Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-dk4vv Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T04:41:56.276Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The First ‘General Chapter’ of Benedictine Abbots (1131) Reconsidered

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 September 2015

STEVEN VANDERPUTTEN
STEVEN VANDERPUTTEN*
Affiliation:
Universiteit Gent E-mail: Steven.Vanderputten@ugent.be
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This paper reconsiders the first ‘General Chapter’ of Benedictine abbots (late 1131). To explain the timing and circumstances of this event, previous scholarship mostly referred to the influence of the Cistercians on reformist groups within ‘traditional’ monasticism. A closer look at the primary evidence reveals how the first General Chapter needs to be framed against the activities of overlapping coalitions of ecclesiastical and secular agents pursuing various political, ideological and institutional interests. It also allows the causes of the ensuing dispute with the Cluniacs to be established more securely, and provides new insights into contemporary usages of statutes and the semantics of the word ‘ordo’.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Journal of Ecclesiastical History , Volume 66 , Issue 4 , October 2015 , pp. 715 - 734
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2015 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Stanislaus Ceglar, ‘William of Saint-Thierry and his leading role at the first chapters of the Benedictine abbots (Reims 1131, Soissons 1132)’, in William, abbot of St Thierry: a colloquium at the abbey of St Thierry, Kalamazoo 1987, 34–112; Giles Constable, The reformation of the twelfth century, Cambridge 1996, 181, 198, 201; Ellen Rozanne Elder, ‘Communities of reform in the province of Reims: the Benedictine “chapter general” of 1131’, in Mark F. Williams (ed.), The making of Christian communities in late antiquity and the Middle Ages, London 2005, 117–29, 182–8.

2 According to Stanislaus Ceglar and Ellen Elder abbots from the following institutions participated: Saint-Thierry (diocese of Reims); Chezy-sur-Marne, Orbais, Saint-Médard (Soissons); Saint-Jean, Saint-Vincent, Saint-Nicolas-aux-Bois, Saint-Michel-en-Thiérache (Laon); Saint-Éloi, Homblières, Mont-Saint-Quentin, Saint-Amand (Noyon/Tournai); Saint-Sépulchre, Hautmont, Liessies and Lobbes (Cambrai); Hasnon, Anchin (Arras); and Saint-Lucien (Beauvais). In addition to these monasteries, all of which belonged to the archdiocese of Reims, those of Lagny (diocese of Paris) and Rebais (diocese of Meaux) were also represented: ‘William of Saint-Thierry’, 58; ‘Communities’, 122.

3 The statutes have been preserved in two manuscripts, namely Bibliothèque Nationale, Paris, ms Latins, 2677, fos 83v–84r, a twelfth-century volume from the abbey of Saint-Martin in Tournai, and Bibliothèque Municipale, Douai, ms 540, fo. 69r–v, a volume dated to the 1130s or 1140s and originating from the abbey of Marchiennes. Discovered in the late nineteenth century, the Tournai copy has been the basis of all editions of this text, the most recent and complete one being Ceglar, ‘William of Saint-Thierry’, 51–64 (for previous editions see nn. 5, 6 below). Ceglar's edition also includes references to a now-lost copy from the abbey of Saint-Quentin that De Cange used when compiling his Glossarium. The Marchiennes copy contains a significantly longer version of the statutes (however missing the list of participating abbots found in the Tournai manuscript) and so far has not been edited. I am planning to remedy this situation in the near future.

4 Auguste Molinier, Les Obituaires français au moyen âge, Paris 1890, 288–9 (including a brief extract of the statutes).

5 Ursmer Berlière, Documents inédits pour servir à l'histoire ecclésiastique de la Belgique, Maredsous 1894, i. 91, with a slightly longer, but still incomplete edition of the statutes as found in the same manuscript at pp. 92–3.

6 Ibid. i. 94–110, and ‘Les Chapitres généraux de l'ordre de S. Benoît avant le ive concile de Latran’, Revue bénédictine xviii (1901), 364–98Google Scholar.

7 Ceglar, ‘William of Saint-Thierry’.

8 On this manuscript see n. 3 above. Its existence was first noted in Gerzaguet, Jean-Pierre, ‘Les Confraternités de l'abbaye de Marchiennes au moyen âge (xiie–xve siècle)’, Revue bénédictine cx (2000), 301–54Google Scholar at p. 315.

