Medieval Music, Legend, and the Cult of St Martin: The Local Foundations of a Universal Saint 9781107060951, 1107060958

Table of contents :
Cover......Page 1
Half-title......Page 3
Title page......Page 5
Copyright information......Page 6
Dedication......Page 7
Table of contents......Page 9
List of figures......Page 10
List of music examples......Page 11
List of tables......Page 13
Acknowledgments......Page 14
List of abbreviations......Page 17
Introduction......Page 19
Tours, the center of Martin’s cult......Page 23
St. Martin and France......Page 30
Sources......Page 36
1 The focal point of the cult: St. Martin’s church in Tours......Page 39
The customary and its importance to the community of St. Martin......Page 45
Augmenting Martin’s cult (and revenues) through vicars......Page 50
The calendar of Saint-Martin......Page 59
Performance practice......Page 65
Triumphationes......Page 66
The singing of neumas......Page 69
Polyphonic practices......Page 77
The corpus of prosas......Page 86
2 Universal and local foundations of Martin’s cult......Page 92
The liturgy in honor of St. Martin (November 11)......Page 104
The feast of July 4: Martin’s translation and ordination, and the dedication of his church......Page 120
Reversion, Subvention, and Translation of Martin’s Head......Page 127
Appendix. Order of responsories in Martinian feasts – comparative tables......Page 143
3 The musical articulation of St. Martin in Tours......Page 149
Themes of weakness and death......Page 158
Translation......Page 165
The triumph of Martin in heaven......Page 167
Echoes of laus perennis......Page 186
4 Competing with success: sharing the aura of St. Martin in Tours......Page 190
The importance of being first......Page 201
The new office of St. Gatien......Page 210
Epilogue: war and peace......Page 220
5 From pacifist to knight: late medieval appropriations of St. Martin......Page 224
A soldier of great prowess......Page 237
The Armed Man, the tearful disciples, and the cunning of the enemy......Page 241
A knight turned soldier of Christ in Machaut’s Motet 5......Page 253
Yvain, or the Knight with the Lion......Page 257
Afterword......Page 265
A. The 1141 miracle account for Martin’s July 4 feast (source: BmT 1294, p. 221)......Page 267
B. The provenance of Bibliothèque municipale de Tours 159......Page 269
The calendar......Page 271
Agreement between calendar and breviary......Page 274
Erasures and additions of text and music......Page 275
Bibliothèque municipale de Tours 159: list of contents......Page 281
Paris, Bibliothèque nationale de France (BnF)......Page 286
Tours, Bibliothèque municipale de Tours (BmT)......Page 287
Primary sources......Page 288
Secondary sources......Page 291
Index of chants......Page 308
General index......Page 311

Citation preview

Medieval Music, Legend, and the Cult of St. Martin

St. Martin of Tours was a protector saint of numerous French kings. His was one of the most successful saintly cults in medieval Europe and the city of Tours functioned as a religious metropolis, drawing pilgrims from all over the Continent. Until now, little has been known about how St. Martin came to inspire such a lively folkloric tradition, numerous works of art, and the establishment of thousands of churches and numerous confraternities. In this book, Yossi Maurey addresses these questions by focusing on the church dedicated to the Saint in Tours, which acted as the crucible for Martin’s cult. Maurey explores the music and liturgy of the cult – the most effective means of its dissemination  – to reveal its enormous diffusion and impact. Building a more concrete picture of how saints’ cults operated and shaped medieval realities, this book also provides new insights into the interactions between contemporary religion, art, and politics. YO S SI M AU R EY has served as Lecturer in the Department of Musicology

at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem since 2008. He holds a Ph.D. (2005) in musicology from the University of Chicago.

Medieval Music, Legend, and the Cult of St. Martin The Local Foundations of a Universal Saint Yossi Maurey

University Printing House, Cambridge CB2 8BS, United Kingdom Cambridge University Press is part of the University of Cambridge. It furthers the University’s mission by disseminating knowledge in the pursuit of education, learning, and research at the highest international levels of excellence. www.cambridge.org Information on this title: www.cambridge.org/9781107060951 © Yossi Maurey 2014 This publication is in copyright. Subject to statutory exception and to the provisions of relevant collective licensing agreements, no reproduction of any part may take place without the written permission of Cambridge University Press. First published 2014 Printed in the United Kingdom by Clays, St Ives plc A catalogue record for this publication is available from the British Library Library of Congress Cataloguing in Publication data Maurey, Yossi, author. Medieval music, legend, and the cult of St. Martin : the local foundations of a universal saint / Yossi Maurey. pages cm Includes bibliographical references and index. ISBN 978-1-107-06095-1 (hardback) 1.  Church music – France – 500–1400.  2.  Catholic Church – France – Liturgy – History – To 1500.  3.  Martin, Saint, Bishop of Tours, approximately 316–397 – Cult – France – Tours.  4.  Martin, Saint, Bishop of Tours, approximately 316–397 – Cult.  I.  Title. ML3027.2M38 2014 781.71ʹ2009440902–dc23 2014011955 ISBN 978-1-107-06095-1 Hardback Cambridge University Press has no responsibility for the persistence or accuracy of URLs for external or third-party internet websites referred to in this publication, and does not guarantee that any content on such websites is, or will remain, accurate or appropriate.

‫לעמיר‪ ,‬אהבת‪ ‬חיי‬

Contents

List of figures  [viii] List of music examples  [ix] List of tables  [xi] Acknowledgments  [xii] List of abbreviations  [xv]

Introduction [1] 1 The focal point of the cult: St. Martin’s church in Tours  [21] 2 Universal and local foundations of Martin’s cult  [74] 3 The musical articulation of St. Martin in Tours  [131] 4 Competing with success: sharing the aura of St. Martin in Tours  [172] 5 From pacifist to knight: late medieval appropriations of St. Martin  [206] Afterword  [247] Appendices  [249] Bibliography  [268] Index of chants  [290] General index  [293]

vii

Figures

0.1 The city of Tours in the sixteenth century. Civitates orbis terrarum (Cologne, 1572). © Bibliothèque municipale de Tours, LA Tours, Est. 9, Ic Auv. 114.  [8] 0.2 The capture of Tours by Philip Augustus in 1189. Bibliothèque nationale de France fr. 6465, fo. 223. Used by permission.  [10] 2.1 St. Martin and the beggar. © Bibliothèque municipale de Tours, MS 1023, fo. 1.  [77] 2.2 Sulpicius Severus, Epistle 3. © Bibliothèque municipale de Tours, MS 1021, fo. 19.  [93] 3.1 The responsory Cum videret and its melisma ad repetendum over “non recuso laborem.” © Bibliothèque municipale de Tours, MS 159, fo. 284v.  [137] 3.2 The responsory O quantus erat luctus (end of verse) and melisma ad repetendum over “Flere Martinum.” © Bibliothèque municipale de Tours, MS 159, fo. 286v.  [138] 4.1 St. Gatien’s new office, First Vespers. © Bibliothèque municipale de Tours, MS 212, fo. 2.  [193] 5.1 St. Martin and the beggar. Bamberg, Staatsbibliothek, Cod. Lit 1, fo. 170 (Fulda, early eleventh century). Photo: Gerald Raab. Used by permission. [208] 5.2 The charity of St. Martin. Saint-Martin d’Ix, second quarter of twelfth century (MNAC 15802; altar frontal from Ix, detail). © Museu Nacional d’Art de Catalunya, Barcelona. Photo: Calveras/ Mérida/Sagristà. Used by permission.  [210] 5.3 St. Martin and the beggar. Paris, Bibliothèque nationale de France nouv. acq. fr. 16251, fo. 89; from the so-called “livre d’images de Madame Marie,” late thirteenth century. Used by permission.  [212] 5.4 Simone Martini, Investiture of St. Martin. © 2013. Photo: SCALA, Florence. Used by permission.  [217]

viii

Music examples

3.1 The responsory Cum videret. BmT 159, fo. 284v.  [139] 3.2 The melisma ad repetendum over “Non recuso laborem.” BmT 159, fo. 284v.  [142] 3.3 The melisma ad repetendum over “Flere Martinum.” BmT 159, fo. 286v.  [142] 3.4 The melisma over “honoratur” in BnF lat. 1028, fo. 263.  [143] 3.5 Responsorial neuma for modes 1, 2, and 4. Source: Kelly, “Modal Neumes at Sens,” 430.  [143] 3.6 Longer version of the responsorial neuma for modes 1, 2, and 4. Source: Kelly, “Modal Neumes at Sens,” 430.  [144] 3.7 The responsory O quantus erat luctus. BmT 159, fo. 286r–v.  [146] 3.8 The prosa Qui calcavit. BnF lat. 1266, fo. 395v.  [147] 3.9 Melismas used in the neuma triplex. [150] 3.10 The prosa Post derelicta compared to likely precedents.  [154] 3.11 The prosa Ad patriam redit compared to likely models.  [156] 3.12 The prosa Octogenus agens compared to likely models.  [157] 3.13 The responsory Martinus Abrahe compared to the responsory Descendit de celis. [160] 3.14 The prosa Euphonias videns. Utrecht, Bibliotheek der Rijksuniversiteit 408, fo. 240r–v.  [163] 4.1 The responsory Beatus antistes. BmT 212, fos. 10v–11.  [196] 5.1 The sequence Miles mire probitatis. BmT 1023, fos. 123v–124. [221] 5.2 The antiphon Dixerunt discipuli. BmT 159, fos. 288v–289.  [224] 5.3 Melodic comparison of readings of the antiphon Dixerunt discipuli (opening) with the superius of Il sera par vous/L’Homme armé. [228] 5.4 (a) Du Fay, Missa L’homme armé, opening of the Christe (cantus); (b) Josquin, Missa L’Homme armé super voces musicales, opening of the Kyrie II (cantus); (c) Josquin, Missa L’Homme armé sexti toni, opening of the “Et in terra” (cantus); (d) Palestrina, Missa L’Homme armé (five-voice setting), from Kyrie I.  [233]

ix

x

List of music examples

5.5 The tenor of M5, Fiat voluntas tua, and the melody of the antiphon Domine, si adhuc. [238] 5.6 Retrograde rhythmic relationship of the tenor and contratenor in Machaut’s M5. Source: Robertson, Guillaume de Machaut and Reims, 171. [243]

Tables

1.1 The calendar of Saint-Martin in its development: twelfth to early sixteenth centuries  [43] 1.2 Neumatizing in Saint-Martin  [53] 1.3 The prosas known in Saint-Martin  [70] 2.1 Text of Martin’s November 11 office  [95] 2.2 The responsories sung during the Martinian feasts (excluding November 11) in Saint-Martin  [105] 2.3 Sequence of responsories according to earliest office sources  [125] 2.4 Sequence of responsories in manuscripts outside Tours  [126] 2.5 Sequence of responsories in sources from Tours and its environs [130] 3.1 The Martinian prosas for November 11 known in Saint-Martin [132] 3.2 The Martinian prosas for November 11 known outside Saint-Martin [134] 4.1 Processions to and from Saint-Martin  [178]

xi

Acknowledgments

xii

It is an immense pleasure to thank friends, colleagues, and institutions who have sustained me intellectually, morally, and financially during the long gestation of this book. I would first like to thank the staff of the Fonds patrimoniaux at the Bibliothèque municipale de Tours, in which much of my research was conducted. I am particularly indebted to the Conservatrice, Michèle Prévost, who showed great flexibility in order to facilitate my frequent consultation of manuscripts and early prints. I am also grateful to Pierre Gasnault, honorary curator of the Bibliothèque Mazarine in Paris, for allowing me access to his unpublished work at the Bibliothèque municipale de Tours. It is while working in that library that I first met Hélène Noizet, who was at the time researching her doctoral thesis on Saint-Martin of Tours. She enthusiastically shared with me transcriptions and insights, for which I am most indebted. On my numerous visits to the Institut de Recherche et d’Histoire des Textes (IRHT) in Paris, the staff generously provided me with access to microfilms and various secondary sources. Over the years, Patricia Stirnemann went out of her way and beyond the call of duty to assist me with settling issues of dating and provenance of certain manuscripts. I owe special thanks to Atara Kotliar, the former music librarian at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, for ordering dozens of titles for me through the Interlibrary Loan Office. This book grew out of my 2005 University of Chicago dissertation, advised by Martha Feldman, Robert Kendrick, and Anne Walters Robertson. Their wisdom and generosity know no bounds. The extraordinary intellectual environment cultivated at the Department of Music at the University of Chicago provided me with numerous opportunities to learn and exchange ideas with faculty members and students alike, and I am grateful to all of them. I owe Anne Walters Robertson special gratitude. A true vade mecum and mentor, she read the entire book manuscript and made significant comments and suggestions; her trenchant criticism saved me from many errors. Her judicious reflections, depth of thought, and prudent suggestions have shaped my own scholarship in several fundamental ways, and they continue to stir my intellectual curiosity. Her teaching and erudition have provided me with a vital model; quite simply, this book could not have been

Acknowledgments

written without her. Paul Gehl of the Newberry Library in Chicago has been a constant source of inspiration, support, and friendship. On countless occasions he offered help with obscure Latin texts, and his perceptive observations on a wide variety of topics enriched this book in more ways than I can enumerate. The hospitality he and his partner Rob showed me during my Chicago visits will always be cherished. The late Father Pierre-Marie Gy held a unique place in this book’s evolution, intellectually, personally, and practically. Numerous colleagues and friends have helped to sustain me during the book’s evolution, some with unflagging enthusiasm, and some unwittingly, through a comment or question that has sparked a thought: Hyacinthe Belliot, Vincent Besson, Gregorio Bevilacqua, Caroline Bynum, Cristina Cassia, Camilla Cavicchi, Damien Colas, Marie-Noël Colette, Marie-Alexis Colin, Alessandro Di Profio, David Fiala, Jean-François Goudesenne, James Grier, Marco Guerrieri, Nicoletta Guidobaldi, Yuval Noah Harari, Marie-Hélène Jullien, Jean-Baptiste Lebigue, Grantley McDonald, Agostino Magro, Francesco Pezzi, Barbara Rosenwein, Benjamin Sass, Catherine Saucier, Dom Daniel Saulnier, Martin Walsh, and Vasco Zara. A number of musicologists and historians provided numerous helpful corrections, advice, and suggestions. Paul Gehl and Yitzhak Hen read the entire book manuscript and offered extensive and constructive criticism that greatly nuanced my arguments. I am also very grateful to Ian Woods, Barbara Haggh-Huglo, and the late Michel Huglo for reading sections of this book and for providing invaluable feedback. I thank Bonnie Blackburn for carefully reading the final version of the book and catching many mistakes. I have been inspired and challenged by all of them. Funding for my 2005 doctoral thesis was provided by the Annette Kade Fellowship in French or German Studies in the Middle Ages or Renaissance (Center for Renaissance Studies, The Newberry Library, Chicago), the Alvin H. Johnson American Musicological Society 50 Fellowship, the Medieval Academy of America, and the University of Chicago. This book was published with the support of the Israel Science Foundation (grant #103/09, and book subvention grant #2085/13), and Yad Hanadiv (The Rothschild Fund). Large portions of the book were drafted during the academic year 2009/10, while I was privileged to be a Fellow at the Institute for Advanced Studies (Le Studium), in residence at the Université François Rabelais in Tours. I sincerely thank Paul Vigny, Michèle Scherer, Isabelle Ziegeldorf, and Christine Bousquet-Labouérie for their tremendous support and help, enabling me to conceive the overall shape of the project. For the leave of absence that allowed me to accept this fellowship I am indebted to my

xiii

xiv

Acknowledgments

colleagues at the Department of Musicology at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem: Roni Granot, Ruth HaCohen, Julia Kreinin, Edwin Seroussi, and Naphtali Wagner. During my Le Studium fellowship, mostly held at the Centre d’Etudes Supérieures de la Renaissance (CESR), I was privileged to work in a world-class research environment and to meet many colleagues who made my residency an unforgettable experience. My association with the CESR in fact started in 2000, when I first arrived in Tours. Ever since, Philippe Vendrix, now Director of the CESR, has been a model of friendship and mentorship, and I thank him for being such a wonderful host. To Christine Bousquet-Labouérie, historian at the Université François Rabelais, I owe special thanks not only for being a wonderful friend, colleague, and collaborator, but also for teaching me so much about medieval art, French argot, and cuisine! I cannot thank her and Benoît enough for their warm hospitality and conviviality. I am grateful to the copyright holders and providers of the illustrations used in this book for permission to reproduce images. Anna Gutgarts provided the research assistantship to help with the various stages of this book manuscript, and I sincerely thank Nir Cohen for his remarkable work on the music examples. His expertise with Finale saved me a lot of trouble. I owe special thanks to both of Cambridge University Press’s anonymous reviewers for their invaluable suggestions. Vicki Cooper and Fleur Jones of the Press have been wonderfully supportive and patient in bringing this project to culmination. Robert Whitelock has been an exemplary copy-editor, steadfastly guiding the manuscript into final production, and saving me from many errors. Last, but by no means least, I want to thank my family. My parents Benjamin and Marlene, and my sisters Lital and Tanya have witnessed this project develop from its inception, always wondering if the end was in sight. Joe and Jeanette Neubauer took a keen interest in my work ever since I began graduate school. Their genuine curiosity, love, and the confidence they had in what I could accomplish continue to inspire me. I am truly fortunate to have such a great, supportive family. There is one person to whom I owe so much that “thank you” is not the right term. Amir Fink, my husband, has taught me about myself more than anyone else ever could. His sense of balance, his passion for life, his creativity, and his unconditional love have always helped keep everything in perspective, setting priorities right, and making it all worthwhile. I dedicate this book to him with love.

Abbreviations

Ah

Analecta hymnica medii aevi, ed. Guido Maria Dreves and Clemens Blume, 55 vols. (Leipzig: R. Reisland, 1886–1922) Ant. Antiphon BAV Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana BnF Paris, Bibliothèque nationale de France Bm Bibliothèque municipale BmT Bibliothèque municipale de Tours BSAT Bulletin de la Société Archéologique de Touraine BVM Blessed Virgin Mary CAO Corpus Antiphonalium Officii, ed. René-Jean Hesbert, 6 vols., Rerum ecclesiasticarum documenta, Series maior (Rome: Fontes, 1963–79) CCCM Corpus Christianorum, continuatio mediaeualis (Turnhout: Brepols, 1971–) Coll. Baluze Paris, Bibliothèque nationale de France, Collection Baluze Comm. Communion Du Cange Charles Du Cange, Glossarium mediae et infimae Latinitatis, ed. Leopold Favre, 10 vols. (Niort, 1883–87) F Florence, Biblioteca Medicea-Laurenziana, Plut. 29.1 Grad. Gradual Grove Music Online Grove Music Online, available at www.oxfordmusiconline.com (accessed 7 May 2014) IRHT Institut de Recherche et d’Histoire des Textes JAMS Journal of the American Musicological Society MGH Monumenta Germaniae Historica Mm Médiathèque municipale MNAC Museu Nacional d’Art de Catalunya, Barcelona Niermeyer Jan Frederik Niermeyer, C. van de Kieft, and G. S. M. M. Lake-Schoonebeek, eds., Mediae Latinitatis lexicon minus, abbreviationes et index fontium (Leiden: Brill, 1976) Off. Offertory

xv

xvi

List of abbreviations PL

J.-P. Migne, ed., Patrologiae cursus completus, series Latina, 221 vols. (Paris: 1844–64) Resp. Responsory RH Ulysse Chevalier, Repertorium hymnologicum: Catalogue de chants, hymnes, proses, séquences, tropes en usage dans l’église latine depuis les origines jusqu’à nos jours, Subsidia hagiographica 4 (Louvain: Polleunis and Ceuterick, 1892–1912) 1 Rism 1504 Motetti C (Venice: Ottaviano Petrucci, 1504) Seq. Sequence SRM Scriptores Rerum Merovingicarum Ver. Verse W2 Wolfenbüttel, Herzog August Bibliothek, Guelf. 1099 Helmstad

Introduction

Saints were of fundamental importance for medieval politics, society, art, and even the economy. Their relics attracted pilgrims and formed the stable nucleus around which abbeys, churches, towns, and cities grew. Saints provided protective patronage to many kinds of clients, from members of professional guilds and religious orders to cities and entire kingdoms. Their vitae inspired numerous works of art and sustained both clerical and lay forms of piety. To modern people, it is often unclear how saints achieved such a crucial status and performed such vital functions. This book takes us behind the scenes of one saint’s cult, explaining how the magic worked. It analyzes in depth the rise of one of the most successful saintly cults in medieval Europe, the cult of St. Martin of Tours. St. Martin was the protector saint of the Merovingian, Carolingian, and Capetian dynasties, and all French kings up to the French Revolution were honorary abbots of the church of Saint-Martin of Tours, built upon the saint’s tomb. St. Martin’s cape served as the original war banner of Frankish royal armies. His city of Tours functioned as a religious center, drawing pilgrims from all over Europe. He was considered one of the founders of western monasticism. Since he was apparently the first non-martyr to receive the cultus of a saint, he can also be seen as pioneering a completely new model of sainthood. Credited with special powers beyond those of a typical intercessor saint, he inspired a lively folkloric tradition, the composition of numerous pictorial and musical works of art, and the establishment of thousands of churches and numerous confraternities all over Europe. As Sharon Farmer notes, “the landscape of medieval Francia was dotted with the consequences and commemorations of his deeds,” and even today, Martin retains a respectable footing within western European culture.1 Lantern parades and the eating of geese are still time-honored traditions on Martin’s principal feast day (November 11) in Germany, Austria, and the Low Countries. The European Institute of Cultural Routes (part of the Council of Europe) is devoting considerable efforts to promoting Martinian themes

Farmer, Communities of Saint Martin, 14.

1

1

2

Introduction

through various cultural programs in Tours and elsewhere.2 The music dedicated to him is enjoying a revival through the efforts of vocal groups such as The Rose Ensemble working in the USA, and Diabolus in Musica in France. And yet, we know little of how all this came about. The most popular and important saints of Christendom were scriptural personages, early Christian martyrs, or popes. The historical St. Martin was none of these. He was the third bishop of a third-rate provincial capital in the fourth century. His sphere of activity was mostly limited to central and northern Gaul, a political and religious backwater. His most famous act was to give half his cape to a beggar. Hardly enough, one would have thought, to inspire so much devotion and gain such universal stature. This book explains St. Martin’s rise to prominence by focusing on the crucible of his cult, the church dedicated to him in Tours. In particular, it focuses on the music and liturgy of the cult, which proved to be the most effective means of its dissemination, from the eleventh to the fifteenth centuries. Only if we understand the instruments of the cult’s formation and the agents of its propagation – liturgy, music, hagiography – can we comprehend its enormous diffusion and impact. As the story goes, Martin was born to pagan parents in a small village in what is today Hungary. He was enlisted in the Roman army and stationed at Amiens, in Gaul. Riding his horse on a cold winter day, Martin noticed an unclothed beggar at the gate of the city. Concerned, he cut his cape into two, covering the poor man with one half. In a dream the following night, the beggar revealed himself to be Christ. This scene, recounted in countless paintings, statues, and stories, was the turning point of Martin’s life. Following this encounter, Martin converted to Christianity, renounced the military, and decided to become a soldier in the service of God. Inspired by his mentor Hilary of Poitiers, in the early 360s he founded a hermitage in Ligugé (in the Poitou in west-central France). This was the first monastery in Gaul. In 371 he was elected bishop of the city of Tours. He did not want the office, and was literally forced to assume the position against his will. Notwithstanding his bishopric, Martin remained devoted to a life of asceticism. He refused to sit on the bishop’s cathedra, lived in a small cell, and removed himself as much as possible from society. He seems to have had very few ties to the city of Tours, preferring to be more active in his While the coinciding of the signing of the Armistice near Compiègne on November 11, 1918 with St. Martin’s Day was evidently a happenstance, Catholics have found this correlation meaningful and profound. After all, it was only fitting that a ceasefire agreement should be signed on a day celebrating a soldier who renounced armed conflict, choosing, instead, to fight for God alone.

2

Introduction

diocese and beyond.3 He founded Marmoutier, a monastery located just outside the city, where he also served as abbot. He wandered around Gaul, from Paris to Autun, from Vienne to Chartres, preaching and converting people to Christianity. To his dying day, he remained a monk as much as a bishop.4 Martin’s earthly existence ended in 397. Shortly before his death, he was called to the small church of Candes, to resolve a dispute among the clergy. While trying to restore peace, he fell ill, grew weak, and died. The people of Poitiers planned to bury him in their city, but the people of Tours had other plans for their deceased bishop. In the middle of the night, they sneaked into the church, lifted the corpse, and hoisted it through a window. It was taken by boat downstream to Tours, and buried there on November 11. A few years later, St. Brice, the fourth bishop of Tours, built a chapel over the tomb of his illustrious predecessor – the church of Saint-Martin of Tours.5 Very soon it became clear that the modest structure could not cope with the growing flood of pilgrims, and it was replaced with a more imposing basilica, dedicated on July 4, 465 by St. Perpetuus, the fifth bishop of Tours (r. 461–91). According to Gregory of Tours, the church was 160 feet long and 60 feet wide (47.36 × 12.72 meters), making it one of the most commanding churches in early Merovingian France. During the Viking incursion of 853, the basilica constructed by Perpetuus was set ablaze and ruined, a fate to which it would also succumb several other times in the course of the following centuries.6 A new edifice, rebuilt beginning in 903 and consecrated by Archbishop Robert II in 918, inaugurated a new architectural phase in the evolution of SaintMartin of Tours, with the succession of Merovingian structures giving way to Romanesque ones until the middle of the twelfth century, when new Gothic additions considerably altered the earlier structure.7 For many reasons, chief of which was the growing popularity of St. Martin, the celebrated church of Saint-Martin of Tours occupies an important place McKinley, “The First Two Centuries of Saint Martin of Tours,” 181–82. As we shall see in Chapter 2, the writings of Sulpicius Severus in the fourth century form the main source for Martin’s life. The first critical edition of this Vita inaugurates the volumes in the series Corpus Scriptorum Ecclesiasticorum Latinorum. See Sulpicius Severus, Sulpicii Severi libri qui supersunt, 109–51. 5 Names of saints are given in their English form, using the abbreviation “St.” (St. Martin). Names of churches and monasteries are hyphenated (Saint-Martin). 6 Gregory of Tours, Libri historiarum X, II.14. See also Vieillard-Troiekouroff, Les Monuments religieux de la Gaule; Boissonnot, Histoire et description de la cathédrale de Tours; Pietri, La Ville de Tours du IVe au VIe siècle. 7 Hersey, “The Church of Saint-Martin at Tours,” 2. 3 4

3

4

Introduction

in the ecclesiastical landscape of the Middle Ages.8 Transformed from a monastery into a college of canons in the course of the ninth century, it became one of the largest collegiate chapters in France, housing 150 canons in the early thirteenth century. Saint-Martin also had an impressive number of honorary canons (around thirty), lay and ecclesiastical; the latter included the archbishops of Bourges and Sens and the bishops of Poitiers, Liège, and Angers. Saint-Martin was not only the commercial center of the entire city of Tours, it also had the highest concentration of people living within its walls. Many of them were thriving merchants and artisans, catering, among other things, to the needs of the thousands of pilgrims who flocked to the doors of Saint-Martin from the fifth century on – their business was the cult of St. Martin.9 The church also had considerable revenues from its many possessions in France and in Europe (mainly in Italy); shipments of wax, grain, wine, and leather regularly reached the banks of the Loire River by boat and were exempt from the fluvial tax imposed by the French monarchy.10 The schola of the church dedicated to St. Martin of Tours rose to fame beginning in the late eighth century when Charlemagne gave Alcuin (c. 735–804), the venerable Carolingian scholar and theologian, the abbacy of Tours in token of his loyal service at court.11 Originally a monk from York in northern England, Alcuin was a teacher at the royal court of Charlemagne between 782 and 790, where he was responsible not only for the education of members of Charlemagne’s family, along with members of the higher strata of the Frankish elite, and talented students from all around the kingdom, but also for carrying out liturgical and education reforms. During his short tenure in Saint-Martin (796–804), he brought the scriptorium to new heights, enriched the monastery’s library with manuscripts that were copied under Several excellent studies on various aspects of medieval Saint-Martin are mentioned throughout this book. Three of the most comprehensive sources, however, need to be singled out, as they form the primary point of departure for the study of this church: Noizet, La Fabrique de la ville; Farmer, Communities of Saint Martin; and Vaucelle, La Collégiale. In contrast to the relative wealth of studies devoted to the history of Saint-Martin, cited throughout this book, the paucity of musicological studies solely devoted to this church is striking. To date, one of the most detailed accounts to examine the liturgy of Saint-Martin has been the opening chapter of a dissertation devoted to Johannes Ockeghem in his capacity as treasurer of Saint-Martin: Magro, “Jean de Ockeghem.” Magro’s well-crafted thesis is indicative of a more general tendency among musicologists to examine the liturgy of Saint-Martin for its potential to shed light on the careers of fifteenth-century composers and their music. See, for instance, Higgins, “In hydraulis Revisited,” 70–76; Higgins, “Speaking of the Devil and Discipuli”; and Perkins, “Musical Patronage at the Royal Court of France,” 523–28. 9 B. Chevalier, “La Cité de Tours,” 243. 10 The exemption was extended to twelve boats. See Galinié, “La Cité de Tours et Châteauneuf,” 176. 11 On Alcuin and his work, see Bullough, Alcuin: Achievement and Reputation. 8

Tours, the center of Martin’s cult

his supervision and with those sent to him by Charlemagne, and also edited a vita of St. Martin intended especially for pilgrims.12 Moreover, it was at Saint-Martin that he would compose many of his significant works, including his revision of the Vulgate, which Charlemagne had commissioned from him.13 Owing to Alcuin’s intellectual enterprise and to the soaring reputation that Saint-Martin enjoyed as a consequence, the scriptorium became an important place of teaching and learning, attracting such intellectuals as Rabanus Maurus in the ninth century and Berengar in the eleventh. It specialized in the copying of Bibles, sacramentaries, and, not surprisingly, Martinelli – manuscripts entirely dedicated to all things Martinian.14

Tours, the center of Martin’s cult There can be no doubt that the source of the city’s prosperity was the church of Saint-Martin and the flourishing cult of its titular saint. Yet Saint-Martin was not the only church in Tours, a city in which two main religious poles dominated the ecclesiastical and civic landscape. Founded in the first century as the chief oppidum of the Gallic tribe of the Turones, the city received its first name, Caesarodunum, from the Romans. Originally comprising several haphazardly organized urbanized hubs against the backdrop of a rural landscape, ancient Tours was consolidated in the fourth century to form a small area corresponding to what is nowadays the northeastern part of the city. By that time, the status of the city was significantly enhanced, as the Delaruelle, “La Spiritualité des pèlerinages à Saint-Martin de Tours,” 234. It is beyond the scope of this short introduction to give a full account of the activities of the school of SaintMartin and the role that Alcuin and subsequent schoolmasters played in it. For a succinct and helpful point of departure, see Vaucelle, La Collégiale, 335–53; Lelong, “Culture et société (ive–xiie siècles),” 66–69; and Marcault, Le Diocèse de Tours, Vol. I, 101–27. For the important achievements of the monastery’s scriptorium, see McKitterick, Carolingian Culture, 243; Rand, A Survey of the Manuscripts of Tours, i; McKitterick, “Carolingian Bible Production”; Ganz, “Mass Production of Early Medieval Manuscripts.” In contrast to Hilduin and Hincmar – abbots who had played an important role in expanding the liturgy in Saint-Denis and in Reims, respectively – when Alcuin arrived at Saint-Martin, the liturgy dedicated to Martin was already firmly developed. See Goudesenne, “De Tours à Rome,” 383. 13 Lelong, “Culture et société (IVe–XIIe siècles),” 67. Incidentally, most of his extant letters were written immediately before and during his tenure at Saint-Martin. See Allott, Alcuin of York, ix; and Jullien and Perelman, Auctores Galliae, 171–75. 14 Vaucelle, La Collégiale, 343; and Goudesenne, “Chant grégorien et renaissances carolingiennes,” 150. Saint-Martin of Tours was no longer the center for learning into which Alcuin had transformed it when schoolmaster Berengar became notorious for his position on the Eucharist controversy that swept the Christian world in the eleventh century. See Maurey, “Heresy, Devotion, and Memory.” 12

5

6

Introduction

Romans transformed it into the capital of a vast administrative region, that of Lugdunensis III (Third Lyonnaise), consisting of nine cities in centralwestern France. By the fourth century the city, by then referred to as civitas or urbs Turonorum – Tours in the vernacular – was already endowed with its first defensive ramparts. The Gallo-Roman wall was erected after 275, a fortification that was restored and reinforced by Charles the Bald between 871 and 878 and that is still in evidence today around the city’s Musée des BeauxArts.15 This fortified part of town slowly developed into a religious center, the site of the first Christian church in the city – probably built by the second quarter of the fourth century – and was where all successive edifices of the Cathedral of Tours would be built. In fact, until the mid-fourteenth century, “Tours” was a topographic definition applied to just one section of the city, namely the episcopal town that sprang up around the Cathedral, which was also referred to as the Cité.16 By the tenth century, the Cathedral was already the spiritual center of a vast archdiocese encompassing the dioceses of Le Mans and Angers, as well as a number of dioceses in Brittany in the west, and comprising some 300 parishes, 19 abbeys, and 98 priories.17 As in many other medieval cities, and as Roman law stipulated, the necropolis of the civitas libera of Tours was situated outside the city proper, west of the first urbanized center in which stood the Cathedral. Here it was that St. Martin, the city’s third bishop, was buried, and the subsequent intensification of his cult gave birth to the religious and secular communities around the monastery that were dedicated to him. These communities would eventually surpass the city’s original administrative and religious center, the Cité, in size and prestige.18 The area that stretched between St. Martin’s town in the west and the Cathedral town in the east was mainly composed of arable lands and vineyards, with both poles being linked by two primary roads that ran parallel to the Loire River, found just to their north.19 Although the city owes its existence to the Romans, it was Christianity in general, and the cult of St. Martin and the pilgrimage that it stimulated in particular, that had a decisive impact on the physical and spiritual layout of the city. Like other medieval cities with origins going back to the Roman empire, by the tenth century Tours was polycentric. To be sure, there was nothing unusual Galinié, “Reflections on Early Medieval Tours,” 57. The origin of the name is still a matter of debate among scholars today. See Audin, Tours à l’époque gallo-romaine, 17–19 and 85. For a clear and detailed survey of the history of Tours, see also Galinié, “Genèse du paysage urbain.” 16 Farmer, Communities of Saint-Martin, 16. 17 Besse, Province de Tours, 8; and Longnon, Pouillés de la province de Tours, i–xiii. 18 Theureau, La Population archéologique de Tours, 20. 19 Ibid. In 943, Archbishop Theotolus refounded the abbey of Saint-Julien in the abovementioned area (the previous edifice was destroyed by the Vikings in 853). See Galinié and 15

Tours, the center of Martin’s cult

about this polarization, as the internal configuration of medieval cities was often an “urban incarnation” of ritualistic realities.20 It developed around the two above-mentioned religious centers, both associated in one way or another with the cult of St. Martin: the city’s Cathedral could claim Martin as its third bishop, and the church erected over his tomb by Perpetuus was the most important shrine dedicated to him in the Christian world. The second decade of the tenth century witnessed the growing physical seclusion of Saint-Martin. Following the devastating Viking invasions of the early tenth century, new wooden ramparts surrounding the church and the adjoining areas were completed in 919, and when they were replaced by a stone wall several decades later, the area found within the walls became known as Castrum novum, or Châteauneuf.21 The Benedictine abbey of Marmoutier formed an additional, third religious pole with ties to St. Martin, who, as mentioned above, founded it in the fourth century. Although it is situated on the right bank of the Loire River – and hence is not technically part of the city of Tours – the ad hoc alliance of this prestigious monastery with Saint-Martin in the eleventh and twelfth centuries would play a significant role in the religious schism in Tours in the following centuries.22 Drawn after 1572, Figure 0.1 shows the Cathedral on the right-hand side, with Saint-Martin facing it some 800 meters to its west. Missing is Marmoutier, which would have been depicted on the upper right-hand corner, on the opposite bank of the Loire. As we shall see in Chapter 4, the remarkable success of the cult of St. Martin in Tours effected a fierce competition between these ecclesiastical institutions, which unfolded primarily in music and ritual. Adding a further dimension to the religious and political character of the city that affected the spread of the cult of St. Martin were various political alliances that were unfolding and crystallizing in the Touraine around the time its defensive walls were constructed. While the Cité came under the political and legal jurisdiction of the various regional counts that were in Randoin, Les Archives du sol à Tours, 28; and Noizet, La Fabrique de la ville, 121–22. The abbey, which in the eleventh century had about forty monks, had relatively close ties with SaintMartin, although it was dependent on the Cathedral. 20 Le Goff, “Croissance et prise de conscience urbaine,” 220. 21 The walls were quite impressive: two meters thick, eleven meters high, and flanked by towers built about forty meters away from one another. See B. Chevalier, “La Cité de Tours,” 238; and Tours, ville royale, 9. See also Lelong, “Culture et société (IVe–XIIe siècles),” 71, 74; and “L’Enceinte du Castrum Sancti Martini.” By June 919, this area, together with an additional stretch of land leading to the banks of the Loire, also gained substantial financial exemptions when Charles the Bald exempted Châteauneuf from customs and police. See Galinié, “La Cité de Tours et Châteauneuf,” 172. 22 There is almost no information about the history of Marmoutier from before the ninth century. For a recent study of this establishment, see Lelong, L’Abbaye de Marmoutier.

7

Figure 0.1  The city of Tours in the sixteenth century. Civitates orbis terrarum (Cologne, 1572).

Tours, the center of Martin’s cult

its jurisdiction, the situation of Saint-Martin was markedly different. The ninth, tenth, and eleventh centuries witnessed communities in the Loire Valley, chief among them Tours, as battlegrounds between two powerful feudal lords and their entourages: the house of Anjou and the house of Blois. As the French monarchy became increasingly preoccupied with defending its estates in and around the Ile-de-France, and given that its influence was relatively weak in the countryside, the king was gradually forced to relinquish his control of cities in the Loire Valley in favor of powerful comital families and vassals, a process that intensified after the rise to the throne of Hugh Capet. Nevertheless, the Capetians, who were honorary abbots of Saint-Martin, were eager to retain their sovereignty over Saint-Martin and Châteauneuf. Overall, they succeeded in doing so despite the challenges to their rule posed by the counts of Anjou. The latter, who gained control of the Touraine from the count of Blois in the battle of Saint-Martin-le-Beau in 1044, had a complex relationship with Saint-Martin, but one that was fundamentally that of a protector. Although in some aspects the inhabitants of Châteauneuf were subject to the count of Anjou, they were for the most part under the direct control of the monarchy.23 Tours as a whole remained under the control of the house of Anjou well beyond the middle of the twelfth century, when Henry Plantagenet, perhaps the most illustrious count to come from this house, was crowned King Henry II of England in 1154. Indeed, his marriage to Eleanor of Aquitaine in 1152, followed by his ascent to the English throne, not only gave him possession of vast territories in central and western France, but also made him the most powerful enemy of the Capetians, against whom he and his son, Richard I, the “Lionheart” (r. 1189–99), would fight numerous battles over the course of the next fifty years. Following the death of Henry II in 1189, and after the release from captivity of his son Richard, Tours suffered a number of sieges – the result of an intermittent war fought between the Capetians, spearheaded by Philip Augustus (r. 1180–1223), and Richard I together with his brother and heir John “Lackland” (r. 1199–1216). We can see in Figure 0.2 a miniature from the Grandes chroniques de France depicting the capture of Tours by Philip Augustus in 1189 (tellingly, only the church dedicated to St. Martin is figured prominently, pointing to its near-identification with the city as a whole). The illumination is attributed 23

Ibid., 168–70. It was a battle in which Geoffrey Martel, count of Anjou, triumphed over Thibaud III, count of Blois. For the feudal rights of the count of Anjou in Châteauneuf, see Boussard, “Enclave royale Saint-Martin de Tours,” 172. Noizet has carefully documented instances attesting to the complex nature of the jurisdiction over Saint-Martin. The counts of Anjou and Blois played, on occasion, a rather major role in Châteauneuf. See Noizet, La Fabrique de la ville, 157–61.

9

10

Introduction

Figure 0.2  The capture of Tours by Philip Augustus in 1189. BnF fr. 6465, fo. 223.

to Jean Fouquet, a native of Tours (c. 1415), and an artist famous for the miniatures he crafted in the aforementioned Grandes chroniques and the Jewish Antiquities.24 Beginning in late summer of 1203, and especially after the death of King John in 1216, the English crown no longer controlled Touraine and Anjou. For the first time in its history, Tours was controlled not by competing vassals and comital houses, but by a single power-broker, the French king.25 This shift was to have ramifications for the increase in the veneration of St. Martin in general, and for the royal involvement in his cult in particular. Leveel, “Trois vues de la collégiale Saint-Martin de Tours,” 85–87. Fouquet visited Tours sometime between 1458 and 1460, perhaps in order to get a fresh look at the sights he was about to paint. 25 Lelong, “Culture et société (IVe–XIIe siècles),” 84–85; and Noizet, La Fabrique de la ville, 333. With the exception of Aquitaine, all French territories occupied by the Angevins had been lost to the French by 1224. 24

Tours, the center of Martin’s cult

Lay rulers and their military forces were not the only ones to place Tours under siege. Between 1122 and 1305, Tours endured communal strife as well, as the burghers of Châteauneuf repeatedly attempted to free themselves from the lordship of Saint-Martin.26 At times, their struggles were quite violent, leading, in 1122, to a rebellion that ended with the burning down of Saint-Martin and Châteauneuf.27 In 1231, a group of laymen assaulted the treasurer of the church in his house, and in 1305, inhabitants of Châteauneuf attacked the church, placed it under siege, and killed a canon and a cleric. The latter year marked the end of hostilities between the two groups of residents, however, as the burghers were required to pay hefty reparations to both the damaged church and to King Philip IV (“the Fair”). The thirteenth century also saw the undertaking of comprehensive construction projects in the three main religious poles in and around the city. Saint-Martin was reconstructed between 1220 and 1250; the Cathedral witnessed the energetic beginning of a lengthy building endeavor that would last until the middle of the sixteenth century; and Marmoutier was almost entirely reconstructed, roughly between 1220 and the 1320s. The peace that followed the victory of Philip Augustus in 1203 brought Tours relative political stability, at least as far as external threats were concerned. Similar to the fate of much of France in the fourteenth century, however, it is not surprising that Tours, too, suffered from the great famine of 1314–15, and that its inhabitants were also affected by the disastrous consequences of the Black Death that appeared in France beginning in 1348.28 Tours had barely escaped the devastation wrought on France by the Hundred Years War (1337–1453), when it eluded a siege mounted by the Anglo-Gascon forces in the late summer of 1356, shortly before the consequential battle of Poitiers. Two years earlier, the people of Tours were already constructing a defensive wall that would surround both the episcopal city (the Cité) and Châteauneuf, bringing together for the first time the two disparate parts of the city, as can be seen in Figure  0.1 above. Only thereafter did the word “Tours,” hitherto merely a convenient topographical definition, become synonymous with the city, encompassing the two communities. Several years later, in 1381, the civic identity of the city was further reinforced when a municipal body comprising representatives from both communities was created. Indeed, Bernard Chevalier, the eminent historian of Tours, proposes that this year The following account is indebted to Farmer, Communities of Saint Martin, 261–64. On the architectural ramification of this conflagration, see Hersey, “The Church of SaintMartin at Tours,” 37. 28 See B. Chevalier, “Naissance de la bonne ville,” 106. 26 27

11

12

Introduction

marks the genuine birth of the city.29 Yet, the importance of St. Martin went far beyond the confines of Tours and the Touraine. Within a few centuries, he became the protector saint of Francia and its monarchy.

St. Martin and France Happy, indeed, is Greece, to have been permitted by God to hear the preaching of the apostle [Paul], yet Christ did not forget the Gallic provinces, since He sent them Martin for their keeping.30

Writing in 800 to Gisela, Charlemagne’s sister, Alcuin expressed his hope that during the emperor’s forthcoming visit to sanctuaries in the Touraine region, he would also pay a visit to “the house of our great patron, St. Martin.”31 In so characterizing Martin’s eminence in the Frankish kingdom, Alcuin was echoing what had been on the lips of Merovingian monarchs since the reign of the first Christian king, Clovis (r. 481–511), anticipating similar pronouncements from virtually all subsequent French kings, namely, that the power of Martin had to be respected.32 In his Ten Books of History, written toward the end of the sixth century, Gregory of Tours made it clear that Clovis believed he owed the victory over the Arian Visigoths and the overthrow of the Visigothic king in southern Gaul in 507 to Martin’s protection. Clovis, who found it “hard to go on seeing these Arians occupy a part of Gaul … marched on Poitiers,” and ordered his soldiers to avoid pillaging any lands belonging to nearby Tours “in respect for St. Martin,” the patron saint of the city. Further testifying to his consideration of Martin as a saint capable of securing a military victory for him, he reportedly advised that “it is no good expecting to win this fight if we offend St. Martin.”33 After his victory, he returned to Tours, bestowed on the church of Saint-Martin many gifts, and, when Emperor Anastasius named him an honorary consul, had himself crowned there with a wreath in 508, assuming the trappings of “[L]a construction d’une enceinte commune met un terme au lent développement de la cité épiscopale et de la ville de Saint-Martin, à celui où Tours … se prépare à une gloire nouvelle.” B. Chevalier, Tours, ville royale, 41. 30 Sulpicius Severus, “Dialogues,” 250. 31 Charlemagne and his family indeed complied later that year. Allott, Alcuin of York, 100, letter 185. See also the information in Jullien and Perelman, Auctores Galliae, 273–74. 32 For the Merovingian period, see Van Dam, Saints and Their Miracles, 22–28. 33 Well into the nineteenth century, these words continued to be echoed in periods of unrest. In 1854, less than two decades before the Franco-Prussian war, Edouard Pie, bishop of Poitiers, warned that there would be no hope of victory “if one offends St. Martin.” Homily given on 25 November 1854, quoted in Brennan, “The Revival of the Cult of Martin of Tours,” 490. 29

St. Martin and France

a Roman emperor. He then returned to Paris “where he established the seat of his government.”34 It was the territorial gains of the Merovingian dynasty of Clovis, including the capture of southern Gaul from the Visigoths, that foreshadowed the boundaries of modern France, as chroniclers well into the fifteenth century were keen to teach to their audiences. Likewise, it was Martin, rewarding Clovis’s devotion to him, who made these victories possible.35 Beginning with the reign of Hugh Capet in 987 and until the French Revolution in 1789, all French kings held the honorary title of “Abbot of Saint-Martin” (the title remained unchanged even after Saint-Martin became a collegiate church), and some of them even had a more special association with the cult of St. Martin. Charles the Bald (r. 843–77), for instance, celebrated the feasts of Easter and Christmas in Saint-Martin almost every year, and Charles VII donated a new reliquary made of gold to host Martin’s relics in 1454. By the late seventh century, the Merovingians had acquired Martin’s cape, one of the most celebrated relics of that period, made famous through the saint’s popular Vita and the corresponding iconography that showed him giving half his cape to an unclothed beggar at the gate of Amiens. Kings in the early Carolingian period used it in times of war to steer and protect them in battle (it was the safeguard, or palladium, of France), and people facing royal judgments and seeking justice attested to the veracity of their statements by an oath taken “over the cape of St. Martin,” much as the Bible is used today in some judicial procedures. Interestingly, we owe the term capella, signifying a space of worship (chapel), and consequently also a group of church singers and their style of singing, to Martin’s cape, or cappa.36 The monarchy was not alone in exploiting the aura of Martin for its own needs; the canons of Saint-Martin guaranteed the place of their church in the ecclesiastical pantheon of France by doing exactly the same thing. In the ninth and tenth centuries alone, for instance, the royal chancellery issued Gregory of Tours, The History of the Franks, II.37 and II.38. See also McCormick, “Clovis at Tours”; and Mathisen, “Clovis, Anastase et Grégoire de Tours.” Also Van Dam, Saints and Their Miracles, 22; Duby, France in the Middle Ages, 14; Farmer, Communities of Saint Martin, 25. 35 On the vicissitudes of Clovis’s legacy in the French historical imagination, see Beaune, The Birth of an Ideology, 70–76. See also the articles in Guyotjeannin, Clovis chez les historiens; and Wood, The Modern Origins of the Early Middle Ages, Chapter 2. 36 “In oratorio nostro, super capella domni Martine, ubi reliqua sacramenta percurribant, hoc dibirit conjurare” (AD 679). For this and variants of this formula see “capella” in Niermeyer, 130–31. See also Van Dam, Saints and Their Miracles, 27 n. 75; and Bas, Saint Martin, 232. On the transformation of the Latin word cappa into a capella see Bosch, Capa, Basilica, Monasterium, 25–35. 34

13

14

Introduction

some twenty charters confirming and even expanding the unique privileges of Saint-Martin.37 Upon the arrival of the king at Saint-Martin, moreover, he would take an oath underlining not so much his devotion to St. Martin, but rather his commitment to protect and sustain the church dedicated to him in Tours: I, N[ame] the King of France, abbot and canon of this church of Saint-Martin of Tours, by the grace of God, swear and promise to God and to St. Martin to be the protector of this church, to defend it, and to sustain all its needs, preserving its rights, its property, its glory, its privileges, and its immunities, insofar as I am capable, with the help of God, sincerely and in good faith. So help me God and his holy words.38

Almost every Capetian king made a pilgrimage to Saint-Martin; after all, the French king was its official proprietor. The king had the privilege to nominate the acting abbot and the treasurer or to control their election, as well as to collect revenues. In 1297, for example, Philip the Fair sent a letter to the chapter of Saint-Martin asking that his son, the future Philip V, be nominated as treasurer of the church and that a stall be reserved for him in the choir.39 Indeed, the monarchy clung to this important possession even in the face of increasing encroachment on their power by local counts in the tenth century, which led them to abandon many villas and abbeys in favor of their vassals.40 Visiting kings included Louis VIII, who became an honorary canon in 1225; his son, Louis IX, who visited with his mother (Queen Blanche) in 1227; Philip V (“the Long”) in 1317; and Charles IV (“the Fair”) in 1323. Such occasions were also a splendid opportunity for the canons of Saint-Martin to secure and enhance its pecuniary wellbeing, as many of the distinguished visitors who frequented their church left them with substantial amounts of money or property. When Louis IX visited the church in 1255, for example, he founded one chaplaincy (capellania), for which he allocated an annual sum to support a chaplain who would chant “as long as [Louis and his mother] live[d] one mass of the

Galinié, “Genèse du paysage urbain,” 38. The translation from the Latin is adapted from Farmer, Communities of Saint Martin, 206. Sometime in the seventeenth century, an additional oath was composed, this time for princes and barons who held honorary canonries in Saint-Martin. See Luzarche, “Notice sur l’évangéliaire,” 46–47. 39 BnF fr. 11806 (Collection Dom Housseau, Vol. VII), doc. 3408. 40 Boussard, “Enclave royale Saint-Martin de Tours,” 159–60. The author suggests two main reasons for the persistence of the French monarchy in Saint-Martin: religious and financial (176). 37 38

St. Martin and France

Holy Spirit or of the Virgin,” and after their death a mass for the dead for the elevation of their souls.41 The French monarchy continued to venerate St. Martin passionately even when their esteem toward saints such as Medard, Hilary, and Denis, for instance, became more pronounced. It was especially St. Denis who emerged as a potent contender under the reign of Dagobert I (r. 632–39), and above all from the early eleventh century (under the reign of Louis VI [r. 1108– 37]). The abbey of Saint-Denis became a royal necropolis and housed the regalia required for the coronation of the French kings, and its alliance with the Capetians developed into an exceptionally strong one. In 1124, Louis VI commissioned a new banner, Saint-Denis’s flag (the Oriflamme), to be carried as a safeguard in battle, replacing Martin’s cape.42 And yet, the special status of Martin as a patron saint of the French kingdom remained strong; as we shall see, his legacy as a soldier of Christ played a fundamental role in this state of affairs. Testifying to the continued significance of Martin to the French monarchy is the story of the holy ampule, ostensibly containing the potion administered to him when he was wounded, that was used in the consecration of Henry IV (r. 1589–1610). This was a tumultuous time in the history of France, then plagued by decades of religious wars between Protestants and Catholics, in which Henry IV played a major role, culminating in the issuing of the Edict of Nantes in 1598. Reims, the location in which most French kings had traditionally been consecrated, was captured by members of the Catholic League, and as a result, the holy ampule containing the ointment used during the consecration ceremony was inaccessible. When Henry decided to consecrate himself on February 27, 1594, just one year after he embraced Catholicism himself, he chose Chartres Cathedral as the new consecration site. The holy ampule conserved in Marmoutier was chosen as an alternative to the one preserved in Reims.43 Most of the surviving sources related to the propagation of Martin and his cult have come down to us from the period when he was already a “[F]undamus in eadem capellaniam unam in qua capellanus qui fuerit institutus ibidem qualibet die pro nobis quamdiu vixerimus missam unam de Sancto Spiritu vel de Beata Maria Virgine celebrare tenebitur et post decessum nostrum pro anima nostra missam quae pro defunctis fidelibus celebratur.” BnF fr. 11806 (Collection Dom Housseau, Vol. VII), doc. 3054. See also BmT 1295, p. 609. Some kings preferred to establish ties with newer cults of saints in northwest Gaul (in places such as Paris, Soissons, and Chalon-sur-Saône) that had had Frankish or semi-Frankish ancestors and in which their role as promulgators and promoters of saints could be more decisive from the outset. See Van Dam, Saints and Their Miracles, 24–28. 42 Beaune, The Birth of an Ideology, 17, 20, and 53; Ewig, “Le Culte de Saint Martin,” 9–10. 43 On the holy ampule of Marmoutier, see Gasnault, “La Sainte Ampoule de Marmoutier”; and “Le Pèlerinage de Jérome Munzer,” 201. 41

15

16

Introduction

­ ell-established figure. Promoting a saint, however, was an arduous task w that required sustained efforts, and these continued unabated well into the fifteenth century. Gaining ownership of the saint – both corporeally (relics) and ritually (through liturgy)  – was of crucial importance. The first chapter of the book addresses several questions about ownership of this sort, and explains who owned St. Martin – the canons of Saint-Martin of Tours – and how they came to own him. It provides a detailed examination of the most important center of the thaumaturge’s cult, providing an overview of the liturgical history of Saint-Martin, chronicling its evolution from an abbey to a college of canons in the ninth century. Drawing on the information found in the church’s only extant customary, the chapter examines the various functions that distinct individuals and groups within the church assume while performing a variety of rituals, and elucidates the intricate system according to which feasts are celebrated. It further delineates largescale narratives of liturgy and music as they unfold on various occasions – including on St. Martin’s feasts – and examines the performing forces and institutional sustenance that supported and facilitated them. The texts of five liturgical reforms spanning some two centuries (1205–1395) are juxtaposed with the church’s only surviving customary as well as with extant liturgical manuscripts. Saints’ names, figures, and cults were not unlike modern brands. In order to make the most of them, it was necessary not only to “own” them, but also to market them. Some saints – particularly those of the New Testament – had universal appeal. The veneration of most others was limited to a small area, and their liturgies remained confined to a particular locale, wherein alone they were celebrated with great solemnity. St. Martin’s owners managed to have it both ways. In Tours he was the most venerated saint of all, and he enjoyed a very elaborate liturgy, in a calendar dotted with peculiar customs and festivals. At the same time, St. Martin was tremendously popular all over Europe, and a universal liturgy coalesced around him. How did the promoters of the cult of St. Martin accomplish this exceptional feat? What day-to-day efforts went into the making of the cult locally, and what made this particular cult so successful elsewhere? The second chapter maps the forces behind the formation and spread of the universal cult and liturgy, while the third chapter explains how the cult in Tours kept its unique traditions and its special ties with the saint. Together they explain how the universal saint was intertwined with local customs and festivals, with the daily fabric of the city, and with the celebration of the liturgical year. The liturgy consecrated to St. Martin stands at the center of Chapter 2. The main sources of knowledge about his life and deeds include a biography

St. Martin and France

by Sulpicius Severus, penned while the saint was still alive, as well as collections of miracles by Gregory of Tours and other early medieval authors. Their writings provide the bulk of the texts subsequently used in the Martinian celebrations. Aside from the saint’s central feast, celebrated in the universal Church on November 11, four additional feasts (the most recent of which was added to the calendar in 1323) were solemnly observed mainly in Tours, each having a distinct significance not only to the community of canons in Saint-Martin, but also to the civic identity of the city as a whole. By the early fourteenth century, service books from Saint-Martin had brought together a highly impressive and substantial body of newly composed prosas: chants performed during the Divine Office. Notwithstanding the prominent stature of the figure of St. Martin in medieval France, these liturgical songs dedicated to him in Saint-Martin were, for the most part, unknown in other parts of France and Europe. Chapter 3 focuses on these unique prosas, and takes into account the various aspects of their creation that made them desirable in the first place, be they theological, civic, political, or poetic. Significantly, the music of most prosas and of the chants that surround them is modeled on a famous Christmas chant that has rarely been associated with a figure from the Sanctorale, suggesting that Martin was often identified closely with Christ. The success of the cult of St. Martin enabled the church of Saint-Martin of Tours to eclipse its chief local rival – the Cathedral of Tours. Normally standing at the top of the regional ecclesiastical hierarchy, the Cathedral found itself overshadowed by Saint-Martin almost from the founding of the shrine in the fifth century. The archbishop was often humiliated and sidelined by the canons of Saint-Martin, and during the thirteenth century, Martin’s devotees went so far as to claim that the relics of the patron saint of the Cathedral – St. Maurice – were brought to Tours by none other than their Martin. The Cathedral reacted ingeniously, by abandoning its longstanding saint and fabricating a completely new cult, dedicated to St. Gatien, the first bishop of Tours. Chapter 4 explains how the Cathedral sought to compete with the aura of St. Martin. It explains how the Cathedral canons went about fabricating a new cult and how the canons of Saint-Martin of Tours reacted to this new saint in town. The rivalry unfolded in song and ritual across several decades. In the event, the community at the church of Saint-Martin used the universal appeal of the Martinian cult to strengthen their local power. By the fourteenth century, Martin’s prominence was undisputed, in Tours and elsewhere. He became such a popular saint that the canons of

17

18

Introduction

Saint-Martin of Tours could not possibly control every aspect and manifestation of his veneration. More and more clients adopted the saint as their own, and began giving him new attributes and devising new liturgical practices and rituals. Chapter 5 explores how a saint who gave up half his cape and was extolled as a pacifist was given a suit of armor by some of his new devotees, and became a soldierly figure, even a model knight. Owing to the emphasis on St. Martin’s military qualities in the later Middle Ages, and at a time when western Europe in general and France in particular sought the help of heroes, his cult eclipsed that of other saints. He came to exemplify the harmonious union of two medieval ideals that were hitherto considered as conflicting: monasticism and chivalry. A novel image of Martin as committed soldier of Christ (miles Christi) was propagated and developed during the crusading years, thereby creating a noble predecessor, indeed precedent, for would-be military champions. The chapter addresses the role art and music played in conjuring up and disseminating this new image, and the ways Martin’s newfangled image inspired new works of art.

Sources The book analyzes the rise of Martin’s cult by focusing on music privileged owing to two main reasons. These chants emanate mostly from Tours, where the aura of the saint was constantly negotiated and effectively exploited for various ends.44 Furthermore, chants were favored because the various aspects of their composition  – from their music and text to the circumstances surrounding their composition  – also shed light on larger issues pertaining to medieval music in general, to saintly cults in the Middle Ages, and frequently to both. Primary sources include a variety of manuscripts and early prints, service books for the Mass and office, lectionaries, hagiographies, chronicles, illuminations, wills, and church registers. Many of these are housed today in the municipal library of Tours (Bibliothèque municipale de Tours, hereafter Remarkably, most studies of Martinian liturgy have rarely taken the rich fount of sources from Tours into consideration. The repertory of mass chants dedicated to St. Martin is perhaps the best studied, notably in Planchart, “The Geography of Martinmas”; Fickett, “Chants for the Feast of St. Martin of Tours”; Historia Sancti Martini; Oury, “Les Messes de Saint Martin”; and Oury, “Formulaires anciens.” In her study and edition, Fickett used a single source from Marmoutier, just outside Tours, but none from Saint-Martin of Tours (see Historia Sancti Martini, viii n. 12).

44

Sources

BmT). Notwithstanding the vicissitudes of time, successive wars, destruction by fire, and the occasional theft, this repository comprises vast collections of liturgical manuscripts and printed sources that are rich in quality and quantity and span almost an entire millennium. Among its holdings are sermons by the Church Fathers, various summae, moral treatises, the Greek and Roman classics, hagiographies – in sum, the fundamental pillars of what one would have hoped to find in a good medieval library housed in a monastery or secular chapter. The BmT was founded, with revolutionary fervor and intent, in 1791. It brought together all the manuscripts that had previously resided in the three principal religious establishments of Tours (the Cathedral, SaintMartin, and Marmoutier) as well as those from lesser institutions. The first librarian of this newly founded institution, then housed in the third floor of the archbishop’s palace, was J. J. Abrassart, a monk from Marmoutier. Several years later, in 1796, the library was moved to the old Préfecture, a period in which the sources apparently suffered not only from very moist conditions, but also from the frequent sale of manuscripts to the highest bidder. A new era in the preservation of these manuscripts was heralded in 1840, when two different attempts were made to catalogue them. The first was commissioned by the French Ministère de l’Instruction Publique, and was undertaken by the famous French philosopher and archaeologist Jean Gaspard Félix Ravaisson-Mollien, and the other was brought to fruition by Chauveau, the librarian of the BmT from 1828 to 1845. Both catalogues, however, suffered from considerable imprecision, a situation aggravated by the numerous thefts that the library witnessed between 1840 and 1847, and the catalogues soon became obsolete.45 This state of affairs changed when August Dorange was nominated to be conservator of the library in 1859. Between 1859 and 1873 he classified all the manuscripts he had at his disposal, and in 1875 he also published his own Catalogue, the library’s first comprehensive and relatively reliable register of primary sources.46 His work was further completed and made more accurate by Gaston J. S. Collon, who was named conservateur of the library in 1895. Collon added some 300 new entries and published an updated catalogue.47 These newly added sources were mainly the result Ravaisson-Mollien, Rapport sur les bibliothèques, 11–16. Nowhere was I able to locate the catalogue that was apparently published by Chauveau, nor was I able to ascertain his first name. On these, see Delisle, Notice, 2. 46 Dorange, Catalogue descriptif. 47 Collon, Catalogue général. There exists an online catalogue for manuscripts housed in public libraries in France: Catalogue collectif de France, http://ccfr.bnf.fr/portailccfr/jsp/index.jsp. 45

19

20

Introduction

of bequests made to the library during the second half of the nineteenth century by three eminent historians who were particularly involved in the study of Tours and its history: André Salmon, Lambron de Lignim, and J. J. Bourassé.48 Because of the significant losses the library suffered between 1815 and 1850, Léopold Delisle published an important study in 1883 in which he discussed the manuscripts missing during the first half of the nineteenth century.49 His book is an invaluable source not only for identifying the now lost sources, but also for its detailed survey of the history of the BmT. In his Notice, he established the extent of depletion of the various religious houses in Tours: 153 manuscripts are missing from the Cathedral, 142 from Saint-Martin, and 91 from Marmoutier.50 Unfortunately, although hundreds of manuscripts were copied during Alcuin’s abbacy at Saint-Martin, for instance, no medieval catalogue of manuscripts from Tours had survived. The earliest ex libris we have dates from the twelfth century.51 On June 19, 1940, during World War II, the library of Tours suffered considerable damage and lost 1,215 out of its 1,999 manuscripts. In 1962, André Masson performed outstanding service for scholars wishing to examine the remaining sources when he listed all the manuscripts that had either disappeared or that were destroyed during the war.52 Notwithstanding the fragmentary nature of the archives, we are blessed with rich sources for St. Martin and his cult that I hope to present in a new light in this book. 50 51 52 48 49

Straeten, Les Manuscrits hagiographiques, 84. Delisle, Notice. Ibid. Rand, A Survey of the Manuscripts of Tours, Vol. I, 4. Masson, Manuscrits des bibliothèques sinistrées.

1

The focal point of the cult: St. Martin’s church in Tours

The year 800 is a revered point of reference in the history of western Europe: on Christmas Day of that year, Pope Leo III (r. 795–816) famously adorned the head of Charlemagne with an imperial crown, proclaiming the king of the Franks to be “the most serene Augustus, crowned by God,” a designation the emperor would later use to refer to himself. Charlemagne’s vision of an empire at whose heart lay a fusion of Roman and Christian traditions was matched by a multilayered rhetoric of reform that stressed uniformity and compliance with Roman practices in every aspect of ecclesiastical and secular life.1 Just months before his journey to Rome, Charlemagne paid a visit to the church of Saint-Martin in Tours, already one of the most popular pilgrimage sites in Gaul. With the tomb of St. Martin at its core, it was an obligatory stopover for any Christian pilgrim in Gaul, a site that the 813 council of Châlons recognized as a destination as important as Rome. Accompanied by his wife and three sons, Charlemagne arrived in Tours late in May of 800 in order to pray for the intercession of Martin, “our private protector” (“peculiaris patroni nostri”), as Merovingian and Carolingian kings habitually identified him. His stay there was unexpectedly prolonged owing to the illness of his wife Luitgarde; when she died on June 4, she was buried in Saint-Martin, an event that chronicles from the period commemorated and publicized in all corners of the empire. In the course of the following year, the news coming from Saint-Martin would prove to be a source of anxiety. The abbey was embroiled in a scandal of such magnitude that its echoes reverberated as far as the imperial palace in Aix-la-Chapelle, testifying to Saint-Martin’s importance in both ecclesiastical and political spheres. A fugitive found guilty and convicted by Theodulf, bishop of Orléans, had fled to Saint-Martin hoping to exercise the right of sanctuary and thus escape due justice. Furious, Theodulf sent soldiers to Tours in order to capture the criminal, but they returned empty-handed after rumors spread that they were about to be ambushed. Far from admitting defeat, the bishop strengthened his position by making Hen, “The Romanisation of the Frankish Liturgy.”

1

21

22

St. Martin’s church in Tours

an alliance with the bishop of Tours, and this time his soldiers marched on Saint-Martin with greater confidence. Like biblical horns calling for arms, the tolling of the bells of Saint-Martin alerted the populace to the intrusion and the impending desecration of “the rights of St. Martin.”2 Soon thereafter, the poor of the city reportedly came to assist the monks of Saint-Martin and Alcuin – their abbot since 796 – in repelling the soldiers. As the fugitive was purportedly hiding in the vicinity of Martin’s tomb, located behind the choir, the tomb became a site of considerable disorder as both sides struggled to gain the upper hand. The monks were accustomed to commotion around St. Martin’s tomb; after all, this was a space to which pilgrims flocked from all over Europe in great numbers, the focal point of a lengthy journey, in which relics were venerated and prayers and miracle stories incessantly recited. Moreover, it was also a place where a perpetual chanting of psalms – laus perennis – could be heard at any given moment, and, most importantly, the burial site of the most revered saint in medieval France.3 But the uproar caused by the hostile factions did not merely replace one kind of disorder with another. Rather, it threatened to destabilize the Carolingian empire as a whole. The mayhem around one of the holiest Christian shrines in medieval Europe, involving key political figures (Alcuin and the bishops), did not bring about the intervention of the pope; it was Charlemagne who brought his might, prestige, and authority to the issue at hand. The matter appears to have been twofold, as we learn from an exchange of letters between the emperor and Alcuin, who was sent to Tours effectively to be a custos sepulchri. Charlemagne took issue with Alcuin’s blatant disregard of the order of law with regard to the fugitive. What is more, he recognized that the havoc wrought around the tomb of France’s patron saint would have far-reaching consequences. The new emperor’s intercession testifies to the centrality of Martin as an intercessory force extending beyond the ecclesiastical sphere. Clearly, as Rob Meens concludes, Charlemagne thought that the disorder in Saint-Martin of Tours was jeopardizing nothing less than “the unity and order of the church and therefore of the entire Carolingian state.”4

“Sonuit siquidem ante civitatem venisse hostem Aurelianensem ad profananda sancti Martini suffragia.” This letter, written by Alcuin, is found as Letter 245 in Epistolae, 398–99. Quoted in Meens, “Sanctuary, Penance, and Dispute Settlement,” 284. The following paragraphs are much indebted to the discussion ibid., and to Noizet, “Alcuin contre Théodulphe.” 3 Contrary to the well-documented practice of laus perennis in the monastery of Saint-Maurice in Agaune, for instance, the information regarding the laus perennis in Saint-Martin is more ambiguous. See Chapter 3 n. 60. 4 Meens, “Sanctuary, Penance, and Dispute Settlement,” 289. 2

St. Martin’s church in Tours

Charlemagne’s judgment was not merely his own. Both before and after the turning point of his reign, the vicissitudes of St. Martin and his cult would be read as an index of the health and stability of the realm. Just as medieval calendars marked the death of a saint as his or her rebirth in heaven, so the death of St. Martin had given birth not only to the church erected over his tomb, but also to one of the most sizeable and flourishing cults that medieval Europe knew. The history of this cult centered at SaintMartin in Tours – its legends, liturgy, and music – offers a compelling story in its own right, one that is the subject of this book. Remarkably, the history of the church of Saint-Martin had been rife with resistance, insubordination, and instability from its early days, making its eventual power as a tool for propagating Martin’s liturgy all the more extraordinary and intriguing. The aforementioned letter addressed to Alcuin and penned by Charlemagne or his scribe unequivocally concluded that Saint-Martin was in need of urgent reform. The emperor professed to have serious reservations on the morality of the monks, and reminded them that their customs and way of life had already been criticized by many. He might have had in mind, for instance, Abbot Teusind – concurrently holding the abbacies of Saint-Martin and of Fontanelle until 774 – who wrote a furious letter to the monks of Saint-Martin, threatening to dispatch the provost of Fontanelle to “show them the right way” if they did not correct their morals and reform their lives.5 For his part, Charlemagne complained in 801 that the men living in the monastery “call themselves sometimes monks, other times canons, and sometimes neither.” Accusing the monks of stirring up discord among the doctors of the Church, he ordered the “canons or monks, whatever you call yourselves” to plead their case in front of his representative.6 By ordering Saint-Martin to stop vacillating between the canonical and monastic orders, Charlemagne effectively confirmed the Rule of St. Benedict as the best way to lead a true monastic life. In this matter he demonstrated his zeal to adopt what he and his advisers considered to be “Roman” norms throughout his kingdom.7 His initiative, however, met the fierce resistance of the monks of Saint-Martin, who resented the imposition Gesta abbatum Fontanellensium, 10, quoted in Chélini, “Alcuin, Charlemagne, et Saint-Martin de Tours,” 27. 6 “Aliquando enim monachos, aliquando canonicos, aliquando neutrum vos esse dicebatis … Vos autem, qui contemplores nostrae iussionis extitis, sive canonici sive monachi vocamini, ad placitum nostrum, iuxta quod praesens missus noster vobis indixerit, nobis vos adsistere scitote.” See Textes de Charlemagne, 393–94. See also Meens, “Sanctuary, Penance, and Dispute Settlement,” 289. 7 See Wollasch, “Benedictus abbas Romensis,” 129–30, quoted in Noizet, La Fabrique de la ville, 33. 5

23

24

St. Martin’s church in Tours

of a rule that they deemed less adequate than their own. They claimed that St. Martin, after all, lived as a monk well before St. Benedict, and that they should be entitled, therefore, to preserve their own ancient customs. There was certainly more than a grain of truth to their claim, for Martin’s priority in the monastic life was universally acknowledged; the example he set in his ascetic existence and the monasteries he established had all profoundly impinged on the understanding of monasticism in the Middle Ages. Yet, the near-ubiquitous embrace of Benedict’s Rule in Europe after the reforms of Louis the Pious was as palpable as the recognition of Martin’s erstwhile role as patron of monastic establishments from late antique Gaul on. Nowhere has this tension been more succinctly articulated than in the Vita Odonis, written by John of Salerno, disciple of Odo of Cluny. While still serving as canon at Saint-Martin of Tours in the early tenth century, and well before he became the influential abbot of Cluny, Odo reportedly “took care to obey the precepts of the one saint [Benedict],” while at the same time desiring “to imitate the life of the other [Martin].”8 The decrees of the council of Aix-la-Chapelle, issued in 817, put an end to Saint-Martin’s vacillation between monastery and secular church, but, as we shall see, they did little to affect the canons’ continued lax discipline. A new Rule was introduced for secular churches, the one devised by Chrodegang, bishop of Metz (c. 712–66), who belonged to the first generation of Carolingian liturgists. His vision for secular churches resembled the one St. Benedict envisioned for monasteries, having at its center a strict sense of communal life, with the bishop playing a similar role to that of the abbot in monasteries.9 But even after the year 829, when Saint-Martin became a collegiate church under Abbot Fredegisius (Alcuin’s successor, r. 806–34), and its monks secular canons, the latter’s lifestyle continued to be controversial. Records from 845 show, for instance, that canons held personal property and lived in private residences.10 Furthermore, because the canons had more ceremonial duties than sacramental ones, and since many of them in fact earned a living by renting houses and accommodating pilgrims, their way of life increasingly resembled that led by the prominent lay bourgeoisie living around them, further weakening their sense of a religious community.11 Vita Odonis, PL 133:50. Quoted and translated in Rosenwein, “St Odo’s St. Martin,” 321. On Chrodegang’s Regula see Claussen, The Reforms of the Frankish Church, 58–113. 10 Farmer, Communities of Saint Martin, 191. On the Carolingian reforms as they affected monastic institutions see Goudesenne, Offices historiques, 24. 11 The canons of Saint-Martin were not even physically separated from the lay inhabitants of Châteauneuf by a wall – contrary to the stipulations of canonical rule – with only the basilica 8 9

St. Martin’s church in Tours

We may catch a glimpse into the canons’ own perception of their status and role vis-à-vis St. Martin, their chief raison d’être, through a letter written by two canons of Saint-Martin – the dean Philip and the treasurer Rainaldus – to Philippe of Heinsberg (archbishop of Cologne, r. 1167–91), in which they recount the history of the cult St. Martin in Tours.12 Citing Tours as a city in which the spiritual aura of Martin gave rise not to one but to two churches (theirs, and Marmoutier), they succinctly elucidate the differences between the two establishments. The “division of labor” encapsulated in this brief representation had nothing to do with theological issues, with the espousal of different visions of Martin, or with the fact that one was a religious house and the other a secular one. Tellingly, the canons state that Marmoutier is “incomparable in its religion and alms to the poor,” while Saint-Martin is unrivaled “in the privilege of signs and the glory of riches.”13 About a year later, Guibertus of Gembloux, who spent eight months in Marmoutier in 1180–81, corroborated the canons’ own perception in a letter that he wrote to the archbishop of Cologne.14 Describing the chapter of Saint-Martin, he was particularly struck by the church’s impressive possessions, which consisted of shining precious stones and silver, keys made of gold, collections of censers, urns, chalices, crosses, and much more.15 He claimed, however, that the canons neglected their duty to write down the miracles of St. Martin, indulging, instead, in hunting and in playing games of chance.16 While Guibertus’s critique was particularly sarcastic (perhaps because he was acquainted with the canons personally), his was not a solitary voice. The content of two papal letters, written in the last quarter of the twelfth century, gives us a glimpse of the criticism that by the following

12 13



16 14 15

standing as an ineffective barrier between these two communities (see Noizet, La Fabrique de la ville, 107–10). Guibert of Gembloux, Epistolae, 71–82 (Epistola V). “In nulla urbe Christiani orbis quilibet sanctorum unus tam divites et nobiles duas simul habeat ecclesias, quarum altera est Majus Monasterium, florigera monachorum fouens collegia, altera ista nostra … illa religione et pauperum eleemosinis, hec signorum privilegio et divitiarum gloria … incomparabilis”; ibid., 77. Translated in Farmer, Communities of Saint Martin, 197. See Rabory, Histoire de Marmoutier, 239–40. Guibert of Gembloux, Epistolae, 135 (Epistola IX). “[N]on inveniuntur miracula, negligentie canonicorum imputandum est; qui potius et in aleis et in avibus celi ludere et cum canibus lepores et capreas cervosque camporum insequi, quam his scribendis operam student impendere”; ibid., 140. See also Farmer, Communities of Saint Martin, 200 n. 13. He greatly esteemed the monks of Marmoutier, however, whom he believed led an exemplary disciplined life: “Quid in gente nostra Maiori Monasterio, etsi forte divitiis cumulatius, religione tamen splendidus, mundius puritate, adversus vitia cautius, contra insidias demonum minitius …?” See ibid., 200 (Epistola XIII).

25

26

St. Martin’s church in Tours

century would become ubiquitous in Saint-Martin. Both letters demonstrate that the execution of the liturgy also suffered from the carelessness of the canons. In a bull written between 1162 and 1174 and addressed to the chapter of Saint-Martin, Pope Alexander III (r. 1159–81) ordered the canons to re-establish the procession on the feast of the Purification of the Virgin, a procession that they apparently had annulled without seeking permission from the Holy See.17 But attention to specific rituals was not the only thing to suffer at the hands of the canons; even the most rudimentary expectation from a canon, attending the services, had been forsaken. Testifying to the deep-rooted laxness, Pope Celestine III (r. 1191–98) instructed the canons to be present in person for the Divine Office, and forbade them to leave the choir, or to be absent altogether, without the permission of the chapter. Should they do so without due justification, six denarii were to be deducted from their daily distribution.18 These and similar reprimands notwithstanding, the beginning of the thirteenth century marked the inauguration of yet further reforms – five in all – whose intensity and scope progressively increased until a final and comprehensive reform took place in 1395. Four of these reforms, all issued by the highest ecclesiastical authority, the pope, were launched in the course of a single century (in 1204, 1208, 1237, and 1262), and one in the following century.19 The canons are ordered to restore the candle procession during Purification, thereafter observed in perpetuity, as the pope orders:

17

Verum quoniam, quanto ecclesia vestra magis celebris et famosa existit, tanto studiosius ad ejus debetis ornatum intendere et decorum; vobis praesentium significatione injungimus, ut processio Purificationis B. Mariae candelis redditis sicut solent, deinceps perpetuo celebratur; nisi de mandato Romani pontificis vel legati ad ejus latere destinati aut pro communi assensu et voluntate capituli, pro gravi excessu, Ecclesia ipsa cessaret. (BmT 1295, p. 595). The bull was issued on August 30, 1195: “Praesentium statuimus authoritate, ut quotiens divina celebrantur officia, si canonicorum aliquis, nisi forte rationabili causa, et a capitulo accepta licentia se duxerit absentandum, sex denarii quos unusquisque canonicus de communi percipere diebus singulis consuevit, et debet omni contraditione et appelatione cessante poenitus denegentur.” See Abrégé de la deffense, 27–28. See also the discussion in Noizet, La Fabrique de la ville, 313–14. 19 The reforms were concluded on January 17, 1205; January 27, 1209; August 26, 1237; February 8, 1263; and February 27, 1396, respectively. See Gasnault, “Etude sur les chartes,” 67. I thank Professor Gasnault for granting me permission to consult his unpublished dissertation. Hélène Noizet has also examined the first four reforms in Saint-Martin, often drawing on the same primary sources cited below (see Noizet, La Fabrique de la ville, 313–31). The integral text of the five reforms is contained in three extant copies. Two copies are found in the BnF: (1) Coll. Baluze, Vol. LXXXIV, fos. 6–34 (copied in 1668), and (2) lat. 4203A, an anonymous copy from the sixteenth century. A third copy exists in BmT 1295, pp. 547–77. Select statutes are also copied in BnF lat. 16806, fos. 74–75. For the purpose of this study, I consulted Vol. LXXXIV of Baluze, which was more readily available to me, and is generally considered to be more reliable. 18

The customary and its importance to the community of St. Martin

The customary and its importance to the community of St. Martin Before turning our attention to the impact of the reforms on the community of canons and on the performance of its daily duties, let us first consider some of the characteristics of the Church’s liturgy, its idiosyncrasies, and the development of its calendar, especially as these features shed light on the rituals for St. Martin. Information concerning these subjects may be gleaned from service books extant from medieval Saint-Martin and from the church’s only extant customary. The latter is a richly detailed source overflowing with information on three main themes: (1) the development of feasts, (2) business of the chapter and duties of specific clergymen, and (3) the intricate web of personal and institutional associations the church of Saint-Martin established in Europe and beyond.20 As we shall see, the customary represents not only a layered series of traditions accumulated around the liturgy dedicated to St. Martin, but also a systematic claim to the cult of the saint in general, and to his local cult in Tours in particular. The customary must have been copied in the second quarter of the thirteenth century. The most recent event recorded in it is the renewal of a confraternity between two churches dedicated to St. Martin, the one in Tours and the one in Mainz, Germany, which took place in 1226. It leaves out, however, statutes from the reform of 1237, suggesting that it was composed before that year.21 Notwithstanding the clarity and painstaking detail in which the customary spells out various ceremonies and functions, the statutes contained in the proceedings of the five reforms (1204–1395) address virtually every aspect contained therein. As we shall see, the statutes effectively focus on several interrelated matters: (1) discipline and administration, (2) accommodating the new performing force instituted in 1222, and (3) the liturgy.22 Although there exists a fundamental conceptual difference between the customary (a record and codification of a lengthy tradition written by insiders) and the reforms (modifications of, and adjustments to, that tradition, imposed by outsiders), both documents were understood as complementary and binding. Not only does the 132-folio customary The title of the customary is “Haec sunt consuetudines ecclesie beati Martini Turonensis.” The original manuscript containing this text, BmT 1508, was destroyed during World War II. Fortunately, a copy of the customary is available in BmT 1295, pp. 451–521, as well as in a modern edition, used as a reference throughout this book: Consuetudines Ecclesiae Beati Martini Turonensis. See also Martimort, La Documentation liturgique, 225–26. 21 See Vaucelle, La Collégiale, xxviii n. 1. 22 These statutes address additional categories of subjects as well. What follows, however, is based on select statutes relevant to the present study. 20

27

28

St. Martin’s church in Tours

incorporate the two reforms enacted up to the time of its composition, but subsequent reforms were also appended to it, indicating that the reforms were considered an effective expansion of the customary, and not a break with it.23 It was adorned with a red leather binding and was chained in the treasury of the church, a clear indication of its repeated use, and testifying to its centrality as both a witness to tradition and a means to its perpetuation. Indeed, we may regard the adoption of the reforms as an agreement to purify liturgical practices for the sake of retaining the power of St. Martin.24 Lacking any indication of its author’s identity, the customary is attributed to Péan Gâtineau (Paganus Gatinelli) by a tradition that goes back to at least the middle of the fifteenth century. A canon of Saint-Martin, he founded his anniversary in 1227, shortly before his death at the end of that same year. There were undoubtedly several men named Péan Gâtineau in medieval Tours who also had some relationship with Saint-Martin, making a precise identification of the author of the customary difficult. In 1180, for instance, a person bearing that name and living in Châteauneuf was excommunicated by the bishop of Chartres, John of Salisbury, and in 1218, a certain Péan Gâtineau was named arbitrator in a litigation that involved the chapter of Saint-Martin. Perhaps the most famous Péan Gâtineau is the author of a vernacular life of St. Martin in verse, La Vie monseignor Saint Martin de Tors, who must also have been a canon in Saint-Martin, for his prose suggests an intimate familiarity with the chapter; it is certainly possible that one and the same person penned both the Vie and the customary.25 As Gâtineau writes toward the end of the prologue of the Vie, his aim is to relate the miracles St. Martin performed before and after his death. He does so in vivid prose and, as we shall see in the concluding chapter, he adjusts Martin’s biography in ways that underline the socio-political priorities of his own time. The canons were undoubtedly dissatisfied with some of the statutes imposed on them. On at least one occasion, they sought to repeal the decrees of the first two reforms, but in vain. See Vaucelle, La Collégiale, 232. 24 Saint-Martin was in possession of additional copies of the customary well into the eighteenth century, when Albert Lerond, a canon of Saint-Martin of Liège, was visiting Tours on pilgrimage in 1738; his account of how specific feasts unfolded matches descriptions contained in the customary. See Gasnault and George, “Journal de la réception,” 636–37. 25 Based on an examination of the Vie’s language and paleography, it has been concluded that the author of the Vie continued to work well after 1227, until c. 1250, casting doubt on the hypothesis that both the Vie and the customary were written by the same person (Farmer, Communities of Saint Martin, 315–17). Information about Gâtineau is taken from Farmer, and from Gasnault, “Etude sur les chartes,” 65–70. The standard edition of Gâtineau’s Vie is Die altfranzösische Martinsleben. For a study of Gâtineau’s linguistic innovations see Hunt, “A Forgotten Author.” 23

The customary and its importance to the community of St. Martin

The canons of Saint-Martin, custodians of their patron saint’s relics, were used to seeing numerous pilgrims around Martin’s tomb. They were also accustomed to regard Martin’s relics as a source of revenue: they collected donations made by pilgrims, and were entitled to a percentage of the profits that came to the merchants of Châteauneuf by attending to the needs of pilgrims. The canons, moreover, had a quasi-monopoly on certain services such as the selling of wine and the collection of bridge and gate tolls.26 As we shall see, they were keen on demonstrating and defining their precedence within the local community around Martin’s church, and vis-à-vis outsiders who might have a claim on the saint. There were approximately 150 beneficed canons in Saint-Martin around the year 1220. Similar to other clerics, their principal duty was twofold: residency and celebrating the daily round of office and Mass. Canons were distinguished by the type of prebend they had, which entailed a host of duties and privileges, and were further divided into two groups referred to as canonici de stallo and canonici de terra. The exact nature of these terms has never been fully elucidated, but in all probability, de stallo referred to canons who possessed a personal prebend and who had an assigned elevated choir-stall,27 while canons de terra had a half-prebend and occupied the lower row of the choir as well as the floor.28 An equally important classification of canons in Saint-Martin, and one more commonly used by Gâtineau, was with respect to stations; four in number, they had to do with the canons’ performance of the daily office in the choir. According to their position, rank, and the time that had elapsed since their promotion, canons occupied four different stationes in the choir, corresponding to the three rows of stalls as well as to the floor of the choir.29 In similar fashion, choirboys, or clericuli, were also assigned to two stations of their own, and the customary devotes, in fact, considerable space to them. The customary does not stipulate the duties of canons belonging to the third and fourth stations (corresponding to the middle and highest row of stalls, respectively), but it is clear that they are of a senior rank; acolytes and subdeacons, the lowestranking canons (second station), occupied the lowest row of stalls, while

Farmer, Communities of Saint Martin, 264. The customary gives no further information about these appellations. The customary of Bayeux (late thirteenth century), moreover, refers to “canonicis de stallo superiori,” which may have been a category similar to that of “first station” in Saint-Martin (see page 30). See Ordinaire et coutumier, 2. 28 According to canon law, a cleric less than eighteen years of age could not occupy a stall in the choir. Corpus Juris Canonici, Clementinarium, lib. I, tit. VI, cap. III. 29 Dissertation historique sur les rits, 9. 26 27

29

30

St. Martin’s church in Tours

simple clerics and those not belonging to the Minor Orders (first station) sat at the floor level, in plano chori.30 As we have seen, the customary incorporates the first two reforms in Saint-Martin (in 1204 and 1208, respectively), established during the pontificate of Innocent III (r. 1198–1216).31 The disciplinary tone of certain statutes resonates with the themes of past reproaches, notably those made by Guibertus of Gembloux, and seems to confirm the notoriety of the canons. Apparently, canons would occasionally wander around in the church or cloister while the hours were celebrated in the choir, disturb the unfolding celebrations, and, what is more, even invite women inside the cloister and entertain concubines in their houses.32 The canons were also asked to refrain from wearing “red or green vestments, sewn sleeves, silk shoes or brooches,” and were reminded to approach and leave the site of Martin’s tomb without any head cover.33 In 1208, the threat of excommunication was extended to canons who wore sleeve mantles.34 Although the canons’ misconduct continued to inspire an inexhaustible reservoir of condemnations, as found in all five reforms and even prior to their inauguration, it was the issue of residency that originally instigated Innocent III’s reforms in Saint-Martin. The papacy understandably viewed residency and the execution of the Divine Office as complementary duties, together constituting the principal responsibility of canons everywhere. The question of residency was of vital importance to secular churches because it alone ensured, at least See Consuetudines Ecclesiae Beati Martini Turonensis, 119–21, and the discussion in Magro, “Jean de Ockeghem,” 22–23. The third station was apparently located on the left side of the choir, while the fourth was on the right side: “in sinistro choro, in tertia statione,” and “in dextro choro, clericis installatis et quarte stationis” (Consuetudines Ecclesiae Beati Martini Turonensis, 11–12). According to the anonymous writer of the 1713 Dissertation historique sur les rits, the middle and upper stalls were occupied by deacons and priests (9). 31 The 1204 commission was headed by Hamelin, bishop of Mans, and Adam, abbot of Persaigne. The second reform, conducted by the cardinal of Notre Dame in Porticu (a papal legate), essentially confirmed the articles of the 1204 reform, elucidating several of its provisions. See Coll. Baluze, Vol. LXXXIV, fo. 8r–v. Certain statutes of first and second reforms, including some of those mentioned below, are expounded in Farmer, Communities of Saint Martin, 200 n. 13, and 202. If I briefly mention them below it is in order to provide a full view of the five reforms altogether, and to place the statutes not discussed elsewhere in context. 32 Coll. Baluze, Vol. LXXXIV, fo. 6r–v. 33 Consuetudines Ecclesiae Beati Martini Turonensis, 123. 34 Coll. Baluze, Vol. LXXXIV, fos. 7r, 8v. Translations of both statutes are taken from Farmer, Communities of Saint Martin, 200 n. 13. Such disciplinary misconduct did not plague SaintMartin alone; similar behavior and reproaches are also known from thirteenth-century Laon, for example, where the canons are asked not to talk with their neighbors while in the choir, to arrive at the hours on time, and to refrain from wandering around in the church. See Millet, Les Chanoines, 266. 30

The customary and its importance to the community of St. Martin

theoretically, the daily execution of office and Mass. According to Innocent’s 1204 bull, the priors, sacristans, and provosts did not fulfill their residency requirements; they reportedly rarely set foot in the church, and for the most part neglected the office by their frequent absence and disrespectful behavior.35 Following the 1204 and 1208 reforms, two possible types of residency were specified for canons who had a prebend in Saint-Martin, stated with a clarity wanting elsewhere in the original layer of the customary: simple canons (canonici simplices) had to be in residence for a total of seven, but not necessarily consecutive, lunar months per year, while the provosts and the priors were required to be in residence for six consecutive months.36 For the latter group, exceptions were made only if a canon had to leave for studies, pilgrimage, or any other duty authorized by the chapter. Leaving nothing to chance, the 1204 reform introduced pecuniary penalties for unauthorized absenteeism, a measure that in the course of the next two centuries would evolve into an intricate system of regulations, fines, and even the occasional threat of excommunication. The first reform, for example, imposed on the duty priest, whose office is a prerequisite for the proper execution of the daily liturgy, the highest fine: two solidi Turonenses for every day of the week in which he was absent. By 1262, the reformers augmented and refined the fines imposed on the duty priest, indicating that even pecuniary reprimands had their shortcomings: five solidi if he were absent from Mass, and two if he missed Matins.37 As if to justify their ill repute, the canons launched a reform of their own in 1222, in which they moved to increase their pay. This they achieved by invoking, nonetheless, the sanctity of St. Martin. As mentioned above, until the 1220s, the chapter of Saint-Martin consisted of some 150 canons, by far one of the biggest collegiate chapters in France.38 Other cathedral chapters pale in comparison: that of Laon, for instance, considered one of the most populated chapters in medieval France, had “only” 83 canons between 1270 and 1388; the chapter of Reims Cathedral consisted of 74 canons in 1313; and the celebrated chapter of Notre-Dame of Paris, perhaps the most Coll. Baluze, Vol. LXXXIV, fo. 6r. Similarly, canons at Reims Cathedral had to be in residence for a total of twenty-eight weeks in each year. See Robertson, Guillaume de Machaut and Reims, 33. Fulfilling the different residency requirements was a prerequisite for receiving a prebend. See Coll. Baluze, Vol. LXXXIV, fos. 6v, 8r. 37 Coll. Baluze, Vol. LXXXIV, fo. 13v. 38 In fact, the number of canons may have been even larger (perhaps as high as 200) in the ninth century. This is gleaned from a chart of Charles the Bold dating from April 16, 849. See Recueil des actes de Charles le Chauve, Vol. I, no. 113, p. 302. Quoted in Noizet, “Le Centre canonical,” 9 n. 2. 35 36

31

32

St. Martin’s church in Tours

prestigious cathedral chapter in France, had 51 canons.39 The presence of such a large number of canons in a single establishment – a number that was continuously on the rise, moreover – ultimately proved to be financially unsustainable, for revenues had to be divided among an increasingly greater number of canons, leaving a dwindling per-capita income. Indeed, by the end of the twelfth century the number of canons wishing to join Saint-Martin was so great that in a bull issued by Pope Lucius III in 1183, he limited the number of canons that could be admitted to the church.40 Furthermore, in the early thirteenth century there were signs that pecuniary issues threatened to unsettle the fragile sense of community among the canons; the statutes of the 1204 reform stipulate that all revenues had to be distributed impartially, suggesting that some canons received more than others. Yet, instead of heeding the reform-minded papal legates, the canons chose to reduce the number of canons with prebends from 150 to 70 (50 canons with full prebends, and 20 with double prebends), thereby distributing the same amount of money to a smaller number of canons. At the same time, they installed 56 new vicars, substitute singers, who were paid lesser amounts. They did this, so they claimed, in order to improve the quality of the divine cult, and in order to service better their patron, St. Martin.41

Augmenting Martin’s cult (and revenues) through vicars Just forty years earlier, however, the dean and treasurer of the chapter explained their reluctance to employ vicars out of their deference to St. Martin. “And testimony of our affection toward [St. Martin] – both our own and that of all the populace,” they wrote in 1180–81, “lies in the fact that, unlike what is done in other churches, we do not appoint vicars – and Millet, Les Chanoines, 34; Robertson, Guillaume de Machaut and Reims, 33; and Wright, Music and Ceremony, 19. 40 See Noizet, “Pratiques spatiales,” 462. 41 The letter in which the canons declare this was penned on December 13, 1222: 39

In super ad Dei et Beati Martini servitium melius per agendum placuit nobis et illis quorum consilio super hoc usi sumus, ad imitationem aliarum ecclesiarum in nostra Ecclesia vicarios instituere perpetuos, quorum [undecipherable] et dispositio tali fiat quid quinquaginta sex perpetuos vicarios habemus … Sint in Ecclesia nostra quinquaginta praebendae personalis tantummodo, et aliae viginti praebendae quae duplicia vocantur. (Coll. Baluze, Vol. LXXVII, fo. 218) For the date see also Chronicon Turonense Magnum, 154. For a good overview of the duties and recruitment of vicars in general, see Dumont, “Choirboys and Vicaires.”

