someone who would appreciate its contents. Laon's manuscripts, therefore, have a value beyond the texts they contain. The history of Laon's manuscript collection reveals the interests and intellectual milieu of the school. 55 CHAPTER FOUR AD LECTORES CODICEM: THE FORMATION OF THE CATHEDRAL LIBRARY The manuscripts of Laon, given the sketchy nature of the narrative sources, are the most important sources for the history of the school. They tell us what the masters and students of Laon read and studied. In addition, the manuscripts of Leon record the contacts and interrela- tionships among masters and cultural centers. Each manu- script has its own history. Its script, for example, often indicates its origin to experts in paleography. Other clues, such as an ex-dono, fill in the provenance of a manuscript. Variations in the text of a particular manuscript indicate different families in the tradition of a text and thus illuminate the manuscript's background. Three important tools aid the systematic exploi- tation of Laon's manuscripts as a source for the history of the school. The first and most recent is Felix Ravaisson's catalogue of Laon manuscripts published in 1849.1 This catalogue was the first departmental catalogue 1"Manuscrits de la bibliothbque de Leon," Cata- lo e énéral des manuscrits des bibliothb ues ubligues do 33 artements (15re str.; 7 vols.; Paris: Emprimerle Ratio I 1329 n8 9’ -1885), 1, 41-2550 56 Rafi \ he. tat. 57 of manuscript holdings published in France. This was a mixed honor though for the manuscripts of Laon. In 1849, Ravaisson was working in the dark as far as the study of medieval literature and paleography in France was concerned. French medieval studies were just beginning to recover from the dissolution of the religious orders during the Revolution. When Ravaisson began to work on the Laon manuscripts, both the Monuments Germaniae Historica and Abbé Migne's republication of medieval sources, the 223327 logia latina, were in their infancy. Ravaisson's catalogue, then, is essentially worthless and offers little help to the researcher. His analyses of the manuscripts are often vague or erroneous. His dating is equally unreliable. He has omitted some manuscripts and misjudged the provenance of others. Two other manuscript catalogues are more valuable than Ravaisson's. They are also both about a century older and record the contents of the library as it existed before the French Revolution. These catalogues record approxi- mately fiftybfour manuscripts which somehow had disappeared by Ravaisson's time. Dom Bernard de Montfaucon, the great Maurist scholar who coined the word "paleography", pub- lished his census of Laon manuscripts in his two volume Bibliotheca bibliothecarum manuscriptorum nova.2 His list 2"Catalogus mss ecclesiae cathed. Laudunensis," Bibliotheca bibliothecarum manuscri torum nova (2 vols.; Paris: Hriasson, 1759),!I,1292-1599. 58 preserves 364 titles. One hundred nineteen of these bear the short description, "est summae antiquitatis," or "est antiquissimae," or simply, "antiquiss." Judging from the existing manuscripts, "very old" connoted a manuscript of the tenth century or older to Montfaucon. Dom Bugnidtre's list of Laon manuscripts is similar to Montfaucon's. Bugniatre, a Maurist engaged in the monu— mental, uncompleted history of the ecclesiastical provinces of France, compiled his catalogue shortly before the French Revolution. It is preserved in the unique manuscript copy of his Histoire de Leon.3 Bugniatre's descriptions of the manuscripts are much fuller than Montfaucon's. Also, un— like Montfaucon, he noted each expdono found in the Laon manuscripts. These precious bits of information make even the "lost" manuscripts of Laon valuable sources. Some of the cathedral's manuscripts left Laon before these three catalogues were compiled. Of these, several can be traced back to Laon by an ex—libris or another clue such as the script of a Laon master. The catalogues of Bugniatre and Montfaucon, however, preserve substantially the contents of the library at Laon as it existed in the ninth and tenth centuries.4 3Chapter 6, "Les bibliothbques, les manufactures et les maisons royales du 1aonnais," Paris B N. Collection de Picardie, t. 265, ff. 97v-113v. It Is interesting that Dom Bugniatre excoriated the eighteenth century canons for their slovenly care of the manuscripts in the Opening paragraph of this chapter. 4It is, of course, entirely possible that a ninth th 11' to. of re: 59 With these basic tools and the surviving manuscripts, the first reconstruction of Laon's ninth and tenth century library can be attempted. This chapter will focus on the formation of the library. Later chapters will examine the origins of the manuscripts and analyze the contents of the library at Laon. The ways in which libraries were formed in the Middle Ages as revealed, for example, in POpe Leo III's gift of manuscripts to Charlemagne, in Lupus of Ferribres' letters in the ninth century, or in Gerbert of Aurillac's in the tenth century allow us to imagine fascinating possibilities for the formation of Notre Dame of Laon's library. Behind manuscript 113, whose contents indicate a Spanish or African archetype,5 or manuscript 424, copied in northern Italy,6 there might have been someone like or tenth century manuscript might have come to the cathe— dral library in the eleventh, twelfth, or later centuries and thus be irrelevant for the study of the ninth and tenth century school. Judging from the surviving ninth and tenth century manuscripts, this possibility seems remote. Most of Laon' s manuscripts bear unmistakable signs that they were in use at Laon during the period cohsidered in this study. SIn addition to the third book of Victor of Vita's De ersecutione Vandalica (ff. 13v533v), this codex conEains an anonymoustreatise on the Trinity which, in the Opinion of its editor, has a Spanish background, of. Dom G. Morin, "Traité priscilliantiste inédit sur la Trinite," Etudes textes découvertes: Contributions b la litterature et 5 la Histoire des douze remiers sfszles aris: icard, 1 , pp. 55-173. This manuscrip1 also contains an anonymous sermon, De fluxu san uinus, remini- scent of Fulgentius of Ruspe, cf. C. H. Turner, "A Leon MS. in 1906 and 1920," Journal of Theological Studies, XXII (1920—1921), 1- 5. 6 Cf. E. Wickersheimer, Les manuscrits latins de 60 Gerbert who introduced northern France to books known only in Spanish or Italian collections. Unfortunately, the only literary evidence for the formation of the cathe— dral's library are the few notices of Hincmar of Reims' gifts to the bishops of Laon,7 and a request by Hincmar of Leon for books from Bishop Witgarius (858-887) of Augsburg.8 médeci e dn.haut mo en a e dans les bibliothb ues de France (Paris: Centre Rationale de la rechercEe scienti- fique, 1966), pp. 36-39 (no. 27). 7In a letter to Pardulus of Leon: "Item pro ecclesia Morini vacante pastore, ut unde cum loquatur, qualiter ipsa electio rite peragatur, et pro libris sanctiAmbrosii de fide sibi mitten- dis." Flodoard, gag, p. 518. In a letter to Hincmar of Laon: "Sententiam beati Leonis ad Leonem Augustum depromp- tam parvipendere nullo modo debes, quam in synodo apud Suessionis audisti; et in illo libro quem tibi dedi ipse legere potes." fl§§,CCXXVI, 544. In another letter to Hincmar of Leon: "Et quia districtione retributionis non considerant de domnis suis miseri excultant, et caetera quae in regula pastorali beati Gregorii ex ordine potes relegere, quam tibi una cum libro sacrorum canonum in manu ante altare sanctae Mariae in die ordina- tionis tuae misi, obtestans quae ignorare non potes et oblivisci non debes." MPL, ibid., 558. In the O usculum LV Ca itulorum 313? RE}: ut certi us credas I g.e., Hincmar of Lao'n—J quae de hoc etiam verbo dicemus, revolve libros veterum et illum nihilominus codicem quondam meum, a sobrino tuo Anselmo receptum, et tibi a me praestitum sed postea sicut nec quosdam alias tibi a me commendatas obtentum. . . ." 8Mentioned in a letter from Hincmar of Reims to Hincmar of Laon, yap, ibid., 280: "Prater Clarentius communis compresbyter noster ad me veniens ex tua parte mihi dixit, quia fratri Hadulfo compresbytero nostro missaticum tuum ad Vitgarium episcopum de civitate Augustiburc pro libro Paterii et aliis quae tibi placuerunt commiseris. . . ." 61 The manuscripts themselves are more helpful. According to Dom Bugniatre, nineteen Laon manuscripts were given to the cathedral by Bishop Dido. A twentieth manu- scriptiwith Dido's ex-dono left Laon before Bugniatre compiled his catalogue.9 Bugniatre attributed twenty- two manuscripts to the generosity of a Bernard and Adelelm. Two additional manuscripts bear their ex-dono.1O Finally, Bugniatre recorded that Bishop Rodulf of Laon gave four manuscripts to the cathedral library. The preser- vation of this information is a stroke of great fortune. Of the approximately 125 manuscripts which were at Laon in the ninth and tenth centuries, forty-eight, or about forty per-cent, can be traced to a donor. More importantly, the size of their donations, whose magnitude has never been suspected, reveal Dido, Bernard, and Adelelm, as cultural patrons of the first order. Their donations compare favorably with that of Archbishop Hincmar of Reims who gave at least twenty-one manuscripts to the churches of Reims.11 9Paris B N lat. 5095 (Anastasius Bibliothecarius, Collectanea ad Ioannem Diaconem;’ Hincmarus Laudunensis, Collectio altera ex 9 istolis Romanorum ontificum; Hinc- marus au unensls e 1ncmarus emensls, is o as . 1o . ' ' . . ‘ Pa 1 B'N’ lat. 5643 (Passiones sancti Issac, Maximiani ironti FHili i Marculi Mariaei. This manu- script came to the Bibliothgque Rationale from the collection of the Sorbonne Doctor, Antonius Faure, of. Jean Mabillon,‘Vetera Analecta, p. 185. Another manuscript from Bernard and Adelelm not included in Bugniatre's- catalogue is Paris B‘N lat. 5670 (Paulus Diaconus, Vita sancti Gregorii) whicfi formerly belonged to Colbert. 11Of. the study by F. M. Carey, "The Scriptorium of Reims during the Archbishopric of Hincmar (845-882 A.D.)," 62 Their personal libraries must have been as large as that of Archbishop Vulfad of Bourges who had thirty-one titles in his collection.12 Of the twenty books which Dido gave to Laon, nine survive.13 His library contains few surprises. It was weighted in favor of patristic authors. Three of his codices, all apparently lost, contained Augustine's sermons on the Psalms and other minor works (Bugniatre, cod. 79, 80, 91).14 Dido also had a collection of Augustine's letters (Bugniatre, cod. 93). Dido's manuscript 97 contains Augustine's De consensu evangelistorum. Another extant manuscript, 135, is a collection of eight Augustinian in Classical and Mediaeval Studies in Honor of Edward Kennar n , e . . . ones ew or : . . ones, , - . Carey attributed twenty-two manuscripts to the archbishop. However, I believe that at least one of - these belonged to his nephew, Hincmar of Leon. Cf. below, p. 180, n. 58. 2For a plate of the manuscript leaf which contains the list of Wulfad's books of. M. Cappuyns, "Les 'Bibli Vulfadi' et Jean Scot Erig ne," Revue de théologie ancienne et médiévale, XXXIII (1966), 1371179. 13His ex-dono is almost invariable: "Hunc librum dedit domnus dido episcopus deo et sanctae mariae. Si uis abstulerit iram dei et sanctae mariae incurrat" ms. 24, f. Av; ms. 97, unnumbered fragment attached to f. 1: ms. 342, f. 1r). Manuscript 122bis, f. 1v and ms. 428, second unnumbered flyleaf, substitute libellum for libgum.' Manuscript 6, inside front cover, ms. 135, f. 85r, m8. 9, f..Av, and Paris B N. lat. 5095, f. 1r have ". . . iram del et eius dominae genitricis offensam incurrat." 4References to lost manuscripts are made to Bugnidtre's fuller description. A concordance of Mont- faucon's, Bugniatre's, and Ravaisson's numbers for the manuscripts is provided in Appendix B. 63 sermons with a pseudo-Augustinian homily and another homily falsely attributed to Fulgentius of Ruspe. Dido also possessed Eugippius' handy précis of the African Father's voluminous work, the Excerpta ex operibus S. Auggstini (Bugniatre, cod. 101). Other:fathers were not so amply represented. Dido gave a copy of Jerome's com- mentary on Daniel, Jonas, Nahum, Micheas, and Habacuc (Bugniatre, cod. 66) to Notre Dame of Leon. His donation of Jerome's Liber interpretationis hebraicorum nominum (manuscript 24) is still conserved at Laon. The only manu- script of Ambrose's work, a collection of his treatises, has been lost (Bugniatre, cod. 57). The bishop of Leon also read John Chrysostom. The eastern fathers, as we shall see, were highly valued at Laon. Dido's copy of Chrysos- tom's thirty-four sermons on the epistles to the Hebrews has not been conserved (Bugnidtre, cod. 61). Among medieval authors, Dido's collection was spread rather thinly. In addition to Bede's commentary on Proverbs and on the book of Tobit (Bugniatre, cod. 123), he owned Alcuin's little treatise, De processione sancti spiritug (manuscript 122bis), and commentaries by Rhabanus Maurus on Genesis (Bugniatre, cod. 133) and Exodus (manuscript 6). Dido also possessed a beautiful copy of Anastasius the Librarian's Collectanea ad Iohannem Diaconem. The same manuscript (Paris. B.Nlplat. 5095) contains Hincmar of Laon's Collectio altera ex epistolis Romanorum Pontificum and a collection of the correspondence between Hincmar of 64 Reims and Hincmar of Laon. Dido's library was completed by two volumes of conciliar canons, the Liber Pontificalis, and a book on the art of warfare. Manuscript 199 is a copy of the Concilium Laternense Romanum of 649. A second collection of canons (Bugniatre, cod. 36), according to Bugnidtre's detailed description,also contained a chronicle from the creation of the‘world to the twenty-fifth year of Charlemagne's reign as well as excerpts from Augustine, Jerome, Anas- tasius, and Gregory of Tours. Dido's copy of the‘Lipgg Pontificalig is conserved as manuscript 342. Vegetius' fourth century treatise, Epitome rei militaris (manuscript 428) enjoyed a vogue in the ninth century. Rhabanus Maurus presented excerpts of it to Lothair II in the hope that it would contribute to the defeat of the Normans. For the same reason, Freculph of Lisieux sent a copy to Charles the Bald. Hartgarius of Libge presented a copy to Count Evrard of Friuli.15 Perhaps Dido intended manuscript 428 for Eudes. Dido's manuscripts add a few details to his sketchy biography. Dido was evidently a wealthy man.16 None of his books can be traced to a scriptorium at Laon during his pontificate. He must have acquired them elsewhere. If 'his books pointed to a single scriptorium, we would have an ‘— ‘5cr. Manitius, I, 293, 667, 316-317, 668. 16For another example of Dido's largess, cf.jpp.213- 214 below, where his donation of a bell to Notre Dame of Laon is discussed. 65 important clue to Dido's origins. However, his books come from various scriptoria in northern France and in the province of Reims. With one important exception, Dido's books do not seem to have been used in the school. They are well preserved and are bare of all notes which would indicate heavy use. In fact, in Dido's nine surviving manuscripts there is no evidence of his own handwriting. The only manuscript which can be connected with the school at Laon is Dido's copy of Jerome's Liber interpretationes hebraicorum nominpg, manuscript 24. On a flyleaf, folio 1r, there are two important notes in Irish script. We shall return to these. 0n the verso of the same leaf, .Martin Scotus cOpied the table of contents for the manu- script.17 Obviously Martin owned this handy guide to Hebrew etymologies before it came into Dido's possession. This manuscript is the only connection between Dido and Laon before his consecration in 882/883. It allows us to suspect that Dido was familiar with one of the Laon masters sometime in the early 870's (Martin Scotus died in 875) and perhaps was a student at Laon. Bishop Rodulf's contribution to the cathedral library was less spectacular than Dido's. Of the four manuscripts Bugnidtre attributed to Rodulf, two have survived. Rodulf's copies of Jerome's commentary on Eze- chiel (Bugniatre, cod. 65) and Cassiodorus' commentary on 17See Plates III (1. 1r) and IV (1’. 1v). 66 the Psalms (Bugniatre, cod. 103) have both been lost. Bugniatre also ascribed a copy of Augustine's De trinitate to the generosity of Rodulf. This must be manuscript 130 whose contents fit Bugniatre's description. The front flyleaf has been cut in half vertically. On the verso of the remaining portion is the note [Rlodulfus episcopus. There would have been sufficient space on the entire folio to read "Hunc librum dedit Rodulfus episcopus," or some variation. According to Bugnidtre, Rodulf also gave a copy of Florus of Lyons' Expositio in epigtglas beati Pauli, ex operibus sancti Auggstini collecta to Notre Dame of Laon. Manuscript 105 exactly fits Bugniatre's description. However, it contains no ex-dono. The ex-dono may have disappeared when the flyleaves were removed from the manu- script after Bugniatre saw it. There are two problems in assessing the significance of Rodulf's contribution to the cultural life of his diocese. First, there were two bishop Rodulfs at Laon during the tenth century. Rodulf I presided over the see 18 from 894 to 921. Rodulf II was bishop of Laon from 936 to 948.19 There is no sure way to tell which of these is 18 See above, pp.48-49. 19 For this politically active prelate cf. Flo- doard, Annales, pp. 71, 73, 110, 115, 118, 120-121; gap, pp. 581, 588, 590; Richer, II, 17: Q9, IX, 520-521. See also, D. Misonne, "La charte de Raoul de Laon relative b l'établissement de moines scots h Saint-Michel-en- - gggfggghe (3 fev. 945),” evue bénédictine, LXXIV (1964), 67 the Bishop Rodulf of the manuscripts. The same must be said for a short note which appears in a medical manuscript at Laon: "Rodulfus episcopus vivat in aeternum."20 For the present, I am inclined to identify Rodulf I as the benefactor of the cathedral library. The two manuscripts which survive and are attributed to him are from the ninth century. Presumably, Rodulf II would have had greater opportunity to present tenth century manuscripts to the library. Secondly, it is surprising that no one has connected the Rodulfs of Leon with two important classical manuscripts now conserved at Leiden.21 Both Leiden Voss lat F. 84, which contains the philosophical works of Cicero, and Leiden,‘Voss, lat, Q. 20, Curtius' Histogy of Alexander the Great with an excerpt from Orosius' Histogy, bear a mutilated ex—dono which refers to a Bishop Rudolf. In the Cicero codex all that is visible at the top of folio 1r is, "Hunc librum dedit Rodulfus episc0pus. . . ." The name of the recipient of the manuscript has been blotted out. 2OIManuscript 420, f. 99v. This copy of Marcellus' De medicamentis (cf. Wickersheimer, pp. 35—36) is from o lrs quar er of the ninth century. It was at Laon at least from about the middle of the century as the presence of Martin Scotus' handwriting indicates. Thus, the epitaph could apply to either Rodulf. ' 21Cf. E. K. Rand, Studies in the Scri t of Tours, 1: 4A Surve of the Manuscripts of Tours, voE. I: Text“ (Cambridge, Mass.: Mediaeval Academy of America, 1959), PP. 134-135; B. Bischoff, "Hadoard und die Klassiker-' .handschriften aus Corbie," Mittelalterliche Studien, I, 53’ n. 14. 68 A Rodulf's ex-dono is found several times in the Leiden Curtius. Unfortunately, it has been zealously covered with dark brown ink so that only a portion of it is legible. Historians who have tried to decipher the ex—dono in this manuscript have been misled by the facsimile of folio 68v presented by Chatelain in his Paléographie des classigggg latins.22 The ex-dono is not confined to the verso of this folio but continues onto the corresponding Opposite recto leaf. In other words, Traube know only half of the ex-dono when he reconstructed it as: "HUNG LIBHH RODULPHUS EP'S DEEIT] onto] Err BEATO EIUS MARTiJNO. "23 The -NO which Traube Observed is not the end Of the ex-dono but a syllable of a word in the middle of the ex-dono. The terminal word, clearly visible on the recto Of folios 41, 45, 53, and 57 is ECCLESIAE. This strongly suggests that the recipient of the manuscript was not a monastery, as Rand thought,24 but a cathedral, most probably the enigmatic Rodulf's own. An ultra-violet light does not help to decipher the 22(2‘vols.; Paris: Hachette, 1884-1894), II, 26 (pl. CLXXXVIII). All discussions of the ex-dono of this manuscript spell the donor's name Rodulohus. However, when I examined the manuscript in.May, T975, I saw Rodulfus, the same form used by the bishops of Leon and found in e ex—dono of the Leiden Cicero. My reading has been graciously corroborated by J. van Groningen, Western Manu— scripts, Bibliotheek der Rijksuniversiteit te Leiden (letter, 1 March 1971). 23"l’alaographische Anzeigen III," Vorlesungen und .Abhandlun en, III, 233. 24 Cf. p. 67, n. 21 above. 69 ex-dono. Although the formula, HUNG LIBRUM RODULFUS EPISCOPUS DEO DEDIT ET SANCTAE MARIAE LAUDUNO or, LAIIDUN- ENSIE ECCLESIAE" could fit the space occupied by the ex-dono, there are no grounds to warrant such a recon- struction. Perhaps someday a chemical means will be employed to bring out the original notice. Another avenue of approach might yield a pro- visional solution to the problem of Rodulf's identity. How many Bishop Rodulfs were there during the ninth and tenth centuries? The earlier of the two Leiden manuscripts is from Tours and dates from the abbacy Of Fridugisus (820-834), according to Rand. The second is from 850 at 5 the earliest.2 However, the ex—dono in both is from the end of the ninth or the beginning of the tenth centuries.26 In addition to the two Rodulfs of Leon, the only other Rodulf is the archbishop of Bourges from 845-866.27 Only a handful of bishops bore the name during the second half of the tenth century.28 None of these, to my knowledge, has been associated with a gift of books to his cathedral 258. Bischoff, ibid., 53. 26Ibid., n. 14. ”or. g_c_, II, 24—27. 28 ' Cf. P. B. Gams, Series geiscoporum EccleEiae ' Catholicae. A search of e is s or rance, e g um, Ho lland, and Lorraine yield the following Rodulfs at the following bishoprics during the second half of the century: Avranches (990-1006;; Chalons-sur-SaOne (977-986); Chartres (1004—1009 ; Noyon (950-952); St. Malo (1008-1022). 70 as has the Rodulf of Laon whose donation is recorded in Bugnidtre's catalogue. Even if some doubt remains on the attribution of the Leiden manuscripts to Rodulf, both Dido's and Rodulf's contributionsto the cathedral library were impressive. From the point of view of the school at Laon, however, the gift of Bernard and Adelelm surpasses that of Dido and Rodulf in importance. Among the twenty-four manuscripts which bear their presentation notice are found the most important books used in the school.29 Bernard and Adelelm were first identified by the modern compiler of Laon's catalogue, Félix Ravaisson.30 29Their ex—dono is also practically invariable: "Istum librum dederunt bernardus et adelelmus deo et sanctae mariae laudunensis ecclesiae. Si quis abstulerit offensionem dei et sanctae mariae incurrat" (ms. 26, inside front cover; ms.'38, f. 1v; ms. 136, f. 1r; '33- 298, f. Iv: ms. 444, f. 1v; ms. 468, f. IIr). Manuscripts 50 (f. Iv), 122 (f. 77r) 273 (f. 1r), 11370 Hunc for Istum. Manuscripts 464 (f. 1r and Paris, I13.;%_7_.g__ft. 5675 (f. 1r) have Istum libellum for Is um w. Manuscript 265 (f. 1v)Has Hunc liBellum. Bugniatre describes cod. 1 as an anonymous commentary on St. John and attributes it to Bernard and Adelelm. Manuscript 80 (formerly numbered 144) is an anonymous commentary on John. The manuscript dates from the middle of the ninth century and bears the handwriting, asterisks, and other marks of Martin Scotus and, perhaps, °f Adelelm. Bugnidtre also describes cod. 362 as a manuscript °f I"Ortunatus's poems. In the margin of his catalogue gPPOBite the description of cod. 362, he noted "Adalolmi". ore is no mention of Adelelm in ms. 469 (Fortunatus, o Carla111a Vita sancti Martini) but this could be due E59 1l<>ss of tHe flyleaf of tHe-manuscript. lat. 5643, f. 51v, is attributed to Ad PariS' BONO 9191111 alone, cf. p. 51, n. 10 above. 30Pages 43-45. 71 He found their names in the testament Charles the Bald prepared before his Italian voyage of 877. In the twelfth paragraph of the testament, Counts Bernard and Adelelm, along with two other counts and various prelates, were delegated to distribute Charles' books to St. Denis, Notre 31 Counts Dame at Compiegne, and Charles' son, Louis. Bernard and Adelelm were also among those designated as Lonis' guardian during his father's absence. Ravaisson conjectured from this testament and the six ex-donos in Laon's manuscripts that he knew that Louis, less interested in books than his father, gave his portion to Bernard and Adelelm who, in turn, gave them to the cathedral at Laon. Ravaisson's hypothesis was strengthened by the fact that Adelelm was a close vessel of Charles. In addition, Adelelm was rector, by royal will, of the monastery of St. Peter and St. Bavo in Gent and also count of Laon.3 Ravaisson's ingenious and happy solution to the Puzzle of Laon's benefactors held sway for more than a 31Cogven§us Carisiacensis (811), MGH, Le , I, 539: " 1 nos 11 e sanc orumque ipsius servitto mors praeoccupaverit, eleemosynarii- nostri , secundum quod illis commendatum habemus, de eleemosyna nostra decertent. Et' libri nostri qui in thesauro nostro sunt, ab illis, sicut dispositum habemus, in sanctum Dionysium et sanctam Mariam in Compendio et filium nostrum dispertiantur. Id est, Hinc- marus venerabilis archiepiscOpus, Franco, episcopus, Odo episcopus, Gauzlinus abba, Arnulfus comes, Bernardus comes, Chuonradus comes, Adalelmus comes." 32Cf. Recueil des actes de Charles 1e Chauve, II, £57117 (no. 272; 11 CctoEer 862), 158-161 (no. 350; August 867) and de Sars, p. 66. a lflklA 72 century despite the publication of the Annales Laudunensis ot S, Vincenti Mottonsis Breves in 1888 by O. Holder- Egger.33 The annals present two cathedral canons, Bernard and Adelelm, whose claim to the books which bear their names is manifestly more obvious and more in accord with the nature of the books than that of the counts Bernard and Adelelm. Bernard, the cathedral canon, was a scolasticus at Laon. He later became dean of the cathedral chapter. Adelelm, who became priest in 892, succeeded Bernard as dean and became bishop of Leon in 921. Thus, both had a long association with the cathedral. Both also taught in the school. As the following discussion will prove, most of the books Bernard and Adelelm gave either came from the school or belonged to a Laon master. They can hardly be described as the "libri nostri qui in thesauro nostro sunt" which Charles the Bald confided to Counts Bernard and 33Cf. L. Delisle Le cabinet dos manuscrits do la Bibliothb ue Nationals (3 vols.; Paris: Imprimerie Rationale, 1838-1881), II, 375; E. Miller, 5-6; W. 'Wattenbach, Das Schriftwesen im Mittelalter (3te Auf1.; Leipzig: Hirzel, 1896), p. 592, n. 3; Loans, IV, 253, n. 3 A. Boutomy, "Notes do voyages sur quelquos manu- scrits do l'ancien archdiocbse do Reims," Scri torium, II (1948), 124; S. Martinet, "Laon," Catholicisme: hior, augourd'hui, domain, ed. G. Jacquemet, vol. VI, 1821. douard leury in his Les manuscrits h miniatures de la bibliothbgue de Leon étudits au point do vue do leur 1 us ra lon remi re ar lo: IIe VI Ie e, Xe fie et XIIe sigcles (2e ed.; Paris: Dumaulin, 1363), 23-25, cHallenged Ravaisson's identification. He suggested that Bernard and Adelelm might be cathedral canons but Offered no proof. Holder-Egger (cf. p.6, n. 6 above) correctly guessed that the Bernard and Adelelm of the Lean Annales were the donors of the manuscripts. n: 73 .Adolelm and others. Charles' will undoubtedly referred to the luxurious illuminated Gospel books prepared for him rather than to a collection of teachers' manuals. In addition, although Bernard and Adelelm jointly donated twenty-three manuscripts, there was at least one donated by Adelelm alone after he became bishop.34 In addition to manuscripts of Jerome's,35 Augus- 36 37 and Gregory the Great's works:38 tine's, Ambrose's, Bernard and Adelelm also owned a copy of Origen's homilies on Numbers (manuscript 298), Cassiodorus' commentary on the psalms (manuscript 26), Prosper of Aquitaine's 23 vocations omnium gontium with five letters of POpo Loo I (manuscript 122), as well as a cOpy of Hesychius' commentary on Leviticus (Bugnidtro, cod. 106), and Fortunatus' Carmina and Vita sancti Martini (manuscript 469). Bernard and Adelelm also owned Rhabanus Maurus' commentary on Exodus (Bugnistre, cod. 135), a complex collection of extracts 34This is the Paris. B.N.. lat. 5643 already mentioned on p. 70, n. 29. 35Bugnidtro, cod. 62, 63, 64: commentary on Isaias; ms. 38: commentary on Joel, Jonas, Nahum, Micheas, .Habacuc; Bugniatre, cod. 69: commentary on Joel, Habacuc, Zacharias, Malachy. 36Manuscript 136: various Augustinian and pseudo- .Augustinian sermons. 37Bugniatre, cod. 54: commentary on the epistles of St. Paul. 38Bugniatro, cod. 107: books 17-22 from the Moralia in Job. In the margin of his catalogue, Bugnistre attriSuted this manuscript to Adelelm. 74 from early medieval authors (manuscript 265), an anony- mous commentary on St. John (manuscript 80), and two collections of saints' Lizg§.39 All these texts, of course, could be used in a school. What is remarkable about Bernard's and Adolelm's collection is the presence of several manuals specifically designed for teaching. Wicbod's uaestiones in Octateuchum ex dictis sanctorum Patri Auggstini. Gregorii, Hieronimi, Ambrosii, HilariiI Eucherii, et Iunilli (manuscript 273) is, as its title suggests, a compilation of extracts from the fathers and other early medieval authors. Wicbod's text has never been fully published for the precise reason that he was merely content to pass on the thoughts of his authorities in a convenient format.40 There is nothing original about Wicbod's work except his system of selection and arrangement Of his materials. In addition to its popular dossier format, Wicbod built his work around a dialogue between a master and a student. In this one codex, then, the masters of Laon possessed a handy and far- ranging repertoire of information on the first eight books of the Old Testament. A similar manual employing the 39 4oWicbod has been identified with the abbot of St. JMaximin in Trier by'W. Lovison, En land and the Continent in the E1 hth Centu (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1936), 128, 9. Martino and Durand published the first book of the uaestiones from a manuscript they found at St. .Maximin, c . CV1, 1105-1168. Cf. p. 61, n. 10 above. 75 dialogue format was Aldholm's treatise on versification, the Retractio reciprocae interrggationes ot responsionis do pedum regglis (manuscript 464). Designed to teach the rules of motor, the dialogue is built around a hundred riddles drawn from pagan and Christian poets and exotic word-lists which exemplify various meters. In manuscript 468, Bernard and Adelelm had a Handbuch for the study of Vergil and of the Christian author Sedulius. This important manuscript provided the student with an introduction to Vergil's life and works as well as a glossary of the more difficult vocabulary in both Sodulius' and Vergil's work. Another important teaching aid is manuscript 444, a Greek-Latin glossary to which Martin Scotus added a Greek and Latin grammar. This manu- script formed the core of instruction in Greek at Laon during the third quarter of the ninth century. Two more aspects of Bernard's and Adolelm's library need to be stressed in order to appreciate fully the significance of their donation. 0f the fifteen extant [manuscripts they donated to the cathedral, ten came to Bernard and Adelelm from Martin Scotus as the presence of his script in their margins or on their flyleaves attests.41 This means that most of the books which Bernard and Adelelm gave to the cathedral were not new to the school of Leon. Rather, they had been at Laon since approximately the middle 41These are manuscripts 38, 50, 80, 265, 273, 298, 444, 464, 468, and 469. 76 of the ninth century. Secondly, of the surviving manuscripts of Bernard and Adelelm, at least four show signs of an Irish background. Manuscript 26 (Cassiodorus, In Psalmos) is copied in Irish pointed minuscule and bears marginal notes in Old Irish.42 Manuscript 50 (Lathcen, Ecloga in Moralia Gregorii in Iob) was copied by a continental scribe directly from an Irish exemplar.43 The Greek-Latin glossary, manuscript 444, bears some words in Old Irish, an important clue to its background. The text of manuscript 468, the guide to the works of Vergil and Sedulius, although written by'a continental hand bears some anomalies that can most easily be explained by the use of an Irish archetype for the material in the manuscripts.44 Bernard and Adolelm's collection of manuscripts mirror the character of the library at Laon in the ninth century. It was a library formed by Martin Scotus. Not surprisingly, this library which was used by John Scotus, .Martin, and other members of the Irish group at Laon con- tained manuscripts with an Irish origin or provenance. Martin never left an ox-dono or ex-libris in his books. we may assume, I think, that Bernard and Adelelm 42K. Meyer has translated these interesting scribal notes into German, cf. "Neu aufgefundene altirische Glosson," Zeitschrift fur celtischo Philolo io, VIII (1912), 1777-1 3".'___—_—_£—. 430f. pill-é, VI, 18-19 (110. 763). The insular characteristics of manuscripts 444 and 468 will be examined further below, pp.107-108, 173- 174. inheri gust 1 g 1 ’1 (k ..) u not p is to adiii c0111 He 31 of; 515:1 "10] be". a: l.‘ ”I. .7 77 inherited their books from the master who died in 875 just as they inherited his position as teacher. Some of Martin's books, or at least the books which he used, were not passed on to Bernard and Adelelm. Martin's handwriting is found in at least fourteen other Laon manuscripts in addition to the ten just mentioned in Bernard and Adolelm's 45 Some of these Martin probably found at Laon. collection. He also added his own to those he found. On the flyleaf of manuscript 38 (folio 1r), Martin recorded the contents of this manuscript: Hic continentur iohel (librum i), ionas (librum i), micheas (libri ii), naum (librum i), abacuc (libri ii). Libri vii. Above this list, at a slightly later date, he noted, "Iohel et abacuc habeo in altero libro." And immediately below his table of contents be indicated, "Expositionem super sophoniam et aggeum non habeo."46 Here was a scholar eager to have all of Jerome's commentaries. Another precious note reveals the source of at least one book Martin owned. In his OOpy of Wicbod's uaestiones in 45These are manuscripts 24, 37, 67, 86, 92, 299, 319, 336, 420, 424, 447 and three others not at Laon: Berlin Deutsche Staatsbibliothek Philli s, 1830; Paris, B N. lat. 2024; Paris B N. lat. 12963. For knowledge of the last two manuscripts which exhibit Martin's hand- ‘writing, I am indebted to Abbé Merlette. 6Bernard and Adelelm Owned a manuscript, now lost, 'which contained Jerome's comments on Joel, Habacuc, Zach- arias, and Malachy (Bugniatre, cod. 69). It is very possible that this is the manuscript to which Martin referred. There is no evidence that the library at Laon over possessed Jerome's commentaries on SOphonias and Aggous. 78 Octageuchum, Martin added a marginal note to the discussion about the sons of Cham which occurs in Wicbod's section on Genesis: Cham invasit per vim fortem fratris sui sem, id est, terram repromissionis, et ideo reddidit eam deus somini sem. Videlicet abraham ot semini eius. Sic enim invoni in libro quem dedit mihi fulbertus.47 The book.Martin referred to has not yet been identified. There is a strong possibility, however, that his friend Fulbort, was attached to Charles the Bald's court.48 We can safely ascribe most of the Irish manuscripts, or manuscripts with an Irish background, to Martin. Of the four just mentioned, only one (manuscript 26) does not bear his script. There were at least three more Irish books at Laon during the ninth century. Unfortunately, they exist today only as fragments used as flyleaves in other manuscripts.49 Bishops Dido and Rodulf, Bernard and Adelelm, and Martin Scotus, were not the only ones who helped form the library at Laon. Bish0p Hincmar of Laon sent one of his canons to Bishop Witgarius of Augsburg to borrow a copy of 47Manuscript 273, f. 67r. 4802. below, pp.176-177. 49Manuscript 55 contains two flyleaves, ff. A and B, from two different sources, in Irish script (one of these is discussed below, pp.153-157). Manuscript 122bis (from Bishop Dido) has two leaves, ff. 25-26, from a common— tary on St. Paul in Irish script, of. B. Bischoff, "Wende- punkte in der Geschichte der latoinischen Exegese im Frfihmittelalter, Mittelalterliche Studien, I, 229, n. 123. 79 Pateriug' abridgement of Gregory the Great's work.50 If he went to such lengths to augment the library one time, he surely added his share to the collection at Laon. An anonymous note in a Laon manuscript further illustrates the efforts that the Laon masters undertook to fill lacunae in their library. On a flyleaf of manuscript 24 (folio 1r) (Jerome, Interpretationes hebraicorum nominum), which Bishop Dido presented to the cathedral but which was already at Laon during Martin Scotus' time, an Irish hand has copied the following note: Domino winiberte commodate nobis felicem capellam parvo tempore et si vultis illum emendabo in illis partibus quas dum simul eramus praotermissimus. Utinam in uno loco essemus etiam parvo tompore! Sidera si sparsim speciali lumine fulget O quam collectim 91.x animosa foret! The identity of the Irish author of this letter and its import for the history of the school of Laon will be ex- 51 Winibert, there is good reason to believe, plored below. was the abbot of Schfittern, near Strasbourg, during the second quarter of the ninth century. Whether he eventually provided his Irish co-worker with a copy of Martianus Capella's De Nuptiis Philologiac et Mercurii is unknown. Only one ninth century manuscript from Schfittern, a deluxe 50Cf. p. 60, 11.8 above. In this letter, Hincmar of Reims interceded for the cleric, Hadulfus, because he never returned to Laon and was excommunicated by Hincmar of Laon. 51Cf. below, pp. 142-146. For this text, see Plate 111 I 80 Evangeliary, has been identified.52 Furthermore, none Of the extant Martianus Cappella manuscripts have been traced to Winibert's scriptorium. Nevertheless, we can now single out another individual at Laon who like Martin, Hincmar, Dido, and Rodulf actively sought and attempted to bring to Laon manuscripts which were important to their work. In no other center can so many individuals with an interest in building a library be found during as short a time span as the period considered here. This intense activity made the library at Laon extremely rich for a cathedral library. It also bears witness to the vitality of intellectual life at Laon especially during the period of Martin Scotus and Hincmar, the third quarter of the ninth century. Thus far, we have considered only half the question Of the library's formation. We have tried to single out those individuals who contributed to the growth of the library at Laon. We have found that these individuals, who can be identified by the presentation notices and other marks they left in their manuscripts, were the bishops and masters of the city. There is yet another factor which ought to be considered - the possibility that an active scriptorium existed at Laon which furnished the school with texts. This aspect of the library's formation deserves special treatment. An ex-dono, or other clue, indicates the provenance of a manuscript. The question of the 520:. p. 145, n. 43 below. 81 existence of a scriptorium, however, necessitates a paleo- graphical study of the origins of Laon's manuscripts. As we attempt this study we can use the origins Of Laon's manuscripts not only to determine whether there was a scriptorium at Laon during the ninth and tenth centuries but also to gain a clearer picture of the other centers with which Laon had the strongest contacts. CHAPTER FIVE THE SCRIPTORIUM AT LAON AND THE ORIGIN OF LAON'S MANUSCRIPTS The study of the origins of Laon's manuscripts opens yet another dimension to the history of the formation of the library and the history of the school at Laon.1 It permits us to distinguish between those books which were copied at Leon and those which were copied elsewhere and later brought to Laon. In the first instance we will again be able to identify those individuals interested in the cultural welfare of the bishoPric. In the second, we will be able to fill in the cultural map of the school of Laon by pin-pointing those centers which maintained contacts with the school of Leon. The origins of the 1I would like to reiterate immediately my debt in these pages to the notes Bernhard Bischoff made of Laon's manuscripts. I have depended on his expert advice for the dates and origins of Laon manuscripts. Unless otherwise noted, it will be understood that my paleographic remarks depend on his notes which were graciously communicated to me by the Librarian at the Bibliotheque municipale Of Leon. These brief notices, dictated and transcribed on pieces of looseleaf, can in no way be considered Professor Bischoff's final analysis of Laon's manuscripts. I, of course, assume responsibility for their use here. 82 83 manuscripts belie the isolation of the school of Leon implied by the silence of the literary sources. Laon.had sufficient material and human resources with which to maintain an active scriptorium. In addition to the cathedral, there were two monasteries at Laon, Notre-Damo-la-Profonde and St. Vincent, whose members could be turned to the task of copying books. Often, in a city such as Laon, Reims, or Lyons, where there was close contact between neighboring monasteries and the cathedrals, scribal activity tended to center in the monas- teries rather than among the canons. In addition, as the preceding chapter made clear, there was a group of men at Laon extremely interested in books. However, while many studies Of several of Laon's more important manuscripts have been made, Laon's numerous ninth and tenth century manuscripts have never been the object of a systematic paleographic analysis which would reveal the existence of 2 What work has been done is ex- a scriptorium at Laon. tremely discouraging. Paleographers have not yet been able to detect a characteristic pattern among Laon's manuscripts which would point to the existence of a scrip- torium at Laon as they have for other centers such as Corbio and Reims.3 It would be beyond my competence to 2Lesne's brief remarks (IV, 252-254) on the scrip- torium at Laon are a hodgo-podgo of notes gleaned from the Often erroneous catalogue of Ravaisson. 3"Ich m6chto nur hinzuffigon, dass es einfachere und klarere Situationen palfiographisches Uberlieforung 84 fill this void here. Nevertheless, we can, I think, Offer substantial proof for the activity of a scrip- torium at Laon precisely during the period when the school Of Leon was most active. .At the same time, the manuscripts of Laon copied elsewhere will illustrate the interdependence of intellectual centers. Paradoxically, the evidence for a scriptorium at Laon is clearest for the least known period in the city's and the school's history, the late eighth and early ninth century. In 1914, W. M. Lindsay published the results of his study of five eighth century manuscripts.4 The script of these manuscripts is characterized by the unusual form of the letters g,and 5, The §_diffors from the usual Open "double 9," g. The curves of the 2's were replaced by angles. Likewise, the g,of those manuscripts exhibits a bizarre top-angle, somewhat like a sharp horn. Two of the five manuscripts Lindsay studied are from Laon, manuscript 137 (Paulus Orosius, Higtgrige)5and manuscript 423 (Isi- dorus Hispalensis, De nature rerum),6 and so Lindsay called this script the "Leon ggrtype." Since 1914, additional specimens Of the "Laon ggrtype" have come to light either as entire manuscripts gibt als in Leon (s.B. in Corbio odor in Roims)." Bern- hard Bischoff, letter, 24 June 1970. 4"The Leon AZ-type," gene die bibliotgegues, xxxv (1914). 15-27. 50:. 9“; VI’ 19 (no. 765). 6 1b; do (no. 766) o 85 or as fragments of earlier manuscripts conserved as flyh leaves or in the binding of more recent manuscripts. Monsignor Lesne has concluded, perhaps somewhat hastily, that Laon was the principal, if not unique center of the ggrtype and deduced that all agrtype manuscripts were 7 products of Laon's scriptorium. In a more recent study of the agrtype manuscripts, E. A. Lowe determined that the gartype is an offshoot of the Luxeuil minuscule and shows some connection with Corbie.8 The connection of the script 'with Luxeuil suggests that manuscripts 137 and 423 origi- nated at the monastery of Notre-Dame-la-Profonde whose foundation was linked to Luxeuil.9 In fact, one of the scribes who worked on this manuscript was a woman: "Ex- plicit liber premiorum ego dulcia scripsi et susscripsi istum librum rotarum." Unfortunately, nothing concrete is known about the scriptorium of Notre—Dame-la-Profonde, if indeed Dulcia did belong to it.10 The entire question of the gzrtype would profit from a re-examination of the 7Lesne, IV, 252. 8Cf. C VI, XVIII, with a list of all the gar type manuscrip s. 9See above, pp. 30-31. ‘1QAnother agrtype manuscript bears the note of a scribe, Fortinatus (Cambrid e C C C., 334; cf. Lindsay, 16 and 2L5, II, no. 12 . According to Professor Bischoff, "Die Schule, die hinter den wenigen Handschriften des az-Typs steht, ist eine der geschlossensten des VIII. Jhs." Cf. "Die Kalner Nonnenhandschriften und das Skrip- torium von Chelles," Mittelalterliche Studien, I, 33. 86 specimens which have survived. The most that can be added here is that an additional agrtype fragment can be traced back to Laon in the ninth century. Paris, §,N,, lat. 2024 is a composite manuscript from the ninth century which contains a flyleaf from.an eighth century manuscript in ggfscript.11 The flyleaf, folio 130, contains an excerpt from.Ambrose's De Bide. On folio 1, there is a note to the effect that the entire manuscript entered the King's Library in 1713. Its history before that date has never been determined. However, at several places in the manuscript, martin Scotus made 12 Thus, the manuscript and, most marginal annotations. probably, the flyleaf in agrscript joined to it, was at Laon in the ninth century. Laon, then, can claim.three of the eight surviving specimens of agrtype script. Only an examination of the remaining_gg_manuscripts with an eye toward establishing their provenances could bolster Laon's claim to being the home of the agrtype script. The dis- covery of Paris, B,N,, lat. 2024 definitely points in that direction. The agrtype script has been dated to 760-780.13 Two of Laon's bishOps at the turn of the eighth century, Gerfrid (798-799) and Venilo (799-814), have been connected 11Cf. QLA,’V, 7 (no. 539) for a description and plate. 12Folios 13r, 31v, 32r, 97r, 123r-124r, 125v. 13Biecheri, "Die Kblner Nonnenhandschriften," ibid. 87 with the activities of a scriptorium. In the case of Gerfrid, the source is a poem Alcuin wrote to be placed in a new Bible. As the poem explains, the Bible was copied for Gerfrid’s new church: Iusserat hunc tomum Gerfridus scribere praesul In laudem Christi, genitricis et illius almae14 Esset 1n ecclesia ut praesto legentibus ille. But Alcuin's poem is ambiguous here. Did Gerfrid order the Bible to be copied at Laon as might first seem? Or, did he order the Bible to be copied elsewhere for his church? Both interpretations have been offered.15 The second is more plausible given Alcuin's connection with this Bible and the fact that he was abbot of Tours, a noted center for the production of deluxe Bibles. A scriptorium was definitely at work at Laon during the pontificate of Bishop Wenilo. A leaf in a manuscript from the cathedral library of Cologne, now lost, carried the following note: Hic liber jussa a Wenilone episcopo Laudonense descriptus ad opus domni Hildebaldi archiepiscopi et sacri palatii capellani de illis libris qui Roma venerunt et domnus apostpgicus Leo domno Karolo imperatori transmisit. 11MGH, P, L., I, 285. 15The first by S. Martinet, "La cathédrale'caro- lingienne de l'éveque de Laon Gerfrid," cf. above, 9. 35, n. 2. S. Berger holds the second view, cf. Histoire de la vul ate endant les remiers sibcles du mo en-E e (Paris: fiacfiette, 1393), pp. 191-192. 53., more recentEy, B. FiScher, "Bibeltext und Bibelreform unter Karl dem Grossen," pp. 162, 190, cf. above, p. 35, n. 2. 16Cf. P. Lehmann "Erzbischof Hildebald und die Dombibliothek von K31n,:' Egg orschung des Mittelalters, II, 140. 