Miracles and Wonders: The Development of the Concept of Miracle, 1150–1350 9780754658757

Table of contents :
Cover......Page 1
Half Tilte......Page 4
Title Page......Page 6
Copyright Page......Page 7
Contents......Page 8
Appreciating Michael Goodich......Page 9
Preface......Page 11
1 Introduction......Page 14
2 Signa data infidelibus non fidelibus: The Theology of Miracle......Page 21
3 The Miracle in Contemporary Sermons......Page 42
4 ‘Popular’ Voices of Doubt......Page 60
5 Theory and Public Policy: Canonization Records......Page 82
6 Canonization and the Hagiographical Text......Page 100
7 Vidi in Somnium: The Uses of Dream and Vision in the Miracle......Page 113
8 Conclusion......Page 130
Bibliography......Page 135
Index......Page 153

Citation preview

Church, Faith and Culture in the Medieval West General Editors: Brenda Bolton with Anne J. Duggan and Damian J. Smith About the series The series Church, Faith and Culture in the Medieval West reflects the central concerns necessary for any in-depth study of the medieval Church – greater cultural awareness and interdisciplinarity. Including both monographs and edited collections, this new series draws on the most innovative work from established and younger scholars alike, offering a balance of interests, vertically though the period from c.400 to c.1500 or horizontally across Latin Christendom. Topics covered range from cultural history, the monastic life, relations between Church and State to law and ritual, palaeography and textual transmission. All authors, from a wide range of disciplinary backgrounds, share a commitment to innovation, analysis and historical accuracy. About the volume In this absorbing book, Michael Goodich explores the changing perception of the miracle in medieval Western society. He employs a wealth of primary sources, including canonization dossiers, hagiographical texts, theological treatises and sermons, to examine the Christian church’s desire to create a sounder legal definition of the miracle. About the Author Michael E. Goodich was formerly Professor of Medieval History at the University of Haifa, Israel.

Church, Faith and Culture in the Medieval West Brenda Bolton with Anne J. Duggan and Damian J. Smith Other titles in the series: Edited by John S. Ott and Anna Trumbore Jones The Bishop Reformed Studies of Episcopal Power and Culture in the Central Middle Ages Patrick Healy The Chronicle of Hugh of Flavigny Reform and the Investiture Contest in the Late Eleventh Century Anke Holdenried The Sibyl and Her Scribes Manuscripts and Interpretation of the Latin Sibylla Tiburtina c. 1050–1500 Edited by Robert C. Figueira Plenitude of Power The Doctrines and Exercise of Authority in the Middle Ages: Essays in Memory of Robert Louis Benson John Hine Mundy Studies in the Ecclesiastical and Social History of Toulouse in the Age of the Cathars Susan E. Wilson The Life and After-Life of St John of Beverley The Evolution of the Cult of an Anglo-Saxon Saint Edited by Christopher M. Bellitto and Louis I. Hamilton Reforming the Church before Modernity Patterns, Problems and Approaches Jerome Bertram The Chrodegang Rules The Rules for the Common Life of the Secular Clergy from the Eighth and Ninth Centuries. Critical Texts with Translations and Commentary Sylvia Schein Gateway to the Heavenly City Crusader Jerusalem and the Catholic West (1099–1187)

Miracles and Wonders

This page intentionally left blank

Miracles and Wonders

The Development of the Concept of Miracle, 1150–1350

Michael E. Goodich University of Haifa, Israel

I~ ~~o~!~;n~~~up LONDON AND NEW YORK

First published 2007 by Ashgate Publishing Published 2016 by Routledge 2 Park Square, Milton Park, Abingdon, Oxon OX14 4RN 711 Third Avenue, New York, NY 10017, USA Routledge is an imprint of the Taylor & Francis Group, an informa business

Copyright © Michael E. Goodich 2007 Michael E. Goodich has asserted his moral right under the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act, 1988, to be identified as the author of this work. All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reprinted or reproduced or utilised in any form or by any electronic, mechanical, or other means, now known or hereafter invented, including photocopying and recording, or in any information storage or retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publishers. Notice: Product or corporate names may be trademarks or registered trademarks, and are used only for identification and explanation without intent to infringe.

British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data Goodich, Michael, 1944–2006 Miracles and wonders : the development of the concept of miracle, 1150–1350. – (Church, faith and culture in the medieval West) 1. Miracles – History of doctrines – Middle Ages, 600–1500 2. Church history – 13th century 3. Church history – 12th century 4. Faith I. Title 231.7’3’094’0902 Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Goodich, Michael, 1944–2006 Miracles and wonders : the development of the concept of miracle, 1150–1350 / by Michael E. Goodich. p. cm. – (Church, faith, and culture in the Medieval West) ISBN 978-0-7546-5875-7 (alk. paper) 1. Miracles–History of doctrines–Middle Ages, 600–1500. 2. Canonization–History–To 1500. I. Title. BT97.3.G66 2007 231.7’309022–dc22 ISBN 978 0 7546 5875 7 (hbk)

2006034822

Contents Appreciating Michael Goodich Gary Dickson  Preface

viii x

1

Introduction

1

2

Signa data infidelibus non fidelibus: The Theology of Miracle

8

3

The Miracle in Contemporary Sermons

29

4

‘Popular’ Voices of Doubt

47

5

Theory and Public Policy: Canonization Records

69

6

Canonization and the Hagiographical Text

87

7

Vidi in Somnium: The Uses of Dream and Vision in the Miracle

100

8

Conclusion

117

Bibliography Index

122 140

Appreciating Michael Goodich Gary Dickson

Appreciation begins in loss. Like historians, perhaps we only begin to understand things retrospectively. Aside from correspondence and emails, I got to know Michael Goodich best on three occasions. For academics getting on with their lives in different parts of the world, where we met had to be at conferences. The first of these was truly memorable. It was held in Erice, Sicily in late September, 1989, at the Ettore Majorana Centre’s International Workshop on Medieval Societies. There were pleasant dinners in the town’s restaurants; André Vauchez was a perfect host; and afterwards Marsala wine was on tap. The conference proceedings, published as Poteri carismatici e informali: chiesa e società medioevali (1992), included essays by Michael and myself. Michael’s subject was one which preoccupied him for many years. In this, his last book it comes to fruition – wonder-working powers, miracles, and those reputed to have performed them. At Erice he spoke of children and young people as holders of miraculous, charismatic power. Erice is where I got to meet (and dine with) this bright, animated, amiable, youthfulseeming scholar, a medievalist like myself, and working in a similar area, that of medieval religion and society. We were both Americans, both lecturing abroad, Michael in Israel, myself in Scotland. I immediately warmed to his personality and mischievous sense of humour. Michael Goodich (1944–2006) was an extraordinarily productive scholar. He was educated in the U.S. (B.A.,City College of New York; M.A., University of Pennsylvania; Ph.D. Columbia University), and apart from a couple of early teaching posts in America, he spent his entire academic career at the Department of General History, University of Haifa, where he rose through the ranks, becoming professor, chair, and dean. Yet this was not the whole story, for Michael loved to travel and took up a succession of visiting professorships at Yale, U.C. Berkeley, Stanford, U.C. Los Angeles, York, Toronto, as well as resident scholarships at St. John’s University, Collegeville Minnesota – where he immersed himself in medieval manuscripts, a ruling passion of his – and Princeton Theological Seminary. He published more than forty articles in leading journals. Overwhelmingly, they concerned saints, their miracles, and the literary genre devoted to them; hagiography. The nine books he edited or wrote before this one not only traversed this same territory which he had made his own; Lives and Miracles of the Saints (2004); Violence and Miracle in the Fourteenth Century (1995); Vita perfecta: the Ideal of Sainthood in the Thirteenth Century (1982), but also tackled other demanding topics from The Unmentionable Vice: Homosexuality in the Later Middle Ages (1979) – a pioneering study – to From Birth to Old Age: the Human Life Cycle in Medieval Thought (1989). In addition, there were books about people on the edges of society; Minorities, Heretics and Life on the Margins in the Middle Ages (2007); Voices from the Bench: the Narratives of Lesser Folk in Medieval Trials (2005); Other Middle Ages: Marginal

Appreciating Michael Goodich

ix

Groups in the Medieval Period (1998). These are books I came to know, and what is the greatest tribute one worker in the field can pay to another, came to use. It is hard not to see Miracles and Wonders: the Development of the Concept of Miracle, 1150–1350 as a grand synthesis of what had preceded it. The articles were his watercolours; for this book Michael Goodich chose to paint in oil. Here we have a close reading of how the miraculous was conceptualized in the Middle Ages, a reading that is anchored in the sources, most impressively including the manuscript sources. Yet by no means does the author ignore how the miraculous sheds light on social history. Of great interest as well, is the constant interplay between two Christianities, learned and popular, Christianity from above and Christianity from below. What the author reveals most of all is the richness of the material. Miracles and Wonders is certain to be exploited by those who come after him. It is a shame that others will not now have the chance to discuss his book and pursue its arguments directly with him. I met Michael for the second time in 1996 in London at the Anglo-American conference. Both of us were appearing at a panel organized by Brenda Bolton, when a hoax alarm sent us scurrying out of Senate House. As we shuffled nervously out of the building, Michael relieved the tension with witty comments. Over dinner that evening I had a chance to meet his charming wife, Marian. The last time I saw Michael was in 2003 at the Leeds International Medieval Congress. It was for all too short a time. We were hurrying between sessions. In the corridor we exchanged the usual pleasantries, news, and gossip about what was happening in ‘our’ medieval world. Michael was in top form. I came away – and I do not think this was a unique experience – feeling enlivened, more cheerful for having met him, as if his vivacity was communicable. Michael’s legacy lives on in an altogether appropriate and tangible fashion. Marian and their daughter Claudia have generously contributed Michael’s personal library of medievalia consisting of well over 200 books and manuscripts in facsimile to the University of Haifa Library, where Michael enjoyed studying, having in great part helped to build up its medieval history holdings. Some might think that the immortality reserved for scholars is a poor thing. For those working in the field it is as close to glory as one gets. It is to be cited in the literature. Michael Goodich now belongs to that literature. Gary Dickson

Preface Recent years have witnessed a marked revival of interest in medieval hagiography. Vauchez, Sigal, Head, Krötzl, Bynum, Kieckhefer, Dinzelbacher, Finucane, Klaniczay, Bartlett, Smoller and Geary are just a few of the increasing army of scholars who have been re-examining medieval hagiography in order to expand our understanding of the miraculous in both learned and popular culture. This book complements their research by examining a wide range of sources (largely from the thirteenth century) which have been barely exploited by other scholars, or which have been fruitfully used in order to explore other issues (e.g. Finucane’s and Bartlett’s reading of the Thomas of Hereford material in their studies of childhood and treason). The aim is to summarize the scholastic understanding of the miracle, to explain the causes of this need to justify belief in the supernatural, and trace the efforts made to provide this belief with a philosophically rational and judicially defensible foundation. Perhaps the richest material evidence for faith in the supernatural during the Middle Ages is the visual arts: manuscript illuminations, frescoes, altarpieces, sculpture etc. This volume, however, is largely confined to the consideration of written sources; otherwise, the theme would have become unmanageable given the large number of resources dealing with saints, miracles, popular devotion and related themes. Although limited to the central Middle Ages, the subject of this volume is not lacking contemporary interest, since the varied and conflicting attitudes toward manifestations of the supernatural have continued. This observation may well lay at the foundation of my attention to this theme. Although reared in an environment in which belief in the supernatural has often been mocked and often regarded as a remnant of earlier cultures, I have nevertheless been struck by its stubborn persistence. Faith in miracles and supernatural intervention in order to solve mundane problems continues to be found even in the most unexpected places and despite the many voices of skepticism which have been raised, at least since the seventeenth century. In late October, 1945, just a few blocks from my childhood home, a miracle occurred. The seven year old son of working class Italian immigrants living on Villa Avenue in the Bronx, New York, had a vision of the Virgin Mary in a vacant lot near his home. Although Joseph attended public school at the time and barely had any religious training, knowledge of the supernatural event reached the wider community and the New York papers. In one of his visions, he saw the Virgin with a Star of David around her neck, which became the emblem of her new cult. Shortly thereafter thousands of believers descended on the neighborhood and an active cult began. Contributions were solicited, a grotto and new church were built. Since then, the boy, who grew up in and continues to live in the same area, has abandoned active participation in the church on several occasions. Nevertheless, the cult has been revived in various forms and is clearly connected to the continuing Marian visions which link Medjigorgy, Lourdes, Fatima and a host



John T. McGreevy, ‘Bronx Miracle’, American Quarterly, 53 (2000), 405–43.

Preface

xi

of other pilgrimage shrines throughout the Catholic world. This continuing faith in the supernatural is found not simply on the level of ‘popular religion’. The events surrounding the death of Pope John Paul II in 2005, given wide international media attention, led to an unprecedented acceleration of canonization procedures. John Paul himself holds the historical record as a canonizer of new saints and often reiterated his deep faith in the intervention of the miraculous and many have been struck by a new receptivity to reports of the supernatural. The persistence of belief in the miraculous is evident at another holy site which has witnessed unusual activity in recent years. St Mary’s Well at Penrhys in Rhondda, Wales was burnt in 1538 by Thomas Cromwell under Henry VIII. The site of an earlier pre-Christian shrine, pilgrims have nevertheless continued to travel to the well for a miraculous cure and since 1945 an annual pilgrimage has taken place during Pentecost. As a result, a considerable sum of money is now to be spent in order to restore the site and make it more accessible. In the same way, Israel, where I now live, is the site of many new and flourishing shrines around which miracles continue to occur despite the doubts, and even ridicule, of many Israelis. Netivot, home of a North African Jewish holy man’s tomb, and Meron, where second and third century miracle-workers are buried, continue to draw tens of thousands of Jewish pilgrims each year, particularly during the annual festivals. A veritable cottage industry of mementoes, charms, guidebooks and devotional pictures, not without strong political connotations, flourishes. The chief shrine dedicated to the prophet Elijah, situated the same distance from my present residence as the grotto in the Bronx had been to my childhood home, has experienced a revival and is invariably thronged with pilgrims seeking solace and assistance, or simply to celebrate a private event. The skepticism of the medieval scholastics, and their Jewish and Muslim counterparts, about unsubstantiated claims to the miraculous, followed by the scientific revolution and the rise of anticlericalism, has thus far failed to dampen the ardor of believers. The gap between ‘popular’ and learned notions of the supernatural thus continues in the three diverse contemporary communities of faith. A considerable number of institutions and libraries have been particularly helpful in providing material and assistance to undertake this research, including: the Bibliothèque Nationale, Bibliothèque Ste-Genéviève, Bodleian Library (Oxford), Vatican Library, Biblioteca Angelica (Rome), Hill Monastic Manuscript Library, British Library, University of Haifa Library, St John’s University (Collegeville, Minnesota) Library, the Institute for Ecumenical and Cultural Research, Stift-Admont, the Institut d’histoire des textes (Paris) , Robarts Library (University of Toronto) and the Pontifical Institute of Medieval Studies. The University of Haifa has allowed me a number of sabbatical leaves in the course of which, while pursuing other projects, I have continued to gather raw material for the present volume. A large number of professional colleagues have been helpful in providing feedback for the papers I have presented at scholarly conferences and on other occasions and have supplied necessary assistance on a number of scholarly issues. I should in particular cite Gary Dickson, Menachem Kellner, Brenda Bolton, Laura Smoller, Yvonne Friedman, Gábor Klaniczay and Peter Brown, whom I have consulted  Yoram Bilu and Issachar Ben-Ami, ‘Saints’ Sanctuaries in Israeli Development Towns: On a Mechanism of Urban Transformation’, Urban Anthropology, 16 (1987), 243–72.

xii

Miracles and Wonders

on specific issues related to this volume. The staff of Ashgate Publishing have been extremely helpful and constructive in seeing this book through the publication process. As always, I owe a debt to my wife Marian, who has continued to encourage my research and has endured innumerable visits to cathedrals, monasteries, chapels and a host of other monuments which serve as witnesses to the powerful faith in the supernatural during the Middle Ages. Some of the ideas found in this book have appeared in more summary form elsewhere. Chapter IV is an expanded version of ‘Miracles and Disbelief in the Late Middle Ages’, Mediaevistik, 1 (1990), 23–38. The publishers wish to express their thanks to Dr Keiko Nowacka for her help in the final stages of production of this book.

Chapter 1

Introduction One of the greatest dilemmas bedeviling attempts to unravel the medieval miracle story has been the difficulty of distinguishing fact from fiction and imagination from reality in every such narrative, demanding some degree of faith to be credible. Those schooled in Leopold Ranke’s famous dictum to write history ‘wie es eigentlich gewesen war’ may be particularly repelled by the leap of faith required to regard the miraculous and supernatural as legitimate areas of historical inquiry. The skeptical, rationalistic attitude characteristic of the historical profession since the Enlightenment has, until recently, often relegated the miracle tale to the historical dustbin filled with the myths, folklore and superstition of the Middle Ages. Miracles have often been perceived as either the unfortunate artifacts of a preliterate tribal past, as the peculiar beliefs of an ill-educated underclass, or as the tools of a repressive class-based culture. Even some important theologians have voiced doubt about the misuse of the cult of relics. In particular, Augustine attacked ‘hypocrites in the garb of monks’ who sold the relics of martyrs ‘if indeed they are martyrs’; and Vigilantius of Toulouse (ca. 406) regarded the parading of sacred relics as a form of sacrilegious idolatry. Students of hagiography have been ambushed by a series of unlikely allies. Two prolific medievalists such as George G. Coulton (1858–1947), a former Anglican priest, and the Quaker, Henry C. Lea (1825–1909), for example, reflected both the repulsion and attraction evoked by medieval tales of the supernatural in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, motivated by a scarcely disguised agenda aimed at casting shame on the medieval church. Coulton even composed an essay in Latin on that most peculiar of medieval relics, the prepuce or foreskin of Christ, in order to avoid embarrassing the Victorian sensibilities of his readers. According to the legend, it had been presented by an angel to Charlemagne in Jerusalem and found its way first to Charroux; and then to the church of St John Lateran in Rome. It has been variously claimed by Coulombs, Calcata (near Viterbo), Le Puy, Metz, Antwerp, Hildesheim, Santiago de Compostela and Notre-Dame-en-Vaux in Châlons-sur-Marne. The highly  Peter Burke, ‘Oblique Approaches to the History of Popular Culture’, in Approaches to Popular Culture, C.W.E. Bigsby (ed.) (London, 1976), 69–84 on the critical need to separate the views of the elite from those of the ‘popular’ classes and the use that can be made of art, ritual and artifacts for an understanding of changes in popular culture. On the problematic issues involved in exploring religious belief systems in the past, see Natalie Z. Davis, ‘Some Tasks and Themes in the Study of Popular Religion’, in The Pursuit of Holiness in Late Medieval and Renaissance Religion, Heiko Oberman and Charles Trinkaus (eds) (Leiden, 1974), 307–336. On pre-Christian survivals in medieval religion see Nicole Belmont, ‘Superstition et religion populaire’, in La function symbolique. Essais d’anthropologie, Michel Izard and Pierre Smith (eds) (Paris, 1979), 53–70.  Coulton’s intellectual conflicts are narrated in George G. Coulton, Fourscore Years. An Autobiography (London, 1945).

Miracles and Wonders



improbable tale of its appearance, coupled with its many claimants, could only expose the medieval cult of relics to scorn. But, contrary to those who assume that the Middle Ages was a time of unbridled ignorance, even Pope Innocent III himself expressed reservations about the relic. Thomas Aquinas and others were to later argue that in fact there could be no earthly physical remains of Jesus, based upon the dogma of the ascension of the body, thus consigning the cult of the prepuce to the ignorant superstitions of the unlettered. The proliferation of relics, many of which allegedly might serve as agents of the miraculous, was a particular source of abuse. Fragments of the True Cross reached the West in large numbers during the Crusader period and offerings to the Cross were regarded as the equivalent of offerings to the Holy Sepulchre in Jerusalem. The crown of thorns was purchased in 1239 by Louis IX to adorn the royal chapel of Sainte Chapelle at Paris, and at least 21 reliquaries were deposited in the chapel (which remains one of the great achievements of Gothic architecture) by that date in order to enhance royal prestige. During the heady revolutionary days of 1793 all were either dispersed or destroyed, an indication of the strong feelings that the veneration of relics and belief in the supernatural could engender. Another medieval abuse, at least in the eyes of religious reformers, were the large number of Eucharistic miracles intended to prove the Real Presence in the sacrament. Such miracles multiplied precisely at a time when scholastic theologians were attempting to provide a more rational basis to the Faith, and they often served to ignite some of the bloodiest outbreaks of anti-Semitism, caused partly by alleged Jewish desecration of the Host. Caroline Bynum has catalogued the physical remnants (frescoes, relics etc.) of these anti-Semitic outbreaks and the commemorations of Host miracles found throughout Germany, which persist today despite the unfortunate events of the twentieth century and the continuing criticism of theologians. Another popular superstition was noted by the late medieval theologian and ‘preReformer’ Gabriel Biel, who reported that some of the faithful falsely believed that miracles might be performed by beautiful sacred images themselves, rather than as a consequence of God’s virtues. Rather, he stressed, the saints and angels act through the prayers of the faithful, although some believers vainly made pilgrimages to the sites of such images for the reprehensible purpose of witnessing miracles, without understanding that the Lord chooses where and when He will perform them. It was Innocent III, De sacro altaris mysterio, IV.30, in PL, 217: 876–7: ‘Creditur enim in Lateransi basilica scilicet a sancta sanctorum conservari. Licet a quibusdam dicitur quod praeputium Christi fuit in Jerusalem delatum ab angelo, Carolo Magno qui sustulit illud et posuit Aquisgrani. Sed post a Carolo Calvo positum est in ecclesia Salvatoris apud Carosium. Melius est tamen Deo totum committere, quam aliud temere diffinire.’  See e.g. Godefridus J.C. Snoek, Medieval Piety from Relics to the Eucharist. A Process of Mutual Interaction (Leiden, 1995), 106–115.  Radulphus Ardens, Speculum universale, in Paris, BNf ms lat. 3240, Eucharistia contains a series of such miracles.  Caroline Walker Bynum, ‘The Presence of Objects. Medieval Anti-Judaism in Modern Germany’, Common Knowledge, 10 (2004), 1–32.  Gabriel Biel, Expositio litteralis sacri canonis misse (Basel, 1510), Lectio 49–50, fols. 124r– 130v. 

Introduction



this very same contempt for the materialism of the ordinary faithful which may have led many into the Cathar heresy in the central Middle Ages, which, in the name of theological dualism, sought to reclaim the faith from its allegedly excessive physicality. Fear of the backlash caused by such scandalous tales of relics and their alleged miracles was heralded by that great Erasmian figure of the Counter Reformation, Cardinal Robert Bellarmine. He had refused to support the Bollandists’ project to produce scholarly editions of the lives of the saints on the grounds that publication of some of the more outlandish miracle stories found in Christian hagiography would surely drive some believers into the waiting arms of the Protestants. The Bollandists soon found even more militant opponents among conservative members of the church. Due to doubts raised concerning the historical claims of the Carmelite order and the reliability of the papal succession list and records of church councils, several volumes of the Acta sanctorum were placed on the Index of Prohibited Books. At the same time such figures as David Hume (1711–1776) and the Swiss Arminian theologian Jean Le Clerc (1657–1736) attempted to tear down the traditional Christian belief in miracles by arguing against the doctrine of the supernatural. Later on, the Bollandists’ research was temporarily interrupted by the Habsburgs, who expelled them from their base in Antwerp between 1773 and 1836, when they re-established their center in Brussels and have since continued the work of editing and publishing scholarly works on hagiography in all its aspects. More recently, however, attempts have been made to re-evaluate the vast storehouse of material that the miracle stories provide us for our understanding of such themes as family structure, attitudes toward gender, childhood, sexuality, medical history, rural life, popular vs. elite culture, minorities, heresy and the remnants of a pre-Christian culture. Many of these issues had first been incidentally dealt with by the paleographers, diplomatists and editors of scholarly editions of saints’ lives and miracles who have attempted to provide more reliable hagiographical texts. There has also been a proliferation of websites, international organizations, journals and conferences devoted to the study of sainthood, pilgrimage and miracles. Many scholars are now engaged in joint efforts to provide a cultic map of medieval Europe, by providing a parish by parish catalogue of patron saints. The study of local cults has revealed the religious shrine as a forum for the meeting of persons of different national and geographical backgrounds, medical conditions and ages. The Holy Land, for example, even contains shrines (such as the cave of Elijah on Mount Carmel) at which Moslems, Jews and Christians continue to gather together as adherents of the three ‘Abrahamic’ faiths sharing common traditions. The unifying nature of the cult was well recognized in the Middle Ages, as hagiographers repeated the standard topos of the translation of the saint’s relics and pilgrimages to his or her shrine as a time when ‘male and female, young and old, cleric  Hippolyte Delahaye, L’oeuvre des Bollandistes à travers trois siècles. 1615–1915, second edition (Brussels, 1959); see also David Knowles, Great Historical Enterprises (London, 1962); Helen Damico and Joseph Zavadil, Medieval Scholarship: Biographical Studies on the Formation of a Discipline (New York, 1995).  See for example, Saints of Europe. Studies towards a Survey of Cults and Culture, Graham Jones (ed.) (Donington, 2003).

Miracles and Wonders



and lay, noble and common folk’ all took part in the festivities. Theobald, Bishop of Gubbio and author of the life of his predecessor Ubald of Gubbio (d. 1160) said about the days following the saint’s death: ‘People flocked [to his tomb], not only from the neighboring villages and castles, but even from distant cities; bishops, clergy, abbots and monks, came, persons of every age and both sexes.’10 And in order to insure that pilgrims could reach the shrine unmolested, warfare between the noble warriors of the suburbs of Gubbio ceased and peace was restored. The details provided in miracle stories – the who, what, when, where, why and how of any inquiry – especially those reported in the framework of a papal canonization process, which demanded high judicial standards, may assist us in recapturing the voices of otherwise inarticulate folk. Children, women, the peasantry and the urban poor, who had been the recipients or witnesses of an original transcendent experience, speak to us more directly via the miracle than they do through the diplomatic documents of state and church. Sharon Farmer, for example, has recently made use of the canonization record of King Louis IX to draw out the lives of such marginalized groups of women as single mothers, the casually employed, servants and recent immigrants living in Paris and its suburbs in the thirteenth century.11 Ronald Finucane has drawn a multi-textured portrait of attitudes toward childhood and children from the well-documented protocol of the miracles attributed to Bishop Thomas of Hereford.12 Traditional diplomatic sources, which are produced by state and church authorities, cannot provide the same kind of evidence from the point of view of the subjects themselves. The testimony deposed at a canonization, like the material gathered in the course of the trial of alleged heretics, often goes beyond the ideological issues that interested the court, to delve into family structure, mores, folk beliefs, and other matters otherwise difficult to ascertain for the medieval centuries. Various levels of discourse, however, must first be identified before we can reach the ‘authentic’ core of any miracle. Many, sometimes conflicting, voices, may be heard through these narratives. These speakers include the recipient of the miracle (the miraculé), the onlookers, those who heard secondhand about the event and the saint’s fama or reputation, the local authorities, court personnel who recorded the testimony of the participants, papal and other officials who judged its authenticity, the preacher, visual artist or composer of liturgy who publicized the event, and the wider audience of believers who accepted (or doubted) these reports. Any effort to peel away these layers of text may be formidable, as has been demonstrated by attempts to uncover the voices of women in the many saints’ lives written by male clerics.13 The orthodox goals of those who recorded the miracle did not always conform to the testimony of the deponents. Furthermore, hagiographical sources are often couched in traditional Theobald of Gubbio, Vita Ubaldini, in AA.SS, 16 May III: 622. On Ubald, see N. del Re, ‘Ubaldo di Gubbio, in Bibliotheca sanctorum, 12 vols (Rome, 1969–1980), XII: 732–735. 11 Sharon Farmer, Surviving Poverty in Medieval Paris. Gender, Ideology and Daily Lives of the Poor (Ithaca, 2002). 12 Ronald Finucane, The Rescue of the Innocents. Endangered Children in Medieval Miracles (New York, 1997). 13 See e.g. Gail Ashton, The Generation of Identity in Late Medieval Hagiography. Speaking the Saint (London, 2000). 10

Introduction



topoi that demand adherence to certain rhetorical formula drawn from both Scripture and from non-Christian writers such as Suetonius, Sallust, Josephus and Apollinaris Sidonius. Such echoes of precedent were in fact regarded as proof of authenticity since they conform to accepted patterns of earlier miracles.14 The medieval hagiographer and his audience regarded the sameness and stereotypical quality of miraculous events as proof of their reliability, since they conformed to precedent, and provided further evidence of the truths of the faith. This adherence to stereotypical prototypes begins with the prologue to a saint’s life and miracles. The fullest prologue may include the following elements: a dedication to the patron who had requested or urged the author to undertake its publication; reference to the author’s personal acquaintance with the subject or with reliable and trustworthy eyewitnesses who could vouch for the accuracy of the account; the citation of Biblical, classical or hagiographical precedents on whom the life has been modeled; a summary of the many pious roles the saint may play in the scheme of salvation; rhetorical protestations by the author of his own lack of skill (also found in other forms of historical writing); and a summary of the structure of the life. The chapter divisions, although sometimes noted by the original author, were often rearranged by subsequent copyists and editors, who might prefer either a chronological or a topical division. For example, the Vita maiora of Duchess Hedwig of Silesia (d. 1243) by Simon of Trebnitz, master of theology and Dominican provincial of Poland, is organized around the following themes: her formative years, marriage and love of chastity; examples of her humility, patience, austerity, prayer and devotion to God; her acts of mercy; miracles performed by Hedwig during her lifetime; her spirit of prophecy; death, posthumous miracles, canonization and translation. This structure may reflect the rubrics of topics dealt with at the 1267 canonization trial, cited by Simon as his source.15 Medieval biography and hagiography continued to reflect the classical role of biography as an educational tool for the instillation of exemplary behavior by providing models worthy of emulation. As Otto of Freising (d. 1158) stated in his oft-cited introduction to the life of his cousin Emperor Frederick Barbarossa: This, I think, has been the purpose of all who have written history before us: to extol the famous deeds of valiant men in order to excite the hearts of mankind to virtue, but to veil in silence the dark doings of the base or, if they are drawn into the light, by the telling to place them on record to terrify the minds of those same mortals.16

The anonymous author (1261–1264) of the life of Juliana of Cornillon (d. 1258) likewise wrote, ‘Among the visible factors by which human nature is easily swayed toward good or evil, example seems to be the chief. Just as wax receives an impression

14 The argument that historic precedent is a proof of reliability was employed by those examining the miracles of Thomas of Hereford. See André Vauchez, Sainthood in the Later Middle Ages, Jean Birrell (trans.) (Cambridge, 1997), 488–98. 15 Simon of Trebnitz, Vita maior S. Hedwigis, in August Bielowski (ed.), Monumenta poloniae historica, 6 vols. (Warsaw, 1864–1893), IV, 510–511. 16 Otto of Freising, The Deeds of Frederick Barbarossa, Charles Christopher Mierow (trans.) (New York, 1966), 24.

Miracles and Wonders



from a seal, so morality is formed by example’.17 He notes that the lives of the more contemporary saints are the most effective spurs to piety. This work is based partly on the life by Eva of St Martin (d. 1265) written in Walloon, and the recollections of John of Lausanne, a canon of Liège, and was intended both to praise the saint and promote the cult of the Corpus Christi, which was confirmed in 1264. Another spokesman for the didactic task of hagiography is the anonymous author of the life of the Praemonstratensian Hermann of Steinfeld (d. 1241), who wrote that his aim was: … to diligently consider and to wisely distinguish what should be admired and imitated: so that the worthy action of grace should be reported to those who admire God, who is ‘wondrous in his saints’ [Psalms 67: 36]; [and] so that the life of the readers should be improved by the examples of virtue through imitation.18

Each miracle, whether the cure of disease, exorcism of demons, rescue from shipwreck, recovery of a lost object or escape from prison, therefore necessarily conformed to historical and literary precedents which may rob any particular case of its credibility. Medieval standards required that a credible miracle conform to precedent. Medieval hagiographers were also less inhibited by modern guidelines concerning plagiarism, and often borrowed whole passages from their honored predecessors. If a saint was to fit into a particular mold, as a confessor, martyr, monk, missionary, virgin or other model of sainthood, his or her miracles should also reflect this ministry. Thaumaturgical miracles in particular, which represented the vast majority of miracles in all periods, reflect a monotonous sameness, especially if provenance, names and places are omitted, which may cast doubt on their authenticity.19 Many were presumably the product of some local inquiry, however informal, often under episcopal auspices, but have been reworked in order to conform to hagiographical standards. Only after the introduction of papal canonization and the survival of several canonization protocols beginning in the thirteenth century is it possible to trace the raw data of the witnesses’ testimony through various versions until an official Vita et Miracula is produced. For example, Archbishop Philip of Bourges’ dossier includes several manuscripts of his canonization hearing held in 1264–1266, a summarized version prepared for scrutiny by the cardinals in the fourteenth century, and a biography, which cites liberally from the original trial. Archbishop Louis of Toulouse’s dossier likewise includes the canonization testimony, several biographies, and the papal bull which drew on this raw material. Thomas Aquinas’ rich material includes fragments of the hearings into his case held at Bologna and Toulouse, and several biographies based on this protocol, including one Barbara Newman (trans.), The Life of Juliana of Cornillon (Toronto, 1988), 25. AA.SS, 7 April I: 689 cited in Monika Rener, ‘Lateinische Hagiographie im deutschsprachigen Raum von 1200–1450’, in Guy Philippart et al., Hagiographies. Histoire internationale de la littérature hagiographique latine et vernaculaire en Occident des origines à 1550, 3 vols. to date (Turnhout, 1994–2001), i, 224. The herein cited Psalms 67.36 made a frequent appearance in canonization bulls and was often the point of departure for preacher’s discussion of the nature of miracle. 19 Pierre-André Sigal, L’homme et le miracle dans la France médiévale (XI–XIIe siècles) (Paris, 1985) undertook a very useful statistical survey of miracle genres for the eleventh and twelfth century in France. 17 18

Introduction



by a witness himself, William of Tocco. This material allows us to trace the contents of the biographies by Bernard Gui, Ptolemy of Lucca and William of Tocco, for example, directly back to the statements found in the Thomas’ trial testimony.20 This raises a number of questions, which have been dealt with indirectly by the theologians, natural philosophers, canon lawyers, and notaries who, because of their commitment to Catholic ideology, sought to understand the nature of the miracle and separate fact from fancy. How did legal procedures, Christian ideology and traditional folklore shape the content and structure of the miracle narrative? How do we separate the rhetoric of hagiographical topoi from their particular manifestations? How does one unearth the ‘authentic’ voice of the eyewitness and object of the miracle from the partisan voices of the preacher, hagiographer and exemplarist who reshaped the miracle narrative? What standards were used to distinguish between miracle and magic, the works of God and of Satan?21 Despite the effort to impose Christian orthodoxy on a sometimes unwilling public, were there marked differences in the comprehension of the miraculous among rural and urban folk, noble, free and bonded persons, male and female, clergy and laity? What was the connection between the rise of such heretical groups as the Waldensians and Cathars, which rejected the cult of the saints, and the proliferation of documented reports of the supernatural? What was the impact of the scholastic awareness of the threat of Judaism, Islam, and philosophical skepticism on the Christian discussion of the miracle? Some of these issues will be addressed in the current volume, which has attempted to integrate a reading of theological tracts with the practical effort to judge the veracity of miracle stories in the context of canonization hearings. The focus is largely on the thirteenth century, when theological/ philosophical speculation and canonization processes converged under the auspices of a centralizing church which employed the talents of the highly skilled canon lawyers, notaries, proctors and theologians in its service.

For a translation of some of the sources, see Kenelm Foster (ed. and trans.), The Life of Saint Thomas Aquinas. Biographical Documents (London, 1957); for the original texts, Thomae Aquinatis vitae et fontes praecipue, A. Ferrua (ed.) (Alba, 1968); Fontes vitae S. Thomas Aquinatis, Dominic Prümmer (ed.) (Toulouse, 1911). 21 Natalie Z. Davis, ‘Toward Mixtures and Margins’, American Historical Review, 97 (1992), 1409–1416 on dealing with learned reports of ‘popular’ belief. Peter Dinzelbacher, Heilige oder Hexen? Schicksale auffälliger Frauen in Mittelalter und Frühneuzeit (Zurich, 1995) on the distinction between witch and saint, magic and miracle. 20

Chapter 2

Signa data infidelibus non fidelibus: The Theology of Miracle While the learned definition of the miracle underwent relatively few changes in the medieval centuries, there were nuances of difference which depended on such factors as the impact of classical philosophy in the schools, the polemical needs of the church in the face of its ideological foes, and the need to distinguish the miracles of angels, prophets, apostles and saints from the magical arts of the magicians, pagan priests, heretics and others. The term miraculum is derived from mirus, namely something to wonder at, a phenomenon which confounds or even appears to contradict the normal rules governing nature or society. The ‘signs and wonders’ found in Jewish Scripture had included both extraordinary acts performed by God in order to aid the Jewish people, often against their foes, such as the plagues of Egypt; and acts performed by divinely-inspired persons serving as agents of God such as the revival of the dead child by Elijah. A ‘sign’ often served the larger purpose of signifying God’s greatness or the order that underlies Creation, such as the considerable catalogue of divine wonders found in Ecclesiasticus 42: 15–25 and 43: 1–33. The efficacy of relics as repositories of the sacred had also received legitimacy in II Kings 13: 21 (‘and when the man was let down, and touched the bones of Elisha, he revived, and stood up on his feet’), which recounted the revival of a dead man through contact with Elisha’s bones; and was later confirmed in the cure of the sick through contact with clothes touched by St Paul (Acts 19: 11–12: ‘And God wrought special miracles by the hands of Paul: So that from his body were brought unto the sick handkerchiefs or aprons, and the diseases departed from them, and the evil spirits went out of them’). The sense of wonder and surprise voiced by both those who experience and witness a miracle remained a sine qua non of a credible miracle and was to become the central feature of those miracles which were intended to convert the non-believers or strengthen the faith of penitent Christians. Harnessed by the church, this elemental emotion insures the glorification of the faith among spectators to the miracle. They express surprise and awe at its performance, sing the praises of the Lord and fulfill a vow. This element of astonishment necessarily appeared in any authenticated miracle recorded by a notary or papal commission during a canonization process. The experience of an eyewitness to such a miracle was graphically reported by Gerard Ithier, who took part in the ceremony surrounding the translation of the relics of Stephan of Muret at Grandmont (d. 1124, canonized 1189). Gerard had reported that a ten year old boy from Limoges who was mute and lame, since birth, had been led to the tomb  Geoffrey Ashe, Miracles (London, 1978), 16. For some of this see Raymond E. Brown et al., The New Jerome Biblical Commentary (Englewood Cliffs, N.J., 1990).

Signa data infidelibus non fidelibus: The Theology of Miracle



in the presence of a great crowd of spectators, who were already excited with fear and anticipation. After the boy began to speak and walk, Gerard reports: We were stupefied and surprised, staring at this for a long time. We lifted up our palm branches in praise unto heaven due to this consolatory event, shed tears, and prostrated ourselves on the ground. We praised Almighty God as much as we could with our hearts and mouths, and along with those who had gathered to witness this spectacle, we blessed him.

This stupor and surprise (stupor et admiratio) accompany all of Stephen’s miracles. Such astonishment need not occur only at a pilgrimage site, although a public place is its proper venue. In the miracles of Empress Cunegunda (d. 1033), recorded just before her canonization in 1200, the spectators enthusiastically expressed their wonder at the revival of a child beside the lake where he had drowned. The late scholastic Carmelite theologian John Baconthorpe (d. 1346–1348) argued in particular that ‘miracles should occur in public places’ in order to enhance their effectiveness. Such miracles and wonders were regarded as necessary (although secondary) aids to the Apostles in their mission of conversion. As St Paul had said, ‘signs are not to them that believe, but to them that believe not’. This was to become a trope of medieval hagiography. Addressing Jewish sceptics, Justin Martyr (d. 163–167), for example, had said that the miraculous restoration of the deaf, blind and lame and the revival of the dead by Jesus served to ‘challenge men of his time to recognize him’. Origen (ca. 185–ca. 254) noted that these miracles and wonders ‘persuaded those who heard new doctrines and new teachings to leave their traditional religion and to accept the Apostles’ teaching at the risk of their lives’. The miracle was regarded as the most effective Gerard Ithier, De revelatione beati Stephani, Scriptores ordinis Grandimontensis, Jean Becquet (ed.), in Corpus christianorum. Continuatio mediaevalis, 7 (Turnhout, 1968), 285: ‘stupefacti ac mirantes haec diu cerneremus, consolationis ac visitationis supernae prae gaudio palmas ad coelum tendimus, lacrimas perfundimus, et ad terram prosternimur, Dominum omnipotentem, ut potuimus, corde et ore laudavimus, atque cum his qui ad spectaculum istud confluxerant ipsum benediximus.’  John Baconthorpe, Quaestiones in quattuor libros Sententiarum, 2 vols. (Farnborough, 1969), IV.qu.5: ‘publice et notarie … in publicis locis ... Christus publice et notorie fecit omnia genera miraculorum in publicis locis populo … ex imperio voluntatis.’  Vita Cunegundis, in AA.SS, 3 March I: 277: ‘Mirum in modum puer annularem digitum movere coepit, et stupentibus omnibus, post spatium unius horae, sanus surrexit.’  Baconthorpe, Quaestiones, IV.qu.4.art.5 (p. 235). On Baconthorpe see A. Xiberta, ‘De magistro Joanne Baconthorpe, O. Car.’, Analecta ordinis Carmelitani, 6 (1927), 3–128. He probably studied at Oxford and Paris and was considered an Averroist.  ‘Signa data infidelibus non fidelibus’, see I Corinthians 1.22 and I Corinthians 14.22; cf. Karl Goetzweiler, La conception paulicienne du miracle (Louvain, 1961).  Justin Martyr, Dialogue with Trypho, R.P.C. Hanson (ed. and trans.) (London, 1963), 6.9 (p. 43). He also notes that false prophets perform deeds which may astonish the observer and ‘glorify the spirits and demons of error’. The Toledot Yeshu (second–fifth century) regarded the alleged miracles of Jesus as acts of magic. See Daniel Lasker, Jewish Philosophical Polemics against Christianity in the Middle Ages (New York 1977), 5.  Origen, Against Celsus, ed. H. Chadwick (Cambridge, 1953), I.4.6; Colin Brown, Miracles and the Critical Mind (Grand Rapids, MI., 1984). The theoretical as opposed to the actual impact of miracles on conversion during this period is discussed in W.H.C. Frend, ‘The Place of Miracles in the Conversion of the Ancient World to Christianity’, Studies in Church History, 41 (2005), 11–21. 

Miracles and Wonders

10

means of converting the Jews, who proved particularly immune to the allegedly rational arguments of Christianity. These phenomena occur in such an unusual way that they are termed miracles and serve the instrumental role of teaching the witnesses a lesson. The ultimate aim is to console and bring the faithful closer to God or to confound the nonbeliever or heretic. At the very birth of the institutional church, in the legenda of St Silvester it was claimed that only after the pope had revived a dead ox did he succeed in converting the 12 recalcitrant Jewish elders with whom he had debated such basic differences between the two faiths as the Incarnation and the Resurrection.10 The Old Testament also offers a distinction between sorcery or magic, and miracle. The miracle brings one closer to God, while magic drives the spectator ‘to go after other gods’. As Deuteronomy 13: 1–5 suggests, such portents or signs which are intended to drive believers away from God, are performed by charlatans or sorcerers, like the magicians who confronted Moses with their secret arts. The criteria for distinguishing such demonic acts from divine miracles were to exercise much of medieval theology.11 As Lucy Mair has noted, although the distinction between miracle and magic is not always clear, the efficacy of magic appears to lie in the correct treatment of the substances employed, rather than in the assistance of a supernatural agency.12 The magical transformation is apparently achieved via the ritual act and the pronunciation of its accompanying formula rather than through supernatural intervention. The Christian and Jew rely on God rather than on magical rites and formulas to control evil forces. The Jewish stress on God’s direct role as the primary cause of miracle continued throughout the Middle Ages.13 The performer of miracles was regarded as a mere messenger, whose mission was to lead to the recognition of God’s greatness, uniqueness and power against His (usually pagan) foes. The miracle may further justify the value of God’s commandments and religious institutions, and the righteousness of the sages. The miracles found in the New Testament largely continued the Jewish tradition. The Gospel of Mark, in particular, is filled with miraculous healing, exorcism, restoration to life, and triumph over the natural world. Nevertheless, the miracles and wonders of Jesus were from the beginning regarded as necessary (although secondary) aids to the Apostles in their mission of conversion. In Biblical exegesis, such miracles were later to be seen as: manifestations of God’s glory and power; evidence of the coming of the Messiah; revelations of the mysteries of the Trinity; symbols of spiritual gifts;



V.11–12.

Augustine, De trinitate libri XV, W.J. Fountain (ed.) (Turnhout, 1968), III.4–10, and

10 For the most widely known account see James of Voragine, Legenda aurea, Giovanni Paolo Maggioni (ed.) (Florence, 1998), 108–19. 11 Ashe, Miracles, 23; Howard Clark Kee, Miracle in the Early Christian World. A Study in Sociohistorical Method (New Haven, 1983), 147–48. Vincent of Beauvais, Speculum naturale, XXIX.94, in Speculum maius, 4 vols (Douai, 1624) on the operation of miracles; c. 95 cites the gloss on Romans II, Augustine’s De trinitate 3, De utilitate credendi, and Super Genesim 9. In c. 96, dealing with God’s performance of miracles via angels and demons, Vincent cites Augustine, Super Genesim 2, and Liber quaestinum 8; see also Thomas Aquinas, Quaestiones disputatae. De potentia Dei, 5 vols. (Turin, 1931), Q. 6 covers this at length. 12 Lucy Mair, An Introduction to Social Anthropology, second edition (Oxford, 1972), 225. 13 Ephraim Urbach, Hazal. Pirkei Emunot ve-Deot (Jerusalem, 1969).

Signa data infidelibus non fidelibus: The Theology of Miracle

11

or prefigurative signs of the transformations to occur at the end of times. Medieval hagiography is filled with stated and implied references to Scriptural precedent, including parallel situations, linguistic citations and reminiscences, and catalogues of virtues and miracles attributed to more recent saints alongside their Biblical stereotypes.15 The Praemonstratensian Philip of Harvengt (d. 1183) in his life of St Waldetrude was to argue that in the primitive church, since miracles are more effective in converting nonbelievers, they were widespread. After the propagation of the faith, they had become infrequent.16 Nevertheless, Francis of Assisi’s (Christus novus) supporters, in particular, exploited the view of the modern saint as a vehicle for the renewal of ancient miracles.17 Many Biblical exegetes have continued to be preoccupied with an attempt to classify the genres of miracle, to explain its role within the early Christian polity, and to schematize the internal structure of the miracle story. Latourelle, for example, classifies miracles in accordance with the number of available redactions of the tradition which have survived: one, two, three etc.18 Van der Loos prefers a simple division between healing and nature miracles, with 19 sub-categories, attempting to sort out the methodological problems encountered in unraveling both text and tradition.19 Gerd Theissen attempts to treat the Gospel miracles in turns from the synchronic, diachronic and functional points of view. He provides a complicated paradigmatic model for the schematization of the miracle 14

René Latourelle, ‘Miracle’, Dictionnaire de spiritualité, 15 vols. (Paris, 1937–1990), X.3: 1274–86. 15 Gregorio Penco, ‘L’imitazione di Cristo nell’agiografia monastica’, Studia monastica, 28 (1966), 17–34; Marc van Uytfanghe, ‘Modèles bibliques dans la hagiographie’, in Pierre Riché and Guy Lubrichon (eds), Le Moyen âge et la Bible (Paris, 1984), 449–88; J. Leclercq, ‘L’Ecriture sainte dans l’hagiographie monastique du haut moyen âge’, in La Bibbia nell’Alto Medioevo. Centro italiano di studi sull’Alto Medioevo. Settimane di studio, 10 (Spoleto, 1963), 103–138. One of the longer list of genres of miracle in a medieval saint’s life is found in the life and miracles of the servant Zita of Lucca (1212–1272): ‘Iterum et subsequenter signa coruscant, prodigia nitent, miranda prodeunt; ac inter ipsas manus et oculos hominum, prae gaudio lacrymantium, mirabilia crebra et manifesta perficiuntur. Hic siquidem caeci vident, surdi audiunt, manci et aridi reviviscunt, claudi et incurvi eriguntur ac muti loquuntur; febricitantes sanantur, doloribus angustiati curantur, immundi spiritus a corporibus effugantur, sanguinis fluxus reprimitur, partu periclitantibus subvenitur, steriles foecundantur, ponderosi levigantur, ulcerosi mundantur, morsi vel capti a bestiis eripiuntur, naufragis succurritur, carcerati laxantur, equuleo torti dolorem non sentiunt, ignis in pluribus ardorem et aqua liquorem amisisse videntur, ad furcas suspensi de ipsis mortis faucibus eruuntur, a medicis ob validissimas febres desperati per eam evadunt; et breviter omnium periculorum, damnorum, et aegritudinum genera ejus meritis effugantur. Tandem dum nec famescentes, nec sitientes, neque caloribus, sudoribus et pressuris gravibus fatigati populi civitatis abirent …’ (AA.SS, 27 April III: 508). 16 Philip of Harvengt, Vita S. Waldetrudis, in Monumenta poloniae historica, 6 vols. (Warsaw, 1864–1893), 2: 1375. 17 In the life of Edward the Confessor, it is reported that St Britwald, bishop of Wilton, was astounded by a new miracle: ‘Obstupefactus præsul tanti miraculi novitate, petit sibi a Sancto huius visionis mysterium revelari.’ See Ethelred, Historia Martyrii et Translationum, in AA.SS, 5 January I: 293. 18 René Latourelle, The Miracles of Jesus and the Theology of Miracle, Matthew J. O’Connell (trans.) (New York, 1988). 19 H. van der Loos, The Miracles of Jesus (Leiden, 1965). 14

Miracles and Wonders

12

story; and catalogs six broad themes, namely exorcisms, healings, epiphanies, rescue miracles, gift miracles and rule miracles.20 He highlights three compositional elements in the miracle story: the persons, e.g. the charismatic performer of miracles, the recipient and the spectators; the narrative theme, i.e. the genre of cure or supernatural event; and the motifs, i.e. the smallest independent narrative features. Kee has noted that miracles functioned in early Christianity as a means of redefining the community of the covenant and heralding the impending rule of God.21 The Biblical miracle stressed God as the underlying cause of both order and disorder in the Universe. Recent theologians have been particularly interested in the classification of such miracles. Geoffrey Ashe has suggested the following classification of Old Testament miracles: folkloristic fairy tales, such as Samson felling the temple after the restoration of his strength (Judges 16: 28–30); mythic fables aimed at providing a moral message, such as the fall of Babel (Genesis 11: 1–9); historically-based events which have been enhanced and empowered via miraculous embellishment, like the Exodus from Egypt (Exodus 14: 21–9); historically plausible, though not provable events, which have been transformed into myth in order to enhance God’s power, such as the tale of Moses and the Burning Bush (Exodus 3: 3–4); events which, at the time, could be properly classified as miracles, but which are now scientifically explicable, such as Saul’s consumption by an evil spirit (I Kings 16: 14; 18: 10–11), which can be explained in the context of abnormal psychology; and a few ‘genuine miracles’ which thus far confound scientific investigation, such as the paradigmatic miracles attributed to Moses, Elijah and Elisha.22 Morton Kelsey suggests another, simpler classification of miracles, which may be more universal in its application: physical and mental healing; the expulsion of a spiritual force, e.g. exorcism; communication with the spiritual world, e.g vision; nature miracles; telepathy, clairvoyance, or precognitive power; and resurrection.23 Following the Christianization of the Empire in the fourth century, the paraphernalia of the saint’s cult (including relic worship, miracles, processions, feast days, etc.) clearly served as a sacred means of spiritually defining the village, urban and national community within a geographic space populated by a defined group of people.24 Cult and miracle became a socially and religiously legitimate agency for the expression of familial, communal or patriotic pride and cohesion.25 This role of the miracle as a means of defining the boundaries of community remained an integral part of the economy of the supernatural well into the late Middle Ages. As Peter Brown has noted, the early bishops often ‘orchestrated’ the cult of the saints in order to legitimize their positions, and miraculous healings were transformed from private to public events. After the fifth century, the episcopal saints in particular, both in life and posthumously, took on many of the functions of both the pagan protective deities and the Roman magistrate, as both Gerd Theissen, The Miracle Stories of the Early Christian Tradition, John Riches (trans.) (Philadelphia, 1983). 21 Kee, Miracle in the Early Christian World. 22 Ashe, Miracles, 36–42. 23 Morton Kelsey, The Christian and the Supernatural (Minneapolis, 1976). 24 Peter Brown, The Cult of the Saints. Its Rise and Function in Latin Christianity (Chicago, 1981); Nicole Hermann-Mascard, Les reliques des saints (Paris, 1975). 25 Numa-Denis Fustel de Coulanges, The Ancient City, Willard Snall (trans.), third editon (Boston, 1877), passim on the patron-god of antiquity. 20

Signa data infidelibus non fidelibus: The Theology of Miracle

13

defenders of the city’s liberty and as protectors of its inhabitants. The patron saint was credited with putting an end to plague, bringing a good harvest, keeping the enemy at bay, and reinforcing the sometimes fragile unity of tribe, city and state.26 Such phenomena were documented and publicized among members of the congregation.27 The life of St Martin of Tours (d. 379) by Sulpicius Severus, for example, contains a nucleus of historical reality upon which the typological themes of hagiography have been imposed. Many episodes occurred in the presence of witnesses and suggest the crystallization of a new collective consciousness which, as Fontaine has argued, constituted the ‘spiritual psychology’ of the Middle Ages.28 The witnesses to such a miraculous event remained eternally bound together as participants in a sacred community. The role of the miracle as a social bond remained one of its central features. The patristic figure whose understanding of the nature of miracles was to remain the essential core of all later discussions was Augustine; although he employed a number of terms (such as signa, portenta, virtutes signorum monstra, magnalia, mirabilia, ostensa, and mira) which appear closely related to miracula.29 In his De utilitate credendi (391–392) he defined the miracle broadly as any difficult, unusual event which exceeds the faculties of nature and surpasses the expectations or ability of the observer to comprehend, so as to compel astonishment.30 In his Contra Faustum (397–399) he added the proviso that miraculous deeds are performed by God contrary to the witness’ knowledge of nature.31 Augustine thus clearly limited the miracle to events whose ‘supra’ or ‘unnatural’ character was merely a consequence of the observer’s limited understanding of the laws of nature. This would lay the groundwork for the later medieval concern to eliminate through judicial or scientific means those alleged miracles which, despite the gullibility and ignorance of the untrained observer, could be rationally understood. The persistence of the Augustinian formulation is evident in John Locke’s later definition of the miracle: ‘A miracle then, I take to be a sensible operation, which, being above the comprehension of the spectator, and in his opinion contrary to the established course 26 John H. Corbett, ‘The Saint as Patron in the Work of Gregory of Tours’, Journal of Medieval History, 7 (1981), 1–13. 27 An important source is Robert Grant, Miracle and Natural Law in Graeco-Roman and Early Christian Thought (Amsterdam, 1952), on nature and miracle in the Hellenistic and early Christian periods; cf. H. Delhaye, ‘Les premiers “libelli miraculorum”’, Analecta bollandiana, 19 (1910), 327– 34; Brown, Cult, 28. 28 Sulpicius Severus, Vie de Saint Martin, Jacques Fontaine (ed. and trans.), 3 vols. (Paris, 1967–1969), I, 188–190. 29 John Hardon, ‘The Concept of Miracle from St Augustine to Modern Apologetics’, Theological Studies, 15 (1954), 231. 30 Augustine, De utilitate credendi [ca. 391/2], 16.34 in PL, 42: 40. 31 Augustine, Contra faustum, 26.3 in PL, 42: 481. In English, ‘Contrary to nature is here used in the sense of contrary to human experience of the course of nature; as that a wild olive engrafted in a good olive should bring forth the fatness of the olive instead of wild berries. But God, the Author and Creator of all natures, does nothing contrary to nature; for whatever is done by Him who appoints all natural order and measure and proportion must be natural in every case … There is, however, no impropriety in saying that God does a thing contrary to nature, when it is contrary to what we know of nature. For we give the name nature to the usual common course of nature; and whatever God does contrary to this, we call a prodigy, or a miracle’.

Miracles and Wonders

14

of nature, is taken by him to be divine.’32 In the City of God (426–427) Augustine claimed that the saints through their miracles could bring humanity closer to God than could the angels, and that this could be achieved by either prayer or the power of grace.33 In the De trinitate (422–426) he suggested that God produces what appear to be miraculous transformations in the natural world as a means of revealing Himself, and may make use of such agents as angels and saints to do so.34 Thus, the bringing of rain to a parched earth by His servant Elijah appears miraculous because it disrupts the normal course of nature. Likewise, lightening and thunder appeared in an unusual manner at Sinai; water was transformed into wine by Jesus more rapidly than usual; and the rod of Moses changed into a serpent. Augustine essentially regarded miracles as an acceleration of the normal processes of nature whereby the seeds (semina seminum) inherent in nature are activated.35 These phenomena occurred in such an unusual way that they are termed miracles and are intended to teach us a lesson. The ultimate aim is to console and bring the faithful closer to God, or to confound the non-believer or heretic. But even the power given to Pharaoh’s magicians originally came from God, although it has been used to deceive and test the believer. Augustine’s definition of the miracle was to remain the standard until Aquinas, and provided the theoretical foundation for the medieval canonists’ attempt to provide reliable standards for distinguishing between true miracles and phenomena which merely appear miraculous to the unlettered or acts of magic which are temporary, performed by the minions of Satan, who is himself a fallen angel.36 For example, Pope Innocent III (1198) compared the heretics to Pharaoh’s magicians when he stated that, just as the staff of Moses had defeated his foes, so the pope’s legates in southern France, Guido and Ranier, would overcome the Cathars.37 John Baconthorpe (1290–1348) suggested the acts of the Antichrist are mere ‘figmenta’ which only last about a year and a half.38 William of Auvergne (d. 1249), bishop of Paris, who provided the most detailed discussion of demonology and angelology identified the pagan deities with demons, who may even transform themselves into angels in order to deceive mankind.39 James of Voragine’s Legenda aurea (1260) popularized the view that even the Devil can perform miracles, writing: John Locke, The Reasonableness of Christianity with a Discourse on Miracles, I.T. Ramsay (ed.) (London, 1958), 79. 33 Augustine, City of God, G. McCracken (ed.), 7 vols. (Cambridge, Mass., 1963), X, and XII. (8); see also Thomas Aquinas, De potentia, Q.6, art. 40, in Quaestiones disputatae. De potentia Dei, 5 vols. (Turin, 1954). For English translation, see Thomas Aquinas, Truth, trans. Robert Schmidt, 3 vols. (Chicago, 1954). 34 Augustine, De trinitate, III.4–10 and V.11–12, W.J. Fountain (ed.), in Corpus christianorum. Series latina, 50 (Turnhout, 1968). 35 De genesi ad litteram, 6.13.24 in PL, 34: 349; cf. also De verbis Domini, 44, in PL, 38: 243–52. 36 Baconthorpe, Quaestiones, 238; Radulphus Ardens (ca. 1192–1197), Speculum naturale, in Paris Ms. BNf ms 33240, fol. 134ra (XII.92, De potestate miraculorum): ‘Porro quod operatio miraculorum sit tam bonorum qua malorum.’ 37 PL, 214: 81, 904. 38 Baconthorpe, Quaestiones, 238. 39 William of Auvergne, De legibus, p. 373; De universo, p. 967; De fide, p. 16 and De sacramento Eucharistiae, p. 439 in Opera omnia Guilelmi Alverni (Venice, 1591). In a letter of 27 February 32

Signa data infidelibus non fidelibus: The Theology of Miracle

15

God does miracles by his own authority, angels because they are superior to matter, demons through natural forces inherent in things, magicians through secret contracts with demons, good Christians by justice publicly recognized, bad Christians by such justice simulated.40

Medieval Theology Perhaps in the face of both the rejection of relics and the cult of the saints by the heretics, along with the philosophical challenge of Greek and Arabic learning in the early twelfth century, the Christian notion of miracle was reexamined.41 The anonymous author of the treatise De mirabilibus sacrae Scripturae, perhaps dating from the eleventh century but falsely attributed to Augustine, sought to provide a rational, mundane explanation for most miracles, reflecting the philosophy of nature prevalent in early scholastic circles. He argued that while Creation ex nihilo is miraculous, other unusual phenomena could not be properly deemed beyond or contrary to nature.42 The author lists a series of natural phenomena which, such as the absence of snakes, wild boar and other creatures in Ireland, or the 24 hour cycle of the tides, which may be unusual, but are not contrary to nature. For example, Sarah’s bearing of a child beyond the normal age may not be customary, but it is not against nature. The transformations of water into blood or wine recounted in Scripture likewise conform to the malleable nature of water, which may take many different forms, such as ice, vapor, urine, wine and blood.43 This notion of the virtue of changeability, which is God-given, and may be the foundation of many miracles, was also adopted by Hugh of St Victor.44 In De mirabilibus the fall of the walls of Jericho may be likened to the consequences of an earthquake. And Jesus’ apparently miraculous walking on Lake Galilee could be explained if the lake had unexpectedly frozen. All of these events, however, strengthened the faith and brought believers closer to God by arousing wonder or surprise in the spectators. Parenthetically, these 1318 John XXII noted that necromancers and those who know other magic arts derived their knowledge from evil angels. See Joseph Hansen (ed.), Quellen und Untersuchungen zur Geschichte des Hexenwahns (Bonn, 1901), 2–4. 40 James of Voragine, Legenda aurea, 2 vols., William Granger Ryan (trans.) (Princeton, 1993), 1: 303. 41 See Bernhard Bron, Das Wunder: Das theologische Wunderverständnis im Horizont des neuzeitlichen Natur-und Geschichtsbegriffs, second edition (Göttingen, 1979). On Aristotle’s influence in the West, cf. Fernand van Steenberghen, ‘La philosophie de la nature au xiiie siècle’, La filosofia de la natura nel medioevo: Atti del terzo congresso internazionale di filosofia medioevale (Milan, 1966), 114–132; Fernand van Steenberghen, Aristotle in the West, L. Johnson (trans.) (Louvain, 1955). See also Aime Forest et al., Le mouvement doctrinal du xi au xve siècle (Paris, 1956), 205–206; Martin Grabmann, Guglielmo di Moerbeke O.P. il traduttore delle opera di Aristotele (Rome, 1946). 42 Auctor incertus (Augustinus Hipponensis?), De mirabilibus sacrae scripturae libri tres, in PL, 35: 2149–2200. I would like to thank Peter Brown for drawing my attention to this treatise. References to Ptolemy and geographical peculiarities in Ireland and Armenia, for example, would probably date the text to a later period, perhaps the eleventh or early twelfth century. 43 Ibid., 2161: ‘Aqua igitur cuncti liquoris materia, quotidie per ipsarum rerum ministrationes in diversa mutatr, dum ad uniuscuiusque naturae pastum et refectionem indesinenter et naturaliter contrahitur.’ 44 Hugh of St Victor, Elucidiarum, 7, in PL, 175: 36C.

