Topographies of Power in the Early Middle Ages.pdf

TOPOGRAPHIES OF POWER IN THE EARLY MIDDLE AGES This page intentionally left blank TOPOGRAPHIES OF POWER IN THE EARLY MIDDLE AGES EDITED BY MAYKE DE JONG AND FRANS THEUWS WITH CARINE VAN RHIJN BRILL LEIDEN BOSTON • KÖLN 2001 • This book is printed on acid-free paper. Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data The Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data is also available. Die Deutsche Bibliothek - CIP-Einheitsaufnahme Topographies of power in the early Middle Ages / edited by Mayke de Jong and Frans Theuws. With Carine van Rhijn. – Leiden ; Boston ; Köln : Brill, 2001 (The transformation of the Roman world ; Vol. 6) ISBN 90–04–11734–2 ISSN 1386–4165 ISBN 90 04 11734 2 © Copyright 2001 by Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, The Netherlands All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, translated, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without prior written permission from the publisher. Authorization to photocopy items for internal or personal use is granted by Brill provided that the appropriate fees are paid directly to The Copyright Clearance Center, 222 Rosewood Drive, Suite 910 Danvers MA 01923, USA. Fees are subject to change. printed in the netherlands CONTENTS Acknowledgements ...................................................................... Mayke de Jong and Frans Theuws vii Abbreviations .............................................................................. ix Topographies of power: introduction ........................................ Chris Wickham 1 Cemeteries as places of power .................................................. Heinrich Härke 9 Topography and the creation of public space in early medieval Constantinople ........................................................ Leslie Brubaker 31 Topography, celebration, and power: the making of a papal Rome in the eighth and ninth centuries .................. Thomas F.X. Noble 45 Monuments and memory: repossessing ancient remains in early medieval Gaul ........ Bonnie Effros 93 Cordoba in the Vita vel passio Argenteae ...................................... 119 Ann Christys Topographies of holy power in sixth-century Gaul ................ 137 Ian Wood Maastricht as a centre of power in the early Middle Ages .... 155 Frans Theuws Aachen as a place of power ...................................................... 217 Janet L. Nelson vi  Convents, violence, and competition for power in seventh-century Francia .......................................................... 243 Régine Le Jan One site, many meanings: Saint-Maurice d’Agaune as a place of power in the early Middle Ages ............................ 271 Barbara H. Rosenwein Monastic prisoners or opting out? Political coercion and honour in the Frankish kingdoms ........................................ 291 Mayke de Jong Monasteries in a peripheral area: seventh-century Gallaecia .... 329 Pablo C. Díaz Aedificatio sancti loci: the making of a ninth-century holy place ................................................................................ 361 Julia M.H. Smith People, places and power in Carolingian society .................... 397 Matthew Innes The regia and the hring – barbarian places of power .............. 439 Walter Pohl Asgard reconstructed? Gudme – a ‘central place’ in the North ................................................................................ 467 Lotte Hedeager The lower Vistula area as a ‘region of power’ and its continental contacts .......................................................... 509 Przemyslaw Urba czyk Topographies of Power: Some conclusions .............................. 533 Mayke de Jong and Frans Theuws Primary sources .......................................................................... 547 Literature .................................................................................... 554 Index ............................................................................................ 597 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This book is part of the series produced by the European Science Foundation programme The Transformation of the Roman World. Our working-group went by the name of ‘Power and Society’. We first published Rituals of power from late Antiquity to the early Middle Ages (2000). The present volume is its successor, and owes much to the discussions and debates that raged in 1995–1997, when ‘TRW’ was still running, and all of us were able to meet on a regular basis. We remain very grateful to the European Science Foundation and to the co-ordinators of the TRW programme for having made our cooperation possible. Once the programme came to an end, we looked for an opportunity to have one more meeting in order to prepare this publication. To our delight and gratitude, the Rockefeller Foundation invited us to organise a workshop in its splendid Bellagio Study and Conference Center on the shores of the Lago di Como. On 7–11 September 1998 we profited from the excellent care of the Center’s staff and the ideal surroundings for a stay filled with both hard work and pleasant relaxation. The Rockefeller Foundation also enabled us to invite extra participants from outside our ESF-group to contribute to this venture on Topographies of Power. Hence, we were joined by Leslie Brubaker, Ann Christys, Albrecht Diem, Bonnie Effros, Matthew Innes, Tom Noble, Walter Pohl, Barbara Rosenwein and Chris Wickham. During preparations for the workshop and in Bellagio itself, we had the benefit of Carine van Rhijn’s formidable powers of organisation. Subsequently, she helped us to edit this volume; without all her efficient and cheerful work, this book would have reached the press much later. We received a lot of help from many quarters. Barbara van Rhijn-Dekker kindly checked the English of one chapter; Walter Pohl lent a hand with editing; Anna Adamska solved some problems concerning Polish typography; Helmut Reimitz helped with the bibliography; Janneke Raaijmakers and Rob Meens gave us editorial (and moral) support at the final stage. But above all, the editors want to thank the contributors for sending us chapters that were stimulating to read and edit, and for promptly and patiently answering viii  our countless e-mails. The ESF-programme The Transformation of the Roman World remains a source of inspiration to all the members of the group ‘Power and Society’. The workshop in Bellagio was a worthy finale to a co-operation that has now formally ended — but in all other possible ways, it continues. M  J F T ABBREVIATIONS AA SS Acta Sanctorum AF Annales Fuldenses Annales ESC Annales. Économies, sociétés, cultures BAR British Archaeological Reports BHL Bibliotheca Hagiographica Latina Bulletin KNOB Bulletin van de Koninklijke Nederlandse Oudheidkundige Bond CBA Council for British Archaeology CCM Corpus Consuetudinem Monasticarum CCSL Corpus Christianorum Series Latina CDF Codex Diplomaticus Fuldensis ChLA Chartae Latinae Antiquiores CL Codex Laureshamensis CSEL Corpus Scriptorum Ecclesiasticorum Latinorum CSM Corpus Scriptorum Muzarabicorum DHGE Dictionnaire d’Histoire et de Géographie Ecclésiastique EME Early Medieval Europe IMR Series Institute for Medieval Research Series LP Liber Pontificalis MGH Monumenta Germaniae Historica AA Auctores Antiquissimi Capit. Capitularia Conc. Concilia DD Diplomata Epp. Epistolae LL Leges Poet.Lat. Poetae Latini SRG Scriptores Rerum Germanicarum SRL Scriptores Rerum Longobardicarum et italicarum SRM Scriptores Rerum Merovingicarum SS Scriptores Migne PL Patrologia Latina, ed. J.-P. Migne Migne PG Patrologia Graeca, ed. J.-P. Migne MIÖG Mitteilungen des Östereichisches Institut für Geschichtsforschung PBSR Papers of the British School at Rome Settimane Settimane di studio del centro italiano di studi sull’alto medioevo SC Sources Chrétiennes TRAC Theoretical Roman Archaeology Conference x TRW UBF ZRG ZRG kan.Abt.  Transformation of the Roman World Urkundenbuch des Klosters Fulda Zeitschrift für Rechtsgeschichte Zeitschrift für Rechtsgeschichte, kanonistische Abteilung TOPOGRAPHIES OF POWER: INTRODUCTION Chris Wickham Mayke de Jong, in her proposal for the Bellagio conference, set out some of the parameters she wanted the participants to work with, in their analyses of the locations in which power was exercised and represented. She argued that one of the central ‘transformations’ in the post-Roman West (as opposed to the post-Roman East) was that the city-based Roman world, orientated towards the Mediterranean, was replaced by societies which resorted to a plurality of ‘locations of power’: cities still, but also palaces, fortifications, monasteries and other ecclesiastical foundations, where royalty and aristocrats could publicly express their status and might; in non-Roman parts of Europe one could add the ‘central places’ and trading settlements that have recently been the subject of much analysis in, in particular, Scandinavia. She went on to say: ‘Such geographical dimensions and divergences should all be taken into account. At the heart of our interest, however, is the intricate connection between the physical topography of power and its mental counterpart. The physical topography of the past has mostly been the province of archaeologists, while historians have concentrated on the domain of “mentalities”, primarily derived from texts. By linking the debates in the two disciplines, we hope to get new insights into the exercise of power and its spatial dimensions. Obvious places for consideration are the cult places of the early middle ages, especially monasteries. In fact, the cult of relics, and its control by aristocratic and royal power, is a precious indicator of the development of a public arena very different from that of the Roman world. But there are also contemporary and past landscapes and townscapes which need to be taken into consideration with regard to the definition of new power positions. A Roman ruin was not a neutral site for quarrying stones; it evoked a glorious past and invited re-use of a site loaded with memory. According to hagiographical conventions, new monastic foundations were situated in a wilderness, but quite a few were in fact located near Roman baths and cult sites.’ 3–8. The same applies to this introduction. 5. or Adalbert II of Tuscany to Louis III). reactions that were to be as off-the-cuff as possible. A. this means the question of audience: who is receiving the message? how are they persuaded to receive it in the ‘right’ way? and so on. Maya Sánchez (Turnhout. These distinctions must be understood as highly generic and provisional. ed. say. aristocrats representing power to kings (as with Masona of Mérida to Leovigild. aristocrats representing power to other aristocrats. some of them were extensively developed in debate at Bellagio. Becker. as were Mayke’s proposals for the texts of the papers. sometimes successfully). which essentially does nothing more than set out the six sets of distinctions that I presented then. 1992). or in the March/Mayfield. and in many cases the papers that follow go well beyond them. 19. non-aristocrats representing power to aristocrats and kings (this being the least likely box to be filled. MGH SRG (Hannover. more generally. all of them with topographical implications: kings representing power to aristocrats. Antapodosis. we could distinguish between several different sorts of power relationship. 1884).2   These were our principal starting-points when we considered our contributions for this conference.1 kings and aristocrats representing power to non-aristocrats (as in the placitum. c. 2. which is focussed on public representations of power. 1915). J. but there are some examples of it. Vita Anskarii. W-? Power relations always need to be analysed through an understanding of (to paraphrase Lenin) who is doing what to whom. pp. ceremonial occasions in which Swedes could argue with and defy kings. G. I was asked to begin the conference with a set of reactions to Mayke’s proposals. 2 Rimbert. 26–7. or in estate-centres at. Waitz. Liutprand of Cremona. harvest). But they were our starting-points for discussion. ed. as set out above. ed. or. on campaign.2 Each of these have different para1 Vitas sanctorum patrum Emeritensium. such as the Swedish placita in the Vita Anskarii. In the context of this conference. MGH SRG 55 (Hannover. and so are perhaps worth recording in the printed version of the conference as well.38. Even if we just consider the context of secular power (and this is not the only context we will be looking at). . by rituals of association. and losing office meant the loss of it. different locations. the Franks. Western rulers were often most concerned to ward off regional separatism. but they needed to ward off coups as well. furthermore. but it has relevance when considering topographies of political power. Visigoths and Lombards ( joined after c. for official positions were funded by taxation. but one already had authority simply by right of office. Rulers everywhere needed to construct awe. speaking very schematically. or the Celtic lands. emperors and other political leaders could control that hierarchy very directly.  :  3 meters. It must be expected that the articulation of power would work differently in each. This distinction is well-known. 750 by the Anglo-Saxons). Scandinavia. or through different forms of ritual. at least if that power is connected to the state. such as early Saxon England. gaining office meant gaining access to that funding. as in the Frankish kingdoms: it was far harder to take land back from subordinates who were disloyal or out of favour (or simply inept) than it was to dismiss officials. To be brief about it: it is a bad idea to mix them up. that is to say Byzantium and the Caliphate (and the Roman empire before them). Furthermore. This is the major feature that separated strong states from weak ones. T     The early middle ages saw three basic types of political system: strong states. cities. the western Slav lands. so did Byzantine emperors. different sets of symbolic geographies. if we want to compare power usefully. In Byzantium. we need to recognise these differences. of course. In the third group. through the geography of buildings. but their aims were different in different state systems: so. weak states. which were not dependent on taxation and which associated office-holding above all with grants of land. and also direct power in the framework of the hierarchy of office. and. and thus consent. above all the Romano-Germanic kingdoms of the centuries after 550. The way Byzantine emperors represented power was differently constructed as a result. landscapes. and very weak states or (according to one’s definition of states). public power was a given: if one got an office one could of course play politics with it. say. stateless societies. because real power was always most associated in Byzantium with control of central government. systems where . and to include more people — as well as to be differently constructed because polities in this group usually had little of the Roman past to draw on. by contrast. and maybe also more materially generous — in the provision of feasts. often works differently. I would add. but not necessarily always with political results. from the villa rustica to the mead-hall or the hunting-lodge. one might expect representations of power to be more direct. he does not really say whether he also thought the first. B. and often did not yet have access to the rituals of Christianity either. or with respect to kings? He thought the second (kings are regularly depicted as afraid of the miraculous power of St Martin). the representation of power would have to be more inclusive.4   there was little public political apparatus at all. 1983). But it must be noted that not all aristocrats actually were great landowners: some had dependants or clients who were not subject to them by the rules of land tenure that had survived from the Roman Empire. 1993). for example — to its potential audience. Saints and their miracles in late antique Gaul (Princeton. perhaps because bishops did not strictly need a major saint to dominate as small a city as Tours. . La ville de Tours du IV e au VI e siècle (Rome. too. with Gregory systematically recording it. at a different level: the topographical representation of the power of great landowners when confronting neighbours or dependants showed more continuities across Europe. 2 (Hannover. Pietri.3 Did Gregory’s effective control of this miracle-working make him more powerful in Tours. MGH SRM 1. one would have to say that Gregory’s power had multiple roots. Brown. finally. Gregory of Tours’ books of the ‘virtues’ of St Martin show the saint’s relics exercising power. Here. R. religious power. even though its material forms could change. Martini. L. if we want to be sure of comparing like with like. S   The above characterisations focus on secular power. and who had to be persuaded into obedience rather than simply coerced. Van Dam. 1981). ed. the key reference-points for this text are P. drawing both from the St Martin tradition and from the politicalreligious traditions of local episcopal/aristocratic power in Gaul that 3 De virtutibus S. The cult of the saints (London. These are basic distinctions that need to be addressed before we compare. a further distinction. Krusch. At the very least. 1885). The same was true of living saints: that they could have secular political power ascribed to them cannot be doubted (think of Daniel the Stylite during the usurpation of Basiliscus). Gregory certainly sought to use St Martin. or more controlled (access to relics was often carefully limited). and indeed earlier. at least — given them by God. like kings in fact. cc. Saints. 1923). did St Denis actually help Dagobert and his heirs? What did people do there? For our purposes here. 4 Vita Danielis. “The rise and function of the holy man in late Antiquity”. in particular. H. for that matter. or entirely restricted (as with the more enclosed monasteries). but it would be unwise to read their authority only through political events — Daniel’s aim was to save souls first. it must also be noted that religious power could have a different topography from secular power.5 A major defining element of this power was that it was not exclusively used for secular ends. These restrictions might have different valencies from the broadly analogous restrictions on access to kings. and this power was not strictly commensurate with the power of kings or even bishops. 1979). For example. ed. so did the kings. just outside Constantinople). Les saints stylites (Paris. which he did on more than one occasion. 69–84. in the sort of uncontrollable power network that has best been characterised by Michel Foucault. furthermore. pp. at pp. to intervene in politics a distant second. we may indeed even wonder whether any spiritually-based power could risk being too exclusively used for secular political purposes. when Gregory faced down kings. But these multiple elements did not necessarily all act in the same way. which could be very large on occasion. were to an extent prisoners of the expectations of their audiences. When monasteries.4 This power that St Martin and Daniel ‘just had’ was — as Daniel thought. 92–7. however. access to it might be wider (Daniel on his column. precisely because religious and secular power were not the same. see P. But there is also a respect in which St Martin himself just was powerful.  :  5 went back to the late empire. Foucault. but was at least as much given them by their audience. bishops with Gregory’s personal charisma and family connections could act pretty well without saintly authority. pp. and how it worked: how. 5 M. we need to ask what type of power. History of sexuality I (London. Delehaye. which might in the end undermine its spiritual identity. . for example. are referred to as ‘centres of power’. Journal of Roman studies 61 (1971). it is not clear that he only did so because he had St Martin to help him. Brown. 80–101. 92–3. Cities also allowed 6 M. Pastor e. It was easier to use architecture as a prop. The open space holds one sort of message: it is particularly often found in the case of representations to wide groups. the army. when he did emerge. the people were living right there. or in the Hippodrome.6 On a less elaborate level. Estructuras y formas del poder en la historia (Salamanca.7 We could ask where western royal palaces fitted on this spectrum. and. themselves created such narrow political communities. We could also ask how much architecture created restrictions. 1991). in: R. and could interact with him. with its precise placings for officials of different types. but he was also closer to the people. how a ‘Germanic’ hall worked can equally clearly be analysed. 1998). where cities were also demographic centres. or whether the existence of the walls of the palace. free men as a political community. or non-aristocratic groups—the religious faithful. is the Great Palace of Constantinople. and the traditions of operating politically inside them. because. Another.5. “El califa patente”. Architecture — or its absence — is an essential theatrical prop when considering how power is represented. including a non-aristocratic one. Antapodosis. in Hagia Sophia. 6.a. Liutprand. with its mechanical devices designed explicitly to impress. and how much it reflected restrictions in political participation that were already in existence: whether the political society of Merovingian Francia or (still more) Byzantium was already restricted to a small group of Königsnähe who were the only people allowed inside a palace’s walls. there was a larger ready-made audience. U   Power was inevitably constructed differently in cities. Buildings can be analysed in detail for how their spatial structure promotes a particular form of political message.6   A Some of the most obvious problems in political topography hang on architecture. A Byzantine emperor might be more hidden behind his palace walls than a Merovingian king was.. 51–71. or before the palace gate. 7 See for example F. One example of this is the throne-room of Mad nat al-Zahr just outside Córdoba. eds. closely parallel. The idea of the good in late Iron Age society (Uppsala. Barceló. Herschend. pp. . with changes in them extremely visible to very large audiences indeed.  :  7 for one particular aspect of the topography of power. receiving the secular or religious message second hand. with an ever-changing composition. which was a real urban centre in this period. All these political representations would work differently in the countryside. B. Processions were indeed sufficiently potent an expression of power that they could themselves serve to delimit cities. For the palaces. or else where the audience would be just that much less immediate. landscapes of power (a rural image above all. whose paths. see J. or by rumour. MGH SRM 5 (Hannover. “Le système palatial Franc: genèse et fonctionnement dans le nord-ouest du regnum”. or Trier. Barbier. it is worth asking how one can build up sets of places of power. 255–79. One example of this is the Paris region. another important element in it was the two great suburban monasteries of the Paris region. pp. and which was sufficiently clearly articulated that it could on occasion generate substantial audiences for major rituals (such as. and personnel were capable of minute regulation. into islands of microurbanism. Bibliothèque de l’Ecole des Chartes 145 (1990). at pp. or to link cities with extramural cult sites. that is to say in less controllable ways. the huge procession. 245–99. St Denis 8 Vita Audoini. whose spatial attraction was otherwise capable of pulling cities apart. one can identify a network of palaces stretching around the city and up the Oise to the North that is sufficiently clear-cut that one could refer to it as a symbolic royal geography. linking in many cases sources of power and architectures of power of different types). timing. as at Tours. inside which Neustrian kings operated politically. .)8 This geography depended on Paris. to take but one example. and which was the meeting-point of all the routes of the region. in the seventh century. or Rome itself. where one would have to work harder to get an audience together (in fact just assembling the audience would be an attribute of power). such as Sta Eulalia in Mérida or St Martin in Tours. Krusch. wider spiritual geographies. where. 1910). 15–18. that took St Audoin’s body from Clichy back to Rouen in the 680s. cc. although it is fair to add that urban micro-landscapes of power are also possible. S  Finally. ed. processions. 9 It seems probable to me that this particular distinction was already clear in the seventh century. however. We need. We then need. let’s face it.10 9 See for example A. Bergengrün. in particular Frans Theuws and Lotte Hedeager. between a standard church service and a festival for example. also stressed that they needed to start with the material evidence. many of which specifically avoided concentrations of power. whose power-points were the villas and aristocratic monasteries dotted around Meaux. 10 The discussion that followed this presentation was sufficiently varied that it would have allowed a completely different introduction to be written — one. Some of the points raised. with how power was conceptualised. one could see the monastic and palatial penumbra of Paris as an extreme example of the tendency of cities to fragment in our period into islands of power. (Whether the Parisis was linked together by processions in the same way as Rome was is less clear. coming second. and. between military and non-military power. as a totality. The (Neustrian) Frankish political community understood their meanings. whether this Parisian royal landscape could be clearly counterposed at the time to what we could characterise as the much more aristocratic landscape of the Brie to its east. . and the Palatine in Rome. But it seems certain to me that these sorts of symbolic landscapes were in general legible. Thanks also to Leslie Brubaker and Mayke de Jong for critiquing this text. the Vatican. that would have borrowed too blatantly the ideas of others. however. my major stress in this introduction. Ian Wood pointed out that audiences are constantly changing. 1958). the whole way these questions are posed would have to be different. The conclusion to this book will pick up their points. 65–84.8   and St Germain. just as the Byzantine political community understood the Kremlinology of who was present or absent at processions or in the Hippodrome. and develop them more fully. Mayke de Jong stressed the importance of rumour and curiosity when assessing isolated monasteries as places of power. he and several of the archaeologists present. Walter Pohl proposed a seventh opposition. to reconstruct these political topographies. my thanks.) We might ask how clearly this spatial geography was visible to the eyes of contemporaries: in particular. to undertake the far harder task of figuring out how they worked — and why. however. and what for. secular distinction was useful or not. first. Adel und Grundherrschaft im Merovingerreich (Wiesbaden. To these commentators. Opinion was sharply divided over whether the religious vs. or the Visigothic political community understood the rituals of public humiliation in Toledo that stud our scarce political histories for Spain. however. and to all the others who contributed to that discussion. Przemek Urbanczyk stressed that in stateless societies. unlikely. as with the opposition between the Lateran. would have altered my introduction sufficiently that they deserve record. In a sense. to their chosen audience(s). pp. I would also like to express my thanks to the members of our ESF workshop for the critical and stimulating discussion of my paper at Bellagio. My Reading University colleagues Tony Walter.CEMETERIES AS PLACES OF POWER* Heinrich Härke Archaeologists have studied the relationship between burial places and power for some time. I am indebted to both institutions. The emphasis of this paper will be on cemeteries rather than burial sites in general. The first draft of this paper was written whilst I was holding a Senior Research Fellowship of the British Academy and the Leverhulme Trust in 1997/98. The reason for this emphasis is the Roman and * I am grateful to the Rockefeller Foundation for the opportunity to spend a week at Bellagio. and which evidence from early medieval cemeteries may relate to the various types of power present at burial sites. Frans Theuws (Amsterdam). Given the problems of inferring power from archaeological evidence. and to the European Science Foundation and the Research Board of Reading University for travel expenses. and which appears to be one of the hallmarks of the transformation of the Roman world. Additional bibliographical references were provided by Roberts Coates-Stevens (Reading). this paper will approach the subject from a theoretical perspective. Rather than presenting evidence and asking how it may relate to power. . and to Jörn Staecker (Lund) for helping to track down the other. implicitly for a much longer time. we will first consider the nature of cemeteries and what goes on in them. Richard Bradley and Robert Chapman kindly read and commented on the final draft of the paper. explicitly and within a theoretical framework since the 1980s at least. General considerations as well as archaeological and historical evidence suggest that cemeteries have their own symbolic power. cemeteries may be part of the plurality of locations of power which emerged in the early Middle Ages. I am grateful to Janet DeLaine (Reading) for providing one of the illustrations. Joanna Sofaer-Derevenski (Cambridge). We will then ask where power comes into this. not from the perspective of much later archaeologists. This will be done from a quasi-contemporary perspective. and are an arena for the display and negotiation of social and political power. Chris Wickham (Birmingham) and Ian Wood (Leeds). Thus. together with the other members of our European Science Foundation workshop. p. communal or collective burial area. 1999). Dalton. e. 1992). cf. New Light on the Dark Ages 1 (Glasgow. J. Council for British Archaeology Research Report 22 (London.g. There may have been some overlap or transition between them. “Frankish royal tombs in the cathedrals of Cologne and SaintDenis”. J.. Osborne. 1 Sidonius Apollinaris. Shephard. A third type of grave location was burial inside churches. Isolated burial of individuals did occur during this period: the remote roadside grave of the grandfather of Sidonius Apollinaris is a case in point. “Sépultures ecclésiastiques et sénatoriales dans la vallée du Rhône (400–600)”.. “Sepolture intramuranee e pesaggio urbano a Roma tra V e VII secolo”. the contributions in S. it is rare in the archaeological record.D. 13–27. 1979). H. Médiévales 31 (1996). 4 For Rome. Death and burial in the Roman world. Delogu eds. pp. or in the development of burial crypts in churches.M. Epistolae.. O. tombs and cemeteries.D.C. Williams. 407– 485 (Oxford. pp. J. 57–86. in M. in B. O. . “Placing the dead: investigating the location of wealthy barrow burials in seventh century England”. For overviews of Roman burial rites. cf. pp.1 as is the use of isolated barrows for the burial of high-status individuals in seventh-century England. 26–29. Paroli and P. 1993). I. For a brief introduction to post-Roman burial rites and places. in L. Schriften des Rheinischen Landesmuseums Bonn 2 (Düsseldorf. 13. 2 J. cf. Pirling. “The social identity of the individual in isolated barrows and barrow cemeteries in Anglo-Saxon England”. The letters of Sidonius.2 However. R. 2 vols. Toynbee. 89–111. be that in a prominent or undistinguished location. Harries. R. 201–16. 1977). be that in the form of small clusters of graves or barrows. Santangeli Valenzani. 100–1600 (Leicester. III. Rundkvist ed. 3 Cf. England and southern Scandinavia. G. Werner. pp. 279–284. Papers of the British School at Rome 53 (1985). Even so. Burial in the Roman world. pp. “The Roman catacombs in the Middle Ages”. Wood.4 There is likely to have been a conceptual distinction between burial in a designated. Death in towns: Urban responses to the dying and the dead. Sidonius Apollinaris and the fall of Rome. Space. Grave matters: Eight studies of first millennium A. which emerged as a royal and aristocratic rite in western Europe by the later sixth century. part. the three types of burial sites share a number of the features discussed below.M. 1966). A. Burnham and J. transl. burials in Crimea. pp. Meneghini and R.10   post-Roman preference for burial of inhumations or cremations in cemeteries. or graveyards around churches with burials inside. Reece ed. Early medieval cemeteries. Kingsbury eds.3 Church burial was an integral part of the gradual shift from Roman extramural to medieval intramural burial. 278–328. anyway.. cf.12. La storia economica di Roma nell’alto Medioevo alla luce dei recenti scavi archaeologici (Florence. 47–79.C. 1995). Bassett ed. Aspects of Greek and Roman life (London. BAR International Series 59 (Oxford. part. Antiquity 38 (1964). BAR International Series 781 (Oxford.. Halsall. 1915). J. Fränkische Fürsten im Rheinland. hierarchy and society. and isolated burial. 1994). (Oxford. Doppelfeld and R. 1971). it seems that such isolated burial was a comparatively rare phenomenon — or at least. the beginnings of which are discernible by the sixth century. cf. pp. pp. 5 R. The death rituals of rural Greece (Princeton. Secondary burial has been practised by a large number of societies. “Totenriten und Bestattung im Paläolithikum”. S. cf.. the dead themselves are not seen most of the time unless the respective society practises exposure of their dead. Randsborg eds. e.g. There have been societies. as is demonstrated by ethnographic and archaeological evidence. Celebrations of death: The anthropology of mortuary ritual (Cambridge. 6 Cf.. 1981). Ullrich. often this involves exhumation after the decay of soft tissue. pp.. Bestattungswesen und Totenkult in ur. 7 For exhumation. 74–6. Studien zum Problem der Siedlungsbestattung im europäischen Neolithikum. Berg. pp. H. 84. 1991). I. 71–81. Rolle and H. 1982). Tübinger Schriften zur ur.J. Der Archäologe und der Tod. Chapman. 1996). R. cf. or some form of ‘secondary burial’ (two-stage or multiple-stage burial).und frühgeschichtlicher Zeit (Berlin. and is still practised in Tibet.und frühgeschichtlichen Archäologie 1 (Münster and New York. Seemann. 2. and there were entire periods of early human prehistory. 83 fig. Metcalf. cf. Kinnes and K. apparently without burial and cemeteries.6 and by the absence of clear evidence for formal burial for much of early prehistory. Horst and H. p. Places of memory In cemeteries. 1981). This decision must have been based on non-functional considerations (such as the desire to create a focus for ritual and remembrance. for the ossuary at Hallstatt. pp. Exposure was not infrequent among Plains Indian tribes who called the rite ‘sky burial’. “The emergence of formal disposal areas and the ‘problem’ of megaliths in prehistoric Europe”. including many European Christian groups. R. It is worth stressing this at the outset because formal disposal as such has not been a universal phenomenon. Bucher Report Series (München and Luzerne. 1979). Disposal areas The practical function of cemeteries is first and foremost that of formal disposal areas of the dead. The archaeology of death (Cambridge. and the removal of bones to an ossuary.     11 W  ? 1. N. below) because dead bodies can be disposed of in other ways. L.7 In such cases. in F. Huntingdon and P. in R. 23–34. U. .5 In other words: cemeteries are the result of a deliberate decision to designate a piece of land an area for the disposal of the dead. Chapman. Veit. Keiling eds. Danforth. part. L. Kellaher and C. Fragments from Antiquity. those of the nineteenth century) and other contemporary cultures (e. 8 Cf. ancestors. 135–7. 9 D. Belinskij. Social Archaeology Series (Oxford. for the link between communal identity. In other societies. “Nouvelles fouilles de 1994–1996 dans la nécropole de Klin Jar”. Indeed. Colloquia Pontica 5 (Leiden. quiet contemplation and subdued emotion are predominant. Soupault eds. 1 (1997). In western culture today. Kazanski and V. pp.g. 1915). and a sense of the sacred. Lee. Barrett. in the case of both. monuments and gravestones provide an ‘ancestral presence’ and an expression of origins. in: M. cf. pp. Francis. 193–210.g. but also for the construction and re-affirmation of individual and community identity. 1994).8 At the individual level. lineages and biographies. such as the Day of the Dead in Mexico or the Sunday family picnic at the graveside in the Ukraine. “Talking to people in cemeteries”. without monuments.g. e. Elementary forms of the religious life (London. this remembrance in cemeteries takes many different forms within and across societies. E. what we see in cemeteries is just the graves of the dead and/or their monuments.. Härke and A. 152–3. . At the societal level. 2000). but which can still be discerned in older cemeteries (e. 14–25. this element of remembrance is so strongly tied to cemeteries that cenotaphs are often located in them.10 The existence of monuments also serves as a trigger for later re-use and re-interpretation of cemeteries. gravestones and markers which are the crucial part of this visual aspect and which are a widespread feature of cemeteries make these sites places of memory and remembrance. J. The monuments. but small acts or ‘rituals’ of remembrance of a private or family nature have been observed in London cemeteries.12   ossuaries would take the form or the place of monuments and become the focus of remembrance. cf. Les sites archéologiques en Crimée et au Caucase durant l’Antiquité tardive et le Haut Moyen Âge. subsequent generations or different societies might not even recognize burial sites for what they are. These monuments comprise a strong visual aspect to cemeteries which is played down in western societies today. Mexico or Russia). 10 For ancestral presence. pp. modern and ancient cemeteries. too. They are genealogy in 3-D: a display of descent and family links which is crucial for legitimation. the site of Klin Yar: H.9 Other cultures put more emphasis on the expression of emotion or more outward forms of remembrance. Journal of the Institute of Burial and Cremation Administration 65. Durkheim. 1995).D. Ann Arbor. van Gennep. T. 1960) [first publ. Critique of Anthropology 7:3 (1988). By contrast. and remembrance spectacles for some exceptional individuals (a varied group which includes Rudolf Hess. “Fields of discourse: reconstituting a social archaeology”. 14 J. accompanying and effecting the dead person’s transformation from living being to ancestor. 1999).14 If mortuary rituals are conducted at the societal (as against individual or family) level.. giving form to mourning and healing. 5–16. Studies in the Social and Cultural History of Modern Warfare (Cambridge. in J. Even atheist burial ceremonies today are often conducted by non-congregational 11 D. Burial rituals which accompany the deposition of the dead are universal in societies with cemeteries. The mourning for Diana (Oxford.g. .. but have become rare in western societies. grief and mourning in modern Britain”. Walter ed. Barrett. sites of mourning: The Great War in European cultural history. Whaley ed.13 Rites of passage would normally refer to religious beliefs and cosmology. Winter. Cannadine. Social dimensions of mortuary practices (unpubl. Saxe. J. rituals of remembrance have been observed in many societies. with the exception of remembrance ceremonies for the war dead. and legitimation of. “War and death. Mirrors of mortality: Studies in the social history of death (London.C. Elvis Presley and Princess Diana). they often involve ritual specialists (e. Ph. priests) who would influence or control the conduct of rituals.12 and they play a role in the reproduction of society. pp.11 Mortuary rituals serve a number of well-defined purposes: they have a psychological function. 1970). 13 A. and they frequently involve processions arising originally from the practical need to transfer the dead from the habitation area to the cemetery. Rites of passage (London. University of Michigan. 1981). 187–242. and the re-allocation of rights and duties often includes the display of genealogy (as claim to. pp.     13 3. thesis. Sites of memory. they are rites de passage. in the re-allocation of rites and duties of the dead.A. Places of ritual Another common feature of cemeteries is that they are places of ritual. power positions) and of social structures (as legitimation of power relations). in French 1909]. 12 A. Mortuary rituals comprise a variety of ritual acts. Being the place of such rituals makes cemeteries one of the ‘fields of discourse’ where societies reproduce power relations and other structures of knowledge. overlap or imperceptibly merge. Bereavement and commemoration: An archaeology of mortality.17 Cemeteries may. The social organisation of death: Medical discourse and social practices in Belfast (Basingstoke.16 In many cases the burial place of the deceased will be the trigger and the venue for such emotions and. Vampires. of the place of humans in the world — we confront aspects of cosmology.14   ‘burial specialists’ who orchestrate a funeral eulogy and assist in the consolation of the bereaved. p. S. their display in ephemeral or material form. pp. also become places of emotional healing. archaeologists have generally steered clear of research on this aspect of human behaviour. Walter.18 15 T. L. where appropriate. Places of emotion Rituals in cemeteries may also involve the expression of emotions. T. vampires etc. 16 Grief and mourning have been subjects of widespread theorising and intense debate. Barber. “An archaeology of remembering: death. Social Archaeology Series (Oxford. . In cemeteries. cf. “Secular funerals”. cemeteries provide the main encounter with death and mortality. for an outline of the growth of the debate. like the belief in the living dead (Wiedergänger. 18 P. 5. By the same token. 1990). we come face to face with the question of the hereafter. S. pp. Tarlow. hallowed places. burial and death: Folklore and reality (New Haven. frequently by enclosure (much like monasteries are). 105–21. Walter. but that expression is only part of a whole complex of emotions inextricably linked with loss and bereavement. 1999). Depending on the social and cultural context. cemeteries are usually sacred. 217–231. Cambridge Archaeological Journal 7:1 (1997). Sarah Tarlow has drawn attention to this lacuna and proposed an archaeological approach to cemeteries which focuses on emotion. part. they are foci of beliefs which today we are inclined to dismiss as ‘superstition’. Therefore.).15 4. Prior. 1988). Tarlow. distinguished from the profane surroundings by their location and by other markers. thus. 133–141. Funerals — and how to improve them (London. of coming to terms with loss. pp. bereavement and the First World War”. 17 Because of the perceived immateriality of emotion. pp. Recently. personal grief and socially accepted forms of mourning may be distinct. Theology 92 (1989). 107. Places of encounter with mortality For most people. 1989). 394–402. Properties A cemetery takes up a specific plot. By way of contrast. This control can be meant to exclude (i. e. post-Roman and Christian cemeteries have often been ‘dead-end’ cemeteries: places of destination which you go to. and to barrows which themselves became markers on the featureless steppes of eastern Europe and Central Asia. pp. Blair ed. strung out along roads for display purposes. This means that often. the use of crematoria and cemeteries is closely controlled by municipal authorities. a monastery. c. a churchyard. or it might be used for active display.     15 6. were essentially ‘drive-through’ cemeteries where travellers could not avoid noticing the deliberate display constructed by the community they were approaching or leaving (fig. perhaps even that somebody has control over access to. 83–95. but rarely pass through casually. a cemetery plot may be located on land without property rights.g.e.e. topographical sense. 1). For example. Such a locale might be hidden away. Kemp. 1988). The local church in transition. B. in: J. and as such. or away from. on an estate. cultural landscape (or townscape).. This locality becomes a locale by its link to remembrance and the specific forms this takes in the respective society. and use of. sometimes deliberately so. 7. to enforce burial in a designated cemetery). or on land owned or controlled by somebody: the Church. be that in the landscape. . Roman cemeteries. or wherever. burial rights were a jealously guarded monopoly in parts of medieval Europe because they entailed the donation of burial offerings (soul-scot and dying bequests) to the respective mother church. This might also apply to prehistoric barrows along ridgeways in western Europe. to reserve the cemetery for a designated group) or include (i. or aristocratic landowners. 950–1200. Localities and locales A cemetery is always a locality in a spatial. it is on community property. Oxbow Monographs 17 (Oxford. there may be rights to consider. But in many other contexts. the cemetery. In some societies. Thus. Ministers and parish churches. a monastic order. in a town.19 In modern Europe. Even where the 19 Cf. part of a constructed. “Some aspects of the parochia of Leominster in the 12th century”. Drive-through commemoration: a Roman cemetery outside Pompeii (photograph J.16   Fig. . 1. DeLaine). World Archaeology 28:2 (1996). 1998). This crucial aspect is highlighted every time when a municipal authority’s plan to put a public footpath or cycle path across a cemetery is met with controversy. “The powers of rock: topography and monument construction on Bodmin Moor”. 1994). cemeteries may constrain movement. paths and monuments (Oxford. tombs are houses for the dead. Fragments from Antiquity. pp. 161–77. on Madagascar and Borneo.     17 latter might happen regularly. Expressions of mental topographies Cemeteries may be the physical expressions of mental topographies. R. “Working the land: imagining the landscape”.23 The Scythians had the concept of the gerrhos. C. esp. for example in the case of churchyards. Bühnen. Placing the dead: Tombs. R. 24 Herodotus. A Borneo journey into death: Berawan eschatology from its rituals (Philadelphia. The Histories. A phenomenology of landscape: Places. Waterfield.24 It may be no coincidence that these steppe nomads conceptualized their burial topography as a landscape. transl. Madagascar: M. In parts of western Africa. Herodotus: The Histories. Oxford’s World Classis (Oxford. Ethnographisch-Archäologische Zeitschrift 38 (1997).21 8. 22 Western Africa: S. ancestral villages and kinship organisation in Madagascar (London and New York.20 Thus. p.22 Many Roman tombs mimick. through the landscape. 1982). Metcalf. there are often inhibitions or superstitions against such casual treatment of the locality if it is still in regular use as a burial site. Bradley. not a cemetery. Huntington and P. England) which shows a similar organization of space to the houses found nearby. A prehistoric case may be the Middle Bronze Age cremation cemetery of Down Farm (Dorset. 1971). or mark paths. Such topographies may be sacred. IV. Archaeological Dialogues 4:1 (1997). 21 Barrett. Metcalf. recreates the political geography of Northern 20 A personal experience which highlighted the issues involved and the passions aroused was the plan of the municipal authorities at Hameln (Germany) in 1998 to put a cycle path across the Deisterfriedhof cemetery. or they may just be a reflection of domestic topography. or they may be topographies of power. the segregation of the dead mirrors that of the living and. Bloch. or show paintings of. a landscape of royal barrows. 451–55. thus. pp. Borneo: P. 6). Celebrations of death (n. 39–52. 45.71. C. “Haus und Grab: gebaute Kosmologie und Ideologie”. pp. which would run within a few metres of the tomb of my family. interiors of the houses of the living. Tilley. . Tilley. although this varies markedly across cultures and periods. In modern Belfast. 23 R. R. monuments and memories. 27 S. but it is still likely to be present as a different perception of time linked to the locale. 309–26. Living with the dead in the Middle Ages (Ithaca and London. present and future. this contrast is bound to be less marked. 1995). suggesting the creation of a ‘symbolic pasture’ for the afterlife. rituals. 322.29 25 Prior.J. to adopt an unhurried behaviour which is in stark contrast to the ‘time-is-money’ attitude outside the cemetery walls. cf. 29 The sociologist Walter has drawn on Hogan’s notion of “everywhen”. to conceptualize the dissolution of temporal and spatial boundaries after bereavement. part. D. is said to have been carted from his battlefields to the barrow location outside Cracow. 34. cemeteries can be argued to be islands of subjective (as against scientific.27 Archaeological evidence has shown that the soil for large Scythian barrows was brought from distances of several kilometres away. of an oasis of sedate pace in a hectic world. p. pp.26 Burial monuments themselves may express mental topographies. Thus. 1989). Facing Death Series (Buckingham and Philadelphia. 1994). and that the locations of saints’ tombs and the spread and redistribution of their relics created a ‘Christian geography’ from the fourth century onwards. who died in the 1790s in an insurrection against Russian rule. the soil for the barrow of the Polish hero Tadeusz Ko ciuszko. Oxford Journal of Archaeology 17:3 (1998). Field. T.18   Ireland. In rural areas. — For concepts of time in relation to rituals and monuments. On bereavement: The culture of grief. Landscape and memory (London. The social organisation of death. p. 166.28 9. and even more so in societies without a scientific concept of time. This contrast is strongest in urban cemeteries today where visitors can be seen to slip into that pace. the first association with cemeteries may well be that of peace and quiet. Places of subjective time The temporal dimension of cemeteries is linked to their locations. 58. p. present and future are blended into a oneness.25 It has also been suggested that Bronze Age barrows in southern England created a ‘sacred geography’. Walter. “Round barrows and the harmonious landscape: placing Early Bronze Age burial monuments in South-East England”. P. p. pp. and where rituals link past. Thus. For many in western societies. industrial) time — islands where monuments evoke the past. p. Rolle. 26. Geary. 1999). 111–132. Bradley. 28 R. on the analogy of a recorded Hittite royal funeral. The world of the Scythians (London. where past. 26 . Schama. ranging from the conventional (power over) to the vaguely Foucauldian (power in) to the metaphorical (power of ). Foucault. La société du spectacle (Paris. 223–35. in P.30 but they appear to be in a different time zone.31 Power of cemeteries One aspect is the power of the place itself. for a wider archaeological perspective on time. more generally on concepts of time.     19 Cemeteries may not be a ‘gravity-free zone’. 31 The concept of “power” used here is deliberately broad. time and history”. located between the spheres of the living and of the ancestors — and as Douglas has argued: ‘to have been in the margins is to have been in contact with “Ritual. this volume. 1991). but they offer a structure for discussion. This perceived power may be older than the cemetery. cf. 1984). Clark. Space. Elias. ‘powerful’ individuals. power in cemeteries. pp. R. cf. Oxford. Arbeiten zur Wissenssoziologie 2 (Frankfurt a. These are very broad distinctions with overlaps. G. 1967). 1980). Jennings. 1992). Some of the power of cemeteries may also be derived from the fact that they are liminal places. Debord. 1989. burials might give power to a location. 209–19. particularly if they are burials of distinguished. and how can this power be shown in the archaeological evidence of Late Roman and early medieval cemeteries? For this discussion. World Archaeology 25:2 (1993). time and man: A prehistorian’s view (Cambridge..32 Alternatively. ritual and religion. The significance of monuments (London. D. Mizoguchi. 85–100. N. M. Toms eds. Bradley. World Archaeology 23 (1991). Power/knowledge: Selected interviews and other writings 1972–1977 (London. 1998). part.. 135–40.M. and power over cemeteries. pp. Über die Zeit. Wood. pp. K. R. “Monuments and places”. R. and may have been the reason why burials were located there. where does power come into this picture of cemeteries. Bradley. 30 I. Skeats and J. “Time in the reproduction of mortuary practices”. Oxford University Committee for Archaeology Monograph 32 (Oxford. it may be useful to distinguish between three different aspects of power in relation to cemeteries: power of cemeteries. Garwood. . cf. cf. C   So. after van Damme. 32 For a prehistoric case. Sacred and profane: Proceedings of a conference on archaeology. G. pp. which has recently been discussed for the Roman Iron Age of northern Germany. 35 R. “Monuments and the past in early Anglo-Saxon England”. 1998). Thäte. A neglected landscape? A study of the value of Antiquity to the inhabitants of Merovingian Gaul. 117. Williams. Härke. in the case of megalithic graves and tors (natural stacks of granite) in southwest England. H. H. with particular reference to the Roman rural landscape (unpubl.35 This might well raise the question if those who chose prehistoric barrows as a place for later burial recognized them for what they were. the very fact that early medieval barrows were often built right next to existing. H. ruined stones: enclosures. 202–6. some 60% of known seventh-century Anglo-Saxon cemeteries in the Upper Thames valley are found in such locations (incl.33 In reality. Hawthorne and R. Archaeological Journal 151 (1994).. or next to. pp. Purity and danger: An analysis of the concepts of purity and taboo (London. Forcey. particularly barrows. thesis. Douglas. University of Reading. Witcher eds. “Alte Denkmäler und frühgeschichtliche Bestattungen: ein sächsischangelsächsischer Totenbrauch und seine Kontinuität”. “Ancient landscapes and the dead: the reuse of prehistoric and Roman monuments as early Anglo-Saxon burial sites”. “Lowbury Hill: A context for the Saxon barrow”. TRAC 97: Proceedings of the Seventh Annual Theoretical Roman Archaeology Conference (Oxford. pp. anyway. the number of cemeteries or barrows located on. cf. 25–7. “Angelsächsische Bestattungsplätze und ältere Denkmäler: Bemerkungen zur zeitlichen Entwicklung und Deutung des Phänomens”. 13–22. to have been at a source of power’. Roman Britain. Williams. in C.20   danger.36 Also. these aspects are probably interrelated. pp. 1–32.g. this re-use is too frequent and systematic to be dismissed as mere coincidence of prehistoric and Roman/postRoman burial sites. and post-Roman England and Gaul. the builders of the former. Bradley.g. Medieval Archaeology 41 (1997). this volume. World Archaeology 30:1 (1998). Williams. and they might be difficult to distinguish in the archaeological record. tombs and natural places in the neolithic of south-west England”. “Ruined buildings. 90–108. “Ancient landscapes and the dead”. pp. The visual power of cemeteries is a much-neglected aspect of research and debate because too many post-Roman monuments are 33 M. The most obvious archaeological indication of the power of particular places is the re-use of older monuments. 105–16. M. H. older monuments can reach staggering proportions: e. e. World Archaeology 30:1 (1998). Williams. 71–86. In some cases. . Effros. 34 E. pp. Härke and H. pp. prehistoric barrows would seem to suggest that the nature of the latter was known to. H. or suspected by. p.34 Bradley has pointed out that the distinction between natural and cultural features may in some cases have been blurred. pp. 1966). T. 1995). Eaton. Williams. J. “The ancient monument in Romano-British ritual practices”. probable and possible cases). Archäologische Informationen 20:1 (1997). 36 H. However.A. Archäologische Informationen 19 (1996). 34. the more frequent and widespread barrows. n. and the fear of the dead. in Lombard Italy as well as in Norse sagas. Fisher. holy or sacred power. although perhaps to a lesser degree. in turn.40 The power of the dead has many facets: ancestral power. R. in L. 1992). Landscape and memory.39 but again we see the latter in their eroded. “Placing the dead”.     21 lost or eroded. 38 I. 1998).J. N. . Berichte der Römisch-Germanischen Kommission 63 (1982). “Directions to the dead”. Müller-Wille. 15. Morris. “The context of early medieval barrows in western Europe”. This visual power of burial places may have been enhanced by their natural setting which.. Death ritual and society in classical Antiquity (Cambridge. even from a distance. of newly erected barrows on the North German Plain or the Ukrainian and North Caucasian steppes. the power of the living. H. this aspect is more immediate and becomes more understandable in the case of Roman mausolea. provided links to other aspects of symbolic power. KVHAA Konferenser 40 (Lund. are thought to be a fitting décor for our earthly remains’.E. The world view of prehistoric man. . M. 66–73. Saxo Grammaticus: The History of the Danes. “Königsgrab und Königskirche”. 41 Geary. p. pp. not in their original shape. id. A new Anglo-Saxon barrow of gleaming white chalk on the green downs of England must have been an eye-catching sight. 39 M. Lutovsky. As Schama has observed: ‘. 61–67. van de Noort. pp. Antiquity 67 (1993). pp. Living with the dead in the Middle Ages. pp. in Die Franken: Wegbereiter Europas. pp. These are all aspects of symbolic power. 1980). II (Cambridge and Totowa. vol. 206–21.. . 349–412. Stjernquist eds. Larsson and B. They are also better illuminated by written sources than by archaeological evidence. Schama. 1996). The symbolism of swords taken from graves appears to have been particularly powerful. 40 S. Williams. “Königtum und Adel im Spiegel der Grabfunde”. Vor 1500 Jahren: König Chlodwig und seine Erben (Mainz. R. The same would have been true. Bradley. cf. p.41 A belief in the benevolent power of certain dead is demonstrated by the attraction of burial ad sanctos which features most clearly in written 37 For a prehistoric case of visual power. It is why a grove of trees. “Between Sutton Hoo and Chernaya Mogila: barrows in eastern and western early medieval Europe”.38 The closest equivalents which the early medieval period can offer are the few burial churches and.. 671–6. with their annual promise of spring awakening. Antiquity 70 (1996). possibly with decoration and sacrifices (fig. pp. Books I–IX. but they can be used to enhance or undermine social power. 123–35. in particular. and their landscape setting has changed beyond recognition. Davidson and P. 69. grassed-over form. 2).37 However. one of our most powerful yearnings: the craving to find in nature a consolation for our mortality. between 1857 and 1859). Billmark.J. . The power of monuments: early medieval barrows and later Christian church at Old Uppsala (lithograph by C. 2.22   Fig. pp.g. tied hands and feet of corpses.D. pp. in Early Christian Ireland and Scotland.43 may well be the reflection of a belief in the power of the dead. part. the archaeological inference of family relationships is a serious problem. 377–80. EME 6. 400 –1200 A. 46 See above. 47 For a critical review of archaeological and biological approaches to the identification of family relationships. 145–88. e. University of Reading. Winskill. the enclosure of early medieval cemeteries.47 42 B. 1 (1997). Thus. Price. An analysis of Anglo-Saxon “deviant” burials (unpubl.45 The graves of ancestors appear to have held a similar attraction. probably where descent and genealogy were important for identity and social status. pp.46 In such cases. 44 For amulets. 1981). and even a possible translation of a skeleton from another burial place. in particular. or more specifically. 13–16. (London.J. 1–23. “Zur Bedeutung der Verwandtschaftsanalyse aus archäologischer Sicht”. In the Roman world. but scientific techniques (in particular odontological and DNA analysis) promise an improvement for the future. bodies and beheadings in Romano-British and Anglo-Saxon cemeteries”. the return of certain dead. it may be that the weakening of that previously strict rule in the post-Roman period led to other forms of demarcation of the two realms. n. T.L. (Geology) 35:3 (1981). 6. Anglo-Saxon amulets and curing stones. . cenotaphs. Russia) was used over five centuries and two cultural phases (Sarmatian and Alanic). pp.42 In the archaeological evidence. B.L. While amulets in graves are difficult to identify and interpret. There are other signs of a belief in the power of the dead. cf. Härke. the elite plot in the long-term cemetery of Klin Yar (North Caucasus.A. 1975). “Burials. “Beyond cemetery walls: early medieval funerary topography and Christian salvation”.Hist. 45 M. Laing. A. Harman. Meaney. H. 8. H. pp. for a recent review of unusual ritual practices in Early Anglo-Saxon England. The archaeology of Late Celtic Britain and Ireland c. Molleson and J. Germania 73 (1995). cf.     23 sources. cf. 1999). that separation was effected by extramural burial. Effros. Bulletin of the British Museum. 307–12. thesis. leading to a clear separation of the dead from the sphere of the living. and post-mortem decapitation may highlight a fear of the dead. Nat.44 Decapitation. other ritual practices such as stones on buried bodies. 43 Ll. BAR 96 (Oxford. with evidence of repeated re-use of catacombs (as family vaults?). is a well-documented practice in England where it is an element of continuity from the Roman to the Anglo-Saxon period. 3. drinking vessels and other artefacts which. this is an intangible aspect which is difficult to demonstrate in the archaeological record. H. pp.24   Power in cemeteries While it is likely that the participants of rituals conducted in Late Roman and early medieval cemeteries believed in the power of such rituals. Frühgeschichtliche Sozialstrukturen in Mitteleuropa. pp.000 years”. 13–9. and here archaeology is in a much better position because of the material display involved (assuming our interpretations of the archaeological record concerning this aspect are correct). Rituals of power from Late Antiquity to the Early Middle Ages. jewellery. Steuer.51 This 48 For recent discussions. because of their range and varying quantities (from ‘poor’ to ‘rich’) have traditionally been seen as a display of economic and social power. The Transformation of the Roman World 8 (Leiden. “Directional changes in funerary practices during 50. R. pp.L. Folge. display status. F. weapons. and one way of distinguishing them from ceremonies). 49 I. Childe.-Hist. Samson. “Introduction: Ritual in transforming societies”. 1982). Theuws. 2000). 147–80. 1–13. Roman grave monuments and mausolea clearly. and often explicitly.. to achieve something (which is one definition of rituals. Nelson eds. “Problems and ideas concerning ideology in the construction of “religion” and “ritual” as analytical concepts”. Jahrbuch des Römisch-Germanischen Zentralmuseums 20 (1973). 116–26. Nordström.50 Childe argued a long time ago that an elaborate gravegoods custom is typical of societies with an unstable social hierarchy which leaves room for competition for status positions. Theuws and J. pp. the typical grave-goods custom of the post-Roman period may be interpreted as competitive display: inhumation and cremation graves of the fifth to seventh centuries in large parts of Europe contain dress items. by drawing them into a ritual community.und Süddeutschland”. pp. Scottish Archaeological Review 4 (1987). “Besitzabstufungen zur Merowingerzeit im Spiegel reicher Grabfunde aus West.49 While there are few such monuments extant from early medieval cemeteries. K. Death ritual and society. Lund Archaeological Review 3 (1997). Morris. by engendering action or acceptance. Christlein. Phil. Rituals may have been powerful simply by the impression they made on participants. cf. Boston and Cologen. Abhandlungen der Akademie der Wissenschaften in Göttingen. 50 R. 51 V. Man 45 (1945). “Social structures from Reihengräber: mirror or mirage?”. . wealth and power.48 The display and negotiation of social and political power appears to have been part of mortuary rituals. 49–57. 128 (Göttingen.G. But they must also have been powerful in the sense that participants believed that rituals had the power to effect. in F. Klasse. thesis. 53 R. “Die Grabstätten der merowingischen Könige in Paris”. Alamannische Adelsgräber von Niederstotzingen. H. nn. “Royal burials among the Franks”. lay-out and subdivisions.und Frühgeschichte (Basle. Praehistorische Zeitschrift 49 (1974). separate Adelsfriedhöfe as well as Adelsgräber in ‘ordinary’ cemeteries have been identified across early medieval Europe and in the preceding societies of the Roman Iron Age. Litt. The interpretation in terms of competition appears confirmed for Early Saxon England by the observation that large cemeteries have a wider range.J. Kasanski. Périn and M. Praehistorische Zeitschrift 34/35:2 (1949/50). Ament. 1970). 1967). P. Das fränkische Gräberfeld von Klepsau im Hohenlohekreis.McA.” in Die Franken.. in Die Franken. The age of Sutton Hoo (Woodbridge. 173–82. pp. “Königsgrab und Königskirche”. Forschungen und Berichte zur Vor. Prestations and distance: a role for Early Saxon grave goods in social reproduction A. pp. 243–54. James. Koch. cf. M. cf. 82–128. Müller-Wille. Schlüter.53 In some cases. Eggers. P. P. of grave-goods than small cemeteries. Martin. The Sutton Hoo ship burial. Baseler Beiträge zur Ur. 416–22. Carver ed. E. the scale of the competitive display during the funeral was directly related to the size of the potential audience.54 supporting the suggested link between funerary ostentation and political power. have always been taken to suggest aristocratic or royal status. 1999). pp. (London.D. such as those at Sutton Hoo and under the cathedrals of Cologne and Saint Denis. King. M. Fränkische Adelsgräber von Flonheim in Rheinhessen. it has been possible to identify the royal occupants of outstanding graves. M. M. Cf. pp. Périn. in the latter case supported by the location of the burials. “Lübsow.S. such as that of the Frankish king Childeric. But power relations in society may also be displayed in cemetery location. Das fränkische Gräberfeld von Basel-Bernerring. Sutton Hoo: Burial ground of kings? (London. 1990). 54 M. Neue Ausgrabungen und Forschungen in Niedersachsen 6 (1970). as well as a higher average quantity and quality. pp. W. 1976). 3 vols. 58–111. Veröffentlichungen des Staatlichen Amts für Denkmalpflege Stuttgart A12 (Stuttgart. 117–45. “Zur Definition älterkaiserzeitlicher Fürstengräber vom Lübsow-Typ”. The conspicuous wealth of certain post-Roman graves. For an East European case. 450–600 (unpubl. .L. 1975–1983). U. “Das Grab Childerichs I. Examples of early medieval sites in western Europe: H.und Frühgeschichte in Baden-Württemberg 38 (Stuttgart. Paulsen. Bruce-Mitford. Härke and Belinskij. Thus. Germanische Denkmäler der Völkerwanderungszeit B 5 (Berlin. ein germanischer Fürstensitz der älteren Kaiserzeit”.52 In other words.55 Differential power in gender relations may be evident in the gender-separate cemeteries of the Older Roman Iron Age in northern 52 J. Gebühr.     25 would certainly explain the marked revival of the deposition of gravegoods from the Roman to the post-Roman period in western Europe. “Nouvelles fouilles”. “Versuch einer sozialen Differenzierung der jungkaiserzeitlichen Körpergräbergruppe von Haßleben-Leuna anhand einer Analyse der Grabfunde”. 1998). in M. 55 For cases in Iron Age societies outside the Roman Empire. pp. Carver. 1992). University of Oxford. 3 and 4. and in the separation of genders in medieval churchyard cemeteries on Gotland and elsewhere..39.60 Christianization is. 1992). Saxo Grammaticus. “Die Einführung der Körperbestattung bei den Slawen an der Ostsee”. “Material culture as myth: weapons in Anglo-Saxon graves”. II. H.B. Staecker.H. XIV. in: C. eds. BAR International Series 84 (Oxford. 56 H. LIII (New York. as a distinct class of specialists overseeing ritual.. Scandinavia and the Western Slavs. cf. 22–43. 340–53. B. 1969). Jensen and K. 1959). pp. F.. Bede’s Ecclesiastical history of the English people. Nielsen eds. Western Slavs: Saxo Grammaticus. 3 vols. Härke. Härke. among others. Jahrhunderts. pp. Derks. 401–76. Burial and society: The chronological and social analysis of archaeological burial data (Aarhus/Oxford/Oakville/Connecticut. Past & Present 126 (1990).K. pp. IV. pp. Danorum Regum Heroumque Historia.13. 1980). “Searching for the unknown: Gotland’s churchyards from a gender and missionary perspective”. Colgrave and R. 56. Zoll-Adamikova. 63–86. and a more or less direct copy of Christian institutions. transl. 119–27.A. F. Ethnographisch-Archäologische Zeitschrift 34 (1993). J. transl. 1997).56 Using a wide range of ethnographic data.59 But it has been suggested recently that the institution of early medieval priests among the pagan Western Slavs may have been a reaction to contact and conflict with Christianity. Härke. Danorum Regum Heroumque Historia Books X–XVI. pp. 58 H.27. but the nature and extent of this kind of control varies from society to society and from religion to religion. Rituals of power. Theuws and M. from Anglo-Saxon England. 1999). 81–93.58 Power over rituals themselves is another important aspect in this context. Historia ecclesiastica gentis Anglorum. Priests. Oxford Medieval Texts series (Oxford. Alkemade. A case in point is the weapon burial rite which appears to have been used as a badge of ethnic identity and social power in Anglo-Saxon society. “Geschlechtsspezifische Bestattungssitten: ein archäologischer Befund und ein ethnoarchäologischer Ansatz”. Mynors. Archäologisches Korrespondenzblatt 24 (1994). but there have been few other studies along these lines. Christiansen. H. 57 See n. in Theuws and Nelson eds.26   Germany. 59 England: Beda Venerabilis. bis 7. The spindle and the spear: A critical enquiry into the construction and meaning of gender in the early Anglo-Saxon burial rite. Stoodley.57 Details of ritual practices can also be used for the symbolic representation of power. likely to have had profound consequences for the conduct and control of rituals in areas where there had been no ritual specialists before. “A kind of mirror for men: sword depositions in Late Antique northern Gaul”. E. pp. . also N. Adam of Bremen.J. Derks has argued that gender-separate burial is typical of societies with low female status. “‘Warrior graves’? The background of the Anglo-Saxon weapon burial rite”. Tschan. Zeitschrift für Archäologie des Mittelalters Beiheft 6 (Köln and Bonn. 60 H. therefore. Angelsächsische Waffengräber des 5. Gesta Hammaburgensis ecclesiae pontificum. Pagan priests were reported. BAR 288 (Oxford. Records of Civilization: Sources and Studies. History of the Archbishops of Hamburg-Bremen. existed in Roman society and in early medieval Christianity. Scandinavia: Adam of Bremen. Lund Archaeological Review 2 (1996). “Models of burial. cf. Archéologie Médiévale 7 (1977).. Schülke. now A. that (ecclesiastical) control over burial places and rituals was only established during the eighth and particularly the ninth centuries. — The suggestion here of (social) control of some form over burial ritual which is based on the archaeological evidence of the sixth and seventh centuries appears to contradict the established view. F. part. p. 672–8.61 The disappearance of the supposedly ‘pagan’ grave-goods custom in Western Europe has often been attributed to the growing power of the Christian church and its increasing control of the conduct of rituals. pp. Southworth ed. christianisation et rites funéraires mérovingiens”. J. in R.62 And as Geary has pointed out. II (Cambridge.M. Boddington. H. 62–3.63 which implies that uniformity was enforced at a lower level. Given that early Christian teaching shows no interest in grave-goods and that the early medieval Church neither encouraged nor prevented the deposition of grave-goods as we find them in the graves of nominally Christian Franks. Alamanni. settlement and worship: the Final Phase reviewed”. BAR 261 (Oxford. European Journal of Archaeology 2. 1990). pp. pp.. A. A. 850. 1990).H. 1995). McKitterick ed. the deposition of grave-goods continued for up to two centuries after Christianisation. Lombards and others. in many areas until the seventh or even eighth century. Paxton. “On Christianization and grave-finds”. 1 (1999). Elements of uniformity may be seen in the lay-out of West European Reihengräberfelder of the sixth and seventh centuries. 1997). 1987).S. 457–68. Smith. For a historical perspective. 62 The classic study of this problem is B. cf. 600 –c. it is likely that the impetus for the continuation of this custom came from 61 G. pp. 63 Geary. 41. cf. Schülke. After all. pp. The new Cambridge medieval history vol. Ethnographisch-Archäologische Zeitschrift 38 (1997). in E. 77–106. or in the few and standardized grave-goods of the so-called ‘late cemeteries’ of the seventh and early eighth centuries in Anglo-Saxon England. for a review of the archaeological debate. it can be surmised that local élites attempted to control its conduct. Because of the importance of mortuary ritual for the reproduction of society (cf. Geake.P. The use of grave-goods in conversion-period England c. but uniformity of grave construction and burial ritual as well as regular lay-out of cemeteries may be possible indicators. early medieval burial rites were never controlled by any ecclesiastical or lay legislation. but Christianity is difficult to demonstrate from grave-goods or grave context alone. part. “Paganisme. Goths. 654–78. Young. . pp. 68–71. “Religion and lay society”. Christianizing death: the creation of a ritual process in early medieval Europe (Ithaca and London. 177–99. Living with the dead in the Middle Ages. above). Anglo-Saxon cemeteries: a reappraisal (Stroud. Fehring. “Zeugnisse der ‘Christianisierung’ im Grabbefund? Eine Forschungsgeschichte mit Ausblick”. 5–81.     27 Control over ritual in cemeteries is difficult to infer from archaeological evidence alone. derived from the written sources. Einführung in die Archäologie des Mittelalters (Darmstadt. pp. Müller-Wille. thus. these retained the burial monopoly until the Late Saxon period when burial rights were increasingly allowed to devolve to the emerging parish churches of that period.64 Again.65 Control over cemetery locations also appears to have been a major factor in the shift of burial sites between the seventh and tenth centuries in England. For the existence of a palace cemetery at Cordoba. in particular from secular élites who may have found this a useful vehicle for social competition. places of symbolic and social power: they themselves have power of the place. and use of. nn. 67 See above.66 A special case is burial in a royal burial church or an Eigenkirche (proprietary church) built and owned by an aristocratic landowner. Chrysties. cf. pagan-Christian nature) which had been located outside settlements in the landscape. 66 Blair ed. this is a subject which is easier to elucidate on the basis of historical evidence. archaeologically documented cases. This was a new feature of the post-Roman period. to the new minster churches serving several communities. are closely interrelated aspects as is demonstrated by the control of early medieval Christian cemeteries. “Königsgrab und Königskirche”. 11–21. The Anglo-Saxon achievement (London. Minsters and parish churches. but one possible archaeological indicator might be the location of a cemetery or burial area within the confines of a clearly identifiable complex.28   elsewhere. they are places of the power of the 64 Effros. 65 . the Frankish royal burials around Paris and the high-status burials of Arlon in Belgium and (possibly) Morken in the Rhineland appear to have been among the earliest. a cemetery. a monastery or a palace. R. Hodges. pp. and was established by the end of the sixth century. “Beyond cemetery walls”. pp. such as a churchyard. and to control access to. 3 and 4. M.. 105–6. this volume. 1989). Starting in the late seventh century. burial shifted from the ‘late cemeteries’ (of possibly hybrid. Power over cemeteries The power to choose a location for a cemetery.67 C Cemeteries are. for the continuity of ostentation through the fifth and sixth centuries among provincial elites of the Rhône valley. TRW 8 (Leiden/Boston/Köln. this volume. Those which are particularly difficult to demonstrate in the archaeological record are the power of rituals (as against their format). on the power of the living and royal funerals. J.     29 dead.70 The id. Nelson. the emphasis was on the competitive display of the wealth of the élite in the form of grave-goods. the provision of grave-goods. in: F.. “Sépultures ecclésiastiques et sénatoriales”.. also. Some of the aspects of power of. In the latter. pp. 22–3. 68 For the plurality of power being negotiated in one place. cf. in. 70 An earlier change of a closely similar nature may have happened in the . A more profound. Wood. While Roman cemeteries showed a very strong element of monumental display. they extracted via rituals power for themselves from the power of the place and the power of the dead. the early medieval evidence suggests that the living used cemeteries systematically for the representation and negotiation of power — in a manner of speaking. Alenus-Lecerf. In other words: the emphasis shifted from offering legitimation via monument construction to pressing claims via conspicuous destruction — or: from genealogy to potlatch. this element was virtually lacking in the post-Roman cemeteries of western Europe. and control over cemeteries.69 But this does not mean that the meaning of such practices remained unchanged. certainly the range and frequency of grave-goods seems to increase over time. Theuws and J. often in the form of mausolea of the leading families. Roosens and J. Archaeologia Belgica 88 (1965). There are instances of continuity of ritual practices from the Roman to the post-Roman period in western Europe. “Sépultures mérovingiennes au ‘Vieux Cimetière’ d’Arlon”. Rituals of power: From late Antiquity to the early Middle Ages. Nelson eds. Nelson.L. The above discussion has also highlighted several aspects of continuity and transformation. 131–84. H. from long-term to short-term perspective. and post-mortem decapitation. and over cemeteries are less tangible than others. But it is another transformation which can tell us more about the different nature of power in the respective societies.68 Indeed. and they serve as an arena for the display of the power of the living.L. “Königtum und Adel”. “Carolingian royal funerals”. such as the re-use of older monuments. but also more gradual transformation was the general shift from extramural to intramural burial between the fourth and tenth centuries across much of Europe. pp. control over rituals. as does the location of burials at older monuments. 69 Cf. 2000). 71 And it is surely no coincidence that it was with the stabilisation and centralisation of these post-Roman polities in the seventh and eighth centuries that the élite (re)turned to monumental display while the deposition of grave-goods (which had been going on irrespectively of Christianisation) ceased in western Europe. pp. transition from the earlier to the later Bronze Age in Europe. It is arguable that these changes reflect the transformation of a state society with a comparatively stable social structure.M. R. Smith ed. 1990). cf.. but continued in northern and eastern Europe where old relations of power. in: L. survived for another two or more centuries. p. Wormald. . “The emergence of Anglo-Saxon kingdoms”. The passage of arms: An archaeological analysis of prehistoric hoards and votive deposits (Cambridge. 59. while a potlatch-style display is a one-off affair. 1984). 49–62. esp. and traditional forms of their negotiation. into unstable ‘snowball’ societies run by competing ‘predatory’ elites.30   change from Roman ‘drive-through’ cemeteries to post-Roman ‘deadend’ cemeteries may well be connected with this ritual change: genealogy can be displayed continuously. The making of Britain: The Dark Ages (Basingstoke and London. 71 P. Bradley. Towns in late Antiquity: Iol Caesarea and its context (Oxford. A good summary of earlier literature is H. My thanks also to Gunnar Branels and Bissera Pentcheva for discussion and comments on the text. 1997). 104–5. This process begins as early as the third century and is nearly — though not entirely — ubiquitous by the sixth. a church and cemetery apparently occupied the old forum by the mid-sixth century. 1995).TOPOGRAPHY AND THE CREATION OF PUBLIC SPACE IN EARLY MEDIEVAL CONSTANTINOPLE* Leslie Brubaker Our understanding of the topography — actual and symbolic — and of the notion of ‘public space’ in early medieval Constantinople is grounded in our interpretations of the transformation of urban space during late Antiquity. 111–2. 400–700)”. First. Echos du monde classique 32 (1988). 2 T. and part was given over to small shops. there is a shift away from monumental civic spaces. Haldon. Byzantium in the seventh century: The transformation of a culture. Fora could be abandoned and the buildings pilfered for stone. 1996). in the same volume.2 at Corinth. pp. part of the old forum apparently became the forecourt of a new church. idem. 376–402. or the space could be appropriated for other uses: when the north African city of Cherchel (Roman Iol Caesarea) was restructured in the 420s or 430s. 92–124. with modifications that respond to points made in discussion.3 elsewhere. pp. 3 E. a much discussed topic. Brogiolo and B. “The idea of the town in the Byzantine empire”. pp.1 This pattern essentially involves three key factors. see: J. pp. 25–57. Loseby eds. 459–61. * The following paper is substantially the same as that delivered at Bellagio in the summer of 1998. and W. ed. 34–44. rev. A. As an introduction to a consideration of Constantinople.D. 1999). in: G. different histories?”. I thank the participants in the colloquium for those comments. 1 For good overviews. The idea and ideal of the town between late Antiquity and the early Middle Ages (Leiden. (Cambridge. 1–23.. pp. in: N. 365–401. Saradi-Mendolovici. Ivison. . I will therefore sketch very quickly the basic patterns of transformation found in sites from the eastern half of the Mediterranean basin. Towns in transition: Urban evolution in late Antiquity and the early Middle Ages (Aldershot. Brandes. Potter. “Byzantine cities in the seventh and eighth centuries — different sources. “The demise of the ancient city and the emergence of the medieval city in the eastern Roman empire”. and Mayke de Jong for inviting me to participate. Christie and S.. pp. WardPerkins eds. “Burial and urbanism at late antique and early Byzantine Corinth (c.F. pp. 8. The idea and ideal of the town. 6 J. Just how important walls were as a marker of urban identity is clear from images. “Public buildings and urban change in northern Italy in the early medieval period”. 1997).6 It is not that walls were purely symbolic — the walls of Constantinople. Die Landmauer von Konstantinopel (Berlin. Schneider. 64–70. Byzantine and Modern Greek Studies 18 (1994). 1992). “The transition from polis to kastron in the Balkans (3rd–8th/9th century): general and regional perspectives”. 5 C. “The long walls of Thrace”. pp. see now also B. where ninthcentury houses have recently been excavated in the Forum of Nerva. Ward-Perkins. 1943). Rich ed. Bulletin d’études orientales 4 (1934). entre idéologie et pragmatisme’. Crow. extended the earlier fourth-century wall of Constantine. Dagron eds. but it is implicit in much of his discussion. 109–24. pp. in: Brogiolo and Ward-Perkins.32   fora became residential areas (as in Luna or Rome. see B. See also SaradiMendelovici. esp. ‘Re-using the architectural legacy of the past. “Le plan de Laodicée-sur-Mer”. 161–80.4 The second key feature of urban transformation was the establishment of walls as a fundamental constituent of the city. pp. though the space remained open and was maintained until ca. . Mango and G. “Edilizia residenziale e aristocrazia urbana a Roma nell’altomedioevo”. As demonstrated by Cristina La Rocca. 7 B. in: C. La Rocca. and ran along the Sea of Marmara. pp. Constantinople and its hinterland (Aldershot. Mitteilungen des deutschen archaeologischen Instituts Römische Abteilung 95 (1988). 122–3. Ward-Perkins. I Congresso Nazionale di Archeologia medievale (Florence. added by Theodosios II in 412/3. pp. for example.M. as famously hypothesised by Sauvaget in 1934. “Demise of the ancient city”.. Deckers. Bemerkungen zur Darstellung der christlichen Stadt”. which appeared first within the colonnades of classical streets and fora and then spilled out to fill the open space itself. 8 J.5 recent studies by Jim Crow and Archie Dunn suggest that across the fifth and sixth centuries walls could take on this same significance in the eastern Mediterranean. in: J. 1995). walls originally erected for defense became a defining feature of urbanism during the late fourth and early fifth centuries in cities of northern Italy. where the shorthand for a city is a picture of a walled enclosure. 303–82. For Rome. p. thus providing a second line of defense on the western edge of the city7 — but that they became a marker of urbanism as well as a protective barrier. R. Towns. Gelichi ed. 240–4. in: S.. For Luna. 397. esp. A. 800) or. Santangeli Valenzani. “Urban continuity?” in: Christie and Loseby. pp. pp. The city in late Antiquity (London.8 A final key feature of urban transformation in the eastern Mediterranean is that there seems generally to have been a contraction 4 J. 81–114. Sauvaget. Meyer-Plath and A. 60–80 does not develop the point. were transformed into a welter of small shops.. 4–17. 225–44 esp. Dunn. p. “Tradition und Adaption. settlement was primarily extramural. 46–50. In Constantinople. in idem.9 The contraction is often attributed to population decline. 1992). Travaux et mémoires du CNRS. at Nikopolis in northern Bulgaria. Baldovin. As Andrew Poulter has shown for the cities of Illyricum. “Archaeology and the ‘twenty cities’ of Byzantine Asia”. 1995). but the enclosed space was largely reserved for ecclesiastical and.13 9 See e. for example. 1990). pp. “The use and abuse of urbanism in the Danubian provinces during the later Roman empire”. The urban character of Christian worship. This is also a standard pattern in north Africa. We should also remember that walls do not lend themselves to simple. cf.g. 170. 1987). J. and the reverse is also true: the contraction of urban space as defined by new walls does not necessarily signal a population reduction. e. his first report: Nicopolis ad Istrum. p. and meaning of stational liturgy. development. “The development of Constantinople as an urban centre”. pp. he thinks. 48–50.12 Poulter’s most recent excavation. American Journal of Archaeology 81 (1977). 1986). Le développement urbain de Constantinople (IV e–VII e siècles). 99–135. one dimensional interpretations: because they have symbolic and hierarchical value in addition to their protective role. Travaux et mémoires du CNRS. idem. always at least partially devoted to market farming. Poulter. despite extensive extramural domestic building. p. 1981). Main Papers (New Rochelle. then as now. 11 P. Studies on Constantinople [Aldershot. Orientalia christiana analecta 228 (Rome. 1996). Journal of Roman Studies monograph 8 (London. C. a Roman. late Roman and early Byzantine city. at sixth-century Timgad: J. according to a recent study of the city — Paul Magdalino’s Constantinople médiévale — the Byzantine capital did not suffer major population decline in the so-called Dark Ages. they cannot only be understood as indicative of settlement size. But we should remember too that contraction is also a result of the more efficient use of space: the filling in of older public spaces meant that a stable population could fit into a smaller space. Etudes sur l’évolution des structures urbaines. La fortéresse byzantine de Thamugadi I (Paris. Foss.. the Constantinopolitan walls remind us that the expansion of urban space does not necessarily signal a population explosion. 28. The origins. 12 A. Mango. 13 Poulter presented this material at the Byzantine Seminar (University of Birmingham) in 1998. monographies 2 (Paris. pp. pp. .g. Magdalino. Constantinople médiévale. Rich ed. 1993]. 469–86. with a scattering of shops. 118 (repr. 17th International Byzantine Congress. Lassus. monographies 9 (Paris. perhaps military use.11 Whether or not this was the case. the Theodosian wall did not only respond to population expansion: the space between the Constantinian and the Theodosian walls was. actually found large areas inside the walls left unbuilt.      33 of urban space. study I). and this may indeed often have been an issue. 10 Called the ‘second area’ (deuteron pempton): see C. The city in late Antiquity (London. in: J. walled areas much smaller than the existing settlement were erected throughout the sixth century.10 Indeed. pp. Dumbarton Oaks Papers 31 (1977). See further Dunn. Mélanges offerts à Hélène Ahrweiler 2. While the forms of ritual public behaviour in a medieval city were different from those of a classical one. Towns. A. “Le christianisme dans la ville byzantine”. with modifications. H. following. An introduction to modern Byzantine studies (Washington DC. pp. “From polis to madina: urban change in late antique and early Islamic Syria”. H. Public urban space has been condensed and consolidated. 345–60. in idem.g.16 the changed form does not necessarily indicate the atrophy of public life — it simply indicates 14 See e. . and often at the same time. 80–90. Potter. confined to Byzantium — but my principal worry is with Kazhdan’s unexpressed assumption (and this assumption is implicit in virtually all urban studies that focus on Byzantium) that smaller public spaces automatically restricted public congress and effectively killed public social life. Byzantina Sorbonensia 16 (Paris. in: EUCUXIA. but also. esp. with processes of urban integration. “Polis and kastron in Theophanes and in some other historical texts”. concepts of urban space are being redefined in late Antiquity and the early Middle Ages. study IX). It has been suggested. 32.g. particularly by the late Aleksandr Kazhdan. 63–73. 73–4. La romanité chrétienne en Orient [London. Past & Present 106 (1985). for example. G. pp. 3–25. “From polis to kastron”. pp. that the contraction and consolidation of urban public space in the Byzantine east went hand in hand with the privatization of daily life and the increasing importance of the nuclear family. Kazhdan and G. People and power in Byzantium. 3–27.34   This brief overview does scarce justice to a complex problem.15 There are problems with this suggestion — the urban pattern is not. Haldon. Dagron. pp. and for the non-Christian east. 4–11 (repr. 1984]. 16 The difference is sometimes expressed as a transition from polis to kastron (walled town): see Dunn. Kennedy. 19–58. Kazhdan. but what I am concerned with here is less why urban space changed than with how this changed urban space interacted with the rituals of urban life — with topographies of power. pp. and it clusters around religious buildings (churches or mosques) rather than around state-dominated civic centres.14 Various explanations for this shift have been offered. “From polis to kastron”. quotation at p. and I would stress especially that different geographical areas follow different chronologies of urban spatial development. 15 E. A. Constable. “Christliches und Nicht-christliches im byzantinischen Eherecht”. 1982). But what does seem clear is that throughout the eastern Mediterranean basin. Hunger. Byzantium in the seventh century.: “In the absence of public social life. pp. 1998). Österreichisches Archiv für Kirchenrecht 18 (1967). the one form of association that flourished was the family”. 305–25. McCormick. . we begin to find widespread evidence for a new type of public appropriation of urban space: the religious procession. a mainstay of Roman imperial display. For early medieval Constantinople.18 This compression of spaces devoted to secular public ritual roughly coincides with the contraction of the types of urban public space associated with the Roman polis. and what this suggests is a reevaluation of civic authority over ritual urban space. 18 Richard Lim has argued that this represents the absorption of the “secular” by the “imperial”: “Consensus and dissensus on public spectacles in early Byzantium”. 1986). pp. In 398 and 403 John Chrysostom records two. In terms of the symbolic importance of space. a martyr from the Pontos: ‘Yesterday our city was aglow. Eternal victory: Triumphal rulership in late Antiquity. became increasingly less common: as Michael McCormick has argued in connection with imperial victory processions. Byzantium and the early medieval West (Cambridge. In Constantinople. . Public life is not static. however.      35 that ritual expressions of public life have changed. for in victory celebrations (for example) the emperor with or without his victorious general might still parade the streets on route to the hippodrome. quotation p. the public life of the city expanded during the early medieval period. 64–79. documents record two types of public processions. Byzantinische Forschungen 24 (1997). it would appear that areas associated with imperial secular public ritual contracted. At the same time. but it does mean that the procession itself became a prelude to a more weighted event. both involving the translation of a martyr’s relics into Constantinople. and shifting patterns of behaviour are as likely to indicate vitality as to signal decay. 159–79. imperial and liturgical. ceremony tended to shift from the streets into the circus’. The public procession exemplifies the intersection of the new urban landscape with a new form of ritual public behaviour. Imperial processions. far from declining. that is. The later account describes the arrival of relics of Phokas. .17 This does not mean that all state-sponsored processions ceased. These develop very differently. 389. . . not because it had colonnades. discussion pp. but because a martyr arrived in procession from Pontos . Did you see the procession in the forum? Let 17 M. into the hippodrome or amphitheatre. ‘from the end of the fourth century . basically to the hippodrome. radiant and famous. changes in one particular type of ritual behaviour — the procession — suggest that. Baldovin. 470: Sidonius Apollinaris. the earliest western religious procession recorded was instituted by Mamertus in Vienne ca. 1981]. J. as such.2. (repr. Past and Present 84 (1979). the symbolic space of the polis is appropriated (‘Did you see the procession in the forum?’). 21 See e. at least on one level: Chrysostom is opposing the old values of the classical polis with new ones (the city is famous not because of its colonnades but because of its new relic). faced with an epidemic. nn. Though liturgical processions. 3–35. The procession — groups of people moving from one significant point to another one in a more or less organised manner — had a long history as an important component of religious ritual and urban integration. pp. Geschichte der Patriarchen von Sergios I. writing to him. pp. and the imperial family participate in the procession rather than acting as a procession’s goal. 10. 158–59. 14.L. van Dieten.I.36   no one stay away from this holy assembly .g.19 It is obvious what is happening here. pp. . 286–89. pp. for even the emperor and his wife go with us . 20 .21 This material can be followed down a number of paths. Anderson II (Loeb). either the idea became established very quickly or earlier processions are simply not recorded: see Baldovin. In any event. Urban character. “Images of authority: élites and icons in late sixth-century Constantinople”. . in eadem. p. 174–8. leading John Baldovin to remark that such processions ‘were a part of the whole urban pattern of worship. who held aloft a relic and a portrait of Christ — which was credited with repulsing the Avars. Urban character.20 This will eventually provide the context for the famous procession around the walls of Constantinople in 626 — with the populace behind the patriarch Sergios. The fifth-century historians Sozomen and Sokrates. Letters VII. congratulates him on his successful rogation (prayerful procession). an obvious early example being the panhellenic procession from Athens proper up to the akropolis.’. 182–183. W. presumably around the walls of Vienne: Sidonius. The liturgy in the city was the liturgy of the city’. pp. Urban character. Cameron. are not recorded in Rome until 590 — when Gregory the Great. The processional path was integrated into certain specific Christian rituals already in the second quarter of the fourth 19 Migne PG 50. Gregory wrote of a procession from S Lorenzo to St Peter’s as if it were established practice. the sixth-century historian Theodore Lektor. . two of which are of particular importance here. 211. A. bis Johannes VI (Amsterdam. Outside of Constantinople there is also abundant evidence for the religious procession. col. led a procession to Sta Maria Maggiore — only a year later.B. see Baldovin. and the anonymous seventh-century author of the Paschal Chronicle provide additional evidence for religious processions in Constantinople. . 1972). 699. study XVIII) cf. ed. Continuity and change in sixth-century Byzantium [London. we 22 See the discussion in Baldovin. Gregory of Nazianzus. . col. Urban character. . and the crowd proclaimed a miracle. p. Baldovin. he was not just asking the populace to show support for the relic. apparently by both sides. When Chrysostom. however. but for the Nicene cause. But as the Nicene procession reached the church. 25 Migne PG 63. were given imperial funding for silver crosses and candles so that their processions might outdo those of the Arians.25 Chrysostom’s processions. are also described by Sozomen and Sokrates.22 but more widespread application of the idea apparently waits until the very end of the fourth or the beginning of the fifth century. as we have seen. In 380. 183–185.23 Gregory’s official attitude notwithstanding. 400. discussion in Baldovin. in the passage quoted earlier. scorned the ‘processions of the Greeks’. the sun broke through the clouds. the patriarch of Constantinople. Urban character. 1325–91). 470. prompting Baldovin to conclude that none occurred under his leadership. pp. But this should not blind us to the use.      37 century. of liturgical processions to solidify and to create the support of the inhabitants of the city. 26 See Baldovin. as when the pilgrim Egeria describes the Easter procession at the Church of the Holy Sepulchre in Jerusalem. ‘making it a river of fire’. or even the emperor and his wife go with us’. John Chrysostom speaks of two more processions. The weather was vile. who make it clear that they were a way of showing Nicene superiority over the Arians: the Nicenes. favoured by the empress. he himself tells us with some enthusiasm about heading a procession of the Nicene Christians to reclaim a church from the heretical Arians. 181.26 The theological arguments advanced by both sides were presumably known in some fashion to much of the populace of the city. The pro-Nicene faction led by Gregory of Nazianzus and John Chrysostom was ultimately successful. Gregory preached a sermon in response.24 By ca. 1120–25 (vv. 24 Gregory described the circumstances in his autobiographical poem: Migne PG 37. pp. one of which he claims has ‘emptied the city’ in a torchlit procession that stretched along the coast. Urban character. urged his listeners ‘Let no one stay away from this holy assembly . and the Arians lined the route and rejoiced that God was showing disfavour of the Nicenes so overtly. cols. and others slightly later in the century (such as the return of the relics of Chrysostom himself to the city in 438). Urban character. 23 . 55–64. p. 183. -L. Villages antiques de la Syrie du nord I. who was attempting to propitiate the hostile population of Antioch. however. topographical appropriation intersects with a larger strategy of control. though no architectural markers remain to valorise the itineraries. Sodini. Symeon died in 459. Biscop and J. which appropriated the topography of the capital through walking it. plus a few later examples such as the Chronicle of Theophanes 27 G. Claude. There is.38   now call them the Orthodox. Die byzantinische Stadt im 6. one difference between urban and rural processional routes that is notable. at least in part through the medium of the impressive and expensive liturgical procession. but in another sense. The first is the sermons and chronicles already mentioned. pp. Jahrhundert. that grew up around the column where St Symeon the Stylite sat for most of his life. and its populace. J. In a sense. 1989). they claimed the city. the city colonized the countryside through the medium of the sacred way. There are three main sources of information about Constantinopolitan processions. Byzantinisches Archiv 13 (München. the truly urban routes were marked by monuments that existed independently of the processions that used them as signposts. the Antioch sacred way. 1953). the monastery and the routes toward it were developed in the 480s. Institut français d’archéologie de Beyrouth. now known as Qal at Sem an. and the relationship between topography and procession in such urban contexts differed from that found on the plains of Antioch or in the suburbs of Constantinople. 1969). pp. In the late fourth and early fifth century. for example. Unlike. pp. and especially in the case of the Antioch routes marked by boundary stones and columns. The material provided by John Chrysostom suggests that routes of some sort also led into the countryside and suburban areas around Constantinople. The well-marked routes leading to Qal at Sem an demonstrate that the idea of creating sacred processional spaces was not confined to urban contexts: it extended into rural areas as well. The fifth century is also when the great chains of ‘sacred ways’ were developed to link Antioch with the monastery. 1675–93. . apparently mostly at the initiative of the emperor Zeno.-P. D. 205–77. Acts of the 11th International Congress of Christian Archaeology (Rome. Tchalenko. 208–19. the rural processional route simply indicates the fragility of any urban/rural opposition.27 Again. Bibliothèque archéologique et historique 50 (Paris. “Travaux à Qal at Sem an”. and there are innumerable other reasons besides — but the continuity is nonetheless worth remarking. that the symbolic topography of Constantinople was established in the early medieval period.. 2nd ed. 1962–1963). suggesting that the processional routes were basically set by the sixth or seventh century. Mango and R. In fact. but much earlier material has been incorporated.29 The third and final source of information is the Book of Ceremonies (De cerimoniis). in other words. Byzantine and Near Eastern history A. and that processions were an integral part of these liturgical celebrations. with summaries at pp. 1967). de Boor (Leipzig. with Commentaire. 225–6.. Le Livre des Cérémonies. the people then followed the bishop into a designated church and received the eucharist. evident that already in the fifth century. (Paris.and tenthcentury documents. (Paris. pp. C. 1883).28 The second is the typikon of the Great Church (Hagia Sophia). C. but we do know some of the key nodal points. 32 So too Baldovin. Orientalia christiana analecta 165–166 (Rome. 51–90. Walking the same processional route presumably meant something different in the twelfth century from what it had meant in the seventh — many layers of social memory had been piled on the site. Scott. and that. 78–85.33 the pattern of symbolic space remained largely unchanged. transl. Urban character. The Chronicle of Theophanes Confessor. 2 vols.32 It would appear. for example. 284 –813 (Oxford. 167–226. 31 Baldovin. Constantinople médiévale. despite later topographical shifts that responded to economic incentives. It is. 204. Le typicon de la Grande Eglise.D.. the nodal points that crop up again and again in the earliest sources are essentially the same as those that appear in the ninth. . a book of imperial protocol compiled from a disparate range of earlier sources in the mid-tenth century. 30 A.31 From the fifth century on. but liturgical scholars have come to a certain points of agreement that are relevant to our understanding of Constantinopolitan processions. 33 See Magdalino. pp. Mateos. 29 J. esp. The earliest surviving copy dates from the late ninth or early tenth century. Sundays and certain feast days. Urban character.30 This is distinctly a mixed bag. liturgical processions moved through the major colonnaded streets on Saturdays. much of it later than the early medieval period. 1967). 2 vols. a book that contains liturgical instructions for each day of the year. We do not know the exact routes used in the early period. 212–4. the main Constantinopolitan liturgy was celebrated at different stations over the course of the year..      39 the Confessor (810–814). for a start. Constantin VII Porphyrogénète. pp. 28 Ed. 2nd ed. 2 vols. 1997). Vogt ed. in idem. Hagia Sophia. Studies on Constantinople [Aldershot. “Reconstructing ninthcentury Constantinople”. 434. was also used for some later imperial burials. 229–35.37 34 See e. Luke and Timothy. 5. which consists of 1. p. Architecture. This is the mausoleum of Constantine and the adjacent church of the Holy Apostles: the mausoleum. Peschlow. Beiheft 18 (Tübingen. so named in emulation of the Altar of Peace in Rome. dedicated to Holy Wisdom. 127. 1971). Byzantium in the ninth century: Dead or alive? (Aldershot. the church. with earlier bibliography. pp. 330. architecture and liturgy (University Park PA. Byzantinische Zeitschrift 83 (1990). was built around 360. pp. Mango. 36 T. between the palace and the patriarchate. Mathews. which housed the relics of the apostles Andrew. 35 W. in: L. Die Irenenkirche in Istanbul: Untersuchungen zur Architektur. structure and liturgy of Justinian’s Great Church (New York. nine appear in the early sources. (repr. Four are clustered into what we might call an inner-city group. pp. Brubaker ed. 1988). The early churches of Constantinople. U. R. 28–33. and perhaps. but the building was damaged in the earthquake of 740 and reconstructed sometime after 753.g. this was a major site along the route of more than half of all liturgical processions. The fifth nodal point appears near the Constantinian walls. 1993]. 1977). 1912). the site is probably pre-Constantinian. 1998). . R. dedicated to Holy Peace. Istanbuler Mitteilungen. on the second main road of the city. 37 See C. Mainstone. I wonder. 212–3.40   Of the eleven critical nodal points isolated in the sources up to the tenth century. study V).36 4. Hagia Eirene: the Old Church. Hagia Sophia: the Great Church. 51–62. The church of the Theotokos (mother of God) Chalkoprateia: this housed the belt of the Virgin Mary and was built in the early fifth century. built by Constantine before his death in 337. Ousterhout. and most of these date from the fifth and sixth centuries..35 3. George. The Church of Saint Eirene at Constantinople (Oxford.34 2. The Forum of Constantine: built by Constantine ca. in its present form by 532–537. The inclusion of the Forum in the list of inner-city foci of liturgical processions makes it clear that in early medieval Constantinople ceremonial topography was not rigidly divided between imperial and ecclesiastical sites. “Constantine’s mausoleum and the translation of relics”. and it suggests that the liturgical procession subsumed and absorbed at least some of the roles of the old civic procession. see Baldovin. 224. along with a portrait of the Virgin herself. 7. 2nd ed. Le siège de Constantinople et le Patriarchat oecumenique 3. and eventually to the inner-city core of the Great Palace and the Great Church (a route of about 10 km).39 The final two are on the major processional route of the city. 161–71. built in the mid-fifth century to house the robe of the Virgin. the most precious relic of the city.      41 6. History of the Church VII. pp. For example. . Les églises et les monastères. pp. 185.40 and it was the site of two major churches. Urban character. 39 Janin. or where it stopped along the way. 43 See Baldovin. The Hebdomon suburb was where the army traditionally proclaimed a new emperor’s accession when the army was implicated in this ritual (which happened thirteen times between 364 and 1000). 856. Janin. we know from the fifth-century historian Sokrates that the relics of John Chrysostom were carried through the city in solemn procession. 184–5.41 The early sources are not always specific about exactly where a procession began.–9. col. 42 Sokrates. 55–61. and deposited in the church of the Holy Apostles — but we are not told the exact route. through the Golden Gate (so called because it was sheathed in gold).43 From the same source we learn that the patriarch Timothy initiated a 38 R. with the chanting of psalms. Urban character. The first is the church of the Theotokos of the Source (Pege) of ca. 40 See Baldovin. 1969). both of the fifth century. La géographie ecclésiastique de l’empire byzantin I. was carried in the procession around the city walls to repulse enemies from apparently ca. built on the site of a healing spring. p.42 The emperor Marcian (450–457) participated in a liturgical procession between the palace and Hebdomon. (Paris. Early churches. Les églises et les monastères.38 This robe. 178. 800. 45: Migne PG 67. 500. both the robe and the portrait performed this role many times in subsequent centuries. the sixth-century writer Theodore Lektor. through all of the imperial fora. the church of John the Baptist (which had the Baptist’s head as its major relic) and the church of John the evangelist. Urban character. 41 Mathews. which followed the Roman Via Egnatia from the suburb of Hebdomon. p. p. but neither the reason nor the precise details are given in our source. The final three nodal points are all outside the walls. Further out still was the shrine of the Theotokos of the Blachernae. pp. pp. but that it worked toward urban integration seems likely. . 496) until his own day (pre-527) imperial legislation required all ecclesiastical processions to be headed by the eparch of the city.and tenth-century typikon of Hagia Sophia or the Book of Ceremonies. Dagron. or — like the populace of Constantinople in 626 — they circuit the walls. the processional circuit that moved from the city into the countryside or suburbs imposed urban authority on rural sites.45 This confirms that religious processions were tightly woven into the civic fabric of urban life. again. Past & Present 90 (1981). the second is intrusive. they move out of the city and then back in again (like the relic greeting procession described by John Chrysostom). Zemon Davis. and it also underscores the issue of control that was at the heart of all topographical progresses across the urban (and rural) landscape. G.42   weekly procession to the church of the Theotokos at Chalkoprateia sometime between 511 and 518. 1971). and the significance of the processions around the walls as a way of asserting and ensuring control over urban boundaries is clear. they do not give us the abundant detail preserved in the ninth. e. 186.g. 40–70.47 All serve to unify urban space. Baldovin. where it began is unknown. pp.. the third is enclosing. Urban character. (Berlin. 47 With better documentation. G. 45 Ed. 46 See. 134. 185–86.44 Theodore Lektor also tells us that from the time of the emperor Anastasios (ca. 140. “The sacred and the body social in sixteenth-century Lyon”. p. 1996). for the Theotokos was the protectress of Constantinople. 106–12. The types of movement here vary: the first is linear. Using those texts as templates. p. Etude sur le “césaropapisme” byzantin (Paris. it might be possible to read meaning into each type: for an exemplary case study see N. p. Baldovin. 2nd ed. Hansen. Empereur et prêtre. Hansen.46 but their exact relationship with early medieval routes is of course open to debate. routes can be mapped out with some assurance. to ensure civic control over the crowd. It is also worth noting that all of the processional routes familiar in early medieval Constantinople describe a type of 44 Ed. the religious processions normally follow one of three directional patterns: they move from site to site. Urban character. but the processions from site to site linked adjacent areas of the city into a cohesive whole. The early sources indicate the importance and the foci of liturgical processions. I thank Chris Wickham for bringing this article to my attention. pp. From the early material itself. it is clear that in Constantinople. however. Harris ed. pp.      43 ritual urban space that is quite distinct from that defined by the fora of the Roman polis. munificence and contested topography”. 1999). now defined by activity rather than by static monuments. Rather than a drying up of public life in public spaces. this was certainly not always the case: when a forum falls into disuse and the area is rebuilt as a church surrounded by a cemetery (as at Corinth) or as a church with a courtyard and adjacent shops (as at Cherchel). and how public space was symbolically appropriated. . 33 (Portsmouth. a high percentage of the populated area of the city was transversed. Over the course of a year.V. from a centralised core of heavily weighted sites around a forum to a decentralized network of sites connected by the processional routes themselves. What constituted public space. As this substitution occurs.. The transformations of Vrbs Roma in late Antiquity. ser. suppl. Journal of Roman Archaeology. seems rather to have increased as the centralized Roman polis was transformed and replaced by the early medieval city. and R. both in: W. “People as power: games. 123–34 and 265–81. Lim. had changed fundamentally. This assessment makes a characterisation of the early medieval period as dominated by a contraction of public space problematic: symbolic and ritualisable public space. we are not necessarily dealing with wholescale urban contraction but rather with the substitution of one type of public space for another. The contraction and consolidation of the use of space evident in Constantinople and other early medieval cities suggests a reevaluation of the understanding of urban topography. and the static symbolic civic spaces of the Roman polis give way to an apparently more diffuse and fluid use of urban space. we actually seem to see an expansion of the public domain. see M. with nodal points defined by churches and walls but with ritual public space constantly redefined by procession routes. though as we have seen fora could be subsumed within processional space. the processional routes of Constantinople were not static: different occasions were marked by different routes punctuated by different rituals.48 While this reevaluation may sometimes have been forced upon city dwellers by a defensive or an economic necessity to draw inwards. Salzman. “The Christianization of sacred time and sacred space”. Though certain fixed points recur again and again in the itineraries. public use of urban space changes too. 48 For a roughly parallel development in Rome. This page intentionally left blank . 35. Early medieval Rome and the Christian West: Essays in honour of A.. In this essay I wish to isolate one unique moment in the long history of the Eternal City. Smith ed. Marazzi. “Rome in transition: economic and political change in the fourth and fifth centuries”.X. development. intimately related types of evidence: (1) The way the popes shaped the topography and the built environment of Rome. too easy. (3) The emergence of certain revealing forms of Herrschaftszeichen — particularly coins. p. (4) The intensification and elaboration of many kinds of public celebrations designed to represent and articulate papal power and position.TOPOGRAPHY.H. city after the Constantinian ‘Peace of the Church’. and techniques of dating. late antiquity witnessed in Rome a ‘church in the city’ but not yet a ‘city of the church’. a moment I have elsewhere characterized as The Republic of St Peter. prominent art works. in: J. titles. As Federico Marazzi has felicitously put it. to think of Rome as a Christian. but as I hope to prove. AND POWER: THE MAKING OF A PAPAL ROME IN THE EIGHTH AND NINTH CENTURIES Thomas F. . Within a half-century of Constantine’s death the imperial government had left the city and before another century had passed the imperial administration had all but vanished from the western half of the empire. Yet there have been many Romes in the last two and one-half millennia and even though all their histories tend to overlap it is important to attempt to identify some boundary markers between their various stages. Donald Bullough (Leiden. My demonstration will depend on four separate. or as a papal. Noble It has always been easy. 1 F.M. 2000). In just this same time frame the papal administration began to function as a licit and visible public structure and that papal administration remains in place to this day. CELEBRATION. (2) The appearance. It is my intention to show that it was during the eighth and the ninth centuries that the popes actually turned Rome into a papal city. and placement of certain public.1 Constantine I promoted Christianity and spent lavishly on the Church. 4 Ammianus Marcellinus.2 That Rome’s attitude toward his Christian convictions was ‘rejectionist’ may be one part of the explanation for his relocation to the east. Barnes.8 Indeed. Krautheimer. p. and invested sizeable sums on the city’s secular fabric.D. Atti del XIII Congresso internazionale di studi sull’alto medioevo 3 . The later Roman Empire. 384. pp. Three Christian capitals: Topography and politics (Berkeley. 40. But the other basilicas of the city which date to this time were without exception aristocratic foundations until the construction of Santo Stephano Rotondo. pp. 99–103. 1–31. “Theodoric the Great and the papacy”. 1994). 48. almost in the face of his own evidence. Constantine and Eusebius (Cambridge.  But in confining his benefactions to the edges of the city — the Lateran and Santa Croce in Gerusalemme in the extreme south. St Peter’s and St Paul’s outside the city altogether — Constantine showed discretion. 1980). 312–1308 (Princeton.4 Later in that century the family of Symmachus spent on single occasions many times more money introducing its scions into public life than the Roman Church realized in annual revenue. 340 says that the creation of Santa Maria Maggiore with its nearby tituli is ‘the symbol of the completion of the Christianization of Rome’.6 It seems slightly exaggerated. Cultus et decor: liturgia e architettura nella Roma tardoantica e medievale. 243–4. This seems too early to me. p. MA. S. 94.3 When Constantius II visited Rome in the spring of 357 he ignored both the Christian sites and the ecclesiastical personnel of the city. 33–58. Matthews. p. Three Christian capitals. 28–9. 1981). the erection of Santa Maria Maggiore. Krautheimer. Sanctae Mariae. Krautheimer. pp. Sancti Petri (Vatican City. Rome. Rome: Profile of a city. And until fairly late in the fifth century Roman noble families were. therefore. 6 R. as likely to spend money on the ancient monumental heart of the city as they were on churches. Basilica Salvatoris. the papacy undertook its first major building project. 1975). p. when Theodoric visited Rome in 500 he addressed the citizens from the senate house. 9 T. stayed on the Palatine. 1986).F. 5 J. Hamilton (Harmondsworth. that ‘Rome by the early fifth century was a Christian city’7 and ‘with Sixtus III. the papacy took building activity into its own hands and developed a papal building program’.9 If the emperors were gone. Noble.46  . Western aristocracies and imperial court A. 364–425 (Oxford. R.D. the great 2 T. pp. W. if not before. 7 R. in: Teodorico il Grande e i Goti d’Italia. 1983)..5 In the fifth century. de Blaauw. for Richard Krautheimer to say.X. 8 R. for reasons both ideological and sentimental. 52. transl. Krautheimer. and dispatched to the Chersonnesus where he died in dreadful conditions. Popes were bullied on theological matters. 1993). Archbishop Theodore: Commemorative studies on his life and influence. pp. and the popes were not especially prominent. Le Liber Pontificalis (hereafter LP) (repr. p. . In 662 Emperor Constans II visited Rome.12 (Spoleto. This was a time when there was a kind of imperial control in the city. pp. 68–87. with its beautiful apse mosaic depicting the pope as donor. 10 The problems here are immense.10 The last pope to hail from a senatorial family. undertook such projects as Sant’Agnese fuori le mura. pp. 12 For the general themes in Rome’s seventh-century history see T. Paroli eds. we cannot say. 343 (Life of Pope Vitalian). And there was no Symmachus or Cassiodorus to plead for the safety and wellbeing of the citizens. brutalized. they could certainly throw their weight around in alarming and effective ways. Paris. J. “Rome in the seventh century”. Moorhead. If the emperor and his exarchs were not always in complete control. Lapidge ed. 1993). in: P. the conventional wisdom teaches.O. 60–5.M.. vol. Even so potentially rich a cache of material as the letters of Gregory I is hard to read for lack of a controlling context. “La storia economica di Roma nell’alto medioevo: Introduzione al seminario”. 1995). pp. 1955). central Italy’s population sagged. and its international connections diminished. 395–423. Duchesne ed. 11–29. During this period. He had an apparently cordial encounter with Pope Vitalian and he ostentatiously visited St Peter’s.. Honorius I (625–638). Bibliotheca di Archeologia Medievale 10 (Florence. vol. but otherwise the seventh century was without significant papal building projects or donations. Textual witnesses to central Italy’s fate in the period from about 550 to 700 are sparse and reticent. 1992). 1.11 To whom. But he also dismantled Roman buildings and carried off loot such as would have warmed the heart of a Visigoth.. at this time. 11 L. La storia economica di Roma nell’alto medioevo all luce dei recenti scavi archeologici. Martin I was unceremoniously hauled off to Constantinople. local elites vouchsafed their loyalty. Those wars occasioned great disruption and dragged over Italy a thick veil of darkness. For a fine summation see P. 1. Cambridge Studies in Anglo-Saxon England 11 (Cambridge. Delogu. its land was increasingly deserted. Noble. Aristocratic benevolence and evergetism are not in evidence either. in: M.      47 families were still there. Delogu and L. Theodoric in Italy (Oxford. Theodoric’s regime failed and Italy was plunged into the turbulence of the Gothic Wars. formed of urban and rural landholders. But two generations after Rome’s pope and monuments suffered at the hands of imperial agents. T. Perhaps it would be better to say that papacy and aristocracy began a long contest for power in Rome that was occasionally interrupted by western imperial interventions. a pope had to protect an exarch from a Roman mob that wanted to tear him to pieces for raising their taxes and trying to arrest the pope. the balance began to tip definitively toward the aristocratic side of this papal/aristocratic formula.48  . the pope stashed him under his bed.  In the early eighth century. only. both refining institutions and projecting power in novel ways. to the inscription above the central portals.13 Henceforth. This was Martin’s revenge. To conclude these introductory remarks I invite you to enter St Peter’s square with me. 680 –825 (Philadelphia. The papal government grew as never before. and religious policies formed in Constantinople caused the popes to take the lead in severing central Italy’s historic ties to the Roman Empire. Soon fiscal.. Until the very end of the ninth century this aristocracy used the papal administration to create for the first time a truly papal city. is a monument to his plans. pp. Subsequent popes stayed in the Lateran precincts. Look up to the facade of the new basilica. One critical feature of this period links it with those that preceded and followed. John VII. with its hauntingly beautiful works of art. By the tenth century. however. who differed in degree of wealth but not in kinds of wealth from their late antique predecessors. In 400 Rome was fundamentally an aristocratic city. 1984). briefly contemplated transferring the seat of the papal government to the Palatine Hill. Camillo Borghese and Symmachus had a lot in common but they differed in important ways too. In an ironic twist on the lit de justice. Noble. by communal movements. There you will read Paulus Borgesius Romanus. things began to change. 1–60. By the middle of the eighth century men whom the Liber Pontificalis labels aristocratic ascended to the papal office and filled the offices of the papal government. But in 1610 the aristocrats controlled the church and thereby presided 13 For basic details. and decisively by the papacy’s removal to Avignon. diplomatic. This was a new aristocracy. The Republic of St Peter: The birth of the papal state. son of the curator palatii Plato. . The church of Santa Maria Antiqua. Plans. visitors to Rome only sought out ecclesiastical officials and religious sites. as it was later in 1610. for nearly two centuries. 1984). of gold. R. From classical Antiquity to the Middle Ages: Urban public building in Northern and Central Italy A. pp. It is in the eighth and ninth centuries. Studi di antichità cristiana 41 (Rome. Archaeologia Traiectina 10 (Groningen. The fundamental source material is provided by the LP. Smith ed. 1). 564–612. 64 (1996). “The surviving remains of the Leonine Wall. 1989). “L’implantation monumentale chrétienne dans le paysage urbain de Rome de 300 à 850”. L. 335–440. pp. Ermini Pani.      49 over a ‘city of the church’. 861–915. in: J. A. ibid. and Leo IV all made extensive repairs to Rome’s Aurelian walls and towers. Early medieval Rome and the Christian West (as in n. 222–39. pp. de Blaauw. 1975). 300 –850 (Oxford. Surely the work of Gregory II and III. 161–200.” in: Committenti e produzione artistico-letteraria nell’alto medioevo occidentale. pp. pp.. faced as he was by Muslim incursions and lacking Carolingian protection. . More Veterum: Il Liber Pontificalis e gli edifici ecclesiastici di Roma nella tarda antichità e nell’alto medioevo. 2. Settimane 39 (Spoleto. ibid. L. vol. S. T R  C In looking at the ways in which the popes could use Rome’s built environment to project their power. in view of the Lombard threat and the absence of effective imperial protection. and Ward-Perkins. To avoid an endless multiplication of references here.14 Gregory II. Hadrian (twice). “‘Renovatio murorum’ tra programma urbanistica e restauro conservativo: Rome e il ducato Romano. pp. Fundamental literature: Krautheimer. Gibson.” PBSR 47 (1979). Rome. He devoted two campaigns to the walls in perhaps the highpoint of the Carolingian Pax Italiae. pp. In Symmachus’ day the aristocracy and the church had little to do with one another. Gregory III. But the work of Hadrian is intriguing. Cultus et Decor. Reekmans. S. let us consider first their repairs to or extensions of the city’s secular fabric. make sense in terms of military exigencies.D. as we will see. H. I shall cite only works not cited in “Paradoxes” or works which illuminate particular points being raised here more explicitly than there. Coates-Stephens. spending in one instance 100 lbs. Part II: The Passetto”. 14 The basic arguments in the next several pages depend on my “Paradoxes and possibilities in the sources for Roman society in the Early Middle Ages”. 500–1000”. 177–232 and “Housing in early medieval Rome. 51 (1983). where the essential literature is cited. 1992).D. 485–530.. Geertman. PBSR 65 (1997). B. in: Actes du XIe Congrès International d’Archéologie chrétienne. or to create a physical environment capable of projecting power. Ward-Perkins. as well as the work of Leo IV. Leo III. 30–57 and “The surviving remains of the Leonine Wall. 239–59. I suspect that this may have been a gesture designed to display his power and prestige. 89–142. that a ‘church in the city’ became a ‘city of the church’. 55–83. “Dark Age architecture in Rome”. pp. this construction in the countryside points to a real projection of papal power in a region threatened sometimes by foreign incursions and sometimes by local factional squabbling. damaged in the Gothic wars and again by the Lombards.50  . Pani Ermini.15 Later. is probably the best known of all these building projects in the areas outside the city. may be seen as no more than an attempt to make the city more liveable. Leo IV completely rebuilt Centumcellae’s fortifications and renamed the place ‘Leopolis’. The creation of the Leonine City by Leo IV.. facing the earliest Muslim attacks. in: G. 369–73 came to my attention after I had submitted “Paradoxes”. De Boe and F. Papal building of a secular sort was not confined to the city proper. a generation later. 11–21 for apposite comments on the practical and ideological significance of aqueducts. “Leopoli-Cencelle: Una città di fondazione papale”.. pp. Nicholas I rebuilt the fortifications there. Archaeological work discerns additional construction along the Via Flaminia and at Monte Gelato. renamed it Gregoriopolis and. Urbanism in Medieval Europe (Zellik. years later. 1. Water and society in early medieval Italy. The reconstruction of Rome’s aqueducts. 1998). Because the peasants on the domuscultae could be armed.16 He also erected anew the walls and gates of Amelia and Orte. practical motivations. Gregory IV. Gregory IV and Nicholas I added new work at the Aqua Sabbatina which brought water to the region of St-Peter’s and to the mills on the Janiculum. Less well known. with its three-kilometer-long circuit of walls.and fifth-century aristocratic solicitude for the city’s monumental center even though the latter was almost wholly propagandistic whereas the former had immediate. because the evi- 15 See P. . I see a possible parallel between the papal concern for Rome’s walls and aqueducts and the fourth.  Hadrian also repaired four of Rome’s aqueducts. a strategic hamlet in south Etruria and. which carried water to the Baths of Caracalla. Sergius II completed additional repairs to the Aqua Jovia. but such work may also be taken as a visible sign of papal power and of the responsibility which the popes had assumed for their city. pp. 1997). Verhaege eds. 400–1000 (Cambridge. whereas clerics and the general run of peasants could not be. vol. Zachary and Hadrian built substantial buildings on at least three of the newly founded domuscultae. Squatriti. fortified Ostia. Gregory III improved the walls of Centumcellae. although it must be admitted that we do not know what kinds of building these were. 16 L. we cannot help but be struck by the papacy’s attention to the Lateran and Vatican18 regions. First. is the borgo constructed by John VIII around San Paolo fuori le Mura. I wish to point out. three aspects of that attention. the sources provide an embarrassment of riches. 1970). aptly if inelegantly. Although many. pp. albeit in rather summary fashion. Recueil de travaux d’histoire et de philologie.17 Still. these qualifications notwithstanding. 195–235 is a detailed assessment of the construction activity in the Vatican region. “Der Campus Lateranensis im Mittelalter”. Herklotz. it must be added. 17 I. Maria Maggiore. For purposes of this analysis. Let’s recall that the basilica of St John Lateran was and is Rome’s cathedral church and that the Lateran palace was the pope’s normal place of residence until after Avignon. many popes invested heavily in Rome’s other patriarchal basilica — Sta. pp. and functions. the pope’s ‘home office’ and the second concerns the churches and other religious establishments of the city. 18 L. rambling complex of buildings that form the nerve center of the papal administration. we have no idea where most of the various branches of the papal administration had their precise locus of activities. tells most of what can be known about the disposition of official spaces in the Lateran. The first involves what might be called. in: Mélanges d’archéologie et d’histoire de l’art offerts au Professeur Jacques Lavalleye.      51 dence is mainly epigraphic. Today’s visitor to the Vatican cannot help but notice the large. Was there such a place in the Republic of St Peter? We cannot say in detail what the administrative complex looked like. Many literary descriptions are inexact and many buildings have been overbuilt so many times that we cannot be too confident about their original locations. “Le développement topographique de la région de Vatican à la fin de l’antiquité et au début du moyen âge”. . their expenditures on those buildings almost pale into insignificance before the time and trouble they lavished on the Lateran and Vatican. The importance of the Vatican region obviously derived from the presumed burial on the Vatican Hill of St Peter whose vicar the pope was. 4th series 45 (Louvain. Université de Louvain. 1–42. and San Lorenzo fuori le Mura. And. Reekmans. extended. shapes. I will divide ecclesiastical building into two kinds. and remodeled. Römisches Jahrbuch für Kunstgeschichte 22 (1985). San Paolo fuori le Mura. the primary ceremonial spaces of the Lateran and Vatican were repeatedly rebuilt. In all that concerns ecclesiastical construction. Nicholas I added a ‘very fine house’ of some kind. Sergius II rebuilt the schola cantorum. went to St Peter’s and prayed. Permission was granted. 1994). Charlemagne’s visit in 774 is revealing. Gregory IV added yet another triclinium at the Lateran and remodeled the residential quarters. D. in: R.. Charles and the pope entered the city together. und die Entstehung einer päpstlichen Programmkunst”. Stephen II. 21 The following details all derive from the relevant vitae in the LP. that is not the problem: We do not know what ‘restored’ means). Zanini. surely a papal residence of some kind. Francovich and G.  The roofs of St John’s and St Peter’s were rebuilt several times and the apse vaults of both churches were reconstructed. that the street system through the center of the city was repaired and rerouted to effect easier communications between the Lateran and Vatican. 22 H. Frühmittelalterliche Studien 12 (1978). Zachary21 added the first triclinium — that is. Belting. “Sul paessagio urbano di Roma nell’Alto Medioevo”. 635–50.. 55–83. 20 . “Die beiden Palastaulen Leos III. He approached the city just before Easter. where he also built a ‘beautiful house’. Noyé eds. a banqueting and reception hall — to the Lateran. Biblioteca dell’archeologia medievale 11 (Florence. pp. and then ‘the king of the Franks begged the generous pontiff to give him permission to enter the city of Rome to fulfill his vow of praying in the various churches of God’. and then were fêted in the nearby papal residences before being marched across the city to the Lateran. Hadrian I. La storia dell’alto medioevo italiano (VI–X secolo) alla luce dell’archeologia. This work may have been necessary as routine up-keep but it is worth bearing in mind how frequently visiting dignitaries appeared at St Peter’s — which was of course outside the city proper — worshipped there.52  .497. pp. In the seventh century 19 LP. He also built a tower and portico there and ‘restored the patriarchate’ — whatever that means (the ‘patriarchate’ was the papal palace.20 There was clearly a need to facilitate dignified celebrations. Manacorda and E. Leo IV added a dining room at the Lateran and also constructed a marble throne in the patriarchate. Leo III added two triclinia22 at the Lateran — one a banqueting and reception hall and the other a council chamber — and another at St Peter’s. The Lateran complex was originally called the episcopium. 1. Terminology kept pace with construction. moreover. and Leo III built towers at St Peter’s.19 There is archaeological evidence. and they concluded the day’s devotions at St-John Lateran. the 750s or 760s. and Romans generally cannot have missed this constant attention to the areas surrounding Rome’s major palaces and basilicas. to give form and meaning to their celebrations. Leo III remodeled the atria. and flights of steps. This brings me to the third aspect of papal building around the Lateran and Vatican. In the 820s this word appeared in the LP. Beginning with Hadrian I and continuing right down to Nicholas I. He also fetched 12. Visitors. of the centuries of work on secular Rome’s public center. clerics. the famous ‘Donation of Constantine’ forged in. temporary residences. He also restored the porticoes and their roofing at the Lateran. . the one devoted to caring for Rome’s visitors. food distribution centers. These atria. and to build 23 De Blaauw. p. Hadrian I added a gallery and a portico at St Peter’s. porticoes. humble pilgrims and mighty emperors alike. where popes addressed the Romans. as I have called it. Such spaces always helped to assemble and consolidate human communities. and chapels or oratories in immense numbers and then joined them with paved walkways. is impressive in both its scale and its continuity over time. the public spaces surrounding both the Lateran and Vatican were repeatedly spruced up. Cultus et decor. and esplanades were precisely the places where crowds awaited the outcomes of papal elections. through which papal funeral processions passed. But much of it is reminiscent of the creation of important public.      53 it began to be called the patriarchium and then in the Constitutum Constantini (cc.23 In the second place. the word palatium was used for the first time. probably. Some of this work will naturally have been deferred maintenance inherited from the relatively penurious sixth and seventh centuries. porticus. All of this attention to the ‘home office’. popes built or remodeled bath houses. 13. and where visiting dignitaries were received. 163.000 tufa blocks to rebuild the porticus from the Tiber embankment to St Peter’s and he refashioned the great steps and porticoes of the basilica. Sergius II reconstructed the entry zone at the Lateran and Leo IV re-roofed the portico there. These spaces also attracted visitors. 14). covered porticoes. The LP reference is puzzling as it comes from the vita of Valentine who was pope for only 40 days in 827. where synodal decrees were proclaimed. and of the better documented construction in later Italian cities such as Florence and Venice. ceremonial spaces in Constantinople in the fourth century. fountains. So it was. Delogu deals with 3.D. 174 of these projects took place in the city. as a percentage of the actual work accomplished. In all.867. 700 –1050.. In the years from 715 to 891 the Liber Pontificalis supplies information on 263 separate construction projects. in: Cultura e società nell’Italia medievale: Studi per Paolo Brezzi. In addition to work on the ‘home office’. 56% of the total number but in reality a much larger share of the actual effort and expense. 1998).51 lbs. Delogu ed. and repousseé images appeared as well. in addition to my comments in “Paradoxes” those of Delogu are critical: “The rebirth of Rome in the eighth and ninth Centuries”. This construction work was accompanied by the donation to Roman churches of at least 5.. My totals differ from his partly because we counted a little differently and partly because he confined himself to the pontificates running from Hadrian I to Leo IV (772–855) whereas I counted the precious cloth from LP evidence across the eighth and ninth centuries. not less than 4. pp.4% of the total effort and expense. . Among these projects. gilded railings. This work constitutes another multi-faceted aspect of the papacy’s projection of its power and influence. in: R. of silver were donated to Roman churches. and gold embroidery..54  . The rebirth of towns in the West A. jewels. 68 (London. plus altar veils and cloths. CBA Research Report vol. “L’importazione di tessuti preziosi e il sistema economico romano nel IX secolo”. In addition to all of this cloth.232 cloths of which more than 4.25 68% 24 In addition to my comments in “Paradoxes” see also P. 1988). only 18 were secular. 33–42 and “Oro e argento in Roma tra il VII e il IX secolo”. 273–93. 184–87 (Rome. Studi Storici vols. The two pontificates of Hadrian I and Leo III account for 147 of these projects.24 Some of these were plain colored veils but many were adorned with images. 1988).738 silk and linen cloths.480.400 were silk. Istituto Storico Italiano. Virtually every major church in the city got sets of intercolumnar veils for its nave. there was general ecclesiastical construction in the city that amounts to a veritable ‘boom’ beginning in the second half of the eighth century. pp. although some of these were of such a magnitude — Rome’s walls or aqueducts — as to suggest that. A few churches got huge curtains that hung before their front portals or in their triumphal arches and a small number of establishments got tapestries. Roma medievale: aggiornamenti (Florence. Hobley eds. Hodges and B. in: P.4 lbs. 123–41. pp. popes donated precious metalwork in profusion. Delogu. 89 of them outside. 25 Again. Lighting fixtures and liturgical paraphernalia made up the bulk of metallic donations but other items such as book covers.  civic consciousness and pride. of gold and 45. I believe. they really represented a good deal more than a mere 6. in the Republic of St Peter. To be sure the 780s saw a building upsurge that still staggers the imagination and that would test the financial resources of almost any polity. This. as they would be again in 815. it is worth noting that these construction projects. the basilican monasteries serving the major churches. In sum. more concern. reading the LP in conjunction with a map of Rome would be enough to convince anyone that work on the patriarchal basilicas. Let us recall that this was a pope who was attacked violently in 799 and whose rural estates were plundered at about the same time. First. I suspect that this was his way of reassuring local populations that the papacy was still a functioning presence in Rome’s territorium after the devastating Muslim raids of recent years. each enterprise was actually quite consistent over the whole period of the Republic of St Peter. and quantity of papal building and donation was one way of projecting power. Second. I have a hunch that Leo was seeking to remind people who controlled the purse strings. The evidence for ecclesiastical construction and donations can only receive a few comments here. This topographical imperialism prompts a few remarks. Leo IV showed. Third. while I do not want to suggest that the papacy instituted a kind of ‘New Deal’. in terms of both bricks and mortar and precious gifts. I think. to say nothing of the city’s other main churches and monasteries. comparatively speaking. dispersion. Indeed. I do think that it is legitimate to point out that all of the construction work will have provided continuous employment for a sizeable number of people over a long period of time. In 807 Leo III made the largest single set of donations to Roman churches in the whole ‘republican’ period. maybe in the whole Middle Ages. Patronage is one very important kind of power and that power was displayed without interruption for a century and a half. the sheer consistency. and their attendant donations. This is patronage on a pretty grand scale. made a mark on almost the whole area inside the walls. although the greatest quantity of both building and benefaction clusters between 780 and 840. and the deaconries (food distribution centers). the title churches. to the churches of Rome’s countryside than any other ‘republican’ pope.      55 of the gold was donated by Hadrian I and Leo III and 48% of the silver by Leo alone. extended very comprehensively over the territory of the city. was Hadrian’s proud gesture as much or more than this pope’s attempt to refurbish a dilapidated ecclesiastical establishment. . These are the same two popes in whose reigns we noticed the cluster of construction of activity. It appears that the papal vestararius may. and will have worshiped in relatively compact and carefully articulated spaces. Some of that art was didactic. all over the city. Geertz. often in many areas simultaneously. It is almost impossible to 26 C.26 Eighth. or will have watched work being undertaken. Again and again we read of popes going out personally to supervise the work. at least sometimes. we even read that Gregory IV took a share in the work.  Work will have been going on. 1983). “Art as a cultural system”. p. The major ecclesiastical complexes tended to exist in proximate groups: say a basilica. Images of many kinds were either repaired or made anew in countless Roman churches. He regularly visited construction sites.. Such visits marked a kind of presence. In neighborhoods all over the city people will have worked. 97. is how to place it within other modes of social activity. In fact. Now we must ask. a kind of power. in his Local knowledge: Further essays in interpretive anthropology (New York. will have gotten their food. Putting a good sized community into the rhythmic vibrations of its quotidian existence represents a significant kind of power. with Geertz. . have been the master builder. how to place that art into modes of social activity and how to incorporate it into the texture of life. Viewed from another angle it was spiritually uplifting. in whatever form and in result of whatever skill it may come.56  . how to incorporate it into the texture of a particular pattern of life”. T M  A Art talks. or at least the textual representation of such power. one or more monasteries. and a deaconry.and ninth-century Rome witnessed the production and display of an astonishing quantity of art that was usually of high and sometimes of breathtaking technical mastery. and some of it was polemical. Viewed from one angle this art was decoratively pleasing. The chief problem presented by the sheer phenomenon of aesthetic force. But to understand what it tries to say we may find some help in the words of Clifford Geertz: “The definition of art in any society is never wholly intra-aesthetic. From one point of view it might be suggested that there were ‘branch offices’ of the ‘home office’ all over the city. and indeed but rarely more than marginally so. Huge apse mosaics were everywhere. 1941). Then I want to turn in particular to images of Mary and of Jesus and to the relationships between those representations and the popes who associated themselves with them. Monumenta di antichità cristiana. John VII. that any one image might have multiple meanings that are not mutually exclusive and that only some of those meanings may be recoverable by us. Ladner. proclaimed key doctrines of the church.J. It must be acknowledged. with 27 G. Instead. I want to focus briefly on the papal portraits that festooned the churches of the city.27 Often the popes depicted themselves as donors or else associated themselves with Christ. St Peter. colored silk cloths that often had images. Based on the evidence assembled by Ladner. There is nothing striking about any of this. 1964). the pope who contemplated moving the papal administration to the Palatine district. 1 Bis zum Ende des Investiturstreits. or particular saints.      57 imagine the richly colored environment that surrounded the daily worshipers and occasional visitors to those churches. Nordhagen. it seems safe to say that popes of the ‘republican’ period represented themselves somewhat more frequently that had been the case in earlier centuries. 32–6 for the stages in the painting of this church. too. and reminded viewers of the holy men and women especially commemorated in particular places.and ninth-century Rome. Romanelli and P. Triumphal arches and side walls were covered with frescoes. Their placement in churches will undoubtedly have buttressed the other messages broadcast by the construction and donation records. pp. Altar zones and the spaces between the columns of naves were adorned with beautiful. Santa Maria Antiqua (Rome. . in a fresco on the third level of the palimpsest wall to the right of the apse in Santa Maria Antiqua. Die Papstbildnisse des Altertum und des Mittelalters.28 at the foot of the Palatine on the forum side. Repoussé images existed in profusion. These pictures illustrated Gospel stories. Their iconographic themes reached far back into antiquity and their particular styles drew from enough wells of inspiration to lubricate interminable art historical investigations. 28 P. 4 (Vatican City. vol. Altars often had cloths with images hanging from their fronts and sides. Some churches housed icons. Mary. associated himself. 2d series. But I think that some of these images are legible as a series of drafts of an ideological program while others point to very specific political situations in eighth. Yet these are not the aspects of the pictures that I want to discuss here. pp. Leo IV. 1). in a fresco in the atrium of the same church. Paschal I appears kneeling before an enthroned virgin in the apse mosaic of Santa Maria in Domnica (see figure 4). put up images of himself. 62. He also portrayed himself with a Maria Regina in a large mosaic in the Marian oratory of old St Peters (figs. pp. about which we will have more to say. finally. and also in the apse of his former title church. while he was still alive and reigning.58  . PBSR 47 (1979). with a Maria Regina. iconografia. Yet the sign is not always confined to the living and. Ladner. 1961). Rome: A re-examination of the so-called ‘square’ nimbus in medieval art”. La Madonna di Santa Maria in Trastevere: Storia. again with Charlemagne. 88. to the left of the presbyterium in Santa Maria Antiqua..30 The extant images may be only a small portion of the ones that once existed. fig.32 Zachary had himself depicted with an enthroned Mary in the chapel of Sts. with a Pantocrator in the apse of Santa Prassede. can be seen with a madonna in the lower church of San Clemente.31 John is depicted with the square nimbus that has always been taken to be a sign of a living person. 90. The Liber Pontificalis says that ‘he provided images in various churches so that anyone who wants to know what he looked like will find his face depicted on them’. Apparently he was also depicted on a silver image placed at St Peter’s tomb. 58–65. Paul I appears with a madonna in the apse of Santa Maria Antiqua and Hadrian I portrayed himself.  a Maria Regina figure (fig. Leo III appears with Peter and Charlemagne in the famous triclinium mosaic in the Lateran. sometimes called the Theodotus chapel (for reasons to which we will return). Ladner. 2 and 3). C. Bertelli. Quiricus and Julitta. 32 “The portrait of Pope Leo IV in San Clemente. Gregory IV appears with Christ and saints in the apse of San Marco and apparently with a madonna on a magnificent altar cloth which he donated to Santa Maria in Trastevere. 88–98. St Susanna. 29 G. Papstbildnisse. 30 . p. and with Christ and various saints in the apse of Santa Cecilia in Trastevere. 31 LP. cf. Stile di un dipinto dell’ottavo secolo (Rome. Papstbildnisse. according to a fascinating hypothesis — never refuted. p.29 John may have been the first pope who.385. He put himself in the same association in the Oratory of Forty Martyrs just outside that church. 1. to show ‘what he looked like’. to my knowledge — of John Osborne the inspiration for the square nimbus may be Egyptian funerary plaques and the point of the image may have been to convey a life-like representation. with figs. on a silk cloth donated to the oratory of St Andrew. 120. and Paul. 1992). 113. 109.33 Before turning to the ways in which these popes portrayed themselves with Mary and Jesus. 34 Excellent comments in P. pp. on a silk cloth depicting Lawrence given to San Lorenzo fuori le mura.      59 on an altar cloth at St Peter’s with Jesus. I think. 129. there are three preliminary comments to be made about this profusion of papal images in the eighth and ninth centuries. temples. and in a nearby chapel of Mary on a cloth depicting the resurrection. and basilicas of antiquity — was meant to forge paternal and communal bonds. 82–4. 111. 2. additional reminders of those bonds. 98–152. For the textual references pertaining to Gregory IV see LP. Second. 35 LP.80 and for Leo IV. 110. Quatro Coronati depicting Jesus and the martyrs. Wealth used on impressive public amenities — and churches were surely functional substitutes for the more obviously ‘public’ baths. Papstbildnisse. on a cloth presented to St Martin’s monastery at St Peter’s. on two cloths donated to SS. 114. First. In important ways that language addresses the possession and use of wealth in a specific time and place. pp.109. . This is a very traditional kind of representation and too much should not be made of it. But I would like to call attention once again to the contemporary construction and renovation work accomplished by the popes and to suggest that the papal images had the particular force of reminding people just who was responsible for all of this work and for the social and economic stimulus that it represented and promoted. WI. 90. the popes occasionally appear as donors — good examples are Paschal I in Santa Prassede and Santa Cecilia in Trastevere or Gregory IV in San Marco. Construction speaks a language all its own. Peter. Brown. Pope Constantine in the early eighth century refused to receive the images of the heretic emperor Philippicus Bardanes35 and there is no secure testimony that any subsequent imperial images were received and displayed in Rome.392. 115. 2. 100. It seems likely that this characteristic imperial prerogative was usurped by the popes 33 Ladner. 113. 119. the images which one pope after another distributed all over Rome are reminiscent of the imperial images. and even of the image-bearing consular diptychs. that had long been disseminated in the Roman Empire. ibid. Power and persuasion in late Antiquity (Madison. 116.34 The papal images were. 106–108. 1.. who experienced intense political opposition. As the shadows lengthened over the Byzantine rule of Rome. p. both historic and social significance? Then Hadrian placed his own likeness in the same place. Leo’s bitter opponents in the family of Hadrian I first of all. pp. a building that was becoming a papal showcase. Light on the Eternal City: Observations and discoveries in the art and architecture of Rome. It stood at the end of the up-scale 36 Bertelli. We will come to those issues shortly. Is this a coincidence in view of his manifest need for protection and his having to deal with the Constitutio Romana of 824 that could have been taken as calling into question the autonomy of papal rule in Rome?37 Gregory IV had himself depicted in San Marco. pp. or where images are known to have existed. in: H. Roman aristocrats began to enter the papal administration.60  . the actual places where the extant images can be found. a place with. Papers in Art History from the Pennsylvania State University 2. In doing so. another aristocrat whose own brother Stephen II preceded him.36 Third. put his picture all over Rome. 62. The rich and noble Hadrian I once lived near and served in this church. Hager and S.  in the very years when they were achieving autonomy from the empire. Can it be a coincidence that Zachary appears in an image with Theodotus. Munshower eds. are revealing of political and ideological cross-currents in eighth. Santa Maria in Trastevere. PA.. 1987). by now. He and his predecessors had been steadily unraveling the ties that had so long bound Rome to Constantinople. (University Park. that Leo was not without powerful friends? Paschal I. I have already mentioned John VII’s putative transfer of the papal administration to the Palatine. he claimed the mantles of Christ and of Mary. But cannot it also have been a not-so-subtle reminder to various members of the Roman elite. Leo’s image in his triclinium mosaic is most frequently interpreted in terms of regnum and sacerdotium problems. Belting.. . also appears in Santa Maria Antiqua. “Papal artistic commissions as definitions of the church in Rome”.S. a Roman blue-blood and the uncle of the later Pope Hadrian I? Is it surprising that Paul I. Republic of St Peter. 308–22. H.and ninth-century Rome. 13–30. 37 On the Constitutio Romana see Noble. Zachary faced acute Lombard pressure and had no serious prospects of outside assistance. Whatever is to be thought about that. he put the papal mark decisively and unambiguously on one of the most ‘Roman’ and imperial spots in Rome. Let us return now to the Theodotus chapel at Santa Maria Antiqua. but sometimes apostles. may have inaugurated an iconographic 38 The older views are well represented in J. É. all was well again. Robert Deshman. the papal images virtually never stand alone.. Iogna-Prat. Marie: Le culte de la vierge dans la société médiévale (Paris. it was long assumed that Marian devotion became prominent at Rome from an early date. Krautheimer. but he also put up his likeness to remind people who their patron and protector was. Can Gregory have been saying. See now B. Russo. evangelists. 3 (Rome. pp. in a Magi scene. without entering into the controversies. 5 (1989). It was the site of possible aristocratic residential construction in the late eighth and early ninth century.      61 Via Lata district. Peter and Paul most frequently. 1975). and martyrs. it can be stated with some assurance that the building need not be taken as a reflection of the Ephesine decrees and that the mosaics on the arch stress Jesus and not his mother even though the way in which Mary was depicted on the triumphal arch. Not only did Leo undertake massive construction projects in that zone. 1996). These are very interesting ways to think about how the popes could project their power not only in general terms but also in quite specific circumstances. 33–70. pp. These images are also revealing of the techniques adopted by the popes to represent their power and authority and point to identifiable social and political contexts. was dedicated to Mary — later called Santa Maria Maggiore — and because some of the work of construction and decoration falls close in time to the Council of Ephesus (431) that defined Mary’s role as theotokos. in: D. Because the magnificent Liberian basilica. in this very place. pp. Corpus Basilicarum Christianarum Romae. 1967). 1–60. R. Die frühchristlichen Mosaiken in Santa Maria Maggiore zu Rom (Wiesbaden.38 Yet. Let us begin with popes who appear with Mary. . and the great families were once more securely in control? Leo IV placed his image in many places but especially in the vicinity of St Peter’s which had been ravaged by Muslims in 846. pp. vol. Wilpert. 176–203. Analecta Sacra Tarraconensia 7 (1931). Palazzo and D. The overall scenes usually included other saints too. that after the faction-ridden pontificate of Paschal. “La proclamazione Efesina e i musaici della basilica di S. “Servants of the Mother of God in Byzantine and Medieval Art. Maria Maggiore”. Most often the popes depicted themselves with Mary or with Jesus. Russo eds.” Word & Image. on whose triumphal arch Mary figures prominently. The most recent discussion is D. Brenk. “Les représentations mariales dans l’art d’occident: Essai sur la formation d’une tradition”. For the building. As noted. 197–213. there was an image of Mary that bears some similarity to the image in Santa Maria Maggiore. “Early medieval painting”. Corippus speaks of ‘Virgo. p. “Maria Regina: Papal symbol”. 203–17. 39 In a sixth-century poem. pp. Word and Image 5 (1989). Visible now only in fragments. appeared in Rome in the sixth century and then was highly favored in the eighth and ninth centuries. Queens and queenship in medieval Europe (London. 150–61. p. 304. 41 Osborne. Cameron (London. U. 55. Gesta 20 (1981). A. on perhaps the lowest level of the palimpsest wall. Art Bulletin 19 (1937). 43 C. 299–310. Osborne. “Early medieval painting in San Clemente. To the right of Mary’s head there is — was. Ursula Nilgen has called this ‘the madonna of the popes’. the fresco was removed by the Istituto Centrale del Restauro in 1956 — a vertical inscription reading MARIA REGINA. wears a jeweled crown. pp. 2. pp. “The paleography of Latin inscriptions in the eighth. “The inscription on the enameled cross of Paschal I”. that might on paleographical grounds be dated to the mid-eighth century. “Les représentations mariales”. M. there is an inscription. “Maria Regina — Ein politischer Kultbildtypus?”. p. pp. PBSR 16 (1948). ed. appeared frequently in Rome. and sits on a jeweled throne. and others that bear some similarity to it. “Maria Regina”.43 So a distinctive type of Marian image. 173–203.. “Servants of the Mother of God in Byzantine and Medieval Art”. 39 For studies of Maria Regina see: M. ninth. Lawrence. 1). Russo. Römisches Jahrbuch für Kunstgeschichte 19 (1981). in Santa Maria Antiqua (fig. 1997). without its image. the Maria Regina. Stroll.42 On an enamel cross of Paschal I. pp. this image is of the ‘Maria Regina’ type: Mary is richly garbed. Osborne.. not far from Santa Maria Antiqua. J. Rome: The Madonna and Child in the niche”. It reads ‘Praeclara virgo caelistis regina superexaltata et gloriosa domina mea Dei genetrix Maria’. Morey. In the late eighth century Hadrian depicted himself with a Maria Regina figure in a fresco in the atrium of that church.41 In the porch of Santa Maria in Cosmedin. 1976). creator genetrix sanctissima mundi. Nilgen. Mary is called ‘regina’. 3–33. excelsi regina poli’. actually. . 40 Flavius Cresconius Corippus. 33–70. Deshman. R.J. Gray.  pattern with a long future ahead of it. In the eighth and ninth century this type of Marian image. In the sixth century. 42 N. “Early medieval painting”. 595–6. in: A. Art Bulletin 7 (1925). pp. and tenth centuries in Italy”.62  . Duggan ed. 52–3. 305. In laudem Justini Augusti minoris. pp. The term ‘Maria Regina’ is not a modern confection.40 These verses are roughly contemporary with the Maria Regina in Santa Maria Antiqua. 48 See s.47 The period from the sixth to the ninth century witnessed the production in Rome of a number of other images of Mary. Ermete”. “La datazione della tavola di S. 47 Ibid. then we should at least note the other prominent way (fig. vol. pp. “Early medieval painting”. p. 6). pp. Cecchelli.44 There was another. indubitably John’s. Salus Populi Romani: Die Geschichte römischer Kultbilder im Mittelalter (Weinheim. This one is unusual because it features a solitary orant Mary instead of an enthroned virgin holding the Christ child. 1991). 1946). or crimson outer garment with a hood)48 and she is usually seated on a gilded and jewelled throne.46 Finally. Rivista dell’istituto nazionale d’archeologia e storia dell’arte 19/20 (1972/73 [1975]). 2 (New York. 25–32 is more cautious and does not take a firm stand. purple.49 Two excellent early examples are the ‘Turtura’ image from the catacomb of Commodilla and the fresco from the 44 A shaky consensus attributes it to John: C.. E. 305. Rivista di archeologia cristiana 17 (1940). Amato. pp. 80–86. 307–9 (with the older literature). Maria in Trastevere”. vol. there is one last member of the group in the lower church of San Clemente dating from Leo IV. pp. the icon from Santa Maria Nova (now Santa Francesca Romana) almost certainly once and perhaps originally in Santa Maria Antiqua. Mater Christi. 120–22 accepts Bertelli. 509. 46 Osborne. P. pp. Josi. 1.v. Repainting and clumsy restorations render some of them very difficult to interpret. pp. It probably dates from the time of Pope John VII. 54–5. “Maphorion”. “Early medieval painting”. 45 LP. 1990).45 A Maria Regina was discovered during restorations in San Lorenzo fuori le mura in the late nineteenth century but was destroyed. M. pp. La madonna di Santa Maria. The oldest ones are the so-called “Pantheon Icon”. 299–303. the ‘Madonna della Clemenza’ is a beautiful example (fig. They are sometimes hard to date. Andoloro. “Rückgewonnene Marienikonen . Protus. Wolf. De Vera Effigie Mariae: Antiche icone Romane (Milan. The icon from Santa Maria in Trastevere. and Hyacinth which that pope restored. A substantial part of it is now in Florence. See: H. Hager. 5). Oxford Dictionary of Byzantium. Bertelli. the “Monasterium tempuli” image now in Santa Maria del Rosario. 1988). in the Marian oratory in Old St Peter’s. 195–208. 1294. In this type of image Mary appears wearing a maphorion (a dark blue. and perhaps the “Salus Populi Romani” about which more just below. G.      63 There are many other ‘regina’ images. 307–9. There might have been one dating from Hadrian in an underground chapel dedicated to Saints Hermes. But if the reginatype represents one way of depicting Mary. pp. 139–215 holds for a sixth-century date. 49 Some of these will be discussed below. Osborne. 1 (Rome. “Scoperta d’un altare e di pitture nella basilica di S. 305–6. Their original iconography cannot always be established with confidence. pp. Maria in Trastevere e le più antiche feste della madonna a Roma”. “L’affresco di Turtura nel cimiterio di Commodilla. “Santa Maria in Domnica: Überlegungen zur frühesten apsidialen darstellung der Thronenden Maria in Rom”.v. regnant Marys with des frühen Mittelalters in Rom”. He says. “Le pitture del VI e VIII secolo nella basilica inferiore di S. Mary in each case holds in her right hand a mappa (or mappula). pp. the emperors having assumed consular authority.50 It is primarily because Mary does not wear a crown in these representations that causes scholars to exclude them from the regina-type. that it is probably late antique. pp. 53 The most recent and authoritative discussion is Wolf. Crisogono in Trastevere”. it obscures some features that these images tend to share with the undoubted regina type. Aachener Kunstblätter 61 (1995/96). 3rd ser. The mosaics of Rome (New York. 209–16. . the magnificent apse mosaic in Santa Maria in Domnica depicts Mary on an exquisite throne and garbed in a luxuriously elegant maphorion. Wisskirchen. 89 (1980/81). pp. then it shares something very interesting with the image in the apse of Santa Maria in Domnica. Bullettino dell’istituto storico italiano per il medioevo e archivio muratoriano 88 (1979).54 which had been a consular symbol until the sixth century when. 51 Color image (Plate XX) and full discussion in W. l’icona di S. 50 E. For instance. unconvincingly. The small marian image in the Zeno chapel in Santa Prassede sits on a jewelled throne as does Mary. and with two unquestioned regina-type images. pp. 139–215. 37–85. figs. “Mappa”. Melograni. pp. 54 See s. 139–61. pp. Amato. “La datazione della tavola di S.52 These images are remarkably similar to the famous ‘Salus Populi Romani’ image of Mary from Santa Maria Maggiore which has been confidently dated to almost every possible period between the fifth century and the thirteenth. Although I believe that the distinction is useful for strict typologies. 1991). 106.. 2 (New York. this time from a Magi scene. cautiously. it became an imperial symbol. 1294. pushed too hard. 381–95.53 If the Salus Populi Romani image can be placed in the early middle ages. The most recent discussion of this image acknowledges its regal nature but insists. that it means to show Mary bodily present in paradise: R. De Vera Effigie Mariae. p. Rivista dell’istituto nazionale d’archeologia a storia dell’arte. Maria in Trastevere”.64  .  lower church of San Crisogono. pp. Connecting these gorgeous. 22–8 on dating questions. 203–4. 1967). in a fragment of a mosaic of John VII now in the sacristy in Santa Maria in Cosmedin.51 This image is about as regal as one could imagine. 71–150. vol. those of Santa Maria Antiqua and San Clemente. 52 Oakeshott. Oakeshott. Andoloro. Römische Quartelschrift für Altertumskunde und Kirchengeschichte 61 (1966). Oxford Dictionary of Byzantium. Mosaics. A. Russo. pp. 13 (1990). Salus Populi Romani. esp. 126. I also think that. began to acquire greater prominence and Constantinople was increasingly placed under Mary’s special patronage. The Annunciation. 1996). too. The Nativity — Mary’s. T. 58 Osborne. “Early medieval painting”. pp. 2 February. 3–35.55 While it is possible that the earliest Maria Regina in Santa Maria Antiqua may either fit into a broad context of intensified Marian devotion. 8 September). 120–35.56 Pope Boniface IV secured from Emperor Phokas the former Pantheon which was soon rededicated as ‘Sancta Maria ad Martyres’. but not of Mary alone to be sure. pp.      65 an imperial symbol brings us back to why Marian images began appearing rather suddenly in Rome and what they might mean. Consider the hauntingly beautiful image of Paschal I kneeling at Mary’s feet in the spectacular apse of Santa Maria in Domnica.376. pp. This concentration on Mary marked an important novelty. Marie: Le culte de la vierge dans la société médiévale (Paris. Baynes. pp. Palazzo and D. is in fact a quotation of a long series of similar Marian images reaching back to John VII. Mary points to Paschal as her servant. Cameron. in a sense. . A.317. The pope stands closest to Mary who has 55 A. Marian images proliferated rapidly in Rome.58 Pope Sergius I implemented in Rome the full set of four annual Marian feasts (The Visitation. pp. 13. In the early seventh century.59 From the time of John VII. 59 LP. or else be a specifically Roman response to it. É. “La dédicace de Constantinople dans la tradition Byzantine”. 57 LP. This apse. These images speak the unambiguous language of intercession. “Jalons liturgiques pour une histoire du culte de la vierge”. Discussion in: E. 15–36. 56 In general. Revue de l’histoire des religions 127 (1944). 15 August. It may have owed something to the Marian devotion and liturgical traditions of resident communities of Greeks and Syrians in Rome. N. “The supernatural defenders of Constantinople”. In sixth-century Byzantium images of Mary. 303. 1. 61–127. Palazzo and A. but local political and ideological explanations are more convincing as an explanation. in: D. 25 March. Klauser. Analecta Bollandiana 67 (1949). Iogna-Prat.H. 165–77. Russo eds. Johansson. 309 n. 1. Past and Present 84 (1979).57 Mary was. The Assumption. Frolow.K. Jahrbuch für Antike und Christentum 15 (1972). “Rom und der Kult der Gottesmutter Maria”. pp. Paschal’s work. as we have seen. several seventhcentury developments in Rome constitute an appropriation of Mary for the eternal city. “Images of authority: elites and icons in late sixth-century Byzantium”. the old Titulus Juli et Callisti came to be called Santa Maria in Trastevere.. now the queen of a heavenly court whose members were Rome’s numerous martyrs. p. pp. 663. to Ladner. p. Deshusses ed.64 As the popes were separating themselves from Byzantium.66  .61 In his Marian oratory on old St Peter’ John placed an inscription reading ‘beatae Dei Genetricis Servvs’ (fig. p. 15. Twice in letters to the Frankish court Stephen II referred to Mary as ‘domina nostra’. 262: ‘intercessionis eius auxilio a nostris iniquitatibus resurgamus’. Assumption (August 15): no. p. 502. 263: ‘a malis imminentibus eius intercessione libremur’. “Commissions”. no. 64 Ladner. The madonna has now become a ruler and the pope is her first servitor. Belting. John appears. p. p. MGH Epp. it is striking that they very quickly fashioned an explicit message saying that their allegiance was not owed to anyone on earth. “Maria Regina”.60 Scenes of papal intercession located in such places were potent reminders of vivid daily realities. 262: ‘genetricis filii tui domini nostri intercessione salvemur’.  the favored intercessory position in heaven. Ladner. no. 128: ‘ut qui vere eam genetricem dei credimus eius apud te intercessionibus adiuvemur’. Annunciation (March 25): no. p.. John — and his successors right down to Paschal and beyond — represented themselves as the dutiful servants of the queen of heaven and not of any earthly ruler. 664. Lawrence.63 As Ladner points out. Le sacramentaire grégorien: ses principales formes d’après les plus ancient manuscrits. 65 Codex Carolinus. Santa Maria Antiqua and Santa Maria in Domnica were both deaconries. food distribution centers maintained by the papal administration.62 The octagonal ambo of John VII in Santa Maria Antiqua has inscriptions in Latin and Greek which read: Johannes Servu[s] S[an]c[t]ae M[a]riae and ÑIvènnou doÊlou t∞w yeotokÒu. Salus Populi Romani. nos. ‘als der Knecht der Mutter Gottes’. Accordingly it is well to emphasize the solemn. 63 Romanelli in: Romanelli and Nordhagen. Some years ago Guglielmo Matthiae made the simple but important point that because so much Roman art 60 On the deaconries see below n. p. and rather recent. Nativity of Mary (September 8): no. 147. 263: ‘subveniat domine plebei tuae dei genetricis oratio’. John was the first pope to depict himself in a posture of submission to a heavenly figure. moving prayers for intercession that were publicly offered on the great. 660. 90. Papstbildnisse. 268: ‘eius intercessionibus complacatus te de instantibus periculis eruamur’. 161. Gundlach. 62 G. 126. 90–4. 124: ‘intercedente beata semper virgine Mariae’. W. 140. ed. Spicilegium Friburgense 16 (Fribourg. p. 16. 122. p. Some examples from J. p. Marian feasts. 1971): Purification (February 2): no. 662. 680. 1892). 2).. no. 61 . 10. pp. 3 (Berlin. By extension. Wolf. 489.65 and the (probably) eighth-century inscription from Santa Maria in Cosmedin mentioned above says ‘domina mea’. p. then. Santa Maria Antiqua. Papstbildnisse. But intercession is also a matter of profound religious and theological significance. 6. “A Byzantine ‘virgo militans’ at Charlemagne’s court”. pp. Pittura politica del medioevo romano (Rome. 69 S. 173–6. called a ‘Virgo Militans’ by its most recent student. their salvation depended on Mary’s magnanimity and the pope’s prayers. It is interesting to think of Paschal in this connection too. BN Lat. pp. apart from NotreDame la Daurade in Toulouse. “Les représentations mariales”. 71–93. What is more. may have depicted himself as the servant of Mary. 218–23. Charlemagne had dedicated his palatine chapel at Aachen to Mary. 1964). Leo 66 G. and after many centuries during which there was. Dumas. 12048. And in an autonomous papal Rome. vol. Lewis. 191–5. 1v). Cf. Russo. Viator 11 (1980). pp. the pope was the chief patron and intercessor in all walks of life. a remarkable ivory from the court of Charlemagne. His potential rival was not Byzantium but Carolingian Francia. 2.66 Daniel Russo has recently stressed that much of the art of eighthcentury Rome can be read as an attempt to claim legitimacy67 and Gunther Wolf has stressed that the art in the area of Santa Maria Antiqua. ed.68 It was precisely that ‘autonomy’ that papal art was seeking to ‘legitimize’ by means of ‘political pictures’. Matthiae. shows Mary holding high a crossstaff (like the ‘Virgo Militans’ and a whole series of comparanda adduced by Lewis) but she is dressed in an ephod like a levite priest and carries a censer. Marian dedications began to spring up everywhere. Russo.69 If in that image Mary is called to serve the Carolingians in war. fol. then in another contemporary one she is figured as a priest.70 Paschal. 120. pp. 5–13. 70 Liber sacramentorum Gellonensis. in particular. 121. The first large picture in the Sacramentary of Gellone. no church in the west dedicated to Mary. may also represent a Carolingian effort at laying claim to Mary’s patronage and intercession. and as the primary conduit for her benevolence. “Les représentations mariales”. Franks or no Franks. ‘cannot be without political significance’ and surely ‘involved a certain claim of autonomy by the church of Rome’. 67 . Salus Populi Romani. plate 1 (= Paris. pp. 68 Wolf. itself produced in the north of France in the 790s. to communicate religious truth along with social and political ideas. precisely to remind the Carolingians that he stood closer to heaven’s queen than they did and to remind the Romans that. whose political machinations in Rome brought on repeated investigations and the issuance of the Constitutio Romana.      67 was didactic it had the power to teach many things simultaneously. it goes without saying. no triconch buildings were built in the west. 4–14. 1976). especially in the east. within just a few years. Zachary had built one at the Lateran. 2.432. This apsidal structure with five flanking conches on each side ‘quoted’ the ‘chamber of nineteen couches’ in the imperial palace at Constantinople. Then. pp. pp. Leo built two and Charlemagne built one.74 Leo’s first one. Popes also represented themselves in connection with Jesus. but nothing is known about it. 40–7. the sala concilia. 74 LP. as far as is known. In the 830s.75 No less symbolic. Art Bulletin 44 (1962).. 73 LP. 75 I. finally. the aula Leonina — ‘greater than all the other triclinia’ — was a triconch structure. The sala is obviously not identical to the chamber of nineteen divans in Constantinople. 11. The construction of triclinia was itself a political act. 1–33. “Palastaulen”.  IV’s invocations of Mary. These buildings were ‘symbols of sovereignty’. The word ‘quote’ is used in Krautheimer’s sense: “An introduction to the ‘iconography of medieval architecture’”. may have had the same double audience: The Romans who had suffered Muslim attacks and the Carolingians in the person of Louis II whose attitudes to Rome and its region were initially undeclared.76. Between late antiquity and the pontificate of Leo. This architectural form took its rise in the domestic architecture of fantastically rich western families in imperial times and then became. in: Roma e l’età carolingia: Atti del giornati di studio 3–8 maggio 1976 (Rome. Lavin. 68–9. pp.71 Leo then built two. 2. “La distruzione dei palazzi imperiali di Roma e la restrutturazione del palazzo lateranense nel IX secolo nel raporti con quello di Costantinopoli”. Journal of the Warburg and Courtauld Institutes 5 (1942). 1. P. 76 Belting. one between 795 and 80072 and another later in his pontificate (fig. 7). Of the aula nothing remains today except the apse with its heavily 71 LP. “The house of the Lord: Aspects of the role of palace triclinia in the architecture of late Antiquity and the early Middle Ages”. Emperor Theophilus built one in Constantinople. a symbol of imperial rule. however.73 A generation later Gregory IV built yet another. Verzone. 72 . The language of this papal art is unambiguous and its social and political contexts are not difficult to discern.3–4. Charlemagne is called ‘rex’ in the inscription so the assumption has always been that the triclinium was erected before he became emperor in 800.68  . pp. was Leo’s second triclinium. For purposes of the present study I shall confine myself to the images erected by Leo III in his two Lateran triclinia.76 It was Leo who gave to the new papal state a proper administrative and ceremonial center. Davis acknowledges Leo’s innovations but still believes that he inaugurated an adaptation of eighth-century Greek styles that reached fruition in the time of Paschal I. religious art with powerful meanings had previously been confined to churches in Rome and it was Leo who shifted the use of this art to more public spaces where those who saw the images would be dignitaries and not worshipers. 167–69. 79 Belting. To create symmetry the mosaicist gave Peter. The one on the left. pp. in: Roma e l’età carolingia. The scene in the apse shows Christ standing on the hill of paradise with eleven apostles arrayed to his right and left.      69 restored mosaics. 171–72 makes good case for a Constantine image of some kind. pp. Zeitschrift für Kunstgeschichte 29 (1966). the famous investiture scene in which an enthroned St Peter presents Leo. This scene was one of a pair. to his right. “Palastaulen”. with a banner. Leo’s work in creating these apse mosaics is distinctive in two ways. pp. 77 The surviving. Leo inaugurated a renewal of tradition that would. and a banner to Constantine. 73. p.79 The apsidial arch in the aula has. The apses in these triclinia were outfitted with mosaics whose iconographic themes are at once religious and political. Davis-Weyer. depicts Jesus giving keys to St Peter. Belting refutes this view and attributes to Leo a genuine renovation of paleochristian styles: “I mosaici”. not least because Benedict XIV rotated the remnant 180o in his restoration. on its right side. 111–32. reach its highpoint in the pontificate of Paschal I.77 The sala was dismantled in the sixteenth century when Domenico Fontana constructed the present Lateran palace. with a pallium.78 Second. pp. 169–71. Belting gives a good account of the history of the monument and its art work: “I mosaici dell’aula Leonina come testimonianza della prima ‘renovatio’ dell’arte medievale di Roma”. or maybe to Pope Sylvester. in artistic terms. pp. these two scenes only take on their full meaning in conjunction with the mosaic in the conch of the apse. First. . 65–6 and “I mosaici”. free-standing apse mosaics are deceptive for several reasons.80 In any case. now largely an eighteenth-century restoration of Cardinal Francesco Barberini’s early seventeenth-century recreation of what he believed must have been there. but one cannot be too confident about just what it looked like. monumental apse mosaics had not been made in Rome in many years. 78 C. and Charlemagne. Immediately to Christ’s right — the viewer’s left — is an agitated image of Peter holding a cross-staff. 80 Belting. to his left. It seems likely that there was a scene of some kind depicting Constantine. “Palastaulen”. “Die Mosaiken Leos III und die Anfänge der karolingischen Renaissance in Rom”. 84 Belting. . 3–5. pp. not as an earthly authority to whom the pope owes obedience. SJ. 93. and of the Holy Spirit . and of the Son. 357–71. Belting. but as a protector of the pope’s church. MGH Epp. The inscription beneath the mosaic ties the whole image together. at least in part.  his staff. Berndt ed. 291. Epistolae.83 That letter assigned to the pope a rather passive role. 82 . he was merely to raise his hand in prayer for the success of the Franks. no. G.. This time the apse and front wall quote the triumphal arch of San Paolo fuori le mura. Leo’s triclinium mosiac assigns the pope and the papal office a more dynamic role. pp. This set of images completes the ones from the aula while. Charles (as once to Constantine). “Papal political imagery in the medieval Lateran palace”. 83 Alcuin. Peter now transmits authority to his vicar Leo and to his protector. in: R. 174–76. 62–7. It is the ‘Great Commission’ from Matthew’s Gospel (28. The independence of the church is proclaimed in both spiritual and temporal terms. Christ gave his authority to the apostles and his keys to Peter. 267. . Christ holds an open book in which one can read ‘Pax vobiscum’. “Königliche Kirchenregierung und römische Petrus-Überlieferung im Kreise Karls des Grossen”. this image is. C. pp. Leo’s answer to the famous letter which Charlemagne sent him in 796.81 The meaning of the group of images is this. And behold I am with you always even to the end of the world’ (fig. emphasizing the primacy of the Roman Church ‘in a surprisingly concrete and also in a surprisingly political manner’.84 81 Cf. Belting. figs. and his billowing garments a double space.70  . 8). Rivista di archeologia cristiana 12 (1935). Das frankfurter Konzil von 794: Kristallisationspunkt karolingischer Kultur. “Palastaulen”. The images in the sala carry the meaning forward. in Belting’s words. pp. Ladner. 68–76 (quotation p. “Palastaulen”. baptizing them in the name of the Father. 4.82 In my view. “Palastaulen”. Charlemagne appears not as a ruler. Here Peter and Paul flank Jesus. Cahiers Archéologiques 20 (1970). Constantine appears not as a ruler but as a benefactor. This strategy creates harmony between the six apostles to Christ’s left and the five to his right. Quellen und Abhandlungen zur mittelrheinischen Kirchengeschichte 80 (Mainz. “I mosaici e gli affreschi ecclesiastico-politici nell’antico palazzo lateranense”. 136–8. 19): ‘Teach all nations. standing as representatives of authority in the church and in doctrine. pp. 71). while each of the ten conches had one apostle preaching to the nations. pp. Walter. 1997). Schatz.. K. The pope is the custodian of Paul’s teaching and Peter’s authority. The pope gets his authority from God. Taken by themselves. “Papal political imagery”. Secular rulers are the pope’s helpers. why. The social modes within which papal art ‘worked’ can be seen as pertaining to earthly and heavenly patronage. I believe that these images — Leo’s images with Jesus and the apostles and the Marian images discussed above — can be read as sketches of an ideological program. they were relegated to the reverse. 85 One good discussion is Walter. I would stress that the images point to the spiritual bases of papal power and authority. In one. This fresco and mosaic evidence accords well with that of the coins that refer to Christ or to St Peter. As the popes separated themselves from the Byzantine Empire and achieved autonomy. then the various sketches to which I referred above are nevertheless apparent and perhaps can be explained by the very novelty of the situation. the emperor takes a position between Christ and the people and in another the emperor is positioned between Mary and those who venerate her. or form of representation predominated. pp. 170–6. and for whom the new system functioned. and intercession.85 This seems entirely possible to me. they used artistic means to communicate important aspects of the changed situation and to define how. The pope answers to God alone. the pope takes the middle position in this hierarchy. To be sure. and with that of the voluminous textual mobilizations of St Peter from this period. In Rome. In the Byzantine East. But Leo is in the privileged position at Peter’s right hand. when emperors finally appeared on papal coins. The pope intercedes with Mary on behalf of his people. style.      71 Scholars have long speculated on whether or not these images echo the Sylvester legends or the ‘Donation of Constantine’. as we will see below. protection. Laymen seldom appear. What I detect in the evidence from the Republic of St Peter is a struggle to define and to articulate a consistent and coherent ideological program. and taken in conjunction with other evidence. Charlemagne also kneels before St Peter in the aula mosaic. artistic and textual evidence often shows two hierarchies. he might seem to be on a par with Leo III. and in likewise receiving the symbols of his rule — a banner — from St Peter. If no single image. Similarly. . To conclude this discussion we can return to Geertz with whom we began. vol.D. 3. Grierson also suggests that they may be exagia. 501 (= notes to nos.72  . 20–1. For any person or entity to issue coins on his or its own authority is a significant claim to authentic rule. and inscriptions.87 Not many survive.. “A find of Byzantine silver from the mint of Rome for the period A. Grierson and M. 262–3. As one would expect. including in a limited sense the ways in which popes referred to themselves and in a larger sense to the ways in which official documents referred to other powers. insignia. 187–9). Bellinger and P. 641–752”. pp. O’Hara. specifically to Byzantine emperors and to Frankish rulers.  The pattern of life within which this papal art took a place was religious in the first place but all-absorbing after that. 1 (Cambridge. It seems that a mint began operating in Rome in the time of Emperor Constans II (r. DC. 1986). pp. Blackburn. 2 in 2 parts (Washington. 644–5 and no. to signify their official position. In the early decades of the eighth century Gregory III and Zachary issued in their own names some square copper ‘objects’ that may be coins. Coins will draw first attention. Their intended use is hard to ascertain. Catalogue of the Byzantine coins in the Dumbarton Oaks collection. we will consider dating devices in papal documents. that is weights for weighing solidi and tremisses or tokens connected somehow with papal charitable activities. 741–775) this mint issued silver coins fairly regularly. Medieval European coinage. these coins bear appropriate imperial images. or pilgrims’ tokens. 1968). or social reconciliation. Then we will turn to titles. Popes began issuing coins in the eighth century. S  A Let us turn now to some of those formal marks of authority and power that the eighth. And their political significance is impossible to interpret. Everywhere there were reminders that the pope could carry the sins of his subjects to the feet of Mary who would be asked to lay them before Christ for forgiveness and also that the same pope could provide the penitent with a job. P. like all rulers. weights. vol. personal security. Swiss Numismatic Review 64 (1985). Grierson.and ninth-century popes. . 1513.D.E. 641–668). 50–1.86 Until the time of Constantine V (r. Finally. It should be pointed out right away that these categories of Herrschaftszeichen overlap at several points. used to express. More intriguing are some coins 86 A. pp. a measure of grain. 126–27 and fig. 87 M. Medieval European coinage. on their reverses.89 and these coins may be indicative of that ambiguous. “La moneta nella documentazione . pp. vol. 717–741) and Constantine V which bear. 9). p. 521–37 and A. monograms of popes Gregory III and Zachary. 1. at least. pp. The popes were not devising a standard of their own or rejecting Frankish norms. Medieval European coinage. Noyé. beginning in 781. he began a fairly regular issue that was continued by Leo III down to Charlemagne’s imperial coronation in 800 and beyond. Papal coins held to this standard until late in the pontificate of Gregory IV and then slowly declined in weight until they reverted to approximately the original Carolingian standard. 260. pp. 259–64. 90 Grierson and Blackburn. For many years the Roman mint was inactive. The gradual decline in the weight of ninth-century of papal coinage is surely an economic fact more than a political one. pp.90 It is not surprising that Rome would have aligned itself with the major power in the West. Perhaps the enigmatic copper pieces should be taken in the same sense. vol. in: R. 113 and 124 nos. All of the ninth century popes issued silver coins (fig. indeed with its ally and protector. La storia dell’alto medioevo. after liberating itself from the clutches of Byzantium. Rovelli. Republic of St Peter. I have argued elsewhere that the popes were.88 This suggests. Francovich and G. Then in the 770s Hadrian I struck some silver coins and. Leo III switched to the new Carolingian standard promulgated in 794. 89 Noble.. 19 and 20. That is. the 88 O’Hara. After 800. tenuous situation. the relative fineness of papal coins declined in lockstep with a discernible fall-off in papal benefactions in precious metal and fine cloth. 91 A.91 First. 1. Grierson and Blackburn. Hadrian’s earliest coins held to traditional Roman weight standards but his issues after 781 adopted the standard of the coinage reforms of Pippin I that had been introduced into Italy in 781. “Byzantine silver”. They were struggling in a western Mediterranean overrun by Muslim raiders and in a central Italy where local power struggles played themselves out in the absence of effective Carolingian protection. from the 730s to the 750s claiming an independence from Byzantium that they could not yet enforce or exercise.      73 of emperors Leo III (r. Any attempt to build the papal coinage into an economic argument crashes against two walls erected by Alessia Rovelli. Rovelli. that these popes were proclaiming a kind of corulership. 15–60. “La funzione della moneta tra l’VIII e X secolo: Un annalisi della documentazione archeologica”. 92 The use of the genitive here might suggest that the coinage and/or the person issuing it are ‘of ’. g (nominative inscription on obverse). in: Paroli and Delogu eds. vol. I am unpersuaded by the argument of M. nos. pp. For Grierson’s suggestions about the IB (which Schramm.. p. But there does not seem to have been a precise. For the coins see C. and the inscription   or   arrayed in three lines.. 1031 and 1032. p. Grierson and Blackburn. 1965). vol. In an email communication Alan Stahl informs me that. I believe that they point unmistakably to the issuance of this coinage as a symbolic projection of power and prestige. p. 263. and thus unambiguous. vol. 92 These are discussed but not reproduced by Grierson and Blackburn. 1. the coinage will have been too valuable for any practical.E. while Grierson takes it as Iesous Basileus or else as a date device.74  . How such a twelve got onto papal coins is impossible to say but perhaps it meant that the coins represented twelve of something in a local context. “Ipotesi sul significato della sigla IB nel denaro papale di Adriano I rinvenuto negli scavi di Aosta”. a long-shafted cross standing on a platform. The coins circulated in a moral economy whose determinants were power and prestige not supply and demand. Orlandoni. syntax for inscriptions on coins.93 The reverse of these coins bear    . pp. Könige. but inscriptions tell another. Unfortunately no small coinage has been found that would qualify. 638. On the reverse these coins had  .    surrounding a bust image — another imperial imitation — and a curious  (the  to the viewer’s left of the bust and the  to the right). If the  on the obverse does mean ‘with Jesus as Ruler’ then the altomedievale di Roma e del Lazio”. pp. und Päpste: Gesammelte Aufsätze zur Geschichte des Mittelalters (Stuttgart. some Byzantine coins of Alexandria had an IB that denominated twelve nummi. 638 and nos. Memorie dell’Accademia Italiana di Studi Filatelici e Numismatici 4 (1990). 1. pp. Medieval European coinage. Weights tell one story then. 333–52. Serafini. 1. on the obverse. in his Kaiser. This brings us to the inscriptions. La storia economica. Medieval European coinage. much earlier. second. 366 fig. ‘belong to’ the pope himself or St Peter. 228 calls “beachtlich”) see his “The coronation of Charlemagne and the coinage of Leo III”. Le monete e le bulle plombee pontificie del medagliere vaticano (repr. 825–33 at 833 and Coinage. a clear imitation of Byzantine coins. that defeats some interpreters. 4–5 and Tavola C. pp.  dissemination of this coinage is so slight as to prove minimal circulation and. Hadrian’s second and seemingly longer series had. p. 638. daily use. 93 For the coins. Schramm. “Die Anerkennung Karls des Großen als Kaiser (bis 800)”. Hadrian’s earlier series of coins had. 133–4 to the effect that the IB refers to John the Baptist. . 1. 1968). Bologna. vol. on their obverse. again in three lines. Revue belge de philologie et d’histoire 30 (1952). 2 and 3 (genitive inscription on obverse) and P. “Anerkennung”. one cannot escape the conclusion that Hadrian was adapting aspects of Byzantium’s symbolic repertoire to his own uses.94 94 R. 1928). Thus the popes seem to have been saying that they shared authority in a relationship with Frankish rulers that put them first but that ultimate legitimation came from either St Peter or Jesus. no. The ruling called for this form: imperante domino piissimo augusto N. 47. (Berlin. Taking together the imperial ‘look’ of the coins. a bust image of Peter. This had references to Peter and the pope on the obverse and the name of the emperor. 3 Novellae. again. . If the popes seem to have displayed some uncertainty in articulating their message. and the  (Constantinopolis Obryzum. In 537 Justinian issued a novella that was promulgated in Rome in about 550 pertaining to how documents issued anywhere in the empire were to be dated. 5th ed. His second coins had. Here we have a reversal of the coins of the early eighth century where the popes put their monograms on the reverse of imperial coins. It will be recalled that Hadrian’s first coins had St Peter in the genitive on the reverse and in some cases the pope’s name in the nominative on the obverse. often with a  and/or an  on the reverse. After Charlemagne’s coronation. the pope’s name — and perhaps Jesus’s — in the nominative. Corpus Iuris Civilis. Several other intriguing and revealing manifestations of the newly emerging situation in Rome can be discerned in various kinds of papal documents. Kroll. the popes adopted a style that persisted into the tenth century. the Byzantine authentication symbol for pure gold). specifically in the ways the popes dated their documents and titled both themselves and other rulers. then perhaps that is attributable to the relative novelty of their situation and runs parallel with the similar but by no means identical messages of papal art. a Deo coronato magno imperatore. the call for victory. Now Leo put St Peter in the nominative and himself into the genitive.      75 imprecation for His victory on the reverse makes a coherent statement. vol. It is a given of the ius monetae that the primary authority figure appears on the obverse. and either a monogram of the papal name or   . Schoell and W. When Leo III ascended the papal throne he issued coins whose obverses bore  . 