9 On statutes in this period see Gert Melville, ‘Zur Funktion der Schriftlichkeit im institutionellen Gefüge mittelalterlicher Orden’, Frühmittelalterliche Studien xxv (1991), 391–417, and Florent Cygler, ‘Ausformung und Kodifizierung des Ordenrechts vom 12. bis zum 14. Jahrhundert. Strukturelle Beobachtungen zu den Cisterziensern, Prämonstratensern, Kartäusern und Cluniazensern’, in Gert Melville (ed.), De ordine vitae: zu Normvorstellungen, Organisationsformen und Schriftgebrauch im mittelalterlichen Ordenswesen, Münster 1996, 7–58.

10 See also André Wilmart, ‘Une Riposte de l'ancien monachisme au manifeste de saint Bernard’, Revue bénédictine xlvi (1934), 296–344 at pp. 299–301.

11 This is edited in Ceglar, ‘William of St Thierry’, 65–86. On Matthew see primarily Ursmer Berlière, ‘Le Cardinal Matthieu d'Albano (c. 1085–1135)’, in Mélanges d'histoire bénédictine 4th ser. (1902), 1–51, and Ryan Freeburn, ‘A great honour and burden: the predicament of Matthew of Albano, monk and cardinal-bishop’, Journal of Medieval History xxxix (2013), 179–96.

12 This is edited in Ceglar, ‘William of Saint-Thierry’, 87–112, and discussed in his ‘The chapter of Soissons (autumn 1132) and the authorship of the reply of the Benedictine abbots to Cardinal Matthew’, in John R. Sommerfeldt (ed.), Studies in medieval Cistercian history, Shannon 1976, ii. 92–105.

13 Adriaan H. Bredero, ‘William of Saint Thierry at the crossroads of the monastic currents of his time’, in William, abbot of St Thierry: a colloquium, 113–37; Ceglar, ‘William of Saint-Thierry’, and ‘The chapter’; Ambrogio M. Piazzoni, Guglielmo di Saint-Thierry: il declino dell'ideale monastico nel secolo XII, Rome 1988, 95–117.

14 As early as 1121 Bernard advised the abbot of Saint-Nicolas-aux-Bois on how to manage the introduction of Cluniac customs there: Elder, ‘Communities’, 185 n. 65. He is also known to have corresponded with Abbot Alvisus of Anchin (1111–31), a key figure in the Cluniac reform of monastic houses in the Low Countries, in the early 1020s (see further nn. 19, 55 below), and to have exercised a profound influence on William, abbot of Saint-Thierry, who according to Ceglar played a dominant role in the 1131 and 1132 meetings and may even have authored the abbots’ response to Matthew of Albano's letter: Ceglar, ‘William of Saint-Thierry’.

15 Bredero, ‘William of Saint Thierry’, 121–3.

16 Elder, ‘Communities’, 129.

17 Ceglar, ‘William of Saint-Thierry’, 108.

18 Vanderputten, Steven, ‘Monastic reform, abbatial leadership and the instrumentation of Cluniac discipline in the early twelfth-century Low Countries’, Revue Mabillon xxiii (2012), 41–65Google Scholar.

19 Heinrich Sproemberg, Beiträge zur Französisch–Flandrischen Geschichte, Band I: Alvisus, Abt von Anchin (1111–1131), Berlin 1931, 122–5, and lemma on Alvisus in Biographie nationale, xxxiii, Brussels 1965, c. 27–33 at c. 29.

20 ‘Affui enim, negare non possum, sed vocatus, sed tractus’: Bernard, letter 48 to Haimeric, in Sancti Bernardi opera, ed. Jean Leclercq, Henri M. Rochais and Charles Talbot, Rome 1957–77, vii. 138–9.

21 Vanderputten, Steven, ‘Fulcard's pigsty: Cluniac reformers, dispute settlement, and the lower aristocracy in early twelfth-century Flanders’, Viator xxxviii (2007), 91–115Google Scholar.