88 The juxtaposition in the manuscript of this notice and the cathedral library's catalogue, compiled in 833, has bred considerable confusion. It was thought that the catalogue recorded the titles of all the books copied by Wenilo's scriptorium for Archbish0p Hildebald from archetypes brought from Italy by Pope Leo III.17 This would really have been a capital discovery for both the history of the activity of Laon's scriptorium and the transmission of culture from Italy to the North under Charlemagne! Unp fortunately, the notice has nothing to do with the cata- logue of over 100 titles but has been removed from a different manuscript and rebound opposite the folio which contains the catalogue. Thus, it can only be concluded that'Wenilo transcribed one book (the notice does read "hic liber. . . .") for Hildebald from those given to Charlemagne by Leo III although the possibility exists that wenilo had access to others. Efforts to find the original manuscript which bore the notice have been unsuccessful. Professor Bischoff noted, however, that the dimensions of the leaf exactly match the dimensions of another Cologne manuscript, Dombibliothek, Hs., 164 (Gesta Pontificum Romanorum), and hypothesized that this might be the manu- script which issued from'Wenilo's scriptorium. He 17Lgid. A. Decker discovered the notice in 1895 and.linked he library catalogue to it. Pierre Courcelle 'has been led astray by Decker despite Lehmann's clari— fication cited in the previous note, of. Les lettres rec ues en accident de Macrobe h Cassiodore (Paris: fie Boccard, 19285, p. 377. exp] pro Wit SCI be: the be me 01 89 expressed the hope that a comparison between the Cologne manuscript and other Laon manuscripts would verify the hypothesis. Unfortunately, his subsequent examination of Laon's early ninth century manuscripts revealed no other product of Wenilo's scriptorium which might be compared with the Cologne manuscript.18 There is one more direct reference to a scriptorium at Laon during the first half of the ninth century which must be considered. Monsignor Lesne interpreted Mont- faucon's description of a lost manuscript as proof of scribal activity at Laon at the end of the eighth or 19 Montfaucon described beginning of the ninth century. the manuscript as "Libri Gregorii Turon. de gloria martyrum scripti fuerunt ab Adelardo Canonico subdiacone hujus Ecclesiae."20 However, Adelard was a subdeacon at Laon during the late eleventh century. He gave two additional books to Notre Dame of Leon which Bugniatre, whose esti- mates are usually quite accurate, thought were 700 years 21 old in the eighteenth century. Thus the evidence of 18 19 20Bibliotheca Bibliothecarum, II, 1295 (no. 172). This manuscr p as s nce 1sappeared. For a complete citation of Adelard's note, cf. Dom. T. Ruinart, Sancti Geor ii Florentii Gre orii e isco i Turonensis cunnia. . ‘paragraph 123. 21Gregory'of Tours' De loria mart is codex 310 in Bugniatre's catalogue. He notes in his Eescription of the manuscript that Adelard subscribed to a charter of "Die Kfilner Nonnenhandschriften," 19, n. 9a. Lesne, IV, 253. Hontf cent scri n'm‘ mid- to bee cha Wit nin Ita lai so] cc] 110‘ 90 Montfaucon's description must be discounted for the ninth century. The evidence presented for the existence of a scriptorium at Laon during the late eighth and earLy ninth century, though meagre, is impressive. During the mid-eighth century, before an official impetus was given to the establishment of scriptoria, Laon appears to have been an important center for cOpying manuscripts. The characteristics of the gg-script reveal close affinities with the scriptoria of Luxeuil and Corbie. Later, in the ninth century, Bishop Wenilo must have been instrumental in transmitting copies of texts previously only known in Italy. The best example, in fact, of Cassiodorus' trans— lating activity at Vivarium is a Laon manuscript, manu- script 96 (Clementus et Didymus Alexandrinis, Commentaria) copied early in the ninth century in a scriptorium in northeastern France but probably derived from one of the manuscripts Pope Leo III brought from Rome.22 No evidence has yet been brought forth for the presence of copyists at Laon during the second half of the ninth century and the early tenth century, the period coincidental with the work of the Laon masters. Many of Laon's manuscripts can be attributed to other scriptoria. ‘Bishop Elinand of Leon in 1084. Adelard also gave codex 71, Jerome's commentary on Matthew, and codex 90, three treatises of Augustine, to Notre Dame of Leon. 22Cf. Pierre Courcelle, pp. 367-368. to thi at th SC F0 to Le sc be 01' OC . 9.1 An important number, however, are only'vaguehy assigned to unknown centers in northeastern France. It is among this latter group that any indication of a scriptorium at Laon must be found. The first task, then, is to isolate the potential Laon manuscripts. The origins of some of Laon's ninth century manup scripts reveal themselves by scribal notes or ex—donos. Folio 148r of manuscript 298 ascribes the production of this collection of Origen's homilies on the Book of Numbers to a Lothair: Claviger exiguus quondam lotharius istius librum quem cernis lector conscribere iussit. Lothair, whose name is found on at least three other manup scripts, was head of the scriptorium at St. Amand and can be identified with the Lothair who died there in 828.23 There is no indication of the "careful reader's" name who ordered this manuscript. 0n folio Iv, an early ex—libris, occupying three lines, has been erased and replaced by that of Bernard and Adelelm. This is one of their manu- scripts which Martin Scotus previously owned. Therefore, it probably came to Laon within the generation after its original owner obtained it from Lothair of St. Amand which suggests a close relationship between Laon and St. Amand. 23Lothair's other subscriptions were published by Traube in.M§§, 2;L., III, 676. His epitaph was published inethe same place by Traube, p. 679. The Annales S. Amandi Breves,|flgg, Scr., I, 184, carry the notice for z o arius monachhs obiit." For Lothair's manu- scripts, cf. Leopold Delisle, Le cabi et d s manuscri ts de la Biblioth‘e us I eriale, W, .3!" """ ' 92 Manuscript 299 (Origenis, Homiliae super canticgm Canticorum, Isaiae, Ieremiah, Ezechielem) is also from St. Amand and also belonged to Martin. It is paleographically similar to manuscript 298 and can reasonably be assigned to Lothair's period. Unfortunately, the lower portion of folio 137, where one would expect to find Lothair's subscription, has been cut away. Later during the ninth century, St. Amand became the center of the so-called Franco-Saxon school of copying and manuscript illumination.24 Six additional manuscripts in Laon's library came from this source at a date posterior to Lothair's work during the first quarter of the ninth century. Manuscripts 80 (Anonymous, Commentarium in evan- geligm Iohannes),25 199 (Canoneg Coneilia Laternense, A,D, 642),26 manuscript 265 (folios 83r-191ve Homilia et alia varia) and the second half of a composite manuscript, are from St. Amand while manuscripts 107 (Ambrosiaster, Commentaria in epistola ad Romanos),27 252 (Lectionarium), and 239 (Gradulae)28 belong to the Franco-Saxon school. 24 . ' . ' For this script, cf. Leopold Delisle L'evan é— , e F liaire de Saint-Vaast d'Arras et la calli rs hi ranco- §axonn0'du Tie siScle (Paris: Champion, 1885}, and A. Boutemy, "Le style franco-saxon, style de St. Amend," Scriptorium, III (1949), 260—264. 25This manuscript is from the second half of the ninth century and not the thirteenth century as Ravaisson, P. 85' has ite 26 28Cf. A. Boutemy, "Un trésor injustement oublié: les manuscrits enluminés du nord de la France (Période 271bid., p. 16. Cf. L. Delisle, ibid., pp. 15—16. 93 Of these six manuscripts, at least one, manuscript 265, passed through the hands of Martin Scotus. Manuscript 80 seems to bear his characteristic asterisk. Contacts between Laon and St. Amand were maintained throughout the ninth century. In addition to the manuscripts which Martin owned during the third quarter of the century, one St. Amend manuscript, manuscript 199, belonged to Bishop Dido during the last quarter of the century. A considerable number of Laon's manuscripts came from nearby Reims. Reims had an active scriptorium during the long pontificate of Archbishop Hincmar.29 The closeness of the two cities as well as the ecclesiastical and histor- ical bonds between them insured that Laon would be one of the prime beneficiaries of Reims'scriptoria. Archbishop Hincmar sent at least five manuscripts to Laon during the bishoprics of Pardulus and Hincmar of Leon.30 These manu- scripts do not seem to have survived. However, at least eleven others have survived. They attest to the activity of the scriptoria at Reims as well as to the cultural rapport between the two cities. Hincmar of Reims was eager to supply his suffragans with cOpies of official ecclesiastical documents. Manu- script 407, whose nearly square format betrays it as a jproduct of the episcopal chancery at Reims, conserves the jpré-gothique), Scriptorium, III (1949), 114. zgcfe Po 61, no 11s 3on. above, Po 60’ no 7e 94 correspondence between the archbishop and the leading figures of his day.31 It has recently been determined that the only complete copy of the Libri Carolini, 22313, Bibliothhgue de l'Arsenal, 663, is a product of Hinc- mar's scriptorium. It was at Laon in the fifteenth century and most probably was also a gift of Hincmar.32 Hincmar also preserved a record of the debate with his nephew, the bishop of Leon. Paris B N. lat. 5095 contains Hincmar of Laon's Collectio altera ex epistolis Romanorum Pontificum as well as the exchange of letters which took place between the two Hincmars. This manuscript can be dated closely. The first half (folios 3r-137v) contains Anastasius the Librarian's Collectanea ad Joannem Diaconem written in 875. The manuscript was given to Notre Dame of Leon, however, by BishOp Dido sometime before his death in 893033 31The written space occupies an area 121 mm. by 110 mm. on the leaves of this manuscript. Another product of the episcopal chancery at Reims which came to Laon is Hincmar of Reims' letter to the clergy and pea 1e of Laon on the occasion of BishOp Hedenulf's election 876). The 'written space on the leaves of this letter (Paris, B,N,, lat. 11379, ff. 25V, 29r-36r) 13 120 mm. by 120 mme 32According to Abbé Merlette, the Arsenal copy of the Libri Carolini bears the mark of Laon's fifteenth cen- tury Librarian. His notation can clearly be seen on the re— production of f. 1r published in the catalogue of the 1965 Charlemagne exposition held at Aachen, Karl der Grosse, ‘werh und Wirkun (Dflsseldorf: Schwann, 1965}, pl. 35. For the recent attribution of this manuscript to Hincmar of Reims' scri torium, cf. Bernhard Bischoff's comments (ibid , p. 193 and A. Freeman "Further Studies in the 17?"; r1 Carolini," s eculum, XL (1965), 203-289. 33For the date of the Collectanea ad Joannem diaconem eeme Fem from com tin from [to] Any. Did: thr. Leo: con 0f 95 Dido owned two other Reims manuscripts. His copy of the Liber Pontificalis, manuscript 342, was apparent- ly copied at Reims during the second quarter of the ninth century. He also owed his collection of St. Augustine's sermons, manuscript 135, to the scriptoria of Reims. Martin Scotus, Bernard and Adelelm, also received books from Reims. Martin's manuscript 92 contains Bede's commentary on the gospel of Mark (folios 1r—162v). Mar— tin was primarily interested, however, in the excerpts from the De locis sanctis which he heavily annotated (folios 162r—164v). Bernard's and Adelelm's copy of Augustine's sermons, manuscript 136, closely resembles Dido's manuscript 135. There is no indication how three other Reims manuscripts came to Laon.34 Most of Laon's manuscripts from Reims bear witness, however, to continuous contact between the two cities from the time of Pardulus to Dido's pontificate. In addition to St. Amand and Reims, Laon's masters were in contact with another great center of manuscript diffusion, Corbie. Some of Laon's oldest manuscripts come cf. Manitius, I, 681, n. 2. Despite Hincmar of Reims' ful— minations against his nephew's works (6.8., 0 usculum LV Capitulorum, 290), this codex seems to me to be a typical pro uc o Reims. 3{Manuscripts 72, 84, 93. On the tap margin of ms. 84, f. 131r, there is a twisted cross followed by the legend ”Scrisit (sic) Hunbertus" - not Hummertus as Lesne (IV, 253) has it._-It is not clear whether Hunbertus sim- ply wrote his name or was the copyist of the manuscript. The main hand of the manuscript seems quite different from that of the note on f. 131r. A priest, Huntbertus, was ° tgg-guggect of the Council of Douzy in 874 (Mansi, XVIIa, 2 9 96 from this source. Folios 187—188 from manuscript 424 are flyleaves from a Corbie manuscript of the second half 35 Apparently the manuscript which of the eighth century. contained these fragments from Gregory of Tours' Libgg in gloria martyggm has disappeared. Another Corbie pro- duct, manuscript 330, which contains St. Basil's fiplg and Orosius' tract against the Priscillianists, is from the end of the eighth or beginning of the ninth century. Manuscript 328bis (Iohannes Cassianus, De institutis coe— _1:_1_q_b_iforum et 49: octo principalium vitiorum remediis) from the first half of the ninth century is a little more re— cent. The most interesting Corbie manuscript which came to Laonis manuscript 67, the first four books of Pas- chasius Radbertus' commentary on.Matthew.' This manuscript 36 It must has been rather precisely dated to about 860. have come to Laon almost immediately after it was copied because it bears notes in several places by Martin Scotus who died in 875. It is no coincidence then that many of the manuscripts which bear the commentary attributed to IMartin on.Martianus Capella's De Nuptiis Philologiae et Mer- eurii'werecopied at Corbie.37 Corbie was another center in 35The leaves are bound with Laon's cOpy of Ori- basius' medical treatises. For a plate and description of the Corbie leaves, cf. CLA, VI, 20 (no. 767). 36cr. Bernhard Bischoff, "Hadoard und die Klassiker— handschriften aus Corbie," Mittelalterliche Studien, I, 56. 37Martin's-handwriting appears on ff. 1v, 2r, 68r, 69r (best example), 70r, 70v, 73r, 74r, 76r, 90r, 99r, 176v. For the Corbie manuscripts of his Martianus Capella commentary, 97 close contact with the school of Laon during the third quarter of the ninth century. .Not all of Laon's manuscripts came from northern centers. At least six can be traced to Tours, Orléans, and Auxerre. In addition to a magnificent Bible, manuscript 63,38 the school of Tours produced manuscript 216, Ambrose's De officiis ministrorum and Bede's Liber do locis sanctis. This manuscript is distinguished by marginal notes made in 39 the very characteristic manner of Lupus of Ferribres. It has not been possible yet to determine whether the notes are due to Lupus or to his followers. Both manuscripts which can be ascribed with certainty to the scriptorium of Orleans were donated to the cathedral at Laon. Bernard and Adelelm presented the older of the two, manuscript 122, Prosper of Aquitaine's De vocatione omnium gentium, and a collection of five letters from Pope Leo I, which was copied at Orleans during Theodulf's time. Bishop Dido's copy of Rhabanus Maurus' commentary on Exodus, manu- script 6, is also from Orleans. According to Professor Bischoff, manuscript 105, Florus of Lyons' commentary on cf. C. Leonardi, "I codici di Marziano CapellafihAevum, XXXIV' (1950), 69-70 (DO. 92); 437 (no. 161). 380:. E. K. Rand, Studies in the Script of Tours, 1, 153 (no. 112). 39These notes were first detected by Professor Bisch- off. It is possible that Lupus himself worked on this manu- script. Cf. the article by Elisabeth Pellégrin "Les manu- scrits de Loup de Ferribres h propos du ms. Orléans 162 (139) corrigé de sa main," Bibliothtgue de l'école des cha tes, cxv (1957), 5-31. . 98 St. Paul, which probably came to Laon through the donation of Bishop Rodulf, was partly copied at Orléans and partly 4O Manuscript 200 is more difficult to place. at Auxerre. This collection of conciliar canons has as a flyleaf a fragment of Theodulf of Orleans' Additio ad capitulare (folio 1r). Perhaps this is a clue to its origin. It is unfortunate that these manuscripts offer such meagre evidence of the relations between Laon and this region. Auxerre was the most important beneficiary of the work of the Lean masters. Heiric of Auxerre and Remgius of Auxerre obtained part of their education at Laon. Laon furthermore owned Heiric's Vita sancti Gogggpi, Pagis, B,N,, lat. 13757, a manuscript whose origin is not yet certain.41 Another area which contributed to Laon's librany was the region between the Rhine and the Moselle rivers. Manuscript 279, which contains Wicbod's Quaestiones in Octateuch , was copied somewhere in the valley of the Moselle, probably not far from Wicbod's abbey, St. Maximin in Trier. Manuscript 4bis, the last six books of Augustine's De Genesi ad litteram, can only be localized to the Lower -——_ 4O 41Abbe Merlette has once again detected the hand of Laon's fifteenth century librarian in this manuscript. His notation can be seen at the top of f. 2r. The manuscript came to the Bibliothbque Nationale from St. Germain-des- Prés, cf. L. Delisle, Le cabinet des manuscrits de la Biblio- thegue Natioggfle, II, . eiric s wor was' 9 ini e y 21:wn.a on a the end of the ninth century, cf. pp. ‘219e Cf. Fe 66 above. 99 Rhine. Nothing more precise can be said for manuscript 86, Augustine's commentary on the epistles of John, which is from eastern France. The only manuscript in this group whose origin is known with more precision is the most interesting. Manuscript 447 is a massive copy of Isidore of Seville's Etymologiae. Professor Bischoff has detected in this manuscript marginal notes made by Probus the Irish- man who worked at Mainz.42 In addition to Probus' hand, however, there is a second annotator whose handwriting is very close to that of Martin Scotus. If this is true, it means that Martin and Probus were in contact with each other and that the Irish colony at Laon was linked to other groups of Irish scholars in the Rhine valley. A handful of Laon's manuscripts come from scattered 43 scriptoria. Two are from northern Italy. There are in 42For'Probus, friend of Walafrid Strabo and Lupus of Ferritres, cf. Manitius, I, 484. 4aManuscript 424, Oribasius' Eu oristae ad Euna ium (l. II-III) and his S o sis, was capied in northern IEaIy during the second quar%er of the ninth century, of. Wicker— sheimer, pp.'36-39 (no. XXVII). Dom.André Wilmart attri- buted Troyeg, Bibliothbgue municipale, 853, Alan of Farfa's collec ion of homilies to Laon, cf. "Easter Sermons of St. Augustineé"'The Journal of Theological Studies, XXVIII (1927), 1 2, n. . ean eclercq o owe i mart, of. "Table pour l'inventaire des homiliaires manuscrits," Scri tori II (1948), 195-214. Tfie manuscript is described in 2E5, VI, 40 (no. 840) where the script is assigned to the end of the eighth century and to northern Italy. The word "ravenna" has been entered in the margins several times (a possible connection.with Bishop Rodulf I of Laon who went to Ravenna at the request of Fulk of Reims? cf. p. 48, n. 36. Lewe records an explibris which attributes the book to "St. Mary“ but there Is no sure indication that Notre Dame of Leon is meant. 100 addition at least one from Arras,44 Soissons,45.Cambrai,46 47 Charles the Bald's palace school, and the Burgundy- SaOne region.48 Three manuscripts are from Paris and the 49 Ile—de—France. When these manuscripts and those which can be traced to centers such as St. Amand or Reims are accounted for, approximately thirty manuscripts remain which can only generally be ascribed to scriptoria in northeastern France. It is among this group of manuscripts Manuscript 469 (Fortunatus, Carmina libri undecimi; Vita sancti Martini). Folio 182r: "Quaterniones vigintf qua uor. 1 qu s unum solum abstulerit offensionem dei et sanctae mariae et omnium sanctorum percipiad (sic)." The church at Arras is dedicated to Mary. Foli3_181v of this manuscript also contains an unidentified genealogy: "Berchildis et filiae eius raintrudis, idelindis, gerlindis, bernildis. De bernildis mainerus et tetgerus. Bernuldis. De rantrudis feruinus. De Idelendis bernuinus et balduinus atque hildiardis. De gerlindis harduidis et bernuidis, odelherus. item florebertus." 45Manuscript 37 (Haimo Autissiodorensis, Annotatio libri Isaiae). 462Manuscript 201 (Glossaria et Collectio canonum et decretum). Folio 2r: eo ericus episcopus unc li e um dedit ad honorem dei et beati petri nec non et ceterorum apostolorum seu et sancti autberti confessor christi." Theoderic was bishop at Cambrai from 832-864. 47Manuscript 81 (Iohannes Scotus; Commentarius in evangelium secundum Iohannem). 48Manuscript 266 (Hieronymus, Liber contra Iovinianum). Polio 111v has the robatio ennae, "Hemius presul " a reference no doubt to KrcEEIsEOp Remigius of Lyon (852-875). 49Manuscript 14, a glossed Psalter, was copied in a Parisian script during the second half of the ninth century. Manuscript 131 (Augustinus, De cathecizandis rudibus) was co ied somewhere in the Ile—de-France. fianuscript 439 Boethius, Consolatio hiloso hiae is from St. Germain-des-Prbs. ragmen e end of the manuscript bears the note "Grimoldus fe cit ". 101 that any evidence must be found for the existence of a scriptorium at Laon during the second half of the ninth centuny and the early tenth century. Very little is known about the episcopal scriptoria in this region.50 Even for Laon, there is no indication that the monasteries of Notre-Dame-la-Profonde or St. Vincent maintained active scriptoria. Thus, it would be hazardous to attribute these thirty manuscripts of northeastern origin to Laon simply by the process of elimination we have used in this chapter. Some historical evidence, as distinguished from paleo- graphical, must first be found before one can point to a product of Laon's scriptorium. Certain of these thirty‘manuscripts, I believe, can reasonably be eliminated from consideration. The collection of Einhard's letters, Paris._B.N.pplat. 11379, probably came to Laon when the monks of St. Bavo in Gent 51 sought refuge there. A flyleaf of manuscript 445, a Latin glossary, bears the robatio ennae, "petriponti, id est ailolfo," probably a reference to Pierrepont which is situated on the Ailette, a tributary of the 0ise river.52 OLesne, IV, 251-252: "Nous ne savons rien, au sujet du scri torium qui a pu fonctionner au cloitre des églises épiscopales de Chalons, Soissons, Senlis, Noyon, Amiens, Tournai, Thérouanne, Boulogne." S1Cf. above, pp. 25-26. Also, F. L. Ganshof, "Eginard'h Gand," Bulletin de la socibtb d'histoire et d'archéolo is de Gand, XXXIV (1926), 13-33. Unfortun- ater no oéher manuscript has survived from St. Bavo which might be compared with this one. 52Folio 96v. 102 Perhaps this manuscript also came to Laon when the canons of the church of St. Boetian at Pierrepont came to Laon. Five of the manuscripts from the northeast are too early to be considered products of a scriptorium at Laon during the second half of the ninth century and early tenth 53 The quire signatures of manuscript 336, capital century.- letters bordered with dots of various colors, are extremely distinctive. This copy of the Qg_ipstitutione canonicorum from the Council of Aix—la-Chapelle in 816 is also graced by rubricated initials and carefully prepared parchment. No other northeastern manuscript compares with this one. Perhaps it was prepared at the palace scriptorium for dissemination to cathedral chapters. Manuscript 422, an excerpt from Isidore of Seville's De nature rerum coupled with a compilation of astronomical lore drawn from various sources, is characterized by its artistic decor. Nothing suggests that Laon could have produced this manuscript which contains approximately sixty beautifully executed designs which illustrate the solar and planetary system. Only a trained eye could discern the common paleo- graphical characteristics of a particular scriptorium among 53Manuscripts so (Lathcen, Eclo a Gre orii in m) tund 68 (Hieronymus, Commentaria in Evan eliai are from the end of the eighth or Be 1' nning of tfie ninth centuries, ct; CLA ‘VI, 18-19 (no. 763? and, 19 (no. 764). Laon's corm'of Marcellus' De medicamentis, manuscript 420, is from.the first quarter of the ninth century, of. Wicker- aheimer, pp. 35-36 (no. XXVI). Manuscripts 121 (Ephraemus Syrii, Sermones et alia) and 319 (Taio Caesaraugustanus, Sentent ae are 0 rom the first half of the ninth century. 103 the remaining manuscripts from the northeast of France. Laon's scriptorium was undoubtedly influenced by those of nearby Corbie and Reims, both major cOpying centers whose products became exemplars for other scriptoria. 0n the other hand, several important Laon manuscripts bear unmistakable signs that they were copied at Laon and thus that there was a local interest to provide the school with essential texts. It is somewhat paradoxical that the only literary reference to scribal activity at Laon in the ninth century comes from the pontificate of the much maligned Hincmar of Laon. Hincmar most certainly had a scriptorium at his disposal for the preparation of the tracts he addressed 54 to the archbishop of Reims. At one point in the contro- versy with his uncle, he mentioned the names of two of his deacons, Teutlandus and Hartgarius, who served him as 55 Scholars have tried to identify the Hart- copyists. garius who corrected manuscript 11, Origen's homilies on Leviticus, without knowledge of this passage.56 The 54However, he presented Charles the Bald with a treatise be copied himself: ”. . . dedit mihi libellum manu sua scriptum. . . ." Concilium Duziacense I (871), M31131 XVI, 5800 55 E istola ad Hincmarum Remensis MPL, CXXIV, 1039: "Nam a5 eol grchbishop Harduicusl iIlam accepi, et relegens ranscribi jussi, e transcripta est per manus duorum ecclesiae mihi commissae dia— conorum, quorum unus est Teutlandus, alter vocatur Hartgarius. . . ." 56Ravaisson, p. 60 conjectured that Hartgarius was Archbishop Halitgaire of Cambrai (817-831). Lesne, IV, 252, 104 Hartgarius who worked as a scribe for Hincmar, however, is obviously the Hartgarius who corrected the Laon manu- script and left the following note on folio 195r: Quis uis ad aeternae festinas gaudia vitae Hos lores typicos devota mente require Noxia quo valeas contempti linquere saecli Et tandem capias celestis premia regni Hartgarii memor esto precor qui noxia cuncta Que potuit rasit nec non condigna remisit. This identification accords well with Bernhard Bischoff's remarks concerning the manuscript. He dates it to the second half of the ninth century. Furthermore, while it is not a Reims manuscript it bears paleographical charac- teristics of the scriptoria of Reims - exactly what would be expected in light of the proximity and ties between Laon and Reims. I conclude that Hartgarius of Leon corrected this manuscript and that the manuscript itself was produced at Laon during the 870's or 880's. Another manuscript which I would not hesitate to ascribe to Laon's copyists is the famous Greekaatin glossary, manuscript 444. This manuscript has an Irish background and was probably cOpied during the 860's.57 It is divided into two distinct parts. Folios 5 to 275 contain the glossary itself. The remainder of the did not repeat this gratuitous identification but suggested that Hartgarius belonged to a scriptorium other than 'Laon's. Traube (MGH, P L., III, 751), identified Hart- garius with Bishop—Hartgarius of Liege (840-854). I do not think that it is necessary to go that far afield. 57'Its composition and historya'le discussed more fully below, pp.173-174. 105 manuscript, from folio 276 to folio 318, contains a Greek and Latin grammar. Two subscriptions in the latter part attribute the grammatical glosses to the hand of Martin 58 Scotus. The subscriptions themselves seem to be a servile imitation of Martin's hand and may belong to a student. But there is no doubt that most of the grammatical portion of the manuscript, as the subscriptions suggest, was personally copied by Martin whose hand is easily recognized in notes and passages copied in numerous other manuscripts. It was not uncommon, of course, for medieval scholars to copy patiently their own material. Lupus of Ferrieres is the most famous case in point. The importance of the presence of Martin's hand in manuscript 444 is that it gives a key to the production of the entire manuscript. As it exists now, the manuscript has the appearance of being completed in two stages despite the fact that the quire signatures run consecutively. The glossary section ends on folio 275v with a dedicatory poem to Hincmar which indi- cates that this leaf was the last in a codex which only 59 contained the glossary. Martin later joined folios 276 58 59 See Plates V and VI. nCf. MGH,P ., III, 686: ecar -§Iossas domino donante peregit HG cmaro gtibimet frater servire paratus. Namque geris vittas longo quo tempore, felix Pontificale decus multumque tenere salubre, Exhinc ad caeli valeas conscendere culmen Ac regem regnum cum sanctis cernere Christum AMEN" Tile dedication appears in the manuscript in Tironian notes. Tire "AMEN" is written in a cryptogram employed by Irishmen. 106 to 319 to the glossary section. Although Greekaatin glossaries were not as rare as one might expect in the ninth century,60 the three hands responsible for the glossary section of 61 I think that it is safe to assume that the manuscript belong to Laon scribes. First, there is the question of the archetype behind manuscript 444. It unquestionably either belonged to or was capied by Irish- men.62 Secondly, the glossary section was produced for a Hincmar. Hincmar of Reims was familiar with Greek, Latin glossaries. However, I think that manuscript 444 was dedicated to his nephew, Hincmar of Leon. The younger Hincmar, according to his uncle, knew both Greek and Irish and loved to garnish his literary productions with Greek 63 This sounds 'words indiscriminately and improperly used. like a trait of someone whose knowledge of a language is superficial and dependent primarily on a dictionary. Thirdly, there is the fact that manuscript 444 is at Laon. It belonged to Martin and then passed to Bernard and Adelelm. 6oHincmar of Reims was well acquainted with them: "Nos etiam moderni glossarios Graecos, quos suatim Lexicos vocari audivimus. . . ." Opusculum LV Capitulorum, 449. 61Professor Bischoff has noted simply that the hands responsible for the glossary exhibit Reims traits. 62See below, pp. 173-174. 63". . . cum suppeterent sufficenter verba Latina, quae in his locis ponere poteras, ubi Graeca, et obstrusa, et interdum Scottica et alia barbara, utttibi visum fuit nothata atque corrupta posup 1. 1a a e e Cf. Opusculum LV Capitulorum, 448 and below, pp. 107 All of Hincmar of Reims' manuscripts stayed at Reims until the modern era.64 I reconstruct the production of manuscript 444 as follows. Martin Scotus had the glossary section cepied by local scribes for Hincmar of Leon, his pupil and patron. When Hincmar was disgraced, imprisoned, and eventually blinded, Martin reclaimed the manuscript. He then added, in his own hand, the grammatical portions of the present manuscript to the glossary portion. Martin was also intimately involved with the pro- duction of a second manuscript as important as the Greek, Latin glossary and grammar to the school at Laon. Manuscript 468 has already been mentioned as a Handbuch for the study of Vergil. The sixtybone folios of this manuscript have been copied by one hand. It is a clear, continental hand which, however, exhibits a tendency to slant to the right and some Irish traits.65 Throughout the manuscript, another hand has assisted that of the principal copyist. This second hand is Martin Scotus'. It is important to note that Martin did not correct the manuscript. The main capyist 64One of Hincmar's twentyaone manuscripts is at Cambridge. Another is at Paris. The remainder are still econserved at Reims. Cf. F. M. Carey, 49-56. 65See Plate VII. There is a tendency to "let off" (and strokes with a flourish in the cross-bar of the p, 1bhe abbreviation bar, the tongue of the‘g, and in the --ur abbreviation. Professor Bischoff has observed that {Ighese traits extend to the "whole Laon circle," cf. 1:. P. Sheldon-Williams (ed.), Idiamis Scotti Eriu ena ‘ ' "Perisphpeon" (De Divisions Naturae), Liber Primus, p. 12. 108 left blank spaces in the text which Martin filled with the proper word or phrase.66 This method of work indicates that there was close cooperation between the scribe and .Martin Scotus. The scribe copied from a text which pre- sented some difficulty to him. To judge from the character- istic nature of Martin's additions to the text, the copy- ist worked with an Irish exemplar and had difficulty with Irish abbreviations and symbols.67 Martin, working with the copyist, filled in the words and phrases which were un— clear to the scribe. Hartgarius and the scribes who worked on manuscripts 444 and 468 for Martin Scotus were, of course, kept busy with other manuscripts. A detailed analysis of manuscripts 11, 444, and 468, would provide sufficient paleographic clues to isolate other products of Laon's scriptorium among the manuscripts generally ascribed to the northeast. 66E.g., Plate VIII where the following words and phrases have been added by Martin: gpasi; hominum; undo. dicunt: atque; hominem: fuit; denique; grecorum; tan- tum ad regnum accipiend . . . habu. . . 3 apud; gmavit; hominum: gpius; interficiendum misit quam. 611a one section of the manuscript ff. 1r-17v, .Martin copied the following words: etiam (two times) or o; vero; hominum (three times); hominem (two times); Jere; ater wo times); patrem (two times); patris (two tImes 5 iliis: dilectione; habet: habere: nam; eo (nine times): uod our een times); dictae; distum: cunt dicunturs seven times); dicitur ee times : four es) : dicta (three times); uos; recum; (tfiree ece ecorum; rec hi; uam fiimes); a§§ue (two imes);— ua%I—(four times( 3 longo; uia (three es) 3 aunt; ersonas; ersonarum: pp: mtur (two times); nomen wo imes); Iormam: v'de tn sine (two times): enim: facit: guiEus; ideo, flaigue. 109 Thus far, only one other manuscript can be attributed with certainty to Leon. The Laon Formulary was compiled at Laon to give young clerics at Laon practice in proper epistolaryform.68 It is surprising that this manuscript, the same one which contains the letters of Einhard, gagig, BiNa: lat. 11379, has not been searched for any clues it might contain concerning the scriptorium at Leon. The formulae were copied onto stray pieces of parchment and addedto the collection of Einhard's letters. The copyist responsible for the Formulagy did not tax his imagination when he compiled his epistolary examples. Instead, he simply copied documents directly from the cathedral archives. For the litterae -formatae, letters which employ a code in the Greek alphabet to confuse would-be forgers, the copyist transcribed a letter from Bishop Heidilo of Noyon (880—893) to Bishop Dido (882- 893) of Laon.69 This letter was written in 892 and thus provides a sure termingg post guem for the Formulagy. One hand is evident throughout all the formulae which pertain to Laon, a hand.which I think is that of Adelelm of Leon (ca. 865-930), a master who, like Martin Scotus, prepared his own texts.7o ‘ 68Karl Zen-er edited the seventeen formulae in the collection in 1882 cf."Formulae Codicis Laudunensis," in MG-g, Form., pp.- 51é-520. 691bid., form. 16. 7O Adelelmks role in the manufacture of the Pormulagz 18 proved below, pp. 228-233. doe em to ab th of ac of 110 Obviously, the evidence thus far brought forth does not indicate that Laon had a thriving scriptorium in the ninth century comparable to that of Corbie, for example. However, manuscripts which date from about 860 to the first quarter of the tenth century can, with reason- able certainty, be attributed to Laon. More importantly, these few manuscripts reveal that the bishops and masters of Leon were careful to augment their library not only by acquisition from other centers, but also by the production of books at Laon. Secondly, it is important to note that three of the four manuscripts we have just discussed were copied at been by or under the supervision of two Laon masters and were intended for use in the school. What the evidence suggests is that copyists at Leon worked primarily to supply the school with texts. The majority of Laon's manuscripts, however, were copied elsewhere. Their origins demonstrate a clear pattern. Laon was in close contact with St. Amand, Reims, and Corbie, each of which influenced and was in- fluenced by the school at Leon. The implications of these interrelationships will be explored further below. The library at Laon has been a fruitful source for the history of the school. It has yielded information on the formation of the library'which grow under the care of men.eager to procure manuscripts or to have them copied at Laon. In addition to the personal interest of certain individuals in the intellectual life of the bishopric, thl ot‘ Ye 111 the manuscripts bear witness to important contacts with other cultural centers. The contents of the library, which will be the subject of the following chapter, re- veal the interests of the Laon masters and the nature of the material at their disposal. CHAPTER SIX THE COMPOSITION OF LAON’S LIBRARY The composition of the cathedral library collection at Laon in the ninth and tenth century can be determined with a high degree of accuracy despite the absence of a medieval catalogue of the library's holdings and the losses which the library suffered in modern times. By collating the lists of manuscripts established by Montfaucon and Bugniatre, one can determine which manuscripts were once at Laon but have since disappeared.1 Lesne thought that more than 100 of the manuscripts listed by Montfaucon were lost.2 But close examination of the manuscripts and some detective work put the number of lost manuscripts closer to fifty. A full list of all the titles presently known to have been at Laon in the ninth and tenth centuries is con- tained in Appendix 0.3 This list represents the first reconstruction of the library’s contents and it should be consulted before this chapter is read in order to gain a 10f. Appendix B. 2 ' ' 3 IV, 608. Cf. below, pp.268—285. 112 113 full impression of the library‘s size and diversity. This chapter will summarize that list and highlight those features of the library's contents which are significant' for the history of the school at Laon. It is not surprising that many of the approximately 135 manuscripts in the collection contain the works of the Latin fathers. Any medieval librarwaould be weighted in favor of Augustine, Jerome, Ambrose, and Gregory the Great. Their commentaries and other works provided both the content and the tools of medieval education. Martin Scotus approvingly quoted Jerome's schema for the study of the Psalms.4 Martin and probably John Scotus used Jerome's handy reference work, the Integpretationesjhe- bifiiifiill nominum.5 Martin also made a concentrated effort to obtain a complete edition of Jerome's comments on the prophets.6 For teaching purposes, ninth century masters relied heavily on abridgments of the fathers' works. Laon had a full complement of such works. Three works dealt ' 4Cf. "Glossaire grec—latin de la bibliothbque de Leon," (ed.'Miller), 13, and Plate IX, 11. 10-13. 5Martin owned manuscript 24 and copied a table of contents for it, of. Plate IV} Edouard Jeauneau cites this manuscript as a source for John Scotus' etymology of the name "John" in the second chapter of John‘s Homily on the Prolo e of John. Abbé Jeauneau does not in ca e further why fie cited this particular manuscript, of. ' Jean Scot homélie sur le rolo ue de Jean: Introduction, texts criti ue traduction ct notes ("gources'chretiennes, ‘ no. 151; Paris: Ees editions du Cerf, 1969), p. 209, n. 3. 6 Cf. above, I). 77. 114 specifically with.Augustine's massive oeuvre. Cassiodorus excerpted Augustine's commentary on the Psalms. Florus of Lyons did the same for the epistles of Paul. The most useful guide to the study of Augustine at Laon was Eugip— pius' Excerpts ex operibus S. Au stini, a lost manuscript, which Montfaucon accurately described as "collatio diver— sorum questionum explicatorum a S. Augustino."7 Taius of Saragossa combined excerpts from.Augus— tine's works and Gregory the Great's Moralia to fashion a digest of theological knowledge. Laon also possessed a copy of Latchen's condensation of Gregory's Moralia but probably never received Paterius' Liber testimoniorum Igteris testamenti ex opusculis S. Gregorii which Hincmar of Laon reouested from'Witgarius of Augsburg.8 ‘Wicbod drew upon the entire field of patristic and early medieval learning for his Quaestiones in Octateuchum. Laon had two copies of this epitome, one of which belonged to Martin Scotus and was later passed to Bernard and.Ade1elm of Laon. Both manuscripts are accompanied by extracts from various early Christian poets such as Proba, Dracontius, and Juven- cus who told sacred history in metrical form. Proba, in her Cegtones virgiliani ad testimonium veteris et now; tegtigenti, even emplqyed'Vergilian hexameters. It is easy to misjudge the significance of the ninth 7n, 1293, no. 24. 80f.p. 60. no 80 115 century‘s sohools' dependence on collections of excerpts and abridgments like those found at Laon. Perhaps they did impart only a superficial knowledge of the authorities. .More importantly, however, they introduced a new approach, synew'method, to learning. When sources were excerpted and juxtaposed under a particular rubric the way was pre— pared for Abelard‘s Sic etgog, Peter the Lombard's Sear tences and Aquinas' Summae. These twelfth and thirteenth century scholars saw and attempted to solve the contra- dictions apparent in the authorities. But before they- could do so, the sources first had to be approached in a specialized fashion. Haimo of Auxerre seems to have been a leading ninth century master in this development.9 He was not unique. Educational methodology in the ninth century emphasized those texts and collections of excerpts which eventually led to the "scholastic method.” This is the important feature of Laon's resources for the study of the Latin fathers. Laon even produced its own dossier text which juxtaposed Haimo's glosses on Biblical vocabup lazy with the often very different interpretations of John Scotus.1o 90f. two articles by E. Bertola, "Il commentario paolino di Haimo di Halberstadt 0 di Auxerre e gli inizi del metodo scolastico," Pier Lombardo, V (1961), 29-54; "I precedenti storici del metodo del "Sic et Non' di .Abelardo," Rivista di filosofia Neoscolastica, LIII (1961),.255— o. 1°01. I. P. Sheldon-Williams, "A List of Works IDoubtfully or‘WrongfulLy Attributed to Johannes Scottus Eriugena," The Journal of Ecclesiastical Histo , XV 116 Laon's manuscripts of the patristic authors were also marked by the representation the eastern theolo- gians had among them. In addition to the commentaries of Clement and Didymns of Alexandria, the library also possessed Origen's homilies on Leviticus, Numbers, and the Prophets and a commentary and two collections of sermons by John Chrysostom. We can add to this list two capies of Hesychius' commentary on Leviticus, a collection of six sermons by Ephrem of Syria and the Admonitio ad filium spiritualem attributed to St. Basil. This emphasis on eastern authors is quite remark, able in a ninth century cathedral library. The presence of Origen's commentaries is especiallynoteworthy.11 Laon's is one of the few ninth century library collections, monastic or cathedral, that could boast a substantial collection of Origen's work.12 It is interesting to compare (1964), 88-89. I hope to be able to edit these notes soon. One example will illustrate the difference between John's interpretation and Haimo's. Both masters commented on the phrase "hiberas nenias" from theaprologue to Genesis (Paris B.N. lat. 4883A, f. 7r : Haimo: "Hiberas nomen gentis. Nenias vanitates vel mandatia.” John: "hiberas nenias. Neniae sunt carmina que in tumbis id est in memoriis mortuorum scribuntur. Quae epi- taphia primo hiberi invenerunt." 11"The great ma ority of manuscripts by which they [ihe eastern fatheré:§were transmitted are monastic in origin. . . . Origen s less frequently represented in the libraries of cathedral churches." Jean Leclercq, 0.S.B., The Love of Learnin and the Desire for God: A Stud of Monastic Culture, =Er. C. Hi'erEi (New York: New Eeri can rary, 1 , pp. 97, 100. 12Cf. H. de Lubac, S. J., Exegese médiévale: Les 117 Laon's library in this aspect with that of John Scotus' friend and colleague, Wulfad, who was a cleric of Reims, abbot of Rebais and St. Medard in Soissons, and finally, archbishop of Bourges (866—876). Vulfad's library con- tains many of the same eastern authors found at Laon.13 That Laon possessed a heavy concentration of the eastern fathers, then, is not an isolated, fortuitous detail. The presence of the eastern fathers in Laon's library re- flects the philosophic and theological interests and in- fluence of John Scotus. This is not the place to examine ninth century neoplatonism. However, it is important to take a closer look at the actual manuscripts of Leon. All three manuscripts of Origen's works, manuscripts 11, 298, 299, as we have seen, have a "history." Manuscript 11, I believe, was copied at Laon under the supervision of Hartgarius. Manuscripts 298 and 299 were copied at St. Amand and used at Laon by Martin Scotus. Thus, they are not books which simplyfound their way into the cathedral library. They were actively sought out and, in one in- stance, copied for the Laon masters. Martin Scotus' notes in his copy of Origen's homilies on the book of Numbers provide an excellent guatre gens de l'Ecriturezéz vols.; Paris: Aubier, , ’ 9 - ‘ 13For a list of Wulfad's books and a plate which reproduces the leaf which contains the list, of. M.‘ Cappuyns, "Les 'Bibli Vulfadi' et Jean Scot Erigene," Recherches de théologie ancienne et médiévale, XXXIII ’ " e 118 insight into the impact Origen had on the intellectual milieu at Laon. Martin's few notes in manuscript 298 do not discuss the content of Origen's homilies. Rather, his notes are paraphrases of key thoughts that particularly attracted his attention in his reading. It is significant that most of these annotations bear on Origen's remarks on the nature and source of wisdom. The substance of these remarks is found in an important letter written by Martin and in a comment he made on Martianus Capella. These two sources show that Martin was inspired by his reading of Origen to emphasize the reality of the arts and to underscore their significance in Christian education. Origen, through Martin, was instrumental in shifting the role of the arts from that of a simple educational tool to a means of human betterment and salvation.14 The non-Patristic authors among Laon's manuscripts provide few surprises. One is impressed by the breadth of the cathedral's resources in Biblical exegesis. Isi- dore of Seville, Bede, Alcuin, Rhabanus Maurus, Paschasius Radbertus, Haimo of Auxerre, are represented by at least one commentary; The library also owned a copy of Ambro— siaster's commentary on the E istle to the Romans, a cOpy of the suspect Claudius of Turin's commentary on the gospels, and a series of treatises by Fulgentius of Ruspe, Prosper of Aquitaine and Gennadius of Marseille. The 14Martin's use of Origen is examined in greater detail below,pp. 187-190. 119 unique manuscript of John Scotus' commentary on the gospel of St. John, manuscript 81, was discovered at Laon. Laon also owned a copy of John's De divisione naturae 15 during the third quarter of the ninth century and what was perhaps the autograph copy of his commentary on Dionysius' De caelesti hierarchia.16 History, both sacred and profane, fared well at Laon. while no classical historical works seem to have been at Laon, the library did possess Orosius' Historia contra accusatores Christianorum, Josephus' rare Libri 15Paris B.N. lat. 12964 contains Books I—IV of John's De 1 s1one na urae. On f. 1r appears the note in a hand of the thirteenth or fourteenth century: 'Iste liber est de conventu Corbeiae. Sed monachi habent unum memoriale pro isto libro 'periphision' sed non totum quod memoriale vel comburatur vel reddatur monachis beati Vincentii in Lauduno. Melius enim esset ut credo quod combureretur propter haereses dampnatos quae sunt in eo." Cf. I. P. SheldonAWilliams, Iohannis Scotti Eriu enae, Peri seon PDe Divisione Na urae 1 er rmus, p. 3. e manuscr a so con a ns a ew marginal notes (pp. 333, 331, 436, 437, 439) from the hand of Martin Scotus. Thus, the manuscript was at Laon before it came to St. ' Vincent. (SheldonéWilliams also states that Paris B .N., lat. 12965, which contains Books IV;V of the De fiivisione Eiturae, is likewise from St. Vincent. Neither e, s 00 o e, nor the manuscript substantiates this claim.) 1GMontfaucon described this lost manuscript, num- bered 215 in his catalogue, as: "Opera Dionysii Areopa— gitae de coelesti Hierarchia, antiquiss." Bugniatre, in his description of codex 43, is more e licit:‘ "Commenp taire sur la hierarchie celeste attribu e E St. Denys Eveque d'Athhnes. On croit que cet ouvrage fut traduit par Scot Erighne. On y'cgte des auteurs du 4e siecle. Le ms. est du milieu du 9. According to Dom Cappuyns, the earliest manuscript of John's Eipositiones super Ierarchias sancti Diogyiii is from he can ury, c . pp. ee a so Jeauneau, pp. 28—29. 120 antigpitatores Judaicorum and Hegesyppius' equally rare Eigtoriae de bello Iudaico. Saints'lives included Fortup natus"Vita sancti Martini, Paul the Deaconds Vita sancti Gre or i, Heiric of Auxerre's Vita sancti Germs , an account of the early martyrs in Anastasius the Librarian's Collectanea, and a collection of early eastern saints' Lizgg. Gregory of Tours' historical works, the Historiae Prancorum and the Libri octo miraculorum, survive only as fragments at Laon. In canon law, the library's holdings were adequate. The basic source was Dionysius Exiguus' Codex canonorum ecclegiasticorum and his Collectio decretorum. Two other manuscripts, now lost, are described as "Antiguissima collectio conciliorum” and ”Antiguissima canonum.collectio." Laon also possessed the decrees of two major councils, the Lateran Council of 649 and that of Aix—la—Chapelle in 816. -The latter established the norms of canonical life and was consulted by the canons at Laon. In addition, Laon also possessed excerpts from less important ninth century French councils. The pseudo-Isidorian decretals were represented in Hincmar of Laon's Collectio ex spig- tolis Romanorum pgntificumand his Collectio altera epigr tolis Romanorum Pontificum. For the historyof the school the most interesting and most pertinent books in Laon's library were those devoted to the study of the arts. In this department, 121 Laon's library has had a poor reputation.17 This repu~ tation has not been deserved. Laon possessed most of the important textbooks and manuals which present the arts. In addition, the Laon masters did their own original work in the study and explication of the arts. Both John Scotus and Martin Scotus glossed Martianus Capella's De Nuptiis Philologiae et Mercurii. The division of the arts into the trivium and the quadrivium as a program of study revived only during the second half of the tenth century and the eleventh century. Thus, it would not be useful to list each art and describe Laon's holdings in that area. The ninth century had one of the arts as its pilot discipline, grammar, just as later periods would emphasize another one of the arts, for example, dialectic or astronomy.18 Training at Laon was primarily aimed at linguistic facility: the ability to comprehend and comment on a text. Grammar was the key to this training. There are some signs, however, that the masters at Laon cultivated some of the other arts. Dialectic was a parti- 19 cular forte of Martin Scotus. Medicine, a practical 17Lesne,'IV, 609. Also, R. 