96 It must be stated right away. Maii imperante domno piissimo augusto Leone a Deo coronato magno imperatore anno tertio.97 Thus. Poole.. The opening words of its acta are distinctive: In nomine Patris et filii et Spiritus sancti. indiccione septima. Regesta Pontificum Romanorum (hereafter Jaffé. 2. 37. Werminghoff (Hannover. apart from a fragment from Hadrian I and a full letter of Paschal. For instance.99 As 95 Sancti Bonifatii et Lulli Epistolae. that very few papal letters survive completely and that. repr. ed. p. 14. pt. p. 2. 98 MGH Conc. P. 372. as we shall see vividly just below. Still.95 In 751 Zachary wrote to Boniface and the date device in this letter reads as follows: Data IIII kalendas Novembris imperante domno piissimo augusto Constantino a Deo coronato magno imperatore anno tricesimo secondo. 1957).  Well into the eighth century papal letters followed this format faithfully. The pertinent clause in his letter reads: Data id.L. ed. indictione quarta. it is safer to talk of general trends than to try to identify decisive changes at particular moments or to speak confidently about how things were always done. p. p. in 719 Gregory II wrote to the Anglo-Saxon missionary Boniface. Dümmler. There are some textual problems relating to the transmission of the acts of this synod but as they do not concern the date clause they need not detain us here. 12. 1 (1885. 2462. 79. 87. no. no. 1956).76  . post consulatum eius anno tertio. vol. 258. in connection with these letters and with those that will follow. Jaffé. it seems safe to say that the papal scrinium was conservative in its dating practices during the very period in which the popes were slowly extricating themselves from the institutional framework of the Byzantine Empire. vol. Bresslau. 1906). indictione secunda. mense Aprile. Berlin. no. nos. post consulatum eius anno undecimo. we have no originals. In April of 769 Stephen III convened a synod in Rome. 2551. 99 H. 3 (repr. Lectures on the history of the papal chancery down to the time of Innocent III (Cambridge. Leipzig. Remember that Gregory III and Zachary put their own monograms on imperial coins and issued those odd copper objects in their own names. regnante domino nostro Jesu Christo uno ex eadem sancta trinitate cum eodem Patre et Spiritu sancto per infinita omnia saecula. . 96 Ibid. Handbuch der Urkundenlehre für Deutschland und Italien. 2. A..98 It has been customary to regard this dating clause as a dramatic expression of the papacy’s rejection of Byzantine rule in Rome. 97 R. E. MGH Epp. 1915). RP). 102 4th ed.und Fürstentitel im neunten und zehnten Jahrhundert. There is no other dated document from the pontificate of Stephen III (768–772) so we have no way of saying what was then normal practice. The absence of the emperor’s name is striking but difficult to interpret. Intitulatio II: Lateinische Herrscher. Pippin III. P. There were.. such formulae had been used in the days of imperial persecution of Christianity and just might have been used here to signal that the authority of the heretical. Frankish and Lombard bishops present at the synod and they would not have welcomed an assertion or recognition of imperial authority. 224. the former of whom was married to a daughter of the Lombard king Desiderius. 2 (Rome. Mitteilungen des Instituts für Österreichische Geschichtsforschung. this ‘regnante formula’ had appeared in a variety of other settings where no implicit rejection of imperial authority was involved. Republic of St Peter. Indictione X. Rome’s nemesis for more than a decade. Moreover. das Papsttum und Byzanz: Die Begründung des karolingischen Kaisertums. p. Beiträge zur Geschichte und Quellenkunde des Mittelalters 9 (Sigmaringen. a privilege of Hadrian for Farfa (22 April 772). after all. Giorgi and U. 90. Wolfram ed. indeed in the papal government itself. There had been bloody political intrigue in the city. 420. that is iconoclast. The Lombards had ravaged the countryside around Rome and attempted to control the papacy. . the papacy’s ally and protector. no. p. Constantine V was being ignored for a very specific reason. this interpretation is plausible. Charlemagne and Carloman.      77 it derives from so public and formal a setting as a synodal protocol. died in 768 leaving two sons. reverted to the customary imperial-style date formula: Data X Kalendas Martii. in: H. p. 1985). 1879). pp. Il regesti di Farfa. 1973). Balzani eds. Ergänzungsband 24 (Wien.100 Caution is in order. Karl der Große. this dating clause may have religious more than political significance. 112–32. Fichtenau. 85.101 The very next securely dated papal document. 100 H. 102 I. In other words. (Berlin. The late 760s and very early 770s were very difficult for Rome and the popes. 11. 1969). “‘Politische’ Datierungen des frühen Mittelalters”. Sed et Leone magno imperatore eius filio anno xxi. Imperantibus domno nostro piissimo augusto Constantino a Deo coronato magno imperatore anno liii et post consulatum eius anno xxxiii. “Anerkennung”. Schramm. p. vol. 101 Basic details in Noble. Finally. Classen.. pp. 485–89. as far as we know. In these tangled circumstances Hadrian may have been taking some thought for the Lombard envoys and the present uncertainty. pp. the very year. “‘Politische’ Datierungen”. I repeat. Then in 773 the Lombard kingdom began breaking up in the face of a Frankish invasion. 536 n. Hadrian had no idea where the Franks stood at that moment. p. in which Hadrian began his second series of silver coins. 514 n. It is like contemporary Roman inscriptions.78  . of which several examples survive from the 750s and 760s: LP. pp. 103 Karl der Große. Hildeprand quickly began to date by Charlemagne’s regnal years: Regnante domno nostro Karolo viro excellentissimo rege. 458 n. Hadrian avoided claiming the Duchy of Spoleto. no. 15. 490 n. 85. Charlemagne had repudiated his Lombard wife and made clear his intention to honor his father’s promise to protect Rome. Regesto delle lettere dei papi del secolo VIII (Milan. 89. Conte. The use of ‘Temporibus . vol. 1984). that name vanished from all subsequent papal documents. 91. Temporibus ter beatissimus et coangelici domni adriani pontificis et universalis papae. No relevant evidence survives until 781. . P. by dating the Farfa donation according to imperial years. That is. As far as ducal documents from Farfa are concerned. p. 105 Il regesto di Farfa. In a document for Farfa issued by Hildeprand a window opens momentarily on the new situation: In nomine Domini Dei Salvatoris Nostri Ihesu Christi. Hildeprand.104 The Lombard king was trying to align himself with the pope and to persuade the pope to abandon the papacy’s alliance with the Franks. Hadrian gave Spoleto a new duke. 27.105 Whatever the emperor’s name meant in the Farfa document of 772. “‘Politische’ Datierungen”. 69. 104 . See also Fichtenau. per indictionem xiii. 2.  In the utter absence of comparanda it seems safest to leave on one side Peter Classen’s surmise that Hadrian may have been signaling a willingness to return to the imperial fold103 and to hew to Heinrich Fichtenau’s prudent assessment of the political situation and of the acute predicament of the pope. 489–92. anno regni eius in Dei nomine in Italia ii. 231–3. . mense iulii. Hadrian temporized and the Lombards attacked Roman territory..’ is interesting because it appears to avoid using regnal years. pp. p. in which Farfa lay. as his own — which the popes had been doing for decades– and left the Franks out of the picture. 1. 492 who quotes the document from a work of E. regnante domino deo et salvatore Iesu Christo cum deo patre omnipotente et spiritu sancto per infinita saecula. This is a direct imitation of the way in which imperial regnal years were cited in the formula required by Justinian and used in Rome at least into the 750s. 5 (Berlin. RP. 5. 103. This system casts a bright. indictione quinta. 1911). Mansi [Lucca. Appendix 12. 106 Il regesto di Farfa. 107 . 108 Jaffé. pp. 492. 3. Jahrhundert”. anno regni eius in Italia deo propitio ii. P. etc. 781 Hadrian issued a privilege for St-Denis: Data kal. the ‘regnante formula’ has been adopted on a regular basis. no. Annales Camaldulenses. Menzer attaches more precise significance to the date devices than Fichtenau is willing to do. “‘Politische’ Datierungen”. Kehr ed.109 Two elements are of real significance in these four documents. retrospective light on the synodal protocol of 769 and accords well with the otherwise anomalous IB on Hadrian’s coins. anno deo propitio pontificatus domini nostri Hadriani in apostolica sede undecimo. Second. Römische Quartalschrift für christliche Altertumskunde und Kirchengeschichte 40 (1932).D. 2437. p. p. 492 who quotes Johannes Benedictus Mirarelli.106 On December 1. No emperor is named and. p... p. 3) to which I did not have access. “Die Jahresmerkmale in den Datierungen der Papsturkunden bis zum Ausgang des 11.      79 Regnante domno nostro Karolo excellentissimo rege Francorum atque langobardorum. vol. “‘Politische’ Datierungen”. p. 2435. Baluze (Miscellanea. 85–88. 109 “‘Politische’ Datierungen”. be it noted. First. RP. Italia Pontificia. no. indictione sexta. On Hadrian’s dating practices see also A. from 775 and 776. Hadrian dates explicitly by the years of his own pontificate. Jesus Christ is claimed as direct overlord of Rome and of the lands under papal rule. J. 1762]. no western ruler is put into the place formerly held by the emperor. from 787 and 788. Jaffé. 1755). 31–32.. regnante domine et salvatore nostro Iesu Christo. no. 96. anno pontificatus nostri in sacratissima beati apostolici Petri sub die [sede?] deo propitio decimo. Cf. qui vivit et regnat cum Deo patre omnipotente et spiritu sancto per immortalia [infinita?] saecula. 92–94. to which I did not have access. no. Again I cite after Fichtenau. Decembris. 27–28. ed. I cite after Fichtenau. pp.107 Another document for St Apollinare in Classe from November of 782 reads: Data kal. that reveal only minor divergences from the two just quoted. 1 (Venice. Novembris per manus Anastasii secundicerii.108 Fichtenau cites two additional letters of Hadrian. nos. vol. Menzer. But it is probably anachronistic to say that he claimed some kind of ‘sovereignty’. particularly what I called the ‘secular’ ones. Earlier we noted that it was in the 780s that Hadrian’s ‘building boom’ and lavish metal and silk benefactions come into view. pp. Mai. regnante domino nostro Iesu Christo cum deo patre omnipotente et spiritu sancto per infinita secula. It was in 781 that Charlemagne and Hadrian met to begin working out the precise terms of the Italian territorial settlement that had been spelled out first in Pippin III’s meetings with Stephen II in Francia in 754 and then reaffirmed in Charlemagne’s visit to Rome at Easter in 774. Republic of St Peter. pp. Equally certainly. While granting that we really have no idea what may have been going on with coins and documents between 772/3 and 781 — construction work is a limited exception — the obvious significance of the period beginning in 781 can be explained. Hadrian acted decisively on a broad front. pp.110 Between about 760 and 780 the popes really did not know what their fate was to be. I suggested already that some of Hadrian’s building projects. he had not admitted Charlemagne as a new overlord.. “Die Vorrechte des Kaisers in Rom. Hadrian’s second series of silver coins and his new and stable dating devices appear in the early 780s. But Fichtenau is also correct in urging caution about just what Hadrian had done. amen. 772–800”. Some years ago there was a lively debate between Percy Ernst Schramm and Josef Deér as to whether Hadrian’s actions amounted to a transferral of imperial prerogatives to Charlemagne (Schramm) or to himself (Deér).112 Indeed. Leo’s letter conferring a pallium on Arn of Salzburg in 798 reads: Data epistola XII kal.111 Clearly the argument goes to the latter. 490–3. Schweizer Beiträge zur allgemeinen Geschichte 15 (1957). 112 Fichtenau. Per manum Pascalii primicerii sanctae sedis apostolicae. “‘Politische’ Datierungen”. may have been proud gestures more than necessary maintenance. 138–75. With the pontificate of Leo III there are once again some new elements.80  . Certainly the pope had dispensed once and for all with Byzantine imperial authority. 5–63. 111 . As soon as the picture became clear. Schramm. Deér. deo propitio pontificatus domno nostro in apostolica sacratissima beati Petre sede ter- 110 Noble. 215–63. pp. “Anerkennung”. J.  There is a marked convergence of elements here. no pope had ever been in the exact position in which Hadrian found himself. Salzburger Urkundenbuch. Leo was also in acute difficulties in Rome in the late 790s and he may have wished to stress his relationship with his protector. Menzer. RP. p. It seems that Leo was acknowledging Charlemagne’s authority without admitting that the king had specific authority in Rome. The ‘a quo . These elements are not easy to interpret. indictione XI. Through most of the rest of the ninth century papal letters followed the format used in Leo’s letter for Fortunatus. Hadrian’s system did not die with him in 795. 495. we need not trouble to cite them. April. the only credential Charlemagne might have had to exercise power in Rome. Leo does place himself first. But there are two novelties. “‘Politische’ Datierungen”. 494–95. p. 2 (Salzburg. Leo is not named and his pontifical years are not given. In a privilege of March 803 for Fortunatus of Grado that has a dubious textual transmission we read: Datum XII kal. 48. Fichtenau. no. 30. In the contrary sense. As they are all unremarkably similar. The first is the inclusion of Charlemagne in the document and the second is the queer ‘a quo coepit Italiam’ formula.115 And that is all. “‘Politische’ Datierungen”. Martin. The emphasis is on Leo and on the Holy See. 48. 2498. “Jahresmerkmale”. W. See also: Fichtenau. p. .113 The ‘regnante formula’ and the pontificate-year dating are just what we have seen in the time of Hadrian. Neither Leo nor any other pope of the period ever referred to his lands as ‘Italy’ so the point of the wording seems to be that Rome did not belong to the Italian kingdom.’ formula dates from the capture of Pavia in 774. ed. p. 113 Jaffé. . 224. Per manum Eustachii primicerii sanctae sedis apostolicae. a quo coepit Italiam anno XXV . but does not date from the conferral of that particular title. Schramm. That counts for a good deal. imperante nostro domino Carolo piissimo augusto a deo coronato magno et pacifico imperatore anno tertio. RP. p. 493. 114 Menzer. pp. “Anerkennung”. Hauthaler and F. I cite after Fichtenau.114 Authentic and complete papal documents from the years just after Charlemagne’s imperial coronation are exceedingly rare. 4. “‘Politische’ Datierungen”.      81 tio atque domni Caroli excellentissimi regis Francorum et Langobardorum et patricii Romanorum. indictione VI. no. 2a. . “Jahresmerkmale”. pp. 115 Jaffé. vol. 2512. no. It appears that some stability has been introduced into papal practices. 1916). The protocol does mention Charlemagne’s ‘patricius Romanorum’ title. pp. “‘Politische’ Datierungen”. Second. 496–7. let us recall that papal coins continued to be struck with the pope’s name on the obverse and the emperor’s on the reverse. not a single document ever betrays the slightest intention on the part of any pope to assign to the Carolingians actual overlordship over Rome. 496. and synodal protocols from before and after 800 began to use distinctive language to refer to the papal office itself. Third. . no. a quo cepit Italiam. summo pontifice sanctae Romanae ecclesiae et universalis tertio papa . private documents. In my view. No pope had.  But we must try to interpret them. They had a vested interest in assuring its continuity and legitimacy. Concilia Aevi Karolini 1. It is striking that the combination appears in 798 and then continues into the next years.. 291–324.116 Fourth. 118 MGH Conc. pp. the popes were struggling to come to terms with the wholly new situation in which they found themselves. See also Fichtenau. 119 Ibid. 23. 202. They had created it. . Leo sanctissimus et ter beatissimus sanctae catholicae et apostolicae Romane ecclesiae et universalis papa. For instance: Anno deo propicio domini Karoli regis Francorum et Langobardorum atque patricii Romanorum. pp. p. it made sense for the popes to trumpet the Carolingian imperial office. Fifth. Moreover. 2. and by the last quarter of the ninth century the formula ‘summus pontifex et universalis papa’ became normal in papal documents. 203. 495–7.119 This was precisely the time when Leo first inserted Charlemagne’s name into papal documents and coinage. Or at least such was their view. Rome was the site of regular crises both foreign and domestic right through the ninth century so interested locals and transalpine rulers could use frequent reminders of who was supposed to protect Rome and the popes. First. presidente ter beatissimo et coangelico Leone. 117 . vicesimo sexto . . papal letters. and universalis papa — had precendents. private documents from Rome and its region cited the emperor’s name first but also included the pope’s name.82  . “‘Politische’ Datierungen”. Republic of St Peter. in a condition of fundamental autonomy. 116 Noble. summus pontifex. Coins are an important kind of Staatssymbolik. pp. No pope had ever before been a temporal ruler whose position was reasonably assured.. . Fichtenau.118 Each aspect of this intitulation — beatissimus.117 Marks of papal authority did not vanish. In a book on the priestly rituals in the Hebrew Bible F. Muir. Moreover. The title priests of the twenty-five. Like other great urban liturgies. 105–268. 13–38. repr. esp. as theologians would later say. 231–99. 212–50. 23–59. pp. They make and maintain communities. 6 (“The ritual occasion”). Still inspirational are V. esp. public. 5 (“A republic of processions”) and ch. ex opere operato. 1987). The urban character of Christian worship: The origins. See also J. 1995). . P   Let us conclude with ritual celebrations as another kind of representation of power and authority. 1–43 and Dramas. Gorman Jr. 185–211. 1981). Rome’s had been developing for centuries and would go right on developing. Supplement Series 91 (Sheffield. In principle the system worked as follows. The basic arrangement in the eighth and ninth centuries is less easy to perceive than it would become later. a power. the popes seem to have displayed a high tolerance for ambiguity. liturgical ceremonies usually center on the sacraments of the church. pp. pp. Orientalia Christianan Analecta 228 (Rome. resolve social tensions.120 The structure of liturgies in the Sancta Romana Ecclesia was highly articulated and complex. Baldovin. development. give symbolic expression to the very real events of life. and meaning of stational liturgy. But the ambiguity attaches less to the objective reality of the situation than to the intense difficulty of articulating that reality. comment continuously on the political order. Much of what he says bears directly on the priestly rituals of Rome: The ideology of ritual: Space. fields. or eventually twenty-eight title churches took it in turns. Journal for the Study of the Old Testament. Civic ritual in Renaissance Venice (Princeton. time and status in the priestly theology. Viewed from one vantage point.      83 sought to regulate relations with an ally and protector. join the present to the past in a hopeful glimpse of the future. permit visible displays of the structure of society. 1974). esp. and permit many people to participate in appropriate. offers valuable definitions of and insights into the ritual process as a priestly affair. pp. 120 For an outstanding presentation see E. esp. Turner’s works: The ritual process: Structure and anti-structure (1969. and a raison d’être that functions. I will focus on just a few revealing refinements and alterations in my period. esp. pp. and metaphors: Symbolic action in human society (Ithaca. ch. But liturgies are also visible. New York. sacraments have an efficacy. 1990). and participatory. By laying much greater stress on the papal office itself while experimenting with ways to express the political situation. defined ways. Studi di antichità cristiana 41 (Rome.121 The popes celebrated most visibly in stational liturgies that arose in antiquity and began being regularized by Gregory I. McKitterick ed..84  . Mélanges d’archéologie et d’histoire 10 (1890).123 Most Roman stations were eucharistic liturgies but not all. 2. pp. 212–7. . Liturgical and other sources provide copious amounts of often conflicting evidence for the organization of the stational liturgies. Santa Maria Maggiore. pp. 1000–4. Detailed documentation can be found for 102 stations in about 800. p. as we shall see below. 1989). law. “Les régions de Rome au moyen âge”. every two to three days. Saxer. These liturgical arrangements necessitated constant processions throughout the city. 946–8. 22–72. Apart from special feasts. vol. 608–13. By the late eighth century at least thirty-seven churches were at some time used for no fewer than 147 separate stations. or public place in or near a city or town. fast. 123 Baldouin. 64. on average. which probably go back to the third century. Reynolds. and liturgy of the Western Church. 1035–62. 1995). concise definition: ‘Stational liturgy is a service of worship at a designated church. The New Cambridge Medieval History. or commemoration. pp. 700–900”. on a designated feast. there was a stational liturgy.. L. 1. 126–49. 37. Cultus et decor. 2 (Cambridge.  on a regular cycle. at 126–30. in: R. and San Lorenzo fuori le mura. pp. 2. pp. vol. pp. shrine. John Baldovin provides a useful. which is presided over by the bishop or his representative and intended as the local church’s main liturgical celebration of the day’. 124 LP. Rome’s suburbicarian bishops took turns celebrating at St John Lateran.124 on a precise weekly schedule as follows: Sunday Monday Tuesday Third Region Fourth Region Fifth Region 121 Basic details and literature in Noble. the more or less regular stations were celebrated throughout the city’s seven ecclesiastical regions.122 In Rome. Urban character. “The organization. Actes du XI e Congrès international d’archéologie chrétienne. Pietri. 122 V. vol. then. Actes du XI e Congrès international d’archéologie chrétienne. de Blaauw. San Paolo fuori le mura. “L’utilisation par la liturgie de l’espace urbain et suburbain: L’exemple de Rome dans l’antiquité et le haut moyen âge”. Virtually every titular and patriarchal basilica had appointed to it one or more monasteries whose monks saw to the laus perennis in that place. to celebrate mass in four of the patriarchal basilicas: St Peter’s. Republic of St Peter. See also R. “Régions ecclésiastiques et paroisses romaines”. Duchesne. C. he processed to the altar for mass. nomenclator. 125 Baldovin. Les Ordines Romani du haut moyen age. Presumably at this point in the procession. The acolytes of the appropriate region and the defensores of the whole city gathered at dawn at the Lateran to accompany the pope on foot to the station. Spicilegium sacrum Lovaniense 23 (Louvian. The maiores of the church. p. pp. A lay cubicularius. For some feasts. Then. who had to enumerate the number of jewels on each. 1971). On special feast days the great paten and chalice along with precious books were let out on the signature of the vestararius. In front of the pope rode regional deacons. Other acolytes accompanied him. pp. were the vicedominus. a gradual book. little money sacks. Ordo Romanus Primus. other gold and silver vessels. The pope proceeded to the sacristy where he exchanged his processional robes for liturgical vestments. vestararius. in front of the pope. the Ordo says. silver cups.      Wednesday Thursday Friday Saturday 85 Sixth Region Seventh Region First Region Second Region. daily paten and chalice. See also de Blaauw. riding. preceded by candles and incense. and regional subdeacons.126 In summary fashion. the gospels. and sacellarius.125 The early eighth-century Ordo Romanus I provides a detailed account of one stational liturgy. walked in front of it as it entered the church. who had already prepared the pope’s sedan chair. 72–102. These officers were arranged in discrete groups and left a good gap between themselves and the pope. local notables. a large silver sieve. Cultus et decor. Behind the pope. 126 . ed. The mansionarii had responsibility for all of this liturgical equipment. and gold and silver candlesticks from the Lateran. and hand basins were carried before the pope. followed the papal chair into the church. other gold and silver vessels. Lay grooms walked to the right and left of the pope’s horse. Michel Andrieu. the baiuli carried the wash basins. 65–112. the ceremony can be described this way. One acolyte from the stational church walked in front of the pope’s horse carrying an ampulla of chrism wrapped in a mappula. Urban character. gold and silver wine sieves. pitchers and vessels. the primicerius and two regional notaries. 131. Once this glittering entourage reached the stational church it was met by local lay and ecclesiastical dignitaries. 131 D. p. and because some laymen were folded into the ceremony in prominent ways.131 All of these items. makes some127 Ordo XX. The apposite remarks of Brenk. and cloth. p. witnessed this grand display of the pope himself. 2. 129 Ibid. But that language was only comprehensible as long as some people could confine its use to themselves while others understood its meaning. 951. prosperity.129 The people of Rome.127 Normally seven candlesticks preceded the pope. 1974). and light. 110. magnificence.130 In the same vein. LP. magic. jewels. Les Ordines Romani du haut moyen age. in their continuous display in the city.. these processions provided a constant proclamation of the precise shape of Rome’s governing order. All of this material spoke a language that served to delineate rank. then. and power. there was a constant accumulation. That is.86  .. exchange. 130 Ibid. 16–25 where gold is interpreted as meaning. in one way or another: splendor. vol. “Early gold mosaics in Christian art”. “L’utilisation”. p. pp. stolen under Paschal I. fire. good fortune. pp. office. 974. also met the pope. He notes that the ninth-century writer Hrabanus Maurus cites twenty different meanings of gold in his allegorical lexicon. 128 Saxer. The pope was preceded by two processional crosses. 236.128 On at least some occasions the banners of the regions and of the scholae. ed. Palette 38 (1972). pp. p. and a choice sample of the treasure of the church on a regular basis. ‘the pope traversed the city as a sovereign.  Additional insignia were usually used as well. Janes. . Andrieu. Cf. At the stational church the procession was met by the seven processional crosses of the seven regions. 973. divinity. and replaced by Leo IV.. opulence. salvation.8. according to an etiquette whose Byzantine origin has been underlined and which even recalls the royal adventus’. Saxer. were ‘signs’ in precisely the sense Augustine had in mind when he said that a sign is something that. God and gold in late Antiquity (Cambridge. and display of treasure: precious metals. “L’utilisation”. light. 18–42. the most important administrators of the papal administration. But as Victor Saxer remarks. beyond the impression it conveys to the senses. Nothing is known about the other one. c. These were stored at Santa Anastasia and carried to the stational church without ceremony for the liturgy. Dominic Janes notes that Roman society was a ‘treasure society’. 975–7. status. 1998). 3 (Louvain. It was given to Leo III by Charlemagne. 7. the communities of foreign residents in the city. One was gold with purple gems. Because privileged positions were always accorded to the acolytes and regionary officials from the station’s own area. All Saints. saw another as did November 1. the beginning of Lent. sometimes connected to the stational processions. the Feast of All Saints. 1979). There may have been a special procession connected with the city’s eighteen deaconries on March 25.W. Instead. 65. 1987). quotation at p. then they ‘are ritual adjuncts. 135 Saxer. pp.136 At least eight times per year (Candlemas. The four Marian feasts discussed already in connection with images were days of major processions. elegant. called collecta. On Tuesday they started from Santa Sabina and processed to San Paolo. patronal. communicate something about culture’. 1.12. 136 LP. pp.132 The fantastic display of wealth that accompanied every stational procession might easily tempt one to advert to Thorstein Veblen’s ‘conspicuous consumption’ as an explanation. . departed from Santa Maria Maggiore and processed to the Lateran basilica. Assumption. and the Wednesday of Ember Days) there were huge public gatherings. Isherwood. Annunciation. in: F. Simons eds. Major Litany — see below. On Wednesday they began at Santa Croce in Gerusalemme and wound up at San Lorenzo. But Richard Goldthwaite. Douglas and B. Patronage. which assembled in prescribed places before processing to the day’s station. 2. The world of goods (New York. 133 . argues convincingly that such an explanation will not quite do. There were other regular celebrations. It is especially interesting to note that four of these collecta gathered in the heart of the 132 De doctrina christiana. 951–9. the pope. art. 156. 129–39. “L’utilisation”. They proceeded as follows. Ash Wednesday. consumption is a ritual process whose primary function is to make sense of the inchoate flux of events’. Urban character. and imperial. .134 The culture being communicated was majestic. On the Monday before Ascension. p. structured. Kent and P. he says. speaking of Renaissance Florence in particular.      87 thing else known. “The empire of things: Consumer demand in Renaissance Italy”. sometimes not. Goldthwaite. we need an explanation ‘that regards any particular historical configuration of consumption habits as a function of the culture of that moment . formal. Goods. in short.. serene. along with ‘all the clergy and the whole people’. R. Nativity of the Virgin. and society in Renaissance Italy (Oxford. 2. essentially the Rogation Days that appeared first in late antique Gaul. 153–75.135 Leo III introduced the Minor Litanies. say Douglas and Isherwood. 134 M.133 When goods are intimately connected to ritual processes. pp.2. Baldovin. Ash Wednesday. Thus it assigned meaning to events. they led the procession. 100. and at San Lorenzo in Lucina near the Campus Martius. pp. stopped for a station at San Valentino. 3. 597. Clergy and people participated together in this procession and a distinctive feature was the inclusion of the poor from the local xenodochium. First. right through Rome’s most aristocratic neighborhood. 139 LP. J. Later writers mistakenly attributed this late eighth-century penitential liturgy to Gregory I: see Saxer. and stopped once again in the atrium of St Peter’s before culminating with mass in the basilica. no. ed.. This procession went along the Via Lata. These celebrations marked an important appropriation of the city’s historical spaces. 211–3. The collecta assembled at San Adriano and Santi Cosma e Damiano in the Forum.443: ‘procedens in letania cum sacratissima imagine domini Dei et salvatoris nostri Iesu Christi quae acheropsita nuncupatur’.88  . vol. Croquison calls this a ‘document iconographique étonnant’ which might apply equally to the image itself and to Leo’s visibly commemorating the most humiliating moment of his pontificate: “L’iconographie chrétienne à Rome d’après le ‘Liber Pontificalis’”. . two in the Forum Romanum. p.140 Whether Stephen carried the image around on August 25 or on another 137 Saxer. the former Curia Senatus. and the nearby church of Santa Maria Nova. Behind them came the seven processional crosses that represented the seven regions of the city. Ordines Romani.. and one near the Campus Martius.10. incorporated the whole city. to the Flaminian Gate. crossed the Tiber at the Ponte Milvio. Deshusses ed. 1. one at the foot of the Palatine. 138 The Litania Maior (so called because it was Rome’s longest procession) is known from several sources: Ordo XXI. 247–9. stopped again at a no longer extant church. From there the procession went to Santa Maria Maggiore for morning mass. p. carried the image on his own shoulders to Santa Maria Maggiore. there is the Litania Maior. The pope. This particular celebration. vol. Andrieu.  ancient city. Leo III presented St Peter’s with a gold-studded cloth bearing an image of it: LP.110.139 This image ‘not made by hands’ is first mentioned by the Liber Pontificalis in the time of Stephen II. barefooted.138 Leo IV led a procession with the acheiropoieta on the vigil of the Feast of the Assumption from the patriarchate to the basilica of Hadrian. “L’utilisation”. well known because it was during its celebration on 25 April 799 that Leo III was attacked in a street near San Lorenzo in Lucina where the procession began.. As if to provide a constant reminder of this celebration. Byzantion 34 (1964). which extended over some 10 km. 954. pp. 2. pp.137 Two of these annual celebrations call for a few additional words. 2. at Santa Anastasia at the foot of the Palatine. 1. 140 LP. Carrying painted wooden crosses. Le sacramentaire grégorien. 963–4. “L’utilisation”. 399.. 980–2.145 After the Lateran council of 769 all of those who had participated proceeded barefoot to St Peter’s. Smith. we just do not know when the Assumption procession was set into the form which it held for centuries. Bullough (London/Boston/Köln. Indeed. p. It seems likely that the image in question is the Lateran icon of Christ. 2000). pp. 1. 178–80. 1.      89 Marian feast day is hard to say and it is equally difficult to know if the image was carried as a palladium because of Lombard threats to the city or if the military menace and a liturgical procession just happened to coincide. Translations of relics were common in the middle of the eighth century and then again under Paschal I. 144 Ibid.. 145 Ibid. 317–39. Early medieval Rome and the Christian West.M. 143 Ibid. singing litanies. “Old saints.H. p.143 On another occasion.M.141 We cannot be certain whether or not Sergius I introduced this specific ritual when he regularized Rome’s Marian feasts. 1020–3 provides a discussion of translations that is briefer than Smith’s.H. Zachary discovered the head of St George in the Lateran patriarchate. long conserved in the Sancta Sanctorum and barely visible today thanks to Innocent III’s silver frame. 464. Salus Populi Romani. to St Peter’s. 37–75. p. new cults: Roman relics in Carolingian Francia”. in: J. Gregory II led several processions after the Tiber flooded Rome in 716. The immense range of meaning attached to the carrying of Christ’s image from the pope’s ‘home office’ to the Senate House and Forum via the old Via Sacra cannot have eluded anyone. Saxer. These occasions were both solemn and joyous. Wolf. Our period also saw a large number of ad hoc processions and celebrations.142 After a successful negotiation with King Liutprand. 142 LP. 429. and accords well with the construction work and artistic patronage in this same area that were discussed above.146 Hadrian I organized a procession of ‘all his clergy and the Roman senate’ from the city to his newly instituted 141 For discussion see: Saxer. .. 146 LP. pp. Essays in honour of Donald M. Zachary returned to Rome. “L’utilisation”. 434. He assembled ‘this city of Rome’s people’ and they processed to San Giorgio in Velabro where the relic was installed. however.477. assembled the ‘people’ at Santa Maria ad Martyres (the Pantheon) from which they processed. “L’utilisation”. pp. See J. Smith ed. pp.144 Paul I led a procession after the installation of the relics of St Petronilla and another after he translated the remains of some Roman martyrs into the city.. And Rome’s populace was reminded of who fed it. Mélanges d’archéologie et d’histoire 57 (1940). in the simplest sense. The individual deaconries were staffed by monks. ed. 95–142. 53. On Fridays the poor of a particular area assembled at a deaconry. 569–70. pp. For present purposes what is striking about the deaconries is the ceremony connected with them. 229–36. “L’origine orientale des diaconies romaines”.150 It is worth remarking yet again how the symbols and realities in the Republic of St Peter so frequently worked in the same realms of meaning. 148 . Some were headed by laymen.. pp. Marrou. vol. 1. 261–98. D’Amico. R. Noble. 309–460. which he may have put there. See Croquison. “L’organizzazione assistenziale: le diaconie”. pp. Republic of St Peter. Older studies remain fundamental: J. was primarily enmeshed in the web of meanings spun by Christian baptism. 509. at several levels. Roma e l’età carolingia: atti del giornata di studio 3–8 maggio 1976 (Rome.-I. “L’Administration de Rome et diaconies du VIIe au IXe siècle”. pp. 50–2. Bertolini. Every Friday a large part of Rome’s population was reminded in a pointed way of its own baptism and of its participation in a Christian society whose head was the pope. 1. perhaps desirable from the standpoint of hygiene. O. 149 Or perhaps as many as twenty-three: Geertman. food distribution centers. In 684/85 Rome saw the foundation of its first deaconry. was stitched together by a single rite. pp. Lestocquoy. pp. was being incorporated by the papal administration into a visible projection of presence and leadership.149 These were.  domusculta at Capracorum. Krautheimer. 111–15.148 By the time of Leo III there were at least eighteen of them. 1976). in his Scritti scelti di storia medioevale. Perhaps too these ceremonies forged bonds of unity with the Lateran baptistery. The food distributed came from papal estates. Cultus et decor.. de Blaauw.147 It would be easy to go on multiplying examples but I think that enough has been said to show that virtually every part of the city. 150 LP. H. at virtually all times of the year. defined and affirmed 147 Ibid. Hadrian indeed dispensed food to one hundred poor people every day at the Lateran in front of a picture. some by clerics. “Per la storia delle diaconie romane nell’alto medioevo sino alle fine del secolo VIII”.502 and 518 n. 231–34. Rivista di archeologia cristiana 7 (1930). Banti (Livorno. Here again the society of the city. pp. The bathing. From there they marched. p. of a pope feeding the poor. 1968). singing psalms. 74–77. pp. “Iconographie”.90  . After this ablution they returned to the deaconry for their food allotment. More veterum. Rome. O. to the nearest bath house. the first and fundamental rite of initiation into the Christian faith. but all heads were appointed by the pope. Between 700 and 900 Rome became a city of the church. political problems. a papal city. might perpetually stand firm and strong. continuing Muslim incursions. construction work. The lengthy and careful description in the Liber Pontificalis of Leo IV’s consecration of the Leonine City may serve to conclude these remarks on the public. tangible expression to their power and majesty. By the tenth century. liberal benefactions. After the walls were finished: The blessed pope. liturgical manifestations of papal power. and the decline of the Carolingian role in Italy all contributed to breaking down the Republic of St Peter and. social struggles. silver. He then ‘honored and enriched’ the nobles of Rome with gifts of gold. every deacon. Everyone is there. during the offices of prayer. ordered that everyone. a ceremony reminiscent of imperial progresses and one which the Frank Clovis mimicked. and enriches them. as Gregory of Tours tells us in a famous passage. after singing litanies and psalms should. barefoot and bearing ashes on their foreheads. He protects. near the main gates. Leo also distributed a great sum of money to the Romans as he was going to St Peter’s to celebrate a mass for the safety of the city. called by its founder after his own name ‘Leonine’. . blesses. he instructed other cardinal bishops to bless water so that in the midst of the procession they might. Meanwhile. from the highest to the lowest ecclesiastical dignitary and from the secular nobles of Rome to the poor. 151 LP. and Staatssymbolik were less and less in evidence. But this does not change the remarkable degree to which the popes over nearly two centuries gave visible. all the orders of the clergy of the holy. as it cracked apart. 2.      91 the same cultural norms. its public celebrations. in order that the above mentioned city. cast that water on the walls for the sake of their complete sanctification. economic reversal. This one ceremony expresses very clearly the nature of Roman society in this dynamic and creative time. The messages which Rome’s ecclesiastical leaders had so consistently broadcast by the means available to them gradually began to reach fewer people and to have less meaning. Here again we see all the orders of the city arrayed behind the pope.124. bishops and priests. to carry out these prayers and blessings. and silk. apostolic Roman church. with great devotion and joyful hearts. make a circuit of the entire walls with him.151 The pope and his companions actually stopped three times. This page intentionally left blank . B.1. Gregory’s predecessor. “Archaeology and the Merovingian monastery”. ed. 1981). Krusch. in quo ferebatur celebre nostrum orasse Martinum. 2 ‘Repperit enim infra territurii Turonici terminum parietes antiquos. 2 (Hannover. quos erudirans a ruinis.’. p. and Bobbio. After the erection of an altar and a miracle enabling a large casket of relics to be enshrined in the small space. God’s miracles sanctified the find and choice of this abandoned ruin. Isabel Moreira. 1969). . p. habitationes dignas aptavit. following the sixth-century nobleman Senoch’s consecration as a cleric.B. Repperitque ibi oratorium. built on the foundations 1 I am grateful to Bailey Young. Southern Illinois University at Edwardsville. Columbanus and Merovingian monasticism. 34. Brennan eds. E. Nina Caputo. Clarke and M. he acquired there a ruined basilica said to be dedicated to St Peter. Jonas of Bobbio recalled that when the saint entered a fertile valley of the Apennines to found a new monastery. James. and a Berkshire Summer Fellowship at the Mary Ingraham Bunting Institute of Radcliffe College in 1998. Gregory noted that Senoch was drawn to the vestiges of this ancient structure not just by plentiful building materials but by the belief that Martin of Tours had recited Mass in the remains of an oratory discovered there. Pauline Head and participants in the “Topographies of power in the early medieval West” conference for critical insights and comments that greatly improved earlier drafts of this essay. Gregory of Tours.MONUMENTS AND MEMORY: REPOSSESSING ANCIENT REMAINS IN EARLY MEDIEVAL GAUL1 Bonnie Effros According to Gregory of Tours.2 A similarly propitious discovery blessed the monk Columbanus soon after his unhappy departure from Gaul. MGH SRM 1. 573) consecrated the altar and initiated the new monastic community. he set out to found a monastery. in: H. the bishop Eufronius (d.. Liber Vitae Patrum 15. divine assistance enabled the abbot to restore the site. Research and revision of this piece were supported by a 1996 Summer Research Fellowship from the Graduate School. Having located in the region of Tours a site at which there were a number of ancient walls in ruins. BAR International Series 113 (Oxford. 271. Despite less than optimal conditions in this mountainous landscape. he constructed a building and made it ready for habitation. In cuius restauratione mira Domini virtus panditur. ed. . no female founders of monasteries received credit for having done the same despite the fact that some of their houses occupied the sites of earlier remains. for instance. he learned of an active pagan cult. 1967). prisco decori renovans reddidit. 85–87. The monastery . Maurilius built a church at the first and a monastery at the second of these sites. MGH SRG 37 (Hannover. 185–86. . 1998). Such missionary accounts provided justification for the incorporation of ruins during the expansion of the monastic way of life in Merovingian Gaul. p. Mathon. Kitchen.5 Despite important differences. Paternus and his companion Scubilio used the former temple to hold livestock.’. 5 ‘.30. Discouraging competitors often required the destruction and immediate reoccupation of ancient buildings used for unholy purposes. pp. G.3 Whereas sixth. B. ut fanum profani cultus ereptis hominibus deputaretur pecoribus et insensatus locus fieret animalium clausura. In his account of the life of Maurilius of Angers (d. these vitae shared many commonalities with the works of Gregory and Jonas. After such thorough cleansing by fire. 1885). Krusch. 4 Vita Beati Maurilii 2 and 6. Krusch. pp. 11. 2 (Berlin. Saints’ lives and the rhetoric of gender: Male and female in Merovingian hagiography (Oxford. Bibliotheca Sanctorum 9 (Rome.and fifth-century bishops focused on their missionary activities among pagans. “Maurilio”. MGH AA 4. pp. pp. these activities also symbolically evoked the pious nature of the monastic founders. 453) written in the 620s. the vitae of fourth. MGH AA 4. Journal of Ecclesiastical History 48 (1997). 6 Due to the discontinuity between the destruction of the site and the arrival of Senoch. Magnobodus of Angers described how the native of Milan brought about divine conflagrations at two pagan temples in the civitas of Angers. Krusch. Jonas of Bobbio. or the consequence of a saint’s direct action as in the second two. Percival. J. would fare well under the leadership of this holy man. J.6 Whether serendipitous discoveries as in the first two examples. 1885).7 3 ‘Ubi cum venisset. Venantius Fortunatus. B. I thank Albrecht Diem for this reference. 1905). 221–2. After they punished its celebrants. 34–6. Vita Sancti Paterni 4–10. omni cum intentione basilicam inibi semirutam repperiens. ed. 44–5.94   of the older structure.and seventh-century saints in the above accounts adapted abandoned ruins. Percival sees this particular example as indicative of the relative scarcity of building materials in Gaul. 7 Recorded miracles involving ruins appear to have been limited to male founders. 2 (Berlin. pp. B. “Villas and monasteries in late Roman Gaul”. since Magnobodus and Fortunatus indicated the practicality of utilizing the building materials already present for new construction. Vitae Columbani discipulorumque eius libri II 1. ed.4 Venantius Fortunatus likewise related that when Paternus traveled to Brittany.’. 1. including some of the more inexplicable rites practiced in Gaul. Nees. R. ibi adstant in aciae nobilia castra Dei. J. 11 The ancient wonders figured large among the marvels Gregory of Tours described. For a discussion of the possible ritual significance of river deposits. Isidore of Seville and the Venerable Bede. MGH SRM 1. 10 ‘Ibidem castrum condiderunt antiqui. Levison. pp. 587–89.-C. The archaeology of ritual and magic (New York. eds. the contemporary history of holy sites often mattered more than their actual past. In the mideighth century Vita Filiberti. 58–60.       95 Keeping in mind the bias of written texts due to clerics’ commitment to providing orthodox interpretations of the symbolism of such ruins. pp. . Levison. The end of ancient Christianity (Cambridge. Percival. ed. R. The ancient fortification included in this bequest to Philibert enabled the monks to transform the site into a fortress of God where those seeking salvation might find shelter. 443–51. Schulze. 1990). in: Lexikon des Mittelalters 4 (München. Poulin. They might thereby verify the worthiness of such sites as holy places to local Christian communities as well as potential pilgrims. MGH SRM 5 (Hannover. of Chelles rested on the remains of structures inhabited in the Roman period but abandoned in the fifth century. Krusch and W. pp. B.9 This motif apparently retained its significance for centuries. 407–10. by the sixth and seventh centuries. W. “Villas and monasteries”.8 sixth. followed by their association in written works with divinely ordained events. Gregory of Tours. 8 Clerical discussions left many subjects unmentioned.und hochmittelalterlicher Flußfunde”. L. MGH SRM 1. pp. “Theodulf ’s mythical silver Hercules vase.’. On the other extreme. ubi suspirantes pro desiderium paradisi gemunt. 1910). the pyramids and other stone wonders of the ancient world possessed by ecclesiastical authors such as Gregory of Tours. Merrifield. . Markus. Krusch. B. pp.11 For them. 222–48. Frühmittelalterliche Studien 18 (1984). 1–21. 154–5. Dumbarton Oaks Papers 41 (1987). some clerics fabricated descriptions of antiquities. J. “Diskussionsbeitrag zur Interpretation früh. Vita Filiberti Abbatis Gemeticensis et Heriensis 6–7. Coxal. For his description of the pyramids as granaries. pp. see: M. . 447–8. 1989). see: Gregory of Tours. p.10. . “Chelles”. Decem libri historiarum. ed. 1987). pp. Ajot and D. Clovis II and Balthild gave a donation of land to the saint for the foundation of Jumièges in 654. for example. Clerical leaders consciously adapted ancient landscapes into Christian milieux through their exploration and excavation.and seventh-century modifications of crumbling structures contributed significantly to the religious topography of Gaul.10 Such depictions of ancient topography connoted both the familiarity and sacred purpose that shaped the identity of the monastic communities thereafter inhabiting the older sites. De cursu stellarum ratio 1–8. These ruins thus differed significantly from the limited knowledge of classical monuments. 9 As noted by Robert Markus. poetica vanitas and the Augustinian critique of the Roman heritage”. 2. “Filibertus”. 18. pp. Gallia informations: Préhistoire et histoire (1993). since this topic has been dealt with extensively elsewhere: P. 1962). or Mamertus’ miraculous exhumation of Ferreolus and Julian. 12 Gregory of Tours. pp. Iuliani 2. 211. World Archaeology 23 (1991).14 In surviving accounts. only clerics of high standing might perform the exploration of indigenous Roman structures if the activ- 1. . however. B. 2. 114–5. 148–9. MGH SRM 1. Excavation of the dead might also lead to the recovery of the physical remains of more ordinary Christians. R. Lindsay (Oxford. and eds. M. 1981). B.A. Historians and hagiographers in successive generations typically observed in these cases that their discovery and re-use were not serendipitous but divinely ordained events. B.96   encounters with the past had more immediate applications in the frequent interactions of Christians with the local ruins of earlier periods. Colgrave and R. Gosden. Gregory of Tours. “Ritual. Bradley. such as the discovery of a girl’s incorrupt corpse discovered when a piece of the vaulting fell upon and shattered the cover of her sarcophagus at the church of St Venerandus in Clermont.4. 2. W. Social being and time (Oxford. 81–2. Bede mentioned the Pantheon. De virtutibus S. ed. De gloria confessorum 34. 2. Gregory of Tours insisted for some time that she was not a saint. B. Bede’s Ecclesiastical History of the English people. pp. ed. Christian leaders incorporated ancient ruins as well as saints’ relics into their communities. Typologie des sources du moyen âge Occidental 33 (Turnhout. The cult of saints: Its rise and function in Latin Christianity (Chicago. Mynors (Oxford. ed. 2. Krusch. 11. MGH SRM 1.M. C. Christian rites and the translation of relics sanctified these locations regardless of their previous functions. Krusch. 13 This essay will therefore address primarily architectural ruins and ancient artifacts. 34–6. p. He apparently wished to discourage a local cult from developing around the girl’s remains. Isidore.13 Through what might be called rituals of possession. 1994). both made the most of the referential powers and adaptability of newly discovered physical fragments. pp. 318–9. The exploration of architectural remnants by late antique and early medieval Christians shared greater affinity with the search for the relics of holy Christians. transl. Gregory of Tours. 14 Sacred spaces were created and reinforced by the habitual actions that occurred at them. Etymologiarum sive Originum 15. Translationsberichte und andere Quellen des Reliquienkultes. MGH SRM 1.11. Heinzelmann. time and history”. Ruins therefore had great significance for the successful foundation of new monasteries despite the often unknown origins of these structures. and not the closely related phenomenon of inventiones of saints’ relics. 1969). 87–90. such as Alchima and Placidina’s cemeterial excavation of the remains of Antolianus at Clermont. Brown. new edition (Hannover. In gloria martyrum 64. More importantly. 1979). but simply a Christian whose body had been preserved in spices. Krusch. ed. p.12 Both types of undertakings reflected some of the same reverence for and fascination with the past. pp.B. pp. 1965). 16 Historical analyses have often traced the roots of interest in the exploration of the physical remains of Antiquity only as far back as eleventh. Journal of the Warburg Institute 1 (1937–38). Elizabeth Wiles-Portier (Cambridge. he suggested that these ancient artifacts helped to shape medieval 15 Giselle de Nie has reconstructed this passage from the Liber historiarum 5. 115–7. Early anthropology in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries (Philadelphia. 1–24. “Relics of pagan antiquity in mediaeval settings”. 17 M. Theodegisel expected to find that an aqueduct was the source of this occurrence.17 and 6. G. such as when Theodegisel. had the affrontery to dig trenches around the site of a sacred pool in Osser (near Seville). pp. Studies in Classical Antiquity 7 (Amsterdam. in: Studies in historiography (London. 1990). 1976). see among others: A. . Piggott. Medieval and historiographical essays in honor of James Westfall Thompson (Chicago. “Ancient history and the Antiquarian”. Ross.T. Thomas Wright remarked that inhabitants of Anglo-Saxon England were accustomed to contact with material remains of Antiquity on a frequent basis.17 As early as 1844.L. 1966).N.B. I       Scholars have long sought explanations for the medieval attraction to and re-use of ancient remains. 1500 –1800. transl. “A study of twelfth-century interest in the antiquities of Rome”. Momigliano. excavation of an ancient site by this notorious heretic constituted additional proof for readers of his unorthodoxy. 302–21. Hodgen. pp. 80–1. Cate and E. pp. Gregory of Tours. for instance. Views from a many-windowed tower: Studies of imagination in the works of Gregory of Tours. depicted excavation of ancient sites in some instances as a sign of disbelief in the miracles of God. in: Ruins in a landscape: Essays in Antiquarianism (Edinburgh. Anderson eds. W. J. in: J. Gregory thus observed that God punished Theodegisel with a premature death the following year.43. pp. and the De gloria martyrum 23–4. Pomian.. however. pp. In fact. de Nie. 1–39. 1964).       97 ity was to be perceived as legitimate and orthodox. On antiquarianism in general. 1938). Collectors and curiosities: Paris and Venice. 1987). K. Heckscher. 204–20. “Antiquarian thought in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries”. Because he did not believe in the presence of God’s power at the water site that filled miraculously with holy water every Easter for the purpose of baptizing local children and curing the ill. the heretical Visigothic king.15 In this hagiographical account.and twelfth-century humanists.S. 16 A very helpful introduction to the medieval origins of antiquarianism is: S. pp. Mâle’s conclusions have been echoed in more recent analyses looking at Christian re-use of formerly pagan sites. pp. Bede’s Ecclesiastical History 4. 19 ‘. Registrum Epistularum Libri VIII–XIV. where missionaries relied upon the incorporation of traditional sites of worship for the successful conversion of local inhabitants. Roman and Celtic Objects from AngloSaxon graves: A catalogue and interpretation of their use.’. R. La fin du paganisme en Gaule (Paris. 235–51. 1. 159–65. 197–200.20 Most recently. 56. pp. 106–9. “Fontaines sacrées et nécropoles antiques. of the past. Wright. ut. de corde errorem deponat et Deum verum cognoscens ac adorans ad loca quae consuerit familiarius concurrat. Young has concluded instead that whatever reclamation of ancient religious sites occurred. A. 1950). By questioning the accuracy of the archaeological and historical evidence presented by Mâle. Saints and relics in Anglo-Saxon England (Oxford. Rollason. BAR British Series 191 (Oxford. T. Objects such as Aethelthryth’s tomb conferred on the church in which it would be located the status of the possession of an exclusive good. 1988). 34–41. White. ed. pp. 20 The takeover of these sites entailed continuity of tradition (though not belief ) between the pagan and Christian periods. Croire et guérir: La foi en Gaule dans l’antiquité tardive (Paris. Appendix XI. Gregory the Great. . altaria construantur. Pointing to the destruction of pagan religious sites by fourth-century medieval clerics such as Martin of Tours.19 Mâle envisioned a process of rapid but shallow Christianization especially in rural places. Bailey Young has challenged the chronology of Mâle’s popular vision of the early medieval re-use of rural pagan structures. M.19. 1982). D. pp. Mâle. eds. quae in eis sunt. eds. He has suggested that the destruction and transformation of sacred places did not typically occur in rapid succession. Based on Gregory I’s instructions in 601 to the missionary Mellitus in Anglo-Saxon England to retain and consecrate pagan structures as churches. Archaeologia 30 (1844). . necesse est ut a cultu daemonum in obsequio ueri Dei debeant commutari. sed ipsa. “On Antiquarian excavations and researches in the Middle Ages”. 1990). it took place only after 18 Wright noted Bede’s account of the monks of Ely and the miraculous discovery of a white marble sarcophagus for Aethelthryth. 392–9. uidelicet quia fana idolorum destrui in eadem gente minime debeant. Rousselle. quia. idola destruantur. Norberg. Mâle observed that their reoccupation immediately afterwards as sacred places was inconsistent with genuine Christian faith. pp. Bede’s Ecclesiastical history of the English people. p.30. pp. reliquiae ponantur. CCSL 140A (Turnhout. one which alluded to the Roman past and possibly possessed amuletic powers. pp. 961–2. Roblin.18 A century later in La fin du paganisme en Gaule. 1989). and possibly misunderstanding. E. Colgrave and Mynors. 32–69. in eisdem fanis aspargatur. Colgrave and Mynors. D.98   consciousness. Aqua benedicta fiat. pp. deux sites fréquents d’églises paroissiales rurales dans les sept anciens diocèses de l’Oise”. Revue d’histoire de l’Église de France 62 (1975). Emile Mâle linked the idea of re-use to a superficial conversion process. 438–57. . si fana eadem bene constructa sunt. pp. dum gens ipsa eadem fana sua non uidet destrui. Galinié eds. and were sometimes copied in contemporary funerary rites. 137–46. 12–22. in: Walter Schlesinger ed. Young. physical remnants of prehistoric activity such as burial mounds also served practical needs such as grave sites.K. pp. 241–50.24 Their ubiquitous presence conceivably struck a deeper chord. 1976). La Rocca. Roman ruins played an influential role in determining the layout and perception of villages. . “Using the Roman past. Ament. 1952). Sippel. 13e supplément à la Revue archéologique du Centre de la France (Tours.22 Archaeologists and historians must therefore recognize the complexity of the relationship between early medieval populations and ancient landscapes. p. see: H.       99 intervals of a century or more. K. H. C.. 85–8. He has argued that discontinuity between the occupation of the Roman-period sites and the re-use of ruins hundreds of years later made this transition practical rather than reflective of religious appropriation. É. Althessen im Frankenreich. shaping regional and 21 B. Historische und philologische Untersuchung zur Entstehung der europaïschen Nationen im Mittelalter 2 (Sigmaringen. 23 J. Nor has Young dealt with other sorts of ruins such as former villas and fortifications. “A propos de Saint Ulrich: Villas et lieux de culte dans la Gaule du Nord-Est”. 374. Although many early medieval structures were built on new sites. in: Aspects de la religion celtique et gallo-romaine dans le Nord-Est de la Gaule à la lumière des découvertes récentes (Saint-Dié-des-Vosges. The Roman villa: An historical introduction (Berkeley. Salin. philologisch-historische Klasse. 169–99. “Merowingische Grabhügel”. boundary markers and landmarks. 24 On grave mounds. 1982). despite the fact that in the imperial period the former often included the equivalent of private sanctuaries. Abhandlungen der Akademie der Wissenschaften in Göttingen. 3–5 novembre 1994. Steuer. Germania 58 (1980). Frühgeschichtliche Sozialstruckturen in Mitteleuropa: Eine Analyse der Auswertungsmethoden des archäologischen Quellenmaterials. Written works are particularly problematic in view of Christian constructs of paganism in the conversion period and afterwards. Nationes. “Archaeology and the Merovingian monastery”. Percival. pp. Gauthier and H. churches and cemeteries both in the north and south of Gaul. 47. however. La civilisation mérovingienne d’après les sépultures. 59–72. Lafon. “Que restait-il de l’ancien paysage religieux à l’époque de Grégoire de Tours?” in: N. dritte Folge 128 (Göttingen. pp. 1997). 1989). pp. p. 22 X. 1975). Tours. “Die Kenntnis vorgeschichtlicher Hügelgräber im Mittelalter”.. pp. James. pp. les textes et le laboratoire 2 (Paris. Grégoire de Tours et l’espace Gaulois: Actes du congrès international.23 As has been shown in Gaul and elsewhere in early medieval Europe.21 In acknowledging existing gaps between the destruction of Roman-period sites and their reoccupation in the early Middle Ages. Young has limited his discussion to the pagan fanum. a square structure notoriously difficult to identify as a religious center without textual references or stray finds of cultic objects. H. Although to a certain extent malleable. 1995).F. 27 He notes: ‘Holiness for them. 1988). in any case. Bloemers. “Sacred topography and early Christian churches in late antique Gaul”.27 both archaeological and written evidence reveal that these sacred sites often had clear links to those existing previously. First millenium papers: Western Europe in the first millenium A. P. and thus might function as Abandoned towns and local power in eleventh-century Piemonte”. Racial myth in English history: Trojans. Teutons. B. 45–69. 181–5. and members of the late antique and early medieval elite often adapted them to advance their own careers.A. reuse might also happen in close succession to destruction. Jones. as demonstrated above. 25 Patrick Périn argues that possession of ruins of former religious sites might have also had implications for social status rather than solely religious practices. Biddle eds. Young. These buildings must have often had multiple functions which. Halsall. In addition. “Remarques sur la topographie funéraire en Gaule mérovingienne et à sa périphérie: Les nécropoles romaines tardives aux nécropoles du haut-moyen âge”. pp. pp.L. whether in restoring a site or pillaging it for the purpose of constructing another. any interpretation of perceptions of ruined sites or artifacts in early medieval Gaul must remain tentative. Cahiers archéologiques 35 (1987).26 The few ruins identified in hagiographical and historical compositions of the sixth and seventh centuries in Gaul pointed to consciousness of their potential for manipulation in clerical discourse.J. in: R. S.D. pp. 20–1. MacDougall.25 In the case of cemeteries. Although many structures must have been abandoned for long periods of time before their reoccupation by Christians. 221–2. Ancient remains held the allure of precious or scarce materials in a form ready to use. 7–18. ruined monuments and ancient objects also had powerful referential qualities.100   ethnic identity by directing or transforming the memory of the earlier history of a particular region. Périn. were not so easily discerned after the passage of a century or more. J. and AngloSaxons (Montreal.. the presence of ancient monuments may have helped contemporary inhabitants defend claims to the land by means of reference to real or fictive ancestors from the region.. H.K. pp. As a consequence of significant tensions between written and material sources. Settlement and social organization: The Merovingian region of Metz (Cambridge.F. 26 G. 1982). Despite Young’s insistence that a ‘new Christian topography’ characterized Merovingian Gaul in the time of Gregory of Tours. EME 5 (1996). the early medieval landscape included many sorts of ruins. however. was a new condition imposed on a previously neutral spot by a sacralising Christian act’. 235–7. pp. BAR International Series 401 (Oxford. . Dyson and M. Hobsbawm. . 305–6. Smith.and fifth-century emperors and bishops for a variety of political and practical purposes. The invention of tradition (Cambridge. Halbwachs. pp. but must be sustained through the sponsorship of activities at them. Smith. L. “Spolie und Umfeld in Egberts Trier”. ed. Coser (Chicago.30 Although Nora believes that this process is limited to the modern world. and transl. ruins clearly attracted elites. 1992). 83–8. in modern society. 84–119. Ancient sites provided highly valued material remains. pp. 30 P. and hence contemporaries frequently considered ancient places sacred. Nora has suggested that the reason for the existence of modern sites of memory is the lack of a ritual structure of living memory that allows for the natural continuation of traditions.28 As noted by Jonathan Z. although contemporary or subsequent narratives might alter the latter.31 The use in a new context of such remains contributed powerfully to the construction of Christian community and identity in early medieval Western Europe. M. since the intended use of an object could be negated and yet the object continued to contribute to the form and symbolism (in some cases more blantantly than others) of the new creation. lay and clerical authorities played an active and conscious role in shaping such customs. 103–7. 1983). pp. E. the uses of which were controlled by none other than fourth.       101 mnemonic repositories. Hobsbawm and T. Westermann-Angerhausen. “Between memory and history: Les lieux de mémoire”. Zeitschrift für Kunstgeschichte 50 (1987). In his view. 7–12. These sites no longer exist spontaneously. in late Antiquity just as in the early Middle Ages. Representations 26 (1989). Early medieval clerical leaders appropriated and adapted the same sort of ancient structures and fragments in the transformation of the landscape of Gaul.A. H. pp.” in: E. albeit in a rather different fashion. To take place: Toward theory in ritual (Chicago. pp. 29 J. Nora.Z. Ranger eds. holy sites on ruins did not operate independently of the memories of the past active among the population there.29 Smith’s discussion helps to modify Pierre Nora’s conception of lieux de mémoire in establishing a paradigm for the process of transformation of ancient ruins into early medieval sacred space. On collective memory. 1987). 31 I thus strongly disagree with Maurice Halbwach’s conception of the Christian rite as unchanging.. Despite their rhetoric that such remnants of the ancient past were potentially harmful if misused. lieux de mémoire and the rituals associated with them must be consciously maintained in order to preserve a context for artifacts of the past. 28 The malleability of spolia made them very attractive. “Introduction: inventing traditions. Monuments instead served to focus the rituals performed there in a very effective manner. 1–2. bishops’ leadership in this custom was not so different from their innovative patronage of saints’ relics in the protection of their communities. 1982).34 By taking a leading role in directing the laity. pp. pp. in: idem. their personal combat against demons demonstrated the triumph of the community of the faithful over supernatural adversaries. 1988). “Dead or alive? The holy man as healer in East and West in the late sixth century”. 33 M. increasingly but not exclusively replaced in the West by their more reliable relics in the care of local bishops. Letteren en Schone Kunsten van België. Society and the Holy. Stylisation biblique et condition humaine dans l’hagiographie mérovingienne (650–750). Petersen. 1987). Christian rites of exorcism therefore provided a focal point for the creation of communal integration and group identity. pp. 102–10. From the New Testament onwards.35 By the sixth century. pp. In Gaul.33 The result of such recitations was a growing belief in the necessity of Christian holy men and women. They provided protection for Christian souls of the living and the dead. “Bodily miracles”. 34 P. R. Extensive documentation is provided in: Y.102   Although it is difficult to ascertain why late antique and early medieval clerics in Gaul did not find sites formerly associated with paganism more dangerous. Brown. “Eastern and western Christendom in late Antiquity: A parting of the ways”. Klingshirn. Brown. 35 W. J. Merovingian bishops ‘collaborated in the sanctification of place and time by their ritual activity’.M. bishops and abbots were unsurprisingly the individuals portrayed as playing the most active part in transforming ancient ruins. 91–8. in his Saints and their miracles in late antique Gaul (Princeton.E. 178–90. Duval. Verhandelingen van de Koninklijke Academie voor Wetenschnappen.36 The latter group’s precautions 32 P. 123–6. demons who tempted the faithful and lured them from salvation had played a central role in Christian perceptions of the cosmos. The process by which they repossessed ancient structures differed significantly from the rites of exorcism performed by Gregory I’s missionaries in England on the pagan shrines that dotted the landscape. 1994). Klasse der Letteren 49. 1993). Caesarius of Arles: The making of a Christian community in late antique Gaul (Cambridge. Van Dam. 89–93. pp. A manifestation of the growing importance of the cult of saints may be measured through the practice of ad sanctos burial in the West. 120 (Brussels. “The rise and function of the holy man in late Antiquity”. Journal of Medieval History 9 (1983). 154–9. 36 Gregory’s letter did not refer specifically to ruins but rather to the pagan sanc- .32 The liturgy highlighted the lives of the saints as a microcosm of the struggles of Christian society. pp. in his Society and the Holy in late antiquity (Berkeley. Auprès des saints corps et âme: L’inhumation ‘ad sanctos’ dans la chrétienté d’Orient et d’Occident du III e au VII e siècle (Paris. Van Uytfanghe. Of great significance for later Christians. H. Smith. .D. The rise of western Christendom: Triumph and diversity A. the emperor excavated and discarded the foundations of the temple of Aphrodite prior to constructing the Church of the Holy Sepulcher. According to Eusebius. in: Egeria’s travels to the Holy Land. pp. p. 77–82. CCSL 140a. 107. however. pp. 200–1000 (Malden. 961–2.37 In his search for holy sites from the earliest days of Christianity.3. In praise of Constantine: A historical study and new translation of Eusebius’ Tricennial Orations (Berkeley. 1996). 25–7. 37 The earliest sites at which spolia were used extensively were the Lateran Basilica (begun in 313) and the Arch of Constantine (consecrated in 314). pp. “Constantine and Jerusalem”. To Take Place. Most recently on Constantine’s excavation of and building campaign at the site of the holy sepulcher and Calvary. Dumbarton Oaks Papers 41 (1987). The late imperial tradition of excavating ancient ruins contributed to early medieval customs of re-use. Drake. 56.’. 411–9. transl. Norberg.B. 38 Eusebius. L R       Study of the late antique practices from which customs of re-use arose provides a clearer understanding of the early medieval attraction to ancient sites. ed. Brenk. Eusebius of Caesarea. Registrum Epistularum XI. 103. Brown. Journal of Ecclesiastical History 48 (1997). for instance. although there would be important innovations in the practice in the context of Gaul. The famous legend that arose in the late fourth and early fifth century around Helena’s supposed discovery of the True Cross at tuaries ( fana) still operating in sixth-century England. see: E. Wilkinson. Constantine apparently did not view pagan religious remains in such a positive light. 1976). p. 103–9. 209. Oratio de laudibus Constantini 11. The confidence of Merovingian clerics in incorporating pagan remains as the foundation of their building projects by contrast. transl. perceived by pagan critics as one of many “memorials to human corpses and tombs”. Vita Constantini 3. were accounts of Constantine’s use of spolia in constructing imperial and religious structures. pp. the emperor’s attention to sites such as the Holy Sepulcher. P. pp. According to Eusebius of Caesarea. pp. J. B. was seen by them as ‘unfitting and demeaning. 164–5. 1981). p.38 Only ancient remains of Christian significance figured large in this account. Brenk “Spolia from Constantine”. Gregory the Great.A. Hunt. indicated Christianity’s ultimate triumph over paganism in Gaul. revised edition ( Jerusalem.       103 resembled more closely the activities of fifth-century continental saints still facing the competition of pagan adversaries. “Spolia from Constantine to Charlemagne: Aesthetics versus ideology”. p. contemporaries viewed the related pagan remains primarily as a source of pollution. Rolfe. CSEL 73 (Wien. if one may believe the ecclesiastical narrators. pp. Barb. Faller. 1955). 1963). Sed non potuit oblitterati Christ triumphus. sive per monumentum transisse vesperi. decutit pulverem. which she had received from Melania the Younger.A. pp. Ambrose. ed. 541. 40 Therasia. 28–49. Radegundis (BHL 7049)”. English translation may be found in: E. p. 285–305. Journal of Medieval History 19 (1993). nothing could obliterate the triumph of Christ. quae ruina contexerat. A. 41 ‘Nam siqui remedia quartanae vel doloris alterius collo gestaret. Crucis: A note on Baudonivia’s Vita S. Moreira.C.36. p. “Provisatrix optima: St Radegund of Poitiers’ relic petitions to the East”. esp. It focused on the extraction of the precious cross and nails from ground desecrated by a statue of Venus. “An early literary quotation from the Inventio S. Helena Augusta: The mother of Constantine the Great and the legend of her finding of the True Cross (Leiden. Krusch and Levison. pronuntiatus reus capitis interibat. 1956). J.G. 394.14. 1982). Ambrose thus noted that even when these remains were amidst pagan ruins. The differences between these attitudes and those of three centuries earlier.. Valentian and Valens enacted 39 ‘Aperit itaque hu mum. and transl. Momigliano ed. Ammianus Marcellinus described the way in which those who were caught lurking near tombs (and thus likely excavating) were assumed to be engaging in sorcery or necromancy. sepulchrorumque horrores.’. 79–117. tria patibula confusa repperit. 312– 460 (Oxford. Ammianus Marcellinus. et errantium ibidem animarum ludibria colligens vana. in: A.104   Golgotha. ed. Whatley. eds. 103–4.39 The restoration of the True Cross granted early Christian leaders and their successors a powerful symbol of Christ’s suffering. to Sulpicius Severus’ mother-in-law Bassula. Not all fourth-century emperors exhibited positive attitudes regarding the benefits of excavating ancient ruins. De Obitu Theodosi 45. 1.W. Gregory of Tours. Drijvers. 1992).’. 27. Analecta Bollandiana 111 (1993). both crimes punishable by death under Constantius II. Res gestae 19. 81–91. For additional information on the early history of the legend of Helena and the True Cross: J. pp.12. pp. Gregory of Tours wrote that Helena. The conflict between paganism and christianity in the fourth century (Oxford. since pieces of it might be bestowed upon well-placed Christian patrons and faithful supporters throughout Christendom. malivolorum argueretur indiciis. when . revised edition (Cambridge. since they associated these practices with illicit and dangerous magic. was even more revealing of such a process. O. Hunt. the wife of Paulinus of Nola sent a piece of the relic of the True Cross. MGH SRM 1. inimicus absconderat.D. Holy Land pilgrimage in the later Roman Empire A. These relics were transported to the capital of the empire so that they might be venerated appropriately in honor of the crucifixion. Decem libri historiarum 1.41 On 9 September 364. helped by a Jew named Judas. E. ut veneficus.D. “The survival of the magic arts”.40 In contrast. was responsible for the discovery of the relic of the Holy Cross. For this event and the case of Radegund of Poitiers’ acquisition of a piece of the True Cross: I. pp. pp. in: Z. Brown. 44 Augustine of Hippo. he did not link these activities to excavation. I. 1972).7.45 Much of the growing interest in excavating graves in the late fourth century stemmed from the increasing significance of the cult of saints. De Civitate Dei 18. and the rise of Christianity from late antiquity into the Middle Ages”. since he calls many acts magical when in fact contemporary clerics interpreted them as demonic in nature. Mathisen. Mass. 1993). 45 P. 43 I.. The Theodosian Code (Ithaca.W.44 By the end of the sixth century. Pliny. transl. demons. While Augustine noted that accusations of Christian sorcery included the mutilation and burial of human remains in conjunction with curses and diabolical rituals included among the magical arts. 161–69. pp. B. Steward ed.131. Shifting frontiers in late antiquity (Aldershot. 652–3. Dombart and A. 309–20. 1962). 1955). Essays on religion and the ancient world 1 (Cambridge. Mommsen. 462. 16–7. Wood.” in R. “Sépultures ecclésiastiques et sénatoriales dans la vallée du Rhône (400–600)”. Mathisen and H.N.N.E. T. “Crossing the supernatural frontier in Western late antiquity. Nock. in particular the Jews. Sivan eds.. R. in: M. in spite of the revulsion with which the remains of the dead had traditionally been viewed by Romans. ed. Wood eds.. leaders mainly directed accusations of sorcery against political enemies or non-Christians. are striking. eds. D. .43 fear of sorcery with respect to ruined sites did not continue to play such a prominent role in succeeding centuries. pp. Naturalis historiae libri XXXVII 36. Witchcraft: Confessions and accusations (London. p.16. CCSL 48 (Turnhout.42 The imperial custom of persecuting sorcerers in the fourth century was commonly directed against groups not profoundly affected by social dislocation. 1962). Ralph Mathisen’s stance is more problematic. 1996). 1970). A. Detectum enim adque convictum conpetenti animadversione mactari perenni auctoritate censemus. Great popular pressure on bishops to produce the remains of indigenous martyrs thus faced resistance in the form of imperial legislation banning relic inhumation was rarely practiced in the Roman world. pp. 278–80. Pliny. Hampshire... pp. 35. Harries and I. Wood. “The Code in Merovingian Gaul”.W. Médiévales 31 (1996). in: J.       105 similar legislation banning nocturnal magic along with funereal sacrifices. Although the laws would have a much longer legacy. 104–7. 42 ‘Ne quis deinceps nocturnis temporibus aut nefarias preces aut magicos apparatus aut sacrificia funesta celebrare conetur. for instance.53. p.’ Codex Theodosianus 9. these accusations represented the means by which the imperial court controlled the traditional aristocracy.S.. Mass. Eichholz (Cambridge.N. “Cremation and burial in the Roman Empire”.D. as they were inherited by jurists in the early Germanic kingdoms by means of the Theodosian Code. pp. “Sorcery. Kalb. noted with wonder the way in which some stone sarcophagi were capable of consuming the bodies of the dead. Douglas ed. third edition (Berlin. 46 As a result. for instance: Codex Theodosianus 9. churches.48 In addition to banning necromancy at cemeteries. Zelzer. Ambrose of Milan’s highly politicized excavation and transfer of the relics of Gervasius and Protasius intra muros later that same year were the source of great contention.B. which noted the expense of the preservation of public structures and the costs incurred by those who stole supplies reserved for upkeep. emperors continued to appropriate spolia to promote their own dignity in what Beat Brenk has termed a new aesthetic. The confiscation of spolia by anyone but the emperor was thus seen as an affront to the 46 ‘Humatum corpos nemo ad alterum locum transferat. McLynn. Williams. The cult of saints.17. 47 In a letter to his sister Marcellina. Cut stone derived from tombs and other monuments might be incorporated into villas. 1995). however. ed. 61–5. and similar events transpired in Gaul in the following centuries. Harries. At risk were the precious columns of marble and other valuable materials such as bronze and lead that adorned public and private structures. and specified high penalties for those who violated the precept. Ossa omnia integra. Ambrose.106   translations in February. Brown. 100–1600 (London. Cassiodorus included Theoderic’s letter to Sabinianus (507–512). ed. CSEL 82. 209–17. .H. 1982). since these older fragments were incorporated into more recent edifices.25 and 3. His triumphant confirmation both through the miracles of the saints and the support of the general populace allowed him to overcome imperial opposition. imperial legislation of the 340s and 350s concerned itself with the preservation of monuments. Variarum Libri XII 1.31. si quolibet in loco sanctorum est aliquis conditus. p. nemo mercetur. In the Variae.’. Mommsen. pp. Codex Theodosianus 9. 48 This event by no means constituted the end of the struggle. and also represented a source of income if sold. 1994).1–5. Habeant vero in potestate. pp.7. pp.’. Epistulae 77. p. 37. ed.J. 463–5. nemo martyrem distrahat. 386. Bassett ed. pp. In addition. D. Mommsen. Ambrose described the discovery of their relics: ‘Invenimus mirae magnitudinis viros duos ut prisca aetas ferebat. 1973).3 (Wien.47 This event represented an important climax in rejecting legislation against this manifestation of the cult of relics. Cassiodorus. Death in towns: Urban responses to the dying and the dead. J. Theoderic deplored those who stole from buildings and diverted the water of the aqueducts. sanguinis plurimum. p. A. Ambrose of Milan and the end of the Nicene-Arian conflicts (Oxford. 126–8. ed. as a novella of Valentinian III in 447 was likely directed against the relic trade. Fridh. 33. N. pp. CCSL 96 (Turnhout.49 Although they banned such practices among their subjects. Ambrose of Milan: Church and court in a Christian capital (Berkeley.17. 119–20. “Death and the dead in the late Roman Empire”. M. 466. in a letter to the Senate (510–511). 1992). 219–23. or city walls. pp. in: S. 49 See.. pro eius veneratione quod martyrium vocandum sit addant quod voluerint fabricarum.1–2. The discovery of the past: The origins of archaeology (London. “Transformations: Classical objects and their re-use during late antiquity”. pp. 134–7. A. Pohl and H. ed. A. he ordered that all buried treasure become property of the public treasury.51 Late fifth-century Christian bishops in the south of Gaul such as Hilarius of Arles also adopted similar policies. Culture and religion in Merovingian Gaul. The re-use of ancient remains in the late antique and early medieval West apparently accelerated over time. “Spolia from Constantine”. Schnapp.. Constantius recounted that the bishop. dum marmorum crustas et theatri proscenia celsa deponeret. Variarum Libri XII 4. he also wrote that the bishop had harvested marble blocks to build new basilicas from civic monuments such as Arles’ theater. p. however. ‘. “Royal treasures and representation in the Early Middle Ages”. Once interred 50 C. directed by a ghost. Some ancient sites. were viewed with greater trepidation. 1995). P. Scholars must therefore treat with great caution legal measures condemning architectural applications of spolia.D. ut et largitatis remedio civibus consulamus et ad cultum reducere antiqua moenia festinemus. . In one passage in which Honoratus of Marseilles noted Hilarius’ deep involvement with his flock.50 By contrast. p. 83–4.44. combed through the rubble and found the unburied skeletons of two chained corpses. . Cassiodorus. Fridh.’. 164. pp. In late fifth-century Gaul. Marinescu.34. .       107 ruling authority. in: W. . ed. pp. ut fortuna urbis. 1995). quae in civibus erigitur. and transl.52 These spolia not only served to honor the churches but also promoted the status of the bishop to whom the foundation of these structures was attributed. In sixth-century Italy. ed. Sic enim fiet. Hardt. 127. 52 Hilarius’ deacon was responsible for the quarrying activities: ‘Qui basilicis praepositus construendis. Reimitz eds. Y. As discussed above.’. Cassiodorus. 1998).A. 481–751 (Leiden. Yet. these attitudes became increasingly prevalent in the early medieval Gaul. Jacob. Fridh. . quod sanctis parabat ornatibus . pp. Honoratus of Marseille. fabricarum quoque decore monstretur. in a letter dated 507/511. M. Brenk. Strategies of distinction: The construction of ethnic communities. 275. the remains from earlier structures. CCSL 96. SC 404 (Paris. 104–5. CCSL 96. 285–86. pp. p. in: Shifting frontiers. 300–800 (Leiden. La vie d’Hilaire d’Arles 20. Variarum Libri XII 3. 228–9. Hen. and also represented a source of civic pride. once applied to late antique religious and state buildings. fidei opere nudans loca luxuriae. Constantius of Lyon’s account of the life of Germanus of Auxerre included a brief reference to the exploration and re-use of a haunted house. Theoderic pillaged ancient structures when it was to his advantage. but notably did not share imperial attitudes toward the importance of civic structures.A. 51 Theoderic saw the city’s fortune reflected in its buildings in a letter directed to the landowners of Arles in the winter of 508–509. 1996). served as propaganda of imperial status. -C. 1 (Berlin. 1994). 56 Pactus Legis Salicae (C6) 55. 1994). Gundlach. K. 1978). the unburied dead and demons rather than the ruins themselves represented cause for concern.22. Caciola. Les revenants: Les vivants et les morts dans la société médiévale (Paris. 1 (Hannover. and transl. 54. p. pp. unpublished doctoral dissertation (Los Angeles. The account of the saint’s cult being discredited as the veneration of a thief in Sulpicius Severus’ Vita Sancti Martini did not involve excavation. the ghosts stopped haunting the site and the house no longer caused any fear in the local community. pp. 1965). pp.56 In Visigothic Spain. J. tectis iam pridem sine habitatore semirutus. Sulpicius Severus. p. and no one in the vicinity thereafter faced any danger in conjunction with the ruins. the structure could be restored and reoccupied.1–5. dritte Folge 113 (Göttingen. 55 Epistolae Arelatenses Genuinae 35. 493. ed. the demons disturbing the remains of former baths in the parish of Succentriones ceased to torment local inhabitants after Caesarius of Arles hung his staff from a wall of the structure. . “Wraiths. H.. ubi daemonum incursus audiebantur: statimque effugatae sunt insidiae diaboli. Subsequent measures in various parts of Gaul distinguished between the re-use of ancient ruins and the destruction and spoliation of grave sites. SC 112 (Paris. Borius.6. deferentes ad locum.108   properly with appropriate prayers.53 Likewise. 1896). SC 133 (Paris. Zum Grabfrevel in vorund frühgeschichtlicher Zeit: Untersuchungen zu Grabraub und “Haugbrot” in Mittel. pp. W. Soon afterwards. quod etiam per incuriam vulgaria arbusta contexerant. revenants and ritual in medieval culture”. B. and H. 209.55 Likewise. 54 ‘Mirantur et agunt Deo gratias virgamque ipsam de pariete illo suspendunt. Vie de Saint Germain d’Auxerre 10. 1967). see: B. 1892).und Nordeuropa. et ultra nulli in loco nequissimum malum facere usque hodie adversarius ipse praesumpsit. Early medieval clerics condemned the appropriation of stone from monuments commemorating Christian dead not only as unacceptable but as actions that resulted in the profanation of the dead. 276–7. Past and Present 152 (1996). and transl.54 In the eyes of both authors. 161. For more on legislation forbidding profanation of the dead. The holy man’s gesture caused the demons to flee. ed. MGH Epp. “Der Grabfrevel in den germanischen Rechtsaufzeichnungen: Zugleich ein Beitrag zur Diskussion um Todesstrafe und Friedlosigskeit bei den Germanen”. 138–43. Constantius of Lyon. in: H. 243–50. philologisch-historische Klasse. ed. . MGH SRM 3 (Hannover. ed. Vie de Saint Martin 11. 1962). Krusch. Abhandlungen der Akademie der Wissenschaften in Göttingen. the forty-sixth canon of the Fourth Council of Toledo (633) penalized clerics partaking in the destruction of sepul53 ‘Erat eminus domicilium. R.A. Vitae Caesarii Episcopi Arelatensis Libri Duo 2. From grave goods to Christian epitaphs: evolution in burial tradition and the expression of social status in Merovingian society. Roth eds. Fontaine.’. Nehlsen. Schmitt. 43–4.’. Jankuhn. ed. pp. MGH LL 4. Eckhardt. Nehlsen. Effros. p. . . p. N. the Pactus Legis Salicae forbade the application of funerary stone to the construction of a church at the same site. J. 3–6. H. p. De virtutibus S. 60 ‘Ferunt autem ducenta quinquaginta talenta argenti fuisse. oportet canonibus in tali scelere proditum a clericatus ordine submoveri et poenitentiae triennium deputari. 1. he donated some of his gains to the poor. Nehlsen. 1. 117. Decem libri historiarum 7. Gregory of Tours.60 In this text. extend to the early medieval excavation of buried treasure not found in conjunction with corpses. quia facinus hoc pro sacrilegio legibus publicis sanguine vindicatur. Decem libri historiarum 8. “Der Grabfrevel”. Vives (Barcelona. By doing this annually for some time. MGH SRM 1. 275.’. Halsall. pp. After having received divine revelation of the whereabouts of the gold and silver. the crime in some cases merited the harsh punishment of exile for the guilty party until the goods were restored and fines were paid. Gregory of Tours. 573. in contrast. G. Juliani 20. Pactus Legis Salicae (C6) 14. ed. Gregory of Tours recounted two stories of recovered treasure hoards without indicating any apparent revulsion from pillaging ancient property. 535–6. the saint went alone to this place and took back to the abbey as much as he could carry from the hoard. auri vero amplius quam triginta. In gloria martyrum 71. B. After the murder of Mummolus by the duke Leudegisel in 585. Lupicinus was able to provide plentiful refreshment 57 ‘Si quis clericus in demoliendis sepulchris fuerit deprehensus. Sed haec. Nor were unexpected finds of great wealth limited to men of the world. 206–7. p.4. Krusch. pp. J. contemporaries did not perceive pillaged goods suspiciously or any differently than property plundered from enemies. B. Ferunt autem ducenta quinquaginta talenta argenti fuisse. ed. 58 Saints’ tombs covered with gold were a constant source of temptation. 68–9.       109 chers with similar measures. quae in urbe relicta fuerant. 207–8. repeated measures against grave robbery did not enjoy any greater success in Merovingian Gaul than they did elsewhere. On the robbery of the grave of Gunthram Boso’s female relative at Metz. MGH SRM 1. see: Gregory of Tours. 2. Krusch.10 and 55. 59 Sixth-century Salian law included measures against grave robbery. Gregory of Tours.58 Predictably. de reperto antiquo thesauro abstulit. 2. p. Gregory’s hagiographical account of the fifth-century abbot Lupicinus involved the discovery of ancient buried treasure. pp.57 Rather than alluding to any magical implications of these activities. MGH SRM 1. Concilios visigóticos e hispano-romanos. MGH SRM 1. EME 5 (1996). she admitted that a treasure trove had been uncovered some time earlier by her husband.’. “Female status and power in early Merovingian central Austrasia: The burial evidence”. . ed. 2. the king forced Mummolus’ widow to reveal the source of their wealth. Hardt “Royal treasures”. MGH LL 4. pp.21. 387–8. 1–2.59 Such attitudes did not. ut ferunt. pp. 363. 1963).40. bans on cemeterial spolia sought to prevent pillaging of the stone sepulchers of the elite as well as the lavishly outfitted tombs of the saints. The king Guntram confiscated the gold and silver. pp. p. and after dividing it with his nephew Childebert. 1994). audierunt. In this particular example. however. Ad quem locum accedens solus.’. monasterio inferebat et.’. Gregory of Tours. et terram illam. quos operuit atque interfecit. pagan Roman structures often provided a convenient source of building material from as early as the fourth century especially south of the Loire.N. Sicque faciebat per singulos annos. mugitum montes.3. for instance.110   for his congregation. nec ultra inventi sunt. aurum argentumque. unde tantam susteneret congregationem. p. 62 ‘. Yet if the example of the fourth-century graves of six newborns. triginta monachi. quod ei Dominus dignatus est revelare. Guyot. Vitae Patrum 1. Quod dum agerent. Wood. Undisputably. aes sive ferrum repperiunt. Gregory of Tours.63 A later example of a similar rite transpired at the Roman villa of Berthelming (Moselle). none older than six months and all buried in a second. . in the construction and expansion of stone edifices. By the early 61 ‘Lupicinus igitur abba cum minus haberet. 215–6. Gregory of Tours (Bangor. pp.31. quos ad Dei officium congregaverat. although not all contemporaries viewed the lavish meals of the monks as appropriate. pp. Nonetheless. the tendency to read too much into this evidence has led in some instances to untenable conclusions. 87. it indicates that not only practicality motivated the repossession of ancient remains. in quo antiquitus thesauri reconditi fuerant. however. Gregory gave greater attention in his writings to the negative connotations of searching for precious metals. advenerunt. quantum levare potuerat. p.A. I. Annales de Normandie 18 (1968). 164. reficiebat fratrum multitudines.62 Just as with ancient ruins. The discovery of the past. Nulli tamen fratrum patefecit locum. revelavit ei Deus locum in heremo. Gregory demonstrated that it was the sanctity of the abbot that merited God’s intervention in this fashion. Schnapp.to third-century structure at Fleurheim (Eure) sheds any light on this topic. exinde coemptos cibos. pars illa quae nondum deruerat super eos cecidet. Decem libri historiarum 4. 25. “Sépultures de nouveau-nés dans les fouilles galloromaines de Fleurheim à Lyons-La-Forêt (Eure)”. Sed dum a saeva cupiditate retenerentur. authors manipulated the interpretation of buried wealth in a manner that suited their objectives. . ut prius fuerat. Near the Rhône. 283–300. A     - Archaeological remains have helped to document more thoroughly the late antique and early medieval use of ruins in Gaul. quae monte deruente remanserat fodientes. rebuilt after its destruction in the late fourth century. unde caster ruerat. p. and thus finds must be assessed cautiously.61 In some cases. 63 M. . Gregory of Tours noted that a landslide killed a number of avaricious monks seeking to gain profit by digging for bronze and iron. Dollfus and A. World Archaeology 30 (1998). “L’occupation funéraire des monuments mégalithiques pendant le haut moyen âge. 65 C. p. 180–4. M.66 Even in the south of Gaul where there was less discontinuity from the arrival of Germanic warriors. Carré. 15–21. Percival. . 14. Duval. whether all already stood in ruins at the time or whether they fell victim to various bishops’ and abbots’ aggressive campaigns of church building. 239–41. 1991). pp. Treffort. Billard.67 At Tholey (Saarland). Établissements ruraux de l’antiquité tardive dans le nord de la Gaule. 187–9. The Roman villa. the villa of Séviac (Gers) was transformed into a baptistery and small chapel. 1992). in: Naissance des arts chrétiens: Atlas des monuments chrétiens de la France (Paris. 184. It is not known. twenty-four graves were aligned with the walls of the villa. Guillon and C. For a comprehensive list of proposed late Roman villas that became monasteries during the middle ages (some outside the chronological scope of this essay). I thank Howard Williams for allowing me to see this manuscript based upon his M. thesis (1996) at the University of Reading before its publication.       111 medieval period. Bulletin de la Société Préhistorique Française 93 (1996). The cathedral and baptistery of Aix-en-Provence were constructed on the site of the city’s forum. By the seventh century. 90–108. Although his ethnic and religious interpretations of the graves are problematic. pp. 82–4. and the ecclesiastical complex of Cimiez (Alpes-Maritimes) and Saint-Pierre-aux-Nonnains in Metz were installed in former thermal baths. 68 P.68 Reminiscent of the sort of continuities characteristic of the tels of the eastern Mediterranean. pp. 67 N. Gallia 6 (1948). E. archaeological remains document a process of reoccupation of civic and religious structures in the late fifth and sixth centuries. “Berthelming (Moselle)”. pp. Delort. F. pp. Williams. 51e supplément à Gallia (Paris. the refuse of previous generations provided an enviable location for the construction of new buildings 64 Percival. see: M. 164. Revue archéologique de l’Est et du Centre-Est 1 (1950). Percival “Villas and monasteries”. see most recently: H. see: Percival “Villas and monasteries”.A. p.65 Reasons entirely undiscernable to scholars in the twentieth century must have also existed for such practices. however. “La ‘villa’ Gallo-Romaine et la nécropole mérovingienne de Berthelming (Moselle)”. 66 For England. p. Modalités et essai d’interprétation”. pp. Lutz. The Roman villa. 169–99.64 Merovingian graves sometimes also clustered at sites of prehistoric megaliths. a small chapel of early date was built on the ruins of a Roman villa and late Roman fortifications abandoned in the fourth century. to name many of the most widely accepted examples of this phenomenon. the church of Saint-Étienne of Strasbourg was built on a former Roman road. Van Ossel. “Monuments and the past in Early Anglo-Saxon England”. “L’architecture cultuelle”. contemporaries used the structure for burials. 279–86. pp. pp. Upon their arrival. Some of the antiquities were carried a number of kilometers before their deposit. a certain sense of authenticity was gained by coopting ancient ruins in a way that would not have been possible at a virgin site. Merrifield. 1938). thirty kilometers southeast of Poitiers. This research is thus not reliable for the period under discussion here. a number of the fragments were also buried deeply in wells. For similar examples in England. no. 70 The work of Michel Roblin on the early medieval reuse of pagan water sites as Christian baptisteries in the Oise has relied heavily on toponyms of a much later period. 72 The remains were found beneath the crypt of the Bonn cathedral. 96–106. one of the first century and one of the third. pp. due to the widespread abandonment of villas in the fourth and fifth centuries. J. Espérandieu. Papinot has proposed that a fourthcentury baptistery was constructed over the site of two Gallo-Roman temples. “Germanic and Roman antiquity and the sense of the past in AngloSaxon England”. 181–5.-C. thirtythree statues were found in wells in Espérandieu’s survey. Hunter. 77–106. pp. see: M. see: Halsall. Établissements ruraux. Duval. .I. É.70 In the case of Roujan (Hérault).72 The attention with which these artifacts were handled for various sorts of re-use suggests that the remains were neither found there coincidentally nor did they have solely util- 69 Van Ossel interprets reuse not so much as continuity of tradition but a tendency to reoccupy the same site. 235–51. Just as at Jericho. 262–8. Emile Espérandieu also noted that multiple altars for pagan goddess cults. 1991).69 Pagan religious structures may also be shown with certainty to have been re-used in late Antiquity and the early Middle Ages on a few occasions in the construction of sanctuaries and larger churches. pp.71 Outside Gaul. 78–84. Flint. 71 J. In the north of Gaul. V. pp. Roblin “Fontaines sacrées et nécropoles antiques”. and a number dedicated to Mercury. in what would become the cathedral of Bonn. pp. constituted part of the foundations of the fourth-century church. Recueil général des bas-reliefs de la Gaule romaine 11 (Paris. a small but classic Roman temple became the basis for a Christian chapel of undetermined date. pp. there.-C. Papinot. The earliest Christian epitaph discovered in conjunction with this site dated from the fourth century. p. Van Ossel. “L’architecture cultuelle”. The archaeology. Notices sur les vestiges archéologiques de Civaux (Poitiers. he believes that reoccupation was less common than in areas south of the Loire. The rise of magic in early medieval Europe (Princeton. 189.112   and cemeteries. pp. 3–20. pp. A very early example of re-use was found at Civaux. 1971). Indeed Merrifield notes that forty-four of the 761 Roman sculptures recorded by Espérandieu in Roman Germany were discovered built into churches. 7760–7792. Anglo-Saxon England 3 (1974). Settlement and social organization. 35–8.J. For a rather different perspective on the issue of the continuity of settlement in the region of Metz. 1970). Le Blant ed. p.. a new entrance was constructed in the west of the cella and a cemetery emerged to its east consisting of forty-two graves. Diehl ed. Documents d’Archéologie Française 46 (Paris. at which the most recent votive deposit dated from the third century. 28– 30 septembre 1989). Archaeologists observed that under the cloister of the Benedictine abbey lay a pagan temple that consisted of a stone chamber 7. 74 A. It appears that burials on the interior of the chamber. 63–9. 149.6 × 8. E. and outside of it at the base of the walls. La ‘Vita Hadelini’ et les découvertes archéologiques d’Anthée et de Franchimont”. Inscriptiones Latinae Christianae Veteres 1.. His conclusions are similar to those made rather more hesitantly at Anthée (Namur).73 Jacques Le Maho further estimates that in the early medieval period. pp. followed by a nave in the Carolingian period. many of which have survived due to their incorporation as grave goods in early medieval burials in the Merovingian world. p. J. shards of glass and pottery. coins. Das fränkische Reihengräberfeld KölnMüngersdorf 1. pp. Instead.       113 itarian purposes. Inscriptions chrétiennes de la Gaule antérieures au VIII e . one of which dated to the Augustan period. in: L’environnement des églises et la topographie religieuse des campagnes médiévales: Actes du III e Congrés International d’Archéologie médiévale (Aix-en-Provence. L’église. pp. “La réutilisation funéraire des édifices antiques en Normandie au cours du haut moyen âge”. 10–21. 1955). J. 24–5. ancient remains played an integral ritual function in the foundation of Christian sites of worship. Germanische Denkmäler der Völkerwanderungszeit 6 (Berlin. Zadora-Rio eds. such as sarcophagi. “Un aspect de la christianisation de la Gaule du Nord à l’époque mérovingienne. Le Maho.5 m2. pp. no. Monographie du Centre des Recherches Archéologiques 1 (Paris. see: E. 75 Fritz Fremersdorf noted the common use of Roman remains in the Merovingian graves at Köln-Müngersdorf. 43–5. Re-use of pagan temples occurred also in later centuries. in: M. pp. Francia 8 (1980). 1994). Fremersdorf. Fixot and E.to early seventh-century cemetery was a fanum subsequently transformed into a Christian funerary chapel. Dierkens. and even cameos. local Christians adapted for re-use as many as forty sites in Normandy. Le Maho. since it cannot be said with certainty that the late imperial structure in the late sixth. At this time. Le terroir. “Saint-Martin-de-Boscherville (Seine-Maritime)”. F. 324. no. excavated in 1981. 39. For examples of the reuse of sarcophagi.. 1989). new edition (Dublin. such as at Saint-Georges-de-Boscherville (Seine-Maritime).74 Former Roman sites also yielded treasures for small-time collectors and thieves. 1670. began only in the seventh century. 623–7. brooches. 75 Scholars have documented similar 73 The fanum itself had been constructed at an ancient site over the remains of three small wooden temples. approximately a quarter of the Gallo-Roman structures which have now been excavated. A. These prized articles included ceramic vases. “Zur Wiederverwendung antiker Gefäße im frühen Mittelalter”. Avesnois (Valenciennes. . 1993). Germania 43 (1965). 450. 1865). pp. Demolon.114   practices in Anglo-Saxon England. where sixth-century vessels for offerings imitated the designs and forms of Gallo-Roman precedents. in: R. had been redecorated with motifs similar to those found on funerary vessels in a time contemporary to the burial.79 siècle 2 (Paris. 1990). Dumas. Meaney. 545. Faider-Feytmans. 122–8. bronze fibules. revealed among other artifacts a first-century ceramic vessel which. Medieval Academy Reprints for Teaching 29 (Toronto. Krämer. 76 A. pp. Southworth ed. in: L’archéologie en Hainaut-Cambrésis.77 The common admiration for ancient wares may also be measured through discoveries such as at Hordain (Nord).78 Ancient objects thus adapted and reemployed had practical. Mélanges d’Archéologie et d’Histoire offerts à André Piganiol 2 (Paris. 1996.L. pp. “Objets d’époque romaine découverts dans des tombes mérovingiennes du bassin de La Haine (Belgique)”. “Cimetière et chapelle mérovingiens à Hourdain (Nord)”. Proceedings of a conference held at Liverpool Museum 1986 (Phoenix Mill. pp.. . and even a bracelet of amber beads. 494–7. The Gellone sacramentary nonetheless acknowledged these objects as signs of God’s rewards for the faithful. 29–30. 1981). in: E. decorative and amuletic functions in the context of these graves. 327–9. 78 P. the late sixth. . W. “The value of recycling: Conversion and the early Anglo-Saxon use of Roman materials”. Henderson. before its re-use. 132–5. pitchers. 77 G. no. BAR British Series 96 (Oxford. Early Medieval. 9–12 May. for instance. 1011–8. White.or early seventh-century female grave #917 at Ciply (Hainaut). Anglo-Saxon amulets and curing stones. entitled.. 300–2. 1981). Only in the eighth century. . et haec vascula que [tuae] indulgentiae piaetatis post spatia temporum a voragine terrae abstracte humanis usibus reddedisti . Anglo-Saxon cemeteries: A reappraisal. Liber Sacramentorum Gellonensis. no.’. In one remarkable case. p. 1981). pp. G. numerous graves in twenty-four cemeteries from the fifth through seventh centuries contained selected objects pillaged usually from neighboring cremation burials from the first to third centuries. “Scrap or substitute: Roman material in AngloSaxon graves”. 79 The prayer Oblationes super vasa reperta in locis antiquis noted: ‘. 192–229. as well as served to express the identity of the interred as perceived by his or her family or religious community. Chevallier ed. CCSL 159 (Turnhout.76 In the region of Hainaut in Belgium. . pp. R. ancient objects were highly valued. pp. Rather than being feared. when Frankish clerics formulated prayers for vessels extracted from the ground. pp. 628. ed. 1966). did liturgical customs begin to reflect greater concern with the origins of excavated objects. I am especially thankful to Carol Neuman de Vegvar for sharing with me a copy of the unpublished paper she presented at the International Medieval Conference at Kalamazoo. “Que restait-il”. 187–90. the referential powers of ancient ruins and the convenience of a partially intact stone structure must have provided sufficient incentives for building there if the population perceived their symbolic potential. however. Studia 9 (Louvain. Young. O.82 While it is possible that some priests may have taken precautions to assure themselves that structures were cleansed of any possible demonic presence linked to their unknown function in previous generations. Mediaevalia Louvaniensia Series 1.. Le Goff. 81 M. “Sacred topography”. no references survive to formal liturgical rituals for the re-use of long-abandoned edifices in the canons of the Gallic ecclesiastical councils or the early medieval sacramentaries. Mâle’s view of the re-use of ancient sites as characteristic of superficial Christian conversion is untenable due to the infrequency of archaeological evidence of the transformation of pagan temples into churches. 156–8. As has been rightly argued by Young and Duval. transl.G. one may safely propose that clerical authorities did not challenge the transition from ancient ruin to Christian structure as unorthodox. pp. clerics did not interfere with burial rites to any significant degree prior to the late Merovingian period. Richter. Ecclesiastical texts only addressed the 80 Young. 1983). but far from all. ruined sites would have likely been recognized as ancient but not necessarily associated with having ever been pagan. The majority. Death in the Middle Ages. pp. pp. in: H. “Die Gegenwart der Toten”.80 Centuries after the abandonment of these locations and artifacts by their original occupants. “L’architecture culturelle”. work. 1994) 35–42. J.       115 C The interpretation of the archaeological evidence has been fraught with difficulties especially in light of the problems of dating the reuse of older building materials in later stuctures. Arthur Goldhammer (Chicago: 1980).81 Although in many circumstances there was no continuity of custom or memory that might explain their attraction. pp. The formation of the medieval West: Studies in the oral culture of the barbarians (Dublin. Oexle. . and culture in the Middle Ages. 82 Mortuary customs amongst the mixed Merovingian population retained remarkable continuity through the time of the conversions. pp. 241–50. From prolific archaeological evidence pointing toward re-use of ancient remains and the apparent lack of opposition to their repossession according to the written sources in Gaul. Duval. Verbeke eds. Braet and W. 49–54. Time. of the remains that led Young and Duval to this conclusion dated from the sixth and seventh centuries. 235–7. Wallace-Hadrill (Oxford. ut pollutionem earum purgabilem non putemus.116   problem of reconsecrating the structures confiscated from contemporary religious opponents. pp.’ Concilia Galliae A.724–729. 1983). S. Wormald ed.1. the seventh-century penitential attributed to Theodore instructed that cadavers of the pagans were to be ejected from churches before the altars might be blessed. Concilia Galliae A. After the fall of the imperial administra83 ‘. not found in Gaul.C. Fumagalli. 1994). p. ed. L.A. p. Reg.W.511–A. 5. it likely referred to those occupied in recent memory rather than ancient ruins. S. Bullough. p. 312. Landscapes of fear: Perceptions of nature and the city in the Middle Ages. Mohlberg. third edition. community and belief in the early medieval West”. possumus revocare. Lat. For a discussion of canon 4.84 As mentioned earlier. ‘In ecclesia in qua mortuorum cadavera infidelium sepeliuntur sanctificare altare non licet sed si apta videtur ad consecrandum inde evulsa et rasis vel lotis lignis eius reaedificetur. Siffrin. Rather than interpreting regular encounters between early medieval Christians and ancient artifacts as occurring in a climate or landscape of fear. CCSL 148a (Turnhout. Mitchell (Cambridge. 7–8. 72–5. reflected both the contemporary conversion of the inhabitants of Anglo-Saxon England and the influence of Gregory I who was far removed from such sites of contact.85 This measure.’.511–A. Ideal and reality in Frankish and Anglo-Saxon society: Studies presented to J.M. De Clercq. 33. Sane quas per violentiam nostris tulerant. p. quas tanta execrationem habemus exosas. 85 4. . 189. L. Fontes 4 (Rome. Although the socalled penitential of Theodore demonstrated the orthodox practice of appropriating edifices which had formerly been used for pagan worship.695. These included prayers for the consecration of formerly heretical churches seized from Arian opponents in the tenth canon of the Council of Orléans in 511.695.4–5. placuit ordine consecrari. Finsterwalder (Weimar.’. Nat. Rerum ecclesiasticarum Documenta. ed. 6–9.’. 1929). “Burial. in: P. Series Maior. P. . 1963). There. 86 V. C. eds. pp. 41/56) (Sacramentarium Gelasianum) 93. Semple. sanctis usibus adplicare dispicimus. pp. pope Gregory I’s letter to Mellitus suggested similar approaches to re-use of religious structures in Anglo-Saxon England. Die Canones Theodori Cantuariensis und ihre Überlieferungsformen U 2.83 The Gelasian Sacramentary likewise contained liturgy for the rededication of synagogues as churches. 84 ‘Orationes et preces in dedicacione loci illius ubi prius fuit sinagoga. 1981).. Liber Sacramentorum Romanae Aecclesiae Ordinis Anni Circuli (Codex Vat.86 interactions between early medieval Christians and ruins were commonplace. see: D. Eizenhöfer and P. et ecclesias simili. “A fear of the past: The place of the prehistoric burial mound in the ideology of middle and later . 114. quo nostrae innovare solent. 7193.’. ed. The thirty-third canon of the Council of Epao in 517 contradicted this legislation by forbidding reconsecration to take place: ‘Basilicas hereticorum. 316/Paris Bibl. ‘Si autem consecratum prius fuit missas in eo caelebrare licet si relegiosi ibi sepulti sunt. pp. archaeological evidence has attested to that reoccupation far more frequently than written sources support this premise. pp. condemned recurring contact with pagan sites such as fountains and sacred groves for ritual purposes as signs of the rusticitas of the population. and the present — a trait common throughout medieval Europe’. World Archaeology 30 (1998). “Gregory of Tours and the myth of the Trojan origins of the Franks”. Markus. 97–8. Germanic. Neuman de Vegvar has noted that the reuse of Roman materials in Anglo-Saxon England functioned as a discourse of social reproduction which changed in vocabulary but not in strategy with the conversions. 90 Although Robert Markus points to the ways in which Caesarius attempted to steer Christian custom in Gaul back into line with the rest of the Western churches. especially ones that had essentially been left untouched for centuries. early medieval authors did not blanch at weaving together Roman. 941–8. “The value of recycling”. although the material remains do not reveal how the general population perceived ancient remains.A. he believes that the anti-pagan legislation in Merovingian councils has received too much attention with respect to the continued existence of paganism in Gaul. Barlow. the re-use of ancient remains by early medieval clerics demonstrated that they shared the widespread attraction to ruins in Gaul. 89 J. Caesarius of Arles. Neuman de Vegvar. Schmitt. they were never actively challenged in the West as inappropriate except when they resembled grave robbery. Annales ESC 31 (1976). He interprets the problem as one of lax standards rather than idolatrous practices among lay persons. “Germanic and Roman antiquity”. “From Caesarius to Boniface: Christianity and paganism .89 Indeed. Various leaders of the Merovingian clergy acted creatively in adapting abandoned sites. 109–26. enhanced the status of those who claimed them through rituals of possession. 87 Pomian.88 Rather than pointing to sharp demarcations between clerical and so-called ‘popular culture’.-C. 86–95. since the value of these artifacts was greater than the resources and labor that went into their excavation. Brown. 46–57. “‘Religion populaire’ et culture folklorique”. Whereas one of the most conservative of bishops. pp.87 This process mirrored the literary flexibility described by Michael Hunter with respect to the Anglo-Saxon written representation of the past. Frühmittelalterliche Studien 29 (1995). 7–44.90 even Anglo-Saxon England”. pp. pp. In making these choices. The public acquisition of ancient objects. biblical and oral sources indiscriminately when describing their heritage. Collectors and curiosities. J. just as precious relics. in his discussion of anachronistic depictions on the Frank’s casket. Hunter. they underlined divine sanction of such forms of re-use to promote various ideological objectives.       117 tion. however alien. pp. R. 88 Hunter also refers to the ‘imperfect awareness of the difference between the past. The rise of Western Christendom. Studies and Texts 118 (Toronto. 185–200. in: Le septième siècle: Changements et continuités (London. In early medieval Gaul. pp. Gregory of Tours. in Gaul”. a time at which no framework outside the imperial court existed for the positive interpretation of these activities. Bede. 550–800): Jordanes. 92 Brown. 110–6. pp. Miracles and the Venerable Bede. It contrasted greatly with late fourthcentury perceptions of re-use. The narrators of barbarian history (A. pp. The cult of saints. he deemed the timely appearance of ancient remains as a visible sign of God’s participation in the larger scheme of universal history. and Paul the Deacon (Princeton. clerical and lay elites successfully found ways in which to channel and direct such energies. and subjected them to a certain degree of adaptation.91 This outlook reflected the consequence of a long evolution of attitudes toward ancient remains. This ideology of the past reflected the material conditions of life in that society. 53–60. W. monastic leaders in the countryside also began to take up the challenge of appropriating ruins in the landscape as ideal bases for their foundations. especially those related to healing. including ancient ruins. pp. just as holy bodies.118   he chose not to include the reoccupation of ancient ruins among taboos of pagan or pagan-like practice. . Imperial officials viewed the excavation of ruins. 1988). these elites thereby exercised a significant monopoly over the memory of Antiquity. pp. 61–74. who sought to become representatives for the precious relics of the martyrs. see: Rousselle.D. gaining new and powerful meanings reflective of the everchanging needs of Christian communities. During the sixth and seventh centuries. Ancient ruins thereby represented a malleable ordering principle for the reorientation of the cultural landscape. 1994). As circumstances changed from generation to generation. intended for the overthrow of the existing regime.92 The powerful bishops thereby rendered digging among ruins more acceptable. Goffart. Like the majority of authors such as Gregory of Tours and later the Venerable Bede. McCready. Croire et guérir. Through miracle collections and church foundations on ancient sites. the memory of the past evolved continuously in accord with changing visions of the model Christian community. 154–68. The material evidence of the past thus continued to play a crucial role in early medieval culture. as subversive. 91 W. 1992). 250–2. challenge these laws successfully. pp. For a very different view of the survival of ancient rituals.D. Only with the growing importance of the cult of saints could men such as Ambrose of Milan and Paulinus of Nola. because they became the centres of the taifa kingdoms which emerged from the break-up of al-Andalus in the eleventh century.CORDOBA IN THE VITA VEL PASSIO ARGENTEAE Ann Christys The history of al-Andalus to the fall of the caliphate is to a large extent the history of Cordoba. In 571 Leovigild took Cordoba from the Byzantines and established a bishopric there. which are propaganda for the Umayyad dynasty who ruled al-Andalus after 756. thus asserting spiritual as well as temporal . Although the Arabic historians recorded Umayyad campaigns against the Christian north and against dissidents within Muslim Spain. According to these sources. The Arab and Berber conquerors of Spain seem to have made Cordoba their capital during the period of brief governorships which followed the conquest. had similar Roman and Visigothic histories. and must have continued to flourish after 711.. such as Seville. Cordoba was first mentioned at the time of the second Punic War. The settlement of Cordoba rather than the Visigothic capital Toledo was an indication that the invaders were not confident of their ability to control the whole of the former Visigothic realm. although the Arabic sources disagree about which governor took this initiative. Toledo. Captured by the Romans in 152 B. Abd al-Ra m n III (912–961) felt sufficiently confident of his position to cast off the nominal allegiance which previous Umayyad emirs had offered to the Abb sids in Baghdad. it became the capital of the whole of Hispania Ulterior. but Visigothic Cordoba was overshadowed by the capital. He ordered a proclamation to be made in the great mosque in Cordoba that he should henceforward be given the title of caliph. In 929. Several other cities in al-Andalus. Cordoba and Toledo were often in conflict. perhaps as early as 717.C. they focussed on life in the capital. Yet they are rarely mentioned in the Arabic narrative histories. on royal appointments and building programmes. and of that city’s greatest glory. Cordoba was without equal in the peninsula. and later of the province of Baetica. Cordoba reached the height of its splendour in the middle of the tenth century. p. II. Syria or Egypt. its extent. Corpus Scriptorum Muzarabicorum (2 vols. 4 Ibn awqal. Gil. with handsome districts and vast squares.. the Arabic histories and the accounts of travellers to al-Andalus portrayed it as one of the wonders of the world. At about this time. . . M. pp. A. ed.1 If the sources accurately reflect Cordoba’s importance as the centre of Islamic power. rat al-Ar .120   power over his subjects. pp. 3 See e. .H. ed. Barcelona/Madrid. Some ten years later he began to build his palace of Mad nat al-Zahr outside the city. One of the longest accounts of the construction of the mosque comes from the 1 Vita Argenteae. p. 1953–5) II. 297–362. 392. Remembering Cordoba of the caliphate. J. wrote: There is nothing to equal it in the whole of the Maghreb [North Africa and al-Andalus]. for the number of its inhabitants. Dozy. 30. 1939) transl. pp. which for modern visitors epitomises the splendour of Umayyad Spain. In this paper I want to examine this idea. 1973). its cleanliness. and his palace is within the city walls. to investigate tenth-century Cordoba as a place of power both in reality and as it appears in the Vita Argenteae. a young virgin named Argentea made her way to Cordoba in search of a martyr’s crown. Several travellers from this city who have visited Baghdad say that it is the size of one of the quarters of that city. Cordoba is not perhaps equal to half the size of Baghdad. Fabrega Grau (2 vols. 2 Eulogius. 2 vols. ed. the collection of traditions made by al-Maqqar in the seventeenth century: Analectes sur l’histoire et la littérature des arabes d’Espagne. J. the architecture of the mosques or the great number of baths and caravanserais. 1855–61) I. The ruler of this city has reigned over it for many years. Romani Suay. 382–7. 1971). 63–4. R. the hagiographer of the ninth-century martyrs of Cordoba had put it. set ‘in the midst of a crooked and perverse nation’. Kramers (Leiden. Textos Medievales XXVI (Valencia. Madrid. the vast area taken up by markets. (Leiden/London. who visited Spain in 948. Configuración del Mundo ( fragmentos alusivos al Magreb y España).2 as Eulogius. Above all. It is a city with a stone wall. it is easy to see how the city might have become the place of martyrdom for Christians.. but is not far off being so. . Pasionario Hispánico.J.g. the rulers were celebrated by their eulogists for their involvement in the construction of the mosque. Memoriale sanctorum I. ed.4 The rulers of al-Andalus appear to have concentrated their building programmes almost entirely on Cordoba and its immediate environs.3 Ibn awqal. or even in Upper Mesopotamia. and it seems. Al-Mundir built a treasury and Abd Ra m n III the first minaret. the notables of al-Andalus. 11–25 and 163–4. 244 seq. particularly the tenthcentury historian al-R z . a considerable number of the inhabitants of the city. and shows that they do not concur. announcing victories.D. pp. II. “El califa patente: el ceremonial . Barceló. Such a study has been carried out for the various descriptions of the palace of Mad nat al-Zahr . García Gómez and E. E. Ibn Idh r ’s descriptions of the mosque have not. When a ruler died. 6 J.7 It was during Friday prayers 5 Ibn Idh r . 1959). vols. Abd Ra m n II added eight bays in 836.5 He was writing in the fourteenth century but claimed to be quoting from earlier authorities. Ibn Idh r ’s history of al-Andalus is often quoted. The actual building which remains is undoubtedly impressive. to which it was joined by a passageway. denouncing the unorthodox. E. which is sometimes far more than seems to have existed in the sources from whom he claimed to have been quoting. 1992). M. transl. Lévi-Provençal (Madrid.S. In the mosque. went to the mosque to swear allegiance to his successor. His successors carried out further improvements to the mosque and its courtyard. and that they became more detailed with each retelling. in the work of the eulogists. and restored the west door. whose work does not survive.   VITA VEL PASSIO ARGENTEAE 121 work of Ibn Idh r .. probably because of the seductive amount of detail he included. pp. naming the important people who were there and adding: ‘This ceremony took all week’. Colin (Paris.6 Muhammad was said to have added a maqs ra. responsible for a further extension to the mosque which is commemorated in an inscription around the qibla. praying for rain or good fortune. so far as I am aware. if not in reality. 93. and it seems that each Umayyad ruler had to be associated with it. the special enclosure reserved for the ruler. I–II eds. 1930). the niche indicating the direction of Mecca. Al-Bay n al-mughrib f akhb r al-Andalus wa-l-Maghrib. Lévi-Provençal and G. p. A late copy of court annals attributed to al-R zi’s son Isa described the oath of allegiance to Abd Ra m n III. messages from the ruler were read out. The ceremonial function of the mosque was closely linked with that of the palace. been compared with other accounts of the building. Ibn Idh r said that the mosque was founded in 785–6 by Abd al-Ra m n I. Al-Andalus: the art of Islamic Spain (New York. The only patron whose contribution can be identified with certainty is al-Hakam II. 7 Una crónica anónima de Abd al-Ra m n al-Nas r. Dodds ed. The Arabic sources are deceptively precise about size. It is not known how much of Cordoba. 108–9. A similar process was at work in the histories of al-Andalus. Estructuras y formas del poder en la historia (Salamanca. about eight times the area of the present city.122   in the mosque that the citizens of Cordoba would have heard for the first time that they were no longer offering allegiance to Baghdad. Mazzoli-Guintard. MGH SS 4. who went to Cordoba as an ambassador in the 950s. mosque and palace. in: R. eds. This pattern. in the fourteenth century. indeed. London. The palace served as the main venue for the reception of embassies. the Umayyads developed as the concrete expression of their dominance. pp. 8 C. not in the simplistic way often assumed — that the area of the mosque divided by that of a prayer mat equals the male population of Cordoba — but as a reflection of its importance as a ceremonial centre. 51–71. which begs another question.8 The splendour of court ceremonial at Mad nat al-Zahr was described in the Life of John of Gorze. Cordoba has been estimated to have as many as a million inhabitants. of a mosque joined to a palace. This implies a city of approximately 5. E. 1989). although it does not of course mean that the whole area was inhabited. the figure of four million inhabitants often quoted for Baghdad seems to be derived from the Arabic sources’ hyperbole. said that tenth-century Cordoba was surrounded by a ditch and a wall of some twenty-two kilometres long. pp. I Kieniewicz. pp. that the power of the caliphate was embodied. nor. Pastor. 335–77. Ibn al-Khat b. The size of the building was related to its function. and it was here that feasts were celebrated. pp.9 It was clearly in these two spaces. The loss of Cordoba’s splendour — Ibn Idh r claimed that there were three omeya de Cordoba o la escenificación del poder”. Abd Ra m n III and his son were both interred in the palace cemetery. 9 Vita Johannis Gorzensis..a. how big the city was. (although the mosque also doubled in this function). 10 Times Atlas of World History (3rd edn. . Garcia de Enterria e. “Remarques sur le fonctionnement d’une capitale a double polarite: Mad nat al-Zahr -Cordue”. in addition to the mosque and palace.. 43–64. but frustratingly vague about topography. was repeated in the building at Mad nat al-Zahr .10 This is the result of taking literally Ibn awqal’s statement that Cordoba was nearly half the size of Baghdad. Al-Qantara 17 (1997). and is depicted in a modern historical atlas as being many times bigger than contemporary cities in the rest of Europe. 1991).000 hectares. they enclose an area of only some seven or eight hectares to the west of the palace. 15 Alvarus.   VITA VEL PASSIO ARGENTEAE 123 hundred baths and three thousand mosques. 14 P. 15.5 hectares. Scales. 12 . Verhaege eds. p. El enigma de la Córdoba califal desaparecida”. 175–82.11 but only three minarets remain — is blamed on the civil wars which followed the collapse of the caliphate. 1997). A recent article refers to ‘the enigma of the lost Cordoba of the caliphate. Abd al-Ra m n II was said to have brought water to the outskirts of the city sometime after 756. The elevated water channel supplying the palace which Alvarus mentioned in the Life of Eulogius.. Traces of a wall running alongside the waterway now known as the Arroyo del Moro may date to the ninth and tenth centuries. p. Pavón Maldonado. describing a city of about the size of medieval York. Thus the Umayyad capital seems to have been based on the Roman city.13 although their construction is very similar to walls built several centuries later after the Christian Reconquest.12 Archaeologists have tried very hard to find the city of the written sources. and with great regret. Al-Qantara 9 (1988). pp. de Roe and F. rather as many Roman structures in Spain have been reclassified in folk memory as ‘Moorish’.’ Cordoba seems to have melted away like the cities of fable. in: G.14 Two arches in the western wall may mark the place where it was crossed by an aqueduct. together with the markets established along the Roman Cardo Maximus. Gil. ed.15 could be the one commissioned by Abd Ra m n 11 Ibn Idh r . 13 Pavon. and this is probably much nearer the mark. Vita Eulogii. c. “Cordoba under the Umayyads: a Syrian garden city?”. CSM I. Abd al-Ra m n III to have extended the aqueduct two centuries later. B. but succeeding generations are gradually. 341. “Entre la historia”. The palace and mosque. and his successor al-Hakam II to have brought water to the mosque. I. “Entre la historia y la arqueología. 189. reducing Cordoba to more modest proportions. although it was a little larger because it was extended towards the river. 169–98 and 403–26. In the nineteenth century. Urbanism in medieval Europe (Zellik. pp. but conflicts with statements by other authors. Ibn awqal claimed to have walked round the city walls in an hour. Al-Bay n al-mughrib II. p. This is plausible. If these walls marked the outer limit of the city in the caliphal period. occupied some 2. the remains of Roman aqueducts well outside the city were thought to be the Umayyad walls. 247. although only one of these. 400 men took refuge in a church. can be identified with a suburb named by Ibn Bashkuw l. dotted with the palaces of the nobility. p. Al-Bay n al-mughrib II.20 The full extent of Umayyad Cordoba will probably never be known. 6–8. Analectes I. so Cordoba’s other public building works became associated with the rulers of Cordoba. Al-Maqqari. little time was allowed for excavation and large areas of important Roman and Islamic remains have been destroyed. Secunda. Just as in Ibn Idh r ’s description of the mosque. however. Scales. “Cordoba under the Umayyads”. Ibn Bashkuw l. but since these aqueducts do not survive. is elsewhere referred to as a village. where the nobility had their country palaces: 16 17 18 19 20 21 Ibn Idh r . 93. 177–8. alSam (718–721). Ibn ayy n. 302–3.16 although al-Maqqar recorded that. during al-Mughith’s attacks on Cordoba in 711. and perhaps built new ones. one of the suburbs.17 One should not pick and choose between those sources which are just credible and those that clearly are not.19 and some of them are mentioned in the Calendar of Cordoba. just as the popes were doing in Rome at the same period. which later became known by antonomasia as ‘el Arrabal’. who was said to have restored the Roman walls and the bridge over the Guadalquivir. The recent archaeology of Cordoba has been marred by rapid redevelopment. pp. The rest of the city’s hinterland was a rural landscape of gardens and orchards. Muslim repair or completely new works. on the other side of the Guadalquivir from the great mosque. Traces of street patterns.18 In order to vindicate Cordoba as a great metropolis it is necessary to include what are always referred to as its ‘suburbs’. pp. Al-Muqtabis f bal d al-Andalus (al-Hakam II) (Al-Muqtabis VII) ed. al-Rus fa. in a passage quoted by al-Maqqar . 25. Analectes II. pp. Al-Bay n al-mughrib II. The Umayyads probably repaired Roman aqueducts. it is impossible to say whether the Arabic sources are describing Roman structures.124   II. Al-Maqqari. and were able to hold out for three months because they had fresh water from a pipe which ran from springs situated in the foothills of the Sierra. Ibn Idh r . when it is clear that he too was describing a compact city surrounded by larger area mainly given over to agriculture.21 Ibn awqal’s picture of Cordoba should be quoted in context. starting from one of the first governors. have been identified outside the walled city. . p. Indeed. listed twenty-one such suburbs. p. on the flank of a rocky mountain with flat summit. 1967).A. p. Mérida. but all were ‘surrounded by a vast rural area’ where the wealth of the city was cultivated. must have been equally impressive. 319–79 at p. p. called Batlash. Ibn awqal went on to describe several cities in al-Andalus. to the west of Cordoba. Muslim cities in the later Middle Ages (Harvard. 23 Ibn awqal. pp. who sought their fortune in heaven. nor the splendour of its buildings. Although the mosque may have been grander than anything in alAndalus.23 Discussing Damascus in the later middle Ages. will receive 400 dirhams.’ A flood of people rushed to build. 64. Configuración del Mundo. E. “Notas sobre la topografía cordobesa en los ‘Anales de Al-Hakam II’ por Isa R z . Al-Hajji (Beirut. Lapidus argued that large villages in the agricultural hinterland of a city might be considered part of the metropolitan conglomeration. 79. 24 I. this description of ribbon development does not imply that the area between Cordoba and Mad nat al-Zahr was urbanised in the commonly accepted sense. 1967). 22 Ibn awqal. and the Alcazaba by the river. Yet Mérida and other cities were rarely mentioned by the Arabic authors. choosing a spot next to the sovereign. García Gomez. This may also have continued to make the city a magnet for Christians aspiring to martyrdom. a city which he called Zahr . .22 Even if it is taken at face value. the city itself was almost certainly little larger than several other former Roman cities in Spain. well-populated and having walls. The Vita Argenteae has nothing to say about the size of Cordoba. founded. and their history in the early Islamic period remains obscure. Lapidus. he brought markets there and had baths. but because it was the seat of power. ibid. p.24 It is not clear that this argument can be applied to Cordoba in the tenth century.   VITA VEL PASSIO ARGENTEAE 125 The ruler of this city.. Al-Andalus 30 (1965). 69. 352. Cordoba attracted ambassadors and merchants and other visitors hopeful of making their fortune not because of its size. with its spectacular Roman buildings.M. many of them. Anales Palatinos del Califa de Cordoba al-Hakam II (Madrid. many of which still survive. the buildings crowded together and the popularity of this city was such that the houses formed a continuous line between Cordoba and Zahr . caravanserais. like Cordoba. He invited the people to live there and ordered that the following proclamation should be issued throughout Spain: ‘Whoever wished to built a house. 1965). palaces and parks built. 211. for example. Configuración del Mundo. Abd Ra m n ibn Mu ammad. Argentea’s yearning for martyrdom in the A. nor about its buildings. 12. The Vita Argenteae is usually dismissed in a few words as though it were a mere footnote to the Cordoban martyr movement of the 850s. but the fate of Vulfura’s relics was unknown even to the hagiographer. This seemed to come with the overthrow of the city. He advised patience. who rejected the trappings of royalty and dedicated herself to chastity. hearing of a saint who was looking for martyrdom. the daughter of a king named Samuel and a queen named Columba of the city of Bibistrense. the Vita records. however. tortured. wishing to be a participant in the hoped-for passion.126   capital can be understood only from a close reading of the text. . Argentea was. During one of these visits. Therefore the blessed Argentea. there are many more circumstantial details. so the Vita tells us. and Argentea’s desire for a Cordoban death is seen as a response to these events. when Argentea and several of her fellow-citizens made their way to Cordoba. Argentea was buried in Cordoba. where Argentea visited him assiduously. . Argentea spent several years in Cordoba. There is. . When her mother died. rejoiced. and put to death. p. 386. until the right opportunity presented itself. the daughter of Samuel their prince?’. apparently practising her vocation of chastity undisturbed. whose cults were neglected in Spain. Vulfura was immediately arrested and thrown into prison. having been asked harmful questions: ‘Are you not. questioned. a Frank named Vulfura was summoned in a dream to come to Cordoba to help her achieve her goal of martyrdom. in particular. no direct evidence that the hagiographer knew of the ninth-century martyrs. Even this privation failed to satisfy her aspirations and. Then. she refused her father’s request to carry out the duties of a royal consort. and she heard. intrepidly declared that she was not only the daughter of the aforementioned father. O woman. These details have been drawn together into a narrative which places Argentea not only in the geographical heart 25 Vita Argenteae. she wrote to him asking for his advice about following this way to perfection. she was recognised as Samuel’s daughter: ‘she found herself surrounded on all sides by pagans. but truly a guardian of the catholic faith. .’25 Both Argentea and Vulfura were brought before an unnamed judge. and immured herself in a secure chamber below the palace enclosure. The Vita Argenteae is not modelled on Eulogius’ accounts of the earlier martyrs.    VITA VEL PASSIO ARGENTEAE 127 of power. Argentea left her native city following its overthrow. As we have seen. Entre el feudalismo y el Islam. an indefatigable maker of connections between bits and pieces of evidence. 1968). Simonet. Bobastro. Rodrigo Ximenez de Rada27 was already arguing about Ibn Haf n’s significance for the history of the Reconquest. accompanied by some of her fellow-citizens. 1984). By the twelfth-century. perhaps wrongly. Simonet. the passion says that ‘cum fratribus ceterisque concivibus Cordobensum urbem petivit’ which implies that she went willingly to Cordoba. Ibn Haf n illustrates the problems of the Arabic sources only too well. He is well documented. The nineteenth-century Dutch Arabist Dozy. 2. although this is not certain. Ximénez de Rada. as we shall see. in: Opera (Valencia. Acién Almansa. 1897. 1994). who led a long-running rebellion against Cordoba. 268. 596 n.28 According to Ibn Askar’s (1188/ 26 F.26 I cannot corroborate this assumption. with a place which the Arabic sources called Bobastro. coming to a climax with Argentea’s death at the heart of Islamic power.’ as though they were being taken into some Bobylonian captivity. was his stronghold. which the Vita names as Bibistrense. Historia Arabum. but in directly contradictory accounts. p.) Add to this mixture an extra-textual reference to the Cordoban martyrs of the 850s and the result is a neat representation of religious conflict in Spain. linked with the Arabic sources which Latinists consider. saying that Argentea was ‘carried to Cordoba with her brother Haf and the other citizens of Bobastro. en las fuentes y en la historia ( Jaén. 28 M. repr. (In fact. The linking of Argentea and Ibn Haf n may have deterred those historians who have written so copiously on the ninth-century martyrs from examining the Vita Argenteae by placing it in the wrong historiographical camp. the author of an influential History of the Mozarabs. all may be late. 27 R. p. Umar ibn Hafsun en los historiadores. He may have apostatized from Islam to the Christian faith of his ancestors as part of his protest. stretched this association. Historia de los Mozárabes de España (Madrid. and it is almost impossible to arbitrate between them. which is given many different but related names in the Arabic sources. whose main function is to tie Argentea in with Ibn Haf n. since their manuscripts certainly are. to be even more impenetrable than their own. identified this city. but in the centre of the Christian-Muslim conflict of the tenth century. among them perhaps monks rather than her biological brothers. . He said that Ibn Haf n died at the beginning of the reign of Abd Ra m n ibn Mu ammad after having made friends with him and pledged his allegiance. 1975). J. Most of the Arabic sources relate his campaigns against Cordoba and his alliances with neighbouring rebels. but his grandfather converted to Islam. “The ninth-century Spanish martyrs’ movement and the origins of western Christian missions to the Muslims”. who was himself of Christian descent. Ph. “Una fuente importante de la historia de Al-Andalus. 237–65. The question of his Christianity is another instance of modern historians selecting their sources according to their own concerns.32 Ibn al-Q i a. 30 R. Arabica 17 (1995). and transl. pp. Cuadernos de Historia de España 27 (1958). Al-Muqtabis. 172. Again. Lévi-Provençal eds. Historia de la Conquista de España por Abenalcotia el Cordobes (Madrid. did not mention it.g. unpubl. ed. Ribera. Marín Guzmán. transl. 1950). who claimed to know the exact date of Ibn Haf n’s apostasy. García Gómez and E.35 29 J. Ibn al-Qutiyya. 180–221. The Muslim World 15 (1965). at p.M. pp. The quest for El Cid (Oxford. 31 R. who described the building of the Cordoban mosque in such detail. (University of North Carolina. J. La ‘Historia’ de Ibn Askar”. 321–39. and may be a contemporary witness (although the one surviving manuscript of his History dates from the fourteenth century).128   9–1239) History of Malaga. 333: “In the famous Umar ibn Haf un the dreams of the martyrs’ movement were perfectly realised”. “The causes of the revolt of Umar ibn Hafsun in AlAndalus 880–928: A study in medieval Islamic social history”. the Cid.29 he was the descendant of a prominent Visigoth named Marcellus. p. . 33 Ibn al-Q t a. 32 See e. transl. Nichols. although it survives in a copy of perhaps the fourteenth century.’33 The earliest account of Ibn Haf n’s apostasy to Christianity appears in a text now called the Anonymous Chronicle of Abd Ra m n al-Na ir. and that of a more famous medieval Spanish adventurer. pp. J. Guraieb.31 Only from the nineteenth century has Ibn Haf n been portrayed as a focus of the nationalist aspirations of indigenous Spaniards. but with markedly different emphases. It appears that Ibn Haf n alternated periods of opposition to the Umayyads with service to the regime in the army and as a governor. 1989). Cutler. it is Ibn Idh r . Una crónica anónima de Abd al-Ra m III al-Nas r (Madrid. A. Diss. and transl. 35 Ibn ayy n.. Vallvé Bermejo. Al-Andalus 31 (1966). 1926).30 There are several similarities between the career of Ibn Haf n and his treatment by later historians.34 which may date from the tenth or eleventh century. His career points to a weakness of central control of al-Andalus which otherwise emerges only rarely from the works of Umayyad panegyrists. Fletcher.D. The history of the conquest of Al-Andalus. 34 E. 119. “De nuevo sobre Bobastro”. Una crónica anónima.39 when Haf ibn Umar. at Las Mesas de Villaverde. besides.37 but since the identification of this site as Bobastro is still disputed. It is possible that the accusation in the Anonymous Chronicle of Abd Ra m n alNa ir that Ibn Haf n was an apostate was a damnatio memoriae. Mainake 1 (1979). Archaeologists claim to have found the church. who confirmed the peace treaty and gave them good welcome. however. 140–41. and could be Visigothic. 37 . 119. Al-Andalus 30 (1965). 923/4 and was finally overthrown c. and the author of the Anonymous Chronicle disparaged Ibn Haf n as the ‘refuge of the unbelievers and hypocrites’. near Ronda. Entre el feudalismo y el Islam. pp. Acien. Ibn Idh r AlBay n al-mughrib. 38 J. To return to more immediate concerns. and that Abd Ra m n III crucified it on the walls of Cordoba between those of two of his sons. Bobastro faced a major Cordoban attack c.38 this is not very likely. that Argentea saw this as the right time to be martyred. p.36 without specifying his apostasy. quoted by Ibn Idh r . p. García. R. p. If. and the dates for his career are difficult to square with those given by the Vita Argenteae. Ardales. 171 has 305/917–18.   VITA VEL PASSIO ARGENTEAE 129 Both Ar b ibn Sa d. but rather unlikely. Umar ibn Haf n himself having died c. 39 García. 139–74. With this good fortune. the church has been dated only as ‘early medieval’. God. where Ibn Haf n was buried. Vallvé Bermejo. and was revealed only when his body was exhumed and found to be buried in the Christian manner. It is impossible to mine the Vita Argenteae 36 ‘ am d al-K fir n wa-r ’s al-mun fiq n’. Puertas Tricas. put an end to the rule of the evil family of Haf n’. (Ardales. 22. It is just plausible. one of several sons of Ibn Haf n. Argentea was said to have left Bibistrense after its overthrow. said to have been built by his father. she had already left Bobastro during one of her father’s periodic defeats. 917. with his power. especially as it is elaborated with the story that Ibn Haf n’s apostasy had been secret. Una crónica anónima. what the Vita described as the ‘turning cycle of her years’ in Cordoba must have seemed to stretch interminably if she had to wait for martyrdom until 931 — the date given in the Vita. 146 and 148. Malaga)”. 928. was in control.40 The Anonymous Chronicle says that ‘Haf ibn Umar ibn Haf n was brought before the emir with his family and hostages. none of the sources say that Ibn Haf n had a daughter. 179–216. Una crónica anónima. p. pp. “La iglesia rupestre de Las Mesas de Villaverde. pp. 40 303/915–16 according to García. . who ‘when the persecution was raging under the Emperor. Musurillo. . if the hagiographer was merely reworking a conventional passion for anti-Muslim polemic. this passage seems rather to have been lifted from a passion of a much earlier period. .130   for facts in any convincing way. abandoned their native city. the result is not a success. 41 K. 281. leaving us with something much more complicated. The acts of the Christian martyrs (Oxford. 386. c. where the Trinitarian emphasis seems to be addressing anti-Arian concerns. the matrona and the bishop: networks of allegiance in early sixth-century Rome”. the crowd excited into fury brought the follower of Christ before the judge. Argentea’s journey to Cordoba recalls the martyrdom of Agapé. which believed in the heart leads to justice and confessed through the mouth to deliverance. . Interrogated by the judge about the conditions of the faith. forthcoming. p. whose judgement is enforced by lictors. and declare the personality to be unconfused. Journal of Roman Archaeology. I confess before all: I believe in one God in three persons. The Vita Argenteae is primarily a treatise on the two principal Christian virtues. 13. surely out of place in tenth-century Cordoba. 42 H. The whole confection that Argentea was the daughter of a proto-nationalist Catholic rebel must be rejected. Equally anachronistic is the reference to an unnamed praeses. and the story is modelled on the anonymous hagiographical romances known as the gesta martyrum41 rather than on contemporary debate with Islam. the historical details are vague. “The martyr. Irene and Chioné at Salonika. Cooper. their family. adored in indistinguishable substance. This impression is reinforced by the relatively good Latin of this text. described in this text as a twofold handful of flowers — the white of chastity and the purple of martyrdom — and is divided almost equally between the two aspects. property and possessions because of their love of God and their expectation of heavenly things’. 43 Vita Argenteae. 1972). . p.43 Although adherence to ludicrously complicated beliefs about the nature of God was one of the accusations made against Christians by Muslim polemic. Yet. Fabrega Pasionario. Apart from the date given for her martyrdom.42 When Argentea made a public declaration of her faith. she responded with constancy thus: Why do you exasperate me with your questions? Have I not testified that I was a follower of the embraced Christian faith? But because according to the apostolic dogma. . p.46 This may be the same Endura who copied Cassiodorus’ Commentary on the Psalms in 949 and Isidore’s Etymologies in 95447 and witnessed 44 J. and thus for a long time she lived through the turning circle of the years. and firm in the usual fashion.44 Christians established prominent roles in government. Analecta Bollandiana 15 (1937).45 The manuscript remained in Cardeña until 1864. but does not give his sources. survived into the Reconquest period. de (1937) “Les notices hispaniques dans le martyrologe d’Usuard”.   VITA VEL PASSIO ARGENTEAE 131 some of the new details work against the picture of Cordoba as a city dominated by Muslim persecutors. A marginal note names the scribe as the priest Endura. 45 British Museum Add.6000. 1934). The impression thus given that there was a flourishing Christian community in Cordoba is the only part of the whole story which seems to ring true. 271–2. she emptied herself busily in continence. Pasionario 27seq. The impression one gains from these fragments is that Cordoba was a Christian as well as a Muslim city. however. Gaiffier B. The text says of Argentea’s arrival in Cordoba. and the focus for opposition to Islam. Los monjes españoles en la edad media (Madrid. the Arabic sources mention them briefly as members of embassies to the Christian courts of northern Spain. . Being martyred in the spectacular way outlined by the Vita might. pp. that he or she may be trying to present. 47 Madrid Academia de la Historia. Pérez de Urbel. The sole surviving copy of the Vita was appended to a copy of a passionary from Cardeña. . Caradignense 76. A pious woman from outside the capital would easily have found a convent to receive her. Several inscriptions commemorated nuns who died in the tenth century (although many survive only as copies made in the sixteenth century). 25. have been more difficult. Fabrega. ‘united with religious people in that city. south of Cordoba. 266 mentions the nuns Ikilio. if we tried to set them all out with our pen we would seem to set out what was no less decorative and boring’. near Burgos in northern Spain. . western Europe and Byzantium. 258v. 46 f. Some of the churches built in the Visigothic period. Justa and Rufina from the monastery of Santa Eulalia. With how many and what kinds of virtues she flourished in her fashion and was illustrious in pious acts. . The task of interpreting the Vita Argenteae is made more difficult because it is not clear when and for whom the text was written. including the basilica of the Three Saints where Argentea was said to have been buried. when it went to the British Museum. The sepulchre is in the District of the Tower. this is assumed to be the church of Faustus. Fontaine and C. after her death. 1961). Madrid Biblioteca Nacional 1005. Many versions of the passion of Cyriacus and Paula (sometimes Paul) exist. which was the most important in Cordoba after the Arab conquest. “Le rayonnement de l’hagiographie hispanique en Gaule pendant le haut Moyen Âge: circulation et diffusion des Passions hispaniques”.50 Thus. Guerreiro. and this is where Argentea was supposed to have been interred. 369. after the ‘Explicit ’ (‘Here ends the first part of the passionary’). 966 and 969. although the additions might be Cordoban in origin. Le calendrier de Cordoue (Leiden. “L’inventio et translatio de S. 1992). Januarius and Martialis. Pellat eds. in: J.’ The Latin version adds: ‘And their festival is in the [church of ] the Three Saints. the passions of Cyriacus and Paula. It consists of the Vita Argenteae. 52 R. and transl. Dozy and C. and written in another hand. 50 B. and Argentea may not have been remembered in Cordoba. p. 51 R. of which her body would soon in the future be an inhabitant’. 49 .’52 Although the saints’ names are not given.. two African martyrs of the fourth century.49 which suggests that this version was known throughout Spain. and continued to be celebrated in Cordoba. a Cordoban martyr from the same period. Pasionario. Her feast day is not listed in the Calendar of Cordoba. but the Cardeña passion is very similar to a hymn in a tenth-century manuscript from Toledo. In both the Arabic and Latin versions of the Calendar of Cordoba. L’Europe Héritière de l’Espagne Wisigothique (Madrid.132   charters of donations to Cardeña in 950. is an appendix. and the palaeography is said to be characteristic of manuscripts written in al-Andalus. and that. her miracles were ‘constantly taking place among us up to now’. Towards the end of the codex. 28. de Gaiffier. p. Zoilus’ cult was also well known. p.51 these texts could have come to Cardeña from elsewhere in the peninsula. Analecta Bollandiana 16 (1938). Pellistrandi eds. October 13 is given as ‘the feast of three martyrs put to death in the city of Cordoba.. Yet neither of these phrases are conclusive. Zoilo de Cordoue”. and the Invention of Zoilus. p. 151. 138. The church. and later changed its name to 48 Fabrega. numbers 3–259 are in the same hand.48 Of the manuscript’s 269 folia. Two allusions in the text might indicate that the author was a native of Cordoba — it says that Argentea ‘made her way to Cordoba as a stranger (advena). His name might. The rulers of Pamplona were called Sancho Garcés or García Sanches alternately.l. A female saint called Columba was commemorated in the Spanish passionary. p. the Holy Spirit. to put it no more strongly. I begin with the names of the participants in the drama which are unusual. 1956). Bibistrense. But it recalls the scribe Vuilfurus of BN n. but suggests a foreigner. Aurea: silver and gold. Pérez. but the details of the argument may be rejected without invalidating its general conclusions.53 Since there is no evidence for the cult of Argentea either in Cordoba or in northern Spain. 239. Yet the memory of Argentea does not seem to have been preserved there. may recall Barbastro. but addressed to contemporary events in the north? This part of the paper is highly speculative. Thus the Vita Argenteae may have been written in the north. perhaps based on the existence of real martyrs in Cordoba. so that he seems no more than a literary device. but in this context. see above. like the monk who told Argentea to wait before she could fulfil her desire to be martyred. which is not a Frankish but an Anglo-Saxon name. Argentea’s name recalls that of a martyr of the ninth century. and suggest that the protagonists of the Vita Argenteae are symbolic rather than real. may have reminded the audience of the dove. survived until after the fall of the Umayyads. in: DHEE 13 (Paris. Perhaps Vulfura was meant to be downplayed in comparison with Argentea. near Huesca. Her father Samuel does not seem to be have anything to do with the biblical Samuel.54 In this story his martyrdom was not described. however. 53 54 F. bring to mind one of the contemporary rulers of León and Pamplona. Samuel’s royal city. he became superfluous to the story. and it should be interpreted as relevant to a northern-Spanish audience. rather than the elusive Bobastro of the Arabic sources. but it is possible that their names helped the audience of the Vita Argenteae to locate the story in northern Spain around the end of the tenth century. the single copy of her Vita is the only evidence we have for this saint. Sancho the Fat ruled León from 955–957 and from 960–967. and his relics were apparently mislaid. Vulfura sounds like Wulfhere. More probably. Argentea and her family and companions are improbable. “Cordue”. Could it perhaps be a moral tale about the duties of a princess.   VITA VEL PASSIO ARGENTEAE 133 St Peter. it was an appropriate name for a protagonist whose main function in the story was to die. 859.a. . I. C. Chronicon mundi (Frankfurt. pp. 85. 58 Ibn Idh r Al-Bay n al-mughrib. T. “Chronicle of Sampiro”. Pelayo y su difusión”. 235. Codera and J. Histoire de l’Espagne musulmane. p. M.134   It may be possible to pin down the genesis of the story more precisely. 251.55 Particularly popular with women was the cult of Pelagius. in 926.57 Elvira seems. but the other acceded to the throne as Hisham II at an early age and his mother was involved in his regency. 97–116. Bowman. Salisbury. the Arabic sources say that he was restored only with the support of a Cordoban army. 1891–2). II. su crónica y la monarquía leonesa en el siglo X (Madrid. E. Anuario de Estudios Medievales 6 (1969). the daughter of the emperor Constantine who. a boy of thirteen who. Scribes copied the lives of several female saints. Al-Bay n al-mughrib II 268. 3 vols. Lévi-Provençal. 4. after bearing two sons to al. Rodríguez Fernández ed. in: Medieval Hagiography. 1952). When in 957. 171. and surrendered a number of frontier fortresses to the Muslims. Díaz y Díaz. 1959). J. after he. Pérez de Urbel ed. (2nd edn. as a manifestation of the growth of female monasticism in northern Spain in the tenth century. 173 and n. “La Pasión de S. II. p. J. al-Maqqar Analectes.58 Perhaps this deal involved sending a royal princess to the Umayyad harem. Historia Silense (Madrid. 60 Ibn Idh r . an anthology. practised a life of chastity rather than comply with the wishes of her father. became prominent at the Cordoban court. preferred death rather than surrender his virginity to Abd al-Ra m n III. Boletín de la Real Academia de la Historia 100 (1932). 2000). pp. Paris.E. 1610). the same story appears in Lucas of Tuy. Sampiro. 10. 1991). It was not unknown for the Umayyads to take Christian wives.akam II.A..C. ibid.. p. Perhaps others were not. transl. like Argentea. “Raguel. Church fathers. to have been an exemplary princess.59 One of the boys died young. Head (New York. 57 M. Ribera (Madrid. F. 4.56 Pelagius’ cult was associated with Elvira. ed. Tar kh ulam al-Andalus eds. p. A woman from Navarre called ub in the Arabic histories. 337–8. independent virgins (London. pp. sister of Sancho the Fat.. The martyrdom of St Pelagius”. 28 ch. 56 . like Argentea... who sent an embassy to Cordoba to obtain the relics of Pelagius for León. 1950). Sancho the Fat lost his throne. La Pasión de San Pelayo (Santiago de Compostela. possibly becoming the mistress of the chamberlain Ibn Ab Am r who later usurped the Umayyad throne and took the title al-Man r. Gómez Moreno ed. including that of Constantina. his grandmother Tota and García Sánchez I of Navarre had made an embassy to Cordoba.60 She is commemorated in the 55 J. 1991). 59 Ibn al-Fara . 38. rather than travelling to Cordoba to consort with the enemy. should she find herself in that city. cited by D. when they were free to imagine how it might have been. in northern Spain. 30. It is almost certain. although the hagiographer did not evoke Umayyad splendour.63 Since the Arabic sources refer only to the caliph’s consorts who provided him with sons.62 ub was said to be a concubine who had been captured in a campaign against Navarre and there is no suggestion that she was of royal blood. p. The author of the Vita Argenteae had more immediate concerns in mind. a Christian princess. 37–8 no.J. 62 Ibn al-Fara Tar kh. 63 Ibn Idh r . The Vita was read. 48. E. the king’. p. which must come from the tenth or eleventh centuries.61 She died in 999. The significance of Argentea’s death 61 E. pp. a far-away city where Christian unease about Islam received its ultimate expression. or possibly of one of the kings of Navarre. III. Yet. The Vita may have been written in response to actual martyrdoms. 1931). The latter were remembering Cordoba after its glories had passed. although the circumstance of Argentea’s death cannot be disentangled from the model of the texts on which it was based.   VITA VEL PASSIO ARGENTEAE 135 inscription on the base of a fountain erected on her orders in 977. may be more realistic than those drawn by the Arabic historians. his (or her) picture of a city where Christian activities were still openly practised. that their picture of Cordoba is overdrawn. nor from the purposes of its author. may have married one of the daughters of Sancho. ed. and may have been written. from what little has been excavated. Inscriptions arabes d’Espagne (Leiden and Paris. The rise and fall of the party kings (Princeton. Lévi-Provençal. as one might have expected from modern reconstructions. however. Thus Cordoba. should prepare herself by a life of chastity and prison-visiting to be worthy of a martyr’s crown. p. 533. Wasserstein. not even by mentioning the great mosque. the mother of one of his sons was ‘the daughter of Shanj h. 1985). The hagiographer may be arguing that. it is not. the Christian. seen from the perspective of the Vita Argenteae is not primarily a topos. Al-Bay n al-mughrib. Al-Man r. 152 no. the place of martyrdom. there may have been other Navarrese or Leonese princesses in his entourage who achieved less prominence in Cordoba but whose defection to the seductions of life with the infidel may be the subject to which the Vita Argenteae is a counterblast. Levi Provençal (Paris. 1930). . either literally or by flirting with Islam. 184–205 at p.136   was that she died a virgin. 191. History as text (London. to go to Cordoba. 1989). pp. and their princesses from the chastity and martyrdom of the ideal Christian life.. Cameron.64 Cordoba’s power lay in its ability to corrupt Christian princes into alliances with the infidel. 64 A. “Virginity as metaphor” in: eadem ed. . For the hagiographer. and this virginity was perhaps the highest virtue at a time when virtue was threatened by the lure of life under Islamic rule. was to place one’s salvation in doubt. 1 although he was by no means the first to emphasise the importance of those pages. which sometimes (Gregory would like us to think regularly) graced the festivities. 75–91. Society and the holy in late antiquity (London. Saints and their miracles in late Antique Gaul (Princeton. 308–17. pp. 1982). Bernoulli. C. and perhaps sometimes slightly detatched. in: idem. 1985). and we can sense something of the drama of the liturgy and of the miraculous. confined to the writings of Gregory of Tours. we can follow Peter Brown and Raymond Van Dam in envisaging the crowds of pilgrims turning up at the great feasts of Martin and Julian.L. .L. 4 H. pp. The evidence which allows this reconstruction of St Martin’s church is not. pp. 230–55: R. 1985).S. 1900). Leadership and community in late antique Gaul (Berkeley. 132–5. Van Dam. Kessler and M. The cult of the saints: its rise and function in Latin Christianity (Chicago.4 The net result is that at Tours in particular. Die Heiligen der Merowinger (Tübingen. 2 Cf.2 and although others have subsequently explored individual cults in greater detail than he has. Van Dam.A. In particular Raymond Van Dam has written extensively on Gregory’s accounts of cults at Tours and Brioude. Pictorial narrative in antiquity and the Middle Ages (Washington. in fact. in: H. “Relics and social status in the age of Gregory of Tours”. Peter Brown has perhaps done more than anyone to draw attention to the Holy in the pages of Gregory. 1993). 1981). but 1 P. Brown.TOPOGRAPHIES OF HOLY POWER IN SIXTH-CENTURY GAUL Ian Wood The works of Gregory of Tours have ensured that for the sixth century the cult of the saints is better known in Merovingian Francia than in any other area of the early medieval West. 222–50: P. Kessler. but also at Brioude.3 while Herbert Kessler has usefully approached the evidence for pilgrimage to the shrine of Martin at Tours from an art historian’s point of view. Brown. Simpson eds. From the work of Herbert Kessler and Raymond Van Dam we can also appreciate what a literate. “Pictorial narrative and church mission in sixth-century Gaul”.. pp. 3 R. pilgrim might sense as he or she surveyed the paintings and inscriptions in the church where the saint was buried. C. where the image of Jacob’s Ladder implicitly identified the spot as being an entrance to heaven — and thus. 802–12. 310–7. 7 Sidonius Apollinaris. at the monastery of Marmoutier. . a ‘gravity-free zone’. Pietri. a fearsome place. pp. ep. Petschenig. Luetjohann. Saints and their miracles.138   comes first and foremost from a group of more or less epigrammatic poems which adorned the walls of various of the Martinian sites of Tours. 2 (Hannover. Over the west door a representation of the widow’s mite drew attention to the importance of good works.5 These poems were at least in part commissioned by the sixth bishop of Tours. B. and the idea was emphasised by poems of Paulinus of Périgueux. who requested them from the most famous writers of late fifth-century Gaul. 1887): see also Van Dam. as Raymond Van Dam has noted. Krusch. pp. Inside the church frescoes based on scenes from the New Testament and the Life of Martin pointed to the mediation of heaven and earth. and which were recorded in the so-called Martinellus. Following the evidence of the Martinellus the eye of the visitor approaching the west end of the church of St Martin was directed by the tower to contemplate the stars above. IV 18. among others Paulinus of Périgueux6 and Sidonius Apollinaris. 1 (1888). ed. as an electrical field energised by liturgy and pilgrims.7 as part of his programme of developing the cult of Martin. but which was also significant both in the cathedral and. 6 Ed. 5 Ed.8 In the area of Martin’s tomb itself the pilgrim was inevitably reminded of the presence of the saint. 314. Saints and their miracles. transl. 8 Gregory. De Virtutibus sancti Martini I 38. Perpetuus. already in heaven. CSEL 16. 165: see also Van Dam. MGH AA 8 (Berlin. La ville de Tours du IV e au VI e siècle: Naissance d’une cité chrétienne (Rome. 315–6. p. p. 245. 5. (460–90). commissioned by bishop Perpetuus. The climax of this mediation was to be found over the arch of the apse. MGH SRM 1. Saints and their miracles. ed. Van Dam. which had its chief focus in the saint’s funerary basilica outside the walled centre of the city. M. L. while his status in heaven was indicated by the miracles worked there. 1983). like its counterpart in the Old Testament. and thus to consider the saint. slightly further afield. What is presented is space as theology in action. where a madman who climbed to the roof sustained no injury when he fell. Leadership and community. or put another way. 1885): Van Dam. p. In Gregory’s miracle stories this part of the church is. pp. 4. given his own position as abbot of the monastery of St Martin. 1976). 9 Sidonius.12 In Alcuin’s view Tours was a place of yet greater holy power — which is not surprising. Galinié eds. pp. Saints and their miracles. Poncelet. in: D. Grégoire de Tours et l’espace gaulois (Tours.10 As late as the eighth century Alcuin. himself abbot of St Martin’s.. although there are indications that other churches shared at least some elements of the church of St Martin. or more generally of the early medieval West. Tours des archives du sol”. Although it was the metropolitan city of the province of Lugdunensis III. Studies in Church History 13 (Oxford. Indeed St Martin’s may well have been extraordinary in the extent of its scheme of inscriptions and paintings. H. ed. and Perpetuus may have intended the shrine to be unique. pp. and not merely a civitas capital.11 This distinction is all the more interesting in that Poitiers had its own mighty religious topography. which Alcuin himself acknowledged. but also of the town of Tours itself. in: N. and also the monastery of Holy Cross. 11 Alcuin. whose emergence as a regional centre seems only to have dated to the fourth century. Tours was a relatively undeveloped place. whose monastery he knew to be a centre of religious power. Gauthier and H. Vita Willibrordi prosaica 32. and which boasted the shrines of Hilary and Radegund. 1997). “The early religious policies of Justin II”. ep. secured by Radegund from the Emperor Justin and his wife. The Orthodox Churches and the West.. vol. November 7th. Galinié. which he saw as a place of economic importance. It is not just this uniqueness which ought to make the historian of religion pause before turning the shrine of Martin into a type site for the cult of the saints in Francia. also composed verses for a church built in Lyons by bishop Patiens9 — though in this case the verse comes rather closer to describing the physical reality of the church and its setting than do those in the Martinellus. and he compared it to Poitiers.     -  139 This remarkable dossier devoted to the Martinian shrines is unique. his description of Tours as a place of little distinction beyond the shrine of Martin is not obviously biased. Cameron. II 10. and it has largely been supported by the very substantial rescue archaeology of the last twenty years. 3. 65–80. Sidonius Apollinaris. It is worth noting some of the oddities not just of the basilica and cult site of Martin. 51–67: on the cult of Hilary in Poitiers. 28–41. as being ‘small and despicable with regard to your walls’. described the town. pp. “Tours de Grégoire. 10 . A. AASS. where there was even a fragment of the True Cross itself. Van Dam. Baker ed. 12 See the comments of A. Nevertheless. for instance. V 49. Van Dam. the cathedral and the monastery of Marmoutier.13 Essentially it was a bifocal city. and across the river. Decem Libri Historiarum V 49. 1 (Hannover. Tours des archives du sol”. round Clermont. B. 17 This is the view expressed by Riculf in Gregory.14 It is against this background of a small community with three religious foci — the funerary basilica of Martin. fourteen out of nineteen bishops came from one family. was Martin’s old monastery of Marmoutier. MGH SRM 1. 16 Van Dam. in that we are apparently faced with a dominant episcopal dynasty which does not appear to have been local. and. but whose numinous centre lay outside in what had been one of the Roman cemeteries of the city. Martin himself.140   Tours does indeed seem to have been made up of a small walled centre. 18 Gregory. Saints and their miracles. pp. in-so-far as we can reconstruct it. 310–1. all associated with the same saint — that one should read other aspects of the history of Tours. 1). Gatianus. Decem Libri Historiarum X 31. 50–81. his own15 — and one should note that the family’s centre of gravity. lay to the south-east. ed. by extension. and a small vicus a kilometre away. In such a one-horse town the bishop will have been a figure of peculiar importance: his power should not be taken automatically as a model for that of other bishops in Gaul.17 If we exclude the first bishop. A third focus. the bishop’s relations with the local comes should not be assumed to be normative. which was also the subject of verses in the Martinellus.18 then all the episcopal promoters of Martin’s 13 Galinié. Ed. Krusch and W. in the church and surrounding vicus of St Martin — as so often in post-Roman Gaul an extramural tomb of one of the special dead was the magnet for the reorientation of the city. “Tours de Grégoire. according to Gregory of Tours. pp. Pietri. Since Gregory’s maternal ancestors came 14 . Saints and their miracles.16 an observation which complicates any understanding of the social and political structure of the city of Tours. 15 Gregory. a good proportion of which lay within what had been the amphitheatre (one side of whose circuit wall functioned as a substantial proportion of the city wall). Levison. around the tomb of Martin itself (fig. transl. Lyons and Dijon. La ville de Tours du IV e au VI e siècle: naissance d’une cité chrétienne. The problematic nature of Tours as a type-site is further highlighted by the fact that. and (with less clear justification) three outsiders imposed by queen Chrotechildis. yet further out. Decem Libri Historiarum. 1951). whose official centre lay in the walled area near the cathedral. Saint-Gervais and Saint-Protais. a single family was in a better position to orchestrate a dominant regional or national cult than would have been possible in more populous centres. “The family of Georgius Florentius Gregorius and the bishops of Tours”. pp. 11. 10. 5. Saint-Pierre and Saint-Paul. 83–95. Tours in the fourth to the sixth centuries. Saint-Vincent. monastery of Ingetrude. basilica of Saint-Martin. monastery of Radegonde. Saint-Monegonde. 2. baptistry of Saint-Martin. 8. it is obviously dangerous to take that cult as the model for other cults elsewhere. 14. Saint-Venant. permanent domestic occupation. 7. 3. . who are stated to have been from that region. 1. basilica of Saint-Lidoire. where there was more competition for urban leadership. promoted largely by one family. 16.     -  141 Tours Rhone +++ + ++ ++ + +++ 0 500 m Fig. he could have been related to Theodore. SaintJulian. from Burgundy. 13. 19 See R. In the situation envisaged here as being that at Tours. 4. Medievalia et Humanistica 12 (1984). cult (notably Perpetuus and Euphronius) were relatives of Gregory. Mathisen. Sainte-Marie and Saint-Jean-Baptist. domus ecclesie. 12.19 If the cult of St Martin at Tours in the fifth and sixth centuries is correctly interpreted as being that of a single major saint in a minor town. cemeteries (after Galinié 1997). 9. Proculus or Dinifius. 6. ecclesia. 15. 1. In his hagiographical writings Gregory provides evidence on an enormous number of cults. however. promoted primarily by Gregory’s family. 27 Gregory. . though for the most part that evidence amounts to only a few lines on each shrine. MGH SRM 1. It also provided the opportunity for processions within the area of Brioude itself. ed.N. see Gregory of Tours. 50. by the well in which the saint’s severed head had been washed.25 Even more than Tours. 2. where the cult of Julian functions very similarly to that of Martin. founded the annual pilgrimage from Clermont to Brioude. albeit the subject of only one substantial chapter in Gregory’s Liber in Gloria Martyrum. and remained in. B. ed. 26 For Dijon. 2 (Hannover.23 A third cult. B. “Constructing cults in early medieval France: saints and churches in Burgundy and the Auvergne 400–1000” (forthcoming). Krusch. 2: I. or regional capitals and cathedral cities:26 further. Krusch. Wood. 74–5. Gregory of Tours.. Brioude and Dijon were one-horse towns — indeed they were castra. pp. De Virtutibus sancti Martini with Gregory. etc. De Virtutibus sancti Juliani. Vienne. 24 Gregory. VI 6. 1979). B. Vitae Patrum. 1885): Van Dam. 25 Compare Gregory.24 may usefully be considered alongside those of Martin and Julian.20 with a subordinate but important focus for the cult at the church of St Ferreolus. and not civitates. 22 Gregory.N. 25. 41–8. the cults of Julian and Benignus were. ed. pp. have more in common than the fact that they receive some emphasis in Gregory’s writings. De virtutibus sancti Juliani 4–5. that of Benignus at Dijon. De Virtutibus sancti Juliani 1–2. “Early Merovingian devotion in town and country”. 26. Studies in Church History 6 (Oxford. The church in town and countryside. in: D. 23 Gregory. Baker ed. Gallus. that is fortified centres.142   This is not to say that there are no cults in sixth-century Gaul which can usefully be compared with that of Martin. Krusch. outside the walls of the castrum. See also I. In Gloria Martyrum. Ferreolus. These cults. MGH SRM 1. One cult other than that of Martin clearly stands out in Gregory’s writings: that of Julian at Brioude. MGH SRM 1. at Saint-Ferréol-les-Minimes.28 that one may 20 For the funerary basilica of Julian. De Virtutibus sancti Juliani 23–5. 9. De Virtutibus sancti Juliani 3. His uncle. 28. 28 Gregory. which was built some two kilometres away.27 and the family as a whole was so closely involved with the cult.. Decem Libri Historiarum III 19. 21 Gregory. which had as its centre a basilica constructed on the site of the saint’s tomb. De Virtutibus sancti Juliani 28.22 this second shrine at Brioude was a substitute for the absent relic. where it was buried with Julian’s mentor.21 Since the head itself had been taken to. Wood. Saints and their miracles. like that of Martin. 1994). 30 Gregory. 6. The bishop. It may be no more than coincidence. 50. Gregory. Gregory of Tours (Bangor. In Gloria Confessorum 42. and 29 Gregory.N.31 This tale of a bishop’s attempt to stop the development of a cult. In Gloria Martyrum.33 and indeed for its promotion of the cult of Benignus. 33 Wood. Wood. was built nearby. Wood. . In the cemetery at Dijon was a large sarcophagus.29 In Dijon the cult of Benignus was essentially created by Gregory’s great-grandfather and namesake. followed by his championing of it. Gregory of Tours’ family was promoting a cult site in the Auvergne which lay at the other end of the diocese from the episcopal seat in Clermont. Gregory reacted by renovating an adjacent crypt. 32 Gregory. 2. where the nun Paschasia was venerated. MGH SRM 1. and thereafter the bishop had a large basilica built on the site. into which he had the sarcophagus moved. It is perhaps significant that the chapter on Dijon in Gregory’s Decem Libri Historiarum III. This may account for the family’s preference for the castrum of Dijon to the diocesan centre of Langres. 19. Vitae Patrum VII. since Gregory of Tours is particularly clear over them. but subsequently had a vision of the martyr Benignus. Certainly Gregory’s father owned land in the Limagne. which lies between Brioude and Clermont. 31 Gregory. Later an account of Benignus’ martyrdom was discovered in Italy. is entitled De sancto Gregorio et situm Divioninsis castri. 6–7. but it is worth noting that in championing the cult of Julian at Brioude. Krusch. Gregory of Tours. which attracted a certain amount of local devotion and was the scene of at least one minor miracle. 5. Nor was that the end of the development of the holy place. pp.     -  143 wonder whether it possessed estates in the vicinity. Gregory of Langres. which he assumed to be pagan. Gregory of Tours. p. who revealed that the site was his burial place. B. attempted to stop the development of a cult. It was even said that Paschasia herself had told the builders that Benignus was supervising their work. is all the more interesting because Gregory’s family appears to have had land in the vicinity. In Gloria Martyrum 83: I.30 The evidence for the origins of the cult of Benignus is worth pausing over. ed. In Gloria Martyrum 50. p. and they thus provide one model for the creation of a religious topography. for another church. 2–3.32 just as Gregory of Tours’ Auvergnat relatives may have owned property near St Julian’s at Brioude. On the presence of the Tergemini in the Passio sanctorum Herenei episcopi. See also. 447–68. somewhat suspiciously.35 It looks. despite the fact that it was clearly well established in his day. Analecta Bollandiana 79 (1961). pp. The work is discussed at length by van der Straeten in “Les actes des martyrs d’Aurélien en Bourgogne: étude littéraire”. Felicis negotiatoris see below. Analecta Bollandiana 79 (1961). Gregory himself thought either that Dijon should have been the civitas capital. Wood. It should probably be seen as one aspect of the cult of Benignus. which fortunately happened to be based near one of their own properties. then. 36 J. provides a fictitious account of early missionary work in the region of Autun. suggesting the centre of both a secular unit and an ecclesiatical diocese. Andochi presbiteri. Gregory of Tours’ account of the discovery of the tomb of Benignus is not our only piece of evidence relating to the cult of this morethan-dubious martyr. separated as it is from the cathedral city of Langres.144   that Dijon. christianised it and promoted it to their own benefit. and in so 34 Gregory. provides an exact parallel. 115–44.36 This text. 35 . has absolutely nothing to say. as if Gregory of Langres — after initial doubts — and his descendents took advantage of a local (probably non-christian) cult. Felicis negotiatoris. the Passio sanctorum Herenei episcopi. “Les actes des martyrs d’Aurélien en Bourgogne: le texte de Farfa”. which survives in a single Farfa manuscript. Tyrsi diaconi. Yet one should also remember that Langres may have been a centre of some significance: it certainly boasted a major cult in that of three brothers who were martyred in the Roman persecutions. Effectively it provides a set of martyr acts which set Benignus and Dijon at the very centre of the christian history of North Burgundy. pp. One of the more remarkable works to have survived from sixth-century Burgundy is a composite passion of a number of martyrs from the region. and could even be the product of the household of Gregory of Langres or of one of his (related) successors — it is perhaps the Passio of Benignus supposedly found in Italy. Benigni presbiteri. or else that it should become the centre of a new civitas34 — the word is ambiguous. “Constructing cults in early medieval France”. Andochi presbiteri. the Tergemini — a cult about which the bishop of Tours. Decem Libri Historiarum III 19. Other sections of Gregory of Tours’ family may have made similar use of the previously existing cults of Martin and Julian at Tours and Brioude. Tyrsi diaconi. Benigni presbiteri. In the eighth century the cult was also of some significance in Northumbria. Saulieu. van der Straeten. Langres and Dijon. because abbot Ceolfrith of Wearmouth-Jarrow died at Langres. Instead of assuming that Tours. they were reflecting the presence of living supporters of these additional saints. and the precise topographical contexts of the cults of Martin. who he baptises. That Benignus has to be portrayed as the baptiser of the Tergemini is. I shall here look at two cities whose religious topography is relatively well known.39 Given the particular nature of personal attachments to saints. Benignus is promoted as a major saint not just for the diocese of Langres. Martin. at the death of Gregory’s friend Aridius might equally indicate the attachments of the dying holy man. both of them. Privatus. 38 Gregory. Decem Libri Historiarum X 29. who had come to join Julian. significantly. and should be examined on their own terms. Saturninus and Denis.     -  145 doing provides a wider context for the cult than is immediately apparent from Gregory’s remarkable chapter. that is sites of cults for which we have significant evidence in Gregory of Tours’ writings. to see how far they differ from the three centres discussed so far: Clermont and Vienne. it is dangerous to regard Tours. one might note. Ferreolus of Vienne. before we decide whether they follow the model of Tours or not.37 In all probability. Here it is important to remember the extent to which families and indeed individuals were associated with specific cults. we should simply take them for what we know them to be. 39 Gregory. but whose cults — with the possible exception of that 37 See the analysis of Gregory’s attachments in Van Dam. as announced once again by the possessed. where he is quite clearly portrayed as superior to the local Tergemini. Saints and their miracles. Other sites may have been different. or of those who were to attend his funeral. of Julian. cities in which Gregory had an interest. Martial (of Limoges). De Virtutibus sancti Juliani 30. 50–81. Julian and Benignus. Brioude and Dijon are type-sites for the cult of the saints. but also for Autun and Lyons. Symphorian of Autun and Saturninus of Toulouse. when the possessed at Brioude cried out that they were being tormented by the arrival Privatus of Javols. and which were also sites dominated in the sixth century by Gregory’s family. Brioude and Dijon as being in any sense normative. pp.38 The arrival. . an indication that their cult was too important to be ignored by the hagiographer. Gregory is interested in their lives rather than in their posthumous cults — and three of them interest him as bishops. Nevertheless.146   of Julian’s master. gives the religious topography of the Auvergne a focus seventy kilometres to the south of Clermont in Brioude. recherches sur la topographie de la ville”. 46 Gregory. P-F. and.. Wood. Clermont appears frequently in Gregory’s writings. 6. after all. the most prominent religious festival in the Clermont region is the Rogation pilgrimage from Clermont to Brioude. fortunately there is additional and important evidence to suggest that even in Gregory’s day the city’s religious topography was very different from that of Tours.48 Gregory. or alternatively are not portrayed by the bishop of Tours at all. Vieillard-Troiekouroff. He also mentions in passing a number of churches in the city.42 Abraham. Vitae Patrum IV. Brioude or Dijon.N. “Clermont-Ferrand au VIe siècle. notably by his uncle Gallus. “The ecclesiastical politics of Merovingian Clermont”. At first sight Clermont itself scarcely appears as a centre of holy power. Les monuments religieux de la Gaule d’après les œuvres de Grégoire de Tours (Paris. 41 . 47 Fournier.46 In the cases of the last four saints. with their 40 Gregory. Wood. “Clermont and Burgundy: 511–534”. however. Bibliothèque de l’École des Chartes. 119–25. pp. in: P. Vitae Patrum II. especially Illidius. however. instituted by Gallus to avert the threat of plague. 43 Gregory. Julian and Benignus. See also I. 85–102.41 It was. 21–3. Wormald ed. Ideal and reality in Frankish and Anglo-Saxon society (Oxford. Fournier. Les monuments religieux de la Gaule d’après les œuvres de Grégoire de Tours. Vitae Patrum VI. 1976).N. Not surprisingly Gregory has some interest in some of the saints of Clermont. Vitae Patrum III. M. a close reading of Gregory does reveal the existence of numerous churches and shrines in the city. pp.43 Sidonius Apollinaris. Decem Libri Historiarum II. For the christian topography of the town. 45 Gregory. 273–344.47 In Gregory’s writings. “Clermont-Ferrand au VIe siècle. De Virtutibus sancti Juliani 1–2. 48 Gregory. 44 Gregory. 128 (1970). Vitae Patrum VI. Nottingham Medieval Studies 32 (1988). pp. as we have seen. 85–102. Ferreolus. 42 Gregory. pp. and I. pp. 1983). at Vienne40 — are portrayed by Gregory differently from those of Martin. the city in which he was largely brought up.44 Quintianus of Rodez45 and Gallus himself. particularly in his narrative of the first half of the sixth century. 34–57. recherches sur la topographie de la ville”: Vieillard-Troiekouroff. that of saint Venerandus. although a significant number of the cults and churches were in existence by his day. “Clermont-Ferrand au VIe siècle. Levison. One church.51 and that it may not. making it 49 Fournier. Clermont. “Constructing cults in early medieval France: saints and churches in Burgundy and the Auvergne 400–1000”. All in all over two hundred dedications are listed. was almost literally ringed with shrines. but rather the ninthcentury Libellus de Ecclesiis Claromontanis. like other major cities such as Lyons and Vienne. and Tours. Clearly the Libellus gives us a picture of an early medieval city as it had developed by the ninth century. boasted six thousand two hundred of these anonymous saints. Vita Willibrordi 32. Within these churches were one hundred and twelve altars. 51 Alcuin. a list of the churches and altars of the city and its immediate environs.     -  147 single dominant cults. ed. And one should also note that the bishop of Tours himself names. Brioude and Dijon may all have developed by that time. Thirty-four of these churches were under the control of the bishop at the time that the list was compiled. Even allowing for confusion between saints of the same name and other errors in identification this provides a remarkable sample. of these nine were monastic. of forty-eight named saints. One should. and a number of the churches and shrines are actually referred to in passing by the bishop of Tours. There were also the bodies. so that the text does not provide a perfect control for the picture given by Gregory. referring to close on one hundred named saints. or perhaps parts of the bodies. Moreover the picture given by this sample gives a different impression from that presented on the surface by Gregory. The twenty remaining churches were in the power of the comes or of vassi dominici. a significant number of the churches and saints listed in the Libellus. however. have developed much since Gregory’s life-time. See also Wood. 50 Libellus de Ecclesiis Claromontanis. and of numerous others whose names were known to God. . remember that Tours for Alcuin in the eighth century was a scruffy place. therefore. 1920). albeit only in passing. W.49 Our main source for the religious topography of Clermont in the early middle ages is not in fact Gregory.50 This document lists fifty-four churches to be found in and around the cathedral city of Clermont. MGH SRM 7 (Hannover. recherches sur la topographie de la ville”. 55 while the Auvergnat cult of Stremonius. MGH SRM 5 (Hannover. there were the descendents of Hortensius. “Merovingian history and Merovingian hagiography”. 1986). pp. different groups favoured different saints. on the cult of Genovefa. such as that of Stremonius or indeed of the Tergemini. 54 Gregory.C. of which no single one was dominant. Decem Libri Historiarum V 49. 1996). This can be seen once again in the bishop of Tours’ writings. Among those who receive minimal attention in Gregory’s hagiography are Genovefa58 and Denis59 in the 52 See Wood. 57 Passio Praeiecti. Fouracre. bishop Cautinus. 1910). Gregory. pp.53 This is anything but the same as Tours. with its single dominant episcopal family. See also P. 58 Gregory. V 32. despite the challenge made to Gregory by Leudast and Riculf. In Gloria Martyrum 64. was championed at Issoire by one of the bêtes noires of the Decem Libri Historiarum. 21–6.54 at least up until the end of the sixth century. “The ecclesiastical politics of Merovingian Clermont”. Études critiques (Paris. 55 Gregory. Past and Present 127 (1990). M. Decem Libri Historiarum I 30. In Gloria Confessorum 89.56 and subsequently. . with a competitive upper class. Poulin. What is apparent both from Gregory and from the seventh-century Passio Praeiecti and the eighth-century Vita Boniti is that Clermont was a divided town. in the seventh century. P. by the bishop of Tours. 56 Gregory. where the descendents of Sidonius try to promote the cult of Anatolianus. by Praeiectus. In Gloria Confessorum 29. See. Gerberding. which vied for episcopal power and indeed for comital office: apart from Gregory’s own family. Fouracre and R. Moreover. 254–300. Krusch. It was not only minor saints who were ignored. “Constructing cults in early medieval France: saints and churches in Burgundy and the Auvergne 400–1000”. 5. Heinzelmann and J. Gregory. the descendents of Sidonius Apollinaris.52 It is worth setting this information alongside what else is known of the city. as we have already noted with regard to Gregory’s own family. or nearly so. at the start of the sixth century if not later. and. 59 Gregory.57 Gregory’s relative silence is all the more noteworthy in that Stremonius was supposedly one of the seven missionaries to Gaul as well as the first bishop of Clermont. It is worth pausing just a little longer over Gregory’s silence with regard to certain cults. who was martyrarius at the shrine before becoming bishop of Clermont. Les Vies anciennes de sainte Geneviève de Paris. ed. which is passed over tersely by Gregory. B. Late Merovingian France.148   quite clear that even in his day Clermont had a large number of cults. history and hagiography 640–720 (Manchester. In Gloria Martyrum 72. Decem Libri Historiarum IV 1. 53 Wood. In the sixth century the cults of Genovefa and Marcellus were being championed by royalty. MGH SRM 2 (Hannover. By contrast. “Gregory of Tours in the light of recent research”. ed. he could be equally selective when dealing with the potential Auvergnat rivals to Julian. To return to Clermont itself: it is not unreasonable to conclude that there is some connection between the numerous saints and saintcults of Clermont and the political divisions within the city — and to propose that the religious topography of Clermont was intimately connected to the city’s social and political structure. In Gloria Martyrum 52 (a miracle perhaps only recorded because of the involvement of an Auvergnat).60 although the last two receive some attention in the Histories. 27. MGH SRM 3 (Hannover. 1962). Wallace-Hadrill. apparently dominated by a single cult. and Marcellus at Chalon-sur-Saône. ed. 60 Gregory. Krusch. or with the cult of the Tergemini in Langres. Also instructive when assessing the importance of the cult is Fredegar. in other words. 1896). X 29: Vita Genovefae 17–22. 34.61 As we have seen. IV 1.     -  149 Paris region. in: idem. that of Gregory himself. The same is true of that of Denis at least by the second quarter of the seventh. and of Dijon almost certainly. 61 Gregory’s commitment to Martin is still best expressed by J. which seems to have become something of a blueprint for scholars studying the cults of Francia. B. pp. by contrast. and in the case of Tours unquestionably. 1888). the cult was dominated by a single aristocratic family. The long-haired kings (London. The Clermont model. . X 10. Tours. 30. it unquestionably had its devotees from the early sixth century onwards. 47–70. The Tours model. Gregory’s lack of interest in Genovefa and Marcellus may suggest that he was inclined to overlook — perhaps for strategic reasons — cults which could present a threat to that of his beloved Martin. Brioude and Dijon were relatively simple centres. not least from the saintly Genovefa. 14. Decem Libri Historiarum V 27. might be expected to hold for those centres where there was a more competitive social and political scene. Which of these two models was predominant in Francia is open to question: a careful survey of the religious topography of individual cities might be used as an index of social competitiveness.M. Gregory. IX 3. because of the political importance of their cult sites. might only be expected to hold in relatively simple urban centres. and even if it had not had much royal backing earlier. B. Krusch. 66 The fifth. Bischofsherrschaft in Gallien.. See also Brown. “Alcimi Edicii Aviti Viennensis Episcopi Homilia Dicta in dedicatione superioris basilicas”. with Nicetius being. 1883). MGH AA 6. 1957). pp.. Certainly it had a significant number of religious centres.and sixth-century evidence for Vienne.65 Gregory. Zur Kontinuität römischer Führungsschichten vom 4. See I. For the evidence of the epitaphs of the bishops of the city see M. 17–35. bishops drawn from hostile factions. after the former had introduced the ceremony to Clermont to secure Christ’s aid in the crises (among 62 Avitus. Jahrhundert. allows a rather different approach to the question of religious topography.N. Picard eds. 30. Decem Libri Historiarum IV 36. 1976).62 Several of the cults are registered clearly by Gregory himself. in: Studi in onore di A. 65 For the religious topography of Vienne. Homily 24. cols. 443–50. Columbanus and Merovingian Monasticism. and he also describes the divided nature of Lyonnais society. 3. Wood. nevertheless. 245. BAR International Series 113 (Oxford. vol. p. most obviously in his accounts of the episcopates of Nicetius and Priscus. a relative of Gregory. . three days of penitential prayers. For an understanding of this particular homily it is necessary to turn to the edition by Perrat and Audin. 66 Gregory. bis zum 7.B. in: H. “A prelude to Columbanus: the monastic achievement in the Burgundian territories”. 63 Gregory. Gregory. 433–51. De Virtutibus sancti Juliani 2. ed. Peiper. 2 (Berlin. Gauthier and J-Ch. Paribeni. Particularly important here is the evidence for the institution by bishop Mamertus of Vienne of the Rogations.63 Vienne is likely to have been similar. 64 Ado. Vita Theudarii.64 and reflected in the modern epithet ‘Vienne la sainte’. Lyons certainly boasted both a large number of cults and a divided political society. 1981). Calderini e R. N. Brennan eds. Clarke and M. although the political scene of the city is not recorded for this period. Vitae Patrum VIII 5. only deals with the cult of Ferreolus. prosopographische und bildungsgeschichtliche Aspekte (München. vol. which prompted Avitus of Vienne to comment that the town was protected rather by basilicas than by defences: plus haec basilicis quam propugnaculis urbs munitur. Migne PL 123. 2 (Milan. Provinces ecclesiastiques de Vienne et d’Arles (Paris. Topographie chrétienne des cités de la Gaule des origines au milieu du VIII e siècle. 