Augmenting Martin’s cult through vicars

indeed up until now no vicar was allowed to enter the choir.”42 Explaining their 1222 resolution, the canons did not veil the financial issues that were at the basis of the restructuring, but couched them in terms that stressed not so much the loss of income as the damaging consequences it had on their ability to perform their liturgical duties. Because the value of individual prebends declined, they argued, poverty forced some to take positions in other churches, leaving Saint-Martin with canons fit to serve neither in the choir nor in the administration of the goods of the chapter.43 Reflecting the dire economic atmosphere in Tours during the 1220s, a report emanating from the Cathedral of Tours reinforces the canons’ personal account: in a letter to the bishop of Rennes, the dean of the Cathedral complains that the city, “once so famously rich and populated,” is now a place where “one finds only misery and pain,” and that “has only tombs to offer to its children.”44 Indeed, the preceding century was a devastating one for SaintMartin, financially and physically: the edifice was severely burned in 1096 and again in 1122, and by the end of the twelfth century it literally disintegrated. The battles between Philip Augustus (whose son, Pierre Charlot, was treasurer of Saint-Martin between 1217 and 1231) and John “Lackland” ravaged the region of Tours in the opening decade of the thirteenth century, causing further damage to the most recent structure commenced in 1175. However justified their complaint, it was the canons’ initiative, effectively restructuring the choir in particular and affecting the entire chapter, that stood at the center of the third reform instituted by Pope Gregory IX.45 In a bull written in 1237, the pope condemns Saint-Martin for reducing the number of canons and prebends by more than half, accusing them of avarice and, what is more, acting in a headstrong fashion without apostolic consent (“pro suae arbitrio voluntatis”). In spite of the pope’s manifest rage and his request to revoke this unilateral action, statutes of the 1237 reform in fact ratify the canons’ resolution, and officially establish the number of canons with full prebends at fifty, a number that the canons are henceforth forbidden to augment or diminish.46 According to the reformers, the Quoted and translated in Farmer, Communities of Saint Martin, 195. “[V]el in servitio chori, vel in consilio capituli, vel in exteriorum regimine Ecclesiae providere.” See Coll. Baluze, Vol. LXXVII, fo. 218. Discussed also in Vaucelle, La Collégiale, 184. 44 The dean of the Cathedral at the time was Josbert de Saint-Maur (see Chalmel, “Histoire et antiquités,” 278). 45 On the destitution of Saint-Martin during the twelfth century see Vaucelle, La Collégiale, 394. Promulgator of the Decretales, a five-volume collection and codification of canon law, he put Thierry, archdeacon, and Arnoul, sacristan of the church of Orléans, in charge of inspecting Saint-Martin. The statutes of their reform were published on August 26, 1237. 46 Coll. Baluze, Vol. LXXXIV, fo. 9v. 42 43

33

34

St. Martin’s church in Tours

endowment of vicars was essential in order to guarantee the continuity of service without interruption, as well as to furnish the church with a more solemn and sumptuous service.47 The institution of vicars to supplement an existing choir, a phenomenon that would become ubiquitous in the fifteenth century,48 was in the early thirteenth century still quite unusual, although much earlier examples are known. In the cathedral of Amiens, for instance, vicars had already been installed by the eleventh century in order to help the canons chant during the office (in the thirteenth century they numbered fourteen); in Saint-Pierre in Lille vicars are attested from 1180; and in Sainte-Gudule in Brussels, vicars replaced absent canons in the early 1220s, about the same time as at Saint-Martin.49 Other notable French chapters such as Paris, Soissons, Reims, and Laon followed suit only decades later. In Laon, for example, eight vicars were recruited in 1346 alone, although the chapter sought to recruit vicars from as early as 1299. Similarly to SaintMartin, they were recruited to assist in the Divine Office, after statutes from 1282 reproached the canons for chattering and poking fun at one another during the chants.50 In Reims Cathedral, moreover, twelve vicars were hired in 1285, a number that reached fifteen by 1370.51 As with other chapters, here too the canons rationalized their decision by stating their wish to augment the solemnity of the divine service – the ubiquitous fig-leaf justification for just about everything in medieval churches – and to assist them in their daily duties. In practice, the institution of vicars created an auxiliary choir that reduced the canons’ duties with regard to the canonical hours and Mass. With the exception of a number of activities during the most solemn feasts, the principal burden of communal worship now lay on the shoulders of the vicars, who were beneficed and received a daily distribution. Absenteeism being the focus of reforms in the early thirteenth century, in Tours as elsewhere, the setting aside of fifty-six prebends for vicars could potentially resolve exactly this issue, although, as we shall see, absenteeism never ceased to be a problem in Saint-Martin.52 The statutes of the 1237 reform had to accommodate the presence of the newly installed vicars, who, in order to qualify for the post, had to have the same qualifications that would make them Ibid. See the excellent discussion in Starr, “Rome as the Center of the Universe.” 49 Ordinaire de l’église Notre-Dame Cathédrale d’Amiens, xxi; Lefèvre, L’Organisation ecclésiastique, 43; and Haggh, “Music, Liturgy and Ceremony,” 188 n. 332. 50 Millet, Les Chanoines, 267. 51 Robertson, Guillaume de Machaut and Reims, 49. 52 Farmer, Communities of Saint Martin, 203. 47 48

Augmenting Martin’s cult through vicars

fit to serve in that church as canons: they had to be able to read and sing, and be over nine years of age. Canons from the nearby churches of SaintPierre-le-Puellier and Saint-Venant could become vicars in Saint-Martin only if they renounced their prebend in their previous church. The priors of Saint-Martin had the prerogative of instituting two vicars, while the fifty canons who had a personal prebend each had the right to recruit a single vicar, a position that undoubtedly enhanced the canons’ prestige and power in the city of Tours. The cantor or the succentor assigned them to one of the four stationes according to the respective talent and age of the vicars in question.53 Priests and deacons occupied the top row, the subdeacons the third and fourth stations; the vicars were seated amid the canons occupying the stalls on either side of the choir. Vicars who were still minors occupied the first and second stations until they reached the age of eighteen, unless the chapter decided to promote them beforehand to another station. Installed in their respective station, they were required to follow and learn from the canons of their station in orderly and just fashion (“disciplina et iustitia”). Provisions were also made for the chapter to see to the education of the vicars: the succentor instructed them in singing, and the magister scholarum taught them the fundamentals of grammar, each receiving an annual sum of 10 solidi Turonenses for their services.54 In conclusion, the reformers state that the first and second stations should each be occupied by no fewer than ten vicars, and that the canons are obligated to fill in the ranks in the event 53



Statuentes ibidem: ita tamen quod quicunque instituetur vicarius in ecclesia B. Martini Turonensis ejusdem conditionis sit cujus fuerit canonicus ejusdem ecclesiae, videlicet quod nullus poterit institui vicarius in ea nisi ad minus novem habeat annos et nisi sciat legere et cantare. Praeterea canonici Sancti Venantii et canonici Sancti Petri Puellarum non poterunt esse vicarii in ecclesia Beati Martini Turonensis nisi prius praebendae suae beneficio resignato: et cum dictum sit supra quinquaginta sex vicarios in posterum esse in ecclesia Beati Martini Turonensis dicimus quod quilibet prior ecclesiae conferat duas vicarias personis idoneis quibus voluerit et cujus aetatis voluerit a novem annis et supra. Quilibet vero canonicus personalis alius a priore conferat unam vicariam personae idoneae cui voluerit et cujus aetatis voluerit a novem annis et supra … In ipsa autem institutione assignabitur ei a cantore, vel in supplente vices cantoris locus in choro secundum suorum exigentiam meritorum et aetatis (Coll. Baluze, Vol. LXXXIV, fo. 9v).

A different copy of this statute has “seven,” instead of “nine,” as the minimal age necessary to become a canon at Saint-Martin (Coll. Baluze, Vol. LXXVII, fo. 27). 54 [I]ta videlicet quod praesbiteri, diaconi in superiori stallo, et subdiaconi in tertio et quarto, inter canonicos utriusque chori medii locabuntur secundum dispositionem cantoris; minores vero vicarii erunt in prima et secunda statione usque ad decem et octo annos nisi de voluntate capituli promoveantur ad alium stationem, et ipsi in disciplina et in justitia sequentur canonicos suae stationis: hoc addito quod succentor habebit annuatim decem solidos pro singulis eorum docendis in cantu et pro faciendo circa ipsos quod succentor facere solet de consuetudine circa canonicos minores (Coll. Baluze, Vol. LXXXIV, fo. 10).

35

36

St. Martin’s church in Tours

that the number of vicars is under ten.55 With four stalls seating at least ten singers each on an ordinary day, and probably a greater number on more solemn feasts, the quotidian performing force in Saint-Martin was quite impressive. The vicars’ principal obligation consisted of reading and chanting on most days of the year, except for all Martinian feasts and some other solemn feasts, in which canons assumed near-exclusive responsibility. Nonetheless, under certain circumstances a vicar could conceivably be called upon to read and chant even on such important festivals, a detail that clearly underscores their stand-in nature: a boy vicar may read the first lesson if a boy canon is missing, and in general, vicars may sing if canons are absent.56 Whereas full canons were entitled to be absent and receive their benefice nonetheless, vicars had no such prerogative; if they did not perform their duties, they were denied their daily distribution. Indeed, a payment scale was devised according to which each of their functions was rewarded depending on the canonical hours in which they participated: the highest compensation was reserved for Matins, in which vicars received two denarii, while attendance at all the other hours and in Mass was rewarded with a single denarius. In services for the Dead for which canons were paid, vicars received two denarii, one for participation in the Mass, and one for the Vigil.57 During the canonical hour of Matins, the cult of St. Martin became significantly amplified. As we shall see, the singing of responsorial prosas in honor of Martin was one of the most cherished traditions in the church dedicated to him in Tours. It was also a means of expressing ownership of the saint; notwithstanding the universal appeal of the saint, most of these prosas could be heard only in Saint-Martin, unbeknownst to the numerous pilgrims who sought Martin’s intercession on a daily basis. Considering the prominence of Matins as an object of reform in Saint-Martin, it is not surprising that the reformers reserved the highest pecuniary compensation for this night office. Saint-Martin was not alone in suffering from non- or poor Ibid., fo. 10r–v. “Instituti etiam vicarii legent et cantabunt eodem ordine quo et canonici simplices praeterquam in festivitatibus V et VII candelabrorum in quibus non legent vicarii nisi primam lectionem, quam poterit legere puer vicarius si praesens non fuerit puer canonicus, cui eam legere sit facultas, nec in his festis cantabunt vicarii nisi propter canonicorum absentiam et defectum” (ibid.). I am unaware of other churches in which categories such as boy canon or boy vicar existed. However, accounts from Cambrai Cathedral dating from 1361 and later distinguish between petits vicaires and grands vicaires. See Planchart, “Choirboys in Cambrai,” 124. 57 Vicars were also paid for processions and, similarly to the canons, they too received candles. See Coll. Baluze, Vol. LXXXIV, fo. 10v. 55 56

Augmenting Martin’s cult through vicars

attendance at Matins; it was a problem that beleaguered other French chapters as well, and for which similar solutions were often offered. Whereas in Notre-Dame of Paris, for instance, the execution of Matins fell exclusively on the shoulders of sixteen clerics (the so-called pauperes clerici),58 the professed duty of the vicars of Saint-Martin was never to replace the canons completely, but to assist and strengthen the already existing forces. Moreover, chanting Matins responsories was a duty normally assigned only to canons, and the reformers took pains to ensure that they were performed with due respect and eloquence. The reformers’ appeal for a more respectful execution of Matins indicates that the canons indeed approached the Divine Office in general and Matins in particular carelessly. Whether the canons were neglectful or simply tired at this hour of the night, they apparently sang the psalmody too quickly and in a sloppy manner; the reformers implored them to open the daily liturgy with due respect, reminding them that the psalmody should be sung slowly and clearly, and not by “running” (“trotando”) through it.59 The feasts dedicated to St. Martin were distinguished by the celebration of a particularly elaborate hour of Matins, owing to the high number of prosas they typically featured. Cognizant of the vocal strain placed on individual singers during this hour, and perhaps also wishing to allow for vocal variety, the 1237 reform set out rules that discouraged individual canons from assuming excessive singing duties in a given hour.60 Consequently, a detailed replacement system was established: (1) a canon-priest normally sang the first responsory, but in his absence, a canon-deacon or a canonsubdeacon might replace him; (2) the deacon sang the fourth or seventh responsories, but if he was missing, a canon-subdeacon or a canon priest (sacerdos simplex canonicus) might replace him; and (3) the subdeacons were usually called upon to substitute for other clerics on various occasions, but should they be absent, they could be replaced either by a canon-deacon or by a canon-priest. These steps assured, in theory at least, that the responsories were performed by experienced canons, holding relatively high ranks within the Church. Indeed, only if everything else failed were vicars allowed Unlike the vicars of Saint-Martin, they were not beneficed, but, by the late twelfth and thirteenth centuries, were compensated in the form of real estate and donations. See Wright, Music and Ceremony, 24. 59 Coll. Baluze, Vol. LXXXIV, fo. 11v. 60 “Ita tamen quod unus canonicus non teneatur pluries cantare in uno officio.” See ibid., fo. 10r– v. This resonates with similar calls for canons to “save” their voice at the church of Saint-Martin in Utrecht; as the ordinal from c. 1200 tells us, when singing the responsory Martinus Abrahe on Martin’s November 11 feast, the canons are asked to sing mediocri voce. See Séjourné, L’Ordinaire de s. Martin d’Utrecht, [4]. 58

37

38

St. Martin’s church in Tours

to replace canons in singing the responsories, testifying to their inferior status within the choir structure at this time.61 Statutes of the 1262 reform indicate that the vicars did not perform their duties reliably, for the cantor or the succentor were now required to see to it that the latter know by heart (“corde tenus”) the cursus of the Psalter, and the histories of the Common of Saints. Vicars were expected to learn them completely in the course of the year, and risked losing their prebend if they failed to do so.62 More than a century later, statutes of the 1395 reform demonstrate that the vicars continued to perform their liturgical duties poorly. Once more, they had to be reminded of their duties, but this time, the office of St. Martin and its Proper hymns were added to the list of items that they had to know by heart. Finally, if the vicars did not learn the aforementioned items completely, they again could lose their prebend, and for the first time, the threat of expulsion was added.63 Whereas statutes of previous reforms clearly distinguished between vicars and canons (the former were to take their cue from the latter), reformers now tended to address both groups as a single entity, testifying not so much to the integration of the vicars into the fabric of the chapter of Saint-Martin, but rather to the overall degeneration that seems to have become ubiquitous.64 By 1395, then, the reformers realized that the institution of vicars had effectively failed altogether. Originally established in order to form an ancillary choir, it now suffered from problems similar to the ones that made its inauguration desirable in the first place. Consequently, the reformers asked the chapter to select only twelve qualified vicars who were familiar with the service of the church, and to employ them on an annual basis. The chapter was permitted to seek vicars from other churches, perhaps underscoring the gloomy reality of the inadequate performing forces in Saint-Martin, echoing Alcuin’s disappointment at the poor level of the locals when he arrived in Tours in 796. These twelve Coll. Baluze, Vol. LXXXIV, fo. 10r–v. The fourth reform was conducted by two papal legates, Bishop Godefroy of Mans and Abbot Philippe of Foucarmont, and their findings were published on February 8, 1263; ibid., fos. 14v–15r. 63 Ibid., fos. 18–34. The reform was conducted by two papal legates, Robert de la Frete and Pierre de Larhlac, canons of the churches of Chartres and Angers, respectively, following the bull of Pope Benedict XIII. They concluded their examination on February 27, 1396: 61 62

[S]ecundum alia statuta antiqua teneantur scire cursus psalterii corde tenus nec non psalmos ac historias de communi sanctorum, et officium Beatissimi Martini cum hymnis de eadem, et si moniti per cantorem vel succentorem infra anni spatium praemissa non didiscerent et plene sciverint, vicariarum suarum fructum perceptione privandi sunt, etsi infra alterius anni subsequentis finem servitium praedictum ad plenum non didiscerint expelli debent omnino. (Ibid., fo. 28) Ibid., fos. 18v–28v.

64

Augmenting Martin’s cult through vicars

vicars were to participate in the collegiate masses as well as in the day and night hours, and, contrary to the previous arrangement, they no longer held a prebend nor were they entitled to hold their office in perpetuity. Instead, they were employed on an annual basis, and their contract was renewed at the discretion of the chapter. Significantly, the selected vicars were expected to resign each year on St. Martin’s July 4 feast, when the chapter met for one of its three annual meetings. Their contracts could then be renewed, but other, more qualified, vicars could also be hired in their stead. Thus, the status of vicars in Saint-Martin underwent a process of change unlike that which characterized other medieval churches: they began their careers as beneficed vicars in perpetuity, and only later were they stripped of their benefices in favor of an annual contract. While Saint-Martin still retained a handful of vicars well into the fifteenth century, it nevertheless sought other means of augmenting the quality of the Divine Office in the church.65 In 1384, the dean of the chapter, Nicolas d’Orgemont (r. 1382–1416), together with the treasurer and several canons, obtained from anti-Pope Clement VII a bull revoking the first prebend that became vacant. The revenues issued from the prebend were used to establish a psalletta, sustaining six choirboys specifically chosen for this purpose, as well as a music master.66 It was during the same century that other ecclesiastical institutions in France began to devote more attention to the cultivation of music, usually by establishing a psalletta or a maîtrise made possible by suppressing a prebend: Reims Cathedral did so by 1285, Amiens by the middle of the thirteenth or early fourteenth century, Angers in 1369, and Bourges Cathedral in 1392.67 References to vicars in Saint-Martin are found, for example, in fragments from a 1450 ordinal from the church: BnF lat. 16806, fos. 30v and 46. What is more, a new designation, that of vicarii de stallo, which first appears in this same manuscript, indicates that perhaps the small number of vicars that were still employed by the chapter were in fact assigned a stall in the choir, a status akin to those of canoni de stallo (ibid., fos. 44 and 54). It is possible that the institution of fifty-six vicars continued well after the end of the fourteenth century, and at least until the middle of the eighteenth century, although perhaps not continuously. During a visit to Saint-Martin in 1738, a canon from Saint-Martin of Liège reported that there were fifty-six vicars in that church. See Gasnault and George, “Journal de la réception,” 645. 66 The bull, addressed to the superiors of Saint-Julien and Marmoutier, states that the revenues from one of their vacant prebends will be transferred to Saint-Martin in order to support a music teacher and six choirboys. See Abrégé de la deffense, 55–56. Such a prebend became vacant only in 1391, however, and was then conferred on an erudite musician and six boys. The word psalletta designates an institution for the preparation of children to participate in the singing of the psalmody, distinct from maîtrise, the schola cantorum whose aim is to amplify the divine service. 67 See Demouy, “Opus Dei,” 21; G. P. Johnson, “Aspects of Late Medieval Music,” Chapter 2; Poirier, La Maîtrise, 17; and Sherr, “Music at the Cathedral of Bourges,” 179. In the Cathedral 65

39

40

St. Martin’s church in Tours

The chapter’s apparent efforts to boost the quality of singing in the choir, and to assure a fine, consistent quality of singing, culminated in the second quarter of the fifteenth century, when an important addition to the choir of Saint-Martin took place. A performing force of eight musicians was instituted, for the purpose of which four prebends were set aside: each musician received half a prebend. This was by far the greatest number of prebends ever devoted to maintaining a good level of music-making in this church. Although this information is gleaned from a 1429 bull by Pope Martin V, suggesting that these eight persons be “instructed in the art of singing” (“arte cantus instructis”),68 it is highly probable that it was the chapter itself that initiated the process at the end of which this bull was issued. This had been the modus operandi of the canons in all matters relating to the choir since at least the 1220s, as we have seen above. To this end, the chapter was ready to devote more than 10 percent of its prebends, surely an indication of the seriousness with which it viewed the proper and solemn execution of the Divine Office. Following nearly two centuries of successive reforms, with new statutes refining, and sometimes completely revising, older ones, a need arose to codify and bring up to date an ordinal or a customary. The responsibility of composing such a codex was entrusted to five canons (“or two of them”), with the aid of vicars or chaplains whose expertise could benefit the project. As the reformers put it, the manuscript was to be “written in good and legible letters” and accomplished within one year.69 The book in question might be identified with a no-longer-extant ordinal copied in 1450. It is described in an eighteenth-century catalogue (BnF Collection Bréquigny 34, fo. 32), and some twenty-five folios of it may have survived in BnF lat. 16806, fos. 20–55.70 Yet, as we have seen above, the core of Gâtineau’s of Tours, however, a psalletta was already instituted in 1227, sustaining six clerics. As in other institutions, its professed purpose was to perfect the execution of psalms and hymns and to assist the canons. See Maan, Sancta et Metropolitana Ecclesia Turonensis, 135. 68 The following is taken from BmT 1295, p. cviii: “Idus Novembris anno Pontificatis XII [Martinus Quintus] salutis 1429 dat capitulo facultatem dividendi quatuor praebendas in octo semiprebendas octo personis in arte cantus instructis conferendas quibus singulis semiprebendis una capellania uniri debent de primi vacaturis.” 69 “Item fiat breve seu ordinarium officii ecclesiae et scribatur in uno libro in bona et legibili ac patenti et formata littera.” See Coll. Baluze, Vol. LXXXIV, fo. 20. 70 Martimort, La Documentation liturgique, 227. The manuscript forms part of a ten-volume opus written by Father Pierre Lebrun (1661–1729) in the early eighteenth century. A professor at the seminary of Saint-Magloire (where the source originally had the shelfmark “78”), he consecrated his series to the manifold liturgical usage in the various dioceses of France, including Tours, to which most of lat. 16806 is devoted. The manuscript is entitled “Extraits de missels, rituels, etc. des églises de Tours, Angers, Dol, Le Mans, Nantes, Rennes, S. Brieuc, S. Pol de Léon.” The portions relevant to the archdiocese of Tours are contained in the first

The calendar of Saint-Martin

customary continued to be regarded as definitive and authoritative centuries after it was copied, in spite of the intervening reforms. It was copied on at least two more occasions in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, encompassing in each instance the complete set of five reforms.71 A great portion of the customary, along with all the vestiges of the putative 1450 ordinal, is dedicated to the liturgy, which drew the occasional attention of the reformers as well.

The calendar of Saint-Martin Details concerning the celebration of feasts in Saint-Martin are meticulously recorded in the customary, and include information concerning such issues as the identity of the chief participants, kinds of garments worn and ornaments displayed, the order in which chants are chanted, who commences what responsory, and the sequence in which various groups of people enter the church in procession. The appellations of the various ranks of feasts routinely allude to the number of candles held during the procession from the sacristy to the high altar before Mass, or perhaps those that stood next to the main altar: one, three, five, or seven.72 Although extant calendars from Saint-Martin (whether manuscripts copied until the early sixteenth century, or printed up to the second half of the eighteenth century) classify feasts according to the candle system, feasts described in the customary occasionally also fall under the category of thirteen silk copes (tredecim caparum), presumably worn by an identical number of canons de stallo. Curiously, such a category is nowhere found in calendars from Saint-Martin; the designation missa in capis appears only in a single calendar (BmT 193, a sacramentary whose calendar dates to the twelfth century), which is also the earliest extant one to employ the system of candles, but clearly it cannot be equated with the above thirteen silk copes.73 For, whereas the customary 157 folios. Whether Lebrun copied the entire ordinal or just portions thereof cannot be ascertained; his extant copies, however, preserve only information relevant to the celebration of the most solemn feasts (Christmas, Epiphany, St. Martin’s November 11 feast, etc.), which were the least affected by the successive reforms. For more information on this source see Troupeau, “Une description de l’office de la Saint-Martin.” 71 See n. 70 above; and Gasnault, “Etude sure les chartes,” 68. 72 The correspondence between the number of candles and the degree of solemnity is also known from the nomenclature used in other churches, although it is not usually marked in calendars, as we find in Tours and in Reims, for instance. See Demouy, “Opus Dei,” 8. 73 It is likely that the system of candles evolved sometime between the eleventh and twelfth centuries, for the earliest extant calendar from Saint-Martin, found in BmT Diocèse 1 (a sacramentary copied c. 1000/20) never makes use of it.

41

42

St. Martin’s church in Tours

posits tredecim caparum as a category distinct from that featuring the number of candles, the calendar of BmT 193 assigns missa in capis to select feasts already classified according to their number of candles. Although tredecim caparum was a category devised apart from missa in capis, both may simply have been an indicator of added solemnity in general. Table  1.1 provides an overview of the solemn celebrations in SaintMartin.74 Feasts in capital letters signify a rank that was promoted from a somewhat lower category (from five to seven candles, for instance); underlined feasts denote new additions to the calendar from the fourteenth century onward (underlined feasts in capital letters signify that a feast was newly added and promoted within the course of a single century); and finally, demoted feasts are italicized.75 An asterisk following a feast signifies that at least until the twelfth century, the Mass on that day was celebrated in capis. The overwhelming majority of these changes are first attested in extant fifteenth-century calendars. The single most important festival in the Martinian year, Martin’s November 11 feast, ranked high in medieval church calendars. At SaintMartin of Tours it was considered a celebration sui generis, observed with grandeur and dotted with customs unique to it. As we shall see further below, it was as elaborate as Christmas, and was in part even modeled on it. Originally commemorating the reception of Martin’s body in the city of Tours and his funeral, it came to be known as Martin’s Transitus, or Natalis, namely, the saint’s death, or his “rebirth” in heaven. The feast of July 4 was likewise celebrated far and wide; it commemorates Martin’s ordination as bishop and the translation of his relics. In the collegiate church of Saint-Martin of Tours alone, however, it was observed as a dedication feast as well. The feasts of Subvention (May 12) and Reversion (December When checked against the customary, this list is considerably different: long after the customary was copied, new feasts were added to the calendar of the church, while the rank of others was elevated. Moreover, the customary does not always refer to the number of candles of feasts, although it often does. Table 1.1 is based on the calendars of the following manuscripts: BnF lat. 9434 (eleventh-century sacramentary from Saint-Martin; later in use at the cathedral); BmT Diocèse 1 (months of January and February missing); BmT 193 (sacramentary, calendar from twelfth century); BmT 159 (breviary, calendar dating to the first half of the fourteenth century); BmT 150 (breviary, beginning of fifteenth century); BmT 194 (missal, mid fifteenth century); BmT 195 (missal, mid fifteenth century); BmT 151 (breviary, end of fifteenth century); Paris, Bibliothèque Sainte-Geneviève BB 8o 1217, Inv. 1441 (printed breviary, 1519). 75 Not all Saint-Martin calendars employ the ranking system of candles. For the purpose of Table 1.1, the solemnity of a feast is considered elevated only if it can be compared with a previous source using the same method of ranking. The three calendars not employing the candle designations are: (1) BmT Diocèse 1, (2) BmT 159, and (3) BmT 194. I borrow the method of listing the various lists and their respective transformations from Robertson, The Service-Books. 74

The calendar of Saint-Martin

43

Table 1.1 The calendar of Saint-Martin in its development: twelfth to early sixteenth centuries 7 candles JANUARY

5 candles

3 candles

1 candle

1 Circumcision*

22 Vincent*

6 Epiphany*

25 CONVERSION OF ST. PAUL 27 JULIAN (bishop of Mans)

12 Octave of Epiphany 20 Sebastian; FABIAN 21 Agnes

13 Hilary*

29 SULPICIUS SEVERUS* 2 PURIFICATION*

FEBRUARY

MARCH

25 ANNUNCIATIONa

APRIL MAY

12 Subvention of St. Martin 13 DEDICATION OF ST MARY AD MARTYRESb

JUNE

JULY

24 NATIVITY OF ST. JOHN THE BAPTIST* 29 NATIVITY OF STS. PETER AND PAUL*

4 Translation and Ordination of St. Martin; dedication of his church*

2 Visitation

22 Chair of St. Peter 24 Matthias 12 GREGORY 19 Joseph 4 Ambrose 25 MARK 1 Philip and James

2 BRIGID 3 Blaise 5 Agatha 1 SIMPLICIUS 21 Benedict 30 EUTROPIUS

2 TRANSLATION OF ST. GATIEN 3 Invention of the Cross 6 John 9 TRANSLATION OF ST. NICHOLASc 19 IVO 11 Barnabasd

16 Cyriacus; Julitta

22 Translation of St. Brice 30 Commemoration of St. Paul 17 ALEXIUS 1 Octave of St. John the Baptiste

44

St. Martin’s church in Tours

Table 1.1 (cont.) 7 candles

AUGUST

SEPTEMBER

8/15 Assumption*

5 candles

3 candles

1 candle

7 Martialis

22 Mary Magdalene

11 Octave of Translation of St. Martin;* dedication of his churchf 15 Vedast

25 James

6 Octave of Sts. Peter and Paul 26 ANNE

8 NATIVITY OF THE VIRGIN

25 CHRISTOPHERg 31 GERMANUS* 1 Peter’s Chains 20 Maximus 3 INVENTION OF ST. STEPHEN 4 Eufronius 6 Transfiguration 10 Lawrence 22 OCTAVE OF THE ASSUMPTION 24 Bartholomew 25 St. Louis 28 AUGUSTINE 29 Beheading of John the Baptist 14 Exaltation of the Cross 19 Eustochius 21 Matthew

22 Maurice and Companions 24 Silvanij

OCTOBER

29 Dedication of the St. Michael’s church 30 JEROME 1 REMIGIUS 9 DENIS AND COMPANIONS

26 Ardeiush

27 Julian

1 Giles 13 Maurilius 15 Octave of the Nativity of the Virgini 23 Florentius 27 Cosmas and Damiank

The calendar of Saint-Martin

7 candles

NOVEMBER

DECEMBER

1 ALL SAINTS* 11 Transitus of St. Martin*

25 Christmas*

5 candles

13 BRICE 18 Octave of Transitus of St. Martin 21 Presentation of the Virgin

1 Translation of St. Martin’s head 8 Conception of the Virgin 13 Reversion of St. Martin* 26 Stephen* 27 John* 28 INNOCENTS*l 30 Perpetuus*

3 candles 12 Sanctinus 16 DEDICATION OF MONT SAINTMICHEL 18 Luke 25 Spanus* 28 Nativity of Sts. Simon and Jude 2 ALL SOULS 17 Gregory of Tours 23 Clement 25 CATHERINE 30 Andrew 4 Barbara

45

1 candle

10 Venantius 22 Cecilia

2 Eligius

6 Nicholas* 18 Gatien* 21 Thomas 29 THOMAS OF CANTERBURY 31 SILVESTER

Mass is celebrated in capis, probably a reference to the silk copes presumably worn by canons during solemn occasions. a The designation of three candles is erased from the twelfth-century calendar of BmT 193, and is replaced by a second hand with five candles. b The calendar of BmT 195 is the only one to accord five candles to this feast. c The feast appears written by an original hand for the first time at the end of the fourteenth century (BmT 159). It is added to the calendar of BmT Diocèse 1 (a sacramentary copied in the early eleventh century) by a different, probably later hand. d Already in the twelfth century (BmT 193), the rank of this feast may have had a certain number of candles, but unfortunately, the number was erased. e Already appears by the end of the fourteenth century, but in a different hand. f This feast is primarily attested in the customary. As for the calendars, only one (BmT 193) refers to this feast: there, it is celebrated on July 4, not on the 11th, and has no candles at all. g Promoted to three candles in the sixteenth century. h The saint is already inscribed in a twelfth-century calendar (BmT 193), but by a different hand. i The feast appears in an original hand only at the beginning of the fifteenth century (BmT 150). j By 1519, this feast was demoted to one candle, however. See Paris, Bibliothèque Sainte-Geneviève BB 8o 1217, Inv. 1441. *

46

St. Martin’s church in Tours

Table 1.1 (cont.) The only attestation of the feast’s prior high stature (five candles) appears written by a second hand in a twelfth-century source (BmT 193). l The rank of this feast must have been elevated before the first quarter of the thirteenth century. While the calendar of BmT 193 assigns to this celebration a rank of three candles, the customary gives it five. k

13) commemorate the delivery of Tours thanks to Martin’s relics, and more than any other Martinian feast, they are fundamentally local, uniquely tied to the city’s history. Finally, the most recent feast dedicated to Martin was added to Saint-Martin’s calendar on December 1, 1324. On that day, in a ceremony orchestrated by King Charles IV and sanctioned by Pope John XXII, Martin’s head was translated into a new golden reliquary. In contrast to the ubiquitous November and July feasts, the commemoration of the three other Martinian festivals  – Reversion, Subvention, and Translation of the Head  – was in general confined to communities of worshipers in Tours in particular, and on occasion also to monasteries and churches in the Touraine. Calendars from the fifteenth century indicate the magnitude of liturgical change that Saint-Martin witnessed following two centuries of reforms. The number of five-candle feasts was nearly doubled, from thirteen in the twelfth and fourteenth centuries to twenty-five in the fifteenth; one feast was promoted from five to seven candles (All Saints), while fourteen were newly accorded five candles. Among the latter, six feasts were completely new, that is, added in or after the fourteenth century, and nine others were promoted from three candles or tredecim caparum. Marian festivals account for almost half of the increase in five-candle feasts: three newly added ones (Visitation, Presentation of the Virgin, and Conception of the Virgin), two whose rank was elevated from three to five candles (Annunciation, and Nativity of the Virgin), and one from tredecim caparum to five candles (Purification). The number of three-candle feasts had risen by almost 50 percent, from forty-one in the fourteenth century to fifty-eight in the fifteenth. Eight three-candle feasts were elevated to five candles, while twentyfive feasts were celebrated according to a solemnity of three candles for the first time; of the latter, six feasts are entirely new additions to the calendar of Saint-Martin, and nineteen others are promoted from either one candle, or from having no candles at all. One of the promoted feasts is the octave of Assumption (August 22), further testifying to the surging popularity that Marian feasts enjoyed during the fifteenth century. Only the

Performance practice

promotion of three Marian feasts, Purification, Annunciation, and Nativity of the Virgin, resonates with the explicit request of the reformers. Statutes of the 1262 reform decree that they should be celebrated according to a solemnity of five candles, up from the previous three-candle rank.76

Performance practice Seven- and five-candle feasts were generally celebrated in an almost identical manner, as were feasts of three candles and one candle, respectively. When differences exist, they involve that which usually distinguishes duplex from three-lesson feasts in other churches – namely, the identity and number of the officiating clerics; the inclusion of certain liturgical accretions, processions, offerings; and so forth. The customary also devotes considerable space to the rituals that mark the four Martinian feasts (the Translation of Martin’s Head was instituted after the customary was copied) discussed in Chapter 2, which, similar to Christmas and Easter, it regards as a category sui generis. All seven- and five-candle feasts in Saint-Martin were celebrated with pomp and splendor that distinguished them from the daily liturgical routine. The desired degree of festivity could be conferred and displayed by the color and quality of garments, the number of candles, procession routes, the presence of dignitaries, and so forth. Music too had a major role in setting apart degrees of solemnity, and the most important feasts inscribed in the calendar of Saint-Martin featured music that departed from the familiar by way of three main procedures. The most common one consisted of horizontal additions to existing chants, such as the addition of vocalizations following antiphons, the substitution of a short melisma with a more extravagant one at the end of key responsories, the interpolation of responsorial prosas into office nocturns, and the singing of tropes. Vertical additions to monophonic chants were less frequent, and resulted in polyphony that, as far as 76

Coll. Baluze, Vol. LXXXIV, fos. 13v–14. Only by the middle of the fifteenth century, however, do extant calendars from Saint-Martin reflect this decision (cf. BmT 194, for example). It is possible, nevertheless, that the feast’s rank was modified well before the fifteenth century, for, although BmT 159 simply marks the feast as duplex without specifying the number of candles, it lacks the system of candles altogether. Did elevations in rank provide an occasion for the addition of sequences to existing liturgies? If so, were they drawn from the Common of Saints, or were they newly composed? Unfortunately, these interesting questions cannot be answered here. Except for a single extant and partially neumed sacramentary from the eleventh century (BnF lat. 9434), all other extant missals from this church are unnotated and date to the fifteenth century or later.

47

48

St. Martin’s church in Tours

is possible to ascertain, took the form of organum.77 These two important categories are discussed further below, but first let us turn to yet a third approach – one that may be designated as variety, or reworking, and that necessitated recourse to no new musical or textual additions whatsoever. On Martin’s July and November feasts, as well as on a limited number of other occasions (Christmas, Easter, and Pentecost), for instance, the canons listened to well-known chants performed by their dean, whom they could hear singing only on rare occasions. Typically, his responsibilities were administrative, but during these five feasts, he assumed musical leadership during Mass, a duty habitually performed by the cantor. On these occasions, moreover, the choir was dominated by the provosts, who replaced not only the subdeacons in their usual capacity of reading the daily epistle, but also the deacons, who would otherwise read from the Gospel. Thus, on five feasts only, mass provided an occasion for the canons to listen to an unusual group of high-ranking figures read and sing various parts of the Mass, which provided variety for the ear, and certainly excitement for the eyes as well. But perhaps the most exceptional approach that falls under this third category is that of reworking, evidenced in all seven- and five-candle feasts, excluding Easter Sunday and Monday.

Triumphationes The triumphing of chants was one of several ancient customs reserved in Saint-Martin for the church’s most revered feasts, and St. Martin was the only figure from the Sanctorale who was promoted in ways normally reserved for the Temporale. The customary alludes to a certain practice observed primarily during Vespers, Matins, and Mass, for which the verb triumphare is reserved, uncommon as it is in a musical context. This curious and unusual practice is rarely recorded in medieval ordinals and customaries, and it may have had different practical ramifications for the execution of the liturgy in different churches. It is interesting that in an ordinal from the Cathedral of Saint-Maurice of Vienne, Martin’s November feast is also mentioned as an occasion for making triumphationes. By the middle of the thirteenth century there were eleven such occasions (always during Vespers) in Saint-Maurice, all but two belonging to the Temporale. Understandably, one of the two was the feast of St. Ado, Bishop of Vienne (r. 860–75), who was accorded the highest rank in the calendar of the church I borrow the distinction between horizontal and vertical procedures from Huglo, “Principes de l’ordonnance,” 81.

77

Performance practice

(four candles). The only other figure from the Sanctorale to be accorded such a distinction was St. Martin: the Vespers antiphon O beatum virum sung during his November 11 feast was reportedly triumphed, although the exact manner in which it was done is nowhere divulged.78 Triumphing a chant entailed dividing it into distinct components, which were consequently interpolated into a different chant, perhaps in similar fashion to the invitatory antiphon and the Venite, a practice believed to originate with the Gallican liturgy.79 The antiphon ad Magnificat, for instance, was divided into three parts and then interpolated between the ten verses of the Magnificat, or perhaps twelve, if we take into account the “Gloria patri.”80 In Vespers celebrated on Martin’s November and July feasts, as well as in all other seven-candle feasts, all but the final verse of the canticle were followed by a part of the segmented antiphon. As for the three other Martinian festivals – Reversion, Subvention, and Translation of the Head  – and five-candle feasts in general, the Magnificat was sung without interruption until verse 8, after which the three parts of the antiphon were interpolated just between the three concluding verses, beginning with “Esurientes implevit.”81 The prolongations of psalmody (with the canticle of Vespers being a close musical relative) by an antiphon seems to have been a monastic tradition whose origins may date back to the early fifth century; the writings of John Cassian (c. 360–435) allude to the expansion of psalms sung during the night offices “by the melodies of antiphons and the addition of certain rhythms (modulationum).” Some four centuries later, both Amalarius of Metz (d. c. 850) and Odo of Cluny offer a more precise description of this practice and its rationale, again in the context of the night offices: the antiphon was repeated after each psalm verse, and, as Odo explained, the resultant lengthier office “helped to fill up the long vigils observed by Gallic

Ordinaire de l’église cathédrale de Vienne, 134 (Martin), 139 (Ado). Guéranger, Institutions liturgiques, Vol. I, 245. 80 “[E]t, in tres partes divisa [antiphona], per totum Magnificat triumphatur” (Consuetudines Ecclesiae Beati Martini Turonensis, 2). On Christmas Day, however, the Magnificat was not triumphed, perhaps because the day was already filled with festivities and ceremonies. Peter Wagner suggests that the custom of triumphare involved a threefold repetition (that is, singing the same chant four times), rather than division, of the antiphon to the Magnificat, as the customary suggests. See Wagner, Origine et développement, 149. 81 “[E]t Magnificat ab Esurientes triumphantur [sic], et antiphona dividitur in tres partes” (Consuetudines Ecclesiae Beati Martini Turonensis, 8). This practice is perhaps reminiscent of a custom observed in the abbey of Saint-Denis, where the antiphon to the Magnificat was sung three times on annuale and semiannuale feasts, and twice on duplex ones. See Robertson, The Service-Books, 314. 78 79

49

50

St. Martin’s church in Tours

monks during the long nights of winter.”82 This reasoning could well have fit the liturgical routine in early medieval Saint-Martin, where a laus perennis was observed, as we have seen above, just until the early ninth century. On St. Martin’s November 11 feast, the Magnificat was not the only chant to be triumphed, as the same procedure was applied to all antiphons and psalms of all three nocturns during Matins.83 As we shall see in Chapter 3, Matins itself was symbolically triumphed on Martin’s November feast: on that day, it was celebrated in three successive cycles, each time by clerics and monks from different ecclesiastical establishments in and around Tours. The etymology of the verb triumphare elucidates the persistence of the threefold division evidenced thus far: tres/trium-fari, that is, to say three times.84 The seven-candle Mass on Martin’s November and July feasts, which was likewise triumphed in Saint-Martin, offers a context that suggests a more loose application of the verb triumphare to indicate prolongation in general, and not necessarily of psalmody: “When the bishop or dean sings Mass, the ‘Gloria in excelsis’ is presented to them by the cantor, and to the others [it is presented] by the succentor. After the cantor has first bowed to him [presumably the dean, but perhaps the schoolmaster], the schoolmaster starts Rex celorum, when the ‘Gloria in excelsis’ is triumphed.”85 After the cantor and the succentor provided vocal cues to the respective celebrants, the cantor began the Gloria, at the same time, it seems, as the schoolmaster commenced the Gloria trope Rex celorum. Like the Magnificat, the Gloria lends itself to such an intertwining, for it too is built from distinct phrases of irregular construction and is usually through-composed. Thus, it is easier to make interpolations that do not obstruct its overall structure. One of the most curious statutes made in the 1237 reform is the prohibition on performing tropes and triumphationes outside their proper liturgical occasion, namely, outside principal feasts. Although they are mentioned concurrently, these items entail procedures that are nonetheless quite distinct: one involves the addition of text or music (or both) to existing melodies, while the other merely calls for a reworking of existing material. The common element uniting them in this context is the temporal effect they have upon the duration of office and Mass: they considerably Dyer, “The Singing of Psalms,” 540. The article includes pronouncements on this practice by several other commentators, including Cassian and St. Benedict (540–41). The recommendation of Cassian is found in his De institutes coenobiorum, II.2, translated into English in McKinnon, Music in Early Christian Literature, 146. 83 Consuetudines Ecclesiae Beati Martini Turonensis, 83. 84 Du Cange, Vol. VIII, 190, quoted in Dyer, “The Singing of Psalms,” 541. 85 “Quando cantat Missam episcopus, vel decanus, Gloria in excelsis eis a cantore offertur et aliis a succentore … Et incipit [magister scole] Rex celorum, cantore ei prius inclinante, quando Gloria in excelsis triumphatur.” Consuetudines Ecclesiae Beati Martini Turonensis, 5. 82

Performance practice

lengthen it. The reformers’ restriction bears witness to their desire to see the execution of the daily office reasonably short, and to avoid excess in general, yet it also informs us that Saint-Martin had a penchant for introducing such accretions to the liturgy. Finally, individuals were not to make decisions about performance practices or to change the personnel who properly undertake these performances. This was especially true on major feast days, when this kind of abuse was tolerated out of favoritism toward or prejudice against the people who by regular rotation should be performing on those days. The reformers forbid “that the good of the church be compromised for love or hate of any individual.”86 While in 1237 the reformers associated triumphationes with improper activities and restricted their execution to certain important feasts, the statutes of the 1262 reform banned them altogether. In the Martinian and other feasts in which the canons previously used to make triumphationes, they now had to repeat the respective antiphon to the Benedictus and Magnificat both at the beginning and end of the canticle.87 The zeal with which the thirteenth-century reformers approached the issue of triumphationes stands in striking contrast to the respect they occasionally showed in the course of the 1395 reform toward Saint-Martin’s liturgical traditions. At least on one occasion, the 1395 statutes’ insistence on an alternatim performance of certain chants was qualified by an equal eagerness to preserve the customs of Saint-Martin.88 Still, judging from an early-eighteenth-century source, chants continued to be triumphed in Saint-Martin long after their official exclusion. What is more, it was not the only archaic tradition to endure the trials of time and reform. On high feasts, the Matins antiphons could be concluded either with triumphationes, or else with a vertical elaboration, in this case neumatizing.89

The singing of neumas The only figure from the Sanctorale to benefit from the addition of neumas – vocalizations on a single syllable – in the collegiate church of Saint-Martin “Item inhibemus ne de caetero fiant tropi et triumphationes quae solent fieri in maioribus festis, conspirationes etiam et conlligationes illicitas, et ne favore aut odio alicuius utilitas impediatur ecclesiae penitus inhibemus” (Coll. Baluze, Vol. LXXXIV, fo. 11v). 87 “Item in festis in quibus fieri solebant triumphationes quae modo sunt amotae repetantur antiphonae super Benedictus et super Magnificat inchoando et semel in fine” (ibid., fo. 14). 88 “[N]isi forsan cerimoniis antiquis laudabilibus repugnaret, quibus ceremonii et nolumus derogare” (ibid., fo. 21v). 89 “Fiunt neume seu triumphationes in fine cujuslibet antiphone matutinarum”; BnF lat. 16806, fo. 108v. 86

51

52

St. Martin’s church in Tours

was St. Martin himself: two of the feasts dedicated to him (Subvention and November 11) featured the singing of at least one neuma. In contrast to triumphing chants, neumatizing was virtually a universal practice in medieval churches, one that was exalted by theologians and liturgists alike. As we shall see, however, the canons at Saint-Martin may have developed their own manner of neumatizing. The occasions for performing neumas were remarkably similar to those appropriate for triumphationes. In addition to Martin’s two feasts mentioned above, they essentially consisted of chief points along the Temporale: the beginnings of Advent (first Sunday) and of the penitential season (Septuagesima), Circumcision, Palm Sunday, and Easter (see Table 1.2). A vocalization over a single syllable, this elaborate musical flourish was perhaps one of the most distinct outward demonstrations of elation in Saint-Martin, so much so that on St. Martin’s November 11 feast, performers were exceptionally instructed to make neumas virtually wherever it pleased them in the course of the Matins nocturns.90 The relative merit of singing the praises of God and his saints sine verbis (as in the neuma) was a decisive factor in the decision to sing neumas on certain feast days, and one that did not go unnoticed by medieval commentators.91 Recapitulating erstwhile views and concepts about the Church, Guillaume Durand’s influential and widely utilized Rationale divinorum officiorum of c. 1286 – a summa of medieval information concerning the Church and liturgy – likened the neuma to “the joy and delight of eternal life.” Like them, Durand continued, the neuma “cannot be expressed by any word, and therefore, through the neuma, which is a non-signifying word, [these joys] are understood.” Furthermore, in churches in which “a neuma is not said, the non-signifying voice is transformed into a signifying voice, because, instead of Jubilus, tropes and sequences are sung.”92 The words that were set to a “[E]t fiunt neume in quolibet nocturno.” Consuetudines Ecclesiae Beati Martini Turonensis, 83. The making of neumas on Martin’s principal feast is discussed in Chapter 3. 91 Needless to say, a neuma was not entirely sine verbis, as it was sung over a single syllable. Yet, it came as close as possible to being sine verbis, and was unquestionably understood as such by medieval commentators, as the following discussion demonstrates. 92 “[E]t idem significat quod neuma, scilicet eterne uite gaudium et delicias que nullo uerbo exprimi possunt; et ideo per neuma, que est uox non significatiua, intelliguntur … in quibusdam ecclesiis in quibus neuma non dicitur, vox non significativa in vocem significativam convertitur, quia, loco iubili, et neume trophi et sequentie decantantur.” Durand, Rationale divinorum officiorum, CCCM 140, 338 (IV.xxii.3). In relation to the medieval sequence, the importance of the neuma as a “mortal representation of the heavenly song” is discussed in Fassler, Gothic Song, 60–64; and Kruckenberg, “Neumatizing the Sequence.” Commentators from the eleventh century onward have understood the neuma to be an expression of ultimate joy, and Beleth even equated the verb pneumatizare with jubilare. See Bautier-Regnier, “Notes de lexicographie musicale,” 5–6. The association between neumatizing and things eternal is also expressed by Amalarius of Metz with regard to the neuma triplex, and is discussed in Kruckenberg, “Neumatizing the Sequence,” 289–92. 90

Performance practice

Table 1.2 Neumatizing in Saint-Martin Liturgical season

Specific assignment

First Sunday of Advent: Matins Circumcision: 1st Vespers

O Virgo (Ant.)

Circumcision: None and 2nd Vespers

Stirps Jesse (Resp.)

Septuagesima Sunday: 1st Vespers, Matins, Lauds Palm Sunday

All antiphons

Easter: Matins

First three antiphons Adest namque (Seq.) Adest namque (Seq.) Nocturns

Easter: Mass St. Martin (Subvention, May 12) St. Martin (November 11)

All antiphons

Ante sex dies (Ant.)

Details

Performer(s)

Neumas made when or after (cum) O virgo is said Antiphons are concluded with the word “alleluia” and with a neuma Stirps Jesse with its verse sung by six clerics in three voices; (polyphonic?) neumas are made All antiphons conclude with a neuma

Cantor

Neumas are made after the antiphon, sung sub corona (under the chandelier) Each antiphon is concluded with a neuma Neumas added to final versicles

Cantor

Neumas added to final versicles

Cantor

“In whatever nocturn which pleases you”

Canons

Two singers together (duo insimul) Six clerics in three voices

Not specified

Not specified Cantor

certain melody, then, demarcated the boundaries of human understanding; beyond words, there lay the realm of pure music, free to declaim the infinite glory of the heavens, and to communicate with God in a manner unfathomable to human beings, an idea suggested also by Pseudo-Dionysian philosophy, much revered by medieval authors.93 Music itself was understood to be connected “to the divine creative force itself ”: the two Latin spellings of “neuma” (neuma and pneuma), both originating in the Greek neuma, or “breath,” each had distinct meanings: the neuma expressed jubilation, while the pneuma was understood to be the Holy Spirit.94 On the cultivation of melismas in Saint-Denis and on their relation to Pseudo-Dionysian philosophy see Robertson, The Service-Books, 245–48. 94 Hiley, Western Plainchant, 345. See also Hiley, “Neuma,” in Grove Music Online. Durand makes a straightforward distinction between neuma and pneuma: he writes that a neuma, spelled without “p” and in the feminine gender, stands for jubilation, while the Greek pneuma, written with a “p” and in the neuter gender, is the Holy Spirit (“Et nota quod neuma-neume, sine p et 93

53

54

St. Martin’s church in Tours

Notated service books for the office in use in Saint-Martin abound in responsory neumas for all Martinian festivals and many other rituals, usually functioning as melismas ad repetendum, that is, as substitute melismas for the final singing of the repetendum, a practice that may be of Gallican origin.95 In striking contrast to the information found in the customary, in which the overwhelming majority of neumatizing activity is recorded in relation to antiphons, these service books transmit no antiphon neumas at all. Responsory neumas are rarely mentioned, most likely because they did not occasion any special performance practice.96 If manuscripts and prints from Saint-Martin do not preserve the melodic formulas for antiphon neumas while they do transmit numerous responsory neumas, it is owing to the mode of transmission of neumas in general. Whereas responsory neumas – a rich, diverse, and largely idiosyncratic repertory – are found in notated service books for the office, antiphon neumas – a fairly standardized and circumscribed repertory usually organized by mode  – are transmitted in tonaries or theoretical treatises, sources that are unfortunately not extant from medieval Saint-Martin.97 Although antiphon neumas in Saint-Martin might have resembled the modal formulas used ubiquitously and found in tonaries,98 there is reason to believe that canons in Saint-Martin performed their own distinctive neumas, perhaps even extemporizing parts of them in performance, and that they did not rely exclusively on a common stock of melodies with a widespread usage. This hypothesis rests on the distinct verbs that the customary reserves for the singing of neumas: while individuals or groups of singers may “start,” “sing,” or “say” a chant (incipere, canere, and dicere, respectively), neumas clearly belong to a different plane of execution altogether, for they are almost always “created” or “fashioned” (facere or feri). The verbs indicating the various singing activities on St. Martin’s Subvention (May 12) are typical: the cantor starts the introit Statuit, the canons sing the



95



96



97



98

in genere feminino, est iubilus de quo premissum est, sed pneuma-tis, grece, scriptum per p in neutro genere, est Spiritus sanctus.” Durand, Rationale divinorum officiorum, CCCM 140A, 28 (V.ii.33). Goudesenne, Offices historiques, 191–92. I shall return to some of these neumas ad repetendum in Chapter 4. All neumatizing activity in Bayeux Cathedral is likewise mentioned in conjunction with antiphons only. See Ordinaire et coutumier, 5, 25, and 138. Although responsory neumas are rarely organized by mode, there is a single extant set of “passepartout” responsory neumas from Sens, which dates somewhere between the sixteenth and eighteenth centuries. See Kelly, “Modal Neumes at Sens,” 432–39. See, for example, the modal neumas found in the treatise compiled by Guy of Saint-Denis in the early fourteenth century (London, British Library, MS Harley 281), and reproduced in Robertson, The Service-Books, 134.

Performance practice

alleluia Letabitur justus, and they sing the sequence Adest namque as well. Neumas, however, are reportedly made, or created, by the cantor;99 this “division of labor” between professional singer(s) and the body of canons is characteristic as well. As can be gleaned from the information in Table 1.2, neumatizing seems to have been the responsibility of trained singers, further underlining the expert ability that this practice necessitated: mostly, it was the prerogative of the cantor, and on two occasions, specially appointed singers were entrusted with the task. The flexibility of medieval terminology in all that concerns the execution of chant is well known; in relation to the neuma alone, ordinals and customaries usually use verb forms of dicere and/or canere, as well as passive forms of finire or terminare. In his Summa de ecclesiasticis officiis, moreover, theologian Johannes Beleth (d. 1182) uses forms of canere and dicere interchangeably, while Peter of Cambrai uses the verb apponere in conjunction with neumas, perhaps in the sense of composition.100 Forms of the verbs facere or feri, on the other hand, are typically used in customaries and ordinals to denote non-musical activities such as the making of processions and stations, or the lighting of candles, for instance.101 Yet, the internal consistency of Gâtineau’s customary and its exceptional association between neumas and facere or feri, verbs rarely used in this context, suggest that neumas were conceivably improvised by specialists, a practice hardly ever recorded in contemporary sources. It is not always possible to ascertain the identity of the chants that were the object of neumatizing; for Septuagesima Vespers, for instance, the “Primo incipit cantor canonicorum … Statuit. Post cantant canonici Alleluia, Letabitur justus, sequenciam Adest namque, et facit cantor neumas.” Consuetudines Ecclesiae Beati Martini Turonensis, 71. Concerning the internal consistency of the use of musical terms in a single manuscript (the verbs dicere and canere), BnF lat. 1246, a royal Ordo copied in the third quarter of the thirteenth century – see Colette, “Le Chant dans l’ordo du sacre,” 227–34. 100 The late-thirteenth-century ordinal from Amiens Cathedral, for instance, nearly always uses the verb dicere in relation to the neuma. During Advent, a neuma is said after the antiphon Miserere michi (“et dicitur neuma post antiphonam”), and on Martin’s November 11 feast the Vespers antiphons are said with their neumas (“ipsorum neumata dicuntur”). See Ordinaire de l’église Notre-Dame Cathédrale d’Amiens, 22 and 511. A mid-thirteenth-century ordinal from Saint-Maurice of Vienne, moreover, regularly uses passive forms of the verbs finire and terminare (“et omnes antiphone cum neumpa terminantur”). See Ordinaire de l’église cathédrale de Vienne, 131. Medieval writers used a varied vocabulary to denote the action of musical composition, and a distinction has to be made between the writings of chroniclers, who are not necessarily musicians or composers, and those of musicians, who are better informed about such matters. The example of Peter of Cambrai is cited by Kelly, which provides insights into the use of additional verbs in relation to musical composition: Kelly, “Medieval Composers of Liturgical Chant,” 112–19. 101 One of numerous examples is the following: “deinde fiat processio per claustrum … et fiant tres stationes per viam; cereum flammescere faciat.” See Le Coutumier de l’Abbaye d’Oigny, 10, 26. 99

55

56

St. Martin’s church in Tours

customary laconically notes that “all antiphons” conclude with a neuma. On other occasions, the identification is further complicated by discrepancies between the customary and extant manuscripts. The first occurrence of neumatizing in the liturgical year is a case in point; a cursory allusion to the making of neumas during the First Sunday of Advent reads as follows: “post, antiphone Venite; et facit pneumas cum dicitur O Virgo.”102 The appearance of O Virgo – an antiphon to the Magnificat that was frequently added to the series of seven O antiphons sung in the week leading to Christmas Eve – in conjunction with the hour of Matins some four weeks earlier, as the customary specifies, is curious. Given the prominent position of O Virgo in Saint-Martin, concluding the series of O antiphons, it would have been a prime candidate for an added musical emphasis, as the making of neumas during or after O Virgo (the word cum could mean either) could achieve.103 Fortunately, pertinent information concerning other feasts is more illuminating, as the examples of Circumcision and Easter instruct us. As was the case in some cathedral chapters, the Circumcision office in Saint-Martin was dotted with the pleasantries and ritual inversions commonly associated with this feast. Known in some regions as the Feast of Fools, it was a day presided over by subdeacons, and notably known for the splendor of the liturgy, its paraliturgical songs, polyphony, variety of tropes, and the irreverence of the clergy participating in it.104 The irregularities characteristic of this day (the rod – baculus – of the cantor, for instance, was passed to other clerics, usually from the lower orders) were accompanied by the singing of chants whose very performance marked a distinct break with the usual unfolding of the daily liturgy. In Saint-Martin, the singing of chant genres infrequently used in the liturgy in general was typical (a prosa, Letemur gaudiis, was sung during First Vespers, for instance), as was the special mode of execution reserved for certain other chants and prayers (the Pater noster and Credo were sung in falsetto, while Stirps Jesse received a polyphonic garb).105 The day was saturated, moreover, with the tolling Consuetudines Ecclesiae Beati Martini Turonensis, 25. See the antiphon O virgo in BmT 149, fos. 54v–55, for instance. As transmitted in this and other notated sources from Saint-Martin, there are no indications (musical or textual) that a neuma was ever envisioned as part of the antiphon’s performance. 104 Indeed, the text of a 1327 endowment from Le Puy refers to the feast of the Circumcision as “lo prosolari,” an unmistakable allusion to the great number of prosulas, or tropes, associated with this feast. See Arlt, “The Office for the Feast of the Circumcision,” 325. Musicologists have thus far treated in detail three offices of the Feast of Fools (from Beavais, Sens, and Le Puy), examined and edited in the following key studies: ibid., 324–43; Arlt, Ein Festoffizium des Mittelalters; and Office de Pierre de Corbeil. 105 It is rare to find evidence for a polyphonic rendition of Stirps Jesse; the latter, however, is one of a handful polyphonic pieces found in BnF lat. 1139, the oldest extant manuscript 102 103

Performance practice

of bells sounding from various locations in the church, and an intricate sequence of bell-ringing was especially devised for this day, with detailed instructions as to what bells were to be rung at specific moments in the liturgy.106 Complementing this richness of musical practices and sounds, neumas were sung during First and Second Vespers as well as in Nones. A neuma was appended to all the antiphons of First Vespers, and the aforementioned Stirps Jesse, sung in Second Vespers, concluded with neumas as well, perhaps in similar polyphonic fashion to the chant that they followed.107 The desire to confer greater solemnity on this day was shared by other religious communities in northern France, evidenced in the degree of ritualistic excess prescribed by ordinals and service books. The canons at Laon Cathedral, for instance, celebrated an “endless Compline” (“completorium infinitum”) saturated with sequences following virtually every chant, and they were instructed to sing all the Benedicamus songs they knew; an ordinal from Bayeux, moreover, ordained the four clerical feasts to be celebrated “as solemnly as they [the clergy] are able.”108 The purely musical outbursts – bells and neumas – heard in Saint-Martin during Circumcision constituted a particularly apt amplification of the sense of prevalent autonomy and immoderation; as the customary plainly states, “in these three [clerical] feasts and in New Year’s, the usual order is not observed.”109 Indeed, in Saint-Martin and elsewhere, the dignitaries usually officiating at office and Mass were substituted by their assistants: Circumcision was presided over by subdeacons, deacons officiated the services on December 26 (St. Stephen), priests on December 27 (St. John), and a boy bishop on December 28 (Innocents). Temporarily, then, discrete groups of clerics became independent of their superiors, bringing about a conspicuous consciousness of freedom that on occasion resulted of Aquitanian polyphony, dating to the twelfth century (see Fuller, “Hidden Polyphony,” 175.) Interestingly, the Circumcision office from Le Puy also calls for the performance of a polyphonic Stirps Jesse just as in Saint-Martin, albeit that there is no reason to believe the two versions were similar. See Arlt, “The Office for the Feast of the Circumcision,” 328. 106 Consuetudines Ecclesiae Beati Martini Turonensis, 39–40. 107 “Stirps Jesse cum versu, quem cantant septem clerici, tribus vocibus; et fiunt pneume” (ibid., 38). The Vespers antiphons are (1) Tecum principium, (2) Redemptionem misit dominus, (3) Exortum est in tenebris, (4) Apud dominum misericordia, and (5) De fructu ventris. See BmT 150, fo. 86; and BmT 149, fos. 83v–84. 108 Laon, Bm 263, fos. 131 and 141v. In Laon, the Feast of Fools was celebrated during Epiphany (January 6). The idiosyncrasies of this celebration in medieval Laon are discussed in Lagueux, “Glossing Christmas,” 334–39; and in Arlt, “The Office for the Feast of the Circumcision,” 327. The rubric from Bayeux is found in Bayeux, Bm 121, and is quoted in Hiley, Western Plainchant, 42. 109 “[I]n his tribus festis et anno novo, non servatur ordo” (Consuetudines Ecclesiae Beati Martini Turonensis, 35).

57

58

St. Martin’s church in Tours

in misconduct and abuse.110 The liberation from monotonous duties and predictable functions found a fitting expression in the wordless utterances that characterized Circumcision in Saint-Martin, echoing Durandus’s recognition that: the neuma or Jubilus is an inexpressible joy or an exultation of the mind turned toward things eternal … For that ineffable joy expressed by the neuma cannot be tasted here, nor fully expressed, nor fully silenced; in this way, omitting words, by the power of rejoicing with a neuma, the Church leaps up as if in admiration and says “What voice, what tongue will be able to reveal [what rewards you are preparing for the martyrs?]” For words do not suffice here, nor does intellect understand, nor even does love permit speech. For who will fully describe what the eye cannot see and the ear cannot hear and what the heart of man ascends to? Neumatizing, therefore, speaks very clearly in a certain way without words what is barely signified through words, how great will be that joy of heaven where words cease and all people will know all things.111

The association of the neuma with such lofty sentiments surely made Easter – with its overtly jubilant nature – and the small number of other festivals listed in Table  1.2, including two Martinian feasts, prime candidates for further neumatizing activity. The first three antiphons of Matins on Easter Day concluded with neumas, which might have consisted, as Durand described, of a vocalized extension over “the final letter of the antiphon, in order to express that the praise of God is ineffable and endless.”112 The neumas performed during Mass were more intricate, and might have been sung together with another musical line, creating some type of polyphony. The customary provides only a succinct description of neumatizing The abuses made in Notre-Dame of Paris, for instance, are gleaned from a mandate addressed to Bishop Odo of Sully, and from the latter’s decree of 1198. See Wright, Music and Ceremony, 237–40. 111 Est autem neuma seu iubilus ineffabile gaudium seu mentis exultatio habita de eternis. Ineffabile namque gaudium, per neuma significatum, quod hic pregustatur nec penitus exprimi nec penitus taceri valet quare merito Ecclesia, verbis omissis, iubilando cum neuma quasi in admirationem prosilit si dicat: “Que vox que poterit lingua retexere” etc. Verba enim hic non sufficiunt nec intellectus capit nec amor etiam dicere sinit. Quis enim plene enarraret quod oculus non vidit nec auris audivit, nec in cor hominis ascendit? Neumatizando ergo expressius quodammodo sine verbis dicit, quod per verba innuat, quantum sit illud celi gaudium ubi verba cessabunt et omnes omnia scient. See Durand, Rationale divinorum officiorum, CCCM 140A, 27–28 (V.ii.32). Durand is paraphrasing from the Speculum ecclesiae, an anonymous work of the second half of the twelfth century (see Fassler, Gothic Song, 61–62.) The quotation in Durand’s text is taken from the hymn Sanctorum meritis. 112 “Et fit neuma in unica et finali littera antiphone ad notandum quod laus Dei ineffabilis et incomprehensibilis est.” See Durand, Rationale divinorum officiorum, CCCM 140A, 27 (V.ii.32). 110

Performance practice

practices during Easter, but more information can be gleaned from its discussion of seven-candle celebrations in general, which include Easter. The sequence Adest namque, comprising eighteen versicles, occupied a special place during Mass. Standing in the middle of the choir and facing that side which was to begin the sequence, the cantor began singing the sequence. When the choir sang the penultimate versicle pair, starting with the words “Regens gubernansque,” the cantor complemented their singing with a neuma, repeating the practice with the last versicle pair (beginning with “Iam debitas”), this time facing the other side of the choir. As in the previously discussed instances of neumatizing, it is difficult to determine from the Latin if the neumas were sung together with the versicle pair beginning with “Regens gubernansque” or immediately after it.113 Additional evidence concerning polyphony in Saint-Martin is occasionally as nebulous; explicit references to vertical additions to the liturgy are rare and often equivocal, as they tend to be in the Middle Ages in general. In spite of the wealth of musical means used to articulate the extraordinary nature of Easter and Circumcision, both feasts, as we shall see, became the focus of attention for composers of polyphony as well.

Polyphonic practices A short and somewhat enigmatic statute from the proceedings of the 1395 reform at Saint-Martin, some two centuries after Gâtineau copied the customary, provides information that is interpreted by some to indicate polyphony: “Let no one sing cum nota outside the choir when the hours and collegiate masses are sung in the choir.”114 Statutes from 1237 had already recognized the need to regulate the succession of celebrations and the identity of the respective officiating priests on days in which several masses took place. Especially if the celebration took place at the main altar, no other singing was allowed, a measure probably intended to prevent disruption from competing sounds. If, then, the reformers sought to argue that singing was “Et nota quod, quando sequentia, scilicet Adest namque, cantatur, cantor, stans in medio chori, versus partem inceptoris, incipit eam, et, quando Regens gubernansque dicitur, facit pneumas et, quando Iam debitas, vertit se ad aliam partem chori, pneumas faciendo.” Consuetudines Ecclesiae Beati Martini Turonensis, 5. As late as the fifteenth century, this sequence was sung with neumas, as attested in BmT 1021, fo. 159v, where the celebrant is required to sing this sequence “cum neumpmis.” For the complete text of Adest namque see Ah, Vol. LIII, 78–79. The sequence’s rhyming hexameters may place it in the eleventh century (see Fassler, Gothic Song, 109). 114 “Item nullus cantet cum nota extra chorum quamdiu cantantur in choro horae vel celebrantur missae collegiales.” Coll. Baluze, Vol. LXXXIV, fo. 21v. 113

59

60

St. Martin’s church in Tours

authorized only in the choir, and not at the side altars where votive masses were usually sung or recited, for example, they did not have to qualify the ordinance by specifying cum nota, and the time in which it was prohibited (“while another ceremony is celebrated in the choir”). The words cum nota may be readily taken at face value to mean simply “with notes” – with music.115 The term might provide a convenient way of distinguishing a sung mass from a recited one, a Low Mass from a High one, and a notated manuscript from one containing only texts. The latter is exactly the intention of an ordinal from the Sainte-Chapelle in Paris copied in 1471 (Paris, Bibliothèque de l’Arsenal, MS 114), which instructs the clergy to seek certain prayers in a book cum nota.116 In the context discussed above, however, as well as in other instances studied elsewhere, the designation cum nota seems superfluous, suggesting that something else might be implied by those two words. The latter compound is first attested in the eleventh/twelfth-century work of Abbot Ingulfus, an English historian, where it appears in conjunction with the celebration of Mass (as it does in subsequent centuries as well); there, the term most probably involves a mass chanted with the help of a service book, or one celebrated with particular pomp.117 In 1349, Jean des Prés, bishop of Tournai, founded in a side altar at the Cathedral of Tournai a daily mass honoring the Virgin. The foundation refers to a “missa cum nota,” and the ensuing provisions assuring its due execution indicate that a polyphonic mass was envisaged.118 Drawing on late-fifteenth-century examples, several scholars have entertained the possibility, with varying degrees of certitude, that cum nota (as well as the French à note) in fact refers to polyphony, and others that the implications of the term should be evaluated vis-à-vis the existing performing forces in particular churches. In relation to medieval Oxford, for example, Beth Anne Lee-de Amici argues for a flexible reading of the term: foundations that had capable choirs could take it to mean polyphony, those lacking adequate performing forces to mean plainchant.119 Nevertheless, only seldom is it Wright, for instance, interprets “une messe à notte” to mean simply “a mass with music.” See Wright, Music at the Court of Burgundy, 134. Dom Prosper Guéranger has also interpreted a mass en note to be simply en plain-chant; see Guéranger, Institutions liturgiques, 331. 116 Haggh, “An Ordinal of Ockeghem’s Time,” 43. 117 Magro, “Plain-chant ou polyphonie?,” 371. 118 La Messe de Tournai, 56–57. In his Vie de Saint Louis, Guillaume de Saint-Pathus recounts how St. Louis rode his horse in the company of his mounted chaplains and said the canonical hours “à haute voix et à note.” The latter has been interpreted to mean both written and improvised polyphony. See Colette, “Le Chant dans l’ordo du sacre,” 227–28. 119 Lee-De Amici, “Cum nota solenniter celebret,” 177 n. 15. A document from 1474 pertaining to the religious activities of the confraternity of candlemakers in the Cathedral of Notre-Dame in Paris refers to a “messe de requiem à note.” Wright concludes that the mass in question 115

Performance practice

possible to ascertain that by cum nota and à note, terms uncommon as they are, polyphony is being proposed. The use of this term is also illustrated in foundations drawn from the archives of Saint-Martin: (1) a foundation from 1407 stating that “une Messe à notes de Requiem” be celebrated in the Notre-Dame du Chevet chapel in Saint-Martin, and (2) a foundation by Louis XI in 1465, establishing “duas Missas in hac Ecclesia cum nota singulis diebus,” a request to which the chapter answered in the negative.120 Judging from the canons’ response (they deemed the king’s request too onerous), among other things, Agostino Magro concluded that the masses cum nota in question could have been polyphonic.121 Nevertheless, the evidence presented above does not allow a more precise definition of the term cum nota, and what is more, the latter never appears in the customary, or, indeed, in any service book emanating from Saint-Martin. Fortunately, the customary offers more tangible evidence of polyphony in Saint-Martin, notably during the feasts of Circumcision and Easter.122 Circumcision (January 1) offers the most extensive information concerning polyphony in Saint-Martin. Following the penitential season of Advent, characterized by abstinence, fasting, and restrictions on certain musical practices, Christmastide ushered in a wealth of excess, all evidenced above in feasts celebrated during that week by clerical communities. The feasts of choirboys (Holy Innocents, December 28) and Circumcision, the feast of subdeacons, were presided over by the youngest clerics, whose festivals were unmistakably the most lively, as we shall see below.123 During the festivities of Circumcision, which lasted from First Vespers to Compline on was probably not polyphonic, for the chart calls for the participation of two singers only. See Wright, Music and Ceremony, 138–39, and 361, doc. 6. In René d’Anjou’s testament (1409–80), a messe à notte is contrasted with a basse messe (“soit dicte et celebré chascun jour de l’an à toujours mais perpetuellement une basse messe et chascun an, à tel jour qu’il trespassera, une messe à notte”). Patrick Macey concludes that René stipulated in fact “that a polyphonic Mass should be performed in perpetuity on the anniversary of his death.” Nevertheless, such assertions must be qualified, for nothing in the text positively points to a polyphonic mass. The text may simply call for a more solemn mass that might, perhaps, include polyphony. See Macey, “Good King René,” 225 and n. 33. In a study devoted to the Cathedral of Bourges, Sherr explores the question of cum nota. Most of the examples he cites do not allow for a less ambiguous definition of the term. See Sherr, “Music at the Cathedral of Bourges,” 195–201. Finally, Haggh hypothesizes that “the phrase ‘cum nota’ implies the use of written notation and, perhaps, the improvisation of a contrapuntal part to a notated melody” (Haggh, “An Ordinal of Ockeghem’s Time,” 60). 120 Magro, “Plain-chant ou polyphonie?,” 370–72. 121 Ibid., 372–73. 122 Curiously, there is no evidence for polyphony during the week following Christmas. See Magro, “Un aperçu sommaire,” 273–80. 123 Wright, Music and Ceremony, 237.

61

62

St. Martin’s church in Tours

the following day, a certain group of six clerics was called upon to perform a variety of chants: a hymn, two versicles, two verses, and a Benedicamus domino. Although the identity of the six men and their level of musical competence is nowhere divulged (the customary consistently and plainly refers to them as sex clerici), there is reason to believe that they constituted a well-defined group within the fabric of the chapter, and that the chants mentioned above were sung by the same singers throughout the feast, and for good reason. As we shall see, they were probably singled out by the cantor of Saint-Martin for their demonstrated ability as soloists and singers of polyphony. Altogether, there are six references to a specific group of “six clerics” who participate in the liturgy of Circumcision: three in which the mode of singing is explicitly stated (tribus vocibus, “in three voices”), and three in which no such information is supplied (of the total six chants, four are assigned to First Vespers). The following chants are reportedly performed in three voices: (1) the hymn O Nazarene dux, sung in First Vespers; (2) the versicle Omnis nostra contio, sung after the hymn Veni Redemptor in First Vespers and just before the Oration; and (3) the versicle Virgo dei genetrix.124 While O Nazarene dux and Omnis nostra contio were sung during the feast’s vigil, Virgo dei genetrix (following the Marian respond Stirps Jesse) was one of several chants sung during the procession held on the following day before Mass, a procession that featured a “boy bishop” (episcopus puerorum) marching at the end of the pageant. In addition, the six clerics also performed the following chants, albeit not explicitly in tribus vocibus: (1) a troped Benedicamus concluding First Vespers (sung to the melody of Primus homo corruit); (2) the versicle Omnipotentissime, sung just before The customary in fact does not identify Virgo dei genetrix by its name, alluding only to the verse that follows the responsory Stirps Jesse (see Table 1.2 above): “Post cantant sex clerici, in medio chori, tribus vocibus, O Nazarene … Post cantant clerici tribus vocibus versiculum Omnis nostra contio … Post, Stirps Jesse cum versu, quem cantant septem clerici, tribus vocibus” (Consuetudines Ecclesiae Beati Martini Turonensis, 36 and 38). It seems reasonable to interpret the above quotation from the customary to mean that only the verse of Stirps Jesse was rendered polyphonically, and not the responsory as a whole (the reference to seven clerics is probably a scribal error; for a different opinion see Magro, “Un aperçu sommaire,” 277). For the hymn O Nazarene dux, see RH 13304. Is it possible that O Nazarene dux is in fact an invitatory antiphon? Although the customary does not indicate that hymns were organized in Saint-Martin, the relative position of the chant in First Vespers perhaps does indicate that the chant in question is a hymn. It is interesting to note that portions of the text of O Nazarene dux are found in two other Circumcision offices, once as an invitatory to the second nocturn (in Sens and in Beauvais), and once as a First Vespers antiphon (in Le Puy). Are the three offices related? See Arlt, Ein Festoffizium des Mittelalters, Vol. I, 97–98, and Vol. II, 52; and Arlt, “Einstimmige Lieder,” 11. I was unable to find a single concordance to the versicle Omnis nostra contio.

124

Performance practice

the sequence Ave Maria (replacing the hymn) in Compline;125 and (3) in Compline following Second Vespers, the processional antiphon Christus resurgens, sung by two clerics in front of the choir crucifix, and the ensuing verse, probably Dicite in nationibus, sung by the six clerics.126 While it is evident that the former three chants were performed in a polyphonic manner, the mode of execution of the three latter ones remains to be examined, as is the particular type of polyphony that governs all of them. Whether the same six clerics were responsible for the execution of all polyphonic chants in this feast cannot be ascertained and is of little importance; it is clear, however, that they were soloists, presumably the same ones who sang the responsorial chants during Mass and office on other occasions.127 If references to sex clerici consistently designate a specific group of six soloists, can we infer that what they perform as a group is therefore always the same, that is, polyphony? After all, throughout the feast of the Circumcision, these clerics are the only entity mentioned in conjunction with polyphony.128 Pertinent thirteenth-century decrees emanating from various Parisian churches indicate that the number of singers performing a given chant cannot, in and of itself, confirm whether a chant was sung monophonically or not.129 Moreover, ordinals often assign the singing of “Et post dicunt sex clerici Benedicamus; Primus homo corruit … Post cantant sex clerici versum Omnipotentissime” (Consuetudines Ecclesiae Beati Martini Turonensis, 37). There exists a Kyrie trope bearing this name, but it is, in all probability, not the chant in question, since the Kyrie sung during this hour has a different trope, Pater cuncta. See Landwehr-Melnicki, Das einstimmige Kyrie, 101. 126 “Post vadunt ante Crucifixum chori, et dicunt Christus resurgens, et sex clerici versum” (Consuetudines Ecclesiae Beati Martini Turonensis, 39). As we shall see below, this antiphon is also ubiquitous during the Easter Week processions, for obvious reasons. The verse is nowhere explicitly mentioned in the customary. References in service books, as well as in a 1450 ordinal from Saint-Martin, however, allow a better identification of this verse. See, for instance, BmT 149, fo. 305; and BnF lat. 16806, fo. 45v. It is conceivable that an even greater number of chants was sung by the said “sex clerici,” but the typically succinct wording of the customary does not allow for a more secure identification. 127 As Wright concludes with regard to Notre-Dame of Paris, “The full choir and the soloists retained their traditional duties regardless of where polyphony was superimposed or what type it might be … Ancient liturgical traditions were not altered to accommodate changing fashions in polyphonic style and genre”; Wright, Music and Ceremony, 344. Unlike in NotreDame of Paris and in other medieval churches where polyphony is known to have been practiced, the customary never employs the term organista. 128 Another group of singers repeatedly mentioned by the customary throughout this feast consists of duo clerici, but since there is nothing to indicate that they ever sing polyphony, it is possible that the identity of the two clerics changed from one piece to the other. 129 On the feast of St. Bartholomew celebrated in the Abbey of Saint-Barthélemy in Paris, the alleluia was “either chanted by four, or sung in organum by two” singers (“alleluia vero vel organizatur a duobos de nostris vel cantatur a iiij canonicis”; Brussels, Bibliothèque royale, MS 1799, fo. 123); English and Latin quoted from Wright, Music and Ceremony, 341. See also 125

63

64

St. Martin’s church in Tours

the Benedicamus to anywhere between two and six singers, without giving a reason to believe that the chant is performed polyphonically.130 In SaintMartin, the sex clerici were nonetheless singled out as a group for a different purpose. Not only was polyphony practiced in Saint-Martin on the feast of the Circumcision, but skilled singers were indeed also a requisite for its execution: “the invitatory, versicles, responsories, prosas, and Benedicamus ought to be sung in organum, and to each psalm, a conductus [has to be] chanted, if there is someone capable of doing [so]. And similarly in all the hours.”131 There exists of course more than one way for six singers to perform a tribus vocibus organum: two singers could sing a part, or perhaps one singer each of the upper parts, with the remaining four chanting the tenor voice.132 If able soloists are present (and residency requirements almost certainly assured that this was the case in feasts such as that of the Circumcision), then the above-mentioned genres are sung polyphonically. What is more, a far greater number of chants were in fact set to polyphony: although examples explicitly indicating the performance of polyphony name only half of the genres mentioned in the above citation (absent are the Benedicamus, responsory, and prosa), it is possible that tribus vocibus was meant to set certain chants apart from the remaining ones, which were perhaps sung in

Wright, Music and Ceremony, 370, doc. 39. Rubrics from Notre-Dame, however, indicate that whether it is executed polyphonically or not, the same number of singers is required: on Easter morning, “six chant or sing in organum the verse Et respicientes” from the responsory Et valde (“organizatur vel cantatur a sex Ver. Et respicientes”; Brussels, Bibliothèque royale, MS 1799, fo. 61v). Wright, Music and Ceremony, 340, and 370, doc. 39. 130 See the examples cited in Robertson, “Benedicamus Domino,” 6–8. 131 “[E]t debent organizari Vitatorium, versiculi, responsoria et prose et Benedicamus ad unumquemque psalmum conductum dici, si est qui faciat. Et similiter ad omnes horas” (Consuetudines Ecclesiae Beati Martini Turonensis, 37–38). The instruction appears in the context of Lauds, but it is clear that it refers to the entire feast, hence the reference to responsories and their prosas. Curiously, invitatories too seem to have been sung in organum in Saint-Martin. This practice may be similar to the one found in the Beauvais Circumcision office, where the rubric above the invitatory to the third nocturn (Pastorem summo iubilemus) specifies “cum organo.” Nonetheless, the invitatory is given only in a monophonic version, and no polyphonic concordance of this chant is known. See Arlt, Ein Festoffizium des Mittelalters, Vol. I, 236. According to David Hughes, in Saint-Martin of Tours “the invitatories, verses of responsories, and proses were sung polyphonically.” As far as I know, this claim may only be sustained for New Year’s. See Hughes, “Liturgical Polyphony at Beauvais,” 199. 132 As Wright notes, the florid nature of the upper voice in organum duplum makes it unsuitable for more than a single voice. As for tripla or quadrupla organa, whose upper voices tend to be less virtuosic, the possibility exists that they were sung by more than one singer to a line. See Wright, Music and Ceremony, 342–43. The specification of six musicians for the singing of polyphony is also known from late medieval Bruges; see Strohm, Music in Late Medieval Bruges, 15.

Performance practice

two-voice settings.133 Although the exact performing forces at work in these chants (namely, the Benedicamus, responsory, and prosa) must remain pure conjecture for now, it is certain that they were known in some sort of a polyphonic garb, for the customary instructs that polyphony be applied to all the above-mentioned genres “in all the hours” during Circumcision. The celebrations of Easter week, dotted with copious processions and opportunities for neumatizing, provided another occasion for polyphony. During this season, the antiphon Christus resurgens and the versicle Dicite in nationibus were chanted at least three times: on Easter Sunday itself, when they were performed by the cantor and by “six other canons” while processing, and on Easter Monday and Tuesday, when they were sung while the entire processing community made a station along the way.134 Understandably, the first instance did not require polyphony, for coordinating two or three melodic lines while processing could have been deemed too difficult. Polyphony was called for, however, on the two following days, which featured processions that led the canons outside their church. On Easter Monday, a procession left Saint-Martin and made stations in the convent of Beaumont (southwest of Tours), the priory of Saint-Jacquesl’Orme-Robert, and finally the church of Notre-Dame de l’Ecrignole, where the canons, standing in the church aisle in front of the crucifix, sang the antiphon Christus resurgens with its versicle Dicite in nationibus. The latter, according to the customary, was sung in organum, although no additional information is provided as to the number of clerics singing it or their identity.135 It could be that six clerics sang the organal rendition of this verse, conforming to the number of those singing the verse on Easter Sunday, and congruent with what is known so far about the performing forces of polyphony in Saint-Martin, as discussed above. The fragment from the 1450 ordinal from Saint-Martin recounting the unfolding of this procession It is known, for example, that the preces in Compline and Prime of feasts of five and seven candles were sung in quinta voce, that is, duplicated at the interval of a fifth. See Consuetudines Ecclesiae Beati Martini Turonensis, 8. On the nature of “fifthing” in the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries, see Fuller, “Discant and the Theory of Fifthing.” I thank Bonnie Blackburn for drawing my attention to this article. 134 The antiphon and its verse seem to have been sung while processing toward the church’s large chandelier (“vadunt sub corona, et incipit cantor Christus resurgens. Post dicit versum, cum sex aliis canonicis, in medio processionis”). There was no maze in Saint-Martin, hence none of the dancing and singing that took place on a maze during the end of Lent and in Easter. See Wright, The Maze and the Warrior, Chapter 5. 135 “Post, in ecclesia Beate Marie, ante Crucifixum, Christus resurgens; et debet versus organizari … ad introitum insule, ante Crucifixum ecclesie, Christus resurgens cum versu, et debet organizari” (Consuetudines Ecclesiae Beati Martini Turonensis, 61, 62). 133

65

66

St. Martin’s church in Tours

demonstrates that little had changed as far as the festivities on Easter Monday went, except for one detail. Similar to the procession described in the customary, the ordinal too prescribes that the canons sing the antiphon Christus resurgens in front of the church of Notre-Dame de l’Ecrignole, but with one difference: “without the versicle Dicite in nationibus.”136 Finally, on Easter Tuesday, the canons walked in a procession to Saint-Cosme, and as they crossed the bridge (the church was located on a small island west of Tours) and stood before the crucifix of the church, they sang the antiphon Christus resurgens. Once more, the verse was executed in organum. No extant service books from Saint-Martin contain polyphonic versions of the chants to which the customary alludes, nor do extant rubrics indicate it; this may be due to the fact that in the early thirteenth century, polyphony was to a large extent still improvised or “composed” in performance, and sung chiefly in side altars, not in the choir.137 Moreover, polyphony was still a relatively rare phenomenon in medieval churches, and even in churches in which it was practiced, its execution could not always be assured. A thirteenth-century ordinal from Chartres Cathedral, for instance, states that on Thursday of Easter week, the alleluia Nonne cor nostrum may be sung in organum if the succentor so wishes (“si succentor voluerit”); in all probability, this was left to the succentor’s discretion exactly because skilled performance forces sufficient for the execution of polyphony could not be assured.138 Of the three organa tripla that the customary unquestionably states were performed in Saint-Martin, only one seems to have a concordance in other roughly contemporaneous sources: the Magnus Liber Organi, for instance, contains a three-voice version of [Stirps Jesse] Virgo dei genitrix (O16), which may have been similar to the one performed in SaintMartin.139 That O Nazarene dux and Omnis nostra contio, the two additional BnF lat. 16806, fo. 45v. May the intentional omission of this verse indirectly confirm, perhaps, the practice of singing it polyphonically in the past? 137 See Robertson, Guillaume de Machaut and Reims, 44–45. 138 L’Ordinaire chartrain, 117. 139 F, fo. 26v. For a modern edition see Les Quadrupla et Tripla de Paris. See also Ludwig and Dittmer, Repertorium organorum. As mentioned above, the customary does not identify the verse sung with the antiphon Christus resurgens, although there is every reason to believe it was the versicle Dicite in nationibus. It may be interesting to note that in Notre-Dame of Paris, the verse that follows this antiphon, Dicant nunc Iudei, is also set to polyphony. The latter certainly has polyphonic concordances in early medieval sources: there are at least two organa dupla set to the versicle Dicant nunc Iudei from the eleventh and twelfth centuries, as well as one organum triplum. Organa dupla: Chartres, Bm 109, fo. 75 (this fragment dates to the second half of the eleventh century); and Oxford, Bodleian Library, Rawl. c.892, fo. 67v (a gradual from Downpatrick, dated to the second half of the twelfth century). Organum triplum: F, fo. 24v. As for the Benedicamus sung in Saint-Martin, there exist several two- and three-voice settings of the Benedicamus in sources from Paris and elsewhere, for example 136

Performance practice

chants that had three-voice settings in Saint-Martin, find no polyphonic concordances in extant medieval sources may suggest that the church cultivated a unique repertory whose relative place in relation to the orbit of influence of Notre-Dame of Paris is yet to be determined.140 Indeed, all major sources of thirteenth-century polyphony, from France, Spain, and England, postdate the written evidence of the customary, itself reflecting a tradition that was undoubtedly established already in the twelfth century. Is it possible that the ritual inversion so characteristic of Circumcision manifested itself also in the odd choice of chants set in polyphony? The Circumcision office of Le Puy, for example, also features a polyphonic performance of a rare Benedicamus trope, Stirps Jesse. Moreover, the repertory exhibited in these Le Puy festivals apparently included a large percentage of unica, which might explain the paucity of concordances with songs from other extant offices, notably those of Beauvais, Le Puy, and perhaps also Saint-Martin.141 As for the conductus, which the customary specifically states is sung in organum (albeit no specific examples are cited), it is certainly possible that the famous Orientis partibus was sung immediately after the opening of First Vespers.142 Yet, is it possible that the customary refers to polyphonic, not monophonic, conductus? How to explain, then, the reason why skilled singers are a prerequisite for the execution of such pieces; surely, a monophonic piece of any kind would have presented no particular obstacle for choirboys, let alone the cantor, for example. Magro believes that the conductus were also sung polyphonically.143 Finally, fragments of the above-mentioned 1450 ordinal leave out any of the paraliturgical richness so characteristic of the Saint-Martin Circumcision office in previous centuries, as it omits specific references to polyphony, indicating that the peculiarities of this festival may have all but vanished, at least from official records, perhaps for reasons similar to those that applied in cathedral chapters throughout France.144 Given the presence of vicars in in W1, fo. 12v, and F, fo. 40v, and in Montpellier, Bibliothèque Interuniversitaire, Section de Médecine, MS H.196, fo. 4v. 140 They find no concordance in the twelfth-century repertory of Aquitanian polyphony, for example, nor are they found in extant manuscripts containing polyphony up to the end of the fourteenth century. See Gillingham, Saint-Martial Mehrstimmigkeit; and Rism 15041. 141 Arlt, “The Office for the Feast of the Circumcision,” 328. 142 Both monophonic and polyphonic conductus are known. In the Circumcision offices of Beauvais and Sens, for example, the conductus was sung monophonically. See Arlt, Ein Festoffizium des Mittlealters; and Office de Pierre de Corbeil, 4. Polyphonic conductus are known from Le Puy, however (see Arlt, “The Office for the Feast of the Circumcision,” 329). 143 See Magro, “Plain-chant ou polyphonie?,” 373. 144 BnF lat. 16806, fos. 20v–22. To be sure, this may have to do with the different nature of both sources under consideration: contrary to the customary, which gives detailed information

67

68

St. Martin’s church in Tours

Saint-Martin by the second quarter of the thirteenth century (individuals who were often involved in singing polyphonic music) we should not be surprised that nascent polyphonic practices sprang up. These instances of polyphony heightened the liturgy of Martin’s church in Tours in ways that could be matched by no other church in the city. The exceptional character of the church’s liturgy was manifested in an even greater number of rituals, to which we now turn our attention.