22 This attitude on the part of local rulers, be they ecclesiastical or secular, probably explains the involvement of the abbots of Lagny and Rebais, two institutions not subordinate to the archbishops of Reims, in the 1131 meeting. The lord of the two institutions, Count Thibaud ii of Champagne, had previously entertained close relations with Bernard and Norbert, and collaborated with both men in pursuing monastic reform, albeit in ways that did not jeopardise his invested legal and symbolic interests at these institutions. In 1124 he personally appointed Rodulphus, a former monk from Saint-Nicolas-aux-Bois, as abbot of Lagny; in so doing he followed the advice of Norbert. Rodulphus, who participated in the 1131 meeting, came under attack from his colleagues in the early 1140s; Bernard subsequently intervened with the pope, apparently with some success: see n. 77 below. Following the ‘reform’ of Lagny, Thibaud also retained the title of advocate, and was eventually buried there: Roselyne Pfeffer, L'Abbaye de Lagny-sur-Marne au moyen-âge: histoire et archéologie, unpubl. PhD diss. Paris 1988, 88–9. On Thibaud's monastic policies in general see Michel Bur, La Formation du comté de Champagne v. 950–v. 1150, Nancy 1977, 317, 351, 487.

23 Bernard, letter 91, Sancti Bernardi opera, vii. 239–41.

24 Ceglar, ‘William of Saint-Thierry’, 78–9.

25 A point previously made in Elder, ‘Communities’, 119–20.

26 Martha G. Newman, The boundaries of charity: Cistercian culture and ecclesiastical reform, 1098–1180, Stanford, Ca 1995, 193–7.

27 Ludwig Falkenstein, La Papauté et les abbayes françaises aux XIe et XIIe siècles: exemption et protection apostolique, Paris 1997, 186–92.

28 See, among others, Wollasch, Joachim, ‘Das Schisma des Abtes Pontius von Cluny’, Francia xxiii (1996), 31–52Google Scholar (with extensive references), and Cluny: ‘Licht der Welt’: Aufstieg und Niedergang der klösterlichen Gemeinschaft, Düsseldorf 2001, 199ff.

29 Idem, Cluny, 226–7.

30 Securely established stops on his itinerary in early 1131 are Vézelay (1 Jan.), Chartres (13–18 Jan.), Morigny (19–20 Jan.), Étampes (20 Jan.), Morigny (21 Jan.), Provins (27–28 Jan.), Châlons (14–20 Feb.), Rebais (21–22 Feb.), Jouarre (25 Feb.), Saint-Quentin (14 Mar.), Cambrai (16 Mar.), Lobbes (16–22 Mar.) and Liège (22 Mar.–2 Apr.): Philippus Jaffé and Samuel Loewenfeld, Regesta pontificum romanorum ab condita ecclesia ad annum post Christum natum MCXCVIII, Leipzig 1885–8, ii. 846–8; Rudolf Hiestand, Initienverzeichnis und chronologisches Verzeichnis zu den Archivberichten und Vorarbeiten der Regesta pontificum Romanorum, Munich 1983, 150. For Innocent's subsequent itinerary see n. 33 below.

31 Dietrich Poeck, Cluniacensis ecclesia: der cluniacensische Klosterverband (10.–12. Jahrhundert), Munich 1998.

32 The Deeds of the abbots of Lobbes (written in 1162) do not mention Bernard's presence at Lobbes: Gesta abbatum Lobbiensium, ed. Wilhelm Arndt, MGH, SS xxi, Hanover 1869, 325.

33 Elder, ‘Communities’, 126–7, 187 n. 91. Innocent's itinerary in these months can be completed with the following stops: Laon (12–13 Apr.), Saint-Denis (15–18, 20 Apr.), Paris (18–19, 26–27 Apr.), Pontoise (5 May), Gisors (May), Rouen (9–10 May), Pivers (11 May), Beauvais (19–20 May), Compiègne (26 May, 18–24 June), Crépy-en-Valois (27 June), Auxerre (9 July, 12 Aug., 13, 24 Sept.), Vézelay (22 July), Orléans (30 Sept.), Blois (6 Oct.), Étampes (6 Oct.), Paris (6 Oct.) and, significantly, Saint-Médard in Soissons (15 Oct.): Jaffé and Loewenfeld, Regesta, ii. 847–50; Hiestand, Initienverzeichnis, 150–1. The available documentation reveals that, in the months leading up to the October council at Reims, Innocent was in contact with the leadership of at least three monasteries that participated in the first General Chapter: Lobbes (Mar.), Saint-Vincent in Laon (Apr.) and Saint-Médard (Oct.). The Lobbes encounter is documented in the Gesta abbatum Lobbiensium (see n. 32 above); that with the monks of Saint-Médard is known through Innocent's reconstructed itinerary; and that with the monks of Saint-Vincent in Laon is documented in a charter issued on 16 April 1131 by Bishop Bartholomew of Laon, which reveals that Bartholomew had complained to Innocent about the refusal of a widow and her son to restitute property formerly usurped by a deceased layman: Actes des évêques de Laon des origines à 1151, ed. Annie Dufour-Malbezin, Paris 2001, 215–16, no. 129.