16

Miracles and Wonders

events should be distinguished from mirabilia, peculiar and rare events in nature, which do not however serve to bring persons closer to the faith. Guibert of Nogent’s (1053/1054–1124) De pignoribus sanctorum represented an important, reasoned attack on the proliferation of forged relics, faked miracles and clerical greed.45 But many contemporary hagiographers preferred to disregard the challenge posed by both the arguments of non-believers and contemporary attempts to provide a philosophical foundation to the belief in the supernatural. They continued to reiterate the patristic view that the believer has no need of miracles to confirm his faith; they are rather necessary as a sign to the non-believer.46 For example, the Praemonstratensian Hermann (Judaeus) of Scheda, a convert to Christianity (d. 1160), in his apologetic and polemical De conversione sua, described three kinds of persons: 1) the small minority who do not require signs to convert; 2) the large number of persons who need miracles to maintain their faith; and, 3) those who remain infidels despite having themselves witnessed miracles.47 Nevertheless, the early scholastic Hugh of St Victor (1096–1141) in his Elucidationes variae in scripturam moraliter, following Augustine, indicates the growing tendency to deemphasize the more fantastic claims of sainthood in favor of emphasis on the ‘miraculous’ character of Creation itself. He sees Psalms 39: 6, ‘Thou hast multiplied Thy wonderful works, O Lord’, as suggesting that all the works of God are wonderful and should bring one closer to God.48 Psalms 67: 36 (‘God is wonderful in his saints’), which was a major locus for the discussion of miracles by later preachers, proves that what is within us is more wonderful than what is without; and in drawing a distinction between the holiness of God, of place and of man, he notes that both man and place are dependent on God for sanctification.49 The theologians repeatedly warned against the misconception that angels, saints, demons and magicians can perform miracles by themselves, independent of a higher authority. The Cluniac and abbot of Cluny, Peter the Venerable (1094– 1156) placed his discussion of the nature of miracle within the context of the polemic against Judaism, paganism, heresy and Islam. Peter was perhaps the first theologian to systematically address the ideological threat posed by Islam, Judaism, and such heretical groups as the Petrobrusians (the followers of Peter of Bruys, who opposed, for example, the veneration of the cross and holy shrines).50 Most polemicists were content to list the 45 Guibert of Nogent, De pignoribus sacrae Scripturae, I, 2.6 in Opera varia, R.B.C. Huygens (ed.), Corpus christianorum. Continuatio mediaevalis, 127 (Turnhout, 1993), 79–175. For a translation of part I, see Thomas Head (ed.), Medieval Hagiography. An Anthology (New York, 2000), 399–427. See also Colin Morris, ‘A Critique of Popular Religion: Guibert of Nogent on The Relics of the Saints’, in Studies in Church History, 8 (Oxford, 1972), 95–111. 46 The phrase most often employed is ‘signa data esse infidelibus, non fidelibus’. See Eberhard Demm, ‘Zur Rolle des Wunders in der Heiligskonzeption des Mittelalters’, Archiv für Kulturgeschichte, 57 (1975), 300–344. 47 Hermann of Scheda, Opusculum de conversione sua, Gerlinde Niemeyer (ed.) (Weimar, 1963), 85. 48 PL, 177: 613. A similar view is voiced by Honorius Augustodunensis, Hexaemeron, caps. 1, 4, in PL, 172: 255A, 262B. 49 PL, 177: 651, 622. 50 Dominique Iogna-Prat, Order and Exclusion: Cluny and Christendom face Judaism, Heresy and Islam, 1000–1150, Graham Robert Edwards (trans.)(Ithaca, 2002) deals with Peter the Venerable

Signa data infidelibus non fidelibus: The Theology of Miracle

17

biblical verses that portend the coming of Christ and his miracles, thus hoping to prove by means of Jewish texts themselves the truth of Christianity.51 In his Adversus iudeorum inveteratam duritiem (1144) Peter the Venerable argued that although there may be many great miracles performed under the old law, nevertheless Christianity is distinguished by more incomparable miracles, which contributed substantially to conversion of so many to the true faith.52 If Christ had not been the Son of God, the eternal King and the Messiah predicted by the prophets, so many miracles would not have been performed by his disciples, the apostles, confessors, martyrs, monks and others. Their deeds could not be works of magic, since these are performed by the unlearned, since the early followers of Jesus, who performed miracles, were unschooled and illiterate. Peter pointed out several great miracles which are incontrovertible proof of the truth of Christianity: the miracles of Mary (who is particularly detested by the Jews), some of which he had himself witnessed; the miracle of the holy fire, performed at the Holy Sepulchre in Jerusalem yearly on the day of the Resurrection;53 and the many miracles performed at the sites of relics of the True Cross. Nevertheless, while at the same time suggesting that one should be cautious about declaring a vision or other apparently supernatural event miraculous, he claimed in his De miraculis to have himself experienced a truly miraculous vision while in Rome.54 The refusal to accept the miracles of the New Testament played a role in other polemical discussions with the Jews. William of Champeaux (1070–1122) noted that the Jews were particularly aroused against the miracle of the Incarnation, and questioned the possibility that Jesus could be generated with a virgin without the act of male impregnation.55 To the Christian, this very possibility is proof of God’s omnipotence and that fact that He can do this portends his position as the Lord of the natural world. In the same way, He was able to part the Red Sea, cause Aaron’s rod to bloom, and bring water forth from a stone. Peter of Cornwall (1208) listed a further large number of miracles performed by the apostles and saints, in addition to the mirabilia in nature, as proof of such omnipotence and the grace granted by Christians due to their belief.56 as the leading polemicist of his age. 51 See for example, the work of a Jewish convert to Christianity, William of Bourges, in his Livre des guerres du Seigneur, Gilbert Dahan (trans.) (Paris, 1981). 52 Peter the Venerable, Adversus iudeorum inveteratam duritiem, in Corpus christianorum. Continuatio mediaevalis, 58 (Turnhout, 1985), 83, 115–123. For a list and summary of anti-Jewish literature, see Gilbert Dahan, The Christian Polemic against the Jews in the Middle Ages, Jody Gladding (trans.) (Notre Dame, 1998). 53 Peter the Venerable, Sermo in Laudem Sepulchri Domini, Giles Constable (ed.), ‘Petri Venerabilis Sermones Tres’, Revue Bénédictine, 64 (1954), 248–250 on the holy fire. 54 Peter the Venerable, De miraculis, in PL, 938A: ‘Licet autem propositum meum sit, ut in narrandis hujusmodi miraculis, aut nunquam aut raro somnia admittam, quia frequenter aut falsa sunt aut dubia, quoddam tamen somnium inter haec quae narro miracula, quia fide dignum videtur, admisi. Nam, ut sanctus Pater noster Odo in Vita sancti viri Geraldi scripsit, somniorum visiones non semper sunt inanes.’ 55 William of Champeaux, Dialogus inter christianum et judaeum de fide catholica, in PL: 1054– 1055; see also Anon., Tractatus contra Judaeum, in PL, 213: 805–806. 56 R.W. Hunt, ‘The Disputation of Peter of Cornwall against Symon the Jew’, in Studies in Medieval History presented to Frederick Maurice Powicke, R.W. Hunt et al. (eds) (Oxford, 1948), 116.

18

Miracles and Wonders

Thus, theological speculation until the thirteenth century clearly aimed at deemphasizing the miracle as a focal witness to the truths of the Faith, and sought to draw the believer’s attention away from the fascination with supernatural intervention in favor of the words and deeds of the saints. This effort was both challenged and advanced by the gradual introduction of Aristotelian natural philosophy into the schools in the early thirteenth century, which demanded a rational explanation of the Christian notion of the miraculous, capable of withstanding the barbs of sceptics. One of the earliest Paris theologians to deal with the efforts of the Devil to fool believers through the performance of false miracles was Radulphus Ardens (d. ca. 1200).57 He draws parallels between the magicians in Pharaoh’s court, the priests of Baal, the Manichaeans and contemporary Cathar heretics. But because the Devil cannot read the inner heart of his victim, he can only judge through exterior signs. He uses food to tempt those who fast, he arouses cupidity among those who admire wealth, and lust among those who express desire. Among those who are ill he may arouse apostasy, desperation, impatience, and other ‘prodigies’ of the Devil. The Antichrist may also create visual fantasies in order to test the just and believers may thus be led into heresy by believing these false miracles. Unlike his predecessors, Ardens illustrates his arguments with examples drawn from the lives of such saints as Bartholomew, Martin, Benedict, Macarius and Nicholas. He argues that miracles may be performed for the following purposes: to confirm the faith of believers; to demonstrate some postulates of the faith; to assist the believer to avoid evil; or to demonstrate the virtue of the miracle-worker.58 In his homilies Ardens distinguished between the reaction of the Jews and of Thomas and Paul to the miracle of the Ascension.59 Each nation has to overcome its own peculiar vice: the French suffer from pride, the Romans greed, the Poitevins garrulousness, and the Jews disbelief.60 Due to their ‘hardheartedness’ the Jews, despite the clear evidence of signs and miracles provided by prophets, apostles, and evangelists, refused to believe in the Resurrection. They regard everyone as deceptive and false. Although Ardens also warns that one should not be naïve, but should test whether any alleged spirit comes from God, Paul and Thomas eventually accepted the Ascension after it was clearly demonstrated to them.61 Ardens draws parallels between the miracles of the Old Testament prophets, Jesus and his disciples, and the saints, whose spiritual virtues and miracles drive away disbelief, ignorance, doubt, error and heresy.62

57 Radulphus Ardens, Speculum naturale, in Paris Ms. BNf ms 3229, fol. 31vb on the temptations of the Devil. 58 Ibid., 134r–v on the power of miracles. 59 Radulphus Ardens, Epistolas et evangelia dominicalia homiliae, in PL, 155: 1923 (Homilia lxix, In ascensione Domini). 60 Ibid., Homiliae II, In die Trinitatis. 61 PL, 155: 1924: ‘Nolite omni spiritu credere sed probate spiritus an ex Deo sint … Postquam probaveritis quod spiritus ex Deo sint, eis fidem adhibete.’ 62 Sermo de libro Sapientiae, in PL, 155: 1579–80. Among the saints he mentions Polycarp, Agnes, Agatha and Cecilia.

Signa data infidelibus non fidelibus: The Theology of Miracle

19

Scholastic Theology The most influential interpreter of the supernatural was Thomas Aquinas (ca. 1225– 1274), whose views of miracle and the sacred were perhaps the most systematic, and were cited by later scholars, such as Pierre d’Ailly, Hugues Nigri and Pope Clement VI, who were called upon to distinguish true from ‘false’ miracles.63 By the early fifteenth century his views seem to have become dominant. Aquinas relies on both Andronicus of Rhodes and pseudo-Dionysius in defining sanctity as a general virtue, implying the unsoiled absence of all impurity and the exclusion of bodily foulness.64 He cites Isidore of Seville’s Etymologiae X. 5 to the effect that in ancient times those who wished to be purified were tinged with the blood of their enemies.65 Thomas thus implies (although he doesn’t say so explicitly) that sacrifice and sanctity are intertwined. In keeping with the tendency to lay stress on the virtuous life of the miracle-worker as an example to the faithful, Aquinas argued that sanctity denotes purity and firmness and suggests that the saint’s actions are directed toward God and ‘transcend the forces of all created nature, human and angelic’.66 In De potentia (1259–1268), following Gregory the Great, he stressed that holy persons perform miracles through both prayer and the power of grace. Both of these means are open to any person possessing faith, for such faith makes one worthy of performing a miracle.67 Aquinas argued that true miracles can only be performed through the power of God and are invariably undertaken for the profit of mankind in order to confirm the truth of the Faith; and to demonstrate the sanctity of a person whom God has designated as an example of virtue to others. In the first instance, miracles may be performed by anyone who preaches the true Faith and invokes God’s name, including sinners. In the second instance, miracles are only performed by saints. Thomas’ view of the miracle as an event contrary to nature also appeared in Richard of St Victor, William of Auvergne, William of Auxerre, and Alexander of Hales, among others.68 On the one hand, God has Himself defined nature; therefore he cannot act against it. On the other hand, He may act outside of the normal pattern or laws of nature as we know them. Such an unusual event provokes our admiration or amazement, and is thus termed a miraculum. Such phenomena may be astonishing to us simply because we don’t know the cause, 63 See the 1417 sermon Sermo primus de sancto Ludovico delivered at the ecumenical council of Constance, in Pierre d’Ailly, Tractatus et sermones (Strassbourg, 1490); the reaction to the creation of an unauthorized cult in B. Montagnes, ed., ‘La repression des sacralités populaires en Languedoc au xv siècle’, Archivum fratrum praedicatorum, 52 (1982), 152–85. 64 Thomas Aquinas, Summa theologiae, T.C. O’Brien et al. (eds), 61 vols. (New York, 1981), 2a2ae.81.8. 65 PL, 82: 893. 66 Summa theologiae, 1a.100.6; cf. Hardon, ‘Concept of Miracle’, 231. 67 De potentia, Q. 6, art. 9; Gregory the Great, Dialogi, II.30, Adalbert de Vogüe (ed.), 3 vols. (Paris, 1978–1980). William McCready, Signs of Sanctity in the Thought of Gregory the Great (Toronto, 1989) provides a good introduction to the concept of miracle in the early middle ages. Much of the scholastic argument is taken wholly out of patristic sources. 68 Aloїs van Hove, La doctrine de miracle chez saint Thomas (Paris, 1927), 83; Alexander of Hales, Glossa in quattuor libros Sententiarum Petri Lombardi (Quaracchi, 1951), I.Dist.42.2b–c; I.Dist.43.5d; Joannes Balbi, Catholicon (Cologne, 1506), Miraculum; Hardon, ‘Concept of Miracle’.

Miracles and Wonders

20

but this cause may be known to others. In that case, they may not be termed miracles.69 Those who know the cause, however, do not express the same degree of wonder.70 It is in fact God’s ability to occasionally alter the course of nature that proves his omnipotence.71 Aquinas cites an example which may justify the efforts of contemporary ecclesiastical authorities to distinguish the apparent miracle as seen by the throng and by the theologian or natural philosopher. When a peasant (rusticus), he says, sees an eclipse of the sun, not knowing its cause, he shows wonderment. But an astronomer does not. On the other hand, in the case of a true miracle, the ultimate cause is God, and the ‘intermediate’ causes are hidden from everyone’s view, including the learned. In De potentia Thomas more clearly distinguished between something which is astonishing in and of itself, and something which is merely astonishing to the callow observer.72 For example, a piece of iron rises upwards toward a magnet, although by natural movement it ought to move downwards. One who understands the inherent power of a magnet, however, is not astonished. A true miracle occurs ‘when the thing has a disposition contrary to the visible effect’.73 Aquinas argued that there are three ways whereby a miracle may be regarded as beyond nature’s powers: by virtue of the kind of event which occurs, e.g. when two bodies occupy the same place at the same time; by virtue of the subject in which it occurs, e.g. the raising of the dead; and by virtue of the manner in which the event is accomplished, e.g. the instant cure of a fever by God, rather than through a gradual, natural healing process; or the rapid condensation of air into rain as accomplished by Samuel (1 Kings [1 Samuel] 12: 18) or Elijah (3 Kings [1 Kings] 18: 44). In De potentia he distinguished between those miracles that are above nature (supra naturam), against nature (contra naturam) and apart from nature (praeter naturam). The miracle above nature is one in which God endows matter with a form which nature is unable to attain, such as the Incarnation of the Word; or when nature, while it can turn matter into a certain form, nevertheless cannot do so with respect to this particular matter. A miracle is against nature when the disposition of the material in which it occurs contradicts what actually occurs, e.g. a virgin gives birth. An event is apart from nature when God has produced an effect which nature can produce, but He does so in a way which nevertheless cannot be attained by nature. This occurs: if nature lacks sufficient tools to accomplish it, e.g. when Christ turned water into wine; if a greater number than is natural is nevertheless produced by God, e.g. the plague of the frogs in Egypt; or if an event occurs in less This is based on Aristotle, Metaphysics, rev. ed., W.D. Ross (ed.), 2 vols. (Oxford, 1958), 1,2.982b.16. 70 Thomas Aquinas, Summa contra gentiles [1258/64], 3.101.2, Vincent J. Bourke (trans.), 3 vols. (Notre Dame, 1975), II, pt. 2: 82: ‘things that are done occasionally by divine power outside of the usual established order of events are commonly called miracles (wonders) (praeter ordinem communiter observatum in rebus).’ 71 Thomas Aquinas, Summa contra gentiles, III, 99: ‘in this God does at times to manifest His power: for there is no better way of manifesting the subjection of all nature to the divine will than by something being done at times beyond the course of nature: for thereby it appears that the course of events proceeds from Him, and is not of necessity of nature, but through free will.’ 72 Thomas Aquinas, De potentia, Q. 6, art. 2. 73 Ibid. 69

Signa data infidelibus non fidelibus: The Theology of Miracle

21

time than is normal, e.g. someone being cured through the invocation of a saint, rather than through the gradual working of nature, as in the case of St Peter’s mother-inlaw (Matthew 8: 14). In sum, compared to Augustine, Aquinas preferred to view the miracle not as an acceleration of nature, but rather as the suspension of nature’s normal processes. Thomas’ contemporary Albertus Magnus (d. 1280) added the necessary distinction between miracula and mirabilia, which are extraordinary but nevertheless explicable phenomena.74 In this he followed the tradition found in many contemporary encyclopedists (such as Thomas of Cantimpré) and natural philosophers (like Roger Bacon), who devoted much attention to wondrous and unusual phenomena found in the natural world. The encyclopedist Gervase of Tillbury had defined mirabilia as those phenomena which do not appear natural to us.75 Although they may function as presages or prodigies, like the comets which sometimes precede a change of rule or military victory, or an eclipse which signals the death of an important figure, such events may nevertheless be scientifically explicable. On occasion, this may also include strange occurrences connected with sainthood such as: the icon at the Damascene church of S. Maria de Sardinax from which milk flows to cure the sick; the vision at a mountaintop abbey near Turin of a banner of the Theban legion which appears during the feast of Constantius and which disappears as one approaches; or the island inhabited by monks where snakes fear to tread. James of Vitry (d. 1254) in his Liber orientalis noted some wondrous events in nature which may be defined as mirabilia, e.g. cold water infused with cold lime turns hot; or the sun’s rays may paradoxically both soften wax and harden clay.76 Albert’s extensive discussion of the nature of miracle largely attempted to limit those phenomena which are termed miraculous by stressing that transformations in nature may in any case be attributed to the latent causal elements or seeds from which all things are created.77 As long as God’s creatures are fulfilling their divinely ordained intention, nature is not contravened. An event may perhaps be termed against nature when an object acts against its own inherent, particular nature. When God, however, restores sight to the blind, movement to the lame, or life to the dead, He is merely reversing the deprivation of those physical characteristics that are inherent in humankind. The growing tendency to limit the number of phenomena classified as miraculous and to divert the believer’s attention from the fantastic to the moral message of miracle is reflected in the De miraculis Christi (ca. 1287) by the Benedictine Engelbert (Poetsch), abbot of Admont (ca. 1250–1331).78 While Engelbert’s early training took place at 74 Albertus Magnus, Summa theologiae [ca. 1270], II.8.30–32, in Opera omnia, A. Borgnet (ed.), 38 vols. (Paris, 1890–1899), vol. 32. 75 Otia imperialia: Recreation for an Emperor, S. E. Banks and J. W. Binns (eds and trans.), (Oxford, 2002), 556–62; Paul Rousset, ‘Le sens de merveilleux à l’époque fèodale’, Le moyen âge, 62 (1956), 25–37. 76 James of Vitry, Liber orientalis, Francis Moschus (ed.) (Douai, 1597), c. 93. 77 Albertus Magnus, Summa theologiae, II. Tract. 8, q. 31. 78 Albert Lang, Die Wege der Glaubensbegründung bei den Skolastiken des 14. Jahrhunderts, in Beiträge zur Geschichte der Philosophie des Mittelalters, 30, Hft.1/2 (Münster, 1931), passim for discussions of the theology of miracle. George Fowler, Intellectual Interests of Engelbert of Admont (New York, 1947);

22

Miracles and Wonders

the cathedral school of Prague, his nine-year stay at Padua under Dominican tutelage probably strengthened his Aristotelian bent, which in this treatise finds expression in the use of the Rhetorica along with the commentaries of Averroes. Although very much in keeping with Aquinas’ approach, his work represents an original and somewhat more systematic synthesis of earlier material. While Engelbert cites Jerome, Gregory and Hugh of St Victor, Augustine remains the solid basis of this systematic study of Biblical miracles. Like Aquinas, in his De gratiis et virtutibus B.V.M. Engelbert noted three kinds of miracles: an event apparently contrary to nature, when a superior cause acts alone without any inferior cause, as when an ass speaks; an event above nature, when a superior cause acts by means of some intermediate cause serving as its agent (which is incapable of acting by itself), as when the Virgin conceived by the Holy Spirit; and, some event beyond nature, e.g. when an infant speaks prematurely, or a child is conceived and born when its parent is beyond the usual age of childbearing.79 In such a case, an inferior cause acts in things according to nature, but not in accordance with the normal time of nature. Although acting according to nature, the inferior cause requires the aid of superior virtues and both the prayers of the saints and the divine will. The conception of the Virgin Mary is such a miracle. All miracles, however, require divine assistance, with the exception of those performed directly by God Himself without an intermediary. While retaining the view that the role of the miracle is to confirm and corroborate the faith, Engelbert (like other scholastics) attempted to marry Scripture to Aristotelian natural philosophy.80 Signs and miracles stand beside the testimony of doctrines, words, precepts, deeds and events as the foundations of the faith.81 He focuses on the Old Testament miracles of Moses and Elijah, and of Jesus, as reported in the Gospels.82 Like his contemporaries, he regards the Eucharist as the greatest miracle of all, only idem, ‘A Chronology of the Writings of Engelbert of Admont O.S.B. (ca. 1250–1331)’, Paradosis, 32 (1976): 121–34; Rudolph List, Stift Admont 1074–1974. Festschrift für Neunhundertjahrfeier (Admont, 1974), 131–45; Jacob Wichner, Geschichte des Benediktiner-Stiftes Admont, 3 vols. (Admont, 1878), III, 1–30; for a partial edition of the De miraculis, see Michael Goodich, ‘A Chapter in the History of the Christian Theology of Miracle: Engelbert of Admont’s (ca. 1250–1331) Expositio super Psalmum 118 and De miraculis Christi’, in Michael Goodich et al. (eds), Cross Cultural Convergences in the Crusader Period. Essays Presented to Aryeh Grabois on his Sixty-fifth Birthday (New York, 1995), 89–110. The manuscript cited here is ms Codex Admontensis 398, fols. 22r–38r. His sermons on the contemporary saints Anthony of Padua, Clare and Francis of Assisi in Einsiedeln ms. 755 (Misc. 660) contain little on miracles. 79 Engelbert of Admont, De gratiis et virtutibus B.V.M., IV.3 in Bernard Pez (ed.), Thesaurus anecdotorum novissimus, 6 vols. (Augsburg, 1721–1729), I, 703. 80 Ms Codex Admontensis 398, fol. 27r–28r. As he says (22r): ‘Opera et miracula non solum sunt intuenda et adtendenda ut in eis ratio habeat quod admiretur, sed ut fides inveniat unde confirmetur et confirmetur.’ In this he relies on Augustine. For citation of Aristotle, see e.g. fol. 36r. 81 Ibid., 22r: ‘Evangelia continere quattuor testimonia praecipue occurrunt de Christo et in Christo mirabilia et miranda. Videlibet: i testimonia doctrine et verborum; ii testimonia preceptorum; iii testimonia operum et sanctorum; iiii testimonia signorum et miraculorum. Hec enim ideo dicuntur et sunt testimonia Christi quod testantur de ipso etiam in ipso Jesu Christo.’ 82 Ibid., fol. 33r.

Signa data infidelibus non fidelibus: The Theology of Miracle

23

after the Incarnation, Crucifixion and Resurrection. Each miracle possesses its own peculiar kind of beauty, greatness and frequency, and differs in the materials in which and out of which it occurs.84 Engelbert’s analysis of the reported cure by Jesus on the Sabbath of the man with dropsy in the house of one of the Pharisees (Luke 14: 1) follows Avicenna’s teachings, which regarded illness as the result of the changing humoral condition of the body, particularly the absence of warmth or of water. This typically medieval psychosomatic explanation of the genesis of disease, argues that one’s spiritual degradation is the inner source of this outward condition.85 Engelbert thus summarized the thaumaturgical miracles of Jesus as the natural result of a spiritual transformation wrought by contact with God. The hemorrhaging of the woman cured by Jesus (Matthew 9: 20), for example, was ultimately caused by her fleshly desire and foulness. After having touched the tassel and cloak of the Lord, she was cured through her faith and devotion, which restored her health.86 Likewise Peter’s mother-in-law (Matthew 8: 14) lay in bed with fever, the result of her dryness, cold, lack of warmth and many vices; both the vice and fever were cured by her faith in God. In keeping with traditional views, the blind are likened to those possessing false and vain opinions and are wavering in their devotion to the faith.87 The demoniacs are likened to the heretics and Pharisees whose errors have driven them insane, and as a result they spout blasphemous words regarding God, the world, the soul and doctrine. This follows a widely-held view of the heretic as Devil-possessed. As a consequence, papal bulls of canonization stressed the cardinal role of the miracle as a tool against heresy.88 The public exorcism of an incubus or succubus (implanted by the Devil in a believer), witnessed at the saint’s shrine by many spectators, is often the first miracle which cements the establishment of a new cult. Engelbert further stressed the role of the miracle as a tool used by believers against the Jews and others whose faith is weak and who can be countered by hearing about the signs brought by 83

Ibid., fol. 33r. Ibid., 26v: ‘Videndum igitur est de qualiter et differentia signorum circa quam considerantur tria. videlicet multitudo et magnitudo et pulchritudo. Multitudo refertur ad sanacionis integritatem et multiplicitatem. quia quos curavit Christus integritatem et in totum curavit … Magnitudo vero refertur ad signorum arduitatem quia iuxta magnitudinem infirmitatum et languorum in toto corpore vel in membris singulis. adtenditur arduitas curacionis in hominibus et transmutacio sancta in aliis rebus … Pulchritudo vero refertur ad ipsius Christi pietatem et liberalitatem.’ 85 Ibid., fols. 31r–32r. He also cites Hugh of St Victor, Allegoriae in novum testamentum, IV.18, in PL, 175: 818–19 (listed by Migne as of dubious authorship). See also 30r: ‘Primo itaque homo peccator factus in anima ydropsicus. Humiditate iniquitate et refrigescente caritate ex fluido et frigido humore cordis pocius et plusquam corporis tamquam paciens luxum vanitatis et voluptatis et fluxum potentis mortalitis. Incidit in tumorem superbie de inde in angustiam invidie et iam vitum avaricie.’ 86 Codex Admontensis, 398, fols. 31r–32r. 87 Ibid., 31v: ‘in fide et virtute fidei vagantes de una opinione ad aliam, de una determinacione ad aliam.’ 88 Ibid., 31vb: ‘Octavo in sanatis duobus demoniacus exeuntibus de monumentis. habetur Matthaeus ix. [=8.28] Curavit et abstulit furores et errores hereticorum et falsorum phariseorum. qui non tamquam errantes ymmo tamquam insanientes. et arrepticii blasphemias evomuunt.’ 83 84

24

Miracles and Wonders

Jesus, which cannot be performed by human beings.89 He reports that he had himself heard both Jews and learned Christians express doubts about whether Jesus the son of Mary was the only true Son of God.90 Much of the treatise may therefore be read as a contribution to the continuing anti-Jewish polemic in which the scholastics were engaged, as the miracle was regarded as the most effective tool of converting ‘the blind, stubborn and hard-hearted’ Jews to the true faith.91 Each miraculously cured illness is thereafter described as a physical manifestation of a psychic weakness; and the ability to cure such diseases is passed on to the Apostles (Matthew 12: 5). The cure of the man who possessed one arm that had ceased to function is therefore likened to those who are believers but have neglected to perform good works.92 In his discussion of God’s mastery over the elements, Engelbert argues that the ‘transformations’ wrought in nature have a rational explanation. These include the cursing of the fig tree, the multiplication of the loaves and fishes, the transformation of water into wine, the turning of bread and wine into body and blood and the calming of the waters. Jesus’ walking on the water (Matthew 8: 23), for example, was possible because the water had been made solid so that it could be trodden upon.93 Hugh of St Victor had suggested an alternative explanation: namely, that Jesus had acquired an unusual agility which allowed Him to cross the Sea of Galilee with great speed. In his discussion of the miracle of the loaves and the fishes (Matthew 15: 36), following Augustine, Engelbert notes that, just as Eve had been born out of Adam’s rib, in accordance with the will of God, the ‘germs’ or seeds present in these loaves and fishes multiplied in number.94 The cursing of the fig-tree (Matthew 21: 19), whereby it ceased to bear fruit, constitutes the deprivation of its moisture, causing it to wither away, and to be deprived of its attractive blossoms, which are necessary for the receipt of nutriment. The miracle of the transformation of wine into water (John 2: 9), Engelbert argues, has perhaps been misunderstood, for the water has not been replaced by wine, but rather turned into wine, which is quite possible, both through artificial and natural means. He compares it with the possibility of turning bread into stones. Engelbert reports having 89 Ibid., 33v: ‘Incumbant ergo nobis christianis primo contra Iudaeos et alios debiles in fide velut intelligendum sacre scripture ostendere signorum Christi difficultatem super humane artis et virtutis possibililatem et facultatem.’ 90 Ibid., 33r: ‘Audivi enim alioqociens non solum Judaeos obponentes sed etiam illiterates aliquos dubitantes quomodo ex eis persuaderi valeat Ihesum Mariae filium fuisse unum Christum dei filii.’ 91 Ibid., 33v–34v. On the anti-Jewish polemic see Jeremy Cohen, The Friars and the Jews. The Evolution of Medieval Anti-Judaism (Ithaca, 1982). 92 Ibid., 31v: ‘Decimo in habente manum aride sanato. Ut habetur Matthaeus XII. Sanavit in his qui eam creduunt et opera fidei negligunt.’ 93 Ibid., fol. 30v: ‘Signum vero virtutes facte circa transmutations diversarum in sex articulos continentur qui sunt sedacio ventorum et tempestatum, solidacio marium et aquarum, multiplicacio panuim et piscium, malediction arborum, mutatcio aque in vinum, conversion panis et vinum in corpore et sanguine sua.’ Engelbert also cites Hilary, Commentarium in Matthaeum, 14.24, in PL, 9: 1001–1002. 94 De miraculis, 32v: ‘fruges crescunt ex seminibus’; Augustine, De trinitate, III.9.17. According to Engelbert, Hilary says this is like creation ex nihilo, while Hugh of St Victor says that the elements are acting in obedience to God’s will.

Signa data infidelibus non fidelibus: The Theology of Miracle

25

himself seen bread in a church at Stift Gottweig-bei-Steinawas in Austria that had been consecrated in wine; having fallen under a bench, it had remained hidden for a year, by which time it had turned into stone.95 Like the canonists, whose views found expression in the wording of all papal bulls of canonization issued after the late twelfth century (which under Innocent III and Honorius III acquired a rather fixed formula), Engelbert warns against the false miracles of Satan and Pharaoh’s magicians and provides arguments against the Jewish detractors of the miracles of Jesus and his deification.96 In his treatise on the Virgin Mary, Engelbert likewise repeats the view that evil persons can perform miracles, and that when faith weakens, God brings miracles in order to frighten the evil and console the good.97 In the De miraculis, he expands upon Augustine in noting the (now defunct) theory of spontaneous generation, which allows the possibility that carrion may produce flies, and wood may generate frogs.98 But he argues that the magicians’ deeds only appear extraordinary, because they are acquainted with the means whereby the potential elements of nature may be summoned. The ‘true’ miracle is a sign aimed at bringing persons closer to belief. Again following Augustine he affirms that evil angels and their agents can call forth the seeds which lie dormant in nature, and which give birth to snakes, fish, etc.99 He affirms that such occult power may belong not only to the fallen angels and their agents the magicians, but also to true angels and persons, particularly the saints, although God is the ultimate source of such power. Under certain circumstances, e.g. proper climate or the application of artificial means, one may even make improvements in the flowering of seeds.100 The angels, demons, magicians, and even the saints must nevertheless make use of some intermediate, physical agent in the performance of miracles. Engelbert lists a series of changes in the natural world, all of which have a rational explanation, but which can be performed by both infernal and heavenly forces, including humans and angels: such as the appearance of light and fire in the air; the spread of disease and pestilence; the dispersion of deluges throughout the land; the springing of water from the earth; the sudden outbreak of lightening and thunder; the blossoming of flowers, fruits and leaves; the granting and restoration of life to animals and humans.101 He further notes that there are even some deeds performed by human beings that call forth the kind of wonderment, admiration and expectation aroused by the miracle. As an example he cites the solemn ceremony in which a king or prince is dressed in mourning clothes, and the people are ‘astounded’ (mirantur), anticipating that Ibid., 32v–33r. De miraculis, 33vb: ‘Iudei itaque obponentes Christi divinitatem quae non posse ostendi ex signis illis qui in evangeliis fecisse legitur. Inducunt ex libri veteris testamenti per Moysen et aaron et helyam et helyseum et alios prophetas et sanctos tot et tanta et forte plura et maiora signa facta fuisse quos propter illa signa populis iudaeos ea non deificavunt illos. Non ipsi se deificaverunt. sed populi eos ut viros iustos et sanctos habuerunt nec ipsi de se adsenserunt. aut dixerunt.’ 97 Engelbert of Admont, Tractatus de gratis et virtutibus beatae virginis Mariae, in ms Admont 181, fols. 72v–73v. 98 De miraculis, 35r–38v. 99 Augustine, De trinitate, III.9.17. 100 De miraculis, fols. 38v–39v. 101 Ibid., 37v. 95

96

Miracles and Wonders

26

something new or secret is about to occur. Nevertheless, in the long run, both saints and angels remain God’s mere instruments, requiring faith in God and merits; being the instruments of a higher agency, their prayers and merits depend upon their faith and salvation. When faith weakens, God necessarily performs new miracles in order to frighten evil persons and comfort and console the good.102 By the early fourteenth century, a theoretical foundation had thus been amassed which could guide the notary and hagiographer in the credible presentation of the miracle. All of the commissions appointed by Rome to investigate miracles employed distinguished theologians who were familiar with scholastic arguments. The late medieval idea of miracle, grounded in Scripture and first clearly formulated by Augustine, had been systematically addressed by such scholastic theologians as Thomas Aquinas, Albertus Magnus and Engelbert of Admont. Rather than viewing the miracle as the cancellation of natural law by divine fiat, the theologian preferred to speak of an acceleration of natural processes or a disruption of the normal course of nature. The introduction of Aristotelian sources to the schools in the mid-thirteenth century enabled the application of the premises of natural philosophy to the attempt to limit the number of phenomena regarded as miraculous; and to the effort to distinguish between those events which merely appear miraculous to the untrained eye and the ‘true miracle’, which required the suspension of natural law. This speculative tradition justified placing the raw data of popular belief as reported in judicial inquiries into miracles within a learned and canonically acceptable context, which both the lawyer and natural philosopher could verify. The contemporary miracle continued to fulfill several traditional roles: it echoed the paradigmatic aims of its Jewish, Christian and early medieval predecessors as the most effective means of converting the nonbeliever and renewing the faith of those whose faith had grown cold; it served as an illustration of the gift of the divine grace with which the apostles, saints, angels and others are endowed; it illustrated the superiority of the Christian deity over the forces of nature. The systematic analysis of the miracle by scholastic theology enhanced the credibility of the Christian miracle in the face of continuing doubts voiced by non-believers, heretics and wavering Christians. These thinkers also used their discussions as an opportunity to distinguish between the acts of magic performed by the fallen angel, the Devil and his agents, and the miracles performed God, the angels and saints. As Albertus Magnus argued, ‘it is not the minister, but the invocation of the divine name that brings about the miracle; and God having been invoked, He performs the miracle by means of his own virtue.’ In his Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding (1748) Hume was to take the scholastic arguments a step further, by arguing that ‘we can never have sufficient evidence to establish the occurrence of a miracle’.103 He adds, that ‘a miracle is a violation of the laws of nature; and as a firm and unalterable experience has established these Engelbert of Admont, Tractatus de gratiis et virtutibus beatae virginis Mariae, in Admont Ms.181, 72v. 103 This summary of Hume’s view is from Robert T. Fogelin, ‘The Tendency of Hume’s Skepticism’, in Myles Burnyeat (ed.), The Skeptical Tradition (Berkeley, 1983), 408. See also Peter Harrison, ‘Prophecy, Early Modern Apologetics, and Hume’s Argument against Miracles’, Journal of the History of Ideas, 60 (1999), 241–56. A very useful introduction is Michael Levine, ‘Miracles’, The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Winter 2002 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.), in http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2002/entries/miracles/. 102

Signa data infidelibus non fidelibus: The Theology of Miracle

27

laws, the proof against a miracle, from the very nature of the fact, is as entire as any argument from experience can possibly be imagined’.104 He elsewhere notes, ‘A miracle may accurately be defined, as a transgression of a law of nature by a particular volition of the deity, or by the interposition of some invisible agent’.105 Although his medieval Christian predecessors never went so far as to express such full-fledged skepticism and totally reject the possibility of miracle, their attempts to limit miraculous phenomena reflect a growing discomfort with alleged supernatural intervention. While Hume’s aim was to completely demolish the notion of miracle, the scholastics sought to apply a critical approach to each alleged example. Despite the role played by the Christian polemic against Judaism in the definition of the miracle, medieval Jewish philosophers took a position close to that of the scholastics. Maimonides (d. 1202) clearly preferred to downplay the role of the supernatural, merely isolating certain Biblical events under the rubric of miracles, and tended only to refer to them in his more ‘popular’ works, for example, as proofs of Messiahship or prophethood.106 If Engelbert of Admont attempted to systematically prove the uniqueness and superiority of the miracles of Jesus, Maimonides claimed that the signs and wonders attributed to Moses are unprecedented, since they occurred in the presence of both friend and foe.107 His notion of the miraculous was calculated to modify the extreme Aristotelian view which, arguing that ‘everything in the Universe is the result of fixed laws, that Nature does not change, and that there is nothing supernatural’.108 Maimonides argued that miracles do occur in order to fulfill a specific need, for example the appearance of manna in order to feed the hungry Israelites during their sojourn in the desert. They are ‘temporary violations of natural law’, or ‘accelerated natural processes’. Since miracles are inherent in the nature of things (recalling Augustine’s doctrine of the potential seeds brought to fruition), he essentially questioned the likelihood of God changing the laws of nature. Miracles were thus provided for prior to Creation, and thus, although unusual, are not extraordinary. Temporary changes may be possible in nature, but this does not change the nature of the object. The Aristotelian Gersonides (1288–1344) in his Milhamot ha-Shem (VI.2.9–12) suggested that miracles are invariably acts of goodness, mercy and providence within the natural world, intended to bring believers closer to the Faith, to protect one from evil, or

104 David Hume, Enquiries Concerning Human Understanding, L.A. Selby-Bigge (ed.), third edition (Oxford, 1975), 114. 105 Ibid., 115. 106 A good explanation is Hannah Kasher, ‘Biblical Miracles and the Universality of Natural Law: Maimonides’ Three Methods of Harmonization’, Journal of Jewish Thought and Philosophy, 8 (1998), 25–52. Y. Tzvi Langermann, ‘Maimonides and Miracles: the Growth of a (Dis)belief ’, Jewish History, 18 (2004), 147–72 tries to explain the seeming contradictions in Maimonides’ approach to the supernatural as a product of his changing views in the course of a long career. In the same way, the influential Muslim philosopher al-Ghazali seems to have supported several views. See Leor Halevi, ‘The Theologian’s Doubts: Natural Philosophy and the Skeptical Games of Ghāzāli’, Journal of the History of Ideas, 63 (2002), 19–39. 107 Moses Maimonides, The Guide for the Perplexed, II. 36, trans. M. Friedländer, second revised edition (New York, 1956), 224–5. 108 Ibid., II. 25, p. 199.

28

Miracles and Wonders

to bring about some bodily good (as in the case of healing).109 He nevertheless argued that miracles do not take place contrary to nature, but merely represent a hastening of the ordinary processes of nature. This view closely conforms to contemporary scholastic definitions of miracle, since both Jewish and Christian theologians relied heavily on Aristotelian natural philosophy. The order of nature itself was regarded as far more ‘miraculous’ than any individual miracle, a view that became dominant by the thirteenth century in scholastic circles. The Jewish polemic against Christianity focused on several doctrines which Judaism regarded as logically impossible, insupportable and compromising the Divinity: Incarnation, the Virgin Birth, transubstantiation, and the Trinity. A considerable Jewish tradition developed around miraculous acts of mercy (particularly toward the poor) displayed posthumously by Elijah.110 Such tales of the supernatural contain a moral or ethical message. One example is the collection of stories by Rabbi Nissim ber Yaakov of Kairouan (d. 1000–1002), which contains exemplary reports of visits made by Elijah to various Jewish communities in order to assist those in straitened circumstances, such as prisoners in need of redemption (including Christians), the deserving poor, and Jews suffering persecution in far-flung lands. The miracle is invariably accompanied by some homiletical advice.111 Paradoxically, although the Christian understanding of the miraculous was forged in the context of the polemic struggle with heresy and rival faiths, Maimonides perhaps best voices the learned medieval approach to the supernatural that spanned religious traditions, speaking for both Christian and Jewish observers of the miraculous: My endeavor, and that of the select keen-minded people, differs from the quest of the masses. They like nothing better, and in their silliness, enjoy nothing more, than to set the Law and reason at opposite ends, and to move everything far from the explicable. So they claim it to be a miracle, and they shrink from identifying it as a natural incident, whether it is something that happened in the past and is recorded, or something predicted to happen in the future. But I try to reconcile the Law and reason, and wherever possible consider all things of the natural order. Only when something is explicitly identified as a miracle, and reinterpretation of it cannot be accommodated, only then I feel forced to grant that this is a miracle.112

109 Gersonides, Milhamot Ha-Shem, VI.2.9–12., cited in Menachem Kellner, ‘Gersonides on Miracles, the Messiah and Resurrection’, Da’at, 4/5 (1980), 5–34. 110 The Exempla of the Rabbis, Moses Gaster (ed.) (New York, 1968), for 450 examples contained in the Sefer Maasiyot. 111 Rabbenu Nissim Baer Yaakov me-Kairouan, Hibur Yafeh me ha-Yeshua, Haym Zeev Hirshberg (ed.) (Jerusalem, 1954) [Hebrew]; see also Bernhard Heller (ed.), ‘Gott Wunscht der Herz’: Legenden über unfaltige Andacht und über den Gefahrten im Paradies’, Hebrew Union College Annual, 4 (1927), 365–404. 112 Maimonides, The Essay on Resurrection, in Abraham Halkin (ed. and trans.), Crisis and Leadership: Epistles of Maimonides (New York, 1985), 223.

Chapter 3

The Miracle in Contemporary Sermons Historians of the central and late Middle Ages have been blessed by a veritable avalanche of sermons suited to every occasion, such as saints’ days, major feasts, funerals and political events, along with model sermons tailored to members of various professions or social positions. At least 60,000 sermons have survived from the period 1150–1350. Many were frequently recopied, or were inserted into collections which became the source for preachers in search of fresh material to include in their sermons. Some of the more prolific preachers, like Odo of Châteauroux (ca. 1200–1273), cardinal bishop of Tusculum, wrote as many as 1,200 sermons, which have survived in 100s of widely distributed manuscripts. Such sermons appear under a variety of rubrics, as Sermones de sanctis, Sermones de tempore, Sermones quadresimales, Sermones funebres, Sermones ad status, Sermones communes and a number of other titles. Every sermon begins with a Biblical verse, which became the theme of the sermon, often entailing an exegetical approach to the initial text that allows the preacher considerable latitude and room for creativity. The preacher spoke from a position of authority and generally voiced the prevailing ideology and dogma of the church, providing instruction in the faith or exhorting his listeners to lead a moral life. Many sermons were delivered within the small circle of a monastery, priory, canonry, school or court, while others were intended for a lay audience and might even have a political goal, such as mobilization of money or soldiers for the Crusades. Some of the preachers occupied leading positions, such as Pope Clement VI (d. 1352), whose widely-known sermon collection is titled Collationes, closer to extended essays than mere sermons; or Odo of Châteauroux, who served as chancellor of the University of Paris (1238–1244) and as cardinal bishop of Tusculum (Frascati) was directly involved in several canonization cases. As chancellor, he was deeply involved in the trial of the Talmud at Paris, and composed sermons against the Jews, traditionally regarded as the chief objects of miracles, arguing against the alleged blasphemous lies found in the Talmud. He composed sermons devoted to Richard of Chichester, Hedwig  A good summary is Beverly Mayne Kienzle (ed.), The Sermon (Turnhout, 2002). See especially Nicole Bériou, ‘Les sermons latins après 1200’, 363–447, and Carlo Delcorno, ‘Medieval preaching in Italy (1200–1500)’, 449–580.  J.-B. Schneyer, ‘Das Predigtwirken des Erzbischofs Friedrich Visconti von Pisa (1254– 1277) auf Grund der Rubriken des Cod. Florenz. Laur. Plut. 33. sin. 1’, Recherches de theologie ancienne et médièvale, 32 (1965), 307–32 is a particularly varied collection. The sermons were delivered in a variety of venues and include sermons on the occasion of the repentance of a heretic and the declaration of a Crusade.  David Behrman (ed.), ‘Volumina vilissima, a Sermon of Eudes of Châteauroux on the Jews and their Talmud’, in Gilbert Dahan (ed.), Le brülement du Talmud à Paris 1242–1244 (Paris, 1999), 189–209.

Miracles and Wonders

30

of Silesia and Philip of Bourges. The canonization of a new saint entailed the public delivery of sermons in his or her honor by the pope and leading ecclesiastics (although not all are extant) such as those delivered by Pope Clement IV on the occasion of Hedwig’s canonization and Pope Boniface VIII, who spoke at the canonization of King Louis IX of France. Eleven panegyrics were delivered when Yves of Tréguier was canonized in 1347. Other preachers produced a body of collateral literature that complements their sermons, such as Radulphus Ardens, John of San Gemignano and Conrad of Megenberg, all of whom were the authors of quasi-scientific encyclopedias. Still others composed saints’ lives on which they could draw for the composition of their Sermones de sanctis, such as Francis of Meyronnes, James of Vitry and James of Voragine. Many of these preachers were members of the mendicant orders. As a result, with the exception of figures identified with the new orders such as Clare of Assisi, Francis of Assisi, Anthony of Padua, Dominic, Elizabeth of Thuringia, Thomas Aquinas and Peter Martyr, recent saints are often conspicuously absent from these collections, just as other saints were largely absent from contemporary legendaries. The Paris theologian Jean de la Rochelle (d. 1245) composed three sermons on Anthony of Padua (d. 1231) shortly after his canonization.10 Many of the themes in these sermons reflect the philosophical treatises treated earlier. Jean takes the opportunity to praise the value of philosophy as an aid to Scripture by sharpening the mind, although he warns that doubts may be sown through such learning. Anthony, however, as a soldier in the Church Militant, confounded the nonbelievers though his miracles and strengthened 

David Jones (ed. and trans.), Saint Richard of Chichester. The Sources for his Life, in Sussex Record Society, 73 (Lewes, 1993); Rome Ms., Biblioteca Angelica 157 (B.6.10), fol. 93v–95v for his sermons on Philip.  The author of the life of Empress Cunegunda, canonized (1200) by Pope Innocent III, based on her canonization record writes in his epilogue: ‘Super hoc Innocentius Papa in sermone ad populum in Lateranensi Palatio habito, vitae illius merita et miraculorum insignia commemorando, subintulit’ (AA.SS, 3 March I: 378).  Joseph Gottschalk, ‘Die Heiligspredigt des Papstes Klemens V. von Jahre 1267’, in Archiv für schlesische Kirchengeschichte, 15 (1957), 15–35; Boniface VIII, Sermo prior factus in palacio apud apud Urbem Veterem die martis ante festum beati Laurentii martyris [‘Reddite quae sunt Caesaris Caesari, et quae sunt Dei Deo’], in André and François Du Chesne (ed.), Historiae francorum scriptores, 5 vols. (Paris, 1636–1649), 5: 482.  AA.SS, 19 May IV: 578 for the list of speakers: Pope Clement VI; the proctor Maurice; the patriarch of Antioch; Archbishop Pierre le Juge of Narbonne; Archbishop Amanevo Sammarthani of Bordeaux; Bishop Oliver Salabadinus of Nantes; Bishop Pierre de Pireto of Mirepoix; Bishop Gonsalvo de Aguilar of Segonza; the Franciscan Bishop Jordan Curti of Trent; and the Augustinian Bishop Galfrid of Fern.  See Maria-Teresa Beoneo-Crocchieri Fumagalli, Le enciclopedie dell’occidente medievale (Turin, 1981), 49–54 for a good bibliography.  See Jacobus de Bonovento (fl. 1360), Sermones de sanctis, in ms Zwettl 387, fols. 14v–17r for six short sermons on Peter Martyr. Because of his reputation as a militant opponent of heresy, these sermons may be related to an anti-heretical campaign. Engelbert of Admont, Sermones, in ms Einsiedeln 755 (Misc. 660), contains sermons on Francis, Anthony of Padua and Clare. 10 Balduinus ab Amsterdam (ed.), ‘Tres sermones inediti Joannis de Rupella in honorem S. Antonii Patavini’, Collectanea franciscana, 28 (1958), 33–58. 

The Miracle in Contemporary Sermons

31

the faithful. Jean cites several of Anthony’s miracles, likening them to those of Jesus and providing each with a moralized interpretation. The calming of the seas by Jesus is similar to Anthony’s bringing endangered sailors to shore, i.e. leading them to the life of faith. Jesus’ cure of a paralytic is likened to Anthony’s conversion of a heretic to the Catholic faith. His restoration of a broken wine jug also led to the conversion of a heretic. His revival of the dead, as Jesus did, represents the recovery of the believer from the spiritual death of sin. These preachers further often fulfilled a quasi-official status and voiced the prevailing ideology.11 The stress was clearly on the moral virtues exhibited by the saint and the need for penance conveyed by means of citations from authority (i.e. Scripture and the fathers), rational arguments and convincing examples, rather than a recount of his or her miracles, although the miracles of a militantly anti-heretical figure such as Peter Martyr (d. 1252) played a central penitential role.12 The church and its spokesmen preferred to emphasize miracles performed during the life of the saint as a reflection of his or her virtues. Believers, on the other hand, were concerned with the continuing posthumous miracle-making charisma of the saint, and after the thirteenth century, as Vauchez has pointed out, miracles were increasingly performed at some distance from the shrine, making use of such intermediary aids as prayers and images.13 Because of the considerable flexibility allowed the preacher, it is not always easy to find remarks on the nature of miracle. Sermones de sanctis almost invariably focus on the moral virtues of the saint as an example to believers, and deemphasize the supernatural. The often blatant absence of references to miracles, even in sermons dealing with contemporary saints, indicates the clear desire to encourage believers to think more about the exemplary quality of the saint than about his alleged supernatural powers, which critics such as Guibert of Nogent, Erasmus, Thomas More and others, not to speak of heretics and nonbelievers, regarded with skepticism or even disdain. For example, the Dominican James of Voragine’s (ca. 1230–1298) Sermones de sanctis, despite James’ reputation as the author of the most influential legendary, contain little of interest to students of the miraculous. On the other hand, his Sermon for the fourth Sunday of Pentecost, ‘Abiit Christus trans mare Galilaeae’ (John 6.1) deals with the genres of miracle.14 He argues that the greatest miracle of all is the Creation and governance of the world. All miracles excite astonishment or surprise in the spectator, although humanity is stirred more by what is rare than what is great. Some miracles may be very useful, but do not excite admiration; while others may be admirable, but are Hervé Martin, Le métier de prédicateur à la fin du moyen âge (Paris, 1988), 31. Semur, ms 42, f. 134v cited in Martin, Le métier de prédicateur, 595 says that Peter was sent ‘primo precipue contra hereticos ut eos suis predicationibus et miraculis percuteret atque converteret’. Martin, Le métier de prédicateur, 330, e.g. notes that this fourteenth century corpus of sermons makes no mention of miracles or of any recent saints. On the other hand, exempla collections such as Paris, BNf ms fr. 17068 often contain material on miracles as an illustration of the protective role of the saint (Martin, Le métier de prédicateur, 509). 13 André Vauchez, Sainthood in the Later Middle Ages, Jean Birrell (trans.) (Cambridge, 1997). 14 James of Voragine, Sermones quadragesimales, in ms Stiftsbibliothek Admont 688, 147v–150r. This verse appears to be the most frequent context for the discussion of miracles, since it focuses on the many miracles of Jesus in Galilee. 11 12

Miracles and Wonders

32

nevertheless useless, or even harmful, such as the acts of the Magi (i.e. Persian priests) and the Antichrist, who may fly or make statues speak. Others may be occasionally useful, but are unnecessary, such as the miracles performed by evil Christians. But not all serve the purposes of faith. Some miracles, for example, may arouse admiration, but do not strengthen belief; this includes the flowering of plants from the earth or the birth of a child out of his mother’s womb. In both cases (following the views of natural philosophy) the seeds are merely fulfilling their natural potential. Other miracles, such as those performed by the Magi or the Antichrist, may induce admiration, but serve a purely temporal purpose and are not long-lasting. This test of durability is in fact one of the standards used to distinguish the ‘delusions’ of the devil from the miracles of God. The miracles of Christ and the saints, on the other hand, induce surprise, occur outside the normal course of nature (praeter ordinem naturae), convert the infidel, provide solace and strengthen the faith of Christians. The Franciscan Francis of Meyronnes (d. 1328) pointed out the three features of the miracle in particular that excited human admiration and praise: it transcends nature; it transcends human art and skill, which merely imitate nature; and it is not customary.15 Humanity praises God because the miracle transcends the bounds of nature, occurs ex nihilo, and occurs without a specific request, dependent only on the will of God.16 Francis reiterated that just as the Resurrection of Christ had aroused fear in the hearts of nonbelievers, so the miracles of a saint such as Louis of Toulouse could frighten the infidels.17 The ancient hagiographical topos that stressed the need to publicize miracles as a means of strengthening the Faith and turning the hearts of sinners to penance was often voiced by both contemporary preachers and hagiographers.18 Dorothy of Montau’s (1347–1394) biographer Johannes of Marienwerder argued that since miracles are the visible signs of God’s goodness: Just as the Jews had been instructed by God to recount to their children [during Passover] about the miracles [of the Exodus] from Egypt, the crossing of the Red Sea, the Judean Desert, and [the conquest of] the Holy Land as a means of praising God through recollection of His deeds, so more recent miracles should be publicly exposed.19

The Benedictine chaplain Eberhard of Fürstenfeld (ca. 1346), who reported the miracles attributed to St Leonard of Inchenhofen after 1258, cited the words of the angel Raphael in Tobias 12:11, ‘A king’s secret ought to be kept, but the works of God Francis of Meyronnes, Sermones quadragesimales (Venice, 1493), Sermo XVII, and Sermo LXV. He also wrote a biography of Elzéar of Sabran. 16 Francis of Meyronnes, Sermones de tempore (Brussels, 1483), Sermo XIII. 17 Francis of Meyronnes, Sermones sanctorum et dominicales per totum annum (Venice, 1493), De sancto Ludovico, fol. 104ra. 18 Anon., Miracula pulchra et ad credendum possibilia, in Ms. Wilhering 96, fol. 279v: ‘Secuntur miracula valde pulcra et ad credendum possibilia que quidem miracula in sermonibus popularibus multos possunt edificare et corda perversorum in melius mutare et ad penitenciam peragendum peccatorium suorum provocare.’ This is a miscellaneous fifteenth century collection of sermons from earlier sources. 19 John of Marienwerder, Vita prima B. Dorotheae, in AA.SS, 30 October XIII: 560.; Isak Collijn (ed.), Acta et processus canonizationis beate Birgitte (Uppsala, 1924–1931), 106 for a comparison of the miracles wrought in Egypt with those in Scandinavia. 15

The Miracle in Contemporary Sermons

33

should be publicly honored’, as justification for the publicity which should be accorded contemporary miracles.20 He suggested three further reasons: to honor and glorify God and Leonard; to satisfy his conscience, since God’s works should not be hidden; and, in order to rectify evil, edify the good, and excite devotion and love. This citation from Tobias also appears in the twelfth century version of the life of Mary the Egyptian by Dominic of Evesham, which stresses that keeping silent about the works of God can injure the soul.21 The sermon was the most widespread means of both enhancing the reputations of the saints, which was so important to the propagation of their cults, and communicating the theology of the miraculous to a wider public, alongside the visual arts. The preacher was regarded as a conduit between God and man, and some of the saints were themselves renowned for the eloquence of their preaching and allegedly performed miracles in the course of their sermons. Anthony of Padua (1195–1231) was credited by an eyewitness, Bartholomew of Trent, with bringing believers to penance, converting heretics and nonbelievers, reforming usurers and invoking the specter of St Francis himself.22 The listeners were allegedly so captivated when Anthony delivered a sermon that no infant cried out and not a sound was heard, as though an angel had descended from heaven to address the assembled crowd, who had come from near and far to hear him.23 The charismatic powers attributed to the Milanese Dominican Peter Martyr (1203– 1252) included ‘knowing how to preach, to dispute sagaciously, to preach for the sake of the faith, to cure the afflicted, performing miracles and prophesying’.24 In the course of one of his sermons in Florence he was interrupted by a wild horse that had dashed threateningly into the crowd. Seized by the Holy Spirit, Peter was able to miraculously calm the frightened onlookers with his outstretched hand, so that none of the spectators was even slightly injured.25 Bernard of Clairvaux reported that when a blasphemous woman interrupted a sermon delivered by Malachi of Armagh (d. 1148), shouting that Eberhard of Fürstenfeld et al., Exordium et miracula sancti Leonardi thaumaturgi in Inchenhofen, in AA.SS, 6 November III: 184–5; Philip of Clairvaux, Vita Elizabeth sanctimonialis in Erkenrode, Catalogus codicum hagiographicorum Bibl. Reg. Bruxellensis, 4 vols. (Brussels, 1886–1889), I: 362; P.A. Grion (ed.), ‘La Legenda del B. Venturino da Bergamo secondo il testo inedito de codice di Cividale’, Bergomum, 50 (1956), 38. 21 Jane Stevenson, ‘The Holy Sinner: The Life of Mary of Egypt’, in Erich Poppe and Bianca Ross (eds), The Legend of Mary of Egypt in Medieval Insular Hagiography (Dublin, 1996), 51, 8l for the text. 22 AA.SS., 13 June II: 703F: ‘Antonius, quem ipse vidi et cognovi, Hispanus fuit genere, primo Regulam Augustini amplectens, deinde ordinem Fratrum Minorum ingrediens, verbo et exemplo multos ab errore revocavit. Desiderabat etiam Saracenos prædicare, et ex his recipere martyrii coronam. Sermone facundus fuit, et multos Christo attraxit. In quodam Capitulo Fratrum Sermonem fecit; ubi eo sermocinante, S. Franciscus cuidam Fratri apparuit, congregatos benedicens. Paduanos prædicavit, et multos usurarios ad restituendum induxit.’ 23 Ibid., 709. 24 Martin, Le métier de prédicateur, 195 citing Semur Ms. 43, fol. 136v: ‘sapienter predicandi, scientifice disputandi, pro fide predicandi, sanandi infirmos, virtue faciendi miracula, gracia prophetizandi.’ 25 Thomas Agni de Lentino, Vita et miracula Petri, in AA.SS, 29 April III: 692, based on the canonization record. 20