The corpus of prosas Perhaps one of the most distinctive aspects of liturgy in Saint-Martin, and one that substantially enhanced the veneration of the saint, is the highly impressive body of prosas the canons cultivated, which by the early fourteenth century reached twenty-eight.145 A syllabic song of praise sung in Latin during the office, the prosa is usually interpolated toward the end of a responsory that concludes one of the nocturns (typically the final one), but sometimes it simply follows the responsory. Medieval usage of the term “prosa” is notoriously, albeit quite typically, flexible, but as far as the repertory that we shall consider below is concerned, use of the term “prosa” is both suitable and justifiable.146 about the identity of the clerics, their actions, and their responsibilities, the ordinal in question focuses on the liturgical items performed during the various feasts, and not on the specific unfolding of feasts. Moreover, it appears that a copy of the customary was placed in the choir of Saint-Martin well into the eighteenth century (Martimort, La Documentation liturgique, 225–26). On the reasons for which polyphonic practices are usually omitted from medieval records, see Robertson, Guillaume de Machaut and Reims, 44–45. 145 As is well known, the word prosa refers, strictu sensu, to sequence texts (see the illuminating discussions in Crocker, The Early Medieval Sequence; Schlager, Thematischer Katalog; and Sevestre, “Prose ou verse?” Yet, medieval usage of the term (and sometimes also its spelling: a thirteenth-century customary from Sens has “prossa,” for instance; BnF lat. 1206, fo. 44) was typically quite loose, and was employed in relation to various chants, including texted melismas and responsorial tropes found in a variety of office and Mass chants. Curiously, the term was even applied to melismas alone, as the example of the Worcester Codex instructs (see Holman, “Melismatic Tropes,” 37). The author of the customary consistently refers to the chants under discussion as “prosa,” a terminology I shall use as well. See Ruth Steiner and Keith Falconer, “Prosula,” in Grove Music Online; and Crocker, “Prosa,” ibid. 146 An examination of manuscripts from the collegiate church of Saint-Martin copied between the early fourteenth and the eighteenth centuries reveals the presence of a consistent scribal tradition: whether interpolated into a responsory or simply following it, whether in abbreviated form or spelled out, only a single designation, if any, is used to denote such additions to office responsories as we shall henceforth consider, and it is always “prosa.” For a discussion of pertinent terminology see Hofmann-Brandt, “Die Tropen,” Vol. I, 2–6; and Huglo, Les Livres de chant liturgique, 31. For a valuable discussion concerning the history of

The corpus of prosas

The solemnity of all Martinian festivals in Saint-Martin was increased by the addition of prosas, and nowhere is this more apparent than in Martin’s November 11 feast, which has two prosas concluding the first and second nocturns, respectively, and three prosas interpolated into the ninth responsory; they are discussed in Chapter 3. In general, the principal occasions for such pieces were feasts that ranked high in the church calendar. In Saint-Martin, this meant feasts to which the calendar accorded at least five candles, with the exception of a pair of three-candle festivals, St. Vincent (January 22) and St. Catherine (November 25), which also feature prosas (see Table 1.3). It is possible that the elevation in rank of certain feasts provided the impetus for the incorporation of a prosa into their office; as we have seen above, the ranks of Purification, John the Baptist, Peter and Paul, and Catherine were elevated at Saint-Martin in the course of the fifteenth century, and all of them indeed have prosas. That the prosas for these four feasts are not yet mentioned by the customary seems to support this line of reasoning. Unsurprisingly, the number of prosas assigned to a given celebration stands in direct relation to the respective rank it occupies in the calendar of the church: feasts of the Temporale and those of St. Martin are the recipients of the greatest number of prosas  – twenty-three  – distributed unevenly between the various constituents of the office. A single prosa, for example, concludes each of the three nocturns in Circumcision, and Christmas has a set of three prosas interpolated in the ninth responsory. Table 1.3 summarizes all the prosas known from medieval Saint-Martin. There were thirty such pieces between c. 1227 and the early fifteenth century (although only twenty-eight survive in service books) performed on sixteen different feast days (certain prosas were sung on more than one occasion). The unusual size of this repertory of the collegiate church and its dependent establishments is almost unrivaled in France. Another particularly rich tradition of prosa cultivation is found in Saint-Maur-des-Fossés: a twelfthcentury antiphoner from that church (BnF lat. 12044)  contains twentyseven prosas, most of which are unica.147 Equally remarkable is the fact that most of these extant prosas (twenty-five) from Saint-Martin are notated. Although the earliest extant sources that transmit notated prosas from SaintMartin date to between the late thirteenth and early fourteenth centuries, it the term and its various transformations see Crocker, “The Troping Hypothesis”; and Steiner, “Some Melismas for Office Responsories.” 147 See Kelly, “New Music from Old,” 377–83. As Huglo concludes, the added emphasis to the ninth responsory by way of the addition of a neuma, a prosa, or polyphony was especially widespread in monasteries in the Loire valley, and particularly in Fleury (Huglo, “Du répons de l’office,” 36).

69

Table 1.3 The prosas known in Saint-Martin Feast

1 Vesp.

Comp.

Noct. I

Noct. II

Translation of St. Martin’s Head (Dec. 1) Vigil of Christmas (Dec. 24) Christmas (Dec. 25)

Innocents (Dec. 28) Vigil of Circumcision

Circumcision (Jan. 1) Vincent (Jan. 22)

Purification of the Virgin (Feb. 2) Subvention of St. Martin (May 12)

Letemur gaudiis*†

Inviolata integra is sung during the procession*†

Customary, pp. 36, 38

Sedentem in superne†

Inviolata integra†b Vernabant nunc supernorum

Noct. III

2 Vesp.

Source (e.g.)

Exultemus et letemur

Attested only in the 18th c.

Conditor glorie†

BmT 149, fo. 68v

(1) Fac deus munda,† (2) Familiam custodi,† (3) Facinora nostra†a Identity of prosa not disclosed*†

BmT 149, fos. 78v–79v

Amplexus parietem† Sanguine passionis sue* Inviolata integra

BmT 149, fo. 89; fo. 90v; fo. 92v BmT 149, fo. 467; BmT 150, fo. 407* BmT 149, fo. 487v

Sanantur*c or Exultemus et letemur

BmT 149, fo. 533v; BnF Rés., vélin-2871

Customary, p. 29

Feast

1 Vesp.

Comp.

Noct. I

Noct. II

2 Vesp.

Preparator veritatis Factus sospes

John the Baptist (June 24) Peter and Paul (June 29) Translation and Ordination of St. Martin (July 4) Martin (Nov. 11)

Non debiles annos

Qui calcavit speculum

Nicholas (Dec. 6)

Custodi nos rex

Hic sanctus languidos* Prophetico plenus spiramine

Exultemus et letemur Calix christi dictus est

(1) Post derelicta, (2) Ad patriam redit, (3) Octogenus agens Eterne virgo memorie Sospitati dedit egros Octogenus agens Ut sit plena

Source (e.g.) BmT 159, fos. 175v–176 BmT 159, fos. 180v–181 BmT 150, fo. 472r–v

Exultemus et letemur

Catherine (Nov. 25)

Reversion of St. Martin (Dec. 13) Corpus Christi

Noct. III

BmT 159, fos. 284v–288v

BmT 150, fo. 601

Creature totius gubernator

BmT 149, fos. 394v–395 BmT 1021, fo. 154r–v BmT 159, ff. 160v–169v

Prosas are notated, unless asterisked. Prosas mentioned in the customary (albeit not always by name) are followed by †. Although a prosa might occur in more than one service book, only an individual occurrence is listed in the “Source” column. In BmT 150 Amplexus parietem concludes the second nocturn, and Facinora [nostra] the third (fos. 87–88v).

a

In this particular position and feast, this prosa appears only in BmT 149. It is absent from BmT 159, however.

b c

Although the prosa is transmitted in a notated breviary, the scribe gives only the incipit of this piece, which does not appear to be extant elsewhere.

72

St. Martin’s church in Tours

is nonetheless possible to point to an even earlier period in which some of them were already firmly in place in the liturgy of the church. This can be gleaned from the customary, which already confirms the existence of ten prosas by the early thirteenth century, about a century prior to the first extant service books for the office in Saint-Martin. The identity of two of these prosas must remain a matter of speculation, each for a different reason. In one instance, the customary simply utilizes the generic designation “prosa” without ever disclosing its identity. A prosa is reportedly sung immediately following the responsory Centum [quadraginta quattuor] on December 28 (Innocents), a day traditionally presided over by choirboys. The responsory Centum concludes the office of Innocents in Saint-Martin, yet extant sources do not feature a corresponding prosa.148 In a second case, the only responsorial prosa out of the ten mentioned in the customary whose title is in fact spelled out, Letemur gaudiis, is missing altogether from extant service books for the office. The only other known concordance of this prosa appears in a twelfth-century manuscript from Notre-Dame of Laon, where it is associated with the responsory Isti sunt sancti for the feast of the Innocents.149 The titles of the remaining eight prosas cited in the customary can be revealed with a reasonable degree of certainty by comparison to prosas found in service books from Saint-Martin and dating from the fourteenth century on. The first reference to a prosa is found in conjunction with the vigil of Christmas: “Following Matins, everyone walks to the chapter, and the cantor begins the Christmas responsory Judea et Jerusalem, with a prosa, “[D]ebent cantare juvenes, in festo eorum, ad Matutinas et ad posteriores Vesperas, nonum responsorium, scilicet Centum, cum prosa ” (Consuetudines Ecclesiae Beati Martini Turonensis, 29). There are at least eight prosas commonly associated with this responsory outside Tours. Only one of them, Sedentem in superne, was also known in Tours, albeit in connection with a different feast; perhaps it was also sung during Innocents. See Hofmann-Brandt, “Die Tropen,” Vol. II, 149. 149 What is more, it is atypical for the author of the customary to mention a prosa without referring to it as such: “post incipit cantor Letemur gaudiis” (Consuetudines Ecclesiae Beati Martini Turonensis, 36). For the prosa text see RH 10087. Letemur gaudiis is also known as an offertory prosa (Ah, Vol. IL, 313; and Hofmann-Brandt, “Die Tropen,” Vol. II, 75), but owing to its position within the liturgy, the beginning of First Vespers on New Year’s Eve, there is no reason to believe it is related to Mass. Incidentally, in his famous 1198 ordinance for Notre-Dame of Paris, Odo of Sully prescribes that First Vespers on New Year’s Eve commence with Letemur gaudiis as well. See Wright, Music and Ceremony, 241. The Laon concordance is found in Laon, Bibliothèque municipale 263, fo. 108r–v. Although the responsory Isti sunt sancti is also chanted in Saint-Martin during Innocents (e.g., BmT 149, fo. 432), no prosa is ever prescribed for this celebration in extant sources. See Hofmann-Brandt, “Die Tropen,” Vol. II, 75. The customary mentions one additional prosa in connection with Circumcision, Hac die (Consuetudines Ecclesiae Beati Martini Turonensis, 38), but here Gâtineau has in mind a sequence rather than a responsorial prosa. The sequence in question is probably Hac die festa (see Ah., Vol. VIII, 16). 148

The corpus of prosas

but without a verse.”150 The prosa in question is undoubtedly Conditor glorie, assigned to this responsory in BmT 149. The three prosas for Christmas are also briefly mentioned, although the exact number and name of each is not divulged.151 An additional prosa reportedly follows the Marian responsory Gaude [Maria], sung during a procession on the vigil of New Year’s.152 It may be possible to identify this prosa as Inviolata integra, which follows the responsory Gaude on Purification. Finally, the unidentified prosas for Circumcision may be none other than the trio Sedentem in superne, Inviolata integra, and Amplexus parietem.153 The majority of the thirty individual prosas listed in Table  1.3 are not mentioned in the customary at all: twenty appear exclusively in fourteenthand fifteenth-century service books, but eight appear in service books as well as in the customary, while two are found uniquely in the customary. It would appear, then, that the overwhelming majority of prosas sung in Saint-Martin were additions made between the second quarter of the thirteenth century and c. 1320, when the Corpus Christi office in BmT 159 was copied,154 and that a relatively large number of the prosas that were featured in Saint-Martin by the early thirteenth century (at least eight out of ten) continued to be revered and used in subsequent centuries as well. It was the heritage of devotion to St. Martin in particular, however, that the canons of Saint-Martin were entrusted to uphold, and in the following chapters we shall examine more closely the various ways in which they did so. Through the composition of new chants and the institution of new feasts, the liturgy composed in Martin’s honor in Tours resembled that of no other church in Europe. The outline of the liturgical issues in this chapter will be enriched by a closer examination of selected extant chants. These explications will also enlarge our understanding of the local politics of Tours, in which Martin’s liturgy played a major role, and the national resonances of the way the cult was celebrated there. “Post Matutinas, vadunt omnes in capitulo, et incipit cantor anni novi responsorium Judea et Jerusalem, cum prosa, sine versu” (Consuetudines Ecclesiae Beati Martini Turonensis, 31). 151 “In festo Natalis … post nonum responsorium et prosas” (ibid.). These prosas are discussed in some detail in Chapter 3. 152 Ibid., 38. This prosa may be one of fifteen such pieces that are associated with the responsory Gaude (see Hofmann-Brandt, “Die Tropen,” Vol. II, 153). On the many chant genres associated with Gaude Maria see Haggh, “From Auxerre to Soissons,” 168–73. 153 “Post dicuntur versiculi et prose responsorii” (Consuetudines Ecclesiae Beati Martini Turonensis, 37). 154 See Maurey, “Heresy, Devotion, and Memory,” 159–96. BmT 159, whose centrality to the study of music in the liturgy in Saint-Martin cannot be overstated, is examined in depth in Appendix B below (251–67). 150

73

2

Universal and local foundations of Martin’s cult

Truly he is a soldier, as he is the colleague of the Apostles and the prophets. From the trope Gentis lingue to the introit Beatus Martinus

Less than a century after his death in 397, two annual feasts dedicated to St. Martin were already inscribed in the calendars of Tours, the city where he served as bishop and from which his aura radiated across France and Europe. In addition to his Vita, additional biographies and miracle accounts of Martin continued to be written in subsequent centuries as well, inspiring an enduring interest in the saint that in turn spawned a plethora of visual, musical, and literary reflections.1 Born to pagan parents in a small village in what is today Hungary, Martin was enlisted – unwillingly, according to his biographer, who tells us that Martin was subjected to the military oath “arrested and in chains” – in the Roman army when he was fifteen years old. He served under Emperors Constantius I and Julian for about three years before ultimately renouncing the military and deciding to become a soldier in the service of God. Although he achieved fame owing, in the main, to the deeds and miracles that followed his conversion to Christianity in the 360s, the act that ushered him into the pantheon of Christian saints took place when he was still an unbaptized soldier. Riding his horse on a cold winter day, Martin noticed an unclothed beggar at the gate of Amiens. Concerned, he cut his cape into two, covering the poor man with one half; in a dream the following night, the beggar revealed himself to be Christ.2 This scene was a widespread motif of medieval miniatures, stained-glass windows, statues, and embroideries, and it became the subject matter for a host of Renaissance painters.3 These two incongruous facets of the saint’s life – an armed soldier on the one hand, and performing an act of charity and compassion on the Already in 461, the feast is mentioned in the preface to the Acts of the Council of Tours. See Lecoy de La Marche, Saint Martin, 654. 2 The beggar himself became somewhat of an attribute of the saint. See Helas, “The Clothing of Poverty and Sanctity,” 249. 3 For selected depictions see, for example, L’Iconographie martinienne; and Saint Martin dans l’art et l’imagerie. 1

74

Universal and local foundations of Martin’s cult

other – were harmoniously drawn to underscore the appeal of the saint, who used an attribute of his former worldly life to point to his new pious calling. As we have already seen, Martin’s prominence was particularly a product of his accomplishments in the episcopal and monastic realms; he served the three final decades of his life in the double capacity of monk and bishop of Tours. As unblemished as his reputation in the Middle Ages was, the posthumous image of Martin could not have been propagated as effectively as it was were it not for the literary oeuvre of Sulpicius Severus (c. 360–c. 420), a GalloRoman lawyer and disciple who befriended him, became his follower, and set out to write his biography within his lifetime. Owing in part to Sulpicius Severus, and mainly to the hundreds of miracles collected by Gregory of Tours in the sixth century, the cult of St. Martin is “the best-documented … in the late-antique West.”4 To be sure, political circumstances were also instrumental in the rise of Martin’s veneration, for “it was only with Clovis’ conquest of [the Loire Valley] in 507 that Martin’s cult achieved wider dispersion through Gaul, thanks to his being adopted by the Merovingians as their patron saint.”5 Nevertheless, it was on account of the engaging Vita by Sulpicius Severus, made popular among clerics and the general public throughout the Christian world, that the cult of Martin spread and prospered. The Vita by Sulpicius Severus was published just months before the death of its protagonist. It was complemented by three additional Epistles, and finally by the author’s Dialogues from c. 404, the second of which adds substantial information about St. Martin, backed with named witnesses to deeds and miracles.6 The ensemble of works by Sulpicius Severus inspired and informed virtually all subsequent forms of Martinian veneration, whether devotional, literary, anecdotal, iconographic, or musical in nature; it was Sulpicius Severus who “transformed bishop Martin into St. Martin.”7 The centrality of Sulpicius Severus in all things Martinian is, above all, evidenced Van Dam, Saints and Their Miracles, 5. On the claims made in the Vita and on the possible motivations for making them, see Rosenwein, “St. Odo’s St. Martin,” 318–21. 5 Stancliffe, St. Martin and His Hagiographer, 361. See also the seminal study by Beaujard, Le Culte des saints en Gaule. Although Gregory of Tours claimed that Clovis adopted Martin as patron saint, it was probably a process that started with Clovis, only culminating during his own bishopric. It may well be that in its early stages Martin’s cult was not as successful as Gregory would have liked us to believe. I thank Professors Ian Wood and Yitzhak Hen for their insights (personal communication). 6 Stancliffe, St. Martin and His Hagiographer, 105; and Abou-El-Haj, The Medieval Cult of Saints, 8–9. All translations of the writings of Sulpicius Severus in this book are taken from Sulpicius Severus, “Life,” “Dialogues,” and “Letters.” For an excellent French translation, critical edition, and in-depth commentary on each chapter see Sulpicius Severus, Vie de Saint Martin. 7 Van Dam, Saints and Their Miracles, 13. Well into the nineteenth century, the texts by Sulpicius Severus continued to inform and inspire new musical items. See Fédoroff, “Les Cantiques à saint Martin.” 4

75

76

Universal and local foundations of Martin’s cult

in the priority his oeuvre invariably receives in collections of hagiographic texts dedicated to Martin (such a compilation is known as a Martinellus) from the early Middle Ages onward.8 One of several Martinelli prepared for the collegiate church of Saint-Martin is the manuscript BmT 1023, copied after 1323. The bulk of this 124-folio manuscript is devoted to the works of just two authors: the opening forty folios (fos. 1–40v) contain Sulpicius Severus’s Vita, Epistles, and Dialogues, while the ensuing forty-three folios (40v–83v) comprise Book IV of Gregory of Tours’s De Virtutibus sancti Martini.9 In addition to acknowledging the seminal role of Sulpicius Severus, BmT 1023 also bears witness to the extraordinary circumstances during which the Vita was written, that is, while Martin was still alive. Both of these themes are encapsulated in the historiated initial that opens the entire manuscript and that spectacularly dominates folio 1, as seen in Figure 2.1. The capital letter S marks the beginning of the Vita’s subtitle: Severus Desiderio fratri karissimo (“Severus to his dearest brother Desiderius”). The sinuous S effectively divides the miniature into two parts with contrasting backgrounds, each corresponding to distinct periods in Martin’s life: the lower part contains what is undoubtedly the most famous and frequent attribute of the saint, namely, his act of charity at the city gate of Amiens. Mounted on a horse and holding a sword in his right hand, he cuts his own cape into two and gives one half to a naked beggar. Conversely, the scene in the upper part of the historiated initial shows Martin in the autumn of his life; dressed in a black monk’s habit, he is sitting next to an empty lectern while Sulpicius Severus, holding the scarcely finished Vita in one hand and ready to walk away from him in the opposite direction, is making a farewell gesture to Martin with the other. The two parts of the initial S illustrate distinct chapters in Martin’s life, and yet, it seems that the artist wished to stress the continuity between them. The curved strokes of the S delineate the flow of the storyline, and in both upper and lower scenes, it is Martin’s use of the right hand that provides a sense of directionality as he makes consequential gestures: one involving an act of charity, the other pointing to his own biography. See Heinzelmann, “L’Hagiographie mérovingienne.” Fos. 101–08 contain the texts of nine lengthy lessons for the feast commemorating the Translation of the Head of St. Martin, instituted in 1323. Additional portions of BmT 1023 are likewise based on the writings of Sulpicius Severus and Gregory, making its dependence on them even more consequential. For the contents of this manuscript see Collon, Catalogue général, Vol. II, 745–46; and Straeten, Les Manuscrits hagiographiques, 141–42. Straeten states that BmT 1023 was copied in the early fifteenth century, but gives no explanation for his dating. Based on the iconography, this source has been dated by experts from the IRHT to c. 1340–50; see the database Enluminure, available at www.enluminures.culture.fr/documentation/ enlumine/fr/index3.html (accessed 3 May 2014).

8 9

Universal and local foundations of Martin’s cult

Figure 2.1  St. Martin and the beggar. BmT 1023, fo. 1.

Sulpicius Severus sought to promote Martin as a universal saint, rather than one tied to a particular city, and in virtually no part of his oeuvre do we find Martin mentioned in conjunction with Tours as much as he is portrayed as active outside of it. It was only in subsequent centuries that St. Martin would become St. Martin of Tours, and as we shall see further below, and particularly in Chapter  4, the precise nature of his close association with the city would be passionately debated. At the hands of Sulpicius Severus, however, Martin came to exemplify “the Christian ideal more fully than almost any other saint,” and ultimately, it was the episode in Amiens that was to change the course of his life.10 The ensuing dream in 10

Reames, “Saint Martin of Tours,” 133; and McKinley, “The First Two Centuries of Saint Martin of Tours,” 181. Much has been written on the relationship between St. Martin and his hagiographer, and various analyses have suggested a variety of motivations behind Severus’s

77

78

Universal and local foundations of Martin’s cult

which Christ appeared to him authenticated his act of charity as a specifically Christian one. Christ praised Martin for clothing the beggar while “still but a catechumen,” and for displaying an exemplary Christian meekness by wanting to receive baptism after hearing his praise, rather than feeling elated by the honor.11 It is undoubtedly owing to the portrayal of Martin as the epitome of Caritas – the greatest of the three theological virtues – that literary and pictorial accounts of Martin’s life frequently commence with, or bring special attention to, this momentous episode at Amiens, leaving out earlier phases of his life. The Martinian cycle of stained-glass windows in Chartres Cathedral (dating to the thirteenth century), for instance, opens with the Charity scene, as does the one found in the St. Francis chapel of Tours Cathedral (end of the thirteenth century).12 And, like many other Martinelli, BmT 1018 – an eleventh-century lectionary from Saint-Martin – opens with the Vita by Severus, and the first of only three episodes complemented by an illumination (fo. 9v) is Martin’s act of charity.13 Martin’s legendary deed also receives a central place within the twentyseven chapters that make up the Vita; it essentially inaugurates a sequence of events and deeds taking place before he became bishop (Chapters 1–8), occurring mainly during his army service and shortly thereafter. These chapters serve as a biographical sketch of Martin and underscore his embodiment of Christian ideals well before his conversion – as the episode in Amiens clearly demonstrates – and admiration of him as a holy man. What is more, they detail two miracle accounts in which he brought back to life two dead men, the first of which takes place in the hermitage that Martin founded in Ligugé.14 It is the resuscitation of a catechumen, who had already been dead for three days in Ligugé, that furnishes the reader with the first “proof or tangible evidence of Martin’s miracles”; from that time on, Sulpicius Severus writes at the conclusion of Chapter 7, “the reputation of the blessed Martin rose in brilliance. Already held to be a saint, he



11 12



13 14

adamant support of Martin, ranging from the psychological to the political. See, for example, McKinley, “The First Two Centuries of Saint Martin of Tours”; Babut, Saint Martin de Tours; Sulpicius Severus, Vie de Saint Martin, Vol. I, 171–210; Van Dam, Saints and Their Miracles, esp. Chapter 1; and Stancliffe, St. Martin and His Hagiographer. A recent study regards Sulpicius Severus as a lawyer of considerable skill whose writings essentially defend Martin’s saintly status from contemporary criticism. See Reed, “Sulpicius Severus and Martin of Tours.” Sulpicius Severus, “Life,” 108. Tours Cathedral has two stained-glass panels dedicated to St. Martin; in addition to the one mentioned above, the one found in the choir (dating to the third quarter of the thirteenth century) actually begins with Martin renouncing his weapons, with the scene in Amiens following. Arretaud, “La Vie de saint Martin”, 62, 93; and Skubiszewski, “Une vita sancti Martini.” On the history of this hermitage see Bord, Histoire de l’abbaye.

Universal and local foundations of Martin’s cult

was now regarded as powerful in wonders and truly apostolic.”15 The insistence on Martin being on a par with the Apostles was to be repeated and intensified in subsequent writings by Sulpicius Severus, by commentators throughout the Middle Ages, and in the saint’s office as well. Both Epistles 1 and 2, for instance, liken Martin to the Apostles, yet the former makes this comparison all the more explicit: not only is Martin declared to be “in everything like the Apostles,” but more specifically, the example of Paul (his tribulations at the hands of the Gentiles as told in Acts 28:4) is cited as a fitting analogy.16 Johannes Beleth – with Durand and others repeating him in the thirteenth century – echoed that belief by writing “it is known that St. Martin is not said to be par apostolis for resuscitating certain dead [people] … but because of another certain miracle” that took place while Martin was officiating Mass. While the saint was blessing the main altar, a globe of fire reportedly sprang as if from his head, a sign that was interpreted by Beleth to mean that the Holy Spirit descended on Martin exactly as it did on the Apostles at Pentecost.17 The liturgy composed in Martin’s honor, moreover, is pregnant with allusions to his apostolicity, evidenced in about one-third of all Martinian hymns composed in the Middle Ages, as well as in chants such as O Martine, o pie, an antiphon to the Magnificat that equates Martin with the biblical prophets, adding that he is “joined to the Apostles.”18 Chapters 9 and 10 of the Vita narrate the events leading to the election of Martin as bishop of Tours, and dwell especially on the resistance he met owing to his decidedly unepiscopal demeanor: “unpresentable in his Sulpicius Severus, “Life,” 114. Sulpicius Severus, “Letters,” 142; and Reames, “Saint Martin of Tours,” 138–39. Additional comparisons between Martin and the Apostles appear in the fifth chapter of the Second Dialogue (Sulpicius Severus, “Dialogues,” 208–10), as well as in the author’s second book of Chronicles, Chapter 49 (essentially a sacred history of the world). Epistle 1 is addressed to Eusebius, Epistle 2 to the Deacon Aurelius. References to the Latin follow the critical edition in Sulpicius Severus, Vie de Saint Martin, Vol. I, 334–44. 17 “De beato Martino sciendum est, quod par apostolis non dicitur pro suscitatione mortuorum quorundam … sed propter aliud quoddam miraculum.” See Beleth, Summa de ecclesiasticis officiis, 320–21; and Durand, Rationale divinorum officiorum, CCCM 140B, 103–04. The miracle of the globe of fire is recounted in Sulpicius Severus, “Dialogues,” 203, and discussed in Farmer, Communities of Saint Martin, 242. 18 “O Martine, prophetis compar, apostolis consertus.” The antiphon Martinus signipotens fulgore makes a similar claim. For an edition of the text and music of these antiphons see Historia Sancti Martini. Eight hymns compare Martin to the Apostles: (1) Martine, par apostolis; (2) Martine, iam consul poli; (3) Martini renitent en speciosa dies (all three composed by Odo of Cluny); (4) In laude Martini, Deus; (5) Martinus, magnus pontifex; (6) Margarita sacerdotum, Martine sanctissime; (7) Martine, par apostolis (this one written by Guibert of Gembloux, on the model of Odo’s), and (8) Pontificum Martinus decus, Martine piorum. 15 16

79

80

Universal and local foundations of Martin’s cult

appearance, shabbily dressed, [and] with unkempt hair.” Sulpicius Severus insists on the qualities of Martin that remained immutable to the authority and gravitas that his bishopric might otherwise confer, confirming the ascetic image he saw manifested in Martin from an early age. Thus, Martin preferred to live in a cell attached to his church, and when visitors caused him too much distraction, he moved to a far more secluded location some two miles from Tours. The image of Martin the monk was in fact heightened by his election as bishop, for attention to his austere humor increased as a consequence of the apparent discord between what his position entailed, and what his disposition bore out. In the opening chapter of the Second Dialogue, for instance, Sulpicius Severus stresses that Martin was never seen using the bishop’s chair, preferring instead to sit on a “rustic bench of the kind that slaves use.”19 It is this precise attribute that is so succinctly depicted in Figure 2.1 above: Martin is wearing the black habit of a monk, yet the scene clearly depicts him during his tenure as bishop of Tours (he died several months after telling his life story to Sulpicius Severus). The juxtaposition of this pictorial feature with the prominent textual rubric that introduces it, clearly identifying Martin as archiepiscopus turonensis – not monachus – reinforces the perceived twofold image of Martin. By the time the miniature was copied, this perception was already deeply entrenched in the cult of St. Martin, in part owing to the writings of Odo, who served as canon of Saint-Martin before becoming the influential abbot of Cluny (927–942). In a hymn written in honor of St. Martin in the early tenth century, Odo appealed to the “gem of all bishops [gemma presulum] to come to the aid of the monastic order, now almost lapsed,” confirming Severus’s statement that what Martin “had been before [an ascetic, a monk], he firmly continued to be.”20 It is this image of Martin – the bishop who lives like a monk – that continues to inform most of the remainder of the Vita (Chapters 11–24), which revolves around his accomplishments in three main spheres: first, “freeing people [mostly pagans] from the error of superstition” (to quote from the conclusion of Chapter  11); secondly, healing the sick and the paralyzed (Chapters 16–19); and finally, encounters with the devil (Chapters 21–24). We follow Martin as he diverts falling trees, turns fire back upon itself, and ventures out to the countryside to destroy pagan temples. “The miracles Sulpicius Severus, “Dialogues,” 201. “Monastico nunc ordini jam pene lapso subveni,” PL 133:516A. Quoted and translated in Rosenwein, “St. Odo’s St. Martin,” 324. See also Sulpicius Severus, “Life,” 116. Significantly, when Martin reportedly appeared to Abbot Odo in a dream, he was dressed like a bishop, not a monk. See Leclercq, “S. Martin dans l’hagiographie monastique,” 186.

19 20

Universal and local foundations of Martin’s cult

of the Vita,” as Sherry Reames observes, “tend to serve two pastoral functions: an immediate human need is met, suffering relieved or prevented; and, as a result, the community of believers is extended.”21 Moreover, amid a myriad of miracle stories and daring acts conducted away from his episcopal see, the authority of Martin-the-bishop is further consolidated in a single chapter within the Vita (Chapter  20), which serves to distinguish him from other bishops. According to Sulpicius Severus, Martin paid a visit to Emperor Maximus, “a man of ferocious temper and full of pride,” to whom, Sulpicius stresses, “numerous bishops from many parts of the world … [showed] their disgraceful flattery” (Chapter 20). During a festive meal, Martin was given the honor of drinking first from the cup, or perhaps blessing it, with everyone expecting the emperor to be offered the cup thereafter. Martin, however, “passed the cup to his priest, convinced that there was no one more worthy to drink immediately after himself, and that it would not be proper to prefer to a priest either the emperor himself or those who were next in rank to the emperor.” Effectively humiliating the emperor, this episode serves a double purpose: it testifies to Martin’s unchanged austere deportment after he became bishop, and it sets him apart from the obsequious bishops who opposed his election and who figure prominently as his rivals throughout the Vita. Further consolidating his standing as bishop and making his Vita an episcopal model for generations to come, it was in the course of performing a quintessentially episcopal function that he became ill and died shortly thereafter. He answered the call of a church in distress and came to restore peace among the clergy of the parish church of Candes. Still in Candes, he began to lose his strength, passing away there several days later.22 A testimony to the great appeal that Martin continued to have in the centuries that ensued, further biographies and miracle accounts were written in the fifth and sixth centuries; they bear witness to the enduring memory and tremendous influence Martin exerted over the course of subsequent ages. Sometime around 463, Paulinus of Périgueux wrote a versified Vita of Martin. Containing 3,600 verses, it is divided into six parts, the concluding one entirely devoted to miracles wrought by the saint after the publication of the Vita by Sulpicius Severus, and reported to Paulinus by none other than Martin’s successor in Tours, Bishop Perpetuus. By the sixth century, interest in the life of St. Martin gave way to a perspective that sought to understand him primarily as an intermediary of 21 22

Reames, “Saint Martin of Tours,” 134. Sulpicius Severus, “Letters,” 153–59.

81

82

Universal and local foundations of Martin’s cult

divine power, and less as an individual with a distinctive life story. When Gregory became bishop of Tours in 573, he effectively also became the guardian of the cult of St. Martin, the latter turning into “the focus of his life and his career”: he devoted most of the space of his four-volume book dedicated to Martin (De virtutibus sancti Martini, apparently begun in 576 and completed in the 580s) to some 200 miracles performed by the saint posthumously, dwelling very little on his biography.23 It was around that time, and probably owing to Gregory’s own interest, that Venantius Fortunatus, the Italian hagiographer and poet, later in life bishop of Poitiers, versified a somewhat shorter Vita of Martin between 573 and 590.24 To be sure, Gregory, like his predecessors, continued to rely on the work of Sulpicius Severus; his Ten Books of History reveal the degree to which Sulpicius essentially “created” the figure of St. Martin. The following excerpt, drawn from the History and essentially all that Gregory has to say about Martin’s biography, states that Martin came from the town of Sabaria in Pannonia … he came to Gaul, converted a great number of pagans, and knocked down their temples and idols. He performed many miracles among the people: before he was made bishop he raised two men from the dead, but after his consecration he raised only one … when his earthly course was run, he died in Candes, a village in his own diocese, in his eighty-first year. From that village he was carried by boat and buried in Tours on the spot where his tomb is now venerated. I have read a life of St. Martin in three books written by Sulpicius Severus.25

In contrast to the early image of Martin as a figure worthy of emulation – in Chapter 1 of the Vita, Sulpicius Severus writes that the “presentation of exemplary actions of great men” is meant to arouse emulation in readers – the one fashioned by Gregory means not so much to inspire by recalling the saint’s youth, conversion, mission, and other “verifiable facts,” but to insist on “the obligation of the faithful … to honor [Martin] as he deserves – and On the relationship between Gregory as bishop of Tours and his patron St. Martin see Van Dam, Saints and Their Miracles, 68–81. For Gregory’s text, see his Libri de Virtutibus. For an English translation, see Van Dam, Saints and Their Miracles, 200–303. Sulpicius Severus, on the other hand, is very much interested in “searching out the facts” about Martin, writing that he was “consumed with a longing to know” him (Sulpicius Severus, “Life,” 137). The above analysis is indebted to Reames, “Saint Martin of Tours,” 139–40. 24 Van Dam, “Paulinus of Périgueux and Perpetuus of Tours,” and Saints and Their Miracles: 142; Gobry, De saint Martin à saint Benoît, 81–121. On the two versified vitae of Martin, and especially on the shift in the image of the saint that they mark, see the discussion in Labarre, Le Manteau partagé. For a recent study examining the narrative structure of Fortunatus’s versified poem, see Roberts, “Venantius Fortunatus’s Life of Saint Martin.” On the Vita as a model for other hagiographies as well as on its progeny, see Bernard M. Peebles, introduction to Sulpicius Severus, “Life,” 93–96. 25 Gregory of Tours, Libri historiarum X, X.31, 594. 23

Universal and local foundations of Martin’s cult

demands – to be honored.” To that end, Gregory calls attention to claims that Martin performed miracles far greater than those wrought by the Desert Fathers.26 He emphasizes accounts testifying to his prowess as a bishop, sacrificing details pertaining to Martin’s ordeals and struggles both before and after his conversion.27 Given Gregory’s somewhat unexpected election as bishop of Tours and the challenges to his authority that characterized the early years of his episcopate in the city, it is not surprising that Gregory’s Martin is decidedly cast in the mold of a steadfast bishop, one who earns the respect of his flock and who is held in admiration by all. Such was the Martin who came to the aid of Gregory shortly after his arrival to Tours, when a potion made with dust from the saint’s tomb miraculously saved the life of the newly installed bishop, providing the endorsement necessary to win the approval of the citizens of Tours.28 Following in the footsteps of Sulpicius Severus, Gregory continued to minimize Martin’s military career; for him, Martin was a civilian saint. One of the miracles reported by Gregory is telling in this regard: a demon repeatedly tried to possess a man named Landulf, who consequently appealed to St. Martin so that he might be saved. One day the demon appeared to the man in the guise of a veteran soldier, announcing himself as the “lord Martin whom [he was] invoking.” But Landulf replied that if he were indeed Martin, he should make the sign of the cross instead, underscoring the perceived extrinsic nature of the military vocation and its associated garb to the saint.29 For reasons we shall see in Chapter 5, it was only by the twelfth century that St. Martin ceased to exemplify solely the ideal of the non-combatant soldier and began to be viewed as the prototype of the Christian knight, a process that had important artistic ramifications. By the time Sulpicius Severus’s Vita inspired Jacobus de Voragine’s Golden Legend, a veritable bestseller in the later Middle Ages, four additional versified poems dedicated to St. Martin had already been composed, in addition to an abridged, sermon-like Vita written by Alcuin at the beginning of the ninth century.30 One life was written in the course of the eleventh century by Ælfric, archbishop of York, while two others The Martin who emerges from Gregory’s Histories is different from the Martin in his hagiographies. According to Yitzhak Hen, this is because of the different audiences Gregory had in mind, and because of the different motivations he had for writing in each case (personal communication). 27 Reames, “Saint Martin of Tours,” 140, 141. 28 Gregory of Tours, “The Miracles of the Bishop St. Martin,” II.1 (trans. Van Dam, Saints and Their Miracles, 228–29, and discussed on p. 291). 29 Ibid. (trans. p. 237, and discussed on p. 283). 30 Alcuin’s Vita Sancti Martini Turonensis is edited in PL 101:657–62. See Jullien and Perelman, Auctores Galliae, 498–501. 26

83

84

Universal and local foundations of Martin’s cult

were written during the twelfth century: by Richer, abbot of Saint-Martin of Metz, and by Guibertus, abbot of Gembloux, whose scathing criticism of the canons of Saint-Martin of Tours discussed in the previous chapter might have prompted him to “save” the honor of St. Martin by taking on himself the duty he believed the canons had neglected.31 Finally, in the course of the following century a life of Martin emerged from the milieu of the church of Saint-Martin itself. La vie monseignor Saint Martin de Tors (sic) was written in the vernacular by canon Péan Gâtineau, probably around the middle of the thirteenth century.32 But it was the popular Golden Legend that was to leave a significant imprint on future understandings of Martin in the centuries to come. A collection of saintly moral tales written in Latin and probably intended to be used by Dominican preachers as a vehicle for instruction, it offers a condensed version of the life, death, and miracles of Martin, drawing on an amalgam of sources consisting mainly of the Vita, the three Epistles, and the Dialogues by Sulpicius Severus, as well as on some miracle accounts reported by Gregory of Tours and others. The Martin of the Golden Legend (compiled c. 1260) emerges as a daring hero, respectful of authority, and devoid of the complexities and outward manifestation of emotion that were characteristic in the Vita, for instance. This transformation reflects the spiritual, literary, and practical priorities that informed Voragine.33 Of the numerous Martinian miracles that were known in the Middle Ages, Voragine chooses to recount mainly those displaying simple signs of power, reworking them in such a way that flattens their breadth, detaches them from their original historical context, and bears witness to Martin’s heroism. Thus, Jacobus informs his audience about the dog that Martin caused to stop barking, and about the serpent that was forced to change course while swimming – miracles that exhibit Martin’s supernatural powers. Miracles with tremendous human impact were likewise attenuated, leaving the magical powers that were invested in them, and omitting historical context and secondary characters. One such To judge from the testimony of Guibertus himself, fire destroyed the life of St. Martin that he had written in rhythmic verse. See Delehaye, “Guibert.” 32 Completed between 1229 and 1250, it also incorporates numerous details about contemporary practices and customs related to the cult of St. Martin in Tours. See Farmer, Communities of Saint Martin, 315–17. Gâtineau’s poem is edited by Werner Söderhjelm in Die altfranzösische Martinsleben. 33 As Reames demonstrates, the image of St. Martin that emerges from the pages of the Legenda does not derive from generic considerations (instructive accounts used by Dominican preachers) nor its purported audience (the laity). Voragine’s priorities are meticulously recounted by Reames, to whose analysis I am greatly indebted. See Reames, “Saint Martin of Tours,” 146–63. On the Golden Legend as a medieval bestseller see Reames, The “Legenda Aurea,” 197–209. 31

Universal and local foundations of Martin’s cult

example, testifying to Voragine’s penchant for dwelling on visible signs of divine power more than on the circumstances that led to their manifestation, has also to do with his ideas about hierarchies and about the relative merits of the monastic and episcopal spheres. While Sulpicius Severus clearly considered the monastic vocation as far superior to the episcopal one, Voragine viewed Martin’s episcopacy as the epitome of the saint’s calling. Not only does he leave out most details concerning Martin’s resolve to live as a monk while serving as bishop, Voragine also places Martin’s three resuscitations squarely during the saint’s tenure as bishop of Tours, thereby contradicting the statements made by Sulpicius Severus and Gregory of Tours about Martin’s miraculous powers effectively diminishing during his bishopric.34 Like earlier authors, Voragine considers Martin on a par with the Apostles, but his popularizing portrayal of Martin insists upon high esteem for the priesthood in general and the class of bishops in particular. When referring to the miracle of the globe of fire that sprang from St. Martin’s head during Mass, the Golden Legend adopts an interpretation made by Beleth in the previous century, citing the miracle as a confirmation of Martin’s apostolic status. Voragine seems to have been expressing a conviction that apostolic grace was intrinsic to the class of bishops alone, thus further calling attention to Bishop Martin and detracting from Martin-the-monk.35 It was the custom at Saint-Martin that Sulpicius Severus’s Vita alone was allowed to stand on the main altar in the period leading to St. Martin’s November 11 feast. This practice attests to the quasi-relic status that the Vita itself had acquired already in the generation of Gregory of Tours, when a book containing the Vita reportedly survived the flames that reduced everything else around it to ashes.36 The Vita remained the fount of all compositions related to Martin. Many other literary works relied on it, such as the moralizing mystery play written by Andrieu de la Vigne He does so in the context of one of his sermons. See Reames, The “Legenda Aurea,” 112; and Farmer, Communities of Saint Martin, 241. 35 See Farmer, Communities of Saint Martin, 243. In a study dedicated to the image of St. Martin as it transpires from numerous hagiographic accounts, Jean Leclercq concluded that Martin was above all venerated as bishop: monastic hagiographers admired Martin as a “man of God,” rather than trying to imitate him. See Leclercq, “S. Martin dans l’hagiographie monastique,” 184. 36 “Et nota quod, a die Omnium Sanctorum usque ad Primam diei beati Martini Hyemalis est oblatio altaris beati Petri camerario, sed non ponuntur ibi reliquie nisi Vita beati Martini, et claves argentes.” Consuetudines Ecclesiae Beati Martini Turonensis, 83. Gregory’s miracle account is told in his Libri de Virtutibus II.42, translated in Van Dam, Saints and Their Miracles, 275–76. The ten-day period leading up to November 11 was sometimes known as Quadragesima sancti Martini, or the Lent of St. Martin. See Walsh, “Martinsnacht,” 128–29. 34

85

86

Universal and local foundations of Martin’s cult

and performed in Seurre in 1496 (Mystère de Saint-Martin). The persistent vitality of the Vita is perhaps uniquely embodied in the historiated initial reproduced in Figure 2.1 above, copied almost a century after the Golden Legend.37 Drawing attention not only to Martin and Sulpicius Severus, but uniquely also to the physical object that is the Vita itself, the historiated initial portrays Martin just as he has finished recounting events in his life to Sulpicius Severus, who, having copied them into a book, rushes to publicize them far and wide.38 The artist, then, makes the reader privy to the precise moment that enunciates the transformation of Martin from bishop and monk to saint, and explicitly makes Sulpicius Severus singlehandedly responsible both for penning the Vita and for its dissemination. This fact, notwithstanding its fame, rarely received a pictorial counterpart in medieval iconography, but, as we have seen above, it is perfectly warranted. By the time this miniature was copied, there were no fewer than five feasts dedicated to St. Martin in Tours, occasions that were balanced by an even greater number of opportunities to sing the saint’s praises during seasons of pilgrimage and in times of personal or political hardship. It is to these feasts that we now turn our attention.

The liturgy in honor of St. Martin (November 11) Martin’s primary festival of November 11 was celebrated from early on throughout Christendom and in every western rite.39 Owing to the success of the Vita by Sulpicius Severus, who emphasized Martin’s universal appeal and reduced the relative importance of Tours in his life, liturgies for the saint’s principal feast were composed in a variety of ecclesiastical regions, often independently of and perhaps even before Tours.40 As Dom Guy Oury has demonstrated, the prayers for the November 11 mass can be dated to the last quarter of the seventh century, testifying to the relative antiquity of this liturgy; and yet, some of the oldest witnesses to the Antiphonale Missarum transmit a more discontinuous picture. Two of these manuscripts, from Senlis and Mont-Blandin, transmit no mass at all for La Vigne, Le Mystère de Saint Martin. Largely based on the Vita, it also incorporates information from the Golden Legend. 38 See also the discussion of this miniature in Bousquet-Labouérie, “Image et rôle du pauvre,” 125. She identifies the person not as Sulpicius Severus, but simply as “a messenger.” 39 On the early diffusion of Martinmas see Planchart, “The Geography of Martinmas,” 119. 40 See Van Dam, Saints and Their Miracles, 16–17. 37

The liturgy in honor of St. Martin (November 11)

St. Martin on November 11, while the one from Corbie conflates Sts. Martin and Mennas (an earlier soldier-saint), whose chief feast was celebrated on that same date.41 From the eleventh century onwards, individual manuscripts transmit anywhere between one and four masses for the November 11 feast – one for the vigil, and up to three for the feast day itself – coupled with a combined total of dozens of tropes (many of which are specific to St. Martin), mainly to the introits, but also to a handful of offertories and communions and some ordinary chants as well. By the fourteenth century, moreover, there were about three dozen sequences in honor of St. Martin, virtually all composed for the November 11 feast, including one attributed to Notker Balbulus (Sacerdotum Christi, Martinum); one, Ave summa presulum, attributed to Radbod of Utrecht; and two to Adam of St. Victor (Gaude Syon, que diem recolis and Rex Christe, Martine decus).42 The mass whose chants had the most thoroughly proper texts – drawn from the predictable writings of Sulpicius Severus and occasionally also of Gregory of Tours  – is O beatum virum, which, although its first fully notated version has come down to us in manuscripts copied in the beginning of the eleventh century in the south of France, may well have been in existence already by the ninth century.43 It is found, moreover, in Italy and in Spain, and is transmitted subsequently also in northern France and as far as Ireland. It may be found assigned to the vigil of the feast or as the second mass of Martin’s November 11 feast, or of course as the sole mass when no other masses are prescribed. Its music is an adaptation of chants of the Common of Confessors whose only common denominator is what Peter Wagner called their “lofty, authentic melodies.”44 The following mass

Oury, “Les Messes de Saint Martin.” In the West, the cult of St. Mennas gradually yielded to that of Martin, whereas in the East, the importance of Mennas caused St. Martin’s feast to be celebrated either a day before or a day after November 11. On the liturgical ramification of the latter see Planchart, “The Geography of Martinmas,” 119–29. The mass propers from Tours are taken from BmT 193, a twelfth-century sacramentary from Saint-Martin (fo. 177). 42 For a comprehensive list of Martinian sequences, see the double-asterisked items in Keane, “Martin Hymns of the Middle Ages,” 35–42, in conjunction with RH. For Radbod’s sequence, see The Utrecht Prosarium, II.52; Lochner, “Un évêque musicien”; and Bower, “The Sequence Repertoire.” 43 This mass and its patterns of transmission are analyzed in Planchart, “The Geography of Martinmas,” to which most of the information that follows is indebted. 44 Wagner, “Wie man im Mittelalter eine neue Choralmesse komponierte,” 168. See his analysis of this Martinmas in the preceding pages of his article. Wagner hypothesizes that the music of some of the verses of the alleluia (he analyzes the alleluia Beatus vir) and of the offertory might be of Gallican origin (165, 168). 41

87

88

Universal and local foundations of Martin’s cult

propers were sung on Martin’s feast in Saint-Martin of Tours, with the sequence Jucundemur hodie following the alleuia versicle Hic Martinus:45 Int. O beatum virum Grad. Ora pro nobis/Ver. Dum sacramenta All./Ver. Oculis ac manibus, (2) All./Ver. Hic Martinus Off. Martinus igitur Comm. Martinus Abrahe The mass sung In die was frequently drawn almost entirely from the Common of Confessors, with a distinguishing chant or chants that were proper to Martin. Just as it could be sung on the feast day of any confessor-bishop, the mass Statuit ei was also sung on Martin’s feast day all over Europe, including in Saint-Martin of Tours, where it also served as the mass for the July 4 feast. It often had a single Martinian chant that was proper, and sometimes also tropes that rendered the otherwise Common chants specific to Martin. At Saint-Martin of Tours and in the Use of Sarum, the alleluia Hic Martinus, set in organum in the NotreDame of Paris manuscripts F and W2, distinguished the saint’s Statuit ei mass from that of other confessor-bishops, and in Saint-Martin it was followed by the above-mentioned sequence Gaude Syon, que diem recolis:46 Int. Statuit ei Grad. Domine prevenisti/Ver. Vitam petiit All. Hic Martinus Off. Posuisti domine Comm. Beatus servus Contrary to the introits specific to St. Martin, which were rarely the recipients of trope sets north of the Alps, some of the most widespread trope sets In Saint-Martin, the first extant notation of this mass is in BmT 1023, fos. 121v–122v, dating to the middle of the fourteenth century. The sequence Jucundemur hodie (BmT 1023, fo. 122; RH 9857) is based on the music of the Christmas sequence Letabundus exultet. BmT Diocèse 1, the notated sacramentary from Saint-Martin copied during the first or second decades of the eleventh century, has unfortunately come down to us comprising only the Temporale. In a near contemporaneous sacramentary from Marmoutier, BmT 196, fo. 241 (unnotated), these proper chants were added to the right-hand margins by a different hand, quite possibly of the same period. See also Oury, “Formulaires anciens,” 30–31; and Planchart, “The Geography of Martinmas,” 129. The mass O beatum virum in the eleventh-century gradual from SaintMichel de Galaillac (BnF lat. 776, fos. 119v–120v), possibly the “oldest Aquitanian Mass for St. Martin,” as Planchart convincingly argues, is transcribed at 130–32. On the Martinian masses of the Gallican, Roman-Frankish, and Milanese rites, see Oury, “Les Messes de Saint Martin.” The music of many of these mass propers is analyzed in Fickett, “Chants for the Feast of St. Martin of Tours,” 15–71. 46 These mass propers are attested in Tours from as early as the eleventh century (BnF lat. 9434, fo. 242.) For the sequence, see Fassler, Gothic Song, 311–12. 45

The liturgy in honor of St. Martin (November 11)

specific to Martin were composed for the introit Statuit ei. A troper copied for the Cathedral of Apt in the eleventh century contains a dozen trope sets just for Statuit ei, reflecting the medieval predilection of introit tropes in general.47 They are found in manuscripts from southern Italy, France, England, and the Germanic lands, including the major Aquitanian and Anglo-Saxon tropers. Numerous and scattered over dozens of sources, the texts of many of them have been catalogued and studied in the volumes of the Corpus Troporum of Stockholm University. Editions of both text and music, however, exist for only a few tropes, including such popular ones as Divini fuerat, Gemma dei Martinus, and Martinus meritis,48 and also Celebremus hodie festivo and Gloriosus confessor domini.49 Martinus meritis is widely associated with the mass of St. Martin, with the exception of SaintMartial of Limoges, where it is associated with the liturgy of St. Martial. It was one of several chants that the liturgy of St. Martin shared with that of St. Martial, but which were eventually eliminated from the liturgy consecrated to Martial when Adémar de Chabannes (989–1034), the prolific monk of Saint-Cybard, updated and composed in his honor a new, apostolic liturgy in the course of the eleventh century.50 In general, tropes for the offertory and communion were far outnumbered by tropes for the introit, and the mass for St. Martin was no exception, as evidenced in BnF lat. 909 (a troper from Saint-Martial of Limoges, copied in the first decades of the eleventh century). There, a chain of eleven tropes for the introit Statuit ei is followed by just a single trope each for the offertory Posuisti and its versicle Magna est, and one for the communion Beatus servus.51 Finally, tropes for the ordinary of the mass for November 11 are considerably less prevalent and widespread, have few concordances, and are usually not specific to Martin, Planchart, “The Geography of Martinmas,” 128 and 145. For the dating and origin of Apt, Musée Trésor de la Cathédral Sainte-Anne, MS 17, as well as for the Statuit ei tropes sung on St. Martin’s feast, see Björkvall, Les Deux Tropaires d’Apt, 56–58 and 102. For the melodies of these tropes see Introitus-Tropen, 98–115. 48 Some trope sets were associated with more than one saint, as with Divini fuerat, which was sung also during the feasts of Sts. Sylvester, Magloire, and others, likewise in conjunction with the introit Statuit ei; see, for instance, the examples cited in Planchart, The Repertory of Tropes at Winchester, Vol. II, 167–68. These three sets of trope lines are discussed and transcribed (from BnF n.a.l. 1235, a twelfth-century troper from Nevers) in Reier, “The Introit Trope Repertory at Nevers,” Vol. II, 54, 69, 84, 99, 107; and Vol. III, 128–29, 108, 109–10. 49 Introitus-Tropen, 101, 108. 50 Grier, The Musical World of a Medieval Monk, 100–15. There exist also a few tropes to the offertory Posuisti domine, such as Celse decus and Munere namque for the versicle Magna est, whose texts, however, were not specific to Martin, and are found also in conjunction with many other feasts. See Johnstone, “The Offertory Trope,” 122. 51 BnF lat. 909, fos. 54v–57. The trope Hic dictis (fo. 57) and its host communion were both part of the St. Martial liturgy as well, before they were deemed unsuitable by Adémar (see Grier, The Musical World of a Medieval Monk, 114). 47

89

90

Universal and local foundations of Martin’s cult

such as the Agnus Dei trope Omnipotens eterna, found also in the liturgies of various feasts of the Temporale, and also in that of St. Martial.52 As Alejandro Planchart has demonstrated, the dissemination of other Martinian masses was much more restricted. The mass Beatus Martinus is found only in manuscripts copied in Italy, and probably originated in the south of that country in the eleventh century. It is a conspicuous example of the universal characteristic of Martin’s cult as far as the November 11 feast is concerned. The text of its propers is drawn from the writings of Sulpicius Severus, and its music is an adaptation of chants from the Common of One Confessor. A single gradual copied in Bologna in the early eleventh century – Rome, Biblioteca Angelica 123 – features the only trope (a textual and/or musical addition to plainchant) to an introit whose text is proper to Martin and which is found in a manuscript from north of the Alps: there, the introit Beatus Martinus is assigned the trope Martinus meritis. Beneventan graduals, however, all routinely transmit tropes for Beatus Martinus, their text largely dependent on Epistle 3 by Sulpicius Severus: (1) Ecce beatus sua, (2) Gentis lingue, (3) Nihil carnalem, and (4) Qui super astra.53 Finally, the mass Ecce sacerdos magnus is known from a single source only, an eleventhcentury sacramentary-antiphoner from Saint-Willibrord of Echternach; it is entirely scriptural, and apparently had no progeny at all.54 Heralded by a solemn mass sung during its vigil, the celebration of the November 11 feast in Saint-Martin of Tours inaugurated a flurry of religious and civic activities, which culminated in another festive Missa Sancti Martini – a designation by which the feast itself was sometimes known – and, as we shall see, an incomparable celebration of the office. During Mass at Saint-Martin, merchants and dignitaries made donations to the chapter in the form of coins and medals, or in gold or silver vessels. In return they received a token of appreciation, a souvenir: a little tile with the figure of the holy confessor, perhaps giving his cloak to the beggar. The feast’s octave, moreover, was primarily associated with the conduct of commerce and trade. A fair took place in the open space surrounding the church, welcoming visitors arriving from all over Europe, and especially merchants, who once a year came to present their goods for sale to the pilgrims flocking Iversen, Tropes de l’Agnus Dei, 63–64. Sulpicius Severus, “Letters,” 153–59. Epistle 3 is addressed to Bassula, the mother-in-law of Sulpicius Severus. On the tropes for Beatus Martinus see Planchart, “The Geography of Martinmas,” 145; and Beneventanum troporum corpus I, I[16]:9–12, and II[17]:6–15. For other instances in which Martinus meritis may have been used with Beatus Martinus, see Planchart, The Repertory of Tropes at Winchester, Vol. II, 173. See also Goudesenne, “De Tours à Rome,” 372–73. 54 Oury, “Formulaires anciens,” 32; and Planchart, “The Geography of Martinmas,” 128. 52 53

The liturgy in honor of St. Martin (November 11)

to the doors of Saint-Martin.55 The location of Tours on one of the principal roads leading to Santiago de Compostela from France, Germany, and Belgium (respectively the so-called Via Turonensis and its northern extension known as Nieder Strasse) contributed not only to an ever-increasing number of people attending the Martinian festivities in Tours, but also to changes to the basilica itself. It was to benefit the considerable numbers of pilgrims to Saint-Martin that Alcuin penned his Life of St. Martin. At the end of the eleventh century, a new edifice on a larger scale was built to accommodate the pilgrims, which included an ambulatory permitting a constant rotation of believers around the choir of Saint-Martin. Finally, the feast was also marked by a meeting of the courts of high justice in Châteauneuf taking place immediately after Mass; twice a year, itinerant officials accompanied either by the king’s servants or by representatives of the treasurer paid a visit to Châteauneuf, once at the end of June and once immediately before Martin’s principal feast.56 The climax of the November 11 feast in Saint-Martin, however, was undoubtedly the celebration of a threefold hour of Matins in which two other religious communities in Tours took part, and which featured a host of liturgical accretions and unique customs, all discussed in the following chapter. An examination of the literary texts found in the elaborate hour of Matins preserved in BmT 159, the oldest extant service book for the office from Saint-Martin (dating from the end of the thirteenth century), demonstrates the degree to which the Vita of Sulpicius Severus remained 55

Information gleaned from BmT 1294, p. 33, a seventeenth-century history of Saint-Martin: Antiquitus celebris fuit haec missa sancti Martini, quae in duobus, ut opinor, consistebat. Primum in celebratione festi Transitus, seu obitus beatissimi Martini, quod in Occidentali Ecclesia quolibet anno die undecima novembris, cum pompa et apparatu magnificis, potissimum in Martinopoli colebatur, quod festum ideo dicebatur et denominabatur missa sancti Martini a priori et nobiliori parte festivitatis huius, quae est Missa. Secundum in mercatu et nundinationibus, quae ad aream Templi sancti Martini, undique illuc advenientibus, maxime mercatoribus, suas ibidem singulis annis merces venales exhibentibus peregrinis. In hac autem Missa, ut mos erat illius temporis, oblationes & donaria fiebant a Magnatibus & Principibus, tam ex Moneta seu nummis sancti Martini, quam ex vasis aureis seu argenteis, tessera beati Confessoris signatis, quae Missam hanc insigniorem reddebant.

A similar association between the November feast and commerce is likewise attested at the church of San Martino in Lucca. See Brand, “Liturgical Ceremony,” 93. 56 “Vicarii comitis bis in anno veniunt in castro ad justitiam castri tenendam cum serviente regis Francie vel eius qui habet thesaurariam. Et est primus terminus in festo beatorum Apostolorum Petri et Pauli. Ipsa enim die, post magnam missam, ad hoc veniunt Castrum novum, et hanc justiciam tenent usque in proximum festum beati Martini, post magnam missam.” Recueil des actes de Philippe Auguste, Vol. I, 441. On the judicial process held in Châteauneuf see Farmer, Communities of Saint Martin, 17–19, and 197.

91

92

Universal and local foundations of Martin’s cult

the main affective vehicle for Martinian spirituality. The nine lessons of this office are taken almost verbatim from Sulpicius Severus’s Epistle 3, and generally, each lesson commences in the place where the previous one ends, preserving the flow of the original narrative. Since Sulpicius Severus disseminated Martin’s Vita while the saint was still alive, his biography naturally left out the events leading to his death, episodes that were to be recounted in a separate appendix. Martin’s death provided Sulpicius Severus with the grounds for writing three documents in letter form, two of which are of special relevance to us: in Epistle 2, he narrates his reaction to news of Martin’s death, brought to him by two monks from Tours, and reflects on Martin’s posthumous glory. In Epistle 3 he meticulously recounts the final days of the saint, namely, his mission to resolve a dispute among the clergy in the church of Candes, his death there due to illness, and his funeral procession and burial in Tours.57 One of the only surviving lectionaries from medieval Saint-Martin, BmT 1021, preserves a fascinating example of the grip that the sequence of events depicted by Severus almost a millennium earlier had on the canons of the church. The lectionary opens with Sulpicius Severus’s Vita of St. Martin (fos. 4–15v), followed by the three aforementioned Epistles (fos. 15v–20v), copied in the mid-thirteenth-century layer of the manuscript (fos. 1–130v). A large S initial occupying the height of eight textual lines marks the beginning of Epistle 3 on fo. 18v (“Sulpicius Severus greets his venerable motherin-law”).58 Although Epistle 3 does not end until fo. 20v, another, almost equally large, initial M (occupying the space of seven lines) unexpectedly punctuates the right-hand column on fo. 19, as can be seen in Figure 2.2. The second initial proclaims an important point of articulation, marking the beginning of that portion of the text that traditionally serves as the opening lesson for Martin’s November 11 feast (“Martin foresaw his death long before it occurred”).59 A second hand added the words “lesson one” on the right-hand margin of fo. 19, pointing to the correspondence between literary text and liturgical object. In similar fashion, the remaining text was broken into three additional lessons by the same hand, resulting in four Sulpicius Severus, “Letters,” 147–59. “Sulpicius Severus Basule parenti venerabili salutem.” I thank Patricia Stirnemann and Denis Muzerelle from the IRHT for their dating of this manuscript (personal communication). For reasons we shall encounter in Chapter 4, BmT 1021 has been in the possession of the Cathedral ever since the end of the fifteenth century. Yet, in what follows I refer to it as a lectionary from Saint-Martin, for which it was originally copied, and in which it was used during the period of time under discussion throughout this book. The contents of this lectionary are detailed in Straeten, Les Manuscrits hagiographiques, 133–41. 59 “Martinus obitum suum longe ante prescivit.” 57 58

The liturgy in honor of St. Martin (November 11)

Figure 2.2  Sulpicius Severus, Epistle 3. BmT 1021, fo. 19.

lengthy lessons.60 The internal division of Sulpicius Severus’s text into individual lessons is graphically telling: it reveals how the canons understood Martin’s Vita as a source of multiple references from which material could be carved out to create readings and chants for the office. 60

It is hard to tell why the text in this manuscript was divided into four lessons, and not nine. Possibly, this and other marginalia (and especially the many added paragraph signs) served for the purpose of study or for reading in refectory. In general, there is no correlation between the division into four lessons in BmT 1021 and the lessons of any other extant Martinian office in Saint-Martin.

93

94

Universal and local foundations of Martin’s cult

Table  2.1 provides an English translation of the main literary material recited and chanted during Matins on Martin’s November 11 festival, namely, the lessons, responds, and their verses. The more or less complete dependence of the office on Epistle 3 is remarkable, and is indicated in square brackets.61 The choice of literary material from Epistle 3 reflects a keen editorial eye: its opening six subsections, left out from the office and set apart in BmT 1021 by two large initials, were justly judged to be of little appeal to the matter at hand, for they recount the circumstances that led Sulpicius Severus to write the letter to his mother-in-law, revealing some personal, unresolved family business. Both logically and for dramatic effect, then, the liturgy begins with Martin’s clairvoyant vision of his own death. The November 11 office of St. Martin is transmitted in two main forms, distinguished not only by two different series of antiphons, but also by an idiosyncratic succession of Matins responsories. Both sets of antiphons for this office draw on the common stock of hagiographical texts we have come to expect – the Vita and related writings – yet they belong to different temporal layers, resulting in conspicuously discrete musical styles reflecting the different periods in which they were composed. Consisting of about forty chants, one series of antiphons is set to a standard stock of Gregorian melodies, and is generally considered to belong to an earlier temporal layer – the office that was, in all probability, composed in Tours.62 Twelve additional antiphons, attributed to Odo of Cluny, were composed as a set in the early tenth century:63 (1) Sanctus Martinus obitum, (2) Cum repente viribus, (3) Scimus quidem te pater, (4) Domine, iam satis, (5) Artus febre fatiscentes, (6) Sinite me, inquit, (7) Media nocte dominica, (8) Glorificati hominis viderunt, (9) Adest multitudo monachorum, (10) Exequie Martine, (11) Martinus signipotens, and (12) O vere beatum.64

Sulpicius Severus, “Letters,” 153–59; Gregory of Tours, “The Miracles of the Bishop St. Martin,” I.5 (trans. Van Dam, Saints and Their Miracles, 207). The composition of this office is attributed to St. Perpetuus, bishop of Tours between 461 and 491 (Boissonnot, Histoire et description de la cathédrale de Tours, 19). For an edition of an entire St. Martin office see Historia Sancti Martini. 62 Wagner, “Wie man im Mittelalter eine neue Choralmesse komponierte,” 133; and Gy, “Les Répons de l’office nocturne,” 215. 63 See PL 133:513A–514B. John of Salerno, Odo’s biographer, recounts how Odo came to write these antiphons; see Historia Sancti Martini, xiv. As Martha Fickett notes here, the first extant source to transmit the text and music of these antiphons seems to be BnF lat. 12601, a notated Cluniac breviary copied in the second half of the eleventh century. The attribution to Odo is also found in sources from Tours, e.g., in the Chronicon Turonense Magnum, copied in SaintMartin in c. 1227. See Chronicon Turonense Magnum, 108. 64 These antiphons are edited in Historia Sancti Martini. 61

Table 2.1 Text of Martin’s November 11 office No.

Lesson

Responsory

Versicle

1

Martin foresaw his death long before it occurred, remarking to the brothers that the dissolution of his body was imminent. At that time, an occasion arose for his visiting the parish of Candes. There was a dispute among the clergy of that church and he wished to restore peace. He well knew the end of his days was close, yet he would not refuse to make the trip on that account. He thought it would be a fitting crown to his life of virtue to re-establish peace [in the church] and leave this as his legacy. [Sulpicius Severus, Epistle 3] So he set out, accompanied, as always, by a large band of holy disciples. On the river he saw some diving birds going after fish. Time and again, the birds would make a capture and stuff their ravenous crops. “Here,” he said, “is a picture of the demons. They ambush the unwary and capture them before they know it; they devour their victims, yet cannot satisfy their voraciousness.” Then, with a mighty and virtuous voice, he ordered the birds to leave the whirling waters where they were swimming and to go to some dry, deserted place. He addressed them with the same commanding tone he commonly used in putting demons to flight. [Sulpicius Severus, Epistle 3] The birds then formed a flock and together left the river, heading for the mountains and forests. Many of his disciples were amazed to see that Martin’s power was so great that he could command even the birds. He stayed for a short while in the village whose church he had come to visit. When peace was restored among the clergy, he thought about returning to the monastery. But he suddenly began to lose his strength. He called his disciples together and said he was going to die. [Sulpicius Severus, Epistle 3]

[Beatus Martinus obitum suum …] Martin foresaw his death long before it occurred, remarking to the brothers that the dissolution of his body was imminent, because he indicated that he was going to die. [Sulpicius Severus, Epistle 3]

The disciples said to the blessed Martin: “Why, father, do you abandon us? We are desolate, and to whom do you leave us?” [Sulpicius Severus, Epistle 3]

[Dixerunt discipuli ad beatum …] His disciples said to the blessed Martin: “why, father, are you leaving us? We are desolate, and to whom do you leave us? The fierce wolves will invade your flock.” [Sulpicius Severus, Epistle 3]

“We know you are longing for Christ; have pity on us whom you abandon.” [Sulpicius Severus, Epistle 3]

[Cum videret beatus Martinus …] When the blessed Martin saw his disciples weeping, moved by these tears, he addressed himself to the Lord and said: “Lord, if I am still necessary to Your people, I do not refuse the toil.” [Based on Sulpicius Severus, Epistle 3]

“Why, father, do you abandon us? We are desolate, and to whom do you leave us? The ravenous wolves will invade your flock.” [Sulpicius Severus, Epistle 3]

2

3

Table 2.1 (cont.) No.

Lesson

Responsory

Versicle

4

The grief and sorrow of everyone made a single voice of lament: “why, father, do you abandon us? We are desolate, and to whom do you leave us? The ravenous wolves will invade your flock, and who will protect us from their bites, with our shepherd stricken? We know you are longing for Christ, but your rewards are safe; postpone them and they will not diminish. Have pity on us whom you abandon.” [Sulpicius Severus, Epistle 3] And he, moved by these tears, absorbed in the Lord as always and overflowing with tender compassion, it is said that he wept: he addressed himself to the Lord and responded to those who were weeping: “Lord, if I am still needed by your people, I do not decline the task, Thy will be done [Fiat voluntas tua].” [Sulpicius Severus, Epistle 3] There is nothing surprising in this: torn between hope and affliction, he almost wavered in his choice, because he wanted neither to abandon them [his disciples] nor to be separated any longer from Christ. He gave no place to his desire and left nothing to his will, committing himself wholly to the decision and power of the Lord. Was he not seen saying to him these little words: “It is hard, Lord, in Thy service to do combat in the flesh, and the battles in which I have engaged up to now are enough. Still, if You bid me continue the toil and stand guard before Your camp, I do not refuse and will not plead the exhaustion of age as an excuse.” [Sulpicius Severus, Epistle 3]

[Domine si adhuc populo …] “Lord, if I am still needed by your people, I do not decline the task, Thy will be done [Fiat voluntas tua].” [Sulpicius Severus, Epistle 3]

“Lord, if You bid me continue the labor and stand guard before Your camp, I do not refuse and will not plead the exhaustion of age as an excuse.” [Sulpicius Severus, Epistle 3]

[O beatum virum Martinum antistitem …] What a blessed man was Bishop Martin, who neither feared to die nor refused to live. [Based on Sulpicius Severus, Epistle 3] [O quantus erat luctus …] Oh, how great was the sorrow of all, how many indeed the laments of the mournful monks. For it is pious to rejoice, and pious too to weep for Martin. [Based on Sulpicius Severus, Epistle 3]

Martin foresaw his death long before it occurred, remarking to the brothers that the dissolution of his body was imminent. [Sulpicius Severus, Epistle 3]

5

6

The body of the blessed man is accompanied to his burial place, while the massed choir sings celestial hymns. [Sulpicius Severus, Epistle 3]

No.

Lesson

Responsory

Versicle

7

“As long as You bid me I will serve under your standard. Although an old man would indeed desire his discharge after a service, courage knows no yielding to old age and can overcome the weight of years. But if You spare my old age, Lord, Your will [voluntas] is kindness to me. You Yourself will watch over these for whom I fear.” What an astonishing man! Toil had not overcome him, nor would death be able to. Inclining neither one way nor the other, he neither feared to die nor refused to live. [Sulpicius Severus, Epistle 3] For several days he suffered a violent fever, yet he did not desist from the work of God. He spent the nights in prayer and vigil, forcing his exhausted limbs to obey his spirit. He lay on that noble bed of his, in sackcloth and ashes. When his disciples asked if they might spread at least a rough blanket under him, he refused. “It is not fitting,” he said, “for a Christian to die except in ashes. I should have sinned if I were to leave you any other example.” [Sulpicius Severus, Epistle 3]

[O beatum virum in cuius transitu …] Oh, blessed man! At [the moment of] his death a crowd of saints was singing, a chorus of angels was dancing, an army of all the celestial powers was in attendance. [Gregory of Tours, “The Miracles of the Bishop St. Martin,” I.5]

The church was strengthened by his power, and bishops were honored by his revelation. [The archangel] Michael received him among the angels. [Gregory of Tours, “The Miracles of the Bishop St. Martin,” I.5]

[O vere beatum in cuius ore …] What a truly blessed [man], in whose mouth there was no guile: he judged no one and condemned no one; there was no one but Christ on his lips; [in his heart] only peace and mercy. [Based on Sulpicius Severus, Vita, Chapters 26 and 27] [Martinus Abrahe sinu …] Martin is received joyfully in the bosom of Abraham. Martin, poor and humble here, enters into heaven a rich man, where he is honored by heavenly hymns. [Sulpicius Severus, Epistle 3]

Oh, blessed man! At [the moment of] his death a crowd of saints was singing. [Gregory of Tours, “The Miracles of the Bishop St. Martin,” I.5]

8

9

His eyes and hands directed always to heaven, his spirit unconquered, he prayed without relaxation. And when the priests who were assembled by his side asked him to rest his body by turning over on his side, he said: “Permit me, brothers, permit me to look at heaven rather than the earth, so that my soul will be already started on the path that will take it to the Lord.” When he had said this, he saw the devil standing close by. “Why are you standing here, bloody beast?” he said, “you will find nothing in me, you wretched beast. The bosom of Abraham receives me.” [Sulpicius Severus, Epistle 3]

Bishop Martin departed from the world. The gem of all priests, he lives in Christ. [Based on Gregory of Tours?]

98

Universal and local foundations of Martin’s cult

They differ from the early ones in several respects: their texts are twice as long, their melodies have a larger ambitus (a seventh to a tenth, compared with a fourth to a seventh in earlier antiphons), and they set the text in a more neumatic fashion, in contrast to the syllabic settings more characteristic of the Matins antiphons. In France, these dozen antiphons (nine, in secular churches) gradually replaced the older chants, becoming the standard antiphons for Matins on November 11 and occasionally also for Martin’s other feasts, while the use of the earlier group of antiphons continued unabated after the eleventh century mainly in manuscripts of non-French origin.65 Yet, far from becoming completely superfluous, these characteristically Gregorian antiphons remained in wide use in France as well; chanted not only during the lesser hours and octave of the November 11 feast itself, they were regularly used throughout the Martinian liturgy as a whole. How unique was the office known in Saint-Martin as found in BmT 159 and in subsequent service books? Did it resemble the celebration of Matins in other churches in Tours and in France in general? A cursory comparison of the series of “Odo antiphons” sung during Matins in the Cathedral of Tours and in Saint-Martin already demonstrates that differences, if minor, existed even between adjacent churches. While the Cathedral uses the first nine antiphons (cf. BmT 148 and BmT 145), Saint-Martin omits the seventh, Media nocte dominica, so that the ninth antiphon is followed by the tenth (cf. BmT 150, and BmT 159). A far more significant context for assessing the geographical profile of the November 11 office is offered by the methodology developed by René-Jean Hesbert. His Corpus Antiphonalium Officii (CAO), published in six hefty volumes between the years 1963 and 1979, principally aimed to discover an archetype of the office. To that end, Hesbert surveyed some 800 sources and came up with twelve antiphoners that he considered to be the most representative (six belonging to the monastic cursus, and six to the Roman one). Drawing on a variety of service Much of the information about these two groups of chants is gleaned from Historia Sancti Martini, viii–xv, where they are designated “Series I” and “Series II” antiphons, respectively. For a musical and textual analysis of fifty antiphons for the office of St. Martin, see Fickett, “Chants for the Feast of St. Martin of Tours,” 72–188. Manuscripts from Saint-Martin of Tours were not consulted for either study. Perhaps as a consequence, or because feasts other than the November 11 one were apparently left out of consideration, the following antiphons were not incorporated into Fickett’s studies, and should be added to the list of Martinian antiphons. These include (1) Arborius stupens (CAO 1471) for Matins during Reversion (BmT 149, fo. 407) and July 4 (BmT 150, fo. 471); and (2) Orante sancto Martino (CAO 4181) for Lauds on Reversion (BmT 149, fo. 409) and on July 4 (BmT 159, fo. 193v), a chant mentioned by Fickett as a responsory verse in both above-mentioned studies.

65

The liturgy in honor of St. Martin (November 11)

books for the office (some early, but many dating to the fifteenth century), Hesbert’s comparative approach also makes a compelling case for a geographical organization of the liturgy found in the antiphoner.66 This methodology has inspired a subsequent study by Father Pierre-Marie Gy, who examined all the Matins responsories for St. Martin’s November 11 feast found in CAO and in eight additional sources.67 The following are the incipits of the twenty-one responsories found in CAO, enumerated according to Gy’s reckoning: 1. Hic est Martinus electus 2. Domine si adhuc populo 3. O beatum virum Martinum antistitem 4. Oculis ac manibus in celum 5. Dum sacramenta offerret 6. Beatus Martinus obitum suum 7. Dixerunt discipuli ad beatum 8. O beatum virum in cuius transitu 9. Martinus Abrahe sinu 10. Ora pro nobis beate Martine 11. O quantus erat luctus 12. Cum videret beatus Martinus 13. Sancte Martine christi confessor 14. Martinus sacerdos dei 15. Ecclesia virtute roboratur 16. O vere beatum in cuius ore 17. Laudabilis et preclarus 18. O beatum virum cuius animam 19. Martinus qui electus est 20. Iste homo ab adolescentia 21. Ecce magnum et verum Hereafter, the following distinction between the Martinian responsories will be maintained: in isolation from their context, responsories will be identified as R1 through R21 (with 1–21 corresponding to this list), while responsories discussed in the context of a specific office will be referred

They are published in Vols. I and II of CAO. See especially the analysis concerning the list of responsories on the four Sundays of Advent in Vol. V. 67 Gy, “Les Répons de l’office nocturne,” 215–23. Although the opening two volumes of CAO list twelve representative manuscripts, one of them, G (French antiphoner of Durham, also known as Gallicanus), does not transmit a St. Martin office. 66

99

100

Universal and local foundations of Martin’s cult

to as Resp. 1 through Resp. 9. Thus, the opening responsory in BmT 159 (Resp. 1) is R6 in “absolute” terms, so to speak.68 Using numerical representation for the Matins responsories, let us examine the various series of responsories and their internal order across regional and temporal boundaries in a schematic way. A comparison of over sixty offices from central and northern France, from Rome as well as from various churches in Tours and its surrounding areas, offers a vista into the various types of offices celebrated on Martin’s November 11 feast. (see Tables 2.3, 2.4, and 2.5 in the appendix to this chapter). The findings build on, reinforce, and broaden the conclusions of Gy, who, in his 1988 article, showed how distinct series of responsories emerged when classified according to the identity of their opening pair. The first group consists of offices that open with R1 and R2: manuscripts transmitting such a sequence belong to the earliest extant stratum of service books (including all but one of the eleven CAO sources that contain this office) originating in Italian, French, and German territories. Service books dating to later centuries (twelfth through fifteenth) demonstrate the continued paths of transmission of this group: it is found in sources from Rome and the greater Ile-deFrance region (Sens, Faremoutiers, Saint-Maur-des-Fossés), but also from the center of the country (Bourges, Châteauroux). The second group opens with R1 and R5. In the earliest sources (tenth to twelfth centuries) this office is found in service books from Mont-Renaud, Corbie, and Saint-Denis, a fact that earned this group the appellation “Carolingian.”69 Subsequent progeny of this particular office are to be found above all in manuscripts from Paris and northeastern France (e.g., Châlons-sur-Marne, Verdun), but also from Arras (Picardy), Coutances (Normandy), and England. It is also possible to point to a third group, which to date consists of merely four sources: characteristic of this group is the opening pair of responsories R1 and R6. These manuscripts originate in establishments located both in the south and in the north of France (in Arles, Beauvais, Chartres, and Cambrai), pointing perhaps to a common archetype. From a geographical point of view, the fourth group is the most coherent of all and consists of sources opening with R6 and R7. An office displaying this opening chain of responsories is almost certain to originate in the city of Tours or in its close vicinity.70 As Table 2.5 shows, moreover, it Gy, “Les Répons de l’office nocturne,” 218–19. Needless to say, the numbers assigned to the responsories do not reflect compositional priority in terms of chronology. 69 Ibid., 219. 70 The presence of this series of responsories in a monastic breviary from thirteenth-century Vendôme (see Table 2.4) is perhaps owing to the historical ties the monastery had with 68

The liturgy in honor of St. Martin (November 11)

is the arrangement of the remaining seven responsories (in secular establishments) that distinguishes churches holding to the tradition of opening Matins with R6 and R7. Saint-Martin of Tours is virtually the only one to have the following series of responsories on November 11: R6, R7, R12, R2, R3, R11, R8, R16, and R9. Notwithstanding its close ties with dependent establishments, the church preserved a unique profile of this celebration by observing a particular sequence of narratives. To be sure, compared with other monastic and secular churches in Tours and its environs, differences are minute: all examined sources share the same cluster of responsories, and differ only in their internal organization.71 Undoubtedly, however, the responsories for the feast of St. Martin belong to the oldest extant layer of responsory texts, for they already appear in the Compiègne antiphoner (c. 860–880).72 Practically all the offices inventoried in the appendix to this chapter routinely conclude either on R9 or on R11. Belonging to one of the abovementioned four groups of offices is a reliable indicator as to how a series of responsories may conclude: those opening with R6 and R7 invariably close on R9, as do most of the offices opening with R1 and R5. Sources inventoried in CAO (typically commencing with R1 and R2) exhibit similar tendencies, albeit less systematically: they may indeed close on R9 or R11, but some also conclude on R13. As we shall see in the following chapter, because of their prominent position within the office, R11 and especially R9 were prime candidates for liturgical accretions. Finally, the system of identification can also work in the opposite direction, that is, a November 11 office opening with R6 as its first responsory is most probably from Marmoutier. After all, it was Geoffrey Martel, count of Anjou, who in c. 1040 encouraged the monks of Marmoutier to participate in the establishment of the new abbey of La Trinité of Vendôme. See Noizet, “Pratiques spatiales,” 301. The abbey did acknowledge its filiation from Marmoutier, although the relationship between the two abbeys was not one of liturgical dependency. See P. D. Johnson, Prayer, Patronage, and Power, 113. On the liturgical ties between Fleury and Saint-Martin of Tours (also evidenced in Table 2.3), see Consuetudines Floriacenses, xliv. Quoted in Gy, “Les Répons de l’office nocturne,” 220 n. 10. Finally, the presence of the R6, R7 series of responsories in Saint-Martin of Tulle is intriguing, and besides the obvious ties to the cult of Martin, patron of the abbey, it is possible that it also had some ties to Marmoutier. 71 No extant service book for the office from Saint-Martin, the Cathedral, and Marmoutier is in its entirety from before the thirteenth century. A fragment of a notated breviary (adiastematic neumes) in use in Marmoutier abbey, however, suggests that the series of responsories for November 11 in Marmoutier remained stable from at least the eleventh century. See Le Sage de La Haye, Répertoire numérique, Vol. I, item 22, fo. 12r–v. 72 As a responsory text, R16 is somewhat more recent, first attested in an eleventh-century summer breviary from Cluny, BnF lat. 12601, fo. 154v. For a modern edition of this responsory as found in this manuscript see Historia Sancti Martini, 11.

101

102

Universal and local foundations of Martin’s cult

Tours.73 St. Martin was venerated universally from early on, but even the most rudimentary property of the most widespread festival dedicated to him – namely, the internal order of its Matins responsories – could impart the idiosyncratic, conspicuously local way in which the church dedicated to Martin in Tours venerated its patron saint. As we shall see in the following chapter, this was just one of the ways in which the local underpinnings of Martin’s cult in Tours differed from those in practically every other place in Europe.

The feast of July 4: Martin’s translation and ordination, and the dedication of his church As elaborate and meaningful as Martin’s November 11 feast was, it was only one of five Martinian celebrations, four of which were instituted by the tenth century. Remarkably, two of those festivals were already celebrated in Tours as early as the fifth century, distinguishing Martin as one of the only saints in Gaul whose cult consisted of two distinctive feasts.74 According to a longstanding tradition in Saint-Martin of Tours, it was during the July 4 feast that St. Martin possessed his church in Tours, where he celebrated the office in person in the company of other saints. Instituted by Bishop Perpetuus, celebration of the feast was initially confined to Tours and to several adjacent dioceses. This probably had to do with the local nature of the feast, as succinctly elucidated by numerous rubrics found in service books from Saint-Martin. BmT 1021, for instance, states that “it is a triple feast, that is, one [commemorating] the translation of the blessed Martin archbishop of Tours [into the newly built church], his ordination as bishop, and the dedication of his church,” commemorating not only the fifth-century edifice, but also the dedication of the new basilica in 1014.75 Gregory of Tours provides us with further background related to the institution of the feast: Together with other supporting details, such information became instrumental in concluding that the late-fourteenth-century ordinal BnF lat. 1237 was used in Tours Cathedral. Folio 47 of the ordinal features St. Martin’s office, where only the identity of the first responsory, R6, is divulged. It is the only extant ordinal from the Cathedral, contrary to the implication in Martimort, La Documentation liturgique, 220. 74 Van Dam, Saints and Their Miracles, 19. 75 “Et est triplex festum, videlicet, Translatio beatissimi Martini archiepiscopi Turonensis; Et ordinatio episcopatus eius; Et dedicatio basilice sue” (BmT 1021, fo. 156v). Indeed, it is Martin’s ordination as bishop that is featured prominently in the historiated initial D on fo. 89 of BmT 193, marking the opening of the episcopal blessing said during Mass. A discussion of this miniature is found in Arretaud, “La Vie de saint Martin,” 151–58; and Lelong, La Basilique 73

The feast of July 4 When Perpetuus saw how frequently miracles were being performed at St. Martin’s tomb and when he observed how small was the chapel erected over the Saint’s body, he decided that it was unworthy of these wonders. He had the chapel removed and he built in its place the great church which is still there … You should observe this feast day on July 4; and you should remember that St. Martin died on November 11.76

Although Gregory commits its celebration to all of Christendom, the feast remained something of a local event for some centuries after its institution. It appears in a handful of Merovingian manuscripts: the Bobbio Missal, the so-called Gothic Missal, and the Irish Palimpsest Sacramentary.77 With the exception of the eighth-century sacramentary of Angoulême (BnF lat. 816), eighth-century Gelasian sacramentaries do not transmit a mass for this feast at all, and not before the Hadrianum and its supplementum does the feast attain widespread recognition: it is found not only in sacramentaries from Tours and Angers, but also in manuscripts from Saint-Denis, Italy, England, and Spain.78 Widely known as Saint Martin d’été (St. Martin of the summer), it was a much revered festivity in Tours, and like Martin’s November 11 feast, it too was accorded the highest rank of seven candles (see Table 1.1 on p. 43 above). From as early as the tenth century the feast had both a vigil and an octave, and the feast day itself was sometimes marked by the singing of two different masses. By the twelfth century, these masses were drawn almost entirely from the Common of Saints, with the mass Justus ut palma sung on the feast’s vigil, and with Statuit ei sung during the feast day.79 The alleluia Posuisti domine sung on the feast day was followed by the sequence Miles mire probitatis, to which we shall return in the concluding chapter. Int. Justus ut palma Grad. Iuravit dominus All. Posui adiutorium Off. Gloria et honore Comm. Magna est

76 77



78



79



Saint-Martin de Tours, 32. On the role of St. Perpetuus in revitalizing Martin’s cult in the fifth century, see Van Dam, Saints and Their Miracles, 18–19. Gregory of Tours, Libri historiarum X, II.14, 130. See Missale Gothicum, 316–24; Hen and Meens, The Bobbio Missal. On the Irish Palimpsest see Hen, “Rome.” The early masses dedicated to St. Martin are treated in depth in Oury, “Les Messes de Saint Martin,” 83–84. See also Deshusses, Le Sacramentaire Grégorien, Vol. I, 286–87 and 557. The following two masses are found in BmT 193, fo. 173. For similar mass constellations for this feast see BmT 196, fo. 193v; and BnF lat. 9434, fo. 201v. For more on the history of the July 4 masses see Oury, “Les Messes de Saint Martin,” 86. These mass propers are attested in BmT 1023, fos. 123–24.

103

104

Universal and local foundations of Martin’s cult

Int. Statuit ei Grad. Domine prevenisti/Ver. Vitam petiit All. Posuisti domine Off. Posuisti domine Comm. Beatus servus Whereas service books from Tours usually insisted on the threefold significance of the July 4 feast, other cities were understandably familiar with the feast as an Ordination and/or Translation feast only. In the abbey of SaintMartial of Limoges the July 4 feast was celebrated “in ordinatione sancti Martini,” for instance, while in the Cluniac abbey of Arles-sur-Tech it was known as Translation.80 Contrary to the November 11 celebration, whose liturgy in Tours was inimitable, the one for July 4 was unremarkable regardless of where it was observed, with the singular exception of the diocese of Utrecht in general, and the church of Saint-Martin in Utrecht in particular. Manuscripts from this church, the oldest ecclesiastical center in the northern Low Countries, were the first to transmit a unique office that was composed in the early tenth century by Radbod, the city’s bishop (r. 899/900–917); the text of the antiphons and responsories was drawn from a sermon composed by Radbod, which was to serve as the basis for a feast instituted much later – Subvention – and celebrated almost exclusively in Tours, as we shall see further below.81 Outside the diocese of Utrecht, however, the lessons for the July 4 office were informed by the same stock of hagiographic texts as the November feast, namely from the Vita and the Dialogues by Sulpicius Severus, and occasionally also from the writings of Gregory of Tours. The responsories, moreover, were regularly drawn from the Common of Saints, with between one and four responsories, if any, borrowed from the liturgy of November 11.82 In Saint-Martin of Tours, the only shared responsory was Sancte Martini Christi (R13), often as a second Matins responsory, but other As in the fourteenth-century breviary from Saint-Martial (Limoges, Bm 4, fo. 465), and the fourteenth-century breviary from Arles-sur-Tech (Narbonne, Bm 166, fo. 294), respectively. But see BmT 196, fo. 193v, an eleventh-century sacramentary from Saint-Martin in use in Marmoutier, which has only “Translation.” 81 In Utrecht, the July 4 feast was known as “Translation.” The earliest extant manuscript to transmit this office is Utrecht, Bibliotheek der Rijksuniversiteit, MS 406 (3.J.7), fos. 133v–135, copied c. 1150. For a facsimile edition see Utrecht, Bibliotheek der Rijksuniversiteit, MS 406. On Radbod, and the July 4 office he composed (including transcriptions for the chants for First and Second Vespers, Matins, and Lauds), see Lochner, “Un évêque musicien.” On the liturgical tradition of Saint-Martin of Utrecht see Loos, “Liturgy and Chant,” 14–18. 82 The twelfth-century ordinal from Bayeux Cathedral, where the July 4 feast had the rank of three lessons, tells us that all the chants are drawn from the Common of Saints (“cantatur de communi”). See Ordinaire et coutumier, 233. 80

The feast of July 4

Table 2.2 The responsories sung during the Martinian feasts (excluding November 11) in Saint-Martin Resp.