34 Orderic Vitalis, Historia ecclesiastica, ed. Marjorie Chibnall, Oxford 1969–80, vi. 418–19, 424–5. On the attendance see Elder, ‘Communities’, 182 n. 1.

35 Wollasch, Cluny, 227–9.

36 Ceglar, ‘William of Saint-Thierry’, 36.

37 While at Cluny, Innocent also issued an important bull confirming the possessions and a number of prerogatives of the Cistercians: Jaffé and Loewenfeld, Regesta, ii. 854 (7537). The most recent edition is in Chrysogonus Waddell, ‘The myth of Cistercian origins: C. H. Berman and the manuscript sources’, Cîteaux: Commentarii Cistercienses li (2000), 299–386 at pp. 338–40, with a discussion of the debate regarding the authenticity of this document at pp. 327–8. If this document is authentic, a possibility rejected by Constance Berman (The Cistercian evolution: the invention of a religious order in twelfth-century Europe, Philadelphia, Pa 2000, 80–1), then its issuance by Innocent, but also the fact that this was done at Cluny, surely also rattled the privilege-bereft Cluniacs.

38 The event is described in Orderic Vitalis, HE vi. 426.

39 Adriaan H. Bredero, ‘Pierre le Vénérable: les commencements de son abbatiat à Cluny (1122–1132)’, in René Louis, Jean Jolivet and Jean Châtillon (eds), Pierre Abélard et Pierre le Vénérable: les courants philosophiques, littéraires et artistiques en occident au milieu du XIIe siècle, Paris 1975, 99–118; Giles Constable, ‘Cluniac administration and administrators in the twelfth century’, in The abbey of Cluny: a collection of essays to mark the eleven-hundredth anniversary of its foundation, Münster 2010, 339–60; Cygler, ‘Ausformung’, esp. p. 23, and Das Generalkapitel im hohen Mittelalter: Cisterzienser, Prämonstratenser, Kartäuser und Cluniazenser, Münster 2001, 322 (with further references).

40 Constable, The reformation, 186.

41 Cygler, Das Generalkapitel, 319–27, with references.

42 Orderic Vitalis, HE vi. 426–7.

43 Ceglar, ‘William of Saint Thierry’, 96–7.

44 Ibid. 89.

45 Bartholomew appointed the abbots of Saint-Nicolas-aux-Bois, Saint-Jean, Saint-Michel-en-Thiérache and Saint-Vincent, all in the diocese of Laon, and sent candidates for the abbatial sees of Saint-Eloi and Saint-Amand to his colleague in Noyon-Tournai: Elder, ‘Communities’, 126–7.

46 Charter edited in Actes des évêques de Laon, 185–6, no. 105.

47 On Bartholomew's involvement with Norbert see Grauwen, Wilfried M., ‘Bartholomeus van Laon en Norbert op zoek naar een vestigingsplaats, begin 1120’, Analecta Praemonstratensia lxx (1994), 199–211Google Scholar, and ‘Norberts reis naar Laon, Kamerijk en Nijvel en de inbezitneming van Prémontré, 1120’, Analecta Praemonstratensia lxix (1993), 41–50Google Scholar. See also Stefan Weinfurter, ‘Norbert von Xanten und die Entstehung des Prämonstratenserordens’, in Gelebte Ordnung–Gedachte Ordnung: Augewählte Beiträge zu König, Kirche und Reich, Ostfildern 2005, 70.

48 Elder, ‘Communities’, 186 n. 74.

49 Erik Van Mingroot, ‘Burchard van Aken’, in Nationaal Biografisch Woordenboek, xvi, Brussels 2002, c. 197–220. It is revealing that the foundation charter of Vicoigne, a Cistercian house in the diocese of Arras, appears to have been made in Bartholomew's scriptorium: Benoît-Michel Tock, ‘Les Chartes de fondation des abbayes de Vicoigne (1129) et de Château–Dieu (1155), dans le diocèse d'Arras’, Analecta Praemonstratensia lxiii (1987), 155–74, esp. pp. 161–2.