Miracles and Wonders

34

he was a thief and hypocrite, she was rewarded for her rash words by becoming insane and choking to death.26 On the occasion of the 1236 translation of the relics of Elizabeth of Thuringia (1207–1231) at Marburg in the presence of her cousin Emperor Frederick II, Caesarius of Heisterbach eloquently employed an etymological play on the word seven embedded in her name (e.g. the seven gates of Jerusalem, the acts of charity etc.) as a framework for providing examples of the seven acts of charity she had displayed in her lifetime and which were to be illustrated on the stained glass windows prepared for the cathedral.27 Caesarius affirms that ‘miracles are not the substance of sanctity, but rather signs of it’ and can easily turn the head of the miracle-worker. God therefore delayed Elizabeth’s miracles until after her death.28 While focusing on the virtues displayed in her lifetime, he notes the miraculous appearance of curative oil that oozed from her tomb several days after the translation, for which there are precedents in the lives of the martyr Demetrius (brother of Dionysius the Areopagite), Catherine of Alexandria and Nicholas of Bari or Myra.29 Within the context of the sermon, a specific miracle was often couched as an exemplum aimed at illustrating some point of Christian belief, and included the minimal narrative elements describing the circumstances of the event, and the antagonism between God and the Devil or his servants. As Oppel has pointed out, the miraculum as a literary genre belongs to a series of related rhetorical terms, all of which possess ancient precedents, which were employed in hagiographical and moral literature in the Middle Ages.30 While the precise definition of such terms (e.g. exemplum, historia, similitudo, parabola, narratio, gestum, fabula, and moralizatio) often lacked theoretical precision, the twelfth century may be regarded as a watershed during which many such set terms acquired a relatively fixed structure. The literary genre most closely related to the miraculum is the exemplum, which has an historical basis and has been defined by Bremond ‘a brief, allegedly true account intended to be included in a discourse (generally a sermon) in order to convince a listener with a lesson of salvation’.31 Although as early as Tertullian Biblical parables and apocryphal stories had been used as exemplary pedagogical sources, the first recognized collection of medieval exempla is Petrus Alfonsi’s early twelfth century translation from the Arabic, the Disciplina clericalis. Crane has distinguished two genres of exempla: illustrative stories and moralized tales. The exempla often provided local examples of the parables and apocryphal stories found in Scripture and reflected divine order in the life of humanity. After the twelfth century, however, social and ethical issues of everyday Bernard of Clairvaux, Liber de vita et rebus gestis S. Malachiae, in PL, 182: 1091C. Caesarius of Heisterbach, Sermo de translatione beate Elyzabeth, Albert Huyskens (ed.), Die Schriften des Cäsarius von Heisterbach über die heilige Elisabeth von Thüringen, Publikationen des Gesellschaft für Geschichtskunde, 43.3 (1937), 381–90. 28 Ibid.: 390: ‘Miracula vero non sunt de sanctitatis substantia, sed quedam sanctitatis indicia … Miracula, nisi homo cautus sit, facillime mentem extollunt. Propter quod pius Dominus miraculorum gloriam post mortem famule sue distulit, quoniam iam extolli non poterat.’ 29 Ibid., 387–9. 30 Hans Oppel, ‘Exemplum und Mirakel: Versuch einer Begriffsbestimmung’, Archiv für Kulturgeschichte, 58 (1976), 96–114; Jean-Claude Schmitt et al., Prêcher d’exemples (Paris, 1985), 11. 31 Claude Bremond, Jacques Le Goff, and Jean-Claude Schmitt, L’Exemplum (Turnhout, 1982), 49; Frederick Tubach, Index exemplorum (Helsinki, 1969), 407–17. 26 27

The Miracle in Contemporary Sermons

35

life were more often raised and many oral, folkloristic and popular themes found their way into these exempla and miracula. Scholars thereby attempted to clarify scholastic intricacies to the unlettered by means of such didactic material.32 Such twelfth century works as the miracle collections of Herbert of Clairvaux, Peter the Venerable, and Conrad of Eberbach present the miraculum as essentially an exemplum in which: supernatural intervention provides proof of God’s glory and His boundless grace; the truth of the Christian Faith in the face of its foes (whether pagan, Jewish, or heretic) is displayed; or such doctrinal points as the need for sincerity during confession, the real presence of Jesus in the Eucharist, the existence of the next world, and the treasury of grace are illustrated.33 But many such tales closely resemble contemporary courtly romances, especially when dealing with acts of derring-do and miraculous escapes from the clutches of death by brave warriors or knights. During wartime, a vision of a patron saint miraculously freeing a prisoner from his shackles, guaranteeing that the guards remain asleep at their posts, and guiding his client safely through a well-fortified keep, played a central role in enhancing a saint’s reputation. Such figures as SS. Martial and Leonard performed such yeoman service to their devotees during the Crusades, Hundred Year’s War, and a host of local conflicts. When historical fact conflicted with the propagandistic intentions of hagiography, the resort to rhetorical convention often freed the biographer from the restrictions of temporal, earthly history. Data might even be falsified or disregarded ‘for the sake of Heaven’ in order to justify the continued existence of sacred institutions.34 A conscientious exemplarist such as Peter the Venerable preferred to report only those events he had himself witnessed, or which had been narrated to him by reliable persons, rather than rote repetition of precedents. Some hagiographers, such as the Dominican Theodore of Apolda in his life (ca. 1289) of Elizabeth of Thuringia, expressed a healthy skepticism concerning unsubstantiated miracles, saying, ‘I have heard some outstanding miracles which, because of their dubious reporters, I have avoided recording’.35 This suggests that the rigorous demand for proof which the 32 See A.J. Festugière, ‘Lieux communs littéraires et thèmes de folklore dans l’Hagiographie primitive’, Wiener Studien. Zeitschrift für klassische Philologie, 83 (1960), 123–52; Thomas F. Crane (ed.), The «exempla» or illustrative stories from the «sermones vulgares» of Jacques de Vitry (London, 1890), xv–cxvi; Jean-Claude Schmitt, ‘Receuils franciscains d’ ‘exempla’ et perfectionnement des techniques intellectuals du xiiie au xve siècle’, Bibliothèque d’Ecole des chartes, 135 (1977), 5–21 indicates that Welter identified at least 46 collections of exempla produced between 1200 and 1500; see Giuseppe Gatto, ‘Le voyage au paradis. Le christianisation des traditions folkloriques au Moyen Age’, Annales. Economies, Sociétés, Civilisations, 34 (1979), 929–42 for the elevation of oral tradition into written by the learned. 33 René Latourelle, ‘Miracle’, Dictionnaire de la spiritualité’, 15 vols. (Paris, 1937–90), X.3: 1274–1286; Denise Bouthiller and Jean-Pierre Torrel, ‘De la légende à l’histoire, Le traitement du «miracle» chez Pierre le Venérable et chez son biographe Raoul de Sully’, Cahiers de civilisation médiévale, xe–xiie siècles, 25 (1982), 81–99. 34 Baudouin de Gaiffier, ‘Mentalité de l’hagiographie médiéval d’après quelques travaux récents’, Analecta bollandiana, 86 (1968), 391–9; Horst Fuhrmann, ‘Die Falschungen im Mittelalter: Überliefungen zum mittelalterlichen Wahrheitsbegriff ’, Historische Zeitschrift, 197 (1963), 529–54. 35 Theodore of Apolda, Vita beatae Elisabethae, in J. Basnage and Canisius (eds), Monumentorum ecclesiasticorum et historicum sive Henrici Canisii Lectiones antiquae (Antwerp, 1725), 4: 131: ‘quaedam

36

Miracles and Wonders

canonists and theologians sought had reached the ears of the hagiographer. Caesarius of Heisterbach in his life of the martyred Engelbert of Cologne (1225), speaking of the small number of miracles performed by SS. Agilolfus and Evergislus, said: ‘After death they in fact performed very few miracles, because they didn’t have to do so, since before that their most holy lives could be commended.’36 The author of the life and miracles of Stanislaus of Krakow likewise suggested that there is indeed no such phenomenon as a miracle, since God is capable of everything; nevertheless, the merits of the saints combined with faith in God, the source of all good, may make the seemingly impossible possible.37 Reliance on reliable sources likewise might extend to the authors of the legendaries that often provided the raw material on which Sermones de sanctis were based. The Dominican inquisitor Bernard Gui (1261/1262–1331) composed a widely distributed legendary, the Speculum sanctorale (1324–1329), which also contains abbreviated saints’ lives devoted to more contemporary figures. It was written at the request of the Dominican Minister-general Berengar of Landorre and presented to the future Clement VI, Pierre Roger. He explicitly states that the lives of Celestine V and Thomas Aquinas were based on the canonization record and cites specific miracles drawn from the official documents.38 Gui cites nine of Thomas’s miracles and notes eight miracles performed posthumously by Elizabeth of Thuringia. His direct quotation from the saint seems to come from the testimony of her four maidservants, which was the major source for knowledge of her earlier life and acts of charity. Nevertheless, the temptation to report undocumented, questionable miracles, and thus do scandalous damage to the church, required a reasoned treatment of the nature of the true miracle. According to the standards of natural philosophy, the visible praeclara audivi miracula, quae propter dubios relatores scribere formidavi.’ 36 Caesarius of Heisterbach, Vita, passio et miracula S. Engelbert, in AA.SS, 7 November III: 665. On Engelbert see Jacqueline E. Jung, ‘From Jericho to Jerusalem: The Violent Transformation of Archbishop Engelbert of Cologne’, in Caroline Walker Bynum and Paul Freedman (eds), Last Things. Death and the Apocalypse in the Middle Ages (Philadelphia, 2000), 60–82. On the greater stress laid on miracles in life rather than posthumously, see Giulia Barone, ‘La santità nel processi di canonizzazione del ‘300’, Santi e santità nel secolo xiv. Atti del xv Congresso internzaionale, Assisi, 15–16–17 ottobre 1987 (Perugia, 1989), 55–78. 37 John Dlugos, Vita Stanislai, in AA.SS, 7 May II: 220F; Wojciech Ketrzyński (ed.), Vita et miracula S. Stanislai episcopi Cracoviensis, in Monumenta poloniae historica, 6 vols. (Warsaw, 1960), 4: 267: ‘Notandum, quid in hiis et consimilibus miraculis, si divine virtutis pensatur operacio nullum est miraculum quia omnia possibilia sunt apud Deum. Si autem sanctorum meritum attenditur et fidei donum, Deus, in quo cuncta bona procedunt, hoc per eos operatur bonum, ut impleatur illud dictum ewangelicum: Qui in me credit opera, que ego facio, et ipse faciet et maiora horum faciet.’ This Vita minor is based on his canonization protocol. 38 Bernard Gui, Legenda de sanctis, in Paris ms BNf, ms 5406. Celestine no. 88, fols. 83v–85v: ‘ex libro canonizationis’ and ‘hic ex praedicta vita canonizationis eiusdem’; Thomas Aquinas no. 46 fols. 46v–55v, Bernard of Clairvaux no. 140 fols. 140r–147v, Louis IX no. 152 fols. 152r–155v, Francis no. 177 fols. 177r–181v, Elizabeth of Thuringia no. 212 fols. 212v–216r, Anthony of Padua no. 99 fols. 99v–101v, Edward the Confessor fols. 184r–184v, Dominic no. 124 fols. 124v–136r. In ms Paris BNf Lat 5407, these lives appear elsewhere. There are also collections of miscellaneous miracles, which could be mined by the preacher. See for example the late thirteenth century collection, Historiae et miracula, in ms Stiftsbibliothek Admont 781, 89r–104v.

The Miracle in Contemporary Sermons

37

world may be exploited as a means of illustrating certain eternal moral truths. As Peter Damian had said, ‘The natural acts of beasts are to be found with the aid of spiritual understanding in the conduct of men; just as in men one may discover what pertains to the angels’. 39 Bernard Silvestris noted that ‘the visible world is a certain book having divinity intrinsically written upon it’.40 The encyclopedist Bartholomew the Englishman (ca. 1230) argued that ‘it is not possible for the soul to achieve contemplation of the invisible unless it has achieved understanding of the visible’.41 His lead was followed by the Dominican John San Gemignano (1260/1270–after 1333), whose widely known aid to preachers, the Summa de exemplis et similitudinibus rerum (1323), provided material from natural history as a resource for the messages of the Faith.42 The Paris theologian Radulphus Ardens stated that the miracle also serves a didactic role, since by carrying out miracles in the visible world, the believers more readily accept what the saintly preacher says about the invisible.43 Odo of Châteauroux also suggested in a sermon directed against the heretics that Jesus had performed corporeal, visible miracles, while the heretics read miracle stories in a spiritual manner.44 Both Odo and Radulphus, who were active at the University of Paris, were presumably referring to the heretical Cathars, for whom the physical world was a creation of Satan and, in their eyes would thus not be the proper vehicle for the miraculous. Another Paris theologian, William of Auvergne, argued that the heretics, philosophers and speculative theologians turn the world upside down. Children for them replace patriarchs, lying preachers stand instead of prophets, the lustful instead of virgins. Philosophers observe creatures rather than the Creator. Heretics replace life with death. Irregular, disobedient monks replace true monks.45 Miracles in which the elements of nature may be miraculously changed, such as the transformation of water into wine or the multiplication of the loaves and fishes illustrate the divine mastery of faith over the created world and were perhaps the most effective means of bringing nonbelievers to the faith. Nevertheless, the medieval preacher preferred to deemphasize the miraculous in hagiography in favor of its moral and ethical goals. Therefore, despite the vast reservoir of sermons which have 39 40

194.

Peter Damian, De bono religiosi status, in PL, 145: 767. Cited in Judson Boyce Allen, The Ethical Poetic of the Later Middle Ages (Toronto, 1982),

41 Barthomoaeus Anglicus, De rerum proprietatibus, Georg Barthold (ed.) (Frankfurt, 1601), praefatio, 1–2. 42 For the growing use of references to nature in sermons see G. Hasenohr, ‘Un receuil des distinctiones bilingue du debut du xive siècle: le manuscript 99 de la Bibliothèque municipale de Charleville’, Romania, 99 (1978), 48. A good example of the use of nature imagery is Konrad of Megenberg, Vita Erhardi, c. 4, in AA.SS, 8 January I: 541–4. 43 Radulphus Ardens, Homiliae de sanctis, Sermo de Matthaeo, in PL, 155: 1518. On Radulphus, see F. Courth, ‘Radulfus Ardens’, Lexikon des Mittelalters, 9 vols. to date, Robert Auty et al. (eds) (Munich, 1977–1999), 7: 393–4. 44 Odo of Châteauroux, Sermo XCI in Dom. XVI PP. Contra hereticos: ‘Ecce homo quidam hydropicus erat.’, in Jean-Baptiste Pitra (ed.), Analecta sacra spicilegio Solesmensis parata altera Continuatio, 2 vols. (Paris, 1885–1888), 2: 281. 45 M.M. Davy, Les sermons universitaires parisiens de 1230–1231 (Paris, 1931), 149–53 for a sermon delivered on 31 October 1230.

Miracles and Wonders

38

survived, the miracles of the saints often received scant attention compared to the saint’s virtuous life, and were often used to illustrate the moral messages of the Faith. John of San Gemignano noted that the miraculous perpetual incorruptibility of the saint’s body after death (which, along with a sweet odor is often one of the first signs of sanctity) is merely a reflection of the innocent absence of moral defects during the saint’s lifetime.46 Henry of Friemar (d. 1340), for example, in his sermon on Bernard of Clairvaux stressed that his control over inanimate objects was a byproduct of his character and his teachings. Thus, torrential rain ceased, a demon was exorcized and a thieving soldier became penitent after the saint uttered wise and moral remarks.47 Johannes Herolt, suggested a tripartite role of the Sermones des sanctis: 1) to stress the moral qualities of the saint’s life; 2) to provide simple folk with advice on how to mend their ways by following the saint’s example; and, 3) to summarize the saint’s most important miracles, all of which would serve as illustrations of the message of penance.48 As the anonymous editor of a contemporary collection of miracle stories to be inserted in popular sermons said, the aim is ‘to edify the believers, turn the hearts of evil persons to the good, and provoke sinners to penance’. The Augustinian Jordan of Quedlinburg (ca. 1300–1380), for example, in his sermon for the second Sunday in Advent (based on Luke 7: 22) regarded the blind who regain their sight as a metaphor for those who reach knowledge of God through understanding, and the lepers who are cured as those who have been purified through removal of the taint of sin.49 Jordan employs the increasingly common metaphor of the heavenly hierarchy as a curia regis, in which Christ presides as king, the Virgin as queen and the saints parallel the knights in an earthly court.50 Therefore, descriptions of desperate situations caused by natural disasters (the products of divine anger) represented for Herolt an opportunity to encourage his flock to invoke divine assistance. The miracle was to be invariably presented as a means of directing his listeners to the transcendent power of God; and in his sermon on Peter Martyr he quotes William of Lyons [Auvergne?] to the effect that no other faith or sect besides Christianity is confirmed by miracles.51 In his Sermo in dominica duodecima Herolt sought to frighten his listeners into yielding to the will of God through the illustrative use of rescue miracles in which believers are endangered by the perils of nature.52 To John of San Gemignano, Sermones funebres (Lyons, 1499), Dist. III. Sermo 1A; see JohannesBaptist Schneyer, Reportorium der lateinischen Sermones des Mittelalters für die Zeit von 1150–1350, 9 vols. (Munster, 1970–1980), 3: 722. This collection contains model sermons for the dead, including popes, physicians, notaries, judges, the nobility, the young, the old, religious etc. 47 Henry of Friemar, Opus sermonum de sanctis (Hagenau, 1513), De sancto Bernardo, Sermo II, fol. CXIIIvb. For sermons on Elizabeth of Thuringia, see sermons clxxxixv–cxciiiv. 48 Johannes Herolt, Sermones discipuli de tempore et sanctis cum Promptuario exemplorum (Strasbourg, 1492), 236r ff. 49 Jordan of Quedlinburg, Postillae de tempore (Strassbourg, 1483), XV. Sermo dominica secunda in Adventu, fols. 17r–18v; see Schneyer, Reportorium, iii, 802–864 (p. 803). 50 Jordan of Quedlinburg, Sermones Dan de sanctis (Strassburg, ca. 1476), Sermo CLXXXXII, De omnibus sanctis, Sermo primo. Sermo cclxvii–CCLXXI deals with particular groups, such as soldiers (CCLXVII), the nobility (CCLXVII), merchants (CCLXVII), those involved in trade (de negociatoribus) (CCLXIX), scholars (CCLXX), and clerics (CCLXXI). 51 Herolt, Sermo XVIII, 256r. 52 Ibid., Sermo CVIII, 154v–155r. 46

The Miracle in Contemporary Sermons

39

illustrate how one should fearfully invoke God’s help and seek mercy upon hearing the bells which warn of a coming storm, Herolt tells of three sleeping youths awoken by a tempest at night. One got up to pray, while the others derided him. The mockers were forthwith struck dead by lightening. In another example, he reported visiting England when an abundant grain harvest was anticipated. But due to a plague of flies caused by God’s ire, hardly any grain could be found. In a third case, he cited the example of two religious who had prayed for rain, one with serenity, the other without. The land of the first was blessed with abundance, while the other was sterile. His sermon on St Nicholas stressed God’s power over the ‘elements, bodies, souls, death and demons’.53 Of all the miracles which had been attributed to Nicholas, Herolt chose to stress not the cases of therapeutic healing, but rather the kinds of drowning, theft and false imprisonment which had become dominant themes in contemporary miracle collections. He cites: sailors saved from a tempest by invoking Nicholas; a boy saved from drowning in return for the promise of a waxen offering equal to the child’s weight; a man who had been robbed and tied to a tree by thieves; and a man unjustly imprisoned and tied with the kind of chains which Herolt had seen himself. One of the most noteworthy innovations of late medieval hagiography and preaching was the humanistic integration of heroes, examples and aphorisms found in classical, pagan sources as precursors and models for Christian sanctity.54 The Biblical exegete Pierre Bersuire (d. 1362), who translated Livy into French, placed pagan mirabilia side by side with Christian miracles in his discussion of the miracle as evidence of supernatural intervention; and he cited liberally from Aristotle, Livy, Pliny etc.55 Maffeo Vegio, in addition to relying on patriotic and Scriptural sources, adapted classical allusions to sacred history. His life (1445) of Pope Celestine V, although based on traditional hagiographical texts, nevertheless made use of Pliny, Valerius Maximus, Virgil and Tacitus for topical and stylistic material.56 The 1457 compiler of the life of the child-saint Rose of Viterbo (d. 1252) relied on Seneca along with Augustine for his argument that the sanctity of the child is more admirable than that of the adult.57 Pierre d’Ailly’s first sermon on the feast of St Louis delivered at the council of Constance in 1417, represents a fine example of this increasing integration of classical sources as a means of praising the nobility and antiquity of the French people and their sovereign.58 The honest, incorruptible virtues of Louis IX are supported by aphorisms from Terence and Seneca and confirmed by Jerome as those virtues necessary for the Ibid., Sermo IIII, 236r–v. Guillaume Mollat, ‘L’oeuvre oratoire de Clément VI’, Archives d’histoire docrinale et littéraire du moyen âge, 3 (1928), 268 notes the use of Valerius Maximus, Cassiodorus and Seneca. 55 Pierre Bersuire, Opera omnia, 3 vols. (Antwerp, 1609), Reductio moralis, XIV: 586–7; Dictionarium, 1020–1022; on the introduction of ancient biographical models see Eric Cochrane, Historians and Historiography in the Italian Renaissance (Chicago, 1981), 292–442. 56 Maffeo Vegio, Vita Coelestini V, Franz X. Seppelt (ed.), in Monumenta Coelestiniana. Quellen zur Geschichte des Papstes Coelestin V (Paderborn, 1921), 183–208. 57 Giuseppe Abate (ed.), ‘S. Rosa da Viterbo, terziaria francescana (1233–1251): Fonte storiche della vita e loro revisione critica’, Miscellanea francescana, 52 (1952), 232–53. 58 Pierre d’Ailly, Tractatus et sermones (Strassbourg, 1490), Sermo primus de sancto Ludovico, and De sancto Dominico sermo; see also his life of Celestine V (ca. 1408), Vita Petri, Seppelt (ed.), Monumenta Coelestiniana, 149–81. 53

54

Miracles and Wonders

40

performance of miracles and combat against the infidel. The Sybilline references to Cassandra and Claudia are paired with the life of Martin of Tours by Sulpicius Severus; the noble virtues of the Gallic warrior are drawn from Roman histories; while Louis is compared in turns to both David and Marius (with Sallust as the source). The true miracle, which requires a good life and the invocation of the Lord’s name, is contrasted with the ‘false’ miracles of pagan literature. Again, in his sermon on St Dominic, d’Ailly notes that such pre-Christian heroes as Cato, Scipio, Socrates, and the Egyptian priesthood (whose lives were semi-monastic) share many Christian virtues. While much of the medieval baggage of sacred biography remained intact, the fifteenth century was to witness the adaptation of humanistic principles to the composition of hagiography. Sicco Polenton’s lives of Helen Enselmini and Anthony the Pilgrim, for example, illustrate the growing recognition of local patriotism as a legitimate element of the saint’s attraction. He noted that the many relics enshrined in Padua were one of the city’s chief sources of glory and pride.59 Such local patriotism could find contrary expression in the imposition of cults by conquering states on their newly-acquired territories. As noted, one of the most prolific preachers was Odo of Châteauroux (. Odo had served as chancellor of the University of Paris (1238–1244) and consecrated Louis IX’s Sainte-Chapelle at Paris (1248), where many important relics were housed. He was involved in the decision to burn the Talmud, may have written a refutation of the errors of the Talmud, was head of the Anagni commission appointed to examine Gerard of Borgo of San Donnino’s Joachitic Introductorius (1255), served with Louis IX in the Holy Land (1248–54) and was papal legate to France.60 Many of his sermons were highly topical, such as the sermon delivered on 18 March 1229 to the people of Paris on the occasion of the killing of several scholars of the new university.61 The sermons he preached at Paris in late 1230 and early 1231 attacked wealthy clergy, simoniacs, Jews, heretics, excommunicates, irregular monks and ‘gentiles’, i.e. other non-Christians.62 As dean of the Sacred College after 1254, Odo was involved in at least four canonization processes, and delivered sermons devoted to Philip of Bourges, Richard of Chichester and Hedwig of Silesia. Odo was responsible for collating and rubricating the documents and testimony concerning Richard which had been submitted to Rome after 1261 prior to his canonization on 22 January 1262.63 His panegyric to Richard 59 60

1675–8.

Sicco Polenton, Vita et visions B. Helenae, in AA.SS, 4 November I.2: 512. M.-M. Lebreton, ‘Eudes de Châteauroux’, Dictionniare de spiritualité, 4.2 (Paris, 1961),

61 André Callebaut, ‘Le sermon historique d’Eudes de Châteauroux à Paris le 18 mars 1229 autour de l’origine de la gréve universitaire de de l’enseignement des mendiants’, Archivum fratrum historicum, 28 (1935), 61–114. 62 M.M. Davy, Les sermons universitaires parisiens de 1230–1231 (Paris, 1931), 179–213. See also his sermon against the Jews, edited in David Behrman, ‘Volumina vilissima, a sermon of Eudes of Châteauroux on the Jews and their Talmud’, in Gilbert Dahan (ed.), Le brûlement de Talmud à Paris 1242–1244 (Paris, 1999), 191–209. I would like to thank Gábor Klaniczay for this reference. 63 David Jones (ed. and trans.), Saint Richard of Chichester. The sources for his life, in Sussex Record Society, vol. 79 (Lewes, 1995), 5–8. For the history of Hedwig’s canonizeion, in which Odo was

The Miracle in Contemporary Sermons

41

of Chichester was delivered between 1262 and 1273 and is based on the Biblical verse ‘Know ye that the Lord has made His holy one wonderful. The Lord will hear when I cry unto him’ (Psalms 4.4), which is usually applied to Jesus, but is here adapted to his subject, Richard.64 Odo notes that ‘lawful proofs’ (presumably the evidence gathered at Richard’s canonization process) attest to his virtuous life and miracles. He recounts the letters addressed to the pope in support of Richard’s canonization, the appointment of a commission of inquiry, and his canonization. Odo summarizes the testimony concerning his virtues, acts of charity, and his miracles, both during his life and posthumously. He provides a concise rationale for the performance of miracles by the saints, citing ‘God is wondrous in his saints’ (Psalms 67.36). God therefore demonstrates his omnipotence and unsurpassable wisdom by performing miracles outside, beyond and contrary to the laws of nature. These acts cannot be equaled by man and are beyond our understanding and confirm the truth of miracles which occurred in the past. Although He certainly does not require the saints to perform such miracles, He rewards them in this way and shows how wonderful it is to serve the Lord. Miracles can only be performed by Catholics, and, according to Odo, even Mohammed allegedly admitted he could not perform miracles, which will attract persons in even the remotest places to turn to the faith. Probably since Richard was himself a bishop, Odo takes note of laymen who dwell in the city, who are hostile to the clergy, but are confounded by the fact that God glorifies the clergy and bishops. The same manuscript containing Odo’s sermon on Richard, and which contains 129 sermons on saints, also includes two sermons devoted to Archbishop Philip of Bourges (d. 1261). As a fellow countryman, a canon and former chancellor of Bourges (1230–1237), Odo was well acquainted with Philip and had also been charged with collating the material gathered for his planned canonization. This sermon barely mentions Philip’s miracles, perhaps because they had not yet been approved by the curia and Odo could thus not be sure of citing authorized miracles.65 His sermons delivered at chapters-general of the Franciscan order, probably in 1265–1269 attempted to defend the miracle of Francis’s stigmata against the calumnies of the secular clergy. Glorifying the achievements of the Dominican and Franciscan orders, he sought peace and concord among the religious, fearing that discord would be readily exploited by the heretics. Francis is placed alongside Benedict and Augustine as a great benefactor of the religious for having planted the seeds that led to the establishment of three orders, i.e. the Franciscans, the Poor Clares and the penitential orders.66

involved, see Joseph Gottschalk, St Hedwig. Herzogin von Schlesien (Cologne, 1964), 274–85. 64 Jones, Richard of Chichester, 75–80. This is transcribed and translated from the single manuscript. Rome ms, Bibliotheca Angelica 157. On the manuscript, see H. Narducci, Catalogus codicum manuscriptorum, praeter Graecos et Orientales in Bibliotheca Angelica olim Coenobii Sancti Augustini de Urbe (Rome, 1893); see also J.B. Pitra (ed.), Analecta novissima Spicilegii Solosmensis altera continuatio, 2 vols. (Tusculum 1888), 2: 288–92 for excerpts of the sermon on Richard. 65 Rome ms, Bibliotheca Angelica, ms 157, 66 F. Gratien (ed.), ‘Sermons franciscains du Cardinal Eudes de Châteauroux (+ 1273)’, Études franciscaines, 29 (1913), 171–95, 647–55; 30 (1913), 291–317. See also A. Walz (ed.), ‘Odo de Castro Radulphi sermones sex de Sancto Dominico’, in Analecta sacri ordinis Praedicatorum, 33 (1925), 171–223.

42

Miracles and Wonders

Clement VI: Theory and Practice of Papal Canonization The marriage of theological theory and canonical practice reached its peak during the pontificate of the Benedictine Pope Clement VI (d. 1352). A master of theology at Paris and Benedictine at Chaise-Dieu, he had served in a series of bishoprics before assuming the papal tiara and promulgated the doctrine of the ‘treasury of good works’ of Jesus and the saints on which Christians could draw. Clement was engaged in the practical task of determining which candidates were worthy of canonization and was called upon to apply the theology voiced by theologians and preachers to papal policy. He firmly reiterated the arguments in favor of papal infallibility and the exclusive right of the pope to canonize that had formally been established by Pope Alexander III. His collection of sermons, the Collationes, written both before and during his pontificate, survive in at least ninety manuscripts and is of capital importance for the study of the medieval notion of the miraculous.67 Sermons on such relatively recent saints as Louis of Toulouse, Thomas Aquinas, Louis IX and Yves of Tréguier all make direct use of the canonization record, and follow hagiographical tradition by citing precedents of earlier saints.68 Three panegyrics on Thomas Aquinas, probably delivered in 1324, 1326 and 1340–1342, appear to be based on William of Tocco’s life of the saint. Clement notes the performance of a hundred miracles, but prefers to cite only those which are mentioned in John XXII’s bull of canonization. In one sermon Clement cites merely four of Thomas’ miracles, in another all eleven that appear in the bull.69 Clement attempted to defend the great theologian against charges of heresy that had been leveled against him by the Spiritual Franciscans and his other writings indicate that he was a leading disciple of the Angelic Doctor.70 His Collationes (part of a series of eleven delivered by various ecclesiastics)71 delivered at Avignon on the occasion of the canonization of the patron saint of lawyers Yves of Tréguier on 18 and 19 May 1347 contains a long discussion of the nature of miracle and the differences between true miracles or magic. His arguments often parallel the 67 For his sermons, I have used Clement VI, Collationes, Paris ms, Bibliothèque S. Geneviève 240, Sermo factus per dominem Clementem in canonizatione Beati Yvonis, ‘Exulta et lauda habitatio Sion quia magnus in medio tui sanctus Israel [Isaiah 12.6]’, fols. 26r–41v. See Collationes, 37v. His second sermon on Yves is, Sermo factus per dominem Clementem papatum sextum in canonizationis sancti Yvonis, ‘Heloy, Heloy [Mark 15.34]’, fols. 528r–542v. For a partial transcription of ‘Exulta’ based on Munich ms, CLM ms 18205, fols. 49c–66b, see Josep Perarnau, ‘El sermó di Climent viè amb la fórmula de la canonització de Sant lu’, Estudios franciscanos, 82 (1981), 117–23. In Collationes, fol. 37v he says: ‘Deus non permittat ecclesiam in talibus errare.’ 68 Clement VI, Collationes, 32vb on Stephen as a precedent, 26r–v, 28v, 30r on Malachy, based on the life by Bernard of Clairvaux, Ambrose’s life of Eusebius and Gregory’s homilies. In the sermon on Louis of Toulouse, ‘Corona fratrum quasi plantation cedri’, 495r he cites Moses, Simon Magus and others as precedents. 69 Collationes, 197v; see also 205r: ‘Et ut solum accipiam illa que sunt certa et approbata dominus papa in bulla sue canonizationis ponit decem.’ 70 M.-H. Laurent, ‘Pierre Roger et Thomas d’Aquin’, Revue thomiste, 14 (1931), 157–73. See Collationes, 193r– 207v, 397v–407. For a partial edition of the third sermon, see J.J. Berthier, Doctor communis (Rome, 1914), 56–61. 71 AA.SS, 19 May IV: 538, §3,and 578, col. 2, only give brief extracts of the papal sermons on the grounds that they are of little importance to the historian.

The Miracle in Contemporary Sermons

43

work of Engelbert of Admont or Thomas Aquinas. Similar arguments also appear in his sermon devoted to Louis of Toulouse, which is based on both the canonization bull and the records of Louis’ canonization.73 As cardinal bishop of St Priscus, Clement had himself served on the commission appointed by Pope John XXII to examine Yves’ canonization record, which had been submitted to the Sacred College in 1331 following an earlier petition to Pope Clement V.74 Of the 100 miracles attributed to Yves by 191 witnesses, Clement cites merely 13, which he believed had been proven more reliably. Most of these deal with children.75 Among the cited miracles are those in which the archbishop of Narbonne (who was among those who delivered a panegyric in Yves’ honour), the penitentiary of Hungary, a papal proctor, and the nephew of a certain master Lawrence were assisted by the saint.76 Clement’s summaries appear to come directly from the summarium vitae which had been prepared for the curia prior to the canonization. Following both Aquinas and Engelbert, Clement classifies the genres of miracle and discusses whether the performance of miracles proves sanctity, arguing that miracles are not sufficient grounds since in Scripture there are examples of the performance of miracles by persons who were clearly not doing God’s work.77 Magicians and others who make a pact with the Devil (himself a fallen angel) perform acts which to ignorant persons may appear to be miracles, since they possess the skill, given them by Satan, to activate the seeds potential in nature.78 Satan and his minions have the power to create illusions so that people may believe something has occurred which in reality has not taken place.79 Unlike these imposters, Yves’ miracles have occurred continuously 72

Schneyer, Reportorium, iv, 757–69; G. Mollat, ‘L’oeuvre oratoire de Clément VI’, Archives d’histoire docrinale et littéraire du moyen âge, 3 (1928), 239–74; P. Schmitz, ‘Les sermons et discours de Clément VI, O.S.B.’, Revue bénédictine, 41 (1929), 15–34; A. Maier, ‘Das literarische Nachlass des Petrus Rogerii (Clemens VI.) in der Borghesiana’, Revue de théologie ancienne et médièvale, 15 (1948), 332–56, 72–98; M.-H. Laurent, ‘Pierre Roger et Thomas d’Aquin’, Revue thomiste, 14 (1931), 157– 73. In general see Diana Wood, Clement VI. The Pontificate and Ideas of an Avignon Pope (Cambridge, 1989), 14–18. 73 Clement VI, Collationes, fols. 487v–495v; Clement says (fol. 487v): ‘ego reperio in depositionibus testium pro canonizatione ipsius de xiii mortuis resuscitates.’ Francis of Meyronnes compared Louis to Elijah. See Frances of Meyronnes, Sermones dominicales (Bologna, 1493), Sermo in festo Ludovici ordinis minorum, 101r–103r. 74 Alexandre Masseron, Saint Yves d’après les temoins de sa vie (Paris, 1952); Jean Le Mappian, Yves de Tréguier (Paris, 1981). 75 Clement VI, Collationes, 32vb, 541r: ‘xiii quo videntur melius probate’. The Relatio processus de vita et miraculis sancti Yvonis was organized by the imperial and papal notary Petrus de Clousello, a cleric of Angoulême and two other notaries working at the order of the papal commissioners. See A. de la Borderie (ed.), Monuments originaux de l’histoire de St Yves (St-Brieuc, 1887), p. 7. 76 Collationes, 31v. 77 Clement VI, Collationes, ‘Corona fratrum quasi plantation cedri [Ecclesiastes 5]’, 33rb. 78 Ibid., 34r: ‘demones et mali hominess arte magica et per invocations demonum per pacta habita cum eis explicate vel implicate possunt facere effectus mirabilis qui ad pauca inspicientibus et minus sapientibus miraculosi videntur tamen non sunt.’ 79 Ibid., 35r: ‘possunt hoc facere per illusionem vel immutationem sensum … possunt enim aliqua facere apparere et in ymaginatione humana que tamen non sunt in rerum.’ 72

Miracles and Wonders

44

for 44 years since his death and took place even during his lifetime.80 As he remarks, ‘all miracles may be wonders, but not all wonders are miracles’.81 Like the scholastics, Clement relies on Aristotle to make the distinction between mirabilia (such as sleights of the hand, an eclipse of the sun or the attraction exerted by a magnet) and miracula.82 The greatest miracles are those which cannot be performed by nature; as when two bodies occupy the same place at the same time, the same object both moves and stands still simultaneously, or when the sea is divided so we can cross. The observation that even Satan’s minions may perform miracles is not original with Clement, although he provides the most concise summary of the precedents. For example, the early Paris theologian Radulphus Ardens (d. 1200), stated ‘Miracles may be performed by both good and evil [persons]’.83 These include: 1) the deeds of the magicians before Pharaoh (Exodus 7 and 8); 2) the revival of Samuel by the witch of Endor (I Kings 28: 8–25) the prophecies of Balaam (Numbers 24); the prophetic power of Caiphas (John 11: 49); the false prophets noted in Matthew 7: 22 and the false prophet who expelled demons in Jesus’ name (Mark 6; 9: 38); the false prophets who gave false signs and portents to seduce the elect (Mark 13: 22; Matthew 24: 44); the Pauline remark concerning the role of Satan as the force behind false prophets (II Thessalonians 2: 9–10) and the beast of the Apocalypse who leads men to worship him (Apocalypse 13: 12–15); and the demons exorcized by a priest noted in Acts 19: 13. Therefore, since even evil persons can perform miracles, they are not necessary for canonization. There are saints who performed few or no miracles, and in recent times they are less frequent than in the primitive church.84 Despite the evidence adduced for Yves’s canonization, Clement nevertheless admits that he only acted after he had been pressured by the Duke of Brittany and his barons, who came to the papal consistory in order to report two miracles attributed to Yves. In one of these miracles Duke Charles had himself first unsuccessfully sought medical assistance for a grave illness. In despair, he made a vow to Yves, and recovered completely. Three days later he undertook a pilgrimage by foot to his shrine. In the second case, a heavily laden boat (including knights) faced the danger of shipwreck. The merchants on board made a vow to Yves and all were saved. Charles was convinced that peace would be restored to his war-ridden country should Yves be canonized. Clement further reported that he had himself seen the saint in a dream admonishing

Ibid., 37v: ‘Miracula autem istius domini yvonis longam habuerunt continuationem qua et in vita sua facta et in morte et post mortem iam xliiiior annis et ultimam continuata. Ergo suppositus doctrina et vita eius miracula sunt argumenta efficacia ad eius canonizatione.’ 81 Ibid., 33v: ‘omnia miracula sint mirabilia, tamen non omnia mirabilia miracula sunt.’ 82 Collationes, fol. 33v: ‘Omnia miracula sint mirabilia tamen non omnia mirabilia sunt miracula.’ 83 Radulphus Ardens, Speculum naturale, in Paris Ms. BNf ms 3240, 134ra (vol. XII, c. 92), De potestate miraculorum: ‘Porro quod operatio miraculorum sit tam bonorum qua malorum; ostendum dominus in evangelio dicent.’ Ardens may have been a Carthusian, and after 1190 served as a chaplain at the court of Richard the Lionhearted. 84 Clement, Collationes, 8r: ‘etiam per malos fiant miracula. Ergo facere miracula non arguit aliquem esse canonizationem. Praeterea multi sancti viri qui non legantur multa fecisse miracula vel nulla et tamen alii minus sancti eis multa talia miracula leguntur fecisse.’ 80

The Miracle in Contemporary Sermons

45

him for delaying the advancement of his canonization; as a result, he instructed the proctors to hasten consideration of the case: That year, [he] appeared to me in my sleep, in order to reprimand me, because I had not advanced his canonization, saying ‘Lama sabactani’ [Matthew 27: 46, ‘Why hast thou abandoned me?’]. He knows whether it was a vision or dream. I don’t know. But I do know that I immediately summoned the proctor in this matter, and I reported my dream to him. From that point on I resolved to pursue this matter, and to say to Yves. ‘I will not fail thee, nor forsake thee’ [Joshua 1: 5].85

Others who asked the pope to act included the king and queen of France, the University of Paris, and a host of distinguished ecclesiastics. Clement reported that the saint’s fama had reached England, France, Spain, Gascony and Normandy, in addition to Brittany, where he was like the sun lighting up the firmament.86 Clement also translated and perhaps canonized Robert of Chaise-Dieu (the monastery in which the pope had himself resided) and patronized St Martial. 87 In sum, while the performance of the miracle remained one of the principle achievements of the saint, the learned preacher preferred to stress virtues and acts of charity and to use the life of the saint as a means of encouraging the believers to penance.88 The miracles were often enumerated in a cursory fashion, and if details were added, it was in order to illustrate one of the dogmas of the faith. Those with access to canonization documents made use of these sources in the preparation of the sermon. Nevertheless, a certain inconsistency characterized the work of the preachers and hagiographers. While evidence of the miraculous pervaded both the saint’s earthly and posthumous life as reported in the standard Vita et miracula and was necessary to confirm the public perception of holiness, the summarized version found in the sermon clearly de-emphasized the role of the supernatural, except in rare instances such as the sermons of Pope Clement VI. Thus, the scholastic theologians had produced a systematic theology of miracle that was given a more public voice in the flourishing sermon literature of the period. This theology of the miracle, based on Augustinian foundations and its application in canon law, continued in the fourteenth century, when procedural and structural recording of the miracle, whether under local or papal auspices, was refined, often under the expert guidance of notaries who were active in both ecclesiastical and secular courts. The miracle acquired a fixed form which satisfied certain uniform literary, theological and legal standards which made it amenable to comparative analysis; and which permitted 85 Collationes, 31v: ‘Et certe mihi in somniis in anno isto visus est dicere, et me increpare, quia ad eius Canonizationem non procedebam; quasi diceret ‘Lamma sabactani’. Utrum autem fuerit visio vel somnium, ipse scit, ego ignoro; sed bene scio, quod statim nisi pro Procuratore negotii et dixit sibi somnium: et ex tunc gessi in animo negotio memorato, et dicere isti D. Yvoni, “Non dimittam te, nec derelinquam”.’ See also 531rb–va; 541r. 86 Collationes, 529r. 87 Joseph van Straeten, ‘S. Robert de Chaise-Dieu. Sa canonisation–sa date de fête’, Analecta bollandiana, 82 (1964), 37–56. Robert’s bull of canonization is dated 1351, but was only published in the seventeenth century. 88 Collationes, 37v: ‘Patet ergo quod miracula sine doctrina vel cum doctrina sive vita bona non sunt sufficientia testimonia ad canonizationem.’

46

Miracles and Wonders

those entrusted with distinguishing questionable from genuine instances of divine intervention to reach a rational conclusion. Paradoxically, while the raw material of the miracle story had often been the transcendent experience of the unlettered, this resource was summarized, classified, organized, judged, and retransmitted to the unschooled by learned hagiographers and preachers as a means of cementing the lessons of the Faith. In this repackaged form the miracle reached the believers through sermons, liturgy and visual art.89 Nevertheless, in the ‘higher culture’ of the preacher’s podium, the miracle was subordinated to the virtues of the saint. Clement VI’s sermons reflect the increasing concern, that had also been echoed by both Thomas Aquinas and Engelbert of Admont, to distinguish between miracle and magic, saint and witch, demon or sorcerer.90 Relying on scholastic theology and canon law, this could only be adjudicated through a legal inquiry. Such difficulties, combined with the doubts voiced by the learned concerning the nature of miracles, may well explain the reluctance of preachers to dwell on the supernatural.

89 The use of a biography as the foundation for a cycle of frescoes is illustrated in the cult of Giovanna da Signa. See Saturnino Mencherini (ed.), ‘Vita e miracoli della Beata Giovanna da Signa’, Archivum fratrum historicum, 10 (1917), 367–86; Daniel Russo, ‘Jeanne da Signa ou l’iconographie au féminin. Études sur les fresques de l’église paroissale de Signa (milieu du xve siècle)’, Mélanges de l’École française de Rome. Moyen âge, 98 (1986), 201–218. 90 Peter Dinzelbacher, Heilige oder Hexen? Schicksäle auffälige Frauen in Mittelalter und Frühneuzeit (Zurich, 1995); Gábor Klaniczay, ‘Miraculum and Maleficium: Reflections Concerning Late Medieval Female Sainthood’, in Problems in the Historical Anthropology of Early Modern Europe, R. Po-Chia Hsia and R.E. Scribner (eds), in Wolfenbüttlicher Forschungen, 78 (1997), 49–71 deal with the difficulties of making such distinctions.

Chapter 4

‘Popular’ Voices of Doubt As we have seen, despite the considerable resources of preaching, confession, scholastic theology, and the visual arts which were at the church’s disposal in its dialogue with the believers concerning the supernatural and its intervention in the natural world, doubts persisted among various opponents of the true Faith. The continuing presence of opposition to the established religious consensus in the Middle Ages is a theme that has received scant attention, despite frequent accounts of voiced skepticism about the tenets of Christian belief found in medieval hagiography. Although the wholesale iconoclastic destruction of sacred and devotional objects during the English Reformation was never reached in the Middle Ages, nevertheless voices of doubt about the miraculous abound. As Susan Reynolds has noted, ‘the miracle stories are full of scoffers’. She has pointed out the rise of this phenomenon after the Fourth Lateran Council (1215), attributing it to the act of personal confession, which may have stimulated believers to think more deeply about their faith, thus provoking doubt. Those miracles in which a skeptic is typically punished for his or her impiety and then miraculously recovers after acts of penance, were regarded as the most effective tools in the battle against disbelief. As one of the witnesses at the canonization hearing of the Augustinian hermit John Buoni had said in 1252: As a result of hearing and seeing the miracles that God performs daily through the merits and prayers of Friar John, many of them [i.e. the heretical Patarenes] who did not believe in the faith of the holy Roman church were converted to the faith.

Papal policy clearly aimed at exploiting the canonization process as a tool against its ideological foes. Innocent IV instructed James of Velletri to look into the case of Stanislaus of Krakow, saying ‘you should inquire whether in the diocese of Krakow About this theme see Alexander Murray, ‘Piety and Impiety in Thirteenth-Century Italy’, Studies in Church History, 8 (1972), 83–106; Paolo Golinelli, ‘Il santo gabbato: Forme di incredulità nel mondo cittadino italiano’, in Città e culto dei santi nel medioevo italiano (Bologna, 1991), 63– 90; idem, ‘Il topos dell’incredulo punito nell’agiografia padana (secoli viii–xii)’, in Florentissima proles ecclesiae, D. Gobbi (ed.) (Trent, 1996), 305–325; Peter Dykema and Heiko Oberman (eds), Anticlericalism in Late Medieval and Early Modern Europe (Leiden, 1993); Benoît Garnot (ed.), Le clergé deliquant (XIIIe–XVIIIe siècle) (Dijon, 1995).  Eamon Duffy, The Stripping of the Altars: Traditional Religion in England, c. 1400–c. 1580 (New Haven, 1992), passim for this phenomenon.  Susan Reynolds, ‘Social Mentalities and the Case of Medieval Scepticism’, Transactions of the Royal Historical Society, Sixth series, 1 (1991), 21–41.  Golinelli, ‘Il topos’, 308–310 notes the schematic structure of such miracles.  Processus canonizationis Iohanni Boni, in AA.SS, 22 October IX: 834. 

Miracles and Wonders

48

there may be pagans or Ruthenian schismatics so that as a result of this, some benefit may come to souls in the region’. The first canonization bull issued by Pope Innocent III (12 January 1199) was devoted to the cloth merchant, the layman Homobonus of Cremona (d. 1197), who had fought against the Cathars and anticlerical Patarenes. In this important bull, which served as a model for Innocent and his successors, the pope argued that the signs and miracles witnessed by heretics at the sacred shrines of the saints would confound nonbelievers. Because ‘the angel of Satan may often transform himself into an angel of light’ (2 Corinthians 11: 14) and some heretics or agents of the Devil may even perform what appear to be miracles, Innocent argued that a virtuous life and miracles are necessary prerequisites for sainthood. Cremona, as Homobonus’ biographer said, was ‘a great city made foul by the evils of the heretics’. Homobonus’ chief mission was the conversion of such heretics to the true Faith. Another biographer wrote that: While still alive he demonstrated many other signs of his sanctity. No fewer occurred after his death, when, many heretics, befuddled by evil and disbelief, were converted due to the signs and words of the man of God.

One of his posthumous miracles concerned a demoniac who had refused the sacrament and holy water, a sure sign of Satan’s blasphemous intervention. A second figure whose sanctity was recognized by Innocent was Peter Parenzo, whom he appointed as rector of Orvieto in order to rid the city of heretics. He confronted the Florentine Cathar Diotosalvo, who was spreading his views in Orvieto, and ‘like Satan has transformed himself into an angel of light’.10 In the course of an encounter with Peter in April 1199, the pope had prophetically said, ‘My son, by the authority of the 

1: 610.

J.H. Sbaralea (ed.), Bullarium franciscanum romanorum pontificum, 27 vols. (Rome, 1759–1765),

Die Register Innozenz’ III, 7 vols. to date, O. Hageneder et al. (eds) (Rome, 1968–2003), I: n. 528 (530). See Roberto Paccioco, ‘“Virtus morum” e “virtus signorum”. La teoria della santità nelle lettere di canonizzazione di Innocenzio III’, Nuova rivisita storica, 70 (1986), 597–610. The Patarenes were a sect born in Milan in the eleventh century, opposed to clerical corruption. The term was, however, often used propagandistically against a wide variety of heretical sects.  Vita Sancti Homoboni, in F.S. Gatta, ‘Un antico codice reggiano su Omobono ‘il santo popolare’ di Cremona’, Bolletino storico cremonese, 7 (1942), 111. On his pursuit of heretics see P.D. Diehl, ‘The Papacy and the Suppression of Heresy in Italy, 1150–1254’ (UCLA unpublished doctoral dissertation 1991), 183–88; for the importance of Homobonus bull of canonization and his model of sanctity, see André Vauchez, ‘Innocent III, Sicard de Crémone et la canonisation de Saint Homebon (+ 1197)’, in Andrea Sommerlechner (ed.), Innocenzo III. Urbs et orbis. Atti del Congresso internazionale Roma, 9–15 settembre 1998, 2 vols. (Rome, 2003), 435–453.  Labentis annis, in D. Piazzi, Omobone di Cremona-Biografie dal xiii al xvi secolo (Cremona, 1991), 64. 10 The views of the Cathars are here summarized by the contemporary author of Peter’s life, written shortly after is death in 1200: ‘asserens, nihil esse Christi Corporis et Sanguinis Sacramentum; baptismum, quem Catholica tradit Ecclesia, nihil proficere ad salutem; orationes et eleemosynas ad absolutionis beneficium non proficere defunctorum; Beatum Silvestrum et omnes suos successores æternæ poenæ cruciatibus alligatos; omnia visibilia esse a diabolo facta et ejus subdita potestati; quemlibet bonum Beato Petro Apostolorum Principi meritis et præmiis 

‘Popular’ Voices of Doubt

49

Apostles St Peter and St Paul, I absolve you of all your sins if you are killed at the hands of heretics’. Peter was indeed assassinated by heretics shortly thereafter, in June 1199.11 One of the first posthumous recorded miracles of the saint reported that a heretical woman of the village of Sermignano, having heard of his death, had cried out, ‘Blessed is the Lord, since that evil man is dead, who so unjustly persecuted many people’.12 The affliction she immediately suffered in her mouth only disappeared after she made her penance at Peter’s tomb. As founder of the order primarily entrusted with the pursuit, persecution and conversion of heretics, Dominic’s biography contains many references to the battle against disbelief. The public debates he conducted with heretics drew a large number of ‘men and women, and wealthy persons from both the noble and popular classes’, in the course of which the books of the heretics spontaneously burst into flames, while Dominic’s books remained intact.13 He especially succeeded in drawing heretical noblewomen back to the Catholic fold and at Fanjeaux, despite the appearance among the heretics of a demon in the form of a cat, many converted to the faith, confounding the heretics, who had behaved ‘as wolves in sheep’s clothing under the pretext of simulated religion’.14 Those who spoke against Dominic’s sanctity or failed to honor his feast day were duly punished with divine revenge.15 The second Dominican saint continued this anti-heretical tradition. In the canonization records of the preacher and inquisitor Peter Martyr (1203–1252), it was reported that in the Dominican church at Florence a heretic youth had tarried along with his companions before a portrayal of the saint’s martyrdom, showing Peter being struck by the unsheathed sword of his assassin. When the youthful heretic spied the illustration of Peter’s martyrdom, he exclaimed, ‘Had I been there I would have struck him even harder!’.16 He immediately fell mute. Taken home by his companions, passing the church of St Michael, he went in, kneeled and prayed to St Peter, promising to abjure heresy should he be cured. After making his confession, he was restored to health, adæquari; quemliber malum cum Juda proditore poenam similem sustinere; addens alia nefanda, quæ in libello contra hæreticos edito possunt colligi manifeste’ (AA.SS, 21 May V: 86). 11 Vincenzo Natalini (ed.), S. Pietro Parenzo. La leggenda scritta dal Maestro Giovanni canonico di Orvieto, in Lateranum, N.S., 6 (Rome, 1936), 157. 12 AA.SS, 21 May V: 91. 13 Peter Ferrand, Legenda. S. Dominici, in Monumenta ordinis fratrum praedicatorum historica, 16 (Rome, 1933), 219–20: ‘Fiebant autem eo tempore frequentes inter catholicos et hereticos in partibus illis disputionum conflictus sub iudicibus disputatis; conveniebat ad hoc spectaculum virorum ac mulierum, divitum ac nobilium et populi multitudo.’ 14 Constantine of Orvieto, Legenda S. Dominici, in ibid., 299, 319–20: ‘Cum autem in partibus Tolosani quam plurimos etiam nobiles diabolica videret operatione delusos, quos lupi rapaces heretici in vestimentis ovium venientes ad se pretextu simulate religionis attraxerant …’ 15 Ibid., 349–50. The claims of Dominic’s alleged universal appeal, voiced by one witness as this canonization inquiry, however, seem rather exaggerated, considering the record of the Dominican order with respect to Jews and Muslims: ‘quod omnibus divitibus, pauperibus, iudeis et gentilibus, quod multi sunt in Yspania, se prebebat amabilem, et, ut vidit, ab omnibus amabatur, exceptis hereticis inimicis Ecclesie.’ See Acta canonizationis S. Dominici, in Monumenta ordinis fratrum praedicatorum historica, 16. 16 Thomas Agni de Lentino, Vita Petri Martyrii, in AA.SS, April III: 705A; James of Voragine, Legenda aurea, 2 vols., W.G. Ryan (trans.) (Princeton, 1993), 1: 260–261.

Miracles and Wonders

50

publicly recanting his error and reporting his experience in the course of a sermon delivered by his confessor. Thus, the tale of Peter’s own martyrdom at the hands of heretics, reported at a trial of his murderers, recounted at his canonization trial, included in the bull of canonization and the biographies in his honor, was illustrated in a fresco which itself was to become the medium for a miracle that was subsequently integrated into the hagiographical tradition. During Peter’s lifetime, Florence had been one of the most important centers of Peter’s anti-heretical crusade, specifically in 1245, when he reportedly led a gathering at the Dominican church of Santa Maria Novella to forcibly drive the heretical Patarenes out of the city.17 Suppliants of the Società established with Peter’s aid at Florence in order to serve as the eyes and ears of the Inquisition and later named after him (in addition to a Società dedicated to the Virgin) commemorated the event.18 While the office in Peter’s honor and sermons on the occasion of his saint’s day became the most widely known oral/aural expressions of his cult and reputation, Peter’s martyrdom visually reached a wider public through frescoes and other media. They retain in semiotic form the basic elements of the tale found in the earliest judicial sources. Some of these illustrations, as noted above, along with his relics, became the medium through which heretics were allegedly converted. This miracle is found in both Thomas de Agni Lentino’s biography and in James of Voragine’s Legenda aurea (ca. 1260).19 It suggests how the visual version of Peter’s miracles could have a direct impact on the ideological battle between Catholics and Cathars, who were the chief objects of Peter’s missionary activity. In all likelihood the young heretic’s conversion occurred shortly after the 1253 canonization, but before James of Voragine’s work, since by that time sacred art dedicated to Peter was already being produced. Immediately following his canonization it was ordered that Peter’s and Dominic’s names were to be recorded in the calendar, litanies were composed and illustrations were to appear in churches. This did not soften the heretics’ continuing hatred of Peter. One charge directed against the Dominicans was that his martyrdom was born as a ruse invented by the Dominicans in order to gather contributions to build fine palaces.20 Such opposition to Peter’s cult persisted. When the people of Albi, the great center of heresy, revolted against the Inquisition in 1302, they replaced images of Dominic and Peter with those of their leaders.21 A century and a half after his death, a Cathar detractor cast doubt on the sanctity of the Dominican inquisitor, saying:

Ibid., 76–7, 80, 150–152. G.-G. Meersseman, ‘Les Confréries de Saint-Pierre Martyr’, Archivum fratrum praedicatorum, 21 (1951), 62–6. 19 For the relationship between the various versions of the life of Peter, see Alain Boureau, ‘La patine hagiographique. Saint Pierre Martyr dans la Légende Dorée’, in ‘Scribere sanctorum, gesta’. Recueil d’études d’hagiographie médiévale offert à Guy Phillipart, Etienne Renard et al. (eds) (Turnhout, 2005), 359–66. 20 Thomas Agni de Lentino, Vita Petri Martyrii, in AA.SS, 29 April III: 713: ‘Ecce isti Praedicatores omnes lucrandi modum invenerunt; nam ut magnam possent pecuniam cumulare, et lata aedificare palatia novum nunc invenerunt Martyrem.’ 21 Bernard Gui, De fundatione et prioribus conventuum provinciarum Tolosonae et provinciae ordinis praedictorum, P.A. Amargier (ed.), in Monumena ordinis fratrum praedicatorum historica, 24 (Rome, 1961), 202–204. 17 18

‘Popular’ Voices of Doubt

51

Peter . . . was an evil man and the sinner and was damned to Hell because he persecuted Christ’s servants, namely the Waldensians and Cathars by whom St Peter was killed. The death of [a certain] Brother Jacopo Bechi was more valuable in God’s eyes than the death of the blessed martyr Peter.22

Medieval hagiography fulfilled a propagandistic role against heretical doctrine and all available media were harnessed to this end.23 Saints’ lives and miracles, themselves based on judicial evidence, at least since the twelfth century, became the programmatic basis of the liturgy, frescoes and other devotional art dedicated to the saint. Peter’s murder at the hands of Cathar heretics at Milan had first been reported in the context of a trial held shortly after his death aimed at identifying the murderers and bringing them to justice. The testimony of two conspirators survives.24 After his death, Peter’s body had been brought to the church of St Simpliciano, where miracles immediately occurred, and his passion was widely compared to that of Jesus. Shortly thereafter, a canonization hearing was held in accordance with accepted judicial procedure in the course of which deponents testified about his life, ministry, martyrdom and miracles. He was canonized in 1253 by Pope Innocent IV. In his bull the pope took note of the miracles performed at his tomb and attributed the conversion of heretics to the true Faith to the impression such events had made on the spectators.25 These documents served as the basis for the shortened versions of his life found in the widely consulted Legenda aurea (ca. 1260) by James of Voragine and Gerard of Fracheto’s Vitae fratrum (ca. 1260). Fracheto’s work (along with others) was the product of the call by Humbert of Romans, minister–general of the Dominican order, to gather material concerning the early members of the order. Dondaine has argued that the Vita Petri by the patriarch of Jerusalem Thomas Agni de Lentino is based on these earlier sources, including the canonization hearing, and may be dated to about 1275.26 This biography also includes reports of how the shirt of a heretic caught fire after he had mocked a youth who cherished a relic, a shred of the saint’s cloak; another heretic practically choked to death, a third turned mute, a fourth was thrown off his horse, while another was killed.27 22 Grado Merlo, ‘Pietro di Verona – S. Pietro martire. Difficoltà e proposte per lo studio di un inquisitore beatificato’, in Sofia Boesch-Gajano and Lucia Sebastiani (eds), Culti dei santi, istituzioni e classi sociali in età preindustriale (L’Aquila, 1984), 480 taken from a 1395 trial of heretics in Piedmont. 23 J. Köhler, ‘Die mittelalterliche Legende als Medium christlicher Verkündigung’, in Peter Dinzelbacher and Dieter R. Bauer (eds), Heiligenverehrung in Geschichte und Gegenwart (Ostfildern, 1990), 175–200. 24 J.S. Villa (ed.), ‘Processus per l’uccisione de S. Pietro Martire’, Archivio storico italiano, 4 (1877), 790–794. 25 AA.SS, April III: 702D: ‘Ad haec magna haereticorum et ipsorum credentium multitudo, cum tantam fidei adverterent efficaciam, et ad eam tot certis et apertis signorum indiciis, tamquam clamantibus quibusdam praeconibus, vocarentur, nec possent quasi tam validae illorum instantiae non parere; ad ipsius lucem fidei de sui erroris nubilo est conversa. Quid plura? his, inquam, et multis aliis miraculis gloriosis magnificavit Dominus Sanctum suum, et colendum exhibuit universis.’ 26 Antoine Dondaine, ‘Saint Pierre Martyre. Études’, in Archivum fratrum praedicatorum, 23 (1953), 66–162. 27 AA.SS, April III: 705.