61. 1986). R. however. Heinzelmann. master of his beloved Julian — not least because the martyr’s head was buried in his tomb. pp. The cults were represented by a great series of extra mural churches.150   One region where the Clermont model is likely to have been predominant is that of the Rhône valley with its numerous and still relatively populous cities. apparent from Ado’s Life of Theudarius. Soziale. once again. These are first recorded in a letter written by Sidonius to Mamertus in the spring of 473. p. “Relics and social status in the age of Gregory of Tours”. To this end he softened up his congregation with prayers. caused the rest of the population to rush from the church. is recounted by Avitus of Vienne. in his homily preached on the eve of the Rogation processions. with him. Mamertus had copied Ambrose. into returning. Homily 6. which led to the destruction by fire of the city hall. On the 67 68 Sidonius. as if there were a zone of special opportunity surrounded by solemnities’. with slight differences of emphasis. in a sense. Thereafter the natural disasters had ceased. Avitus is a well-placed witness. but only partly. As a result Mamertus planned the institution of the Rogations with some care. and had translated the body of Ferreolus and. ep. He decided that his liturgical innovation should both be seen to be an instant success and should be habitual from the start. had lived through the crisis. as he himself had. the head of Julian — the martyr of Brioude. Avitus. the discoverer of the bodies of the martyrs Gervasius and Protasius. Mamertus can dictate to the clergy and inspire the man in the street. 1. who had fled the city. and then chose the three days between ‘the feast of holy Ascension and the following Sunday. The obedience of the ordinary people shamed the rich. VII. and patron of both Sidonius and Gregory of Tours. Avitus also recounts the opposition of the senatorial aristocracy. What is most interesting for the present argument is the evidence for division within the city of Vienne — division which is partly. determined by class. Initially Mamertus had imposed fasts on the clergy and had incited the populace at large to prayer.67 According to Sidonius. and he attributes the idea of the processions to Mamertus. Avitus again situates the institution of the Rogations in a time of earthquakes. Roughly the same story. remarks Sidonius. a free period immediately following a major festival. who was left standing alone at the altar during an Easter service when a tremor. In addition. and he was preaching to a congregation part of which.68 As the godson of Mamertus. . as he openly states. noting the then size of the city’s curia. until shamed into piety. That is he chose a timespan which was. and as his successor-but-one in the episcopacy of Vienne. Mamertus instituted three days of processions and litanies as a result of a series of earthquakes. but the aristocracy is initially absent.     -  151 them the Visigothic expansion) afflicting his own city. had recently instituted Rogations on the model of those of Vienne. significantly and not unlike the Viennese aristocracy. which was organised so that there should be no stragglers. for prayers for rain or sunshine could not find favour with both the gardener and the potter at the same time. What is clear in both narratives is the psychological astuteness of Mamertus. B. 69 70 71 Gregory. V 14. Vita Caesarii I 27. This brevis atque angusta processio was focused on a basilica which was at the time close to the city walls — since Avitus implies that the church in question had to be moved.. it can reasonably be identified with the basilica in which Ferreolus. to prevent the congregation slipping away. they had got in the way of aristocratic dinners. Such a disengaged attitude to religious feasts was something that Sidonius himself would have understood. Krusch. MGH SRM 3. De Virtutibus sancti Juliani 2. who had. was buried. and that members of the senatorial aristocracy were distinctly lukewarm about any novelty. together with the head of Julian. He was aware that support for his idea was unlikely to be universal. since Mamertus had subsequently to rebuild the church on a new site. Equally important. Cyprianus et al. and he embarassed the sceptics into joining. Sidonius. without criticism. urging him to attend. who was by this time bishop of Clermont. because the original building was being undermined by the river Rhône. and he wished to use them to unify the population of Clermont. gone off to his rural estate.70 Mamertus’ success in social management was noted in a letter of Sidonius Apollinaris to the aristocrat Aper. ep.71 Sidonius. ed.152   Friday he held a first day of processions and prayers. .69 The success of this first procession ensured that of the full three days of prayer. They had not pleased everyone. These Rogations were subsequently copied throughout Gaul — as both Avitus and Sidonius bear witness. so he instituted his processions in such a way that they were an instant success. for in a letter to Eriphius recording the feast of St Justus at Lyons he noted. He thus wrote to Aper. He admitted that previous days of public prayer had been pretty lukewarm affairs. Nor was he the only bishop who resorted to tricks to entrap his congregation: better known — and less subtle — is Caesarius of Arles’ technique of having the church doors locked before he began his sermons. ep. From the writings 72 73 74 75 Sidonius. so as to make the canonical enshrining of the relic difficult. had no means of controlling the development of a cult to which he took exception. Decem Libri Historiarum IX 40. downright hostile. . in which the people of Vienne became the reincarnation of the people of Nineveh.74 He seems to have taken the presence of the relic of the Holy Cross as a challenge to his own authority. whose united penitence secured divine forgiveness. deliberately absented himself from the city. Maroveus in Poitiers. One might add the evidence for a slightly different category of opposition: that of a bishop who. Gregory. Gregory was faced with a cult that he did not like. but he knew only too well what difficulties Mamertus had had to overcome in inspiring the population of Vienne to acts of collective prayer and penance. and thus potentially within his control. Mamertus was faced with a sceptical aristocracy. Most of Gregory of Tours’ evidence on the holy topography of Gaul relates to established cults — he treats the actual process of their establishment very much less frequently. social and political realities underlying the development of the religious topography of Gaul. while waiting for the next service to begin. 28–41. Doubtless for him the great cult of Poitiers was that of Hilary. unlike the relic of the Holy Cross. and he clearly had no desire to help promote the cult of the woman who had caused him so much discomfort — even though. Gregory of Langres at Dijon and Mamertus in the Rogation liturgy of Vienne introduce us to some of the religious. on a great extra-mural basilica. This was an achievement that Sidonius wished to emulate. V 17. But it is clear from his account of events at Dijon that the institution of a cult was no cut-and-dried issue. In Gloria Confessorum 104. her tomb was outside the confines of her nunnery. or. bishop75 — focused. but exploited it to his own ends. Saints and their miracles.72 Sidonius at Lyons and Clermont. as in the case of Maroveus at Poitiers. unlike Gregory of Langres. Van Dam. theologian and.73 He resorted to the same tactic when it came to the burial of Radegund herself. and forced them to join his annual processions. faced with Radegund’s acquisition of a relic of the True Cross. yet again. Even the bishop might be sceptical.     -  153 the impromptu organisation of a ball game outside the church. perhaps more important. Gregory. pp. We now understand Gregory’s view of the Holy well enough to set against it the various alternative models that can be reconstructed from other sources. influenced largely by his experiences at two arguably eccentric places.edu/publications/medieval/vol14. To forget the scepticism and the manipulation is to misunderstand the complex processes which lay behind the creation of the religious topography of sixth-century Gaul.luc. is to ignore the enormous variety of circumstances which defined the possibilities for a religious topography in any one place. There is. At the same time. Other sixth-century cities. as indeed it has been in the last twenty years78 — but it should also be understood for what it is: one author’s view. 69–127. however. The image of the cult of the saints presented by Gregory is a remarkable reading by a single author: it deserves to be taken seriously. a fair amount of evidence. Wood. indeed. 76 On this complexity.N. Frantzen and T. and that his congregation needed to be manipulated: in Clermont Sidonius himself oversaw a similar congregation.N. devotion and cult. even in Gregory’s hagiography. The cult of saints. esp. in: A. 78 For an analysis of Gregory’s view. with its single episcopal family. “Relics and social status in the age of Gregory of Tours”. Hill eds.77 and even he was more enthusiastic about some shrines than others. see also Brown. Indeed it should make one look very carefully for indications in Gregory’s writings that not everyone was as enthusiastic about shrines as he was. . “How popular was early medieval devotion?”. Essays in Medieval Studies. crucially. oddly enough imposed from outside. 77 See. Brown.. pp. and different types of topography to describe. with their sizeable aristocracies composed of potentially rival families. I. had different stories to tell. and other sixth-century authors.J. Proceedings of the Illinois Medieval Association 14 (1997) http://www.76 This glimpse of the realities of religious enthusiasm (or its absence) needs to be borne in mind when one considers Gregory of Tours’ evidence on the cult of the saints. Brioude and Tours.154   of Sidonius and Avitus it is clear that Mamertus was faced with a sceptical aristocracy. for a less than credulous view of the miraculous and its working at the tombs of the ‘special dead’. to ignore the differences between a city like Tours. see. Popular piety: Prayer. and a city like Vienne or Clermont. one of the leading experts on the early history of the Meuse valley. a small fortress on the river Meuse protecting the bridge on the road from Tongres to Cologne. Arnoud-Jan Bijsterveld and Jos Bazelmans also made valuable comments on an earlier draft. and has remained my mentor until this moment. De . Mayke de Jong transformed my DutchEnglish into something bearing a closer resemblance to proper English. He was my teacher of the first hour. Some points in his study — notably those relating to the archaeological evidence — merit further discussion. Mayke de Jong. while Annette Visser did the final editing. We exchanged our ideas at the ESF meeting in Nicosia.D. the capital of the civitas where Maastricht was situated. It was his study on the cult places of Maastricht that sparked off a new in-depth debate on the significance of Maastricht.” Theme group 5 of the ESF programme on the Transformation of the Roman World. also at NIAS in 1999–2000. He was buried in a cemetery on the road to Tongres.1 The early history * This paper was written in the stimulating environment of the Netherlands Institute for Advanced Study in the Humanities and Social Sciences (NIAS) of the Dutch Royal Academy of Sciences. published his views on late-Roman and Merovingian Maastricht in reaction to Leupen’s study. a position it had gained after bishop Servatius died there in the second half of the fourth century. were a source of inspiration and I thank them for sharing their insights. Some see Servatius as one of the mythical city founders of early medieval Europe. and at the “Mosa Nostra” conference in Namur that same year. “Het gelijk van Sint-Servaas en Onze-Lieve Vrouwe. Last but not least I would like to thank Piet Leupen for his comments and for the stimulating discussions on the subject. following a long period in which we thought there was nothing more to be said about its early history. for sharing their ideas.MAASTRICHT AS A CENTRE OF POWER IN THE EARLY MIDDLE AGES* Frans Theuws In late Antiquity Maastricht was a northern outpost of what was then considered the civilised world. in March 1999. Maastricht would probably have remained a place of little significance. Discussions with Tom Noble and Julia Smith.H. The very fact that this insignificant place emerged as a key centre in a vast region is an indicator of the power of the saint. Even today Servatius is vital to the self-image and identity of the citizens of Maastricht. Leupen. This article was written before Alain Dierkens. Without Servatius. I did not include these in the present article in the hope that we may continue the debate on Maastricht and its related centres in the context of a future project in which the archaeological data figure more prominently. I would like to thank him for his open-minded discussions. 1 P. I would also like to thank the members of “Power and Society. Cyprus. Wim Dijkman. Erkelens-Buttinger e. This article therefore constantly moves between local history and theory. pp. 2 In addition. My first objective is to analyse the local history of Maastricht in late Antiquity and the Merovingian period. in: E. the basilica of Our Lady in the old Roman fortress and the cemeterial basilica of St Servatius.S. esp. The historiography of Maastricht and the centres in the Meuse valley forces modern scholars to explain their position in these highly specialised discussions so that they can proceed with the main argument. Instead. cult places. eds. and their relation to the bishop. Maastricht’s complex late antique and early medieval past is worth investigating. It contains two different parts. De Kerk en de Nederlanden.. instellingen. the article contains a third strand relating to problems that are discussed in detail. Panhuysen. each with a distinct emphasis. The history of late antique Maastricht cannot be understood without that of Tongres. just as the late Merovingian history of Maastricht cannot be understood without that of Liège. Most of this discussion is found in the notes. a new centre that emerged in the early eighth century.C.156   of Maastricht is hotly debated.2 The first concentrates on Maastricht’s highly controversial local history. Alain Vanderhoeven from the Institute of Archaeological Heritage of the Flemish Government in Belgium has transformed the archaeological landscape of Tongres in a similar fashion. In this section I intend to focus on the different actors relevant to such topographical elements of Maastricht as the castrum. 1996). Romeins Maastricht en zijn beelden (Maastricht/Assen.S. I have no hope of solving existing problems and shall in fact add new ones. 29–42. my second is to show how this local history relates to the debate on late antique and early medieval ‘centres of power’ and their conceptualisation. it allows us to study the significance of a centre of power in a wider social context. We have been helped here by twenty years of intensive archaeological research on the part of Maastricht’s municipal archaeological department. 1997).a.A. it is an attempt to initiate a new line of research. At a more abstract level. and the surrounding landscape. On the Roman history of Maastricht see T. I will devote special attention to the significance of aristocratic families for the early development of the Maastrichtse kapittels in de vroege Middeleeuwen”. This paper does not seek to present final results. p. 30. samenleving (Hilversum. portus.M. and particularly the efforts of its archaeologists Titus Panhuysen and Wim Dijkman. and not just because the fascinating local history offers opportunities for comparison with other centres of the period. . The key issue is the status of its major churches. Archieven. for they were essential to the constitution of society as a coherent whole. Rousseau in his influential study La Meuse et le pays Mosan. long-distance trade were responsible for the growth of Maastricht and Huy. namely. Leur importance historique avant le XIII e siècle (Namur. It has also led scholars of central places to neglect the role of aristocrats. pp. Etudes sur le grand domaine Carolingien (Aldershot. Theuws. however. In modern historiography. 24–9. more specifically.      157 town. G.5 Early medieval centres. 5 This of course comes as no surprise as many high medieval towns developed out of early medieval centres that were then automatically regarded as early towns or proto-towns and analysed from the same perspective. not only because of the patchiness of extant sources and the concomitant difficulties of interpretation.-M.’ Adherents of the economic view maintain that economic activities and.-P. Maastricht did not just flourish as a result of economically favourable conditions and long-distance trade. . 1988). The early history of Maastricht is controversial. Despy. campagnes. in J. pp.-P. In other words. le site. Dierkens eds. 145–68. J. but because the debate has been dominated by a number of unhelpful perspectives. croissance agraire dans le pays Mosan avant l’an mil: vingt ans après”. Villes et campagnes au moyen âge. 1999). “L’agglomération urbaine pendant le haut moyen age (du VIIe siècle aux environs de 1200)”. related early medieval centres in the Meuse valley.. les hommes de l’époque Romaine au XVIII e siècle (Bruxelles. 1991). Devroey. I will come back to the significance of coin production in these centres later. The institutional perspective has a different but equally problematic consequence. are different from late antique or high medieval towns. in: J. “‘Centres commerciaux’ dans la vallée de la Meuse et l’économie du Haut Moyen Âge. “Villes. 63–78. pp. Verhulst.3 This perspective has recently been criticised. Namur. Namur and Dinant. pp. 3 One advocate of this perspective is F. A. Models useful to research into other periods should not be applied uncritically to early medieval centres. F. 1993). Duvosquel and A. bishops and merchants. The production of coins was often seen as proof of the economic importance of the power centres in the Meuse valley. Revue du Nord 50 (1968). Mélanges Georges Despy (Liège. the history of Maastricht and related centres is one of kings. his office and institutions. Vers une répresentation conceptuelle des centres du haut moyen age”. 4 G. that different segments of society are studied independently. The rise of cities in north-west Europe (Cambridge. XII). in press. as this aspect has been neglected by a historiography with an almost exclusive focus on the bishop.4 The development of these centres should be interpreted in a wider context. Two of these we can identify easily: the ‘economic’ and the ‘institutional. The economic perspective seems to have been borrowed from the study of the development of later towns. Despy. 1930). Devroey. 223–60 (Repr. “Villes et campagnes aux IXe et Xe siècles: l’exemple du pays mosan”. F.). Theuws. and with the development of new concepts. A focus on power would also yield too limited a perspective.L. Although power must have played a vital role in these centres. albeit at different social levels and with different levels of intensity. for within this wide range ‘society is constructed’ and reproduced. “Centre and periphery in northern Austrasia”.H. pp.” Revue d’histoire ecclésiastique 79 (1984). R. there is more to it than that. “Saint Lambert: de l’histoire à la légende. as important aristocratic groups like the Pippinids. Werner. from a farmstead to a large town. Untersuchungen zur Geschichte einer karolingischen Stammlandschaft (Göttingen. Besteman. What we need is a new conceptualisation of these centres. 7 M. 1990). norms and ideas were given form. They were places where values. van Regteren Altena (Assen. Gerberding. they are lost sight of in an institutional perspective. .6 Yet this particular study has not led to a further analysis of the nature of episcopal power in the civitas of the Tungri. Theuws. 5–49. J. The rise of the Carolingians and the Liber Historiae Francorum (Oxford. My analysis will examine not just centres of power themselves. Der Lütticher Raum in frühkarolingischer Zeit. Aristocrats barely feature in the narrative on these central places. but the surrounding cultural landscape of which they were a part. and were reproduced. 41–69. Medieval archaeology in the Netherlands. Frankish transformations. Obviously such activity had a far greater impact in a place like early medieval Maastricht than in a farmstead. and in roughly the same region. interpreted and negotiated upon by different groups in society. pp.7 Because these groups do not have neat institutionalised histories.158   The one exception is Kupper’s study of Bishop Lambert’s Life. 1980).. Studies presented to H. It is not easy to define ‘centres of power’ and I will not make a serious attempt here. Any place can function as a centre of power. we are dealing with places that were essential to the constitution of the socio-cosmological order as a whole. Kupper. 1987). The ultimate aim is to arrive at a better understanding of the meaning of ‘centres of power’ in the early middle ages. in: J.A. The second part of the paper will therefore deal with a number of more abstract questions. in spite of the fact that they emerged in the same period. In other words. represented. which does highlight the role of aristocrats in the development of these centres and in connection with episcopal power. Heidinga eds. Actions and thoughts of aristocrats and dwellers in the pagus Texandrië (in prep. F. 6 J. Bos and H. 1. inhabited area with artisanal activities.159       M         (fig. cemeteries. with castrum and basilica of St Servatius (after Panhuysen 1986 and Dijkman and Ervynck 1998). 2. on the Cologne Tongres Saint Servatius WIJCK castel lum Jeker 0 200m Meuse 1 2 3 4 5 Fig. to a lesser extent. . 3. 5. 1. scholarly attention has focused on the dynamics of social interaction and. 4. Maastricht in the Merovingian period. Roman road from Tongres to Cologne. and from the interaction of these actors with the supernatural world and their physical environment. possible roads or tracks. reconstructed course of the Meuse.8 Until now. 1) Centres of power such as Maastricht derived their significance from the complex interaction of a varied group of social actors. 8 I realise that this is a modern categorisation of the cosmological order. the supernatural world and cultural space. Namur and the basilica of St Servatius. the cultural landscape inside and outside the centres. 10 H. See also Innes in this volume.10 This complicates any analysis of the interaction between social actors. The physical setting.     M  The bishops of the civitas of the Tungri were very peripatetic. text and gender. and the data about the new centre of Liège (c. 183–8. 1986). has mainly been perceived as either a backdrop to or a product of power relationships. pp. But what did ‘residing’ entail? The Merovingian period yields few precise indications of the location of a sedes episcopalis. 700) dates from the late eighth century. The idea and ideal of the town between late Antiquity and the early Middle Ages. What complicates matters still further is the fact that the actors involved did not always distinguish these categories (social actors.9 Dominant ideas and values represented in monuments and the landscape may well have differed significantly from the interpretations of those who ‘read’ the monuments and the cultural landscape.P. An anthropological study of the Marakwet of Kenya (Cambridge. scholars have tended to view them in terms of static representations of power. Maastricht and Liège. See for instance G. 166–8. While often recognising the symbolic nature of some of these contexts. Space. In the late Roman and Merovingian period. There are only indirect allusions to the episcopal residence being associated with the church of Our Lady in the castrum in late seventh-century Maastricht and we have no explicit information about Tongres as the location of the sedes episcopalis in late Antiquity. Much less attention has been given to other questions such as how the power of geography functioned and how the landscape was read. the supernatural and ‘cultural space’) so clearly. I will deal below with some of the actors relevant to Maastricht and comment on aspects of their presence. interpreted and negotiated upon by different social groups and actors in early medieval places of power. 1999). Moore. Brogiolo and B. Some scholars are inclined to include Huy. 9 Recent research has addressed these problems.160   relations with the supernatural. . they are believed to have resided in Tongres. Dinant. TRW series 4 (Leiden. 189–95. all of which have been viewed as ‘secondary residences’ of the bishops. Ward-Perkins. M. or more precisely. 14 Gregory devoted just a few lines to the saintly bishop Aravatius.. and the discussion on p. Geruisloze verhuizingen van de Episcopi Tungrorum.A. Sint-Servatius.-L.S. pp. On Servatius in general see: H. 430–1. van Ommeren. R. Ontstaan en vroegste Geschiedenis.13 The earliest medieval texts on Maastricht were written by Bishop Gregory of Tours (d. Panhuysen and P. pp..D. 5–48. Bisschop van Tongeren-Maastricht. Kupper. Sint-Servatius. .G. pp.12 However. Ein gallischer Bischof im arianischen Streit”. Maastricht and Liège. in: C. For a chronology of his life. 1986). Tongeren en Maastricht 1984 (BorgloonRijkel. de Dijn ed. pp. “Archéologie et Histoire. pp. 15 I adhere to this identification as there are no convincing arguments for supposing them to be two different bishops. Publications de la Société Historique et Archéologique de Limbourg 127 (1991). 1985). 419. de Dijn ed. 13 Part of the problem is of course the lack of evidence for crucial moments or periods in the history of Tongres. and the bishop’s residence. J. The often highly speculative chronology of successive ‘transfers’ of the episcopal see and their possible motives has attracted considerable attention. Aux origines de la cité de Liège (VIIIe –XIe siècle)”. and the actual early medieval dynamics of episcopal power on the other. the place where the sedes episcopalis was located. the question as to why the bishops of Tongres/ Maastricht/Liège were repeatedly on the move has not yet been adequately dealt with. pp.R. Een archeologisch en historisch probleem (Brussels.15 In his Histories.C. Het vroegste Christendom in het Maasland. Handelingen van het colloquium te Alden Biesen (Bilzen). 411–55. R. “Het gelijk van Sint-Servaas en Onze-LieveVrouwe”. i. Such an approach would help resolve the tension between the ideal of a cathedra episcopalis with a specific and stable location on the one hand. Leupen. Bisschop van Tongeren-Maastricht.M. Deel 1: Bronnen betreffende het tijdvak vanaf het jaar 359 tot en met 923”.      161 As we shall see. “Maastricht in het eerste millenium. pp. these are precisely the places that force us to adopt a very differentiated approach to the nature of episcopal power in the diocese of Tongres/Maastricht/Liège. “Servatius von Tongern. 17–36. 22–3 and 85–97. De bischoppen van Maastricht (Maastricht. Een poging tot reconstructie”. “Op zoek naar de meest geschikte residentie. Gregory wrote: ‘At that time in the fortified township (oppidum) of Tongres there lived an extremely saintly bishop 11 A. see n. which could have been in a different place. van Berkum. esp. 1990). who modern scholars usually identify as Servatius. 415. T. De vroegste stadsontwikkeling in Nederland”. De bischoppen van Maastricht. “Maastricht in het eerste millenium”. Ontstaan en vroegste Geschiedenis van de middeleeuwse steden in de zuidelijke Nederlanden. 21. 430–3. 594). De La Haye. 377–89. pp.H.e. I intend later to specify the lacunae in our knowledge that largely determine the outcome of the debate. “Bronnen voor de geschiedenis van Maastricht (359–1204). in: C. 19–31.G. 147–62. 14 All texts relating to Maastricht from the period 359 to 923 have been catalogued by H. De La Haye. Leupen. 12 Panhuysen and Leupen.11 Leupen and others distinguish between the official seat of the bishop. Brennecke. They wept and groaned as they walked behind him. ed. Van Dam. How after the lapse of many years. and then they went back home. See R. p. p. 17 The Apostle is not mentioned by name. 1988). MGH SRM 1. transl. Van Berkel. he decided to go to Rome and pray at the tomb of the Apostle. he quickly made all the preparations necessary for his own burial. It was in Tongres where 16 Gregory of Tours.’16 As Aravatius was afraid that the Huns would devastate Gaul. holy father! Good shepherd. who spent his time in vigils and fasting. and they addressed the following humble supplication to him: ‘Do not leave us. A crucial passage follows: When he reached the town of Tongres. Historiarum libri decem.17 There he received the message from the Apostle to return home: Go home quickly and put your domestic affairs in order. Judging by Gregory’s account. for with all their tears they could not turn him back. 18 De La Haye. Aravatius travelled back to Gaul.162   called Aravatius. As soon as his soul had left his body he was washed by the faithful and buried beside the public highroad. pp. transl. II–5. De bisschoppen van Maastricht. for that is the decision announced by our Lord God. his holy body was moved elsewhere I have described in my Book of Miracles. 147–8. Thorpe. He made his way to the town of Maastricht (ad Treiectinsem urbem) and there he fell ill of a mild fever. B. prepare your place of burial and have ready a clean shroud. The story about the devastation of Gaul by the Huns has captured the imagination of many scholars. Krusch and W. Levison. do not forget us!’ He gave them his blessing and the kiss of peace. He said goodbye to his clergy and all the other citizens of the town.. but it is most likely St Peter. and then with tears and lamentation he told them that they would never see his face again. but Aravatius/Servatius must have had a different reason for departing for Maastricht.18 Subscribers to this view assume that Servatius preferred the protection of the small stronghold of Maastricht to that of the large town of Tongres.: L. Gregory of Tours. “Op zoek naar de meest geschikte residentie”. and his prayers at Tongres were unable to prevent this. 75. pp. The history of the Francs (Harmondsworth. 1982). Translated texts for historians. Latin series IV (Liverpool. 114–5. and your eyes will not see the devastation which the Huns will cause in Gaul. You are about to leave this earthly life. This text has often been used as evidence for Servatius taking up residence in Maastricht. . pp. Gregory of Tours. 45–7. 23. Glory of the Confessors. the bishop first went to Tongres after returning from Rome. But this would suggest that Avaratius/Servatius left his flock behind without protection. Was Avaratius/Servatius then buried within a family context. Apart from the family. who was most certainly a member of an important regional aristocratic group. most likely in a family grave. an unforgivable act for any holy man. Der Bischof in Merowingischer Zeit (Wien. see the contributions by Wood and Le Jan in this volume.19 By moving from Tongres to Maastricht. Aravatius/Servatius departed for Maastricht to die and be buried. somewhat surprisingly. Maastricht therefore appears to have been his family’s seat of power. falls outside the scope of the institutional perspective and its rigid separation between ‘the bishop’ and his role as a member of an aristocratic group. Such behaviour. the episcopal office has become the focus of attention. to be buried in a familial context. that is all that we can deduce from Gregory’s narrative. To Gregory. but without any reference to his episcopal status? Gregory is silent on this point. The bishop left for Maastricht to die and be buried there. left for Maastricht. pp. was the location of the sedes episcopalis as well. An episcopal scion of an aristocratic family was important to his ‘clan.’ especially at the time of his death and burial. . but it seems highly unlikely. the clergy of the diocese 19 G. 1983). If we follow Gregory’s version of events. It was an episcopal city where Aravatius/Servatius made preparations for his burial and then. For further examples. Scheibelreiter. Gregory describes the departure for Maastricht as a separation from the clergy of the diocese: ‘They would never see his face again’. and Avaratius/ Servatius’ ‘move’ to Maastricht has been interpreted in institutional terms: moving the see and seeking refuge elsewhere. certainly in Gregory’s view. The funeral of an early medieval bishop would have been an ideal opportunity for representing his dual status as both bishop and aristocrat. Aravatius/Servatius must have acted in accordance with the interests of the aristocratic group to which he belonged. We must look further. there is no doubt that Tongres. Tongres is also the place where the clergy and the faithful resided. centre of the civitas. or by a desire to move the episcopal residence. for the answers. According to Gregory. It was not at all unusual for an early medieval bishop.      163 he spent time in worship before going to Rome. 245–7. Thus. the place where his relatives lived and his ancestors were buried. it was clear that Tongres was and would remain the episcopal city. There is no evidence that this move was motivated by fear of the Huns. and elsewhere. however. M. 5–28. “Servatius von Tongern”. 23 T.S. pp. Tongeren Romeinse stad (Tielt.24 This clearly indicates that no successors to Aravatius/ Servatius were buried there. Sint-Servatius. In my view. cols. G. in: C. p. this indicates that.G. two dates relate to this bishop: 535 (Council of Auvergne) and 549 (Council of Orleans). p. bisschop van Tongeren-Maastricht. de Dijn ed. De bisschoppen van Maastricht. are the material sources. See Van Dam transl. after Aravatius/Servatius. 24 W. de Boe.21 Not until the beginning of the sixth century does a new and securely documented bishop re-emerge upon the scene. The only certainty we seem to have is a terminus post quem of 359. Sint-Servatius.23 It should be stressed that not a single cult place emerged at Tongres. tijdschrift voor Limburgse geschiedenis en oudheidkunde 113 (1994). Vanvinckenroye. 125–46. 40–1: Domitianus. to a large extent.. “Wat weten we over de continuiteit van Maastricht?”. If Gregory’s Aravatius is indeed the same bishop as Servatius. pp.22 What happened in the meantime to the bishopric and to Aravatius/ Servatius’s grave? The texts are silent and so. p. 27. Servatius’s grave represented the power of a family that staked its claim against others competing for episcopal power.. there were no bishops present in Tongres or Maastricht until the start of the sixth century. 37–62. 125–32. 18 and p. Brenecke. Gregory obviously places him in the wrong century for the Huns sacked Gaul in the fifth. which is the date of the Synod of Rimini where Servatius was a participant.or fifth-century bishop who was a worthy successor to Aravatius/Servatius. for it is inconceivable that an episcopal town that lacked a saint would not make the most of an episcopal grave.G. 21 . outside the walls or at one of the large cemeteries. 39: Falco.20 Aravatius/Servatius’s death is difficult to date. This tallies with the fact that only a few early medieval cemeteries from the Meuse valley and adjacent areas contain graves dating from the second half of the fifth and the first half of the sixth 20 I thank Prof. De La Haye. p. in: C. Leupen for discussion on these matters.. The date of 384 has been suggested by the Bollandist Henschen. not in the fourth century. “De archeologische getuigen van het eerste christendom in de Civitas Tungrorum”. Glory of the Confessors. We only know that he was still alive in 359. bisschop van Tongeren-Maastricht. These rites created a link between a specific place — that of episcopal death and burial — and different actors with a vested interest in being associated with the saintly bishop. who places Aravatius/Servatius in the fifth century. esp.A. De Maasgouw. 126. an enigmatic bishop. pp. Gregory of Tours. See also R. “In welke eeuw leefde Sint Servaas?”. 22 De La Haye. p. P. de Dijn ed. 75.164   were likely to attend such important burial rites. Maastricht also had no cult of a fourth. Panhuysen. 1985).       165 century, pointing to a phase of decline and to limited resources and population numbers.25 Servatius’ grave It comes as no surprise then that there is little activity associated with Aravatius/Servatius’s grave during this period. Notwithstanding the subsequent historiography which has glorified Servatius, both the grave and the cult must have had a very low profile well into the middle of the sixth century. In his Glory of the Confessors, Gregory of Tours devoted an intriguing passage to Aravatius/Servatius’s grave:26 Aravatius is said to have been bishop of Maastricht during the time of the Huns, when they burst out for the invasion of Gaul. He is said to have been buried next to the bridge of the public road. Although snow fell around his tomb, it never moistened the marble that had been placed on top [of the tomb]. Even when these regions were gripped in the cold of the excessive frost and snow covered the ground to a thickness of three or four feet, the snow never touched his tomb. One might understand that Aravatius was a true Israelite. For as the Israelites [passed] between the walls of water, the water was an indication not of danger but of safety; and now the snow that fell around the tomb of this just man was an occasion not of moisture but of honour. Around the tomb you might see mountains of snow heaped high, but they never touch the edge of the tomb. We do not marvel when the ground is covered with snow, but we do marvel that it did not dare to touch the spot of the blessed tomb. Many times the devotion and zeal of believers have constructed an oratory (oratorium) from wood planks that had been planed smooth; but immediately the planks either are snatched by the wind or collapse of their own accord. And I believe that this continued to happen until someone came along who constructed a worthy building in honour of the glorious bishop. After some time passed Monulf became bishop of Maastricht. He built, arranged, and decorated a huge church (templum magnum) in honour of Aravatius. His body was translated into this church with great zeal and veneration, and it is now distinguished with great miracles.27 25 F. Theuws and H. Hiddink, “Der Kontakt zu Rom”, Die Franken, Wegbereiter Europas. König Chlodwich und seine Erben (Mainz, 1996), pp. 66–80. 26 Gregory of Tours, In Gloria confessorum, ed. B. Krusch, MGH SRM 1 (Hannover, 1885), c. 71, p. 340. Van Dam, Gregory of Tours. Glory of the Confessors, pp. 75–76. It would be interesting to know why Gregory thought Aravatius/Servatius worthy of attention. As Ian Wood has pointed out, Gregory was highly selective, favouring some saints and leaving out others (see Wood this volume). 27 Van Dam, Gregory of Tours. Glory of the Confessors, pp. 75–6. 166   It would seem that Aravatius/Servatius’s grave was situated in the open air. But can we take the text at face value? Historiography has until now neglected this particular aspect and concentrated instead on the later part of the text (the passage that mentions the building of a large church by bishop Monulphus in honour of Servatius), which is seen as a precise description. The church replaced a wooden oratory whose planks would not stay in place, suggesting that there was little interest in Aravatius/Servatius’s grave until bishop Monulphus built his magnum templum. Nevertheless his tomb was remembered, and a humble wooden oratory was kept up. By whom? Recent research has shown that it was not only pious Christian communities and episcopal institutions which promoted saints’ cults. It was also a concern of local family politics and aristocratic networks.28 The same may be true of Aravatius/Servatius’s grave. His own family or aristocratic group may have promoted his cult, however limited. But should we accept Gregory’s account of the humble nature of the grave architecture? Let us turn to what archaeology can tell us about the fate of Aravatius/Servatius’s grave. Excavations by the town archaeologist in the basilica of St Servatius have revealed a number of late antique and early medieval structures that are difficult to interpret. The situation is complicated still further by the fact that the remains of the eastern parts of subsequent churches were all destroyed when various crypts were built in the later Middle Ages. The excavator is convinced, however, that he has rediscovered the remains of the cella memoriae connected with Servatius’s grave: a small rectangular building measuring 4.3 m. by 3.9 m.29 Yet there is no clear evidence to substantiate this claim. The dating is based on two coins of Theodosius I (379–395) found on the concrete floor of another structure discovered immediately to the south, but we do not know whether this structure was erected in the same period.30 The subsequent history 28 See Wood this volume. T.A.S.M. Panhuysen, “Die Maastrichter Servatiuskirche im Frühmittelalter. Ein Vorbericht über die jüngsten Grabungen des städtisches Amtes für Bodendenkmalpflege Maastricht”, Kunstchronik. Monatschrift für Kunstwissenschaft, Museumswesen und Denkmalpflege 43 (1990), pp. 514–33. T.A.S.M. Panhuysen, “De Sint-Servaaskerk te Maastricht in de vroege middeleeuwen. Voorlopig eindverslag van de opgravingen door de dienst Stadsontwikkeling Maastricht in de periode 1981–1989”, Bulletin KNOB 1991, pp. 15–24. 30 I will deal with this structure later. It is difficult to evaluate such a coin find 29       167 of the small structure and its relation to later buildings is somewhat unusual. No other building activities are recorded on the site until the sixth century, when a church was built. The remains of its western part have been found, but these cannot be dated with any precision either. All we can say is that the new church was built after the end of the fifth century or later. Panhuysen identifies this building as Monulphus’s ‘templum magnum,’ mentioned by Gregory of Tours and built in the second half of the sixth century.31 Curiously, the new building left the cella memoriae untouched. If this were indeed Servatius’ cella memoriae, we would expect it to have been incorporated into the new building. Servatius’s body may have been transferred from this cella memoriae into the new church, as Gregory’s account seems to indicate.32 If so, it is still surprising that the cella memoriae was left intact, standing almost directly against the western wall, unattended until it was reused. Traces of a sarcophagus, placed there in the sixth or seventh century, have been recovered. The cella was demolished in the course of the seventh century, when the new church was enlarged in a westerly direction.33 The main argument for identifying the small building as the cella memoriae connected with Servatius’s grave is its location. One corner of its foundations was destroyed when a new confessio and grave chamber were built in the eleventh century. This superposition is the main argument for identifying the small building as Servatius’ cella memoriae. However, Panhuysen may well have fallen into a trap set for him by the clergy of the eleventh century who, while perhaps digging for Servatius’ grave, found these foundations and defined them as such.34 It is difficult to know why they would have built the new confessio and grave chamber on this very spot. There is no continuity from the early cella memoriae to the eleventh-century grave chamber and confessio. Excavations of the Carolingian basilica have yielded no architectural structures in this particular area that might be remotely connected with Servatius’ grave. This is remarkable considering the as the coins may have been circulating for a long time. The exact date of the floor and the cella memoriae remains a moot point. 31 Panhuysen, “De Sint-Servaaskerk in de vroege middeleeuwen”, p. 19. 32 See n. 25. 33 The interpretation of this western extension as a west chancel seems very hypothetical to me. 34 Panhuysen himself regarded this as one of the possibilities in a preliminary report: T. Panhuysen, “De archeoloog”, De Sint Servaas. Tweemaandelijks restauratieinformatiebulletin 39–40, (1988), pp. 309–12, esp. 312. 168   importance of the cult of Servatius in Carolingian times. Obviously, the focus of the veneration of the saint was located elsewhere. The cella memoriae that has been unearthed may have been one of several already present in the late antique cemetery. Until now, we had known of no similar examples of cellae, but this is hardly an argument for ascribing this one exception to Servatius. Only a limited area of the cemetery, located at some distance from the Roman road where we might expect such constructions, has been excavated to date (see fig. 2). We should bear in mind that the original grave of Servatius might be located at the eastern end of the church built after the fifth century. Tongres THEATER Roman ro ad + + + + + ++ + + + + + + + + + cloister + ++ SINT SERVAAS KLOOSTER Slope Colog ne ++ + VRIJTHOF BASILICA OF SAINT SERVATIUS SAINT JOHN 0 50 m Fig. 2. Maastricht. The basilica of St Servatius and excavated areas (white: Theater, Vrijthof, Basilica of Saint Servatius, Sint Servaasklooster). The locations of the cemetery surrounding the basilica and the Vrijthof cemetery, as they surfaced in the excavation trenches, are indicated by crosses. In black: structures from the tenth and eleventh centuries and later (after various publications by Panhuysen and Bloemers 1973).       169 Another surprising element is the so-called piscina located to the south of the cella memoriae. This piscina has been identified as such on the basis of a small fragment of concrete floor bearing the imprint of a lower step belonging to a stairway that has itself disappeared. The excavator has subsequently termed the piscina a baptismal font, and the building around it a baptisterium; a slightly raised floor band running along the wall should lend support to this hypothesis. But is this a sufficiently strong argument to reconstruct a baptisterium next to a small cella memoriae, which has wide-ranging consequences for the interpretation of the site? Such constellations (baptisteria in burial grounds) do exist, and baptism ad sanctos is a known feature, but it is a highly unusual phenomenon in Gaul, and an alternative interpretation will have to be found to interpret the floor.35 35 For the combination of baptisteria and memorial churches, see the extensive reviews by J. Christern of works on early Christian cult places in Spain in the Bonner Jahrbücher 148 (1984), pp. 756–66. It is certainly not so that baptisteria only occur near large episcopal churches. However, the examples given by Christern are located in the Mediterranean and in Rome and include the memorial basilicas in heremus such as the one at Qal’at Sim’an in northern Syria. In some cases the development is reversed, in that a saints’ cult with a related infrastructure is created at a church with a baptisterium. According to Christern, the baptistries near memorial churches were not intended for the local population but for pilgrims visiting the saint’s tomb. If this is the case, a possible baptismal font near the possible grave of Servatius cannot be used as proof that St Servatius’ basilica was the episcopal church. Similar doubts were raised with regard to one of the structures found underneath St Severin’s basilica south of Cologne. Päffgen wondered whether the small polygonal building in the cemetery, dating from the fourth century, might have been a baptistry. After evaluating all the evidence he had to conclude that nothing supported this proposition, and that it was in fact a two-storey grave monument (B. Päffgen, Die Ausgrabungen in St Severin zu Köln (Mainz, 1992), pp. 90–6). In the lower chamber of this building the floor was almost entirely broken out, although small parts remained. If I understand Päffgen’s description correctly, there is a band running along the wall, comparable to the one found in Maastricht. Päffgen interprets it as a band designed to prevent water from reaching the foundations from inside. Water may have streamed in from above as the lower chamber was dug into the subsoil (Päffgen, Die Ausgrabungen in St Severin zu Köln, p. 92). The floor of the piscina in Maastricht seems to be rectangular (Panhuysen, “De Sint-Servaaskerk te Maastricht in de vroege Middeleeuwen”), whereas the normal shape for a piscina in a baptistry is polygonal or round. The three volumes of Les premiers monuments chrétiens de la France (Paris, 1995–1998) make only two references to baptistries with rectangular basins, one in Reims and the other in Pianottoli-Caldarello in Sicily (see the respective entries by Neiss and Berry and Duval under these place names in volumes 3 and 1 respectively). Also, the reconstruction implies that a piscina for baptisms is present at places where there is no proper church. Furthermore, the baptistry has no further architectural history and was already destroyed in the sixth or seventh century. 170   There is more. The piscina and baptistry were thus built at a time when the cult of Servatius was not very prominent, and when the region had a comparatively small population. Could the so-called ‘piscina’ conceivably have been part of another cella memoriae that was partly dug into the subsoil so that the floor could only be reached by descending a flight of steps? Similar structures are quite common in late antique cemeteries.36 We can now give two answers, depending on the possible location of the grave, to our initial question about the fate of St Servatius’s grave. If it was located in the eastern part of the later churches, we know nothing about the grave’s original architecture, nor about any building activity prior to the construction of the new post-fifthcentury church (possibly Monulphus’ magnum templum). If, on the other hand, the cella memoriae bore some relationship to Servatius’s grave, we must conclude that nothing happened in the period between the construction of the original memoria and of the new church. Although we cannot be certain about building activities (which cannot have been extensive), the archaeological remains seem to fit Gregory’s description: Servatius’ grave architecture had a very low profile. The grave only received attention from Servatius’ family or a few local admirers from Maastricht. He was apparently not regarded as the ‘central saint’ of the civitas until the middle of the sixth century. This supposition is confirmed by another observation. According to Gregory of Tours, Bishop Monulphus built a magnum templum in honour of Servatius, a fact that has held historians and archaeologists spell-bound. Yet Monulphus is not the first sixth-century bishop we know of; he is the third. This indicates that the two previous bishops paid no attention to the cult of Servatius or, at least, their interest did not take the form of building activity around his grave.37 Once more, this suggests that Servatius was not considered the ‘official’ saint of the diocese in the first half of the sixth century. Monulphus was the first to honour him, and it is no coincidence that he and Gondulphus, who is always associated with him, are the only Merovingian bishops to be buried near the grave of Servatius.38 36 It may well be that both the cella memoriae and the floor with a step belong to the same building which had a sunken floor and two subsequent rooms, i.e. an entrance room and a second room where the dead were placed. 37 Once again, we cannot say with certainty that Servatius’ grave was on the east side. 38 We cannot be sure where they were buried in the sixth century. The later       171 The lack of interest shown by the two previous bishops and the sudden interest of Monulphus and Gondulphus in Servatius can, I think, best be explained by viewing these men as members of an aristocratic group intent on promoting ‘their’ saint. This may be an example of the planned development of a saint’s cult in relation to the interest of a specific group. This correspondence of episcopal and local group interests would explain matters more satisfactorily than the institutional perspective which stresses the episcopal role. The latter perspective has led to the conclusion that the basilica of St Servatius was an episcopal ‘Eigenkirche’, a major episcopal church (also serving as a baptismal church and parochial church) in Maastricht, where the bishops occasionally resided as well.39 To my mind, this is too institutional a view of the status and function of a church that was first and foremost a cemeterial basilica. Once again, all depends on how we deal with concepts such as ‘bishop’ and ‘episcopal property’. I would argue that the current approach to the church’s function and the episcopal office is overly determined by modern, Carolingian or even ‘Roman’ perspectives on Merovingian bishops and their property. The nature of ‘episcopal property’ should of course be interpreted within a medieval frame of reference, but this was a dynamic one; the concept of episcopal property may well have been transformed in the Carolingian period. It is worth stressing that cenotaph is outside the Merovingian church. A Merovingian double grave has been found underneath the cenotaph (Monulphus and Gondulphus?). Panhuysen, “De Sint-Servaaskerk te Maastricht in de vroege middeleeuwen”, p. 21. 39 This is Leupen’s conclusion, “Het gelijk van Sint-Servaas en Onze-LieveVrouwe”, p. 36. He considers the church as an episcopal “Eigenkirche”, a concept that is difficult to apply in these fluid situations. That this is the episcopal church par excellence is also inferred from his conclusion that the church of our lady in the castrum did not obtain this status until the late seventh century. Although it is generally accepted that no episcopal church remained in Tongres, without the help of excavations we cannot be certain. Even with the benefit of excavations, it would be difficult to distinguish an episcopal church from another church. Leupen’s view of the basilica of St Servatius as an episcopal “Eigenkirche” leads him to conclude that a change of ownership took place, for in later times the Carolingians controlled the basilica and monastery. However, a transfer would not have occurred if the basilica were controlled by an aristocratic group (with or without the king’s cooperation), such as the one Monulphus and Gondulphus belonged to (see below). In the end, we have to admit that we have no clues as to who controlled the basilica of St Servatius after Monulphus and Gondulphus around 600, or at any time before the end of the eighth century when the Carolingians were in control. Nor do we know how and when the Carolingians gained control. This is one of the great lacunae that makes our reconstructions problematic. 172   the position of Merovingian bishops was a dual one, i.e. both aristocratic and clerical. His Merovingian basilica of St Servatius should therefore be viewed as an aristocratic ‘Eigenkirche’. Episcopal graves The bishops’ membership of aristocratic groups motivated their actions, as we can also infer from the burial places of the Merovingian bishops of the bishopric of Tongres/Maastricht/Liège. With the exception of Monulphus and Gondulphus, not a single bishop was buried in or around the basilica of St Servatius, or in the church containing the sedes episcopalis in Tongres or Maastricht. Monulphus may well have had family motives for wishing to be buried near the grave of Servatius rather than ‘official’ episcopal ones. Domitianus, the bishop in office before Monulphus, was buried in Huy, possibly his family’s power base.40 The same may be true of the enigmatic Bishop Perpetuus, of whom it is claimed that he was buried in Dinant, where a cult of Perpetuus subsequently developed.41 According to a much later source, the equally enigmatic Bishop Joannes Agnus was buried in the church of the holy Cosmas in monte at Huy.42 Amandus, bishop for only three years, was buried in the monastery of Elnone.43 Remaclus, of whom we do not know for certain that 40 For the burial of Domitianus at Huy, see: A. Dierkens, “La ville de Huy avant l’an mil. Premier essai de synthèse des recherches historiques et archéologiques”, Ontstaan en vroegste geschiedenis van de middeleeuwse steden in de zuidelijke Nederlanden (S.L., 1990), pp. 391–409. 41 De La Haye, De bisschoppen van Maastricht, p. 49. 42 Huy is his home region, as he is said to have come from the nearby village of Tihange. De La Haye, De bisschoppen van Maastricht, p. 51. See also Dierkens, “La ville de Huy avant l’an mil”, pp. 404–5, for the debate on the status of this church in Huy. Dierkens is correct in questioning the status of Huy and Dinant as ‘secondary residences’ of the bishop of Tongres-Maastricht-Liège, for this qualification does properly address the nature of episcopal power in the bishopric. Dierkens believes the church of Our Lady in Huy was an episcopal church (p. 405). This may be correct for a later period (Carolingian and later) but we should consider another alternative for the Merovingian period, especially that of Domitianus, namely that the church was connected with the aristocratic group of which Domitianus was an important member, and that it gradually became incorporated into the episcopal sphere. I will come back to the relationship between aristocratic groups and these centres in the Meuse valley later. 43 De La Haye, De bisschoppen van Maastricht, p. 54.       173 he was bishop of Tongres/Maastricht, was not buried in Maastricht but in the monastery of Stavelot/Malmédy.44 Bishop Theodardus’ place of burial is not known, but later traditions maintain that Bishop Lambert transferred Theodardus’ body to Liège.45 Lambert himself was buried in a family burial ground south of Maastricht, near a chapel dedicated to St Peter.46 His successor Hubert later transferred his body to Liège. Hubert himself was buried in the newly-built church of St Peter’s at Liège.47 These examples show that, in some cases at least, family considerations influenced the choice of burial location. The same may be true for all the bishops buried outside Maastricht, and even for those (Monulphus and Gondulphus) buried in or near the basilica of St Servatius. What we need to bear in mind is that the burial of a bishop, an important member of an aristocratic group, was not a matter of chance. Their funerals represented different claims to power. As must have been the case with Servatius’ grave, those of Domitianus and Perpetuus represented a dual structure involving claims on the part of the aristocratic family and the representation of episcopal power. It is worth considering how such burials later helped to ‘construct’ the connection of a bishop to a given place, such as Huy, Dinant or the basilica of St Servatius. The position of the basilica of Servatius may be exceptional, however, certainly when compared to other churches. It is precisely for this reason that traditions have been kept alive, and that we now know of these burials. They must have played a central role in later claims by bishops to these places, especially when the bishops were members of other competing aristocratic groups. When assessing these claims, we must bear in mind the dynamic nature of episcopal power, and the constant tensions between aristocratic and episcopal elements in the constellation. Carolingian bishops 44 De La Haye, De bisschoppen van Maastricht, pp. 58–60. De La Haye, De bisschoppen van Maastricht, pp. 62–3. His translatio by Lambert to Liège (not a cult place at that time) is inconceivable. 46 De La Haye, De bisschoppen van Maastricht, pp. 66–7. Gerberding, in The rise of the Carolingians and the Liber Historiae Francorum, pp. 125–6, considers Lambertus to be an outsider, a courtier of Childeric II, who was appointed bishop from outside the region. We have to agree with Werner, Der Lütticher Raum in frühkarolingischer Zeit, p. 243, that he was of local origin. Strong evidence for this is his burial at Saint Peter’s church, believed to lie just south of Maastricht, where his father was also buried. 47 De La Haye, De bisschoppen van Maastricht, p. 75. Werner, Der Lütticher Raum in frühkarolingischer Zeit, p. 292. 45 174   probably differed from their Merovingian counterparts in constructing their claims to places such as Huy, Dinant, Tongres and the basilica of St Servatius. Our comparatively late sources on the ‘episcopal nature’ of places like Huy and Dinant (the so-called ‘Nebenresidenzen’) most likely convey a Carolingian episcopal representation, in which a discourse is created of episcopal ‘Eigenkirchen’ such as Our Lady in Huy. Most likely, the graves of these aristocrats/bishops marked the beginning of an episcopal tradition, rather than that the aristocrats/bishops were buried on existing ‘episcopal property’. After all, the christianisation of the diocese was not merely the work of clerics and missonaries, but just as much of aristocratic groups and their networks. Liège: a new Pippinid cult place We now turn to another important instance of ‘saint-making’ by a bishop within a now familiar framework: the interests of an aristocratic group. There is little doubt that in the early eighth century Bishop Hubert wanted to create a new cult centre in Liège (24 km south of Maastricht), and that for this reason he relocated Bishop Lambert’s remains to this villa.48 This action has been discussed with reference to the transfer of the bishop’s see to Liège in the course of the eighth century.49 Leupen proposes the following solution: the bishops concentrated on Liège because the king was promoting the (new) church of Our Lady inside the castrum of Maastricht, which then led to a decline of the basilica of St Servatius, which Leupen sees as an episcopal church. But if the basilica of St Servatius was the main episcopal church in Maastricht, and Servatius the champion of the bishops, why did Hubert not take Servatius’ remains to 48 Werner, Der Lütticher Raum in frühkarolingischer Zeit, pp. 280–319. J.L. Kupper, “Sources écrites: des origines à 1185”, in: M. Otte ed., Les fouilles de la place Saint Lambert à Liège (Liège, 1984), pp. 31–4. De La Haye, De bisschoppen van Maastricht, pp. 85–95, with in my opinion an incorrect interpretation of Werner’s conclusions and incorrect conclusions regarding the date of the transfer of the see from Maastricht to Liège in the years of Lambert’s episcopate (691–706). Kupper, “Saint Lambert: de l’histoire à la légende”. 49 The date of the transfer and the motives are a matter of debate. Kupper, “Archéologie et Histoire”, p. 379. For the latest discussion see: Leupen, “Het gelijk van Sint-Servaas en Onze Lieve Vrouwe.”, pp. 34–5. It is uncertain whether there was also a transfer of property (involving the basilica of St Servatius and the church of Our Lady in the fortress) in the period 650–750, as Leupen proposes.       175 Liège instead of Lambert’s in order to develop a new episcopal centre? Did the bishops no longer control the basilica of St Servatius? Was it no longer in the hands of the aristocratic group to which Hubert belonged, or did the king have some interest in it? Rather than answer these questions, I will develop another line of investigation. There is no reason to assume that Hubert was trying to develop a new episcopal see, as has often been suggested.50 Most likely he wished to create a new power centre with its own ‘sacred infrastructure’,51 adapted to the needs of the aristocratic group then in control, i.e. the Pippinids, whose sphere of influence by then included Liège.52 This was why a new saint was needed, and the murdered Lambert made an excellent martyr.53 The relocation of Lambert and the rise of his cult went hand in hand with the rise of a powerful aristocratic group.54 The bishop’s church in the castrum of Maastricht (fig. 3) But what of the church of Our Lady in the castrum of Maastricht? Not surprisingly, its status is the subject of intense debate. Some think a church already existed there in the days of Servatius, and that it was also the sedes episcopalis, with Servatius supposedly having transferred the episcopal see to Maastricht. Leupen has suggested 50 See note 11 and the discussion of the problem in Kupper “Saint Lambert. De l’histoire à la légende”, pp. 21–5. Kupper correctly opts for the second half of the eighth century as the period in which the transfer of the see took place. See also his “Archéologie et histoire: aux origines de la cité de Liège” and the comments of Genicot on his paper in La genèse et les premiers siècles des villes médiévales dans les Pays-Bas méridionaux. Un problème archéologique et historique (Brussels, 1990), pp. 450–2. 51 Kupper “Saint Lambert. De l’histoire à la légende”, p. 22. 52 It is not entirely clear when the Pippinid concentration of power developed around Liège. Werner sees in the concentration of estates an old core of Pippinid properties (Werner, Der Lütticher Raum in frühkarolingischer Zeit). Gerberding (The rise of the Carolingians and the Liber Historiae Francorum) thinks that the development of Pippinid power around Liège should be dated later i.e. the late seventh and early eighth century. 53 We will see later that Lambert (and perhaps his family) adopted a rather independent position in the aristocratic networks of the Meuse valley and vis-à-vis the king. 54 See the section on “Maastricht and the aristocrats” below. We should not, however, overlook the king. Although his role is not clear, he must have acted in accordance with at least some of the interests of the aristocratic group. It is difficult to disentangle the aristocratic networks in the Meuse valley in the late seventh and early eighth century. 176   reconstructed course of the Meuse bridge roman road 20m 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 Fig. 3. Plan of the Roman fortress at Maastricht (after Panhuysen 1996). 1. observed moat; 2. reconstructed moat; 3. foundations (fourth century and younger); 4. walls (fourth century and younger); 5. possible location of Merovingian episcopal church; 6. reconstructed trajectories of walls. 56 But the question is. with the support of the king who controlled the location. which Leupen believes had until then been the true episcopal centre in Maastricht. “Het gelijk van Sint-Servaas en Onze-Lieve-Vrouwe”. Alternatively. not Perpetuus and Domitianus. If Monulphus upgraded Maastricht. when bishops who were active in Maastricht as well as in Tongres reappear in the sources. The consecration thus took place after Clovis III granted immunity to the church (see the section “Maastricht and the Merovingian kings” below). and that the new bishops preferred Maastricht to Tongres. note 27.      177 that the church (which may already have existed — perhaps as a small royal chapel) was promoted (perhaps in accordance with the interests of the Pippinids) by the king (possibly Childeric II [672–675] and/or Clovis III [690/1–694/5]) to become the new episcopal centre in the late seventh century. Was Monulphus the bishop who upgraded Maastricht to be the episcopal see? If so.55 Contemporary textual sources reveal that by the late seventh century the church of Our Lady in the castrum contained the sedes episcopalis: Hubert was consecrated here. The reason for this is obvious: the beautiful Romanesque church of Our 55 Leupen. p. or was there no such church? Archaeologists have not been able to shed any light on these questions. where was the episcopal church of Perpetuus and Domitianus located? Was it still in Tongres. We should consider this possibility in the light of my earlier conclusion that there were no bishops in the civitas of the Tungri after Servatius. when did it become so? We do not know the answer. 36. In addition to the possibilities mentioned above — the second half of the fifth century (Servatius) and the second half of the seventh century (the king or the Pippinids) — there is a third possibility: the first half of the sixth century. the king — in co-operation with or in opposition to an aristocratic group that controlled the basilica of St Servatius — may have created a new church himself. All this was to the detriment of the basilica of St Servatius. he not only created a magnum templum over Servatius’ grave (perhaps controlled by his family). but he may also have built a new episcopal church in the castrum. 35–7. “Het gelijk van Sint-Servaas en Onze-Lieve-Vrouwe”. 56 . it was Monulphus who showed interest in Servatius’ grave. where such a complex might be expected. As we have already seen. pp. Leupen. No remains of an episcopal church (with baptisterium and domus episcopalis) have been found in the south-western corner of the fortress at Maastricht. W. 71.60 This church must have been situated in the far south-western corner of the fortress. where the bishops’ church may have been built. inside the fortress. esp. p.M.58 But a new moat was dug around the southern part of the fortress in the fifth or sixth century. Panhuysen. 138–9. The way in which the material has been presented to date does not enhance our understanding of the dating of the different phases of the site. pp. “Late Roman and early merovingian glass from a settlement site at Maastricht (Dutch south Limburg)”. whereas Van Lith suggests a date “perhaps in the fifth or at the latest.A. A sixthcentury date (“vermoedelijk al in de zesde eeuw”) is given in J. pp. 370–2). parts 1 and 2. points to some building activity in the seventh century.S.A. 58 Panhuysen/Leupen. 125–45. “Wat weten we over de continuïteit van Maastricht”. “Romeinse en vroegmiddeleeuwse munten uit een stadskernopgraving in Maastricht”. Dijkman and R. 132. 60 Problematic here is that the excavations between Wolfstraat and Havenstraat have revealed no trace of the moat on the western side of the castrum.M.S. “Archeologische kroniek van Maastricht”. the early sixth century”: S. pp.M.178   Lady dominates this particular quarter of the town. 121–5. a fifth-century date was given (“vermoedelijk al in de loop van de 5e eeuw. Publications de la Société Historique et Archéologique dans le Limbourg 129 (1993). “Maastricht in het eerste Millenium”. but only two fourth-century moats (T. “Wat weten we over de continuiteit van Maastricht?”. p. 62–76. as well as for the restoration of the castrum by the bishop in co-operation with the king. have revealed no habitation layers dating from 400/450 to 700.61 57 Panhuysen. 430. without any accompanying publication of coherent collections of material from different stratigraphic contexts to substantiate the claims. 132 and 138–40. 61 Panhuysen. 122. Later. Hulst. Thus the age of the moat changes.57 Excavations to the north of the church. 335–80.S. 59 The date of this highly significant feature has not yet been confirmed. As yet there have been no publications on the excavations in the cloister of the Church of Our Lady. Journal of Glass Studies 29 (1987).P. De Beeldenaar 4 (1983). maar niet later dan de 6e eeuw”): T. hard against the wall. 125–46. as was often the case in late Antiquity (fig. Maastricht staat op zijn verleden (Maastricht.M. one from the seventh century. pp. 1984).59 The latter date could match the one for the construction of a new episcopal church in this part of the fortress. esp.A. van Lith. pp. esp. In 1986 the moat was catalogued as one of the sixth and seventh century elements in Panhuysen. . van der Vin and T. 3).E. 47–59 and 30 (1988). Panhuysen. esp.A.A. Panhuysen. “Wat weten we over de continuiteit van Maastricht?”. This may indicate that the moat was only dug around the south-western corner of the castrum. pp. pp. north of the gate. Only the chance find of two capitals in this area. De l’histoire à la légende”. Spaces of the living and the dead: An archaeological dialogue (Oxford. was a ‘one-horse town’. K.E. like Tours. Recent works include: Werner.67 The evidence for Maastricht points in yet another direction: that of a small one-horse town where. 241–74. another ‘bipolar’ town with some distance separating the episcopal church and cemeterial basilica.M. De l’histoire à la légende”. “Saint Lambert. Galinié. this made him an acceptable hero. Maastricht was dominated by the cult of a single saint.66 Other larger and more important towns were the scene of competition between various aristocratic groups. pp. “De ‘zeven zaken’ en de frankische bisschop”. E. 64–71. with several cults developing simultaneously. For that reason Leupen calls Servatius a mythical city founder. 30. Karkow. together with a number of other places in the Meuse valley. For the hagiographer. What better symbol than the sword to characterise Lambert as bishop/aristocrat?69 He was not the first bishop in the civitas to be murdered.65 Yet there seems to be an important difference between Tours and Maastricht. De bisschoppen van Maastricht. Kupper.63 Like Tours. 87–105. 66 See Wood this volume. 67 See Wood this volume.64 In the more prosaic terminology of Wood. “Archéologie et histoire”. Young eds. p.      179 A ‘one-horse town’ 62 After the emergence of the cult of Servatius from the middle of the sixth century onwards. van Hartingsveldt. Tours was a small one-horse town dominated for a long time by a single family. p. 64 Leupen. “Saint Lambert. Wickham-Crowley and B. in: C. pp. 1). Revue Belge de Philologie et d’Histoire 67 (1989). “Het gelijk van Sint-Servaas en Onze-Lieve-Vrouwe”. Maastricht. “Tours from an archaeological standpoint”. 63 .. The best evidence dates from the late Merovingian period when Bishop Lambert was murdered in a conflict between rival aristocratic groups. 68 The historiography on Lambert and his relocation is voluminous. that of Gregory of Tours.68 His vita recalls how he drew his sword when attacked in Liège. p. 1999). H. 69 Kupper. Der Lütticher Raum. and the construction of an episcopal church (at whatever date). His predecessor 62 See Ian Wood’s contribution in this volume. De La Haye. pp. In this respect it is almost a copy of Tours. 677–94. 378. Maastricht increasingly became a bipolar centre of power with the old castrum and the episcopal church on the one hand and the cemeterial basilica of St Servatius on the other (fig. 12. Kupper. 65 See Wood this volume. aristocratic families played out their intense rivalries. first the Meuse valley. p. was bishop for only about three years. The fact that the bishops were buried in different places support this view. A more appropriate image would be that of a three-stage rocket. but locates it in Maastricht alone. I suspect that we are dealing here with a larger number of groups active in the Meuse valley. The cult of Servatius did not emerge ‘naturally’ and gradually as the result of the unrelenting piety of a faithful few.70 Amandus. and then an entire kingdom. De bisschoppen van Maastricht. and the third stage relates to the rise of power of the Pippinids and the growing influence of this group in Maastricht in the eighth century. an outsider installed by the king. is absent. However. Each of these stages was driven by the interests of a specific group of aristocrats. 62. Werner. p. On the basis of the distribution of burial places of bishops. They must have intensified with the unprecedented attempts by the Pippinids to dominate the entire area. 72 Gerberding also points to this competition (The rise of the Carolingians and the Liber Historiae Francorum). there is one notable exception. Huy and Dinant are mentioned as burial places while Namur. 235.180   Theodardus suffered the same fate. Maastricht. we can conclude that Maastricht was a small one-horse town where the nature of episcopal power was largely determined by the ever-present competition between aristocratic families for whom the occupation of the sedes episcopalis was just one element in their control of the region. The first stage was the relatively low-profile creation and upkeep of his grave. In the final analysis. who must have had their own candidate.71 Was Amandus a Pippinid candidate in a non-Pippinid centre who subsequently became involved in a fierce power struggle in the Meuse valley? The evidence for such élite competition dates mainly from the seventh century. but such struggles can hardly have been a new phenomenon. which to his mind signals the power of the Pippinid Grimoald vis-à-vis the local aristocracy. probably by the group or family Servatius belonged to.72 This aspect of episcopal power is responsible for the dynamics and multi-focal history of the see of 70 De La Haye. Der Lütticher Raum in frühkarolingischer Zeit. Werner stresses that Amandus was not chosen from among the local aristocracy. It is said that the clergy of Maastricht were hostile to him. the second stage is associated with Monulphus’s efforts in the middle of the sixth century. Does this indicate that the Pippinids barely played a role in the competition for the bishop’s see? 71 . the power centre of the Pippinids. or rather the local and regional aristocracy from which the clergy were recruited. the king. but we should not assume that the same applied in the Merovingian period. 36. Once more. Der Lütticher Raum in frühkarolingischer Zeit. He believes that Hubert was able to develop Liège because the bishops exercised almost full control over it. This does not necessarily mean that the see was in fact moved. independent of the political constellation (his family. Leupen. wishing to develop the cult of Lambert that was then gaining popularity. Werner also regards Liège as episcopal property. and without precedent. pp. the aristocrats and the Pippinids). Bishop Hubert’s activity in Liège seems to tally with Pippinid initiatives. 317–9. this would depend on our definition of ‘see’. missionary bishops/diocesan bishops. Frankish transformations. but I doubt this.75 It would be helpful to know how the various actors involved actually perceived the cemeterial basilica 73 See also Theuws. and episcopal churches/private churches. there are hardly any political motives for Hubert’s actions. who needed a new centre in a region beyond Merovingian royal control. we should conclude that we need more careful research into the diffusion of Christendom through lay networks and into the activities of the so-called ‘clergy. in prep. p.74 Leupen suspects that this immunity should also be interpreted as a sign of Pippinid control.      181 Tongres/Maastricht/Liège. It is highly unlikely. for Bishop Hubert to have acted entirely on his own. I agree with Leupen that the granting of immunity to the church of Our Lady in the fortress of Maastricht by Clovis III in the years 690 to 695 indicates of royal control. This was indeed the case later. but there is no evidence for this. The multi-focal activities may also be the reason why the bishopric of Liège became so large. and why Bishop Hubert was not so much moving the see as creating a new power centre in Liège. If we disregard the institutional perspective. such as wandering bishops/bishops with a fixed residence. which represents bishops as operating within a static. almost exclusively episcopal system. we might begin to understand why various bishops divided their time between different places. but it also was the result of the geographical extension of élite networks. He was acting as bishop of his own accord. are not in fact modern constructions in an institutionally-oriented debate. 74 . In Werner’s view. Or perhaps we should say that this was done by the Pippinids. main residences/secondary residences. “Het gelijk van Sint-Servaas en Onze-Lieve-Vrouwe”. 75 Werner. rather than with an episcopal desire to have their own centre under their control. In the vitae of bishops this expansion is generally ascribed to missionary activities. We have to ask ourselves whether opposing concepts.’73 This perspective also makes it easier to understand why ‘the see’ was moved several times. Ewig. “Bronnen voor de geschiedenis van Maastricht (359–1204)”.182   of St Servatius. pp.N. with the bishop’s church in the castrum and the basilica of St Servatius outside. . E. 81 Van Ommeren. 80 Pactus legis Salicae. Records reveal another royal visit in 669/670. The laws of the Salian Francs (Philadelphia. p.. Van Ommeren. The Merovingian kingdoms 450–751 (London/New York.’. This in turn suggests that Maastricht was fiscal property at the time.F. the Pippinid family was unable to win the glittering prize: the episcopal see. towards the end of the seventh century. Rheinische Geschichte in drei Bänden (Düsseldorf. “Bronnen voor de geschiedenis van Maastricht (359–1204)”. K. he and a number of optimates met in Maastricht in 595. 79 Once again I rely here on the work of Van Ommeren. 78 See Leupen “Het gelijk van Sint-Servaas en Onze-Lieve-Vrouwe”. Drew transl. for they honoured it with their presence on several occasions. as Roman fiscal property. . 33. p. 255–72. To my knowledge there is as yet no adequate explanation as to how this change-over worked and whether it went uncontested by local magnates. Eckhardt. p. It is then interesting to note that the Pippinids were most active in this regard in the southern Meuse valley. 157. ed. who did have an impact on this remote part of their realm. when he issued a charter for the monastery of Stavelot/Malmédy. 22. by King Childeric II. see I.77 Maastricht and the Merovingian kings It is generally accepted that the Roman fortress in Maastricht. 1994). . 1991). 20. 1980). K.78 Maastricht seems to have been at least partly in the hands of Merovingian kings. 77 For a different view on the “weak” kings. p. a church that ultimately became one of the pillars of Carolingian power. Cf. 46. Wood. p. MGH LL 4 (Hannover 1962). like other fortresses or state forests.81 His presence indicates 76 Anne-Marie Helvétius points out that the founding of private monasteries can be considered an anti-episcopal act. 268: ‘(Similiter) Treiectum convenit ut .80 which implies that the infrastructure was sufficient to house and feed a royal party of this nature. All our scant evidence indicates that. p. Frühes Mittelalter.76 This means that Maastricht had another opponent to Pippinid encroachment as powerful as the aristocratic groups: the supposedly weak Merovingian kings. was a prerogative of the Merovingian kings. a further indication that they did not control the bishop’s see (see the section “Maastricht and the countryside” below). “Bronnen voor de geschiedenis van Maastricht (359–1204)”.A.79 According to a decree of King Childebert II. 83 See Werner. 84 Wood. MGH SS 15. pp. 87 Leupen. 228–9. and been deposed by Wulfoald. “Bronnen voor de geschiedenis van Maastricht (359–1204)”. in the 680s. 599–607. in later traditions Pippin II is held partly responsible for Lambert’s murder (see Werner. pp. Childeric II may have had a special interest in Maastricht. see Werner. pp. 1888). who was a somewhat 82 Herigerus. the later bishop. pp. 35–6. until his death sometime in the years 703 to 705.84 Lambert himself was closely associated with the king and his entourage. O. Krusch. which is one of the few texts favourable to King Childeric II. 45–6. Pippin II seems to have associated himself more closely with aristocratic groups centred around the Maastricht-Liège area. “Bronnen voor de geschiedenis van Maastricht (359–1204)”. pp. The Merovingian kingdoms.86 This is a rather late text. Der Lütticher Raum in frühkarolingischer Zeit. p. Der Lütticher Raum in frühkarolingischer Zeit. 22 and 44. He may have belonged to an aristocratic faction opposed to the Pippinids. confirming our impression that the Pippinids did not control Maastricht at that time.85 Werner concludes that the relationship between Lambert and Pippin II was not very close. Van Ommeren. 243–5. This royal act may have prevented the Pippinids from taking control of the bishop’s see. Van Ommeren. 2 (Hannover. pp. Der Lütticher Raum in frühkarolingischer Zeit. 1913). pp. 85 For Lambert’s position in the complicated political arena of that time. when Lambert was again bishop. Holder-Egger. 86 Vita Landiberti auctore Nicolao. 407–29. 603. 253–66. His parents are said to have belonged to the presides. . but is nonetheless accepted as reliable. Lambert lost the see of Maastricht. Lambert. He had local supporters in the family of Lambert. However.83 According to Lambert’s vita. 124–5).      183 that Maastricht was still firmly in the hands of the king. a supporter of Childeric II. ed. this is what the author of the twelfth-century Vita Landiberti IV maintains. After the murder of Childeric II in 675. “Het gelijk van Sint-Servaas en Onze-Lieve-Vrouwe”.82 although it is difficult to judge the reliability of such detailed information provided three hundred years after the event. B. Landoaldi sociorumque eius. Late in the tenth century Heriger recounts that the same King Childeric II was present at Maastricht on another occasion and supported Saint Landoaldus. MGH SRM 6 (Hannover and Leipzig. pp. Translatio S. esp. Later. esp. who restored him to the position of bishop of Maastricht. pp. but he may also have switched allegiance to the Pippinids before Childeric II’s murder. which could mean that his father was the king’s local representative.87 The granting of immunity occurred in the period from 682/683. Another important indicator of a Merovingian king’s involvement with Maastricht is the granting of immunity by Clovis III (690/691– 694/695) to the church of Our Lady in the castrum — at least. 411. ed. Later he is supposed to have belonged to the Pippinid camp. M. Also. for it excluded other groups almost entirely. The family exercised power with the support of the king. We should bear in mind all the uncertainties that accompany this type of historicalgeographical research. reconstructed by Hardenberg.A. it tends to overestimate the size of the territory.88 The importance of the power base of the Merovingian kings in Maastricht is also illustrated by the vastness of the royal fisc. pp. as all early medieval political/ecclesiastical power depended on complicated networks. or his family’s. Its western parameter is defined by the estates of the monastery of Munsterbilzen.90 If this reconstruction is correct and if it existed in this form from early times. the situation in Maastricht may have been rather complicated in that different aristocratic groups may have controlled different parts of the bipolar centre in changing combinations. pp. the office of representative of the king and the episcopal see.A. Late Merovingian pottery kilns have been found in the southern part of this quarter (T. royal power in Maastricht could not survive on its own. This is unsurprising. Dijkman. 4). R. but it is nevertheless useful to bear in mind.M. where a trade and artisanal centre probably developed.89 It includes most of the later town as well as a number of villages further to the west (fig. 1962). This approach tends to eliminate the geographical dynamics occuring over time.184   fickle ally of Pippin II. 90 It did not extend to the east of the Meuse river. It has been suggested above that the basilica of St Servatius may have been controlled by aristocratic 88 On the relationship between aristocratic and royal power. Like episcopal power. the castrum. Bijdragen aan de geschiedenis van Maastricht uitgegeven bij gelegenheid van het 300 –jarig bestaan van de stadsbibliotheek van Maastricht 1662 31 juli 1962 (Maastricht. On the other hand. by adding up information from different periods in order to reconstruct a territory. then most of the activities of bishops and aristocrats with regard to Maastricht took place on royal property. The Merovingian fisc may well have had a territorial structure that differs from that of the Carolingian fisc. but was closely bound up with the interests of aristocratic groups. . Ideally.A. 89 H. W. Panhuysen. such a situation may not have been ideal for the king. The fisc thus comprises a large part of the fertile lands to the west of Maastricht. pp. 29–53. a concentration of power that made Lambert such a controversial figure. Miscellanea Trajectensia. 259–88. seems to have followed his own. we cannot be certain that the fisc consisted of an unbroken territory within its borders.G. and the southern boundary by the property of the bishop. However. The rise of the Carolingians and the Liber Historiae Francorum. although there is nothing to indicate that they had anything to do with the basilica of St Servatius. Hardenberg. “Opgravingen door het Gemeentelijk Oudheidkundig Bodemonderzoek Maastricht [GOBM] in het jaar 1991”. independent course. an aristocratic group would control the basilica of St Servatius. esp. “De Maastrichtse Vroenhof ”. I believe Lambert’s family achieved this. 264–74). R. Hulst. see Gerberding. Panhuysen. However.S. who then had to face a single dominant group. Publications de la Société Historique et Archéologique dans le Limbourg 128 (1992). The extent of the fisc of Maastricht as reconstructed by Hardenberg (1962). 3. Aristocratic groups needed such centres with their own sacred infrastructure. I think. It is impossible to determine the extent of the king or bishop’s control. property of the abbey of Munsterbilzen. 1. that the Pippinids decided to make Liège a centre of their own. which were different from monasteries such as Nivelles and Andenne that were created in the seventh century. The hatched line gives a crude idea of the course of the boundaries. 2. This is the assumption that underpins the next section. episcopal property. This would reveal the hypothetical nature of our understanding of Maastricht’s early medieval history. but some form of power-sharing is an attractive model for understanding Maastricht’s early history. However. It is for that reason. groups. fiscal property. both Childeric II and Clovis III did not lose their hold on Maastricht vis-à-vis the activities of local and regional aristocratic groups. . Important lacunae in our knowledge of early medieval Maastricht It might be useful to pause here and recall the gaps in our knowledge of early medieval Maastricht. 4.185       Demer Munsterbilzen MAASTRICHT TONGRES Jeker Voer Meuse 1 2 3 Fig. and if so.91 but was the entire old town royal property? Was there a Carolingian church. A fourth lacuna is the status of Tongres from the death of Servatius until the tenth century. Was the basilica already controlled by the Pippinids under Pippin II. when a monastery was attached to the basilica. 1979). Van Romeinse civitas tot middeleeuwse stad (Assen. Tongeren. We do not know whether it was located in the basilica of St Servatius. or did this not happen until after 716. to Hubert’s family. or whether it was royal property. We do not know whether it belonged to the Pippinids. A fifth lacuna is the status of the cult place at Liège and its sedes episcopalis up until the eighth century. when the bishops controlled a monasterium in the town. We do know that the king exercised some control over Tongres as well. to Alpaida’s family (see below). 15–27 and pp. when Charles Martel could make his power felt in the region? Another lacuna is the status of Liège at the time Hubert began to develop it as a cult place. 35–47. who controlled it? How did the bishop regain control over the ruined old Roman city? Perhaps because of a royal donation? There is an urgent need for a new study of the early medieval history of Tongres up to the eleventh century. 92 The standard reference work is Werner. in the church in the Maastricht castrum.92 but the research has largely been ignored 91 H. Was the episcopal see already located there at the beginning of the eighth century? Although these gaps in our knowledge prevent us from arriving at firm conclusions. they must nevertheless be kept in mind.186   The first major lacuna is the political situation surrounding the basilica of St Servatius from the time of Monulphus’ activities (and perhaps those of his family) in the mid-sixth century until control by the Carolingians in the late eighth century. A third lacuna is the location of the sedes episcopalis prior to the end of the seventh century when it was in a church in the Maastricht castrum. Baillien. Der lütticher Raum in frühkarolingischer . to the bishops. M    The aristocratic groups active in the Meuse valley have been the subject of extensive study. pp. We do not know when the Carolingians or Pippinids gained control. still in Tongres — of which we know so little — or whether it had no fixed location at all. pp.97 Details may have differed. Autour du pays Mosan (Brussels.96 However. Essai d’anthropologie sociale (Paris. Villes — Affaires — Mentalités. pp. coin production (for whatever purpose). At first sight their development reveals many parallels. but in general these centres were very similar. 257. artisan quarters. Although we lack sufficient archaeological data on Dinant. Gerberding. “Villes. 96 Devroey. Scholars have attributed this synchronous development to their function as stations along the long-distance trade route that ran from south to north and vice versa along the Meuse river. 94 Rousseau. and on the position of these centres some 30 kilometres apart — the distance that could be sailed in one day. “Villes. that of Huy not until 862 and those of Namur and Dinant only in the second half of the tenth century does not mean that no boats landed in Namur in the seventh century. Other works relevant to the study of these aristocratic groups are M. Namur and Dinant. croissance agraire dans le pays Mosan avant l’an mil: vingt ans après”. 1958). 225–50. campagnes. 139–48. pp. Famille et pouvoir dans le monde Franc (VII e–X e siècle). and much more diverse than has been assumed. campagnes”. such as the churches. “A propos de ‘burgus’ à Huy et à Namur”. . See also note 4. 1982).94 Recent criticism of this interpretation has centred on the lack of evidence for long-distance trade. important burials Zeit. which was not necessarily synchronous with the others. 1993). however. have been studied in relation to aristocratic groups. 93 Elements of these places. p. Werner.93 The development of Merovingian Maastricht has always been considered in relation to three other centres: Huy. The fact that the portus of Maastricht is mentioned before 700 (in the Vita Landiberti from c. Namur and Dinant. these centres have not been incorporated as meaningful entities into the history of aristocratic groups. campagnes”. Bergengrün. 97 Devroey. each centre sported a fortress. Or. A. They suggest that each place had its own pattern of development. an important river crossing. and some elements may have been introduced earlier or later. 95 For a full discussion of these problems. 735). A.      187 by those studying power centres in the region. “Villes. The rise of the Carolingians and the Liber Historiae Francorum. Huy. see Devroey. Die Verwandtschaft Irminas von Oeren und Adela von Pfalzel (Sigmaringen. Adelsfamilien im Umkreis der frühen Karolinger. Joris. 257. La Meuse et le Pays Mosan. 1995). R. a main church dedicated to Our Lady. more precisely.95 Both Despy and Devroey have questioned the supposed parallel histories of Maastricht. we should question whether the conflicting chronology of the sources does in fact reflect a different pattern of development. p. Le Jan. Adel und Grundherrschaft im Merowingerreich (Wiesbaden. 37–81. p. esp. pp. the seventh century saw the rise of different aristocratic groups for whom the centre was an important power base. we can identify seventh-century aristocratic families who turned these places into their power base. Namur was the base of the Pippinids. Despy. les hommes de l’époque Romaine au XVIII e siècle (Bruxelles. offices such as that of bishop. pp. Our Lady as its patron. who used its castrum as a stronghold. Dierkens. 67–115. and therefore hardly mentioned in the literature. 416–20. 401–4. rather than that of her husband. les hommes de l’époque Romaine au XVIII e siècle (Bruxelles. The crucial elements in such a power base were the following: one or more fortresses. are the profits from exchange and trade. Namur. G. Not all elements were necessarily present in all cases. Der Lütticher Raum in frühkarolingischer Zeit. and we have no need of economic arguments to explain them. Dinant: Atlas du soussol archéologique des centres urbaines anciens. With the exception of Dinant. Missing from this list. and proximity to the king. Cinq années d’archéologie en province de Namur 1990–1995 (Namur. Both the monasteries of Nivelles and Andenne may well have been constructed on the property of her family. Werner sees these properties as proof of Pippinid presence throughout the central Meuse valley. 63–78. the wife of Pippin I: her power base lay in the Meuse valley between Namur and Maastricht. and the ‘gains’ — both material and immaterial — from artisanal production (unless we assume a priori that aristocrats were not involved in these activities at all). Namur: A. pp. 63–78. I prefer to differentiate between the properties of Pippin I and those belonging to the . “L’agglomération urbaine pendant le Haut Moyen Age (du VIIe siècle aux environs de 1200)”. “Premiers structures religieuses: paroisses et chapitres jusqu’au XIIe siècle”. Namur.188   (no evidence yet in Namur and Dinant) and possibly the presence of fiscal lands (figs. cultsites linked to the family. Der Lütticher Raum in frühkarolingischer Zeit. “L’agglomération urbaine pendant le Haut Moyen Age (du VIIe siècle aux environs de 1200)”. pp.100 Finally. Le site. 33–61. Maastricht was within the sphere of 98 Huy: Dierkens. landed property. Since the early seventh century. 5 and 6). pp. 1988). 100 Werner. See also the various contributions by Plumier and Plumier-Torfs in: J. a spouse from another powerful family. Le site.99 Huy may have been connected with the family of Itta. Plumier ed. 99 Werner. Despy. Namur. count or domesticus. 1996). 1988).. In each place. Dinant (Brussels. invariably. Le site. and others might well be added. 1988). membership of an established noble family. “La ville de Huy avant l’an mil”.98 The parallels are such that we cannot ignore them. The important thing to bear in mind is that different aristocratic groups were probably active in the power centres that boasted a castrum and a cult-site with. a retinue. les hommes de l’époque Romaine au XVIII e siècle (Bruxelles. 1988). Dinant: G. 3. pp. a thesaurus.       189 Fig. Huy in Merovingian times with castrum. Plumier-Torfs and Plumier 1996) . Namur in Merovingian times with castrum. artisanal quarters. 6. church of Our Lady and cemeteries (after Dierkens 1990) Fig. 5. artisanal quarters. 1996a. Church of Our Lady and cemeteries (after Plumier 1996. and a little further: “dürfte sich Hubert somit auf das Einverstandnis Pippins II. 103 However.102 Liège and its environs probably entered the Pippinid orbit when Pippin II married Alpaida. Werner sees no special motive. . in: J. der Schaffung eines mit dem hl Lambert verbundenen religiösen Zentrums in unmittelbarer Nachbarschaft seiner bevorzugten Besitzungen Chèvremont und Jupille wohlwollend gegenüberstand und sie sehr wahrscheinlich auch förderte”. 118–25. as Pippin II’s son Grimoald was murdered there. 32. The relocation of Lambert’s relics to Liège took place in the year 716. Gerberding suggests that Hubert moved the episcopal see to Liège in order to submit the bishop to Pippinid control. p. p. and possibly others competed for dominance as well. Nonn and M. 717 or 718. “Sources écrites: des origines à 1185”. pp. Bishop Hubert. p. came from a family based in Maastricht and/or Liège. pp. had the full support of his ally Charles Martel. Gerberding. On later traditions and their context. pp. De l’histoire à la légende”. Gestützt und möglicherweise sogar dessen Interessen entsprochen haben”. he constructed the basilica Sancti Landiberti. in Der Lütticher Raum in frühkarolingischer Zeit.. he was a member of a very important local family. 101 Gerberding. Richter eds.103 This is highly likely. R. pp. The rise of the Carolingians and the Liber Historiae Francorum. pp. but not I believe for the reasons Gerberding mentions. who created the cult centre. Later sources suggest that Alpaida was the sister of Dodo. “716. Jarnut. 125–6. but there does seem to be a relationship to Charles Martel’s rise to power. “Saint Lambert. while I share Gerberding’s view that they were a Pippinid activity. as has been explained above. in which case it is unlikely that Alpaida and Lambert belonged to the same family. U. Almost immediately after Lambert’s death (703/705). “716: A crucial year for Charles Martel”. 104 Gerberding.101 Gerberding has correctly suggested that Alpaida. the domesticus who killed Lambert. 120–3. Alpaida’s son. which would also explain why a new cult centre was developed in Liège under Pippin II and Charles Martel. pp.104 Yet Hubert’s initiative was a two-stage one. regards Lambert as an outsider. Karl Martell in seiner Zeit (Sigmaringen. 1994). This murder related the Pippinid family directly to Lambert.105 In other words. which we know was finished before 714. Werner thus sees Hubert’s actions as an episcopal intitiative. the creation of the new cult aristocratic group from which Itta originated. A crucial year for Charles Martel”. in The rise of the Carolingians and the Liber Historiae Francorum.190   influence of the aristocratic group to which Bishop Lambert belonged. Gerberding. Werner. 105 Kupper. I agree with Gerberding that Liège was not part of the original power base of the Pippinids as Werner suggests: Gerberding. the second wife of Pippin II. The power base of Alpaida’s family was most likely Liège. esp. But. 206 and 214. The rise of the Carolingians and the Liber Historiae Francorum. Nivelles and Andenne might be Itta’s portion. is more cautious on the subject of cooperation between Pippin II and Hubert: “Dies lässt darauf schliessen dass Pippin II. Hubert started to create the centre while Pippin II was still in power. 307. 204–7. 134. 102 Gerberding. see the analysis by Kupper. According to Gerberding. The rise of the Carolingians and the Liber Historiae Francorum. 205–16. 27–49. the direct cause of Lambert’s translatio.108 Yet there was a major difference between the old centres and Liège/Chèvremont — it was the only one beyond royal control. Der Lütticher Raum in frühkarolingischer Zeit. and not those of Servatius. Hoffsummer-Bosson.. created in the fortress of Chèvremont by Pippin II. HoffsummerBosson on the excavations in the fortress. Chèvremont has never been associated with the creation of Liège and its sacred topography because of its relatively distant location and the many questions surrounding the chronology of its establishment. Werner. Thus. a centre with a castrum (Chèvremont). Bulletin de l’Institut Archéologique Liègois 100 (1988). she refers to the historical debate and Werner’s ideas (A. pp. . i. 108 Here we should add the monastery of Saint Mary. 1966) and the contributions in the Bulletin de l’Institut Archéologique Liègois 100 (1988). Perhaps the Pippinids originally intended to create a new centre of the type Dinant-Namur-Huy-Maastricht. were still in power.e. 107 It probably dates from the early eighth century. of the kind we have just discussed. It is a tempting hypothesis. Werner.107 But was there another hill near Liège suitable for building such a fortress? I view Chèvremont and Liège as two building blocks in a power centre typical of the Central Meuse valley. Charles Martel’s maternal family rose to great importance in a short time. Der Lütticher Raum in frühkarolingischer Zeit. a cult place (St Lambert’s basilica). Hoffsummer-Bosson would surely have mentioned it. Werner’s wish to see the Liège/Chevremont area as belonging to the Pippinid sphere of influence in the first half of the seventh century makes him question this date of construction. no Merovingian pottery is mentioned or illustrated. Servatius was associated with a long history in which the Pippinids played no role. The rapid development of this new centre must have been closely linked with Charles Martel’s victories. were moved to Liège. as Werner suggests. 410–41. 422–37. See also: M. with its construction contemporaneous with that of the cult-site at Liège. Chèvremont was clearly more than a fortress with a military function. If archaeological evidence could have established beyond doubt a seventh-century date for the first construction activities.      191 place was already well under way when Pippin II. “Chèvremont: l’apport des sources archéologiques”.106 The actual removal of Lambert’s relics took place when Charles Martel had already taken over. Only later — the second stage — was the bishop’s see moved to Liège. It would be worthwhile to carry out new excavations in the fortress. Josse. pp. pp. It is referred to as Novum Castellum early in the eighth century. If we assume 106 It is uncertain whether the relocation of Lambert’s relics thirteen years after his murder was already planned from the beginning. Le domain de Jupille des origines à 1297 (Bruxelles. In the paper by A. artisanal quarters etc. I believe this was the reason why Lambert’s remains. In the discussion on dating. as well as his consecutive wives Plectrud and Alpaida. but this time connected with Alpaida’s family. 71–87). That leaves a royal or aristocratic route. was a relative of Alpaida. But once again. centred on the castrum? The conclusion is that the Pippinids did not gain control over the basilica via the episcopal ‘route’. I will present one of the many possibilities here. came from other families. Namur. The Pippinids gained a strong influence in the Maastricht-Liège area after the alliance of Pippin II with Alpaida. The situation is thus as follows: just as the Pippinids exerted no influence over the bishop’s see in the seventh and early eighth century. we can understand Pippin’s interest in her and her family. for a new centre. However. Huy. in which case she and her family chose a martyr who was a victim of their own family. centres that were different from monasteries such as Nivelles and Andenne. Lambert’s murderer. Is that because bishops.109 Only after the Pippinids managed to break the aristocratic and royal hold on Maastricht did they begin to control the basilica built over St Servatius’s grave and the castrum with the bishop’s see. like Lambert. Although these two bishops were buried in the basilica. the move to Liège made considerable sense. Surprisingly. there was no immediate need to move the episcopal see. In that case it is astonishing that we hear nothing of it. after Monulphus and Gondulphus. . no episcopal claims were made in Carolingian times. 110 Here I wish to return to the problem of how the Pippinids/Carolingians gained control of the basilica of St Servatius (which is not the same as gaining control of the episcopal see). An interesting alternative could be that Alpaida’s family controlled the basilica. that of Monulphus and Gondulphus)? Were they able to control it for most of the seventh and early eighth century? In Carolingian times it was again firmly in the hands of one family: the Pippinids. if the basilica was controlled by an aristocratic group the royal route would only be possible after a confiscation and donation by the king of the basilica to the Pippinids. Lambert’s relics were an excellent choice indeed: a new saint. but if it took longer. Maybe the “route” was a silent one. Huy and Maastricht in their exercise of power. but were intent on creating a new aristocratic centre linked with Alpaida’s family. this fits within our representation of Lambert as a fickle ally of the Pippinids. for they provided an important entrance to Maastricht.110 If this happened shortly after Charles Martel rose to power. unlike in Huy and Dinant where bishops were also buried. Namur. Nivelles and others in that the latter contained the grave of a saint who was a mem- 109 A cynical element here is the possibility that Dodo. The cult places of Maastricht (castrum). and Dinant differed from the monasteries of Andenne. If Alpaida’s family controlled the basilica of St Servatius in addition to some estates around Liège. So who then was responsible for the move away from a traditionally prestigious place? The creation of Liège/ Chèvremont shows that aristocratic groups needed composite centres such as Dinant. the bishops exerted little over the basilica. Is this because the basilica had always remained firmly in the hands of an aristocratic family (e. the bishops in the seventh and eighth centuries do not seem to exercise control of the basilica.g.192   that Bishop Hubert and the Pippinids did not wish to move the episcopal see. . pp. 31. p. 730). artisans (and builders). 112 This part of the vita seems to describe actual events.     The social actors discussed so far — the bishop. That clerics were a regular presence in Maastricht is also clear from the account of Bishop Lambert’s murder (c. C. Der Lütticher Raum in frühkarolingischer Zeit. we now turn to others who were important to social interaction in early medieval Maastricht and who should not be overlooked. 111 J. Deeters. merchants and other inhabitants.112 Who were these sacerdotes? Most likely they were members of the aristocratic families who controlled the various cult places in the Meuse valley and in the bishopric in general. See Werner. . towards the middle of the seventh century. Der Lütticher Raum in frühkarolingischer Zeit. n. Bishops and aristocrats are difficult to distinguish: the Janus-like early medieval aristocracy had both a lay and a clerical face. This seems not to be the case in centres with churches consecrated to the Virgin. De bisschoppen van Maastricht. p. pp. 54.113 Although we know little of the status of the Maastricht clergy. Der Lütticher Raum in frühkarolingischer Zeit. 322–3. p. we sense their presence in the sources. p. a monasterium was attached to the cemeterial basilica of St Servatius. Both central churches and family monasteries had their place in the ‘sacred infrastructure’ of aristocratic families. De La Haye.111 Most likely the inhabitants had their predecessors. Werner. king and aristocrats — were not the only ones who determined the role and significance of Maastricht. 1970). it is difficult to imagine Christian Maastricht without any clergy. the saint was driven out of Maastricht by sacerdotes gentis illium. Lambert was supposedly murdered in the company of priests and in a building containing a dormitory for clerics. “Sources écrites: des origines à 1185”. They are the clergy. a conclusion that we also draw from other texts. 288. The Life of Amandus recounts how. . 17. The king was clearly a powerful factor in Maastricht until the end of the seventh century. 231–3. 14. In the eighth century. 113 Werner. but they were without doubt the most powerful. Kupper.      193 ber of the founding family. Servatiusstift und Stadt Maastricht. Untersuchungen zu Entstehung und Verfassung (Bonn. On the basis of admittedly patchy textual evidence. Dierkens eds. We may assume that the volume of trade and transport would have been considerably less at an earlier date in the far north. ero114 Panhuysen. in: J. Duvosquel and A. Revue du Nord 61 (1979). Ervynck.194   To find out more about artisans in Merovingian Maastricht. Sablerolles. Archaeologica Mosana 1 (Maastricht. pp. two sites that on a structural level may be highly comparable to Maastricht. Devroey. X). 185–202. 15–23. Vormen uit vuur 155 (1995). see the recent work by Stephane Lebecq: S.-P. ivory and teeth: The use of animal skeletal materials in Roman and early Medieval Maastricht. Distribution and Demand (Leiden/Boston/Köln. Y. pp. Lebecq. bone. 1993). 73–82. before abbeys were built or when they owned less property. Several excavations in the modern town have yielded evidence of glass-making. S. 92–5. (Aldershot. bone-working. nr.116 However.. Galinié eds.-P. Hodges and W.M. some of which were building materials. via Maastricht to Tongres and beyond. 116 Despy. S. 115 See elsewhere in this volume for Hedeager’s contribution on Gudme and Lundeborg. Devroey. W. Dijkman/A. “Villes et campagnes”. 1997). pottery production. 3–5 novembre 1994 (Tours. “Quentovic: un état de question”. Gauthier and H. we have to turn to archaeological evidence. Nowadays it bears the name Wijck.C. 1998). Mélanges Georges Despy (Liège. most of the written evidence dates from the Carolingian period. Bowden eds. Antler. 117 For trade and artisanal activities in general. Actes du congrès internationale. 1998). The sixth century. “Les échanges dans la Gaule du nord au VIe siècle. Les services de transport à l’abbaye de Prüm au IXe siècle”. 169–76. The presence of these artisans must have been vital to the contemporary view of Maastricht as a true power centre. Gregoire de Tours et l’espace gaulois.117 An interesting but enigmatic aspect of early medieval Maastricht is the development of the quarter on the opposite bank of the Meuse. 543–69 (repr. “Made in Maastricht: glaskralen uit de Merovingische tijd. pp. Villes et campagnes au Moyen Age. 415–28.. “Villes et campagnes aux IXe et Xe siècles: l’example du pays Mosan”.115 There is no direct textual or archaeological evidence for traders and barge operators from the Merovingian period. Despy and Devroey have emphasised the importance of trade. in: N. pp. “Gregoire de Tours et la vie d’échanges dans la Gaule du VIe siècle. Maastricht staat op zijn verleden. Etudes sur le grand domaine carolingien.118 Unfortunately. Studien zur Sachsenforschung 8 (1993). 1991). Lebecq. pp. in: R. Lebecq.. and coin production. such as the one from Cologne. J.114 In addition. and from monks and nuns who organised the transport of produce from outlying estates to their abbey. S. pp. there were building activities that required a skilled workforce. in: J. Production. from the Latin vicus. Devroey. especially along old Roman roads. often an indication for a trading and artisanal quarter. Lebecq. 118 For discussion of this term. Tours. metal-working. “Pour une histoire parallèle de Quentovic et Dorestat. see: A. horn.-F Koch. but their presence is evident from imports. “Phasen in der Entstehung von . 318. Translatio et Miracula SS Marcelini et Petri. . pp. p. Van Ommeren. pp. 122.120 If Wijck’s artisanal and trade quarter had already developed in Merovingian times. 1970). 261. 123 J. the late medieval property of the chapter of St Martin in Liège. ed. mainly inhabited by merchants. 1887). p. 119 Vita Landiberti vetustissima. esp. De reconstructie van een middeleeuws landschap. p. 371. 45. MGH SRM 6 (Hannover. Nederzettingsgeschiedenis en instellingen van de heerlijkheden Eijsden en Breust bij Maastricht (10e-19e eeuw) (Assen/ Maastricht. 1998). 31–2. The complete Einhard (Ontario. G. Festschrift für Franz Petri (Bonn. but it was clearly already in existence. In her contribution to this volume. Waitz.119 mentioned in passing in a description of Bishop Lambert’s murder thirty years earlier. 1986). with its fortress and cult place. Pippinid or episcopal property has ever been identified immediately Kaufmannsniederlassungen zwischen Maas und Nordsee in der Karolingerzeit”. It is impossible to reconstruct early medieval property relations east of the river. 1913). the royal fisc lay to the west of the Meuse. 289. Did the same apply to Maastricht? The second observation relates to the widely-held belief that traders regularly operated under royal protection. As we have noted already. Carlemagne’s courtier. 238–64. “Bronnen voor de geschiedenis van Maastricht (359–1204)”. 121 We cannot rule out the development of an artisanal quarter on the west bank. Krusch. His corpse was brought back from Liège by boat. 25. Landschaft und Geschichte. we can make two interesting observations. p.122 but Maastricht seems to have been an exception. 120 Einhard.121 and if the presence of pottery production in its southern-most part is an indication of this early development. there was a clear separation between this quarter and Maastricht’s older centre. Translation: P. pp. Hartmann. though there is as yet no evidence for this. 730) that we hear of a portus at Maastricht. esp. 312–24. Further to the south lay the estate of Breust. and probably episcopal or royal property at an earlier stage. Whether the portus was situated in Wijck is not certain. First.E. 122 Verhulst. “Bronnen voor de geschiedenis van Maastricht (359–1204)”.123 No royal. The rise of cities in north-western Europe. Hedeager describes craftsmen and traders as quintessential ‘outsiders’ who derived great prestige from this status. Van Ommeren. It is not until the Vita Landiberti (c. p. MGH SS 15 (Hannover. B. Around 830. Einhard explained in his Translatio et Miracula SS Marcellini et Petri that Maastricht was a vicus. Many of the later Carolingian trade centres did enjoy some form of royal protection. ed. Dutton.      195 sion caused by the river has washed away most of the evidence. a place filled with archaeological riddles. 128 Panhuysen. in: J. By about 800. 1996). Whereas there is considerable evidence of pottery. the non-presence of material is central to understanding the processes involved. the situation had probably changed. Pieterstraat (Rijksarchief ). but if an artisanal and trade quarter had developed in Wijck in Merovingian times. in the triangular area between the Sambre and Meuse rivers. Dijkman and Ervynck do not record Carolingian artisanal activities relating to boneworking (“Antler. Ceramique. comparable evidence. 126 Once again. Cinq années d’archéologie en province de Namur 1990–1995 (Namur. Der Lütticher Raum in frühkarolingischer Zeit. but none from the Carolingian period. although not entirely absent. The only clearly identifiable element is the newly-built basilica of St Servatius. 95–8..126 Recent excavations have been carried out in Namur at the Grognon site and its surroundings. p. near the supposed location of the portus on the Sambre. “De Sint-Servaaskerk te Maastricht in de vroege middeleeuwen”. “La chapelle Saint Hilaire”. It therefore seems highly unlikely. Hondstraat 13–17. Maastricht: The yearly reports record activities dating from Merovingian times at several sites encircling the old castrum. whose walls were maintained till 124 Werner. this may have been precisely because of its intermediary position between the various spheres of influence. These show that in Carolingian times the oratory of St Hilarius was situated on top of the previous artisanal quarter. Plumier ed. Excavations in Maastricht. as does the notion that all later destruction reached the precise depth of the Merovingian layers. which would suggest that the area had a different function then. as Hedeager suggests elsewhere in this volume.125 The rather tenuous archaeological explanation for this curious phenomenon is that later activities destroyed earlier layers.e. horn.127 Something similar may have happened in Carolingian Maastricht. 81). Jodenstraat. Wolfstraat/Havenstraat. and archaeological reports should place more emphasis on this. But this does not explain how a growing number of excavations have yielded supposed identical patterns of destruction in three different centres. 96. I am referring here to the following excavations: Witmakersstraat. bone-work and metal-work from the Merovingian era.124 This may be due to a lack of evidence. ivory and teeth”. 125 . p. i. 21.196   to the east of Maastricht.128 And then there is the Roman castrum. It may have been akin to Lundeborg in relation to Gudme. Namur: see various contributions in n. which Panhuysen dates to roughly the middle of the eighth century. bone. Plumier. is difficult to find for the Carolingian period. 127 J. pp. Huy and Namur have revealed a significant new feature. 67–90. Perhaps artisanal activities were moved out of the old centres to quarters like Wijck or to a quarter north of the old castrum where streets run at right angles to the Meuse as in Dinant. This presents us with an enigma. 2) have yet to reveal the presence of a Carolingian artisanal quarter. pp. 130 .129 The details elude us. but first we will concentrate on a more abstract 129 Panhuysen. Der Lütticher Raum in frühkarolingischer Zeit. where they lived.      197 the end of the Carolingian period. “Das Testament des Diakons Adalgisel-Grimo vom Jahre 634”. We need to know who else lived in Maastricht in the Merovingian period. 1999). “Handwerk in der Karolingerzeit”.131 The changes may also have spelled a change in status for artisans and traders. and for their position in society in general. T. Maastricht staat op zijn verleden. taking over the functions of the preceding artisanal quarter on the left bank of the Meuse around the castrum. pp. “A fetishism for commodities: ninth century glass-making at San Vincenzo al Volturno”. p. R. More generally. 32–37. but which we must certainly bear in mind. p. the largest group of people is the most enigmatic. 118–38 (Original publication: Trierer Zeitschrift 7 (1932). 115. 424–9.. Huy and Namur underwent a major transformation after about 700. 21. Levison. Capelle. Werner. This can only be understood within the context of the development of major monastic establishments in this period. These are questions that we cannot fully understand at present.132 Archaeology can provide some answers. Mendera ed. Or perhaps they were moved even further away to monasteries. Aus rheinischer und fränkischer Frühzeit. 91. As is usually the case with the early Middle Ages. and whether they were dependent or free. and of the complex transport systems described by Devroey. what their numbers were. in: M. Karl der Grosse und Papst Leo III in Paderborn (Mainz. W. 132 Van Ommeren. pp. Hodges. Kunst und Kultur der Karolingerzeit. which recent excavations reveal to have been important production centres in the Carolingian period. but it is clear that the nature and function of these centres changed profoundly in the course of the eighth century.130 Excavations around the basilica of St Servatius (fig. Ausgewählte Aufsätze von Wilhelm Levison (Düsseldorf. 1948). We do know of one group. the lepers of Maastricht. Archeologia e storia della produzione del vetro preindustriale (Siena. archaeological evidence has shown that places like Maastricht. 69–85). 131 See n. “Bronnen voor de geschiedenis van Maastricht (359–1204)”. pp. as Adalgisel Grimo donated land to them in his testament of 634. pp. as we might have expected this important Carolingian abbey to be the focus of a whole new centre. 1991). Carver. The physical context cannot be considered as a mere product of the other two components.134 There was nothing commercial about their supply. campagnes”. Devroey. This is an important insight. Archaeological research and the european town in the first millennium (Oxford. “Villes. yet Devroey’s explanation remains embedded in the ‘economic perspective’. I maintained that this was a matter of complex dialectics between the social actors.198   level of analysis and examine the ways in which early medieval Maastricht manifested itself as a ‘centre of power. have questioned the importance attributed to long-distance trade and artisanal activities as major incentives for the development of early medieval centres. Devroey.135 He distinguishes between early medieval towns with a ChristianMediterranean background and the towns of non-Christian northern and eastern Europe.’ adopts another approach. as well as their interaction with the supernatural and the physical world. 1993).H. Arguments in stone. Martin Carver. Devroey stresses the independent development of each centre but is less clear about why they flourished. other than to discuss their integration into the manorial economy of the early middle ages. in his ‘Arguments in Stone. it is important in its own right. 134 . 135 M. He sees such centres as being largely dependent on a closed regional economy. thanks to the surplus from estates handed over in the form of taxes or rents. and Despy before him. What was the chemistry of early medieval Maastricht.133 He. “Villes. Various scholars have sought to reconceptualise centres of power. He uses the twin — and opposing — 133 Devroey.O. 251–260. has presented important research on the Meuse valley. and how did it function as a centre of power? At the beginning of this paper. campagnes”. pp. for example. We need to develop a new frame of reference to replace the institutional and economic perspectives that have so far dominated the research.’ L A         The above discussion serves as a starting point for further hypotheses and is not a matter of firm conclusion. Towns in transition. 252.138 What matters is ‘a sufficiently assured social hierarchy and control of surplus’. “Towns. pp. societies and ideas: the not-so-strange case of late Roman and early Merovingian Metz”.T. p. 137 . Roskams.. Halsall regards the social rather than the ‘ideological sphere’ as the ‘key to urban survival from late Roman to early medieval times’. 278. Arguments in stone. Loseby eds. 235–61. 159–83. 1996). in: N. but his own Marxist approach with its inevitable ‘slave mode of production’. ‘a tributary mode of production’. Why should we favour a perspective in which ‘agencies are always seen as rooted in specifically 136 Carver. Loseby eds. p. 138 G. a ‘debate about alternative strategies for living’. Discussing the usefulness of the search for continuity of urban life. esp. In my opinion.. in: N. 262–88. Urban evolution in late Antiquity and the early Middle Ages (Aldershot. Carver. which in turn creates a major shift in the nature of urban communities. he stresses the need to look for diversity of urban settlements at different periods. Christie and S.139 This seems self-evident. in: N. 139 Halsall.T. 57. Christie and S. pp. p. Towns in transition. Roskams identifies two ‘radically different ways. 279. neither the idealist nor materialist position alone can help us. if we want to understand the significance of towns — and not just early medieval towns — in a wider social context. and his own explicit Marxist perspective with its materialist counterpart.      199 concepts of ‘bureaucratic’ and ‘baronial’ state to describe the contexts in which these towns flourished.137 Carver’s insistence on ideology and ‘the argument’ as a major driving force in the development of the town has drawn criticism from Halsall and Roskams. Christie and S.141 I share Roskams’ criticism.T. Urban evolution in late Antiquity and the early Middle Ages (Aldershot. “Urban transition”.136 Carver sees the differences between the towns as ‘largely a record of ideological investment’. pp. 1996). His major criticism of Carver’s model is that it leaves no room for explaining the change from one political constellation to the next. Loseby eds. S. Roskams. Arguments in stone. Towns in transition.140 He equates Carver’s approach with the idealist view. “Urban transition in early medieval Britain: the case of York”. ‘localised tributary relations’ and ‘feudal relations’ cannot help us much either. but does it in itself determine the different cultural forms that urbanisation might take? Roskams goes even further in his criticism. 140 S. p.. 141 Roskams. from either an idealist or a materialist standpoint’. societies and ideas: the not-so-strange case of late Roman and early Merovingian Metz”. “Urban transition in North Africa: Roman and medieval towns of the Maghreb”. “Towns. Halsall. To explain this diversity. 18. and finally. 279. and that practices are connected with ideas on many levels and in many. space and the constitution of society. gender relations etc. Grierson. 143 P. power centres in their social and symbolic landscape. and it should be approached with the aid of the vast body of archaeological material and theory now at our disposal. Transactions of the Royal Historical Society 9 (1959). “Commerce in the dark ages: a critique of the evidence”. “Urban transition”. all of which affect the nature of the data set. contexts?142 Explanations should be able to account for practices and ideas.. refuse deposition is a cultural activity which relates to ideas about hygiene. thus questioning traditional approaches to early medieval economies based on modern common sense. C          At the beginning of this paper. It is not my intention now to provide an all-embracing interpretative framework. pp. Duby. Exchange did play an important role in this development. This reflects my present state of mind. Maastricht and the whole transactional order Philip Grierson in the 1950s. Instead. have alerted medievalists to the anthropological concepts of gift exchange. p. .200   material reality rather than in ideas’ when we know that such ‘agencies’ are rooted in both. I criticised the dominance ascribed to economic processes in the development of centres such as Maastricht.143 The debate on the 142 Roskams. The early growth of the European economy. However. The topics I wish to present are the following: centres of power and the articulation of exchange spheres. 123–40. G. if not all. I have opted for the less ambitious course of proposing some new areas for future research. Warriors and peasants from the seventh to the twelfth century (Ithaca. rather than the full range of possible research areas. the cultural appropriation of past space. the position of elements (animals and plants) in the cosmological order. Nor do I deal with all themes in equal depth. 1989). and then George Duby in the 1970s. His examples of refuse depositions seem to be based on the assumption that these practices inform us mainly about ancient forms of food supply and consumption patterns. 909–1049 (Ithaca/London. the terms “prestige goods economy” and “gift exchange” are often used interchangeably.J. Taking their cue from anthropologists. and societies with an economy based on commodity exchange on the other. Rosenwein. “The internal structure and regional context of early Iron Age society in south-western Germany”. Inalienable possessions: the paradox of keeping while giving (Berkeley. One well-known example in the field of the exchange of prestige goods is: S. 1992). 1999). 73–112. VIII e–XII e siècles. Valuable grave goods supposedly fall into the former category. 144 There is a wealth of literature available. Bulletin of the Institute of Archaeology 15 (1978). see J. which supposedly developed later into a mercantile economy dominated by competing commercial centres. objects acquire new meanings and what was once a humble pot may become a sacred vessel.146 Weiner maintains that giving often entails keeping inalienable objects.144 has led to a distinction between societies with a gift-exchange or prestige-goods economy on the one hand. archaeologists have tried to distinguish between prestige goods — potential gifts — and mere commodities. Premier essor de l’économie européenne (Paris. and Barbara Rosenwein has rightly criticised it in one of her famous studies of Cluny. pp. The social meaning of Cluny’s property. Frankenstein and M. In the early 1980s Chris Gregory helped guide the future debate by defining gift exchange as ‘the exchange of inalienable objects between interdependent transactors’ and commodity exchange as ‘the Originally published as: Guerriers et Paysans. retainers and their relationship in Beowulf (Amsterdam. . 1973).      201 conceptualisation of the ‘economic’ among anthropologists. 1989).147 But how can we make such a distinction with only the object to go by? Over time. Several authors have subsequently stressed the importance of gift exchange in the early middle ages. 146 A. pp. By weapons made worthy: lords. Annette Weiner. 125–43. 145 B. Weiner. pottery into the latter. and have accordingly suggested that the early medieval economy was a gift-exchange economy. This is a false dichotomy that obcures our understanding of early medieval economies. which also influenced archaeology. 147 In archaeological literature. Bazelmans. Rowlands. To be the neighbor of Saint Peter. has argued that valuable objects were kept out of the gift exchange as part of a strategy of defining and reproducing the identity of social groups and individuals. For a recent discussion on the exchange of valuable objects between lords and warrior/followers.145 Anthropologists have brought new perspectives to the debate on ‘exchange’. for example. pp. 24. Money and the morality of exchange. Appadurai ed. The social life of things: commodities in a cultural perspective (Cambridge. Bloch and J. 151 Thus specific transactions such as paying rent or transferring surpluses can only be qualified after an assessment of the meaning in the socio-ideological sphere. Both transactions exist side by side in many types of societies.. pp. . p. As Bloch and Parry explain. values and ideas. a move from one (long or shortterm) sphere to another may involve a move from one field of values to another. in: A. Parry.152 whereas shortterm transactions spring from individual behaviour and gains.153 It is possible to transfer an object from one sphere to another. I. The social life of things. Appadurai. Gifts and commodities (London. “Introduction: commodities and the politics of value”. and specific objects are not necessarily confined to either of the spheres. “The cultural biography of things: commoditization as process”. 64–94. and objects may be transformed from a commodity to a gift. Appadurai ed. however. such transformations are complex affairs. Kopytoff.150 The emphasis here seems to have shifted from the objects exchanged and the actors involved to the meaning of the transaction and its perception by the actors. 1988). 3–63. long-term transactions relate to the reproduction of the social and cosmological order. “Introduction: money and the morality of exchange”. for each sphere has its own norms..202   exchange of alienable objects between independent transactors’. 1982). Thus. 100–1. pp. Gregory.151 In this perspective. 1–32. M. with the result that objects undergo a process of transformation and obtain new meanings. pp. in: J.149 Bloch and Parry no longer view gift exchange and commodity exchange as opposing concepts. 152 Transactions also take place between members of low-ranking families.148 Several anthropologists have developed this idea and provided us with new perspectives that also apply to the early middle ages. deeply affecting all of society. or even a sacred object and vice versa. Parry and M. 153 For this reason it is difficult to classify societies on the basis of the dominance of either gift or commodity exchange.. Money and the morality of exchange (Cambridge. in: A. C. Bloch and Parry explain that transactions can only be understood when interpreted in the total context of contemporary forms of exchange and their con- 148 As rephrased by Bloch and Parry. 1989). Bloch eds. 150 Bloch and Parry. 149 A. They define the exchanges of the long-term (or the ‘long-term transactional sphere’) as ‘transactions concerned with the reproduction of the long-term social or cosmic order’ and transactions of the short-term (or the ‘short-term transactional sphere’) as ‘transactions concerned with the arena of individual competition’. The enigma of the gift (Cambridge. Are there specific places where an articulation of exchange spheres takes place involving a transformation of objects. “The enigma of the gift”: ‘Introduction. Commodities and the politics of value”. however difficult this may be to ascertain.156 For archaeologists it is important to understand that the value of an object is not just determined by its material value but by its cultural biography. Godelier. of L’énigme du don (Paris. but kept”. what is at issue in such a tournament is not just the status. for it brings us to the interconnectedness of different values prevalent in a given society. Concerning Things that are given. M.157 With this modern definition in mind. 1999). The currency of such tournaments is likely to be set apart through well understood cultural diacritics. Bloch and Parry. 155 Hence Maurice Godelier’s choice of subtitle for the introduction to his book. “Introduction. fame or reputation of the actors. Things that are sold.154 The two spheres of exchange and the efforts to keep objects constitute ‘the whole transactional order’. we can envisage how and where ‘tournaments of value’ took place in the early middle ages. Nevertheless. but the disposition of the central tokens of value in the society in question. p. their forms and outcomes are always consequential for the more mundane realities of power and value in ordinary life. ritually or otherwise? Appadurai’s ‘tournaments of value’ may be useful here: Tournaments of value are complex periodic events that are removed in some culturally well defined way from the routines of economic life. This is a central issue. Though such tournaments of value occur at special times and places. 156 Kopytoff.      203 comitant values. The fair at St Denis was not just a market. such objects obtain a ‘cultural biography’ characterised by a number of transactions and transformations that add to their value and meaning. .155 Objects may move from one sphere by means of more or less elaborate rituals. 1996). rank. 21. and Things that must not be given or sold. “The cultural biography of things”. Money and the morality of exchange. We must then ask questions about the spatial dimensions of the whole transactional order. but a great festival as 154 In practice this means that a study of “trade” that confines itself to commercial transactions in the early Middle Ages (I have referred to this earlier as the “economic perspective”) does not allow for a proper understanding of a place like Maastricht. In the course of time. Participation in them is likely to be both a privilege of those in power and an instrument of status contests between them. 157 Appadurai. the precise nature of the interrelationships between the different types of exchanges and how they articulate remains unclear. transl. Finally. adapted to the needs of the regional and local aristocracy.’ a place where the articulation of exchange spheres took place on occasions that can be termed tournaments of value. in different types of transactions). whatever its merits. The Merovingian kingdoms. clergy and above all. which dates from the beginning of the eighth century. The perspective of ‘whole transactional order’. 216. Production et distribution des monnaies mérovingiens mosanes”. see A.162 The cross on 158 I. 161 For the production of gold coins. the impact of Maastricht’s ‘tournaments of values’ was considerable. pp. we also need to analyse the artisanal production of such sites as Maastricht in this light.161 Coin production played a special part in the ‘tournaments of value’ which I believe must have taken place in early medieval Maastricht. 185–200. pp. Thus Maastricht’s position stemmed not just from its function as a commercial centre but from the special place it occupied in the ‘whole transactional order.160 Because of the elevated social positions of the actors involved. “Het middeleeuws officie van het hoogfeest van Sint Servaas te Maastricht”.e. See R. the central person in the ceremonies. p.N. 94. a place where the whole transactional order became visible. De La Haye. at least sheds some light on the production of gold coins (trientes) in these centres. bishops. which bore a relationship to a cult place. The monetarius may also have had a special — perhaps temporary — position during festivals and celebrations that were tournaments of value. The feast of St Servatius is mentioned in the Calender of St Willibrord. merchants. “Les monétaires à Huy et Maastricht. Appadurai speaks of a ‘currency of the tournaments of value’ which was defined through cultural diacritics. We should consider the possibility of a special relationship between the production of coins and the saint.158 Maastricht may have celebrated its feast of St Servatius on the thirteenth of May. but their use in any type of transaction always contains a reference to their special context of production. artisans. Publications de la Société Historique et Archéologique dans le Limbourg 133 (1997). the saint. Bulletin de l’Institut Archéologique Liègois 107 (1995). 93–140. and in other eighth century sources.159 It was a place where almost all the powerful had a foothold: the king.204   well. Other places in the Meuse valley may have had a similar position. 162 This is not the same as saying that bishops were responsible for coin pro159 . 160 As Hedeager explains in her contribution to this volume. aristocrats. The production of coins may have taken place in ritualised conditions and the coins may for this reason have been used in different contexts (i. who was also an actor. which was already mentioned at the beginning of the eighth century. esp. Pol. Wood. in preparation. which places too great an emphasis on the institutional role of the bishop. I thank Jos Bazelmans for the discussion on this subject. Instead. Frankish transformations. Maastricht derived its position as a place of power precisely because it was a point of gravity in this particular order. Maastricht’s St Servatius had become the most important saint in the region. and then on the cultural appropriation of past space. marks a fundamental change in ideology with regard to the production and use of these coins. By the end of the seventh century. Finally I will deal more generally with the meaning of space in these centres. the production of such coins and their inherent value and meaning over time are still being analysed from an institutional perspective which includes the king. 163 There may not have been a fixed atelier or workshop that produced coins all year round like a modern business or shop. Grierson maintained that gold trientes were not merely a feature of commercial exchange.      205 the trientes. I would like to argue that minting is relevant to the whole transactional order. .’ I will focus first on the countryside surrounding Maastricht. the church and the fisc. the bishop. values in a more general sense are the important element here. with coins perhaps minted on the occasion of his festival163 being used for other purposes later. In the 1950s. involving the saint and his prestige as well. including their exalted origin and their history of circulation. 164 See Theuws. a view that has since become widely accepted. Maastricht and the countryside What was Maastricht like in spatial terms in the early middle ages? Where were the ‘borders’ between this power centre and the duction. which appeared from the last quarter of the sixth century onwards.164 This varied use shows that the value of such coins was not just derived from their material value but from their cultural biography. in commercial transactions and as oboli at funeral rituals. S      In this section I will briefly deal with three aspects of the research on places of power that relate to ‘space. Inspired by Bloch and Parry. Nonetheless. van Es. Early medieval Maastricht was embedded in a rich agricultural landscape. Kooistra. 1996). 222–4.A. For stock breeding and agricultural practices in the vicinity of Maastricht. 280–5. this band of fer165 L. 168 N. The regions between Tongres and Maastricht. esp. Possibilities and limitations of farming in the Roman period and the early Middle Ages between the Rhine and the Meuse (Assen and Amersfoort. Some implications of recent research in Tongres”. were dotted with Roman villas prior to the third century (fig. When we define a centre of power as a ‘place. “The earliest urbanisation in northern Gaul. in: N. based on late medieval models. Some implications of recent research in Tongres”. W. 1981). or were they situated in ‘the countryside’? This is another distinction we should avoid. “Urban transition in early Medieval Britain: the case of York”. Roymans ed. pp.206   countryside? If Maastricht was indeed a bipolar place with a castrum and a cult place outside. how should we conceptualise the world outside these two poles of gravity? Were the pottery kilns found to the east of the Meuse part of the centre. and in surplus extraction and taxation. From the sword to the plough. For consumption patterns in the Roman town of Tongres. 180.’ we need some idea of its physical features. 166 Interesting comments on this type of research can be found in: Roskams. but we also need to think carefully about the actors’ activities in a wider geographical network. “The sword and the plough. Vanderhoeven. “The earliest urbanisation in northern Gaul.167 There must have been some continuity in the use of this land from the Roman period into the early Middle Ages. see: A. although there is little solid evidence for its scale and intensity. 282–5. 7). Borderland farming. “Urban transitions in North Africa”. pp. Departing from the observed practices of stockbreeding and agriculture.166 although some form of commodity exchange should not be excluded. Commercial exchange may have been of minor importance in this context. This area of rich loam lies between the less fertile sandy areas in the north and the forests of the Ardennes to the south. Three studies on the earliest Romanisation of northern Gaul (Amsterdam.165 Recently. and between Maastricht and Aachen. Roymans. they have tried to determine the involvement of a local elite in the food supply.168 From west to east. Regional dynamics in the . 206–9. It is a modern distinction. p. see: Kooistra. archaeologists have concentrated on developing a conceptual framework in order to understand the social organisation of the food supply of power centres and cities. 167 A.. De Romeinen in Nederland (Haarlem. and we should not forget this. Roskams. 189–260. pp. This will result in a blurred boundary between a ‘centre of power’ and the ‘countryside’. Borderland farming. pp. 1996). Vanderhoeven. pp.      207 Fig. the region had a ‘social landscape’ which played a role in early medieval politics and ideology.. Innes. 9–126. Frankish transformations. From the sword to the plough. 62. passing Tongres and crossing another major trade route. Theuws. and centres such as Tongres. Roymans ed. Romanisation of Belgic Gaul and the Rhineland area”. esp. forthcoming. The road (a Chaussée Brunehaut) was still in use in the Merovingian period. State and society in the early Middle Ages. see especially M. the Meuse river at Maastricht. Karte 14. 7. tile land was intersected by the Roman road from Bavai to Cologne. politics and ideology. .169 In early medieval Maastricht. Der Lütticher Raum in frühkarolingischer Zeit. Aachen and Liège. See also the map in Werner. 169 For examples of an analysis of the interrelationships between social landscape. In addition to its ability to sustain a relatively large number of people. p. in: N. The fertile lands and infrastructure were capable of supporting large groups of people. The distribution of Roman villa’s (squares) and tumuli (dots) in the area between Tongres and Maastricht (after Vanderhoeven 1996). more evidence exists for the Carolingian period and the tenth century. although the elaborate decoration of the ‘chapel’ suggests that it was already a high-status site. Here I can only deal superficially with the problems posed by the evidence. A central problem is our lack of information about the antecendents of the large number of royal estates southwest of Maastricht. 1953). we should emphasise that the Carolingian social landscape may have differed significantly from the Merovingian. Aachen and Liège.170 In his study on the central Meuse region in the early Carolingian period.172 Merovingian royal property seems to have been based on ancient The middle Rhine valley. only archaeology can help us determine its nature. L’église halle des Saints Hermes et Alexandre à Theux (Dison. See Werner. we do not know whether each recorded site with remains of villa-type buildings represented an estate of its own or whether several “villas” were organised into larger complexes. which dates back to the early Carolingian period. which is a very rare phenomenon in the countryside in this period. Der Lütticher Raum in frühkarolingischer Zeit. The map differs in a significant respect from that depicting occupation in Roman times in that it shows control of property in addition to areas of habitation (most villages will have existed by then). 43–82. in Carolingian times. 8). we know little about the origins of the royal estates to the east of the Meuse. See P. Hoffsummer. 1986). Luxemburg und Nordfrankreich (Bonn. This evidence alone is insufficient to determine whether Theux was a royal estate in those early years. Studien zur Geschichte des Reichsguts in Niederlothringen und Friesland während der sächsischsalischen Kaiserzeit. ‘landscapes of power’ or different forms of surplus extraction than a distribution map of Roman villas could ever do. Das Reichsgut in den heutigen Niederlanden. .208   there was a ‘spatial debate’ that must have also involved the surrounding countryside. Archaeological research in the centre of Theux has revealed Merovingian burials and a small cult building from this period adorned with wall mosaics consisting of glass tesserae.171 One of the distinctive features is a ‘royal landscape’ in the south-western confines of the town. Belgien. pp. 172 See also Nelson this volume. Do they predate 700/750? If there is a connection between the creation of the new centre at Aachen and the development of these estates. a church was built on this spot. carved out of the large fiscal complex of the Ardennes forests. It therefore tells us much more about the ‘social landscape’. 170 There is meagre evidence for the Merovingian period in this regard. 2000) and Innes. Some have suggested that Theux was already a Merovingian fisc. Härke and Hedeager this volume. However. Rotthoff. Unfortunately. G. 171 For instance. Later. Royal estates occupied almost the entire triangle between Maastricht. Matthias Werner published an intriguing map of the properties in the countryside (fig. 400 –1000 (Cambridge. Bertholet and P. as does the way in which Merovingian and Carolingian kings implemented their power at a local and regional level. and Innes this volume. Innes. Future research will have to provide the answers. Merovingian royal property.D. royal property mentioned in Carolingian times. Roman centres and the Ardennes. 2. 1. 3. . 700.      209 Fig.173 How did Carolingian kings transform this ancient landscape with its long cultural biography? This remains an important question. Pippinid property c. M. 1980). a huge Roman fiscal territory surviving into the early middle ages. Merovingian and Carolingian property in the middle Meuse area (after Werner. 8. 1000). Royal 173 Innes describes a comparable situation for the central Rhine region around Mainz and Worms. The presence of a ‘royal landscape’ did not mean that other social actors were completely passive. royal property mentioned in later times (mainly after A. State and society in the early Middle Ages. 4. Nelson. but to the fact that it is represented as such (in the texts!). By the time the Carolingians were in power. we could say that the Meuse river is a symbolic boundary between a ‘royal landscape’ to the east and an ‘aristocratic landscape’ to the west. pp. 224–6). Der Lütticher Raum in frühkarolingischer Zeit. Some identify the districtus as being the fisc Theux because it was on the eastern side of the Meuse. The term ‘royal landscape’ refers not only to the practicalities of the exercise of royal power. possibly originating from the family of Alpaida. Any such aristocratic property in the east would have constituted a veritable inroad into the ‘royal landscape’. “Het gelijk van Sint-Servaas en OnzeLieve-Vrouwe”. We find here instead a concentration of Pippinid estates. the situation was complicated by the fact that a great deal of Pippinid property was integrated into the pool of royal property after the ascension of King Pippin III. though we do know of two possibilities (Halmaal and Emmeren). although admittedly we have no information about the origins of the royal property east of the Meuse and little about the early history of episcopal property south of Maastricht. We find a different situation further to the west of the Meuse and beyond. The districtus Trectis is mentioned as belonging to Louis the German and the eastern kingdom. the immediate environs of Maastricht reveal a social landscape whose topography seems the complete reverse of the one just described. for the por174 See above. where royal property was rare. see: Werner. and possibly at Tienen and Jandrain. Ligney and Lens. pp.210   estates were the stamping ground of aristocratic groups seeking to obtain offices and other props to sustain their position. boast much royal property. The royal fisc of Maastricht extends only to the west of the Meuse and is thus a bridgehead in the aristocratic landscape. 1992). (Leupen. For a discussion of this property. the fertile lands of Haspengouw. 40–1. The treaty views the 175 . This aspect of the representation of power and its various interpretations is essential to any analysis of the countryside.176 This reversal is significant. but no royal property has been identified to the east.L. and the abbey of St Servatius as belonging to Charles the Bald and the western kingdom. The lack of overlap between royal and aristocratic property supports this view. Royal property can later be found at Tongeren. Pippin II’s second wife. whereas others interpret it as the castrum Maastricht and its immediate environs. Charles the Bald (London and New York. 176 The division of the kingdom in the treaty of Meerssen in 870 has led to some confusion. Significantly. which seems insignificant in relation to the estates found east of the Meuse.174 Nor does the ‘far west’.175 In general terms. for the general context see: J. Merovingian royal estates in the countryside are almost non-existent. they consisted of a number of farmsteads whose inhabitants had to support the owner when present or to pay tribute. Carolingian estates probably differed from Merovingian ones in that the latter did not have such clearly defined parts exploited for the owner. These practices may have transformed ideology. 177 Theuws. pp. n. Devroey. with ever increasing proximity. Devroey. yet also close by. The treaty as well as the later discussion show that “inversions” in the social landscape may create situations that are difficult to interpret. We can make two observations here. we should distinguish between the lands of the church and the king on the one hand and those of aristocrats on the other. Stability was not always in the best interest of this latter group. Instead. First. The social differentiation that accompanied it became ‘naturalised’. But ‘rhetorics of the landscape’ also operate at a more ideological level. These properties most likely became bipartite estates in the course of the eighth and early ninth centuries. 93–7. 179 J.e. or in other words. i. However. Frankish transformations. The estates that were the subject of our previous discussion had not just an owner. part of nature. Etudes sur le grand domaine carolingien (Aldershot. outside the fisc. If this is the case. By reclaiming parts of the landscape for the benefit of the owner. or in other words.      211 tus of Maastricht may have been located on the east bank of the Meuse. relations of dependence were also given form later.178 We do not know how such early demesnes came into being but we can hypothesise that it was through reclamation carried out by the ‘local’ inhabitants as part of their obligations to the owner. esp.177 I refer to these estates as ‘invisible’ because the demesne — the part exploited for the landlord — was not visible in the landscape. Devroey stresses the strategy of the king and clerical elite of creating an immobile society by dividing the landed property into two categories — one exploited by the peasants for the peasants and one exploited by the peasants for the benefit of the elite. 1993). forthcoming. New research may shed more light on the vital role of ‘rhetorics of landscape’ in the creation and representation of power relations in such regions — far from the king. 178 Theuws. but a highly relevant spatial structure. it is an example of how relationships of dependence acquired visibility in the landscape through the practices of dependent people.-P. forthcoming. in which case a fisc transferred to the eastern kingdom is located to the west of the Meuse. and . II. “Les premiers polyptyques rémois VIIe–IXe siècles”. reprinted in: J. they made his presence part of the landscape. Frankish transformations.179 Thus on a daily basis and on a micro Meuse as a border. through the process of ‘reading’ this landscape and ‘interpreting’ it. part of God’s creation and God’s given order that could not be contested or subject to interpretation.-P. we could view this as further would have been difficult to achieve in view of the constant partitioning of the property on the death of the owners.181 This raises the question of whether aristocratic families who controlled the see also founded monasteries or convents with this objective in mind. this volume. whereas the creation of bipartite estates had already begun in the eighth century. or do such places as Maastricht not fit comfortably within the Carolingian paradigm? Perhaps monasteries fitted the Carolingian constellation better. 1991). pp.. pp. Abbayes et chapitres. in R. 318–27 and De Jong “Carolingian monasticism”. Roymans and F. Boulogne sur Mer) for allowing me to quote from her paper “Gender and monasticism in the Frankish world” (unpublished). as they seem to have done in other regions. It was probably not something they “invented”. 623–7. 391–7. As I have said above. de Jong. “Landed property and manorial organisation in northern Austrasia: some considerations and a case study”. We must ask ourselves about the role and significance of Maastricht in a changing social and symbolic landscape. Anne-Marie Helvétius explained that the founding of a monastery or convent in the seventh and early eighth centuries can be considered an anti-episcopal act. Second. the social landscape conveyed a message about power relationships and norms. If. Maastricht’s role became more enigmatic than ever in the Carolingian period as it lost some if the charisma that was now exclusively derived from the abbey of St Servatius. “Carolingian Monasticism: the power of prayer”. the ideology behind the creation of polyptics may have developed as a result of the dialectics of “reading and interpreting the landscape” in the process of estate formation so that the new ideology may have been “handed on a platter” to ninth-century authors and to the creators of polyptics. 700 –c. 622–53. However. The lack of such religious houses in and around Maastricht suggests that this was probably not the case. 181 I wish to thank Anne-Marie Helvétius (Université du Littoral.. 180 M.180 and if so. in: N. pp. See F. Images of the past. See also Innes. the creation of bipartite estates and of the polyptics themselves may have been a strategy on the part of the king and the church to immobilise or stabilise society. 900 (Cambridge. Studies on ancient societies in northwestern Europe (Amsterdam.212   scale. evidence for this strategy does not appear until the ninth century. Theuws eds. why were so few monasteries founded in Maastricht and surroundings in the Merovingian and Carolingian period? In a stimulating paper presented at the International Medieval Conference in Leeds in 2000. McKitterick ed. The resident artistocrats were vying for control of the episcopal office. on the other hand. pp. Theuws. 299–407. . The New Cambridge Medieval History. the Pippinids and their ‘friends and relations’ founded several religious establishments further to the south. 1995). esp. Is this transformation a coincidence caused by our present state of knowledge. values and ideas. vol II c. See also Dierkens. power and authority to reclaim the ancient city of Tongres? Did the presence of the castrum walls in Maastricht and the town walls in Tongres lend prestige to these sites. and therefore relevant to strategies defining local groups who might bury their dead in such places (as was the case in Rosmeer. 6. Archeologia Belgica 204 (Brussel. most of which later lay in ruins. there was a dense concentration of villas in the region between Tongres and Maastricht. 326. Moreover. Population growth after the mid-sixth century did not occur in a vacuum. 184 For a discussion of related problems. Roosens. 1978). Until the beginning of the third century. The cultural appropriation of past space Early medieval cultural appropriation of past space is a much neglected aspect of power centres in northern Gaul. La Rocca. EME 5 (1996). and were they important in representing power? Without doubt. Was the sixth-century townscape of Tongres and the landscape between Tongres and Maastricht filled with Roman ruins? If so. see C. This raises a host of questions. p. and the townscape of places such as Maastricht and the surrounding landscape were not a tabula rasa to be colonised. Abbayes et chapitres. 45–69. concludes that the Pippinid monasteries he studied in the Entre-Sambre-et-Meuse were created in a region devoid of episcopal and royal influence. . 183 H. “Using the Roman past.      213 circumstantial evidence that they lacked influence over the see of Tongres/Maastricht and were competing with other groups to control it. Abandoned towns and local power in eleventh century Piemonte”. how did this affect the way in which the early medieval inhabitants perceived the landscape? Were the ruins — in practice and symbolically — still the focus of old estates. just west of Maastricht. pp. he refers to the observation made by Van Rey that the few episcopal foundations in the diocese of Tongres/Maastricht had no Pippinid support . the bishop and the king use the visible past in their efforts to give meaning to their environment and position? What was the impact of a ‘dead’ city like Tongres?184 Was it important for a bishop seeking to define his status. on fiscal land)?183 How did the inhabitants. the aristocrats.182 The example of Maastricht shows once again how aristocratic competition for special positions within a centre affects the structure of the cultural landscape outside it. 182 Dierkens. p. Het Merovingisch grafveld van Rosmeer. Archäologische Informationen 20 (1997). culture and identity. Zadora-Rio eds. 161–274. “La reutilisation funéraire des édifices antiques en Normandie au cours du haut moyen age”. “Angelsächsische Bestattungsplätze und ältere Denkmäler: Bemerkungen zur zeitlichen Entwicklung und Deutung des Phänomens”.. Ward-Perkins.’ which prehistorians initiated and which medieval archaeologists are only just beginning to enter into. Thäte. the appropriation of ruins laden with significance is not an unproblematic affair. B.214   ancient structures played a part in what Carver has called the ‘image war’.-A. Härke and H.185 Of course. Bradley and H. Documents d’archéologie française 46 (Paris. esp. L’environnement des églises et la topographie religieuse des campagnes médiévales. in: M. 1994). for instance to repair the foundations of the Roman bridge at Maastricht in the fourth century. Williams. H. Zadora-Rio eds. 113–29. pp. Fevrier. Actes du III e congrès international d’archéologie médiéval (Aix en Provence 28–30 septembre 1989). 1999 [1996]). pp. Arguments in stone. the work on the bridge was thus represented as an act of state. The extensive use of spolia from second-century funerary monuments. For a full understanding.A.M. 25–7. “La marque de l’Antiquité tardive dans le paysage religieux médiéval de la Provence rural”. “Time regained: The creation of continuity”. pp. Brogiolo and B. pp.187 More research is needed. 1993). 10–21.189 occurred in a world where such activity implies the involvement of the imperial government. Thomas. 63–77. Bradley. R. Archäologische Informationen 19 (1996). Time. Eine vergleichende Studie”. J. Fixot and E. pp. 1996). Ward-Perkins eds. An interpretive archaeology (London and New York. Future work on the role and significance of a place such as Maastricht should address 185 Carver.S. 1–17. Journal of the British Archaeological Association 140 (1987).).188 A closer analysis reveals differing perceptions of ancient ruins in different periods. eds. World Archaeology 28 (1998). “Re-using the architectural legacy of the past. entre idéologie et pragmatisme”. 188 See: R. and we can profit from the recent debate on ‘monument re-use. 105–16. pp. R. Williams. Bradley. 189 T. 187 Effros this volume. Fixot and E. pp. in: G. in preparation. Altering the earth: The origins of monuments in Britain and continental Europe (Edenburgh. J. pp. R..P. 225–44. 27–35. Panhuysen. 186 . pp. The past in the Past: the re-use of ancient monuments (London. On the re-use of spolia and the Roman state. see Effros this volume. see: E. 1998). in: M. “Sacred geography”. yet as Bonnie Effros makes clear in this volume. Bradley. For the early Middle Ages. “Alte Denkmäler und frühgeschichtliche Bestattungen: ein sächsisch-angelsächsischer Totenbrauch und seine Kontinuität.. L’environnement des églises. Frankish transformations.186 This practical use of Roman ruins has attracted most attention. Romeins Maastricht en haar beelden (Corpus Signorum Imperii) (Maastricht. Le Maho. Recent work in France includes: P. the interpretation of monument re-use in the Early Middle Ages should be studied in relation to other forms of contemporary “cultural appropriation” of the landscape (Theuws.. the landscape of the past was also used in more practical ways by providing buildings and building material. The idea and ideal of the town. What we can learn from Moore is to analyse the relationship between dominant representations and dominant interpretations and practices. Space and the analysis of centres of power and their environment A brief final statement of my views on the analysis of space is in order. but its role in representing power cannot be overlooked by even the most superficial observer. The fortress of Chèvremont can be interpreted as part of a defensive structure. and above 190 I. monastery fields. 217–27. EME 6 (1997).191 Texts and landscapes are tempting for scholars interested in the analysis of representations. early medieval texts and landscapes filled with dominant representations (the fortress. In my paper. text and gender.190 I agree. I have regularly used the word ‘representation’. An important source of inspiration for me in this respect is Henrietta Moore’s ‘Space. Yet these dominant representations do not remain unchallenged. Wood. but I think this stance could be developed further. Henrietta Moore studied the representations dominating the Marakwet’s organisation of household space. it also leads to new interpretations that are negotiated upon. interpreted. To stop here would be to ignore the dynamic ways in which such a representation ‘works’ in society. for they are ‘read’ by others: young men. using the insights gained by anthropologists on ‘reading’ the landscape. pp. and outsiders such as missionaries. the visible world is a male world. As Ian Wood has argued. Similarly.N. sacred tree.) were read. etc. monumental grave. ‘Reading’ is not simply adhering to or reproducing a given representation. text and gender’. An anthropological study of the Marakwet of Kenya. Often these representations are easily identifiable. These are clearly male representations. monastery. villa. the very nature of the sources at our disposal leads those studying the Transformation of the Roman World to write a history of the representations of this transformation. a key concept in the programme on the Transformation of the Roman World. Space. 191 Moore. In Kenya. and how it affects ‘the audience’. appropriated.      215 the ways in which past space and material culture became incorporated in the socio-cosmological order of early medieval society. . women in general and women who wished to be ‘modern’. “Report: The European Science Foundation’s programme on the transformation of early medieval Europe”. representing their society as stable and unchanging. but the interaction between dominant representations and dominant interpretations as well. with the landscape as its main source.216   all. this was most likely the outcome of a long-term process of interpretion and negotiation. Our greatest challenge is to develop our discipline in such a way that we can explain not just the practices of different groups. or the landscape as a whole. When the learned men of the Carolingian age drew up estate records. there are considerable opportunities for archaeologists to contribute to the debate on the constitution of society. had such a wide audience. for this was a dialectic process in which different actors had different voices. Just as the audience of a dominant representation of power was diverse. so too were the interpretations. It is difficult to gain a clear idea of these matters. contested. Because spatial elements. as well as the processes of negotiation between different groups about power and the basic values and ideas in society. . and to Paul Fouracre whose constructive criticisms have been as helpful as ever. See H. pp. Vita Karoli. were also places for serious conversations. Aus Mittelalter und Diplomatik. 1989).1 Alcuin interestingly recalled the baths at Aachen when he explained to his young friend Nathaniel the meaning of the draught of 153 fishes the disciples caught in the sea of Galilee following the instructions of the risen Christ ( John 21. “Beiträge zur Geschichte des römischen Kur. below. Brühl. n. Revue historique 130 (1963). Ewig. 84. vol. Gesammelte Schriften. and because he and his Franks loved swimming — indeed while Charlemagne was merely good at hunting. in: idem. in: idem.-R. Spätantikes und fränkisches Gallien. 1895). Nelson Charlemagne chose Aachen for his principal residence in his later years. in: idem ed. 362–408. then. and the cultivation of health of body and mind. and to Carine van Rhijn for editorial help. p. Beihefte der Francia 3. esp. . p. pp. repr. MGH Epp. “Résidence et capital pendant le haut Moyen Age”.11): ‘I remember talking to my lord David about the wonderful significance of this number. space clearly marked ‘men only’: an ideal locale. It may be that not much swimming was actually done in the Aachen baths when ‘such a crowd of members of his entourage and military household bathed with Charlemagne that more than a hundred men might be in the water together’. pp. stressing the conceptual link between capital in the modern sense and governmental centre. because of the baths. 32–7. says Einhard. 1 Einhard. 262. Gesammelte Aufsätze. 193 (115). at swimming he positively excelled. H. more or less outdoor. 27. in the bath bubbling warm from the natural springs’. 4 (Berlin. For the definitional question of capital as distinct from residence. 59–67. pp. .’. ed. Brühl was responding to a fundamental paper of E. see C. esp. 2 vols. 1976). * My warm thanks go to Mayke de Jong for percipient comments on a draft of this paper. I am also grateful to all the colleagues who commented on earlier versions at Bellagio and Vienna. ed.und Badeortes Aachen”. repr. 1. my heart hot with love. . (Hildesheim/München/Zürich. Beiträge zur Archäeologie von Aachen (Köln. 420: ‘fervente naturalis aquae balneo . Atsma (München. Journal des Savants (1967). Cf. Aquae Granni. p. 2 Alcuin. pp. hence embraced clerics and scholars as well as fighting men. They were a public. 1–75. 115–37. Cüppers. Dümmler. “Remarques sur les notions de ‘capitale’ et de ‘résidence’ pendant le haut Moyen Age”.2 The baths. vol. 193–215. c. 25–72. then. I.. 1982). E. 22. Ep. for political sociability.AACHEN AS A PLACE OF POWER* Janet L. 1999). 1906). 62. 7 Annales regni Francorum. is datelined “Aachen” but. F. pp. pp. MGH SRG (Hannover.7 This was no coincidence. pp. Though the Admonitio generalis itself contains no information on its place of issue.a. nos. pp. 4 Annales regni Francorum. pp. no. 55.3 Aachen was a site with a past. The place first hits the early medieval historical record in the Annales regni Francorum for 765. Rosenwein. 52–64. Karl der Grosse und Papst Leo III in Paderborn. Ibid. with the exception of a brief stopover in December 777. 152 (March 786). pp. in: 799. an original (on which see now B. 56. at 236–7. which accords with the evidence of the Annales: see MGH Capit. was more probably issued at Attigny. Moreover. ed. too. “‘opere mirabile constructa’. as Mühlbacher notes. 28–9. while the so-called “revised” version gives Aquisgrani (Aquasgrani). Die Aachener ‘Residenz’ Karls des Grossen”. Negotiating space. and the place of that project’s adoption. possibly abandoned subsequently. nos. 81–3. 1895). to form the basis for a restoration. with the reference to Aachen at p. both were instruments. pp. 5 MGH DD Karol. whether in the seventh or the eighth century is impossible to say. pp.H. Falkenstein. Power. amongst those old stones were (whether recognised or not by eighth-century restorers) the ruins of a little Christian church. practical and 3 M. at 152. carried an aura of romanity. Mühlbacher (Hannover. I. restraint and privileges of immunity in early medieval Europe (Ithaca NY. both represented breaks with the Frankish past and harked back to much older pasts. took possession of the terrain and established a residence there. Untermann. 164–6. . 252–64. 22–3. 152–64. 6 Ibid.  Baths. but that past must have been fairly etiolated when some ancestor of Charlemagne’s. ed. E. for the reform project announced in the Admonitio. 84–5: ‘in Aquis palatio’/‘in Aquisgrani palatio suo’. when he wintered there and held a large assembly in March 789 at which the Admonitio generalis was promulgated. At the same time.5 Yet. s. in 768–9. Byzantion 61 (1991). and a good deal of Roman stonework evidently survived. perhaps of the fifth or sixth century. “Charlemagne et Aix-la-Chapelle”. 118. 115–34).218  . Then Charlemagne himself stayed there just over two years later. no.4 Two charters issued during this stay term Aachen palatium publicum. 205–7. and the invaluable study of L. 1. Kunst und Kultur der Karolingerzeit. 1999). 22. Beiträge zum Katalog der Ausstellung (Paderborn. surviving in a seventeenthcentury copy. the Duplex Legationis Edictum. opens with a statement that it was issued in Aquis palatio publico on the 23 March 789. when Pippin is said to have stayed in Aquis villa for the winter 765–6. 765. 768.6 Charlemagne seems not to have visited Aachen thereafter until 788. Note that the so-called “original version” of the Annals refers to Aachen as Aquis villa. in the very first winter of his reign. 23. significantly. pp. Kurze. its companion document in most manuscripts. villa quae dicitur Aquis. the builders were busy. 12 The only winter he spent elsewhere was 805–6: Annales regni Francorum. 1999). Cf. 142 with n.. from Rome: the pope came in person to celebrate Christmas 804 at Aachen. the holding of the great summer assembly at Aachen was consuetudo. p. the signal that such a change had now been determined by Charlemagne.-R. describing the embassies and exotic gifts (including the elephant Abul Abaz) from Baghdad. Baghdad and Jerusalem. Cf. 9 . Bourdieu. in: R. 807. Till that point in his reign. Contrast Falkenstein. 59. and statist. Rulers and ruling families in early Medieval Europe (London. Scandinavia. and 799–800. pp. 35–63.13 The same source records embassies received there from Constantinople.      219 ideological. but I hope below to defend “capital”. 18–23. Brühl. Fodrum. at Aachen. whereby Charlemagne intended to shape the future. I think. “Rethinking the state”. s. 120–1. Bullough. 277. 134. p.a. Court culture in the earlier middle ages (Leiden. 1998). “Was Charlemagne’s court a courtly society?” in: C. 14 For details.14 These visitors were meant to be impressed 8 D. J. “Remarques”. i. who sees Aachen’s function as a capital resulting from “circumstances that had become favourable to such an evolution in the last years of the reign” rather than from any decision or programme. 133). notably Herstal and Worms. with breaks only for summer campaigns and autumn hunting. my forthcoming. see Annales regni Francorum. p. cultural. repr. esp. Venice and Dalmatia.12 According to the Annales regni Francorum for 811. ch. La royauté et les élites dans l’Europe carolingienne (du début du IX e aux environs de 920) (Lille. 802. Gistum. XIV. p. Brühl.. Carolingian renewal (Manchester.L. symbolic. Nelson.9 Meanwhile. Le Jan ed. coercive. repr. Northumbria.10 Thereafter. 21 (repr. Charlemagne wintered there in 795–6. prefers the term “favourite residence”. from Slavs and Avars. Saragossa and Cordoba. but does not directly discuss capitals in the central-place sense.a. though he comes close to doing so in considering the French kings of the late-twelfth and thirteenth centuries. pp. examines various kinds of capital (in the sense of resources). pp. P. p. and from winter 801–2 onwards he resided there more or less permanently. in his Practical Reason (1998). Sociological Theory 12 (1994). in: Nelson. pp. Servitium Regis (Köln. Charlemagne wintered at Aachen again in 794–5. “Charlemagne et Aix-la-Chapelle”. s. Aachen’s qualitative and quantitative growth transformed it into an effective capital11 as well as something like a modern third-world ‘mushroom town’. 13 Annales regni Francorum. 1968). 1991). 11 Brühl. “La cour impériale de Charlemagne”. 2001). 21–2. 123–4.8 It was also. and indeed seen as key to the project’s implementation. 10 C. and last but not least. p. 811. Cubitt ed. Fodrum. 181–2. Cf. 796–7. The 789 assembly certainly ‘foreshadowed a major change in the way of life of the itinerant court’. economic. pp. pp. 48. esp. 117. 22. Aachen had shared a prominent place on Charlemagne’s itinerary with other palaces. MGH SS 1 (Hannover. One was emulation of the work of other powerful rulers. from Ravenna. Agnellus. Boureau. but surely. MGH SRL (Hannover. 250–1. the emperor’s aula. 1877). for Alcuin. “‘opere mirabile constructa’”. Historiarum libri IV. in vertice palatii a Karolo Magno acsi volans fixa erat’. p. p. 196–200. recalled for Charlemagne’s benefit in 798 a conversation he had had with a lady at the palace in the course of which they had admired ‘columns erected in that most beautiful work and wondrous church’. reproduced by kind permission. 1985) ranges appropriately widely in examining the uses of this symbol in monarchic representation. 796. p. O. . ed. 158. G. evoke. . a blend of meanings. Pertz.15 A whole new public space was created with large buildings linked by a processional way (fig. offering an even closer parallel in terms of scale. Pace Donald Bullough.H. of course. Falkenstein. Ep. 244. pp. “Charlemagne et Aix-la-Chapelle”. 18 A. Fittings and decorations no doubt continued to be added once the basic structure was complete. 1 from Falkenstein. p. including. Charlemagne had brought the treasures of the regnum to Aachen. See now Untermann.19 That church still stands: a monument to Charlemagne’s aspirations. c. who left the court later that year. 1826). Benevento. completed probably only a few years 15 Chron. Waitz. too. unpublished Ph. 1). III. A humble piece of wooden anchorage recently found above one of the columns in the church has been dendrodated to 776+/–10 years. MGH SRG (Hannover.  by what they saw. San Vitale.a. ed. p. Moissiacense. replete with number-symbolism. Its structure. L’aigle: chronique politique d’un embleme (Paris. and its bronze fittings. p. which proves that new building at Aachen predated 788–9 — though it doesn’t. p. . Holder-Egger. like the eagle. pp. but it was of an imperial and Roman-Christian kind in a ceremonial setting with shades of Ravenna. s. 338. “Alcuin’s world through his letters and verse”. 17 If we can believe the late tenth-century Richer. 1996). 1878). 111: ‘aerea aquila . Garrison. supply a date for Charlemagne’s decision to build a capital. was set a bronze eagle with outspread wings:17 potent symbol of imperial power. ed. past and present. 243. “Charlemagne et Aix-la-Chapelle”. Nearly half of the works listed in Untermann’s bibliography of 45 items have been published during the past ten years: a vivid indication of contemporary interest in Aachen’s Carolingian past. 149. 302. datable to 22 July 798. thesis (Cambridge.16 At the summit of the highest building. provided inspiration. drawing attention especially to the eagle as a symbol both of the evangelist John and of John the Baptist.220  . 247–8. G. of Christian evangelism. Liber pontificalis ecclesiae Ravennatis. I think there was more to Charlemagne’s re-erection of this statue at Aachen than “the symbolism of the Jensen or Rolls-Royce”! Magnificence was indeed the name of the game. the equestrian statue of Theoderic which was re-erected near the palace. 16 See fig. Cf. see L. 62.18 The splendid new church was already largely built by 796. 71. 19 Alcuin. did Santa Sofia. 94. Ravenna. and so too. M.D. Carolingian renewal. porch. northern annex. the countryard in front of the church.221       market place B L D F E K C G M A N J I H Fig. I. Baths. baptismal font in upper storey of the church. altar of the Saviour in upper storey of the church. C. 1. G. M. the covered and colonnaded processional way. main altar of the Virgin. D–E. N. southern annex. presumed location of the equestrian statue of Theoderic. J. The church dedicated to the virgin Mary. K. B. the aula regia. L. . A. F. H. twelfth-century chapel of St John the Baptist. Charlemagne’s Aachen. It was geographically central on the east-west axis of Francia itself. my own remarks (“a shift of register from private to public”). 22 Cf. between the people of the old Israel. even democratised. 57–8. Opus Caroli regis contra synodum (Libri Carolini ). is characteristically thought-provoking: Bullough insists. and it was located on a spur of the old Roman road between Cologne and Maastricht. Nova Antiquitas et Antiqua Novitas: typologische Exegese und isidorianische Geschichtsbild bei Theodulf von Orleans (Köln. discussion of Aachen at 154–6. Aachen was a sensible mustering-point for the host. 1987). Freeman’s introduction to her fine edition of the Libri Carolini. not a palatine chapel. Garrison. pp. The Frankish world (London. 26.. function. underlined its generalised.222  . as too did the dedication of its main altars to Christ and the Virgin. and the echo of 1 Peter 2:9–10. first published in 1975 and reprinted in Carolingian renewal. Vita Karoli. Price eds. pp. . and now A. cited in next note. no doubt. and now the excellent systematic study of this theme by M. “Karl der Grosse. 20 Untermann. in the Church and the peoples of Charlemagne’s much expanded regnum Francorum. pp. Nelson. in: Y. The Benevantan Sta Sophia model seems to me.  before work on the Aachen church began. Bullough. “‘opere mirabile constructa’’’. For the Franks as the chosen. Bullough. illuminating. Militarily. rightly. For Theodulf. in: F. like Aachen itself.22 There were strategic considerations too. but the baptismal church of a local community. Innes eds. Supplementum I (Hannover. The uses of the past in the early Middle Ages (Cambridge. 1998). pp. 95–108. at 108–12. 160. and the baptismally reborn gens sancta of the new Israel embodied. Hen and M. with a brief. “Imagines regum and the early medieval West”. 1996). D. p. Dahlhaus-Berg. not only on the problems caused by successive remodellings of the interior of the Aachen church. in: “Carolingian royal funerals”. Kunst und Kultur. reprinted in J. 114–61. J. Cannadine and S. Nelson. hence. at 98. Rituals of power: From late Antiquity to the early Middle Ages (Leiden. 30–1. Rituals of royalty: Power and ceremonial in traditional societies (Cambridge. forged by the Fathers and strengthened by scholars like Theodulf but surely well understood by Aachen audiences in the 790s.L. 99–132. Theuws and J. now. for choosing Aachen.. cf.21 The fact that this building was. see E. Cf. on balance. 147. see J. c. MGH Conc. 2. a likelier one than Justinian’s church. but on the need to focus on demonstrably original features of structure and fittings. p. Rom und das Vermächtnis der Langobarden”. “The Lord’s anointed and the people’s choice: Carolingian royal ritual”. “The Franks as the New Israel? Education for an identity from Pippin to Charlemagne”. 1975). It served the community of a nascent capital. 2000). Nelson eds.. 2000). 21 Amid the welter of recent historiography. in: D. whose importance was indicated by Einhard himself.L. once Charlemagne began his regular Saxon campaigns (these were almost annual events between 772 and 803). in: 799.L. pp. Mitchell. had at once local and universal significance.20 No less important were typological links. from the Meuse and a busy quay at Maastricht. 146. very clever as he was ( peritissimus). royal servants. which in a political sense. pp. eds. 299–407. in: N. substantial concentrations of Carolingian family lands lay not far from Aachen. large and lofty. Haefele. 1993). J. . the houses of the servants of all those officers. the houses of the nobility. 322. no. p. 1 (Hannover. S. Roymans and F. II. Images of the past. See A. 297–8. Boretius and V. The rise of cities in North-West Europe (Cambridge. but not so lofty as the emperor’s residence: Charlemagne.      223 with a direct route leading east towards the heart of Saxony. Map at pp. translated in Appendix I. 936–1075 (Cambridge. 1985). 87-9. if not in terms of volume of output. 1888).23 Towards the west. there clustered the mansiones of the ministri and royal officers. “Landed property and manorial organisation in Northern Austrasia: some considerations and a case study”. G. A. below. Studies on ancient societies in Northwestern Europe (Amsterdam. following Solomon’s example. 1888). all their comings and goings. 47–8. Theuws. 28 Éinhard. Einhard. Wightman. 1 (Hannover. Itinerant kingship and royal monasteries in early Medieval Germany.28 where Charlemagne and his closest entourage were lodged. p. Theuws eds. After praising the fine buildings built by Charlemagne. 25 MGH Capit. it was only 17 km. pp. 13. MGH SRG (Berlin. Within only a few years. MGH Capit. c. 1999). Waitz. IV. p. Coupland. Translatio SS Marcellini et Petri. F. p. ed. who caused magnum impedimentum in palatio. Notker has a story which may be apocryphal (he was after all writing seventy years after Charlemagne’s death) but vividly evokes conditions of life at Aachen. Bulletin de la société française de numismatique 41 (1986).. 24 CF. 41. 1. and for the regional context. pp. was the most important in the realm. 153.27 Around the royal palace and the cubiculum regium. over the mansiones of the nobles and see all they did. Krause (Hannover. 30. p. was in a position to shape those who dwelled 23 E. Bernhardt. Gallia Belgica (London. Verhulst. 26 De disciplina palatii Aquisgranesis (?820).29 Thus. Charlemagne having made his sedes the more or less permanent centre of an empire. Waitz.26 There was a weekly market. no. Map 7. without any of them realising it. Aachen had become a hub: continuously attracting crowds of litigants and seekers of justice. 1883). 1.24 In every direction. H. pp. could look out from the windows of his apartments. MGH SS 15. Gesta Karoli I. MGH SS 15. Notker mentioned the mansiones of the men of various ranks: constructed all around the palace. ed. ed. 29 Notker. G. 261. there was a mint. 64. I. 27 Cf. 245. xii–xiii. Translatio SS Marcellini et Petri. “In palatio nostro: les monnaies palatines de Charlemagne”.W. 1991). cf.M.25 clients. whores. 1962).F. beggars. Vita Karoli. “The voice of Charlemagne”.224  . For the extension of the originally monastic sense of conversatio to lay people. population. camerarii. a mint. 3. 31 J. 248. 1994). Nelson.L. houses of urban type. see J. Karl der Grosse als vielberufener Vorfahr (Sigmaringen.36 The fact. and Appendix A. in effect. Wilson ed. idealierende Vorstellung von angemessener. 2001). 99–150. Saurma-Jeltsch ed.E. 162: “Nicht ein realistisches Bild von ‘Rom’ prägt die Pfalz Aachen. The archaeology of Anglo-Saxon England (London. “‘opere mirabile constructa’”. p.  therein into a self-conscious elite. it surely reflects conditions that had come into being during the latter part of Charlemagne’s. and using Martin Biddle’s archaeologist’s check-list of urban traits. 35 Including Roman ones: W. wrote of the ‘houses where conversations took place’. 34 Cf. complex religious organisation.. at 100. for instance. Einhard. above. 272. actores. below. “Die Struktur des Hofes Karls des Grossen im Spiegel von Hinkmars ‘De ordine palatii’”. in a forthcoming Festschrift (Oxford. der Residenz eines Königs würdiger Repräsentation”.33 But it certainly did have a market. 7. were showing. and embrace a variety of traditions35 without being the prisoner of any one of them. “Was Charlemagne’s court a courtly society?” 32 M. a theatre for 30 Einhard. 26. the officers of the count of the palace.M. social differentiation. and a new kind of place. and the existence of a planned street-system is questionable. 5–22. and economic role is to be found in the Capitulary on palace discipline. their new administrative talents. . pp. was for a new place.34 Charlemagne’s choice. 37: ‘in domibus ubi conversabatur’. a role as a central place. meant that it was untramelled by a past. 33 Falkenstein. Zeitschrift des Aachener Geschichtsvereins 83 (1976). p. It could be made the focus of new traditions. and though this was produced early in Louis the Pious’s reign. Translatio II. IV. Untermann. comites. Biddle. “Die Pfalzkonzeptionen Karls des Grossen”. 36 Untermann. in: L.30 Aulici. 258 (the ‘domus Einhardi’). Particularly comprehensive evidence for market. “Towns”. Jacobsen. It may never have had defences. in: D. pp. 32.32 Aachen can be appraised as an urban site. p. The very fact that it was new. who later in life would himself keep a townhouse at Aachen. and a judicial centre. mansionarii. sondern ein eklektische. at least in the sense of hitherto insignificant.31 In the light of the above. houses. “Charlemagne et Aix-la-Chapelle”. See further. pp. and showing off. including those at Charlemagne’s court.. 1976). a diversified economic base. 23–48. “‘opere mirabile constructa’”. 4. Fleckenstein. a relatively large and dense population. below. pp. 162. n. that it was not the seat of a bishopric meant that it could be designed as a new kind of religious centre. p. c. and also my forthcoming paper. as compared with earlier phases of the reign. no fewer than nine new charter-scribes were active. stresses the limits to Charlemagne’s control. Quellen und Forschungen zum Recht im Mittelalter 4 (Sigmaringen. Thanks to Hubert Mordek.38 No wonder that for at least the latter part of his reign. 273–4. no. and had his own writing-office.43 It 37 Contrast the reading of Brühl.. 204. starting from the early 770s.39 Three further types of evidence can be brought into the picture. changing earlier plans.. 144. 42 MGH DD Karol.42 The second type of evidence is that of capitularies. Überlieferung und Geltung normativer Texte des frühen und hohen Mittelalters. the substantial impression given by the old MGH edition can be both amplified and given more precise contours. “Recently discovered capitulary texts belonging to the legislation of Louis the Pious”.. Studi Gratiani 13 (1967). could suggest a parallel increase of personnel in that department. and. in: P. and idem. 48. 127.      225 the rites of rulership. in: R. 41 Bullough. “The voice of Charlemagne”. forthcoming. “Carolingian royal funerals”. 31. cols. p. Einhard. cf. 35. Schieffer ed. n. showing no fewer than three deputy counts of the palace. Vita Karoli. 133). New perspectives on the reign of Louis the Pious (Oxford. A royal Judgement of 806 (one of only two extant from the years 800–814). at 15–9. p. Ganshof. on the stages of a capitulary’s creation. notably from 811 through to 813: Nelson. I. Bishops were there in plenty. 39 Nelson. idem. 1986).40 In the pre-imperial years. and that very plenty underlined the ruler’s dominance. Godman and R. had indicated that the Aachen church was where he wished to be buried. p. 146. 43 H. Collins eds. “Karolingische Kapitularien”. pp. “Kapitularien”. when Hitherius’s absence in Italy apparently meant that no charters could be issued for the best part of a year. F. pp. “Note sur les ‘Capitula tractanda de causis cum episcopis et abbatibus tractandis’ de 811”. idem. First. 21 (p. in: Lexikon des Mittelalters 5 (1990). where I would see a consistent policy pursued effectively throughout the imperial years. the numbers of active scribes of royal charters were much smaller. pp. In these years.41 and settling down to a complement of two or three in the 780s and 790s. 151–3. 1–25. “Kapitularien und Schriftlichkeit”. 25–50.-L. c. Carolingian renewal. Schriftkultur und Reichsverwaltung unter den 38 . “Capitale”. 40 See Appendices II and III. 943–6.37 The climaxing of the five great reform councils of 813 in a general meeting at Aachen put the trumps in Charlemagne’s hands. Charlemagne’s heir. Charlemagne. an examination of the scribes responsible for royal charters suggests that the staffing of Charlemagne’s writing-office increased strikingly from 800 onwards. 437–53. in: idem ed. 1990). Mordek. pp. cf. art. in addition to two new notaries for the count of the palace who was responsible for hearing law-suits and complaints. 55–85. 1990). this extraordinary text originated. J. Archiv für Diplomatik 32 (1986). eds. or the 806 Divisio regni. in a work by Adalard of Corbie (+823). 1995). remarkable. which interested parties — that is. p. 34–66. but also a raft of new administrative legislation in the form of capitularies.. MGH Hilfsmittel 15 (München. that Charlemagne returned from Italy in 801 fired with the idea of an imperial programme entailing not just revisions of and additions to the leges. p. repr. the emperor.44 The profusion of such documentation in the imperial years is. Cuius libellum de ordine palatii legi et scripsi. The third sort of evidence is a single piece: the De ordine palatii. former assembly-attenders — drew up for themselves as aides-mémoires for what had been projected. in adolescentia mea vidi. . 1996). and undoubtedly surviving in a form revised and augmented by the archbishop of Rheims at the very end of his life. in: R. as a youth. “Capitularia Relecta. 45 De ordine palatii. 1980). pp. 1971). in: J. like the capitulary of 802 dignified by Ganshof as ‘programmatic’. 1999). discussed and agreed. Bibliotheca capitularium regum Francorum manuscripta. 44 Ganshof. .L. “Literacy in Carolingian government”. 1897). Nelson. See further A. 12 in Krause’s edition in MGH Capit. in 882.’ I give references to both these editions’ chapter-divisions . MGH Fontes Iuris Germanici Antiqui 3 (Hannover. pp. Sondheimer (London. Not only were there large-scale efforts. esp. c. and that he had read and copied his treatise. 2 (Hannover. Nelson. Wormald. The Frankish world (London. chapter 2. at all events. the codes of Frankish law. 258–96. Bühler. had seen Adalard.  may be. transl. The uses of literacy in early Medieval Europe (Cambridge. 522]: ‘Adalardum senem et sapientem domni Karoli magni imperatoris propinquum . Studien zur Entstehung und Überlieferung der Kapitularien Karls des Grossen und Ludwigs des Frommen”. Part I. pp.226  . inter primos consiliarios primum. in his The Carolingians and the Frankish monarchy. McKitterick ed. Abhandlungen der Nordrhein-Westfälischen Akademie der Wissenschaften 97. 45–53. Überlieferung und Traditionszusammenhang der fränkischen Herrscherlasse. pp. as Hincmar himself said. Often referred to as ‘Hincmar’s’. as often as not simple lists of points. Schieffer. pp. and for the manuscripts and their contents idem.45 Brigitte Kasten. Gross and R. 1–36. “Charlemagne’s programme of imperial government”. and now the excellent discussion in: P. Hincmar refers to Adalard as ‘an old and wise kinsman of the elder Charles. building on the work of Karolingern.-L. J. Ganshof long ago argued. pp. 1996). as F. The making of english law (Oxford. or the huge combined output of the reform councils of 813 which was collected and promulgated at Aachen later that year: there were also literally dozens of brief sets of rules and regulations. T.L. All this suggests considerably larger numbers of active participants in the business of administrative reform than before the Aachen years. and first amongst his first counsellors’. 305–501. adding that he himself. 54 [c. III. Fontes Minores 1 (Münster. c. 231–2. B. Kasten.      227 C. at 54. early sixteenth-century. no. 72–84. without committing himself to a precise date. IV. 48–77. 38. I. 46 Kasten. see below. 56 and p. “Hinkmariana 1”. n.-R. Depreux. 30. IV could represent the join between Hincmar’s new prefatory material and Adalard’s original text: see above. Quellen und Forschungen aus Italienischen Archiven und Bibliotheken 72 (1992). has persuasively argued that it was written for Bernard of Italy. followed by Krause’s in square brackets). 3. 34: see below. pp. Louis II’s acknowledged partner from 851 but not endowed and married till 860 after the birth of children: see the dower-charter of 5 October (860). 79. pp. P. Schmale-Ott. 45. but note that the text survives in just one. It could well be that it was intended that the relationship should be legalised once Cunigunda had borne children. p. V. Adalhard. and. 1979). The hypothesis raises a difficulty. 48 The presence in the unique manuscript of the single indication of a new chapter at Gross and Schieffer’s c. except the word “capi” (with superscript suspension-mark) at the beginning of Gross and Schieffer’s c. however (unnoted by Depreux. The relevance of all this to the authorship of the De ordine palatii would be that Adalard in 812 expected Cunigunda to become queen in fairly short order. c.47 While Hincmar made additions (the preface addressed to King Carloman (879–84) and the ensuing chapters I to III. 76). Cunigunda’s case could then be compared with that of Angilberga. Bougard and R. following C. in other words that no full marital endowment was made in 812/3. cf. “Das Königtum”): it seems that Bernard never formally married his partner Cunigunda. but the likely link with Bernard’s coming of age and endowment with a kingdom by his grandfather suggests to me 812: see below. 