'r. Coolidge, "Adalbero, Bishop of Laon," 107. Coolidge noted, however, that Laon's collection of manuscripts on the practical and natural sciences was not found in many libraries in the tenth century. 18Cf. Jean Jolivet, Godescalc d'Orbais et la tri— nite: La methods de la chologie 5 I'epogue caroliggienne at 83 r n, 9 PP.- "' 0 19Of. the remarks of Cora E. Lutz, Dunchad Glossae in.Martiggpm (Lancaster, Pa.: American P o og ca 122 art rather than a liberal art, was also intensely studied at Laon.20 Isidore of Seville's Etzpologiae and Martianus Capella's De Nuptiis Philologiae et Mercurii gave an introductory over—view of all the arts.21 Isidore's compilation especially made up for gaps in manuscripts on the arts. As far as is known, for example, there is no mention at Laon of the two famous medieval textbooks, Donatus' Ars grammatica minora and Priscian's Institutio de arte grammatica. What they had to say, however, was available in Isidore's encyclopedia. Once the arts were introduced, specialized training began. Here Laon was unique among ninth century schools. Its program of studies included both Latin and Greek grammar. Only a fragment of Priscian's Partitiones duodecim versum Aeneidos principalium survives at Laon. Undoubtedly, though, the study of Latin grammar was built around the reading of the best Latin authors, especially Vergil. Manuscript 468 introduced the -student to the mythology and vocabulary of Vergil. It also contains a glossary for Sedulius' Carmen Paschale, a Christian poem written in'Vergilian hexameters. Vergilian Association, 1944), xvhxix. This commentary, formerly ascribed to Dunchad, has now been attributed to Martin. 200:. below, pp, 125-126. 1No copy of Martianus' work has been found which can be placed at Laon during the ninth century. 123 studies were aided by Servins' commentary on the Georgics, Bucolics, and the Aeneid. Servius does not survive at Laon but he was undoubtedly used in the ninth century. Extracts are contained in manuscript 468 and Martin Scotus referred to Servius in an explication of a passage from John Chrysostom.22 Similarly, no copy of vergil's works has survived at Laon although obviously he was studied there. In 1961, Claudio Leonardi published his discovery of two very interesting leaves from an unknown manuscript which he rightly concluded bore the influence of the school of Leon.23 The leaves contain grammatical obser- vations culled fromeergil, Martianus Capella, Priscian, Donatus, and Servius. One of the two leaves contains extracts from Martin Scotus' Greek.notes in manuscript 444 which proves that the master who copied the grammatical notes spent some time at Laon. Leonardi thought that the manuscript which bore the two leaves, now in the Vatican, was most probably a copy of Martianus Capella's allegory on the arts. Instead, this manuscript, Paris. B.N.. lat. 10307, is a folio-sized codex of Vergil's works. Unfortu- nately, there is no indication that this manuscript be- longed to a Laon master. I am more inclined to believe that it belonged to someone who took some of his education - 22Cf. "Glossaire grec-latin de la bibliothbque de Laon," ed. Miller, 11 and Plate X, 11. 1-10. 23Vatican Re lat. 1625, ff, 65-65, of, Claudio 'Leonargi, uove voci poetiche tra secolo IX e XI,” 141—15 . 124 at Laon under the influence of Martin Scotus and John Scotus.24 In addition to classical and late antique gram- matical tools, the masters at Laon also used part of Aldholm's Liber de septepario et de metris. eniggatibus ac pedum regglis25 of the Liber glossarum which escaped the notice of both 26 and possessed a highly interesting cOpy Lindsay and Goets. Instruction in Greek was built around one manuscript, Martin Scotus' Greekaatin glossary and grammar. Priscian's Greca de octavo partibus et con- structione was the basic source for Martin's grammatical glosses. Not all the sources of this important manuscript have yet been identified. Laon's library contained a few other specialized treatments of selected arts. Rhetoric, in the classical sense, was not studied in the ninth and tenth centuries. Instead, a highly practical form of rhetoric, the ars dicta- ggpig, supplanted the art of the orator. With the 2323 24See below, pp. 219a222. A detailed description of Paris B.N. lat. 10307, not pertinent for the present stu can e oun in my "A propos de quelques manu- scrits de l'école de Laon au IXhme sibcle: Decouvertes et probltmes," to appear in Le Mozen Age. 25Manuscript 464 contains Aldholm's Retractio reci- procae interrogationes et responsiones de pedum regglis. “or. w. M. Lindsay, et al., Glossaria latina, 'vol. I: Glossarium Ansileu s1ve Lihrum Glossarium (Paris: as e es e res, lso, Goats, Cor us Glossariorum Latinorum (7 vols.: Lei zig 'and Berlin: TeuEEer,1333:19231,V, xx-xxvi; 161- 55. Manuscript 445 merits a detailed study. 125 ,Engplary, including the letters of Einhard which were preserved as epistolary exemplars, and several copies of the_;gg31§_fgrmgtggpp, Laon was well prepared to teach the art of letter writing. The science of the calendar was taught from Dionysius Exiguus' Liber Paschale and aided by'a metrical rendition of the rules of the computus. The computus was also treated in a treatise applying arithmetical knowledge to astronomy. For astronomy it- self, Laon had two copies of Isidore of Seville's cos- mography, the 23_patura rerum. Only the study of medicine, however, rivalled that of grammar in the arts program at Laon. When the history of Carolingian medicine is written, Laon will undoubtedly be recognized as a major ninth century center for its study'ppgypractice. Here we will only mention Laon's manuscript resources in this domain. Laon had two major collections of late antique medical lore: Marcellus' Q2 medicamgntis and Oribasius' Sypopsis preceded by his Eupor- istae ad Eunapium. Several folios at the end of Laon's copy of Palladius' qus agriculturae contain various medical recipes. These items plus a rectangular figure which when used with the numerical equivalents of certain diseases was supposed to predict the outcome of the disease have all been noted in'Wickersheimer's recent important catalogue of medieval medical manuscripts in French libraries.27 There are some medics from Laon, however, 21Vickersheimer, pp. 35-41. The rectangular figure 126 which escaped'wickersheimer's notice. They add to the im- portance of Laon as a center for the study of medicine. Manuscript 445, folio 1v, bears another figure used to“ predict the outcome of a disease. This one, however, is a circle. A fragment, folio 138r, which contains a list of ingredients for a medical recipe is attached to Bishop Dido's copy of the Council of 649. Another medical recipe from the first or second decade of the tenth cenp tury and, I think, by the hand of Adelelm of Laon, is hidden among the formulae of the Laog Formulagy,l§g£i§, Bela: lat. 11379, folio 2v. The significance of these pieces is that they prove that medicine was not simply an academic concern. It led to practice. The composition of Laon's library confirms what we have learned of its formation. Scholars and masters formed it. They acquired manuscripts from numerous copying centers. But they also commissioned some of the more important educational manuals to be cOpied at Leon. The kinds of books left at Laon establish further that the library was formed by pedagogues. There was, of course, a predominant interest in Scriptural studies which was firmly anchored by an extensive selection of patristic is divided into four quadrants. Each quadrant contains certain.numbers. Alongside the figure, a table gives the numerical equivalent for the letters of the alphabet. A malady is given a numerical value by adding the numer- ical equivalents of the letters of the malady's name. This number is then located in one of the four quadrants. Each quadrant signifies a different outcome for the sick person. 127 and medieval commentators. Several important compilations and abridgments made the fathers more accessible. Espe~ chflkyneteworthy, however, is the distinct interest in the eastern theologians at Laon. Scriptural studies were supported by a strong interest in the arts, the propadeutic to medieval exegesis. Grammar, both Greek.and.Latin, absorbed most of the interest of the Lean masters. How- ever, in their commentaries on the Middle Ages' most use- ful text on the arts, that of Martianus Capella, they ranged over all the arts. These commentaries led directly to the rediscovery of the antique division of the arts into the trivium and guadrizium and thereby to the specialized approach to knowledge characteristic of the medieval universities. Study in Scripture, influenced by eastern theology, formed the milieu in which John Scotus' De divisione naturae was created. John's influence in his own century, which appears larger than is usually thought, was in some way due to the influence and interests of the school of Leon. This influence, of course, is not explained by the material aspect of the school - its books. In the Middle Ages, the master and his personality were all impor— tant. A strong master set the tone for studies at his school for his generation and, perhaps, even longer. He attracted students from afar to the detriment of other schools. His students became the means whereby a school's influence spread. In a sense, we have already considered 128 the personal element at Leon. The formation and compo- sition of the library at Laon was not fortuitous. Both depended on the contacts and interests of individuals - the masters and the students at Laon. PART THREE LAON' s MASTERS , 850-930 The next three chapters will focus on the indi- viduals responsible for the school of Laon's growth and influence. Laon's masters are hardly known except by their names. However, their manuscripts which reveal so much about their library and their intellectual interests also furnish important information on their careers. Their biographies reveal the contacts and influences which precipitated the growth of the school and facili- tated the diffusion of its influences. There are two phases to the history of Laon's ninth century masters. The first phase from about 850 to approxi- mately 875 embraces the first generation of masters who formed Laon's Irish colony. This group of scholars, attracted to Laon and patronized by Laon's bishops, can be studied more precisely than before with the help of the manuscripts. The key figure to emerge from this circle is not John Scotus but, surprisingly, the less well known Martin Scotus. The second phase in the history of Laon's masters, from 875 to 930,embraces the last two generations of masters whose activities are the focus of this study: that of 130 131 Bernard and.Manno of Laon and that of Adelelm of Leon. Compared to the first phase, this one might be characterized as a period of decline for the school. The masters who succeeded to the Irish masters of the third quarter of the ninth century did not produce any work comparable to the commentaries and instruction in Greek that characterized the Irish generation of masters. The one certain literary production at Laon during this second phase is a practical guide to letter writing. Also, Manno of Laon's teaching career was at the palace school rather than at Laon. very little evidence exists on the teaching careers of Bernard and Adelelm. They inherited most of Martin Scotus' books but do not seem to have added to the collection with their own acquisitions. Although the signs are abundant that the school declined under the second and third generations of masters, the concern to explain both the "rise and fall” of insti- tutions should not obscure the more important diffusion of ideas and methods which accompanied the decline. Decline, in fact, was built into the medieval school. A group of brilliant masters established at one cathedral or monastery taught, of course, local students. But they also attracted other students who because of their special promise were sent to study with renowned masters. Occasion- alby, one of the local students would prove good enough to maintain or advance the quality of instruction of his master. But more often, the promising students sent from 132 afar returned to their own monasteries or cathedrals and established schools superior to those of their fellow students who took over the school of their common master. There was never any guarantee that the local students ‘would ever be more than simply adequate. This is the way I would characterize Bernard and Adelelm of Laon. However, the "outsiders" were sent to a school because of their particular promise. One thinks especially of Lupus of Ferrihres who studied at Pulda and then returned to Ferrihres and Gerbert of Aurillac who studied in Spain and then returned to France. Neither the school at Fulda nor that at Ripoll could compete with those established by Lupus and Gerbert at Perribres and Reims. The second phase of the history of Laon's ninth century masters seems to me to be another example of the process I have just sketched. The achievements of the first generation of Leon masters did not endure at Laon beyond the third quarter of the ninth century but were transferred elsewhere. I will attempt to chart this diffusion and to account for it by concentrating on the biographies of several late ninth century masters. CHAPTER SEVEN THE IRISH COLON! AT LAON Vhen.Heiric of Auxerre presented his Life of St. 1 Germain to Charles the Bald sometime during the 870's, he took the opportunity to praise the monarch's wisdom and patronage of learning. In his dedication, he wrote to Charles that even Greece was envious because its learning had been transferred to Charles' kingdom. The theme of the transferral of Greek.learning or, more specifically, of the establishment of a "second Athens” in the Vest, was not a new one with Heiric. More interesting is the recog- nition Heiric gave to the Irishmen who played an imp portant role in the "second Carolingian renaissance”: Vhy should I speak of Ireland when almost all of its people, contemptuous of the dangers of the ocean, have migrated to our shores with their crowd of philosophers? The more learned of them are more apt to exile themselves in order 50 serve the wishes of the most wise Solomon. 1For a discussion of the date of this work, cf. R. Quadri, I Collectanea, pp. 25-27. 2Vita sancti Germani episcopi Autissiodorensis, MBH P , : "Quid Hiberniam memorem, contempto pelagi dis- crimine, pone totam cum grege philosophorum ad littora nostra migrantem. Quorum quisquis peritior est, ultro sibi indicit exsilium, ut Salomoni sapientissimo famuletur ad votum." 133 134 During the second half of the ninth century, Laon was one of the important centers of Irish intellectual activity on the continent. The existence of an Irish "colony" at Laon has long been acknowledged although somewhat vaguely.3 The manuscripts, as we have seen, mani- 4 The fascin- fest the presence of the Irishmen at Laon. ating history of the Irishmen on the continent is scat- tered through a dozen or so important modern papers and books. The absence of a systematic approach has led to confusion and discrepancies. In addition, the Irish- men rarely appear as personalities whose careers and intellectual formation can be readily reconstructed. Migrants and foreigners on the continent, they disappear from the scene as mysteriously as they entered upon it. By the second half of the ninth century, Laon and the surrounding region were well acquainted with Irish monks 3An Irish colony is mentioned at Laon in such general works as Manitius, I, 324, 502, 535, and Laistner, Thought and Letters, pp. 244, 259, and in more specialized works such as Traube' 3 classic "0 Roma nobilis: Philolog- ische Untersuchungen aus dem Mittelalter, " Abhandlungen der ohilosochisch-ohilolo:ischen Classe der kon lich-ba er- IX 3-2-3 3; Cappuyns, J§§, pp. 54-55; J. F. Kenney' s indis— pensable guide to the sources of Irish history, The Sources for the Earl Histor of Ireland- Ecclesiastical An Intro— duction and a Guide New York: 0c agon Books, 19 , pp. 569-594; and, Dom Louis Gougaud's Christianit in Cal ic Lands: A History of the Churches of the Celts, their Ori- in their Develo ment Influence and Mutual Relations, tr. M. Joynt ZLondon: Sheed and Ward, 1932;, pp. 300-303. For a more recent treatment, cf. B. Bischoff, "Il mona- chesimo Irlandese nei suoi rapporti col continente," Mittel- alterliche Studien, I, 195-205. 4See above p. 78. 135 and travellers. Geographically, Laon was on the route Irish travellers took after landing on the coasts of Pic- ardy and Flanders.5 There were other attractions in the region. Not far from Laon is Peronne, the site of the famous menastery, Peronna Scottorum. This seventh century foundation held the body of St. Fursa and had become the object of pilgrimages for Irishmen. As far as its his— tory can be traced before its destruction in 880 by the Northmen, Perrona Scottorum was an Irish monastery.6 The forest of St. Gobain, close by Laon, was named for one of Fursa's twelve Irish companions. The Irish pilgrims were welcomed on the contin- ent for their piety and learning. Charlemagne is supposed to have brought to his court two Irishmen who landed on the coast and announced themselves as "merchants of wis- dom."7 The story is probably fanciful, but the presence of Irishmen at the court was sufficienflqrstrong to arouse some criticism.8 In 813, the Council of Chalons—sur- Sadne condemned the Irish "bishops" who wandered from place to place ordaining unfit candidates to the 5Gougaud, p. 175. 6Cf. L. Traube, "Perrona Scottorum ein Beitrag zur Uberlieforungsgeschichte und zur Palaeographie des Mittel- alters," 'Vorlgsungen und Abhandlungen, III, 95-119. 7‘flonachi Sangallengis De Gestis Karoli Imperatoris, MGH, Scr., II, 731. . gAlcuin and, to a greater degree, Theodulf of Cr- ldans objected to the presence of Irishmen at court, of. Kenney, Sources, pp. 535-537. 136 priesthood.9 Nevertheless, the Carolingian rulers and bis- h0ps generally protected and patronized the Irishmen. In 845, the Council of Meaux condemned the alienation of the hospitalia scottorum, shelters and way-stations for Irish pilgrims, andasked Charles the Bald's help in restoring 10 the hospices to the Irishmen. At Epernay, the next year, 11 When Charles' territory Charles ratified this canon. was invaded by his brother, Louis, in 858, the bishops of the provinces of Reims and Rouen urged Louis to insure the proper administration of the hospices.1 But not all the Irishmen were to be found at court or on the pilgrim roads in the ninth century. Some of the Irish scholars, in particular settled with some compatriots in the cathedral towns of the north. At Cambrai, Bishop Albericus (763-790) had a collection of Irish canons copied in his scriptorium. His copy of the Collectio canonum Hiberniensig is the oldest one which has been conserved. This manuscript was probably used by the later bishop of 13 Cambrai, Theoderic,for manuscript 201 of Laon. One of 9Conciligg Cabilonense II, Mansi,.XIV, 102: "Sunt in quibusdam locis Scoti, qui se dicunt episcopos esse, et multos negligentes, absque licentia dominorum suorum, sive magistrorum, presbyteros et diaconos erdinant. . . ." 1OConcilium Mel e se, ipig,, 827.823, "MGH, Leggg, I, 390-391. 12MPL, cxxv1, 17. 13Lesne, IV, 49; Gou and, p. 301; Charles Le- febvre, "Laon: (collection de ," apholicisme: Hier, au- joprd'hui, domain, ed. G. Jacquemet, VI, 1823. 137 the many Irish Dungals dedicated a poem to Albericus' successor, Hildoard (790-816).14 Two manuscripts copied '5 The penitential for Hildoard bear Irish influences. which Halitgaire of Cambrai (817—831) composed at the request of Archbish0p Ebbo of Reims likewise has an Irish background.16 In 848, Sedulius stopped at Libge with several companions. There, they were warmly received by BishOp Hartgarius (840—854) and his successor, Franco (854- 901). Sedulius disappeared sometime after 858, but during .those ten years he and his "circle" firmly established Lidge as the intellectual capital of Louis the German's kingdom and laid the foundations for the schools of Liege in the tenth century.17 Even after Sedulius' sudden dis— appearance, Irish continued to come to Liége. The city was a favorite stop on the journey up the Rhine through Louis' kingdom to Rome. Irish pilgrims in the second half of the ninth century sought Bishop Franco's help. One, in an apologetic tone, explained that he was a simple pilgrim 18 and neither a grammarian nor skilled in Latin speech. 1 1MGH, P,L. I, 411. 15Cf. Gougaud, p. 301, and Lesne, IV, 50. 16P. Pournier, "Etudes sur les penitentials," e d'hi t01re t de. ittér ture reli ieuse, VIII (1903), . Cf. also, Lesne, ibid., and Gougaud, ibid. 17Kenney, Sourcg, pp. 553-569. 18m" VI, 196: "Non sum grammaticus neque sermone latino peritus. . . ." Apparently, Irish 138 Closer to Laon, Soissons also sheltered Irishmen. One of them left some poems in his copy of Priscian.19 Marcus, who was born in England but received his education in Ireland, settled as a hermit in Soissons after many years as a bishop. He gave Heiric of Auxerre important details 20 on St. Germain's miracles in England. At the monastery of St. Remi in Reims, another Irishman, Duncaht taught computus using Martianus Capella's book on astrology.21 "Mais aucune ville de cctte région n'attira plus 22 The attraction at Laon for the que Laon les Irlandais." Irishmen who gathered there was the proximity of ready patronage at Charles the Bald's palace school, the favor of Laon's bishops, and the influence of John Scotus who, to judge from the caliber of his work and his fame in his own time, must have been at the center of the group at Laon origin was usually synonymous with scholarship. An inter- esting addition to the Latin glossary (ms. 445, f. 44r) in— dicates as much. After the entry, "Idcirco- idea," a second hand added "ideomochos vel ideotistas, id est in peritos laboratores vel in cultus doctores.‘ Above "id egg" another band added the word "scotti". 1 9cr. MGH, P,L., III, 687-688, 690. ZQMPL, cxx1v, 1245. See also Manitius, I, 240. Manitius apparently refers to Marcus when he lists "Mar- tinus der Brite von Soissons" (italics added) as a member of Egan's Irish colony, ibid., 502, 525. 21A ninth century manuscript from Reims, now in the British Museum (Egg. 15 A XXXIII) carries this note on f. 3r: "Commentum Duncaht pontificis Hibernensis quod con— tulit suis discipulis in monasteri sancti Remigii docens super astrologia Capellae Varronis Martiani." Cf. Kenney, Sources, pp. 573-574. 22L. Gougaud, "L'oeuvre des Scotti dans l'Europe con- tinentale," Revue d'histoire ecclesiastigue, IX (1908), 258. 139 as Sedulius was at Liege. Where was Charles' palace school located? No docu— ment gives a precise location. Recently, historians have begun to fix the location of the palace school itself at Laon.23 Two of the three known masters at the palace school were also masters at Laon. Prudentius, who was to become bishop of Troyes, was at the palace until approximately 845-846. He, however, was born and apparently educated in Spain and has no documented link with Laon.24 After Pru- dentius, John Scotus, the most famous of the palatine mas- ters, taught at the palace. John was either succeeded by or had as a colleague Manna of Leon who early in the 870's 25 Another began to educate future bishops at the palace. piece of evidence in support of Laon's claim as the site of the palace school occurs in Laon's cOpy of the Librum Glossarium. In an unused column on folio 79r of manuscript 445, there is a description "de palatio in passione tome." In fifteen short lines, the copyist gave a brief description of each of the twelve rooms in the celestial palace which the apostle Thomas planned shortly before his death in, 23Cappuyns, ggg, p. 65; Gougaud, Christianit in Celtic Lands, p. 302; G. Mathon, "Jean Scot ErigSne," Catho- licisme: Hier, aujourd'hui, demain, VI, 626; L. Bieler, Ireland: Harbi er of the Middle A es (London: Oxford ‘fiiiversity Press, 1933;, p. 123. I. P. Sheldon-Williams ( ohannis Scotti Eriu enae Peris h seon, p. 3) distinguishes be ween John's probable teaching career at the palace school and his certain teaching career at Laon. 24Cf. Cappuyns, ibid., p. 54 and Manitius, 1, 334-335. 25For Manna, cf. below, pp. 199-203. 140 according to the legend, India. In three places, the copy- ist departed from the standardized description of the rooms and substituted descriptions which more accurately fit a Carolingian palace. One of the descriptions so revised was that of the gygggsium: VIII. Gimnasia, locus ubi varie artes exarcentur. The copyist may well have had before his eyes either one of Charles' palaces in the region or in Leon itself.26 None of the king's acts, however, were ever dated from Laon. But Charles must have had some sort of accomodations when he visited the episcopal city. Perhaps Lothair's palace, the first one mentioned at Laon,was earlier Charles‘.27 I am more inclined to believe, however, that the palace school was not located at Laon.' First, there is the explict reference to Manno's residency at the palace at Compfbgne. In his previous sentence, the anonymous source of this information discussed John Scotus in a completely different context. The impression is that the author, while discussing a doctrine of John Scotus, was led to think about the palace and his encounter with Manno there. He “associated" John, Manno, and the palace at Com- 28 piegne. Another argument against the location of the 26This text has been published and commented on by S. Martinet, "Un palais decrit dans un manuscrit carolingien de la bibliotheque municipale de Laon," Egggzatign_dgg 0” ' o o ' o ' o ’ IIE o ’ XII 19 , 72 4. 27cr. above, p. 47, n. 30. 28This source, a highly interesting letter from an 141 palace school at Laon is provided by Laon's manuscripts. They witness the instructional activity of one man, Martin Scotus. There is very little during the reign of Charles the Bald which can be attributed to another master at Laon. Instruction at Laon itself, then, was offered by Martin Scotus, one member of "Laon's Irish colony." The most that can be concluded, it seems to me, is that the school at Laon and the palace school were interdependent. Charles drew on Laon for masters, such as Manno, for his palace school just as he selected Hedenulf of Laon to over- see the foundation of the new royal monastery at Compiégne.2 We must imagine a more fluid situation during the third quarter of the ninth century than a desire for precision and, sometimes, local patriotism, would allow. Charles the Bald had his palace school and the school of Laon to which to send his sons. However, he chose to educate two of them 30 at St. Amand. Undoubtedly, a,sizeable Irish colony existed anonymous master known simply by his initial, A, to his mas- ter, known only as E, is discussed in Appendix D. The pass- age which concerns us here (MGH, Ep., VI, 184, 11. 19-24) reads: ". . . quive sint psalmi plebeii, quos prohibent canones recitari in ecclesia, et qualiter cantetur apud vestrates in res onsorio 'Domine pater,‘ et 'animo' (vel 'animae'g 'inreverenti et infrunito' (aut 'infronito' sive 'infrodito') antepenultimo acuto secundum doctrinam Iohannis Scotti. Quando nunc fui ad palatium Compendium, dixit michi Manno ex nostri consultu, qui esset mechani, unde mechanica ars, sed excidit a memoria." 29See above, p. 44. 30Cf. A. Van de Vyver, Hucbald de Saint-Amand," 62. 142 at Laon, especially during the pontificate of Bishop Hinc- mar. But there is no sure evidence to fix the palace school at Laon during this period. Laon's Irish scholars oscillated quite easily between Laon and the palace school and Laon and other centers. It is a measure of the obscurity surrounding the lives of these men that so little is known about the most famous of Laon's Irish masters, John Scotus. The best date for his birth that can be offered is sometime during the 31 He is first mentioned first quarter of the ninth century. in a letter from Bishop Pardulus to the church of Lyons in 851 or 852. At that time, the province of Reims was plunged in the controversy over predestination aroused by Gottschalk of Orbais. In order to inform himself, Pardulus wrote to John at the palace.32 We may assume, then, that by 850 John had already begun to make his reputation and that this was not his first contact with Pardulus who was a familiar figure at court. Given the obscurity of John‘s early life, there is considerable room for speculation. I would like to present the hypothesis here that the letter copied in an Irish hand on a flyleaf of manuscript 24 might be by John and, thus, that John at an early stage in his career worked 31Cappuyns, JSE, p. 9. 32MPL, CXXI, 1052: "Sed quia haec inter se valde dissentiebzfit, Scotum, illum qui est in palatio regis, Jo- hannem nomine scribere coegimus." John addressed his trea- tnn on the problem, De divina praedestinatione to Pardulus and Hincmar of Reims. cf. ibid., CXXII, 355. 143 together with a Winibertus on the correction of a Mar- tianus Capella manuscript.33 Just before his death, Ludwig Traube thought he could identify John's handwriting in certain manuscripts from Reims, Laon, and Bamberg. Rand, his pupil published Traube's notes and the plates he had gathered.34 Later, however, Rand made his own study of the question and was led 35 to reject the identification preposed by Traube. More re— cently, however, Professor Bischoff identified John's script in the marginal notes of the ninth book of the 23 Nuptiis Philologiae et Mercurii in a manuscript at Leiden.36 Obviously, the entire question of John's script should be taken up once again. Such a study should consider not only the manuscripts which Traube and Rand studied but also the 33This letter is transcribed above,p. 79. 34"Palaeographisches Forschungen, Ffinfter Teil: Autographa des Iohannes Scottus aus dem Nachlass heraus- gegeben von Edward Kennard Rand," Abhandlgpgen g2; k8n1.- ba er Aka ' ' Philos -.hi_ol.~und hist Klas:e Munchen 1912 , 1-17. 35Cf. "The Supposed Autographa of John the Scot," University of California Publications in Classical Philol- m, V 1918-1923 , 134-141. 36Leiden Bibliotheek der Ri'ksuniversiteit, B.P.L., 88, ff. 133-181. Professor Bischoff's identifi- cation of John's hand in this manuscript has been reported by A. Verhulst, "L'activité et la calligraphie du scriptori- um de l'abbaye Saint-Pierre-au-Mont—Blandin de Gand a l'époque de l'abbe Wichard (+1058);'Scriptorium, XI (1957), 44, n. 43: and, by I. P. Sheldon-Williams, "A Bibliography of the Works of Johannes Scottus Eriugena," Journal of Ecclesiastical Histo ,,X (1959), 207. For the present state 0 the question, see Sheldon-Williams' introduction to his edition of the first book of John's De givisione ngtugge, especially pp. 7-8, 12. Plate III reproduces the letter in ms. 24. 144 Leiden manuscript as well as the note in manuscript 24. Until this study is completed by experts in insular paleo— graphy, we can only conclude here that the hand of the note in manuscript 24, which is very similar to that in the Leiden notes, might possibly be John's. The identification of Winibertus is more certain. His title, dominus, indicates that he was a bishop or an abbot. The name is not a common one. There was a Wene- bertus as fifth abbot of St. Amand during the eighth cen- 37 a Winebertus at St. Martin of Tours in 813,38 a tury, Wenebertus, abbot of Schuttern during the second quarter of the ninth century,39 and a Winebertus whose name ap- pears on a tenth century list probably from Fleury.4O The only one who might be identified with the Winibertus of manuscript 24 by rank and by date is the abbot of Schfittern. Like John Scotus' early biography, the history of Schfittern is obscure during the early ninth century.41 Wenibertus must have been abbot there for only a short 37:19, III, 255. 381bid., xxv, 183. 39MGH, Libri Confraternitatum sancti Galli, Augiengigl Fabariensis, p. 213. Cf. 0. Hamburger, Qie illustrierten Handschriften e rlm rolin ischen und karol- ingischen Handschriften Bern: Burgerbibliothek Bern, 19627; p. 19. ere may, of course, still be other Weneberti whose names have escaped me. 41 1Of. F. Mone, Quellensammlung der badischen Landesgesghighte (3 vols. ; Karlsruhe: C. Macklot, 1 3), III, 49- 30 4o 145 time when he attended the Council of Mainz in 829. the Liber Confraternitates Aggienges, his name follows those of abbots Beretrich and Erchanpertus. Beretrich 42 In was abbot during the first quarter of the ninth century. A deluxe Evangeliary, executed under his direction, dates from this period.43 In addition, Beretrich's and Erchan- pertus' names were inserted into the Liber Confraternitates Augienses when it was compiled in 826. However, the names of Wenibertus and his successors were only added in the tenth century according to the editor of the Liber Con- fratergitates Augienses. Wenibertus, then, must have become abbot between 826 and 829. The date of his death is unknown. If he remained abbot of Schflttern as long as his confreres at the Council of Mainz remained bishops and abbots, he could well have lived into the 840's, the decade when John Scotus began his commentary on the De Nuptiis Philologiae et Mercurii.44 The only other mention of Wenibertus is significant. Among the numerous poems Walafrid Strabo dedicated to the leading figures of his day, he included one to Wenibertus in which he addressed the abbot with filial devotion and 42MGH, Concilia aevi Karolini, I, 604, 1. 14. 43Cf. L. Dorez, "Evangéliaire exécuté h l'abbaye de Schu'ttern (VIIIe-IXe sibcles)," W. W (Paris: Champion, 1910 , 293-299. This manuscript definitely belongs to the ninth century, cf. m, II, ix. 4{According to Werminghoff's notes in the Concilia (of. n. 42 above), the participants at the Council of Mainz occupied their offices from twenty to thirty years. 146 urged him to continue his correspondence with Walafrid.45 It appears, then, that the abbot of Schfittern was respected in the Rhine valley for his counsel and erudition. "Utinam in uno loco essemus etiam parvo temporel" At one time, Wenibertus and the Irishman I tentatively identify as John Scotus worked on a copy of the De Nuptiig Philologiae et Mercurii. However, when the letter was copied in manuscript 24, they were separated by a distance which made further collaboration impossible. If the script of this letter can be identified as John's, it will open a new chapter in his biography and throw new light on his in- tellectual formation. Before he came to Charles' court, John quite possibly could have spent his first years on the continent at Schfittern or at some other nearby monastery in the Rhine valley. These monasteries sheltered numerous Irishmen and as we shall see there is more than one link between the Irishmen of the Rhine valley and those of Laen. In the twenty year period after Pardulus' letter to Lyons during which John's activities can be followed, there are very few references to his teaching. In a docu— ment extremely difficult to interpret, Elias, a fellow Irishman and future bishop of Angouleme (861/862-875» is described as an heir to John's learning.46 Wicbald, bishop of Auxerre (879-887) is the only other student of John ”use. as... u, 359- 46Cf. Appendix E. 147 whose name has survived.47 John's death, although unrecorded, is not as mysterious as legend depicts.48 His last work was his incomplete commentary on John's Gospel, manuscript 81. This manuscript he annotated himself. The script of these notes, although similar to other specimens of John's handwriting, is ganerally less steady. The notes in this manuscript have the appearance of having been copied by an elderly person. John died while at work and left the unique manuscript of his commentary at Laon or to someone who deposited it there. Although extremely difficult to document, John's teaching touched an entire generation of students. Heiric 49 of Auxerre, Almann of Hautvillers, perhaps Hucbald of of St. Amand,50 and an anonymous master perhaps from Auxerre or Fleury freely borrowed from John's works.51 Another master, also unfortunately anonymous, can be added to this list. In his copy of Vergil's works, this master copied extracts from Martin Scotus' Greek-Latin glossary as well as two previously unknown poems by John 47Cf. Ex Gestis Episcoporum Autisiodorensium, MGH Scr., XIII, 399. 48For these legends, of. Cappuyns, JSE, pp. 252-260. I 49For Heiric, Remigius, and Almann, cf. below, PP- 205-207. 5on. G. Mathon, "Un florilége éripénien h l'abbaye'de Saint-Amand au temps d'Hucbald,“ Recherches de theologie ggcienne et médiézale, xx (1953), 302-311. 51Cf. p. 140, n. 28 above. 148 52 He also copied what seems to be an original Scotus. composition, a prayer to the Virgin, which breathes the language and philosophy of the De divisione natur- ae. John's brother, Aldelmus, another member of the Irish group at Laon, has surprisingly been ignored by historians. He rates only a fleeting mention in Cappuyn's 54 Most comment still authoritative study of John Scotus. about Aldelmus has mistakenly attempted to identify him with Adelelm of Laon.55 The most important mention of Aldelmus occurs at the top of folio 42r of Paris, B,N., lap. 12949 which contains a table of computus with the legend "frater iohannis scotti aldelmus fecit istam pagi- ."56 The same hand that copied this piece of infor- nan mation tried to use the table for the year 896. This date provides a terminus ante guem for Aldelmus. The proximity of this date to 892, when the Laon Annales inform us that Adelelm of Laon became a priest, led to the identi- fication of John Scotus' brother with the priest of Laon and benefactor of the cathedral library. But this is 52 53 54 55Ibid., p. 11; Kenney, Sources, p. 591. Quadri, p. 17, n. 1, writes Aldelmus but means Adelelmus. 56The preceding folio, f. 41r, contains another reference to Aldelmus: ". . . et per pagina aldelmi invenitur cotidie lune." Cf. above, pp. 123-124. This passage is transcribed below, cf. Appendix F. Pages 3, n. 7, 11-12. 149 hardly possible. If Adelelm was about thirty years old when ordained a priest in 892, his birth date would be in the early 860's. The best date that can be offered for John's birth is the first quarter of the ninth century. In addition, Adelelm of Laon died as bishop of Laon in 930.57 The manuscript tradition of Aldelmus' works drama— tically illustrates the connections of the Irishmen at Laon.with other centers. Paris, B.N., lat. 12949 is an important corpus of logical works from the end of the ninth century which belonged to Hucbald of St. Amand and passed to the masters of Auxerre. Andre Van de Vyver discovered that Aldelmus' table of computus in this manu- script is also found in another manuscript of the end of the ninth centuny,'Valenciennes, BiblI mun., 174, which also belonged to Hucbald. In fact, the tables in the Paris manuscript appear to have been copied from the Valenciennes manuscript. Hucbald learned from both John and his brother Aldelmus.58 Another work has been attributed to Aldelmus by Van de'Vyver. A table of lunar cycles entitled Cyclus 51Van de Vyver, 71, n. 35, who discovered that Aldelmus worked during the first half of the ninth century also distinguished him from the priest of Laon ordained in 892. Van de Vyver consistently spelled Aldelmus as Aldholmus. 58See above, p.147, n. 50 . IFor Aldelmus' work and the Paris and Valenciennes manuscripts, of. Van de Vyver, 64-71 . 150 aldhelmi de cursu lune per siggg xii secundum graecos appears in three manuscripts. The earliest, significantly, from what we have hypothesized of John's early career, is from Reichenau, KiarlsruheI Aug. 167. But the manu- script was not copied there. It was cepied sometime between 836 and 848 by Irishmen. The mention of St. Quentin in one of the calendars has led scholars to con- clude that the manuscript was copied in northeastern France, specifically at Peronna Scottorum which is only a short distance from St. Quentin.59 It is possible and perhaps even more probable that this manuscript was copied at Laon. According to Professor Bischoff's notes, the Reichenau manuscript is similar to a Laon manuscript copied in Irish pointed minuscule still at Laon, manuscript 26. In addition, somewhat later in the centuny, the body of St. Quentin was brought to Laon as a safeguard against the raids of the Northmen.6o The origin of the Reichenau manuscript can only be determined by further study of the codex itself. For the moment, it is sufficient to conclude that a work by Aldelmus, copied either at Laon or Peronna, found its way to Reichenau. That the Irishmen of Leon were not an isolated group but rather profited from exchanges among compatriots is further indicated by the source of some of the material Martin Scotus included in his 59Cf. Van de vyver, 70-71; Kenney, Sources, pp. 670-671. 6OCf. above, p. 26, n. 53. 151 Greek-Latin glossary. His tractatum de declinationibus (manuscript 444, folios 300v—302v) is also found in a Reichenau manuscript from the mid-ninth century copied in Irish script and owned by an Irish master.61 John Scotus worked primarily at the palace either at Compibgne or Quierzy. His brother, Aldelmus, apparently worked at Laon or Peronna and exerted his greatest in- fluence at St. Amand and Reichenau. Another Irishman, Fergus, links the group at Laon to that surrounding Sedu- lius at Libge. Fergus is praised in a poem by Sedulius as a close friend.62 His name is also found in the margin of a famous ninth century manuscript which also contains the names of other members of Sedulius' group.63 But Fergus was also a member of the Laon group. An eleventh or twelfth century manuscript, apparently copied from an older Reims manuscript, recommends a medicament on the testimonies of Bishop Pardulus of Leon, a certain John familiar with Greek learning, and a grammarian named 64 Fregus. John is undoubtedly John Scotus whose interest 61Cf. G. Goetz, CGL, II, xxxvii; P. Lehmann, "Von den Quellen und Autoritgten irisch-lateinischer Texts," Erforsch des Mittelalters, III, 143-148: Kenney, Sources, pp. 677-573. 520:. MGH, P,L., III, 199, 518. 630f. Kenney, Sources, pp. 559—560 and p.156 , below. 64Avranches Bibliothb ue de la Ville, 235, f. 51v: "Non solum autem, ut superius dictum est, piles delet verum etiam noxium humorum impetum reprimit: que et 152 in medicine is well-attested although hardly studied. A scribe's error has changed Fergus to Fregus. Professor Bischoff discovered additional references to Fergus in two other manuscripts. In a manuscript at Valenciennes, Bibl, mun., 81, probably from St. Amand and copied during the first half of the tenth century, some Greek-Latin glosses are attributed to Magister Ferggs.65 Bischoff also discovered a verse, unfortunately badly obliterated, concerning Fergus in Paris, B.Nu lat. 10307 on the same folio which contains extracts from Martin Scotus' Greek- Latin glossary. This is the manuscript to which the Vatican fragments described by Leonardi belong. The fragments also contain poems by John Scotus. Apparently the uniden- tified master who made a stay at Laon knew both Fergus and John.66 Several lesser known figures may also belong to the frequenter‘Pardulus utebatur episcopus, et Fregus gramma— ticus, qui et dicebant: Quicumque hoc tercio usus fuerit in Martio, non opus ei febrium molestiam timere in anno illo. Greci quoque sapientes, ut audivi a Johanne, hoc maxime utuntur medicamine.” Claudio Leonardi gives the best description of ’ this manuscript, "1 codici di Marziano Capella," Aevum, [XXXIV (1960), 3-4. The manuscript contains various astro- nomical and astrological works as well as two treatises attributed to Gerbert of Aurillac who taught at Reims. Folio 26r contains a geometrical figure with the caption "ISTA ROTUNDA QUADRATA TRIANGULA FORMA. . . ." Above the word Forma, the name Iohannis has been copied. Could this annotated detail be a reference to John Scotus? 65"Das griechische Element. . . ," Mittelalfigaligha Studien, II, 67’ no 109e 66Ibid., n. 107. See also above, p.123. 153 group at Laon. Elias, who became bishop of Angouleme (862—875), is described as a student of John Scotus and master of Heiric of Auxerre by the tenth century genealogist, Gausbert. Gausbert should only be used as a general frame of reference.67 It is doubtful that one can make Elias a master at Laon on the strength of Gausbert's vague list. Duncaht, an Irishman who taught at St. Remi's in Reims, perhaps also belonged to the group at Laon.68 Nothing else is known about Duncaht except that he com- mented on Martianus Capella's work at St. Remi. A more interesting figure is that of Cathasach. His name occurs at Laon on an Irish flyleaf attached to the continental manuscript of Bede's Egpositio in libro Salomogis, manuscript 55. The flyleaves in Irish script have not been identified. They contain a grammar and a dialogue between a student and a master.69 The texts bear glosses in Old Irish.70 One of the marginal notes, however, is a Latin poem lamenting the death of a Cathasach: 67Cf. Appendix E. Gausbert makes Helias the master of Heiric of Auxerre but this is very doubtful. Heiric's relationship with the school of Leon is discussed below, PP. 209-2190 68See above, p.138, :1. 21 . I would like to thank the British Museum for providing me with photographs of the leaf which carries the note by Duncaht. The script is continental but bears strong Irish traits. I do not recognize it in any Laon manuscripts. 69Kenney', Sources, p. 680. 70Published by W. Stokes, "Old-Irish Glosses at Laon,” Revue celtigue, XXIX.(1908), 269-270. 154 gloria quid mundi felix quid pompave turbae dum cathasach potuit non sortem evadere mortis nam nos deseruit sapiens prudensque magister atque pius iuvenis castus custosque decorus. Efforts to identify Cathasach have centered on five men of that name who lived in Ireland during the ninth century. 0f the five, Kuno Meyer argued in 1914 that only the Cathusach mentioned in the Annals of Ulster for 897 ful- fills the description of the Cathasach in the Laon verses. The last line of the eulogy in the Laon fragment describes Cathasach as "a pious, dutiful youth, a decorous superior." The notice in the Annals of Ulster mentions that "Cathu— sach mac Fergusa, tanase abbot of Ard-Macha, a pious young man, died."72 Kenney characterized Meyer's identification as ”purely a guess." I am inclined to believe that it is an erroneous guess at that. First of all, there is no evidence that there were any Irishmen at Laon late in the ninth century or early in the tenth century who might have preserved the memory of Cathusach. Neither Laon's manuscripts nor the school itself exhibit any Irish in- fluence during this period. It was during this period that Laon's Irish manuscripts, illegible to most 71Stokes, ibid., knew the first two verses. K. Meyer found the concluding two verses on the verse of the leaf with the verses published by Stokes, cf. "Uber eine Handschrift von Laon," Sitzun berichte der ' kfinglich-Preussichen.Akademie der WIssenscHaTten, (1914), 72 . ' ‘7 ‘ . . Ibid. Kenney, Sources, p. 680, explains that a "tanase abbot" is "the person having the right of succession to the abbacy." 155 continental readers, were dismembered and used as flyb leaves in continental manuscripts. The fragments contained in manuscript 55 can only be attributed to the first gener- ation of Leon masters during the third quarter of the ninth century. Meyer's identification evaporates when one looks more closely at the closing verse of the Laon fragment. Cathusach of the Annals of Ulster was undoubt- edly a young man when he died. But was the Cathasach of Laon? I do not believe that the last two lines of the Laon fragment ("For he has forsaken us, the wise and learned master, the dutiful, virtuous youth, the decorous superior”) lead to that conclusion. Rather, the eulogy seems to say that as a master, he was wise and learned, as a youth, he was dutiful and virtuous, and, as a super- igg, he was decorous. He was all these things during his life, not necessarily at the point of his death. It is difficult to imagine that a youth would simultaneously be a wise and learned master and a superior. Whitley Stokes, in 1908, thought that Cathasach might be the abbot of Armagh who died in 856.73 It was impossible for him, however, to decide among this Cathasach and four others mentioned in Irish sources. Stokes, like Meyer and even Kenney, has assumed that Cathasach died in Ireland and that his eulogy was written in Ireland. The marginal note, of course, could have been added to the fragments on the continent. The fact that the fragments 731n the article cited above, p. 153, n. 70. 156 are at Laon suggests that Cathasach was an Irishman on the continent and that he either belonged to the group at Laon or had some contact with it. To identify him, it is only necessary to consult that ”Who's Who" of Irish scholars on the continent during the ninth century, Codex Bernensis 363.74. This important and famous manuscript was copied in Irish script during the last quarter of the ninth century. It contains various educational manuals, among them Servins' Vergilian com- mentary, the Rhetoric of Chirius Fortunatianus, the Dia— lectic and Rhetoric of St. Augustine, Horace's poems pre- faced by’his|zitg, and extracts from Ovid and Priscian. The manuscript is especially interesting for its marginalia which make numerous references to various ninth century figures.75 Sedulius is mentioned more than 200 times. John Scotus is also frequently mentioned in marginal notes. Less important figures, such as Fergus,occur less frequently. In addition to these three Irishmen there are: Dubthach, Suadbar, Comgan, Dungal, Colgu, Cormac, Mace Longain, Mac Ciallain, Taircheltach, Robartaich, Brigit (the saint), 74Cf. Kenney, Sources, pp. 559-560. The manuscript has been published in a facsimile edition: Codices Graeci et Latini! t, II: Codex Bernensis 263 (Leiden: SI}- 0 , e 75Traube was the first to provide a list of the names which appear in the margins, of. "O Roma nobilis. TED. 350-351. The margins also refer to continental figures: Gottschalk,.Agano (bisho ‘of Bergamo, 837-8677), Queen Angelberga (wife of Louis II , Hincmar (of Laon or Reims?), Adventius (bishop of Metz, 855-875), and Ratramnus of Corbie. 