52

Miracles and Wonders

Another opponent of heresy, who brought many nonbelievers to the faith despite his short ministry, was the Franciscan Anthony of Padua (1195–1231). For example, at Rimini the eloquence of his preaching was credited with converting all the heretics of the city and of strengthening the faith of the believers.28 In Toulouse, the hotbed of heresy, a mule who had been led to one of Anthony’s sermons by a nonbeliever, miraculously genuflected before the saint.29 The following account of one of his miracles is found in one of his many early biographies: A certain knight, who had been a heretic from the earliest age, sat down to a meal and heard reports of the miracles of the holy man. He mockingly threw a wine jug, which he held in his hand, from on high to the ground saying, ‘If Anthony should preserve this jug unbroken, I’ll then believe he is a saint.’ When it hit the ground, it miraculously remained whole. Putting aside his former errors, he began to believe in Christ with complete faith.30

Although he cites no specific miracles in his bull of canonization (1232), Gregory IX was quite explicit in stating that the signs and prodigies produced by Anthony would bring heretics, Jews and pagans to the faith.31 The mockery hurled at early Franciscans like Anthony is also found in the process of Ambrose of Massa’s miracles, in which it is reported that a woman made fun of his merits by calling him Ambrolio, i.e. ‘Spendthrift’, and was duly punished.32 These miracle stories were all intended as a warning to those who would disdain the saint or his miracles, whether heretics, Jews, infidels or merely Christians whose ‘faith had grown cold.’ Similar reports of the vengeance wrought against sceptics also appear in the lives of saints not conspicuous for involvement in the battle against disbelief. In his 1317 canonization bull of Louis of Toulouse (1272–1297), Pope John XXII included the following miracle among the fifteen confirmed miracles attributed to the saint: A certain man who had denigrated the miracles of this saint suffered from a contortion of his face, and his eyes were discolored for six days. He devotedly made a vow to the saint,

28 AA.SS, April III: 725C: ‘omnes haereticos ibi existentes convertit, et fideles roboratos in fide cum gaudio et benedictione remisit.’ 29 Ibid., 725. 30 Ibid., 717C. 31 Ibid., 724A: ‘Ut enim suae virtutis potentiam mirabiliter manifestet, et nostrae salutis causam misericorditer operetur; fideles suos, quos semper coronat in caelo, frequenter etiam honorat in seculo; ad eorum memorias signa faciens et prodigia, per quae pravitas confundatur haeretica, et fides Catholica confirmetur; fideles, mentis torpore discusso, ad boni operis excitentur instantiam; hæretici, depulsa in qua jacent caecitatis caligine, ab invia reducantur ad viam; et Judaei atque Pagani, vero lumine cognito, recurrant ad Christum lucem, viam, veritatem, et vitam. Unde Nos, carissimi, etsi non quantas debemus, quantas possumus gratias agimus gratiarum omnium Largitori; quod diebus nostris, ad confirmationem Catholicae fidei, et ad confusionem haereticae pravitatis, evidenter innovat signa, et mirabilia potenter immutat; faciens illos coruscare miraculis, qui fidem Catholicam, tam corde quam ore, nec non et opere, roborarunt.’ 32 Processus canonizationis B. Ambrosii Massani, in AA.SS., November IV: 597.

‘Popular’ Voices of Doubt

53

visiting his tomb and offering a waxen head. Before leaving the church, he was completely cured.33

As one of Louis’ biographers noted, such miracles were necessary ‘to strengthen the faith of Catholics, embarrass the stubbornness of the Jews, confound the errors of the heretics, and astound the ignorance of the pagans’.34 This summarizes those persons regarded as the prime objects of the miracles and ministry of the saints. John XXII in his bull of canonization claimed that Louis had led Jews and other non-believers to the baptismal font.35 Although initiated by Pope Boniface VIII, the inquiry into Louis’ life and miracles had begun under Clement V in 1308 at the church of Notre Dame de Marseille under Guy, bishop of Saintes and Raymund, bishop of Leictoure with the assistance of five procurators; the protocol was examined by a panel of cardinals before Louis’ canonization. The particular miracle cited in the bull of canonization had been reported by the victim himself, i.e. a 60 year old stonecutter of Marseille named Guillaume of Moissac, along with two of his fellow workers, aged 50 and 70.36 At the time of the events, two months after Louis’ burial in 1297, Guillaume was 49. He reported that on a Sunday in 1297 he had come to the Franciscan church in Marseille during mass, which was celebrated by a large throng bearing candles, images, heads and various statues in honor of Louis of Toulouse. When he saw this he said, ‘From now on the other saints in Paradise have little to do, since St Louis does everything’ (in the presence of one other friend, who was dead at the time of the inquiry). The moment he blurted this out, his mouth and lips contorted, his left eye became discolored (which he pointed out to the investigators), he lost all feeling, couldn’t talk and had difficulty eating. Everyone saw what had happened, but he couldn’t respond and, covering himself with his cloak, remained at home for three days. Returning to work for four days, Guillaume was mocked by his fellow workers at Philip Corder’s stoneworks in the carreria de Cordis, who said that his affliction was caused by his derisive words against the saint. One of his companions, Raymund de Solario, persuaded him to make a waxen head to be brought to Louis’ tomb. Guillaume then voiced contrition by stretching his hands out against the wall they were then building, imploring Louis for aid. On Saturday morning he went to the tomb with his waxen offering. When asked by one of the attending clerics why he was there, he was still unable to speak. But by the time he had returned home, he was cured. Guillaume then returned to the church and reported what had happened to the attending friar, swearing on the Gospels. His condition was witnessed by his wife and many others, and the miracle was well known in Marseille, Provence and surrounding areas. Guillaume’s testimony was supplemented by two other eyewitnesses. The stone mason Romeo de Ydier said that Guillaume had called Louis an ass, although Romeo Processus canonizationis et legendae variae, in Analecta Franciscana, 7 (Quaracchi 1951), 399 for bull. This miracle is also summarized in the Vita of Louis written in 1316 by John de Orta at the request of John XXII in Alban Heysse, ‘Documenta de vita S. Ludovici episcope Tolosani’, Archivum franciscanum historicum, 40 (1947), 134, n. 67. Margaret R. Toynbee St Louis of Toulouse and the process of canonisation in the 14th century (Manchester, 1929) on cult. 34 ‘Vita sancti Ludovici episcopi Tolosani’, Analecta bollandiana, 9 (1890), 289. 35 Ibid., 397. 36 Processus canonizationis, op. cit., 233–6. 33

Miracles and Wonders

54

warned him that he had spoken evil and would be punished. He also reported that after physicians had despaired of Guillaume’s condition, he turned to Louis. Although the cause of Guillaume’s condition may be subject to doubt, his cure as a result of pleas to Louis appears to have convinced the cardinals who, particularly under John XXII, had often expressed skepticism about the many miracles submitted to them for consideration. Unlike the miracles of retribution found in Peter Martyr’s file, which involved heretics, Guillaume’s may perhaps be subsumed among Louis’ ministry to those Christians whose ‘faith had grown cold,’ and were therefore in need of the restorative balm of miracle. A second case of doubt is found in Louis’ extensive file. Unlike the first case, the skeptic supplies an explanation for her doubts about Louis’ sanctity.37 The human characteristics of Louis of Toulouse had served as the subject of a conversation between two women of Marseille, Gaufrida Rossa, wife of a citizen of Marseille, and her cousin Beatrix Bruna on the feast of St Michael (29 September), perhaps in 1299. On their way to the church of St Michael of Marseille, Beatrix, who was probably a member of one of the confraternities established to support Louis’ cult, suggested they stop off at the Franciscan church where Louis’ relics lay, saying, ‘I want to go to the Friars Minors’ church in order to hold a vigil in honor of the blessed Louis because of the grace he has shown by kindly curing my daughter of a pain in her leg’. Gaufrida replied (several versions were reported), ‘Do you believe that this son of the lord king [Charles II of Naples] will be made a saint so quickly? The Minor Friars preach and say so in order to get lots of wax’. She allegedly continued: I will willingly accompany you to the Franciscan church, but I won’t hold a vigil there nor will I place a candle there to burn because I don’t believe that he is a saint; but I will make the sign of the cross as one does for any dead person; and I believe that the Friars Minor have invented this for the sake of filthy lucre and profit. I don’t believe that he is a saint, because he was a carnal man like any other.

The 15 year old Richardeta, the girl who had benefited from Louis’ benevolence, interrupted, ‘Mistress, did you even believe that he might be a saint like St Peter, and many others, who was a fisherman and carnal man? Especially since he was the son of a king and a man of holy and laudable life’. Her mother said that she had added ‘Didn’t the Apostles, who were carnal men and fishermen, make miracles?’. To which Gaufrida replied, ‘You can say anything you want, because I don’t believe any of it’. Richardeta further confirmed that Gaufrida had expressed an unwillingness to make any expenditure on St Louis, but would agree to make the sign of the cross and bless him (reciting seven Psalms), as she would for any other dead person. Shortly after leaving the church, Gaufrida’s head, face and throat swelled up, so she was unable to see. Her family was convinced this had been caused by her contemptuous words about the saint. Gaufrida averred: For certain, mistress, I believe this happened to me because of what I said about the blessed Louis when I told you that he isn’t a saint. Since then I have become penitent and spent the night humbly and devotedly asking him to forgive me for the evil words I said about him 37

Ibid., 236–9.

‘Popular’ Voices of Doubt

55

and to intercede with God concerning this illness in order to cure me of the suffering in my head and face.

Several days later, she was cured. All of the witnesses attributed Gaufrida’s subsequent headaches to her blasphemy. The first miracle, cited above, in which the stonemason Guillaume made blasphemous remarks, became ill, and was then cured, was included in the bull of canonization. Gaufrida’s case did not pass muster, perhaps because the reports of the conversation given by the three witnesses were not identical and, more importantly, there is no indication that Gaufrida had sought medical help for her affliction before resorting to the miraculous. By this time, proof that the miraculé had first sought a natural cure had become a sine qua non of any confirmed miracle. According to the account found in the canonization record, Gaufrida’s doubts appear to have arisen from several sources: 1) claims that the friars encouraged Louis’ cult out of greed; 2) suspicion about the undue speed that Louis was becoming a saint; and, 3) a suggestion that his royal position propelled him to sainthood, rather than the claims of true sanctity. Gaufrida does not express explicit doubt about miracles per se, merely about Louis’ ability to perform them. Similar sentiments were voiced by the stonecutter Nicholas Gaudentz, who tried to dissuade his wife from patronizing the shrine of Dorothy of Montau, saying, ‘Do you consider this Dorothy a saint, even though while married she bore many children? You shouldn’t believe it, nor will I’. This suggests that some considered chastity to be a necessary requirement for sainthood and the performance of miracles – a conclusion that can be drawn from the Church’s position on celibacy. Even the local priest had responded to reports of Dorothy’s sanctity to a visiting cleric by blaming the greed of the local canons, saying, ‘Wo man nit hin leget, da findt man auch nit, und wo man viel hin leget, da findt man auch viel ’.38 The possession of holy relics and the festivities surrounding their veneration were regarded as a means whereby the transcendent, divinely-sanctioned unity of the social polity was revitalized. New political entities sought sanctification through possession of holy relics which protected the community and defined its sacred space. Relics were jealously sought, sometimes even stolen (as during the sack of Constantinople during the Fourth Crusade in 1204, when many important relics were brought to the West) or forged. Victorious states often pillaged the defeated of their most sacred relics, returning home in triumph with their holy booty. Their miraculous inventio or discovery became the occasion for rejoicing and the building of a church or chapel. The chief miracle of Archbishop Philip of Bourges (d. 1261) in his lifetime had been the discovery of the relics of St Severa at the church of St Stephen.39 But what of those who failed to join in the general festivities, mocked and derided the efficacy of the relics, and thus threatened such long-cherished unity? One of the great miracles of the period was the discovery of the Cross and the instruments of the Passion engraved on the heart of Clare of Montefalco (1268–1308) which had been surgically removed after her death in August, 1308, which aroused the entire city and brought visitors from near and far.40 Several days Johannes of Marienwerder, Miracula B. Dorotheae, in AA.SS., 30 October XIII: 566. Vita sancti Philippi, in E. Martène and U. Durand (eds), Thesaurus novus anecdotorum (Paris, 1717–1726), III. 40 Enrico Menestò (ed.), Il processo di canonizzazione di Chiara da Montefalco (Perugia, 1984), 459–61. 38 39

56

Miracles and Wonders

after its discovery, a certain Simon dei Gilii of Spoleto, along with family and friends, including the podestà and other local notables, were shown the saint’s heart. Unable to refrain from laughter at the sight of the relic, he began to joke and mock it, comparing the heart to that of an animal. He was immediately stricken with a very serious nosebleed that could not be stanched. It only ceased after the priest placed the relic over his face, and he made a vow to God and St Clare. Much weakened by the event, he became a devotee of Clare’s monastery of Santa Croce, its relic and saint. Such a miracle was a sine qua non for the establishment of Clare’s cult in the face of opposition, particularly of the renegade, heretical Fraticelli, with whom she had debated in her lifetime. The earliest miracle collections had contained such examples of the vengeance wrought against those who doubted the power of God and his agents, as a foil to illustrate such power and to verify the authenticity of disputed relics. Civic regulation of the liturgical calendar and communal mobilization in support of a cult, its confraternity and chapel, are widespread features of late medieval piety. Opposition to the efficacy of the cult and the miracles it engendered might thus be regarded as treasonous to economic, political and social stability. And just as the saint possessed the power to heal, so he or she also had the power to do harm and take revenge against those who cast doubt on the efficacy of the relics. Blasphemy and the Miracle of Vengeance The most widespread verbal expression of doubt found in hagiographical sources was described as derisory or blasphemous words – the terms blasphemare, deridere, denegare, contemnare, and insultare, are used – directed against reports of miracles.41 In medieval theology, the term blasphemy was often confused with heresy (Augustine often used the terms interchangeably) and it is not always certain that a clear distinction was made between the two. Defined by Jerome as ‘insolent words directed against God’, blasphemy was linked to the sin against nature in the Code of Justinian as a crime which, by provoking God’s wrath, could lead to famine, earthquake and pestilence, and was thus punishable by death.42 Such an offense against God could occur in four forms, namely blasphemous thoughts, oral blasphemy, the publication of blasphemous writings, and acts of blasphemy. Aquinas classified it as a separate form of disbelief beside heresy, paganism, Judaism and apostasy.43 At the same time, because the saints praise God through their virtuous lives and miraculous deeds, words uttered against them were seen equally as brazen contempt for God, although speech against God 41 See e.g. Bonaventura, Legenda Francisci, in AA.SS, 4 October II: 746: ‘operibus et miraculorum signis impudentissime detrahebat’; Processus canonizationis … Thomae episcopi Herefordensis, in AA.SS, 2 October I: 648: ‘quae miraculis supradictis insultans.’ 42 Novella 77, in Corpus iuris civilis, 3 vols., T. Mommsen and P. Kruger (eds) (Berlin, 1908– 1944), Codex Iustiniani IV. Novellae, Coll. 6, Tit. VI, pref. C. I; see Leonard Levy, Treason against God. A History of the Offense of Blasphemy (New York, 1981), 103–113. See also Charles de Fresne Ducange, Glossarium mediae et infimae latinitatis, 10 vols. (Paris, 1904–1905), I, 636–37 (blasphemare) for some contemporary sources. 43 Thomas Aquinas, Summa theologiae, T.C. O’Brien et al. (eds), 61 vols. (New York, 1981), IIa–IIae, q. xiii, a.1, 3 and q. cxiii, proem.

‘Popular’ Voices of Doubt

57

might be termed ‘immediate blasphemy’ and against the saints ‘mediate blasphemy’. Contemporary moral treatises classified blasphemy as a form of ira (anger), a vice born out of disturbed reason, a product of carnal weakness and an imbalance of bile. One of the recommended remedies for anger was contemplation of the behavior of the saints, who repeatedly warn the believer not to quarrel and to put an end to indignation. The Speculum morale (1300?) makes no real distinction between blasphemy against God and the saints; and all of the illustrative examples cited in this work are drawn from hagiography, describing the vengeance wreaked on those who defiled the saint in word and deed.44 As the daughter of ira, the third capital sin, blasphemy could entail a variety of evil consequences, such as the loss of tranquility, peace of mind, grace, piety, justice, peace, social concord, and nobility of spirit; and it is a Pandora’s box which introduces many other evils. The prophecy of Ezekiel concerning the results of God’s anger against the rebellious people of Jerusalem for denying the laws of God was regarded as a normative description of the consequences of blasphemy: the fathers will eat their children, and those who remain will be scattered to the four winds. As a result of defiling God’s holy place, some would die of pestilence and famine; others would fall by the sword or be dispersed, pursued by a vengeful God, to suffer childlessness, pestilence, famine and slaughter. In Carolingian legislation, capital punishment was the prescribed punishment for blasphemy, although a variety of other penalties was available, including imprisonment on a diet of bread and water, the cutting off or slitting of the offender’s lips, branding the tongue with a hot iron, or cutting it out. Relying on the Roman precedent, Bonifacio de Vitalinis (d. ca. 1388) in his Tractatus super maleficiis called blasphemy the cause of famines, tempests and earthquakes.45 But the considerable Italian urban legislation was not uniform: the fines might vary, depending on the frequency of the offense; offenders might be plunged into a lake, river or sea; placed in a pillory or flogged; paraded through the city or imprisoned; their tongues might be stretched or cut out. Beginning in the late thirteenth century, as a form of disgrace and embarrassment, their caricatures might be drawn in public places and, in the case of the most serious forms of sacrilege, they might suffer capital punishment.46 The first references to blasphemy in French law, under Philip Augustus, were linked to the Jews, who had allegedly been overheard uttering blasphemies concerning Jesus; as a result, according to William Breton, in 1182 debts to the Jews were cancelled, they were expelled from the kingdom, and their synagogues were turned into churches. Further legislation against blasphemers was enacted in 1262–1265, 1268–1269, 1272, 1293 and 1339, providing heavy fines, imprisonment, beatings, mutilation and immersion in Vincent of Beauvais, Speculum morale (Douai, 1624), III, pars V, Dist. I–III; Thomas of Chobham, Summa confessorum, F. Bloomfield (ed.) (Louvain, 1968), 495; Robert of Flamborough, Liber poenitentialis, J.J. Firth (ed.) (Toronto, 1971), IV, c. 4; V, c. 5; Henricus de Segusio (Ostiensis), Summa aurea, N. Soranza (ed.) (Venice, 1586), fols. 256r–v; Vincent defines blasphemy as follows: ‘blasphemia est quando contumeliosa verba contra Dei bonitatem vel Sanctorum reverentiam proferuntur’ (Vincent, Speculum morale, col. 1180). 45 Georg Dahm, Das Strafrecht Italiens im ausgehenden Mittelalter (Berlin, 1931), 405–7. 46 Samuel Edgerton, Jr., Pictures and Punishment. Art and Criminal Prosecution during the Florentine Renaissance (Ithaca, 1985), 65. 44

Miracles and Wonders

58

water. Despite these regulations, in 1349, shortly after the Plague, Philip VI noted that the punishment of blasphemers had been much neglected and reaffirmed the existing penalties. The degree of compliance with the law cannot be ascertained. One of the few extant collections of sentences, taken from the Paris Châtelet, included the 1391 case of a carriage driver who had uttered a foul curse against God when asked to pay the tax on the import of some cloaks into Paris; he was pilloried and imprisoned; and in 1392, a proclamation condemning blasphemy was read out in all quarters of the city. Examples of prosecution for blasphemy of the saints or of miracles are not recorded.48 Although in legal sources the emphasis was laid on blasphemy against God, hagiographical sources are filled with expressions of doubt about the saints and their miracles. The underlying reasons why someone might voice contemptuous remarks are often always not stated explicitly in contemporary hagiography, but the detractor was invariably rewarded with some physical or mental disorder which disappeared once a penitential vow to provide some token contribution to the saint’s tomb had been uttered. Such diffuse mocking of miracles, saints or relics is no respecter of class, and one finds among the detractors: a scabinus of Temsche who had doubted the exorcism of demons performed by means of the relics of Amalberga in 1327; a nun of Bisabergh in Sweden (1376) who spoke against Bridget of Sweden; a tax farmer of Florence (1317) who derided the Servite Philip Benizi; and a carpenter of Marienwerder (1404) who spoke against Dorothy of Montau.49 Some of these reports of blasphemy are rather perfunctory, merely reporting the ill-chosen words and the punishment exacted. In 1338 a bow maker visiting Prague mocked two co-workers for attending the shrine of St Wenceslas and called the saint a ‘simpleton and dullard’; his tongue swelled up, a kind of divine imitation of the punishment meted out by secular authorities to blasphemers.50 Since blasphemy was traditionally classified under the sins of anger, it is fitting that such expressions of scorn for God, His miracles or the saints in hagiography should occur in a fit of pique.51 When William of Tocco and his Dominican companions came to Fossanova in 1319 in order to gather evidence in support of the canonization of Thomas of Aquinas, they asked the smithy Leonard of Piperno to shoe their two 47

47 Ordonnances des roys de France de la troisième race (Paris, 1723), I: 49, 101, 206; II: 282–3, 48; XII: 328–9; Recueils des historiens des Gaules et de la France, new edition, 24 vols. (Paris, 1869–1904), XVII: 66D, 126E. 48 Société des bibliophiles français (ed.), Registre criminel du Châtelet de Paris du 6 septembre 1389 au 18 mai 1392, 2 vols. (Paris, 1861), II: 353–7. 49 Miracula S. Amalbergae virginis, in AA.SS, 10 July III: 103; Nun of Vadstena, Vita Birgitte, in AA.SS, 8 October IV: 555; Vita Philippi Benizii, in AA.SS, 23 August IV: 712; Richard Stachnik (ed.), Die Akten des Kanonisationsprozesses Dorotheas von Montau von 1394 bis 1521, in Forschungen und Quellen zur Kirchen-und Kulturgeschichte Ostdeutschlands, 15 (Cologne, 1978), 41; Johannes of Marienwerder, Vita B. Dorotheae, AA.SS, 30 October XII: 565–6. 50 Miracula S. Winceslai, AA.SS, 28 September VII: 784. 51 Levy, Treason against God, 17, 22, 99, 103, 112, 113, 143; A. Molin, ‘Blasphéme et Blasphémateurs’, Dictionnaire de droit canonique, 7 vols., Raoul Naz et al. (eds) (Paris, 1924–1985), 2: cols. 902–910; V. Oblet, ‘Blasphème’, Dictionnaire de théologie catholique, 15 vols., A. Vacant et al. (eds) (Paris, 1908–1950), 2, pt. 1: cols. 907–910.

‘Popular’ Voices of Doubt

59

mules. Angered by the extra work, Leonard reportedly said, ‘These preachers who are handling the affairs of Brother Thomas are such trouble. If he’s such a holy man, let him make such a great miracle that these brethren will leave now and not remain here any longer’. Leonard suddenly lost the use of his right arm in the presence of his apprentices, and wasn’t cured until he visited Thomas’ tomb. The anger aroused over a gambling loss led one Zanino son of Massoli di Terra Soragna near Parma in 1322 to blaspheme God, the Virgin and the putative saint Simon of Todì, derisively shouting ‘How can this brother Simon control the bettors? It can’t be. I don’t believe he’s a saint, and don’t believe what is said about him’.53 After dinner, Zanino went to sleep and was violently thrust from his bed and over the balcony, losing the power of speech. 52

Political Opposition to Miracles The most widespread identifiable source of doubts about saints and miracles was political bias, which encompassed contempt for a particular saint, followed by doubt about his or her alleged miracles. The political role of the saint as the patron of city, dynasty, clan, profession, nation or party faction had long been recognized, and thus often called forth the determined opposition of those identified with the opposite faction. The partisan interests of those opposing a cult are sometimes readily discernible. Caesarius of Heisterbach reported that when the body of the murdered Archbishop Engelbert II of Cologne reached the village of Wesseling in 1225, two miles from Cologne, a knight named Arnold complained that ‘Many say that this lord, who has injured, condemned and disinherited many persons, may be a saint and may perform miracles. If this is true, which I don’t in any case believe, may God make me insane before I die’.54 This man had earlier been fined 40 marks by Archbishop Engelbert for raping his son’s wife. A goldsmith of Siegburg named Arnold had also said, ‘How can he be a saint, at whose order many houses were destroyed, many were despoiled, and who appears to have been the author of so many evils’. Those who had taken part in Engelbert’s murder, led by Frederick of Isenberg, suffered a gruesome death, recorded in graphic detail by Caesarius, who stresses the blasphemy of the archbishop’s detractors, their punishment and the saint’s martyrdom. Engelbert’s blood-stained garments became an instantly prized relic. As in the case of Peter Martyr, an investigation was immediately undertaken into the circumstances of his death. It was reported that Engelbert had expressed a desire to die as a martyr in the course of a Crusade; his wish had been fulfilled via the

52 Angelico Ferrua (ed.), Processus canonizationis sancti Thomae Aquinatis, in S. Thomae Aquinatis Vitae Fontes (Alba, 1968), 238–39 for testimony delivered on 28 July 1319 at Naples; see also ibid., 265–66 for a case in which a canon of Salerno mocked the relic of Thomas’ arm. 53 Miracula ex processibus … Simonis Tudertini, in AA.SS, 20 April II: 816, recorded on 22 April 1322. 54 Caesarius of Heisterbach, Vita, passio et miracula S. Engelberti, in AA.SS, 7 November III: 623–84; for summary see Heinz Wolter, ‘Engelbert v. Berg’, Lexikon des Mittelalters, 3: 1917– 1918. See also Jacqueline E. Jung, ‘From Jericho to Jerusalem: The Violent Transformation of Archbishop Engelbert of Cologne’, in Caroline Walker Bynum and Paul Freedman (eds), Last Things. Death and the Apocalypse in the Middle Ages (Philadelphia, 2000), 60–82.

Miracles and Wonders

60

murder. Caesarius’ biography highlighted the miraculous vengeance wrought on those who had mocked claims of sanctity. Henry IV of England’s supporters termed the deeds attributed to his opponent Archbishop Scrope ‘false miracles’.55 Henry VII sought to suppress the cult around his predecessor Henry VI as a form of pro-Yorkist agitation.56 Similarly, on 24 February 1379, a petition was presented by the lower guildsmen of Florence to make the feast of St Julian, patron of the innkeepers’ guild, a public holiday. The guilds thereby sought to express their hostility to the radical Ciompi, whose revolution had been defeated on Julian’s feast day.57 Elsewhere, the political character of a cult, although presumed, is difficult to detect. The vote tallies during council discussions held after 1325 at Poggibonsi concerning communal appropriations for Lucchesio’s cult, for example, indicate the existence of a continuous, although steadily declining opposition to such funding.58 But since the grounds of this opposition were not stated, one can only surmise whether budgetary, political, or ideological considerations played a role. By the fourteenth century, national or patriotic fervor increasingly found expression through the cult, which may perhaps be viewed as the primary agent for the expression of the nascent notion of national patriotism. During the Hundred Years’ War such shrines as those of St Catherine of Fierbois and St Martial of Limoges, and recent saints such as Charles IV of Brittany rallied local patriotism against the depredations of the English and their allies. At the same time, blasphemous words and deeds at their shrines by the foreign foe and their allies were suitably punished. A prime example is the cult surrounding Duke Charles of Brittany. Fearing the agitation in favor of his dead rival Charles of Blois, on February 1, 1368, Duke John IV of Brittany ordered some English Franciscans to whitewash a mural containing a portrait of the former duke alongside the arms of Brittany; it was contained in a cycle of the life of St Francis at the Franciscan church of Dinan.59 On February 2, Duke John arrived and was satisfied that the image had been removed, although the bishop of St Malo questioned its destruction and wanted to consult the pope. But the miraculous appearance of blood stains on the fresco during a mass held the next day (i.e. February 3) was to become an important episode in the agitation in favor of Charles’ canonization. Witnesses reported that the crowd shouted ‘Look at the bleeding image of the lord Charles, no one can doubt his sanctity’, for blood was flowing from both his heart and neck. Two soldiers attached to Duke John however mocked the communicants, saying, ‘false hicks and country folk, J.W. McKenna, ‘Popular Canonization as Political Propaganda: The Cult of Archbishop Scrope’, Speculum, 45 (1970), 601–623. England was crowned with a large number of antiPlantagenet saints. See Josiah Russell, ‘The Canonization of Opposition to the King in Angevin England’, in Anniversary Essays in Medieval History presented by students of Charles Homer Haskins (Boston, 1929), 279–300. 56 Paul Grosjean (ed.), Henrici VI Angliae Regis miracula postuma (Brussels, 1935) 294 passim. 57 Gene Brucker, ‘The Ciompi Revolution’, in Nicolai Rubinstein (ed.), Florentine Studies (London, 1968), 352, n. 1. 58 Martino Bertagna (ed.), ‘Note storiche e documento interno a S. Lucchese da Poggibonsi’, Archivum franciscanum historicum, 62 (1969), 3–114. 59 François Plaine (ed.), Monuments du procès de canonisation du B. Charles de Blois duc de Bretagne, 1320–1364 (Saint-Brieuc, 1921), 283–5, 293–4. 55

‘Popular’ Voices of Doubt

61

you believe him to be a saint, but you are lying. Lying bumpkins, by St George, he is no saint’. One of them climbed up to touch the image, and the other grazed it with a small knife in two spots, saying, ‘Look at his face, if he’s a saint he’ll bleed now’. One of the witnesses at Charles’ canonization trial, the knight Godfrey Budes (who had experienced other miracles at Charles’ hand), climbed a ladder to inspect the fresco. He found drops of a liquid which appeared to be blood, and said, ‘You can readily see that it is blood’. The Englishmen, still unconvinced, said that he spoke evil and was acting against the present duke. The canonization inquiry was to hear much testimony to the effect that no one had colluded to daub blood on the fresco. Another miracle concerned an Englishman who in 1373 had come to Tréguier to visit the shrine of the Breton Yves Helory.60 On the road his companions said to him, ‘We are near the village of Guincamp; let’s go to see the tomb of the lord Charles, the former duke of Brittany, who has performed many beautiful miracles’. The Englishman reportedly replied, ‘You believe he’s a saint. By saint George, he’s no saint, nor do I believe he is ... I beseech him to perform such a miracle on me, that I can’t make a pilgrimage to the blessed Yves before I’ve been forced to visit the church where he’s [i.e. Charles] buried’. The man suddenly fell ill, made a vow to visit Charles’ tomb, and was cured. The witness then reported seeing Charles’ former detractor threatening to duel with anyone who doubted his sanctity. Doubts concerning the sanctity and miracles of Charles of Blois were further voiced by one Bertrand de Beaumont who served in the army of the count of Rohan in September 1371 during the siege of Becquerel, which was occupied by the English. Bertrand called Charles a ‘malus homo, pillator et depredator’.61 Although warned of the duke’s uprightness and saintliness, he nevertheless cried out, ‘Let me die by that evil cannon if it is not as I say’. Another witness heard him say, ‘Let’s not talk about the lord Charles, because he is not really a saint, nor do I believe he’s a saint as far I can see’. A Breton soldier who had belonged to the duke’s retinue said, ‘I ask the lord Charles, if he has power before God, to show you today and perform a miracle in your presence, and if you die by the evil cannon [it will prove] that you are a liar’. To this Bertrand angrily replied ‘Amen’. During the siege he was mortally wounded by cannon fire and died. Charles’ detractors, as Englishmen, cast doubt on the Breton’s powers; they did not deny the institution of sainthood per se, but often preferred to invoke St George as a more effective patron of English interests. Clerical Greed As we have seen, another source of verbal opposition to claims of the miraculous referred to by both the laity and more learned critics of the abuse of relic veneration such as Guibert de Nogent,62 Salimbene de Adam, and John Wycliffe (d. 1384) was suspicion Ibid., 296–7. Ibid., 303. 62 Guibert of Nogent, De pignoribus sanctorum, in Opera varia, R.B.C. Huygens (ed.), in Corpus christianorum. Continuatio mediaevalis, 127 (Turnhout, 1993), 79–175.; for a partial translation by Thomas Head see Thomas Head (ed.), Medieval Hagiography. An Anthology (New York, 2000), 399–427; see Colin Morris, ‘A Critique of Popular Religion: Guibert of Nogent on the Relics 60 61

62

Miracles and Wonders

of the greed of the clergy, who invented miracles in order to dupe the gullible crowd and enrich themselves. It was fear of such false miracles, the need to separate believer from heretic, which lay behind the mechanism of papal canonization. The Franciscan chronicler Salimbene (d. 1287) listed five reasons why believers become devoted to the saints: the disabled hope to be cured; the curious love novelties, and thus flock to the tombs of newly-minted saints; the clergy are envious of the new religious orders, like the Franciscans, and thus manufacture miracles and saints; the bishops and canons are greedy for the profits made from local cults; and the Ghibelline partisans of Emperor Frederick II hope that the religious enthusiasm bred by cults and their miracles will lead to communal peace, the repossession of their confiscated goods, and their return from exile.63 He thus notes that the performance of miracles is the major attraction of the saint’s cult, and this could be exploited by unscrupulous persons. These remarks should be viewed in the context of the considerable battle between the Franciscans and their opponents, including the secular clergy and rival religious orders such as the Dominicans, for the support of the laity. The partisans of several ‘false saints’ like Armanno Pungilupo and Anthony the Pilgrim of Padua had successfully established cults in their honor. Guglielma of Milan’s flourishing cult, which enlisted the cooperation of the local Cistercians at Chiaravalle, claiming miraculous powers for this alleged daughter of the king of Bohemia, was only brought to an end when an inquisitorial trial proved charges of heresy against the cult and its founder. But the line between heresy and orthodoxy was often perilously thin.64 John Wycliffe argued that since Christ is greater than all the saints, the feast of each saint lacks validity unless some preparations are made to glorify Christ and direct one’s prayers to Him, since cupidity and sin are often the true cause of such solemnities.65 He suggested that some demand the exclusive adoration of Jesus, since a saint is less comparable to Christ than even the lowliest jester to a king. A canonization carried out by the curia appears blasphemous to some, since the members of the curia cannot truly know the sanctity of the dead, and the testimony of the witnesses proves nothing, since the saint’s life may have been hypocritical, and the miracles caused by the Devil. In his De probatione spirituum Gerson suggested that restrictions be placed on the number of saints. This learned criticism was likewise echoed on the popular level, which belies the suggestion of a sharp distinction between learned and popular religion. A vintner of the parish of San Salvator in Siena, invited by some friends to attend the feast (1310?) of Joachim Piccolomini, reportedly said, ‘I will not come, nor do I want to attend the feast of such a fool [fatuus] whom the brethren affirm to be a saint so that they can enrich themselves. I’d rather go in the morning to my vats and sell my wine’.66 of the Saints’, Studies in Church History, 8 (1972), 55–60; Klaus Guth, Guibert von Nogent und die hochmittelalterliche Kritik an der Reliquienverehrung (Ottobeuren, 1970); Giles Constable, ‘Opposition to Pilgrimage in the Middle Ages’, Studia gratiana, 19 (1976), 125–46. 63 Salimbene de Adam, Cronica, Oswald Holder-Egger (ed.), in MGH. Scriptores, 32 (Hannover, 1913), 503–504. 64 Dyan Elliot, Proving Woman. Female Spirituality and Inquisitional Culture in the Later Middle Ages (Princeton, 2004), 119–230 deals with many of these cases. 65 John Wycliffe, Trialogus, Gotthard Lechler (ed.) (Oxford, 1969), 3: 30. 66 Christopher of Parma, Vita Ioachimi Senensis, in Analecta bollandiana, 13 (1894), 393.

‘Popular’ Voices of Doubt

63

When he inspected the wine he discovered that it had a fecal consistency and an acid aroma; recalling his blasphemous words, he made a vow to bring a valuable offering to Joachim’s tomb. The wine suddenly acquired a beautiful bouquet and clarity, greater than what it had formerly possessed. In another case, in 1309 during the dedication of the cathedral of Eichstadt, a certain villein [rusticus] named Lewis from the village of Morhn observed the throng as he ploughed on a mountainside, and exclaimed, ‘Oh, the clergy of Eichstadt have invented a trick in order to obtain money’.67 He was duly deprived of sight until he made a vow to St Gundechar, bishop of Eichstadt. During the translation of the relics of Peter of Luxemburg, a local priest suggested that ‘the whole display is a fake invented in order to attract pilgrims, especially because of the Schism’.68 In 1404, a female tavern keeper of Lampersdorf was heard suggesting that the new cult of Dorothy of Montau was being encouraged by the canons of Marienburg for their own profit.69 Thus, the charges voiced by Guibert, Wycliffe and Salimbene were echoed in the Miracula collections and were clearly not confined to learned circles. Such carping was occasionally seen as the consequences of envy, as when a parishioner of the church of Ste Marie de l’Espérance in Avignon complained that the people had abandoned the local church in favor of the flourishing shrine of Cardinal Peter of Luxembourg.70 The Schism may have fed public doubts. The editor of the miracles of Martial of Limoges in 1388 suggested that hopes of healing the breach in the Church nourished the popular cultic enthusiasm.71 And in 1389 a scuffle broke out in Avignon after a Saxon had ‘blasphemed’ Pope Clement VII. 72 Taken to the papal court, the intemperate man drew a knife, wounding a visiting man of Prague, who was saved by a vow to Peter of Luxemburg. Heresy and Blasphemy Some of the blasphemers reveal a possible knowledge of heretical theology, in which reservations about the institutional and spiritual ramifications of Catholic miracles, the institution of sainthood and the veneration of relics were to be found. Some Cathars, for example, had rejected the entire visible world, and thus regarded miracles as the creation of the Devil. They regarded saints’ cults as a form of idolatry, although they often treated their own martyrs as saints and believed in the miraculous power of the

Miracula Gundechari, in AA.SS, 2 August I: 185. Processus de B. Petro de Luxemburgo, in AA.SS, 2 July I: 512: ‘Tenens firmiter quod esset quaedem fictio, adinventa ad populum alliciendum maxime propter schismatic factum.’ 69 Stachnik, Die Akten, 252–3, 218, 566. 70 Processus de B. Petro de Luxemburgo, in AA.SS, 2 July I: 511: ‘invidiae malo succensa’. 71 Jean-Loup Lemaitre (ed.), ‘Les miracles de Saint-Martial accomplis lors de l’Ostension de 1388’, Bulletin de la société archéologique et historique du Limousin, 102 (1975), 67–139; ‘Miracula S. Martialis anno 1388 patrata’, François Arbellot (ed.), Analecta bollandiana, 1 (1882), 411–46. 72 Processus de B. Petro de Luxemburgo, in AA.SS, 2 July I: 594: ‘habuit dissensionem cum quodam Allemano, qui dicebat injurias, et blasphemias de Domino nostro Papa.’ 67 68

Miracles and Wonders

64

perfecti. More persistent opposition to the miracles performed at saints’ cults was found among Waldensians. A Waldensian of Giaveno reportedly said, ‘You priests make images in order to extort our goods from us’.74 Another heretic was reported to have said, ‘Do you believe the saints can aid you on Judgment Day? They have enough to do to help themselves’. Another said, ‘We go to church and say what appears to us; we won’t adore the pictures that appear on the walls because the priests have made them more for temporal reasons [propter utilitatem temporalem] than out of devotion’. The Brethren of the Free Spirit, the most antinomian of all, allegedly rejected all of the outward trappings of the Faith, believing that all Christians could achieve the perfection of sainthood. The sectaries at Strasbourg reportedly said that ‘Christianity is foolishness’.75 In the trials of Waldensians held at Stettin in Pomerania in 1392–1394 by Peter Zwicker, while many admitted to appealing to Mary or one of the Apostles in their hour of need, others noted that their heretical pastors had taught them that invocations to the saints were of no use [non esset utile], and that one’s sole recourse was to God.76 One woman rejected Indulgences and excommunications as the product of clerical avarice. A ninety-year-old heretic, whose parents had also belonged to the sect, admitted that she had indeed prayed for the souls of the dead and invoked the saints, but did not in fact believe they were of any help, because there is no Purgatory and one goes directly to either Heaven or Hell. When pressed, several witnesses rejected relic worship, Indulgences, pilgrimages, images, and all the paraphernalia of Christian sainthood. The more radical sectarians went so far as to reject the cult of Mary and to argue that those who go on pilgrimages are damned. The possible infiltration of Waldensian views found occasional echo in hagiographical reports of blasphemy. The aforementioned tavern-keeper of Lampersdorf had been stricken with impaired hearing for eight days as a result of her blasphemy. She believed that her disability came from the Devil, not from God. When her husband suggested she seek Dorothy of Montau’s help, she replied, ‘How can a putrid and fetid body help me? I wish to put my faith in my Lord Jesus Christ: he will cure me of my infirmity’. Her condition worsened until she fulfilled a vow to Dorothy.77 Perhaps a streak of Waldensianism is to be detected in this reliance on God rather than the saints; for as the investigations of Peter Zwicker had shown, the country folk of Pomerania were much infected with heresy. In general, the rise of heresy seems to have been accompanied by a corresponding increase in blasphemous remarks uttered against feast days, relics, saints, miracles, etc. Such errors were dealt with by the Inquisition, which was charged with 73

Mariano d’Alatri, ‘Culto dei santi ed eretici in Italia nei secolo XII e XIII’, Collectanea francescana, 45 (1975), 84–104. For examples of Cathars debunking Christian miracles which they believed had been caused by the Evil One, see Ignaz von Döllinger (ed.), Beiträge zur Sektengescichte des Mittelalters, 2 vols. (Munich, 1890), 2: 40, 169, 247. 74 Grado Merlo, Eretici e inquisitori nella società piemontese del trecento (Turin, 1977), 11, 166–7 for Waldensian remarks against saints’ cults. 75 Alexander Patschovsky, ‘Strassburger Beginenverfolgungen im 14. Jahrhundert’, Deutsches Archiv für Erforschung des Mittelalters, 30 (1974), 56–198. 76 Dietrich Kurze, Quellen zur Ketzergeschichte Brandenburgs und Pommerns (Berlin, 1975), passim; see also Alexander Patschovsky, Die Anfämge einer ständigen Inquisition in Böhmen (Berlin, 1975), 90, 130–132. 77 Johannes of Marienwerder, Miracula B. Dorotheae, in AA.SS, 30 October XIII: 566. 73

‘Popular’ Voices of Doubt

65

investigating heresy, superstition and blasphemy. The responsibility of the Inquisitor could include inquiry into both legitimate and illegitimate reports of miracles, the distinction between sorcery, magic and exorcism, and the abuse of calls for supernatural intervention; the miracle collections are thus not the sole, or even the major source for our knowledge of opposition to the saints’ cults. Divine Vengeance The blasphemous acts which appear in hagiography and which were punished by miraculous divine vengeance include theft from pilgrims, especially at the saint’s shrine, the theft of relics, recidivist failure to fulfill a vow, and failure to confess prior to approaching sacred relics. The typical account includes a swift display of divine wrath, followed by a heartfelt act of penance. A Waldensian widow suffered from a tumor in her nose and was only cured posthumously by Elizabeth of Thuringia after she had renounced heresy and undertaken true penance.78 The reestablishment of the cult of Amalberga at Ghent in 1327 was accompanied by many such displays of vengeance against those who failed to honor the saint; these cases portray a cross-section of the persons who supported the cult.79 A mother had cautioned her daughter, saying, ‘Stop spinning, since it is the feast of the blessed Amalberga. You can see the pilgrims arriving at Temsche to honor her ...’. Her daughter replied, ‘I don’t care about that. I want to spin my thread before it gets dark’. She promptly fell off her stool as if possessed. This miraculous punishment accorded blasphemers played a central role in the establishment of some shrines. The recognition of the shrine of St Leonard at Inchenhofen in Bavaria to which penitent soldiers were drawn from near and far, was attributed entirely to acts of blasphemy or sacrilege that revealed the saint’s miraculous power.80 These episodes illustrate the kind of wrath which a dishonored saint could exact, and perhaps further express the local patriotism which informed every shrine; for foreigners and enemy soldiers were a common source of blasphemous words and deeds. The victims of their sacrilege included a soldier who had stolen three chickens from the shrine, a Swiss army groom who stole bread intended as an offering to Leonard, and a stonecutter who stole a pfennig from the shrine in order to buy some belladonna. The failure to purge oneself of sin through confession prior to approaching sacred relics was also a punishable offense, and perhaps indicates an unvoiced opposition to the institution of confession, which had become a major means of social control.81 This sin received extensive treatment in the Miracula of Giovanna da Signa. In 1348 at the time of the Plague when food, medicine and divine service were at a premium, 24 men gathered together to form the Compagnià della Spirito Santo in order to provide

78 Albert Huyskens (ed.), Quellenstudien zur Geschichte der heilige Elisabeth (Marburg, 1908), 174–78. On this case, see in Gábor Klaniczay, ‘Proving Sanctity in the Canonization Processes’, in idem (ed.), Procès de canonisation au moyen âge. Medieval Canonization Processes (Rome, 2004), 134. 79 Miracula S. Amalbergae virginis, in AA.SS, 10 July III: 103–104. 80 Eberhard of Fürstenfeld, Miracula Leonardi, in AA.SS, 6 November III: col. 184C-D. 81 Thomas Tentler, Sin and Confession on the Eve of the Reformation (Princeton, 1977); Cyrille Vogel (ed.), Le pecheur et la penitence au moyen âge (Paris, 1969).

Miracles and Wonders

66

relief to the suffering in Tuscany. After consulting the Carmelite provincial prior, they confessed, held communion and swore mutual loyalty. One of their number, Morozzo Tendi of Signa, begged off, promising to confess at a later date. During a general procession they reached the church of Signa, where Giovanna’s relics lay, in order to celebrate a mass calling for an end to the Plague. As her relics were presented to the assembled throng to kiss, Morozzo was seen to be thrown down three times, unable to approach. He publicly admitted his failure to confess for twenty years, made public confession, and died in three days. A similar fate befell a woman who hadn’t confessed in forty years and sought to approach the relics of Bridget of Sweden.83 Such reports of the punishment wrought on those who blasphemously despoil honest pilgrims are found throughout the hagiographical literature; the Miracula of St Martial of Limoges is replete with such tales, that largely concern the routiers and freebooters who failed to respect the traditional safe conduct accorded pilgrims; although such anecdotes perhaps do not reflect any loss of faith, but rather the exigencies of war and pestilence.84 The failure to fulfill a vow, to recognize a miraculous event when it occurs, or a denial of the saint’s power after one has enjoyed his/her patronage, were classified as acts of blasphemy and punished accordingly. In 1345, a youth of Pisa had been attacked by a malign spirit and was cured after a visit to the shrine of Gerard Cagnoli.85 But although his health had returned and his parents had fulfilled their vow, he began to ‘condemn the relics of the saint’. As a result he suffered an incurable relapse. In the same way, one Mazina Spaletta falsely believed she had been cured of certain lesions on her hands through medicine rather than the saint’s curative powers, and was thus punished accordingly. A tale of such false faith told by Jean Burgarelli de Sompniac of Lautrec in the diocese of Castres reads like a contemporary adventure novel.86 In 1372 he was captured by the Armagnacs and held prisoner for 13 weeks, unable to pay the ransom demanded. After vowing to approach the shrine of Urban V barefoot bearing two wax candles of four librae, he was freed from his irons within two or three days and escaped, but failed to fulfill his vow. In July 1376 he was again captured by the Armagnacs and brutally confined in chains for 14 weeks. Fearing the possible loss of both his goods and his life, he turned to Urban, saying: 82

O blessed Urban, just as you once saved me during my first captivity, through your holy merits, please assist me in my captivity, and intercede before God. I have failed to complete my vow, but will do so as soon as I can, and in addition to the original vow I will offer an image of two librae if I can escape.

Shortly thereafter, Jean discovered a small metal sickle which he fashioned into a key and after three days loosened the chains. Although still weighed down by a 25 pound weight, the saint showed him how to escape by eluding his guards. The fortress was Vita et miracula Joannae de Signa, in AA.SS, 9 November IV: 287. AA.SS, 8 October IV: 543. 84 Arbellot, ‘Miracula S. Martialis’, 411–46. 85 Filippo Rotolo (ed.), ‘Il trattato dei miracoli del P. Gerardo Cagnoli O. Min (1267–1342) di Frà Bartolomeo Albizi, O. Min (d. 1351)’, Miscellanea francescana, 66 (1966), 177. 86 Miracula B. Urbani quinti, in T.H. Albanès (ed.), Actes et documents concernant le bienheureux Urbain V pape (Paris, 1897), 284–6. 82 83

‘Popular’ Voices of Doubt

67

well-fortified and lit by a full moon, but he managed to free himself, though injured in the attempt. The danger which a blasphemer or doubter could pose to the public welfare is graphically recalled in a miracle reported by Bartolomeo Albizi. In 1343 a quarrel had arisen among the Augustinian nuns of San Marco just outside Pisa, which engaged the energies of the archbishop, bishop, commune and clergy of Pisa.87 Despite the intervention of many parties, conditions in the nunnery reached such a pass that the sisters could no longer hold divine service together. During Lent 1347 Mistress Gheccha of Pisa, whose niece was cloistered at San Marco, told the prioress about the posthumous miracles of the Franciscan Gerard Cagnoli had performed in the region. During communion, the prioress Neze heard a voice instructing her to invoke Gerard in order to restore peace to the monastery. After making a suitable vow, an unidentified holy man appeared, first alone, and then accompanied by a friend (St Gerard?). He gathered the warring factions together and secured a peace. That evening one of the sisters, Giovanna, niece of the aforementioned Gheccha, spoke contemptuously. As a result, the heavenly guest reappeared as she slept, leading her to the Arno river. He pointed to a spot in the riverbed where one could see sinners being punished, and said, ‘If you commit these sins, you and your sisters will be punished in this way’. He pointed heavenward, where she saw the virtuous and holy, saying, ‘If you are virtuous, you and your sisters will be crowned with such rewards’. The next day Giovanna repented of her error, reporting what she had seen. The sisters then sent six librae for the picture of St Gerard painted in the Franciscan church at Pisa. Thus, by mocking the miraculous reconciliation which had been accomplished under Gerard’s auspices, Giovanna’s blasphemy had threatened to destroy the hard-won unity of her familia. Considering the universal appeal of the saint, punishment for the intemperate mocking of divine power was swift. A woman who had questioned Nicholas of Tolentino’s (1310) merits, saying: ‘If he can perform miracles, let my son not have eyes’, was rewarded with a sightless child.88 A skeptic who had derided Raymund of Penyafort (ca. 1279) saying ‘Whoever is blind, let him remain so’, had lost his sight. Such was God’s miraculous retribution against those who disturbed the divine order and threatened social unity.89 Nevertheless, since the didactic aim of the miracle was to graphically demonstrate God’s boundless grace and the inclusive, rather than the exclusive nature of the Faith, the implicit theme of readmission through the expression of belief is repeated in these collections. Hedwig Repshliger, a widow of Danzig, had doubted reports that Dorothy of Montau had lain in a bath of frozen water during the winter and had emerged unscathed. While navigating the Vistula in 1385 and thinking of the alleged miracle, the boat entered some deep water and three men fell into the river. Two were rescued by the passengers, but the third had apparently drowned. After he had disappeared for about an hour, joined by the others, this same Hedwig invoked Dorothy’s help, vowing never to doubt her sanctity should the man be rescued. He Filippo Rotolo (ed.), ‘La Leggenda del B. Gerardo, O. Min (1267–1342) di Frà Bartolomeo Albizi, O. Min (+1351)’, Miscellanea francescana, 55 (1957), 440. 88 Peter of Monte Rubiano, Vita Nicolai, in AA.SS, 10 September III: 657. 89 Miracula Raymundi, in AA.SS, 7 January I: 428. 87

68

Miracles and Wonders

appeared floating on the water in the form of a cross; was taken ashore and, while the bystanders tried to revive him with some warm beer, he protested that he was fine. Thus, if the miracle served as a means of establishing unity, it was also a means of identifying and punishing those who threatened that unity, and whose blasphemy could bring vengeance on the community. Blasphemy could call forth divine wrath not simply upon the offender, but also upon those who protected him. Vengeance against the blasphemer was therefore one of the leading genres of miracle found in contemporary collections, and its victims could be heretics, opponents of clerical greed, members of other religious orders, schismatics, political foes, and Christians whose faith had waned. Through divine intervention, those infected by religious doubt performed public contrition and returned to the faith. This public aspect parallels the traditional aspect of any miracle whose spectators and recipients glorify the faith after witnessing God’s greatness. As we have seen, contemporary political conflicts often lay behind such events. The Cremonese Giovanni Cacciafronte for example, became the object of an inquiry in 1224 due to his strong opposition to Patarenes and Cathars, and schismatics, i.e. the followers of Frederick Barbarossa.90 The role of the miracle as a major weapon in the war against heresy was already stated by Innocent III in his canonization bull of Homobonus of Cremona, and became a continuing topos in contemporary hagiographical literature.

90 Giorgio Cracco, ‘Ancora sulla ‘Sainteté en Occident’ di André Vauchez (con una Appendice sul processo Cacciafronte del 1223–1224)’, Studi medievali, ser. 3, 26 (1985), 889–905.

Chapter 5

Theory and Public Policy: Canonization Records Speculation on the nature of the miraculous voiced by natural philosophers and preachers did not take place in a philosophical vacuum, but was put to practical use. In the thirteenth century, although the church preferred to stress the virtuous life of the saint, the believers continued to regard the performance of miracles as the surest evidence of sanctity. The effort of contemporary preachers to praise the virtues of the saint failed to dampen the need for more visible signs of the intervention of the sacred among the believers. Beginning with the canonization bulls of Innocent III, an effort was made to harness this popular faith in miracles and the new pilgrimage sites where they had allegedly occurred as a means of mobilizing the believers against the threat of heresy. Innocent attempted to both curb the excesses of popular enthusiasm, and to establish a sound evidential foundation to the belief in miracles; while at the same time he himself expressed a cautious faith in the supernatural. Both Waldensians and Cathars had voiced skepticism concerning the Christian cult of saints, and the Jews continued to regard the miracles of such prophets as Moses and Elijah as superior to those of the Christians. Since Satan, as a fallen angel, and his servants the demons and heretics might perform deeds which to the untrained eye of the faithful might appear to be miraculous, it became necessary to apply the highest standards of proof to the alleged miracles of potential saints. After their followers had established cults in their honor, several false saints, such as Ermanno Pungiluppo, Gerard Segarelli and Guglielma of Milan, in the course of a local inquiry, had turned out to be heretics and their recalcitrant followers were persecuted by the Inquisition. Both Christina of Stommeln (1242–1312) and Elizabeth of Herkenrode of Spaalbeeck (1247/1250–1316?), who as beguines hovered on the edge of heresy, were subjected to investigation after reports of their supernatural abilities (Elizabeth was graced with stigmata) reached learned circles. After hearing of her extraordinary behavior, Christina’s case was investigated by the Dominican Peter of Dacia who visited her in order to witness her ecstasies, and continued to carry out a correspondence Brenda Bolton, ‘Supporting the Faith in Medieval Rome’, Studies in Church History, 41 (2005), 157–78. Among other acts, Innocent recognized the inventio of the relics of Mary Salome, mother of the apostles John and James, and consecrated the ‘church of the flowing oil’ at Santa Maria in Trastevere, Rome.  Gabriele Zanella, ‘Armanno Pungilupo, eretico quotidiano’, in idem, Hereticalia. Temi e discussioni (Spoleto, 1995), 3–14; Daniele Solvi, ‘Santi degli eretici e santi degli inquisitori intorno all’anno 1300’, in Paolo Golinelli (ed.), Il pubblico dei santi. Forme e livelli di ricezione dei messagi agiografici (Rome, 2000), 267–86; Carol Lansing, Power and Purity. Cathar Heresy in Medieval Italy (Oxford, 1998), 92–96. 

Miracles and Wonders

70

with her which is the major source for her life. Another observer, Aldobrandino, had doubted signs of Christina’s rapture, but after undertaking an investigation, he reported seeing stigmata etched on her body and observing her in ecstasy. Elizabeth’s stigmata were investigated by Philip of Clairvaux. Philip had undertaken a visitation to the local Cistercian houses; although at first doubtful, he discovered after thorough investigation that Elizabeth’s true achievements dwarfed what he had first been told. Even the works of Hildegard of Bingen were examined by no less a personage than the Paris scholastic William of Auxerre to determine that they were divinely inspired before a canonization trial could be held. In the same way, the Humiliati (whose rule in many ways foreshadowed the early Franciscans) had been investigated in 1206 by Ranier of Ponza under Innocent III due to their possibly heretical views. As a result, some remained outside the church and were declared heretical, while others were allowed to establish a new religious order under papal auspices. Ranier was also consulted by Innocent when he was unsure whether or not to canonize Gilbert of Sempringham, and was only convinced after a revelatory dream confirmed that he was worthy of sainthood. This problem of distinguishing demonic from saintly behavior continued to concern the church, particularly among holy women. Perhaps the most well known case was Joan of Arc, first burned as a witch and then declared a saint. Nearly 500 years elapsed before she was fully exonerated and raised to the rank of saint and her visions were declared legitimate and divine. In the case of mystical women such as Margarete Porète, the political constellation appears to have been decisive in consigning the deponent to heresy or orthodoxy, since it is not always clear what distinguished heretical and orthodox mystics, aside from the degree of their adherence to clerical discipline. In order to guarantee that only worthy saints’ cults be confirmed by the church, the canonization process made use of the inquisitorial method of inquiry in order to judge candidates for sainthood in the course of which both their lives and miracles were reported by reliable, trustworthy witnesses testifying under oath before a commission of qualified judges. The board of inquiry often included or was assisted by a distinguished master of theology who was conversant with contemporary views concerning the miraculous, and notaries and canon lawyers familiar with the rules of evidence. In this way, only those miracles that had undergone such scrutiny would be included in the final

For the exchange of letters with Peter and her biography, see AA.SS, June IV, 270–454; Peter of Dacia, Vita Christianae Stumblensis, I. Collijn (ed.) (Stockholm, 1936).  Philip of Clairvaux, ‘Vita Elisabethae’, in Catalogus codicum hagiographicorum bibliothecae R. Bruxellensis, 2 vols. (Brussels, 1886), 1: 362–78.  Petrus Bruder (ed.), ‘Acta inquisitionis de virtutibus et miraculis S. Hildegardis’, Analecta bollandiana, 2 (1883) : 126: ‘eos assignavit et sibi eos restituit, affirmans quod magistrorum esset sententia non in eis esse verba humana, sed divina.’ William was one of the first theologians whose work exhibits the influence of the new Aristotelian texts at the university.  Herbert Grundmann, ‘Zur Biographie Joachims von Fiore und Raniers von Ponza’, Neues Archiv, 16 (1960), 237–46; H. Tiraboschi, Vetera Humiliatorum monumenta, 3 vols. (Milan, 1766–1768), II, 139; Frances Andrews, The Early Humiliati (Cambridge, 1999).  Peter Dinzelbacher, Heilige oder Hexen? on the many cases in which the difficulties of distinguishing divine from Satanic influence are traced. 

Theory and Public Policy: Canonization Records

71

bull of canonization; should any contradictions be found among the deponents, the miracle would be rejected. Despite such care some of the more controversial miracles, such as the stigmata of Francis of Assisi, continued to be subjected to scrutiny and were not confirmed by Gregory IX until 1237, after the bull of canonization. The document generally recognized as the first papal canonization bull, issued by Pope John XV in 993 in favor of Ulrich of Augsburg (890–973), notes the use of a notary to record the document. This attempt to place the cult of the saints on a sound legal foundation, paralleled the rise of the practice of authenticating relics through the ordeal of fire, and attempts to establish a more uniform canon law and penitential code.10 The 1050 canonization of Gerard of Toul (935–994) notes the dependence on ‘testimony’ as its foundation.11 The biography of Nicholas of Trani composed in 1094–1097 at the request of Pope Urban II spoke of those who had flocked to the saint’s tomb as ‘witnesses’.12 As early as 1139, Pope Innocent II had noted that the miracles performed by God due to the Benedictine Sturmo of Fulda’s (715–779) merits had been supported by reliable testimony, although we do not possess any transcripts. The canonization bull of Emperor Henry II (1152) refers to two papal legates who recorded the testimony of reliable witnesses to his miracles.13 Because of the establishment of unauthorized cults devoted to clearly unsuitable persons, Alexander III declared that relics could not be moved about from place to place nor could new cults be established without papal approval. This decision was reiterated at the Fourth Lateran Council of 1215, partly as a result of the wholesale theft and transfer of relics from the East during the notorious Fourth Crusade in 1204, which had witnessed the looting of Constantinople’s churches by Western Crusaders. The exclusive right of the papacy to control cults was inserted into the Decretals (1234) of Gregory IX, although local cults might continue to flourish with episcopal approval. This enhancement of papal power at the expense of the local bishops also occurred simultaneously with respect to the investigation of charges of heresy, although the bishops continued to be the first line or inquiry in both cases. Many of the late twelfth century cases refer to testimony, i.e. ‘attestationes’ as the foundation of canonization. The process of Galgano of Chiusdino (d. 1181) under Lucius III in 1185 is the first extant protocol in which the kernel of a formal procedure is found, including the testimony of 20 witnesses (including Galgano’s own mother) and  André Vauchez, ‘Les stigmates de Saint François et leurs detracteurs’, Melanges de l’Ecole française de Rome. Moyen âge, 80 (1968), 595–625. The controversy continued throughout the later middle ages, led by detractors of the Franciscan order.  Codex constitutionum suos summi pontifices ediderunt in solemni canonizatione, Giusto Fontanini (ed.) (Rome, 1729), 1–2 (no. 1); H. Zimmerman (ed.), Papsturkunden, 896–1046, 3 vols. (Vienna, 1988–1989), 1: 611–613. Although doubts have been raised about the authenticity of papal bulls issued before 1050, most observers consider this document authentic. 10 Thomas Head, ‘An Alternative Form of “Canonization”’, in Gábor Klaniczay (ed.), Procès de canonisation au moyen âge. Medieval Canonization Processes (Rome, 2004), 19–37. 11 Codex constitutionum, Fontanini (ed.), 6 (no. 4). 12 Adelferio, De adventu Tranum, obitu, miraculis Nicolai, in AA.SS, June, 246C: ‘Quod primum maximumque miraculorum fuisse, nemo quis dubitet: cum in advenae et peregrini funere, necdum per eum signo ostenso, tanta utriusque sexus congregata est copiositas: quod idcirco gestum reor, ut miraculorum insignia plures testes haberent.’ 13 Codex constitutionum, Fontanini (ed.), 13 (no. 9), 14–15 (no. 10).

