John S. Ott (c2008, 2012, 2014, 2017, 2020, 2021, 2022)
Department of History
Portland State University
HST 355U - Late Medieval History

READING GUIDE #2 : STUDY QUESTIONS
  for
GUIBERT OF NOGENT, MONODIES and ON SAINTS AND THEIR RELICS


Background notes and study questions

I. Monodies (Memoirs)

Our readings fully get underway this term with the memoirs of Guibert, writer, historian, theologian, monk of Saint-Germer of Fly (pronounced like 'fleA,' near the town of Beauvais), and finally abbot of Nogent-sous-Coucy, a modest monastery located northeast of Paris. Guibert (born around 1060, died ca. 1124) produced his memoirs, which he referred to as monodiae, or "songs for a single voice," during the years 1114-1115. He was an acute, often acerbic, and sometimes humorous observer of the times in which he lived, and his memoir is the first fully realized autobiography written in western Europe since the Confessions of Augustine of Hippo, the Catholic Church Father and theologian, in 397. He also had an eye (and ear) for irony. In his memoir, Guibert primarily observed and commented upon affairs in the neighboring dioceses of Laon and Beauvais (see map inset in the book, p. xli), seldom venturing far outside this constrained geographical territory in his writings. Although his life experiences and travels remained resolutely local, Guibert was aware of events going on in the wider world, which he heard about from eyewitnesses and personal contacts. His work thus captures the spirit of an age undergoing rapid transformation at all levels of society. That spirit, in religious and psychological terms, is depicted most vividly in Guibert's portrayal of himself, his family -- especially his mother and schoolteacher, Solomon -- and his intellectual and religious development.

Book I opens with an account of Guibert's youth and childhood, and concentrates primarily on describing his family life, schooling, and time as a novice at the monastery of Saint-Germer. His father died while Guibert was still an infant, and his mother never remarried. These opening pages present us with a psychological portrait of a medieval monk and member of the lesser nobility, written while in his mid-50s. It is a highly particular portrait, one in which Guibert emphasizes certain aspects of his life while totally neglecting others. For example, he never mentions the name of his mother or the names of his siblings. As you read, consider the following questions and try to produce an intellectual profile of the author.

1) As a memoirist and social commentator, what, chiefly, are Guibert's preoccupations?  What kind of childhood did he have--or, put otherwise, how does he choose to remember his childhood? How does he remember his mother? How did she influence his life?  What pressures and concerns troubled Guibert's family?  How does the idea and practice of confession -- whereby Christians admit to their sins, seek absolution, and perform penance -- contribute to the structure of the text?
2) What is Guibert's memory of his schooling and his tutor? What was he taught, and how was he taught? What skills was he expected to master by his first teacher, Solomon?
3) What is Guibert's take on his times?  Is he optimistic or pessimistic about the direction in which society is headed? What evidence is there for your view?
4) Does Guibert write from a particular moral stance? If so, how would you describe it?
5) Do his writings contain material of interest for historians, and does Guibert think historically as he writes about his own past? What are some of the ways he talks about the past?

In Book II, Guibert shifts from describing his youth, his profession as a monk, and his family to considering the circumstances of his election to the abbacy of Nogent, which occurred in 1104, when he was about 45 years old. This is by far the shortest of the three books in the memoir, and part of it may have been lost. It opens with his consideration of his abbey's historical origins, which was prompted by his discovery of some ancient sarcophagi (stone tombs) around the abbey and his exploration of their remains. Book II closes with mention of his mother's death and of some wondrous events nearby. In between, Guibert alludes darkly to unspecified troubles that overhung his early abbacy (1104-1107), leading to his temporary exile, and sheds light on his view of the distant past.

1) Why do you think Guibert offers an explanation of the abbey's history?
2) While his account of the Briton king Quilius is pure invention, how does it explain the abbey of Nogent's origins? What are the key points of the story of Quilius?
3) What is, for Guibert, the purpose of writing history?
4) Does Guibert feel that he is up to the task of leading a community of monks? Why or why not?