157 . and Cathasach. Cathasach is again mentioned with Sedulius, Dubthach, and Dongus in a St. Gall manuscript which also apparently issued from the "circle" of Sedulius.76 Cathasach is even more obscure than Fergus. There is no reference to any work by Cathasach or to the conp tent of his teaching. The important point, however, is that he is another example of the rapport between the group at Laon and Irishmen elsewhere on the continent. The terminology used to describe these groups, "colony“, "circle”, is highly misleading. It obscures the dynamism of intellectual life in the ninth century, a dynamism which accounts for Laon's sudden emergence from obscurity in the first half of the ninth century to become a leading educational center during the third quarter of the century. There were undoubtedly other Irishmen at Laon whose names have been lost. Some copied an entire manuscript in Irish script and filled its margins with banalities in Old Irish perhaps to escape the reprobation of a con- 77 tinental scriptorium head. Others wrote a poem in 76$ ‘ t Gall Stiftsbibliothek, 48. or. Kenney, Sources, p. 553. 7“(Manuscript 26 contains Cassiodorus' commentaries on the Psalms. Kuno Meyer translated the Old Irish glosses into German, cf. "Neu aufgefundene altirische Glossen,” Zeitschrift ffir celtische Philolo ie, VIII (1912), 175-177. Some of {He IrisE gIosses are: "Today is cold. That's natural, it's winter:" "The light of the candle is not bright;" "It's time for us to begin to do something:" "God bless my hand today!" 158 . honor of St. Benedicta.78 Collectively, their presence at Laon still survives in the name of a street just behind the church of St. Martin. The modern "Rue des Echos" is a corruption of the "Rue des Escots," or "street of the Scots."79 John Scotus, in one of his poems copied by the master who owned Paris, B.N., lat. 10307, preserved some of the camaraderie of the Irish "exiles" who grouped together in a network of monasteries and cathedral towns throughout Europe.80 Laon was an important element in this network. The Irish scholars at Laon received and spread influence throughout northern France and the valley of the Rhine. Perrona Scottorum, St. Amand, Reichenau, Schflttern, Reims, St. Gall, and, of course, the palace school were acquainted with the Irishmen from Laon. The men we ascribed to Laon in this chapter moved in and out of the city. Sometimes their names only survive on a frag- ment of parchment. Laon did, however, have an "Irishman 78The metrical Lives of Saints Cassian, Benedicta, and Quentin were written at Leon. The author of the Life of St. Benedicta drew heavily on.Alcimius Avitus' poems. The reading of one such borrowing from.Avitus is only found in Laon's copies of his works, manuscripts 273 and 279. The Lives seem to have been written by a continental author. 'The Eife of Benedicta, however, was copied by an Irishman, cf. the remarks of'von Winterfeld, LEE, 23L" IV, 178-181, and Manitius, I, 703-704. 79I heard this, somewhat skeptically, at Laon. Hows ever, Bernhard Bischoff repeats it in his "11 Monachesimo Irlandese nei suei rapporti col continente," Mittelalter— liche Studien, I, 203. 80Cf. Leonardi, "Nuove voci poetiche," 148: "Bacchus abest siccis Scottorum faucibus estu/ Et ventres nostros morbida replet aqua." 159 in residence" who presided over the school at Laon during his entire active career. He more than anyone else was the school of Leon during the third quarter of the ninth century. Kenney called Martin Scotus, after John Scotus, the most important Irishman in Charles the Bald's kingdom. "0f him, however," Kenney lamented, "we know very little."81 Fortunately, Martin's manuscripts tell us much more about the man and about the circumstances which favored the work of the Irishmen at Laon. 81Sources, p. 589. CHAPTER EIGHT MARTIN SCOTUS, MAGISTER LAUDUNENSIS, 819-875 Martin Scotus has long lived in the shadow of his famous compatriot, John Scotus. Martin's chief claim to fame has been his connection with Laon's Greek-Latin glossary which included a study of John's Greek poems as a teaching device. More recently, Martin, like John, has also been credited with a commentary on Martianus Capella's 1 However, by and large, De Nuptiis Philologiae et Mercurii. Kenney's statement that little is known of Martin still holds true. Martin seems not to have aroused any controversy during his life and thus his memory has not been preserved in polemic as John's has. Furthermore, Martin did not possess John's brilliant philosophic mind nor did he pro- duce strikingly original work. Martin was a typical Carol- ingian master. He possessed some expertise in Greek, but his chief proficiency lay in the transmission of knowledge, that is, in teaching. While John's role as a teacher is largely conjectural, there is no doubt that teaching was the focus of Martin's career. Martin, not John, is at the center of the school of Laon. 1Cf. J. G. Préaux, "Le commentaire de Martin de Laon sur l'oeuvre de Martianus Capella," 437-459. 160 161 The key to any study of Martin still lies in his manuscripts. Even his commentary on the De Nuptiis Philologiae et Mercurii, except for a few fragments, re- mains in manuscript form.2 The first consideration, then, should be the identification of his manuscripts. Only one codex bears Martin's name. On folio 296v of manuscript 444 beneath a glossary there is the note, "Martin the Greek cepied these letters."3 Some Greek poems in the same manuscript carry the subscription, "The beautiful poems of Mhrtin the teacher."4 The first note is extremely im- portant because it identifies Martin's script. The glos- sary, the poems, in fact, most of the grammatical section of the Greek-Latin glossary have been copied by the same hand.5 The hand of the subscriptions, while of the general character of the text of the manuscript, seems to be by a slightly different one. The script attributed to Martin in manuscript 444 is also found in at least twenty additional 2Fragments of the commentary Préaux identified as Martin's were published under Dunchad's name by C. E. Lutz in 1944, of. p. 121,n.s19 above. For the manuscripts of Martin's commentary see C. Leonardi, "I codici. . . ," nos. 20, 60, 83, 84, 89, 92, 131, 134, 144, 161, 208, 210, 220. 3 4Folio 297v (cf. Plate VI). Both subscriptions were transcribed by Traube, MGHI P.L., III, 696-697. See Plate V, bottom right column. 5In the grammatical section of the glossary, ff. 276r-318v, Martin copied everything except ff. 300r- 302v. Except for the ex-dono of Bernard and Adelelm, Martin was also responsisle for the material on ff. 1r- 4v. Among these notes is an interesting, anonymous poem (cf. MGH P L , III, 692-693) entitled Versus de octo vi- tiis $51.5 probably should be credited to Martin. 162 manuscripts.6 The notes in these manuscripts are not as extensive as those in manuscript 444. They are, for the most part, simply marginal notations. However, these notes confirm what the subscriptions in manuscript 444 imply: that the texts there were not copied by a scribe but by a master, Martin, who also left specimens of his script in scholarly notes throughout Laon's manuscripts. The principal hand of the Annales Laudunenses et sangti Vincenti Mettensis Breves is Martin's.7 In his con- tribution to the Annales, Martin copied historical infor- mation of a general nature. It seems that he copied the Annalgs S, Columbae Senonensis for the details of events between 708 and 840.8 He apparently copied the same de- tails into the manuscript from which the Annales S. Maximig; 9 Tgevirensis were published. The manuscript of the Laon 6I believe that Martin's script can be seen in the following manuscripts at Laon: 24, 37, 38, 50, 67, 86, 92, 265, 273, 298, 299, 319, 336, 420, 424, 444, 447, 464, 468, 469. Abbe Merlette has pointed out Martin's script to me in two manuscripts now at the Bibliotheque Nationals in Paris: lat. 2024 and let. 12964. Martin also wrote in Phillipps 1820 which is presently conserved in the Deutsche S aa sbibliothek in Berlin. Perhaps he also annotated the manuscript which contains the Annales sancti Maximini Trezigensis (see below, n. 9). 7That is, the "primus manus" designated by Holder- Egger in his edition of the épnales MGH Scr. XV 1293- 1295. Cf. Plate I, upper lef margin’: PIate II,’ top, margin. 8This is according to Holder-Egger, ibid., 1293. 9This manuscript was also at Laon during the ninth century (see below, p. 201 ). In the nineteenth century, it belonged to the German publicist, Joseph Gorres. In 1919, it was in the private collection of Freiherr von Cramer- Klett of Hohenaschau (of. L. Traube, "Bibliotheca Goerresiana," Vo lesun en und Abh ndlun en, III, 284, and, F. Schillmann, . ~ 163 Annales, Phillipp§, 1830, preserves what is perhaps the latest specimen of Martin's script, for it is his hand which copied the following note published by Holder- Egger, "Sunt nunc ab incarnatione domini usque ad pre- sentem annum,anni dccclxxiiii. Ab initio autem mundi us- que ad presentem annum, sunt anni iii? dcccxxvi." Mar- tin copied the Laon Annales just before his death in 875. His script, at age fifty-five, is clear, steady and vigorous. Martin habitually wrote in a continental hand. His script is generally vertical, his letters large and thick. The plates which accompany this study will hopefully lead to the identification of additional specimens of Martin's script.10 Some traits should be pointed out. Martin's §,is distinctive. The first di- agonal stroke, from the left to the right, is a straight, usually thick, line. The second stroke, from the left to the right, is thinner. Unlike the §fs of other copyists, this second stroke terminates in a slight curve to the right. Most end on a flourish to the left.“ His g is 'z--:i cui: der lzteinischen Ha-ds hrif en der oreussischen Staa sbiblio -ek zu Be lin, 3te Bd.: Die Garreshandschrift- gg’=erlin: Behrend, 191‘ ,pp. 58). The manuscript is presently in the possession of Mr. Harrison Horblit of Ridgefield, Connecticut, U.S.A. (Information graciously communicated by Dr. Dressler, Munich, Bayerische Staats- bibliothek, letter, 7 December 1970). I hope to compare the script of Phillippg 1820 with this manuscript soon. '00:. Plates 1, II, IV, V, VI, VIII, IX, x, xx, XII. 11E.g., Plates IV (middle right column: exodo) and XI (1. 10: 2;) for Martin's "x". Cf. Plates VIII (1. 19: ion: rex) and XIII (l. 12: 12;) for the usual form of tie lettzr. 164 also characteristic. When he is careless, the lower 100p of the g,is a slightly curved line, much like the lower portion of an Irishg.12 Generally, however, Martin corrected this by the addition of a second stroke, a very rounded curve, to the end of the lower portion of the 3, Sometimes this procedure is quite noticeable but usually his two-step construction of the lower loop of the g,cannot be detected. The effect is of a carefully formed, rounded loop which contrasts markedly with the closed lower loops of some gfs and the more flamboyant open flourishes in the lower portions of other g's.13 It might also be noted that the diagonal stroke in Martin's fi,usually intercepts the second vertical stroke about a third of the way from the bottom of the second vertical.14 His script bears some insular traits although not as many as might be expected. He seems to have mastered Gentinental script thoroughly. Perhaps he came to the continent while quite young. He uses some Irish abbreviations, especially the seven-shaped symbol for gt_and the two vertical lines intercepted by a slightly diagonal slash for gnim.15 Occasionally, the stem of a letter, such as 12E.8., Plate VII (bottom margin: generapione; gugggiantur: prestrigigg: prestringendo). 13Cf. Plate IV for Martin's hastily made gfs and Plate XII for more careful versions. Plates VII and VIII present the usual open gfs of the Laon-Reims region. 14Cf. Plate IV (upper left and right corners: IE). '50:. Plate x1 (11. 6-7, 9). 165 the g'or 3, will descend below the line in the Irish fashion.16 Occasionally,when Martin is rushed or careless, his script takes on some of the relatively "nervous" or "jumpy" characteristics of Irish script. Flourishes, especially, the last stroke on an 2, the cross-bar of a t, the end-stroke of an E, the abbreviation bar, or the end stroke of the "2" symbol for -tur, become elongated and wispy.17 Martin's script would be the perfect starting point for a paleographical study of the unique script found in northern France during the second half of the ninth century - continental script with insular symptoms. Martin may have had a hand in the fashioning of this blend of insular and continental script. He directed the principal copyist of manuscript 468 who, as we have noted, exhibits insular traits in his script.18 Perhaps during this scribe's earlier formation he learned his art from Martin himself. The importance of Martin's script for our present purposes, however, lies in another direction. We can learn much more than has hitherto been brought to light about Martin from what he wrote and, sometimes, from what particular manuscripts he annotated. 16Cf. Plate IV (bottom right column: Den or 0 io) and Plate X (bottom right column: litteris). 17Cf. Plate IV (entire right column) and Plate X (bottom half of leaf). 18Cf. above, pp. 107-108. 166 In one respect, more is known of Martin than of John Scotus. The second hand which contributed to the Laon Annales, which I provisionally attribute to Manno of Laon, recorded Martin's birth date and date of death: 819-875. These dates are close to the best dates proposed for John Scotus. We may regard the two Irishmen, then, as contemporaries although Martin is sometimes erroneously de- scribed as John's student or disciple.19 Martin's early intellectual formation, nevertheless, is as obscure as John's. We can begin to illuminate it with the help of Martin's manuscripts. On folio 3r of manuscript 444, Martin copied an anonymous letter which has been published twice although somewhat carelessly.20 The identities of the author and the recipient of the letter have been hidden by the use of initials in the salutation of the letter: "Dilectissimo abbati S. M. fidissimus amicus veram in Christo salutem. Lectis epistolae vestrae litteris '90:. M. L. w. Laistner, "The Revival of Greek in Western Europe in the Carolingian Age," Histogy, IX (1924), 180. 20Cf. Du Cange, Glos ari ediae et infimae latini- tatis (7 vols.) Paris: Firmin Didot, 1840), I, 27; and, B. e Montfaucon, Paleo a hia Graeca (Paris: Guerin, Bau- dot, Robustel, 1708), p. 249. Abba Merlette, who was the first to propose the identification I present here, pro- mises a modern edition of the letter with a commentary (letter, 1 June 1970). In his paper, "Ecoles et biblio- tthues d Laon de la fin de l'antiquité 5 la naissance des universités," Abbe Merlette argued that the letter was written between 858 and 862 - the earliest possible date the manuscript could have been cepied and the probable date of the death of the letter'srecipient. I propose an earlier date for the letter and suggest the circumstance which prompted it. 167 amantissime abba. . . ." The initials, "S. M.", have been taken to represent the monastery of "Sancta Maria 21 at Laon." But, as we have already noted, Notre-Dame- la-Profonde was a monastery for women whose abbesses in the ninth century were all Carolingian queens or noble- women.22 Du Cange took the initials to refer to Smarag- 23 dus, abbot of St. Mihiel around 820. We need not pause long over this gratuitous attempt at identification. Smaragdus' dates are too early to have anything to do with this manuscript. There is also nothing which links him with Laon or with the study of Greek there. Miller, on the other hand, came closer to the mark when he sug- gested, without further proof, that the letter was by 24 Martin. The fact that it is cepied in Martin's hand suggests as much. The text of the letter unravels the mystery: I have read your letter, most beloved abbot, in which you wanted to consult me about some small problems and in which you expressed the desire to apply your talents, not to the tumult of worldly affairs, but to the more praiseworthy meditation of Scripture. It is for this reason that I, moved by piety, should explain the answers to your questions - rather, that Eb, through me, deigns to comment on them, in Whom are all the "treasures of wisdom and of hidden 21Traube, "O Roma nobilis. . . ," 362; and, Kenney, Sources, p. 90. 22 23 24"Glossaire grec-latin de la bibliotheque de Laon," 13. Cfe above, PP. 31-32e See p. 166, n. 20, above. 168 knowledge," "Who opens and no man closes, Who closes and no man opens," for His is the "splen- dor of an eternal light and ofea mirror without stain."25 Accept, therefore, the solutions to your questions which we have studiously drawn from Greek sources and copied for you, collect- ing them, witggut exception from the more valid explanations. The subject of the letter is not manuscript 444, the Greek-Latin glossary, which would have been an inap- propriate response to "quibusdam quaestiunculis."27 Rather, the letter is a copy of the original. This or- iginal must have been composed sometime before the 25The Scriptural quotations are from Colossians, 2: 3, Apocalypse, 3: 7, and Wisdom, 7: 26, respectively. The theme expressed in these citations reflects Martin's attitude toward learning. Significantly, he found the first citation in Origen's ninth homily on Numbers (Mpg, XII, 6310) and marked the passage in ms. 298, f. 36v, "de grammatica": . ". . . et quod in sermonibus legis, qui viles et in contemptu habentur pro eo quod nulla arte grammatica expoliti videntur, reconditus sit thesaurus sapientiae et scientiae Dei: ita ut merito dici possit, quod in ipsis sint thesauri sapientiae, et sapientiae Dei absconditi." 26Cf. Plate IX for a reproduction of the text. "Dilectissimo abbati S. M. fidissimus amicus veram in christo salutem. Lectis epistolae vestrae lit- teris, amantissime abba, per quas me super quibus- dam questiunculis consulere voluisti, animadverti diligentiam efficacis ingenii vestri nequaquam rerum temporalium tumultibus succumbere, sed scriptuarum meditationibus laudabiliter in- haerere. Atque idcirco dignum est ut pie puls- anti aperiam, immo ipse per me pandere dignetur, in quo sunt omnes thesauri sapientiae et scientiae absconditi, qui aperit, et nemo claudit, claudit et nemo aperit, splendor est enim lucis aeternae, et speculum sine macula. Accipite igitur {Pan-Kama vestrarum solutiones, et vobis legendas sine prae- iudicig altioris forte interpretationis transcrip- simus. 27Du Cange, Montfaucon, Traube, and Kenney (cf. p.166, n. 20: p. 167) have assumed as much. 169 manufacture of the glossary in which it was placed, that is, sometime before the early 860's.28 This letter, copied by Martin into his manuscript, strongly suggests that it was ha who was asked to solve some Greek problems by the unknown abbot. The Latin cases in the salutation of the letter, in fact, refer to two persons, not one: "Dilectissimo abbati S. M. fidissimus amicus. . . ." All the evidence points to the conclusion that M‘is Martin and that the salu- tation should be read as follows: "To the most be- loved abbot S, Martin, most faithful friend, truly in Christ, greetings." It is apparent that Abbot S knew some Greek but was unsure of the language. He lived sometime before the 860's when the letter was copied into manuscript 444. He was also active in affairs of state, but would much rather have devoted his time to study. We know now that this abbot had contacts at Laon. The only Carol— ingian abbot who fits this description is Lupus of Ferriéres, or Servatus Lupus as he was also known.29 28The date of manufacture of the glossary is discussed below, pp.104-107. 29Lupus never used his surname in the salutations of his extant letters although in one he made a play of words on it: ". . . quod te mihi seravit, quo servato ipse quoque servatus sum," Qgrzgspgndangg, I, 188. One of his letters is entitled ,ihid., II, 126. Several ninth century manu- scripts refer to Lupus as Servatus Lupus, cf. MGH, 22., IV, 1: and, Manitius, I, 484. 170 The theme of the interference to his studies caused by his involvement in worldly affairs is found through- out Lupus' letters. Another recurring theme is Lupus' quest for knowledge, either in the form of better manu- scripts or the clarification of difficult points. We have already seen that Lupua,who died around 863, was in contact with Pardulus of Laon several times in the 850's.30 He also had a smattering of Greek, but was clearly only a student of the language. In 836, he asked Einhard to explain the obscurities of certain 31 The next year, he explained the Greek nouns to him. pronunciation of the word blasphemus to his friend, Altuin, using information which he received from a Greek and checked with Einhard.32 More than ten years later, in 849 or 850, Lupus was still unsure of his Greek. This time, Gottschalk of Orbais asked him for the meanings of some Greek words. In his reply, Lupus temporized because, as he put it, he was not sure of the meanings and was too overwhelmed by affairs at the moment to search for the precise meanings among the Greek authorities as he should.33 3O 31"Abdita in lege et maxime graeca nomina, et alia ex Servio item graeca, quae initio vobis direxi saltem nunc utinam gravemini explanare," Correspondance, I, 50. 32"Itaque Graecus quidam Graecos 'blasphemus' dicere correpta paenultima a mihi constater asseruit et id ipsum Einhardus noster astruxit," ibid., pp. 64-66. See above,p. 37. 33Ibid., II, 54: "Verborum verq,quorum flagitasti rationem, quia nec 171 The sentiments expressed in this letter so closely re- semble the terms of Martin's letter (Lupus' preoccupation with "rerum temporalium tumultibusg" Martin's closing assurance that he had consulted the best Greek sources) that their relationship would seem to be much more than coincidental. After he received the request from Gottschalk, Lupus postponed his reply and wrote, in the meanwhile, to Martin for the solution to Gottschalk's questions.34 No mention of Martin or of the other Laon masters occurs in Lupus' correspondence. Neither do we have Lupus' reply to Gottschalk's questions if indeed he did eventually make one. The unique manuscript of Lupus' letters, Paris, B,N,, lat, 2858, was compiled shortly af- ter his death and was intended for use in epistolary instruction.35 This collection does not represent all of 36 Lupus' correspondence. Much has doubtless been lost or plenaria statim omnium occurrit et eam indagare maximae causarum moles, quibus assidue obruor, inhibuerunt, in aliud tempus distuli, quamquam non sim nescius graecorum sermonum proprietates a Graecis potius expectandas." 34The use of the word.gng§tigngg;;§ by Martin in his letter could be entirely his own. It appears in one of his glosses in ms. 444: "HI’OBAHMR id est questio vel propositio; unum et HPOBAHMLTION , id est, questiun- cula (f. 298v). It was also a favorite word of Lupus' which he got from Cicero's De oratore. Martin could be recalling Lupus' letter to him with this word. Cf. C. H. Beeson, "The Authorship of 'Quid sit ceroma '" in Studies in Honor of EI K, Rand, p. 6. Cf. Plate XI 1. 2). 350i. ggrrgspongancg, I, xiv-xvii for Levillain's description of the manuscript. 36 Five of the letters in Levillain's edition are not from the collection in the Paris manuscript but have 172 remains to be discovered. Thus, the letter in manuscript 444 provides valuable evidence for the intellectual acti— vity of the Carolingian humanist. It also affords us a rare index of Martin Scotus' influence. Compiler of what Professor Bischoff has called the Thesaurus linguae Grae- 223 of the ninth century, Martin was also the authority for Greek matters in northern France. Curiously, Lupus' letter came to Martin about the same time that Pardulus' letter came to John Scotus. The first mention of both Irishmen thus occurs almost exactly at mid-century. Martin, again like John, however, met have been on the continent for a considerable period for his expertise in Greek to reach Lupus' ears. Perhaps the "Greek" Lupus consulted in 837 was Martin. Irishmen learned in Greek were sometimes referred to as "Greeks." The subscription in manuscript 444 so describes Martin.37 been found in other manuscripts. Another letter, not in- cluded in Levillain's edition, has been attributed to Lupus by C. H. Beeson, in the article noted above,p. 171, He 34e 37For the subscription see above, p.161 and Plate V} .M. L. W. Laistner in "A.Ninth—Century Commentary on the Gospel According to Matthew," Harvard Theological Review, XX (1927), 143, cited the Euphemium graecum mentioned by Christian of Stavelot as an Irishman. He also thought that the "Graecus uidam" Lupus of Ferribres consulted was also an IrisHEan iTHou ht and Letters, p. 241). Traube, on the other hand, thougfit Both "Greeks" actually were Greeks, "O Roma nobilis," 354, n. 2. With— out other sources, as there are for Martin Scotus, it is impossible to decide how the phrases would be understood. It is possible that Lupus' Greek might be Martin but given.Martin's age at the time of Lupus' letter in 837, it seems improbable that Martin would have been expert enough in Greek to be known as a Greek. 173 It is certain that Martin received his education in Greek on the continent rather than in Ireland. His manu— script 444 is the fundamental witness to his formation in Greek. The glossary was not compiled by Martin. It belongs to the so—called Cyrillus family of Greek glos- saries, the oldest representative of which is a manuscript from the eighth century now in the British Museum (Harley, 5792). This manuscript was copied either in France or Italy. Some Merovingian probatione pennae on its last leaf definitely place it in Gaul sometime during its exis- tence. The Leon glossary is related to this older manu- script through an unknown intermediary.38 We can learn something of this intermediary from which Martin's manuscript 444 was copied and Martin's education in Greek from manuscript 444 itself. The glossary was copied by at least three continental hands. At the bottom of folios 194v, 202v, and 244v, the last leaves of the twenty-second, twentyathird, and twenty-eighth gatherings respectively, the following words appear along— side the usual quire signatures: fichatmathkin, 3232;- fichchit, and tresfichet. These words, copied like the text by continental scribes, are Old Irish. They have 38Cf. W. M. Lindsay, "The Cyrillus Glossary and Others," The Classical Review, XXXI (1917), 188-193; Goetz, C. . ., , xx-xxvi. For the date and origin of Harley 5752'; cf. CLA, II, 25 (no. 203). This manuscript was owned by NichBTEs of Cusa and was bought by Robert Harley in 1723 or 1724. 174 been deciphered as numerals used as quire signatures.39 However, these Old Irish numerals do not correspond to the place they are found in manuscript 444. Fichatmathkin, for example, means "the twentieth gathering," but is found instead at the end of the twenty-second: ‘kiggp- fichchit refers to the twenty-fifth gathering but is placed after the twenty-third in manuscript 444. The explan- ation for this confusion is easily furnished. The arche- type for manuscript 444, the lost intermediary between it and Harley 5792, was copied by Irishmen who numbered the gatherings in their native language. When the continental scribes copied manuscript 444 from this archetype, they slavishly cepied the Old Irish words ignorant of the fact that they did not correspond to the gatherings in the new manuscript.40 The Old Irish quire signatures will later allow us to identify Martin's own contributions to the codex. Their importance here is that they point not only to an Irish source for Martin's knowledge of Greek but also to Irishmen working on the continent. 391Miller's discussion of these signatures (8-9) is not helpful. See instead, J. Vendryes, "Les mots vieil-irlandais du manuscrit de Leon, " Revue celti ue, XXV (1904), 377-381. At ff. 264v and 27 v, he eps of' some words can be seen at the bottom edge of the leaves. The words, cut away by the modern binder, were also Irish quire signatures. OCf. J. Vendryes, 379; and, Whitley Stokes, A Supplement to "Thesaurus Paleohibernicus" (Halle a. S: emeyer, , Pe 175 Where was Martin educated? Part of the material he added to the grammatical section of manuscript 444 is from an Irish manuscript of the mid-ninth century from 41 The Vergil handbook, manuscript 468, contains Reichenau. an extract from what I think is Donatus' lost Vergilian commentary. During the ninth century, this commentary was known to be at LiBge during the time of Sedulius.42 Another manuscript also points in the direction of the Rhine valley. Laon's copy of Isidore of Seville's Eiymg- ‘lggig, manuscript 447, contains marginal notes by the hand 43 The manu- of Probus, an Irishman who worked at Mainz. script also contains notes by Martin which indicates that it came to Martin shortly after Probus owned it. Thus, it would not be surprising if eventually some trace of Martin's handwriting is found in a manuscript from Lihge, Reichenau, Mainz or some other Irish center in the Rhine valley. Perhaps the M237 who appears in the margins of a manuscript from the circle of Sedulius Scotus is neither a Marcus nor Martianus Capella but Martin.44 For the present, we can only conclude that Martin received his education on the continent, among Irishmen, and probably among a 41 420f. my forthcoming study of manuscript 468 in Le Moyen Age. 43For Probus, friend of Lupus of Ferrihres,and Wala- frid Strabo who died in 859, cf. Kenney, p. 551. 44 Cf. above, p.151. Cf. Traube, "0 Roma nobilis," 351: Kenney, p. 559. 176 group situated somewhere in the Rhine valley. If the date we assign to the letter to Lupus of Ferritres in manuscript 444, the early 850's, is correct, Martin must have been at Laon from at least the mid-840's. There is also some evidence that Martin like John Scotus had contacts at Charles the Bald's palace. In one of his manuscripts he attributed one of his books to the gift of a certain Fulbertus.45 Now, there is no record of a Fulbertus at Laon during the ninth century but there was one at the palace who was a deacon and a chanter there. In addition, this Fulbertus possessed preperty "in page Laudunensi." In 855, according to a charter granted by Charles the Bald, Fulbertus exchanged this preperty for five manses and their serfs at Confavreux—en-Orceois, on the Ourcq river.46 Nine years later, in another charter, Charles confirmed Fulbertus' donation of this property to the monastery of Saint-Crépin-le-Grand. In the second charter, Fulbertus is no longer described as a chanter in the palace.47 This would seem to indicate that he left 45Cf. above, p.78 : "Sic enim inveni in libro quem dedit mihi fulbertus." 46Cf. Recueil des actes de Charles II le Chauve, roi de France, I, 453-455 (no. 172: 11 JuIy’855; given at tHe paIace at Verberie). Fulbertus is described as "quidam diaconus, sacri palatii nostri cantor, Fulbertus nomine. . . ," (ibid., 454, l. 15). His preperty in the Laonnais consisted of two manses at Courcelles and one manse at Bruyeres. 47Ibid., II, 109—111 (no. 271: 26 July 864; given at St. Medard in Soissons). Fulbertus is described as 177 the palace and the area of Laon when he gave up his lands there. In that case, he probably knew Martin during the early 850's although it is quite possible that they main- tained contact during the 860's. During the quarter century that Martin was at Laon, he carefully built Laon's library by procuring copies of Origen's works, the Vergil manual, and the Greek—Latin glossary. He copied some of his own material and care- fully supervised the copying of other manuscripts. As a scholar and teacher, his manuscripts and extant works indicate that he ranged over the arts, Greek, and medi— cine. In addition to his academic life, Martin was also deeply involved in the spiritual life of the diocese. Martin is usually described as a monk.48 Actually, there is no proof for this other than the unwarranted assumption that all learned ninth century men must have been monks. If Martin were a cleric, he was undoubtedly a canon in the cathedral chapter at Laon. His students were cathedral canons and his books passed to cathedral canons. Furthermore, he closely read Laon's copy of the De institutione canonicorum (manuscript 336) which issued ". . . dilectus nobis diaconus noster Fulbertus nomine . . . ," (ibid., 110, l. 17). 48Cf. M. L. W. Laistner, "Notes on Greek from the Lectures of a Ninth Century Monastery Teacher," Bulletin of the John R lands Libra , VII (1923), 421-456; "The RevivaI of Greek in Western Europe in the Carolingian Age," Histor , IX (1924), 181; W. M. Lindsay, "Etyma LatinaIF'ISEXClassical Review, XXXI (1917), 128. 178 from the Council of Aix-la-Chapelle in 816. His marginal comments are among the most interesting and detailed notes he left in Laon's manuscripts. Loafing through this manu- script, one receives the impression that Martin was in a position to enact or enforce the kind of canonical life recommended by the Council of Aix and presented in this manuscript. His notes reveal him as a reformer interested in the strict observance of the canonical hours. Chapter thirtybsix of the Council, which argues that priests are responsible for the sins of the people, particularly attracted Martin's attention.49 The chapter pointed to the example of Elias the priest who was condemned for the sins of his sons. In the margin, Martin noted "De heli 50 His concern sacerdote qui non corripuit filios suos." for discipline is evident in another passage of the same chapter which he paraphrased with the marginal comment "De his qui blando verbo non corriguntur." If kind words did not produce the desired result, Martin agreed with the Council of Aix that "Necesse est up pro multorum salvatio 51 Only infirm canons were allowed to 52 unus condemnetur." bring walking-sticks into choir, Martin noted. 49 5OFoIio 32v“. 51Both notes at f. 33ra. 52Folio 69v: "Non.baculos in choro tenere debent nisi infirmi." This note is a re es of chapter 131 of the Council, Mansi, ibid., 257-533. 179 Furthermore, canons were not allowed to leave the cloister and roam about the fields and streets without permission.53 Martin's interest in the regulation of canonical life is not merely academic but programmatic. He was deeply involved in the reformation of the chapter at Laon. During Hincmar of Laon's pontificate, Martin's name is absent from the correspondence Hincmar exchanged with his uncle. The only canons'names who do appear are the trusted messengers or allies of both Hincmars. During this period, one dean, Angelrannus, and two provosts, 54 If Heddo (or Hitto) and Bertharius are known at Laon. either of these men were in office when Hincmar was deposed at the Council of Douzy, it is likely that they were re— placed also. Charles the Bald and Hincmar of Reims made sure that the successor to Hincmar of Laon was a man of religious scruples when they selected Hedenulf, who pre- sided over Charles' new monastery at Compiégne to become bishOp of Laon in 876. But before his election, there was a four year period when Laon was without a pastor. This hiatus coupled with the confusion of Hincmar of Laon's last years as bishop when the diocese was under excommuni- 55 w cation and the cathedral chapter apparently split, as 53Folio 71v (chapter 134, ibid., 239): "Claustris sine licentia non debet exierit canonicus. In plateis et biviis non debet morari." S4Cf. above, p.19. 55According to Hincmar of Reims, the clerics of Leon presented him with a petition protesting the tyranny of Hincmar of Laon, cf. Opusculum LV Capitulorum, 290, 397. 180 undoubtedly deleterious for canonical life. Although there are no explicit sources for the various stages of Martin's career, he could well have been delegated to restore proper canonical observances at Laon during the last years of his life. His notes in manuscript 336, his title as magister, his renown as witnessed by the letter to Lupus, and his piety as witnessed by the tenor of that letter and other remarks which can be attributed to him56 make this conclusion highly probable. This does not mean that Martin and perhaps the other Irishmen who frequented Laon were not in favor with Hincmar of Laon. The fact that the Irishmen noted in the last chapter as well as Martin Scotus and John Scotus were at Laon during Hincmar's pontificate points to quite a different conclusion. It is no coincidence that the flowering of the school coincided with Hincmar's pontifi- cate. Hincmar of Laon, during his troubled and contro- versial fourteen years as bishop was, to call him by a title that has never been applied to him, a real patron of culture. He was careful to build his cathedral's collection of manuscripts both by acquisition and the maintainance of a scriptorium.57 Early in his youth he began to collect a personal library.58 Finally, he was avidly interested in 56See below, pp. 187-193. 5701. above, pp. 60, 103-104. 58F. M. Carey based his study of Reims' ninth centuny scriptorium on twentybtwo manuscripts which bear the ex-dono 181 the work of the Irishmen who collected at Laon. In fact, their influence on him may have been at the root of his difficulties with Charles the Bald and Hincmar of Reims.59 Hincmar of Laon not only patronized the Irishmen he gathered around him but he also learned from them. Scattered throughout Hincmar of Reims' critique of the younger Hincmar's pontificate are several revealing com- ments concerning Hincmar of Laon's intellectual formation and characteristics. They shed light not only on Hincmar but also on the intellectual milieu fostered at Laon under Martin Scotus and John Scotus. Disdainfully, Hincmar of Reims called his nephew a "new grammarian" who spewed forth musty and ponderous words to which he attached new meanings. "Like a tree packed with leaves, you ought to go about dressed up in the foliage of your ornate vocabulary and parade about your puffed-up braggardly grammatical saliva," he advised of Archbishop Hincmar. However, for one manuscript, Reims, Bibliothegue de la Ville, 118, Carey noted: is does no have e regu ar Hincmar bookmark. In- I have no doubt that the Hincmar in question is the famous bish0plarchbish0p. ." Cf. "The Scriptorium of Reims during e rchbis epric of Hincmar (845-882 A.D.)," 44-45. Carey should have doubted the attribution of this manuscript to Hincmar of Reims. Hincmar was educated at St. Denis by the abbot Hilduin. He was never a deacon at Reims. Rather, this manuscript belonged to his nephew, the future Hincmar of Laon, who was educated by his uncle at Raj-mas 59This has already been suggested above, pp. 41 -43. 182 the bishop of Laon.6O He commanded Hincmar of Laon to "polish up your language" and to use plain words correctly and clearly rather than words culled from glossaries and used incorrectly.61 In an especially sarcastic passage, the archbish0p of Reims referred indirectly to Martin Scotus and Laon's other Irishmen as well as to Martin's Greek—Latin glossary, Laon's copy of the £223; glossarum, and the glossary of Vergilian vocabulary con- tained in manuscript 468: The abstruse words, culled from glossaries and any other place you could find them, which you have used incorrectly in this work and which you gathered together in other works addressed to the king and to me betray in you a kind of boastfulness, for as the Apostle says: you should "avoid gossip" (I Tim. v); and "in the church, I had rather speak five words with my understanding, that I may also instruct others, than ten thousand words in a tongue" (Cor. xiv). You, who cannot only not speak the language in which you were born, but, indeed, can neither understand it without an interpreter, when there were sufficient Latin words you could have 6ogppggplgm£LV Capitulorum, 316: "Quapropter, quoniam e novo u re—tuo adhuc grammaticae artis mustum et ponderationes verborum ebulliunt, primo videamus de verbo 'promulgo'. . . ." Ibid., 383: "Tibi autem novo grammatico, qui ut frondosa et condensa arbor, foliis ornatus verborum phaleris debes incedere, et tua figmenta grandisonis pompare modis, et in omnem ventum inflatis buccis grammaticas spumas exspuere, hoc dicere non licebit." 61Ibid., 383: ". . . et quando altera vice sic accurate dictabis, studiosius polire linguam tuam cura- bis, ne vitiose contra tuam grammaticam dictes. . . ." Concilium Duziacensis I, 6-7: ”Rescribe mihi planis verbis, et non tortuoso sicut soles, sed recto et aperto sensus. . . . QuaprOpter nunc tibi iterum, frater, scribe, non pueriliter sermonibus per glosulas exquisitis, ut studes, quo sine ullo intelligentiae ac instructionis fructu a fatuis inanes admirationes rumusculas capias. . . ." 183 used in these works, have used corruptly and falsely Greek and obscure words and sometimes Irish and other barbarisms as you have seen fit. It is obvious that you have used them (what ou want to call Greek words) most awkwardly not on of humility or as a proof that you do not understand them. Rather you have planted them most stupidly in your work for the sake of ostentation, so that all who might read them would understand that you vomitted those you could not swallow.62 Unfortunately, no passage in Hincmar of Laon's extant works and letters displays the preciosity that so angered his uncle. Nevertheless, Hincmar of Reims' in- dictment of his nephew's grammatical fantasies and his neologisms is valuable. It describes an intellectual at- mosphere at Laon very near to that which produced the Hisperica famina - a style of literary mannerism practised especially, but not uniquely, in Ireland.63 62Opusculum LV Capitulorum, 448: "Verba quoque obstrusa, et undecunque per glossulas collecta, et sine ratione posita, quae in hoc scripto tuo posuisti, sicut et in aliis domno regi et mihi olim directis congressisti, redarguunt te typo jactantiae, cum dicat Apostolus: 'Vbcum novi- tates devita' (I Tim. vi); et 'Malo quinque verba loqui in Ecclesia ad aedificationem, quam decem millia verborum in lingua' (Cor. xiv). Qui enim linguam, in qua natus es, non solum non loqui, verum nec intelligere nisi per interpretem potes, cum suppeterent sufficenter verba Latina, quae in his locis ponere poteras, ubi Graeca, et obstrusa, et interdum Scottica et alia barbara, ut tibi visum fuit, nothata atque corrupta posuisti, paret quia non ex humilitate, vel ad manifestationem, ea quae .dicere voluisti Graeca verba, quae ipse non intel- ligis, inconvenientissime posuisti, sed ad ostenta- tionem illa insipientissime inseruisti, ut omnes qui illa legerint intelligere possint, te illa velle vomere quae non glutiisti." 630f. Kenney, pp. 255-258; and P. Riché, Education et culture dans l'occident barbare VIe-VIIIe siScles (2nd ea.; Paris: Editions du Seuil, 1962), p. 359. 184 Interesting though Hincmar's career is for the insight that it gives to Martin's influence at Laon, it does not enable us to assess what kind of master Martin was. The importance of his work extends far beyond the fact that he influenced the literary style and, perhaps, the politics of one Carolingian bishop. The full extent and impact of Martin's teaching will only be known after his works have been published in.modern editions and his comments thoroughly scrutinized. We can begin to appreciate the significance of his teaching career, however, by ex- amining one aspect of it, Martin's attitude toward learning as reflected in his ideas about the arts. Both Martin's and John's commentaries on the arts are the first important developments in the study of the arts during the Carolingian renaissance. The explication of Martianus Capella's allegory forced his commentators to consider such wide-ranging problems as the division of knowledge, the place of the arts in a Christian edup cation, and the nature of man and the universe. Despite the chaotic situation of the texts of Martin's and John's commentaries, their commentaries have already been ex— ploited in exciting ways.64 In order to comment on a work as rich and as obscure 64Cf. H. Liebeschfitz, "Texterklfirung und Weltdeutung bei Johannes Eriugena," Archiv ffir Kulturgeschichte, XL (1958), 66-96; and, G. Mztfion, "Les formes et la signifi- cation de la pédagogie des arts libéraux au milieu du IXe sibcle. L'enseignement palatin de Jean Scot Erighne," Arts libéraux et philosophic au moyen-age(Paris: Vrin, , " a 185 as the De Nuptiis Philologiae et Mercurii. a high degree of technical expertise in Greek, mythology, classical literature, and the arts themselves was necessary. This type of training inevitably affected a master's approach to other problems where the intrusion of the methods and materials gained in the explication of Martianus Capella were resented by some. Prudentius of Troyes' critique of John Scotus' Depredestinatiopg centers exactly on this 65 point. But Prudentius' view was only one. The study of the arts was officially sanctioned and encouraged in the Epistola de litteris colendis, a document which might be called thenmanifeste of the Carolingian renaissance. Here, Alcuin argued that the proper understanding of the Christian religion depends on a proper understanding of a written text, the Scriptures. In order to comprehend this text, one must be trained in the arts, especially in grammar.66 What he was saying, reduced to simplest terms, is that the search for spiritual wisdom presup- poses intellectual training. In another place, Alcuin employed a striking image which enjoyed great success in ninth century poetry and art. Christian wisdom he com- pared to a temple supported by seven columns. The columns 650f. Kenney, Sources, p. 577; and, Cappuyns, JSE, pp. 114-116. 66cr. MGR, Leges, III Capit, I, 79: "Cum enim In sacrls paglnis schemata, tropi, et cetera his similis inserta inveniantur, nulli dubium est quod ea unusquisque legens tanto citius spiritaliter intellegit, quanto prius in litterarum magisterio plenius instructus fuerit." 186 were the seven liberal arts without which, of course, the the temple would not stand. For Alcuin, the arts were not simply a prqamdeutic but rather an essential element of Christian learning.67 In their notes and comments, the masters at Laon, especially the two about whom we know the most, John Scotus and Martin Scotus, completed the Christianization of the arts initiated by Alcuin along different lines. John's striking metaphysical formulations have recently been the subject of an important paper which emphasizes John as a teacher rather than as a philosopher.68 For John, philosophical wisdom was not only an aid toward the achievement of Christian wisdom but a means of sal- vation itself: "Nemo intrat in caelum nisi per philoso- phiam."69 In another place, he equated philosophy with religion: "Verum esse philosophiam veram religionem, conversimque veram religionem esse veram philosophiam."7O We have already read Martin Scotus' thoughts on the relationship between learning and the desire for God in his letter to Lupus of Ferrieres. In that letter, 67Alcuin made the allusion in his De rammatica, MPL, CI, 760. Its significance and fortuna hmiamy treated in M.-Th. d'Alverny's "Ea-EEEEsse et ses sept filles: recherches sur les allégories de la philoso hie et des arts libéraux du IXe au.XIIe sibcle," Mélapges F lix Grat (2 vols.; 680f. G. Mathon's study cited above, n. 64. 69Annotationes in Marciappp,(ed. Lutz), p. 64. 7°De redestinatione, MPL, CXXII, 358. 187 Martin grouped together a series of Scriptural references around the theme that God is the source of all wisdom. Martin was inspired in this letter by'a passage he read in Origen's ninth homily on Numbers. It is striking, in fact, to note that the few annotations that Martin made in his copy of Origen's homilies (manuscript 298) pertain to the arts. In his eighteenth sermon, Origen asked how the verse, "Omnia sapientia a Deo est," should be under- stood. "It seems to me," he commented, "that all skills which are either considered necessary for human needs or any other object of knowledge, are caIled wisdom given by the Lord." In support, he cited a passage from Exo- due: The Lord said to Moses, "See, I have chosen Bese- ' leel, son of Uri, son of Hur, of the tribe of Juda, and I have filled him with a divine spirit of skill and understanding and knowledge in every craft: in the production of embroidery, in making things of gold, silver or bronze, in cutting and mounting precious stones, in carving wood, and in every other craft. As his assistant I have appointed Oholoab, son of Achisamach, of the tribe of Dan. I have also endowed all the experts with the necessary skill to make all things I have ordered you to make." 71Manuscript 298, f. 86v (MPG, XII, 714-715): "Quid ergo est quod ait: Tfiahis sapientia a Deo est?’ Illud mihi sensisse videtur, quia omnis peritia, quae vel erga artem aliquam usui humane necessaria habetur, vel cujuslibet rei scientia, sapientia dicatur a Domino data. . . . Sed et in Exodo: 'Locutus est, inquit, Dominus ad Meysen di- cens: Ecce vocavi nominatim Beselehel filium Uri, filii Or ex tribu Juda, et replevi eum spiritu di- vino sapientiae, et intellectus, et disciplinae, ut in omni opere intelligat, et sit architectus ad operandum argentum, et aurum, et aes, et lapides ' repletionis, et omnia opera fabrilia, et in ligno, ut operetur secundum omnia opera, ad quae ego dedi 188 Origen commented on this passage as follows: Now consider from all this how the knowledge of handicrafts, whether in gold, silver, or any other kind of material, or the knowledge of weaving is from the Lord and that it can truly be said that these sciences are from the Most High. Now, if the knowledge of handicrafts is said to be from the Most High, why not that of geometry from which indeed is derived that knowledge which the Scriptures call architectonics? . . . And what are we to say of music which of all the skills attracted the most wise David . . . and which can soothe a king troubled and vexed by an ill-natured spirit? From this, I conclude that anyone who would deny that all these kinds of learning are from the Lord is not being rational. I cannot doubt that the same is true of medical knowledge. For if any knowledge is from God, what more will be from Him than the science of health which deals with green herbs and the qualities and differences of potions. . . . So that we may still further fully understand that all 'wisdom draws it origin from the Lord . . . let us re—read what is written in the book of Daniel about Daniel and his three friends. . . . "The Lord gave science and knowledge and wisdom in all grammatical arts to them and to Daniel he gave understanding in all words, and visions, and dreams. And they were with the king and whatever 'words, wisdom and instruction the king sought from them, he found them much wiser than all the philosophers and sophists in his kingdom. . . ." From all of this it is now possible to understand what Balaam meant when he described himself as ' someone "who knows the science of the Most High, " that is, that tbs source of all science takes its origin from Him7 Sed et Eliab filium Achisamach ex tribu Dan. Et dedi in cor omni prudenti intellectum, ut faciant omnia quae constitui tibi. ' " The passage in Exodus is from 31: 1-6. In my text, I have used the Confraternitbeouay translation. 72;bid., ff. 87r-87v (MPG, ibid., 715-716): "Considera ergo ex iis omnibus quomodo a Domino est sapientia fabrilis, sive in euro, sive in argento, sive in alia quacunque materia, vel etiam textrini sapientia: et vide quia jure dici de iis Omnibus potest, quod horum scientia ab Excelso sit. Quod si fabrilis scientia ab Excelso esse declaratur, quomodo non et geometrica, ex qua utique haec scientia quam Scriptura architectonicam nominat, 189 Martin Scotus closely read this passage and marked in the margins of his manuscript those sections which he found especially meaningful: "Quia omnis sapientia a Deo est," "De geometrica," "De musica," "De medicine," "Quia omnis ars a Deo est,“ "Origo totius scientiae a Deo est." His statement in his letter to Lupus of Ferribres that it was not he who was replying to Lupus' questions but rather God through him was not an exercise in liter— ary humilty. It derives directly from Martin's conviction that Wisdom is God-given. On its face, this conclusion on the part of a Christian scholar during the Middle Ages does not seem derivatur? . . . Quid autem dicemus de musica, cujus omnem peritiam ita attigerat sapientissimus David, ac totius melodiae, et rhythmorum collegerat disciplinas ut ex iis omnibus inveniret sonos, qui- bus posset etiam perturbatum regem vexatumque ab spiritu maligno psallendo mitigare? Unde non puto aliquem recti sensus, qui in horum omnium scientia neget, quia omnis sapientia a Domino est. Jam vero de medicinae scientia nec dubitari puto. Si enim est ulla scientia a Deo, quae magis ab eo erit quam scientia sanitatis, in qua etiam herbarum vires, et succorum qualitates, ac differentiae dignoscuntur? . . . Ut autem amplius intelligamus adhuc totius scientiae sapinetiam a Deo originem trahere . . . relegamus ea, quae in Daniele scripta sunt de ipso Daniele et tribus amicis ejus. . . . Ibi ergo scriptum est, uia 'dedit eis Dominus scientiam et' intellectum, e prudentiam in omni arte grammatica, et Danieli dedit intellectum in omni verbo, et visione, et somniis: 'et erant apud regem: et in omni verbo et prudentia, et disciplina, in quibuscunque quae- sivit ab eis rex invenit eos decuplo amplius quam erant sophistae et philosophi, qui erant in omni regno ejus. . . .' Ex iis ergo omnibus potest in- telligi quomodo et Balaam dixerit de semetipso, 'qui scit scientiam Excelsi,‘ scilicet ut intelli- gatur quod origo totius scientiae ab ipso acceperit exordium." ' The citation from Daniel is from 1: 17, 19-20. 190 especially profound. But there is more to it than this for what Origen was saying is that Wisdom, or science, not only comes from God, but that it has been given to man, planted in his soul and, so to speak, innate to him. In the ninth homily on.Numbers, Origen's theme was that nothing is useless orodious to God despite how it might appear to man. His text concerned the allegory of the golden, silver, and earthen vessels. A propos of the last, he remarked, "Our body is called an earthen vessel or even the letter of the Law, for as the Apostle says, 'We carry this treasure in vessels of clay' . . . however, in them are the treasures of wisdom and of the hidden knowa ledge of God."73 This passage, as already noted, attracted Martin's attention.74 Origen's theme of the immanence of wisdom and of the arts was central to Martin's concept of teaching. It received a more philosoPhic treatment in his comment on a passage in Martianus Capella. In the fourth book of the De Nuptiis Philologiae et Mercurii on dialectic, Martianus defined an ”accident" as "that which occurs only in the same species, but not always, as rhetoric 73Ibid, f. 36v-(pgg, ibid., 631): - "Dicitur praeterea corpus nostrum vas fictile, sive etiam legis litters, in ca quod ait Apostolus: 'Habentes autem thesaurum hunc in vasis fictilibus. . . .' ita ut merito dici possit, quod in ipsis sint thesauri sapientiae, et scientiae Dei abs- conditi." ‘ ' The Scriptural citation is from II Corinthians, 4: 7. 74He used it in his letter to Lupus of Ferrieres, cf. above p. 168, n. 25. 191 occurs only in man but it is possible not to occur in him as it might be in some man who is not an orator."75 In his comment on this passage, Martin considered the thorny problem of the existence of an accident, that is, whether or not an accident exists independently of a substance: It ought to be determined in what the accident was. Also, if an accident leaves Cicero, to what did it return if it left that in which it was, in this case, Cicero? We can answer this question as follows: accidents are those things which are not only able to be accidents of other things but are even able to stand by themselves and be substances. Therefore, if rhetoric is not only an accident, for example, of Cicero, but even a substance which stands by itself, is it not probable that when it comes to a substance, it comes of itself and that when it leaves a substance it returns to itself? However, because any art, which might have a nature appropriate to itself, cannot be in itself but is necessary in some subordinate sub- stance as a ground, therefore, it is not able to come from itself if it is not in itself and cannot return to itself if it is not contained in itself. Thus, an accident is necessary as we better and otherwise understand it. Every art, therefore, is naturally found in human nature and is con- crete. It follows that all men, by nature, possess natural arts but because of the punishment for the sin of the first man, they are obscured in the souls of men and sunk in a profound ignorance. In teaching we do nothing other but to recall to our present understanding the same arts which are stored deep in our memory. And when our minds are occupied with other cares, in neglecting the arts, we do nothing but let go of them as they return to that from which they had been recalled. Thus, when rhetoric appears in some soul, it does not originate elsewhere but comes from the soul itself, that is, gart: 75Edited by A. Dick, rev. ed. by J. Préaux (Stutt- Teubner, 1969), p. 160, 1-4: "ACCIDENS est, quod non nisi eidem formae, sed non semper evenit, ut rhetorica, non nisi homini accidit, sed ei potest et non accidere, ut quam-- vis sit aliquis homo, non sit tamen orator." 192 from the depths of the memory and it returns for some reason (either death or any other thing) to the same depths of memory.76 This Neoplatonic theory of recollection that Mar- tin drew upon in this comment does not clash radically with what he read in Origen. The distinction between the God—given and the innate could easily have been bridged by Martin and his colleagues if, indeed, the distinction posed any problem to them. The important point to seize 76Paris B.N. lat. 8760, r. 38r: " uerendum est autem in quo erat et si ciceronem deseruit ad quid redit dum id in.quo erat idem ciceronem deseruit. Possumus sic responders: ac— cidentium quaedam sunt quae non solum possunt ac- cidentia fieri aliarum rerum sed etiam stare per se et substantias esse. Si igitur rethorica non solum accidens est verbi causa ciceronis sed etiam substantia per semet ipsa est, nonne probabilem est ut quando venit a semet ipsa veniat et quando re- cedit in semet ipsam redeatur. Sed quia unaquaequae ars quamvis propriam quandam naturam habeat suam in se fieri non potest sed in aliqua subiecta sub- stantia necesse est ut consistat. Ideo no potest a semet ipsa venire si in semet ipsa non est et ad semet ipsam redire, dum alio aliquo continentur. Itaque necesse est ut aliter atque melius intel- legamus. Omnis igitur naturalis ars in humana natura posita et concreata est. Inde conficitur ut omnes homines habeant naturaliter naturales artes sed quia poena peccati primi hominis in ani- mabus hominum obscurantur et in quandam profundam ignorantiam devoluntur. Nihil aliud agimus discendo nisi easdem artes quae in profundo memoriae repositae in presentiam intelligentiae revocamus. Et cum aliis occupantur curis nihil aliud agimus artes neglegeno nisi ut ipsas artes iterum dimittere ut redeant ad id a quo revocatae aunt. Cum ergo ap- paret rethorica in animo alicuius non aliunde venit nisi ab ipso, id est, profunditate ipsius memoriae et ad nullum alium redit aliqua causa, id est, aut morte vel alia qualibet re nisi ad eandem eiusdem memoriae profunditatem." ‘ The same note, in a slightly different version, was published in.MiSs Lutz' edition of Dunchad Glossae in Martianum, pp. 22—23.' For the manuscript I used, of. C. Eeonardi, "I codici," no. 161. 193 from this note and the passages in Origen's homilies which caught Martin's eye is the tremendous emphasis they give to the arts and to the process of education. Whether the arts are innate in human nature or God—given, the student, in studying them perfects himself not only in the sense that he acquires additional intellectual skills but, also, in the more profound sense that he progresses towards man's privileged status before the fall while enjoying the fruits of the Almighty's largess. The arts, then, are not only a convenient schema of knowledge nor simply an important element of Christian wisdom in Alcuin's sense. They have not been invented by man but, rather, are a constituent part of his nature. No longer simply a tool, the arts are man's only link with the Divine. Their cultivation is a means to salvation. It would be difficult to underestimate the sig- nificance of this development. This new emphasis on the place of the arts in Christian education must be seen as the chief factor which animated the ninth century's intense interest in the arts and the immense labor involved in commenting upon Martianus Capella's work. Remigius of Auxerre, who summed up and transmitted to a wide audience the work of Laon's Irish masters, owed his thoughts on the arts directly to Martin Scotus and John Scotus.77 77Cf. Cora E. Lutz, "Remigius' Ideas on the Classifi- cation of the Seven Liberal Arts," Traditio, XII (1956), 65-86, where Miss Lutz acknowledged Remigius'debt to Martin in a footnote. 194 In addition, Martin's ideas on the place of the arts in Christian education can be seen as an important step in the ninth century's idealization of learning. Sys- tematic education became during the Carolingian renaissance a worthwhile activity that could lead to man's betterment. At the outset of this chapter, it was remarked that Martin Scotus was a typical Carolingian master. This is true in the sense that he cannot be compared with men of rare and specialized learning such as Lupus of Ferribres or John Scotus. Neither can his work be com- pared with Haimo of Auxerre's or Gottschalk of Orbais' for both volume and brilliance. Yet, the judgment is not entirely negative. Martin seems to have been a hum- ble, hard-working, uncontroversial figure whose many years at Laon were passed, to judge from the sources, in seeming anonymity. Yet what a range of learning was embraced by his teaching and how far-flung was his .influence! Patronized by his bishop and student, Hincmar, Martin was on intimate terms with both John Scotus and Lupus of Ferribres. His friendship with Fulbert indicates that Martin was known at court. Perhaps his early years were spent in one of the Irish centers in the Rhine valley where he met Probus of Mainz. At Laon, his teaching covered every usual discipline and several that were quite rare in the ninth century. His knowledge of Greek, the arts, and medicine were his forte. He also was an accomplished copyist who taught the art to other Laon scribes. All 195 of his activity was suffused, as we have just seen, not by the conviction that ancient learning had to be saved or that religious orthodoxy had to be defended, but by the belief that intellectual activity could reform man and lead him to a previously lost state of perfection. A poem in manuscript 444 copied by Martin and probably composed by him should be read in this light. It is entitled Versus de octo vitiis. The last two lines are significant: Deiicit ast alios kenodoxia corde superbog Hos restaurat ovans divini lectio verbi.7 Martin's death, Hincmar of Laon's downfall, and John Scotus' disappearance from the historical record, all occurred during the 870's. Bishops Hedenulf and Dido, Hincmar's immediate successors, showed no interest in maintaining a second generation of Irishmen at Laon. It was probably during their pontificates that Irish manu— scripts began to be dismembered and used as flyleaves in 78Manuscript 444,: f. 2r (5gp, §_._p., III, 692-693): "Labitur heu nimium praesumpta superbia cosmi: Tapinosis surgit Christi solamine fulta. Octonos generat lapsus ellonis amica: Temperat hos iustus ieiuna mente politus: Fornicor in multis loetali fraude peremptus: Me tamen evacuat felix ENC—90.1.66. totum. Servus avaritiae cunctum degluttit et orbem: Dissipat et largus hanc pestem falce venusta. Ira furit nimium semper saevire parata: Quam vir pacificus patienter percutit ore. Anxietas mentis gignit suspiria cordis: Quae Christi famuli sedant placamine miti. Tristitiae iaculis plures turbantur in orbe: Quos quoque solatur Christus laetamine sacro. Deiicit ast alios kenodoxia corde superbo: Hos restaurat ovans divini lectio verbi." 196 other Laon manuscripts. Thus the work of the Irishmen at Leon and the palace school was limited to the period from the 840's to the 870's, roughly the reign of Charles the Bald. During this time, Irishmen at Leon and elsewhere 'were an important element of the second Carolingian renaissance. Their achievements would have meant very little, however, had they died with the first generation of masters at Laon. In many ways, this generation's greatest achievement was the transmission of its learning to continental masters who, in turn, perpetuated the Carolingian renaissance. In this process some of the strengths of the first generation Laon masters, notably in the study of Greek, rapidly dissipated and disappeared. However, their emphases on the arts and Scripture were maintained by their disciples, if not advanced, and reached a greater audience during the end of the ninth century and the tenth century. CHAPTER.NINE THE SECOND AND THIRD GENERATIONS 0F LAON MASTERS In contrast to the obscurity of the early lives and intellectual formation of the Irish generation of masters at Laon, the careers of the second and third generations of Laon masters are relatively well documented. What is not so well known, however, is the nature of the relationships which existed between the Laon masters and the masters of other Carolingian educational centers, especially those of Reims, Auxerre, and St. Amand. This chapter will seek to clarify these relationships and to chart the impact and influence of the school of Laon at the end of the ninth century and the beginning of the tenth century. The complexity of this task is suggested by two key sources. The Laon Annales very clearly desig- nate three men, Manno, Bernard, and Adelelm, who had charge of the school at Laon. Paradoxically, the work of these three masters has been virtually ignored. Historians have rather chosen to follow Gausbert's less precise genealogy of masters and use it as a roster of the "Laon school."1 According to Gausberh John Scotus and his 1E.g., Manitius, I, 499: Kenney, Sources, p. 592. 197 198 fellow Irishman, Elias, "imbibed" learning from Theodulf of Orléans. Elias, in turn, educated Heiric of Auxerre and subsequently became bish0p of Angouleme (862-875). Heiric, for his part, became the master of Remigius of Auxerre and Hucbald of St. Amand. Gausbert must be taken advisedly. It is obvious that he means that John Scotus and Elias succeeded to Theodulf's learning rather than personally experienced Theodulf's teaching. Furthermore, how dependable is his account of Heiric's formation and teaching? Elias, even as bishop, is an exceedingly obscure figure.2 There is no other mention of his role as a teacher or scholar. There is especially no reason to believe that he was ever at Laon. In fact, Heiric paid special tribute to his masters, Lupus 0f Ferribres and Hai- mo of Auxerre, but made no mention of Elias.3 Despite Heiric's own silence, the silence of the Lean Annales, and the nature of Gausbert's testimony, made undoubtedly from a confused tradition in the tenth century, Heiric has been enrolled among the disciples of the masters of Laon. Despite its lack of precision, Gausbert's account of the transmission of learning is attractive because it preserves a general sort of truth. Heiric of Auxerre was 2Cf. Kenney, Sources, ibid: g9, II, 983-984. 3Cf. Collectanea (ed. Quadri), p. 77: "His Lupus, His Haimo ludebant ordine grato, Cum quid ludendum tempus et hora daret. Humanis alter, divinis calluit alter: Excellet titulis clarus uterque suis." 199 influenced by the Laon masters, especially John Scotus, even if he was not personally taught by them. His pupil, Remigius of Auxerre, somehow had access to both John's and Martin Scotus' commentaries on Martianus Capella. Hucbald of Saint-Amand also was influenced by the school of Laon. The problem is not so much to choose between the account of the Lean Annales and Gausbert's genealogy but rather to weave the two accounts together to present a coherent picture of the role of the school of Leon in the transmission of learning during the latter half of the ninth century. Manno and Bernard of Leon were disciples of Martin Scotus. Hincmar of Laon, and perhaps Liuddo, who is praised in manuscript 444 for his knowledge of Greek,4 also learned from the Irishman. Martin undoubtedly had other students during his long career as a teacher whose names have been lost to us. Only Manno and Bernard, how- ever, stayed at Laon and formed the nucleus of the school during the last quarter of the ninth century. They are both first mentioned in the Laon Appales in a series of notes copied by the same hand: 843. Manno scolasticus Laudunensis nascitur 847. Bernardus scolasticus Laudunensis nascitur 857. Pardulus beatae memoriae episcopus in Christo dormivit 866. Karolus minor regulis Aquitaniae moritur 5 875. Martinus Hiberniensis in Christo dormivit 4 Cf. MGH P L. III 697: "Romani o uli Iohannes constat/Graecfiffim‘Gfiieéus ftlget nunc Liuddg Eolendus." 50:. MGH, Scr., xv, 1295. or. Plates I and II. 200 The first four entries were all made at the same time, to judge from a microfilm of the manuscript.6 The last entry which records Martin Scotus' death is in a much lighter ink - in fact, it is almost invisible in the microfilm - and was obviously copied later than the first notices which were cepied sometime before 875 but after 866. The script of these notices is very close to Martin's in appearance. Except for the last entry, the letters are hoary and thick and copied in dark ink. This hand can tentatively be identified as Bernard's. A different Laon master was responsible for several entries in the codex which bears the Annales sancti Maximini Trevirensis:7 843. Manno nascitur 865. Xarlus rex per Hedennulfum Laudunensis eccle- siae episcopum, coepit congregare clerum sub norma canonica Deo militaturum in coeno— bio a se fundato, quod prius regium ac 6O. Holder-Egger, the editor of the Laon Annales, ascribed all these notices to a second hand, the principal hand being that of Martin Scotus (see above, pp. 162-163). From photos I had made from a microfilm of the manuscript, graciously provided me by the Deutsche Staatbibliothek, I doubt that the last entry really was copied by this hand. The contrast with the entries for 843, 847, 857, and 866, is quite marked. However, for the present, one must assume that Holder-Egger who worked with the manuscript saw common traits not visible through microfilms. 7Holder-Egger, MGH Scr. xv, 1294, distinguished between the two hands: "Et‘EEta a. 843, quam secunda manus Laudunensis intulit, etiam in Ann. S. Maximini altera manu exaratur legitur, ubi etiam a. 865. 876. notae Laudunenses inveniuntur. . . ." I hope soon to examine the manuscript of the annals of St. Maximin, now in the possession of Mr. H. Horblit (see above, p. 162, n. 9 ) and to substantiate the hypothesis presented in this paragraph. 201 deinceps apostolica auctoritate vocatum est novum. 876. Rex Karlus, Hludowici imperatoris filius, ab apostolica in nativitate Domini Romae in imperatorem ungitur, anno regni sui 36 - Manno sacerdos est ordinatus 16. Kal. Iulii. We can safely conclude that these entries were made by Hanna (only he would record both his birth date and date of ordination) and, thus, that the entries in the Laon Annales were made by Bernard. The manuscript which contains the Laon Annales remained at Laon with Bernard whereas the manuscript which bears'flueannals of St. Maximin left Laon with Manno soon after the above entries were recorded in it.8 Manno, who must not be confused with another ninth century master of the same name,9 was undoubtedly a student of Martin Scotus with Bernard. He seems also to have known Hedenulf well and to have taken an interest in his career. Like Hedenulf, Manno was drafted into the service of Charles the Bald. His career as master was not spent at Laon but at the palace school at Compibgne. It is difficult to determine precisely when Manno came to the palace. He was ordained in 876 at the age of thirty-three. Whether this event had anything to do with his new position is unknown. It could be that Manno took the place of the recently deceased John Scotus at the palace. In any event, 8See below, p. 203, n. 12. 9Traube was the first, in 1893, to untangle the careers of Manno of Saint Oyan and Manno of Laon, cf. "Zur Uberlieferung der Elegien des Maximianus," Vorles- un en und Abhandlun en, III, 38-42. 202 he seems to have been a familiar and important figure at the palace in the mid-870's. The anonymous author of the letter to his master, E, met Manno at Compibgne and asked him about the mechanical arts.10 To judge from this, Manno's speciality was the liberal arts. The palace school educated future bishops. The most important source for Manno's teaching career is, in fact, the £333 of Radbod, bishop of Utrecht, 899-917.11 According to the £122, Radbod first went to study with his uncle, Archbishop Gunther of Cologne. When the archbish0p was deposed in 864, Radbod came to Charles the Bald's court not to pursue courtly honors but, rather, "because at that time the study of the seven-fold wisdom (septiformis;phi- losophiae) flourished between the walls of Charles' home." Manno, who is designated hiloso hus, presided over the 10Cf. above, p. 140, n. 28. 11Vita Radbodi Episcopi Traiectensis, MGH, Scr., XV, 569: "Florem vero primevae iuventutis apud Guntherum Agrippinensis ecclesiae praesulem, qui eius avun- culus extitit, sub ferula scolae degens edomuit. Sed presuli non succentibus prosperis, tamen nequa- quam ad animae dampnum, ut credendum est, puer indolis egregiae suorum consultu, multorum et favore, quia ut Dei gratia, perfusus amabatur ab omnibus, Karoli regis Francorum, filii quoque Lothowici imperatoris, adiit palacium, non pala- tini honoris avidus, sed quia tune temporis infra domestico prefati regis parietes insigne septiformis philosophiae viguit exercicium. Huius gymnasii curam Manno philosophus freno sapientiae regebat, cui sanctus puer litteram pollens studio sagaciter adherebat. Erant autem et illi sodales huius modi convivii participes Stephanus et Mancio, aetate maiores, non studio superiores." 203 school. In addition to Radbod, he also taught two other future bishops, Stephen of Libge (901-920) and Mancio of Chalons (893-908) at the palace. According to his biographer, Radbod left the palace when Charles died in 877. He could not have come to the palace too soon after his uncle's deposition in 864. Manno would only have been twentyaone years old at the time and hardly worthy of the title "philosopher." Radbod's biographer has obviously telescoped the events in Radbod's life. While Manno was at the palace during the 870's, who taught at Laon after Martin Scotus' death in 875? Apparently, Manno never returned to Laon after his move to the palace. His last note in the Annales sancti Maximi Trevirenses concerns his ordination in 876. Thereafter, all the notes in this manuscript, beginning in 882, concern St. Maximin.12 Presumably, Bernard of Laon stayed at Laon and maintained the school during the last quarter of the century. One must say "presumably" because this master is the least known of the Laon masters. Manno recorded his birth in 847 in the Laon Annales and described him as a scolasticus. In 902, he died as dean of the cathedral chapter. His library permits us to add some further details. Many of 12Cf. Annales sancti Maximini Trevirensis, MGH, Scr., IV, 6. According to Pertz, all the entries which pertain to St. Maximin for 882 to 900 were copied by the same hand. Sometime afteeranno had the manuscript in 876, it was taken to Trier. By whom? 204 his books were previously owned by Martin Scotus. Bernard, then, must have known him and very probably was his student. Bernard, in turn, shared Martin's books with Adelelm before they both donated them to the cathedral. We may surmise that the younger Adelelm was Bernard's student although no source so indicates. Claudio Leonardi believed he discovered a reference to Bernard in the Vatican fragments which were once part of a Paris manuscript which contains a substantial extract 13 On folio 66 from Martin Scotus' Greekaatin glossary. of Vatican, Rega lat. 1625 appears the note, "Bernardus magister noster ferus et malus." One immediately thinks of Bernard of Leon. The copyist of the notes in these fragments obviously spent some time at Laon and worked with manuscript 444. However, the hand which wrote the note referring to Bernard is not the same as the hand responsible for the other notes in the Vatican fragments and Paris manuscript. It is a larger hand and, it seems to me, somewhat more recent than the late ninth-century entries by the principal hand. Then, too, Bernard is a very prevalent name. The note refers, I think, to some tenth or eleventh century master rather than to Bernard of Laon. Given this scanty evidence, we must conclude that 13Cf. Leonardi, "Nuove voci poetiche tra secolo IX e XI," 147: "L'identificazions, con il poco materials a disposizione, pub essere solo congetturale né vi insistiamo." 205 there is nothing in Bernard's career which suggests that he was responsible for the transmission of John Scotus' and Martin Scotus' work to a new generation of masters at the end of the ninth century. He was an obscure master whose only known pupil, Adelelm, was only slightly less obscure. Yet there is substantial evidence that an entire generation of masters was influenced by the Irish~ men at Laon. The anonymous owner of Paris, B.N., lat. 10307 is the most recent of these masters to come to light. His work, to judge from this manuscript, can be dated to the end of the ninth or beginning of the tenth century.14 He copied substantial portions of Laon's Greek-Latin glossary, Martin's subscriptions in the same manuscript, as well as two previously unknown poems by John Scotus. This anonymous master's apparently original additions to the codex mark him as a man imbued with the thought and the language of the De divisione naturae. A .moving and personal poem reveals him as a man who spent most of his career explicating Martianus Capella, an author who prompted two commentaries from Laon's masters.15 The anonymous author, A, of the letter to his master, E, is obviously another scholar influenced by the Laon mas- ters during the last quarter of the ninth century. He 141 have Professor Bischoff to thank once more for the dating of this manuscript which he assigns to the last quarter of the ninth century (letter, 3 July 1970). 15Cf. Claudio Leonardi, "Nuove voci poetiche tra secolo IX.e X1," 150 and Appendix F below. 206 cites John Scotus and was personally acquainted with Manno of Leon. I think the author of this letter was from Auxerre.16 All the Auxerre masters during the second half of the ninth century’ followed the paths sketched by Martin Scotus and John Scotus. Heiric of Auxerre, whose career we shall examine more closely, incorporated extracts from the De divisione naturae into his life of St. Germain. Heiric's pupil, Remigius, wrote a commentary on.Martianus Capella's De Nuptiis Philologiae et Mercgpii which was a skillful amalgam of Martin Scotus' and John Scotus' commentaries. In fact, Helissus, an archdeacon at St. Germain of Auxerre presented the monastery with a copy of Martin's commentary sometime during the last quarter of the ninth century.17 Hucbald of St. Amand's work in computus derives 18 In Hucbald's from Aldelm's, the brother of John Scotus. hagiographical productions, there are :rsminiscences from Radbod of Utrecht's poetry. Radbod's contemporary in Manno of Laon's school, Stephen of Libge, was a close friend and patron of Hucbald.19 16The letter is discussed in Appendix D. 17For this recent discovery, of. C. Leonardi, "Raterio e Marziano Capella," italia Medioevale e Uman- istica, II (1959), 79-80e 180f. Van de Vyver's important study cited above, p.3. '90:. L. Van der Essen, "Hucbald de Saint-Amand (c. 840-930) et as place dans 1e mouvement hagiogra hique médiéval," Revue d'histoire ecclésiati ue XIX €1923), 521- 522, 537-5 . es a ove, p. , n. or other links be- tween Hucbald and the school of Laon. 207 From.Reims, Hincmar sent two deacons to Laon to be trained for the priesthood.20 Emmo, a monk at St. Remi in Reims’seems to have studied sometime at Laon. One of his manuscripts contains extracts from Laon's Greeks Latin glossary.21 Another monk from the province of Reims, Almann, the hagiographer from Hautvillers, betrays the in- fluence of John Scotus.22 He also incorporated into his ‘pgygp Greek phrases which seem to come from the scholica graecarum, a collection of notes on Greek words which originated at Laon. Abbo of St. Germain-des-Prés also 20Flodoard (HRE, 533) recorded the contents of a lost letter from Hincmar to Hedenulf of Laon: "Hedenulfo, quem post Hincmarum Lauduni ordinaverat episcopum, pro qui- busdam diaconis, quos ei dirigebat ad sacerdotium prove- hendos." 21For the extracts in Bern Bur erbibliothek, 83 from ms. 444, of. B. Bischoff, "Das griechische EIement," Mittelalterliche Studien, II, 267, n. 107. On f. 1v of e ern manuscript, there is the following subscription: "Liber fratris Emmonis dono Teutboldi ad obsequium sancti Remigii. Scripsit illi partim frater Warinus partim Her- nardus clericus." Bischoff dates the manuscript to the ninth century. F. M. Carey ("The Scriptorium of Reims," 58) dated it to 882-900. However, Dom Lambot dated the ex-dono to the second half of the tenth century when there was an Emmo at St. Remi according to Mabillon (cf. Oeuvres théolo i use at rammaticales de Godescalc d'Orbais Igou- vain: SpiciIequm Lovanienses, 1942!, x). However, an Emmo, Warinus, and Teutboldus are a found at St. Remi between 873 and 901, a period which accords well with the date of the manuscript, of. L. Delisle, "Régistre des pro— fessions et des associations de l'abbaye de Saint-Rémi de Reims (IXe-Xe sibcles), in Littérature latine at his- toire du mo en-a e (Paris: Leroux, 1890), 9—17 (nos. 11, '2: I5, 23:§3: 5E)- 22For Almann, see the article by A. Wilmart cited above, p.20,1326. The scholica raecarum are discussed below in Appendix G. IImannis interesting epi- taph, which is published by Wilmart, was preserved in a Laon manuscript from which Mabillon transcribed it. This manuscript is now apparently lost. 208 used the scholica in the last book of his account of the Norman siege of Paris.23 This widespread influence of the school of Leon during the last quarter of the ninth century cannot be explained by Bernard's obscure career. It is highly unlikely that his influence was anything but local. His only known pupil is Adelelm who spent his life at Leon and does not seem to have had a brilliant career as master there. Yet, it was precisely during Bernard's period, as we have just seen, that so many masters drank from Laon's well so to speak. We know from one famous passage in Flodoard's history of the church of Reims that Archbishop Fulk (883- 900) called both Remigius of Auxerre and Hucbald of St. Amand to Reims to restore the schools there.24 This tantalizingly but unfortunately rare note in Flodoard can also be used to explain what was happening at the school of Laon during the same period. While Fulk restored the schools of Reims, Bish0p Dido (ca. 882-893) presided over the see of Leon. I think that we must view Dido as a patron of culture who worked to maintain the school at Laon. Dido defected from the Carolingian cause toward the end of his pontificate, perhaps with justice on his side, and was politically qpmessive in sharp contrast to his successor, Hedenulf. 23Cf. M. L. W. Laistner, "Abbe of St. Germain- des-Prés," Bulletin du Cange, I (1924), 27-31. 240:. HRE, 574. 209 Dido also collected an impressive library which he do- nated to his cathedral. One of his manuscripts can be traced back.to Martin Scotus.25 How did this manuscript "escape" Bernard of Laon who inherited the remainder of Martin's manuscripts? Either Martin gave it to Dido or Dido claimed it somehow after Martin's death when his books were divided among his students. In any event, Dido's possession of a book formerly owned by Martin Scotus points to the fact that Dido did not first come to Laon as bis- hop around the year 882. He must have already had contacts with the school of Laon and was, perhaps, a student of Martin Scotus. I would further argue that as bish0p of Leon, Dido attracted one of the foremost masters of his generation, Heiric of Auxerre, to Leon and that Heiric was the principal means by which the thought of the Irish masters at Laon was disseminated to Reims, Auxerre, and, perhaps, to St. Amand. Heiric's associations with Laon have long been ack- nowledged: "As a young man he continued his studies for a while at Ferribres, Laon, and Soissons. The combination is important, for it meant that a second tradition, dif- fering from Lupus' helped to mould Heiric's mind, that of the Irish monks at Laon."26 In addition, Heiric has already L 25Manuscript 24, cf. above p. 65. 26M. L. W. Laistner, Thou ht and Letters, p. 259. 210 been recognized as a Laon master.27 The sources of both traditions are, however, worthless. Gausbert's state- ment that Heiric was trained under Elias, supposedly a member of Laon's Irish colony, cannot be taken to mean that Heiric ever studied at Laon, especially in light of Heiric's silence on the matter. He explicitly stated that his masters were Lupus of Ferribres and Haimo of Auxerre.28 Heiric did, however, spend part of his career at St. Medard in Soissons, probably from 862 to 865. Here, he consulted Marcus, the English hermit, for de- tails on St. Germainb miracles in England. Furthermore, he dedicated his Collectanea, the notes he collected from Lupus and Haimo, to the bishop of Soissons, Hildebald (871-884). While Heiric was at Soissons, Wulfad was abbot at St. Medard. A cleric of Reims, Wulfad was also a close friend of John Scotus. John dedicated his 22 divisione naturae to Wulfad, asked him to read it and correct it, and very flatteringly called him a "fellowb 27Cf., most recently, Jacques Boussard, The Civil- ization of Charlema e tr. F. Partridge (New Ior : Mc- GrawbHiII, 1968), f. 128: ". . . nor were learned men, like Eric of Auxerre, at Laon Cathedral, too proud to teach it [pinging] to children." Cf. also Cappuyns, JSE, p. 65: Manitius, I, 499: J. G. Préaux, "Le commentaire de Martin de Leon sur l'oeuvre de Martianus Capella," 458. 28Riccardo Quadri, who prefaced his recent edition of Heiric's Collectanea with a detailed study of Heiric's biography, concluded tHat his "contatti diretti con Laon, lo ripeto, sono possibilissimi, ma restano da provare," Collectanea (ed. Quadri), p. 24. 211 29 worker in scholarly studies.” Wulfad's personal li- brary is quite respectable and bears the stamp of a friend and colleague of John Scotus.30 Heiric was introduced to John's De divisione na— tapas by Vulfad. His acquaintance with John's work is first manifested in the Life of St. Germain which Heiric began to write at Soissons. We do not have to rely on surmise to prove that Heiric knew Wulfad when he was at Soissons although it would be strange if he did not know the abbot of the nnnastery where he resided. That Heiric and Wulfad also had intellectual contacts is proved by one of the titles in Wulfad's library. He possessed a copy of Petronius. The only other contemporary who knew this author was Heiric who quoted him in the Eggs of St. Germain.31 If Heiric did not study directly under any of the Laon masters, did he ever teach there? Again, the evidence that has been brought forth to date cannot support this conclusion. 0n folio 119r of manuscript 107 (Ambrosiaster, Commentaria in epistolam ad Romanos) there is a list, arranged in two columns, of two groups of chanters. Next to these lists, two different hands copied the following 291bid., pp. 17-24. 30See above, p.117} 3‘01. P. Lehmann, "Zur Kenntnis und Geschichte einiger Iohannes Scottus zugeschriebener Werke," Erfors- chun des Mdttelalters, 11, 145-156. 212 material: ADALO memo nfi's' BENEDICAT ericus sprisit magistri discipulis: eric ISTIUS DIDASCALI MATITES SUNT ISTI What I have typed in capitals was copied by one hand. The second hand, rather smaller than the first, copied the interlinear material. When Ravaisson transcribed this folio into his catalogue of Laon manuscripts, he ignored the first line, beseeching the Lord's blessing for the deacon, Adalus, and made no distinction between the different hands of the text. According to Ravaisson's presentation, Eric was the master in question and the nineteen chanters were his students. Ravaisson even ventured that the line "Ericus sprisit" meant that Eric copied the entire manuscript! Finally, he identified Eric with Heiric of Auxerre.32 This sloppy scholarship is the proof for Heiric's magistracy at Laon. The full text of the note on folio 119r clearly indicates that the students are not Eric's but rather Adalus'. Eric wrote the interlinear notes and quite plainly indicated he was one of Adalus' students by repeating his name after discipulis. We might also add that Eric's handwriting (which definitely is not that of the principal copyist ach. Ravaisson, pp. 93—94. These pages are obviously the source for Boussard's line quoted above, p. 210, n.27 . Lesne, despite a cautious peut-Otre, added an entire paragraph to Heiric's biography, after assuming that he was to be identified with the Eric of manuscript 107, cf. V, 100-101. 213 of this manuscript) has been proved not to be that of Heiric of Auxerre.33 In order to link Heiric to Laon, we obviously need different evidence. One piece of evidence has been long available but, I think, has not been interpreted properly. Heiric included in his Collectanea some material of his own composition. First, there is the dedication to Hildebald in which Heiric mentions his debt to Lupus of Ferribres and Haimo of Auxerre.34 Then, he attributed the collection of excerpts from'valerius Maximus to Lupus.35 Later in the Collectanea, he wrote a small preface which 36 attributed the Scolia guaestionum to Haimo. Finally, at the end of the Collectanea there are two longer poems. The second one interests us: Hoc signum iussit praesul componere Dido, Personet ut sancte sacro sub honore Mariae Horis distinctis pulsato sidere caeli, Quo surgant cuncti cantantes carmina Christa. Virgo Maria, Dei genitrix, praesul tibi Dido Hoc tribuit signum, quo tecum vivat in aevum. Pulsetur, surgant fratres cum laude sophiap Laudetur Christus rectorum rector ubique.3 33Cf. Giuseppe Billanovich's study of Heiric's script, "Dall'antica Ravenna alle Biblioteche Umanis- tiche, Universita cattolica del Sacro Cuore Annuario, (1955-1953,, 35-55. Billanovich published a plate of the folio in question. 34 Collectanea (ed. Quadri), p. 77. 35Ibid., . 78: "Haec Lupus, haec nitido passim versabat in or9700mpensans aptis singula temporibus." 36Ibid., p. 113: "His quoque discipulos mulcebat plausibus Hzimo iocundos lepidos doctus amare iocos." 37Ib1d., p. 157. 214 The presence of this poem at the end of Heiric's Collec- tgggg has been interpreted as a bit of "local color" added to the compilation by a Laon copyist.38 I think, however, that this poem, like everything else in the Collectanea, is from the pen of Heiric. Dido commissioned Heiric to compose a poem in commemoration of the bell which Dido dedicated to the Virgin and presented to his cathedral. The reason that Quadri and all his predecessors have regarded this poem as an interpolation is that Heiric's and Dido's dates supposedly do not match. Dido was bishOp of Laon from about 883 to 893 or 895. Heiric is supposed to have died sometime before 877. He recorded the important events of his life in a famous manuscript now at Melk. The last entry is for the year 875 when he noted the death of the emperor, Louis.39 Heiric's last work is the Lifg'of St. Germain which was dedicated to the emperor Charles the Bald in 876 or 877. These dates, however, should only be taken as termini post guem for the date of Heiric's death. There is no reason that Heiric could not have lived into the 880's, known Dido, and composed the above poem for him. In 883, Heiric, born in 840, would only have been forty-three years old. The 381b1d., P, 47: "Evidentemente la nota di colore locale rappresentata dai versi fu aggiunta da un copista del luogo, lo stesso forse che scrisse anche il primo carme finale, e non certo da Eirico che mori nell'876/877." 39Cf. ibid., 5-7; Quadri presents the essential bibliography; 215 fact that the last entry in his "diary" is for 875 means nothing as far as Heiric's death is concerned. Between 850 and 859, there is a nine year hiatus between his entries in the manuscript. In 865, he noted his ordination. His next note recorded the blinding of Carloman in 873. Heiric's death date remains to be discovered.40 It is obvious from the poem appended to the Collectanea that he lived into the 880's and was at Laon where he was on familiar terms with BishOp Dido. Even Heiric's dedi- cation of the Collectanea to Hildebald of Soissons favors this thesis. According to Quadri, the Collectanea was completed sometime after the Life of St. Germain and thus presented to Hildebold after 873 but before Heiric's supposed death in 877. Heiric left Soissons for Auxerre in 865. Hildebold only became bishOp in 871. Why would Heiric dedicate the Collectanea to Hildebald eight to twelve years after he left Soissons? Perhaps, Quadri hypothesized, Heiric came back to Soissons toward the end of his life (ca. 877).41 This is, in fact, what the 4OMabillon, who did not know the manuscript of Melk, believed that Heiric lived at least until 883, cf. ibid., p. 25. Mabillon did know the Paris manuscript of the Collectanea and based his date on the commonsensical conclusion that Dido's poem belonged with the Collectanea and proved that Heiric lived to know Dido. Another Bene- dictine, Dom Cappuyns, also argues in favor of moving Heiric's death date forward, of. "Publications de sources at trauvaux," Revue d'histoire ecclésiastique, LXII (1967), 720-721. 41Collectanea (ed. Quadri), p. 27. It is important to note ha Heir c did not die at Auxerre; at least his death is not recorded there. 216 attribution of the second poem at the end of the Collec- 35322 to Heiric suggests. As late as at least 883 he was in the region of Laon in the service of Dido. He could well have dedicated the Collectanea to Hildebold during this period. Hildebold lived at least until 884 and it is but eighteen miles from Soissons to Laon. If Heiric taught at Laon, as I have suggested, during the 880's there should be some additional evidence in Laon's manuscripts. Abbé Merlette has recently dis- covered that the earliest manuscript of Heiric's Life of St. Germain, perhaps the copy he presented to Charles the Bald, was at Laon during the fifteenth century and most probably from the last quarter of the ninth century.42 There is no doubt that some copy of the Life was at Laon and was studied there during this period. On a flyleaf of manuscript 469 (Fortunatus, Carmina libri undecim; ‘Vita sancti Martini), folio 182r, there are a series of seemingly random glosses. Most of the glosses are short explanations of Greek.words. Two are longer and rather interesting. Iulius cesar in primo belli gallici: ‘Populorum galliae tria sunt summa nomina terminataque fluviis ingentibus. Namque a pyreneo ad garonnam, aquitania. Ab eo ad sequanam, celte. Inde, ad rennm, belgae. Ibi finis galliae. The second note is by a different hand. This second hand is contemporary with the first and is responsible 42See above, p. 98, n. 41. 217 for all the glosses on the Greek words on folio 182r: Nihilum vocatur deus non per privationem essentie ut aliquid non sit sed per excellentiam quia plus- quam aliquid est. Dum enim super omnia queritur in nulla essentia invenitur. Dum ergo incompre- hensibilis intelligitur per excellentiam nihilum vocatur. At vero in suis theOphaniis incipiens apparere veluti ex nihilo in aliquid dicitur procedere. The vocabulary and the philosophical tone of this second note easily betray it as an excerpt from John Scotus' 43 De divisione naturae. This identification provides a clue to the source of the other notes, including the first one, transcribed above, copied into manuscript 469. Heiric of Auxerre annotated his Life of St. Germain with Greek etymologies and extracts from the De divisione naturae as well as from other works. Traube, in his edition of the L232, also edited these scholia from Paris, B.N., lat. 13757.44 All the notes on folio 182r of manuscript 469 were taken from Heiric's scholia to the Lifg of St. Germain.45 Manuscript 469 was at Laon from the time of Martin Scotus. A short note on folio 156r is from his hand. The notes on folio 182r prove, then, that Heiric of Auxerre's influence was felt at Laon and that his Life of St. Germain, most probably the copy now conserved in 43 44MGH, P.L., III, 428-517. or. MPL, CXXII, 681. 450:. ibid.,pp. 434 and 438 for the notes tran- scribed above. Most of the Greek etymologies are from the fifth book of the Life. 218 Paris, was studied there. Can we deduce anything further from the notes in manuscript 469? The excerpt from Julius Caesar's Gallic Wag; came to Heiric from an anonymous work, apparently written before 870 and dedicated to Charles the Bald, entitled De situ 232;§.46 Heiric consulted it several times for geograph- ical details. As Traube noted, the extract from Julius Caesar, as it appears in Paris, B.N., lat. 13757, folio 11r, has been carelessly copied from the De situ orbig. The same reading occurs in manuscript 469. The extract from the De divisione naturae shows some differences in both manuscripts. On folio 7v of the Paris manuscript, the copyist has nichilum and nichilo where manuscript 469 has nihilum and nihilo. The Paris manuscript also has teohpaniis for the Laon manuscript's correct theophaniis. Now, Heiric's script, after Billanovich's important recent investigation, is well known. It is certain that he did not copy the notes in the Paris manuscript of the Lifg of St. Germain.47 On the other hand, the script of the notes in manuscript 469, which I do not think is characteristic of the Laon—Reims region, is very similar to Heiric's script. The same angular character of Heiric's script is especially observable in the extract from the De situ orbis. The gfs are the same as is the tendency to add a 460i. Manitius, I, 675-678. 47Traube (MGH, P.L., III, 425) and Manitius (I, 504) thought so, But see now, Billanovich, 90. 219 leftward hook or wedge at the top of the ascenders, es— pecially of the‘b. One other manuscript attests to Heiric's presence at Laon. According to Professor Bischoff, manuscript 216 (Ambrose, De officiis ministrorum; Bede, Liber de lo- cis sanctae)is from the circle of Lupus of Ferrieres. The text has been copied according to Lupus' criteria and the margins especially bear reference notes in his manner. Again, these marginal notes were not made by a Laon hand but rather by a hand which seems remarkably similar to Heiric's. There are, I think, at least two educational manuals which can be traced to Heiric and are products of his "Laon period." One is the Scholica raecarum, long attributed to Martin Scotus, and the other is a little- known collection of Biblical glosses.48 More importantly, Heiric's presence at Laon explains the diffusion of the school's influence to Reims, Auxerre, and St. Amand. It was during Heiric's stay at Laon that the anonymous scholar who owned the vergil manuscript, 22£ip.B.N.. lat; 10307,to which were joined the Vatican fragments, was at Laon. This master, I think, came from Auxerre, and was perhaps attracted to Laon by the presence there of Heiric. The anonymous master's prayer to the Vir- gin on folio 96rb of Paris, B.N.. lat. 10307 has some attachment to Heiric. The prayer is prefaced by an extract 48See Appendix G. 220 from a poem: Si vis Mlac sursum volitare per auras emnynoc. que poles mentis sulcare meatu . GMAT? glaucivido lustrabis templa sophiae These are the first three lines of John Scotus' poem, 23 verbo incarnate.49 It was a poem which especially appealed to the Auxerre masters. It is the only poem of John's to which Heiric alluded in the Life of St. Germain.50 In addition, the first and third lines of the extract transcribed above are also found on a fragment of parch- ment attached to an important school manual, Paris. B.N., 12$. 