Miracles and Wonders

72

the use of trained notaries. The surviving text appears to be a collection of notarized statements following some formulary pattern. The appointment of papal emissaries to serve as a commission of inquiry is apparent under Clement III and Celestine III (d. 1197), who, in particular, had accumulated considerable experience as a papal legate involved in the translationes of the relics putative saints, and is credited with confirming the establishment of new cults as cardinal.15 In the course of the thirteenth century, inquisitorial procedure was increasingly refined and the processes became lengthier and more detailed. An increasing number of miracles were cited in canonization bulls, beginning with general references to the performance of miracles or the citation of a mere handful to a summary of perhaps over 20. We possess some fragmentary canonization hearings from the beginning of the century, and many biographies were clearly based upon such hearings, notably the lives of Francis of Assisi, Hugh of Lincoln, Gilbert of Sempringham and William of Bourges. In these cases, the miracles are summarized (sometimes in great detail) in the biography, but we are provided with no detailed information concerning the identity of all of the corroborating witnesses and how they may have differed in their testimony. 14

Elizabeth of Thuringia The first dossier in which we can judge the standards employed to determine the reliability of reports of miracles is that of Elizabeth of Thuringia (d. 1231). It was the pontificate of Pope Gregory IX that witnessed the firm establishment of the inquisitorial investigation of both heresy and canonization, which may have begun under Pope Lucius III and was probably enshrined in canon law by Innocent III. Dyan Elliott has traced the parallel development of investigations into heresy and the miraculous.16 In about 1206 the procedural canons De inquisitionibus and De testibus et attestionibus had been inserted in canon law, and in 1234 were formally included in Gregory IX’s decretal collection.17 This landmark collection was edited by the Dominican canonist Raymund of Penyafort, who served as papal penitentiary. Although Elizabeth’s case was being adjudicated simultaneously with the case of Dominic (for whom the direct ‘unmediated’ 14 Fedor Schneider (ed.), ‘Der Einsiedler Galgano von Chiusdino und die Anfänge von San Galgano’, in Quellen und Forschungen aus italienischen Archiven und Bibliotheken, 17 (1914–1924), 61–77. 15 Jürgen Petersohn, ‘Die päptstliche Kanonisationsdelegation des 11. und 12. Jahrhunderts und die Heiligsprechung Karls der Grossen’, Proceedings of the Fourth International Congress of Medieval Canon Law. Toronto, 21–25 August 1972, Stephan Kuttner (ed.) (Rome, 1979), 163–206. 16 Dyan Elliott, Proving Woman, 119–79. 17 Werner Maleczak, ‘Innocenz III., Honorius III., und die Anfämge der Inquisition’, in Praedicatores, Inquisitores. I. The Dominicans and the Medieval Inquisition. Acts of the 1st International Seminar on the Dominicans and the Inquisition, 23–25 February 2002 (Rome, 2004), 33–43; Raoul Naz, ‘Inquisition’, Dictionnaire de droit canonique, R. Naz et al. (eds), 7 vols. (Paris, 1935–1965), 5: 1418– 26. The inquisitorial procedure does not appear in Roman law. Elements already appeared in a canon dated 22 September 1198. See Deretales Gregorii IX, II. Tit. xxiv. C. 21. See also Decr. III. Tit. xii.c. 1 ; Decr. V. tit. 34. c. 10; Decr. V. tit. 1. c. 17; Decr. V. tit. 3. c. 31, c. 32, in Emil Friedberg and Emil Richter (eds), Corpus iuris canonici, 2 vols. (Leipzig, 1876–1881).

Theory and Public Policy: Canonization Records

73

testimony of witnesses survives), Elizabeth’s is the first that contains both the testimony of deponents at a canonization trial and allows us to compare the testimony of several witnesses to the same miracle.18 By comparing the raw testimony in Elizabeth’s trial with the papal bull and subsequent biographies based on this testimony, it is possible to discern how credible these miracles were regarded in the eyes of contemporaries. The chief investigator in Elizabeth’s case was Conrad of Marburg (1180/1190– 1233). Conrad actively preached the Crusade to the Holy Land, and has been regarded by some as the first official papal inquisitor, who had become acquainted with proper judicial procedure in his position as inquisitor of Germany in the late 1220s. He is the first to have pursued the heretical Stedingers, who dwelled in the marshlands near Bremen, refused to pay the tithe, were accused of witchcraft and debauchery and had been excommunicated in 1228.19 This early use of personnel with experience in the pursuit of heretics has often been overlooked and many of those involved in canonization cases also served on inquiries into heresy and in other kinds of cases employing the inquisitorial procedure. Conrad was also a suitable candidate to conduct Elizabeth’s process since he had served as her confessor and spiritual guide. Such close ties with the putative saint on the part of the chief investigator suggest a clear bias in her favor in papal circles. He had written to the pope immediately after her death describing several miracles that he had himself witnessed at the site of her tomb in Marburg. In Elizabeth’s case, another letter was written, apparently by Abbess Lutrude of Wetter, concerning Elizabeth’s miracles. As a result, Conrad was appointed along with Archbishop Siegfried III of Mainz (d. 1249) and the Cistercian Abbot Raymund of Eberbach to look into her case. Beginning in the twelfth century, we also have a considerable number of other postulatory letters addressed to the pope asking for canonization of candidates for sainthood. These often contain extensive reports of miracles which were based on some quasi-judicial inquiry, such as the letters related to Peter of Tarantaise, Lawrence of Dublin, Gilbert of Sempringham and Edmund of Canterbury. Such letters encouraged the pope to appoint a commission of inquiry, and may well have served as the foundation of the papal inquiries.20 For a list of sources concerning Elizabeth see J. Ancelet-Hustache, ‘Elisabeth de Thuringe’, in Dictionnaire d’histoire et géographie historique, vol. 15, col. 225–8. See also H. Knies, ‘Miracula Sanctae Elisabeth. Bemerkungen zu den Kanonisationsakten der heiligen Langrafin’, in Universitas. Dienst an Wahrheit und Leben. Festschrift für Bischof Dr. Albert Stohr, 2 vols. (Mainz, 1960) II, p. 78–88; P.G. Schmidt, ‘Die zeitgenössische Űberlieferung zum Leben und zur Heiligsprechung der heiligen Elisabeth’, in Sankt Elisabeth. Fürstin, Dienerin, Heilige (Sigmaringen, 1984), p. 1–6; J. Leinweber, Das kirchliche Heilsprechungsverfurhren bis zum Jahre 1234. Der Kanonisationsprozess der hl. Elisabeth von Thuringen, in idem, p. 128–38. 19 Lothar Kolmer, Ad capiendas vulpes. Die Ketzerbekämpfung in Südfrankreich in der ersten Hälfte des 13. Jahrhunderts und di Ausbildung des Inquisitionsverfahrens (Bonn, 1982), 113–122; Alexander Patschovsky, ‘Konrad v. Marburg’, Lexikon der Mittelalter, Robert Auty et al. (eds), 9 vols. to date (Munich, 1977–1999), 5: 1360–61; idem, ‘Zur Ketzerverfolgung Konrads von Marburg’, Deutsches Archiv, 37 (1981), 641–93. It is not clear whether Conrad was associated with any particular religious order. 20 Hugh Farmer, ‘The Canonization of St Hugh of Lincoln’, Lincolnshire Architectural and Archaeological Society Reports and Papers, N.S., 6, pt. 2 (1956), 86–117 contains a dossier of such letters. 18

Miracles and Wonders

74

The commission received by Conrad, Siegfried and Raymund from Pope Gregory IX, probably acting through the papal penitentiary Raymund of Penyafort, instructed them to inquire who knew about each miracle, when it had occurred, in what month and day, who was present, where it had occurred, which saint had been invoked, what words were used, who had experienced the miracle, how long before the event they themselves had seen the victim suffering, how long the victim had the affliction, where they were from and what were the circumstances of each event.21 When Archbishop Siegfried came to Marburg, Conrad was able to supply him with testimony about 59 miracles. In this early stage in the history of papal canonization, such preliminary inquiries, aimed at convincing the pope to act, are found in the 1233 cases of the Carthusian Stephen of Die, Hildegard of Bingen, Odo of Novara and of Archbishop Edmund of Canterbury (1246). The proctors and commissioners at canonization processes were aware of papal dissatisfaction with the conduct of earlier hearings, in which deponents had spoken as a group, thus creating the appearance of collusion and raising doubts about the credibility of their testimony.22 Elizabeth’s is also the first case which explicitly indicates the impact of Augustinian theology and early scholastic thought on the definition of the miracle. It is reported that testimony concerning miracles demanded that each deponent specifically state that he or she had been cured following the invocation of God and Elizabeth and that ‘the cure took place immediately contrary to the power of nature and the use of medicines’.23 The impact of the scholastic discussion of the nature of miracle is indicated in a Zwettl manuscript life of Elizabeth written shortly after her canonization. The rescue of two criminals from hanging, says the author, was due to the fact that they were victims of a miscarriage of justice which was corrected by miraculous intervention.24 Elsewhere, he says that the natural philosophers, presumably the ‘Aristotelians’ active at the University Epistola examinatorum miraculorum sanctae Elyzabet ad dominum papam, in Albert Huyskens (ed.), Quellenstudien zur Geschichte der heilige Elisabeth (Marburg, 1908), 155; Johannes Hyacinth Sbaralea (ed.), Bullarium franciscanum romanorum pontificum, 27 vols. (Rome, 1759–1765), 1: 86 (no. 80): ‘… quomodo sciunt, quo tempore, quo mense, quo die, quibus presentibus, quo loco, ad cujus invocationem, et quibus verbis interpositis, et de nominibus illorum circa quos miracula facta dicuntur, et si ante cognoscabant, et quot diebus ante viderunt eos infirmos et quanto tempore fuerunt infirmi, et de qua civitate sunt oriundi et interrogantur de omnibus circumstantiis diligenter.’ See also Registres de Grégoire IX, Lucien Auvray (ed.), 4 vols. (Paris, 1890–1955), 1: 548; Lucas Wadding, Annales minorum seu trium ordinum a S. Francisco institutorum, third edition (Quarrachi, 1931), 2: 447–9. The same formula appears in Gregory’s adjudication of the case of the Franciscan Ambrose of Massa in 1240. See Registres de Grégoire IX, Auvray (ed.), iii, 239. 22 Huyskens, Quellenstudien, 161–2, the well-documented case of a blind five year old boy cured on 8 April 1232, the first case in which a tally of the points of agreement among witnesses is reported states: ‘… cives de Marpurch, requisiti et iurati singulariter.’ 23 Processus et ordo canonizationis beate Elyzabet propter quorundam detractione et caumpnias, in Huyskens, Quellenstudien, 142: ‘‘subita cura non vi nature proveniens successive vel opere medicine.’ Vita sanctae Elisabeth, in Zwettl ms. 326, fol. 159r says that only cases are considered that ‘solam invocationem sancta Elisabeth praeter omnis humane medicine remedia visibiliter sunt curati.’ 24 Vita sanctae Elisabeth, in Zwettl ms 326, 157a: ‘clave iudicii nequicia iudicium vel errore distorta’ and called ‘provisio duos propter divina facinora diversis temporibus.’ These are miracles nos 17 and 18 in protocol. 21

Theory and Public Policy: Canonization Records

75

of Paris and elsewhere, were confounded by the performance of miracles. This suggests that the learned skepticism voiced about miracles, perhaps influenced by heretical theology, had become known in wider circles. This same biography contains direct quotations from the canonization hearing, along with some miracles and information lacking in our extant canonization source, which suggests the use of a fuller version of the hearing by the anonymous author.26 Here, at the birth of papal canonization, an effort was already being made to sift out unreliable cases. For example, in Odo of Novara’s (d. 1198) 1240 case a witness was asked how precisely he knew a vision of the saint was not a devilish delusion.27 The problem of a possible fraud perpetrated by the Devil also arose in a well documented and oft repeated miracle attributed to Elizabeth. An 18 year old epileptic Cistercian of Amelungborn had suffered day and night during the winter of 1234. He was forced to lie down with his head on the ground or on a bed, his back and feet trembling, crying out in pain, held down by four brothers. He had envisioned Elizabeth twice in a dream admonishing him for having made a vow to her without first asking the permission of his abbot, as was required by the Benedictine rule, which is why he had not been cured immediately. He reported this to the abbot, and the next night she appeared again.28 The abbot then gave the ailing monk permission to bring an ex-voto offering to Marburg and he was cured. At the hearing, the deponent noted that the fact that the vision had appeared thrice is proof of its authenticity. This view conforms to the argument that a true divine vision should appear three times in order to distinguish between the fantastic delusions implanted by Satan in naïve or unsuspecting believers and the dreams or visions sent by God or His messengers. Nevertheless, the difficulty of authenticating whether a vision was of divine or satanic origin, and the absence of reliable corroborating testimony continued to concern investigators of the supernatural. Such phenomena therefore rarely appear in bulls of canonization. In Odo of Novara’s case 106 witnesses were asked if their knowledge was firsthand or based on hearsay (‘vidit, audivit, et interfuit ’). Particularly important in the effort to prove supernatural intervention was a detailed description of the symptoms of disease and reference to physicians who had unsuccessfully ministered to the victim before a resort to the faith-cure.29 One witness was prodded as to how precisely he could vouch for the 25

25 Ibid., 157b: ‘Erubescant igitur miseri merito naturales confundatur illorum phylosophorum perversa sententia qui dum nature virtuti totum quidquid in orbe creatur attribuunt omnipotentiam.’ 26 Ibid., 156a on a poor man of Wiesbaden, no. 49 in the protocol and no. 8 in James of Voragine, who nearly drowns. This biography reports that he was taken home to be assisted, a fact absent from the hearing; ibid., 156a–b for a six month old body left at home and found dead when his mother returns, a miracle not found in the canonization record. 27 ‘Documenta de B. Odone Novariensi ordinis Carthusiani’, Analecta bollandiana, 1 (1882), 323–54, at 327, two commissioners assisted by two friars and two notaries. 28 Miracula Elyzabet … in quattuor ordines distincta, in Huyskens, Quellenstudien, 243–5. This is contained in the report dated 1 January 1235, and deals with a case 1234. It is attested by 12 monks, the abbot and subprior, and heard by Bishop Conrad of Hildesheim; see also Vita sanctae Elisabeth, Zwettl ms 326, fol. 159r. 29 ‘Documenta’, op. cit., 331, 339, 340, 344; cf. Joseph Ziegler, ‘Practitioners and Saints: Medical Men in Canonisation Processes in the Thirteenth to Fifteenth Centuries’, Social

76

Miracles and Wonders

fact that a man had been cured of deafness through Odo’s intervention. He replied that he had spoken and called out to him, but the victim had not responded at all.30 After the cure, he replied immediately. Regarding Odo’s monastic life, corroborative documents were presented. In Elizabeth’s case, Conrad of Marburg also composed a Summa vitae, which, along with the testimony of her four loyal ladies-in-waiting, served as the chief evidence about Elizabeth’s life. After Conrad was killed (under unclear circumstances, perhaps due to his militant pursuit of heretics) in October 1234, a new commission was created including the bishop of Hildesheim and the abbots of Georgental and Hersfeld. Letters were solicited from all those with knowledge of the saint or her miracles ‘through themselves having seen or heard, having heard from others, having been proven to them, or in their own experience’.31 The testimony concerning Elizabeth’s life and miracles was also examined by professors of law (‘examinatis per iuris professores’) and by Abbot Bernard of Buch, the preacher Master Salomon, perhaps a Dominican, and brother Conrad of Thuringia before the decision on canonization. In the final stage it was discussed in the papal consistory. It was also explicitly stated that the aim of her canonization would be to assist the militant church to battle against heresy, a view likewise voiced in her bull of canonization.32 One of the miracles concerned a widow of Denzerhaid near Wiesbaden who had been a Waldensian, but converted to the true faith. After she had confessed, she was cured of a growth by Elizabeth after suffering for 12 years.33 Likewise, the report of 90 miracles at Elizabeth’s tomb noted in a collective letter asking for her canonization, sent on 11 August 1232, specifically emphasizes the performance of miracles as the proper answer to the alarming rise of heresy in Germany.34 The first report had consisted of 12 miracles summarily reported at her tomb. The first fully reported posthumous miracle had occurred on November 20, 1231, three days after her death. It concerned a Cistercian monk cured at her tomb of an undefined mental disease after suffering for 40 years.35 In subsequent reports, the notaries recorded the degree to which various witnesses to each miracle agreed or disagreed about History of Medicine, 12 (1999), 191–225. 30 Ibid., 338. 31 Ibid., 143: ‘prout visu, auditu, relatione, probatione aut experientia.’ 32 Ibid., 145; Bullarium romanum, op.cit., 3: 490: ‘hereticis confusionis multae material cumulatur.’ 33 Miracula sancta Elyzabet, in Huyskens, Quellenstudien, 174, n. 13. 34 Arthur Wyss (ed.), Hessisches Urkundenbuch. I. Urkundenbuch der Deutschorden-Ballei Hessen, 1207–1299 (Leipzig, 1879), 25; ‘In partibus Alamanie ubi fides orthodoxa vigere consueverat pullulare ceperat virulentium semen heretice pravitatis et periculosissime dilitari. Sed Christus qui temptari suos non patitur supra vires, pro hereticorum pertinatis convincenda tormentorum et mortis varia suscitavit genera contra eos, quos nunc etiam modo mirabilis conprimit et confutat, nostre fidei veritatem ostendos per miracula plurima et virtutes, que ad suam gloriam et honorem felicis recordationis domine Elysabeth olim lantgravie Thuringye multipliciter et magnifice operator, quorum quedam, de quibus nobis facta est plena fides per juramenta tam testium quam juratorum, paternitati vestre duximus transcribenda.’ 35 Epistola magistri Cunradi de Marbuch ad papam de vita veate Elyzabet, in Huyskens, Quellenstudien, 160: ‘Nam quidam monachus ordinis Cisterciensis ad eius sepulchrum se quodam morbo mentali, quem plus quam XL annis habuerat, curatus est, et hoc iuravit me presente et plebano Marpurg.’

Theory and Public Policy: Canonization Records

77

the event. This indicates an honest effort to supply the curia with judicially reliable evidence. A similar record is found in the dossier of Stanislaus of Krakow (d. 1079) from 1250/1252, and the inability to verify visions which accompany miracles is also noted.36 Nineteen of Elizabeth’s miracles achieved wider currency since she was one of the few contemporary saints included in James of Voragine’s Legenda aurea (ca. 1260).37 The notary reports that each witness testified individually, in order to correct errors made in earlier cases, when deponents had appeared as a group. The auditores often state that they themselves have met and seen the victim in his or her pristine state after a cure, or that they have seen scars which indicate that the victim had been cured.38 The highest number of witnesses who testified in one of Elizabeth’s cases was 17 and in another the commissioners reported that after 12 deponents had appeared ‘many others of the village wanted to give testimony, but we thought that there had already been enough’.39 An even higher number of persons had come from three parishes and had been present at the supernatural rescue from hanging on December 21, 1234 of the thief Johannes of Wolfhagen, near Cassel. Such public hangings, in the course of which a criminal was saved from death due to divine intervention, were particularly dramatic evidence of the miraculous.40 At the end of their report, the commissioners note that many others wanted to report miracles but because of the distance and the inability of the nearby villages to accommodate so many visitors, they could not testify.41 The notaries scrupulously report the differences among the deponents. Nevertheless, true contradiction does not appear. Note is merely taken of the fact that some witnesses may not have had full and complete knowledge of the event. For example, they might not have seen the victim in his prior condition, or had heard of the event secondhand. In Elizabeth’s dossier, we are therefore presented only with those cases which at least provide some prima facie evidence worthy of further investigation, and cannot be dismissed out of hand. This contrasts with the much fuller summaries of 100s of miracles recorded in the late thirteenth and early fourteenth centuries at the shrine of Thomas Cantilupe, bishop of Hereford (d. 1282).42 Only a small number of these were

Wojciech Ketrzyński (ed.), Miracula sancti Stanislai, in Monumenta poloniae historica (Lvov, 1884), IV, 285–318, especially miracles nos 23, 27. A comparison with the miracles recorded in the Vita maior allows us to fill out those miracles which are not recorded in the fragmentary examination by the commissioners, and to note the narrative version of each miracle. On this canonization see Alexsandra Witkowska, ‘The Thirteenth Century Miracula of St Stanislaus’, Gábor Klaniczay, op. cit., Medieval Canonization Processes, 149–63. 37 James of Voragine, Legenda aurea, 2 vols., Giovanni Paolo Maggioni (ed.), second revised edition (Florence, 1998), 2: 1175. Of the 19 specific miracles cited by James, I have been able to discover 11 referred to in the canonization documents. 38 Miracula, in Huyskens, Quellenstudien, 221, n. 81: ‘nos auditores vidimus cicatrices et signa ustionis in uno humero et brachi.’ 39 Ibid., 211–12, n. 67. 40 The best documented case comes from the protocol of Thomas of Hereford. See Robert Bartlett,The Hanged Man. A Story of Miracle, Memory and Colonialism in the Middle Ages (Princeton, 2004) for the retelling of this tale. 41 Ibid., 236. 42 Oxford, Exeter College, MS 158. 36

78

Miracles and Wonders

considered at Thomas’ canonization hearing itself, after each case had been weighed to determine whether it was suitable for further investigation. Philip of Bourges In addition to Elizabeth’s case, the file of Archbishop Philip of Bourges (d. 1261) includes a checklist of the degree to which witnesses to each miracle agreed or were in conflict. Philip’s dossier is unpublished, but is unusually rich, including: copies of the protocol of the original process held in 1264–1266 at Bourges, Beaugency and Orléans (Rome, BAV ms lat. 4019 and Paris ms, BNf 5373A), including a narrative account of the canonization process; a rubricated summary or relatio including summaries of each miracle along with remarks made by each relevant witness, prepared for perusal by the cardinals by William of St Sabina, Peter of St Praxed and Jacobus of St Giorgio, possibly in 1331, when the case was reexamined (Rome, BAV ms lat, 4021); a summary of 17 miracles with notes concerning the agreement and disagreement among the witnesses (Paris ms, BNf 5373A, 1r–3v); and a Vita et miracula taken verbatim from the summary, but which doesn’t include all the miracles attributed to Philip. In the relatio, each miracle is summarized, followed by a list of witnesses, stating whether they were present at the miracle, heard and saw it performed, whether they had seen the victim both before and afterward, and how their testimony might differ from others. For example, the eighteenth miracle considered in the rubricated manuscript dealt with one Isabelle, wife of Hugh, who had suffered tremors for three months.43 Eight witnesses were called to testify, including Isabel herself, her widowed mother, two priests and several neighbors; four are female, four male. After making a vow to Philip of Bourges, Isabel had incubated at his tomb for nine days. On the sixth day, she began to feel an improvement in her condition and was cured shortly thereafter. Isabelle corroborates the summarized version except to add that she was 12 years old at the time, and that she had only recently married. Her mother Martina supplies slightly different symptoms of Isabelle’s disability. The priest Jean testified that the cure began to appear on the seventh rather than the sixth day of her incubation. Five of the witnesses testified that they had seen the victim disabled, but had only heard of the cure itself through hearsay. Seventeen of the 45 miracles attributed to Philip are specifically singled out to be examined in greater depth by the curia.44 Since Philip was not canonized by Rome in the middle ages, we do not know which of the miracles was regarded as more credible. In this rich dossier, many of the miracles can be traced from the original testimony via the rubricated summary to the semi-official biography of the saint. It is possible to discern what elements the curial staff might regard as essential for consideration by the conferring cardinals, which witnesses and evidence were disregarded, and which 43 This is based on witnesses nos 47–55. See Rome, MS Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana, Lat, 4019, 65v–67r; Inquisitio super vita et miraculis Philipi Bituricensis, in Rome MS, Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana, ms 4021, 14r (miracle no. 18); Paris, MS BNf ms 5373A, fols. 19r–20v (miracle no. 10); Vita sancti Philippi, in E. Martène and U. Durand (eds), 5 vols, Thesaurus novus anecdotorum (Paris, 1717–1726), III: 1939E. It does not appear in the brief summaries of miracles found in Paris MS, BNf ms 5373A, 1r–3v. 44 Rome, Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana, ms lat, 4019, fol. 18r.

Theory and Public Policy: Canonization Records

79

elements were necessary for a summarized miracle. For example, the case of Isabelle, daughter of Osanna and Stephen of Brocia, was based on the testimony of four witnesses: the 30 year old Osanna, her 50 year old husband Stephen, the 20 year old Perinet, and a neighbor, Agnes, age 40, the wife of Faber de Bosco, all from the parish of St Palladio in Bourges.45 One Saturday morning in May around Ascension Day, 1262 little Isabelle fell into a large and deep spring, floating on the surface of the water, arms outstretched as if in the form of a cross, covered with sand. According to her mother, she lay there for about as long as it would take to say a mass, and when she was rescued with the aid of the neighbor Perinet, her body was cold as ice, rigid and (so her mother said) partly black. She was carried by Perinet back to her home, where she lay, apparently dead, from nones to sunset. Perinet forced a knife into her mouth between her teeth, so any excess water would be expelled, although it turned out that there was none. Her mother called out to God and Philip of Bourges, promising to visit his shrine as a pilgrim should her child survive the threat of death. At sunset the ailing child began to revive and move her feet. The father claimed that on the same day, Isabelle began to laugh, walk and sing, totally restored to health. All of those present attributed her revival to a miracle. In the rubricated version, many details are missing, most importantly any reference to the rescuer Perinet’s relatively full testimony, and some of the symptoms of the child’s alleged death. It may well be that the papal investigators had already decided that this miracle was not likely to pass muster. The ice cold condition of the body and the fact that no water was expelled from the child’s mouth would indicate she was not dead, which is not unusual for infants or children drowned in icy cold water.46 The survival of a summary of only those miracles that appeared most credible provides some indication of the approach taken by curial officials. One case which was not pursued any further concerned Dulcia of the parish of St Chartier, whose husband and his paramour had poisoned her with the assistance of an old crone; he was eventually hanged, the lover burned, and the witch fled. Dulcia then recovered.47 The witnesses differ on so many points, including the contents of the potion which had been fed poor Dulcia to drive her crazy and the vision she had experienced prior to her cure that the event could hardly be clearly pronounced miraculous and was severely expurgated in the later biography of Philip. Despite the fact that the witnesses all claim to have been present at the husband’s hanging, and even specify the kind of poison used to drive Dulcia mad (although they differ about the precise contents), the inquisitors clearly doubted the reliability of this case. In 1258, Pope Alexander IV had specifically left the prosecution of witchcraft to other courts, provided it did not appear in tandem with heresy, in which case the inquisitors would prosecute the case. 45 This is reported by witnesses nos 62–65. Rome, BAV lat. 4021, 13r (miracle no. 11); BAV lat. 4019, 69r–70v; BNf 5373A, 22v–24r (miracle no.13). In BNf 5273A, 2v–3r a summary appears, based on the mother’s testimony, and the remark that two witnesses were present both before and after the event and one other agrees, making a total of four witnesses. 46 Ronald Finucane, The Rescue of the Innocents. Endangered Children in Medieval Miracles (New York, 1997). 47 BAV 4019, fols. 75r–76v; Paris, BnF MS ms 5373A, fols. 28v–30r. A fuller study of this case appears in Michael Goodich, ‘The Multiple Miseries of Dulcia of St Chartier (1266) and Cristina of Wellington (1294)’, in idem (ed.), Voices from the Bench: The Narratives of Lesser Folk in Medieval Trials (New York, 2006).

80

Miracles and Wonders

In any case, Dulcia probably recovered simply because the slow-acting poison was no longer being administered by her wayward spouse, rather than due to the intervention of the saint. Dulcia’s was not the only case in which Odo of Châteauroux or some other member of the curia excised testimony from the later record presented to the cardinals. In such cases, if only one witness had provided some bit of evidence, without corroboration, it was excluded from the relatio or summary read by the consulting cardinals. This expurgation was reflected in the biography based on the canonization process, which was based on the rubricated relatio. Louis IX of France Like the cases of Elizabeth, Stanislaus and Philip, King Louis IX’s fragmentary collection of miracle testimonies includes notes concerning the degree of agreement or discord among witnesses. In the case of Amelot de Chambly, for example, it is noted, perhaps by Giordano Orsini, Cardinal priest of San Eustachio, that ‘the two witnesses appear to disagree concerning the date of the cure’, specifying the differing dates and hours of the alleged event and the time that elapsed until a final cure.48 In addition, the earliest fragmentary record of an internal examination by a curialist of a miracle presented for consideration in a canonization process concerns a case attributed to Louis IX.49 It was written by Cardinal Peter Colonna of St Eustachio between 23 January 1295 and 3 May 1297, when he was dismissed by Pope Boniface VIII.50 Since Colonna was not a member of the commission of cardinals entrusted by the pope to examine the case, this consultation was probably recorded just before the canonization itself. Louis had been the object of three inquiries: the first had been undertaken secretly by Simon de Brie, cardinal of Sta Cecilia and papal legate in France concerning the miracles that had been reported after Louis’ death in 1271 at the site of his tomb at St Denis. The other two processes were undertaken in 1278 and 1282. This latter inquiry heard 378 witnesses, 38 of whom spoke of the saint’s life. Very fragmentary material from the 1282 trial survives. The miracle examined by Cardinal Colonna concerns the cure of Amelot or Emmelot de Chaumont-en-Vexin in 1277, an unmarried domestic in the home of a prominent bourgeois, Jean Augier. It is easily confused with a miracle worked on a second Amelot, Amelot de Chambly-le-Haubergier.51 48 For some of the testimony of 1282 see H.-F. Delaborde (ed.), ‘Fragments de l’enquête faite à Saint-Denis en 1282 en vue de la canonisation de Saint Louis’, in Mémoires de la Société de l’Histoire de Paris et de l’Ile de France, 23 (1896), 37: ‘Et sic duo testes videntur dissonare in die curationis cum primus testis dicat quod sexta vel septima die postquam cepit venire fuit curate, quartus vero dicat post vii dies continuous. Item isti duo testes scilicet primus et quartus dicunt quod hora curationis fuit post prandium …’ 49 L. Carolus-Barré, ‘Consultation du cardinal Pietro Colonna sur le IIe miracle de Saint Louis’, Bibliothèque de l’Ecole des chartes, 117 (1959): 57–72. 50 On the Colonna cardinals see Denis Waley, ‘Giacomo Colonna’, in Dizionario biografico degli italiani, 27: 314–6; and idem, ‘Pietro Colonna’, Dizionario biografico degli italiani, 27: 399–402. For the rancorous relationship between Peter and the pope, see Agostino Paravicini Bagliani, Boniface VIII. Un pape hérétique? (Paris, 2003), 159–96. 51 See also L. Carolus-Barré (ed.), Le procés de las canonisation de Saint Louis (1272–1297): Essai de reconstruction (Rome, 1994).

Theory and Public Policy: Canonization Records

81

Amelot de Chaumont’s cure was the second miracle reported at Louis’ trial. The 28 year old had come to St Denis in early 1277 with two other women. Shortly thereafter she fell ill and was accompanied on a stretcher to St Denis to affect a cure by several women and her friend Marguerite de Rocigny, who had helped her find lodging on the Rue St Jacques. The event which prompted her visit to Louis’ shrine was paralysis of her right leg, thigh and foot. On her first visit, she was given crutches, and undertook several more visits before being finally cured. Amelot herself was to die two years later at the Hôtel-Dieu of St Denis. She had been taken there by her employer and was therefore dead at the time of Louis’ process.52 Arguments are presented by Colonna in favor and against the miracle, with citations from the Digest, Gratian’s Decretum, the Decretals of Gregory IX, the Code of Justinian, and Seneca, along with the canonization process itself. The author notes that many witnesses agree concerning the fact that the victim could not sit or lie down at the king’s tomb and had seen her suffering for some time before the cure. Nevertheless, differences of opinion on several points are noted. One witness, a servant, said that Amelot’s condition began around midnight on the Wednesday after the Purification of the Virgin, i.e. February 3, shortly after her arrival in St Denis. Three others, including a citizen of St Denis and his son, and an English resident, alternatively cited the Wednesday before the Feast of St Vincent, i.e. February 20. On the other hand, Colonna presents several parallels concerning the issue of the time of the event. These are drawn, for example, from contract law and from the distinction between the time of a child’s conception and time of its birth. Based on the decisive canon De accusationibus of Innocent III, the curialist nevertheless argues that it is sufficient that they agree about the substantive issue, namely the victim’s infirmity itself.53 A further objection to the miracle was that, if one of the deponents had actually lied concerning the time, this would constitute a violation of the Ten Commandments, thus tainting all of the testimony. But since human memory is fallible, especially considering the amount of time that had elapsed, this lapse, he argues, may be excusable, and in fact strengthens the credibility of the deponents concerning issues on which they all agree. Colonna addresses the possibility that Amelot’s illness may have been feigned or fraudulent. He cites among other texts Pope Innocent III’s canon De hereticis.54 This citation confirms the link between the investigation of sainthood and of heresy. He first argues that the fact that several witnesses had seen the victim walking as if she were disabled is not in itself incontrovertible proof of her disability. Furthermore, the fact that according to the witnesses Amelot lay in bed cold and in pain, likewise doesn’t necessarily prove that she was in fact ill. But, citing Seneca, Colonna concludes that one cannot feign illness for a long time and, in any case, all the deponents agree concerning her condition.55

Guillaume de Saint-Pathus, Les miracles de Saint Louis, Percival Fay (ed.) (Paris, 1932), 7–12 for case; Sharon Farmer, Surviving Poverty in Medieval Paris, passim. 53 Decretales Gregorii IX, c. 17. X.v.1. 54 Fraternitatis, c.4. X v, 7 in Decretales Gregorii IX, in Friedberg (ed.), II, col. 779. 55 Seneca, De clementia, I.1.6, Wofflin (ed.), Publii Syri Sententiae (Lepizig, 1869), 127, n. 221. 52

82

Miracles and Wonders

Another problem is that the witnesses differ concerning the manner in which they prove that she was infirm. Amelot’s room-mate Ameline la Charonne used a needle to prod her limbs. Amelot told her she had lost all sensitivity. Marguerite de Rocigny had used hot water in order to test her sensitivity; and a third witness made use of fire to show she had lost all feeling. Here again, Colonna provides parallel cases in which a fact is proven in different ways. But he argues that the different methods of proof do not have a contradictory result; thus, the fact of both Amelot’s illness and her cure are not disproven by such differences. Here again, Colonna resorts to the canons of Innocent III, and suggests that the differences may be attributed to lapses of memory.56 The fact that the witnesses were poor, and Norman, is also considered as a possible indication of fraud, since both the poor and Normans were not noted for their reliability. But Colonna argues that in any case the rich would not have slept at the tomb nor have resided where Amelot did. So the lower social status of the witnesses is not relevant. Furthermore, although Normans appear to have had a reputation for dishonesty, Colonna suggests that among every people there are good and bad, even among Normans. He argues that their testimony cannot therefore ipso facto be considered worthless. In the end Colonna concludes that one should trust the judgment of those who conducted the initial inquiry with respect to both the reliability of the witnesses and the credibility of the miracle. He therefore recommends that the Holy See accept the veracity of this miracle.57 Pope Celestine V The only extant internal poll of the papal curia concerning the miracles of a putative saint dealt with Pope Celestine V, canonized by Clement V in 1313.58 This document was produced after several inquiries had been held beginning in 1306; in the course of the first inquiry, one of the investigating cardinals had died; the second was undertaken by Richard of Siena and Giacomo Colonna (appointed cardinal in 1327 by John XXII) and Pietro Colonna, the same cardinal who had examined the case of Louis IX. Four cardinals were then appointed to organize the material for consideration by the curia; another commission of eight cardinals was then established. The participation of several notaries themselves as witnesses at Celestine’s hearing might further insure success. In the case of Catania, the widow of the notary Giovanni di Riccardo, her husband’s intervention helped bring about a cure since the saint had been unwilling to have any contact with women. Her case was supported by her father, himself a physician, another

56 See Innocent’s canons De accusationibus, c. 17; Qualiter et quando in Decretales Gregorii IX, V. Tit. 1. c. 17 in Friedberg, 738 on the conduct of inquisitorial hearings. 57 This miracle does not appear specifically in the approved list reflected in the bull of canonization, which simply makes a broad statement about the cure of paralytics. See Bullarium romanum, IV, 151. 58 F. van Ortroy (ed.), ‘Procès-verbal du dernier consistoire secret préparatoire à la canonisation du Célestin V’, Analecta bollandiana, 16 (1897), 475–87. For his incomplete canonization record see Franz X. Seppelt (ed.), Die Akten des Kanonisationsprozess in dem Codex zu Sulmona, in Monumenta Coeslestiniana: Quellen zur Geschichte des Papstes Coelestin V (Paderborn, 1921).

Theory and Public Policy: Canonization Records

83

doctor, and the wife of a judge, among others. Many of the participants at the closed meeting during which the cardinals were balloted were partisans of the Celestine V’s candidacy for sainthood, because they had worked with the late pope, were allied with the Angevins, Celestine’s chief promoters, or were enemies of his successor Boniface VIII. For example, Jean Lemoine, bishop of Arras and papal camerarius, had been appointed by Celestine, and William le Long of Bergamo, had served as chancellor to the Angevin King Charles II of Sicily. Boniface had been accused by some of having himself killed Celestine and he was thus regarded as a martyr. This document nevertheless indicates the concern for procedural rectitude in the curia. Not all of the miracles considered were confirmed by the conclave. There were 19 attendees, including the pope himself and the future Pope John XXII, cardinals and curial officials, among them masters of theology and canon lawyers. Most of these participants had themselves been appointed by Clement V and were of French origin. At least ten cardinals did not participate. The pope himself was the last to vote, and was perhaps the most willing to accept Celestine’s alleged miracles. The most skeptical was Richard Petronius of Siena, cardinal deacon of S. Eustachio (d. 1314), vice-chancellor of the curia and a participant in the earlier inquiry.60 He was followed by the two Caietani cardinals, Francesco, cardinal deacon of Sta. Maria in Cosmedin and Giacomo, cardinal deacon of San Giorgio, both relatives of the late, much maligned Pope Boniface VIII. A brief consultation is presented by James Colonna, and Pietro Colonna, who had earlier presented the problems in Amelot’s case. Both had earlier regarded Celestine’s successor Boniface VIII as illegitimate and denied the right of Celestine V to abdicate as pope, even hinting that Boniface had threatened and killed the ‘angelic pope’. They were also great partisans of the Spiritual Franciscans, who had been recognized by Celestine, but banned by Boniface. The consilium asked: 1) whether the inquiry should continue, since there did not appear to be sufficient evidence concerning Celestine’s fama or reputation; 2) whether if the inquiry did in fact continue, only one cardinal should undertake this task; 3) whether the rubrics presented to the consistory should remain (which would eventually supply the structure of the canonization bull); 4) whether the depositions of the witnesses indeed prove a saintly life and miracles; and 5) whether the life should be examined prior to presentation of the miracles. In the end, both cardinals recommend proceeding toward canonization. Giacomo Colonna makes the salient remark that posthumous miracles are of capital importance since someone who is holy in life and even performs miracles during his or her lifetime is not necessarily a saint. But the performance of posthumous miracles is patent proof of sainthood.61 Eighteen miracles were voted on by the assembled cardinals. In each case they were asked whether a miracle had occurred and whether it had been sufficiently proven. 59

59

174–5.

Paolo Golinelli, ‘Social Aspects in Some Italian Canonization Trials’, in Klaniczay, op. cit,

60 Gerd Friedrich Nüske, ‘Untersuchungen über das Personal der päpstlichen Kanzlei 1254–1304’, Archiv für Diplomatik, 20 (1974), 77–84 on Richard. 61 Ibid., 476: ‘Nam in hac vita nunc sanctus est potest postmodum sanctus non esse. Miracula vero post mortem facta finalis bonae et sanctae vitae propria argumenta.’ The presence of judges, notaries, physicians and judges as witnesses at Celestine’s trial presumably enhanced the likelihood of his success. See Seppelt, Kanonisationsprozess, 214–15, 223–5, 225–9, 232–5, 276– 7, 277–8, 310, p. lviii, lxi.

Miracles and Wonders

84

In the end only 11 were cited in the papal bull of canonization; at least ten of these appear to be included in the extant internal vote.62 Some were rejected out of hand by the assembled cardinals (no. 1) Another was alleged to be based on too few witnesses, one of them the victim herself (no. 2) A third, which passed, was nevertheless termed a miracle by one cardinal, but not attributable to Celestine (no. 4). Of the miracles opposed by Richard of Siena, his usual argument was that although it was a miracle, it had not been sufficiently proven (nos 1, 4, 9, 12, 14, 15, 17 and perhaps some others). Despite overwhelming votes in favor, including the pope’s, Richard’s opposition seems to have been sufficient to guarantee that those miracles he opposed – even as a minority of one – would not be accepted for inclusion in the bull of canonization. Incontrovertible proof (within the context of contemporary standards of veracity, of course) seems to have been a necessary prerequisite for papal confirmation of a miracle, despite a majority vote of the curia, the pope’s own positive view, and the political sympathies of the cardinals. This poll is supplemented by extant remarks made by Pope Clement V noted in the Ordo Romanus XIV.63 Here, the pope raises doubts about one miracle because the cure was not instantaneous and might have been brought about by medical means, and another miracle because of contradictions among the witnesses. Thomas of Hereford The final text to be considered is an examination of 26 of the miracles of Bishop Thomas of Hereford (although these may be reduced to 24) by an anonymous curialist, probably in 1318.64 Ten of the miracles herein discussed finally appeared in John XXII’s bull of canonization and are dealt with in the same pro and contra manner used in the case of Louis IX’s cure of Amelot.65 Thomas’ case had been heard at London and Hereford in 1307, and it was reported that ‘the greater part of the people of the city of Hereford gathered in the cathedral to testify’.66 He leaves perhaps the fullest medieval dossier, which was examined by six cardinals in May, 1313. In many ways, this document summarizes the approach taken by papal officials during the preceding period. The introductory remarks cite the Biblical evidence for the performance of miracles by Elijah, Elisha, and by the successors of Jesus, i.e. the Apostles, and Christian holy persons thereafter. The author first summarizes each miracle, and then notes the objections which may be raised, followed by a solution. In some cases, where doubts may be raised about whether death had occurred, about the symptoms and Bullarium romanum, III, 489–91. Bernhard Schimmelpfennig, Die Zeremonialbücher der römischen Kurie im Mittelalter (Rome, 1973), 174. 64 For transcription of text see André Vauchez, Sainthood in the Later Middle Ages, Jean Birrell (trans.) (Cambridge, 1997), 540–554; for discussion see 488–98. The text is also discussed in Ronald Finucane, ‘Authorizing the Supernatural: A Curialist’s Analysis of Some English Miracles around 1318’, Paper presented at International Medieval Congress, University of Leeds, 14–17 July 2003. 65 AA.SS, 4 October I: 597–8 (17 April 1320). 66 AA.SS, 4 October I, 640: ‘esset magna pars populi civitatis Herefordensis in cathedrali ecclesia ad testificandum congregatur.’ 62 63

Theory and Public Policy: Canonization Records

85

the possibility of sustaining injuries under the circumstances described, the author undertakes a logical analysis of the kind of fall, drowning, and other details in order to confirm the miraculous nature of the recovery. An issue which concerns the author is the problem of whether recoveries which occur over a period of time, rather than immediately, and cures in which scars remain, can be considered true miracles. He answers in the affirmative, again citing Biblical and historical precedent. In cases where a dream or vision plays a central role, miraculous cures and prophecies in a dream are cited as scriptural precedent. In fact, the authority of Scripture or the precedents of the saints in the performance of similar miracles, citing Bede, Augustine and Gregory, is often taken as the most convincing evidence for the performance of a miracle. One contemporary event is taken as proof of the possibility of survival from a difficult fall: a child had been seen by an unnamed master of theology surviving a fall from a great height at the home of Cardinal Pietro Colonna. I would argue that this document concerning Thomas of Hereford, and the others that preceded it, indicate that curial officials were very much concerned to ensure that only those miracles which conformed to the highest standards of verifiability were accepted. Although few internal records survive, they all indicate that genuine efforts were made to integrate the rules of evidence taken from Roman law into the inquisitorial procedures developed in the early thirteenth century, along with contemporary medical and philosophical knowledge, and Biblical and hagiographical precedents. The foundation of this conscientious enterprise was undoubtedly the fear that heretics, Jews, and sceptics – some of whom appear in contemporary saints’ lives – could easily put the faith to ridicule and scorn should unreliable cases of supernatural intervention be authorized by the church. The continuing rejection by ecclesiastical authorities of the alleged miracles reported at the site of a saint’s relics is amply documented in the fuller dossiers, such as those of Elizabeth, Philip of Bourges or Thomas of Hereford. Without a sufficient number of reliable witnesses, providing full and incontrovertible testimony, no miracle could reach the final bull of canonization. Curial practice was therefore brought into line with contemporary theological speculation. The cult of the saints had in fact also become one of the most effective means of combating heresy. Those who had taken part in the battle against the church’s rivals, be they heretics, Jews, schismatics, Muslims, pagans or skeptical Christians, were rewarded with recognition as saints. Their followers were mobilized into the creation of a confraternity, the collection of funds for the establishment of a shrine, the encouragement of pilgrims to the site of the saint’s relics. Such believers could serve as a counterweight to the heretics and their supporters. As Innocent III had said in the canonization bull (1199) of Homobonus of Cremona, the heretics will be confounded when they witness the prodigies performed at the site of his tomb. The good deeds and miracles are prerequisites for canonization since … ‘the angel of Satan may transform himself into an angel of light’ (2 Corinthians 10: 14) and some may ‘carry out deeds to be seen by men’ (Matthew 23: 5) and some may even perform miracles, although they may be ‘men of corrupt lives’ [and] ‘reprobate’ (2 Timothy 3: 8), just as is read concerning Pharaoh’s magicians (Exodus 7: 11, 22) and even the Antichrist, who ‘if it were possible [would] seduce the very elect’ (Matthew 24: 24; Mark 13: 22) into error with their miracles … .’

Miracles and Wonders

86

This confirms how intensely the need to prove the reliability of miracles engaged the papacy. Radulphus Ardens, an important pre-scholastic in late twelfth century Paris, had already warned that one should ‘not trust every spirit, but test whether or not it comes from God’.67 This need to distinguish between true and false miracles therefore exercised the attention of contemporary preachers, natural philosophers, theologians, and papal officials.

67

Radulphus Ardens, Homilia lxix. In ascensione Domini, in PL, 155: 1925.

Chapter 6

Canonization and the Hagiographical Text As we have seen, in canonization cases the canon lawyers, notaries, and theologians who were charged with determining the authenticity of miracles received a list of questions to which witnesses testifying under oath were asked to respond. All of the extant canonization reports are prefaced by such a formal list of questions covering the putative saint’s life, conduct, ministry, and faith; his/her public reputation; the cult surrounding his or her ministry; and miracles, both in life and posthumously. This ‘charge to the jury’ was refined in the course of the thirteenth century, and was intended to reduce the number of miracles confirmed by Rome only to those which were backed by full documentation and conformed to the standards for judging the miraculous. The following charge was issued by Pope Clement V in 1307, and was to guide the panel of investigators (which included the prominent theologian William Durand the Younger) appointed to look into the case of Thomas of Hereford: The third article [of the inquiry] deals with the miracles of said lord Thomas; concerning which the witnesses were first to be asked, testifying why, how often, and how God had acted through him, or for his sake [pro eo], both in the course of his life and after his death. Second, if they testify about said miracles, they are to be asked the sources for their knowledge. Third, if said miracles occurred above [supra] or against [contra] nature. Fourth, what words were used by those who sought to have said miracles performed, and how they invoked God and said lord Thomas. Fifth, if in accomplishing said miracles, herbs, stones, and any other natural or medicinal materials were used; and if incantations or trickery [superstitiones] or forms of deceit [fraudes] were involved in the operation of said miracles. Sixth, if, after said miracles had been accomplished, due to these miracles faith or devotion had grown among For an early protoptype, see Innocent IV’s letter of November 27, 1252 to the papal commissioners, in Rose of Viterbo, Giuseppe Abate (ed.), ‘S. Rosa da Viterbo, terziara francescana (1233–1251): Fonti storiche della vita e loro revisione critica’, Miscellanea francescana, 52 (1952), 126–7: ‘Testes legitimos, quos super vita, conversatione ac miraculis recolendae memoriae Rosae puellae Viterbiensis debetis recipere, prius ab eis prestito juramento, diligenter examinare curetis; et de omnibus quae dixerint interrogetis eosdem: quomodo sciunt, quo tempore, quo mense, quo die et quibus mense, quo die et quibus praesentibus, quo loco, ad cuius invocationem, quibus verbis interpositis; et de nominibus illorum, circa quos miracula facta dicuntur; et quot diebus antea eos viderant infirmos; et quanto tempore visi sunt sani; et quo loco sunt oriundi; et interrogetis de omnibus cicumstantiis diligenter; et circa singula capitula fiant, ut expedit, quaestiones praedictae; et sic series testimonii et verba testium fideliter redigantur in scriptis.’ See also the bull of Innocent IV initiating the inquiry into Clare of Assisi in Zefferino Lazzeri, ‘De processu canonizationis S. Clarae’, Archivum franciscanum historicum, 5 (1912), 645: ‘quo tempore, quo mense, quo die, et quibus prasentibus, quo loco, ad cuius invocationem et quibus verbis interpositisi, et de nominibus illorum circa quod miracula facta dicuntur’; see also ‘Documenta de B. Odone Novariensi’, 323–54. 

Miracles and Wonders

88

those persons at whose invocation or petition said miracles had occurred; or among those persons for whom the miracle had occurred; or among others to whom it became known; and they had glorified God. Seventh, who were the persons in whom the miracle had occurred, their age and social condition; where were they from and who were their parents. Eighth, whether before the miracle had occurred, the witnesses had been acquainted with those persons who had allegedly experienced said miracles; if so, then for how long had they seen them healthy. Ninth, for how long and of what ailment [aegritudo] were they miraculously cured; how long had they suffered before the miracle took place, and for how many days before [the miracle] had they seen them suffering from such an ailment and how they knew they were suffering from such an ailment. Tenth, whether after the miracle they were fully and completely cured and healthy; and whether continuously and without pause, and for how long they were healthy, and for how long after said miracle had the witness seen them healthy and free of their ailment. Eleventh, in what year, month, day, place and who was present, whether said miracles were continuously and after the fact. Twelfth, if they occurred after the fact, how long afterwards did they become known in the places in which they were said to have taken place. Thirteenth, whether there is and was public knowledge of said miracle; if so, then for how long and from what time in the places in which said miracle were said to have occurred and in other places.

This list of questions, when broken down, reduces the miracle to a series of over 30 elements which will guarantee its reliability, authenticity and credibility in accordance with the standards of contemporary theology, philosophy and canon law. After the introduction of the formalized canonization, many miracle reports and hagiographical biographies were the product of a legal inquiry, and were thus grounded in the testimony of deponents testifying under oath. A Select Example If we select a miracle which was included in a papal canonization bull, this adherence to judicial standards is apparent. The miracle which I have broken down appears in Urban IV’s canonization bull of Richard of Chichester as the child who ‘had been crushed by the wheel of a runaway cart’ and in Odo of Châteauroux’s sermon as ‘a boy who had been killed when a heavily laden cart ran over his stomach ... [and] the print left by the wheel still remains on the boy’s stomach’. In the village of Winterbourne [in the diocese of Chichester, county of Sussex], which is called Earls in order to distinguish it from a like named place, there was a man named Walter who had a wife named Juliana, both of whom had married according to the law, joined together in faith in a simple and honest life. God gave them a son, whom  Miracula ex processu Thomae, in AA.SS, 3 October I, 585–6. On Thomas’ case see Patrick H. Daly, ‘The Process of Canonization in the Thirteenth and Early Fourteenth Centuries’, St Thomas Cantilupe Bishop of Hereford. Essays in His Honour, Meryl Jancey (ed.) (Hereford, 1982), 125–35.  Ralph Bocking, A.A.SS, 3 April I: 315; David Jones (ed. and trans.), Saint Richard of Chichester. The Sources for his Life, in Sussex Record Society, 73 (Lewes, 1993), 74, 78. The following translation is my own.

Canonization and the Hagiographical Text

89

they baptized John, a name whose designation, by a wonderful miracle of divine grace, did not appear to be in vain. When he was almost two years old, on the feast day of the blessed Mary Magdalene [i.e. 22 July 1262–1270], since the weather was pleasant, for his comfort he was carelessly left out in the public street. At around noon, a carriage led by a team of horses, driven briskly by a drunken man, suddenly appeared from the marketplace. As is customary with such men, the more they drive the beast with the whip, the more they are inflamed by the beer, and attack the beast’s neck. With a sudden jolt the horse dashed against the boy, who was thrown down on his back and the wheel of the cart, which was loaded with the rural driver [rusticus], two female passengers, and a large amount of salt, fell on the soft part of his stomach. The boy was left severely injured and dead. [Upon hearing of] such a terrible event, persons of both sexes rushed from every direction. His wretched mother was aroused, bent down and cried out [ad clamorem]; she tore her hair, sighing that she was unable to bear the possibility of childlessness and of losing her offspring and threw herself down as if she herself were dying. The boy was born on the arms of the mourners, who tried to restore to restore the breath of life to the child. Cold water was thrown on his face, he was shaken, carried and lifted up; he was checked to see if by chance some sign of life should appear, but there was neither sound nor breath within him. Lord Gilbert was present, the parish rector and priest. He saw that he was covered with the pallor of death and that there was no sign of life left in him. There were traces of the wheels, which had fallen on his stomach near the navel, which, due to the clotted blood, appeared blacker than other parts of his body. He [i.e. the priest] said, There is no doubt that the boy is dead. It is no wonder, for even if a strong and robust man had been injured by such a heavy weight, he would certainly die; more so in the case of a young boy, not yet two years old. Let us leave, he said, since there is no further hope for his life. They would have already brought the boy into the house, and would have covered him with the shroud of the dead, except that in accordance with the English law, the arrival of the coroners who would investigate the death was anticipated. Although the aforesaid priest wanted to leave, the mother of the dead child urged him to stay in the name of the Passion of the Lord and the glorious Virgin. While they congregated around the dead boy, the priest remembered a miracle that he had heard had occurred due to the merits of the blessed Richard. Therefore, aroused by divine inspiration, he began to say, Let us all devotedly on bended knee pray to God that through the prayers of the blessed confessor Richard the spirit of life may be restored to the dead boy. He [i.e. the priest] urged each one to promise to say both the Paternoster and the salutation to the Virgin three times in honor of God, the blessed Virgin and the blessed Richard. After the priest had added several Psalms with his prayer, before he had finished, the boy began to move first one foot, and then the other, and afterwards sat up. All the onlookers were awestruck, as he began to open his mouth and eyes, and not only was life restored to him, but he showed signs of full health and laughed heartily. Not only did he feel the vigor of life return to him, but he seemed to be even more lively [than before] so that his mother who had nourished him both before and after, testified that in her opinion he was even more vigorous in both strength and faculties afterward than he had been before. The sound of those who had been mourning and lamenting was transformed into praise of Christ, who through the merits of the blessed Richard, wished to provide a sign to mortals of this great victory over death, and [to show that] God, who lives with the Father and the Holy Spirit, reigns through all the centuries.

90

Miracles and Wonders

We may superimpose the previous list of questions posed by Rome on this narrative by the Dominican Ralph Bocking, who composed Richard’s narrative life and miracles. We should bear in mind that: 1) his account is the product of the collective testimony of several witnesses, some of whom are identified; 2) some editorial remarks are inserted by the author; 3) the narrative conforms to many standard hagiographical topoi; and, 4) the specific conditions of English legal and social life are reflected in the narrative (e.g. the use of the royal coroner, the drunkenness of the carter, the mining of salt). If we impose the elements demanded by the pope on Richard’s miracle as reported by Ralph Bocking, the following breakdown appears: 1. Why, how often, and how God had acted through Richard of Chichester, or for his sake [pro eo], both in the course of his life and after his death: one case cited of child overrun by cart. 2. The sources for the witnesses’ knowledge: eyewitnesses. 3. If said miracles occurred above [supra] or against [contra] nature: He [i.e. the priest] said, ‘There is no doubt that the boy is dead. It is no wonder, for even if a strong and robust man had been injured by such a heavy weight, he would certainly die; more so in the case of a young boy, not yet two years old. Let us leave’, he said, ‘since there is no further hope for his life’. 4. What words were used by those who sought to have said miracles performed?: ‘Let us all devotedly on bended knee pray to God that through the prayers of the blessed confessor Richard the spirit of life may be restored to the dead boy.’ He [i.e. the priest] urged each one to promise to say both the Paternoster and the salutation to the Virgin three times in honor of God, the blessed Virgin and the blessed Richard. After the priest had added several Psalms with his prayer. 5. How they invoked God and Richard of Chichester: his wretched mother was aroused, bent down and cried out [ad clamorem]; she tore her hair, sighing that she was unable to bear the possibility of childlessness, and of losing her offspring and threw herself down as if she herself were dying. The mother of the dead child urged him [i.e. the priest] to stay in the name of the Passion of the Lord and the glorious Virgin. He began to say, See no. 4 above for priest’s words and request. 6. If in accomplishing said miracles, herbs, stones, and any other natural or medicinal materials were used: Cold water was thrown on his face, he was shaken, carried and lifted up; he was checked to see if by chance some sign of life should appear, but there was no sound nor breath within him. 7. If incantations or trickery [superstitiones] or forms of deceit [fraudes] were involved: none are cited. 8. If, after said miracles had been accomplished, due to these miracles faith or devotion had grown among those persons at whose invocation or petition said miracles had occurred: All the onlookers were awestruck and aroused by divine inspiration. 9. Or among those persons for whom the miracle had occurred: the infant John was too young to exhibit religious faith, but he was allegedly healthier after the miracle even than he had been before the accident.

Canonization and the Hagiographical Text

91

10. Or among others to whom it became known; and they had glorified God: The sound of those who had been mourning and lamenting was transformed into praise of Christ. 11. Who were the persons in whom the miracle had occurred, their age and social condition: [a] son, whom they baptized John, he was almost two years old. 12. Where were they from and who were their parents: In the village of Winterbourne, [in the diocese of Chichester, county of Sussex], which is called Earls in order to distinguish it from a like named place. A man named Walter had a wife named Juliana, both of whom had married according to the law, joined together in faith in a simple and honest life. 13. Whether before the miracle had occurred, the witnesses had been acquainted with those persons who had allegedly experienced said miracles: Walter had a wife named Juliana. Lord Gilbert was present, the parish rector and priest. 14. If so, then for how long had they seen them healthy?: presumably for the first two years of the infant John’s life. 15. For how long and of what ailment [aegritudo] were they miraculously cured?: The boy was left severely injured and dead. 16. How long had they suffered before the miracle took place?: unclear time between accident and miracle. 17. For how many days before [the miracle] had they seen them suffering from such an ailment?: no time – immediate cure. 18. How they knew they were suffering from such an ailment: he was covered with the pallor of death and that there was no sign of life left in him. There were traces of the wheels, which had fallen on his stomach near the navel, which, due to the clotted blood, which made it appear blacker than other parts of his body. [Similar reports from both France and England indicate considerable knowledge of the symptoms of death among rural folk.] 19. Whether after the miracle they were fully and completely cured and healthy: he showed signs of full health and laughed heartily. Not only did he feel the vigor of life return to him, but he seemed to be even more lively. 20. Whether continuously and without pause: so that his mother who had nourished him both before and after, testified that in her opinion he was even more vigorous in both strength and faculties afterward than he had been before. 21. For how long they were healthy: almost two years old [prior to the miracle]. 22. For how long after said miracle had the witness seen them healthy and free of their ailment: unclear, but presumably from time of miracle to date of testimony. 23. In what year, month, day, place [the event occurred]: on the feast day of the blessed Mary Magdalene [i.e. July 22, the year is unclear, perhaps July 1253–1262]. At around noon.