50 Wilfried M. Grauwen, ‘Hugo van Fosse’, in Nationaal Biografisch Woordenboek, iii, Brussels 1968, c. 412–21. See also Weinfurter, ‘Norbert’, 76ff., and Mingroot, Erik Van, ‘Hugo van Fosses als kanunnik in Fosses-la-Ville en Cambrai (1087/95–1121/23): Bijdrage tot de ontstaansgeschiedenis van de Orde van Prémontré’, Analecta Praemonstratensia lxxxiv (2008), 250–477Google Scholar.

51 On this see Vanderputten, ‘Monastic reform’.

52 Jean-Pierre Gerzaguet, L'Abbaye d'Anchin de sa fondation (1079) au XIVe siècle: essor, vie et rayonnement d'une grande communauté bénédictine, Villeneuve d'Ascq 1997, 199.

53 Poeck, Cluniacensis ecclesia, 97–104.

54 Vanderputten, Steven, ‘A time of great confusion: second-generation Cluniac reformers and resistance to centralisation in the county of Flanders (circa 1125–45)’, Revue d'histoire ecclésiastique cii (2007), 47–75Google Scholar.

55 Gesta abbatum Lobbiensium, 324–5. Alvisus did not attend the meeting, having been elected bishop of Arras in April or May of that same year: Benoît-Michel Tock, Les Chartes des évêques d'Arras (1093–1203), Paris 1991, xxxvi.

56 See n. 54 above.

57 The two key references here are Berman, Cistercian evolution, where it is argued that the entire body of early Cistercian narratives, legislative documents and customs are forgeries from the third quarter of the twelfth century, and, among the many publications by Chrysogonus Waddell, his Narrative and legislative texts from early Cîteaux: Latin text in dual edition with English translation and notes, Brecht 1999; Cistercian lay brothers: twelfth-century usages with related texts: Latin text with concordance of Latin terms, English translations and notes, Brecht 2000; and Twelfth-century statutes from the Cistercian General Chapter: Latin text with English notes and commentary, Brecht 2002. In all three of these works Waddell essentially takes the documents from early Cistercians for what they purport to be. See, among a plethora of commentaries on this debate, Martha G. Newman's review of Waddell's Narrative and legislative texts in Speculum lxxvii (2009), 623–5, and that by Holdsworth, Christopher of the same book, in ‘Narrative and legislative texts from early Cîteaux: a review article’, Cîteaux: Commentarii Cistercienses li (2000), 157–66Google Scholar. See also Waddell's own commentary on the debate in ‘The myth’, 317–27.

58 Gert Melville, ‘Zur Semantik von “ordo” im Religiosentum der ersten Hälfte des 12. Jahrhunderts: Lucius ii., seine Bulle vom 19. Mai 1144, und der “Orden” der Prämonstratenser’, in Irene Crusius and Helmut Flachenecker (eds), Studien zum Prämonstratenserorden, Göttingen 2003, 201–24 at pp. 201–3.

59 Grauwen, Wilfried, ‘Norbert en de oudste organisatie van de premonstratenzerorde’, Analecta Praemonstratensia lxvi (1990), 48–53Google Scholar; Franz J. Felten, ‘Zwischen Berufung und Amt: Norbert von Xanten und seinesgleichen im ersten Viertel des 12. Jahrhunderts’, in Giancarlo Andenna, Mirko Breitenstein and Gert Melville (eds), Charisma und religiöse Gemeinschaften im Mittelalter, Münster 2005, 129–33, 148. See also Weinfurter, ‘Norbert’.

60 Felten, ‘Zwischen Berufung’, 129ff.; Cygler, Das Generalkapitel, 120.

61 Krings, Bruno, ‘Zum Ordensrecht der Prämonstratenser bis zur Mitte des 12. Jahrhunderts’, Analecta Praemonstratensia lxxvi (2000), 9–28Google Scholar at pp. 17ff.; Felten, ‘Zwischen Berufung’, 142 n. 148 (with further references); Weinfurter, ‘Norbert’, 77.

62 Waefelghem, Raphael Van, ‘Les Premiers Statuts de l'ordre de Prémontré’, Analectes de l'Ordre de Prémontré ix (1913), 1–74Google Scholar. According to Chrysogonus Waddell, the Cistercians began systematically recording the decisions of the General Chapters only considerably later. His dating of the earliest written record of decisions taken at a General Chapter is c. 1136/7 (Twelfth-century statutes, 56), whereas the first systematic collection, recapitulating previous decisions, appears to cover the period up to about 1135/6 (ibid. pp. 512–16, with comments on pp. 505–16).