12949, which belonged to Remigius of Auxerre and Hucbald of St. Amand, his colleague at Reims.51 Finally, the same hand which transcribed this poem into the Paris manuscript also copied a note into the Vatican fragments which formerly belonged to it and which Leonardi was un- able to identify:52 EPISTULA lentuli ad catilinam. Quis sim et quem ad to misi, cognosces. Fac cogites in quanta calamitate sis et memineris te virum esse. Con- sideres quid tuae rationes postulent. Auxilium petas ab omnibus etiam infimis. Vata Rega lat. 1625, f. 65rb. 1 lentuli added above ne; co . calinam 49So titled in MPL, CXXII, 1230. Traube (MGH, P.L., III, 537) has the better edition of the poem. 5°02. Traube's notes, ibid., 537-538. 51P01i0 23bisr: "Si vis uranias sursum volitare per auras. Ommate glaucivido lustrabis templa sophye. Versus Iohannis Scotti.” 52He does not mention this note at all, of. "Nuove voci poetiche tra secolo IX e XI." 221 This passage is from Sallust's Bellum Catilinarium (c. 44, 4—6). Of course, the master who cepied this note may have come across it in his reading of Sallust. In the ninth century, however, it is more probable that he found it in a florileg§g9,a collection of interesting passages extracted from a classical or patristic author. In fact, a florilegiumof the Bellum Catilinarigg, which contains the passage cepied in the Vatican fragment, was at Auxerre at the end of the ninth century.53 The hand responsible for these notes in the Paris manuscript and the Vatican fragments is not Heiric's. The only other Auxerre master whose work shows strong ties with the school of Laon is Heiric's pupil, Remigius. Remigi- us' script, as far as I know, has not yet been identified. Yet, it is entirely possible that he studied with Heiric at Laon and that the notes in the Paris and vatican manu- 54 scripts represent this period in his training. In addition 53Bern Bur erbibliothek, 357, f. 32rb. For this manuscript, of. Cite Homburger, pp. 134-136 and G. Billano- vich, 90, n. 4. The reading of Vat. Re . lat. 1625 is closer to that of the florile imithan to that of the text edition of Sallust's work: Bern, 357, f. 32rb: Libri de Catilinae Coniur- ”EPISTULA LENTULI AD CATILI- 233222' °d"§775I3¥335_T531P' NAM. Qui sim et quem ad te 218’ Teubner, 1874): 44: 4'58 misi, cognosces. Fac cogi- "Quis sim, ex ea quem ad te tes in quanta calamitate sis miai cognosces. Fac cogites, ac memineris t8 virum esse. in quanta calamitate sis, et Consideres qui tuae rationes memineris te virum esse: con- Postulent. Auxilium petas sideres quid tuae rationes ab omnibus etiam 8b infi- postulent: auxilium petas ab mis." omnibus, etiam ab infimis." 54It is assumed that both Hucbald of St. Amand and Remigius studied under Heiric at Auxerre, but there 222 to his use of John Scotus' and Martin Scotus' commentaries on Martianus Capella, Remigius used the Greek-Latin glos- sary, manuscript 444, in his commentary on Priscian's Pariitionegéhodecim versuum Aeneidos pringipaligg.55 He could have come by the Laon commentaries on Martianus 56 Capella by several avenues. Manuscript 444, however, was to be found only at Laon. We have already noted that the master I think came from Auxerre cepied a substantial portion of manuscript 444 into the Paris Vergil.57 Sometime during the late 880's or the 890's, Remi- gius was called to Reims to restore the schools there.58 is no evidence of this. Cf. Plate XIII (left column) for the script of the master who owned ParisI B.Nn lat. 10307. 550:. Manitius, I, 509. 56E.g., the donation of Archdeacon Heliseus of Auxerre, cf. above, p. 206. 57Cf. above, p. 123. 58Most scholars date Remigius' arrival at Reims with Hucbald at about 893. Recently, however, C. E. Lutz opted for a date ten years earlier, 883, cf. Remi ii Aut's i dorenses Commentum in Martianum Ca ellam (2 vols.; Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1962-1965), I, 7, n. 9. Her evidence: "L. Delisle published from a Paris manuscri t (B.N., lat. 13090)|§?. above, p. 207, n. originally from Rheims, a record of thirty-eight boys who were presented by their fathers or guardians for admission into the monastery of St. Remi. The dates are given for some. Number 29 was presented in the year 883; no date is given for Numbers 30 and 31. Since the names are in a year by year sequence, it would seem as if Num- ber 31 should be for 884 or 885. This entry is of considerable importance because it re- cords the presentation of Rodericus by his brother Seulfus and names as witnesses seven monks, in- cluding Remigius." 223 Archbishop Fulk of Reims probably knew Remigius' colleague at Reims, Hucbald of St. Amand, from his contacts at St. Bertin.59 But how was he acquainted with Remigius? If Remigius were teaching at St. Germain in Auxerre, would it be likely that he would leave Auxerre to come to Reims? It seems more probable, rather, that Remigius was at Laon when Fulk decided to restore his city's schools. Hincmar before him had taken the expedient of sending young men to Laon to finish their training. Fulk brought the master to Reims instead. With Remigius' departure, the second generation of Laon masters came to an end. Remigius was a prolific commentator and excellent teacher whose career at Reims and later Paris left its mark on an entire generation of tenth century masters. Remigius left Laon and Reims during a grave period for both cities. Dido's politics made Remigius is named on folio 76r of the manuscript in question, but I doubt that he is Remigius of Auxerre. First of all, notices for 882 and 884 occur on f. 75v. Notice 31 (the numbers are Delisle's not the manuscript's) begins on t0p of f. 76r. The two leaves seem to be from different manuscripts and thus do not present a continp uous, year by year list: f. 75 37 11.; 283 mm X 210 mm 198 mm X 154 mm; f. 76 42 11.; 277 mm X 130 mm 226 mm X 149 mm In fact, notice 31 is immediately followed by a notice which does contain a date: 971. Finally, in the diocese of Reims, in the monastery of St. Remi, Remigius must have been a common name. 59Fulk was abbot of St. Bertin until he became archbishOp of Reims in 882. Hucbald was teaching at St. Bertin in 889, cf. Manitius, I, 588, 590. 224 Laon a key city in the rebellion against Charles the Simple. Bishop Dido placed Laon under the protection of King Eudes and severely punished the "treason" of Walcher, Baldwin of Flanders' partisan. In 900, Remi- gius' patron at Reims, Fulk, was assassinated by Baldwin. Dido's efforts to restore St. Vincent ended in failure. The mood of the era is summed up in the lugubrious pre- face to the Council of Trosly held in 909: "You see before you the wrath of the Lord breaking forth. . . . There is naught but towns emptied of their folk, monas- teries razed to the ground or given to the flames, fields . desolated. . . . Everywhere the strong oppresseth the weak and men are like fish of the sea that blindly devour each other."60 The instability of the closing decade of the ninth century and the beginning of the tenth century had an adverse effect on the school of Leon. I interpret Ber- nard and Adolelm's gift of the most important educational texts of the Laon masters to the cathedral library not only as an act of generosity but also as an attempt to insure that the books would remain at Laon. It is one thing to steal from Bernard and Adelelm and quite another to steal from God and his mother, as Bernard and Adolelm's ex-dono tells us. At the same time, the manuscripts were taken out of private circulation among the Laon masters and 6oFrom Marc Bloch, Feudal Societ , tr. L. A. Man on (2 vols.; Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1964 , I, 3. 225 entered the library. It seems that no one at the beginning of the tenth century was available or eager to carry on a program of studies. In recent years, Adelelm, who succeeded Bernard as dean of the cathedral chapter upon the latter's death in 902, has been credited as the head of a school at Laon.61 The old hypothesis that Adelelm was Aldhelm, John Scotus' brother, is no longer tenable.62 Instead, there is a tendency to identify Adelelm with the Adalus whose name heads the list of students cepied into manuscript 107 and who is described as both a deacon and a master.63 Adelelm, who probably came from an important Laon family,64 undoubtedly taught at Laon but I do not think that he can be identified as the Adalus of manuscript 107 and thus imagined as the head of a flourishing school. For one thing, there is the different form of the names: Adelelmus and Adalus. Adalus seems to be an entirely different name rather than a misspelling of Adelelm whose 65 name is properly spelled in all other sources. Secondly, 610:. H. Love, 40, n. 88; and, Quadri, 17, n. 1 (who mistakenly spells Adelelmus Aldelmus). 62 63For this list, see above, pp. 211-213. 64The Count Adelelm, mentioned in Charles the Bald's testament, was count of Leon. Perhaps the deacon and later bishop of the same name belonged to his family. According to the Laon Annales, Albuinus, the brother of‘ Adelelm was killed by the "pagans" in 911 (cf. above, p. 22). 65That is, in the ex—dono in the Laon manuscripts, in the Laon Annales, and in FIodoard's Annales, Later sources adopmmewhat corrupted spelTi'fi'g'Vfiich, however, See above, p. 148. 226 there is the list of students' names some of which are quite unusual and rare.66 If these were Adelelm's students, some mention of them might be expected in later tenth century sources.67 The only names that reoccur at Laon are Rodulfus and Roric. Rodulfus is such a common name, however, that this student cannot be identified with the bishop of Laon between 936 and 948 or with the prevost of 961. The name Roric though is less common and might present the strongest argument for the attribution of these students to Adelelm of Leon.68 If one assumes that Adalus does not approximate Adalus. Cf. Cartulaire, 185: "pre- decessor meus Adelinus"; GC, IX, 187: "praedecessor noster Adelmus": MabillonTE'copy of Adelelm's charter of ca. 59925 has both Adelelmus and Adalelmus, of. above, p. 27, n. . 66In addition to Adalus and Ericus, there are: Albertus, Ansigisus, Bertoldus, Bevo, Etto, Euracrus, Frodo, Frotulfus, Geroldus, Gerverus, Gisleboldus, Gunp duinus, Hoidilo, Raimboldus, Rainardus, Rodulfus, Rorico, Serilo, Tetboldus. An onomastic index for the early Middle Ages would determine the community to which these men belonged. A search of the indices of most of the_M§fl_reveals no common pattern. There are hundreds of ninth and tenth century names still in the margins and on.the flyleaves of manuscripts. 67The Alb. . . whose name figured in a spiritual contract between Notre Dame of Laon and St. Remy in 929 (cf. above, p.22 ) cannot automatically be identified with Albertus of manuscript 107. The best tenth century source for the personnel of the cathedral, Roric's charter for St. Vincent in 961, bears an unpublished list of signatories to the document: "Sig. Rorico, Rodulfi praepositi, Hiberti archdiaconi, Ful- conis archdiaconi, Immonis archdiaconi, Egroldi decani, Bevonis presbyter, Beroldus presbyterii, Ingenulfi diaconi, Rogeri diaconi. Ego Odelardus cancellarius scripsi et subscripsi." Laon Bibl mun. 15 carton, no. 39. Except for Boric's name and that of the provost, Rodulfus, none of these names recalls those of manuscript 107. 68E. Fleury, I, 36-37, H. Leclercq, Dictionnaire 227 the deacon is Adelelm, then the list of his students must have been drawn up between 902 when Adelelm became dean 69 and 921 when he became bishop of Leon. Roric was bishop of Laon from 948 to 976. Could he have been Adalus/Adelelm's student? Roric was a natural son of Charles the Simple and thus brother to King Louis IV (936—954) and nephew to King Lothair (954-986). His birthdate is unknown. He is first mentioned as a notary for Louis in 943. When he was elected bishop in 948, he was still a deacon.7o This would seem to indicate that Roric was born to Charles the Simple around the year 920 or, at the latest, before 71 923 when Charles was deposed and imprisoned. Roric's death in 976 is graphically ascribed to some sort of d'archéolo ie chrétienne et de litur ie, (Paris: Letouzey st 139, 1958),TXVIII, 1324, and H. Lfiwe (p. 40, n. 88) want to identify the Roric of manuscript 107 with the later bishop. 69Flodoard (Annales, p. 5 ) noted that Adelelm was treasurer of the cathedral chapter when he became bishop in 921. Evidently, Adelelm had moved to a new position by 921. However, we shall keep the dates 903- 921 to allow the widest possible margin that he could have been dean and Roric of Laon's master. 70Flodoard, ibid., p. 121: "Anne DCCCCXLVIIII, Laudunenses, qui fidelitati Ludowici regis attendebant, eligunt sibi praesulem Roriconem diaconem, ipsius regis fratrem. . . ." For other details on Roric's career, cf. above, pp. 50-51. 711.6., he was not of canonical age, thirty years old, in 948 when elected bishop as a deacon. 228 paralytic disease.72 There is no hint that he was aged at the time of his death. But in order to have been Adelelm's pupil, he would have been born during the first decade of the tenth century and thus would have been a student during the second decade of the century. He then would have been almost a septmmpnarian at his death - a conclusion that finds no support in his death notice. The Roric in Adalus' list of students cannot be made a student of Adelelm of Laon. His dates, as far as they can be reconstructed, indicate that Roric of Laon was probably too young to have been Adelelm's student. Furthermore, Roric was reputed for his knowledge.73 There is no indication that the school of Laon in the tenth century was able to dispense training leading to such a reputation. The Leon Formulary provides the only indication of instruction at Laon during the early tenth century. These formulae were added to the collection of Einhard's letters, Paris, B.N., lat. 11379, sometime after 892, to give Laon clerics practice in epistolary forms not 72Flodoard, Annales (continuator), pp. 162-163: "Ipso in anno, tertia decima Kalendas Januarii, praesul Rorico sanctae Laudunensis aecclesiae, qui erat langore paralisi correptus, post multas ac debitas Deo pro ipsa infirmitate redditas gratias vita decessit. . . 73Adso of Montier—en—Der (MPL, CI, 1291). "clar- rissimum speculum totius sapientiae atque eloquentiae hac valde nostra aetate." Richer of Reims (II, 82): ". . . omni rerum scientia inclitus." 229 74 There were found among Einhard's correspondence. after 892 two masters at Laon who could have been responsible for the compilation of the‘Eggmglazy: Bernard who died in 903 and Adelelm who died in 930. One clue points in the direction of Adelelm. On folio 15r of the manuscript, the master respon- sible for the compilation copied three examples of replies to death notices. These replies were intended to inform the sender of the death notice that the notice had indeed been received. Usually. in a formulary. proper names were always omitted from the examples. However, in two of the three examples of replies to death notices, the master has kept the name of a deceased member of his community: Bernard, priest and dean. 10. Kal. Sept. venit lator apicum vestrorum in monasterio. . . . ubi praeest domnus ill. episcopus, ill. decanus, ill. praepositus. . . . ill. the- saurarius, ill. receptor pauperum. . . . frater- nitatem vestram pro fratribus nostris nuper 74Cf. above, p. 109, for this date and the manuscript. The Laon formulae were edited by Karl Zeumer in 1882 as the "Formu ae odicis Laudunensis," MGH, Formulae Mero- win ici et Karolini Aevi, pp. 512-5207_'0f the seventeen formulae edited 5y Zeumer, one through five were copied an s contemporary to the hands which copied Einhard's letters (ca. 850). For the remainder, six through seven- teen, Zeumer thought he could detect five separate hands: "At no hae quidem omnes eadem manu exaratae sunt, sed quinque manus discernendas esse existimo. . . ," (ibid., p. 512). After a long study of the manuscript, I cannot share this opinion. Formulae six through seventeen seem to me to be by the same hand. I attribute the slight and relatively unimportant differences in script to the very different qualities of parchment the Laon master had at his disposal rather than to the presence of five different hands. The formulae were copied on scraps of parchment from different sources. 230 defunctis ill. Domini misericordiam exoretis, et ad contigua loca innotescere. . . . 10. Kal. April. venit gerulus apricum vestrorum . . . . ubi egregius pontifex ill. pastorali fungitur officio.'. . . illi praepositurae, ill. dapsilis largitor. Precamur venerabilem paterni- tatem atque fraternitatem vestram. . . . Bernardo decano, ill. thesaurario Domini misericordiam exoretis, et ad contigua loca innotescere. . . . 11. Kal. Junias adiit baiulus literarum vestrarum . . . ubi venerandus ill. pontificatus gerit officum, ill. custodiam eclesiae, ill. archidia— conatum. . . . ill. hospitalitatis custodiam. Precamus pro fratribus nostris hoc anno ab hac labili luce sublatis, Bernardo . . . sacerdote et decano, et pro aliis tam canenicis . . bus ill. ut misericordiam Domini imploretis.7 Given the historical nature of the material the master used for the formulae, would it be too audacious to identify the Bernard of these notices with Bernard of Laon and thus conclude that Adelelm was responsible for the Laon Formulagy? A closer look at the notices on folio 15r further corroborates the historical value of the Formulagy as well as these references to Bernard of Laon. According to Zeumer, the editor of the Laon For- mular , the opening sentence of the eleventh formula should be restored as "10. Kal. sept. venit later apicum vestrorum in monasterio. . . . ubi praeest domnus ill. episcopus. . . ." Folio 15, like many others in Paris, B.Nn lat. 11379, has been damaged by heavy use and humidity. In the line just quoted from Zeumer's edition, the corresponding line in the manuscript terminates with 75Ibid., formulae 11, 12, 13. Cf. Plate XIV (lower half of leaf). 231 76 Zeumer did not the incomplete phrase, "in mont. . . ." hesitate to read this as "in monasterio" even though it does not make sense with the rest of the sentence. Would a bishop and all the dignitaries of a cathedral chapter usually be found in a monastery? An ultra-violet lamp helps to solve the confusion and proves that the master responsible for the Laon Formulagy copied an his- torical document. The true reading of the line just cited is: "x kalends septembris venit lator apicum vestrarum in monte lauduni,” or, "On the tenth kalends of September, the bearer of your message came to Laon." Again, with the aid of the ultra-violet lamp, the twelfth formula, one of the two which mentions Bernard, can be restored as: "x kalends aprilis venit gerulus apicum vestrorum in monte lauduni ubi egregius pontifex ill. . . ." These formulae were thus based on historical docup ments which refer to the death of Bernard of Leon in 903. Happily, we do not have to depend on a process of elimi- nation to ascribe the compilation of the Laon Formulary and instruction in the are dictaminis at Laon to Adelelm. A specimen of Adelelm's handwriting has survived. The three notices in the Laon Annales which touch on events in Adelelm's life in 892, 903, and 911 are by the same hand.77 This is undoubtedly Adelelm's hand. 76See Plate 11v (1. 12). 77MGH, Scr., xv, 1293: "392. Adelelmus efficitur presbyter 232 His script is clear, his letters are well-formed and generally vertical. The formation of some of his let- ters calls for special notice. His minuscule §.exhibits a large, rounded "belly". His‘d is made with three easily detected strokes. First, there is a long vertical line to the left of which is joined a short curved line which connects with the vertical at its base. Finally, a hori- zontal stroke joins the curved line to the vertical and thus closes the rounded portion of the d. At the t0p of the vertical strokes of his 2, d, and l, Adelelm makes a small leftward hook which is very noticeable. Finally, his minuscule‘g bears notice. Like'g's made by other Laon hands, the upper portion of Adelelm's g is closed. However, where other Laon hands make a curved hook or a more angu- lar and elegant hook for the lower portion of their g's, Adelelm finishes his 3 with a straight line which slants about fortyhfive degrees to the left.78 As one would expect, Adelelm's notices in the Laon Annales, copied rapidly into the limited space at the margin of the manuscript, are not as carefully done as the material in the Laon Formulary. Nevertheless, in the Formulary, one easily recognizes the general and particular characteristics of Adelelm's script as found in 903. Bernardus obiit; Adelelmus efficitur de— canus 911. Albuinus interficitur a paganis, frater Adel— elmd sacerdotis." For this example of Adelelm's script, cf. Plate 11. 780f. Plates II and XIV. 233 the Annales. The master responsible for the manufact- ure of the Formulagy, then, was Adelelm who in a touch- ing gesture conserved the name and memory of his col- league and master in the formulae of folio 15r. Ade- lelm became bishop in 921 and died in 930. If we can assume that he no longer taught after he became bishop, we can date the Laon Formulary to between 903 and 921.79 The Laon Formulary is the only witness to educational activity during the first quarter of the tenth century at Laon. As such, it attests to the decline of the school. Adelelm, in effect, prepared students for service in the episcopal chancery. His few notes in other Laon manuscripts indicate that his teaching was probably broader than the practical, essentially technical business of letter writing.80 Nevertheless, these few notes and the formulae cannot be compared to the commentaries and manuals which issued from the first and second generation masters as an index of the instructional level at Laon. By the time of Adelelm, the influence of the school of the Irish masters during the third quarter of the ninth cen- tury had died at Laon and through Remigius of Auxerre was transferred elsewhere. 791t is possible that Adelelm continued to teach af- ter his elevation to the episcOpal seat as did Bishop Ber- tarius of Verdun, cf. Gesta e isco orum'Virdunensium, MGH, Scr., IV, 45. In any event, the Laon Formulagy dates rom the first quarter of the century. 801 find no extensive notes which resemble Adelelm's script in any other manuscript than Paris B.N. lat. 11379. A few brief notations by Adelelm are found in mss. 11, 38, 48, 80, 86, 92, 122bis, and 130. CHAPTER TEN CONCLUSION This study is an archeological investigation of culture. It has examined the physical remains of a ninth century school in order to reconstruct and illuminate two important elements of the school, its manuscripts and the careers of its masters. The logical sequel to this work would be a study of the scholarship of the Laon masters and students. Their thought and work have already been the sub- vject of several important articles by scholars interested in the history of the arts and Greek during the Carolingian period. Before these investigations can be extended, how- ever, additional texts will have to be studied and pub- lished. John Scotus' De divisione naturae is just now receiving a modern critical edition. The partial edition of his commentary on Martianus Capella needs to be redone in light of new manuscript discoveries. John's homily on the prologue to St. John has recently been edited but his glosses on the Bible which are juxtaposed with those of Haimo of Auxerre are still in the manuscripts. Martin Scotus' commentary in the De Nuptiis Philologiae et Mercurii, like John's,has been partially edited and still awaits a full critical edition. Remigius of Auxerre's commentary on Martianus Capella has been published but 234 235 considerable controversy surrounds the attribution of other commentaries to him. In light of these fundamental diffi- culties and uncertainties, it seems prudent to postpone a study of the thought of the Laon masters. The results of our research have, nevertheless, thrown considerable new light on the history of the school of Laon in the ninth century and on the place of the school in the Carolingian educational renaissance. These results have also, I think, proved the effectiveness of the codi- cological method and shown how much history still remains in the manuscripts. The school of Laon during the third quarter of the ninth century was an important link in the chain of cultural centers responsible for the Carolingian renaissance of Charles the Bald. Among these centers, Laon was especially characterized by its connection to the hub of this renais- sance, Charles' court, and by its distinctly Irish flavor. The Irishmen who worked at Laon, our evidence indicates, transmitted the influence of the Irish monasteries of the Rhine valley to Charles' kingdom. Irishmen such as Fergus and Cathasach are found both at Laon and among the group of Irishmen associated with Sedulius Scotus at Liége. If the hypothesis which attributes a note to Vinibert to John Scotus is valid, this great figure also emerged from the Rhine valley. Some of the material Martin Scotus used in his manuscripts also points to this region. He may have known Probus of Mainz. It is certain that he received his 236 education in Greek on the continent from Irishmen. When these masters settled at Laon, they were patronized by both Laon's bishops and Charles the Bald. Hincmar of Laon was a protégé of the Irish masters and Charles welcomed John Scotus into the palace and may even have directly patronized Martin Scotus if the identification of the latter's friend, Fulbert, with the palace chanter is correct. Manno of Laon, a student of the Irish masters, became a master in the palace. This patronage, both at the cathedral and at the court, assured a wide audience for the exercise of the Irishmen's teaching talents in the arts and in Greek. Heir to the scholarship of Irishmen from the Rhine, Laon, in turn, spread its own influence to a wide range of continental masters at the end of the ninth century. Manna, Bernard, and Adelelm were, in fact, eclipsed as masters by two monks from Auxerre, Heiric and his pupil, Remigius. Our research indicates that these two masters not only were acquainted with the thought of the Laon masters but, it appears, were personally attached to the school at Laon. In addition to the masters of Auxerre, scholars at Reims and St. Amand were influenced by the work of the Laon masters. The school, then, transmitted the scholarship of a small group of Irish scholars to an entire generation of continental scholars. In addition to the information the manuscripts have yielded on Laon's role in a dynamic cultural process, they also contribute to the history of the school itself. 237 While a number of Irishmen can be traced to Laon, there can be no doubt that the school there was built around Martin Scotus. He is the magister Laudunensis, as the Laon Annales describe him. His notes are found throughout Laon's manuscripts, many of which he undoubtedly brought to the cathedral library himself.' Martin was an excellent scribe who, in addition to copying his own Greekaatin grammar, supervised the copying of other Laon manuscripts. His interests ranged over the arts, Greek, medicine, and, of course, the study of Scripture. His circle of known acquaintances included his students, Manno and Bernard, as well as John Scotus, Hincmar of Laon, Fulbert, the court chanter, Lupus of Ferribres, and, perhaps, Probus of Mainz. Laon's manuscripts also manifest the continuous support the school received from the city's bishops especially Hincmar, Dido, and Adelelm. .Most of the impor- tant manuscripts used in the school were preserved by these men. Hincmar sheltered the Irishmen at Laon and supported the only known ninth century scriptorium at Laon. Dido brought Heiric of Auxerre to Laon. Adelelm, with his master, Bernard, prevented the dispersion of Martin Scotus' manuscripts. Adelelm also compiled and copied the Laon Formulgrx. Hopefully, the research presented here will comple- ment additional investigations and further our understanding of the Carolingian renaissance. Schools, such as that at Laon, were the most durable and influential product of the 238 Carolingian renaissance. The humanism.of Lupus of Ferribres or the philosophical brilliance of John Scotus were ephemeral phenomena. The purity of Carolingian script rapidly degen— erated and had to await its rediscovery by Renaissance printers. The study of Greek, a special project fostered by the court, withered after the ninth century. The great Carolingian program of manuscript copying was not vigor- ously promoted in the tenth century. What did survive was the infrastructure of schools established in the ninth century. At first glance, the schools' accomplishments in terms of "thought" seem rather modest. What is perhaps more important though is not so much speculative systems but rather the mechanism of the transmission of culture. The schools of the Carolingian renaissance canonized a certain body of knowledge as a legitimate educational goal. This fact itself is significant. The Word was to be ex- plicated and understood. The predominant mode of inquiry was thus grammatical. Commentaries grappled with reality through the interpretation of words. The meaning of words Vtwwi however, and lead to different interpretations. The consequence was a dynamism born of contradiction and a tireless effort to understand better the Word. The schools of the ninth and tenth centuries did not produce Greek scholars, or philosophers, or classicists. Rather they produced men with an inquisitive and analytic bent who may not have increased the "store of knowledge" but who did 239 promote increased critical mental activity. In this respect, there is not a great distance between Gottschalk of Orbais and Peter Abelard. BIBLIOGRAPHICAL ESSAY BIBLI OGRAPHI BIBLIOGRAPHICAL ESSAY Laon's manuscripts, of course, are the chief bibliographical item used in this study. Their exploi- tation, however, would have been impossible without the aid of other source material, reference works, manu— script studies, and general works on ninth century cul— tural life. A full list of the works I have consulted follows this essay. This essay will discuss the most im- portant and useful works and indicate some desiderata. The few brief details contained in the Lean Ag: gala; constitute the most important primary source for the history of the school of Leon. A variety of other ninth and tenth century sources have proved useful, howb ever, not so much for their interpretation of events but, rather, for the chance details they have conserved. Hincmar of Reims' letters, his Opusculum LV Capitulorum, and the letters and works of Hincmar of Leon have been especially fruitful sources for the names of key person- nel at Laon. Flodoard's Historia Remensis Ecclesiae and his Annales provide some information on Laon's bishops but very little of it is of cultural significance. The entire third book of his history of Reims is devoted to the pontificate of Hincmar of Reims. For this book, Flodoard consulted the cathedral archives and presented 241 242 synopses of most of Hincmar's letters. Some of these letters, most of which have not survived, touch on events at Laon. Richer of Reims repeats Flodoard's Annales for what he has to say of the ninth century. Lupus of Ferrihres letters are always a delight to read. They should be consulted in Léon Levillain's edition for his excellent chronological arrangement. While he has very little to say of Laon, he does preserve an accurate re- cord of the difficulties of scholarship in the ninth ‘ century. Non-literary sources, the charters and diplomas of the Carolingian kings and the acts of church councils, can not be ignored. Some of these sources directly concern Laon, such as the Council of Douzy's examination of Hincmar of Laon's pontificate. Usually, however, they preserve only a name which can help solve a puzzle. The difficulty in using the sources is not that they have so little to say about the school of Laon. The real problem is a modern one. Sources for the ninth century are scattered throughout a variety of source collections for which there is no complete, centralized index. It is only a mild inconvenience that one must con- sult the Monumenta Germaniae Historica for Hincmar of Reims' earlier letters and Migne's Patrologia latina for his later letters. It is much more difficult to dis- cover that a letter by Pardulus of Laon is found in the 1645 edition of Hincmar of Reims' works or that a charter of Bishop Rodulf of Leon is preserved in Mabillon's 243 De re diplomatica. Martin Scotus' letter to Lupus of Ferritres has escaped study because it is preserved in two relatively obscure works, the preface of Du Cange's Glossarium mediae et infimae latinitatis and in Montfaucon's Palaeographia Graeca. In addition to a complete guide to the sources, another desideratum is a modern onomastic index. Chevalier's Répertoire des sources historigues du.Moyen Age is old and out of date. It includes only the "famous" personages. What is needed is an index that contains all medieval names not only those mentioned in literary works but also names found in letters, charters, necrologies, and lists of members of ecclesiastical commup nities. This task is not as enormous as it seems. One could begin by collating the indices of the Mpg with those of the Gallia Christiana and the collections of charters, for example. Additional names could be gleaned from the manuscripts. A tool such as this would not only save time but would also lead to the solution of many problems. Several reference works have been quite useful. Pius Bonifacius Gams' Series Episcoporum Ecclesiae Catho- liggg lists the names and dates of every known bishOp, chronologically and according to dioceses, throughout the world up to the mid-nineteenth century. Gams supersedes Duchesne's older Fastes gpiscopaux. However, if exact chronology were important, one would have to check even Gams in the light of more recent scholarship. Two refer- ence works, M. Vatasso's Initia Patrum aliorumgue Scriptorum 244 Ecclesiasticarum Latinorum, and E. Dekkers' and E. Gaar's Clavis Patrum Latinorum, have not been mentioned in my notes but were of inestimable value. ‘Vatasso's work was a great help in the identification of the contents of Laon's manu- scripts. As the name implies, the Initia is a two volume table of the opening lines of most medieval literature. If a work is untitled in a manuscript and the incipit is preserved, it can be traced with the help of the Initia. ‘Vatasso took all his incipits, however, from Migne's Patrologia latina. Any medieval source not found in Migne or published after vatasso's work (1906-1908) will not, of course, have its incipit in the Initia. This is the major weakness of this otherwise useful tool. The Clavis Patrum Latinorum is a complete bibliographical guide to early Christian literature. "Fathers" is interpreted broadly and includes, for example, Isidore of Seville, Gregory of Tours, Bede, and the ubiquitous "anonymous". The Clavis furnishes references to the most recent text editions and scholarly literature. I used the better organized 1961 edition primarily to identify the contents of manuscripts. Two other reference works are repeatedly referred to in my text. No one can work in medieval intellectual history without the help of Max Manitius' Geschichte der lateinischen Literatur des Mittelalters. Manitius' three fat volumes (1911, 1923, 1931) cover the period, in 3229? M style, from Justinian to the end of the twelfth century. I used the first volume which stops in the 245 mid-tenth century. Manitius has amassed the basic infor- mation one needs to begin a study of the work of the impor— tant medieval cultural figures. Each medieval author's biography is given and a brief synopsis of his work is provided. Manitius' notes refer to extant manuscripts, the pertinent medieval source material, text editions, and the secondary scholarly literature. Each volume is completed with a working index which allows one to consult it easily for a particular detail. Manitius' guide is, in some sense, inadequate and needs to be used with care. Although Manitius often referred to his own research, he was forced to depend to a large degree on the work.of’others. Much of this scholarship is now unreliable or out of date. Manitius includes some "phantom" figures (such as Dunchad) and, of course, does not include others discovered more recently (notably Martin Scotus). Manitius interprets "literature" rather strictly. Hagiographical productions and theological works, for example, are mentioned only if they contain literary allusions. One also wishes for an index to the manuscripts to which he refers. Nevertheless, despite its age and the limitations of its concept of literature, Manitius is indispensable. A modern revision will probably have to come from groups of scholars working in their specialities. J. F. Kenney's The Sources for the Early:History of Ireland: Ecclesiastical (An Introduction and a Guidab is a more specialized guide than Manitius', It considers 246 both Irish ecclesiastical history and the history of Irishmen on the continent. He refers to texts, manu- script studies, and other secondary literature produced before 1931. Again, this work's utility is diminished with every passing year. Ludwig Bieler lent his name to a reprinted version of The Sources in 1966 but was only able to make limited revisions. The most important of these are more accurate dates for the manuscripts based on his own and Bernhard Bischoff's work. The biblio- graphy is essentially that of Kenney's original work. The Gallia Christiana, a product of eighteenth century Maurist scholarship, is a twelve volume guide to French ecclesiastical history. It gives a brief history of French ecclesiastical establishments and brief bio- graphies of bishOps, abbots, and abbesses. All of this information is based on source material. Refinements of and additions to the source material have made many' of the 92's entries obsolete. Still, it is a good introduction to the sources on a particular ecclesiastic or institution. H. Fisquet's La France pontificale is a nineteenth century translation of the g9 into French. Fisquet corrected some of the more obvious blunders of the Maurists. Another category of reference work is manuscript catalogues. Here, quality and therefore usefulness vary enormously. This is surprising because there are a finite number of manuscripts and one would think that each manu- script would have a detailed and accurate description by 247 now. Enough has already been said of the Laon manuscript catalogues above. Hagen's catalogue of the Bern manuscripts, published in 1875, is excellent. Wilmart's more recent catalogue of the Regina manuscripts in the Vatican also meets high standards and is extremely useful. However, Wilmart described five hundred of the Regina manuscripts in his catalogue. Since it was published in 1937, no one has continued the task and described the remaining one thousand manuscripts in the collection. For the approximately fifteen thousand Latin manuscripts con- served at the Bibliothbque Nationale in Paris, only about five thousand are described in a modern catalogue. Terse descriptions in volumes three and four of the 1744 9232f loggs codicum manuscriptorum bibliothecae regiae cover another five thousand Latin manuscripts. These notices are unreliable. For the manuscripts which entered the Bibliothhque Nationale after the French Revolution, that is, those numbered after 10,000 generally, one has only an inventory prepared by Leapold Delisle. It will be many years before all the manuscripts of the Bibliothhque Nation- ale will be provided with descriptions available to all scholars. Leopold Delisle's three volume Le cabinet des manuscrits de la Bibliothéque Nationale is more than a history of the formation of the manuscript collection in Paris. It contains important information on the origin and provenance of many of the manuscripts and is indis- pensable in light of the absence of modern catalogues. 248 Unfortunately, Delisle did not include a manuscript index to his work about manuscripts. One must turn hundreds of pages in search of a detail that may or may not be there. One way to fill in the gaps in the catalogues of manuscript collections is to consult specialized catalogues. The most important of these is E. A. Lowe's Codices latini antiquiores which gives a paleographical description of every Latin manuscript copied before 800. The accent is on paleography but there is much in the CLA which is helpful to the historian. Claudio Leonardi's catalogue of all Martianus Capella manuscripts contains exact descriptions of 241 manuscripts. For these manu- scripts, Leonardi is the best guide. Wickersheimer's catalogue of medical manuscripts found in French col- lections is another specialized catalogue with recent and detailed descriptions of a number of manuscripts. One should also mention the studies of the various schools of script such as Lindsay's study of the‘gg-type script, Rand's study of the Tours manuscripts, Jones' study of the scriptoria of Cologne and Carey's article on the Reims scriptoria. Delisle's and Boutemy's articles on the so-called "Franco-Saxon school" bear directly on several Laon manuscripts. While there is no universal unanimity on whether certain manuscripts should be as- signed to a particular copying center, these studies, nevertheless, contain the fullest descriptions of man* manuscripts. 249 Numerous specialized paleographical studies have been valuable both for what they have to contribute to the study of Laon's manuscripts and to the study of the ninth and tenth centuries. Three scholars' works, in particular, address themselves to both paleography and the history of culture. I refer to the work of Ludwig Traube, Paul Lehmann, and Bernhard Bischoff. Their most important papers have been republished in collections which facilitate their consultation. It should also be noted that the editor of Traube's papers, Lehmann, and Bischoff, took the opportunity of the re—edition of their studies to make, in some cases, important additions to them. Two specialized manuscript studies have been especially pertinent for the history of the school of Leon. Giuseppe Billanovich's "Dall'antica Ravenna alle Biblioteche Umanistiche," identified Heiric of Auxerre's autograph notes in a Vatican manuscript. Additional studies like Billanovich's would help to clarify much of the intellectual history of the ninth and tenth centuries. The plates which he published lead me to suspect that Heiric also left notes in several Laon manuscripts. When Claudio Leonardi was engaged on his project of a catalogue of Martianus Capella manuscripts, he uncovered new manuscript information important for Laon and for the study of Martianus Capella. His "Raterio e Marziano Capella," for example, identifies the notes 250 in one Martianus Capella codex as those of Rathier of Ver- ona. The same manuscript bears Martin Scotus' commentary and was presented to St. Germain in Auxerre by a ninth century archdeacon, Heliseus. It thus furnishes one of the prime material witnesses to the intellectual rapport between the two centers. An American scholar thought that Leo— nardi's "Nuove voci poetiche tra secolo IX e.XI" was a 1 The publication of two relatively insignificant piece. previously unknown poems by John Scotus and another poem by an unknown ninth century master does not seem unimpor- tant to me. Leonardi also presented in this study exact descriptions of the fragments on which this material was found. This information has enabled the present writer to discover the manuscript whichoriginally bore the fragments. Another important aid for the study of manuscripts, although not strictly a bibliographical item, must be mentioned here. The section lgtine of the Institut de Recherche et d'Histoire des Textes in Paris main~ tains a file on every Latin manuscript. If a manuscript has been the object of a detailed study or even mentioned in passing, there will be a bibliographical reference in the Institut's files. The utility of these files is immediately apparent. There is no satisfactory study of cultural life during the reign of Charles the Bald. The deficiencies of 1Cf. W. H. Stahl, "To a Better Understanding of Martianus Capella," Speculum, XL (1965), 113. 251 Monsignor Lesne's treatment have already been noted. M. L. W. Laistner attempted a synthesis of Carolingian cultural history in his Thought and Letters. By letters, however, he meant classical letters or classical forms of expression. Thus, one is limited to articles on various aspects of intellectual activity during the latter half of the ninth century. Laistner contributed heavily to this literature when he worked with Lindsay on the latter's edition of medieval glossaries. We have discussed Laistner's attribution of the scholica graecarum to Martin Scotus elsewhere. For the study of Greek during the ninth century, one must now start with Bischoff's "Das griechische Element in der abendlfindischen Bildung des Mittelalters." Dom.Cappuyns considers the period in his classic work on John Scotus. Almost thirty years ago, Cappuyns presented the then radical but now generally accepted thesis that Irishmen received the bulk of their intellectual formation on the continent. Most scholars, Cappuyns included, have paid scant attention to the mechanics and substance of education during the Carolingian period. Recently, G. Mathon has emphasized John Scotus' career as a master in his "Les formes et l'interprttation des arts liberaux au milieu du IXe sitcle. L'enseignement palatin de Jean Scot Erigbne." J. G. Preaux has attributed a commentary on Martianus Capella to Martin Scotus. His most important evidence rests on the discovery that a note in manuscript 444 on the nine Muses is also found in an anonymous commentary. 252 .Martin wrote the note in manuscript 444, but whether it is material from.his own commentary or a note copied from someone else's commentary, I do not know. We will have to await the full edition of the commentary in order to substantiate Preaux' attribution. Two Italian scholars have made a great contribution toward a new approach to ninth century cultural history. Riccardo Quadri has pre— sented an excellent edition of Heiric of Auxerre's 22;: lectagea, a work long known and ignored. Quadri has also minutely examined Heiric's career in a preface to his edition of the Collectanea. The same work permitted Quadri to assemble the biography of one of Heiric's masters in his "Aimone di Auxerre alla luce dei Collectanea di Heiric di Auxerre.” The importance of the Collgcjaneg lies in its format. It is an arrangement of excerpts on various topics which reflect not only the composition of the Collectanea but also the teaching methods of Heiric's masters. Ermenegildo Bertola has seen in these methods the pre- cedent for the scholastic method. He even goes so far as to designate Haimo of Auxerre a precursor of Abelard. This is a fertile area for further study. The High.Mid- dles Ages' debt to Carolingian masters, it seems to me, is amply demonstrated in Jean Jolivet's work on Gottschalk of Orbais and Carolingian theology and his more recent ‘work, Agts du langage et theologie chez Abelard. BIBLIOGRAPHY Primary Sources Annales Laudunenses at S, Vingenti Mettensis Breves. Monu- menta Germaniae Historica Scriptores, XV, 1293- 1295. Annales Sancti Maximini Trevirensis. Monumenta Germaniae Historica, Scriptores, II, 212-213. t ne, U. Durand, Ve erum S ri tor Collectio (Paris: Montalant, 1724 , I, Almann of Hautvillers. "La lettre philosOphique d'Almanne et son contexte littéraire," edited by Andre Wil- mart, Archives d'histoire doctri le et littéraire du moyen—age, III (1928), 285-319. Charles the Bald. Georges Tessier, et a1. Regueil des actes de Charles II 1e Chauve, roi de France. 3 vols. Paris: Imprimerie Nationale, 19 3-1955. Charles the Simple. Recueil des actes de Coarl 8 III le Sim le roi de France m . Edited by F. Let, P. Lauer. 2 vols. Paris: Imprimerie. Nationale, 1940-1949. gorpgg Glossariorum Latinorum. Edited by G. Goetz. vols. Leipzig and Berlin: Teubner, 1899- 1923. Dunchag Glossae in Martianum. Edited by C. E. Lutz. Lancaster, Pa.1 American Philological Association, 1944. 82 . Edited by R.-H. Bautier. pr erie Nationale, 1967. Forgglge ngigig Laudunensis. Edited by K. Zeumer. JMonumenta Germaniae Historica. Formulae Mero- wingici et Karolini Aezi, pp. 512-520. Eudes. Paris: Im- 253 254 Flodoard. Les Annales de Flodoard. Edited by P. Lauer. Paris: Picard, 1 05. . Historia Remensis Ecclesiae. Monumenta Ger- maniae Historica, Scriptores, XIII, 409-599. Heiric of Auxerre. Vita Sancti Germani, Episcopi Autis- siodorensis. Monumenta Germaniae Historica, Foetae latini aevi’karolini, III, 4 — 1 Hincmar of Laon. quscula at E istolae. J.-P. Migne, Patrologia latina, CXXIE, 981-1071. Hincmar of Reims. E istolae. J.-P. Migne, Patrologia latina, CXXVI, - 0. . Epistolae quae spectant ad causam Hincmarii Laudunensis. 93.-P.