Reversion (July 4 and December 1)a

Subvention (May 12)b

1 2

O quam admirabilis SANCTE MARTINE CHRISTI [R13]

3 4 5 6 7

Ecce vir prudens Ecce vere israelita Iste sanctus digne Laudemus dominum O sacerdotum nobilissime

8 9

Iste est de sublimibus Agmina sacra angelorum

HIC EST MARTINUS [R1] DUM SACRAMENTA OFFERRET [R5] Ecce vir prudens Pretiosa in conspectu Lux perpetua Iste est de sublimibus SANCTE MARTINE CHRISTI [R13] O sacerdotum nobilissime Laudemus dominum

See, for example, the offices in BmT 150, fos. 470–72 (July 4), BmT 150, fos. 379v–381v (December 1), and BmT 149, fos. 402–09 (Reversion). b The second nocturn in a single manuscript, BmT 150, features two responsories drawn from the Common of Several Martyrs, as its lessons relate to St. Maurice and the Theban Legion. Its fourth and fifth responsories are Sancte tui domine and Verbera carnificum, respectively. a

churches often featured in addition to the responsories Hic est Martinus, Dum sacramenta, and Ora pro nobis (R1, R5, and R10, respectively).83 The sequence of responsories evidenced in Table 2.2 seems to have been unique to Tours, but common to all churches transmitting this liturgy is their overall dependence on the Common of Saints, testifying to the quodlibet character of the feast as a whole. As indistinct as the July 4 liturgy was, it inspired practically all the chants for Reversion and for December 1, and much of the liturgy for Subvention as well. They all share the same series of responsories organized in the same internal order (in Table 2.2, responsories proper to Martin are capitalized). The overall dependence of these offices on July 4 (the oldest among them) is striking: they share a total of five responsories, although their distribution among the three nocturns is different. Yet, the celebration of this feast did have some idiosyncratic characteristics, and these had to do with the dedication of Martin’s basilica in Tours, an aspect of this threefold celebration that was observed only in Tours. In SaintMartin, the July 4 mass was immediately followed by the Dedication mass 83

In Marmoutier, the twelve-lesson office included all four above-mentioned proper responsories, which were also used for Subvention, discussed further below (see BmT 153, fos. 95–99; and Evreux, Bm 119, fos. 176–79).

105

106

Universal and local foundations of Martin’s cult

Terribilis est, which was itself followed by an additional mass “in honore sancti Martini confessoris Christi.”84 Further highlighting the local nature of this dedication, as tends to be the case with such feasts, was the tradition that began in 1141, according to which Martin personally possessed the basilica on his feast day, where he celebrated the office in the company of other saints. This custom originated in the testimony of an elderly canon who was “raised from boyhood in [Saint-Martin, and who had] led an honest and blameless life.” On July 3, 1141, he was present in the church after everyone had already left, when he reportedly witnessed Martin, adorned with pontifical emblems, entering the choir together with three other bishops. The saint sat in the pontifical chair, with one of the bishops sitting next to him, and the two others sitting on both sides of the choir. Ecstatic and startled, the canon was agitated by fear, lying down hidden as Martin and his disciples prayed. When Martin found the cleric hiding, he grabbed him by the hand, and lifted him from the ground, saying: “Since our brothers and bishops do not want you to stay in our midst, you must leave, brother. You will be able to hear our nocturnal office from outside.” The terrified canon, who knew his death was imminent, was escorted outside the church, and asked Martin to forgive him for his sins.85 By the time this miracle account was recorded in the twelfth century, the July 4 feast had already enjoyed widespread popularity, and yet the idea that Martin celebrated Mass in the church dedicated to him in Tours seemed astonishing enough even for the archbishop of Cologne, who in 1181 asked the monks of Marmoutier and the canons of Saint-Martin to confirm its veracity, which the canons did.86 After the vigil, which began immediately following Vespers, no one was allowed to enter the church: the main altar was prepared just as for the celebration of Mass, incense was put in the censer, and the bread and wine were set in their place. Further instructions found in the customary testify to the determination of church officials to

BnF lat. 9434, fos. 204–05. The Latin text as found in BmT 1294, p. 221 is followed by an English translation in Appendix A on p. 249 below. This is one of two extant accounts of this miracle. See Farmer, Communities of Saint Martin, 222–31. For additional miracles associated with this feast see Vaucelle, La Collégiale, 366–69. 86 See Farmer, Communities of Saint Martin, 223. Unfortunately, what has survived from the customary of Marmoutier copied sometime during the twelfth century (a copy of it was made in the eighteenth century by Edmond Martène, and is found in BnF lat. 12879, fos. 86–118v, described in Farmer, Communities of Saint Martin, 311–12) includes very few references to St. Martin, and none to his feasts, which leads me to think that Martène may not have copied all of it. 84 85

The feast of July 4

ensure that the church was completely empty and properly lit. After the vigils, it instructs, the church is locked, and the sacristan of the week takes the keys with him. And for the entire night all the lights are left burning, and the weekly duty canon and the sacristan place guards over all the doors of the church and in the chevet [capite ecclesie], and they give them wine and everything else that is necessary. The treasurer places guards in front of his own house, and provides for them similarly.87

Both the customary and the canons’ response to the archbishop of Cologne emphasize the role light played in this feast; although the feast took place during the long days of summer, it was during the night hours that Martin was reportedly present in the church. The canons’ letter stressed that the church was “radiant with a number of torches and with candles that shine in coronas,” and rubrics from service books from Saint-Martin routinely point to the importance of light as well, as does BmT 1021, which states that “the whole chandelier and the oil lamps have to burn the entire night.”88 Further underlying the importance of lighting is the endowment of Etienne du Mont (Stephanus de Montibus), a schoolmaster from Saint-Martin, who in 1219 donated a sum of 60 solidi to the chapter of his church in order “to augment the cult of St. Martin’s July 4 feast.” The endowment made possible the institution of an annual procession, during which the canons held candles and marched in silk copes: We ordain that in the summer feast of our patron St. Martin [July 4] on which a procession had not hitherto taken place, we shall make [one] henceforth in silk copes, each one holding in his hand a single candle, so that the glowing lamps in our hands indicate that we resemble those who await their God. The candles will have the same weight as those for Purification of the Blessed Virgin Mary, and will be distributed to the canons in the chapter after the [tolling of the] bell of Terce, “Dicta vigilia, paratur altare beati Petri sicut ad Missam cantandam, et ponitur ibi incensum in turibulo, panis et vinum. Et post clauditur ecclesia, et claves portat capicerius septimane. Et per totam noctem ardet in ecclesia totum luminare, et septimanarii et capicerii septimanae ponunt custos ad omnes portas ecclesia et in capite ecclesie, et dant eis vinum et alia necessaria. Et thesaurarius ponit custos ante domum suam, et eis similiter administrat” (Consuetudines Ecclesiae Beati Martini Turonensis, 78). In their reply to Philip of Heinsberg, archbishop of Cologne, however, the canons stressed that they “put on the altar no necessary preparations for the Mass, because we know that the spirits and souls of the saints have no need for these things for the divine services” (“De cultu Sancti Martini apud Turonenses extreme saeculo XII epistolae quatuor,” Analecta Bollandiana 3 (1884): 227. Quoted and translated into English in Farmer, Communities of Saint Martin, 223). Apparently, this custom had changed by the time the customary was copied. 88 “[C]ereis super coronas fulgentibus radientem et pluribus coruscantem lampadibus”; “et debet totum luminare cereum et olei ardere per totam noctem” (BmT 1021, fo. 157r–v). 87

107

108

Universal and local foundations of Martin’s cult just as on Pentecost, in sign of the Holy Spirit that descended in tongues of fire upon the disciples, in the very same hour Veni creator Spiritus is sung. Next, the processional candle will be lit in the choir, and thus in the aforementioned festivity in Terce, when Nunc sancte nobis Spiritus is started, everyone will hold a lighted candle so that the interior light will be marked out through the exterior. No canon shall receive a candle unless he was present in Terce and in the procession, and the clerics who, according to the custom of our church, enter our choir shall also receive candles like us if they were present.89

In the course of the procession they also sang the responsory Sint lumbi, and when they made a station under the crown-shaped chandelier they sang the responsory Agmina sacra without its verse. Finally, the prosa Octogenus agens was sung, one of the favorite pieces chanted during processions on Martinian feasts.90 That the endowment is concerned with the question of light is clear: most of it, in fact, deals with candles – it even specifies their weight – and it also provides a somewhat atypical elucidation for their use, being primarily concerned with assuring that the interior light burning inside the church be seen from the outside as well (“ut ignis interior per exteriorem designetur”). Exactly because the church was cleared of its everyday occupants and essentially stood empty (at least for the vigils), the light fiercely radiating from its interior served as the only palpable confirmation of the events taking place within it. Events that in spite of their conspicuousness and renown, remained as supernatural and were recounted by many but attested by a single canon only. Finally, in contrast to the other aspects of the feast, which could be commemorated in churches all over Europe, the ceremony

Statuimus quod die festivitatis estivalis Beatissimi patroni nostri Martini in qua hucusque facta non fuerat processio de caetero in cappis sericis faciamus, habentes singuli singulos cereos in manibus, ut lucernae ardentes in manibus nostris signent nos esse similes expectantibus dominum suum. Erunt autem cerei ad pondus cereorum Purificationis B. Mariae et post classicum horae tertiae distribuentur in capitulo singulis canonicis sicut et in die Pentecostes in signum Spiritus Sancti qui hora tertia descendit in linguis igneis in discipulos eadem hora qua cantatur Veni creator Spiritus. Quilibet dein cereum processionalem accensum in choro et ita in praedicta festivitate hora tertia quando inchoatur Nunc sancte nobis Spiritus quilibet tenebit cereum accensum ut ignis interior per exteriorem designetur. Nullus autem canonicus habebit cereum nisi intersit horae tertiae et processioni illi etiam clerici qui secundum consuetudinem ecclesiae nostrae intrant chorum nostrum habebunt cereos sicut nos si presentes interfuerint (BmT 1295, p. 604. See also BnF fr. 11805 [Collection Dom Housseau, Vol. 6], doc. 2477). 90 BmT 1021, fo. 157v (fifteenth-century layer). The identity of the chants sung during the procession varied; according to a processional copied in 1697 (BmT 204, p. 226), the responsory Laudemus dominum in beati antistitus “was sung after the responsory Sint lumbi, and was then followed by the prosa Exultemus et letemur” (another prosa associated with several Martinian feasts, and whose music is a contrafactum of Sospitati). 89

Reversion, Subvention, and Translation of the head

conducted behind the church’s well-guarded doors could be observed exclusively in Saint-Martin. And this, as Farmer suggests, seems to have been the most important message the canons wished to convey – that Martin was their saint, and that his power as bishop and miracle worker resided in their church – with no other spiritual reflections or benefits offered.91

Reversion, Subvention, and Translation of Martin’s Head In contrast to the July 4 feast, which was celebrated universally and yet retained a very distinctive character in Saint-Martin, the following three feasts were known almost exclusively in Tours. They commemorated events that affected the local populace of the city, and two of them  – Reversion and Subvention – played a role in the local politics surrounding questions of ownership of St. Martin. Notwithstanding the idiosyncratic events commemorated in this trio of feasts, they nonetheless share several characteristics: the authority invested in Martin’s relics plays a pivotal role in their history, they essentially share an identical stock of antiphons and responsories (diverging only in their respective lessons and certain liturgical accretions – see Table 2.2 above), and they have a distinct local flavor, rarely appearing in manuscripts outside Tours.92 The most recentlly established feast of the three was instituted on December 1, 1324, when King Charles 91 92

Farmer, Communities of Saint Martin, 230. Reversion was commemorated, however, in the Benedictine monastery of Saint-Martin of Tulle, where a breviary from the second half of the fifteenth century (BnF n.a.l. 1872, fo. 447r–v) features some short prayers but nothing in terms of proper liturgy. Significantly, SaintMartin of Tulle shares the same series of responsories for Martin’s November 11 feast with other monastic sources from Tours and the monastery of Trinité de Vendôme (see Table 2.4). Several miracle accounts and excerpts concerning Reversion are also found in a thirteenth/ fourteenth-century Martinellus now housed in Orléans (Médiathèque d’Orléans, MS 344 (293), fos. 70–78v, provenance unknown). Moreover, the table of contents opening this manuscript includes references to several legendae related to the Subvention and the December 1 and July 4 feasts, none of which is now extant. On this source, which was given to the library at Orléans by Abbé Dubois in the nineteenth century, see Cuissard, Catalogue général, Vol. XII, 188–89; and Alexandre et al., Médiathèque d’Orléans, 276. Additional, rare references to these feasts in manuscripts from outside Tours have come down to us from fifteenth-century sources: (1) a breviary from Bourgueuil (diocese of Angers) that features just a single prayer in commemoration of Reversion in its Sanctorale (BnF lat. 1043, fo. 447v), and (2) Nantes, Musée Dobrée, MS 10, fo. 193, a pontifical from the Benedictine abbey of Saint-Serge in Angers, which remarkably alludes to all five Martinian feasts. The latter is certainly owing to strong ties between Elie II of Angoulême, abbot of Saint-Serge in the late fourteenth century, and Marmoutier, where he was in residence between 1389 and 1412. See Leroquais, Les Pontificaux manuscrits, Vol. I, 251; and Durville, Catalogue de la bibliothèque du musée Thomas Dobrée, 323–39.

109

110

Universal and local foundations of Martin’s cult

IV led the ceremony during which Martin’s head was translated into a new reliquary. In attendance at Saint-Martin were the king’s wife Jeanne, the counts of Anjou and Valois, the archbishop of Vienne, and many other lay and ecclesiastical dignitaries. Subsequently, the new reliquary was carried in a solemn procession from Saint-Martin to the cathedral twice a year, until 1562, when it was destroyed at the outset of the Wars of Religion.93 The earliest extant office for this feast is transmitted in an unnotated breviary from the beginning of the fifteenth century (BmT 150, fos. 379v–381v), with BmT 1021 and 1023 transmitting its nine lengthy lessons on fos. 183v– 189 and 101–108v, respectively. Except for the lessons, whose text narrates the events leading to the translation of Martin’s relics and to the role played by Charles IV, the feast has no proper chants, and the celebrant is instructed to find these items in Martin’s July 4 feast or in Reversion.94 The feasts of Reversion (December 13) and Subvention (May 12) commemorate events that took place in the late ninth and early tenth centuries, respectively, and their histories and liturgies are intertwined in ways that reveal the intricate rapport between hagiography, history, and political agendas, and the ways they are channeled into liturgy. Celebrated on May 12, Subvention commemorates the delivery of Tours thanks to Martin’s relics, and their eventual return from the Cathedral of Tours. According to the Chronicon Turonense Magnum, on that date in 919, Robert, the archbishop of Tours, oversaw the transfer of the relics from their temporary location in the Cathedral  – where they had been kept as a safeguard for almost sixteen years – to a newly built church dedicated to St. Martin, replacing the one destroyed in the Vikings’ invasion on June 30, 903. As the chronicler noted, this was the second time in recent memory that the relics were transferred back to Saint-Martin from an alternative location, a reference to the return of the relics from Burgundy some years earlier, an event that by that time was celebrated in the feast

An account of the Translation of Martin’s Head, drawn from the capitulary registers of Saint-Martin and dating to 1323, can be found in BnF fr. 11807 (Collection Dom Housseau, Vol. VIII), doc. 3507. Unfortunately, it contains little information with regard to the liturgy performed during the ceremony, except for a passing reference to the recitation of the Te Deum. See also Vaucelle, La Collégiale, 165–67. 94 Like all Martinian feasts celebrated in Saint-Martin, the December 1 feast too was concluded with a prosa, one that was featured in all but the November 11 feast. The prosa Exultemus et letemur is attested, however, only in a winter portion of a breviary from Saint-Martin printed in 1748: BnF Rés. B-4908 (Breviarium nobilis et insignis, p. 370). I have found only two other instances in which this feast appears in medieval liturgical manuscripts: (1) Evreux, Bm 119, fo. 245v, where it appears in a hand later than the original thirteenth-century one, and (2) the calendar of Nantes, Musée Dobrée, MS 10. 93

Reversion, Subvention, and Translation of the head

of Reversion.95 The earliest extant source recounting these events of 903, and from which virtually all the proper liturgy for Subvention was drawn, is a sermon written by Radbod of Utrecht, a city that was no stranger to Viking raids, and whose own Cathedral, as we have seen, was dedicated to St. Martin. Radbod may well have studied in Tours before his appointment in Utrecht, and his personal devotion to St. Martin is attested in a number of short verse works he dedicated to him, as well as the sermon, known as the Libellus de Miraculo Sancti Martini, chronicling the tumultuous events of the summer of 903. Although the first extant and complete office for Subvention dates to the thirteenth century, the Libellus was known in Tours already in the eleventh century (and probably much earlier), when it was copied into a lectionary from Saint-Martin (BmT 1018, fos. 208–217v), remaining a standard feature in subsequent lectionaries and Martinelli.96 Radbod’s Libellus opens with a lengthy introduction regarding the virtues of the Church and the triumph of Christ, with the miracle performed by Martin (the nature of which is not yet divulged to the reader) providing a case in point. Radbod then continues on to develop an extended metaphor likening Martin to a most precious stone (“gemma pretiosissima”), contrasting it with various other jewels, and enumerating its many benefits and merits. Thereafter follows a comparison between the relics of Martin and luminaries of antiquity (Xerxes, Alexander the Great, and Augustus Caesar), which renders the latter undistinguished (1–8). The events concerning the siege of Tours in 903, the raison d’être of the Libellus, are narrated after a brief description of the Vikings and of their disastrous campaigns in France. According to Radbod, when the Vikings struck their city, the people of Tours rushed to gather around the tomb of St. Martin, where, “Robertus archiepiscopus Turonensis, III idus maii, corpus Beati Martini in loco ubi nunc adoratur reposuit, ante Fulconem Rufum comitem Andegaviae et Ingelgerium filium ejus qui cum patre suo ab Autissiodoro eum reportarat” (Chronicon Turonense Magnum, 109). According to the Chronicon, twenty-eight additional churches were set on fire during that siege (107). 96 The year 903 is nowhere mentioned in the Libellus, but it is clear that Radbod is describing the siege that took place that year. See the following lectionaries: BmT 1019, fos. 114–21 (copied at the end of the twelfth century; this lectionary is a composite source made of five manuscripts mostly copied between the eleventh and thirteenth centuries, with the concluding portion, fos. 145–60, copied in the fifteenth); BmT 1021, fos. 110v–115v, copied in the thirteenth century; and BmT 1023, fos. 83v–88v, copied in the fourteenth. References to the Libellus are made in relation to the following edition: Recueil de chroniques de Touraine, 1–15. The text for the unique July 4 office from Saint-Martin of Utrecht, mentioned above, is drawn from the Libellus. Finally, the earliest extant Subvention office survives in a fragmentary form in two leaflets from a twelfth-century antiphonary, transmitting mainly the antiphons for the first and second nocturns, but also two responsories, O quam admirabilis vir and Iste sanctus digne, consistent with the makeup of the office as known from later sources. See fo. 4r–v in Le Sage de La Haye, Répertoire numérique, Vol. I, 120. 95

111

112

Universal and local foundations of Martin’s cult

demoralized and overpowered by great fear, they cried out for Martin’s intervention: old men were groaning, boys crying, and women lamenting, saying “St. Martin, why did you fall asleep so deeply? Why does it not please you to wake up while we are oppressed?”97 As a last recourse, Martin’s relics were taken out of their resting place and brought to the gates of the city, where they provoked confusion in the camp of the Vikings, who subsequently became disorganized, and began running away as if they were “running on ice.” After the defeat of the Vikings, the people of Tours returned Martin’s relics to their original resting place, and the sermon ends with an appeal to Martin, the “invincible warrior” (“bellator invictissime”), to perform a similar miracle for the people of Utrecht, and deliver them too from the hands of the Vikings.98 The Libellus devotes relatively little space to details about the siege (9–11), concentrating instead on praising Martin as a precious jewel, and on his qualities as divine intercessor; it is through him that Christ becomes favorably inclined to come to the help of Tours, and it is God that the people of Tours thank “for providing them with an unexpected victory.”99 More than two centuries later, new priorities in recounting the invasion of 903 were evidenced in a treatise probably written, as Sharon Farmer speculates, by a monk from Marmoutier between 1137 and 1156, entitled “Narratio de reversione beati Martini a Burgundia tractatus.”100 As we shall see in greater detail below, it is the feast of Reversion that is the main subject matter of the “Narratio,” and yet the latter opens, in fact, with a protestation concerning Subvention, elucidating the origins of the feast and the meaning of its designation. “This solemn observation,” it states, “is called neither Translation nor Ordination [a reference to the July 4 feast], neither Transitus [November 11] nor Exception [Reversion], but Subvention,” revealing a certain perplexity that must have surrounded Reversion and Subvention even in the twelfth century, owing to the near-identical kinds of events that had led to their institution, and the fact that the two historical events “[S]epulchrum defensoris sui undique circumsteterunt pavore nimio simul et dolore perculsi, ubi inter gementes sense, inter plorantes pueros, inter lamentantes feminas, sic conclamabant: ‘sancte Dei Martine, quare tam graviter obdormisti? Cur ad pressuram nostram tibi evigilare non placet?’” Libellus, in Recueil de chroniques de Touraine, 10. 98 On the special relevance of the Libellus to the people of Utrecht see Zimmern, “Hagiography and the Cult of Saints,” 163–64. 99 “[M]agna voce laudantes et glorificantes Dei misericordiam, qui eis inopinatam victoriae dederat palmam” Libellus, in Recueil de chroniques de Touraine, 11. 100 “Narratio de reversione beati Martini.” For its date of composition, see Gasnault, “La ‘Narratio,’” 166–67; and Farmer, Communities of Saint Martin, 305–06. Until the eighteenth century, the treatise was widely and wrongly attributed to Odo of Cluny. See Gasnault, “La ‘Narratio,’” 162–63; and Farmer, Communities of Saint Martin, 79. 97

Reversion, Subvention, and Translation of the head

took place within decades of one another.101 According to the “Narratio,” it was above all the triumph of Martin’s relics over the invading Vikings in 903 that was commemorated in Subvention, a fact conspicuously indicated by the name given to the feast name itself – “Subvention”: coming to assistance – deemed fitting “because no other name is judged to be more proper.”102 In contrast to the Libellus, the “Narratio” devotes virtually no space to the poignant plight of the people of Tours, addressing neither individual misery nor collective supplication. Instead, it revolves around the gruesome military operations conducted during the siege, providing details about the use of battering rams and various blowing machines, and likening the numerous arrows descending on Tours to a hailstorm. This depiction, in turn, serves as a background against which Martin emerges as a mighty victor (“bellipotens triumphator”), a heroic portrayal underscored by a sixfold insistence on various declinations of “triumph” and “victory,” and by a monument erected in honor of Martin’s military victory: the church of Saint-Martin of the Battle.103 Notwithstanding the shift in tone evidenced in the “Narratio,” the latter hardly constitutes what Farmer has dubbed “a new explanation” for Subvention. In her analysis of the feast and of the rituals that became associated with it in the twelfth century, she makes several claims: (1) the feast originally celebrated the return of the relics by the archbishop of Tours in 919, but by the twelfth century, it became associated with the events of 903; (2) this sliding back of time was purposeful, and was meant to circumvent the historic role that the archbishop and his Cathedral played in safeguarding Martin’s relics until 919; and (3) this new interpretation “resulted from, or helped prompt” the exclusion of the Cathedral from the May 12 procession itinerary, involving Saint-Martin and Marmoutier alone, and drawing further attention to the tensions between the latter two communities and the Cathedral.104 Information about this procession is gleaned from the earliest “Solemnitas autem ista, non translatio seu ordinatio, non transitus, non exceptio dicitur, sed subventio … nominatur” (“Narratio de reversione beati Martini,” 18). 102 “[Q]uae nullo alio nomine rectius quam subventio censetur” (ibid., 20). This shift of objective may well have been related to the canons’ wish to distinguish Subvention from Reversion, for both feasts essentially celebrated similar events, albeit taking place in different periods. It is telling that both feasts were originally called Reversio. See Oury, “Culte et liturgie,” 646. 103 “[I]n honore ipsius fabricata est ecclesia, quae propter belli eventum, Sancti Martini Belli sortita est vocabulum” (“Narratio de reversione beati Martini,” 20). The church is in fact called Saint-Martin-le-Beau, owing to a probable confusion between the Latin word for battle (bellum) and the French word for beautiful (beau). 104 For Farmer’s analysis of the May 12 celebration, see pp. 52–57, as well as Part III (passim), in her Communities of Saint Martin. Also figuring into her analysis of Subvention as part of a concentrated effort to exclude the Cathedral is discussion of another feast commemorated 101

113

114

Universal and local foundations of Martin’s cult

extant source to discuss the liturgy of the May 12 celebration, a renewal of a prayer association between the canons of Saint-Martin and the monks of Marmoutier in 1115, which stipulates the celebration of Subvention in Saint-Martin by both groups of clerics.105 Both events – the siege of 903 that culminated in the triumph of Martin’s relics, and their return on May 12, 919  – were clearly closely linked and understood to be on a single temporal continuum; emphasizing the events of 903 did not entail an ignorance of the archbishop’s role in 919. Indeed, the “Narratio” states that “Thereupon, the archbishop with the devout public also restored the church of Saint-Martin, in honor of that very saint,” and as we have seen above, that much is also acknowledged by the Chronicon Turonense Magnum.106 Subvention, therefore, continued to celebrate the return of the relics, and commemorated especially the remarkable sequence of events that had led to their displacement and eventual return. Moreover, the “Narratio” has left no imprint on the liturgy of this feast, casting further doubt on the supposed novelty of its claims and their import. The office for Subvention has survived in manuscripts copied only after the “Narratio,” and so it is impossible to know what form it took before.107 But there is no reason to imagine that the “Narratio” had no impact on the composition of the office at all, for even much afterward, lessons for Subvention were continuously drawn from Radbod’s Libellus, written more than two centuries earlier. Especially given that the “Narratio” was probably written by a monk from Marmoutier, it is surprising that service books from that monastery did not adopt its characteristic triumphant overtones, preferring instead to feature Matins lessons drawn entirely from that section of

on May 12, namely, the translation of the relics of St. Maurice, to whom the Cathedral was dedicated until the fourteenth century (232–35). 105 “[O]rdinatum est atque statutum ut in illa beati Martini festivitate quae est IIII idus maii faciant monachi annis singulis processionem unam cum abbate et conventu suo ad ipsam beati Martini et eorum ecclesiam, in qua nimirum missam abbas ipse celebrabit, ministrantibus sibi de monachis suis diacono et subdiacono aliisque ad hujus modi officium necessariis.” The prayer association is copied in BnF lat. 12875, fo. 607, and is transcribed in Gasnault, “Etude sur les chartes,” 297–300. It states that “inter canonicos beati Martini castri novi et maioris monasterii monachos amicicia quondam et antiqua fuerat constituta societas.” Significantly, the prayer association refers to the feast simply as the May 12 feast (“in illa beati Martini festivitate que est IIII idus maii”), making the “Narratio” the first extant source to use the word “Subvention.” 106 “Ibi archiepiscopus cum populo devoto ecclesiam, quae Sancti Martini Basilica dicitur, in honore itidem ipsius sancti instauravit”; “Narratio de reversione beati Martini a Burgundia tractatus,” 20. 107 Neither is the feast found in service books for the Mass, including, for instance, BmT 196, an eleventh-century sacramentary.

Reversion, Subvention, and Translation of the head

the Libellus that precedes the description of the siege altogether.108 In sum, a new understanding or explanation of Subvention did not figure in the liturgical arsenal of Marmoutier or Saint-Martin, and certainly none was offered by the “Narratio,” whose focus is the feast of Reversion. The exclusion of the Cathedral from the May 12 procession may well have had to do with the far broader power struggle led by the canons of Saint-Martin and the monks of Marmoutier to distance the city’s archbishop from the cult of St. Martin, a topic to which I shall return in Chapter 4.109 Whether the Cathedral considered itself to be excluded cannot be ascertained, but it is entirely possible that on May 12 canons of the Cathedral were already preoccupied with commemorating the translation of the relics of St. Maurice and his companions, one of two feasts honoring their newly adopted patron saint. Service books from the Cathedral give special prominence to the liturgy of Maurice on that day, while limiting the importance of Subvention. One breviary copied in 1343 devotes a single nocturn to Martin (BmT 145, fos. 86v–87), while most calendars ignore it altogether.110 In essence, then, Subvention was observed only in Marmoutier and in Saint-Martin, and contrary to other Martinian feasts, which entailed the participation of neighboring churches and monasteries, its celebration was quasi-private: On this day, [the bells of] Terce having been rung, the [monks of the] monastery of Marmoutier arrive at Saint-Martin by way of the [Loire] River, and saying the Psalter, they toll the bell. Entering the choir, they begin chanting [the antiphon] O Martine with a collect. Afterwards, they say Terce. Having completed Terce, they go the chapter to get dressed. Having done so, they come to the choir where they occupy the left-hand side, and the canons the right-hand side, except for the treasurer, who sits in his own stall. If the abbot [of Marmoutier] is present, he sings Mass according to the monks’ ordo. And, if he is not present, then it is according to the As in the following thirteenth-century breviaries, which provide identical lesson incipits for the opening two nocturns only: Evreux, Bm 119, fo. 160; and BmT 153, fo. 73. Their lessons correspond to pp. 4–6 of the Libellus. For a later example, see the Subvention office in BnF Rés., vélin-2871 (Breviarium Sancti Martini Turonensis, a breviary from Saint-Martin printed in 1493, unpaginated throughout). For a description of the Evreux breviary, see Leroquais, Les Bréviaires manuscrits, Vol. II, 101–03. Breviaries from Saint-Martin also draw on the Libellus, but feature a more complex picture as far as the choice of lessons is concerned. 109 Farmer, Communities of Saint Martin, 49–53. 110 We shall return to further implications of the joint celebration of May 12 in Saint-Martin and the Cathedral in Chapter 4. Subvention appears in the following calendars from the Cathedral: BnF lat. 10504, copied in the thirteenth century, and then again only in the late fifteenth century, in BmT Rés. 7599 (Missale secundum usum, printed in 1485); and BmT 147 (copied before 1494). Lectionaries from the Cathedral likewise ignore this feast (cf. BmT 156, for instance). 108

115

116

Universal and local foundations of Martin’s cult canons’. A cantor from among the canons, dressed in white and a silk cope, begins [the introit] Statuit, and a monk sings the psalm Inveni David and [the introit] Statuit, and then the canons [intone] the Gloria patri … Clearly throughout the entire [mass], canons say the first verse, and monks the second.111

Perhaps also reflecting the somewhat exclusive nature of this celebration, one of the solitary chants that seems to have been proper for Subvention is the prosa Sanantur – one of three prosas concluding each of the Matins nocturns (see Table 1.3 on p. 70 above) – which seems to have been known in no other place but Saint-Martin of Tours.112 The pronouncement about Subvention that opens the “Narratio” plausibly served to promote its celebration, which in the twelfth century was barely observed even in Tours, and additionally to distinguish it from Reversion, which also commemorated the return of Martin’s relics after an earlier Viking attack. Nowhere does the importance of differentiating Subvention from Reversion become more apparent than in breviaries from Saint-Martin, which remarkably, as we shall see below, include lessons drawn entirely or partially from that opening section of the “Narratio” about Subvention for the office of Reversion.113 The events concerning the peregrinations of Martin’s relics are described in a number of chronicles, and most elaborately in the “Narratio.”114 According to the treatise, which fixed the time-honored traditions resulting in the institution of Reversion and undoubtedly fabricated certain ones as well, as soon as rumors about the Vikings’ capture of Le Mans had reached Tours (the Vikings eventually attacked Tours on November 8, 853), Martin’s relics were taken out of

Hodie, Tercia sonata, venit conventus Majoris Monasterii ad Beatum Martinum per aquam, dicendo psalterium, et sonant classico. Intrantes chorum, incipiunt O Martine cum collecta. Post dicunt Tertiam. Qua dicta, vadunt in capitulum se revestire. Quo facto, veniunt in choro in sinistra parte, canonici autem in dextera, excepto thesaurario, qui sedet in stallo suo. Si abbas venit, cantat Missam, et est ordo Misse monachorum. Et, si non venit, ordo est canonicorum. Primo incipit cantor canonicorum, in alba revestitus et capa serica, Statuit, et monachi psalmum Inveni David et Statuit. Et post canonici Gloria patri … Plane de toto dicunt canonici primum versum, et monachi secundum. (Consuetudines Ecclesiae Beati Martini Turonensis, 71) 112 Unfortunately, only the opening word of this prosa is extant, but it must have had something to do with Martin’s healing faculties, perhaps a reference to a miracle account told by Gregory of Tours in Chapter 22 of his Glory of the Confessors. 113 Extant missals and calendars from the tenth and eleventh centuries do not transmit this feast: BmT Diocèse 1 (a sacramentary copied in 1000–1020), BmT 196 (an eleventh-century missal from Marmoutier), and BmT 184 (a tenth-century sacramentary in use in the Cathedral of Tours). Subvention is first inscribed in the calendar of BmT 193, a sacramentary from SaintMartin copied in the twelfth century. 114 “Narratio de reversione beati Martini,” 21–34. 111

Reversion, Subvention, and Translation of the head

the city as a precaution, first to Orléans, and then to Chablis, until finally reaching the church of Saint-Germanus in Auxerre. There, Martin reportedly performed such a great number of miracles – the blind had their vision restored, cripples leapt to their feet, lepers were cured – that the influx of pilgrims flocking to the church was greatly intensified. The city’s bishop refused to return the relics to Saint-Martin even after peace was restored to Tours, however, and only after a long litigation, with the arbitration of Ingelgerius, duke of Burgundy, were the relics given back to Saint-Martin of Tours on December 13, 885 or 886.115 Yet earthly potestas alone could not secure the return of the relics, and it took a miracle to demonstrate to the bishop of Auxerre the superiority of St. Martin over St. Germanus, the patron of his church. A leper who was brought into SaintGermanus of Auxerre and asked to stand between the two reliquaries containing the relics of St. Martin and St. Germanus was cured only in that side of his body that was close to Martin’s relics.116 At some point in the journey of the relics back to Tours, the Auxerrois guardians turned over the relics to the people from Tours, a group that included both men and women, clerics and layfolk. The event stimulated so much piety that for the duration of the journey they did not do anything in the least selfish, predatory, or sexual. On a long journey this seemed so remarkable that it was deemed miraculous: After the mass for St. Martin was solemnly celebrated, Ingelgerius of Angers and Armarius of Auxerre, laying upon their shoulders that noble burden they had taken up, began making their way back to their homeland. The bishops led back the relics of the holy prelate accompanied by hymns of praise, and a crowd of both devout clerics and common people assembled. After the aforementioned leaders [Ingelgerius and Armarius] had returned, the army of Martin continued on the route they had begun, and achieved the longed-for triumph. Each day, the abbot, the monks, and the clerics performed the daily task imposed on them as servants of God [the office] with great devotion, and Mass was celebrated daily. In that noble army, there was not a single soft or effeminate man, no one indulged in carnal Ibid., 22–24, and Gasnault, “Etude sur les chartes,” 14–15. The “Narratio” erroneously implies (21) that the relics were returned in 918 (“Elapsis post Hastini incendia tribus lustris,” i.e., fifteen years after the siege of Tours in 903, when in fact the return from Burgundy took place fifteen years before this, as the penultimate paragraph of the “Narratio” clearly admits. I thank Grantley McDonald for this insight). Although Reversion only gained in popularity after the “Narratio” was written, it must have been celebrated some time earlier. The first extant manuscript that refers to this feast is an eleventh-century martyrology from Cluny (BnF lat. 17742); see Atsma and Vezin, “Cluny et Tours au xe siècle,” 132. 116 “Narratio de reversione beati Martini,” 24–25. 115

117

118

Universal and local foundations of Martin’s cult relations with women, and no one indulged in plunder, but each one provided for himself by means of fair trade.117

As with Subvention, Farmer interprets the twelfth-century narrative concerning the late-ninth-century return of relics as constituting another front in the protracted struggle between Marmoutier and Saint-Martin against the archbishops of Tours, from whose authority they wished to be exempt. “In creating the image of the bishop” of Auxerre, Farmer concludes, the “Narratio” “reiterated views that had arisen both at Marmoutier and at Saint-Martin during their struggles for exemption”: just as the bishops of Tours were portrayed as enemies of God (Amalek) and likened to a vile, non-Christian figure, so was the bishop of Auxerre compared to Pharaoh. Furthermore, a position that was developed especially in Marmoutier sought to prohibit episcopal visitations to the monastery, on the grounds that they violated not only the liberties of Marmoutier as an institution, but also the spiritual well-being of the monks; the bishop of Auxerre too was portrayed along similar lines.118 The struggles between Marmoutier and Saint-Martin, on the one hand, and the Cathedral, on the other, were indeed tangible and considerable. But Farmer’s carefully articulated understanding of Reversion does not seem to reflect the way the liturgy in either church developed or came to be understood there. The intriguing events around the return of Martin’s relics from Burgundy in the “Narratio” can be interpreted as an echo of a prolonged power struggle, but they were not reflected in the liturgy of the two feasts. Extant offices for Reversion emanating from Marmoutier are found in breviaries copied in the eleventh and thirteenth centuries, that is, before and after the “Narratio” came into existence. Given that they emanate from that same milieu that in all likelihood produced the “Narratio,” it is surprising that no such office from the thirteenth century reflects the tenor of the “Narratio” and alludes to the return of Martin’s relics from Burgundy. Both thirteenth-century breviaries, Evreux, Bm

Celebrata igitur propria de sancto Martino missa solemniter, Ingelgerius Andegavensis et Armarius Autissiodorensis assumptum onus illud nobile, suis imponentes humeris, repatriandi aggrediuntur iter. Deducunt pontifices cum hymnis et laudibus sancti antistitis reliquias necnon et clerus devotus et vulgi undequaque concurrens frequentia. Reversis vero deductoribus illis, Martini exercitus aggressum capit iter et optato potitur triumpho. Debitum servitii pensum ab abbate et monachis necnon et clericis Deo in dies devotissime exhibebatur, et missa quotidie celebrabatur. In nobili illo exercitu nullus mollis vel effeminatus; nemo ibi feminam, nemo rapinam noverat, sed unusquisque ex mercato competenti vivebat. (Ibid., 30). 118 Farmer, Communities of Saint Martin, 60–61; and “Narratio de reversione beati Martini,” 28–29. 117

Reversion, Subvention, and Translation of the head

119 and BmT 153, feature lessons drawn from Martin’s Vita, the former from Chapter 20 (describing the episode in which Martin pays a visit to Emperor Maximus), the latter from Chapter 21 (telling about an encounter with the devil). In that, they follow the long-established practice of the earliest extant Reversion office (Rouen, Bm 243, fos. 290–91), where the lessons of the first and second nocturns are drawn from Chapters 20 and 21 of the Vita (the concluding nocturn is based on the Common of One Confessor). Similarly, service books from the Cathedral do not take account of the “Narratio,” transmitting instead lessons derived from a sermon by Alcuin, whereas those from Saint-Martin, moreover, where Reversion was celebrated as early as the eleventh century (cf. BmT Diocèse 1), transmit a more complex, indeed puzzling, picture.119 The lessons in BmT 149, fos. 402–09, the earliest extant office for Reversion from that church, are drawn entirely from the opening narrative about Subvention, which opens the “Narratio”; those in BmT 150, fos. 391v–395 (olim fos. 582v–585v), copied in the early fifteenth century, moreover, are mostly drawn from that same account concerning Subvention (lessons 1–6), with only the final nocturn focusing on events related to Reversion.120 The “Narratio,” then, only slightly affected the liturgy of the three churches in Tours where Reversion was observed; this, in contrast to the modest fame it achieved as a literary text.121 Two aspects pertinent to the return of Martin’s relics from Burgundy as articulated in the “Narratio,” however, affected not only the liturgy of Reversion, but in part also the business of the chapter of Saint-Martin as a whole. As in all the feasts dedicated to St. Martin in his church in Tours, the colorful language of prosas (short, syllabic songs of praise sung in BmT 145, fos. 16–18 (breviary copied in 1343); and BmT 146, fos. 184v–185v (breviary copied in 1412). For the Sermo de transitu Sancti Martini by Alcuin see PL 101:662D–664. 120 A breviary printed in 1536 in Tours was destined for use in Loches. It contains an office for Reversion, a rarity outside Tours. See BnF Rés. B-27700 (Regalis et collegiate ecclesie, fos. xxi–xxiiv; each section of the book is paginated anew). The printer, Mathieu Chercelé, also supplied Marmoutier with some of its printed service books. 121 Interest in the “Narratio” continued well into the fifteenth century: it survives in at least nine manuscripts dating from between the twelfth and fifteenth centuries (mostly from Tours, but also from Metz and Charleville), and portions thereof were quoted in an even greater number of chronicles and literary sources. See, for example, BmT 1024, fos. 1–5v (a Martinellus copied in the fourteenth century, indexed in Straeten, Les Manuscrits hagiographiques, 142–44); and BmT 1019, fos. 122–32v (in the part of the manuscript copied in the thirteenth century) and fos. 151–60 (copied in the fifteenth). The “Narratio” was also translated into French by Péan Gâtineau (bearing the same name as the author of the customary, but apparently not the same person), surviving in a single manuscript – BnF fr. 1043, lines 7590–8257 – copied in the middle of the thirteenth century, and receiving several other print editions at the end of the fifteenth century and during the sixteenth. 119

119

120

Universal and local foundations of Martin’s cult

conjunction with a responsory) adorned also the feast of Reversion. The prosa Hic sanctus languidos, one of a trio of prosas sung during Matins (see Table 1.3 on p. 71), concludes the first nocturn, and is extant without its music. Effectively a litany of some of the most celebrated miracles wrought by Martin, it provides a context and vindication for the saint’s triumph over St. Germanus in the struggle for superiority of relics told in the “Narratio”:122 Hic sanctus languidos cunctos curavit. Prece tres mortuos resuscitavit. Ruentem arborem cruce levavit. Misertus leporis canes fugavit. Canibus imperans leporem ne sequantur. Martin attended to the weak, resuscitated three dead persons by prayer,123 lifted up a ruined tree with the help of the cross,124 and, motivated by compassion, chased away dogs in pursuit of a hare, commanding them not to follow it.125

But it is the prosa concluding the second nocturn, Exultemus et letemur, which seems to resonate the most with one of the main themes of Reversion (the third prosa sung during Reversion, Octogenus agens, is actually proper for November 11 and discussed in detail in the following chapter). The prosa opens with a reference to a miraculous restoration of eyesight – bringing to mind the theme of kindling and efflorescence associated with Reversion – and more specifically, with the actual crossing of Martin’s relics from exile into the boundaries of his archdiocese.126 According to the “Narratio,” this exact moment was articulated by the breathing of life into inanimate objects: gloomy trees in winter suddenly blossomed, and chandeliers, candles, and lamps in Saint-Martin and in the nearby monastery of Marmoutier were See also Keane, “Martin Hymns of the Middle Ages,” 164–65: the prosa is solely attested in the fifteenth-century layer of BmT 1021, fo. 154r–v, and is therefore not a thirteenth-century prosa. 123 Sulpicius Severus, “Life,” 113, 114; Sulpicius Severus, “Dialogues,” 208. 124 Sulpicius Severus, “Life,” 120–22. 125 Sulpicius Severus, “Dialogues,” 216. 126 See Farmer, Communities of Saint Martin, 292. Exultemus also brings to a close the third nocturn of the July 4 feast (a tradition that continued unabated well into the eighteenth century, as can be seen in the summer portion of Breviarium nobilis et insignis, 398) and, at least in one instance known to me, also of Subvention (see Breviarium Sancti Martini Turonensis). No extant source from before the fifteenth century transmits this prosa (according to Farmer, a “thirteenth-century hymn”). Given that no service book from SaintMartin that contains the office of July 4 is extant from before the fifteenth century (the prosa is transmitted with its music in BmT 159, fo. 193r–v, but in the eighteenth-century layer), it is impossible to determine the original recipient of Exultemus et letemur, although it seems to me to be Reversion. Indeed, the 1494 breviary from Marmoutier commands the chanting of Exultemus “as in Reversion” (“sicut in reversione”). 122

Reversion, Subvention, and Translation of the head

miraculously lit.127 The music that sets Exultemus et letemur is a contrafactum of Sospitati, the ubiquitous prosa for St. Nicholas:128 Exultemus et letemur Martini solemnio. Qui Paulino lucem dedit prece non collirio. Et levare regem fecit superbum incendio. Cum angelis collocutus sepe secretario. Perpudenda Sathani iecit vidente Tetradio. Vitalinam Christo iunxit dampnatam indicio. Cuius prece suscitatur Maximus naufragio. Et ad illum clamans dixit: “Romam tecum venio.” Let us exalt and rejoice in the feast of St. Martin, who gave sight to Paulinus by prayer, rather than by eye-salve;129 who made a proud king rise [from his throne] through fire;130 who often conversed with the angels in his private quarters, who cast off Satan’s most shameful deeds while Tetradius was looking;131 who brought the condemned Vitalina together with Christ by [his] testimony;132 and by whose prayers was saved from shipwreck Maximus, who shouted to him “I shall come with you to Rome.”133

The themes of light and renewal are evinced not only in this prosa, but also in the flurry of activities in the chapter of Saint-Martin that were inaugurated with Reversion. Falling during the penitential season before Christmas, the feast became associated with Advent as a whole, and administrative business conducted during that day suggests that, much like Advent itself, it too carried overtones of anticipation for more joyous occasions. Immediately after Matins, for instance, the succentor singlehandedly chose the two choirboys

Ingresso itaque beato archipraesule Martino propriae parochiae fines, mirum in modum res inanimatae et insensibiles, pastoris sui sentientes adventum, grata congratulationis suae signa praetendunt … Universae siquidem arbores et fruteta tempore brumali, repugnante licet natura, redivivis vestita foliis vernant et in sui ornatu quantae meritorum excellentiae sit pater patriae repatrians demonstrarunt. Itidem dextra laevaque in ecclesiis ejusdem parochiae, sine humano adminiculo, signa divinitus pulsabantur, luminaria tam cereorum quam lampadarum divinitus accendebantur. See “Narratio de reversione beati Martini,” 33. 128 Hofmann-Brandt, “Die Tropen,” Vol. I, 111; Vol. II, 139. 129 According to Martin’s Vita, Chapter 19, Martin cured one of Paulinus’s eyes by touching it “with a little sponge” (Sulpicius Severus, “Life,” 128). The opening of the prosa and the association of Reversion with light is discussed in Farmer, Communities of Saint Martin, 291–92. 130 A reference to an episode in which St. Martin forced a reluctant Emperor Valentinian to stand before him by setting his throne on fire (Sulpicius Severus, “Dialogues,” 209–10). 131 A reference to the exorcism by Martin of the servant of a certain proconsul Tetradius, after which the latter converted to Christianity (Sulpicius Severus, “Life,” 125–26). 132 A reference to a story reported by Gregory of Tours, according to which Vitalina, a virtuous nun buried in Artonne, was denied “the presence of the Lord” because she once washed her face on Good Friday. With Martin’s intercession, she was able to gain access to heaven (Gregory of Tours, Glory of the Confessors, 6). 133 I have been unable to find the source for this miracle account. This prosa is also discussed in Keane, “Martin Hymns of the Middle Ages,” 166–68. 127

121

122

Universal and local foundations of Martin’s cult

who would perform the roles of boy bishop and cantor during the octave of Christmas, a week known for its parody and inversion of church hierarchy. The entire body of canons, moreover, convened in the chapter room to elect two crupitores, whose duty consisted of seeing that the church was well illuminated during New Year’s.134 Given the relative darkness and cold that prevail in Tours in the middle of December, it is not surprising that the feast came to be associated with light and hope, evidenced not only in the eagerness to prepare in advance for more joyous and illuminated occasions, but also in the miracle accounts associated with that day. The Martinian feasts celebrated in the months of May, July, November, and December served as pivotal points of articulation and were instrumental in reinforcing the notion that the basilica in Tours “controlled calendric and cosmic time.”135 Service books from Saint-Martin routinely distinguish the two principal Martinian feasts of November and July according to the seasons in which they were celebrated. A frequent designation for the latter was that of estivalis, the feast of summer. The theme of light linked the July feast and Reversion, occurring during the summer and winter periods, respectively, an association already suggested by their use of a common stock of chants. Reversion was known as hiemalis, that is, the feast of winter, and it was not uncommon for rubrics in missals and breviaries to omit any reference to Martin altogether. The November feast has traditionally marked the end of the harvest season and the beginning of winter, a function it still occupies today in countries such as France and Germany. The feast also designated something of a milepost in the agricultural year, when it coincided with the securing of meat supplies for the winter – there exists a ninth-century blessing for swine that invokes St. Martin! – and the availability of new wine pressed just weeks earlier. The association of drinking songs and carnivalesque pursuits with St. Martin received numerous literary and picturesque counterparts, and at least one vivid and whimsical musical counterpart in Audite nova!, a four-voice The crupitores had to see to it that there was enough wax and oil to assure ample illumination during New Year’s (“Crupitores debent facere omne luminare anni novi, tam cere quam olei, et sonare, et alia necessaria ministrare”; Consuetudines Ecclesiae Beati Martini Turonensis, 29). There is no reason to believe that the cantor in question was selected for New Year’s (cf. Farmer, Communities of Saint Martin, 291): the identity of the cantor of Saint-Martin did not change on a yearly basis (i.e., there was no need to select a new one for New Year’s), and the customary clearly states that the cantor had to come from the ranks of choirboys (“Post succentor debet eligere episcopum et cantorem de clericulis prime stationis”; Consuetudines Ecclesiae Beati Martini Turonensis, 29). 135 Farmer, Communities of Saint Martin, 295. 134

Reversion, Subvention, and Translation of the head

motet by Orlando di Lasso published in 1573, conjuring up the festive atmosphere of merrymaking:136 Hear the news! The peasant from Donkeychurch, he has a fat goo-goo-goose, the gyri gyri goo-goo-goose, that has a long, fat, thick, well-fed neck; bring the goose here! Have at it, my dear Hans; pluck it, pull it, boil it, roast it, tear it up, devour it! This is St. Martin’s little bird, we may not be his enemy; servant Heinz, bring here a good wine, and pour us a hearty draught, let it go all around! In God’s name we drink good wine and beer to the stuffed goose, to the roasted goose, to the young goose, that it may do us no harm. St. Martin had a significant following while he was still alive, and in the course of the centuries after his death he came to be viewed as a vital intercessor for individuals and institutions alike. His devotees included laymen, clergymen, knights, and kings; his patronage extended from single churches and monastic communities to the kingdom of France itself. Sulpicius Severus made Martin a universal saint, disassociating him from the city of Tours and promoting him as a Christian ideal, on a par with the Apostles. The compelling Vita he wrote inspired further accounts of Martin’s life in poetry and prose for over a millennium. The writings of Severus were also the inspiration for most of the liturgy composed in Martin’s honor. Walsh, “Martinsnacht,” 127–65, and esp. 133–40. On the medieval English celebrations of St. Martin’s feast, and on the further association of Martin with the slaughtering of animals, see Walsh, “Medieval English ‘Martinmesse.’” The music and text of Audite nova! are edited in Lasso, The Complete Motets 10, xix, 36–39.

136

123

124

Universal and local foundations of Martin’s cult

The promoters of Martin’s cult were numerous and in many regions throughout Europe. Chief among them were the canons of Saint-Martin, who, in contrast to Sulpicius Severus, stressed the saint’s ties to their city. Although often reprimanded for lax morals and deficient manners of conduct, they were masterful propagandists. They used music, liturgy, and hagiography to elevate – gradually and deliberately – their chief patron from a saint exemplifying the ideal of Christian behavior into one intermittently identified closely with Christ. This transformation, though effected locally, had consequences for concepts of sainthood elsewhere. As we shall see in Chapter 5, it may well have influenced the eventual understanding of St. Francis of Assisi as an alter Christus; certainly Martin’s Vita had helped inspire the first biographers of St. Francis in the thirteenth century. An exact period of composition cannot be ascertained for much of the Martinian liturgy for the Mass and office. These elements were in place by the time our first surviving sources were redacted. Still, we can glimpse some crucial moments of continuing liturgical creativity at Tours. Some of the prayers for the November 11 Mass date from the last quarter of the seventh century, and the set of twelve Martinian antiphons attributed by some to Odo of Cluny from the early tenth century. Some additional feasts  – that of July 4, Reversion, Subvention by the tenth century, and later on also of the Translation of Martin’s Head – were mainly marked by the issuing of new hagiographic texts, although music too played a role in articulating the main themes of these feasts. New sets of office and mass propers were never composed for any of these feasts, yet the canons of Saint-Martin resorted to their habitual manner of personalizing the liturgy dedicated to their patron saint by demonstrating their penchant for responsorial prosas. Indeed, ingenuity of this kind is the subject matter of the next chapter, which explores the ways in which the community of Saint-Martin maintained its special ties with the cult of St. Martin effected on the local level.

Appendix. Order of responsories in Martinian feasts – comparative tables Table 2.3 Sequence of responsories according to earliest office sources Cursus

MS

Date

R

R2

R3

R4

R5

R6

R7

R8

R9

R10

R11

R12

R O M A N

C G B E M V H R D F S L

860–80 XI (no office) XIIex XI XIin XI XIin XIII XII XIII XI XIIex

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 17

2 2 2 2 2 2 5 2 2 1

3 3 3 3 3 3 6 3 3 5

6 4 4 4 4 14 7 16 4 4

7 6 5 5 5 4 2 4 6 6

4 7 6 6 6 6 3 5 7 7

8 8 7 7 7 7 4 6 8 12

9 9 8 8 8 8 8 7 9 2

11 11 9 9 9 5 15 12 5 3

11 11 11 10 11 8 12 9

M O N A S T I C

Sigla following Hesbert’s CAO, Vol. I (Roman) and Vol. II (monastic).

13 9 10 11 11 18

11 9 9 13 11

Table 2.4 Sequence of responsories in manuscripts outside Tours Siglum

Date

Provenance

R1

R2

R3

R4

R5

R6

R7

R8

R9

BnF lat. 1028, fos. 261v–263 (breviary) ♪ BnF lat. 1255, fos. 342v–346v (breviary) ♪ Chantilly, Musée Condé 47 (718), fos. 74–77v (antiphoner) Paris, Bib. Mazarine 355, fos. 250v–254 (breviary) ♪

XIII

Sens

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

XIII

Bourges

1

2

3

4

5

6

8

9

11

XVI

Saint-Martin, Châteauroux

1

2

3

4

5

6

8

9

11

XIII

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

11

9

BnF lat. 903, fos. 339v–341 (breviary) Verdun, Bm 107 (summer breviary) ♪ Lucca, Biblioteca Capitolare 602, fos. 202–240v (antiphoner) Essen, Codex D3, fos. 267v–270 (antiphoner) BnF Rés. B 545, n.p. (printed breviary) BnF lat. 12044, fos. 203v–206 (antiphoner) ♪ Narbonne, Bm 166, fos. 379v–381v (breviary)

XIII3–4

Hospitaliers de Saint-Jean de Jerusalem Vich Cathedral

1

2

3

4

5

9

6

7

11

XIV

Verdun

1

2

3

4

6

7

9

10

11

1150–75

Probably from Luccaa

1

2

3

4

6

7

9

10

11

IX

Essen

1

2

3

4

6

7

8

9

11

1497

Gouda, diocese of Utrecht Saint-Maur-desFossés Arles-sur-Tech

1

2

3

4

6

7

8

11

9

1

2

3

16

4

5

6

7

1

2

3

16

4

5

6

7

XII XIV

R10

R11

R12

12

8

11

9

12

8

11

9

Siglum

Date

Provenance

R1

R2

R3

R4

R5

R6

R7

R8

R9

R10

R11

R12

Paris, Bib. Mazarine 349 (761), fos. 367–71 (summer breviary) BnF lat. 12601, fos. 152v–153v (breviary copied after 1064)b Meaux, Bm 5, fos. 368v–370v (breviary) Limoges, Bm 4, fos. 557v–559v (breviary; only the first eight lessons are copied) BnF lat. 1290, fos. 487v–489v (breviary) BmT 143, fos. 448–450v (breviary, attested in SaintMartin from 18th c.) BnF lat. 10481, fos. 396v–398v (Roman breviary adapted to Franciscan use) BnF n. a. l. 622, fos. 379–81 (summer breviary) Paris, Bib. de l’Arsenal 595, fos. 408–09v (missal and breviary) Paris, Bib. Mazarine 342 (775), fos. 465–66v (breviary)

XIII

Faremoutiers

1

2

3

16

4

5

6

7

12

8

11

9

XI

Cluny

1

2

3

16

4

5

6

7

12

8

11

XIII

Saint-Nicasius, Reims Saint-Martial, Limoges

1

2

3?

16

4

5

6

7

12

8

11

1

2

3

16

4

5

6

7

—

XIV

Rome

1

2

3

4

6

7

8

9

XVex

Rome

—

2

3

4

6

7

8

9

—

c. 1340

Rome-Franciscan

1

2

3

4

6

7

8

9

11

XIV

Arras

1

5

6

7

2

4

3

12

11

XIII

Saint-Etienne, Châlons-surMarne Paris

1

5

6

7

2

3

4

11

9

1

5

6

7

2

3

4

11

9

XIVex/XVin

XIV3–4

Table 2.4 (cont.) Siglum

Date

Provenance

R1

R2

R3

R4

R5

R6

R7

R8

R9

Paris, Bib. Mazarine 347 (760), fos. 436–37v (breviary) BnF lat. 10482, fos. 554–56v (breviary) ♪ BnF lat. 15182, fos. 433v–438 (breviary, summer portion) ♪ BnF lat. 1266, Vol. II, fos. 389–95v (breviary) BnF lat. 13233, fos. 429–33 (breviary) BnF lat. 17991, fos. 226v–28v (breviary) Arras, Bm 412, fos. 572–76 (breviary) BnF lat. 802, fos. 254v–257v (breviary) ♪ Paris, Bib. Mazarine 350 (774), fos. 448–50v (breviary) Paris, Bib. Mazarine 346 (767), fos. 412v–414v (breviary) BnF lat. 1794, fo. 136v (ordinal)

XIII3–4

Saint-Victor, Paris

1

5

6

7

2

3

4

11

9

XIIIin

Paris

1

5

6

7

2

3

4

11

9

XIIIex/ XIVin

Paris

1

5

6

7

2

3

4

11

9

1309

Meaux

1

5

6

7

2

3

4

11

9

XIII

Paris

1

5

6

7

2

3

4

11

9

XI

Reims

1

5

6

7

2

3

4

11

9

XIV

Arras

1

5

6

7

2

3

4

11

9

XIII

Châlons-sur-Marne

1

5

6

7

2

3

4

11

9

XV

Coutances

1

5

4

6

7

2

8

3

11

1429–33

Saint-Magloire (Paris) Chartres

1

5

6

7

12

3

11

4

8

1

6

7

2

3

4

8

9

11

XIII

R10

9

R11

R12

Siglum

Date

Provenance

R1

R2

R3

R4

R5

R6

R7

R8

R9

R10

R11

R12

BnF lat. 1037, fos. 266v–268 (breviary) BnF lat. 1030, fos. 217v–222v (summer breviary) ♪ Cambrai, Mm 46, fos. 202v–204 (breviary) ♪ Cambrai, Mm 38 (40), fos. 360v–364 (antiphoner) ♪ Vendôme, Bm, 17E, fos. 516v–520v (breviary) BnF n. a. l. 1872, fos. 426–28 (breviary; the opening lesson is missing) Vatican, BAV, S. Pietro B. 79, fos. 168–169v (antiphoner)

XIV

Arles

1

6

7

2

4

3

8

11

9

XIII

Beauvais

1

6

7

2

8

4

16

11

9

XIII

Cambrai

1

6

7

2

3

12

4

9

11

XIII

Cambrai Cathedral

1

6

7

2

3

12

4

9

11

1245–66

6

7

2

12

3

16

1

11

XV

Monastery of Trinité de Vendôme Saint-Martin, Tulle

8

15

4

9

[6]

7

2

12

3

16

1

11

8

15

4

9

c. 1175

St. Peter’s, Rome

1

10

5

9

3

7

8

21

A ♪ sign following a manuscript indicates that it is notated.

See Brand, “Liturgical Ceremony,” 278–80. This office is edited in Historia Sancti Martini, ed. Fickett. It presents a responsory order identical to that in F, Saint-Maur-des-Fossés. BnF lat. 12584.

a b

Table 2.5 Sequence of responsories in sources from Tours and its environs MS

Date

R1

R2

R3

R4

R5

R6

R7

R8

R9

BmT 159 (Saint-Martin) ♪ BmT 1021 (Saint-Martin) BmT 150 (Saint-Martin) BmT 151 (Saint-Martin) BmT 152 (Saint-Cosme) BnF Rés., vélin-2871 (Saint-Martin) Paris, Bib. Ste.-Gen. BB 8o 1272, Inv. 1441 (Saint-Martin) BnF Rés. B-27700 (Loches) BmT 145 (Saint-Gatien) BmT 148 (Saint-Gatien) BnF lat. 1032 (Saint-Gatien) Paris, Bib. Mazarine 352 (780) (Ste.-Marie de Grâce, Tours) Loches, Bm 5 BmT 153 (Marmoutier) ♪ Evreux, Bm 119 (Marmoutier?) Arch. Dep., Series I, 22 BmT Rés. 2753 (Marmoutier) BnF lat. 1043, fos. 421v–424v (Saint-Martin of Bourgueil)

XIII4 XIII XVin XVex XVex 1493 1519

6 6 6 6 6 6 6

7 7 7 7 7 7 7

12 12 12 12 12 12 12

2 2 2 2 2 2 2

3 3 3 3 3 3 3

11 11 11 11 11 11 11

8 8 8 8 8 8 8

16 16 16 16 16 16 16

9 9 9 9 9 9 9

1536 1343 XV2 XV2 XV

6 6 6 6 6

7 7 7 7 7

12 2 2 2 2

2 12 12 12 12

3 3 3 3 3

11 11 11 11 11

8 16 16 16 16

16 8 8 8 8

9 9 9 9 9

XV XIII XIII XI 1536 XIV

6 6 6

7 7 7

2 2 2

12 12 12

6 6

7 7

2 2

12 12

3 3 3 3 3 3

11 16 16 16 16 4

16 1 1 1 1 16

8 11 11 11 11 11

A ♪ sign following a manuscript indicates that it is notated.

R10

R11

R12

9 8 8

15 15

4 4

9 9

8 8

15 5

4 1

9 9

3

The musical articulation of St. Martin in Tours

Without a doubt, Martin’s office for November 11 was the object of a great creative initiative in the church dedicated to him in Tours. As we have seen in Chapter  1, service books from Saint-Martin testify to the great fervor with which responsorial prosas were cultivated in that church. Nowhere is this ingenuity more evident than in the November 11 office, which was crowned with five exceptional prosas.1 The interpolation of these songs further distinguished Martin’s principal feast from the other Martinian celebrations: its liturgy was the most thoroughly proper, and very little of it was ever reproduced in other offices. Martin’s office had a distinct profile, as we would expect given the passionate cult this figure enjoyed in SaintMartin. Moreover, the distribution of five prosas throughout the canonical hour of Matins in the earliest extant breviary from that church further emphasized important points of articulation within the office. This was a conventional function of prosas.2 Remarkably, the responsory concluding the office, Martinus Abrahe, was adorned with an exceptionally high number of three prosas. Both responsory and prosas were modeled after a famous responsory for Christmas that provided not only procedural direction of theological consequence, but much of their music as well. These prosas are further set apart from the two preceding ones in that they belong to the original phase of the copying of BmT 159 – the earliest extant manuscript to transmit them – whereas the prosas concluding the third and sixth responsories were added to the liturgy of Saint-Martin only in the course of the fourteenth century, and were appended to chants that originally featured merely a substitute melisma. Given the stature of St. Martin and his ubiquitous veneration all over Europe, it may seem surprising that these responsorial prosas were little known outside Saint-Martin of Tours, let  alone in other parts of the Continent, as can be gleaned from Table 3.1. Prosas for Sts. Nicholas and Stephen, for instance, were considerably more popular and copied into See Table 1.3 on p. 71 above. On the makeup of BmT 159, the bulk of which was copied c. 1285–1300, see Appendix B on p. 251 below.

1 2

131

132

The musical articulation of St. Martin in Tours

Table 3.1 The Martinian prosas for November 11 known in Saint-Martin Prosa/Matins responsory

BmT 159

Non debiles annos/Cum videret Textual concordances: •  BmT 150, fo. 577 •  BmT 1021 (first half of the 15th-century portion, lectionary from Saint-Martin), fo. 158v •  BmT 151 (late 15th-century breviary from Saint-Martin), fo. 471 •  BmT 152, fo. 470v •  BnF Rés., vélin-2871 •  BnF lat. 16806, fo. 48v (incipit only) •  BnF Rés. B-4908 (printed breviary from Saint-Martin, 1748), p. 429

Folio 284v; c. 1285– 1300 layer (prosa in later hand)

Qui calcavit seculum/O quantus erat luctus Textual concordances: •  BmT 1021, fo. 159; BmT 150, fo. 578 •  BnF lat. 16806, fo. 49 (incipit only) •  BmT 151, fo. 472; BmT 152, fo. 471 •  BnF Rés., vélin-2871 •  BnF Rés. B-4908, p. 431 Musical concordance: •  BnF lat. 1266, Vol. II (breviary from Meaux, 1309), fo. 395v (with responsory Martinus Abrahe)

Folio 286v; c. 1285– 1300 layer (prosa in later hand)

Post derelicta/Martinus Abrahe Textual concordances: •  BmT 1021, fo. 159 •  BmT 150, fo. 579 •  BnF lat. 16806, fo. 49 (incipit only) •  BmT 151, fo. 473v •  BmT 152, fo. 472 •  BnF Rés., vélin-2871 •  Paris, Bib. Ste.-Gen. BB 8o 1217, Inv. 1441 (printed breviary from Saint-Martin, 1519), fo. 126v •  BnF Rés. B-4908, pp. 433–34

Folio 288; c. 1285– 1300 layer

Ad patriam redit/Martinus Abrahe Textual concordances: •  BmT 1021, fo. 159 •  BmT 150, fo. 579 •  BnF lat. 16806, fo. 49 (incipit only) •  BmT 151, fo. 473v •  BmT 152, fo. 472 •  BnF Rés., vélin-2871 •  Paris, Bib. Ste.-Gen. BB 8o 1217, Inv. 1441, fo. 126v •  BnF Rés. B-4908, p. 434

Folio 288v; c. 1285– 1300 layer

The musical articulation of St. Martin in Tours

Prosa/Matins responsory

BmT 159

Octogenus agens/Martinus Abrahe Musical concordance: •  BmT 204 (17th-century processional in use in Saint-Martin), p. 260 (some minor textual and musical variants exist) Textual concordances: •  BmT 150, fo. 579 •  BnF lat. 16806, fos. 49, 49v (incipit only) •  BmT 151, fo. 473v •  BmT 152, fo. 472 •  BnF Rés., vélin-2871 •  Paris, Bib. Ste.-Gen. BB 8o 1217, Inv. 1441, fo. 126v •  BnF Rés. B-4908, p. 434 •  BmT 1021, fo. 159 (incipit only) •  BmT 1021, fo. 154v (in the context of St. Martin’s Reversion)

Folio 288v; c. 1285– 1300 layer

manuscripts all over Europe. Sospitati dedit egros, for St. Nicholas, was copied time and again, and its music inspired a multitude of contrafacta (including for St. Martin, as we have seen in the previous chapter), while Stephanus dei gratia plenus, although less renowned than Sospitati, was nonetheless chanted in churches from Piacenza to Worcester. And yet, the paths of dissemination of the Martinian prosas are congruent with the localizing character of this genre as a whole. With the exception of the two above-mentioned prosas and a handful of others, the ones that enjoyed considerable repute were usually those dedicated to feasts of the Temporale (especially to Christmas) and to the Virgin. The existence of additional, utterly different prosas for the November 11 feast outside Tours (see Table  3.2) demonstrates the degree to which the dissemination of responsorial prosas was quite restricted in general, and reveals moreover that, with the exception of Tours, prosas were not the preferred expressive vehicle for Martinian devotion. Only four prosas dedicated to Martin survive in sources from outside the confines of Tours. Regardless of their origin, however, all prosas were interpolated in just three host responsories, undoubtedly chosen because of their prominent position within the office, concluding a nocturn: O quantus erat luctus, Martinus Abrahe, and Cum videret.3 The latter responsory is attested with An antiphoner from Marmoutier includes a series of prosas for Martin’s November 11 feast: one concluding each of the opening two nocturns, and three interpolated into Martinus Abrahe. Copied in the 1620s, these seem to be new compositions of the seventeenth century (BmT 163, fos. 214v–215, 221v–222v, and 228v–230).

3

133

134

The musical articulation of St. Martin in Tours

Table 3.2 The Martinian prosas for November 11 known outside SaintMartin Prosa/responsory Flebant pictavi presulem/O quantus erat luctus Known sources: •  Barcelona, Biblioteca Central, M 662, fo. 179 (14th/15th-century Catalan antiphoner) •  Gerona (Spain), Diocesan Museum 19 (Noem. Inv. MD45, 11th/12th-century antiphoner and responsoriale from Gerona) •  Montblanch (Spain), Archivo de la Iglesia de Santa Maria, s.n. (13th/14thcentury antiphoner) •  Vich (Spain), Archivo Capitular, 2+ (14th-century antiphoner fragment) Honore cives/Martinus Abrahe Known source: •  Barcelona, M 662, fos. 177v–178 Martinus hac die inclita/Martinus Abrahe Known sources: •  Barcelona, M 662, fo. 177v •  León, Biblioteca de la S. Iglesia-Catedral, 9 (15th-century processional), fos. 38–39 Euphonias videns/Martinus Abrahe Known sources: •  Utrecht, Bibliotheek der Rijksuniversiteit, MS 406 (3.J.7), fo. 198v (antiphoner from Mariakerk in Utrecht, second half of the 12th century) •  Utrecht, Bibliotheek der Rijksuniversiteit 408, fo. 240r–v (15th-century antiphoner from the Mariakerk in Utrecht) •  Utrecht, Bibliotheek der Rijksuniversiteit 409, fos. 233v–234 (15th-century antiphoner from the Mariakerk in Utrecht) •  Stadsbibliotheek Haarlem, MS 184-C3, fo. 101 (15th-century notated breviary from Laurentiuskerk in Heemskerk) •  Brussels, Bibliothèque royale de Belgique, Série II (nouv. acq.) MS 923, fo. 244 (15th-century notated breviary, probably from Utrecht Cathedral) •  BnF Rés. B 545 (unnotated breviary printed in 1497 from Gouda, the diocese of Utrecht)

a prosa only in a group of breviaries from Saint-Martin of Tours and from the nearby priory of Saint-Cosme, a dependent establishment. Three of the four prosas known outside Tours are found exclusively in a small number of Spanish sources.4 The fourth, Euphonias, is transmitted only in sources On prosas and their performing practice in Catalunya, where they were known as verbeta, see Anglès, La música a Catalunya, 231–39. A single Catalan antiphoner, Barcelona, Biblioteca Central, M 662 (see Table 3.2), has one of the largest collections of prosas in Europe in general,

4

The musical articulation of St. Martin in Tours

from the diocese of Utrecht, no doubt owing to the special esteem in which Martin was held there and to the personal promotion his cult enjoyed by bishop and composer Radbod, as we have seen in the previous chapter. An ordinal of Utrecht Cathedral possibly identifies Euphonias as the prosa sung not only during the feast of St. Martin, but also when the newly elected bishop of Utrecht made his first solemn entry into the city.5 The bishop was received into the city with the chanting of the responsory Martinus Abrahe, the chant in which Euphonias is interpolated, which celebrates the welcoming of St. Martin “in the bosom of Abraham,” that is, in heaven. Sung anew during the pontifical procession that led the bishop into his new cathedral, Euphonias ushered in the newly installed bishop as if he were Martin himself.6 The series of November 11 prosas in Saint-Martin, however, opens with two prosas – Non debiles annos and Qui calcavit seculum – that have problematic sources. It is with them that we inaugurate an inquiry into the lyrical interpolations that so characterized the cult of St. Martin in medieval Tours. Like most other responsoria prolixa, the responsories in the November 11 office have the usual ABA′ form, and in accordance with convention, the scribe of the original layer of BmT 159 eschewed the replication of each repetendum in its entirety. Instead, he copied only the elaborate melismas ad repetendum of the third and sixth responsories (fos. 284v and 286r–v, reproduced in Figures 3.1 and 3.2, respectively), which set the final chanting of the respond dramatically apart from the first one.7 The first nocturn concludes with the responsory Cum videret followed by the versicle Cur nos, Pater. Following the repetendum (implied by the cue word Domine) the Gloria patri is intoned, and is in turn followed by another partial repetition

and transmits most of the Martinian prosas known outside Tours. The Martinian prosas contained therein are studied in Bonastre, “Estudis sobre la verbeta,” 306–14. 5 “Notandum est quod omni die dominica, a festo sancti Martini usque ad dominicam ante Adventum Domini, qua cantatur ad processionem Ecce karissimi, cantabitur ad processionem responsorium Martinus Abrahe, cum versu et prosa.” The latter was added to the Utrecht ordinal by a later hand during the thirteenth century, and Euphonias is nowhere identified as such explicitly in this source. Yet, it is the only Martinian prosa known from Utrecht sources, and was interpolated in Martinus Abrahe, as can be gleaned from two surviving ordinals from the Utrecht Cathedral: BnF lat. 328, fo. 29v (copied in the fourteenth century, the entry on Martin’s November 11 feast reads: “Ad introitum Resp. Martinus Abrahe cum prosa Euphonias cantetur”); and Séjourné, L’Ordinaire de s. Martin d’Utrecht, 7 and [5]. 6 Ibid., 122. In Tables 3.1 and 3.2, concordances outside BmT 159 are taken in part from Hofmann-Brandt, “Die Tropen,” Vol. II. 7 As can be gleaned from Appendix B, BmT 159 consists of multiple temporal layers. Unless otherwise noted, references to BmT 159 in this chapter apply to the bulk of the manuscript dating to c. 1285–1300.

135

136

The musical articulation of St. Martin in Tours

of the respond. As we can see in Figure 3.1, at some point after BmT 159 was copied, a scribe superimposed the words of the doxology above the words of the verse, indicating to the officiant that it is to be sung to the melody of the verse – an action that underscores the troping verity of this procedure, effectively creating a second verse. The second iteration of the repetendum ends with a substitute melisma set to “Non recuso laborem,” the concluding words of the respond – the kind of melisma ad repetendum that may well be a vestige of Gallican use.8 A performance of the third responsory (transcribed in Example 3.1) would therefore have the following configuration: respond—versicle 1—repetendum—versicle 2 (Gloria patri)—repetendum + alternative ending (transcribed in Example 3.2). At some stage, the melismas ad repetendum of the third and sixth responsories were themselves substituted: they were marked off by the word vacat, signifying that as they stood, they were not to be sung. In both cases, the same hand that added the word vacat also inscribed a tie mark with the Latin abbreviation for the word prosa next to it. The tie mark leads the reader to the margins of the folio, where a new text is found. These texts seem to have been jotted down rather carelessly: the writing is sloppy, and the words are written in small and sometimes barely legible characters. What is more, no apparent effort was made to indicate the precise relation between the new text and the music of the alternative endings, nor was the text of the prosas preserved in a way that would permit their proper execution, probably indicating a prior familiarity with them. The first extant manuscript from Saint-Martin that transmits the texts of these prosas – Non debiles and Qui calcavit – in the original layer of copying is BmT 150, an unnotated breviary dating to the late fourteenth century. It can be surmised, therefore, that the texts of our two prosas were penned in the course of the fourteenth century: the date of BmT 159 may serve as its ante quem non, with that of BmT 150 as its post quem non.9 But what is the exact relation between these canceled melismas and their newly added texts? Since the number of notes in each See Goudesenne, Offices historiques, 191. The texts and music of the third and sixth responsories are given further below. 9 Marie Michael Keane suggests that the texts of all five prosas listed in Table 3.1 were composed already in the thirteenth century (Keane, “Martin Hymns of the Middle Ages,” 161). Her observation is based on the presence of these prosas in BmT 1021, a lectionary from SaintMartin. Following the dating of this lectionary by Collon in his Catalogue général of the BmT, scholars have generally accepted that this manuscript was copied in the thirteenth century in its entirety. Clearly, however, large portions of it (fos. 129v–191v) were copied in a much later period. On fo. 160, for example, 1323 is mentioned as the year in which the translation of Martin’s head took place. Denis Muzerelle from the IRHT in Paris has kindly dated for me folios 129v–191v of BmT 1021 to the first half of the fifteenth century (personal communication). For a catalogue raisonné of this lectionary, see Straeten, Les Manuscrits hagiographiques, 133–41. 8

The musical articulation of St. Martin in Tours

Figure 3.1  The responsory Cum videret and its melisma ad repetendum over “non recuso laborem.” BmT 159, fo. 284v.

137

138

The musical articulation of St. Martin in Tours

Figure 3.2  The responsory O quantus erat luctus (end of verse) and melisma ad repetendum over “Flere Martinum.” BmT 159, fo. 286v.

far exceeds the number of syllables found in the respective marginal text, what certainty is there that they were meant to complement one another? Additional instances in BmT 159 in which melismas ad repetendum are replaced by a prosa may point to instructive parallels that can provide a key to understanding the text–music relationship in the two prosas under

The musical articulation of St. Martin in Tours Example 3.1  The responsory Cum videret. BmT 159, fo. 284v.

initial consideration, Non debiles annos and Qui calcavit seculum. The office of John the Baptist is a case in point: although the concluding ninth responsory Inter natos originally ended with a melisma ad repetendum, the latter was replaced with the prosa Preparator veritatis, with the word vacat signaling the invalidation of the alternative ending. Unlike the examples drawn from Martin’s office, both the music and words of this new prosa were written out in full in the lower margins of fos. 175v–176, pointing to the complete melodic divergence between the new piece and the one

139

140

The musical articulation of St. Martin in Tours

it replaced. Similarly, the ninth responsory concluding the feast of St. Germanus, bishop of Auxerre, featured a melisma ad repetendum that was discarded at a later stage (BmT 159, fo. 208). Although the scribe stretched the word vacat over the entire length of the alternative ending, he did not provide a new, fully notated prosa in its stead, by contrast to his practice for the celebration of the feast of John the Baptist. What is more, he did not furnish a new set of words to go with it. Apparently, then, performing that responsory with a more festive ending was, for some reason, no longer warranted. Notwithstanding their ostensible differences, both examples suggest that if the scribe did not concern himself with setting the new text of Non debiles annos and Qui calcavit seculum to music, it was probably because, in contrast to the examples discussed above, their respective melismas ad repetendum suggested parallels in musical sources already familiar to the performers.

Themes of weakness and death As the first nocturn draws to a close, we encounter in the lessons the elderly Martin predisposed to die – it is only owing to the poignant pleading of his followers that he finally yields to God’s will and continues to serve as a leader of His flock. While the third lesson merely touches upon Martin’s prediction that his death is imminent, the ensuing responsory elaborates the emotional reaction of Martin’s disciples to this news. There is one perspective missing from this account, however, and indeed, from Sulpicius Severus’s Vita as well – namely, Martin’s mindset and emotional disposition at the time he declares his willingness to depart from life. Perhaps stemming from a desire to provide an appropriate background for the saint’s conduct, the author of the prosa provides worshipers with a pretext for his apparent yearning to die and forsake them. This rationalization at once absolves them of guilt for the saint’s impending actions, and places Martin’s desire to die squarely on his old age, a factor over which he could have no control: 1. Non debiles annos obiciam 2. Ut tuam senior familiam 3. Minore studio custodiam 3. Licet pro maxima parte refuses 4. Sit vigor et minor corporis usus 5. Plebs tamen plebs tua servorem 6. Tempore corpore debiliorem 7. Exigit expetit defensorem. I shall not take advantage of my feeble years, that I, being very old, might protect your family with less attention. Even though in large part my vigor is gone, and I have less use of my body, the people, indeed, your people need [and] desire in this temporal body a weaker protector [and] a defender.

Themes of weakness and death

The prosa, which would have been performed intertwined with the respond, further stresses Martin’s resolution to continue and serve his community in spite of a litany of objective difficulties having to do with his old age. The following passage elucidates the textual interpolation of the prosa (italicized) within the respond (small capitals): “when the blessed martin saw his disciples weeping, moved by these tears, he addressed himself to the

I shall not take advantage of my feeble years … Even though in large part my vigor is gone … i do not decline the task.’” The words of the prosa function as a gloss on the concluding words of the respond, “Non recuso laborem”; their placement in the manuscript does so as well (see Figure 3.1). The texts of both prosa and the melisma ad repetendum that it replaces open with the word “Non,” underscoring a common procedure familiar to the medieval scholastic from the Glossa ordinaria: a biblical excerpt appears in the center of the folio, while commentaries on it are written in much smaller script in the margins surrounding the original text. The marginal gloss draws attention to itself by opening with exactly the same words as the text it seeks to explicate, words that are usually copied in bold or colored characters. The addendum transmitting the text of our prosa assumes the same place on the page as other medieval glosses. The text and music of the third responsory (the “base text”) occupies the center of the page, and the prosa sits in the margin at the lower right-hand corner of the folio. We may never know exactly how Non debiles annos sounded at medieval SaintMartin, but we can come close to knowing the core of its melodic fabric, as the discussion further below demonstrates. Before moving to the second prosa in Martin’s office, Qui calcavit seculum, let us first examine the melodies of the two melismas ad repetendum that were later replaced by prosas; they share not only a generic purpose – being a melodic trope – but also much of their music. The melismas follow mode-4 responsories, and at their core stand a common stock of melodic units that draw attention to A, the recitation tone of the mode. In Examples 3.2 and 3.3, these two well-defined families of motifs are bracketed and labeled with the letters a and b (vertical strokes appear in the manuscript). The layout of these two families of motifs a and b (with their variants) differs from melisma to melisma. Whereas they appear in a straightforward reduplicated form in the melisma over “Non recuso laborem” – much like versicle pairs in sequences or prosas – they occur in a somewhat unstructured succession in the other case. Given that they are derived from neither parent responsory, and in light of their striking similarities, they clearly spring from a common source of inspiration. These short melodic units lord and said: ‘lord, if I am still necessary to your people,

141

142

The musical articulation of St. Martin in Tours Example 3.2  The melisma ad repetendum over “Non recuso laborem.” BmT 159, fo. 284v.

Example 3.3  The melisma ad repetendum over “Flere Martinum.” BmT 159, fo. 286v.

are indeed peripatetic: they are found in a number of melismatic contexts (responsorial melismas and melismas ad repetendum) and texted ones (prosas).10 Manuscripts from medieval Sens, for instance, transmit a wealth of responsorial neumas and prosas. One of them, a thirteenth-century breviary (BnF lat. 1028), includes a lengthy melisma over “honoratur,” the concluding word of the responsory Martinus Abrahe, which we shall examine in greater detail further below. As can be seen in Example  3.4, although it is implanted in a responsory in mode 1, the melisma over “honoratur” consists nonetheless of near-identical melodic cells, the familiar melodic cells a and b from Examples 3.2 and 3.3. Since mode 4 has a weak finalis on e, chants in this mode often have intermediate cadences on d as well as A loose leaf from a no-longer-extant service book from Marmoutier transmits a lengthy substitute melisma over “Flere” (Archives Départementales d’Indre-et-Loire, Série 1 I 22). It has a clear, duplicated structure, but not the same as the one in Example 3.3.

10

Themes of weakness and death Example 3.4  The melisma over “honoratur.” BnF lat. 1028, fo. 263.

Example 3.5  Responsorial neuma for modes 1, 2, and 4.

melodic inflections characteristic of mode 1, such as the podatus d–a or the scandicus d–a–b.11 In fact, the melisma in Example 3.4 is a perfect example of a model responsory neuma for modes 1, 2, and 4 – the kind that is found abundantly, but not only, in medieval Sens, about which we are particularly well informed thanks to Thomas Kelly (see Example  3.5).12 Variants of this responsorial neuma were also known at Worcester Cathedral: they are found in the responsories Cuthbertus puer and Electus et dilectus from the liturgies of Sts. Cuthbert and Gregory; in Saint-Martin of Tours, to some extent they set the text of the Corpus Christi prosa Ut sit plena; and, I suspect, they were used in numerous other churches as well.13 While the neumas substituting for “Non recuso laborem” and “Flere Martinum” are fundamentally similar, their margins contain, nonetheless, melodies that connect them to their parent responsories. The melodic segment that extends to the first vertical stroke and that which stretches after the final stroke are virtually identical to the melody that sets the words “non” For example, in the antiphons Anxiatus est and Pater iuste. This and other examples are provided in Saulnier, Les Modes grégoriens, 73. 12 Kelly, “Modal Neumes at Sens,” 429–51. 13 The examples from the liturgies of Sts. Cuthbert and Gregory are taken from Holman, “Melismatic Tropes,” 39. The prosa Ut sit plena is transcribed and discussed in Maurey, “Heresy, Devotion, and Memory,” 180. In medieval Sens alone, the neumas MEL 1A and a longer version of it (MEL 1B), are found in no fewer than fifteen chants (see the appendices in Kelly, “Modal Neumes at Sens,” 444–48. 11

143

144

The musical articulation of St. Martin in Tours Example 3.6  Longer version of the responsorial neuma for modes 1, 2, and 4.

and “recuso laborem,” respectively, in the responsory Cum videret.14 Only the conclusion of the melisma over “Flere Martinum” corresponds to the music set to those words in its parent responsory O quantus erat (labeled Y in Example 3.3), whereas the opening segment (X) is a faithful duplication of the opening motive of a longer version of the neuma in Example  3.5, which is reproduced in Example 3.6.15 Returning to the prosa Non debiles annos, the outer melodic segments of the melisma ad repetendum in Example 3.2 or portions thereof would presumably have been left out in the process of a new prosulation, but in the absence of any melodic concordance, this must remain a speculation. The difficulty of reconstructing the melodic setting of Non debiles annos out of the core of the melisma over “Non recuso laborem” stems also from the discrepancy between syllable count and note count. The three versicle pairs consist of two nine-note melodies (the melodic units labeled a), and one eight-note melody (labeled b). The text of Non debiles annos, however, has only two pairs of lines having an identical number of syllables: lines 2 and 3, consisting of nine syllables, and lines 4 and 5 – eleven. While matching music to words may be straightforward in relation to some parts of the purported prosa, others present considerable obstacles, which prevent a conclusive, convincing reconstruction. The music set to Non in the melisma ad repetendum is slightly at variance with the corresponding place in the respond: it consists of nineteen notes where the respond has fifteen, and also includes some melodic variations, such as the fourth note, which is F in the respond, but E in the melisma. It is impossible to ascertain whether these division lines (found in conjunction with this and other responsorial melismas in BmT 159) belong to the original phase of copying or not, although I suspect they do. It has been surmised that unless such division signs in responsorial melismas “are merely analytical marks,” they “must be used to indicate a change of side in the antiphonal performance of the melisma.” See Kelly, “Melisma and Prosula,” 166. 15 The source of Example 3.6 is Kelly, “Modal Neumes at Sens,” 430. 14

Themes of weakness and death

Qui calcavit seculum, the second prosa in this office, has come down to us under circumstances remarkably similar to those of Non debiles annos. The word vacat, canceling out the alternate melisma over “Flere Martinum,” together with the addition of the word “prosa” in abbreviated form, indicates that something new (a prosa) replaces something old (a substitute ending). And yet, a notated version of Qui calcavit seculum is nowhere to be found in extant service books from Saint-Martin. We can see in Figure  3.2 the end of the sixth responsory O quantus erat luctus (transcribed in its entirety in Example 3.7) in the left-hand column, and the ensuing melisma ad repetendum over the concluding words of the respond, “Flere Martinum.” Part of the text of Qui calcavit seculum in the left-hand margin is missing, which has led to its misidentification as [O]ravit sanctum.16 Fortunately, we are considerably more informed about how our prosa might have sounded in Saint-Martin thanks to a fourteenth-century breviary from Meaux. A unique, fully notated version of Qui calcavit seculum is found in the summer portion of a breviary from Meaux, dating to 1309. The transcription provided in Example 3.8 uses the version of the text known in SaintMartin (BmT 1021, fo. 159), which varies slightly from the one in Meaux.17 The prosa in Meaux is neatly integrated into the original copying phase of this source, and is thus devoid of the obstacles presented by BmT 159. Yet, it does not follow the responsory O quantus erat, but Martinus Abrahe. Melodically, Qui calcavit seculum is equally unrelated to either responsory, for its music may well be a contrafactum of Sedentem in superne, a prosa crowning the responsory Hic qui advenit for Circumcision, extant in other notated service books from Saint-Martin.18 If so, this is just one of several connections that Martin’s November 11 office in Tours had with the liturgy of Christmas and its octave, as we shall see below. Just like Qui calcavit, it has nine textual lines, set to the reduplicated musical structure AABBCCDDA. Conversely, Qui calcavit seculum is perhaps just another, if less frequent, prosulation of the responsory neuma in Example 3.6. Be that as it may, while the latter enjoyed a rather stable and widespread transmission, variants of it do exist, including at Saint-Martin of Tours. The second reduplicated melodic unit, for instance, was at times extended by an extra note or two, and in Saint-Martin the characteristic leap of a fifth (D–A) Hofmann-Brandt, “Die Tropen,” Vol. II, 92. BnF lat. 1266, fo. 395v. Folio 2 of the Meaux breviary reads: “incipit secunda pars breviarii temporis estivalis secundum ordinarium Meldensem.” Leroquais suggests the year 1309, based on liturgical evidence found in the winter portion of this breviary, but his conclusion holds good for the summer portion too (see Leroquais, Les Bréviaires manuscrits, Vol. III, 93–94). 18 See BmT 149, fo. 89, for instance. 16 17

145

146

The musical articulation of St. Martin in Tours Example 3.7  The responsory O quantus erat luctus. BmT 159, fo. 286r–v. Responsory (CAO 7295): “Oh, how great was the sorrow of all, how many indeed the laments of the mournful monks. For it is pious to rejoice, and pious too to weep for Martin.” Versicle (CAO 7295a): “The body of the blessed man is accompanied to his burial place, while the massed choir sings celestial hymns.”

proceeded half a note upward to B flat, before descending to A. This variant is plainly in evidence in melismatic versions of it (as in the melisma ad repetendum over “Flere Martinum”) as well as in texted ones (Sedentem in superne). Quite likely, then, Qui calcavit seculum sounded slightly different in Saint-Martin than in Meaux.

Themes of weakness and death Example 3.8  The prosa Qui calcavit. BnF lat. 1266, fo. 395v.

Translation (1) He who despised the world from a tender age, (2) Living in heaven while on earth with a very pure spirit, (3) While the fire flickers with a fiery glow, (4) [Martin] stopped [the fire] from [reaching] the higher part [of the house]. (5) The impure is purified by a kiss from the mouth, (6) The feeble girl by the sacred liquid. (7) The virgin is purified from the heat of her fever by [touching] a letter [written by Martin], (8) The dumb from his impure possessor. (9) Therefore, [weep for pious Martin] for the sake of the worthy honor of a funeral.

The English translation of the concluding sentence of the prosa presupposes the inclusion of the final words of the respond, “flere Martinum,” reflecting the performance practice of the responsory as a whole: subsequent to the performance of the prosa (which stands in the place of a melisma ad repetendum) the choir would bring the entire chant to a close, chanting “flere Martinum” set to the melody of the respond. The poet of Qui calcavit seculum was clearly aware of this, and therefore composed a poem whose final phrase is grammatically dependent on the closing words of the respond that it follows.19 In essence, Qui calcavit seculum comprises a list of miracles performed by Martin, all drawn from the writings of Sulpicius Severus. The reference to fire in line 3 is rather general, and might be related to two 19

An attempt to translate “Igitur pro debito funeris honore” without “flere Martinum” is awkward, for “flere Martinum” provides the verb complementing the adverbial phrase in the prosa.