Miracles and Wonders

92

24. Who was present?: a drunken man [who caused the accident] two female passengers [riding in the carriage] persons of both sexes rushed from every direction [presumably from the village square]. His wretched mother was aroused. Lord Gilbert was present, the parish rector and priest. Walter had a wife named Juliana. John [the infant]. 25. Whether said miracles were continuously and after the fact: 26. If they occurred after the fact, how long afterwards did they become known in the places in which they were said to have occurred?: immediately, on the spot. 27. Whether there is, and was, public knowledge of said miracle: The sound of those who had been mourning and lamenting was transformed into praise of Christ, who through the merits of the blessed Richard, wished to provide a sign to mortals of this great victory over death, and [to show that] God reigns through all the centuries who lives with the Father and the Holy Spirit. 28. If so, then for how long and from what time in the places in which said miracle were said to have occurred and in other places?: at least after 1253. This miracle thus fulfilled nearly all the requirements of a credible miracle laid down by Thomas of Hereford’s commission, although it predates the papal letter by 40 years. Its appearance in a list of Richard’s miracles in the bull of canonization confirms that an internal curial committee, which may have included Odo of Châteauroux, had thoroughly investigated the case, and the biography presumably only included those elements that had passed judicial muster. The attested miracle conforms not only to the standard issues dealt with in an authentic diplomatic document: quis, quid, quomodo, quibus auxiliis, cur, ubi, quando. It also provides sufficient evidence to assist the curia to distinguish acts of God from acts of Satan, a sine qua non for any miracle cited in a papal bull of canonization. The elements of the authenticated miracle conform to the structural forms of the traditional legend outlined by folklorists. André Jolles and Vladimir Propp have taken note of the dependence of medieval hagiography on trial testimony, and the stereotypical character of the legend. Hagiographical narrative thus parallels the folktale in its reliance on oral 

92–113.

Leonard Boyle, ‘Diplomatics’, in James M. Powell (ed.), Medieval Studies (Syracuse, 1992),

 André Jolles, Einfache Formen (Halle, 1930), 19–49; Helmut Rosenfeld, Legende, third edition (Stuttgart, 1972); Vladimir Propp, Morphology of the Folktale, second edition, Laurence Scott (trans.) (Austin, 1968), 58; Gábor Klaniczay, ‘Speaking of Miracles. Oral Testimony and Written Record in Medieval Canonization Trials’, Unpublished paper, 5–6. I would like to thank the author for allowing me to see the typescript of this paper. For the relevance of folklore studies to hagiography, see Alain Boureau, La legende dorée. Le système narratif de Jacques de Voragine (Paris, 1984), 213–14.

Canonization and the Hagiographical Text

93

transmission and its origins in the memories of often illiterate persons. The folktale may have first been recorded by an ethnologist such as Charles Perrault (who in 1697 published the first collection of Mother Goose tales) or the Grimm brothers (whose collection of folktales first appeared in 1812). The miracle was reported by learned commissioners inquiring into supernatural phenomena who, like those who inquired into cases of heresy, may be regarded as early anthropologists, albeit with a rather blatant program as their brief. This miracle may then be transformed into a literary narrative or a visual image by those entrusted with communicating the church’s ideology to a wider public through sermons, liturgy, poetry, frescoes or other devotional art. 

A Hagiographical Topos: The Child Rescued from Drowning Those who collated the canonization dossier before its presentation to the cardinals or pope, often reordered the miracles in accordance with genres: cures of disease, lameness, escapes from prison etc. They were aware that such cases share a common morphology, in addition to a common core theme. Like the case taken from Richard of Chichester’s life and miracles, among the miracles recorded employing the new judicial standards a high number concerned the dangers of childbirth, infertility, stillbirths, childhood injuries and disease. This fact has been noted by Finucane, Sigal, Vauchez, Krötzl and others. Michel Vovellle has noted that in James of Voragine’s Golden Legend, 40 per cent of the recorded miracles concern children, and this rises to 54 per cent for thirteenth-century saints. For example, two cases not found in the Golden Legend may be cited: in the case of the Carthusian Stephen of Die (d. 1208), adjudicated in the 1230s, and not known for his interest in children, 16 of the recorded 58 miracles deal with children, including three cases of drowning.10 Thirteen of the 42 miracles attributed to Lawrence of Dublin (d. 1180), canonized in 1226, dealt with children.11 Ronald Finucane has devoted a volume to the dangers to children reflected specifically in such miracle collections, focusing especially on the early fourteenth century dossier

Jan Vansina, Oral Tradition as History (Madison, 1985), 74. For efforts to trace hagiographical accounts through various versions, see Michael Goodich, ‘Form and Filiation in the Late Medieval Miracle Story’, Hagiographica, 3 (1996), 305–22; idem, ‘The Use of Direct Quotation from Canonization Hearing to Hagiographical Vita et Miracula’, in Gerhard Jaritz and Michael Richter (eds), Oral History of the Middle Ages. The Spoken Word in Context (Krems, 2001), 177–87.  Ronald Finucane, The Rescue of the Innocents. Endangered Children in Medieval Miracles (New York, 1997); Pierre-André Sigal, L’homme et le miracle dans la France médiévale (xie-xiie siècles) (Paris, 1985); André Vauchez, Sainthood in the Later Middle Ages; Christian Krötzl, Pilger, Mirakel und Alltag. Formen des Verhaltens in skandinavischen Mittelalter (12.15. Jahrhundert) (Helsinki: SHS, 1994); Göran Bäärnhelm and Janken Myrdal, ‘Miracles and Medieval Life. Canonization Proceedings as a Source for Medieval Social History’, in Gábor Klaniczay (ed.), Procès de canonisation au moyen âge. Medieval Canonization Processes (Rome, 2004), 101–116.  Michel Vovelle, La mort et l’occident de 1300 à nos jours (Paris, 1983), 35. 10 AA.SS, 7 September III: 194–200. 11 Charles Plummer (ed.), ‘Vie et miracles de S. Laurent’, Analecta bollandiana. 33 (1914), 121–86.  

Miracles and Wonders

94

of Thomas of Hereford (d. 1282). Barbara Hanawalt has pointed out the particular danger that local wells and other bodies of water, natural and artificial, might pose for infants, toddlers and children in rural society,12 and this is well-documented in miracle collections. It is rare that the child himself is blamed for the accident. In one case, however, his parents had urged a young boy to join them for mass on Sunday. When he preferred to go off and play with his friends, the devil caught hold of him and thrust him into a well. Another little girl, known for being argumentative, was taken from outside her home one night and thrust into a well.13 The detail provided in these cases, which sheds light on the social history of childhood, increased as the church became more bureaucratized and the standards for achieving canonization became more stringent. These miracle stories typically reflect such themes as: 1) the kinds of dangers to which children were exposed; 2) the symptoms regarded by contemporaries as evidence of death; 3) the means employed to revive the child; and, 4) notions of time among the peasantry. Nevertheless, while local folk may have believed that a miracle had occurred, church authorities were clearly more skeptical. As a consequence, despite the large number of childhood drownings noted in miracle collections, the first case to be cited in fact in a papal bull of canonization, which had thus achieved the high standards demanded by the curia, is only found in the 1320 canonization of Thomas of Hereford. This is nearly 150 years after the first proof-based papal canonizations.14 In order to guarantee that the miracle report was genuine and that only supernatural intervention could have effected the child’s revival, witnesses were asked to describe the signs of death and any natural means applied to bring about the child’s recovery. For example, the signs of death cited in the report of a drowning in the Yonne River at Sens were ‘the length of time the body had been submerged, its rigidity, color and temperature’, as noted in the miracles of Peter Martyr (d. 1253).15 These symptoms were often cited by rural witnesses, who might have been even more knowledgeable than urban dwellers of the symptoms of death.16 In rural areas, a corroborating physician or coroner at the site of the drowning, sometimes found in other kinds of cases, was 12

41.

Barbara Hanawalt, The Ties that Bound: Peasant Families in Medieval England (Oxford, 1985),

13 Both of these come from František Krásl (ed.), Sv. Prokop. Kláster a Památka u Lidu (Prague), 503–504. 14 Ronald Finucane, ‘Authorizing the Supernatural: A Curialist’s Analysis of Some English Miracles around 1318’, Paper presented at International Medieval Congress, University of Leeds, 14–17 July 2003. This case appears in the bull of canonization as: ‘Infans item biennis quidam in aqua quadam submersus et mortuus, extractus inde, post factum pro ipso votum miraculose extitit suscitatus.’ See AA.SS, 2 October I: 618. 15 Ambrose Taegio, Vita Petri, in AA.SS, 9 April 3: 708: ‘cuius mortis quatuor erant indicia certitudinis, videlicet magnum temporis spatium, rigiditas corporis, frigiditas, et nigredo’ (based on contemporary sources). 16 Simon of Trebnitz, Vita maior S. Hedwigis, A. Bielowski (ed.), in Monumenta poloniae historica, 6 vols. (Warsaw, 1961–1962), IV: 620–23 contains several cases of drowning in the Oder, with considerable detail about the condition of the body. In one case, 100 people responded to the call for help, despite the fact that the child had drowned at a depth of 20 cubits. A boat was used to attempt a rescue.

Canonization and the Hagiographical Text

95

usually absent; this would have rendered the testimony unreliable. Urban reports, on other hand, sometimes cited expert testimony. The report concerning the recovery from a fall from a second floor balcony of a child at Bergamo (whose father was a lawyer at the Roman curia) attributed to prayers to Peter Martyr in 1312, notes that twelve of the best physicians in town declared that no natural cure was possible.17 In the earliest papal canonization of the thirteenth century, the case of Empress Cunegunda (d. 1033 or 1039), canonized in 1200, six of the 19 miracles noted in her biography based on the canonization hearing refer to children. Some suffered illnesses and paralysis, others accidents, one was attacked by wolves, and another suffered premature death before baptism. Two examples of childhood drowning appear, a three year old in the Hessian town of Gruenberg, and a seven year old girl at Liuberstadt, during Rogations. In the more detailed case at Gruenberg, the elements which were to later characterize such cases already appear. The child was found in a lake, taken home, and an all night vigil was conducted around his bed. In the morning, the local priest pronounced the boy dead. But because Cunegunda’s reputation was beginning to spread, the onlookers beseeched her help, and the child revived within the hour. Eight knights could allegedly testify to the miracle.18 One of the earliest cases dealt with under the new, more rigorous standards concerned Osmund of Salisbury (d. 1099), whose case was investigated several times in the 1220s. In 1229 seven witnesses reported on a little girl who was extracted at dusk from a well in Salisbury in 1227 by her nurse.19 She was found to be cold, stiff, lacking in feeling, and unable to talk. One of the bystanders tried to open her mouth, placing her finger into the child’s throat, which was found to be cold. She was taken to a fire to be warmed, wrapped in a warm cloth until morning. In accordance with English custom, a wick was fashioned for a candle the length of the child as an offering at Osmund’s tomb, and the infant revived. The saint most widely regarded as a patroness of the young due to her assistance to orphans and children in distress was Elizabeth of Thuringia (d. 1231). The first investigation into her life and miracles consisted of an inquiry conducted by a papal commission shortly after her death on November 17, 1231.20 In 1235, another 24 miracles were added. Sixty-seven of the miracles in this early phase were performed on children, including recovery from birth defects, childhood diseases, possession, epilepsy, accidents, collapsing houses and the revival of dead children.21 As many Ibid., 712: ‘Medici autem meliores civitatis Bergomi, convocati fuerunt numero duodecim; quorum omnium una fuit sententia, ut nullum ei posset valere medicinae remedium.’ 18 Vita Cunegundis in AA.SS, March I: 277C. In two slightly earlier cases, Godehard of Hildesheim aided a fisherman’s son who nearly drowned crossing the Weser river; a little boy, travelling with other pilgrims, who drowned while his parents were feeding their horses and failed to look after the toddler (Wolfher, Vita Godehardi, in AA.SS., 4 May I: 526, 528). 19 A.R. Malden (ed.), The Canonization of St Osmund (Salisbury, 1901), 40, 42–5, 70–71, 74–5 for various cases of childhood drowning. 20 See Gábor Klaniczay, ‘Proving Sanctity in the Canonization Processes’, in Gábor Klaniczay (ed.), Procés de canonization au moyen âge. Medieval canonization processes, in Collection de l’École française de Rome, 340 (Rome, 2004), 121–35 on the canonization hearings. 21 For Elizabeth as patron of children see H. Zielinski, ‘Elisabeth von Thüringen und die Kinder’, in U. Arnold and E. Liebing, Elisabeth,Der Deutsche Orden und die Kirche; Festschrift zur 77 17

96

Miracles and Wonders

as 11 witnesses might testify to one miracle. These miracles include three cases of the accidental drowning of children and of a student who had gone fishing. Two of these cases received wider currency, since they appear in James of Voragine’s widely distributed version of Elizabeth’s life in the Legenda aurea. The new standards for reporting such cases demanded that the witnesses testify concerning the precise circumstances of the event, including the age of the victim, site of the miracle, the signs of death, the natural means employed to revive the victim, how long he or she had remained under water, what vow was uttered in order to effect a resuscitation, how much time had elapsed before the revival had occurred, and who was present. In Elizabeth’s dossier, all childhood drowning cases occurred in the summer of 1232, the most common period for childhood falls, since during the late spring or summer rural children were typically less subject to parental supervision and were prone to potentially fatal injury due to the dangers of nature, particularly from bridges, ponds, springs, open pits, cesspools, wells, mills, and streams. A four year old boy had gone out to play with his playmates in Metbach at vespers around June 24, 1232. He was discovered around sunset by two witnesses who had come to draw water from the well, and was described by his rescuers with ‘his mouth and eyes open, his skin completely blackened and wrinkled, his stomach swollen, his arms, legs and all his members stiff ’ – i.e. the necessary prerequisites for an assumption of death.22 His condition was such that one of the eyewitnesses mistook the injured boy for his own son and had begun to wail. The child was then brought to his parents’ home. Perhaps in order to explain why he had been left unattended, the protocol reported that his father lay sick and his mother was pregnant. All of those who were present beseeched the posthumous aid of Elizabeth of Thuringia and two devout women were asked to bring an ex-voto offering to the dead saint. As a result, the child revived. In the second case the parents of the victim were also absent. A two year old girl of Zeppenfeld in Westphalia near Trier had been rescued around April 25, 1232 from a stream by a six year old girl. As the villagers gathered, the infant was laid down in a field, her eyes and mouth closed, her body blackened and swollen. The local women wouldn’t let the girl’s mother approach. The infant was brought home, and shortly afterwards, revived as the mother and villagers invoked Elizabeth, saying, ‘St Elizabeth, help me so my daughter will be revived, and I will visit your tomb with her’. All of the witnesses were asked a critical question, how much time had elapsed between her drowning and being found and revived. The mother said, ‘the time it takes for an arrow to reach its destination’ (ad tractum baliste). Another woman said twice as long as it takes to string a bow. The time that lapsed between her rescue and revival was ‘longer than it takes to recite a mass’. The local priest, a premier witness in such cases, said that since the site of the event was too far for the commissioners to make an on-site inspection, he could vouch for the fact that eight people had sworn that the women’s testimony was accurate.23 A third childhood drowning in Elizabeth’s dossier was reported more tersely.

jährige Wiederkehr der Weihe der Elisabethkirche (Marburg, 1983), 27–38. 22 Albert Huyskens, Quellenstudien zur Geschichte der hl. Elisabeth (Marburg, 1908), 171–2. 23 Ibid., 96–7. This case is the first documentary evidence of the existence of this village. See http://www.heimatverein-zeppenfeld.de/.

Canonization and the Hagiographical Text

97

A year-and-a-half year old infant of Hesse drowned, and his case was reported by three men, including his father.24 Twenty-nine of the 81 miracles attributed to the Franciscan Ambrose of Massa (d. 1236) dealt with children. His 1240 dossier is based on a hearing held by the bishops of Orvieto and Soana and the Augustinian prior of San Giovanni in Piazza at which over 200 witnesses testified. Ambrose’s protocol has proven particularly valuable as a source for the history of Orvieto. Many cases note the unsuccessful application of medicine, or the poor prognosis reported by a physician prior to a resort to the supernatural. Full reports in the dossier include a child who fell from a window, three infants who fell out of their cradles at night and a fourth from the second story of his home; also included were still births and a child seized by a demon. In cases of childhood disease, physicians were usually consulted prior to calling on the supernatural. The falls however lack such corroboration. The dossier contains a full report of a childhood drowning at Orvieto in which five witnesses, including the boy’s father, the town chamberlain and his assistant, along with other bystanders, were deposed at Orvieto beginning on 12 June 1240.25 The case was recorded by the kind of well-trained notary employed by the papal court and was deposed according to strict legal standards. Since the depositions were taken only three days after the event, the memories of the witnesses were far fresher than in earlier cases. The event had occurred near the Orvieto home of Sinibaldo Ranucci Ermanno on June 11, 1240, when a boy nearly ten years old named Benvenuto, son of a treasurer, was playing in the Paglia River, an Umbrian tributary of the Tiber. After they had taken off their clothes, the child’s father Legerio lost sight of his son. Although allegedly warned by his father, Benvenuto had wandered off to the deeper part of the river, and unable to swim, drowned, before being retrieved by a bystander, also a treasurer. The signs of death reported by the deponents were that Benvenuto’s eyes were filled with dirt, his eye balls rolled back, and he had no pulse. He had remained under water for at least an hour and survived. This miracle received wider currency through the Dialogus de gestis fratrum minorum, a collection of Franciscan lives and miracles.26 The resort to Ambrose may be explained by the fact that 11 miracles had already occurred on the day of his Ibid., 259. Processus canonizationis B. Ambrosii Massani, in AA.SS, 10 November IV: 576–7. The papal bull initiating the procedure reads as follows: ‘Testes legitimos quos super vita et conversatione ac miraculis recolende memorie fratris Ambrosii debetis recipere, prius ab eis prestito iuramento, diligenter examinare curetis et de omnibus que dixerint interrogetis eosdem: quomodo sciunt, quo tempore, quo mense, quo die, quibus presentibus, quo loco, ad cuius invocationem et quibus verbis interpositis, et de nominibus illorum circa quos miracula facta dicuntur, et si eos ante cognoscebant, et quot diebus ante viderunt eos infirmos, et quanto tempore fuerunt infirmi, et quanto tempore visi sunt sani, et de quo loco sunt oriundi; et interrogentur de omnibus circumstantiis diligenter et circa singula capitula fiant ut expedit questiones premisse. Series testimonii et verba testium fideliter redigantur in scriptis’ (Ibid., 572). On Ambrose’s trial see Carol Lansing, Power and Purity. Cathar Heresy in Medieval Italy (New York, 1998), 130–33; Letizia Pellegrini, ‘Negotium imperfectum: il processo per la canonizzazione di Ambrogio da Massa (O.M., Orvieto 1240)’, in Società e storia, 17 (1994), 253–78. 26 Thomas of Pavia, Dialogus de gestis fratrum minorum, Ferdinand Delorme (ed.) (Quarrachi, 1923), 179, n. 49. 24 25

Miracles and Wonders

98

death on 17 April 1240, the foundation of the first Franciscan church at Orvieto had been laid early in 1240, an indulgence had been granted to pilgrims to his tomb, and his canonization trial had just begun. All of this was probably known to the child himself, who had been heard invoking Ambrose shortly after his revival. In Benvenuto’s case, the father promised to remain a faithful servant of the saint for the rest of his life, should his child revive. This suggests the genesis of a cult, and perhaps a confraternity organized by those who had benefited from the saint’s intervention, like Benvenuto’s family, with the assistance of the Franciscans. Children often played a major role in the festivities, processions and ceremonies surrounding the establishment of a new cult. For example, after Anthony of Padua’s death in 1231, despite attempts to hide the event for fear of conflict over his relics, children roamed through the city reporting the saint’s demise.28 Eyewitnesses noted that at the translation of John Buoni’s relics at Mantua to the church of St Agnes on June 14, 1251, a large number of children took part in the procession from the St Nicholas quarter of the city, and witnessed the miraculous relighting of a large candle made for the occasion by two children.29 In the rich dossier of Archbishop Philip of Bourges (d. 1261), first adjudicated in 1264–1266, four of the 46 recorded were childhood accidents, including falls into wells, rivers and mills. The drowning of Isabelle in a local spring, based on four witnesses, including her parents Osanna and Stephen of Brocia from the parish of St Palladio in Bourges, had taken place on a Saturday morning around Ascension Day in 1262.30 This miracle has been discussed earlier in this volume, and conforms to many of the elements found in the topos of the drowning child. After surveying these select examples of childhood drowning drawn from canonization miracles of the early thirteenth century, the following elements can be identified as necessary for a full miracle report: the personal details concerning the victim and witnesses; the precise time and location of the event; all of the circumstances surrounding the drowning; the reactions and identity of the bystanders at each stage of the event; signs of death and attempts made to revive the child; the precise invocation, to whom, and by whom; the reputation or fama of the miracle-worker and the oath or promise made to the saint; the amount of time the child had remained in and out of the water; the time and place of the testimony; the fulfillment of the vow; and the identity of the notaries, commissioners and other officials. As a consequence of the rigorous standards now demanded by the curia, many of these features were to become almost ritualized elements of the successful resuscitation. In the 60 years that had elapsed between the cases of Empress Cunegunda and Archbishop Philip of Bourges, reports of this miracle genre had become progressively more detailed in order to pass judicial muster. A more thorough study of these events might even allow us to draw a map of the places where children’s lives were conducted 27

Processus, 571 on the problem of dating his death. Vita Antonii, in AA.SS, June II: 714 based on the canonization hearing. 29 Processus canonizationis Ioannis, in AA.SS, 22 October IX: 884. 30 This is reported by witnesses nos 62–65. BAV ms 4021, 13r (miracle no.11); BAV ms r 4019, 69 –70v; BNf 5373A, 22v–24r (miracle no.13). In BNf 5273A, 2v–3r a summary appears, based on the mother’s testimony, and the remark that two witnesses were present both before and after the event and one other agrees, making a total of four witnesses. 27 28

Canonization and the Hagiographical Text

99

and where, in addition to the dangers of childbirth and postnatal disease, accidents might often occur. As a balm against the often fatal uncertainties of childhood, supernatural protection and intervention.

Chapter 7

Vidi in Somnium: The Uses of Dream and Vision in the Miracle Scholastic theologians, canon lawyers, ecclesiastical court personnel and even hagiographers had thus made a concerted effort to define and scrutinize the miraculous. Nevertheless, belief in divine intervention through revelation and the prophetic power of dream and vision was a universal value shared in the Middle Ages by Christian, pagan, Jew and Muslim alike, and the miracle narrative could not be immune from this. There is as yet no full census of all the recorded medieval dreams and visions, which would assist us to build a comparative portrait of the symbols and images that populated the imagination of medieval persons. Thousands of dreams were recorded in which members of all social classes, lay and clergy, noble, peasant and urban dweller, male and female, adults and children were allegedly visited by otherworldly forces both heavenly and infernal who were intent on communicating with the living. Such dreams served many purposes. They were a vehicle for the solution of theological or philosophical problems and for voicing new theological themes. For example, the new cults of the Infant Jesus and the Corpus Christi were propagandized by means of such dreams experienced by saintly women and others in the thirteenth century. Due to a lack of formal learning, their theological influence could thus only be felt through the agency of the dream or vision and such experiences often served to empower otherwise politically weak persons. The newly detailed view of the contours and topography of the next world were also reported in a host of revelations, such as the Vision of Tnugdale and an 1196 vision of sinners in the next world attributed to a monk of Eynsham. Female visionaries such as Christine of Stommeln who claimed  Among useful works are Steven F. Kruger, Dreaming in the Middle Ages (Cambridge, 1992); Peter Dinzelbacher, Vision and Visionsliteratur im Mittelalter (Stuttgart, 1981); Paul Edward Dutton, The Politics of Dreaming in the Carolingian Empire (Lincoln, 1994); Steven Fischer, ‘Dreambooks and the Interpretation of Medieval Literary Dreams’, Archiv für Kulturgeschichte, 65 (1983), 1–20; Maria Elisabeth Wittmer-Butsch, Zur Bedeutung von Schlaf und Traum im Mittelalter (Krems, 1990); Tullio Gregory (ed.), I sogni nel medioevo (Rome, 1983); Thomas Ricklin, Der Traum der Philosophie im 12. Jahrhundert: Traumtheorie (Leiden, 1998); Jacques Le Goff, ‘Rêves’, in Dictionnnaire raisonné de l’Occident medieval, Jacques Le Goff and Jean-Claude Schmitt (eds) (Paris, 1999), 950–68.  See for example, Thomas Agni de Lentino: Vita Petri Martyrii, in AA.SS, 29 April III: 694 for a vision of the Infant Jesus seen by Peter Martyr in the course of celebrating the mass, following a confrontation with a heretical necromancer. This biography is based on the canonization record.  Herbert Thurston (ed.), ‘Visio monachi de Eynsham’, Analecta bollandiana, 22 (1903), 225–319; Brother Marcus: The Vision of Tnugdal, Jean-Michel Picard (trans.) (Dublin, 1989). This work was inserted into Vincent of Beauvais’ Speculum maius and was translated into several

Vidi in Somnium: The Uses of Dream and Vision in the Miracle

101

to have visited the next world were often the recipients of such knowledge. Some of these visions reach us through the reports of their confessors, but with the rise of female literacy, some were composed by the women themselves and do not suffer from the interference of a perhaps unreliable intermediary. Much of the kabbalistic, mystical and apocalyptical Jewish literature of the period likewise contains such dreams and visions, suggesting that reliance on dream and vision was nearly universal, despite the guarded skepticism of some. The same rationalistic approach noted in both Aquinas and Maimonides with respect to miracle likewise informed their attitude toward visions and dreams. Nevertheless, questions of Jewish law could allegedly be solved in one’s sleep, and it was also reported that during the great evangelical year of 1233, both Jews and Christians were subject to apocalyptic visions. The autobiography of the convert Hermann of Cappenberg (d. 1160), the son of a Jew of Cologne, even contains two interpretations he had received of the same dream, one supplied by a local rabbi, another by the theologian Rupert of Deutz. It has been argued that these dream interpretations were meant to reflect the basic differences between Jewish and Christian exegesis: the Jewish allegedly superficial, the Christian anagogical and allegorical. 

Dreams and Hagiography Since its inception, dreams and visions have played a variety of roles in medieval hagiography. For example, the passion of the martyrs Perpetua and Felicity (203 A.D.) contained dreams confirming the existence of an afterlife for true believers. The dream and vision assisted in the establishment of new religious cults, the discovery of longlanguages. It provided an excellent vision confirmation of the views sin and salvation and of the next world which were then being formulated in learned circles, and were to be canonized by the Fourth Lateran Council (1215). A preliminary drawing for the famous Hell wing of Hieronymous Bosch’s The Garden of Earthly Delights, bears a reference to the vision of Tondale, which is an indication of the extent of its influence.  For her many visions, see Epistolae, in AA.SS, 22 June V: 294–348.  Ephraim Kanarfogel, ‘Peering through the Lattices’. Mystical, Magical and Pietistic Dimensions in the Tosafist Period (Detroit, 2000) attempts to show that, contrary to received opinion, medieval rabbinic thought attempted to demonstrate the compatibility of Talmudism and mysticism.  Hermannus Judaeus: Opusculum de conversione sua, Gerlinde Niemeyer (ed.), in MGH. Quellen zur Geistesgeschichte, 4 (Weimar, 1963). Hermann used these differing interpretations as a way of illustrating the superficial nature of Jewish Biblical exegesis as compared to the multilevel allegorical technique of Christian exegesis. The Jewish interpreter viewed the dream as a portent of worldly status and wealth; the Christian as a promise of eternal salvation should Hermann convert. At the age of 42 he converted and joined the Praemonstratensian order. The authenticity of this particular dream has been subject to some doubt, since it so closely reflects some of the arguments found in contemporary Christian-Jewish polemics. See Michael Goodich, ‘Oneiromantie im Mittelalter: Jüdische und christliche Perspektiven’, Psychologie und Geschichte, 3 (1991), 1–6 on the two differing interpretations; reprinted in Michael Goodich, Lives and Miracles of the Saints: Studies in Medieval Latin Hagiography (Aldershot, 2004). See Jean-Claude Schmitt, La conversion d’Hermann le juif. Autobiographie, histoire et fiction (Paris, 2003), 89–142 on the dream.  W.H. Shewring (trans.), The Passion of Perpetua and Felicity (London, 1931); see also Peter Dronke, Women Writers of the Middle Ages (Cambridge, 1984), 2–4.

102

Miracles and Wonders

lost relics and the initiation of public policy. They occur as a spur to conversion, a premonition of the future (such as imminent death or a military victory), a means of communication with dead relatives and enemies and a constituent element in the cure of disease. The great polymath Ramon Llull (d. 1315) reported that at every turning point in his life he had experienced a dream or vision that pointed him in a new direction. This included a thrice-seen dream of the crucified Christ that convinced him to abandon his family and the Majorcan court in favor of a life of penance and contemplation; and a vision of a shepherd (presumably Jesus) near Montpellier who had inspired him to begin his career as the author of philosophical tracts directed against Islam. A vision led Ramon to the Franciscan Tertiaries, and another to lay down his political program to convert nonbelievers. In the autobiography of Pope Celestine V (d. 1294), probably based on the recollections of his disciples, it was claimed that as a child of six he told his mother that during a visit to the local chapel he saw both Saint John and the Virgin addressing him. His mother told him not to report this to his playmates, lest they make fun of him. This so-called vision may have been the imaginings of a young child as he stared at a fresco or mosaic depicting these figures in the apse above the altar. Most such visions were reported secondhand by an admiring hagiographer, confessor or court biographer and conform to stereotypical, earlier Biblical and classical precedents. Thus, the topos of the miraculous visitation by a heavenly visitor who promises the birth of a child to a barren woman provided the newborn is dedicated to God, follows a fixed form with minimal variations.10 Celestine’s alleged recollections (up to age 30) are filled with many visions and dreams that re-appear in his hagiographical tradition and his canonization trial held in 1306. His early life is characterized by a dream life akin to many other eremitical saints, thus placing him within a continuing tradition.11 Another typical hagiographical topos concerns the inventio or discovery of long-neglected relics as a result of a dream, leading to the establishment or revival of a cult or the construction of a new pilgrimage church. Such dreams were especially prevalent in the central Middle Ages, answering the need for sanctification of newly established monasteries, bishoprics and settlements. In the thirteenth century, for example, Archbishop Philip of Bourges was directed to the site of the relics of St Severus, which had been unknown to the local community.12 This miraculous discovery  Raimundus Lullus: Opera latina, 8, Hermogenses Harada (ed.) (Turnhout, 1980), xxxiv, 259–309.  Arsenio Frugoni (ed.), ‘L’ “Autobiografia” di Pietro Celestino’, Celestiniana (Rome, 1954), 56–67. 10 Francesco Lanzoni, ‘Il sogno presago della madre incinta nella letteratura medievale e antica’, Analecta bollandiana, 45 (1927), 225–61. 11 Celestine’s life bears comparison to another Italian hermit, Placid of Val d’Ocre (d. 1248), often endowed with visions that fortified his faith. See Paul of Celano: Vita Placidii in AA.SS, 12 June III: 611: ‘Noli timere, Placide, serve meus: quia sicut tu rogasti me, ita et ego rogavi Patrem, ut non deficiat fides tua.’ This is based on some kind of local inquiry. The thirteenth century witnessed a revival of the eremitical life, particularly in Italy, centered on more remote regions such as the Abruzzi and Calabria. 12 Vita S. Philippi archepiscopi Bituricensis, in Thesaurus novus anecdotorum, Edmond Martène and Ursin Durand (eds), 5 vols. (Paris, 1717), III: 1934. This is based on the papal inquiry held in 1265/1266, copied at the curia in 1331 (BAV ms MS. 4019), which contains reports of dreams

Vidi in Somnium: The Uses of Dream and Vision in the Miracle

103

is the first reported in his life and miracles, based on the canonization hearing. Similar visions had preceded the miraculous discovery of the Holy Lance near the high altar of the cathedral of Antioch. In this case, however, the dreamer, Peter Bartholomew had allegedly been forced to undergo a trial by ordeal in order to authenticate his claims to divine revelation; some believed he had failed the test, since he died soon thereafter.13 Wider exposure to the nature of vision was provided through a variety of media, including sermons, drama, liturgy, frescoes, stained glass and other forms of visual art in which visions were depicted, thus providing the believer with a framework through which to understand his or her own visions. For example, in Clare of Montefalco’s (d. 1308) canonization record it is reported that in 1312/1313 Venutula, a widow of Montefalco had suffered from a disease which left her sleepless and experiencing continuous pain in one arm, despairing of medical help. After committing herself to Clare, who had recently died and was becoming the object of a flourishing cult, she eventually fell asleep and Clare appeared to her, ‘as she appeared in a portrait above Clare’s tomb’. After making a vow, in a fortnight her condition improved, and a month later she was cured.14 Such visual images reinforced the church’s ideological rendering of the nature of the dream. These images reappear in miracle stories; for example, an escaped prisoner may later report having envisioned a saint dressed in ecclesiastical garb or the Virgin as he had seen illustrated in a local church or cathedral, instructing what escape route to use, or how to find the keys to the prison. The aforementioned convert Hermann the Jew specifically cited the paramount importance of images of the crucified Christ in his adolescent decision to explore Christianity and convert. The distinction between vision and dream is not always clear, although the dream generally occurs at night, and the vision during one’s waking moments. In Clare’s canonization record, the notary reports a ‘dream or vision’ experienced by one of the witnesses; and a witness says that the saint appeared to her when she was ‘neither asleep nor awake’.15 A distinction is made between devilish illusions and divine revelation: Hermann Joseph’s miraculous knowledge of the martyrdom of Engelbert of Cologne (d. 1225) is referred to as a vision rather than a ‘sleepers’ delusion’.16 The interpretation of a complicated dream is sometimes found in the text itself or may require consultation

in which the saint, clergy and lay suppliants were involved. In the early church, Saint Ambrose, for example, allegedly found long buried relics of saints in Bologna and Milan, restoring them to their glory. Aspects of this phenomenon are discussed in Patrick Geary, Furta Sacra. Thefts of Relics in the Central Middle Ages (Princeton, 1978). 13 Bernard Hamilton, ‘“God Wills It”: Signs of Divine Approval in the Crusade Movement’, in Signs, Wonders, Miracles. Representations of Divine Power in the Life of the Church, Kate Cooper and Jeremy Gregory (eds), in Studies in Church History, 41 (2005), 88–98. 14 Enrico Menestò (ed.), Il processo di canonizzazione di Chiara da Montefalco (Spoleto, 1984), 405. 15 Ibid., 405: ‘post hoc sopnium, seu visionem’; 378: ‘nec bene dormiebat, nec bene vigilabat.’ 16 Caesarius of Heisterbach, Vita, passio et miracula S. Engelberti, in AA.SS, 7 November III: 681: ‘Non per phantasmata somniorum, sed per visionem etiam corporeis oculis manifesta preostensa fuerit.’

Miracles and Wonders

104

of one of the contemporary dream manuals.17 Works influenced by the Arabic tradition tended to provide a more mechanistic and physiological interpretation of dreams, while the Christianized interpretations focused on the religious symbolism of objects which appeared to the dreamer. Dream manuals, for example, argued that proximity to dawn meant that the dream would be fulfilled more quickly; or that the food consumed by the dreamer before going to sleep, through changing the balance of the humors, or astrological factors, might influence the nature of the dream. Both physicians and priests used these texts in order to assist the unlearned to interpret their dreams, although direct documentation of such practical use is rare. No saint’s life is without its visions or dream sequences, which are one way of cementing the tie between the visionary and the divine. In the life of Elizabeth of Thuringia it was reported that Hermann of Roermond in Holland, a Cistercian of Amelungsborn, suffered severe epilepsy in the winter of 1233. While asleep he twice dreamed of Elizabeth garbed in white vestments instructing him to bring an ex-voto offering to her shrine. The abbot did not believe the first vision. He was only persuaded after the cure had transpired. Thus, for this skeptic the miracle resided in the cure, rather than the vision.18 Traditionally, when the dreamer doubts its reliability or is unsure of its source, a dream occurs three times as a way of providing divine authentication. For example, the Archpriest Oderisio of Tagliacozzo reported that sometime before April, 1240 he had a nocturnal dream of Odo of Novara (d. 1200) instructing him to have Abbess Adhuisa move his body. Since ‘he regarded this as a fantastic [i.e. diabolical] illusion’, the dream occurred with great clarity a second and third time.19 In 1249 the monks of Celestine V’s incipient religious order had a vision of the Virgin, John the Baptist and John the Evangelist after recitation of the Introit, and three angels appeared at the end of the mass celebrating the dedication of the Holy Spirit at Mount Magella by Celestine. The priest Jacopo de Castellione subsequently voiced doubts about this event to the saint’s companion, Roger the Englishman. After Roger had prayed, Jacopo dreamed of seeing St Benedict dressed in ecclesiastical garb in said church confirming the church dedication.20

The Book of St Gilbert, Raymonde Foreville and Gillian Ker (eds and trans.) (Oxford, 1987), 173–75 for an interpretation provided to Innocent III by Rainer of Ponza in the case of Gilbert of Sempringham. See also Adam of Eynsham, Magna vita sancti Hugonis, Decima L. Douie and Hugh Farmer (eds and trans.), 2 vols. (London, 1962), II: 209–211. For a case of Richard of Chichester interpreting the dream of an unnamed noblewoman, see the life by the Dominican Ralph Bocking, based on the 1262 canonization hearing, in AA.SS, 3 April I: 301. 18 Diodorus Henniges (ed.), ‘Vita Sanctae Elisabethae, Landgraviae Thuringiae auctore anonymo’, Archivum franciscanum historicum, 2 (1909), 261–2. This is taken from the partial canonization hearing found in Albert Huyskens (ed.), Quellenstudien zur Geschichte der hl. Elisabeth v. Thuringen (Marburg, 1908), 243, n.1. 19 ‘Documenta de B. Odone’, 329–30 for the evidence taken from a papal inquiry held in 1240. 20 Supplementum historicum of Lelio Marini, which is taken from the canonization record, in AA.SS, 19 May IV: 502–503. The original vision was confirmed by Brother Angelo de Caramanico in his testimony at the canonization hearing. The second vision was confirmed by Roger the Englishman. 17

Vidi in Somnium: The Uses of Dream and Vision in the Miracle

105

Papal Dreams If the recipient still fails to act on the message conveyed by the dream, then God’s retribution may be felt. Given the well-known tradition of premonitory dreams in both the hagiographical and philosophical traditions, it is not surprising that even high ecclesiastics might be cautious about dreams reported to them. Nevertheless, despite the growing attempt to base belief in the miraculous in rational foundations, even the pope might chasten his learned legalism with a cautious belief in the providential role of the dream and vision. The dream or vision thus often served as a decisive factor in the papal decision to canonize, even when sufficient evidence had been gathered to prove the performance of miracles. For example, shortly after Pope Innocent III assumed the papal throne in 1198, an old man reported that St Peter, patron saint of the papacy, had appeared to him instructing him to approach the pope and urge him to repair various neglected altars at Rome.21 When the man disregarded this divine call he was struck blind as retribution by the angry saint. After finally reporting his dream to the chief papal lieutenant, the cardinal bishop of Ostia (the future Pope Gregory IX), the old man’s sight was restored. The pope’s letter warned of devilish delusion on such occasions, but cautioned the cardinal to take the claims of such supernatural visitors seriously, and ordered that the decrepit altars be repaired. This was coincidentally part of a program for the beautification of Rome undertaken by Pope Innocent III and reflects his campaign to enhance the status of St Peter as the forerunner of the pope. It thus well-served Innocent’s oft-noted view of the Petrine plenitude of power given to his papal successors. In his letter to cardinal bishop Octavian of Ostia, Innocent had written that ‘it is right that according to the Apostle that “one should not believe every spirit” [1 John 4.1], because in such matters “the angel of Satan himself may transform himself into an angel of light” [2 Corinthians 10.14]; and it is better to piously believe than to fearlessly doubt’. Innocent was to employ the same image of Satan posing as an angel of light in his letters concerning the danger of heretics, i.e. false prophets, appearing to the believers as pious agents of God. His 1199 call to the archbishop of Metz to investigate possible instances of heterodoxy notes that ‘this work demands great discretion, since bitter vetch secretly subverts with the appearance of virtue, and “the angel of Satan” fraudulently “may transform himself into an angel of light”’.22 In his canonization bull devoted to the merchant Homobonus of Cremona (d. 1198) issued in 1199, Innocent’s demand that signs and miracles are necessary proofs of sanctity likewise was likewise ground on the fear that the believers might easily be led astray by Satan, who has ‘transformed himself into an angel of light’, a trick performed by both Pharaoh’s magicians and the Antichrist.23

21 Die Register Innozenz’ III, 7, O. Hageneder et al. (eds) , I: no. 359, 540–41; see also Michael Goodich, ‘Vision, Dream and Canonization Policy under Pope Innocent III’, in Pope Innocent III and his World, John C. Moore (ed.) (Aldershot, 1999), 151–63.; reprinted in Goodich, Lives. 22 Register Innozenz’ III, 2: 132, p. 273; PL, 214: 695, no. 141; Kurt Victor Selge, Die erste Waldenser, 2 vols. (Berlin, 1962), 1: 299. 23 Register Innozenz’ III, 1: 528 (530); PL, 214: 483.

106

Miracles and Wonders

Another papal visionary was Pope Gregory X, who reportedly gave an account of his decisive dream to the conferees at the Second Council of Lyons (1274).24 Just prior to his difficult election to the papal throne, he had dreamt that during a sea voyage all the passengers in his vessel had drowned except him. Christ then appeared, hand outstretched, saying that He didn’t want Gregory drowned so that he could help fulfill two important goals: to recover the Holy Land and bring the errant Greek Christians back into the true Church. Not surprisingly, these two issues played a central role at the Lyons Council. Both Innocent III’s and Gregory X’s dreams thus served to provide divine approval to the political program of the papacy. A particularly rich source of firsthand evidence concerning dreams and visions are the documents related to papal canonization.25 As we have seen, because a dream or vision, due to its very personal nature, cannot be verified by several unimpeachable witnesses, it could not withstand the rigid standards of proof laid down in canon law (and echoed in Innocent III’s aforementioned letter concerning the altars of Rome). They would not appear in the final canonization bull among the verified miracles of the saint.26 Nevertheless canonization hearings are filled with reports of dreams and visions that were one of the constituent elements of a miracle. The theological demand that a miracle be a public event that would encourage wonder and thereby convert nonbelievers or strengthen the faith of Christians reduced the value of the vision per se as an element of sanctity. Its secondary by-product, however, i.e. a cure, could nevertheless be viewed as a miracle by the spectators.27 Odo of Châteauroux, who was active in the adjudication of several canonization trials in the 1260s, argued that, unlike the Patarene heretics who interpret miracles in a spiritual manner, Jesus preferred visible, corporeal miracles.28 Papal personnel were aware of the difficulties entailed in verification of a dream or vision. The extant summary of the hearing in support of the Franciscan Simon of Collazzone (d. 1250) contains one case in which a dream precedes the thaumaturgical 24 Julian Gardner, ‘Päpstliche Träume und Palastmalereien. Ein Essay über mittelalterliche Traumikonographie’, in Träume im Mittelalter. Ikonographische Studien, Agostino Paravicini Bagliani and Giorgio Stabile (eds) (Stuttgart, 1985), 113–24. 25 Chiara Frugoni, ‘“Domine, in conspectu tuo omne desiderium meum”: visioni e immagini in Chiara da Montefalco’, in S. Chiara da Montefalco e il suo tempo, Claudio Leonardi and Enrico Menestò (eds) (Spoleto, 1992), 155–81 for visions experienced by Clare, her biographer Berengar of Saint-Affrique, and several nuns, along with illustrations of dreams in the visual art of the period. 26 For bulls see Codex constitutionum quas Summi Pontifices ediderunt in canonizatione Sanctorum ab anno 993 ad annum 1729, Justus Fontanini (ed.) (Rome, 1729); Zbigniew Perzanowski (ed.), ‘Miracula S. Stanislai’, in Analecta Cracoviensia, 11 (1979), 98, in which the absence of corroborating witnesses to a miracle is noted by the contemporary editor of the evidence concerning the miracles of Stanislaus of Cracow. 27 As John Baconthorpe says in Super quattuor libros Sententiarum (Milan, 1511), iv. qu.5: ‘Christus fecit publice et notorie haec omnia genera miraculorum in publicis locis … ex imperio voluntarie.’ See Pierre-André Sigal, L’homme et le miracle dans la France médiévale (xie-xiie siècle) (Paris, 1985), 145–47 on the dream which accompanies a cure. 28 Odo of Châteauroux: Sermo XCI contra hereticos, in Analecta novissima, Joannes Baptista Pitra (ed.), 2 vols. (Rome, 1888), 2: 281.

Vidi in Somnium: The Uses of Dream and Vision in the Miracle

107

cure of a hernia that had lasted five years and had not responded to medical assistance. Four witnesses to the cure are noted; the victim himself, however, is the only person who could vouch for the vision, although the cure itself was attested to by others.29 Many of the papal canonization protocols contain a summary of the testimony, which note how many deponents had testified concerning each article and what contradictions might exist in their testimony. In the 1363 case of Delphine of Languedoc (d. 1360), for example, it was reported that in 1300, at the age of 13, she had been pressured by King Charles II of Sicily and her relatives into marrying the future Count Elzéar of Sabran, despite her stated desire to remain chaste. She fled to the upper floor of her hospice, and turned in prayer to the Virgin for guidance.30 Mary appeared to her and comforted the troubled girl by saying that she would look after her. The collators noted that this event was reported by three witnesses who themselves were not present and who had relied on the recollections of named and unnamed persons. This vision was therefore not supported by reliable first-hand testimony. Thus, despite their widespread use in hagiography, dreams and visions do not appear among the miracles cited in canonization bulls. Edmund of Canterbury’s (d. 1241) vision of his dead mother advising him to study theology, and his conversations in a dream with Thomas Becket, while reported in all documents related to the canonization and subsequent biographies, are not repeated in the canonization bull (1246).31 Clare of Assisi’s dream of suckling at the breast of St Francis is likewise not repeated in the bull of canonization, and is even absent from some biographies, despite the canonization testimony of her colleagues.32 Nevertheless, the dream and vision were recurrent elements in canonization hearings. The earliest extant protocol of such a papally-ordered investigation dealt with Galgano of Chiusdino (d. 1181), held in August 1185 under Pope Lucius III.33 Testifying long after the events, Galgano’s mother Dionigia said that as a youth Galgano had dreamt that the Archangel Michael had asked her to make her son a soldier. She Michele Faloci-Pulignani (ed.), ‘Il beato Simone de Collazzone e il suo processo nel 1252’, Miscellanea francescana, 12 (1910), 125. 30 Jacques Cambell (ed.), Enquête pour le procès de canonisation de Dauphine de Puimichel comtesse d’Ariano (Turin, 1978), 34, 164, 210–211, 246–47. 31 See the life by Eustace of Faversham, considered closest to the inquiry, in Clifford H. Lawrence (ed.), St Edmund of Abingdon. A study in hagiography and history (Oxford, 1960), 203–221 (at 206 for the vision of his dead mother); Historia canonizationis S. Edmundi, in Thesaurus, Martène and Durand, 3: 1812–1813; also Vita sanctissimi Edmundi, in London, British Library, Vitellius, C. XII, 288v (called ‘Anonymous A’ by Lawrence, St Edmund, 49). 32 Gary Dickson, ‘Clare’s Dream’, Mediaevistik, 5 (1992), 39–55; Zefferino Lazzeri (ed.), ‘Il processo di Chiara d’Assisi’, Archivum franciscanum historicum, 13 (1920), 403–450 for testimony. 33 Fedor Schneider (ed.), ‘Der Einsiedler Galgano von Chiusdino und die Anfänge von San Galgano’, Quellen und Forschungen aus italienischen Archiven und Bibliotheken, 17 (1914–1924), 61–77 for the canonisation text. Eugenio Susi, ‘La Vita Beati Galgani del Codice Laurenziano Plut. 90., Sup. 48’, Benedictina, 39 (1992), 316–40 contains a Vallumbrosian life; Franco Cardini, San Galgano e il spada nella roccia (Siena, 1982), 101–111 contains an Augustinian biography of the fourteenth century; Eugenio Susi, L’eremita cortese. San Galgano fra mito e storia nell’agiografica toscana del xii secolo (Spoleto, 1993), 185–213 for an anonymous Cistercian life. Rudolph Arbesmann, ‘The Three Earliest Vitae of St Galganus’, in Didascaliae. Studies in honor of Anselm M. Albareda, Sesto Prete (ed.) (New York, 1961), 1–37 deals with the interdependence of Galgano’s biographies, but does not deal with the trial testimony on which these lives were presumably based. 29

Miracles and Wonders

108

then gave him to the angel, whom he followed. Awakening from the dream, he reported it to his mother, who suggested that it was a good dream. She testified that her dead husband had been a devotee of St Michael, and that Galgano continued to dream of the archangel. This dream parallels the popularity of St Michael during the period and was to become a central feature of Galgano’s visual history, illustrated by such great artists as Lorenzetti. Although clearly an apocryphal legend intended to cement mendicant, particularly Dominican, claims against their opponents, in the 1240s it was also reported that in 1215 Pope Innocent III had decided to establish the Dominican and Franciscan orders only after dreaming that two friars, Dominic of Guzman and Francis of Assisi were supporting the collapsing papal church of St John Lateran in Rome.34 The report of a vision of Francis propping up the crumbling church of St Peter is found in the second Vita by Thomas of Celano, Bonaventure’s Legenda maior, and the Legenda trium sociorum, all of which were written after the canonization. It may be classified as the kind of pia fraus so common in medieval hagiography, intended to enhance the reputation of both participants. Giotto’s famous fresco of Innocent’s alleged dream (in which only Francis, and not Dominic, appears), situated in the upper basilica at Assisi, was to become one of the most well-known images of a medieval pope. Innocent’s reputation was, however, not uniformly positive. Lutgard of Aywières reported having seen Innocent shortly after his death in 1216 suffering the tortures of Purgatory for his evil deeds, and was only spared further pain due to the intervention of the Virgin, since he had piously built a monastery (unnamed).35 This same pope often hesitated to canonize newly proposed candidates for sainthood without some supernatural sign. Despite a host of letters from ecclesiastical and secular dignitaries and evidence of miracles and a virtuous life gathered in the course of a judicial inquest, Innocent was allegedly only persuaded to announce the canonizations of the English saint Gilbert of Sempringham and the Czech Procopius of Sazawa after a prophetic dream. Innocent’s dream concerning Gilbert occurred between 2 and 12 January 1202, when he was considering his canonization. He dreamt of seeing a bed draped with a silken canopy embroidered with saints. As the pope himself attempted to stitch, he thought of the impending case of Gilbert of Sempringham and heard a voicing calling out to him, ‘Archangel Michael will help you in this matter’. Innocent consulted the Cistercian Ranier of Ponza, known for his occult skills, concerning the dream; and he confirmed that Gilbert should be canonized.36 In 1203 the Benedictine Procopius (1004–1053), at whose tomb in Prague miracles had already occurred, appeared in a vision to Abbot Blasius of Sazawa, urging him to go to Rome in order to lobby for his canonization. He appeared three times, in order to convince the abbot of the veracity of his demand. The pope, however, did not take sufficient notice of the evidence and the abbot, having exhausted his funds after spending a year in the city, undertook the journey home. As he reached the city’s outskirts Innocent suddenly experienced a vision of Procopius berating him for having failed to Goodich, ‘Vision’, n. 7. This appears in Constantine of Orvieto’s 1246/1247 life of Dominic. 35 Thomas of Cantimpré, Vita Lutgardis, in AA.SS, 16 June IV: 197. 36 On Ranier see Herbert Grundmann, ‘Zur Biographie Joachims von Fiore und Raniers von Ponza’, Neues Archiv, 16 (1960), 237–546. 34

Vidi in Somnium: The Uses of Dream and Vision in the Miracle

109

act. He raised his staff and threatened the pope if he did not immediately recall the abbot from the road near San Lorenzo Outside-the-Walls. He identified himself to the pope, who recalled the abbot, celebrated a mass, and ordered the canonization, which was handled by the cardinal priest of Santa Maria in Trastevere, Guido di Preneste.37 Such saints as William of Bourges, Clare of Assisi, Yves of Tréguier and Stanislaus of Krakow were also only given the papal blessing after such a dream, although their cases had often been supported by 100s of witnesses. Although the pope established commissions of inquiry to draw up a dossier dealing with the candidate’s life and miracles, some of which were supported by the testimony of up to 12 witnesses, the dream retained its confirmatory role and allowed the pope to carry out the decision to canonize. Stanislaus of Krakow’s case, for example, had been delayed due to the long time that had elapsed since his death and the time of his miracles. The first posthumous miracle claimed that a nobleman named. Falus had been instructed in a dream to visit the cathedral of Krakow in order to bring about a cure of his illness.38 When he came to the church, he had in a vision seen the former bishop of Krakow instructing him to visit the tomb of Stanislaus. He was instructed to approach the present bishop Prandotha and convince him to undertake a campaign for Stanislaus’ canonization. But because he failed to act, the knight again fell ill, was warned by the dead saint of his lapse, and the moment he mounted his horse to ride to Prandotha, he was cured a second time. Later, Raynald, Cardinal bishop of Ostia (the future pope Alexander IV), had been entrusted with handling the case. Overwhelmed by the large number of miracles attributed to Stanislaus, Raynald (an perhaps others) raised objections about the case. The auditor therefore had expressed the view that one last miracle might clinch the case and encourage a unanimous vote among the cardinals.39 After some time Raynald fell ill with what appeared to be a terminal illness. As he lay alone on his sickbed waiting to receive the final sacrament, he was visited by the dead saint garbed in his ecclesiastical robes. After promising to support the case, Raynald was cured; physicians confirmed that no medical explanation could be found for this cure, and Stanislaus was canonized by Innocent IV in 1253; curative visions of Stanislaus also appeared to four other persons, lay and clergy, prior to the canonization.40 As pope, on a journey from Perugia to Assisi, Raynald also had a vision of Clare of Assisi’s impending death.41 37 František Krásl (ed.), Sv. Prokop. Kláster a Památka u Lidu (Prague), 499–500; Václav Chaloupecky and Bohumil Ryba, Stŕedověké Legendy Prokopské (Prague, 1953), 158–9. 38 Wojciech Ketrzyński, Miracula S. Stanislai, in Monumenta poloniae historica, 6 vols (Warsaw, 1960–1961), IV: 311. 39 Vincent of Kielce, Vita S. Stanislai, Wojciech Ketrzyński (ed.), Monumenta poloniae historica, 6 vols (Warsaw, 1960–1961), IV: 434–5: ‘Tunc stupefactus Iohannes presbiter cardinalis, qui datus erat auditor cause beati Stanislai martyris, quod non esset admissa tanta congeries miraculorum cum tanta nube testium, dixit ad magristrum Iacobum ecclesie Cracovienis nuncium: Necessarium sanctus vir finale operari miraculum, quod discordantes cardinales in miraculis faciat mirabiliter concordare in unum.’ 40 Vincent of Kielce, Vita S. Stanislai, 434–35. John Dlugos, Vita et miracula Stainislai, in AA.SS, 7 May II: 253–54. For the case of another prelate cured at the papal curia due to Pope Celestine V, see ‘S. Pierre Célestin et ses premiers biographes’, Analecta bollandiana, 16 (1897), 456. 41 Thomas of Celano, Vita Clarae, in AA.SS, 12 August III: 764.

Miracles and Wonders

110

Bartholomew of Sulmona had a vision of Thomas Aquinas complaining that Pope Celestine V had been canonized, but his own case was delayed.42 In a process that had begun under Pope John XXII, 249 deponents had testified concerning the life and miracles of the Breton Yves of Tréguier (d. 1303), the patron saint of lawyers. Nevertheless, the process had not been concluded. In one of the collations delivered by Pope Clement VI in 1347 on the occasion of Yves’ canonization, the pope stressed the decisive role played by a posthumous visitation from the dead saint in his own decision. He noted that in the period prior to the canonization, the duke of Brittany had come to the curia and had reported that he himself could attest to two miracles performed by the saint. The barons and duke had argued that Yves’ canonization would greatly benefit the province and peace would be restored to the land (which was then suffering the depredations of the Hundred Years’ War). As noted in chapter 3, Clement had experienced a vision of the saint reprimanding him for having delayed the treatment of his case. As a result, he reported his dream or vision to the proctor and order him to pursue the matter. Thus, Clement adopted the cautious policy recommended by his predecessor Innocent III, and decided to act. It was this vision, rather than the 25 proven miracles cited in the bull of canonization and the eyewitness testimony of the duke himself, which had strengthened the pope’s resolve to act favorably.43 In other cases, persons closely connected to the candidate dreamed of the putative saint in glory, which could serve as a sign encouraging the curia or local bishop to initiate proceedings. Such dreams were generally the prerogative of ascetic monks or nuns who, according to contemporary dream theory, were the most likely recipients of divine messages. This dream was generally relayed to Rome, and the pope could then be assured of the divine intervention required in order to affirm the proposed canonization. In such cases a constituency already existed which convinced the curia and pope to act and considerable sums of money had been mobilized to mount a campaign. Nevertheless, the intervention of God through a dream was often a sine qua non to tip the scales in favor of the putative saint. For example, around the time of the death of Hugh of Lincoln (d. 1200), three of his confidants had complicated dreams in which he was seen in glory.44 Likewise, one of Hedwig of Silesia’s (d. 1243) companions, sister Juliana, had a vision of two bishops reporting that what Urban IV had begun, Clement IV had happily completed. Two abbots had likewise appeared to Juliana in a vision at the time of Hedwig’s translation.45 In a late thirteenth century biography of the nun Margaret of Hungary, daughter of King Bela IV, it is reported that a few days before Margaret’s (d. 1270) death a Praemonstratensian nun dreamed that the Virgin Mary and a heavenly host of saints were preparing to welcome Margaret in glory.46 This was confirmed by three other visions/dreams that occurred shortly after her death. As William of Tocco, Vita Thomae, in Fontes vitae S. Thomae Aquinatis, Dominic Prümmer (ed.) (Toulouse, 1911), 155. 43 AA.SS, 4 May I: 678. 44 Adam of Eynsham, Magna vita, II: 208–217. 45 Simon of Trebnitz: Vita majora Hedwigis, in Monumenta poloniae historica, A. Bielowski (ed.), IV: 629. 46 Legenda beatae Margaritae de Hungaria, in Scriptores rerum hungaricarum (Budapest, 1938), II: 694–95. I wish to thank Prof. Gábor Klaniczay for this text. 42

Vidi in Somnium: The Uses of Dream and Vision in the Miracle

111

a result, a commission of inquiry was established to investigate Margaret’s suitability for official sainthood. One of the witnesses at Clare of Montefalco’s inquiry, a Tertiary Franciscan, dreamt the day after the saint’s death that St Martin came to him in a dream saying, ‘You ought to firmly believe that sister Clare is a saint’.47 Another woman who had asked Clare for assistance envisioned Clare in a dream assuring her that she would be aided, saying, ‘I will not lie, since my body is supposed to be canonized’.48 A similar dream came to a nun of Ripoll near Florence concerning the recently martyred Peter of Verona (d. 1252). Looking up into the sky, she saw the Virgin sitting on her throne of glory, and two Dominican friars ascending into heaven. A voice told her that they were Dominic and Peter, who was to be canonized.49 The Dream in a Miraculous Cure The introduction of papal canonization demanded that witnesses be asked under oath to recall their acquaintance with the putative saint, their own experiences of the miraculous, and the saint’s reputation. Many deponents remembered having seen the saint in a dream or vision in the course of which they might receive: advice about how they could escape from prison or other distressing situation; assistance against the devil and his agents; or the cure of an illness or injury.50 Such witnesses usually belonged to a constituency of parishioners or others who had come to a papal or episcopal court in order to support the candidate’s claims to sanctity. It is therefore difficult to judge the accuracy of such memories, particularly since the witnesses were rarely questioned immediately after the events. They were thus subject to post-event suggestions, distortions caused by the trauma they had experienced, information acquired by talking to others, stereotypical perceptions of the saint’s ministry, and the influence exerted by community’s collaboration in creating a particular image in support of the putative saint’s case. For example, a young girl reported at Odo of Novara’s tomb at the monastery of SS. Cosmas and Damian in 1240 that after having lost her sight she had dreamed that Odo had said, ‘Go to my cell in Tagliacozzo, because you will be completely cured’. Odo removed a ring from his finger and signed her with it; upon awakening she felt much better. At the shrine, she recognized Odo’s relics due to the ring on his finger. Such a report is not trustworthy, since her identification of Odo may have been the consequence of information she acquired prior to the dream.51 The testimony often included not only the dreamer himself, but also those persons, including family members and neighbours who could confirm the circumstances surrounding the experience. For example, in 1299 11 persons testified concerning the cure of the noblewoman Philippa, wife of Richard de Pratis, following three visions of Menestò, Il processo, 407. Ibid., 463. 49 Thomas Agni di Lentino, Vita, 699. A vision of Thomas Aquinas in glory was reported by friar Alberto of Brescia at Thomas’s canonization hearing, and was repeated in all subsequent biographies. See AASS, 7 March I: 667. 50 William of Tocco, Vita, 146 for a youth who spoke to the saint at the tomb of Thomas Aquinas. 51 ‘Documenta de B. Odone’, 336. 47

48

Miracles and Wonders

112

Pope Celestine V directing her to his tomb.52 Such dreams or visions helped to both cement and expand the saint’s constituency, even encompassing former enemies. For example, a knight had tortured a devotee of the Cistercian Maurice of Carnöet in order to extort money from him.53 The knight warned his victim that neither St Andrew nor St Maurice could help him. Not taking such an insult lightly, Maurice, whose case was dealt with by Honorius III between 1224 and 1226, posthumously appeared to the cruel knight to berate him and deprive him of his sight for three days.54 In the end, the victim was freed, and both captive and captor made a pilgrimage to Maurice’s shrine, where they both provided a suitable ex-voto offering. In the same way, a convicted Welsh renegade hung (unsuccessfully) by William de Broase, the English lord of Gower, was joined by William and his household on a pilgrimage to the shrine of Thomas of Hereford in 1289 as an act of reconciliation.55 The aforementioned genres of dream appear in the extensive canonization dossier of the Augustinian hermit Nicholas of Tolentino (d. 1305).56 The dreams and visions in this case may be divided into two categories: those attributed to the saint himself and his family, and those experienced by his followers, some of whom had known him personally during his lifetime. All of these dreams/miracles belong to traditional medieval topoi, although this does not in itself cast doubt on the veracity of the witnesses’ testimony. Three reports of prisoners who in a dream are helped to escape with the saint’s assistance occur in Nicholas’s inquiry. In the first, a friar reported that in 1307, i.e. two years after the saint’s death, a gang of thieves had attacked a man of Tolentino at his farm, stealing his oxen and taking him and his flock to the area of San Severino. The captured man had called out to Nicholas for help, but at first to no avail. He was tied hand and foot so as not to escape. At daybreak, while the bandits were still asleep, Nicholas appeared to him, and led him out of captivity, despite the braces with which he was bound. The saint also instructed him to go to Montecchio rather than Tolentino. There he found refuge at the Augustinian priory, where his story was told to Prior Giovanni de Montecchio, who reported it 18 years later to the papal commission. Giovanni had also spoken to the thieves themselves, who confirmed

‘Pierre Cölestin et ses premiers biographes’, Analecta bollandiana, 16 (1897), 457. Beda Plaine (ed.), ‘Duplex vita inedita S. Mauritii Abbatis Carnoetensis ordinis Cisterciensis (1114–1191)’, Studien und Mitteilungen aus dem Benedictiner und dem Cistercienser Orden, 7 (1886), 386–87. 54 For a dream in which a man is warned of the dangers threatening those who fail to honor of the feast of Bona of Pisa (d. 1207), see Vita Bonae, in AA.SS, 29 May VII: 162, based on eyewitnesses. 55 Michael Goodich, ‘Foreigner, Foe and Neighbor: the Religious Cult as a Forum for Political Reconciliation’, in Meeting the Foreign/er in the Middle Ages. Xenological Approaches to Medieval Phenomena, Albrecht Classen (ed.) (New York, 2002), 127–53. 56 Nicola Occhioni (ed.), Il processo per la canonizzazione di S. Nicola da Tolentino (Rome, 1984). The case was recorded in towns of the March of Ancona between 7 July and 28 September 1325. 371 witnesses appeared, including 196 men and 175 women, the vast majority laity, although the testimony of the Augustinian hermits themselves is the fullest. The contemporary biography based on this case is Peter of Monte Rubiano: Vita, in AA.SS, 10 September III: 644–64. 52

53

Vidi in Somnium: The Uses of Dream and Vision in the Miracle

113

their captive’s account, which became common knowledge throughout the area. In a second escape episode, which had occurred in 1315, the victim himself was able to appear at the 1325 hearing. Jacobuccio Petrucci of Tolentino had stolen some oxen and was imprisoned under harsh conditions at Ascoli for eight months. He claimed to have frequently envisioned the saint, whom he had known personally and to whom he had confessed. When he vowed to make a waxen offering should he manage to escape, the saint immediately appeared, instructing him to leave the prison, which he had opened. Jacobuccio told another prisoner, who had been sentenced to death, and was weighed down with heavy weights. He touched these chains and they immediately fell off. The two found the gates open and the guard missing from his post.58 The third escape case was reported second-hand by two women of Perugia, who had heard of a man who had escaped in a similar way from the prison of the podestà of Perugia in December 1324, and which had been attested by many persons.59 Similar cases are found in Clare of Montefalco’s 1317/1318 protocol. Here, two women reported that they had been assured in a premonitory dream of the saint that their sons, who had been imprisoned by the communal authorities, one for homicide, were to be freed.60 Such reports of a miraculous escape from prison following a nocturnal visitation by a patron saint possess a venerable history in Christian hagiography. The canonization reports are remarkable, however, insofar as they provide detailed testimony concerning the circumstances of the imprisonment (e.g., places, dates), the persons involved, the size of the ransom, the topography of the prison, corroborating witnesses etc.61 A second kind of vision concerns the saint’s appearance to a person suffering an illness or injury, or to a parent or spouse of the victim. The dreamer recognizes Nicholas of Tolentino, vows to provide an ex-voto offering and visit the saint’s tomb.62 In such cases, a vision of the saint serves as a surrogate for a vow made at the tomb, which may be inaccessible to the recipient of the dream, either because of the geographical distance or because of physical limitations. In some cases, the dream occurs when the recipient is in the process of fulfilling a vow during an ‘incubation’ period at the tomb.63 The third genre of dream or vision is diabolical. Many reported having heard how Nicholas battled with visions of the devil in his cell. In a case reported by a large number of witnesses, the nuns of the monastery of Santa Lucia at San Ginesio reported seeing a host of demons, including some dead men who had earlier ravaged the area. 57

57 Occhioni, Il processo, 84–5. See also Vita et miracula Zitae, in AA.SS, 27 April III: 509–10 for a report of a man accused of stealing an ass freed from the stocks at Capua in 1300 after of vision of Zita of Lucca. This report is based on a notarized statement taken down at the time. 58 Occhioni, Il processo, 183. 59 Ibid., 178–79. 60 Menestò, Il processo, 378, 498. 61 See e.g. František Graus, ‘Die Gewalt bei den Anfängen des Feudalismus und die “Gefangenenbefreiungen” der merowingischen Hagiographie’, Jahrbuch für Wirtschaftsgeschichte, 1 (1960), 61–156. For other examples in contemporary ‘papal’ hagiography of miraculous escapes following a vision, see Schneider, ‘Der Einsiedler’, 74–5.; Vita et Miracula Stephani, in AA.SS, 7 September III: 194–200 for proceedings concerning Stephen of Châtillon (d. 1208), bishop of Die, held in 1222/1230. 62 Occhioni, Il processo, 301, 143, 357–8, 375, 432. 63 Ibid., 378, 418.