1986). Depreux. offers an invaluable discussion of arguments for Adalard’s authorship of the De ordine. pp. Le Jan eds. pp. 229. p. accepts a link between Adalard’s writing of the De ordine palatii and his role as Bernard’s counsellor. c. n. p. 134–5. 48. 525]. suspects that Adalard wrote for Bernard of Italy. P. For the basis of Adalard’s depiction in his personal acquaintance with the queen’s role at the courts of Pippin and Charlemagne. can be excluded: see below. Les douaires (Lille. 22.-R. I think Kasten’s alternative possibility of “soon after 781”. n. Kasten. Wanner.48 the (Gross and Schieffer’s first. 18. Adalhard von Corbie (Düsseldorf. 1997). 810–814 (which I would narrow further to 812). Veröffentlichungen der Historischen Kommission für Westfalen 41. ed. The notable role assigned to the queen at De ordine. Prosopographie de l’entourage de Louis le Pieux (781–840) (Sigmaringen. Further Hincmarian . Prosopographie. La Rocca. K. cf. with further references. 231. 125–7. might be linked with Bernard’s marriage which according to the Translatio sancti Viti was arranged by Adalard. p. but Bernard’s rebellion in 817 and death in 818 precluded such developments. at 7. for penetrating discussion. Brühl and others. nor was she ever queen: see C. “Das Königtum Berhards von Italien”. with Pippin as addressee. pp. Instituto Storico Italiano per il Medio Evo (Rome 1994). pp. 77. Brühl. 72–4 [c. 72. Adalhard. p. in: F. gives good grounds for dating the work “vor 814” (p. forthcoming). Deutsches Archiv 29 (1964). 47 Translatio sancti Viti. 1–25. manuscript which lacks any chapter-divisions. ed.. p. B. and hence signalled her future role in the palace. p. p. and idem. Ludovici II Diplomata. pp. suggests 810–814. I intend to explore elsewhere the implications of such provisional relationships for the management of royal families in the early Middle Ages.46 when Adalard had gone back to Italy with the young king in the role of advisor and guide: guidance which included the finding of a suitable bride. “Les reines dans le royaume d’Italie du IXe siècle”. Beiträge zur Interpretation von “‘De ordine palatii ’”. P. 523]. 20. First. pp. Adalhard. pp.228  . Kirn. 29–30.54 But Adalard’s experience of additions were interpolations. among the court-circle of Charlemagne. 2: ‘pincerna quem vulgo scaffardum dicimus’. Löwe. Adalhard. VI. till 771/2. 62. 1972). 61. pp. c. Heimpel. IV. 209. pp. certain features can be claimed as symptomatic of Adalard’s core-text. pp. which seem indicative of the author’s Italian governmental experience and Italian addressee. n. 78 with n. 197–225. Nelson. IV on. Halphen. could work equally well for 881 or 812.49 and. Adalhard. p. V. citing Paul the Deacon’s gloss. the use of phrases to link chapters or sections. and monk for many years. p. Cf. 1–9. V. this is a work of political science. detectable only by the sharp eyes of H. of Adalard’s Statutes for Corbie. and contrasts strikingly with Hincmar’s writing. unlike Hincmar who was a former child-oblate. and a (perhaps defensively) favourable comment from his biographer. 54 De ordine palatii. “Die mittelalterliche Staatsverwaltung als geistesgeschichtliches Problem”. His knowledge was of the experiential kind. 82–6 [cc.51 It’s relevant here to recall that. Kasten. for instance c. pp.53 and certain touches. pp. 527]. “Hinkmariana”. pp. 522–4. having spent his earlier years as a young warrior at the courts of Pippin and then. Halphen’s argument that Adalard’s entire libellus was Hincmar’s invention: cf. p. 64 [c. possibly. at 533–6. 32. see Brühl. before accepting episcopal office. pp. 52–4. Charles the Bald (London. to twice-yearly assemblies). Revue historique 183 (1938). see Löwe. “Le ‘De ordine palatii’ d’Hincmar”. VI. 49 In cc. 51 J. Few if any scholars nowadays accept L. see Mayke de Jong’s chapter in this volume. Schmidt which I have unfortunately not been able to consult. “Hinkmar”. which is a feature. 1992). too. 43–8 (carelessly attributing the whole work to Hincmar). it is not primarily concerned. 56. citing the dissertation of J. VI’s stress on counsel and references to seniores and minores. Adalard had been an adult conversus. L. 16. which could again reflect Adalard’s relative ‘illiteracy’. with christian moralising but with a cool exposition of structures and processes and an appreciation of the sociological context in which political relations operated. 528]. Antony (who had also been a conversus). . p. sufficiently so to have evoked both an appropriate nickname. pp. 221–2. 52 See below. Historisches Vierteljahrschrift 27 (1937). 76–7. 50 De ordine palatii. For further comments on monks easily traversing the space between palace and monastery. Löwe and others.50 and while some of the text.L. Historia Langobardorum. 13. 53 See Kasten. 17. that is. as are other exemplars of the Mirror of Princes genre. 3 (Göttingen. 88 [cc. 523–48. “Hinkmar von Reims und der Apokrisiar.  references to the apocrisiar. Festschrift für H. p. V. notably the use of scapoardus to mean pincerna (butler). see H. Charlemagne. and Kasten. 68–70. 74.52 Then there are stylistic traits: the lack of biblical quotations from c. c. follows the lectio composed by Adalard. ed. in: J. the bulk of his political career was played out at. and 237 (801). and it is hard not to discern a little irony here. 9. p. in: R. he seems to have asked Adalard for a position paper. 129. When Alcuin wanted to get a message to his former student Angilbert at court in 790. Cf. 382.56 It was perhaps at Paderborn that Adalard impressed Pope Leo III so greatly that at a subsequent meeting between the two in Rome. p. The allusion here was to the celebrated fourth-century desert hermit. 1. McKitterick 56 . 299–300. 290–1. the phrase ubicumque vadas suggests an allusion to Adalard’s travels. 222. addressing Adalard as mansionarius. 181. 801). PL 120. role as “a dweller in many mansions and an assigner of appropriate residence rights to others”. which might allude to his earthly. look to me as if they might have been addressed to Adalard at court rather than at Corbie. pp. no. The Paderborn meeting followed a familyconclave at Aachen: cf. Charlemagne’s Aachen years were also very largely Adalard’s. Antony. see M.58 Later that same year. specifically between 790 and 810. In other words. at Adalard’s expense. 175. 1517. A. 365. For Adalard’s subsequent visit to Rome. 35. pp. and courtly rather than monastic. 381–2.      229 Carolingian government was by no means confined to Italy: Hincmar rightly identified his role as Charlemagne’s kinsman and ‘first counsellor’. pp. 42. col. Vita Adalardi. Am Vorabend der Kaiserkrönung: Karl der Grosse und Leo III (forthcoming. p. 237 of which only 220 (c. 176. a synod summoned to Aachen to pronounce on the filioque question produced a statement which was taken to Rome early in 810 by Adalard who had evidently taken a leading part in the discussions. Annales regni Francorum 809. 4.60 Word55 MGH Epp. Charlemagne’s court. 33. pp. he wrote to Adalard. Jarnut. 2001). 220. the pope jokingly told him: ‘O Frank. Werminghoff (Hannover. “Charlemagne. no other Frank had better come here expecting me to trust him!’57 When in 809 Charlemagne wanted to guide discussion at Aachen of astronomical matters bearing on the date of Easter. pater optimus?”. p. Adalhard. Garrison. he wrote to ask Adalard.59 But perhaps the most telling evidence for Adalard’s frequent residence at court is the fact that Alcuin gave him a nickname. and just possibly 175. 364. the replies of the compotist(a)e. 60 For nicknames at Charlemagne’s court in general. see below. n. “The emergence of Latin literary culture and the court of Charlemagne”.55 When Alcuin wanted to know about the events of summer 799. p. be sure that if I find you to be other than I think you are. 59 MGH Conc. Epistolae variorum no. as well as hoped-for heavenly. Kasten. MGH Epp. where c. or in close contact with. p. 58 MGH Epp 4. Other letters addressed to Adalard are nos. p. 1906). 4. Nelson. 63. 9. no. 17. 222. 57 Paschasius Radbertus. 237. 2. also no. 235–44. c. cf. Though he served two important stints in Italy in the 780s and in 810–4. In no. 58. no. 566. above all. 63 De ordine palatii. pp. VI. can be substantiated in part through careful weighing of the multifarious documentation that capitularies offer for the years from 802 onwards. when Byzantine envoys arrived near the beginning of the year. cf. pp. in: P. 27–28. pp. MacDonald eds. “Plunder and tribute in the Carolingian empire”. PL 120. 111–40. along with one envoy from the calif Harun ed. 62 De ordine palatii. V. Alcuin of York and his influence on European culture. Vita Adalardi. echoed the contrast between Antony/Adalard’s lack of formal training and his natural gift for understanding. both regularly. J.. 59–79. and where such transactions are scrappily documented in prose and poetry. and whose incidence multiplied..61 The De ordine palatii describes a system whose salient features arguably reflect Adalard’s court experiences. diverse.63 Aachen. 526]. and redistributions of gifts. as an example of an illiterate who learned the scriptures by heart and learned to understand them by deep reflection.62 Aachen. pp. 80–2 [cc. again. 61 In her soon to be published Ph. 72. VI. was the destination of foreign embassies whose origins were. and that Paschasius. from king and queen to unbeneficed milites in the palace service. and irregularly. on an annual basis. 1993). 29–36. forthcoming. from 802. from churches and from lay attenders too. Cf. Martin. De doctrina christiana. Germania Latina III (Groningen 1998). Nelson eds. pp. into the De ordine palatii. again. ‘as time and circumstance allowed’. Garrison notes that Antony was cited by Augustine. and into the palace at assemblies generaliter. 1962).230  . pp. “The social world of Alcuin: nicknames at York and at the Carolingian court”. This was the venue of nearly all the great assemblies of the years after 794. cc. was the hub of multiple givings. 327–9]. at 80–7.L. idem. c.L. 1539. 525. and Isaac the Jew (whom Charlemagne had sent to the East four years before) arrived home on 20 July.. Linehan and J. 181–2. thesis. Transactions of the Royal Historical Society 35 (1985). CSEL 32 (Turnhout. col. 7. Garrison’s perceptive observations offer possibilities for new insights into Adalard’s life and. receivings. through that. as the De ordine says. in: L. pp. proemium 4. and the De ordine’s details about procedural arrangements. “Assemblies”. Reuter. that is. 2001). pp. messengers. pp. Carolingian culture: Emulation and innovation (Cambridge. Houwen and A.  play and ironic mixes of affection and critique were symptomatic of the close personal relationships generated in the intimate yet also highly competitive atmosphere of the court. 2–3. The medieval world (London. Nelson. involving a complex geography of separate sittings.D. at Aachen. and then collective decision-making. “The voice of Charlemagne”. ch. J. 22. 82–96 [cc. . the De ordine’s several references accurately depict the variety and significance of these various transactions: gifts in kind and cash flowed. The whole subject was illuminatingly discussed by T. 75–94. 61. forthcoming. idem. c. ed. cc. “Missus — marchio — comes”.-F. suggesting.64 The phrase ‘return home’ assumes a more or less fixed capital. 82. c. VI. 66 Kasten. and an (only partly) “itinerant court”. After Rome’s fall: Narrators and sources of . esp. 74 [c. I return to the De ordine’s comments on the role of the queen as not only highly relevant to Bernard’s situation in 812. De ordine palatii. when Charlemagne ‘returned home’ from Saxony to receive envoys from Constantinople and from Cordoba. 810. “Making a difference in ninth-century politics: the daughters of Desiderius”. 527]. 94–6 [c. when Adalard had brought Cunigunda to be the young king’s bride. 529]. p. Cf. 31. Adalhard. 205. IV. 78. p. pp. 191–239. 67 De ordine palatii. 9 (1980).. Beiheft der Francia.67 This clear perception of the geography of power and its implications might be seen as the hallmark of someone who had experience of government in a major province (Italy) but also at the centre. Werner. p. 84 [c. 66 [c. p. and the De ordine’s observations on the management of the palace economy tend to confirm this. p. 22. 88 [c. but also deriving from Adalard’s mixed experience of the court of Charlemagne. 68 J. Adalard. 525]. 212–3. V. 36. so that regional officers only forward matters to the ruler for decision when these cannot be dealt with locally. Histoire comparée de l’administration. Nelson. 30. “Famille”. 65 Though Kasten. until 810. cf. K. Nelson. and (temporarily) from royal favour in 772 as a consequence of the repudiation of the Lombard queen in whose selection and approval Adalard had been personally involved. cf.L. in: W. by careful distribution of offices at court. Lastly. Adalard’s prior closeness to Bertrada. Paravicini and K. 132: ‘domum revertitur’.66 Further governmental features noted in the De ordine are depicted as arising from realm’s vast extent: the need to have farflung regna represented..L. p. VII.68 Subsequent experience of 64 Annales regni Francorum 802. the need for good intelligence on frontier regions. as it were. p.F. Adalhard. p.      231 al-Rashid and another from Abraham amir of Kairouan. 117. p. p. Murray ed. pp. 18. no very sharp distinction can be made between a seasonally mobile court spending lengthy winter stays in one spot. p. VI. originally a tiro in the household of Charlemagne’s parents. ‘with the elephant and with gifts’. in: A.65 as also do references to the mansiones of chief ministers and to the presence of discipuli at what Kasten terms a sort of ‘civil service college’ (Verwaltungshochschule). perhaps. Werner eds. pp. 527–8]. 523–4]. finds here “die organisatorische Seite der wirtschaftlichen Versorgung eines reisenden Königshofes”. p. given their sensitivity. now J. pp. the necessity of delegating responsibility. had first withdrawn from Charlemagne’s court. could never have been treated as a normal or even desirable state of affairs: hence De ordine’s recommendation of more conventional arrangements.70 The variety of senses in which Charlemagne used Aachen as a theatre of power can be illustrated by two episodes. and not to presume to raise any infant from the baptismal font until they were able to know and recite the Prayer barbarian history. Recalling orders to clergy ‘that no-one should presume to lift someone from the font at baptism before they can recite the Lord’s Prayer and the Creed before you or one of your ordained ministers’.  Charlemagne’s court before 800 might well have confirmed Adalard’s confidence in the importance of queenly patronage and power. 178. nunc istos. the other of vast political import. advising her son to dine as often as possible with good priests. 70 De ordine palatii. ed. Essays presented to Walter Goffart (Toronto. III. proutque cuique possibile erat. We ordered them not to proceed. by Hildegard. p. P. one apparently small-scale. 194. n. Riché (Paris. and by Fastrada. Liber manualis. quam verae familiaritatis seu dilectionis amore. 526]: ‘. 27. V. Cf. All told. pp. in his view successfully. 1975). the above features of the De ordine seem to reflect not (or not just) Adalard’s experience of the Lombard kingdom. and we ordered them to be individually and carefully tested and examined as to whether they knew and had by heart the Lord’s Prayer and the Creed. by Charlemagne’s Lombard queen. 11. The queenless years which came after 800. Adalard hoped that Cunigunda could assume the role once played. p. but his years at the Aachen court — which had left him just as keenly aware of the importance of the on-the-spot networking implied by the invitations issued by capitanei ministeriales to the young palace milites to dine with them in their mansiones. and many of them could not remember them at all. 1998). therefore. Dhuoda. 69 This now seems to me a preferable explanation of De ordine’s depiction of the queen’s role to the alternatives I offered in: “La cour impériale”. illos [milites] praefati capitanei ministeriales certatim de die in diem. The first is described by Charlemagne himself in a letter to Bishop Ghaerbald of Liège. and despite Adalard’s own personal standing with and participation in that regime. 171–90. . 80 [c. p. nunc illos ad mansiones suas vocabant et non tam gulae voracitate. . there were many in our presence (apud nos) at Epiphany whom we found wished to receive infants from the baptismal font. p. however well Charlemagne’s daughters worked as advisers. impendere studebant’. c. .232  . 8. Charlemagne reports that ‘just recently.69 This was not a role that Adalard could have observed during his years governing Italy. 1983). For the wider context of Charlemagne’s efforts to get the practice and meaning of baptism “right”. when all had processed into the church. 11 September. 241. Tremp. and they replied enthusiastically that it was God’s choice’. witnessing what is in effect a coronation oath. ed. in: U. pp. 1964). They blushed deeply [valde erubescentes fuerunt] because of this. Nelson. and to enforce the obligations of godparents. 1995). p. cf. children and the church in the earlier Middle Ages”. p. J. 72 Thegan. the sedes regni. much more famous. in short. 6. 22. Vita Hludowici imperatoris. Blumenthal ed. their public naming and shaming here by the ruler himself showed his determination that the laity should practise the fundamental requirements of Christianity regardless of rank. The second. In September 813. This is what gave his project its élan. see S. 169–237. religious and secular.73 After Louis’s death. and months of inter-Carolingian conflict. pp. But Charlemagne’s power and responsibility as God’s agent on earth are also impressively on display. Aachen.L. . Charlemagne presided over a great assembly at Aachen. from the greatest to the least. scene shows power that likewise transcends modern distinctions between public and private. I. F. though ‘everyone’ is involved in rulership’s transmission. ed. he too chose the Aachen palace as the ritual site. 73 Annales de Saint-Bertin 837. c. where ‘he asked everyone.      233 and Creed. no. Studies in Church History 31 (1994). Aachen was to remain throughout the ninth century a favoured site for ritual inaugurations and acknowledgements and transfers of regnal power in Francia. showing that no fewer than 61 responses to Charlemagne’s enquiry are still extant. was abandoned by Lothar in March 71 MGH Capit. 138. is God’s.. and when Louis agreed. Annales regni Francorum 813. they would be able in time to remove this shortcoming from themselves’. E. again. 122.-R. Keefe. “Carolingian baptismal expositions: a handlist of tracts and manuscripts”. Aachen. “Parents. was the place where collective power was mobilised by a ruler exceptionally aware of his responsibility. Carolingian essays (Washington DC.71 Did the inadequate would-be godparents perhaps include some of the Aachen élite along with humbler people? If so. and willingly promised that if they were allowed. Grat et al.A. 81–114. (Paris. p. Charlemagne asked Louis if he would agree to abide by a series of rules of just government. The Sunday following.72 The power. MGH SRG 54 (Hannover. The letter’s date is uncertain but can’t be from long before 810. if it pleased them that he should hand over the imperial dignity to his son Louis. he was told ‘to take the crown from the altar and place it on his own head’. When Louis’s own turn came to pass rulership on to his son Charles in 837. even the exact location of Charlemagne’s tomb had been forgotten. 77 K. p. he never visited Francia. especially during the lifetime of Charlemagne. there are no further records of ritual events at Aachen after 881. 80 Above. 1998). 29. IV. 34. p. Past and Present 158 (1998). ed.234  . p. ed. Überlegungen zu Heiligerverehrung. 876. in 881. A story recorded in 885 about the mid-eighth-century origins of the Aachen palace may well have begun life. on his own admission. 87. 47. 1891). 97. 39. down to the twentieth century. 167–8. E. p. Heiligsprechung und Traditionsbildung”. with successive rival kings staging rituals of power in the church and the palace.75 Conversely.  842: Lothar’s younger brothers Louis and Charles immediately made for Aachen. 75 Annales Fuldenses 870.79 he’s already been mentioned in this paper as the recipient and purveyor of an anecdote about Charlemagne’s control of Aachen’s inhabitants that depends for its effect on detailed knowledge of the place’s topography. Herrschaftsrepräsentation im Ottonischen Sachsen (Sigmaringen. pp. p.80 In this other story. pp. F. Kurze. Gesta Karoli. p. 90. “Otto III. 381–430. had been a place of power in more than one sense. 40. 71–2. ‘Everyone’ then asked Louis and Charles if they were willing to rule ‘according to God’s will’. pp. ‘ordered them to receive the regnum’. 1907). By the year 1000. M. and though. 1. and circulated for decades. I. Althoff and E. 78 Cf. 223 and n. 171. 79 Notker. held an assembly there. When Aachen was used again by Ottonians and others. among aulici.77 Nevertheless Aachen. . and their bishops pronounced Lothar’s forfeiture of the regnum on account of his lack of ‘the knowledge of ruling the state’.74 Aachen was still a central place in the minds of competing Carolingians until the late 870s. 877. and in the Chronicle of Regino too. pp. These silences of the late ninth century shout the demise of a place of power — in a certain sense. For other stories about Aachen. Annales de Saint-Bertin 869. III. Görich. Innes. 7.76 This was the last mention of Aachen in these Annals. “Memory. pp. in: G. 76 Annales Fuldenses 881. Gesta Karoli. MGH SRG (Hannover. 210. 3–36. Historiarum Libri IV. p. Müller. 870. MGH SRG (Hannover. 175. 876. Schubert eds. p.78 The story-teller is Notker the Stammerer. Aachen appears as a place of power of a different kind: 74 Nithard. it was no longer as a base of power. öffnet das Karlsgrab in Aachen. orality and literacy in an early medieval society”. the author of the Annales Fuldenses recorded the desecration of Aachen by Northmen who stabled their horses in the church and ransacked the palace. and when they agreed. Notker. 1969). Wadley eds. No Christian story-teller or audience could miss the message that associated the health-giving spring with the salvific waters of baptism. Aachen assemblies and congregations) wrestled with the problems of correct baptismal performance and the Christian formation of the young baptised. II. the innocent would-be bather had encountered the slime of lurking pre-Christian. 160–1. driven by his determination. “Humour as history in Notker’s Gesta Karolii Magn”. “Charles the Fat”. Monks. “Gesta Karoli. But the shape had such grossness to it that it befouled all the springs with filth and blood and revolting slime.      235 [Pippin] once fought an unheard-of battle against ‘spiritual wickedness’ (Ephes. 31. thesis. J. at the time he wrote this part of the Gesta Karoli. King. the king picked up his sword in his hand and hurried off to the bath in his shirt and slippers. in: E. 92. The story’s second motif is confidence: the waters would flow pure again. The translation is mine. p.B. I. 80. 12). 6. but surely not I. 81 Notker. When this had been done. 42–5. The story focuses first on dynastic anxiety. 21. University of London Ph.T. canalisable. . Sensing a shape in human form. Thorpe. 1989). Not even this could trouble the unconquerable Pippin. that it was only after a long struggle that he managed with great difficulty to draw it out again. 171–83. 32. had high hopes for a renovation of the regnum Francorum. Suddenly the Old Enemy attacked him and made as if to kill him. said he to his chamberlain. as it were. see now Simon MacLean..” II. but hardly controllable by man. Just as Charlemagne (and. generated by the idea of the dynasty’s founder exposed to diabolical threat. p. 38. see D. anti-Christian. and Pippin’s victory was also Christ’s. he struck his invincible sword so firmly into the ground. 15. however. II. pp. nuns. p. For Notker’s humour. ‘Let the filthy water flow away. Two Lives of Charlemagne (Harmondsworth.81 This seriously entertaining story was intended for a Carolingian ruler. the hot and most health-giving springs simply bubbled forth there. Pippin ordered his chamberlain to make sure that the springs were clean and that no unknown person had been allowed in. but with some debt to that of L. 27. power. The apt symbol of this threat was diabolical pollution of springs that were an inexplicable natural force. 8. 59. pp. and as soon as it runs clean again. p.B. Charles the Fat. pp. and friars in medieval society (Sewanee TE. and for the dates of writing of the two books. For Book I’s group of Aachen stories.D. In a place that should have been ‘health-giving’. The king protected himself with the sign of the Cross and drew his sword. 2000. Ganz. ‘Don’t be upset by what’s happened’. then I will have my bath at once’. Since the thermal baths had not yet been built at Aachen. Schaefer and W. of whom Notker still. so the story recorded. Literally and metaphorically. Nelson. reminded him of the same interpretation of John 21.83 Notker’s story needs to be read. p.L. his fideles) could vanquish the dangers in chthonic powers. by Notker was that. Cf. explained and justified the centring of Charlemagne’s whole project at Aachen. 353. with God’s help. 1987). G. PL 100. Cannadine and S. . Einhard’s muscularly romanist (and Suetonius-inspired) account of Charlemagne’s choice of Aachen underestimated. Ep. The story. esp. Alcuin explained that the unbroken net with its huge load of fish signified ‘the Holy Church of the elect undamaged by any dissensions’. the builder of the Aachen baths. to the arch-chaplain Riculf. A further echo is surely to be found in Annales Sancti Amandi 800.  invented. See Garrison. recalling for Charlemagne’s benefit the Aachen baths as the entirely appropriate location for his own exposition of John 21. Price. evoked his lord’s divinely-appointed task. repr. yet the context in both is secular and political: cf. for insights on the associative implications of Alcuin’s thoughts on fishing and episcopal duties. ed. Ep. but to be. alongside Alcuin’s commentary. pp. 202–4. 83 Alcuin. 1996). no doubt. a place of cleansing for a people assured that they were God’s. 137–80. 11. to Arn of Salzburg. A serious Sunday-lunchtime conversation with Billy Nelson helped me think laterally about Notker’s story. p. Aachen was not just to be represented as. In his Commentary in Joh. “The Lord’s Anointed and the people’s choice: Carolingian royal ritual”.L. 163. a place where power was harnessed for multiple human applications in the service of God. whose projection back onto Charlemagne’s father made it the more effective as a myth of dynastic legitimation. 99–132. col. and as a counterweight to Einhard’s rationalising. Pippin’s initial purification of the natural springs had made possible their canalising by his son. was to contrast Charlemagne with Titus.82 Alcuin. 198. 212 (800/1). the significance for Charlemagne of Aachen’s bubbling springs. indeed absolutely of their own Carolingian moment.. What Aachen’s hot springs meant for Charlemagne and his court in some ways resembled their meaning for their nineteenth-century devotee the Empress Elisabeth after whom they are named today.236  . Alcuin. MGH SS I (Hannover. p. 43. with a similar exegesis. 113 (796). The Frankish world (London. 10. Geo-politics and 82 Part of its point. pp.11 as a prototype of apostolic Church-making. Nelson. by extension. 1826). pp. vii. in: J. yet in other ways (and these were the ways of Alcuin and Notker as well as Einhard) meant things that were quite different. J. 996. “Alcuin’s world”. or heard. What was inevitably presented. Pertz. as renewal was in fact new. given a culture deriving all legitimacy from the past. 112–3. if it did not wholly misrepresent. a courageous Carolingian king (and. in: D.H. Rituals of royalty (Cambridge. was the creation of a new place of power. in still more fundamental ways. . in direct and obvious ways. was transient — though it lasted longer than many — it proved to be ideologically indefinitely renewable.      237 geo-ideology had everything to do with this. the precondition for that achievement. Yet. and by a thought-provoking paradox. made possible by Charlemagne’s political achievement. and while his regime. as well as its sign. Aachen’s construction as a political centre was. like all regimes. and our vassals (vassi ). 114 Capitulary on discipline in the palace at Aachen 1. if he refuses. or any homicide or adultery or any crime whatsoever and who has come to our palace for this reason and has tried to go into hiding there. Ratbert the estate-manager (actor) is to have a similar inquiry made in his area of office ( per suum ministerium) that is in the houses (mansiones) of our servants both in Aachen and in the nearby estates belonging to Aachen. he is to be kept an eye on in our palace.  A I Translation of Capitulare de disciplina palatii Aquisgranesis (?820). it is our will that he. no. Likewise it is our will that the household-officers (ministeriales) of our beloved queen and of our children do the same. I. those who are not themselves estate-managers. 297-8. Every palace officer (ministerialis) should make inquiry most carefully first of all among his own men and then among their fellows ( pares) if any of them. along with her shall be beaten in the same place. 146. We will and command that none of those who serve us in our palace should presume to harbour any man on account of his having committed theft. MGH Capit. at a time when those lords (seniores) are not there in those houses. from MS Paris BN lat 4788. The deputy-seneschal (mansionarius) is likewise to make inquiry with his junior officers through the houses of bishops and abbots and counts. he is likewise to carry the malefactor on his own shoulders to jail. 3. 2. and whether they are Christians or Jews. . If the man who despises our order is a slave. pp. Any man who had such a man or woman with him. and then he himself is to be lead into the marketplace and there flogged according to his deserts.238  . that in whosesoever’s houses they may be found they should likewise by carried by those men to the marketplace where those same women are to be flogged or. let him know that he will have to carry on his shoulders that man who was found in his house. first around the palace and then to the jail in which that criminal must be put. It is our will likewise. and Ernald through the houses of all traders whether they trade in the market (in mercato) or elsewhere. or of their people (sui) should be found hiding a whore or a man. fol. If any free man who violates this order and harbours such a man. Peter and Gunzo must make a similar inquiry throughout the personal rooms (scruae) and houses of all our estate-managers. concerning trollops ( gadales) and whores. if he refuses to pay emendation. 8. and refuses to make known to the brawlers that he will report them. let him present him [i. whether they have diligently and truthfully held a further inquiry and investigated it. those counts] have taken their statement (indiculum) from them. if he cannot present him. let him know that he will be [treated as] as partner in the crime (damnum) done by the brawlers between them. they can affirm in our hands [in manu nostra — i.e. If he sees them brawling and can’t make peace between them. Every week. our officials and servants are to report what they have done about making those inquiries.      239 4. Whoever finds men brawling (rixantes) in the palace and could make peace between them but refuses to do that. 7. so that. Supervisors (magistri ) are to be set up over beggars and poor people with the task of giving them care and provision so that ?tricksters [lacuna] and frauds may not hide themselves among them. on every Saturday. the criminal] or. 6. Our palatine counts are to apply all their attention to ensuring that appellants whose statements they have received should not remain in our palace after they [i. if it pleases us. 5. Whoever receives or harbours or refuses to make arrangements to expel a man coming from anywhere whatsoever to our palace who has committed any crime in our palace.e. let him pay compensation for the crime that [the criminal] did.e. their hands in ours?] that they have reported nothing but the truth to us. . and in cases that have been reported to us. we likewise will that he should share in [paying] the composition for the crime those two have committed. D 218) (813.240  . D 114) (774. Dates and charter (D) numbers give earliest and latest evidence for an individual’s activity. (807. D D 190–802. (803. D 188) 120–798. D D D D D D D c. 207) D 208) D 209–810. (812. MGH DD Karol. Chancellor Hitherius Notaries: Rado Wigbald ([760. D 162) 136–794. (778. D 84–786. D 55–777. 215) D 217) d. D 154) 119–799. Chancellor Ercambald Notaries: Ermin Amalbert Genesius Hagding Aldric Blado Ibbo Suavis Guidbert (799. (799. I. D 187–812. D Pippini 13] 768. D 218) 116–799. D 114) (772. D 154) b. D D 213. a. D D 200) DD 206. (808. Chancellor Rado Notaries: Wigbald Ercambald Giltbert Optatus Widolaicus Jacob (777. (799. D 178) 157–792. (779. (799. (778. (787. D 179) 122–788. Under Jeremiah Notary: Witherius diaconus (813–4. D 67–777. (781. (774. D D 187) D 189–807.  A II: C’   The evidence is culled from Mühlbacher’s introduction and edition of Charlemagne’s chartes. (811. (809. D 175) 217) 205) 198) 210) . D 188) 84–786. C’  (with thanks to Billy Nelson for bar-charting) 24 20 16 12 8 4 813 811 809 807 805 803 801 799 797 795 793 791 789 787 785 783 781 779 777 775 773 771 769 0 .241       A III. This page intentionally left blank . Monastic foundations multiplied when these served the interests of aristocratic * I should like to thank Jinty Nelson for translating this paper. social and political conditions. See the classic study of F. Settimane 28 ii (Spoleto. Dierkens. AND COMPETITION FOR POWER IN SEVENTH-CENTURY FRANCIA* Régine Le Jan The monasteries founded in such numbers in northern Gaul in the seventh century. den Rheinländen und Bayern am Beispiel der monastischen Entwicklung (4. and A. of Columbanus and his disciples. of the holy men. and the staging-posts. made a powerful contribution to the christianianisation of the countryside. Le Jan. . pp. in modern colloquial English it tends to be reserved for male institutions.-M. monasticism) is used either in a general sense for any religious house. Semmler. the word convent is used in what follows to denote a community. The journey-routes.CONVENTS. évêques et laïques. of Amandus. prepared and supported by groups of aristocratic kin and by kings and their families. or to denote a male community. a little later. with “convent” the usual word for women’s ones. Essai d’anthropologie sociale (Paris. Une politique du pouvoir en Hainaut au Moyen-Age (VII e–XI e siècles).1 Most of the time. see A. For the sake of stylistic variety. VIOLENCE. 1982). and the missions succeeded in the end only where they were favoured by religious. wholly or largely consisting of women. Abbayes et chapîtres entre Sambre et Meuse (VII e–XII e siècle) (Sigmaringen 1985). Prinz. 1995). of which an abbess was in charge. and the works of J. Jht)”. (Brussels. Monastery (cf. French “monastère”). or. especially “Mission und Pfarrorganisation in den rheinischen. 125–6. pp. While the existence of double monasteries in the early Middle Ages complicates the picture. [ Translator’s note: While the word “monastery” strictly speaking refers to a religious community whether of men or women (cf. Frühes Mönchtum im Frankenreich.] 1 There is a vast historiography on this subject. Jht) (München and Wien. Cristianizzatione e organizzazione ecclesiastica delle campagne nell’alto medioevo e resistenze. bis 8. For two regional studies. the missionaries were not operating in virgin territory among populations that were still largely pagan.2 The missionaries were expected. Abbayes. were not the result of chance: they were organised. Mosel. Kultur und Gesellschaft in Gallien. 1965). 1994). 387–400.und Maasländischen Bistümers (5–10. in the wake of preachers and missionaries. Famille et pouvoir dans le monde franc (VII e–X e siècle). and no doubt even summoned. the terms “men’s house’ and women’s house” are also used. 813–88. 2 R. by the aristocrats themselves. however. Helvetius. took a leading hand in the game of inheritances. following the rhythm of vocations and oblations. founding a monastery in the countryside thus became an aristocratic family’s means of expressing its power while at the same time reinforcing it by appropriating the sacred power conveyed in relics. That power was spiritual by virtue of the tombs of the founding saints and the relics piously and jealously preserved in these places.244    families. the possession of precious relics made it possible to attract the gifts of the faithful and to group friends around the monastery. In the seventh century. Yet the monasteries in whose founding 3 See especially B. and the making of copies of authoritative books. Mélanges de l’École Française de Rome 111–2 (1999). as well as the production of new works. it was economic thanks to the landed capital invested in them. where networks of clientage and fidelity could be constructed and reinforced. In a wider sense. and became major players in the complex mechanisms by which land-ownership circulated. founding a monastery was as much a political as a religious act. by the artisans and artists who worked there. 909–1049 (Ithaca and London. monasteries were key centres of political power. 4 On this cluster of problems. the sacred and the profane. monasteries were the only institutions whose capital. and new bonds created. In a society soaked in the irrational. gifts. The social meaning of Cluny’s property. Recent work has shown how important were the kind of links created by gifts in the tenth and eleventh centuries. and it was cultural because of the education provided there for the young oblates. Rosenwein. In the seventh and eighth centuries. To be the neighbor of Saint Peter. Last but not least. 1989).4 Monasteries themselves were true microcosms reflecting the social form and internal structure of aristocratic groups. . It was by such means that monastic communities were inserted into local communities. Monasteries were places of prayer and asceticism. and regarded as something sacred. namely. the interpenetration of the religious and the secular. Reducing the phenomenon of monasticism to its religious aspect alone would mean seriously misunderstanding a basic feature of the way in which early medieval society worked. grew of its own accord. Everything converged at these sites. but at the same time they were places of power. both symbolic and real. see Les transferts patrimoniaux en Europe occidentale VIII e–X e siècle.3 and these findings are equally valid for earlier periods too. the public and the private. and spiritual and material exchanges. and the revenues extracted therefrom. The foundation of a private monastery thus strengthened the founding group at the expense of its rivals: so much was this the case that the Eigenkloster swiftly became major objects in a competition for power which involved the use of force. Episkopat und Adel zur Gründungszeit des Klosters Reichenau. Dierkens. Women. (Sigmaringen 1974). pp. The chronology of monastic foundations for women later in the medieval period is discussed by B. outside and inside monastic communities. Frauenbild und Frauenleben im Frankenreich.-M. Women in Frankish society. and. 8.6 Hence it was women’s 5 J. in so far as in the Merovingian period every monastery was subject to episcopal authority. figure 2. particularly that of influencing the choice of the abbot. Yet it is not exemption that defines a ‘private monastery’. in: A. pp. Marriage and the cloister. “Virgo et virago: reflexions sur le pouvoir du voile consacré d’après les sources hagiographiques de la Gaule du Nord”. and involved the earmarking of patrimonial land. Le Jan and J. Sansterre eds. 1981). . see Wemple. unless an exemption had been obtained. that the family kept certain rights over the monastery. but rather the fact that the foundation had been the work of a noble family. pp. Vorträge und Forschungen 20.. (Weimar/Köln/Wien. and had varied social and political functions. see A. 500 to 900 (Philadelphia. Goetz. pp. It is true that the concept of the Eigenklöster is applicable to these places only to a certain extent. Seventh-century monasticism had a pronounced female character: for it was women in particularly large numbers who founded convents into which they retired to abandon the world and vow themselves to a life of prayer and divine service. Some were founded on fiscal land given by the king. . Venarde. “Episcopi potestas und karolingische Klosterpolitik”. 1995). of guaranteeing the place’s tuitio. and hence were placed de facto under royal patronage even if the influence of the founding group might still predominate there.L. Mönchtum.-W. Semmler. 190ff. further. above all. A critical discussion of recent historiography. Wemple. 1999).5 Every one of these monasteries had been founded with the support of the local bishop. its protection. in: S. Frauen im Frühmittelalter.-M. 6 S. On reasons motivating women to choose the monastic life. p. 197–8. 305–94. Women’s monasticism in the central Middle Ages (Ithaca and London. A. R. Others belonged to the founding family as its own property: cases in point were the convents to be considered in this paper..F.. Borst ed. and H. directly and indirectly. and. Helvetius.       245 aristocratic kin-groups took part were not all of the same type. The monastery was therefore part of the family’s honor without being subject to the traditional rules of inheritance. Femmes et pouvoirs des femmes à Byzance et en Occident (VI e–XI e siècle) (Lille. Lebecq. 1997). 126–88. An abbess might be attacked the moment her family became weakened. 11 K. . 1980). Besides. founded under the influence of Irish monasticism. In a society where social reproduction was achieved by means of mechanisms of exchange and the creation of bonds of friendship. 8 Roger Verdier. and through highly codified rituals. Halsall ed. 13–44. 1–28.9 sociologists like Pierre Bourdieu10 and historians like Klaus Schreiner. and was closely linked with honour as studied recently by anthropologists like Julian PittRivers. in: idem ed. 9 J.. Merovingian society was violent generally. pp. and their explanation lies elsewhere than in mere greed for profit. in: K. 1997). “Le système vindicatoire”. pp. vol. but the deeper reasons for such acts of violence have be sought at the level of the symbolic system. Ehrkonflikte in Gesellschaften des Mittelalters und der frühen Neuzeit (Norm und Struktur) (Köln/Weimar/Wien. Schreiner.8 In so far as violence was controlled and led eventually to pacification. and with the king. with a small male community living alongside the main.11 Attacks on abbesses and their communities of nuns were not a matter of blind violence. then. 13–42. La vengeance. 1983). met the needs of society by affording greater security for the nuns in a social context where effective protection could not be guaranteed at local level. were the specific targets of violence. Bourdieu.. But no more so than did abbots.. of iniuriae committed by the abbesses’ enemies. with their diocesan bishops. Abbesses welcomed pilgrims. Anthropologie de l’honneur. Études d’éthnologie. it was part of the normal mechanisms of social regulation. 1972). these convents were double monasteries. Violence and society in the early medieval west (London.246    houses which. I want now to examine 7 On early medieval violence. d’histoire et de philosophie. La mésaventure de Sichem (Paris. female. refugees. of actual attacks. iniuria caused a breach of equilibrium which entailed an exchange of violence in order that peace could be re-established. Verletzte Ehre. under the abbess’s authority. abbesses sent messengers. 1 (Paris.7 and these convents. pp. in the countryside. Pitt-Rivers. Esquisse d’une théorie de la pratique. Schwerhoff eds. kept up relations with other abbesses. précédée de trois études d’éthnologie kabyle (Geneva. community. Such institutions. royal envoys. 1995). visitors. “Le sens de l’honneur”. in the seventh century. were ready prey to the wicked and the greedy. Schreiner and G. mostly open to their surroundings. In order to highlight more clearly the function of a convent as place of power. in: idem. sick people. see G. 10 P. True. “Verletzte Ehre”. and modern scholars have had good reason to surmise that Grimoald was behind the decision to found a convent at Nivelles. pp. Krusch. McNamara et al. 455. 329. pp. 640. V e–IX e siècles.15 Pressure could often be exerted even before a convent was founded or in its earliest days. I shall look at three cases-studies in detail. ed. and advised her to found a convent for herself and her daughter. p. c. shortly after Anstrude’s death. partial transl. with her daughter Gertrude. P. ibid. 18 Werner. Sainted women of the Dark Ages (Durham and London 1992). Krusch. ed. transl. Vita Columbani abbatis et discipulorum eius libri duo. Vita Anstrudis. the Vita Sadalbergae and the Vita Anstrudis. MGH SRM 6 (Hannover. Nivelles and StJean de Laon. Later Merovingian France (Manchester 1996).16 paid Itta a visit. 176–94. W. All three are well-documented in hagiographical sources that are either strictly contemporary or were written only slightly after the events they record: for Faremoutiers. 235.. 16 M.13 and for St-Jean. Krusch. Krusch. MGH SRM 2 (Hannover.12 for Nivelles. who had probably just become bishop of Tongres-Maastricht with the help of Grimoald. J. B. pp. Fouracre and Gerberding. 13 Vita Geretrudis prima. Levison. 1913). 234. introduction to the Vita Anstrudis. p. . Der lütticher Raum. and the Additamentum Nivialense de Fuliano. 109. 19 A. son of Pippin and Itta. 66–78. written by Jonas of Bobbio c. his widow Itta was staying at her estate of Nivelles. ed. in: Saint-Géry et la christianisation dans le Nord de la Gaule. Amandus. 220–34. 1910). ed. ed. written c. Der lütticher Raum in frühkarolingischer Zeit. 670. According to the Vita Geretrudis. Later Merovingian France. MGH SRM 4 (Hannover 1902). Fouracre and R. p.A. 12 Jonas of Bobbio. 1958). after the death of Pippin I. the Vita Columbani. the Vita Geretrudis prima. pp. in the south of Brabant. pp. 2. Gordon Whatley. p. Adel und Grundherrschaft im Merowingerreich (Wiesbaden. pp.17 Of course this story is a reconstruction of the past in typical hagiographic style.. transl.14 the last of these probably a ninth-century text but certainly composed on the basis of an earlier version written in the early eighth century. 14 Vita Sadalbergae abbatissae Laudunensis. Revue du Nord 69 (1986). 1980). B. MGH SRM 5 (Hannover. and wondering what was the best course of action to take for herself and the girl: at this point.18 on family land. “SaintAmand et la fondation de l’abbaye de Nivelles”. ed. p. B. McNamara and J. Dierkens. Sainted Women. p. pp. 452–63. cit. Faremoutiers..       247 the causes and nature of acts of violence against abbesses. Additamentum Nivialense de Fuliano. 1887). 15 Levison. A. 40–66. Werner. Gerberding.19 Indeed by 648/9. 449–51. 17 Vita Geretrudis. Halborg with E.. 1–152. Untersuchungen zur Geschichte einer karolingischen Stammlandschaft (Göttingen. . Bergengruen. partial transl. 64. former guardian of the young king Sigebert III. Schieffer. p. Der lütticher Raum. 355. were neither of them private monasteries. 22 For the foundation of Stavelot-Malmédy. 96. She assumed the leadership of the community. Mons and Soignies. They had been founded on royal land thanks to the co-operation of certain nobles and the king. Stuttgart/Berlin/Köln. see Werner. The foundation of Nivelles. Mönchtum. “Saint Amand”. and in Remaclus’ foundation of StavelotMalmédy shortly after. 23 R. pp. following the other foundations inspired or encouraged by Amandus. 1987). 2. on the death of his father Pippin. in Borst ed. as widows often did. These families were based in the border-lands of Neustria and Austrasia and had links with both regna. though it’s not quite clear whether the property was part of her own inheritance or belonged to her dower.22 But these two houses.21 Thereafter Grimoald strengthened his hand. 25 According to Heriger in his chronicle of the bishops of Liège. Semmler. c. The case of Nivelles was quite different. 1997). like the Pippinids. that the project had aroused fierce opposition from ‘wicked men’ who caused Itta and Gertrude to suffer injuries. p. had supported Amandus’s missionary work and who. insults and privations. 455–6. and took a large part in the foundation of the monastery of Cugnon in 646. 331.. 24 Vita Geretrudis. however. must have brought an increase in contacts and hence consolidated the Pippinids’ position in this strategic region. often wrongly thought to have been Pippinid foundations.248    his position was secure enough for what was no doubt a longcherished project to be put into effect. Gerberding. Remaclus left 21 .20 Grimoald had had to bide his time. p.. 18. Assured of the support of Amandus. 387. p. p. Die Karolinger (2nd ed. bishop-elect of Tongres-Maastricht. In 640. The rise of the Carolingians and the Liber Historiae Francorum (Oxford. The hagiographer did not fail to note.24 Who were these opponents? Itta came originally from Brabant and had links with families who. shortly after Nivelles’ foundation. he had been driven out of the post of mayor of the palace and replaced by Otto. and it was only three years later that Grimoald returned to the political centre-stage after Otto’s murder by Duke Leuthar. Their enemies were comparable to those who emerged after Remaclus’s foundation of Cugnon25 in the shape of rival and neighbouring groups 20 Dierkens. “Episcopi potestas und karolingische Klosterpolitik”. Grimoald was able to found a private convent23 on land that apparently belonged to his mother Itta. J. founded their own monasteries of Maubeuge. R. she left the leadership of her convent to her niece Wulftrude. The couple had five children. was another case of a private convent. 367. a close counsellor of King Dagobert. This account is accepted by Werner. c. Sadalberga. she chose Laon because of the site’s defensive advantages. pp. who had succeeded Chagnoald soon after 632. able to found on her estate near the Meuse at Andenne a private convent where she could shelter for the remainder of her widowhood. It flourished so well that before she died in 665. 27 Vita Sadalbergae.       249 ever ready to block their opponents’ efforts to strengthen their position by founding a new monastery. 3.. Only then was his mother Begga. p. and Bishop Attelanus. between 656 and 662. inter alia. the site eventually proved too exposed to the attacks of enemies. One of her kinsmen. daughter of Duke Gunduin and his wife Saretrude. . p. Der lütticher Raum. This. on land inherited from her father Gunduin. the vexations of neighbouring lords. or Baso.26 Once the opposition had been overcome. when Pippin II’s power had become firmly established in Austrasia. forty miles from Luxeuil. 26 Werner. and then. Die Karolinger. Nivelles grew rapidly and Gertrude succeeded her mother without difficulty. then made to accept a second marriage with Blandin. bishop of Toul. c. a widow for thirty years. Gesta Pontificum Leodiensium.27 She had been married off. . and move to Laon to found another house on the frontier between Austrasia and Neustria. 22. The new house seemed destined to flourish. Three months before her own death. Sadalberga got her husband’s agreement to found a convent at Langres. The Vita Sadalbergae provides another instance of the problems that new convents could run into. 401–4. there was no new Pippinid foundation until 691. Grimoald’s daughter. Der lütticher Raum. According to the Vita. but other sources reveal that she had some supporters there. 47. founded with the support of Sadalberga’s brother Leuduin. had been unable to follow the vocation aroused in her in childhood when Columbanus’s disciple Eustasius has visited her parents. then. Schieffer. and quickly widowed. 57. had been bishop of Laon. p. but according to the hagiographer. who had been dedicated since childhood to the religious life. Sadalberga could have the body Cugnon to escape. It’s worth recalling that after Grimoald’s fall. once those were grown up. Chagnoald. backed the new convent. and c. 650 Sadalberga had to abandon her paternal lands and her patria (Austrasia?). 29 Aega was of Neustrian origin. were able to develop quickly. 1974). “Faremoutiers”. Guérout. as did Eboriacum/Faremoutiers. The fourth book of the Chronicle of Fredegar and its continuations (London. transl. p. violent attacks by their enemies who tried to drive them out and to take over control of their foundations. Wallace-Hadrill. of a crisis of familial power. p. . 38. p. however.250    of her brother Leuduin/Bodo brought there from Toul. Once the foundation’s initial difficulties had been overcome. Aega became a powerful man at his court. MGH SRM 2. Krusch. founded in the Brie a few decades earlier. cols.30 After Dagobert’s reunification of the kingdom in 629. The convent had been founded c. DHGE 16. towards the end of the 630s. c. but the community’s rapid success must surely have aroused envy. As we shall see. 1960). 620.’ 30 H. Wulftrude at Nivelles. 62. were victims. 31 Fredegar. XII. p. within an environment of Columbanan influence. both Nivelles and St-Jean. 29 Vita Columbani II. of iniuriae. 137: ‘Erat enim adversarius monasterii Ega nomine. and is first documented in the Testament of Bishop Bertramn of Le Mans as the buyer of a colonica near that civitas. see J. these acts of violence can’t be understood unless they are linked with three murders of which kinsmen of each of the three abbesses had been victims not long before. art. Jonas of Bobbio in his Vita Columbani says nothing of any subsequent hostility to the new foundation. Laon. 51. 67. Prosopographie der Amtsträger des Merowingerreiches von Chlothar II (613) bis Karl Martell (741). The case of Eboriacum/Faremoutiers reveals something of how complex were these struggles and how high were the stakes. J. one after the other. the mayor of the palace Aega was a savage adversary of Faremoutiers: he continually violated its boundaries and kept persecuting its dependants ( familia) living in the neighbourhood every time he got the chance. His ergo adversabatur supradicto coenubio terminosque violabat omnemque familiam eius circummanentem quacumque poterat occasione persequebatur. vir in seculo sublimis. Fara at Faremoutiers. no. ed.28 At any event. and she bequeathed the convent’s leadership to her daughter Anstrude. and Anstrude at Laon. B. Yet the abbesses of all three convents. in each case. and one of the king’s chief counsellors.M. 534–7. c. 151. The iniuriae suffered by the abbesses thus belong within the framework of feuds or powerstruggles that pitted rival groups against one another: they were the sign and expression.31 A few days 28 On Faremoutiers’ development in the Merovingian period. 620 by Chagneric and his daughter Burgundofara on one of their estates. cui Dagobertus moriens filium Chlodoveum cum regno commendaverat. Beihefte der Francia 2 (Sigmaringen. Chronicon IV. Ebling. Le Moyen Age 8 (1895). “Le testament de sainte Fare. XII. pp. that Chainulf was assassinated by Aega’s own son-in-law. including the hearing of disputes. Revue d’Histoire Ecclésiastique 60 (1965). cumtis erat precellentior. Aega acted effectively as regent until his death in 641. 33 . Prosopographie. Guérout.32 Fredegar paints a flattering portrait of him. Chron. p. represented by Chagneric. Matériaux pour l’étude critique de ce document”. Wallace-Hadrill. paratus in rispunsis. Eratque genere nobele. 761. Dagobert entrusted Aega with the care of the palace and the regnum.35 Aega’s assaults on Faremoutiers. only criticising his tendency to avaritia. 80. his brother Chagnoald and their kinsman Autharius. Burgundofara’s brother Chainulf seems to have been count of Meaux during those years. eo quod esset avariciae deditus. Aega’s hostility to Faremoutiers certainly predated his mayoralty. .33 and says nothing about his hostility to Faremoutiers. As mayor of the palace of Neustria-Burgundy. The onomastic evidence further indicates this relationship. aeruditus in verbis. Yet the mention of Aega’s avaritia may be a coded reference to his attacks on the convent. when his power was at its height. These hostilities constituted a grave affront to Fara’s family. Fredegar. The Faronids and Aega’s family in fact belonged to two distinct factions at the Neustrian court. 161 (transl. they 32 Ebling. 1–6. A placitum was an assembly at which the king and/or some of his leading men dealt with. 39. were clearly linked. and for obvious reasons of political survival. and Chainulf’s murder by Ermenfred. Famille. pp. 35 M. Chagnetrada: Le Jan.present in Chagneric. particularly to her brothers Bishop Burgundofaro and Count Chainulf. tantummodo a plurimis blasphemabatur. but Jonas seems to limit his acts of violence to that very period. p. p. in full view of the court. 68): ‘Aega vero inter citiris primatebus Neustreci prudentius agens et plenitudinem pacienciae inbutus. Did they decide to bring the case before the royal tribunal? Certainly it was in the course of a placitum at Augers-enBrie.       251 before his death. pp. “L’extention sud-est du ‘pagus meldensis’ ou ‘civitas meldorum’ au VIIe siècle”. where she refers to property to be bequeathed to her brothers Chagnulf and Burgundofaro and to her sister Chagnetrada. IV.34 and Aega must have used either his own lands or royal lands assigned to him (the two possibilities are obviously not exclusive) as the base from which to attack the convent. ed. legal business. 388–93.’ 34 The link between Burgundofara and Chainulf emerges from the abbess’s testament. with the name-element Chagn. opes habundans. no. Chagnoald. J.. He had installed them in the Brie. iusticiam sectans. Chagnulf. Here was a case of a feud that pitted against each other two groups competing for power in Neustria. had earlier served the Austrasian king Theodebert II. inter alia. Lecomte. in the name of his young son Clovis and Queen Nanthild. The first. AA SS OSB 2. col. his brother. the sons of Autharius. In providing the estate on which Autharius’s sons would build their last foundation. p. 269. Jonas says that Aega was among those who opposed the monks of Luxeuil. where. Chagnoald. the Faronids’ power in the Brie. founded in solo proprio a convent for nuns at Jouarre c. 635. 394. For Jouarre. Almost imme36 Le Jan. in: DHGE 16. “Faron”. ed. Rado. 632/4. He succeeded Gundoald who was probably his kinsman: Le Jan. Famille. 17. “Fare”. Chagneric had perhaps been count of Meaux before his son Chagnulfus. Famille. but his attitude here was not without self-interest. By the close of the 630s. the Faronids held not only the bishopric (Burgundofaro) and countship (Chainulf ) of Meaux. it remained orientated towards Austrasia. he was bishop of Laon by 626/7. at the young Dagobert’s Austrasian court. founded Rebais c. and died c.37 but had also managed to create a monastic network within the wider Luxeuil orbit — for Columbanus in his time had had the support of this family. Vitae Columbani II. if not limit. Guérout.38 The group’s rapid ascent in eastern Neustria could not fail to have aroused the hostility of rival groups. c. a monastery for men at Rueil in patrimonio proprio.39 For his part. see J. 654. pp. col. Chagneric’s son Burgundofaro duly appeared. 37 . and not least those opposed to Columbanan monasteries and their supporters. He certainly wanted to control and counterbalance. Burgundofaro became bishop of Meaux between 629 and 637. J. especially of old Neustrian families. 515. in: L’Abbaye NotreDame de Jouarre (1961). p. together with his kinsmen Ado and Dado/Audoin.252    subsequently rallied to Clothar II of Neustria when he reunited the kingdom. the eldest of Chagneric’s sons. art. while the youngest. Dado/Audoin. art. MGH SRM 4. Guérout. in their turn. and then all three of his sons. 636/7 with the help of King Dagobert who this time provided the land. 394. 39 Jonas. Ado. Mabillon. was probably born in the Portois. “Les origines et le premier siècle de l’abbaye”.36 This group also had interests at Soissons and at Laon: to that extent. p. J. had founded monasteries: the eldest. 321. DHGE 16. the king supported the Faronid foundations. First of all Chagneric had founded Faremoutiers for his daughter c. after becoming a monk at Luxeuil. After Clothar II’s death in 629 and Dagobert’s accession to kingship over the entire regnum Francorum. Guérout. 1–67. the group rose to power in eastern Neustria and embarked on a systematic extension of territorial control there by amassing the chief honores in that region. p. 620. Dagobert was inserting himself into the network of founders and de facto placing the monastery under his protection. 38 Vita Agili abbatis Resbacensis. 1999). he granted immunity to Rebais. 17. 323. The Vita Agili. hence as a focal point for their political activities. in other words. were kinsmen of the founder and first abbot. who thus forbade free access to Rebais’s septa secreta. .40 Here immunity and exemption.41 It seems noteworthy that of the four monasteries founded by this group (Faremoutiers. and held the bishopric of Meaux (Burgundofaro). Rosenwein. The prohibition on entering the monastery tended above all publicly to affirm the king’s role as the one who directly or indirectly had control over sacred space. and privileges of immunity in early medieval Europe (Ithaca and London. Rueil. pp. Jouarre. Negotiating space. As she has so beautifully demonstrated. there were no royal monasteries in the Carolingian sense of the term. restraint. as guardian for his young son Sigebert of Austrasia he chose Otto who belonged to a kin-group consisting of the Pippinids’ rivals and 40 B. and just before the king’s death in 639. late though the text is. seems to convey an echo of tension between Audoin and the king: tension resolved by the monastery’s coming under royal authority. c. p. It is tempting to link Dagobert’s attitude towards the Faronids with his and his son Sigibert III’s concern to limit Pippinid power in Austrasia.H. This hypothesis is strengthened by Aega’s designation as mayor of the palace a mere two years after the exemption grant. the county of Meaux (Chagnulf ) and perhaps already the abbacy (if Agil was abbot by the time of the grant).. . Jouarre. Rebais). 59–96. It therefore seems likely that the king was anxious to avoid Faronid exploitation of Rebais as a private monastery. Power. none of the three private houses (Faremoutiers. Such privileges can be seen as a flexible instrument that enabled more than one power-sharer to derive benefits in terms of prestige and social connexions. negotiated between the king and the group that founded Rebais (Audoin). Rebais) obtained exemption and immunity. moreover. In this period. immunity and exemption in the Merovingian period could not be dissociated and were always granted to monasteries under royal patronage. For while Dagobert had Pippin I follow him into Neustria after the reunifying of the regnum in 629. and in particular that Bishop Burgundofaro and Count Chainulf. reinforced the bonds between the various parties. esp.       253 diately. 41 Vita Agili. The royal grant needs now to be reconsidered in the light of Barbara Rosenwein’s recent study of immunity. and the following year got Bishop Burgundofaro to grant it an exemption. Wallace-Hadrill.’ 43 Ibid. 163 (transl. just as his father had done for Rebais some years before. col. IV. as Fredegar strongly indicates.. . under royal pressure. DHGE 16. the murderer had to flee to Austrasia and took refuge at Rheims in the church of St-Rémi. Further. however. 646. who was also of Anglo-Saxon origin. In the Brie. Yet King Dagobert had succeeded in maintaining a balance between the various groups. . firmly based in the Brie. so much so that all those whose greed had made them her ravagers and accusers in the past subsequently became generous and well-disposed defenders’. p. Ermenfredus in Auster Remus ad baseleca sancte remediae fecit confugium. Thus. both in the Brie and at court. Sigebert took action in his turn to provide the requisite lands for the new foundations. there began a period of violence marked by the iniuriae against Faremoutiers and by Chainulf’s murder which. p. qui filiam Aegane uxorem acceperat. Ermenfredus. ibique diebus plurimis hanc infestacionem devitando et rigio temore residit. Aega’s death changed the situation: the dowager-queen Nanthild allowed Chainulf’s kin to seek revenge. daughter-in-law of Anna queen of the East Angles and Æthelburh. Anna’s illegitimate daughter.254    enemies. But the presence of the Anglo-Saxon 42 Fredegar.43 Jean Guérout saw here the influence of Queen Balthild. . Chron. thus overlooking Pippin’s son Grimoald. Ob hanc rem gravissema stragis de suis rebus iussionem et permissum Nantilde a parentebus Ainulfi et populum pluremum fiaetur. In the end. Chainulfo comiti in Albiodero vico in mallo interfecit. when Pippin I died in 640. 70): ‘Ante paucis diebus. Clearly there were several groups in Neustria who were rivals for power. art.42 Thus Fara was able to withstand the assaults of her enemies. when two Anglo-Saxon princesses succeeded Fara as joint-abbesses: Sæthryth. Fara kept Faremoutiers until her death. only makes sense if dated within Aega’s lifetime. The Faronids were one of the strongest of them. To escape the faidosi (pursuers of the feud). 527. and Guérout. and Audoin’s appointment to the see of Rouen in 641 was a further sign of their loss of influence at court. having finally become mayor of the palace. Sigebert chose Otto to succeed him. ‘protected by the mercy of the Lord and the prayers of the saints . His death unleashed a crisis for the Faronids. the convent was removed from Faronid control. founded Cugnon and Stavelot-Malmédy c. 83. Faremoutiers came under royal control. and with Audoin as their man at court. The Faronids had been able to maintain their position only with the queen’s suppport. “Fare”. When Grimoald. 46 Erchinoald. The careers of Brunhild and Balthild in Merovingian history”. 31–77 at 70–2 (repr. pp. The Faronids could resist their enemies successfully only with Queen Nanthild’s help and also with the support of the new mayor.L.44 Ian Wood has also pointed out that the royal families of Kent and East Anglia seem to have been related to Erchinoald’s family.K. keen to enhance his own influence at Faremoutiers. Bede says that while Fara was abbess. daughter of King Anna of the East Angles. that Jouarre also came under the control of the royal convent of Chelles. a kinswomen of Erchinoald. who were also his own kinswomen. “Queens as Jezebels. Historia ecclesiastica gentis Anglorum III. Collins (Oxford. p. 1994). 104–5.47 44 Bede. 47 J. J. in: D. in L. . Bede adds that the kingdom of the Angles had few monasteries at this time. 122–4. There cannot be much doubt that Erchinoald pointed Ercangota in the direction of Faremoutiers. 8. 1989). 1999). Erchinoald. Medieval women (London. in order to strengthen his own as well as royal influence there. daughter of King Erconbert of Kent (640–64) and Sexburh. Later Merovingian France.. an Anglo-Saxon princess was alrready at Faremoutiers: this was Ercangota. nor that the arrival of the two Anglo-Saxon princesses ought to be seen as part of the aftermath of the crisis of 641. Later Merovingian France. They also sent their daughters so that they could be educated and married to the Heavenly Bridegroom. a slave-woman. Since he belonged to a different faction from that of Audoin and his kin. and that many of the inhabitants of Britannia had become accustomed ‘to enter Frankish monasteries to practise the monastic life there. Debates on Medieval history (Oxford and New York. 198–9. 105. Wood.45 Erchinoald had contacts of his own with England: it was he who offered King Clovis II his future wife. Baker ed. to enter the convent so that he could prepare the succession to Fara and hence the convent’s transfer to royal control. and especially to the convents of Brie (Faremoutiers). 45 I. Chelles and Andelys-sur-Seine’. .       255 princesses at Faremoutiers should more probably be linked with the crisis the convent underwent c. too.H. for the mother of King Erconberht of Kent was probably of Frankish origin. Nelson.. caused the two Anglo-Saxon royal women. or captive. pp. mayor of the palace. named Balthild. Rosenwein eds. Little and B. 46 Fouracre and Gerberding. McClure and R. 641 and the likely intervention of Erchinoald who succeeded Aega as mayor of the Neustrian palace. The Merovingian kingdoms 450–751 (London. pp. It’s worth noting. see also Fouracre and Gerberding. 1978). pp. transl. through the Devil’s envy. 6. . widow of Sigebert III. and Queen Chimnechild. shortly before. It was Gunduin who. This was the heart of the struggle which over at least two generations had pitted the Wulfoald-Gunduin group. Childeric represented the Neustrian branch of the royal dynasty. The attacks on Nivelles clearly postdated the death of Childebert the Adopted. that kings. Thus behind the kings and queens who attacked Wulftrude lay the shadows of Wulfoald. iniquiter possiderent. and Gunduin. was a victim of this hatred (odium). out of hatred of her father. his son-inlaw. had to undergo violent pressure: ‘It happened .48 Scholarly opinion is divided on the date of the assaults on Wulftrude. to drive her out of Nivelles and thus strike a blow to Pippinid power that was intended to be fatal. dated 6 September 48 Transl. Wulftrude. et res Dei. reginae. even priests. postmodum vellent per vim trahere. and more broadly the Agilolfings too. the new mayor of the Austrasian palace. pp. she had named her successor as Agnes. Wulftrude’s adversaries found more ammunition for their assault on the Pippinids: Childeric II’s charter for Stavelot. Later Merovingian France. 460: ‘Contigit autem ex odio paterno. The author describes how Wulftrude. a young nun whom Gertrude herself had brought up in the convent. wished to drag her away from her place. 57–8. from Vita Geretrudis. Grimoald’s fall. widow of Clovis II. or in 662). Grimoald’s brother-in-law.256    The Vita Geretrudis’s account of the attacks on Nivelles throws more light on the familial context of such acts of violence. because of the disputed chronology of the fall of Grimoald (whether before 657. and Childeric’s assumption of the Austrasian throne. had murdered Ansegisil. c. slightly adapted from that of Fouracre and Gerberding. against the Arnulfings and Pippinids.’ . ut reges. so that they might evilly possess the property of God which the blessed girl oversaw’. . When she died in 669. then force. quibus benedicta puella praeerat. and he was summoned to the throne by enemies of the Pippinids. p. Yet Wulftrude fought back. Her enemies used first persuasion. at first by persuasion and later by force. like her father and uncle before her. but all are agreed in identifying the persecutors of Grimoald’s daughter as Kings Clothar III and Childeric II along with their mother Queen Balthild. having succeeded her aunt Gertrude as head of the convent. et etiam sacerdotes per invidiam diaboli illam de suo loco primum per suasionem. queens. in avenging the murder of his father Ansegisil. one of the Pippinids’ opponents. Fouracre and Gerberding. but that Grimoald had founded the monastery suo opere: cf. pp. 679. a kinsman of the Pippinids. in: J. 29. Later Merovingian France. 142. transl. allowed Pippin II to return to the centre-stage of Austrasian politics.54 As a final instance. by Lambert. 50 See now R. Pertz. 2. in: J. 562–97 esp. Richter eds. c. B. MGH SRG (Hannover-Leipzig. “Moines et nature sauvage dans l’Ardenne au haut Moyen Age”. Nivelles remained one of the family’s safest anchorage-points. 51 Sigebert’s charters for Stavelot-Malmédy show that the king had given the royal land. 11. ed. Wulfoald’s death. 256. Despy (Brussels. On this charter. von Simson. M. Mélanges G.51 Furthermore. was murdered. 105. no. It was. who encountered such difficultes at Laon after founding the monastery of St-Jean. The Vita Anstrudis tells at length of the iniuriae inflicted on the abbess. Werner.49 meant a substantial reduction in the southerly part of the royal estates granted to Stavelot-Malmédy. 1998). 1991). “Der sogenannte Staatsreich Grimoalds. His marriage to Plectrude had already brought him important resources around Cologne and in the Eifel region. . Then Bishop Theotard of Tongres-Maastricht. 53 M. however. Villes et campagnes au Moyen Age. 23–9. 1994). Duvosquel and A. accusing her to the king of false witness so as to induce him to expel her from the convent founded by her mother Sadalberga.52 But the worst was over.. . Noel. The set-back to the Pippinids’ adversaries at Nivelles confirms the impression that after 657/662. G. p. p. Chimne-child and her daughter Bilihild.       257 670. pp. 351.50 while at the same time presenting the original foundation as having been the work of Sigebert III. this document mentioned Gunduin. Dierkens eds. I take the case of Abbess Anstrude. MGH Studien und Texte 21 (Hannover. 55 Vita Anstrudis. followed by Childeric II’s in 675.-M. Karl Martell in seiner Zeit (Sigmaringen. 54 Annales Mettenses priores. Der lütticher Raum. Jarnut. U. pp. 1905). Her enemies deployed against her all sorts of wicked ploys. 364. the Pippinids had succeeded in preserving the core of their Austrasian power-base. ed. Kölzer.. Nonn. p.55 49 MGH DD Merovingorum. that Pippin gave proof positive of his virtus by striking down Gunduin with his own hand. 580. p. Merowingerstudien I. see the recent analysis of T.53 and that at the heart of Pippinid power. as David slew Goliath. 71. Der lütticher Raum. p. Versuch einer Neubewertung”. 52 Werner. in c. Becher. along with the two queens. and replaced. sometime between 669/670 and mid-675. wife of the young Childeric II. p. Baldwin. and that the friends and faithful ones who betrayed him were the very people who were supposed to negotiate a settlement. though. 69. at the very place which should have been one of peace. stimulante diabolo. quorum nomina et stirpem dicere. Summoned to a placitum at an estate in the Laonnois. Before her death in 655. 679. 6. Baldwin had gone taking only two horsemen with him. qui sumens secum duos tantummodo equites. . omnium hominum quos terra sustinet sceleratissimos. Anstrude then received from the bishop her consecration as abbess. 57 . 68: ‘Erat namque ei frater carissimus nomine Balduinus. c. With this in mind. c.56 Thus all possible steps had been taken to assure the convent’s stability. tertius confestim ivit ut causa placiti ad hostes crudeles. why did I send you on the advice of the cruellest of men? Would that it had pleased Heaven that this dispute had never arisen — since it was for this that I decided that you should go and be murdered in so cowardly a fashion. The Vita’s reference to peace-making (sub falso colore pacis) and the mention of friends and faithful ones. . you who were the staff of my weakness!’58 Baldwin was thus the convent of St-Jean’s 56 Vita Anstrudis. he was slain by those whom he had believed to be his and Anstrude’s friends. p. was murdered. probably c. c. adversus hunc. the foundress had taken advice from the bishop of Laon and also from the local aristocracy. 4. qui videbantur esse amici. Yet. 68. concipiunt et meditantur dolos. qui videbantur esse amici et fideles huius virginis et fratris . The Vita shows Anstrude directly involved in the dispute. 5.57 The circumstances of this murder should be set alongside those of Chainulf’s death as discussed above. The names of the murderers are not given. lest insult be offered to their family: Baldwin is simply said to have fallen into a trap laid by false friends. iniuriam esse putamus. and there. Sub falso colore pacis deceptus est et confossus gladiis. sicque apparuerunt impii in occisione iusti. Sadalberga had decided to pass on control of the convent to her daughter Anstrude as soon as she should reach the age of twenty. seem to indicate that the meeting was intended to put an end to a dispute that involved Baldwin. Tenerrime autem dilectus a sorore Balduinus in simplicitate cordis sui dolose cum peste invidiae vocatur ad placitum a ministris satanae in quadam villa Laudunensis provinciae. The hagiographer recounts in detail the circumstances of the crime and the abbess’s grief. a few years later. for it was she who had sent Baldwin to the placitum to defend their interests: ‘Alas. Having obtained royal permission.’ 58 Vita Anstrudis. Anstrude’s brother. p. Vita Anstrudis.258    The chronology of these events is worth recalling. and she had secured the nuns’ agreement. 60 . though without making any charges stick. p. Anstrude’s family was allied with the Wulfoald-Gunduin group. pp. On a visit to Laon by the mayor and the king.59 While it is impossible to date Baldwin’s death precisely. the Vita says that Anstrude suffered all kinds of iniuriae from her enemies. The rise of the Carolingians. 390–1. and it may well have been planned that he should become bishop eventually: after all. Ebroin directly accused the abbess of wrong-doing. 77. p. just as Chainulf had been the defender of Faremoutiers and Grimoald of Nivelles.60 In any event. Ebroin was the new mayor of the palace. together with a miracle. This Neustrian triumph must have taken place between 675 and 679. the Faronid-Gunduin group wielded control over the bishopric. Famille. In Neustria-Burgundy. Dagobert II was indeed Pippin’s king. which seems to me convincing. After Baldwin’s murder. where the Neustrians took on the Austrasians led by Duke Martin and Pippin II. turning friends into enemies. It is also followed by Schieffer. The Rise of the Carolingians. when Dagobert II died. the presence at Laon of Theuderic III and Ebroin is surely to be linked with the battle of Bois-des-Fays (Lucufao). ‘Pippin’s king’. and then the mayor himself. of Anstrude’s sanctity! In the troubled circumstances of the years 675–680. Here I follow Gerberding’s reconstruction of events. and it had always had the firm support of the abbesses Sadalberga and then Anstrude. 78–84. He was probably archdeacon of Laon. Yet the events described in the Vita show that Anstrude’s family was now in difficulties at Laon itself and in the Laonnois. and that those enemies were influential at the Neustrian court where they had gained the support of Ebroin. 61 Le Jan.. 23. the hagiographer also mentions how grieved were the inhabitants of Laon whose tutor et pastor Baldwin had been. . with the return of Dagobert II. pp. at that time mayor of the palace under Theuderic III. and defeated them. the Pippinids had resurfaced after Childeric II’s death.       259 defender. Even the nuns were apparently beginning to have doubts about their abbess. a good deal of political reconfiguration was under way and bonds of friendship broke. After a long account of the grief of the abbess and her nuns. when the assurances offered to them by a man named Aglibert. Die Karolinger. while in Austrasia. the political upheavals of these crucial years certainly brought changes of loyalty in their wake.61 and must surely have benefited from 59 Gerberding. finally convinced Ebroin’s entourage. appealed to her consanguineus Count Wolfold of Verdun. The assailant this time was a man named Harvey (Chariveus). who is said by a later source to have been count of Laon. Perhaps she had at first given a welcome to Martin. but was suddenly stricken with 62 The Vita Anstrudis shows that at the beginning of the eighth century. and the dramatic change of heart of Ebroin.260    Childeric II’s reunification of the kingdom to strengthen its position in the Laonnois. c. In any case. for he certainly seems to have found a secure refuge at Laon. and friends had become enemies. but the attacks on Anstrude herself prove. . in any case. c. Halkin and G. Continuator of Fredegar. It would be going beyond the evidence to claim that Ebroin and his supporters were responsible for Baldwin’s murder. 12 (692). At the time of the events recounted in the Vita. weakening the grip of Anstrude’s family. n. 3. she was not among the friends of the mayor of the palace. Did Anstrude then make a deal with Aglibert. and the revival of the Pippinids’ fortunes in Austrasia. It was a trap: Martin emerged from the stronghold. Chartes de l’abbaye de Stavelot-Malmédy 1 (Brussels. Ebroin’s envoy: she would hand over Martin in exchange for the mayor’s ‘protection’? The Vita breathes not a word. only to be cut down. 63 Liber Historiae Francorum. p.62 must inevitably have had repercussions at Laon. What explanation can be offered for Ebroin’s and Theuderic’s dramatic change of attitude towards Anstrude? According to the Liber Historiae Francorum and the Continuator of Fredegar. Roland eds. Ebroin’s return to Neustria. the disappearance of the Austrasian mayor. make this scenario a highly plausible one. who intervened on her behalf with Pippin II.. Conversely. 46. p.63 Anstrude was in the thick of these events. But the intermediary role of Aglibert. 1909). 83). some of the amici et fideles of Anstrude and her brother had clearly changed sides. that towards the close of the 670s. Anstrude. Ebroin’s death in 680 loosed a new volley of assaults on Anstrude. Ebroin then sent Aglibert and Bishop Reolus of Rheims to Laon to persuade Martin to come out and surrender to the king. 64 L. p. suddenly transformed into an amicus religionis.64 He pursued her with murderous intent right into the church of Ste-Marie. subjected to persecution by Bishop Madelgaud of Laon. 320. Duke Martin took refuge at Laon after his defeat at the hands of Ebroin and Theuderic. Count Wolfold had evidently rallied to Pippin by then. 170 (Wallace-Hadrill. Vita Anstrudis. c.       261 remorse and died. She was at loggerheads with Bishop Madelgar. 73: ‘. p. nor were they directed solely against the abbesses in question. Revenge imposed its own imperatives. . c. acts of violence against abbesses followed immediately on the deaths of their father or brother. 68 Semmler. Anstrude appealed to the princeps Pippin. and their context was a series of bitter power-struggles which inevitably threatened the honour of families. The acts of violence analysed above were certainly not gratuitous. a former enemy of the Pippinids who had now rallied to the triumphant mayor. 14. qui suum despexerunt dominium’. 15. whose persecution took the form of trying to ‘usurp’ (usurpare) her convent. Once inside the holy precinct. 67 Vita Anstrudis. The motives behind them were far bigger. Ebrohard was struck by divine justice and died a horrible death. c. and the fragility of her position there in the 680s. The hagiographer is specific about Ebrohard’s accusation: the abbess was ‘his adversary (adversatrix) and had favoured the side of men who spurned his lordship’. In the three cases discussed here. and he demanded that she open the convent gates to him. 312. He was buried in the church. after 687. . 66 . et quod faverat partibus eorum. and the iron laws of politics did not lose their force at convent-gates. on undermining their rivals’ position on their home territory. quod eius fuerat adversatrix. 72. The situation changed with Pippin II’s reunification of the kingdom. He accused her of having offered a refuge in her convent to Gislehard against whom he was conducting a feud. and sent his son Grimoald to Laon with orders to tell the bishop to stop troubling the abbess.66 These episodes confirm both Anstrude’s involvement in the political affairs of Laon. because competing groups were bent on strengthening their own position at others’ expense and hence. Count Wulfoald of Verdun. . p. using the mediation of one of her kinsmen.. Pippin received the abbess’s envoys kindly.65 Anstrude was also threatened by a man called Ebrohard. p. 73.67 The hagiographer here puts a bland construction on a major political shift: the coming of St-Jean into the hands of the Pippinids. 16.68 The Gunduin group had just definitively lost control of their foundation. The sudden absence of a defender weakened the abbess’s position and 65 Vita Anstrudis. “Episcopi potestas”. p. After many confrontations. of a single capacity for domination. were. Helvetius eds. creates a sharp rupture with the woman’s original milieu. c. in: E. 263.. W. hence to strike her family at the very heart of its symbolic power by seizing control of the sacra which. ed. MGH SRM . A convent was a place where sacred and profane converged and fused around the two poles of the family — the masculine and the feminine. are really all about. cultes. articulated around the conflict of good and evil. The vocations of women are presented in the Vitae. “Reliques et pouvoirs”. This is what the foundation-stories in the Vitae of women saints. along with terra salica and honores. Les reliques. p. and determine the specific place of women’s foundations at the heart of family honour. Two themes are central here: confrontation between a girl and her family. the two wings. Convents of women were not the only type of family monastery. as the result of a radical conversion. Vita Trudonis. In this society. 70 Compare the incomprehension aroused by the young Trudo’s refusal to go hunting with other noble youths. Objets. Churches and family monasteries. politics turned on the control and manipulation of the sacred:69 aristocratic families had to make good their claims to a share of that key resource in order to sacralise their own power. Thus was their power itself made sacred. which arouses the family’s opposition. Levison. but I think they constituted the crucial sacralising element of familial power. and that is one of the commonest topoi in women’s Vitae.-M. Seen in this light. The hagiographic texts on which modern historians must rely are part of a system of representation that conveys a model of Christian life adapted to the mentalités of the early medieval period: a heroic model. had been jointly guarded by the abbess and her kinsman-protector. and entails a rejection of social conventions. far more often than vocations in the Vitae of male saints. Boesch Gajano.70 69 S. and an ensuing reconciliation. noble families established churches on their estates. sacred and profane. The theme of confrontation is often associated with that of refusal to marry. To capture the sacred forces of rural areas in the process of christianisation. Bozoki and A. hagiographic topoi are part and parcel of the construction of familial power. and also the same sources’ accounts of attacks on abbesses. up to then. while the mightiest of them founded monasteries and convents where the relics they had acquired were jealously guarded. 1999). 4. in my view.262    enabled her enemies to assault her directly. symboles (Turnhout. 75 Hucbald of St-Amand. this is linked with the visit of a missionary who blesses her: Columbanus does this for Fara. 71 Hucbald of St-Amand. then. Vita Rictrudis abbatissae Marcianensis. 87–8. c. Nivelles. ed. B. Laon.74 and tried to make Rictrude remarry. 862. Pious spouses are sometimes said to have chosen to separate so that both could retire into monastic foundations. Levison. or the family hostility provoked by a boy’s religious vocation. and instead to vow their virginity to Christ. 9. the normal destiny of the female sex. c. 53.75 Other 6 (Hannover. J.. p. Only widowhood might be said to lend itself much better to the monastic life. or even after she had done her duty as a woman.72 But did young girls’ refusals to obey the rules constraining womankind seriously threaten a demographic and social equilibrium? At first glance. were cases in point: all three were among those women depicted as having struggled against their families to escape marriage. as Sadalberga and Blandin/Baso did. AA SS OSB 2. col. MGH SRM 7 (Hannover. a positive answer to that question might seem suggested by several Vitae (those of Sadalberga. female honour was closely bound to sexuality. Vita Aldegundis virginis. 6. ed. opposed her daughter’s vocation). MGH SRM 6. 73 Vita Geretrudis. In each of the three cases. p. Dagobert himself wanted to marry Gertrude. 8. Krusch. and many a pious matron was able to enter a convent after her husband’s death. Migne PL 132. p. Vita Leutfredi abbatis Madriacensis. and St-Jean. 1913). c. pp. c. are shown in the Vitae refusing to submit to the laws of their feminine condition and the rules governing the exchange of women. or Waltrude and Vincent/ Madalgar. c. Yet in all three cases. Did their conduct create real tensions within aristocratic society? Clearly. c. 72 Vita Aldegundae prima. Gertrude. that is. . 1. But the topos is less frequent in male Lives. the father opposed the vocation. 942–3. Mabillon. 74 Vita Sadalbergae. and Rictrude) which show kings putting pressure on girls to marry. 2. . 4. for instance.71 the classic model is that of paternal opposition and maternal support. 278. There is no reason to doubt the reality of these missionaries’ influence on the minds of young women. while the mother defended it. borne and brought up children. 1920). and for each. 459.73 and he also imposed a second marriage on Sadalberga. pp. the young saint discovers a precocious vocation. Eustasius for Salaberga.       263 The foundresses of Faremoutiers. ed. to marriage and reproduction. and Amandus for Gertrude. 1. p. These girls. Though there are variants in other Vitae (Aldegund’s mother. duke of Alsace and his wife Berthswind. “Die Etichonen. Le Moyen Âge 89 (1983). See F. It records events that happened in the late seventh century. then of the restoration of concordia.76 What mattered in these Vita-accounts was the representation of opposition. namely. 137–84. Equal in monastic profession. the central Middle Ages. Refusal of marriage was only a topos deployed by the authors of Vitae to exalt virginity. esp. and the 76 For a later period. Odilia’s identity was then discovered. 78 There is a large literature on Adalric/Eticho and his family: see especially F. Tellenbach ed. there is a significant implication. It was Odilia’s mother who intervened at this point. ed. Johnson. 1913). Why would aristocrats have welcomed missionaries into their halls. Cardot. He gave orders for her to be killed or at any rate removed from the family scene. 1993).D. they served the interests of their families. was his aim not to prevent families founding convents which would later turn out to have such political importance? If so. 141–7. pp. . Studien und Vorarbeiten zur Geschichte des grossfränkischen und frühdeutschen Adels (Freiburg. pp. 14–5. or when they offered their own children as oblates. the nurse had to give her up. the founding families actually retrieved what they gave up when a daughter chose to become a nun. and her father rejected her.264    sources show Merovingian kings of the first half of the seventh century quite powerful enough to intervene in family strategies and decree marital exchange. or when they gave land to their own monasteries. 24–50. MGH SRM 6 (Hannover. 77 Vita Odiliae abbatissae Hohenburgensis. She handed the baby over to a wet-nurse who cared for her for a year.78 Odilia was born blind. 1957). “Le pouvoir aristocratique et let sacré au haut Moyen-Âge: Saint Odile et les Etichonides dans la vita Odiliae”. even though it postdates them by some eighty years. pp. If the Vitae are to be credited. hence to enhance the sacredness of what were in fact joint-foundations of father and daughter. Vollmer. and given support to their activities. The Vita Odiliae is a fine example. that is. 173–93. that girls who rejected marriage in favour of founding convents did not really reduce their family’s symbolic capital by causing them to lose opportunities to make new alliances and perpetuate the dynastic line: instead. had those activities really endangered the mechanisms of social exchange? The truth was that when young women chose the monastic life. Ein Beitrag zur Frage der Kontinuität früher Adelsfamilien”. and the king really did make girls and young women marry. between the masculine and feminine poles of the family. Levison. Religious women in medieval France (Chicago. pp. W. in: G. see P.77 Odilia was the daughter of Adalric/Eticho.. after a vision had revealed Odilia’s situation to him.79 Fundamental here is the theme of reconciliation and co-operation between the two poles.. the father put up a lengthy resistance. she advanced in holiness. who are female and male. one who wielded genuine power. and founded the convent of Hohenburg for his daughter. pp. and that the key element was the daughter’s heroic struggle. it’s clear that the theme of refusal of marriage was not essential to the hagiographic plot. threatened by enmities within the monastery where she resided. then. “Virgo et virago”. this time appealing to the father directly by telling him that the ‘dissension’ between him and his daughter was the work of the Devil and that he must restore concordia. paternal resistance was as necessary as daughterly intransigence in order for her to triumph in the end. But a day came when Odilia. 79 Helvétius. sought the help of her brother. with increased prayer. In every instance mentioned above. 189–204. the bishop pleaded in vain. who arranged for her return to her natal family. baptised the child and thus cured her blindness. Again the bishop intervened. The father finally gave way. Adalric/Eticho learnt of his daughter’s cure. and thus enables familial honour to be sacralised. From that moment. It is this theme that locates the founding of a convent within the crucible of the family. the curing of her blindness) had manifested the divine will. Bishop Ehrard of Regensburg. against her father. went to the monastery. Only the restoration of concordia allows the hagiographer to present the foundation as the collaborative work of father (or brother) and daughter. the natural weakness of her sex: she became a virago. . and is its gubernatrix. The very moment of foundation is placed at the point of intersection between the two phases of opposition and co-operation between the historical individuals. For the moment.       265 baby was sent to a monastery in the Jura. through the sacred. For in conflicts that symbolised the battle of good and evil. fasting and almsgiving. The relationship between the two individuals is transformed: the daughter runs the convent. . even after a miracle (in Odilia’s case. often with her mother’s help. was represented in action in the daughter’s struggle against her father and against the social pressures he embodied. but still refused to acknowledge her. Female sanctity. The struggle was heroic and also unequal: the young woman nearly always emerged victorious and this enabled her to transcend. In this case. 80 not so much by being subordinated to it. nieces. are actually strengthened here. Gertrude and Wulftrude were in direct contact with Grimoald.81 Sadalberga her daughter Anstrude. 67. as its defensor. Helvetius. 47. p. The bonds of kinship. It’s already been observed that Grimoald chose to meet Dido at Nivelles because he thought his sister’s convent the most secure place in which to devise a common political strategy at a critical conjuncture. 84 Additamentum Nivialense de Fuilano. pp. 451. p. 83 Vita Odiliae. first by gathering and bringing up daughters. as Gertrude brought up her niece Wulftrude as well as the future abbess Agnes. 6. family monasteries in the true sense of the term. p. Krusch.266    while the father protects it. It’s no less certain that convent-gates were opened only to friends of the abbess and her family. The seventhcentury abbess quite directly served her family’s interests. and became linked into other networks. or to plan a response to it). p. 5–20. 467. were more readily detached from their family. It also shows the mayor of the Austrasian palace having close political links with Neustrians (the see of Poitiers was part of the Neustrian kingdom at that time).84 The meeting certainly took place. or 656) and its purpose (to concert policy before Sigebert’s death. No doubt similar factors were at work when Burgundofaro and Chagnulf were ‘at home’ at Faremoutiers. 81 De virtutibus sanctae Geretrudis. far more than male houses can be. or when the hagiographer tells of 80 M. Abbots. Abbesses remained closely and permanently linked to their family. or Odilia’s brother Adalbert at Hohenburg. but because that was their function. or Baldwin at St-Jean. female kin. Women’s houses of this type are thus. ed. c. even if there is dispute over its date (651. 198. Revue d’Histoire de l’Église de France 76 (1990). 19. who employed Nivelles in his political strategy. Laon. MGH SRM 4. Gaillard. MGH SRM 2. “Virgo et virag”. When Jonas of Bobbio says that Aega violated the boundaries (termini ) of Faremoutiers. The Additamentum Nivialense records a visit of Grimoald and Bishop Dido of Poitiers to Nivelles ‘to visit the holy places’. 3. 82 Vita Anstrudis. c. far from being weakened. by contrast. Atala and Gundlinda. p. . “Les fondations d’abbayes féminines dans le nord et l’est de la Gaule. c. through the co-operation of the masculine and feminine poles of the family. and in so doing identified herself as wholly involved in the play of family politics.83 The abbess also opened her convent-gates to the men of her family.82 Odilia her nieces Eugenia. de la fin du VIe à la fin du Xe siècle”. Gajano. L’énigme du don (Paris. within the framework of the family.85 The Additamentum Nivialense refers to ‘holy places’ (loci sancti ). through them. Relics come to mind as linked to power in their very essence.86 The relic not only had a power in itself. brother or son. or. ever received privileges of immunity or exemption. 86 . 259. The mightiest aristocratic families of the seventh century gained access to the sacred by means of the convents they founded. Inalienable possessions. and sacralised the power of its abbesses and.87 85 But see the contributions to this volume of Rosenwein and De Jong. A. sanctified the community of nuns. The paradox of keeping-while-giving (Berkeley.       267 Ebrohard’s demands to Anstrude for entry to St-Jean. reserving access for friends of the family. In the Merovingian period. When the Vita Geretrudis reports Grimoald and Dido meeting at Nivelles ‘to visit the holy places’. Relics were among the family’s collective possessions — and they were inalienable. referred to above in the context of Rebais. This is not the place for pinning down more precisely what the septa secreta consisted of. which was displayed in miracles. and especially those of Gertrude herself after her death. Weiner. so far as the extant sources go (and some may of course have been lost). Godelier. The problem of access to monasteries is linked to that of immunities and exemptions. M. the consecrated women. to be specific. 1996). . “Reliques et pouvoirs”. and. it is evident that the abbesses personally controlled access to their convents and that they reserved access to the septa secreta for their kinsmen and friends. whether the house was for men or for women. the septa secreta of this Pippinid private monastery. it should therefore be taken absolutely at its word.. these women exercised the sacred part of familial power and guarded the septa secreta. The Vita Geretrudis shows how Nivelles’s relics. Under the tuitio of father. Sofia Bosch Gajano has recently highlighted the point that the community responsible for a relic-cult’s organisation transformed the passive object of the cult into a ‘place’ where miracle-working force was concentrated. Those monasteries that did receive privileges were all royal foundations. the sacred seems to have located itself on the side of the women. the power of the Pippinid family. p. 1992). 87 Cf. but it also conferred a power on whoever possessed it. no private monastery. or founded with royal collaboration. 469. c. for these convents also found place for the tombs of bishops (or future bishops) who were the foundresses’ close kin: in the crypt at Jouarre.89 Sadalberga had the body of her brother Leuduin/Bodo. marquise de Maillé. but simply transferred the use of them to other members of the familia. also founded by Itta but a male monastery. G. Itta. pp. Gertrude and Wulftrude at Nivelles. Abbesses guarded the tombs of those of their male relatives who had been. 1971). Sadalberga and Anstrude at St-Jean. and in which the categories of profane and sacred. books of Holy Scripture. The foundress-saints were buried in the main convent church: Fara at Faremoutiers. To relics were soon added the tombs of foundresses. It’s no coincidence that the Pippinids’ enemies attacked Nivelles rather than Fosses in Brabant. de Rohan-Chabot. . in their septa secreta. 10. where Anstrude would later have her brother Baldwin buried. however. and that of her brother Bishop Agilbert of Paris. as they themselves were.88 In acting thus. Dierkens. bishop of Toul. she sought spiritual support (adiutorium de causa spirituale) from the nuns of Nivelles. like those of public and private. They sent her relics. The gift established the two communities’ belonging to a single familia. then.A. 70–5. consecrated to God. the nuns of Nivelles had not ‘alienated’ their relics. Laon. The commemorative function extended beyond this. her kinswomen. and a single sacred power. Begga had the relics. Abbayes. and their abbess Agnes. At the heart of the family convent. They also sent the bed in which her sister Gertrude had died. were deeply intertwined. family convents served to locate familial 88 89 90 De virtutibus. was the place where familial power itself became sacred. and some nuns of advanced age capable of teaching the discipline of life according to a Rule and of setting up the new community properly. the tomb of Abbess Theodechild had alongside it the tombs of Abbesses Balda and Agilberta.268    When Pippin II’s mother Begga was finally able to enter her convent at Andenne. Women’s houses had a commemorative function which men’s houses perhaps never had in such an intense form. brought to Laon so that it could be reinterred in her convent.90 In a society of intense competition for power. and the bed. solemnly carried into the convent church and placed on the altar of St Genevieve. Les cryptes de Jouarre (Paris. p. They could also be its victims. Consecrated women were the intermediaries of this sacralisation. .. .       269 power within the sacred. It is hardly surprising that all the great women’s houses discussed in this chapter eventually passed into royal control. This page intentionally left blank . c. those who tapped into and associated themselves with the place hoped to — and apparently did — enhance their own power and prestige. Agaune was a toll-collection center. rev. Mayke de Jong for their important suggestions. MGH SRM 1. High upon a rocky cliff close to the Rhône river. about 40 km from the Great Saint Bernard pass. and François Wiblé for their generous help in introducing me to the archaeology of Agaune. pt. it was a strategic point between Italy and the north. monks.2 What sort of power did they have? The answer is hardly simple. Loyola University Chicago Research Services awarded me a Summer and Research Grant in 1998. it demanded recognition. 75. 2 (Hannover. deference. p. Die Abtei Saint-Maurice d’Agaune im Hochmittelalter (830 –1258). Liber in gloria martyrum. . and monumentalization. I thank Alessandra Antonini. 1885. and occasionally ordinary people — to reorganize and make use of the site and to model other institutions upon some of the key features of the monastery built there. 87: Magna est enim virtus ad antedictorum martyrum sepulchra. Krusch ed. Agaune’s very emplacement made it powerful for worldly reasons. above all. This paper is an exploration of the changing ways in which beliefs about the power at Agaune led people — rulers. These acts in turn intensified and complicated the ways in which the site’s power was understood.H.3 in the Burgundian 1 I am grateful to the members of the Bellagio workshop. bishops. Nelson. MANY MEANINGS: SAINT-MAURICE D’AGAUNE AS A PLACE OF POWER IN THE EARLY MIDDLE AGES1 Barbara H. Loyola University Center for Instructional Design (LUCID) ably drew the figure. Charles Bonnet. And. This meant different things at different times: in the Roman period. B. 3 M. Since the power at the tombs was believed to be the power of God.. Ian Wood and. Julia M. Rosenwein ‘Great is the power (virtus) at the tombs of the [Theban] martyrs’ wrote Gregory of Tours about the site of the saints buried at the monastery of Saint-Maurice d’Agaune. 2 Gregory of Tours. Janet L. and in particular to Albrecht Diem. 1969).ONE SITE. Zufferey. in yet another turn. which made it possible to for me to visit the site and write up my findings. Smith. Nor is it the same for all time. Christian Sapin supplied much-needed general orientation. Passio Acaunensium martyrum. Eucherius was almost certainly substituting Maximian for Constantius Chlorus. c. and the equally anonymous Vita of Saint Severinus. 33.7 As we shall soon see. were decimated near Agaune for refusing to kill Christians in the vicinity. n. 450/4). and led by their commander Maurice.. pp. B. Eucherius tells us. 1896). this description in the Passio inspired a compelling — but wrong — modern interpretation of the archaeological evidence. MGH SRM 3 (Hannover. called up by emperor Maximian at the end of the third century. quae vastae nunc adiuncta rupi.4 The Christians followed suit in their own way. uno tantum latere adclinis iacet’. The cult of the saints: Its rise and function in Latin Christianity (Chicago. and not to be outdone by the latter’s appropriation of Saints Gervasius and Protasius. it was a symbolic hinge. The Passio Acaunensium martyrum by Eucherius. p. disciple of Ambrose. in Charlemagne’s empire. thus writing the latter out of the story of Christian persecution. dedicated Agaune to the nymphs. A whole monastic complex.272  . father of Constantine. 1988). Veröffentlichungen des Max-Planck-Instituts für Geschichte 88 (Göttingen. 29.5 Their bodies were discovered about a century later. B.  and Merovingian periods. Krusch ed. It remains today in the vestibule of the abbey. connecting the conquered peninsula of Italy to the kingdom of the Franks. it was a demarcation point.6 constructed a basilica at Agaune in honor of Maurice and his associates ‘now nestled against the looming rock. 1896). . Pagan Romans. gives us the fifth-century version of the Christianization of Agaune: Roman imperial troops from Thebes. probably dual sex. 26. however. 16. Passio Acaunensium martyrum. who incorporated aquae into their topographies of power. c. 5 Eucherius. p. only from Eucherius’s Passio. Theodore. 1981). 6 P. separating the Italian south from Europe’s northern kingdoms. 38: ‘basilica. Brown. MGH SRM 3 (Hannover.8 Subsequent written sources made a conscious effort to suppress — or in any event keep mute about — this early monastery. Unexpected springs of water spout from crags on the site. 8 Vita Severini abbatis Acaunensis. Krusch ed.. p. by Theodore. 2. leaning against it on just one side’. We know about this community. 4 An altar dedicated to the nymphs dating from the third century was found on the spot. grew up around the tombs of the martyrs and served the pilgrims who came there. 7 Eucherius. bishop of Lyon (d. the anonymous Life and Rule of the Jura abbots. bishop of Martigny (then known as Octodorum). 36–7. Its geo-political position was always the backdrop to Agaune’s numinous powers. Nevertheless. Masai. Brunhölzl eds. its symbolic embodiment of an episcopal-royal alliance. about ten years after Sigismund and his wife and sons were killed by the Franks in 523. 168–70. 1951). soon. 10 Gregory of Tours.. p. c. Martine ed. F. For.11 Saint-Maurice thereafter became a model monastery for Burgundian kings. 1 (Hannover. Rudolf I was lay abbot of SaintMaurice before becoming king of Burgundy. the abbot of Saint-Maurice retrieved their bodies and buried them in a church near his monastery. “La ‘Vita patrum iurensium’ et les débuts du monachisme à Saint-Maurice d’Agaune”. rebuilt and reorganized the site with the help of his episcopal advisors. Dicta in basilica sanctorum Acaunensium. EME 2 (1993). . he too had the exemplar of Agaune in view. no 1. Die Abtei Saint Maurice d’Agaune. in innovatione monasterii. Schieffer and H. pp. 1977).. Saint-Maurice became a house of canons. III. 9 Nevertheless. see note 39. he had Saint-Maurice in mind. Nor is Friedrich Prinz wrong pp. c. Gregory of Tours. Homilia 24. in: U. 43–69. its stewardship of the first royal saint in the West. it still maintained a reputation for holy power. 13 Zufferey. They included the new monastery’s extraordinary day-and-night liturgy. T. at note 36. “Power and the power to heal: the cult of St Sigismund of Burgundy”. eds. Festschrift Bernhard Bischoff zu seinem 65. see Avitus of Vienne. the title of Avitus’s Homily 24. p.10 By 590.. MGH SRM 1.S. p. and. pt. a Burgundian prince fairly newly converted from Arianism to Catholic Christianity. 11 See F.12 The Carolingian period brought changed status to the monastery when. Mayer = Die Urkunden der Burgundischen Rudolfinger (München. Oeuvres complètes de saint Avit évêque de Vienne (nouv. in the ninth century. Liber in gloria martyrum. 5. 87. according to Gregory of Tours. see below. 101. p. Geburtstag (Stuttgart. Paxton. Lyon. the king was consorting with saints and Masses said in his honor were working miracles. SC 142 (Paris. 95–110. new sources of power were now added. 74. Saint-Denis. 93. ed. see: F.- ’      273 In 515 Sigismund. Levison eds. shows that the church was being ‘revived’. Krusch and W.9 To Agaune’s fame as the place of martyr-soldiers. healer of fevers and the first patron saint of an illness. pp.E. When King Guntram founded Saint-Marcel de Chalon. 337. Autenrieth and F.. 95. 12 For Guntrum. Vie des Pères du Jura. see Regum Burgundiae e stirpe Rudolfina Diplomata et Acta. in: J. 1890).13 What was so compelling about the place? Certainly Frederick Paxton is not wrong to stress the cult of Sigismund. p. not founded. for Dagobert.. B. and when Dagobert reformed his favorite monastery. Decem libri historiarum. and in 888 Rudolf chose the spot for his coronation as king of Burgundy. which the monks carried out in relay. 1968). On dating the latter text to just before 515 and on the general silence regarding this pre-515 community. 1971). Chevalier ed. bishop of Vienne and advisor to Sigismund and his father. 37–56. 102–12. On the other hand. dubbed the laus perennis by modern commentators. pp. in: S. 1988). Kultur und Gesellschaft in Gallien... Rosenwein.H. especially regarding liturgical practices. F.274  . Rosenwein eds.. I argue that Agaune’s liturgy. 15 B. . and sometimes different things in different contexts. I have argued elsewhere that the monastery was in many ways a creation of the episcopacy. The only man associated with Agaune who might have been in a position to know about those monks was Avitus. Monks and nuns. 105–9. München. His cousin Sedeleuba and his aunt Theudelinda had already founded churches near the city of Geneva 14 Paxton.Y. he had good political reasons for favoring the Theban martyrs. Frühes Mönchtum im Frankenreich. pp. “Perennial prayer at Agaune”. Maurice himself. N. But Avitus’s letters show him to be thoroughly confused as to what was and was not orthodox at Constantinople. esp. King Gundobad. Avitus and the other bishops involved with Sigismund in Agaune’s foundation need have looked no further than the practices of bishops and monks in the Rhône Valley to find extraordinary liturgical innovation. Prinz.  to highlight the monastery’s extraordinary liturgy and its popular martyr-saint. Farmer and B. When Sigismund founded Agaune. Agaune was powerful because it meant more than one thing. highlighting those few moments when the sources — both material and written — seem to cluster closely enough to allow us to say something reasonable about them. Indeed. S’  The foundation of Saint-Maurice marked the start of an orthodox (i. but it is not the whole truth. and the early Carolingian period. Jahrhundert) (2nd ed.15 In that same study.H. the mid-seventh century. catholic) royal-episcopal alliance. saints and outcasts: Religion in medieval society (Ithaca. den Rheinlanden und Bayern am Beispiel der monastischen Entwicklung (4. There was precedent right at home for a liturgy of day-and-night psalmody. pp. 2000). the reign of King Guntram. The remainder of this paper will elaborate on this point.e. has been wrongly attributed to the model of the staunchly orthodox Akoimetoi monks at Constantinople. bis 8. “Power and the power to heal”. These moments are: the time of Sigismund’s foundation.14 All of this is true. Oxford. Victoris et sociorum. but they did so in a different way. then. 1888). 22. AASS. see: Fredegar. and a hospice for pilgrims. 211–58. 292. “Le prieuré Saint-Victor. ‘intent on eclipsing the works of his relatives’. B. p. Wood. 470–530” (Ph. was the advisor who ‘incited’ Sigismund to oust the ‘vulgar’ crowd at Agaune and reorganize the site in a way suitable for the martyrs. “Avitus of Vienne”. Bishop Domitianus was known for having transferred Victor’s bones to Geneva as well as for his discovery and invention of the relics of Innocentius. according to the Vita abbatum Acaunensium. another Theban martyr. Krusch ed. Wood. p. Bishops and prince together. Eucherius. . .. nitor habitantium remearet’. IV. 2. MGH SRM 3 (Hannover. c. 217.18 And Bishop Maximus. Victoris et Sociorum. . for Sedeleuba.17 In this he resembled the bishops of Geneva. later enlarged into a basilica built over the martyr’s tombs against the rock. Chronica. The new monks still tended the relics of the Theban martyrs. MGH SRM 2 (Hannover. “Avitus of Vienne”. see: Passio S. 1980).D. c. diss. who also took keen interest in the cult. . et . c. in the words of Ian Wood. p. 19 Vita abbatum Acaunensium. p. 18 Passio S.19 This suggests that the bishop of Geneva may have been interested in redrawing jurisdictional as well as spiritual boundaries. Passio Acaunensium martyrum. ut de loco illo. p. pp. ad hanc devotionem Sigismundi praecordia incitavit. when the archaeologist Louis Blondel confidently asserted that he had found the preSigismund edifices: a chapel. and in entirely new buildings. 2.. an attached baptistery.16 Sigismund thus may have been.. even though Agaune was not in Maximus’s diocese. 1896). quem pretiosa morte Thebaei martyres et effusione sanguinis . 41. This was not recognized in the 1940s and 1950s. reconfigured the topography of the holy. 208–9. 292. September VIII. c. 17 Wood. 129. ornaverant. 176: ‘Maximus Genavensis urbis antistes . B. L. He also found structures that he took to be Sigismund’s basilica. setting up a monastery that suppressed an older community of worshippers at the martyrs’ tombs while drawing upon a large local repertory of cults and cultic practices for the new monastic ordo there. Bulletin de la société d’histoire et d’archéologie de Genève 11 (1958). . Les débuts du christianisme et la royauté burgonde à Genève”. pp. .N.- ’      275 dedicated to Ursus and Victor. and he interpreted a ramp that led around the southern and western walls of that new basilica as a pathway by 16 For Theudelinda. martyrs associated with Maurice. promiscui vulgi commixta habitatio tolleretur. appendix 2. 3. 209. “Avitus of Vienne: Religion and culture in the Auvergne and the Rhône Valley. Krusch ed. I. . Blondel. p. p. “La rampe d’accès à la basilique d’Agaune.-J. and that is probably too restricted. figs. 1. Actes du III e congrès international pour l’étude du haut moyen age. “Saint-Maurice”. 1954). 9–57 and “Aperçu sur les édifices chrétiens dans la Suisse occidentale avant l’an mille”. mostly unpublished.. Une rectification”. which pilgrims gained access to the old basilica.276  . 3 and 5).21 It should be said from the outset that their reassessment is extremely preliminary. Étude archéologique”. under which was the primitive mausoleum (fig. pp. incomplete. Blondel. see Blondel. The most important include: L. Vallesia 22 (1967). 341–4. 271–308. pp. 2. Wiblé ed. pp. They were able to revisit only the site that Blondel had chosen to excavate. Blondel observed very 20 Blondel published numerous articles on Saint-Maurice beginning in the 1940s and continuing into the 1960s. Saint-Maurice d’Agaune. Lehner. fifth to the ninth centuries (schematised plan. at 283–9. above all. “Chronique des découvertes archéologiques dans le canton du Valais en 1995”. in: Frühmittelalterliche Kunst in den Alpenländern — Art du haut moyen âge dans la région alpine — Arte dell’alto medioevo nella regione alpina. 9 –14 septembre 1951 (Olten.20 We have to thank several trees and their destructive roots for causing an emergency that sent new archaeologists led by Hans-Jörg Lehner to the site in 1995/96. 21 H. and. pp.  rocky bluff Blondel’s pre-515 basilica Blondel’s pre. . 1–3. 1). on the ramp. Vallesia 51 (1996). adapted from Blondel 1948. “Les anciennes basiliques d’Agaune. But when the present community at Saint-Maurice decided to expand their church in the 1940s. The present church and buildings of the complex take up a good deal of space below and to the southeast of Blondel’s excavation area. Vallesia 3 (1948).515 baptistry rock and earth fill wall with arcosolium passage way Sigismund’s church ramp tombs beneath Carolingian church Carolingian church western apse eastern apse Fig. in: F. . 29–30. pp.24 It is unlikely that a royal scion and his episcopal advisors envisaged less for their common enterprise. with two differently organized basilicas marking out its northern and southern flanks. Dubuis and A. after all. and a grand episcopal reception hall fitted out with a magnificent mosaic tile floor. The baptistery that Blondel had identified off the south wall of the basilica turns out to have been a sacristy attached to the later Carolingian church built on the site. 2. over which the first chapel had 22 See the ‘state of the question’ and discussion of the date of this baptistery in F. and Lyon — boasted tri-partite episcopal compounds (i. 1990).e. whether by chance or design. the Burgundian region — including the sees of Vienne. more likely. 3: “Notes et documents pour servir à l’histoire des origines paroissiales”. in the first place. 25 This may be especially true given the association of Theodore with Ambrose: Ambrose’s Milan had a double cathedral. pp.25 So what we see is hardly what was there. 24 C. esp. 1993). “Les premiers siècles d’un diocèse alpin: recherches.23 and when the bishop at Geneva presided over a still more impressive compound. It suggests. 135–9. 23 H. Valence. pp. as did many late antique Lombard episcopal sees. Lyon (Rhône) aux premiers temps chrétiens. acquises. pt.-F. And yet what we see is enormously suggestive. et questions sur l’évêché de Sion”. extending into the area now covered by modern edifices. meant to showcase the piety of a king and his bishops at a time when the nearby bishop of Martigny had a huge ecclesiastical complex boasting two large churches side-by-side. “Martigny VS: De la première cathédrale du Valais à la paroissiale actuelle: la contribution de l’archéologie”. esp. Wiblé. Gothic building. Lehner and F. Vallesia 50 (1995). Saint-Maurice was. Helvetia Archaeologica 25 (1994–98). Reynaud. a baptistery. I thank Professor Bonnet for a splendid tour of the excavations. that nearly everything that had been built before 515 was obliterated.-J. 60–64.22 It is thus very likely that the early architectural group at Agaune was considerably larger and more complex than the one now on view. What Blondel took as the evidence for the pre515 basilica — an apse wall — turns out. upon modern inspection. esp. see P.-O. 51–68. Lugon. Guides archéologiques de la France 10 (1986). Ricerche sulle ‘cattedrali doppie’ da Sant’Ambrogio all’età romanica (Quistello. Piva. Le cattedrali lombarde. 89–97. while the ‘mausoleum’ that Blondel had thought contained the tombs of the martyrs. two cathedrals plus baptistery) at this period. Basiliques et nécropoles. See J. chap.- ’      277 clearly (before it was covered over by modern structures once again) the remains of an ancient (perhaps sixth-century) baptistery and an eighth-century tomb. to be a Romanesque or. Les fouilles de l’ancien groupe épiscopal de Genève (1976–1993). Cahiers d’archéologie genevoise 1 (Geneva. Bonnet. In general. . in fact contains only three tombs: one dates from before 515 while the others are later (though pre-Carolingian). two ‘hot’ zones may be discerned. this western axis is clearly represented by only the smallest bit of wall. it is just possible that the early basilica never in fact existed. in that case. and it is tempting to think that the site was in fact reorganized as completely as possible in the time of Sigismund. and in this instance he may not be wrong. which appear to date from the sixth century. Finally. The other ran parallel to. For the earliest period. But need the architecture mirror the texts? Let us put the matter in its simplest form: on the basis of our present knowledge of the site. Alternatively. into which was placed the tomb of Saint-Maurice within an arcosolium. Nothing. it is possible that the first basilica was where Blondel sought it. when an entire western apse was built. Certainly the texts about the new foundation hid and obfuscated the existence of the earlier monks who lived on the site. therefore. Blondel confidently spoke of ‘Sigismund’s church’. but their function is uncertain. (It was signaled. by the Gothic apse next to the rock). but was obliterated deliberately by Sigismund’s architecture. there is no trace of an early basilica ‘against the rock’. a rectangular space topped by an archway.  been erected.278  . It is possible that we have been looking in the wrong place. In particular. One ran north-south along a line marked by the eastern apses of a sequence of churches built on the site up to and including the Carolingian period. but to the west of. we might say simply that Sigismund and his advisors erected a prestigious new church without reference to the old. This western axis may not have been neglected by Sigismund’s church either. suggests the pre-515 community or any of its structures. as Charles Bonnet pointed out to me. The only buildings that Blondel plausibly got right are the church of Sigismund (with its subsequent expansions) and the Carolingian church with its eastern and western apses. the first. as we shall see. as well. the absence of the oldest structures does not obviate the fact that. there is evidence of long-term continuity at the site. Some few walls that Blondel considered to be the pre-515 hospice for pilgrims are (according to the observations of Lehner and his group) properly to be dated to that period. Whatever the case. We know that Sigismund’s church was ded- . But we can see it as a focal point in the Carolingian period. We can associate that latter church with the constructions that Lehner calls ‘phase 2’. Katalog der Denkmäler bis zum Ausgang der Ottonen. pilgrims entered only after going round the west end of the church. Why would pilgrims care to enter there? I have two complementary suggestions.26 There Avitus calls attention to the psalmody of the monks. wrapping itself right around the ramp.R. they entered to marvel at the monks’ non-stop liturgy.. “Groupe épiscopal de Genève”. 38–9. features Saint Maurice comforting a mourning mother on the spot by inviting her to rise for matins the next day to listen for the voice of her dead son ‘among the chorus of psalm-singing monks’. 515–830 environ = Vallesia 9 (1954). quoted at the beginning of this paper. but Blondel was right to think that it was a simple basilica with one fairly elongated eastern apse. . c. It is striking that no barrier has been discovered between the area around the altar and the rest of the basilica. To return to the foundation of 515. Gregory of Tours suggests that laypeople were welcome to come to Agaune and listen to the monks. She could do this ‘every day of [her] life’ if she liked. 28 See Bonnet. Theurillat. then. But here we are getting ahead of our story. suggest two preoccupations. the sources. 29 Gregory of Tours. and H. he even makes up a word. This was clearly a privileged burial place. His first illustration of the virtus of the tombs of the martyrs. Vorromanischen Kirchenbauten. pp. L’Abbaye de St-Maurice d’Agaune des origines à la réforme canoniale.-M. see J. Oswald. under which are tombs that appear to date from the eighth and ninth centuries. Certainly it is striking that a bit later another corridor was built. “Saint-Maurice”. 1966–1971. p. (München. It now seems more likely that the ramp led right into Sigismund’s church. reprint 1991). 27 Lehner. One was to forget 26 On the date of the foundation. to emphasize the solemn tones of the day and night liturgy there. Liber in gloria martyrum. the relics (if such there were) along that western axis.28 Indeed. however. in some way we cannot now determine. Sennhauser eds. Unfortunately. First.- ’      279 icated in 515.27 Blondel also thought that flanking it to the south and gradually rising along its west end was a ramp leading to the old basilica of the pre-515 monks. L. for such structures were common in churches of this period. Schaefer.29 Second. 88. 2 vols. modifies the sequence of apse construction. This may have been to allow them to visit. both textual and material. he does not describe the church in which this liturgy took place. and F. and we have a homily written by bishop Avitus for the occasion. 75. psalmisonum. in Gregory’s second (and last) illustration of the virtus of the tombs of the Theban martyrs. p. and his gifts to the monks at Agaune. C. IX. T   K G The texts for King Guntram show that the alliance between bishops and kings persisted when the Merovingians took over Burgundy and that Agaune remained a potent symbol of close royal-episcopal relations. For Gregory. he dwelt on Guntram’s ‘spiritual activities’. Decem libri 32 “Concilium Valentinum”. a. c. Indeed. Concilia Galliae. 21. The other was to create — through episcopal ingenuity and royal power — a spectacularly long liturgy that would express the piety of the bishops while according appropriate deference to the site and glory to the king.  the first community that had tended the relics of the martyrs. 441.30 Gregory of Tours could hardly mention Agaune without invoking the piety of kings. p.32 It is clear by the end of the document that the ‘poor’ were the monks of royal monasteries. “Power and the Gregory of Tours. In the Liber in gloria martyrum. . more precisely. the salvation of his soul.. [Guntram] ordered all the people to assemble in church and to celebrate Rogations with the highest devotion. 31 power to heal”. historiarum. 235. Guntram’s bishops met ‘on account of the complaints of the poor’ to decide what would be best ‘for the safety of the king. . in: CCSL 148A (Turnhout. In his Histories. p. they were the 30 Pace Paxton. Guntram was a bishop manqué.695. Indeed.280  . he was another Mamertus. Frankish king of Burgundy (561–92). de Clercq ed. his alms-giving flowing more than usual.511–a. . he linked it as well to King Guntram. For three days. he was so anxious about all the people that he might well have been thought not so much a king as a bishop of the Lord. 1980). penitent murderer of his own son. his renunciation of earthly pomp. he associated the site with the remorse of King Sigismund. or.31 At the Council of Valence in 585. and the state of religion’. the bishop of Vienne who (as Ian Wood describes in this volume) created a new kind of rogation liturgy in the face of natural disasters: as if a good bishop [Gregory writes] providing the remedies by which the wounds of a common sinner might be healed. 107. . and their two daughters. Chronica. It declared that whatever the royal family had given or would give to these places — ‘whether in the ministry of the altar or in gold and silver ornaments (speciebus) for the divine cult’ — was not in future to be diminished or taken away either by the local bishop or by royal power ( potestas regia).. for example. under the impetus of a reform movement spearheaded by the disciples of Columbanus. p. chap. dates Fredegar c. and privileges of immunity in early medieval Europe (Ithaca. 35 Fredegar. IV. In the mid-seventh century. calling its assent not simply worthy of bishops but a matter of divine inspiration. Queen Austrechildis. The liturgy is easy to deal with: Fredegar. 658. the latter three now deceased. The council confirmed the gifts to loci sancti by these royal personages and. 34 W. went beyond linking king to episcopacy: the king himself became pliant and bishop-like. Negotiating space: Power. Here the alliance of king and bishops had become so intense as to lead them to proclaim a mutual and complementary selfrestraint. restraint. 322. Goffart. turned to consider how to protect the basilicas of SaintMarcel and Saint-Symphorian and other places endowed by royal largesse. on pain of perpetual anathema. though one not entirely divorced from that of Sigismund. p.Y. It was lauded for its liturgy and renowned for its monastic exemption.H.33 T -  In the mid-seventh century Agaune had two related meanings: liturgical and juridical.35 The long day and night liturgy at Agaune continued to exert its magnetic attraction. which betokened its excellent relations with kings. c. Rome’s fall and after (London. 79. “The Fredegar problem reconsidered”. in: idem. however. When Fredegar tells us that in 584 King Guntram founded Saint-Marcel de Chalon on the model of Saint-Maurice. what he means (as he goes on to say) 33 On these disciples. 1999). writing in the mid-seventh century. The new model. . Rosenwein. 1989).- ’      281 monks of monasteries favored by King Guntram. this selfrestraint would come to be interpreted as formal exemption. N. 3.34 speaks of the psalmody of Saint-Denis ad instar — on the model — of Agaune. Exemption is more complicated and involves a new kind of royal model. 161. see B. Lérins. c. bishop of Meaux. as Albrecht Diem pointed out to me. Diem concludes that ‘Rebais is a sort of mega-extension of Valence’. following the example of the foundation of Agaune. called a council of bishops to carry forward the task. Fredegar thought that Guntram followed the model of bishops when he was with bishops: ‘sacerdus ad instar’. which (this was Fredegar’s point). Luxeuil. In the first of these provisions. then. The privilege for Rebais. whatever. drawn up c. And Saint-Marcel itself was understood to be a precedent for the Rebais exemption. that pertains to the divine cult or functions as offerings for the altar.37 Rebais’s is the first extant privilege containing an episcopal exemption. “Fredegar problem”. Its provisions of ‘exemption’ (libertas). and Saint-Marcel of Chalon. Indeed. How can this be? There are no charters of exemption for any of these monasteries prior to the one given to Rebais. 37 . in the time of Sigismund was confirmed by Avitus and other bishops upon the orders of the prince. For Fredegar. Quoted from a private E-mail communication. Chronica. it is probably the first ever drawn up. For the Council of Valence see note 32 above. p. But by Fredegar’s day. 124. 1. 38 See Goffart. the ideas and even the vocabulary of the Council of Valence appear: whatever is given to the monastery. that is.38 He noted that Guntram called a synod of forty bishops ‘ad instar institucionis monasterii sanctorum Agauninsum’. Saint-Marcel followed the model of Agaune because it involved a king who acted according to the model of bishops and who ratified his foundation through them. Agaune became a ‘type’ of exempt 36 Fredegar. is not to be usurped or diminished by bishops or kings (regalis sublimitas). presents Burgundofaro. IV.36 Fredegar had in mind the Council of Valence. some of the words of this council had been incorporated into the first charter of exemption.  is that Guntram. thinking like a bishop. 640. Yet it places itself within a venerable monastic tradition that begins with SaintMaurice. I suggest that the new mid-seventh century understanding of the right relations between a special. 343.282  . that is. that for Rebais. arise not from mere ‘impulse’ (instinctu) but rather from the norms of the ‘holy places’ of Agaune. as initiating a series of provisions directed against his own diocesan powers of jurisdiction over the monastery of Rebais. p. it declares. royal monastery and the king and his bishops was read back to the time of Agaune’s foundation. Clovis II issued a diploma for Saint-Denis that neatly tied together the newstyle royal patronage with both exemption and the non-stop liturgy at Agaune. This perspective is echoed as well in the papal exemption for Agaune.39 Itself a confirmation of an episcopal exemption that must have been very close to Burgundofaro’s for Rebais. eds. Marichal. just a few years before Fredegar was writing. In 654. may he carry off the tithes which. finally.H. Anton. Bruckner and R. nor. Atsma and J. H. issued in the mid-seventh century by Pope Eugenius I (654–657). says the privilege. Beiträge zur Geschichte und Quellenkunde des Mittelalters 4 (Berlin. Vezin eds. 36–7. 40 H. and the pope prohibits the diocesan bishop from extending his ditio or potestas over the monastery. had instituted at Saint-Denis ‘psalmody per turmas.40 The right of the brethren to choose their own abbot is affirmed. By the late seventh or early eighth century. nor may the diocesan even enter it unless invited by the abbot to celebrate Mass. were given to the monastery by the founder. 1975). The emphasis in the mid-seventh century was on the king as an associate of episcopal sponsors who guaranteed the monastic liturgical enterprise by staying clear of the monastery. A. 13 (Dietikon-Zürich. pp. 12 and 115. where Agaune again paraded with Lérins and Luxeuil 39 Chartae Latinae Antiquiores: Facsimile-edition of the Latin charters prior to the ninth century. Part XIII. and it ended with a reminder that King Dagobert. as reconstructed by Anton. 1981). [henceforth ChLA] vol. presenting his words as confirmation of the statutes and privileges of King Sigismund and the kings who came after him. pp. just as it is practiced at the monastery of Saint-Maurice d’Agaune’. the SaintDenis privilege linked the king’s interests with those of the bishops. Clovis’s father. now styled ‘Saint Sigismund’. Studien zu den Klosterprivilegien der Päpste im frühen Mittelalter. and from thence back to Agaune. the pope writes at the behest of Clovis II (‘postulavit a nobis Chlodoveus’). the idea that Agaune was ‘hands off ’ to its diocesan bishop was enshrined in the formulary of Marculf.. . France I. In this text.- ’      283 monastery through a chain of associations that led from Rebais back to Saint-Marcel and the Council of Valence. These various ideas came together because of the mid-seventh century conviction that episcopal exemption freed the monastery to carry out its liturgical round ‘for the stability of the kingdom’. nor may he take away any of the alms given to it by the faithful. no 558. Mühlbacher ed. they asserted not — as in the Merovingian period — a hands-off policy but rather their very active hands-on control over the monasteries of the empire. the monastery received a privilege said to be on the model of those for Lérins.’ 43 See Rosenwein.. p. books or anything else pertaining to the ministry of the church. where its neat dual symbolism — as exemplar of effective liturgy and as model of episcopal and royal synergy — gave it particular panache when kings and bishops were creating the first charters of exemption and immunity.. nor. the association became general and routine. This view of royal/episcopal/monastic relations did not last. the privilege for Farfa marks the last gasp of the Merovingian tradition of according episcopal exemptions to monasteries. in the mid-seventh century Agaune was a place of power not so much at its site on the Rhône as at the Frankish royal court.43 T C  Meanwhile a different aspect of Agaune was gaining new emphasis: the organization of the monks into turmae (companies) to carry out 41 Marculf. but they changed their character. 141. 1956).42 Thus. I in: A. By the addition of tuitio (protection). and Luxeuil. 1962).  as precedents for episcopal exemption.284  . . patens. 42 Diplomata Karolinorum. no 1. no 98 (775): ‘. MGH DD 1 (2d ed. Agaune. finally. E. Part 2. Marculfi formularum libri duo (Uppsala. . namely (in the words of the charter): that no bishop should receive a gift for the election of the abbot. .41 Indeed. reprint Berlin. kings gave out both exemptions and immunities. chalices. nor have power to carry away from the monastery the crosses. p. for example. . In the Carolingian period. Already by the mid-eighth century bishops had virtually stopped giving out episcopal exemptions.. . ut nullus piscoporum pro electione abbatis dationem accipere debeat et potestatem non habeat de ipso monasterio auferre cruces calices patenas codices vel reliquas quaslibet res de ministerio cclesi nec ipsum monasterium sub tributo ponere principum potestatem minime haberet nec denuo tributum aut censum in supradicto monasterio eorum exigere debeat . be able to exact tribute or a census from that monastery of theirs. Uddholm ed. In Charlemagne’s first diploma for Farfa. nor have the least power to subject the monastery to princely taxation. Formulae. 20. Negotiating space. the western one of which had a crypt below. L’Abbaye de St-Maurice d’Agaune. it seems that the passage-way that limned it. and a very pliant ‘King’ Sigismund. The sources here are both material and textual. They include the new Carolingian structures at Agaune itself and the socalled foundation charter of King Sigismund. These might have provided pilgrims with contact of some sort with the relics along the western axis. p. second is the king’s donation charter. which was placed in an arcosolium within its western wall. “Saint Maurice”. but no one has yet bothered to put it into its Carolingian context. The Passio sancti Sigismundi and the Vita Sadalbergae I also take to be Carolingian.45 It is of rather little value for the sixth century. Sigismund’s church. while no longer opening onto the new church. “Les premiers siècles d’un diocèse alpin”. which focuses on the royal properties given 44 Blondel spoke of a crypt in the eastern apse as well. pp. . It is worthwhile to make the attempt here. they may help us to assess the meaning of Agaune in the late eighth and early ninth centuries. In the early Carolingian period. The text falls into two parts: first is the account of a huge council purportedly taking place at Agaune in 515 consisting of 40 bishops. which Theurillat has shown was a forgery of the late eighth/early ninth centuries. was nevertheless fitted out with windows or apertures. Though based on sixth-century materials. was knocked down and subsumed into a far larger basilica with two apses. Dubuis and Lugon. 45 Theurillat. Theurillat has argued plausibly that this source was forged whole cloth in the late eighth or early ninth century.- ’      285 their day-and-night liturgy in a church which itself had become all the holier by organizing in focused fashion the translated relics of the martyrs. 128–9. cite an alternative date: during the reign of Rudolf III of Burgundy (993–1032). Efficient organization was also the theme of the Carolingian texts concerning Agaune. 40 counts. Though Lehner’s findings suggest that the old access ramp was destroyed at this time. Entry and egress was provided for the western crypt by a set of stairs. but Lehner. This church was more clearly focalized and organized than its predecessor. observed no evidence for this. 63.44 The focus of this western end was the tomb of Saint Maurice. which had meanwhile undergone several changes and expansions at its east end. Consider the so-called foundation charter of Sigismund. is to endow the monastery. turmae — to succeed one another in relay for the various hourly offices. Theodore gets down to brass tacks. their clothing. of which the first. 710–784). 1956). Victor — in an ambitus of the basilica (this is.286  .46 It is so unusual that 46 P. such as the one Stephen II gave Fulrad of Saint-Denis in 757. 2 vols. eds. Leipzig. to live justly). a reference to the wall of the Carolingian church in which is the arcosolium) and put the others in a well-fortified place so that they cannot be stolen. Jaffé et al. A. it is extremely effective. Theodore advises him on how to dispose of the relics: put the ones that can be associated with a specific name — Maurice himself. no 2331. There are to be eight groups — here they are called normae (a common term for ‘monastic community’). Exupery. eat in one refectory. The king volunteers to do what is necessary. An abbot presides over all. surely. of course. is largely authentic. says the Viventiolus of this account. and Viventiolus. The council is presented as a dialogue between bishops and king. Four bishops dominate: Maximus. If the abbot runs into any problems. Le Moyen Age 88 (1982). “Fulrad de Saint-Denis (v. The king’s role. Who will build churches for them? Unmentioned. . The immediate and pressing question is what to do about the bodies of the Theban martyrs. 205–35. reprint Graz. Theodore. is the church that we know had been built for those relics and tended by a group of monks. Rhetorically. he is to betake himself to the Holy See and seek help there.  to the monastery. Victor. This is an extraordinary suggestion: such ‘right of appeal’ was a provision of only the rarest and most up-to-date privileges of the eighth century. The tone of the proceedings is set from the start when the king abjures the Arian heresy and asks the bishops to instruct him in the true religion. See A. ‘deacons’ preside over each norma. this is utterly impossible: Theodore was long dead by the time of Sigismund. The monks are freed from manual labor. drink. abbé et archiprêtre de monastères ‘exempts’”. After evoking some general principles (for example. Candidus. (2nd ed. Regesta Pontificum Romanorum. There are two versions. The four do not hesitate to do so. and food are prescribed. The counts are there only for show. Then have the monks there carry on an office of perpetual psalmody day and night. 1885–88. pp. warm themselves in the same warming room. Stoclet. They are to sleep in one dormitory. in most of the other sources of the period. Historically... The latter is institutionalized through the prescriptions of Bishops Victor and Viventiolus. coll. the Benedictine rule is not printed in sequence in the PL ed.47 However. however. on Stephen’s trans-alpine journey to ask for Pippin’s aid against the Lombards. 50 ChLA 13. 47–106. “Règle des IV Pères et Seconde Règle des Pères.48 One. Revue bénédictine 77 (1967). of the Regula IV Patrum is J. “La Vita patrum iurensium”.50 None of the sources that may be associated with the foundation of 515 — not the writings of Avitus of Vienne. c. Indeed. 435–42 for the Rule of the Four. not the additions made after the death of Sigismund to the text of the Passio Acaunensium martyrum. not the Vita abbatum Acaunensium. Three decades ago François Masai already noticed that the foundation charter of Sigismund echoed two rules. one that is broader and may be more important: the monastic reform movement of the Carolingian period. . p. pp. §24 in: L. and uniform. 51–3. that a monastic reformer need not necessarily have been at Aachen or Inden to have been preoccupied with cleaning up untidy monastic practices and making all orderly. in the phrase ‘psallencius per turmas’. and two fathers both named Macarius together in council. 2 vols. Texte. 37. By contrast. (1886–92). Le Liber Pontificalis. but it constituted the first Western Rule in Benedict of Aniane’s collection. pp. The most recent ed.49 It is clear. p. there is another context for the text as well. regular.- ’      287 it suggests that the creation of the ‘foundation charter’ of Sigismund might reasonably be placed at the time of Fulrad.. not the writings of Gregory of Tours nor even the later chronicle of Fredegar — say a word about turmae. These sources certainly stress the day and night psalmody carried out by the monks. Indeed. The other is the Rule of St Benedict. has Serapion. but they are unconcerned about its practical organization. 48 Masai. Duchesne ed. Although the turmae of the monks at Agaune were mentioned in Dagobert’s charter for Saint-Denis in 654. no 558. it is rather likely that Agaune was the place where the foundation charter of Sigismund was drawn up. Migne PL 103. 94. the so-called ‘Rule of Four Fathers’. each taking turns in a sort of dialogue in which they dictate their rule. Codex regularum. 1. this use of the term remained an isolated instance until the Carolingian period. 49 Benedict of Aniane. introduction et commentaire. we know from the Liber Pontificalis that Agaune is where Stephen and Fulrad met in 753. Neufville. 447. Paphnutius. part 1. the Carolingian sources can almost be so identified because of their use 47 Liber Pontificalis. Texte critique”. Both were collected in the Carolingian reformer Benedict of Aniane’s Codex Regularum. and. see Theurillat. p. The word turma had primarily military associations.53 And in the Vita Amati. for these same cohorts will (in Num 1:52) pitch their camp per turmas et cuneos atque exercitum suum. 57 Eucherius. may possibly be a Merovingian text.288  . c.57 In 51 For the text. p. p. which. In the so-called ‘Chronicle of the Ninth Century’.52 In the Carolingian Gesta Dagoberti I. under a leader.. 5: Fingierte Briefe. Sadalberga’s nuns are distributed ‘per turmas. 1888). where the monk Matulphus. pp. 1902). Jacob divides his people and herds into duae turmae. 59. 55 M. September 1986. it can quickly become so. MGH Schriften 33. 6:26. see: I. pp. on the model of Agaune and (in this case) Tours as well. p. L’Abbaye de St-Maurice d’Agaune. B. They are his ‘company’. Here turma is used in place of cognatio. 1910). MGH SRM 2 (Hannover. Nevertheless here we are not far from military meaning. in: Fälschungen im Mittelalter.55 Historians have interpreted this as a ‘vestige’ of the original organization at Agaune. the monks are organized in nine turmae to chant their psalms. ad instar Agaunensium’. but from the evidence here adduced. he did so ‘to the sacred place or indeed to the turma Valdensis. MGH SRM 5 (Hannover. 55.. 33. 16. B. 294–6. while not necessarily armed. Krusch ed. 35:10 the Levites stand in turmis to take part in the rites of Passover. Passio Acaunensium Martyrum. Vita Sadalbergae. Internationaler Kongress der MGH. 414. “Forgery in Merovingian hagiography”. in 2 Chron. Nevertheless. 10. where he had once spent time as a monk. the saint organizes his house at Remiremont ‘per septem turmas’. to be sure. 54 Vita Amati. but it might as easily mark a newly reformed organization there. is seen to preside’. 218. 17. has the monks chanting the psalms turmatim. 52 . 56 The Vulgate provides a quick overview of turma’s semantic field. Clearly the meaning of turma deserves special study. Realienfälschungen. In 1 Chron.N.56 In Eucherius’s Passio of the Theban martyrs.51 In the Vita Sadalbergae. 53 Gesta Dagoberti I regis francorum. p. 1988). God commands Moses and Aaron to lead the children of Israel out of Egypt ‘per turmas suas’. however. Frömmigkeit und Fälschung. the impious ‘squadrons’ who carried out emperor Maximian’s evil persecutions were organized in turmae. 27 the king’s army is organized in turmae in companies of 2400 men.54 When a donor named Ayroenus gave a donation to the monastery of Saint-Maurice in 765. Krusch ed. Krusch ed. 1. we may say fairly certainly that it implies more than a simple ‘group’: it is an organized band. In Exod. but one that is decidedly unarmed. More than mere interest in organization may be involved. “La donation d’Ayroenus à Saint-Maurice (mardi 8 octobre 765)”. On the possibility of this as a Merovingian text.  of the term. Wood.. 35. Pt. 32:7–8. In Gen. 370–1.V (Hannover.–19. Dagobert’s reform of Saint-Denis. c. the turmarius. Besson. c. Zeitschrift für schweizerische Kirchengeschichte/Revue d’histoire ecclésiastique suisse 3 (1909). München. B. c. presumably inspired by Agaune. MGH SRM 4 (Hannover. Adriaen ed.61 It is useful to note in this regard that visual representations of the soldier-martyr Saint-Maurice began to be produced only in the ninth century. 64 On Carolingian prayer for the dead. pp. pp. his bishops. pp. hence given different meanings. MGH SRM 2 (Hannover. Ntedika. B. p. 59–60./Ducunt et validas instructo robore turmas’. Étude de patristique et de liturgie latines (IV e–VIII e siècles) (Louvain. and Fulda’s abbot Sturm presided over turmae monachorum in a charter of 779. II. 1926). The writings of Gregory the Great already expressed some themes. see: M.. Moralia in Job. Prudentius. 62 D. p. p.14. no 127 (Fulda). they were tied 58 Avitus.59 In Gregory’s Moralia in Job the Chaldaean army forms three turmae. 78: ‘Post quos belliferae disponunt arma cohortes. L’évocation de l’au-delà dans la prière pour les morts. and the military martyrs they honored there were always paramount in the power that it exerted. 336. 60 Gregory I. we have seen that Agaune was a powerful holy place — in part meaning a model holy place — for a very long time. V. 94–100. CSEL 61 (Wien. This may be connected with its renewed emphasis on prayer for the dead. 170: ‘ipse salutiferas obsesso in corpore turmas depugnare iubes’. especially regarding the efficacy of prayer for the dead. 772/3.63 Monasteries had always been understood as a kind of religious army. le souci des morts. CCSL 143 (Turnhout. Krusch ed. . Lauwers. La mémoire des ancêtres.. 1997). in: Chevalier. XI e–XIII e siècles) (Paris. p. c. rites et société au moyen âge (diocèse de Liège. J. “Culte et iconographie de saint Maurice d’Agaune: bilan jusqu’au XIIIe siècle”. Psychomachia. that were later picked up by the Carolingians. c. What is more interesting is that those elements were paired with different ones. bk. 7–18.60 Using the word turma thus gave a particularly militant cast to the efficacy and singleness of purpose of monastic psalmody. 1888). the word is equivalent to an army cohort. 61 MGH DD 1. 6. 59 E. 63 Passio Sigismundi regis. Oeuvres complètes. Bergman ed. In 515 and shortly thereafter. no 72 (Lorsch). 15. Morts. The king. Zeitschrift für schweizerische Archaeologie und Kunstgeschichte/Revue suisse d’art et d’archaeologie/ Rivista svizzera d’arte e d’archeologia 49 (1992). p.62 In the Passio Sigismundi regis. Thurre. at different times. 105. l. In the Carolingian period it became a kind of shorthand for the monastic corporation as a whole: Lorsch was a monachorum turma in a charter of protection issued by Charlemagne c.58 In Prudentius’s Psychomachia the virtues are drawn up in turmae.- ’      289 Avitus of Vienne’s poem on the deeds of the Jews.. 105–10. On Gregory’s views. see: J. 177. the king sets up his choirs of psalm-singers at Agaune ‘ad instar caelestis militiae’.g. M. 75. p. Poematum libri VI. 1971). but in the Carolingian period the liturgy itself was militarized.64 Via a rapprochement of material and written sources. 1979). general hypothesis. These were not contradictory representations: episcopal will and freedom from episcopal control went hand in hand in the midseventh century. If we read that a monastery was set up ‘on the model’ of Agaune.290  . So it was with Agaune in the early middle ages. they suggested a model of freedom from episcopal control. There is every reason to think that at some level all these facets coexisted at Agaune from the time of its reorganization in 515. the reason that it is important to tease out various emphases and subtleties of meaning is to quell our impulse to generalize. All this leads to a final. we should not jump to the conclusion that such a monastery carried out the ‘laus perennis’. In the midseventh century. and liturgy by turmae was itself a reflection of episcopal creativity and royal and soldierly militancy. Nevertheless. (Indeed. It is that for a place of power to be lasting. so that in each era new maestri can tease out different timbres and themes. If our source is from the late eighth century. .  to an emphasis on episcopal liturgical innovation. it most certainly did not carry out ‘the’ laus perennis. the monastery in question was probably organized by turmae and performed an aggressive non-stop liturgy — or at least hoped to do so.) If we are speaking about a mid-seventh century monastery. it is very much more likely that the place had an episcopal exemption — or wanted one. In the early ninth century they were harnessed to an ideal of organization and militant liturgy. it must have the same sort of complexity as a great piece of music. and ‘mancipated’ to monasteries as a matter of course. Die Versuch einer Rehabilitierung”.3 The rebellion of 830 elicited a similar response. 818. most of Bernard’s followers were treated more leniently. now giving freely to God what they had been forced to offer ignominiously and against their will. Anonymus (Astronomer). p. to live in monasteries’. ed. c. 148: ‘. Rau. see also Frans Theuws’ chapter in this book. Tremp. iussit orbari. Quellen zur karolingischen Reichsgeschichte I (Darmstadt. .’ Cf. Studi Medievali 30 (1989). All the bishops involved were deposed. With regard to the ‘rhetoric of the sources’ I have learned a lot from Philippe Buc. Jarnut. Vita Adalhardi. while those deemed to be more innocent were to be ‘tonsured. p. 30. the tide had turned. a punishment which cost Bernard his life. 637–48. Albrecht Diem and Rosamond McKitterick for their helpful comments on earlier drafts. pp. 1 About this revolt. Migne PL 120. coniurationis auctores .1 But as the Royal Frankish Annals put it. col. those most guilty were exiled. ed. 50. According to * This chapter is dedicated to my friend and colleague Piet Leupen: a belated gift for his 60th birthday. s. et dant Deo sponte. Furthermore. . At the assembly of Diedenhofen in 821 the emperor declared a general amnesty. “Kaiser Ludwig der Fromme und Bernhard von Italien. the initial death sentence for Bernard — the emperor’s nephew — and other ringleaders was converted into blinding. as for the laity. prout quisque vel nocentior vel innocentior apparebat. however. I am grateful to Barbara Rosenwein. Rosamond McKitterick also kindly checked my English. 2 Annales regni Francorum. . in the aftermath of Bernard of Italy’s revolt against Louis the Pious. MGH SRG 54 (Hannover. although one author noted that some chose to stay. allowing all insurgents to leave their monasteries as well as their involuntary clerical state. . Vita Hludowici. and a contribution to the Festschrift he did not want us to write. 1534: ‘Tum deinde quorumdam tonsura propter furoris saevitiam illata transiit ad coronam.’ . quod dudum inviti quasi ad ignominiam susceperant. caeteros. Most of the former rebels probably availed themselves of this opportunity. 1995).2 Only three years later. vel exilio deportari vel detondi atque in monasteriis conversari. 3 Paschasius Radbertus. 1974). R. But something of the sort emerged all the same. episcopos synodali decreto depositos monasteriis mancipari. E.MONASTIC PRISONERS OR OPTING OUT? POLITICAL COERCION AND HONOUR IN THE FRANKISH KINGDOMS* Mayke de Jong In 818. c. see J. 386.a. Thronsturz und Herrscherabsetzung im Frühmittelalter. Die Einweisung ins Kloster und in den geistlichen Stand als politische Massnahme im frühen Mittelalter (Heidelberg. kanonistische Abteilung 95 (1978). quae sicut de se ait Iob.6 Behind these overlapping concepts is the idea that monasteries were the prisons avant la lettre of early medieval states. 1973). to the extent that they could turn them into something resembling a prison. and that kings controlled monastic space. 1964). ut multis visus est. evocatos bonis propriis restituit. when rulers and bishops had more control of monastic space than ever before. Frühes Mönchtum im Frankenreich. I. This holds true even for the Carolingian age. 1994). Vita Hludowici. p. an in habitum redire pristinum vellent.7 ‘Monastic imprisonment’ is a misleading notion: this is the point I want to get across in this chapter. et si qui attonsi fuerant. bishops and lay aristocrats. p. . idem. Louis decided to become even more lenient. Vita Hludowici. W. . the clerics to be locked up in suitable monasteries’. “Zwangsaufenthalt im frühmittelalterlichen Kloster. Bund. et de utero matris videtur cum ipso egressa. 321–30. c. Rechtshistorische Arbeiten 2 (Zürich. The Merovingian kingdoms. pp. bis 8. Heavy-handed Carolingian protection 4 Anonymus. Louis the Pious displayed a truly imperial leniency towards his opponents: ‘He ordered the laymen to be tonsured in appropriate places. 46.).N. facultatem contribuit.. Darmstadt. 450 –751 (London. 155.4 Only three months later.’ 5 Anonymus. however. K. 1979).’ 6 K. 7 Cf. There is a general assumption that the monasteria that harboured such political exiles were ‘royal’ ones.5 The use of religious communities as places of internal exile was no Carolingian novelty. relatives. Wood. . returning their property to the insurgents and giving those already tonsured a choice between remaining clerics or returning to the lay state. In German legal history this phenomenon has become known as ‘Klosterhaft’ (monastic imprisonment). sed usus. Bonner Historische Forschungen 44 (Bonn. F. For centuries Frankish kings had despatched dangerous rebels to monasteries: sons. Laske. ab initio crevit cum illo. Gott und Mensch im Einklang und Widerstreit”. leniori quam debuit pietate (. Sprigade. Jahrhundert) (2nd ed. 464: ‘. . clericos vero in convenientibus itidem monasteriis custodiri. ‘Zwangstonsur’ (forced tonsure). or ‘politische Mönchung’ (making someone a monk for political reasons). utrum sic manere. eos quos dudum exigentibus meritis per diversa deputaverat loca.292    the Astronomer. 195. Zeitschrift der Savignystiftung für Rechtsgeschichte. Kultur und Gesellschaft in Gallien. den Rheinlanden und Bayern am Beispiel der monastischen Entwicklung (4. 1988). p. p. c. . 338: ‘Ipso denique tempore consuetae non immemor misericordiae. even to the extent that monastic exile has become one of the ways of identifying royal monasteries. 45. laicos quidem praecepit locis opportunis attundi. Prinz. Das Problem der Mönchung in der Völkerwanderungszeit. which. Surveiller et punir. 44–5. Power. The implicit assumption of those writing about ‘politische Mönchung’ is that prominent rebels exiled to monasteries received a clerical tonsure as a preparation for monastic vows or a promotion to higher ecclesiastical orders. Rosenwein.H. Their sacrality was formally recognized. moreover.. These created ‘hands-off’ zones that enhanced royal authority by allying the king to sacred spaces out of bounds to secular power. Davies and P. and their return to the world therefore amounted to apostasy. the lowest order of the ecclesiastical hierarchy. the concept of ‘monastic imprisonment’ remains an inadequate one. according to some. But what kept these ‘prisoners’ inside the monastic confines? Unless we imagine abbots and monks as jailers. Property and power in the early Middle Ages (Cambridge. Negotiating space. 342–3. Foucault. Einweisung. however. 10 Sprigade. and this seems to have been the case. The two recent fundamental discussions are: W. restraint and privileges of immunity in early medieval Europe (Ithaca. by royal immunities and episcopal exemptions. There are other problems. including the representatives of royal might. 1995). It evokes an eminently modern institution. or members of the abbot’s secular retinue keeping constant guard. B. Fouracre eds. as long as they were not admitted into 8 M. this is difficult to reconcile with the notion of Klosterhaft.        293 (tuitio) of royal monasteries implied their self-evident use as places where political opponents might be banished. La naissance de la prison (Paris. Clerici. at least at times. pp. Thronsturz. 1975). Bund. so even for this period.8 and. it takes it for granted that early medieval rulers possessed the powers of coercion usually associated with the modern state. What made monastic space suitable as a location for ‘inner exile’? We shall see that this was connected not to the development of monasteries as royal prisons but rather as sacred places. rattling their keys. some measure of co-operation from those exiled to religious communities must have been involved.10 Clerical tonsure was a more open-ended affair. were betwixt and between. 9 . older and more more flexible forms of monastic exile continued to exist in the ninth century. their clerical tonsure was meant to be irrevocable. however.9 If monasteries enjoying a royal immunity or royal protection (tuitio) — immunity’s Carolingian successor — were indeed the ones where prominent political opponents ended up. As becomes clear from the reports on the rebellion of 818 just cited. entailed life-long obligations. pp. 1999). and with greater expectations of permanence. for monastic exile was now perceived as a public penance. It will bring us no closer to ‘what actually happened’ or to the actors’ personal motivation. on both sides. this was the aim of the operation. this flexibility was an integral part of a practice that I would prefer to call ‘monastic exile’ rather than monastic imprisonment. a return to the world outside remained possible. There is a reason for this: early medieval authors reconstructed or construed such events post-hoc. and they had honour on their minds. Whether a retreat into a monastery was voluntary or not mattered deeply to the reputation of the political actors involved. for often early medieval authors are far from unanimous on this point. Busch. Both parties kept their options open. one way or the other. Monastic exile represented the honourable option out of a political predicament. C  ? The discussion about so-called monastic imprisonment intersects with a debate concerning supposedly decreasing levels of political violence in the Frankish kingdoms. . Did the powerful who withdrew into a monastery do so because of political coercion.294    higher orders or made monastic vows. or.11 11 J. and on monastic space as a political ‘time-out zone’ allowing conflicts in the outside world to be suspended or resolved. should be taken into account. reputations might be made or broken by portraying it either as a voluntary and honourable decision. for that matter. Recent historiography has concentrated on the opposition between political and religious motives. retreating into monastic space. monastic prisoners. Were Carolingian rulers less inclined to kill their political opponents than their Merovingian predecessors? Jörg Busch has recently answer this question in the affirmative. “Von Attentat zur Haft: Die Behandlung von Konkurrenten und Opponenten der frühen Karolinger”. but it will shed some light on the values — religious and secular — that informed monastic exile. The high-born happy few that were allowed to leave the political arena unscathed. Historische Zeitschrift 263 (1996). were never meant to become monks immediately. or was it a matter of a religious conversion? This either/or question has proven notoriously difficult to answer. After the event. 561–88. acting under pressure.W. The rhetoric of early medieval authors intent on portraying monastic exile. pp. To my mind. or as its despicable opposite. see B. a first had appeared in 1939. 584: ‘Verchristlichung und damit schließlich einhergehend Verrechtlichung sind allgemeine Phänomene des 8. “The Franks as the New Israel? Education for an identity from Pippin to Charlemagne”. 576: ‘. the notion of ever decreasing levels of violence — due to Christianisation. what about subsequent and presumably even more Christian medieval dynasties? Furthermore. or both — is untenable.. 16 About the ramifications and limits of the Frankish “New Israel”. “Vom Attentat zur Haft”. p. This was the second edition. (Bern/München. monasteries played a crucial role in this process. for Merovingians had their relatives killed without any qualms.16 Many 12 Busch. it was the ‘increasing Christianisation of actual relations of power’ that was the main cause of the Carolingian mildness towards opponents. but so is the command to fight valiantly against Israel’s enemies. According to Busch. ibid.12 Supposedly. 15 This kind of evolutionism is certainly a problem in Norbert Elias’s Über den Prozess der Zivilisation. in: Y. Hen and M. but remained largely unnoticed. For a thoughtful critique. Busch argues. To love one’s neighbour as oneself is indeed a central Christian tenet.. The social uses of an emotion in the Middle Ages (Ithaca. Rosenwein. not only as the recipients of ‘monastic prisoners’.. “Controlling paradigms”. but also — from Charles Martel’s sons onwards — as the educators of young princes and the mediators of Christian norms. pp. ‘civilisation’.’ 14 Busch. 2 vols. 233–47. 1969). 13 . “Vom Attentat zur Haft”. 114–61. pp.H. 584–5. Innes eds. 571. In a similar vein. In any long-term view. this increasing leniency cannot be explained by the fact that that many Carolingian insurgents came from the ruling family itself. Anger’s past.14 In other words. Busch. “Vom Attentat zur Haft”. resorting to ‘Klosterhaft’ instead. p. . an injunction foremost in the minds of those ruling the New Israels of the early medieval West. pp. Jahrhunderts.        295 From Charles Martel onwards. Carolingian kings were less violent because they were better Christians than their predecessors. rulers were wary of killing competitors and powerful opponents. eine zunehmende Verchristlichung des tatsächlichen Herrscherverhaltens und nicht bloß eine Verchristlichung der einschlägigen Normen’. . p. those who credit Christianity with autonomous powers capable of containing political violence seem to treat a complex and historical religion as a supra-historical and unchanging phenomenon. The uses of the past in the early Middle Ages (Cambridge. in eadem ed. Garrison. 1998). It derives from nineteenth-century evolutionist dreams of peace and order that were rudely interrupted by the massive state-directed violence of the twentieth century. see M.13 In Busch’s view. 2000).15 If Carolingians used less political violence. If the Carolingians indeed killed fewer of their powerful opponents than their Merovingian predecessors had. this must have been politically expedient. Halsall ed. as Busch seems to do?18 This capitulary shows what Charlemagne thought his sons capable of: he forbade them to kill. 575. so it may have been expedient to spare insurgents who in due course might become loyal fideles once more. Execution or murder was not necessarily the safest method of eliminating the competition. 1998). 18. the Carolingians were usurpers. no. 129–30. maim or forcibly tonsure their younger kinsmen. which made violence — especially within the royal family — particularly dangerous. Paul Fouracre has suggested that the Carolingian rulers’s more lenient treatment of political opponents might be explained by ‘a lingering precariousness in their position as kings’.. pp. 18 Busch. including members of their own family — or should we take the Divisio regnorum of 806 as an example of the self-control of Christian kings. in: G. pp. and a sharp eye for the long-term consequences of an irrevocable killing may have guided the decision to refrain from eliminating the opposition.17 After all. 19 Divisio regnorum (806). . the Carolingians not excepted. One might perhaps add that within this huge empire a loyal Reichsaristokratie was a scarce commodity. blind. Violence and society in the early Medieval West (Woodbridge. p. which options did rulers have to suppress insurgence. 45. To begin with. c. and what was to be gained from either killing political opponents or from sparing their lives? The answer varies according to specific political circumstances. but attempts to connect this to changing literary traditions and political structures—a much more sensible approach. To complicate the argument even further: in the Divisio regnorum 17 P. and few of those happened to comply with modern notions of what ‘real’ Christianity should look like. 70. I.and eighth-century Francia”.296    different Christianities have existed. explanations should be looked for in a different direction. Fouracre has also noticed a decrease of political violence at the highest political level.19 These remained the options open to any early medieval ruler. “Vom Attentat zur Haft”. if the latter resorted to political coercion by means of forcibly tonsuring their enemies and exiling them to monasteries. MGH Cap. even if this happened to conform to Christian principles of forgiveness. 60–75. esp. p. certainly not if rulers needed to win the loyalty of the aristocratic backers of the insurgents. Fouracre. “Attitudes towards violence in seventh. Yet the Carolingian rulers themselves did not think they had moved beyond killing their opponents. A need to accommodate. 68–70. p. but happened to correspond and mutually reinforce each other: mercy and the love of God.a. . these tend to surface in hagiographical texts. at least. “Attitudes towards violence”. ut licentiam haberet sibi tonsorandi et in monasterio introeundi et pro tantis peccatis paenitentiam agendi et ut suam salvaret animam’. in the court-oriented historiography portraying Louis’s leniency in this light. Similarly. About political violence in the aftermath of insurgence against Charlemagne.21 Contradictory biblical precepts were embedded in new and complex cultural contexts. restraint in dealing with one’s kinsmen. as such. rather than invoking ‘Christianisation’ as the inevitable agent of civilisation. hope of salvation. monastic exile functioned in the aftermath of the revolts against Louis the Pious — or. for the liberation of prisoners was one of the favourite miracles of Merovingian saints. we should concentrate on historical varieties of Christianity — in short.        297 of 806. decided otherwise. on Christianities. forcible tonsure figures as the weakest form of agression against royal kinsmen. these issues will be explored in my forthcoming book The penitential state. the latter ‘requested to be given leave to be tonsured. 788. Frantisek Graus gathered a wealth of texts documenting these liberation miracles. however. see Fouracre.20 This rendering of the event enhanced the king’s reputation in various ways. and in Louis the Pious’s dealings with prominent enemies. pp. according to values that were not wholly identical. 56: ‘Ille vero postolavit. moved by mercy and love of God and conscious of the fact that Tassilo was his kinsman. so he might save his soul’. As the Royal Frankish Annals put it. a body of evidence that still awaits 20 Annales regni Francorum s.     Without any doubt there were royal prisons in the Frankish kingdoms. 21 These dynamics are fully present in the difficult years 828–833. in 788 at Ingelheim ‘the Franks’ unanimously (una voce) sentenced Duke Tassilo of Bavaria to death for treason. M. the capacity of the king to pardon where others had called for revenge. plural. Charlemagne. such as his kinsmen Adalhard and Wala. Charlemagne asked Tassilo what he wished to do. but it also could be the result of an act of royal pardon that enhanced the king’s authority. respect for a high-born adversary. an eminently royal self-control. Three decades ago. enter a monastery and do penance for his many sins. 1964). Migne PL 111. “Die Gewalt bei den Anfängen des Feudalismus und die ‘Gefangenenbefreiung’ der merowingischen Hagiographie”. 3. and they contained the more deplorable specimens of humankind: helpless men in chains who were about to be executed. 10 ‘Et Lodharius quidem eo tenore republica adepta.’ 24 Hrabanus Maurus. 417: ‘. Migne PL 117. 61–156. and the same was true of Hincmar of Rheims. 810B: ‘Nam cum venisset Romam. col. 1378D. Tolet. the notion of libera custodia was intricately connected with a retreat to the monastery. Ph. Vives. either at the court or in the monastery. This was Bede’s view. Graus.22 We should be wary of turning a hagiographical cliché into a straightforward report on early medieval prison conditions. .298    further analysis. ibid. Nam quando ista scribebat. ed. ed. qui eidem vitam monasticam traderent. This must have been not unlike the dishonourable imprisonment against which Visigothic members of the political élite vociferously protested in 683: they did not deserve dishonourable incarceration and humiliation..25 22 F. he could not leave the city. he enjoyed libera custodia. p. Madrid.23 By early medieval definitions. pp. p. that is. ac per monasteria sub libera custodia commendavit’. . 25 Nithard. When St Paul remained in Rome for two years. a liberty of movement within certain restrictions. without honour or recourse to powerful friends — except the saints to whom they cried out from their dungeons. For the Carolingian aristocrat Nithard. non est interfectus idcirco dicit se liberatum’. In epistolam II ad Thimotheum. 2. 1963). I. Also: Haymo of Halberstadt. col. Merovingian royal prisons were located in ‘cities’ (civitates). for example. et eamdem vitam illum assumere suaderent. Lauer (Paris. Enarrationes in Epistolae B. Concilios visigóticos e hispano-romanos (Barcelona. . Jahrbuch für Wirtschaftsgeschichte 1 (1961). ad conventum publicum eos venire praecepit. J. esse . . in libera custodia erat: et quia statim ut adductus est. et postea transivit ad alias nationes quae erant in circuitu Romae. Historiae I. p. Cum quo monachos. Pauli. 2. but some features are too recurrent to be merely stereotypical. et in suo conductu. c. 23 XIII Conc. but he could write his letters and lived in the style befitting an apostle. c. and demanded the libera custodia. c. 8: ‘Hinc autem metuens ne post dicti fratres populo sollicitato eadem facerent. patrem et Karolum sub libera custodia servabat. and it was reiterated by Hrabanus Maurus. totondit. duobus annis mansit in libera custodia. hos sine aliquo vinculorum vel inuriae damno sub libera custodia consistere oportebit .24 It is difficult to get a good idea of the restraints suffered by high-born monastic exiles. that was fitting to their high status. but these comments — admittedly from an entirely different context — on the honourable nature of libera custodia are more informative in this respect than the vast hagiographical dossier on prisoners liberated by saints. imprisonment in a carcer was a grievous defamation. 900 (Cambridge. in: R.H. col. 700 –c. gradually emerged in the West from the midsixth century onwards. Speculum 65 (1990). p. . pp. see J. leaving its unsatisfactory abbot behind. About very different patterns of insular and Breton sanctity.A. Howard-Johnston and P. Smith. Luxeuil. Essays on the contribution of Peter Brown (Oxford. miracles and relics in Brittany”. enabled the powerful to have a stake in sanctity. 26. Hayward eds. F. ut custodes monachos ac bonos canonicos habeat. pp. 1995). 3–36—cf. The cult of the saints in late Antiquity and the early Middle Ages. 143–65. St Marcel in Chalon and St Symphorian in Autun.’ Cf. Royal immunity and/or episcopal exemptions helped to reinforce this sense of integrity. enhanced by the presence of powerful relics within the monastic confines. 1999).5. also Hincmar. “La ‘Regula cuiusdam patris ad monachos’. It was a monasticism that did not favour freefloating ascetiscism. in: J. see P. Ses sources littéraires et ses rapports avec la ‘Regula monachorum’ de Columban”. ed. The New Cambridge Medieval History II. St Maurice d’Agaune.’ 26 Regula cuiusdam patris ad monachos c.        299 In the Frankish kingdoms. McKitterick ed. A monastic community moving elsewhere to retain its ascetic standards. Revue de l’histoire de la spiritualité 49 (1973). 1122B: ‘Reconciliatus autem benigne tractetur. Yet such expectations are only possible if monastic space is perceived by all concerned as a separate territory with clear boundaries.. et tali loco sub libera custodia misericorditer custodiatur. “Saints. and to control these precious resources to a greater or lesser extent by showering monasteries and praeceperat. not saintly people. pp. They had sacred places in mind. well-defined sacred places with an army of prayer that was guaranteed to remain in situ for the duration of its members’ lives. Consilium de poenitentia Pippini regis. qui eum exhortentur. 27 M. St Denis and Chelles — became places where powerful political opponents might be sent to — or retreat to of their own volition — in the expectation that their lives would be spared as long as they remained within the monastic confines. but before monastic communities could become the beneficiaries of such privileges guaranteeing the inviolability of monastic space. c. “Carolingian monasticism: the power of prayer”.26 was of no use to the rulers and bishops granting such privileges.. they first had to become identified with well-defined places that enjoyed a measure of stability through time. a small number of religious communities — for example. Villegas.27 This place-bound religious life. This type of monasticism. 309–43.M. 20. but instead. et quorum doctrina et exemplo bene de caetero vivere et praeterita peccata plangere discat. pp. “The origins of the Carolingian attempt to regulate the cult of the saints”. St Wandrille. de Jong. for a perceptive discussion about the emergence of this kind of place-bound sanctity. so familiar to those dealing with the ninth century and beyond. Migne PL 125. Fouracre. 622–53. Child oblation in the early medieval West (Leiden etc. 29 Rosenwein. guarded against contaminating contact with the world outside. 126–55. Negotiating space. 1996). with its sharp boundaries delineating the inner sanctum of the monastery and the liminal zones surrounding this so-called claustrum. Keusch und Rein. The rise of child oblation as the predominant way of recruiting new monks and nuns is the most telling symptom of this development. The innocent children that entered a locus sanctus were pure. The background and context of royal immunities and episcopal exemptions has recently been explored and re-interpreted by Barbara Rosenwein. This inviolabitity of the inner domain ensured the efficacy of a monastic prayer mediating between God and those who supported the community and its resident saints by their gifts and protection. . and the ‘stability of the realm’. A. In Samuel’s Image. and expected to retain this purity as long as they remained isolated within the monastic confines. 28 M. immunities and protection (tuitio). The rulers were the first to avail themselves of the benefits of these stable sacred resources. except with the hindsight informed by the Carolingian order. There is nothing self-evident about this development.28 This type of monasticism. rather than by their individual asceticism.300    nunneries with lavish gifts. exemptions. The members of religious communities became sanctified by the purity of the sacred location they had entered. See also Rosenwein’s contribution to this volume. became increasingly harnessed to the salvation of the world outside. which had come to depend on the power of monastic prayer to an even greater extent. de Jong. revealing how informal congregations of individual ascetics striving for personal salvation gradually turned into ‘sacred places’ (loci sancti) filled with monks and nuns who had entered the community in childhood. Albrecht Diem has now provided us with a detailed view from ‘within’. where the purity of prayer might enhance the wellbeing of the rulers and their families. that in many ways complements Rosenwein’s analysis. grants of immunity or exemption were aimed at safeguarding the sanctity of a specific place. Eine Untersuchung zu den Ursprüngen des frühmittelalterlichen Klosterwesens und seinen Quellen (Amsterdam. These places retained their purity as long as their inner domain (septa secreta) remained inaccessible to the laity. esp. Diem. 2000). ‘Distance’ was therefore not a geographical concept.29 Diem has charted the transformation of monasticism in late antique Gaul and the Frankish kingdoms. pp.. 196–98.        301 for such sacred places were situated within a world that increasingly came to depend on monastic mediation. One decisive stage in this process occurred after the death of Bishop Caesarius of Arles (524). pp. religious communities developed elaborate strategies for punishing wayward monks and nuns. pp. Essays on medieval clerical celibacy and religious reform (New York/London. 32 All this is an all too brief summary of Diem’s extensive analysis.. so it was all the more essential to preserve the separateness of monastic space. The Council of Chalcedon (451) firmly put ‘the monks of each city or region’ under episcopal authority. then kings — protected the inner domain from contamination. 33. Bishops did play an important part in creating the place-bound monasticism just mentioned. for later developments. Negotiating space.32 A next crucial phase occurred in the seventh century. A rigid control of speech. Caesarius of Arles. pp. they ensured direct access to the benefits of monastic prayer. thought and dreams became the hallmark of cloistered life. 174–183. Medieval purity and piety. however. Keusch und Rein. The making of a Christian community in late antique Gaul (Cambridge. this largely remained wishful thinking on the part of bishops. by bishops intent on safeguarding their foundations against malicious gossip in the world outside.33 In order to discipline its members. “Imitatio morum. p. The cloister and clerical purity in the Carolingian world”.30 but where Gaul was concerned. 31 . with daily confession and penance operating as a ‘self-cleansing’ mechanism that ensured the virtus of prayer and the purity of what had become a sacred place. Rosenwein. 49–80. under Caesarius’ successor Aurelian. About Merovingian bishops and their strategies to safeguard the reputations of religious communities. M. de Jong. Keusch und Rein. in the wake of Columbanus’ brief but important impact on Frankish monasticism. in: M. p. 34 Diem. Klingshirn. 1998). see also W.E.31 It was this kind of monasticism that first attracted royal interest: in 547. by imposing restrictions of physical access on themselves as well. 33 Diem. a male monastery — well furnished with relics — was dedicated in Arles with the support of King Childebert and his wife Ultrogotha. his powerful model of secluded and cloistered female monasticism was extended to male communities as well. lest the power of prayer would be lost. pp. 263. monasticism never became fully integrated into diocesan structures. Frassetto ed. see Diem. Privileged outsiders — first bishops. 216–29.34 but these centered upon excluding the culprits from prayer and communal 30 Cf. Keusch und Rein. 224–29. 1994). 209–29. it was the monastery in its entirety. 1880).2. that is. 2000).35 Also. the main altar and its resident saint. Mittermüller. M.. 306–9. Benedict had still reckoned with the need to exile monks from the community. and probably represents a version of Irish monasticism that was not integrated into the mainstream of Frankish religious life. in: W. de Jong. Journal of Medieval History 9 (1983). to better their lives. those who had grown up within the monastic confines since childhood. see M. “Internal cloisters: The case of Ekkehard’s Casus sancti Galli”. sed magis in carcerem mitti. Grenze und Differenz im frühen Mittelalter. Merovingian asylum. but detailed descriptions of the kind Gregory of Tours furnished with regard to those seeking the protection of St Martin are lacking when it comes to monastic exile and/or asylum. and emerging much later than monastic exile with its enduring connotations of honourable libera custodia. had never been ‘of the world’ and should therefore not be sent back to it. 6. but a Carolingian commentator on the Rule amended this in a significant way. ed. they should be incarcerated. By then. Expositio regulae S. including its inner and liminal zones. Pohl and H. but as Diem explains (Keusch und Rein. Expositio regulae ab Hildemaro tradita et nunc primum typis mandata (Regensburg etc. rather than on disciplinary incarceration. 230– 236). p. Forschungen zur Geschichte des Mittelalters 1 (Wien. 36 Hildemar of Corbie/Civate. Those who ran to monasteries to save their lives may well have made a beeline for the most sacred part of the monastic precincts. p. 2. 627.38 Gregory wrote about 35 M. the inner space only accessible to the members of the community itself and a few privileged outsiders. or within a more liminal zone of the community? As far as I can see at present. 38 For a summary of the passages in Gregory of Tours’ work referring to asylum. once they had entered the monastic confines: within the septa secreta itself. that might serve as a location of exile and/or refuge. the increasing differentiation of monastic space had yielded the architectural concept of the claustrum. p. “Growing up in Carolingian monastery: Magister Hildemar and his oblates”. another understudied topic. Kulturgeschichte der Merowingerzeit nach den Werken Gregors von Tours I (Mainz. 71. The nutriti. . 363: ‘si autem ille. See also ibid. 28. 109 and c. pp. Benedict’s Rule had become the text governing monastic life. Significantly. Benedicti. p. c.302    life.. of course comes into it. pp. 122–23. qui expellendus est. this rule is very quite exceptional. pp. sicut diximus. fuit ab infantia in monasteria. c. the first explicit mention of a monastic carcer in Frankish sources dates from the 840s.. 1982). quoadusque malum suum emendet et bonum etiam facere vellet’. Weidemann. 37 There is only one ‘Frankish’ exception: the Regula cuiusdam patris ad monachos (c. 15) did envisage a carcer. Reimitz eds. instead. nutritus. for his own sixth-century Italian monastery. pp. non debet expelli.37 Where did monastic exiles reside.36 This is a monastic prison indeed. de Jong. but one meant for internal use. R. bishops in Gaul had disciplined incorrigible clergy — including fellow-bishops — by dispatching them to a monastery in order to do penance. but there may be better ones. Klingshirn.        303 the episcopal church in Tours. monasteries were to remain the secluded locations where bishops. it was an episcopal council in 533 chaired by Caesarius of Arles. C. “What was public about public penance? Paenitentia publica and justice in the Carolingian world”. 40 M. pp. La discipline pénitentielle en Gaule des origines à la fin du VII e siècle (Paris. pp. Vogel. that condemned Bishop Contumeliosus of Riez for sexual misconduct and alienation of church property. These men — and sometimes women. kan. Rituals of power. ZRG. a deposition followed by ‘penance in the monastery’ was the punishment par excellence for higher clerics guilty of severe crimes. Yet the debate and incertainty about 39 K. which would reflect badly on the entire clergy’s reputation. monastic exiles moved into a monastic inner sanctum. a bishop deeply involved in the creation of monastic separateness. Caesarius.L. a public place by definition. M     From the early sixth century onwards. also by the authors writing about such a delicate transition. widows of clerics — were to be spared the shame of submitting to an excommunication or of performing a penance under public scrutiny. M. Settimane 42. “Transformations of penance”. . 80 (1994).Abt. This practice not only required a measure of episcopal control over monasteries. 200–1. “Das Kloster als ‘Strafanstalt’ im kirchlichen und weltichen Recht der Spätantike”.40 For centuries. pp. priests and deacons guilty of capital crimes made their amends in relative secrecy. (Spoleto. 1997). La giustizia ne’ll alto medioevo (secoli IX–XI) II.L. Theuws and J. Nelson eds. in: F. From late Antiquity to the early Middle Ages (Leiden/Boston/Cologne. 247–49. in the secrecy of the monastic confines. pp. Noetlichs. and therefore did so secretius. Caesarius maintained that Contemuliosus was deposed. but also that such communities were perceived as ‘secret’ places. and should remain in in Casinenso monasterio (location unknown) forever. de Jong. sending him to a monastery to do penance. removed from the public gaze.. however. 2000).39 In fact. This is my explanation for the time being. Predictably. a place inaccessible to outsiders or to be treated with circumspection. Significantly. 18–40. and the question of the duration of Contumeliosus’ penance was left undecided. 139–40. de Jong. pp. other bishops begged to differ. 1952). 875–6. and taken into cus41 R. however. 20. About Louis the Pious’s public penance. The two criminal bishops were deposed once more. had performed seven years of penance in Fulda. ne cui ad eos visitandos ullus pateat aditus. 885–7. his political opponents. pp. The public penance imposed on Louis the Pious in 833. ut ipsos cum armatis custodire debeant. Die Bußbücher Halitgars von Cambrai und des Hrabanus Maurus. Bishop Gregory of Tours saw nothing wrong with King Guntram (561–592) resorting to monastic exile in his efforts to curb the insurgence of two bloodthirsty brothers. some bishops felt the brothers had performed a sufficient penance and should be restored to their former office.42 During a subsequent trial at the council of Chalon (579). 1980) pp. c. but kings soon followed suit. this question was difficult to answer. Kottje. M. When the brothers proved incorrigible and once more showed contempt of the king. p. The king was the one to convene the synod that deposed the two culprits. Beiträge zur Geschichte und Quellenkunde des Mittelalters 8 (Berlin/New York. 216–40. and not to allow them any visitors. non amplius quam singulos eis clericos relinquens: iudices locorum terribiliter commonens. to do penance. Ihre Überlieferung und ihre Quellen. Had such penitents actually ‘converted’ to monasticism forever.41 Bishops were the first to avail themselves of monasteries as means to discipline their clergy.304    the duration of such amends continued as well. see M. de Jong. he felt this sufficiently exonerated him to return to his former see. but then granted them an appeal to Pope John III. “Power and humility in Carolingian society: The public penance of Louis the Pious”. in quibus paenitentiam agerent. Decem libri historiarum. Bishops Salonius of Embrun and Sagittarius of Gap. insisted that Ebo had been irrevocably deposed. 228: ‘His auditis. pp. ipsosque in monasteriis a se longiori accessu dimotis. and that his penance in fact amounted to a conversion to monastic life. Guntram had them shut up in monasteries far removed from each other. When in 834 Archbishop Ebo of Rheims. “Paenitentia publica and justice”. gave rise to a similar debate. MGH SRM 5. the scapegoat of the rebellion against Louis the Pious.’ . for that matter. or was their penitence a temporary affair? Given that those who had committed grave and notorious sins increasingly gave ‘satisfaction’ by retreating into a religious community. includi praecepit. EME 1 (1992). usually with episcopal support. 29–52. de Jong. tam equos quam pueros vel quaecunque habere poterant abstulit. 42 Gregory of Tours. rex commotus valde. he instructed his counts to keep the twosome under armed guard. and accepted the papal verdict that they should be restored to their bishoprics. it took fresh charges — of offending the king and betraying the patria — to get a new verdict of deposition. including the bishop of Chalon himself.45 Did such privileges. Cf. “Was bedeutet regula Columbani?”.43 On the one hand. also. his wife and his daughters. checking on their visitors as well. He did so at the Council of Valence (583–583). The two bishops received chance upon chance to rehabilitate themselves. far removed from each other. Presumably Sagittarius and Salonius were equally well guarded in St Marcel. when they emerged in the course 43 Gregory. 2001. Guntram’s counts were make sure the brothers remained inside the nameless monasteries where they had been initially sent. this duty could not be left to the responsible abbots. forthcoming). for the two escaped. p. by implication.. but it did not yet amout to a full-blown immunity or exemption. “Transformations of penance”. safeguarding the property of these two communities against possible violations by ‘the bishops and royal power’. Decem libri historiarum. in: M. This site was obviously considered a more effective place to contain the likes of Sagittarius and Salonius than the two monasteries. 233. this is a story of surprising royal lenience. 210–2. Diem. Diesenberger and W. it is worth pointing out that only four years or more after the trial of the two criminal bishops. cf.        305 tody in the basilica of St Marcel in Chalon (in basilicam beati Marcelli sub custodia detruduntur). What turned this basilica into a place where King Guntram thought he might safely confine two formidable political opponents? St Marcel had been Guntram’s foundation. p. 45. on the other. 45 Rosenwein. where they had been kept earlier — but St Marcel in Chalon was no foolproof ‘prison’ either. pp. they managed to escape. but all the same. . De Jong. of which Gregory patently disapproved. V. with seventeen bishops co-signing the conciliar record. Pohl eds. c. Ethnische Identitäten und soziale Organisation im Frühmittelalter (Wien. Barbara Rosenwein’s chapter in this volume. to become wanderers on the face of the earth. just as bishops had been in the habit of doing. Negotiating space. favoured by gifts from the king. but sank ever further into a morass of sin. Guntram confirmed his gifts to St Marcel and to St Symphorian.44 Guntram’s gesture are an early sign of the self-imposed limits bishops and kings set against their own encroachment upon monastic space. but before we turn St Marcel into an evident ‘state prison’. 44 See about this important ‘immunity avant la lettre’ A. 27. Gregory’s pages about Sagittarius and Salonius reveal a king who high-handedly used monastic space in order to control two powerful clerical opponents. Integration und Herrschaft. upon his revolt and bid for power in 870 he lost ecclesiastical rank and was imprisoned in the castrum of Senlis. At the court. the court — or wherever Chilperic happened to be — was the place of custodia.’ 48 For Carolingian example of royal son who was gradually excluded from the throne. But it was Merovech’s priestly consecration that mattered most.48 Of course Merovech had no idea what it took to be a priest — or perhaps a bishop. he was tonsured and had his clothes changed for ‘those customarily used by clerics’. and sought asylum in the church of St Martin in Tours. 257–8. ut ibi sacerdotali erudiretur regula. 47 . put on secular clothes. then ordained a priest. he then was sent to St Calais near Le Mans in order to be instructed in the way of life of a priest (regula sacerdotalis). he died as the abbot of Echternach in 881. V. eventually — so he was sent to St Calais for further instruction. Was he meant to remain 46 Prinz. Only lightly guarded. discussed by De Jong. the fact that Merovech was tonsured. Decem libri historiarum. Carloman first became a child oblate. Some state prison! The passage about Merovech’s so-called imprisonment deserves some closer scrutiny. Further rebellion led to his blinding and exile to Corbie. 578). As Friedrich Prinz expressed it. the rebellious son of King Chilperic I (561–584). c. qua clericis uti mos est. not the monastery. Merovech never made it to to St Calais. p. otherwise it could not have served as a kind of ‘state prison’. 155. pp. where Gregory just happened to be celebrating mass. Merovech was instantly transformed into a priest. quod vocatur dirigitur. There is one powerful layman in Gregories Histories who counts as a monastic prisoner: Merovech (d. tonsuratus est. see Charles the Bald’s treatment of his son Carloman. 14: ‘Post haec Merovechus cum omni custodia a patre retineretur. he escaped en route. for — at least in theory — this was an irrevocable measure disqualifying the prince from the throne forever. et ad monasterium Cenomannicum.306    of the seventh century.47 Held in custody by his father. made a priest and packed off to St Calais at his royal father’s command no doubt meant that this monastery ‘had close connections with the royal house. Frühes Mönchtum im Frankenreich. From there. presbyter ordinatur.46 But according to Gregory. In other words. Louis the German. Carloman fled to his uncle. with the necessary earlier stages — the reception of a clerical tonsure and habit — thrown in for good measure. In Samuel’s Image. Gregory. then a deacon. mutataque veste. turn monastic communities into places even better equipped to lock up royal ‘prisoners’? Or did a royal immunity instead preclude the matter-of-fact use of monastic space with which Gregory of Tours credited King Guntram? I would argue for the latter. c. Vita Columbani I. the Jezebel of Jonas’ hagiography. From whichever side one looks at this story. pp. and refused to budge. The story discussed here leads up to these dramatic events. residing in another villa. but refusing to enter the royal establishment. Brunhild presented Columbanus with the illegitimate sons of King Theuderic II. pp. but the saint flatly refused and left. Negotiating space. Jonas. Rosenwein. Theuderic drove Columbanus from Luxeuil and sent him into exile. a terrifying earthquake occurred.        