147

148

The musical articulation of St. Martin in Tours

different accounts having to do with flames. Sulpicius Severus reports that by setting it on fire Martin sought to destroy a pagan shrine, which, however, soon threatened to consume a nearby house. Although the wind was blowing in the direction of the house, Martin managed to avert the fire and save the house (Sulpicius Severus, Vita, Chapter 14).20 The “impure” in line 5 is undoubtedly a reference to the leper whom Martin encountered when he arrived at one of the gates of Paris: after Martin had kissed and blessed the leper, the man was completely cured (Vita, Chapter  18). The miracle concerning the feeble girl (Vita, Chapter 16) took place in Trier. The father of the paralyzed and dying girl pleaded with Martin, who was visiting the city, to cure her. Martin asked for some oil, sanctified it, poured it into her mouth, and the girl was miraculously healed. Martin’s capacity to perform miracles was manifested not only through immediate bodily contact, but also indirectly. A girl who suffered from very high fever was reportedly restored to health when her father placed a letter written by Martin on her chest (Vita, Chapter  19). The list of beneficiaries of Martin’s miraculous powers concludes with the dumb person who in the Middle Ages was believed to be possessed by the devil (the “possessor” in our text). Through Martin’s intervention, the mute girl from Chartres regained her ability to speak (Sulpicius Severus, Third Dialogue, Chapter 2). As we have seen in Chapter  2, most of the liturgy for November 11 is drawn from Sulpicius Severus’s Epistle 3, whose unambiguous aim is to delineate the circumstances leading to Martin’s death. As a consequence, the epistle, and indeed the entire office, make no allusion to the saint’s miracles, which, moreover, were already outlined in detail in the Vita proper. Qui calcavit seculum, then, may have been composed specifically to provide a glimpse into the extraordinary events that made the saint worthy of the veneration being observed on that day. Of all the prosas adorning this feast, it is the only one to allude to events and miracles that took place after Martin’s death. The prosas that precede and follow it address Martin’s bodily exhaustion and his death; that is the episode celebrated and expounded upon throughout the office in general. The opening nocturn overflows with the voice of Martin’s disciples, who fear his imminent departure; the responsories are saturated with the theme of abandonment. Against the backdrop of a growing anxiety, Non debiles annos, concluding the first nocturn, reassures Martin’s community My translation of lines 3–4 relies on this particular incident. In another incident, when Martin met with Emperor Valentinian, the latter allegedly refused to rise, and only when flames engulfed the imperial throne did the emperor stand up before Martin (Sulpicius Severus, “Dialogues,” 204–06).

20

The triumph of Martin in heaven

that in spite of his old age and tired body, the saint will not forsake them. Moreover, the prosa not only foreshadows Martin’s own words in the following responsory (he will “not refuse and will not plead the exhaustion of age as an excuse”), it also provides a crucial element missing from the entire office: a rationale for Martin’s apparent wish to desert his people. The responsory opening the second nocturn shifts from the third person plural to the first person singular: in both respond and verse, Martin assuages the fears of his followers by promising God that he will continue to fulfill His will as long as His people need him. By the sixth responsory, however, Martin is already dead, and his body is buried to the mournful cries of his disciples. Although the miracles listed in Qui calcavit seculum all occurred while the saint was still alive, they are undoubtedly enumerated at this point in the office not only as a reminder of Martin’s past glory, but to encapsulate a potent promise of miracles yet to come. The third nocturn, underlining a clear shift in the overall tone of the office, moves away from images of lamenting monks and sorrowful disciples to a world rejoicing in Martin’s ascent to heaven, where he reportedly enters as “a rich man.” Accompanying him on his ascent are the prosas Ad patriam redit, Post derelicta, and Octogenus agens.

The triumph of Martin in heaven The culmination of Martin’s office is particularly fascinating and festive for its incorporation into the responsory Martinus Abrahe of an unusual threefold addition. The melodies that set its trio of prosas are modeled on the neuma triplex, a set of three melismas sung during Christmas Day, which in all probability provided the impetus for the creation of the earliest examples of prosas in general. Whether found in troped renditions or simply textless, the neuma triplex has rarely been associated with a figure from the Sanctorale: it is almost invariably found in the context of Christmas and its octave. Writing in c. 840, Amalarius of Metz is the only medieval writer to refer to the neuma triplex, usually inserted toward the end of the responsory Descendit de celis that concludes the canonical hour of Matins on Christmas Day. According to his testimony, the three melismas were originally sung in conjunction with the responsory In medio ecclesie on the feast of John the Evangelist. Nonetheless, he continues, the “moderni cantores” of his day evidently transferred them to the responsory Descendit de celis, a practice that must have almost totally replaced the original usage, since the neuma triplex is seldom found interpolated in the responsory In medio ecclesie in

149

150

The musical articulation of St. Martin in Tours Example 3.9  Melismas used in the neuma triplex.

extant manuscripts.21 The three melismas and their variants appear in over fifty medieval sources, and although their internal grouping varies from source to source, their melodic transmission is quite stable.22 In a study dedicated to the neuma triplex, Kelly shows that there are, in fact, five distinct melismas from which the famous threefold melisma may be assembled, and what is more, that the latter are geographically specific. Example 3.9, drawn from Kelly’s study, identifies these five melismas as follows: A and B (with “Canunt etiam moderni cantores praesens neuma in responsorio Descendit de caelis et in verbo fabricae mundi; in quo verbo potest neuma apte convenire” (Amalarius of Metz, Opera liturgica omnia, Vol. III, 56). See Kelly, “Neuma Triplex,” 2; and Holman, “Melismatic Tropes,” 36–40. 22 As Kelly stresses, there is not a single, definitive threefold melisma. For a comprehensive list of sources see Kelly, “Neuma Triplex,” 8. 21

The triumph of Martin in heaven

A having chronological priority over B); two variants of C (C1 and C2); and melisma D, an alternative to melisma C.23 Contrary to the responsorial neumas, which, as we have seen above, were used in a variety of liturgical contexts, variants of this threefold amalgamation, as mentioned, appear almost exclusively at Christmas. There are only four known exceptions.24 As a pure vocalization, it seems that the neuma triplex was first implanted out of its usual context in the tenth century, where it is found in the office of St. Vedast, inserted in the responsory Agmina sacra.25 Soon thereafter, in the eleventh century, a breviary from Tours has the melisma BAC1 inserted in the responsory Martinus Abrahe on Martin’s principal feast.26 In the middle of the twelfth century, moreover, the melisma ABC1 occurs in the responsory Post passionem from the feast of St. Denis (October 9).27 Curiously, a purely vocalized neuma triplex also appears in the liturgy of St. Firmin, who was martyred in Amiens at the beginning of the fourth century, and whose office was known almost exclusively in Amiens and in neighboring cities – and this in striking contrast to the liturgies of Denis and Martin, saints of national reputation. Just like the rest of Firmin’s office, the responsory Honestus vero, which features the neuma triplex, is an adaptation – text and music – from the office of St. Denis.28 As for prosulated melismas, Kelly shows that the addition of text to the triplex postdates Amalarius’s writing by about a century-anda-half: by the late tenth/eleventh century, the neuma triplex was already troped repeatedly. In France, the best-known and most prevalent group of prosas was based on the melisma ABC1: Familiam custodi Christe (based on melisma A), Fac deus munda (B), and Facinora nostra relaxari (C1).29 Not only was the responsory Descendit de celis regularly accompanied by Ibid., 20–21. Example 3.9 is taken from ibid., 3. These melismas are occasionally featured in non-Temporale contexts, either as a single tune, or as a combination of two of the melodies shown in Example 3.9. Melisma D, for example, occurs in the responsory Iste sanctus (ibid., 8). For a study of a solitary melisma taken from the neuma triplex amalgam and made into a prosa see Steiner, “The Responsories and Prosa.” For the melismas found in the liturgies of the ecclesiastical province of Reims, see Goudesenne, Offices historiques, 189–92. 25 Goudesenne, Offices historiques, 191. 26 Rouen, MS 243 (olim A. 164), fo. 272v, a breviary from Marmoutier (see Kelly, “Neuma Triplex,” 5). This manuscript is the only extant witness to the presence of the neuma triplex in Marmoutier. 27 BnF lat. 17296, fo. 229v. See Robertson, The Service-Books, 136. For an edition of responsory Post passionem and its three neumas ad repetendum see Goudesenne, L’Office romanofranc, 8–9. 28 Amiens, Bm 112, fos. 268v–274, a late thirteenth-century breviary from Saint-Acheul. See Goudesenne, Offices historiques, 191, 229–30. 29 Kelly, “Neuma Triplex,” 12–13. 23 24

151

152

The musical articulation of St. Martin in Tours

three prosas or melismas, it was, moreover, one of the early chants that was set to polyphony in Notre-Dame of Paris, as the ordinance of Bishop Odo from 1198 demonstrates.30 At Saint-Martin, however, the prosa Post derelicta inaugurates a series of three songs that marks a double departure from common medieval French practice in all that concerns usage of the neuma triplex. Not only are they interpolated in a responsory other than Descendit de celis, they also have unique texts found nowhere else in extant manuscripts before BmT 159 – that is, before the late thirteenth century.31 They are introduced with the responsory Martinus Abrahe in the following order: Post derelicta (based on melisma B), Ad patriam redit (A), and Octogenus agens (C1). Significantly, the only other documented occurrence of this infrequently found version of the neuma triplex (BAC1) outside the usual two host responsories (Martinus Abrahe and In medio) also comes from Tours. It is found in only two sources from closely related establishments three centuries apart, early on as a pure melisma at Marmoutier, and later as a prosulated one at Saint-Martin. The use of the neuma triplex in Martin’s office was apparently a practice exclusively observed in just these two churches, which obviously had a special rapport with the cult of St. Martin, and whose strong liturgical ties were further underlined by their 1115 prayer association.32 No other church in Tours seems to have cultivated this threefold interpolation of prosas into the responsory Martinus Abrahe, not even the Cathedral. A small number of manuscripts from outside Tours do contain melismatic or texted interpolations in the final responsory of Martin’s November 11 office, as infrequent as this practice seems to have been. We have already seen that a responsory neuma adorned Martinus Abrahe in medieval Sens, and a similar practice was also observed in Amiens Cathedral, where the final responsory concluded with a neuma.33 Moreover, a single prosa, Euphonias videns, See Wright, Music and Ceremony, 239. For a complete list of concordances see Table 3.1 above. 32 It is possible that the office of St. Martin was the first recipient of such an embellishment based on a migrating neuma triplex. As Kelly demonstrates, the Marmoutier manuscript is the earliest to use an entire neuma triplex with the responsory Martinus Abrahe, or, for that matter, with any responsory other than Descendit. For some reason, the interpolation of the threefold melisma in Martin’s office was short-lived at Marmoutier. A thirteenth-century notated breviary from the monastery (BmT 153, fo. 183) shows no trace of these melismas or of their prosulations. For a brief discussion of these musical tropes (but not of their prosulations) see Fickett, “Chants for the Feast of St. Martin of Tours,” 269–72. 33 “Ultimum responsorium tantummodo reincipitur et canitur neuma finale” (Ordinaire de l’église Notre-Dame Cathédrale d’Amiens, 512). Although the identity of the responsory is not disclosed by the ordinal, it may be Martinus Abrahe, which commonly concludes Martin’s November 11 office. 30 31

The triumph of Martin in heaven

is interpolated into the responsory Martinus Abrahe in the liturgy of medieval Utrecht, as we have already seen. It may be the only other prosa sung in the context of Martin’s feast and which is based on one of the neuma triplex melismas, D (see Example 3.9), but as we shall see, its ties to St. Martin are tenuous at best.34 Since no notated office sources from Saint-Martin survive from before the last quarter of the thirteenth century, it is impossible to ascertain whether the custom of prosulating the neuma triplex existed there in the preceding centuries as well. The practice of texting “formless” melismas such as the neuma triplex is generally considered a sign of relative antiquity.35 Moreover, it is clear that by the late thirteenth century the addition of the neuma triplex prosas to the responsory Martinus Abrahe in Saint-Martin was already an established tradition, not a novelty. After all, the readings, respond, verse, and prosas concluding the office in BmT 159 all belong to a single phase of copying, devoid of the type of haphazard additions witnessed in Non debiles and Qui calcavit above. Substantiating this hypothesis is the transmission of the responsory Descendit de celis on folios 78v–79v of BmT 149, which features the three prosas Fac deus munda, Familiam custodi, and Facinora nostra; they too are based on the melisma BAC1, the one unique to Tours.36 Unlike any other prosa discussed above, the November 11 trio of prosas is unique in that both their melismatic and prosulated forms are documented in Tours. We are thus offered a glimpse into the compositional process that brought them into being. In the examples below, I provide melodic comparisons of each prosa and its presumed precursors, followed by English translations of the Latin texts and analysis of the music. The conclusion of each prosa, interpolated immediately before the final word of the respond, normally signals the resumption of the respond at the word honoratur. In the ensuing transcriptions, therefore, prosas are always followed by the word honoratur and the music to which it is set, reflecting the performance practice of prosas. Let us begin with the melisma B, the first in the neuma BAC1 that was known in Tours. Example 3.10 compares the two prosulated versions of melisma B – the prosas Post derelicta (BmT 159) and As can be gleaned from Table 3.2 above, Euphonias videns is already attested by the second half of the twelfth century (Utrecht, Bibliotheek der Rijksuniversiteit, MS 406), making it the earliest extant indication that a prosulated melisma from the neuma triplex was associated with a chant from the liturgy of St. Martin (see Hofmann-Brandt, “Die Tropen,” Vol. I, 30 and 55–58). 35 Hofmann-Brandt, “Die Tropen,” Vol. I, 25. 36 These are probably the prosas that the customary of Saint-Martin mentions in conjunction with Christmas (“nonum responsorium et prosas”). See Consuetudines Ecclesiae Beati Martini Turonensis, 31. 34

153

154

The musical articulation of St. Martin in Tours Example 3.10  The prosa Post derelicta compared to likely precedents.

Post derelicta

Fac Deus

After the desertion of the limbs / The soul, called forth to the skies up high, is honored / While a great host applauds its virtues’ merits.

Make clean, o Lord, our bodies and souls this day that, protected by your right hand, we may extol the maker of the fabric of creation. (Translated in Steiner, “The Responsories and Prosa,” 174.)

Fac deus munda (BmT 149)  – and two B melismas, one from a twelfth/ thirteenth-century antiphoner from Sens (BnF n.a.l. 1535) and one from an eleventh-century breviary from Marmoutier (Rouen, Bm MS 243, olim A. 164). Melodic segments in square brackets indicate melodic variance.37 In the various melodic comparisons that follow, the melisma from Sens is taken from Hofmann-Brandt, “Die Tropen,” Vol. I, 63. The one from Marmoutier is found in Kelly, “Responsory Tropes,” 71, 302.

37

The triumph of Martin in heaven

The melodic comparison demonstrates that all four melodies are essentially in agreement with one another.38 It is clear that Post derelicta shares more melodic material with the prosulated version of BmT 149 than it does with the melisma in the eleventh-century source from Marmoutier. Both prosas deploy similar assonances: “derelicta”/“deus munda,” “dies ista”/“evocata,” and “plaudente turba”/“prolecti dextra,” for example. Whenever possible, the prosulator of Post derelicta attempted to create an affinity with Fac deus by placing words consisting of the same numbers of syllables in parallel positions in the new prosa.39 Other aspects of the prosa, however, suggest that the prosulator was also familiar with the melismatic precedent. Although the syllable count of certain words in Post derelicta deviates from that of the respective place in Fac deus, the prosulator is always careful to adhere to the boundaries suggested by the ligature. Thus, although just two words in Post derelicta – “evocata superum” – take the place of four in Fac deus – “die ista ut tua” – the former is nonetheless faithful to the ligature count in the melisma over “fabrice mundi.”40 The second prosa adorning the responsory Martinus Abrahe, Ad patriam redit, is set to the melody based on melisma A of the neuma triplex and is reproduced in Example 3.11. Melodic segments in square brackets indicate melodic variance (the final portion of the melisma in BmT 149 is not spelled out in the manuscript; hence it is placed in square brackets as well). Like Post derelicta, Ad patriam redit too seems to follow both melismatic and texted models: connections to Familiam custodi are evident in the use of similar assonances (“patriam”/“Familiam,” “sideream”/“tuam,” “reddita”/“Maria”). Links to melisma A can be seen in the overlap of ligatures with entire words or word units: the words “redit,” “triumphanti,” But see the square-bracketed exceptions in Example 3.10. The first square bracket shows that two distinct concurring pairs emerge, namely the two Saint-Martin prosas versus the two melismas. In the second one, the Marmoutier melisma emerges as the most peculiar of the four, bearing the least resemblance to BmT 159; the remaining three sources are noticeably similar. Finally, the third square bracket shows that each of the four melodies gives a different reading. 39 The most striking resemblance is seen in the use of two cases of the word corpus in the corresponding position within the prosa – “corporis” and “corpora” – which suggests an intimate knowledge of Fac deus. 40 There are other indications suggesting that perhaps a melismatic version was at the basis of prosulation, and not a prosa such as Fac deus. Although both prosas employ the same overall number of syllables, their respective distribution among the poetic lines is somewhat different (10, 8, and 15 syllables in Fac deus, and 10, 11, and 12 in Post derelicta). This detail is discussed in Hofmann-Brandt, “Die Tropen,” Vol. I, 64–65. Finally, while Fac deus consistently adheres to the assonance “-a” of the original “FA-brice mundi” melisma, especially at endings of poetic lines (“nostra,” “ista,” and “dextra”), only the first poetic line of Post derelicta ends on “-a,” “membra.” 38

155

156

The musical articulation of St. Martin in Tours Example 3.11  The prosa Ad patriam redit compared to likely models.

Ad patriam redit

Familiam custodi

The jewel of bishops returned to the starry homeland. Once arrived, he is honored with the prize of a rejoicing world.

Protect your servants, o Christ, who, born of loving Mary, have been redeemed by your death, that they may recognize you as the maker of the fabric of creation. (Translation adapted from Steiner, “The Responsories and Prosa,” 174.)

“mundi palma,” and “celestibus,” for instance, are all set to a single melodic unit. There is more melodic variance between Ad patriam and Familiam custodi than with the two readings of melisma A (the bracketed segments in the example highlight those differences). Moreover, poetic lines in both prosas differ in their distribution of syllables: 11, 9, 8, and 9 syllables in Familiam custodi, compared to 10, 9, 8, and 9 syllables in Ad patriam.41 See Hofmann-Brandt, “Die Tropen,” Vol. I, 64–65.

41

The triumph of Martin in heaven Example 3.12  The prosa Octogenus agens compared to likely models.

Finally, whereas the prosulator typically preserved the same number of notes found in both melismatic and prosulated models when he composed the other two prosas, Ad patriam has one note less than the other sources compared. The third prosa, Octogenus agens, is reproduced in Example  3.12, and once more, melodic segments in square brackets indicate melodic variance, and the final portion of the melisma in BmT 149 is again placed in square brackets for the same reason given above. As with the previous two prosas, Octogenus agens adheres to both melismatic and texted versions of melisma C1. The distribution of syllables per poetic line in Octogenus agens and Facinora nostra is identical: 15, 17, 20, 14, and 16. In sum, the prosulator was clearly familiar with both melismatic and troped traditions of the neuma triplex.42 Adhering to a double source 42

As we shall see below, there is reason to believe that they are the creation of a single person.

157

158

The musical articulation of St. Martin in Tours Example 3.12  (cont.)

Octogenus agens

Facinora nostra

Being eighty, in the weak time of old age, The failing saint feels the chains of exhausted flesh dissolving; In the middle of the night [he] sought again the stars of his birth. Then Martin is laid in the bosom of Abraham, heaven rejoicing, he was honored with divine applause and praises.

We pray to the Queen of Heaven that the noble progeny of David, the son of the greatest Father, whom the chaste virgin Mary bore to the world, and whose birth gives all men salvation through all ages, should forgive our sins; may he sustain us graciously now and forever. Of the fabric of creation. (Translated in Steiner, “The Responsories and Prosa,” 175.)

of inspiration permitted him a significant degree of flexibility, as he did not need to follow slavishly the limitations imposed by a single set of ligatures, word units, or assonances. Indeed, as Kelly notes, “the transfer of the neuma triplex to R. Descendit set a precedent for just such a procedure.”43 Having Kelly, “Responsory Tropes,” 212.

43

The triumph of Martin in heaven

two reputable models allowed the poet to craft a new piece by extracting the salient features of both melismatic and texted models, while complementing the sentiment expressed in the readings and chanted items of the ninth responsory, of which the new prosas were to be important constituents. Originally stemming from the responsory Descendit de celis, the neuma triplex and its prosulations in French sources (that is, Fac deus munda, Facinora nostra, and Familiam custodi) share the modality of their parent responsory  – mode 1.44 With all three prosas ending on C, it is the concluding melisma of the respond (over “fabrice mundi”) following each individual prosa that articulates the return to the finalis D. Similarly, the responsory Martinus Abrahe is in mode 1, making it a perfect candidate for receiving the neuma triplex. And yet, a common modality alone cannot explain the rationale for transplanting a threefold melisma from one chant to the other, a criterion met by many other responsories in mode 1 from the Sanctorale. Why, then, was a responsory for Martin’s November 11 feast the first and primary recipient of a melodic configuration so ubiquitously associated only with Christmas? A closer look at the melodies of both responsories shows that they share more than just modal underpinnings. As Example 3.13 demonstrates, the music of the two chants is virtually identical, with melodic segments in variance placed in square brackets. The opening melodic gesture as well as a considerable part of the middle section of Martinus Abrahe is identical to that of Descendit de celis. Both responds are already present in the oldest extant office book (the unnotated antiphoner of Compiègne, copied 860–880), and there can be no doubt that both chant texts belong to a very early layer of chant repertory.45 Amalarius asserts that the neuma triplex migrated into Descendit de celis, yet he is silent concerning Martinus Abrahe. Since it is usually accepted that texts for the feasts of Christ represent the oldest layer in the office repertory, it is almost certain that Descendit de celis was the model for the responsory Martinus Abrahe.46 The connection between the two responsories, then, is not fortuitous: they share a single modality because the latter is based in part on the former. It is possible that the underlying theme common to The responsory In medio ecclesie, the alleged original host of the neuma triplex, is likewise in mode 1. When this responsory appears in liturgical contexts other than the feast of John the Evangelist, it sometimes has a different modality: on St. Jerome’s feast, for example, that same responsory is in mode 8. 45 See Goudesenne, “De Tours à Rome,” 376. Fickett has analyzed Martinus Abrahe in the light of Frere’s formulae in his Antiphonale Sarisburiense, overlooking the responsory’s relation to Descendit de celis. See Fickett, “Chants for the Feast of St. Martin of Tours,” 194–98. 46 Presumably, this truism holds for their music as well. 44

159

160

The musical articulation of St. Martin in Tours Example 3.13  The responsory Martinus Abrahe compared to the responsory Descendit de celis.

both responsories, namely, the recollection of a life cycle coming to a close, provided the impetus for the musical affinity between the two responsories. Nowhere is the degree of musical interdependence of the two chants more evident than in their verses, which are virtually identical; interestingly, this particularly melismatic reading of the versicle Martinus episcopus seems to have been known only in Tours. Thus, the neuma triplex was not merely grafted onto Martinus Abrahe indiscriminately; rather, its presence there reflects a larger musical borrowing of which the neuma triplex was

The triumph of Martin in heaven Example€3.13╇ (cont.)

Descendit de celis

Martinus Abrahe

Resp. He descended from heaven, sent by the fortress of the Father, he entered our world through the ear of the virgin, dressed in a purple garment, and he, the light and splendor of the created world, departed through the golden gate.a Ver. Which is like a bridegroom coming out of his chamber.

Resp. Martin is received joyfully in the bosom of Abraham. Martin, poor and humble here, enters into heaven a rich man, and he is honored by heavenly hymns. Ver. Bishop Martin departed from the world. The gem of all priests, he lives in Christ.

a

╇The final three words of the Latin are “universe fabrice mundi.” Admittedly, the translation and consequent division of the phrase make it seem that “universe” can go with “the light and splendor,” and “fabrice mundi” with “the maker.” However, mundus is a masculine noun, and universa and fabrica are feminine; the latter two cannot possibly modify mundi, although I see no other solution. Consequently, I translate “universe” as if it were in the genitive, for lack of a better solution. Incidentally, at least one extant manuscript, Vatican City, BAV San Pietro B. 79 (a twelfth-century antiphoner of Old Roman chant) has “universi … mundi.” It is possible that “universe” was considered a lectio facilior, which performers and scribes realized. If true, such an approach substantiates the above partition of the phrase.

161

162

The musical articulation of St. Martin in Tours

an important component. Significantly, the music set to the verses differs in only one place, square-bracketed in Example€3.13: the sole melodic segment in the versicle Tamquam sponsus that finds no correspondence in the versicle Martinus episcopus is set to the words “vivit in Christo” (“he lives in Christ”). Anyone familiar with the versicle Tamquam sponsus could easily detect that the melody set to “vivit in Christo” is new: it is the only departure from what is otherwise a straightforward textual trope. Thus, the verse draws attention to these three words in a clearly audible manner, surely deliberately.47 As we have seen in Chapter€2, the text of the verse concluding the ninth responsory takes its cue from Sulpicius Severus’s Epistle 3: “Bishop Martin departed from the world. The gem of all priests, he lives in Christ.” The central theme of the November 11 feast is Martin’s final hours leading to his triumphant ascent to heaven. Although Sulpicius Severus’s Epistle 3 reveals little about Martin’s posthumous honors, the compiler of the office reverses this state of affairs by addressing the saint’s praise in heaven in three out of the nine responsories.48 According to a twelfth-century hymn, Martin was not only reunited with God (expressed in the respond in the affectionate and protective metaphor, the “bosom of Abraham”), he was in fact believed to reign together with Christ “in the heavenly palace.” Guibertus of Gembloux, the monk who had made a lengthy sojourn in Tours in 1180– 81, is the author of the hymn Martine, par apostolis, which includes the following stanza: “Hail, outstanding solider / a glorious conqueror / you reign together with your King / in the celestial palace.”49 The words “vivit in Christo,” which are set to music in a way that differentiates them from the remainder of the verse, serve, then, as a potent memento for the canons of Saint-Martin that their patron saint lives in Christ. With the music of Descendit de celis now clothed in a new liturgical garb, Martinus Abrahe too can be said to “live in Christ” symbolically, just as the text of the verse suggests. Although believers everywhere were reminded that Martin lived in Christ whenever Martinus Abrahe was sung, this notion received an equally The sequence Gaude Syon, que diem recolis utilizes a similar procedure to draw attention to the claim that Martin is on a par with the Apostles. The music of this sequence is based on various melodic units known from Saint-Victor, and “just when the text says that Martin is comparable to the Apostles (‘qua Martinus compare apostolis’), the music shifts to a melody associated in St. Victor with the Apostles.” See Fassler, Gothic Song,€312. 48 Only the final paragraph of Epistle 3, which is relatively short, is devoted to this episode. 49 “Ave, miles egregie, / Triumphator gloriose, / Iam corregnas regi tuo / In coelesti palatio.” For a modern edition of the text, see Keane, “Martin Hymns of the Middle Ages,” 145–47. The hymn should not be confused with another Martinian hymn opening with the same words: Martine, par apostolis, written by Odo of Cluny (see text in Ah, Vol. L,€266). 47

The triumph of Martin in heaven Example 3.14  The prosa Euphonias videns. Utrecht, Bibliotheek der Rijksuniversiteit 408, fo. 240r–v.

Euphonias videns fert ysayas. HoHec innuptis regnans dicit uranis. [Ho-] Do eis in mansione mea. [Ho-] In muris et meis sua loca. [Ho-] Et nomen melius a filiolis utriusque generis ad ea. [Ho-] Feliciores hinc fore virgines insinuat Maria regina mundi. -noratur.

Seeing this, Isaiah brings forth these well-sounding words; Reigning from the skies, he says the following things to the unwedded [virgins]: “I give them their places in my house and in my walls.” And to my dwelling place I give a better name taken from my children of both sexes. And because of this, Mary, Queen of the world, suggests that the virgins will be happier.

powerful musical complement in only one other place – as far as I know – and that is Utrecht, which brings us back to the prosa Euphonias, already encountered above, and transcribed in Example 3.14. Just like the trio of prosas interpolated in Martinus Abrahe in SaintMartin of Tours, the music of Euphonias too is based on one of the neuma

163

164

The musical articulation of St. Martin in Tours

triplex melismas, melisma D in Example  3.9  – one found mainly in East Frankish sources but not in Tours. Manuscripts in which melisma D figures in their neuma triplex clusters generally transmit just a single prosa based on that melisma alone, as is the case in Utrecht. Since melisma D comprises a triple set of discrete melodic units, each in turn duplicated, the addition of words must have been particularly appealing.50 In contrast to the prosas in Saint-Martin, however, where only the music associated with Christmas was borrowed, the presence of Euphonias in a Martinian context is all the more conspicuous because its text is equally unrelated to St. Martin. Reminiscent of many Descendit de celis prosas, and obviously of the versicle Tamquam sponsus, Euphonias too concludes with the word “mundi,” functioning as a theological rhyme of sorts, further drawing attention to Christmas. In similar vein to Familiam custodi and Facinora nostra, the text of Euphonias can indeed be appropriate for Christmas, with its references to the Virgin and to the prophecy of Isaiah to the Gentiles (Isaiah 56:1–8), offering those who keep the Sabbath – Jews and non-Jews alike – hope and salvation. Martinus Abrahe can therefore be added to a minuscule group of responsories  – Verbum caro factum, Centum quadraginta, and Sancte Stephane protomartyr – whose neuma triplex prosas bear relation neither to their respective music nor to their texts.51 And yet, the context of Martin’s principal feast is unique, in that unlike the other responsories in this group, it does not take place during the octave of Christmas. This spectacular transplant, made all the more striking owing to the juxtaposition of the word “honoratur” taken from Martin’s liturgy in a prosa in effect for Christmas (see more below), may well have aurally reinforced the textual reference to Martin as living “in Christ,” as every aspect of Euphonias unambiguously pointed away from November 11 and forward to the octave of Christmas. In that sense, the prophecy of Isaiah lying at the core of Euphonias effects an Advent-like sentiment in keeping with the tradition from the sixth century onwards, according to which Martin’s principal feast day marked the beginning of a penitential season leading to Christmas (that is, overlapping in part with Advent) known as Quadragesima S. Martini.52 Now that we have examined the musical underpinnings of Martinus Abrahe and its prosas, let us turn to the relation between their Martinian texts and the literary context in which they are embedded. The third nocturn is saturated with echoes of joyful music sung in the saint’s honor: “an See Kelly, “Neuma Triplex,” 6, 9; and Hofmann-Brandt, “Die Tropen,” Vol. I, 69. See Kelly, “Neuma Triplex,” 4–5. 52 Walsh, “Martinsnacht,” 128–29. 50 51

The triumph of Martin in heaven

assembly of saints sings” upon hearing the news of Martin’s death, and he is subsequently welcomed into heaven by “a chorus of angels” singing “celestial hymns.” The entire office progresses toward the elation of the ninth responsory. The text of the respond makes an unmistakable allusion to the parable in Luke 16 in which the selfish rich man ends up in hell while the beggar Lazarus, covered with sores, is carried by angels to the “bosom of Abraham” – that is, to heaven. The association with Martin is unambiguous: like Lazarus, he too was a poor man while on earth, but was later rewarded with great riches in heaven.53 Celebrating this vision of the triumphant saint, and further expounding on the jubilant theme of the entire third nocturn, the three prosas interpolated into Martinus Abrahe overflow with joy and praise for a man who receives well-deserved privileges in heaven. The prosas are saturated with references to heaven and to the stars (sidera), the celestial elements that embrace Martin as he leaves his austere way of life on earth to receive well-earned gratitude on high. These allusions may well have been inspired in part by Descendit de celis, which, as we have seen, provides Martinus Abrahe with most of its musical material. The verse of the former is especially rich in astral imagery. After all, as Psalm 18 (and this is the biblical source for the versicle Tamquam sponsus) tells us, it is the sun that is likened to a “bridegroom coming out of his chamber,” radiant and bright on his wedding day. Whereas in the hagiographic genre the theme of returning to heaven is a common metaphor for passing away, stellar allusions such as the ones found in Ad patriam and Octogenus agens are far less frequent. Interestingly, similar vocabulary is used in another chant dedicated to Martin, the hymn Cum plebe clerus, in which one of the strophes declares that Martin’s death “makes this day sacred” and that the stars are longing to see Martin “return” to them.54 Let us now examine the prosas in relation to Martinus Abrahe: at what point in the responsory would they have been sung? Were they conceived as independent creations, or perhaps, as their modality might suggest, as songs dependent for modal closure on their parent responsory? The opening prosa, Post derelicta, is inserted between the last two words of the respond, namely “celestibus” and “honoratur.” The ensuing versicle Martinus episcopus is followed by the repetendum at the word “celum.” The In his Gloria confessorum, Gregory of Tours mentions both Martin and Lazarus in a single breath. Describing a miracle that took place while Martin visited St. Gatien’s tomb, Gregory writes that people who witnessed the miracle said that “he who had once summoned Lazarus from his tomb was now dwelling in Martin.” See Gregory of Tours, Glory of the Confessors, 21. 54 “Felix tuus hanc transitus / Sacrat diem, qua caelitus / Tibi petenti sidera, / Martine, coetus obviate.” See Keane, “Martin Hymns of the Middle Ages,” 122–23. 53

165

166

The musical articulation of St. Martin in Tours

repetition, however, is not exact, for the prosa Ad patriam redit is inserted in the place where Post derelicta was previously sung. The ensuing lesser doxology, effectively troping the versicle Martinus episcopus, functions as a second verse.55 Finally, the entire respond is intoned anew (the cue word “Martinus” signals, this time, the return of the entire respond, not just of the repetendum), with a new, third prosa inserted just before the word “honoratur.” The following schematic representation summarizes the above information (the text of the respond and verse is italicized, prosas are underlined, cue word preceded by asterisk): Resp. Martinus Abrahe … PROSA Post derelicta, honoratur. Ver. Martinus episcopus … *Celum … PROSA Ad patriam, honoratur. Ver. Gloria patri. Resp. Martinus Abrahe … *Celum … PROSA Octogenus agens, honoratur.

Textually, the prosas were composed so that they could be performed either independently of the respond, or together with it. Specifically, the potential of such interlocking hinges on the relative success of incorporating into the prosa the word “honoratur” concluding the entire respond, for each prosa would have been followed by it. As can be seen in Example 3.14, the performance of Euphonias calls for a similar intercalation of “honoratur,” but in contrast to the three prosas from Saint-Martin, each syllabic line of Euphonias is echoed by a melismatic rendition of itself. Precisely this practice, moreover, seems to be prescribed by the ordinal from Saint-Martin of Utrecht dating to c. 1200. The prosa is sung by the choirboys of the maîtrise, while the choir of canons respond by singing the word “honoratur” after each verse of the prosa, effectively duplicating a chant already consisting of paired versicles and thus lending itself to antiphonal singing.56 It is interesting to note that notated sources from Catalunya transmit the exact same performance practice in sources dating from between the eleventh and fifteenth centuries, a convention referred to in local customaries as repetitur pneuma: what was just sung syllabically is thereafter sung melismatically.57 The compositional ingenuity – both musical and textual – that allowed the singing of our trio of prosas independently of, or followed by, “honoratur” is undoubtedly owing to the dexterous use of discrete grammatical units, or modules, that, complementing the similar gist and mood characteristic of the prosas, confer unity across the three texts. Let us refer to the The melody of this Gloria patri is based almost entirely on that of the preceding versicle Martinus episcopus, with the exception of the final four syllables (spiri-TU-I SANC-TO). 56 See Séjourné, L’Ordinaire de s. Martin d’Utrecht, 122. See also Kelly, “Melisma and Prosula,” 169. 57 Anglès, La música a Catalunya, 233. See also the melodic transcriptions in the following pages. 55

The triumph of Martin in heaven

use of the participle plus “est” as module A, the ablative absolute construction as module B, the adverbial prepositional phrase as C, and “honoratur” as module D.58 If in Post derelicta and Ad patriam, for instance, the verbs are understood to be “evocata [est]” and “adiunctus [est]” (module A) respectively, syntax and meaning are not necessarily dependent on the presence of “honoratur.” Ad patriam, nonetheless, is the most dependent on “honoratur”; short of a detachable adverbial prepositional phrase (module B), the kind of versatility mentioned above is somewhat jeopardized. Octogenus agens too exhibits the adaptability associated with module D: the word “honoratur” can be considered an integral part of it, but it can also be omitted. Line 5 of the prosa can be made to depend grammatically either on line 4 (“Heaven having greeted him with divine applause and praises”), or on “honoratur,” as the translation above suggests. As in Ad patriam, the use of modules B and C in the concluding line enables the poet exactly this kind of flexibility. At will, the prosa can be linked to its parent respond, and at will, it can be performed in isolation. There is no doubt, however, that incorporating the word “honoratur” into the fabric of each prosa produces a text that is grammatically smoother and generally more logical.59 The prosulator apparently set out to make the new text grammatically complete on its own terms, as well as correct and logical in relation to the respond. The musical setting of these texts equally fits this picture too. Although the prosas end on C, one step lower than the finalis D of the parent responsory, there is no doubt that they are in mode 1. Their modal integrity is preserved even if the finalis D, reached by virtue of the final melisma on “honoratur,” is omitted. Two of the prosas, Post derelicta and Octogenus agens, contain vivid accounts of Martin’s weakening body, and in so doing they are similar to the prosa Non debiles encountered above. They too are empathetic about Martin’s deteriorating physical condition (Octogenus agens is particularly explicit in that regard) and provide details wanting in Sulpicius Severus’s Epistle 3. Contrary to the first two prosas in this trio, Octogenus agens takes I am indebted to Paul Gehl of the Newberry Library, Chicago, for suggesting the prism of modules. 59 I have attempted to capture this by providing translations that rely on “honoratur.” Further substantiating this view is the presence of the word “honoratur” immediately following the prosas on fo. 472 of BmT 152, an unnotated breviary from Saint-Cosme from the end of the fifteenth century. It is possible that the use of modules was inspired by a similar procedure found in the three neuma triplex prosas. Although Fac deus and Familiam custodi make perfect sense as independent creations, they too are modular in a way not dissimilar to the three Martinian prosas: they end with the accusative of an active person (“auctorem” and “conditorem,” respectively) so that they may easily be read with the genitival phrase (“fabrice mundi”) that follows. 58

167

168

The musical articulation of St. Martin in Tours

us back in fictional time, for it starts at a chronological point in history that precedes the one reached in the respond. In the respond Martin has already died; but in the ensuing prosa he is in the process of dying. Taken together, the prosas of the third nocturn may collectively represent the “heavenly hymns” referred to in Martinus Abrahe: they are indeed written in the saint’s honor, and their congratulatory tone is openly inspired by the responsory that crowns Martin as the gem of all bishops.

Echoes of laus perennis More than any other office, Martin’s November 11 celebration echoed the laus perennis, the perpetual psalmody instituted in Saint-Martin as early as the sixth century whereby the canons, divided into groups of twenty, took turns in chanting incessantly next to Martin’s tomb.60 This custom, which came to an abrupt end when Saint-Martin became a secular church in the ninth century, was annually recalled during one of the most important celebrations that the church witnessed. Although proper festivities for Martin’s Transitus or Natalis already began on the eve of the official commemoration on November 11, the canons took note of even earlier indications that heralded the approaching celebration. From as early as All Saints, habitual rituals inside and outside the church gave way to special observances. During Mass, the offerings were presented on the main altar by the chamberlain, whereas it was the deacon who usually placed them on the altar dedicated to St. Brice. Moreover, a pair of silver keys belonging to the treasury of the church was placed on the altar, alongside the relics of St. Martin – the only items allowed on the altar. The combination of the relics together with the silver keys symbolically reinforced the notion that Martin alone was the possessor of the church. Outside the church, crowds of pilgrims

60

Quibus ultimis verbis videas ad hoc etiam usque tempus psalmodiam illam ab initio institutam ad sepulchrum beatissimi Martini … tam magnam fuisse hoc etiam tempore, ut succedentibus sibi vicissim choris continuarentur solemnia divinorum, adeo ut ne momentum quidem diei ac noctis vacaret a laudibus divinis, cum enim tunc ducenti in nostra sancta basilica essent instituti canonici succedentibus sibi invicem choris viginti canonicorum per alternas vices, perpetua reddebatur haec divina psalmodia, sic ut regula fuerit psallendi in aliis pluribus ecclesiis, ut diximus. Quando vero laus haec perennis cessaverit in dicta ecclesia, sicut nihil ea de re habemus in Actis ecclesiae, sic de tempore cessationis ejus nihil audemus asserere. (BmT 1294, p. 154). See also Vaucelle, La Collégiale, 356. By “Quibus ultimis verbis …” the author of BmT 1294 must be referring to the following excerpt from a donation charter by count Heligaud from 813: “ad ipsum corpus Beati Martini die noctuque Dei misericordiam deprecantes atque conlaudantes non cessant.” See Hauréau, Gallia christiana, 14, instrumenta, col. 18.

Echoes of laus perennis

filled the open areas surrounding the basilica, and the courts of justice of Châteauneuf, the prosperous community of burghers associated with the church, held their biannual sessions from November 1 to 13. Three days before the 11th, the canons eschewed the daily liturgy altogether, perhaps in order to attend to the needs of the hundreds of pilgrims who were flocking to the doors of Saint-Martin from all over Europe. Freshly tonsured, the community of canons was present in the choir in its entirety, as residency requirements ensured that no one would be on leave during this feast. The canons were now ready to receive solemnly two additional groups of clerics from neighboring establishments; together, they were to celebrate Martin’s Transitus in a unique fashion reminiscent of the ancient tradition of perpetual psalmody (laus perennis).61 Like other seven-candle feasts in Saint-Martin, the vigil of November 11 did not start with Vespers but with Terce, with festivities continuing until the octave a week later. A solemn votive mass was celebrated immediately after Terce. As the hour of First Vespers came to a close, the chamberlain announced the hour of Matins by chiming the bells of the church, skipping the hour of Compline. Normally sung much later at night, Matins on that day began early in the evening, for it was the first in three consecutive Matins offices that were to be celebrated. As the Magnificat was chanted in Saint-Martin, preparations to join the canons of Saint-Martin in two nearby dependent establishments, Saint-Venant and Saint-Pierre-le-Puellier, were well underway.62 Prompted by the lengthy ringing of bells, the two groups of canons converged on Saint-Martin from the right and left flanks of the church, respectively. Marching into the brightly lit church while singing the responsory Sancte Martine, they took their places in the new Gothic choir that replaced the one destroyed by fire in 1230. Unaccompanied by the canons of Saint-Martin, the two groups of canons were now responsible for the execution of First Matins, with certain duties passing in yearly rotation between them. The canon who happened to be the weekly duty priest in his church performed the duty of the cantor: in a year that the latter came from Saint-Pierre-le-Puellier, his fellow canons also recited the ninth lesson, while those of Saint-Venant recited the third and sixth lessons. Singing the nine responsories was likewise divided between the two groups of clerics, with the canons of Saint-Pierre-le-Puellier singing the first responsory, This custom was still current in the fifteenth century, as reported in BmT 1021, fo. 158. Unless otherwise noted, information regarding the execution of Martin’s November 11 feast is primarily gleaned from Consuetudines Ecclesiae Beati Martini Turonensis, 82–84. 62 On Saint-Martin’s jurisdiction over these two churches, see the discussion in Consuetudines Ecclesiae Beati Martini Turonensis, 140–41. 61

169

170

The musical articulation of St. Martin in Tours

Saint-Venant the second, and so forth. At the end of Matins, two canons from Saint-Martin incensed the choir, and the bells rang again, signaling the commencement of Second Matins, chanted by the canons of SaintMartin. Of the successive offices, it was the second one, performed by the canons of Saint-Martin, that was by far the most memorable, not only because most of the canons were holding one-pound candles in their hands, but also because the service was dotted with several unique practices. The antiphons were divided into three parts, and each part was followed by a psalm; the Gloria, normally sung only at the end of nocturns, was here sung after each responsory, which, moreover, was repeated in its entirety after the lesser doxology. Furthermore, neumas, including the neuma triplex, were added to various parts of the office, as we have seen in Chapter 1. Most conspicuous, however, were the five prosas composed in the course of the thirteenth century, and especially the ones modeled after the neuma triplex. The longest prosa, Octogenus agens, performed under the church’s large chandelier (“sub corona”), was also chanted during the procession that took place on that day in the church.63 As the canons of Saint-Martin recited and chanted the nocturns, the church was continuously incensed. According to their respective hierarchy, canons would take turns reading the lessons and singing the responsories: a boy cleric (clericulus) read the first lesson, whereas the ninth was read by the deacon or, in his absence, by the treasurer. The responsories were always sung by a duo of clerics: canons from different stations, priests, boys, and so on. Once the Second Matins was completed, the monks of Saint-Julien marched in procession into the church and began celebrating the third and final hour of Matins – this time a lengthier monastic office, perhaps the one Odo of Cluny had composed on request of the canons of Saint-Martin.64 Just two weeks before the season of Advent began, the ceremonies marking the most solemn feast of the Sanctorale in Saint-Martin anticipated in large part the festivities of Christmas Day and its octave, along with Easter, See BmT 1021, fo. 159v; and BmT 204, pp. 257–61 (a seventeenth-century processional from Saint-Martin). 64 “Et debet venire conventus in festo sancti Marci et in festo Hyemali ad Matutinas ultimas, ad ecclesiam nostram.” See Consuetudines Ecclesiae Beati Martini Turonensis, 145; and Vaucelle, La Collégiale, 363 n. 364. The tradition of a threefold execution of Matins on this feast day continued at least up till the eighteenth century, as did many of the customs already in place by the thirteenth century. See Troupeau, “Une description de l’office de la Saint-Martin,” 897–912. On the twelve lengthy antiphons and three hymns composed in honor of St. Martin and attributed to Odo see Chapter 2 above; and also Pothier, “Douze antiennes”; and Reames, “Saint Martin of Tours,” 141–43. 63

Echoes of laus perennis

the most important feast in the Church year. The music of most of the Martinian prosas, as well as that of Martinus Abrahe, made this connection aurally clear, and symbolically compelling. As the responsories and readings celebrated Martin’s triumphant ascent to heaven, the prosas, with their unequivocal Christmas associations, symbolically united Martin and Christ, and foreshadowed the arrival of the Savior in the upcoming weeks in December. Nowhere is this more evident than in the concluding responsory of the November 11 office, in which the intertwining of Martinian and Christmas elements is made graphically clear by the intertwining of a trinity of prosas into a single chant. We can observe, then, the workings of a closely organized and largely inward-looking community at Saint-Martin. Poets, authors, and composers alike worked hard to emphasize the blessed Martin’s place in heaven (as well as other characteristics) in a sophisticated way that assumed a memorial culture that was both verbal and musical. Nowhere is this more apparent than in the November 11 liturgy in which the intertwining of music and text draws attention to Martin “who lives in Christ” (an interesting reversal of Gregory of Tours’s pronouncement that Christ lives in Martin), and where the final responsory overflows with music borrowed from the liturgy celebrating the birth of Christ. Chants commonly sung during Martin’s principal feast all over Europe were constantly personalized at Saint-Martin by the addition of unique prosas. The November 11 feast is the only Martinian festival not exclusively associated with the community of canons at SaintMartin. As we have seen, the other Martinian feasts – including the July 4 feast, ubiquitously celebrated but functioning as a Dedication feast only in Saint-Martin – had far more explicit ties to Martin’s church. This may explain the immense efforts to individualize – and therefore make local – the most universal elements of Martin’s liturgy. Such determination is above all evident in the concluding responsory, where the combined length of the trio of prosas concluding Martin’s office far surpasses that of the responsory they adorn. As we have seen, these songs counterbalance the somber tenor of the office by providing hope for miracles to come and continued sustenance. They also enhance Martin’s reputation by emphasizing his distinction as the crown of all bishops, and indeed, identify him closely with Christ, invested with special powers beyond those of a normal intercessor saint.

171

4

Competing with success: sharing the aura of St. Martin in Tours

Let us wake up our sleeping friend, so that he might be together with us on all days and forever. Because he is certainly buried among us; we cannot be silent about him. BmT 212, fo. 5v

172

Throughout the Middle Ages, the cult of St. Martin continued to inspire composers and poets alike, who sang the saint’s praises in a variety of contexts and musico-poetic genres both within and outside the walls of the church that bore his name. The city of Tours, the most important nucleus of Martin’s cult, gave rise to an exceptionally large number of such pieces, and yet, notwithstanding the saint’s prominence in all of Christendom, most of the Martinian liturgy composed in Tours failed to make an impact on his veneration in Europe. In general this was because it invoked a more circumscribed image of Martin that was predominantly tied to the city of Tours, directly opposed to that constructed by Sulpicius Severus, as we have seen in Chapter  2. His universal aura was utilized to transform and sustain power relationships among religious communities in the city where he spent his entire episcopal career. Thus, Martin appeared in French art and literature often with such well-known attributes as his charitable demeanor on the one hand and his military career on the other; but the particular local color and practice of his cult in Tours had very little resonance among his devotees outside Tours, for they were tightly bound up with a power struggle between the religious poles in Tours that claimed tangible ties to the saint himself. Although the city’s Cathedral could have made an equal claim with the collegiate church to St. Martin’s cult, it did not engender new Martinian liturgies, and in fact found itself relegated to a secondary role in all that concerns the veneration of Martin in Tours, especially with regard to the new feasts dedicated to him from the tenth century onward, namely, Subvention and Reversion. Since vying for a stake in the aura of St. Martin within the city of Tours proved to be increasingly impractical (for reasons we shall explore in depth), the canons in the Cathedral were determined to capitalize on a different saintly figure whose finest attribute was that he was bishop of Tours before Martin. In what follows, we shall see how the

Sharing the aura of St. Martin in Tours

tensions produced by the veneration of St. Martin on the local level effected a fierce competition between the Cathedral and the collegiate church of Saint-Martin, the most spectacular battle of which was fought on the liturgical field during the thirteenth century, when canons in the Cathedral sought to procure the assistance of a “sleeping friend.” Tensions between the Cathedral and Saint-Martin gradually increased between the tenth and thirteenth centuries, and the festivities of Subvention (May 12) and Reversion (December 1), with their complex histories, provided further opportunities to display the rift between the two communities, as the exclusion of the Cathedral from the procession held during Subvention may well indicate. Moreover, the Cathedral’s apparent reluctance to embrace the liturgies of these two Martinian feasts in any meaningful way – a peculiarity, given its obvious ties to Martin – was all the more conspicuous since both churches were separated only by an 800-meter stretch of arable land. Then, too, there were other, deep-rooted aspects of the growing rift between SaintMartin and the Cathedral that at first had little to do with Martin per se but that eventually came to impinge on their ceremonial relationship in a way that very much implicated St. Martin. Beginning in the mid tenth century, for example, the territory around Saint-Martin ceased to be the necropolis of the archbishops of Tours, a function it had occupied since antiquity. The death of Archbishop Theotolus (r. 931–945), who began his ecclesiastical career as a canon at Saint-Martin (he served as the basilica’s dean between c. 914 and 927), marks the first documented instance in which an archbishop of Tours was not buried in Saint-Martin. Subsequently, archbishops of Tours were laid to rest either in the Cathedral, or in a church or monastery of their choice.1 Above all it was the movement for monastic exemption, revived at the end of the tenth century, that brought on the ultimate demise of the hitherto unified religious landscape in Tours, when participation in the liturgy of St. Martin became highly manipulated.2 In the late tenth century, monasteries in western France sought to obtain rights and privileges that would liberate them from the authority of local bishops and lay rulers. Chief among the advocates of monastic rights was Abbo, the abbot of Fleury-sur-Loire, who in the 990s turned to the papacy, not to local knights, for protection, and challenged the prevalent practice of kings’ exertion of their earthly powers over church officials. In a Farmer, Communities of Saint Martin, 31. Information about Theotolus’s career is found in the Chronicon Turonense Magnum, 112; and in Noizet, “Pratiques spatiales,” 280–81. 2 Barbara Rosenwein has narrated the complicated history of immunity (having to do with taxes) and exemption (ordinations) granted to religious institutions in the Middle Ages, a history that harks back to the late seventh century. See Rosenwein, Negotiating Space, 27–96. 1

173

174

Sharing the aura of St. Martin in Tours

treatise he wrote for the kings of France, he presented his view that monks, not secular rulers, stood at the “summit of earthly hierarchy.”3 Moreover, in 997 he obtained a charter from Pope Gregory V that secured a set of unparalleled privileges for his monastery, effectively bypassing the episcopal authority of the diocesan bishop. For example, Fleury was given permission to appeal directly to the pope, the abbot was free to discipline the monks without outside intervention, and the monastery was not bound by any general interdiction set by the diocese.4 A year later, in 998, the monastery of Cluny too received its papal exemption, and in 1024 the latter was extended to stipulate that “none of its monks in any of its monasteries were subject to interdictions, excommunications, or anathemas declared by a local bishop.”5 In Tours, already in the 1070s during the episcopate of Ralph of Langeais (r. c. 1072–1093), the deepening division between Saint-Martin and Marmoutier on the one hand, and the Cathedral on the other, took a particularly vicious turn. The episcopate of Ralph of Langeais was marred by accusations of simony, and for various reasons he was opposed by practically all political and religious powers in Tours, most notably the canons of Saint-Martin, who dubbed him “the enemy of God.” The context in which these harsh words were articulated was the canons’ refusal to receive Ralph and a papal legate named Amatus ceremoniously into their church. The account written by the canons in 1096 depicts events that took place in 1083: At that time, on the advice of the sons of priests who were canons at the [Cathedral], all concord between the bishop of the city and the clergy of Saint-Martin was destroyed … But this discord arose out of jealousy of their city, so that they did not make processions to us, nor we to them, as was established by ancient custom. The same year Archbishop Ralph and the legate Amatus excommunicated the people of Tours and those of Anjou from all Christian office. And we, the canons of SaintMartin, celebrated the mass at [the monastery of] Saint-Julien on the first days of Rogations, against their will, and on the second day at [the convent of] Saint-Mary of Beaumont, and we made all the stations, just as the ancient custom prescribes. Moreover, William Bassus, the chaplain of Saint-Martin, excommunicated Ralph, the enemy of God.”6

Clearly, canons from both churches used the liturgy as an instrument of power, denying one another participation in reciprocal processions, Duby, France in the Middle Ages, 6. See Mostert, The Political Theology. 5 Rosenwein, Negotiating Space, 173. 6 English translation adapted with minor changes from Farmer, Communities of Saint Martin, 45. Quoted from “Narratio controversiae,” 461. 3 4

Sharing the aura of St. Martin in Tours

visitations, and the celebration of Mass. The right to perform rituals was also at the center of the struggle between the monks of Marmoutier and the archbishop, to whom they referred as Amalek (i.e., the enemy of the Israelites) and whose partisans they compared to the Vikings who had invaded Tours in 903. In about 1076, the archbishop was prevented from making a station in Marmoutier during a procession that took place on Holy Tuesday. Reportedly, the monks barred Archbishop Ralph from entering the monastery, and even called for the help of an armed band in order to keep him out.7 The monastic exemption movement in France reached new heights at the end of the eleventh century, when, during a year-long journey across France (1095–1096), Pope Urban II (r. 1088–1099) visited his past religious house of Cluny (he was formerly Odo, grand prior of Cluny), in which he consecrated a wide geographical area of jurisdiction surrounding the monastery, calling for the excommunication of those who violated it.8 It was in the course of this lengthy voyage that the pope also visited Tours; having already granted the monks of Marmoutier a bull of exemption in 1089, he visited and dedicated the monastery’s new church in 1096. On that occasion he confirmed Marmoutier’s past privileges and immunities, and he reprimanded the canons of the Cathedral for oppressing the monks.9 Next, on March 30, 1096, the pope issued a bull exempting the canons of Saint-Martin from obedience to their archbishop. The bull, addressing all the bishops and archbishops of France, stated that henceforth the canons were to be placed under the direct jurisdiction of Rome, and that those who opposed the decision would be “slain by the sword of our apostolic indignation.”10 Taken as a whole, the effect of these bulls on the ceremonial discourse between the Cathedral on the one hand, and Marmoutier and the collegiate church of Saint-Martin on the other, cannot be overstated. No longer having spiritual authority over these two institutions, the archbishop was restricted from celebrating the Mass or office in either church. Moreover, he was now entitled only to a single ceremonial reception in Saint-Martin during the entire Maan, Histoire de l’église de Tours, 213. Le Tort provides only a partial translation of Maan’s book, that which concerns the chronology of bishops and archbishops of Tours. In what follows, therefore, references to other parts of Maan’s work will be made to the original 1667 book. 8 Rosenwein, Negotiating Space, 1–3. 9 Farmer, Communities of Saint Martin, 48. 10 “Qui vero ipsos, aut quae eorum sunt, impugnare praesumpserit, indignationis apostolicae gladio feriatur” (PL 151:459). Cited and quoted in Noizet, “Pratiques spatiales,” 371. See also Noizet, La Fabrique de la ville, 200. The canons were apparently not content with the rather general language employed in the bull; they consequently forged two additional bulls in which they specified clauses that made their church totally independent from the Cathedral. 7

175

176

Sharing the aura of St. Martin in Tours

length of his episcopate, an honor that he could previously claim at liberty.11 The unfolding of this ceremony, rich with potent symbolism, offers a poignant example of how the aura of Martin was used to eclipse the authority of the Cathedral. In particular, it is interesting to examine the recounting of this ritual as it enters, quite literally, the space of Saint-Martin, a station in the procession following the consecration of the archbishop in the monastery of SaintJulien, located halfway between the Cathedral and the basilica. Details of this event, moreover, as told from the perspective of the canons of SaintMartin in the church’s customary, offer further insight into how relations between the two entities were channeled into an aestheticized display of power: The archbishop of Tours is consecrated in Saint-Julien, and then he arrives in procession at Saint-Martin, where he is received at the “gate of the little place” by a procession. The cantor of Saint-Martin intones the responsory Sancte Martine or Sint lumbi to the sound of the bells. The deacon and the treasurer, or two other dignitaries from Saint-Martin, lead the archbishop to the tomb [of St. Martin] and then, the prayers having been completed, the archbishop, standing behind the [main] altar of St. Peter, gives his first blessing to the people. That having been done, the deacon and the treasurer or others, as is said above, lead him to the choir and invite him to sit on his chair, and then the cantor of Saint-Martin immediately intones the Te Deum laudamus. Then the barons carry the archbishop in his chair to Saint-Maurice [the Cathedral]. And while the processions in which the invited bishops participate unfold in front of him, the procession of Saint-Martin remains in the choir.12

In fact, by the time this customary was copied – between 1226 and 1237 – such encounters between the canons of Saint-Martin and the archbishop of Tours may well have been quite rare. Evidently, the canons did not participate in the consecration ceremony itself; rather, they waited for the newly installed archbishop to honor them by processing to their church, where he was greeted by the tolling of bells. Upon his arrival, the cantor of SaintMartin chanted either the responsory Sancte Martine – a supplication for Martin’s protection frequently used during processions – or the responsory Sint lumbi, drawn from the Common of Bishop-Confessors. Subsequently, the archbishop blessed the worshipers gathered in Saint-Martin – the first

Farmer, Communities of Saint Martin, 46. Consuetudines Ecclesiae Beati Martini Turonensis, 148. The “gate of the little place” (“parve aree” [sic]) played an important role during various ceremonies (e.g., during Rogation days), and served as an entryway for important dignitaries, including kings. See Lelong, La Basilique Saint-Martin de Tours, 88.

11 12

Sharing the aura of St. Martin in Tours

blessing of his episcopate. The order in which the ceremony unfolded would have suggested, therefore, that it was the visit to Saint-Martin (and not merely a prayer addressed to the saint) that provided access to episcopal authority, a supposition symbolically strengthened by the archbishop’s prayer at Martin’s tomb immediately before making his first blessing. Tellingly, the shift in power relations and the consequent remapping of liturgical space in Tours were accompanied by the introduction of a new term designating the area around the Saint-Martin basilica. By using the designation “Martinopolis,” the canons underscored the new spatial reality that they perceived to be the direct outcome of their success in gaining exemption from the authority of their archbishop. Just as they effectively restricted the archbishop’s visitations and jurisdiction, they also sought to regulate access to the liturgy and aura of St. Martin. No longer the patron saint of the entire city, Martin was their saint, the canons asserted – an intent precisely encapsulated in the term “Martinopolis,” which they employed beginning in the early 1090s.13 Processions to and from Saint-Martin offered a particularly potent realization of the network of alliances among churches in Tours, which further reinforced the privileged status of the basilica in all that concerned the veneration of St. Martin in the city. As can be seen in Table 4.1 (listing only those processions that involved movement outside the church proper), the unfolding of these “ritualized expressions of dominance,” to use Farmer’s fitting phrase, concretized the exclusion of the Cathedral on the one hand, and the inclusion of subordinate religious houses on the other. These processions delineated itineraries that took the canons to churches in and around Tours but, with a single exception, not to the Cathedral. Most of the churches that had a processional rapport with Saint-Martin were dependent houses over which the basilica had some kind of jurisdiction: Saint-Venant, Saint-Cosme, the convent of Beaumont, Saint-Pierrele-Puellier, and Cormery. (Marmoutier had always been an independent establishment.) For the canons of Saint-Martin, the processions provided opportunities to display the submission of other churches in ways not unlike that of diocesan churches to their Cathedral. When canons from SaintVenant and Saint-Pierre-le-Puellier joined Saint-Martin in procession, for instance, they were not allowed to carry their own cross; instead, they were spearheaded by the processional cross of the basilica, thus symbolically subsumed under the patronage of Martin. What is more, some aspects of SaintMartin’s visits to other churches showed evidence of episcopal symbolism, 13

On the usage of “Martinopolis” across history see Noizet, La Fabrique de la ville, 193–212.

177

178

Sharing the aura of St. Martin in Tours

Table 4.1 Processions to and from Saint-Martin Feast

Itinerary

St. Nicholas (Dec. 6) To chapel of SaintNicholas St. John the To Beaumont, treasurer’s Evangelist gate (Dec. 27) St. Perpetuus To Sainte-Colombe (Dec. 30) Ash Wednesday To various unspecified churches, and to chapels within SaintMartin

Palm Sunday Maundy Thursday Monday after Easter

Tuesday after Easter Rogations/ Monday

To Saint-Pierre du Chardonnet To Cathedral and back to Saint-Martin To Beaumont, with a station in the priory of Saint-Jacques de l’Orme-Robert, and in Notre-Dame de l’Ecrignole To Saint-Cosme, via Saint-Anne

Distinctive features

Source

Prosa Sospitati

Customary, p. 27; BmT 204, pp. 313–18 Customary, pp. 34–35

Canons ride horses, inversion of hierarchy Vigils

Customary, pp. 35–36

Processing to cemeteries, list of chants sung as function of visited places/altars. Processions on each Wednesday and Friday until Palm Sunday Mock dragon, a banners Obtaining chrism and holy oils Organum, and singing on bridge

Customary, pp. 44–46

Organum

Customary, pp. 61–62; BmT 204, pp. 123–29 Customary, p. 67; BmT 204, pp. 130–83

Mock dragon, banners

Rogations/ Tuesday

To Saint-Julien through Saint-Pierre-lePuellier; Saint-Julien to Saint-Martin To Beaumont; SaintCosme to Saint-Martin

Rogations/ Wednesday (vigil of Ascension)

To Saint-Jacques de l’Orme-Robert; Beaumont to SaintMartin

Missa cum ordine

Customary, pp. 49–51; BmT 204, pp. 57–96 Customary, p. 54; BmT 204, pp. 96–108 Customary, p. 61; BmT 204, pp. 115–23

Customary, p. 67; BmT 204, pp. 184–85; BmT Rés. 4669, p. 93 Customary, p. 68; BmT 204, pp. 185–88

Sharing the aura of St. Martin in Tours

Feast

Itinerary

Distinctive features

Source

Ascension

To Saint-Pierre-lePuellier

Customary, pp. 68–69; BmT 204, pp. 191–204

St. Mark (Apr. 25)

To Saint-Hillaire; Marmoutier, SaintJulien, Saint-Pierrele-Puellier, Beaumont, Saint-Venant, Saint-Jacques de l’Orme-Robert, and Saint-Cosme to SaintMartin To chapel of Saint-Jean (just south of SaintMartin) Marmoutier to SaintMartin

Elaborate route details, mock dragon, banners, shattering of spear Letania maior

Blessing of font, flowers, and birds in mass Arrival per aquam, the making of neumas

Customary, pp. 72–73; BmT 1204, p. 213

To Saint-Julien

Prosa Preparator veritatis

To Saint-Jacques

Without singing

Customary, pp. 76–77; BmT 204, pp. 220–25 Customary, p. 79

Saint-Venant and SaintPierre-le-Puellier to Saint-Martin To Saint-André chapel (just southwest of Saint-Martin)

Triumphationes in the Martinian liturgy, threefold Matins Responsory Venite post me sung during procession

Pentecost

St. Martin’s Subvention (May 12) St. John the Baptist (June 24) Sts. James and Christopher (July 25) St. Martin (Nov. 11) St. Andrew (Nov. 30) a

179

Customary, pp. 69–71; Farmer, Communities of Saint Martin, p. 257; BmT 204, pp. 189– 191; BmT Rés. 4669, pp. 92–93

Customary, pp. 71–72

Customary, pp. 82–84

Customary, p. 87

On the symbolism of the dragon and its use in Tours see Robertson, “The Savior, the Woman, and the Head of the Dragon,” 575.

among which was the right of procuration (food and lodging) and the election of a boy bishop during the feast of the Innocents, as we have seen in Chapter  1. While the inversion of church hierarchy that took place during the octave of Christmas was not unusual in medieval France, it was a custom normally reserved to cathedral chapters, that is, to churches that were in fact the seat of a bishop or an archbishop. Indeed, the installation of the boy bishop remarkably paralleled the installation ceremony of the

180

Sharing the aura of St. Martin in Tours

city’s archbishop, which also included visitation to a subordinate church.14 Finally, the only procession whose objective was to reach the Cathedral took place on the morning of Maundy Thursday, when a weekly duty priest from Saint-Martin, accompanied by one of the men who was on the list of poor receiving a dole from the church (matricularius), went to the Cathedral to have their containers filled with chrism and holy oil. Significantly, although the chrism for the Mass of the Chrism sung later that day, as well as the oil required for various consecrations, all had to be blessed by the archbishop – hence the unavoidable visit to the Cathedral – the latter is never mentioned by the customary, which tells of a rather reserved and low-key procession, “with a staff but merely on foot,” without talking (“nemini loquentes”) or singing, and with very little interaction with the Cathedral itself.15 The fragmentation of the religious communities in Tours reached new heights when yet another symbol on which the Cathedral traditionally relied for exerting authority became appropriated by the canons of SaintMartin, and once more, liturgy was the weapon of choice. In the last quarter of the twelfth century, a new chapter in the history of St. Martin was written, when two of the highest-ranking canons of Saint-Martin – the dean, Philip, and the treasurer, Rainaldus, already encountered in Chapter 1 – recounted how Martin, returning from a pilgrimage to Rome, prayed at the site of martyrdom of one of the Christian legions composing the Roman army. Details about the Passion of Maurice and the Theban Legion in Agaune (today in the Canton of Valais, Switzerland) were already known from accounts written from the fifth century onwards, according to which the entire Theban Legion and their commander, Maurice, were martyred because they refused to take part in a pagan sacrifice. The Cathedral’s own ties to the cult of Maurice were just as well known, for they were recounted by Gregory of Tours in his Ten Books of History. According to his own testimony, when he became the nineteenth bishop of Tours, the Cathedral had already been destroyed by fire; Gregory had it reconstructed, building it “higher and larger,” and dedicated it in the seventeenth year of his episcopate, that is, in 590. Moreover, he translated back to the newly built Cathedral the relics of St. Maurice and his companions, whose remains had been housed in Farmer, Communities of Saint Martin, 249, 253–55. Et nota quod circa Primam vadit unus ex septimanariis et unus de matriculariis ante eum, cum equis et in vestibus chori. Et ita vadunt ad Sanctum Mauritium, nemini loquentes, et ante eos vadit serviens matricularius, cum virga, sed non cum equo, et portat butam cum urceolis, ad Crisma et Oleum deferendis. Ad portam ecclesie tradit septimanario butam, et ille portat eam super altare beate Gatiani, matriculario preeunte cum virga. Et post recedit sicut venit. Et nota quod urceoli sunt pleni oleo olivarum. (Consuetudines Ecclesiae Beati Martini Turonensis, 54).

14 15

Sharing the aura of St. Martin in Tours

the treasury of Saint-Martin during the construction project.16 There is a truly novel feature in the twelfth-century description of the Cathedral by Rainaldus and Philip that squarely impinged on the Cathedral’s relation to St. Maurice, its patron saint. Undoubtedly seeking to appropriate a standing symbol of this rival church, they claimed that Martin himself played a role in the dedication of the Cathedral to St. Maurice, and that Saint-Martin also owned a portion of the relics of Maurice and his Theban Legion.17 After praying at the martyrdom site, they continued, Martin miraculously drew some of the martyrs’ blood from deep underground (“abyssis terre”), pouring it into several small vessels, one of which he gave to the Cathedral in Tours, one to that of Angers, and a third of which was discovered, “only in our times,” hidden in the vicinity of the tomb of St. Martin in the basilica. In the last quarter of the twelfth century, then, the canons of Saint-Martin argued not only that they possessed the same kind of relic that gave rise to the Cathedral – a vessel containing the martyrs’ blood – but also that the Cathedral essentially owned its very distinctiveness to Martin, their saint.18 The liturgical significance of the above became all the more palpable owing to the juxtaposition made by Philip and Rainaldus of the translation of the martyrs’ relics by Martin and the celebration of Subvention, both having taken place on May 12.19 By juxtaposing the two events, which took Gregory of Tours, Libri historiarum X, X.31. Although the Cathedral seems to have been dedicated to St. Maurice from the outset, it is only in the eighth century that extant evidence (a Merovingian coin, in fact) unmistakably points to a connection with the cult of St. Maurice. See Lelong, “Saint-Gatien ou Saint-Maurice?,” 421. See also Vieillard-Troiekouroff, Les Monuments religieux de la Gaule; and Pietri, La Ville de Tours du IVe au VIe siècle. 17 The eighteenth-century historian Pierre de Rivaz asserted that a tenth-century martyrology from Tours recounts how Martin always carried with him an ampule filled with the martyrs’ blood. I have found no corroboration of this, and given de Rivaz’s tendency to make extravagant claims in his book (he is, after all, defending the historicity and veracity of the legend concerning Maurice and the Theban Legion), it is certainly possible that no such statements were ever made in the martyrology he professed to have seen. See Rivaz, Eclaircissements, 58. 18 “[P]er quotquot uoluit uascula diuisum, locis quibus iudicabat oportere decenter composuit, eiusdem metropolis principalem ecclesiam, sed et Andegauensem … in honorem eorundem martyrum Mauricii sociorumque eius consecravuit … Hanc nostris modo temporibus ex occulto secretario, quod sub archa corporis eius est, inuentam, et ex capsa argentea.” Guibert of Gembloux, Epistolae, 74, 75 (Epistola V). See also Farmer, Communities of Saint Martin, 232–35. Interestingly, a breviary from Saint-Martin printed in 1748 tells a somewhat different story, according to which the third vessel of blood was given to the church in Candes, and no allusion is made to such a vessel in Saint-Martin. See BnF Inv. B-4098, pp. 516–24 (spring volume). 19 In Marmoutier, St. Maurice was already honored on May 12 by at least the eleventh century, as can be seen in the breviary Rouen, Bm 243 (olim 164), fos. 190–91. And yet, there is nothing in the liturgy of that day to suggest that Martin played any role in the translation of Maurice’s relics, lending further support to the supposition that the account told by Philip and Rainaldus was indeed an innovation in the late twelfth century. 16

181

182

Sharing the aura of St. Martin in Tours

place hundreds of years apart, the canons of Saint-Martin drew attention to Martin as the paragon of spiritual authority in Tours, giving birth to all the religious shrines in the city and continuing to sustain its inhabitants by working miracles posthumously, and by coming to the city’s assistance against the invading Vikings. The understanding of Subvention as a double celebration is evidenced in a lectionary copied just around the time in which Philip and Rainaldus juxtaposed Subvention with the story about St. Maurice. An eight-leaf manuscript copied at the end of the twelfth century transmits the readings for Martin’s May 12 feast.20 The readings for Subvention are interrupted after the third lesson by three lessons devoted to St. Maurice, containing an excerpt from his Passio (usually found in the liturgy for the saint’s principal feast on September 22). A title written in red ink and inserted at some later stage clearly indicates the interpolation (“De S. Mauricio”).21 Thereafter, at fos. 118v–121, the readings for the third nocturn resume with material relevant to Subvention, as we have seen in Chapter 2. The rubric found in a thirteenth-century lectionary from SaintMartin, moreover, echoes the belief evidenced since the twelfth century regarding the role Martin played in obtaining the relics of St. Maurice. Prefiguring the text of three lessons dedicated to St. Maurice, the rubric in BmT 1021, fo. 148v, announces that these lessons effectively constitute the middle nocturn of Martin’s Subvention office, because on that day, Martin brought and placed the relics of St. Maurice and his companions in Tours.22 The earliest extant breviaries from Saint-Martin that include the liturgy of Subvention date to the fourteenth century, and they continue in the tradition set by the aforementioned lectionaries. The office of Subvention in BmT 149 is typical in this regard. Whereas the opening and concluding nocturns are dedicated to Martin (the lessons drawn from Radbod’s Libellus and the responsories mostly from the Common of Saints), the middle nocturn is entirely devoted to St. Maurice, with the lessons drawn from a sermon “in natale sancto Mauricii martyris,” and the responsories drawn from various Commons (Pretiosa in conspectu, Lux perpetua, and Iste est de sublimibus).23 Remarkably, no Subvention office has come down to us from Saint-Martin Folios 114–21, the third of five sources that make up BmT 1019. The Passion of St. Maurice and the Martyrs of Agaune, on which these lessons are based, is edited in Dupraz, Les Passions, 1*–4*. 22 “Secuntur tres medie lectiones in die subventionis beatissimi Martini Turonensis pro eo quod tali die idem sanctus attulit et reposuit Turonis reliquias sanctorum Mauricii et eius sociorum.” See also Straeten, Les Manuscrits hagiographiques, 138. 23 The sermon is edited in Dolbeau, “Trois sermons latins,” 409–10. Other breviaries from SaintMartin feature the same division of nocturns between Martin and Maurice, albeit not always with the same lesson texts and responsories. Whereas thirteenth-century breviaries from 20 21

The importance of being first

that does not include a middle nocturn dedicated to Maurice, testifying to the complete synthesis between the two commemorated episodes. This synthesis, interestingly, was not unique to Saint-Martin. It is also found in the liturgy of May 12 in the Cathedral, albeit with a crucial difference: it was a mirror image of the liturgy in Saint-Martin. In the Cathedral, the first and third nocturns were devoted to St. Maurice (lessons drawn from his Passio, just as in sources from Saint-Martin, and chants from the Common of Saints), whereas the middle nocturn concerns St. Martin.24 For both the canons of Saint-Martin and of the Cathedral, then, the feast of May 12 – a designation perhaps more appropriate than Subvention  – served as an annual reminder that the histories of both churches were tightly woven, an association to which each church attributed a different degree of prominence. By the end of the thirteenth century, the Cathedral’s hold on the memory of St. Maurice must have been severely undermined, for it was deemed necessary “to wake up” a certain “sleeping friend” who could allow the Cathedral, this time, to gain exemption from Saint-Martin.

The importance of being first In 1281, Pope Martin IV, formerly treasurer of Saint-Martin (Simon de Brion), issued a bull confirming the privileges of his old church, and forbidding the archbishop of Tours and any of his officers to interfere with its liberties. A mere decade later, Pope Nicholas IV allowed the canons of Saint-Martin to turn to any bishop of their choice in order to receive minor or holy orders.25 At approximately the same time, canons at the Cathedral of Tours encountered for the first time a proper liturgy honoring St. Gatien (December 18). The first bishop of Tours, Gatien had just recently been transformed into the Cathedral’s new patron saint.26 The motivation behind Marmoutier do not incorporate the liturgy for Maurice into Subvention, those from the late fifteenth century onward do. 24 BmT 145, fos. 85v–87v. 25 “Ne archiepiscopus archidiaconus et archipresbyter Turonensis vel eorum dein officiales, seu aliquis alius, in Sancti Martini Ecclesiae libertate, ex eo aliquem seu quem vis alium eiusdem Ecclesiae libertate gaudentem interdicti vel suspensionis aut excommunicationis sententiam valeant promulgare.” BmT 1294, p. 248. See also Vaucelle, La Collégiale, 247–48. 26 As far as can be told, the Cathedral was never officially rededicated to Gatien, and still in the fifteenth century, calendars from the Cathedral featured on January 7 a feast for “Dedicacio ecclesie Mauricii” (see, for instance, BnF lat. 1032, fo. 160). It has recently been suggested that Lidorius, in fact, was the first bishop of Tours (Galinié, “Gatien, compagnon du Christ,” 285). And yet, there can be no doubt that Gatien was considered to be the first in the eyes of practically everyone from the Middle Ages (and notably, in Gregory of Tours’s Ten Books of History) up until the twenty-first century.

183

184

Sharing the aura of St. Martin in Tours

the composition of the new office, in the center of which stood the legend that begins with the words “Liquet, dilectissimi” (“It is clear, beloved”), betrays an ambitious agenda of self-promotion based on an outright forgery of history.27 Central to this new celebration was a rewriting of the life of Gatien, the third-century bishop of Tours, in an effort to place him squarely in apostolic times, to elevate his posthumous reputation, and perhaps more importantly, to boost the stature of the Cathedral and the Cité around it. As we shall see in greater detail, the office makes several incredible claims that contradict everything that was known about the bishop up to that time and giving little attention to the implications of the overall chronology of the bishops of Tours, Gatien’s episcopate having been pushed back to the first century. After Gatien’s episcopate, for instance, we learn that the see of Tours was vacant for thirty-seven years, when it was occupied by Lidorius, the city’s second bishop.28 This chronology implies, then, that less than a century elapsed between the episcopate of St. Gatien (allegedly in the first century) and that of St. Martin, who died in the late fourth century. For the medieval worshiper, information about Gatien’s activities in the ecclesiastical domain was largely gleaned from the oeuvre of Gregory of Tours. This can be seen in versions of the December 18 office that predate the late thirteenth century, when the new office was composed. According to the liturgy that Gregory’s writings spawned, the mission of Gatien to Gaul took place in the third century. It was Pope Fabianus who, during the first year of Emperor Decius (r. 249–251), sent St. Gatien and six other bishops to evangelize Gaul. During his episcopate, Gatien reportedly had to find refuge and hide in caves, celebrated the Eucharist in “crypts and hiding places,” and, despite his apparent zeal, managed to convert but a small number of people.29 In the thirteenth century, when his new office The earliest extant copy of this office is BmT 212, fos. 1–28 (its contents are itemized in Straeten, Les Manuscrits hagiographiques, 115). For an edition of the office see Historia Sancti Gatiani. As far as I know, it appears in two other sources only, both copied for the Cathedral: BmT 156, fos. 39v–44, a late fourteenth-century lectionary, and BmT 146, fo. 279, a winter breviary copied in 1412. The office occupies the bulk of BmT 212, copied within the final two decades of the thirteenth century in Tours (I thank Patricia Stirnemann for dating the manuscript). Originally, this manuscript was dedicated solely to Gatien’s new office. Sometime during the fourteenth century, the texts of a few office lessons (unrelated to Gatien, except, perhaps obliquely, for a single lesson for the feast of St. Maurice found on fos. 32v–34) were added in seamless fashion, occupying eight folios (fos. 29–36). For a detailed bibliography of works dealing with the issue of Gatien’s episcopate, see Besse, Province de Tours, 5 n. 1. 28 “Cessavit autem tunc episcopatus metropolis Turonensis, ob paganorum persecutionem gravissimam, annis triginta septem … Post obitum vero sancti Lidorii, beatus Martinus tertius ordinatur episcopus” (extract from lesson 8 of the office, as found in BmT 212, fos. 20v–21). 29 Gregory of Tours, The History of the Franks, I.28, X.31. 27

The importance of being first

was copied, the contours of Gatien’s image were as faded as the memory of yesteryear’s snow, in Tours as in elsewhere. Not a single church in the entire diocese of Tours was dedicated to him before the thirteenth century, and rarely did liturgical manuscripts from before the fourteenth century mention him at all. A thirteenth-century breviary from the abbey of SaintPierre de la Couture in the diocese of Le Mans includes a brief mention of his December 18 feast (Le Mans, Bm 188), as does a thirteenth-century breviary copied for Bayeux Cathedral, which features the same feast as an addition copied by a later hand (Paris, Bibliothèque de l’Arsenal, MS 279, fo. 570). Gatien is at times also mentioned in the litanies of saints (as in the late-fourteenth-century psalter from Avignon, Bm 10), but in Paris he was practically unknown, with only one extant book of hours dating to the fifteenth century mentioning him.30 Until the composition of Gatien’s new apostolic liturgy, sources from Tours and its environs indicate that the saint’s liturgy was largely drawn from the Common of Confessors; the writings of Gregory of Tours; and, on occasion, from the rituals of other saints. The scribe of BmT 193, a sacramentary from Saint-Martin copied in the twelfth and fourteenth centuries, for instance, indicates that the celebration of Gatien’s feast follows the example of that for St. Nicholas (fos. 15 and 168), while that of BnF lat. 9434, an eleventh-century missal from the Cathedral (originally in use in Saint-Martin), does not even include a proper mass for Gatien. As for the profile of St. Gatien’s office before the fourteenth century, we are informed by two extant manuscripts from Marmoutier: a thirteenth-century breviary and an eleventh-century responsorial transmit Gatien’s December 18 feast. Although both sources are notated, they do not feature any music for this celebration, nor do they offer any clue as to the identity of the chanted items, an indication that they were probably drawn from the Common of Confessors.31 Moreover, the lessons in these two sources are practically identical, with the opening eight succinctly overviewing events in the life BnF lat. 18017, fo. 91. Prayers for a mass in his honor are found in Reims, Bm 235, a fifteenthcentury missal probably in use in Tours Cathedral (fo. 231v). Manuscripts from the fifteenth century onward are somewhat more generous to the memory of St. Gatien. For knowledge of Gatien outside Tours see Oury, “Recherches sur le culte,” 14–19. 31 The manuscripts in question are BmT 153, fo. 213, and Rouen, MS 243, olim A. 164, fos. 292–93, respectively. The latter is the earliest extant service book for the office from the entire city of Tours. This source gives only the incipit and explicit of the lessons; the second lesson in Gatien’s office reads as follows: “Anno enim imperii Decii primo primus est a Romanae sedis antistite huic Turonicae civitati transmissus episcopus.” The same version of Gatien’s vita is also presented in Marmoutier’s thirteenth-century breviary, BmT 153. For a detailed discussion of earlier sources that reproduce Gregory’s account and that show no trace of the new legend, see C. Chevalier, Les Origines de l’église de Tours, 303–46. Unfortunately, no service books for 30

185

186

Sharing the aura of St. Martin in Tours

of Gatien (at least one lesson, the second, is taken almost verbatim from Gregory of Tour’s Ten Books of History, I.30), and the concluding four are drawn from the Common of One Confessor. Finally, an eleventh-century lectionary from the Cathedral (BnF lat. 8883) features extensive readings from Martin’s Vita, yet in its present form offers not a single reading related to St. Gatien. Despite the utter lack of service books from the Cathedral prior to the copying of BmT 212 – the first extant manuscript to transmit Gatien’s new office – it is nonetheless possible to get a glimpse into the Vita of St. Gatien that was probably known in the Cathedral. In his Sancta et Metropolitana Ecclesia Turonensis published in 1667, the canon Jean Maan reported that he found in a “very old codex” belonging to the Cathedral an office for Gatien, probably dating to the thirteenth or even the twelfth century, from which he provided readers just the following short passage: Jesus Christ shed the rays of his divine light through the entire universe by sending preachers to the people of all nations sunken in the darkness of errors. First [he sent] the Apostles, whom he chose especially for this divine Wisdom from amongst the number of men in all the world. Later through subsequent preachers he impressed upon their hearts a new seed [i.e., a new impetus] for the beginning of holy preaching; among the latter group was St. Gatien, who was chosen by the pontiff of the Holy See [i.e., the pope] as a preacher of the truth, and ordained bishop of Tours.32

If we take Maan at his word, then the text that he reproduces leaves no doubt that before the composition of the new office in BmT 212, the canons of the Cathedral were familiar with a version of St. Gatien’s life that was more in keeping with Gregory of Tours – namely, that Gatien was sent to Gaul by a pope (and not by St. Peter), and that he did not live in apostolic times.33 Maan reports also that he witnessed in the Cathedral manuscripts transmitting the authentic version of Gatien’s Vita that had the words “pontiff of the Holy See” crossed out and replaced by the words “St. Paul.” He was the office from the Cathedral, or from Saint-Martin that transmit an office for Gatien, have survived from before the fourteenth century. 32 Christus Dominus ipsos divinae lucis radios, missis praedicatoribus, Gentium populis sedentibus in tenebris errorum, toto orbe diffudit. Et quidem primum per apostolos, quos ad hoc divina sapientia de numero universitatis hominum praelegit. Deinde, per secundos praedicatores, tanquam nova semina cordibus eorum initia sanctae praedicationis impressit; De quorum numero B. Gatianus a Praesule Sedis Apostolicae veritatis praedicator electus, et Turonorum Specialis Pontifex Ordinatus. (Maan, Sancta et Metropolitana Ecclesia Turonensis, preface, Section IV. See also C. Chevalier, Les Origines de l’église de Tours, 341). 33 The office that Maan observed is probably identical to the one found in a breviary from Loches printed in 1536, in which the first lesson opens with exactly the same sentence that concludes the paragraph quoted by Maan. See BnF Rés. B-27700, fo. xxii/v (“Beatissimus Gatianus a presule sedis apostolice veritatis praedicator electus, et Turonorum specialis pontifex ordinatus”).

The importance of being first

well aware, moreover, of a more wide-ranging issue that stood behind this clear attempt to transform Gatien into a first-century figure.34 Although it was the rivalry between Saint-Martin and Marmoutier, on the one hand, and the Cathedral on the other, that encouraged the liturgical forgery surrounding the episcopacy of Gatien, we should indeed not lose sight of a more general trend in the Middle Ages, whereby churches claimed to have origins more dignified and ancient than they actually did. The thirteenth century in France has been hailed as the century of evangelism, in which Christian believers were fascinated by everything having to do with the Gospels.35 As Maan himself recorded, fabrications similar to that seen in relation to St. Gatien also took place in the abbey of Saint-Martial in Limoges and in the royal abbey of Saint-Denis, to name just two wellknown examples. The legend championing the apostolic case for Martial – ostensibly written by Aurelian, Martial’s disciple, and known as the Vita prolixior – began to gain currency in the late 1020s, when it was matched by an apostolic liturgy. The principal source for the latter was composed by Adémar de Chabannes, who revised the Vita prolixior to reflect a shift from an episcopal liturgy to an apostolic one. A major figure in the polemic surrounding the apostolicity of Martial, Adémar composed, adapted, and compiled numerous Mass and office chants honoring the “new” Apostle. Like Liquet, dilectissimi in Tours, the new Limousin liturgy claimed, inter alia, that Martial was sent by the Lord to evangelize Gaul, that he was a companion of Jesus, that he attended the Last Supper, and that he witnessed Pentecost.36 One of the most spectacular fabrications of a saint’s life, moreover, occurred in the royal abbey of Saint-Denis. When Louis the Pious asked Hilduin, the influential abbot of the abbey (r. 814–841), to write a history of the life of St. Denis, the abbot wrote an account that conflated two additional individuals into what became the accepted figure of the abbey’s patron. One of them was Pseudo-Dionysius, a fifth- or sixth-century philosopher, the other Dionysius the Areopagite, a Greek philosopher and a disciple of St. Paul.37 Like Gatien and Martial, Denis too belonged to the Maan, Sancta et Metropolitana Ecclesia Turonensis, preface, Sections VI–VIII. Oury, “Recherches sur le culte,” 20. 36 See Grier, The Musical World of a Medieval Monk, 25–34 and 296–326. The vast literature about Adémar and St. Martial, to which Grier is a major contributor, can be found in the bibliography section therein. The debate on Martial’s apostolicity that apparently took place in Limoges during a church council in 1031 pitted Martial againt St. Fronto, for whom similar apostolic claims were made in the city of Périgueux. See Kahn Herrick, “Studying Apostolic Hagiography.” 37 Robertson, The Service-Books, 38–39. It appears that these two figures were themselves conflated into a single murky entity: Pseudo-Dionysius “evidently tried to enhance the popularity of his works by adopting the name of Dionysius the Areopagite” (ibid.). On the 34 35

187

188

Sharing the aura of St. Martin in Tours

group of seven bishops who, according to Gregory of Tours, “were sent to preach among the Gauls” in the third century. By placing Denis in the first century, Hilduin undoubtedly sought to augment the stature not only of Denis, but also of the abbey over which he presided and the royal veneration of its titular saint.38 Understandably, the canons at Tours sought to join the ranks of other churches in France that claimed origins going back to the first century, such as Saint-Austremoine in Clermont-Ferrand, the Cathedral of Saint-Julian in Le Mans, Saint-Sernin in Toulouse, and Saint-Front in Périgueux, to name just a few. Moreover, as Dom Oury suggests, “everywhere but in Tours, the mission of the seven bishops [to Gaul] that included St. Gatien was dated to the first century.”39 The eventual state of affairs was inevitable: if one of the seven bishops – St. Denis, for instance – was believed to hail from the first century, then it stood to reason that the other six bishops belonged to the same era. By the late thirteenth century, the Cathedral of Tours began to align itself with the chronology of Gatien’s life that had gained currency outside Tours. But in doing so, the Cathedral did not merely succumb to pressure to tell the story “rightly.” Rather, its campaign of self-aggrandizement served a more pressing goal on the local level – that of challenging more effectively the prestige of Saint-Martin and its titular saint. The church’s increasing independence from the archbishop’s authority had badly undermined not only the Cathedral’s influence over a nearby church, but also its ties to the cult of St. Martin. One of the only historical narratives produced in Saint-Martin in the thirteenth century, the so-called Chronicon Turonense Magnum, was copied c. 1227 by a canon from Saint-Martin of Tours. Tellingly, the chronicle opens with a statement that touches directly on the issue at hand: In the eleventh year of the rule of Domitian, Pope Cletus was martyred, and was succeeded by Pope Clement who sent many doctors of the church to various regions, namely: Fotinus to Lyon, Paul to Narbonne, Denis the Areopagite to Paris, and Gatien to Tours. But, as Gregory of Tours reports, St. Gatien was sent to Tours in the first year of the rule of Emperor Decius.40 liturgical expressions of this conflation and the controversy to which it gave rise see Choate, “The Liturgical Faces of Saint Denis,” 185–219. 38 Gregory of Tours, Libri historiarum X, I.30. On the mission of these seven bishops and on the validity of Gregory’s account thereof, as well as on differing medieval accounts of these missions, see the detailed discussion in C. Chevalier, Les Origines de l’église de Tours, 153–202. 39 Oury, “Recherches sur le culte,” 10. 40 “Anno Domitiani XIo, Cletus papa martyrizatus Sanctum Clementum habuit successorem, qui plures doctores ecclesiae in diversas partes misit, scilicet, Fotinum Lugduno, Paulum Narbonae, Dyonisium Areopagitam Parisius, et Gatianum Turonis; sed, sicut refert Gregorius

The importance of being first

In the opening sentence of the chronicle, probably copied from a “General History” he obtained from the church’s library, the chronicler mentions Denis and Gatien as saints whose mission to Gaul reportedly took place in the first century (Pope Cletus died in 88). Since the canon from Saint-Martin was not in a position either to confirm or refute the information about the mission of Denis, he did not contest it. (He could not have been aware of the tripartite conflation that took place in the ninth century.) He was aware, however, that there existed two conflicting views concerning the life of St. Gatien, and he offered his readers both accounts.41 The subject of Gatien’s origins, therefore, was probably being debated several decades before the copying of BmT 212. Indeed, one feels a sense of urgency from the manner in which this issue is presented in the Chronicon Magnum Turonense: it is literally the first subject matter that the author addresses. If our chronicler was familiar with the claim that Gatien was a first-century saint, it is because the office in BmT 212 might in fact have its roots in an even earlier fabrication of Gatien’s Vita, perhaps written by Philippe Berruyer (1190–1262). A native of Tours, he served as archdeacon in the Cathedral before he became bishop of Orléans and later archbishop of Bourges. In his 1654 Histoire des illustrissimes archevêsques de Tours, Ollivier Cherreau published a legend that various authors have since attributed with varying degrees of conviction either to Berruyer or to another, anonymous thirteenth-century author. Regardless of his identity, the creator of this legend, who must have composed one of the first full-scale vitae of St. Gatien, attempted to transform Gatien into a genuine vere israelita. He claimed that the first bishop of Tours was born in Canaan, that his original name was Magdaliel, that he knew Jesus personally, and that he was sent to Gaul by St. Peter. Moreover, Gatien reportedly converted pagans living in vast areas in Asia Minor, Greece, and France.42 Whether or not the legend Turonensis, Sanctus Gatianus missus est Turonis anno Decii imperatoris primo” (Chronicon Turonense Magnum, 64). The reliability of Gregory of Tours’s testimony concerning St. Gatien has been questioned by many since the thirteenth century, most vehemently in Jéhan, SaintGatien, 728–29. 41 It is telling that the issue of Gatien’s life is brought up at the outset of this lengthy chronicle, as if the author were impatient to get the truth out. Why did the chronicler present two opposing accounts of Gatien’s life in a single breath, and not simply relate to his readers what he thought to be the truth? According to Chevalier and Salmon, the majority of the Chronicon Turonense Magnum is openly based on a slightly earlier chronicle from Auxerre, which the chronicler uses as a canvas on which he interpolates facts concerning Tours and its environs. See C. Chevalier, Les Origines de l’église de Tours, 334–35 ; and Recueil de chroniques de Touraine, xxi. 42 Cherreau, Histoire des illustrissimes archevêsques de Tours. See also the discussion in Jéhan, Saint-Gatien, 729–30.