‘Migne, Patrologia latina, . O usculum LV Ca itulorum adversus Hincmarum mLauWW W494- . Vita Remi ii e isco i Remensis. Monumenta Germaniae Historica, Scriptores rerum Merovingi- carum, III, — . Hincmarii archiepiscopi Remensis O era. Edited by J. Sirmoid. *2 vols. ‘Paris: Cramoisy, 1645. John Scotus. Iohannis Scotti: Annotationes in Marcianum. Edited by C. E. Lutz. Cambridge, Mass.: Media— eval Academy of America, 1939. Louis IV. Recueil des actes de Louis IV roi de France (936:954). Edited by P. Eauer. Paris: Imprim- erle a ionale, 1914. Louis V. Recueil des actes de Lothaire et de Louis V, rois de France ’ " .1 ed oy L. =alp-en an. F. Lo . Imprimerie Nationale, 1908. Lothair. See Louis V. Lupus of Ferrihres. Lou de Ferribres Corres ondance. Edited and transgated by L. LevilIain. 2 vols. Paris: "Les Belles Lettres," 1924-1935. Remigius of Auxerre. Remi ii Autissiodorensis Commentum in Martianum Capellam. Edited by C. E. Lutz. 2 vols. Leiden: Brill, 1962-1965. 255 Richer of Reims. Histoire de France (888-9952. Edited and translated by R. Latouchb. Paris: "Les Belles Lettres," 1937. Sacrorum Conciliorum nova et agplissima collectio. Edited by J. D. Mansi. 53 vols. Graz: Akademische Druck— und Verlagsanstalt, 1960. Vita Sadalbergae Abbatissae Laudunensis. Monumenta Ger- maniae Historica, Scriptores rerum Merovingicarum, V, 40-66. Reference Works and Manuscript Catalogues Bugniatre, Dom. "Les bibliothéques, les Manufactures et les maisons royales du laonnais, " Histoire de Laon, Paris: Bibliothbque Nationale, Collection de Picardio, t. 265, ff. 97v-113v. Carey, Frederick M. "The Scriptorium of Reims During the Archbishopric of Hincmar (845-882 A. D. ), in Classical and Mediaeval Studies in Honor of Ed— ward Kennard Ran , edi e by W. ones ew fork: L. W. 3ones, 1938), 41—60. Catalo s Codicum Manuscri torum Bibliothecae Re iae. Vols. III and IV. Paris: Typografihia Eegia, 1744. Dekkers,E . Clavis Patrum Latinorum. Editio altera. Steenb rugis: In abbatia sancti Petri, 1961. Delisle, L. Le cabinet des manuscrits de la Bibliothe ue Nationale. vols. Paris: Imprimerie Nationale, -1 Fisquet, H. La France ontificale (Gallia Christiana}. Metro ole de Reims: Soissons et Laon. Paris: E. Repos, 183V. Fleury, E. Les manuscrits a miniatures de la bibliothegue de Laon etudigs au oint de vue de leur illustration: PremiSre artie:‘VIIe VIIIe IXe Xe XIe et_ XIIe siEcles. 2nd edition. Paris: fiufiouiin, 1863. Gaar, E. See Dekkers, E. Gallia Christiana. Twelve vols. Paris: Ex Typographia Regia, 16—1877. 256 Game, P. B. Series ggiscogorum Catholicae. Graz: Akademisc 9 rue - un erIEgsanstalt, 1957. Hagen, H. Catalogus codicum Bernensium flBibliotheca Bongarsianafi' ern: Haller, 1 75. Hamburger, 0. Die Illustrierten Handschriften der Bur- gerbibliotheE Be . Die vorkarolin ischen und karolin ischen Handschriften. Bern: Burger- SiETiotEek Bern, 1932. Jones, L. W. The ScriEt of Cologne from Hildebald to Hermann. Cambridge, Mass.: The ediaeval cademy 0? America, 1932. Kenney, J. F. The Sources for the Earl Histor of Ire— land: Ecclesiastical SAn Introduction and Euidez. ReV1sed edition y L. Bie er. ew ork: c a- gon Books, Inc., 1966. Leclercq, H. "MSS liturgiques de Laon," in Dictionnaire dtarchéologie et de liturgie, edited by F. Cabrol, H. Leclercg, et a1. 15 vols.; Paris: LetOuzey et Ané, 19 4—19505, ‘VIII, pt. 1, 1323-1326. Leonardi, C. "I codici di Marziano Capella," Aevum, 9 mm (1959), 443-489; ibid., XXXIV 1—993 411-524. Lowe, E. A. Codices Latini Anti uiores. 11 fascicules. Oxford: Siarendon Press, 1952:1966. Mabillon, Jean. ‘De re diplomatica libri VI. Paris: Robustel, 1759. Manitius, Max. Geschichteggr lateinischen Literatur des Mittelalters. 3 vols. Munich: Beck, 1911- 195f. Montfaucon, Bernard. "Catalogus mss ecclesiae cathed. Laudunensis," in Bibliotheca bibliothecarum manu- scri torum nova ( vo s.; aris: riasson, II, 1292-1299. Rand, E. K. Studies in the Script of Tours. 1: A Sur- ve of the Manuscri ts of Tours 'Vol I Text. CamEridge, fiass.: MediaevaI Academy of America, 1929. Ravaisson, Felix. "Manuscrits de la bibliothbque de Laon," in Catalopue énéral des manuscrits des bibliothe ues uhligues de dégartements (1Sre s3r.; 5 vois.: Paris: mprimerie a ionale, 257 Vatasso, M. Initia Patrum aliorumgue Scrigtorum Ecclesiasticorum Latinorum. vols. ome: is Va icanis, 1903:1903. Wickersheimer, E. Les manuscrits latins de médecine du haut mo en—E e dans les biinothSques de France. Paris: 'Centre Nationale de la Recherche Scien- tifique, 1966. Wilmart, A. Codices Reginenses Latini {Bibliothecae A ostolicae Vaticanae) tomus I: Codices 1- 2E5. Vatican: In Bibliotheca Vaticana, 1937. Secondary Works d'Arbois de Jubainville, H. "Uh fragment grec transcrit en lettres latines par un irlandais au VIIIe ou 1x sihcle," Revue celtigue, XXVI (1905), 384-387. (Ms. 4447 Beeson, C. H. "The Authorship of Quid sit ceroma," in Classical and Mediaeval Studies in Honor of Edward Kennard Rand, edited by E. W. Jones ew or z . . Jones, 1938), 1—7. Bertola, E. "I precedenti del metodo del sic et non di Abelardo," Rivista di filosofia neoscolastica, L111 (1961), 255- 0. . "Il commentario paolino di Haimo di Halberstadt 0 di Auxerre e gli inizi del metodo scolastico," Pier Lombardo, V (1961), 29-54. Billanovich, G. "Dall'antica Ravenna alle Biblioteche Umanistiche," Universith cattolica del Sacro Cuore (Milano), Annuario {1955-1955}, 73—157. Bischoff, B. Mittelalterliche Studien: Ausgewfihlte Aufsfitze zur Schri?tkunde und titeraturgeschichte. 2 voIs. Stuttgart: Hiersemann, 1936—1967. . "Das griechische Element in der abendlfindischen Bildung des Mittelalters," in Mittelalterliche Studien, II, 246—275. . "Hadoard und die Klassikerhandschriften aus Corbie," in flittelalteriiche Studien, I, 49-63. . "Die Kalner Nonnenhandschriften und das Skriptorium von Chelles," Mittelalterliche 258 Studien, I, 16—34. Boutemy, A. "Le style franco-saxon, style de St—Amand," Scriptorium, III (1949), 260-264. . "Notes de voya es sur quelques manuscrits de l'ancien archdiocgse de Reims," Scri torium, II (1948), 123-129. (Mss. 6 38, 507'57E‘T227’122bie, 123,)136, 199, 265, 273, 598, 342, 428, 444, 464, 4 . . "Un trésor injustement oublié: les manuscrits enluminés du nord de la France (période pré-gothique), Scri torium, III (1949), 110—122. Broche, L. "L'ancien palais des rois e Laon," Bulletin de la société académique de Laon,"XXXI (1900-1954), Cappuyns, M. "Les 'Bibli Vulfadi' et Jean Scot ErigEne," Recherches de théologie ancienne et médiévale, II 1 , 137'- O . Jean Scot Erigene: sa vie son oeuvre sa en- sée. Impression anastaltique. BruxelIes: Cui- ture et Civilisation, 1969. Coolidge, R. T. "Adalbero, Bishop of Laon," Studies in Medieval and Renaissance History, II ( , 1- 14. . "Notes sur l'épitaphe de 1'éveque Adalbéron de Laon," Fédération des sociétés savantes de l'Aisne, Memoires, I 1 , — . Delisle, L. L'évan éliaire de Saint4Vaast d'Arras et la calli ra hie Franco-Saxonne du IXe siScIe. Baris: Champion, 1333. . "Notice sur les manuscrits originaux d'Adémar de Chabannes," Notices et extraits, XXXV, 1hre pte (1896), 241—35 . "Régistre des professions et des associations de l'abbaye de Saint-Remi de Reims (IXe et Xe sihcles," in Littérature latine et histoire du moxen-age (Paris: eroux, , — . Devisme, J. F. L. Hiitoire de la ville de Laon. 2 vols. Laon: Courto s, . Dumas, G. "Capitales des rois et empereurs carolingiens, principalement dans l'Aisne, l'Oise et la Champagne," Fédération des sociétés historigues et archéologigues e isne, emoires, II 1 7 , 5- . 259 - Eckel. A. Charles 1e Simple. Paris: Bouillon, 1899. Favre, E. Eudes comte de Paris et roi de France 882— 898 . Paris: Bouillon, 1 93. Fleury, E. Un é isode de la chute des Carlovin iens (Laon - Reims 988-9925. Laon: Jacob, 1573. Freeman, A. "Further Studies in the Libri Carolini," Speculum, XL (1965), 203-289. Ganshof, F. L. "Eginard e Gand," Bulletin de la société d'histoire et d'archéologie de Hand, 1 ,1-- Gougaud, L. Christianitx in Celtic Lands: A Historv of the Churches of the CeltsJ their Origin, their DeveIopment, Influence and Mutual Relations. rans ated by M. Joynt. London: Sheed and Ward, 1932. . "Les surnuméraires de 1'émigration scotti ue VI—VIII 8.," Revue bénédictine, XLIII (1931 , Hagen, H. Etude littéraire et histori ue sur Pierre Daniel. Translated by PauI de EeIice. Orleans: HerIuison, 1876. Hampe, K. "Reise nach Frankenreich und Belgien im Frfih- jahr, 1897," *Neues Archiv, XXIII (1898), 656- 657. (M58. 5,'6; 67;'TT27 220, 407, 426bis) Jeauneau, E. Jean Scot Homélie sur le rolo ue de Jean (Voxgpiritualisf. Paris: Editions du Cerf, 19690 Jolivet, J. Arts du langage et théologie chez Abélard. Paris: r n, . . Godescalc d'Orbais et la Trinité: La méthode (19 T8. EEGOIOKIO 5 I'Epoque carolingienne. $813188 Vrin, 1953. Laistner, M. L. W. "Abbo of St—Germain-des-Prés,” Bulletin du Cangg, I (1924), 27-31. . "Candelabrum Theodosianum," The Classical '“"""Quorter11, XVI (1922), 107. "Martianus Capella and His Ninth Century Com- mentators," Buéletin of the John Rylands Librapy, IX (1925), 1 . 260 . "A Ninth-Century Commentator on the Gospel Accordin to Matthew," Harvard Theological Review, XX (1927?, 129-149. . "Notes on Greek from the Lectures of a Ninth Century Monastery Teacher," Bulletin of the John R lands Libra , VII (1923), Zifiigo. . "The Revival of Greek in Western Europe in the Carolingian Age," Histopy, IX (1924), 177-187. . "Rivipulensis 74 and the Scholica of Martin of Laon," in MéIanges Mandonnet: Etudes d'histoire litteraire et doctrinale du mo en—a e (2 vols.; Paris: Vrin, 1930 , II, 31-37. . Thought ang_Letters in Western Europe. A. D. goo to 900. Ithaca, N. Y.: Cornell University ress, . Lauer, P. Robert Ier et Raoul de Hour 0 e rois de France (923—9565. Paris: Champion, 1915. Lehmann, P. Erforschun des Mittelalters: Ausgewfihlte Abhandlungen und Ausztze. 3 vols. S u gar : Iersemann, . . "Erzbischof Hildebald und die Dombibliothek von K31n," Erforschung,des Mittelalters, II, 139- 144. "Von Quellen und Autoritaten irisch-lateinischer Texte," Erforschung des Mittelalters. III, 143-148. "Zur Kenntnis und Geschichte einiger Iohannes Scottus zugeschriebener Werke," Erforschungides Mittelalters, II, 145-156. Le Long, N. Histoire ecclésiastique et civile du diocese de Laon et de tout le a s contenu entre l'Oise et la Meuse l'Aisne et la Sambre. Channs: Seneuze, 1783. Leonardi, C. "Nuove voci poetiche tra secolo IX e XI," Studi medievali, 3rd ser., II (1961), 139—168. . "Raterio e Marziano Capella " talia medioevale e umanistica, II (1959), 73-10%. Lesne, E. Histoire de la propriété ecclésiastique en France ‘VoI IV: Les Iivres ifEcri toria" et BlEIiOtES ues du commencement du VIIIe E Ia fin du X39 siche. LIIIe: FacultEs catEoquues, 1938. 261 . Histoire de la ro riété ecclésiasti no on France. Vol V: Les 3coIes de Ia fin du VIIIe sIScIe E Ia fIn du XIIe. LiIIe: Facultes cathoquues, 1935. Lindsay, W. M. "The Cyrillus Glossary and Others,” The Classical Review, XXXI (1917), 188—193. . "The Laon AZ—Type," Revue des bibliothb ues, "'"'""xxxv (1914), 15-27. Lot, F., Halphen, L. Le re e de Charles 1e Chauve 840- 8 : Premibre_partie 40- 51 . Paris: Champion, Lot, F. Les derniers carolin iens: Lothaire Louis V, rles e Lorraine I . Paris: Bouil on, Lave, H. "Dialo s de statu sanctae ecclesiae: Das Werk eines Iren 1m Laon des 15. Jahrhunderts," Deutscher Archiv ffir Erforschun des Mittelalters, XVII (19615, 12:95. Martinet, S. "La cathédrale carolingienne de l'éveque de Laon Gerfrid," Fédération des sociétés d'histoire et d'archéologie de l'Aisne, Mamoires, I ’ '3. V . "Laon," in Catholicisme: Hier au'ourd'hui, demain, ed. G. Jacquemet. Vol. VI (Paris: Ee- touzey et Ané, 1967), 1820—1823. . "Un palais décrit dans un manuscrit carolingien de la bibliothbque municipale de Laon," Fédération des sociétés d'histoire et d'archéolo ie e l'AisneJ Mémoires, XII (1966;, 75-84. Marville. "Etude sur les lieux oh s'est arrété Charles le Chauve, pour ses chasses, on 867," Bulletin académi ue de Laon, XV (1865), 219-234. Mathon, G. "Ecole de Leon au Moyen—Age," in Catholicisme: Hier au'ourd'hui demain ed. G. Jacquemet. Voi. VI (Earls: retouzey et Age, 1967), 1823-1824. . "Les formes et la signification de la pédagogie des arts libéraux au milieu du IXe sibcle: L'en- seignement palatin de Jean Scot Erigbne," in Arts‘ liberaux etpphilosophie au moyen-age(Paris: Vrin, . . . "Jean Scot Erigbne," in Catholicisme: Hier au- aourd'hui, demain, ed. G. Jac uemet. 501. VI aris: e ouzey et Ané, 1967 , 626-631. 262 . "Un florilege érigénien e l'abbaye de St-Amand au temps d'Hucbald," Recherches de théolo ie anp sienna et médiévale, XX (1953), 352-311. Melleville, M. Histoire de la ville de Laon et de ses institutions. 2 vols. ‘Paris: Dumoulin, 1846' . Notice historique sur l'ancien diOCEse de Laon et les‘evegues de cette ville. Paris: DumouIin, 1 . Merlette, B. "Ecoles et bibliothbques o Laon de la fin de l'antiquité e la naissance des universités," manup script copy of an oral communication presented at the 95e Con rEs National des Sociétés Savantes (Reims, 23 March 1970). Meyer, K. "Neu aufgefundene altirische Glossen " Zeit- schrift ffir celtische Philologie, VIII (1916— 1 , -1 . MS . . "Uber eine Handschrift von Laon " Sitzun s- , d ' éer berichte der ani lich-Preussichen Aka emie Wissenschaften (1513), 385:381. (Ms. 55) Miller, E. "Glossaire grec-latin de la bibliotheque de Laon," Notices et extraits, XXIX, 2e pte Misonne, D. "La charte de Raoul de Laon relative e l'établissement de moines scots a Saint-Michel- en-Thiérache (3 fév. 945)," Revue bénédictine, LXXIV (1964), 298-307. Mone, F. J. "Chronik von Schfittern," in Quellensammlung der badischen Landes eschichte. Vol, II arls- Euhe: Macklot, 1863;, 41-132. Morin, G. "Traité priscillianiste inédit sur la Trinité," Etudes textes in découvertes: Contributions 5 la Iitterature et 5 I'histoire des douze remiers siSCIes (Paris: Picard, 1913), 155-255. (Ms. 113) Petschenig, M. "Ein griechisch-lateinischer Glossar des achten Jahrhunderts," Wiener Studien, V (1883), 159-163. Préaux, J. G. "Le commentaire de Martin de Laon sur l'oeuvre de Martianus Capella," Latomus, XII (1953), 437-459. Quadri, R. I Collectanea di Eirico di Auxerre. Friburg: Edizioni finiversitarie FriEurgo, 1963. 263 . "Aimone di Auxerre alla luce dei Collectanea di Heiric di Auxerre," Italia medioevale e uman— istica, VI (1963), 1-48. Rand, E. K. "The Supposed Autographa of John the Scot," Universit of California Publications in Classical Philolo , V (1918-1923), 135-141. de Sars, M. Le laonnais féodal. Vol. II: Duché- airie de Laon. Paris: Champion, 1924. SchrBrs, H. Hinkmar: Erzbischof von Reims. Sein Leben ‘j und seine Schriften. fFreiburg im Breisgau: Her- der, 1883. SheldonAWilliams, I. P. "A Bibliography of the Works of Johannes Scottus Eriugena," Journal of Ecclesiastical Histogy,.X (1959), 198—224. "A List of Works Doubtfully or Wrongfully Attributed to Johannes Scottus Eriu ena," Journal of Ecclesiastical History, XV (1964 , 76-98. . Edition of Iohannes Scotti Eriu enae Periph seon. Liber Primus. Dublin: The DuBIin Institute or Advanced Studies, 1968. Stokes, W. "Old—Irish Glosses at Laon " Revue celtigue. XXIX (1908), 269-270. (Ms. 55 Taiée. "L'abbaye de Saint-Jean (602-1789): Ses trans- formations, ses péripéties, sa decadence," Bulletin de la société académique de Laon, XXI (W 4.17 ,17—09. Thompson, H. J. "Anaphus," The Classical Review, XXXIV (1920), 32-33. Traube, L. Vorlesun en und Abhandlun en. Hrsgb. F. B011. 3 vols. Munich: BecE, 1965. .. "Palaographische Anzeigen III," in Vorlesungen und Abhandlun en, III, 229-246. . "Palaeographische Forschungen, Ffinfter Teil: Autographa des Iohannes Scottus aus dem Nachlass herausgegeben von Edward Kennard Rand," in Abhand— lungen der an lich ba erischen Akademie des Wis- genschaften. ghiioso hisch—‘hilolo ische-und historische Klasse (Mfinchen), XXVI E1912), 1-17. "Perrona Scottorum," Vorlesungen und Abhand— lungen," III, 95-119. 264 . "Zur Uberlieferung der Elegien des Maximi- agus," VOrlesungen und Abhandlunggn, III, 38- 4 . Turner, C. H. "A Laon MS in 1906 and 1920, " Journal of Theological Studies, XXII (1920—1921),1-5. S. Van de vyver, A. "Hucbald de Saint-Amand, écoldtre, et l'invention du Nombre d'0r, " in Mélan es Au uste Pelzer: Etudes d'histoire II {teraire et doctrinale de la scolastique medievale (Université de Louvain: 'Recueil de travaux djhistoire et de philologie, 3e sér., 6 38¢. , 0 Van der Essen, L. "Hucbald de Sthmand (c. 840—930) et sa place dans le mouvement ha iographique médiéval, " Revuedfl histoire ecclesiastique, XIX (1923), 521— 527. Vendryes, J. "Les mots vieil-irlandais du manuscrit de Laon," Revue celtique. XXV (1904), 377-381. (Ms. 444) Wyard, R. Histoire de l’abba e de SaintéVincent de Laon. SaintZQuentin: Moureau, 1853. APPENDICES APPENDIX A ANONIMI VERSUS DE PRAECONIO URBIS LAUDUNENSIS1 Macrobius praetor Bibrax tua moenia jecit, Brachia sunt quia bina tibi res nomina fecit. Quod te Laudunum dici voluere sequentes, Hoc quoque res habuit, quia mons laudabilis esses. Caesaris ille liber qui narrat Gallica bella, Caesarius ipsius memorat quia viceris arma: Hac igitur causa conjurans Gallica tota Improvisa tuos circumdedit undique muros; Sed tibi sic clausae succurrunt caesaris alae. Et dant terga fugae quae te cinxere catenae. Attila rex saevis qui servis praefuit Hunis, Urbibus eversis habuit quas Gallicus orbis, Laudunum solam sibi comperit esse rebellem, Indigenae genti quae confugiunt fugienti, Vicinos et se rabido defendit ab hoste. Hinc et Normannos post multos pertulit annos. Nec tamen his cessit, quoniam confusa recessit Gens inimica Dei, voto frustrata trophaei. Normannos istos de Danis novimus ortos, Quos Deus in Francos iratus fecit acerbos, Illorum terram dans illis depopulandum, Tempore qui Calvi Caroli trans aequara vecti, Gallica regna sibi conquirunt lege tributi. Discalius partes Danos conduxit ad istas, Garmundum dici quem postera maluit aetas. Nunc a Normannis retinens Normannia nomen, Haec eadem dici consuevit Neustria pridem. Normannis illam Carolus concessit habendam, Et jam perpetuo cessit quasi jure tenendam. Corpora sunt illa sanctorum multa sub ara Laudunum translata forent ne tradita praedae. Quorum pars illic digno requiescit honore. 1 E. Marthne, U. Durand, Veterum Scri torum . . . Amplissima Collectio (Paris: Montalant, 17BZ), I, 662e663. 266 APPENDIX B CONCORDANCE 0F RAVAISSON'S, MONTFAUCON'S, AND BUGNIATRE'S CATALOGUE NUMBERS FOR LAON'S NINTH CENTURY MANUSCRIPTS R B M R B M R B M 4 75 275 201 38 107 27 4bis 76 107 216 58 182 115 28 6 134 121 220 376? 290? 123 29 11 45 171 239 106 30 14 5 13 252 106 32 16 78 103 265 157 197 54 9O 24 73 180 266 74 183 57 91 26 10 192 273 360 276 53 92 37 138 141 274 150 160 56 93 38 68 18 279 361 15 94 48 109? 23 298 47 178 93 95 50 110 26 319 122 77 97 55 125 212 328bis 97 286 79 102 63 15 330 50 181 136 118 67 142 211 336 40 313 124 120 68 70 203 342 308 305 333 123 72 70 203 403bis 306 108 305 125 80 144 407 137 163 85 162 81 145 280 420 326 146 167 84 131 31 422 119 291 60 169 86 81 101 423 118 210 61 170 92 126 262 424 327 156 62 175 93 127 114 426bis 372 155 176 96 44 278 428 373 238 65 177 97 84 266 439 182 296 29 179 105 129 96 444 371 349 103 185 107 55 184 445 370 161 209 113 39 307 447 114 216 35 213 114 149 284 464 365 223 36 214 121 49 277 468 355 228 43 215 122 99 279 469 362 294 100 259 122bis 132 281 473bis 1 1 135 261 129 89 350 289 46 265 130 83 104 140 16 269 131 87 268 66 17 52 274 135 88 166 67 19 121 283 136 86 105 63 20 69 285 137 307 64 21 288 199 34 194 101 24 292 200 37 350 111 25 301 309 303 312 1Now Paris, B,H,, lat. 11379 267 APPENDIX C LAON'S NINTH CENTURY CATHEDRAL LIBRARY References are generally made to Migne's edition of the sources to indicate the length of a work as it appears in a Laon manuscript. Though older, Migne's editions are more accessible than the modern critical editions specialists will want to consult. ADAMNANUS: De 10 is same is (cap. 22), ms. 92, ff. 163r-164v ed. MPL, LXXXVIII, 791-793) ALCUINUS: Comm in Iohannem, ms. 84, ff. 1r-164r; faucon, no. 292 (ed. MPL, C, 738-1006) De fide sanctae et individuae trinitatis (frag. cap. 1-14), ms. 445, ff. 93r-95r (ed. MPL, CI, 13-22) De virtutibus et vitiis (cap. 1—33), Paris B N , 1et.'2024, ff. 101r-125v (ed. MPL, CI, 613-635) Libellus de processione Spiritus sanctus, ms. 122bis, ff. 2r-23v—(ed. MPL, CI, 64482) Mont- PSEUDO-ALCUINUS: Domini Augustini explanatiogmysterii sancti trinitatis, ms. 122bis, ff. 24r-24v (ed. ALDHELMUS: Liber de enario et de metris aeni bus ac pedum regulis , ms. 464, ff. 1r-38v AMALARIUS EPISCOPUS TREVIRENSIS: De Officis et de ordine ecglesiastico, Montfaucon, no. 290 (ms. 220 ff. 2r-179r = liber sancti Vincenti Laudunenses) AMBROSIASTER: Comm in e istolam ad Romanos, ms. 107, ff. 1v-118r (ed. MPL, XVII, 45-184) AMBROSIUS AUTPERTUS: De conflictu vitiorum et virtutum, Paris, , AMBROSIUS: Comm, in epistolae ad Galatos, Montfaucon, no. 1 7 268 269 » Comm. in omnes S. Pauli epistolae, Montfaucon, no. 0 Comm. inppartem epistolae S. Pauli, Montfaucon, no. 93 De fide éexc.— II, 64-69), Paris, B .N., lat. 2024, f. 130r ed MPL, XVI, 596-598) De officiis ministrorum (lacunae: lib. I, 24-34; lib. II, 25- lib. III, 4), ms. 216, ff. 1r-66r (ed. MPL, XVI, 23-184) Liber in lucam, Montfaucon, no. 92 Liber tres officiorum; libri Naboth; Comm. in Tgbiam at Ibb; ‘Iiber de Elia et jejuno; inter- pretatiopsalmo‘72: apologia regis Davidis dicata heodosius, Montfaucon, no. 91 Tractatus de atriarchus de oenitentia de morte fratris, Montfaucon, no. 274 ANASTASIUS BIBLIOTHECARIUS: Collectanea ad Ioannem Diaconem, Paris B N lat. 5095, ff. 1r-58v TEEZ‘EEE, EXXEXf‘337f3967‘ PSEUDO-ATTICUS: Re Is formatorum, ms. 200, ff. 1va2r; ms. 336, f. 7r ed. MPL, LXXXIV, 179—180) AUGUSTINUS: Ad Orosium contra Priscillianistes et Ori- genistas, ms. 330, ff. 51r-58v (ed. MPL, XEII, Commg in psalmos 71 ad 8Qi ms. 16, ff. 1r-110r e a J, I, 961—1046) Comm. in psalmos 128 ad 150, Bugniatre, cod. 80 Contra duas epistulas Pelagianarum, Bugnifitre, cod. 51 De baptismo contra Donatistas.p1ib. vii, Bug- niltre, cod. 91 De bono viduitatis seu e istola ad Iuliana viduam, ms. 135, ff. 53V567r; ms. 136, ff. 91vb98v (ed. MPL, XL, 431-450) De cathecizandis rudibus, ms. 131, ff. 2r-44r (ed. - 48) De consensu evangelistorum, ms. 97, ff. 1r-134r e. , , 01-1 270 . _ De cura ro mortuis erenda ad Paulinum ms. 135, ff. 68r-75r: ms. 13%, ff. 98VH105r (Ed. MPL, XL, 591—610) De fide et operibus, ms. 135, ff. 28v-41v; ms. 136, DeIIIIatura boni, ms. 129, ff. 80v-104v (ed. MPL, , - De octo Dulcitii uaestionibus, ms. 129, ff. 104v- 108r; ms. 135, ff. 75r-84r ms. 136, ff. 105r- 112v; ms. 330, ff. 60-62r (ed. MPL, XL, 147-170) De 0 ere monachorum, ms. 135, ff. 16r-28v; ms. 136, ff. 51r-63r (ed. MPL, XL, 547-582) De sancta vir initate, ms. 135, ff. 41v-54r; ms. 136, ff. 74V- r (ed. MPL, XL, 397-428) De spiritu et littera, Bugniatre, cod. 91 De trinitate, ms. 130, ff. 5vh148r (ed. MPL, XLII, -10 De utilitate credendi, ms. 129, ff. 1r-32v (ed. _W. H. — _ Enarrationes in psalmos a 100 ad 116, Montfaucon, no. 102 E ositio superppsalmosJ desinit in 40, Montfaucon, no 97 In enesi ad litteram, ms. 4, ff. 1r—133r; ms. “"'g'4bis,"'ff. 1v-‘83v'T1'i‘b. VII-XII) (ed. MPL, XXXIV, 355-486) In Iohannis e istolam ad Parthos tractatus decem (lacuna: 1-2, vg, ms. 86, ff. 1r-67r (ed. MPL, XXXV, 1992-2062 Libri supergpsalmos a 75, Montfaucon, no 94 Plurimae epistolae, Montfaucon, nos. 95, 269 O era de 8 bolo libri 4 de 4 virtutibus, etc., Montfaucon, no. 162 Psal us contra artem Donati, Bugniatre, cod. 91 Re 1a secunda, ms. 328bis, ff. 139Vb140v (ed. . erheijen, "La regula sancti Augustini," Vigiliae christianae, VII fi95§| , 27-56) 271 Sermo de Adam et Eva et S Maria, ms. 121, ff. 0 r— v ed. ova Paorum Bibliotheca, I, 1-2) Sermo de cantico novo ad cathechumens, ms. 136, f 0 V- v 6d. L , '- _, Sermo de cataclysmo, ms. 136, ff. 30r-33r (ed. MPL, 9 Sermo de uarta feria, ms. 136, ff. 26v~30r (ed. El. Xi. a85-3945 Sermo de sprolo ad catechumens, ms. 136, ff. 1r— 1‘ ed. , ’ "' 3 Sermo de tem ore barbarico, ms. 136, ff. 33r-37v (ed. MPL, XL, 699-708) Sermo 56 inc Beatus a ostolus tem ore vita H . . ms. 135, . r- v: ms. 136, If. r- v (ed. MPL, XXXVIII, 377-386: of P. Ver- braken, Remi—Eb nédictine, XLVIII [1:958 , 5—40) Sermo 215, inc., §acrosancta sterii vita . , ms. '35, ff. 54r-56v; ms.13%, ff. 86r—88r (ed. MPL, XXXVIII, 1072—1076; of. P. Verbraken, ibid.) Sermo 242 de 3 bolo, ms. 265 ff. 182r-183v, 168r- M1 v e . , , 2191-2193) Solilo uia (frag., lib. I,1) ms. 113, ff. 34r- EF'Tv 9%: MPL, XXXII, 869-972) PSEUDO-AUGUSTINUS: De unitate sanctae trinitatis, Paris, lat. 2024, If. 13r-20v (ed. MPL, XEII, 1207- B.N., Liber de auattuor virtutibus et charitatis, ms. , ff. O'V- 1‘} aria Be 0 a o 4’ ff. 1V- 12v (ed. MPL, XLVII, - Re 1a ad servos dei, ms. 328bis, ff. 140r—145v (ed. Dom He Bruyne, "La premibre e le de saint- BenOit," Revue bénédictine, XLII E930 , 320-326) Sermones tres de sypbolo, ms. 136, ff. 4v~16v (ed. .—.’ 9 — ‘ Sermo, inc. Credimus in unum deum. . . ., ms. 136, Sermo 116 de natale domini, ms. 121, ff. 118r- e g ’ ’ -1977) 272 - Sermo 173 de die dominico ante laetanias ms. 121, ‘??I7fiZiE3fiREF1EEE'IEEZ'XXXIXI'EEVEZEEV81 AVITUS, ALCIMIUS EDICIUS: Poematum de mosaicae historiae gest (lib. I—IV),“m§."273, ff. 6r:§1r, 111riTT3r; ms. is ) 79, ff. 5r-18r, 100v-105v (ed. MPL, LIX, 323- 368 "" PSEUDO-BASILIUS MAGNUS: Admonitio ad filium s iritualem éRegula sancti Basili), ms. 121, ff. 152r-128v ed. MPL, CIII, 3-688, 691-696) BEDA VENERABILIS: In ex ositionem evan elii secundum Marcum, ms. 93, ff. 1r-125r; ms. 92, ff. 1r-162v (ed. MPL, XCII, 131-302) Su er arabolis Salomonis alle orica e ositio, ms. 55, ff. 1r-104r (ed. MPL, XCI, 937-1040) Comm. in_proverbia Salomonis et in librum Tobiae, Montfaucon, nos. 29, 120 Comm.pet homiliae in evan elia, Montfaucon, no. 312* Liber de locis sanctis, ms. 216, ff. 66v-73v (cap. xviii, xix, conclusion); ms. 92, ff. 162v— 163rr (cap. ii, 5) (ed. CSEL, XXXIX, 301-324) In lucae evan elium ex ositio, ms. 265, ff. 160r- 1 v ed. MPL, XCII, 55 ~553 PSEUDO-BEDA VENERABILIS: Comm in Psalmos ms. 26, ff. 9r- 26v (ed. MPL, XCIII, 477-1098 ) Inter r tat'one nominum ebraicorum, ms. 26, ff. 8r-8v (ed. MPL, XCIII, 1101-1104) Inter retatio salterii artis, ms. 26, ff. 7r—8r (ed. MPL, XCIII, 1099-1102) Catalo us dia salmatum, ms. 26, ff. 6V-7r (ed. MPL-I—g, XCI'I'I', 1io97-1'1"o'To Comm in Psalmos, ms. 26, ff. 1r-6v (ed. MPL, XCIII, 477-1598) Homilia subdititia 48 de filio rodi 0, ms. 265, If. 149r—156v (ed. MPL, XCIV, 375-380; BENEDICTUS III PAPA: Epistola ad Hincmarum Remensis, ms. 407, ff. 661'- r e o , Ea, ’ " 273 BOETHIUS: Consolatione hiloso h'ae (lib. II medius - lib. ‘T—‘V ms' . 4'39, "rr‘.—1'£r-'3§'4"r' ed. MPL, LXIII, 657-862) CAESARIUS ARELATENSIS: Sermones collectio 25 admonitionum, ms. 121, ff. 46r-101r (ed. G. Morin, S, Caesarii e isco i Arelatensis o era omnia, I, nos., 30, 179, 45, 73, 74, 64, 65, 5, 32, 66, 150, 67, 15, 60, 61, 39, 42, 46, 47, 23, 48, 12 CAROLUS CALVUS REX: E istolae ad Nicolaum I a am, ms. 407, ff. 35r-37v, 71r, 73r (ed. MPL, CXXIV, 837-869, no. 3; 869-870, no. 4) Capitularia Pistense (864), Paris B.N. lat. 5095, ff. 1 r—130r ed. GH, Legpp, I, 488:499) CASSIANUS, IOHANNES: De institutis coenobiorum et de octo principalium vitiorum remediis ms. 328bis, ff. 1V- V ed. L, , - 5 CASSIODORUS SENATOR: Ex tractatibus sancti Au ustini ex- positio spper Psalmos, Montfaucon, no. 135 CHRYSOSTOM, IOHANNES: Comm. in Matthaeum et Iohannem, Montfaucon, no. 1 Homiliae in Novum Testamentum et in psalum 'Miserere mei DeusT,‘Montfaucon, no. 169 Sermones, Montfaucon, no. 170 CLAUDIUS TURINENSES: Comm. in evangelia, Montfaucon, no. 16 CLEMENTIS ALEXANDRINI: Adumbrationes in e istolas Petri, Iudae Iohannes I, ms. 93, ff. 1r-9v (ed. MPG, If 729-733) "“ ’ COELIUS SEDULIUS: Carmen natalis domini nostri, ms. CONCILIA: Collectio canonum hibernensis, ms. 201, ff. 30r-112r (ed. F. Wasserschleben, Die Buss- ordnungen der abendlfindischen Kirchen, HaIIe, 1851) Anti uissima collectio conciliorum, Montfaucon, no. 213 Antiguissima canonum collectio, Montfaucon, no. Lateranense Romanum (649), ms. 199, ff. 1v—137v ed. 8.1181, ’ -11 274 Aguisgranense (816), lib. I: De institutione canonicorum, ms. 336, ff. 1r-77r (ed. Mansi, XIV, 14 - 46) Suessionenses III (866), E istola synodica ad ' Nicolaum a am, ms. 407, ff. 73r—78v (ed. Mansi, XV 728-731; 9 Tricassinium (867% ms. 407, ff. 151r-158v (ed. ans1, , - S Tullense II (860E, terminatio, Paris B.N. lat. 0 , ff. 1 r-1 2r (ed. Mansi, XV, 557-551) PSEUDO-CYPRIAN: Liber in Genesim, ms. 279, ff. 23v- 33v (ed. MP' ""‘L, 'X‘I“_'3X, 4'5-380) Versus do Sodoma, ms. 273, ff. 5r-6r; ms. 279, DIDYMUS ALEXANDRINI: Enarrationes in epistolae beati Iacobi I S. Petri II S. Petri, I.S._Ighannis- II S. Iohannls III S. Ichannis Beatae Judae, ms. 96, f?. 10r-68v (ed. MPG, XXXIX, 1749-1818) DIONYSIUS EXIGUUS: Codex canonum ecclesiasticorum, ms. 200, ff. 2r-118v (ed. MPL, EXVII, 141-230) Collectio decretorum, ms. 200, ff. 118v—223v (ed. MPL, LX711, 231-346) Liber de paschate, Berlin Deutsche Staatsbiblio- thek Philli s, 1830, ff. 1r-2v (ed. MPL, LXVII, DRACONTIUS: Carmen de deo (exc. lib. I), ms. 273, ff. 21r-25v' ms. 279, ff. 18r-22r (ed. MPL, LX, 695-7705 EBO REMENSIS ARCHIEPISCOPUS: Retractio, ms. 407, ff. 159r- 160r (ed. MPL, XCVII, 635-636) EINHARDUS: 'E istolae, Paris B.N. lat. 11379 ff. 3r- 15r,+T_Or- 0v (e'd"."'M"'fi—G , 'pp'T,‘ "V,"'1o9-145 EPHRAEMUS SYRI: Sermones 6 ms. 121, ff. 1r-46r; Paris, B N. lat. , . 21r-23v (ed. Assemani, ' S E Hraemi s ri o era omnia, I, 40-70, 148—153, 292-E98: II, 50-55, 553-557, 557-560) EUGIPPIUS: Collatio diversorum uestionum e licatorum a S. Augustini, Montfaucon, no. 24 275 EVANGELIAE: ms. 63; ms. 473bis EVRARDUS TURONENSIS: Adnuntiato ad 3 odum Suessionensis 111(866), ms. 407, ff. 82v:8%v (ed. Mansi,7XV, -7 FACUNDUS HERMIANENSIS: E istola fidei catholicae in de- fensione trium capitulorum, ms. 113, ff. 51r-58v ed. , I , '- FORTUNATUS: Carmina libri undecimi (Miscellanea), ms. 469, Vita sancti Martini, ms. 469, ff. 142r-181v (ed. MPL, EXXXVIII, 363-426) FLORUS DIACONUS: Expositio in epistolas beati Pauli ex 0 eribus sancti Au ustini collecta, ms. 105, 9%. 1r-184r (ed. MPL, CXIX, 279-351) FULGENTIUS FERRANDUS: Epistolum ad Reginum comitem, Paris B.N. lat. 0 , ff. 4 r- 0r ed. L, ' LXVII, 928:950) FULGENTIUS RUSPENSIS: De fide seu de re ula verae fidei ad Petrum, ms. 265, ff. 95r-122r (ed. MPL, EXV, 37117—5?" _ Epistola ad Donatem de fida, ms. 265, ff. 83r- 1‘ ed. L, , 3 O— O era anti uissima sed multum dila idata, Mont- faucon, no. 259 PSEUDO-FULGENTIUS RUSPENSIS: Liber ro fide catholica adversus Pintam episcopum Xrianum, ms. 135, r... o 1 V- I" ma. ’ a '9' (ed. m, LXV. 707-720) GENNADIUS MASSILIENSIS: Liber de ecclesiasticis dogpati- bus, ms. 113, ff. 43v—51r; ms. 265, ff. 3 r- (ed. MPL, XLII, 1213-1222) GREGORIUS I PAPA: Dgcreta (529), m8. 200, ff. 239Vb240V (ed. Labbe, Sacrosancta concilia, V, 1585—1588) Homiliae in Ezechielem (exc. I, de carnis resurrectione; II, de caritate), ms. 255, ff. 157—EFT” v ed."'MPL, LEVI—m, 103—‘0-1034, 857-858) Duo libri homiliarum in Ezechielem. incipit a 23, on aucon, no. 276 . Moralia in Iob (libri XXX:XXXV), ms. 48, ff. 1r— 122'r (ed. EL, LXXVI, 321-782); exc. pt. 2, liber II, ms. 1217—1318. 103v-108r (ed. MPL, LXXV, 760- 766); exc., ms. 265, ff. 65v—727—Ted. MPL, LXXVI, 619-623); Pars Moralium sancti Gregoriae papae, incipit a libro 7 et desinit in 22, Montfaucon, no. 3 secunda pars expositiones morales in Iob a libro 17,7M0ntfaucon, no. 176 Degpastoribus, Montfaucon, no. 288 GREGORIUS TURONENSIS: Historiae Francorum (exc., I, 34; VI, 21; X 1; I , 3 , 4 , ms. 121, ff. 108r-115r (ed. gap, LXXI, 179, 390, 527-529, 415-418, 555-556) Libri octo miraculorum (exc. I, 17-32), ms. 424, ff. 187r—188v (ed. MGH, Scr. rer. Merov., I, 499- 508) HADRIANUS II PAPA:' E istolae iii 'viii vii x xviii, xvii xxii xxiii, ms. 407, ff. 183r-197v (ed. ME ‘ ., VI, 699-700, 707-709, 704-707 710- n m: 0-721, 719-720, 726-727, 727-729) HEGESYPPIUS: De excidio Hierosolimorum ms. 403bis, ff. 1r-162__(——v ed. M , ,1 1- o) HEIRICUS AUTISSIODORENSIS: Vita sancti Germani, Paris, B.N. lat, 13757, if. '1r"-'87r‘Te'd'."1§'—L, CXXI'VT' 113'1"-'1‘2"8'o “'— Vita rosa, Paris B.N. lat. 13757, ff. 88r- 156v (ed. 11PL,'UXXIV,"1267-1272) HEITILO EPISCOPUS NOVIOMAGENSIS: Epistola ad Didone Laudunensis, Paris B.N. la . 1137 , f. v (ed. MGH, Form., pp. 519-520) HESYCHIUS:' Se tem libri in.Leviticum, Montfaucon, nos. 30, 32 HIERONYMUS: Comm in Danielem ro hetam (exc.), ms. 265, ff. 5""1r-‘5‘7—T—W ed. 1 L, . ,p' 583-575) Comm in Danielem Ionam Michaeum Nahum, Habacuc, Montfaucon, no. 17 Comm. in Danielem Oseam Amos Abdiam, Mont- faucon, no. 19 Comm, in Isaiam prophetam, Montfaucon, no. 20 Octo ultimi libri in.Isaiam, Montfaucon, no. 21 277 Ultimi libri in Isaiam prophetam incipit a liber _J on faucon, no. 17 Comm in Ioelem So honiam A aeum et Malachiani, Montfaucon, no. 255 Comm in evan elium secundum Matthaeum (ad ' I 5 IV 23), ms. 72, ff. 1r-104v; ms. 68, l . co ff. 1v-143v (ed. MPL, XXVI, 15-218) Canones evangeliorum, Montfaucon, no. 301 Epistola beatissimo papae Damaso, ms. 342, f. 1r 9 0 9 1 ) E istola 122 ad Rusticum de oentitentia (exc.), ms. 265, ff. 72r-81v (ed. MPE, XXII, 1039- 1045, 1046) Inter rctationes hebraiorum nominum ms. 24, W. r- v ed. L, XXIII,"775-858) Liber a 010 eticus ad Pammachium e istolae xlix et xlviii, ms. 236, ff. 96v—111r (ed. MPL, W11, 1- 1 , 493-511) Liber contra Iovanianum, ms. 266, ff. 1r-96v Liber de situ et nominibus locorum hebraiorum 859-909) Sex libri in Ezechielem, Montfaucon, no. 177 Prologi in universam scripturam, et glossae; Liber de ratione animae et versus S. Gregorii attributi de,partu’Virginis, Montfaucon, no. PSEUDO-HIERONYMUS: Epistola ad Oceanum et Sofronium de vita clericorum, ms. 113, ff. Or- 1v; frag. ms. 255, I. 82r (ed, MPL, XXX, 288) HILARIUS ARELATENSIS: Metrum in Genesi ms. 273, ff. 1r-2v: ms. 279, P. 1r (ed. MPL, L, 1287-1292) HINCMARUS EPISCOPUS LAUDUNENSIS: Collectio ex e istolis . 5095, Romanorum ontificum, Paris BTN. lab "ff .' 'W-r-9LT—1v ed.'T__fPL, We. .1 , -100 I cum, Paris . . a MPL, CXXIV, 1051-1026 278 istolae ad Hincmarum Remensem 'i ii iii 1x, arls o a o y. 0 Vi I‘T‘m W985-986, 985-994, 1027- e . ___J - 1070, 1069-1072) HINCMARUS ARCHIEPISCOPUS REMENSIS: Epistolae, ad clerum et' 0 ulum Laudunensem Par' ' . , ff. 25v, 29r—36r (ed. MPL, CXXVI, 270); ad Ludp- vicum Paris B N lat. 5095, ff. 130r—137v ' (ed. MPL, CXXVI, 9-25); ad Hfincmappp Laudunepgem, Paris B N lat. 5095, ff. 7 r—7 v, 82r- 2v,' 91VB92v(ed. MPL, CXXVI, 277-281); ad variig, ‘ ms. 407, ff. 9r—18v, 39r-62v, 79r—92v, 120r-136r, 149v~150v, 165r-174r, 176r-177v. 197r-211v (ed. MGH‘_§p., VIII, 194-201, 174-194, 204-217, 225- 226’ 17-223, 223-225; MPL, CXXVI, 174-186) IOHANNES SCOTUS: Carmina, ms. 444, ff. 296r-298r (ed. MGH, P.L.,T—5n, 40-542, 545-546) Comm, in evangelium secundum Iohannem, ms. ’ o r- v e o __2, II, -348) Comm, de coelegti hierarchia, Montfaucon, no. 215 De divisione naturae libri I-IV' Paris B.N., lELJ . pp. - e . ___, . I, 4 - 0) IOHANNES EPISCOPUS CAMARACENSIS: istola formata, Paris, 13.11 lat. 11379, ff. $va e . G ,"'Form., P. 5'9) IOSEPHUS: Libri anti uitationes Iudaicorum latino ser- mone, MonIIaucon, no. 125 IULIANUS TOLETANAE: Chronicon cum aliis o usculis contra Arianos, Montfaucon, no. 283 ISIDORUS HISPALENSIS: De differentiis rerum (exc.) ms. 265, ff. 125r-14'8‘T-‘T—‘m—‘r ed. (PL, III 69-96); B.N. Paris lat. 2024, 2?? 20v-41r ed. MPL, M, .. "'— De ecclesiasticis officiis (exc. lib. I, 17; 115. II, 18), ms. 265, If. 168v~171v (ed. MPL, De natura rerum, ms. 423, ff. 1r-33v (ed. MPL, I , -1 18); ms. 422, ff. 1r-22v (ea. MPL, LXXXIII, 963-1016, cap. I-XLVII) De ortu et obitu patrum, ms. 423, ff. 45v-79r e o p I ’ - 56) I._L111_:u3 I..nh_-~ ’x .uadne -ab '....-"'».::_.:.i.£.:1=.-;.~.1-.,.84.... " ....‘ : ti-Ii'? =34 -‘ 5~88§xo.n , .27 ,:.24g?_25792 :3 a “rl"' 97 :818'957 ,- . I” ;\;11‘~E' 7 , Ti 17» (:1; ,‘ ll... .7“ ‘ 1395—1357 .” ' '8" {5.3.17 .Jq}: .310.) 119-“A3,. 1’5 "1 :- ‘7‘ , ', ,14‘r “TI ,1 .dJI .315) 21:9‘110 a'o‘ JR“ .110) wan-4881 .. 1 8188 £58; 8.5.: ~ .(se moi-ecu '. uIIIflIGCW.IIi'§Qb .gfi u :A' 279 Epypologia, ms. 447, ff. 1r—202r; Montfaucon,' no. ed. MPL LXXXII, 73—728); Exc. Paris, B.N. lat. 2024 ff. 41r-42v (lib..XIII, 13); m8. EST-LT, f._1v-2v (VIII, 9, 16—28) Sententia lib III, ms. 422, ff. 73v-91r (ed. LIT—"LL, LXXXIII ," 653-705) Liber de ordinis, Montfaucon, no. 288 LATHCEN: Eclo ia de moralibus Iob uae Gregorius fecit, ms. 50, If. 1v-185v (ed. Corpus Christianorum, t. CXLV) xxxv xxxi clxv, lix, ms. 1 , ff. 0r—7 r ed. MPL, LIV, 0 10, 1703-1107, 803-810, 789-796, 1157-1190, 865-872) LOTHARIUS IMPERATOR: Diploma guo Eboni sedem restituit, MACROBIUS: Passio Isacis et Maximiani, Paris B.N. lat. 5643, ff. 1r-8r (ed. MPL, VIII, 737-774) MARCELLUS: De medicamentis cum diversorum e istulis de ualitate et observatione medicinae, ms. 420, ff. 1r—199v (ed. G. Helmreich, Leipzig: Teubner, 1889) MARTINUS SCOTUS: Carmina, ms. 444, ff. 2r, 275v, 294v, 296v, 297v (ed. ”MGH, P,L., III, 686, 692-693, 696-697) E istola ad Lu um abbatem Ferrarienses, ms. 444, f. 3r (ed. DuCangeS Glossarium mediae et infimae latinitatis, I, 27 Glossae et alia varia rammatica raecolatina, ms. 444, ff. 275r-318v (ed. Miller, 112-229) NICOLAUS I PAPA: Epistolae lxxv. lxxiv lxxvii lix lxxviii, lxxix lxxx lxxxi ci c ms. 407, ff. 28r—34v, 37v~38v, 68r-70v, 93r-94v, 94v-104v, 105r-119v, 138r- 149r (ed. MGH, E ., VI, 407—409, 404-407, 411- 412, 365-3377 41 -414, 414-422, 422-432, 609, 601-609) ORIBASIUS: Collectionum medicarum, ms. 424, ff. 1r- 186v (ed. J. Raeder, Co us medicarum raecarum, VI, 1-3, Leipzig: Teubner, 1926-1928) ORIGENIS: Homiliae in canticum canticorum 1—2, ms. 299, ftm, XIII , 117-5'37 Hom liae in Ezechielem II, ms. 299, ff. 123v~ WLT“: edi—E'T—‘GM , III, 5- 87) 280 Hopeliae in Isaia, I-IX ms. 299, ff. 31v-59r e o , III, " S Homeliae in Leviticum, I-XVI, ms. 11, ff. 1r-195r (38:-EIET'XIIT‘405Z574) Homeliae in Ieremia I—XIV, ms. 299, ff. 59r—123v ' Md. G, III, - , 534-542, 454-462, 335-347, 347-358? 367-375 358-367, 378-398, 398-403, 403- 427, 438-451, 278-282, 283-294) Homeliae in Numeros, I—XXVIII, ms. 298, ff. 1r- Homeliae in librum Re ium, ms. 299, ff. 2r—14v, (ed. MPG, XII, 995-1052) OROSIUS, PAULUS: Historia contra accusatores christianorum, Qommonitorum de errore Priscillianistorum et Origenistarum ad Augpstinum, ms. 330, f7. 48r— 1' ed. L, I, 1 - 16) PALLADIUS: 0 us a riculturae, ms. 426bis, ff. 1r-116r (ed. J. ScmitI, Leipzig: Teubner, 1898) PASCHASIUS RADBERTUS: Liber de 00%pore et sangpine domini, m8. 114, ff. 1r- ed. L, , 1 " Comm in evan elium Matthaei, ms. 67, ff. 1v- ET‘FV—‘L—TT—v libri I-IV , ed. """"'M:PL, LXXV, 41-59) PAULUS DIACONUS: 'Vita Gre oriae a ae, Paris B.N. lat. 5670, ff. 1v-92v (ed. MPL, LXXV, 41- PIPPINUS REX: Ca itularia excer ta de matrimonio (Vermerie, £23; Com is e 75 5, ms. 255, ff. 162r—164v (ed. G , Leges, I, - , 27-29) PRISCIANUS: Partitiones duodecim versuum Aeneidos rinci a1- ium I 1—6, Paris B.N.I Iat. 11579 ff. 22r- 26v (ed.'HT Keil, Grammatici latini vols.; Hildesheim: Georg UIms, 1961LIII, 459-460) PROSPER AQUITANUS: De clericis canonicus et episcopis, Montfaucon, no. De vocatione mnium entium lib. II ms. 122, ff. 2r-6Cr (ed. MPE, XVII, 1973-II52) RHABANUS MAURUS: Comm. super libros Regpum, Montfaucon, no. 118 281 Comm in Exodum, ms. 6, ff. 1r-87v; Montfaucon, n0. 26' (ed. ML, CVIII, 9.246) Ad Hincmari archie isco i Remensis litteras scri ta- ue de GOIescalci erroribus, ms. 407, ff. 1r—8v; IN- V ed. M H, £23., V, 90-499) RUFINUS AQUILEANSIS: Re la S Basilii ad monachos, ms. 330, ff. 3r:§7r (ed. MPL, CIII, 483:554) SERVIUS HONORATUS: Prolo s commentarii in Ver ilii Bucolica, ms. 458, If. 2r-3v; in Aeneidam ms. 358, ff. 4v-5v; in Geor ica, ms. 468: ff. 3v-4r (ed. G. Thilo, H. Hagen, Servii gramma- tici ui feruntur in Vir ilii Bucolica e Geor icalEeipzig: Teubner, 1927I,pp. 1:4, 128:729; Servii rammatici ui feruntur in Vergilii carmina commenIarii [Eeipzig: Teubner, 1 9 I. 1- ) TAIO CAESARAUGUSTANUS:7 Sententiae, ms. 319, ff. 2r-179v (ed. MPL, LXXX, 7 - THEODULFUS AURELIANENSIS: Additio ad Ca itularia, ms. 200, f. 1r (frag.), (ed. MPL, CV, 2587 VALERIA FALTONIAE PROBA: Centone Vir iliani ad Testimonium veteris et novi TestimenIi, ms. 273, If. 2v-5r; ms. 279, II. 1v-3v (2g. MEL, XIX, 803-818) VEGETIUS: E itoma rei militaris, ms. 428, ff. 1r—67r (ed. C. fang, Eeipzig: Teubner, 1885 ) VICTORIS VITENSIS: De persecutione Vandalica, liber III: Professio fide catholicorum ep1s00porum Hunerico re 1 Van alorum o la a, ms. , . v- v (ed. MPL, LXVIII, 219-234) VIGILIUS EPISCOPUS THAPSENSIS: Co tra Felician Arianum de unitate trinitatis, ms. 135, ff. 1v-15v* ms. , . r- r e . MPL, XLII, 1157-1172 VITRUVIUS: De robatione auri et ar ente; De mensura cerae e5 metaIIi in o eribus Iusilibus, ms. 426bis, If. 720v-121r (ed. V. Rose, Leipzig: Teubner, 1899) WICBODUS: uaestiones in Octateuchum, ms. 273, ff. 25v- 111r: v- 73v; ms. 279, If. 34v-100r: 105v- 163v (ed. Liber I: uaestiones super librum Genesis, MPE, XLVI, - 68) 7:43.181} ‘ : mm “"113. LWA '11!!!) ’7 fi '. '1 ."zl'i film ‘ ”$1.... (9:91: 1' 325.1139!{,'C‘3 :1]; 14.-.131 - 511:..." 5;}: '34 tame m. _r' 09.; 1 m a .8 .88 .en ma H. 218mm 5“ :‘Y{.; 7 ‘II‘LY 7‘L&: .9. ' N H“ . 282 TEXTI ANONIMI SIVE INCERTI AUCTORI ACTA PILATI: (seu Evan elium Nicodemi),ms. 265, ff. 2r-3 r (ed. A. 13c en or , elpzig: Teubner, 1876 ANNALES LAUDUNENSIS ET SANCTI VINCENTII METTENSIS BREVES: Berlin Deutsche Staatsbibliothek Philli a, 1355, If. 142v (ea. L33. Lora 336, 12933895) ANNALES SANCTI MAXIMI TREVIRENSIS: apud Mr. H. Horblit. Ridgefield, Connecticut, U.S.A. (ed. MGH, Scr., II, 212-213; ibid., Iv, 5—6) "'" ‘— CALENDARIUM DIAETETICUM: ms. 426bis, ff. 117v5118r (ed. B. Krusch, "Reise nach Frankreich im Frfih— 'ahr und Sommer 1892," Neues Archiv, XVIII 1893] , 579-580) COMM. IN EVANGELIUM S. IOHANNIS: ms. 80, ff. 1r—80r. Inc.: "In nomine patris et filii et spiritus sancti. In principio erat verbum qua similtudine intellegitur verbum substantiale. . . ." COMM. IN VITAM VERGILIANUM: ms. 468, ff. 1r—2r. Inc.: "Dicitur autem Virgilius vel a patre Virgilio vel quasi verecundus. . . .". ‘ EXCERPTUM COMM. IN PSALMOS: ms. 26, ff. 257b27r. Inc.: "In sancto'invenitus. . . .: COMM. SUPER ISAIAH: ms. 121, ff. 103r-103v. Inc.: Vidi dominum sedentum super thronum. . . ." COMM. IN LEVITICUM: "laceratus," Montfaucon, no. 265 COMPILATIO ASTRONQMIAE ET COMPUTI: ms. 422, ff. 227i 70v (ex Isidorii) COMPENDIUM MYTHOLOGIAE: ms. 468, ff. 5Vh8v. Inc.: "Iste aunt viiii muse. . . ." (ex Iaidorii et Fulgentii) COMPENDIUM SCIENTIARUM DIVERSARUM: ms. 468, ff. 9r-14v. Inc.: "Omnis philosophia in tres specie dividitur e e o 0"(93‘ Isidorii) DE GRADIBUS AFFINITATUM: ex Isidorii, ms. 468, ff. 15r-17v P lat. 2024, ff. 99r— DE PECCATI RECORDATIONE: aria B.N. 100r. ‘Inc.: "Bonum est Eomini semper ante oculos. . . ." 283 DE QUAESTIONES CONIUGIORUM: ms. 265, f. 164v. Inc.: "Qui in matrimonio sunt iiii nocte abstineant se. . . ." DE TETRAGONO SUBJECTO: ms. 407, ff. 136va137r (ed. E. Wickersheimer, "Figures médico-astrolog’ques des IXe; Xe, XIe siecles," Janus, XIX D914 , 173-174 DE TRINITATE FIDEI CATHOLICAE: ms. 113, ff. 1r-13v (ed. G. Morin, "Traité priscillianiste inedit sur la trinité " Etudes textes découvertes: contributions i la 1 raEure et 5 I'Eistoire des Houze firemiers siScIes‘fsris: Ficard, 1§73 I, PPo - EPISTOLA AD HERMIGARD IMPERATRICE: Paris B.N lat. 11379, ff. 17r—17v (ed. A. DucEesne, Historiae Francorum Scriptorestiaris: CramoisyI,II, 715- FORMULAE LAUDUNENSIS: Paris B N 'lat. 11379, ff. 15r— 16v, 18v-19v, 24r, r, v, r-27v (ed. K. Zeumer, MGH, Form., pp. 513-520) GLOSSAE IN S. PETRI EPISTULAM II: ms. 121, f. 103r GLOSSAE IN OPERA VERGILII (BUCOLICA, GEORGICA ET SEX PRI- MOS LIBROS AENEIDOS): ms. 468, ff. 18r—51r. In0.: "Epytheton est quando proprietas. . . ." GLOSSAE IN AENEIDAM: ms. 468, f. 4r. Inc.: "In Aeneade primo omnium iudicum poete laudsndum est. . . ." GLOSSARIUM DIVERSA FRAGMENTA: m8. 445, ff. 80r—81v; ff. 82r—82v; ff. 83r-92v. Ms. 201, ff. 3r-29v GLOSSARIUM ANSILEUBI SIVE LIBRUM GLOSSARIUM: ms. 445, ff. 4r—79v (ed. W.M. Lindsa , gt‘gl., Glossaria latina [paris, 1925],I, 15-604K GLOSSARIUM GRAECOLATINUM DICITUR CYRILLI: ms. 444, ff. 57b275v (ed. Goetz, CGL, II, 213—484) GRADUALE: ms. 239 HOMILIAE SIVE COLLATIONES IN EVANGELIA QUAE LEGEBANTUR AB ADVENTU USQUE AD PASCHA: Montfaucon, 22 LIBER PONTIFICALIS: ms. 342, ff. 1r-120r; Montfaucon, no. 303 (ed. Duchesne, Le "Liber Pontificalis . . ," Paris; Thorin, 13335 .'3 ;"h5;031H03 ‘ IF"’-E'OB d *QLEUB “ ‘ .‘ 1!! fish}! 0 . x . x1 " 9 (in-3 3W: . rm.) M be) ' 3 5f -7 7,.. ,- 2f , ' , ' gkdi 'A . 1mm LIT)93V AfiB§0‘ . I ‘ ‘.Y~Cul $05311 '- 13;!) no}! —1.t . '2. ‘ »' I, ‘v‘ " :." ,E’I'fl Ium _ 32!}.11‘ ‘r; [xi-4. .1 i mine .3: -vr»_p02 11 .ib: .av ~'w MnAsq Aaflll Q ”°~7€ ,? .!H( .9“ \\R-.t3 .Tt ' ‘J\ .t'I fih .3“ :2U;u;<;‘j& ”““:'LJ :VIE Ia'- N suit”; aiusguola ..£ 39 kwehnzdl .8. LI, _!-00-PF ,I 8" ‘3‘ .eep .am :1a1rx71 n :zazn "gut, (¥B"LV5 .11.JDD .xteob .fi.}£ W 1195 AIM“ M 8m 98 runonattnofi tAlfith EA IUQII M’ " > ' 284 LIBER DE QUATTUOR VIRTUTIBUS: ms. 113, ff. 62r—85r. Inc.: "Dominae meae dilectae et debita reverentia proferenda. . . ." LIBRI CAROLINI: Paris: Bibl. de l'Arsenal, 663, ff. (ed. MGH, Legumi Sectio IIIJ II, Supplementum) LIBRI QUORUM MULTIPLEX E3 VARIUM EST ARGUMgNTUM: 1° De agte poetica; 2 De I etorica; 3 De phélosophia; 4 De math maticis; 5 De as ronomia; 6 De hgmine; 7 De animalibus; 8 De geographia; 9 De physica, etc." Montfaucon, no. 123. Bugniatre, cod. 333: "Argumentorum diverses." ORIGO TROIANORACUS: ms. 468, ff. 4r—4v PASSIO CLEMENTIS: ms. 265, ff. 184-190v (cf. Bibl. hag. lat. I, 278, no. 1848) PASSIO MARCULI PRESBYTERI: Paris B.N. lat. 5643, ff. 35r—44r (ed. MPL, VIII, 7 0-76 PRAENOTATIONES LITTERARUM: ms. 445, f. 3vb. Inc.: "A littera etiam nota praenomine est cum augustum 301a significat vel aurelium." PRAECEPTA.MORALIA: ms. 121, ff. 102Vb103r. Inc.: "Unius expeditionis curam quam. . . ." PSALTERIA CUM GLOSSA: ms. 14, ff. 1r—133r RHYTHMI COMPUTUSTICI: ms. 26, f. 27r; Paris B.N., lat. 11379, f. 24r (ed. MGH, P.L., , 671) TEXTUS ACEPHALUS: ms. 121, ff. 129r-129v. Inc.: "quo dolo re quo gemitu. . . ." VERSUS ECHOICI: Paris B.N- lat. 11379, f. (ed. Hampe, Ne““"'“"ues Arch—ivAfi", III [1898] ,637) VITA VERGILIANA QUAE DICITUR VITA BERNENSIS: ms. 468, f. 1r (ed. I. Brummer, Vitae vergilianae [Peipzigz Teubner, 1933],pp. 66-677 SERMONES ANONIMI IN EVANGELIUM I: ms. 265, ff. 123r-124r. Inc.: '"In illo tempore recumbentibus xi discipulis. . . ." IN EVANGELIUM II: ms. 265, ff. 124r—125r. Inc.: "In illo tempore dixit Ihesus discipulis quis vestrum ll 'I };d'lm «. ~.-.;.':'0.Ia U9, . , , , -_ . :EI)IZ‘ , I. = -‘r"*‘j‘“.7‘_; . J33; .2- ~-.'.’ .1? .(‘Yitf ' ‘ .2111" -:')‘ ;.:=:.f ‘ : If! .3“! :3- . .5193 cup" OI" l‘rLj’l ¢" 9',‘:l‘('-A- I»"'.' 1!; (A V !_ V .} TE}: . LSCRII'] f I ,9: - " ‘vuia 7’ _ {,3}- - ,uc: :315’. 1'21?!“ XII"! HE"? I)Ia 810 314331111! 54:“; stig’ufib and v' . mun-18 49‘7”; _’ ‘- I' ‘ W i ‘ UIU 31” {ml (1&3: Lou“ .fi CBS 4‘ " . . .fljuqfaaib ix audL’M aim-2+3: .11 .eas I. a ’ “gag “Ln-gian“ mod! ”an " 285 DE 3. IOHANNE BAPTISTA: ms. 265, ff. 129v—130v . Inc.: "Dixit Iohannes discipulis suis. . . ." DE TRINITATE: ms. 121, ff. 129v~130v. Inc.: "Omni— potentem deum trinitatem ita esse crediderunt It 0000 IN GRATIONEM DOMINICAN: m8. 265, ff. 180VH182r. Inc.: "0 quam magma est clementia. . . ." DE RESURRECTIONIS DOMINI: ms. 113, ff. 40r-42V. Inc.: "Post laborem noctis. . . ." DE NATIVITATE DOMINI: ms. 113, ff. 40r-42v. Inc.: "Thalamus Marie et secrete coniugia. . . ." QUIDAM ANTIQUAE SERMONES: Montfaucon, no. 209 DE NATIVITATE S. IOHANNIS: m8. 113, ff. 42VB4BV. Inc.: "Ecce amicus sponsi caelestis. . . ." DE CONTEMNENDA MORTE: as. 135, f. 15r; ms. 136, f. 50v. Inc.: "Omnis causa martyrii. . . ." (Cf. Clavis Patrum Latinorum, 1164c) DE SENTENTIA S. PETRI: ms. 121, ff. 117r-118r. Inc.: "Audi frater karissime qualem sententiam detulerunt " IN PASCHA: ms. 1212 ff. 115r-117r. Inc.: "0 fratres dilectissiml presentem diem. . . ." DE FLUXU SANGUINIS: ms. 113, ff. 37r-38v (ed. C. H. Turner "A Leon MS. in 1906 and 1920," Journal of Theélogical Studies," XXII [i920-1921I'1'3T, .— IN EVANGELIUM S. IOHANNIS: ms. 265, ff. 157r-158v. Inc.: "Non frustra beatus Iohannes supra pectus domini in cane recubuit. . . ." A IN EVKNGELIUM: ms. 265, ff. 159v~160v. Inc.: "Ductus est Christus in deserto et cetera. Queri a quibusdam solet. . . ." DE REDEMPTIONE: ms. 265, f. 176r. Inc.: "Necessarius est enim unicuique hamini primitus scire et investigare scripture sancta. . . ." HOMILIA: ms. 265, ff. 178r-180v. Inc.: "Dilectus'in quo mihi complacui at quia per universum. . . ." DE NATALE S. CIPRIANI: ms. 113, ff. 38v-39v. InC.: "Hodierna reddendi non debiti domino tempus inluxit. . . ." APPENDIX D THE LETTER FROM A TO E The anonymous letter from A to his master, E, conp tains numerous clues to the identities of these two indivi- duals, yet their full names have eluded scholars.1 This is an important letter. It is highly literate and contains the key to many of the interrelationships among the schools of the last quarter of the ninth century. Hopefully, a discussion of the letter will renew interest in it and eventually lead to the identification of the author and recipient. The author was acquainted with the work of John Scotus; he knew Manno of Laon personally and mentions a meeting with him at the palace at Compibgne; he mentioned that he confided some of his works to a "dearly beloved" Teutbertus; other works he sent to a Bishop L who I am inclined to believe must be Liuddo of Autun (866—874), a former Laon cleric; he also knew Bishop Isaac of Langres (856-880); he asked the recipient to remember two youths from St. Amand; he resented the fact that a recent bishop had been installed in his see by the king rather than by 1Published by E. Diimmler, MGH, £22., v1, 182-186. 286 r“ r:.(.‘fl‘(flflu ‘6‘ g 3 . mtif‘ BUM (mm-fly Q's" If.“ M .. Wm .M” ,, ‘7 z'J ‘30 M , ~.‘.. ‘0 rests-Q m «is! 0* h V I. J; '1. a sailifAWL 91¢ 08’ 5.03 11.147 "i; “'1’" ‘1: Ai-J ' *l"‘r:_'.;x‘fi «E 33" a, as items ms ‘.-".'sn.. 21a. nos} [0 0M4. i-nnudncn m1 :nmérmm') 1:. uoaIsq ad! I; "beveled {{useb" :3 OJ afl’xow air}! to m 2" cm I adv J qodeia .8 03 urea 91! m .9. .