307 in this community? There is no way to tell. but surely Gregory’s neutral dirigitur should not be translated tendentiously as ‘packed off’. written between 639 and 643. Queen Brunhild instructed Luxeuil’s neighbours to stop any monk who wished to leave the monastery. Merovech travelled with a minimal guard and easily escaped. Jonas of Bobbio spelled out the rules of the game according to the monastic point of view: these boundaries were not to be set by rulers. Columbanus retaliated by going to Theuderic’s court. Negotiating space. 50 . Theuderic. 74–96. After the death of her son Childebert II (596) she ruled together with her grandsons Theudebert II (592–612) and Theuderic II (596–613). pp. 70–3. according to Gregory. In revenge.49 and therefore an age of even stricter — and subtler — definitions of the boundaries of sacred space. MGH SRM 4. it does not qualify as an instance of Klosterhaft. ordering him to give then his blessing. 87–90. ed. In his celebrated Life of Columbanus. together with his grandmother. as opposed to the unholy space of a contaminated court. 19. an indication — perhaps — of some confidence in the effectiveness of the new priest’s ordination.50 In the royal villa Bruyères-le-Chatel. and to withold all material sustenance and other support from the community. The latter is the other villain of the piece. as Barbara Rosenwein expressed it. he planted himself outside. B. Krusch. One of Jonas’ stories to this effect revolves around interdependent ‘places of power’ and their limits: the sacred space represented by Columbanus’ foundation Luxeuil. when he crossed the threshold of the court (aula regia). D    :  VITA COLUMBANI The seventh century was the ‘heyday of Merovingian immunities’. wishing to keep his 49 Rosenwein. At the centre of this episode is Queen Brunhild. for Jonas was intent to show that the saint was the one who most effectively controlled the nature of royal and monastic space. but at the background hovers the monasterium. always in one place. Theudebert and Brunhild came to the saint. instead. the king tried to include the saint in royal space by extending its parameters. Conversely. and refusing to set foot in the other. This is a story about a saint establishing his authority by defining the nature of monastic and royal space. the saint returned to the monastery’. Columbanus declared the aula regia to be out of bounds. The scene is set in two royal villae. inflicting a terrifying tremor on one aula regia. By refusing to enter. a contaminated place. to which the saint travels. Jonas implicitly contrasted the foot-loose nature of the royal court with Luxeuil’s stability. The implication of the . But there was another side to this coin: a royal court (aula regia) cut off from the benefits of prayer and blessing was also in danger of disintegration. for no religious community could survive in total isolation. But Columbanus. turning the tables on his royal adversaries by means of inversion. asking for forgiveness and promising to reform their lives. surveying this splendour. ‘Pacified by these promises. It is Columbanus who has freedom of movement and entry. the court can be here. all that Brunhild and Theuderic could manage was some unsuccessful manipulation in the margins of places with boundaries over which they had no control. both explicitly mentioned by name. This was an effective threat to Luxeuil’s existence. Of course Columbanus emerged victorious from this battle of wits. ordered his servants to bring Columbanus food and gifts ‘fit for a king’ (regio cultu oportuna). wine and food dripped to the floor. As a result. she attempted to sever the monastery from the indispensable support of its ‘neighbours’ (vicini ). and all who witnessed this miracle were frightened out of their wits. there and everywhere. Brunhild did not dare to interfere with Luxeuil’s inner domain. All the vessels broke.308    peace with the redoubtable man of God. even when Theuderic moved the aula regia to the saint — the mountain came to Mohammed — it remained a source of pollution by which a man of God should not contaminate himself. declared that they were an abomination: the servants of God should not contaminate their mouth with food sent by those who barred them from entering ‘their own place and that of others’. Theuderic then attempted to shift the boundaries of the court. These tactics miserably misfired. to make his point. by giving the saint a royal welcome in a place Columbanus had defined as being ‘outside’ the court. and would sustain and strengthen the might of kings as long as the latter respected the integrity of the monastic confines. countered that the dwellings of the Lord’s servants were out of bounds for laymen and those unfamiliar with religious life. who did know how to organise a proper monastery. it was now the king who travelled to Luxeuil. thus being turned into a laughing stock for Jonas’ contemporaries: the man obviously had no idea what he was talking about. to berate Columbanus for departing from the custom of allowing all Christians access to the ‘very secret enclosure’ (septa secretiora). any statement about such a ‘custom’ must have seemed ludicrous. But here is a king who declares the monastic enclosure accessible to all. Theuderic said to Columbanus. that of Columbanus’ pupils. or you will receive no gifts or support from me. with an inner enclosure surrounded by a liminal area accessible to outsiders. p. In other words.        309 story is that monastic space was firmly integrated into the topography of political power. This spatial division had become customary in prominent monasteries with royal connections in Jonas’ day and age. From the mid-630s onwards.e. If the they violated the integrity of the locus sanctus. with Brunhild still at the background as the evil genius inspiring strife: she intimated to bishops that Columbanus had ‘polluted’ the very rule he had instructed his monks to live by. What better way to ridicule a hated king than by putting patently ridiculous words in his mouth? By the time Jonas wrote his Life of Columbanus. the aula regia would suffer as well — measure for measure. however. as is revealed by the next stupid move from a king oblivious to custom. the saints’ disciples began to issue episcopal exemptions. and a renewed confrontation with the saint ensued. their alterceration amounted to the following. rightly concludes that Jonas’ Vita Columbani represents the views of ‘the next generation’. 66. Negotiating space. i. Briefly put. it had already been self-understood for several generations that one could not simply enter the ‘very secret enclosure’ of any religious community. Theuderic persisted in his concubinage. This yielded Columbanus’ predictable reply: if you violate our 51 Rosenwein. in unison with kings granting immunities. Significantly. Columbanus.51 regardless of such privileges. . open up your monastery. monastic space was made up of concentric circles. But Jonas’s narrative about defining royal and monastic space did not end here. but of course the monastery had suitable quarters where guests received a warm welcome.. and carried his portrait of ‘a king who did not know custom’ to an even more vicious level. Theuderic tried to enter the refectory. according to time-honoured hagiographical principles. who made him leave the monastery for Besançon. These were duly opened by divine power. there was no question of Columbanus himself being anything remotely resembling a ‘prisoner’. Several important messages were transmitted at once. What Theuderic should have said. this familiar topos took on a new meaning. unless they dragged him out by force. Columbanus repaid this in kind: he would no longer leave the confines of his community (caenubii septa). very much a part of the septa secretiora. Jonas made him say precisely the opposite. in the custody of one of the king’s proceres. and therefore worthy of my patronage. “Die Gewalt bei den Anfängen des Feudalismus”.310    inner space. but. was: please make sure your monastery is sacred and inaccessible. don’t you?’. To begin with. Here the saint was to remain until a royal verdict had been pronounced. but then closed once more. in front of the amazed guards chasing their fugitive charges. but in Jonas’ narrative. I shall not accept your gifts or support. the saint moved about the city 52 Graus. passim. The king could not resist a taunt and a threat: ‘you probably hope to get your martyr’s crown through me. inciting his leading men to declare they wanted no community in their territory did not make everyone welcome. Theuderic went back to the court. Jonas’ story still continues. . Theuderic restricted Columbanus’ freedom of movement. This ignominous episode called for yet another installment of Columbanus turning the tables on the king: the saint went out into the city and liberated all the king’s prisoners.52 Good Merovingian saints freed prisoners by droves. but made another attempt at isolating Luxeuil. rest assured that your kingdom and progeny will be destroyed as well. guiding them to a church with locked doors. and also a crystal-clear statement of the kind of interdependence between monastic prayer and royal power Jonas believed in. As usual. so the saint retaliated by setting the king’s prisoners free. terrified by the saint’s malediction. he retreated. but Jonas’ version of the saintly liberation of prisoners had some special features: Columbanus called upon the king’s prisoners to do penance. This was a powerful malediction. chains dissolved miraculously. of course. And if you have come to destroy our community. Columbanus was left in Luxeuil. meant to explain to the next generation — Columbanus’ pupils — why the saint who had created a sacred domain deeply respected by kings had nonetheless been chased out of his septa secretiora.53 this meant as much as. suddenly saw the saint sitting there. “Transformations of penance”. leaving Luxeuil and part of his monastic flock behind. come to the monastery and save your souls. Second. this particular passage is the only instance where Jonas uses the words carcer or ergastulum. Third. the truth still did not sink in. and realised he was in the presence of a miracle. quietly reading a book. any king attempting to wrest a saint from his locus sanctus would be confronted with doors that opened and closed at unpredictable moments. Vita Columbani I. without anyone hindering his passage. The soldiers rushed past Columbanus. revolving around a saint who did not wish to leave his community. but did not want to endanger the lives of the soldiers who came to carry him off. And last but not least. 20: ‘ipsum nequaquam viderent. looking through a window. 215–7. eratque expectaculum pulcherrium’. Columbanus posited his superior means of punishment: sinners should do penance. Columbanus triumphantly returned to his monastery ‘through the centre of town’. torn between obedience to their king and deep fear for the divine punishment they might incur because of their subservience to earthly powers. however. To the two rulers whose reputation Jonas intended to dismantle as thoroughly as possible. and the soldiers themselves. Jonas implicitly extolled the virtues of other rulers. against a royal model of incarceration.        311 freely. This is Jonas’ background to Columbanus’ exile in 610: a truly impressive hagiographical narrative. c. Was there better proof of this place being sacred? From then on. Given Jonas’ definition of the medicamenta paenitentiae elsewhere in his Life of Columbanus. 54 . It was a lovely scene. the narrative develops. mercifully freeing them that of saints. this was a challenge they could not allow to go unnoticed. guided by God rather than by royal command. in search of prisoners to liberate. Jonas. even stumbled over him. locking up miserable prisoners was the business of kings. Brunhild and Theuderic sent soldiers who entered Luxeuil’s inner domain (septa). By damning Brunhild and her progeny. but they could not see him. occasionally touched him. Jonas said.54 The man in charge. pp. where the saint sat in the atrium of the church. the good kings (and bishops) who 53 De Jong. Ideal and reality in Frankish and Anglo-Saxon society.M. Peritia 1 (1982). J.55 Jonas was writing in better times. For an in-depth exploration of Jonas’ Life of Columbanus. designed to remove a rival king’. Politics and ritual in early medieval Europe (London/Ronceverte. ‘In Merovingian circles the tonsuring of a prince or king and his confinement within a monastery was simply a political act. 63–80. pp. on the Continent. Wallace-Hadrill (Oxford. see I. Continental rulers had no reason or incentive to renounce kingship of their own volition: they could be kings and good Christians at the same time. Stancliffe maintains. when the interdependence between royal and monastic space — and the separateness essential to their mutual benefits — were first formulated in the juridical documents known as ‘immunities’. pp. Irish ascetism took a bleak view of the possibilities of rulers to achieve Christian goals while remaining in the secular domain. provided it remained a locus sanctus. 158). the monastery was a place where prisoners might go voluntarity.56 By contrast. can be explained by different religious traditions.. pp. O    ? In a stimulating article on ‘kings who opted out’ Clare Stancliffe argued that the involuntary retreat to a monastery was typical of the Romanised continent. 56 Clare Stancliffe. Collins) ed. the real carcer was located in the city (urbs) and guarded by the king’s soldiers. Jonas’ elaborate narrative reveals a topography of power into which Luxeuil was fully integrated. His Life of Columbanus is very much a document that belongs to his own day and age. 154–76 (esp.312    respected and protected monastic space. 1986). in P. p. Wood. “Queens as Jezebels: the careers of Brunhild and Balthild in Merovingian history”. at the very start of the heyday of Merovingan immunities. Studies presented to J. Studies in Church History. freely exchanging their royal office for the monastery or a life-long pilgrimage. Subsidia I (1978). however. 1–48. 31–77. Bullough and R. to do penance. “The Vita Columbani and Merovingian hagiography”. This difference. repr.L. in the early medieval insular world kings opted out of their own accord. after having been liberated by a saint. “Kings who opted out”. Nelson. pp. On the contrary. a more optimistic attitude to Christian kingship prevailed. 1983).N. Wormald (with D. The monastery as a ‘prison’ does not not enter into the discussion. 55 Cf. In other words. . in eadem. making better use of its divine uses than Brunhild/Jezebel and her bungling son had done. 60 An essential element is left out of the argument. it was clearly the Anglo-Saxon missionary Boniface who was behind his conversion. not 57 K. to say the least. Though well aware of the contradictory nature of the sources. The obvious disagreement among early medieval authors about what exactly happened to Carloman and Ratchis should be taken into account. and then proceeds to build a context for Carloman’s and Ratchis’ supposedly voluntary entry into Monte Cassino. Krüger came to the conclusion that these two conversions followed Anglo-Saxon models. . Karl-Heinz Krüger had discussed the puzzling conversion of two rulers opting out. 216–17. but there is a more fundamental problem. Carloman and Ratchis are the two exceptions that prove the rule: kings voluntarily abandoning secular power are only found in England. “Königskonversionen”. and that Merovingians aimed for murder.59 For Stancliffe. pp. the question is whether a given conversion was either voluntary or forced. however: the particular rhetoric of the sources that ‘describe’ these events. and a wish to portray a retreat into monastic space as an eminently honourable conversion — or as its opposite? And what about the sources offering ‘proof ’ that the tonsuring and monastic confinement of continental princes or kings was merely a political political act? We are back with Jonas’ Life of Columbanus once more. for this contains the key text upon which such arguments are built: that the kings on the Continent did not opt out voluntarily. Krüger feels compelled to decide in favour of Carloman’s ‘religious motivation’. that no religious motivation was involved until Boniface and so-called insular inspiration came along. p. the Frankish maior domus Carloman (747) and the Langobard king Ratchis (749). Krüger manages to come up with some Anglo-Saxon connections: Bishop Wilfrid of York and King Caedwalla of Mercia had once visited the Langobard court in Pavia.57 In Carloman’s case. Krüger. 169–222. Jahrhundert’. Was there perchance a debate after the event. Throughout. “Königskonversionen”.-H.58 Did it take Anglo-Saxons to inspire eighth-century Frankish and Langobard rulers with religious fervour? This view seems a bit insular. 60 Stancliffe. “Kings who opted out”. 185. ‘Königskonversionen im 8. p. 158. Frühmittelalterliche Studien 7 (1983). pp. but even for Ratchis. 58 Krüger.        313 A decade earlier. Krüger argues. who both retreated to Monte Cassino. 59 Krüger. Jonas’ cleverly constructed narrative was meant to destroy the reputation and honour of Brunhild and Theuderic. His ergo dictis. se numquam audisse. who ‘full of wrath’ ( furens) had him made a cleric. Columbanus was welcomed in the realm of Theudebert II. ut coepte arrogantiae supercilium deponeret seque clericum faceret. But the story goes on. c. vaunting the invinciblity of their peoples. had a vision of Theuderic calling him.62 This is another turning point in the narrative. in regno sublimatum. 61 Jonas. This earned Columbanus the ridicule of the king himself as well as of the royal entourage: ‘They had never heard of a Merovingian who had been raised over a kingdom becoming a cleric of his own free will’. aientes. Columbanus. a malicious prophecy by a powerful saint. It is at this point that Columbanus prevailed upon Theudebert — the most sensible of the warring parties — to give up the ‘superciliousness of his arrogance’ and to become a cleric ‘in ecclesia positus’. and Theudebert had to flee. only a few days afterwards she ruthlessly (‘impie’) ordered him to be killed. The two half-brothers fought a ferocious battle at Zülpich. Theuderic then attacked his half-brother. Theudebert was duly captured and taken to his grandmother Brunhild. lest he lose eternal life along with his earthly realm. vir Dei ad cellolam remeat. 28. asking him for help. and one more maledictio. sacre subderetur religione. p. After his departure from Luxeuil.: ‘Detestantibus ergo omnibus beatus Columba ait: “Si voluntarius nullatenus clericatus honorem sumat. which of course came true.’ . and the two kings fought a war aimed at mutual destruction. the evil instruments of the saint’s exile from his locus sanctus — and Jonas managed quite successfully. Jonas has Columbanus exclaim: ‘If he does not accept the honour of being tonsured voluntarily. Quod et regi et omnibus circumadstantibus rediculum excitat. 105: ‘Inter quae vir Dei ad Theudebertum accedit eumque suadet. Columbanus refused: this was not what the Lord had intended when He ordered us to pray for our enemies. But as we have seen. voluntarium clericum fuisse’. in brevi invitus clericus existat”. he will briefly be a cleric against his will!’. he answered. the other of Brunhild’s grandsons he once had refused to bless.61 This is the passage on which historians have concentrated: Merovingian kings were no wimps opting out.314    for monastic exile. Vita Columbani I. sitting on a rotting tree trunk reading a book. moxque prophetici dicti eventum res non diu dilata adfirmat. nec simul cum damna presentis regni aeternae pateretur vitae dispendia. et in ecclesia positus. This is not a text from which to glean straightforward information about Merovingian custom of any sort. Merovengum. 62 Ibid. 131. Kusternig (Darmstadt. In other words. 82. IV. 13. ed. no. Mommsen (1898). 1994). We have only Jonas’s word for it that Theudebert was murdered at Brunhild’s behest. Ant. 65 Twelfth Council of Toledo (681). Theudebert’s stupidity (and superbia) consisted of not opting out at a moment of total defeat. In Wamba’s case. Theudebert refused to do so. this has been construed as the result of an evil plot — the king had supposedly been drugged and turned into a penitent — but there is no evidence for this tall story invented in the late-ninth century. According to Jonas. a similar scenario was probably intended in 833. There is no way to tell whether it was shared by all the powerful of his day. In Visigothic Spain. 46–47. 256. p.64 Wamba (680)65 and Erwig (687)66 all gave up royal office by becoming penitents. saving his life and honour. 66 Laterculus Visigothorum. 468. This is no doubt part of Jonas’s narrative tour de force63 by which he succeeded in perpetually damning Brunhild’s memory. It is much more likely that these kings decided to become penitents of their own 63 Wood’s expression. Th. Chindasuinth (653). MGH Auct. c. the but moral of the tale is clear: killing an opponent who had just been tonsured was ‘impious’. ed. if only because there is not a monastery in sight. 386. 1994). this story presents some problems. but shortly afterwards she had him put to death. A. 64 . accepting the clericatus honor. 450–751 (London. This was the view Jonas wished to get across.        315 As an example of a typically Merovingian practice of forced tonsure and monastic confinement. Brunhild ‘requested that Theudebert was made a cleric’. a real king would have withdrawn from the political arena. thereby implicitly granting him his life. p. and of death at the hands of a wicked woman. Concilios. As for Theudebert and his entourage ridiculing Columbanus’ suggestion that the should become a cleric of his own volition. ed. thus avoiding a bloody conflict and making room for their successors. Vives. the honourable way out for a king was to adopt the status of a public penitent. but neither is there any reason to jump to the opposite conclusion. rulers exchanging secular power for ‘ecclesiastical honour’ were by no means exceptional on the Continent. By the mid-seventh century. this was just one more instance of Jonas cleverly highlighting the difference between a wise saint and a stupid king. p. Fredegarii continuationes. p. and got his just deserts: the shame of a forced tonsure. when Louis the Pious submitted to a public penance. in The Merovingian kingdoms. mox per scribtuarum definitionis suae hunc inclytum dominum nostrum Ervigium post se praeelegit regnaturum. 373–422. p. with the Lord as provider. p. pp. 69 See Fouracre and Gerberding. with references to earlier literature. pp. she came to her above-mentioned monastery at Chelles. 197–222. 10. “Queens as Jezebels”. pp. pp... Nelson. An ethnographic perspective (Woodbridge. Late Merovingian kingdoms.70 The queen fervently wished to retreat to Chelles. Vives ed. designating his successor: ‘Idem enim Wamba princeps dum inevitabilis necessitudinis teneretur eventu. I follow the translation of the Life by Fouracre and Gerberding. M. 70 Fouracre and Gerberding. she was honourably and very lovingly received into the holy congregation by the holy maidens. pp. Rosenwein. Late Merovingian France. pp. peace was fully restored among them. “Adding insult to injury: Julian of Toledo and his Historia Wambae”. Concilios. suscepto religionis debitu cultu et venerabili tonsurae sacro signaculo. discussing this quickly with the priests. 118–32. however. she kindly forgave them everything and asked them to forgive her the disturbance of her heart. 386. MGH SRM 2. This certainly holds true for the author of the first Vita Balthildis. the nunnery Chelles — sometime between August 664 and August 665 — was consistently presented presented as a voluntary action. but we do know that contemporary authors chose to depict these royal conversions as a highly commendable gesture. she had a complaint of no mean size against those whom she had kindly nurtured. But. in: P. 71 Vita Balthildis c. Queen Balthild’s withdrawal into her own foundation. about her reputation. and there. The Visigoths from the migration period to the seventh century. 74–81. . About Balthild and her policy of immunities and exemptions. et sacerdotali benedictione unguendum’. with Christ as a guide. see Wood. through whatever means.69 yet authors favourable to Balthild subtly enhanced her reputation by stressing that she entered Chelles of her own volition.67 We cannot be certain. de Jong. 114–5. because they had erroneously considered her suspect and even repaid her with evil for good deeds. written before 690. pp.68 This amounted to more than a mere cover-up. Heather ed. esp. cf. 495. And thus. Late Merovingian kingdoms.71 67 Cf. 373–4. And having been escorted there by certain noblemen. That the queen actually needed to opt out because of factional strife is clearly hinted at in various sources. 1999). Merovingian kingdoms. but ‘for the love of her’ she was delayed by the Franks — who ultimately permitted her to leave because they were afraid of the formidable ‘Lady Balthild’: But the lady considered it God’s will that this was not so much their decision as a dispensation of God that her holy desire had been fulfilled. Negotiating space. even in Wamba’s case.316    accord. Then. 68 The Twelfth Council of Toledo merely stated that Wamba received his penance ‘in the event of inevitable need’. guided by a mixture of political acumen and religious fervour. 97–118 for a discussion of the sources for Balthild’s life. as is fitting. one should not treat this as a formal monastic vow of any sort. Such tell-tale details suggest that Bathild’s life as a politically active member of the royal family did not end once she retired to Chelles. with Balthild suggesting to the abbess ‘that they should constantly visit the king and queen and the palace nobles in befitting honour with gifts. Krusch. The author cleverly managed to convey two conflicting messages: factional strife forced Balthild to retreat into ‘her’ monastery. quem prediximus. days of political activity were not quite over.’ The expressions devotio and conversare both belong to monastic usage. out of the political arena but with all her royal potential intact. Afterwards. 3:7). receiving a royal reception. at a price. She was a queen lying low. as it is written: ‘It is necessary to have a good report of them who are without. Her Life provides a revealing vignette of queenly diplomatic activity within the cloister. guided by Christ. She therefore entered Chelles in a most honourable fashion. 72 Vita Balthildis c. and to protect the blameless reputation which would attract gifts and protection.’ (I Tim. . Balthild did not become a nun. 498. If one wishes to translate Balthild’s devotio sancta as a vow at all. her behaviour befitted that of the most worthy of nuns. the expression is used twice) to enter Chelles. but rather as a personal and informal promise to God. MGH SRM 2. Balthild was in an excellent position to appreciate her monastery’s need to keep up good relations with the palace.        317 This is as good an example as any of the way in which the theme of force versus choice might be exploited to bolster a reputation.73 As a former outsider who was now within. but ‘vow’ is only one of its possible translations (others are ‘religious intention’ or ‘pious wish’). but she remained a queen. 10. ut in monasteriam. for a grievous dispute still had to be settled. Peace was the result. however. by emphasizing her ‘holy desire’ (sancta devotio. but this nevertheless was her own choice. conversare deberet. but would always remain more fully in the affection of love with all its friends and more strongly in the name of God in love. B. hoc est in Kala. so that the house of God would not lose the good reputation with which it had begun. as the author of the Life is at pains to point out. ed. 495: ‘Erat enim eius santa devotio. but nonetheless Balthild remained betwixt and between. p. as was the custom. 73 Vita Balthildis c. 12. the author turned Balthild’s retirement into a matter of choice and honour. p. quam ipsa edicavit. religiosarum foeminarum.72 Once inside. 75 See also Wood. transl.318    O  —    This brings us to the flexibility and open-endedness of monastic exile. The first Passion of Leudegar. Both men left Luxeuil again to return to power. Asked by his brother what fate he preferred. and Ebroin was murdered two years later. that veils could be taken off. 234–8. It was then ordered that he should remain in the monastery 74 P. contains a remarkable story about Theuderic III.76 They presented him shaven to his victorious brother. But early medieval exilers and exiles must have known from experience that monastic confinement was rarely permanent. pp.74 Just a brief reminder of the main events: after having engineerd Ebroin’s downfall and exile to Luxeuil in 673. The Merovingian kingdoms. 76 Passio Leudegarii. which entailed the monastic exile in Luxeuil of two adversaries. Bishop Leudegar ended up there himself only two years later. The usual assumption is that monastic exiles became full members of a religious community and were therefore were politically kaltgestellt. and he declared that he was anticipating a swift judgement from God in his favour. Upon Ebroin’s fall from power King Theuderic had his hair cut off by ‘certain men who were seen to be leaders in the kingdom and wished by flattery to persuade Childeric not to shed blood’. but the way this confrontation unfolded owes a lot to the fact that the first Passion of Leudegar was written at a time when Theuderic had returned to power. SRM 5. “Merovingian history and Merovingian hagiography”.75 The rhetoric of voluntary/involuntary exile had its impact on these texts as well. ‘he [Theuderic] would only say this: that he had been unjustly cast down from the throne. that hair once tonsured grew back. Krusch. pp. Fouracre & Gerberding. Past and Present 127 (1990). the maior domus Ebroin and Bishop Leudegar of Autun. Balthild’s youngest son who was put onto the throne by Ebroin. c. MGH. so I shall not repeat his analysis here. B. written shortly after the saint’s death. 3–38. 6. Fouracre. 223. with all the risks involved: in 678 Leudegar was gruesomely executed as an accessory to regicide. Late Merovingian France. 288. p. Paul Fouracre has brilliantly examined the evidence. and that a political following might as well be built up within as without a monastery. . ed. This becomes apparent from the cluster of texts dealing with the tempestuous events of 673–675. p. As the First Passion of Leudegar (c. 12) has it: ‘Again and again Hermenar threw himself at the king’s feet. but exiles might be pardoned and leave again. All this hinges on a kind of double entendre: that monastic exile was perpetual. this passage suggests that the king was eminently capable of extracting Leudegar from Luxeuil if he wished. c. All the same. p. 294. banking on the king’s wrath to subside. with some of the priests and bishops feeling that presently they would bring him back from the king’s anger’. imploring him to let Leudegar remain in Luxeuil and not to order him to be led out to a certain death according to the cruel ones whom the devil had stirred up in a rage against him’. Two dukes were charged with this task. Passio Leudegarii. 12. Luxeuil has many functions. It was a place where one could bring a political hot potato like this powerful bishop while deciding what to do with a man with so many allies. one of their men was to kill Leudegar ‘as soon as he saw the servant of God outside Luxeuil’. which they had cut off ’. c. 12. but that they might be killed if one managed to get them outside the monastic precincts.78 Apart from glossing over Hermenar’s dubious role in Leudegar’s martyrdom. As an example of representing monastic exile as a result of an honourable choice. Yet the author explicitly indicates what kind of leeway such a ‘perpetual’ banishment might offer: ‘This judicial decree was quickly confirmed. but was subsequently sentenced to remain in Luxeuil in perpetual exile. still in the custody of the two 77 78 Passio Leudegarii. . But the villain took fright and begged the saint for mercy. this passage equals that of the Life of Balthild. the next thing we know is that Leudegar was indeed outside Luxueil. that tonsured exiles were immune to violence. that monasteries were both within withdrawn from the world. As for Leudegar himself (still according to the first Passion).77 In this narrative. he was first taken to Luxeuil ‘to stay there until all had taken counsel together what should be done with a man of such great reputation’. p. so they might bring him out again. The allies themselves seem to have been content with the verdict of perpetual banishment.        319 of the martyr St Denis and be protected there until he grew his hair. the author of Leudegar’s first Passion is extremely vague about the way Leudegar left his place of internal exile. 294. MGH SRM 2. They suddenly appear in c. 81 Ursinus. c. ed.’ 82 Liber Historiae Francorum. p. 241: ‘Leodegarius vero penitentia ductus et exilium Luxovio trusus’. ed.’ 83 Fredegarii continuationes c. who could safely credit the protagonists with lofty penitential motives. Passio Leudegarii. Ebroinum totundunt eumque Luxovio monasterio in Burgundia dirigunt. 327. the result of an act of mercy on the part of King Childeric and his leading men. incidunt. vacare Deo. after having cut off Theudebert’s hair.79 In the first Passion. 272: ‘Eo tempore Franci adversus Ebroinum insidias praeparant. 26. relicto saeculo. 16. 296–98. c. veniam vicissim petentes. Once in Luxeuil. c. crinesque capitis amborum vi abstrahentes. quem protinus illic ire non distulit. 2.81 This is the view of a man writing more than 70 years afterwards. 14. cc. Luxovio coenuvio.: ‘Et iuxta iussum regis. without any indication that they did follow up their orders. when an author from Poitiers rewrote the tale of Leudegar’s sufferings. 4. who now had become his firm allies. Krusch.80 By the mid-eighth century. Leudegar’s entry into Luxeuil is unequivocally presented as a sentence of exile. 14 and 16. contra Theudericum consurgunt eumque a regno deiciunt. he encountered his fellow-exile Ebroin. The Liber Historiae Francorum (727) merely stated that the enraged Franks ‘tonsured Ebroin and sent him to the monastery of Burgundy in Luxeuil’. requesting the king’s permission to leave the world and devote himself to God. the story had become a different one. Leudegar now took the initiative himself. Qui festinus in monasterio perveniens. inter contubernia monachorum strinue habitare quasi perpetue monachi conati sunt. super Theudericum consurgunt eumque de regno deiecunt. ut ei liceret. It is a far cry from the seventh-century versions of Ebroin’s exile. The two men confessed their mutual guilt.83 This one little word reflects two 79 Cf. dicens se aliquid in eo peccasse. who received a similar uplifting treatment from this hagiographer. MGH SRM 5.’ . ibidem Ebruinum iam clericum invenit.320    dukes. steterunt concordes. Passio altera Leudegarii. MGH SRM 5. humili poposcit prei se dirigendum. p. ipsumque pontificem deprecantem. Tamen ab abbate seiuncti.82 The Continuator of Fregedar’s Chronicle related these events in an equally dead-pan fashion. aliquod spatium temporis uterque penitentiam agentes. p. 80 Also in Leudegar’s case: Passio Praeiecti. pp. Kusternig. and suddenly appear to have done so in c. and ‘did their utmost to live forever within the monastic community as if they were monks’. All this prevarication suggests that the crossing of Luxeuil’s boundaries in either direction was a sensitive issue. Crines capitis eius abscidentes tutunderunt Ebroinumque et ipsum tutundent et in Burgundia Luxovio monasterio invitum dirigunt. but with the addition of a tell-tale detail: Ebroin was taken to Luxeuil against his will (invitum). obeyed the abbot when he imposed a penance on them. about the ‘duces’ who had been ordered to take Leudegar out of Luxeuil. 45. B. 317: ‘Eo tempore Franci adversus Ebroinum insidias praeparant. p. c. c. 688. ‘a cruel man and prone to several vices’ may have been induced by contemporary controversies about converts to monastic life leaving their communities once more. Ebroin only became a real monk in the early ninth century. took a wife. 288: ‘Episcopis tunc quibusdam intercedentibus et praecipue intervento antistitis Leodegarii eum non interficiunt. The uses of the past in the early Middle Ages (Cambridge. quae perpetraverat. leaving the monastery behind and keeping the habit only so far as his tonsure. forced by certain circumstances. ut facinora. 6. once in Luxeuil. p. 13. MGH SRM 5. the hair of his head having been cut. ed. Yet however divergent. abandoned the monastic habit.. with full references to earlier literature. MGH SRG 10 (Hannover/ . But with the passing of years. simulatam gerens concordiam. and to leave the place when he thought the time was ripe. p. merely feigned to lead the life of a monk — a true apostate. the monastery was a place where one might keep one’s options open. all accounts agree in one respect: whether Ebroin’s efforts to behave like a monk were presented as sincere or hypocritical. Given that most Merovingian kings were not deemed worthy of more than a passing remark. The Annales Mettenses Priores. Innes eds. But compared with the irregular and illicit way he succeeded to the management of his office. and again snatched up the position of mayor of the palace. p.. p. joined the monastery which is called Luxeuil. quasi dum uterque unam.a. At best he was ‘tonsured. 298. sed Luxovio monasterio dirigitur in exilium.87 84 Passio Leudegarii. he excercised his rule even more perversely and wickedly. against all the rules that had been set by this time: At one point he. Ibid. Hen. It was nothing surprising. c. for Ebroin to gather a gang (comitatus) of friends and servants around him at Luxeuil. when another king who had been friendly to him took up the rule of the Franks. 296: ‘In illis igitur diebus adhuc exsul in Luxovio resedebat Ebroinus monachali habitu tonsuratus. he. 86 For a recent appraisal of this text. the author’s digression about Ebroin. B. 175–90. a perfidious Julian who. “The Annals of Metz and the Merovingian past”. in monastic habit’.84 This dim view of Ebroin would eventually prevail. ibid. 298: ‘Iuliano similis. Hen and M. in: Y. he never became a monk. then. In the first Passio Leudegarii Ebroin became the villain of the piece. von Simson. from a typically Carolingian perspective.86 made the most of Ebroin’s departure from Luxeuil.85 For such exiles. see Y. s. or living ‘as if ’ he would be a monk forever. 85 Passio Leudegarii. qui vita fincta monachorum tenuit’. he. c. 16. a hagiographical piece of propaganda for the Carolingian dynasty composed in 806 or shortly thereafter. exiled to do penance for abominable sins ( facinora). and there.        321 generations of literary agitation against Ebroin. pp. concordem ducerent vitam’. 2000). 16. evadisset penitendo’. 87 Annales Mettenses priores. took up the habit of monastic life. sed disparem exilii accepissent sententiam. with a vow. to make matters worse. but to earlier authors. but when it came to his monastic exile. ed.A. This was a real accusation in society busily ordering its monastic life. Late Merovingian France. 89 Annales S. and transl. MGH SRM 5. decided to spare his life. with one important difference. Tassilo’s first disappearance into a monastery — presumably Jumièges — was turned into a dishonourable and coercive affair: ‘et Taxilo dux tonsus est. he took a wife as well. Fouracre and Gerberding. The subtle expressions used by contemporary authors speak for themselves: these were still political actors who only became ‘like’ monks. 88 Vita Anstrudis. monastic exile and public penance had become identical. then became an apostate and returned to power. 90 De Jong. they left his reputation intact. Krusch and W. Ebroin became the quintessential violator or the cloister and Anstrud’s exiler — until the community’s terrifying prayer and a miracle turned him into the abbess’ devoted supporter. MGH SS 1. not only when Louis the Pious in 833 staunchly refused to take ‘voluntary’ monastic vows under duress. Halborg with E. 1992). 262.a. see the Vita Philiberti cc. duke of Bavaria. pp. 24–7. The Royal Frankish Annals portrayed Tassilo as an oathbreaker and a fickle ally. De Jong. 5–6. Bertiniani s. Tassilo asked leave to be tonsured and do penance for his many sins. 1972). Pertz. Levison. p. transl. 152. Charlemagne. Gordon Whatley eds. ed. Quellen zur karolingischen Reichsgeschichte II (Darmstadt. This distinction did matter. pp. p. moved by the love of God and conscious that Tassilo was his kinsman. and neither did any of his fellow exiles. ed.90 This much resembles the treatment Theudebert III supposedly met at the hands of his brother. G. B. cc. “The Franks as the New Israel?”. The same holds true for the monastic exile imposed in 788 and 794 on Charlemagne’s brilliant adversary Tassilo. p. for a compilation of the relevant sources. pp. In Samuel’s Image.89 but also in the world of Ebroin and Leudegar. so that he might save his soul. retrususque Gemetico monasterio’. including the irrevocability of monastic vows. For the author of the Royal Frankish Annals. 22. B. p. p. pp. McNamara and John E. Ebroin had never become a full member of a religious community. 296–97. 596–9. and asked him what he wished to do. “Paenientia publica and justice”. Sainted women of the Dark Ages (Durham/London. this whole business about broken vows would not have been understandable. 11–13.H. . Balthild included. pp.322    This verdict is the result of a cumulative literary defamation. 834. with the result that Leipzig. For more Ebroin-bashing. 71–2. MGH SRM 6. Krusch. 353. as a follow-up to his public penance.. 1905).88 but the Annals of Metz introduced a new element: Ebroin had taken monastic vows (votum). For a context to this passage. 880–82.a. In this preseumably eighth-century text. Rau. ed. see Garrison. R. cf. J. But in the Annales Petaviani s. 17. 788. F. . The lives of the eighth-century popes (Liber Pontificalis) 94. Here Carloman is accused of cooperating with ‘the unmentionable Aistulf’. but probably because of his love for the contemplative life. McKitterick. this was the way in which a true penitent should atone for his sins. 1974). 1992). nr. The republic of St Peter: The birth of the papal state. 1984). Vita Stephani II. p. Here he remained for a few years. It looks as if Carloman remained politically active once he retreated from the world — like Balthild. ed. To my mind.92 Many 91 Einhard. It is within this complicated context — voluntary/involuntary. monk/ cleric. Carloman withdrew to the peace and quiet of Monte Cassino. But questions about historiographical complications surrounding the accession of the Carolingians are now finally being raised: see R.’ I follow Davis’ translation.91 For reasons unknown. c. “The illusion of royal power in the Carolingian Annals”. Carloman became a monk in St Silvester in Monte Soracte. Louis the Pious fully availed himself of this method of correcting and pardoning his opponents in the wake of the revolts of 818 and 833. his own foundation. 65.        323 monastic exile became more like a definitive departure from the world. Rau. 680–825 (Philadelphia. 1–20. Vita Karoli. T. Having discarded his secular clothes.. Leudegar and others. Bund. Penance became a theme that could be fully exploited in the literary battle fought over the memoria of those who had left the political arena. 82. Quellen zur karolingischen Reichsgeschichte 1 (Darmstadt. transl. pp. ed. he — or she — might not. ‘But God was propitious and Carloman totally failed to divert to his purpose the steadfast heart of his brother the christian Pepin king of the Franks. Had it been voluntary and therefore honourable. Ebroin. For the many instances in which Einhard’s account has been taken at face value. c. R. Meanwhile. where he led a religious life until he died. and ed. 448–9. 2. p. Davis. p. 168. pp. The English Historical Review 115 (2000). The locus classicus is Einhard’s Life of Charlemagne. L. eager to visit their former lord. in the full understanding than none of these men would enter monastic life forever. 1955). R. 367–8 may serve as a pars pro toto. the question whether Carloman opted out for religious or political reasons is une question mal posée: religious fervour and political expediency were not necessarily at odds. pp. Cf. good/bad penitent — that Carloman’s retreat into monastic life in 747 should be situated. the ‘ordinary’ kind of monastic exile — by means of a mere clerical tonsure — continued to exist. 94. or a matter of despicable coercion? This was the question. 92 Liber Pontificalis.30 (Liverpool. Le Liber Pontificalis I (Paris. Thronsturz. but because of the hustle and bustle of a steady stream of eminent Frankish pilgrims to Rome. Duchesne.X. 30. Noble. Carloman relinquished his royal office and went to Rome — says Einhard. But then again. and then — with his entire family — received the monastic 93 Annales Petaviani s. 12. The Liber Pontificalis reported that Ratchis. J.94 In other words. ed. MGH SS 1. had been made a cleric. to become a monk forever. 100–2. conveniently nearby when they made a pilgrimage to Rome. But what if his brother Pippin had been killed in a hunting accident. cf. some questions should be asked about the rhetoric of the sources usually cited to ‘prove’ Carloman’s exclusively religious motives. G. Krüger. this was not a story with an open end. Pertz. 746. committed his realm and sons into Pippin’s hands and went off to Rome. accompanied by his wife and sons. ed. ‘burning with religious desire’. as Aistulf ’s brother Ratchis did. where many thousands of men met their death. pp.M. A version of Annales Petaviani attributed Carloman’s conversion to his compunction about a crushing defeat in Alemannia. Thronsturz. p. 85. both ended up in Monte Cassino as ‘servants of Christ’. both became pilgrims to Rome.a. 30.324    important visitors paid their respects to their former ruler now in Monte Soracte. “Königskonversionen”. 186. in order to take charge of a chaotic situation?95 There are striking similarities between Carloman and Ratchis: both had a powerful brother. Great men (and women) who disappeared into monastic space did not entirely relinquish their power and status.a. Wallace-Hadrill. MGH SS 1. pp.93 This hardly amounted to praise. Carloman had safely left the corridors of power forever. and the most conspicuous one is that Ratchis’ departure from the political scene — or his reappearance. There are two nearly contemporary ones. But there are also differences.H. so the accusation that Carloman was busily plotting with the Lombards against his brother Pippin is not entirely surprising. 11. Instead. It left the initiative and honour to Carloman. p. but it also hammered home an important point: Carloman left for Rome in order ‘to persevere in the monastic order’. Annales Petaviani s. such qualities might even be enhanced. This was the text upon which Einhard relied. The fourth book of the Chronicle of Fredegar and its continuations (London. by voluntarily leaving the political arena. 95 Bund. c. like the Langobard King Aistulf in 756? Would Carloman then have emerged from Monte Cassino. . 214–9. which took Pippin’s line entirely: Carloman. n. 746. p. 94 Fredegarii continuationes. The same holds true for the Continuation of Fredegar’s Chronicle. 1960). for that matter — was not a contentious issue for contemporary authors. 98 J. Vita Zachariae c.98 For Ratchis. who wrote several generations later and had been raised in the Benedictine monastery of Fulda. however. Andreae monachi chronicon. Fleckenstein. claiming that he did not really know what was behind Carloman’s decision. This. the king of the East Angles. he wielded a stick instead. All that remained by the 820s was a series of skilfull accounts editing out the tension of the late 740s. 97 . 23. as it had been for an Anglo-Saxon king recalled from the monastery to lead his people into battle. until in due course he realised that he had only one option left: to remain in Monte Cassino. is Bede’s vignette of a saintly kind who would not fight with the sword. in much detail. Einhard did much to reinforce this view. 18): Sigebert. pp. It is worth pointing out that Einhard’s chapter on Carloman is preceded by his extremely effective defamation of the ‘do-nothing’ Merovingian dynasty.97 But Carloman’s ‘opting out’ caused real embarassment. Historia ecclesiastia. 233–234. MGH SS 3. Carloman became the one pious exception proving the rule of hard-nosed Frankish Klosterhaft. 702. c. for he had become a monk. Carolingian historians went out of their way to make it clear that Carloman had become a real monk.. 96–121. 434. “Kings who opted out”. De Jong. 154 (Bede. and also by his story about the most infamous 96 Liber Pontificalis. 1974). I. p. Das Einhardkreuz (Göttingen. crowned by Einhard’s disclaimer: he had no idea what had moved Carloman. G. seine Gründung und sein Vermächtnis in Seligenstadt”. that Carloman gave up his secular reign because he burned with longing for the contemplative life. Einhard described the various stages by which Carloman had left the corridors of Frankish power: he exchanged his secular clothes for clerical ones and became a monk in Monte Soracte. ed. Pertz. 631 was enticed back onto the battlefield. ed. rather than simply submitting to clerical tonsure. said Einhard. however. 16. “Einhard. In Samuel’s Image. p.        325 habit. Duschesne. c. but when the world impinged on him too much. Was there a more definitive way to leave the world? Not for Einhard. Then. leading the religious life Einhard credited him with. in: K. 99 Stancliffe. But it appeared. pp. Benedicti S. p. who in c.96 Intimations of political controversy only surfaced a century later.H.99 The same may have held true for Carloman with regard to Aachen. the man’s religious fervour was harnessed to this imagebuilding as well. c. surely. Hauck ed. II. if it was not genuine piety. Thus. 15 and III. in 756 the road from Monte Cassino back to Pavia was but a short one. he retreated to the most sacred monastic space in the Carolingian empire: Benedict’s very own Monte Cassino. A privilegium from Pippin III for St Wandrille is cited. 51–3. Cf. 102 The claim that it was St Bertin that served the last Merovingian as his ‘prison’ crops up in the Gesta of the Abbots of St Wandrille. pp. . rex constitur Francorum. 31 and 34. MGH SS 2. Which monastery? Einhard did not bother to mention a particular place.101 Einhard introduced a much stronger expression: Childeric was ‘in monasterium trusus’ — once more. 1840). the Royal Frankish Annals.326    monastic exile of all: Childeric III. Frühmittelalterliche Studien 8 (1974). Whereas the last Merovingian ruler was dragged off to a nameless monastery. Folcuin (d. ed. 990). p. But along comes Einhard. Laporte (Paris. 101 Likewise: Breviarium Erchanberti. Einhard had a lot of influence in this monastery. went to nameless monasteries. and included a royal charter of 743. “The illusion of royal power in the Carolingian Annals”. Monte Soracte. The only eighth-century source. K. Cartulaire de l’abbaye de Saint-Bertin (Paris. pointedly ante-dating Pippin’s assumption of royal office. proving the point that Childeric had lost all claims to royal honour. either from lack of interest or. The author adds: ‘Cuius filius nomine Theodericus in hoc monasterio anno sequenti clericus effectus collocatus est’. but did not mention Childeric having been ‘thrust’ (trusus) into St Bertin. ed. confirming earlier royal privileges.-H. in an entry written before 830. and tonsured. more likely. Vita Karoli. In other respects as well. p. p. Useless kings. ed. p. say no more than that Childeric was ‘tonsuratus et in monasterio missus’ in the year 750. R. Apart from crediting Pope Stephanus II — consecrated on 26 March 752 — with the king’s deposition. F. MGH SRG 24 (1886). cf. Carloman was merely driven by reli100 Einhard. Monte Cassino. cf. Unde rumor potentiae eius et timor virtutis in universas transiit terras. S. Cf. justly deposed. Guérard. the two chapters seem to be linked by their contrast. c. English Historical Review 115 (2000). 166: ‘qui iussu Stephani Romani pontificis depositus ac detonsus atque in monasterium trusus est’. and thrust into a monastery’. Krüger. cc. Folcuin. depositus tonsusque in monasterio Sancti Audomari qui dicitur Sidiu trusus est’. Et Hildericus rex. However. 1938). B. McKitterick. pp. 77.102 Conversely. as part of his strategy of defamation.100 This brief sentence is packed with powerful statements: all that happened to the hapless last Merovingian king was done by force. “SaintBertin als Grablege Childerichs III und der Grafen von Flandern”. 1–20. ablato principis nomine. Meroingorum ex genere ortus. 328. the last Merovingian ruler ‘who was deposed at the Roman pontiff Stephanus’ orders. when it came to Carloman’s various stages of monastic retreat. and firmly dated as having been issued on 6 June 750: ‘Quo anno idem gloriosus Pippinus ex consultu beati Zachariae papae urbis Romae a Bonifacio archiepiscopo unctus. 1. Einhard named every relevant place: Rome. so it is not surprising that the same strong terminology is used. 43. Loewenfeld. pp. Gesta abbatum Fontanellensium. Gesta abbatum Sithiensium. This had apparently become the official version of the Carolingian usurpation. the author of the Gesta of the abbots of St Bertin recalled that Childeric was buried in St Bertin. Lohier and F. a use of force and loss of honour is implied. 71–80. control over these precious resources of prayer was to be preserved by royal restraint. What seems at first sight to be a straightforward ‘description’ of a withdrawal to the monastery. he made sure to bury them by contrasting Childeric. In both cases. at least in the first years of their monastic exile? If any such memories were still alive when Einhard wrote. On the one hand. Such loci sancti became places of internal exile to the powerful needing to escape from the political arena if they were to save their lives. we have to face the problems posed by the rhetoric of the sources. In view of this ambivalence — and often. consumed by religious fervour. The boundaries between sacred and . but they were by no means royal prisons. with Carloman. Could it be that these two famous chapters attempted to seal off any troubling memories of two rulers who chose the honourable option out — withdrawal into a monastery — while keeping their options open. the purity of monastic prayer represented a crucial source of spiritual power to Merovingian rulers. the concept of monastic prisons is not very helpful. These monasteries were certainly closely linked to royal power. may turn out to be a literary strategy aimed at preserving or destroying the subject’s honour. This is not to say that rulers did not invade the cloister. it might cost them their reputation in the long run. making his way — gradually. They could fulfill this role beause sacred space had become indispensable to the powers that were — as a ‘hands-off’ zone. there is the integration of monastic space into the topography of political power in the Frankish kingdoms. or as involuntary captives in the monastic precincts. the result was the same: two rulers disappeared into monastic space forever. but if they did. Reputations were made or broken by means of depicting monastic exiles either as masters of their own fate. the powerless victim of coercion. By the early seventh century. On the other hand.        327 gious zeal. C This has been an exploration of two interconnected issues. religiously motivated. contention — in the texts informing us about the powerful who disappeared into monastic space. the recipients of immunities and exemptions: sacred islands where royal might was both restricted and reinforced. A group of ‘royal monasteries’ emerged. and of his own volition — to the then most sacred places in Western Christendom. .328    secular space were reinforced in literary battles between saints and kings. Such texts are never explicit about the precise limits and extent of sacred space. these places were closely connected to the secular centres of power. All the same. the former fluidity and double entendre of monastic exile tended to harden into a strictly regulated public penance or as a fully fledged monastic profession. the boundaries between these worlds became less permeable. from inner sanctum to outer precincts. or be killed. Through such instances of indignant outrage. but their lives depended upon the integrity of sacred space. but rulers still needed their ‘time-out zones’ and used them in more traditional ways. a landscape emerges. not because we have any reliable description of the concentric circles of which monasteries consisted. Whenever sacred space was infringed upon. depending on how matters developed. an outburst of protest followed. and intend to return to them in the near future. In fact. but then returned to the political arena. where they might survive. The monastic exiles temporarily became part of the stable world. A religious community without links to the outside world was doomed to disappear. monastic exile was no longer possible. By the ninth century. but because early medieval authors were extremely sensitive to the issue of ‘border-crossing’. and by saints and their communities staying in place. however. sacred space was defined as a ‘hands-off’ zone where the normal rules of power politics. but the fury about ‘invasion of the cloister’ helped to distance worlds that came very near. they lent a measure of stability to volatile political communities. the same held true for a monastery that did not know how to guard the separateness and purity that inspired confidence from outsiders. It is dominated by the secular powerful moving about. however undefined. All of this tension — between versatile political futures and the place-bound ideals of religious life — surfaces in texts dealing with so-called ‘monastic prisoners’. if such boundaries. early medieval authors tended to be vague about the spatial details of the loci sancti that became integrated in the topography of political power. In fact. Gradually. but even more by what was left unsaid. A retreat into monastic space might be both temporary and permanent. The contours of these sacred spaces do become visible. disappeared. I have only scratched the surface of these issues. Monastic exiles could exist by virtue of the proximity of monastic and royal precincts. honour and revenge no longer pertained. all the time and of necessity. Naturalis historia 5. Expositio totius mundi 59 (est ibi finis mundi ). 76 (Gadibus extra orben conditis). 1992). As I shall argue. 1988). of eccentricity. In this physical sense. which itself was seen by imperial authors as an outermost boundary. Nicolet. “Finis Terrae: the land where the Atlantic Ocean begins”. Gallaecia. 1 J. was situated on the furtherst borders of the Roman world. with references to Silius Italicus. Arce. pp. p. L’inventaire du monde: geographie et politique aux origines de l’empire romain (Paris.1 However. this concept of remoteness and distance. Fernández Ochoa ed. Barahona Simoes. C. Díaz This chapter discusses the pivotal role of a special kind of monastic organisation in a peripheral area (Gallaecia) during a period in which this region was affected by change. the most remote province of Hispania. 853–8. Of a general nature. turned into a province by Diocletian’s reform. Época prerromana y romana (Madrid. 4–6 (London. Plinius maior. why do we characterize late ancient and early medieval Gallaecia as a peripheral area? G    The first and commonsensical meaning of periphery is that of an area closest to the outer of a given space perceived as ‘the centre’: an external boundary or region.. 1996). more specifically. in: C.MONASTERIES IN A PERIPHERAL AREA: SEVENTH-CENTURY GALLAECIA Pablo C. Punica 17.637 (terrarum fines Gades). 73. the monasteries depicted in the seventh-century Regula communis functioned as ‘places of power’. . “Orbis Romanus y Finis Terrae”. M. well into the era of the so-called Reconquest. Gallaecia was a finis terrae in the west of the Empire. History of the european ideas 15. These monasteries were able to withstand the might of bishops and local aristocratic landowners. in that they enabled the inhabitants of Galicia to resist these changes and preserve older patterns of community life within the monastic confines. But first we should answer an essential question: what is a peripheral area? Or. Los finisterres atlánticos en la Antigüedad. at the edge of the entire world’ (intra extremam uniuersi orbis Galleciam). 8–9: ‘. 9–10. . Intr. its integration within the structures of the Visigothic kingdom was slow and probably never complete. 829–32. .’ 6 J. Fontaine and Ch. In fact.2 This same sense of remoteness was expressed by Pope Vigilius. Isolated politically during the period of Sueve control. 11–13: ‘. The references are from the edition by R. 1993). . referred to Gallaecia as in ipsa extremitati mundi. but its isolation was not merely a geographical matter. be it in Rome or in the East.6 Gallaecia was therefore situated within the geographical limits of the known world. Burgess. Mattoso. huius occiduae plagae sera processione tandem refulsisset extremitas .5 This is also an acknowledgement of a cultural and political remoteness. 28–31. Vives. 1992). col. Hydatius began his Chronicle by saying that he was writing from ‘the end of the earth’ (extremus plage). . The Chronicle of Hydatius and the Consularia Constantinopolitana. pp. or to an apostolic see that by the seventh century had practically lost all contact with Hispania. J. After the middle of the fifth century. cf. Past & Present 137 (1992).4 Already in the seventh century. De genere monachorum 1.3 This perhaps stands to reason. 4 Ed. 3 Vigilius Papa. 5 Valerius abbas Bergidensis. p. 325. . From the perspective of Rome. Chronica.. Pellistrandi eds. the Gallaecia depicted by seventh-century sources was a Visigothic province largely unaffected by the developments in the rest of the kingdom. 1963).330  . who in 538 replied to a series of letters sent from Braga by Bishop Profuturus. extremo occidui maris Oceani litore exorta . in 561. . . Lucrecius of Braga. Gallaecia’s inhabitants also felt that they were part of a distant world. Migne PL 84. the Profuturus had the care of Christ’s flock in the ‘outer parts of the world’ (extremis mundi partibus). Valerius of Bierzo confirmed that feeling of geographical isolation: . “Concepts of Europe in the early and high Middle Ages”.. in: J. but even with regard to the centre of Visigothic political power then located in Toledo.W. also in Epistola de beatissimae Aetheriae 1. . L’Europe heritière de l’Espagne Wisigothique (Madrid. 66. Epistula ad Profuturum. Intr. .’ and 4. in the context of relating some events that occurred ‘within Gallaecia. Two contemporary accounts of the final years of the Roman Empire (Oxford. “Les Wisigoths dans le Portugal medieval: état actuel de la question”. in ista ultimae extremitatis occiduae partis confinia. . Concilios visigóticos e hispano-romanos (Barcelona-Madrid. not only with respect to an Empire long forgotten. Leyser. J. Its administrative structure 2 Hydatius. in the opening speech of a council held in this metropolitan see. p. and in the monastic context upon which this article centres.  was not only perceived by those writing in the centre of power. but a few years later. 1 and 6. . et Galleciae in urbe toletana . took the kingdom from King Audeca. a. in provincia. . .’ 12 Epistula IX. Suevorum gentem Thesaurum et patriam in suam redigit potestatem et Gothorum provinciam facit. 683. . pp. a. Gallecie vel in cunctis provinciis . an inalienable property associated with the monarchy.’ 8 . the territory over which the 7 Cf. Thompson. . ut terminos huius provinciae Lusitaniae . 229. 590. Galliae vel Gallaeciae Concilium XIII Toletanum. 1969). quilibet infra fines Spanie. 1: ‘Sancta Synodus episcoporum totius Hispaniae Galliae. as is shown by literary texts9 as well as by ecclesiastical10 and legislative documents. omnes ecclesias Spaniae. there was a tacit agreement that a distinct Sueve-Galician aristocracy still existed. c. This could explain why Gregory the Great refered to Reccared as ‘king of the Goths and the Sueves’ (rex Gothorum atque Sueuorum). 666. (. 589. All this become clear from the acts of the Council of Mérida in 666.12 Most likely this special political status of the former Sueve kingdom was the result of a de facto situation. .’ 9 John of Biclar. c. . E.     331 was not adapted until the middle of the seventh century. Chronica. sedem reduceret et restauraret. . in the period following 652. 211–7.’ 11 Leges Visigothorum IX. the treasure and the fatherland of the Sueves to his power.A. . 2. who was taken prisoner and subjected the people. a. a. The Goths in Spain (Oxford. Concilium Emeritensis. 2: ‘Leovegildus rex Gallaecias vastat. suggerente sanctae memoriae sanctissimo viro Orontio episcopo.) hoc etiam adiciens ut de [eo] id unde ad Galliciae metropolim diocesis sui fuerat possessum ille reciperet. . when Recesvinth carried out a general administrative reorganization. .’ 10 Concilium III Toletanum. . . 585.8 It is hard to say whether Gallaecia was thought of as similar to the rest of the territory once subject to Sueve rule. this would mean that the once the Sueve kingdom was subdued. 8: ‘. not of any formal or legal recognition. quamvis longa post tempora. Tomus: ‘. if so. Audecanem regem comprehensum regno privat. . 2: ‘. . 13 John of Biclar. of the patria. with only three left to function. Chronica. making it a province of the Goths’.13 The Sueve kingdom consisted of its treasure. Visigothic sources seem to attribute to Gallaecia a different status and its own idiosyncrasies. Galliae vel Galliciae atque in omnes provincias Hispaniae. The story of the conquest of Gallaecia by Leovigild leaves no doubt as to the method used: ‘King Leovigild laid waste to Gallaecia. . animus eius (Reccesuinth) ad pietatem moverit. a. .7 At time many mints of that territory were apparently closed. while the original provincial borders were redrawn. 8: ‘. Gallie.11 Whether or not these references imply anything more than a stock phrase for defining this part of the kingdom we do not know. quae parrochiae // suae fuerant debita. 18 E.18 still identified by this text as ‘the kingdom of the sueves’. Beiheften der Francia 3 (Sigmaringen.  monarchy reigned. This disintegration is often ascribed to conflicts between monarchs and nobles. Gil. present-day Tuy. These references are brief.332  . Spätantikes und fränkisches Gallien. so that the father had the kingdom of the Goths. pp. The choice of Tude as Wittiza’s seat of power is equally peculiar. ut pater teneret regnum Gotorum et filius Sueuorum’. García Moreno. Probably the city had gained a certain prominence within Gallaecia. fueled by the tradition of the old sedes regia. 1976). An. and which is specified as Gallaecia. El fin de reino visigodo de Toledo. J. 113–49. that of the Sueves’. X. and the son. 585. only Braga. pp. Iste in uita patris in Tudense Hurbe Gallicie resedit ’ See J. 369.L. Crónicas asturianas (Oviedo. probably not only Sueves. considers that there was a lively autonomism of the Sueve kingdom. when centrifugal forces threatened to disintegrate the realm. Chronica. Except for this intriguing passage about Wittiza 14 John of Biclar. Its distinct status apparently continued to be recognized. but no briefer than those concerning the rest of the peninsula.A. 17 L. 33: ‘Uittizza rg.16 We do not know whether this decision was motivated by some political conflict and the weakness of the kingdom in its final years. Moralejo. for after Chindaswinth’s reign. 140–212.14 It is very likely that such situation instability characterized the entire Visigothic period in these northwestern border areas of the realm.15 The chronicle of Alfonso III implies that this happened on the instructions of his father: ‘Wittiza.’ 15 Chronica Albendensia XIV. probably a Sueve aristocrat. but all the subjects of the kingdom. which was the centre of the old Sueve aristocracy and therefore a possible stronghold of resistance. “Residence et capitale pendant le haut Moyen Age”. . Lucus and Tude continued to be mints. in the same year a certain Malaricus. and ordered to live in the city of Tude. The city may have been chosen and promoted by the Visigothic authorities as an alternative to Braga. An isolated reference from the Asturian period tells us that. 16 Adefonsi Tertii Chronica 4 (Rotensis): ‘(Wittiza) quem rex in uita sua in regno participem fecit et eum in Tudensem ciuitatem auitare precepit.17 but we should not rule out separatist tendencies in Gallaecia. 151–88. Ruíz de la Peña. pp. 1985). p. Decadencia y catástrofe. J. 1975). Una contribución a su crítica (Madrid. a. with whom the king while alive shared the realm. and of its people. while his father was alive. Wittiza lived in Tude. Crónicas asturianas. Ewig.I. However. All this was subjected by right of conquest. 6: ‘Malaricus in Gallaecia tyrannidem assumens quasi regnare vult. assumed tyrannical power and almost managed to reign. The way in which historians sometimes jump from so-called ‘superstition’ to well-defined forms of paganism is not sustained by the sources. and on the other. a continuity of ancestral ways of life deeply rooted in rural society.20 The texts simply yield insufficient information to warrant such conclusions. we have no information about later Sueve attempts to regain independence. Hence the ecclesiastic organization of the countryside occurred very late. in: E.     333 and Tude. 19 Concilium I Bracarensis.19 Whether this was a matter of the survival of specific beliefs. M. despite the survival of pre-Roman housing structures. a. Suffice it to say that in the seventh century the region was undeniable in the political periphery. It is almost unanimously accepted that the North and North-West of Hispania were pockets of paganism until practically the end of the Visigothic period. C Its geographical location and political isolation are two aspects of the peripheral status of Gallaecia. Its analysis takes us directly to the role played by the monasteries in this region in the seventh century. or. pp. no episcopal and hierarchical structures were established. or about the need for a military occupation. .’ 20 Cf. Cristianizzazione ed organizzazione ecclesiastica delle campagne nell’Alto Medioevo. Until the end of the sixth century. . Of greater interest to us is the region’s closely related social and cultural separateness. 1980). is a matter for discussion. 1982). 561. in ultimis huius provinicae [regionibus] constituti aut exiguam aut pene nullam rectae eruditionis notitiam contingerunt. (Spoleto. 3–60. ‘Incipit: . this was a result of the peculiar way in which Christianity came to be implanted in the Hispanic North-West. James ed. “Penetración de la Iglesia en los medios rurales de la España tardorromana y visigoda”. . The introduction of Christianity in Gallaecia was a relatively late and difficult process. We are dealing with a province of the Empire with relatively low levels of urbanization. J. pp. more accurately in my view.N. Sotomayor. On the one hand. already in 561 Lucrecius of Braga observed that the most isolated regions of Gallaecia still had not embraced the true faith. Hillgarth. “Popular religion in Visigothic Spain”. 17–53. Visigothic Spain: New approaches (Oxford. of the impact Christianity appears to have had on the social structures in a region where primitive economic relations and group associations still predominated.. “El Parrochiale Suevum: organización eclesiástica. Escribano. Estudios sobre el priscilianismo en la Galicia antigua (Granada.24 The Priscillianist ideas were theologically poor. . Galicia fai dous mil anos. 221–3. 26 Sulpicius Severus. p. see idem. Primera reunión gallega de estudios clásicos (Santiago de Compostela. in: R. and some other customs such as going barefoot. 124. 1998). the first diffusion of Christianity in important areas of Gallaecia at the end of the fourth century and the beginning of the fifth was the work of Priscillianism. L. Congreso Internacional la Hispania de Teodosio. p. C. O feito diferencial galego I. 278–321.22 The success of the followers of Priscillian among the Galician population was largely due to their acquiescence with regard to indigenous practices of magic and prophesying. Alvar ed. Pereira-Menaut ed. Il vescovo Idazio (Catania. 1–82. 1983). Chronicorum II. 23 J. he seems to have been behind the councils held in this city in the years 561 and 572.V. 1981). pp.25 all the same. the practices Priscillian’s followers expressed a radical and challenging rejection of all worldliness.C. M. pp..21 For the rest. 237–42.23 even to the extent that the persistence of such practices and the success of Priscillianism have been seen as two facets of the same reality: the survival of indigenous culture.. but not necessarily heretical. Goosen.J. the bishops had to fight against great landowners who built churches on their estates. Uno storico del V secolo. “L’organisation ecclésiastique du royaume suève au temps de Saint Martin de Bracara”. Achtergronden van Priscillianus’ christelijke ascese (Nijmegen. 1997). the missionary responsible for the conversion of the Sueves. more extensively. Blázquez VI (Madrid. “El éxito de los Priscilianistas: a propósito de cultura y fe en el siglo IV d. Cracco Ruggini. 46. CSEL 1. 1997). in: G. 35–47. (Santiago de Compostela. 1947). Homenaje a José M ª.B. P. Etudes historiques sur la Galice et le Portugal du VI e au XII e siècle (Lisboa-Paris. poder politico y poblamiento en la Gallaecia tardoantigua”. 1. and by the testimony of the accusers of Priscillian’s adherents. pp. thanks to the conciliar action initiated by Martin of Braga. 25 A.334  . 1976).M. Historia 1. Mole. pp. Pérez eds. 24 Cf. p.C.”.. Around this time the Parrochiale Suevum describes a system of churches depending on a group of episcopal sees which were being formed simultaneously. David. arcanis oculta secretis26 or magicarum artium 21 P. This is revealed by the acts of the Council of Braga in 561.  Instead. 41. Teja and C. Cabrera. pp. 2 vols. “Igrexa e Herexia en Gallaecia: O Priscilianismo”. v. Díaz. “Algunas observaciones sobre la neumatología de Priscilianus”. Their taste for isolated religious services of men and women in small convents. 22 Cf. where consecrated wine and bread was kept to be used during Mass. in: J. 1978). which gave rise to the suspicion of superstition and magical arts (superstitio extitiabilis. 1 (Valladolid-Segovia. When. There was no vacant see. his many activities also included the founding of monasteries. Studien zum Priszillianismus. P. From its foundation onwards. traducción (Sevilla. McKenna. 400–800) (Barcelona.32 Hence. Studia Monastica 23 (1981). 1. Braulius of Zaragoza warned Fructuosus of Braga to beware of the corrupt doctrine of Priscillian. “The missionary labors of St Martin of Bracara in 6th century Galicia”. pp. pp. and. See B. on the outskirts of Braga. reveal the resilience of such traditional religious practices. L. pp. Epistula 15. especially his treaty De correctione rusticorum. Hommages à Marcel Renard 2 (Bruxelles. is remembered for his missionary work and his fight against paganism.C. The writings of Martin of Braga. Die Forschung. Sedes regiae (ann. Meslin. which was to become an important centre of monastic culture in the next century. in the mid-seventh century.29 he may have been more worried by its reputed condoning of traditional practice than by any well-defined dogma. Escribano. 512–24. 122–38. pp.V. Ferreiro.. 29 Epistula 44. 30 S.30 Martin of Braga. Cf. der fünfzehnte Brief Papst Leos des Grossen (St.4. 75.     335 profana secreta).M. Whatever the case. 246–59. 31 A. the Sueve people. 171. Ottilien. 2000). 16. 28 M. Iglesia y Estado en el certamen priscilianista. 404–23. the writings of Valerius of Bierzo. 1965). Riesco Terrero. die Quellen. would soon lead to their relentless persecution on the part of the bishops. finally. . Vollman. and a location as close as possible to Braga and the Sueve monarch was considered appropriate for the man who had converted the royal family. Díaz. 11–26. Probably Martin earned his episcopal office as a reward from the Sueve church for his success in converting the king. Gurt eds. 1988). 1938). “El reino suevo de Hispania y su sede en Bracara”. Ripoll and J. “Persistances páiennes en Galice. the acts of the Second Council of Braga of 572 and. even at the end of the seventh century. Causa ecclesiae e iudicium publicum (Zaragoza. p. in: G. 1969). 32 Cf. especially the abbey-bishopric of Dumio. a Pannonian monk who came to Gallaecia from the East. vers la fin du Vie siècle”.27 together with their anti-hierarchical conception of the episcopal office. Paganism and pagan survivals in Spain up to the fall of the Visigothic kingdom (Washington. edición critica. its loss of influence from the middle of the sixth century did not necessarily the eradication of the older beliefs with which Priscillianism had been identified. Epistolario de San Braulia Introdución.31 However. the monastery at Dumio 27 Leo I Papa. 1975). M. the monastery at Dumio was closely connected with the Sueve monarchy.28 The success of Priscillianism in the Hispanic North-West has been explained by its sympathetic attitude to indigenous religious practices. pp. 69–118. Initially this did not create a precedent. 1995). P. CCSL 175. pp. 1985). often with their own ‘Klosterbischof’. La cura pastoral en la España romanovisigoda (Rome. c. 1958).37 but the monasteries were capable of imposing 33 Parrochiale Sueuum 6: ‘Ad Dumio familia servorum’.336  . the introduction of the monasteries offered a model of organization which. as the councils repeatedly pointed out. for it was only shortly before 656 that Fructuosus once more exercised episcopal authority over both Dumio and Braga. where aristocratic monastic foundations. enabled the integration of traditional ways of life into new systems of values. Oliger. The priests.R. The sphere of influence of the bishop of Dumio was defined by the monastic family. hoping that their churches would become centres of faith and religious practice.36 easily adapted to local syncretistic traditions. was equally unusual. Whereas the representatives of the diocesan clergy could only resort to the preaching of the gospel. Les evêques réguliers (Paris-Louvain. pp. Dierkens. considering that they were not known on the continent except in the north of Armorica. M  Dumio’s monastic influence was to be far-reaching. 35 An interesting comparison can be made with the seventh-century Meuse valley. “Das Fortleben des germanisches Heidentums nach der Christianiserung”. helped to contain episcopal power. Dumio possessed an undeniable moral authority resulting from Martin’s prestige. but without any churches or territory over which to exercise its jurisdiction. Fernández Alonso. 900 (Cambridge. in: R. as we shall see. Doubtless the see’s legal status was exceptional . attributes an Irish origin to this type of bishopric. 700-c. p.34 and its position with respect to the bishop of Braga. “Carolingian monasticism: the power of prayer”. 36 J. 37 Cf.35 On the death of the metropolitan bishop Lucrecius of Braga. Martin came to occupy the latter’s see without abandoning his ‘bishopric’ Dumio. de Jong. See A. 411–20. Beiheften der Francia 14 (Sigmaringen. in whose diocese Dumio had been installed. 20.33 which ultimately gained a tremendous authority. La conversione al cristianesimo nell’Europa dell’Alto Medioevo (Spoleto.. with their scant theological training.  became an episcopal see. Kuhn. 34 . Whether bishops managed to conquer rural areas is a matter of debate. Abbayes et chapitres entre Sambre et Meuse (VII e-XI e sciècles): Contribution à l’histoire religieuse des campagnes du haute moyen âge. H. but the monasteries’ authority and success in this respect is indisputable. 1955). 1967). McKitterick ed. M. 625–8. The New Cambridge Medieval History II. pp. syncretisme et culture religieuse populaire au haut Moyen Age. a formula which probably lasted throughout the century. The foundation 743–57. Sobre los orígenes sociales de la Reconquista (Barcelona. the documents of the second half of the seventh century testify to concerted attempts to reinstate some kind of canonical order in monasteries accused of ‘laxity’. in response to Eastern models. p. Vita Sancti Fructuosi (Bracara. It is not the object of this paper to study all the monastic manifestations of the Hispanic North-West. 665) founded a number of monastic communities known from the Vita Fructuosi. pp. Large rural monasteries were more capable of meeting the demands of peasant communities than urban bishops. 1974). this effectiveness was ensured by respect for a monastic rule and a ready submission to the bishop who endorsed it. Vives. Martin and Fructuosus of Braga.C. 1982). 40 M. Künzel. Semana de Historia del monacato cántabroastur-leonés (Oviedo. pp. these centres of religious power were therefore well placed for spreading the gospel to the remotest corners of rural areas. supported by rigid penitential systems. Hillgarth. pp. Díaz y Díaz. For example.40 He also established a monastic rule perfectly suited into these traditions. in Gallaecia Bishop-Abbot Fructuosus (d. 1974). “La organización social de los cántabros y sus transformaciones en relación con los orígenes de la Reconquista”. Concilios visigóticos e hispano-romanos. 1055–69. Vigil. A. These were self-sufficient units in a rural landscape. practical considerations will have mattered as well. “Popular religion in Visigothic Spain”.38 The monasteries. 35–56. pp. G. “Paganisme. the maintenance of the churches had become a problem. R. González Echegaray. Annales ESC 47 (1992). However. In many places remote from the episcopal centre. 38 Cf. 39 Cf.39 As we shall see. But the latter reasserted themselves in due course. As a result. adapted to the canonical and monastic systems which had proliferated north of the Alps. as King Egica stated in the Tomus presented before the sixteenth Council of Toledo in 693. Réflexions de méthode”. “El monacato en la España nórdica en su confrontación con el paganismo (ss. The extraordinary proliferation of monasteries in seventh-century Gallaecia is usually explained by the missionary zeal of the two ‘founding fathers’. c. 484–5. to the extent that buildings fell into ruin and the daily liturgy was no longer carried out. 38. and neither shall we deal here with those communities which. however. . 188–92. VI–VII). capable of attending to their own spiritual needs and those of their surroundings.     337 more or less uniform standards of behaviour. fulfilled a role they also assumed elsewhere in Europe. with greater or lesser flexibility. Barbero and M. The Regula communis is generally thought to have been written around 660. which had been put into practice in Fructuosus’ own foundations. Studia Monastica 3 (1961). 645). and should be taken into account. Santos Padres españoles II. Hence the origin of heresy and the schism and great controversy over the monasteries.43 41 A. 1971). Mundó.338  .41 But here we are interested in another category of texts. 172–208. some have the custom of organizing monasteries in their own homes. harnessing and adapting them to new beliefs. The first document which merits our attention is the famous Regula communis. (Madrid. Campos and I. But we do not call those dwellings monasteries. children. although he believes that the disciplinary reference would refer to the Regula communis. and of joining together in a community with their wives.’ See: Campos and Roca. . Inde surrexit haeresis et schisma et grandis per monasteria controuersia. It was a series of instructions issued by an assembly of abbots who attempted to ‘canonize’ the many spontaneous monastic initiatives just mentioned. 42 J. Nos tamen haec non dicimus monasteria sed animarum perditionem et ecclesiae subuersionem. pp. but also ways in which the monasteries served as a focus of regional traditions. probably followed a similar pattern. Religious and social conflict was important during this period. and of consecrating churches in their own homes with the names of martyrs. 166. Santos Padres españoles II (Madrid. or Rule of the Abbots. 1971).42 Apparently it should offer an alternative for the rigid monastic system outlined by Fructuosus in his earlier monastic rule (c.  of the monastery of Samos shortly after 650. We get to know more about such ‘unruly’ monasteries from the two first chapters of the Regula communis. These reveal not only the variety of responses to monastic initiatives in Gallaecia. The inflexibility of this system was unacceptable to the monasteries organized outside the monastic traditions represented by Fructuosus. but rather the ruin of souls and the perversion of the church. the Regula communis was probably a document arising from specific circumstances. through fear of hell. the first chapter is of particular interest in this respect: Indeed. “La inscripción visigoda del monasterio de Samos”. 43 Regula communis 1: ‘Solent enim nonnulli ob metum gehennae in suis sibi domibus monasteria componere et cum uxoribus filiis et seruis atque uicinis cum sacramenti conditione in unum se copulare et in suis sibi ut diximus uillis et nominee martyrum ecclesias consecrare et eas tale nominee monasteria nuncupare. p. Roca. serfs and neighbours under the steadfastness of an oath. on the initiative of Ermefredus of Lucus. 157–64. Of uncertain authorship. although attributed by some scholars to Fructuosus. and of calling them monasteries. pp. . Bishko44 believes that these monasteries. were fostered by a segment of the secular clergy strongly opposed to the Bishop-Abbot of Dumio. and plot with full intention so as to divulge falsely what they have not heard against us and spread and maintain publicly in the squares what we have not committed. Vives. 45 Regula communis 20 [De fugitiuis]: ‘Quod si et ipsi laici suo eum recipierint consortio et pariter cum eo contra monasterium exarserint in contumeliam.46 With regard to the control of monastic life. those who leave the monastery because of their own vices are received with applause. and with the pretext of holiness seek the emoluments of wealth (. but rather serve the church as paid workers. cuncti a nostra ecclesia expellantur et nullo nobiscum karitatis foedere copulentur. pp. and that the monasteries and monks under his rule lived in constant struggle against other communities supported by another part of the clerical hierarchy mentioned in Rule’s second chapter: Some presbyters [priests] have the custom of feigning holiness. protected and defended by them. Bishko. 2.J. 371–8. Bishko’s argument rests on the reference to ‘heresy and schism’ in the first chapter.). . like the presbyterial ones cited in the second chapter of the Regula communis. of worldly princes or of the people. They did not live an industrious life in the monastery (. just as they rejoice in their advantages. . Spanish and Portuguese monastic history. 22. (. . as well as on chapter 20 which speaks of nostra ecclesia. etc.’ 46 Regula communis 2. p. . 7 and 8. these texts supposedly reflect the confrontation of two divergent ethical conceptions.47 But the first chapters of the Regula communis may also reflect a conflict of jurisdiction between a monastic congregation sponsored from 44 Ch. Furthermore. cherished by opposing factions in the Galician bishopric: an ascetic movement pitted against a more worldly group. and they do so.). 1984).45 He assumes that the Bishop-Abbot of Dumio was the episcopus sub regula mentioned in the Regula communis. abuse of episcopal power. not precisely for the sake of eternal life. 4.J. 1. simony. worldliness. quousque ueritatem cognoscant. specially. There a whole series of disciplinary errors were noted: acceptance of anticanonical liturgical practices. These. congratulate themselves on our misfortunes. . Concilios visigóticos e hispanoromanos. as if we had been caught in misdeed. Incipit and cc.     339 Ch. 600–1300 (London. “The pactual tradition in Hispanic monasticism”. 47 See. which was denounced by the Third Council of Braga held in 675.). . they preach what they do not observe and follow the common way of secular bishops. et nobiscum stantes iniurias ecclesiae uindicantes pari deuotione consurgant. and the claims of bishops who felt their rights were infringed upon. ita ut omnem metropolim provinciae Gallaeciae cunctosque episcopos populosque conventus ipsius omnemque curam animarum et rerum Bracarensis ecclesiae gubernanda suscipiens ita conponat atque conservet . From then on. as Martin had done a century before. The latter must have considered Dumio’s pre-eminance as a flagrant violation of their episcopal prerogative. should be in charge of the church of Braga. If we think of the Regula communis as an initiative of Fructuosus. After all. as is revealed in the second chapter. . Vives. this created a favourable climate for the proliferation of monasteries following the Regula communis. which had given Dumio renewed influence. 321. the subscriptions to ecclesiastical councils seem to indicate a conflict. The continuation of this situation must have been subject to the approval of the monks 48 Concilium X Toletanum.48 Fructuosus was probably chosen for this exalted role by virtue of his prestige. this must have happened before 675. as well its pastoral care and the administration of ecclesiastical property. . when Leudigisus was the metropolitan bishop presiding over the Third Council of Braga. and of a monastic congregation backed by Dumio. the bishop of Braga. ‘Item Decretum pro Potamio episcopo in eodem concilio: venerabilem Fructuosum ecclesiae Dumiensis episcopum conmuni omnium nostrorum electione constituimus ecclesiae Bracarensis gubernacula continere. 656. conflict also raged over the control of donations and the management of charities. with substantial influence in other dioceses. possibly over efforts on the part of Braga to absorb Dumio. Fructuosus position as a bishop in two sees depended on his personal prestige.340  . so that by assuming leadership of the church of Braga he will thus hold together and preserve the entire metropolitan province of Gallaecia and all its bishops and peoples. p.’. we do not know when Fructuosus died. and declared: This is what the council decreed concerning Bishop Potamio: with the full agreement of all of ours we have decided that the venerable Fructuosus. Furthermore. . The Tenth Council of Toledo (656) was attended by Fructuosus in his capacity as the metropolitan of Gallaecia. However.  Dumio. we must keep in mind that shortly before 656 Fructuosus once more joined the see of Dumio to that of Braga. Concilios visigóticos e hispano-romanos. bishop of the church of Dumio. When Fructuosus gained the metropolitan see and thus became the head of the Galician church. who had confessed to fornication. It issued a decree deposing Potamio. a. in the wake of the removal of Sisibert of Toledo. 681. whereas two years earlier he had done so exclusively for Braga. when the Sixteenth Council of Toledo (693) confirmed these new appointments. the conflict. Dumio was represented by Vincentius and Braga by Faustinus. may well have induced the monks to demand. when the Fifteenth Council of Toledo gathered. and the monastic confederation led by Dumio on the other. In our view. but in 688. for we know that the bishops of this general council took a dim view of a monastery that was also an episcopal see. once more. Vives. . revoked a decision from the times of Wamba. Felix signed as bishop of Braga. pp. Concilios visigóticos e hispano-romanos. Vives. 392. was appointed as metropolitan of Braga. but they are in fact only of secondary importance. a. by which the Monastery of Aquis had become an episcopal see.50 However. losing control of it meant relinquishing authority in a substantial part of the Galician church. p. After thirty years of unification. This marked a climax in the ongoing tension between episcopal jurisdiction on the one hand. for they loom large in present-day ecclesiastical history. a. making it clear that he was also bishop of Dumio. Felix. who would not renounce their episcopal rights unless they had a good relationship with their metropolitan bishop. The solution of the problem cannot have benefited Dumio.     341 of Dumio. a bishop of their own. 4. c. a bishop of Dumio appeared on the scene once more. for the see of Braga. it is also clear that at this stage the monastic congregation at Dumio was an extremely powerful organization. taken on the initiative of the King. ‘N ’ We have paid some attention to these debates. Concilios visigóticos e hispano-romanos. 693. 513–5. Subsequently. Decretum iudicii ab universis editum. This may not always have been the case. 50 Concilium XII Toletanum. and the bishop of Porto.49 We do not know whether these moves were used to resolve the conflict mentioned above. Faustinus was transferred to Hispalis (Seville). In 684 another council was held in Toledo and the see was represented by an abbot. once Liuva had died. the tension between different types 49 Concilium XVI Toletanum. In 683 Liuva subscribed the acts of the Thirteenth Council of Toledo as bishop of Braga and Dumio. pp. and elected as abbot someone who would allow them their whims. J. Bracara Augusta 21 (1967). putting them under the guidance of a bishop who ‘lived by the Rule’ (per Regulam uiuit or who sub Regula uiuit — probably the bishop of Dumio. 52 Cf. as we have said). a rigid abbatial authority was put into place. did not want to be subjected to any superior. et mensuales laetanias strenue celebrent .342  . A. Orlandis. quia suo arbitrio uiuunt nulli senioreum uolunt esse subiecti (.51 or perhaps under the supervision of more than one bishop. diverged from the essential principles of Christian charity. pp. it was said. . idem. 107–25.’ These assemblies of abbots were not a novelty but acquired genuine significance here. 53 Regula communis 10: ‘Secundo ut per capita mensium abbates de uno confinio uno se copilentur loco. 10 and 14). 3. who follows I. living as they pleased.52 This discipline was to be guaranteed by monthly synods of abbots. “El movimiento ascético de San Fructuoso y la congregación monástica dumiense”. Mundó. it was decided that only free men or ex-serfs with a charter of liberty could enter the 51 Cf. they had no stable leadership. sought worldly profit. p. Estudios sobre instituciones monásticas medievales (Pamplona. Everyone should stay away from these communities.53 The Rule criticized two kinds of monasteries. where the abbots gathering in different regions.J. 54 Regula communis 1: ‘.54 the authority of a superior with due qualifications was to be established. Das Pactum des Hl. Bishko. 63–4. cf. To counter these. and others that apparently emerged spontaneously. . In order to prevent indiscriminate access to monastic life. Ch. To oppose those who. . 19–20. (cc. pp. and its members were solely concerned with maintaining a wife and children. neighbours and their servants. Estudios sobre instituciones monásticas medievales. and neither should they be imitated. Herwegen. 77. pp. . In its first two chapters the Regula communis describes two kinds of ‘reprehensible’ monasteries: those built in the cities by priests with a view to profit. Patrum”. can be explained differently. 55–60. To end this situation an attempt was made to subject the ‘spontaneous’ monasteries to a discipline. . 1907). “Episcopus sub regula or episcopi sub regula? St Fructuosus and the monasticized episcopate in the peninsular West”. Fruktuosus von Bracara Ein Beitrag zur Geschichte des Suevisch-Westgotischen Mönchtums und seines Rechtes (Stutttgart. “Las congregaciones monásticas en la tradición suevo-gótica”. . “Les ánciens synodes abbatiaux et les Regulae SS. Studia Anselmiana 44 (1959). “The pactual tradition in Hispanic monasticism”.) talem praeesse sibi abbatem desiderant ut ubi se uoluerint conuertere quasi cum benedisctione suas uoluntates faciant’. yet when we unravel the disciplinary content of its subsequent chapters we find that its most important target consisted of the apparently very threatening monastic associations of families. The latter. . 5. 1971). 102. and above all the appearance of those monasteries created by an accumulation of families and neighbours.  of monasteries. p. idem. Ultimately. But it soon became clear that the Rule imposed a discipline that was at loggerheads with more traditional models of monastic life. Orlandis. this system would produce so-called double monasteries. albeit within severe limits. the separation of sexes is regulated as well as the relationship between parents and children under seven years old. Clearly boys and girls will live in the same monastery. 57 Regula communis 13: ‘Solent nonnulli prosuis uxoribus atque filiis aut etiam quibusque propinquis curam habere more pietatis plerique uero qui non sunt in talibus implicati pro alimento sunt solliciti. their placing and conduct when meeting at a religious service. Throughout this long and detailed chapter. According to the Rule. “Los orígenes del monaquismo dúplice en España”. would submit themselves obediently to the discipline of the abbot (cc. 492. 123–63. including serfs. The latter were expected to be instructed in the Rule ‘so they may be prepared. whether they are boys or girls.57 In a context where the illness of a monk was foreseen it was established: 55 A. Cf. La cura pastoral en la España romanovisigoda. but also larger groups of relations and dependents. not only families in the sense of parents and small children entered these monasteries. “En torno a la Regula Monachorum y su relación con otras reglas monásticas”. It is evident that these regulations were meant for an environment that accepted the monastic profession of entire families. Linage Conde. for the monastery where they will live in the future’ (ut siue sint pueri siue puellae monasterio prouocentur. 34. who understands that the Regula communis was already in its origins. the continuation of family ties within the religious community was taken into account. 4 and 5). Fernández Alonso. p.55 The sixth chapter of the Regula communis foresaw the possibility of men entering the monastery with their wives and children: ‘How men should live without danger with their wives and children in the monastery’ (Qualiter debeant uiri cum uxoribus ac filiis absque periculo uiuere in monasterio). In later chapters (cc. as we have pointed out. 56 J.’ . p. ubi habitare futuri erunt). the regular meetings should first strive to correct ‘the many men’ who showed concern for their wives and children and even for other relations. Estudios sobre instituciones monásticas medievales. pp. who.     343 monastery. and so on. also held true of the Regula Fructuosi that was so severe with ‘anti-canonical’ practices. 15. Bracara Augusta 21 (1967). 16 and 17) some practical arrangements for the separation of the sexes are worked out: the conditions under which men and women can see each other. destined to these double monasteries.56 Moreover. moreover. something which. tolluntur ex familiis sibi pertinentibus subulci. carried away by an illusory idea of charity. But if one of them should suffer weakness. nor wife. having later lost their fervour. the Regula communis by no means tried to eradicate these collective professions. atque de possessionibus parvuli. it did so in a way very similar to the one just observed: We have found that in not very cautious monasteries those who entered with their goods.’ 60 Regula communis 1. nor relation. nor sister. seek with great infamy the world they left and return to it like dogs to vomit. also occurred among those reorganized by the Rule. they carry off each others’ goods that. together 58 Regula communis 17. but with insults. sticks and threats. and try.58 The first chapter of the Rule criticized the often less than voluntary monastic professions made by serfs. If one of the aforementioned women should happen to be sent with the abbess with some medicine.59 Yet as far as we can see. it emphasizes a particular and peculiar aspect of those making their profession: Estranged from the very neighbours to whom they had bound themselves by oath. nor a female stranger or a female slave nor any other kind of woman should care for the men during their illness. the text sought to ‘canonize’ them. And not simply.  We order that all sick monks should lie in male monasteries and we order that neither mother. de diversisque gregibus dorseni. . But who were the men and women who made these collective professions? Once more. she shall not be able to visit him without a male nurse. presented as characteristic of these arbitrarily established monasteries. they separate with intense quarrels and disagreements. atque falso nomine monachi nuncupantur. qui pro officio supplendo inviti tondentur et nutriuntur per monasteria.344  . they resort to the relations that they left in the outside world for them to help them with weapons. 695). nor daughter. we turn to the Rule and related documents. . We order the same regarding the men. De genere monachorum 1: ‘.60 This situation. nor remain next to him. and furthermore. Instead. a theme also taken up by Valerius of Bierzo (d. had previously put together to use in common. N   When the first chapter of the Regula communis condemns local monasteries set up without control. c. 59 . pp. relied on the support of their relations to recover it. sufficient for scarcely three months. so it should be supplemented with livestock. ‘in rough and steep mountains and inaccessible valleys’ ( fragosa et abrupta montium et inaccessibilia uallium). et insuper uix tribus mensibus per pleraque monasteria abundarentur. . 523–47. García Fernández. by which most ecclesiastical institutions and more ‘central’ monasteries lived.63 Something similar may have pertained in an earlier age. Annales ESC 27 (1972). Gurevic. si sola cotidiana fuissent paxamacia in hac prouincia plus omnibus terris laboriosa. it seems clear that those making their profession in this type of monastery were not really aware from the start that a monastic profession implied a renunciation of worldly property. a part of a patrimony handed over through the generations. 18) that those who wish to enter the monastery must first distribute all their riches among the poor. “Sobre los orígenes del paisaje agrario gallego”. . 62 . Estudios geográficos 129 (1972). It is very likely that the contribution of each of the members who entered the community was essential for its maintenance. “Représentations et attitudes à l’égard de la propriété pendant le haut moyen âge”. 61 Regula communis 18. probably with the intention of re-appropriating what they had contributed. Of a more general nature A. these newly professed monks who renounced their vows seem to have harboured notions of ownership that were very different from those we know from late Roman law or the Leges Visigothorum. or by the collective use of undivided public areas. its maintenance was more important than the private interest of the family member who benefited from it by association. pp.’ 63 J. These may have been connected with the agricultural or grazing practices of local communities. Rather these were communities situated in marginal areas. this does not seem to have been common practice. Despite the brevity of these references.     345 with their relations. 20). calling upon secular judges and devastating the monasteries with men of arms. to snatch back what they had taken to the monastery. The Regula communis evokes conceptions of property involving extensive communal rights.62 Furthermore. as we read in the text.61 This situation is described again with regards to fugitive monks (c. who. Later tradition in Galicia considered the family house as something sacred. 753–63. these were not large foundations with an abundant original patrimony based on a large estate. Regula communis 9: ‘. Here agriculture yielded only a meagre livelihood. the Rule says. Although the Rule points out (c. such as a concern that those who wish to enter the monastery should leave their goods to the poor and not to any relative. King. in a more general way. 222. . non propinquo. ties and loyalties of kinship still generated lasting solidarity. 8). non liberis . We have already seen some examples of this. nostalgia. nor children’ (non dedit patri.64 This observation is correct if we analyse the contents of the great majority of Visigothic sources. non fratri. so as to avoid affection for one’s relatives (propinquitatis affectum. Regula communis 13.D. A first reference lists those to whom a professing monk must not leave his goods: ‘He should not give it to his father. children and other relatives. Apart from being more virutuous. according to customary affection’ (solent nonnulli pro suis uxoribus atque filiis aut etiam quibusque propinquis curam habere more pietatis). their relatives. it is said that ‘many are in the habit of caring for their wives. . monastic discipline and the effective exercise of abbatial authority. with its irregular ‘neighbourhood’ monasteries. nor adoptive son. nor brother. 1972).D. in the Iberian peninsula of the seventh century the individual could no longer count on an effective network of kinship. Likewise there is mention of the elderly who retire to the monastery. their brothers and blood relations and 64 65 P. especially the legislative ones. King maintained. 4). King’s observation about increasing individualism does not seem to hold true.  As P.65 These attachments are very human. Law and society in the Visigothic kingdom (Cambridge. and others make similar claims for their parents. .346  . Yet in the world we encounter in the Regula communis. or a desire to see their relations once more in those who had converted to monastic life. nor mother. 13) the Rule discusses the monks’ vanity about their family connections: ‘one boasts about the nobility of his genealogy and lineage. In the Regula communis we find several references to this subject. non filio adoptiuo. non uxori. their cousins. and beyond affective emotions. a donation to the poor would be a more effective way to renounce one’s property than handing it over to a family member. Here. p. nor wife. On at least three occasions the Rule describes what these ties of kinship were like. non consanguineo. when the sins and wickedness of monks is discussed. and induced compassion. c. c. and most likely communities of patrimonial interests tended to extend beyond the restricted family circle. Elsewhere (c. (c. non matri. embedded in more general statements about the patrimonial interests of the monastery. nor blood relation.. or. 4). nor relative. 67 This is probably because the underlying social reality the Regula communis reflects diverged from the more general pattern in the Iberian peninsula. propinquum uel extraneum . filia. within the context of Gaul. propinqua. germanis.’ (c. wife. full sister. while the persons who collectively form the group are known as propinqui or parentes. . It should also be noted that the Regula communis has a more elaborate terminology for degrees of kinship than any other Western monastic rule. . is totally different: ‘. genealogia does not appear in any other Rule. Le Jan. see R. 68 Cf. a phrase which perhaps indicates the more encompassing solidarity leading to a predominance of collective interests. however. A case in point is propinquus. 67 Cf. .M. alius de germanis. that of the south of Hispania. 2 vols. . . Essai d’anthropologie sociale (Paris. pp. Likewise. the meaning of terms denoting ‘family’ seems to have a broader scope. stranger. relative. at times. 1978). Past & Present 45 (1969). ‘. Clement. a document transmitted together with the Regula communis with which we will deal below. whose context. alius de cognatis.A. and the expression propinquus is used once by Isidore of Seville and by Aurelian and Caesarius of Arles (as opposed to eight times in the Regula communis and another mention in the Pactum). J. 18). uxor. Léxique des anciennes règles monastiques occidentales. cognatis uel propinquiis . . These terms can have had a special meaning in local tradition which now eludes us.’ (c. the Rule sums up the possible relationships that might be involved: ‘mother.66 This broad spectre is best expressed in the already mentioned reference to someone taking pride in his ‘genealogy and people’. . . who shows how cognatio. “Early medieval social groupings: The terminology of kinship”. 24). ancilla) (c. 11–2. The terminological problems are evident. whereas the consanguinei can still be found occasionally. daughter. On the terminology of kinship.     347 the like’ (alius de genealogia et de sua gente fatetur esse princeps. alius de parentibus.68 66 This opposition is likewise found in Regula Isidori. the Pactum. which covers all possibilities. or kindred. . D. Bullough. (Steenbrugge. 159–78. a more general list of forbidden connections is mentioned: cum parentibus. 1995). . genealogia and consanguinitas are terms used in the sense of kin-group. Part of the terminology conforms to that of that found in the Leges Visigothorum. but clearly that the concept of the late Roman family is not very useful in the Galician context. . slave’ (mater.. extranea. especially if it is used in opposition to extraneum. alius de fratribus et consanguineis et idoneis). 19). filiis. parentibus uel extraneis . When making it clear that a sick monk should not be attended by any woman. Famille et pouvoir dans le Monde Franc (VII e –X e siècle). germana. pp. p. 572. 48–50. 3. from the analysis of 89 of these. Isidore of Seville. Members of a village community considered themselves related to each other.70 To sum up. David. the Auregenses72 and Aunonenses. Piel deduced that 11 were personal names.69 Relatives and uicini joined together to form part of the monasteries denounced in the first chapter of the Rule. Historia gothorum. Chronica. vandalorum et suevorum 91. and it probably corresponded to a specific level of social development. given the level of endogamy.73 which were strong enough. 71 Bullough. pp. 70 J. 12. These peoples are not mentioned again. Orígenes de la familia moderna (Barcelona. “Les communautés villageoises du Nord de la Péninsule Ibérique au Moyen Age”.A. but in the following century the Sueves still faced the Runcons. and there existed a very powerful indigenous substratum. 55–77. a.71 S     This seems to have been the situation that the Regula communis bears testimony to. ed. 72 Hydatius. In this respect. They also had the ability to get into contact with the Visigoth king in Gaul.75 This text gives a total of 132 place names. Flaran 4 (1982). 13 episcopal sees and 119 churches. 75 CCSL 175. Chronica 197. as was the case of the Aunonenses with whom the Sueve kingdom was forced to sign a peace treaty.20. 74 John of Biclar. The existence of such villages is confirmed in the Hispanic north in the early middle ages. one should realize that for a long time in rural areas ‘relations’ and ‘friends’ tended be confused. “Early medieval social groupings: The terminology of kinship”. 27 Roman-Latin generic 69 J. 73 Hydatius. 411. according to the chronicler.74 Martin of Braga observed how deeply rooted traditional beliefs were.348  . 1979). García de Cortazar. When in the fifth century Hydatius wrote his chronicle. which.L. ‘in a traditional society the only true friends a man can have are those linked to him by ties of blood’. Chronica 229. to maintain a prolonged and even successful armed conflict with the Sueve kings. Flandrin. P.  One might wonder whether these relationships were a matter of communities defined by kinship. as revealed in the already mentioned Parroquiale suevum. 235 and 243. was often true. there were indigenous groups in Gallaecia. or of villages with strong ‘neighbourly’ interests. . pp. Romanische Forschungen 71 (1959). pp. however. 319–25. “La comunidad hereditaria y la partición de la herencia en el derecho medieval español”. J.77 These were communities in which social. Montanos Ferrín. L. E. Hinojosa y Naveros. 160–7. and at least ‘the neighbourhood monastery’ denounced in the first chapter. . T. Martínez Gijón. Torelli and J. together with 11 mediaeval interpolations. Coarelli. Uroz Sáez eds. Les communautés familiales (Paris 1963). 245–59. Divisio Theodemiri ”. G. Dialoghi di Archeologia 1–2 (Roma. this situation prevailed.78 In Galicia. have ethnic origins. 221–302. The family and social relationships mentioned in the Regula communis confirm these observations.79 G      We have tried to sketch a context for the people who organized themselves in the communities regulated by the Regula communis. to continue throughout the post-Roman centuries. seem to have been part of a rural population inhabiting marginal areas..76 The first impression is that the rural area and its social reality to which the text refers had a mainly non-Romanized substrate. 1977). J. Anuario de Historia del Derecho Español 27 (1957). where relatively primitive social relations still predominated. pp. Pereira-Menaut. “Cambios estructurales versus romanización convencional. pp. Conquista romana y modos de intervención en la organización urbana y territorial. in: F. La familia en la alta edad media española (Pamplona. Piel. González and J. This of course does not only hold true for Gallaecia alone. Obras II (Madrid. and furthermore that at least 19 of these names. Goody. In these regions. p. J. pp. pp. economic and family life had never adapted to Roman influence. “La comunidad patrimonial de la familia en el derecho español medieval”. but for any extensive and largely inaccessible mountain area relying on hunting and livestock for its sustenance.M. The members of the monastic communities the Rule attempted to regulate. idem. 1983). 15–6. if a new church had to be named. 85–100. But 76 J. pp. pp. Glick. the name of a people (or of the segment of a people) was preferred over a place name. Cf. 1980). La transformación del paisaje político en el Norte de Hispania”. Gaudemet. 79 Cf.F.     349 names and 51 pre-Roman names without etymology. Estudios medievales de Derecho Privado (Sevilla. “Callaecia”. 77 This strength of the elements that we have called primitive is not unanimously accepted. Islamic and Christian Spain in the early Middle Ages: Comparative perspectives on social and cultural formation (Princeton. E. Estudios sobre la Tabula Siarensis (Madrid. 137. 1992). 331–45. M. “Über die Namen der sog. “La comunidad doméstica en España durante la Edad Media”. 78 Cf. Arce eds. pp. 1988). 295–321. in: J. The development of family and marriage in Europe (Cambridge. 161–328.. 1979). García de Valdeavellano. pp. 1955).  why did these monasteries play such a prominent role? Only by addressing this question we can understand the place of these powerful communities in the world of late antique and early medieval Gallaecia and their significance as ‘places of power’. These monasteries provided new forms of social solidarity in a rapidly changing world. Chronica 240. Hyadatus’ Aunonenses can probably be identified with the church of Aunone.350  . Valerius. as well as the organization of family and neighbourhood communities in monastic style. By the time Valerius wrote. but apparently the ensuing conflict of loyalties did not affect the aristocracy’s power and status. We began our argument by pointing out the marginal or peripheral nature of Gallaecia. On the other extreme of the social spectrum. was a sign of this transition. This may indicate a process of territorialization. In fact. a brief description of ancestral and ‘popular’ practices sufficed. our brief survey of indigenous Galician culture from the fifth to the seventh centuries reveals qualitative and quantitative changes. among the large land-owning aristocracy.80 other events make it clear that some Galician aristocrats were willing to cooperate with the Sueves. By the beginning of the seventh century such ethnic groups seem to have disappeared. the development that took place from the fifth to the seventh century seems to have followed generally known patterns. however. imply stagnation. the traditional society was breaking down. This marginality did not. 194 and 225. and the West in general. or that there was no similarity to processes of development known in the rest of the Iberian peninsula. and the Regula communis. Although some events might lead us to think the Sueves attacked or killed the representatives of this social group.81 In the following centuries the large 80 81 Hydatius. Whereas in the fifth century such ‘peoples’ still represented military force and autonomous political capacity. mentioned in the Parrochiale among the churches of the diocese of Tude. no longer mentions them. Hydatius. or involvement in longdistance trade and cultural contacts. who gave by far the best description the rural environment of Gallaecia. Chronica 191. Most likely. their names had turned into a mere identifying labels by the sixth century. it did not mean that there was no familiarity with classical forms of social and spatial organization. . The invasions of the fifth century probably threw the Galician aristocracy into a temporary state of confusion. ). pp.85 hit a hard blow at traditional arrangements of property. Disturbances were caused by relatives who came to recover property contributed by the newly professed. since they administrated these churches and managed them. cc. p.’ 84 Vives. . the run-away monks fought over patrimonies they had donated 82 Concilum II Bracarensis. whom he captured with his wife and children. Concilios visigóticos e hispano-romanos.84 Evidently in this period the accumulation of land on the part of the local aristocracies and the church was accomplished at the expense of the small landowners and the peasant communities. Its huge fortune and the size of its properties can be deduced from the will of Abbot Ricimiro. as well as the breaking up of the undivided patrimonies which were essential for maintaining the peasant community and the solidarity of the kin-group. forthcoming. . Chronica. 322–4. These conflicts are implicit in the text of the Regula communis.     351 landowners occupied an essential position in the social network of the kingdom. Salamanca. a. upon leaving. Concilios visigóticos e hispano-romanos. Most likely it meant the appropriation of common pastures. 1996). Aspidium loci seniorem cum uxore et filiis captivos ducit opesque eius et loca in suam redigit potestatem. revoked by the Tenth Council of Toledo held in 656. The church itself controlled large areas of land. 3: ‘Leovegildus rex Aregenses montes ingreditur. 575. Their unquestionable economic autonomy was accompanied by an undeniably important role in religious affairs. . loci seniorem . 83. . 85 R. Frighetto. ignoring diocesan discipline. 5 and 6. the chronicler defined him as ‘the lord of the place’ (. When Leovigild was carrying out his campaigns against the frontier of the Sueve kingdom. . his power must have been based on this wealth and the accumulation of landed property. its wealth included large monasteries. de la Península Ibérica en época visigoda.83 Whether the man in question was a large Galician-Roman landowner or an indigenous aristocrat.82 They probably also had a large measure of autonomy in the fiscal and political domain. and the first chapter of the Rule reveals the instability of these pseudo-monasteries where. among which Dumio was particularly conspicuous. This process. he came up against a certain Aspidius. they built churches on their lands and had so much power that they came into conflict with the bishops. Panorama económico-social del NO. and ultimately the absorption of entire peasant communities into the landowner’s patronage. Vives. 83 John of Biclar. La obra de Valerio del Bierzo (Tesis Doctoral. which is evident from the writings of Valerius of Bierzo. family life. as well as of the De genere monachorum by Valerius and the Consensoria. .). . pp. at least not ‘religious’ in the way a monastic profession required. This ‘a priori’ needs to be demonstrated.” (Si certe aliquis insequutor monasterii accesserit et aliquid auferre conauerit . A close reading of the Regula communis and the criticism it met. American Journal of Philology 69 (1948). Of those who professed to the Rule. their behaviour was comparable to that of lay people and worldly princes (c. .  to the monastery. . 1). The sudden and violent attacks suffered by the communities under the Regula consensoria monachorum86 were all signs that previous patterns of property ownership were breaking down. Migne PL 66. Díaz. It was necessary to accommodate elements that did not fit monastic tradition: cohabitation of the sexes. 90–4. and the care of the helpless elderly of the community. It also transpires that the monastic space envisaged was not a unity. After all. 1987). 993–6.J. a process to which the monastic organisation contributed as well. but were driven by weakness. felt that this attack would respond to the same cause reflected in chapter 18 of the Regula communis. pp. From the more general chapters of the Rule it becomes clear that economic order was both of major importance and discipline difficult to impose. and thus sought to gain more than was possible in the world outside. the very notion of irrevocable donations to a monastic community by an individual was directly opposed to the concept of undivided peasant patrimonies. 382–3.C. Allegedly. The first criticism of the authors of Regula communis was that some had joined forces for fear of hell. . . incursio repentina aut hostilitas . .87 86 Regula consensoria monachorum 7: ‘. they were scared of impending death and anguished by illness. Bishko. Formas económicas y sociales en el monacato visigodo (Salamanca. 18). Ch. where the relatives of a monk tried to recover by force what he had brought to the monastery. or even more clearly in the reference in chapter 3 where the possibility is posed that “an enemy of the monastery should appear and try to take something and carry it away by violence .’. “The date and nature of the Spanish Consensoria Monachorum”. it was observed that many did not come to the monasteries through love of Christ. . . The peasant communities organized themselves as monasteries in an attempt to preserve their integrity. acting not from love of Heaven but out of fear of the punishments awaiting them in Hell (c. rather than by religious considerations (c. 87 P. reveals that the motive to found these monasteries was not primarily a religious one. but a dispersed group of buildings — probably a village converted into a monastery.352  . cols. 9). the old structure of kinship and even of neighbourhood could be maintained. et suscipio. where the case of Hispania is analyzed.89 This undoubtedly altered strategies of 88 Augustinus. Formas económicas y sociales en el monacato visigodo. The request that faithful Christians should yield a part of their inheritance to the Church — ‘Christ’s share’ as St Augustine called it88 — or that the son who was a priest or monk should not be forgotten in the will. Furthermore. To those who were part of these monasteries. 89 Díaz.’ Cf. To all this we must add a phenomenon that may have been essential for the continuity of the community and the preservation of traditional concepts of property: the Christianisation of rural areas had a direct influence on customs relating to wills. pentet Christum alterum. pp. pp. and the Rule sustaining it. would soon become a universal custom. and this was essential. 295–8. Gaudemet. this.     353 What possible advantages could this have? In principles the arbitrarily formed monasteries are presented as a failure. Meanwhile. putet Christum tertium. the procedure seems to have become acceptable once some order was imposed. The formation of a monastic congregation fulfils this requirement in several ways. si faciat quod saepe hortatus sum: unum filium habet. decem habet. L’Eglise dans l’Empire Romain (IV–V siècles) (Paris. are to be found everywhere in late ancient Christian literature. Sermo 355. To the church of Dumio. these communities operated on a contractual basis. this was a convenient base for spreading the faith. Christum undecimum faciat. We should also remember that a voluntary donation. which in turn was to become one of the main mechanisms for accumulating property on the part of churches and monasteries. the acceptance of a discipline set by a bishop afforded legitimacy. with reference also to Salvien of Marseilles (Timothee ad ecclesiam Libri IV ). it was a system both favoured by tradition and by an ecclesiastical structure with tremendous economic power. had the support of the clerical hierarchy. They were not governed by an externally imposed discipline. which included the possibility of expulsion. duos filios habet. organization meant stability. Given the fact that the diocesan bishop was also the bishop of Dumio. 1958). However. submission to the Rule and a regular supervision of activities and discipline to some extent safeguarded unity of purpose and orthodoxy. On the one hand. J. 45–7. seeking divine favour. The support of Dumio was a guarantee against attempts at annexation on the part of the diocesan church and laymen alike (c. but by a discipline sustained by mutual agreement. 3). 4: ‘Sed plane. . ’ . at times infringing upon local customs. However. and therefore also that of the group of supervising abbots. In practice. and promising that they would follow his teaching.90 To call upon a meeting of the entire community. with the aid of a relative or another monk. had plotted secretly contra regulam. he could impose a solitary 90 Pactum. For example. the text states that if ‘someone grumbling against the Rule and your authority should be stubborn. after having read the Rule in the presence of everyone. The foundation of monasteries based on family or neighbourhood groups halted this process. which limited the authority of the community’s superior. after affirming that they would humbly accept their abbot’s discipline in accordance with the Rule. It created a closed circuit of transfer of property and inheritance. existeret tunc habeamus potestatem omnes in unum congregare.354  . The Pactum is crucial to this argument. The Pactum became a substitute for the customary law that governed the peasant community and gave it cohesion. it broke up family property structures with a broad collective base. the church demanded documents proving rights of property. uel calumniator. contumax. 683–5: ‘aliquis ex nobis contra regulam et tuum praeceptum murmurans. et lecta coram ommnibus regula culpam publice probare. freely committed themselves on entering the monastery. In the model of such a pactum transmitted together with the Regula communis we find some examples of the original community rule inspiring these contracts. on the initiative of the rank and file of the monks and in cases when the authority of the abbot was called into question. disobedient or perverting the law. the Pactum did authorize the superior to act against any of the members of the community who. which usually upheld the principle of obedience and the disciplinary superiority of the abbot or his representatives. The monastery became a defensive structure of the peasant community against innovations dictated by the ecclesiastical hierarchy. then we shall all have the power to meet in an assembly. This was a contractual document given to those who professed to monastic life. By encouraging these kind of donations the church stemmed the flow of such legacies to the family.  inheritance. thus impeding the disintegration of traditional structures and safeguarding the integrity of patrimonial property. and. inoboediens. ll. to prove his guilt in public’. was not common in monastic rules. This is why abandoning the monastery became an act especially condemned by the Regula communis as well as the Pactum and the Consensoria. ll. 94 The Consensoria also stated that monks could be expelled for compelling reasons. et eum confusionis nota a monasterio expellatur . . 694–6. . 690–2: ‘. he should be cut off from and expelled from the community with public shame’ (deposita ueste monasterii. It is contemplated. Expulsion from the monastery resembled the exclusion from the neighbourhood group. Regula consensoria monachorum 4: ‘Sed si contingerit ut aliquis ex qualibet causa necessitatis a monasterio fuerit abstractus . per sex menses indutus tegmine raso aut cilicio. discinctus et discalceatus in solo pane et aqua in cella obscura exerceat quodlibet opus excommunicatis. .94 Here. and. he was to be stripped. had he should be expelled from the monastery with shameful notoriety’ (in conlatione deductus exuatur monasterii uestibus et induatur quibus olim adduxerat saecularibus.’ 92 Pactum. 696–705. 93 Regula communis 14. . ll. The text foresees that the guilty party may try to defend himself with the aid of his relatives (‘et cum propinquis se uindicare maluerit’). he will be excommunicated without ever being reconciled. . those supposedly could give 91 Pactum. separation from the community and its protection. two times in the Regula Benedicti (cc. not even on his deathbed. for example. according to the rules which had governed their peasant communities. Once apprehended by the civil authorities he must immediately be subjected to the discipline of the Rule by his superior.92 Expulsion was also prescribed by the Regula communis for the excommunicated who continuously persisted in their errors.91 If the culprit did not accept this. that of a monk who decides to leave the community because of some vice. an expulsion was a drastic punishment in monastic tradition. ‘after having taken off his monastic habit. but it is unknown in Hispania out of the North-West pactual context.). expulsion was a matter of the community protecting itself against errant members. This was expressed in similar terms: ‘Taken into the meeting he should be divested of his monastic habit and clothed in the dress he once brought when he came from the world. or from the kin-group within which the individual received protection. ll. 28 and 71). which agrees with the idea that expulsion is a punishment. so he is undressed from [the clothes] he was dressed in upon his entry. is dealt with in a similar way.’ 95 Pactum.93 Given that a monastic profession was meant to be irrevocable. if he seeks refuge elsewhere. . receiving 72 lashes. . indutus quod in introitu exutus est scissum notabili cum confusione a coenobio expellatur).     355 confinement of six months.95 Significantly. The opposite case. with the monk being shorn and clad in penitential garb. “La autoridad en el monacato visigodo”. or someone under his authority. or under pressure from rival forms of monasticism. ll. and if he has no intention of mending his ways. 705–717: ‘tunc habeamus et nos potestatem cetera monasteria commouere aut certe episcopum qui sub regula uiuit uel catholicum ecclesiae defensorem comitem et aduocare ad nostram conlationem ut coram ipsis te corripias. on the one hand.’ . which monasteries it applied to.98 have lead scholars to think this was another contractual model that was not necessarily associated with the Dumian community.’ 97 A.356  . which once more indicates a tension between a monastic congregation depending on a bishop-abbot. and if so. For a while this text was considered a rule of Priscillianist monks. Whether the system of signing the contractual agreement of stability was already in existence when the Rule was drawn up. or if he is guilty of favouritism. we shall also have the power to bring in the other monasteries. presumably the one of Dumio. with pride or anger.97 There is also doubt as to whether the text known as Regula consensoria monachorum is another model of pactual contract. pp. and the superior must bow to the Rule (in communi regula ceruicem humiliare et corripere et emendare). Ligarzas 7 (1975). aut laicus). or a layman’ (episcopus uel eius qui sequitur ordo. 98 Regula consensoria monachorum 6: ‘quia non poterit proprie retinere quod per pactum ad omnes pertinere. Linage Conde. Bishko. Bishko considered this text to be connected with a specific 96 Pactum. However. its structure. 22–4. 20–3. or the count who is a catholic defender of the church. The contractual nature of the power structure within the community is also revealed at the end of the Pactum. “The pactual tradition in Hispanic monasticism”.96 The fact that this Pactum has been transmitted together with the Regula communis has been taken as proof that this was the very pactum referred to in chapters 8 and 18 of the Rule. its references to the agreements entered into for the sake of stability and for the preservation of the order in the case of external attack. and the rest of the bishops or at least some of them on the other. the monks have a right to be heard.  protection to the runaway monk were the ‘bishop. is a matter for debate. so that you shall mend your ways in their presence. If the abbot treats any of the monks unjustly. pp. as well as the explicit reference that the text makes to itself as a pactum. or whether it arose from some immediate need. or at least to call to our meeting to our congress the bishop who lives according to the rule. the reception 99 Bishko. G. 101 Herwegen.101 These communities probably also had some pact.99 which was perhaps on good terms with those represented by the Regula communis. the ‘consensorial’ monasteries represented an independent phenomenon. The latter represented an agreement between powers and a mutual acceptance of discipline and doctrine. 1974). 1943). 102 Bishko. . R. pp. 377–95. 23–4. and those supervised by the bishop-abbot and the congress of abbots.102 In Bishko’s view these monastic pacts were yet another example of the various ways in which monastic orthodoxy adapted to indigenous custom and vice versa. The editors attribute the Consensoria to Fructuosus of Braga. were now undertaken by the monastery. 26. 104 Herwegen. The Rule foresees. Regole monastiche antiche (Roma. based on the structures of kinship and the social environment from which such communities arose. Humfner.100 According to Bishko. pp. 1 and 2.104 The Regula communis and the Pactum both clarify the nature of the relationship between monastic communities ‘proper’. taking Herwegen’s lead. 295–7. Arbesmann and W. After all. although he considers that the nature of this indigenous substratum has not yet been determined. “The date and nature of the Spanish Consensoria Monachorum”. the latter was not condemned in the Regula consensoria. 21. “The pactual tradition in Hispanic monasticism”. as many scholars are inclined to. eds. p. Das Pactum des Hl Fruktuosus von Bracara. nn. in exchange for the maintenance. as such. and the two texts have been transmitted in the same collections of monastic rules. The chapters of the Rule reveal how collective tasks. Iordani de Saxonia Liber Vitas Fratrum (New York. lxxvi–lxxvii. of older conceptions of power. as an important task. “The pactual tradition in Hispanic monasticism”. previously taken care of by the rural community. with the support of the ecclesiastical authorities of Dumio or of Dumio/ Braga and the lay powers in the region. identified it as the pact of the monasteries condemned in chapter 1 of the Regula communis. idem. Iordani. 392.103 but in no case should such oaths be treated as an example of ‘Germanism’ coming from Sueve or Visigothic influences. includes it in the monastic legislation of St Augustine. “The date and nature of the Spanish Consensoria Monachorum”. p. p. pp. Bishko identified the iuramentum or sacramenti conditio mentioned in the first chapter of the Regula communis. in as far as possible. 100 Jordanus of Quedlinburg. However. Turbessi. pp. 76–8. Das Pactum des Hl Fruktuosus von Bracara. This type of monastic association would enable local communities to preserve some of their former group cohesion. 103 Bishko. pp. unrelated to the presbyterial or neighbourhood monasteries criticized in the Regula communis.     357 type of consensorial monastery. pp. Jahrbuch für Wirtschaftsgeschichte 1 (1961). A propósito de Regula Communis IX ”. and especially the Consensoria. see Mayke de Jong. turning them into a powerful network within Gallaecia in the second half of the seventh century. 287–93. Graus. Towards the end of the seventh century. who also believes that the neighbourhood monasteries were encouraged by the diocesan clergy at odds with Dumio. which is more difficult to sustain. the presbyterial monasteries encouraged defections and would receive and protect those who had abandoned the monastic communities subject to the discipline of the Sancta communis regula. which were then associated in a monastic confederation and sponsored by the abbey/ bishopric of Dumio in what the Rule calls nostra ecclesia (c. About the liberation of captives as a constant theme in Merovingian and early Carolingian hagiography.106 It is rather difficult to determine the success of the monasteries following the Regula communis. by contrast. which. According to this text. and furthermore unusual tasks such as the redemption of captives. In Samuel’s Image. “Redimuntur captiui. a device which. see F. This confederate and ‘pactual’ structure enabled these members of these monastic communities and the members of former peasant communities to withstand the might of the large landowners and the diocesan church. “Die Gewalt bei den Anfangen des Feudalismus und die ‘Gefangenenbefreiung’ der merowingischen Hagiographie”. the monasteries of the Regula communis incorporated earlier structures of peasant power. Valerius at great length condemned monastic communities consisting of families and their serfs. despite certain restrictions. Díaz. Gerion 10 (1992). 1996).358  .. This conflict probably reflects the crisis and social polarisation of Visigothic society during those final years of the monarchy. the strategy of turning local communities into monasteries seems to have been sufficiently effective to withstand ecclesiastical resistance and 105 P. which should probably be seen in the light of the climate of violence that the Rule itself reflect. p. About children and their care in Western monasteries.  and care of the elderly and sick.C. Despite occasional disagreement. 61–156. 22. Most likely he not only had the monasteries criticized by the Regula communis in mind. Child oblation in the early Medieval West (Leiden etc. founded the presbyterial monasteries denounced in the Rule’s second chapter. .105 Seen from this perspective. the care of children. 20). but also those sponsored by this very Rule. pp. 106 Bishko. “The pactual tradition in Hispanic monasticism”. allowed these communities to keep their own identity. pp. 25–43. “Gallegan pactual monasticism in the repopulation of Castille”.M. pp. Mínguez. published with an “Additional note” in Spanish and Portuguese monastic history (London.     359 local aristocracies.107 107 Ch. vol. “The pactual tradition in Hispanic monasticism”. . pp. “Los monasterios familiares en Hispania durante la Alta Edad Media”. 1984). 7–32. Estudios sobre instituciones monásticas medievales. In the whole of northern Hispania. II (Madrid. Estudios dedicados a Menéndez Pidal. J. 513–31. 125–64. which probably slowed down the introduction of a manorial system. ‘neighbourhood’ and family monasteries organized in this way proliferated during the Reconquest. 1951). 513–31 and 532A–36A. Stvdia Historica. idem.J. Historia Medieval 3 (1985). Orlandis. “Ruptura social e implantación del feudalismo en el Noroeste peninsular (Siglos VIII–X)”. pp. Bishko. pp. More recently J. This page intentionally left blank . ed. . Mayke de Jong.8. so that his hips and arms seemed to be shattered. Landowners on a massive scale. C. Julia Crick. home to many hundreds of monks. the mercy of God did not fail his servant. specialist advice and comments on drafts of Donald Bullough. careered away and knocked down one of the servants. In this event. Barbara Rosenwein. Having done this.1 Institutionalised monasticism was such an integral aspect of Carolingian society that we run the risk of taking it for granted. expecting nothing other than the death of his servant. the major monasteries of the Carolingian empire transformed the landscape as much by their politics and religiosity as by their splendid buildings and vast agricultural estates. named Ioucum. powerhouses of prayer and politics. As he was praying to God in this way. p. Smith It happened at that time that Tethuiu was sent out under obedience by the holy father of the monastery of Redon. self-justifying images in a wide variety of textual formats. Brett. The monks of Redon: Gesta sanctorum Rotonensium and Vita Conuuoionis (Woodbridge. textuality became so implicated in the ideology of monastic reform 1 Gesta sanctorum Rotonensium. one of the carts broke loose. 1989). he came towards the monastery with the building materials and carts. Part of their success lay in their ability to exploit the potential of the written word by developing archives of written documentation and by projecting powerful. his servant quickly rose from the place where he had lain. Janneke Raaijmakers. to the holy monks for the sake of his soul. safe and unharmed. But when they came down from the top of the hill which overlooks the monastery. tenth and eleventh centuries. all of whom I thank warmly. He therefore began to pray hard to God for his recovery.AEDIFICATIO SANCTI LOCI: THE MAKING OF A NINTH-CENTURY HOLY PLACE Julia M. he stood stunned.H. Simon Taylor and Frans Theuws. A powerful man named Ronuuallon had given his house. When the man of God saw this. II. Whilst writing this paper I have benefited greatly from the support. 169. and so the aforementioned monk had been sent to collect it and bring it to the monastery with carts and oxen. Hereafter GSR. Throughout the ninth. adapted from Brett’s translation. built of planks of wood. 1. 109. 165. prayer and intercession. Guyotjeannin. commonly known as the Gesta sanctorum Rotonensium. 3–35 at pp.4 It hints too at the wider environment in which this project of aedificatio took place — one of donors. 145–7) speaks of both the aedificatio mentium credentibus and the aedificationem sancti loci with planks and beams. 4 The dual senses of aedificatio are contained within the text of the GSR: the preface to book II (pp. In general. quoting O. For further uses of aedificio. 147–70. “Originals and cartularies: the organization of archival memory (ninth to eleventh centuries)”. ad aedificationem uestram et ad firmamentum sancti loci’ (p. 14–5. 199). maintained. and aedificatio in its dual senses of material construction and spiritual improvement. Such communities — ascetics living within the family home. religious status and reform in tenth. aedificare in both senses see GSR I. at p.4: ‘de multis pauca uobis referam. Redon (Ille-et-Vilaine). the religious communities which lack documentation are those which failed to establish an institutional existence. . Declercq. I am extremely grateful to Marco Mostert and Karl Heidecker for allowing me access to this volume in advance of its publication. The tale of Tethuiu’s runaway wagon occurs in the latter and adumbrates the three themes I shall pursue: place. the monastery’s archive and an anonymous work on its history and holiness. “Queens. pp. 171).  that the achievement of an enduring corporate existence presupposed a written collective memory.3 How. holiness. pp. Past & Present 163 (1999).. transported and reused to 2 P. in: K. Just as the planks of Ronuuallon’s house were disassembled.and eleventh-century England”.9 (pp. The association of spiritual formation with physical place is also stresssed in III. Stafford. material resources. 3 G.362  . II.. and of course abbatial authority. Charters and the use of the written word in medieval society (Turnhout. 2000). women’s monasteries — remain ‘houses without history’. It answers them by deploying two late ninth-century sources. or which fell outside the hegemonic power structures of the day. nunneries and reforming churchmen: gender.2 These places have benefited from recent interest in marginal communities of all sorts: their existence serves to highlight the documentary strategies which accompanied the ‘monastic bid for power’. labourers. did a new religious community build an enduring existence? How was a corporate identity achieved. were denigrated or silenced for not conforming to the high standards of reforming ideals. clergy in loose forms of community. recorded and transmitted to posterity? How did the use of the written word contribute to this? This paper asks these questions with respect to one particular ninth-century monastery. Heidecker ed. then. undocumented because powerless. for it is best assessed against the background of a more conventional account of its institutional development. ed. A. on a plot of land just within the diocese of Vannes which Ratuili. politics and patronage. Chédeville and H. 7 N.5 Redon was founded in 832 at the confluence of the river Vilaine and one of its tributaries. so this paper dismantles Redon’s ideological self-image. examines its constituent parts and reassembles them into something very different. 1997). 29–72. 1). It also supplies the context within which the monks who contributed to the written project lived and worked. an exploration of the role of record-keeping. 378. 1863).7 Until 851 the river also formed the boundary between Carolingian Neustria and Brittany. but in an unfamiliar environment. Province and empire: Brittany and the Carolingians (Cambridge. Redon was marginal.   363 make a completely different building in the monastic precinct. “Les pays de la Basse Vilaine au haut moyen âge”.6 The Vilaine and its tributaries form the major arterial waterways of a wide region. Hereafter cited as CR and the appendix as CR A. 8 Cf. Astill and W.8 In this sense. gave to Conuuoion. pp. J. my strategy parallels that of Redon’s house author. 1992). As will become clear. La Bretagne des saints et des rois. A Breton landscape (London. This first section tells a more familiar tale of land. V e–X e siècle (Rennes. 6 . by commencing outside the cloister and then narrowing attention to the texts produced or kept within it. a province where Carolingian control was always indirect and usually contested. Guillotel. de Courson (Paris. Smith. p. a major local landowner.-Y. G. tenurial and familial networks which criss-crossed its 5 Below. located near major Roman roads and within the river’s tidal reaches. Tonnerre. the Oust. 1984). T     R Redon’s project of textual aedificatio forms the second part of this paper. the basin of the Vilaine and its affluents provided the means to create economic. A.H. founder and first abbot. 1. But the political frontier paid scant attention to cultural or linguistic difference and indeed.M. Davies. Cartulaire de Redon. no. a frontier location whether viewed from a Frankish or a Breton perspective. rhetoric and ideology in the building of a ninth-century holy place. Redon enjoyed a strategic location (fig.    . Mémoires de la Société d’Histoire et d’Archéologie de Bretagne 63 (1986). -Y. pp. In terms of regional topography. 1993). but entirely peripheral — and usually ignored — from a Frankish perspective. “Celtic literary tradition and the development of a feudal principality in Brittany”. “Cartulaires bretons médiévaux”. Ethnische Identitäten und soziale Organisation im Frühmittelalter (Wien. Redon fully exploited these possibilities.. pp. on a pattern of documentation more characteristic of Frankish than of Breton churches. banks. Actes de la table ronde organisée par l’Ecole National des Chartes Mémoires et documents de l’Ecole des Chartes 39 (Paris. . H. 1. however. Redon and environs. 166–82. lower case: not mentioned in the GSR.10 9 On the politics and perceptions of Redon’s frontier location. forthcoming). Literacy in medieval Celtic societies (Cambridge. L. Smith. Guyotjeannin.H.M. “Confronting identities: the rhetoric and reality of a Carolingian frontier”.9 In historiographical terms. Diesenberger eds. in: O. Les Cartulaires. Guillotel. 10 On the distinctiveness of Breton literacy and documentary traditions see N. this in turn urges a reassessment of its peripheral status in Carolingian terms. therefore.. 1998).. Small caps: mentioned in the Gesta sanctorum Rotonensium. Pryce ed.364  .. in: W. Redon was a central place. in: H. see J.  Fig. Tonnerre. Redon has been central to early medieval Breton history. Morelle and M. Its centrality in Breton terms depends. Pohl and M. Parisse eds. Integration und Herrschaft. New Cambridge Medieval History II: c. 274. only minor differences in chronology differentiate northern Gaul. Airlie. see S. 225–7. 181. 17. “True teachers and pious kings: Salzburg. almost all Frankish monasteries were established institutions which had largely completed assembling their landed endowments and building their networks of patronage. 2000). 1995). the Rhineland or Bavaria in this respect. 400 –1000 (Cambridge. 13 The chronology and context of Saxon foundations are sketched by C. see M. 154. 11 Cf. A31. pp. A26. 71–2. Smith. Gameson and H. Belief and culture in medieval Europe (Oxford. vol. Mémoires pour servir de preuves à l’histoire ecclésiastique et civile de Bretagne. McKitterick ed. Leyser eds. many of the communities which housed the most important relic shrines of the region had an even longer history. 247. Although a precise chronology is impossible. 225. J. 309–43. Louis the German and Christian order”. “Oral and written: saints. only in newly-converted Saxony did royal or episcopal initiative foster new communities.H. State and society in the early Middle Ages: the middle Rhine valley. 272. 325–41. 14 Smith. 900 (Cambridge. in: R. pp. in: R. By then. Also. pp. “Carolingian monasticism: the power of prayer”.13 In Breton terms.and eighth-century monastic foundations had long since waned by the time Redon was established in 832. 1. Morice. 700–c.   365 We should also pay attention to the date of Redon’s foundation. Münstersche Mittelalter-Schriften 31 (München. Forschungen zu monastischen und geistlichen Gemeinschaften im westfränkischen Bereich. There are also 24 abbots . (Paris. EME 8 (1999). Redon was also a latecomer on the scene. having originated as extramural episcopal basilicas which only later become monasteries or communities of regular canons. c. 233. 106. A40. pp. 276. 2001). The great tide of late seventh.11 In Neustria. 12 See also G. 3 vols. 141. 219–45 at pp. 15 Some 17 such places are known from the Redon charters (CR 11.    . miracles and relics in Brittany. 97. Speculum 65 (1990). “The bishoprics of Saxony in the first century after Christianization”. Carroll. M. 622–53.14 No other monasteries are known to have been established in the Carolingian period.. the landscape around Redon was dotted with tiny religious communities and hermitages. and H. For a parallel subversion of the centre/periphery distinction on the eastern margin of the Carolingian world in the context of a major church’s textual self-presentation. 57. 1978). de Jong. p. A45. A53. Innes. 1742–6).12 Although small aristocratic family monasteries were founded here and there in the Frankish lands during the ninth century. A4. In general. Province and empire. col 265). 850–1250”. A54. 13.15 Redon’s foundation thus fits no general rhythm of institutionalised monastic foundation. monasteriola. abbatiolae and minihis. 152. Oexle.. several major monasteries certainly existed in pre-Carolingian Brittany and at least two had already attracted the patronage of Carolingian rulers.M. 137–64. 233. Had Breton warlords and Frankish rebels made common cause in the early 830s. success or failure contingent and unpredictable. Tonnerre. 60–85 on Breton revolts in the early years of Louis the Pious’s reign and on the intertwining of Breton and Frankish politics in the 830s. and Breton leaders and Frankish rebels did ally in revolt. 85–115 for the Breton role in the politics of Charles the Bald’s reign. 139. Landévennec et le monachisme breton dans le haut moyen âge (Landévennec. 354–7. 16 A glance at the politics of the reign of Charles the Bald affirms the plausibility of such a scenario. 133–7. Smith.18 unconnected to Redon. W. pp. “Adding insult to injury: power. ibid.. 281. Province and empire. pp. pp. 268. Simon ed. 47. see Smith. pp. Chédeville and N. I.. 52. 129. Province and empire. XI e–XIII e siècle (Rennes. efforts to win imperial approval met with immediate rejection. Redon developed rapidly under the joint patronage of Breton principes and Carolingian rulers. 28.8–9. in: W. 171. 23. see the discussion of W. 129–30. 142. at the very least. 265. Small worlds: the village community in early medieval Brittany (London. in: M.-Y. 266. For princely patronage. . 1985). see J. A. 64.. p. for in his reign Franks and Bretons did indeed meet in battle twice. In Redon’s case. A41). gave his support to the new monastery and asked the fledgling community to pray for the Carolingian emperor in his troubles. 198. 160. the immediate political context of its foundation and the details of Conuuoion’s career underscore this. Fouracre eds.16 832 was thus hardly an auspicious moment to found a monastery right on the Franco-Breton border.M. 116. 1988). 138. 18 For details of Carolingian patronage. La Bretagne féodale. 159. 1995). the Vilaine valley around Redon would in all likelihood have been a battleground or. Smith. a region of contestation and anarchy. From 834 onwards. 276. 1987). pp. 150. pp.17 But when Nominoe. 154. 247. 241.H. the resentments within the Frankish aristocratic elite which boiled over into open rebellion against Louis the Pious in 830 and 833–4 had their epicentre in western Neustria and the Breton border region — and these revolts followed hard on the heels of repeated Breton efforts to throw off Carolingian hegemony. 109. The exact nature of Carolingian patronage remains problematic. the Breton regional leader. 129–39. A minihi (from monachia) was an ecclesiastical site with rights of sanctuary by the eleventh century.366  . 193 and n. Indeed. Davies and P. Notably. pp. 153. only one of whom is certainly associated with one of these monasteriola (CR 21. the political context was transformed. Davies. Davies. “Culte impérial et politique frontalière dans la vallée de la Vilaine: le témoignage des diplômes carolingiens dans le cartulaire de Redon”. property and immunities in early medieval Wales”. 17 GSR. very close to Redon.  Every attempt to found a monastery was inevitably a speculative venture. cf. 143. 255. Property and power in the early Middle Ages (Cambridge. friends and associates of the Carolingian magnates whom Louis the Pious had appointed to office in eastern Brittany. 133. 179. 21. some of them definitely literate priests. 21 Vita Conuuoionis.   367 Redon’s first abbot was no modest ascetic. vol. 132 (3 August 850). 177. local landowners made numerous property donations. Guillotel. CR 5. Conwoion’s skills in negotiation and mediation must have contributed substantially to Redon’s ability to survive on its strategic frontier location. p. Brett. Of noble origin. By persisting in establishing his community on the site. pp. ed. Conuuoion seems to have been an abbot with enough political acumen to remain on good terms with both Frankish and Breton leaders even when they were in direct conflict with each other. in: Cartulaire de l’abbaye Saint-Sauveur de Redon [facsimile edition] (Rennes. A4. 76. some of them certainly aristocrats who brought with them into the monastery a mastery of secular politics. according to his eleventh-century vita. 348–51. pp. Smith. 141–3 on Conuuoion’s activities during the FrancoBreton conflict in 836/7.11. Very probably bilingual. Tessier. 147–51) depicts him celebrating mass.1. 229. Brett. 20 GSR I. had been promoted to deacon by Bishop Raginarius. The region west of the Vilaine was predominantly a land of peasant proprietors 19 Cf. 1943–55).8. Province and empire. Brett. their radical break with their secular past was similar to that of Benedict of Aniane. GSR I.19 The men who entered the monastic life with him included men from noble families.20 They were adult converts. p. he must have been ordained a priest at some point. no. it did more than survive: it thrived. since GSR II. ed. As for Conuuoion in particular. that Charles the Bald issued a diploma for Redon at the height of his confllict with Nominoe also suggests Conuuoion performed a delicate political balancing act. It would make more sense of Conuuoion’s career if he had been archdeacon of the diocese. G. The writing abilities of Conuuoion and his companion Condeloc is attested by their role as charter scribes. p. he had been educated among the cathedral clergy of Vannes and.1 (ed. 3 vols. 1998). Recueil des actes de Charles II le Chauve. Not missionaries.    .22 Controversy thus marked Conuuoion’s career and Redon’s establishment alike. . Conuuoion thus directly opposed the bishop whom he had formerly served. “Le manuscrit”. (Paris. 1. pp.21 Probably an appointee of Louis the Pious. H. 2. not oblates. Indeed. 107–13 and my comments in “Confronting identities”. these men were ideally placed to act as political mediators. Brett p. quite detached from their families. pp. 22 GSR I. Raginarius had spoken out against the foundation of a monastery at Redon in Louis’ presence. 128. From 834 onwards. ed. 212.  and of machtierni. 80.25 or bought up lands directly adjacent to estates already in monastic ownership. 6. political and ecclesiastical traditions. 325. 3. pp. 35–43. 27 Redon’s seigneurie is discussed by Davies. . 188–200. Other purchases in areas where Redon already had substantial landholdings are CR 38. Further purchases are recorded in CR 209. so did the buildings. Astill and Davies. 39.29 In 863 he also turned the princely residence at Plélan into a dependent cell 23 On this distinctive society see Davies. GSR II. gatehouse. if grateful. 4. 244. 167. 82. suggesting a calculated strategy of estate accumulation. beneficiary of these donations: on occasion Conuuoion directly approached landowners and persuaded them to relinquish key properties.27 It also absorbed many of the tiny monasteries in the region. Redon’s first property acquisitions lay here. A35. previously independent local priests also joined the monastery in increasing numbers. Province and empire. 24 Smith. pp. East of the Vilaine. As its landed endowment grew. 234. 81. Conuuoion oversaw the building of two churches. the main abbatial basilica dedicated to Christ the Saviour and another dedicated to the Virgin. it took many individual acts of generosity to build even a modest landed endowment field by field. these formed the nucleus of the monastery’s seigneurial powers.28 The monastery’s foundation thus transformed local tenurial. 149. Breton landscape. a hospitium for the external canons attached to the monastery as well as the monks’ cemetery and garden. pp. 190–2.. estates were considerably larger but nevertheless still small in comparison with the massive scale of Frankish aristocratic landed wealth in Austrasia and the Rhineland: here too Redon gradually acquired substantial holdings. 91–115. hospitale pauperum. domus peregrinorum. 7. Small worlds pp. small-time landlords who nevertheless functioned as a local ruling elite. 155. Small worlds.24 And the abbey was not merely the passive. 25 CR 23. 40. Small worlds. we hear also of the monastic dormitory. boundary clauses indicate that the land purchased in CR 148 lay adjacent to that gifted five years previously by CR 12).g.1. pp. 2.368  . 26 This is sometimes explicit: a deed of sale to Redon specifies that the land lay ‘circumcincta a terra mea et a terra supradicti emptoris per botinas fixas per loca designata’ (CR 125) and sometimes can be deduced (e. 29 CR 28. 28 Davies.26 In addition. 157. A19. the monastery gained jurisdictional rights over several communities in the vicinity. 153.23 In the absence of anything comparable to the generous royal endowments of fiscal land which had established the economic security of seventh-century monasteries in northern Gaul. Annales de Bretagne 5 (1890). 1950). vol. pp. Unsurprisingly. Koch. for Niederaltaich see the breviarius of Urolf and a charter of Gozbald. 125. their conduct and their settlement in the village communities of eastern Brittany in the ninth century”. before informal mediators. pp. 23 (1943). 1 no 49 at p. Diplomata Belgica ante annum millesimum centesimum scripta. the largest could support three or four hundred. Repeated lawsuits and disputes over property rights and ownership brought Conuuoion or his successor. A37. “Le Nombre des moines dans les anciens monastères”. 19–42. 741 for 20 monks but had apparently dropped to 16 under Abbot Gozbald (825–55). de La Borderie.F. Berlière. (Brussels. Ritcant.33 Under the rule of an abbot who was as much local lord as spiritual father.31 Still tiny in comparison with major Carolingian monasteries.   369 and built a stone church there. The church (S. The settlement of disputes in early medieval Europe (Cambridge. Fouracre eds. 2 vols. Münstersche Mittelalter-Schriften 8 (München. pp. Major Carolingian monasteries usually housed upwards of one hundred monks. M. 64–84. funded by its regional patrimony and sustained by Breton princely and Carolingian royal approval. Ve–Xe siècles”. Redon had completely altered the traditional topographies of power in southeastern Brittany. Gent which had 24 regular canons during Einhard’s lay abbacy (815–40) and Niederaltaich which was founded c. Schmid ed. pp. Davies and P. eadem. 241.34 Unlike the endowments of 30 CR 78. Fulda reached over 600 under Hrabanus Maurus. see A.. pp. “L’Architecture religieuse en Bretagne. History and anthropology 1 (1985). pp.    . 1986). Mémoires de la Société d’Histoire et d’Archéologie de Bretagne. pp. building a monastic endowment could be fraught and uncertain work. K. Davies. Gysseling and A. 1771). R. 31–5. Summary figures derived from U. local tribunals or the Breton princely court to defend Redon’s title: in this respect too. 535–630 at pp.C. Redon had nevertheless become of major regional significance. 611–7. Couffon. 289–312. Monumenta Boica XI (München.. Redon had impressive buildings and a secure existence. in: K. “Mönchslisten und Klosterconvent von Fulda zur Zeit der Karolinger”. 611–2. pp. 33 For the chronology of Conuuoion’s resignation and death a year later. Die Klostergemeinschaft von Fulda II/2. 32 Redon was comparable in size to St Peter’s. 14–6. 231–61 and 42 (1930).30 The size of the community also expanded: Conuuoion’s original six followers doubled to twelve within six months and then increased to eighteen by 854. “Disputes. 1–40 at pp. A . “People and places in dispute in ninth-century Brittany”. For St Peter’s Gent see the Ratio fundationis seu aedificationis Blandiniensis coenobii. A2. in: W. contestation and conflict accompanied this transformation. “La chronologie du cartulaire de Redon”. 82. Schmid. and to twentyfive by 870. 224. ed. Maxent) had architectural features in common with many other Carolingian churches. 109–13. Revue Bénédictine 41 (1929). for Fulda.32 By the time the aging Conuuoion resigned as abbot in January or February 867. 34 On disputes and disputing procedures in the region see W. 1978). 31 CR 1. 105. GSR I. Although Redon certainly cultivated links with donors’ families across the generations. Ratuili had four sons: he gave one. Redon was located in an area where social power remained incoherent. Redon still received lands when local landowners entered the monastery to die in monastic dignity. pp.3. virtually no-one except the principes bothered to support Redon any more. And in 874. see Davies. 280.370  . By the early tenth century.38 With the Vilaine valley too vulnerable to Viking attack and even the inland refuge at Plélan which Salomon had given them not safe. this was not always enough to ensure support. rather. His assassination plunged Brittany into a political crisis from which his successors never fully recovered. pp. 115–9.35 No regionally dominant family claimed it as its Eigenkloster. but the community seems not to have prospered. pp. the monks’ first benefactor.  the major monasteries of Austrasia and the Rhineland which had been developed in the eighth century in the context of strong regional networks of aristocratic power and patronage. State and society. and threatened to burn the monastery down. 10. Innes. This was that of Salomon. Redon’s vigorous land grab cut right across local familial traditions with their presumptions of relatives’ interest in the lands of their close kin. Catuuoret also gave land and a son to Redon. 35 Cf. to Redon as an oblate a year after his founding grant. 13–93 on the patronage networks which underpinned the property acquisitions of Lorsch and Fulda. the flow of donations dwindled to a trickle. even the support of the Breton principes who succeeded Nominoe was not always forthcoming. 215. . 37 CR 235 for Alan I’s restoration in 878 of a grant ‘cupiditate aliorum principum ablata est a Sancto Salvatori’. After 874. 278. Redon’s property rights and claims were at issue in two-thirds of these.36 There is no evidence that the immunity and protection granted by Charles the Bald in 850 meant anything in practical or political terms. CR 3. another. 68 of the latter article. Small worlds. 38 CR 270. Thereafter. the most vigorous and successful of ninthcentury Breton principes (857–874). another death accelerated the pace of change. Liberius. p. the other two. who had established a quasi-royal rule throughout the peninsula and western Neustria. On other activities of Ratuili and his family. Ratfred and Ratuili (II) were in dispute with Redon about land they claimed as their inheritance. 179–81. 36 As is demonstrated by the relationship between Redon and the family of Ratuili. opaque and open to challenge. the remaining monks packed their list of all forty-nine records of disputes is provided at n.37 Conuuoion’s death on 5 January 868 proved to be a turning point in Redon’s history. 4. quite apart from the Viking attacks which strained both resources and leadership.. propsperity and influence had proven unsustainable. in: idem ed. and although the late Roman procedure of registering title in municipal archives. careful documentation of property claims and entitlements nevertheless remained crucial. esp. These can be traced through the indirect testimony of laws or formularies. 1984). C   In the early Middle Ages. “Annales Rotonenses (um 919)”. 102–5. . lay society.   371 bags in 919 and decamped. if for rather different reasons. Vorträge und Forschungen 23 (Sigmaringen. 40 P. to adapt late Roman practices to their changing institutional and legal environment and to exploit the administrative and ideological potential of the carta and notitia. “Zur rechtlichen Funktion von Traditionsnotiz.. 39 CR 283 for the narrative. Traditionsbuch und früher Siegelurkunde”.    .41 In the transformed environment of the early Middle Ages. Late Roman procedures for guaranteeing title to property had depended heavily on written documentation. 136–45. Uncertainty.39 Almost a century had passed since Conuuoion and his companions first adopted the ascetic life on their plot of land in the lee of the hill that overlooked the confluence of the Oust and the Vilaine. pp. B. in: Classen ed. Early medieval kings and churches were keen. 131–62. pp. reaching Auxerre before 921 but finally settling in Poitou in 924. pp.40 Yet the administrative framework within which such documents were used was shifting. 1977). 41 P. Bischoff. a powerful connection existed between landholding and literacy. and occasionally directly through surviving archives. The monks’ return at the end of the tenth century — and Redon’s continuous existence thereafter down until its dissolution in 1790 — is only relevant here inasmuch as it ensured the survival of the ninth-century textual corpus. lingered on here and there into the early seventh century.. Texte des vierten bis sechzehnten Jahrhunderts (Stuttgart. “Fortleben und Wandel spätrömischen Urkundenwesens im frühen Mittelalter”. the monks began their project of textual aedificatio. In this changed atmosphere. Recht und Schrift im Mittelalter. pp. to which we now turn. even a mood of retrenchment and decline must have been inevitable. Classen. in: Analecta Novissima. The date of departure from Redon is supplied by a fragmentary set of annals apparently composed by a member of the Redon community in the first half of the tenth century. the gesta municipalia. Johanek. Decades of growth. 13–54. ed. Recht und Schrift. the onus for redacting and preserving texts gradually passed everywhere to individual or institutional proprietors. Documentary traditions also continued in use in local. “People and places in dispute”. 43 I. 63–81.43 Charter evidence also indicates that local scribes remained in the habit of drawing up formal records for lay landowners in the dioceses of Rennes. For 42 N. McKitterick ed. pp. Here. Innes. as in Italy. 1981–4). Studi Medievali 3e ser. 7–22 at pp. “Scribes and charters in Lombard Italy”. in: R. pp. 69. Histoire des institutions de la Bretagne. and the evidence of regional formularies confirms that a sub-Roman documentary tradition remained strong throughout the Merovingian period. 12–4. 134–8.42 Another was western Neustria. others conceivably lay — drew up documents recording land transfers and reporting the settlement of disputes between private individuals in a tradition evincing clear debts to the Merovingian usages of the region. Angers and Vannes. 41 (2000). see Johanek. State and society.44 These scribes were the recognised redactors of formal documents and employed authoritative forms of words for the purpose. Wood. idem. 115–34. pp. 68–70 with map of distribution of these local scribes on p. Everett. When an unknown scribe used the traditonal local formulae of the Vannetais to draw up the document recording Ratuili’s grant of the site of Redon. “Scribes and charters in Lombard Italy”. Small worlds. 42–55. eadem. law and culture in Merovingian Gaul”. 113–8 and Everett. 46 CR 1. registration in the gesta municipalia persisted into the early seventh century. 140–3. 1989). in: Davies and Fouracre eds. 153–60. in both urban centres and rural villages in this region. pp. these local scribes were heirs to a tradition stretching back to the public procedures of late Antiquity. 1990). Ninth-century landowners in this region clearly placed great value on written documentation of their property rights and also took considerable pains to preserve their own charters. .372  .46 he unwittingly recorded not only the beginning of the tenurial revolution which Redon’s foundation brought about but also the beginning of a documentary and archival evolution. Around 800. 45 For local scribes elsewhere in the Carolingian empire and the discussion over whether they had any “official” status.N. The uses of literacy in early medieval Europe (Cambridge. “Disputes in late fifth. II. “Administration. The settlement of disputes. Planiol.. pp. local scribes — some certainly clerical. although whether they ever functioned in association with comital lawcourts or episcopal households cannot be ascertained. pp...and sixth-century Gaul: some problems”. 39–83.45 Whatever the precise local arrangements for having a document drawn up may have been. McKitterick.. (Mayenne. pp. 5 vols. 44 M. R. pp. “Zur rechtlichen Funktion”. vol. Nantes. pp. The Carolingians and the written word (Cambridge. Davies. pp.  Italy is well-known as a region of particularly strong continuity of documentary forms and procedures. see below. Davies. when Redon acquired an estate at Lusanger (dioc. That is not to say. that ninthand tenth-century churches west of the Rhine made do with an unsorted muddle of loose documents. a form of institutional memory which interrupted individual or familial record-collecting. Its monks also functioned as scribes. some time between 1773 and 1856 forty-two folios vanished from the section of the cartulary which contains charters from the first twenty-five years of the abbey’s history. Nantes) in 864. 69–90. 231. Rather. of which only about half survive in seventeenthcentury transcripts and eighteenth-century histories. Smith. 54.48 Thus. it took over a family archive of six charters stretching back to 816 and detailing complex transactions within three generations of one family. however. it was not until the eleventh century that churches in West Francia/ France began to follow suit. These will have contained approximately one hundred charters.. Charters and the use of . traditional local ones. pp. Province and empire. 48 For example. CR 57. of which 283 are in Redon’s main cartulary. recording transactions which predated Redon’s acquisition of particular lands by a generation or more. but they were also keen to acquire any existing documentation which pertained to a piece of land prior to their acquisition of it. grants to Redon by local landowners. even replace. Cf. Naturally.47 As Redon’s landholdings grew. pp. the monks kept these vital legal and administrative records. pp.49 Only east of the Rhine did Carolingian monasteries decide to preserve their property records by copying out the many individual pieces of parchment into books. 52.   373 Redon rapidly developed its own documentary forms to supplement. 77–9. 38–9. in: Heidecker ed. usually but not always anonymously for transactions to which the abbey was party. nn.    . 225. 230. 50 Declercq. in the process ordering them by geographical or chronological schemes. the outcome of disputes and lawsuits which the monks had fought and the benefactions of Breton princes and Carolingian sovereigns. scribal activity became increasingly centred on the monastery. For details of Redon’s cartularies. or a mixture of both. However. from the founding moment onwards. 227. 226. Redon built up its archive. Francia 17/i (1990). By Conuuoion’s death it contained several hundred documents. 229. “The composition of the Redon cartulary”. The idea was slow to spread west of the Rhine: except for a couple of experiments in cartulary construction in tenth-century Flanders. there is good evidence both for the careful endorsing of the loose originals and for the compilation of dossiers of selected royal diplomata and papal or episcopal privileges in the context of specific legal or political battles. esp. 49 Around 350 documents survive from the period before 924.50 47 W. “Originals and cartularies”. 54 See now. These were less systematically arranged. He arranged the documents in several groups. Geary.  At Redon. Conuuoion’s successor Ritcant (867–71) took the step of sorting the extensive monastic charter collection into an ordered archive. H.374  . 151–3. more or less in the order in which they were produced. Les cartulaires. 51 Thus far I follow the analysis of Davies. included a collection of royal diplomata. 42. P. princely charters and ecclesiastical privileges and correspondence. introduction to GSR. although he did keep together several groups of documents all relating to the same place. the largest of which contained documents produced and retained at Redon during Conuuoion’s abbacy. pp. Mémoires de la Société d’Histoire et d’Archéologie de Bretagne 63 (1986). 13–24.52 Ritcant’s arrangement. p. in the localities. 27. Only six leaves survive which. although on philological grounds it is clear that he (or his copyist) did not alter the ninth-century orthography of the documents in front of him.and tenth-century practice in this respect for two reasons: (a) all the surviving Carolingian diplomata and several of the ninth-century princely charters have a different textual tradition from the rest of the charters and (b) a second cartulary. 27–48 at pp. the mid-twelfth century ‘petit cartulaire’. in: Guyotjeannin et al. was carefully maintained by his successors and they added their own documents to the stack containing the records from their own period in office. 52 For examples of Carolingian and post-Carolingian separate classification of diplomata and important privileges and their copying into separate dossiers. Then he gathered together charters produced elsewhere. “Composition”. “Originals and cartularies”. Dol et Saint-Malo (Rennes. in addition to the edition by de Courson (as n. royal diplomata.. Brett. in whatever may have been the ninth-century equivalent of filing boxes. 80–2. 1998). “Les cartulaires de l’abbaye de Redon”. pp. Unfortunately. filed in approximately chronological order.54 The rush to compile cartularies in the eleventh century reflected the written word. 53 Davies. eds. pp. we cannot know how selective Almod may have been in copying out the ninth-century archive. Guillotel. episcopal and papal letters. 6 above) the facsimile. “Composition”.51 Another group probably contained princely charters.. His third bundle comprised the documents produced during his own abbacy.53 This large collection of loose documents survived the tenth-century hiatus in Redon’s history to be copied in the order Ritcant had instituted into the cartulary compiled during the abbacy of Almod (1062–1084). For discussions of its . “Entre gestion et gesta”. 45. an eighteenth-century description made before the mutilations notes that it also included letters between the princeps Salomon and Pope Hadrian II. contain important princely charters. Cartulaire de l’abbaye de Saint-Sauveur de Redon. inter alia. pp. Amis des archives historiques du diocèse de Rennes. I suggest that Redon was following this common ninth. I have not seen the extant folios. see Declercq. then. simply an adjunct to efficient property management (although it is clear that Ritcant was an energetic administrator and landlord): it was also a textual representation of the monastery’s past and his predecessor’s great achievements. As such. its purpose must have been instructive — edifying. he consolidated its institutional memory. Like Almod. and his prefatory essay to the new facsimile edition. Ordering a charter collection was not. as well as of its property claims and rights.   375 a widespread concern ‘for reforming the past in light of present needs’. 6 vols.57 None of them offer massive revisions of the compilation and history see Guillotel. IV.J. Breton princes and Carolingian kings. and to proclaim its importance and wealth. Phantoms of remembrance: Memory and oblivion at the end of the first millennium (Princeton. 1988–9). 57 W.    . “Les cartulaires”. In Ritcant’s case. 55 P. Ritcant adopted the prevalent attitude of the day to the challenge of archival preservation. MGH Schriften. He may also have tinkered with that memory. Ritcant not only consolidated Redon’s property claims. p. Geary.56 This forty years had witnessed Redon’s establishment of a secure existence despite the climate of FrancoBreton tensions and the repeated challenges and claims mounted by aggrieved local landowners. 56 Leuhemel was one of the original six monks in 832. But Ritcant made his compilation just as the monks must have been struggling to come to terms with the falling level of local benefaction after Conuuoion’s death. that past stetched back just under forty years — a span encompassed within the living memory of at least one member of the community. 265–74. 87.55 and Almod responded to the political challenges of ecclesiastical property owning in the same way as many of his contemporaries. as Wendy Davies has argued. vol. very probably occurred in the ninth century. which. Some of Redon’s ninth-century charters show clear evidence of subsequent emendation. became prior and was still alive to witness a charter in 870 (CR 224). Davies. 1994). . in: Fälschungen im Mittelalter. pp. even — to remind older monks and inform new recruits of Redon’s commemorative obligations to local families. (München. Each of them thereby offered an image of the monastery’s past. “Forgery in the Cartulaire de Redon”. It is from this eleventh-century cartulary (which received additions into the middle of the twelfth century) that our knowledge of Redon’s properties and local Breton society in the ninth century is derived. P.’. Lot. 1907).’ 61 Cf. quia ego eram illo tempore illius sancti [Conuuoion] minister. designed for the needs of a community which may already have been aware that its glory days were fast ebbing away. p.59 had known the founding fathers personally. 13–18.61 Rather. somewhat manipulated view of the past. 8–10. Lifshitz. 149: ‘Testor uobis. He set himself to represent Redon’s history in sacred terms. Sot. 95–113. p. Lifshitz has pointed out. pp. Typologie des sources du moyen âge occidental 37 (Turnhout. and anything which demonstrated its holiness. 59 GSR II. Their archive offered an ordered..  past. Viator 25 (1994). indeed. merely enough to protect Redon’s title from the counter-claims of a donor’s heir. Mabillon’s editorial title is misleading: it is certainly not in any conventional sense the gesta of Redon’s monks. Whether or not the responsibility is attributable to Ritcant. Mélanges d’histoire bretonne (Paris. another monk took a different approach to the project of textual aedificatio. he constructed a vision of Redon’s past to reassure monks and patrons alike of the monastery’s continuing importance. fratres carissimi. 1981). Brett’s introduction to her edition.58 This man had entered the monastery as a small child. “En relisant ‘L’Histoire des Saints de Redon’”. 58 For arguments as to the date of the GSR. Riché. . in: Simon ed. pp. he produced the work known as the Gesta sanctorum Rotonensium. presumably as an oblate. Landévennec et le monachisme breton. Gesta abbatum.5. to offer a historical account of the aedificatio sancti loci. and of the potential for rewriting it to suit contemporary needs. including both its living members and the long-dead saints whose relics they acquired. had been Conuuoion’s servant. M. My own view is that it is more likely to have been written sooner rather than later after Conuuoion’s death. gesta episcoporum. .376  . see F. 60 GSR II..60 Writing for his fellow monks whilst some but not all of the original six were still alive. its subject is the place itself. pp. As F. C   As Redon faced mounting difficulties in securing support and patronage in the generation following Conuuoion’s death. Note that the (?) eleventh-century . 5–17 cf. the monks of Redon had become aware of the malleability of the past. “Beyond positivism and genre: ‘hagiographical’ texts as historical narrative”.1. and. efforts such as these to classify such works as either history or hagiography have had a deleterious effect on the understanding of their nature and function. pp. In so doing. 163: ‘denique cum essem iuuenculus in monasterio positus . F. 64 GSR II. and self-consciously to situate himself within the literary traditions he was manipulating. But subject matter also relates to avowed purpose.65 The third book. 147: ‘certamen malorum hominum cum sanctis uiris descripsimus. especially those worked by relics obtained by Conuuoion. 233. to elaborate the ‘life and manner of living of the holy monks who served Christ the Lord faithfully in that most sacred place right until the end of their life’. 187. p. 62 Outlined by Brett in her introduction. on the other hand. it is far more important. 63 GSR II.66 In both these prefaces. VC 5. et inquisitiones rerum ad eum pertinentium succincte deprompsimus’.. concentrates on mirabilia.64 He also announces the purpose of this second part.   377 The manuscript tradition of the Gesta Sanctorum Rotonensium is entirely separate from that of the charters. . p. virtutes and prodigia performed at the sanctus locus.. The loss of the initial preface is particularly unfortunate. he states. The preface to book two provides a retrospective indication of the subject matter of the preceding book: de situ et constructione sancti loci. 145: ‘uitam et conuersationem sanctorum monachorum qui in eodem sacratissimo loco usque ad finem uitae suae fideliter Christo Domino mancipauerunt’ ‘Gesta et facta’: ibid. Nevertheless. the prefaces to books two and three allow us to go some way towards establishing what the author was seeking to do. it is also defective and does not allow us to establish exactly what the author wished to say about his own endeavour. 145.    . p. the building of the holy place and a brief inquiry into monastic property. the ending of the first chapter and one or more chapters from the end of the third and last book. 185. et aedificationem sancti loci. Poulin. ed. pref. the unifying theme of the sanctus locus is prominent. but this is the missing section. Brett.. p.62 Unfortunately.. pp.63 This he subdivides into three themes: the struggle of the holy monks against their wicked enemies. pp.-C. 209–34 with the important additional remarks of J. 147. p. The extant text lacks the opening preface. which he also refers to as their gesta et facta. The author announces that at its end he will deal with Conuuoion’s death. pref. 65 GSR II. 139–59. pref. 66 GSR III. ‘to set down in writing the struggles of the holy men who author of the Vita Conwoionis regarded the GSR as a liber miraculorum. In contrast to the antique custom of emperors committing accounts of their victories to writing and to annals.. Francia 18/i (1991). for this was the conventional place for an author to declare his purpose. p. “Le dossier hagiographique de Saint Conwoion de Redon. pref. A propos d’une édition récente”. because it was most harmful that all the stories should be consigned to oblivion. qui incessanter die ac nocte dimicauerunt cum inuisibili hoste?’ 68 Ibid. if not the author of all mankind.. . aedificatio mentium credentibus traditur. . . the sanctus locus. his division of the subject matter into three distinct books. The three tableaux thus move from the profane world of courtly politics through monastic space and finally to the place of most intense sacrality. Iesus Christus dominus noster. In this way. Brett. honour is shown to the monks. His selection of miracle stories told to him by the elders of the community is narrated with God’s help ‘in order to confirm the faith of believers. honor monachis exhibetur.  battled day and night with the invisible enemy’. ed. narrating anecdotes about the monks’ vita et conversatio which took place at indeterminate times in the monastic fields and precincts. The struggles against ‘wicked men’ of the first book occur in widely separated places. edification of the mind is provided for the faithful. pref. . ranging from Redon to Louis the Pious’s imperial court at Charmont-en-Beauce. p. ‘When these things are read.: ‘Et cum ista leguntur. the memory of the saints is evoked. et merita eorum per populos suos demonstrat?’ . Three aspects of the author’s working methods elucidate his project of textual aedificatio.378  .67 In this way. also has a topographical dimension. nisi auctor hominum. The second narrows the focus to the monastery and its immediate vicinity. 145: ‘Quanto magis nunc debemus certamina sanctorum uirorum litteris tradere. pref. who everywhere rules and guards his saints and makes their merits known among their peoples?’69 His purpose is thus to anchor Redon within the overall history of Christian redemption. . The third looks into the abbey church itself.. This is the only book which has a roughly chronological ordering. he presents himself as the mouthpiece of Christian. salvific history.’68 In distancing himself from classical historiographical traditions. First. Jesus Christ our Lord. p. Who knows how many miracles and how many marvels were shown forth through them. ut haec omnia traderentur obliuioni .’ 69 GSR III. Tours and Thionville. memoria sanctorum colligitur. Quis enim scit quantae uirtutes et quanta prodigia per eos ostensa sunt.. is thus situated in a landscape whose contours are 67 GSR II. an account of the building of the monastery and the deeds of its inhabitants becomes a work of edification for the faithful. each with its own theme. recording the miracles which happened at its relic shrines and recounting the preservation of the church from Viking destruction. his task is to edify. qui ubique regit et custodit sanctos suos. The holy place. 185: ‘ad corroborandum fidelium fidem_ quia ualde perniciosum erat. Mt V.3. ed. Annales de Bretagne et des Pays de l’Ouest 106 (1999). ed. Second. 71 For a lay penitent attending the night vigil. VI. historical and sacred. And the decision to reach out to the laity as well may reflect the growing Carolingian concern to adapt this advice to provide moral instruction for those in secular life. emphasising that right religious conduct means honouring Redon and its monks.70 Since laymen clearly did on occasion attend monastic services. 2 vols. As a contribution to the literature of monastic spiritual edification. Cassian and Gregory the Great. Il Chronicon Farfense di Gregorio di Catino.8. Its modular structure enabled individual passages to stand alone. the Gesta sanctorum Rotonensium offered a view of Redon’s history intended to strengthen the minds of the faithful. any individual chapter fulfills the author’s edifying purpose. V. 7–23 at pp. his cure by the monks and. then.72 Completing this survey of the textual construction of the Gesta sanctorum Rotonensium. usually unadorned Latin style. the narration of the illness of the founder Ratuili..6. that the ‘classics’ of this literature supplied some of the individual building blocks: 70 For example. Fonti per la Storia d’Italia 33–34. 7–8. framed by opening and closing biblical quotations which serve to emphasise the moral lessons to be drawn from the incident narrated. the message matched the audience. pp. 72 At both Farfa and Mont-Saint-Michel. V. as a thank offering. 1389–94 and comments of N. vol. ninth-century texts on the foundation of the monastery were also used for monastic lections.20 on the blessed. pp. Some chapters preach a message of more general applicability or are particularly suited for a lay audience.71 For both monastic and lay hearers then. Simonnet. (Rome. Apparitio S. 1.   379 simultaneously geographical. reprint 1969–72). 207–12. This. 3–23. The author presents each episode as a discrete textual unit. Together with his simple. U. . Balzani. Brett.21. we should note the author’s choice of building materials. yet combined them all together into a structured whole. XXVIII. 1903. the segmental structure of all three books is important within this overall framework. “Constructio monasterii Farfensis”. Michaelis archangeli in Monte Tumba in Gallia. Migne PL 96 cols. the Gesta belong to a literary tradition stretching back to the works of Sulpicius Severus. this format suggests that the text may have been intended for monastic lections.14–5 on priests anointing the sick and terminated by Lc. pp. albeit in the eleventh century. then. Almost every chapter is deliberately homiletic. is the architectural principle of this work of textual aedificatio. Read on its own.3 is opened by Iac. his oblation of his son Liberius and a further grant of land in GSR I. “La fondation du Mont-SaintMichel d’après la Revelatio ecclesiae sancti Michaelis”.    . It is no surprise. see GSR III. 73 His textual sources also extended to Redon’s own archive.76 Although his indebtedness to his oral informants is explicit. 3–36. as did other ninth-century writers on the fairly recent past. 75 Below. so the anonymous author’s textual borrowings and allusions remain covert. Past & Present 158 (1998). 64–9. 73 Summary analysis of textual borrowings and stylistic influences is provided by Brett. pp. 86 below. pp. At its most straightforward level.  Sulpicius Severus’ Vita Martini and Dialogues and also the Dialogues of Gregory the Great underpin parts of the text.. establishing an easy congruence between textual and oral material. pp. 144–5 and C. “Memory. pp. he supplemented the archives with stories told to him by other monks. apart from biblical citations. pp. shaping the monastery’s self-representation and speaking to the textual community which he hoped his words would encourage. but also to its library and the minds of the boys in the monastic classroom. his textual sources remain undisclosed. The author was also familiar with at least one Merovingian vita. and one section of the Liber Pontificalis. “Dossier hagiographique”. he pursued the work of construction in new directions.. the Gesta sanctorum Rotonensium thus indicate the level of cultural achievement in this monastery towards the end of the ninth century. for he demonstrably had certain charters in front of him as he wrote. “Dossier hagiographique”. orality and literacy in an early medieval society”. 473–5.380  . the Redon anonymous had himself participated in that. 74 Poulin. Stancliffe’s review of Brett’s edition in Journal of Ecclesiastical History 42 (1991). 146–7. GSR. Her list is incomplete: for additions see Poulin. From oblate to house author. 209. 76 As is well demonstrated by M. And in his writing. 390–1. Innes. 77 For example GSR II. others almost certainly remain to be identified. On occasion. Whereas the former provided a repertoire of words and phrases to be appropriated. A further textual borrowing is identified at n. pp. .75 Finally. the latter also supplied a template for how to write about holiness in a way which contributed substantially to the edifice as a whole. pp. he simply extracted details of property granted. Conuuoion’s building work had not been limited to the monastic buildings.74 elsewhere he presented accounts of some of Redon’s conflicts with local landowners that differed substantively from his archival sources. 185.77 Just as the planks from Ronuuallon’s house that were reused in building the abbey buildings would not have proclaimed their source. 8. pref. Yet in practice hagiographical works are rarely simple and straightforward. a liber miraculorum offers an image of the world as its author wished it might be but not necessarily as it was. or of the translation of his/her relics. This textual aedificatio 78 The best survey of the genre remains M. issues or themes. and penitents with clanking chains and suppurting sores reconciled at the shrines of Redon’s potent relics. The anecdotes generally have little or no explicit temporal relationship to any other events and only a loose chronological articulation with each other. 79 An exemplary study from which I have learned much is K. 1999). thus making either excerpting or continuation by a later author easy. Ashley and P. whose rhetorical strategies and political agendas have been the subject of numerous recent studies. Sheingorn. Their episodic structure gives early medieval libri miraculorum a ‘scrap-book’ quality which contributes to the definition of the genre. sign and history in the miracles of Sainte Foy (Chicago. libri miraculorum nevertheless comprise carefully selected material which may construct highly tendentious or partial images. each telling another miracle but yet making the same point. these proclaim the power of the saint or relics through a series of disjoint vignettes. Typologie des sources du moyen âge occidental 33 (Turnhout. Close reading suggests that underneath this characteristic presentation.79 Viewed from this perspective. That they are also revelatory of their authors’ ideologies and presumptions is little surprise. sick men being healed by the monks’ miracles. 1979).   381 I     Part of the charm of the Gesta sanctorum Rotonensium lies in the text’s apparent simplicity. Artful simplicity is also to be found in collections of miracle stories. but they may also encode coherent polemical positions and arguments.    . Heinzelmann. with its tales of Conuuoion’s struggles against rapacious local landowners. Translationsberichte und andere Quellen des Reliquienkultes. their closure is often arbitrary or incomplete.78 Though their opening may well be an account of the death of the holy man or woman. . the Gesta sanctorum Rotonensium become a sophisticated presentation of Redon’s past designed to meet the anxieties of a monastic community left increasingly insecure as benefactors turned their backs and Vikings advanced. Characteristically. This is evident in the case of many vitae. Structured as much by exclusion as inclusion of persons. Writing Faith: Text. and deconstructs his carefully built text to reveal its inner polemics. Agius’s Life of Hathumoda or Rimbert’s Life of Anskar are all ninth-century vitae written by a disciple or close personal associate of the deceased. in effect. But.382  . a paradise-like place of fresh waters. as the vita Antonii also made clear. 187: ‘quia ipse sanctus pater fundator et constructor sancti Rotonensis loci ab initio exstitit. had doubtless been chosen carefully. The author’s choice of subject immediately becomes significant. Liudger’s Life of Gregory. a pièce justificative for the monastery’s continuing existence. In most cases where a house author took up the pen within living memory of a revered founder or first abbot/abbess. The site itself. Although Conuuoion’s life from the foundation of Redon until his death provided the framing chronology and the subject matter for the opening and closing paragraphs.’ . a dangerous place to temper and test the ascetic spirit. strategically located.. From Evagrius’s translation of Athanasius’s Life of Antony onwards. Redon’s establishment had been marked by the conflict between founder and diocesan bishop. then. was its suitability in terms of the western ascetic tradition. it should also be a place inhabited by God. Eigil’s Life of Sturm. spreading trees and verdant meadows. however. What interested the author of the Gesta. The concluding section of this paper examines how the Redon author deployed his literary resources to this end. does the Gesta argue for Redon as a place distinguished by its holiness? We may answer with respect to place and person. et usque ad summum perfecte perduxit. pref. the ideal monastic site was one which resembled a desert. p.80 the work in no way conforms to the conventions of a founder’s vita. Ardo’s Life of Benedict of Aniane. Merovingian hagiography developed the themes.. His aggressive strategies for land acquisition and the long sequence of litigation in which he was embroiled may well have left him more feared than admired by the laity. Conuuoion’s retirement from the abbacy a year before his death may suggest an equally fraught ending to his career. the result was a vita. How. Why might the author have decided to reject this hagiographical tradition? It is tempting to speculate that Conuuoion had been far too politically controversial. and although the Gesta hail Conuuoion as the fundator et constructor under whose guidance the holy place attained the peak of monastic perfection.  is. balancing rhetorical traditions 80 GSR III. Brunnert. 7.3. I. The site chosen by Conuuoion was a locus desertus. p. Levison. this locus sanctus provided a glimpse of paradise. See the discussion of representations of the Seine in the vita Filiberti and other sources in M. illinc placet uberrima tellus.-E. 109. W. 85 GSR I. pp.5. 145). 6.86 His purpose was not simply to capture the lushness of the place.1. 2. quia diuerso uernat more gemmarum decore.. pp. pp. Studien und Mitteilungen zur Geschichte des Benediktinerordens und seiner Zweige 84 (1973). 121–3. Levison noted the exact parallel. istinc uirentia prata graminibus. von der Nahmer.83 But it was not at all like the rugged offshore islands or coastal caves where dragons lurked which earlier generations of Breton holy men had sought out. abstinentia magna.84 a place where ‘wonderful charity.81 This is exactly what the Redon author did.7. 82 GSR I. the Redon author simply lifted verbatim the description in the vita Filiberti of the site of Jumièges on the fertile banks of the Seine. 115: ‘peruenit ad locum sibi a Deo reuelatum’. Diesenberger. 87 I count thirty-two instances of the expression or its very close equivalent (sacratissimus locus. 119: ‘Caritas ibidem fulget mira. 2000). M. hinc frondium coma siluestris. cuncta undique aquis irrigata. 84 GSR I.   383 and actual topography. Zentrale Quellen über die Gründung im Spiegel der hagiographischen Tradition”. whose italicised portion is taken directly from vita Filiberti ch. 9–33.82 Here the devil lurked to tempt the weaker monks and to rouse evil laymen to attack the community. pp. p.). 59–78.’ 86 GSR I. pp. III. Kloster Fulda in der Welt der Karolinger und Ottonen (Frankfurt.87 Although the original Christian loca sancta were the sites in 81 D. in: C. ubi suspirantes pro desiderio paradisi gemunt’. The author’s insistence that Redon is a locus sanctus is unremitting. Brett’s edition fails to note it. pp. Rather. compendium nauium apta. 119. great austerity. 6. Schrimpf ed. MGH SRM 5. pp. in: G. hinc multiplices arborum fruges. nunc ad sinum rediens aquarum impetus manat. sanctum monasterium etc. castitas ante omnia. ed. 127–31. 125. 205 (the devil and laymen).2. ibid. it was a place known to God and revealed by him to the holy.3. “Wahrnehmung und Aneignung der Natur in den Gesta abbatum Fontanellensium”.. 163. To do so. 113. . 113–5. inclita coespis pastui pecorum congrua fundens frugem lactiferam. plaustris equinis etiam atque ratibus.6. Egger and H. Quellenkundliche Arbeiten aus dem Institut für Österreichische Geschichtsforschung. hinc hortorum odoriferi flores. humilitas summa. pp. p. nunc ascendens mare eructat. in the divine presence.’85 As such. “Über Ideallandschaften und Klostergründungsorte”.5. Ibi adstant in acie milites Christi.    . 83 GSR II. it deserved to be described in words redolent of paradise. 588–9: ‘Uere digna etymologia nominis Roton nuncupatur. “Fulda als Kloster in eremo. hinc uinearum abundant butriones. 203 (the devil and the monks). Mitteilungen des Instituts für Österreichische Geschichtsforschung Ergängzungsband 35 (Wien. Poulin inexplicably denied it (“Dossier”. III. Weigl eds. 7. the utmost humility shines forth. Text — Schrift — Codex. 195–270. p. Here. 165. chastity above all. but rather to emphasise the sacred qualities that enabled the monks to pursue their vocation there. 1996).. nihil paene indigens ex eo quicquid ministratur uehiculis pedestribus. I. 397–8. “How on earth could places become holy? Origins of the Christian idea of holy places”. Quentel. pp. there is a distinctive Breton place-name element loc. 28. pp. 91 See B.91 Redon was no different from many other Carolingian monasteries in this respect. 92 Tessier. royal grants of immunity to a church or monastery made it clear that the place thus privileged was a locus sanctus. 16. Revue Mabillon 62 (1972). 17–27. pp. 1925).(from locus) meaning “monastery. From c. Rosenwein. Les origines de la Bretagne (Paris. no. 700 onwards. 306. Boesch Gajano and L. 133–54). pp. 23–35. the use of the phrase in Marculf. Gourvil. Journal of Early Christian Studies 2 (1994). Pietri. Luoghi sacri e spazi della santità (Turin. “Le mot locus employé dans le sens de monastère”. pp. “Loca sancta: la géographie de la sainteté dans l’hagiographie gauloise (IV e–VI e s.3.-M. pp. MGH LL sectio V. L. 290. 15 (1963). it became a hagiographical assumption by the end of the sixth century that any site associated with such a person must be a locus sanctus.88 Then. 81–8. a place whose sacrality made it so powerful that even royal power there was constrained. 65. for example. 1990). Revue Internationale d’Onomastique 14 (1962). pp. F. Les saints et l’organisation chrétienne primitive dans l’Armorique breton (Rennes. 47–52. K. 90 See. 53–4. Dimier.. 15. 89 In addition to the common usage of locus to refer to a monastery (A. the spread of the cult of martyrs in late Antiquity had been accompanied by an acceptance that sanctity extended from the person to embrace the place where his/her tomb lay. for in 850. . ibid. Collectio Sangallensis 3. 43. Charles the Bald had issued a diploma granting immunity and protection. “Toponymie bretonne. P. “Les loc. Chronologie des noms en loc-”.dans l’hagiotoponymie bretonne”. See R. 44. NY. Markus. Fleuriot. thereby recognising that Redon was an established site of political and sacred significance in the topography of the Carolingian Reichskirche. vol. 4. ed.)”. 1980). Formulae Imperiales e curia Ludovici Pii 4. 80. pp.  Palestine hallowed by Christ’s presence and death. esp.A.89 and it certainly had strong legal overtones too. Scaraffia eds. His repetitious use of the phrase perhaps also owes something to specifically Breton toponymic conventions for monastic sites. Zeumer. p. 53. 257–71. 74–134. Formulae I. Immunities were one of the chief instruments through which the interaction of secular and sacred power was negotiated and. holy place” found from the eleventh century at the latest.90 Such a church stood in a special relationship to the king and his officials.92 88 R. Whether it was used with that meaning in earlier centuries remains disputed. pp. Negotiating space: Power. by the Carolingian period.H. restraint and privileges of immunity in early medieval Europe (Ithaca. 132. 35. The Redon anonymous thus tapped into an established hagiographical convention. Formulae Merovingici et Karolini Aevi. Largillière. 1999). Actes de Charles II..384  . as confessors came to be hailed alongside martyrs. L. in: S. conflated. 348–51. 263 who overemphasises the Anglo-Saxon influence behind these continental dedications. if desirable. Prüm. 260–317 at p. II pp.H. the year of consecration must precede the beginning of the charter habit of making grants to Sanctus Salvator in Rotono of which the earliest are dated 1 May 834 (CR 128.M. in: idem. 1979).94 On other occasions.A. (München. 133–73. and dedicated to Christ the Saviour. into the tenth century. 221–46 at pp. 2000). “Image du Christ. the dedication expressed the nature of a church as a house of God.    . “Kathedralpatrozinien im römischen und im fränkischen Gallien”. B. Sometimes.95 Although the dedication of a church commonly involved placing relics in the altar. Hypothemius.96 Whether Carolingian churches dedicated to Christ the Saviour contained modest relics from the start is unclear. where he and his saints were venerated. 277 for the day. they deliberately invoked Rome. Historia ecclesiastica gentis Anglorum. 114. where the Lateran basilica was known as the basilica Salvatoris. Brooks. the acquisition of major relics enshrined at the main altar tended to push the initial dedication into the background. new cults: Roman relics in Carolingian Francia”. also P. pp. Mynors (Oxford. Rome and English identity”. 96 On the various western rites for consecrating a church in the early Middle Ages. Smith ed. Ewig. all that was technically required was a mass of consecration. pp.H. “Old saints. Relics remained optional. Aniane and elsewhere. Roman relics had an especial prestige. pp. see G. Colgrave and R.M.33. Revue d’Histoire de l’Eglise de France 68 (1982).G. 97 J. 1969). p. ed. in: eadem ed. as it had done in early Christian times. Smith. 95 Cf. encouraged pilgrims and hence both income and reputation. in: J.97 The Gesta sanctorum Rotonensium describe at some length Conuuoion’s theft of the relics of the late fourth-century bishop of Angers. Le Maître. In many cases however. before narrating how 93 CR 137. 317–39. pp.93 Common in late Antiquity. 201–12. On this see N. Such shrines brought enhanced sacrality. image de l’empereur. “Canterbury. E. By the ninth century. . 130). 94 Cf. Willis. Further essays in early Roman liturgy (London. Eichstätt. Spätantikes und fränkisches Gallien. Conuuoion’s new church was consecrated on the feast of the apostles Simon and Jude (28 October) in 832/3. Early medieval Rome and the Christian West: Essays in honour of Donald A. 1968).. Bullough (Leiden.B. Early medieval Rome. 224–8. I. Beihefte der Francia 3. L’exemple du culte du Saint Sauveur sous Louis le Pieux”. dedications to sanctus Salvator continued to be made in the early Middle Ages.. it continued in use in the eighth and ninth centuries for new churches at Fulda.   385 For all its juridical implications. Bede. 2 vols. Paderborn. and Redon joined the competition for them. a locus sanctus remained a place of nearness to God. As such. vol. the Gesta claimed too that Redon outranked the archiepiscopal shrines of western Francia. 1894–1915). 320–36. 189–93. 147–51. and reject the jurisdiction of the Frankish church and of Rome. for the later years of Conuuoion’s abbacy were dominated by the attempts of some of the Breton bishoprics to throw off their Carolingian archbishop (Tours). p. 9. however.3. pp. 352–3. pp. Pope Leo IV gave him the relics of his martyred thirdcentury predecessor. References to the presence of Hypothemius in the charters show that his relics were there by 842/3 at the latest. pp. p. (Princeton 1990). Samson at Dol. Duchesne. 10. 101 GSR II. There is an important political context here too. he situated Redon in the topography of Christian holiness. 8. Through them. These relic acquisitions were not only central to Conuuoion’s strategy for building up Redon’s reputation as a sacred place. 195–7. 103 GSR III. 201–3. 3 vols.. Beauvoir (northern Poitou) and Glanfeuil (near Angers). p.101 As a papal shrine. 1996). Province and empire. Redon was proclaiming its affiliation with the universal Roman church and its recognition of the authority of the vicarius Sancti Petri apostoli. Martin at Tours and Hilary at Poitiers. 171–82. (Paris. 5. Nantes.3. This had a regional aspect. Smith. see P. 6. 181. pp. Redon’s relics healed those who had 98 GSR II. In the same place the Lord Jesus Christ reveals the merits of his martyr everywhere’. they are crucial to the anonymous author’s textual representation of it. The Hypothemius of the GSR is presumably the Apodemius who is listed as the second bishop of Angers in episcopal lists. Geary. 2. atque in eodem loco Dominus Iesus Christus merita martyris sui ubique demonstrat. Furta sacra: Thefts of relics in the central Middle Ages. L.386  . 99 GSR II. 181: ‘gauisus est populus gaudio magno.100 More ambitious. The monks and all the Bretons ‘were delighted with great joy that they had been found worthy to receive the vicar of the holy apostle Peter in their province. which does not however refer to this particular theft. III. 154–61.10.10. Herbers. Jahrhunderts (Stuttgart.  in 848/9. On relic thefts in general. was the universal dimension of the status claimed for Redon as a result of its possession of the relics of Pope Marcellinus.102 Pilgrims from as far afield as Spoleto and Lotharingia confirmed the monastery’s status as an international centre of healing.1. K. 197. Marcellinus. pp. describing Marcellinus.J. 207–13.98 The miracles worked by the relics then form the main theme of the third book. . 2nd edn.103 Moreover. Leo IV. and the Gesta duly describe pilgrims who found healing at Redon who had originated at Lehon (northern Brittany). pp.1. quia meruerant accipere uicarium sancti Petri apostoli in sua prouincia.99 In reporting the visionary visit of three famous holy men to one of these pilgrims. Fastes épiscopaux de l’ancienne Gaule. und das Papsttum in der Mitte des 9. 100 GSR III.’ 102 GSR II. vol. 283. Africa.8. 108 CR 59. pp. Mémento des sources hagiographiques de l’historie de Bretagne (Rennes. Frotmund and his brother had killed two relatives in a feud over inheritance.   387 failed to find a cure elsewhere. is much more shadowy. “Dossier”. According to the Redon anonymous. had been buried next to his shrine. three charters note his presence at Redon itself from 849 onwards. Charters make reference to this saint. Mount Ararat and Mount Sinai before returning to Rome. 67 (1962). For Conuuoion had acquired other relics too. no. 105 For the papal aspect of the shrine of Marcellinus.106 Redon also possessed a copy of the vita Maxentii. 84. A36. pp. pp. see Poulin. the author of the Gesta was also carefully omitting material which did not fit his purpose. 61–95.108 In stressing Redon’s Angevin and Roman allegiances. see F. and back to Rome. Redon succeeded. 269. Egypt. see Herbers. pp. Redon’s sacrality had gradually increased as relics were translated there and 104 GSR III. 241. In locating Redon in the topography of Christendom. Melor. de Poerck. and a Lotharingian synod sent them bound in pentitential chains to Rome. crossing the Alps and finally reaching Brittany. several high status people.107 Redon’s fourth saint.104 That his chains finally fell off and his wounds healed at the shrine of Marcellinus not only suggests that Redon regarded itself as an outpost of papal influence. so too the Gesta presented it as the central place in a topography of Christian holiness. “Les reliques des saints Maixent et Léger aux IXe et Xe siècles et les origines de l’abbaye de l’Ebreuil en Bourbonnais”. the Red Sea. Cf. Jerusalem and Mount Sinai failed. On Melor. 1918). but also that it claimed to be the most potent shrine in all Christendom. Revue Bénédictine. Commencing with the consecration of the church. 154–5. Conuuoion included. where their wanderings took them to Cana. For an identification of Frotmund and the political context of his sentencing. But the pope sent them back to the Holy Land. 373–8. Just as the Redon archive presented the monastery as the focus of a topography of power carefully built up by Conuuoion. 236. 106 CR 52. Duine. 207–13. pp.105 Where Rome. but he continued to Redon. A Brittonic saint whose cult centre in Brittany had been Lanmeur.    . 107 CR 241. . Maxentius was a Poitevin saint whose relics had reached Brittany by unknown means and which Conuuoion had enshrined in Redon’s dependent cell at Plélan. the Gesta conveniently forgot the Breton and Poitevin saintly heritage. G. Frotmund’s brother died at Rennes. but the Gesta author ignores this. they moved on to Jerusalem. Leo IV. 99–101. De translationibus et miraculis Santi Filiberti. ed. Michaelis archangeli (as n. Redon doubtless had an urgent need to make this claim. Eastwards. pp. Descriptiones Terrae Sanctae ex saeculo VII. tiny monasteries tended the cults of local saints. pp. pp. lay somewhat nearer to hand at Glanfeuil. For the arrival of Michael’s relics at Mont-Saint-Michel. only 75 km south-east of Redon (fig. monasteriolum quod vocatur Sent Tovi: CR A40. 1905). 31–2. Monuments de l’histoire des abbayes de Saint-Philibert (Paris. Vita Ermenlandi abbatis Antrensis. 1057–9 and Ermentarius. T. 51–66 at pp. monasterium Sancti Toinani: CR 276. 85–7. disciple of Benedict. 72). 154. pp. . Mauri. centenaire de la découverte du tombeau de saint Martin à Tours (Paris. in: Mémorial de l’année martinienne. Even closer. 52–3. Levison. however. Sancta Leupherina in monasterio Conoch: CR 152. pp. AA SS Jan.to late-ninth century at Glanfeuil and at Grandlieu. monasteriolum quod vocatur Sent Ducocan: CR 247. MGH SRM V. ch. W. “Le tombeau de Saint Martin et les invasions normandes dans l’histoire et dans la légende”. Tobler. ed. 674–710 at p. Even in its immediate vicinity. 708. whilst on a rocky knoll in the marshes of the Couësnon estuary.110 To the north. A45. W. ed. “Oral and written”. see P. Levison. IX. I. two outcrops off the Breton coast both housed active shrines. pp. see Odo of Glanfeuil. 1874). 111 On the cult of Malo and its promotion see Smith. chs. Vita Frodoberti abbatis Cellensis. A4. No liber miraculorum records miracles being worked at St Martin’s. Gasnault.. 1962). Seizième centenaire de l’abbaye de Ligugé. up the Loire valley. Martin’s famous and rich shrine at Tours was 200 km away. 1051–60 at pp. 100 km or as away. 85–99 and Adso. 5–6. see Donatus. XV (Leipzig.  legal immunity acquired. 27.109 At a regional level. the recently-arrived relics of St Michael were already demonstrating their ability to attract pilgrims from all over the Frankish world. for Frankish pilgrims there see Itinerarium Bernardi. 67–88 at pp. 331–4. Redon’s house author presented his readers and hearers with a holy place so suffused with divine presence that it resembled paradise. By the 860s the bishops of Alet were energetically promoting the relics of St Malo on his island hermitage. more famous saints attracted pilgrims and worked miracles at their well-endowed shrines. XII. Maurus. 110 On Martin’s shrine as a centre of pilrimage. Historia translationis S. unknown to us by not thereby unimportant to their neighbours. pp. the shrine of Ermenland on the island of Indre downstream from Nantes also healed pilgrims sent on from Rome. 19–70. One of the most sacred spots in Christendom. other. chs.111 The guardians of Hypothemius and Marcellinus had to compete in an environment already pullulating with miracle-working shrines: Redon’s claims reflect the magnitude of the challenge. MGH SRM 5. For miracles recorded in the mid. and Philibert had been translated in 836 from the island of Noirmoutier to Grandlieu. 1). For a pilgrim sent from Rome to Indre. R. Poupardin. 109 Martiris Sergii monasterium: CR 247.388  . see the Apparitio S. ed. emphasis on regular life distinguished Redon and reinforced its allegiance to Carolingian reform ideology. 2000). W.    . etc. 6. pp. 7. de Jong. 115 Gerfred. Eine Untersuchung zu den Ursprüngen des frühmittelalterlichen Klosterwesens und seine Quellen (Amsterdam. “Dossier”. Notable among these images of the pure and impure are the bishops of Vannes. falling prey to demons and lost all discipline in his conduct. pp. In this way. Raginarius is mentioned only for his opposition to Redon’s foundation. 195–7. quotations from p. Diem. . the Gesta author judged people not according to whether they were monks or clerics but instead in terms of their support for Redon and its ideals.   389 One way in which a holy place is distinguished from its milieu is by rituals and codes of conduct which emphasise its purity. III.’116 Adherence to the Rule of Benedict thus forms an important definition of Redon’s purity. his successor Susannus (838–848) only for his 112 A. M.114 These included the Angevin hermit Gerfred who instructed the fledgling community in the rule of St Benedict. or improper and thus polluting. “Internal cloisters: the case of Ekkehard’s Casus Sancti Galli ”.3. 163. 114 GSR I. Keusch und rein.5.115 But when brother Osbert left the ‘angelic life’. ‘as an untamed horse without a rider rushes anywhere headlong.2. 161–5. 5. 5. 2000. 149. 115–9. Grenze und Differenz im frühen Mittelalter.’ For example: CR 2. he demonstrates that Redon is a place where full purity is maintained. 113 GSR I. Pious lay benefactors who gave land and offered their sons as oblates enhanced the blessedness of Redon. 113–5. Reimitz eds. To demonstrate that Redon was a place of purity. 3. frequently referring to grants made ‘ad illos monachos habitantes et exercentes regulam Sancti Benedicti in monasterio quod vocatur Roton. he fell into the wost possible form of error. pp.112 The Redon author was sensitive to this: he depicts individuals behaving in ways which are either clearly pure and proper.113 hermits and monks from other monasteries who spent a period of time at Redon contributed to its sacrality. Pohl and H. 201–3. 4. restricts access to the laity and eliminates pollutants from ritual actions and spaces. a monk of St-Maur de Glanfeuil. 116 GSR II. Forschungen zur Geschichte des Mittelalters 1 (Wien. charters drafted at Redon put emphasis on its Benedictine observance.3. abundant legistation controls monastic behaviour.117 In a landscape dotted with tiny shrines. p. was a hermit in western Brittany at Coat-Guinec au Huelgoat (Finistère).. 117 Similarly. Poulin. forthcoming). Early medieval monastic texts make much of this. and the face of the regional competition of such prestigious cults as St Martin or St Michael. 6. but for the Gesta audience the moral was rather that ‘all that will live godly in Christ Jesus shall suffer persecution’. Courantgen surrendered the right to ordain Redon’s monks on the grounds that Viking raids were making the journey to Vannes approx (60 km) too difficult. pp.119 Furthermore.122 Redon’s monks thus approximate to living martyrs. AASS Jan. The context of the charges against Susannus in GSR II.3. 154–6.8. Veröffentlichungen der Historischen Kommission für Westfalen (Münster. 119 Carolingian legislation is summarised by Heinzelmann.10 was highly political. 1. yet the Gesta remain silent about who said mass at the installation of the relics of Hypothemius and Marcellinus. at least for ordaining its monks to the diaconate and priesthood — but that Bishop Courantgen (850–868) relinquished the right. p. 179. p. Balthildis. 141. 7. 121–31. pp. Translatio sancti Viti martyris.123 The theme 118 GSR I. 5. 46–8.  improper conduct. 123 GSR I. Guillotel has recently made the important suggestion that GSR II. “Cartulaire de Redon: le manuscrit”. 133. Many Frankish translationes take care to emphasise the bishop’s officiating role.390  . both Louis the Pious with his entourage and the local landowners who opposed Redon and tried to recover lands which their relatives had donated to the monks. For examples of bishops authorising and presiding at relic translations in the 830s see Historia translationis s. 1979). ed. I.747–9. which Conuuoion denounced to the pope.’ . 109. 122 II Tm 3:12 quoted in GSR I. p. 121 GSR I. This and all other accounts of the events of 848–9 are highly tendentious.120 Whilst it may be going to far to characterise the bishops of Vannes as the villains of the piece. 119: ‘ibi adstant in acie milites Christi. Translationsberichte.10. 20. II. their rhetorical role as the antithesis of Redon’s holiness hints at tense relations between monks and bishops and underscores the political subltety of the Gesta. ch. More useful in narrative terms were Redon’s secular opponents.. 36.7 and 11.118 The Gesta create the impression that the monastery functioned without any reference whatsoever to its diocesan bishop. pp. Translations of biblical quotations given in the Douai-Rheims version. 120 CR A46. 5. The solemn liturgies to enshrine the relics of Hypothemius and Marcellinus are the litmus test: Carolingian legislation had stipulated that relic cults should remain under firm royal or episcopal control. pp.10 may have been rewritten in the late eleventh or early twelfth century. the ‘soldiers of Christ [who] stand in battle order’. 127.. II. See my comments in Province and empire.121 Conuuoion had won imperial support after two years of adroit politicking. Schmale-Ott. we know from a letter which survives among the Redon charters that the bishops of Vannes did have a claim to authority over the monastery. pp. 1. 71.125 Outward persecution was not the only or even the best mark of the purity of Redon’s monks.129 His saint’s sanctity was rarely spectacular. Whereas the charters show Conuuoion resorting to lawcourts. the Gesta reassures the monks that trust in God would bring victory over their enemies. for child oblation to provide a major source of recruits for the monastic 124 Mt 5:10 quoted in GSR I. negotiation and pay-offs to defend his property and rights. “Dossier hagiographique”.127 Gregory presented ‘a cogent portrait of holiness presenting the quotidian virtues of Christian life: charity. 130 De Vogüé. pref. ed. the author of the Gesta had a persuasive model to hand in the Dialogues of Gregory the Great. SC 251. “Gregors des Grossen Dialogi und die Vita Goaris Wandelberts von Prüm”. with the age of actual martyrdom now past. with its emphasis on intercessory liturgy and corporate existence was a far cry from Gregory’s understanding of the ascetic life. 126 Direct quotations from the Dialogues are noted by Brett. de Vogüé. good men performing miracles did still exist. 86 above. and that ‘blessed are they that suffer persecution for justice’ sake: for theirs is the kingdom of heaven’. famulus Dei. (Paris.E. It thus adapted the literature of asceticism to the conditions of postRoman Italy. vol. Gregory the Great. 65 and Poulin. and always the external mark of the interior spiritual condition. Straw.’128 Whether monk. A. obedience and the discipline of the flesh. p. See quotation linking the paradise-like site of Redon and its battle lines in n. 265 3 vols.    . Redon’s monks live in a virtual paradise.   391 is pursued through the accounts of the monks’ dealings with local tyrants. vol. p. vir sanctus. I. I. bishop or even layman committed to a Christian life. 164–8. introduction. for Redon itself was the site where the army of God was arrayed. 14. So too was the tendency for monks to be priested. Gregory’s saint was the vir Dei. 127 Dialogues. pp. 135.9. 7. For the Dialogues’ influence on another ninthcentury hagiographical text.126 Writing in 593–4. 144. Gregory’s account of everyday sanctity soon established itself as one of the most influential and popular monastic texts of the Middle Ages. 51–62. p. Gregory had offered sketches of many Italian holy men as a reassurance that.130 The highly institutionalised Benedictine monasticism of the Carolingian empire. p. 128 C. 125 . 129 Epithets assembled by Straw. Stiene. In presenting their inner holiness. p. vir venerabilis. 1988). 1978–80). p. Mittellateinisches Jahrbuch 18 (1983). Gregory the Great: Perfection in imperfection (Berkeley. 260. pp. 69.124 As virtual martyrs. see H. 141–3. 1. have visions. abbas136 heal the sick.H. 2. Gregory says: ‘sed talis eiusdem viri vita perhibetur. once a wealthy layman. P. Past & Present 146 (1995). pp.5. ut qui conversationem agnoverit. 147–53.392  . 135 J. Fouracre. pp. 3–37. A44. for clerical canons to be attached to the monastery and for commemorative prayer for patrons and benefactors to command much time.M. “The origins of the Carolingian attempt to regulate the cult of saints”. 134 For example.. such miracles were important inasmuch as they provided the external signs of inner spiritual grace. 165. he trusted everyone. de Vogüé. clerical canons: GSR II. 8 pp.137 Just as for Gregory the Great. 1999). Indeed. A vir simplex et rectus.1. 65. for example. . 780–920”. II.. 2. 80. for the sancti monachi and their sanctus ac venerabilis . in: J. the Dialogues provided the template for demonstrating the ritual purity of Redon’s monks and enabled him to stress the efficacy of their prayers and masses. atque omnibus bonis adornatus. Howard-Johnston and P. III. Dialogues.6. dozens of pro anima mea charters imply prayers for the souls of living donors. 147–5. “The problem of female sanctity in Carolingian Europe. 236.134 In adopting this correlation between purity of life and miraculous actions. monks celebrating daily mass: GSR II. 51. 4. his eyes flowed with tears. He maintained his chastity. ed.276. 115–9.131 In all these respects.133 he transformed Redon’s monks into holy men just like Gregory’s. 157–65. .5.3. In addition. their conversatio and their vita. 255. innocens. p. virtutem non debeat mirari’.  life. The latter had emphasised his subjects’ holiness by recording the miracles which were the outer signs of their vocation and monastic way of living.132 Yet the author of the Gesta sanctorum Rotonensium found no discordance between the monastic life he experienced directly and that portrayed by Gregory. pp. Because he ‘flourished with virtues’ Conuuoion 131 Cf. Smith. 137 GSR II. 133 Above. twenty were priests. 3. 136 GSR II. 5. “Carolingian monasticism”. 147–9. pp. the Redon author remained unaffected by the deep mistrust of living holy men and thaumaturges which distinguished Carolingian Christianity from its late antique roots. n. his new life was led in summa sanctitate. GSR I. The cult of saints in late antiquity and the early Middle Ages (Oxford. Pref. pp.135 His monks are the living saints of Redon. With his emphasis on vita et conversatio. 167–71. Hayward eds. De Jong. on Sabinus. 132 . commemorative prayer: CR 28. Redon was a typical ninth-century monastery. walk on water.1. oblates: CR 27. 145. bishop of Canosa. 69. 52. 238. identify and defeat the devil..A. Condeloc. Monks as priests: of the 28 witnesses of CR 224. became the monastic gardener. c. 143–65. Since the miracles worked by the monks were not theirs but God’s. who vowed not to desecrate 138 GSR II. mira.3. the Gesta sanctorum Rotonensium is highly distinctive for retaining the Gregorian readiness to associate purity of monastic life with miracle-working. abstinentia magna. Here.2. As a rhetorical strategy. A storm panicked the Vikings. . 159. the monks prayed that their monastery would be spared ‘the pollution of the pagans’.’141 As Christ had said to his disciples. p. . fratres carissimi. 141 ‘Videte.138 In recounting Redon’s foundation. and know that Christ was in their midst. 140 ‘Mirabilia domini nostri Iesu Christi . As n. Among ninth-century works of monastic edification. he could argue that the sanctity of this holy place inhered not only in its relics but in its living inhabitants and the pure liturgy which they maintained in the face of persecution. quoted in GSR II. p. it enabled him to present Redon as a worthy rival to the established holy places of Francia and Christendom. That the holiness of Redon’s monks demonstrated the holiness of the place is the message of the last chapter of the Gesta in its extant. GSR II.’ GSR II. humilitas summa.    . pp.139 His miracle stories add substance to the assertion and affirm that humble monks contributed as much as their influential abbot to Redon’s holiness. by what ways and means the Lord makes his saints wonderful everywhere in heaven and on earth. 142 Io 15:5. he expelled them by invoking the Trinity. they furnished a further proof that Redon was a place touched by God’s presence. qomodo uel qualiter Dominus sanctos suos in caelo et in terra ubique mirificat. the author had already summarised the virtues for which Redon was important: caritas . 85 above.’142 Redon’s monks should count themselves among the saints. p. .140 The anonymous author’s message for his readers is clear: ‘See.   393 put him in charge of the monastic garden. 139 . equally potent for its lived sanctity and its relics. 151. castitas ante omnia. . His inner holiness manifested itself when. 153–5.4. ‘Without me you can do nothing. 157.4. The author developed the theme so that. dearest brothers. per famulos suos’. by affirming God’s presence at Redon. the author narrates with brio the activities of two Viking fleets in the mouth of the Loire in 852 and then the move of one of them up the Vilaine. faced with an infestation of caterpillars. Before fleeing. truncated form. Although it participated fully in the culture of Carolingian monasticism it nevertheless lacked the means to integrate itself in that wider monastic world. its abbot and monks lacked links to court circles.394  .. the Vikings who survived were those who honoured the sanctity of the monastic altar.143 As the sacrosanct space of Redon’s altar lay at the heart of the cloister. Redon was authentically Carolingian-Benedictine. the place furthest from the outside world where priestly purity contributed to the efficacy of the sacraments.9. From a local point of view. Only those Vikings who slunk into the sacristy to drink the mass wine died. so God thwarted the Viking attack on Redon. pp. Nevertheless Redon enjoyed direct. links with the Carolingian court. 213–19. for Louis the Pious’s precious diplomata legitimised its existence and bound it into the community of prayer which upheld imperial authority. which rode rough-shod over traditional ways of conduct- 143 GSR III. but on its own terms. Redon was on the outermost periphery of the networks of association. furthermore. Rather. Charles the Bald. The miracle manifested the transformative powers of Redon’s mass wine. As Sennacherib. having gone instantly mad. Unmentioned in the extant libri memoriales. the author made the parallel between Jerusalem and Redon explicit. finally. incorporated it into the network of juridical holy places which formed his state church. the texts that circulated through such networks or the aristocratic patronage that came with them. Redon was an upstart and powerful presence. Here. Postponed until nearly the end of the work. whose ideologies and practices only spread successfully insofar as individual monastic communities found it worth their while to tap into them. the safe-keeping of the Breton Jerusalem is the narrative culmination of everything which precedes it. To construe Redon as a marginal place is thus overly reductive. .  ‘the holy place of God’ and instead lit candles around the altar. so this episode lay at the heart of the Gesta. king of the Assyrians prepared to attack Jerusalem but was deflected by the God of the Israelites. friendship and patronage which bound together many of the major monasteries of the Carolingian empire. its history points to the flexibility of state-sponsored Benedictine monasticism. if tenuous. It needed to be: how else could a new monastery transform the ecclesiastical topography of western Gaul whose main contours stretched back five hundred years to the days of Martin of Tours? And how else could it justify itself in the straightened and insecure circumstances of the late ninth century? Perhaps because he was spared the straitjacket of an institutional history reaching back far into the distant past and replete with its own canonical traditions. the Redon anonymous produced a work of considerable originality and effectiveness. his demise ushered in a period of retrenchment from which Redon never recovered in the early Middle Ages. ideological and ascetic themes which served his purpose. Since the Carolingian state church and Breton princely power both crumbled in the last quarter of the ninth century. home of miracle-working monks. the community had nevertheless prospered and obtained widespread support.    . a proponent. whether between pagans and Christians. It had forged an institutional existence which exploited local possibilities. perhaps because of a sturdily independent habit of thought. Redon needed a defender. He argued Redon’s case: that it was Jerusalem in Brittany. It also reminds us forcibly of the fluidity of political and cultural topography of early medieval imperial peripheries. abbot and laymen. paradise on earth.   395 ing life but brought spiritual benefits to the region. perhaps because he lacked access to the most up-to-date norms of Carolingian historical and hagiographical literature. . It needed to justify its existence. Franks and Bretons. to show that there was only one safe haven in a world where power was always in contestation. The moment of Redon’s foundation had hardly been opportune. a veritable holy place. Carefully selecting a range of topographical. One anonymous monk rose to the challenge. an advocate. God and the devil. princely patronage and distant imperial ideologies alike. a mark of the enduring significance of these early medieval transformations to topographies of power. of monastic engagement with the secular world. Conuuoion’s death in 868 perturbed its search for stability however. In this changed environment. Under the shrewd leadership of Conuuoion. The twelfth-century abbey church that replaced Conuuoion’s original buildings is today stands at the centre of a prosperous regional market town. he envisioned Redon as none of the monks can ever quite have experienced it. That it developed as an important central place in its own right is an example of a monastery functioning as an agent of social and political change. each constructed within very different textual traditions and strategies. This interpretation reveals that whatever late ninth-century Redon lacked in institutional stability. Prüm or Lorsch — as the norm. Taken together. they demonstrate the textual bid for monastic power at its most persuasive and cogent. endured cyles of prosperity and decay. and enjoyed only a regional significance. Each puts the other into perspective. Its exceptionalism lies in the conjunction of a large archive and a historicalcum-hagiographical self-portrait of overlapping content. Fulda. The typical early medieval monastery was one which left scrappy. The Redon cartulary and the Gesta each offer a profoundly different perspective on what was entailed in building a holy place in the ninth century. Redon represents this. We should not fall into the trap of thinking that one is somehow ‘more real’ than the other: rather. . They enjoyed exceptional wealth. But that is to regard the monasteries with enduring links to the Merovingian or Carolingian ruling dynasties — communities such as Saint-Denis. they present complementary identities. the Gesta sanctorum Rotonensium may seem grandiose and unrealistic. partial documentation.. They were not. That the Gesta are essentially tendentious emerges only when they are read against Redon’s charters on the one hand. it acquired in textual representation. In arguing the case for Redon.396  . and Latin hagiographical conventions on the other. privilege and prominence. and left ample written evidence to tell us so.  With unadorned Latin but skilful rhetoric he constructed a place of such unimpeachable holiness as to obfuscate the degree of special pleading involved. Paul Fouracre and Simon MacLean for discussion of issues covered in this paper. for one or other party petitioned Charlemagne himself about their extent. For the wider political and social history of the area discussed. ed. Heppenheim was the site of a sizeable and strategically placed estate centre which had been granted to the nearby. . 3 vols. the current discussion aims to investigate the relationship between space. 2000). Hence the calling of the 795 meeting ‘through a precept of King Charles’. immediately after he had assumed lordship over the monks. 1 Codex Laureshamensis. K. perspective on the basic problems of early medieval society to that adopted in my book. 6a: ‘De marcha Hephenheim . 1.1 Over 1200 years on. mediante mense augusto placitum in eadem silva ad tumulum qui dicitur Walinehoug habuit. sub certis et designatis limitbus disterminauit. vol. a public meeting was held in the woods which covered the area where the valley of the Rhine met the rugged hills of the Odenwald. abbey of Lorsch by Charlemagne himself in 773.    In the middle of August 795. but complimentary. eam a silva que pertinet ad Moynecgowe. at a tumulus called the Walinehoug close by the villa of Heppenheim.’ . Evidently the precise bounds of the extensive rights over the woodland and hamlets of the surrounding area that went with Charlemagne’s gift were a matter of dispute between the monks and their neighbours. . Innes. et cum illustrium virorum iudicio et testimonio terminum et divisionem eius faciens. see M. 400 –1000 (Cambridge. 1929–36) [hereafter: CL plus charter number]. Glöckner. no. and newly founded. (Darmstadt. but some self-citation has proved unavoidable in covering background information. a local meeting in the woods that line the Rhine valley as it meanders its way north might seem impenetrably * I would like to thank fellow participants in the “Topographies of Power” conference. Marios Costambeys. Warinus ex precepto Karoli regis anno XXVII regni eius. . PLACES AND POWER IN CAROLINGIAN SOCIETY* Matthew Innes A C : . et ab omnibus circumpositis marchis. State and society in the early Middle Ages: the Middle Rhine Valley.PEOPLE. and the subsequent establishment of the boundaries of property rights within the Odenwald ‘through the judgement and testimony of illustrious men’. place and power in the hope of opening a different. it is vital to remember that the sources from which we work did not stand outside of the relationships they recorded. 1997). Davies and P. Small worlds: the village community in early medieval Brittany (London. and the model case study. New Cambridge Medieval History II (Cambridge. it flowed from person to person at those places where individuals came together. and thus increased the social and political distance between rulers and localities. . Within this ‘small world’ power — the ability to affect the strategies of others. at the beginning of the Carolingian period.. but exercised in public. Changing spatial patterns of social action can thus reveal the complexity of the evolving symbiotic relationship between kings. 2 For this approach see e. But by analysing moments such as this. like an electric current. and the creation of fixed and insulated connections between the circuits of local power. W. For the value of the charter material in building a bottom up picture of early medieval society see C. we can examine some fundamental aspects of social organisation. which was patterned around a settlement hierarchy ultimately determined by. I thus begin with a microcosm made possible by the 795 meeting. But they also led to more direct competition between kings and elites for access to local circuits of power. Using the very full documentary record from the middle Rhine and lower Main valleys. W. but not identical to. the making of those contacts which allowed power to be exercised locally remained essentially a matter of social interaction. when latent conflicts within the rural communities that made up the Carolingian Empire emerge into the light of day. The ninth century saw changes in these local patterns of interaction. Fouracre eds. and the actions of those who attended of little moment. the Roman civitas system. The settlement of disputes in early medieval Europe (Cambridge. either actively or passively — was embedded in interpersonal relationships. 1). 1986). and local conflicts were processed and consensus created. Davies. the notice of the 795 enquiry is thus an excellent starting point for an investigation of the relationships between place and power in the Carolingian world. 510–37. McKitterick ed..2 Despite its inherent difficulty and modesty. which were the ultimate places of power through which rulers plugged into local currents. elites and localities in the Carolingian period (fig. These changes enabled both kings and elites to plug into the currents of local power more efficiently from a greater distance. “Rural society in Carolingian Europe”. Wickham. 1989). it is possible to trace the development of the circuits of power over time. This essay argues that.398   obscure. in: R.g. pp. From the outset.       399 Fig. Unlike an ethnographer able potentially at least to talk to all the parties involved. 1.3 3 But for a stimulating ethnographic study which considers the active relationship between local knowledge in the field and official documentation. and one produced by a particular interested party and designed to bolster their particular understanding of property relationships at that. see P. .. we have only a textual presentation. In particular. Gow. the documentary riches on which this essay is based rehearse the property claims of the church in the language of the church. The middle Rhine valley and the major places mentioned in the text. 400   Nonetheless. It is worth noting that the almost wholesale ignorance of such documents is a direct result of the ingrained “statism” of modern scholarship. 1–18. R. 4 Cf. unformulaic and unconcerned with selfverification and thus so unlike a forger’s concoction. “What was Carolingian government?”. class of documents recording the local enactment of royal commands. so circumstantial. when the surviving Lorsch cartulary was compiled and the surviving account of the 795 meeting copied into the introductory chronicle as an appendix to Charlemagne’s gift of Heppenheim to the monks. EME 3 (1994).5 The record of the 795 meeting is a difficult text — or rather. O’Hanlon. it was one of the foundation charters of the territorial lordship the monks exercised in their immediate vicinity. 1995). “The monastery of Sant’ Ambrogio and dispute settlement in early medieval Milan”. pp. pp. . and if we recreate the context of our text carefully enough we may even begin to hear an echo of the loud debate that must have taken place. Balzaretti. series of texts. not least as the procedures and personnel it details are so utterly consistent with those recorded in the thousands of “Land. in: J. for the woodland rights that were at stake were of such importance to the Lorsch monks that the boundaries established by the 795 meeting were amplified and edited by successive monastic scribes to support current claims. diplomatists and local historians have gone some way towards elucidating its textual archaeology. pp. It sheds a penetrating light on the actual impact of the royal will — here itself transmitted in written form — in the localities. in the useful anthology edited by E. is accepted as essentially genuine. social historians and prosopographers. State and society. the account of the August 795 meeting is one of a particularly intriguing. The anthropology of landscape: Perspectives on place and space (Oxford. people and paper in Central Amazonia”. The account of the 795 meeting. 43–62. even such a partial record allows us to view the mechanisms through which local conflicts were processed. in other words the basic mechanisms of Carolingian government. By the twelfth century.4 Indeed. 6 Innes.6 It is therefore composed of a number of layers. Charlemagne (forthcoming). Hirsch and M. and the work of successive generations of modern antiquarians. and particularly the rigid application of nineteenth-century bifurcations of “public” and “private”: local documents responding to royal commands like the Heppenheim placitum have been left among the “private” charters and thus dissociated from “official” and “governmental” material and left to local historians. Storey ed. Innes. 5 See M. 246–50.. yet almost wholly neglected. ,       401 other transmitted documents from this region at this time; but the boundaries it describes are to be regarded with the utmost suspicion.7 We are given the names of no fewer than thirty seven men who served as witnesses and ‘made’ these boundaries: they are listed as representatives of the geographical units, or pagi, into which the region was divided, with a dozen men from the Lobdengau (the lower Neckar valley around Ladenburg), eight from the Wingarteiba (a small area deep within the Odenwald), and seventeen, led by one Count Rupert, coming jointly from the Rheingau (the western part of the Odenwald down to the banks of the Rhine) and the Maingau (the lower Main valley and the neighbouring parts of the Odenwald). The identities of these individuals can be fleshed out from the wealth of documentary evidence for land-holding and monastic patronage in the area; and the lists are circumstantially plausible in the light of the rest of the surviving documentation, much of which did not survive through the Lorsch archive. These men — property-holders of some social distinction, the grandest of them not without illustrious connections or hopes of rising through royal service — were representatives of their localities, leaders of their communities. Their coming together to reach a collective judgement and determine ‘right’ both mobilised the local knowledge necessary to settle the claims and counter-claims they heard, and underwrote the acceptability and validity of the settlement. 7 The bibliography is vast, but Glöckner’s notes in his edition of the text remain a good starting-point, and H.-P. Lachmann, “Die frühmittelalterlichen Marken zwischen Rhein und Odenwald unter besondere Berücksichtigung der Mark Heppenheim”, Berichte zur deutsche Landeskunde 49 (1975), pp. 27–37, the best treatment, which I largely follow; see also C. Wickham, “European forests in the early Middle Ages: Landscape and land clearance”, reprinted from Settimane 37 (1989), pp. 479–548, in Wickham’s collected essays, Land and power: Studies in Italian and European social history, 400–1200 (London, 1994), pp. 155–200. Note that the two critical key studies of the middle Rhenish material, M. Gockel, Karolingische Königshöfe am Mittelrhein, Veröffenlichungen der Max-Planck Instituts für Geschichte 31 (Göttingen, 1970) and F. Staab, Untersuchungen zur Gesellschaft am Mittelrhein in der Karolingerzeit, Geschichtliche Landeskunde 11 (Wiesbaden, 1975) both likewise regard CL 6a as an interpolated account of a genuine meeting. There is a good discussion of the significance of the interests at and around Heppenheim, again accepting the account of the 795 meeting, by the doyen of mittelrheinische Landesgeschichte, H. Büttner: “Die politische Kräfte zwischen Rhein und Odenwald bis zum 11. Jht.”, in his collected essays, ed. A. Gerlich, Zur frühmittelalterlichen Reichsgeschichte am Rhein, Main und Neckar (Darmstadt, 1975), pp. 253–66. 402   Not only did the tradition of processing conflict through public meetings ensure both local knowledge and local agreement, but also the precise makeup of the 795 meeting underlined a concern with reaching a broadly based and extensive local consensus. The villa of Heppenheim, and the vast woodland ‘mark’ which was attached to it, lay unambiguously within the Rheingau, but representatives of the surrounding pagi as well as the illustrious of the Rheingau met at the Walinehoug (fig. 2). Doubtless this was partly because at places the boundary of the Heppenheim mark were coterminous with the boundaries of the Rheingau. But this was essentially an assembly of the local elite as a whole to settle a highly contentious dispute, which determined the distribution of economic, social and political power within their area. After all, it was not Count Rupert, the royal official who led the contingent of Rheingau and Maingau men, who presided, Fig. 2. The ‘mark’ of Heppenheim with its boundaries in 795 (after Lachmann) and the later interpolations to the west and south. ,       403 but another count, Warin, most of whose activities in royal service were focussed slightly further to the south, along the Neckar. It is more or less impossible to make sense of the precise personnel and procedures used in terms of administrative or jurisdictional boundaries: this was a meeting whose rationale was social and political, not a court with a defined legal competence.8 Warin brandished the royal precept which called the meeting and authorised it to determine the boundaries of the Heppenheim mark not as count of the locality, but on account of his special link with the place under discussion, for the notice rehearses the history of the Heppenheim estate before Charlemagne gave it to Lorsch. It recounts how Heppenheim was held by Warin’s father, Wegelenzo, in beneficium, then by Warin himself as a count in ministerium ad opus regis, and then by Count Baugolf.9 Deciding on the current state of property rights involved establishing an agreed view of their history; the recitation of the estate’s genealogy established that the 795 meeting was establishing an order which had, according to the scribe, existed since ‘ancient time’, and which could be traced back through 8 In an important article J. Hannig, “Zentrale Kontrolle und regionale Machtbalance. Beobachtungen zum System der karolingischen Königsboten am Beispiel des Mittelrheingebietes”, Archiv für Kulturgeschichte 66 (1984), pp. 1–46 esp. pp. 27–33, argues that the Heppenheim case and other surviving placita deal with particularly difficult or sensitive cases which could not be handled through the ‘normal’ courts; but given the total lack of evidence for the existence of a ‘normal’ system of neat territorial jurisdictions it may be more likely that the kind of local meetings revealed in the placita were the norm — see Innes, State and society, pp. 118–24. 9 Again, a history which finds striking corroboration elsewhere in the documentary evidence: see Innes, State and society, pp. 180–2, with references to earlier discussions, for similar changes at Lorsch, and note also Die Urkunden Pippins, Karlmanns and Karls des Großen, ed. E. Mühlbacher, MGH DD 1 (Berlin, 1906), Charlemagne charter no. 63 for Charlemagne’s similar intervention, on formerly fiscal land at nearby Umstadt in favour of Fulda against a local landowner. We are clearly witnessing a wholesale working of local patronage networks, involving a thorough look at local landowning particularly on fiscal land. For Heppenheim see Innes, State and society, p. 190 and for the family involved Gockel, Königshöfe, pp. 262–5. This Baugolf was a close kinsman of Warin’s, and probably identical with the eponymous abbot of Fulda. Note that the language used to explain Heppenheim’s status — first as a beneficium held by Wegelenzo, who was not a count, then a ministerium held by a local count — is recognisably that of the early Carolingian period, whilst the reflection that the woodland mark had been attached to Heppenheim ‘semper ex tempore antiquo sub ducibus et regibus’ again shows a full understanding of local history that would have escaped a later forger (in the late seventh and early eighth century the region up to the Rhine had been effectively ruled by more or less independent duces based at Würzburg: Innes, State and society, p. 176). 404   three generations of property-holders.10 An intimate link between property rights, the people who had exercised them, and the places at which they were exercised runs through the entire procedure: the meeting, led by Warin, former holder of Heppenheim, took place within the woods under scrutiny themselves, concluded with a perambulation of the boundaries which it had established. A written account complemented the memory of those who took place. The account of the 795 meeting records the creation of a topography of ownership. The boundaries of the Heppenheim mark were consciously embedded in local topography. The long account of these boundaries, notwithstanding the accretions of later confection, serves as a reminder that rights over land were understood first and foremost as experienced practices. Because they were practical and real, they were etched into the landscape through topographical markers and place-names. Both could be used actively, to make claims, as well as serving as a passive witnesses of exercised rights. The surviving account describes the bounds of the Heppenheim mark being physically marked, with the construction of tumuli at key points by local property-holders, some of whom doubled as royal agents. Placenames similarly served to articulate the property claims of landowners whose interests abutted onto this contested boundary with its predatory monastic owner: Albwines sneida, Hildegeresbrunno, Manegoldescella and so on. The description of the bounds thus evokes a world where rights and relationships were set in a living landscape, and place was central to identity.11 But we should also remember that such detailed and elaborate accounts of estate boundaries are extremely unusual amongst the voluminous Carolingian material. Evidently in normal transfers of property, concerning discrete units of agricultural exploitation or settlement, such details needed no rehearsal: where so-and- 10 For the ongoing debate about the applicability of notions of ‘customary law’ to the early middle ages see the characteristically sensible overview of S. Reynolds, Kingdoms and communities in Western Europe, 900 –1300 (Oxford, 1984), pp. 12–66. The Heppenheim document presented its conclusions as the declaration of a self-evident order rooted in past practice, but these findings were debated and constructed, and clearly in actuality anything but long-established: antiquity is here a legitimating ideology within which the meeting operated. 11 Thus P.J. Geary, “Land, language and memory in Europe, 700–1100”, Transactions of the Royal Historical Society 9 (1999), pp. 169–84, drawing particular attention to the frequent use of the vernacular in boundary clauses right across western Europe, and whilst not discussing the Heppenheim document drawing on evidence from Fulda and Wurzburg which is very close in date and context. ,       405 so’s holding ended was known to all, and all that was recorded was the owner of neighbouring owners. The Heppenheim description, though, settled boundaries of a different significance, which marked off a huge area of wooded hills, complete with scattered dwellings, peasant holdings, hunting and woodland rights exercised by a variety of individuals and institutions. Such rights were anything but selfevident or rooted in everyday practice: they established essentially political control on a level divorced from the direct exploitation of the countryside. Hence the care with which the highly contentious and actively contested rights were recorded, and the very need for a written record in the first place.12 Note that the meeting was held out-of-doors, away from the main core of settlement in Heppenheim, at a tumulus whose name may have commemorated an earlier holder of the villa, and which certainly seems to have served as an identifiable marker at which locals could meet.13 Whatever private negotiations went on before the 795 meeting, decisions were reached not at the royal court, not at Lorsch, nor at the residence of either of the counts present, but at the place under discussion itself: rights were inextricably tied to the places where they were exercised, and the landscape itself was witness to rights over the land. The findings of the meeting may have been recorded in writing and preserved at Lorsch, but in 795 agreement was reached face-to-face and in public, and hence out-of-doors. On this most local of levels, rights were inscribed in the landscape, through the actions of human inhabitants who shaped and labelled it: landscape functioned as a mnemonic for property rights and the relationships between people, which they created. Whilst place and landscape were important in the settlement of the boundaries of Heppenheim, they were not sufficient on their own. This was a dispute over the local distribution of power, and its resolution took force because it was agreed and established by ‘illustrious 12 These concerns are also present in the other detailed boundary descriptions in the Lorsch and Fulda material; for the argument that the Fulda material actually relates to a significant shift in the organisation of agrarian exploitation, see Innes, State and society, pp. 73–81. We cannot therefore see such accounts, whether vernacular or Latin, as straightforward evidence for an organic link between land and identity. 13 Indeed, if the element Waline- which serves to identify the tumulus relates to a personal name, as seems likely to this untutored eye, it is striking how closely it relates to names in the family of those local nobles who held Heppenheim from the king before 773. 406   men’ in a meeting sanctioned by the king and summoned through his written order carried by one of his local agents. This meeting was thus ‘public’ simultaneously in several different senses. It was set in motion by an authoritative royal order, chaired by his agent on account of that order, and thus legitimated by royal power. But its findings gained force from the presence of the local elite, and its staging out of doors, in the collective gaze; its doings were thus open, transparent and manifest. In this sense, the meeting involved an implicit process of representation, with local elites acting as de facto representatives of the wider community because they acted before that community with royal blessing. Their judgement was therefore able to determine the fate of the peasants who had interests in Heppenheim and the neighbouring woodland.14 As the subsequent alteration and interpolation of the written account of boundaries reminds us, however, the decisions inscribed in the landscape through word and deed in 795 did not stay constant for all time. The settlement of 795 was essentially an agreement about the local distribution of power, and the relationship between Lorsch and its neighbours at a particular point in time; the story of the successive reworkings of the details of the 795 agreement by successive generations of Lorsch monks is the story of the changing balance of power in the locality. Interestingly, here writing, operating in the context of non-written forms of legal memory, proved malleable, and was adapted to reflect changing realities, just as the landscape features recorded in the successive versions of the bounds had their meaning altered to legitimate new social realities: we can see no hard-and-fast divide between oral and written legal practices, but rather see both serving to underline the status quo and to legitimate current claims. Writing did not alter social practice in and of itself: the extension of the boundaries of Lorsch’s rights as recorded in writing seems to have followed Lorsch’s acquisition of the dominant property interests in the settlements around Heppenheim in the ninth century, whilst physical force was deployed to good effect in asserting and defending claims in the tenth century. Nonetheless, the monks’ control of the written record regarding the Heppenheim mark gave them a strategic advantage over their neighbours, particularly 14 Cf. J. Habermas, The structural transformation of the public sphere, transl. T. Berger (London, 1989), esp. pp. 1–13. ,       407 as local power came to be abstracted from social relationships on (and with) the ground. Lorsch’s interests in the Heppenheim woodlands were slowly reified into a series of jurisdictional rights that existed independently of the people over whom they were exercised, until by the eleventh century they were the basis of the monastery’s territorial lordship. P      Thanks to the richness of the Lorsch archive in which this document was transmitted, and that of the monastery of Fulda, it is possible to build up a very detailed picture indeed of patterns of social action in Carolingian middle Rhine and lower Main: around 5,000 records of legal transactions are transmitted from the region, most concerning the second half of the eighth century and the first decades of the ninth. Ploughing through the Lorsch and Fulda evidence certainly is a pretty rebarbarative exercise, but the charters represent total social occasions that were marked by public rituals, and so they supply information of the utmost significance. In the second half of the eighth century, the charters suggest the existence of a hierarchy of venues for public meetings and legal action. At the apex of this hierarchy were cities: the former Roman civitates of Mainz and Worms, now episcopal seats where kings stayed when they were in the region, plus the former Roman stronghold of Ladenburg on the lower Neckar, an important ecclesiastical outpost of Worms east of the Rhine which early medieval scribes likewise referred to as a civitas.15 The significance of the cities as the places par excellence for public action is clearest at Mainz: through the 760s and 770s it is difficult to find a donation of land to Fulda which was not made at Mainz. The historical links between Fulda and Mainz through the person of St Boniface might partly explain 15 See Staab, Gesellschaft, pp. 118–36; H. Büttner, “Zur Stadtentwicklung von Worms im Früh- und Hochmittelalter”, in: Aus Geschichte und Landeskunde: Festschrift F. Steinbach (Bonn, 1960), pp. 389–407; idem, “Ladenburg am Neckar und das Bistum Worms bis zum Ende des 12. Jahrhunderts”, Archiv für Hessische Geschichte und Altertumskunde 28 (1963), pp. 83–98; idem, “Mainz im Mittelalter: Gestalten und Probleme”, in: his collected essays, ed. A. Gerlich, Mittelrhein und Hessen: Nachgelassene Studien, (Stuttgart, 1989), pp. 1–50; L. Falck, Mainz im frühen und hohen Mittelalter (Mitte 5. Jht. bis 1244) (Düsseldorf, 1972). 408   this prominence, as they undoubtedly do account for the fact that Fulda’s most important patrons in this period were the elite of the Mainz area who expressed their devotion to Boniface’s memory by giving land to the resting place of his body at Fulda. But there is enough evidence from Fulda, Lorsch and Wissembourg16 for the importance of Worms, Ladenburg, and, further south, Strasbourg, to assure us that the Boniface connection simply made Mainz’s centrality especially visible, not exceptional in itself. The presence of civic notaries, who used styles from the late Roman legal tradition as transmitted through Merovingian Gaul, might even suggest that the high profile of cities in the earliest charters owes something to the continuation of ultimately Roman city-based administrative traditions, albeit in a piecemeal manner and a radically changed social and political context.17 Certainly the Roman past was central to the definition of these civitates — above all through the Roman walls that were the main marker, which differentiated them from the countryside. But these settlements were far from being ghost towns, not least given their natural domination of river routes along the Rhine and Main and so patterns of inter-regional contact. The Roman heritage, indeed, consolidated this domination, in that the Roman road system remained central to land travel in the early Middle Ages. Ecclesiastical organisation, centred on bishoprics located in these sites, in spite of some disruption in the post-Roman period, also contributed to the local centrality of the civitates. About them as functioning settlements, charters and a little archaeology allow some suggestions. We can say most about Mainz, which was an agglomeration of more or less selfcontained elite compounds, some secular, some ecclesiastical (the line between the two blurred).18 Already in the seventh century its centrality was such that the leading men of the surrounding area could be collectively referred to as the Macanenses, the ‘men of Mainz’.19 16 A. Doll and K. Glöckner, Traditiones Wizenburgenses: Die Urkunden des Klosters Weissenburg, 661–864 (Darmstadt, 1979). 17 Staab, Gesellschaft, pp. 137–53, and cf. Innes, State and society, pp. 111–18. 18 In addition to bibliography from the previous note see K. Weidemann, “Die Topographie von Mainz in der Römerzeit und des frühen Mittelalters”, Jahrbuch des Römisch-Germanisches Zentralmuseums Mainz 15 (1968), pp. 146–99; E. Wamers, Die frühmittelalterlichen Lesefunde aus der Löhrstraße (Baustelle Hilton II) in Mainz (Mainz, 1994). 19 J.M. Wallace-Hadrill ed., The fourth book of the chronicle of Fredegar with its continuations (Oxford, 1960), IV:87, pp. 73–4. ,       409 Those at the apex of the regional elite had town houses here: not necessarily places where they resided the year round, but pieds-aterre where they stayed when in the city on business. When the young Hraban Maur was given over to Fulda, his parents gave the monks a stone town house in Mainz, reserving life-interests for themselves and Hraban. Hraban’s father was often present at Mainz, witnessing charters there for a whole range of kin and contacts with a wide geographical range.20 What marked out Mainz and the other civitates was a concentration of high status people: bishops, kings and royal officials as well as members of local elites. Part and parcel of this was a concentration of churches too, their dedications reflecting the city’s importance as a regional focus, and as a point of contact between the region and the wider world. One grouping founded a church dedicated to St Lambert of Liège, one of the classic ‘political saints’ of the late Merovingian period, at Mainz at some point in the first decades of the eighth century, and by the ninth century we also find a church dedicated to the Bavarian missionary, Emmer am of Greensburg.21 It was presumably precisely this kind of centrality, plus the natural advantages of its location, that made Mainz so economically important once exchange down the Rhine to the North Sea took off in the seventh and eighth centuries. The archaeology, however, strongly suggests that Mainz was a regional centre before it became the economic valve linking the region’s economy to the North Sea via the Rhine. The earliest of the remarkable finds of craftwork and coin from the city are of high status goods (predominantly ornate women’s brooches) from the very beginning of the seventh century, and we know from written sources (Gregory of Tours, Venantius Fortunatus, Jonas of Bobbio) that Mainz was the political, social and cultural centre of the middle Rhine and Main valleys from at least 20 Townhouse: E.E. Stengel ed., Urkundenbuch des Klosters Fulda (2 vols., Marburg, 1913–58) [hereafter: UBF] charter no. 177. On this charter see F. Staab, “Wann wurde Hrabanus Maurus Mönch in Fulda? Beobachtungen zur Anteilnahme seiner Familie an den Anfängen seiner Laufbahn”, in: R. Kottje and H. Zimmermann eds., Hrabanus Maurus: Lehrer, Abt und Bischof (Wiesbaden, 1982), pp. 75–101 (the best discussion of Hraban’s family), and cf. M. De Jong, In Samuel’s Image: Child oblation in the early medieval West (Leiden/New York/Köln, 1996), pp. 73–7. Hraban’s father Walaram witnessed no fewer than 41 charters dealing with property in the Mainz area between 754 and 802: see UBF passim. 21 St Lambert’s: CL 1966–7, 1969–72, 1974 and see Gockel, Königshöfe, pp. 238–58. Church dedications: Falck, Mainz, pp. 12–3. 410   the late sixth century. The earliest status symbols found at Mainz are best seen as evidence for the concentration of moveable wealth there, and may even suggest that the city functioned as an arena for conspicuous display amongst the elite. In any case, these certainly predate the creation of a regularised network of administered exchange along the Rhine, associated with the foundation of emporia, notably Dorestad near the Rhine delta, in the later seventh century — a development paralleled at Mainz with the demolition of part of the Roman walls and the creation of an ‘enterprise zone’ along the Rhine’s banks circa 700, and so vividly illuminated by recent finds. Mainz was exceptional here, as the centre for long-distance exchange within the region: the situation at Worms, which seems to have been an important centre within the local economy but not a supraregional trading centre on any scale before the ninth century, may have been more normal.22 But the central role of the civitates within the regional economy, particularly before the economic changes of the late ninth century, serves only to underline their general importance within their localities. None of this is to deny that the eighth-century elite was ruralised in both their residences and interests. To stick with Hraban and his family, it is clear that an estate complex at Hofheim, a few miles down the Nibelungenstrasse towards Worms from Heppenheim, served as their country seat, complete with a newly-founded proprietary church dedicated to St Boniface that doubled as a family mausoleum. Whilst Hofheim was clearly in a very real sense the place from which this family ran their interests, it is striking that we never see them exercising power from Hofheim direct: none of the fifty or so documents in which Hraban’s family figured were actually transacted there. Hofheim may well have been a place for meeting friends and clients, doing deals and wielding influence, but public business was formally conducted elsewhere, in full view of the collective gaze. Thus even when they wished to conduct property dealings concerning Hofheim itself, Hraban’s family travelled to the appropriate civitas, at Ladenburg, to do so in public.23 22 Mainz’s economic success story deserves a fuller study, but the basic archaeological data is discussed and analysed by Wamers, Die frühmittelalterliche Lesefunde, and on the regional economy see the important study of W. Heß, “Geldwirtschaft am Mittelrhein in karolingischer Zeit”, Blätter für deutsche Landesgeschichte 98 (1962), pp. 26–63. 23 UBF 38, and on Hofheim see also E.F.J. Dronke ed., Codex Diplomaticus Fuldensis ,       411 This hierarchy of venues reflected and reinforced a social hierarchy. This is clear if we look at charter witnesses from Mainz. Counts were often present — more often than in transactions that took place outside the city — but this simply reflected the city’s social and political importance. There is no hint that these counts had any official function in Mainz. Rather, the most striking point about the charter witness lists is their domination by the great and good of the region. The witness lists of charters redacted within Mainz tend to be dominated by a small, compact and interrelated group, regardless of the identity of the donor and recipient of the transaction recorded. Although — or perhaps because — they were dominated by the local elite, cities were defined public spaces, for public in contemporary usage carried with it connotations of the visible, open, manifest, that which was acknowledged in the eyes of the locality. Because of their control of the levers of patronage, Hraban’s kin might dominate the locality, but this did not place them outside of local traditions of collective action: they were powerful because they could deliver results through public meetings. When, on occasion, rural groups who had little contact with the city came to Mainz to have a charter drawn up, the local elite still witnessed: there were no formal barriers of access, precisely because this social hierarchy presented itself as a natural order (as social hierarchies which are deeply entrenched and largely unthreatened are wont to do). The key to eighth-century society is the relative lack of differentiation of social action, and of specialisation of social function. Mainz — or Worms, or Ladenburg — was where you went for everything: to visit powerful relatives, to buy and sell luxury goods, to petition an official, to encounter the sacred, to see and be seen by the cream of regional society. In other words, thanks to the all-round dominance of a local elite systems of cultural, political, social and economic power were mutually reinforcing. These different spheres of activity were embedded in, and thus determined by, patterns of elite sociability.24 (Kassel, 1850) [hereafter: CDF] charter no. 487, and Hraban, Carmina no. 86, ed. E. Dümmler, MGH Poetae Latinae aevi Karolini 2 (Hannover, 1881), p. 238, and Gockel, Königshöfe, pp. 41–2 n. 42. 24 Cf K. Polanyi, “The economy as instituted process”, in: idem et al. eds., Trade and market in early empires: Economics in theory and practice (New York, 1957), pp. 243–57, for a classic discussion of this phenomenon in the context of economic systems. 412   The nature of the charter evidence from the middle Rhine, and particularly the unique position of Mainz within it, may accentuate the position of cities in the region. Certainly we should not forget that our surviving charter traditions relate to a relatively late, Carolingian phase of monastic foundation, and thus give a very particular perspective on social change. Already in the seventh century we find the first rural monastic foundations in the area — Tholey in the Hunsruck and Wissembourg on the Saar — and in the first half of the eighth century the wave of monastic foundations supported by the local elite — such as Hornbach on the Blies, Amorbach on the Main — grows. We would expect, thinking about what we know of seventh-century developments further west, in both Neustria and central Austrasia, that such foundations would act as rural focal points for elite families in the seventh century. Certainly there are hints at the familial role of rural monastic foundations in our region in the late Merovingian period, and the underlying dynamic in the changing geography of power was similar (although the eighth-century evidence also suggests some genuine differences between regions, with rural family monasteries coming relatively late to the Rhine valley). It is clear that the scale and scope of the monasticism offered by the foundations of the mid-eighth century, above all by Lorsch and Fulda, marked the advent of something new. Lorsch was able to swallow up earlier family foundations, such as Baumerlenbach and Roden in the Odenwald, and Fulda likewise received some gifts of earlier foundations. Whereas the rationale of these smaller houses remained resolutely familial, reminiscent of those seventh-century foundations of the Neustrian and Austrasian heartlands, monasteries like Lorsch and Fulda offered spiritual patronage on a supra-familial scale.25 The emergence of Lorsch and Fulda as providers of spiritual patronage in the second half of the eighth century went hand in hand with their acquisition of titles to land, and therefore social muscle, to an unprecedented extent, in a region which was only just being fully integrated into the Frankish kingdom. The extraordinary scale of monasticism east of the Rhine in the later eighth century must be explained by the conjunction of political and religious centralisation, as direct rule was imposed by the Carolingians on a region which had been under only indirect Frankish overlordship under the 25 For seventh-century monasticism and familial strategy see Régine Le Jan’s paper in this volume; a comparison between her discussion and mine must make clear the shift in emphasis between the late Merovingian and Carolingian periods. and D. 1920).27 A similar pattern emerges in the Fulda donations. with Ladenburg at its apex and larger rural settlements like Mannheim and Weinheim. 71. 178. their relatives. 73–7.. In Samuel’s Image.. clients and friends travelled. Le Jan ed. The first series of donations of land to the new monastery. and De Jong. 13–50. It is particularly evident in the Lorsch material. 1902). network of spiritual and political patronage. That patrons of monks were increasingly prepared to travel to monastic complexes to make their pious gifts is hardly surprising. State and society.. on what had been an aristocratic complex not unlike that of Hraban’s family at Hofheim. Innes. But the emergence of a monastic centre at Lorsch transformed this pattern. expanded in Innes. “Wann wurde Hrabanus Maurus Mönche im Fulda?”. nos. in: R.       413 Merovingians. on which see Staab. (Darmstadt. . La royauté et les Élites dans l’Europe Carolingienne (Lille. 1974–7). in 766. 301–24.28 Those who sought the patronage of the monks of Gorze. 27 See CL. began to make journeys of a similar length to transact their gifts at this date too. A neat example is provided by charters from 788. the donors visited Lorsch itself to have a charter drawn up. By the 770s when land in the locality was given to the monks. open a window onto a complex settlement hierarchy in the surrounding area. 29 A. The earliest donations tend to be made at Mainz. 2 vols. 70. both on roads and administrative boundaries. where the donors. near Metz. 791 and 801 associated with the young Hraban.29 These were not just family gettogethers. supra-regional. but in the 780s and 790s we begin to have gifts of middle Rhenish land to Fulda being written up at Fulda. Cartulaire de l’abbaye de Gorze (Paris. 28 UBF 177. 1998).. Die Reichsabtei Lorsch. The monastery of Lorsch was founded in 764. a child oblate at Fulda: here his kin and their closest contacts travelled to Fulda and made pious gifts of interests in Mainz. but what is telling is that monastic complexes were increasingly seen 26 On patronage of Lorsch see M. pp. “Kings. Neundörfer. they mark the emergence of new patterns of sociability.26 The surviving charters present a dramatic — as we shall see. pp. Knöpp ed. 219. and on Lorsch’s estates see F. Studien zur ältesten Geschichte des Kloster Lorsch (Berlin. whilst the work of Anglo-Saxon and other missionaries bound the regions’ religious life to the Frankish church. monks and patrons: Political identity at the abbey of Lorsch”. d’Herbomez ed. pp. usually by a Lorsch monk. Local elites bought into the monastic foundations of these missionaries and their Frankish allies to cement their place in a new. operating as more local centres. an over-dramatic — picture of the implications of this process for local patterns of power. After all. The acquisition of rights over land by monasteries changed the rules of landownership. Wissembourg in the Saarland — suggests that the Lorsch and Fulda evidence may give a particularly clear view of a more widespread phenomenon. Nonetheless. The increasing prominence of monasteries as social centres — whilst obviously overstated by the surviving evidence. or as needs waxed and waned in the course of the familial cycle.30 30 For a stimulating discussion of the development of ecclesiastical architecture as motivated by competition and imitation see W. Gorze. “Was is die karolingi- . with hundreds of monks inhabiting large. from the islet in the Weschnitz at the heart of a high status secular site to a natural mound above the river with more room for expansion. but at established places for legal action. at Fulda. And this change in patterns of land tenure was not just quantitative. and better able to house a group of patrons.414   as legitimate stages for such property transactions. and thus between monasteries and the kin-groups which defined themselves in relationship to that land. after all. was transmitted through monastic archives — was linked to real processes of institutional development and social change. indeed more or less immutable. but which were constants. which. for that matter. Jacobsen. Monastic control of land created continuous. the temporal patterning of such journeys is striking. rights which were not redistributed through inheritance. Evidence from other great Carolingian monasteries — Echternach and Gorze in the Moselle valley. building campaigns culminated in the career of Abbot Ratgar in the 810s. witnessed by friends and neighbours. Such journeys never wholly dominate the record — going to Gorze or Fulda from the middle Rhine valley was not a trip undertaken lightly — and the majority of gifts to Fulda and. bonds between monasteries and localities where they held land. given the way in which the earliest donations had been made not at the monasteries themselves. This transfer of land funded monasticism on a new scale. Rebuilding at Lorsch in 767–774 necessitated a shift of location. much more inviting. than their predecessors. continued to be written up at settlements local to the donors. Monastic networks were different from earlier systems of patronage because they were embedded in rights over land. stone-built complexes. the thousands of Lorsch and Fulda charters recorded the transfer of property rights to the new monasteries which became landowners on an unprecedented scale. These new-style monastic complexes were doubtless much more impressive. they should be taken seriously as centres of social action. art and politics at St-Riquier (Philadelphia. articulating the hierarchical relationship between God and this world. 32 De Jong. They were not defined by their visibility to the locality. with their emphasis on the public and collective. The need to reconcile this with their centrality to patterns of landholding and allegiance led to a complex and ambivalent set of practices: the establishment of a firm division between the claustrum. 1995). clients and allies descending en masse. then. 633. pp. in which power descended from above. Gifts to the monks took on a wholly different aura from public business. with the legal action taking place in an enclosed and controlled space. 31 See M. charters placed on the altar. 622–53 esp. Cf. be taken seriously. and the development of ideas about immunity and sacred space. Rabe. notably in the centrality of the cloister. before a restricted and very special group. cut off from the secular world.. 313–47. 1995). McKitterick ed. 99–115. 1998). “Carolingian monasticism”. Zeitschrift für Kunstgeschichte 3 (1988).32 When Hraban’s father and his sche ‘Renaissance’ in der Baukunst?”. in the church. De Jong. pp. because the term continued to carry implications of secular collective action which was not appropriate to a monastic context. often to visit kin who were inmates of the monastery. and made guesthouses such an important facet of Carolingian monasticism. The New Cambridge Medieval History II (Cambridge. pp. restraint and privileges of immunity in early medieval Europe (Chicago. we should not forget the splendid hospitality which worried some Carolingian commentators on the Benedictine Rule. Negotiating space: power. in: R. Rosenwein. and the rest of the complex. 635–40 and B. pp. Monasteries were social centres of a very different type to cities. When we imagine such visits. nor even by the concentration of the interests of the local great and good. 637–8.       415 The new prominence of monastic complexes should. . “Carolingian monasticism: the power of prayer”. Faith. esp. the visits recorded in the charters are only the tip of an iceberg. pp. After all. public stages for the transaction of public business.31 Charters very rarely described actions which took place in monastic complexes as ‘public’. I would suggest that changing social functions of monasticism encouraged the dynamic. It marked a clear departure from the characteristic inherited patterns of social action.. Note that the new monastic complex at Lorsch played an important role in the development of a standard Carolingian monastic “plan”. Although monastic complexes were quite clearly differentiated from open. They were by definition sacred places. S. and they make clear that we are dealing with groups of kin.H. 35 The evidence in CL. from our region e. in: K. clearly recognised a distinction between sales and exchanges on the one hand. eds. for example. 115 on the charter evidence. CDF and UBF is legion: see e. and calls Baugolf ‘most jocund’.. their landed muscle and dedication to functional specialisation leading to the foundation of monastic workshops. p. Glöckner’s chronological register to the Lorsch material in vol. they did not carry all before them. 1984). 1963). Fenske e. the charter recording their gift even drops the characteristic honorific used to describe the abbot as ‘most venerable’. even in the charters it is essentially only one type of transaction — pious gifts of land — which frequently took place in monastic complexes. esp..g. Supplex Libellus cc. and to seasonal festivals such as Easter. in content. Gesellschaft und Kultur im Mittelalter: Festschrift J.a. indeed. For one thing. whereas it was merely the abbot in the former.35 33 UBF 178. and on the functioning of monastic networks.g. and pious gifts on the other. Semmler.416   friends. their relation to patronal Saints’ days. feasting on his game and enjoying the wine which Lorsch and Fulda specialised in producing. in the 810s the monks of Fulda complained about the raucous secularity of Abbot Ratgar’s lay familiars. continued to take place at the kind of important rural centres that they had done before the foundation of Lorsch and Fulda. in: L. Hallinger ed. CDF 471. This is not to deny that there are problems is classifying the type of reciprocal exchange encouraged by the monasteries.33 Sustained work on the chronological patterning of such visits as revealed in the charters. CDF 336. CL 508. 319–27. 15. and that it might be possible to see some charters as gifts as. where it emerges particularly clearly. could shed real light on the new patterns of sociability which emerged. and in the process transformed. being ‘hidden sales’ and so on: but it is clearly important that contemporaries attempted to distinguish gifts from sales. existing social patterns. J.34 When we think of monasteries as social centres we should imagine laymen hunting in the abbot’s wood. even when they involved the monks. and . as the swords. Nor should we forget that monasteries were centres of production. 101–23. Charter formulae. This also made monasteries centres of redistribution. Sales and exchanges of land. family and followers visited Fulda in 791. Fleckenstein (Sigmaringen. 3. Schwind. ed. CCM I (Siegburg. For all the significance of the emergence of rural monasteries as places of power. Institutionen. 34 F. pp. pp. but rather slotted into. cloaks and horses given out by monks to their benefactors in a handful of charters suggest. “Zu karolingerzeitlichen Klöstern als Wirtschaftsorganismen und Stätten handwerklicher Tätigkeit”. as types of social action: the Saint was the legal actor in the latter. 1 of CL. in contrast. and more secular property deals which happened to involve the monastery as a landowner. Lorsch was situated only a kilometre or two from the place with which we began. H. between Heppenheim and the neighbouring villa. Wehlt.36 Through Chrodegang. was the key to local political dominance. 16–25 (with a more rigorously ‘fiscal’ interpretation than mine). Heppenheim. 1968).37 So the initial foundation was a very real bid that this affected not only charter formulae but also the places at which transactions took place. whilst pious gifts and related types of sociability which primed networks of saintly patronage networks were separated from the public world of collective secular action. Veröffentlichungen der Max-Planck Instituts für Geschichte 28 (Göttingen. monks and patrons” and has benefited in particular from discussion with Marios Costambeys. The emergence of rural monasteries was not simply a spiritual initiative. but as an outlying site within the area dependant of Heppenheim: in the parlance of these scribes it was a locus which lay on the edge of the marca attached to the villa of Heppenheim. and so we could see his interest in Lorsch as a continuation of these earlier interests. Kehr ed. Fiscal churches at this date in this area served as centres for the collection of royal dues.       417 The reflection of this in the choice of stages surely reflects a wider perception of a distinction between transactions involving formal entry into the spiritual patronage of the Saint. for example. Fiscal churches and royal dues: see the two closely related confirmations. 1940) nos. 67 and . Control of Heppenheim. Bürstadt.. Lorsch was initially not seen as a centre of settlement. who installed his brother as the first abbot. Dargestellt am Beispiel der Abtei Lorsch mit Ausblicken auf Hersfeld. a fiscal estate held through the eighth century by members of one local landowning family. 36 What follows expands upon Innes. pp. MGH Diplomata regum Germaniae ex stripe Karolinorum 3 (Berlin. P. Chrodegang held the important fiscal church at Heppenheim before Lorsch’s foundation. Reichsabtei und König.. a kinsman of the family which owned the Lorsch estate. Stablo und Fulda. was founded on the site of the rural residence of one of the most powerful families in the region. Lorsch. Die Urkunden Arnulfs. “Kings. that world itself continued. 37 Chrodegang and Heppenheim: CL 429. and on its foundation was given to Chrodegang of Metz. That is. Lorsch was part of a web of monasteries which spread from the Meuse to the Rhine and was centred on the bishopric of Metz. but also a political strategy on the part of local elites. For the early history of the Lorsch estate cf.-P. Count Cancor.418   to institutionalise local political power. the foundations associated with Boniface. based on charters going back to Pippin. 39 J.39 Part and parcel of this process was the dismantling of the regional monastic constellations like Chrodegang’s. confirming the bishop of Würzburg’s possession of a number of these churches and the appended rights.. in: Knöpp ed. were disentangled. and the family which controlled Heppenheim. . but bound them into a system of royal patronage which prevented their becoming the nodal points of freestanding political configurations. 6 (this section of the cartulary-chronicle based on a lost Carolingian account of Nazarius’ miracles). led the watching crowds. Semmler. Fulda included. 310–11 (a link given further confirmation by Charlemagne’s gift of a very rare total immunity to the church of Metz at precisely the juncture at which the standing of Lorsch was clarified: Mühlbacher ed. events at Lorsch are paralleled right across the newly acquired regions of Charlemagne’s Empire in the last decades of the eighth century: east of the Rhine and south of the Loire Charlemagne pursued a systematic policy of imposing himself over and above local elites by establishing royal lordship over key rural monasteries. pp. Royal lordship did not dislodge the networks of power which emanated from rural monasteries. and particularly the relationship between monasteries and the episcopal hierarchy. 40 For events at Lorsch and Fulda as indicative of the impact of Carolingian “reform” in the localities. and establishing his lordship over Lorsch. monks and patrons”. who controlled the Heppenheim estate. As Josef Semmler has shown. Lorsch’s owner. using a family dispute between the heirs of Chrodegang and those of Lorsch’s founders as an opportunity to intervene. 99–115) is crucial and its implications for our understanding of Carolingian “reform” need pursuing. 38 CL c. pp. Rosenwein’s discussion of Chrodegang’s role here (Negotiating space. When Chrodegang had Roman relics translated to the new monastery at Lorsch in 765. “Die Geschichte der Abtei Lorsch von der Gründung bis zum Ende der Salierzeit. But Charlemagne’s gift only came after he had successfully gained a hold of Lorsch. and Count Warin. 764 bis 1125”.. Die Reichsabtei Lorsch I. 75–173 at pp. the lavish gift of Heppenheim only served to firm his control.38 Charlemagne’s 773 gift of Heppenheim to Lorsch was therefore in part a recognition that the two neighbouring sites formed one complex of power. pp. led by Chrodegang in alliance with his kinsmen who supplied the land at Lorsch. at a similar date.40 69. Die Urkunden Pippins. see Innes. 78–80. “Kings. Karlmanns und Karls des Großen Charlemagne charter 66). 229–36 (Mainz) and 259–67 (Worms). pp. the precise tenurial status of Heppenheim and Lorsch was ambivalent. in the middle Rhine. documents very similar strategies of monastic foundation and political control in eighth-century central Italy. based on his unpublished 1998 Cambridge Ph. . 161–274 esp. but was also seen as being owned outright by the family of Cancor. Before the establishment of royal lordship of Lorsch. and claimed ownership. Brühl. but which Warin’s son likewise continued to control. rulers visited the region — which was effectively the frontier of direct Frankish power — only intermittently.-R. when kings were present in the middle Rhine they resided in urban palaces at Mainz and Worms which had been used by their Merovingian predecessors. and placing these key resources under direct royal control. thesis.41 So by placing the lot soundly in the hands of monks under monastic lordship. a court case of 819 trying to unravel the ultimate ownership of another piece of land attached to a fiscal church which had been controlled by Warin and given to Lorsch. by geopolitical change. until by the 790s it was established as one of the key areas of royal residence within the Empire as a whole. Lorsch likewise was described as ‘public’ (it was a locus publicus).       419 And by establishing his lordship over the monastery. Warin’s son retained possession. pp. “Königspfalz und Bischofstadt in fränkischer Zeit”. Marios Costambeys’ forthcoming monograph on the Farfa material. A direct parallel is CL 22. Until the middle of the eighth century. but was passed on within one family.D. Charlemagne was also able to establish direct control over the key estates of Heppenheim and Lorsch. Charlemagne was disembedding the families who had enjoyed a de facto monopoly on these ‘public’ lands. Initially. but it is difficult to make such an interpretation stick. and even in the ninth century. The increased eastward scope of Frankish politics under the Carolingians brought kings to the Rhine more frequently. Rheinische Vierteljahrsblätter 23 (1958). 42 C.42 Fire may have destroyed Charlemagne’s favourite royal 41 Earlier historians such as Wehlt have tended to see the description of Lorsch as ‘public’ as indicative of fiscal interest.. of land there. after the Heppenheim mark as a whole had been granted to the Lorsch monks. and it may make much more sense to see such labels as evidence for the ambivalence surrounding notionally ‘public’ resources whose effective control was embedded in one family. Heppenheim was technically ‘public’ land. E     These political changes were compounded. pp.44 and in general see P. “Les reprèsentations du palais dans les textes littéraires du Haut Moyen Age”. They were seen as sacred places.43 These were dedicated royal centres. Francia 4 (1976). Ingelheim: P. Veröffentlichungen der Max-Planck Instituts für Geschichte 11/i (Göttingen. 1991). .420   residence. Ingelheim am Rhein: Forschungen und Studien zur Geschichte Ingelheims (Ingelheim. converting the heathen. This is not to deny that rural royal residences had an important role to play as early as the sixth century. but the overall pattern of residence. a custom-built rural palace for the whole Empire. Schalles-Fischer. in: Deutsche Königspfalzen I. Autenrieth ed. Veröffentlichungen der Max-Planck Instituts für Geschichte 30 (Göttingen. Sage. so as to encourage the king’s political constituency to look on themselves as members of the royal familia. the foundation of Frankfurt and Ingelheim in our region in the 790s directly mirrors the simultaneous building of Aachen. 123–60. Nelson’s chapter in this volume. Certainly. Francia 4 (1976). and the increasingly central role of suburban and rural palaces. Bullough. but in the following decades a real shift occurs. “Bemerkungen zur Pfalzenforschung am Mittelrhein”. Eine Untersuchung zur Verfassungsgeschichte des fränkisch-deutschen Königtums. pp. and in doing so capping the history of salvation. and the function of different kinds of residences within the itinerary. does seem to me to change quite markedly in the seventh and eighth centuries. 1963). Carolingian renewal: Sources and heritage (Manchester. pp. pp. Riché. 161–71. Frankfurt: M. In honorem Hludovici Pii. 75–96. 44 P. 1960–70”. This was the projection of the royal household on a grand scale. “Aula Renovata: the Carolingian court before the Aachen palace”. monks or relics. 141–60. and the developments of the late eighth century in our area could be seen as a relatively late and compressed articulation of the same dynamic. On Aachen see now Janet L. “Die Ausgrabungen in der Pfalz zu Ingelheim am Rhein. Classen. in Merovingian Gaul in the ‘long seventh century’. whilst we must acknowledge peculiarities in the experience of this particular region. “Die Geschichte der Königspfalz Ingelheim bis zur Verpfändung an Kurpfalz 1375”.. 1964). 43 For this crucial period see D. but their charisma was not a matter of the presence of bishops. founded on exclusively royal sites cut off from the hustle and bustle of everyday social exchange. Classen. in: J. but the moral seriousness of Christian rulership: the frescoes around the chapel and great hall at Ingelheim depicted the Carolingians as champions of the faith. the pattern of change is one that can be paralleled across Francia as a whole: one thinks of the move from primarily urban patterns of royal itinerancy. Again. comparison suggests that. and see Ermold. 1969). Pfalz und Fiskus Frankfurt. 87–146 and for archaeology W. pp. with the development of new rural palaces. The palaces themselves were built in a monumental style which articulated a specifically royal agenda and evoked ancient models. that at Worms. in 790. in: idem. seems to have been utilised only indirectly.. Königshöfe. and third. and the 795 meeting was above all concerned with property boundaries within the Odenwald. with royal rights reorganised so as to be exploited directly. in the 820s as Louis the Pious increasingly cultivated support east of the Rhine. . This context also explains the intensive manorialisation of royal land in the region. evident in the remarkable ninth-century survey of it which survives. the new palace complexes and the great and good who haunted them needed feeding. which was multi-centred and predicated on movement between a series of complementary centres. but they marked fundamental alterations in the exercise of political power. Fiscal land in the region. The creation of a royal landscape changed all this. before the late eighth century. explains the timing of these shifts. in the 850s with the crystallisation of an east Frankish kingdom.       421 The creation of a royal landscape in the middle Rhine and lower Main valleys took place in three critical stages: first. pp.45 The new palaces of the decades around 800 were not isolated: they were the prime sites in a consciously planned royal landscape. Poetry of the Carolingian Renaissance (Oxford. and so from Ingelheim to Frankfurt. which also has an important discussion of the management of forest rights in the Odenwald. and above all direct rule east of the Rhine in middle of eighth century. and the resultant shift of emphasis from the line of the Rhine itself to the Main corridor. in the 790s. 45 The polyptych is CL 3671–4. Geopolitical change. But these political changes themselves led to socio-economic change in the localities: after all. 250–5. and emergence of a new kingdom whose centre of gravity lay east of Rhine in course of the ninth. granted out to local families who could effectively do as they pleased on the ground. 1985). and it is the mainstay of Gockel’s study. with the realisation that the increased scope of Frankish power east of the Rhine made the region a key point in the expanded kingdom. not least as the Odenwald was a royal forest devoted to royal hunting. in P. second. Smaller residences such as Trebur or Bürstadt were sites for less solemn or formal occasions than the epic backdrop of the great palaces: hence when Louis the German wished to emphasise the subordinate nature of the kingships he had extract transl. These developments supply an important context for the Heppenheim dispute with which we began. Godman. pp. MGH SS 15. Das Frankfurter Konzil von 794: Kristallisationspunkt karolingische Kultur. in: D. 78.L. pp. c. Already in the 770s the Anglo-Saxon holy woman Leoba was implored to reside close to the royal centres of Mainz and Worms. 47 On the political significance of the royal hunt see R. transl. F. (Mainz. 96–121. Fleckenstein. Jarnut. and K. J. La translation de Saints Marcellin et Pierre. 49 See F. T. 2 vols. p. 137–80. 1887). on the relationship between hunting resources and palaces in addition to Le Jan see K. “Tiergärten im Pfalzbereich”. pp. pp. Deutsche Königspfalzen III. “Die frühmittelalterliche Jagd unter rechts. Cannadine and S.47 Royal churches. “Die Königin Fastrada”. pp. Veröffentlichungen der Max-Planck Instituts für Geschichte 11/iii (Göttingen.. 1907). Königshöfe. 873. Waitz. 1891). s. Rituals of royalty: Power and ceremonial in traditional societies (Cambridge. I. “Women at the court of Charlemagne: a case of monstrous regiment?” in her The Frankish world. pp. 1980). 35–57. 258–310. G.1 (Hannover. in: K. the crucial evidence is in Einhard’s letters): I hope to return to the issue of Einhard’s ‘retirement’ and his political role in the 830s at length elsewhere. Kurze.46 These smaller palaces were also conveniently sited for the pleasures of the hunt in the royal forest: they were sites for the intimate rather than the sacred face of kingship. coinciding with the emergence of nearby Ingelheim as a royal residence. p. in: R. Bürstadt: Gockel. in Deutsche Königspfalzen I. and see J. pp.49 In the 820s the Roman relics acquired by the courtier and royal advisor Einhard would not settle until they found their way to Seligenstadt. 238–64. Nelson.. ed. Staab. ed.a. 234. 1–29. Reuter. Vita Leobae abbatissae Biscofesheimensis. 86–110. (Paris. 130.L. “Einhard. seine Gründung und sein Vermächtnis im Seligenstadt”. Trebur: M. 765–808.1 (Hannover. 1974). 1887). For the complementary intimate and sacred faces of kingship see J. 223–42 at p. a convenient distance up the Main from the recently redeveloped palace at Frankfurt. 48 Rudolf of Fulda. 1997). Translatio et miracula sanctorum Marcellini et Petri. 1996). pp.422   granted his sons he had them judge cases at Bürstadt. .und sozialgeschichtelichen Aspekten”. Das Einhardskreuz: Vorträge und Studien der Munsteraner Diskussion zur arcus Einhardi (Göttingen. Bondois. MGH SRG (Hannover. Berndt ed. G. Hauck ed. Gockel. 30–74. in a seminal and stimulating paper saw Einhard creating a new basis for his power in his relics following his retirement from the court. not Frankfurt. MGH SS 15. Revue du Nord 62 (1980).50 46 Annales Fuldenses [hereafter AF]. “The Lord’s anointed and the people’s choice: Carolingian royal ritual”. Bosl. The Annals of Fulda (Manchester. “Pfalz und Försten”. 1987). Price eds. 1992). Settimane 31 (1985). Kurze. 750–900 (London. 20. and particularly favoured monasteries. Étude sur Einhard et sa vie politique de 827 à 834. vol. “Die Bedeutung Treburs als Pfalzort”. ed. Veröffentlichungen der Max-Planck Instituts für Geschichte 11/i (Göttingen. pp. on the social significance of hunting see J. but the proximity of Seligenstadt to Frankfurt is particularly significant when placed alongside the evidence for Einhard’s continued political involvement with the court in the 830s (see M.48 In the 790s St Alban’s at Mainz emerged as the burial place of one of Charlemagne’s wives and an important political centre. “Espaces sauvages et chasses royales dans le Nord de la France”. Waitz. Hennebicque [Le Jan]. Hauck. pp. 1963). 50 Einhard. ed. Nelson. were also important. 183–217. a special place of dynastic charisma.-M.a. 53 See for example the processions and ceremonies accompanying Harald Klak’s baptism at Ingelheim described in Ermold. Reichsabtei und König. In honorem Hludovici. on royal redevelopment of Lorsch in particular see Innes. but sailings along the Rhine and Main which bore the hallmarks of a ceremonial progress may have played an important role.54 Franz Staab 51 On royal lordship at Fulda and Lorsch see Wehlt. pp. motion took the form of ceremonies and processions within individual complexes. Frankfurt as “principal seat”: Regino of Prüm. and the links between places. in: H. were integrated into it in recognition of their spiritual and political power: Lorsch was conveniently sited. Ratzinger eds. 1959). p. ed. 83.52 Political topography is not just a matter of places: space. 840. 31. and with the increased importance of Frankfurt as ‘principal seat’ of the eastern kingdom from the middle of the ninth century it was redeveloped as a mausoleum for the east Frankish royal line. 307–11.g. 876. and on Lenten prayer see R.a. About movement between the different sites we are less than fully informed.53 But movement also took place between a series of royal places within a given region. p. pp. Gesta Karoli. . are also central in the functioning of a landscape. 54 Ceremonial sailings: examples in the various annals are numerous. “König Ludwig der Deutsche und die Fastenzeit”. Jahrbuch für Geschichte des Feudalisimus 8 (1984). MGH SRG (Hannover. Ermold le Noir: Poème sur Louis le Pieux (Paris. which reminds us just how much there is to be done on the cultural and social aspects of royal itineraries. Chronicon. or in Notker of St Gallen’s vivid evocation of Easter ceremonies. 1964). Auer (Regensburg. the places of consensus within the royal landscape. with their own special functions within it: royal assemblies for the regions along and east of the Rhine were habitually held at Mainz and Worms through the ninth century and beyond. 874. “Kings. II:21. E.. Fulda became a favourite Lenten visiting place of kings coming from or going to Frankfurt at a similar date. pp. which could transmit powerful messages. p. Kurze.. Eibl. were a part of the system. H.a.       423 Foundations such as Lorsch and Fulda. 121. though they predated the creation of a royal landscape. Faral. 52 Demonstrated for Arnulf ’s reign by E. monks and patrons”. see e. F. ed. as well as around the kingdom between different complexes of royal interests. 73–112. 1890). 1975). the traditional centres of regional society. “Zur Stellung Bayern und Rheinfranken im Reiche Arnulfs von Kärnten”. s. On a micro-level. Haefele. MGH SRG (Berlin. Kottje. Mysterium der Gnade: Festschrift J. ed. 312–3. AF s. s. Roßman and J.F.51 Even the cities of Mainz and Worms. determined by. 191–204 esp.-R. looked very different. 56 See Wandelbert of Prüm. 195–6. Holder-Egger. MGH SS 15:1 (Hannover. but the political topography of neighbouring areas.. Godman and R. pp. and in turn defining. 1994). 57 This phenomenon is best studied for the Ottonian period: see particularly E. whose elites visited kings at Frankfurt or Ingelheim. Fodrum.W. Miracula s. (Köln and Graz. with its stories of royal goodwill and munificence. positive action in the summer. Frankreich und Italien vom 6. Die Reichsstruktur im Spiegel der Herrschaftspraxis Ottos des Großen (Berlin. bis zur Mitte 14. pp. a dependence of the great royal abbey of Prüm.424   has delineated the infrastructure of roads and provisions which underpinned the royal iter.56 The king’s progress from one such site to another was marked by rituals of arrival which underlined the ties between the different aspects of the royal progress. 1887). 361–73. Charlemagne’s heir: New perspectives on the reign of Louis the Pious (814 –40) (Oxford. was one of these stepping stones. Strategically-placed monasteries and royal villae were the stepping stones on which the royal household paused and caught its breath before moving on. in: P. Goaris. as kings had to acknowledge on the rare occasions that they entered them. J. more exclusive counsel in the winter. Gistum. for non-royal travel along the iter and the travel of political news. Itinerant kingship and royal monasteries in Germany. and along which royal servants and political news travelled. Brühl.55 The monastic cell of St Goar. The middle Rhine valley may have been a royal heartland. The Carolingians did not seek to inscribe royal power into the landscape of the entire Empire. pp. prayer at Lent. strategically placed downriver from Bingen in the Rhine gorge: a written collection of the miracles associated with the shrine give a flavour of the intermittent royal stopovers. Bernhardt. 1968). ed. when Louis the German made a grand tour through Saxony — an event which was worthy of extended comment and special explanation in the eyes of contem55 Staab. 1989). Müller-Mertens. Servitium Regis: Studien zu den wirtschaftlichen Grundlagen des Königtums im Frankenreich und in den fränkischen Nachfolgestaaten Deutschland. and the rich polyptych evidence from our region shows how the demands of the royal iter shaped the services demanded from the local peasantry. 1980) and for the Anglophone. O. 919–1056 (Cambridge. Movement over space had an important temporal element too. Collins eds. 2 vols. “Bonds of power and bonds of association in the court circle of Louis the Pious”. 32–106 and see S. the political calendar. Gesellschaft. Airlie.57 Hence in 852. regal celebration at Easter. Jahrhunderts. . pp. For Carolingian itineraries see C. which was itself shaped by the liturgical year and the seasons — public meetings in spring. Whilst in prayer in Lent Louis dreamt that he had seen his own dead father. coming to Frankfurt. The elites of particular regions interacted with kings at particular complexes of royal power. Louis the Younger. pp. holding assemblies at Minden and Erfurt. Louis the German stayed in the region.       425 porary commentators — he stayed ‘in individual holdings (mansiones) as the opportunity permitted’. the court was a crucial point of reference even for those who ruled the roost with limited interference in their home areas. Early in the year. and Louis the Younger was evidently seeking to use this to strengthen his position and slip the tight leash on which his father kept him. before travelling to Fulda to celebrate Easter and then holding a general assembly at the royal villa of Trebur. as is neatly shown by the denouement of an east Frankish political crisis in 874. where he ‘took counsel with his faithful men about the peace and state of his kingdom’. as contemporary annals record a prodigiously bitter winter and the ravaging of rebellious Slav neighbours. A sense of crisis may have been in the air. The contrast between the son’s rebellious ‘secret meeting’ and the father’s legitimate and public counsel-taking is striking. ed. Here we clearly see the political importance of the royal iter.. Reuter. using Reuter’s translation. 800 –1056 (London. 1991). In 58 AF s. pp. Germany in the early Middle Ages. asking that prayer be said for the good of his soul: Louis the German played the dutiful son and did so. continuing to disarm potential discontents. Kurze. the ambitious son of the elderly east Frankish ruler Louis the German. and the unwritten norms and expectations that surrounded it.a. and in the normal run of things they sought out kings in the royal heartland of the middle Rhine: given the importance of royal patronage and extensive links. 852. both the sites of bishoprics. around February 1. And see the comments of T. . Louis the Pious. ‘held a secret meeting with certain of his father’s counsellors’ at Seligenstadt. Louis’ conspicuous piety over Lent and Easter is a particularly striking example of the power of place and its political significance. just down the Main from Seligenstadt. But Louis the German acted decisively to defuse the potential crisis. 42–3.58 It was the secular and ecclesiastical elite whose interests informed the political topography of this region. breaking off secular affairs and spending Lent in prayer. 85–9. movements between court and locality determined by an annual political rhythm. 60 The attention attracted by Seligenstadt surely relates to its high profile in the contemporary crisis involving tensions between a Carolingian father and son. Einhard. notably in failing ‘to observe the warnings of the Archangel Gabriel which Abbot Einhard wrote down in twelve chapters and offered to him’. was demonstrating his own filial piety. Seligenstadt’s founder. Louis the German and Louis the Younger. ed. Indeed.59 Louis the German’s dream clearly echoed another dream.a. lies close to several impor- 59 60 AF s. alarmed at the portents of crisis. in making the dream public and acting upon it. ed. pp. pp. with a connection which was self-evident to contemporary commentators. T   Sites of royal power played a crucial role in political strategies. from the very beginning Carolingian palaces may have been designed to function as such. III:15. nearly fifty years earlier. 81–3. a message passed on to Louis the Pious by Einhard. By linking himself to Einhard’s pleas of reform to Louis the Pious he was demonstrating to his followers that the proper response to political crisis was piety to propriate God. Reuter. Louis the German. Kurze. his wife at the time that the centre was developed. . linking the current crisis to one of half a century earlier. 874. as he himself practised. Ingelheim. Translatio. interestingly. Waitz.426   the eyes of one contemporary commentator ‘from this it may be understood that although [Louis the Pious] had done many praiseworthy things pleasing to God. and so to disarm those counsellors who had met in secret with his son. And place played an important role in this strategy. Charlemagne’s choice of Frankfurt as a palace site may have owed much to the influence of the kin of Fastrada. nevertheless he allowed many things against God’s law in his kingdom’. a demonstration which was a clear message to his own rebellious and eponymous son. 252–3. The role of particular complexes of royal centres as focal points for regional elites made them crucial stages for rulers negotiating with those elites for political support. whose interests were focussed in the lower Main region. transl. in which the Archangel Gabriel had appeared to a monk at Seligenstadt and urged that reform was the response to political crisis.       427 tant residences of another of Charlemagne’s wives. Louis the Pious temporary deposition in 833 came after his celebration of Easter at Worms. attempting to rally aristocratic support against his brothers. Nelson. began a stellar political career as administrator of the palace at Ingelheim. Lauer (Paris. Lothar I to the daughter of Hugh.62 It is striking how many episodes of the subsequent conflict between Lothar and his father and brothers centre on the complex of royal palaces around Worms and Lothar’s alliance with the aristocracy of the neighbouring regions. 841. in: Berndt ed. ed. The suggestion about the link between Fastrada’s interests and Frankfurt was made by Janet L. 821. winning over the support of powerful backers from the surrounding regions who came to meet him there. pp. as he headed south into Hugh’s backyard to a confrontation with his sons at which Lothar was able to command aristocratic loyalties. In 841. The marriage of Louis the Pious’ eldest son. and for the type of political concessions wrung from Lothar by prospective supporters see Innes.. Innsbruck. but also the most powerful aristocrat along the upper Rhine in Alsace and Alemannia. 33. Böhmer with E. count of Tours. Die Regesten des Kaiserreiches unter den Karolingern 751–918 (2nd edn. 209). P. Regesta Imperii I. “Die Königin Fastrada”. 62 Annales Regni Francorum. I.a. Das Frankfurter Konzil von 794. State and society. MGH SRM (Hannover. and can be documented continuing through the plentiful charter evidence in UBF and CDF plus Ermold’s testimony as to Odo’s official position at court at Ingelheim. the links between Ingelheim and Hildegard’s kin both fit the model. . III:6. Historiae. pp.. 1895). 1926). before marrying off his daughter to a prominent aristocrat and celebrating the wedding at Worms.63 Note throughout these 61 On both Fastrada and Hildegard see now Franz Staab’s excellent study of their careers. Odo.61 Certainly by the reign of Louis the Pious we can begin to trace specific elite groupings enjoying particular ties to individual royal centres. 211–12. and one of Hildegard’s descendants.a. Note the long high profile stay in the area by Charles the Bald and Louis the German once they had driven Lothar out. ed.F. and evidently marked the consummation of a crucial political alliance between Lothar and Hugh’s friends and clients. 63 For Lothar’s activities in 834 and 841 see J. Kurze p. ed. s. In both 833 and following his death in 840 Lothar’s initial actions on claiming Imperial status were to attempt to rule from the royal heartland of the middle Rhine. which clearly was important in winning over aristocratic support: see above all Nithard. was celebrated at Worms.. AF s. 110–12. For the marriage of Lothar’s daughter. Hildegard. F. p. State and Society. Mühlbacher. the political constituency of this palace complex. he ordered his followers to meet him at Mainz and Speyer. 1908). and note Charles’ marrying into the regional aristocracy at this point (Innes. Kurze. Charles the Bald. in Frankfurt [and] with Louis’ agreement and support they agreed that he [Lothar II] should rule them’. Reuter. Kurze. and the claims of another of Lothar I’s son.65 Fourteen years later. Aristocrats were also well aware of the potential of these sites as ways of attracting royal backing at crucial moments. AF s. CL 1522. traditional sites of royal assemblies. But. 64 65 66 AF s. p. Overlapping and interacting with the topography of royal power were a multiplicity of local landscapes determined by kinship. In 855. ed. Kurze. 870. transl. whilst visits to court. Reuter. the topography of royal power remained a constant point of reference for local elites who wished to exercise something more than local power. to kin. where he arrived on the feast of the Purification of the Virgin Mary. p. Charles the Bald invaded Lotharingia and had himself crowned king at Metz whilst Louis the German lay ill ‘so much that the doctors despaired of saving his life’.a. and patronage of the church. king of the eastern Franks and his uncle. friends and clients which underpinned elite strategies at court needed constant maintenance. and worried at the ambitions of the western king. an itinerant lifestyle was necessary to hold on to scattered estates and to guard diverse interests. But when in early 870 Louis recovered and travelled to Frankfurt. on Lothar II’s death. local networks of kin. 55. transl.64 These actions had been prefaced by less public negotiations using other sites within the political topography. who had waited for him there a long time’. ed. the ‘princes and leading men’ of the kingdom of Lothar I were anxious to secure the succession of Lothar II on their ruler’s death. .a. on a level which barely finds mention in the narrative sources. for example. 855. 70. there he found ‘many of the leading men of Lothar’s kingdom.66 The integration of royal sites into elite political strategies thus emerges from the narrative sources: whilst high politics remained court-centred and Königsnähe was the trump card. land. as the points of negotiation between kings and elites: different kinds of centres were suitable for different kinds of political activity. Charles of Provence: they therefore ‘brought [Lothar II] to Louis.428   episodes the significance of cities. reflected in the charter evidence for the visit of the leading magnate of Lothar’s kingdom to the royal abbey of Lorsch whilst his master lay on his deathbed. Davies and P. Fouracre eds. 69–70. Famille et pouvoir dans le monde Franc.67 67 C. This pattern of giving was probably only possible in this kind of exceptional context. included her husband’s erstwhile patron. vol. Kasten. Germanische Abteilung 107 (1990). pp. and it has been suggested that the will itself is particularly sensitive to the need to ensure the support of surviving kin and patrons for its contents. pp.. 1935) no. Nelson. VIII e–X e siècles (Paris. 87. .       429 to patrons and to favoured monasteries ensured that contacts with backers and brokers were continued. which was held in an open-air site beyond the city itself. 3).und Quellenbuch zur Geschichte der altluxembourgischen Territorien. Le Jan. like the kin who were to make gifts to them points of contact with local networks of power. Jhts. Its very existence makes Ercanfrida’s will unusual: her lack of direct heirs made the fate of her legacy unsure. St Maximian’s was the most powerful house in Trier and was thus central to the family’s power in the area that Ercanfrida’s husband had ruled. It is precisely because of this very peculiar context that the document is able to reveal so vividly the contacts which made up an aristocratic world. B. 1 (Luxembourg. und 9. Trier. Zeitschrift der Savigny-Stiftung für Rechtsgeschichte. Urkunden. in: W. and a series of gifts to kin who were to distribute gifts for Ercanfrida’s soul to a series of twenty-one churches down the Moselle and Rhine.L. Zugleich ein Beitrag zur Organisation und zur Schriftlichkeit bei der Verwaltung adeliger Grundherrschaft am Beispiel des Grafen Heccard aus Burgund”. “Erbrechtliche Verfügungen des 8. 82–113. pp. and on Ercanfrida see J. Property and power in the early Middle Ages (Cambridge. Ercanfrida’s will was carried out in the forum through which local power was exercised. in the public court (mallus) of the Trier region. 236–338. 1995). The will of one woman from the circles which sought out Louis the German at Frankfurt in 855 and 870 gives a priceless insight into the topography of elite power. widow of an influential and well-connected count of Trier. and its contents acknowledged the network of family estates and favoured monastic houses through which bonds with kin and friends were maintained. 1995). These favoured monasteries were the nodal points of Ercanfrida’s world. Ercanfrida. Wampach ed. 240–84. pp.. and there is no reason to see these patterns as unusual (fig. The whole transaction was carried out before a series of aristocratic witnesses. made her will in 853: it centred on the grant of the estate which she had been given as a morninggift after her marriage to the monks of St Maximian’s. R. who were to celebrate her and her husband’s memory with an annual feast. “The wary widow”.. esp. T   These complex spatial patterns may be usually invisible in the sources. Einung. 3. Schriften . the 68 The fundamental discussion of this outbreak of conflict is G. Bündnis. Amicitiae und Pacta.430   Fig. Althoff.68 Indeed. but the incandescent outbreaks of violent political conflict which flamed through the last decade of the ninth century shed the occasional brilliant light on the topography of elite power. Beneficiaries of Ercanfrida’s will (After Le Jan).. Politik und Gebetsgedenken im beginnenden 10 Jht. the dominant figure in the middle Rhine and Moselle region. 896.71 der MGH 37 (Hannover. 140. 1992). Regino ed. ed.a. 122. pp.       431 sudden visibility marks a new stage in the relationship between the topographies of royal and elite power. 70 Arnulf’s tour: AF s. . Chronicon. Kurze. and subsequently working from the traditional places of negotiation between east Frankish kings and Lotharingian aristocrats. Regino s. 222–41. he had tried in vain to have his illegitimate son Zwentibald accepted as king of Lotharingia. and for events in 893. and the lay-abbacies of a series of royal monasteries which were the key to local dominance had traditionally been granted to local leaders. Kurze. 69 Regino. 893. 140.69 The Carolingian ruler. State and society. transl. the best political narrative is E. 894. 141–3. and lavish royal gift-giving. on the Moselle just north of Trier. p. Lothringen und das Reich an der Schwelle der deutschen Geschichte. which is suggestive of the political significance of visits to favoured churches on holy days). the royal centres of the middle Rhine: conciliation in 893 culminated in an assembly.a. was murdered by his rival Alberich at the small monastery of Rettel. 144. conflict broke out with — quite literally — a vengeance in the 890s. Reuter p. 71 Trier: Regino s. pp. at Worms. 893. 141–2. pp. Trier was not used to sustained royal presence. pp. An urban centre and the seat of the most powerful churchman in the region. 895. Schriften der MGH 21 (Stuttgart. on the implications for local power see Innes. In our area. In 892 Count Megingoz. 892. in 894. Arnulf’s actions acknowledged this. which for quarter of a century had been ruled by east Frankish kings who had been happy to leave regional government in the hands of Megingoz and his clients.a. 124. had attempted to pacify the region and assert his control of it by ‘visiting monasteries and bishoprics for the sake of prayer’ and making large gifts to the bishops in 893. ed. 1968).70 The geography of these events highlights the complexity of the spatial interaction between kings and elites. s. Alberich was in turn struck down by Megingoz’s followers in 895 (again on a religious festival in an ecclesiastical context. Kurze p. Arnulf.a. ed.. before a synod at Trebur and another Worms assembly finally secured Lotharingian acknowledgement of Zwentibald in 895. 892. 894. Kurze. entering the Moselle as a peacemaker and the guest of local bishops in 893. most recently Megingoz whose control of the region was centred on the monastery of St Maximian at Trier. whilst in 894 Arnulf’s failed attempt to have Zwentibald accepted as king in a meeting at Worms was followed by more exclusive counsel at Lorsch. Hlawitschka. This may have made strategic sense. as he sought to avoid offending his former opponents on the Moselle. Zwentibald as ruler of Lotharingia was more directly implicated in regional politics and thus encountered direct local opposition. 134. it was necessary to re-establish a landscape of royal power within the region. MGH Studien und Texte 22 (Hannover. But the very act of holding these honores brought Zwentibald into conflict with Megingoz’s kin and clients: it is no accident that the latter opened a feud by killing Megingoz’s assassin immediately after Zwentibald’s arrival in Lotharingia. 74 Regino. each of which sought control of the regnum as a whole through Königsnähe. and that he played hard and loose with church land and lay honores. Whereas Carolingians had previously played off these geographically distinct factions. as the respect shown to Arnulf at Worms demonstrates: it was a refusal to allow the creation of a royal toehold in Lotharingia to disrupt the networks of power which had been built up over the previous decades. Conflict in Lotharingia culminated in Zwentibald’s assassination by 72 Aachen’s role under the later Carolingians is discussed by L. pp. It was also a political necessity. the faction which dominated the Meuse valley. 145. 900. and particularly the lay-abbacy of St Maximian’s at Trier. 2–7. for a generation the preserve of bishop and count. . stripped by Zwentibald of their honores.a. Chronicon s. ed. p. Falkenstein.74 Zwentibald’s subsequent actions brought him into conflict with his erstwhile allies. Kurze.72 But Zwentibald chose to rule from Trier. marched on the king at Trier and forced him to flee to Worms.a.73 In 897 the leading aristocrats. or the Carolingian family. where Arnulf acted as conciliator between his son and the Lotharingian aristocracy. Aachen was traditionally the key to Lotharingia. ed. 73 AF s. Kurze. and it had been the favoured residence of Lothar and Lothar II. Later accusations that Zwentibald struck the archbishop of Trier on the head with his own pastoral staff. reflect the lack of a royal base which necessitated intrusion in the key city of Trier. as Zwentibald was worried by the support attracted by Rudolf of Burgundy in Burgundy. The key to Zwentibald’s efforts to establish himself was his control of what had been Megingoz’s honores. Otto III und Aachen. 897. This was not a move against kingship.432   But once Zwentibald’s kingship in Lotharingia was accepted. 1998). p. as the power vacuum in the Moselle following Megingoz’s murder was the only available point of entry into Lotharingian politics. The effort to establish Zwentibald in Lotharingia. ravaging. pp.a. The second half of the ninth century had seen the emergence of a system of power based on mediation between regional elites and the eastern court. and so on dialogue between the regional networks emanating from Trier and the royal sites of the Rhine valley. Charles the Simple and Louis the Child. ed.76 In 906 continued conflict over dominance in Lotharingia still centred on dominance of Trier through the key lay-abbacy of St Maximian’s. and s. the former heart of the Empire became the scene of competing and shifting loyalties. The resolution of the crisis.a. whose death began it. 901. and so have an adult Carolingian dominating the geographical heart of the Empire. Waltgar. Arnulf’s successor in the east. Kurze. 145–6. 77 Regino. and the elevation of Zwentibald to the Lotharingian throne. Chronicon. 76 See e. which was ‘violently invaded’ by one faction: the denouement of the conflict came.a. and the conflict between Zwentibald and the Lotharingian elite turned precisely on issues of access and presence.       433 his aristocratic enemies in 900. Kurze. indeed. Odo at Worms in 893 and 895). 906. 149. the fortified stronghold of one faction at Bamberg similarly emerges as the key to their power: from 75 The feud.g. 898. the Blies valley.. pp. p. threatened this arrangement. and laid siege to a fortification owned by their rivals. ed. was also involved in violent conflict with his local opponents in 892: Regino. as they marched into their rivals’ backyard. Regino.75 Political conflict in Lotharingia in the 890s was played out through competing topographies of power. falling to his death in lurid circumstances from his residence. however. was all along a matter of international relations. whilst Zwentibald’s fall followed alliances between the Lotharingian aristocracy. similarly depended on negotiations with other rulers (Louis of Provence at Lorsch in 894. p. was a nepos of the western king. Even this was not an attempt to opt out of Carolingian kingship: the Lotharingians’ loyalty was problematical precisely because they had access to alternative sources of royal power in the west. for Zwentibald’s killer. But in the accounts of the conflict we also witness an emerging stress on the political significance of fortifications. whilst Zwentibald was finally abandoned only when a more pliable Carolingian who was conveniently kin of some of their number became available in the shape of Louis the Child. Odo (and note that another Lotharingian nepos of Odo’s. . 140). for the stronghold of Zwentibald’s opponent Reginar at Doveren. 150–1. in that Zwentibald. As western and eastern Frankish kingships had stabilised. Chronicon. Stephen. s.77 In a similar feud for regional dominance which raged through the 890s and 900s in Thuringia. s. Otto III und Aachen. the archaeological evidence for these fortifications is still patchy. pp. had to court the bishops. Burgenbau and Landesverteidigung um 900. eds. such as Chèvremont. in the context of a changing balance between royal and elite power non-royal residences came to have a more visible place in the political landscape. pp. but defensible sites were nothing new. their increased prominence in the atmosphere of political violence of the decades around 900 need not be seen as a revolutionary change. they could control the region and drive rivals ‘beyond the Spessart’. 29–37. Jäschke. ed. 151–3. 902. In 930 Henry I. counts and other nobles of the region by visiting them one by one. 906.a. . pp. 231–3.78 Unfortunately. 903. 1860). and monasteries like St Maximian’s and Lorsch. The charters show a vigorous tradition of local collective action which was not yet enveloped into lordship. Kurze. Saxon. the first king of a new. there is documentary evidence suggesting royal oversight of castle-building in the Moselle. Jäschke links the charter to Henry I’s policy of building manned fortifications against the Magyars. Coulson. 81 Innes. dynasty. 167. Urkundenbuch zur Geschichte der jetzt die Preußischen regierungsbezirke Coblenz und Trier bildenden mittelrheinischen Territorien I (Koblenz. Monasteries. pp. 149. interestingly. Vörträge und Forschungen 16 (Sigmaringen. originated in the late Merovingian period. no. not political centres in their own right.79 The precise balance between royal oversight and local control of fortifications is difficult to unpick. indeed. The charter is H.80 Fortifications did not sweep away previous patterns of power. discussed both by Coulson and by K. 42–8. 1975). 149. may have played an important role in mediating the control of fortifications: the Moselle document concerns a castellum built by three laymen but given by them to St Maximian’s at Trier with royal blessing. some prominent fortified sites of the tenth century. Nonetheless. State and society.81 If fortified residences remained bolt-holes for times of troubles.-U. 240–1. in person in their 78 See especially Regino s. Zeitschrift für die Archäologie des Mittelalters 4 (1976). for the importance of the fortress at Bamberg for control of Thuringia. and its periodisation unclear. 79 On Chèvrement see Falkenstein. at Hersfeld this was also implemented via the agency of a royal monastery. 80 For Carolingian policy towards fortifications see C. “Fortresses and social responsibility in late Carolingian France”. with Charles the Bald’s famous legislation for the destruction of all unlicensed castella in all probability the tip of an iceberg of royal bargaining with aristocrats over when and where such seats could be built: even in the tenth century. Beyer et al.434   it. Kings did attempt to regulate fortification.. and the central places of local networks remained the cities such as Trier and Worms. 235–9. idem. but by the reign of his son Otto I. 6–9. 1841).a. 835–7. 931. have been much discussed. Reich und Kirche vor dem Investiturstreit. MGH SS 4 (Hannover. . Frühmittelalterliche Studien 32 (1989). Kurze. or at Mainz.84 82 Adalbert of Trier. G. and was sent scurrying back to Saxony. as he had intended. pp. ed. 83 Innes. p. Herrschaftsformen und Gesellschaftsstrukturen im Regnum Teutonicum”. and Widukind’s celebrated account thereof. Royal monasteries and itinerant kingship. For Ottonian itinerancy see above all Müller-Mertens. 84 The events of 953–4. ed. pp. The classic description of the Salians’ fortifications allowing them to dominate Worms: Vita Burchardi. 248–64. Settimane 38 (1990).. Schmid ed. MGH SRG (Hannover. Keller. idem. F. and Conrad’s possession of fortified residences at strategic points — such as the tower from which his son dominated Worms a generation later.83 Royal patronage (in Conrad’s case marriage to Otto’s daughter).82 Henry I in 930 was in a particularly weak position. 1979). binding together the regional elites. Rule and conflict in an early medieval society: Ottonian Saxony (Oxford. s. 1890). 17–34. But Ottonian kingship rested on a different form of power-sharing between kings and elites from that attempted by the Carolingians.. Tellenbach (Sigmaringen. kings were once again accentuating their social distance from their erstwhile peers. Waitz. “Zum Charakter der ‘Staatlichkeit’ zwischen karolingischer Reichsreform und hochmittelalterliche Herrschaftsausbau”. pp. 159–95. pp. 1985). 243–5. The classic analysis of the centrality of ritual to Ottonian rule is K. Amicitiae und Pacta. continuation of Regino’s Chronicle. This vivid description needs handling with care. political ritual and the royal itinerary thus took on a heightened significance as the integrative factor in the polity. pp. And it was through the royal itinerary that the relationship between regnal and regional power was negotiated. The proper performance of political ritual at these sites was crucial in relating kingship to the surrounding regions. on the site of the old Carolingian royal palace — underwrote his local power.       435 homes (domi ) and creating bonds of friendship through gift-giving and the sharing of banquets: the residences of the elite were the central places in the political topography of the region. Leyser. Otto allowed local landowners such as Conrad the Red to rule the region via the cities of Worms and Trier and via key monasteries. on Ottonian government and its differences from its Carolingian predecessor see H. in: K. cc. In the great revolt of 953–4. Reichsstruktur. 159. an outsider who had to come to terms with deeply entrenched local families. “Reichsorganisation. “Grundlagen ottonischer Königsherrschaft”. who fell in with Otto’s rebellious brother Liudolf. Festschrift G. State and society. Otto found himself unable to celebrate Easter at Aachen. and Bernhardt. and see Althoff. Otto lost the support of Conrad. aimed at overcoming space. and to which the aristocracies of neighbouring regions came. allowing a greater distance to emerge between elites and the localities that they ruled. movement and presence are central to the sociology of power. too. But that does not negate their significance. Throughout the early Middle Ages power remained relatively uninstitutionalised. Elite power strategies thus centred around the need to plug into as many of these small worlds as possible. space and movement across space were a fundamental element of social structure. we are in a position to detect underlying structural characteristics and their dynamics. diagrammatic terms. honour and collective action which we saw so vividly in the Walinehoug meeting. Exercising power at a distance was the fundamental problem faced by both elites and kings. One driving force for political . But in a world where power was embedded in personal relationships. indeed. as a two-dimensional hierarchy. through which both elites and kings could plug into local circuits of power. patterns of mobility. and the eventual splitting of the Carolingian Empire into an eastern and western kingdom with a central zone typified by divided and shifting allegiances — played a central role in the developments traced above. We are used to thinking of society in static. difficult to abstract from the small worlds of status. through movement around and between a series of royal heartlands. In the Carolingian period we see a dramatic increase in patterns of social complexity. Proper generalisation should proceed not from granting normative status to one area and then cataloguing deviation. and to identify the crucial variables which determined divergent regional experiences. were created. Royal power. where complexes of rights and property sustained residences. we must acknowledge regional variety and then seek to explain it. Rather. by definition the richness of the evidence makes it exceptional. as more forms of specialised social centres. through the creation and maintenance of an extensive circuit of contacts and interests: the successful pursuit of power was possible only through the careful manipulation of patterns of movement and residence.436   C This essay is not an attempt to advance any paradigmatic claims for the region it discusses. Clearly. If we avoid the temptation of dismissing difference and instead try to assess the reasons for it. geopolitical change — the more easterly orientation of the Carolingian kings when compared to their Merovingian predecessors. . a dialectic between elites and kings in attempting to control the interface between regional and regnal power. the price was a reliance upon royal patronage which made for insecurity.       437 development was. and court elites competed with one another to access regional support. If entry into this charmed circle whose Königsnähe placed them on a different political plane remained the goal of regional elites. But kings and elites remained interdependent. The crisis of the Carolingian Empire was essentially a crisis caused by increasing political complexity. And the highest echelons of elite society — the so-called ‘Imperial aristocracy’ — were always in danger of becoming disembedded from the worlds whence they sprang. . indeed. The outcome was a simpler system in which regional elites were left more or less to their own devices and kingship fulfilled an essentially integrative function. as the social distance between courts and regions increased. This page intentionally left blank . 2 . eds. Rituals of power from late Antiquity to the early Middle Ages. we may picture the ‘tall-gabled’ mead halls in Beowulf: the laughter of heroes.4 Whether cleric or layman.. transl. 65–73. 97ff.. But perhaps his suggestive text tells us more about what. in: The Cambridge companion to Old English literature. pp. pp.E. P. 1973).2 In fact. Michael Alexander (Harmondsworth. 1996). Theuws ed. “Beyond power. p. pp. The mode and meaning of Beowulf (London. It came to his mind that he would command the construction of a huge mead-hall. 2000). and share the gifts God had bestowed on him upon its floor with folk young and old . 1970).. Parker. . E. The lady with the mead cup (Dublin and Portland.3 But there are some methodological problems involved. “Anglo-Saxon society and literature”. R. 4 F. 3 M. Goldsmith. in his view. and his band increased to a great company.g. 142–59. vv. Wormald. pp. esp. M.1 Imagining barbarian residences. “Germanic legend in Old English literature”. harp-music. Lapidge (Cambridge.. 613ff. mastery of the field. scops delivering poems. TRW 7 (Leiden/Boston/Köln. 1991). 1987). Enright. p. 311–76. so friends and kinsmen gladly obeyed him. Beowulf and Christianity (New York. Godden and M. ibid. We have to keep in mind that Scandinavian society as described in the Old English Beowulf is stylized in a particular way. M. . J. M. pp. ibid. “Beowulf ”. sophisticated models of early medieval social interaction and ‘rituals of power’ have been based upon the Beowulf poet’s vivid descriptions. 88–106. ceremonial gift-giving and a lady with a mead cup entertaining the lord’s retainers. a house greater than men on earth ever heard of.A. Bazelmans. Frank.. 1–22.. Beowulf vv. the author describes places of power with a great deal of empathy and delight.THE REGIA AND THE HRING – BARBARIAN PLACES OF POWER Walter Pohl Then to Hrothgar was granted glory in battle. 9f.C. 70. Robinson. Ceremonial exchanges in Beowulf ” in: F. 1 Beowulf. pp. esp. 53. 2000). Pohl.D. Therefore. It is perfectly possible to study the cosmological significance of gift exchange.5 R   G  M  R There is. 1990). 91–130. 69–72. Theuws eds. Pohl. 404–23. “Herrschaft von der Höhe”. in: N. pp. Retinue: J.. pp. or the composition and function of the king’s retinue in Beowulf. Studies on ancient societies in Northwestern Europe (Amsterdam. 6 W.440   a barbarian residence should (or. archaeology provides good indications).. general anthropological models in many respects tend to conceptualize the obvious. the less can they be applied to barbarian places of power in general. but Ammianus does not care to tell us. Ausstellungskatalog (Stuttgart. Sedes regiae (400–800 D. Reial Acadèmia de Bones Lletres de Barcelona (Barcelona. interesting) they become. Images of the past. However. the Heruls. But the more specific (and therefore. It is not unlikely that many barbarian residences were wooden halls occasionally filled with drunken warriors bragging about their heroic deeds. 7 H. pp. Bazelmans. Ripoll eds. only one general observation about barbarian places of power that can be made on the basis of our written evidence: From Augustus to Charlemagne. Die Alamannen. W.). in: J. their results can hardly be generalized for the pre-Carolingian period when we have no descriptions of barbarian places of power in the west at all.C.M. hardly any author bothered to write about the residences of Germanic kings and dukes. the residence of 5 Role of women: Enright. . 1991). for instance the Runder Berg at Urach or the Zähringer Burgberg (and in some cases. 2000).6 This silence even holds true for basic topography and names — where were the residences of the kings of the Thuringians.7 Only a few scraps of information have been transmitted in writing. idem. Die Germanen (München. and such studies may sharpen our eyes for the problems at stake. the role of women in a warrior society. Steuer. Gurt and G.. pp. The lady with the mead cup. In the first century A. Roymans and F. should not) be like than about what really happened there. the Gepids or the Lombards? Where did the reges of the Alamanni so vividly described by Ammianus Marcellinus reside? Perhaps on some of the many hillforts that have been excavated. 1997). “Germania — Herrschaftssitze östlich des Rheins und nördlich der Donau”. “Conceptualising early Germanic political structure: a review of the use of the concept of Gefolgschaft”. Archäologisches Landesmuseum BadenWürttemberg. in some cases. as it seems. 149–63. Die Alamannen auf dem Zähringer Burgberg (Stuttgart. Cf. and the map from Codex lat. Appendix 1. Waitz. king of the Vinedi. p.14 This scarcity of information is not simply due to the lack of written souces. the latter inrumpit regiam castellumque iuxta situm. King Wacho’s residence in the land of the Beovinidi (Bohemia). the regia. and participated in the new urbanism at Dorestad. ed. 269. cf. 13 Even before Radbod. MIÖG Erg. still highlights tÚ toË MarobÒdou bas¤leion. 62. 14. p. 1990). Venantius Fortunatus alludes to the royal hall of the Thurinigians that had been burnt down by the Franks. and Ptolemy lists the toponym MarÒboudon. but does not mention the name. ed. 2. 31 (Wien.LD 8 (832 × 6). a fortified residence — Radulf had specifically constructed it when he heard that the Frankish army was approaching. for instance. I. Pagani (Torriana. We have extensive accounts of.. Chronica IV. and a Harilungoburg near the Danube. 1878). 5f. W. Geographica 7. Chronica IV. 297 (Radbod in Utrecht and Dorestad). spotting. for instance. their distant past. VF. reproduced in Claudii Ptolemei Cosmographia. 260. Strabo. 26.12 There is a little more in Frankish sources about Frisian residences in the time of Radbod. 12 Fredegar. castrum lignis monitum in quodam montem super Unestrude fluvio in Toringia construens’. Salzburg. but the Frisians lived much closer to the Frankish heartlands. Cf. Bayern. seems to have been quite extraordinary. The Merovingian Kingdoms 450–751 (London and New York. Tavole. and not inside it. Tacitus recounts that when Marbod was dethroned by Catualda. 3. properly speaking. Die Awaren (München. the Thuringian duke Radulf was besieged in an unnamed wooden fortress at the river Unstrut by King Sigibert II. But that was not. F. H. 6. Harilungoburg: MGH DD.11 The fort of Wogastisburc where Samo. the location or any details (although Queen Radegund must have known it well). p. Die Conversio Bagoariorum et Carantanorum und die Quellen ihrer Zeit. Aldgisl’s palatium is mentioned in the Vita Wilfredi. Bd. Biblioteca Nazionale di Napoli. p.9 In the sixth century. Opera 2. and the remains of the old at Utrecht. in his Geography. eds. REGIA   HRING –     441 Marbod. c. 10 Venantius Fortunatus. 1. MGH SRL (Hannover.13 Only Carolingian writers began to be interested in places of power of the migration period. Leo. tav. 9 .10 In 639. resisted Dagobert’s army in 631/32 is one of the rare places of power in the Merovingian periphery of which we know the name. Strabo. 54. 14 Wacho’s residence: Historia Langobardorum codicis Gothani. Bethmann and G. Österreich. V. king of the Marcomanni. Marbod’s residence. was next to the fortress. Appendix 3. c. L. cf. Wood. Wolfram. 68. 1 (Berlin. the wars 8 Tacitus. 11 Fredegar. 32.8 This means that the residence. 87: ‘Radulfus haec cernens. Opera poetica. p. 1994). MGH AA 4. 1881). Annales 2. L. 1988). Pohl. Ptolemy. 1995). against the Romans and even against members of his own family. or the Saxon Irminsul in the eighth century. but there is also Menander’s account of a visit to the khagan of the Turks in the late sixth century. ed. pp. K. 772. Gepid Sirmium or Bavarian Regensburg. which Arbeo of Freising. Annales. eds. Menander. palaces and roads. 1983).17 In the forests of Germania. Diesenberger (Wien.16 Barbarian residences only become apparent once they have been transferred to Roman cities: Frankish Cologne or Tournai. Müller (Paris. Die Germanen 83f. 39.g. pp. we know that Severinus could easily reach the residence of the kings of the Rugi across the Danube. Annales 1. 4. Vita Haimhrammi. 1851). whoever knew Roman and. leader of the Cherusci. calls metropolis huius gentis in arce. however. defended by towers and adorned by many fountains. 69–110. W.C. Fragmenta historicorum Graecorum 4. 43. Priscus and Malchus (Liverpool. 14–16. we hear more about holy places: the sacred groves of the Marsi. 18 Tacitus. Annales regni Francorum a. Vita Severini. ed. Pohl. c. Germania. in the eighth century. 6. 222–378.C. was not very impressed by centres of power beyond the old frontiers. cc. forthcoming). but Eugippius does not give any specific information about it. 8. Wolfram. apart from the legend that Queen Giso detained some barbarian goldsmiths. 17 Arbeo. 51. Byzantine diplomats occasionally described such steppe residences. R. and this is what this paper will concentrate on: the ‘places of power’ of steppe peoples. p. Blockley. der Text und der Heilige. the walled capital of this people. 40. Der Autor. in general. Olympiodorus. Semnones or Naharnavali in the classical period. The fragmentary classicising historians of the later Roman Empire: Eunapius. Tacitus. T P : H  A There is one exception. Salzburg. cc. R. later. built in stone.19 Byzantine sources about the Avar wars in the last 15 E. to make them produce royal prestige goods. cc. The history of Menander the Guardsman 16 . Tacitus. see Eugippius und Severin. The eyewitness report of life at the court of Attila around 450 written by Priscus is the most famous of these descriptions. Bayern.442   fought by Arminius. Pohl. but we do not hear about his residence. Österreich. Die Germanen. Frankish towns. aurefices barbaros. Pohl and M. Eugippius. ed. or: Fragmenta historiae Byzantinae. pro fabricandis regalibus ornamentis.15 The Vita Severini contains a wealth of circumstantial information about life along the Norican Danube in the second half of the fifth century. 55–71. 19 Priscus. 12. pp.18 Obviously. Blockley. in which we found wooden walls made of smoothed planks. 1994). and now in: W.23 The king of the Huns had several residences. contain long rhetorical speeches by Roman ambassadors and Avar khagans. Pohl. but hardly any circumstantial evidence about the setting of these meetings. The Huns. W. at which I shall take a few glimpses for comparison. Le origini etniche dell’Europa (Rome. Most of the texts have the advantage of being (or being based on) eye-witness reports. They were joined together to suggest solidity in such a way that even by looking hard one could scarcely see the joints. not only in the Nibelungenlied. You might see dining rooms of great dimensions and colonnades laid out with every form of decoration. Marco Polo and the discovery of the world (New Haven and London. 200–69. . pp. K. Frühmittelalterliche Studien 26 (1992). but also in the books of Plano Carpini or William of Rubruck. 2000). will be addressed below.22 Similar descriptions appear in Chinese sources. 165–207. and Notker later gives an elaborate and exaggerated description. Wirth. or: ed.. 1985). the methodological implications of their genre and the intentions of their authors. 69–91. notably Marco Polo’s. but chose to receive the Byzantine ambassadors in the largest and most beautiful one. MGH SRG. 306–8. “Konfliktverlauf und Konfliktbewältigung: Römer und Barbaren im frühen Mittelalter”. ed. pp. 1996). (Oxford. Attila — Flagellum Dei? (Rome. of which I will briefly consider one of the Turkish court in the early seventh century by the Buddhist monk Hsüan-Tsang. Die Awaren. 23 W. NS 12 (Berlin.21 Steppe rulers’ residences continued to inspire western phantasies. Thompson. chiefly Menander and Theophylactus Simocatta. E. Haefele. Fragmenta historicorum Graecorum 4 (Paris. 1959). Larner. pp. pp. 21 Notker. 104–36. 241–62. REGIA   HRING –     443 third of the sixth century. The area of the courtyard was enclosed by a circuit wall of high extent so that its size might show (Liverpool.H. however. 2nd edn. Attila — Das Hunnenreich und Europa (Stuttgart/Berlin/Köln. situated in a big village: A village like a very large city. pp.20 A few details about the ‘hring’ of the late Avar khagans emerge from contemporary Frankish sources. 79–86. Pohl. “La sfida attilana: Dinamica di un potere barbaro”. and the problems of comparison they raise. Müller. pp. Gesta Karoli magni imperatoris. The report by Priscus of his visit to Attila’s court in 449/50 is the most detailed description of a late antique barbarian place of power.A. overview of other sources: W. Pohl. 1999). The vivid descriptions they offer can. Pohl. 1999). in: S. be misleading. detailed as they are about many aspects of wars and negotiations. 1851). H. and many other travel reports. 22 J. Blason Scarel ed. pp. 20 Cf. G. Blockley 11. 26 Priscus. this was the dwelling he preferred to the cities which he had captured. This was the seat of Attila (. 277. and behind that. But rather than simply the employment of foreign labour the wooden buildings represented the process of acculturation of the Huns. 3. which was screened by fine linens and multicoloured ornamental hangings like those which Greeks and Romans prepare for weddings’. ed. there were a number of wooden buildings. there was a large banquet hall where Priscus repeatedly attended ceremonial banquets: ‘All the seats were arranged around the walls of the building on both sides. the king received his subjects to settle their disputes. ed. Blockley 11.). Die Welt der Hunnen (Wien. Blockley 13. 285. c. Behind him was another couch. Köln and Graz. 2. since Attila was coming out.27 Attila rested on a kline. Getica. In the centre of Attila’s compound. 27 Priscus. and ate from a wooden 24 Priscus. In the very middle of the room Attila sat upon a couch. Attila was also greeted by singing girls dressed in white. 2. and many persons who had disputes with one another stepped forward and received his judgement. . . p. and no one hindered me). who had already lived for at least three generations in an environment where wood was much easier to get by than in Central Asia. Priscus.’26 In front of the house. Unlike his guests. O. 137. and offered a welcome drink when he returned from a military expedition. p. Then he re-entered the house and received the barbarian envoys who had come to him. steps led up to Attila’s bed.24 The palace was built in a slightly higher position than the rest of the village and surrounded by a decorated fence with towers that were ‘built with an eye not to security but to elegance’. 1979). the floors covered with carpets. ed. one of his sons had the privilege of sitting on its edge. He came out of the house swaggering and casting his eyes around. he stood with Onegesius in front of the building. argues that Attila’s wooden halls must have been built by Gothic carpenters. as Priscus could observe: ‘As I was standing in the midst of the whole throng (for I was known to Attila’s guards and followers. partly covered with carved decoration and panelled walls.25 It does not seem that the residence had any defences at all. Maenchen-Helfen.444   that this was a royal palace. I saw a group of persons advancing and heard murmuring and shouts around the place. 281 (= Jordanes. 25 . 265. 34). When he had come out. p. the king was dressed in an exceedingly simple fashion. a Roman bed. Blockley 11. p. ed. In front of the building where Attila lived. p. In this compound. which began from the ground and rose to a moderate height. 261). most likely. The right side was considered more honourable. 265. 2. 275. ed. pp. p. 2. They were set on circular piles made of stones. to his dismay. fetching stones from Pannonia. 2. Blockley 11.’28 In Hereka’s house. the Tisza (Priscus 11. quem in nostra lingua hringe 28 Priscus. ed. Other buildings belonged to Attila’s wives. REGIA   HRING –     445 plate. whereas the Roman envoys had been placed along the left wall. p. most probably. ed. p. Not far from this wall was a bath which Onegesius had built. 29 . We know much less about the residence of the Avar khagans that must have been in the same region. Blockley 11. as was Attila’s. The guests sat on the chairs along the walls according to their honour and prestige. Pippin’s army in 796 came from Italy and had to cross the Danube to reach the residence of the khagan (Pohl. and then across some navigable rivers of which the last was the Tiphisas. 32 Annales qui dicitur Einhardi a. Hereka (Kreka) inhabited a compound of her own: ‘Inside the wall there was a large cluster of buildings. 30 Priscus. Blockley 11. quae hringus vocabatur.29 The road to Attila’s palace passed through the compound that belonged to his chief advisor Onegesius: ‘The buildings of Onegesius were second only to those of the king in magnificence. then across the Danube somewhere east of Belgrade. in the plains between the Danube and the Tisza.’30 It was the only stone building in the whole village and had been constructed by a captive Roman architect from Sirmium who then. 275. obviously to demonstrate that he did not need any precious materials to demonstrate his superiority. Die Awaren. 796. ubi reges Avarorum cum principibus suis sedere consueti erant. p. Frankish annals that report the conquest of the Avar khaganate by the armies of Charlemagne only briefly mention the Hunorum regia. Priscus. ‘the floor was covered with woollen felt-rugs for walking upon’. and they too had a circuit wall made of timbers but not embellished with towers. 31 The only hint for the location of Attila’s main palace is the route that Priscus’ embassy took: north from Naissus.32 The Lorsch annals call it locum.31 Byzantine sources give no information about it. 306–8). others from timbers which had been debarked and planed straight. some made of planks carved and fitted together for ornamental effect. This order of prestige was enacted in an elaborate drinking ritual. the queen was ‘reclining on a soft couch’ when Priscus entered. had to serve Onegesius as a bath attendant. 2. Pohl.38 But on the other hand. almost exactly one thousand years later (in 1799) and now kept in Vienna’s Kunsthistorisches Museum may be a part of the Avar treasure that was hidden before the Franks could get hold of it. Urbanczyk ed. 312–20. built in several places in the western periphery of the Avar empire which Charlmagne’s army encountered in 791. in: P.34 This evidence has provoked some debate.”. 34 . Annales qui dicuntur Einhardi a. that it was situated in a plain and made the impression of a mobile settlement. east of the Tisza. no resistance was offered there in 795 and 796. munitiones. 1. hringus. These images are probably derived from the Avar defences. Die Awaren. a veteran of the Avar wars. 38 W. Der Goldschatz von Nagyszentmiklós (Budapest. the campus.33 One redaction of the Royal Annals speaks of eorum regia. Each of them was 20 feet wide and twenty feet high. 1977) (with the outdated opinion that this was a Hungarian treasure). 65–78. Rácz.446   nominant. 796. 36 W. pp. 37 G. 35 Notker. the country of the Huns was enclosed by nine concentric circles. Pohl. But nothing suggests that the khagan’s residence itself was fortified. who claimed to rely on a story he had heard as a child from Adelbert. a Langobardis autem campus vocatur. 796. László and I. A publication edited by Falko Daim is in preparation.D.37 E  C A Huns and Avars in Europe lived in the periphery of the Eurasian steppe and got accustomed to sedentary ways of life fairly soon. The image of the ring is enlarged into bizarre dimensions by Notker of St Gall. 1997). quae. Origins of Central Europe (Warsaw. they remained part of a cultural universe 33 Annales Laureshamenses a. separated from each other by a distance as from Zurich to Constance. Gesta Karoli II.36 Contemporary sources and Notker’s account agree in one point: that is the marvellous treasure that many generations had heaped up at the Avar court. at least. built from timber and filled with stones and mud.35 According to him. “The role of steppe peoples in eastern and central Europe in the first millennium A. The ‘ring’ seems to indicate that the Avar residence was round. The hoard found at Nagyszentmiklós. pp. and which Charlemagne distributed freely after getting hold of it in 795/96.. ut dictum est. 1992). It was furnished with silken hangings dyed without skill in various colours. 1999) which he is currently preparing for print. sitting upon a golden throne with two wheels. “Royal treasures and representation in the early middle ages”. 255–81. they were summoned and immediately came in Sizabulos’ presence. On the third day. pp. 40 . 3. 1998). sometimes kalubh (hut). 19–29. 1990). sometimes Menander uses skhnh (tent). Blockley. In August 569. ed. 300 –800. Studies in medieval inner Asia (Aldershot. which could be drawn when necessary by one horse. Pohl and H. The Greek words for the dwellings vary. “The establishment and dissolution of the Türk Empire”.41 Sizabulos presented the Byzantine envoys with a notable display of prestige goods — this is as good a description of a barbarian treasure.-E. 39 O. In it stood statues of different shapes. dishes and bowls. Reimitz eds. pp. He was in a tent.39 Therefore.42 Then. ‘Then they turned to feasting and spent the rest of the day enjoying lavish entertainment in the same tent. W. Inner Asian frontiers of China (New York. in: D. 1997). 1940). in: W. also of silver and in no way inferior to those which we make. so wealthy is the ruler of the Turks’. Hardt.’ The envoys offered their gifts and were greeted by the khagan. I. The construction of ethnic communities. 41 Menander. n.’ On the next day. Sizabulos sat there on a couch (kline) made completely of gold. Strategies of distinction. fr. Scharlipp. pp. and the way in which it was displayed in public. In front of this dwelling were drawn up over a wide area wagons containing many silver objects. Lattimore. TRW 2 (Leiden/Boston/Köln. Die frühen Türken in Zentralasien (Darmstadt. In the middle of the building there were golden urns. and a large number of statues of animals. the Byzantines were dismissed with presents. 285–316. it may be worth looking for comparison to reports from the courts of medieval Inner Asian rulers. the Byzantine ambassador Zemarchos departed on a long journey to the residence of the Turkish khagan Sizabulos (Istämi) in the Altai mountains. pp. For the context. Sinor. 119–21. 42 See M. REGIA   HRING –     447 that extended to the ‘Inner Asian frontiers of China’. Sinor ed. ‘which was similarly decorated with multicoloured silken hangings. ‘they came to another dwelling in which there were gilded golden pillars and a couch of beaten gold which was supported by four golden peacocks. esp. as we get in the early middle ages. The Cambridge History of Early Inner Asia (Cambridge.. or in: idem.40 ‘When Zemarchos and his companions reached the place where Sizabulos was presently staying — in a valley of the so-called ‘Golden Mountain’ — having arrived there.. they were received in another hut. 10. D. water-sprinklers and also golden pitchers’. Zemarchos received a female slave. and his dissertation on early medieval treasures (Marburg. When Chinese envoys arrived. the region of the Issik-Köl served as winter quarters. 28f.46 43 Scharlipp. north of the Tien-shan mountains. He wears garments of embroidered silk. His officers sat in front in two rows on long mats that had been spread for them. only Hsüan-Tsang received pure food according to his monastic diet. There follows a description of the king’s favourite wife. (with n.43 This was not far from where Zemarchos had met Sizabulos. as that lake does not freeze over because of its warm sources. pp. encountered the khagan T’ung shih-hu near the IssikKöl. Die Reise nach Westen. Grousset. the khagan offered them wine and drank with them. The khagan’s body guard stood behind them. oder wie Hsüan-Tsang den Buddhismus nach China holte (Köln. Quarters of sheep and calves were heaped up in front of the guests. one could only regard him with a feeling of admiration and respect’.) The king has put up for himself a large felt tent of about forty square feet. . Their dwellings are made of felt (. they have their residence in a mobile camp. Die frühen Türken. ‘Then one could see the increasingly merry guests trying to outdo each other drinking.44 ‘The khagan inhabited a spacious tent adorned with golden flowers whose splendour blinded the eyes. pp.448   Sixty years later. the walls are made of woollen rugs. 45 Grousset. I have to rely on R. east and west kept ringing out with its noisy chords’. Die Reise nach Westen. Sung-yün. all of them wore splendid costumes of embroidered silk. For the source and its context. while the music of the barbarians of the south and north. he sits on a golden couch supported by four golden phoenixes’. 46 Grousset. who wears a long silk robe and has her hair set in an eight-foot long horn adorned with precious stones in five colours. 1). clinking their cups that they filled and emptied in turn. 1986). It was the buddhist monk Hsüan-Tsang who. in 629/30. a traveller from a very different cultural background arrived in Central Asia at the court of another Turkic ruler.45 The khagan’s respect for the monk was also expressed by the fact that he was allowed to sit in an iron chair. 78f. on his way to India. Die Reise nach Westen. 44 . Another Chinese author. . had described the residence of the Hephthalites in 519: ‘The Hephthalites do not live in cities surrounded by walls. 76f. Although he was a barbarian ruler who lived in a felt tent. pp. whereas all other guests sat on mats on the floor. Die Mongolen und ihr Weltreich. IX.48 Therefore. Ural-Altaische Jahrbücher 49 (1977). 1992). Berend in The Medieval Review (online). 1–46). “Giovanni di Pian . n. 1985). In Iohannes de Plano Carpini’s Historia Mongalorum. It is not impossible. those elements that appear both in early medieval and thirteenth-century century texts may be taken as an indication that they may have had a more general significance. A. Weiers. Roux. 48 For instance. in: idem.A. pp. 317–322). Les explorateurs au Moyen Age (Paris.).a. Larner.50 47 Les précurseurs de Marco Polo. Sinor. that some information from Byzantium available to Greek diplomats had reached them indirectly. 185–95). there is a description of his visit to the court of the Mongol Khan Güyük in the 13th century. 9. 1959). “Westliche Boten und Reisende zu den Mongolen im 13. Laszlovszky ed. 29–35. and unthinkable that they knew any of the Chinese sources. from the thirteenth century onwards.. ed. 121–40. Historia Mongolorum (esp. the review of J. Tender meat under the saddle: Customs of eating. 49 Cf. see also ibid. t’Serstevens (Paris. interprets the rise of the Mongols in the context of an “eastern Eurasian cavalry revolution”.49 However. Medium Aevum Quotidianum. it is rather unlikely that western friars who travelled to the Mongol court knew the Excerpta de legationibus. “Le Mongol vue par l’Occident”.47 In the meantime. 1998) by N. drinking and hospitality among conquering Hungarians and nomadic people. Reichert. thirteenth-century sources should not be used to shed light on those aspects of early medieval steppe rulers’ residences that remain obscure in the earlier reports ( just as the Edda cannot be used to reconstruct ancient Germanic religion). Wittfogel. for instance. Of course. ed. und 14. As our aim here is not to analyse all the details of barbarian residences. Eggebrecht (Mainz. We know. K. Petech. Vatatzes. D. M. Begegnungen mit China: Die Entdeckung Ostasiens im Mittelalter (Sigmaringen. esp. V. but only to draw a general picture of the way in which they were perceived by western envoys.-P. a cautious look far beyond the time limits of this volume may be permissible. Jahrhundert” (pp. s.. “Introduzione” (pp. J. Sonderband 7 (Krems. Marco Polo. this type of comparison always risks projecting intertextual relations onto the object under scrutiny. In our case. L. pp. c. February 2000. 50 Iohannes de Plano Carpini. A. the world of the steppe had changed to considerable extent. that William of Rubruck met envoys from the emperor at Nikaia. the friar travelled there as papal envoy in 1245. E. Studies in Medieval Inner Asia. at the Mongol court. REGIA   HRING –     449 M : P C  W R Extensive reports by Europeans who visited Central Asian courts are only preserved again at a much later date. though. “China und die osteurasische Kavallerie-Revolution”. Menestò. que aureis laminis erant tecte. Sartach/Sartaq in his encampment three days’ journeys west of the Volga. after which a banquet started with drinking and eating that continued all day. 1990). c. . Güyük was sitting on a throne to receive homage. which rested on gilded columns: ‘Tentorium illud erat positum in columnis.54 He visited several khans on his journey eastward: first. according to Plano Carpini’s reckoning. and finally. Et per gradus ascendebatur illud quod rotundum erat parte posteriori. Banci etiam erant positi in circuitu sedis. pp. in medio. sed duces sedebant in bancis inferius. there were two doors. Marco Polo. 9. 33–35. 311f. In these panels. Here. For the Mongol context of his report. si bene meminimus. accommodate more than 2000 people. di Carpine: da compagno di Francesco a diplomatico presso i Tartari”. 18–23.53 In the years 1253–55. p. esp. 49–68. ed.M. 17. and then wrote a report to Louis IX of France. 35. pp. sed exterius alii erant panni’. Ibi etiam erat aurum et lapides pretiosi. His journey to the Great Khan Möngke. see C. Larner. pp. The Mongols (Malden and Oxford. Morgan. one of which was exclusively reserved for the khan. cf. Larner. and had the opportunity to admire the splendid ebony throne: Solariulum unum de tabulis erat alte preparatum. but otherwise similar.52 These three tents were the largest ones. D. 9. mirabile sculptus. p. pp. 52 Iohannes de Plano Carpini. was made of purple fabric and surrounded by wooden panels on which various images were painted. he was impressed by the number of lavish tents of state. The tent used for meetings and banquets could. et clavis aureis cum aliis lignis erant affixe et de baldachino erat tectum superius et interius parietum. 54 The mission of Friar William of Rubruck. 322. 136–44. 320. 51 Iohannes de Plano Carpini. 53 Iohannes de Plano Carpini. 32. totum de purpura ruffa. 1253–55.450   Like some of the earlier travellers. et margarite. 9. et alii sedebant post eos. Halperin.51 A third tent that the papal envoys were taken to later was the most marvellous of all. Jackson (London. c. Marco Polo. Arrangements at the court of Batu that they passed on the way were slightly more modest. pp. esp. Tronus autem erat de ebore. Batu’s mobile camp on the eastern bank of the Volga. p. but the tents of the khan’s wives were also of considerable size and splendour. When they entered. There was another tent called orda aurea. Russia and the golden horde (Bloomington. they were offered wine and beer. ubi domine sedebant in scamnis a parte sinistra. the friar William of Rubruck travelled to the Mongol empire. ubi tronus imperatoris erat positus. 1987). P. then. a dextris autem nemo sedebat superius. 1987). and transl. c. 23–25. in which audiences. from Priscus’ report to that by William of Rubruck. meaning ‘the middle’. c. William of Rubruck. p. . or caracomos (clear mare’s milk). c. or bal (honey mead)’. P      What do these texts. so these people know on what side of the residence (curia) to station themselves when they are unloading their dwellings. or a wooden hall. and in a little hearth in the middle there was a fire burning. tell us about places of power in the Steppe? In many respects. . c. 19. 177. 15.57 The envoys were told to sit on a bench. large audience-halls with wooden pillars and panels. between the Altai and the Tien-shan mountains. 28.) He then asked us what we should like to drink: wine. made from twigs and the roots of wormwood. 4. Authors (for instance Menander) do not always distinguish clearly between tents and wooden buildings. this being the direction towards which the doors of the residence open. meetings and banquets took place. the perceptions they relate are surprisingly similar. REGIA   HRING –     451 the winter residence of the great khan Mangu/Möngke. 6. Almost all of them centre around a large tent. And just as the people of Israel knew on which side of the tabernacle to pitch their tent. . For this reason the court is called in their language orda. One league is about 1500 paces. As in Sartaq’s residence: William of Rubruck.56 ‘At the entrance. and also from cattle-dung.55 The residences of the khans all looked more or less like Möngke’s residence. He (the khan) was sitting on a couch. 14. except that nobody takes up his station due south. since it is always situated in the midst of his men. William was impressed by its size and the careful lay-out: His own (= Batu’s) dwelling had the appearance of a large city stretching far out lengthways and with inhabitants scattered around in every direction for a distance of three or four leagues. there was a bench with some comos’. 55 56 57 William of Rubruck. 117. as described by William on the occasion of their first audience. p. ‘The interior of the dwelling was completely covered in cloth of gold. or terracina (rice wine). Batu’s camp was moved up and down along the Volga following the rhythm of the seasons. p. 131. dressed in a fur which was spotted and very glossy like sealskin (. which grows there to a considerable size. 2. Byzantine diplomacy (Aldershot.60 This order of precedence may have been underlined by drinking rituals. a golden couch resting on four golden phoenixes at the Hephthalite court. fr. where he also mentions medos. rugs or carpets. Smythe. drinks. .61 The Secret History of the Mongols records a quarrel between the Khans Güyük and Batu about which of them was allowed to drink first at a ceremonial dinner. a table with kumys next to the entrance. Franklin eds. Frühmittelalterliche Studien 26 (1992). differed widely: wine. of different sizes and distinguished by colour (silver/gold.59 two couches in his banqueting hall. c. A lot of emphasis is put on banquets that usually went on all day. 63 Priscus. et apostolicus repetit quoque castra suorum. a reserved door for Khan Güyük. Dschingis-Khan — ein Weltreich zu Pferde. 208–29. Heissig.. pp. or sometimes on one side. as a rule. a drink made from barley).58 Sometimes there were several tents used for banquets or receptions. . Shepard and S. W. fr.452   decorated with textiles. most of them alcoholic. n. see D. golden flowers. In front of the throne or along the side walls. a golden throne on two wheels and a couch of beaten gold which was supported by four golden peacocks in Sizabulos’ tents. painted panels. kamon (according to Priscus. 61 In general. “Why do barbarians stand around the emperor at diplomatic receptions?”. in: J. which. 181–208. we often get some information on materials and decoration: wood or felt. p. 11. pp. 1992). 2.63 and in Central Asia. 168f. white/ purple). 62 Ed. Vom Wohnen im Zelt im Mittelalter’. 305–12. there is a throne or a royal couch. chairs or mats were arranged on which aristocrats. 11. Balzer. were often simply described as ‘dwellings’. 41. ‘. Although detailed descriptions are rare. Cf. Das Buch vom Ursprung der Mongolen (Köln. beer. R. The day was spent drinking. 60 For similar arrangements at the Byzantine court. Social interaction at court figures prominently in most narratives. pp. 12. wood carvings. purple and gold. 1985). M. Archiv für Völkerkunde 6/7 (1951/52). as described by Priscus at Attila’s banquet. embroidered silken hangings. pp. p. “Zeremonielle Trinksitten und Raumordnung bei den turko-mongolischen Nomaden”. 261. also kumys (an alcoholic drink 58 See above. often in an elevated position. 255. Bleichsteiner. . elaborate pillars. an ebony throne in Güyük’s residence.62 The ambassadors’ reports from the Mongol court underline the symbolic significance of the doorways: there was a taboo on touching the threshold. mead. ambassadors and leaders of subject peoples sat in a carefully arranged order of precedence. 59 Priscus. In the centre. is briefly sketched in our reports: a simple wooden chair in Attila’s tent. and inside. 279. Die Awaren. “The making of a Great Khan”. 36. or the European powers of the thirteenth century. At Möngke’s court. c. Pohl. 114. for the Huns. 9.’68 Noble women. William of Rubruck is very specific: ‘His camp (curia) struck us as extremely large. REGIA   HRING –     453 made from mare’s milk). pp. Die Awaren. 71 Denis Sinor. 15. at Möngke’s court. 209–15. who had been regent after the death of his father Ögedei. Iohannes de Plano Carpini c. 32–43. 70 William of Rubruck. 67 William of Rubruck. 65 . ‘thus concealing the word tribute. c. rice wine. and in Pohl. fr. where Priscus paid a visit to Attila’s main wife Hereka. 2. Gift giving was an essential part of diplomatic contacts. and to each woman belong a large dwelling and possibly two hundred wagons’. the khan’s secretaries insisted that they took a tunic each: ‘You are not willing to accept gold and silver. and his eldest son. This was the case in the palace of Attila. for the Avars.64 Treasures. pp. sometimes only to a restricted audience. so that you do not leave him empty-handed. William visited some of the women’s houses. 319 and 321. the envoys were offered a choice of several drinks. 178. p. Cf. the payments were issued to him disguised as provisions issued to the generals.’67 As far as the relationship between Byzantium. 31 and 34. the distinction between gifts and tribute became rather blurred. 11. 68 Priscus. 69 William of Rubruck. play an important part. 28. come into focus to a differing degree. 15. E. As a result. for instance at the court of Sizabulos. but also of the relationship between subordinate princes and the rulers of steppe empires. and steppe empires was concerned. 178–85. In several residences. p. pp. pp. 66 I have discussed that in Pohl. 1. 69 Later. 15. and you have been here a long time praying for the khan. is exceptional for taking her share in affairs of state. He requests each one of you to accept at least a simple garment. c. and their public display.71 There 64 William of Rubruck. who is with him. p. Studies in Medieval Inner Asia. 251. and especially the ruler’s wives. two or three. For Sartaq’s court. “La sfida attilana”. 29. since he has six wives. Priscus observed that the Western Emperor had conferred upon Attila the title of magister militum. 195–99.g. c.70 Güyük’s mother Töregene.65 What gift exchange in places of power in the steppe meant for barbarian society can only be guessed at from chance remarks. milk. they had their own buildings near those of their husband.66 When William of Rubruck and his companions left Möngke’s court and refused gifts of gold and silver. p. c. p. the dominae sat to his left on the platform. c. 178. And although he had brought in the young wife as well. 29. In Güyük’s purple tent. 19. again ‘there sat a young wife. p. p. and the noblemen to his right below.’74 William of Rubruck then encountered a similar arrangement in Möngke’s residence. William later visited it again when the khan was not present. The ascension of Güyük and his short reign are also featured prominently in Rashid al-Din. 74 William of Rubruck.A.76 It is quite remarkable that women get more attention in the reports from Mongolic residences than in our early medieval texts. 178–203. John and William were friars who n. But it is doubtful whether any general conclusion can be drawn. a very ugly girl named Cirina. and as he goes to some lengths in describing which of Attila’s sons and relatives sat next to him.72 Whether women were present at receptions and banquets is not always clear. there may not have been any. 132. 15. pp. probably all of them were his wives. 1971). nevertheless the daughter was mistress of the entire establishment (curia) that had belonged to her mother’.454   was a tent that was divided equally between Güyük and his mother for holding court.’ 73 Iohannes de Plano Carpini c.. 322. p. 322: ‘Ibidem divisi fuerunt ab invicem imperator et mater eius: et mater imperatoris ivit in unam partem et imperator in aliam. The dwelling had belonged to a Christian wife to whom he had been very attached and who had borne him his daughter. 195.75 The audience therefore took place in one of the women’s compounds. esp. and a full-grown daughter of his. 35. 251–53. Priscus does not mention them at Attila’s banquet. pp. At the courts of Mongol rulers. 6. 36. 9. apart from difference in the authors’ interests. 28. and the space on their side not taken up by women — since the only ones there were Batu’s wives — was filled by men. one of the khan’s wives was sitting next to him. 32. was sitting on a couch behind them with the other children. Boyle ed. Neither are ladies mentioned in the residence of Sizabulos. ‘men were sitting around to his right and the ladies on his left. XIV. J. . 76 William of Rubruck. the wives of the Khan seem to have been present. The successors of Genghis Khan (New York. Apart from that. Beside the khan. in bancis inferius. 9. Et omni die veniebat multitudo maxima dominarum. 72 Iohannes de Plano Carpini c. 75 William of Rubruck. where the envoys were made to sit in front of the women. c. p.73 At Batu’s court. ad iudicia facienda. where an Avar renegade. p. and were therefore keenly observed.79 Power was. 79 De Pippini regis victoria Avarica. 19. a queen is mentioned only once in a political role: the catuna mulier.80 What is. serving food and wine which he consumed in the saddle. to a large extent. When Attila returned to his favourite residence. 13. largely absent from all accounts is an active or ceremonial role of women at court assemblies. REGIA   HRING –     455 went to Mongol courts with an eye to mission. the wife of Onegesius came out to meet him with her attendant. p. 29. 1 (Berlin. however. also among the Mongols (William of Rubruck. Pohl.77 The wives or widows of kings also had their own economic base. as Attila was entering.. “Queens as Jezebels: the careers of Brunhild and Balthild in Merovingian history”. 6. neither in the early middle ages nor at the Mongol court. young girls came to meet him 77 Priscus. fr. 261. pp. The title katun for the ruler’s wife is rather common among steppe peoples. Both in Priscus’ and in William of Rubruck’s account. 80 J. 189). She ‘ruled the village’: Priscus. 11. 305. Women did however play an important role in rituals of welcome. Die Awaren. Priscus also found it advisable to establish contacts with women who had a say in politics: most importantly. 291. c. fr. Baker ed. who perhaps had suffered the effects of her power. in: D. the khagan’s wife. Priscus and Zemarchos (on whose report Menander relies) were Byzantine diplomats who were more interested in hierarchies and informal networks of power. 78 . in which women (some of whom were Christians) could perhaps support them.Lat. exercised in the hall. MGH Poet. 31–77. Nelson. for instance one of Bleda’s widows in whose village the Roman envoys had to seek shelter because of a storm. There is no evidence for a lady with a mead cup entertaining the steppe emperor’s retinue.L. 1881). 116.78 The system of providing for (at least some of ) the many wives of the ruler who had their own houses seems to have been similar to that observed by William of Rubruck in the Mongol empire. the ruler is also welcomed by singing girls. Still. p. abused her. In the case of the Avars. 1978). p. Medieval women (Oxford. accompanied her husband when he submitted to Pippin in 796. p. Attila’s wife Hereka who not only received presents but also arranged a dinner in the house of her ‘master of affairs’ where the Roman envoys met ‘some of the leading men of the nation’. receptions or banquets. ‘In this village. 2. who underlines the strong role of Frankish queens in this exercise of power in the hall. 25. Heissig.83 The thirteenth-century friars. rites and ceremonies. Tacitus’ Germania. closely observing ways in which they had adapted Christian ritual to pagan practices. pp. and they sang Scythian songs’. 169–82. c. and repeatedly remarks that touching the threshold of the residence was taboo.84 William of Rubruck is not only very accurate in his observations about Manicheans. with fire. 235–44. pp. 265. . magic. Iohannes de Plano Carpini c. Temples. Die Germanen. 153–56. Eliade. is quite rich in detail about Germanic religion. 29. William of Rubruck c. An anthropological study of spirit possession and 82 . French original: Paris.456   and went before him in rows under cloths of white linen. 280f. Cf. Iohannes de Plano Carpini c. 319. 1951).M. 83 Pohl. bells and drums. see Das Buch vom Ursprung. cantabatur eidem et cum quibusdam virginibus pulchris. quando Cuyuc de tentorio exibat. pp. In general. First. Lewis. 1975. 1984). 166. 78–85.86 Menander describes with gusto a shamanistic purification rite practiced on Zemarchos and his companions when they entered the Turkish realm. in general. do describe some religious practices at steppe residences. pp. in: A. Eggebrecht ed. 11. inclinabant ei. 87 Menander.. s. 31. M. c.82 What should we make of the things that we might expect to find in these descriptions but that are scarcely present? Several examples can be noted. 86 Priscus. 3. 84 Esp. Roux.). quousque exterius morabatur’. Schamanismus und archaische Ekstasetechnik (Frankfurt/Main. c. 192–94.C. taboos. 177–248.87 Plano Carpini’s party had to undergo a somewhat sim81 Priscus. I. pp. religious sites. for instance.81 And 800 years later: ‘Semper. quod nulli alii duci fiebat. pp. rituals and practices are virtually absent from our early medieval reports. La religion des Turcs et des Mongols (Paris. pp. Armenians and other Christians he encounters. are a recurrent feature in texts about barbarians. 9. trance and exorcism. 240–45. 22. fr. p. p. divination. esp. fr. 3. 35. 85 William of Rubruck. ed. fr. 1–2. For a similar oracle in the “Secret history of the Mongols”. 119. and which Attila considered as an omen. which were held up by the hands of women on either side . sacred images.a. incense. barbarian chants. p. Die Mongolen und ihr Weltreich (Mainz. . 10. 26–28. priests. whose reports are cushioned in ethnographic material. Müller.85 The only hint of religious beliefs in Priscus is the story about the sword of Mars found by accident. he also records in detail rituals of divination from the charred shoulder blades of sheep at Möngke’s court. 2. C. There were many such rows of women under cloths. “Die Religion der Mongolen”. see Jean P. 12. Ecstatic Religion. que in summitate lanam habebant coccineam. p. pp.. triumphal arches. Die nordeurasischen Schamanen”. Few early medieval authors cared much about the exact forms of barbarian paganism. The reports from steppe residences have little that is comparable. If cosmology governed life at barbarian courts. Wood ed. “Diplomatic practices in medieval Inner Asia”. p. Plano Carpini prefixes a short history of the Mongols to his account. The Beowulf poem is permeated by recapitulations of a (often not-sodistant) past that serves as an index of prestige. among which would have been the pagan religion of their hosts.89 On the other hand. 89 For instance. and many texts rely on stereotypes of classical religion or even descriptions from the Old Testament when they describe pagan practices. “Ekstatische Seelenreisende.90 its impact goes rather unnoticed in the reports we have. even in the practices described by Plano Carpini and William of Rubruck. 343 (walking between two fires as a ritual of submission). W. n. we may conclude that religious ritual was not an unmistakeable part of the setting in which ambassadors were received by steppe emperors. Schamanen und Geisterbeschwörer in der östlichen Mongolei (Wiesbaden. does not mention any religious practices at the khagan’s residence itself. Secondly. however.. “Deliberate ambiguity. 348. “Beyond power”. the same can be said for the sense of the past. c. inscriptions. 1992). on the way to Batu’s court. On the other hand. Mitteilungen der Grazer Morgenländischen Gesellschaft 6 (1997). and so on. 90 As could be expected according to the model proposed by Bazelmans. J. But the traces of the staging of memory as a part of the shamanism (Harmondsworth. Barbarian envoys who arrived at Rome or Constantinople were (as far as they understood them) overwhelmed by representations of the past: statues. in terre finibus Comanorum. . 310. and as a matrix for the future. IMR series (Turnhout. XVI. Pohl. His silence cannot be due to a lack of interest or the systematic disregard for pagan practices by a Christian author. when they had to pass between two fires. 14. Studies in Medieval Inner Asia. in: I. 1971). p. 9. forthcoming). it was not part of the mission of Byzantine diplomats to describe in detail what was to be expected. cf. REGIA   HRING –     457 ilar ritual of purification when they crossed the border. Gießauf. pp. 4. in the case of the Lombards: W. cenotaphs. however. Heissig. and William of Rubruck indulges in historical digressions. 88 Iohannes de Plano Carpini c.. The Lombards and Christianity”.88 Menander. D. otherwise he would have omitted the shamanistic ritual as well. mosaics. 3. 39–62. Both also use information they have obviously collected on the spot. Sinor. Conversion in the Middle Ages. p. 93 Beowulf vv. fr. Heissig. while others.93 We know from Old Turkic inscriptions that a ruler’s exploits mattered for the ideology of steppe empires (as could be expected). ed. c. “Alttürkische Inschriften in der Mongolei”.91 A rare exception in the early medieval texts is Priscus’ remark that at Attila’s banquet. 3. Reactions were emotional: ‘The guests fixed their eyes on the singers: some took pleasure in the verses. p. ‘two barbarians came in and stood before Attila and chanted songs which they had composed. apart from being called ‘Attila’s palace’ or ‘the hring of the Avars’. Western ambassadors seem to have missed.. when night fell. whose bodies were enfeebled by age and whose spirits were compelled to rest. going back to a grey wolf. p. Innes eds. thirdly. so it is not simply due to the mobile and temporary character of the encampments of a steppe ruler — and in any case Attila’s wooden palace or the Avar ring were permanent settlements. there is. were reduced to tears’. 121–75. pp. p. This corresponds to the lack of names for the residence of the Thuringians or other Germanic peoples. 9.95 Past victories played a role in many negotiations. others recalling the wars became excited. 95 Das Buch vom Ursprung. 203. 94 V. Using the past in early medieval Europe (Cambridge. and the ‘uses of the past’ for steppe empires went unnoticed.92 The scene may have been similar when a bard was ‘bidden to sing/a hall-song for the men on the mead-benches’ in Beowulf. 3.. do not occur in our texts. in general: Y. or of ethnic identity. 1.94 The ‘Secret History of the Mongols’ appropriately begins with Gengis Khan’s lineage. but only attrib- 91 Iohannes de Plano Carpini c. Plano Carpini relates that idols of Chingis-Khan were venerated. 182. a surprising vagueness about names and locations. 92 Priscus. 13. 2000). those songs were in praise of somebody who was present. Thomsen. But formal statements.96 Related to this lack of attention towards barbarian memoria. 287. None of the residences has a name in our sources. telling of his victories and his deeds of courage in war’.458   representation of rulership. or failed to record such occasions. Even Beowulf usually gives no names for the mead-halls. p. or ritual invoking the deeds of the ruler. and saw one in front of Güyük’s residence. let alone his lineage or the origin myth of his people. are few. 237. too. Zeitschrift der Deutschen Morgenländischen Gesellschaft 78 (1924/25). 96 Cf. . repeatedly. p. 1067–68. Hen and M. Die Mongolen und ihr Weltreich. 1. 72–92. 105–66. pp.. Even their location was not described with much exactitude. Fourth. horse-breeding or the general level of technology. 4. William of Rubruck. Among the few exceptions. The size of the population. pp. or in the forests of Germania. c. 7–11. Reimitz.97 It seems that barbarian residences were only indirectly linked with this matrix.. “Aethicus Ister: an exercise in difference”. Grenze und Differenz im frühen Mittelalter. Grenze und Differenz im frühen Mittelalter Forschungen zur Geschichte des Mittelalters 1 (Wien. cc. 2. Roman and Byzantine. . 232–35. notably as regards the economy and infra-structure. pp. and later. REGIA   HRING –     459 utes them to a king or a people (the great exception being Heorot). but not least. 248–51. The lack of place-names does not reflect a general disregard for barbarian geography. the Bavarian Geographer). c. 2000). These ethnic topographies were a means of cognitive appropriation that might facilitate political control.99 97 H. the role of artisans and trading activities remain largely obscure. for instance. 2000). mountains. the reports of Arabian geographers or the deeply puzzling Cosmography of Aethicus Ister). Reimitz eds. much pragmatic information is absent from the early medieval accounts. esp. 197–208.98 Plano Carpini and William of Rubruck provided much fuller accounts of the living conditions of the Mongols in the context of their ethnographic chapters. the maids of Attila’s wife Hereka stitching embroidery in her house. 99 Iohannes de Plano Carpini. in some cases also long lists of barbarian civitates (as in Ptolemaios. and peoples. Pohl and H. they were not. The topography of barbarian lands strove to define the vast spaces beyond the civilised world using names of rivers. Wood.N. Reimitz eds. One might expect some interest from diplomats in the production and exchange of weapons. a few dozen miles from the Roman frontier. in: W. pp. in: W. their living conditions. knots in the net of political geography of barbarian countries. there are the goldsmiths at the Rugian court. 