189

190

Sharing the aura of St. Martin in Tours

was composed by Berruyer, it certainly served as a historical prelude to the Liquet, dilectissimi legend, copied in BmT 212 several decades later. We may owe Gatien’s new office to an individual coming from the ranks of a confraternity within the Cathedral.43 It was during the reign of the dynamic Juhel de Mathefelon, archbishop of Tours between 1227 and 1245, that the ambitious construction project of a new Cathedral (the fourth on the site) was undertaken. The edifice, which was finished only in 1546 with the completion of the south tower, was built over the ruins of the previous structure, destroyed by fire in 1168. In order to finance the expensive building, Mathefelon was relentless in his efforts to secure capital from outside Tours. He sent a letter to the archbishop of Rouen imploring him to collect funds from churches in his diocese, and may have also approached Louis IX, who donated a stone quarry and two acres of forest for the benefit of the Cathedral in the early 1240s.44 In that same decade, the choir was already completed, just around the time that construction of the Sainte-Chapelle in Paris was begun. Mathefelon was equally influential as a reformer of liturgy, and his energetic tenure reportedly culminated in the copying of a new codex (probably an ordinal or some consuetudines) in which the new customs he instituted were codified.45 His impact in this domain must have been considerable, for future generations of archbishops consecrated in the Cathedral were sworn to “maintain the rights and customs of this holy church of Tours and the constitution” established by Mathefelon.46 Significantly, Mathefelon took great interest in promoting the cult of St. Gatien, which had been rather dormant until he took office, as we have seen above. In 1243 he increased the solemnity of Gatien’s May 2 feast (his Translatio), and he assured an ample attendance at the ceremonies by distributing contributions that were dispersed among the participants.47 Since the saint’s chief celebration of December 18 fell during the very busy liturgical season of Advent, and his octave on Christmas Day itself, Mathefelon ordained that Gatien be commemorated on each and every day of the C. Chevalier, Les Origines de l’église de Tours, 512–13. There existed a confraternity dedicated to St. Maurice from as early as the eleventh century. Except for a list of some 160 members and their professions, copied around 1050 and inserted into BnF lat. 9430 (a tenth-century sacramentary from Tours) on fos. 282v–283, nothing is known about the activities of this confraternity or of its fate after the likely rededication of the Cathedral to St. Gatien. On the composition of the Saint-Maurice confraternity, see Meersseman and Pacini, Ordo fraternitatis, Vol. I, 100–08. 44 Boissonnot, Les Verrières, 5–6; and C. Chevalier, Histoire et description, 9–10. 45 Maan, Histoire de l’église de Tours, 320. 46 This oath is published in Archives Départementales d’Indre-et-Loire, Série G. 1, pp. 461–62. The original documents were apparently destroyed during the French Revolution. 47 Maan, Histoire de l’église de Tours, 321; and C. Chevalier, Les Origines de l’église de Tours, 510. 43

The importance of being first

octave, save the octave day itself (Christmas) “in a manner akin to the most solemn feasts,” and that in the course of the feast day, the Credo be intoned “because he [Gatien] himself implanted faith in the diocese of Tours.”48 Given his personal involvement in the construction of the new Cathedral and his devotion to and advocacy of the cult of St. Gatien, it is certainly reasonable that he or one of his successors should have played a role in “rededicating” the church to Gatien. It is possible, moreover, that a new confraternity dedicated to St. Gatien might have owed its existence to him, as many confraternities came into being in conjunction with the construction of new churches or the maintenance of existing shrines.49 If so, this would explain the sudden elevation in rank of a saint who, in spite of his symbolic significance as the first bishop of Tours, had hitherto attracted little attention even in his own city. The rivalry with Saint-Martin and its encroachment on the cult of St. Maurice seems to have left the Cathedral without a unique cult of its own and no significant claim on St. Martin’s either, so Mathefelon may have decided to address the Cathedral’s need to cast itself afresh. Certainly his earnest leadership of the construction project suggests a program of the sort. Although he died in 1245, some four decades before the copying of BmT 212, the office and the legenda on which it was based might have been in the making during his lifetime, only to be neatly copied sometime in the 1280s or 1290s.50 In the face of increasing defiance and of mounting infringement on its episcopal supremacy and its patron saint, the Cathedral was under growing pressure to uphold its status, and it did so by adopting a new patron saint, of whom the collegiate church of Saint-Martin could claim no part. The one place in which the Cathedral could perhaps successfully contend with Saint-Martin was in the realm of local bishops. Exactly because St. Maurice, the patron saint of the Cathedral since the sixth century, never played a direct role in the city’s history, he was a symbol that could be appropriated by “Anno Domini MCCXLIII, in crastino B. Gatiani. Statutum est, quod festum B. Gatiani, propter Adventum et Domini Nativitatem, suas non potest habere octabas, cotidie usque ad vigiliam Natalis fiat de ipso memoria in matutinis et vesperis et in missa; item quod die festo ipsius, quia ipse fidem plantavit in diocese Turon. et est ipse apostolus Turon., in missa cantetur Credo in unum Deum.” The excerpt is taken from the registers of the Cathedral chapter, generally known as Statuta et Juramenta (BmT 1273), which contained entries from the thirteenth to the seventeenth century. The registers are no longer extant, as the manuscript was destroyed during the bombardment of Tours in World War II. Quoted in C. Chevalier, Les Origines de l’église de Tours, 510 n. 1. 49 See the discussion in Vincent, Les Confréries médiévales, 33–34. 50 Interestingly, no legendary windows were dedicated to St. Gatien when the stained-glass panels of the choir were completed in 1267. The Cathedral does feature, however, almond-shaped medallions depicting scenes of the martyrdom of St. Maurice and the Theban Legion. They are discussed in Papanicolaou, “Stained Glass Windows,” 38–44. 48

191

192

Sharing the aura of St. Martin in Tours

Saint-Martin, if only by forgery. In St. Gatien, the Cathedral found a fitting figure whose greatest attribute was that he was incontestably the first bishop of Tours, hence directly tied to the Cathedral, to the city as a whole, and most importantly, with symbolic priority over Martin’s episcopate.

The new office of St. Gatien The new office composed in honor of St. Gatien – the vita Liquet, dilectissimi and the amalgam of chants throughout which its themes recur – stands in sharp contrast to the unremarkable account of the life of St. Gatien known before the thirteenth century; it offers a livelier and more exciting vision of the saint, one that befitted a new patron of the Cathedral. The opening nocturn in particular overflows with lofty and unsubstantiated assertions, claiming that Gatien was one of the seventy-two disciples of Christ, that he was allegedly sent to evangelize Gaul by the “prince of all Apostles” (St. Peter), and that he participated in the Last Supper as well as in the ceremony of the Washing of the Feet. He reportedly witnessed the Ascension of Christ into heaven, saw the Holy Spirit descend on the Apostles during Pentecost, was present at the two miracles in which Jesus multiplied the bread and fish in Galilee, and even collected the food remaining after the crowds had eaten. Gatien emerges as a vital, relentless missionary, a glorious thaumaturge who restores sight to the blind and hearing to the deaf, and who chases away demons from possessed bodies. Furthermore, the office calls attention to the saint’s double vocation as Apostle and bishop. The first of these is evoked immediately in the first antiphon of the first nocturn (Beatus vir apostolicus Gatianus). The second is expressed with virtually every possible synonym using various forms of the epithets presul, pontifex, episcopus, and antistes throughout the office. As can be seen in Figure  4.1, moreover, the opening folio of the manuscript office also draws attention to Bishop Gatien. The letter B of the opening antiphon Beate Christi confessor, the only historiated initial in the entire manuscript and one of the only ones to depict Gatien anywhere, shows him adorned with episcopal vestments, namely the mitre and the crosier. The office essentially revolves around three main themes, all of which can be construed as responses to the challenges posed by St. Martin, or rather, by the manipulation of his cult in Tours. Endowing the saint with an aura of grandeur and magnificence, the office transforms Gatien into the fons et origo of everything Christian in Tours as well as in Gaul. Portrayed as the fount of episcopal authority in Tours (city and archdiocese), Gatien is

The new office of St. Gatien

Figure 4.1  St. Gatien’s new office, First Vespers. BmT 212, fo. 2.

193

194

Sharing the aura of St. Martin in Tours

credited with ordaining priests and bishops everywhere (“ubique”), thus laying the foundation for Christianity in a vast region.51 As the third responsory, Beatus antistes, conveys to worshipers (see pp. 197–98 for a translation of the entire text), it was Gatien, “the first Apostle to the people of Tours,” who “delivered the grains of Christian faith to Tours.” The city’s conversion to Christianity, moreover, gives rise to a second central theme in this office, the prosperity of Tours owing to its strong ties with Gatien. From these various chants and lessons there emerges a unified Tours in which no differentiation is made, even implicitly, between the Cathedral and SaintMartin. In this idyllic place full of riches, rivers abound with fish, game is available to all in plenty, and fruit-bearing trees grow abundantly (BmT 212, fos. 7v–8). The office, moreover, is saturated with direct and indirect references to the city of Tours (employing a variety of words to refer to it, such as “urbem Turonicam,” “metropolis,” and “civitas”), and even more so with allusions to the collectivity of people who inhabit it, the citizens of Tours, expressed by such terms as “populum Turonorum,” “civibus Turonicis,” and “publice Turonicis.” The relationship between the inhabitants and St. Gatien is elucidated in the seventh responsory of this office, which points to Gatien as their daily source of comfort: “Resp. The blessed Gatien, not wishing to deprive the city of Tours of his presence, enriched the treasury with his precious body, which does not cease to comfort with splendid powers and remarkable miracles. Ver. Here, with the radiance of these miracles, he illuminates the church and delights the city every day.”52 The people of Tours were exceptionally well informed about the supremacy of Martin’s relics and the role they played in their city’s history, as the feasts of Subvention and Reversion reminded them on an annual basis. And yet, a new liturgy now insisted on a similar recognition of the power of the relics of St. Gatien as relentless providers of miracles, and the source of their well-being. A saint they had no particular reason to hold in high esteem until the end of the thirteenth century, Gatien was now christened as the new patron of their city (“patronus Turonorum”), as the third lesson proclaimed him to be. A third prominent theme of the new office is Gatien’s distinction as the first bishop of Tours, securing him a place of honor in the chronology of Tours’s bishops in conjunction with the effort to associate his name indivisibly with As the conclusion of the fourth lesson tells, he reportedly installed a disciple of his in various places: “Suos vero discipulos per provinciam destinabat per quorum doctrinam et predicacionem tota occidentalis plaga sacre fidei rivulos paulatim accipiebat. Episcopus et presbyteros ordinabat et ubique necessariam ordinationem relinquebat.” BmT 212, fo. 13. 52 “Beatus Gatianus, urbem Turonicam nolens sua praesentia viduare, pretioso sui corporis locupletavit thesauro, quam praeclaris virtutibus et miraculis ingentibus non desinit consolari. Ver. Hic signorum radiis illuminat Ecclesiam et quotidie laetificat civitatem.” BmT 212, fo. 20r–v. 51

The new office of St. Gatien

the city’s history and with the welfare of the people of Tours. When medieval writers evoked Martin, they erroneously and almost invariably referred to him as the first bishop of Tours, oblivious to the fact that it was Gatien who deserved this distinction.53 Lesson 8, for instance, thus enumerates the bishops of Tours: “after the death of St. Lidorius [who followed Gatien], the blessed Martin was ordained as the third bishop.”54 This episcopal genealogy, however, falls short of listing any significant portion of the complete line, and the sheer concision of this lineage leaves the impression that its only purpose is to establish Gatien’s priority over Martin; simply put, Gatien was the first bishop of Tours, Martin was third.55 The campaign to elevate Gatien to the rank of an Apostle was accompanied by the composition of entirely new Matins chants, as opposed to recourse to contrafacta (compare the near-contemporaneous office of Corpus Christi) or to various Commons. This shows not only that music was considered to be a crucial instrument of propagation, but also that the passion fueling this campaign was ardent.56 It is certainly possible that Archbishop Mathefelon, the promoter of Gatien’s cult in the Cathedral, stipulated the erection of a new musical monument in his honor, just as he was rebuilding the Cathedral anew. The melodies of the responsory Beatus antistes and its verse (Example 4.1) are fairly typical of the bulk of Matins

Thus, for example, in a letter seeking to promote the status of Martial as an Apostle to Gaul, Adémar de Chabannes lists Martin as the first bishop of Tours. See “Ademari, Epistola de apostolatu S. Martialis,” in PL 141:99. 54 “Post obitum vero sancti Lidorii, beatus Martinus tertius ordinatur episcopus.” BmT 212, fo. 21. 55 The formulation “Gatien was the first, Martin was the third” is also found in the offices for St. Gatien’s two additional feasts. The lesson opening the octave of his Translation (May 9) begins with the following statement: “After the blessed Martin, the third bishop of Tours, the holy body of the blessed Gatien, the first bishop of Tours …” (“Postquam beatissimus Martinus, tertius Turonensis archiepiscopus, sanctum corpus beatissimi Gatiani, primi Turonensis archiepiscopi …”); BmT 156, fo. 61. 56 As expected, the celebration of First Vespers opens with a sequence of psalm antiphons drawn from the Common of One Confessor (Figure 4.1 reproduces the first two antiphons). Aside from their internal order, they are identical to those sung during the various Martinian feasts. The Vespers hymn Iste confessor, moreover, also drawn from the Common of One Confessor, may in fact have originally been composed in honor of Martin. Although nothing in the text is specific to him, it “may well have sprung from the characterization of Martin provided in the Vita” by Sulpicius Severus (Keane, “Martin Hymns of the Middle Ages,” 94). Other scholars, cited by Keane, assert confidently that Iste confessor was originally addressed to Martin, to which we can add the concurring view of Wagner, “Wie man im Mittelalter eine neue Choralmesse komponierte,” 134. It is certainly possible, moreover, that psalm antiphons sung on First Vespers were initially composed specifically for Martin as well, although this must remain a speculation for now. The canons of the Cathedral were surely unaware of this probability, but it is tempting to see this as an example of the great shadow of Martin’s liturgy – its inevitable presence even in an office composed with the intention of distinguishing itself from that of Martin. 53

195

196

Sharing the aura of St. Martin in Tours Example 4.1  The responsory Beatus antistes. BmT 212, fos. 10v–11.

responsories in this office. They are written in mode 6 transposed a fifth higher (the first out of five such tritus-mode responsories, as unusual a proportion as it is in a single office); they tend to have a rather excessive range (a tenth for the responsory, a seventh for the verse) and long melismas (see, for instance, the seventeen-note flourish over “christi-A-ne” in the responsory); their contour lines are very angular. Finally, every single one of the responsories – not just the last responsory of the nocturn – concludes with the Lesser Doxology.57 As in other responsories in this office, the reference to Gatien in the responsory Beatus antistes receives a particularly prominent musical setting. The sweeping melody that sets the word “Gatianus” rises an octave to the highest note in the entire responsory (high C), which moreover appears only in this instance. Like most other responsory verses in Gatien’s new office, moreover, “Sicut sol” is not sung to one of the standard tones for its mode, but composed instead of a completely free melody, and showing virtually no trace of recitation. The melodies of the responsory As far as I know, no other office from any church in Tours transmits this practice. Can it be that the singing of the Lesser Doxology after each responsory was meant to confer an aura of respectability on this new office? As Grier notes in relation to BnF lat. 1085 – an eleventhcentury codex presenting “a complete set of Offices for the liturgical year” at Saint-Martial in Limoges – this practice was understood by Carolingian liturgists such as Amalarius of Metz and others “to be Roman, as opposed to Frankish” in origin. Understood this way, the composer of Gatien’s new office could plausibly have used this as a marker of antiquity. See Grier, “The Divine Office at Saint-Martial,” 182.

57

The new office of St. Gatien

Beatus antistes, and indeed of all responsories in this office, seem to be new compositions of the thirteenth century, their extravagance surely providing an aural indicator of the freshness of the celebration, and an opportunity to showcase the competence of skilled singers. If the music that glitters through the lessons of Matins is newfangled, the qualities of Gatien that come to light during this canonical hour are not, and this has to do with the hagiographic accounts that inspired it. Clearly, one of the primary models for the texts in Gatien’s new liturgy is the office of St. Julian, the first bishop of Le Mans, for whom similar claims of apostolicity were made in the Middle Ages. As we can see below, the text of the responsory Beatus antistes is an adaption of the responsory Splendens Lucifer from Julian’s January 27 office.58 The similarity between the two responsories is striking. Both saints are likened to the morning star banishing the darkness and both are hailed as instillers of faith among their peoples. Given that both Julian and Gatien were the first bishops of their cities, it is hardly surprising to find such claims in their respective offices. Yet, the choice of words, the peculiar figures of speech, and their order leave no doubt that Gatien’s office was modeled in part on Julian’s. Nowhere is this reliance more conspicuous than in the fifth responsory of Gatien’s office, Sanctus dei Gatianus, whose text is practically identical to that of the responsory Beatissimus Julianus, concluding Julian’s office in both monastic and secular versions.59 The responsory Beatus antistes compared to the responsory Splendens Lucifer: From St. Gatien’s office

From St. Julian’s office

Resp. Beatus antistes et primus Turonorum apostolus, resplendens ut Lucifer tenebris infidelitatis expulsis gloriosus enituit Gatianus et micia fidei christiane Turonicis nunciavit. Ver. Sicut sol inter nebulas, sic in templo dei virtutibus elucescit.

Resp. Splendens Lucifer velut solem post anxie noctis nunciat umbram, sic Julianus post errorum tenebras exortum solem iusticie Cenomanensibus nunciavit. Ver. Sedentibus in tenebris et umbra mortis, Julianus praeco veritatis.

The responsory is found in Vendôme, Bm 17E, fo. 347r–v. Existing in both monastic and secular versions, Splendens Lucifer is the tenth responsory in the former cursus and the penultimate in the latter. I am grateful to Dom Daniel Saulnier for the discussion we had on this responsory. 59 Gatien’s responsory is found in BmT 212, fo. 15r–v, and Julian’s in Vendôme, Bm 17E, fo. 347v. Further affinities between the two offices also exist, such as the likening of both saints to “a glorious prelate and a harbinger of supreme truth” (“O gloriosum presulem, o summe veritatis preconem”), the shared opening phrase of the responsories, “O gloriosum presulem” (the second responsory in Gatien’s office), and the conclusion of the second nocturn in both monastic and secular versions of Julian’s office. 58

197

198

Sharing the aura of St. Martin in Tours

From St. Gatien’s office

From St. Julian’s office

Resp. Blessed bishop and first Apostle of the people of Tours, radiating like the morning star, and having banished the darkness of faithlessness, the glorious Gatien shone and delivered the seeds of Christian faith to Tours. Ver. Like the sun among the clouds, so he shines forth among the virtues in the temple of God.

Resp. As the morning star brightening the shadow announces the sun after the darkness of the night, so, after the darkness of errors, Julian announced to the people of Le Mans the risen sun of Justice. Ver. Julian is the harbinger of the truth for those who are seated in darkness and the shadow of death.

The responsory Sanctus dei Gatianus compared to the responsory Beatissimus Julianus: From St. Gatien’s office

From St. Julian’s office

Resp. Sanctus dei Gatianus Christi confessione fundatus, hostis antiquis superbia triumphata, felix et victor regna subiit sempiterna. Ver. Immortalis palme adeptus bravium regnat cum Christo in eternum. Resp. St. Gatien, having established the faith in Christ, after having triumphed over the pride of the ancient enemy, entered happy and victorious into the eternal kingdom. Ver. Having attained the reward of the immortal palm, he reigns together with Christ in eternity.

Resp. Beatissimus Julianus Cenomanensium pontifex primus, virtutum fulgore clarissimus, antiqui hostis superbia triumphata, hodie felix et victor regna subiit sempiterna. Ver. Immortalis palme adeptus bravium, regnat cum Christo in eternum. Resp. The most blessed Julian, first bishop of the people of Le Mans, most illustrious for the splendor of his virtues, after having triumphed over the pride of the ancient enemy, entered today, happy and victorious, into the eternal kingdom. Ver. Having attained the reward of the immortal palm, he reigns together with Christ in eternity.

At the moment when the urgency to counterbalance the authority of St. Martin in the Cathedral was growing, and with it the impulse to diffuse Gatien’s purported apostolic pedigree, the canons sought out the example of another saint for whom similar apostolic claims had already been made by the eleventh century. Although Julian’s feast was celebrated in numerous churches on January 27, his proper liturgy, the one which inspired the composition of Gatien’s new office, seems to have been little known outside Le Mans. The office, composed by the monk Létald of Micy at the beginning of the eleventh century, survives in its entirety (text and music) in only three manuscripts and one printed edition, with a fourth manuscript from

The new office of St. Gatien

Marmoutier transmitting the lesson texts for the opening two nocturns.60 Strangely, although Gatien’s office was clearly inspired by the office composed by Létald, Julian’s office never seems to have been adopted by the Cathedral, whose fourteenth- and fifteenth-century breviaries transmit an office entirely drawn from the Common of one Confessor.61 The composition of Gatien’s new office did coincide, however, with an awakening of the cult of Julian in the Cathedral, as may be gleaned from an addition made to the earliest extant missal from the Cathedral (BnF lat. 10504), copied in the thirteenth century. During the original phase of its copying, the scribes of the missal did not envisage a mass or even a simple commemoration for St. Julian. They proceed directly from the Conversion of Paul (January 25) to Agnes Second (January 28). Just to the left-hand side of the rubric announcing Agnes Second on folio 121v, however, a later hand (possibly still in the thirteenth century) added a stipulation that a Collect for St. Julian be intoned, indicating at minimum an increased interest in Julian’s liturgy.62 We may never know why the Cathedral did not espouse the apostolic liturgy of Julian – in fact, practically no one other church did – but it clearly found in Létald’s work a source of guidance as it sought to champion the apostolicity of his alleged contemporary as evangelist, St. Gatien. Although it was the liturgy of St. Julian that provided the Cathedral with a highly revered hagiographic model, it was the gigantic shadow cast by the aura of Martin in medieval Tours that stood in the background of the novel claims made in the apostolic office of Gatien. If the canons of Saint-Martin repeatedly encroached on symbols belonging to the Cathedral and made Other aspects related to this commission, as well as a discussion of the sources containing Julian’s proper office, are found in the only study to date devoted entirely to Julian’s office: Hiley, “The Historia of St. Julian of Le Mans,” 444–47. Hiley, however, does not treat the breviary from Marmoutier, whose liturgy, as we we have seen in previous chapters, has much in common with Vendôme, Bm 17E. So it should come as no surprise that Julian’s office is also found in an eleventh-century breviary from Marmoutier (Rouen, Bm 243, fos. 170v–171v). I should like to thank Dom Jacques-Marie Guilmard of Solesmes for sharing with me a copy of Julian’s office from the 1529 edition of the Antiphonarium Cenomanense of 1529 (Solesmes, Bibliothèque de l’Abbaye Saint-Pierre LLa.7–7-2, fos. 222–29). It seems that Létald’s position on the apostolicity of Julian was too equivocal for the taste of Le Mans Cathedral, and therefore those portions of his new liturgy that contained such ambivalent statements (he tended to believe that Julian’s mission to Gaul took place in the fourth century) were excised by the chapter of the Cathedral. See Persigan, Recherches sur l’apostolat de saint Julien, 94–98; and Piolin, Histoire de l’église du Mans, Vol. III, 78. 61 It is impossible to know whether the Cathedral had in its possession a copy of Julian’s Vita. As the comparison between the texts of the four responsories above demonstrates, however, the Cathedral must have had knowledge of the actual office. 62 It is impossible to know whether Julian appeared in the calendar of this missal, for the folio containing the month of January is missing. He does appear in the earliest extant calendar from the Cathedral that has survived in full: BmT 144, copied in 1343. 60

199

200

Sharing the aura of St. Martin in Tours

Martin their personal saint, the Cathedral was now reversing those claims by claiming that Martin was the one truly indebted to Gatien. This saint’s new office realizes this in several ways, first of all by showing obliquely that Gatien’s life could serve as a model for Martin’s, attributing to him many of the activities for which Martin would later become renowned. Reportedly living some three centuries before Martin, Gatien fought paganism, razed shrines, and converted scores of people to Christianity, while at the same time living as a poor and humble person.63 Although there is little remarkable about such a narrative, since we would expect to find such activities in the hagiography of an early Christian saint, nothing like this had been claimed for Gatien before the thirteenth century, whereas the example set by Martin was well known and widely circulated thanks to Sulpicius Severus and Gregory of Tours. Most revealing, however, are the direct references to Martin in the office of a saint who ostensibly died some centuries earlier, betraying the true motivation behind its composition. We have already seen how the office offers a concise and gratuitous genealogy of the bishops of the city of Tours, starting with Gatien and ending with Martin. Further amplifying the import of this episcopal lineage, the final nocturn in particular is rich with allusions to Martin, who is each time mentioned not as a patron saint of the city (a role reserved for Gatien), but in a subordinate position with respect to Gatien. Indeed, in the new office it is Martin’s duty to protect the cult of St. Gatien.64 Martin is reported to have regularly venerated Gatien, offering him extended prayers at this tomb, and the verse of the final responsory O caritas informs us that “While Martin in his heart solicitously sought the favors of Gatien from the saint himself, Gatien from out of the tomb required marvelous undertakings” from Martin, suggesting perhaps that Martin’s achievements were the result of Gatien’s posthumous leadership.65 This revised episcopal hierarchy, attributing only an auxiliary role to Martin, may well have received a pictorial counterpart at the very outset of the manuscript that transmits office. To the left of the decorated Other passages in Gatien’s office, especially the sixth lesson and the seventh responsory, offer further evidence that the Vita of St. Martin inspired in part that of Gatien, and this is particularly evident in the depiction of the moments preceding the saints’ deaths. For other hagiographic influences on Gatien’s Vita see C. Chevalier, Les Origines de l’église de Tours, 515–24. 64 “Hic itaque Gatianus, procurante Martino, sepultus in urbe, desideratam habuit sepulturam” (“And so this Gatien, buried in the city, had a longed-for burial arranged by Martin”); BmT 212, fo. 21v (lesson 8). 65 “Gatiani dum beneficia corde petit Martinus sedulo ab eodem, mira elementia Gatianus poscit e tumulo.” The text from lesson 8 reads “Quadam vero die cum idem beatus pontifex Martinus ante sepulchrum huius gloriosi presulis Gatiani more suo solito adorationem venisset, post effusas ibidem preces humiles dicto etiam capitello” (BmT 212, fo. 21). 63

The new office of St. Gatien

initial B found on the opening folio of this office (Figure 4.1 above), we can see another bishop bedecked with pontifical vestments. Kneeling in a supplicating position, he surely represents Martin as a devotee of Gatien, in a deferential posture toward his predecessor, rather like the role assigned to him by the text of the office.66 Except in BmT 212, which propagates the new office for Gatien’s December 18 feast, the vita Liquet, dilectissimi seems to have produced few progeny in the Cathedral or elsewhere. In fact, it appears in only two additional extant sources from the Cathedral, and not always in connection with the December 18 celebration: (1) in a late fourteenth-century lectionary that contains, among other things, readings for Gatien’s feasts (BmT 156, fos. 39v–44), and (2) in a winter breviary copied in 1412 (BmT 146, fos. 270v–272v), in which the readings from Gatien’s May 2 office are drawn from Liquet, dilectissimi.67 Not surprisingly, extant manuscripts from Saint-Martin and Marmoutier ignore this office altogether. Instead, the legend Catholica mater, probably composed in or before the late thirteenth century – that is, in close proximity to Liquet, dilectissimi – appears regularly for May 2 in service books from both the Cathedral and Saint-Martin, and outside Tours as well, usually in considerably abbreviated form.68 In all that concerns the mission of Gatien to Gaul, the tone of Catholica mater is significantly more restrained and subtle than Liquet, dilectissimi, although its source in the writings of Gregory of Tours is nonetheless unmistakable. For example, Catholica mater no longer claims that Gatien was among the seventy-two disciples As this supplicating bishop is devoid of any other attributes, a more accurate identification cannot be offered here. Had the artist wished to make an unequivocal reference to Martin, he could have shown him in the famous charity scene in Amiens, for instance. Yet, it seems that this and other possible iconographic depictions of Martin would have detracted from the tête-à-tête with Gatien. The context supplied by the office, however, strongly suggests that it is indeed Martin depicted here. A seventeenth-century history of the archbishops of Tours testifies to the persistence of representing Martin in deference to Gatien. The very first engraving shows Martin visiting Gatien’s tomb. See Cherreau, Histoire des illustrissimes archevêsques des Tours. 67 Compared with BmT 212, the readings in BmT 146 are considerably abbreviated. 68 The earliest extant source to transmit Catholica mater in its entirety is BmT 156, fos. 44v–46v – a manuscript that offers Liquet, dilectissimi in the immediately preceding folios. Earlier and later service books from the Cathedral invariably transmit a much shorter version of this legend. As for Saint-Martin, Catholica mater first appears in BmT 149, copied just before 1323, in much abbreviated form. Lessons 8 and 9 of this legend also appear in the fifteenth-century layer of BmT 1021, fo. 149r–v. Surviving manuscripts from Marmoutier transmit a legend that seems different from both Catholica mater and Liquet, delictissimi (see BmT 153, and Rouen, Bm 243, fos. 292–93). Like Liquet, delictissimi, Catholica mater was far from adopted universally, with only a handful of manuscripts transmitting any proper liturgy for Gatien’s feast (as for instance in Douai, Bm 166, fos. 325–26v, a breviary from the second half of the fifteenth century whose provenance has not been determined). 66

201

202

Sharing the aura of St. Martin in Tours

of Christ; instead, he is described as belonging to a second generation of preachers. There is no further allusion to his presence in key events in the life of Jesus, a theme that was paramount in Liquet, dilectissimi. In other matters, however, both legendae are remarkably similar, namely in establishing Gatien’s status as the first bishop of Tours and in ascribing him the role of church builder (Catholica mater claims that he established eight churches in the pagus of Tours). Interestingly, the differences between the two offices mirror those found in the liturgy of St. Denis, belonging to the same group of evangelizing bishops as Gatien. The two offices of St. Denis contain differing emphases on the saint’s mission: the office offered to Louis the Pious around 835 does not draw on the Areopagite theme as prominently as does the rhymed office composed in the mid eleventh century.69

Epilogue: war and peace The ardent rivalry between the Cathedral and Saint-Martin lasted for centuries, and the feast of St. Gatien was only one of many areas of conflict. The fourteenth century would finally see a change of landscape and a lessening of tensions in Tours. Of course, the principal feast of St. Gatien on December 18 had always been celebrated at Saint-Martin (it already appears in the calendar of BmT Diocèse 1, the early eleventh-century sacramentary), a practice consistent with that church’s veneration of practically all of the city’s saintly bishops. During the first half of the fourteenth century, moreover, the feast was “newly introduced as a duplex,” having previously been classed as a feast of three candles.70 In retrospect, the promotion of Gatien’s feast at Saint-Martin (with Catholica mater) served as a herald of better or at least more cooperative times to come. To adopt the language of Liquet, dilectissimi, it was a Lucifer, a light-bringer. The second half of the fourteenth century heralded the end of the administrative decentralization in Tours, at a time when the intermittent battles of the Hundred Years War reached the environs of the city. The convergence of the disparate hubs of the city, then, came about initially because of an external threat much like the Viking raids of 903. Even before the advancement of the Anglo-Gascon forces from Aquitaine toward the Loire Valley See Robertson, The Service-Books, 227, 230; Goudesenne, “La Propagande aréopagitique,” and Offices historiques, 213–68. 70 We find the class of three candles in the twelfth-century calendar of BmT 193, while the promotion to duplex (“Et nota quod istud festum est duplex de novo introductum”) is found on fo. 411 of the breviary BmT 149. Incidentally, all the responsories for Gatien’s office in BmT 149 are drawn from the Common of One Confessor. 69

Epilogue: war and peace

in the summer of 1356, the inhabitants of Tours had begun the construction of a wall encircling the entire city, bringing an end to the geographic seclusion of Saint-Martin, the Cathedral, and the urban center to which they gave rise, and placing the two communities under a single municipal authority.71 This had far-reaching repercussions for the relationship between the two churches. Possibly for the first time in some generations, they were required to cooperate in matters that concerned the administration of the city. The Assemblée générale, which managed the affairs of the city, was presided over by elected officers (there were two of them beginning in 1390), and included also one or more representatives of the king, a tax collector, and up to forty local notables. Significantly, it also included three canons: one from the Cathedral, one from Saint-Martin, and an additional one representing the archbishop personally. By the beginning of the fifteenth century, moreover, it was the Assemblée that controlled the progress of processions through the city, and once more, Saint-Martin and the Cathedral were linked by the marching of worshipers chanting and carrying candles.72 This transformation proved to be consequential also for the liturgical rapport between the two rival churches, as can be seen in the new miracle accounts that arose after the summer of 1356. Although the people of Tours were spared from a possible siege during the second week of September 1356, there was little they could do to avert one of the most famous battles in the history of the Hundred Years War, which began to unfold near Poitiers on September 19. It was during this battle, in which the French were decisively defeated, that John II was captured, and with him his retinue. But the people of Tours had much to celebrate – their city remained intact. An account of the tumultuous events of the summer of 1356 is transmitted in the office for the octave of Gatien’s Translation (May 2), uniquely found in a lectionary from the Cathedral, which seems to be indicative of a change in the character of the relationship between it and Saint-Martin. According to the office, Edward, the Prince of Wales, who would later be known as the Black Prince (the eldest child of Edward III, king of England), approached Tours accompanied by a great English army, “exploring how he might be able to bring the city under his yoke.”73 For three days, he camped in the nearby town of Montlouis On March 30, 1356, they obtained permission from King John II the Good to demolish several buildings that stood in the way of the new ramparts. Building of the latter, incidentally, had already begun in 1354. See B. Chevalier, Tours, ville royale, 82–86. On the construction of the wall see Giraudet, Histoire de la ville de Tours, 167–71. 72 B. Chevalier, Tours, ville royale, 88–91, 197; and Farmer, Communities of Saint Martin, 302. 73 “[P]er regnum Francie equitavit post magnum patrie circuitum descendit ad partes Turonicas explorari faciens qualiter civitatem sue subiugaret dictionem.” This is from the third lesson of this office as found in BmT 156, fo. 61v. 71

203

204

Sharing the aura of St. Martin in Tours

(“Montem Laudatum,” located twelve kilometers east of Tours), and then ordered his 1,000 armored men and 500 archers to attack Tours. Extreme weather conditions, however, reportedly averted the plans of the Black Prince.74 A sudden tempest, accompanied by strong winds, rain, and fog, apparently obscured daylight to such an extent that his soldiers could not find their way, nor could they mount their horses, a clear sign that the deliverance of Tours was owing to divine intervention. Yet, far from ascribing the victory to St. Gatien alone, as we might expect from a miracle account originating in the Cathedral, the office in fact claims that it was through the intercession of both Martin and Gatien that God spared the city.75 If in the preceding centuries the aura of Martin and Gatien was a tool in the hands of those who strove to draw the boundaries of the religious communities of Tours, the octave of the May 2 feast for Gatien suggested that the two communities may well have been on the verge of a fresh beginning, at least judging from the perspective of the canons of the Cathedral. In the course of the above-mentioned third lesson alone, the names of Martin and Gatien are jointly mentioned no fewer than four times, and unlike their juxtaposition in Liquet, dilectissimi, the lesson underscores a theme of saintly parity and pastoral and civic unity. If this was a conciliatory nod on the part of the Cathedral, there is no evidence that it was ever acknowledged in Saint-Martin. Although Gatien’s translation began to be celebrated there in the early fifteenth century, its octave does not seem to have been observed at all, nor is the miracle account to be found anywhere else but in the Cathedral. This, however, may simply be owing to the fact that of the dozen or so octaves observed in the Sanctorale of Saint-Martin, none were of local saints, with the exception of St. Martin. And yet, even if manuscripts from Tours suggest that the heyday of liturgical manipulation for propaganda purposes was, on the whole, over by the fifteenth century, relationships between the archbishop of Tours and the canons of Saint-Martin were still far from settled. The new administrative reality in the city must have eased some of the tensions between the two institutions, explaining, perhaps, the unusual transfer of the above-mentioned lectionary. And what is more, the ceremonial relationship between the two churches was to a large extent regulated and normalized by the end of the fourteenth century. Nevertheless, there was no end in sight to the petty quarrels between the archbishop and the canons of the collegiate For a more accurate account of what actually happened see Hewitt, The Black Prince’s Expedition, 105–07; and Green, The Battle of Poitiers, 46. The events leading to the battle of Poitiers are famously recounted by the chronicler Jean Froissart in Book I of his Chroniques. 75 BmT 156, fos. 61v–62. 74

Epilogue: war and peace

church of Saint-Martin. In 1431, for instance, the latter physically barred the archbishop from traversing their cloister en route to meet the count of Vendôme, whose house was located near Saint-Martin.76 On January 2, 1429, an important lectionary from Saint-Martin (BmT 1021) was offered to the Cathedral, a gesture that probably would not have occurred less than a century before.77 Partly copied in the thirteenth century, and partly in the fifteenth, it used to be one of the heavily used manuscripts in Saint-Martin, so much that it had to be chained in the choir to prevent abuse and theft. It was one of eight hagiographic manuscripts then found in the library of Saint-Martin, and one of only four devoted almost exclusively to Martinian liturgy. What is more, BmT 1021 even contained a miracle performed by St. Martin that is unknown from any other source, further testifying to the great esteem in which the canons of Saint-Martin must have held this manuscript.78 Nevertheless, this precious lectionary was bequeathed to the Cathedral in the will of Jean Tenegot, a canon of SaintMartin who probably died late in 1428. In this manuscript, the canons of the Cathedral would have read a miracle account that emphasized the miraculous power of singing the praises of saints. As the story goes, a certain cleric from the nearby church of Saint-Pierre-le-Puellier suffered from a painful sore in his foot that prevented him from walking without the assistance of his companion. As he approached Saint-Martin, he heard the canons singing in praise of the great number of miracles performed by Martin. When he heard the hymn Te Deum laudamus, sung by most pleasing voices, he entered the church, where he was immediately healed, without even asking for a miracle.79 Undoubtedly, both the canons of the Cathedral and those of Saint-Martin were fully cognizant of the power of the music accompanying the liturgy to entice worshipers.

Giraudet, Histoire de la ville de Tours, 215. The following information is gleaned from the ex libris found on fo. 2 of BmT 1021. The Latin text is reproduced in Collon, Catalogue général, Vol. II, 744–45. 78 Of the lectionaries devoted solely to Martin, one was copied entirely in the eleventh century (BmT 1018) while another, BmT 1019, is composed of sources copied between the eleventh and fifteenth centuries, as we have seen above. A third lectionary was copied in the first half of the fourteenth century (BmT 1023). The unique miracle account is transcribed in Straeten, Les manuscrits hagiographiques, 139–40. 79 “Cum itaque pro tantis et tam manifestis miraculis clerici signa pulsarent et hymnum Te Deum laudamus iocundis vocibus decantarent, quidam clericus de ecclesia beati Petri puellaris in pede cancri percussus, audita psallentium voce, nisu quo potuit, comitum sustentatus auxilio, miracula qui ibi fiebant visurus, basilicam beati Martini introivit, statimque, quod mirabile dictum, sanitatem quam non petebat eadem hora adipisci promeruit.” BmT 1021, fo. 174v. Transcribed in Straeten, Les manuscrits hagiographiques, 172. 76 77

205

5

206

From pacifist to knight: late medieval appropriations of St. Martin

We have thus far examined the cult of St. Martin mainly from the perspectives offered by his ritual, as it was celebrated in its most important center in Tours, where the canons entrusted with safeguarding his memory were to a large extent keen on stressing that Martin was their saint. They did so not only by preserving a unique profile of the saint’s principal celebration, with its inimitable sequence of responsories, intercalated prosas, and related liturgical practices, but also by manipulating his aura to advance their own interests in their struggle against the authority of the Cathedral. As we have seen in the preceding chapter, partaking in the legacy of St. Martin became a contentious matter for the three ecclesiastical establishments in Tours that claimed direct ties to his cult, with farreaching consequences for the liturgy as well. But the devotion to Martin was influenced not only by events in the city of Tours. After all, this was a saint who enjoyed a universal veneration from early on, and it is to his stature as a national figure that we now turn our attention. As we shall see, his image witnessed a significant transformation in the high Middle Ages, one that inspired numerous artistic expressions for which liturgy was only a tangential point of departure. The Sanctorale of every medieval church included liturgy for a number of warrior saints: soldiers (Michael, and Roman martyrs such as George, Sebastian, and Maurice and his Theban Legion); kings (the crusading St. Louis); and those who in fact refused to fight, like St. Martin. Portrayals of these and other comparable saints abound in the interiors and exteriors of numerous cathedrals and parish churches, in an age – approximately between 1100 and 1500 – in which the ideal of the Christian warrior underwent significant changes. In France, the number of communities – villages, districts, cities – dedicated to St. Martin far surpasses those dedicated to Sts. George, Michael, and Maurice. Martin’s illustrious biographer Sulpicius Severus championed an ideal of sanctity that saw the military vocation as essentially incompatible with a religious one, yet remarkably, it was especially in territories that were repeatedly a theater of war – Normandy, Aquitaine, and the Touraine, for instance – where Martin was most frequently invoked as

Late medieval appropriations of St. Martin

a protective saint.1 Notwithstanding the assertion of Sulpicius Severus that Martin was “non miles, sed monachus,” this deep-rooted image of Martin began to change gradually in the tenth century, when Odo of Cluny posited the saint as a “prototype of the Christian knight.” A century later, during the pontificate of Gregory VII (r. 1073–1085), the concept of miles Christi was expanded to include not only spiritual warriors such as Martin – the definitive miles Christi – but also crusaders and other bellatores, thus paving the way to a reinterpretation of Martin in this new light.2 Expressed in numerous fields (from art to theology) and reflecting the socio-political priorities of the time, St. Martin was assimilated with the chevalier celebrated in the chansons de geste, romances, and epic poems, at a time when chivalry became more formalized and ritualized. Although the most frequent association made in relation to Martin in liturgical poetry (specifically prosas, sequences, and hymns) is his status as a bishop,3 the medieval iconography of the saint centers around an episode of his life that underscores his charity and humility well before he became bishop – in fact, while he was still a catechumen and a soldier. Drawing on the celebrated episode narrated in Sulpicius Severus’s Vita and examined in Chapter 2, the scene portrays Martin at the gate of Amiens, where he meets a naked beggar who later reveals himself in a dream as Christ. On that particularly cold day, Martin felt pity for the beggar, and cut his cloak into two pieces with his sword, clothing the poor man with one portion.4 If medieval manuscripts were to feature a depiction of Martin at all, it was this scene that eclipsed all other episodes from the saint’s life and posthumous miracles, so much so that the beggar became an attribute of Martin.5 It is no surprise, therefore, that the transformation Martin’s image underwent was made manifest first and foremost in renditions of this legendary act of charity. Corvisier, Les Saints militaires, 221–23, 227. For the Latin see Sulpicius Severus, Vie de Saint Martin, Vol. I, 256. The validation of a new pattern of sainthood in the tenth century – that of the holy warrior – took as its point of departure Sulpicius Severus’s St. Martin. The process by which this came to pass is meticulously charted in the following essay, whose insights impact on this and the following pages: Rosenwein, “St Odo’s St. Martin.” The quotation is taken from p. 328. For the gradual merging of the temporal and spiritual idea of war in the eleventh through the thirteenth centuries see Smith, “Saints in Shining Armor,” 576–82. 3 Keane, “Martin Hymns of the Middle Ages,” 194–98. 4 This iconography, as Jacques Fontaine remarks, expresses in a concrete manner Martin’s “love of God to the degree of self-contempt.” See his edition of Sulpicius Severus, Vie de Saint Martin, Vol. II, 475. 5 Bousquet-Labouérie, “Image et rôle du pauvre,” 123. 1 2

207

208

Late medieval appropriations of St. Martin

Figure 5.1  St. Martin and the beggar. Bamberg, Staatsbibliothek, Cod. Lit 1, fo. 170 (Fulda, early eleventh century).

Early depictions of Martin and the beggar are characterized by what Christine Bousquet-Labouérie has described as a “dynamic horizontal relationship.”6 The image in Figure  5.1, taken from one of the earlyeleventh-century Fulda sacramentaries, is a case in point: both men are Ibid., 124.

6

Late medieval appropriations of St. Martin

depicted on the same plane, practically devoid of features that might point to their respective social status. Their physical traits, moreover, are practically identical, and the individual who represents the beggar could certainly have stood for Martin as well. Similar portrayals are found in the two other Fulda sacramentaries copied between the end of the tenth century and the beginning of the eleventh, as well as in the Ivrea sacramentary.7 The popularity of this mode of representation is coupled with a wide geographic diffusion, as we can see in Figure 5.2, a panel from an altar frontal painted on wood from Saint-Martin d’Ix in Catalunya (in Alta Cerdanya, today part of France) dating to the second quarter of twelfth century. Both Martin and the beggar stand next to one another, and the main elements differentiating them are the halo decorating the saint’s head and their respective heights.8 Closer to the hub of Martin’s cult, we find analogous depictions of Martin in the Romanesque capitals in the porch-tower (the so-called Tour de Gauzlin) of the abbey of Saint-Benoît-sur-Loire (late eleventh century), and also in the eleventh-century Martinellus from Saint-Martin of Tours, BmT 1018, fo. 9v.9 Yet, in subsequent depictions, Martin increasingly assumes the trappings of a knight, a transformation that is accompanied by a more conspicuous opposition between his social standing and that of the beggar. From the early twelfth century onward, Martin is primarily shown mounted on a horse, seated on a saddle; he holds a sword in one hand (usually his right), with a scabbard suspended from his sword belt (we have seen an example of this in Figure 2.1). The late-twelfth-century epic Garin le Loherain, for instance, has a group of future knights travel the road to “la capelle del baron Saint-Martin,” whose stained glass portrays the saint as a knight. Although the epic poem is entirely fictional and purportedly takes place in the eighth century during the reign of Pepin the Short, the allusion The Fulda codices are Göttingen, Staats- und Universitätsbibliothek, Cod. Theol. 231; and Udine, Biblioteca Capitolare, Cod. 1. The Ivrea sacramentary is Ivrea, Biblioteca Capitolare, MS 31 LXXXVI, fo. 114v. See Palazzo, Les Sacramentaires de Fulda, 93–95. 8 In addition, the saint is wearing a pair of shoes, and curiously, his sword seems to be made of wood. On the poor man’s shoulders rests what seems to be a yoke, suggesting that he is a slave. The painting is housed in the Museu Nacional d’Art de Catalunya (Barcelona). For other similar depictions of this scene in Catalunya see Moreu-Rey, “Un sant cavaller,” 674. 9 Bousquet-Labouérie, “Image et rôle du pauvre,” 124–25; and Laffineur-Crépin and Lemeunier, “La Représentation du partage,” 149–50. In BmT 1018, Martin is standing next to his horse. Whether as a civilian (as in the above-mentioned examples) or as a soldier, Martin is occasionally portrayed on foot well into the fifteenth century, especially in German-speaking territories. See also Skubiszewski, “Une vita sancti Martini,” 131–32. For other manuscripts transmitting the Amiens scene with Martin on foot and not as a soldier or knight, see Sauvel, “Les Miracles de saint Martin,” 170–72. 7

209

210

Late medieval appropriations of St. Martin

Figure 5.2  The charity of St. Martin. Saint-Martin d’Ix, second quarter of twelfth century (MNAC 15802; altar frontal from Ix, detail).

Late medieval appropriations of St. Martin

to Martin as a baron is suggestive of his new status as a prosperous knight.10 Earlier in the century, moreover, a new, aristocratic lineage was created for Martin by a monk of Marmoutier. According to the Legend of the Seven Sleepers of Marmoutier, “Martin was the firstborn son of the firstborn son of the King of Hungary,” and his female lineage related him “to a Saxon king and a Roman emperor.”11 The depiction in Figure  5.3, from a latethirteenth-century manuscript from Hainaut (the so-called “livre d’images de Madame Marie”) is a characteristic visual expression of this transformation, notwithstanding the admonition of theologians such as Bernard of Clairvaux against knights “clad in such pomp.”12 Martin is girded with a white belt and dressed in a silken garment and a cloak lined with royal ermine tails. He wears a pair of white gloves; his hair is carefully arranged; and parts of his saddle, sword, and scabbard are gilded, as are the spurs affixed to his heels. In sharp contrast to earlier portrayals of this scene, Martin and the beggar can no longer be considered equal and the power relations between them are evident: the beggar, half-naked and clearly emaciated, occupies the right-hand margin of the miniature, whereas Martin and his well-groomed horse take up most of the space, both in its vertical and horizontal dimensions. Moreover, there is no longer an attempt to relate the scene to the ensuing dream in which Christ would reveal himself to have been the beggar, and this thus reduces the episode to a simple act of charity by a wealthy, noble knight toward the weak and the oppressed, fulfilling the chivalric virtue of generosity (prouesse, largesse) along with upholding a Christian tenet (caritas).13 As we have seen in previous chapters, military victories were at times ascribed to Martin or indeed demanded of him.14 Moreover, the example set by Martin was occasionally found to be most suitable for milites, as Jacques Gautier, Chivalry, 124. In a Bible copied in Pamplona, Spain, in 1197, Martin is shown mounted on a horse, holding a sword in his right hand. And yet, he is devoid of any aristocratic attributes, and the beggar is almost of the same height and demeanor. It may thus be considered a transitional depiction. See Amiens, Bm 108, fo. 243v. I thank Jean-François Goudesenne for drawing my attention to this image. 11 Farmer, Communities of Saint Martin, 167. 12 Articulating a new conception of chivalry, St. Bernard made this and a similarly scathing critique in his De laude novae militiae in the second quarter of the thirteenth century. Quoted and discussed in Gies, The Knight in History, 109. 13 As we have seen in Chapter 2, a similar detachment from the historical context is evidenced in that part of the Legenda aurea that concerns Martin. See Reames, “Saint Martin of Tours,” 148–49. 14 Martin never became a military saint, at least not in the Middle Ages. On the transformation of Martin into a military saint during the Franco-Prussian war of 1870–1871 see Brennan, “The Revival.” 10

211

212

Late medieval appropriations of St. Martin

Figure 5.3  St. Martin and the beggar. Paris, BnF nouv. acq. fr. 16251, fo. 89; from the so-called “livre d’images de Madame Marie,” late thirteenth century.

Late medieval appropriations of St. Martin

de Vitry recommended in a sermon written after 1225.15 The portrait of Martin as a temporal miles emerges also through some of the proper chants and readings for Matins on his principal feast. In Reims Cathedral, for instance, one of the opening readings treats Martin’s early history as a pagan soldier, where “he fought under King Constantius, later under Emperor Julian” (“sub rege Constantio, deinde sub Iuliano cesare militavit”).16 This office displays but a scant impression of the central position that the military trope would assume in later centuries, dedicating only a single lectio to Martin’s career as a soldier. By the fourteenth century the military vocation of Martin came to occupy a more prominent position among the readings in the November 11 feast. In a late-thirteenth-century missal and breviary from Châlons-sur-Marne, for example, four out of nine lections relate to his military career.17 It may not be a coincidence that this change in emphasis is witnessed primarily in service books from the environs of Reims, but not in Tours, an issue to which we shall return. Tours, as we have seen, commemorated four Martinian feasts, two of which celebrated military victories that impinged directly on the inhabitants of the city and were not observed outside it. If religious establishments outside Tours sought to transform Martin into a chevalier, then the November 11 office was the locus classicus to do so. In addition, one of the proper Matins antiphons sung in Reims – but not in Tours – offers particularly evocative imagery: “With the sign of the cross, protected by neither shield nor helmet, I shall break through the lines of the enemy in safety” (“Ego signo crucis, non clipeo protectus aut galea hostium cuneos penetrabo securus”).18 With these words Martin articulates the notion of donning spiritual armor, a virtue that was celebrated by earlier medieval exegetes as diametrically opposed to actual warfare. Yet already by the twelfth century the boundaries between the miles temporalis and the miles spiritualis were no longer as unambiguous as they had been for Severus and others. On the contrary, Urban II, Bernard of Clairvaux, and Alan de Lille – to name some prominent authors – encouraged knights to practice both kinds of warfare. It was not simply a matter of clerical approval of medieval knights or the recitation of the benedictio armorum: after all, Bernard of Clairvaux contemplated “the possibility that 17 18 15 16

The sermon by Vitry is discussed in Longère, “L’Enseignement de deux sermons inédits,” 97. BnF lat. 17991, fo. 227 (eleventh-century breviary). Lessons 1–3 and 5. See Paris, Bibliothèque de l’Arsenal, MS 595, fo. 408r–v. BnF lat. 17991, fo. 226v. Contrary to lesson texts, which vary in length and contents from manuscript to manuscript, the transmission of antiphon texts, such as Ego signo crucis, is quite stable, and appears in fourteenth-century breviaries from Châlons-sur-Marne (for example, ibid., fo. 408v).

213

214

Late medieval appropriations of St. Martin

attributes of both groups might be merged in the new warrior-monks of the military orders.”19 The suggestive reference to the triumphal Constantinian signum in the antiphon Ego signo crucis is a characteristic military allusion, not only to Constantine as the Warrior of God, but to countless generations of crusaders as well – by definition Warriors of God – who counted on the protection of this signum against hostium cuneos. By contrast to Sts. Michael and George, who are frequently depicted in partial- or full-plate armor, Martin was rarely portrayed in the context of warfare, and never jousting or participating in tournaments in quest of military glory.20 Even the occasional portrayal of Martin on the actual battlefield shows the saint’s disdain of war. The painter Simone Martini (1280/85–1344) devoted to Martin a series of frescoes in the church dedicated to St. Francis in Assisi, commissioned in 1312 and completed some five years later.21 On the lower level of the San Martino chapel we see Martin as an officer in the Roman army face to face with the enemy, announcing his decision to cease fighting. Although Martin is clearly a knight, he does not hold a sword in his hand, nor is he mounted on a horse, two prominent themes in his iconography. Although the threat of war is imminent (we see the barbarians approaching from the hills with their weapons), Martin is looking toward the emperor but walks toward the enemy. Holding only a cross in his left hand, and making a sign of blessing with his right, we can imagine him saying to the emperor: “With the sign of the cross …” Returning to the charity scene in Amiens, the iconography most often strikes a delicate balance between showing Martin as a soldier on the one hand and acknowledging his famous repudiation of combat and the shedding of blood on the other. Although Sulpicius Severus describes Martin as wearing “his armor and his simple military cloak,” nothing is ever mentioned about the horse and certainly not about the affluent countenance of the saint. On the contrary, we learn that Martin “had nothing except his cloak he was wearing, [and that] he had already devoted the rest of his clothing to similar purposes.”22 If the idea of a concurrent religious and military vocation was anathema to Martin’s chief biographer and subsequent generations of hagiographers, it grew in acceptance, in part, when the function of Smith, “Saints in Shining Armor,” 580. I know only of one, late-fifteenth-century example, in which St. George and St. Martin are shown side by side (on different murals separated by a single window) and are almost indistinguishable from one another. The message seems to be clear: both saints embody the same chivalric virtues. The paintings are found in Santa Maria delle Grazie in Vicolungo, Italy. 21 Most recently, Martini’s fresco has been discussed in Helas, “The Clothing of Poverty and Sanctity,” 247–62. See also the important analysis in Brink, “Sts. Martin and Francis.” 22 Sulpicius Severus, “Life,” 107. 19 20

Late medieval appropriations of St. Martin

the warrior in Christian society was rehabilitated owing to the success of the First Crusade in 1099, which “helped to put the estate of chivalry on a par with the priesthood in its Christian service.”23 In the chansons de geste written in the wake of the First Crusade such as the Chanson de Jerusalem and the Chanson d’Aspremont, the warrior saints are themselves transformed into chivalric knights. About a century-and-a-half later, Péan Gâtineau, a native of Tours who may or may not be the same Gâtineau who wrote SaintMartin’s customary examined in previous chapters, was writing a versified Vie of St. Martin, a romanz, in his own words. Comprising 10,296 lines, the Vie narrates numerous episodes in the life of St. Martin, dwelling in considerable detail on the miracles he performed while still alive and also posthumously, including some that find no correspondence in what had hitherto been known about the saint. One such episode is the saint’s investiture as a knight (lines 172–79): “Martin who is in the good service / of the Emperor Constantius / is hereby dubbed a knight; / Martin is to receive the following / items: arms, a horse and livery / of his own device. / For his benevolence and his service / the Emperor is honoring him so.”24 As anachronistic a ritual as it may have been for a fourth-century saint, Martin’s investiture was merely a natural outcome of his new image, cast in a chivalric mold. The Martin who emerges from the Vie can easily be confounded with one of the protagonists of the chansons de geste, leading the adventurous life of a chevalier, as Martin is occasionally called by Gâtineau. Seen in this light, his dubbing as a knight was a necessary component in his late medieval image. A handful of subsequent depictions of Martin continue to depict this extraordinary scene, and at least one of them may well have been inspired by Gâtineau’s Vie, for it too emanates from Tours. In 1266, just a couple of years after the Vie was copied, a new set of stained-glass windows was installed in Tours Cathedral, one of which is dedicated to St. Martin. Remarkably, the investiture scene literally inaugurates the entire St. Martin window: we see Martin standing in the middle of the lower left-hand medallion, with the emperor, on the left-hand side, providing him with his new Keen, Nobles, Knights and Men-at-Arms, 2. In relation to warrior saints, the two chansons are discussed in MacGregor, “Negotiating Knightly Piety,” 338–43. Of course the First Crusade was just one episode that was instrumental in articulating this change, others being two important movements promoted in the tenth and eleventh centuries: the Peace of God and the Truce of God, respectively. It is beyond the scope of this chapter to explore this and subsequent related developments in the image of the Christian knight. 24 “Martins a bien cinc an entiers / Servi l’emperiere Costanz. / Si ëust il fet itex. ij. tanz; / Mès a chevalier l’adouba; / Armes et cheval et robe a / Martins trestout a sa devise; / Por sa bonté, por son servise / L’a l’emperiere henoré.” Translated in Hoch, “St. Martin of Tours,” 476. For the original French I used the following edition by Werner Sjöderhelm, which I find more reliable than the one used by Hoch: Leben und Wunderthaten des heiligen Martin, 36–37. 23

215

216

Late medieval appropriations of St. Martin

sword, while Martin’s father, bearing witness to the ceremony, kneels on his right-hand side.25 Some four decades later, yet another compelling visual expression encapsulates the transformation of Martin into a knight. A fresco painted by Martini on a panel just to the left of the one mentioned above, this investiture scene (see Figure 5.4) reflects not only the priorities of the painter and those of his aristocratic patron – the Franciscan cardinal Gentile Partino da Montefiore – but also most broadly the spirit of the time as far as the stature of St. Martin is concerned, and the religious overtones that a knight’s vesting had accrued by the early fourteenth century. The power of the “chivalric” Martin is perhaps most tellingly evident in the early narratives of St. Francis’s life.26 Returning to consider Figure 5.3, the book of images of Madame Marie, there can be little doubt that the portrayal of Martin is meant to exemplify a knight who has been dubbed. Although the ceremony of the elevation to knighthood took on several forms in the Middle Ages, Martin is shown in this miniature bedecked with many of the accoutrements widely associated with this ceremony as described by Ramon Lull, John of Marmoutier, and others: namely the white belt, the gold spurs, the sword, and the cloak.27 The exaltation of armed men in the Middle Ages had indeed become a religious preoccupation that often took on an allegorical dimension. An early-twelfth-century treatise attributed to Anselm of Canterbury, the Similitudo militis, even enumerates the trappings of the knight and compares them to those of the spiritual warriors. Thus, for instance, the knight’s hauberk is likened to justice, “for the works of justice are like the rings of the hauberk.”28 Thirteenth- and fourteenth-century authors writing in the vernacular with a more popular appeal urged their readers to don a spiritual armor, which was preparation for a life journey. Perhaps one of the most celebrated examples of this genre, and one that enjoyed tremendous popularity, is Guillaume de Deguileville’s The Pilgrimage of Human Life. In this allegorical poem charting the struggle against temptation in the pursuit of an upright life, the Pilgrim falls asleep after reading Le Roman de la Rose, and in his dream he sees the heavenly Jerusalem  – the ultimate objective of the crusading pilgrim – which he is now determined to reach. The allegorical figure of Grace (who, according to the author, commissioned the poem from him in 1331) serves as his vade mecum and offers Boissonnot, Histoire et description de cathédrale de Tours, 109 and 134; Hoch, “St. Martin of Tours,” 476; and Arretaud, “La Vie de saint Martin,” 86–88. 26 Hoch, “A New Document.” On the hagiographic parallels between Sulpicius’s Vita of Martin and those written by Bonaventure (Legenda maior) and Thomas of Celano (Vita secunda) for St. Francis, see Cardini, “I primi biografi fransescani,” esp. 56–61. 27 Keen, Chivalry, 64–82. 28 Quoted in Smith, “Saints in Shining Armor,” 581. 25

Late medieval appropriations of St. Martin

Figure 5.4  Simone Martini, Investiture of St. Martin.

him, among other things, armor to guard him against the various vices and evils he is about to encounter.29 That the armor could be spiritual and not physical was also suggested in a thirteenth-century hymn to St. Martin, in 29

The Pilgrim, incidentally, declines her offer. On the pervasiveness of the theme of the armored man in allegorical writings of the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries see Wright, The Maze and the Warrior, 169–74.

217

218

Late medieval appropriations of St. Martin

which the poet alludes to the saint’s bloodless martyrdom: “O Martin, O renowned Martin! Christ, for whom you manfully fought in the lists, made you a martyr, not by the sword of some executioner, but through bodily suffering. [You fought] the war between flesh and spirit in ashes and sackcloth.”30 Curiously, it is the use of the language of martyrdom in relation to Martin that betrays the emphasis placed on his being first and foremost a soldier who fights “manfully.” After all, the archetypes of Christian soldiers usually included a group of martyrs who served in the Roman army, such as Sebastian, and Maurice and the Theban Legion. The life of St. Martin as recounted on numerous occasions from the fourth century onward fell into three distinct phases, namely, as layman and soldier, monk, and bishop. This tripartite division was acknowledged by medieval writers such as Jacques de Vitry, mentioned above, and by Jacobus de Voragine, who, in his Sermones aurei, written with a more sophisticated and intellectual audience in mind than he had envisaged for the Legenda aurea, “spells out the duties and virtues associated with Martin in the three phases of his life.”31 Hinged together like panels in a triptych, each of these iconographies could at times be folded in or out to highlight one or the other facet of the saint’s life. Depending on a variety of factors (ranging from the context in which Martin is exalted  – liturgical or folkloristic  – to variants owing to regional or period differences), one or more of these chapters in Martin’s life were brought to the fore to the detriment of others. Thus, Severus downplayed Martin’s military career, reducing by a fifth his tenure in the army, seeking instead to promote him as an ideal monk and a reluctant bishop. Generations of artists from the twelfth century onwards, in contrast, disseminated an image of Martin as a prosperous knight, while Péan Gâtineau saw in him the epitome of chivalry. Liturgical poetry typically emphasized his tenure as bishop, more than any other phase in his life. As we have seen, Martin’s November 11 office in Tours revolved around his death. The added five prosas enliven its rather gloomy tone, but the expanded office is consistent in sounding the two themes most important in the Saint-Martin community – Martin’s asceticism on the one hand and his faithfulness to his pastoral role on the other. What role did music play in conjuring up these contextualized images of Martin? Liturgical music composed during the thirteenth and fourteenth “Martine, martyr inclite, / sed non lictoris gladio, / Qui pro Christo viriliter / decertasti in stadio, / Te fecit esse martyrem / Corporalis afflictio, / Bellum carnis ac spiritus / Cinisque cum cilicio.” The latter constitutes strophe 5 of the hymn O Martine, flos praesulum, uniquely found in Brussels, Bibliothèque royale 5397–407, and reproduced in Keane, “Martin Hymns of the Middle Ages,” 156–58. 31 Reames, “Saint Martin of Tours,” 152. 30

A soldier of great prowess

centuries – that is, when that new image was already a familiar trope – rarely reflects these changes. Whether originating in Tours or in Catalunya, the Martinian prosas composed after the twelfth century impart a congratulatory tone, praising Bishop Martin on his ascent to heaven.32 The hymns too are largely devoid of chivalric overtones, and any reference to Martin’s military vocation is made exclusively in the context of the saint’s career before his baptism, stressing his refusal to fight earthly battles. In contrast to the relative wealth of pictorial and literary expressions that evidence the transformation of Martin into a medieval knight, music offers only a few examples that can be understood in this light. Most were composed during the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries. This may be because composers of monophony and polyphony alike continued to draw their source of inspiration from the time-honored image of Martin championed by Sulpicius Severus and ubiquitously transmitted through the liturgy composed before this transformation took place.33 Later in this chapter we shall examine two examples of polyphonic music that, notwithstanding their reliance on traditional Martinian liturgy, bring to the fore the newly articulated image of Martin through the subtle intertwining of musical and textual codes. First, however, let us turn to Miles mire probitatis, a late medieval sequence uniquely found in manuscripts from Saint-Martin of Tours. Not only does it recapitulate the traditional understanding of Martin in his triple capacity of bishop, monk, and soldier; it also underscores his growing appeal as a military saint.34

A soldier of great prowess A Martinellus from Saint-Martin of Tours is the only extant source to transmit both text and music of Miles mire probitatis (BmT 1023, fos. 123v–124). As we have seen in Chapter 2, this manuscript is one of several Martinelli copied for that church, and is mostly dedicated to the writings of Sulpicius Severus and Gregory of Tours. Although such lectionaries tend to be made up entirely of texts, BmT 1023 concludes with a gathering that is largely notated (fos. 121–124v), comprising readings and chants for several Martinian masses. In all probability, these folios were not part of the

As we have seen, Euphonias videns, the prosa from Utrecht, has little to do with Martin. For sixteenth- and seventeenth-century motets based on Martinian liturgy see Launay, “A propos de quelques motets polyphoniques.” 34 There exists also a motet based on the sequence; see n. 40 below. 32 33

219

220

Late medieval appropriations of St. Martin

original layer of BmT 1023 (copied after 1323) and they must have belonged to a notated missal, which is no longer extant, and whose provenance, we must assume, is Saint-Martin.35 Judging from the handwriting, this gathering may well have been copied during the fourteenth century. The final gathering of BmT 1023 contains the following: (1) text and chant incipits for the mass celebrated on the vigil of Martin’s July 4 feast (fo. 121); (2) a notated mass for November 11, including the alleluia Oculis ac manibus and the alleluia Hic Martinus pauper, which is followed by the sequence Jucundemur hodie (fos. 121v–122v); and (3) a notated mass Statuit ei for the July 4 feast, including the alleluia Posuisti domine, followed by the sequence Miles mire probitatis (fos. 123–24). While the Martinellus is the only source for the music, the text of Miles mire probitatis is transmitted in a handful of other fifteenth-century sources, all emanating from Saint-Martin of Tours.36 In BmT 1023, fos. 123v–124, it reads as follows: 1(a) Miles mire probitatis Martinus, lux sanctitatis, Sacerdotum gloria 1(b) Armis cessit vanitatis, Tenens fidem trinitatis Sanctus ab infantia. 2(a) Regularis, militaris, Presularis, singularis, Vite fulgens gratia 2(b) Tibi caris dum precaris Expers paris comprobaris Conferre remedia. 3(a) Innotescis toti mundo, Qui iam regnas corde mundo In Dei presentia. 3(b) Nunc devote supplicanti Choro pro te iocundanti Largiri subsidia. 4(a) Ut qui tibi sunt subiecti Per te tute37 sint protecti Ab hostis astutia 4(b) Sed et sursum sint subvecti Et cum sanctis sint refecti Superna letitia.

Soldier of great prowess, light of holiness, glory of the priests, holding fast to the Trinitarian faith, holy from infancy, Martin gave up prideful arms. While you – resplendent with the graces of a monk’s, a soldier’s, and a bishop’s life – will pray for those who are dear to you and like no other strengthen [them], grant [them] favors. You have become known in the entire world, who now reign pure in heart in the presence of God. Give sustenance now to that chorus, which is devoutly prayerful and joyous before you. May those who are your servants safely be protected by you from the cunning of the enemy. And also let the downcast rise up and be restored to heavenly happiness among the saints.

The only extant missals from Saint-Martin are from the fifteenth century, and they are not notated. 36 See, for example, BmT 1021, fo. 161v (fifteenth-century portion); BmT 1299, fo. 23v; and BmT 194, fos. 288v–289. 37 “[T]ute” is a mistake, and should probably be “tuto” (an adverb), as the translation suggests. 35

A soldier of great prowess Example 5.1  The sequence Miles mire probitatis. BmT 1023, fos. 123v–124.

Miles mire probitatis is a relatively short rhymed sequence; it is regular in structure, comprising four poetic strophes divided into paired versicles, each pair having the same melody ending on F (see Example 5.1). The four poetic strophes are the epitome of regularity and clarity, reminiscent of the Victorine sequences of the twelfth century.38 All versicles are rhymed, ending with two unstressed syllables (e.g., “subsi-DI-A”) probably in assonance with the last syllable of the alleluia, which precedes the singing of the sequence. Having a regular accentual verse shared by all but the third strophe, the versicles are further unified by the use of identical or similar rhyme schemes: aabaab (for versicles 1 and 2), ccbccb (versicle 3), and ddbddb (versicle 4). The numerous adjectives and appositives amassed before or after single verbs, moreover, give a certain grammatically determined momentum to the whole text, which the rhymes help emphasize. The opening strophe, for instance, has one main verb (“cessit”) – an indicative of historical description – and a lengthy appositive phrase for a subject. Further intensifying the uniform rhythm already generated by the rhyme scheme and accentual verse, all versicles are isosyllabic, made of a standard trochaic line of syllables (8 + 8 + 7), with the shift from eight to seven 38

Fassler, Gothic Song, 72–73. I would like to thank Paul Gehl for the translation, and for sharing with me his many insights about the poem. As far as I was able to determine, it is not a contrafact. I am grateful to David Hiley for his help with examining the repertory of Parisian and English sequences.

221

222

Late medieval appropriations of St. Martin

syllables matching the shift between the two elements of the rhyme scheme (e.g., from aa or dd to b). The sequence is in the tritus mode, and just like the melody of the mode 1 alleluia Posuisti domine that it follows (catalogued by Karl-Heinz Schlager as no. 46), it has a B that is quite consistently flattened.39 The range is rather narrow, with only a fifth above the finalis F fully exploited. The melodies that set the two middle paired versicles slightly expand the ambitus, if only momentarily: that of the second strophe descends to the subfinalis e just once over the second syllable of “re-GU-la-ris,” while that of the third reaches up to E – a seventh above the finalis – over the first syllable of “RE-gnas.” Adding to the overall coherence of the sequence, the shared rhyme scheme of the first two strophes (aabaab) is balanced by a musical end-rhyme linking the two final strophes. The melody of every versicle is composed of three subphrases corresponding to the three trochaic lines of syllables. Each subphrase is articulated by a median cadence that can occur on F, A, or C, and that is typically more ornate (the sequence is predominantly syllabic), with two to three notes setting the penultimate syllable of subphrases (e.g., “pro-bi-TA-tis,” “gra-TI-a,” or “MUN-do”). The rhyme scheme common to the first and second strophes may well reflect the fact that the two form one logical unit: a leisurely declarative sentence centering on a striking historical fact (Martin’s renunciation of arms) is followed by a prayer for favor from the saint who had so unique a life course. The third strophe repeats this action (historical declarative, then petition) in miniature, which accelerates the pace. It is also the only strophe that has two sentences, the others each forming a single grammatical unit. The fourth strophe accelerates the pace even further, with a series of three hortatory verbs (“sint protecti,” “sint subvecti,” “sint refecti”) centering not on the saint but on his clients. Thus, in the poem as a whole, the subject shifts from Martin as soldier and saint in his own lifetime, to Martin as patron of today’s devotees. The poem, moreover, seems to be in counterpoint with the words of Martin as reported by Sulpicius Severus (Epistle 3), and as were read in the course of Lesson 6 in the November 11 feast in Saint-Martin: “It is hard, Lord, in Thy service to do combat in the flesh, and the battles in which I have engaged up to now are enough. Still, if You bid me continue the toil and stand guard before Your camp, I do not refuse and will not plead the exhaustion of age as an excuse.” The initial military fact (“soldier of great prowess”) gets lost in this logical progression, although such words as “regnas” and “largiri” in the third strophe Schlager, Thematischer Katalog, 90.

39

The Armed Man and the tearful disciples

do have a certain chivalric ring. Although the final strophe continues the logic of the preceding ones by moving to the devotees and what they can gain, the words “subiecti,” “protecti,” and “hostis” hark back to the military theme with which the sequence opens.40 While paying tribute to the more conventional image of Martin – underscoring his merits as monk, bishop, and soldier – the emphasis placed on his role as a soldier betrays the sense of protective exigency that was projected on the saint’s image, validating his transformation into a miles, non monachus. It is with a similar sense of urgency that fifteenth- and sixteenth-century composers wrote masses based on a tune about a certain Armed Man. As we shall see, the vicissitudes of St. Martin may well have played a role in the inception of that compositional tradition.

The Armed Man, the tearful disciples, and the cunning of the enemy Let us now consider how the complex overlay of iconographies in art and literature might have given rise to polyphonic music about the Christian knight. The reliance of much medieval and Renaissance polyphony on preexisting material – often one or more chants drawn from the same liturgical context for which the new piece was composed  – might explain, in part, why the polyphonic music based on Martinian chants rarely took into account the shift in his image evidenced above. As we shall see, however, it is exactly owing to this juxtaposing of the old with the new that Martinian liturgy of yore could become realigned with a more contemporary image of the saint. Liturgy served as a source of inspiration for composers of polyphony in more than one way. Conceptually, it provided a spiritual context against

40

Illustrating the continuing appeal of Martin as a soldier saint protecting his devotees from the wrath of the enemy, the sequence served as a cantus firmus for a four-voice motet composed in the closing decades of the fifteenth century. Printed by Petrucci in Motetti C of 1504 (Rism 15041), the motet Miles mire probitatis is the nineteenth of forty-two motets, mostly unattributed, in the Petrucci partbooks. For a modern edition see Selections from Motetti C, 93–108. I sincerely thank Richard Freedman for his help in obtaining sources not available to me otherwise. Once uncritically believed to be the work of Ockeghem, the motet has not been included in the complete Ockeghem edition, not even in the dubia section (Ockeghem, Collected Works, Vol. III). For the attributions to Ockeghem see Ambros, Geschichte der Musik, Vol. III, 179; and Pirro, Histoire de la musique, 114. My article on the motet Miles mire probitatis is forthcoming. Given that the sequence is known only from Saint-Martin of Tours, the composer is someone who must have been associated with that church.

223

224

Late medieval appropriations of St. Martin Example 5.2  The antiphon Dixerunt discipuli. BmT 159, fos. 288v–289.

which a new motet or mass movement could be contemplated and enjoyed; and compositionally, it served as musical scaffolding upon which the new piece could be organized in multiple ways. Perhaps the most spectacular use of Martinian liturgy in a polyphonic context  – and one of relatively few such instances – is Obrecht’s Missa de Sancto Martino, which has been aptly described as “almost a historia of St. Martin, giving a musical survey of the saint’s life.”41 Indeed, as indicated on the title page of the mass in the so-called Mewes Print from c. 1510  – the only source to attribute the mass to Obrecht and the only one that transmits the mass in its entirety, albeit with many printer’s errors – the music is based on the antiphon Martinus adhuc cathecuminus and “other antiphons” (et sequentes alias antiphonas), all belonging to an older layer of “Gregorian” chants.42 One of these antiphons is Dixerunt discipuli (shown in Example 5.2 is the reading from Saint-Martin of Tours), which Obrecht used in the Gloria (mostly in the tenor, but also in the opening of the altus), and upon which four other mass movements (two Glorias and two Credos copied in two of the Trent Codices) and a motet are based as well:43 “His disciples said to the blessed Strohm, Music in Late Medieval Bruges, 41. Obrecht, Missa de Sancto Donatiano; Missa de Sancto Martino, xxiii and xxix. The eight antiphons and the invitatory belong to what Fickett has characterized as Series I antiphons. See her Historia Sancti Martini, xi–xiii. The mass was composed c. 1486–87, most probably for the church of Saint-Donatian in Bruges. See Wegman, Born for the Muses, 165–69. The antiphon Martinus adhuc cathecuminus is quoted toward the end of Te dignitas presularis, a motet by Johannes Brassart. Margaret Bent has suggested that in choosing this particular antiphon, Brassart might have sought the patronage of Pope Martin V as a future employer. Presumably, the clothing metaphor in the antiphon would have been particularly appropriate for the composer’s circumstances, for it would have most likely been understood as a wish to find employment in the papal chapel. See Bent, “Early Papal Motets,” 34–36. 43 The antiphon appears in a Gloria in Trento, Biblioteca Capitolare, MS 93, fos. 189–91 and in Trento, Castello del Buonconsiglio, Monumenti e Collezioni Provinciali, MS 90, fos. 158v–160; and in a Credo in Trento, MS 93, fos. 228v–291 and in Trento, MS 90, fos. 216v–219. Information taken from Eloy d’Amerval, Missa Dixerunt Discipuli, xi n. 11. Franciscus IJsenbaert’s only surviving motet, found in the Leiden Choirbooks, is based on this antiphon as well. 41 42

The Armed Man and the tearful disciples

Martin: ‘why, father, are you leaving us? We are desolate, and to whom do you leave us? The fierce wolves will invade your flock.’” This antiphon in mode 7 invariably inaugurates the canonical hour of Lauds in Martin’s November 11 office, and in the 1460s, some three decades before Obrecht composed his Missa de Sancto Martino, Eloy d’Amerval weaved part of it into the polyphonic fabric of a single mass. Eloy’s Missa Dixerunt discipuli is a setting of the five ordinary chants of the Mass belonging to the tour-de-force genre, of which Ockeghem’s Missa Prolationum and Josquin’s Missa Ad fugam and Missa Sine nomine, based on canonic procedures, are prime examples. In his Missa, Eloy used a single set of seven notes – the opening of the antiphon Dixerunt discipuli – which he then transformed by applying to them all sixteen possible mensural combinations.44 Clearly the text of this antiphon has no militaristic overtones, and yet it has recently been suggested that exactly the melody that sets this antiphon “would appear to link [it] directly to the nascent L’homme armé tradition.”45 As is well known, the famous L’Homme armé tune served as a cantus firmus for almost forty masses and mass movements, and a smaller number of secular pieces as well. It was by far the most frequently used cantus firmus beginning in the early 1460s – when the L’Homme armé masses by Du Fay and Ockeghem were probably written – and lasting until about 1570, when Palestrina published in Rome two masses based on that tune. The original monophonic L’Homme armé tune, composed in the early decades of the fifteenth century, is a call to arms: “Everyone should arm himself with a breastplate of iron,” the lyrics exhort, warning that “the Armed Man should be feared.”46 Whomever the tune’s composer had in mind when he envisioned the Armed Man “who should be feared,” he became associated, especially through the polyphonic masses it inspired, with a series of Christian figures This procedure is explained in detail in the introduction to the two modern editions of this mass, ibid., xi–xiv; and in Masses for the Sistine Chapel, 32–34. It is astonishing that this beautiful mass has yet to be released in a commercial recording. 45 Higgins, “Speaking of the Devil and Discipuli,” 175. 46 Pointing to number symbolism embedded in the tune (made of thirty-one semibreves in its extended version: “precisely the number of chevaliers in the order of the Golden Fleece throughout most of its early history”), Planchart has argued convincingly for late 1433 or 1434 as the terminus ante quem non for the composition of the monophonic tune (Planchart, “The Origins and Early History,” 310–12). For the dating of the masses by Du Fay and Ockeghem see ibid., esp. 333–56. For a contrasting view, dating both the Du Fay and Ockeghem masses to after 1467, see Heide, “New Claims for a Burgundian Origin.” The English translation is taken from Wright, The Maze and the Warrior. For analyses of the text see Cohen, The Six Anonymous L’Homme armé Masses, 19–20; and Long, “Arma virumque cano,” 135–40. 44

225

226

Late medieval appropriations of St. Martin

whose might the infidels were expected to dread. In particular, the song became identified with Charles the Bold – duke of Burgundy (1467–1477) and head of the Order of the Golden Fleece  – with whom the six Naples L’Homme armé masses are associated. Indeed, the musical tradition of the L’Homme armé seems to have radiated from the milieu of the Burgundian court to the French royal court, Italy, and beyond.47 The association of several fifteenth-century L’Homme armé masses with the Order of the Golden Fleece, with its crusading aspirations against the invading Turks after the fall of Constantinople in 1453, has led scholars to recognize Christ, together with various saints – and perhaps every miles Christi – as the likely Armed Man. Depending on the context, it could be, for instance, St. Andrew, patron saint of the Order of the Golden Fleece; the triumphant Christ; or St. Michael.48 Besides Charles the Bold, St. Michael was the only figure associated explicitly with the L’Homme armé tradition in this early period, perhaps as early as 1462. In his Missa Dum sacrum mysterium/L’Homme armé, Johannes Regis (c. 1430–1496) makes use of what Pamela Starr has characterized as a “doubly militant cantus firmus.” The composer uses the L’Homme armé tune as well as five chants honoring St. Michael – patron saint of the chivalric order founded by Louis XI in 1469 – the warrior who in the Book of Revelation emerges as a “militant champion of the church,” commanding the army of God to victory over Satan.49 This unequivocal alliance between the Armed Man and St. Michael is not surprising; the Prince of Knights, he was the quintessential warrior saint, repeatedly depicted in shining armor and wearing a helmet, often standing over the dragon (personifying Satan), slaying him with his lance.50 In view of the exaltation of St. Martin as a newly dubbed medieval knight  – one who Fallows, Dufay, 201–02; Taruskin, The Oxford History of Western Music, Vol. I, 484–86; Prizer, “Music and Ceremonial in the Low Countries.” For the Naples masses see Cohen, The Six Anonymous L’Homme armé Masses. 48 See Prizer, “Music and Ceremonial in the Low Countries,” 113–53; Wright, The Maze and the Warrior, 159–205. It has been suggested that some L’Homme armé masses (such as the ones copied in Rome, BAV, Cappella Sistina, MS 14) were probably used in the Sistine Chapel “in the context of Masses contra Turcos.” See Kirkman, The Cultural Life of the Early Polyphonic Mass, 121. 49 Starr, “Southern Exposure,” 36; and Lockwood, “Aspects of the ‘L’Homme armé’ Tradition,” 115–16. On the musical symbolism of Christian victory in the mass of Regis see Wright, The Maze and the Warrior, 178–84. For an analysis of the Regis mass that modifies its relative place in the L’Homme armé mass tradition see Heide, “New Claims for a Burgundian Origin,” 5–13. 50 As Sean Gallagher has recently demonstrated, the mass should also be understood in light of the foundation by a canon from Cambrai Cathedral, Michel de Beringhem, of a procession for St. Michael, his name-saint. The L’Homme armé mass by Regis was intended to be performed in conjunction with the procession. Gallagher, Johannes Regis, 84–92. 47

The Armed Man and the tearful disciples

looked like he could fight – and his universal veneration, it would be surprising if Martin had not been associated with the L’Homme armé mass tradition, at least by composers who were closely associated with the French royal court.51 Returning to the antiphon Dixerunt discipuli and to its possible association with the L’Homme armé tradition, Paula Higgins has recently shown that “sixteen of the first eighteen notes of [the antiphon] are identical to the superius melody” of the rondeau Il sera par vous/L’Homme armé.52 This combinative chanson is the earliest extant incorporation of the L’Homme armé tune into a polyphonic piece, and has come down to us in two versions. As a three-part polytextual chanson, it is found without any ascription on fos. 44v–45 of the Mellon Chansonnier, compiled in the mid 1470s, probably under the supervision of Johannes Tinctoris. A textless four-part version is found in the Casanatense Chansonnier, fos. 156v–157, where it is ascribed to a certain “Borton.”53 As can be seen in Example 5.3, the antiphon Dixerunt discipuli supplies most of the pitches of the superius in the three-part chanson: virtually the entire A section, as well as the final three measures of the B section.54 Up until the evocation of St. Martin by Higgins (see n. 45 above), Leeman Perkins has been the only scholar to suggest that the saint could be one of those to whom the L’Homme armé tune alludes, if only because he was one “of the most popular soldier-saints of the age” (Perkins, Music in the Age of the Renaissance, 363). Earlier he had remarked that the meaning of singing Ockeghem’s L’Homme armé mass in a church dedicated to “soldier-saint Martin … would not have been amiss” (Perkins, “The L’Homme armé Masses of Busnoys and Ockeghem,” 390–91). The meeting of the Order of the Golden Fleece in Saint-Martin of Utrecht in 1546 may have presented the opportunity to perform some Martinian chants and perhaps also related polyphony, but from what can be gleaned from secondary sources it seems unlikely. See Prizer, “Music and Ceremonial in the Low Countries.” 52 Higgins, “Speaking of the Devil and Discipuli,” 175; and see the melodic comparison on p. 176. I adopt here Planchart’s logic for preferring “par” instead of “pour” for the opening of the superius (Planchart, “The Origins and Early History,” 317). 53 The manuscripts are, respectively, New Haven, Yale University Library, Beinecke Rare Book and Manuscript Library, MS 93; and Rome, Biblioteca Casanatense, MS 2856. Transcriptions and analyses of the chanson can be found in Perkins, Music in the Age of the Renaissance, 301–04; and Planchart, “The Origins and Early History,” 314–19. 54 Example 5.3 is inspired by Higgins, “Speaking of the Devil and Discipuli,” 176, Example 1. The opening of the antiphon is very similar to other antiphons in mode 7, including Oculis ac manibus from Martin’s office. An even more substantial overlap with Dixerunt discipuli can be found in such antiphons as Afferte domino (Epiphany) or Ecce ascendimus (Lent). The overall correspondence between the pitch sequence of the opening of the antiphon Dixerunt discipuli and that of the rondeau (superius part) is startling. It would seem to me an unnecessary stretch to suggest that the composer had any other chant (or a combination of chants) in mind when he composed the polyphonic chanson. I would like to thank Elsa de Luca for providing me with the Parisian example. Bari, Archivio della Basilica di San Nicola, MS 3 (81), fo. 265r (thirteenth-century breviary, use of Notre-Dame of Paris). 51

227

228

Late medieval appropriations of St. Martin Example 5.3  Melodic comparison of readings of the antiphon Dixerunt discipuli (opening) with the superius of Il sera par vous/L’Homme armé.

In Il sera par vous/L’Homme armé the contrafacted segment of the chant melody honoring Martin is juxtaposed with the two following texts:55 SUPERIUS: He will be confronted by you, the dreaded Turk, Master Symon – there can be no doubt – and with an axe-spur [a stalk of celery?] struck down. We hold that his pride will be beaten down if he falls into your hands, the wicked one. He will be confronted … In no time you will have beaten him, God willing; then will they say: “Long live ol’ Symon the Breton! For he has battled the Turk.” He will be confronted … TENOR AND CONTRATENOR: The armed man, the armed man, should be feared. Everywhere the cry has gone out, everyone should arm himself with a breastplate of iron. The armed man, the armed man, should be feared.

The English translation of the superius is taken from Perkins, Music in the Age of the Renaissance, 304. I have made one change, preferring to replace “little Symon the Breton” with “ol’ Symon the Breton,” which strikes me as a more idiomatic translation of Symonet, as per the translation of Wegman, “Mensural Intertextuality,” 198. I prefer the English translation of the L’Homme armé text in Wright, The Maze and the Warrior, 165.