Miracles and Wonders

114

Although dead, they now invaded the convent for more than a year and took possession of the nuns.64 They were exorcised through the posthumous assistance of the saint. Such invasions often occur as a result of a violent or evil death, which had condemned the ‘victims’ to enter another’s soul until being expelled by an exorcist. A fourth kind of vision, of the prophetic variety, refers to how Nicholas’ childless parents had been instructed by an angel in a dream to go to the shrine of Nicholas of Bari. While sleeping as pilgrims at the church, they dreamed of St Nicholas, who prophesied the birth of their son, who was to be devoted to God. All of these visions and dreams enhanced the saint’s reputation or fama, and served as necessary propaganda for the establishment of his cult. The vision preceding the birth of a child to a childless couple is particularly common among devotees of the saint, and Nicholas, as the patron, is then repeatedly called upon to aid the child in distress.65 In many of the aforementioned cases, the dream or vision has thus served as a catalyst to encourage the victim to act: a prisoner actively attempts to escape, an afflicted person undertakes a pilgrimage, a new public policy is initiated, which may have been the subject of prior discussions. For example, Innocent III and the other popes were already involved in a canonization procedure when a dream appeared to encourage quicker action. The movement away from crusade in favor of mission preceded Ramon Llull’s visions, since the crusaders increasingly faced military defeat. The theology of the next world had long been the subject of lively discussion prior to the visionaries’ experiences. The many visions and dreams reported in the investigations into Galgano, Peter Martyr, Nicholas of Tolentino, Clare of Montefalco and others strengthened a case that the church had already begun to pursue through the establishment of a papal commission of inquiry. Nevertheless, these dreams clearly helped to arouse the cult’s popular constituency and demonstrate the saint’s divine competence. The respect accorded the dreamer and the apparently miraculous recovery subsequent to the dream served to confirm both divine election and miracle-working power. The fullest legitimately attested miracle should contain a series of the standard constituents of a thaumaturgical cure in which the vision or dream might serve as integral agents of such a miraculous recovery. These elements were partly imposed on the purported event by the notaries, scribes, canon lawyers, proctors and others who handled the canonization trial or submitted official documents for consideration by the papal commission. These included the following basic pieces of information: a description of the symptoms of the problem; an unsuccessful attempt to achieve a cure through medical means; a desperate call to the saint for help; the appearance of a saint in a dream providing directions to the suppliant or his/her surrogate; the utterance of a vow; the miraculous cure itself; rejoicing among those who witness or hear of the cure, Ibid., 135. For the nocturnal appearance of Peter Martyr to the wife of a man of Ascoli, see Thomas Agni de Lentino, Vita, 712: ‘“Ego sum ille S. Petrus, quem quotidie pro puero habendo deprecati estis: et quia apud me tantum precibus institistis, ego quod postulastis, a Domino impetravi”: et porrigens illi puerulum, ait: “Accipe filium, quod petisti”. Post spatium autem novem mensium predicta mulier peperit filium masculum; et diebus conceptionis diligenter computatis, reperit, quod a nocte visionis usque ad diem partus spatium novem mensium, nulla die superabundante vel deficiente, concurrit.’ The infant was then mortally ill, unable to eat, and was restored to life through a vow to the saint. This miracle probably occurred in 1312 or later. 64 65

Vidi in Somnium: The Uses of Dream and Vision in the Miracle

115

and the fulfillment of the vow. For example, all of these elements appear in the first posthumous miracle (thus immediately confirming his martyrdom) attributed to the rector of Orvieto, Peter Parenzo (d. 1200), who had been killed by Cathar heretics and became the object of a flourishing cult which Innocent III was asked to confirm.66 This framework appears in reports found in canonization hearings ordered by the pope and in notarized miracles recorded by local church officials trained to note the necessary elements of a miracle, as in the case of the Dominican Ambrose Sansedoni (d. 1287).67 This same collection reports the case of a young woman, cured by the saint in such a Canon John of Orvieto: Vita Petri, in AA.SS, 21 May V: 91: ‘Quaedam namque matrona, de districtu Coruarii Urbevetanae dioecesis, quatuor annis ita manus contractas habuerat, omni confectas macie, ut in eis soli nervi existere viderentur, et a mulierum officiis essent penitus alienae. Hanc quidam Prior S. Andreae de Monte-Martha misit cuidam venerabili honesto et religioso viro, Anselmo nomine, physicali scientia erudito, civi Urbevetano, ut ei medicinarum auxilio subveniret. Qui cum non posset ei cum suis proficere medicinis, nono Kalendas Junii somnum dans oculis suis in nocte, ac palpebris requiem consuetam, vidit in somno se ante altare B. Petri Apostoli Romae cum magna multitudine permanere; et multorum concentum audiens Angelorum, qualis cantus esset, coepit humiliter postulare. Cui unus illorum quaerenti respondit: “Hic est Petrus Parentii, qui occisus est in Urbeveteri gladiis impiorum; et hi sunt Angeli qui cum deducunt ad patriae mansionem.” Evigilans autem mane medicus antedictus, grandaevus aetate, quid significaret haec visio coepit subtiliter cogitare. Tunc supervenit matrona iam dicta, et eum visitans sibi suam retulit visionem, dicens se in somnis eadem nocte vidisse totum mundum aquis abundantibus coopertum, in illis autem aquis submergebantur homines, et eadem mulier erat usque ad labia eiusdem aquae liquoribus occupata; et dicebat ei quidam eminens super aquas: “Vade ad illum plagatum et ipse tibi tribuet sanitatem, et de aquarum fluctibus liberabit.” Et ut ipsa mulier referebat, Petrus Parentii videbatur stare prope ipsam, ita in veritate plagatus, sicut vulneratus extitit manibus iniquorum. Dixit autem in visu mulier: “Domine, adjuva me.” At ille extendit digitum, et mulier coepit digitum B. Petri Parentii: et statim de aqua exiens in visione, fuit cum multis populis liberata. Magister autem Anselmus audiens mulierem et eius visionem recogitans, revolvens etiam in mente qua de causa fuerat Dominus Petrus occisus; dixit ad mulierem: “Soror, vade ad illum sanctum Martyrem: quia cum sit propter justitiam interfectus, tibi forsitan desideratam tribuet sanitatem.” Mulier autem fidem adhibens dictis eius, se devote ac humiliter sepulcro Martyris praesentavit; ibique orans tota quarta feria, se nervis extendentibus et ossibus fragorem facientibus, elevatis manibus dicebat: “Deus adiuva me.” Et statim recepit in manibus sanitatem, ita ut manibus operaretur, quidquid officia exigunt feminatum.’ This biography was written shortly after Peter’s martyrdom in 1200. See also Thomas Agni de Lentino, Vita, 713 for a youth cured at Milan, in which all these elements appear. Peter Martyr’s inquiry also contains other such examples with more medical detail, including suppliants who came to Milan from as far away as Pest in Hungary in order to visit Peter’s tomb. 67 Gisberto, Recuperato and Oldrado: Vita et miracula Ambrosii, in AA.SS, 20 March III: 198: ‘Mulier quaedam Senensis, Soza nomine, fistulas in brachio per quinque menses habuit, quae in eodem brachio octo foramina causaverunt, nec remediis ullo modo medicorum curari poterant. B. Ambrosio se devote commendans in hoc per biduum perseverauit, sperans divinum sibi [non] defore auxilium meritis Sancti sui. Cumque sic perseveraret, nocte quadam apparuit ei in visione B. Ambrosius, et brachium infirmum manu tangens, dixit: “Noli timere, & fide integra te Deo devote commenda.” Mane evigilans invenit se totaliter ab ea infirmitate liberatam, prout ipsa postmodum testata est.’ In Ambrose’s case a request to the papacy by both the Dominicans and the commune of Siena was not acted upon. According to the authors of his life, this was due to Pope Boniface VIII’s Ghibelline (i.e. pro-imperial) sympathies. 66

116

Miracles and Wonders

recuperative dream, whose recourse to the supernatural was needed since she could not afford any other medical care.68 A vision might also inspire the saint’s biographer to undertake the composition of a biography. In the life of Thomas Aquinas by William of Tocco, the author reports that he was returning to Astura after having taken part in the learned Dominican’s canonization trial (1318/1321). He was contemplating how to write eloquently about Thomas’ many virtues, and dreamed of a gold net bound with golden chains and filled with multi-colored precious stones.69 William understood that these represent the gems of wisdom, the life, miracles and achievements of the saint. Nevertheless, despite the encouragement which such dreams or visions gave to all those who favored the candidacy of a putative saint, they could not be confirmed in accordance with acceptable judicial procedure. Thus, while often appearing as focal elements of a miracle, they could not appear in the final bull of canonization.

68 Recuperato of Arezzo: Vita et miracula Ambrosii, in AA.SS, 20 March III: 224: ‘nec poterat aliquibus remediis liberari, praecipue cum esset pauperrima, nec ei humana remedia suppetebant.’ 69 William of Tocco, Vita S. Thomae Aquinatis, in AA.SS, 7 March I: 675: ‘vidit in somnis coram se rete argenteum, contextum catenulis argenteis cum diversorum colorum lapidibus pretiosis, in ipsius retis nodis mira varietate contextis. In qua visione cum intelligeret in illo reti ex lapidibus pretiosis vitam et virtutes praedicti Doctoris specialiter designari, cogitabat in somnis, qui lapides quibus possent adaptari virtutibus, ut diversis lapidibus diversae etiam virtutes congrue responderent.’ In addition, Thomas envisioned his sister in Purgatory, and other persons related visions concerning the saint’s virtues. William’s biography is based on the canonization hearing.

Chapter 8

Conclusion This book was born as a byproduct of my interest in the social aspects of the miraculous in the central Middle Ages. In the course of reading miracle tales with an eye to what they could tell us about such themes as family structure, child-rearing, violence and other themes, I have been struck by the growing legalistic desire of those entrusted with their composition to ensure accuracy and credibility. A tension appeared to exist between the desire to exalt the Faith through a record of miracles performed through the agency of the Christian saints and the need to guarantee believability in the face of the opposition of heretics, Jews and other sceptics. The aim of this volume has been fourfold: to explore the relationship between reason and revelation in the medieval understanding of miracles; to link the desire to provide a more rational foundation to the Christian belief in miracles with the rise of heresy and other forms of disbelief; to compare and contrast ‘popular’ and learned understanding of the miraculous; and to trace the application of the rules of evidence in the examination of miracles in the central Middle Ages. It has been based largely on the exploitation of four kinds of primary sources: canonization dossiers and contemporary hagiographical Vitae and miracle collections; philosophical/theological treatises dealing with miracles attributed to God, the prophets, angels, saints, Satan and others; sermons which reflect both the learned perspective on miracles and the attempt to communicate this theology to a wider audience; and canon law and ancillary sources dealing largely with the procedure of canonization. The learned understanding of the miraculous has often been effectively transmitted to a wider public through the great flourishing of devotional art that characterized the central Middle Ages and early Renaissance. Its iconography has not been dealt with in this volume, although it continues to provide inspiration to both believers and scholars. As we have seen, beginning in the late twelfth century, scholastic theologians such as William of Auvergne, Thomas Aquinas and Engelbert of Admont attempted to provide a rational foundation to the Christian belief in miracles, bolstered by the Aristotelian theory of natural law. A similar effort is evident in contemporary Jewish philosophical discussions of the supernatural, found in the work of such figures as Maimonides and Nahmanides. In Christianity this may be seen as an attempt to rationalize the continuing supernatural claims of Christianity against its chief polemical opponent, Judaism and its new enemies, the heretics. This goal was explicitly stated in several canonization bulls issued since Innocent III, including those of Anthony of Padua, Louis of Toulouse, Lawrence of Dublin, and Edmund of Canterbury. At the same time, the developing principles of canon law supported the notion that evidence of the miraculous requires the application of proper judicial procedure and the deposition of witnesses of unimpeachable character. The aim was to achieve a single reliable version of the events, free of contradictions and capable of withstanding scrutiny.

118

Miracles and Wonders

References to such trustworthy witnesses testifying under oath as the necessary proof of saintliness appear in twelfth century miracle collections and bulls of canonization, e.g. in the case of Galgano of Chiusdino (1185) under Pope Lucius III. Already prior to Innocent III (1198–1216), the inquisitio had become the acceptable procedure for the examination of witnesses to the life, miracles and ministry of a putative saint (as it was in the investigation of heresy). In the thirteenth century this procedure was formalized and refined through the employment of notaries, canon lawyers, proctors, translators, scribes and others trained in canon and Roman law, and was applied to a host of other ecclesiastical trials. Nevertheless, the desire for supernatural intervention as confirmation of the conclusions reached via legal procedures persisted. The central Middle Ages may be viewed as a transition period when faith in the revelatory nature of dreams, visions and unsubstantiated cures continued alongside the growing demand for proof supplied in accordance with the standard rules of evidence. Despite the scholastic application of reason and law to the adjudication of sainthood, visions and dreams (which by their nature cannot be confirmed by corroborating witnesses and which implied supernatural intervention) continued to play a role in the learned approach to the miraculous. Such visions were not merely experienced by the unlearned, for whom the posthumous apparition of a dead saint as a prelude to a successful thaumaturgical cure often remained a common theme in the etiology of the miracle. In the case of Margaret of Hungary (1267), for example, SS. Bartholomew, Demetrius and Lawrence allegedly appeared in a vision to one of the witnesses at her trial, hoping to communicate with the Archbishop of Esztergom, who was then investigating Margaret’s candidacy for sainthood. Many proposals for canonization reached a final resolution only after the pope himself or persons close to the curia experienced confirmatory dreams, visions or cures. This was the case despite the high standard of legal and scholarly training that characterized the medieval papacy. For example, Innocent III (d. 1216) had several dreams which resolved his doubts about such candidates for canonization as Gilbert of Sempringham, Procopius of Sazawa and Peter Parenzo. Despite substantial evidence in the case of Hedwig of Poland, Clement IV (1267) demanded a sign from heaven, which came in the form of the restoration of sight to his daughter. One of the most skeptical of all popes was John XXII, who, as a cardinal (1313), had rejected many of the miracles proposed in the case of Pope Celestine V. Nevertheless, he accepted the miraculous cure of his niece through the intervention of Thomas Aquinas, whom he canonized (1323). Clement VI likewise reported his own vision of the Breton lawyerpriest Yves of Tréguier (d. 1303) prior to the 1347 papal canonization. Such personal reports of the supernatural appear to have remained necessary despite Clement’s own citation of 25 miracles as proof of sanctity, as noted in his sermons delivered on the occasion of Yves’ canonization. Thus, while ecclesiastical circles attempted to provide corroboratory evidence of supernatural intervention prior to the establishment of a saint’s cult, divine revelation continued to play a role in the confirmation of the cult. The framers of public policy and the hagiographers who composed saints’ lives, liturgy, and sermons were acutely aware of those forces ready to cast doubt on Catholic claims of sainthood. All of the bulls of canonization beginning with Innocent III take note of Satan’s wiles and the need to establish clear standards for judging the deeds of candidates for sainthood, who, like the heretics, may be wolves masquerading in

Conclusion

119

sheep’s clothing. Such alleged miracle-workers as Ermanno Pungilupo, Guglielma of Milan and Gerard Segarelli were at first venerated by their followers; following an investigation, they were declared to be heretics and cast out of the church. Every saint’s life contains reports of the skepticism voiced by persons from all social classes who opposed the saint or cast doubts on his or her miracle-making powers. Beginning with early Christianity, the power of miracle as a means of converting the nonbelievers had been recognized. For example, the alleged conversion of more than 3,000 Jews by Pope Sylvester in the fourth century was attributed to his miraculous restoration of life to a bull which had been killed by a Jewish magician in the course of a public debate between spokesmen for the two faiths. Thus, skepticism and miracle continued to coexist side by side in Christian sources, and the miracle was regarded as the most effective means of overcoming doubts. This criticism of faith in the miraculous might be the result of political bias, heresy, patriotism, personal animus, conflicts among religious orders or ideological opposition to the cult of the saints. Such reports sometimes betray a level of anti-clericalism or religious doubt rarely revealed in the official documents of the church and contradict the presumption of the Middle Ages as an ‘age of faith’. In addition to the need for Christian miracles at the sites of holy relics as a means of combating the false claims of heretics, note was taken of Christians whose ‘faith had grown cold’ and who needed miracles to reaffirm their wavering faith. And indeed, saints’ lives are filled with cases of spectators who doubt the saint’s virtues, invariably leading to divine revenge and the inevitable miracle which brings the nonbeliever back to his faith. Likewise, the increasing militancy of the church in the face of its ideological foes, which led to the marginalization of so many groups, demanded miracles as further proof against the false arguments of Jews, Muslims, pagans and schismatics (as stated in the papal bulls of canonization and documented in contemporary hagiographical sources). Those cast out of the church, such as the leper, prostitute, usurer, heretic and criminal, were most dramatically returned to the faith through the agency of the miracle. Alongside the theoretical and judicial sources which allow us to flesh out a picture of attitudes toward the sacred and supernatural, the many witnesses to cures and other miracles present the popular view of the supernatural, albeit through records produced in clerical circles. The sources provide a textured portrait of urban and rural, noble and clerical, male and female attitudes toward sainthood, miracles and the sacred. The cases of Philip of Bourges (d. 1260), Elizabeth of Thuringia (d. 1231) and Richard of Chichester (d. 1253) for example, which are highlighted in this volume, illustrate the application of canon law procedure to the deposition of witnesses and provide examples of the rejection of evidence which was contradictory or imprecise. The many documents related to the canonization trial of Bishop Thomas of Hereford (d. 1282) present a veritable microcosmic social history of the saint’s cult. This dossier allows the scholar to trace the most complete history of the transformation of the raw testimony of a canonization hearing into the final papal bull. A stenographic list of miracles recorded at the tomb site, containing the basic elements of each miracle, survives in an Exeter College, Oxford manuscript. The canonization hearing provides the testimony of witnesses to miracles selected for further adjudication. The papal bull of canonization and subsequent biographies make use of this raw material.

120

Miracles and Wonders

Among the neglected sources employed in this volume have been the anonymous De mirabilibus sacrae Scripturae, Radulphus Ardens’ encyclopedic Speculum universale, and the De miraculis Christi by the Styrian Benedictine scholastic Abbot Engelbert of Admont. The concern with proofs of the miraculous found in these treatises reflects not only the rise of scholastic philosophy and the institution of papal canonization, but also the growing concern with the wiles of the Devil and the need to distinguish between ‘true and false prophets’ and between the miraculous and the magical. Engelbert’s treatise is clearly addressed to Jewish and philosophical objections to the Christian miracle and is found in about ten manuscripts housed largely in German and Austrian libraries (thus far uncollated and unpublished. The De miraculis Christi provides a systematic discussion of the miracles of Jesus, the angels, the prophets and saints, in comparison to the deeds of Satan and his minions. Engelbert attempts to provide a rational explanation for miracles (citing Hugh of St Victor and others), based on the prototype of Jesus’ miracles, within the context of natural law theory. He systematically deals with each of Jesus’ miracles and their Old Testament precedents. Like other similar treatises, Engelbert also cites the classic examples of the Devil and his minions (for example in the guise of Pharaoh’s magicians) performing acts of magic which may lead the unwary astray). The De mirabilibus and Speculum were less well known than Engelbert’s treatise, but likewise suggest the implications of natural law theory and scholastic theology for the study of the supernatural. In addition, a vast body of contemporary Sermones de sanctis reflects the image of the saint, his/her ministry and miracles as communicated to a wider audience. The examples cited in this volume represent only a very small proportion of the untapped resources available to historians of the sacred. Delivered in both Latin and the vernacular and based on Biblical exegesis, scholastic theology, hagiographical Vitae et miracula and canonization records, such sermon literature served as the basis for the changing learned and popular public perception of the miraculous. The church’s stated desire to stress the virtues of the saint during his or her lifetime as an example to believers and as the most effective means of combating heresy is reflected in these sermons. Nevertheless, the miracles selected for summary in the sermon and the speaker’s scholarly interpretation continued to reflect changing views of the miraculous. Among those preachers whose work may be profitably consulted are Henry of Friemar, Jordan of Quedlinburg, John Herolt, and Peregrinus of Oppeln. Most notably, Odo of Châteauroux, as Cardinal bishop of Tusculum, had himself been directly involved in the canonization trials of Hedwig of Silesia, Philip of Bourges, and Richard of Chichester (his sermons dealing with these saints likewise remain in manuscript form). Another important collection includes the sermons of Pope Clement VI, who had direct access to many of the canonization records. An ancillary source are the legendaries, like the well-known Legenda aurea (ca. 1260) by James of Voragine, which often summarized the material found in saints’ lives, and were often the foundation of both sermons and visual art related to saints’ cults. One such collection, the Sanctorale (ca. 1323) by the Dominican inquisitor Bernard Gui (and author of a biography of Thomas Aquinas), was widely distributed and remains in manuscript. Thus far, no full catalogue of the miracle reports during the Middle Ages has been undertaken. Although a stereotypical structure may unite all of these tales, nevertheless each one reflects its own social milieu and is often the sole written record of the lives

Conclusion

121

of anonymous folk. In the central Middle Ages, alongside the reports of miraculous escapes from jail or drowning, burning houses or fatal falls, the cure of disease or congenital disorders, every miracle collection contains at least one report of a skeptic mocking the miracle or miracle-worker. In accordance with the new standards applied to inquiries into manifestations of the supernatural, many of these reports are welldocumented, and are thus not merely necessary fictions aimed at enhancing the saint’s reputation. They indicate a persistent rejection of miraculous claims, and may well explain the attempts by theologians, canon lawyers and church officials to provide a rational foundation to the belief in miracles, and apply legal norms to the adjudication of miracles stories and the institution of sainthood.

Bibliography Primary Sources Manuscripts Anon., Miracula valde pulchra et ad credendum possibilia, in ms Wilhering, IX, 96, 279b–285a. Bernard Gui, Legenda de sanctis, in Paris, BNf lat. 5406–5407. Clement VI, Collationes, in Paris, Bibliothèque S. Geneviève, ms 240. Engelbert of Admont, De miraculis Christi, in ms Codex Admontensis 398, fols. 22r–38r. Engelbert of Admont, Sermones in Einsiedeln ms 755 (Misc. 660). Engelbert of Admont, Tractatus de gratis et virtutibus beatae virginis Mariae, in msCodex Admontensis 181. Historiae et miracula, in ms Codex Admontensis 781, 89r–104v. Inquisitio de miraculis Thomae Herefordensis, in Oxford MS, Exeter College 158. Inquisitio super vita et miraculis Philipi Bituricensis, in Rome ms, Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana Lat. 4021. Jacobus de Bonovento, Sermones de sanctis, in ms Zwettl 387. James of Voragine, Sermones quadragesimales, in ms Codex Admontensis 688. Odo of Chateauroux, Semones, in Rome ms Biblioteca Angelica 157 (B.6.10). Processus super vita et miraculis Phillipi, Paris ms BNf Lat. 5373A., 1r–65r. Processus super vita et miraculis Phillipi, in Rome, ms Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana Lat, 4019. Radulphus Ardens, Speculum naturale, in Paris ms BNf Lat. 3240. Radulphus Ardens, Speculum naturale, in Paris ms BNf Lat. 3229. Vita sanctae Elisabeth, in ms Zwettl 326. Vita sanctissimi Edmundi, in London, British Library, Vitellius, C. XII. Printed Works ab Amsterdam, Balduinus (ed.), ‘Tres sermones inediti Joannis de Rupella in honoremS. Antonii Patavini,’ Collectanea franciscana, 28 (1958), 33–58. Abate, Giuseppe (ed.), ‘S. Rosa da Viterbo, terziara francescana (1233–1251): Fontistoriche della vita e loro revisione critica,’ Miscellanea francescana, 52(1952), 113– 278. Acta canonizationis S. Dominici, A. Walz (ed.), in Monumenta ordinis fratrum praedicatorum historica, 16 (Rome, 1935), 93–194. Adam of Eynsham, Magna vita sancti Hugonis, Decima L. Douie and Hugh Farmer (eds and trans.), 2 vols. (London, 1962). Adelferio, De adventu Tranum, obitu, miraculis Nicolai, in AA.SS, 2 June I: 244–8. Agni de Lentino, Thomas, Vita et miracula Petri, in AA.SS, 29 April III: 686–712. Albert Huyskens (ed.), Quellenstudien zur Geschichte der heilige Elisabeth (Marburg,1908).

Bibliography

123

Albertus Magnus, Summa theologiae in Opera omnia, A. Borgnet (ed.), 38 vols. (Paris, 1890– 1899), vol. 31. Alexander of Hales, Glossa in quattuor libros Sententiarum Petri Lombardi (Quaracchi, 1951). Aquinas, Thomas, Quaestiones disputatae. De potentia Dei, 5 vols. (Turin, 1954). Aquinas, Thomas, Summa contra gentiles, Vincent J. Bourke (trans.), 3 vols. (Notre Dame, 1975). Aquinas, Thomas, Summa theologiae, T.C. O’Brien et al. (eds), 61 vols. (New York, 1981). Aquinas, Thomas, Truth, Robert Schmidt (trans.), 3 vols. (Chicago, 1954). Barthomoaeus Anglicus, De rerum proprietatibus, Georg Barthold (ed.) (Frankfurt, 1601). Ambrose Taegio, Vita Petri, in AA.SS, 9 April 3: 686–726. Anon., Tractatus adversus Judaeum, in PL, 213: 747–808. Arbellot, François (ed.), ‘Miracula S. Martialis anno 1388 patrata’, Analectabollandiana, 1 (1882), 411–46. Aristotle, Metaphysics, revised edition, W.D. Ross (ed.), 2 vols. (Oxford, 1958). Auctor incertus (Augustinus Hipponensis?), De mirabilibus sacrae scripturae libri tres, in PL, 35: 2149–2200. Augustine, City of God, G. McCracken (ed.), 7 vols. (Cambridge, Mass., 1963). Augustine, Contra faustum, in PL, 42: 207–518. Augustine, De genesi ad litteram, in PL, 34: 219–486. Augustine, De trinitate libri XV, W.J. Fountain (ed.), in Corpus christianorum. Serieslatina, 50 (Turnhout, 1968). Augustine, De utilitate credendi, in PL, 42: 63–92. Augustine, De verbis Domini, in PL, 38: 243–52. Auvray, Lucien (ed.), Registres de Grégoire IX, 4 vols. (Paris, 1890–1955). Baconthorpe, John, Quaestiones in quattuor libros Sententiarum, 2 vols. (Farnborough, 1969). Baconthorpe, John, Super quattuor libros Sententiarum (Milan, 1511). Balbi, Joannes, Catholicon (Cologne, 1506). Behrman, David (ed.), ‘Volumina vilissima, a Sermon of Eudes of Châteauroux on the Jews and their Talmud’, in Gilbert Dahan (ed.), Le brülement du Talmud à Paris 1242–1244 (Paris, 1999), 189–209. Bernard Gui, De fundatione et prioribus conventuum provinciarum Tolosonae etprovinciae ordinis praedictorum, P.A. Amargier (ed.), in Monumena ordinisfratrum praedicatorum historica, 24 (Rome, 1961), 202–204. Bernard of Clairvaux, Liber de vita et rebus gestis S. Malachiae, in PL, 182: 1073–1118. Bersuire, Pierre, Opera omnia, 3 vols. (Antwerp, 1609). Bertagna, Martino (ed.), ‘Note storiche e documento interno a S. Lucchese da Poggibonsi’, Archivum franciscanum historicum, 62 (1969), 3–114. Bocking, Ralph, Vita Ricardi Cicestriensis, in A.A.SS, 3 April I: 282–318. Bonaventura, Legenda Francisci, in AA.SS, 4 October II: 742–83. Boniface VIII, Sermo prior factus in palacio apud apud Urbem Veterem die martis ante festum beati Laurentii, André and François Du Chesne (eds), Historiaefrancorum scriptores, 5 vols. (Paris, 1636–1649), 5: 482. Brother Marcus, The Vision of Tnugdal, Jean-Michel Picard (trans.) (Dublin, 1989).

124

Miracles and Wonders

Bruder, Petrus (ed.), ‘Acta inquisitionis de virtutibus et miraculis S. Hildegardis’, Analecta bollandiana, 2 (1883), 116–29. Caesarius of Heisterbach, Sermo de translatione beate Elyzabeth, Albert Huyskens (ed.), Die Schriften des Cäsarius von Heisterbach über die heilige Elisabeth von Thüringen, Publikationen des Gesellschaft für Geschichtskunde, 43.3 (1937), 381–90. Caesarius of Heisterbach, Vita, passio et miracula S. Engelberti, in AA.SS, 7 November III: 623–84. Callebaut, André, ‘Le sermon historique d’Eudes de Châteauroux à Paris le 18 mars1229 autour de l’origine de la gréve universitaire de de l’enseignement desmendiants’, Archivum fratrum historicum, 28 (1935), 61–114. Cambell, Jacques (ed.), Enquête pour le procès de canonisation de Dauphine dePuimichel comtesse d’Ariano (Turin, 1978). Cardini, Franco, San Galgano e il spada nella roccia (Siena, 1982). Carolus-Barré, Loius, ‘Consultation du cardinal Pietro Colonna sur le IIe miracle de Saint Louis,’ Bibliothèque de l’Ecole des chartes, 117 (1959): 57–72. Carolus-Barré, Louis (ed.), Le procés de las canonisation de Saint Louis (1272–1297):Essai de reconstruction (Rome, 1994). Chaloupecky, Václav and Bohumil Ryba, Stŕedověké Legendy Prokopské (Prague,1953). Christopher of Parma, Vita Ioachimi Senensis, in Analecta bollandiana, 13 (1894), 383–97. Collijn, Isak (ed.), Acta et processus canonizationis beate Birgitte (Uppsala, 1924–1931). Constantine of Orvieto, Legenda S. Dominici, H. Chr. Scheeben (ed.), in Monumentaordinis praedicatorum historica, 16 (Rome, 1935). Corpus iuris civilis, 3 vols., T. Mommsen and P. Kruger (eds) (Berlin, 1908–1944). Crane, Thomas F. (ed.), The «exempla» or illustrative stories from the «Sermones Vulgares» of Jacques de Vitry (London, 1890). d’Ailly, Pierre, Tractatus et sermones (Strassbourg, 1490). Damian, Peter, De bono religiosi status, in PL, 145: 763–92. de la Borderie, Arthur (ed.), Monuments originaux de l’histoire de St Yves (St-Brieuc, 1887). Delaborde, Henri-François (ed.), ‘Fragments de l’enquête faite à Saint-Denis en 1282 en vue de la canonisation de Saint Louis’, in Mémoires de la Société del’Histoire de Paris et de l’Ile de France, 23 (1896), 1–71. de Orta, John, ‘Vita sancti Ludovici episcopi Tolosani’, Analecta bollandiana, 9 (1890), 281–340. Die Register Innozenz’ III, 7 vols. to date, O. Hageneder et al. (eds) (Rome, 1968–1997). Dlugos, John, Vita et miracula Stainislai, in AA.SS, 7 May II: 203–54. ‘Documenta de B. Odone Novariensi ordinis Carthusiani’, Analecta bollandiana, 1 (1882), 323–54. Eberhard of Fürstenfeld, Miracula Leonardi, in AA.SS, 6 November III: 182–204. Engelbert of Admont, De gratiis et virtutibus B.V.M., IV.3 in Bernard Pez (ed.), Thesaurus anecdotorum novissimus, 6 vols. (Augsburg, 1721–1729), I: 503–762. Epistolae, in AA.SS, in 22 June V: 294–348. Ethelred, Historia Martyrii et Translationum, in AA.SS, 18 March II: 293–302. Faloci-Pulignani, Michele (ed.), ‘Il beato Simone de Collazzone e il suo processo nel 1252’, Miscellanea francescana, 12 (1910), 97–132. Farmer, Hugh, ‘The Canonization of St Hugh of Lincoln’, Lincolnshire Architectural and Archaeological Society Reports and Papers, N.S., 6, pt. 2 (1956), 86–117.

Bibliography

125

Ferrand, Peter, Legenda. S. Dominici, M. Laurent (ed.), in Monumenta ordinis fratrum praedicatorum historica, 16 (Rome, 1933), 118–67. Ferrua, Angelico (ed.), Thomae Aquinatis vitae et fontes praecipue (Alba, 1968). Fontanini, Giusto (ed.), Codex constitutionum suos summi pontifices ediderunt insolemni canonizatione (Rome, 1729). Foster, Kenelm (ed. and trans.), The Life of Saint Thomas Aquinas. Biographical Documents (London, 1957). Frances of Meyronnes, Sermones dominicales (Bologna, 1493). Francis of Meyronnes, Sermones de tempore (Brussels, 1483). Francis of Meyronnes, Sermones quadragesimales (Venice, 1493). Francis of Meyronnes, Sermones sanctorum et dominicales per totum annum (Venice, 1493). Friedberg, Emil and Emil Richter (eds), Corpus iuris canonici, 2 vols. (Leipzig, 1876– 1881). Frugoni, Arsenio (ed.), ‘L’ “Autobiografia” di Pietro Celestino’, Celestiniana (Rome, 1954), 56–67. Gabriel Biel, Expositio litteralis sacri canonis misse (Basel, 1510). Gaster, Moses (ed.), The Exempla of the Rabbis (New York, 1968). Gatta, F.S. (ed.), ‘Un antico codice reggiano su Omobono “il santo popolare” di Cremona’, Bolletino storico cremonese, 7 (1942), 111. Gerard Ithier, De revelatione beati Stephani, Jean Becquet (ed.), Scriptores ordinis Grandimontensis, in Corpus christianorum. Continuatio mediaevalis, 7 (Turnhout, 1968). Gervase of Tillbury, Otia imperialia, in G.G. Leibnitz (ed.), Scriptores rerumbrunsvicensium, 3 vols. (Hannover, 1707). Gervase of Tilbury, Otia imperialia: Recreation for an Emperor, S. E. Banks and J. W. Binns (eds and trans.), (Oxford, 2002). Gisberto, Recuperato and Oldrado, Vita et miracula Ambrosii, in AA.SS, 20 March III: 181–201. Goodich, Michael, ‘A Chapter in the History of the Christian Theology of Miracle: Engelbert of Admont’s (ca. 1250–1331) Expositio super Psalmum 118 and Demiraculis Christi’, in Michael Goodich et al. (eds), Cross Cultural Convergences in the Crusader Period. Essays Presented to Aryeh Grabois on his Sixty-fifth Birthday (New York, 1995), 89–110. Gottschalk, Joseph, ‘Die Heiligspredigt des Papstes Klemens V. von Jahre 1267’, in Archiv für schlesische Kirchengeschichte, 15 (1957), 15–35. Gratien, F. (ed.), ‘Sermons franciscains du Cardinal Eudes de Châteauroux (+ 1273)’, Études franciscaines, 29 (1913), 171–95, 647–55; 30 (1913), 291–317. Gregory the Great, Dialogi, Adalbert de Vogüe (ed.), 3 vols. (Paris, 1978–1980). Grion, P.A. (ed.), ‘La Legenda del B. Venturino da Bergamo secondo il testo ineditode codice di Cividale’, Bergomum, 50 (1956), 11–110. Grosjean, Paul (ed.), Henrici VI Angliae Regis miracula postuma (Brussels, 1935). Guibert of Nogent, De pignoribus sanctorum, in Opera varia, R.B.C. Huygens (ed.), in Corpus christianorum. Continuatio mediaevalis, 127 (Turnhout, 1993), 79–175. Guibert of Nogent, De pignoribus sanctorum, in Thomas Head (ed.), Medieval Hagiography. An Anthology (New York, 2000), 399–427. Guillaume de Saint-Pathus, Les miracles de Saint Louis, Percival Fay (ed.) (Paris, 1932). Hansen, Joseph (ed.), Quellen und Untersuchungen zur Geschichte des Hexenwahns (Bonn, 1901).

126

Miracles and Wonders

Henniges, Diodorus (ed.), ‘Vita Sanctae Elisabethae, Landgraviae Thuringiae auctoreanonymo’, Archivum franciscanum historicum, 2 (1909), 240–68. Henricus de Segusio (Ostiensis), Summa aurea, N. Soranza (ed.) (Venice, 1586). Henry of Friemar, Opus sermonum de sanctis (Hagenau, 1513). Hermannus Judaeus, Opusculum de conversione sua, Gerlinde (ed.), in MGH. Quellen zur Geistesgeschichte, 4 (Weimar, 1963). Herolt, Johannes, Sermones de tempore et sanctis cum Promptuario exemplorum (Strassbourg, 1492). Heysse, Alban, ‘Documenta de vita S. Ludovici episcope Tolosani’, Archivumfranciscanum historicum, 40 (1947), 118–42. Hilary, Commentarium in Matthaeum, in PL, 9: 909–1078. Historia canonizationis S. Edmundi, in Thesaurus, in E. Martène and U. Durand (eds), Thesaurus novus anecdotorum (Paris, 1717–1726), 3: 1881–98. Honorius of Autun, Hexaemeron, in PL, 172: 253–266. Hugh of St Victor, Allegoriae in novum testamentum, in PL, 175: 751–922. Hugh of St Victor, Elucidationes, in PL, 177: 469–898. Hugh of St Victor, Elucidiarum, in PL, 175: 29–114. Hume, David, Enquiries Concerning Human Understanding, L.A. Selby-Bigge (ed.), third edition (Oxford, 1975). Huyskens, Albert (ed.), Quellenstudien zur Geschichte der hl. Elisabeth v. Thuringen (Marburg, 1908). Innocent III, De sacro altaris mysterio, in PL, 217: 763–966. James of Vitry, Liber orientalis, Francis Moschus (ed.) (Douai, 1597). James of Voragine, Legenda aurea, 2 vols., Giovanni Paolo Maggioni (ed.), second revised editon (Florence, 1998). James of Voragine, Legenda aurea, 2 vols., William Granger (trans.) (Princeton, 1993). Johannes of Marienwerder, Miracula B. Dorotheae, in AA.SS., 30 October XIII: 560–67. John of San Gemignano, Sermones funebres (Lyons, 1499). Jordan of Quedlinburg, Postillae de tempore (Strassbourg, 1483). Jordan of Quedlinburg, Sermones Dan de sanctis (Strassburg, ca. 1476). Ketrzyński, Wojciech (ed.), Miracula sancti Stanislai, in Monumenta poloniaehistorica, 6 vols. (Lvov, 1884), IV, 285–318. Konrad of Megenberg, Vita Erhardi, in AA.SS, 8 January I: 541–4. Krásl, František (ed.), Sv. Prokop. Kláster a Památka u Lidu (Prague, 1895). Kurze, Dietrich, Quellen zur Ketzergeschichte Brandenburgs und Pommerns (Berlin, 1975). Lawrence, Clifford H. (ed.), St Edmund of Abingdon. A study in hagiography and history (Oxford, 1960). Lazzeri, Zefferino (ed.), ‘Il processo di Chiara d’Assisi’, Archivum franciscanumhistoricum, 13 (1920), 403–50. Legenda beatae Margaritae de Hungaria, in Scriptores rerum hungaricarum (Budapest, 1938), II: 694–95. Legenda de virtutibus Christinae, in AA.SS, June IV, 270–454. Lemaitre, Jean-Loup (ed.), ‘Les miracles de Saint-Martial accomplis lors del’Ostension de 1388’, Bulletin de la société archéologique et historique du Limousin, 102 (1975), 67–139. Locke, John, The Reasonableness of Christianity with a Discourse on Miracles, I.T. Ramsay (ed.) (London, 1958).

Bibliography

127

Maimonides, Moses, The Essay on Resurrection, in Abraham Halkin (ed. and trans.), Crisis and Leadership: Epistles of Maimonides (New York, 1985). Maimonides, Moses, The Guide for the Perplexed, M. Friedländer (trans.), second revised edition (New York, 1956). Malden, A.R. (ed.), The Canonization of St Osmund (Salisbury, 1901). Martyr, Justin, Dialogue with Trypho, R.P.C. Hanson (ed. and trans.) (London, 1963). Mencherini, Saturnino (ed.), ‘Vita e miracoli della Beata Giovanna da Signa’, Archivum fratrum historicum, 10 (1917), 367–86. Menestò, Enrico (ed.), Il processo di canonizzazione di Chiara da Montefalco (Perugia, 1984). Miracula B. Urbani quinti, in T.H. Albanès (ed.), Actes et documents concernant lebienheureux Urbain V pape (Paris, 1897). Miracula ex processibus … Simonis Tudertini, in AA.SS, 20 April II: 816–21. Miracula Gundechari, in AA.SS, 2 August I: 184–89. Miracula Raymundi, in AA.SS, 7 January I: 428. Miracula S. Amalbergae virginis, in AA.SS, 10 July III: 100–107. Miracula S. Winceslai, AA.SS, 28 September VII: 783–84. Natalini, Vincenzo (ed.), S. Pietro Parenzo. La leggenda scritta dal Maestro Giovanni canonico di Orvieto, in Lateranum, N.S., 6 (Rome, 1936). Newman, Barbara (trans.), The Life of Juliana of Cornillon (Toronto, 1988). Nun of Vadstena, Vita Birgitte, in AA.SS, 8 October IV: 534–60. Occhioni, Nicola (ed.), Il processo per la canonizzazione di S. Nicola da Tolentino (Rome, 1984). Odo of Châteauroux, in Jean-Baptiste Pitra (ed.), Analecta sacra spicilegio Solesmensis parata altera Continuatio, 2 vols. (Paris, 1885–1888), II: 188–343. Origen, Against Celsus, H. Chadwick (ed.) (Cambridge, 1953). Ordonnances des roys de France de la troisième race (Paris, 1723). Otto of Freising, The Deeds of Frederick Barbarossa, Charles Christopher Mierow (trans.) (New York, 1966). Patschovsky, Alexander, ‘Strassburger Beginenverfolgungen im 14. Jahrhundert’, Deutsches Archiv für Erforschung des Mittelalters, 30 (1974), 56–198. Perarnau, Josep, ‘El sermó di Climent viè amb la fórmula de la canonització de Santlu’, Estudios franciscanos, 82 (1981), 117–23. Perzanowski, Zbigniew (ed.), ‘Miracula S. Stanislai’, in Analecta Cracoviensia, 11 (1979), 48–141. Peter of Dacia, Vita Christianae Stumblensis, I. Collijn (ed.) (Stockholm, 1936). Peter of Monte Rubiano, Vita Nicolai, in AA.SS, 10 September III: 644–64. Peter of Orvieto, Vita et miracula Petri Parentii, in AA.SS, 21 May V: 85–99. Peter the Venerable, Adversus iudeorum inveteratam duritiem, in Corpus christianorum. Continuatio mediaevalis, 58 (Turnhout, 1985). Peter the Venerable, De miraculis, in PL, 189: 851–954. Peter the Venerable, ‘Petri Venerabilis Sermones Tres’, Giles Constable (ed.), Revue Bénédictine, 64 (1954), 224–72. Philip of Clairvaux, ‘Vita Elisabethae’, in Catalogus codicum hagiographicorumbibliothecae R. Bruxellensis, 2 vols. (Brussels, 1886), 1: 362–78. Philip of Harvengt, Vita S. Waldetrudis, in Monumenta poloniae historica, 6 vols.(Warsaw, 1864–1893), 2: 1375.

128

Miracles and Wonders

Piazzi, D. (ed.), Omobone di Cremona – Biografie dal xiii al xvi secolo (Cremona, 1991). Pitra, Jean-Baptiste (ed.), Analecta novissima Spicilegii Solosmensis alteracontinuatio, 2 vols. (Tusculum, 1885–1888). Plaine, Beda (ed.), ‘Duplex vita inedita S. Mauritii Abbatis Carnoetensis ordinis Cisterciensis (1114–1191)’, Studien und Mitteilungen aus dem Benedictinerund dem Cistercienser Orden, 7 (1886), 386–87. Plaine, François (ed.), Monuments du procès de canonisation du B. Charles de Bloisduc de Bretagne, 1320–1364 (Saint-Brieuc, 1921). Plummer, Charles (ed.), ‘Vie et miracles de S. Laurent’, Analecta bollandiana. 33 (1914), 121–86. Processus canonizationis B. Ambrosii Massani, in AA.SS, 10 November IV: 566–608. Processus canonizationis de vita et miracula Ivonis Trecorensis, in AA.SS, 19 May IV: 541–77. Processus canonizationis et legendae variae Sancti Ludovici, in Analecta Franciscana, VII (Quaracchi 1951). Processus canonizationis Iohanni Boni, in AA.SS, 22 October IX: 771–885. Processus canonizationis … Thomae episcopi Herefordensis, in AA.SS, 2 October I: 610–96. Processus de B. Petro de Luxemburgo, in AA.SS, 2 July I: 494–551. Prümmer, Dominic (ed.), Fontes vitae S. Thomas Aquinatis (Toulouse, 1911). Rabbenu Nissim Baer Yaakov me-Kairouan, Hibur Yafeh me ha-Yeshua, Haym Zeev Hirshberg (ed.) (Jerusalem, 1954) [Hebrew]. Radulphus Ardens, Homiliae, in PL, 155: 1293–1626. Radulphus Ardens, Homiliae in epistolas et evangelia, in PL, 155: 1603–2118. Raimundus Lullus, Opera latina, 8, Hermogenses Harada (ed.) (Turnhout, 1980), xxxiv, 259–309. Recueils des historiens des Gaules et de la France, new edition, 24 vols. (Paris, 1869–1904). Recuperato of Arezzo, Vita et miracula Ambrosii, in AA.SS, 20 March III: 210–40. Robert of Flamborough, Liber poenitentialis, J.J. Firth (ed.) (Toronto, 1971). Rotolo, Filippo (ed.), ‘Il trattato dei miracoli del P. Gerardo Cagnoli O. Min (1267– 1342) di Frà Bartolomeo Albizi, O. Min (+ 1351)’, Miscellanea francescana, 66 (1966), 128–92. Rotolo, Filippo (ed.), ‘La Leggenda del B. Gerardo, O. Min (1267–1342) di Frà Bartolomeo Albizi, O. Min (+1351)’, Miscellanea francescana, 55 (1957), 367–446. Salimbene de Adam, Cronica, Oswald Holder-Egger (ed.), in MGH. Scriptores, 32 (Hannover, 1913). Sbaralea, Johannes Hyacinth, Bullarium franciscanum romanorum pontificum, 27 vols. (Rome, 1759–1765). Schneider, Fedor (ed.), ‘Der Einsiedler Galgano von Chiusdino und die Anfänge von San Galgano’, Quellen und Forschungen aus italienischen Archiven und Bibliotheken, 17 (1914–1924), 61–77. Seneca, De clementia, I.1.6, Wofflin (ed.), Publii Syri Sententiae (Lepizig, 1869). Seppelt, Franz X. (ed.), Die Akten des Kanonisationsprozess in dem Codex zu Sulmona, in Monumenta Coeslestiniana: Quellen zur Geschichte des Papstes Coelestin V (Paderborn, 1921), 211–334. Sicco Polenton, Vita et visions B. Helenae, in AA.SS, 4 November I.2: 512–17. Simon of Trebnitz: Vita majora Hedwigis, in Monumenta poloniae historica, A. Bielowski (ed.), Monumenta poloniae historica, 6 vols. (Warsaw, 1961–1962), IV: 510–651.

Bibliography

129

Société des bibliophiles français (ed.), Registre criminel du Châtelet de Paris du 6 septembre 1389 au 18 mai 1392, 2 vols. (Paris, 1861). ‘S. Pierre Cölestin et ses premiers biographes’, Analecta bollandiana, 16 (1897), 365–92. Stachnik, Richard (ed.), Die Akten des Kanonisationsprozesses Dorotheas von Montau von 1394 bis 1521, in Forschungen und Quellen zur Kirchen – und Kulturgeschichte Ostdeutschlands, 15 (Cologne, 1978). Stevenson, Jane, ‘The Holy Sinner: The Life of Mary of Egypt’, in Erich Poppe and Bianca Ross (eds), The Legend of Mary of Egypt in Medieval Insular Hagiography (Dublin, 1996). Sulpicius Severus, Vie de Saint Martin, Jacques Fontaine (ed. and trans.), 3 vols. (Paris, 1967–1969). Susi, Eugenio, ‘La Vita Beati Galgani del Codice Laurenziano Plut. 90., Sup. 48’, Benedictina, 39 (1992), 316–40. Susi, Eugenio (ed.), L’eremita cortese. San Galgano fra mito e storia nell’agiograficatoscana del xii secolo (Spoleto, 1993). The Book of St Gilbert, Raymonde Foreville and Gillian Ker (eds and trans.) (Oxford, 1987). Theobald of Gubbio, Vita Ubaldini, in AA.SS, 16 May III: 627–34. Theodore of Apolda, Vita beatae Elisabethae, in J. Basnage and Canisius (eds), Monumentorum ecclesiasticorum et historicum sive Henrici Canisii Lectionesantiquae, 5 vols. (Antwerp, 1725), 4: 116–52. Thomas of Cantimpré, Vita Lutgardis, in AA.SS, 16 June IV: 234–262. Thomas of Celano, Vita Clarae, in AA.SS, 12 August III: 754–67. Thomas of Chobham, Summa confessorum, F. Bloomfield (ed.) (Louvain, 1968). Thomas of Pavia, Dialogus de gestis fratrum minorum, Ferdinand Delorme (ed.) (Quarrachi, 1923). Thurston, Herbert (ed.), ‘Visio monachi de Eynsham’, Analecta bollandiana, 22 (1903), 225–319. Tiraboschi, Girolamo, Vetera Humiliatorum monumenta, 3 vols. (Milan, 1766–1768). van Ortroy, Fernand (ed.), ‘Procès-verbal du dernier consistoire secret préparatoire à lacanonisation du Célestin V’, Analecta bollandiana, 16 (1897), 475–87. Vegio, Maffeo, Vita Coelestini V, Franz X. Seppelt (ed.), in Monumenta Coelestiniana.Quellen zur Geschichte des Papstes Coelestin V (Paderborn, 1921), 183–208. Villa, Joannes Seraphinus (ed.), ‘Processus per l’uccisione de S. Pietro Martire’, Archivio storico italiano, 4 (1877), 790–794. Vincent of Beauvais, Speculum maius, 4 vols. (Douai, 1624). Vincent of Kielce, Vita S. Stanislai, Wojciech Ketrzyński (ed.), Monumenta poloniaehistorica, 6 vols (Warsaw, 1960–1961), IV: 362–438. Vita Antonii Patavii, in AA.SS, 13 June II: 703–18. Vita Bonae, in AA.SS, 29 May VII: 145–63. Vita Cunegundis, in AA.SS, March I: 272–8. Vita et miracula Joannae de Signa, in AA.SS, 9 November IV: 280–88. Vita et Miracula Stephani, in AA.SS, 7 September III: 194–200. Vita et miracula Zitae, in AA.SS, 27 April III: 504–32. Vita Philippi Benizii, in AA.SS, 23 August IV: 712. Vita Placidii, in AA.SS, 12 June II: 609–15.

130

Miracles and Wonders

Vita S. Philippi archepiscopi Bituricensis, in Thesaurus novus anecdotorum, Edmond Martène and Ursin Durand (eds), 5 vols. (Paris, 1717–1726), III: 1927–46. von Döllinger, Ignaz (ed.), Beiträge zur Sektengescichte des Mittelalters, 2 vols. (Munich, 1890). Walz, A. (ed.), ‘Odo de Castro Radulphi sermones sex de Sancto Dominico’, in Analecta sacri ordinis Praedicatorum, 33 (1925), 171–223. William of Auvergne, Opera omnia Guilelmi Alverni (Venice, 1591). William of Bourges, Livre des guerres du Seigneur, Gilbert Dahan (trans.) (Paris,1981). William of Champeaux, Dialogus inter christianum et judaeum de fide catholica, in PL: 1054– 1055. William of Tocco, Vita S. Thomae Aquinatis, in AA.SS, 7 March I: 657–86. William of Tocco, Vita Thomae, in Fontes vitae S. Thomae Aquinatis, Dominic Prümmer (ed.) (Toulouse, 1911), 1–251. Wolfher, Vita Godehardi, in AA.SS., 4 May I: 521–30. Wycliffe, John, Trialogus, Gotthard Lechler (ed.)(Oxford, 1969). Wyss, Arthur (ed.), Hessisches Urkundenbuch. I. Urkundenbuch der Deutschorden–Ballei Hessen, 1207–1299 (Leipzig, 1879). Zimmerman, H. (ed.), Papsturkunden, 896–1046, 3 vols. (Vienna, 1988–1989). Secondary Sources Allen, Judson Boyce, The Ethical Poetic of the Later Middle Ages (Toronto, 1982). Ancelet-Hustache, Jeanne, ‘Elisabeth de Thuringe’, in Dictionnaire d’histoire etgéographie historique, XV: 225–8. Andrews, Frances, The Early Humiliati (Cambridge, 1999). Arbesmann, Rudolph, ‘The Three Earliest Vitae of St Galganus’, in Didascaliae. Studies in Honor of Anselm M. Albareda, Sesto Prete (ed.) (New York, 1961), 1–37 Ashe, Geoffrey, Miracles (London, 1978). Ashton, Gail, The Generation of Identity in Late Medieval Hagiography. Speaking the Saint (London, 2000). Bäärnhelm, Göran and Janken Myrdal, ‘Miracles and Medieval Life. Canonization Proceedings as a Source for Medieval Social History’, in Klaniczay, Procès, 101–116. Barone, Giulia, ‘La santità nel processi di canonizzazione del “300”, Santi e santità nel secolo xiv. Atti del xv Congresso internzaionale, Assisi, 15–16–17 ottobre 1987 (Perugia, 1989), 55–78. Bartlett, Robert, The Hanged Man. A Story of Miracle, Memory and Colonialism in the Middle Ages (Princeton, 2004). Belmont, Nicole, ‘Superstition et religion populaire’, in Michel Izard and Pierre Smith (eds), La function symbolique. Essais d’anthropologie (Paris, 1979), 53–70. Berthier, Joachim Joseph, Doctor communis (Rome, 1914). Bilu, Yoram and Issachar Ben-Ami, ‘Saints’ Sanctuaries in Israeli Development Towns: On a Mechanism of Urban Transformation’, Urban Anthropology, 16 (1987), 243–72. Bolton, Brenda, ‘Supporting the Faith in Medieval Rome’, in Cooper and Gregory, Signs, 157–78.