98 I. “Grenzen und Grenzüberschreitungen im karolingischen Mitteleuropa”. 2–7. pp. although much of that was from second-hand knowledge. as might be expected. Pohl and H. but little of this is attested in the early medieval texts used here (quite unlike. It is almost a paradox that on the basis of written accounts distant Central Asian residences can be traced more easily than those in the Carpathian basin. Carolingian authors fill their accounts with barbarian names. by being connected with names of a people and a ruler. and Onegesios’ Roman architect. Forschungen zur Geschichte des Mittelalters 1 (Wien. or later. we do not have the work of Priscus (or that of Menander) as a whole. Die Byzantiner und ihre Nachbarn (Wien. The genre of diplomatic travel reports with its attention for details. The emperor Marcian. We have to take several filters into account through which information about the court of Attila has been passed down to us. its sobriety.102 But most of it became useless after Attila died in 453. the encyclopedia that Constantine had commissioned. in which a lot of specific information which was of interest to the courtiers and generals of Theodosius II may have been omitted. and how cautious do we have to be about the information they convey? The vivid stories. but a stylized literary version directed at a general Roman audience. we have to be cautious. First. W. ibid. and others. Hamilton (Harmondsworth.. transl. 1986). That Constantine Porphyrogennetos. told by an eye-witness in the first person singular. 88. How do we deal with these reports. may have used some of the information brought back when he made the hazardous decision to stop payments to Attila. p. produce a strong narrative ‘effet de verité’. its aloofness creates a further impression of credibility. pp. cf. we can return to the fundamental methodological question raised above. we do not get the full diplomatic report delivered by the ambassadors on their return. Shepard and S. as compared to the collection of prejudice and stereotypes about the Huns that we find in Ammianus Marcellinus. Soustal eds. Furthermore. in general: J. took such interest in the material is the only reason why we know anything at all about the places of power of those steppe rulers with whom the Byzantines had to deal with. 46. M. 203–16. who came into power in 450. Byzantine diplomacy (Aldershot. 1992). Belke and P. p. 101 Ammianus Marcellinus 31. K.100 And indeed.. pp.101 the report of Priscus is a unique source of information. but only fragments preserved in the Excerpta de legationibus in the tenth century. esp. Attila. and therefore see the courts of Attila and Sizabulos through Constantine’s eyes.460   T     On the basis of these observations. However. Mullett. . 411–14. a series of thematic selections from ancient and Byzantine writers. 1995). even Priscus cannot be regarded as a straightforward first-hand witness of life at the court of Attila. 103 The Excerpta de legationibus are the only completely transmitted part of the Eklogai. Franklin eds. 102 Wirth. quite soon after the embassy had returned. 100 See.103 But we only have the texts that were selected in the tenth century. 2. “The language of diplomacy”. pp. but that was of course a mix of observations. The Mongols were not receptive to the friars’ missionary zeal: Plano Carpini came back to the pope with ‘one of the most ominous documents ever received by a western potentate’. and when the Byzantine envoys returned later. Both Plano Carpini and William of Rubruck garnished their reports with valuable ethnographic material. and the passages that I have considered only constitute the setting for these negotiations. but most of those belong to the level of literary stylization. political rhetoric and polite conversation (or religious argument). The mission of Friar William of Rubruck. were mostly intended to clear the envoys of the suspicion of having done a bad job. all of that fills many pages in our texts. What ambassadors observe at a foreign court is for the most part specifically addressed to them. The Turks of Sizabulos did not attack the Avars from the rear as the Byzantines had hoped. and his account centres on diplomatic exchange. The reports I have quoted prove that steppe rulers were experts in the art of dealing with diplomats. Jackson and D. bringing the envoys into an embarrassing and dangerous situation. a few sketches on the margin of a political agenda. the eyes of the missionarydiplomat. The plot against Attila’s life prepared by members of the Priscus embassy was disclosed. 105 Sinor. or. Attila or Möngke received the envoys with a carefully calculated blend of hospitality and intimidation. hearsay and literary borrowings. He basically writes what pertains to his mission. condescension and confidentiality. Acute observers like Priscus may have added some descriptions and anecdotes to the accounts of their diplomatic business. Pohl. “Konfliktverlauf ”. “Diplomatic practices in medieval Inner Asia”. It is no coincidence that most of the missions from which reports have survived were failures. in the case of the thirteenth-century friars.104 and the joint attack on the Muslims in the Holy Land hoped for by William Rubruck was never launched. Morgan. REGIA   HRING –     461 A second filter is constituted by the eyes of the diplomat. “Introduction”. and their literary elaborations. 28f. curiosity and neglect. for it takes us into the heart of barbarian politics. they were bitterly reproached by the successor of Sizabulos for having concluded a treaty with the Avars. Diplomatic reports.105 104 P. Cf. and do not necessarily represent what they had observed with the cold eye of the diplomat. generosity and greed. A further filter is the most interesting one. . with further literature. On the other hand. and diplomatic relationships were a way to negotiate this flow of gold and silver.462   Next to sending armies. 107 . “Soziale Grenzen”. too. they were themselves part of the staging of barbarian rulership. the Panegyric by Corippus on Justin II (In laudem Iustini Augusti Minoris. for example. and at the courts of Charlemagne or Frederick Barbarossa. Die Awaren. pp. In this way. Cameron [London. silk and crafts from Byzantium. a fact that Byzantine envoys ascribed to the hubris and arrogance of the barbarians. alliance and enmity were continually renegotiated. gestures of intimidation. 2. Pohl. and the representation of rulership at ceremonial banquets were directed. ed. but the Byzantines had to sit on the left side in Attila’s banquet hall. No fundamental difference was made between the envoys of subject peoples and of exterior powers. the envoys played a double role in the representation of barbarian rulership. In both cases. displays of treasure. This was a privileged way of symbolic communication in which submission. and at times the contempt with which he treated them. frontiers of significance were being drawn and redrawn:106 inside and outside. 178–85. The reception of ambassadors was a ritual of power directed at the aristocrats present at court. In fact. western Europe was ephemeral. Gesta Karoli. That did not make much of a difference in the ceremonial setting. this was not so different in Constantinople. there was a considerable difference between the steppe empires in the Byzantine periphery and the Mongols. war and peace. Whoever entered into gift exchange with a steppe ruler recognised his power. considerably enhanced the prestige of a ruler. and became part of a sophisticated ceremonial hierarchy of foreign envoys. they are a key to their func106 Pohl. 108 See. 1976]) in which Avar envoys are treated with extreme contempt. William of Rubruck sat on the less prestigious left side next to the women at Möngke’s reception.107 For the Mongols. On the one hand. 6. and designed to demonstrate the high esteem and unequalled power their ruler enjoyed. they were the audience at which speeches and rhetoric exchanges. about ambassadors who were plunged into confusion by being successively led to several magnificently dressed dignitaries they mistook for Charlemagne. their submissiveness. A. The number of foreign envoys.108 Ambassadors are not external observers of barbarian places of power. Huns and Avars relied on the massive import of Byzantine prestige goods. dealing with envoys was the principal way in which a steppe empire happened. or the story in Notker. However. but one that puzzled Plano Carpini and William of Rubruck. just as they are not allowed to pitch their tent on higher ground than the king. Barth. Legrand. A considerable proportion of the reports deals with the way in which the envoys were told which route to take and what to do. For the envoy. These arrangements are an example of the subtle control of spatial movements in space common in steppe empires. REGIA   HRING –     463 tion. The representation of a barbarian ruler is no one-way showoff.109 However. Ethnological studies of nomad societies have demonstrated how such a complex coordination of movements can be achieved. it is a communication between competitors in a game of power. and they frequently receive indications what to do from more or less high-ranking messengers. converge with a West Roman embassy. Entwurf einer Theorie der Praxis (Frankfurt. Even Priscus observed some of the constant comings and goings of Attila’s envoys entrusted with the control of groups of warriors and the sedentary part of the population somewhere on the periphery of the empire (for instance. A further element of interaction between the diplomat and the barbarian state is the control of movement. There is an element of taboo in these travel arrangements. Nomads of South Persia (New York. and between the diplomat and those who sent him. J. Pastoral production and society (Cambridge. have to wait for Attila in a specified village and then follow him to his main residence. all the movements of the envoys are under control. E. Bourdieu. and help us to reconstruct it. The Byzantines are not allowed to arrive at the residence before Attila. 155–69). Gli uomini delle tende (Milano. 1979). Finally. being part of this game may obscure many of the things that happen in and around a barbarian residence. then take a different route. even though we only have access to it through filters — the communication between the author and his public. P. they are escorted out of the country again. 1979). While near the court. the early medieval regna 109 F. division territoriale et division politique chez les Mongols de l’époque post-imperiale” (pp. “Conceptions de l’éspace. 1983). Maintaining the hold on all these groups required the constant exchange of information and a coordination of movements that was complicated by the fact that the residence itself was constantly on the move. the Akatzirs north-east of the Carpathian mountains). . and he may not even fully understand his part in it. esp. Turri. But his perceptions follow the logic of the game. 1965). they follow him. Priscus’ narrative shows just how much coordination was necessary: The Byzantines meet Attila in his camp near the frontier. ). encountered Kublai Khan in his urban residence of Khanbaliq in China. legislation by the Lombard kings Ratchis and Aistulf shows the attempt to control all traffic across the kingdom. from the perspective of the ‘Secret History of the Mongols’. 15.464   in the west faced similar problems. he could use the yam. perhaps mistakenly. let alone move his residence there. p. Pohl. Whereas Attila seems to have conferred the task of communicating with foreign envoys ad hoc and regarded this as a favour and a sign of personal trust. pp. . the Mongols had set up clear spheres of competence. the khagan did not plan to maintain urban life in the city.111 And like all other travellers in the Mongol realm. 112 For the institution of the Mongolic postal system. calls iam-iam. Pohl. and who were responsible for dealing with arriving envoys. 221f. not least to in order to curb the exchange of envoys between the pope and the Franks. c. For instance. 3). the system of relay stations that facilitated and controlled travel throughout the steppe. 113 Pohl. a few decades later. When the Avars together with the Persians besieged Constantinople in 626 the arrangement was that the Avars would plunder the city when it was taken. pp. 117–42. William of Rubruck c. p. Wood and H. William of Rubruck repeatedly had to deal with officials whom he. The Roman cities that Attila’s armies occupied in 447. ed. 114 William of Rubruck c. Attila could have shifted his residence to the former imperial capital Sirmium (as the Gepids did later). for instance. Die Awaren. The transformation of frontiers. Heissig. 114 (with n.. 32. 175f. “Frontiers in Lombard Italy: the laws of Ratchis and Aistulf ”.1. in: W. 12. One of Möngke’s residences was outside the walls of Karakorum. see the “Secret history of the Mongols” (Das Buch vom Ursprung.110 The Mongols seem to have developed the control of space beyond what Attila or the ancient Turks had achieved. written 110 W. were practically deserted when Priscus saw them two years later. From late antiquity to the Carolingians (Leiden/Boston/Köln. I. pp.112 Mongol rulers also cooperated more directly with cities than early medieval steppe empires had done. 111 For instance. whereas the Persians would receive the population.114 And Marco Polo. Reimitz eds. for instance Naissus. Diplomats’ descriptions of the residences of steppe rulers are traces of a particular form of communication. 2000). 251. but he showed no intention to do so.113 The Mongols controlled a number of important cities along the silk route. very different. their interest differed from ours. This was not only an exchange of words. REGIA   HRING –     465 from a Mongol perspective in 1240. the envoys had some interest in the different symbolic systems that they encountered. But they were less interested in the complex system of ritual exchange between the ruler and his aristocrats as a whole. What this communication meant for the inner cohesion of a steppe empire remained largely obscure to its visitors. symbols. his wives. especially in Byzantium. or had to fear. threats and commands. The envoys did have a vital interest in gathering information about the delicate balance of power between the ruler’s sons. was almost put to death. On the other hand. William had to swear they had not known about the taboo. I would like to thank Herwig Wolfram and Brigitte Resl for suggestions. that was part of the social field in which they themselves had to learn to move. Read systematically. Their texts have to be understood in relationship to this social space. perhaps. 194–96. the texts contributed decisively towards shaping the reality that they described. Heissig. William of Rubruck. But again.116 Ambassadors noticed restricted and open spaces and the hierarchical order of accessibility. as far as it mattered for their purpose. pp. ed. c. 29 and 37. They wanted to identify individuals whose influence as advisors and possibly as intercessors they might use. and hardly capable of deciphering the cosmological framework that might have regulated these relations. gifts.115 They privilege those elements where an intense interaction between the ruler and the ambassador took place. Such interests obviously were less important in diplomatic contacts with barbarian residences in the west. 29. 116 . There is much less evidence about other aspects of barbarian residences in these reports. There was always the risk of comitting a fatal mistake. William of Rubruck’s companion once stumbled over the threshold of the khan’s tent and as a consequence. Of course. but also of gestures. they can yield considerable information about it. Even though Roman diplomacy 115 Das Buch vom Ursprung. But in this respect. and Ian Wood and Ann Christys for also revising my English. his chief advisors and. The collection of the Excerpta de legationibus only represents a late stage in the collection of a growing body of texts about missions to foreign powers which generations of diplomats used as a guideline. But that does not make those observations which allow us to reconstruct their role at a barbarian court any less valuable. writers obviously were not very keen on expounding it for a general public. Above all. . how it worked. the one thing that they had in fact come for: power. bewildering or incomprehensible about barbarian places of power.466   had acquired a thorough knowledge of ways to deal with barbarians. and in what ways it shaped social relations. On the whole. almost a social experiment by which they tested its force and impact. We may wish that they had been more curious to ask what it was. Apart from some atmospheric detail. Steppe residences were the only examples of barbarian large-scale organisation that were conspicuous enough for early medieval authors to write about. one thing seemed quite natural to these visitors that came from far away. many features that emerge from the texts were reasonably familiar. these descriptions do not highlight what was exotic. But they made up for this lack of analytical insight by leaving an account of their own movement through the gravitational field of a distant place of power. in a more elaborate version. Gudme was considered unique. ‘economy’. Thrane eds. in: T. “The ethnogenesis of the Danes and the making of a Danish kingdom”. Last but not least.3 Because of its * I am indebted to all members of the ESF’s theme group on “Power and Society” for stimulating and productive meetings. 8. p. In 8. Näsmann. 1998). nor to the entire group of Scandinavian sites that could be classified as ‘central places’.2 Initially..g. any remaining deficiencies are my own responsibility. and ‘power’. always supporting an interdisciplinary approach. L. centrala frågor. Although these keywords are significant.. ‘richness’. Hårdh eds. Dickinson and D.ASGARD RECONSTRUCTED? GUDME – A ‘CENTRAL PLACE’ IN THE NORTH* Lotte Hedeager I Gudme/Lundeborg on the Danish island of Funen was excavated during the 1980s and early 1990s. ‘gods’. Ser. K. Nielsen. Griffiths eds.. 3 I. no. ‘gold’. Dickinson and D. The site has mainly been understood in terms of ‘long-distance trade’. neither in relation to Gudme/Lundeborg itself. U. so I am grateful to Mayke Jong and Frans Theuws for their support. A matter of production. This paper on Gudme was first presented at our meeting in Ravenna 1995. Randsborg and H.e. 28 (Lund.. Centrala platser. p. not textual evidence or Christianity. C. 2 E. ‘sacred’. ‘control’. Anglo-Saxon Studies in Archaeology and History 10 (Oxford. in: T. Acta Archaeologica Lundensia. Mayke has transformed my “English” text into the English you are about to read. Anglo-Saxon Studies in Archaeology and History 10 (Oxford. I am grateful for all critical as well as encouraging comments during this long time of formation. 1 P.O. and religion”. Larsson and B. 37. in Bellagio in 1998. 1999). Griffiths eds. they have never been included in a coherent model of explanation. The archaeology of Gudme and Lundeborg (Copenhagen. I am a prehistoric archaeologist whose main field is the pagan North and its archaeology. The making of kingdoms. 1999). ‘production’. Fabech. 1994).1 and has been interpreted as a unique trading and production site that flourished from the third to the sixth/seventh centuries. ‘hall’. The making of kingdoms. and then. Needless to say. . but nowadays it is regarded as one of several rich archaeological settlements in South Scandinavia dating from the third to the sixth/seventh centuries. “Organising the landscape. power. Since much cos- . the early thirteenth century. I will pay special attention to the importance of skilled crafting — and skilled metal work in particular — as an activity fundamental to the process of transformation. skilled metal work and gold were crucial concepts in northern cosmology. It would go too far to discard all written texts as useless to our endeavour. an anthropological approach based on non-western. I will also look at the role of smiths and the significance of gold in Old Norse sources. where ancient beliefs were articulated in rituals and performances. however. that is. The article is organised in an inductive manner. Finally. Similarly. I will discuss Gudme as a place where foreign objects from the outside world were acquired (‘trade’) and transformed into ‘prestige objects’ (‘production’) embedded in the cosmological order. furnishes archaeologists with a general theoretical framework. This approach is not unproblematic. All this will reveal that metallurgy. the Old Norse texts yield valuable information. for purposes other than strictly economic and political ones. Lacking the modern separation of economic. if used carefully. Gudme was a ceremonial centre. pre-Christian Scandinavia can be compared to traditional communities. and are therefore not to be treated as a reflection of ‘genuine paganism’. maintained and transformed over centuries.468   size and the nature of its finds. I will focus on Gudme and the surrounding landscape as a sacred place — a representation of the ‘centre of the world’ along the lines of northern mythology. The Old Norse sources originate from early Christian times. Using data from anthropological research as an explanatory framework. This paper deals with Gudme/Lundeborg as a place that has been constructed. and also provide a model of comparison that is helpful to the interpretation of other sites in Scandinavia. enabling them to get beyond the archaeological and textual evidence. studying Gudme/Lundeborg can give us more insight in the characteristics of a ‘central place’. beginning with the archaeological evidence and finishing with the interpretative topographic model of Gudme as a paradigmatic model of Asgard — home of the Asir gods. pre-industrial societies. in both cases the world view of a given society tends to fuse these separate domains into a coherent whole. In the opening section. First and foremost. political and symbolic institutions. This would leave archaeologists without any relevant written evidence from the North. To broaden the context. Thrane. such activities are to be included in a coherent model of explanation. pp. including production and/or trade. The publication from 1994. which should also become part of a more general discussion of other central places in the North. However. Nationalmuseets Arbejdsmark. 1984–91 and the find material. the spatial organisation of the place can no longer be interpreted as a mere expression of the practicalities of power. the general impression is that the two places have functioned roughly during the same period. 6 In this paper I want to focus on the overall structure of the area in the fourth to the sixth century. or as a simple reflection of economic activities. in: T. These are published by P. The archaeology of Gudme is the last extended contribution including a variety of articles — by different authors — about the investigation. The latest example is H. . 1999). Von der Eisenzeit zum Mittelalter. The Gudme/ Lundeborg area occupied a prominent place in the Late Roman import into Scandinavia. Weiner. U.a. Lund Hansen.4 special attention will be paid to the myths of Old Norse literature. Reallexikon der Germanischen Altertumskunde 13 (Berlin. the dating is a matter of debate.. Afterwards the big hall and other houses have been excavated. Wesse ed. “Gudmehallerne”. The present material indicates a maximum for Gudme in the fourth to the sixth century and for Lundeborg in the third and fourth century. Instead. 1). If one focusses on Gudme as a symbolically constructed place which represents notions of the cosmological order in connection with social power. T     G 5 Gudme is a complex of sites in a limited area on the east coast of the island Funen.. Nielsen e. a trading port situated on the coast. Still. 1994 (Copenhagen. Ingold ed.. Festschrift für Michael Müller-Wille (Neumünster. Thrane. 1987).6 4 J. in: A. Römischer Import im Norden (Copenhagen. Studien zur Archäologie des Ostseeraumes. there are also Lundeborg. “Myth and metaphor”. This article apart a lot of minor articles have been published in a variety of contexts and by a variety of authors too. none of the sites have been fully excavated. 5 Neither Gudme nor Lundeborg have been published in monographic form. Companion Encyclopedia of Anthropology (London. 1994). 591. which is the inland settlement area. 142–8. “Gudme”. only 10% of the site at Lundeborg have so far been investigated and the huge settlement area of Gudme has been excavated in selected plots. 1998) and H. p. Østergaard Sørensen. and the extensive cemetery of Møllegårdsmarken (fig. –  ‘ ’    469 mological information is thought to be contained in myths. Apart from the locality Gudme itself. “Materialien zur Topografie einer eisenzeitlichen Sakrallandschaft um Gudme auf Ostfünen in Dänemark”. 1999). p. Langå cemetery. + graves.470   Fig. … settlement. 2. Broholm gold hoard. Frühmittelalterliche Studien 21 (1987). 36. 6. 5. ▲ hoard. . “Das Gudmeproblem und die Gudme-untersuchungen. D bronze statue. Lundeborg. 3. 1. x stray find. Settlement (indicated by Sehested as ‘Måltidsplads’). Thrane. 1. 4. Møllegårdsmarken. Heights are in meters above sea level. † church. (After H. 1800. The cultural landscape is reconstructed on the basis of the topographical maps of c. Gudme I–II. The research area of Gudme. . Østergaard Sørensen. 11 This is my suggestion. 25 meters.9 The largest building — a hall10 — was nearly 50 meters long and 10 meters wide with eight sets of posts. 7 P. the issue has not yet been discussed by archaeologists. i. The archaeology of Gudme and Lundeborg (Copenhagen. existed from c. 10 The foundation of the hall is dated to A.O. While the surrounding area was inhabitated from around 100 B. each with a diameter of more than 80 centimeters. in the early stage of the settlement: Thrane. 215 and Fig. eds.11 Two wide doorways in the centre of the building led into a particularly large room. The number of contemporary farms is unknown.D. until the early middle ages. L. P.e. to support the huge roof construction (the size of these posts may indicate a second floor). Nielsen e. “The find material from the settlement of Gudme II — composition and interpretation”.. “Excavations at sites of treasure trove finds at Gudme”. 1994). Nielsen. 8 L.O. farmsteads and settlement pattern in the Gudme area”. 14. with references. 200– 600 A. this particular settlement. of which about 500. 300–400. These are similar to other farmsteads in Denmark from the Late Roman and Migration periods.G. 145.D. Besides common farmsteads. 1988”. the peak of activity of the settlement. Vang Petersen. Jørgensen. Compared to the normal farmsteads with a maximum length of 35 meters and a standard width of 6–7 meters.C. all in: P. 1995). “Gudme”. “Gudmehallerne”.. “The warrior aristocracy of Gudme: the emergence of landed aristocracy in Late Iron Age Denmark?”. Jørgensen. Apparently. Produksjon og Samfund. p. Interdisciplinary research. for nothing like it is known in Denmark before the early middle ages. these houses represent a tradition and a technical knowledge that has no background in local traditions.D. and a width of nearly 10 meters. p.000 m2 has been documented.a. the size of the hall (and the width of the small house too) is unknown in Denmark before the Viking Age. in: H.8 A range of small excavations in the central area reveal a settlement organized in fenced farmsteads. but judging by the estimated size of the settled area there must have been at least 50 farms around 400 A. According to the excavator the house was a long construction building (cogging). P. 9 Østergaard Sørensen. two exceptional houses have been excavated. “The Gudme-Lundeborg project. The construction is remarkable as well. “Houses. Resi ed.. One smaller house nearby was constructed in the same manner. It had a length of c. Varia 30. –  ‘ ’    471 The settlement of Gudme7 is located approximately four kilometers inland. Universitetets Oldsaksamling (Oslo. “Gudme as Kultort und seine Rolle beim Austausch von Bildformularen der Goldbrakteaten”. Among the finds from the plough soil were a Frankish silver bird fibula and some gilded fragments of a Roman bronze helmet. Besides the jewelry.a. “Gudme and Lundeborg — The coins”. H. 13 M. finger rings.. The archaeology of Gudme. 78–88. some with marvellous filigree work. some shaped as a gold spiral.. treasures.472   Gudme In Gudme itself. neck rings. Prunkbewaffnung und Rangabzeichen germanischer Krieger. Kromann. bronze and glass as well as hammer scales of iron slag and small strips of gold foil.. silver and copper)12 were also present in amazing numbers. “Gudme and the gold bracteates”.a. and K. the largest14 Danish gold hoard from the Migration period was recovered in the same area: the hoard from Broholm with more than four kilos of golden arm..and necklaces. 189–236. have been found. arm rings. eds. silver. Steuer.a. Axboe. “Archaeology and history: proposals on the social structure of . “Helm und Ringschwert. in: Nielsen e.13 In addition. necklaces. all indicate an extensive forging and casting activity. 68–77. pp. and single finds of precious metals. either as hoards or as stray finds. fibula with inlayed garnets. numerous hoards. pp. The archaeology of Gudme. 14 With the exception of two golden horns from Gallehus in Southern Jutland (stolen and remelted early in the ninetheenth century).. mostly of local Scandinavian origin. bracteates and suchlike. Other hoards or treasures contain golden jewelry. This impression is supported by finds of drops of melted gold. 15 H. and even scrap gold. in: Nielsen e. especially gold. pp. but also some of Byzantine provenance. eds. Ein Übersicht”. in: Studien zur Sachsenforschung 6 (1987). in Nielsen e. bracteates. bracteates etc. scrap bronze such as part of a Byzantine statue. Hauck. eds. has drawn attention to the fact that the Gudme area played an important part in the development of gold bracteates and their iconography. etc.15 Although the settlement has not 12 A. although it cannot have been the only place in Scandinavia that played such a role. but also along the coast and scattered in the whole area. The archaeology of Gudme. Steuer. 64–7. agreeing with Karl Hauck. In his study of gold bracteates Morten Axboe. as well as intertwined pair of rings for pommels of the so-called ringswords which have been interpreted as the customary insignia for members of the royal Frankish hird (retinue of warriors). All kinds of Roman coins (gold. pp. the hoards contain scabbard mouths. Hoards containing scrap silver (amongst others Byzantine tablewares cut into pieces). a small stream connecting Lundeborg with its hinterland around Gudme. All known Iron Age crafts are represented by their tools: those of carpenters. glass vessels and terra sigillata. “Lundeborg — an early port of trade in Southeast Funen”.O. P. in: K. The coastal site of Lundeborg Lundeborg17 is situated on the coast. Small weights.a. 1993). 23–9.. No doubt. Supplementum XVI (Roma. The other remarkable feature of Lundeborg is the convincing evidence of extensive craft activities. eds. Randsborg ed. Østergaard Sørensen. scrap metal as well as masterpieces. bronze-. More than 8000 unused and broken iron rivets from ships have been found.. like the royal palace in Copenhagen today — and with an overwhelming amount of metal finds. There are only traces of small structures (c. “Gudmehallerne”. Germanic brooches. Jørgensen. blacksmiths as well as craftsmen working with amber. The Iron Age finds recovered there were distributed in an area of some 900 meters along the coast by 30 to 75 meters inland. silver denarii and gold pieces have been found as well.O. extensive shipbuilding and ship repairs have taken place at the coast during the whole period. 2. silver. the objects found in this area mostly date from the third and fourth centuries.16 the results are already impressive: a huge settled area with a monumental building at its heart — a hall measuring around 500 m2. in: Nielsen e. 17 P. The objects found at Lundeborg stem from both trading activities and crafts. bone and antler. –  ‘ ’    473 yet been fully excavated. 1989). The commodities are mainly Roman glass beads. There was activity at Lundeborg from the third century (late Roman Period) until 700/800 (early Viking Age). L. 16 The latest updated map of the excavated areas is shown in P. pp. .D. fig. Thomsen. on both sides of the mouth of Tange Å. pp. 100–22. Thomsen et al. Only 10% of the site has been excavated. The birth of Europe: Archaeology and social development in the first millennium A.and goldsmiths. and dating to the early phase. 4 × 5 meters). Analecta Romana Instituti Danici. Lundeborg — en handelsplads fra jernalderen (Svendborg.. Iron ingots seem to have been imported from Poland. interpreted as huts for seasonal use. the Merovingian empire”. The archaeology of Gudme. So far no traces of proper houses have been recovered. in and around the central settlement area. “The warrior aristocracy of Gudme”. arrowhead and metal fittings for swords and scabbards have been found as well. up to the early fifth century. recent excavations at Møllegårdsmarken have produced new evidence concerning the organisation of the cemetery. These are often richly furnished but never contain weapons. cremations at the cemetery may have continued during the fifth and sixth centuries. the same holds true for all the other known cemeteries in the Gudme region. with many urn graves among them. Hardt. Lady with a mead cup (Dublin and Portland. the many activities at Lundeborg have probably been limited to specific periods during the year. Thus far. 85–100. 22 M. J. mostly because of the number of graves and the amount of Roman objects. Christoffersen.20 Still. The prevailing impression of Gudme-Lundegård-Møllegårdsmarken is that of an important area in which specialized production of luxury goods took place. Enright. Albrectsen. the third and fourth centuries. Fynske Jernaldergrave IV. halfway between Gudme and Lundeborg. 1992). According to the excavator. 77–91.474   i. must have been clearly visible in the Migration period landscape. Bd. Fynske Minder (1995). “Lundeborg”. pp. aimed — as we shall see — at the rituals of life and death typical of Germanic gift-giving societies.e. the extensive cemetery located at the brink of Tange Å. M.22 18 Thomsen.1–2 (Odense. but also in view of the cremation graves which predominate. 23. 19 .J.21 Although Møllegårdsmarken ceased to be in use. Madsen and H. 1971). Iron-Age societies (Oxford. “Møllegårdsmarkens veje og huse”. 21 C. Thrane. There are no traces of later burials. this picture corresponds with burial practices from all over Denmark: there is a hiatus from the fifth until the eight century (early Viking Age). p. Furthermore.C. Frühmittelalterliche Studien 21 (1987). Møllegårdsmarken is unique in many respects.18 The cemetery of Møllegårdsmarken Møllegårdsmarken19 is the huge cemetery situated between Lundeborg and Gudme close to the stream Tange Å. E. these have been dated from the first century B. 20 L. About 2300 graves have been excavated and many more have been destroyed by ploughing. 1996). Hedeager. such as possible small houses for ritual purposes and parts of tracks running through the area. pp. “Møllegårdsmarken — Struktur und Belegung eines Gräberfeldes”. The graves are primarily cremation graves. Anglo-Saxon Studies in Archaeology and History 10 (Oxford. “Iceland: sorcerers and paganism”. “Gudhem”. 2000). Strömbäck. the place where the ancient god/gods were thought to live. 1999). in: B.)”. L.26 “Royal treasures and representation in the early Middle Ages”. “Iceland: sorcerers and paganism”. (Leiden. Sejd.. pp. 387.24 In Nordic mythology Odin himself was the great sorcerer in control of sejd. M.e. Dickinson and D. Solli. galdra. 131–8.D. Tor 29 (1997). New Cambridge Medieval History I (Cambridge. Gudme itself means ‘the home of the gods’. Hastrup..L. in: F. Early Modern witchcraft. 1990). L. Kousgård Sørensen. . it indicates that in Iceland. the technique of the shamanic soul journey. Frühmittelalterliche Studien 19 (1985). 311–76. Reimitz eds. 1984). 1997/1998 (Oslo. the Gudme area also contains a significant number of place-names with allusions to pre-Christian religion. 388–9. Pohl and H. 2 (Chicago. –  ‘ ’    475 G’   Apart from being an important archaeological site. in: P. Bazelmans. Theuws and J. 255–80. At a distance of 1. J. pp. 7–42. pp. Årbok. in: W. Universitetets Oldsaksamling. 1935). Many of these place-names are ‘holy’. “Odin — the queer? Om det skreive i norrøn mytologi”. p. it also testifies to the power embedded in metric forms. 160. who also mastered oral magic. 1998). 25 D. Hedeager. “Myth and art: a passport to political authority in Scandinavia during the Migration Period”. pp. Rituals of power. the word ‘galdr’ in Old Icelandic refers to sorcerers’ songs in the sense of ‘charm’ or ‘spell’. Hedeager. 26 K. Henningsen eds. Ceremonial exchanges in Beowulf ”. pp.. The making of kingdoms. 151–6. in: T. “Scandinavia (c.. and on the basis of such toponymic evidence the conclusion can be drawn that this region also had religious significance. Centres and peripheries (Oxford. “Beyond power. Eliade. there are three hills with significant names: Gudbjerg to the west means ‘the hill of the god/gods’. 300 –800 (Leiden. Skyggger af en shamanistisk tradition i norsk folkevandringstid”. Albjerg to the south means ‘the hill of the shrine’ and Galbjerg to the north has a less clear meaning. Hastrup. the spoken word was the most important instrument of supernatural power. i. Galdur was an important element in Icelandic witchcraft. which was practiced as late as the seventeenth century. The construction of ethnic communities. ‘Galdur’ should probably rather be translated with ‘magic’. Hedeager. B. 1998). L. From late Antiquity to the early Middle Ages. Fouracre ed. A history of religious ideas. pp. pp. but has been interpreted as ‘the hill of sacrifice’.23 although an explanation of the word ‘gal’ as ‘galdr’ may be more plausible. p. 265–78.5 kilometers to the north. 24 K. “Odins offer. west and south of Gudme. Ankerloo and G. Textstudier i nordisk religionshistoria (Stockholm and Copenhagen. Nelson eds.25 This is yet another reference to chants and spells being central to witchcraft..5 to 2. 23 J. Griffiths eds. 500–700 A. Strategies of distinction. forthcoming). vol. Jahrbuch des RömischGermanischen Zentralmuseums Mainz 17 (1970).a. pp. K. in: Nielsen e. Karl Hauck has argued that the iconography of the gold bracteates points to the establishment of an Odin cult in Gudme. Hauck. 210. pp. Et Hus med Mange Rom. This is consistent with the archaeological record. 29 D. pp. the Gudhem-names stem from the Migration and Merovingian periods. “Gudme as Kultort und seine Rolle beim Austausch von Bildformularen der Goldbrakteaten”. Frühmittelalterliche Studien 21 (1987). eds. connected with sacred kingship. and coins of gold into symbolic objects like bracteates and ornamented scabbard mounts. K. K. Sachsen und Angelsachsen. Fuglestvedt. i. Frühmittelalterliche Studien 21 (1987).29 Initially the Scandinavian gold bracteates imitated the Byzantine Emperor’s medallions. but one with sacred connotations. Hauck. Oxenstierna. and also with the sacred toponomy in mind. “Götterglaube im Spiegel der goldenen Brakteaten”. 78–88. I do not wish to claim that myths and stories from the Poetic Edda or in Snorri’s Edda have remained unchanged until the thirteenth century. 28 K. in: C. “Gudme in der Sicht der Brakteatenforschung”.476   All this indicates that Galbjerg means ‘the hill of galdring’. In their present form. Hedeager. T. “Skandinavisk dyreornamentik”. as argued by L.. Thrane. but according to philologists. 1956). AmS-Rapport 11A (Stavanger. Gansum and A. “Zur Ikonographie nordischer Goldbrakteaten”. a place where master artisans transformed bars. “Gudme als Kultort und seine Rolle beim Austausch von Bildformularen der Goldbrakteaten”. 1978). p. It is of course impossible to date these place-names with any precision. 210. pp. Vennebok til Bjørn Myhre på 60–årsdagen. 202.27 Gudme’s great wealth suggests that this site was not just a central place for trade and production. Although the time-difference between the written text and the iconography is several hundred years. . E. 2). ingots.28 A motif resembling the archetypal representation of a shaman — presumably Odin’s journey to the Other World — is the most common one on these bracteates. in: I. Hauck. Hauck. Veröffentlichungen des Helms-Museums 32 (Hamburg. symbolically connecting Roman Emperors and Asir kings. 40. p. but other motifs known from Nordic mythology are also found (fig. 36. in the complicated way of any 27 H. The archaeology of Gudme. 1999).e.. 78–88. it does not seem too daring to regard the gold bracteates as confirmation of the central religious complex and the central myths of the fifth and sixth century traced in the Old Norse literature from the early Middle Ages. pp. Ahrens ed. Against this background. these texts represent a pre-Christian universe that has been incorporated into a literary Christian tradition.. the hill of magic. p. 219–38. Ellmers. Opedal eds. “Das Gudme-Problem und die Gudme-Untersuchungen”. when they were written down. 220. 147–81. Die Goldhörner von Gallehus (Lidingö.  –  ‘ ’    477 Fig. 2. Gold bracteates from the Gudme area (after K. Hauck IK 2, Tafel 229b, IK I Tafel, 75,3b). 478   such tradition reflecting on its past from a new perspective. There is no doubt, however, that the Poetic Edda and Snorri’s Edda give us a good idea of the nature and scope of Old Norse mythology.30 Any mythological system provides a conceptual support for social life in traditional societies, preserving the integrity of society, 31 and the Northern mythological system was no exception. If Gudme was indeed the main home of the Odin cult, as has been maintained, the central area framed by the sacred hills would have been a place of display and communication, at the social level as well as with the supernatural world. In this place the representation of world was given a concrete form by specialists in control of the production process by which metal was transformed from one shape (scrap metal, ingots, coins etc.) into another (bracteates, fittings for swords etc.). C     For the Nordic realm before 800 there is no textual evidence of any specific locations of religious or political power, such as monasteries or other sacred sites, cities, or royal palaces, so the archaeological sources and the toponymic evidence provide the only basis for analysing the concept of ‘places of power’ in this area. Still, the Old Norse literature does throw some light on certain essential components of places of power in Scandinavia. For example, the hall assumes great importance in the ideological universe represented in these texts.32 Given the prominent role of the hall in Old Norse literature, it is remarkable that the word ‘hall’ hardly ever turns up in Scandinavian place-names. The reason may be that the Scandinavian language of the time used another word, such as ‘sal’, as in Uppsala, Onsala, Odensala or just Sal (a): the god whose name is compounded 30 P. Meulengracht Sørensen, “Om eddadigtenes alder”, in: G. Steinsland, U. Drobin, J. Pentikäinen and P. Meulengracht Sørensen eds., Nordisk Hedendom. Et symposie (Odense, 1991), pp. 217–28; M. Clunies Ross, Prolonged echoes. Old Norse myths in medieval northern society, vol. 1 (Odense, 1994), vol. 2 (Odense, 1998). 31 Weiner, “Myth and metaphor”, pp. 591–2. 32 F. Herschend, Livet i Hallen (Uppsala, 1997); ibid., The Idea of the Good (Uppsala, 1998); ibid., “Halle”, Reallexikon der Germanischen Altertumskunde 13 (Berlin, 1999), pp. 414–25; Enright, Lady with a mead cup.  –  ‘ ’    479 with ‘sal’ is always Odin, the king of the gods.33 The word ‘sal’ is often linked with ‘zulr’ (thyle), the term for a particular type of leader or priest. The ‘thyle’ is regarded as a poet, i.e. a skald or storyteller: in other words, the person who preserves the treasure hoards of mystical and magical knowledge that was essential to understand the Eddic poems. He was the cult leader who understood the cult activities and uttered the proper magical words. His main function was to speak, whether this was to recite the verses and sacred stories, to know and to declare the laws, or to function as the spokesman of a king or earl during a feast, a cult festival or a legal moot.34 The ‘thyle’ was one of the specialists who controlled society’s esoteric knowledge on the king’s behalf. Apparently ‘sal’ means the king’s and earls’ assembly hall, cult hall or moot hall: the place in which the functions of ‘theatre, court, and church’ were united.35 The ‘sal’ or the hall was the centre of the human microcosmos, the symbol of stability and good leadership. The hall was also the location where communal drinking took place, which had the purpose of creating bonds of loyalty and fictive kinship; liquor was the medium through which one achieved ecstasy, and thus communion with the supernatural.36 The high seat, that is, the seat with the high-seat posts, served as the channel of communication with the supernatural world. Since the hall with the high seat served as the geographical and ideological centre of leadership, it is understandable why the earls and kings, as the literature tells us, could suppress and ruin each other by simply destroying their opponent’s hall.37 The multifunctional role of the hall thus extended beyond the site itself. The hall was at the centre of a group of principal farmsteads; it was the heart of the central places from the later part of the Iron Age,38 which existed all over Scandinavia, as is now increasingly recognized. Apart from Gudme/Lundeborg one might mention Sorte Muld on Bornholm, Lejre, Boeslunde, Jørlunde, Kalmargård, Nørre 33 S. Brink, “Political and social structures in early Scandinavia”, Tor 28 (Uppsala, 1996), pp. 235–81. 34 Brink, “Political and social structures”, pp. 256–7. 35 See the comprehensive account in Herschend, The idea of the good. 36 Enright, Lady with a mead cup, p. 17. 37 F. Herschend, “Hus på Helgö”, Fornvännen 90 (Stockholm, 1995), pp. 221–8; ibid. Livet i Hallen. 38 A possible ranking of this places can be found in U. Näsman, “The etnogenesis of the Danes and the making of a Danish kingdom”, pp. 1–10. 480   Snede, Stentinget, Drengsted and Ribe in Denmark; Trondheim, Borre, Kaupang and Hamar in Norway; Slöinge, Helgö, Birka, Uppåkra, Vä, Gamla Uppsala, Högum, Vendel and Valsgärde in Sweden.39 Characteristicially, many of these sites are located a few kilometres inland, relying on one or more landing places or ports situated on the coast.40 Although this is still a matter of debate, I believe that such central places served as a basis for some form of politcal or religious control excercised over a larger area; the radius of their influence went well beyond the site itself.41 In his innovative analysis of the toponymic evidence Stefan Brink42 has argued that rather than being a precisely defined site, such central places should be understood as a somewhat larger area encompassing a number of different but equally important functions and activities. Both toponymic evidence and archaeological finds suggest that this was a recurrent pattern. This means that it is inadequate to refer to these sites as ‘trading sites’, ‘cult sites’, ‘meeting or thing places’, emphasizing only one of their many functions. Instead, these locations should be perceived as multifunctional and composite sites. In addition to their ‘official’ function as trading- and market sites, and as centres where laws were made and cults were established, these central places were probably also associated with special functions such as the skilled crafting of jewellery, weapons, clothing, and, furthermore, with special cultic activities performed by religious spe- 39 For further details see L. Jørgensen, “Stormandssæder og skattefund i 3.–12. århundrede”, Fortid of Nutid 2 (1995), pp. 83–110; Brink, “Political and social structures”, and Larsson and Hårdh eds., Centrala platser, centrala frågor. 40 Fabech, “Organising the landscape”, p. 43. 41 The social geographer Mats Wiedgren has discussed the concept of central places and criticized the Scandinavian Iron Age archaeologists for having returned to their classical hunting grounds: imports and precious metals. By focussing on gold and its connection with aristocratic power, archaeologists have neglected the economic and social organization of the agrarian landscape. M. Wiedgren, “Kulturgeografernas bönder och arkeologernas guld — finns det någon väg til syntes?”, in: L. Larsson and B. Hårdh eds., Centrala platser, cantrala frågor (Lund, 1998), pp. 281–96. 42 Brink, “Political and social structures”, pp. 235–8. In several articles C. Fabech has developed this model in archaeological case studies; most recently Fabech, “Organising the landscape”, and idem, “Kult og samfund i yngre jernalder — Ravlunda som eksempel”, in: L. Larsson and B. Hårdh eds., Centrala platser, centrala frågor (Lund, 1998), pp. 147–64. However, the model of ritual depositions in the cultural landscape, which plays an important part in Fabech’s general model, has been the subject of debate; see: L. Hedeager, “Sacred topography. Depositions of wealth in the cultural landscape”, in: A. Gustafsson and H. Karlsson eds., Glyfer och arkeologiska rum — en vänbok til Jarl Nordbladh (Göteborg, 1999), pp. 229–52.  –  ‘ ’    481 cialists. These places were also the residence of particularly privileged warriors or housecarls. Archaeological research has revealed a whole range of activities in Gudme, but the picture becomes more clear by taking the place-names into account. These demonstrate the presence of a pagan priesthood, of military units and warriors, of the most prominent smiths, and so on. Some of these central places, such as Gudme/Lundeborg, originated in the Late Roman period (200–400), but the majority only emerged after 400. In fact, it looks as if most of these multifuntional sites did not predate the seventh century. Many of these sites remained centres of power and of economic activity well into the middle ages. In some respects, Gudme fits the general model of a ‘central place’ as we have defined it, but in others, it diverges. First, Gudme is among the earliest of these places, and may even be the earliest, for it already gained its central position during Late Roman period. Second, Gudme is bigger and the settlement area more extended than that of any of the other central places hitherto found in South Scandinavia;43 its great hall, situated in the centre, is unique because of its size and its construction. Third, the sheer amount of archaeological finds from the area is overwhelming; this goes especially for the number of gold finds and superb jewellery produced by skilled craftsmen. Fourth, the evidence of place-names connected with the sacred is more persuasive in Gudme than anywhere. We have to consider the possibility that Gudme was perceived as the foremost ‘residence’ of the pre-Christian god(s), and that it may have occupied a unique place in the cosmology of the Nordic realm in the middle of the Iron Age.44 G: A      To understand the role of Gudme as the central place in South Scandinavia, in the sense that it was the place receiving most of the desirable objects from the world outside, we also have to take another 43 Jørgensen, “The warrior aristocracy of Gudme”, fig. 14. Gudme is suggested as the dominant centre in South Scandinavia during the Migration Period by J. Ringtved, “The geography of power: South Scandinavia before the Danish kingdom”, in: T. Dickinson and D. Griffiths eds., The making of kingdoms. Anglo-Saxon Studies in Archaeology and History 10 (Oxford, 1999), pp. 49–64. 44 482   problem into account. How could such objects be reinterpreted and transformed into so-called ‘prestige objects’, that might subsequently become embedded in the local cultural system? We should therefore consider the possible symbolic structure underlying the production and acquisition of valuable goods. In other words, the association of elites with crafting and long-distance trade must not merely be understood as a materialistic and economic phenomenon, but also in terms of qualities and values prevailing within a cosmological scheme.45 Long-distance trade and exchange in the Roman and Migration Periods have been discussed from different perspectives, such as ‘trade’, ‘economy’, ‘prestige-goods’, ‘gifts’, ‘war booty’, ‘payment’, and so on. Initially, Roman tablewares were manufactured in the Empire and brought to the Nordic area either by long-distance traders or as ceremonial gifts in the context of inter-elite alliances. In the the Migration period, however, gold came into the barbarian world primarily as a military payment by the Romans, to be transformed into prestigious objects essential for ‘Germanic’ gift-giving. This represents an essential shift in the relations Germanic societies entertained with the outside world — a change that can be documented in Gudme. It is highly unlikely that any prehistoric society ever saw activities and objects associated with remote distances in a neutral light. The common denominator of objects deriving from outside the local cultural system and serving as gravegoods, is ‘prestige goods’, or ‘luxury goods’. Elite graves from all over prehistoric Europe contain foreign objects as a significant part of their display, be they from Hallstat — and La Téne (with Greek and Etrurian imports), from the Roman period (imports from Greek and Italy), or from the Migration and Merovingian period (with Byzantine and Frankish objects). Elite graves in Scandinavia followed these patterns as well. In prehistoric Europe foreign objects were closely connected with social prestige at a more general level. How can this be explained? Objects obtained from distant places have two things in common. First, whether crafted or uncrafted, they all had to pass the boundary between the unfamiliar world outside and the familiar ‘inner’ 45 M. Helms, Craft and the kingly ideal. Art, trade and power (Austin, Texas, 1993); E. DeMarrais, L.J. Castillo and T. Earle, “Ideology, materialization, and power strategies”, Current Anthropology 37 (1996), pp. 15–31.  –  ‘ ’    483 world of a given society. Furthermore, they represented unequal access to symbols of status and authority. Mary Helms, an anthropologist who has investigated how various traditional cultures interpret space and distance in cosmological terms,46 has argued that social and political power are associated with information about strange places, peoples, and things. In all non-Western native cosmologies, people and things coming from ‘afar’ are invested with a range of symbolic meanings, and with qualifications such as superiority, inferiority, or danger.47 In well-functioning societies, bad things are banished and good things are acquired from ‘outside’. In her impressive Craft and the Kingly Ideal (1993) Mary Helms argues that places ‘out there’ are represented by two axes, one situated horizontally (the geographical distance) and the other vertically (the cosmological distance). A morally informed and ‘cultured’ social group representing the centre is surrounded on all sides by a cosmological realm ‘out there’, which, as Helms expresses it, ‘is believed to contain all manner of visible, invisible and exceptional qualities, ‘energies’, beings, and resources, some harmful, some helpful to those at the centre’.48 When geographical and supernatural distance are thought of as corresponding and closely related to one another, a horizontal movement, away from the social centre, is also a departure into an area that is seen as increasingly ‘different’, and therefore increasingly supernatural, mythical, and powerful. Often objects acquired from geographically distant places carry associations with ancestors and cultural heroes.49 The point of Helms’ argument is that objects acquired from the world beyond the confines of a traditional society are considered to be powerful, and potentially beneficial either to society at large or to its leaders. In order to comprehend how a Roman vessel — or a cowri shell — may become a more powerful object than a locally manufactured iron spear, we have to regard power not merely as a function excercised by people, but also as an entity or quality that may be acquired or accumulated, and as an existential reality that 46 M. Helms, Ulysses’ sail: An ethnographic odyssey of power, knowledge and geographical distance (Princeton, 1988); ibid. Craft and the kingly ideal; ibid., Access to origins. Affines, ancestors, and aristocrats (Austin, 1998). 47 Helms, Ulysses’ sail; Helms, Craft and the kingly ideal. The following is based primarily on these two works. 48 Helms, Craft and the kingly ideal, p. 7. 49 Helms, Ulysses’ sail. 484   may be connected to wealth or weapons, but also to other objects. In this sense, power is a spiritual energy enabling an individual to interact with the forces of the natural and supernatural world. Objects obtained from ‘outside’ tend to channel and concentrate such energy, and the individual in possession of such goods will become associated with the power with which these objects are infused.50 The fundamental quality attributed to such ‘prestige goods’ or ‘luxury goods’ is that of having encapsulatd the forces present in a dangerous universe. Long-distance travellers may have chosen particular places, such as Lundeborg, to cross the barrier between the outside world and the inner space of society, bringing Roman tableware, Byzantine jewellery, and metals such as gold, silver and bronze. Helms sees similarities between travellers, who communicate with the dangerous but potentially powerful outside world, and religious practitioners — shamans, priests and diviners — because the latter also explore, control, transform, and exploit a realm situated outside human society. She also includes artisans in this category, for highlevel crafting is an act of creation, equally involving some kind of communication with the outside world; craftsmen, therefore, tend to be liminal figures credited with supernatural powers. This must have been particularly true if objects representing spiritual power were crafted, as was the case in Gudme, where gold bracteates and other emblems of religious leadersip were produced. Locally crafted goods as well as those acquired from distant countries could thus become the tangible embodiement of numinous powers. Both the skilled metal-worker and the skilled trader acts as intermediaries between human society on the one hand, and a greater realm outside characterised by what Helms calls the ‘intangible energies that must be tapped and transformed via the artisan’s various skills into cultural formats that encode qualities identified with whatever is thought to constitute true humanness’.51 By obtaining such goods, the elite is involved in a process by which resources from outside are brought into their society, where they are subsequently transformed, both materially and symbolically, in order to meet local 50 D. Carmichael, “Places of power: Mescalero Apache sacred sites and sensitive areas”, in: D.L. Carmichael, J. Hubert, B. Reeves and A. Schanche eds., Sacred sites, sacred places. One World Archaeology (London, 1994), pp. 89–98; E.W. Herbert, Iron, gender and power (Indiana, 1993), pp. 1–5. 51 Helms, Craft and the kingly ideal, p. 15.  –  ‘ ’    485 ideological needs. Likewise, the organisation of expeditions and expertise concerning shipbuilding and navigation do not only reflect practical considerations; such skills also represent the ability to mediate successfully between one’s own society and the outside world. For obvious practical reasons, the final stages of shipbuilding often take place on the beach; but the beach is also a liminal zone, separating land and sea, the gateway to a dangerous world beyond the own group, but full of desirable objects.52 The argument developed by Helms is of course a matter for further discussion, but I still find her approach stimulating and ‘good to think with’ in relation to Gudme/Lundeborg, for it offers a new paradigm for understanding the cosmology of traditional societies, that of pre-Christian Scandinavia not excepted. If we follow Helms, Gudme can be understood as a central place where Roman tablewares and Byzantine gold were acquired and transformed, while Lundeborg, a site of shipbuilding and other kinds of skilled crafting, served as the liminal zone between inland society and the great and unknown world across the sea. A      One of Gudme’s most striking characteristics is the overwhelming evidence of intensive crafting activities, especially those of jewellers and blacksmiths. Metal production and craftmanship in Scandinavia during the Iron Age are usually regarded as a neutral or even secondary affair, but to my mind, metallurgy and skilled crafting were in fact closely connected to what in these societies was conceived of as the quality of power. The role of metal-workers — especially blacksmiths and jewellers — deserves special attention,53 for the technicalities of metallurgy and metalwork included a symbolic and ritual element,54 which gave the practicioners as special status. Mastering metallurgy meant controlling a transformation: from iron ingots to 52 Ibid., p. 21. Weavers for example can be seen as skilled artisans as well, but their activities are difficult to trace at Gudme. 54 M. Rowlands, “The cultural economy of sacred power”, in: Les princes de la protohistoire et l’Èmergence de l’Ètat; Actes de la table ronde internationale organisée par le Centre Jean Bérard et l’École francaise de Rome; Naples, 27–29 octobre, 1994. (Naples and Rome, 1999), pp. 165–72. 53 486   the tools for agricultural production and the weapons on which production, fertility, and protection or aggression depended; from ingots, bars, and items of gold and silver into ritual objects central to the symbolic universe of a given society.55 Blacksmiths and jewellers in traditional societies are usually associated with power56 because they forge the implements by which the natural and social world may be dominated; futhermore, they create objects that mediate between mankind and the supernatural. To be a specialist of this kind demands not only superb skills, but often also the possession of magic power.57 The smith’s work requires the esoteric kind of knowledge enabling him to manipulate the dangerous forces unleashed in the process of transforming shapeless metal into a finished product; this especially holds true when sacred objects are cast, or specific types of jewellery associated with status and/or ceremonial use. Because of the secret knowledge inherent to such activities, smiths were specialists who were both powerful and feared.58 As Eugenia Herbert explains,59 in traditional societies the nature of their work set smiths apart from other people. Often they are ethnically different, or at least regarded as ‘others’, precisely because they mediate between the natural and the supernatural. The smith has magical powers, often holding a high position in society.60 Although these insights are derived from traditional African societies of the past centuries, they seem to be of general validity for most traditional societies.61 55 In this particular case I refrain from discussing iron technology and the extraction of iron ore as such although this must have been of major importance in an Iron Age society. 56 P. Maret, “The smith’s myth and the origin of leadership in Central Africa”, in: R. Haaland and P. Shinnie eds., African iron working (Oslo, 1985), pp. 73–87; E. Herbert, Red gold of Africa (Madison, 1984); ibid. Iron, gender and power; Rowlands, “The cultural economy of sacred power”, pp. 165–72. However, metallurgy and skilled metal work represent important values in the central myths of any traditional society, not only in Africa. This counts for the Indo-European cultures as well. Judging by Homer, classical authors, and the Celtic myth Cycles, the smiths had a high position, however different these societies (e.g. M. Rowlands, “The archaeological interpretation of prehistoric metalworking”, World Archaeology 3 (1971), p. 216). 57 Herbert, Red gold of Africa, p. 33. 58 M. Eliade, The forge and the crucible (2nd ed., Chigago, 1978), p. 99. 59 Ibid. and Herbert, Iron, gender and power. 60 As argued convincingly by Herbert, Red gold of Africa, p. 33; Herbert, Iron, Gender and power; Helms, Craft and the kingly ideal; Rowlands, “The archaeological interpretation of prehistoric metal working”, pp. 215–6. 61 Ibid.  –  ‘ ’    487 In order to get a hold of the metal, the artisan often has to take part in trading activities.62 Together with poets, troubadours, carvers, and musicians, smiths constitute a group of specialists whose frequent long-distance travel associates them with spatial distance and foreign places. As such, they might gain great reputations; as Helms argues, artisans coming from outside were often believed to be superior. Such specialists, as well as travelling religious experts come to embody the supernatural qualities of the world beyond the settlement. They roam between cultivated and settled space and the wild and dangerous territories beyond its pale.63 These views from anthropology and ethno-history furnish a tempting frame of reference for the interpretation of the archaeological evidence from Gudme presented in the first section of this chapter, and I shall pursue my argument along these lines. In Gudme as well, artisan smiths, shamans and long-distance travellers may have functioned as ‘specialists in distance’, concentrated in what constituted a multifuncional central place. E       Given the importance of smithing and jewellery associated not only with Gudme, but with any central settlement and big farm from the fifth century until the late Viking Age in Scandinavia, such activities must have served a purpose. This problem may of course be approached from a functional perspective: all big farms needed tools and weapons, and smithing activities must have been an essential part of day-to-day work in all non-urban, pre-industrial societies. Obviously weapons and iron tools were primarily manifactured to meet practical demands, but this is not true of items of gold and silver, which met social requirements. Keeping this in mind, smithing and the manufacture of jewellery can be expected to have a place in the mythological world of pre-Christian Scandinavia. This brings us back to the problem of the written sources. The lack of Scandinavian written records before c. 1200 means that any 62 Maret, “The smith’s myth and the origin of leadership in Central Africa”, p. 76. 63 Helms, Craft and the kingly ideal, pp. 35–9. 488   conclusions drawn about pre-Christian beliefs are speculative. However, the Old Norse myths incorporated in the Poetic Edda and in Snorri’s Edda may well provide valuable information, if treated with extreme caution; these texts of course do not necessarily fit the material evidence from the Iron Age, but they may create a plausible setting.64 Central myths representing the wisdom and knowledge of the preChristian world may contain core elements that remain in place through time, although encrusted in new layers of meaning, and adapted to new contexts. As Kirtsen Hastrup maintains, an extensive pagan wisdom still existed in pre-Reformation Icelandic society, in the guise of traditional esoteric knowledge, which then was transformed into Satan-worship and witchcraft in the seventeenth century.65 Galdur (galdring), galdraastafir (magic staves), runa (secret or occult), skaldskapur (poetry), and hamrammr (a person who could change shape at will), were too much rooted in everyday life and thought to lose their role as meaningful concepts. The runic staves from Bryggen in Bergen also indicate that the Eddic poems were still well known in Norway by the late middle ages.66 From another perspective Margareth Clunies Ross67 has convincingly argued that mythological texts such as the Poetic Edda, some scaldic verses, and Snorri’s Edda, incorporate myths that explore fundamental ideas with regard to life and death in Nordic societies. These ideas retained their relevance when the majority of the population of Iceland had become Christian. The myths were simply ‘very good to think with and good to use as schemas for the representation of the major concerns of human life.’68 Snorri’s role in writing the Edda has been a matter of debate since long. Some scholars have seen him as a creative literary artist, others as a far more reliable com- 64 G. Steinsland, Det Hellige Bryllup og Norrøn Kongeideologi (Oslo, 1991); L. Hedeager, “Cosmological endurance: pagan identities in early Christian Europe”, European Journal of Archaeology 1 (1998), pp. 382–96; ibid., “Skandinavisk dyreornamentik”. L. Hedeager, “Sacred topography. Depositions of wealth in the cultural landscape”. 65 Hastrup, “Iceland: sorcerers and paganism”, p. 401 66 P. Meulengracht Sørensen, “Om eddadigtenes alder”, in: G. Steinsland e.a. eds., Nordisk Hedendom (Odense, 1991), p. 219; Clunies Ross, Prolonged echoes I, the Myths, p. 139. 67 Clunies Ross, Prolonged echoes vol. 1; ibid., Prolonged echoes vol. 2, The reception of Norse myths in medieval Iceland. 68 Clunies Ross, Prolonged echoes vol. 2, p. 191. and therefore distorted. pp. we should not discount the possibility of some ‘invention of tradition’. it may give us some ideas about the beliefs that informed the construction of Gudme as a sacred site. . If one pursues these arguments. pp. ‘Christianisation’ also meant that prior beliefs and concepts helped to shape new varieties of Christianity. not something transcending time and change. Within a Christianised society. 1970). but with a longue durée of fundamental myths and systems of beliefs in Iceland. 1999). “Religion”. 72 Meulengracht Sørensen. Snorri’s narratives correspond in many details to other early medieval texts from different parts of Scandinavia. stressing the continuity between ‘old times’ and the new world they inhabited. 1964). 2001). in: U. which should not be regarded as the mere product of the late pre-Christian era in Scandinavia. Also. de Vries.e. Hultgård. By the way. Religion och Samhälle i det Förkristna Norden (Odense. “Om eddadigtenes alder”. In spite of all these problems. be it of a Christian type. J. 217–28. or of the sort defined by Christians as ‘pagan’. possibly perceived through a Christian perspective. its roots must be deeply anchored in the traditional pagan universe. A.G. pre-Christian traditions were still kept alive. A. E. 70 E. we cannot afford to disregard Snorri’s informations and the informations given by the Poetic Edda. pp. McKitterick ed. it follows that Christianity was a historical phenomenon. The Oxford Short History of Europe II (400–1000) (Oxford.O. remained omnipresent in the daily lives of medieval people. –  ‘ ’    489 municator of pre-Christian mythology.69 who had no obvious reason to disparage the faith of his ancestors.71 Yet I would go further than this. Drobin ed. Turville-Petre. in R. Myth and religion of the North (Westport. 109–24.70 Although Snorri’s work has been influenced by Christianity — for he wrote in a Christian society — one may well wonder whether he could manipulate old and familiar myths to the extent of giving a false image of the pre-Christian cosmology still known to his audience. On the contrary. 69 In general modern scholars represent the “positive” opinion. Studier i Snorres Mytologi (Oslo. “Fornskandinavisk hinsidestro i Snorre Sturlusons spegling”. i. although he probably did not share it himself. Magic. 1975). 71 M. and of authors like Snorri being eager to incorporate traditional myths within a new framework.g. 131–68. Holtsmark. Altgermanische Religionsgeschichte (Berlin... de Jong. We are dealing not merely with folk magic.72 Even if they do not ‘fit’ Gudme chronologically. robbed of his gold and sword. a lay in the Poetic Edda.73 Like the Asir in the Golden Age. But the Old Norse texts also contain other smiths. they were in possession of magical powers. 1994). held prisoner and forced to create high quality weapons and jewellery for his captor.M. transl. the gods had to ‘create’ the dwarfs and place them in the outside — underground — world. sometimes willingly and sometimes under duress. who crafted the precious objects ensured success in the gods’ struggle against the Giants: Odin’s spear Gungnir and his golden ring Draupnir. and jewellers are represented in the northern mythology. the dwarfs constituted a male society unable to reproduce itself. With 73 74 75 R. Thor’s hammer Mjollnir. 68. Eliade. But when this talent was destroyed by the arrival of giant women from Utgard. creating technical wonders for their masters. p. forgers. 98. Moreover. Although Snorri designates Odin and his priests as ‘forgers of songs’. and Freyja’s golden necklace. The Poetic Edda. p. the happy Golden Age. They were all dwarfs. captured and mauled by the king. the gods had special talent for skilled metallurgy. adapted to the code of the Nordic apophthegm. they lived apart. Simek. . T    O N  In the Poetic Edda as well as in Snorri’s Prose Edda metallurgy and skilled metal work were closely associated with dwarfs who were imagined to mine and manufacture underground. Hollander (Austin. 1993). The Forge and the crucible. Dictionary of Northern mythology (Cambridge. This is how smiths. However.75 This is an Old Norse version of the widely known story of the master smith. In the world’s first age. L.490   The description of smithing and gold may in Eddic poetry shed some light on the social importance of metal work in the late Iron Age. Subsequently the dwarfs became the god’s craftsmen. the dwarfs were credited with magical powers. the gods remained dependent on the dwarfs.74 neither Odin nor any of the other Asir gods were in command of forging. among stones and cliffs. where they controlled precious metals and produced much coveted objects. and they formed a male society. Volund is the tragic figure of the hero-smith. The most famous text in this respect is Volund the Smith. he is most at home in the outside and dangerous world from where he was captured by a human king and brought into society. Bæksted. set apart from society. is typical of the master smith who could change shape like the shaman to mediate between human society and the supernatural world. was married to a valkyrie. the worldly king is dependent on the smith to come across these emblems of royal power. The ability to grow wings and fly like the wind to escape the greedy king. the Volsunga Saga became the core of the Niebelungenlied in a Christianised German version from around 1200. herself daughter of a king and in control of shape changing. to retain his royal power. he is no human being either. 388–9). Although Volund is not a dwarf. namely Regin from the lay Reginsmál. –  ‘ ’    491 revenge as its central theme. Like the Asir gods. he fabricates prestigious objects essential for the kingly ideal. although subordinate character. 76 An element of shamanism was present on Iceland only in the late Middle Ages (Hastrup. he has no children. and he himself is a feared person in control of the gold. a giant woman from the outside world. the father. She was a skilled weaver.76 Volund’s pedigree and family relations are a good illustration of the smith’s position in the cosmological world of the Old Norse texts. In this epic cycle about Odin’s grandchild Volsunga and his descendants. Regin the Smith is an important. As the master smith in control of gold as well as skilled crafting. One more ‘personified’ smith is known from the mythological circle of the Poetic Edda. pp. pp. the king depends on Volund the Smith. 1990). 77 A. in the Old Norse sources a Finnish (or Saami) background always indicated someone who represented dangerous magical forces from outside. . so he does not belong to any family group as a human being. Volund. the poem must have provided a logical and intelligible story line for its Scandinavian audience. as Volund did. “Iceland: Sorcerers and paganism”.77 Although married. 216–20. As son of a Finnish king his origin was clearly defined as ‘out there’. In other words. who is called ‘king of the elves’. which tells the story of the fall of the Burgundians after the attack by the Huns in 437. his captive. Nordiske Guder og Helte (Copenhagen. Known from a number of Old Norse Sources. His forge is situated on an isolated islet. His family was composed of a father (no mother is mentioned) and two brothers (no sisters). This is part of the great epic cycle of the Volsunga. They all belonged to the realm outside human society. and lay his hands on the gold. nor sister or wife. and he has no children.492   Hreidmar. Fáfnir. had the shape of an otter (and was killed by the god Loki). they were all males and they were — for social. a liminal figure who partly belongs to the world outside. changed himself into a dragon to guard the gold treasure. the objects they forged were essential to the power position of the elite. was an odd person who knows magic. In all. he is not an integrated member of human society. Sigurd was able to kill the dragon Fáfnir. they seem to represent structures and concepts specific to Nordic mythology. Regin is the only one who knows how to forge a sword with the necessary (magical) power to kill Fáfnir. he masters magic. and the second. Later he went on to another ruler. Although Regin at first sight behaves like a human being. who was a famous war-king. have certain specific traits in common. With this sword named Gram. like human smiths were supposed to do. they mediated between the settled heartland of human society and the dangerous outside world. Regins brother. He is a long-distance traveller and a skilled artisan smith. whether gods or human kings. to a foreign king to become his master’s smith. Furthermore. Time and again we meet the disastrous greed for gold as an archetypal theme in myths and stories. To sum up. G  O N  In Volsunga Saga treasures of gold generate the greed that constitutes the main story-line. skilled long-distance travellers. neither mother. Utter. he travels between realm of kings. Last but not least the smiths were. He is a stranger among humans. not biological reasons — unable to reproduce themselves. and he knows the right magical acts to perform before the fight becomes succesful. In the story Regin acts like a human being and travels. and his brothers master shape changing. . whether dwarfs or men. one brother. in one way or another. such skilled smiths. By way of magic. Volsung’s son Sigurd. Even the strongest king is dependent on him. there are no women present in his family. here and in other heroic tales. such as Beowulf. In the Old Norse sources gold and gold treasures regularly play a central role in the construction of stories. however. The idea of the good. in: Theuws and Nelson eds. 2000). 2000). Enright. gift-giving was more 78 Cf.81 The written sources. swords and other prestigious good must have circulated as gifts without leaving any traces in the archaeological record. 401–76. which means ‘golden-drink. pp. Movable wealth with strong symbolic connotations were the most prestigious gifts in this highly ritualised process.. Theuws and J. The idea of the good. By weapons made worthy. 1999). Lords. the highly ritualised competitive gift-giving system endows the gold with authority and power. M. 80 Herbert. “Beyond power. “Beyond power. mainly consist of silver objects (Hedeager. The gift (London. whether the Old Norse ones or texts from continental early medieval Europe.83 If the strategy of gift-giving included an element of competitive display. Ceremonial exchange in Beowulf ”.. Herschend. From late Antiquity to the early Middle Ages (Leiden. Le Jan. Theuws and M. 1990 [1950]). pp. Lady with a mead cup. 82 Cf. in: F. Bazelmans.. The ‘Golden Age’ of Scandinavia is the Migration Period. and of exchange. yield the impression that gift-giving was the crucial instrument in creating and upholding political alliances. 301–2. “The circulation of weapons in Anglo-Saxon societies”. “Sacred topography. latest: J. pp. pp. in: F. –  ‘ ’    493 Saxo’s Gesta Danorum. Enright. “A kind of mirror for men: Sword depositions in late antique Northern Gaul”. Nelson eds. R. 229–52). Leiden 31/8–2 /9 1992.79 Gold was a potent vehicle of cultural values. Mauss. and H. Rituals of Power. Bazelmans. in the course of only a few generations. Alkemade. “The gift in the Old English epic Beowulf ”. 281–309.80 The amount of gold treasures from the fifth century in Scandinavia appears that if it confirms this general approach. comprehensively. 60–3. pp. Depositions of wealth in the cultural landscape”. golden-intoxication’ or ‘golden-power’. . however. Red gold of Africa. 1–7. From late Antiquity to the early Middle Ages (Leiden. Immense quantities of gold were deposited in the fifth and sixth centuries. retainers and their relationship in Beowulf (Amsterdam. is known exclusively from Voluspa (21 and 22) in the Poetic Edda. 377–99.. of art. Lecture given on: Theory and method in the study of material culture. Theuws and J.L. ibid. 311–76. “Frankish giving of arms and rituals of power: continuity and change in the Carolingian Period”. Ceremonial exchange in Beowulf ”. Herschend.L. Lady with a mead cup. it means as much as the ’the personified greed for gold’. Härke. pp. and Snorri’s Ynglinga Saga. Nelson eds.78 Gold itself is personified in the name Gullveig. however. Bazelmans. J. 83 Cf. pp. Rituals of power. Within the same conceptual framework gold could function as a medium of power.82 Much gold and silver. the discussion in F. Rituals of power. 79 The name Gulleveig. 81 An equal depositional pattern characterise the Viking Age where the hoards. however. To secure or maintain dominance in the social hierarchy of early medieval societies. Gräns. Green eds. R. By the added value of highly qualified artisans.C. objects of gold were central to political strategies primarily because such treasures had been acquired by honourable and daring acts performed in far-away places.. folkloristic treasure legends from later periods feature people of a much lower social standing. monuments and society. a world tree or the like. 85 T. Stockholm Studies in Archaeology vol. gold had to be appropriated and controlled by the elite.. For this reason. and thus condemning him to a dismal fate. Bradley and M. Gård. Gold represented its owner’s honour and riches. The sacred and the profane.86 Byzantine churches. C   ‘   ’ A central place with sacred functions represents the whole universe in symbolic form. Barrett. but also to steal his good fortune. gold was transformed into something that embodied values crucial to elite identities in the Nordic realm. In the late Iron age and early Middle items of gold represented the honour and respectability of the owner. 1987).85 To sum up. as Mircea Eliade made clear in several publications. 1998). where the value to the treasures is bound up with the notion of faith. 15. III. it is deliberately constructed as the ‘centre of the universe’. p. The prehistory of Cranborne Case (Cambridge. These later tales contain an element of ludicrousness never encountered in the Scandinavian legends from the early middle ages and the late Iron Age. The nature of religion (New York and London. 1991). . Gravfält. Patterns in comparative religion (London.84 According to the early written evidence gold treasures and the powerful enchantments were associated with members of the upper social stratum.494   likely to play a central role in political strategies. we should expect to find some evidence of the ritualised use of these artefacts in hoards and in graves. Zachrisson. it has been 84 J. 1997). ibid. Sammanhang kring ädelmetalldepåer och runstenar från vikingetid och tidigmedeltid in Uppland och Gästrikland. Landscape. in these cases. Eliade. (Stockholm. conversely. ch. those who managed to steal a treasure were struck by dire punishment. and as such it was equivalent to happiness. 86 M. 240. Stealing a treasure did not only mean robbing someone of his riches. be it a Christian cathedral or a pagan cult site organized around a sacred pool. in the western part of the city the patron saints were European ones. Patterns in comparative religion. During Easter week. is the realm of darkness. who await resurrection of the flesh and the last judgement. Die Entstehung der Kathedral (Zürich. on the contrary. buried in Trondheim. pp. which are surmounted by a dome.’ As Eliade argues. The topography of the churches built after Lund became an archbishopric in 1104 mirrored the supposed location of important saints’ graves in the Christian world. citing H. as sacred placeces always do. Eliade. The imperial door to the altar was also called the Door of Paradise. Thus. All the constructions associated with sacrality symbolize the entire universe. churches were built that were dedicated to patron saints from Asia. in the far north of the Christian world. incorporating an image of the cosmological world. Wahlöö . According to Eliade. the see of the Danish archbishop in Scania from the twelfth century onwards. and this symbolism also extends to the apparently ‘secular’ part of the settlement. the earth is rectangular and is bounded by four walls.’ The west. the four parts of the interior of the church symbolise the four cardinal directions. the realm of the eternal mansions of the dead. of grief. 89 And the following: A. Andrén. To the east. 88 M. a microcosmos of the Christian world.89 87 M. The cathedral was situated in the centre of the city (like Jerusalem in the Christian world). of death. The altar is Paradise.87 Eliade’s views on Byzantine churches may be useful to our question: how can a sacred place be organized to repeat the paradigmatic work of the god(s)? In Eliade’s terminology. 1950). embodied all the features of the Christian universe. 367–85. 61–2. –  ‘ ’    495 argued. the great door to the altar remains open during the entire service. The middle of the building is the earth. in: C. 119. the meaning of this custom is clearly expressed in the Easter Canon: ‘Christ rose form the grave and opened the doors of Paradise unto us. a Byzantine church was ‘a central place for rituals’.88 In Lund. Sedlmayr. Eliade. the whole Christian world was deliberately replicated in the city. citing historians of church architecture. “Världen från Lunds horisont”. which lay in the east. pp. p. Lund was constructed as a sacred city. in the northern part of the city the main patron saint was St Olav. be they pagan or Christian. The interior of the church is the universe. The sacred and the profane. 90 De Jong. Denmark. especially R. p. pp. Fabech and J. Hagdahl eds. “Från antiken till antiken”. very little is known. “Religion”..A. As Anders Andrén has noted. 1998).. himmel eller helvete (Stockholm. .496   A Christian topography apparently emerged all over the Christian world. in: S. where a precarious peace had to be constantly negotiated. ibid. 1998). ibid. 909–1049 (Ithaca and London. in the course of this process the whole landscape. of which. in: C. The social meaning of Cluny’s property. however. 1989). According to the sagas. Ringtved eds. Ett stycke Europa (Lund. ibid. 91 B. In this landscape the ‘places of the saints’ (loci sanctorum) were the real landmarks. pp. because they established a connection with the heroic history of the Church. 92 Cf. became organised according to a Christian topography. To be the neighbor of Saint Peter. in: S. Its Christian landscape was no neutral configuration. pp. Rosenwein. 1990). Andrén. where social and legal negotiations took place. the hall. these institutions were the sacred foundations of society. including the parishes with their churches and manor houses. The end of ancient Christianity (Cambridge. 93 A. “Världen från Lunds horisont”. himmel eller helvete (Stockholm. 1999). “Från antiken till antiken”. 203. Pilgrimage in late antiquity and the early middle ages integrated the Holy Land and its sacred sites into a new Christian landscape. 383–94. “Landscape and settlement as utopian space”. the most important institutions were the home. and had to ‘compete’ by creating its own sacred topography.. 1998). Hagdahl eds. pp.. 142–93. Metropolis Daniae. “Religion”... Thorman and M. after centuries of contact and mutual influence prior to the beginnings of a formal conversion around the year 1000. Staden. 142–93. Settlement and landscape. Staden.92 In early medieval Scandinavia Christianity was gradually incorporated into the cosmology of a pagan Northern world.93 The creation of sacred places in pre-Christian Scandinavia must have followed the pre-Christian cosmology. 117–30. within this particular landscape Saint Peter was a familiar and regular landowner. also De Jong. Instead.90 This organisation of the landscape according to a Christian cosmology has also been investigated in connection with the Burgundian monastery of Cluny. In a society without any form of central public power. such as pre-Christian Scandinavia. ibid. it was charged with affective significance. May 4–7 1998 (Århus. Proceedings of a conference in Århus.. “Landscape and settlement as utopian space”. and the thing. Markus. the focal points in the topographical structure ed..91 Christianity established itself in a Roman world full of sacred places and sacred spaces. Thorman and M. however temporary such a structure may have been. “Topography and world view”. Herschend. a monastery. pp. An attack on the hall or the home. but organized according to a specific symbolic meaning. 295–333. Iason. the struggle for power among the leading families revolved around destroying each other’s halls. a hall. landscapes and settlements in the early middle ages and the late Iron Age. the dangerous world ‘outside’. 2000). and therefore the backbone of the family’s power. Tor 29 (1997). churches or manor houses/ halls. –  ‘ ’    497 of the Icelandic universe in the early middle ages. The world depicted in the sagas knew a distinction between the sacred and the profane..94 Spatial organization in early medieval Scandinavia was never perceived as ‘neutral’. a temple. in: Njáls saga. pp. Patterns in comparative religion. land and settlement were organized in accordance with a clear perception of ‘centres of the universe’. 379–80. it was thus sharply differentiated from the profane world surrounding it.96 To sum up. ibid.97 In a tentative manner — for our insight into pre-Christian religion remains hypothetical — it has been suggested that Gudme was the 94 V. 97 Eliade. On the contrary. be they (arch)bishoprics. 95 F. pp. This is to be supported by Frands Herschend’s study of archaeological and textual evidence of the hall in late Iron Age Scandinavia. 96 Herschend. near rivers and in areas bordering on the wild interior. as well as the sagas. This was political rather than economic warfare. that is. a church. 131–5. or simply a house. pp. Festskrift till Lars Lönnroth (Stockholm. The idea of the good. but it was radically different from that of the modern secularized world view. The most common locations for fights and open attack were outside the precinct of the farms (utangards): in woods.95 These sources all reveal that royal power could not be exercised without a hall. 37. with destruction as its main purpose. . Hansson and M. can be a transcendent space constructed as the ‘centre of the universe’. Gudar på jorden. not plunder. The idea of the good. A sacred space. This fits the general explanation of ‘sacred places’ and ‘sacred spaces’ offered by Mircea Eliade. “Striden i Finnsborg”. To some degree. were no neutal configurations. including Beowulf and The Fight at Finnsburg. 14–62. in: S. p. or to take up arms at the thing all counted as the worst possible outrage in Icelandic society. whether it is a city. Malm eds. also reiterates the creation of the world. the residence of the those who died on land of illness or of old age. is located under the third. in the east. earth is that of the dwarfs. Mankind lived under one root. and what has been interpreted as the hill of magic (galdring) — frame the central locality. 98 Ibid. 367–85. is Hel. the hill of the shrine. The Asir gods lived in Asgard. the Vanir in Vanheim. the construction of Gudme as a sacred place reflects. for juxtaposition see for example: Simek.498   main centre of the Odin cult during the period when this site flourished. or at least during the fifth and sixth centuries. pp. it is an evergreen ash whose roots reach out to the ends of the inhabited universe. but there are some common features attested in the Poetic Edda as well as in Snorri’s Edda that are worth exploring. In the north and beneath Midgard. Yggdrasill. which hides all wisdom and understanding in the world. Grimnismal 29.98 Still following Eliade. Beneath Yggdrasil. 99 . the world of the giants. and mankind inhabited Midgard. but never clearly specified. according to Voluspa (19) lies Urd’s well. Dictionary of Northern Mythology. At the heart of the Norse literature and its view of the world is the world-tree. 100 Gylfaginning 14. and. a place that — like Christian churches — served as a channel to the sacred. lies Jotunheim. where the gods should meet and hold council before Ragnarok. the giants under another. Three sacred hills — the hill of the god/gods. 30.. and Hel. the realm of the dead. if not a certain one. Yet we should not discard what we know from textual evidence. it may offer a plausible context. however tenuous the connection with Gudme itself may be. A: H    It is far from clear what the pre-Christian universe in Scandinavia looked like.101 All nine worlds are mentioned more than once. 101 The descriptions in the Poetic Edda and in Snorri’s Edda are not completely identical. for our interpretation of Gudme’s significance. Whereas Alfheim is the world of the elves.99 according to Snorri100 this is the location for Mimir’s well. to some extent. home of the giants and demons. Beyond the human world lies Utgard. separated by rivers. As I said earlier. the Gylfaginning is also a systematic presentation of pre-Christian mythology. in: T. and it was the best and greatest building in the world. where Odin gathered the warriors slain in battle. Snorri is the one who frequently mentions Asgard and gives the most detailed description in Gylfaginning in his Edda. 49. inside and outside. Schjødt.102 Furthermore. and a separate hall for the female Asir. the gods themselves were able to produce all the implements they needed. the ‘bright home’ was Odin’s residence. Ahlbäck ed. The lost beliefs of Northern Europe (London. pp. 35–57. J. 5 and 9. A giant built Asgard on Idavoll. hammers. however.. Old Norse and Finnish religions and cultic place-names (Stockholm. 106 According to Grímnismal 8.105 from where he overlooked the whole world. Ellis Davidson. 1990). home of the gods. Vingolf. In the following I shall briefly describe this cosmic world of the North. furthermore it harboured Valhall. 103 . in Asgard’s centre lies Hlidskjalf. 9. Snorri Sturluson. Asgard figures as the home of the gods and the residence of the Asir. it was made of gold. and in Ynglinga Saga. Gladsheim. and it has proven impossible to come up with a convincing blue-print of Scandinavian views of the ‘other world’. and even their furniture. possibly. whether all these various worlds were oriented towards the world-tree. Odin’s high seat. 105 According to the introduction to Grímnismal. Another crucial element of Idavoll and the only other building mentioned was the forge. with gold. Gladsheim. Ynglinga Saga 2.104 Apart from being part of a didactic work about the art of scaldic poetry. one inhabited by the dead heroes in Valhall and the other by the most powerful gods. 104 Snorri’s Edda. In the beginning. From then onwards. 8. Although in this elusive Nordic cosmology the Yggdrasill is the undisputed centre of the universe.106 and maybe also that of Hlidskjalf. –  ‘ ’    499 There are two further worlds. as I argued above. It is not clear. Skírnismal and Gylfaginning 16. The gods had a temple. made woodcarvings and had sufficient gold to contruct their dwellings. 69. are a matter of debate. the two ‘axes’ of the cosmic world. In Gylfaginning (13) Snorri says Gladsheim was the temple of Odin and twelve other gods. anvils. 41. one horizontal and one vertical.P. this age is called 102 H. yields many problems of interpretation. 1993). called ‘the Holy and Mighty Ones’ in Alvissmál in the Poetic Edda. Gylfaginning 2. p.103 In old Norse texts the representation of Asgard. “Horizontale und vertikale Achsen in der vorchristlichen skandinavischen Kosmologie”. They forged iron ore. and tongs were created. at first the gods had unlimited time for it. before the arrival of women from the dangerous outside world of Utgard. including iron. and gold. the myths explain. Asgard lost its Paradise-like status after the war that ended its Golden Age. . who were now to become the skilled artisans in charge of iron and precious metals. Asgard is a subordinate centre within the Scandinavian view of the universe. Gylfaginning 37–40. Although its status declined. however. and armour is piled on its benches. the gods founded the world of the Asir. Odin. G:     A In the Christian world of the middle ages. From his High Seat. Jerusalem. the skilled and powerful carpenter who created Asgard belonged to the world outside. As a remedy. As I have argued earlier. they also lost direct access to all precicious metals. Judging by its impressive hall. Asgard was also a place where skilled crafting took place.107 According to Old Norse tradition. Valhall is the place for Odin’s hird (armed followers) of human heroes. the Asir lost control of the highly skilled crafting that had been their monopoly. particularly metal work. By settling on Idavoll. was in contact with the outside world through his shamanistic helping spirits. and their control over the precious metals. In a manner of speaking. the happy first age of the world. Asgard’s original splendour was eclipsed forever. The hall is covered by a roof of spears and shields. and the Temple represented the centre of the world. skilled crafting. the gods created the dwarfs. silver. the rock on which 107 Grìmnismal 8–10. the two ravens.500   the Golden Age. Asgard remained the central part of the universe according to Northern mythology. which meant that the gods lost their skills as artisans. the link between earth and heaven. and the object of intense nostalgia. for the Asir themselves had become dependent on dwarfs for gold. and also boundless access to gold. The Golden Age became what it is throughout human history: a paradise lost. copper. where a giant built Asgard. On top of this. the hall-owner. Palestine. Asgar was also the focus of ideals of kingship. and magical treasures. 18–26. From then on. coming down out of heaven from God . The twelve gates were twelve pearls.108 A twelfth-century visitor to Jerusalem. brought as clear glass . widely read and commented upon in medieval Europe. p. each gate being made from a single pearl. It had a great.I. it may indeed have been constructed to represent the centre of the world and a cosmic moral order. with the Asir gods in mind. the secluded space only accessible to munks/nuns. wrote on the Holy Sepulcher: ‘The centre of the world is there. the home of the gods. 255. an ideal world that had once been lost. . Asgard may have been Scandinavia’s heavenly Jerusalem in the late Iron Age. while the city itself was of pure gold.e. and life in a paradigmatic Carolingian monastery. Jerusalem/Paradise represented a central ideal. If we pursue this argument. was the navel of the earth. . such as the altar in any church. the light of the sun falls perpendicularly from Heaven. W. the ‘claustrum’. If Gudme was a sacred place. and showed me the holy city of Jerusalem. or. there. 110 Parts of Apocalypse 21. Andrén. . cited from A. like translucent glass. with twelve gates . . A study of the architecture and economy of. The streets of the city were of pure gold. the monastic choir was called ‘Paradisum’. Graltempel und Paradise (Stockholm. 351. clear as crystal.’109 The Apocalypse. “Landscape and settlement as utopian space”. 10–21. 109 L. The sacred and the profane. according to Snorri ‘the best and greatest building in the world’ and the hall of Odin — may have been on the minds of those who built the central hall of Gudme. inaccessible to the uninitiated. quoted after Eliade. it had the radiance of some priceless jewel. a possible context for Gudme begins to emerge. gives a detailed and enticing description of the heavenly city of Jerusalem: ‘So in the Spirit he carried me away to a great high mountain. Something resembling the centre of Asgard — Gladsheim. Horn and E. i. in a monastery. . The plan of St Gall. (Los Angeles/London. in the ninth-century Plan of St Gall. Sacred places in Christian Western Europe all had an ‘inner’ sacred space. With its 500 square meters it is the largest 108 Cf. –  ‘ ’    501 the temple of Jerusalem was built. 40. . 1979). Born. 3 vols. but which also might be retrieved. the Icelandic pilgrim Nicolas of Thverva. 1951). Ringbom. p. high wall. The nature of religion. as we have argued earlier. like a jasper. p. with elaborate reproductions of the Plan of St Gall. . on the day of the summer solstice. The wall was built of jasper.’110 In some ways. based on textual and archaeological evidence. In Gudme. were situated to the north of this area. Festschrift für Heiko Uecker (Berlin. 112 In a traditional archaeological view such ‘workshop areas’ and ‘workshop production’ are treated as marginal to social and political life. Skilled crafting. 626–47. “Eros of Død — de to hovedkomponenter i norrøn kongeideologi”. “The warrior aristocracy of Gudme”. G. Valhall. Livet i Hallen. The forge and the crucible. in: Studien zum Altgermanischen. this interpretation is too narrow. 180. pp. 111 This is widely accepted among Scandinavian archaeologista and historians of religion.114 In the Old Norse mythology Odin’s hird of (dead) human heroes lived in a separate hall. p. and access — like Odin — to the secret knowledge essential to his authority. The excavations in Gudme have shown that the big hall and the workshop area were located in the central and southern part of the settlement. especially from metal work. constructed with a measure of technical knowledge without any precedent in local tradition. 113 Eliade. Craft and the kingly ideal. Together with a smaller hall (Vingolf. p. Steinsland. In this process the ideal of cosmic order was re-created and re-expressed in a tangible form. ibid. .113 For this very reason. 49–59. and something closely linked to ideals of royal authority. pp. It was first invented by Gro Steinsland (in historiy of religion) and Frands Herschend (in archaeology). Det Hellige Bryllup og Norrøn Kongeideologi (Oslo. 112 Jørgensen. The idea of the good. “The warrior aristocracy of Gudme”. the High Seat in the hall must have been a similar centre. the dwellings of the high-ranking warriors. 114 Jørgensen. 212. Highly skilled metal work was not merely a craft. Helms. especially forging and the work of jewellers — and probably woodcarving as well — were the hallmark of political and ideological authority in the traditional societies I have discussed earlier. ibid. which connected divine and royal power.502   building known from Denmark before the Viking Age. the halll of the female Asir?) it represents a complex and extremely accomplished building that was most likely created by skilled craftsmen who were outsiders — as also held true of the mythological Gladsheim. however. pp. Herschend. From this elevated place. 25–62. 1991). Gladsheim’s centre was Odin’s High Seat. 1994). it was an integral part of political and religious power. from where he surveyed the entire world. the king had a privileged view of the supernatural world. Old Norse mythology situated the workshop area close to the hall. but to my mind.111 The hall in Gudme is situated in a location held by archaeologists to be the ‘workshop area’ because of the many finds of workshop material. Although this is highly speculative. There are other streams in the Gudme area. Snorri situated it somewhere in the north. so one needed to cross a bridge in order to get there. the transitional zone between civilisation and a threatening ‘world out there’ of giants. 115 I. Valhall was thought of as part of Hel: Simek. –  ‘ ’    503 situated in that part of Asgard which is close to Gladsheim. Møllegårdsmarken is located between the centre of the world (Gudme) on the one hand. Careful investigation has yielded no indication whatsoever that the lake was used for sacrificial purposes.e.117 a mythical place in the icy north. on the other. This is the place where the gods hold council. separated from Midgard by rivers. of natural causes. however.116 In his Edda Snorri identifies Niflheim with Hel. on the northern bank of Tange Å. Tange Å arises near the sacred hill of Albjerg. however. Lundeborg on the coast. where those who died on land. From this perspective. the world of Hel. Dictionary. the next element to be metioned is the lake is in the western part of the central settlement. where Utgard is to be found. is located halfway between Gudme and the coast. demons and chaos. It passes Møllegårdsmarken cemetery on its way to the coast at Lundeborg. Valhall may be located to the north. 54. 117 Gylfaginning 33. to the south of the central settlement area. which is by far the largest in Denmark in prehistoric times. as high-ranking warriors from the Viking Age are known to have been.115 The high-ranking warriors living in Gudme may have been dedicated to Odin. Keeping Nordic mythology in mind. p. were buried. Continuing this attempt to make sense of the topography of Gudme. Gylfaginning 48. 116 Gylfaginning 48. rising from below the roots of Yggdrasil and may as such belonge to the centre of the cosmic world. in some early texts. the springs reflected the significance of the mythical springs to which Urd’s well (the ‘well of fate’) and Mimer’s well (the ‘spring of wisdom’) count. and Mimer’s well is known as the source for Odin to achieve his wisdom. In the Old Norse mythology. . for this was where Norse mythology situated the realm of the dead. and some springs connecting Gudme lake with Gudbjerg to the west and Galbjerg to the north. and the outside realm. such a great cemetery must have been associated with the realm of the dead. This cemetery. 73. p. Gudme. south of Gudme’s central area. The entrance to this secluded zone may have been the stream Tange Å passing through the realm of the dead on the northern bank.. may have entailed a process of initiation. pp. Grønbech. Craft and the kingly ideal. 21. Some of these stressed the difficulties of entering the centre without coming to grief. It was the transformative. 119 Helms. 120 Eliade. albeit problematic. Gudme must have been a scene where cultic dramas were played out. Myths and symbols. desires and expectations of those involved. others made the area accessible. Lundeborg — en handelsplads fra jernaldere. This left some tempting traces in later literature.119 To enter Gudme from the coast. Bd.121 There is no contemporary documentation for such ‘cultic dramas’. 1993). I would say that entering Gudme was a passage through the entire cosmic landscape that 118 P. but Old Norse literature at least gives us a plausible. from ‘Utgard’. frame of reference to imagine such rituals. a place of great repute. and therefore part of the process of bringing resources of ultimate cosmological qualities into society. . and with its source close to the sacred ‘mountain’ Albjerg. (Svendborg. and for this very reason a powerful model to emulate. liminal zone between land and sea where prestige goods from ‘beyond’ entered society as well as a place where specific kinds of skilled crafting took place. 1954).O. Thomsen. of which I am admittedly making the most. as a sacred place associated with myths concerning the home of the gods. this is a characteristic that Gudme shares with many other sacred places.120 Like any other sacred place.504   was the place where long-distance travellers entered inner space. Thinking along these lines. 2 (Stuttgart. et al.118 Organising expeditions and mastering shipbuilding and navigation are all prerequisites for skilled long-distance travelling. ‘the hill of the shrine’. such as the monasteries discussed in this volume. Kultur und Religion der Germanen. 382–4. such as extensive repairs to ships. the domain of the familiar. 264–341. encapsulating the hopes. p. must have been anxiously guarded against unwanted incursions. that was also forbidden to the uninitiated. pp. Patterns in comparative religion. 121 W. A sacred place like Gudme was both accessible and inaccessible. rituals and processions — and people in need of these — were all part of what kept sacred places alive. thesis Oslo University (Oslo. forming the cosmic landscape and protected it from the dangerous forces of the ‘outside world’. transforming gold into objects who were essential to the power position of the elite. 2000). gold and silver deposited in the ‘Underworld’ were not meant to remain out of sight forever. those who arrived in Lundeborg. Hedeager. 123 . at least to the initiated.d. Gullbrakteatene — i dialog med naturkreftene. put underground. In the human world of Gudme. though its ‘Hinterland’ is usually connected with the centre. 20–67. after a long and arduous voyage across the sea. C: A    In this chapter I have developed a tentatative model that will hopefully add to a better understanding of Gudme’s underlying structure. 124 G. The sacred and the profane. According to the Old Norse mythology. its divine counterpart. to the impressive hall in Gudme. Setting apart a location as a sacred place implies a sudden interruption between the sacred and the profance. Men and women constructed such sacred spaces according to patterns they believed to be divinely inspired. were then taken. and possibly as a replication of Asgard. by gradual stages. a sacred place is unlike its surroundings.124 These treasures could as well be meant for the skilled work of jewellers. by definition. furnishing jewellers with the necessary gold for their artisan work. and of the complexity of such a central place in Scandinavia during the late Iron Age. Treasure played an important role in all this. –  ‘ ’    505 ranged between Utgard and Asgard. Gudme may have been a reconstruction of Asgard.123 If so. they may still have been ‘visible’. these treasures mediated between the Other World and humankind. the outside and the inside. pp. Too little imaginative thought has hitherto 122 Eliade.122 In this sense. that is. Put differently. the home of gods and kings. the enormous amount of gold found in Gudme’s centre as well as in its surroundings suggests that those who built this complex central place perceived it as a sacred place. Wiker. these were divine treasures. something similar may have pertained: treasures were deposited. however. generation after generation. the tangible symbols of power. Unpublished ph. “Sacred topography”. for this archetypal sacred place. Gudme may in fact be the key to a better understanding of comparable sites.125 These sites can be regarded as paradigmatic models of the cosmic world.o. I have tried to extend the explanation beyond the traditional references to ‘trade’.e. which I have classified as ‘multifunctional and composite central places’ because they combine 125 See a. embodying the ‘nostalgia for Asgrad’. is likely to have served as a model for emulation throughout Scandinavia. Larsson and Hårdh eds. Centrala platser. By focusing on Gudme as a symbolic constructed place that represented specific concepts of cosmological order.127 These are archaeologically well-defined settlement areas. gold finds and other extraordinary features. 382–5. “Helgö als frühmittelalterlicher Handelsplatz in Mittelschweden”. We urgently need to get beyond the traditional circular arguments about gold meaning power and vice versa. The introduction of anthroplogical perspectives on the nature of trade and crafts in traditional. I am well aware that what I have performed is a highly speculative operation. ‘holy island’) in the Mälar area. provided one realises that in their written form they only originated in Scandinavia’s early Christian period.. albeit with more humble results. namely that the archaeological evidence and the written sources are not contemporaneous. on the other I have stressed that it has many features in common with other places in Scandinavia that have also been called ‘central places’ or ‘places of extraordinary power’. and therefore do not reflect anything like an original and untainted ‘paganism’. 127 A. deriving their structure and organisation from archetypal sacred places126 such as Gudme on Funen. pp. On the one hand I have discussed Gudme as an extraordinary place. But does this mean that all texts should consequently be jettisoned as unreliable? I believe not. I have had to face a basic problem. Lundström. 278–90.506   been devoted to the implications of Gudme’s toponomy. 126 . ‘richness’. ‘power’. Frühmittelalterliche Studien 2 (1968). and so on. In order to do so. and probably also from contemporary important sites such as Helgö (i. pp. centrala frågor. but I am equally convinced that much is gained by also applying our well-informed imagination to the interpretation of complex sites such as Gudme. All these different versions of sites inspired by Gudme fall into the category of what archaeologists today call central places. Patterns in comparative religion. also furnishes the archaeologist with some helpful parallels. Eliade. non-industrialized societies. århundrede”. “Stromandssæder og skattefund i 3. or anything in between. –  ‘ ’    507 the function of ‘trading sites’.–12. .128 To some extent. within a limited area. 128 L. be they pagan. gold finds etc. the hall (or ‘sal’). Fortid og Nutid 20 (1995). created to be paradigmatic models of the universe. All were places of power. Jørgensen. ‘cult-sites’. Christian. the puzzle of such complex central places in the late Iron Age of South Scandinavia can be solved by a comparison with the cathedrals and monasteries in the middle ages. ‘production places’. This page intentionally left blank . Moreover. This artificial boundary is seldom crossed. “Pogranicze polsko-pruskie w czasach w. for those attempting to generalize about the developments in the region have limited their observations to either the first or the second half of the first millenium A. the Roman period and early Middle Ages.D. The region’s many contacts with distant parts of Europe. the lower Vistula region has attracted much scholarly attention. “Rejon Wis y we wczesnym redniowieczu. partly to avoid the difficult problems of interpretation connected with the transformation that took place in the middle of the first millennium. . 1999). M.THE LOWER VISTULA AREA AS A ‘REGION OF POWER’ AND ITS CONTINENTAL CONTACTS Przemyslaw Urba czyk Because of its important position in the early history of the Baltic. and therefore difficult to explain. Jagodzi ski ed. Whenever possible I give references to texts published in West-European languages. Wojciecha” (Elbl[g. hardly any attention has been paid to the longterm significance of the area. a significance that persisted throughout a millennium. with the result that archaeologically observed changes appear to be ‘sudden’ or ‘radical’. Jagodzi ski. Okulicz-Kozaryn. Another drawback of current research is its tendency to focus on relatively small areas.e. instead of as an integral element of interpretative arguments. Any regional analysis should be related to a broader geographical perspective. regardless of important cultural and geopolitical changes. in: M. Barbaricum 2 (1992). pp. i. Struktura zasiedlenia I stosunki etniczne”. and the welldocumented changes in the archaeological record — often interpreted in terms of ethnicity and migrations — made it a focus of research for both historians and archaeologists. 138–156.1 Traditionally the first millenium is divided in two halves. My aim here is to sketch a ‘continental’ background to the changes that took place in the lower Vistula region during the first millennium. As a consequence. However. Roman written sources tend to be used as haphazard illustrations of archeologically observed trends. which often helps to understand local 1 J. pp. 35–80.. “Centrum kulturowe z pierwszych wieków naszej ery u uj cia Wis y”. a truly long-term perspective still eludes us. To this end he 2 J. . as well as the expansion across the Danube under Trajan in 101–106. 63 which brought about a decisive change in the contacts with the lower Vistula region. along with Agrippa’s Commentarii. 1–15. Kolendo. 3 This was a general notion of the waters that surrounded the northern edge of the world known to the Romans.2 which implies the existence of lively contacts between the Empire and the shores of the Baltic. Yet it was the official expedition organised by Nero in ca. or Germania and Scythia. pp. Archeologia 34 (1985). “Entdeckungsgeschichte”. appears for the first time on a map prepared for the emperor Augustus by his friend Marcus Vipsanius Agrippa. cultural and geopolitical. Trousset. 6 J. “La carte d’Agrippa: nouvelle proposition de lecture”. Timpe. “Les connaissances des Anciens sur les lieux de provenance de l’ambre jaune”. p. 193–206. 0000. The lower Vistula region is a textbook example of this. 1987). Kolendo. 5 P. 4 Cf. 307–89. here the Vistula figured as the river dividing Germania and Dacia. Studia Antiqua 4 (1981). New York. pp. D. 2 (1993). “A la recherche de l’ambre baltique.510  … processes. pp. must have provided the Romans with new information about the Baltic shores. L’expedition d’un chevalier romains sous Néron”. Dialogues d’Histoire Ancienne 19. pp. the river separated Germania and Sarmatia. Vistula. 2nd edn.5 This map. this is the core of my argument. (Berlin. Kolendo. 1989). 137–57.6 This campaign was a part of the emperor’s ambitious plan to explore the limits of the world. in Reallexikon der Germanische Altertumskunde 7. Later Roman authors also treated the Vistula as an important boundary. “Rejon uj cia Wis y w oczach staro ytnych”. in: Badania archeologiczne w województwie elbl[skim w latach 1980 –1983 (Malbork. situated far beyond the northern Danube frontier of the Empire.4 Its name. Expeditions to the northern seas during Augustus’ reign. It was unveiled in Rome on the porticus vipsaniae in 12 A. Changes taking place in one part of the continent provoked echos in distant regions. Since Roman times different parts of Europe were linked in a complex network of versatile relations: economic. greatly influenced the development of Roman geographical knowledge. J. Scandinavia was considered an island. A number of texts mention this part of the continent. they suggest that it belonged to the best-known areas of the Barbaricum. The presence of a great river leading to the ‘Northern Ocean’3 and its coast rich in amber seemed to be known already to learned Greeks several centuries before Christ’s birth.D. but in their eyes. The Romans were familiar with the region around the delta of the Vistula river. D.11 Ptolemy of Alexandria. pp. 43.      ‘  ’ 511 sent expeditions to the south (to search for the sources of the river Nile). esp. in Tacitus’ view. Burgundians or Rugians. Bericht der RömischGermanischen Kommission 77 (1996). 11. “L’ambre à l’époque romaine.C.9 This ‘culture’ (also known as ‘Venedian’ or ‘Vandal culture’) was dominant in the Polish lowlands from the second century B. Problèmes d’origine. The attempts to interpret this ‘culture’ in ethnic terms. Wielowiejski. connecting it with Vandals. By 98 A. Herulians. the raw material for incense and the decorative objects that were so popular with the Roman elite. Germania 45–6. Braemer. are not convincing. p. until the fifth century A. The information brought back by the special envoy (eques R[omanus] ) along a route running all the way from Rome to the Baltic led to an intensified trade contacts between Italy and the eastern border of the lower Vistula. 23–73 A. de commerce par terre et par mer et de lieu de façonnage des objets. 217. so in his Germania Tacitus could include not only geographic data but also some ethnographic indications. 1983). There is no textual evidence as to the precise identity of those people. who. He is the first to mention Gotones and Aestii living at the northern end of the amber route. in: Colloque international sur les ressources minérales et l’histoire de leur exploitation (Grenoble. notamment figurés”. the amount of information had grown significantly. “Bernstein in der Przeworsk-Kultur”. Germania 45. 215–342.8 These were probably middlemen. Archaeology can only suggest that they may be identified with the ‘producers’ of the archaeologically defined ‘Przeworsk culture’. Silingians. 11 Tacitus. 361–81.10 It was the Aestii who collected amber on the coast and exchanged it with merchants coming from the Empire. to the east (to find Jason’s Colchis) and to the north (to the coast of the ‘Northern Ocean’). the Romans were after amber. Above all.7 According to Pliny the Elder (ca. active in the regions between the southeast Baltic coast and the Roman border. writing in the second quarter of the second century A. Historia Naturalis XXXVII. 9 P. pp. Along its northern stretch he located the Gythones12 as well as other peoples 7 F.D. 8 Pliny.D.D. Geographia II. maintained that the Vistula divided Germania from Sarmatia. had different languages and a disctinct material culture. 10 Tacitus.) this highly prized amber was brought to the province of Pannonia by Germani.. 12 Ptolemy. . however. Wolfram.14 Archaeologists connect these ethnic labels to the ‘Wielbark culture’ and the ‘West Baltic grave-mound culture’. see D. Frühmittelalterliche Studien 28 (1994). Urba czyk. The so-called Wielbark culture is archaeologically visible since the mid-first century A.13 Historians seem to agree on the identification of these peoples with. pp. Arguments and explorations (London.. Entwurf einer historischen Ethnographie. “Linguistic evidence for the early migrations of the Goths”. For an interesting linguistic perspective. in: P. P. the Goths and the western Balts. (München. Die Goten. Chr. 11–32. Excavations have yielded the cemeteries thought to be characteristic for this culture. “Archäologie und Geschichte der Goten von 1. pp. Buko and P. 1999). The first name given to these lost Goths 13 Ptolemy. It is not the place here to discuss the complex problems of ethnicity. pp. Geographia III. and also numerous Roman imports to the southeast Baltic region. 16 R. and also because such notions may serve as a starting point for a more general discussion of the problems pertaining to ‘ethnicity’. I am aware that equations of the type of ‘Goths = Wielbark culture’ are too simple. V. but at this point I would like to avoid endless deliberations about the ethnic meaning of particular elements of the material culture. pp. 9–43. negotiable rather than a given structure. in: A. Constructing identities in the past and Present (London.–7. I will stick to the traditional names used by historians and archaeologists.16 Regardless of all these difficulties. Jahrhundert n. 1992). Jahrhundert. 3rd edn.15 This basic division in two distinct groups observed both by modern archaeologists as well as ancient historians dominate the ‘ethnographic’ picture of the south-east Baltic region during the first half of the first millennium. pp. according to much later textual sources. V. respectively. also. subjective rather than universal. H. 151–71. in the regions to the west of the lower Vistula. 2000). 15 Cf.512  … including some Osioi (= Ostoi?). “Archeologia etniczno ci — fikcja czy nadzieja?”. Versuch einer Bilanz”. emotional rather than rational. Universitetets Oldsaksamlings Skrifter NY rekke 14 (Oslo. Jenkins. 14 . The archaeology of ethnicity.D. Green. “Die Goten vom 1. 5. S. Rethinking ethnicity. Von den Anfängen bis zur Mitte des sechsten Jahrhunderts. which is in recent research considered to be circumstantial..: Siedelgebiete und Wanderbewegungen aufgrund archäologischer Quellen”. Jones.–7. I do so for pragmatic reasons. had been present in this region after they migrated from Scandinavia. who. 1997). The Visigoths from the migration period to the seventh century (Woodbridge. 137–46. 1990). Archeologia w teorii i w praktyce (Warsaw. Urba czyk eds. Heather ed.H. The notion ‘Wielbark culture’ stems from a modern search for material traces of the Goths. 47–66. In other words. 9. Bierbrauer. Peregrinatio Gotica 3. Bierbrauer. 1997). Goffart. Bede and Paul the Deacon (Princeton. pp. Jordanes. Most important was the trade with Roman Italy. “Das Gräberfeld von Weklice. 21 See also: Urba czyk.      ‘  ’ 513 retrieved by archeaologists was ‘Gotho-Gepidic culture’.D. .17 Everyone was happy: historians had their archaeological evidence confirming their textual sources. Germania. local populations initiated lively contacts with distant lands. seemingly advantageous to both disciplines. . The narrators of barbarian history (A. Okulicz-Kozaryn. Zur Besiedlungsgeschichte des Weichselsraums in der römischen Kaiserzeit”.21 This was no longer 17 For a fundamental critique of the use of Jordanes as a straightforward historical record.20 This display of wealth featured exclusive Roman imports (glass vessels. glazed pottery. Instead.18 There was no ‘invasion’ of Scandinavian immigrants. where the elite admired the amber from the Baltic shores. 2. According to this new research Gothic ethnicity was formed at the very beginning of our era as a result of a transformation of the local Oksywie culture. The cemetery of Weklice near Elbl[g provides a good example of this. The Goths (Cambridge.19 The inflow of silver. European Journal of Archaeology 1 (1998). The centre of the amber ‘industry’ was located in Aquilea where raw amber was reworked before entering the Roman markets. 550–800). The emergence of this new social hierachy depended on the control of the northern part of the amber route (fig. gold and rare objects. archaeologists could put a name to the culture they excavated.”. fostered an increasing social hierarchy in the societies around the lower Vistula. medallions. 20 J. 18 P. where an elite developed that demonstrated its status by burying their dead in ostentatiously rich graves. . This situation. “The Goths in Poland . 20–111. 397–415. pp. Archeologia 40 (1991). 115–27. Heather. 45–6. For decades such ‘historical’ reconstructions clearly determined the outcome of archaeological interpretations. 1). The uncritical acceptance of the Ostrogothic oral tradition. fig. resulted in the formulation of concepts that aimed to establish a perfect fit between written texts and archaeological data. pp. “The Goths in Poland — where did they come from and when did they leave?”. Gregory of Tours. 1996). and conversely. This process is well attested for the area east of the lower Vistula. all crucial to the representation of social prestige. 19 Tacitus. see W. Urba czyk. P. as well as the need to institutionalise these regular contacts. These connections triggered of a process of social and cultural transformation. lasted until recent years when new interpretations of both the texts and the material evidence were proposed. 1988). supposedly recorded by Cassiodorus and Jordanes in the sixth century. precious artefacts). 514  … Fig. A reconstruction of the main direction of the Amber Route in the first century (after Urba czyk 1998. fig. 2). . 1. This expansion was probably of a mixed character. Sadowska-Topór. Their unchallenged domination of an area with many natural resources.300 metres long and up to 4 metres wide) is sufficient proof of its great importance. and by the broad marshy valley of the Dzierzgo river..24 22 J. this construction was functional. separated by sea inlet deeply cutting into the land. 24 Okulicz-Kozaryn. until the early third century A. p. had no impact on this development. One such locality was discovered and excavated near wi ty Gaj (former Heiligenwalde) south of Elbl[g. 1. The Marcomannic wars troubling the imperial marches in 166–180 A. A geological study allowing for a reconstruction of the coast-line in early Roman times clarifies the strategic value of the northernmost stretch of the main route over land along the south-east Baltic coast. when ‘Wielbark culture’ populations thrived under climatic optimal conditions. attracting foreign traders as well.C. 23 M. 1999). 2). There a huge road construction made of oak and sand was laid out across the marshes of the Dzierzgo river valley.22 The size of the track (ca. 137. Built in the second half of the first century B. Clearly visible traces of cart wheels and scattered pieces of raw amber leave no doubt as to the material that was transported over this particular road. but a route along which various goods were transported in both directions. Kasprzycka. allowed their culture to spread towards the south and south-east. a one-way street along which precious goods flooded to Rome. StaroΩytne drogi w dolinie rzeki Dzierzgo w wietle bada archeologicznych (Warsaw.D. “Centrum kulturowe z pierwszych wieków naszej ery u uj cia Wis y”.23 This situation did not change much during next hundred and fifty years. This reconstruction also shows the ecological differences between the western and eastern zones of the ‘Wielbark culture’.D. On the contrary: the richest ‘Wielbark graves’ date from the late second century and beyond. that is. for both migration and the adoption by others of what we call ‘Wielbark-Gothic culture’ played a role.      ‘  ’ 515 a road in the Roman sense of the word. T o paleogeograficzne osadnictwa Ωu aw Elbl[skich w pierwszym tysi[cleciu naszej ery (Warsaw. with repairs and reconstructions. when close contacts with South Scandinavia are clearly attested (fig. Elaborate constructions existed only at some strategic points. . 1999). fig.516  … Fig. . 6). 2. The concentrated distribution of identical Roman imports in the lower Vistula region and in south Scandinavia (after Okulicz 1992. 1994). The large-scale production of characteristic wheel-turned and octogonal beads took place somewhere in the lower Vistula region. 28 M. This is typical of archaeologists dealing with the early Gothic history. so some have taken Jordanes’ claim that all Goths migrated to the south-east on the order of their king Berig literally. a change in material culture is explained by an uncritical application of ‘data’ from the written sources. This coincided with the appearance of the Goths in the Black Sea area. J. 27 H. although during the previous two hundred years there were short periods in which the average temperature dropped. “Kriegs. but also finished products (mainly amber beads) were ‘exported’. the reasons for changes in material culture are much too complex for this haphazard combining of archeological and textual data. 26 . Stupner eds. Zabehlicky.oder Klimafolgen in archäologischen Befunden?”.26 In other words. Getica. “Bernstein in der Przeworsk-Kultur”. we need a more coherent picture explaining the circumstances. These became fashionable imports in large areas of the Barbaricum as well as in the West. in: H.28 Two or three bad harvests could have been dangerous for an agricultural society especially in a region with rather unfertile sandy soils. 26ff. First. and it is near at hand: didn’t Jordanes say so himself ? However. reasons and results of the processes reflected in material culture as well as those suggested by the texts. 463–9. Zmiany klimatyczne i procesy osadnicze w rejonie dolnej Wis y 2500–1000 lat temu [manuscript submitted to Archeologia Polski ]. that such a deterioration only started at the turn of the third century.. In the face of failing crops and 25 Wielowiejski. Kasprzycka.and CentralEuropean provinces of the Empire. Tejral and A. An easy solution is looked for. Jordanes.      ‘  ’ 517 The problems of sustaining the traditional contacts with the Roman empire were solved by activating trade with the north-western Roman provinces. to which not only raw amber. Archaeology shows that most of the classic Wielbark cemeteries to the west of the lower Vistula were abandoned by this time. pp. Ursachen und Wirkungen (Brno. To begin with. Friesinger. however. we have to consider the claim that the turn of the second century saw a deterioration of the climate in the Baltic. Markomannenkriege.27 Recent paleo-climatic studies indicate.25 Various types of data suggest that the situation changed sometime around the turn of the second century and the early third century A.D. Another type of military solution is external aggression. T. A reduced agricultural production and a decrease in the volume of long-distance trade must have resulted in an intensification of the competition for prestige and status. attained by persuasion and by attracting followers. Getica 96. Kotula. as Jordanes said.31 Such a combination of economic and climatic factors may have struck the ‘Wielbark elite’ hardest. 1996). Several possible crisis strategies could be followed in such a situation. Mielczarek and W. In societies without a developed state political power usually relies on acceptance and consensus. rather than by coercion. Numismatic evidence (Berlin. 29 Jordanes. M.30 The barbarians took advantage of the weakness of the Romans by attacking the border provinces in the third quarter of the century. the military alternative. However. albeit temporary. entailed the internal use of physical power by the elite in order to coerce members of the society and/or its neighbours to provide important goods and to have their power accepted. Raiding and looting rich neighbours by small but determined war parties was often a strategy of societies on the periphery of empires that had problems with their distant marches. p. Nowakowski eds. the Wielbark Goths had no chance to raid the distant Roman empire and its precious resources they depended on for sustaining their social prestige. a militarised economy is self-consuming and unsustainable without a developed system of taxation. Sustaining a high social position became more difficult than ever before. Later Roman-Barbarian contacts in Central Europe. must have had a long-term negative impact on the frequency and predictability of the long-distance contacts an trade. However. which depended on substantial surplusses and exclusive goods for consumption and redistribution. pp. and the application of physical force is often a short-term solution. The first one.518  … persistent bad weather. some may have decided to look for ‘better soils’..29 These deteriorating natural conditions coincided with what historians of the Roman Empire consider to be a period of economic crisis lasting from 235 to 284 A. Indeed. the number of Roman coins found in the south-east Baltic region is significantly lower for this period.D. 1995). These fifty years of decline. Bursche. 89 ff. Nunc de Svebis dicendum est (Warsaw. Bursche. “Le début de la ‘crise du IIIe siècle’ de l’Empire romain: depuis quand? (summary)”. in: A. 30 . 31 A. 156. who had inherited ‘good luck’ from their ancestors. The narrative of the early Gothic history is full of dramatic events. and had to rely on the support of its followers eager for gifts. the ‘king’ who had to persuade his followers to undertake a migration from the lower Vistula to the Black Sea could have been at its origin. Such constructions could not solve the fundamental social and economic problems determined by external factors. one might also argue that the story of the organised migration from the north was ‘invented’ in the Ostrogothic kingdom. of which only one left the Vistula homeland with its supporters? Or. or was there a conflict between competing lineages. Will we ever know the circumstances of such dramatic decisions to leave a familiar region? Did the dominant lineage decide to migrate towards the Roman colonies on the Black Sea coast near the fertile soils of the Ukraine. once the attack by the Huns in 375 led to the dramatic decision to leave the Pontic zone.      ‘  ’ 519 The alternative was an economic strategy. When there were no sufficient resources to be mustered locally. in times of crisis there were no reserve supplies to support the system. . such as ‘consuming’ and redistributing treasure. If such a crisis situation continued. the only choice was to move the settlement nearer to the area where such resources were abundant. but it is unlikely that these tactics were applied in the transformation of the Baltic regions. but they could legitimize dramatic decisions taken by the leaders whose positions were endangered and who were in desperate need of support. The heroic crossing of a sea (= the Baltic) recorded by Jordanes might just have been ‘ideological camouflage’ to show how mindful leadership helped to turn a crisis situation into succes. and to flee for safety into the Roman empire. Berig. Thus. won by real or invented ancestors. or to find better luck by initiating a risky journey. The alternative for the leaders was either to ‘dissolve’ into a society with an organisation slowly developing into one more egalitarian social structures. with leading families developing and promoting a myth of ancient glory and success. Economies based on redistribution had no power centres with an independent economic base. in the void left by Roman power. each of these situations must have involved an ideological change. This helped to symbolically connect the prosperity of the society to its leaders. the elite was in danger. Within this context. was there no clear decision and is the story of the heroic migration a later invention constructed to legitimize the Amals’ domination of the Pontic Goths? Whatever is the answer. Those who did not succeed disappeared from history’s view.520  … Roman texts first mention the presence of the Goths near the Danube limes in 238 A. 3). pp. Phil. Wolfram. Neither was there any break in contacts between those who migrated on the one hand. in: H. and its tradition can be traced until the fifth or even the sixth century. 239–305. To my mind. 33 . Denkschriften der Österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften. The so-called Wielbark culture did not disappear in this region.-Hist. Kl. which led to the formation of a large zone of cultural contact that stretched between the two seas where Wielbark and Cherniakhov cultures were located. Die Goten. Die Völker an den mittleren und unteren Donau im fünften und sechsten Jahrhundert. who were first observed near the Danube limes during the reign of the Emperor Probus (276–282 A. and its glorious memory was later promoted by the Amal dynasty. which needed a myth of an heroic past with which everybody could identify him/herself. we should be suspicious of records and reconstructions of so-called primary migrations involving a small number of participants who were later followed by subsequent larger waves. or by a stable inflow of people moving along the lines joining the Baltic and Pontic regions.33 was of a similar nature. We do not know whether this was the only migration. Wolfram and F. and those who stayed in the south-east Baltic area. known archaeologically as the Cherniakhov culture.). The Goths. pp. 32 Cf. 43–5.D. 1980). Heather. Daim eds. for only those leaders who managed to build stable domains in the new lands managed to create the type of dynastic tradition later recorded by Cassiodorus and Jordanes. Archaeological data do not support the notion of a depopulation of the lower Vistula area. See Heather.D. 53–64. The northern end of this axis was the region of lower Vistula. Pohl. “Die Gepiden und die Gentes an der mittleren Donau nach dem Zerfall des Attilareiches”.D. when local populations developed a new material culture and merged with recently arrived newcomers. The Goths. pp. This fits very well with the argument that the Goths’ alleged departure from the Baltic homeland coincided with the crisis in the Empire that started in 235 A. 145 (Wien. The linear distribution pattern of many artefacts typical for this zone clearly shows the main axis of these contacts (fig.32 This journey was a real success.. The creation of an identity by the Gepids. Both populations communicated with each other. 38–43. W. ) . 26. 3. 9. cf. map 56. An example of the linear distribution pattern of specific types of finds between the Baltic and Black seas (after Kokowski 1995.      ‘  ’ 521 Fig. similar distribution patterns in his maps 6. 48 and 65. Basic geographic and ethnographic information survived in the history of the Goths written by Cassiodorus and rewritten by Jordanes in the first half of the sixth century.38 However. Variae V. “Rejon we wczesnym redniowieczu. Jordanes. 36 Jordanes. In earlier times. He also correctly pointed to its sources in the Carpathians and described its tripartite delta. “Nap yw bursztynu z pó nocy na tereny Imperium Rzymskiego w I–VI w. 39 Pliny. Getica 36. 2.34 He thought of the Vistula as the border between Germania and Scythia. 38 J.36 From the period of Theoderic’s reign (493–526) we have also proof of some direct contacts between Ostrogothic Italy and the south-east Baltic area. Getica 17 and 31.n. the intermediaries changed: in the first century the Germani exported the amber from the north. Historia Naturalis XXXVII. 40 Cassiodorus. 41 Jagodzi ski. pp.522  … This long-distance communication between various Gothic groups added much to Roman knowledge of the area. It is a concept of a letter sent in 523–526 by Theodoric to those Hestii who lived on the coast rich in amber. 43. so it may be accepted on a provisional basis. 2. Variae V.37 Four hundred years passed since the lower Vistula was mentioned for the first time in written sources. Prace Muzeum Ziemi 41 (1991). Struktura zasiedlenia i stosunki etniczne”.39 in the first half of the sixth century we hear of the Hestii assuming this role. but this scant information is not contradicted by the archaeological data.e.”. What caused the expansion of that characteristic tradition around the middle of the first millennium? Why did the characteristic features of the ‘Wielbark culture’ reach other areas by the third 34 Getica 17 and 36. creating a kind of ‘no man’s land’ in between.40 One might argue that such accounts are untrustworthy because other independent information is lacking.35 There Jordanes situated some mysterious Vidivarii and the Hestii. Jordanes mentioned the river Vistula/Viscla six times. and 120. 35 . 96. 37 Cassiodorus. Archaeologists date the westward expansion of the West-Baltic culture towards the lower Vistula to the late fifth century. they kept their settlements well away from the area where the Wielbark culture is found. 91–100. Kolendo.41 The material evidence of this process is usually connected with the Aestii/Osioi (= Ostoi?)/Hestii who were often mentioned in Roman sources. and still it was the amber that was on the mind of the powerful in the Mediterranean. who set a course northwards in 512. after all. We will never really know whether any re-migration to the Baltic zone actually occurred. Only archaeology furnishes some data to support this hypothesis. The final collapse of Attila’s polity in 453 created a power vacuum along the northern frontier of the Roman Empire. Katalog . phrased differently. making room for new settlers who occupied their deserted lands. had been kept in check by the mighty Hun.42 This 42 M. This direction was attractive for those intent on military and political expansion.      ‘  ’ 523 and fourth century? The explanation that the ‘Wielbark people’ left the area. This merging of various traditions must be seen against the background of continental developments. The disappearance of a major power that had dominated multi-ethnic masses opened the way for many to strive for supreme prestige. and presumably facilitated the adaptation to a culture that was. territorial control and privileged relations with Constantinople. Cultural similarities between the two regions made direct contact more easy. that is. Archeologiczne lady osadnictwa mi dzy Wis [ a Pas \k[. Thus. This resulted in geopolitical disorder. In the late fifth and early sixth century. is too simple. who had to look for better chances in regions not claimed by the winners. However. and led to conflicts among ambitious leaders who. Once more north and south appear to be closely connected. This spiral of conflicts must have produced many unlucky leaders. Roman historians exclusively recorded migrations of groups who moved around the Mediterranean zone. a good example is that of the Heruli. it seems highly probable that some desillusioned groups followed the ancient route established between the Black Sea and the Baltic. for relations with the ‘home territory’ had been kept up throughout the centuries. a familiar one. until then. Jagodzi ski. I think the more likely explanation is that of new cultural codes being accepted by those who lived there. between the Pontic domains of the Goths and their original homeland. for those who left the sphere of Roman civilisation simply disappeared from the focus of literate observers. there must have been migrations to the north as well. between the ‘Cherniakhov’ and ‘Wielbark cultures’ — or. They had to seek new territories to present their claims for power. numerous late Roman and Byzantine golden solidi as well as valuable objects ‘suddenly’ appeared in the eastern part of the lower Vistula region. Przegl[d Archeologiczny 26 (1978). Barbaricum 2 (1992). 47 A. 1998). If so. W. 164.43 as well as other finds. these ‘new powerful’ settled in what had earlier been the richest area of the Wielbark culture. “Archeologiczne lady osadnictwa mi dzy Wis [ a Pas \k[ we wczesnym redniowieczu. 43 P. vol. a phenomenon that requires some kind of explanation. M. 46 Bitner-Wróblewska. 1997). It reached to the western (main) branch of the lower Vistula.45 Some archeaologists have argued in favour of a continuation of local Wielbark traditions in this region. Bitner-Wróblewska. p. in: P. 107–45. . “The Southeastern Baltic zone”.”. pp. when the area between stanowisk (Warsaw. in: P. nomadic and Baltic traditions. and the presence of characteristic sax-type swords in decorated scabbards. Duczko. 45 Jordanes. p. pp.47 The geographical range of these cultural phenomena extends to the west as far as the Drun o estuary and Dzierzgo river. esp. 191–211. Adalbertus. all indicate a combination of Germanic. esp. vol. pp. This situation presumbably lasted until the eighth century. Komentarz do katalogu stanowisk”.D. “Geneza wczesno redniowiecznych metalowych pochew broni bia ej ze stanowisk kultury pruskiej”.. p. 241–62. 262.46 something they consider proven by are similar techniques used in the production of pottery. What we are left with is a new material culture apparently emerging in the lower Vistula during the sixth and seventh centuries. 166. 245–66. taking advantage of the strategic position of this region. Jagodzi ski. as well as with Scandinavia. Urba czyk ed. 44 A. 159–97. pp. The archaeological evidence of this period consists of a complex mixture. “Archeologiczne lady osadnictwa mi dzy Wis [ a Pas [k[ we wczesnym redniowieczu. in: P.44 All this material evidence suggests that ‘various tribes’ merged into a new entity to which Jordanes in the mid-sixth century gave the name Vidivarii. Rich cremation graves often situated on top of horse burials. once they re-migrated to the north. 1998).524  … increase in war gains — stemming from robbery. Adalbertus.. table 3. pp. Apart from these ‘southern’ and ‘eastern’ elements there are also connections with the Merovingian kingdom. Jagodzi ski. Urba czyk ed. Komentarz do katalogu stanowisk”. 1997). “Wczesno redniowieczne szlaki komunikacyjne Starego Mazowsza”.. 1 (Warsaw. Urba czyk. “Scandinavians in the Southern Baltic between the 5th and the 10th centuries A. Moszczy ski. “The Southeastern Baltic zone and Scandinavia in the early migration period”. war booty and tribute — may indicate the presence of powerful men who brought these prestige goods with them. Urba czyk ed. 1 (Warsaw. Origins of Central Europe (Warsaw. the traditional divide of the ‘Wielbark culture’. Further to the west a new ‘no-man’s land) was established during the fifth century. Getica 36 and 96. 51 B. to be replaced.50 Thus. the significance of the last part of Wulfstan’s itinerary has been fully understood (fig. Wulfstan’s report was included.49 They ousted the Scandinavians who had penetrated the south Baltic coast during the Migration Period. Anglo-Saxon prose (London. when geologists reconstructed the coastal area east of the lower Vistula. when many Scandinavian artefacts — and also graves with evidence of Scandinavian ritual — testify to trans-Baltic contacts. “Scandinavians in the Southern Baltic”. which does not mean that the situation was stable.48 To the west of this area the Wielbark traditions vanished completely. pp. (Teophylact Simokatta.. settled by the Slavs. 167–70. from the early seventh century onwards. 48 Jagodzi ski. Lapidge and S. Swanton ed. “Archeologiczne lady osadnictwa mi dzy Wis [ a Pas [k[ we wczesnym redniowieczu. Komentarz do katalogu stanowisk”. possibly made to King Alfred the Great (871–899) himself. pp. Historiae VI. 1975). A new archaeological landscape emerged in the eighth and ninth centuries. who were interrogated by Emperor Maurikios ca.      ‘  ’ 525 the main branch of the Vistula and the Dzierzgo river was still almost depopulated. Since the seventh century the lower Vistula divided Pomerania. 32–37. pp. Alfred the Great. 595 A. Bonner Hefte zur Vorgeschichte 9 (Bonn. 49 Maybe these were the Slavs settled near the “Western Ocean”. This division lasted for several centuries. by groups with a radically different material culture. when he observed that it divided the Slavs from the land settled by the Estii. Die Kultur der Wikinger in Ostpreussen.52 Wulfstan accurately described the route from Hedeby/ Haithabu to Truso via the ‘Estian Gulf ’ (= the Vistula Bay). Duczko. . 4). commonly identified as early Slavs. 50 Duczko. and transl. Keynes. When the king of Wessex had Orosius’ Historia adversus paganos (417) translated into Old English by an anonymous West Saxon. 1975). known from the report of the AngloSaxon merchant-sailor Wulfstan on the south-east Baltic coast. of the kind defined earlier by Marcus Vipsanius Agrippa and Ptolemy. the lower Vistula was once more an ethnic and cultural border area. pp. 2. “Scandinavians in the Southern Baltic”. from the region inhabited by the Estii/Balts. Asser’s Life of King Alfred and other contemporary sources (Harmondsworth. von zur Mühlen. 1983). 33 and 258. 10–16). some helpful comments in M.D. One of them was Truso.51 These contacts were so intensive that several emporia were founded under the aegis of Scandinavian settlers. 52 Translated in M. 195–200. Wulfstan also confirmed the river’s persistent function as an important border. but only recently. . fig. 4. The reconstruction of the Vistula estuary at the end of the tenth century (after Kasprzycka 1998.526  … Fig. 6). Wulfstan’s report is the last historical source in which the thousand-years-old name Estii was recorded. Since the mid ninth century the new ethnonym of Burus (= Pruss) became popular. Their material culture was not very sophisticated or rich.55 This ten hectare large settlement. “Rejon Wis y we wczesnym redniowieczu. the last remnant of the southern part of the former Vistula Bay. These two ‘ethnic’ regions developed differently. Struktura zasiedlenia i stosunki etniczne”. with a layout of regular streets and a rampart. Apparently. where early state formation processes started by the turn of the ninth century. and situated on the boundaries of local settlements. but they were different: small. 696–715. the eastern zone kept up its cultural relations with the Baltic tribes. It survived until 1945.54 The precise location of the site of Truso was finally identified in 1982. when the German provinces of Ost. and there were no more horse burials. not central places. these strongholds had another function than their Slavic counterparts. . which is characteristic of most Slavic populations during this period. on the eastern coast of Lake Dru no.53 In most cremation graves only few grave goods were present. Strongholds were built there. Kasprzycka. Here archeaologists have also observed a relatively poor and uniform material culture. Jagodzi ski and M. so typical of an earlier period. it was the Dru no estuary and Dzierzgo river. Antiquity 65 (1991). There is no evidence that they developed any territorial political organisation comparable to the one in central Poland. 54 It may be interesting to note here that river Dzierzgo and lake DruΩno marked the border line between those two provinces. by the tenth century it was generally accepted as that of the West-Baltic tribes. “The early medieval craft and commercial centre at Janów Pomorski near Elbl[g on the South Baltic Coast”. Subsequently the new name appeared in the Arab sources as well. when he wrote in ca. Kulm Land and Masovia. People over here lived in settlements concentrated around large central strongholds. 55 M. pp.and Westpreussen disappeared from the map. It was first used by the so-called ‘Bavarian Geographer’. The western one was densely settled since the ninth century by people with cultural affiliations to Slavic Pomerania. 848 of the eastern neighbours of Louis the German’s east-Frankish kingdom. was inhabited 53 Jagodzi ski.      ‘  ’ 527 Archaeological investigations have enabled a more precise location of this border: once more. These were local watchtowers. Meanwhile. weights and scales. Menzlin in Germany. a town promoted by the nascent Polish state. Archaeological data clearly suggest substantial changes in the economic significance of the regions on either side of the lower Vistula. They were not pulled onto land out of the shallow bays. but needed deep ports with special waterfront constructions. Truso disappeared from the Baltic stage just like many other Viking Age emporia (e. pp. The new ports were located near the old trade centres. and to expel Viking chiefs and entrepreneurs who had refused to submit to a new regime of taxation. there is more to this transformation. Haithabu in Denmark. or Hamwih by Southampton. “Arabische münzen aus einer frühmittelalterlichen Handwerker. These new political powers managed to muster an effective control over their newly subordinated territories. Czapkiewicz. Folia Orientalia 25 (1988). This particular transformation was also induced by changes in shipbuilding technology. Gem. However. it was never rebuilt again. Kmietowicz. Traditional flat-bottomed ships were replaced by those with deep hulls. Coins.g. It should be interpreted against the larger background of important contemporary changes in the way maritime trade was organized. Elbl[g”. 157–169. Jagodzi ski and Z. Numerous finds of Arabic dirhams from the early ninth century56 testify to the importance of Truso for the Baltic exchange system. In the mid-tenth century its function of a coastal port of trade was taken over by Gda sk. In the ninth century it was the coastal area east of the river where the majority of the deposits of dirhams are found (fig. . which now was overtaken by Gda sk. pottery as well as glass.528  … by Balts. usually at the mouth of big rivers which allowed ships and merchants to penetrate landinwards.und Handelsiedlung in Janów Pomorski. who had workshops producing jewellery. These technological changes contributed to the decline of Truso. and imports from Scandinavia and western Europe indicate that trade was their main activity. iron. These were replaced by newly founded towns enjoying the protection of the kings in charge of early states. which offered more space for cargo. M. Scandinavians and Slavs. Was it again amber. just as Haithabu was replaced by Schleswig. This replacement was not an accident. Wiskiauten in Lithuania). or rather furs and slaves that were sought by the entrepreneurs who kept up the trade contacts between the Baltic and the lower Volga? Whatever 56 M. Early in the tenth century Truso went up in flames. 5). antler and amber artefacts. The distribution pattern of finds of dirhams issued before A.      ‘  ’ 529 Fig. .D. 4). 900 (after Brather 1996. fig. 5. He tried to subjugate groups in the estuaries of both large rivers — Vistula and Oder — which ran from his territory to the Baltic. The first missionary campaign was led by Bishop Voitech-Adalbert. and subsequently to the Prussian lands east of the lower Vistula. to become an isolated province in the rapidly changing Baltic basin. He tried to promote indirect cultural and ideological expansion by organising Christian missionary activities. when the opposite situation emerged: all treasures with dirhams from that period are found to the west of the lower Vistula. “St Adalbert-Voitech — missionary and politician”. this trade lost its importance during the next century. the region 57 P. who came from Rome especially for this purpose. and the Life of Adalbert of Prague.530  … it was.. This change in the geography of coin deposition patterns gives the impression that the Prussian lands lost their economic significance. 155–62. The Vistula became the spine of the expanding state of Mieszko I. With this note on the tragic death of Adalbert I will end this paper. esp. which began and ended with texts written in Rome. pp. They rejected the ideological and organisational characteristics of their neighbours. They themselves actively raided the Polish territory. Urba czyk. in: P. The Prussian side of the lower Vistula seems to have lost its contacts with the outside world. the Polish monarch applied a strategy of partial measures.57 He went from Boleslav’s court by boat to Gda sk. Urba czyk ed. 161. Early Christianity in Central and East Europe (Warsaw. where he was killed on 23 April 1997. Therefore. with only one exception: the Prussian lands. . It is even more striking after 970. where he gained no success whatsoever. when coin finds are only known from Slavic Pomerania (fig. 6). who had no political centres and developed a system of boundary defence that was difficult to break. including the Christian faith. During the millennium between the first information recorderd by Marcus Vipsanius Agrippa. The reason for this was the different territorial organisation of the Prussians. The port in Gda sk built in the second quarter of the tenth century was the Baltic vanguard of the Polish state. All that is meticulously described in St Adalbert’s Life written in 999 in Rome by his friend. 1997). p. who converted to Christianity in 966. thus founding a stable dynastic state. His son Boleslav the Great (992–1025) enlarged his domain in all directions. the Benedictine monk Johannes Canaparius. . The distribution pattern of finds of dirhams issued after A. 970 (after Brather 1996. 11). fig.D. 6.      ‘  ’ 531 Fig. political and social changes.532  … of the lower Vistula was part of a transformation affecting large areas of Europe. which brought about numerous changes in the material culture. the rivers Dzierzgo and the Dru no estuary retained their function as a significant border from the second centuy A. .D. There were also flexible ethnic affiliations among the inhabitants of the lower Vistula. until the year 1000. observed by archaeologists. Regardless of all these cultural. which have been mainly traced by historians. There are many areas we did not manage to cover. We are most grateful for all this assistance. Given the expertise present in our group. Those who contributed to this volume have focussed on the ‘high-level’ power exercised by early medieval political and religious elites and its topographical setting. the Frankish kingdoms get a large share of our attention. Bonnie Effros and Walter Pohl kindly checked the final version. Did a Roman world. * Barbara Rosenwein and Matthew Innes sent us stimulating comments on an earlier draft of this conclusion. Furthermore. in turn. give way to a multitude of places and spaces where political and religious power might be represented? If so. and we are well aware of only having scratched the surface of a vast area of research — but let us concentrate on what we have to offer. and how did such places. discussed by historians and archaeologists. also enters upon the scene. Scandinavia or the lower Vistula. any remaining errors are our own.TOPOGRAPHIES OF POWER: SOME CONCLUSIONS* Mayke de Jong Frans Theuws How did people construct ‘places of power’. there are chapters on what ‘centres of power’ may have meant in the steppes of Inner Asia. Monasteries and their integration into early medieval topographies power also loom large in this book. Rome and Constantinople. and what can we learn about the ways in which audiences recognised and interpreted such ‘places of power’? These are some of the issues featuring in the papers gathered in this book. what was different about the interaction between people and places in this new context? Where and how was political and religious power — or the combination thereof — concentrated and expressed. but the changing topography of power in the old centres of the Roman world. where political power was even more mobile and decentralised than in the post-Roman kingdoms. create powerful people? This is the central question of this book. . and on the transformation of this relationship in the postRoman kingdoms. where cities were the obvious ‘central places’ providing the stage for rituals of power. 139–55. embedded in this network. institutional. They were all of this at the same time. These were sacred places. to which all those competing in this arena assigned a different significance. In early Christianity God was thought to be present wherever a Christian community happened to meet. first and foremost. but this did not necessarily entail any ‘weakness’. it is emphatically not with the exclusively institutional and economic meanings which have burdened this concept.534       The notion of ‘weak’ post-Roman states. Instead. 1990).A. this derives from an institutional perspective which may be relevant to later Middle Ages.1 The powerful — kings. Some examples might clarify this point. see R. we are dealing with power assuming different forms and following different rules. The end of ancient Christianity (Cambridge. this episcopal see was not fixed in one location. . It was a ‘multivalent’ place. pp. Something similar holds true for monasteries. was a centre in which kings. political power and its location became more decentralised and less institutionalised in the post-Roman West. but not to earlier periods. precisely because it concentrates the mind on the ways in which early medieval polities did not fit this definition. they were situated topographical contexts one cannot classify as either political. In the Frankish kingdoms the possible meanings of an ‘episcopal town’ are not exhausted by stating that this was an episcopal see. social or economic. Early medieval power-relations became interpersonal and complex. mentioned in Chris Wickham’s introduction — a discussion paper which was our point of departure — turned out to be the kind of Weberian ‘ideal type’ Wickham meant it to be: a concept useful to work with. Markus. but these mutiple meanings reinforced each other. bishops and lay 1 For a still fundamental discussion of this development. religious. artistoctrats and (aristocratic) bishops all had a competitive stake. whenever the expression ‘central places’ is used in this volume. Certainly. but in the post-Roman world Christianity became a religion revolving around well-defined places: the loci sancti empowered by the relics of saints and enriched by the patronage the laity. dominated by a bishop. As Frans Theuws explains with regard to Maastricht. episcopal power depended on a network of places of power in the Meuse Valley. and they take us straight into the contributions of this book. and Maastricht itself. Hence. but it was precisely the religious nature of monastic sites that turned them into places with a significance that went far beyond modern — or early Christian — notions of a ‘religious community’. entire villages. The Short Oxford History of Europe II (Oxford. Rosenwein. By the late eighth century. 131–64. Still. pp. aristocratic families located familial power within the sacred by founding female religious communities in which abbesses and nuns retained intricate links with the world 2 Cf. By the middle of the seventh century.  535 aristocrats — claimed the biggest stake in these sacred domains. the alternative monastic strategies investigated by Diaz and Smith help to bring out the peculiarities of the ‘Frankish model’ and its alliance between monastic space and political power — a phenomenon that by no means is an exclusively Frankish one. With regard to religious foundations in Brittany and Galicia.2 In seventh-century Francia. preserving older social patterns. In other post-Roman kingdoms not represented in this book. “Religion”. sacred spaces where the ordinary rules of political practice prevailing in the world outside were suspended. 2001). Many smaller monastic houses which did not belong to the ‘happy few’ of those singled out by kings and bishops ‘fixing’ sacred space and depending on monastic prayer. a limited number of monasteries were singled out by episcopal privileges of exemption and royal grants of immunity. according to Diaz. in which kings. episcopal and royal networks. in R. Innes. political power also increasingly depended on monastic prayer. which is explored by Le Jan. In other words.). transformed themselves into monastic communities. bishops or aristocrats played only a minor role. threatened in their existence by royal or episcopal power. such as Lombard Italy and Anglo-Saxon England. becoming ‘central’ by virtue of their liminality. Monasteries and their relics became crucial nodes in familial. these sacred places were gradually integrated in the topography of royal and episcopal power. or none at all. and De Jong. McKitterick (ed. M. de Jong. these loci sancti were invested with an inherent power to which only those who had granted these ‘hands-off ’ privileges had direct access. This is not to say that all Frankish monasteries fell into this category. such favoured religious communities were called ‘royal abbeys’. as such. . Carolingian royal protection (tuitio) turned them into communities of prayer closely connected with the court. or where. Julia Smith and Pablo Diaz remind us that there were other ways of creating sacred spaces. This meant that such monastic sites became ‘hands-off ’ areas. Other religious communities remained local and unknown places that only left haphazard traces. A specific Frankish model emerged. This was a precarious balance. . those exercising political power — be they kings. ‘it is hardly surprising that all the great women’s houses discussed in this chapter eventually passed into royal control’. such ‘hands-off ’ areas played an important role in situations of high-level political conflict. could assume many different meanings over time. into which the kings inserted themselves. they helped to ‘build up’ places of power. a significant ‘scene’ already existed. Monasteries such as Fulda and Lorsch were central places where the members of the elite flocked when there was important business at hand. discussed and written about. As De Jong argues. 269. allowing the powerful to withdraw gracefully into sacred space. But Innes also shows how the control of such sacred sites allowed new rulers — the Carolingians — to gain a foothold in regional power structures. A trail of royal charters springs to mind. The powerful moved about. Rosenwein shows how one particular site. until the tide had turned. as Matthew Innes expressed 3 See above. bishops and abbots meeting for a synod. But kings did by no means dictate the terms of the sacred.536       they came from. displaying their might in a public arena which included towns. increasingly. but also its extremely vulnerable victims. issued in a multitude of dispersed locations in the Frankish kingdoms.3 In Matthew Innes’ chapter. p. as Régine Le Jan explains. bishops or nobles — were not ‘place-bound’. this particular stage of the process is outlined: monasteries once dominated by local aristocrats became royal ones. protected and relied upon. but unlike the sacred sites they founded. Or. and. The integration of sacred loci into a political topography is also central to the papers written by Barbara Rosenwein and Mayke de Jong. so-called ‘monastic imprisonment’ was a flexible and open-ended strategy. Such important events and visits were remembered. ‘Centrality’ consisted of a network of significant places where rituals and ceremonies were enacted and remembered. royal and aristocratic residences. aristocrats gathering to transact their business — they all created central places over time. not even in royal monasteries. monasteries. As Le Jan says. moving gradually into a royal orbit. Saint-Maurice d’Agaune. Consecrated women were the intermediaries of this sacralisation. Kings visiting with their entourage. Monastic stabilitas thus supported the stability of the new polities. By their presence.   537 it: ‘The centre was a locus. In the Eastern Mediterranean. popes led the way. and with the articulation of an ideological programme expressed in papal patronage and gifts: buildings. Whereas the space associated with secular public ritual seems to have contracted to the hippodrome. as kings wove a giant web around their kingdoms’. this new symbolic topography. is also an appropriate metaphor.4 With regard to ancient cities remaining undisputed central places. to mention just a few items. liturgical processions connected the significant churches within the city. established in the early medieval period. the ‘shift away from monumental civic places’ that already had started in the third century had become ubiquitous by the early Middle Ages. for there was no rigid separation between ecclesiastical and imperial sites. Who represented power to whom in Rome? Thomas Noble’s chapter deals with the emergence of Rome as a papal city in the eighth and early ninth centuries. linking the new foci of public space: churches. one might say that in both East and West. gold and coins. but it followed a different pattern. however. but from this perspective. and it now clustered around religious buildings rather than around civic ones. but as Leslie Brubaker argues. . This did not mean that public life and its rituals declined or disappeared. redefining space. Public life had lost nothing of its vitality. religious processions gained in importance. Constantinople remained the centre of an empire. not a location. mosaics. but not exclusively. In Rome as well. To compare the topography of an ancient city like Constantinople to webs woven in the post-Roman kingdom takes a helicopter-view. 4 A reaction per e-mail of 6 December 2000 to an earlier draft of this conclusion. a kind of forcefield bending and warping physical space. connecting new significant places to older ones. the image of webs being woven. royal (and imperial) ritual became sacralized. Early medieval Rome. a real capital in the Roman sense of the word. mostly. was a city without a resident emperor or king. appropriating public space and turning it into St Peter’s Republic. was still largely in place in the twelfth century — a remarkable case of longue durée. public space had contracted. the other side of this coin is that throughout the early medieval world. spaces and places defined as ‘sacred’ became the scene on which the important rituals of power were enacted. As Brubaker notes. precious textiles. Papal claims to being a summus pontifex et universalis papa were supported by emperors who visited Rome and inspected the city and its expressive rituals they depended on. and with the authentic Christian past now embodied by an eminently papal Rome. a font of authenticity and orthodoxy upon which new political identities in the north — such as the Carolingian empire — were built. for that matter) yields a whole range of interesting differences.7 Aachen was not a tabula rasa: there were 5 Cf. Early medieval Rome and the Christian West: Essays in Honour of Donald Bullough (Leiden/Boston/Köln. The English Historical Review 115 (2000). 1–20. McKitterick. as renewal was in fact new’. 236. 7 See above. Anglo-Saxons and other peoples in the north harboured ‘great expectations’ of this source of authenticity and orthodoxy. Her chapter vividly evokes the growth of royal and imperial business which made Aachen the hub of the Carolingian empire.6 This was a two-way street. R. The famous papal approval of the Carolingian bid for royal power may well have been a Frankish invention of tradition. had huge ramifications. Rome was not only a papal city. 2000). for they were now connected with Rome. it was also a theatre where rulers who based their authority on a close connection with Rome manifested themselves — as humble pilgrims. surely. In other words.5 but this does not detract from the importance attached by the Franks and other ‘northerners’ to papal authority and Roman authenticity. pp.538       The audience for this display of papal power did not merely consist of the people of Rome in general. To begin with. Rome’s symbolic topography. p. as Janet L. 6 J. “The illusion of royal power in the Carolingian Annals”. but also expressing their power through gestures of humility.. or its aristocratic — lay and clerical — elites in particular. 317–39. in: eadem ed. ‘what was inevitably presented.M. even. Smith. As Nelson puts it. Aachen was a new centre. By then. pp.H. A comparison between Aachen and Rome (and Constantinople. . and an urban site. given a culture deriving all legitimacy from the past. explored by Noble. Aachen had become established as the privileged seat of an emperor — a capital. for Franks. new cults: Roman relics in Carolingian Francia”. Nelson argues. “Old saints. The tide of relics of Roman martyrs that flooded into Carolingian royal abbeys meant that the recipient sites became more sacred. There was also a ‘Rome in the mind’ above the Alps. In 804 Pope Leo III travelled to Aachen to celebrate Christmas. now. but also figure as the theatre for eminently secular rites of rulership — not unlike Constantinople. The same holds true for the baths where Charlemagne and his courtiers swam. those in Aachen were the locus of male conviviality. As had been the case with the Roman baths of the past. p. and did their presence. underlining its importance and centrality.  539 Roman remains which were re-used in the construction of the palatium and its famous chapel. though Nelson doubts whether these inspired the eighth-century builders with any concrete sense of ‘romanity’. but to be. ‘Aachen was not just to be represented as. Aachen was a place with a Roman past. a place where the Frankish king and his inner circle relaxed and discussed important business. but as Nelson explains. in the Church and the peoples of Charlemagne’s much expanded regnum Francorum’.9 For this very reason.8 It could gain this position because there was no serious ecclesiastical competition. But Nelson’s chapter also explores new meanings of the baths that were at Aachen’s heart. 236. the ‘baptismally reborn gens sancta of the new Israel embodied. See above. From its foundation. a place of cleansing for a people assured that they were God’s. . this new centre could become loaded with religious connotations. but with a very different starting point and development. Aachen embodied the link between the old Israel and the new. it is impossible to say whether those who reconstructed the place in the eighth century were aware of this. hence. Aachen was called the ‘sacred palace’ (sacrum palatium) in the generation following Charlemagne. however ephemeral. p. Aachen was a resolutely royal centre. a place where power was harnessed for multiple human applications in the service of God’. with a religious significance that owed as much to the more recent as to the distant past. guide the selection of apparently ‘new’ places of power? These questions are confronted in Bonnie Effros’ chapter on the reuse of Roman ruins. and they grew over time. when he discusses the complexity of Maastricht as an emerging 8 9 See above. 222. There was no bishop in Aachen. What was the symbolic potential of visible remains from the glorious past? Did the ruins of ancient monuments still have a meaning to later generations? Did they impose contraints on new ‘mental maps’. but they are also at the back of Frans Theuws’ mind. although droves of bishops flocked to the place. images of pagan idols still littered the surrounding forest. studded with places with an ancient past. B. . too many post-Roman monuments have disappeared. When searching for a suitable place in ‘the wilderness’ (in heremo) to found a monastery. When it comes to determining how this past was remembered. these might be rejected and destroyed. gained a foothold in places dispersed over an large but integrated region. Such rituals also were also enacted in texts. Some might depict the foundation of their monastery as having occurred in ‘the wilderness’. Sometimes the written sources allow a glimpse into the possible reactions to ancient monuments and ruins. Bishops. Theuws rejects the notion of a ‘central place’ — in this case. but also integrated into Christian communities by what Effros calles ‘rituals of possession’. however. Luxeuil was founded on royal land. a city — merely defined in economic and institutional terms. Once written sources are absent. p. ed. As Heinrich Härke remarks in his discussion of cemeteries. Yet however elusive. 76. while others incorporated the presence of ancient ruins into their narrative. and the landscape is changed beyond recognition. Discussing early medieval Gaul. c.10 This is an image of idolatry having been conquered by wilderness. it is even harder to assess what the physical presence of the past may have meant for those living with it. the presence of the past clearly weighted upon the present. MGH SRM 4 (Hannover. now the territory of wild beasts. as members of aristocratic groups. 1902). a virgin territory without a past. Vita Columbani I. but nonetheless. In his Life of Columbanus. historians and archaeologists alike are faced with limits and constraints of their sources. Krusch. within the ‘Meuse Valley web’ of which Tongres. Effros admits that there is a tension between written and material sources which makes any effort to determine past perceptions of ruined sites or artifacts tentative — at best. and was this perceived as such by the king and his entourage 10 Jonas of Bobbio. Namur and Liège were also an integral part. Columbanus and his monks hit upon an ancient fortification called Luxeuil. the former site of great Roman baths. Did the remains of a glorious Roman past make this land more royal. Jonas of Bobbio combined these two themes. the presence of the past looms large in Jonas’ narrative.540       place of power in the eighth century. and this mattered. 10. the visual power which ancient remains may have exerted over later spectators eludes us. and neither are the people who turned cemeteries into much more than a place where one might commemorate the dead. which were then transformed into artefacts with great symbolic value? These questions crop up on Theuws’ discussion of Maastricht. as Härke reminds us. Places of power. re-constructed and manipulated over time.  541 who supported Luxeuil’s foundation? It is hard to say. but they are central to Lotte Hedeager’s chapter on Gudme. Texts played an important role in this process. but what did it mean to those who built and sustained it? Hedeager wrestles with a 11 See above. It is their very complexity that determines the symbolic potential of such places. Was the value of the latter enhanced because of their connection with places which also had sacred connotations? Did sacred places attract precious metals. ranging from political competition to the production of valuable artefacts. 290. The perceptions of the past. a ‘home of the gods’ in South Sandinavia. This was a composite site flourishing between the third and seventh centuries. as well as buildings of a formidable size. palaces or entire regions studded with central places. p. however elusive they may be to modern scholars. had many meanings to different people. ‘for a place of power to be lasting.’11 In less poetic words. Theuws uses this notion to clarify how one central place — Maastricht and its ramifications — became a focus for many actors and activities. . so that in each era new maestri can tease out different timbres and themes. Recent excavations in this area have yielded a stupendous amount of treasure. but these questions should be asked. So did the charter recording this event. As Barbara Rosenwein expressed it. were part of this spectrum of meaning — this much is clear. it must have the same sort of complexity as a great piece of music. Thus they helped to build Lorsch’s reputation in this respect. but so did human action. for Jonas wrote a generation later. places of power were constructed. The group of nobles flocking to Lorsch’s villa of Heppenheim (discussed by Innes) went to a place that to them held significance as a site where important public business might be transacted — a public place. be they monasteries. but these men conducting their affairs in a monastic site were no figment of the scribe’s imagination. for that matter. This is where Appadurai’s concept of ‘tournaments of value’. as well as their endurance. comes into its own. invoked by Frans Theuws. Hedeager’s reflections on Gudme as a privileged location for highstatus artisanal production yield some relevant insights for scholars thinking about monasteries in the early medieval West. this was indeed the case. pp. the Roman empire to begin with — but many followed suit. Gudme was a place attracting precious goods from the world outside. ed. 94. 801–802. how did perceptions of this ‘great world outside’ contribute to notions of centrality on the inside? Or. Hedeager broaches an issue also relevant to contexts other than pre-Christian Scandinavia. What about all these dirhams and other exotic items turning up in excavations in the Lower Vistula — why there. These were not only sacred places. cf. when an elephant arrived in Aachen in 802. 1974). 76–8. as a gift from Harun-al-Rashid. . but it subsequently became a depository of wealth that must have had its impact on the ruling elites in situ. Her analysis mainly rests on a combination of archaeological data and insights gained from anthropology. as Urba czyk argues. and not anywhere else? This was region of rich economic resources of which various powers availed themselves. also p. Rau (Darmstadt. which were then reshaped and transformed. we can see how a historiographer made the most of his journey and arrival. but where Gudme is concerned. but also sites where prestigious artisans were 12 Annales regni Francorum s. In the case of the elephant. did this enhance Aachen’s profile as a central place? Judging by the way the author of the Royal Frankish Annals dwelled on the elephant’s difficult journey to the north. it remains a matter of carefully assessing archaeological data and tentatively exploring a possible context. R.542       lack of total textual evidence. This was another region attracting a concentration of human activity and productivity marking then out as ‘central’.a. The Lower Vistula was a highly valued source of amber in the Roman era. on the death of the elephant in 810. to put it differently. and this region remained important over the centuries. As Hedeager argues. gaining new meanings intricately associated with Gudme’s status as a sacred place. If ‘central places’ were built up by means of precious metals and artefacts imported from distant and exotic places. The same holds true for Przemek Urba czyk’s contribution on the region of the Lower Vistula.12 Precious objects — and animals — arrived from faraway and mysterious regions via tortuous routes. although she tentatively uses information yielded by thirteenth-century epic material. and efforts to relegate places that did hold significance to contemporaries to a minor status. This is one of the conclusions of Julia Smith’s investigation of Redon. but when it comes to excavated remains. Those dealing with texts have to be aware that they are entering the vociferous debates of the past. They might represent this ‘opting out’ as a voluntary and therefore honourable action. Was this a matter of monks just having superior resources — the traditional narrative cherished by historians — or did the sacredness of these production site also come into it? This is a question we need to pursue in the future — one of many. Should one hope that more of the Cordoba existing in early medieval minds . difficult to identify as such. De Jong argues that the withdrawal of high-level political players into monastic space was never an affair represented in a neutral fashion by the authors who ‘recorded’ such events.  543 at work. but with a similar emphasis on the rhetoric of texts. with authors making a strong case for some places being more important than others. or as a the result of dishonourable coercion. the focus of Al-Andalus’ identity. To be undocumented meant not having the wherewithal to establish a lasting existence. Smith’s contribution makes it clear that Redon’s aedificatio was a matter of texts. there is not much to be found. or even to oblivion. Ann Christys’ account of Cordoba is a worrying case in point. which went a long way towards constructing places of power. whether viewed from a Frankish or Breton perspective. ‘Tournaments of value’ also happened at the level of texts. In the post-Roman kingdoms. But there are also meaningful silences. Textual aedificatio of places of power should not be taken at face value. and the same pertains to Frankish royal monasteries. while others just disappeared without a trace. but the authors who thus built Redon drew upon textual traditions that diverged from ‘mainstream’ Carolingian monasticism. This was a town enthusiastically and admiringly written up in Arabic sources listing its vast number of baths and caravanserais. The only part of this debate we can still grasp is the one which was fixed in texts which still survive — but these went a long way towards establishing the views that came to dominate both early medieval and modern historiography. a marginal place. Great reputations were constructed or destroyed in debates about the ‘right interpretation’ raging long after the events in question. It is misleading to say that some places happened well-documented. the written word was an instrument of power. From a different perspective. and reminds us of topographies of power about which this influential author remained silent. So heroic tales were told. Tours became the model of an episcopal town. Pohl’s chapter should be read alongside Hedeager’s. whose sweeping and compelling narrative pointedly excluded other centres representing possible competition for Tours’ (and St Martin’s) pre-eminence. Pohl’s approach is a different one.544       may be unearthed in due course? Or will Cordoba go the way of Tours. and the paradigm for the cult of the saints in early medieval Gaul. ‘from the outset. for those in charge of the written word were instrumental in the aedificatio of central 13 See above. but equally valid. p. aided by anthropological theory. there are no textual sources giving any insight into the pre-Carolingian ‘hall’ and what went on in there. a ‘one-horse town’. Wood’s chapter offers a fundamental critique of a model relying almost exclusively on Gregory’s writings. In short. it is vital to remember that the sources from which we work did not stand outside of the relationships they recorded’. Hedeager and Pohl both shed light on the possible impact of places ‘out there’ on centrality defined from inside. and then what? This is a view which may displease archaeologists who have tried to make sense of the rituals in the hall featuring in Beowulf and other epics. when historians became seriously interested in the intricate connection between early medieval bishops and their saints. and Beowulf ’s much-cited account is highly stylised and idealised. In other chapters. As Walter Pohl says in his discussion of the elusive courts of Inner Asia.13 The written sources present us with clearcut topographies of power. texts helped to shape and articulate places and relations of power. in very different ways. who tried to make sense of the vast and unknown world they encountered. as Matthew Innes’ reminds us. Drunken warriors did most likely boast about their heroic deeds in such places. as Ian Wood calls it? The great reputation of this one-horse town was constructed by its bishop Gregory. By the 1970s. . 398. but as accounts of such sessions become more detailed — and highlighted in anthropologically inspired research — such ‘accounts’ become less amenable to generalisation. He scrutinises the accounts of the diplomats and voyagers coming from places they themselves perceived as central. the possibilities and limits of texts also a central issue. or. but also by ‘readers’ who interpreted. Yet places of power are not only created by ‘authors’. This ongoing process of aedificatio and interpretatio is an challenging area of future research where archaeologists and historians can fruitfully join forces. we hope this becomes evident to those perusing its contents. if we are to make the most of the rich and complex texts at our disposal. in the sense that historians can rely on the apparent solidity of excavation reports. such as the performance of rituals and ceremonies. enhancing their importance over time or allowing them to be forgotten. Archaeological data often yield a very different picture. These are false securities. The tensions between written and material sources are part and parcel of this book. or the naming of places. and we need to be aware of this. The authors of the sources we work with had a particular agenda. or that archaeologists can make sense of material culture by taking recourse to the enticing details offered by the written record. along with a variety of human activity.  545 places. We do not argue that archaeological and historical sources are in any way ‘complementary’. . for material and written sources pose their own problems. Some first attempts in this direction have inspired this book. contested and changed their meaning. and they played their own role in strategies of ‘aedificatio’. This page intentionally left blank BIBLIOGRAPHY P  Adalbert of Trier, Continuation of Regino’s Chronicon, ed. F. Kurze, MGH SRG 20 (Hannover, 1890). Adam of Bremen, Gesta Hammaburgensis ecclesiae pontificum, transl. F.J. Tschan, Adam of Bremen, History of the Archbishops of Hamburg-Bremen. Records of Civilization: Sources and Studies LIII (New York, 1959). Additamentum Nivialense de Fuliano, ed. B. Krusch, MGH SRM 2 (Hannover, 1888), pp. 449–51. Adefonsi Tertii Chronica, in: J. Gil, J.L. Moralejo and J.I. Ruíz de la Peña eds., Cronicas asturianas (Oviedo, 1985), pp. 113–49. Ado, Vita Theudarii, Migne PL 123, col. 443–50. Adso, Vita Frodoberti abbatis Cellensis, ed. W. Levison, MGH SRM 5 (Hannover, 1910), pp. 67–88. Agnellus, Liber pontificalis ecclesiae Ravennatis, ed. O. Holder-Egger, MGH SRL (Hannover, 1878). Alcuin, Commentaria in sancti Joannis Evangelium, Migne PL 100, col. 733–7. ——, Epistulae, ed. E. Dümmler, MGH Epp. 4 (Berlin, 1895). ——, Vita Willibrordi prosaica, ed. A. Poncelet, AASS, November 7th, vol. 3. Alvarus, Vita Eulogii, ed. J. Gil, CSM I. Ambrose, De obitu Theodosi, ed. O. Faller, CSEL 73 (Wien, 1955). ——, Epistulae, ed. M. Zelzer, CSEL 82, 3 (Wien, 1982). Ammianus Marcellinus, Res gestae, ed. and transl. J.C. Rolfe (revised edition, Cambridge, 1956). ——, The later Roman Empire, transl. W. Hamilton (Harmondsworth, 1986). Analectes sur l’histoire et la littérature des arabes d’Espagne, ed. R. Dozy, 2 vols. (Leiden/ London, 1855–61). Annales s. Amandi, ed. G.H. Pertz, MGH SS I (Hannover, 1826), pp. 6–10 and 12–14. Annales s. Bertiniani, ed. R. Rau, Quellen zur karolingischen Reichsgeschichte II (Darmstadt, 1972); eds. F. Grat et al., Annales de Saint-Bertin (Paris, 1964). Annales qui dicuntur Einhardi, see Annales regni Francorum. Annales Fuldenses, ed. F. Kurze, MGH SRG (Hannover, 1891), pp. 1–107; transl. T. Reuter, The Annals of Fulda (Manchester, 1992). Annales Laubienses, ed. G.H. Pertz, MGH SS 4 (Berlin, 1841), pp. 9–20. Annales Laureshamenses, ed. G.H. Pertz, MGH SS 1 (Hannover, 1826), pp. 19–39. Annales Mettenses priores, ed. B. von Simson, MGH SRG 10 (Hannover, 1905), pp. 1–98. Annales Petaviani, ed. G.H. Pertz, MGH SS 1 (Hannover, 1829), pp. 15–8. Annales regni Francorum, ed. F. Kurze, MGH SRG 6 (Hannover, 1895), pp. 3–115; ed. R. Rau, Quellen zur karolingischen Reichsgeschichte I (Darmstadt, 1974). Annales Rotonenses, ed. B. Bischoff, “Annales Rotonenses (um 919)”, in: Analecta novissima. Texte des vierten bis sechzehnten Jahrhunderts (Stuttgart, 1984), pp. 102–5. Anonymus (Astronomer), Vita Hludowici, ed. E. Tremp, MGH SRG 54 (Hannover, 1995). Apparitio S. Michaelis archangeli in Monte Tumba in Gallia, Migne PL 96, cols. 1389–94. Arbeo of Freising, Vita vel passio Haimhrammi episcopi et martyris Ratisponensis, ed. 548  B. Krusch, MGH SRG 13 (Hannover, 1920), pp. 26–99; ed. B. Bischoff, Leben und Leiden des Hl. Emmeram (München, 1953). Augustine of Hippo, De Civitate Dei, eds. B. Dombart and A. Kalb, CCSL 48 (Turnhout, 1955). ——, De doctrina christiana, ed. J. Martin, CSSL 32 (Turnhout, 1962). Obras completas de San Agustín XXVI. Sermones (6 º) 339–396, ed. P. de Luis (Madrid, 1985). Avitus of Vienne, Epistolae, ed. R. Peiper, MGH AA 6, 2 (Berlin, 1883), pp. 117–269. ——, Opera omnia, ed. U. Chevalier, Oeuvres complètes de saint Avit évêque de Vienne, (Lyon, 1890). Baluze, E., Miscellanea, ed. J.D. Mansi (Lucca, 1762). Beda Venerabilis, Historia ecclesiastica gentis Anglorum, eds. B. Colgrave and R.A.B. Mynors, Bede’s Ecclesiastical History of the English People. Oxford Medieval Texts series (Oxford, 1969). Bede, The Ecclesiastical History of the English People, eds. and transl. J. McClure and R. Collins (Oxford, 1969). Benedict of Aniane, Codex regularum, Migne PL 103, col. 717–1380. Benedicti S. Andreae monachi chronicon, ed. G.H. Pertz, MGH SS 3 (Hannover, 1829), pp. 695–719. Beowulf, transl. Michael Alexander (Harmondsworth, 1973). Sancti Bonifatii et Lulli Epistolae, ed. E. Dümmler, MGH Epp. 3, Epp. Merovingici et Karolini Aevi 1 (repr. Berlin, 1957). Braulio of Saragossa, Epistularium, ed. L. Riesco Terrero, Epistolario de San Braulio. Introdución, edición crítica, traducción (Sevilla, 1975). Le Calendrier de Cordoue, eds. and transl. R. Dozy and C. Pellat (Leiden, 1961). Die Canones Theodori Cantuariensis und ihre Überlieferungsformen, ed. P.W. Finsterwalder (Weimar, 1929). Cartulaire de l’abbaye de Gorze, ed. A. d’Herbomez (Paris, 1902). Cartulaire de l’abbaye de Saint-Sauveur de Redon. Amis des archives historiques du diocèse de Rennes, Dol et Saint-Malo (Rennes, 1998). Cartulaire de Redon, ed. A. de Courson (Paris, 1863). Cassiodorus, Variarum Libri XII, ed. A.J. Fridh, CCSL 96 (Turnhout, 1973). Chartae Latinae Antiquiores: Facsimile-edition of the Latin charters prior to the ninth century, eds. A. Bruckner and R. Marichal, part XIII, France I, ed. H. Atsma and J. Vezin, vol. 13 (Dietikon/Zürich, 1981). Chronica Albendensis, eds. J. Gil, J.L. Moralejo and J.I. Ruíz de la Peña, Crónicas asturianas (Oviedo, 1985), pp. 151–88. Chronicon Moissiacense, ed. G.H. Pertz, MGH SS 1 (Hannover, 1826), pp. 282–313. “Chronicle of Sampiro”, ed. M. Gómez Moreno, Boletín de la Real Academia de la Historia 100 (1932), pp. 337–8. Codex Carolinus, ed. W. Gundlach, MGH Epp. 3 (Berlin, 1892), pp. 476–657. Codex Diplomaticus Fuldensis, ed. E.F.J. Dronke (Kassel, 1850). Codex Laureshamensis, ed. K. Glöckner, 3 vols. (Darmstadt, 1929–36). Codex Theodosianus, ed. Th. Mommsen (3rd edition, Berlin, 1962). Concilia Galliae, a. 511–a. 695, ed. C. de Clercq, CCSL 148A (Turnhout, 1980). Concilios visigóticos e hispano-romanos, ed. J. Vives (Barcelona/Madrid, 1963). Constantius of Lyon, Vita Germani, ed. and transl. R. Borius, Vie de Saint Germain d’Auxerre, SC 112 (Paris, 1965). Constructio monasterii Farfensis, ed. U. Balzani, Il Chronicon Farfense di Gregorio di Catino. Fonti per la Storia d’Italia 33–34, 2 vols. (Rome, 1903, reprint 1969–72). Conte, P., Regesto delle lettere dei papi del secolo VIII (Milan, 1984). Flavius Cresconius Corippus, In laudem Iustini Augusti Minoris, ed. A. Cameron (London, 1976). Corpus Iuris Civilis, vol. 3 Novellae, eds. R. Schoell and W. Kroll (5th edition Berlin, 1928).  