63 Cygler, Das Generalkapitel, 121–8.

64 Weinfurter, ‘Norbert’, 75.

65 PL clxxix.87–8. See Melville, ‘Zur Semantik’, 204–5, and Franz J. Felten, ‘Die Kurie und die Reformen im Prämonstratenserorden im hohen und späten Mittelalter’, in Crusius and Flachenecker, Studien zum Prämonstratenserorden, 349–98. On the transformation of the meaning of ordo in papal privileges see again Melville, ‘Zur Semantik’, 211–21.

66 Innocent's bull seems to interpret ordo as a shared mode of monastic life and shared legal status: Weinfurter, ‘Entstehung’, 78; Melville, ‘Zur Semantik’, 216.

67 PL clxxix.880–2.

68 Ceglar, ‘William of Saint-Thierry’, 36.

69 Sigeberti chronica continuatio Aquicinense, ed. Georg H. Pertz, MGH, SS vi, Hanover 1844, 395.

70 Ceglar, ‘The chapter’, 104, where he quotes the Vita Willelmi as corroborative evidence, and ‘William of Saint Thierry’, 37.

71 This is edited in PL clxxix.253. Bredero argues, on what grounds is unclear, that the letter is from 1131: ‘William of Saint Thierry’, 126.

72 PL clxxix.253.

73 For references to papal support of Cistercian (by Calixtus ii), Premonstratensian (Alexander iii) and Cluniac (Celestinus iii) statutes see Gert Melville, ‘Regeln-Consuetudines-Texte-Statuten: Positionen für eine Typologie des normativen Schrifttums religiöser Gemeinschaften im Mittelalter’, in Cristina Andenna and Gert Melville (eds), Regulae-Consuetudines-Statuta: studi sulle fonti normative degli ordini religiosi nei secoli centrali del medioevo, Münster 2005, 5–38, esp. pp. 17–18.

74 Berlière, ‘Les Chapitres’, 259. See also Ceglar, ‘William of Saint-Thierry’, 38.

75 For this see Vanderputten, ‘A time’.

76 Berlière, Documents, 98.

77 This is edited in PL clxxxii.713–14, 714–16. Bernard of Clairvaux came to Rodulphus’ rescue by defending his case with the pope: Bur, La Formation, 351; Pfeffer, L'Abbaye, 25.

78 ‘Inter ipsos etiam et abbates Praemonstratensis ordinis constitutum est ut pro fratribus utriusque ordinis defunctis premissa absolutione in capitulo officium unum semel in anno in festivitate videlicet beati Cisogoni martyris cum pulsatione signorum et prebenda in refectorio et collecta Deus veniae alterutrum in conventu fiat et uniusquisque sacerdos missam unam ipsa die vel quando placuerit ei persolvat’: Bibliothèque Municipale, Douai, ms 540, fo. 69v.

79 This is edited in Jean le Paige, Bibliotheca Praemonstratensis ordinis, Paris 1633, i. 321–2. See Giles Constable, ‘Commemoration and confraternity at Cluny during the abbacy of Peter the Venerable’, in The abbey of Cluny, 313–38 at pp. 330–1.

80 The most recent edition is in Waddell, ‘The myth’, 351–2.

81 Berman, The Cistercian evolution, 83–6.

82 Waddell, ‘The myth’, 340–50.

83 What the discovery of the agreement with the Reims abbots evidently does is to undermine Berman's argument that the main purpose of the agreement, the establishment of a prayer fraternity for the annual commemoration of one another's dead, is more germane to the 1170s than to the document's supposed dating of 1142: Berman, The Cistercian evolution, 85.

84 Suggestive remarks as to Bernard's involvement can be found in Waddell, ‘The myth’, 349.

85 Patrick Demouy, Genèse d'une cathédrale: les archevèques de Reims et leur église aux XIe et XIIe siècles, Langres 2005, 313–17, esp. p. 314 n. 386.

86 ‘Caritas’ is used here to describe a desire to promote ‘order and coordination for the good of all’: McGuire, Brian Patrick, ‘Charity and unanimity: the invention of the Cistercian order: a review article’, Cîteaux: Commentarii Cisterciences li (2000), 285–97Google Scholar at p. 297, with reference to Newman, Boundaries of charity.