55

The Armed Man and the tearful disciples

The allusion in the superius to Symon le Breton, chaplain and singer at the Burgundian court and then a canon at Cambrai Cathedral, together with some insider jokes, point to this chanson as an occasional piece perhaps written for a civic tournament honoring Symon, or, as Planchart suggests, for “a celebration in Cambrai.” Whatever the occasion, it can be understood as “a specific response to the crusading climate after the Fall of Constantinople.”56 Both music and text suggest that the rondeau emanates from a Franco-Burgundian milieu. Although practically any composer working in France or the Low Countries would have known the St. Martin antiphon, the association of Martin with earthly battles in general, and with the chivalric esprit in particular, may fix our attention on a more specific background of the likely composer. Planchart has persuasively argued against the widespread attribution of the combinative chanson to the English composer Morton, proposing Du Fay as the likely composer, while Richard Taruskin and others have made the case for Busnoys.57 Owing to the considerable correspondence between the St. Martin antiphon and Il sera par vous discovered by Higgins, perhaps the composer was someone who worked in the orbit of the French royal court. It was in France, after all, that Martin was most fervently associated with military victories, especially during and after the Hundred Years War, when Tours and the sanctuaries in neighboring bonnes villes played an increasingly important role. Although the cult of St. Martin was of course widespread all over Europe, including in the duchy of Burgundy, which observed the liturgical rite of Paris, it was in French territories that the saint received steadfast, official support.58 This was unmistakably apparent in the Loire Valley Wegman, “Mensural Intertextuality,” 196–98; Planchart, “The Origins and Early History,” 326. The quoted insight was originally made about the text of L’Homme armé alone, but holds also for the text of Il sera par vous. See Long, “Arma virumque cano,” 135. The chanson dates from early 1460. See Planchart, “The Origins and Early History,” 327; and Heide, “New Claims for a Burgundian Origin,” 10–11. Heide further surmised that “the composition is a reaction to the designation of the court chapel singers who were to accompany Philip the Good on his travels to the Holy Land. It indicates that the chanson must have been written before 1463” (“New Claims for a Burgundian Origin,” 11). 57 Planchart, “The Origins and Early History,” 319–23; Taruskin, “Antoine Busnoys”; and Taruskin, The Oxford History of Western Music, Vol. I, 498–99. Despite circumstantial evidence suggesting a possible connection between Eloy and Tinctoris (aside from the involvement of the latter in the production of the Mellon Chansonnier, which transmits Il sera pour vous/L’Homme armé, he knew Eloy’s Missa Dixerunt discipuli quite well, and they were both working in Orléans in the early 1460s), Higgins is justifiably cautious to assert that “This is by no means to suggest Eloy as a possible composer” of the rondeau. See Higgins, “Speaking of the Devil and Discipuli,” 176. 58 Wright, Music at the Court of Burgundy, 140–42. Jennifer Bloxam has carefully demonstrated that some of Busnoys’s sacred works transmitted in Brussels, Bibliothèque royale, MS 5557, 56

229

230

Late medieval appropriations of St. Martin

and in Tours, where the church dedicated to Martin was a royal enclave in which the French kings served as honorary abbots. In the domain of music, their prerogative to appoint a man of their choice to the lucrative position of treasurer famously brought Ockeghem to Tours. Both Charles VII and his son, Louis XI – employers of, inter alia, some of the best fifteenth-century composers – were roughly contemporaneous with the last two Burgundian Valois dukes, Philip the Good and Charles the Bold. They were also their committed opponents during the Hundred Years War, when the court of Burgundy tried to take advantage of the power crisis of the French monarchy, most seriously during the relatively short reign of Charles the Bold, in order to advance its claims to political independence. Especially during the rule of Charles, who strove to undermine the legitimacy of French kingship and territorial integrity, the relationship between the French and Burgundian courts became decidedly hostile. Although it was St. Michael who was transformed into the official royal and national saint of France in the fifteenth century – Charles VII saw in him a personal guardian; Louis XI viewed him as protector of the nation’s borders, and as we have seen, created the royal Order of St. Michael in 1469 – the aura of St. Martin remained radiant in the historical consciousness of the French monarchy in general, and in the Loire Valley in particular.59 The two French kings followed in the footsteps of their predecessors when they made pronouncements acknowledging the role of Martin as protector of the French nation, occasionally attributing military victories to him. In 1433, for instance, Charles entreated the saint for help “with the recovery of the kingdom,” and further demonstrated his devotion to Martin by burying one of his sons in the collegiate church of Saint-Martin. Louis XI likewise regarded Martin as “the special guardian of the kingdom,” and evoked the historical ties of the monarchy with him by donating to the chapter of Saint-Martin stained-glass windows featuring Clovis venerating Martin. The figuring of Clovis is telling: as we have seen in the introduction, he was not only the first Christian king of the Franks, he was also the progenitor of a long line of kings to attribute military victories to Martin. Louis XI was a true heir to that tradition; in 1463, he ascribed to Martin his victory in the battle of Perpignan, and subsequently rewarded the church of Saint-Martin with 1,200 écus.60 copied for the chapel of Charles the Bold, make use of cantus firmi stemming from the Use of Paris. See Bloxam, “On the Origins.” 59 For the transformation of the cult of St. Michael in medieval France into an official and royal one, see Beaune, The Birth of an Ideology, 152–71. 60 “[Q]u’il ensoit memoire le miracle que mondit Seigneur Saint Martin nous a fait en cette besoigne, laquelle reputons miraculeuse” (BmT 1295, fos. 296–97). Quoted and discussed

The Armed Man and the tearful disciples

Circumstantial evidence like this suggests that the composer of Il sera par vous/L’Homme armé was not only well acquainted with the liturgy of St. Martin; he would perhaps have been someone who worked in the Loire Valley, or else was employed by the French royal court in the second half of the fifteenth century.61 Although by the time he had composed the chanson he was already present in the Burgundian court, he might have instinctively found St. Martin to be an appropriate figure to commemorate in counterpoint with a call to arms in the vernacular (the Martinian antiphon, as we have seen, is devoid of martial associations). Such an association would have come almost spontaneously for someone working in the orbit of the French royal court, where, in the collective consciousness enhanced by generations of French kings, St. Martin was inexorably linked with military victories and protection, and from the twelfth century onward also with ideas about knighthood.62 The composer, then, used a chant segment that was appropriate for pairing with the L’Homme armé tune on both conceptual and musical grounds. As noted above, the St. Martin antiphon is in mode 7, and thus easily fitting a tune written in G Mixolydian.63 We can be reasonably certain, however, that the chanson had relatively little to do with the L’Homme armé mass tradition as such; rather, it is the soaring opening motif (G–B–C–D–E–D; see Example 5.3) of the antiphon Dixerunt discipuli that is quoted, and even that only occasionally. Busnoys, whose L’Homme armé mass has often been hailed as one of the most dependent on Il sera par vous/L’Homme armé, obviously quotes the L’Homme armé tune. Very little melodic material, however, is quoted that originates in the upper voices of the chanson. The soaring motif is essentially quoted only in Magro, “‘Premierment ma Baronnie de Chasteauneuf,’” 178. Additional information concerning both kings is taken from Beaune, The Birth of an Ideology, 135. 61 Unfortunately, the chant comparison in Example 5.3, showing little variance in the transmission of the antiphon Dixerunt discipuli save for the opening of the reading from Bourges, does not allow for a more precise identification of the chant tradition that informed the composer. 62 As we have seen in Example 5.2 above, the text of the antiphon Dixerunt discipuli is an odd choice for evoking the saint’s military past. The scene of inconsolable disciples beseeching a dying spiritual leader is hardly an inspiring image for warriors preparing for battle, and yet almost no chant hailing from the saint’s liturgy would be appropriate in that sense, for the reasons outlined above. Conceivably, it is the plea for continued defense against the invading wolves (perhaps reinterpreted as the invading Turks?) that made this particular antiphon especially fitting for the new polyphonic context. 63 The above insights do not necessarily detract from the conclusions of Planchart, whose comprehensive analysis suggests that Du Fay composed Il sera par vous/L’Homme armé. They constitute but a detail in the question revolving around the likely identity of the composer of the chanson, and at this stage, it is impossible to know their relative merit and the ways they might affect future research.

231

232

Late medieval appropriations of St. Martin

once, “slightly altered but at pitch” in the “Tu solus dominus” section of the Gloria (the first statement of “Jesu Chri[ste]” by the bassus). Another, but far less palpable statement, is in the “Et incarnatus est” of the Credo, where the superius sings a variant a fourth lower to the words “et ascendit.”64 The polyphonic chanson is thought to be the point of departure not only of Busnoys’s mass, but also of Ockeghem’s L’Homme armé mass, both of which reportedly owe to it “considerably more than the borrowed melody.”65 Ockeghem quotes the opening motif just once. Sung by the superius, it is transposed a fifth below, setting the words “et unam sanc[tam]” in the Credo. Moreover, the fanfare of falling fifths in the polyphonic chanson – conceivably imitating a trumpet call – held as the most striking instance of borrowing in both masses, is really part of the original monophonic tune.66 In addition to the two above-mentioned masses, we may add four additional masses that may be linked through the use of the opening of the antiphon Dixerunt discipuli. Lewis Lockwood has identified a thematic resemblance common to four L’Homme armé masses whose composition stretches throughout the entire period that constitutes that heyday of the tradition, beginning with Du Fay’s, continuing with Josquin’s two settings, and concluding with Palestrina’s five-voice mass. The opening six pitches of the segment these four masses share, the ones Lockwood found to be related to “Kyrie VIII of the Roman gradual (the so-called Kyrie de Angelis)” as well as to the In nomine mass complex, are practically identical to those of the antiphon Dixerunt discipuli (all but the example drawn from Palestrina’s mass start on different pitches than the antiphon) and therefore also to those of the superius of Il sera par vous/L’Homme armé (see Example 5.4).67 I refer to the text setting in Busnoys, Collected Works, Part II, 1–48. Perkins has identified an additional (and in my mind far less distinctive) melodic fragment, which he believes Busnoys quoted from the superius of the chanson – namely, the music that sets the second utterance of “le doubté Turcq,” cadencing on G (see Perkins, “The L’Homme armé Masses of Busnoys and Ockeghem,” 376, 378; see also Examples 8, 10, and 11a). Since the correspondence between the St. Martin antiphon and the superius of Il sera par vous/L’Homme armé was unknown to Perkins, his sole point of reference was the polyphonic chanson. Admittedly, neither motif is particularly prominent in Busnoys’s mass. To my ears, moreover, the one identified by Perkins as corresponding to “le doubté Turcq” is such a common – indeed generic – cadential formula that it is hard to accept it as actually related to the soaring motif opening the antiphonal Dixerunt discipuli, especially given that it never follows it. Perkins’s argument is far more nuanced and complex than can be presented in the context of the current examination. It is also dependent on the juxtapostion in Busnoys’s mass of another chanson, Ockeghem’s L’Aultre d’antan. 65 Perkins, “The L’Homme armé Masses of Busnoys and Ockeghem,” 370–72. 66 Ibid., 373–78, 383; and see the cautious assessment of the latter in Planchart, “The Origins and Early History,” 327. 67 Lockwood, “Aspects of the ‘L’Homme armé’ Tradition,” esp. 116–21. The quotation is taken from p. 118. The melodic agreement is especially noticeable in Palestrina’s five-voice L’Homme 64

The Armed Man and the tearful disciples Example 5.4  (a) Du Fay, Missa L’Homme armé, opening of the Christe (cantus); (b) Josquin, Missa L’Homme armé super voces musicales, opening of the Kyrie II (cantus); (c) Josquin, Missa L’Homme armé sexti toni, opening of the “Et in terra” (cantus); (d) Palestrina, Missa L’Homme armé (five-voice setting), from Kyrie I. (a)

(b)

(c)

(d)

Yet even if those four instances can tentatively be added to the small number of L’Homme armé masses that show some kind of relation to Il sera par vous/L’Homme armé and the antiphon Dixerunt discipuli, the overwhelming majority of L’Homme armé cycles do not. The only motif that to my ears is somewhat pertinent to the issue at hand – the opening six pitches of the antiphon Dixerunt discipuli – is nowhere featured prominently, neither musically nor conceptually. The cumulative evidence presented above does not seem to be more significant than other features that L’Homme armé masses sometimes share. For instance, the L’Homme armé masses by Busnoys, Obrecht, and Josquin’s super voces musicales all share a substantial omission of text in the Credo, from “Et in Spiritum Sanctum” to “et apostolicam ecclesiam.”68 armé mass, which is in Hypomixolydian, and where the above-mentioned melodic segment opens likeswise on G. The melodic segment appears in the course of several movements of Palestrina’s mass (Kyrie I, Gloria, Credo, and Agnus Dei), and in the other examples cited by Lockwood, it appears only in a single movement and in transposition. Referring to this motif, Perkins suggests that “it can be construed as a combination of the opening figure in the cantus of Il sera pour vous and the cadential phrase” on “le doubté Turcq” (Perkins, “The L’Homme armé Masses of Busnoys and Ockeghem,” 378 n. 37). Examples 5.4, 5.5, 5.6, and 5.7 are all copied from Lockwood, “Aspects of the ‘L’Homme armé’ Tradition,” 116–17. 68 Fallows, Josquin, 151.

233

234

Late medieval appropriations of St. Martin

If there was ever an unambiguous reference to St. Martin in the L’Homme armé polyphonic tradition, then it was exactly at the moment when it was born in the composition of the combinative chanson. As we have seen, the time-honored liturgy of St. Martin – chants that composers of polyphony were likely to know  – is generally devoid of martial connotations, and the antiphon Dixerunt discipuli is no exception. Yet the juxtaposition of this well-known Martinian antiphon with music explicitly associated with combat makes the association of Martin with the L’Homme armé tradition possible. Composers of a handful of subsequent mass cycles based on the monophonic tune may or may not have had the St. Martin antiphon in mind when they bequeathed their own contribution to that tradition. As Rob Wegman has rightly emphasized, “the mass tradition was to carry the L’homme armé theme to an entirely different intellectual and musical plane” than either the original tune or Il sera par vous/L’Homme armé could.69 The complex overlay of iconographies in art and literature – sacred and profane, pacific and militant – suggests that Martin could or should find a place in a polyphonic piece about a Christian knight. As is well known, such an intertwining of discourses is altogether characteristic of the great body of courtly love literature, and is also the hallmark of the Ars antiqua and Ars nova motet as a whole. It is not surprising, then, that this intertextual image of Martin may have received a fitting counterpart in a fourteenth-century motet by Guillaume de Machaut  – a full century before the L’Homme armé tradition began – to which we now turn our attention. With its juxtaposition of poetic registers, sacred and profane music, two languages, and a mixture of literary and musical codes, the motet was an ideal artistic vehicle for the presentation of this multifaceted image of St. Martin as it was articulated in the late Middle Ages.70 Although Martin appeared infrequently in such popular genres as the polytextual chanson, it was above all in the motet, with its polyphony of texts and melodies, that the composite virtues of St. Martin could be most appropriately reconciled. It is perhaps owing to the renewed appeal of this saintly figure that Machaut, a composer whose personal and professional life were deeply influenced by the turmoil of the fourteenth century, alluded to Martin in one of his early motets.

Wegman, “Mensural Intertextuality,” 199. The subject of intertextuality in the thirteenth-century motet is presented in Huot, Allegorical Play, 1–18, to which I am greatly indebted.

69 70

Knight turned soldier of Christ: Machaut’s Motet 5

A knight turned soldier of Christ in Machaut’s Motet 5 In her monograph on Machaut, Anne Robertson identifies the composer’s first seventeen motets as a self-contained allegorical series. Reading these works in light of medieval mystical treatises suggests that they were ordered as steps in a spiritual journey, influenced by the pilgrimage-of-life literary genre (cf. Dante’s Divine Comedy and Chaucer’s Canterbury Tales). The tenors of Motets 1–17 encapsulate themes elaborated in the motets’ upper voices, guiding the interpretation of the motets as a whole, marking the mileposts of the journey through their ordering according to steps traditionally found in mystical works.71 The tenors, according to Robertson, reveal the gist of the story of Motets 1–17. Motet 5 (Aucune gent/Qui plus aimme/T. Fiat voluntas tua, hereafter M5) is the first and only four-voice motet in this series; as we shall see, within this self-contained series of seventeen motets, the four-voice layout of M5 is meaningful, as is the retrograde motion between the tenor and contratenor. It seems that Machaut deliberately chose to symbolize retrograde motion at this point in the series, where, according to Robertson, the lover/pilgrim’s first submission (or turning around) occurs.72 It is significant, therefore, that the tenor of M5 can be associated with St. Martin, a saint whose own transformation (a soldier who renounces arms transformed into a medieval knight) Machaut was evoking in ways that tie together the various secular and sacred references in the piece. Motet 5 is a four-voice work with a Latin tenor that is paired with an untexted contratenor. Tenor and contratenor move in retrograde motion below two French-texted voices, the motetus and the triplum. These two upper lines carry texts in the masculine voice emblematic of the courtly love idiom: Triplum

Motetus

Aucune gent m’ont demandé que j’ay Que je ne chant et que je n’ay cuer gay, Si com je sueil chanter de lié corage; Et je leur di, certes, que je ne sçay. Mais j’ay menti, car dedens le cuer ay Un trop grief dueil qui onques n’assouage. Car sans sejour ay mise ma pensée

Qui plus aimme plus endure Et plus mainne dure vie, – Qu’Amours qui est sans mesure Assés plus le contralie – Que il mauvais qui n’a cure De li, einsois met sa cure En mal et en vilonnie.

Robertson, Guillaume de Machaut and Reims, Chapters 3–6. Large portions of the discussion that follows are based on my previously published article, “A Courtly Lover and an Earthly Knight.” 72 Robertson, Guillaume de Machaut and Reims, 120. 71

235

236

Late medieval appropriations of St. Martin

Triplum

Motetus

A Bonne Amour faire ce qui agree, Ne à nul fuer n’i pensasse folage; Et je sçay bien que ma dame honnourée, Que je tant crime, si m’a ma mort jurée Par crueus cuer et par simple visage. Car, quant je voy son gracious viaire, D’un dous ottroy me moustre un exemplaire Et si me vuet tenir en son hommage, Ce m’est avis; mais aus doleurs retraire, J’ay cent tant pis qu’on ne me porroit faire, Car nuls ne puet penser si grief damage Com le refus que ses durs cuers m’envoie; Et si l’aim plus, se Dieus m’en envoit joie, Que riens qui soit. Don’t n’est-ce droite rage? Certes, oïl; mais, pour rien que je voie, De ce peril issir je ne voudroie, Car tous siens sui sans changement de gage, Quant esperer me fait ma garrison; Et c’est tout cler que monsigneur Yvon Par bien server, non pas par vassalage, Conquest l’amour dou grant lion sauvage.

Hé! Dieus, que m’ont signourie Les dames de leur droiture, Que ciaulz qui ont la pointure D’amours au cuer atachie Choisissent sans mespresure! S’einsi fust, je m’asseüre, Tels est amés qui ne le seroit mie Et telz haïs qui tost aroit amie.

Some people have asked me what is wrong, why I do not sing and my heart is not merry, for I am wont to sing with a happy heart; and I say to them, “Truly, I do not know.” But I have lied, for in my heart I have a very great sorrow which is never eased. For I have ceaselessly turned my thoughts both to doing that which is pleasing to good Love and to avoiding all thought of folly; and yet I know well that my honored lady, whom I so fear, has sworn to cause my death through her cruel heart and sweet face. For when I see her gracious countenance she seems to me a very example of sweet acceptance, and I believe that she wishes me to pay her homage; but, to speak of my sorrows, I have a hundred times worse than anyone might do to me, for none could think so great a harm as the refusal that comes to me from her hard heart; and – may God send my joy of it! – I love her more than anything in the world. Am I not then on the road to madness? Truly, I am; but, for nothing I might see would I wish to be free from this danger, for I am entirely hers, with no exchange of pledge, for she causes me to hope for relief; and it is quite clear that my lord Yvain won the love of the great wild lion through true service and not through his knightly valor. Tenor – THY WILL BE DONE.73

He who loves most endures most and lives the hardest life, because Love, who lacks measure, most opposes him, for the wicked fellow cares nothing for him, but rather puts his effort into doing him harm and playing him base tricks. Dear God, why do not ladies exercise such sovereignty over their favors so as to choose unerringly those who have the arrow of love fixed in their hearts! I am certain that, if this were so, many who are now loved would not be, and many a one who is hated would soon have his lady’s love.

73

Slightly adapted from the translation of Donagher, ibid., 301–02.

Knight turned soldier of Christ: Machaut’s Motet 5

The narrator of the triplum incessantly complains about the hardships inflicted on him by his lady but vows nonetheless to remain entirely hers; he concludes by alluding to Yvain and his lion, characters in a romance by Chrétien de Troyes. The narrator of the motetus, who is somewhat less optimistic than the speaker in the triplum, believes that those who love most suffer most. The text of the tenor, “Fiat voluntas tua” (“Thy will be done”), underscores the frame of mind depicted in both voices: the will of the speakers is subsumed in that of their ladies. The tenor occupies a special role in vernacular motets of the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries: not only does it underpin the melodies of the upper voices contrapuntally, it also provides intellectual and interpretive undergirding for the texts of these pieces. The biblical or liturgical context of a tenor, drawing on well-understood exegetical and literary traditions, often entails an allegorical reading of the upper voices, and vice versa. Because of the foundational nature of the tenor within the Ars nova motet in particular, our identification of the exact musico-liturgical sources of this voice, where possible, is of special significance. For all of Christendom in the Middle Ages, the words of the tenor of M5, “Fiat voluntas tua,” would have had a familiar ring.74 Most would recognize these words as coming from the Pater noster – the text of the Lord’s Prayer, first set forth in Matthew 6:9–13. Used on various occasions during Mass and office, the Pater noster was sung by a single priest, by the entire congregation, and sometimes antiphonally, between the two. These words would have also been known from the Maundy Thursday responsory In monte oliveti and the short communion Pater, si non potest (Matthew 26:42), which follows the offertory Improperium expectavit sung during the solemn mass of Palm Sunday. As we have seen in Chapter 2, the phrase “Fiat voluntas tua” also appears several times during St. Martin’s principal feast. Concluding the responsory Domine, si adhuc (R2, and recited in Lesson 5, which immediately follows it) as well as the Lauds antiphon Domine, si adhuc, these words form part of Martin’s valediction. In his Epistle 3, Sulpicius Severus meticulously recounts the final days of the saint – namely, his mission to resolve a dispute between the clergy in the church of Candes (a city situated along the Loire River, downstream from Tours), his death there due to illness, his funeral procession, and his burial in Tours:75 For listings of Machaut’s motets see Earp, Guillaume de Machaut, xvii; and Robertson, Guillaume de Machaut and Reims, 80–81. There remain two motets whose tenors have never been identified, Motets 13 and 18. On the latter, see ibid., 53–68. Motet 5 has been edited by Leo Schrade in Polyphonic Music of the Fourteenth Century, Vol. II, 123–36. More recently, a new transcription of it has been provided in Boogaart, “Encompassing Past and Present,” 81–86. 75 Sulcipius Severus, “Life,” 153–59. 74

237

238

Late medieval appropriations of St. Martin Example 5.5  The tenor of M5, Fiat voluntas tua, and the melody of the antiphon Domine, si adhuc.

There was a dispute among the clergy of that church [in Candes] and he wished to restore peace … When peace was restored among the clergy, he thought about returning to the monastery [in Tours]. But he suddenly began to lose his strength. He called his brothers and said he was going to die … “why, father, do you abandon us,” they all lamented, “… to whom do you leave us? … who will defend us … Have pity on us whom you abandon …” [and then Martin] addressed himself to the Lord and only in this way replied to those who were weeping: “Lord, if I am still needed for your people, I do not decline the task, thy will be done.” [“Domine, si adhuc populo tuo sum necessarius, non recuso laborem, fiat voluntas tua.”]76

As I have shown elsewhere, it is the melody that sets the words “Fiat voluntas tua” in the antiphon Domine, si adhuc that inspired Machaut’s tenor in M5 (see Example 5.5).77 Yet, what might an adumbrated presence of St. Martin in this motet mean? Since in the Middle Ages the words “Fiat voluntas tua” had, and still have, a clear and immediate association with the Pater noster, why choose those same words from a different, and admittedly lesser known, context?78 In other words, what does St. Martin have to do with M5? One of the most important distinguishing features of Machaut’s motets is his extensive use of French in the upper voices of most of them, despite the tendency in the fourteenth century toward the composition of entirely Latin motets or of formes fixes, sung in French and eschewing a tenor altogether.79 An examination of the intertextuality between Machaut’s sacred Latin tenor and the two secular (French) upper voices helps to explain Machaut’s decision to base M5 on a tenor taken not directly from the Pater noster but from the antiphon Domine, si adhuc from the feast of St. Martin. The point of departure for the following discussion is the concluding phrase of the triplum: “and it is quite clear that my lord Yvain won the love of the great wild lion through true service and not through his knightly valor.” Ibid., 155–56. Maurey, “A Courtly Lover and Earthly Knight,” 172–97. 78 Paul Gehl suggests a possible reason for this preference: Christ’s words in Gethsemane are expressions of individual sufferings; those of the Pater noster are the collective words of the church community (personal communication). 79 Except for Motets 9, 18, 19, and 21–23, composed entirely in Latin, and Motets 11, 16, and 20, which have French in all voices. 76 77

Yvain, or the Knight with the Lion

Yvain, or the Knight with the Lion Decontextualized from its existence as a Latin phrase taken from an antiphon, the tenor abstracts the mood of both motetus and triplum. The narrator of the triplum is the more explicit: although he admits his fear of the lady who threatens to kill him and causes him countless sorrows, he does not intend to leave her. On the contrary, he is “entirely hers,” and does not “wish to be free of this danger.” The tenor thus underlines the narrator’s submission to the lady: her voluntas (will) be done. The concluding words of the triplum, however, present the listener with a semantic problem; in more than one way, the last phrase seems detached from the general context presented in the triplum. It marks a sudden shift from the first person je to the third person – it does not seem to relate in any way to the preceding phrases. How can we reconcile the sudden and late appearance of two new figures, Yvain and the lion? And what do they have to do with the rest of the triplum, the motet as a whole, and St. Martin? Yvain and the lion are leading characters in Chrétien de Troyes’s romance of the second half of the twelfth century, Yvain, ou le chevalier au lion (c. 1176–1181).80 Yvain is the story of a knight who marries Laudine after killing her husband in a bitter fight. Promising to return after one year, he sets out on a journey during which he gains fame and glory in numerous tournaments. However, he neglects to come home on time to Laudine, who now asks him to stay away from her. Yvain goes mad but through a series of adventurous and heroic deeds ultimately regains the love of his wife. The episode relevant to our discussion begins in line 3341, when the lion is first mentioned.81 Wandering through the forest, Yvain suddenly hears a piercing scream. Approaching the scene, he sees a serpent with flames coming out of its mouth, biting a lion’s tail. Instinctively, Yvain decides to help the lion. Before doing this, however, he contemplates his reasons for doing so. He first realizes that he should not help the serpent “because such a venomous and treacherous creature deserves nothing but maltreatment” (3359–61).82 Yvain then rationalizes his desire to protect the lion despite the possibility that the lion might eventually kill him. He regards the lion as a noble beast (“[un] animal noble par excellence”) and cannot bear the For the original Middle French, I have used the following edition: Daniel Poirion, ed., Chrétien de Troyes, œvres complètes, 340–503. Line numbers correspond to this French edition. I have also consulted Burton Raffel’s English edition, Yvain, the Knight of the Lion, from which all English translations are taken. 81 The figure of the lion disappears from the romance in line 6727. 82 “Car une créature venimeuse et félonne ne mérite que d’être maltraitée.” 80

239

240

Late medieval appropriations of St. Martin

idea that the treacherous serpent will kill the lion. After Yvain slays the serpent, the lion stands on his hind paws, crying and thanking him for saving his life. Having won his love, Yvain is thereafter served and helped by the lion. In the Hebrew Bible, animals constitute the summit of the non-human creation. The existence of all animals is considered a fundamental good, with the biblical lion emblematic of magnanimity and courage.83 Throughout medieval Europe, the dichotomy between the lion and the serpent flourished: the serpent, often assuming the form of a dragon, was seen as the incarnation of evil, while the lion was usually the epitome of good.84 This view was primarily transmitted through the Physiologus, written in Alexandria in the second century AD. In the twelfth century the Physiologus regained currency, and, together with Isidore’s Etymologiae, was transformed into the literary genre known as the bestiary.85 The Physiologus is structured allegorically, with every animal used to teach a moral lesson. In the Physiologus, and consequently in medieval bestiaries in general, the lion is invariably Genesis 1:21: “And God created great whales, and every living creature that moveth, which the waters brought forth abundantly, after their kind, and every winged fowl after his kind: and God saw that it was good.” English translations follow the King James Version. In Genesis 49:9, Jacob refers to his son Judah as a lion’s whelp: “Like a lion’s whelp, O Judah, from the prey, my son, thou risest: he stoopeth down, he croucheth as a lion, and as a lioness, who shall rouse him up.” One of the most famous descendants of this “lion’s whelp” is King David. See also Revelation 5: “Do not weep! See, the lion of the tribe of Judah, the root of David, has triumphed.” The serpent in the Bible, however, represents the other pole of the spectrum; whereas the lion is majestic and noble, the serpent embodies everything evil. In Genesis 3:14, God informs the serpent: “Because thou hast done this, thou art cursed above all cattle, and above every beast of the field; upon thy belly shalt thou go, and dust shalt thou eat all the days of thy life.” In Revelation 12:7–9 the dragon (serpent) is portrayed as the devil: “And there was war in heaven: Michael and his angels fought against the dragon; and the dragon fought and his angels, and prevailed not … And the great dragon was cast out, that old serpent, called the devil, and Satan, which deceiveth the whole world: he was cast out into the earth.” In his Etymologiae, Isidore of Seville refers to Draco as a great serpent: “draco maior cunctorum serpentium, sive omnium animantium super terram … Unde et derivatum est in latinum ut diceretur draco.” See Isidore, Etymologiae, Book XII (“De animalibus”), iii. 84 On the association of the serpent/dragon with the doctrine of original sin, and the symbolism of its defeat by Christ and by medieval warriors in medieval art and theology, see Robertson, “The Savior, the Woman, and the Head of the Dragon,” 546–64. 85 Hoogvliet, “De ignotis,” 199. See also Hassig, “Marginal Bestiaries,” 171. For the popularity and influence Isidore’s Etymologiae enjoyed during the Middle Ages, see Voisenet, Bestiaire chrétien, 16–17. Although no exemplar of the Physiologus survives in the Reims Cathedral library, a copy of Isidore of Seville’s Etymologiae is extant. It is reasonable to assume a direct or secondary knowledge of this literature by educated persons in the Middle Ages; there exist over 250 manuscripts of the Physiologus in Latin and other Romance languages, copied between 1100 and 1400. See Carmody, “Physiologus Latinus Versio Y,” 95. Characteristically, medieval bestiaries are not scientific works, but rather moralized treatises used by priests to deliver moral lessons to their congregations. See Merimier, A Medieval Book of Beasts, iv–vi. 83

Yvain, or the Knight with the Lion

the symbol of Christ, or God.86 Yet another link between the lion and God/ Christ is provided in Isidore’s Etymologiae: “but leo is Greek, in Latin it is interpreted ‘king’, the one who rules all animals … when they [the lion and the lioness] sleep, the[ir] eyes are watching [guarding].”87 In Yvain, the lion likewise stands guard at night while Yvain is sleeping. The image of lion-asChrist in the Middle Ages thus seems to resonate strongly with Yvain’s lion. Nevertheless, merely suggesting that Yvain’s lion symbolizes God/Christ still does not explain why Machaut chose to allude to Yvain and the lion at the end of the triplum of M5. In more than one way, Chrétien’s lion not only represents Christ symbolically, but also functions as Christ. Julian Harris has suggested that the moment in the story where Yvain meets the lion marks a turning point for him. Until this time Yvain has been motivated by his sense of pride: he is more interested in taking part in various tournaments and fights than acting like a noble knight. His fame and success have made him forget the promise he made to his wife Laudine to return home after his mission was completed. After the lion incident, however, Harris points out, Chrétien “make[s] it a point to say that the hero is moved by pitié before resolving to fight.”88 Something in Yvain has changed. Indeed, as the triplum asserts, “he has won the love of the great lion.” Yvain is now left to win back the love of his bitter wife. Having attained the love of the lion, he performs his knightly duties in a way that underlines not his “knightly valor,” but his “true service.” Whereas his actions prior to meeting the lion are mere feats of arms motivated by pride and revenge, thereafter his behavior has a clear moral impetus: he overcomes a giant to save an innocent girl accused of treason and about to be burned at the stake, and he successfully fights the three knights to save Lunete, Laudine’s maid, from an unjust trial (4323–579). Through these deeds, the lion helps Yvain achieve his victories, and Chrétien makes it clear that without the lion, Yvain would have failed in his mission. Brodeur, “The Grateful Lion,” 150. See also Physiologus, 3–4; and White, The Book of Beasts, 7–9. Like all medieval bestiaries, the first chapter of Philippe de Thaun’s Bestiaire, for example, is devoted to the lion. Here, we find numerous references to Christ and God. Verses 47–49 carry the following symbolism: “The lion signifies the son of St. Mary; He is king of all people” (“Le Leüns signifie Le fiz Sainte Marie; Reis est de tute gent”). Philippe de Thaün’s Bestiaire was the first to be written in French, in the first third of the twelfth century. Written in England, it uses much imagery derived from Isidore of Seville’s Etymologiae. References to Thaün’s Bestiaire are based on Emanuel Walberg’s edition, Le Bestiaire de Philippe de Thaün. 87 “Leo autem Graece, Latine rex interpretatur, eo quod princeps sit omnium bestiarum … cum dormierint [leo et lea], vigilant oculi.” See Isidore, Etymologiae, XII.ii. 88 Harris, “The Rôle of the Lion,” 1147. See, for example, Yvain’s pity before fighting for Lunete (lines 4357–59): “And an immense pity seized him, hearing and seeing and understanding the poor ladies of that court.” 86

241

242

Late medieval appropriations of St. Martin

The notion of the lion as a guardian, or Christ-like figure, is further enhanced in lines 3479–83: “Yvain rested his head on his shield all night; he rested as best as he could. The lion had enough sense to remain awake and watch over the horse.”89 These lines resonate with a familiar theme in Scripture, one that affirms God’s role as a watchman over his people. Most famously, perhaps, this idea is encapsulated in the spirit of Psalm 121:4–5: “Behold, He shall neither slumber nor sleep – the keeper of Israel. The Lord is thy keeper, the Lord is thy protection upon thy right hand.” In both the triplum of M5 and the romance, the appearance of the lion marks a turning point as well as a climax. In the romance, Yvain’s meeting with the lion underscores a moment of metamorphosis: he has “seen the Lord [lion]” and won back the love of his wife. Similarly, in M5, the concluding allusion to Yvain in the triplum serves to highlight a moment of transformation that has just been stated by the narrator: after expressing his grievances toward his lady, he finally admits that “for nothing [he] might see would [he] wish to be free from this danger [a reference to his lady], for [he] is entirely hers, with no exchange of pledge.” Chrétien’s romance seems to supply M5 with more than just a pretext for winning the love of God. In a more general sense, it is possible to situate the upper voices of the motet within the context of the romance. Yvain’s earliest adventure leads him to the castle of Escaldos the Red, whom he eventually kills in a bitter fight. Upon seeing Escaldos’s wife, Laudine (whom he later marries himself), he immediately falls in love with her, and is subsequently “tortured with grief ” (1508–09) over the thought of the poor lady. Although he is “mightily afraid” (1951) and “half overcome with fear” (1955) of her, he still hopes that she will marry him. Yvain’s meeting with the lady clearly evokes the content and style of Machaut’s triplum, a trope found in other courtly love settings. Although Yvain fears that she will kill him (1230–31), he will do whatever she wishes.90 Like the narrator of Machaut’s triplum, Yvain fears his lady although he “did nothing wrong” (1993–94); he is entirely hers and will consent to her will “completely and in every regard” (1989). In all probability, Machaut chose to include an explicit reference to Yvain and the lion because they symbolize Yvain’s metamorphosis from a brutish warrior to a veritable noble knight – or, in light of the allegorical reading offered above, from an earthly bellator to a miles Christi now solely motivated “Tote la nuit sor son escu, A tel repos come ce fu; Et li lyons ot tant de sens Qu’il veilla et fu an aspens Del cheval garder.” This point is suggested in Brodeur, “The Grateful Lion,” 497. 90 The original French reads: “Dame, la vostre grant merci, que ja ne m’an orroiz dire el.” 89

Yvain, or the Knight with the Lion Example 5.6  Retrograde rhythmic relationship of the tenor and contratenor in Machaut’s M5.

by the wish to perform good deeds under the protective eyes of God. The situation is strikingly similar to that of St. Martin, whose Vita may provide a context not only for the tenor of M5, as I have argued above, but also for the motet’s upper voices. Although the narratives of Yvain and Martin are markedly different, both underline a process of change whereby each is transformed into a knight/soldier of God after a consequential encounter. To be sure, Martin underwent a transformation well before meeting the beggar (his “lion”) – who later revealed himself to have been Christ – in Amiens. Yet this detail was obscured in the tradition that privileged the Amiens episode in the saint’s iconography and in the various Latin and vernacular retellings of the Vita, collapsing all temporal layers of Martin’s life into this single moment. The transformations of both Martin and Yvain are mirrored in Machaut’s musical structure in M5. As noted earlier, the tenor and contratenor together form a retrograde rhythmic relationship (see Example  5.6), featuring the kind of symmetry that fascinated Machaut in numerous other works.91 The talea of the tenor turned around thus becomes the contratenor talea. Just as Yvain and St. Martin changed directions and sought to adopt humility and devotion in their capacities as knights/soldiers, so the retrograding of the tenor in the contratenor offers a graphic metaphor for their conversions.92 This change of direction may also have a pictorial counterpart in depictions of the charity scene in Amiens. As we saw in Figures 2.1 and 5.3 above, as well as in numerous other similar portrayals, Martin is mounted on a horse See, for example, the various canons at the unison (e.g., Lai 16 [Le Lay de Confort], Ballade 17), and the famous example of the retrograde canon, R14 (Ma fin est mon commencement). See the discussion in Wright, The Maze and the Warrior, 111–14. For the issue of musical symmetry in Machaut’s motets 1–17 see Robertson, Guillaume de Machaut and Reims, 168–71. 92 The Latin verb convertire means to turn back, to reverse (meanings that are infrequent in use of the modern English convert), but also to change direction and “convert” in a religious sense. Admittedly, the St. Martin imagery is allusive and abstracted, evident only in the tenor melody, while the reference to Yvain is incontestable and found in the words of the triplum. In the context of M5, St. Martin is perhaps an aural, Christianized echo of the Yvain story. 91

243

244

Late medieval appropriations of St. Martin

facing one direction, while turning toward the other, where the beggar is literally standing behind the horse.93 When Machaut composed M5, he must have found the tenor “Fiat voluntas tua” particularly appropriate for “the matter [from which he wished] to make the motet,” just as the author of a near-contemporary manual, Egidius de Murino, recommended.94 Although he might have chosen a chant segment from the setting of these same words in the Pater noster, he found he had at his disposal an even more precise context, with respect to his plans for the motet. True, the words “Fiat voluntas tua” convey the same message in both settings – that is, obedience and surrender to someone else’s will. However, in the antiphon Domine, si adhuc, these words also encapsulate the theme of knightly conversion and humility, evidenced in both the music and subject matter of M5. The life of St. Martin may offer more than simply a pertinent allusion for M5. Machaut held a canonry at Reims and was present during the siege of that city in 1360. He knew the miseries of the first decades of the Hundred Years War at first hand. France would see many of its cities occupied and pillaged; its population devastated by natural and man-made disasters; one of its kings taken captive; and many of its sanctuaries increasingly under English, and later on also under Anglo-Burgundian, rule. Especially in the second and third quarters of the fourteenth century, the areas to suffer the most were those of northeastern France, located on the invasion route taken by the English: Artois, Picardy, Champagne, and the Ile-de-France.95 In addition to the changing geo-political boundaries of certain French territories controlled by various dynastic families (the Plantagenets, the Valois, and the Burgundy branch of the Valois), prolonged internal unrest impinged on the French monarchy and on ordinary people as well, notably the peasant uprising of the Jacquerie in 1358, and the taking over of Paris by Charles II, king of Navarre, a move that effectively challenged the French monarchy. Adding to this grim picture were periods of famine, and notably the deadly consequences of the Black Death epidemic of 1348. Against this backdrop of a daily reality saturated with images of horror and vulnerability (personal and public, religious and intellectual, economic Other examples may be found in the miniatures in the following manuscripts: BmT 185 (a missal from the Cathedral of Tours copied between 1363 and 1379), fo. 253; and Université de Liège, Bibliothèque Générale de Philosophie et Lettres, MS 431 (the so-called Psalter of Lambert-le-Begue, copied 1285–90). 94 “First take the Tenor from some antiphon or responsory or another chant from the antiphonal, and the words should concord with the matter you wish to make the motet.” Egidius de Murino, De modo componendi tenores motetorum, quoted in Leech-Wilkinson, Compositional Techniques, Vol. I, 21. 95 Jones, “War and Fourteenth-Century France,” 345. 93

Yvain, or the Knight with the Lion

and social), we may understand the increasing reliance on and supplication of patron saints such as St. Martin, who had a militaristic vocation and who enjoyed an enduring national recognition as well. Although the national patron saint of France, St. Denis, never lost his radiance, he did not possess the military pedigree that made St. Martin such an attractive figure during the fourteenth century. Notwithstanding the attempt to promote him as a warrior saint in the Chanson de Jerusalem, recounting the First Crusade and its aftermath, Denis was, after all, a martyr – hardly a promising image for a nation under siege – and rarely associated with the class of warrior saints as a whole.96 Regions south of the Loire were generally spared from the massive warfare experienced in the northeastern and southwestern parts of France. Given the association of St. Martin with the city of Tours, it is likely that a connection between his increasing popularity and relevance to the French in this tumultuous period might have something to do with the relative peace that the city and its sanctuaries experienced.97 It is perhaps owing to this renewed appeal of Martin that Guillaume de Machaut, a composer whose personal and professional life were deeply influenced by the turmoil of the fourteenth century, alluded to Martin in one of his early motets. In Martin, Machaut no doubt found an inspiring image. As a composer of vernacular poetry and sacred music, Machaut was uniquely qualified to mediate between the secular and sacred domains. Martin was a knight, a “soldier of great prowess,” but he was not expected to fight. Military victories were attributed to him, but Laudes regiae only occasionally invoked his name in order to guarantee his intercession on behalf of princes and warriors. His association with the L’Homme armé tradition was real but tenuous, reflecting the subtlety of the contour lines of his image as they were projected in the literary and pictorial forms discussed above.98 Tuscan translations of the Legenda aurea refer to him as cavaliere de Cristo, but secular orders of chivalry preferred to associate themselves with the patronage of Sts. George, Maurice, Michael, and even with the Holy Spirit.99 The iconography of St. Martin juxtaposes two different but compatible layers of codes: the earthly and martial together with the sacred. Various forms MacGregor, “Negotiating Knightly Piety,” 340–41. As for St. Louis, despite his crusading activities, his posthumous reputation did not include military fame. For the French nobility, after all, St. Louis “stood for coinage, fiscal privilege, and a sound judicial system,” and between 1350 and 1500 he “became the patron saint of individual confraternities.” See Beaune, The Birth of an Ideology, 116, 120–21. 98 On the liturgical forms of knightly piety see MacGregor, “Negotiating Knightly Piety,” 321–22. 99 As did the Order of the Knot, founded by Louis of Naples in 1352 (Keen, Chivalry, 182). For the Tuscan translations see Hoch, “St. Martin of Tours,” 477 n. 420. 96 97

245

246

Late medieval appropriations of St. Martin

of devotion and literary genres with a more popular appeal stressed the one aspect of Martin’s life that was the least emphasized in his liturgy and Vita, namely, the military vocation with its suggestive chivalric overtones. Liturgy typically presented a nuanced and complex understanding of the saint – one that was more enduring and changed little throughout the Middle Ages – usually insisting on his threefold capacity as bishop, monk, and soldier. The stereotypical qualities of the medieval knight could be equally vindicated and displayed in religious and secular contexts. Generosity, noble birth, loyalty, courtesy, and valor are all visible or implied in the newly fashioned image of St. Martin, woven from the various liturgical and more popular forms of piety examined above. Just like music, the concept of chivalry can be as elusive as it is evocative. When they are juxtaposed in a single work of art – as in the small number of compositions we have examined in this chapter – the result can be just as subtle as St. Martin himself. By the fourteenth century he was not merely soldier, monk, and bishop. He was also the Patron of France, a knight of great prowess, and a chivalric hero as complex as Yvain.

Afterword

All medieval saints were to some degree local, associated with individual places through a variety of means: the site of their martyrdom, the place where they worked miracles, the location of an object related to them, and most powerfully through the presence of their corporeal remains. St. Martin was unquestionably a local saint, yet thanks to the persistent promotion by Sulpicius Severus, he was venerated universally well before the church dedicated to him in Tours became his pivotal locus of sanctity, that is, before he became also a local saint. The events leading to his burial in Tours, moreover, reveal the extent to which Martin was also a regional or even a supraregional saint. Both in Poitiers and in Tours his clients bickered over his final resting site, with the citizens of Tours ultimately gaining the upper hand. Yet even in Tours, as we have seen throughout this book, the cult of Martin could be more appropriately characterized as multi-local, with Marmoutier, Tours Cathedral, and the church of Saint-Martin all claiming important ties to the saint. There are many tensions implicit in the local and universal portrayals of St. Martin, yet they are by no means contradictory. As Catherine Cubitt stresses, “There is no simple opposition between universal and local saints: even so widely venerated a saint as Peter acted as the local patron of Rome.”1 Indeed there are constant, local, close-read adjustments attributable to specific individuals and other forces that come from society writ larger and represent a response by individuals (like Machaut, for instance) to broader cultural imperatives. The cult of St. Martin in Spain, Italy, Britain, the Low Countries, and even in many parts of Gaul did not depend entirely on developments in Tours. The Merovingian monarchy, for example, adopted Martin as a national patron saint without establishing a significant contact with the city of Tours.2 Exactly during the Merovingian period, Gregory of Tours strove to make Martin a model of the local bishop saint, and saw in him a personal patron saint.

Cubitt, “Universal and Local Saints in Anglo-Saxon England,” 423. Thacker, “Loca sanctorum,” 1–31; and Van Dam, Saints and Their Miracles, 25–26.

1 2

247

248

Afterword

This power of the cult to inspire certain kinds of replication but not others is important. Certain themes, such as the tripartite attributes of Martin as bishop, monk, and soldier, and his apostolic vocation, found widespread resonance because they stemmed from the amalgam of sources written by Sulpicius Severus or inspired by him, which formed the basis of the saint’s universal appeal from early on. Yet other themes, most importantly Martin’s transformation into a medieval knight, seem to have circulated independently of any single source of inspiration, and sprung up quasi-spontaneously as a response to larger processes that affected congregations of believers far and wide, including in Tours. As we have seen, Martin had a role in securing military victories for the people of Tours – events locally commemorated by his custodes sepulchri in the feasts of Reversion and Subvention. But his identification as a veritable miles Christi extended to a wider European audience because of a host of socio-political circumstances that had little to do with Tours. Not least among these was the generalized recasting of the Roman soldier-saints of late antiquity in the mold of knightly chivalry. By contrast, some chants, miracle accounts, and prosas were so tightly tied to the city of Tours that they could not possibly have found any resonance outside the city. In many respects, the modes of transmission of the various components of Martin’s liturgy are perfectly congruent with what is known about the lines of transmission of other liturgies of the Sanctorale, where there exists a fertile tension between the local and universal aspects of the saint’s veneration. This tension is one of the main reasons for the success of Martin’s cult. In this book, I hope to have elucidated the counterpoint between local, often petty manipulations of the cult on the one hand, and national and international cultural developments on the other. Sulpicius Severus played a crucial role in making Martin a universal saint, and his pioneering Vita became a model followed for many saintly figures, and a literary genre adopted by numerous hagiographers in subsequent centuries. The powerful prestige that his early and non-formulaic Vita brought for Tours and its saint cannot be overstated. The image in Figure 2.1 again proves pertinent. Almost from the moment Sulpicius Severus left Martin’s presence, his fertile book in hand, St. Martin’s legend assumed a life of its own. Martin’s devotees at every period believed that his complex destiny and their parts in it were divinely ordained. Their accounts, whether verbal or musical, are often profoundly moving and beautiful. Our story is rather more dependent on human motives, power politics, and propaganda, but it is no less compelling for all that.

Appendices

A.  The 1141 miracle account for Martin’s July 4 feast (source: BmT 1294, p. 221) … Hic autem de quo loquimur: canonicus a pueritia nutritus in eadem ecclesia honestam et sine querela vitam duxerat. Cum vero iam esset decrepitae aetatis, omnia quaecumque habere potuit in ornamentis ecclesia B. Martini distribuit, et cum iam nihil penitus haberet mortemque sibi sentiret adesse praesentem, ut iam praemisimus, vigilia translationis Beatissimi Martini, populo simul cum clero recedente, in supradicta remansit Ecclesia cumque collegiale[?] ante B. Martini corpus ageret excubias, ecce S. Martinus pontificalibus exornatus insignibus cum tribus aliis episcopis chorum ingreditur et coram altari brevi completa oratione, ipse quidem in sede pontificali, aliorum vero trium, unus juxta ipsum, duo autem in altera parte chori recederunt. Hoc canonicus, qui inter duos latebat chorindros [sic] aspiciens gaudio metuque turbatus in oratione prosternitur et lacrimis ora suffusis celestes viros tota mentis intentione contemplatur, cum interim quatuor alios pontifices videt eadem qua venerant alii via venire, unumque illorum altiorem caeteris et comptiorem imminere. Ut vero et ipsi orationem sicut alii compleverunt in suis sedibus juxta alios consederunt, ille autem quem longiorem caeteris apparuisse diximus, coram B. Martino assistens, submissa voce sic ait: Sciat paternitas vestra Domine quemdam clericum intra Basilicam ipsam latere, nosque contueri attentius. Cui Sanctus permittite inquit eum ibi manere, quia bona intentione huc advenit. Clericus haec audiens alacrior in contemplatione persistere coepit, cum subito chorum intrare prospicit praesulem veneranda specie barba subrufa, parum habentem calvitii et  alii similiter insignibus episcopalibus renitentem. Qui omnes sicut alii facta oratione in choro consederunt. Ille autem rufus coram B. Martino veniens, humiliter suggessit ei, Non est, inquiens, Domine, dignum ut clericus illo nostro intersit officio, quia necdum nostram societatem impetravit a Domino. Post haec S. Martinus surgens venit ad locum ubi se clericus latere credebat, et manu apprehendens eum, et levans a terra dixit ei, Quoniam fratres et episcopi nostri nolunt te interesse huic nostro conventui, egredere frater, et deforis

249

250

Appendices

audies nocturnale nostrum officium. Canonicus vero inquit, Cum omnes huius Ecclesiae portae clausae sint et obseratae, quomodo possum exire Sanctissime Pater nisi mihi copiam praestiteris abeundi? Tunc B. Martinus manum eum tenens, duxit secum usque ad majores Ecclesiae fores, et eas sine clavi aperiens praecipit ut exiret. Clericus autem ad pedes eius corruens cum lacrimis, ut sui memoriam haberet, observat, ut veniam peccatorum a benigno Salvatore ei acquirat. Sanctus ergo Pontifex finem dierum praedixit illi imminere, et ut se praeparet ad transeundum[?] ex hoc mundo praecipit, spem veniae in clementia salvatoris sibi positam, nihil de salute desperandum Christum credentibus et amantibus. … Here is what we say on the matter: a canon, raised from boyhood in that church, led an honest and blameless life. When he was getting old, whatever he had he donated for ornaments for the church of blessed Martin. And when he had absolutely nothing more left, and felt that death was now approaching him (as we said before), after the vigil of the translation of the blessed Martin was over, he stayed in the aforementioned collegiate church when the people and the clergy left. And, as this canon kept watch before blessed Martin’s body, behold, St. Martin, adorned with pontifical regalia, entered the choir with three other bishops. After saying a short prayer before the altar, Martin sat in the pontifical chair; one of the three others stood next to him, and the two others processed to the other side of the choir. The canon, who was hiding between two columns[?], moved by joyful awe, bowed down in prayer. With tears coursing down his cheeks, he gazed upon the heavenly men with undivided attention, while meanwhile he saw four other priests coming from the same place as the others, one of whom, more elegant than the others, stood much taller than the rest. When they had said their prayer like the others, they sat in their places alongside the others, whereas the one we described as taller than the others stood before the blessed Martin, and said in a low voice: “May your fatherhood know, master, that a certain cleric is hiding in this basilica, watching us carefully.” To which the saint replied: “Allow him to stay here, since he came here with a good intention.” The cleric listened to these words and remained in eager contemplation, when suddenly he saw a bishop of marvelous appearance, red bearded, slightly bald, and with other shining tokens of a bishop. All of them together sat in the choir after they had said a prayer. The redhead came before the blessed Martin and humbly petitioned him saying: “Sir, it is not appropriate for this cleric to be among us during the office, since he has not yet sought entrance into our community from the Lord.” After that St. Martin rose and came to the place where he thought this cleric was hiding, and grasping him by the

The provenance of BmT 159

hand lifted him from the ground and said: “Since our brothers and bishops do not want you to stay in our midst, leave, brother. You will hear our nocturnal office from outside.” The canon, however, said: “when all the doors of the church are closed and locked, how can I leave, Holy Father, unless you give me a way to get out.” Then Blessed Martin, holding his hand, led him to the great gates of the church, and opening them without a key, ordered him to leave. Then the cleric fell at Martin’s feet, weeping, and begged him to be mindful of him and intercede that he might gain mercy for his sins from his gracious Savior. The holy priest predicted that his death was approaching, and instructed him to prepare himself to depart this world, and not to lose of the hope of mercy of the Savior laid up for him, nor of the salvation that comes to those who believe in Christ and love him.

B.  The provenance of Bibliothèque municipale de Tours 159 The centrality of BmT 159 to the study of music and liturgy in Saint-Martin cannot be understated: most of the celebrations it transmits date to the last quarter of the thirteenth century, making it the earliest service book for the office extant from this church. As we have seen, it occupies a unique position among French sources in general in all that concerns the transmission of prosas for St. Martin. Because of its overall significance as the sole extant mode of transmission for this group of songs, it is important to make clear the status of this source as a reliable witness to the musical tradition in the basilica of Saint-Martin of Tours in the Middle Ages. Because of the manner in which BmT 159 comes down to us, as a manuscript consisting of disparate sources belonging to various temporal layers, there is no concrete evidence that it was copied and destined for Saint-Martin of Tours. A careful examination of its discrete parts can provide insight into the possible origins of this source and its intended usage. Substantially, BmT 159 is a compilation of four separate sources, which, having been reorganized and intercalated, resulted in the following fourpart service book: (1) The opening calendar (fos. 2–7v); and (2) the ensuing ferial psalter and litanies (fos. 8–81), date from approximately the same period. The calendar may have been written in the early 1320s, while the psalter dates c. 1340–45. (3) Temporale: fos. 83–170v. The most heterogeneous part of the manuscript, it opens with an eighteenth-century antiphoner, in use in

251

252

Appendices

Saint-Pierre-le-Puellier (as the title page on fo. 83 divulges), a church dependent on Saint-Martin.1 Stretching continuously from fo. 83 to fo. 145v, the antiphoner opens with Christmas Day and ends on Ascension. The three subsequent feasts, however, are from different periods. The folios containing the liturgy of Pentecost and the week leading to Trinity (fos. 146–57) derive from a breviary dating to c. 1285–1300. The office of Trinity (fos. 157v–158v) marks a fleeting return to the eighteenthcentury stratum. It is entirely a palimpsest, and traces of the previous layer of c. 1285–1300 are still evident in the upper right-hand corner of fo. 157v. The very beginning of Corpus Christi (fo. 158v), namely the opening portion of the antiphon Sacerdos in eternum, belongs to the eighteenth-century layer.2 The remainder of this lengthy office (fos. 158v–170), however, continues with neither interruption nor lacuna on the following fo. 159, copied around the 1320s (possibly by the same hand as the calendar and psalter). (4) Sanctorale (June 24–November 23), fos. 171–307v.3 Aside from the opening feast – that of John the Baptist (June 24, fos. 171–176v), which belongs to the breviary copied c. 1340–1345  – the Sanctorale comes from a single source, a breviary copied c. 1285–1300, in the same hand just as fos. 146–57 above.4 It contains a wide variety of feasts, from elaborate nine-lesson offices to modest commemorations.5 Importantly, the single most substantial space in the extant part of this breviary is devoted to St. Martin’s November feast, which occupies almost ten folios (fos. 282–91). “Antiphonarium ad usum precentoris Ecclesiae Collegiatae Sancti Petri Puellarum, membri dependentis ab insigni Ecclesia Beatissimi Martini Turonensis.” 2 The original beginning of this feast must have been removed from BmT 159 in the eighteenth century for the sake of repair only, and not because its music or text were incorrect or incomplete. That portion of the feast’s liturgy found on the upper-left column of fo. 159 suggests that the no-longer-extant opening of the feast too was copied on the lower portion of the rightside column of the immediately preceding folio. In order to avoid an awkward compilation, the eighteenth-century scribe simply copied in his own hand that portion of the office which he discarded. He thus achieved paleographical coherency, with fo. 158v written entirely in an eighteenth-century hand, and fo. 159 in a fourteenth-century one. 3 Folio 170r (lower half of right-hand column) and 170v were erased. In its present condition, the Sanctorale in fact ends on November 24 (St. Chrysogonus), but the latter was added by a fifteenth-century hand. 4 The absence of the office for St. Louis (August 25, canonized in 1297) from this portion of the breviary lends further support to this supposition. 5 I am extremely grateful to Patricia Stirnemann for her insightful observations concerning BmT 159. Based on paleographical considerations and a thorough examination of various aspects of the illuminations contained in this source, the proposed dating of the various sections of BmT 159 is entirely the product of Stirnemann’s acumen. 1

The provenance of BmT 159

It is evident, therefore, that the compiler of BmT 159 did his utmost to make the temporal layers at his disposal correspond to generic subdivisions.6 Between the Temporale and the Sanctorale, the latter seems to have been preserved in BmT 159 in a form closest to its original state. Given the gamut of feasts it contains, it was probably extracted from a summer breviary. This no longer extant summer breviary also had a Temporale section, a fraction of which may have survived in BmT 159 in the office for Pentecost (fos. 146–57). The hybridity of the Temporale is clearly displayed in the two main generic constituents of our manuscript: it comprises an antiphoner as well as a breviary. What is more, the latter incorporates three distinct sources (comprising more than twenty folios) following one another (fos. 146–70). The eighteenth-century scribe could have easily copied the entire Temporale anew in his own handwriting, without having to produce such an amalgam of elements. He has done so with the office of Trinity, which he copied as a palimpsest on fos. 157v–158v. It may well be that he wished to preserve the fourteenth-century Corpus Christi office because it was the only source available to him that contained the five unique prosas that adorn this celebration.

The calendar Since it is obvious that the disparate parts of BmT 159 were bound together only in the eighteenth century, and since the provenance of the respective parts has never been convincingly elucidated, we may ask ourselves what parts, if any, were in use in Saint-Martin, and in what period.7 Let us begin with the calendar, one of the most concise sections of church service books, and one that has the misleading allure of straightforwardness. There are numerous indications (all in the original hand) that this calendar is not only from the region of Tours in general, but more specifically from SaintMartin. The presence here of three Martinian feasts regularly celebrated in Tours (July 4, November 11, and December 13), as well as celebrations that are only of local significance (such as feasts of Arnulf, archbishop of As we shall see further below, the calendar and the late-thirteenth-century breviary might have been used together already in the Middle Ages. Here, then, I refer to the hypothetical medieval compiler, not to the eighteenth-century one. 7 The two main catalogues that cite BmT 159 plainly state that the provenance of the breviary portion is Saint-Martin. They do not take into account the abundant corrections made to this manuscript, which would seem to suggest a change in usage. See Collon, Catalogue générale: Vol. I, 115; and Leroquais, Les Bréviaires manuscrits, Vol. IV, 211. 6

253

254

Appendices

Tours, July 18; Venantius, abbot of Tours, October 11; and Brice, bishop of Tours, November 13) all furnish the calendar with its local Tours flavor. Is the calendar therefore from Tours? These features certainly support a Tours provenance. As we have seen in Chapter 2, although Martin’s July 4 festival has the unmistakable underpinnings of a local event, it was celebrated ubiquitously. That the calendar of BmT 159 also features an octave for this celebration, moreover, is telling. Such an occasion would have provided a particularly potent symbol reinforcing the local association of a feast that was also celebrated on a national level, notwithstanding its unmistakable local significance.8 The presence of several additional feasts, moreover, points to Tours as the likely provenance of our calendar, and probably to Saint-Martin. The feast honoring the “Seven Sleepers” (July 27), who, according to the twelfthcentury legend written in Marmoutier were Martin’s first cousins who formed part of the first generation of monks in that monastery, appears in the calendar of BmT 159, albeit in a fifteenth-century hand.9 By contrast, this celebration, which is featured in all the Saint-Martin calendars postdating BmT 159, is found in only a single calendar from the Cathedral of Tours (BmT 147, copied before 1494), further strengthening the likelihood of a Saint-Martin provenance.10 An additional localizing element may be found in the feast of Aredius (August 25), who may be identified as St. Aredius, abbot of Limoges in the first quarter of the seventh century; his liturgy is found on fos. 230v–232, that is, in the c. 1285–1300 layer of the breviary.11 The calendar too features this celebration, inscribed in the original phase of the copying. The celebration of this feast is quite uncommon, and the saint seems to have enjoyed only local fame. Yet this festival is inscribed in all calendars from SaintMartin, while absent from those from the nearby Cathedral. Its presence in both calendar and breviary suggests that the two parts might have been intended to go along with one another. Moreover, and very much in keeping with the hybrid nature of the Temporale that it precedes, the calendar too seems to be an amalgam of usages. As we shall see further below, the

Such octaves are not to be found in service books outside Saint-Martin. For the legend, see PL 71:1105–18. The legend was written, in all probability, “before 1181 and possibly before 1156.” See Farmer, Communities of Saint Martin, 310; and also Perdrizet, Le Calendrier, 263–64. 10 Further pointing to Saint-Martin and away from the Cathedral are two St. Gatien feasts – Translation (May 2) and Reversion (October 19) – which were absent from the original layer of the calendar when it was first copied, but were added by a later hand. 11 As the readings on fo. 230v inform us, Aredius was active in Limoges “in Aquitanie provincia.” 8 9

The provenance of BmT 159

calendar might in fact reflect the usages of both Paris and Saint-Martin of Tours. When examined against all extant calendars from Saint-Martin up to the late fifteenth century, the calendar of BmT 159 is conspicuous for the relative number of celebrations unique to it – seven in the month of January alone. Even though the overwhelming majority of these feasts are of lesser reputation, the absence of three celebrations is particularly surprising: (1) Martin’s Subvention (May 12); (2) the translation of the relics of St. Brice (a three-candle feast celebrated on June 22); and most surprisingly, perhaps, (3) the feast commemorating the translation of Martin’s head (December 1), which occurred in 1323.12 The absence of the feast of St. Ivo (May 19, instituted in 1347), supported by paleographical evidence that suggests a c. 1320s date for this calendar, however, might elucidate the lack of Martin’s December 1 feast. Two additional oddities for a calendar presumably from Saint-Martin need to be mentioned. First, the feast of St. Louis (August 25)  is plainly missing from the original layer of the calendar (it was added by a later hand). For a church that enjoyed extremely close ties to the French monarchy, such a glaring omission is indeed remarkable. Secondly, the presence here of a celebration of local caliber commemorating the miracle performed by St. Geneviève in Notre-Dame of Paris (November 26, feast established in 1131) is likewise surprising.13 If the calendar of BmT 159 is indeed from Tours, then it is the only one from that city that features the feast. Is the provenance of our calendar, therefore, Parisian? The rubric on December 4 certainly seems to suggest so: it proclaims “Susceptio reliquiarum” (written in the original hand), a feast celebrating the reception of the relics of five saints, and one that is distinctive of the Cathedral of Notre-Dame of Paris and its dependent churches.14 Indeed, Craig Wright has concluded that “any service book prescribing a feast of the relics on December 4 can only belong to the liturgical usage of the secular churches of the diocese of Paris.”15 We can only conclude, then, that this manuscript deliberately conflates the usage of Tours and Paris.

Incidentally, the calendar does not utilize the candle system already in use since the twelfth century (cf. the calendar of BmT 193). However, neither does the calendar of BmT 194, which dates to the mid fifteenth century. 13 Perdrizet, Le Calendrier, 271. 14 Baltzer, “Another Look at the Composite Office and Its History.” On the composite office for this feast see Wright, “The Feast,” 12. 15 Wright, “The Feast,” 12. 12

255

256

Appendices

The compound nature of this calendar is further illuminated by the unusual juxtaposition of feasts that are not usually found together in a single calendar. Although Martin’s July 4 and November 11 feasts were indeed celebrated in Paris, that of December 13, present in the calendar of BmT 159, was not. Moreover, at least one feast characteristic of the Parisian calendar is wanting altogether in the calendar of BmT 159: the Invention of St. Denis and His Companions (April 22). Thus, it is possible that the calendar was copied for a Parisian church, and that it was later adapted to the use of Saint-Martin. More probably, however, it originated in a milieu close to the French royal house, which might explain the quasi-conflation of the liturgies of Tours and Paris.16 As we have seen, ties between the French monarchy and Saint-Martin were intimate. Most of the deans appointed in the thirteenth century were appointees of the king: some of them were active as counselors to the king in the royal court, and others were keepers of the seal.17 It is possible that a dignitary belonging to this milieu provided the mechanism through which the hybrid calendar of BmT 159 became part of a service book in use in Saint-Martin. There can be no doubt, moreover, that the church for which it was originally destined had extremely close ties to the cult of St. Martin, and to the church dedicated to him in Tours.

Agreement between calendar and breviary Significantly, although the calendar and the bulk of the breviary section date to different periods, it seems that already in the early fifteenth century they were used in tandem. The feast of John the Baptist (June 24) is a case in point: as we have seen in Chapter 1, an octave was added to the calendar of Saint-Martin only in the beginning of the fifteenth century (BmT 150). Since an octave for this celebration was still not called for when the calendar of BmT 159 was copied in the 1320s, it was understandably added by a later hand (fo. 5). The breviary portion of the manuscript, copied c. 1285–1300, likewise lacks the liturgy for this octave (July 1), which would have been found between the commemoration of Paul (June 30) and that of Processus and Martinianus (July 2). In what seems to be an attempt to bring the breviary into agreement with the above-mentioned adjustment made in the calendar, a later hand, possibly the same that made the fifteenth-century additions to the calendar, added a tie mark above the rubric signaling the Wright, personal communication. Farmer, Communities of Saint Martin, 201 n. 218.

16 17

The provenance of BmT 159

feast of Processus and Martinianus, and marked the addition of an octave to the feast of John the Baptist. Paleographical evidence, kindly communicated to me by Patricia Stirnemann from the IRHT in Paris, lends further support to the supposition that both parts, calendar and breviary, were used together well before the eighteenth century, when the two manuscripts were bound together. According to Stirnemann, the scribes working on the fourteenth-century portions of BmT 159 attempted to imitate the script and filigrees of the thirteenth-century section.18 These observations also find support in the seamless transitions between the thirteenth- and fourteenth-century parts. The office of Mary Magdalene (July 22), for instance, opens with a hymn found in the lower right-hand column, a palimpsest written in the fourteenthcentury layer (fo. 196v). The office continues in the same fourteenth-century hand for another folio (fo. 197r–v) when a flawless shift back to the c. 1285–1300 layer takes place on fo. 198 (the invitatory on fo. 198 marks a brief transition to the fourteenth-century layer). Regardless of the provenance of the late-thirteenth-century breviary and that of the calendar (as well as the ferial psalter), the two must have been used together in a single religious establishment already by the fourteenth century.

Erasures and additions of text and music Thus far, I have been primarily concerned with liturgical and paleographical evidence. It now remains to examine the various layers of music and text transmitted in BmT 159. What can the copious modifications made to the melodies of certain chants teach us, and what information can be gleaned from those chants that were left intact, with little or no revision at all? Satisfactory answers to these questions are not easy to come by. As was already noted, if BmT 159 is indeed from Saint-Martin, then the thirteenthcentury breviary portion of it constitutes the church’s earliest extant service book for the office; earlier sources from Saint-Martin to which BmT 159 might be compared are wanting.19 With this caveat in mind, let us briefly examine what may potentially be the most interesting and promising place to begin such a query – namely, St. Martin’s principal festival. There is good reason to believe that in Saint-Martin, the November 11 office would have seen relatively little change throughout the centuries; 18 19

Personal communication. Nor is there an ample number of notated office manuscripts that postdate this source from Tours in general.

257

258

Appendices

although it witnessed a number of liturgical accretions, the antiquity of its core elements must have been a source of pride and gratification to the canons in the church dedicated to him in Tours. Indeed, when in 1282 Pope Martin IV instructed the canons of Saint-Martin to adopt the liturgy of the Ecclesia Romana in their collegiate church, he recognized the distinctiveness of the church’s rituals, and therefore permitted the clergy to celebrate certain special feasts according to their own custom.20 As the church’s customary makes clear, there can be no doubt that Martin’s November 11 feast was considered one of the most exceptional celebrations adorning SaintMartin’s calendar. Given that we do not have a November 11 office from Saint-Martin that predates that of BmT 159, the importance of the abovementioned assumption – namely, that the transmission of Martin’s office in Saint-Martin was highly stable – cannot be underestimated. For if subsequent manuscripts from that church all agree with BmT 159 on the liturgy of Martin, they will confirm, retroactively, the status of BmT 159 as a source originating in that church. Agostino Magro, who has worked closely with the service books of SaintMartin, has recently concluded that BmT 159 was not originally from SaintMartin, and that it was “entirely modified and corrected in the fifteenth century in order to render it according to the use of the collegiate church.”21 In support of his conclusion, he cites the great number of modifications made to the breviary. Indeed, even a casual leafing through BmT 159 shows that the manuscript underwent considerable editing after its original copying, and hence Magro’s supposition is entirely plausible and reasonable. We have already seen above, however, that the calendar is in fact hybrid. Moreover, a closer examination of the breviary contained in BmT 159 reveals that the picture is less clear. It is possible to embrace the notion of a radical transformation in usage on the one hand, and affirm the undeniable stamp of Saint-Martin in some instances on the other. As we have seen in Chapter 2, Saint-Martin preserved a unique office for its patron saint’s chief celebration: the series of responsories distinguishing this office produces distinct contour lines shared only by sources hailing from Saint-Martin and its dependent churches, such as Saint-Cosme. “[A]uthoritate vobis praesentium indulgemus, ut in celebratione officiorum praedictorum, ordine quem ecclesia romana in divinis officiis celebrandis observat, uti libere si eidem ecclesiae videritis expedire possitis; et nihilominus speciales ipsius ecclesiae vestrae festivitates, si velitis, more solito celebrare.” For the complete bull, published on February 13, 1282, see Abrégé de la deffense, 41. 21 “En fait il a été entièrement revisé et modifié au xvème siècle pour le render ‘à l’usage’ de la collégiale.” Magro, “Plain-chant ou polyphone?,” 377. 20

The provenance of BmT 159

Significantly, this particular office differs from other November 11 celebrations found in the churches of Tours and its environs: despite their geographical proximity to Saint-Martin, service books from both the Cathedral and the convent of Saint-Mary-of-Grace, for example, reveal a different order of responsories for this festival. Given the shining singularity of this celebration in Saint-Martin, and in light of the discussion in Chapter 2, it stands to reason that since BmT 159 transmits a series of responsories for Martin’s November 11 feast that is unique to Saint-Martin, this manuscript, or more precisely, the breviary portion thereof, also originated in this church.22 It is therefore surprising that certain elements of this office in BmT 159 were heavily modified (the textual corrections are relatively negligible compared to the musical ones). The feast’s octave, for instance, was entirely altered by a fifteenth-century scribe, presumably a canon from Saint-Martin. Most of the chants were crossed out and replaced with new ones added in the lower margins of fos. 290v–291. Moreover, in the original phase of copying, the November 11 feast was designated “Translatio beati Martini,” a title that was later erased and replaced with “Transitus beati Martini” (fo. 282). Yet a person familiar with the liturgy of the thaumaturge in Tours would have known that the feast commemorating Martin’s ordination and the translation of his relics (Translatio) takes place on July 4, not to be confused with the November feast that commemorates the arrival of Martin’s body from Candes to Tours (his Transitus). This blunder could easily lead one to believe that the original copyist was not from Tours, hence the mistake of confusing Transitus with Translatio. Indeed, the illuminated initials, filigrees, and handwriting of the bulk of BmT 159 (that is, of the late-thirteenth-century breviary) unmistakably point to a Parisian artist.23 The manuscript, then, was probably copied in Paris. It is a considerably more difficult a task to assess the nature of the musical erasures and additions made in BmT 159 (what usage was the new rendering supposed to reflect, for instance?), for, as mentioned above, no earlier notated source containing similar repertory from Saint-Martin is extant. Although a later notated breviary from that church does survive (BmT 149, dating to the second quarter of the fourteenth century), it consists of the winter portion only, and so the repertories that these two sources contain

A much less likely scenario is one in which BmT 159 inaugurates a completely new liturgy for St. Martin, one that was copied in subsequent service books in Saint-Martin, and that differed from what was hitherto known in that church. There is nothing in the history of Saint-Martin, however, that would warrant such a far-reaching supposition. 23 Once again, I am indebted to Stirnemann for this information (personal communication). 22

259

260

Appendices

do not overlap. Fortunately, however, there exists a single celebration from the Temporale that is transmitted in both sources: Pentecost.24 A comparison of the feast’s vigil, as well as the five ensuing ferias in both sources, sheds light on the nature of BmT 159 and reveals its original destination. As far as Pentecost is concerned, the main difference between these two breviaries is evident, above all, in the attribution of lessons to the canonical hours: they tend to vary at almost every hour of the day. Nonetheless, and more importantly, they show a remarkable consistency in all that concerns the distribution of responsories and their verses, as well as hymns and antiphons: without exception, both sources prescribe exactly the same chant in every given hour, regardless of the existence of a different lesson that precedes it. Moreover, several textual additions and corrections made by a later hand to this feast in BmT 159 bring it closer to the version found in BmT 149. For example, in Vespers of feria ii (BmT 159, fo. 150v), the antiphon Sic deus dilexit was originally followed by a psalm (Magnificat) and the lesser doxology. At some later stage, the psalm was crossed out, and the collect Deus qui apostolis was added, a procedure that is also found in BmT 149, fo. 372, where the psalm is indeed different (Benedictus), and the collect Deus qui apostolis does conclude this office. Moreover, the versicle Cum essent (Lesson 2, responsory Spiritus sanctus) originally incorporated the word “discipuli” between “unum” and “congregate.” It was erased at a later stage, perhaps following the example of BmT 149, fo. 373v, which omits this word as well. Finally, the responsory Loquebantur variis and the versicle Repleti sunt are practically identical in BmT 159 (fo. 151v) and 149 (fo. 373v). Although the offices are structurally alike, their melodies are, on the whole, different. In some instances, not only do the musical modifications not bring BmT 159 closer to the readings in BmT 149, they in fact create a greater variance between the two sources. Before the responsory Spiritu sancto was modified (BmT 159, fo. 152), for example, it was almost identical to the version found in BmT 149 (fo. 374v). The music set to the hymn that opens this celebration, Beata nobis gaudia, was also amended (BmT 159, fo. 146), twice over the word “reduxit,” and twice over “spiritus.” Were it not The Sanctorale of BmT 149 begins on December 30 (St. Perpetuus), and ends on June 11 (St. Barnabas). The Sanctorale of BmT 159, in contrast, opens on June 24 and ends on November 23 (St. Clement). Both sources transmit Martinian feasts (BmT 149 contains Martin’s Subvention and BmT 150 the November 11 celebration), but their chants do not overlap. For Pentecost, see BmT 159, fos. 146–153v; and BmT 149, fos. 364v–377v. The famous hymn Pange lingua is also common to both manuscripts (BmT 159, fo. 159v; and BmT 149, fo. 251r–v). However, in the former, it is the Corpus Christi hymn composed by Thomas Aquinas in the thirteenth century (Pange lingua, gloriosi corporis mysterium), whereas in the latter it is the Pange lingua hymn for Easter (Pange lingua gloriosi).

24

The provenance of BmT 159

for these changes, the original melody would have been identical to the one transmitted in BmT 149, fo. 364v.25 Even when the melody of a certain chant for Pentecost in BmT 159 is left relatively untouched, the melodic readings are still not identical with those of BmT 149, as we would expect from two sources supposedly intended for the same church and copied around the same time. Finally, although Pentecost is the only feast common to both sources, they do contain a certain number of common chants, assigned to different feasts. A select comparison of such antiphons reaffirms the above conclusion, namely, that these sources generally transmit different readings for the same chants.26 In short, it appears that BmT 159 presents us with two contradictory sets of evidence. First, when compared to a breviary whose Saint-Martin provenance is undeniable (BmT 149), the revised melodies of BmT 159 do not conclusively point to the use of Saint-Martin. Because these two sources transmit repertories that only narrowly overlap, however, only a very limited number of chants can be compared. Hence, the conclusion concerning the use that these melodies reflect is hampered, and remains imperfect and incomplete. Secondly, the presence in BmT 159 of a St. Martin office with a distinct profile characteristic only of Saint-Martin, together with a body of prosas copied by the original hand and whose propagation, as we have seen, is restricted to Saint-Martin and its ancillary churches, all point to a use conforming to that of Saint-Martin. Adding a further layer of complexity to these two conclusions is the hybrid calendar, reflecting the use of Paris and that of Saint-Martin of Tours. As tempting as it is to make a conclusive determination as to the original destination of the breviary and calendar contained in BmT 159, and to its later destination, the encountered complexities and contradictions render such an endeavor virtually impossible. We may never know with certainty whether BmT 159 was originally for Saint-Martin. It is almost certain, however, that it was used in Saint-Martin: and certainly Martin’s November 11 office, as transmitted in this source, is congruent with the liturgy of this establishment, and this church alone.

In the case of “reduxit,” two notes were erased and none supplemented in their stead, and in that of “spiritus,” two notes were erased and replaced by new ones. 26 See, for instance, the following Marian chants (assigned to Annunciation in BmT 149, and to Assumption in BmT 159): the antiphon Gaude Maria virgo, and the versicle Ave Maria gracia plena. Magro has already established that in all that concerns the melodic reading of the Marian antiphon Alma redemptoris mater in BmT 159, the chant was closer to the Roman version before its music was altered, but now reflects the use of Saint-Martin. See Magro, “Plain-chant ou polyphonie,” 376–77. 25

261

262

Appendices

Finally, we may find further testimony, albeit a late one, that possibly ties the breviary contained in BmT 159 to Saint-Martin. In a letter written in the first or second decade of the eighteenth century, the canon Michel Vincent addressed the following letter to the chapter of Saint-Martin: Wishing to re-establish the use of the breviary of Saint-Martin in the church of Saint-Pierre-le-Puellier, the chapter [of Saint-Martin] solicited me to work on this matter. I did not want to take on this project according to the proverb “serving everyone, serving no one,” but since they implored me and since I was promised that I would not do this for free, I engaged myself in this project together with a canon from the said church of Saint-Pierre. I repaired a great number of pages that were worn out in the antiphonaries, among other things, and I rewrote and notated an entire Common(?) that contained more than 100 pages … I would not have rewritten and notated this for less than twelve or fifteen sols per page.27

May we infer from the letter that we owe the modern compilation of BmT 159 to Michel Vincent, the cleric who continued the work commenced by Monsnyer on the history of Saint-Martin (BmT 1294–95)? Vincent informs us that the choirbooks of Saint-Pierre-le-Puellier, a church dependent on Saint-Martin, were deemed too corrupt, and that he was asked to help amend this state of affairs by introducing the breviary of Saint-Martin to that church. Consequently, he maintains that he had restored many pages that were used in the antiphoners, and that he rewrote and copied more than 100 notated pages. Is it possible that they correspond to the 140 notated pages of the eighteenth-century portion of BmT 159 (about 70 folios)? If Vincent indeed refers to what we know today as BmT 159, then the information contained in his letter may well suggest that the two portions of a breviary incorporated in this source were originally in use in Saint-Martin, and were handed over to Vincent for the purpose of creating a new service book for Saint-Pierre. Presumably, in that case, these breviaries had already been replaced by newer service books.

Le chapitre voulant retablir dans l’eglise de St Pierre le Puellier l’usage du breviaire de st Martin, les livres de choeur de cette eglise se trouvant beaucoup deffectueux, le chapitre m’engagea d’y travailler, je ne voulus plus travailler a rendre service a l’Eglise suivant le proverbe serviens omni, serviens nulli, mais a la prière qu’on en fit en me promettant que je ne le ferois pas gratis, je m’y employé avec un chanoine de la dite Eglise de St Pierre. Je refis quantité de pages qui etoient usées dans les antiphoniers, entre autres, je recrivis et noté tout un commun qui contenoit plus de cent pages … on n’auroit pas pu les faire rescrire et noter a moins de douze ou 15 sols la page. (Letter printed in Liber Rituum officiorum et consuetudinum Ecclesia Sancti Martini Turonensis [Tours, 1713]).

27

The provenance of BmT 159

Reusing the books for Saint-Pierre implies that a strong sense of tradition nonetheless was attached to them, and a certain nostalgic medievalism made them worth saving in the form that has come down to us as BmT 159. Finally, the following list of contents offers a succinct description of BmT 159.

Bibliothèque municipale de Tours 159: list of contents Folio(s)

Description

1

Title page: Psalterium et Antiphonarium ad usum Precentoris jure … in festis septem et quinque candelabrorum [Blank] [CALENDAR, c. 1320s] [FERIAL PSALTER AND LITANIES, c. 1340–45] [Blank] [TEMPORALE] [ANTIPHONER, eighteenth century] Title page: Antiphonarium ad usum precentoris Ecclesiae Collegiatae Sancti Petri Puellarum, membri dependentis ab insigni Ecclesia Beatissimi Martini Turonensis [Blank] Christmas (December 25). Nine-lesson office Stephen (December 26). Nine-lesson office John (December 27). Nine-lesson office Innocents (December 28). Single antiphon Circumcision (January 1). Nine-lesson office Epiphany (January 6). Nine-lesson office Purification (February 2). Nine-lesson office Annunciation (March 25). Nine-lesson office Holy Week plus Easter and subsequent ferias. Offices Ascension. Nine-lesson office [BREVIARY, various temporal layers] Pentecost: beginning with Vespers, followed by feast day (nine lessons), and the entire week leading to Trinity; c. 1285–1300 layer Trinity: Lauds. This office is a palimpsest. Traces of the previous c. 1285–1300 layer are still evident in the upper right corner of fo. 157v; eighteenth-century layer. Corpus Christi. The feast starts with First Vespers at the lower right corner of fo. 158v (eighteenth-century layer). The remainder of this nine-lesson office, however, continues without interruption on the following fo. 159, which belongs to the fourteenth-century layer.

1v 2–7v 8–81v 82v

83

83v 84–92 92–98 98–104v 104v–105 105–11 112–18 118–124v 124v–130 130–38v 138v–145v 146–57

157v–158v

158v–170

263

264

Appendices

Folio(s)

Description

170

[Lower half of right-side column]– fo. 170v: erased; fourteenth-century layer [SANCTORALE] [BREVIARY, mostly c. 1285–1300] John the Baptist (June 24). Nine-lesson office; fourteenthcentury layer Commemoration of Peter and Paul, martyrs (June 26); c. 1285–1300 layer Peter and Paul (June 29). Nine-lesson office; c. 1285–1300 layer Commemoration of Paul (June 30). Nine-lesson office; c. 1285–1300 layer Processus and Martinianus (July 2). A single prayer; c. 1285–1300 layer Vigil of Martin’s Translation and Ordination (July 3); c. 1285–1300 layer. The antiphon Iste est Martinus on the lower right column continues on the following folio without interruption, but in an eighteenth-century layer. Martin’s Translation and Ordination (July 4). Continuation of vigil, plus nine-lesson office. Lauds continues in the eighteenth-century layer until the upper left column of fo. 194 (palimpsest?), when the office resumes in the c. 1285–1300 layer. Martin’s Translation and Ordination (July 4), and a threelesson office for the crastino of this feast (July 5); c. 1285–1300 layer Octave of Peter and Paul (July 6); c. 1285–1300 layer Octave of Martin’s Translation and Ordination (July 11). Contains a long legenda for the octave; c. 1285–1300 layer. Praxedis (July 21). A single prayer; c. 1285–1300 layer Mary Magdalene (July 22). The opening hymn, in the lower right column, is a palimpsest, and marks a brief return to the fourteenth-century layer; fourteenth-century layer. Mary Magdalene (July 22). Nine-lesson office; c. 1285–1300 layer Appolinaris (July 23). Prayer; c. 1285–1300 layer Abdon and Sennen (July 27). Prayer; c. 1285–1300 layer Germanus, bishop of Auxerre (July 31). Nine-lesson office; c. 1285–1300 layer Peter’s chains (August 1). Prayers; c. 1285–1300 layer Stephen (August 2). Nine-lesson office; c. 1285–1300 layer Eufronius, bishop of Tours (August 4). Nine-lesson office. The following information is given: “iacet in ecclesia beati Martini Turonensis”; c. 1285–1300 layer.

171–76v 177r–v 177v–182 182v–186v 186v–187 187r–v

188–94

194–95

194–95v 195v–196v 196v 196v–197v

198–203 203 203 203–09 209 209v–210 210r–v

The provenance of BmT 159

Folio(s)

Description

210v

Sixtus (August 6). Long legenda, from which three lessons were later fashioned; c. 1285–1300 layer Commemoration of Felicissimus and Agapitus (August 6). Legenda; c. 1285–1300 layer Donatus (August 7). Prayer; c. 1285–1300 layer Cyriacus (August 8). Prayer; c. 1285–1300 layer Lawrence (August 10). Nine-lesson office; c. 1285–1300 layer Tiburtius (August 11). Prayer; c. 1285–1300 layer Hyppolitus (August 13). Long legenda, prayer; c. 1285–1300 layer Assumption of BVM (August 15). Nine-lesson office; c. 1285–1300 layer Crastino of Assumption of BVM, and its octave (August 16, 22). Three-lesson office; c. 1285–1300 layer Octave of Lawrence (August 17). Chants, plus long legenda from which nine lessons were later fashioned; c. 1285–1300 layer Maximus (August 20); c. 1285–1300 layer Octave of Assumption of BVM (August 22). Long legenda from which nine lessons were later fashioned; c. 1285–1300 layer Bartholomew (August 24). Prayer; c. 1285–1300 layer Aredius, abbot of Limoges (August 25). Prayer, long legenda out of which nine lessons were later fashioned; c. 1285–1300 layer Rufus (August 27). Prayer; c. 1285–1300 layer Julian (August 27). Nine-lesson office; c. 1285–1300 layer Beheading of John the Baptist (August 29). Nine-lesson office; c. 1285–1300 layer Aegydius (Giles), abbot (September 1). Nine-lesson office; c. 1285–1300 layer Nativity of Mary (September 8). Nine-lesson office; c. 1285–1300 layer Maurilius, bishop of Angers (September 13). Nine-lesson office, c. 1285–1300 layer Commemoration of Lidorius and Amandus (September 13), added in later hand Exaltation of the Cross (September 14). Nine-lesson office, Lauds; c. 1285–1300 layer Commemoration of Euphemia (September 16). Prayer; c. 1285–1300 layer Commemoration of Eustochius, bishop of Tours (September 19); c. 1285–1300 layer

210v–211v 211v 211v 212–17 217 217r–v 217v–224 224–26v 226v–228

228– 29v 229v–230v

230v 230v–232

232 232–33 233–36 236r–v 236v–241 241–46v 241 246v–250 250 250

265

266

Appendices

Folio(s)

Description

250–51 251–256v

Matthew (September 21). Prayer, reading; c. 1285–1300 layer Maurice and Companions (September 22). Nine-lesson office; c. 1285–1300 layer Florentius (September 23). Legenda from which nine lessons were fashioned by a later hand; c. 1285–1300 layer Commemoration of Silvanus28 (September 24). Legenda; c. 1285–1300 layer Cosmas and Damian (September 27). Legenda out of which nine lessons were fashioned by a later hand; c. 1285–1300 layer Michael the Archangel (September 29). Nine-lesson office; c. 1285–1300 layer Jerome (September 30). Prayer, c. 1285–1300 layer Germanus, bishop of Auxerre, Translation (October 1). Prayer; c. 1285–1300 layer Leodegarius (October 2). Prayer; c. 1285–1300 layer Mark (October 7). Prayer; c. 1285–1300 layer Denis and Companions (October 9). Nine-lesson office; c. 1285–1300 layer Venantius, abbot of Tours (October 11). Legenda from which nine lessons were fashioned by a later hand; c. 1285–1300 layer Callistus (October 14). Legenda from which nine lessons were fashioned by a later hand; c. 1285–1300 layer Simon and Jude (October 28). Prayer; c. 1285–1300 layer Vigil and feast of All Saints (October 31, November 1). Nine-lesson office; c. 1285–1300 layer Martin (November 11). Nine-lesson office; c. 1285–1300 layer Brice, bishop of Tours (November 13). Nine-lesson office, plus legenda from which are fashioned lessons for “subsequent days”; c. 1285–1300 layer Gregory of Tours (November 17). Nine-lesson office; c. 1285–1300 layer Octave of Martin (November 18). Nine-lesson office; c. 1285–1300 layer Cecilia (November 22). Nine-lesson office, Lauds; c. 1285–1300 layer Clement (November 23). Nine-lesson office, Lauds; c. 1285–1300 layer

257–58 258–59 259–60

260–66 266 266v 266v 266v 266v–273v 273v–274

274–75v 275v 275v–282 282–91 291–298v

298v–299v 299v–300 300–05 305–07v

Crossed out, and a tie mark is added. It sends the reader to the top margins, which are unfortunately trimmed.

28

The provenance of BmT 159

Folio(s)

Description

307v

Chrysogonus (November 24). Added by later hand (fifteenth century?) [End of manuscript]: Sundays after Pentecost, eighteenth century

308–10v

267

Bibliography

Select list of manuscripts Evreux, Bibliothèque municipale MS 119. A breviary, 13th century. Marmoutier Abbey.

Nantes, Musée Dobrée MS 10. A pontifical, copied 1412–18. Abbey of Saint-Serge, Angers.

Paris, Bibliothèque nationale de France (BnF)

268

Coll. Baluze, Vol. LXXVII, early 18th century. Extracts from the cartularies of Marmoutier and Saint-Martin of Tours. Coll. Baluze, Vol. LXXXIV, copied in 1668. Documents concerning Saint-Martin of Tours. Collection Bréquigny, Vol. XXXIV. Notes taken by de Bréquigny during the 2nd half of the 18th century on manuscripts from Saint-Martin of Tours and from Tours Cathedral. fr. 11805. Collection Dom Housseau, Vol. VI: copies of now-lost medieval charters concerning Saint-Martin of Tours (charters copied between 1199 and 1250). fr. 11806. Collection Dom Housseau, Vol. VII: copies of now-lost medieval charters concerning Saint-Martin of Tours (charters copied between 1250 and 1299). fr. 11807. Collection Dom Housseau, Vol. VIII: copies of now-lost medieval charters concerning Saint-Martin of Tours (charters copied between 1299 and 1400). lat. 328. An ordinal, 14th century. Utrecht Cathedral. lat. 816. A sacramentary, 8th century. Angoulême. lat. 909. A troper copied in the first decades of the 11th century. Saint-Martial of Limoges. lat. 1028. A breviary, 13th century. Sens Cathedral. lat. 1032. A breviary, 15th century. Tours Cathedral. lat. 1237. An ordinal, late 14th century. Tours Cathedral. lat. 1266. A breviary (Vol I: winter portion; Vol. II: summer portion), copied in 1309. Meaux Cathedral. lat. 8883. A lectionary, 11th century. Tours Cathedral.

Bibliography lat. 9430. Fragments of three sacramentaries from Tours, 9th century. Tours Cathedral. lat. 9434. A sacramentary, 11th century. Saint-Martin of Tours. lat. 10504. A missal, 13th century. Tours Cathedral. lat. 12044. An antiphoner, 12th century. Saint-Maur-des-Fossés. lat. 12601. A breviary copied in the second half of the 11th century. Cluny. lat. 16806. Extracts from liturgical manuscripts from Tours, Angers, Dol, and other cities, copied in the early 18th century by Pierre Lebrun. lat. 17296. An antiphoner, copied between 1140 and 1150. Saint-Denis. lat. 17991. A breviary, 11th century. Reims Cathedral. lat. 18017. A book of hours, 15th century. Paris. n.a.l. 1535. An antiphoner, 12th /13th century. Sens Cathedral. n.a.l. 1872. A breviary, 15th century. Monastery of Saint-Martin of Tulle.

Rouen, Bibliothèque municipale MS 243, olim A. 164. A breviary, 11th century. Marmoutier Abbey.

Tours, Archives Départementales d’Indre-et-Loire Série 1 I 22.

Tours, Bibliothèque municipale de Tours (BmT) 144. A breviary (Temporale), copied in 1343. Tours Cathedral. 145. A breviary (Sanctorale), copied in 1343. Tours Cathedral. 146. A breviary (winter portion), copied in 1412. Tours Cathedral. 147. A breviary (Temporale), copied c. 1494. Tours Cathedral. 148. A breviary (Sanctorale), copied c. 1494. Tours Cathedral. 149. A breviary (winter portion), 14th century. Saint-Martin of Tours. 150. A breviary, early 15th century. Saint-Martin of Tours. 151. A breviary, late 15th century. Saint-Martin of Tours. 152. A breviary, late 15th century. Priory of Saint-Cosme, Tours. 153. A breviary, 13th century. Marmoutier Abbey. 156. A lectionary, 15th century. Tours Cathedral. 159. A breviary, 14th century, Saint-Martin of Tours; and antiphoner, 18th century, Saint-Pierre-le-Puellier, Tours. 163. An antiphoner, 17th century. Marmoutier Abbey. 184. A sacramentary, 10th century. Tours Cathedral. 185. A missal, copied 1363–1379. Tours Cathedral. 193. A sacramentary and gradual, 12th, 13th centuries. Saint-Martin of Tours. 194. A missal, 15th century. Saint-Martin of Tours. 195. A missal, 15th century. Saint-Martin of Tours.

269

270

Bibliography 196. A missal, 11th century. Marmoutier Abbey. 204. A processional, 17th century. Saint-Martin of Tours. 212. An office of St. Gatien and miscellany, 13th, 14th centuries. Tours Cathedral. 1018. A lectionary (Martinellus), 11th century. Saint-Martin of Tours. 1019. A lectionary, 11th, 12th, 13th, 15th centuries. Saint-Martin of Tours. 1021. A lectionary, 13th, 15th centuries. Saint-Martin of Tours. 1023. A lectionary (Martinellus), mid 14th century. Saint-Martin of Tours. 1024. A lectionary (Martinellus), 14th century. Saint-Martin of Tours? 1294–95. Celebrissimae S. Martini Turonensis ecclesiae, by Raoul Monsnyer (in print) and Michel Vincent (manuscript), 17th, 18th centuries. Saint-Martin of Tours. Diocèse 1. A sacramentary copied c. 1000–1020. Saint-Martin of Tours.