Guibert's focus in Book III is on (1) the bishops of Laon and (2) the townspeople and their surroundings, including the doings of the local aristocracy. As you will see, he is loud in his criticism of the bishops of that city. He is equally vociferous in his criticism of the lord of the nearby domain of Coucy, Enguerrand; of Enguerrand's son, Thomas of Marle; and of the townspeople of Laon. Situated on a hill overlooking the surrounding lowlands, the ancient city of Laon at this time was a prosperous cathedral town of perhaps 10-12,000 residents; Nogent was a few kilometers away, and had holdings in the city. It sat in the middle of a vast wine-growing region, and was a center of wine production and regional trade. Its merchants were thus relatively prosperous, and desired to obtain from their bishop the privilege of exemption from the taxes and tolls they had customarily owed to him and the leading nobles of the city. Laon in its day was perhaps best known, however, for its cathedral school, whose master Anselm and Anselm's brother Raoul attracted ambitious clerical students from all over Europe to listen to his lessons on the scriptures.

Laon was thus in many respects a "college town" with a large and transient student population, considerable local wealth, and a prominent and prestigious clergy. It was also a hotbed of unrest and of social pressures that produced conflicts between its various constituent groups.

Guibert mentions a large cast of characters in Book III. Here is a glossary to help you sort through them.

canons - members of the clergy attached to the cathedral, numbering many dozens in all.  The canons assisted the bishop in governing the cathedral, administering its properties and parishioners, and conducting the daily church services. Below the top officers noted below were the chanter (responsible for music and the choir), deacons, subdeacons, canons, acolytes, and others of lesser status, plus many servants. The upper ranks of the cathedral canons at Laon consisted of:
castellan of Laon - a vassal of the French king, responsible for representing his interests at Laon, where the castellan possessed various properties and controlled a fortified tower

vidame (vicedominus, or "sub-lord") - one of the bishop's chief lay vassals, responsible for protecting the church and dealing with secular matters

1) Does Guibert support or dislike the commune of Laon? Why? What is it, and who seems to belong to it?
2) Why do you think Guibert spends so much time discussing the history of the bishops of Laon?  What do they have to do with the commune of 1111/1112?  What insight does Guibert's description of them shed on his understanding of history and how it works?
3) What is the king's role in all this?  Is he an effective or weak ruler in Guibert's estimation?  What sort of image does Guibert paint of him?  (The king at this time was Louis VI "the Fat," who ruled from 1108-1137 and was widely praised in other circles.)
4) Try to diagram Guibert's world-view: what mattered to him, and why?  In what ways is his view "biased" or skewed?  Do you think he is fairly representative of the medieval clerical establishment?  If so, how; if not, why?


2. On Saints and their Relics

Guibert turned to writing his treatise on saints and their relics a few years after completing his memoirs. His tone in this four-part treatise is, if anything, more acerbic than his memoirs. He wrote the text for a specific purpose: to refute the claims made by the monks of the nearby abbey of Saint-Médard of Soissons (about 10 miles distant from Laon) to possess a baby-tooth of Christ, which they claimed as a miracle-working relics. In the same treatise, Guibert entered into a raging theological debate in his time on the nature of transubstantiation and the body of Christ. Guibert's hostility toward the baby tooth did not meet with widespread acceptance, and he was not hostile to miracles per se. Indeed, in expressing doubt about many miraculous claims, Guibert was unusual for his time, which may explain in part why this treatise survives in only a single manuscript. In the pages we are reading, Guibert first differentiates between what beliefs are necessary for salvation and what religious practices are the subject of church teaching and writing, before describing a series of purported miracles in the region.

1) Did Guibert hold that belief in miracles was necessary for salvation? Why, or why not? What is the use of miracles?
2) What made for an authentic, as opposed to a fraudulent, miracle-claim? What were, for Guibert, the key components that led to this differentiation, that is, what was good and necessary evidence for a miracle to be authentic?