Bibliography

131

Boureau, Alain, ‘La patine hagiographique. Saint Pierre Martyr dans la Légende Dorée’, in ‘Scribere sanctorum, gesta’. Recueil d’études d’hagiographiemédiévale offert à Guy Phillipart, Etienne Renard et al. (eds) (Turnhout, 2005), 359–66. Boureau, Alain, La legende dorée. Le système narratif de Jacques de Voragine (Paris, 1984). Bouthiller, Denise and Jean-Pierre Torrel, ‘De la légende à l’histoire, Le traitement du«miracle» chez Pierre le Venérable et chez son biographe Raoul de Sully’, Cahiers de civilisation médiévale, xe–xiie siècles, 25 (1982), 81–99. Boyle, Leonard, ‘Diplomatics’, in James M. Powell (ed.), Medieval Studies (Syracuse, 1992), 92–113. Bremond, Claude, Jacques Le Goff and Jean-Claude Schmitt, L’Exemplum (Turnhout, 1982). Bron, Bernhard, Das Wunder: Das theologische Wunderverständnis im Horizont desneuzeitlichen Natur – und Geschichtsbegriffs, second edition (Göttingen, 1979). Brown, Colin, Miracles and the Critical Mind (Grand Rapids, MI., 1984). Brown, Peter, The Cult of the Saints. Its Rise and Function in Latin Christianity (Chicago, 1981). Brown, Raymond E. et al., The New Jerome Biblical Commentary (Englewood Cliffs, N.J., 1990). Brucker, Gene, ‘The Ciompi Revolution’, in Nicolai Rubinstein (ed.), Florentine Studies (London, 1968). Burke, Peter, ‘Oblique Approaches to the History of Popular Culture’, in C.W.E. Bigsby (ed.), Approaches to Popular Culture (London, 1976), 69–84. Bynum, Caroline Walker, ‘The Presence of Objects. Medieval Anti-Judaism in Modern Germany’, Common Knowledge, 10 (2004), 1–32. Cochrane, Eric, Historians and Historiography in the Italian Renaissance (Chicago, 1981). Cohen, Jeremy, The Friars and the Jews. The Evolution of Medieval Anti-Judaism (Ithaca, 1982). Constable, Giles, ‘Opposition to Pilgrimage in the Middle Ages’, Studia gratiana, 19 (1976), 125–46. Cooper, Kate and Jeremy Gregory (eds), Signs, Wonders, Miracles. Representations of Divine Power in the Life of the Church, in Studies in Church History, 41 (2005). Corbett, John H., ‘The Saint as Patron in the Work of Gregory of Tours’, Journal of Medieval History, 7 (1981), 1–13. Coulton, George G., Fourscore Years. An Autobiography (London, 1945). Courth, F., ‘Radulfus Ardens’, Lexikon des Mittelalters, 9 vols. to date, Robert Auty et al. (eds) (Munich, 1977–2003), 7: 393–4. Dahan, Gilbert, The Christian Polemic against the Jews in the Middle Ages, Jody Gladding (trans.) (Notre Dame, 1998). Dahm, Georg, Das Strafrecht Italiens im ausgehenden Mittelalter (Berlin, 1931). d’Alatri, Mariano, ‘Culto dei santi ed eretici in Italia nei secolo XII e XIII’, Collectanea francescana, 45 (1975), 84–104. Daly, Patrick H., ‘The Process of Canonization in the Thirteenth and Early Fourteenth Centuries’, St Thomas Cantilupe Bishop of Hereford. Essays in His Honour, Meryl Jancey (ed.) (Hereford, 1982), 125–35. Damico, Helen and Joseph Zavadil, Medieval Scholarship: Biographical Studies onthe Formation of a Discipline (New York, 1995).

132

Miracles and Wonders

Davis, Natalie Z., ‘Some Tasks and Themes in the Study of Popular Religion’, in Heiko Oberman and Charles Trinkaus (eds), The Pursuit of Holiness in Late Medieval and Renaissance Religion (Leiden, 1974), 307–336. Davis, Natalie Z., ‘Toward Mixtures and Margins’, American Historical Review, 97 (1992), 1409–16. Davy, Marie-Madeleine, Les sermons universitaires parisiens de 1230–1231 (Paris, 1931). de Fresne Ducange, Charles, Glossarium mediae et infimae latinitatis, 10 vols. (Paris, 1904– 1905). de Gaiffier, Baudouin, ‘Mentalité de l’hagiographie médiéval d’après quelques travauxrécents’, Analecta bollandiana, 86 (1968), 391–9. del Re, Niccolo, ‘Ubaldo di Gubbio’, in Bibliotheca sanctorum, 12 vols. (Rome, 1969–1980), XII: 732–35. Delahaye, Hippolyte, L’oeuvre des Bollandistes à travers trois siècles. 1615–1915, second edition (Brussels, 1959). Delhaye, Hippolyte, ‘Les premiers “libelli miraculorum”’, Analecta bollandiana, 19 (1910), 327–34. Demm, Eberhard, ‘Zur Rolle des Wunders in der Heiligskonzeption des Mittelalters’, Archiv für Kulturgeschichte, 57 (1975), 300–44. Dickson, Gary, ‘Clare’s Dream’, Mediaevistik, 5 (1992), 39–55. Diehl, Peter D., ‘The Papacy and the Suppression of Heresy in Italy, 1150–1254’ (UCLA unpublished doctoral dissertation, 1991). Dinzelbacher, Peter, Heilige oder Hexen? Schicksale auffälliger Frauen in Mittelalter und Frühneuzeit (Zurich, 1995). Dinzelbacher, Peter, Vision and Visionsliteratur im Mittelalter (Stuttgart, 1981). Dondaine, Antoine, ‘Saint Pierre Martyre. Études’, in Archivum fratrumpraedicatorum, 23 (1953), 66–162. Dronke, Peter, Women Writers of the Middle Ages (Cambridge, 1984). Duffy, Eamon, The Stripping of the Altars: Traditional Religion in England, c. 1400–c. 1580 (New Haven, 1992). Dutton, Paul Edward, The Politics of Dreaming in the Carolingian Empire (Lincoln, 1994). Dykema, Peter and Heiko Oberman (eds), Anticlericalism in Late Medieval and Early Modern Europe (Leiden, 1993). Edgerton, Samuel, Jr., Pictures and Punishment. Art and Criminal Prosecution during the Florentine Renaissance (Ithaca, 1985). Elliot, Dyan, Proving Woman. Female Spirituality and Inquisitional Culture in the Later Middle Ages (Princeton, 2004). Farmer, Sharon, Surviving Poverty in Medieval Paris. Gender, Ideology and Daily Lives of the Poor (Ithaca, 2002). Festugière, André-Jean, ‘Lieux communs littéraires et thèmes de folklore dans l’Hagiographie primitive’, Wiener Studien. Zeitschrift für klassischePhilologie, 83 (1960), 123–52. Finucane, Ronald, ‘Authorizing the Supernatural: A Curialist’s Analysis of Some English Miracles around 1318’, Paper presented at International Medieval Congress, University of Leeds, 14–17 July 2003. Finucane, Ronald, The Rescue of the Innocents. Endangered Children in Medieval Miracles (New York, 1997).

Bibliography

133

Fischer, Steven, ‘Dreambooks and the Interpretation of Medieval Literary Dreams’, Archiv für Kulturgeschichte, 65 (1983), 1–20. Fogelin, Robert T., ‘The Tendency of Hume’s Skepticism’, in Myles Burnyeat (ed.), The Skeptical Tradition (Berkeley, 1983), 408–. Forest, Aime et al., Le mouvement doctrinal du xi au xve siècle (Paris, 1956). Fowler, George, Intellectual Interests of Engelbert of Admont (New York, 1947). Fowler, George, ‘A Chronology of the Writings of Engelbert of Admont O.S.B. (ca.1250–1331)’, Paradosis, 32 (1976), 121–34. Frend, W.H.C., ‘The Place of Miracles in the Conversion of the Ancient World to Christianity’, in Cooper and Gregory, Signs, 11–21. Frugoni, Chiara, ‘“Domine, in conspectu tuo omne desiderium meum”: visioni eimmagini in Chiara da Montefalco’, in S. Chiara da Montefalco e il suotempo, Claudio Leonardi and Enrico Menestò (eds) (Spoleto, 1992), 155–81. Fuhrmann, Horst, ‘Die Falschungen im Mittelalter: Überliefungen zummittelalterlichen Wahrheitsbegriff ’, Historische Zeitschrift, 197 (1963), 529–54. Fumagalli, Maria-Teresa Beoneo-Crocchieri, Le enciclopedie dell’occidentemedievale (Turin, 1981). Fustel de Coulanges, Numa-Denis, The Ancient City, Willard Snall (trans.), third edition (Boston, 1877). Gardner, Julian, ‘Päpstliche Träume und Palastmalereien. Ein Essay übermittelalterliche Traumikonographie’, in Träume im Mittelalter.Ikonographische Studien, Agostino Paravicini Bagliani and Giorgio Stabile (eds) (Stuttgart, 1985), 113–24. Garnot, Benoît (ed.), Le clergé deliquant (XIIIe–XVIIIe siècle) (Dijon, 1995). Gatto, Giuseppe, ‘Le voyage au paradis. Le christianisation des traditions folkloriquesau Moyen Age’, Annales. Economies, Sociétés, Civilisations, 34 (1979), 929–42. Geary, Patrick, Furta Sacra. Thefts of Relics in the Central Middle Ages (Princeton, 1978). Goetzweiler, Karl, La conception paulicienne du miracle (Louvain, 1961). Golinelli, Paolo, ‘Il santo gabbato: Forme di incredulità nel mondo cittadino italiano’, in Città e culto dei santi nel medioevo italiano (Bologna, 1991), 63–90. Golinelli, Paolo, ‘Il topos dell’incredulo punito nell’agiografia padana (secoli viii–xii)’, in Florentissima proles ecclesiae, D. Gobbi (ed.) (Trent, 1996), 305–325. Golinelli, Paolo, ‘Social Aspects in Some Italian Canonization Trials’, in Klaniczay, Procès, 165–80. Goodich, Michael, ‘Foreigner, Foe and Neighbor: the Religious Cult as a Forum for Political Reconciliation’, in Meeting the Foreigner in the Middle Ages. Xenological Approaches to Medieval Phenomena, Albrecht Classen (ed.) (NewYork, 2002), 127–53. Goodich, Michael, ‘Form and Filiation in the Late Medieval Miracle Story’, Hagiographica, 3 (1996), 305–22. Goodich, Michael, ‘Oneiromantie im Mittelalter: Jüdische und christliche Perspektiven’, Psychologie und Geschichte, 3 (1991), 77–82. Goodich, Michael, ‘The Use of Direct Quotation from Canonization Hearing to Hagiographical Vita et Miracula’, in Gerhard Jaritz and Michael Richter (eds), Oral History of the Middle Ages. The Spoken Word in Context (Krems, 2001), 177–87. Goodich, Michael, Lives and Miracles of the Saints: Studies in Medieval Latin Hagiography (Aldershot, 2004).

134

Miracles and Wonders

Goodich, Michael, ‘The Multiple Miseries of Dulcia of St Chartier (1266) and Cristina of Wellington (1294)’, in idem (ed.), Voices from the Bench: The Narratives of Lesser Folk in Medieval Trials (New York, 2006), 99–125. Goodich, Michael, ‘Vision, Dream and Canonization Policy under Pope Innocent III’, in Pope Innocent III and his World, John C. Moore (ed.) (Aldershot, 1999),151–63. Gottschalk, Joseph, St Hedwig. Herzogin von Schlesien (Cologne, 1964). Grabmann, Martin, Guglielmo di Moerbeke O.P. il traduttore delle opera di Aristotele (Rome, 1946). Grant, Robert, Miracle and Natural Law in Graeco-Roman and Early Christian Thought (Amsterdam, 1952). Graus, František, ‘Die Gewalt bei den Anfängen des Feudalismus und die “Gefangenenbefreiungen” der merowingischen Hagiographie’, in Jahrbuch für Wirtschaftsgeschichte, 1 (1960), 61–156. Gregory, Tullio (ed.), I sogni nel medioevo (Rome, 1983). Grundmann, Herbert, ‘Zur Biographie Joachims von Fiore und Raniers von Ponza’, Neues Archiv, 16 (1960), 237–546. Guth, Klaus, Guibert von Nogent und die hochmittelalterliche Kritik an derReliquienverehrung (Ottobeuren, 1970). Halevi, Leor, ‘The Theologian’s Doubts: Natural Philosophy and the Skeptical Games of Ghāzāli’, Journal of the History of Ideas, 63 (2002), 19–39. Hamilton, Bernard, ‘“God Wills It”: Signs of Divine Approval in the Crusade Movement’, in Cooper and Gregory, Signs, 88–98. Hanawalt, Barbara, The Ties that Bound: Peasant Families in Medieval England (Oxford, 1985). Hardon, John, ‘The Concept of Miracle from St Augustine to Modern Apologetics’, Theological Studies, 15 (1954), 231. Harrison, Peter, ‘Prophecy, Early Modern Apologetics, and Hume’s Argument against Miracles’, Journal of the History of Ideas, 60 (1999), 241–56. Hasenohr, G., ‘Un receuil des distinctiones bilingue du debut du xive siècle: lemanuscript 99 de la Bibliothèque municipale de Charleville’, Romania, 99 (1978), 48. Head, Thomas, ‘An Alternative Form of “Canonization”’, in Klaniczay, Procès, 19–37. Heller, Bernhard (ed.), ‘“Gott Wunscht der Herz”: Legenden über unfaltige Andachtund über den Gefahrten im Paradies’, Hebrew Union College Annual, 4(1927), 365–404. Hermann-Mascard, Nicole, Les reliques des saints (Paris,1975). http://www.heimatverein–zeppenfeld.de/ Hunt, Richard W., ‘The Disputation of Peter of Cornwall against Symon the Jew’, in R.W. Hunt et al. (eds), Studies in Medieval History presented to Frederick Maurice Powicke (Oxford, 1948). Iogna-Prat, Dominique, Order and Exclusion: Cluny and Christendom face Judaism, Heresy and Islam, 1000–1150, Graham Robert Edwards (trans.) (Ithaca, 2002). Jolles, André, Einfache Formen (Halle, 1930). Jones, Graham (ed.), Saints of Europe. Studies towards a Survey of Cults and Culture (Donington, 2003). Jung, Jacqueline E., ‘From Jericho to Jerusalem: The Violent Transformation of Archbishop Engelbert of Cologne’, in Caroline Walker Bynum and Paul Freedman (eds), Last Things.Death and the Apocalypse in the Middle Ages (Philadelphia, 2000), 60–82.

Bibliography

135

Lasker, Daniel, Jewish Philosophical Polemics against Christianity in the Middle Ages (New York, 1977). Kanarfogel, Ephraim, ‘Peering through the Lattices’. Mystical, Magical and Pietistic Dimensions in the Tosafist Period (Detroit, 2000). Kasher, Hannah, ‘Biblical Miracles and the Universality of Natural Law: Maimonides’ Three Methods of Harmonization’, in Journal of Jewish Thoughtand Philosophy, 8 (1998), 25–52. Kee, Howard Clark, Miracle in the Early Christian World. A Study in Sociohistorical Method (New Haven, 1983). Kellner, Menachem, ‘Gersonides on Miracles, the Messiah and Resurrection’, Da’at, 4/5 (1980), 5–34. Kelsey, Morton, The Christian and the Supernatural (Minneapolis, 1976). Kienzle, Beverly Mayne (ed.), The Sermon (Turnhout, 2002). Klaniczay, Gábor, ‘Miraculum and Maleficium: Reflections Concerning Late Medieval Female Sainthood’, in Problems in the Historical Anthropology of Early Modern Europe, R. Po-Chia Hsia and R.E. Scribner (eds), inWolfenbüttlicher Forschungen, 78 (1997), 49–71. Klaniczay, Gábor (ed.), Procés de canonization au moyen âge. Medieval canonization processes, in Collection de l’École française de Rome, 340 (Rome, 2004). Klaniczay, Gábor, ‘Proving Sanctity in the Canonization Processes’, in Klaniczay, Procés, 49–71. Klaniczay, Gábor, ‘Speaking of Miracles. Oral Testimony and Written Record in Medieval Canonization Trials’, Unpublished Manuscript. Knies, H., ‘Miracula Sanctae Elisabeth. Bemerkungen zu den Kanonisationsakten derheiligen Langrafin’, in Universitas. Dienst an Wahrheit und Leben. Festschriftfür Bischof Dr. Albert Stohr, 2 vols. (Mainz, 1960), II: 78–88. Knowles, David, Great Historical Enterprises (London, 1962). Köhler, Joacim, ‘Die mittelalterliche Legende als Medium christlicherVerkündigung’, in Peter Dinzelbacher and Dieter R. Bauer (eds), Heiligenverehrung in Geschichte und Gegenwart (Ostfildern, 1990), 175–200. Kolmer, Lothar, Ad capiendas vulpes. Die Ketzerbekämpfung in Südfrankreich in derersten Hälfte des 13. Jahrhunderts und di Ausbildung des Inquisitions verfahrens (Bonn, 1982). Krötzl, Christian, Pilger, Mirakel und Alltag. Formen des Verhaltens inskandinavischen Mittelalter (12.15. Jahrhundert) (Helsinki: SHS, 1994). Kruger, Steven F., Dreaming in the Middle Ages (Cambridge, 1992). Lang, Albert, Die Wege der Glaubensbegründung bei den Skolastiken des 14. Jahrhunderts, in Beiträge zur Geschichte der Philosophie des Mittelalters, 30, Hft.1/2 (Münster, 1931). Langermann, Y. Tzvi, ‘Maimonides and Miracles: the Growth of a (Dis)belief ’, Jewish History, 18 (2004), 147–72. Lansing, Carol, Power and Purity. Cathar Heresy in Medieval Italy (Oxford, 1998). Lanzoni, Francesco, ‘Il sogno presago della madre incinta nella letteratura medievalee antica’, Analecta bollandiana, 45 (1927), 225–61. Latourelle, René, ‘Miracle’, Dictionnaire de la spiritualité, 15 vols. (Paris, 1937–1990), X.3: 1274–1286. Latourelle, René, The Miracles of Jesus and the Theology of Miracle, Matthew J. O’Connell (trans.) (New York, 1988).

136

Miracles and Wonders

Laurent, Marie-Hyacinthe, ‘Pierre Roger et Thomas d’Aquin’, Revue thomiste, 14 (1931), 157–73. Lazzeri, Zefferino, ‘De processu canonizationis S. Clarae’, Archivum franciscanumhistoricum, 5 (1912), 645. Le Goff, Jacques, ‘Rêves’, in Dictionnnaire raisonné de l’Occident médiéval, Jacques Le Goff and Jean-Claude Schmitt (eds) (Paris, 1999), 950–68. Le Mappian, Jean, Yves de Tréguier (Paris, 1981). Lebreton, Maria Magdalena, ‘Eudes de Châteauroux’, Dictionniare de spiritualité, 17 vols. (Paris, 1932–1995), 4.2: 1675–8. Leclercq, Jean, ‘L’Ecriture sainte dans l’hagiographie monastique du haut moyenâge’, in La Bibbia nell’Alto Medioevo. Centro italiano di studi sull’AltoMedioevo. Settimane di studio, 10 (Spoleto, 1963), 103–138. Leinweber, Josef, Das kirchliche Heilsprechungsverfurhren bis zum Jahre 1234. Der Kanonisationsprozess der hl. Elisabeth von Thuringen, in Sankt Elisabeth. Fürstin, Dienerin, Heilige (Sigmaringen, 1984), 128–38. Levine, Michael, ‘Miracles’, The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Winter 2002 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.), in (http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2002/ entries/miracles/). Levy, Leonard, Treason against God. A History of the Offense of Blasphemy (New York, 1981). List, Rudolph, Stift Admont 1074–1974. Festschrift für Neunhundertjahrfeier (Admont, 1974). Maier, A., ‘Das literarische Nachlass des Petrus Rogerii (Clemens VI.) in der Borghesiana’, Revue de théologie ancienne et médièvale, 15 (1948), 72–98, 332–56. Mair, Lucy, An Introduction to Social Anthropology, second edition (Oxford, 1972). Maleczak, Werner, ‘Innocenz III., Honorius III., und die Anfämge der Inquisition’, in Praedicatores, Inquisitores. I. The Dominicans and the Medieval Inquisition. Acts of the 1st International Seminar on the Dominicans and the Inquisition, 23–25 February 2002 (Rome, 2004), 33–43. Martin, Hervé, Le métier de prédicateur à la fin du moyen âge (Paris, 1988). Masseron, Alexandre, Saint Yves d’après les temoins de sa vie (Paris, 1952). McCready, William, Signs of Sanctity in the Thought of Gregory the Great (Toronto, 1989). McGreevy, John T., ‘Bronx Miracle’, American Quarterly, 53 (2000), 405–443. McKenna, J.W., ‘Popular Canonization as Political Propaganda: The Cult of Archbishop Scrope’, Speculum, 45 (1970), 601–623. Meersseman, Giles Gérard, ‘Les Confréries de Saint-Pierre Martyr’, Archivumfratrum praedicatorum, 21 (1951), 62–6. Merlo, Grado, Eretici e inquisitori nella società piemontese del trecento (Turin,1977). Merlo, Grado, ‘Pietro di Verona – S. Pietro martire. Difficoltà e proposte per lo studiodi un inquisitore beatificato’, in Sofia Boesch-Gajano and Lucia Sebastiani (eds), Culti dei santi, istituzioni e classi sociali in età preindustriale (L’Aquila, 1984). Molin, A., ‘Blasphéme et Blasphémateurs’, Dictionnaire de droit canonique, 7 vols., Raoul Naz et al. (eds) (Paris, 1924–1985), II: 902–10. Mollat, G., ‘L’oeuvre oratoire de Clément VI’, Archives d’histoire docrinale et littéraire du moyen âge, 3 (1928), 239–74.

Bibliography

137

Montagnes, Bernard (ed.), ‘La repression des sacralités populaires en Languedoc auxv siècle’, Archivum fratrum praedicatorum, 52 (1982), 152–85. Morris, Colin, ‘A Critique of Popular Religion: Guibert of Nogent on the Relics of the Saints’, Studies in Church History, 8 (1972), 55–60. Murray, Alexander, ‘Piety and Impiety in Thirteenth-Century Italy’, Studies in Church History, 8 (1972), 83–106. Narducci, Enrico, Catalogus codicum manuscriptorum, praeter Graecos et Orientales in Bibliotheca Angelica olim Coenobii Sancti Augustini de Urbe (Rome, 1893). Naz, Raoul, ‘Inquisition’, Dictionnaire de droit canonique, R. Naz et al. (eds), 7 vols. (Paris, 1935–1985), V: 1418–26. Nüske, Gerd Friedrich, ‘Untersuchungen über das Personal der päpstlichen Kanzlei 1254–1304’, Archiv für Diplomatik, 20 (1974), 77–84. Oblet, V., ‘Blasphème’, Dictionnaire de théologie catholique, 15 vols., A. Vacant et al. (eds) (Paris, 1908–1950). Oppel, Hans, ‘Exemplum und Mirakel: Versuch einer Begriffsbestimmung’, Archivfür Kulturgeschichte, 58 (1976), 96–114. Paccioco, Roberto, ‘“Virtus morum” e “virtus signorum”. La teoria della santità nellelettere di canonizzazione di Innocenzio III’, Nuova rivisita storica, 70 (1986), 597–610. Paravicini Bagliani, Agostino, Boniface VIII. Un pape hérétique? (Paris, 2003). Patschovsky, Alexander, Die Anfämge einer ständigen Inquisition in Böhmen (Berlin, 1975). Patschovsky, Alexander, ‘Konrad v. Marburg’, Lexikon der Mittelalter, Robert Auty et al. (eds), 9 vols. to date (Munich, 1977–2003), V: 1360–1361. Patschovsky, Alexander, ‘Zur Ketzerverfolgung Konrads von Marburg’, Deutsches Archiv, 37 (1981), 641–93. Pellegrini, Letizia, ‘Negotium imperfectum: il processo per la canonizzazione di Ambrogio da Massa (O.M., Orvieto 1240)’, in Società e storia, 17 (1994), 253–78. Penco, Gregorio, ‘L’imitazione di Cristo nell’agiografia monastica’, Studia monastica, 28 (1966), 17–34. Petersohn, Jürgen, ‘Die päptstliche Kanonisationsdelegation des 11. und 12. Jahrhunderts und die Heiligsprechung Karls der Grossen’, Proceedings of the Fourth International Congress of Medieval Canon Law. Toronto, 21–25 August 1972, Stephan Kuttner (ed.) (Rome, 1979), 163–206. Philippart, Guy et al., Hagiographies. Histoire internationale de la literature hagiographique latine et vernaculaire en Occident des origines à 1550, 3 vols. to date (Turnhout, 1994–2001). Propp, Vladimir, Morphology of the Folktale, second edition, Laurence Scott (trans.) (Austin, 1968). Reynolds, Susan, ‘Social Mentalities and the Case of Medieval Scepticism’, Transactions of the Royal Historical Society, Sixth series, 1 (1991), 21–41. Ricklin, Thomas, Der Traum der Philosophie im 12. Jahrhundert: Traumtheorie (Leiden, 1998). Rosenfeld, Helmut, Legende, third edition (Stuttgart, 1972). Rousset, Paul, ‘Le sens de merveilleux à l’époque fèodale’, Le moyen âge, 62 (1956), 25–37.

138

Miracles and Wonders

Russell, Josiah, ‘The Canonization of Opposition to the King in Angevin England’, in Anniversary Essays in Medieval History presented by students of Charles Homer Haskins (Boston, 1929), 279–300. Russo, Daniel, ‘Jeanne da Signa ou l’iconographie au féminin. Études sur les fresquesde l’église paroissale de Signa (milieu du xve siècle)’, Mélanges de l’Écolefrançaise de Rome. Moyen âge, 98 (1986), 201–218. Schimmelpfennig, Bernhard, Die Zeremonialbücher der römischen Kurie im Mittelalter (Rome, 1973). Schmidt, P.G., ‘Die zeitgenössische Űberlieferung zum Leben und zur Heiligsprechung der heiligen Elisabeth’, in Sankt Elisabeth. Fürstin, Dienerin,Heilige (Sigmaringen, 1984), 1–6. Schmitt, Jean-Claude et al., Prêcher d’exemples (Paris, 1985). Schmitt, Jean-Claude, ‘Receuils franciscains d’ “exempla” et perfectionnement destechniques intellectuals du xiiie au xve siècle’, Bibliothèque d’Ecole des chartes, 135 (1977), 5–21 Schmitt, Jean-Claude, La conversion d’Hermann le juif. Autobiographie, histoire etfiction (Paris, 2003). Schmitz, Philibert, ‘Les sermons et discours de Clément VI, O.S.B.’, Revuebénédictine, 41 (1929), 15–34. Schneyer, Johannes-Baptist, ‘Das Predigtwirken des Erzbischofs Friedrich Viscontivon Pisa (1254–1277) auf Grund der Rubriken des Cod. Florenz. Laur. Plut. 33.sin. 1’, Recherches de theologie ancienne et médièvale, 32 (1965), 307–332. Schneyer, Johannes-Baptist, Reportorium der lateinischen Sermones des Mittelaltersfür die Zeit von 1150–1350, 9 vols. (Munster, 1970–1980). Selge, Kurt Victor, Die erste Waldenser, 2 vols. (Berlin, 1962). Shewring, Walter H. (trans.), The Passion of Perpetua and Felicity (London, 1931). Sigal, Pierre-André, L’homme et le miracle dans la France médiévale (XI–XIIe siècles)(Paris, 1985). Snoek, Godefridus J.C., Medieval Piety from Relics to the Eucharist. A Process of Mutual Interaction (Leiden, 1995). Solvi, Daniele, ‘Santi degli eretici e santi degli inquisitori intorno all’anno 1300’, in Paolo Golinelli (ed.), Il pubblico dei santi. Forme e livelli di ricezione dei messagi agiografici (Rome, 2000), 267–86. Tentler, Thomas, Sin and Confession on the Eve of the Reformation (Princeton, 1977). Vogel, Cyrille (ed.), Le pecheur et la penitence au moyen âge (Paris, 1969). Theissen, Gerd, The Miracle Stories of the Early Christian Tradition, John Riches (trans.) (Philadelphia, 1983). Toynbee, Margaret R., St Louis of Toulouse and the process of canonisation in the 14th century (Manchester, 1929). Tubach, Frederick, Index exemplorum (Helsinki, 1969). Urbach, Ephraim, Hazal. Pirkei Emunot ve-Deot (Jerusalem, 1969) [Hebrew]. van der Loos, Hendrik, The Miracles of Jesus (Leiden, 1965). van Hove, Aloїs, La doctrine de miracle chez saint Thomas (Paris, 1927). van Steenberghen, Fernand, Aristotle in the West, L. Johnson (trans.) (Louvain, 1955).

Bibliography

139

van Steenberghen, Fernand, ‘La philosophie de la nature au xiii siècle’, La filosofiade la natura nel medioevo: Atti del terzo congresso internazionale di filosofiamedioevale (Milan, 1966), 114–32. van Straeten, Joseph, ‘S. Robert de Chaise-Dieu. Sa canonisation – sa date de fête’, Analecta bollandiana, 82 (1964), 37–56. van Uytfanghe, Marc, ‘Modèles bibliques dans la hagiographie’, in Pierre Riché and Guy Lubrichon (eds), Le Moyen âge et la Bible (Paris, 1984), 449–88. Vansina, Jan, Oral Tradition as History (Madison, 1985). Vauchez, André, ‘Innocent III, Sicard de Crémone et la canonisation de SaintHomebon (+ 1197)’, in Andrea Sommerlechner (ed.), Innocenzo III. Urbs etorbis. Atti del Congresso internazionale Roma, 9–15 settembre 1998, 2 vols. (Rome, 2003), 435–453. Vauchez, André, ‘Les stigmates de Saint François et leurs detracteurs’, Melanges del’Ecole française de Rome. Moyen âge, 80 (1968), 595–625. Vauchez, André, Sainthood in the Later Middle Ages, Jean Birrell (trans.) (Cambridge, 1997). Vovelle, Michel, La mort et l’occident de 1300 à nos jours (Paris, 1983). Wadding, Lucas, Annales minorum seu trium ordinum a S. Francisco institutorum, 32 vols., third edition (Quarrachi, 1931). Waley, Denis, ‘Giacomo Colonna’, in Dizionario biografico degli italiani, Alberto Ghisalberti (ed.), 63 vols. to date (Rome, 1960–2000): XXVII: 314–316. Waley, Denis, ‘Pietro Colonna’, Dizionario biografico degli italiani, Alberto Ghisalberti (ed.), 63 vols. to date (Rome, 1960–2000): XXVII: 399–402. Wichner, Jacob, Geschichte des Benediktiner – Stiftes Admont, 3 vols. (Admont, 1878). Witkowska, Alexsandra, ‘The Thirteenth Century Miracula of St Stanislaus’, in Klaniczay, Procès, 149–63. Wittmer-Butsch, Maria Elisabeth, Zur Bedeutung von Schlaf und Traum im Mittelalter (Krems, 1990). Wolter, Heinz, ‘Engelbert v. Berg’, Lexikon des Mittelalters, 9 vols. to date, Robert Auty et al. (eds) (Munich, 1977–2003), III: 1917–1918. Wood, Diana, Clement VI. The Pontificate and Ideas of an Avignon Pope (Cambridge, 1989). Xiberta, A., ‘De magistro Joanne Baconthorpe, O. Car.’, Analecta ordinis Carmelitani, 6 (1927), 3–128. Zanella, Gabriele, ‘Armanno Pungilupo, eretico quotidiano’, in idem, Hereticalia. Temi e discussioni (Spoleto, 1995), 3–14. Ziegler, Joseph, ‘Practitioners and Saints: Medical Men in Canonisation Processes in the Thirteenth to Fifteenth Centuries’, Social History of Medicine, 12 (1999), 191–225. Zielinski, Herbert, ‘Elisabeth von Thüringen und die Kinder’, in U. Arnold and E. Liebing, Elisabeth, Der Deutsche Orden und die Kirche; Festschrift zur 77 jährige Wiederkehr der Weihe der Elisabethkirche (Marburg, 1983), 27–38. e

Index Acta Sanctorum 3 admiration 19, 25, 31, 32 afterlife 35, 100, 101, 114 Agni de Lentino, Thomas 50, 51 Ailly, Pierre d’ 19, 39–40 Albertus Magnus 21, 26 Albi 50 Albizi, Bartolomeo 67 Aldobrandino 70 Alexander III, Pope 42, 71 Alexander IV, Pope 79, 109 Alexander of Hales 19 Alfonsi, Petrus 34 Amalberga 65 Ambrose of Massa 52, 97–8 angels 2, 8, 14, 15, 16, 25, 26 evil 25 anger, 57, 58, 59 Angevins 83 Antichrist 14, 18, 32, 105 see also Satan Anthony of Padua 30–31, 33, 40, 52, 62, 98, 117 aphorisms 39 Apostles 8, 9, 10, 17, 18, 24, 84 Aquinas, St Thomas 2, 19–21, 22, 26, 30, 36, 43, 56, 58, 59, 110, 116, 117, 118 canonization process of 6–7, 42 and dreams 101 Arabic tradition 15, 34, 104 see also Islam Aristotle 18, 22, 26, 27, 28, 39, 44, 117 Ascension 2, 18 Ashe, Geoffrey 12 astonishment 8, 9, 13, 20, 25, 31 Augustine, St 1, 13–14, 16, 21, 22, 25, 26, 27, 41, 56, 74 authenticity 4, 5, 6, 56, 75, 87, 88 Avicenna 23 Avignon 63 awe 8, 89, 90 Baconthorpe, John 9, 14 Bartholomew, St 18, 118

Bartholomew of Sulmona 110 Bartholomew of Trent 33 Bartholomew the Englishman 37 Bartlett, Robert ix Beaumont, Bertrand de 61 believers 2, 10, 14, 18, 24, 62 skepticism of 47, 53, 54–5 Bellarmine, Cardinal Robert 3 Benedict, St 18, 41 Bernard Gui 7, 36, 120 Bernard of Clairvaux 33, 38 Bersuire, Pierre 39 Biblical exegesis see Scripture Biel, Gabriel 2 biographies see saints’ lives bishops 12, 41, 62, 71, 110 blasphemy 23, 33, 55, 56–9 definition of 56–7 and heresy 56, 63–5 punishment of 57–8, 60 blindness 23, 38, 67, 105 Bocking, Ralph 90 Bollandists 3 Boniface VIII, Pope 30, 53, 80, 83 Bourges 78, 79, 98 Bridget of Sweden 58, 66 Brie, Simon de 80 Brittany 44, 45, 60, 61, 110 Brown, Peter 12 Buoni, John 47, 98 Burgarelli, Jean 66 Bynum, Caroline Walker ix, 2 Cacciafronte, Giovanni 68 Caesarius of Heisterbach 34, 36, 59, 60 Cagnoli, Gerard 66, 67 canon law 45, 46, 71, 72, 117, 118, 119 canon lawyers 7, 25, 26, 70, 83, 87, 100, 114, 118, 121 canonization bulls 6, 23, 25, 42, 43, 48, 50, 51, 52, 53, 71, 72, 85, 88, 106, 107, 116, 117, 118, 119 canonization process x, 4, 6, 7, 8, 40, 41, 95, 117, 119

Index ‘charge to the jury’ 87–8 commission of inquiry 41, 72, 73, 74, 111, 114 dreams and visions in 106–11, 118 and heretics 72, 73, 76, 81, 85 inquisitorial method 70–72ff., 118 letters relating to 73, 76 preliminary inquiries 74, 82, 87 sermons in 30 theory and practice of 42–5 as tool against heretics 47–8ff. see also trials cardinals 53, 54, 78, 80, 82, 83 Carmelites 3, 9, 66 Cathars 3, 7, 14, 18, 37, 48, 50, 51, 63, 68, 69 Catherine of Alexandria 34 Catherine of Fierbois 60 Catholic faith 7, 31, 41, 50, 53, 118 cause 10, 12, 19– 20, 21, 22, 57, 62 Celestine III, Pope 72 Celestine V, Pope 36, 39, 82–4, 102, 104, 110, 112, 118 Charles, Duke of Brittany 44–5, 60–61 Charles of Blois 61 chastity 55 childbirth 93, 99, 114 children 3, 4, 39, 43, 81, 88, 93, 94, 95–9 Christianity, 10, 11, 12, 17, 28, 117 and dreams 101, 104 Christians 3, 8, 15, 17, 24, 26, 28, 32, 42, 52, 54, 64, 65, 69, 85, 101, 106, 119 Christina of Stommeln 69–70, 100–101 Church 1, 3, 7, 8, 10, 11, 94, 114, 119 Clare of Assisi 30, 107, 109 Clare of Montefalco 55–6, 103, 111, 113, 114 class, social 1, 49, 58, 82, 100, 119 classical sources 5, 39, 40, 102 Clement IV, Pope 30, 118 Clement V, Pope 43, 53, 82, 83, 84, 87 Clement VI, Pope 19, 29–30, 36, 42–5, 46, 110, 118, 120 Clerc, Jean le 3 clergy, greed of 16, 40, 55, 61–3 see also cardinals; friars; monks; priests Colonna, Cardinal Giacomo 82, 83 Colonna, Cardinal Pietro 80, 81, 82, 83, 85 community 12–13, 55, 56, 67, 68, 111 confession 35, 47, 65, 66 confraternities 54, 56, 85, 98 Conrad of Eberbach 35 Conrad of Marburg 73, 74, 76

141

Conrad of Megenberg 30 conversion, 8, 9–10, 17, 24, 31, 32, 50, 51, 102, 103, 119 Corpus Christi cult 6, 100 Coulton, George G. 1 court 4, 29, 111 officials 4, 100, 102 papal 63, 97 courtly romances 35 Creation 8, 15, 16, 21, 27, 31 credibility 6, 8, 26, 74, 81, 82, 88, 117 Cross, True 2, 17 Crusades 2, 29, 35, 55, 59, 71, 73, 114 cults 3–4, 12, 23, 56, 62, 85, 98, 114, 115 academic study of 3 and dreams 100, 101, 102 and local patriotism 40, 65 papal control of 71 political nature of 59, 60 unifying nature of 3–4 see also shrines Cunegunda, Empress 9, 95, 98 cures 6, 8, 12, 20, 21, 23, 24, 31, 55, 66, 74, 75, 82, 85, 91 and dreams 102, 104, 106, 109, 111, 114–16, 118 see also healing miracles Damian, Peter 37 De Mirabilibus sacrae Scripturae 15, 120 De Miraculis Christi 21, 120 death 31, 39, 84, 87, 89, 90, 91, 92, 94, 96, 114 deceit 87, 90 deeds 17, 18, 22, 25, 44, 56, 60, 69, 85, 118 Delphine of Languedoc 107 Demetrius, St 34, 118 demonic acts 10, 23, 70 see also magic; Satan demons 14, 15, 23, 49 deponents 4, 71, 73, 77, 81, 107, 110, 111 see also witnesses Devil see Satan Dialogus de gestis fratrum minorum 97 Dinzelbacher, Peter ix discourse 4, 34 disease 8, 23, 24, 81, 97, 99 divine vengeance 57, 65, 67, 68, 105 Dominic, St 30, 40, 49, 50, 72 Dominic of Evesham 33 Dominicans 22, 36, 41, 49, 50, 51, 58, 62, 108 Dorothy of Montau 32, 55, 58, 63, 64, 67

142

Miracles and Wonders

dreams 70, 85, 118 and biographies 116 as catalyst to act 114 compared to visions 103 and cures, 102, 104, 106, 109, 111, 114–16 diabolical 103, 113–14 genres 111–15 of escapes 112–13 in hagiography 101–4, 108 interpretation of 101, 103–4 Islamic 104 Jewish 101 papal 105–10, 114, 118 prophetic 102, 105, 113, 114 purpose of 100, 101–2 records of 100 verification of 106–7 and women 100–101, 110–11, 115 drowning 39, 85, 93–4, 95, 96, 97, 98, 106, 121 Dulcea of St Chartier 79–80

families 3, 4, 67, 98, 117 Farmer, Sharon 4 feast days 29, 49, 62, 64 festivities 4, 55, 98 Finucane, Ronald ix, 4, 93, 94n. Florence 33, 49, 50, 58, 60 folktales 1, 12, 92–3 Fontaine, Jacques 13 Fourth Lateran Council 47, 71, 101 France 14, 30, 39, 40, 45, 57–8, 80, 91 Francis of Assisi 11, 30, 41, 60, 71, 72, 108 Francis of Meyronnes 30, 32 Franciscans 41, 52, 54, 60, 62, 67, 97, 102, 108 Frederick II, Emperor 34, 62 Frederick Barbarossa 5, 68 frescoes ix, 2, 50, 51, 60, 61, 93, 102, 103, 108 friars 55, 108, 111, 112

Eberhard of Fürstenfeld 32–3 Edmund of Canterbury 73, 74, 107, 117 Elijah x, 3, 8, 12, 14, 22, 28, 84 Elisha 8, 12, 84 Elizabeth of Herkenrode of Spaalbeeck 69, 70 Elizabeth of Thuringia 30, 34, 35, 36, 65, 72–8, 85, 95–7, 104, 119 Elliott, Dyan 72 encyclopedists 21, 30, 37 Engelbert of Admont 21–6, 43, 117, 120 Engelbert of Cologne 36, 59–60, 103 England 39, 45, 60, 61, 90, 91, 94 Enselmini, Helen 40 escapes 6, 66, 103, 111, 112–13, 114 Eva of St Martin 6 evil persons 25, 26, 32, 38, 44 evil spirits 8, 12, 66 ex nihilo 15, 32 example 5–6, 18, 19, 31, 34, 35, 38, 39, 120 exempla 34–5 exorcism 6, 10, 12, 23, 58, 65, 114 eyewitnesses 7, 8, 90, 98

Galgano of Chiusdino 71–2, 107–8, 114, 118 Geary, Patrick ix Gerard, St see Cagnoli, Gerard Gerard of Borgo 40 Gerard of Fracheto 51 Gerard of Toul 71 Germany 2, 73, 76 Gersonides 27–8 Gervase of Tillbury 21 gifts 10, 12, 26 Gilbert of Sempringham 70, 72, 73, 108, 118 Giotto 108 Giovanna da Signa 65–6 God 8, 10, 12, 13, 14, 16, 19, 21, 26, 32, 33, 67, 87, 90 blasphemy against 56, 57, 58 omnipotence of 17, 20, 36, 41 see also divine vengeance good 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 33, 36, 38, 40, 86 grace 17, 19, 35, 67 Gregory the Great 19, 22, 85 Gregory IX, Pope 52, 71, 72, 74, 81, 105 Gregory X, Pope 106 Guglielma of Milan 62, 69, 119 Guibert of Nogent 16, 31, 61, 63 Guillaume of Moissac 53–4 Gundechar, St 63

faith 1, 18, 19, 22, 32, 87–8, 90, 91 false miracles 14, 15, 18, 19, 25, 40, 44, 60, 62, 63, 85, 86, 120 false prophets 105 false saints 62, 69, 119

hagiography 1, 3, 9, 11, 13, 35, 40, 56, 57 didactic role 6 dreams in 101–4, 108 and precedent 5 and oral transmission 92–3

Index and propaganda 51 skepticism in 47 topoi 3, 5, 7, 32, 90, 93, 98, 102 Hanawalt, Barbara 94 hangings 77, 79 Head, Thomas ix, 93 healing miracles 9, 10, 11, 12, 23, 28, 33, 39, 79, 88, 114–15 see also cures Hedwig of Poland 118 Hedwig of Silesia 5, 29–30, 40, 110, 120 Henry II, Emperor 71 Henry VI, King 60 Henry of Friemar 38, 120 Herbert of Clairvaux 35 heresy 3, 16, 18, 23, 28, 42, 49, 50, 52, 62, 69, 70, 71, 72, 73, 76, 79, 81, 85, 93, 117, 118, 119, 120 and blasphemy 56, 63–8 and canonization process 47–8 see also heretics heretics 4, 8, 10, 14, 15, 16, 18, 23, 26, 37, 40, 47–53, 56, 63–4, 65, 69, 70, 105, 106, 118–19 and canonization inquiry 72, 73, 76, 81, 85 see also Cathars; Jews; nonbelievers; pagans Hermann of Cappenberg 101, 103 Hermann of Roermond 104 Hermann (Judaeus) of Scheda, 16 Hermann of Steinfeld 6 heroes 39, 40 Herolt, Johannes 38–9, 120 Hildegard of Bingen 70, 74 history 1, 3, 12, 13, 35, 94, 117, 120 Holy Land, 3, 32, 40, 73, 106 Holy Spirit 22, 33, 89, 92, 104 Homobonus of Cremona 48, 68, 85, 105 Honorius III, Pope 25, 112 Hugh of Lincoln 72, 110 Hugh of St Victor 15, 16, 22, 24, 120 humanism 39, 40 Humbert of Romans 51 Hume, David 3, 26–7 Humiliati, the 70 Hundred Years’ War 60, 110 ideology 7, 29, 31, 93 illusions 43, 103, 104 images 2, 31, 50, 103

143

imprisonment 6, 35, 39, 57, 66, 93, 103, 111, 112, 113, 114 Incarnation 10, 17, 20, 23, 28 Indulgences 64 information 111 Innocent II, Pope 71 Innocent III, Pope 2, 14, 25, 48, 68, 69, 70, 72, 81, 82, 85, 115 dreams of 105, 106, 108–9, 114, 118 Innocent IV, Pope 47, 51, 109 Inquisition 50, 64–5, 69 Isabelle, daughter of Osanna and Stephen of Brocia 79, 98 Isabelle, wife of Hugh 78 Islam 7, 16, 102, 104 see also Muslims Israel x, 3 Ithier, Gerard 8–9 Italy 57, 65–6, 102n., 112, 113 James of Vitry 21, 30 James of Voragine Golden Legend 93 Legenda Aurea 14–15, 50, 51, 77, 96, 120 Sermones de sanctis 30, 31 Jean de la Rochelle 30 Jerome 22, 39, 56 Jesus 9, 10, 14, 15, 17, 20, 22, 23, 24, 31, 32, 35, 37, 62, 100, 106, 120 relic of 1–2 Jews x, 2, 3, 8, 23–4, 25, 28, 29, 40, 53, 120 and blasphemy 57 conversion of 9, 10, 119 and dreams 101 and miracles 8, 10, 17, 18, 24, 25 Joan of Arc 70 Johannes of Marienwerder 32 John XV, Pope 71 John XXII, Pope 42, 43, 52, 53, 54, 82, 83, 110, 118 John of Lausanne 6 John of San Gemignano 30, 37, 38 John Paul, Pope x Jolles, A. 92 Jordan of Quedlinburg 38, 120 Joseph, Hermann 103 Josephus 5 Judaism 7, 16, 27, 28, 117 see also Jews judicial procedure 51, 73, 88, 96, 97, 98, 116, 117

144

Miracles and Wonders

Julian, St 60 Juliana of Cornillon 5–6 Justin Martyr 9 Kee, H.C. 12 Kelsey, Morton 12 Klaniczay, Gábor ix, x, 40n. Krakow 108, 109 Krötzl, Christian ix laity 7, 61, 62 Lampersdorf 63, 64 Latourelle, R. 11 Lawrence of Dublin 73, 93, 117, 118 Lea, Henry C. 1 learned people x, 20, 46, 61, 62, 70, 75, 93, 117, 118 legal inquiry 46, 88 see also canon law; judicial procedure legends 92, 108 legendaries 30, 36, 120 Lemoine, Jean 83 literary genres 34, 93 Leonard of Inchenhofen, St 32–3, 35, 65 Leonard of Piperno 58–9 liturgy 4, 46, 51, 93, 103, 118 Livy 39 Llull, Ramon 102, 114 Locke, John 13–14 Louis IX, King 2, 4, 30, 39–40, 42, 80–82 Louis of Toulouse, Archbishop 6, 32, 42, 43, 52–5, 117 Lucchesio 60 Lucius III, Pope 71, 72, 107, 118 Magi, the 32 magic 7, 8, 10, 14, 26, 42, 46 magicians 8, 10, 15, 16, 25, 43, 46, 119 Pharoah’s 14, 18, 25, 44, 85, 105, 120 Maimonides 27, 28, 101, 117 Mair, Lucy 10 Malachi of Armagh 33 Margaret of Hungary 110–11, 118 Mark’s Gospel 10 Marseille 53–5 Martial, St 35, 45, 60, 63, 66 Martin of Tours, St 13, 18, 40, 111 martyrs 1, 17, 63, 101 Maurice, St 112 media 50, 51, 103 medicine 44, 55, 66, 74, 84, 85, 97, 109, 114

memory 81, 82, 93 Messiah 10, 17, 27 metaphor 38 Metbach 96 Michael, St 54, 108 Middle Ages 1, 2, 13, 102, 118 mirabilia 13, 16, 17, 21, 39, 41, 44 miracle stories 1, 3, 4, 37, 38, 46, 47, 52, 94, 103, 117, 120–21 and skepticism 47, 121 structure of 11, 12 visions in 103 miracles 41, 78, 79, 80, 81, 82, 83, 84, 85, 88 classification of 11–12 contemporary x and conversion 8, 9–10 definition of 8, 12–13, 43, 74 durability of 32 Eucharistic 2, 22, 35 genres 11, 12, 31, 43, 68, 93 inquiry elements 87–8, 90–92, 96, 98 inquisitorial method and 74–6ff., 118 mocking of 39, 51, 52, 53, 55, 56, 58, 60, 67, 121 posthumous 5, 12, 28, 31, 34, 36, 41, 45, 48, 49, 65, 67, 76, 83, 87, 109, 112, 115, 118 precedents for 5, 6, 11 publicity for 32–3 purpose of 9–10, 12, 13, 14, 18, 19, 26, 32, 33 rational attitude to 1, 2, 3, 13, 15, 18, 24, 25, 27, 35–7, 46, 69, 75, 85, 117, 118, 120 systematic theology of 45–6 themes 3, 12, 39, 93, 94, 118 true and false 14, 19, 20, 26, 32, 36, 40, 42, 43–4, 46, 86, 120 see also healing miracles; mirabilia; miracle stories; miraculum; nature miracles; rescue miracles; signs; wonders miraculum 8, 19, 21, 34, 35, 44 Mohammed 41 monks 1, 4, 6, 17, 21, 37, 40, 75, 104, 110 morality 6, 10, 12, 14, 21, 28, 31, 34, 37, 38 Moses 10, 12, 14, 22, 27, 69 motifs 12 Muslims x, 3, 85, 100, 119 see also Islam myth 1, 12

Index Narbonne, Archbishop of 43 narrative 1, 4, 7, 12, 34, 92, 93 see also miracle stories natural history 37 natural law 25, 26, 27, 41, 117, 120 natural philosophers 7, 20, 21, 26, 37, 74 see also philosophy nature 13, 14, 15, 19–21, 24, 26, 28, 32, 87, 90 nature miracles 11, 14, 16, 20, 24, 37 see also mirabilia New Testament 10, 11, 17 see also Scripture Nicholas, St 18, 39, 114 Nicholas of Bari 34, 114 Nicholas of Tolentino 67, 112–14 Nicholas of Trani 71 Nigri, Hugues 19 Nissim ber Yaakov 28 non-believers 8, 9, 10, 16, 26, 53, 11, 32, 48, 106, 119 see also heretics notaries 7, 8, 26, 45, 70, 71, 72, 76, 77, 82, 87, 97, 98, 103, 114, 115, 118 nuns, dreams of 110–11 oaths 70, 87, 88, 98, 111, 118 Octavian of Ostia, Cardinal 105 see also Gregory IX, Pope Oderisio of Tagliacozzo 104 Odo of Châteauroux 29, 37, 40–41, 80, 88, 92, 106, 120 Odo of Novara 74, 75–6, 104, 111 Old Testament 8, 10, 12, 18, 22, 120 see also Scripture onlookers see witnesses Oppel, Hans 34 Origen 9 Orvieto 97–8 Osmund of Salisbury 95 Otto of Freising 5 Padua 22, 30, 33, 40, 62 pagan deities 12, 14, 18 pagans 8, 16, 39, 40, 48, 53 papal canonization 42–6, 62 see also canonization bulls; canonization process parables 34 Parenzo, Peter 48–9, 115, 118 Paris 2, 4, 40, 80, 81 see also University of Paris

145

Patarenes 47, 48, 50, 68, 106 patriotism 12, 40, 60, 65, 119 patron saints 3, 13, 35, 42, 59, 60, 61, 105, 110, 113, 114 Paul, St 8, 9, 18, 44 penance 31, 32, 33, 38, 45, 47, 49, 65, 102 Peregrinus of Oppeln 120 performer (of miracles) 19–0, 12, 18 persons 12, 16, 19, 25, 43, 44, 53, 88, 90, 91, 111, 113 Perugia 113 Peter, St 21, 49, 51, 54, 105 Peter Bartholomew 103 Peter Martyr 30, 31, 33, 38, 49–51, 54, 59, 94, 95, 114 Peter of Cornwall 17 Peter of Dacia 69 Peter of Luxemburg 63 Peter of Tarantaise 73 Peter of Verona 111 Peter the Venerable 16, 17, 35 Petrobrusians 16 Philip of Bourges, Archbishop 6, 30, 40, 41, 55, 78–80, 85, 98, 102–3, 119, 120 Philip of Clairvaux 70 Philip of Harvengt 11 philosophy 8, 18, 22, 26, 27, 30, 32, 36, 37, 120 see also natural philosophers physicians 54, 75, 95, 97, 104, 109 Piccolomini, Joachim 62–3 pilgrimages x, 2, 3, 4, 64 Pisa 66, 67 place 3, 9, 12–13, 40, 92 plagiarism 6 Pliny 39 Polenton, Sicco 40 politics x, 29, 55, 56, 59–61, 68, 70, 84, 100, 102, 106, 119 Pomerania 64 poor people 4, 28, 82 see also unlearned people popular culture ix, 3 popular religion x, 4, 62, 69, 117, 119 Porète, Margarete 70 prayer 2, 19, 22, 31 preachers 4, 29–31, 33, 37, 46, 120 precedent 5, 6, 11, 42, 85, 102 prepuce of Christ 1–2 priests 8, 44, 55, 56, 63, 64, 78, 89, 90, 91, 95, 96, 104

146

Miracles and Wonders

processions 12, 98 Procopius of Sazawa 108–9, 118 prodigies 21, 52 see also signs; wonders professions 29, 59 proof 5, 17, 27, 35, 41, 55, 69, 75, 81ff., 94, 105, 106, 118, 120 propaganda 51, 100, 114 prophets 8, 18, 33, 44, 85 see also dreams; visions Propp, V. 92 psychology 12, 13 Ptolemy of Lucca 7 public places 9 Pungilupo, Armanno 62, 69, 119 Radulphus Ardens 18, 30, 37, 44, 86, 120 Ranier of Ponza 14, 70, 108 Ranke, Leopold 1 rationalism 1, 2 Raymund of Penyafort 67, 72, 74 Raynald, bishop of Ostia 109 see also Alexander IV, Pope recipient 4, 8, 12, 105, 113 recovery 85, 114 see also revival of the dead redactions 11 reliability 5, 72, 75, 77, 79, 82, 85, 86, 88, 104, 111, 117 relics 12, 34, 40, 50, 55–6, 65, 66, 72, 85, 102 authentification of 71 abuse of 2, 16, 61 in Jewish scripture 8 political uses 55 skepticism towards 1–2, 55–6, 58 religious orders 30, 41, 62, 68, 108, 119 Repshliger, Hedwig 67 rescue miracles 6, 12, 38, 67, 74, 77, 79, 93, 96 research 1, 3, 4 restoration see revival of the dead Resurrection 12, 17, 18, 23, 32 revelation, divine 10, 100, 103, 117, 118 revival of the dead 8, 9, 10, 25, 31, 94, 95, 96, 119 Reynolds, Susan 47 Riccardo, Giovanni di 82 Richard of Chichester 29, 40–41, 88ff., 119, 120 Richard of St Victor 19 Richard of Siena, Cardinal 82, 83, 84 Roger the Englishman 104

Roman law 12, 85, 118 Romans 18, 40, 57 Rome 1, 17, 105, 106, 108 Rose of Viterbo 39 Rossa, Gaufrida 54–5 rule 12, 21 rural society 3, 94 St Mary’s Well, Penrhys x saints 2, 12–13, 14, 25, 26, 41, 64 academic study of 3 blasphemy against 57, 58 not dependent on miracles 44, 45 and heresy trials 72, 73, 76, 81 investigation of 70 political role 59–61, 70 reputation of 4 words and deeds of 18, 38, 45, 85 see also false saints; patron saints; saints’ lives; sanctity saints’ lives 3, 4, 6, 7, 50, 51, 52, 72, 73, 85, 88, 107, 118, 119, 120 classical model 5 and dreams 116 prologue and structure 5 and sermons 30, 36, 37–8 Salimbene de Adam 61, 62, 63 Sallust 5, 40 sanctity 19, 34, 38, 39, 43, 48, 69, 105, 106 Satan 14, 18, 25, 26, 32, 34, 37, 43, 44, 48, 64, 75, 105, 118, 120 schismatics 68 scholarship 3, 35 Scholastic theologians 2, 15, 19–28, 42, 45–6, 74, 117, 120 science 12, 13, 21, 30 Scripture 5, 8, 11, 12, 15, 17, 22, 24, 26, 27, 29, 30, 31, 34, 39, 41, 43, 84, 85, 102 see also New Testament; Old Testament Scrope, Archbishop 70 seeds 14, 21, 24, 25, 27, 32, 41, 43 Segarelli, Gerard 69, 119 Seneca 39, 81 Sermones de sanctis 29, 30, 31, 36, 38, 120 sermons 50, 103, 117, 118 and canonization 30 classical sources 39–40 collections 29, 42 and miracles 31–5, 41, 42, 44–6 purpose of 29, 38 and saints’ lives 30, 36, 37–8

Index themes 29, 30, 35 Severus 13, 40, 102 shrines 3–4, 9, 44, 65, 85 Siegfried III of Mainz, Archbishop 73, 74 Sigal, André ix, 93 Signa 66 signs 8, 9, 10, 11, 16, 18, 22, 23, 27, 32, 34, 38, 44, 48, 69, 118 Silvester, St 10 Silvestris, Bernard 37 Simon of Collazzone 106 Simon of Todi 59 Simon of Trebnitz 5 skepticism x, 1–2, 7, 31, 35, 46, 94, 118, 119, 121 of believers 47, 53, 54–5 and blasphemy 55, 56–9 of cardinals 54 of the learned 62, 75 papal 2 popular 62–3 punishment of 52, 56, 65–8 rational 1, 27 see also heretics; Jews; pagans Smoller, Laura ix, x social control 65 social life 3, 4, 34, 55, 56, 57, 67, 90, 94, 117, 120 see also class, social social unity 3, 12, 13, 55, 67, 68 sorcerers see magicians sources ix, 3, 4, 6, 36, 39, 40, 87, 90, 117, 119, 120 spectators 8, 9, 10, 12, 13, 15, 23, 31, 33, 51, 68, 106, 119 see also witnesses Speculum universale 120 spirits 8, 12, 18, 86, 105 Spiritual Franciscans 42, 83 Stanislaus of Krakow 36, 47, 77, 109 state authorities 4, 13, 55 Stedingers 73 Stephan of Muret 8–9 Stephen of Die 74, 93 stereotypes 5, 11, 92, 102, 111, 120 stigmata 41, 69, 70, 71 stories 34 see also miracle stories; tales stupor 9 see also astonishment; surprise Sturmo of Fulda 71

147

Suetonius 5 supernatural 3, 10, 12, 17, 18, 19, 27, 35, 45, 46, 69, 75, 77, 108, 118, 119 contemporary belief in ix–x superstition 1, 2, 65, 87, 90 surprise 8, 9, 15, 31, 32 Sylvester, Pope 119 symbols 10, 100, 104 tales 1, 12, 28, 34, 35, 50, 66, 120 see also folktales; miracle stories Talmud, 29, 40 testimony 71, 73, 75, 76, 90, 92, 107 conflicting 4 popular 4 thaumaturgical miracles 6, 23, 106–7, 114, 118 theft 39, 65 Theissen, Gerd 11–12 Theobald, Bishop of Gubbio 4 Theodore of Apolda 35 theologians 7, 87 see also Scholastic theologians theology 3, 7, 10, 18, 26, 33, 42, 45, 74, 100, 114 medieval 15–18, 56 see also Scholastic theologians Thomas of Hereford 4, 77–8, 84–5, 87, 94, 112, 119 time 22, 80, 81, 85, 88, 91, 94, 96, 98, 109 Tobias 32–3 Tolentino 112–13 topoi 3, 5, 7, 32, 90, 93, 98, 102, 112 Toulouse 6, 52 transformation 10, 11, 14, 15, 21, 23, 24, 37 trials 4, 5, 6, 7, 29, 50, 51, 61, 62, 64, 70, 73, 80, 81, 92, 103, 106, 118, 119, 120 Ubald of Gubbio 4 Ulrich of Augsburg 71 University of Paris 18, 29, 37, 40, 45, 74 unlearned people, 17, 20, 46, 93, 104, 118 see also poor people Urban V, Pope 66 urban society 4, 7, 12, 94, 95, 100, 119 Van der Loos, H. 11 Vauchez, André ix, 5n., 31, 93 Vegio, Maffeo 39 vengeance 52, 56, 57, 60, 65, 68 see also divine vengeance verifiability 85

148

Miracles and Wonders

see also proof vice 18, 23, 57 Vigilantius of Toulouse 1 Virgin Mary 17, 22, 25, 107, 110, 111 virtues 5, 6, 11, 18, 19, 26, 31, 34, 38, 39, 40, 41, 45, 69, 105, 120 visible world 37, 63 visions 12, 17, 21, 75, 77, 85, 118 demonic 113–14 in hagiography 102, 108 Jewish 101 prophetic 114 and women 100–101 see also dreams visual arts ix, 33, 46, 47, 50, 51, 103, 108, 117, 120 Vitalinis, Bonifacio de 57 Vovelle, Michel 93

William of Auxerre 19, 37, 70 William of Bourges 72, 109 William of Champeaux 17 William of Tocco 7, 42, 58, 116 Winterbourne, Sussex 88, 91 witchcraft 73, 79 witnesses 4, 8, 13, 70, 71, 73, 77, 87, 90, 94, 107, 109, 111, 117–18, 119 and disagreement 78, 79, 80, 81, 82 see also eyewitnesses; spectators women 4, 70, 82, 100–101, 110–11 wonder 8, 9, 15, 20, 25, 106 see also astonishment; surprise wonders 8, 9, 10, 21, 27, 44 see also miracles; signs words 18, 22, 34, 87, 90 see also blasphemy Wycliffe, John 61, 62, 63

Waldensians 7, 51, 64, 69 war 35, 44, 60, 66, 68, 110 water 15, 21, 24, 79, 94, 96 Wenceslas, St 58 William of Auvergne 14, 19, 37, 38, 117

Yves of Tréguier 30, 42, 43–4, 45, 61, 109, 110, 118 Zeppenfeld 96 Zwicker, Peter 64