Primary sources Adémar de Chabannes. Ademari Cabannensis ed. Pascale Bourgain. CCCM 129–. Turnhout: Brepols, 1999–. Alcuin. Epistolae, ed. Ernst Dümmler. MGH. Berlin, 1895. Die altfranzösische Martinsleben des Péan Gatineau aus Tours, ed. Werner Söderhjelm. Helsinki: Wentzel Hagelstam, 1899. Amalarius of Metz. Amalarii episcopi opera liturgica omnia, ed. J.-M. Hanssens. Studi e testi. 3 vols. Vatican City: BAV, 1950. Breviarium nobilis et insignis ecclesiae S. Martini Turonensis. Tours: F. Lambert, 1748 (BnF Rés B-4908). Breviarium Sancti Martini Turonensis. Tours: Simon Pourcelet, 1493 (BnF Rés. vélin-2871). Busnoys, Antoine. Collected Works, ed. Richard Taruskin. Masters and Monuments of the Renaissance. New York: Broude Trust, 1990. Cérémonial à l’usage des dames religieuses de l’abbaye royale de nostre-dame de Beaumont les Tours, ordre de saint benoist. Tours, 1694 (BmT Rés. 4669). Chrétien de Troyes. OEuvres complètes, ed. Daniel Poirion. Paris: Gallimard, 1994.   Yvain, the Knight of the Lion, trans. Burton Raffel. New Haven and London: Yale University Press, 1987. Chronicon Turonense Magnum. In Recueil de Chroniques de Touraine, ed. André Salmon, 64–161. Tours: Imprimerie Ladevèze, 1854. Eloy d’Amerval. Missa dixerunt discipuli, ed. Jean-Michel Vaccaro and Philippe Vendrix. Collection Ricercar. Paris: Honoré Champion, 1997. Gregory of Tours. Glory of the Confessors, trans. Raymond Van Dam. Translated Texts for Historians: Latin Series. Liverpool University Press, 1988.   Gregorii Episcopi Turonensis libri historiarum X, ed. Bruno Krusch and Wilhelm Levison. MGH: SRM 1.1. Hanover: Impensis Bibliopolii Hahniani, 1937–1951.   The History of the Franks, trans. Lewis Thorpe. Harmondsworth: Penguin, 1974.

Bibliography   Libri de Virtutibus Sancti Martini Episcopi, ed. B. Krusch. MGH: SRM 1, 134– 211. Hanover, 1969 [1885].   “The Miracles of the Bishop St. Martin.” In Van Dam, Saints and Their Miracles, 199–303. Guibert of Gembloux. Guiberti Gemblacensis epistolae, ed. Albert Derolez. CCCM 66. Turnhout: Brepols, 1988. Historia Sancti Gatiani, Episcopi Turonensis, ed. Yossi Maurey. Historiae. Lions Bay, BC: Institute of Mediaeval Music, 2014. Historia Sancti Martini, ed. Martha Van Zandt Fickett. Historiae. Ottawa: Institute of Mediaeval Music, 2006. Isidore of Seville. Isidori Hispalensis Episcopi Etymologiarum sive Originum, ed. W. M. Lindsay. Scriptorum Classicorum Bibliotheca Oxoniensis. London and New York: Oxford University Press, 1911. Jéhan, L.-F. Saint-Gatien, premier évèque de Tours: Epoque de sa mission dans les Gaules. Mémoires de la Société Archéologique de Touraine, 21 645–756. Tours: Guilland-Verger, 1871. La Vigne, Andrieu de. Le Mystère de Saint Martin, 1496, ed. André Duplat. Geneva: Librairie Droz, 1979. Lasso, Orlando di. The Complete Motets 10: The Four-Language Print for Four and Eight Voices (Munich, 1573), ed. Peter Bergquist. Recent Researches in Music of the Renaissance 102. Madison, WI: A.-R. Editions, Inc., 1995. Leben und Wunderthaten des heiligen Martin: Altfranzösisches Gedicht aus dem Anfang des XIII. Jahrhunderts, ed. Werner Söderhjelm. Bibliothek des Litterarischen Vereins in Stuttgart 210. Tübingen: Litterarischer Verein, 1896. Liber Rituum officiorum et consuetudinum Ecclesia Sancti Martini Turonensis. Tours, 1713. Masses for the Sistine Chapel: Vatican City, Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana, Cappella Sistina, MS 14, ed. Richard Sherr. Monuments of Renaissance Music 13. University of Chicago Press, 2009. Missale Gothicum e codice Vaticano Reginensi Latino 317 editum, ed. Rose Els. Corpus Christianorum, Ser. Latina 159D. Turnhout: Brepols, 2005. Missale secundum usum et consuetudinem ecclesiae metropolitanae Turonensis. Tours?/Paris?, 1485 (BmT Rés. 7599). “Narratio controversiae inter capitulum S. Martini Turonensis et Radulphum ejusdem urbis archiepiscopum.” In Recueil des historiens des Gaules, ed. Martin Bouquet, 24 vols., Vol. XII, 459–61. Paris: Aux dépens des Libraires Associés, 1738–1904. Obrecht, Jacob. Missa de Sancto Donatiano; Missa de Sancto Martino, in Collected Works, ed. Barton Hudson. New Obrecht Edition 3. Utrecht: Vereniging voor Nederlandse Muziekgeschiedenis, 1984. Ockeghem, Johannes. Collected Works. 18 vols., Vol. III: Motets and Chansons, ed. Richard Wexler and Dragan Plamenac. Boston: E. C. Schirmer, 1992.

271

272

Bibliography Office de Pierre de Corbeil (office de la Circoncision), improprement appelé “office des fous”, ed. Henri Villetard. Bibliothèque musicologie 4. Paris: Librairie Alphonse Picard et Fils, 1907. L’Ordinaire chartrain du XIIIe siècle, ed. Yves Delaporte. Mémoires de la Société Archéologique d’Eure-et-Loire 19. Chartres: Société Archéologique d’Eure-etLoire, 1953. Ordinaire de l’église cathédrale de Vienne (XIIIe) publié d’après le manuscrit original de la bibliothèque de Grenoble, ed. Ulysse Chevalier. Bibliothèque liturgique 27. Paris: Auguste Picard, 1923. Ordinaire de l’église Notre-Dame Cathédrale d’Amiens par Raoul de Rouvroy (1291), ed. Georges Durand. Mémoires de la Société des antiquaires de Picardie: Documents inédits concernant la province 22. Amiens and Paris: Société des antiquaires de Picardie; Auguste Picard, 1934. Ordinaire et coutumier de l’église cathédrale de Bayeux (XIIe siècle), ed. Ulysse Chevalier. Bibliothèque liturgique 8. Paris: Alphonse Picard et Fils, 1902. Philippe de Thaün. Le Bestiaire de Philippe de Thaün, ed. Emanuel Walberg. Librairie de l’Université Lund, 1900. Physiologus, trans. M. J. Curley. Austin, TX and London: University of Texas Press, 1979. Posterior breviarii pars ad ritum insignis ecclesie beatissimi Martini Turon[ensis]. Tours: Matheus Lateron, 1519 (Paris, Bibliothèque Sainte-Geneviève BB 8o 1217, Inv. 1441). Recueil de chroniques de Touraine, ed. André Salmon. Tours: Imprimerie Ladevèze, 1854. Recueil des actes de Charles le Chauve, ed. Georges Tessier. 3 vols. Paris: Imprimerie Nationale, 1943. Recueil des actes de Philippe Auguste, roi de France, ed. Elie Berger and Henri François Delaborde. 2 vols. Paris: Imprimerie Nationale, 1916. Regalis et collegiate ecclesie beatissime dei genitricis et virginis Marie Lochensis, sancte sedi apostolice immediate subjecte Breviarium. Tours: Mathieu Chercelé, 1536 (BnF Rés. B-27700). Selections from Motetti C (Venice, 1504), ed. Richard Sherr. Sixteenth-Century Motet 2. New York: Garland, 1991. Sulpicius Severus. “Dialogues,” trans. Bernard M. Peebles. Fathers of the Church 7, 161–251. New York: The Catholic University of America Press, 1949.   “Letters,” trans. Bernard M. Peebles. Fathers of the Church 7, 141–59. New York: The Catholic University of America Press, 1949.   “Life of St. Martin,” trans. Bernard M. Peebles. Fathers of the Church 7, pp. 101– 40. New York: The Catholic University of America Press, 1949.   Vie de Saint Martin, ed. Jacques Fontaine. 3 vols. Sources Chrétiennes: Série des textes monastiques d’Occident 22–24. Paris: Editions du Cerf, 1967.

Bibliography   Sulpicii Severi libri qui supersunt, ed. Carl Halm. Corpus Scriptorum Ecclesiasticorum Latinorum 1. Vienna: Geroldi Filium, 1866. Textes de Charlemagne, Eginhard, Alcuin, Hincmar, Notker, Thégan, Théodulphe, et les annales royales et les capitulaires de Charlemagne, ed. Georges Tessier. Coll. Le Mémorial des Siècles. Paris: A. Michel, 1967. Utrecht, Bibliotheek der Rijksuniversiteit, MS 406 (3.J.7), ed. Ruth Steiner. Publications of Mediaeval Musical Manuscripts 21. Ottawa: Institute of Mediaeval Music, 1997. The Utrecht Prosarium: Liber sequentiarum ecclesiae capitularis Sanctae Mariae Ultraiectensis saeculi XIII, Codex Ultraiectensis, universitatis bibliotheca 417, ed. N. de Goede. Monumenta musica Neerlandica. Amsterdam: Vereniging voor Nederlandse Muziekgeschiedenis, 1965.

Secondary sources Abou-El-Haj, Barbara. The Medieval Cult of Saints: Formations and Transformations. Cambridge University Press, 1994. Abrégé de la deffense des privilèges de la noble et insigne église de S. Martin de Tours sujete sans moyen au S. Siège apostolique contre l’appel comme d’abus interjetté par Messire Mathieu Isore d’Hervault, conseiller du Roy en ses conseils, archevêque de Tours: Titres et pièces justificatives produits au procès. Paris, 1709. Alexandre, Jean-Louis, Guy Lanoë, Aurélie Bosc-Lauby, and Geneviève Grand. Médiathèque d’Orléans. Reliures médiévales des bibliothèques de France. Turnhout: Brepols, 2004. Allott, Stephen. Alcuin of York: His Life and Letters. York: William Sessions, 1974. Ambros, August Wilhelm. Geschichte der Musik. 5  vols. Leipzig: F. E. C. Leuckart, 1893. Anglès, Higini. La música a Catalunya fins al segle XIII. Biblioteca de catalunya: Publicacions del departament de música 10. Barcelona: Institut d’Estudis Catalans, 1935. Arlt, Wulf. “Einstimmige Lieder des 12. Jahrhunderts und Mehrstimmiges in französischen Handschriften des 16. Jahrhunderts aus Le Puy.” Schweizer Beiträge zur Musikwissenschaft 3 (1978): 7–47.   Ein Festoffizium des Mittelalters aus Beauvais in seiner liturgischen und musikalischen Bedeutung. 2 vols. Cologne: Arno Volk Verlag, 1970.   “The Office for the Feast of the Circumcision from Le Puy.” In Baltzer and Fassler, The Divine Office in the Latin Middle Ages, 324–43. Arretaud, Irène. “La Vie de saint Martin dans l’imagerie mediévale (XII–XV siècles) en Touraine et dans les provinces voisines du Val de Loire.” Thèse de Maîtrise, Université François Rabelais, Tours, 2005. Atsma, Hartmut, and Jean Vezin. “Cluny et Tours au Xe siècle: Aspects diplomatiques, paléographiques et hagiographiques.” In Die Cluniazenser in ihrem

273

274

Bibliography politisch-sozialen Umfeld, ed. Giles Constable, Gert Melville, and Jörg Oberste, 121–32. Münster: LIT Verlag, 1998. Audin, Pierre. Tours à l’époque gallo-romaine. Collection Histoire et Archéologie. Saint-Cyr-sur-Loire: A. Sutton, 2002. Babut, Ernest-Ch. Saint Martin de Tours. Paris: H. Champion, 1912. Baltzer, Rebecca A. “Another Look at the Composite Office and Its History: The Feast of Sueceptio Reliquiarum in Medieval Paris.” Journal of the Royal Musical Association 113 (1988): 1–27. Baltzer, Rebecca A., and Margot E. Fassler, eds. The Divine Office in the Latin Middle Ages: Methodology and Source Studies, Regional Developments, Hagiography: Written in Honor of Professor Ruth Steiner. New York: Oxford University Press, 2000. Bas, Henri. Saint Martin. Tours: Louis Dubois, 1897. Bautier-Regnier, Anne-Marie. “Notes de lexicographie musicale: A propos des sens de Neuma et de Nota en latin médiéval.” Revue belge de musicologie 18 (1964): 1–9. Beaujard, Brigitte. Le Culte des saints en Gaule: Les premiers temps, d’Hilaire de Poitiers à la fin du VIe siècle. Paris: Les Editions du Cerf, 2000. Beaune, Colette. The Birth of an Ideology: Myths and Symbols of Nation in LateMedieval France, trans. Susan Ross Huston. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1991. Beleth, Johannes. Summa de ecclesiasticis officiis, ed. Herbert Douteil. CCCM 41A. Turnhout: Brepols, 1976. Beneventanum troporum corpus I: Tropes of the Proper of the Mass from Southern Italy, AD 1000–1250, ed. Alejandro Enrique Planchart. Recent Researches in the Music of the Middle Ages and Early Renaissance 16, 17–18. Madison, WI: A.-R. Editions, 1994. Bent, Margaret. “Early Papal Motets.” In Papal Music and Musicians in Late Medieval and Renaissance Rome, ed. Richard Sherr, 5–43. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1998. Besse, Jean-Martial. Abbayes et prieurés de l’ancienne France, Vol. VIII: Province de Tours. Archives de la France Monastique 19. Chevtogne: Abbaye de Ligugé; Paris: A. Picard, 1920. Björkvall, Gunilla. Les Deux Tropaires d’Apt, mss. 17 et 18: Inventaire analytique des mss. et édition des textes uniques. Corpus troporum 5. Stockholm: Almqvist and Wiksell International, 1986. Bloxam, M. Jennifer. “On the Origins, Contexts, and Implications of Busnoys’s Plainsong Cantus Firmi: Some Preliminary Remarks.” In Higgins, Antoine Busnoys, 71–88. Boissonnot, Henri. Histoire et description de la cathédrale de Tours. Paris: Imprimerie Frazier-Soye, 1920.   Les Verrières de la cathédrale de Tours: Dessins et aquarelles de Melle de Costigliole. Paris: Imprimerie Frazier-Soyre, 1932.

Bibliography Bonastre, F. “Estudis sobre la verbeta: La verbeta a Catalunya durant els segles XI–XVI.” Ph.D. dissertation, Tarragona, 1982. Boogaart, Jacques. “Encompassing Past and Present: Quotations and Their Function in Machaut’s Motets.” Early Music History 20 (2001): 1–86. Bord, Lucien-Jean. Histoire de l’abbaye Saint-Martin de Ligugé: 361–2001. Paris: Geuthner, 2005. Bosch, J. van den. Capa, Basilica, Monasterium et le culte de saint Martin de Tours: Etude lexicologique et sémasiologique. Nijmegen: Dekker and van de Vegt, 1959. Bousquet-Labouérie, Christine. “Image et rôle du pauvre dans la charité de saint Martin.” In XVIème centenaire de la mort de saint Martin. Mémoires de la Société Archéologique de Touraine 63 (1997): 121–29. Boussard, Jacques. “Enclave royale Saint-Martin de Tours.” Bulletin de la Société Nationale des Antiquaires de France (1958): 157–79. Bower, Calvin M. “The Sequence Repertoire of the Diocese of Utrecht.” Tijdschrift van de Koninklijke Vereniging voor Nederlandse Muziekgeschiedenis 53 (2003): 49–104. Brand, Benjamin David. “Liturgical Ceremony at the Cathedral of Lucca, 1275– 1500.” Ph.D. dissertation, Yale University, 2006. Brennan, Brian. “The Revival of the Cult of Martin of Tours in the Third Republic.” Church History 66 (1997): 489–501. Brink, Joel. “Sts. Martin and Francis: Sources and Meaning in Simone Martini’s Montefiore Chapel.” In Renaissance Studies in Honor of Craig Hugh Smyth, ed. Andrew Morrogh, 79–96. Florence: Giunti Barbèra, 1985. Brodeur, Arthur G. “The Grateful Lion.” Publications of the Modern Languages Association of America 39 (1924): 485–524. Bullough, Donald A. Alcuin: Achievement and Reputation. Being Part of the Ford Lectures Delivered in Oxford in Hilary Term 1980. Education and Society in the Middle Ages and Renaissance. Leiden and Boston: Brill, 2004. Cardini, Franco. “I primi biografi francescani dinanzi a un modello agiografico cavalleresco: San Martino di Tours.” Studi Francescani 76 (1979): 51–61. Carmody, Francis J. “Physiologus Latinus Versio Y.” University of California Publications in Classical Philology 12.7 (1941): 95–134. Chalmel, J.-L. “Histoire et antiquités de l’église de Saint-Martin de Tours, depuis sa fondation au commencement du cinquième siècle jusques à sa destruction en 1797” (1807, BmT 1296). Chélini, Jean. “Alcuin, Charlemagne, et Saint-Martin de Tours.” In Mémorial de l’Année Martinienne M.DCCCCLX–M.DCCCCLXI, 19–50. Paris: Bibliothèque Philosophique J. Vrin, 1962. Cherreau, Ollivier. Histoire des illustrissimes archevêsques de Tours. Tours: chez Jacques Poinsot, 1654. Chevalier, Bernard. “La Cité de Tours et Châteauneuf du Xe au XIIe siècle: Note sur l’échec du mouvement communal dans la centre de la France.” Cahiers d’Histoire 17.3 (1971): 237–47.

275

276

Bibliography   ed. Histoire de Tours. Toulouse: Privat, 1985.   “Naissance de la bonne ville (XIIIe–XVe siècles).” In Histoire de Tours, 90–124.   Tours, ville royale, 1356–1520: Origine et développement d’une capitale à la fin du Moyen Age. Publications de la Sorbonne: N. S. Recherches 14. Louvain: Vander, 1975. Chevalier, Casimir. Histoire et description de la cathédrale de Tours. Tours: RouilléLadevèze, 1877.   Les Origines de l’église de Tours d’après l’histoire: Avec une étude générale sur l’evangélisation des Gaules et de nombreuses pièces justificatives. Mémoires de la Société Archéologique de Touraine 21. Tours, 1871. Choate, Tova A. Leigh. “The Liturgical Faces of Saint Denis: Music, Power, and Identity in Medieval France.” Ph.D. dissertation, Yale University, 2009. Claussen, M. A. The Reforms of the Frankish Church: Chrodegang of Metz and the Regula canonicorum in the Eighth Century. Cambridge Studies in Medieval Life and Thought. Cambridge University Press, 2004. Cohen, Judith. The Six Anonymous L’Homme armé Masses in Naples, Biblioteca Nazionale, MS VI E 40. Musicological Studies and Documents 21. Dallas: American Institute of Musicology, 1968. Colette, Marie-Noël. “Le Chant dans l’ordo du sacre.” In Le Sacre Royal à l’époque de Saint Louis d’après le manuscrit latin 1246 de la BNF, ed. Eric Palazzo, Jacques le Goff, Jean-Claude Bonne, and Marie-Noël Colette, 227–47. Paris: Gallimard, 2001. Collon, M. Catalogue général des manuscrits des bibliothèques publiques de France. Départements – Tome XXXVII: Tours. 2 vols. Paris: Librairie Plon, 1900–05. Consuetudines Ecclesiae Beati Martini Turonensis: Rituel de Saint-Martin de Tours, documents et manuscrits, ed. Abbé Fleuret. Paris: Firmin-Didot, 1899–1901. Consuetudines Floriacenses saeculi tertii decimi, ed. Anselme Davril. Corpus consuetudinum monasticum 9. Sieburg: Franciscus Schmitt, 1976. Corvisier, André. Les Saints militaires. Paris: Honoré Champion, 2006. Le Coutumier de l’Abbaye d’Oigny en Bourgogne au XIIe siècle: Introduction, texte critique et tables, ed. Placide Fernand Lefèvre and A. H. Thomas. Spicilegium sacrum lovaniense: Etudes et documents 39. Louvain: Spicilegium sacrum lovaniense, 1976. Crocker, Richard L. The Early Medieval Sequence. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1977.   “The Troping Hypothesis.” Musical Quarterly 52 (1966): 183–203. Cubitt, Catherine. “Universal and Local Saints in Anglo-Saxon England.” In Local Saints and Local Churches in the Early Medieval West, ed. Alan Thacker and Richard Sharpe, 423–53. Oxford University Press, 2002. Cuissard, Charles. Catalogue général des manuscrits des bibliothèques de France: Départements, Vol. XII. Orléans. Paris: Plon, 1889. de la Haye, Yves le Sage. Répertoire numérique de la série I: Feuillets et fragments de livres manuscrits avec et sans notation musicale (IXe–XVIe siècles), Tours: Archives Départementales, 2000.

Bibliography Delaruelle, Etienne. “La Spiritualité des pèlerinages à Saint-Martin de Tours du Ve au Xe siècle.” Paper presented at the conference “Il culto dei Santi nella tradizione musicale medievale liturgica ed extraliturgica,” 1961. In Atti del IV Convegno del Centro di studi sulla spiritualità medieval 1961, 199–243. Todi, 1963. Delehaye, Hippolyte, S. J. “Guibert, abbé de Florennes et de Gembloux, XIIe–XIIIe siècles.” Revue des questions historiques 46 (1889): 5–90. Delisle, Léopold. Notice sur les manuscrits disparus de la bibliothèque de Tours pendant la première moitié du XIXe siècle. Extrait des notices et extraits des manuscrits 31. Paris: Imprimerie Nationale, 1883. Demouy, Patrick. “Opus Dei: L’oeuvre de louange dans la cathédrale médiévale.” In La Maîtrise de la cathédrale de Reims des origines à Henri Hardouin, XIIe–XVIIIe siècles, 7–35. Reims: Bibliothèque municipale/Médiathèque Cathédrale, 2003. Deshusses, Jean. Le Sacramentaire Grégorien: Ses principales formes, d’après les plus anciens manuscrits. 3rd rev. edn. 3 vols. Fribourg: Editions Universitaires, 1992. Dissertation historique sur les rits et anciens usages de la noble et insigne église de Saint-Martin de Tours. Paris: Gilles Paulus du Mesnil, 1713. Dolbeau, François. “Trois sermons latins en l’honneur de la Légion Thébaine.” In Mauritius und die Thebäische Legion: Akten des internationalen Kolloquiums. Freiburg, Saint-Maurice, Martigny, 17.–20. September 2003  = Saint Maurice et la légion thébaine: Actes du colloque international. Fribourg, Saint-Maurice, Martigny, 17–20 Septembre 2003, ed. Otto Wermelinger, 377–421. Fribourg: Academic Press Fribourg, 2005. Dorange, A. Catalogue descriptif et raisonné des manuscrits de la bibliothèque de Tours, 2 vols. Tours: Imprimerie Jules Bouserez, 1875. Duby, Georges. France in the Middle Ages: 987–1460, trans. Juliet Vale. Oxford and Cambridge, MA: Blackwell, 1987. Dumont, Sandrine. “Choirboys and Vicaires in the Maîtrise of Cambrai: A Socioanthropological Study (1550–1670).” In Young Choristers: 650–1700, ed. Susan Boynton and Eric Rice, 146–62. Woodbridge: The Boydell Press, 2008. Dupraz, Louis. Les Passions de S. Maurice d’Agaune. Studia Friburgensia, Nouvelle Série 27. Fribourg: Editions Universitaires, 1961. Durand, Guillaume. Rationale divinorum officiorum I–VIII, ed. Anselme Davril and Timothy M. Thibodeau. 3 vols. CCCM, 140, 140A, 140B. Turnhout and Brepols, 1995–2000. Durville, G. Catalogue de la bibliothèque du musée Thomas Dobrée. Nantes: Au musée Thomas Dobrée, 1904. Dyer, Joseph. “The Singing of Psalms in the Early-Medieval Office.” Speculum 64 (1989): 535–78. Earp, Lawrence. Guillaume de Machaut: A Guide to Research. Garland Composer Resource Manuals 36; Garland Reference Library of the Humanities 996. New York and London: Garland, 1995. Ewig, Eugen. “Le Culte de Saint Martin à l’époque franque.” In Mémorial de l’année martinienne M.DCCCC.LX–M.DCCCC.LXI, 1–18. Paris: Bibliothèque Philosophique J. Vrin, 1962.

277

278

Bibliography Fallows, David. Dufay. London: J. M. Dent, 1982.   Josquin. Collection “Epitome musical.” Tours: Centre d’études supérieures de la Renaissance; Turnhout: Brepols, 2009. Farmer, Sharon. Communities of Saint Martin: Legend and Ritual in Medieval Tours. Ithaca, NY and London: Cornell University Press, 1991. Fassler, Margot. Gothic Song: Victorine Sequences and Augustinian Reform in Twelfth-Century Paris. Cambridge University Press, 1993. Fédoroff, Y. “Les Cantiques à saint Martin.” Revue de musicologie 47 (1961): 81–102. Fickett, Martha Van Zandt. “Chants for the Feast of St. Martin of Tours.” Ph.D. dissertation, The Catholic University of America, 1983. Fuller, Sarah. “Discant and the Theory of Fifthing.” Acta musicologica 50 (1978): 241–75.   “Hidden Polyphony: A Reappraisal.” JAMS 24 (1971): 169–92. Galinié, Henri. “La Cité de Tours et Châteauneuf, ville double et double ville.” In Tours: Des légendes et des hommes, ed. Michel Lussault, 172–93. Paris: Autrement, 2001.   “Gatien, compagnon du Christ ou Lidoire, notable?” In Tours antique et médiéval: Lieux de vie, temps de la ville. 40 ans d’archéologie urbaine. Supplement to Revue archéologique du centre de la France, ed. Henri Galinié, 285. Tours: FERAC, 2007.   “Genèse du paysage urbain.” In B. Chevalier, Histoire de Tours, 11–48.   “Reflections on Early Medieval Tours.” In The Rebirth of Towns in the West AD 700–1050, ed. Richard Hodges and Brian Hobley, 57–62. London: Council for British Archaeology, 1988. Galinié, Henri, and Bernard Randoin. Les Archives du sol à Tours: Survie et avenir de l’archéologie de la ville. Tours: La Société Archéologique de Touraine, 1979. Gallagher, Sean. Johannes Regis. Collection “Epitome musical.” Tours: Centre d’études supérieures de la Renaissance; Turnhout: Brepols, 2010. Gallagher, Sean, James Haar, John Nádas, and Timothy Striplin, eds. Western Plainchant in the First Millennium: Studies in the Medieval Liturgy and Its Music. Aldershot and Burlington, VT: Ashgate, 2003. Gameson, Richard, ed. The Early Medieval Bible: Its Production, Decoration, and Use. Cambridge University Press, 2009. Ganz, David. “Mass Production of Early Medieval Manuscripts: The Carolingian Bibles from Tours.” In Gameson, The Early Medieval Bible, 53–62. Gasnault, Pierre. “Etude sur les chartes de Saint Martin de Tours, des origines au milieu du XIIe siècle.” Thèse de l’Ecole Nationale de Chartes, 1953.   “La ‘Narratio in reversione beati Martini a Burgundia’ du pseudo-Eudes de Cluny (sources et influence).” Studia Anselmiana 46 (1961): 159–74.   “Le Pèlerinage de Jérome Munzer à Saint-Martin de Tours et à Marmoutier en 1495.” Bulletin trimestrial de la Société Archéologique de Touraine 38 (1976): 197–204.

Bibliography   “La Sainte Ampoule de Marmoutier.” Analecta Bollandiana 100 (1982): 243–57. Gasnault, Pierre, and Philippe George. “Journal de la réception d’un chanoine de Saint-Martin de Liège par le noble chapitre de Saint-Martin de Tours.” BSAT 43 (1992): 631–55. Gautier, Léon. Chivalry. London: Readers Union, Phoenix House, 1966. Gies, Frances. The Knight in History. New York: Harper and Row, 1984. Gillingham, Bryan. Saint-Martial Mehrstimmigkeit; Saint-Martial Polyphony, ed. Bryan Gillingham. Wissenschaftliche Abhandlungen 44/Musicological Studies 24. Henryville, Ottawa, and Binningen: Institute of Medieval Music, 1984. Giraudet, Eugène. Histoire de la ville de Tours. Marseille: Laffitte Reprints, 1977 [1873]. Gobry, Ivan. Les Moines en Occident, 3 vols., Vol. II: De saint Martin à saint Benoît: L’enracinement. Paris: Fayard, 1985. Goudesenne, Jean-François. “Chant grégorien et renaissances carolingiennes (782–980): Un ‘miracle’ observé depuis les écoles de Tours.” BSAT 52 (2006): 149–58.   “De Tours à Rome: Le corpus musical martinien au temps d’Alcuin.” Annales de Bretagne et des pays de l’Ouest 111 (2004): 371–85.   L’Office romano-franc des saints martyrs Denis, Rustique et Eleuthere, ed. László Dobszay, Barbara Haggh, and Ruth Steiner. Historiae. Ottawa: Institute of Mediaeval Music, 2002.   Offices historiques ou historiae composés pour les fêtes des saints dans la province ecclésiastique de Reims (775–1030). Turnhout: Brepols, 2002.   “La Propagande aréopagitique dans la musique de l’office de saint Denis (IXe–XIe s.).” Hagiographica 11 (2004): 81–112. Green, David. The Battle of Poitiers, 1356. Stroud: Tempus, 2002. Grier, James. “The Divine Office at Saint-Martial in the Early Eleventh Century: Paris, BNF lat. 1085.” In Baltzer and Fassler, The Divine Office in the Latin Middle Ages, 179–204.   The Musical World of a Medieval Monk: Adémar de Chabannes in EleventhCentury Aquitaine. Cambridge University Press, 2006. Guéranger, Prosper. Institutions liturgiques. 2nd edn. 4 vols., Vol. I. Paris: Société générale de librarie catholique, 1878. Guyotjeannin, Olivier, ed. Clovis chez les historiens. Genève: Droz, 1996. Gy, Pierre-Marie. “Les Répons de l’office nocturne pour la fête de S. Martin.” Studia Anselmiana 95 (1988): 215–23. Haggh, Barbara. “From Auxerre to Soissons: The Earliest History of the Responsory Gaude Maria virgo in Gautier de Coinci’s Miracles de Nostre Dame.” In Gautier de Coinci: Miracles, Music, and Manuscripts, ed. Kathy M. Krause and Alison Stones, 167–93. Turnhout: Brepols, 2006.   “Music, Liturgy and Ceremony in Brussels, 1350–1500.” Ph.D. dissertation, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, 1988.

279

280

Bibliography   “An Ordinal of Ockeghem’s Time from the Ste-Chapelle of Paris, Paris, Bibl. de l’Arsenal, ms 114.” Tijdschrift van de Koninklijke Vereniging voor Nederlandse Muziekgeschiednis 47 (1997): 33–71. Harris, Julian. “The Rôle of the Lion in Chrétien de Troyes’ Yvain.” Publications of the Modern Languages Association of America 64 (1949): 1143–63. Hassig, Debra. “Marginal Bestiaries.” In Houwen, Animals and the Symbolic in Mediaeval Art and Literature, 171–88. Hauréau, Barthélemy. Gallia christiana in provincias ecclesiasticas distributa. Vols. XIV–XVI. Paris: Firmin Didot, 1856. Heide, Klaas van der. “New Claims for a Burgundian Origin of the L’Homme armé Tradition, and a Different View on the Relative Positions of the Earliest Masses in the Tradition.” Tijdschrift van de Koninklijke Vereniging voor Nederlandse Muziekgeschiedenis 55 (2005): 3–33. Heinzelmann, Martin. “L’Hagiographie mérovingienne: Panorama des documents potentiels.” In L’Hagiographie mérovingienne à travers ses réécritures, ed. Monique Goullet, Martin Heinzelmann, and Christiane Veyrard-Cosme, 27–82. Ostfildern: Thorbecke, 2010. Helas, Philine. “The Clothing of Poverty and Sanctity in Legends, and Their Representations in Trecento and Quattrocento Italy.” In Weaving, Veiling, and Dressing: Textiles and Their Metaphors in the Later Middle Ages, ed. Kathryn M. Rudy and Barbara Baert, 245–87. Turnhout: Brepols, 2007. Hen, Yitzhak. “The Romanisation of the Frankish Liturgy: Ideal, Reality and the Rhetoric of Reform.” In Rome across Time and Space: Cultural Transmission and the Exchange of Ideas c. 500–1400, ed. Claudia Bolgia, Rosamond McKitterick, and John Osborne, 111–23. Cambridge University Press, 2011.   “Rome, Anglo-Saxon England, and the Formation of the Frankish Liturgy.” Revue Bénédictine 112 (2002): 301–22. Hen, Yitzhak, and Rob Meens, eds. The Bobbio Missal: Liturgy and Religious Culture in Merovingian Gaul. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2004. Hersey, Carl K. “The Church of Saint-Martin at Tours (903–1150).” Art Bulletin 25 (1943): 1–39. Hewitt, H. J. The Black Prince’s Expedition of 1355–1357. Manchester University Press, 1958. Higgins, Paula. Antoine Busnoys: Method, Meaning, and Context in Late Medieval Music. Oxford University Press, 1999.   “In hydraulis Revisited: New Light on the Career of Antoine Busnois.” JAMS 39 (1986): 69–86.   “Speaking of the Devil and Discipuli: Eloy d’Amerval, Saint-Martin of Tours, and Music in the Loire Valley, ca. 1465–1505.” In Uno gentile et subtile ingenio: Studies in Renaissance Music in Honour of Bonnie J. Blackburn, ed. M. Jennifer Bloxam, Gioia Filocamo, and Leofranc Holford-Strevens, 169–82. Turnhout: Brepols, 2009.

Bibliography Hiley, David. “The Historia of St. Julian of Le Mans by Létald of Micy: Some Comments and Questions about a North French Office of the Early Eleventh Century.” In Baltzer and Fassler, The Divine Office in the Latin Middle Ages, 444–62.   Western Plainchant: A Handbook. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1993. Hoch, Adrian S. “A New Document for Simone Martini’s Chapel of St. Martin at Assisi.” Gesta 24.2 (1985): 141–43.   “St. Martin of Tours: His Transformation into a Chivalric Hero and Franciscan Ideal.” Zeitschrift für Kunstgeschichte 50 (1987): 471–82. Hofmann-Brandt, Helma. “Die Tropen zu den Responsorien des Officiums.” 2 vols. Inaugural dissertation, Erlangen–Nürnberg, 1971. Holman, Hans-Jörgen. “Melismatic Tropes in the Responsories for Matins.” JAMS 16 (1963): 36–46. Hoogvliet, M. “De ignotis quarundam bestiarum naturis: Texts and Images from the Bestiary on Mediaeval Maps of the World.” In Houwen, Animals and the Symbolic in Mediaeval Art and Literature, 189–208. Houwen, Luuk A. J. R., ed. Animals and the Symbolic in Mediaeval Art and Literature. Groningen: Egbert Forsten, 1997. Hughes, David G. “Liturgical Polyphony at Beauvais in the Thirteenth Century.” Speculum 34 (1959): 184–200. Huglo, Michel. “Du répons de l’office avec prosule au répons oroganisé.” In Altes im Neuen: Festschrift Theodor Göllner zum 65. Geburtstag, ed. Bernd Edelmann and Manfred Hermann Schmid, 25–36. Tutzing: Hans Schneider, 1995.   Les Livres de chant liturgique. Typologie des sources du Moyen Age occidental, fasc. 52. Turnhout: Brepols, 1988.   “Principes de l’ordonnance des répons organisés à Notre-Dame de Paris.” Revue de musicologie 83 (1997): 81–92. Hunt, Tony. “A Forgotten Author: Péan Gatineau.” French Studies 58 (2004): 313–26. Huot, Sylvia. Allegorical Play in the Old French Motet: The Sacred and the Profane in Thirteenth-Century Polyphony. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 1997. L’Iconographie martinienne en Touraine. Catalogue of the Exposition de la Société Archéologique de Touraine, May 28–November 16, 1997. Tours: Société Archéologique de Touraine, 1997. Introitus-Tropen, I: Das Repertoire der südfranzösischen Tropare des 10. und 11. Jahrhunderts, ed. Günther Weiss. Monumenta Monodica Medii Aevi 3. Kassel: Bärenreiter, 1970. Iversen, Gunilla. Tropes de l’Agnus Dei. Corpus troporum 4. Acta Universitatis Stockholmiensis: Studia Latina Stockholmiensia 27. Stockholm: University of Stockholm: Almqvist and Wiksell International [distributor], 1980. Johnson, Glenn Pierr. “Aspects of Late Medieval Music at the Cathedral of Amiens.” Ph.D. dissertation, Yale University, 1991.

281

282

Bibliography Johnson, Penelope D. Prayer, Patronage, and Power: The Abbey of la Trinité, Vendôme, 1032–1187. New York University Press, 1981. Johnstone, John Gearey. “The Offertory Trope: Origins, Transmission, and Function.” Ph.D. dissertation, Ohio State University, 1984. Jones, Michael C. “War and Fourteenth-Century France.” In The Wars of Edward III: Sources and Interpretations, ed. Clifford J. Rogers, 343–64. Woodbridge: The Boydell Press, 1999. Jullien, Marie-Hélène, and Françoise Perelman, eds. Clavis Scriptorum Latinorum Medii Aevi, Vol. II: Auctores Galliae, 735–987. Clavis des auteurs latins du moyen âge: Territoire français, 735–987. CCCM. Turnhout: Brepols, 1999. Kahn Herrick, Samantha. “Studying Apostolic Hagiography: The Case of Fronto of Périgueux, Disciple of Christ.” Speculum 85 (2010): 235–70. Keane, Marie Michael. “Martin Hymns of the Middle Ages: A Collection and Analysis of Hymns in Honor of St. Martin of Tours up to c. 1300.” Ph.D. dissertation, The Catholic University of America, 1968. Keen, Maurice Hugh. Chivalry. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1984.   Nobles, Knights and Men-at-Arms in the Middle Ages. London and Rio Grande, OH: Hambledon Press, 1996. Kelly, Thomas Forrest. “Medieval Composers of Liturgical Chant.” Musica e storia 14 (2006): 95–125.   “Melisma and Prosula: The Performance of Responsory Tropes.” In Liturgische Tropen: Referate zweier Colloquien des Corpus Troporum in München (1983) und Canterbury (1984), ed. Gabriel Silagi, 163–80. Munich: ArbeoGesellschaft, 1985.   “Modal Neumes at Sens.” In Gallagher, Haar, Nádas, and Striplin, Western Plainchant in the First Millennium, 429–51.   “Neuma Triplex.” Acta musicologica 60 (1988): 1–30.   “New Music from Old: The Structuring of Responsory Prosas.” JAMS 30 (1977): 366–90.   “Responsory Tropes.” Ph.D. dissertation, Harvard University, 1973. Kirkman, Andrew. The Cultural Life of the Early Polyphonic Mass: Medieval Context to Modern Revival. Cambridge University Press, 2010. Kruckenberg, Lori. “Neumatizing the Sequence: Special Performances of Sequences in the Central Middle Ages.” JAMS 59 (2006): 243–317. Labarre, Sylvie. Le Manteau partagé: Deux métamorphoses poétiques de la vie de Saint-Martin chez Paulin de Périgueux (Ve S.) et Venance Fortunat (VIe S.). Collections des Etudes Augustiniennes, Série Antiquité 158. Paris: Institut d’Etudes Augustiniennes, 1998. Laffineur-Crépin, Marylène, and Albert Lemeunier. “La Représentation du partage.” Mémoires de la Société Archéologique de Touraine 63 (1997): 147–55. Lagueux, Robert Charles. “Glossing Christmas: Liturgy, Music, Exegesis and Drama in High Medieval Laon.” Ph.D. dissertation, Yale University, 2004. Landwehr-Melnicki, Margareta. Das einstimmige Kyrie des lateinischen Mittelalters. Regensburg: Gustav Bosse Verlag, 1955.

Bibliography Launay, Denise. “A propos de quelques motets polyphoniques en l’honneur de saint Martin: Contribution à l’histoire du motet aux XVIe et XVIIe siècle.” Revue de musicologie 47 (1961): 67–80. Le Goff, Jacques. “Croissance et prise de conscience urbaine.” In La Ville en France au Moyen Age des Carolingiens à la Renaissance, ed. André Chédeville, Jacques Le Goff, and Jacques Rossiaud, 189–232. Paris: Editions du Seuil, 1998. Le Sage de La Haye, Yves. Répertoire numérique de la série I: Feuillets et fragments de livres manuscrits avec et sans notation musicale (IXe–XVIe siècles). 2 vols. Tours: Archives départementales, 2000. Leclercq, L. “S. Martin dans l’hagiographie monastique du moyen âge.” Studia Anselmiana 46 (1961): 175–87. Lecoy de La Marche, Albert. Saint Martin. 3rd edn. Tours: Alfred Mame et Fils, 1890. Leech-Wilkinson, Daniel. Compositional Techniques in the Four-Part Isorhythmic Motets of Philippe de Vitry and His Contemporaries. 2  vols. Outstanding Dissertations in Music from British Universities. New York: Garland, 1989. Lee-De Amici, Beth Anne. “Cum nota solenniter celebret: Music in the Chapel of All Souls College, Oxford, 1445–1550.” Renaissance Studies 18 (2004): 171–207. Lefèvre, Placide Fernand. L’Organisation ecclésiastique de la ville de Bruxelles au Moyen Age. Louvain: Bibliothèque de l’Université, 1942. Lelong, Charles. L’Abbaye de Marmoutier. Chambray-lès-Tours: CLD, 1989.   La Basilique Saint-Martin de Tours. Chambray-lès-Tours: CLD, 1986.   “Culture et société (IVe–XIIe siècles).” In B. Chevalier, Histoire de Tours, 49–90.   “L’Enceinte du Castrum Sancti Martini.” Bulletin archéologique du Comité des travaux historiques et scientifiques 6 (1970): 42–56.   “Saint-Gatien ou Saint-Maurice?” BSAT 44 (1995): 421–31. Leroquais, Victor. Les Bréviaires manuscrits de bibliothèques publiques de France. 5 vols. Paris: [Macon Protat frères imprimeurs], 1934.   Les Pontificaux manuscrits des bibliothèques publiques de France. Paris: [Macon Protat frères imprimeurs], 1937. Leveel, Pierre. “Trois vues de la collégiale Saint-Martin de Tours, sur des miniatures du XVe siècle.” BSAT 48 (2002): 85–88. Lochner, Fabian. “Un évêque musicien au Xe siècle: Radbod d’Utrecht (†917).” Tijdschrift van de Vereniging voor Nederlandse Muziekgeschiedenis 38 (1988): 3–35. Loizeau de Grandmaison, Charles. ed. Inventaire-sommaire des archives départementales antérieures à 1790: Indre-et-Loire, Vol. 2: Archives Ecclésiastiques, Série G: Clergé Séculier (Tours: Imprimerie E. Arrault & Cie, 1882. Reprinted 1993). Lockwood, Lewis. “Aspects of the ‘L’Homme armé’ Tradition.” Proceedings of the Royal Musical Association 100 (1973–1974): 97–122. Long, Michael. “Arma virumque cano: Echoes of a Golden Age.” In Higgins, Antoine Busnoys, 133–54. Longère, Jean. “L’Enseignement de deux sermons inédits de Jacques de Vitry († 1240) pour la fête de saint Martin.” Mémoires de la Société Archéologique de Touraine 63 (1997): 95–105.

283

284

Bibliography Longnon, Auguste. Pouillés de la province de Tours. Recueil des Historiens de la France 3. Paris: Imprimerie Nationale, 1903. Loos, Ike de. “Liturgy and Chant in the Northern Low Countries.” Tijdschrift van de Koninklijke Vereniging voor Nederlandse Muziekgeschiedenis 53 (2003): 9–47. Ludwig, Friedrich, and Luther A. Dittmer. Repertorium organorum recentioris et motetorum vetustissimi stili. 3 vols, Vol. I: Catalogue raisonné der Quellen, Abteilung II: Handschriften in Quadrat-Notation. New York: Institute of Mediaeval Music; Hildesheim: Georg Olms Verlagsbuchhandlung, 1964. Luzarche, Victor. “Notice sur l’évangéliaire de l’abbaye de Saint-Martin.” Bulletin de Mémoires de la Société Archéologique de Touraine 9 (1857): 43–48. Maan, Jean. Histoire de l’église de Tours (Sancta et metropolitana ecclesia Turonensis), trans. Paul LeTort. Saint Quentin sur Indrois: Les Editions du Python, 1997.   Sancta et Metropolitana Ecclesia Turonensis … Tours: In aedibus authoris, 1667. Macey, Patrick. “Good King René, and O bone et dulcissime Jesu.” In Hearing the Motet: Essays on the Motet of the Middle Ages and Renaissance, ed. Dolores Pesce. New York: Oxford University Press, 1997. MacGregor, James B. “Negotiating Knightly Piety: The Cult of the Warrior-Saints in the West, ca. 1070–ca. 1200.” Church History 73 (2004): 317–45. Le Magnus Liber Organi de Notre-Dame de Paris, ed. Edward H. Roesner. Vol. I: Les Quadrupla et Tripla de Paris. Monaco: Editions de l’Oiseau-Lyre, 1993. Magro, Agostino. “Jean de Ockeghem et Saint Martin de Tours (1454–1497): Une étude documentaire.” Ph.D. dissertation, University of Tours, 1998.   “Plain-chant ou polyphonie? A propos de Saint-Martin de Tours à la fin du Moyen Age.” Yearbook of the Alamire Foundation 4 (2000): 369–84.   “‘Premierment ma Baronnie de Chasteauneuf ’: Jean de Ockeghem, Treasurer of St. Martin’s in Tours.” Early Music History 18 (1999): 165–258.   “Un aperçu sommaire sur le ‘Rituel’ de Péan Gatineau (XIIème siècle), chanoine de Saint-Martin de Tours.” Musica e storia 7 (1999): 257–91. Marcault, O. Le Diocèse de Tours, sa vie morale, intellectuelle et religieuse depuis Saint Martin jusqu’à nos jours. 3  vols. Tours: Ancienne Librairie Alfred Cattier, 1918. Martimort, Aimé-Georges. La Documentation liturgique de Dom Edmond Martène: Etude codicologique. Studi e testi 279. Vatican City: Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana, 1978. Masson, André. Catalogue général des manuscrits des bibliothèques publiques de France. Vol. LIII: Manuscrits des bibliothèques sinistrées de 1940 à 1944. Paris: Bibliothèque nationale, 1962. Mathisen, Ralph. “Clovis, Anastase et Grégoire de Tours: Consul, patrice et roi.” In Clovis: Histoire et memoire, ed. Michel Rouche, 2 vols., Vol. I: 395–407. Presses de l’Université de Paris-Sorbonne, 1997. Maurey, Yossi. “A Courtly Lover and an Earthly Knight Turned Soldier of Christ in Machaut’s Motet 5.” Early Music History 24 (2005): 169–211.   “Heresy, Devotion, and Memory: The Meaning of Corpus Christi in Saint-Martin of Tours.” Acta musicologica 78 (2006): 159–96.

Bibliography McCormick, Michael. “Clovis at Tours, Byzantine Public Rituals and the Origins of Medieval Ruler Symbolism.” In Das Reich und die Barbaren, ed. Euangelos K. Chrysos and Andreas Schwarz, 155–80. Vienna: Böhlau, 1989. McKinley, Allan Scott. “The First Two Centuries of Saint Martin of Tours.” Early Medieval Europe 14 (2006): 173–200. McKinnon, James. Music in Early Christian Literature. Cambridge Readings in the Literature of Music. Cambridge University Press, 1987. McKitterick, Rosamond. “Carolingian Bible Production: The Tours Anomaly.” In Gameson, The Early Medieval Bible, 63–77.   Carolingian Culture: Emulation and Innovation. Cambridge University Press, 1994. Meens, Rob. “Sanctuary, Penance, and Dispute Settlement under Charlemagne: The Conflict between Alcuin and Theodulf of Orléans over a Sinful Cleric.” Speculum 82 (2007): 277–300. Meersseman, G. G., and Gian Piero Pacini. Ordo fraternitatis: Confraternite e pietà dei laici nel Medioevo. 3 vols. Italia Sacra 24–26. Rome: Herder, 1977. Merimier, G. R. A Medieval Book of Beasts: Pierre de Beauvais’ Bestiary. Lampeter: The Edwin Mellen Press, 1992. La Messe de Tournai: Une messe polyphonique en l’honneur de Notre-Dame à la cathédrale de Tournai au XIVe siècle. Etude et nouvelle transcription, ed. Jean Dumoulin, T. Hackens, and J. Pycke. Tornacum 4. Tournai and Louvainla-Neuve: Archives du Chapitre Cathédral and Université Catholique de Louvain, 1988. Millet, Hélène. Les Chanoines du chapitre cathédral de Laon 1272–1412. Collection de l’Ecole Française de Rome 56. Ecole Française de Rome, Palais Farnèse, 1982. Moreu-Rey, Enric. “Un sant cavaller: Sant Martí de Tours. L’espasa de Sant Martí.” In Studia in honorem prof. M. de Riquer, 665–86. Barcelona: Quaderns Crema, 1986. Mostert, Marco. The Political Theology of Abbo of Fleury: A Study of the Ideas about Society and Law of the Tenth-Century Monastic Reform Movement. Medieval Studies and Sources (= Middeleeuwse studies en bronnen). Hilversum: Verloren, 1987. “Narratio de reversione beati Martini a Burgundia tractatus.” In Supplément aux chroniques de Touraine, ed. André Salmon, 14–54. Tours: Guilland-Verger, 1856. Noizet, Hélène. “Alcuin contre Théodulphe: Un conflict producteur de normes.” In Alcuin de York à Tours: Ecriture, pouvoir et réseaux dans l’Europe du haut Moyen Age, special issue of Annales de Bretagne et des pays de l’Ouest, Anjou, Maine, Poitou, Touraine 111 (2004): 113–29.   “Le Centre canonical de Saint-Martin de Tours et ses domaines périphériques en Val de Loire (IXe–Xe siècles).” Annales de Bretagne et des Pays de l’Ouest 109.2 (2002): 9–33.   La Fabrique de la ville: Espaces et sociétés à Tours, IXe-–XIIIe siècle. Paris: Publication de la Sorbonne, 2007.

285

286

Bibliography   “Pratiques spatiales, représentations de la ville, et fabrique urbaine de Tours du IXe au XIIIe siècles: Chanoines, moines et laïcs à Saint-Martin et Saint-Julien.” Ph.D. dissertation, Université François Rabelais, Tours, 2003. Oury, Guy. “Culte et liturgie de Saint Martin.” L’Ami du clergé 44 (1961): 641–50.   “Formulaires anciens pour la messe de Saint-Martin.” Etudes grégoriennes 7 (1967): 21–40.   “Les Messes de Saint Martin dans les sacramentaires gallicans, romano-francs et milanais.” Etudes grégoriennes 5 (1962): 73–97.   “Recherches sur le culte d’un fondateur d’église, Saint-Gatien.” Etudes grégoriennes 9 (1968): 7–24. Palazzo, Eric. Les Sacramentaires de Fulda: Etude sur l’iconographie et la liturgie à l’époque ottonienne. Liturgiewissenschaftliche Quellen und Forschungen. Münster: Aschendorff, 1994. Papanicolaou, Linda Morey. “Stained Glass Windows of the Choir of the Cathedral of Tours.” Ph.D. dissertation, New York University, Graduate School of Arts and Science, 1979. Perdrizet, Paul. Le Calendrier parisien à la fin du Moyen Age. Paris: Les Belles Lettres, 1933. Perkins, Leeman L. “The L’Homme armé Masses of Busnoys and Ockeghem: A Comparison.” Journal of Musicology 3 (1984): 363–96.   Music in the Age of the Renaissance. New York and London: W. W. Norton, 1999.   “Musical Patronage at the Royal Court of France under Charles VII and Louis XI (1422–83).” JAMS 37 (1984): 507–66. Persigan, Louis. Recherches sur l’apostolat de saint Julien, premier évêque du Mans. Le Mans: Imprimerie Leguicheux, 1886. Pietri, Luce. La Ville de Tours du IVe au VIe siècle: Naissance d’une cité chrétienne. Collection de l’Ecole française de Rome 69. Ecole française de Rome, Palais Farnèse, 1983. Piolin, Paul. Histoire de l’église du Mans. 6  vols. Paris: Julien, Lanier, Cosnard, 1858. Pirro, André. Histoire de la musique de la fin du XIVe siecle à la fin du XVIe. Manuels d’Histoire de l’Art. Paris: Librairie Renouard; H. Laurens, 1940. Planchart, Alejandro Enrique. “Choirboys in Cambrai in the Fifteenth Century.” In Young Choristers: 650–1700, ed. Susan Boynton and Eric Rice, 123–45. Woodbridge: The Boydell Press, 2008.   “The Geography of Martinmas.” In Gallagher, Haar, Nádas, and Striplin, Western Plainchant in the First Millennium, 119–56.   “The Origins and Early History of L’Homme armé.” Journal of Musicology 20 (2003): 305–57.   The Repertory of Tropes at Winchester. 2 vols. Princeton University Press, 1977. Poirier, Jean. La Maîtrise de la cathédrale d’Angers: Six cents ans d’histoire. n.p., 1983. Polyphonic Music of the Fourteenth Century. 24  vols. Vol. II, ed. Leo Schrade. Monaco: Editions de l’Oiseau-Lyre, 1956.

Bibliography Pothier, Joseph. “Douze antiennes de saint-Odon de Cluny en l’honneur de S. Martin de Tours.” Revue du chant grégorien 15.5–7 (1906/07): 65–73. Prizer, William F. “Music and Ceremonial in the Low Countries: Philip the Fair and the Order of the Golden Fleece.” Early Music History 5 (1985): 113–53. Rabory, J. Histoire de Marmoutier. Paris: Arthur Savaète, 1910. Rand, E. K. A Survey of the Manuscripts of Tours. 2 vols., Vol. I: Studies in the Script of Tours. Cambridge, MA: Mediaeval Academy of America, 1929. Ravaisson-Mollien, Jean Gaspard Félix. Rapport sur les bibliothèques des départements de l’ouest. Paris, 1940. Reames, Sherry L. The “Legenda aurea”: A Reexamination of Its Paradoxical History. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press, 1985.   “Saint Martin of Tours in the ‘Legenda aurea’ and Before.” Viator 12 (1981): 131–64. Reed, Matthew R. “Sulpicius Severus and Martin of Tours: Defending a Mentor, Securing a Saint.” MA thesis, University of Louisiana, 2009. Reier, Ellen Jane. “The Introit Trope Repertory at Nevers: Mss Paris B.N. lat. 9449 and Paris B.N. n.a. lat. 1235.” Ph.D. dissertation, University of California at Berkeley, 1981. Rivaz, Pierre de. Eclaircissements sur le martyre de la légion thébéenne … Paris, 1779. Roberts, Michael. “Venantius Fortunatus’s Life of Saint Martin.” Traditio 57 (2002): 129–87. Robertson, Anne Walters. “Benedicamus Domino: The Unwritten Tradition.” JAMS 41 (1988): 1–62.   Guillaume de Machaut and Reims: Context and Meaning in His Musical Works. Cambridge University Press, 2002.   “The Savior, the Woman, and the Head of the Dragon in the Caput Masses and Motet.” JAMS 59 (2006): 537–630.   The Service-Books of the Royal Abbey of Saint-Denis: Images of Ritual and Music in the Middle Ages. Oxford Monographs on Music. Oxford University Press, 1991. Rosenwein, Barbara H. Negotiating Space: Power, Restraint, and the Privileges of Immunity in Early Medieval Europe. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1999.   “St. Odo’s St. Martin: The Use of a Model.” Journal of Medieval History 4 (1978): 317–31. Saint Martin dans l’art et l’imagerie: Exposition nationale, Musée des beaux-arts, du 7 juillet au 1er octobre, Tours: La Musée, 1961. Salmon, André. Supplément aux chroniques de Touraine. Tours: GuillandVerger, 1856. Saulnier, Daniel. Les Modes grégoriens. Solesmes: Abbaye Saint-Pierre, 1997. Sauvel, Tony. “Les Miracles de saint Martin: Recherches sur les peintures murales de Tours au Ve et au VIe siècle.” Bulletin monumental 114.1 (1956): 153–79. Schlager, Karl-Heinz. Thematischer Katalog der ältesten Alleluia-Melodien aus Handschriften des 10. und 11. Jahrhunderts. Munich: Erlanger Arbeiten zur Musikwissenschaft, 1965.

287

288

Bibliography Séjourné, Paul. L’Ordinaire de s. Martin d’Utrecht. Utrecht: Dekker en van de Vegt, 1919–21. Sevestre, Nicole. “Prose ou verse?” In Recherches nouvelles sur les tropes liturgiques, ed. Wulf Arlt and Gunilla Björkvall, 429–39. Stockholm: Almquist and Wiksell, 1993. Sherr, Richard. “Music at the Cathedral of Bourges in the Time of Ockeghem.” In Johannes Ockeghem: Actes du XLe Colloque international d’Etudes humanistes. Tours, 3–8 février 1997, ed. Philippe Vendrix, 173–219. Paris: Klincksieck, 1998. Skubiszewski, Piotr. “Une vita sancti Martini illustré de Tours (Bibliothèque Municipale, ms. 1018).” In Le Culte des saints aux IXe–XIIIe siècles: Actes du colloque tenu à Poitiers, les 15–16–17 septembre 1993, ed. Robert Favreau, 109–36. University of Poitiers, Centre d’études supérieures de civilisation médiévale, 1995. Smith, Katherine Allen. “Saints in Shining Armor: Martial Asceticism and Masculine Models of Sanctity, ca. 1050–1250.” Speculum 83 (2008): 572–602. Stancliffe, Clare. St. Martin and His Hagiographer: History and Miracle in Sulpicius Severus. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1983. Starr, Pamela F. “Rome as the Center of the Universe: Papal Grace and Music Patronage.” Early Music History 11 (1992): 223–62.   “Southern Exposure: Roman Light on Johannes Regis.” Revue belge de musicologie 49 (1995): 27–38. Steiner, Ruth. “The Responsories and Prosa for St. Stephen’s Day at Salisbury.” Musical Quarterly 56 (1970): 162–82.   “Some Melismas for Office Responsories.” JAMS 26 (1973): 108–31. Straeten, Joseph van der. Les Manuscrits hagiographiques d’Orléans, Tours et Angers: Avec plusieurs textes inédits. Subsidia hagiographica. Brussels: Société des Bollandistes, 1982. Strohm, Reinhard. Music in Late Medieval Bruges. Rev. edn. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1990. Taruskin, Richard. “Antoine Busnoys and the L’Homme armé Tradition.” JAMS 39 (1986): 255–93.   The Oxford History of Western Music. 6 vols. Oxford University Press, 2005. Thacker, Alan. “Loca sanctorum: The Significance of Place in the Study of Saints.” In Local Saints and Local Churches in the Early Medieval West, ed. Alan Thacker and Richard Sharpe, 1–43. Oxford University Press, 2002. Theureau, Christian. La Population archéologique de Tours (IVe–XVIIe siècle): Etude anthropologique, ed. Henri Galinié. Recherches sur Tours 7. Tours: FERAC/ ADEAUT, 1998. Troupeau, Gérard. “Une description de l’office de la Saint-Martin dans la collégiale de Tours au début du XVIIIe siècle.” BSAT 44 (1996): 897–912. Van Dam, Raymond. “Paulinus of Périgueux and Perpetuus of Tours.” Francia 14 (1986): 567–73.   Saints and Their Miracles in Late Antique Gaul. Princeton University Press, 1993.

Bibliography Vaucelle, E. R. La Collégiale de Saint-Martin de Tours: Des origines a l’avènement des Valois (397–1328). Mémoires de la Société Archéologique de Touraine. Tours: L. Péricat, 1907. Vieillard-Troiekouroff, May. Les Monuments religieux de la Gaule d’après les oeuvres de Grégoire de Tours, Paris: H. Champion, 1976. Vincent, Catherine. Les Confréries médiévales dans le royaume de France: XIIIe–XVe siècle. Paris: Albin Michel, 1994. Voisenet, Jacques. Bestiaire chrétien: L’imagerie animale des auteurs du haut Moyen Age (Ve–XIe s.). Toulouse: Presses Universitaires du Mirail, 1994. Wagner, Peter. Origine et développement du chant liturgique jusqu’à la fin du moyen âge, trans. Abbé Bour. Tournai: Desclée, Lefebvre, 1904.   “Wie man im Mittelalter eine neue Choralmesse komponierte: Zum 11. November.” Gregorius-Blatt 51 (1927): 129–34, 145–50, 161–69. Walsh, Martin W. “Martinsnacht as an Early Locus of Carnivalesque Study.” Medieval Folklore 3 (1994): 127–65.   “Medieval English ‘Martinmesse’: The Archaeology of a Forgotten Festival.” Folklore 111 (2000): 231–54. Wegman, Rob C. Born for the Muses: The Life and Masses of Jacob Obrecht. Oxford Monographs on Music. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1996.   “Mensural Intertextuality in the Sacred Music of Antoine Busnoys.” In Higgins, Antoine Busnoys, 175–214. Oxford: Clarendon Press; New York: Oxford University Press, 1999. White, T. H. The Book of Beasts, Being a Translation from a Latin Bestiary of the Twelfth Century. London: Jonathan Cape, 1954. Wollasch, J. “Benedictus abbas Romensis: Das römische Element in der frühen benediktinischen Tradition.” In Tradition als historische Kraft: Interdisziplinäre Forschungen zur Geschichte des früheren Mittelalters, ed. N. Kamp and J. Wollasch, 119–37. Berlin and New York, 1982. Wood, Ian. The Modern Origins of the Early Middle Ages. Oxford University Press, 2013. Wright, Craig. “The Feast of the Reception of Relics at Notre Dame of Paris.” In Music and Context: Essays for John M. Ward, ed. Anne Dhu Shapiro, 1–13. Cambridge, MA: Department of Music, Harvard University, 1985.   The Maze and the Warrior: Symbols in Architecture, Theology, and Music. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2001.   Music and Ceremony at Notre Dame of Paris, 500–150. Cambridge Studies in Music. Cambridge University Press, 1989.   Music at the Court of Burgundy, 1364–1419: A Documentary History. Henryville, PA: Institute of Mediaeval Music, 1979. Zimmern, Matthew. “Hagiography and the Cult of Saints in the Diocese of Liège, c. 700–980.” Ph.D. dissertation, University of St. Andrews, 2007.

289

Index of chants

Ad patriam redit, prosa, 71, 132, 149, 152, 155–57, 166–67 Adest multitudo monachorum, ant., 94 Adest namque, seq., 53, 55, 59 Agmina sacra angelorum, resp., 105, 108, 151 Afferte domino, ant., 227 Alma redemptoris mater, ant., 261 Amplexus parietem, prosa, 70, 71, 73 Ante sex dies, ant., 53 Anxiatus est, ant., 143 Apud dominum misericordia, ant., 57 Arborius stupens, ant., 98 Artus febre fatiscentes, ant., 94 Ave Maria, seq., 63 Ave Maria gracia plena, ver., 261 Ave summa presulum, seq., 87 Beata nobis gaudia, hymn, 260 Beate Christi confessor, ant., 192 Beatissimus Julianus, resp., 197–98 Beatus antistes, resp., 194–98 Beatus Gatianus urbem Turonicam, resp., 194 Beatus Martinus, int., 74, 90 Beatus Martinus obitum suum, resp., 95, 99 Beatus servus, com., 88, 89, 104 Beatus vir apostolicus Gatianus, ant., 192 Benedicamus domino, 62, 64

290

Calix christi dictus est, prosa, 71 Celebremus hodie festivo, trope, 89 Celse decus, trope, 89 Centum quadraginta quattuor, resp., 72, 164 Christus resurgens, ant., 63, 65, 66 Conditor glorie, prosa, 70, 73 Creature totius gubernator, prosa, 71 Cum essent, ver., 260 Cum plebe clerus, hymn, 165 Cum repente viribus, ant., 94 Cum videret beatus Martinus, resp., 95, 99, 132, 133, 135, 144 Cuthbertus puer, resp., 143 Cur nos, Pater, ver., 135 Custodi nos rex, prosa, 71

De fructu ventris, ant., 57 Descendit de celis, resp., 149, 151, 153, 158–62, 164, 165 Dicant nunc Iudei, ant., 66 Dicite in nationibus, ver., 63, 66 Divini fuerat, trope, 89 Dixerunt discipuli, ant., 224–25, 227–34 Dixerunt discipuli ad beatum, resp., 95, 99 Domine, iam satis, ant., 94 Domine prevenisti, grad., 88, 104 Domine si adhuc populo, ant., 105, 237–38 Domine si adhuc populo, resp., 96, 99, 237 Dum sacramenta, ver., 88 Dum sacramenta offerret, resp., 99, 105 Ecce ascendimus, ant., 227 Ecce beatus sua, trope, 90 Ecce karissimi, 135 Ecce magnum et verum, resp., 99 Ecce sacerdos magnus, int., 90 Ecce vere israelita, resp., 105 Ecce vir prudens, resp., 105 Ecclesia virtute roboratur, resp., 99 Ego signo crucis, ant., 213–14 Electus et dilectus, resp., 143 Eterne virgo memorie, prosa, 71 Euphonias videns, prosa, 134–35, 152, 163–64, 166 Exequie Martine, 94 Exortum est in tenebris, ant., 57 Exultemus et letemur, prosa, 70–71, 108, 110, 120–21 Fac deus munda, prosa, 70, 151, 153, 154, 155, 167 Facinora nostra, 70, 151, 153, 157–59, 164 Factus sospes, prosa, 71 Familiam custodi, prosa, 70, 151, 153, 155–56, 159, 164, 167 Flebant pictavi presulem, prosa, 134 Gaude Maria, resp., 73 Gaude Maria virgo, ant., 261

Index of chants Gaude Syon, que diem recolis, seq., 87, 88, 162 Gemma dei Martinus, trope, 89 Gentis lingue, trope, 90 Gloria et honore, off., 103 Glorificati hominis viderunt, ant., 94 Gloriosus confessor domini, trope, 89 Hic dictis, trope, 89 Hic est Martinus electus, resp., 99, 105 Hic Martinus pauper, all., ver., 88 Hic qui advenit, resp., 145 Hic sanctus languidos, prosa, 71, 120 Hic signorum radiis, ver., 194 Honestus vero, resp., 151 Honore cives, prosa, 134 Improperium expectavit, off., 237 In laude Martini, Deus, hymn, 79 In medio ecclesie, resp., 149, 152, 159 In monte oliveti, resp., 237 Inter natos, resp., 139 Inveni David, psalm, 116 Inviolata integra, prosa, 70, 73 Iste confessor, hymn, 195 Iste est de sublimibus, resp., 105, 182 Iste homo ab adolescentia, resp., 99 Iste sanctus digne, resp., 105, 111, 151 Isti sunt sancti, resp., 72 Iuravit dominus, grad., 103 Iustus ut palma, int., 103 Jucundemur hodie, seq., 88, 220 Judea et Jerusalem, resp., 72 Letabundus exultet, seq., 88 Laudabilis et preclarus, resp., 99 Laudemus dominum, resp., 105, 108 Letabitur justus, all., 55 Letemur gaudiis, prosa, 56, 70, 72 Loquebantur variis, resp., 105, 260 Lux perpetua, resp., 105, 182 Magna est, ver., 89, 103 Margarita sacerdotum, hymn, 79 Martine, iam consul poli, hymn, 79 Martine, par apostolis (Guibert), hymn, 79, 162 Martine, par apostolis (Odo), hymn, 79, 162 Martine sanctissime, hymn, 79 Martini renitent en speciosa dies, hymn, 79 Martinus Abrahe sinu, resp., 37, 132–33, 134, 135, 142, 145, 149–68, 171 Martinus adhuc cathecuminus, ant., 224 Martinus episcopus, ver., 160–62, 166

Martinus hac die inclita, prosa, 134 Martinus igitur, comm., 88 Martinus, magnus pontifex, hymn, 79 Martinus meritis, trope, 89, 90 Martinus qui electus est, resp., 99 Martinus sacerdos dei, resp., 99 Martinus signipotens, ant., 79, 94 Media nocte dominica, ant., 94, 98 Miles mire probitatis, seq., 103 Munere namque, trope, 89 Nihil carnalem, trope, 90 Non debiles annos, prosa, 71, 132, 135–41, 144, 148, 167 Nonne cor nostrum, all., 66 Nunc sancte nobis Spiritus, hymn, 108 O beatum virum, ant., 49 O beatum virum, int., 87–88 O beatum virum cuius animam, resp., 99 O beatum virum in cuius transitu, resp., 66, 99 O beatum virum Martinum antistitem, resp., 96, 99 O caritas, resp., 200 O gloriosum presulem, resp., 197 O Martine, flos presulum, hymn, 218 O Martine, o pie, ant., 79 O Nazarene dux, hymn, 62, 66 O quam admirabilis vir, resp., 105, 111 O quantus erat luctus, resp., 99, 132, 133, 134, 144, 145 O sacerdotum nobilissime, resp., 105 O vere beatum, ant., 94 O vere beatum in cuius ore, resp., 97, 99 O Virgo, ant., 53, 56–73 Octogenus agens, prosa, 71, 108, 120, 133, 149, 152, 157–59, 166, 170 Oculis ac manibus, all., ver., 88, 220 Oculis ac manibus, ant., 227 Oculis ac manibus, resp., 99 Omnipotens eterna, trope, 90 Omnipotentissime, ver., 62 Omnis nostra contio, ver., 62, 66 Ora pro nobis, grad., 88 Ora pro nobis beate Martine, resp., 99, 105 Orante sancto Martino, ant., 98 Oravit sanctum, resp., 145 Orientis partibus, 67 Pater iuste, ant., 143 Pater noster, 56 Pater, si non potest, comm., 237

291

292

Index of chants Pontificum Martinus decus, Martine piorum, hymn,€79 Post derelicta, prosa, 71, 96, 132, 149, 152, 153–55, 165–67 Post passionem, resp.,€151 Posui adiutorium, all.,€103 Posuisti domine, all., 103–04,€220 Posuisti domine, off., 88, 89, 104 Preparator veritatis, prosa,€71, 139 Pretiosa in conspectu, resp., 105,€182 Primus homo corruit,€62 Prophetico plenus spiramine, prosa,€71 Qui calcavit speculum, prosa, 71, 132, 135–52 Qui super astra, trope,€90 Redemptionem misit dominus, ant.,€57 Regens gubernansque, ver.,€59 Repleti sunt, ver.,€260 Rex celorum,€50 Rex Christi, Martine decus, seq.,€87 Sacerdos in eternum, ant.,€252 Sacerdotum Christi, Martinum, seq.,€87 Sanantur, prosa, 70,€116 Sancte Martine Christi confessor, resp., 99, 104–105, 169,€176 Sancte Stephane protomartyr, resp.,€164 Sancte tui domine, resp.,€105 Sanctorum meritis, hymn,€58 Sanctus dei Gatianus, resp.,€197 Sanctus Martinus obitum, ant.,€94

Sanguine passionis sue, prosa,€70 Scimus quidem te pater, ant.,€94 Sedentem in superne, prosa, 70, 72, 73, 145,€146 Sic deus dilexit, ant.,€260 Sicut sol, ver.,€196 Sinite me, inquit, ant.,€94 Sint lumbi, resp., 108,€176 Sospitati dedit egros, prosa, 71, 121, 133,€178 Spiritu sancto, resp.,€260 Spiritus sanctus, resp.,€260 Splendens Lucifer,€197 Statuit ei, int., 54, 88–89, 103, 104, 116,€220 Stephanus dei gratia plenus, prosa,€133 Stirps Jesse, resp., 53, 56–57, 62,€67 Tanquam sponsus, ver., 162, 164,€165 Te Deum laudamus, 110, 176,€205 Tecum principium, ant.,€57 Terribilis est, int.,€106 Ut sit plena, prosa, 71,€143 Veni creator Spiritus, hymn,€108 Veni Redemptor, hymn,€62 Venite, ant., 49,€56 Venite post me, resp.,€179 Verbera carnificum, resp.,€105 Verbum caro factum, resp.,€164 Vernabant nunc supernorum, prosa,€70 Virgo dei genetrix, ver., 62,€66 Vitam petiit, ver., 88,€104

General index

Abbo, abbot of Fleury-sur-Loire, 173 Adam of St. Victor, 87 Adémar de Chabannes, 89, 187 Ado, St., bishop of Vienna, 48 Aelfric, archbishop of York, 83 Alcuin, abbot of Tours, 4–5, 12, 20, 22, 38 in liturgy, 119 life of St. Martin, 83, 91 Alexander III, pope, 26 Amalarius of Metz, 49, 52, 149, 151, 159, 196 Amatus (papal legate), 174 Amiens Cathedral, 34, 39, 55, 152 ampule, holy, 15 Andrew, St., feast of, 179 Angers Cathedral, 39, 131–71, 181 Annunciation, feast of, 46, 47 Anselm of Canterbury, 216 Apt Cathedral, 89 Aredius, St., 254 Arles-sur-Tech, abbey of, 104 Armarius of Auxerre, 117 armor, spiritual, 216–18 Ascension, 179 Ash Wednesday, 178 Assumption, feast of, 46 Aurelian (disciple of St. Martial), 187 Auxerre, bishop of, 118 Bassus, William, 174 Bayeux Cathedral, 54, 57 Beaumont, convent of, 65, 110, 174, 177, 178–79 Beleth, Johannes, 55, 79, 85 bell-ringing, 57 Benedicamus songs, 57 Berengar, 5 Bernard of Clairvaux, 213 Berruyer, Philippe, 190 Borton, 227 Bourges Cathedral, 39 Bousquet-Labouérie, Christine, 208 boy bishop, see Saint-Martin of Tours: boy bishops Brassart, Johannes, Te dignitas presularis, 224

Brice, St., 3, 168, 255 Busnoys, Antoine author of Il sera par vous?, 229 Missa L’homme armé, 231–32, 233 Cambrai Cathedral, 229 Candes, 92, 237 candles, 170 and lighting, 107–09, 120, 122 as indication of rank, 41–48 capella (term), 13 Catherine of Alexandria, St., feast of, 69, 71 Catholica mater, 201 Celestine III, pope, 26 Charlemagne, 4–5, 12, 21, 22–23 visit to Tours, 21 Charles IV (the Fair), king of France, 14, 46, 109–10 Charles VII, king of France, 13, 230 Charles the Bald, king of France, 13 Charles the Bold, duke of Burgundy, 226, 230 Charlot, Pierre, 33 Chartres Cathedral, 66, 78 Châteauneuf, 24, 91, 169 and Saint-Martin, 9, 29 Chauveau (librarian), 19 Cherreau, Ollivier, 189 Chevalier, Bernard, 11 Chrétien de Troyes, Yvain, ou le chevalier au lion, 237, 239–42 Christmas, 145, 149, 151, 159, 164, 170 performance on, 49, 69, 70, 72–73 Chrodegang, bishop of Metz, 24 Chronicon Turonense Magnum, 32, 94, 110, 111, 188–89 Circumcision, feast of Feast of Fools, 56 performance on, 52, 53, 61–65, 67–68, 69, 70, 73, 145 Clement I, pope, 188 Clement VII, anti-pope, 39 Cletus, pope, 188–89 Clovis, king of the Franks, 12–13, 75, 230 Cluny, 174, 175

293

294

General index Collon, Gaston J. S., 19 Compiègne, 159 Compline, “endless,” 57 Conception of the Virgin, feast of, 46 conductus, 64, 67 Cormery, 177 Corpus Christi, 71, 143 Credo, 56 Crusades, 215 Cubitt, Catherine, 247 cum nota, 59–61 customary, see Saint-Martin of Tours: ordinary or customary Cuthbert, St., 143 Decius, emperor, 184, 188 Dedication, 105 Delisle, Léopold, 20 Denis, St., 15, 151, 188–89, 202, 245 dicere/canere, 54–55 Dionysius the Areopagite, 187, 188 Dorange, August, 19 dragon, mock, 178–79 Du Fay, Guillaume composer of Il sera par vous?, 229 Missa L’homme armé, 232 Du Mont, Etienne, 107 Durand, Guillaume, 52, 58, 79 Easter performance during Easter week, 65–66, 178 performance on Easter Day, 52, 53, 58–59 Edward, prince of Wales (Black Prince), 203–04 Egidio de Murino, 244 Elie II of Angoulême, 109 Eloy d’Amerval, Missa dixerunt discipuli, 225 Fabianus, pope, 184 falsetto, 56 Farmer, Sharon, 1, 112, 113–14, 118, 177 Feast of Fools, see Circumcision, feast of: Feast of Fools fifthing, 65 Firmin, St., 151 Fleury, abbey of, 101 foundations, 61 Fouquet, Jean, 10 Fredegisius, Abbot, 24 Gallican use, 49, 54, 87, 88, 136 Garin le Loherain, 209 Gatien, St., 183

cult, 17, 190–92 life, 184–90, 192, 200 liturgy for, 183, 184, 190, 192–202 miracles, 194 tomb, 165 Gâtineau, Péan, 28–29, 40, 84, 119, 215, 218 George, St., 214 Germanus, St., 117, 140 Gloria, interpolated, 50 Gregory V, pope, 174 Gregory VII, pope, 143, 207 Gregory IX, pope, 33 Gregory of Tours as bishop of Tours, 82 in liturgy, 87, 97 on Clovis, 12–13 on July 4 feast, 102–03 on Maurice, 180 on miracles, 17, 75, 165 on St. Denis, 188 on St. Gatien, 184–86, 188, 201 on St. Martin, 3, 76, 82–83; life of St. Martin, 121; Martin and Christ, 171 Martin as bishop saint, 57 Guibertus of Gembloux, 25, 30, 79, 84, 162 Guillaume de Deguileville, 216 Guy of Saint-Denis, 54 Gy, Pierre-Marie, 99, 100 Harris, Julian, 241 Heligaud, count, 168 Henry II, king of England, 9 Henry IV, king of France, 15 Hesbert, René-Jean, 98 Higgins, Paula, 227, 229 Hilary of Poitiers, 2 Hilduin of Saint-Denis, 187 Holy Innocents, performance on, 57, 61, 70, 72 Homme armé tradition, see L’Homme armé tradition Hundred Years War, 11, 189–202, 229, 230, 244 IJsenbaert, Franciscus, Dixerunt discipuli, 224 Il sera par vous/L’homme armé, 227–29, 231–34 Ingelgerius, duke of Burgundy, 117 Ingelgerius of Angers, 117 Ingulfus, abbot, 60 invitatories, 64 Isidore of Seville, Etymologiae, 240 Jacobus de Voragine, Golden Legend, 83–86, 218 Jacques de Vitry, 211, 218

General index James and Christopher, Sts., feast of, 179 Johannes Regis, Missa Dum sacrum mysterium/L’homme armé, 226 John II the Good, King of France, 203 John XXII, pope, 46 John Cassian, 49 John “Lackland,” king of England, 9, 33 John of Salerno, 24, 94 John the Baptist, feasts of, 139, 195, 256–57 performance on, 69, 71 John the Evangelist, feast of, 149, 178 performance on, 57 Josquin des Prez, Missa L’Homme armé super voces musicales, 232, 233 Julian, St., of Le Mans, 197 Kelly, Thomas Forrest, 150, 151, 282 L’Homme armé tradition, 225–29 La Vigne, Andrieu de, Mystère de SaintMartin, 85 Landulf, saved by Martin, 83 Laon Cathedral, 34, 57, 72 Lasso, Orlando di, Audite nova!, 123 laus perennis, 168–71 Lazarus, 165 Le Puy, 56, 67 Lebrun, Pierre, 40 Lee-de Amici, Beth Anne, 60 Legend of the Seven Sleepers of Marmoutier, 211 Lerond, Albert, 28 Létald of Micy, 198–99 Lidorius, St., 183, 184, 195 Ligugé, 2, 78 lion, as symbol of Christ/God, 240–42 liturgy, performance of, 37–40, 47–68 Lockwood, Lewis, 232 Louis VI, king of France, 15 Louis VIII, king of France, 14 Louis IX, king of France, 14, 60, 190 Louis XI, king of France, 61, 230 Louis the Pious, king of the Franks, 187, 230 Lucius III, pope, 32 Luitgarde (wife of Charlemagne), 21 Maan, Jean, 186–87 Machaut, Guillaume de, 234–39 and Martin, 245 and Reims, 244 Aucune gent/Qui plus aimme/T. Fiat voluntas tua (M5), 235–39, 242–44 Magnificat, 51

interpolated, 49, 50 Magnus Liber Organi, 66 Magro, Agostino, 61, 67, 258 Mark, St., feast of, 179 Marmoutier, abbey of, 39, 106, 120, 177 and St. Maurice, 181 and Seven Sleepers, 254 bull of exemption, 175 conflicts with archbishop, 118–19, 130, 175 founded by St. Martin, 3 holy ampule, 15 liturgy in, 115 processions to, 113, 179 sources, 20, 88, 101, 112, 114, 133, 142, 151, 152, 154, 155, 185, 199, 201 ties with Saint-Martin, 7, 25 ties with Vendôme, 101 Martel, Geoffrey, count of Anjou, 101 Martial, St., 89, 90, 187–88 Martin IV, pope, 183, 258 Martin V, pope, 40 Martin, St. and the beggar, 2, 13, 74, 76, 78, 207–11 and L’Homme armé tradition, 234 as bishop of Tours, 3, 79–81, 85, 195, 218 as national patron saint, 13–15, 247 as soldier of Christ, 18, 207–46 at Candes, 3 cult, 1–18, 74–86, 205; outside France, 247–48 death and burial, 237–38, 249–51 dedications to, 206 feast of December 1 (Translation of Head), 45, 46, 109, 255; liturgy on, 105; performance on, 49; prosas on, 70 feast of December 13 (Reversion), 42, 45, 109–10, 112, 116–17, 122, 173; liturgy on, 105, 118–22; performance on, 49, 51, 71 feast of July 4 (Ordination and Translation), 42, 43; liturgy on, 102–09, 220; miracle account, 249–51; performance on, 50, 51, 71; role of dean, 48 feast of May 12 (Subvention), 42, 43, 109–10, 173, 179, 255; juxtaposed with St. Maurice, 181–83; liturgy on, 105, 110–17, 119; performance on, 49, 53, 54, 70 feast of November 11 (transitus or natalis), 42, 45, 85, 122, 133, 134; liturgy on, 86– 102, 95–97, 213, 218, 220, 225, 256, 259; performance on, 37, 49, 50, 52, 53, 69, 71, 179; role of dean, 48; triumphed, 49

295

296

General€index Martin,€St. (cont.) iconography, 201, 207–11, 214–16 in art and literature,€74 in liturgy of St. Gatien, 200–01 life, 2–3,€74–86 miracles, 28, 74, 75, 78–79, 80–86, 95–97, 103, 106, 111, 117, 120–21, 147–48, 149, 165, 205, 215, 249–51 on par with Apostles, 74, 79,€85 polyphony for, 223–46 relics, 13, 110–12, 114, 116–22,€168 tomb, 22–23, 29, 82, 83, 111, 131–71, 176–77,€181 versified life, 215; see€also€St. Martin’s Day festivities Martinellus, 5, 76, 78, 111, 119, 219–20 Martini, Simone, 214,€216 Martinopolis, see€Saint-Martin of Tours: as Martinopolis Masson, André,€20 Mathefelon, Juhel de, archbishop of Tours, 190–92 Matins, 36–38, 50, 91–92, 94,€120 Maundy Thursday, 178, 180,€237 Maurice, St., 17, 114,€191 and the Theban Legion, 105, 180–83 Maximus, emperor,€81 Meaux,€145 Meens, Rob,€22 melismas ad repetendum, 54, 135–40,€144 memorization of liturgy,€38 Mennas, St.,€87 Michael, St., 214, 226,€230 Miles mire probitatis (anon.),€223 monastic exemption movement, 173–77 Montlouis,€203 mystery plays,€85 Narratio de reversione beati Martini a Burgundia tractatus,€112–121 Nativity of the Virgin, feast of, 46,€47 neuma triplex, 149–68,€170 neumas, 51–59, 143, 170,€179 Nicholas IV, pope,€183 Nicholas, St., feast of, 131, 178,€185 performance on,€71 Nicolas d’Orgemont,€39 Notker Balbulus,€87 Notre Dame de l’Ecrignole, 65, 66,€178 Notre-Dame of Paris, 37, 58, 66, 67, 152,€255 O antiphons,€56 Obrecht, Jacob Missa de Sancto Martino, 224–25

Missa L’Homme armé,€233 Ockeghem, Johannes,€230 Miles mire (attr.),€223 Missa L’Homme armé,€232 Odo of Cluny, 112,€175 antiphons by, 94,€124 canon of Tours,€24 hymns, 79, 80,€162 office for St. Martin,€170 on antiphons,€49 on Christian knight,€207 Odo of Sully, bishop,€58 Order of St. Michael, 226,€230 Order of the Golden Fleece,€226 ordinary, see€Saint-Martin of Tours: ordinary or customary organum, 64, 65–66, 67, 88,€178 Oriflamme,€15 Oury, Dom, 86,€188 Palestrina, Giovanni Pierluigi da, Missa L’homme armé a 5, 232,€233 Palm Sunday,€178 performance on,€52 Paulinus of Périgueux,€81 Pentecost, 179, 260–61 performance practice, 53, 147, 166,€170 Perpetuus, St., bishop of Tours, 3, 7, 81, 94,€102 feast of,€178 Peter and Paul, Sts., feast of: performance on, 69,€71 Peter of Cambrai,€55 Philip IV (“the Fair”), king of France,€14 Philip V (“the Long”), king of France,€14 Philip Augustus, king of France, 9, 11,€33 Philip, dean of Saint-Martin, 25, 180–82 Philippe of Heinsberg, archbishop of Cologne,€25 Physiologus,€240 Planchart, Alejandro Enrique, 90,€229 polyphony, 58–68; see€also€Martin, St.: polyphony€for Prés, Jean des, bishop of Tournai,€60 Presentation of the Virgin, feast of,€46 processions during Easter Week,€65–66 on Circumcision,€70 on feast of July 2, 107–08 on feast of May 3,€173 on feast of November 3,€170 on January 3,€198 on Purification,€26

General index to and from Saint-Martin, 177–80 to Cathedral, 110, 174, 203 to Marmoutier, 113, 175 to Saint-Martin, 176–77 prosas, 36, 37, 68–73, 110, 116, 119–22, 132–33, 219, 251 outside Tours, 134 psalletta, 39 psalmody, interpolated, 49–50 Pseudo-Dionysius, 187 Purification, feast of, 26, 46, 47, 69 performance on, 70, 73 Radbod, bishop of Utrecht, 87, 104, 111–12, 114, 135 office of St. Martin, 182 Rainaldus, treasurer of Saint-Martin, 25, 180–82 Ralph of Langeais, bishop of Tours, 174–75 Ravaisson-Mollier, Jean Gaspard Félix, 19 Reames, Sherry, 81 Reims Cathedral, 15, 34, 39, 213, 244 relics, 131–71, 181–83, 194; see also Martin, St.: relics Requiem Mass, 61 responsories, 37–38, 99–102, 104–05, 133, 196–98 sequence of, 125, 126–29, 130 retrograde motion, 235 as metaphor, 243–44 Rhabanus Maurus, 5 Richard I, the “Lionheart,” king of England, 9 Richer, abbot of Saint-Martin of Metz, 84 Robert II, archbishop of Tours, 3, 110 Robertson, Anne Walters, 235 Rogations, 174, 178 Rule of St. Benedict, 23–24 Saint-Austremoine in Clermont-Ferrand, 188 Saint-Cosme, 66, 134, 167, 177, 178 Saint-Denis, abbey of, 15, 49, 187 Saint-Front of Périgueux, 188 Saint-Germanus of Auxerre, 117 Saint-Jacques de l’Orme-Robert, 65, 178–79 Saint-Julien, abbey of, 6, 39, 170, 174, 176, 178 Saint-Julien of Le Mans, 188 Saint-Martial of Limoges, 89, 104, 187 Saint-Martin of Liège, 28 Saint-Martin of Tours and trade, 90–91 as Martinopolis, 177 boy bishops, 62, 179 buildings, 3–4, 7, 11, 91, 103, 110

calendar, 27, 41–47 canons, 29–32, 33–41 choirboys, 39, 121 Dedication, 105 duties of dean, 48 education in, 35 endowments, 14–15 exemption from jurisdiction of archbishop, 183–84 feasts, classification of, 41–42; see also individual feasts foundations, 107–09 French kings as honorary abbots of, 13, 230 history of, 21–26, 33 liturgy of, 27–32 magister scholarum, 35 music master, 39 ordinary or customary, 27–32, 40–41 prebends, 29, 31, 32–33, 34–35, 38–40 pilgrimages to, 14, 21, 22, 24, 29, 90–91, 168–69 privileges of, 14–15 reform of, 23–26, 27–28, 30–32, 33, 51 relics, 29 residency, 30–31 rivalry with Cathedral, 17, 115–16, 118–19, 173–205 schola, 4–5 scriptorium, 4 sources, 17, 18–20 succentor, 35, 121 vicars, 32, 67 Saint-Martin of Tulle, 101 Saint-Martin of Utrecht, 104 St. Martin’s Day festivities, 123 Saint-Maur-des-Fossés, 69 Saint-Maurice of Agaune, 22 Saint-Maurice of Vienne, 48, 55 Saint-Pierre de la Couture, 185 Saint-Pierre du Chardonnet, 178 Saint-Pierre-le-Puellier, 35, 169, 177, 178–79, 205, 252, 262–63 Saint-Pierre of Lille, 34 Saint-Serge of Angers, 109, 110 Saint-Sernin of Toulouse, 188 Saint-Venant, 35, 170, 177, 179 Saint-Willibrord of Echternach, 90 Sainte-Chapelle of Paris, 60 Sainte-Colombe, 178 Sainte-Gudule of Brussels, 34 saints, veneration of, 16 Salmon, André, 20

297

298

General index Sens Cathedral, 54, 62, 67, 68, 152, 154 sources, 142–43 sequences, 59, 87; see also Miles mire probitatis (anon.) serpent, as symbol of evil, 239–41 Seven Sleepers, feast of, 254 Starr, Pamela, 226 Stephen, St., feast of, 131 performance on, 57 Stirnemann, Patricia, 257 Sulpicius Severus in liturgy, 87, 90, 91–93, 95–97, 162, 222 life of St. Martin, 17, 75–86, 140, 207, 214 Martin as universal saint, 248 on Martin’s last days, 237 on Martin’s military career, 218 on military vocation, 206 on miracles, 147–48 Symon le Breton, 229 Taruskin, Richard, 229 Tenegot, Jean, 205 Teusind, abbot, 23 Theodulf, bishop of Orléans, 21 Theotolus, archbishop of Tours, 173 Tournai Cathedral, 6, 11, 60, 78, 98, 172 Tours archbishops of, 173, 183 Viking invasion of, 110–13, 116–17, 182 Tours Cathedral

and relics of St. Martin, 110 building, 190, 192 excluded from procession, 113, 115 rivalry with Saint-Martin, see Saint-Martin of Tours: rivalry with Cathedral sources, 20, 119 stained-glass windows, 74, 215 Tours, city of, 3–4, 5–12, 194, 202 triumphationes, 48–51, 179 trope sets, 88–90; see also triumphationes Urban II, pope, 175 Valentinian, emperor, 121, 148 Vedast, St., 151 Venantius Fortunatus, 82 vicars, 34–36; see also Saint-Martin of Tours: vicars Vincent, Michel, 262 Vincent, St., feast of performance on, 69, 70 Visitation, feast of, 46 Wagner, Peter, 87 warrior saints, 206, 214, 215; see also Martin, St.: as soldier of Christ; Michael, St. Wegman, Rob, 234 women, 30 Worcester Cathedral, 143 Wright, Craig, 255