(meaaa) awe-ml 1'0 oéhutd ed’ i“ august in max god-la wens! ooh cl mu w W 09 msqzm w (M arm A M the? w M 287 the peeple; another friend was a "venerable" dean, Ful- coldus; he also knew Burgard, the provost of the monastery of St. Mary; he asked E to undertake the education of two religious of this monastery: the daughter of Baldwin, count of Flanders, and Judith, daughter of Charles the Bald, and a relative of his ("mea consobrina"). Interspersed among these names are requests for information on various scholarly topics. The author shows a knowledge of Martianus Capella, Fulgentius, vergil, and Aulus Gellius. This is one of the very few mentions of Aulus Gellius' work during the ninth century. The author's style is ornate and somewhat complex. The letter was published with a long extract from a poem which has been attributed to Gottschalk of Orbais.2 ~There is also another letter from a master H to the "famous and celebrated" A.3 Presumably the latter is the A who wrote the first letter. The letter from A to E has been discussed several times. Dfimmler discussed it at some length in an article in.Neues Archiv and rightly assigned the letter to the early 870's.4 Any daughter of Baldwin and Judith, who were married in 862, must have been at least ten years old when her education with a famous master was contemplated. Charles the Bald is mentioned as king, so the terminus ante 21bid., 180-182. 31bid., 186-187. 4 "Briefe und Verse des neunten Jahrhunderts," Neues Archiv, XIII (1888), 345-348. He confuses Manna of Leon with Manna of St. Oyan. ~1 u': TedJ’OM . “191-é 0.1: d was ad tu” Wu“ “to “new.- by U ,ulfala’l a u *,- - . .»,»..-raqe-ro¢nl .mms wow 'sllllsfl 1'. than“. [:m. at?“ I»; x "and J? ‘0" ‘ “12911309 ”V 19618. ‘ ;,--‘;,'. 19“: Y" , l‘ .. .‘_. 151-{'1' " : ‘-. “1 i007! W, :2 J: bosonsctb‘, ' 19039! on: bshgxaas (Tidal! l...’ . :13 j 13;. L :3“ I, <~ioiJ‘xs rm. :;., du‘NHL-h- am')‘: y. . l‘- ‘ ‘Obd L K. 315x: mi 1:11.; niwblsfl ‘10 19Sdm5 “ rig-.1»! 37'." 'i":.’£e.-'._ .123 Jase! J's ‘meu {twin} 0'“?- ' w ,‘ "betsiqmaaaoo saw messes sua-.3 ax ' / . ‘ W- W at“ 9" '3‘” “ mm". ‘54’ .- 288 guem for the letter must be 877. Manitius, in various places, repeats the details furnished by Diimmler.5 M. L. W. Laistner, in 1928, was the first to detect the author's knowledge of Fulgentius in the letter.6 He made no attempt, however, to identify the author of the letter. The most important discussion of this letter was provided by André van de Vyver in a two page footnote to his article on Hucbald of St. Amand.7 He dated the letter to 870, the year that Charles the Bald installed the archbishOp of Cologne contrary to the wishes of the clergy and people of that city. He further argued that the letter was not written at Laon, but sent there. Master E was asked to supervise the education of the two religious who belonged to St. Mary's at Laon.(Notre-Dame-la—Profonde). Finally, van de vyver identified E as Heiric of Auxerre who, according to Van de vyver's interpretation of manuscript 107, was teaching at Laon around 870.8 The second letter, from H to A, was written by Heiric who spelled his name in the proper fashion. According to Van de vyver, it was Heiric, E in one letter, H in the other, who collected and pre- served the letters rather than A, the author of the first 5ve1ume I, 335, 488, n. 5. 6" Fulgentius in the Carolingian Age," The Intel- lectual Herita e of the Earl Middle A es: SeIectedE Essa s b E. E. W. Laistner, ed. C. G. Starr iDew YorE: Dctagon BooEs, 15335, 557- 25 . 7"Hucbald de Saint-Amand, écolatre, et l'invention du Nombre d'Or," 62, n. 12. 8However, cf. above, pp. 211-213. .lf‘ 3‘3"!!! 70‘"! ‘ :urb ends am :31 , Magi"! I. .1‘2‘t‘crebi ct NHIZBUDIl‘ .; '1': 1m? ‘, '. ."‘.'it .38 E. A-J'radO M - I '-‘ «"1 81'... , T L, 8;; .Vh ,1 »: ‘nd mod it '_ "cwsoube o“ ' 50.3] as e‘“_ , ~-~':1!.‘Tsobk‘fl .. n r'r , zucfirm‘ni 8"!” . . . ‘ .i’. , vr " "“1. (1"...3 . I , humus not! ‘H Y ’ffis. 11".! :73. orum: k..." | up; no” Ah iefl m - ."v 1,1391?! am; #1 ,1.‘-V"{V 3F :13? mt 31:-[Meets am; has beteeifm ndw .xedd'o ed: at I doe-13:1 exit ‘10 rod-3113 9113' J and! Todd's! I. . .P. .r: 38+ .ECI .. ,. "1 _ as ,[osz e“ . _ “I” I" A ‘ ‘ '1 'V '0 D‘ o " mm v: zeal: flung... 289 and recipient of the second. Quadri, in his exhaustive study of Heiric's life, was not convinced by Van de vyver. He rightly dismissed Van de vyver’s dependence on manuscript 107 and warned that it would be hazardous to attribute the letters to Heiric on the basis of similar initials alone.9 Recently, Abbé Merlette provisionally identified E with Heiric.1o An examination of the manuscript which contains the letters is most rewarding and may shed new light on the identity of the scholars mentioned in them. Leiden, Eggg. lat. oct. 88 is a scholastic miscellany which I date from the end of the ninth or, more probably, the beginning of the tenth century. I will review its contents below. It is a composite manuscript, both parts of which were owned by Pierre Daniel, the lawyer from Orléans.11 Folios 96r- 111v belong to a manuscript of the fourteenth century. We can ignore this section of Egg§&:lat, oct. 88. The letter from A to E was impeccably transcribed by Dfimmler except in one place where he made a crucial error. On folio 24r, in reference to the two nuns, Dfimmler read "Quad superest: in monte sanctae Mariae sunt duae sanctimoniales. . . ."12 A footnote explains "i.e. 9Collectanea (ed. Quadri), p. 17, n. 1. 1O Cf. his "Ecoles et bibliothtques, e Laon, de la fin de l'Antiquité au début de l'Université," to be published shortly. 11Folio 2r: "Ex libb. Petri Danielis Aurelii, 1560"; f. 111v; "Ex libb. Petri Danielis, Aurelii, 1564." 1201'. MGH, 232., v1, 186, 1. 15. ".(‘Lr‘fl at“ N ‘1“? 21“ ll ‘ ."1 7".C‘q.b . " J “35153“ “' ~231H 10 u :1riehc‘t" interim. d .‘m’? {1'3 MOI “ ., We cut! ‘0‘ 'Cn0.'. I! at “" :J-Jf‘jfl 9‘" t 1 1 7. “mm :f' y‘anfllfl d’ " - ist—11' me ,1. 'x’uv > ,Iw- 'H J'_i":'vaUllm A a .' .- .532 .3.1 3 ' undress 81.; :.';r\;-LI'.‘PfZU‘!.‘ n,“1u;.u"._:'.1 -_:'.‘-I .3 13+ I! met? lel'w'xu n efwr ".16 P195»! habit; we 81 wsimmflfi ,cnua owe edi o: unaewaiev n1 ,1QC;v ",p-jvg‘r‘ snub Jana sateen aseoass siuom a: I- ' .e.k" Bailque eioafioo! A St". A ”1%. . ,; .1 I. 1" 0‘ I‘M on) _ 290 Laudunensi, qui mons Lauduni vocatur, cf. Flodoard Ann. a. 951." Everyone who has discussed the letter has followed Dfimmler and assumed that it concerned Leon. The manuscript, however, reads (folio 24r, l. 15) ". . . in mung? sanctae Mariae. . . ." The abbreviated word is monasterig and not mgntg, Mgg§£:occurs seven lines later in the manu- script and is correctly transcribed as monasterii by the editor. This emendation throws new light on the problem. Baldwin's daughter and A's consobrina could have belonged to any number of monasteries dedicated to Mary. It is not at all certain that they belonged to the one at Laon. The contents of the manuscript indicate that its owner was from the region of Fleury and Auxerre. The fact that Pierre Daniel owned it in the sixteenth century also points in this direction. The first gathering of the manuscript is missing.13 It Opens in the middle of an unidentified commentary which occupies folios 2r-10v. Folios 11r-18r contain Greek and Latin etymologies from classical authors. At least thirty-seven of these entries come from the same source as the scholica graecarum edited by M. L. V. Laistner.14 However, in the Leiden manuscript 13Folio 7v is signed with a "ii". Folio 14v is signed "iii". The remaining gatherings are unsigned. 14Cf. "Notes on Greek from the Lectures of a Ninth Century Monastery Teacher." Laistner thought that there were only "a dozen or so" scholica entries in the Leiden manuscript (ibid., 424). However, he was following G. Goetz' partial edition of these notes in C.G.L., V, 657-660. Q en.- -:1\--‘ one ~- «1 Banal... Lin!) IIOII, . N w?) a. ‘ § ‘ we . --3‘_L'IO'J It . 3.3 ILLruBfl .¢"4'4, l ' " k w raid”. our '29 1 [ii uia-fun a 2Inelaoa: _ "grip: 9“ m "Jr-1’” 49M ;.‘ _. . . ""ni'Too‘th Hi. ‘1', .1. a.‘ .L t;.gflillh ‘i ("is 7.1;1'1')"; Pfiiifl‘ll’tL‘ 1 "4111: mum ~11 8‘71:{1)i')l37_&"‘ urae.. Sum: 3509-113 31.3.“. 3'."~:14‘n‘.‘ fixed: 1 uc‘r'irswaJignid Jase! 3‘4 bGIJDE mugnoosgn seriodoe ads as 9319.. eqiuqauuam netted 9d: ui .1evcwcfl ck Wt otloi ."n" s rte-hr , J!“ m .312th; um mei; “mega * 4. ‘42." 291 they are not in alphabetical order and thus would seem to represent a different tradition than the notes Laistner published. He attributed the scholica to Martin Scotus' lectures. I believe rather that Heiric of Auxerre compiled the scholica from an unidentified.Martianus Capella commen- tary he knew.15 The copyist of the Leiden glossary would seem to have known the same source, a source which, if Heiric knew it, was from Auxerre or perhaps Ferrieres. Among these notes, on folios 17r-17v, are the etymologies of Greek words which I think might be found in John Scotus' works. Folios 18v-25v contain Gottschalk's poems and the two letters. Folios 26r-39v carry the De dialectica which is attributed to Augustine in the manuscript. Folios 40r- 41v contain another glossary of twenty-six Greek words. Their source has not been identified. They seem to consist of metrical and rhetorical vocabulary. The same glossary is also found in two manuscripts now at Bern: 172 (tenth century) and 184 (ninth-tenth century).16 The former belonged to Pierre Daniel and came from Fleury. Bern, Burgerbibliothek, 184 belonged to Jacob Bongar who in- herited some of Daniel's manuscripts. Thus, the glossary 15 160f. H. Hagen, Catalo us codicum Bernensium (Bern: B. F. Haller, 1375), pp. 23?, 245. The glossary was published from the two Bern manuscripts by H. Hagen, "Scholica Bcrncnsia ad Vorgilii Bucolica atque Georgica," Jahrbficher ffir classische Philologie. Supplementband, , . Cf. pp. 297-305. ,4 . _ n >9 'Jndfldqll Rf " Arms.» ensue“... ..!713¢£ C. v . -. 1., 4 - " r availed I ,. ' . a. r I’ , .' 5" 3‘01! {r4011}! w .31 wad. ' .EJJ'OIL ’0‘ V aw at!" ’0 . .—"§»-78f to“. " 9:116! ‘. :.F“u3uA at :59 191mm .iwr dahd Jon “‘ IRMA”) (J; r: , . 93.2.". ., 3.1911036!!! W" ,3 T r~- - -s. m 'e'rm 2.! f’T'H'L’Flflm M fl 10'111032 mi'l‘ I .{wg'runzeo Newman“) dinsf‘ ,msfi .351qu?! met? one: mm 195cm -ni odw maofi «most. 0+ Lognolcd Hf. vessels as“ .axui'!‘ .aéql‘msunsm e'I 1M) _.:4.~ “1.1.. AA; ' 292 in the Leiden manuscript seems to have originated in the Fleury-Auxerre region. Folios 42r-42v contain an excerpt from an unknown commentary; folios 43v—48v have another unidentified commentary on grammar; the remainder of the manuscript contains Prosper's Epigrammata (folios 48r-79v) and an anonymous piece (folios 80r-94v). The identification of these important anonymous commentaries and notes should help to localize further the author (or authors) of the letters included among them. As far as I can see, all this material was compiled at Fleury or Auxerre and not at Laon as has been thought. . 3:11-2:me .noig” .. vat-«9' ' "7 Gail” :‘x lm'm .‘ 6"1900" ‘ 3 J 1.5'!‘ Obit" ‘ r:.'.-.¢1Jaobl a" ‘ = .1 Mn I‘. ‘7'; I no“ . i» 13)” a“ t 1 "mu 0 APPENDIX E A TENTH CENTURY ACCOUNT OF THE TRANSMISSION OF LEARNING Gausbert's geneaology is preserved in Leiden1 Voss. latI oct., 15, a manuscript of the tenth century which belonged to Adémar of Chabannes and which he presented to St. Martial in Limoges. The manuscript is fully described by Leopold Delisle.1 The geneaology has been discussed by Pierre Riché2 and Riccardo Quadri.3 Theodorus monacus quidam a Tharso Cilitae atque Adrianus abbas scolae Grecorum Romae quondam positi, simulque grecis ac latinis litteris, liber- alibus quoque artibus instituti, a papa Romano Brittanniarum insulae sunt directi, ac eandem tam salubribus fidei documentis quam eciam secularis philosofiae inlustrarunt disciplinis. Quorum discipulatui Aldelmus quidam, vir venerandus, inherens, Bedam dinoscitur habuisse successorem. Ex cujus fonte quidam, cujus nomen excidit, fluenta hauriens doctrinae, Rhabanum cognomento Maurum eruditorem propriae reliquit scolae. Qui ab episcopis Gallicanis sive a regibus Francorum, transmarinis a partibus, docendi causa accitus ac postmodum episcopatus honore ditatus, Alchuini cognomento Albini insti- tutione est dotatus. Qui susceptae scolae eruditioni 10f. "Manuscrits originaux d'Adémar de Chabannes," Notices et Extraits, XXXV, 1ere pte (1896), 241-358. 2Cf. De 1'éducation antique a l'éducation chevaler- esgue (Paris: Flammarion, 1968), pp. 101-102 where there is a French translation of a portion of Muller's edition of 1867. 3Collectanea (ed. Quadri), pp. 15-18. 293 L; 7 iHT ‘0 m 3 .er .' 1...». do. v mosh! at .ntltII‘ _ 2m. ‘umf { 1' ¢ n.;:xnm 8n1obooll ,‘; «MM wasn‘t ,~? ‘I’ ‘ "- n' '2 91”»): euplulkt .5.;' .:.3 mil! _ ;. . ‘ :41; L137. r wiko'MB sum, 5.” ' ‘ :1.’ - v. ,1 ‘,;’;h inn?) “Sit/("l M1. Aaao-n‘t'm :1: . ., 155m 9. & View! no!“ E951} _"‘ , “null: eIJHI-gr‘127’; 'LGU‘IR’EJEUIAI I 1aaexadur aubns~'~s 1L: ,v;bib“ uumiebil Int fiuLU) rd .mo 022n31u2 seatudnd matte «.qeixusd sdueui’.’ fricaxe :15 mos nuts: ms‘md’ihxne .wwsM consmongoo m a naoiiiefi 33mm... :2an 13 NC: .oelooa $111,114?" audzlmsq s aiurxamennxd ,myaoaatt' abiaqaoaiqe mxbontaoq an audios: -L¢an.‘z mmu oenenengeo Inhale“ .acnibu'm salons eatqeomm i119 . M3“ .aennndst sh Iiflfifil'bm £10 .aet-ns .(mn etq 913 'g 294 naviter inserviens, doctrinae philosoficae Smaragdo reliquit ginmica campestria. Quae ille Theodulfo, postmodo Aurelianensi episcopo constitute, contra- didisse visus agnoscitur. Qui per Johannem Scoti- gneam, Heliam aeque, ejusdem gentis patriotam, virum undecumque doctissimum, philosoficis artibus expo— livit. At Helias, Heiricum informans, sapientiae merito Egolismensis donatus est throno. Heiricus porro Remigium, Sancti Germani Autricae urbis monacum, alium quoque Sancti Amandi, ejusdem ordinis, edocens Hubaldum, alterum litteris, alterum prae- fecit musis. Remigii porro cum plurimi extiterint successores, hi fuerunt eminentiores: Gerlannus, Senonum archiepisc0pus, vuido, Autisioderensium praesul, Gauzbertus quoque, ipsius germanus, Never- nensium pontifex, Daoch quoque Brittigena, qui omnes Gallias doctrinae suae radiis inlustrarunt; Ambro— sius quoque, Hisraelis praeceptor auditoris; Egro- alis, Gonno nihilominus, quorum alter Britanniam, alter Italiam septemplici Minerva celebrem reddidit. E quorum fontibus hi qui hodieque studere dinoscuntur, eruditionis eorum rivulos exhauriunt ac sitibundis doctrinae pocula refundunt. Quorum ciatos, quia fialas nequaquam assequi valet; quidam non modo opere verum monacus Gautbertus sola pro- fessione guttatim sitiens exsorbet; scutellarum nihilominus mensis illorum sublatarum reliquias lingcndo adlambit; infelix prosus, qui sensus acumine hebetatus exsaturari nequit famelicus. Recapitulatio nominum: Theodorus monacus at abbas Adrianus Aldelmo instituerunt grammaticam artem. Aldelmus, Bedam, Beda, Rhabbanum. Rhab- banus, Alcuinum. Alcuinus, Smaragdum. Smaragdus, Theodulfum. Theodulfus, Johannem et Heliam reliquit, sed non imbuit. Elias, Heiricum. Heiricus, Huc- baldum et Remigium. Remigius, Gerlannum episcopum. Gerlannus, Guidonem episcopum Autisioderensium. Gausbert's designation of Alcuin as Rhabanus Maurus' disciple does not detract from the general accuracy of Gausbert's list. As his last paragraph, the Recapitulatio nominum, indicates, Gausbert did not intend to establish a personal relationship among the masters he listed. Rather, he compiled a list of scholars who inherited the wisdom of their predecessors. Thus, this source should 4Ed. L. Delisle, "Manuscrits originaux," 311-312. ' .amslVTOlnl ‘. ‘ , ‘ : FL'J ’e: ‘l-rlw ;‘V- H 5:4}: .1... , a .th lsdufl ome::‘t . .t.aun #1 ' "1 ‘1'i:/£’\) ‘L’ .' :9wJ‘11 ~1L~.‘1rb u: f .VI‘n ”If“ amub an > " if?“ 1" .“ remaking! O. ‘fsru , enntv t’ .nuigtsol Olfll'P fu. (I. (Mf‘ .4 ,857500 ' 1 -A.-U_31y , .. "1' . mpoup uh . . z: ' .531 entice .I ' _ I -' .‘uJ ‘LBJ’I I“ . r’ 1-.""1 :N’TOU’ l "‘ 'A ll" ""1'":~ ,‘IUJ'RU (' -éf aibnu‘h’r . rfl siup I. ' I ”.12qu O ' .~ . . '. W;\ 3 .'-. ’ Tllzihbsm .s‘. u 'L i‘ 3. ".“11. 317‘ EU“ 1 ‘ . . 1.1h7 1.... rfn- r“ 1.11. (My :Jslyii . .7 ?""‘:;r"’ H‘ " " ’ J"? :’-'..Vl (inzz'bf‘lfi HUM?! ~11 r25 .(r. T ..v.-.". gust"! .an‘aE .aumloM‘ .Ilfllifl.“ .‘iuprle1 mqunH ts womandoL ,au3iubood! ,1:-.~.1j'7'ru~’r .m 71:3: 151:. zuu'r- MU A «nun ‘ecalnaii mus trio}! ”mils .mgooaiqu mumwf’rofl ,auigimfl .m: M .wiaae-reboierlulc auq-oaatqe mono 1:301 'zmsn alluded}! as nine“. ‘20 1101:...“ To zen-woos 143191103 art? not! in“; M ed: (dqsigs'uq he! BM Olaf. hildqfleo 01f Mosul duos bib 3:960:19 g ~ w fiW-u 5" un- ““1r-av Jam! ‘ ”" m Nam 80 mi 0 'J"_ 295 not be used, as it has been, to prove a master—disciple relationship between two scholars. It is only valuable in that context when it corroborates other independent sources as there are, for example, for Heiric's tutelage of Remigius. Kbnnsy thought that Daoch and Egroalis and Israel were members of "the group which may loosely be called the Laon colony. . . ."5 So far, none of these three individuals have been identified. There was an Egroldus at Laon, however, who signed Roric's charter of 961 for St. Vincent in his capacity as dean of the cathedral chapter.6 Also, Flodoard records that Bishop Israel attended the synod of Verdun in 948. Israel's see is unknown but Flodoard does describe him as a Briton.7 5Sources, p. 592. 6For the signatories of this charter, of. above p. 226, no 67. 7Annales, p. 107: "Israhele Britone" (cf. also, Richer, T, 253;. 144-1'!“ ~, ‘VT'TO'OVM ‘J 11V 3! ‘ tzs wed? ‘— U” l o " - I . «quam? “(if was" Yo I“: acacia-I I, ‘ svu! " no?“ u. , .-:; aid at it «.7251 .0!“ " 1M- bom 9 ~» ~ passim“? . a. r, . f- 1:- -. ,, :Jj'wmfanjll O“ L' I. \. V l' v ‘4' ’. APPENDIX F TWO WORKS BY REMIGIUS OF AUXERRE? I vatioan, Regg lat., 1625, f. 65r:1 Sollers artis eram prima florente iuventa, Qua colitur summus, unus et ipse Deus; Hoc mihi placuit multis conquirere libris. Nunc nimium fallor, me mala causa tenet. Ille Capella strio, translato nomine Felix, Nos fallit vetulos: nam vetus ipse fuit. Hymeneum cecinit carmen Kartaginis arvis, Femineo vultu numina falsa docet; Aetherios superasse polos talaribus altis Mercurium finxit duceret inde deam. II Paris B.N. lat. 10307, f. 95v“: Si via 0 Ple ac sursum volitare per auras fiMnyvlocque polos mentis sulcare meatu ngaucivido lustrabis templa sophiae Magnificamus te dei genitrix virgo ex te enim incarnatus est omnium creator assumptione carnis intel- 5 lectualem animam habentis et non conversionem deitatis unus atque idem dei filius unigentius persona et in dua- bus naturis substantia ratione et modo differentiae. Tanta enim ipsa conveniunt et transmutationem non re- cipiunt quoniam et arcane unitate facts at creatum manp 1O sit creatum et non creatum similiter inconversum. Et enim in qualitate naturalis differentia unitatem in pro- priis duxit et confusionem negavit; in divisionem non admisit. Sic intelligentes et credentes, gloriosa, custodire nos, pete filium tuum et deum nostrum. 15 Ave sancta virgo mater maria! Ex te enim pro- cessit incarnatum verbum consubstantialem coaeternum 1Edited by C. Leonardi, "Nuove voci poetiche tra secolo IX e XI," 150, who remarks, "Siamo pertanto di fronte, crediamo, a un episodio della migliore poesia carolingia." 296 LL318 ISO!- . L zvnxloo is ‘.V Iq Edi. , .n,‘ . ; I‘llim , 19$ 2‘10?” ‘ m I! 'Jn: 51f 3 >.t‘»y xtfuv o. .' 'Jifibfi . L . w «a,s~9qsa a ILfiii an f‘ A” .TUCOF o H w, .13-,11.;"' :. loa’! Ila .s I " - "x M -‘:’!:, 7—1‘7; 34.3 ,I_. v . c ,. .Ls “f Lu 8 LJq OI‘*_ n5!;ifl; : gnu! ;;a"1 as! obi719" mm"- 0:: 5+: :14". L. 31111 L493; 191‘. a: - . " «is-nu eta-rm «mm-.mmzwa s rotsero In!“ sidasisb m9.’1‘-':€-:3vn:* man 39 BIW‘ «1.1.5 a: do ence; sq as: (me gius nulli! I” .951#n»~;11kb chem *3 enoktai 0 ~91 (we as noikscumzxnal is Jon! "H mm: amass-w so was: esssinu men. 33 .awsmvuoosi actual.“ “it" ~01q :11 medsiws sitnesatiih 31W son magkmih n1 {strayed ' 3.0 so afitasboxo #9 l- ar ‘ mug ' ,C! at» a _* ' 7 «2:; also at x! 1% «ti: art-totum “Isaiam”: ’ a: 049 297 patris non conversions sustinuit neque confusionem neque mntationem. Ipse vero unus filius et deus ducens unam suam compositam substantiam. Omnia est dupla credidi- mus generationes et formas operationes et voluntates et naturalium eius proprietatum. Unitatem enim in~ separabilem diversarum nativitatum et non earnndem essentiarum nemo piorum in unam naturam conscripsit. Sic credentes et sic glorificantes dei genitrix in- contaminata, postula salvare animas nostras. Ave! ignem divinitatis inextinguibilem in tuo utero ac- cipiens mater incontaminata, inextinguibili igne libera. Ave! spes nostra dei genitrix incontamin— ata. Ave! quae ave per angelum accepisti. Ave! concipiens patris splendorem benedicta. Ave! pudica sanctissima virgo sola in nupta te glorificat omnis creatura matrem luminis. Quis non glorifi- cabit te sanctissima virgo, quis non laudabit tuum inaestimabilem partum? Summus enim tamquam ex patre elucens filius unigenitus ipse ex te, sancta, natus est et ineffabiliter incarnatus natura deus subsistens et natura factus homo propter nos, non in duas per- sonas divisus sed in duobus naturis inconfuse gloriosus. Ipsum obsecra, pndica et beatissima, salvare animas nostras. 23 cod.: nativi vitatum 20 25 3O 35 4o sz. Plate XIII (left column) for this text. 1'1”} :: A m: :4" l t V v ‘2' was :. 10131.". . _. 13v sui A‘JA >11";J8due d ' 5. A *9 B.”' évtlJI- L';{ ‘1 auto W I missrsvfl ' ”a .01; cal. 07.18 to >1. 'i‘. Hfbd’h.‘ at?“ avg-h . IL CHI! 1“"; as qus !0Vl V}! 51.09 3' (f 311381 3'!" ' . mm amt tlhe!#onn. "1.14th U01 ' I _, . ‘ 7a: 411': :H‘l ”i; . . _ ~:..-.<>z! . - w '1‘ n; 1).! and» MI - .'.s"’sul[ - .. ..-.-'- ~— ; L EX «an " ' 4F? '4) APPENDIX G DO THE SCHOLICA GRAECARUM BELONG TO MARTIN SCOTUS? The above question has long been answered in the affirmative. In 1923, M. L. W. Laistner published the scholica under Martin's name,1 an attribution which has been universally followed.2 I think that Martin's claim to the scholica is doubtful and would like to present the case that the question should be reopened. The scholica are an important source of Greek learning in the ninth century. Their influence is found in numerous ninth and tenth century works. In addition, there are at least a half-dozen manuscripts of the scholica. Laistner attributed the scholica to Martin because he believed that the principal manuscript of the scholica 1"Notes on Greek from the Lectures of a Ninth Century Monastery Teacher," Bulletin of the John Rylands Library, VII (1923), 421-456. 2Manitius, III, 1062; Kbnnfi Sources 591 y e P- 3 Ca puyns, JSE, p. 65, n. 1; H. Waqdet led.’, Abbon: £3 si e de Paris ar les Normands obme du IXe siecle (Paris: fies Belles Lettres, 1§%Z§, xii, n. 1; a. E. Lutz (ed.), Dunchad Glossae in Martianum, xii, n. 9; J. G. Préaux, oeuvre cer a ne e artin"), 448 ("oeuvre authentique de Martin de Laon"), 458; B. Bischoff, "Das griechische Element," 266; C. Leonardi, "Nuove voci poetiche," 146, n. 31; 149, n. 54. 298 42££3£92 a v vn‘ .--! uTHO. :- qvuilfli I :12 .li’lav :.~—. _~_,.A ‘ -.'- 2.; ammo _,_- o: '.“‘._‘_'_‘. »' )T’fdt'li‘". i~" .aunam inqisnth 0" .9- _ o ‘A .1 ”$3121 chiral (ii moi ;l“fi . ~aodd 4 v 4.. W ‘vnnsz .830: JR, ‘ was? .sl :a unsuiosd ed: 301‘ 1001. l’; ' en! " )Ameilga ".101“ .6th'“ “ &' o. .0 .o' '« - ‘3‘. Q.. Jw‘ ‘.‘ . . W‘T‘ ' I | . "fin-013‘ ‘ft 0. q”" 299 came fromLaon.3 Nowhere in his article of 1923 or in his subsequent remarks about the scholica did Laistner present further evidence that the scholica are "lecture notes" copied down and preserved by a pupil of Martin Scotus.4 The principal manuscript of the scholica contains a note of provenance although, unfortunately, it is quite 5 cryptic. At the top of folio 1r of Yatican, Reg= lat. 215 30f. "Notes on.Greek," 423. The source for Laistner's information was a short note on a glossary word: ”Ana hus looks like the creation of some graecising teacher. "Who this was we may guess with some proba- bility. I learn from.Professor Lindsay that 922. vat. Re . 215 was written in 876 at Laon, where Greek.was taught by Martin the Irishman; and though Martin died in 875 it is likely enough that the 'scholica graecarum glossarum' represent some of his teaching." Cf. H. J. Thompson, "Anaphus," The Clas- sical Refiew, XXXIV (1920), 32—33. n 922, Laistner accepted Thompson's guess: "In a recent article, mention was made of a MS. (Cod. vat. Reg. 215) from which Goetz printed a selection in . . . the 00 us Glossariorum Latin- orum, and one of its entries was discussed. This so-called glossary, which as was indicated in the article in question, appears in reality to be a collection of notes, arranged in alphabetical order, from the lectures delivered by Martin the Irishman in the middle of the ninth century. . . ." Cf. "CandalabrumlTheodosianum,” The Classical Quarterly,.XVI, (1922), 107. 4Laistner returned to the scholica several times: "Abbe of St—Germainpdes-Preé," Bulletin du Can e I (1924), 27-31; "The Revival of Greek in Western Europe in the Carol- ingian Age," Histo IX (1924), 177-187; "Martianus Ca- pella and his Nintfi Century Commentators," Bulletin of the John R lands Libra IX.(1925), 130-138; ”Rivipulensis 72 and ES. Scholica of Martin of Leon," Mélan es Mandonnet (2 vols.; Paris: ‘Vrin, 1930), II, 31-57; Efioufifii an§ Letters, PP. 215,244. 5The manuscript is fully described by A. Wilmart, Codices Re;inenses Latini Bibliothecae A-ostolicae Vati- canae W0 : 'a mans: 1 -l o oeca a icana, ° : PP. ' " a 9.1on to“ ufJJ eitll'l 1m“ a-~ :«302; h.- 1, v , .4. qucaal'lq ‘- \ . '» «sass-ven‘mflifl _ ‘ c»: Edi 3‘ e 2:2} 11" .29! . )"’ a I- .a 31:12. a” . 01W" . '."~ n7: ease L‘ .1 V I - 21:." 3‘ a , i’ 'JBOUP I! i 2f T‘.‘ ' ‘ ' 113; LAY‘J'JJA'L‘I'LA- ‘ 1 We'v",£'.:£‘r‘1!’ “mm: ‘0 a. aumAELTZ ndf JI,7 H .i its reiutaol .‘z- ". . . .‘giiu'CITL-H {tram edr fie o .T‘z- .‘qurissgfasiaaqfl 3&1 " :aean’ [111692 a n ed: a: '29?',‘ i ‘IEV ".391!- L- ' 81 '10st (am) wlouss add a: oqow ~33 anssitzifl“n t» , , >3 I 300 stands the truncated explibris, "Bic liber est sEZ'Mar". The name of the church to which the manuscript belonged is incomplete because the corner of the leaf which bears the ex-libris has been torn away. R. Arevalo, an eighteenth century Spanish scholar, suggested that the ex—libris should be completed as "S. Marii Forcalqueriensis".6 Bethmann, in 1874, suggested that the church in question is "5. Marie".7 In 1895, Bruno Gfiterbock noticed that a series of Old Testament glosses in the Vatican manuscript contained several Old Irish words. In addition, many of these glosses were preceded by the letters IQ or lgg,and A; or §£I,which Gfiterbock interpreted as abbreviations for John Scotus and Haimo, one of Heiric of Auxerre's masters. Armed with this evidence, Bethmann's reconstruction of the ex-libris. and the evidence of his friend, Ludwig Traube, Gfiterbock concluded that the manuscript most probably came from Laon.8 In 1913, Manitius went one step further and 9 In the claimed that the manuscript was copied at Laon. meantime, however, Traube, who had initially followed Bethmann and suggested the Laon attribution to Gfiterbock, examined the manuscript in 1902 and attributed it to Tours 601. MPL, m1, 825. 70:. Archiv, XII (1874), 270. 8"Aus irischen Handschriften in Turin und Rom," Zeitschrift ffir ver leichende S rachforschun auf dem Gebiete'der indogermanischen Sprachen, XEYIII (1395,, 9Volume I, 470: ". . . die Exempla diversorum auctorum, die in einer zu Laon geschriebenen Handschrift erhalten sind. . . ." u' nude 0‘ v semi h .noum a: near a! ‘1'“, inemw* _ nai‘II we 2 .. 'Iv ' - v ‘7. (.9601?! WI . - :od'xom - :2. .om‘z‘ w: nun-23;? 0 M' . rvs ed: he 4m: babes“ 1:“ r . Lump. crera‘ 1’ _ :{i'xoaun- *2 Flz’WC LI 001' ”(.3 .1 IA? 1‘ ‘.L ."IUd 011V (KENS?! ‘ .J.,_-v.,.!-J;';'~'fl n n 12.:11..’3.-3 aha] ad? but.“ .31sz 03' r '.~f-.:‘1‘ 1' :‘1IYE;,AlM-‘ bill Q availed Jun at. f .30 13231.1(: 516:} b. v... c” '5’ ms 113'! " 113313811). 39110. -. 0.31 no u «1 .9. Likes art! so! 0‘1 .ECI ,Aoodrod’ifi) bar. 52?? .III . .9 'J' ‘ e1. 9' "1 , e .r'i ,4 90 am e m 3,. .zthveeamsfl mingled :13 .10? 19M' 1‘ 1 11.779 , .Sfl . .4 a ‘- .v'typ 1.}4 "7." _.." 1 innuk‘ta.‘ -_ » _. 7.1. 302 that the origin or the provenance of‘Vaticaanega lat., 215 can be traced to Laon. Paleographically, this manu- script does not resemble the ninth century manuscripts which I believe were copied at Laon. Furthermore, the ex—libris does not resemble any of the explibris, from many different periods, that are found in the Lean manuscripts. I With the Laon origin or provenance of the manuscript, Laistner's sole reason for attributing the scholica to Martin, now extremely doubtful, the attribution of the scholica to the Laon master is highly uncertain. In— directly, Laistner came to the same conclusion. After he first published the scholica, he discovered that they were actually a series of glosses from a commentary on Martianus Capella. His comparison of the scholica led him to believe that the ninth century produced a fourth commentary on Martianus Capella in addition to John Scotus', Dunchad's, and Remigius of Auxerre's. This fourth commentary, he suggested,was Martin Scotus'. However, substantial portions of Martin's commentary have been recovered. It is the commentary which was formerly attributed to Dunchad on rather scanty evidence. However, of this commentary, Laistner wrote, "clearly the source of the scholica graecarum is not the commentary of Dunchad or John Scotus. . . ."14 The few comparisons I have made between the scholica items and the commentaries of Martin (i.e.,"Dunchad"), John Scotus, and Remigius of Auxerre support this last 14Cf. "Martianus Capella and his Ninth Century Commentators," 137. -v . rr‘tléE'Q‘f m . .‘L-{fl‘a '3.» '«4 “1“} L 7i. a". 3" :1 a“ 910. C ‘m—yhcs ' ‘ w 0.1 950 * ‘ ,v 19113.)“: i. w 't n "it. 5.“ ‘|‘ > ‘ H . _". 4211‘”. m f“ * - 3 (twine!) .‘ . , . «@1232! at £1 ’ , .)-" . .‘ rcil‘ .2'9‘1'10311‘“... ”1‘ mi; '.b' J *zrfia‘u '. ~‘)-r-vw-.~.11 . '21:;3'098 ‘ I .‘n'r'j‘v’rwrn my»: {Mind (2 ,ndJa'x m fmdoxtnr 00 baiudizfin‘ {11901103 I", .' '5. rstzkaJ ,‘ma‘meema aim} to (Inc-G )1 ’t‘ :3: gy'xcognga £03;ng 5113 to can!“ a 5' A? . . .aud‘osi mm, 16 Mom “I; W «a comma or». oval 3" .("bW.-.a.l) um I. ' 303 conclusion. Martin and John seem to be ignorant of the scholica whereas, as Laistner saw, Remigius of Auxerre consulted them frequently in his own commentary. The fact that Remigius of Auxerre used the scholica is, I think, a significant clue to their origin. It might be profitable to look in the direction of Heiric of Auxerre, rather than Martin Scotus, for the identity of the compiler of these Greek notes. In the Vatican manuscript, the scholica are found with additional educational material. Included among these is a series of "miscellaneous notes" which Laistner edited with the scholica. Laistner did not search for all the sources of the sixtybsix etymologies which comprise the untitled notes. Entries such as "Celox: navis” and "Eglogae: excerpta testimonia" do not really give one much to go on. The etymologies, mostly of grammatical and poetical words, were probably commonplace. There is, however, a word by word translation of a Greek line from one of John Scotus' poems.15 One of the etymologies ("Praecluesx valde nobiles") has a close echo in John's commentary on Martianus Capella: "Preclues id est valde 16 gloriosi." The etymology of Calliophe's name, "Callion phone: bona vox," is also found among the notes Martin 15Miscellaneous notes (ed. Laistner), 60. The Greek line from John's poem is from his preface to his translation of Dionysius the Areopagite addressed to Charles the Bald, cf. Egg, 2411., III, 548, 1. 21. 16Annotationes in.Marcianum (ed. Lutz), p. 5. was 111'!" “*i‘nd Pf? ‘ sup‘n! rode? ’0‘ " man a ‘ . , artist!“ ‘ 323.." rsM' -..-(3 to 1“ , :L"aV O!” J. a f mm‘ 1“. ' ram!" 3. . . , r ., 'u‘uv“ on} w. _.- 5,211! 0‘ ' a .».._m.:.: I!“ . :31 x: 2".4.3393‘ “WV ‘71-; . ium fury-{Jo efl‘ ‘ " ‘ ., v 11' ‘..1 .' ‘ is ‘mr '1“ 319? ‘M f - H: Ifllj 75:44,.5-W-Ll f‘ ’1.) {10"‘818681‘? b'IW v . .. . (‘u‘ . aetgotmzcgie em in nnfi .moq a'.-m‘oL :51 mice “solo a 8rd ("sslidoa qi-ia‘r ice bi venias'r‘l" asiioqa3 . worUs')" .smm a'edqoifis!) to WM naum notes a!” games have! all u r - rV’f D“ .“ .(39“.m eh:) ’1' , 0 o u: M m . "‘1, .43 :1 s9!!!" 7 . 1" _"' 304 Scotus made in manuscript 444 on the nine Muses.17 The etymology "Problema: quaestio" might also be an abbrevi— ation of a similar note Martin made in manuscript 444.18 The most startling parallel between the miscellaneous notes and the work of the Laon masters is a verbatim transcription of a line from Martin's unpublished accessus to his commen- tary on.Martianus Capella: Miscellaneous notes19 Leiden 'VOss. lat. 22;! 23: I: 2r Periocha est circumstantia Periochia id est circum- quae significat personam, stantia quae significat locum, tempus, rem, qualita- personam, locus, tempus, tem, causam, et facultatem. rem, qualitatem, causam, et facultatem. The presence of this note from.Martin's accessus to Marti- anus Capella and the explication of the line from John Scotus' poem allow us to reasonably attribute these notes and the scholica with which they are associated in the manuscript to someone with contacts at Laon. This master's work can be dated to between 862, the date of the poem by John Scotus which he cited in his "miscellaneous notes," and 877, the closing date of a chronicle found in Vatican, RegI lat., 215. These circumstances fit Heiric's career. Another collection of notes contained in the vatican 17Miscellaneous notes (ed. Laistner), 10. Manu- script 444, 1'. 299v (ed. Miller, 202). 18Miscellaneous notes ed. Laistner), 43. Manu— script 444, f. 298v: "“903 “Ma. id est questio vel propositio unum et HFOBA HM A'noN id est questiuncula." 19 Laistner's edition, 8-9. 1‘ swam!“ d zeallilllfll gilt emf to ‘,‘ .I' '{l'llt “0” air 1 a,“ 1 4w 51h: ,.. i l""‘ I .-~ - U; ”1 enema é: ‘_ , '. g .. 253-’38d 0’ k ' w. r um». _v r .I 71"1'i5 9d . 27315;"...‘37 a‘V' "nu!" J G? ' :q-.u:zmuoilo 300‘! 11.5 imniatnuo rt-J'uh f0 50 . 3;, l -J .meuuaw 3‘1? ‘4“ 311 a¢~iJ4V “At .‘t‘ «van! .0.’ Assaulted .bo) so: .(509 .101”?! . if.“ Jungian“! .hQ - ,2: __ In was»; he 1!! M . -" Romanum a. M Home 4’“- _ .M :1 ‘. - 305 manuscript is the series of glosses on the Old Testament. These have not yet been published. There is no reason to doubt that the marginal references to a IO or IOH and to a Al or HAI refer to John Scotus and Haimo of Auxerre.20 Of all ninth century masters, only Heiric had access to the work of both these masters. Finally, there is the title and source of the scholica themselves. Heiric's scholarship consisted mainly of compiling and arranging material from various sources, e.g., his Collectanea. The title of the scholica graecarum is not unlike Heiric's title for his collection of glosses from Haimo of Auxerre, the scolia questionum. The source of the scholica is undoubtedly a commentary on Martianus Capella, a commentary which has yet to be iden- tified. I would argue that this commentary was made by comeone from the Fleury/Auxerre region. Lupus of Ferrieres was familiar with one of the etymologies found in the 21 scholica. In addition, many of the scholica are found in unalphabetized form in a Leiden manuscript.22 Although 2001’. I. P. Sheldon-Williams, "A List of the Works Doubtfully or Wrongly.Attributed to Johannes Scottus Eriu- gena," The Journal of Ecclesiastical History,.XV (1964), 88—89. 21In his letter of 837 to his friend Altuin, Lupus offered the following explanation of the word fialas: "Fialas, correpta paenultima, ea causa dicimus, quo fiaIae dicuntur, quia fiunt ex vitro, quod graeci hialin appellant," cf. Corres ondance, I, 66—68. A similar explanation is found in the scholica: "Hialin: vitrum"; "Phiala eo quod fiat ex hialin, hoc est vitro, Hialin enim dicunt Graeci vitrum." 22Cf.p. 289. _ .w!1.l edi , in, M nug‘xll! * ‘ ’. H" -3 10%.! ._ puma-O a- [Ned ~ -t- .‘(Il .e--v {om r-ux liqmoo h '13st “’11.. ‘. (:71: for! '1' I ula” “301* ';;::£ 943 3‘ L . .. ‘silsgflé ‘ .n' 18 5w 1' :s,‘ 111911 94“ .. 1; - “"13ij "3‘ '1': 350 “2.2%. "r 23', 432i: . T- . (Vim: not-11.5118 “.1; d'é‘W‘JTJ'i." g" .'I 1 .‘II.""1 3"."‘bi'h1 ;' {U m -—*~. J..- -. 1512'ch guilt “to raid .#” .mwilli'fi-nobloa .’ «111', an}: 03?, asunczial‘ ori .uoflrdrtdét A?“ J?~38 ((dere 73 ‘vxeaggy foo'&,s solo a ; *“ suqu.) ,cimi 5119(1'1 aid o-f YE8 10 '1 ' ‘3’ * ., zgagti brow grit {to neitmi - esp ,wmiakb sum .9 .m ailsid ice ban ,eadiv x. to!!! 1.11mi: '. t' ‘ (I ' :"mam’tv : x m m wt“: ii". ' , D 306 . this manuscript is relatively late (late ninth, early tenth century), it preserves the scholica as they existed before they were arranged in alphabetical order during the 860's or 870's and given the format they have in the Vatican manuscript. One would not unalphabetize an alpha- betized glossary. Now, the Leiden manuscript is from the Fleury/Auxerre region and thus suggests that its owner probably encountered the scholica, glosses from a Martianus Capella commentary which pre-dates those of John Scotus, Martin Scotus, and Remigius of Auxerre, in that region. Heiric also encountered them there, arranged them in alphabetical order, and used them in his teaching. This explains Remigius' familiarity with the notes. has) s'O‘N I. G.- . “7:73".- W . mas-01g m 1 ~»11M\m .mrom 1m " ., ‘nomeo m , .urtool'“ J-zuwvm "I.“ .1051!) In” INDEX OF MANU SCRIPTS AVRANCHES, Bibl, mun., 232: 151-152. BERLIN, Deutsche Staatsbibliothek, PhillippsI 1830: 6, 77, 1 2-163, 199-200, 274, 282. BERN, gurgerbibliothek, 83: 207. 9123 2910 , 184: 291. . 321: 221. . 3 3: 156-157. CAMBRIDGE, Cor us Christi Colle e 3 4: 85. COLOGNE, Dombibliothek 64: 88. KARLSRUHE, Aug‘, 161: 150. LAON, Bibl mun 4: 270. , 4bis: 9 , 270. g E: 62, 63, 97’ 2810 8 103’ 108, 117, 233, 2800 4: 100, 284. 269. c-L ramsmaslaamcwmfism r: 277. 77, 100, 162. 70, 73, 75, 77, 162, 233. 233, 276. 70, 75, 76, 102, 162, 279. 78, 153-157, 272. 97, 275. 77, 96, 162, 280. 102, 277. 95, 277. 70, 74, 75, 92, 83, 233, 282. 100, 119, 147, 278. 77, 99, 162, 233, 270. 77, 95, 162, 233, 268, 272. N..O..'.‘.O.‘...0....OOI.C.N...‘ ix, ix, 62, 63, 65, 77, 79, 113, 142-146, 162, 70, 73, 76, 78, 150, 157, 272, 282, 284. 95, 272. 90, 273, 274. __ 31, 62, 268. _. J€¥§z 66, 97, 275. : 92, 211-213, 225-228, 268. JJ;;: 53, 271, 273, 275, 277, 281—283, 284, 285. 14: 2 O. BiZi: 102, 271, 272, 273, 274, 276, 282, 283, 284, 5. 308 ‘v Ir‘ ‘ . .m; .33:- 5...or ,at' .21" .01” .579 .YEf-Clt .8 .ars . . “5,9,: ,Saf ‘OQ .073 .£85 .38: . .sv: ,eo: .tcs .SOI 309 70, 73, 97, 279, 280. 188 62, 63, 78, 233, 268. 270. ' 66, 233, 270. 100, 269. 62, 95, 270, 271, 275, 281, 285. 70, 73, 95, 269, 270, 271, 281, 285. 84, 85, 280. , 64, 92’ 93, 2730 269, 274, 275, 281. 100, 273, 279. 97, 219, 269, 272. 268. 92, 283. 92. . 7o, 74, 75, 92, 93, 162, 271, 272, 275, , 7 , 278, 280, 282, 283, 284, 285. 266: 100, 277. : 7o, 74, 75, 78, 158, 162, 176—177, 272, 74, 277, 281. : 98, 158, 272, 274, 277, 281. 87-190, 280. 222; 77, 92, 117, 162, 279, 280. 212; 77, 102, 162, 281. 328bis: 96, 270, 271, 273. “253-‘3’ 96, 269, 280, 281. 3 77’ 102, 162’ 177-179, 2740 $3 62, 64, 95, 277, 283. 402bis: 276. 93, 272, 273, 274, 275, 276, 278, 279, : 67, 77, 102, 162 279. 2 102, 278, 279, 282. 8 d N N 0. N N D‘ 98 O \I_AI_AI_A I_AI_I I._xl__a N O O O‘ N 81882! L‘slrulslxM N N .4 01:: N E A O 8 K). O 84, 85, 278. 59, 77, 96, 99, 162, 276, 279. 'iabis: 280, 281, 282. 62, 64, 281. 100, 273. : ix, 3, 7o, 75, 76, 104-108, 113, 123, 151, ALA IAlAiAlALL .a a?” 000‘ u.“ I {01, 124, 126, 137, 139-140, 268, 283, 284. 77, 99, 162, 175, 279. E8 onion-wooNd..noo.oomnnoouonc—LonN..N~s~onononnornoon0: (a; ‘ ,6: 193T. '5“: IQQS‘ 7“;ng {69" ,CE’? 'bT,-ba - F8: .(83 (3")‘9 gm“ l-Qit ‘Y{[ ‘63, ‘ng .‘ , 7‘ 073?: (a?! .937 Q" -888 ,set .LSI , .28: .93: ,ss: .SOR-TOf ,6? ,ev 5 .ms .289 ' x .a“: .Q'S“.': ‘80, (90' 'ct ‘ . I ’v . ‘4' I.‘ 7 . .2: - -. _ ’- AL'JE.C.Z-£_ni_nfi-nfl-m..h ' 310 LEIDEN, Bibliotheek der Rijksuniversiteit B P L 88: 143. -8 . Voss, lat. Fol 4Q: 304. __J 2285. lat. Fol. 81: 37-73. VossI lat._0ctL : 93- 95. : VossI latI Oct, 8%: 289-292. , Voss. lat 20: 67-70. LONDON, British MuseumI HarleyI §122: 173—174. , e . 1 A XXXIII: 13 . PARIS, Bibl de l'Arsenal 66 : 94, 284. , Biblg Natn CollI de Picardie, 262: 58. no 2&1; 23s , Bibl Nat lat 2024: 77, 86, 162, 268, 269, 271, 275, 278, 279, 282. , 2858: 171. 488 A: 116. . 5025: 61, 62, 63, 94, 269, 273, 274, 277, 278. , 2642: 61, 7o, 73, 279, 284. 9 fig: 61, 70, 280. g z 03 192. 2 1030 : ix, 123-124, 152, 158, 205, 219-222, 9 1 : ix, 94, 101, 109, 126, 228-233, 274, 7%:2%78, 280, 283, 284. 12242. 148-149, 220. 12 48 77’ 119, 162’ 278. 12232: 119. 090: 222. 4zczz: 98, 216-218, 276. won‘t”. I_nL__a REIMS, Bibl, mun,, 118: 181. RIDGEFIELD, CONNECTICUT (U.S.A.), Collectioanr, H, Horblit: 162-163, 200, 282. ST. GALL, Stiftsbibliothek, 48: 157. TROYES, Bibl mun 8 : 99. VALENCIENNES, Bibl mun 8 : 152. , 114: 149. VATICAN, Re lat 2 : 299—302. ,“1525: 123,Lgb4, 220-221, 295. 1:311:45]: .L1 ‘134 [r‘j.,"_"'4‘)~‘ .. _ __,__-- «-~~a~- "d—i. " . - ' ._ . _ _ 4A..” _..'.. PLATES 312 m ' a'H'H'H'i k H'H'H-H H - f? 'i‘fii',3"313-:‘1'z'1 '3'0'5: :"‘ 5, 5 1h: 1i1iii¢1111111 s41 ‘fl=\3 ’31:. I‘zfisxs‘ts \!.35 . ~i7itttj*11311" - ‘- ”‘Q-I J‘. a ‘3”313 ' I} . M 4‘#141111+,1141 .- ‘2' “2‘34! "In 8.0 a“ dJa-an’ ‘1 1. 321.! can,” an" as A; . «539.91.11.73 451.3351). .3.ng ‘14 . align? n} 1‘“ PLATE II i, 314 . L ‘ !‘ . I befitfiu‘f “‘1’4131,55';:'1,77-""1’"J"LB" Q A we ‘91:; n a l‘aavaddrfiu [“1319 b' A 1 Amfianzxfiny‘ 'I- 1111‘ fif,‘ ~ 1‘10. 15"?“ ‘ 11“ 0.?" “A? [a cur-1 :ub'oyw "'3“ WW:- am v1 (omwzfizw 5‘ m . smt’t‘fi ‘1’“‘f‘s‘u “C 32;; u‘ “‘4 '3” k; 1; 13 “‘1‘” 1.1111 1011' \i‘lyf fig‘fl' ”03‘ ‘ f, s . “Al‘s . ‘ ‘ 1151 \V' “:{fflfl ”11.11143"; 1 1 ‘ Mfr-1? “3'91“ N ““' g’fifi WMWV‘1191‘1MM“M u. wtat’g—é 1 1‘111111’ 31‘ ' ' “1711‘?ng 1'4 $131111 '1‘ /1-fl2“‘¥"::r {111111111 V1|r1sv Lev-0:5." 10m w?! i“ ‘1 Rt. ,5 saw-drew 111 .2, . ‘3: S. 3.2:: owi'cuu-nfi nu' ( bomm‘ mu mLW co’mobmclwf $011138:ny _‘ 1; , . ”mm {1(111111311‘ 11131 mfgflamk ; :_‘_ ‘ W4, ‘1‘.“ ‘11.” 13111111 :s‘mrgm'mmar“ 5.1:, A “a; ,‘ m“"1°"WMmm~t/\ r. .1 smwmmw PLATE III ! 315 “.1310“an &::1mldmmr M11122. :1 "enr- I 1H ' ' . Dnmbufisflfi ’0er , 11 15mm , Dflpflhanomufo . D. £1.31:- Dmfiohf uh ”guru“: hI D JWnom D 1’ ’Lfiflu’ meMufimm . Dthlwiudwu'o 111511001» 111fo 09539151.?“ ¢ g DM . Duluth "- 0W ‘ 11’4”?“ - DWIW “morn: ' PM“! ”WW I! “I 7| ' ILL ‘ ’ DW'I '- ‘A A"! 3..“ ‘ M"; 32;“ " "1.15,.- ‘11gr'u- 99w 0;?" .1 _ pnmf W040 09ml” - M _ gm v pgmfidmmw Dewfut ~ 1! . '. 99“» WNW 9‘73“ 5rd...“ 11.-uk- 4- ”u Dd‘bwu'dim DE“, . 091113“ MW ’.~ W Dec-um . a 1 ‘. *stimdcurbubufnccldoaf ~ 0 one: ‘ D 33:93”: 1m 0 £10111: _, \ p mmrz‘. , 2‘th DMrZfltASM‘ ”WM 09! . 1 ,3“ _ , . . D0 D gm. 1‘0””! ~ 7 tamen-(11211391101111... ‘ 'v .A-, mack» Des-mea A _ D Dawn-1171 - : 1~ vfi-ff. . ' :fldrut. 0&1?de D 1 '):":§' ’1 D” I‘ 1 {7 I" IDAWHKDES'”*‘ ‘9 «pm ‘ , oms“ ' f . ...._._ ’“ifm’or «1311' #1.; g PLATE IV I . “- ,1, 316 ‘ , 4 .... CTboMATOt-fi 5+0?" " 'HxOé 00"“ Exam! made ‘01va ”I‘M Runny” cram" J—me (mf- ' faywm' AAan "am-r "to“ dutch“? 675170: crux. ,3} Co’w: RPVCMAL : mass-MW Luv-f «mum v and. flo. :nf‘mf (V‘NW M'W’ ‘« 9% dc: TWIN 514: q "“1“th . (3M: Rafa.“ r144...“ J 0mm“: ‘- Lauduni ‘1 dDammor ;w¢¢1 a“ xcruu . t. "A; Cow uh {bhtf'oMHNoc H‘NT'T? fl"; ' J. '5’ «"rw‘u: CLUMA F: Hut: «gm- CTM' r“, Amp (nut “00‘, h .7 swung; cad; APMOAIO: _. ”f “’T‘cs,‘ 0y Lam! A AA H N "A {PfYS‘icTn PM"; *POckmoc :- h'uftmtfrufirw" " Am :3. p J,” I.» m: um “£132.: nutty wrw "’ A: Mm: ”‘6; ”NW WENT“ ouyTau , ”NWMdroc 1"? W A“: ac “my TNM W PLATE V 317 .' ’7“; ' ‘1.“ fi Ma "' ”Gm-l ” > ' . iv . QM“- M'nm kflfl-rm humane-7“ znaro mun urh ”h ’70 " pnwvonuazum ref.“ WM . Wm pwawyv .umoy Ian-M“ 7 ' ‘ " ' W, W M ’f tuo-mum Mama um 15w 9'” ‘ ' em a“ If '9" ‘. "4. ”M w“ Tin-0mm“ mm a: h 6 Ma? r in“ a .' Runyon-m muruu' Mum hi, .0! L w. at. ’ unc- PLATE VI . ‘1’.” I: . 49" I 318 ‘V—-1 r lava uh 43H 1"me“ lunar Hummus... . OSO HLS “muff-W j } glulatbphgn Mm kmfififiww a: :- . ”*I‘W fiery-{murlnu-fi-n f anal W 7 1 WM?" \n'vgannmmn uadebmr- Ni" % ”1".me a“ “he “Logic 5M h: ' Wren-u finch And-“lama 'Hflud 5; Cream Pun-3m ,1 1. Gama” Mt», meum; phnlazphan‘i , . 5‘8qu May-Wmmnfiflpmm ' ' ,. *Ww- www.m“m f r“, Um? lam trust: ' ' -' ' . “an Crud.“ Us JWW 085”qu M38 éL—a‘fm TW‘ .\ m‘oyfirmnyp‘vmmwf- Demon it? www.mm \ W Q mambmfi gufulél “43:“ A_""—"' - WM 4 W .Mfi. .: ’_< I . ”5mm: - mg?- mm «1“.5: . - . ref\ufpta1 “artem“; fire W' "£13m Orrin?! (511: .W: :r $ . m-DIDILSGINNTLUA‘ waif!” In . 5ft,” 'lvvmnefolomfiufi? umur arrow: .z-di um 5”th tplldfiufp WW4.- I tiff-Ar: dart? loamy-t ”1.“, m1; po-ar P‘Wval‘Fnl‘asIrm."be % nay-cu; (“fund‘fmnfm‘fl‘i We": {3" W44.“ affluarfihw “ O . . A“ y I 1.. m... .- M J m _ AA A I A‘ 4 ‘ . fl 7 PLATE VI I 319 -‘. 3 Wheralf ‘ mire-J; m-m’msuld’ ar- m auri" ELIE 1";qude , W49 W - ,auma TWvamIWqujuoflMMrm/inm [MWfUtWfimaLumbamtnm- nude-awn": = - . . ”hammer" - quam idem thmmm ‘61, ' bfirlnbihnfixtnc- quug‘né 'qlo ~1ara7unm4rgr i ”Ommfiftm . - Wm «ream-a3 ’ " " ' - 09w»... - Cum-ula ~ ‘ . . mm. ,. - Iu'iWhaynvncfi ' ' k-meundmmMmml-SWJ' “I. MA' suum-m FMWW' -- ‘ TI.» WWmc- . . I 3 #WW ' :72; ' - W - MIA} ‘ I '1‘“ d! t ;- W WWJ-AWI I I i»; ,2. .all” I- lamb -' 1 1““! I ‘ ‘ WP: Jamxomnsuf- M - quem mam W -- MW *ficwdufnwch-qudmww PLATE VIII 320 ‘ Wu".- W '1 44 .4 .. "( till';v"“.\bw’j‘ .Wmmlf .J‘wn' “won‘t" I [dd-qufffi; ‘ f ‘ "fi‘mfiusflm “Sm-.5 ,{ 1‘ 1 . nun; vim I”"!‘Vi’1f I‘mm‘3”.;" “'7‘ ( wry-‘32 "fl", . “u" m 5"" mfir'flnv‘ 'Irflmf' ml - 1mqhwquw.ch "m.“ [Hm-by M .- / Mr 1Muldlinmmlas 3‘03“!“ ' _ _ II " qwmrzmbuf 'vaunrffi'ut'uu Wmonvamrcnrflm-ui \ . J H i MN 1M In murr‘drfi Ad MAMd . W Meg"? ylf‘vfifl’ru.’ ‘tncrfim ? - “h”: o (:3. :ufl- ‘Drbfl'J/Iav1'ln [ennui-JIM um :rfalnvol'fl'fiom‘Ln; '"u m“ r ' C.\' (‘1’ I: 3:; Kkuncdqwnfi 1!: rfdlmfl‘ finsubfllnl‘nf finsfllufurrflo‘of WHOM-I: b qummw-ulhmm. Mm .-'c1:nlmrr ' MM" a on- "w . 'W'C'W H “1‘0.” at . luau ”Lg-u . _ q — nmwnogmqwf... g». lmrm Jr ~13» rarubuf- 1 confwucuonc'. laww‘ainflvm‘nui- an... ffflgnme‘nfipfi 3:11;?" In: w-x-r an? rmruzunulw t I “ W'fi'.‘ m Ite'snrrj. u £3.41.“ ._. - D ‘3‘ :12": - ‘MV’H ItE—Inurfumonean-EWW . Munrrz‘ufhunomq “in” I‘VJuW' ‘ {a ”W?" W - “a ' . - . (oh-Duff“ ' D WPMMW ’ g ' - . ' .1. ““1“!“‘061 - g M ' r153; Wino-nah: W .. W . [fied'hJ-co Da- — wfimwwyuam «- hth» m a . — O ‘ . ' ‘5‘. “Y mf” -thzmc‘uqd’“wa‘ Mano 5%me (311-:an 0H. néairlulm . ’- -. I . 0: ui'r'if-uIv-fi-n 57007;: HA‘KF; D Wants) canvmmfilL-Lr Wyfrfi b- MHFIw:&,&..-Dmm.l.uuyunw in.“ nr- 5““fl’mmm . 1 It 'v‘\' WW?“ 11?“:3‘ "“‘n -' M PLATE X 322 fat-hm Fin-I'M“ crust-t 15M ‘ufofihlwm- ng Hus rem-«samur- ter-mac a... “W MMW C W and“ italic-bu mmflJtflUAntQ’M k PC& ary-m. can Lunat- ”Arpx Carma. .xtq‘ nth-(05pm harp» " A HOPonoMop§tm F-hereuq qukmforml mac" fmyan 1: Am... 1:4 Imminent E»? ’ I klpm mot-1 HAH’IC? « 9‘be d. mf hither - y we gm: amt-neon mum a; Cl- Luann new»; 1m 93' Ram: I: W»! R a (PT n a o n man? “41" T‘Y him-v n'ocrau kwrrreynonnw fiAof’ToCOI 60:- cvux’énmmn Hqu. 323 No M8 N1 u: N! 13.“: stun-ct 1.11m;- um Doom/Fur. m-umrfipwm ' ‘3') o _, sums-Mum- ( . _ ~. "k" r. "1...;- WWW ”1,“ “ W‘Merfimrmrn-apddlf ' Cm LnbnAfic‘mM-ufi , D «haloqud‘ulmofeumrtflmbururgux. mh‘m'moduixuow C OM\Ql&flluoszancc (ment-duller Mm edmrg. mfiqu‘oc.‘ 2‘.\ droanrclmAt memboaru- mdrmcwpdur. "inns TL .111} Cort‘ Afffcrurchuthmourr imrmng'ThW'yfit’n-t rfdtgr, H‘eft coy” uncnofld'vroJuanOML—t - 1— w, i- "5‘“ Mtu .rt’v‘l” 1 LCK‘C1’~‘S“‘7T11r¢‘r.1to F11 mr pair-camme «1111" ‘ embwm‘ " “I S Isnxt'iunmtn‘lnu 3 a guy; tgv ; ubmvukgffiu ' POl;"“" 34‘1“"? “ :\ '° 9“” I‘, ‘- Kl ,nnhur To“ 1}: ”incur un-isrrmUfl‘I‘. any"; Aftyaloyx; ‘f : Cdrmnu cwlwy i 13 ka‘rmm rum—’1“ 'Cwore [maxi-‘1‘, 'JW‘J‘" r‘ ‘ l'uutrjt‘f. -7 w Jq I‘vr'lf .\ ‘mllni‘k‘ 1111/. \frnoun‘r rm :n ~°Mtlfltr "T .‘l :1 r" . _ ' 1nmn-v.mrfl‘ndeni‘comrl"HIEHT 0'"'v‘ "k‘r’fl'ifl ' (:EmH-'1.\rlwn.\"wu‘. *0 " “'0'" ""lrthfimbr’f‘l‘ {I b" “ “"7 "H“ I" m ;' my.“ ‘. hm 111 (1 mp, ; ury,-J bw 'le'z“tt.\"I.-§‘1‘1"7[IIrV'YIN’i'jw‘a'Wrurl ii .f J‘~‘\ ‘tt‘.cy'-lf:-‘ a} 3» fulfil" 'V“~.i't.\3 ‘x’ll 1‘.“ I "",'.‘l”"-‘"l."> ’ "71: £1 1. .7 A '3ud.1‘.r‘nz}mx}.\y' 9: (hr—A121.» \ lnlvt i‘L t’tAru. "Cpxlu t Fr”: {Alvxnrxf-TH €4.43 'xx‘,=q:.‘.'. 1 r -~..;“ 1 "‘5‘ :L."v I I , ' IHV'WTIOIIAHKC“: ch \nthfimrl'w;'f1f|' ‘ 1’ 1 ' j‘olummAdé '1‘” 'T‘de'm'" ‘11 I- .,..ul1lnmhnor1:tf.u.nm: ‘hw‘r"carum,“?- (31110ij muemrnffimli': 1,? "'11" "Th." 1mt'moni- unfit 1‘ Hr ‘ flfl1llt“ 114(qu mun-41'“ ' _ ’Auxlchc‘trv uann. ‘CPWfitorv Hm? Mum‘“"“““”""' ”S'rmwamm} arvnm» .uu‘u- \J ram-u»? finu‘ ‘fL’fflr' rue dnquArmn? Ployfqm‘J.“'-, quul 44'0“" M". l. untc»:adutfi.{.d|frug¥¢v/ \"lPflP "Vb“HIlfi-v 0 Th . “pi! .4 PLATE XII .. r- '-‘ ’3'”. "1a,”, . "J' ; ' ' f We». W1Mnbnrmm IIWFKW waLglouqura-L H-mflfi I ' WILJHEFnJLawmmaflyundnmuws I I'.I.;IIII,I .- 'I ‘ (31‘ S NM£~:‘LWMM“ W‘u ‘1”. II . . ‘r . . - . . I, . «W A p’uquhrtgnfiqulam‘frmmfld 3f uwpnuuuwhnmkbwwt III :*~155u** l.M¥akwn$unumnimmampwfifld:“ g.‘_ *Iwa’aWW—nd" I , "In“ W- 5‘ LA‘ZI‘ ‘_ STD W‘fmq Trim C'M- “raid-“W ‘11;me LEM“; “r ”5““; “- ullo-I'm van-m4 an rIll-l Dru ,‘nwmxwfiudnf; ,M. m “"‘ WW" A -( I» , .1M-sH-~ yuihfitrmu‘whwli 7 1 WW ?“"'I"*' “”H-‘W’vvkw WM Ww'NG WWW°WW Mus] m“ “WW“ ““W 9%,» clown-u aurulmn nan-affix aufnsqunsu wm' M? M v... I». .. maLJJwb—ummmrmmkl mum Pu" “Mim‘fil n m. as Act-M r th-i :ff‘fimw \fl ":wa 'I::;H i Mafia!” IWflurmnm an 01v ".611me- “an.“ lWH mm ”m MWWM'I llwfl~;LMm A.» W :51.“' ' \ ”2.... Wu... Afijwmfi’gzm QWIP‘WWLM- ' n ~ " «flu-Cum- ”mks-nur- flmfme‘iA ffl'fl‘lm’J mid-Hmm'( “It“ \’ “A... .Iu NIL ' ' ,, t.“ 5‘ J “WWNMMW $1:an 2.7:?” ml; rim dumfla’ twp‘vflrf-mm—F‘ murmur WWW. efuuml mW-aWur 4;. b-sfiw‘ ""‘ l..- rmafrfilrr J «LL 3 N mgr www.~1,mnm S dwhmflcfuflcrnnfardmdtm < O_muuwr9wmuf ' . I O. Jain anflnFrm rim-nub“:- PLATE XIII 325 7 J ’I (”I ‘flflc‘ Jf-mflddmficll'h [non 'll LII! ‘a‘fquII; 411: {Mn-'6'?“ 4 501-0“ """frné‘r ""Jan 41“ Yu'Jffl“‘n‘: "‘"flgrrruo‘un quasi ‘Jeflfau non J.) urnrr auflt' ufir cA/hudvnvinnowfé.~ur d," 0/7 fifth A — qmefi-rvmfl'u confer-um .yfluq Wuficrsmgr'mgl. mun 1“}??qu muffia‘lrfetl; ALfl-ultr ary: cufme—ufifi; ”'i ru—yrf‘ctrd truFo {bruma arut'fiufJflh ht WMMM fl'lnlrfi indicts mo» fiIN‘quno‘if'meu/‘uflwflmw 7WAnot ‘RO'IIWnuulfiwdoflf’MHfofflnw Q‘r" "' W «Mir-f otmfmm'gmmlmu‘dmp; .- mm im‘lr- \lWinJriouJMfiauu-u -. 7 p. 21.: on one suum L ‘ kf'v'rp'; umxmhutvawfiuu'; ‘ . “L, pfdotnvm. ‘E‘Pf‘ Jig .r m fh‘q‘wmxul' :E‘» rt" - i tau-£33 9meme ‘ «ore-ti ~. “W“r dwwt’mnflm‘b“ A!“ ' 13m 1ft Y’t‘fi‘V man _ , - (1143*? ruamlw 7 1 1. - w 38"“? ”a"; . PA :1 . R 5'1"“ lam , - noun-L51. 0"“ 'q '4‘ .7 . V .. . '1) I ‘1‘" ‘d '3 Mr u . _ 4 {- c ‘- ~ ‘ a .' I " ‘ . > v 4 *:A& ' ‘ ' D -'5 ... . ' ~ I _ A '9 f 3‘4“ I“: ’ 1 5 ~ (4. » -. a ” at -‘ "4 " . . ~’ .-”"~‘ , u . ~ ‘: ‘ .w.‘ x 1.1141.- .. 'I' I V - PLATE XIV HICHI n «a;railwmmmrjmumfiirS