549 Corpus Scriptores Ecclesiasticorum Latinorum 16, ed. M. Petschenig (1888). Crónicas asturianas, eds. J. Gil, J.L. Moralejo, J.I. Ruíz de la Peña (Oviedo, 1985). Cyprianus et al., Vita Caesarii, ed. B. Krusch, MGH SRM 3 (Hannover, 1896), pp. 457–501. Davis, R., transl. and comm., The lives of the eighth-century popes (Liber Pontificalis) (Liverpool, 1992). Dhuoda, Liber manualis, ed. P. Riché, SC 225 (Paris, 1975). Donatus of Metz, Vita Ermenlandi abbatis Antrensis, ed. W. Levison, MGH SRM 5 (Hannover, 1910), pp. 674–710. Drew, K.F., transl., The laws of the Salian Franks (Philadelphia, 1991). Duchesne, L., Fastes épiscopaux de l’ancienne Gaule, 3 vols. (Paris, 1894–1915). Dutton, P.E., Carlemagne’s courtier. The complete Einhard (Ontario, 1998). Egeria’s travels to the Holy Land, transl. J. Wilkinson (revised edition, Jerusalem, 1981). Einhard, Translatio et Miracula SS Marcelini et Petri, ed. G. Waitz, MGH SS 15 (Hannover, 1887), pp. 238–64. ——, Vita Karoli Magni, ed. O. Holder-Egger, MGH SRG 25 (Hannover, 1911); ed. R. Rau, Quellen zur karolingischen Reichsgeschichte 1 (Darmstadt, 1974). Epistolae Arelatenses Genuinae, ed. W. Gundlach, MGH Epp. 1 (Berlin, 1892), pp. 1–83. Epistolae decretales ac rescripta Romanorum pontificum, ed. F. Antonio González (Madrid, 1821). Erchanberti breviarium regum Francorum, ed. G. Pertz, MGH SS 2 (Hannover, 1829), pp. 327–9. Ermentarius, De translationibus et miraculis Santi Filiberti, ed. R. Poupardin, Monuments de l’Histoire des Abbayes de Saint-Philibert (Paris, 1905), pp. 19–70. Ermoldus Nigellus, In Honorem Hludovici Pii, ed. E. Faral, Ermold le Noir: Poème sur Louis le Pieux (Paris, 1964). Eucherius, Passio Acaunensium martyrum, ed. B. Krusch, MGH SRM 3 (Hannover, 1896), pp. 20–41. Eugippius, Vita Severini, ed. R. Noll, Eugippius: Das Leben des Heiligen Severin (Passau 1963); ed. Th. Mommsen, MGH SRG 26 (Berlin, 1898). Eulogius, Memoriale sanctorum, ed. J. Gil, CSM, 2 vols. (Madrid, 1973). Eusebius of Caesarea, Oratio de laudibus Constantini, transl. H.A. Drake, In praise of Constantine: A historical study and new translation of Eusebius’ Tricennial Orations (Berkeley, 1976). Flavius Cresconius Corippus, In laudem Justini Augusti minoris, ed. A. Cameron (London, 1976). Folcuin, Gesta abbatum Sithiensium, ed. B. Guérard, Cartulaire de l’abbaye de Saint-Bertin (Paris, 1840). Fragmenta historiae Byzantinae, Fragmenta historicorum Graecorum 4, ed. K. Müller (Paris, 1851), pp. 69–110. Fredegarii Chronicarum libri IV cum continuationibus, ed. B. Krusch, MGH SRM 2 (Hannover, 1888), pp. 1–193; ed. A. Kusternig, Ausgewählte Quellen zur deutschen Geschichte des Mittelalters 4a, 2nd edn. (Darmstadt, 1994), pp. 1–325; ed. M. WallaceHadrill, The Fourth Book of the Chronicle of Fredegar with its Continuations (London, 1960). Gesta Dagoberti I regis francorum, ed. B. Krusch, MGH SRM 2 (Hannover, 1888), pp. 399–425. Gesta sanctorum Rotonensium, ed. C. Brett, The monks of Redon: Gesta sanctorum Rotonensium and Vita Conuuoionis (Woodbridge, 1989). Giorgi, I. and U. Balzani eds., Il regesti di Farfa, vol. 2 (Rome, 1879). Gregory of Tours, De cursu stellarum ratio, ed. B. Krusch, MGH SRM 1, 2 (revised edition, Hannover, 1969), pp. 404–22. ——, De virtutibus S. Martini, ed. B. Krusch, MGH SRM 1, 2 (Hannover, 1885), pp. 584–661. 550  ——, Decem libri historiarum, eds. B. Krusch and W. Levison, MGH SRM 1, 1 (Hannover, 1951; revised edition, Hannover, 1965). ——, Glory of the confessors, transl. R. Van Dam. Translated texts for historians, Latin series IV (Liverpool, 1988). ——, De virtutibus sancti Martini, ed. B. Krusch, MGH SRM 1, 2 (Hannover, 1885), pp. 584–66; revised edition (Hannover, 1969), pp. 134–211. ——, De virtutibus sancti Juliani, ed. B. Krusch, MGH SRM 1, 2, (revised edition, Hannover, 1969), pp. 112–34. ——, In gloria confessorum, ed. B. Krusch, MGH SRM 1, 2 (revised edition, Hannover, 1969), pp. 294–370. ——, In gloria martyrum, ed. B. Krusch, MGH SRM 1, 2 (revised edition, Hannover, 1969), pp. 34–111. ——, Vitae patrum, ed. B. Krusch, MGH SRM 1, 2, (revised edition, Hannover, 1969), pp. 211–94. ——, The history of the Franks, transl. L. Thorpe (Harmondsworth, 1982). Gregory the Great, Epistola, ed. D. Norberg, CCSL 140A, Registrum epistolarum, libri VIII–XIX, Appendix (Turnhout, 1982), pp. 805–11. ——, Dialogi, ed. A. de Vogüé, SC 251, 260, 265 3 vols. (Paris, 1978–80). ——, Moralia in Job, ed. M. Adriaen, CCSL 143 (Turnhout, 1979). ——, Registrum epistolarum libri VIII–XIV, ed. D. Norberg, CCSL 140A (Turnhout, 1982). Haymo of Halberstadt, In epistolam II ad Thimotheum, Migne PL 117, col. 797–810. Herigerus, Translatio s. Landoaldi sociorumque eius, ed. O. Holder-Egger, MGH SS 15, 2 (Hannover, 1888), pp. 599–607. Herodotus, Historiae, transl. R. Waterfield, Herodotus: The Histories. Oxford’s World Classics (Oxford, 1998). Hildemar of Corbie/Civate, Expositio regulae s. Benedicti, ed. R. Mittermüller, Expositio regulae ab Hildemaro tradita et nunc primum typis mandata (Regensburg etc., 1880). Hincmar of Rheims, Consilium de poenitentia Pippini regis, Migne PL 125, col. 1119–22. ——, De ordine palatii, eds. T. Gross and R. Schieffer, MGH Fontes Iuris Germanici Antiqui 3 (Hannover, 1980); ed. V. Krause, MHG Capit. 2 (Hannover, 1897), pp. 518–530. Historia Langobardorum codicis Gothani, eds. L. Bethmann and G. Waitz, MGH SS Rer. Lang. (Hannover, 1878). Historia Silense, ed. J. Pérez de Urbel (Madrid, 1959). Historia translationis s. Balthildis, AASS Jan., II, pp. 747–9. Honoratus of Marseilles, Vita Hilarii, ed. and transl. P.-A. Jacob, La vie d’Hilaire d’Arles, SC 404 (Paris, 1995). Hrabanus Maurus, Carmina, ed. E. Dümmler, MGH Poet. Lat. aevi Karolini 2 (Hannover, 1881), pp. 154–258. ——, Enarrationes in Epistolae B. Pauli, Migne PL 111, col. 1273–1616. Hucbald of St Amand, Vita Aldegundis virginis, Migne PL 132, col. 862. ——, Vita Rictrudis abbatissae Marcianensis, ed. J. Mabillon, AASS O.S.B. II, pp. 942–43. Hydatius, Chronica, ed. R.W. Burgess, The Chronicle of Hydatius and the Consularia Constantinopolitana. Two contemporary accounts of the final years of the Roman Empire (Oxford, 1993), pp. 70–123. Ibn al-Fara , Tar kh ulam al-Andalus, eds. F. Codera and J. Ribera (Madrid, 1891–2). Ibn al-Q a, ed. and transl. J. Ribera, Historia de la Conquista de España por Abenalcotia el Cordobes (Madrid, 1926). Ibn awqal, rat al-Ar , ed. J.H. Kramers (Leiden, 1939) transl. M.J. Romani Suay, Configuración del Mundo ( fragmentos alusivos al Magreb y España). Textos Medievales XXVI (Valencia, 1971). Ibn ayy n, Al-Muqtabis f bal d al-Andalus (al-Hakam II) (Al-Muqtabis VII), ed. A.A. Al-Hajji (Beirut, 1965).  551 ——, Al-Muqtabis, transl. J. Guraieb, Cuadernos de Historia de España 27 (1958). Ibn Idh r, Al-Bay n al-mughrib f akhb r al-Andalus wa-l-Maghrib, eds. E. Lévi-Provençal and G.S. Colin (Paris, 1930). Iohannes de Plano Carpini (Giovanni di Pian del Carpine), Historia Mongolorum (Storia dei Mongoli ), ed. P. Daffinà e.a. (Spoleto, 1989). Inscriptiones Latinae Christianae Veteres 1, ed. E. Diehl, new edition (Dublin, 1970). Isidore of Seville, Etymologiarum sive Originum, ed. W.M. Lindsay (Oxford, 1962). ——, Historia vel Origo Gothorum, ed. C. Rodríguez Alonso, Las Historias de los godos, Vándalos y suevos de Isidoro de Sevilla. Estudio, edición crítica y traducción (León, 1975). ——, Regula sancti patris Isidori episcopi, eds. J. Campos and I. Roca, Santos Padres españoles II (Madrid, 1971), pp. 90–125. Itinerarium Bernardi, ed. T. Tobler, Descriptiones Terrae Sanctae ex saeculo VII, IX, XII, XV (Leipzig, 1874), pp. 85–99. John of Biclar, Chronica, ed. Th. Mommsen, Continuatio Isidoriana Hispana, MGH AA 11 (Berlin, 1961), pp. 211–20. Jonas of Bobbio, Vita Columbani abbatis discipulorumque eius libri duo, ed. B. Krusch, MGH SRM 4 (Hannover, 1902), pp. 1–152; ed. B. Krusch, MGH SRG 37 (Hannover, 1905), pp. 1–152. Jordanus of Quedlinburg, Iordanis de Saxonia Liber Vitas Fratrum eds. R. Arbesmann and W. Humfner (New York, 1943). Laterculus Visigothorum, ed. Th. Mommsen, MGH AA 13 (Hannover, 1898), pp. 464–9. Le Blant, E. ed., Inscriptions chrétiennes de la Gaule antérieures au VIII e siècle 2 (Paris, 1865). Leges Visigothorum, ed. K. Zeumer, MGH LL 1 (Hannover/Leipzig, 1902), pp. 34–456. Leo I Papa, Epistula 15 (ad Turibium Asturicensem Episcopum), ed. B. Vollmann, Studien zum Priszillianismus. Die Forschung, die Quellen, der fünfzehnte Brief Papst Leos des Grossen (St. Ottilien, 1965), pp. 122–38. Libellus de Ecclesiis Claromontanis, ed. W. Levison, MGH SRM 7 (Hannover, 1920). Le Liber Pontificalis. Texte, introduction et commentaire, ed. L. Duchesne, 2 vols. (Paris, 1886–92). Liber sacramentorum Gellonensis, ed. A. Dumas, CCSL 159 (Turnhout, 1981). Liber sacramentorum romanae aeclesiae ordinis anni circuli (Cod.Vat.Reg.Lat. 316/Paris Bibl.Nat. 7193, 41/56), eds. L.C. Mohlberg, L. Eizenhöfer and P. Siffrin. Rerum Ecclesiasticarum Documenta, Series Maior Fontes 4 (Rome, 1960). Libri Carolini, see Opus Caroli regis contra synodum. Liutprand of Cremona, Antapodosis, ed. J. Becker, MGH SRG 40 (Hannover, 1915). Lucas of Tuy, Chronicon mundi (Frankfurt, 1610). Ludovici II Diplomata, ed. K. Wanner, Instituto Storico Italiano per il Medio Evo (Rome, 1994). Marculf, Formulae, ed. K. Zeumer, Formulae Merovingici et Karolini Aevi, MGH LL 5 (Hannover, 1886), pp. 36–106; ed. A. Uddholm (Uppsala, 1962). McNamara, J.A. and John E. Halborg with E. Gordon Whatley eds. and transl., Sainted women of the Dark Ages (Durham/London, 1992). Menander, ed. K. Müller, Fragmenta historicorum Graecorum 4 (Paris, 1851), pp. 200–69. ——, ed. R.C. Blockley, The History of Menander the Guardsman (Liverpool, 1985). Mirarelli, Johannes Benedictus, Annales Camaldulenses 1 (Venice, 1755). Monumenta Boica XI (München, 1771). Nithard, Historiae, ed. Ph. Lauer, Nithard: Histoire des fils de Louis le Pieux (Paris, 1926); ed. E. Müller, MGH SRG 14 (Hannover, 1907). Notker, Gesta Karoli magni imperatoris, ed. H.H. Haefele, MGH SRG, NS 12 (Berlin, 1959). Odo of Glanfeuil, Historia translationis S. Mauri, AASS Jan. I, pp. 1051–60. Oeuvres complètes de saint Avit évêque de Vienne, ed. U. Chevalier (new edition Lyon, 1890). Opus Caroli regis contra synodum. (Libri Carolini), ed. A. Freeman, MGH Conc. II, Supplementum I, (Hannover, 1998). 552  Pactum s. Fructuosi, eds. J. Campos and I. Roca, Santos Padres españoles II (Madrid, 1971), pp. 208–11. Pactus Legis Salicae, ed. K.A. Eckhardt, MGH LL 4, 1 (Hannover, 1962). Parochiale suevum, ed. P. David, CCSL 175 (Tunhout, 1965), pp. 411–20. Paschasius Radbertus, Vita Adalhardi, Migne PL 120, col. 1507–82. Passio Leudegarii, ed. B. Krusch, MGH SRM 5 (Hannover, 1910), pp. 282–322. Passio Praeiecti, ed. B. Krusch, MGH SRM 5 (Hannover, 1910), pp. 225–48. Passio s. Victoris et Sociorum, ed. J. Mabillon, AASS September VIII, p. 292. Passio Sigismundi regis, ed. B. Krusch, MGH SRM 2 (Hannover, 1888), pp. 329–40. Pliny, Naturalis historiae libri XXXVII, transl. D.E. Eichholz (Cambridge, 1962). The Poetic Edda, transl. L.M. Hollander (Austin, 1994). Priscus, ed. R.C. Blockley, The fragmentary classicising historians of the later Roman Empire: Eunapius, Olympiodorus, Priscus and Malchus (Liverpool, 1983). Blockley, R.C. ed., The History of Menander the Guardsman (Liverpool, 1985). Prudentius, Psychomachia, ed. J. Bergman, CSEL 61 (Wien, 1926). Claudius Ptolemeaus, Opera, ed. J.L. Heilberg (Leipzig, 1898–1908). ——, Cosmographia—Tavole geografiche di Tolomeo, ed. L. Pagani (Torriana, 1990). “Raguel, The Martyrdom of St. Pelagius”, transl. J.A. Bowman, in: T. Head ed., Medieval Hagiography, an Anthology (New York, 2000). “Rashid al-Din”, ed. J.A. Boyle, The successors of Genghis Khan (New York, 1971), pp. 178–203. Ratio fundationis seu aedificationis Blandiniensis coenobii, ed. M. Gysseling and A.C.F. Koch, Diplomata Belgica ante annum millesimum centesimum scripta, 2 vols. (Brussels, 1950). Regesta Pontificum Romanorum, eds. P. Jaffé et al., 2 vols. (2d edition, Leipzig, 1885–88; reprint Graz, 1956). Regino of Prüm, Chronicon, ed. F. Kurze, MGH SRG 50 (Hannover, 1890). Regula communis, eds. J. Campos and I. Roca, Santos Padres españoles II (Madrid, 1971), pp. 172–208. Regula consensoria monachorum, Migne PL 66, col. 993–6. Regula cuiusdam patris ad monachos, ed. F. Villegas, “La ‘Regula cuiusdam patris ad monachos’. Ses sources littéraires et ses rapports avec la ‘Regula monachorum’ de Columban”, Revue de l’histoire de la spiritualité 49 (1973), pp. 3–36. Regula quattuor patrum, ed. J. Neufville, “Règle des IV Pères et Seconde Règle des Pères. Texte critique”, Revue bénédictine 77 (1967), pp. 47–106. Regum Burgundiae e stirpe Rudolfina Diplomata et Acta, eds. T. Schieffer and H.E. Mayer = Die Urkunden der Burgundischen Rudolfinger (München, 1977). Richer, Historiarum libri IV, ed. G. Waitz, MGH SRG 51 (Hannover, 1877). Rimbert, Vita Anskarii, ed. G. Waitz, MGH SRG 55 (Hannover, 1884). Rudolf of Fulda, Vita Leobae abbatissae Biscofesheimensis, ed. G. Waitz, MGH SS 15, 1 (Hannover, 1887), pp. 118–31. Salzburger Urkundenbuch, eds. W. Hauthaler and F. Martin, vol. 2 (Salzburg, 1916). Santos Padres españoles II, eds. J. Campos and I. Roca (Madrid, 1971). Saxo Grammaticus, Danorum Regum Heroumque Historia, transl. E. Christiansen, Saxo Grammaticus, Danorum Regum Heroumque Historia Books X–XVI, 3 vols. BAR International Series 84 (Oxford, 1980). Sidonius Apollinaris, Carmina et epistolae, ed. C. Luetjohann, MGH AA 8 (Berlin, 1887). ——, Epistolae, transl. O.M. Dalton, The letters of Sidonius, 2 vols. (Oxford, 1915). ——, Letters, ed. and transl. W.B. Anderson. The Loeb classical library (London and Cambridge Mass., 1936–65). Sokrates Appolinaris, History of the Church, PG 67, cols. 29–842. Snorres Edda, transl. B. Collinder (Stockholm, 1983). Snorre Sturluson, Nordiska Kungasagor I. Från Ynglingasagan till Olav Tryggvasons saga, transl. K.G. Johansson (Stockholm, 1991).  553 Strabon, Geographica, ed. W. Aly, 4 vols. (Bonn, 1957). Sulpicius Severus, Chronicorum, ed. C. Halm, CSEL 1 (Wien, 1866), pp. 3–105. ——, Vita s. Martini, ed. and transl. J. Fontaine, Vie de Saint Martin SC 133 (Paris, 1967). Supplex Libellus, ed. J. Semmler, in: K. Hallinger ed., CCM 1 (Siegburg, 1963), pp. 319–27. Swanton, M., ed. and transl., Anglo-Saxon Prose (London, 1975). Tacitus, Annalium libri XVI, ed. H. Furneaux (Oxford, 1965); ed. H. Heubner (Stuttgart, 1983). Tacitus, Germania, eds. M. Winterbottom and R.M. Ogilvie, Opera minora (Oxford, 1975); ed. A.A. Lund (Heidelberg, 1988). Tessier, G., Recueil des actes de Charles II le Chauve, 3 vols. (Paris, 1943–55). The Chronicle of Theophanes the Confessor. Byzantine and Near Eastern History A.D. 284 –813, ed. C. de Boor (Leipzig, 1883), transl. C. Mango and R. Scott (Oxford, 1997). Thegan, Vita Hludowici imperatoris, ed. E. Tremp, MGH SRG 54 (Hannover, 1995). Theophanes the Confessor, Chronicle, ed. G. Hansen (2nd edition Berlin, 1971). Thorpe, L., Two Lives of Charlemagne (Harmondsworth, 1969). Traditiones Wizenburgenses: Die Urkunden des Klosters Weissenburg, 661–864, eds. A. Doll and K. Glöckner (Darmstadt, 1979). Translatio sancti Viti, ed. I. Schmale-Ott. Veröffentlichungen der Historischen Kommission für Westfalen 41, Fontes Minores 1 (Münster, 1979). Una crónica anónima de Abd al-Ra m n al-Na r, eds. and transl. E. García Gómez and E. Lévi-Provençal (Madrid, 1959). Die Urkunden Arnulfs, ed. P. Kehr, MGH DD 3 (Berlin, 1940). Die Urkunden Pippins, Karlmanns and Karls des Großen, ed. E. Mühlbacher, MGH DD 1 (Berlin, 1906). Urkundenbuch zur Geschichte der jetzt die Preußischen regierungsbezirke Coblenz und Trier bildenden mittelrheinischen Territorien vol. I, ed. H. Beyer e.a. (Koblenz, 1860). Urkundenbuch des Klosters Fulda, ed. E.E. Stengel (2 vols., Marburg, 1913–58). Urkunden- und Quellenbuch zur Geschichte der altluxembourgischen Territorien, ed. C. Wampach, vol. 1 (Luxembourg, 1935). Ursinus, Passio altera Leudegarii, ed. B. Krusch, MGH SRM 5 (Hannover, 1910), pp. 323–56. Valerius abbas Bergidensis, De genere monachorum, ed. M.C. Díaz y Díaz, Anécdota Wisigothica, I. Estudios ediciones de textos literarios menores de época visigoda (Salamanca, 1958), pp. 56–61. ——, Epistola de beatissimae Aetheriae laude, ed. A. Arce, Itinerario de la virgen Egeria (Madrid, 1980), pp. 8–16. Venantius Fortunatus, Opera poetica, ed. F. Leo, MGH Auct. Ant. 4,1 (Berlin, 1881). ——, Vita s. Paterni, ed. B. Krusch, MGH AA 4, 2 (Berlin, 1885), pp. 33–7. Vigilius Papa, Epistula 1 (ad Profuturum), ed. F. Antonio González, Epistolae decretales ac Rescripta Romanorum Pontificum (Madrid, 1821), pp. 154–56. De virtutibus s. Geretrudis, ed. B. Krusch, MGH SRM 2 (Hannover, 1888), pp. 464–74. De virtutibus s. Martini, ed. B. Krusch, MGH SRM 1,2 (Hannover, 1985). Vita abbatum Acaunensium, ed. B. Krusch, MGH SRM 3 (Hannover, 1896), pp. 329–36. Vita s. Agili abbatis Resbacensis, ed. J. Mabillon, AASS O.S.B. II, p. 321. Vita Aldegundae prima, ed. W. Levison, MGH SRM 4 (Hannover, 1902), pp. 87–8. Vita Amati, ed. B. Krusch, MGH SRM 4 (Hannover, 1902), pp. 215–21. Vita Anstrudis abbatissae Laudunensis, ed. W. Levison, MGH SRM 4 (Hannover, 1902), pp. 66–78. Vita Argenteae; Pasionario Hispánico, ed. A. Fabrega Grau (Barcelona/Madrid, 1953–55). Vita Audoini, ed. B. Krusch, MGH SRM 5 (Hannover, 1910), pp. 536–67. Vita Balthildis, ed. B. Krusch, MGH SRM 2 (Hannover, 1888), pp. 475–508. Vita beati Maurilii, ed. B. Krusch, MGH AA 4, 2 (Berlin, 1885), pp. 84–101. 554  Vita Burchardi, ed. G. Waitz, MGH SS 4 (Hannover, 1841), pp. 829–46. Vita Danielis, ed. H. Delehaye, Les saints stylites (Paris, 1923). Vita Filiberti abbatis Gemeticensis et Heriensis, ed. W. Levison, MGH SRM 5 (Hannover, 1910), pp. 568–606. Vita s. Fructuosi, ed. M.C. Díaz y Díaz (Bracara, 1974). Vita Genovefae, ed. B. Krusch, MGH SRM 3 (Hannover, 1896), pp. 204–38. Vita Geretrudis prima, ed. B. Krusch, MGH SRM 2 (Hannover, 1888), pp. 452–63. Vita Johannis Gorzensis, MGH SS 4 (Hannover, 1841), pp. 335–77. Vita Landiberti auctore Nicolao, ed. B. Krusch, MGH SRM 6 (Hannover and Leipzig, 1913), pp. 407–29. Vita Landiberti vetustissima, ed. B. Krusch, MGH SRM 6 (Hannover, 1913), pp. 353–84. Vita Leutfredi abbatis Madriacensis, ed. B. Krusch, MGH SRM 7 (Hannover, 1920), pp. 7–18. Vita Odiliae abbatissae Hohenburgensis, ed. W. Levison, MGH SRM 6 (Hannover, 1913), pp. 24–50. Vita Sadalbergae, ed. B. Krusch, MGH SRM 5 (Hannover, 1910), pp. 49–66. Vita Severini abbatis Acaunensis, ed. B. Krusch, MGH SRM 3 (Hannover, 1896), pp. 168–70. Vita Trudonis, ed. W. Levison, MGH SRM 4 (Hannover, 1902), pp. 273–98. Vitae Caesarii episcopi Arelatensis libri duo, ed. B. Krusch, MGH SRM 3 (Hannover, 1896), pp. 433–501. Vitae patrum Jurensium, ed. F. Martine, Vies des Pères du Jura, SC 142 (Paris, 1968). Vitae sanctorum patrum Emeritensium, ed. A. Maya Sánchez (Turnhout, 1992). Wandelbert of Prüm, Miracula s. Goaris, ed. O. Holder-Egger, MGH SS 15, 1 (Hannover, 1887), pp. 361–73. The Mission of Friar William of Rubruck. His Journey to the Great Khan Möngke, 1253–55, ed. and transl. by Peter Jackson (London, 1990). L Acién Almansa, M., Entre el feudalismo y el Islam. Umar ibn Hafsun en los historiadores, en las fuentes y en la historia ( Jaén, 1994). Actes du XI e Congrès international d’archéologie chrétienne. Studi di antichità cristiana 41 (Rome, 1989). Airlie, S., “Bonds of power and bonds of association in the court circle of Louis the Pious”, in: P. Godman and R. Collins eds., Charlemagne’s heir: New perspectives on the reign of Louis the Pious (814–40) (Oxford, 1989), pp. 191–204. ——, “True teachers and pious kings: Salzburg, Louis the German and Christian order” in: R. Gameson and H. Leyser eds., Belief and Culture in Medieval Europe (Oxford, 2001), forthcoming. Ajot J. and D. Coxal, “Chelles”, Gallia informations: Préhistoire et histoire (1993), pp. 58–60. Albrectsen, E., Fynske Jernaldergrave IV, Bd. 1–2 (Odense, 1971). Althoff, G., Amicitiae und Pacta. Bündnis, Einung, Politik und Gebetsgedenken im beginnenden 10. Jht. Schriften der MGH 37 (Hannover, 1992). Amato, P., De vera effigie Mariae: Antiche icone Romane (Milan, 1988). Ament, H., Fränkische Adelsgräber von Flonheim in Rheinhessen. Germanische Denkmäler der Völkerwanderungszeit B 5 (Berlin, 1970). ——, “Merowingische Grabhügel”, in: W. Schlesinger ed., Althessen im Frankenreich. Nationes: Historische und philologische Untersuchung zur Entstehung der europaïschen Nationen im Mittelalter 2 (Sigmaringen, 1975), pp. 63–93. D’Amico, R., “L’organizzazione assistenziale: le diaconie”, in: Roma e l’età carolingia: Atti del giornati di studio 3–8 maggio 1976 (Rome, 1976), pp. 229–36.  555 Andoloro, M., “La datazione della tavola di S. Maria in Trastevere”, Rivista dell’istituto nazionale d’archeologia e storia dell’arte 19/20 (1972/73 [1975]), pp. 139–215. Andrén, A., “Guld og makt—en tolkning av de skandinaviska guldbrakteaternas funktion”, in: C. Fabech and J. Ringtved eds., Samfundsorganisation og Regional Variation. Jysk Arkeologisk Selskabs Skrifter XXVII (Århus, 1991), pp. 245–55. ——, “Världen från Lunds horisont”, in: C. Wahlöö ed., Metropolis Daniae. Ett stycke Europa (Lund, 1998), pp. 117–30. ——, “Från antiken till antiken”, in: S. Thorman and M. Hagdahl eds., Satden, himmel eller helvete (Stockholm, 1998), pp. 142–93. ——, “Landscape and settlements as utopian space”, in: C. Fabech and J. Ringtved eds., Settlement and landscape. Proceedings of a Conference in Århus, Denmark, May 4–7 1998. (Århus, 1999), pp. 383–94. Anton, H.H., Studien zu den Klosterprivilegien der Päpste im frühen Mittelalter. Beiträge zur Geschichte und Quellenkunde des Mittelalters 4 (Berlin, 1975). Appadurai, A., “Introduction: commodities and the politics of value”, in: A. Appadurai ed., The social life of things: Commodities in a cultural perspective (Cambridge, 1988), pp. 3–63. Arbesmann R. and W. Humfner, Iordanis de Saxonia Liber Vitas Fratrum (New York, 1943). Arce, J., “Orbis Romanus y Finis Terrae”, in: C. Fernández Ochoa ed., Los finisterre atlánticos en la Antigüedad. Época preromana y romana (Madrid, 1996), pp. 71–4. Arrhenius, B., “Ein Goldschmiedegrab von Hovgårdsberg Vendel, Uppland, Sweden”, Frühmittelalterliche Studien 13 (1979), pp. 393–414. Ashley, K. and P. Sheingorn, Writing Faith: Text, sign and history in the miracles of Sainte Foy (Chicago, 1999). Astill, G. and W. Davies, A Breton landscape (London, 1997). Atlas du sous-sol archéologique des centres urbains anciens. Dinant (Bruxelles, 1988). Axboe, M., “Guld og guder i folkevandringstiden”, in: C. Fabech and J. Ringtved eds., Samfundsorganisation og Regional Variation. Jysk Arkeologisk Selskabs Skrifter XXVII (Århus, 1991), pp. 187–200. ——, “Gudme and the gold bracteates”, in: P.O. Nielsen e.a. eds., The archaeology of Gudme and Lundeborg (Copenhagen, 1994), pp. 68–77. Baillien, H., Tongeren. Van Romeinse civitas tot middeleeuwse stad (Assen, 1979). Baldovin, J., The urban character of Christian worship. The origins, development, and meaning of stational liturgy. Orientalia christiana analecta 228 (Rome, 1987). Balzaretti, R., “The monastery of Sant’Ambrogio and dispute settlement in early medieval Milan”, EME 3 (1994), pp. 1–18. Balzer, M., “. . . et apostolicus repetit quoque castra suorum. Vom Wohnen im Zelt im Mittelalter”, Frühmittelalterliche Studien 26 (1992), pp. 208–29. Barahona Simoes, M., “Finis Terrae: the land where the Atlantic Ocean begins”, History of the European Ideas 15, 4–6 (London, 1992), pp. 853–8. Barb, A.A., “The survival of the magic arts”, in: A. Momigliano ed., The conflict between paganism and christianity in the fourth century (Oxford, 1963), pp. 100–25. Barber, P., Vampires, burial and death: Folklore and reality (New Haven, 1988). Barbero A. and M. Vigil, “La organización social de los cántabros y sus transformaciones en relación con los orígenes de la Reconquista”, in: Sobre los orígenes sociales de la Reconquista (Barcelona, 1974), pp. 139–95. Barceló, M., “El califa patente: el ceremonial omeya de Cordoba o la escenificación del poder”, in: R. Pastor, I. Kieniewicz, E. Garcia de Enterria e.a. eds., Estructuras y formas del poder en la historia (Salamanca, 1991), pp. 51–71. Barlow J., “Gregory of Tours and the myth of the Trojan origins of the Franks”, Frühmittelalterliche Studien 29 (1995), pp. 86–95. Barnes, T.D., Constantine and Eusebius (Cambridge, MA, 1981). Barrett, J., “Fields of discourse: reconstituting a social archaeology”, Critique of Anthropology 7, 3 (1988), pp. 5–16. 556  ——, Fragments from Antiquity. Social Archaeology Series (Oxford, 1994). Barrett, J.C., R. Bradley and M.Green eds., Landscape, monuments and society. The prehistory of Cranborne Chase (Cambridge, 1991). Barth, F., Nomads of South Persia (New York, 1965). ——, Pastoral production and society (Cambridge, 1979). Bassett, S. ed., Death in towns: Urban responses to the dying and the dead, 100–1600 (Leicester, 1992). Baynes, N.H., “The Supernatural Defenders of Constantinople”, Analecta Bollandiana 67 (1949), pp. 165–77. Bazelmans, J., “Conceptualising early Germanic political structure: a review of the use of the concept of Gefolgschaft”, in: N. Roymans and F. Theuws eds., Images of the past (Amsterdam, 1991), pp. 91–130. ——, “The gift in the Old English epic Beowulf ” Unpublished lecture given at the symoposium Theory and Method in the Study of Material Culture, Leiden 31./8.– 2./9.1992. ——, “Beyond power. Ceremonial exchanges in Beowulf ”, in: F. Theuws and J.L. Nelson eds., Rituals of power from late Antiquity to the early Middle Ages, TRW 8 (Leiden/Boston/Köln, 1999), pp. 311–76. ——, By weapons made worthy: Lords, retainers and their relationship in Beowulf (Amsterdam, 1999). Bæksted, A., Nordiske Guder og Helte (Copenhagen, 1990). Becher, M., “Der sogenannte Staatsstreich Grimaolds. Versuch einer Neubewertung”, in: J. Jarnut, U. Nonn, M. Richter eds., Karl Martell in seiner Zeit (Sigmaringen, 1994), pp. 119–47. Belke, K. and P. Soustal eds., Die Byzantiner und ihre Nachbarn (Wien, 1995). Bellinger, A.E. and P. Grierson, Catalogue of the Byzantine Coins in the Dumbarton Oaks Collection. Vol. 2 in 2 parts (Washington, DC, 1968). Belting, H., “I mosaici dell’aula Leonina come testimonianza della prima ‘renovatio’ dell’arte medievale di Roma”, in: Roma e l’età carolingia: Atti del giornati di studio 3–8 maggio 1976 (Rome, 1976), pp. 167–182. ——, “Die beiden Palastaulen Leos III. und die Entstehung einer päpstlichen Programmkunst”, Frühmittelalterliche Studien 12 (1978), pp. 55–83. ——, “Papal artistic commissions as definitions of the Church in Rome”, in: H. Hager and S.S. Munshower eds., Light on the Eternal City: Observations and discoveries in the art and architecture of Rome. Papers in Art History from the Pennsylvania State University 2 (University Park, PA, 1987), pp. 13–30. Berg, S., R. Rolle and H. Seemann, Der Archäologe und der Tod. Bucher Report Series (München/Luzern, 1981). Bergengrün, A., Adel und Grundherrschaft im Merovingerreich (Wiesbaden, 1958). Berkum, A. van, “Op zoek naar de meest geschikte residentie. Geruisloze verhuizingen van de Episcopi Tungrorum. Een poging tot reconstructie”, in: C.G. de Dijn ed., Sint-Servatius. Bisschop van Tongeren-Maastricht. Het vroegste Christendom in het Maasland. Handelingen van het colloquium te Alden Biesen (Bilzen), Tongeren en Maastricht 1984 (Borgloon-Rijkel, 1986), pp. 147–62. Berlière, U., “Le nombre des moines dans les anciens monastères”, Revue Bénédictine 41 (1929), pp. 231–61 and 42 (1930), pp. 19–42. Bernhardt, J.W., Itinerant kingship and royal monasteries in early medieval Germany, 936–1075 (Cambridge, 1993). Bernoulli, C.A., Die Heiligen der Merowinger (Tübingen, 1900). Bertelli, C., La Madonna di Santa Maria in Trastevere: Storia, Iconografia, Stile di un dipinto dell’ottavo secolo (Rome, 1961). Bertholet, P. and P. Hoffsummer, L’église halle des Saints Hermes et Alexandre à Theux (Dison, 1986). Bertolini, O., “Per la storia delle diaconie romane nell’alto medioevo sino alle fine  557 del secolo VIII”, in: O. Banti ed., Scritti scelti di storia medioevale (Livorno, 1968), pp. 309–460. Besson, M., “La donation d’Ayroenus à Saint-Maurice (mardi 8 octobre 765)”, Zeitschrift für schweizerische Kirchengeschichte/Revue d’histoire ecclésiastique suisse 3 (1909), pp. 294–6. Bierbrauer, V., “Die Goten vom 1.–7. Jahrhundert n. Chr.: Siedelgebiete und Wanderbewegungen aufgrund archäologischer Quellen”, Peregrinatio Gotica 3. Universitetets Oldsaksamlings Skrifter NY rekke 14 (Oslo, 1992), pp. 9–43. ——, “Archäologie und Geschichte der Goten von 1.–7. Jahrhundert. Versuch einer Bilanz”, Frühmittelalterliche Studien 28 (1994), pp. 151–71. Biddle, M., “Towns”, in: D.M. Wilson ed., The archaeology of Anglo-Saxon England (London, 1976), pp. 99–150. Billard, C., F. Carré, M. Guillon and C. Treffort, “L’occupation funéraire des monuments mégalithiques pendant le haut moyen âge. Modalités et essai d’interprétation”, Bulletin de la Société Préhistorique Française 93 (1996), pp. 279–86. Biscop, J.-L. and J.-P. Sodini, “Travaux à Qal’at Sem’an”, Acts of the 11th International Congress of Christian Archaeology (Rome, 1989), pp. 1675–93. Bishko, Ch.J., “The date and nature of the Spanish Consensoria Monachorum”, American Journal of Philology 69 (1948), pp. 377–95. ——, “Gallegan pactual monasticism in the repopulation of Castille”, Estudios dedicados a Menéndez Pidal II (Madrid, 1951), pp. 513–31 (Published with an “Additional Note” in: idem, Spanish and Portuguese monastic history, 600–1300 (London, 1984), pp. 513–31 and 532A–36A). ——, “Episcopus sub regula or episcopi sub regula? St. Fructuosus and the monasticized episcopate in the peninsular west”, Bracara Augusta 21 (1967), pp. 63–4. ——, “The pactual tradition in Hispanic Monasticism”, in: idem, Spanish and Portuguese monastic history, 600–1300 (London, 1984), pp. 1–43. Bitel, L.M., Isle of the saints. Monastic settlement and Christian community in early Ireland (Cork, 1990). Bitner-Wróblewska, A., “The Southeastern Baltic zone and Scandinavia in the early Migration Period”, Barbaricum 2 (1992), pp. 245–66. Blaauw, S. de, Cultus et Decor: liturgia e architettura nella Roma tardoantica e medievale. Basilica Salvatoris, Sanctae Mariae, Sancti Petri, 2 vols. (Vatican City, 1994). Blair, J. ed., Minsters and parish churches: the local church in transition, c. 950 –1200. Oxbow Monograph 17 (Oxford, 1988). Bleichsteiner, R., “Zeremonielle Trinksitten und Raumordnung bei den turko-mongolischen Nomaden”, Archiv für Völkerkunde 6/7 (1951/52), pp. 181–208. Bloch, M., Placing the dead: tombs, ancestral villages and kinship organisation in Madagascar (London and New York, 1971). Bloch, M. and J. Parry, “Introduction: money and the morality of exchange”, in: J. Parry and M. Bloch eds., Money and the morality of exchange (Cambridge, 1989), pp. 1–32. Blockley, R.C., The fragmentary classicising historians of the later Roman Empire: Eunapius, Olympiodorus, Priscus and Malchus (Liverpool, 1983). ——, ed., The History of Menander the Guardsman (Liverpool, 1985). Bloemers, J.H.F., “Twenty five years of ROB Research in Roman Limburg, Berichten van de Rijksdienst voor het Oudheidkundig Bodemonderzoek 23 (1973), pp. 237–258. Blondel, L., “Les anciennes basiliques d’Agaune. Étude archéologique”, Vallesia 3 (1948), pp. 9–57. ——, “Aperçu sur les édifices chrétiens dans la Suisse occidentale avant l’an mille”, in: Frühmittelalterliche Kunst in den Alpenländern—Art du haut moyen âge dans la région alpine—Arte dell’alto medio evo nella regione alpina, Actes du III e congrès international pour l’étude du haut moyen age, 9–14 septembre 1951 (Olten, 1954), pp. 271–308. 161–274. de commerce par terre et par mer et de lieu de façonnage des objets. The past in the Past: The re-use of ancient monuments (London. “Sacred Geography”. in: E. xxx. 39–52. pp. symboles (Turnhout. World Archaeology 30. pp. ritual and religion. Bosl.. Les fouilles de l’ancien groupe épiscopal de Genève (1976–1993).G. pp. A. M. Entwurf einer Theorie der Praxis (Frankfurt. 1998). 211–58. pp. pp. Garwood. Altering the earth: The origins of monuments in Britain and Continental Europe (Edinburgh. “De archeologische getuigen van het eerste christendom in de Civitas Tungrorum”. De La. Bulletin de la société d’histoire et d’archéologie de Genève 11 (1958). 123–35. ——. 1983). 1–3. 1990). Cahiers d’archéologie genevoise 1 (Geneva. pp. Bradley. 361–81. Problémes d’origine.558  ——. précédée de trois études d’ethnologie kabyle (Genève. “Le prieuré Saint-Victor.. Veröffentlichungen der Max-Planck Instituts für Geschichte 11/i (Göttingen. pp. 1993). 1998). 255–69. “La chronologie du cartulaire de Redon”. Boesch Gajano. 1989. K. pp. Innsbruck. 1985).. World Archaeology 23 (1991). in: Colloque international sur les ressources minérales et l’histoire de leur exploitation (Grenoble. Skeats and J. D. Sociological Theory 12 (1994). ——. tombs and natural places in the neolithic of south-west England”. Anglo-Saxon cemeteries: A reappraisal (Stroud. S. ——. 37–62. in: P. in: Deutsche Königspfalzen I. R. 1–29. Une rectification”. “L’ambre á l’époque romaine. “Monuments and places”. C. Borderie. “Le sens de l’honneur”. “Pfalz und Forsten”. 1 (1997). de. Southworth ed. 1979). “Ruined buildings. Stjernquist eds.. Regesta Imperii I. de Dijn ed. 1999). “Models of burial. Rijkel.. settlement and worship: the final phase reviewed”. Toms eds. Bradley. pp. Annales de Bretagne 5 (1890). Böhmer. in: idem.. ——. Journal of British Archaeological Association 140 (1987). “Reliques et pouvoirs”. La translation de Saints Marcellin et Pierre. Boe. cultes. Braemer. The world view of prehistoric man. R. ——. 35–63. ——. The passage of arms: An archaeological analysis of prehistoric hoards and votive deposits (Cambridge. 1990). A. “Directions to the dead”.. ——. Étude sur Einhard et sa vie politique de 827 à 834 (Paris. Bourdieu. ——. Sint-Servatius. 1907). R.. F. pp. with E. 1–17. 1972). eds. Vallesia 22 (1967). in: C... Bozoki and A-M. 135–40.. L’aigle: chronique politique d’un embleme (Paris. G. 1998). KVHAA Konferenser 40 (Lund. Boureau. in: L. bisschop van Tongeren-Maastricht. Tongeren en Maastricht 1984 (Borgloon. 209–19. 177–99. ——. Les reliques. “Rethinking the State”. Handelingen van het colloquium te Alden Biesen (Bilzen). repr.. pp. in: idem. pp. Esquisse d’une théorie de la pratique. The significance of monuments (London. Jennings.. Het vroegste Christendom in het Maasland. 1986). pp. pp. Les débuts du christianisme et la royauté burgonde à Genève”. Bonnet. Mühlbacher. and H. Oxford University Committee for Archaeology Monograph 32 (Oxford. Die Regesten des Kaiserreiches unter den Karolingern 751–918 (2nd edn. 535–630. Objets. pp. in: E.. 13–22. 1963). ——. 1991). Larsson and B. 1993). World Archaeology 28 (1998). F. “Ritual. “La rampe d’accès à la basilique d’Agaune. A. Bondois. J.. Oxford. P. Archaeological Dialogues 4. pp. “Working the land: imagining the landscape”. “Time regained: the creation of continuity”. ——. 1 (1998). ruined stones: enclosures. . ——. Time and History”. Helvetius eds. notamment figurés”.. Boddington. pp. 1908). Williams. Sacred and profane: Proceedings of a conference on archaeology. Practical Reason (1998). R. 17–45. pp. Bühnen. 1981). Die frühchristlichen Mosaiken in Santa Maria Maggiore zu Rom (Wiesbaden. Brenk. 1996). pp. “Frühmittelalterliche Dirham—Schatzfunde in Europa. Witchcraft: Confessions and Accusations (London. pp. G. Zentrale Quellen über die Gründung im Spiegel der hagiographischen Tradition” in: G. Handelingen van het colloquium te Alden Biesen (Bilzen).. The rise of western Christendom: Triumph and diversity A.D. in: M. 103–52.P.. Brühl. 3 vols. Studien zur Entstehung und Überlieferung der Kapitularien Karls des Grossen und Ludwigs des Frommen”.. demons. W... (London. 25–57. “Early gold mosaics in Christian Art”. Fodrum. repr. “Sorcery. 59–78. TRW 4 (Leiden/Boston/Köln. Brogiolo. pp. 200 –1000 (Malden. Rheinische Vierteljahrsblätter 23 (1958). ——. different histories?”.. 1967. S. TRW 4 (Leiden/Boston/Köln. “Eastern and western Christendom in late Antiquity: a parting of the ways”.. 1996). Bisschop van Tongeren-Maastricht.S. pp. 222–50. Ward-Perkins.. 166–95. 80–101. 2 vols. pp. Ein gallischer Bischof im arianischen Streit”. Tongeren en Maastricht 1984 (Borgloon-Rijkel. The Sutton Hoo ship burial. Gistum. 235–81.C. “Byzantine cities in the seventh and eighth centuries—different sources. Brennecke. ——. 115–37. in: idem. (Hildesheim/München/Zürich.. Archiv für Diplomatik 32 (1986). 1999). Schrimpf ed.. pp. The idea and ideal of the town between late Antiquity and the early Middle Ages. ——. P. de Dijn ed. EthnographischArchäologische Zeitschrift 38 (1997). B. Brogiolo and B. “Relics and social status in the age of Gregory of Tours”. Bresslau. 1982). pp. Society and the holy in late Antiquity (London. vol. “Capitularia Relecta.. 305–501. pp. Frankreich und Italien vom des bis zur Mitte des 14.G. Brather. H. pp. Handbuch der Urkundenlehre für Deutschland und Italien 2. and the rise of Christianity from late Antiquity into the Middle Ages”. “The rise and function of the holy man in late Antiquity”. in: C. pp. 1989). The cult of saints: Its rise and function in Latin Christianity (Chicago. S. “Spolia from Constantine to Charlemagne: Aesthetics versus ideology”. 451–55. ——. “Remarques sur les notions de ‘capitale’ et de ‘résidence’ pendant le haut Moyen Age”. Brown. pp. “Servatius von Tongern. Brunnert. in: idem. 73–153. ——. A. Bruce-Mitford. M. 193–215. H. WI.. ——. ——.. ——. Servitium Regis: Studien zu den wirtschaftlichen Grundlagen des Königtums im Frankenreich und in den fränkischen Nachfolgestaaten Deutschland. 17–36. 1996). S. (4th edition Berlin. 1975). Society and the holy in Late Antiquity (Berkeley. Society and the Holy in Late Antiquity (Berkeley. Brink. 103–9.L. Ward-Perkins eds. 1992).-R. pp. 1. Aus Mittelalter und Diplomatik. (Köln and Graz. Sint-Servatius. 1970). “Königspfalz und Bischofstadt in fränkischer Zeit”. “Haus und Grab: gebaute Kosmologie und Ideologie”. repr. 1969). pp. 48–77. 2 vols. 1982). “Fulda als Kloster in eremo. 1986). Dumbarton Oaks Papers 41 (1987). pp.. Tor 28 (Uppsala. Zeitschrift für Archäologie des Mittelalters 23/24 (1996). 16–25. 559 Brandes. Probleme ihrer wirtschaflichen Interpretation aus archäologischer Perspektive”.. ——. Deutsches Archiv 29 (1964). ——. pp. The idea and ideal of the town between late Antiquity and the early Middle Ages. Jahrhunderts. in: idem. 1968). C. 2. “Hinkmariana 1”. Douglas ed. in: G. and B. ——. 161–274. . Das Kloster Fulda in der Welt der Karolinger und Ottonen (Frankfurt. pp. Bühler. Journal des Savants. Journal of Roman studies 61 (1971). pp. 1999). Palette 38 (1972). Power and persuasion in Late Antiquity (Madison. in: idem. 1982).-E.. Gesammelte Aufsätze. “Political and social structures in Early Scandinavia”. Het vroegste Christendom in het Maasland. 1975–1983). 3–45. Hubert. in: Aus Geschichte und Landeskunde: Festschrift F. pp.O. Busch. . A. in: D. pp. 1996). I.. Steinbach (Bonn.. Chapman.W. Carroll. One World Archaeology (London. Historische Zeitschrift 263 (1996). Cannadine.M. R. Cameron. pp. D. 1983). Kinnes and K. J. pp. D. B.. 1989). 1946). in: D. study XVIII. pp. “Images of authority: élites and icons in late sixth-century Constantinople”. pp. grief and mourning in modern Britain”.”. pp... Mirrors of mortality: Studies in the social history of death (London. Burgess. 187–242. “Die politische Kräfte zwischen Rhein und Odenwald bis zum 11. M. Sutton Hoo: Burial ground of kings? (London. 1975). Reeves and A. F. in: P. pp. 83–98. pp.. Bonner Historische Forschungen 44 (Bonn. EME 8 (1999). Le Moyen Age 89 (1983).. Kunst und Kultur der Karolingerzeit. “Virginity as metaphor”.560  Bullough. The archaeology of death (Cambridge.. K. 3–18. 219–45. “Wraiths. Carver. C. Past and Present 45 (1969). in: J. Chapman. 1991). Archiv für Hessische Geschichte und Altertumskunde 28 (1963). Schanche eds. Randsborg eds. Jahrhunderts”. 1993). Numismatic evidence (Berlin. 1961).. 1981). Past and Present 152 (1996). 1979). Zur frühmittelalterlichen Reichsgeschichte am? Rhein. in: R. H. 1998). “War and death. repr. Bund. 424–9. “Zur Stadtentwicklung von Worms im Früh. pp. in: D. 89–98. ——.. ——. pp. A. ——.. “The emergence of formal disposal areas and the ‘problem’ of megaliths in prehistoric Europe”. Past and Present 84 (1979). in eadem. History as text (London. 1960). Caciola. Cabrera. Continuity and change in sixthcentury Byzantium (London.. ed. pp. Chadwick. Baker ed.K. Karl der Grosse und Papst Leo III in Paderborn (Mainz. Mater Christi 1 (Rome. 1976). 1994). 1999). pp.. C. 177–201. Jht.. pp.. D. Bursche. 389–407. The orthodox churches and the West. The Chronicle of Hydatius and the Consularia Constantinopolitana. pp.L. Cecchelli. 1989).A. WallaceHadrill (Oxford. Carolingian renewal: Sources and heritage (Manchester. “Vom Attentat zur Haft: die Behandlung von Konkurrenten und Opponenten der frühen Karolinger”. M. T. Ideal and Reality in Frankish and Anglo-Saxon Society: Studies Presented to J. 3–35.. N. J. Carmichael. Cameron. Bullough.. 71–81. “Places of power: Mescalero Apache sacred sites and sensitive areas”. Main und Neckar (Darmstadt. 1981)... Gerlich. Capelle. Archaeological Research and the European Town in the first Millennium (Oxford. Sacred Places. ——.W. J. “The bishoprics of Saxony in the first century after Christianization”. “Mainz im Mittelalter: Gestalten und Probleme”. “Le pouvoir aristocratique et le sacré au haut Moyen-Age: Sainte Odile et les Etichonides dans la vita Odiliae”.. Büttner. “The early religious politics of Justin II. A. Carolingian renewal: Sources and heritage (Manchester. ——. A. Bullough. The Age of the saints in the early Celtic Church (Oxford. 1981). Carmichael. pp. Thronsturz und Herrscherabsetzung im Frühmittelalter. 173–93. Sacred Sites.. 51–67.H. 1991).. Gerlich. in his collected essays. Carver. A... Whaley ed. 1983). Wormald ed. Estudios sobre el priscilianismo en la Galicia antigua (Granada.. “Early medieval social groupings: the terminology of kinship”. Arguments in Stone. ——. 1–50. 1993). 123–60. Studies in Church History 13 (Oxford. 561–88.. “Handwerk in der Karolingerzeit”. 253–66. N. “Ladenburg am Neckar und das Bistum Worms bis zum Ende des 12. Community and belief in the early medieval West”. Cardot. in his collected essays. Mittelrhein und Hessen: Nachgelassene Studien (Stuttgart. Later Roman-Barbarian contacts in Central Europe. in: eadem ed. ed. D. Two contemporary accounts of the final years of the Roman Empire (Oxford. revenants and ritual in medieval culture”.. “Burial. “Aula renovata: the Carolingian court before the Aachen palace”. pp.und Hochmittelalter”. R. und Süddeutschland”. 1982). M.”. Clark. 1987). C. Ingelheim am Rhein: Forschungen und Studien zur Geschichte Ingelheims (Ingelheim. Bulletin de la société française de numismatique 41 (1986). 208–19. P.. 1978).. Guillotel. “The long walls of Thrace”. A.D. in: idem ed.. the matrona and the bishop: networks of allegiance in early sixth-century Rome”. 65 (1997). “Directional changes in funerary practices during 50. Regesto delle lettere dei papi del secolo VIII (Milan.. A. thesis. J. Aquae Granni. Journal of Roman Archaeology. Zeitschrift für die Archäologie des Mittelalters 4 (1976). Classen. 1984). Ve–Xe siècles”.C.. (Steenbrugge. Couffon.. “L’Architecture religieuse en Bretagne. Beiträge zur Geschichte und Quellenkunde des Mittelalters 9 (Sigmaringen. . Old Norse myths in medieval Northern society 1: The Myths (Odense. H. 177–232. Cüppers. Crow. 1–40. pp.. Frühmittelalterliche Studien 21 (1987). das Papsttum und Byzanz: Die Begründung des karolingischen Kaisertums. 147–80. Space. pp. La Bretagne des saints et des rois. Die byzantinische Stadt im 6.. R. Jahrbuch des Römisch-Germanischen Zentralmuseums 20 (1973). pp. 1995). pp.. 13–9.. “El éxito de los Priscilianistas: a propósito de cultura y fe en el siglo IV d. L. “An aristocratic community on the northern Frankish frontier. Christoffersen. XI e–XIII e siècle (Rennes. 1969).M. Jahrhundert. Beiträge zur Archäeologie von Aachen (Köln. Tonnerre. “Dark Age architecture in Rome”. Man 45 (1945). Clunies Ross. Mango and G. ——. 1963). Cooper. 1998).. forthcoming. Mémoires de la Société d’Histoire et d’Archéologie de Bretagne 23 (1943). “Housing in early medieval Rome. pp. Coulson.. 2: The reception of Norse myths in medieval Iceland (Odense. Chédeville. “The martyr. “Besitzabstufungen zur Merowingerzeit im Spiegel reicher Grabfunde aus West. 1994). pp. 561 Chédeville. “Bemerkungen zur Pfalzenforschung am Mittelrhein”. pp. Pérez. pp. Piety. forthcoming in book form). pp. G. pp. in: C. 1964). 1977). in: idem ed. 534–606. 1992). 75–96. V. “Fortleben und Wandel spätrömischen Urkundenwesens im frühen Mittelalter”. PBSR 64 (1996).. pp. ——. D. Teja and C. Christlein. V e–X e siècle (Rennes.-Y. Byzantinisches Archiv 13 (München. Dagron eds. Childe. 39–62. J. pp. Claude. pp. Vorträge und Forschungen 23 (Sigmaringen. Constantinople and its hinterland (Aldershot. Cambridge. pp.. ——. Croquison. time and man: A prehistorian’s view (Cambridge. “Fortresses and social responsibility in late Carolingian France”.. 87–9.D. 1985). P. La Bretagne féodale. and N. Clement. R.. Congreso Internacional la Hispania de Teodosio (Valladolid/Segovia. 239–59. 85–100. Byzantion 34 (1964). property and power in eighth-century central Italy (unpublished Ph.und Badeortes Aachen”.. “Møllegårdsmarken—Struktur und Belegung eines Gräberfeldes”. Prolonged echoes. in: J. Coupland. Coates-Stephens. Veröffentlichungen des Max-Planck Instituts für Geschichte 11/i (Göttingen. 1984). Cracco Ruggini.. pp. in: R. Lexique des anciennes règles monastiques occidentales. S.. 29–37. R. 1998. Autenrieth ed. 690–726”. Recht und Schrift im Mittelalter. “Beiträge zur Geschichte des römischen Kur. ——.. ——. Conte. pp. 500–1000”.. Karl der Große.. 109–24. M. pp.000 years”. A. 1997). Costambeys. 2 vols. L. “In palatio nostro: les monnaies palatines de Charlemagne”.G. and H. J.. 1–75. 87–146. in: Deutsche Königspfalzen I. “Die Geschichte der Königspfalz Ingelheim bis zur Verpfändung an Kurpfalz 1375”. 13–54. 39–47. PBSR. K. EME 3 (1994). “L’iconographie chrétienne à Rome d’après le Liber Pontificalis”. J. Property and power in the early Middle Ages (Cambridge. 772–800”. Heidecker ed. Fouracre eds. (repr. 5–63. pp. Servatiusstift und Stadt Maastricht. Davies and P.. pp. “Die Vorrechte des Kaisers in Rom. Zeitschrift für Kunstgeschichte 29 (1966). 157–69. ——. G.. N. “Die Mosaiken Leos III. The settlement of disputes in early medieval Europe (Cambridge. “People and places in dispute in ninth-century Brittany” in: W. ——. R. MGH Schriften IV (München.. David. Deeters.E. Deér. Property and power in the early Middle Ages (Cambridge. “In welke eeuw leefde Sint Servaas?” De Maasgouw.. 1975). tijdschrift voor Limburgse geschiedenis en oudheidkunde 113 (1994). De bischoppen van Maastricht (Maastricht.. 1970). ——. “The rebirth of Rome in the eighth and ninth centuries”. 303–82. Bemerkungen zur Darstellung der christlichen Stadt”. C.. 137–64. 1861–1901)... in: Fälschungen im Mittelalter. 1984). 64–84. 1947). J. Etude sur le ‘césaropapisme’ byzantin (Paris. 2 (Cambridge/Totowa. Small worlds: The village community in early medieval Brittany (London. and P. Untersuchungen zu Entstehung und Verfassung (Bonn. col. ——. “Forgery in the Cartulaire de Redon”. Dahn. 1980). Folia Orientalia 25 (1988). 1988). in idem. L. pp. pp. 1967). J. vol. Books I–IX. and P. pp. pp. H. ——. “Het middeleeuws officie van het hoogfeest van Sint Servaas te Maastricht”. The Muslim World 15 (1965). 265–74. Davies. Jagodzinski and Z. pp. 1982). Fouracre eds. Dahlhaus-Berg. 5–28. pp. Dumbarton Oaks Papers 31 (1977). ——. “The ninth-century Spanish martyrs’ movement and the origins of western Christian missions to the Muslims”. 1986). 2000).. pp. pp. Elblog”. Declercq... und die Anfänge der karolingischen Renaissance in Rom”. Fisher. The death rituals of rural Greece (Princeton.. 69–90. Publications de la Société Historique et Archéologique dans le Limbourg 133 (1997).. pp. Davis-Weyer... ——. History and Anthropology 1 (1985). “Tradition und Adaption. property and immunities in early medieval Wales” in: W. Deckers. The settlement of disputes in early medieval Europe (Cambridge. A. P. “Arabische Münzen aus einer frühmittelalterlichen Handwerker. Kmietowicz. La société du spectacle (Paris. 289–312..J. Saxo Grammaticus: The History of the Danes.. ——. pp. 1–82. “Originals and cartularies: the organization of archival memory (ninth to eleventh centuries)” in: K. 3–25. F.562  Cutler. De La Haye. 1996). G.. 1995). ——. 147–70. pp. 321–39.und Handelsiedlung in Janów Pomorski. M.. 111–32. ——. in: R. “L’organisation ecclésiastique du royaume suève au temps de Saint Martin de Bracara”. Nova Antiquitas et Antiqua Novitas: typologische Exegese und isidorianische Geschichtsbild bei Theodulf von Orleans (Köln. Czapkiewicz. Mitteilungen des deutschen archaeologischen Instituts. “Adding insult to injury: power. G. study IX). Debord. Delogu. Danforth. 1985). La romanité chrétienne en Orient (London. M. 1995). Francia 17/i (1990). Hodges . Die Könige der Germanen (München.. Davies and P.. “The composition of the Redon cartulary”.. Davidson. Römische Abteilung 95 (1988). J. Fouracre eds. W. 93–140. Gem. Fouracre eds. P. Charters and the use of the written word in medieval society (Turnhout. Etudes historiques sur la Galice et le Portugal du VI e au XII e siècle (Lisboa/Paris. “Le christianisme dans la ville byzantine”.. and P. N. Schweizer Beiträge zur allgemeinen Geschichte 15 (1957). E. 1986). their conduct and their settlement in the village communities of eastern Brittany in the ninth century”. in: idem. pp. Dagron. Empereur et prêtre. 1988–89). “Disputes. Depreux. G. La storia economica di Roma nell’alto medioevo all luce dei recenti scavi archeologici. Bibliotheca di Archeologia Medievale 10 (Florence. in: Cultura e società nell’Italia medievale: Studi per Paolo Brezzi. “Servants of the Mother of God in Byzantine and medieval art”. in: idem ed.. Paroli eds.C. Villes et campagnes au moyen âge.-M. 1993). “Villes. La storia economica di Roma nell’alto medioevo all luce dei recenti scavi archeologici. 1988). pp. 33–42. “L’importazione di tessuti preziosi e il sistema economico romano nel IX secolo”. 340–53. pp. “El reino suevo de Hispania y su sede en Bracara”. ed. “Berthelming (Moselle)”. 239–41. 1993). in: idem and L. 563 and B. L. pp. E. 273–93. 1–25. 1998). (Barcelona. P. 1985). “La Pasión de S. in: L’archéologie en Hainaut-Cambrésis. croissance agraire dans le pays Mosan avant l’an mil: vingt ans après”. Mélanges Georges Despy (Liège. . Roma medievale: Aggiornamenti (Florence. E. pp. 1971). 1993).. Namur. Alvar ed.. Díaz. A propósito de Regula Communis IX”. 1993). 97–116. R. Homenaje al Prof. and L. in: J. Gerion 10 (1992). Etudes sur le grand domaine Carolingien. Derks. 1997). Devroey. ——. 404–23. 1998).D. Word and Image 5 (1989). pp. pp. in G. 33–70. Roma medievale: Aggiornamenti (Florence.. Anuario de Estudios Medievales 6 (1969). 400–800).. les hommes de l’époque romaine au XVIII e siècle (Bruxelles.. Duvosquel and A. Gallia 6 (1948). J. 1981).. 1998).-P. Demolon. and power strategies”. C. nr. ——. pp. Devroey. Earle. “L’agglomeration urbaine pendant le haut moyen age (du VIIe siècle aux environs de 1200)”. 1988). CBA Research Report 68 (London. Istituto Storico Italiano. 1 (1996). pp. “Redimuntur captiui.. 29–30. P.. M. Etudes sur le grand domaine Carolingien (Aldershot. Castillo and T. 1987).. Revue du Nord 50 (1968). pp. Avesnois (Valenciennes. “El Parrochiale Suevum: organización eclesiástica. “Ideology. ——. n. “Cimetière et chapelle mérovingiens à Hourdain (Nord)”. Deshusses. 700–1050.M ª. 2000). in: J. pp. Ethnographisch-Archäologische Zeitschrift 34 (1993). “Das Königtum Berhards von Italien”.C. Revue du Nord 61 (1979). 11–29. 1993). Formas económicas y sociales en el monacato visigodo (Salamanca. Spicilegium Friburgense 16 (Fribourg. in: J. 15–31. H. Díaz y Díaz. Ripoll and J. 543–69 (repr. Current Anthropology 37. ——. ——. pp. Dierkens eds. Prosopographie de l’entourage de Louis le Pieux (781–840) (Sigmaringen. pp. ed. ——. ——.. Quellen und Forschungen aus Italienischen Archiven und Bibliotheken 72 (1992). materialization. Pelayo y su difusión”. “Geschlechtsspezifische Bestattungssitten: ein archäologischer Befund und ein ethnoarchäologischer Ansatz”.J. “Villes et campagnes aux IXe et Xe siècles: l’exemple du pays Mosan”. Sedes regiae (ann. pp.-P. Blázquez VI (Madrid. “La storia economica di Roma nell’alto medioevo: Introduzione al seminario”. (Aldershot. 78–97 (repr. nr.. DeMarrais. campagnes. Paroli eds.. pp. Bibliotheca di Archeologia Medievale 10 (Florence. Devroey. pp.. 1991). in J. Le sacramentaire grégorien: Ses principales formes d’après les plus ancient manuscrits. in: La grande domaine aux epoques Merovingiennes et Carolingiennes (Gand. Gurt eds. in: J.. 63–78. Despy. J-P.M. le site. Devroey. pp. ——. pp. 145–68. 287–93. Díaz. ——. ——. poder politico y poblamiento en la Gallaecia tardo-antigua”. XII. P. “Les premiers polyptyques rémois VII e–IXe siècles”. 223–260 (repr. J... The rebirth of towns in the West A... 123–41. Etudes sur le grand domaine Carolingien (Aldershot. 1988). Hobley eds. Studi Storici 184–187 (Rome. “Les services de transport à l’abbaye de Prüm au IXe siècle”. “Oro e argento in Roma tra il VII e il IX secolo”. X.-P. pp. ——.. II. pp. Deshman. Delort. 25–37. Francia 8 (1980).D. O. Diesenberger and W. pp. Revue du Nord 69 (1986). 133–54. Pohl eds. 1966). acquises..564  ——. L. (Amsterdam. Dierkens.A.. “Ideologies in Social History”. Le site. M. bone. pp. Egger and H. bis Johannes VI. in: M. 1988). “Wahrnehmung und Aneignung der Natur in den Gesta abbatum Fontanellensium” in: C.L. in: P. horn. ——. ——. Archaeologica Mosana 1 (Maastricht. 1997). M. Eine Untersuchung zu den Ursprüngen des frühmittelalterlichen Klosterwesens und seine Quellen (Ultrecht. Mémento des sources hagiographiques de l’Historie de Bretagne (Rennes. 283–300.. Weigl eds. Dollfus. Integration und Herrschaft. M. 1972). 1989). et questions sur l’évêché de Sion”. 1974). “La ville de Huy avant l’an mil. 2000). 325–34. “Le mot locus employé dans le sens de monastère”. Dijkman. and A. 9–33. Dimier. Nora eds. 1990). 191–211.. Dodds. Originally published as: Guerriers et Paysans.. 1985).. Diesenberger. in: J. 126–49. 1992). 1973). Mélanges d’archéologie et d’histoire 10 (1890). Premier essai de synthèse des recherches historiques et archéologiques”. and A. and B. ——.D. 613–28. J. 1985). Forschungen zur Geschichte des Mittelalters 3 (Wien. W and A. Duczko. ed. 391–409. A. VIII e–XII e siècles. J. Vallesia 50 (1995).. and R. Doppelfeld. Douglas. Abbayes et chapitres entre Sambre et Meuse (VII e–XII e siècle) (Sigmaringen. Dubuis. G. Le Goff and P.W. 1966). Schriften des Rheinischen Landesmuseums Bonn 2 (Düsseldorf. Ontstaan en vroegste geschiedenis van de middeleeuwse steden in de zuidelijke Nederlanden (S. Isherwood. Vita Sancti Fructuosi (Bracara. “Sépultures de nouveau-nés dans les fouilles galloromaines de Fleurheim à Lyons-La-Forêt (Eure)”. Pirling.L. Quellenkundliche Arbeiten aus dem Institut für Österreichische Geschichtsforschung. F. pp. “Saint Amand et la fondation de l’abbaye de Nivelles”.. ——.. A. A. . Ervynck. “Premiers structures religieuses: paroisses et chapitres jusqu’au XIIe siècle”. Ergängzungsband 35 (Wien. pp. pp. Keusch und rein. pp. V e–IX e siècle.. Mitteilungen des Instituts für Österreichische Geschichtsforschung. Origins of Central Europe (Warsaw. les hommes de l’époque romaine au XVIII e siècle (Bruxelles. pp. pt. The world of goods (New York. Duchesne. pp.. 1979). Urbanczyk ed. Drijvers.-M. 33–61. Revue Mabillon 62 (1972). 1992). Duine. Lugon. 2000). 1998). pp. “Les premiers siècles d’un diocèse alpin: recherches. Text—Schrift—Codex. Guyot. Helena Augusta: The mother of Constantine the Great and the legend of her finding of the True Cross (Leiden. Dieten. The early growth of the European economy. Duby. Saint-Géry et la christianisation dans le nord de la Gaule... J. “Was bedeutet regula Columbani?”. Al-Andalus: The Art of Islamic Spain (New York.”.-O.. 1918). forthcoming). ivory and teeth: The use of animal skeletal materials in Roman and early medieval Maastricht. “Un aspect de la christianisation de la Gaule du Nord à l’époque mérovingienne. pp. “Les régions de Rome au moyen âge”. pp. Namur. Antler. M. Warriors and peasants from the seventh to the twelfth century (Ithaca. Ethnische Identitäten und soziale Organisation im Frühmittelalter. Geschichte der Patriarchen von Sergios I. 3: “Notes et documents pour servir à l’histoire des origines paroissiales”. ——. Premier essor de l’économie européenne (Paris. 2001. 135–9. F. Purity and danger: An analysis of the concepts of purity and taboo (London. La Vita Hadelini et les découvertes archéologiques d’Anthée et de Franchimont”. “Scandinavians in the Southern Baltic between the 5th and the 10th centuries A. Diem. 151–65. Fränkische Fürsten im Rheinland. Douglas. Annales de Normandie 18 (1968). W. ——... Constructing the Past: Essays in Historical Methodology (Cambridge. 1994). Pereira-Menaut ed... Verhaege eds. in: Naissance des arts chrétiens: Atlas des monuments chrétiens de la France (Paris. Ebling. 1991). Galicia fai dous mil anos... Unpublished doctoral dissertation (Los Angeles. in: G. Effros. Settimane 39 (Spoleto. O feito diferencial galego I. 1993). E..a. T. 73–112. pp. 1975.. Auprès des saints corps et âme: L’inhumation ‘ad sanctos’ dans la chrétienté d’Orient et d’Occident du III e au VII e siècle (Paris. Über den Prozess der Zivilisation. orig.). Urbanism in Medieval Europe 1 (Zellik. pp. ——. Recueil général des bas-reliefs de la Gaule romaine 11 (Paris. ——. 485–530..A. “Renovatio murorum tra programma urbanistica e restauro conservativo: Rome e il ducato Romano”.London. 60–80. 39–83. Eibl. pp. “L’architecture cultuelle”. 1978). ein germanischer Fürstensitz der älteren Kaiserzeit”. ——. 2 (1949/50). 1915). From grave goods to Christian epitaphs: Evolution in burial tradition and the expression of social status in Merovingian society. W. de Boe and F. University of Reading. ed. “Beyond cemetery walls: early medieval funerary topography and Christian salvation”. Lady with a mead cup. Eggebrecht.. A.. Espérandieu. 1987). Escribano. 1951). A history of religious ideas.-M. ——. ——.. E. Beihefte der Francia 2 (Sigmaringen. M. Ewig. H. pp. 1938). M. Elementary forms of the religious life (London. Ermini Pani. Elias. Jahrbuch des RömischGermanischen Zentralmuseums Mainz 17 (1970). 565 Dunn. “Leopoli—Cencelle: Una città di fondazione papale”. Die Mongolen und ihr Weltreich (Mainz. Spätantikes und fränkisches Gallien. Gesammelte Schriften. 2 vols.. Causa ecclesiae e iudicium publicum (Zaragoza. M. 41 (2000). H. pp. Durkheim. prophecy and lordship in the European warband from La Tène to the Viking Age (Dublin/Portland. Über die Zeit. Ellmers. 1978–1985). Byzantine and Modern Greek Studies 18 (1994). I. N. Studi Medievali 3e ser. Eggers. 1981). Beihefte der Francia 3.... (Bern/München. 2 vols. “The transition from polis to kastron in the Balkans (3rd–8th/9th century): general and regional perspectives”.. 1969). L. 1984). Iglesia y Estado en el certamen priscilianista.. Eaton. 1974).. pp. “Zur Stellung Bayern und Rheinfranken im Reiche Arnulfs von Kärnten”. 369–73. 1997). Ellis Davidson. 1988). Enright. “Kathedralpatrozinien im römischen und im fränkischen Gallien” in: idem. A neglected landscape? A study of the value of Antiquity to the inhabitants of Merovingian Gaul. E. D. in: Committenti e produzione artistico-letteraria nell’alto medioevo occidentale. 186–219. Prosopographie der Amtsträger des Merowingerreiches von Chlothar II (613) bis Karl Martell (741). 1995). 1996). 201–84. Eliade. H. in: idem. pp.. Revue historique 130 (1963).. pp. 1 (1997). Praehistorische Zeitschrift 34/35. 278–321. Historia 1 (Santiago de Compostela.. The sacred and the profane. with particular reference to the Roman rural landscape (unpublished M.M. “Igrexa e Herexia en Gallaecia: O Priscilianismo”. 25–72. “Lübsow. Es. ——. Arbeiten zur Wissenssoziologie 2 (Frankfurt a.A. pp.. 1997).. (Chicago. The nature of religion (New York. 1988). 1–23. De Romeinen in Nederland (Haarlem. pp. 58–111. Duval. pp. 3 vols. Atsma (München. . H. “Résidence et capital pendant le haut Moyen Age”. vol. N. Y. The forge and the crucible (second edition Chicago. Schamanismus und archaische Ekstasetechnik (Frankfurt/Main.J.V. repr. 1997). thesis. in: G. ed. 1992). Everett. EME 6. ——.. 362–408. The lost beliefs of northern Europe (London. “Scribes and charters in Lombard Italy”. ——. É. Patterns in comparative religion (London. s. pp.. Paris. N. 1976). B. Jahrbuch für Geschichte des Feudalisimus 8 (1984). Ritual. A. ——. Duval. “Zur Ikonographie nordischer Goldbrakteaten”. van. 37–47. Dickinson and D. in: J. 1998). P. pp. C. Falck. G. Centrala Platser. “Round barrows and the harmonious landscape: placing Early Bronze Age burial monuments in South-East England”. Halsall ed.. II. J. P.. Frühes Mittelalter. ed. 453–540. R. pp. “Organising the Landscape. in: K. Hårdh eds. L. 147–64. The cult of the saints in late Antiquity .. in: H. power.. 1979). Fevrier. 1975). Mitteilungen des Instituts für Österreichische Geschichtsforschung. “The missionary labors of St. seine Gründung und sein Vermächtnis im Seligenstadt”. Documents d’archéologie française 46 (Paris. 11–26.. La naissance de la prison (Paris. 1998). Das Einhardskreuz: Vorträge und Studien der Munsteraner Diskussion zur arcus Einhardi (Göttingen. ——.und Fürstentitel im neunten und zehnten Jahrhundert.A. 3–38. J. Field. 1987). and R. in: G. Fletcher.. Fouracre.J.. American Journal of Archaeology 81 (1977).. Fernández Alonso. 27–35. Einführung in die Archäologie des Mittelalters (Darmstadt. 1980). Hauck ed.. Late Merovingian France. in: M. Foss. Faider-Feytmans. pp. pp. Fichtenau. 1979). Byzantion 61 (1991). ——. Fabech. Hayward eds. Fixot and E.. in: T. pp.. pp. pp.Griffiths eds. Anglo-Saxon Studies in Archaeology and History 10 (Oxford. Chevallier ed.566  Spätantikes und fränkisches Gallien. “‘Politische’ Datierungen des frühen Mittelalters”. The Making of Kingdoms. History of sexuality I (London. Orígenes de la familia moderna (Barcelona. 1966). Violence and society in the early medieval West (Woodbridge. Atsma (München. pp. V. 1979).. 309–26.. Foucault. H. “Charlemagne et Aix-la-Chapelle”. “The origins of the Carolingian attempt to regulate the cult of the saints”. H. ——. 1999). 1972). Oxford Journal of Archaeology 17. Jht. Rheinische Geschichte in drei Bänden (Düsseldorf. Martin of Bracara in sixth-century Galicia”. “Attitudes towards violence in seventh. 1980). 1973). Fleuriot. bis 1244) (Düsseldorf. 1994). Falkenstein.. 1989). Wolfram ed. D. The rise of magic in early medieval Europe (Princeton.... 96–121. Mainz im frühen und hohen Mittelalter (Mitte 5. pp. Beihefte der Francia 3. 1011–8. pp.L.. Zadora-Rio eds. ——. 1974). G. Fehring. ——.. 5–22. Ergänzungsband 24 (Wien. Fleckenstein. Flandrin. The quest for El Cid (Oxford. 1955). Intitulatio II: Lateinische Herrscher... “Die Struktur des Hofes Karls des Grossen im Spiegel von Hinkmars ‘De ordine palatii ’”. vol. Zeitschrift des Aachener Geschichtsvereins 83 (1976). 1996). pp. Actes du III e congres international d’archéologie médiéval (Aix en Provence 28–30 septembre 1989). 231–89.. pp. Past and Present 127 (1990). Centrala Frågor (Lund. Gerberding.I. Studia Monastica 23 (1981).. ——. 469–86. MGH Studien und Texte 22 (Hannover. “Archaeology and the ‘twenty cities’ of Byzantine Asia”. ——. L. “Einhard. pp. Larsson and B. Power/knowledge: Selected interviews and other writings 1972–1977 (London. A. C. in: R.P. “Merovingian history and Merovingian hagiography”. Surveiller et punir. Mélanges d’Archéologie et d’Histoire offerts à André Piganiol 2 (Paris. 1991). L’environnement des églises et la topographie religieuse des campagnes médiévales. “La marque de l’Antiquité tardive dans le paysage religieux médiéval de la Provence rural”. in: L. “Objets d’époque romaine découverts dans des tombes mérovingiennes du bassin de La Haine (Belgique)”. 60–75. 260–317.. “Kult og samfund i yngre jernalder—Ravlunds som eksempel”. Ferreiro. ——. La cura pastoral en la España romanovisigoda (Rome. 2 vols. Les origines de la Bretagne (Paris. Flint. Howard-Johnston and P. History and hagiography 640 –720 (Manchester.and eighth-century Francia”.. pp. 1998). M.. and religion”. J. L. A matter of production. ——.-A. 3 (1998). 1980).. Otto III und Aachen. Grégoire de Tours et l’espace gaulois (Tours.-L. Das fränkische Reihengräberfeld Köln-Müngersdorf 1. Landscapes of fear: Perceptions of nature and the city in the Middle Ages (Cambridge. “Germanic legend in Old English literature”. in: idem. Spaces of the living and the dead: An archaeological dialogue (Oxford. L... Et Hus med Mange Rom. pp..B. Young eds. “La dédicace de Constantinople dans la tradition Byzantine”.T. P. 1991). “L’inventio et Translatio de S. 14–25.-F. 753–63. Analecta Bollandiana 15 (1937). “Note sur les ‘Capitula tractanda de causis cum episcopis et abbatibus tractandis’ de 811”. 1–25. “Les notices hispaniques dans le martyrologe d’Usuard”. 439–504. R. nuns. Schaefer and W. pp. Tours des archives du sol”. Wadley eds. V.. . F. in: I. Monks. 1977).. Galinié eds. “Touis de Grégoire. Analecta Bollandiana 16 (1938). Estudios geográficos 129 (1972). S. 1994). Gansum. pp. The Cambridge Companion to Old English literature (Cambridge. and friars in medieval society (Sewanee TE.A. Opedal eds. Francovich. Lee.. “Mythos. 61–127.. J. 1955). pp. D. in: idem. in: N.. “Sobre los orígenes del paisaje agrario gallego”. Gansum and A. 55–85. Frolow. 143–65. Panorama económico-social del NO. 65–80. 1999).. transl... Francis.. recherches sur la topographie de la ville”. D. Bibliothèque de l’École des Chartes 128 (1970). and G. García de Cortazar. pp. “The internal structure and regional context of early Iron Age society in south-western Germany”.J. Salamanca. Noyé eds. Ganz. García de Valdeavellano. Zoilo de Cordoue”. ——. “La comunidad patrimonial de la familia en el derecho español medieval”. Anales Palatinos del Califa de Cordoba al-Hakam II (Madrid. forthcoming. in: M. Lapidge eds. 1994).. 1 (1997). B. R. 171–83. “Clermont-Ferrand au VIe siècle. Kellaher and C. 273–344. Journal of the Institute of Burial and Cremation Administration 65. 88–106. “Charlemagne’s programme of imperial government”. “Tours from an archaeological standpoint”. 87–105. Frank. Frankenstein. Logos. Germanische Denkmäler der Völkerwanderungszeit 6 (Berlin. Estudios medievales de Derecho Privado (Sevilla. King.. J. García Gomez. 1999). Symbolisme og gravskikk i lys av gudediktene i den eldre Edda”. 567 and the early Middle Ages. 319–79. de la fin du VIe à la fin du Xe siècle”.. 1989). J. E. Biblioteca dell’archeologia medievale 11 (Florence.. Flaran 4 (1982). Al-Andalus 30 (1965). “Notas sobre la topografía cordobesa en los ‘Anales de AlHakam II’ por Isa R z ”.. 295–321. 5–20. Fumagalli. Godden and M. Gauthier and H. pp. pp. Revue d’Histoire de l’Eglise de France LXXVI (1990). Ritus. Ganshof. H. WickhamCrowley and B. pp. Fremersdorf. pp. Karkow. Galinié. 73–112. de. ——. J.M. García Fernández. in: E. 55–77. Essays on the contribution of Peter Brown (Oxford. Gaiffier. 1996). F. Sondheimer (London.. K. T. pp. de la Península Ibérica en época visigoda. pp. T. A. 1967). AmS-Rapport 11B (Stavanger.. pp. ——. Gaillard. pp. Rowlands.. Vennebok til Bjorn Myhre på 60-årsdagen. C.E. Studi Gratiani 13 (1967). pp. “Humour as history in Notker’s Gesta Karoli Magni ”. Frighetto. Fournier. pp. “Talking to people in cemeteries”. Fuglestvedt. ——. La storia dell’alto medioevo italiano (VI–X secolo) alla luce dell’archeologia. “Les fondations d’abbayes féminines dans le nord et l’est de la Gaule. pp. “Les communautés villageoises du Nord de la Péninsule Ibérique au Moyen Age”. and M. 1971). M. La obra de Valerius of Bierzo (Doctoral thesis. The Carolingians and the Frankish monarchy.. in: C. 1997). pp. Revue de l’histoire des religions 127 (1944). Bulletin of the Institute of Archaeology 15 (1978). 271–2. pp.B. L. 1999). Genicot. Provinces ecclesiastiques de Vienne et d’Arles (Paris. J. 1987).. 205–16. Praehistorische Zeitschrift 49 (1974). Gaudemet.. Karolingische Königshöfe am Mittelrhein. Geake. pp. Gerberding. A. “The Franks as the New Israel? Education for an identity from Pippin to Charlemagne”. L. M. pp. ——. 1909]. Garrison.F. PBSR 47 (1979). 1962). Geertman. Karl Martell in seiner Zeit (Sigmaringen. H. T. Geary. 600–c. 1999).A. ——. pp. Archaeologia Traiectina 10 (Groningen. BAR 261 (Oxford. Seizième centenaire de l’abbaye de Ligugé.. 1975). Gockel. J. in: J. Gibson. centenaire de la découverte du tombeau de saint Martin à Tours (Paris. Picard eds. The rise of the Carolingians and the Liber Historiae Francorum (Oxford. ——. 1993). 57–79. ——. George.. 17–35. Gebühr.. The use of grave-goods in conversion-period England c.. “The surviving remains of the Leonine wall.D. 39–62. 1975). 1958). Alcuin’s world through his letters and verse. The uses of the past in the early Middle Ages (Cambridge. “Zur Definition älterkaiserzeitlicher Fürstengräber vom Lübsow-Typ”. Gießauf. Nonn and M. Veröffentlichungen der Max-Planck Instituts für Geschichte 31 (Göttingen.. 1912). “The emergence of Latin literary culture and the court of Charlemagne”. “Le Tombeau de Saint Martin et les invasions normandes dans l’histoire et dans la légende” in: Mémorial de l’année martinienne. El fin del reino visigodo de Toledo. 1960) [orig.. ——. “Art as a cultural system”.J. pp. 114–61. More Veterum Il. in: Alcuin of York and his influence on European culture. Ward-Perkins. Furta sacra: Thefts of relics in the central Middle Ages (2nd ed. 850. 111–40. S. pp. M. 1970). Part II: The Passetto”. 1994). The Church of Saint Eirene at Constantinople (Oxford. ——. Mitteilungen der Grazer Morgenländischen Gesellschaft 6 (1997). pp. L’Eglise dans l’Empire Romain (IV–V siècles) (Paris. P. 1986). Hen and M. Gauthier. 82–128. Innes eds. Gennep. 1963). . 1973). 169–84. thesis (Cambridge 1996). C.. 1994)..568  García Moreno. Gasnault. McKitterick ed. Geertz. N. U. Carolingian culture: Emulation and innovation (Cambridge. pp. Germania Latina III (Groningen. 2000). “The surviving remains of the Leonine wall”. 1994).. in: idem: Local knowledge: Further essays in interpretive anthropology (New York.. Decadencia y catastrofe. Glick. 1997). W. ——. Les communautés familiales (Paris. and B.. ——. Phantoms of remembrance: Memory and oblivion at the end of the first millennium (Princeton. pp. 1979). “The social world of Alcuin: Nicknames and the Carolingian court”. PBSR 51 (1983). pp. Unpublished Ph. 1983). “Ekstatische Seelenreisende. Living with the dead in the Middle Ages (Ithaca and London. M. Rites of passage (London. and J-Ch. Princeton 1990). “Land. van.. R. Jarnut. 51–66. Richter eds. Transactions of the Royal Historical Society 9 (1999). pp. in: R. Die nordeurasischen Schamanen”. 222–39... 700–1100”. P. Islamic and Christian Spain in the early Middle Ages: Comparative perspectives on social and cultural formation (Princeton. “716: A crucial year for Charles Martel”. The Interpretation of cultures (New York. language and memory in Europe. 30–57. J.. Topographie Chrétienne des cités de la Gaule des origines au milieu du VIII e siècle 3.. ——. H. in: Y.. La genèse et les premiers siècles des villes mediévales dans les Pays-Bas meridionaux. 1990). Liber Pontificalis e gli edifici ecclesiastici di Roma nella tarda antichità e nell’alto medioevo. ——.. Una contribución a su crítica (Madrid. pp. Un problème archéologique et historique (Brussels. ——. “The paleography of Latin inscriptions in the eighth. The ideology of ritual: Space. 1999. D. Herrschaftsrepräsentation im Ottonischen Sachsen (Sigmaringen. H. F. Smedverkt_y i Norske Gravfunn. J. öffnet das Karlsgrab in Aachen. 1967). Gregory. O’Hanlon eds. DHGE 16 (Paris. J. 61–156. col.. Grousset. Graus. A. in: F.M. P. Heiligsprechung und Traditionsbildung”. Blackburn. 1985). Revue Belge de Philologie et d’Histoire 30 (1952). in: idem.. Grierson. The narrators of barbarian history (A. “Commerce in the Dark Ages: a critique of the evidence”. S. Godelier. in: idem. The mode and meaning of Beowulf (London. Kent and P.. F. Die Reise nach Westen.. pp. G. pp. Veröffentlichungen der Max-Planck Instituts für Geschichte 11/iii (Göttingen. 1967). The enigma of the gift (Cambridge. Journal for the Study of the Old Testament. 35–56. ——. Oldtiden 9 (Oslo. Revue Internationale d’Onomastique 15 (1963). art. 1976). and tenth centuries in Italy”.. Grieg.B.. 1986). M.D. Bede. ——. “Die Bedeutung Treburs als Pfalzort”.W. ——. cols. González Echegaray. K.. pp. art. in: P. Poetry of the Carolingian Renaissance (Oxford. 381–430. Goldsmith. Social Being and Time (Oxford. 11–32. in: G. oder wie Hsüan-Tsang den Buddhismus nach China holte (Köln. 654.. ——. 1986). Green. Grønbech.W. The development of family and marriage in Europe (Cambridge. P... DHGE 16. Gourvil. Deutsche Königspfalzen III. 1995). . “Algunas observaciones sobre la neumatología de Priscilianus”. W.. 1998). orig. 825–33. 1995).. M. (Paris. Heather ed. “Faron”. “Les loc. in: E. “Land. 1990).. pp. 1922).dans l’hagio-toponymie bretonne”. DHGE 16 (Paris. Schubert eds.E. Görich. “The empire of things: consumer demand in Renaissance Italy”. Goetz. Simons eds. Kultur und Religion der Germanen (Stuttgart. 1954). and M. and Paul the Deacon (Princeton. 1989). 1980). Gifts and commodities (London. R. 569 ——. “The coronation of Charlemagne and the coinage of Leo III”. pp.. “Die Gewalt bei den Anfängen des Feudalismus und die ‘Gefangenenbefreiung’ der merowingischen Hagiographie”. 1967). Rome’s fall and after (London. pp. 123–40. pp. 47–52. 1994). Medieval European coinage 1 (Cambridge. Goldthwaite. 1982). “Fare”. 1996). “Linguistic evidence for the early migrations of the Goths”. 43–62. 1981).. Goffart. Transactions of the Royal Historical Society 9 (1959).. R. people and paper in Central Amazonia”. 2 vols.. 118–9. Gosden. (Nijmegen. 1970). Goody. Gregory of Tours. Paris. Frauen im Frühmittelalter. 1996). 1983). Semana de Historia del monacato cántabroastur-leonés (Oviedo. ——. C. PBSR 16 (1948). Überlegungen zu Heiligerverehrung.. col. C. 1982). 550–800): Jordanes. Patronage. pp.. Achtergronden van Priscillianus’ christelijke ascese. Frauenbild und Frauenleben im Frankenreich (Weimar/ Köln/Wien. 1987). and society in Renaissance Italy (Oxford. “Otto III. Guerout. pp. Gow. art. N. Goosen.. “Faremoutiers”.J. Althoff and E. pp..H.. The Visigoths from the Migration Period to the seventh sentury (Woodbridge. Gray. “El monacato en la España nórdica en su confrontación con el paganismo (ss. ninth. W.. 153–75. F. Gorman.. Godman. 534–37. L’énigme du don (Paris. ——. Jahrbuch für Wirtschaftsgeschichte 1 (1961). time and status in the priestly theology. 515. Hirsch and M. 1999). P. “The Fredegar problem reconsidered”.. 1988).. 237–42. Supplement Series 91 (Sheffield. VI–VII)”. art. pp.. in: Primera reunión gallega de estudios clásicos (Santiago de Compostela. The Anthropology of landscape: Perspectives on place and space (Oxford. . 1995). Hastrup. pp. H. K. Sachsen .. Revue Belge de Philologie et d’Histoire 67 (1989). 1–9.F. “Towns. in: W. in: Cartulaire de l’abbaye Saint-Sauveur de Redon [facsimile edition] (Rennes. Guerreiro. 1996). 209–16. Halsall. 1–46. J. “Les cartulaires de l’abbaye de Redon”.. Revue historique 183 (1938). Ahrens ed. in: N. in: J. 1997). van.. in: Deutsche Königspfalzen I. Haldon. Pohl and H. Byzantium in the seventh century: the transformation of a culture (rev. M. 1963). in: L’abbaye Notre-Dame de Jouarre (Paris. pp.. “Le rayonnement de l’hagiographie hispanique en Gaule pendant le haut Moyen Âge: circulation et diffusion des Passions hispaniques”. 30–74. pp. in: G. M. Guillotel. 325–41. WardPerkins eds. pp. Archiv für Kulturgeschichte 66 (1984). Settlement and social organization: The Merovingian region of Metz (Cambridge.T. 1961). TRW 4 (Leiden/Boston/Köln. A. pp. R. Christie and S. Römische Quartalschrift für Altertumskunde und Kirchengeschichte 61 (1966). Hager. Morelle and M. pp. Reimitz eds. ed. “Female status and power in early Merovingian Central Austrasia: The burial evidence”. E. 383–401. pp. 56–67. H.. 1992).570  ——. “De Maastrichtse Vroenhof ”. pp. Hannig. 1989). Fontaine and C. TRW 2 (Leiden/Boston/Köln. ——.. pp... Bijdragen to de geschiedenis van Maastricht uitgegeven bij gelegenheid van het 300 –jarig bestaan van de stadsbibliotheek van Maastricht 1662 31 juli 1962 (Maastricht. J. pp. “The idea of the town in the Byzantine empire”. Habermas. Centres and peripheries (Oxford. Halperin. Russia and the Golden Horde (Bloomington. and transl. Strategies of distinction: The construction of ethnic communities.. 1–67. J.. “Le ‘De ordine palatii ’ d’Hincmar”. Halbwachs. ——. 523–47. Hartingsveldt.. ——. The structural transformation of the public sphere. 1993). in: O. Ch.. 1995).. 677–94. in: S. in: B. Cambridge. H. Loseby eds. Henningsen eds. “Représentations et attitudes à l’égard de la propriété pendant le haut moyen âge”. New light on the Dark Ages 1 (Glasgow. 29–53. Annales ESC 27 (1972). “Le manuscrit”. Miscellanea Trajectensia. L.A. Parisse eds. 1990). Les cartulaires. M.. ——. pp. On collective memory. ed. J. ——. “De ‘Zeven Zaken’ en de frankische bisschop”. “Les origines et le premier siècle de l’abbaye”. pp. 1992). pp. The idea and ideal of the town between late Antiquity and the early Middle Ages. 1–24. L. G. 1997). in: C.. “Zentrale Kontrolle und regionale Machtbalance. Coser (Chicago. ——. Violence and society in the early medieval West (London.. Towns in Transition. “Death and the Dead in the Late Roman Empire”. Halphen. 1998). “Royal treasures and representation in the early Middle Ages”. Mémoires et documents de l’Ecole des Chartes 39 (Paris. 100–1600 (London. 1992). Veröffentlichungen der Max-Planck Instituts für Geschichte 11/i (Göttingen. Berger (London. Beobachtungen zum System der karolingischen Königsboten am Beispiel des Mittelrheingebietes”. societies and ideas: the not-so-strange case of late Roman and early Merovingian Metz”. 1998).. L. 300–800. pp. 1–23. “Iceland: sorcerers and paganism”. pp. ——. transl. Death in Towns: Urban Responses to the Dying and the Dead.. pp.. “Götterglaube im Spiegel der goldenen Brakteaten”.. Pellistrandi eds.. K. Guyotjeannin. Harries. “Tiergärten im Pfalzbereich”. Hardenberg. Ankarloo and G... “cartulaires bretons médiévaux”. ——. 1999). 235–61. Mémoires de la Société d’Histoire et d’Archéologie de Bretagne 63 (1986). L’Europe Héritière de l’Espagne Wisigothique (Madrid. 1962). 255–80. EME 5 (1996). Gurevic. Brogiolo and B. Actes de la table ronde organisée par l’Ecole National des Chartes. “Rückgewonnene Marienikonen des frühen Mittelalters in Rom”. Hauck. Hardt. Bassett ed. 27–48. Early medieval cemeteries. ed.. T. Urban evolution in late Antiquity and the early Middle Ages (Aldershot. 1987). Early Modern witchcraft. ——. Karlsson eds. Archäologische Informationen 20 (1997). “Odins offer.” in: M. ——. ——. 2000). Price. “Europe in the Migration Period. Theuws and J. ——. pp.K. 219–38. The Making of Kingdoms. Nelson eds.L. Härke. “Zur Bedeutung der Verwandtschaftsanalyse aus archäologischer Sicht”. 1992). 1986). H. Glyfer och arkeologiska rum—en vänbok til Jarl Nordbladh (Göteborg. 1992). 193–210. pp.. 2000). “Gudme as Kultort und seine Rolle beim Austausch von Bildformularen der Goldbrakteaten”. Opedal eds. pp. Hedeager. ——. . 407–485 (Oxford.H. pp. 1978). Skygger af en shamanistisk tradition i nordisk folkevandringstid”. Archaeological Journal 151 (1994). pp. From late Antiquity to the early Middle Ages. ——. TRW 8 (Leiden/Boston/Köln. Harke. ——. pp. and A. Harman. “Cosmological endurance: pagan identities in early Christian Europe”. Germania 73 (1995). European Journal of Archaeology 1. in: T. Nederzettingsgeschiedenis en instellingen van de heerlijkheden Eijsden en Breust bij Maastricht (10e-19e eeuw) (Assen/ Maastricht. “Nouvelles fouilles de 1994–1996 dans la nécropole de Klin Yar. and Williams. Les sites archéologiques en Crimée et au laucase durant l’Antiquité tardive et le slaut Mogen Age.. Jensen and K. TRW 8 (Leiden/Boston/Köln. ——. Molleson and J. Härke. 78–88. in: P.J.. 265–78. Rituals of power. “Angelsächsische Bestattungsplätze und ältere Denkmäler: Bemerkungen zur zeitlichen Entwicklung und Deutung des Phänomens”. Sidonius Apollinaris and the fall of Rome. pp. Härke.. 382–96. Harries. 147–81.L. 1994). Kazanski and V. 377–99.L. Iron-Age societies (Oxford. 185–218. 151–56. 2000). Theuws and J. pp. Nielsen e. pp.. Belinskij. “Sacred topography. Nelson eds. eds. H. “Lowbury Hill: A context for the Saxon barrow”. Hartmann. Burial and society: The chronological and social analysis of archaeological burial data (Aarhus. (Geology) 35. T. H. ——. From late Antiquity to the early Middle Ages. “The circulation of weapons in Anglo-Saxon societies”. Connecticut. Zeitschrift für Archäologie des Mittelalters Beiheft 6 (Köln/Bonn. 3 (1998). 15–57. The Goths (Cambridge. 229–52. pp. Tor 29 (Uppsala. The Archaeology of Gudme and Lundeborg (Copenhagen. AmS-Rapport 11A (Stavanger. Gustafsson and H.. 145–88. 571 und Angelsachsen. Oxford/Oakville. Frühmittelalterliche Studien 21 (1987). pp.. Fuglestvedt. De reconstructie van een middeleeuws landschap. in: C. Past and Present 126 (1990). Rituals of Power. 1997). “‘Warrior graves’? The background of the Anglo-Saxon weapon burial rite”.. T.. Dickinson and D. M. Jahrhunderts.. Depositions of wealth in the cultural landscape”. 25–7. ——.O. ——. in: F.a. 22–43. 1994).Hist. Colloquia Pontica 5 (Leiden. Et Hus med Mange Rom. “Burials. 307–12. Anglo-Saxon Studies in Archaeology and History 10 (Oxford. The formation of a political mentality”. J.D. 1996). Gansum and A. 119–27. H. pp. “Myth and art: a passport to political authority in Scandinavia during the Migration Period”. Soupault eds. Vennebok til Bjorn Myhre på 60–årsdagen. pp. (Hamburg. Angelsächsische Waffengräber des 5.. Heather. Griffiths eds. “Gudme in der Sicht der Brakteatenforschung”.. Bulletin of the British Museum. 3 (1981). L. 202–6. pp. bis 7. 1999).. “Material culture as myth: weapons in Anglo-Saxon graves”. ——.. bodies and beheadings in Romano-British and Anglo-Saxon cemeteries”. pp. in: I. H. P. in: A. 1999). 1997). Veröffentlichungen des Helms-Museums 32. in: F. pp. J. “Skandinavisk dyreornamentik.. Symbolsk repræsentation af en for-kristen kosmologi”. A. Nielsen eds. 1999) pp. Nat.. . Herbert. pp. The uses of the past in early medieval Europe (Cambridge. A. pp. Medieval Academy Reprints for Teaching 29 (Toronto. J. ——. Abbayes. “Virgo et virago: réflexions sur le pouvoir du voile consacré d’après les sources hagiographiques de la Gaule du Nord”. Herschend. 1992). G. Herbers.. ——. Hillgarth.H.. Les Vies Anciennes de sainte Geneviève de Paris.. Innes eds. 1998). Hennebicque [Le Jan]. Helvétius. 481–751 (Leiden/New York/Köln. 1988). Une politique du pouvoir en Hainaut au Moyen Age (VII e–XI e siècle) (Bruxelles. Dschingis-Khan—ein Weltreich zu Pferde. 500–700 A.D. pp. pp. J.D. R. 1980). 1995). E. 221–8.. Helms. 167–94. ——. pp. forthcoming).. Y.. “Der Campus Lateranensis im Mittelalter”. Zur Kontinuität römischer Führungsschichten vom 4.. gender and power (Indiana. Tor 29 (1997). 1986).-C. 1999). “Relics of pagan Antiquity in mediaeval settings”. Iron. C. 1907). A-M. pp. 331–45. Sansterre eds. 1993). pp.W. 6 (1962). “Scandinavia (c. Blätter für deutsche Landesgeschichte 98 (1962). Dierkens. Translationsberichte und andere Quellen des Reliquienkultes. Jahrhundert. Henderson. prosopographische und bildungsgeschichtliche Aspekte (München.. Schamanen und Geisterbeschwörer in der östlichen Mongolei (Wiesbaden.)”. ——. in: P. “Popular religion in Visigothic Spain”. “La comunidad doméstica en España durante la Edad Media”. “Visigothic Spain and Early Christian Ireland”. 1985). “Halle”.572  ——. Typologie des sources du Moyen Âge Occidental 33 (Turnhout. 204–20. Études critiques (Paris. The idea of the good in late Iron Age society (Uppsala. M. The uses of the past in the early Middle Ages (Cambridge. 1997). in: E.. Fouracre ed. 2000). Herwegen. ——.. ——. New Cambridge Medieval History I (Cambridge. F. J-M. “Hus på Helgö”.. Texas. Proceeding of the Royal Irish Academy 52. I. Red Gold of Africa (Madison.. 1984). Das Buch vom Ursprung der Mongolen (Köln. I. “The Annals of Metz and the Merovingian past”. “Striden i Finnsborg”. E. Femmes et pouvoirs des femmes à Byzance et en Occident (VI e–XI e siècle) (Lille. pp.. Herbert. 1–42. Heissig. Visigothic Spain: New approaches (Oxford. Revue du Nord 62 (1980). Heckscher.. The anthropology of landscape: Perspectives on place and space (Oxford. Obras 2 (Madrid. Hen.. 35–57. O’Hanlon eds.S. pp. pp. 1996). Ulysses’ sail: An ethnographic Odyssey of power. ——. 1993). . évêques et laïques. Early medieval. 175–90. E. Hen and M. 1979). W. 1999). Fruktuosus von Braga: ein Beitrag zur Geschichte des suevisch-westgotischen Mönchtums und seines Rechtes (Stutttgart. Lebecq. ——. Art. Fornvännen 90 (Stockholm. R. ——. Livet i Hallen (Uppsala. 1995). und das Papsttum in der Mitte des 9. James ed. 1976). 2000). ——. 414–25. in: Y. “Espaces sauvages et chasses royales dans le Nord de la France”. and Poulin. Culture and religion in Merovingian Gaul. K. W. Römisches Jahrbuch für Kunstgeschichte 22 (1985). in: S. E. pp. and M. trade and power (Austin. Reallexikon der Germanischen Altertumskunde 13 (Berlin. Heß. ——. ——. W... 1995). Le Jan. Hinojosa y Naveros. 26–63. and M. pp. Heinzelmann. 1993). Jahrhunderts (Stuttgart. 1955). Herklotz.. “Geldwirtschaft am Mittelrhein in karolingischer Zeit”.. Journal of the Warburg Institute 1 (1937–38). Leo IV. Hirsch.. 295–333. Innes eds. ed. knowledge and geographical distance (Princeton. 189–204.. Bischofsherrschaft in Gallien. A. 1994). 3–60. Das Pactum des Hl. bis zum 7. M. Craft and the kingly ideal.. Soziale.. Metcalf. Hunt... A. 1964). pp. “Christliches und Nichtchristliches im byzantinischen Eherecht”. 109–24.E. Lothringen und das Reich an der Schwelle der deutschen Geschichte. 29–50. D. pp. “Burial and urbanism at late antique and early Byzantine Corinth (c. Christie and S. . Loseby eds. “Introduction: inventing traditions”. in: idem and T. 1968). Katalog stanowisk (Warsaw. in: M. 313–47. Innes.B. 2000). ——. Jagodzi ski. 99–125. Festskrift till Lars Lönnroth. A. 405–24. “Archeologiczne lady osadnictwa mi\dzy Wis [ a Pas \k[ we wczesnym redniowieczu.. pp. 1999). ——. pp. Hunger. State and society in the early Middle Ages: The middle Rhine valley 400 –1000 (Cambridge. in: N.. 400–700)”. Fornnordisk Mytologi (Lund.T. Hodgen. Religion och Samhälle i det Förkristna Norden. pp. Storey ed. E... R. Ranger eds.. “Die Pfalzkonzeptionen Karls des Grossen”. 301–24. E. Adalbertus.. ——. Charlemagne (forthcoming). 23–48. and transl. Jackson. orality and literacy in an early medieval society”. Bulletin de l’Institut Archéologique Liégois 100 (1988). ——. Huntingdon. “Was is die karolingische ‘Renaissance’ in der Baukunst?”. in: S. Saurma-Jeltsch ed. 67–90. Hodges. 1994). 3–36. “Fornskandinavisk hinsidestro i Snorre Sturlusons spegling”. Urba czyk ed. pp. Lason. 1989). Gudar på jorden... Schriften der MGH 21 (Stuttgart. Hoffsummer-Bosson... Studier i Snorres Mytologi (Oslo. Iogna-Prat. “Germanic and Roman Antiquity and the sense of the past in AngloSaxon England”. Celebrations of death: The anthropology of mortuary ritual (Cambridge. Malm eds. “Kings. ——. in: U. M... Hansson and M. Hultgård. H. “What was Carolingian government?”. Anglo-Saxon England 3 (1974). pp. Drobin ed. pp. Ivison. V. 1983). and P. A. 1997). Mendera ed. Morgan. eds.. Komentarz do katalogu stanowisk” in: P. The mission of Friar William of Rubruck... 1990). 1996). M. 1991). W... pp. pp. The Anglo-Saxon achievement (London. E. Journal of Ecclesiastical History 48 (1997). Österreichisches Archiv für Kirchenrecht 18 (1967).. Karl der Grosse als vielberufener Vorfahr (Sigmaringen. Et symposium. La Royauté et les Élites dans l’Europe Carolingienne (Lille.D. Towns in transition: Urban evolution in late Antiquity and the early Middle Ages (Aldershot.. Archeologiczne lady osadnictwa mi\dzy Wis [ a Pas \k[. 1 (Warsaw. Holy Land pilgrimage in the later Roman Empire A. pp. Marie: Le culte de la vierge dans la société médiévale (Paris.D. 1992). 71–87. 1964). pp. A. pp. in: R. É. in: L. Russo eds. “Memory. “Chèvremont: l’apport des sources archéologiques”. 1979).. (Odense. “Topography and world view in Njáls saga”.. pp... Palazzo and D. and D. 305–25.. 1982). 1–14. 1996). 1253–55 (London. 2000). Jacobsen. vol.. ——. “A fetishism for commodities: Ninth-century glass-making at San Vincenzo al Volturno”. Hunter.. M. Le Jan ed. The invention of tradition (Cambridge. P. (Stockholm. Hobsbawm. 159–97. Early anthropology in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries (Philadelphia. 312–460 (Oxford.D. Zeitschrift für Kunstgeschichte 3 (1988). 573 Hlawitschka. “Constantine and Jerusalem”. 1998). Holtsmark. 131–41. His journey to the Great Khan Möngke. in: J. M. Past and Present 158 (1998). E. E. 1998). R. monks and patrons: Political identity at the Abbey of Lorsch”. ——. Archeologia e storia della produzione del vetro preindustriale (Siena. Hunt. -U. Heather ed. 33–55.574  ——. 622–53. pp. in: R. D. Recht und Schrift. pp. 131–64.. P. 29–52.. 1999). Traditionsbuch und früher Siegelurkunde”. pp. Reimitz eds. “Growing up in a Carolingian monastery: Magister Hildermar and his oblates”.D. 1992). Ermete”. de.und sozialgeschichtlichen Aspekten”. pp. Carver ed. 700–c.. “Royal burials among the Franks”.. Columbanus and Merovingian monasticism. pp. McKitterick ed. “Carolingian monasticism: the power of prayer”. pp. L. 139–48. Vörträge und Forschungen 16 (Sigmaringen. in: F. “Imitatio morum. 248 (1991). in: R. Paris. 1969). Settimane 42 (Spoleto. in: H. 1996). “The early medieval craft and commercial centre at Janów Pomorski near Elbl[g on the South Baltic Coast”. Joris. —— and M. Le domain de Jupille des origines à 1297 (Bruxelles. J. McKitterick ed. pp. Les églises et les monastères (2nd ed... The cloister and clerical purity in the Carolingian world”. God and gold in late Antiquity (Cambridge. Kasprzycka. EME 1 (1992). Johanek. ——. “What was public about public penance? Paenitentia publica and justice in the Carolingian world”. Le siège de Constantinople et le Patriarchat oecumenique 3. in: W. ——. ——. Journal of Medieval History 9 (1983). ——. “The find material from the settlement of Gudme II—composition . E. Pohl and H. L’uomo di fronte al mondo animale nell’alto medioevo.. 696–715. La géographie ecclésiastique de l’empire byzantin I. 1985). “A propos de ‘burgus’ à Huy et à Namur”. Jong.. “Rejon Wis y we wczesnym redniowieczu. 1998). “Zur rechtlichen Funktion von Traditionsnotiz. pp. 900 (Cambridge. 1966). ——.L. c.. Josse. in: M. 1975). From late Antiquity to the early Middle Ages. 863–902.B. ——. pp. pp. 373–422. in: M. Janin. 765–808. 1993). Jagodzi ski ed. pp... 184–224. 2001). “Power and humility in Carolingian sociey: the public penance of Louis the Pious”. pp. In Samuel’s Image: Child oblation in the early medieval West (Leiden/ New York/Köln. 99–128. Struktura zasiedlenia i stosunki etniczne” in: M.. “Adding insult to injury: Julian of Toledo and his Historia Wambae”. Settimane 31 (Spoleto. Essays on medieval clerical celibacy and religious reform (New York/London. “Archaeology and the Merovingian monastery”. A. 35–80. Forschungen zur Geschichte des Mittelalters 1 (Wien. Religious women in medieval France (Chicago.. 2000). Clarke and M. Grenze und Differenz im frühen Mittelalter. Classen ed. 1998). La giustizia nell’alto medioevo (secoli IX–XI) II. in: P. 1993). Poggranizce polsko-purskie w czasach w. E. Villes—Affaires—Mentalités. The Visigoths from the Migration Period to the seventh century. in P. 2000). “Transformations of penance”. Wojciechna (Elbl[g. Antiquity 65. no. The age of Sutton Hoo (Woodbridge. pp... Johnson. K. Equal in monastic profession. 1995). M. ——. Burgenbau and Landesverteidigung um 900. ——. pp. Frassetto ed. 49–80. 1997). “Die frühmittelalterliche Jagd unter rechts. 131–62. An ethnographic perspective (Woodbridge. BAR International Series 113 (Oxford. M... Medieval purity and piety. 243–54. pp. “Internal cloisters: the case of Ekkehard’s Casus sancti Galli”. pp. 1999). Nelson eds. ——. ——. R. P. Brennan. The Short Oxford History of Europe II (Oxford. Jäschke. 209–21. Rituals of power. Theuws and J. TRW 8 (Leiden/Boston/Köln. Josi.. pp. “Scoperta d’un altare e di pitture nella basilica di S. Jarnut. James. “Religion”... Jørgensen. 1981). The New Cambridge Medieval History II. Janes. Rivista di archeologia cristiana 17 (1940). Autour du pays Mosan (Brussels. 195–208. in: Il secolo di ferro: mito e realítà de Secolo X. 3–27. in: EUCUXIA. S. Blair ed. 1995). Kessler and M..D. “Some aspects of the parochia of Leominster in the 12th century”. 1986).L.. Kirn. “Pictorial narrative and church mission in sixth-century Gaul”. in: idem. “Carolingian baptismal expositions: a handlist of tracts and manuscripts”.–12. vol 1. The art of Byzantium and the medieval west: selected studies (Bloomington. H. 1998). pp. 1911). 83–95. ——. ——. 17–34. 1985).Litt. Kemp. McA. pp. 75–91. T o paleogeograficzne osadnictwa z´ u aw Elbl[skich w pierwszym tysi[cle-ciu naszej ery (Warsaw.. Keefe. Kehr. Kazhdan. Kitchen. pp. Oxbow Monograph 17 (Oxford... Historisches Vierteljahrschrift 27 (1937). 523–48.-R. 1999). Adalhard von Corbie (Düsseldorf. 83–110. 575 and interpretation”. Simpson eds. ——. pp.S. Fortid of Nutid 2 (1995). 205–20. Frühmittelalterliche Studien 32 (1989). E. 450–600 (unpubl. “The warrior aristocracy of Gudme: The emergence of landed aristocracy in Late Iron Age Denmark?”. Nielsen e. 1982).D. Prestations and distance: A role for Early Saxon grave goods in social reproduction A. Law and society in the Visigothic Kingdom (Cambridge. . ——. King.. essay III. pp. Herrschaftsformen und Gesellschaftsstrukturen im Regnum Teutonicum”. 209–23. pp. Kasprzycka. 345–60.. 1998). rozwój. Pictorial narrative in Antiquity and the Middle Ages (Washington.. H.. Past and Present 106 (1985). Produksjon og Samfund. in: J. pp. 1985). 1999). B. Kitzinger. P. [manuscript submitted to Archeologia Polski]. M. pp. in: P. pp. 1988). Universitetets Oldsaksamling (Oslo. pp. Actes du VI e Congrès International d’Etudes Byzantines 2 (Paris.. Zeitschrift der Savigny-Stiftung für Rechtsgeschichte. repr. Varia 30. Zugleich ein Beitrag zur Organisation und zur Schriftlichkeit bei der Verwaltung adliger Grundherrschaft am Beispiel des Grafen Heccard aus Burgund”. 1951). Italia Pontificia 5 (Berlin. 169–237. 1976). Germanische Abteilung 107 (1990).a. “Die mittelalterliche Staatsverwaltung als geistesgeschichtliches Problem”. 53–63. Reich und Kirche vor dem Investiturstreit. 1983).L. Mélanges offerts à Hélène Ahrweiler 2. J. pp. in: K. pp. King.. University of Oxford. Minsters and parish churches: the local church in transition. 1972). Jhts. “Stormandssæder og skattefund i 3. ——. The archaeology of Gudme and Lundeborg (Copenhagen. 1998). Gostein Resi ed. “Polis and kastron in Theophanes and in some other historical texts”. eds. cie niny”..A. Kessler.. pp. 236–338. “From polis to madina: urban change in late antique and early Islamic Syria”.. A. Kennedy. Saints’ lives and the rhetoric of gender: Male and female in Merovingian hagiography (Oxford.. J. “Mosaic pavements in the Greek east and the question of a ‘renaissance’ under Justinian”. 1994). Kasten. in: U. ed. ——. Tellenbach (Sigmaringen. Zmiany klimatyczne i procesy osadnicze w rejonie dolnej Wis y 2500–1000 lat temu. thesis.. “Zum Charakter der ‘Staatlichkeit’ zwischen karolingischer Reichsreform und hochmittelalterliche Herrschaftsausbau”. Blumenthal ed.. in: P. and G. H. Schmid ed. “Erbrechtliche Verfügungen des 8. Keller. Byzantina Sorbonensia 16 (Paris. Festschrift G.århundrede”. Carolingian essays (Washington DC. “Grundlagen ottonischer Königsherrschaft”.. An introduction to modern Byzantine studies (Washington DC. P. in: H. in: H. und 9. ——. B. 35–48. 159–95.. ——. M. P. 248–64. pp. “Reichsorganisation. c.O. Adalbertus 1 (Warsaw. Constable. 950–1200. People and power in Byzantium. pp. “Mierzeja Wi lana—powstanie. 38 (1990). Urba czyk ed.. . W.und Frühgeschichte in Baden-Württemberg 38 (Stuttgart. A la recherche de l’ambre baltique. 71–80. 1967). Annales ESC 47 (1992). Die Bußbücher Halitgars von Cambrai und des Hrabanus Maurus. Germania 43 (1965). Les fouilles de la place Saint Lambert à Liège (Liège. W. pp. T. Ihre Überlieferung und ihre Quellen. “Saint-Bertin als Grablege Childerichs III und der Grafen von Flandern”. “Paganisme. pp.576  Klauser.a. Réflexions de méthode”. 1974–7).. I. W. 327–9..C. 1967). 2 vols. Ratzinger eds.-F. Frühmittelalterliche Studien 8 (1974). “Les connaissances des Anciens sur les lieux de provenance de l’ambre jaune”. Jahrbuch für Antike und Christentum 15 (1972). The social life of things: Commodities in a cultural perspective (Cambridge. T. A. Kottje. Archeologia 34 (1985). 1055–69. 64–94. Künzel. Kupper.. Das fränkische Gräberfeld von Klepsau im Hohenlohekreis. 64–7.. Knöpp. Bursche. MGH Studien und Texte 21 (Hannover. Frühmittelalterliche Studien 7 (1983). Mielczarek. Klingshirn. M. in: Landschaft und Geschichte.. ——... pp. p. Prace Muzeum Ziemi. Kooistra. ——. pp. ——. J. 1983). Appadurai ed. Krautheimer. pp. Nowakowski eds. pp. 312–1308 (Princeton.n. 1987). pp. Kopytoff.. “Königskonversionen im 8. Festschrift für Franz Petri (Bonn. 91–100. J. in: H... 312–24. T.. 1981). 1984). Roßman and J. . 1990). in: A. Kromann. 156. pp. ——. (Darmstadt... Koch. Krüger. “Gudme and Lundeborg — The coins”.. “Le début de la ‘crise du IIIe siècle’ de l’Empire romain: depuis quand?” (summary) in: A. L. 1980). ——.”.. pp. F. K.. Kuhn. Nielsen e. Grupa Mas om\cka (Lublin. 1994). 41 (1991). Beiträge zur Geschichte und Quellenkunde des Mittelalters 8 (Berlin/New York. “The cultural biography of things: commoditization as process”. ——. 1–15. Krämer. 1994).. A. R. in: Badania archeologiczne w województwie elbl[skim w latach 1980–1983 (Malbork. Forschungen und Berichte zur Vor. Rome: Profile of a city. 193–206. 1975).e.. “Nunc de Svebis dicendum est” (Warsaw. Mysterium der Gnade: Festschrift J. “Sources écrites: des origines à 1185”. 1995). 1–33. syncretisme et culture religieuse populaire au haut Moyen Age.. vol. pp. Caesarius of Arles: The making of a Christian community in late antique Gaul (Cambridge. A. 1980). pp..O. “Phasen in der Entstehung von Kaufmannsniederlassungen zwischen Maas und Nordsee in der Karolingerzeit”. Kölzer. Jahrhundert”. Journal of the Warburg and Courtauld Institutes 5 (1942). 307–11. in: M. ——..E. “König Ludwig der Deutsche und die Fastenzeit”. 120–35. R. pp. The archaeology of Gudme and Lundeborg (Copenhagen.. 1988). Merowingerstudien I. 169–222. Koch. R. L’expedition d’un chevalier romain sous Néron. 1998). Three Christian capitals: Topography and politics (Berkeley. Die Reichsabtei Lorsch.-H. Borderland farming. “Das Fortleben des germanisches Heidentums nach der Christianiserung”. 1970). Auer (Regensburg. pp. U. “Nap yw bursz\ynu z pó nocy na tereny Imperium Rzymskiego w I–VI w. “Rom und der Kult der Gottesmutter Maria”. “Rejon uj cia Wis y w oczach staro ytnych”. pp. Kokowski. in: P. H. ——. 1995). pp. Possibilities and limitations of farming in the Roman period and the early Middle Ages between the Rhine and the Meuse (Assen and Amersfoort. Studia Antiqua 4 (Warsaw.. La conversione al cristianesimo nell’Europa dell’Alto Medioevo (Spoleto. 1996). ed. Kotula. Corpus Basilicarum Christianarum Romae 3 (Rome. 743–57. Kolendo.L. “An Introduction to the ‘Iconography of Medieval Architecture’”. “Zur Wiederverwendung antiker Gefäße im frühen Mittelalter”. 31–4. eds. Otte ed. Larsson. Les saints et l’organisation chrétienne primitive dans l’Armorique breton (Rennes. pp. Aux origines de la cité de Liège (VIIIe–XIe siècle)”. forthcoming). Le Goff. Rich ed. work. Ser. 1997). Larner. Marco Polo and the discovery of the world (New Haven/London. 59–72. “Zwangsaufenthalt im frühmittelalterlichen Kloster.. 1995)..M.. J. J. ——. 1989). Laske. 28 (Lund. pp. La Rocca. 1975). G. TRW 8 (Leiden/Boston/Köln). Lavin.. Zeitschrift der Savignystiftung für Rechtsgeschichte. “I mosaici e gli affreschi ecclesiastico-politici nell’antico palazzo lateranense”. ——. 4–14. pp. Centrala Frågor. Rivista di archeologia cristiana 12 (1935). pp. 1981). Keynes. 1941). Lafon. Lachmann.. Alfred the Great. 2d series. 281–309. I. Largillière. Der Goldschatz von Nagyszentmiklós (Budapest. 4 (Vatican City. kanonistische Abteilung 95 (1978). L. in: F. X. “Public buildings and urban change in northern Italy in the early medieval period”. Lawrence. . no. 321–30.D. 1925).. 265–92. Berichte zur deutsche Landeskunde 49 (1975). 1967). C. pp. Revue d’histoire ecclesiastique 79 (1984). Laing. 1980).. ——. 1990). H. 1992).. Art Bulletin 7 (1925).. Die Papstbildnisse des Altertum und des Mittelalters 1: Bis zum Ende des Investiturstreits. XI e–XIII e siècles) (Paris. Le Jan. “A propos de Saint Ulrich: Villas et lieux de culte dans la Gaule du Nord-Est”. “Les reines dans le royaume d’Italie du IXe siècle”. Tender meat under the saddle: Customs of eating. pp. pp. 27–37..-P. M. Rechtshistorische Arbeiten 2 (Zürich. Famille et pouvoir dans le monde Franc (VII e–X e siècle). I. “Frankish giving of arms and rituals of power: Continuity and change in the Carolingian Period”. (London. transl. rites et société au Moyen Âge (diocèse de Liège. 150–61. Centrala Platser. pp. Les douaires (Lille. Art Bulletin 44 (1962).. In 8. Morts. “Archéologie et Histoire. Een archeologisch en historisch probleem (Brussels. and I. 45–69. 1999). Rituals of Power. 1998).. pp.. Lapidus. 1977). Medium Aevum Quotidianum. pp... R. Abandoned towns and local power in eleventhcentury Piemonte”. Asser’s Life of King Alfred and other contemporary sources (Harmondsworth.L. 161–80. drinking and hospitality among conquering Hungarians and nomadic people. and B. Lattimore. “Maria Regina”. 377–89. “Die frühmittelalterlichen Marken zwischen Rhein und Odenwald unter besondere Berücksichtigung der Mark Heppenheim”. Gott und Mensch im Einklang und Widerstreit”. Nelson eds. J. “Saint Lambert: de l’histoire à la legende. G. ed. W. Hårdh eds. ——. La fortresse byzantine de Thamugadi I (Paris. Monumenta di antichità cristiana. L. EME 5 (1996). 5–49.. J. 1940). ——. Arthur Goldhammer (Chicago. Essai d’anthropologie sociale (Paris. 1998). La mémoire des ancêtres. Das Problem der Mönchung in der Völkerwanderungszeit. in: Ontstaan en vroegste geschiedenis van de middeleeuwse steden in de zuidelijke Nederlanden. 577 ——. 17–27. Rácz. Lapidge. O... M. 1983). le souci des morts. “Using the Roman past. Inner Asian frontiers of China (New York. Lassus. Laszlovszky.. 1973). pp. Le Jan eds. Lauwers. in: Aspects de la religion celtique et gallo-romaine dans le Nord-Est de la Gaule à la lumière des découvertes récentes (Saint-Dié-des-Vosges.. The city in late Antiquity (London. and culture in the Middle Ages. The archaeology of late Celtic Britain and Ireland c. Bougard and R. Theuws and J. Ladner. Time. Acta Archaeologica Lundensia. László. “The House of the Lord: Aspects of the role of palace Triclinia in the architecture of late Antiquity and the early Middle Ages”. 2000) pp. in: F. ——. 400–1200 A. in: J. Muslim cities in the Later Middle Ages (Harvard. M and S. R. Sonderband 7 (Krems. 63–9. “Concensus and dissensus on public spectacles in early Byzantium”.. L’église. pp. Lebecq. pp. pp. Hodges and W.D. pp... Fixot and E. pp. 185–202. Les transferts patrimoniaux en Europe occidentale VIII e–X e siècle. W. Production.. Duvosquel and A. “Image du Christ. in: F. “La réutilisation funéraire des édifices antiques en Normandie au cours du haut moyen âge”.... Aus rheinischer und fränkischer Frühzeit. Documents d’Archéologie Française 46 (Paris. P. pp. 261–98. Lehner.. Gauthier and H. Ecstatic Religion... ed. Archieven.. “People as power: games. pp. R. Ausgewählte Aufsätze von Wilhelm Levison (1948. pp. S. Past and Present 137 (1992). Dierkens eds. pp.... pp. 118–138 (Original publication: Trierer Zeitschrift 7. 1931). 73–82. Le Terroir. “Concepts of Europe in the early and high Middle Ages”. 1997).. Wiblé. 1991). J. pp.M. “Saint-Martin-de-Boscherville (Seine-Maritime)”. Le Maître.578  Le Maho. 51–68. ——. J. “Martigny VS: De la première cathédrale du Valais à la paroissiale actuelle: la contribution de l’archéologie”. Rule and conflict in an early medieval society: Ottonian Saxony (Oxford. (1932). “Quentovic: un état de question”. image de l’empereur. Vallesia 51 (1996). H. Helvetia Archaeologica 25 (1994–98). 3–5 novembre 1994 (Tours. Lehner.. 10–21. Leyser. in: R. Lewis. “A Byzantine Virgo Militans at Charlemagne’s court”. pp. 25–47. 95–113. Mélanges de l’Ecole Française de Rome 111... Melanges Georges Despy (Liège. Lim. distribution and demand. 71–93. 341–44. in: L’environnement des églises et la topographie religieuse des campagnes médiévales: Actes du III e Congrés International d’Archéologie médiévale (Aix-en-Provence. 159–79. Bowden eds. H. 2 (1999). Byzantinische Forschungen 24 (1997). 1971). P.C. samenleving (Hilversum. Wiblé. Studien zur Sachsenforschung 8 (1993). “Het gelijk van Sint-Servaas en Onze-Lieve-Vrouwe. Galinié eds. Gregoire de Tours et l’espace gaulois. 1997). “L’extension sud-est du ‘pagus meldensis’ ou ‘civitas meldorum’ au VIIe siècle. in: M. Lebecq. pp. Viator 11 (1980). 1989). and F. Viator 25 (1994). pp. Le Moyen Age 8 (1895). De Kerk en de Nederlanden. instellingen. ——.-J. Lifshitz. Erkelens-Buttinger e. 169–76. ——. R. An anthropological study of spirit possession and shamanism (Harmondsworth.. The sixth century. 1–6. ——. munificence and contested topography”. De Maastrichtse kapittels in de Vroege Middeleeuwen”. Histoire de l’Espagne Musulmane 3 vols. Revue d’Histoire de l’Eglise de France 68 (1982). “Saint-Maurice”.H. 1979). Monographie du Centre des Recherches Archéologiques 1 (Paris. pp. 1995–1998). Les premiers monuments chretiens de la France (Paris. “Chronique des découvertes archéologiques dans le canton du Valais en 1995”. “Das Testament des Diakons Adalgisel-Grimo vom Jahre 634”. Inscriptions arabes d’Espagne (Leiden/Paris. Lim. 29–42. Levison. ZadoraRio. 1950). pp. 415–28. K. in: N.. Leyser. eds. in: J. in: . “Beyond positivism and genre: ‘hagiographical’ texts as historical narrative”. E. Actes du congres internationale. in: E. “Administration de Rome et diaconies du VIIe au IXe siècle”.. Lévi-Provençal. F. J. Leupen. I. Düsseldorf ). Tours. Villes et campagnes au Moyen Age. 69–85).S. pp. 201–12. (2nd edition Paris. 1994). pp. TRW 6 (Leiden/Boston/Köln 1998). “Pour une histoire parallèle de Quentovic et Dorestad”. Lestocquoy.M. S. M. “Les échanges dans la Gaule du nord au VIe siècle”. “Gregoire de Tours et la vie d’échanges dans la Gaule du VIe siècle”. L’exemple du culte du Saint Sauveur sous Louis le Pieux”.a. S.-J. 28–30 septembre 1989). Lecomte. Rivista di archeologia cristiana 7 (1930). Lewis. and E. Les chrétientés celtiques (Paris.A. 123–63. A. Essays in honour of Donald A. 1985). 51–62. U. 47–59 and 30 (1988). F. pp. 73–87.. “Møllegårdsmarkens veje og huse”. Antiquity 70 (1996).D. Frühmittelalterliche Studien 2 (1968).. 1979). van.. Teutons. Smith ed. bd. 1988). Manacorda. “The development of Constantinople as an urban centre”. 1907). Shinnie eds... study V. Sivan eds. S. “La autoridad en el monacato visigodo”. Haaland and P. pp. in: 17th International Byzantine Congress. Bullough (Leiden/Boston/Köln. O. Arabica 17 (1995). ——. “En torno a la Regula Monachorum y su relación con otras reglas monásticas”. pp. pp. 671–6. Studies on Constantinople (Aldershot. pp. and Anglo-Saxons (Montreal. Constantinople médiévale. University of London Ph. S. “Late Roman and early Merovingian glass from a settlement site at Maastricht (Dutch South Limburg)”. 1996). Fynske Minder 1995 (Odense. “Hinkmar von Reims und der Apokrisiar. and H. C. in: R. “The smith’s myth and the origin of leadership in Central Africa”. “Transformations: Classical objects and their re-use during late Antiquity”. monographies 2 (Paris. La storia dell’alto medioevo italiano (VI–X secolo) alla luce dell’archeologia. Noyé eds. 1972). 62–76. Shifting frontiers in late Antiquity (Aldershot. O. African Iron Working (Olso. P. “Between Sutton Hoo and Chernaya Mogila: barrows in eastern and western early medieval Europe”.. in: J. ——. Mainstone.. 21–41. 33 (Portsmouth. C. Harris ed. 180–4.W. nr. 2000). Journal of Glass Studies 29 (1987). R. Mélanges d’histoire bretonne (Paris. M. Biblioteca dell’archeologia medievale 11 (Florence.A. 118. pp. É. Bracara Augusta 21 (1967).M. Ligarzas 7 (1975). parts 1 and 2. 1995). H. Studies on Constantinople (Aldershot. Lutovsky. H. Early medieval Rome and the Christian West. A. pp. Journal of Roman Archaeology. Magdalino. 579 W. “La ‘villa’ Gallo-Romaine et la nécropole mérovingienne de Berthelming (Moselle)”. repr.. Charles the Fat. Römischer Import im Norden.V. I. Byzantinische Zeitschrift 83 (1990).. Thrane. 1986). Francovich and G.S. 1994). Main Papers (New Rochelle. 1996). pp. pp. monographies 9 (Paris. pp. suppl. 180–221. 265–81.H. Le développement urbain de Constantinople (IV e–VII e siècles). Löwe. MacLean. 1965).. ——. P.. Mathisen and H. repr. Etudes sur l’évolution des structures urbaines.E. Madsen. pp. 1993). 197–225... 4th–6th centuries”. 278–90. pp. 635–50. 77–91. Lutz. Nordiske Fortidsminder ser. in: idem. pp. 1999). “Constantine’s mausoleum and the translation of relics”. The transformations of Vrbs Roma in late Antiquity.M. structure and liturgy of Justinian’s Great Church (New York. Lot. in idem.. in: R.. 2000).. 10 (Copenhagen. “The Causes of the Revolt of Umar ibn Hafsun in Al-Andalus 880–928: a study in medieval Islamic social history”. Travaux et mémoires du CNRS. . “Sul paessagio urbano di Roma nell’Alto Medioevo”.. F. Maenchen-Helfen. MacDougall. Linage Conde. “Rome in transition: economic and political changes in Rome. de. 6–24. “Helgö as frühmittelalterlicher Handelsplatz in Mittelschweden”. Maret. pp. Racial myth in English history: Trojans. 1993). La fin du paganisme en Gaule (Paris. B. pp.. Die Welt der Hunnen (Wien/Köln/Graz. R. 1990). pp. 1950). Lith. Mango. Beiträge zur Interpretation von ‘De ordine palatii ’”. Loyer. in: R. Travaux et mémoires du CNRS. Hagia Sophia. D. 434. thesis (London.. Marinescu. Architecture. ser. Zanini. Lund Hansen. Lundström... Mâle. 1987). in: Festschrift für H. C. 1982). M. Marín Guzmán. p.. Marazzi. Heimpel 3 (Göttingen. Revue archéologique de l’Est et du Centre-Est 1 (1950). 285–98. N. La Storia economica di Roma nell’allto Medioevo alla luce dei recenti scavi archaeologici (Florence. Meaney. Gordon Whatley eds..A. Sainted women of the Dark Ages (Durham/London.. pp. 1971). Paganism and pagan survivals in Spain up to the fall of the Visigothic kingdom (Washington. McKenna. R. Mathisen.und Frühgeschichte (Basel. Shifting frontiers in late Antiquity (Aldershot. 1993). 257–71. 1971). . pp.-I.... J. and transl.L. S. R. 1990) transl. in: J. M. “The illusion of royal power in the Carolingian Annals”. Autenrieth and F. 2 vols.... W.. “Maurilio”. J.D. 1938). 1967). The Gift. Festschrift Bernhard Bischoff zu seinem 65. “Le pitture del VI e VIII secolo nella basilica inferiore di S. 1975)... The form and reason for exchange in archaic societies (London. The end of ancient Christianity (Cambridge. Mauss.... Mathews. in: Le septième siècle: Changements et continuités (London. 1996). 185–6 Matthews.580  Markus. Les cryptes de Jouarre (Paris.. R. pp. in: J. McNamara. J. pp. M. Geburtstag (Stuttgart. Mélanges d’archéologie et d’histoire 57 (1940).. J. and R. in: idem and H..D. Western Aristocracies and Imperial Court A. Martin. Halls. W. 3rd ser. 95–142. pp.S. 43–69.W. 83–95. Le typicon de la Grande Eglise. 1971). Marquise de Maillé. 309–20. 221–302. 1992). A. 1–20. pp. 325–9. Byzantium and the early medieval West (Cambridge. Ambrose of Milan: Church and court in a Christian capital (Berkeley. McLynn. “Sepolture intramuranee e pesaggio urbano a Roma tra V e VII secolo”. pp. L’Europe Heritière de l’Espagne Wisigothique (Madrid. 13 (1990). Mathon. Baseler Beiträge zur Ur. pp. Marrou. Melograni.. McCormick. “Remarques sur le fonctionnement d’une capitale a double polarite: Mad nat al-Zahr -Cordue”. Mateos. Mathisen. Anuario de Historia del Derecho Español 27 (1957). 1994). A. Delogu eds. T. 1981). pp. McKitterick.. Mazzoli-Guintard. 1990). Meneghini. 1992). “How on earth could places become holy? Origins of the Christian idea of holy places”. The early churches of Constantinople: Architecture and liturgy (University Park PA. “The family of Georgius Florentius Gregorius and the bishops of Tours”. “La Vita patrum iurensium et les débuts du monachisme à Saint-Maurice d’Agaune”.. The English Historical Review 115 (2000). Rivista dell’istituto nazionale d’archeologia a storia dell’arte.. “La comunidad hereditaria y la partición de la herencia en el derecho medieval español”. 139–61. Medievalia et Humanistica 12 (1984). Fontaine and Ch. ——. Martínez Gijón. R. in: L. H. pp. 1986). Al-Qantara 17 (1997). M. 43–64. “Les Wisigoths dans le Portugal Medieval: état actuel de la question”. 1964). ——. Pellistrandi. Anglo-Saxon amulets and curing Stones. Matthiae.. Bibliotheca Sanctorum 9 (Rome. 1976). McCready. G.D. Halborg with E. Miracles and the Venerable Bede. Brunhölzl eds. pp. Journal of Early Christian Studies 2 (1994). Santangeli Valenzani. 1992). “From Caesarius to Boniface: christianity and paganism in Gaul”.. 1994).A. 154–72. Paroli and P. J. BAR British Series 96 (Oxford. and John E. pp. G. Crisogono in Trastevere”. C. Das fränkische Gräberfeld von Basel-Bernerring. F.B.. pp. Eternal victory: Triumphal rulership in late Antiquity. 364–425 (Oxford. 89–111. Sivan eds. “Crossing the supernatural frontier in Western late Antiquity”. Pittura politica del medioevo romano (Rome. 1962–1963). “L’origine orientale des diaconies romaines”. Mattoso. Masai.. Studies and Texts 118 (Toronto. R.. Orientalia christiana analecta 165–166 (Rome. World Archaeology 25... Space. 1982). “Die Religion der Mongolen”. 1742–6). Morice. B. 25–50. Überlieferung und Geltung normativer Texte des frühen und hohen Mittelalters. Morey. 1992). P. 1991)... H. Studia Historica. “Om eddadigtenes alder”.. Muir. pp. “Karolingische Kapitularien”. J. pp. Moore. s. Mínguez. 223–35. ——. Müller-Mertens. Journal of Medieval History 19 (1993). 34–66. I.. Mühlen.. Nordisk Hedendom. Karl der Grosse und Papst Leo III in Paderborn. 1969). E. Uno storico del V secolo.M. pp. C. 285–305. “Recently discovered capitulary texts belonging to the legislation of Louis the Pious”. and A. pp. in: Arne Eggebrecht ed. von zur. Rom und das Vermächtnis der Langobarden”.. pp.. 581 Menzer. Moreira. art. Historia Medieval 3 (1985). ——. Metcalf.. H. Die Reichsstruktur im Spiegel der Herrschaftspraxis Ottos des Großen (Berlin. Civic ritual in Renaissance Venice (Princeton. Schneider.. Beiträge zum Katalog der Ausstellung (Paderborn. E.. Godman and R. in: Studies in historiography (London. 1986). Morris. Charlemagne’s heir.. E. pp. in: P. 169–82. M. Mitchell. 1 (Warszawa. Mémoires pour servir de preuves à l’histoire ecclésiastique et civile de Bretagne. Jahrhundert”. Abhandlungen der Nordrhein-Westfälischen Akademie der Wissenschaften 97 (1996). 1966). P. R.. Moorhead.. 7–32. “Karl der Grosse. Momigliano. 1943). Die Kultur der Wikinger in Ostpreussen. C. Art Bulletin 19 (1937). Collins eds. 2 (1993). in: P. (Paris. . 512–24. “Kapitularien”. J. pp. Meyer-Plath. 437–53. H. J. in: Hommages à Marcel Renard 2 (Bruxelles. ——. 1987).. Urba czyk ed. “Ruptura social e implantación del feudalismo en el Noroeste peninsular (Siglos VIII–X)”. Radegund of Poitiers’ Relic Petitions to the East”. Kunst und Kultur der Karolingerzeit. Death ritual and society in classical Antiquity (Cambridge. 1980). An anthropological study of the Marakwet of Kenya (Cambridge. text and gender. Meulengracht Sørensen. 1987). 1995). New perspectives on the reign of Louis the Pious (Oxford. “Provisatrix optima: St. Die Landmauer von Konstantinopel (Berlin.. 1998). 1981). 3 vols. in: Lexikon des Mittelalters 5 (1990). Et symposie (Odense. 27–103.C. cols. vers la fin du VIe siècle”. Quellen und Forschungen zum Recht im Mittelalter 4 (Sigmaringen.. in: idem ed. 1990). Morgan. pp.. MGH Hilfsmittel 15 (München.. The Mongols (Malden/Oxford. 217–28. in: R. “Time in the reproduction of mortuary practices”. Meulengracht Sørensen eds. A. 95–108. The archaeology of ritual and magic (New York.. A. B. Meslin. 1–39. Römische Quartalschrift für christliche Altertumskunde und Kirchengeschichte 40 (1932). 241–62. K. “Wczesno redniowieczne szlaki komunikacyjne Starego Mazowsza”. Mordek. 1999). U.. Adalbertus. ——. La familia en la alta edad media española (Pamplona. pp. Mole. 1975). Montanos Ferrín. 1980).. pp. Schieffer ed.. A.. 943–6. Steinsland. pp. Die Mongolen und ihr Weltreich (Mainz. “Ancient history and the antiquarian”. Mizoguchi. “Die Jahresmerkmale in den Datierungen der Papsturkunden bis zum Ausgang des 11. 1986). pp..M. A Borneo journey into death: Berawan eschatology from its rituals (Philadelphia. pp. Bonner Hefte zur Vorgeschichte 9 (Bonn. Pentikäinen and P. in: G. “The inscription on the enameled cross of Paschal I”. I.. 1978). in: 799.a. J. Moszczy ski. “Persistances páiennes en Galice. Drobin. D.). 1992). Schriftkultur und Reichsverwaltung unter den Karolingern. “Kapitularien und Schriftlichkeit”.. Merrifield.. Theodoric in Italy (Oxford. Traditionszusammenhang der fränkischen Herrscherlasse. vol. Il vescovo Idazio (Catania. Müller. C. 31–77. ——. 2001). “The wary widow”. in: T. Nehlsen. repr. pater optimus?”. ——. 1996). 750–900 (London. pp. M. ——. “Making a difference in ninth-century politics: the daughters of Desiderius”. ——. H.. “The Lord’s anointed and the people’s choice: Carolingian royal ritual”. After Rome’s fall: Narrators and sources of barbarian history. forthcoming (Oxford. Rituals of power: From late Antiquity to the early Middle Ages. 1992). “Parents. pp. 1999). A. 1996). 1996). “Königtum und Adel im Spiegel der Grabfunde”. The Frankish world (London. in: Dumbarton Oaks Papers 41 (1987). repr. Politics and ritual in early medieval Europe (London/Ronceverte. H. ——. “La inscripción visigoda del monasterio de Samos”. 2001). in: Die Franken: Wegbereiter Europas. repr. 1986). “Les ánciens synodes abbatiaux et les Regulae SS. “Was Charlemagne’s court a courtly society?”. 1998). Berichte der Römisch-Germanischen Kommission 63 (1982). 195–270. 1–10. 223–42. 99–132. Studies in Church History 31 (1994). pp. 1999). Theuws and J. ——. pp. pp. in: J. 171–90. Essays presented to Walter Goffart (Toronto. Cannadine and S. Mullett.C.. in eadem. “Women at the court of Charlemagne: a case of monstrous regiment?” in: J.. in: J. Subsidia I (1978). 258–96. 1993). 1–48. pp. pp. pp. 137–80. and H. in: R. D. Franklin eds. 1998). in: A. “Theodulf ’s mythical silver Hercules vase: poetica vanitas and the Augustinian critique of the Roman heritage”. pp. Studia Anselmiana 44 (1959).582  Müller-Wille. 1996).und frühgeschichtlicher Zeit: Untersuchungen zu Grabraub und “Haugbrot” in Mittel.. J. ——. repr. M. 1995). Medieval Queenship (Stroud.L. 81–114. 82–113. Price eds. TRW 8 (Leiden/Boston/Köln. Jarnut. “Königsgrab und Königskirche”.. Studien und Mitteilungen zur Geschichte des Benediktinerordens und seiner Zweige 84 (1973).. 2001). La royauté et les élites dans l’Europe carolingienne (du début du IXe aux environs de 920) (Lille. Cubitt ed. Am Vorabend der Kaiserkrönung: Karl der Grosse und Leo III (forthcoming. Property and power in the early Middle Ages (Cambridge. von der.. Näsmann. Shepard and S.. Parsons ed. Le Jan ed. ——. repr. Musurillo. McKitterick ed. “The Ethnogenesis of the Danes and the making of a Danish kingdom”.... Rituals of royalty (Cambridge. ——. Court culture in the earlier Middle Ages (Leiden. 157–64. in: eadem. Griffiths eds. pp. XIV. pp. “The voice of Charlemagne”. ——. pp. in: Nelson. ch. in eadem. 1978). The uses of literacy in early medieval Europe (Cambridge. pp. in: W. ——. . Charles the Bald (London. Roth eds. pp. Murray ed. 443–51. philologisch-historische Klasse. Dickinson and D. “Queens as Jezebels: the careers of Brunhild and Balthild in Merovingian history”. ——. Mundó. “The language of diplomacy”. forthcoming ——. ——.. 131–184... 203–16. Davies and P. 1992). “Charlemagne. pp. U. The Acts of the Christian martyrs (Oxford. Nahmer.und Nordeuropa. 1–36. Anglo-Saxon Studies in Archaeology and History 10 (Oxford. children and the church in the earlier Middle Ages”.. Abhandlungen der Akademie der Wissenschaften in Göttingen. “Über Ideallandschaften und Klostergrüngungsorte”. pp. pp. Zum Grabfrevel in vor. in: F. 1972). 1987). in: eadem. Nelson eds. in: C. 206–21. 349–412. “Literacy in Carolingian government”. Studia Monastica 3 (1961). The Frankish World. The Making of Kingdoms. pp. 107–68. 1990).. Fouracre eds. “Carolingian royal funerals”. The Frankish world (London. in: R. Rulers and ruling families in early Medieval Europe (London.L. Nelson. Vor 1500 Jahren: König Chlodwig und seine Erben (Mainz. 107–25. Byzantine Diplomacy (Aldershot. in: D. L. pp. Nees.. Studies in Church History. “La cour impériale de Charlemagne”. dritte Folge 113 (Göttingen. pp. 2000). Patrum”. pp. Diss. 3–33.D. K.. Okulicz.D.. 1975). Ibn al-Qutiyya. Nock. Archeologia 40 (1991).D. “Die Gegenwart der Toten”. Thrane eds. P. Despy. K. “A Find of Byzantine Silver from the Mint of Rome for the Period A.. de. pp.... ——. Oexle.. O’Hara. Nie. Peter: The birth of the Papal State. 1994). Römisches Jahrbuch für Kunstgeschichte 19 (1981). “Centrum kulturowe z pierwszych wieków naszej ery u uj cia Wis y”. 1971). pp. Ph. 66–73. 1988). Oexle. 1995). pp.. Les évêques réguliers (Paris. pp. M. Noort. 680–825 (Philadelphia. O. Dierkens eds. Archbishop Theodore: Commemorative studies on his life and influence. pp. 115–27. (Liège. 277–307. W. pp. 49–57. Oliger. in: Teodorico il Grande e i Goti d’Italia.G. A. C. 18–40. 137–56. in: J. Atti del XIII Congresso internazionale di studi sull’alto medioevo 1 (Spoleto. Breat and W. “Paradoxes and possibilities in the sources for Roman society in the early Middle Ages”. The Republic of St. J.R. 1920). Bullough (Leiden/Boston/Köln. The archaeology of Gudme and Lundeborg (Copenhagen. Nichols. “Das Kloster als ‘Strafanstalt’ im kirchlichen und weltichen Recht der Spätantike”. 1967). in: Z. Lund Archaeological Review 3 (1997).. 395–423. “Between memory and history: Les Lieux de Mémoire”. ——. “Theodoric the Great and the Papacy”.M.. Mass. “Maria Regina—Ein politischer Kultbildtypus?”. Oakeshott. 80 (1994). 1994). Verbeke eds. Randsborg and H.. Essays in honour of Donald A. 1983). (University of North Carolina. G. Duvosquel and A. 1993). Early medieval Rome and the Christian West.. Abt. R. “Rome in the seventh century”. 1991). 55–83. . in: idem e. pp. 2000). J. G. 16–22. Nora. Smith ed.. 1978). Studies in Classical Antiquity 7 (Amsterdam.. 1958). 1984). Essays on Religion and the Ancient World 1 (Cambridge. 105–39. Nielsen. Villes et campagnes au Moyen Age. 49–54. Noetlichs.. Studien zur ältesten Geschichte des Kloster Lorsch (Berlin. pp.. eds. The mosaics of Rome (New York. P. Nordström. 641–752”.. pp. Interdisciplinary research 1988”. 583 Neundörfer.. Étude de patristique et de liturgie latines (IV e–VIII e siècles) (Louvain. 69–87. Noble. in: M. T. Death in the Middle Ages. Studia 9 (Louvain. D. ——.. Mélanges G. U.a. kan.. Swiss Numismatic Review 64 (1985). pp. Nilgen. Antiquity 67 (1993). Ntedika. pp. L’évocation de l’au-delà dans la prière pour les morts. Noel. 1972). Mediaevalia Louvaniensia Series 1. P. ——. “Problems and ideas concerning ideology in the construction of ‘religion’ and ‘ritual’ as analytical concepts”. Forschungen zu monastischen und geistlichen Gemeinschaften im westfränkischen Bereich.X. “Moines et nature sauvage dans l’Ardenne au haut Moyen Age”.. L’inventaire du monde: Geographie et politique aux origines de l’Empire romain (Paris. Stewart ed.. The archaeology of Gudme and Lundeborg (Copenhagen. pp. J. ZRG. pp.. K. Views from a many-windowed tower: Studies of imagination in the works of Gregory of Tours. Barbaricum 2 (1992). “Das Gräberfeld von Weklice. Münstersche Mittelalter-Schriften 31 (München. Louvain.. 1987). Representations 26 (1989). Cambridge Studies in Anglo-Saxon England 11 (Cambridge.. in: J-M.. Lapidge ed. Nicolet. transl..L. ——. The History of the Conquest of Al-Andalus. pp.M. unpubl.F.H. R. “Cremation and burial in the Roman Empire”.. “The Gudme-Lundeborg project. Zur Besiedlungsgeschichte des Weichselsraums in der römischen Kaiserzeit”.D. 563–97.O. van de. in: H. 7–25. “The context of early medieval barrows in western Europe”. 1971). The Archaeology of Gudme and Lundeborg (Copenhagen.. “Wat weten we over de continuiteit van Maastricht?”. pp. P. Monatschrift für Kunstwissenschaft. Østergaard Sørensen. van. ——. Publications de la Société Historique et Archéologique de Limbourg 127 (1991). Museumswesen und Denkmalpflege 43 (1990).. PBSR 47 (1979). pp. Katalog der Denkmäler bis zum Ausgang der Ottonen. ——. 278–328. Estudios sobre instituciones monásticas medievales (Pamplona. van.. Handelingen van het colloquium te Alden Biesen (Bilzen). H. in: C. pp. 1992). pp. “Reconstructing ninth-century Constantinople”. ——. De Sint Servaas. pp. 309–12. “Gudmehallen. Palazzo and D. 514–33. 1996). 1956). 1994). Deel 1: Bronnen betreffende het tijdvak vanaf het jaar 359 tot en met 923”. pp. ——. 25–39. pp. Orlandoni. pp. “Bronnen voor de geschiedenis van Maastricht (359–1204). pp. 1971). Maastricht staat op zijn verleden (Maastricht. Gesta 20 (1981).R. 69–82.. Ossel. Ousterhout R. ——. 58–65. reprint 1991). farmsteads and settlement pattern in the Gudme area”. Marie: Le culte de la vierge dans la société médiévale (Paris. 95–123. 15–24. Tongeren en Maastricht 1984 (Borgloon-Rijkel. “Early medieval painting in San Clemente. “Ipotesi sul significato della sigla IB nel denaro papale di Adriano I rinvenuto negli scavi di Aosta”.. É. 1966–1971. “The portrait of Pope Leo IV in San Clemente. 17–34. Kongeligt byggeri fra jernalderen”. “Die Maastrichter Servatiuskirche im Frühmittelalter. 299–310. “El movimiento ascético de San Fructuoso y la congregación monástica dumiense”. ——. Severin zu Köln (Mainz. de Dijn ed.M. Iogna-Prat. Panhuysen. Oxford Dictionary of Byzantium 2 (New York. Tweemaandelijks restauratie-informatiebulletin 39–40.S. “Los orígenes del monaquismo dúplice en España”. pp.. Het vroegste Christendom in het Maasland. 41–7. 1991). in: D.. “De Archeoloog”. E. Oxenstierna.R. Voorlopig eindverslag van de opgravingen door de dienst Stadsontwikkeling Maastricht in de periode 1981–1989”. “Las congregaciones monásticas en la tradición suevo-gótica”. Rome: a re-examination of the so-called ‘square’ nimbus in medieval art”. pp. 1998). 5–48.G. Schaefer and H. “De Sint-Servaaskerk te Maastricht in de vroege middeleeuwen. in: L. Osborne. “Houses. Sint-Servatius. 51e supplément à Gallia (Paris. Ein Vorbericht über die jüngsten Grabungen des städtisches Amtes für Bodendenkmalpflege Maastricht”. 15–36. J. Rome: the Madonna and Child in the niche”.. B. J. Orlandis. Die Ausgrabungen in St. 1986). Päffgen. ——. 115–30.. 1994). Memorie dell’Accademia Italiana di Studi Filatelici e Numismatici 4 (1990).. Kunstchronik. in: idem. “The Roman catacombs in the Middle Ages”. Estudios sobre las organizaciones monásticas medievales (Pamplona. E. and A.K. pp. L. . Die Goldhörner von Gallehus (Lidingö. 2 vols. Johansson. in: idem. Papers of the British School at Rome 53 (1985). eds. M. 1971). Palazzo. pp. (München. 1984)..O. pp. Estudios sobre las organizaciones monásticas medievales (Pamplona.. 125–64. Nielsen e. “Jalons liturgiques pour une histoire du culte de la vierge”. in: idem. Oswald.a. “Los monasterios familiares en Hispania durante la Alta Edad Media”. Établissements ruraux de l’antiquité tardive dans le nord de la Gaule. P. ——. pp. Sennhauser eds. Vorromanischen Kirchenbauten. in: P. 1992). Byzantium in the ninth century: Dead or alive? (Aldershot. Bulletin KNOB (1991). Nationalmuseets Arbejdsmark 1994 (Copenhagen. bisschop van Tongeren-Maastricht. pp.584  Ommeren.. (1988). Brubaker ed. ——.A. in: idem. 125–146. Russo eds. Estudios sobre instituciones monásticas medievales (Pamplona. 1971). T. ——.. F. “Archeologische kroniek van Maastricht”.. DHGE 13 (Paris. W. Journal of Ecclesiastical History 48 (1997). Beowulf and Christianity (New York. Petersen. 1956). Publications de la Société Historique et Archeologique dans le Limbourg 129 (1993). Papinot. Een archeologisch en historisch probleem (Brussel.. 1952). 1996).M.. Journal of Medieval History 9 (1983). 160–7. 585 ——.”. U. pp.S. De vroegste stadsontwikkeling in Nederland”.. W. ——. “Die Grabstätten der merowingischen Könige in Paris”. Peschlow. J. in: Die Franken: Wegbereiter Europas. Sigismund of Burgundy”. EME 2 (1993). Panhuysen. Romeins Maastricht en zijn beelden.S. 1967). “Régions ecclésiastiques et paroisses romaines” in: Actes du XI e Congrès international d’archéologie chrétienne (Rome. pp. G. pp.A..A. su crónica y la monarquía leonesa en el siglo X (Madrid. Arce eds.. in: J. Dialoghi di Archeologia 1–2 (Roma. 1996).. Paxton..S. Alamannische Adelsgräber von Niederstotzingen. 1989).. J. C.. “Dead or alive? The Holy Man as healer in East and West in the late sixth century”. Percival. “Cordue”. pp. Romanische Forschungen 71 (1959).. and Leupen. Kazanski.D.. Torelli and J. 259–88. “Entre la historia y la arqueología. “Callaecia”. Périn.. 411–55.S. pp. ——. Pérez de Urbel. 9–30. “Opgravingen door het Gemeentelijk Oudheidkundig Bodemonderzoek Maastricht [GOBM] in het jaar 1991”.A. ed. P.A. Pereira-Menaut. J. Divisio Theodemiri ”..M. 416–22. Pérez. Hulst and R. Hulst. La transformación del paisaje político en el Norte de Hispania”. 91–8.-C. 1992). Los monjes españoles en la edad media (Madrid. Dijkman. 1987). Notices sur les vestiges archéologiques de Civaux (Poitiers. T. Publications de la Société Historique et Archéologique dans le Limbourg 128 (1992). J. 1971).M. Panhuysen. 1976). Périn. Coarelli. Vor 1500 Jahren: König Chlodwig und seine Erben (Mainz. Sampiro. Al-Qantara 9 (1988). B.. “Über die Namen der sog. “Maastricht in het eerste millenium. pp. pp. T. 1–21. Vor 1500 Jahren: König Chlodwig und seine Erben (Mains. in: Die Franken: Wegbereiter Europas.. Uroz Sáez eds. L. M.G. pp. “Cambios estructurales versus romanización convencional. Conquista romana y modos de intervención en la organización urbana y territorial. 319–25.H. Veröffentlichungen des Staatlichen Amts für Denkmalpflege Stuttgart A12 (Stuttgart. 859. ——. Pietri. Beiheft 18 (Tübingen. J. La ville de Tours du IV e au VI e siècle: Naissance d’une cité chrétienne (Rome. pp. Ontstaan en vroegste geschiedenis van de middeleeuwse steden in de zuidelijke Nederlanden.. Dijkman and R. 95–110. Istanbuler Mitteilungen. Piel. 335–80. 1983). F.A. “Das Grab Childerichs I. pp.M.. Parker. 1990). R.A. 173–82. . 1988). 1996).. ——. in: F.. 1035–62. “Villas and monasteries in late Roman Gaul”. “Remarques sur la topographie funéraire en Gaule mérovingienne et à sa périphérie: Les nécropoles romaines tardives aux nécropoles du haut-moyen âge”... 1977). Panhuysen. Christianizing death: The creation of a ritual process in early medieval Europe (Ithaca and London.A. Roman Maastricht reflected in Stones (Maastricht/Assen. 169–98 and 403–26. P. P. and M. 245–59... M. T. ——. Cahiers archéologiques 35 (1987). Estudios sobre la Tabula Siarensis (Madrid. Panhuysen. “Power and the power to heal: the cult of St. pp. Pavón Maldonado. 1934). pp. Paulsen.M. González and J..M. P. El enigma de la Córdoba califal desaparecida”. F. The Roman villa: An historical introduction (Berkeley.. pp. 1990). Die Irenenkirche in Istanbul: Untersuchungen zur Architektur. Pietri. pp. 1996). eds. in: S. K. 61–95. T. Pohl. transl. Die Germanen (München.. Trade and market in early empires: Economics in theory and practice (New York. de. pp.. pp.. R. “Les reliques des saints Maixent et Léger aux IXe et Xe siècles et les origines de l’abbaye de l’Ebreuil en Bourbonnais”. Gurt and G. Reial Acadèmia de Bones Lletres de Barcelona (Barcelona. A propos d’une édition récente”... Poole. 1990). Production et distribution des monnaies mérovingiens mosanes”. “Loca sancta: la géographie de la sainteté dans l’hagiographie gauloise (IVe–VIe s. P.a.C. K. Bulletin de l’Institut Archéologique Liégois 107 (1995). “La sfida attilana: Dinamica di un potere barbaro”. 2000). Poerck. 2001). Piva.L. 95–8. Francia 18. La mésaventure de Sichem (Paris. Towns in late Antiquity: Iol Caesarea and its context (Oxford. Pitt-Rivers. Poulin. Eugippius und Severin.. 5 vols. W.-Hist. Urbanczyk ed.. Pohl. Cinq années d’archéologie en province de Namur 1990–1995 (Namur. “L’époque mérovingienne” in: J. 139–59. 1995). 1994)... Pohl.. in: P. ——. J. .)” in: S. Plumier.586  ——.. 1990). ——. W. “The Economy as instituted process”.. (Cambridge. 185–200. 239–305. Origins of Central Europe (Warsaw. pp. J. “Le Dossier hagiographique de Saint Conwoion de Redon. G. Luoghi sacri e spazi della santità (Turin. Attila—Flagellum Dei ? (Rome. Collectors and curiosities: Paris and Venice. Polanyi. Plumier.. Frühmittelalterliche Studien 26 (1992). Denkschriften der Österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften. Wood ed. ——. A. 1957). “Frontiers in Lombard Italy: the laws of Ratchis and Aistulf ”. Ricerche sulle ‘cattedrali doppie’ da Sant’Ambrogio all’età romanica (Quistello. 1976).. Sedes regiae (400–800 D. S. Wood and H. in: idem e. Anthropologie de l’honneur. 1988). Diesenberger. ed. pp. 1996). 2000). “Les monétaires à Huy et Maastricht. pp. forthcoming). pp.. 145 (Wien. I. Reimitz eds. Histoire des institutions de la Bretagne.. pp. pp. in: idem ed. 1981–4). 447–8. Revue Bénédictine 67 (1962). The Lombards and Christianity”. “Die Gepiden und die Gentes an der mittleren Donau nach dem Zerfall des Attilareiches”. ——. 1500 –1800. Le origini etniche dell’Europa (Roma. Pomian. “Deliberate ambiguity. pp. “Germania—Herrschaftssitze östlich des Rheins und nördlich der Donau”.. IMR series (Turnhout. 1997).D. and J. 305–18. Phil. Die Völker an den mittleren und unteren Donau im fünften und sechsten Jahrhundert. 1990). (Mayenne. in: Ruins in a landscape: Essays in antiquarianism (Edinburgh. in: W. in: I.”. Planiol. Piggott. pp. 243–57. “La chapelle Saint Hilaire”. Cinq années d’archéologie en province de Namur 1990 –1995 (Namur. The transformation of frontiers. ——. 1983). Scaraffia eds. Der Autor. Cinq années d’archéologie en province de Namur 1990–1995 (Namur. Wolfram and F. in: J. Lexikon des Mittelalters 4 (München. 2000). Pol. in: H. Boesch Gajano and L. “The role of steppe peoples in eastern and central Europe in the first millennium A. “Filibertus”. Lectures on the History of the Papal Chancery Down to the Time of Innocent III. Plumier ed.. Elizabeth Wiles-Portier (Cambridge. From late Antiquity to the Carolingians (Leiden/Boston/Köln. Plumier-Torts. pp. Le cattedrali lombarde. pp. Blason Scarel ed. pp. 117–141. 165–207. forthcoming). 1980). 1989). ——. Daim eds. M.-C. 23–35. “Antiquarian thought in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries”.). ——. Ripoll eds.1 (1991). pp. 91–94.M. ——. ——.. der Text und der Heilige.. S. 65–78. pp. 1915). 1996a). J.. ——... Die Awaren (München. (Wien.. Kl. 69–91. Conversion in the Middle Ages. and M. Potter. “Konfliktverlauf und Konfliktbewältigung: Römer und Barbaren im frühen Mittelalter”. ——. 1–24. . 105–166. Revue Internationale d’Onomastique 14 (1962). L. 1988). 1970).. Malaga)”. “Les représentations du palais dans les textes littéraires du Haut Moyen Age”.C. ——. Rich ed. Francia 4 (1976). 587 Poulter. 861–915.. 700–900”.. 1951). “Assemblies”.. Burial in the Roman world. 161–71. “Toponymie bretonne. The social organisation of death: Medical discourse and social practices in Belfast (Basingstoke. “Plunder and tribute in the Carolingian Empire”.. P.. pp. late Roman and early Byzantine city. Richter. 1965. “The organization. The Cambridge Companion to Old English Literature (Cambridge..I. Lapidge eds. 1977). “Beowulf ”. 900–1300 (Oxford. 1989). Griffiths eds. Reimitz. pp. 1995). ——. 2001). Robinson. Ringbom.-F. in: R. pp. Kingdoms and communities in Western Europe. “L’implantation monumentale chrétienne dans le paysage urbain de Rome de 300 à 850”.. P. 4th series. Rabe. a Roman. pp. deux sites fréquents d’églises paroissiales rurales dans les sept anciens diocèses de l’Oise”. Riché. ed.. and liturgy of the Western Church. 179–216. ed. The Medieval World (London. pp.. ——. 99–135. ——. . in: T. H. 587–621. M. M.. pp. Revue d’histoire de l’Église de France 62 (1975). The New Cambridge Medieval History 2 (Cambridge. pp. La Pasión de San Pelayo (Santiago de Compostela. Mainake 1 (1979).. R.. “Grenzen und Grenzüberschreitungen im karolingischen Mitteleuropa”. pp. T. Prinz. 75–94. L.. 1989). F. “The geography of power: South Scandinavia before the Danish kingdom”. R. den Rheinländen und Bayern am Beispiel der monastischen Entwicklung (München and Wien... Transactions of the Royal Historical Society 35 (1985). 2nd ed. in: M. The formation of the medieval West: Studies in the oral culture of the barbarians (Dublin. Grenze und Differenz im frühen Mittelalter (Wien. “Fontaines sacrées et nécropoles antiques. Faith. forthcoming. 800–1056 (London. Lyon (Rhône) aux premiers temps chrétiens. Godden and M. Nelson eds. 1992). 2000). 142–59. S. law. Pohl and H. Recueil de travaux d’histoire et de philologie. art and politics at St-Riquier (Philadelphia. 1991). The city in late Antiquity (London. “La iglesia rupestre de Las Mesas de Villaverde (Ardales. 1995). Reynaud. in: W. München. Quentel. L. Dickinson and D. Reynolds. 49–64. J. Roblin. 1992).. 1999). Frühes Mönchtum im Frankenreich. 1984). 235–51. Linehan and J. “The use and abuse of urbanism in the Danubian provinces during the later Roman empire”. J. pp. Begegnungen mit China: Die Entdeckung Ostasiens im Mittelalter (Sigmaringen. pp.. The Making of Kingdoms (Oxford. Basiliques et nécropoles. 1991). Journal of Roman Studies monograph 8 (London. Reece. V.. F. McKitterick ed. Université de Louvain. R. Reuter. Guides archéologiques de la France 10 (1986). A. Reimitz eds. Puertas Tricas. pp. “Le développement topographique de la région de Vatican à la fin de l’antiquité et au début du moyen âge”. 45 (Louvain. Nicopolis ad Istrum. S. Chronologie des noms en loc-”. in: Actes du XI e Congrès International d’Archéologie chrétienne (Rome. in: J. Graltempel und Paradise (Stockholm. Reynolds. pp.... Council for British Archaeology Research Report 22 (London. Prior. 81–8. C... 1995). 1994). Germany in the early Middle Ages. Rodríguez Fernández. in: Mélanges d’archéologie et d’histoire de l’art offerts au Professeur Jacques Lavalleye. 195–235. Reichert. 1991). Reekmans. in: P. Ringtved. Kultur und Gesellschaft in Gallien..L. Luxemburg und Nordfrankreich (Bonn. The world of the Scythians (London. Das Reichsgut in den heutigen Niederlanden.L. 1938). ——. La Storia dell’Alto Medioevo italiano (VI–X secolo) alla luce dell’archeologia. G. Croire et guérir: La foi en Gaule dans l’antiquité tardive (Paris. “Urban transition in North Africa: Roman and medieval Towns of the Maghreb”. in idem ed.-P. pp. ——. 165–72. D. Medieval and historiographical essays in honor of James Westfall Thompson (Chicago. To be the neighbor of Saint-Peter. “Les représentations mariales dans l’art d’occident: Essai sur la formation d’une tradition”. Palazzo and D. Loseby eds. Towns in transition. Cate and E.. Bullettino dell’istituto storico italiano per il medioevo e archivio muratoriano 88 (1979). 1999).. Farmer and B.. pp. Towns in transition. pp. J. pp. Iogna-Prat. pp. D. ——. pp. 37–85. Roux. . 176–203. in: S. Regional dynamics in the Romanisation of Belgic Gaul and the Rhineland area”.. Maria in Trastevere e le più antiche feste della madonna a Roma”. The Social Uses of an Emotion in the Middle Ages (Ithaca. Russo eds... 1984). The social meaning of Cluny’s property.. in: N. 1989). Biblioteca dell’archeologia medievale 11 (Florence. Loseby eds. 159–83. “La funzione della moneta tra l’VIII e X secolo: Un annalisi della documentazione archeologica”.T. pp. pp. Delogu eds. pp. Naples. 1996). “Perennial prayer at Agaune”. Het Merovingisch grafveld van Rosmeer. 302–21. Rousselle. Actes de la table ronde internationale organisée par le Centre Jean Bérard et l’École francaise de Rome. “La moneta nella documentazione altomedievale di Roma e del Lazio”. B. 262–88. Roskams. Roosens. 1996). Archaeologia Belgica 88 (1965).H.. N. Three studies on the earliest Romanisation of northern Gaul (Amsterdam. Christie and S. N.. 333–52. “The sword and the plough. Francovich and G. 36–56. Urban evolution in late Antiquity and the early Middle Ages (Aldershot.. 1989). É. in: J. pp. 27–29 octobre 1994 (NaplesRome 1999). Rolle. R. H. (Ithaca. 71–150. saints and outcasts: Religion in medieval society. Archaeologia Belgica 204 (Brussel. A. H.. 1989)..588  Rollason. Studien zur Geschichte des Reichsguts in Niederlothringen und Friesland während der sächsisch-salischen Kaiserzeit. La religion des Turcs et des Mongols (Paris. and privileges of immunity in early medieval Europe (Ithaca.. Belgien. P. M. in: R. Rowlands.. “Controlling Paradigms”. 233–47.H. in: Paroli and P. Santa Maria Antiqua (Rome.B.. Noyé eds. 1990). ——. Rosenwein. Christie and S. World Archaeology 3 (1971). La Meuse et le Pays Mosan. 1996). “Sépultures mérovingiennes au ‘Vieux Cimetière’ d’Arlon”. 210–24. Les explorateurs au Moyen Age (Paris. and J. Rousseau. pp. 909 –1049 (Ithaca. “L’affresco di Turtura nel cimiterio di Commodilla. Negotiating space: Power. Roosens. Nordhagen.. “A study of twelfth-century interest in the antiquities of Rome”.. La storia economica.T. J. S. 1985). Ross. 1976). 1998). Leur importance historique avant le XIII e siècle (Namur. From the sword to the plough. Monks and nuns.N.Y. ——. Roymans. pp. Rovelli. Anderson eds..Y. 1964). l’icona di S. in: idem ed. 1994). in: N. Marie: Le culte de la vierge dans la société médiévale (Paris. Rotthoff. 1953). “Urban transition in early medieval Britain: the case of York”.. in: D. Roma e l’età carolingia: Atti del giornati di studio 3–8 maggio 1976 (Rome.)... (1980/81). pp. ——. Saints and relics in Anglo-Saxon England (Oxford.”The archaeological interpretation of prehistoric metal working”. F. N.. Urban evolution in late Antiquity and the early Middle Ages (Aldershot. Russo. restraint. Romanelli. Rosenwein eds. Alenus-Lecerf. Anger’s Past.J. ——. 1996). 521–37... A. Russo. 9–126. 1978). and P. 89. “The cultural economy of sacred power”... in: Les princes de la Protohistoire et l’émergence de l’État. 1930). E. Schieffer. “Königliche Kirchenregierung und römische Petrus-Überlieferung im Kreise Karls des Grossen”. 917–1033. pp. 1978). Santangeli Valenzani. 123–34. Vormen uit vuur 155 (1995). pp. Scales. 117–45. 1983). Veröffentlichungen der Max-Planck Instituts für Geschichte 30 (Göttingen... 365–401.. Old Norse and Finnish Religions and Cultic Place-Names (Stockholm. Berndt ed. Stuttgart/Berlin/Köln. “Versuch einer sozialen Differenzierung der jungkaiserzeitlichen Körpergräbergruppe von Haßleben-Leuna anhand einer Analyse der Grabfunde”. Schwerhoff eds. Urbanism in Medieval Europe (Zellik... Kaiser.. Saxe. pp. Schlüter.. Les revenants. V. 15–23.A.. La civilisation mérovingienne: d’après les sépultures. pp. in: idem. Verhaege eds.. pp. Journal of Roman archaeology. und Päpste: Gesammelte Aufsätze zur Geschichte des Mittelalters 1 (Stuttgart. P. pp. SJ... Münstersche MittelalterSchriften 8 (München.. G.. Schalles-Fischer. Scheibelreiter. .D.. Social dimensions of mortuary practices (unpublished Ph.E. I Congresso Nazionale di Archeologia medievale (Florence. Verletzte Ehre. H. Schramm. J. Annales ESC 31 (1976). Saradi-Mendolovici.V. “Die Anerkennung Karls des Großen als Kaiser (bis 800)”. “Horizontale und vertikale Achsen in der vorchristlichen skandinavischen Kosmologie”. “Social structures from Reihengräber: mirror or mirage?”. Samson. 571–639. J.. A. R... 64–70. Salin. 1994). Bulletin d’études orientales 4 (1934). “Le plan de Laodicée-sur-Mer”... suppl. Church Fathers. 175–82. Sage. “Edilizia residenziale e aristocrazia urbana a Roma nell’altomedioevo”.. Roe and F. Die Klostergemeinschaft von Fulda. ser. 1990). in: R. K.. Saxer. Könige. pp. P. pp. Scharlipp. Landscape and memory (London. 33 (Portsmouth. in: W. Neue Ausgrabungen und Forschungen in Niedersachsen 6 (1970). Der Bischof in Merowingischer Zeit (Wien. thesis.. Schmid ed. in: idem and G. The transformations of Vrbs Roma in late Antiquity. 1997). pp. 1992). Pfalz und Fiskus Frankfurt. Ahlbäck ed.-C.. Schreiner. Gelichi ed. “The demise of the ancient city and the emergence of the medieval city in the eastern Roman empire”. “L’utilisation par la liturgie de l’espace urbain et suburbain: L’exemple de Rome dans l’antiquité et le haut moyen âge”. Studi di antichità cristiana 41 (Rome. K. Eine Untersuchung zur Verfassungsgeschichte des fränkisch-deutschen Königtums. University of Michigan. Francia 4 (1976). 141–60. ——. Scottish Archaeological Review 4 (1987).P. “Cordoba under the Umayyads: a Syrian garden city?”. W. 1999). Schnapp. 1968). 1970).. 1969). M.. 1995). “Die Ausgrabungen in der Pfalz zu Ingelheim am Rhein. J. pp. 1991). 1997). É. les textes et le laboratoire 2 (Paris. “Mönchslisten und Klosterconvent von Fulda zur Zeit der Karolinger” in: K. The discovery of the past: The origins of archaeology (London. pp. 357–71. Ann Arbor.-E. 1960–70”. 941–53. M.. Das frankfurter Konzil von 794: Kristallisationspunkt karolingischer Kultur. S. Schama. 1996).. “The Christianization of sacred time and sacred space”. 1997). Sauvaget. R. 215–63. independent Virgins (London. 35–57.. Salzman. 589 Sablerolles. W. pp. Salisbury. Die Karolinger (2nd edition. W. pp. 81–114. Actes du XI e Congrès international d’archéologie chrétienne. Schmitt. Schjødt. “Made in Maastricht: glaskralen uit de Merovingische tijd”... A. pp. Y. 1952). Die frühen Türken in Zentralasien (Darmstadt.. Les vivants et les morts dans la société médiévale (Paris. in: S.1997). pp. R. II/2. “‘Religion populaire’ et culture folklorique”. in: G. Schatz K.E. “Verletzte Ehre”. Schmid. Quellen und Abhandlungen zur mittelrheinischen Kirchengeschichte 80 (Mainz. 116–26. 1989). Echos du monde classique 32 (1988). Harris. J. in: T. 1982). Die Entstehung der Kathedral (Zürich. ——. 1965).M. R. Germania 58 (1980). Studies in medieval Inner Asia (Aldershot. Annales de Bretagne et des Pays de l’Ouest 106 (1999). nr. “La Fondation du Mont-Saint-Michel d’après la Revelatio ecclesiae sancti Michaelis”. 1993). 457–68. pp.. N. “The establishment and dissolution of the Türk Empire”. S. t’. 1959). 850–1250”. Schwind. pp. hierarchy and society. 137–46. nr. Semple. Semmler. Gesellschaft und Kultur im Mittelalter: Festschrift J. 109–26. C.und Maaslaändischen Bistümer (5. Studies in medieval Inner Asia. ed.-10. “The making of a Great Khan”. Mosel. The Cambridge History of Early Inner Asia (Cambridge. Settimane 28 (Spoleto. “The social identity of the individual in isolated barrows and barrow cemeteries in Anglo-Saxon England”. ——. 1997). Episkopat und Adel zur Gründungszeit des Klosters Reichenau.H. Borst ed. Repr. Dictionary of Northern Mythology (Cambridge. 1990). A. Speculum 65 (1990). “On Christianization and grave-finds”. 309–43. Speculum 65 (1990). IX. Jahrhundert)”. ——.590  Ehrkonflikte in Gesellschaften des Mittelalters und der frühen Neuzeit (Norm und Struktur) (Köln/Weimar/Wien. Shephard. Sippel. ——. “Zu karolingerzeitlichen Klöstern als Wirtschaftsorganismen und Stätten handwerklicher Tätigkeit”. 309–43. “Culte impérial et politique frontalière dans la vallée de la Vilaine: le témoignage des diplômes carolingiens dans le cartulaire de Redon” in: M. 1992).a. J. Die Reichsabtei Lorsch vol. in F. pp. “Le Mongol vue par l’Occident”. Vortäge und Forschungen 20 (Sigmaringen. in: idem. M. K. “Mission und Pfarrorganisation in den rheinischen.. World Archaeology 30 (1998).. (Bologna. “Oral and written: saints. Burnham and J.. A. Franklin eds. I (Darmstadt. Studies in medieval Inner Asia (Aldershot. D.. XIV. in: B. Serstevens. pp.und hochmittelalterlicher Flußfunde”. Simek. 1985).. Sedlmayr. European Journal of Archaeology 2:1 (1999). Les précurseurs de Marco Polo (Paris. 1897. J. Le monete e le bulle plombee pontificie del medagliere vaticano 1. 1979). Mönchtum.. “Die Geschichte der Abtei Lorsch von der Gründung bis zum Ende der Salierzeit. ——.. Shepard. ——. eds. 1984). pp.. J.. nr. c.. 1984). Simonet. “A fear of the past: The place of the prehistoric burial mound in the ideology of middle and later Anglo-Saxon England”. Simonnet. Kingsbury eds. miracles and relics in Brittany. “Diskussionsbeitrag zur Interpretations früh. . Ethnographisch-Archäologische Zeitschrift 38 (1997). Sinor ed. “Zeugnisse der ‘Christianisierung’ im Grabbefund? Eine Forschungsgeschichte mit Ausblick”.... J. 1974). repr. pp. 1950). 75–173 ——. pp. Fleckenstein (Sigmaringen. 1992). “Episcopi potestas und karolingische Klosterpolitik”. and S. 47–79.. “Saints. pp. 1977). 101–23. Institutionen. Simon ed. ——. Studies in medieval Inner Asia (Aldershot. 305–94. F. 764 bis 1125”. miracles and relics in Brittany”. 77–106. pp. Byzantine diplomacy (Aldershot. pp. pp. 1997). pp. Schulze.. Frühmittelalterliche Studien 18 (1984). 285–316. Schülke. 1–28. ——. in: A. 7–23. 813–88. in: L. Knöpp ed.. ——. 129–39. H. Province and empire: Brittany and the Carolingians (Cambridge.. “Die Kenntnis vorgeschichtlicher Hügelgräber im Mittelalter”. pp. BAR International Series 59 (Oxford. Smith.C. 1995). in: idem. in: Cristianizzazione e organizzazione ecclesiastica delle campagne nell’alto medioevo e resistenze. Landévennec et le monachisme breton dans le haut moyen âge (Landévennec. Fenske e.. “Diplomatic practices in medieval Inner Asia”. F.. pp.. 222–48. in: D. Historia de los Mozárabes de España (Madrid.. Sinor. 1997). pp.. Space. XVI. in: idem. pp. Serafini. . pp. ——. pp. Mainz. “Penetración de la Iglesia en los medios rurales de la España tardorromana y visigoda”. pp. in: eadem ed. 3–35. McKitterick ed. religious status and reform in tenth. in: J. Abt und Bischof (Wiesbaden. Randsborg ed. Smythe. c. P. pp. 1982).. II (Cambridge. 1995). “Kings who opted out”. 1975). 2000). “Wann wurde Hrabanus Maurus Mönch in Fulda? Beobachtungen zur Anteilnahme seiner Familie an den Anfängen seiner Laufbahn”. 780–920”. 1982). forthcoming). new cults: Roman relics in Carolingian Francia”. 7–42. gesta episcoporum. 2001. Collins) ed.. “Archaeology and history: proposals on the social structure of the Merovingian Empire”. 131–38. Pohl and M. “Confronting identities: the rhetoric and reality of a Carolingian frontier” in: W. 3–37.. Bullough (Leiden/Boston/Köln.. “Odin—the queer? Om det skreive i norr_n mytologi”.. 317–39. pp. Berndt ed. “Queens. 654–78. dritte Folge 128 (Göttingen. Hrabanus Maurus: Lehrer. B.. Settimane 28 (Spoleto.. 1991). 1964). Ethnische Identitäten und soziale Organisation im Frühmittelalter. K. Squatriti. pp. “The problem of female sanctity in Carolingian Europe. Early medieval Rome and the Christian West: Essays in Honour of Donald A. 400–1000 (Cambridge. J. 154–76. 1998). The Birth of Europe: Archaeology and Social Development . M.. Universitetets Oldsaksamling Årbok 1984/85 (Oslo. 1981). pp. Universitetets Oldsaksamling. Past and Present 146 (1995). in: R. Abhandlungen der Akademie der Wissenschaften in Göttingen.M. Sørensen. ed. Smith. 1982). F.. Lund Archaeological Review 2 (1996). J. ——. and J. “Die Königin Fastrada”. 1987). Wormald (with D. Bullough (Leiden/Boston/Köln. Studies presented to J. To take place: Toward theory in ritual (Chicago. Sprigade. pp. Det Hellige Bryllup og Norr_n Kongeideologi (Oslo. h_y eler lav status”. 1992). ——.and eleventh-century England”. Bullough and R. pp. Frühmittelalterliche Studien 19 (1985). ——. pp. 17–53. Franklin eds. ——. Geschichtliche Landeskunde 11 (Wiesbaden. in: R. bofast—ikke bofast. Frühgeschichtliche Sozialstruckturen in Mitteleuropa: Eine Analyse der Auswertungsmethoden des archäologischen Quellenmaterials. Untersuchungen zur Gesellschaft am Mittelrhein in der Karolingerzeit. “Why do barbarians stand around the emperor at diplomatic receptions?”. eds.. 75–101. Staecker. pp.. “Religion and lay society”.. 45–58. The new Cambridge medieval history vol. “Old saints. 1986). Wallace-Hadrill (Oxford 1983). Stancliffe. Sot. Kottje and H. 63–86. Shepard and S. Solli. nunneries and reforming churchmen: gender.. Årbok 1997/1998 (Oslo.. ——.. H. D. in: Cristianizzazione ed organizzazione ecclesiastica delle campagne nell’Alto Medioevo. philologisch-historische Klasse.. 1998). Integration und Herrschaft. Staab. P. ——. in: P. pp. Stafford. Steuer. in: K. “Searching for the unknown: Gotland’s churchyards from a gender and missionary perspective”... 1997). in: R. Past and Present 163 (1999). C. Die Einweisung ins Kloster und in den geistlichen Stand als politische Massnahme im frühen Mittelalter (Heidelberg. 183–217... Steinsland. Das Frankfurter Konzil von 794: Kristallisationspunkt karolingische Kultur I (2 vols. “Gudhem”. Sotomayor. 591 ——. Ideal and reality in Frankish and Anglo-Saxon Society. Byzantine Diplomacy (Aldershot. Kousgård. M. G. Water and society in early medieval Italy.Z.. Early medieval Rome and the Christian West: Essays in Honour of Donald A.. pp. Zimmermann. P. Starume. Typologie des sources du moyen âge occidental 37 (Turnhout. Gesta abbatum. “Smeden i jernalderen. Diesenberger eds. E. 305–12.. 2000). Forschungen zur Geschichte des Mittelalters 3 (Wien. . E. Studies on ancient societies in Northwestern Europe (Amsterdam. 205–77. Medieval archaeology in the Netherlands. 1991). 1997). 1 (1997). abbé et archiprêtre de monastères ‘exempts’”. 1989). in F. Stiene. Heidinga eds. ——. Besteman. Le Moyen Age 88 (1982).. “Landed property and manorial organisation in Northern Austrasia: some considerations and a case study”. L’Abbaye de St-Maurice d’Agaune des origines à la réforme canoniale. 1988). Actions and thoughts of aristocrats and dwellers in the pagus Texandrië (in prep. 201–5.-M. E. pp. 1–13. “Der Kontakt zu Rom”. 173–203. pp. Thäte.L.L. Bereavement and commemoration: an archaeology of mortality. in: F. M.. H. nelson eds. in: M. Stoodley. Die Alamannen. 1999). Thomas. ——. pp. van der. Time. pp. Bos and H. Wegbereiter Europas. pp. Die Alamannen auf dem Zähringer Burgberg (Stuttgart. 1990).W. culture and identity. Rituals of power from Late Antiquity to the Early Middle Ages. Theurillat. Studies presented to H. “Alte Denkmäler und frühgeschichtliche Bestattungen: ein sächsisch-angelsächsischer Totenbrauch und seine Kontinuität”. pp. 1999 [1996]). British Archaeological Reports 288 (Oxford.D. 100–22. N. ——. pp. pp. “Gregors des Grossen Dialogi und die vita Goaris Wandelberts von Prüm”.. Tchalenko. S. Analecta Bollandiana 79 (1961). “Les actes des martyrs d’Aurélien en Bourgogne: le texte de Farfa”. “Centre and periphery in northern Austrasia”. D. C.. “An archaeology of remembering: death.. Social Archaeology Series (Oxford. F. in: J. 1990). pp. 51–62. pp. Stroll.. 105–21.H. 66–80. Institut français d’archéologie de Beyrouth.Vers une répresentation conceptuelle des centres du haut Moyen Age”.. forthcoming. 1968).. Theuws eds.. ——. 115–44. Frankish transformations. Analecta Romana Instituti Danici. “‘Centres commerciaux’ dans la vallée de la Meuse et l’économie du haut Moyen Age. The spindle and the spear: A critical enquiry into the construction and meaning of gender in the early Anglo-Saxon burial rite. Cambridge Archaeological Journal 7. “Fulrad de Saint-Denis (v. pp.. Theuws and J. Strömbäck. 300–700 (Leicester. Theuws. 1996). 205–35. “Introduction: Ritual in transforming societies”. 1935). Stoclet. Archäologische Informationen 19 (1996).C. Theuws F. “A kind of mirror for men: sword depositions in Late Antique northern Gaul”. “Herrschaft von der Höhe”. 105–16. Nelson eds. TRW 8 (Leiden/Boston/Cologne..). in: N. Rituals of power from Late Antiquity to the Early Middle Ages. 401–76. Theuws and J. 149–63. “Les actes des martyrs d’Aurélien en Bourgogne: étude littéraire”. An interpretive archaeology (London/New York. J. Straeten J. 447–68. Sejd. pp. Gregory the Great: Perfection in imperfection (Berkeley. . and H.P. pp.. Archäologisches Landesmuseum Baden-Württemberg.A. Bibliothèque archéologique et historique 50 (Paris. König Chlodwich und seine Erben (Mainz.. Thompson.. Duggan ed. pp. Images of the past. Queens and Queenship in Medieval Europe (London.A. 515–830 environ = Vallesia 9 (1954). Analecta Bollandiana 79 (1961). 710–784). Hiddink.J. 1997).. 2000). Ausstellungskatalog (Stuttgart. pp. Alkemade.592  in the First Millenium A. Straw. ——. 41–69. ——. Tarlow. 1999).E. Villages antiques de la Syrie du nord I. and M. Barley and R.. Christianity in Britain. “Maria Regina: Papal Symbol” in: A. van Regteren Altena (Assen. Supplementum XVI (Rome.. Roymans and F. G. “Britonia”. pp.. Textstudier i nordisk religionshistoria (Stockholm/Copenhagen. J. Mittellateinisches Jahrbuch 18 (1983). ——. ——. J. Die Franken. 1953). bereavement and the First World War”. ——. TRW 8 (Leiden/Boston/Cologne. 299–407. A. Hanson eds. 2000). 397–415.C. Thomsen. “Entdeckungsgeschichte”. ——. World Archaeology 28:2 (1996). 1989). pp. 1969). “The Goths in Poland—where did they come from and when did they leave?”. Aspects of Greek and Roman Life (London. Kunst und Kultur der Karolingerzeit.. 2nd edition. “The powers of rock: topography and monument construction on Bodmin Moor”. M.... Wesse ed. D. Przegl[d Archeologiczny 26 (1978). 152–64.. Trousset. ——. pp. Times Atlas of World History (3rd edn. Early Christianity in Central and East Europe (Warsaw.G. 1998). 1993). Urbanczyk. ——. Turville-Petre. N. ——. Die Aachener ‘Residenz’ Karls des Grossen”.. “Celtic literary tradition and the development of a feudal principality in Brittany” in: H. Untermann. Turbessi. G.O. 2nd edition. Myth and religion of the North (Westport. 3 (1998).. E. 155–62. The Huns (Oxford. pp. pp.. pp. Reallexikon der Germanische Altertumskunde 7. 161–77.. (Berlin/New York.. 1989). Verhandelingen van de Koninklijke Academie voor Wetenschappen. 1996). 235–47. Turri. Beiträge zum Katalog der Ausstellung (Paderborn. Literacy in medieval Celtic societies (Cambridge. 121–75. B. P. Karl der Grosse und Papst Leo III in Paderborn. Tilley. Thomsen. Adalbert-Voitech—missionary and politician”. “Lundeborg—an early port of trade in South-East Funen”. D. Dramas. in: A. pp. N.. Mémoires de la Société d’Histoire et d’Archéologie de Bretagne 63 (1986). 1994). P. Studien zur Archäologie des Ostseeraumes. The Goths in Spain (Oxford. pp. Michaelsen... Zeitschrift der Deutschen Morgenländischen Gesellschaft 78 (1924/25). and metaphors: symbolic action in human society (Ithaca. 29–72. Habis 3 (1972). “Totenriten und Bestattung im Paläolithikum”. Dialogues d’Histoire Ancienne19. 23–34. P. 1974). 1999). 1983). Tonnerre. pp. 1997).-Y. Thomsen.”Culte et iconographie de saint Maurice d’Agaune: bilan jusqu’au XIIIe siècle”. pp.. pp. Stylisation biblique et condition humaine dans l’hagiographie mérovingienne (650–750). A phenomenology of landscape: places. Lundeborg—en handelsplads fra jernalderen (Svendborg. 1998). “La carte d’Agrippa: nouvelle proposition de lecture”. ——. Blæsild. 1994). paths and monuments (Oxford. 155–8.O. H. pp. Bestattungswesen und Totenkult in ur. 1991). London. E. 142–8. J. 1995). ... Frühmittelalterliche Studien 21 (1987). in: idem ed. The ritual process: structure and anti-structure (1969. “Das Gudme-Problem und die Gudme-Untersuchungen”.Y. 1971). Thurre. 593 ——. C. ——. 137–57. Toynbee. “‘Opere mirabile constructa’. pp. fields. M. 107–45. Thrane.O. ——..M. in: F. Ullrich. “Les pays de la Basse Vilaine au haut Moyen Âge”. Gli uomini delle tende (Milan. 23–9. 166–82. 1–48. 7–18. eds. pp. Festschrift für Michael Müller-Wille (Neumünster. H. Nielsen e.und frühgeschichtlicher Zeit (Berlin.. Keiling eds. 1974). 1975). Timpe. Turner. “Alttürkische Inschriften in der Mongolei”.. repr.. Von der Eisenzeit zum Mittelalter. Hardt and K.a. Zeitschrift für schweizerische Archaeologie und Kunstgeschichte/Revue suisse d’art et d’archaeologie/Rivista svizzera d’arte e d’archeologia 49 (1992). pp. “Gudme”. V. “Geneza wczesno redniowiecznych metalowych pochew broni bia ej ze stanowisk kultury pruskiej”. in: 799. Horst and H. “Un obispo con nombre británico y los orígenes de la diócesis de Mondoñedo”. The Archaeology of Gudme and Lundeborg (Copenhagen. van. N. pp.O. “Materialien zur Topografhie einer eisenzeitlichen Sakrallandschaft um Gudme auf Ostfünen in Dänemark”.K. Regole monastiche antiche (Rome. Pryce ed. 2 (1993).. Death and burial in the Roman world. A. 1999). New York. Uytfanghe.. ——. pp. pp.. European Journal of Archaeology 1.. P. Reallexikon der Germanischen Altertumskunde 13 (Berlin. “St. Tovar. in: P. 307–389. V. ——.O.P. 1967). 2 vols (Paris. “Die Etichonen. ——. ——.A. Some implications of recent research in Tongres”. J. “Secular funerals”. Panhuysen. die Quellen. 120 (Brussel. 40–7.. University of Århus (1992). Vang Petersen. pp. A.A. Verhulst.. Klasse der Letteren 49. Theology 92 (1989). T.M. 237–65. Roymans ed. Venarde. 1962). .S. Facing Death Series (Buckingham/Philadelphia. d’histoire et de philosophie vol. 1994). La vengeance. “Excavations at sites of treasure trove finds at Gudme”. Verdier. La ‘Historia’ de Ibn Askar”.. pp. 1980). Altgermanische Religionsgeschichte (Berlin. Etudes d’ethnologie. Vieillard-Troiekouroff. De Beeldenaar 4 (1983). 1999). R. ——.. “La distruzione dei palazzi imperiali di Roma e la restrutturazione del palazzo lateranense nel IX secolo nel raporti con quello di Costantinopoli”. Al-Andalus 30 (1965). 1952). “Una fuente importante de la historia de Al-Andalus. 2nd edition. 1970). Nielsen e. 394–402. Al-Andalus 31 (1966). pp. A. van der. Van Dam. E. Verzone. Constantin VII Porphyrogénète. in: idem. Le Livre des Cérémonies. Vallvé Bermejo. pp. Vollmer. The mourning for Diana (Oxford. 85–102. P. 1 (Paris.. 121–5. de. ——. 1965).und frühgeschichtlichen Archäologie 1 (Münster/New York. eds. thesis. 2 vols. W. 30–40. 139–74. Völsunge-Nibelungen Traditionen. Wallace-Hadrill. Antropologiske studier i en episk traditions transformation i forhold til dens sociale sammenhæng Unpublished Ph. Funerals—and how to improve them (London. pp.. “Le système vidicatoire”. with Commentaire. 1976). in: P.. 1993). “Gregory of Tours in the light of recent research”. Tellenbach ed. “The earliest urbanisation in northern Gaul. “De nuevo sobre Bobastro”. 137–84. (Paris. in: G. ed. pp. Vogt. pp. and T. 49–70... The long-haired kings (London. B.. “Papal Political Imagery in the Medieval Lateran Palace”. C. 2nd edition. pp.. J. Les monuments religieux de la Gaule d’après les oeuvres de Grégoire de Tours (Paris. A. 1994). J.. M. “Bodily miracles”.. Ottilien. Tongeren Romeinse stad (Tielt. From the sword to the plough.M. U. Ein Beitrag zur Frage der Kontinuität früher Adelsfamilien”... ——. Veit. J. 1987). 189–260. Saints and their miracles in late antique Gaul (Princeton... pp. Studien zum Priszillianismus. Three studies on the earliest Romanisation of northern Gaul (Amsterdam. der fünfzehnte Brief Papst Leos des Grossen (St. R. Vanderhoeven. 1985).. The rise of cities in North-West Europe (Cambridge. in: idem. 1999).594  Letteren en Schone Kunsten van België. 1967).L. Studien zum Problem der Siedlungsbestattung im europäischen Neolithikum. in: Roma e l’età carolingia.. Die frühmittelalterlichen Lesefunde aus der Löhrstraße (Baustelle Hilton II) in Mainz (Mainz. E. 1976). P. Die Forschung. Vin. 1999). On bereavement: The culture of grief. Vollman. Leadership and community in late antique Gaul (Berkeley.. La discipline pénitentielle en Gaule des origines à la fin du VII e siècle (Paris. Vries. Vestergaard. Walter. ed. Wamers.. 1993). Walter. pp. 1996).. pp. “Romeinse en vroegmiddeleeuwse munten uit een stadskernopgraving in Maastricht”. 1990). 1997). 82–115. 1985). Studien und Vorarbeiten zur Geschichte des grossfränkischen und frühdeutschen Adels (Freiburg. Saints and their miracles in Late Antique Gaul (Princeton. Vogel. Cahiers Archéologiques 20 (1970). in: idem ed. Vanvinckenroye.. in: N. The archaeology of Gudme and Lundeborg (Copenhagen. F.. 1996).a. Women’s monasticism in the central Middle Ages (Itahca. Tübinger Schriften zur ur. 13–42. C. 1957).. pp. B. Atti del giornati di studio 3–8 maggio 1976 (Rome.D. no. 1999). 185–95. Reichsabtei und König. 81–91. 1998). Beiheft der Francia 9 (1980). C. Dargestellt am Beispiel der Abtei Lorsch mit Ausblicken auf Hersfeld. Brogiolo and B. Wehlt. S. “Urban Continuity”. 4–17. Analecta Bollandiana 111 (1993)... und 14. Der Lütticher Raum in frühkarolingischer Zeit. From classical Antiquity to the Middle Ages: urban public building in Northern and Central Italy A. 125–52.. 1988). K. in: L’ambiente vegetale nell’alto medievo.. M. Werner eds. pp. 479–548. in A. The paradox of keeping-while-giving (Berkeley 1992).F. Westermann-Angerhausen. B.. 300–850 (Oxford. 1985). Antiquity 38 (1964). Wemple. pp.. pp. pp.. pp. pp. “Bernstein in der Przeworsk-Kultur”. 1984). “European forests in the early Middle Ages: landscape and land clearance”. Wielowiejski. in: R. Die Mongolen und ihr Weltreich (Mainz s. Zeitschrift für Kunstgeschichte 50 (1987). Werner. ——. H. 1996). After Rome’s fall: Narrators and sources of early medieval History (Toronto. Paravicini and K. Christy and S. 201–16. ——. Stablo und Fulda. “Frankish royal tombs in the cathedrals of Cologne and Saint-Denis”. E. Wiblé. 1980). 1990). ed. Urban evolution in Late Antiquity and the Early Middle Ages (Aldershot. Marriage and the cloister.. pp. 152–70.. pp. K. in: N. in: A..-P...C. Bericht der Römisch-Germanischen Kommission 77 (1996). 1981). A.F. Inalienable possessions. Cantrala Frågor. Werner. Land and Power: Studies in Italian and European Social History. Centrala Platser. Women in Frankish society. “Westliche Boten und Reisende zu den Mongolen im 13. McKitterick ed. Untersuchungen zur Geschichte einer karolingischen Stammlandschaft (Göttingen. Towns in Transition.. The idea and ideal of the town between late Antiquity and the early Middle Ages. M. 155–200. 28 (Lund. Werner.. pp. 1989). ——.T.. Weidemann.. White. TRW 4 (Leiden/Boston/Köln. “Re-using the architectural legacy of the past. Loseby eds. Larsson and B. Whatley. ——. 281–96. Die Verwandtschaft Irminas von Oeren und Adela von Pfalzel (Sigmaringen. Wasserstein. BAR British Series 191 (Oxford.-F. 500 to 900 (Philadelphia. in: E. in: W. Anglo-Saxon cemeteries: A reappraisal... ——. 1998). Roman and Celtic objects from Anglo-Saxon graves: A catalogue and interpretation of their use. “Aristocratic power in eighth-century Lombard Italy’. “An early literary quotation from the Inventio S. . M.. F. Acta Archaeologica Lundensia. 1968). Wickham. Adelsfamilien im Umkreis der frühen Karolinger. Veröffentlichungen des Max-Planck Instituts für Geschichte 28 (Göttingen. pp. “Chronique des découvertes archéologiques dans le canton du Valais en 1995”. The rise and fall of the party kings (Princeton. R. Southworth. “Missus—marchio—comes”. Ward-Perkins eds. “Spolie und Umfeld in Egberts Trier”. 400–1200 (London. pp. Vallesia 51 (1996). Ser... Proceedings of a Conference held at Liverpool Museum 1986 (Phoenix Mill. pp.G. J. In 8. 1997). pp. “Rural society in Carolingian Europe”. repr. entre idéologie et pragmatisme”. in: Wickham. “Kulturgeografernas bönder och arkeologernas guld—finns det någon väg til syntes?”. Jahrbuch des Römisch-Germanisches Zentralmuseums Mainz 15 (1968). New Cambridge Medieval History II (Cambridge.. 595 Ward-Perkins.. Histoire comparée de l’administration. Weiers. J. 1994). 510–37. Jahrhundert”. 146–99. ——. Eggebrecht ed.. Wiedgren. in: G.D. 215–342.D. “Scrap or substitute: Roman material in Anglo-Saxon graves”. in: L. H. pp. pp. P.a. Hårdh eds.). “Die Topographie von Mainz in der Römerzeit und der frühen Mittelalter”. Murray ed. 191–239.P. Weiner. Settimane 37 (Spoleto. 225–44. Radegundis (BHL 7049)”. 1982). 305–36. Crucis: A Note on Baudonivia’s Vita S. 1985).B.A..M. pp. pp. in: C. thesis. “The ecclesiastical politics of Merovingian Clermont”. K. Aachener Kunstblätter 61 (1995/96). ed. Ideal and Reality in Frankish and Anglo-Saxon Society (Oxford. Maria Maggiore”. Columbanus and Merovingian monasticism. 369–84. ——. 1995). ——. pp. World Archaeology 30. pp. 1999). “A prelude to Columbanus: the monastic achievement in the Burgundian territories”. ——. ——. “Early Merovingian devotion in town and country”. “Administration. 74–75. eds. “The ancient monument in Romano-British ritual practices”.. in: D. pp. Winter. burials in Crimea. in: H. pp. 34–57. 381–95. diss. 31 (Wien. in: J. England and southern Scandinavia. Analecta Sacra Tarraconensia 7 (1931). pp.. ed.H.. Wilpert. 1983). Attila—Das Hunnenreich und Europa (Stuttgart/Berlin/Köln. pp. ——. Further essays in early Roman liturgy (London. 1995). “Monuments and the past in early Anglo-Saxon England”.D. BAR International Series 781. “Clermont and Burgundy: 511–534”. “The Code in Merovingian Gaul”. “La proclamazione Efesina e i musaici della basilica di S. “Forgery in Merovingian Hagiography”. pp. ——. Wirth. law and culture in Merovingian Gaul” in: R.D. An analysis of Anglo-Saxon ‘deviant’ burials (unpubl. 63–81. Hawthorne and R. University of Reading. “The Vita Columbani and Merovingian hagiography”. in: P. Brennan. 3rd edition. 1979). in: M. MGH Schriften 33.. Ural-Altaische Jahrbücher 49 (1977). Studies in Church History 6 (Oxford.C. B. September 1986 5: Fingierte Briefe. H. Medieval Archaeology 41 (1997). Wisskirchen. Studies in the Social and Cultural History of Modern Warfare (Cambridge. 161–77... Wormald. The Theodosian Code (Ithaca. G. E.. 1990). “Placing the dead: investigating the location of wealthy barrow burials in seventh century England”. Internationaler Kongress der MGH. Bayern. 16. Baker. Williams.. 1999). ——.. Avitus of Vienne: Religion and culture in the Auvergne and the Rhône Valley.596  Wightman. Die Goten... Clarke and M. ——.. sites of mourning: The Great War in European cultural history. (Oxford. ——. MIÖG Erg. Oxford.V (Hannover. (München. Nottingham Medieval Studies 32 (1988).. 1981). Von den Anfängen bis zur Mitte des sechsten Jahrhunderts. “Santa Maria in Domnica: Überlegungen zur frühesten apsidialen darstellung der Thronenden Maria in Rom”. Ambrose of Milan and the end of the Nicene-Arian conflicts (Oxford. 119–25. H. Frömmigkeit und Fälschung. H.1 (1998). 1–32. Österreich. . Gallia Belgica (London. Wood. Salus Populi Romani: Die Geschichte römischer Kultbilder im Mittelalter (Weinheim. pp. J. ——. pp.–19.. 90–108. G. J. Grave matters: eight studies of First Millennium A. pp. 1995). in: Fälschungen im Mittelalter.. Wood eds. Winskill.N. 197–213. The uses of literacy in early Medieval Europe (Cambridge.. “Ancient landscapes and the dead: the reuse of prehistoric and Roman monuments as early Anglo-Saxon burial sites”. Realienfälschungen. 1993). Witcher eds. “China und die osteurasische Kavallerie-Revolution”. D. TRAC 97: Proceedings of the Seventh Annual Theoretical Roman Archaeology Conference (Oxford. Forcey. I.. 3–32. Wittfogel. 121–40. Bd.G. 1990). ——. Wolfram. J. Harries and I.. Die Conversio Bagoariorum et Carantanorum und die Quellen ihrer Zeit. 470–530 (Ph. 1968). pp. ——. R.A. G. 1988). 71–86.. McKitterick ed. BAR International Series 113 (Oxford. 1980). 57–86. The Church in town and countryside. Peritia 1 (1982). Entwurf einer historischen Ethnographie. Salzburg. pp. 1990). Sites of memory. 1998).. 63–80. München. Williams. 1999). Rundkvist ed. Willis. Wolf. pp. N. Gregory of Tours (Bangor.. 1998). The Cambridge Companion to Old English Literature (Cambridge. 81–93. Gård.. 1994). ——. Sammanhang kring ädelmetalldepåer och runstenar från vikingetid och tidigmedeltid in Uppland och Gästrikland. 597 ——. Archäologisches Korrespondenzblatt 24 (1994). 1988).. ——. pp. First Millenium Papers: Western Europe in the First Millenium A. Pohl and H. The making of Britain: the Dark Ages (Basingstoke and London. “How popular was early medieval devotion?” in: A. 438–57. Reimitz eds.. in: W. “On Antiquarian excavations and researches in the Middle Ages”.oder Klimafolgen in archäologischen Befunden?”.. Lapidge eds.. “Sacred topography and early Christian churches in late antique Gaul”. J. pp. pp. . Markomannenkriege. Frantzen and T. ——.J. 1999). Ursachen und Wirkungen (Brno. Biddle eds.M. EME 6 (1997). H. Tours. Historia Arabum (Valencia. 1994). christianisation et rites funéraires mérovingiens”. The Merovingian Kingdoms 450–751 (London/New York. ——. pp. M. Gauthier and H.. Wormald. in: L. Bloemers. (Stockholm. ——. in: M. ——. 1991). Grégoire de Tours et l’espace Gaulois: Actes du congrès international.. Wright. “Report: The European Science Foundation’s programme on the transformation of early medieval Europe”. J. “Aethicus Ister: an exercise in difference”. Veröffentlichungen des Max-Planck-Instituts für Geschichte 88 (Göttingen. Zoll-Adamikova. Essays in Medieval Studies. Stockholm Studies in Archaeology 15. pp. 49–62. 463–9.F.N. 2000). 5–81. P. Gräns. Proceedings of the Illinois Medieval Association 14 (1997). in: H. Archéologie Médiévale 7 (1977). 1988). Past and Present 90 (1981). ——. The making of English Law (Oxford. pp. Zemon Davis. Grenze und Differenz im frühen Mittelalter. B. ——.. “Anglo-Saxon society and literature”. 1984). Dyson and M. Popular piety: Prayer. Tejral and A. 1997).. Ximénez de Rada... devotion and cult.H. pp. BAR International Series 401 (Oxford. “Kriegs. Zufferey. 13e supplément à la Revue archéologique du Centre de la France (Tours. “Sépultures ecclésiastiques et sénatoriales dans la vallée du Rhône (400–600)”. H. S. “The sacred and the body social in sixteenth-century Lyon”. Young. 13–27. Zabehlicky. Zachrisson. Godden and M. “Constructing cults in early medieval France: saints and churches in Burgundy and the Auvergne 400–1000” (forthcoming)... Médiévales 31 (1996).F. 40–70. Stupner eds. Gravfält. ——.L. pp. Jones. Die abtei Saint-Maurice d’Agaune im Hochmittelalter (830–1258). 1968).. in: R. “The emergence of Anglo-Saxon kingdoms”.D. T. “Die Einführung der Körperbestattung bei den Slawen an der Ostsee”. 3–5 novembre 1994. Smith ed.. pp. Galinié eds. 217–27. Friesinger. 241–50. pp. “Paganisme. 1994). pp. “Que restait-il de l’ancien paysage religieux à l’époque de Grégoire de Tours?”. ——. Hill eds. Archaeologia 30 (1844). in: N. pp. 1–22. Forschungen zur Geschichte des Mittelalters 1 (Wien. 197–208. 219–40. T.J. R. This page intentionally left blank . 463 Priscus on 442–5 Aula Leonina 68–70 Austrechildis. See: Baldwin. as a centre 432. 455 image of 439–40 of Attila 443–4. 306 Attelanus. 84 Baldwin. See: Regula Benedicti Benignus. 459 See: hall. 492. queen 95. bishop of Vienne 151. 254. Alcuin. 448. 123. 543 Al-Andalus 119ff. Vita Anstrudis Appadurai. See: Faronids aedificatio 362–3. See: councils asylum 302. 445. Home of the Gods 498–505 assemblies. 544 Bernard. 326 Anonymous chronicle of Abd Ra m n al-Na ir 128–9 Anstrud. abbess of St Jean (Laon) 257–62. bishop of Tongres-Maastricht 172. 129 Adalard of Corbie 226–9 at the court 229–31 Addidamentum Nivialense de Fuliano 247 Admonitio Generalis 218–9 Ado 252. 447 women at 445. 445 of Frisians 441 of Marcomanni 441 of Thuringians 441 of Turkish khagans 442–3. 322. 235–6. 445 Avitus. drinking rituals at 443–4. 274. abbot of Redon 375–6 Alpaida. 448. bishop of Laon 249 Attila 523 court of 443–5. queen 281 Avar khagans. 539 Bede 255 Begga 249. 451. 231. 513–5. monastery of 185–6 Annales Mettenses priores 321–2 Annales Petaviani 324 Annales regni Francorum 218–9. 217ff. 497. 453. 236 elephant at 542 Notker Balbulus of St Gall on 223–6 palace at 420. 538 as an urban site 225–6. 539 bishops at 539 buildings at 220–2 Charlemagne at 217ff. 147 Almod. 539 church at 220–2 decline of 234 Einhard on 217. 133 . 235–6. 247 amber route 511. 460–1. brother of Anstrud 258 Balthild. palaces baths at Aachen 217–9. See: Codex regularum Benedict. 279 Baldovin. on Tours 138. 180. 383. 517. J. city of 127. cult of at Dijon 142–5 Beowulf 439. A. 453–5. 316–7 See: Vita Balthildis banquets 444–5 barbarian royal residences diplomats at 442ff. king of Italy 227.INDEX Aachen 206–8. 522. 224.. 539 pope Leo III at 538 rituals at 233–4 ruins at 218 strategic importance of 222–3 abbeys see: monasteries Abd al-Ra m n III 119. 463 of Avar khagans 442–3. 457. court of 442–3. 291 Bibistrense. 233 as palatium publicum 218 assemblies at 218–9 baths at 217–9. 202–4 aquaducts 50 Aravatius: See: Servatius Arians 37 Asgard. wife of Pippin II 190–2 Alvarus 123–4 Amandus. at Aachen 218–9. 243. 371–2. 542 Ambrose of Milan 106 Ammianus Marcellinus 104 Andelys-sur-Seine. 129. 268 Benedict of Aniane. monastery of 255 Andennes. 376–9. 460–1. Gregory of Langres. 17. B. Monulphus of Tongres-Maastricht. Carolingian government. 175–186 graves of 172–4 of Tours 140–1 power of 173ff. 267 Bourdieu. Gregory of Nazianzus. secondary 11–2 Busch. and towns 137ff. Eucherius of Lyon. 339. 80 as a state 3 Caesarius. 137 Brunhild. 21 See: Maastricht. Caesarius of Arles. 29 control over 27–8 in the landscape 15. Hubert of Liège. royal control over 434 See: fortifications cemeteries 9ff. abbess of Faremoutiers 250. Maurice 202. P.600  Bishko. king and Redon 370. 205 Blondel. Vita Karoli Charles the Bald. Sagittarius of Gap. king 235 charters Charlemagne’s 241 Childeric II for Stavelot 256–7 from Lorsch 413–4 from the Middle Rhine 412–6 of Redon 874–5 Chelles. mechanisms of 400ff. 357 bishops and ruins 102–3. 522 castle-building. Burgundofaro of Meaux. bishop of Meaux 250–3. 301 and ruins 117–8 Capitulare de disciplina palatii Aquisgransensis 238–9 capitularies 225–6 Carloman. Lambert of Liège. 78 at Aachen 217ff. 534 at Aachen 539 episcopal see: 160ff. 323ff. Salonius of Embrun.J. 66. R. 480 Brioude. 117 and saints’ cults 137ff. 214 Cassiodorus 513. Ch. 282–3. Leudegar of Autun. Ebo of Rheims. Potamio of Braga. See: Chagneric Burgundofaro. Martin of Braga. M. Mamertus of Vienne. Gregory of Tours. L. bishop of Laon 249 Chaignulf... 294–6 Byzantine Empire and Rome 60. See: exemptions See: Amandus of Tongres-Maastricht. 275ff. king conversion of 313. 539 chancery staff 240 charters 241 letter to bishop Ghaerbald of Liège 232–3 See Einhard. 76–7. See: Chagneric burial. Attelanus of Laon. cartularies 373–5 of Redon 374–5 Carver. 106 Brink. Avitus of Vienne. Hincmar of Rheims. bishop of Arles 152. P. count of Meaux 251 Charlemagne 284 and Lorsch 418–9 and political opponents 296–7 and pope Hadrian I 80 and pope Leo III 81 and Rome 52. Leudegisus of Braga. Servatius of Tongres-Maastricht blinding 291.. J. 73. Chrodegang of Metz. Contumeliosus of Riez. 384. 71. cult of Julian 142–5 Brittany 361–96 Brown. S. S. 24–7. 246 Bradley. Møllegårdsmarken Chagneric (father of Burgundofara/o). and graves of ancestors 23 and mental topographies 17–8 and power 19–28 as disposal areas 11 as places of memory 11–2 as places of ritual 13–4. queen 307–15 Burgundofara. 275–9 Bonnet. 20 Brenk. 296 Bloch. C. 278 Book of Ceremonies 39. 29 visual aspect of 12. monastery of 315–6 . 394 in Lotharingia 428 Charles the Fat. Ghaerbald of Liège. Chagnoald of Laon.. Fructuosus of Braga. 198–9. 251–3 Chagnoald. 42 Bosch Gajano.W. Cordoba. Chèvremont. 187. 351 XIII Toledo (683) 341 XV Toledo (688) 341 XVI Toledo (693) 337. royal 312–5 Anglo-Saxon 313 See: Carloman. 428 walls 32 See: Aachen. 230–2 deaconry (Rome) 90 dead. 300 . Turkish khagans craftsmen. bishop of Metz 417–8 cities as central places 533. 187. Cherniakhov culture 520. king 252 Chrodegang. 537 as places of power 6–7 public meetings at 407–9. Trier. Dijon. 256–7 Childeric III. 23 Derks. queen 231–2 Dado/Audoin 252. 375 De ordine palatii 226–8. 341 Valence (585) 280. Brioude.. 25 Despy. palaces. 537 shrine of the Theotokos of the Blachernae 41 symbolic topography of 39–41 Contumeliosus. abbot of Redon 363ff. penance of 303 Conuuoion. Ratchis Cordoba as place of power 119ff. See: Faronids Dagobert I. king 95. J. Hephthalite court. 198 Devroey. king 177. 282. Langres. G. emperor 103 Constantinople 31ff. Roman past of 408 Clermont and Gregory of Tours 146–9 as a model 149–50 as cult centre 146–9 churches at 148 cults and politics at 148–9 Clovis II. penance of 315 Chlotar II. Mongol court. Worms civitates. 48. Constantinople. V. Huy. 282–3. Toledo. 24 Childeric II. W. Tours. Vita Columbani Constans II. female conversion. convents see: monasteries. and economy 73–4 production 204–5 Cologne 194. 194. emperor 47 Constantine. dwarfs Cugnon. 253 Clovis III. 523 Chèvremont 190–2 Childe. Namur. 82 papal. 411. 488–9 Codex regularum 287 coins 166 and papal authority 72–5. 254. 537 architecture 53 church of Holy Apostles 40 church of the Theotokos Chalkoprateia 40 church of Theotokos of the Source 41 Forum of Constantine 40 Golden Gate 41 Hagia Eirene 40 Hagia Sophia 39–42 Hebdomon 41 601 mausoleum of Constantine 40 processions at 35ff. significance of 484–5. 197–8 Diem. Liège. Bibistrense. 281. king 326–7 Chindasuinth. Rome... H. 182–3. monastery of 248 Cunigunda. Frankfurt. 301. 78. 305 court and sacred space 306–8 nicknames at 228–30 women at 231–2 See: Attila. king 252–3 Daniel the Stylite 5 Davies. 194. 207 Columbanus 243. 487 See: smiths. power of the 21. Clermont. bishop of Riez. Maastricht. Mainz. See: Jonas of Bobbio. king. Dinant. A. 543–4 mosque of 120–2 palace of 121–2 cosmological order 201–15 councils Arles (533) 303 Braga (561) 334 Braga (572) 335 III Braga (675) 339 Merida (666) 331 X Toledo (656) 340. Cologne. barbarian royal residences. Avar khagans. 183 Clunies Ross. M.G. Vienne. king of the Franks 177.-P. 253. 484. monastery of 413–4 Gothic ethnicity. 451. G. 112 Eucherius. 441 Douglas. 465 exemptions episcopal 245. Truso Ercanfrida. 426 Ferreolus 142. 426 Fredegar’s Chronicle 251. emporium of 410. 412–4. 254 Continuations 260 on liturgy 281–3 Fructuosus. bishop 232–3 gift-giving 54–5. queen 232. will of 429–30 Erwig. monastery of 284 Faronids 251–4 Fastrada. R. 19–20 dreams as political instrument 425–6 drinking rituals at barbarian court 443–4. 536 abbot Ratgar 416 Funen 467ff. 71 Gerberding. 318 Frankfurt. M. 455 in Scandinavia 479 Duby. 78–9 fortifications in lower Vistula area 527 royal control over 434 Fosses. bishop of Lyon. monastery of 304.-L. penance of 304 Ebroin exile of 318–21 maior domus 259 penance of 320 Eddic poetry as a source 487. Divisio regnorum (806) 296–7 Dorestad. Petri et Marcellini elephant at Aachen 542 Eliade. 5 Fouracre. 472. B. abbey and bishopric 335ff. C. abbes of Nivelles (Life of 247) Gesta Dagoberti I 288 Gesta sanctorum Rotonensium 376ff. See: Burgundofara Farfa.J. 214 Eigenkirche 171. 297 . palace at 422–3. 448. 476. 353 isolation of 329–33. 56. E. 453. formation of 513 Gothic Wars 47 Graus. monastery of 268 Foucault. 236 on Caroloman 323–5 on Childeric III 326–7 See: Vita Karoli and Translatio et miracula SS. 281 debates on 201–5 See: exemptions. 492. 174 burial in 28 Eigenkloster 245 Einhard 442 on Aachen 217. 505 in lower Vistula area 513 Gorze. Gallaecia 329ff. 492–4. voluntary/involuntary 318–21 Faremoutiers. 244. 200 Dumio. 190 Gertrude. P. 407. M. 423. See: Passio Acaunensium martyrum Eugenius I. 224. 500 Ebo. 350–51 monasteries in 329ff. H. 226 Geary. 256. bishop of Braga 335ff. archbishop of Rheims. christianization 333–5. immunities gold at Gudme/Lundeborg 468. 482. 299–300 papal 283 See: Rebais exile from the monastery 355–6 to the monastery 291ff. P. See: Redon Ghaerbald of Liège. 497 emporia 525. social change 348–9 See: Priscillianism Ganshof. F. pope 283 Eulogius 126 Excerpta de legationibus 460. 27 Geertz. F. dwarfs and mining 490 as smiths 490. king. 152 Fichtenau.602  Dijon cult of Benignus 142–5 religious topography of 143 Dinant 157ff. See: Vita Fructuosi Fulda. M. 150. penance of 315 Espérandieu. 490–2 Effros. 282–4. disappearance of 529 See: Dorestad. monastery of 247ff. 494–5. Ingelheim. and local nobility 434–5 Hephthalite court. 62. 517–30. 350 Ibn Askar 127–8 Ibn al-Khatib 122 Ibn al-Qutiya 128 Ibn Haf n 127–9 Ibn awqal 120. 500 Halsall. 541 meeting at (795) 397–8. 137ff. 78–80 and Charlemagne 80 Hagia Sophia. See: Constantinople hall at Gudme 502. 66 Jonas of Bobbio. 483–5. 484. 319–327 familial 261–2 female 263 Hrabanus Maurus. monastery of 265 Honorius I. 312. pope 49–51. 86 John Chrysostom 35ff. 413. 279–80 on Tours 179 on treasure 109–10 Gregory. 304–6 Hadrian I. 153 Gregory. D. 505 importance of 478–80. 280–2. 449–50 iter. 421 local importance of 417–9. king. See: Moralia in Job Gregory IV. pope 98. archaeology of 469–74 as centre of the world 501–2 compared with Maastricht 195–6 gold at 468. 479. bisshop of Langres 143–4. 305–6. Sung-yün at 448 Heppenheim dispute over 397–8. 391–3. 428 Itta 188. pope 47 honour depiction of in texts 298. 299–300. M.-M. 212 Henry I. Ph. 415–6 hring 443. 150–1 family of 141–9 on Aravatius/Servatius 161–6 on asylum 302 on Merovech 306 on St Martin 4–5 on St Maurice d’Agaune 271. See: Wulftrude Gudme/Lundeborg 467ff. 524 Jouarre. 201 Grierson. 247 Janes. 476. Vita Columbani 247. 426–7 Iohannes de Plano Carpini at Mongol court 443. G. royal 424–5. 284. 544 and Clermont 146–9 and excavations 97 and Vienne 145. monastery of 95 . pope 48. queen 232. K. 199 Hauck.. 487 Helvétius.128–9 immunities 253. typicon of 39. 496–7. 195–6 Helena and the True Cross 103–4 603 Helms. palace at 297. monastery of 252 Julian. 505 Odin cult at 476. 42. 540–1 Jordanes 513. 420. king 273–4. 400–6. 522. pope 58 Gregory. bishop of Nazianzus 37 Gregory. family of 410–1. John of Gorze. 535 imprisonment 292ff. Hyadatus 330–1. bishop of Liège 173–5 Huy 157ff. 427 Hincmar. 472. 74. 472. 541–2 Gundobad. bishop of Tours 93ff. 445–6 Notker Balbulus of St Gall on 446 Hsüan-Tsang at Turkish court 448 Hubert. 57–8. graves gravegoods 24–6. mayor of the palace 180. 58. 482. 250. 200 Grimoald. 498 sacred features of 475–8 treasure at 472. archbishop of Rheims 226–9 Historia Mongolorum see: Iohannes de Plano Carpini Hohenburg. 273. 190. 29 of ancestors 23 of bishops 172–4 spoliation of 108–9 Gregory I. cult of at Brioude 142–5 Jumièges. 476 Hedeager. 478. 379–80. A. 247–9. king 274 Guntram. Life of 122 John VII. 421 Hildegard. 505 hall at 502. 492–4. L. 122–5 Ibn Idh r 121. 400–6.. C. 307–315. P. Charlemagne. Clovis III. monastery of 282–3 Leudegar. 423–4. Guntram. 75. 206 cemeteries 160–174 compared with Gudme 195–6 episcopal graves 172–4 episcopal see (sedes episcopalis) 175–98 excavations at 166–72. Lombard king and pope 78 Lorsch. 32 Ladner.604  Kasten. 71. 285 Leo III. 432 Krautheimer. monastery of 282–3.L. 322 rebellion against 291. 91 Lérins. Meuse Valley. cult of Tergemini 144–5. 318–22 Maastricht and Merovingian kings 182–6 and Pippinid power 173–95. 46 Kupper. 278. Carloman. processions. 400. I. king and political crisis 424–5 in Saxony 424–5 Louis the Pious and Redon 366. Zwentibold kinship bonds of 344–8. 539–50 basilica of Our Lady 175–8 basilica of St Servatius 164ff. 196–7 portus 187. Lothar I. Childeric II. as centre of Pippinid power 173–93 See: Chèvremont litanies See: liturgy liturgy litanies (Rome) 87–8 monastic 284ff. Wittiza. bishop of Autun exile of 318–20 penance of 319 See: Passio prima Leudegarii. Charles the Fat. 534. See: honour Königsnähe. Gundobald.M. Erwig. H. Louis the Pious. king. 113 Leges Visigothorum 345 Lehner. 276. Passio secunda Leudegarii Leudegisus. St Maurice d’Agaune. 541 and Charlemagne 418–9 charters 413–4 conflict involving 397. Louis the German. bishop of Braga 340 Leupen. 346 kings See: Bernard of Italy. 68. 211 royal estates 208–13 See: Amandus. abbey of 397.. Huy. transformation of 97–103 Langres. 536. Childeric III. pope 58. P. 400–5 monastic network of 417–8 Lothar I. Vita Lamberti IV landscape adaptation of 95 symbolism of 208ff. 58. Lothar II. Theodegisl. 366. 320 Liber pontificalis 48. R. 213–4 artisanal quarters 194–8 as centre 155ff. Clovis II.D. G. 297. Rogations. Dinant. 125 lay abbacy of St Maximian’s (Trier) 432–3 Le Maho. 148–9 Laon 269ff. exercise of 398ff. Wamba. king. Otto I. C. turmae local power. Chlotar II. Theodoric. bishop of Liège 173ff. 66 Lambert. 302 Libri miraculorum 381 Liège 157ff. Chindasuinth. 370 Luxeuil. 80–1. Henry I. 226–7 King. Theudebert.H. pope 58 Leonine City (Rome) 50. Lapidus. Servatius. Sisigmund. 307–14. 417. Hubert. stational (Rome) 83–6 See laus perennis. castrum 196–98. J.D. importance of 428. 380 Libera custodia 298. 324. 174–9 Libellus de ecclesiis Claromontanis 147–8 Liber historiae Francorum 260. succession of 428 Louis the German. 158 La Rocca. marriage of 427 Lothar II. Charles the Bald. J. See: Vita Lamberti vetustissima. Monulphus. 412–3. 538 and Charlemagne 81 Leo IV.-J. B. Wijck . Lambert. 351–2 marriage politics. Dagobert I. Marbod. Theuderic III. 289. 394 coronation of 233 public penance of 313. 390. gift-giving. St Maximian’s (Trier). Nivelles. Munsterbilzen. septa secreta See: Andelys-sur-Seine. Jouarre. 543 as sacred places 271ff. murder of 431–2 Mellitus. images of 61–8 Matthiae. queen 254–5 Neustria (Carolingian) 363 Nicenes 37 nicknames at the court 228–30 Nilgen. penance at 303–7 political significance 244ff. Nanthild. 98 Mamertus. Cugnon. Mainz as a centre 407–13. as ‘prisons’ 292ff. Fulda. 5 as production site 196–7. missionary 98 Merovech. 534–5. relics 267 royal patronage of 272ff. 58 ossuaries 11–2 Otto I. 89 Martellinus 138–40 Martin. Andennes. penance. Lorsch. 449–50 William of Rubruck at 443. Lérins. 188. Chelles. Rebais. son of Chilperic I 306 Meuse valley 155ff. 302 double monasteries 246 Eigenklöster 245 familia 268 female 245ff. Farfa. St Jean (Laon). 474. See also: barbarian royal residences . 418–9 ruins 93–7 sacred space 267. Møllegårdsmarken. 478. immunities. monastery of 248 Megingoz. F. 498 Ordo Romanus I 85 Osborne. E. Fosses. Ingelheim. convent of 185. St Maurice d’Agaune. monastery of 247 Monte Cassino. monastery of 313. 215 Moralia in Job 289 Munsterbilzen. as places of power 1. Theban 272. H. St Calais. Faremoutiers. St Denis. 62 nimbus. 66–7 Maubeuge. 160ff. St Calais. 300. 247ff. P. abbess of Hohenburg 264–5 Odin cult at Gudme/Lundeborg 476. See: Wulftrude Nora. Maubeuge. St Symphorian (Autun). 453 Mons. bishop of Vienne 150–4 Marazzi. 101 Notker Balbulus of St Gall on Aachen 223–6 on the hring 446 Odilia. Frankfurt. 323–7 Monulphus. Stavelot-Malmédy Mongol court Iohannes de Plano Carpini at 443. Seligenstadt. Mons. and royal authority 281 and stabilitas 299–301. exile. square 58 Nivelles. Redon. 45 Marbod. cemetery of 469. bishop of Tongres-Maastricht 164–74. king of the Marcomanni 441 Marco Polo 443 Marian feasts (Rome) 87.. G. Monte Cassino. monastery of 184 Namur 157. J. 536 and texts 361ff. 286–9 Mary. bishop of Braga 334 Martyrs. 281. U.. legal activities at 412–5 liturgy 284ff. 300–1 See: exemptions. Rueil. St Marcel (Chalon). Dumio. 93ff. Luxeuil. Soignies. Cordoba. 503 monasteries and public business 415–6 ‘neigbourhood monasteries’ 343–9 and aristocratic families 243ff. 306–8. 542–3 as social centres 412–5 carcer 302 child oblation 264. 449–51. re-use of 20. 423 economic importance of 409–11 Mâle. 381–94. 180 monuments. Hohenburg. 214 Moore.. count. Jumièges. 605 Gorze. king and local nobility 435 Pactum 354–7 palaces rural 420–1 See: Aachen. John VII.. Nanthild Rado 252. exile. Ebo of Rheims.. 205 Paschal Chronicle 36 Paschal I. 202. 67 and Francia 67–8 Passio Acaunensium martyrum 272. Leudegar of Autun. 356 Priscus on Attila’s court 442–5 prisons liberation miracles 297–8. 543 Almod. 538 coins 72–5. 253. and papal ideology 71–2 categories of 59–61 Gregory IV 58 Hadrian I 58. Sagittarius of Gap. priests as ritual specialists 26 Prinz. royal 297–8.606  Panhuysen. Fastrada. king. J. Honorius I. wife of Pippin II 191 Plélan. 71 Leo IV 58 Paschal I 58.. pope 58 Paxton. Louis the Pious. 247 Pippin II. 66 Leo III 58. 255–70 Pitt-Rivers. Paschal I. 249. 273 Priscillianism 334ff. conversion of 313. 196 papal portraits 57ff. 482ff. 67 Paul I 58 with Jesus 68–72 with Mary 61–8 Zachary 58 Paris as a centre 7–8 Parochiale Suevum 350 Parry. Paul I. Contumeliosus of Riez. 289 Paternus 94 Paul I. Wamba Phokas (martyr) 35–6 Pippin I. Leo III. 82 exemptions 283 insignia 86 northern perception of 538 symbols of authority 72–83 See: Eugenius I. penance. 537 Frankish 423 Rome 83–91. meaning of 200ff. cell of 368. Leo IV. Erwig. See: Faronids Ratchis. and Carolingian emperors 80–2 and documents 75–83 and Lombard king 78 and patronage 55 and topographical imperialism 55–6 as temporal rulers 82–3 at Aachen 219–20. Balthild. 51 and building 49ff. 390. in the monastery 303–7 public 304 See: Chindasuuninth. 175–93. 370. 324 Ratgar. 78. F. Tassilo. Gregory IV. Cunigunda. 310 See: libera custodia processions 7 Constantinople 35ff. Hadrian I. 156. 167. Stephanus II. F. abbot of 375–6 and Charles the Bald 370. 257 Alpaida. monastery of 362ff. 394 and Louis the Pious 366. J. T. 68. Hildegard. Salonius of Embrun. wife of 190–2 Pippinids. Gregory I. monastery of 252 exemption for 282–3 Redon. Zachary Potamio. pope 58. abbot of Fulda 416 Rebais. 65. rising power of 158. 65.. 287 Passio Praeiecti 148 Passio prima Leudegarii 318–21 Passio secunda Leudegarii 320 Passio Sisigmindi regis 285. 394 and Rome 386–7 . imprisonment. 62 John VII 57–8. 537 Scandinavia 504 Vienne 150–3 property rights 404–5 punishment of political opponents 291–7 See blinding. 246 Plectrude. Brunhild. mayor of the palace 183–6. 310 monasteries as 292ff. Ebroin. bishop of Braga 340 prestige goods. mayor of the palace 188. tonsure queens see: Austrechildis. 387 popes administration 45. 384. 273 Pelagius 134 penance as punishment 303ff. K. 117 and Caesarius. monastery of 306 St Denis. 107–9 St Calais. 275. historian) 36–7. penance of 304 Sancho the Fat 133–4 Sauvaget. monastery of 247ff. deaconries 90 ecclesiastical building projects 54 Leonine city 50. 285 and ruins 96. abbess of Marchiennes 263 Ritcant. St Marcel (Chalon). 246 Seligenstadt. 283–7. relics at 381–94 Ritcant. and Byzantine Empire 60. 86 Schama. 500 Soignies. V. 199 Rovelli. S. 73–4 Rueil. 452 Simonet. archive of 371–6. F. 385. 540 reuse of 93–5 Roman 99–100. 80 and Charlemagne 52. penance of 304 Sala concilia 68.H. 490–2 dwarfs as 490. B. monastery of 203. 214 of objects 113–4 of pagan religious structures 112–4 of ruins 93–5 Rictrude. S.. monastery of 273. 21 Schreiner. J. abbey of 426 Semmler. monastery of 252 ruins and bishops 102–3. 66. abbot of 374–6 Regula Benedicti 287. 273. 150–4 silk decorations Rome 54. See: Passio Sisigmundi regis Smith. 538 and art 56ff. 71. 41 Sozomen 36–7 spolia 103. 148. J. king and saint 273–78. 105–6 and rituals of possession 96. 105–6 at Redon 381–94 Roman 538 re-use of monuments 20. 369 Conuuoion. A. 418 septa secreta 300. church decoration 54ff. 300 Roskams. 117 at Aachen 218 attitudes towards 103–10 perception of 100. 355 Regula communis 329ff. 537 relics from 538 stational liturgy 83–6 Synod of (769) 76–7 Rosenwein. monastery of 271–90 . 257 family of 249–50 See: Vita Sadalbergae Sagittarius. 537 Turkish court 447. abbot of 363ff. abbot of Redon 374–6 Rogations 280 at Vienne 150–2. J. 395 cartulary of 374–5 charters 374–5 community at 367.. 380. endowment of 363–72 foundation of 363–72 Gesta sanctorum Rotonensium 376ff. bishop of Arles 117–8 607 and elites 101–3 and memory 100–1 and monastic foundation 93–7 and relics 96. 76–7. 91 litanies at 87–8 Marian feasts at 87. 93ff. 310–1 Servatius. 32 Saxer. 387 as centre 364–5 as holy place 381–94 buildings at 368–9. 127 Sisigmund. power of 4–5 St Maurice d’Agaune. 485–7. 282–3 St Martin. 302. 89 papal gifts to churches 54–5 processions at 83–91. 70–2 Salonius. bishop of Gap.Z. 73. Regula consensoria monachorum 352 relics 267. bishop of Tongres-Maastricht 161–6 Sidonius Apollinarus 138–9. 78 and Redon 386–7 as papal city 45ff. 281 St Jean (Laon). bishop of Embrun. 280 Rome 45ff. 280. 492. monastery of 247 Sokrates (5th C. 101 smiths 468. abbess of St Jean (Laon) 249–50. 201. 539 sacrality of 101 Sadalberga. 314–5 Theuderic III. king 46–7 Theodosius I. 453 Gregory of Tours on 109–10 triclinia 68–72 Trier as a centre 431–5 True Cross. 274. 452 Hsüan-Tsang at 448 Zemarchos at 447 turmae 286–90 Typicon. of Hagia Sophia 39. 445. 128 urban space consolidation of 34 contraction of 32–3. cult of at Langres 144–5. types of early medieval 3–4 Stavelot-Malmédy 248. basilical monasterium of 193ff. 544 bishops of 140–1 cult of St Martin 141–2. lower 509ff. St Symhporian (Autun). 148–9 Theban Martyrs 272. 456. 527–8 Turkish khagans. 41–2 Theodoric. monastery of 281 Staab. 147 as a model 140. penance of 297. 279–80 liturgy at 274ff. 257 Vita Antonii 382 Vita Argenteae 125–36 audience of 131–2 authorship of 132 date of 131–2 on virtues 130–1 provenance of 132 Vita Balthildis 316. 447 decorations at 447. 541–2 Valierius of Bierzo 330. 42 Tacitus 441. king 97 Theodore Lektor 36. against political opponents 294–7 Vistula area. 434 lay abbacy of 432–3 St Servatius. pope 326 Subh. 431.608  architecture 275–9 Gregory of Tours on 271. king 251. 150–1 processions at 150–3 Rogations at 150–2. court of 442–3. 273. See: amber route Translatio et miracula SS. emperor 166 Theophylactus Simocatta 443 Theudebert II. 519 at Gudme/Lundeborg 472. and Helena 103–4 Truso. 511 Tassilo. king 318 Toledo 119 tonsure clerical 293–4 forced 294ff. Woman and Cordoban Court 134–5 Sulpicius Severus 379–80 Sung-yün at Hephthalite court 448 Symeon the Stylite 38 Synod of Rome (769) 76–7 Avar 446 display of 86–7. 335. St Maximian’s (Trier). 280 violence against female monasteries 243ff. 286–9 Theodegisel. 544 Gregory of Tours on 179 St Martin’s church 137–9 trade. monastery of 429. 257 Stephanus II. Petri et Marcellini 195 treasure 493–4. 319 Vita Boniti 148 Umayyad dynasty 119–20. 350–2 Venantius Fortunatus 94 Vienne as cult centre 145. early knowledge about 510–2. long-distance 206–7. duke of Bavaria. F. 322 Tergemini. 487. bisshop of 151. 149. emporium of 525. 43 redefinition of 34 transformation of 31–3 . 279 Gregory of Tours and 145. 307. 458. 150–1 Avitus. 423–4 states. 447. 482–3. 479. 345. 522–3 fortifications 527 gold in 513 Vita abbatum Acaunensium 287 Vita Agilis 253 Vita Amandi 193 Vita Anskarii 2 Vita Anstrudis 247. Tours 139–42 Alcuin on 138. I. 255. daughter of Grimoald. emperor 38 Zwentibold. 609 Vita Columbani 540–1. 275 Worms. and crisis 518–20 Yggdrasill. Icelandic 475. 97–8 Wulftrude. 517–8. A. 453 witchcraft. king 431–3 . 488 Wittiza. king of the Sueves 332 Wood. 179. 427. count 403–4. king. penance of 315–6 Warin. as a centre 423. 520. 434–5 Wright. 215. 285. 515. 449–51. 201 Wielbark culture 512–3. 522–4 elite. the World-Tree 498–9. 503 Young. 418 Weiner. pope 58 Zemarchos at Turkish court 447 Zeno. T. 288 Wijck (near Maastricht) 194–5 William of Rubruck at Mongol court 443. 98–100 Zachary. 431. abbess of Nivelles 249 Wamba. See Jonas of Bobbio Vita Eulogii 123–4 Vita Filiberti 95 Vita Fructuosi 337 Vita Karoli (Einhard) 323–7 Vita Landiberti vetustissima 187 Vita Landiberti IV 183 Vita Odiliae 264 Vita Severini 442 Vita Sadalbergae 247ff.. B.