Florbert

ON ST. FLORBERT, FIRST ABBOT OF BOTH MONASTERIES OF ST. PETER AT GHENT AND BLANDIGNY IN FLANDERS,

BEFORE THE MIDDLE OF THE 7TH CENTURY.

PRELIMINARY COMMENTARY.

Florbert, abbot at Ghent in Flanders. (S.)

BHL Number: 3029, 3030

BY C. D. S.

§ I. The sources of this treatment distributed into three classes. The chief of these edited here from manuscript codices.

A twofold series of documents is available to us in which St. Florbert is spoken of distinctly or, as they say, ex professo. The one comprises the monuments of the monastery of St. Peter, Three kinds of documents concerning St. Florbert. afterwards called of St. Bavo, which, founded by St. Amandus at Ghent before the middle of the seventh century, was abandoned in the year 1540 by the monks, a little before reduced to the state of secular canons, so that on that place there might be built

the citadel which the Emperor Charles V judged necessary for holding to their duty the overly fierce citizens of the municipality of Ghent Cf. A. Van Lokeren, Histoire de l'abbaye de Saint-Bavon. . Under the other come the monuments of the monastery of St. Peter on Mount Blandin near the same city, likewise established by St. Amandus, which lasted until the great French upheaval, which invaded our fatherland also, at the very end of the last century [Cf. A. Van Lokeren, Chartes et documents de l'abbaye de Saint-Pierre du mont Blandin à Gand, avec une introduction historique.] . Besides that twofold series, a third can be indicated, namely of those documents whose chief matter indeed does not relate to the history of St. Florbert, but which treat of things in some part connected with that history; indeed, as will soon appear, from them are excerpted nearly all that is truly narrated of St. Florbert in the proper monuments of both monasteries. To this third class belong the Lives of St. Amandus Act. SS., vol. I Feb., p. 848 ff. , St. Bavo Act. SS., vol. I Oct., p. 229 ff. and St. Livinus Act. SS. O. S. B., Sec. II, p. 450 ff. Act. SS. Belgii, vol. III, p. 96 ff. . Since enough has been said of their authority by our predecessors in their prefatory commentaries to those Lives, it does not seem that we should discourse on it again here. But the things contained under the first twofold series must be examined a little more distinctly.

[2] The letter of St. Livinus; the epitaph of St. Florbert. As regards, then, the Bavonian monuments, among these the principal place is held by the metrical letter of St. Livinus sent to Florbert while he was still living, and the sepulchral stone, which seems to have been carved immediately after the death of Florbert and which was found together with his holy body a little after the middle of the 13th century. Of this notable sepulchral inscription we shall have to discourse below in a special chapter § VI. , where we shall set an accurate drawing of it before the eyes of readers. The poem of St. Livinus, however, though edited more than once already, we have nevertheless thought should be inserted here anew among the documents on our saint, with new aids of codices employed Below, Docum. III. .

[3] [Bavonian monuments more recent than the middle of the 13th century: 1. The Chronicle of John of Thielrode;] Besides these no Bavonian monument relating to our matter older than the very end of the 13th century is at hand. At which time, namely between the years 1276 and 1298 Cf. Van Lokeren, op. soon to be cited, pref., pp. III, IV. , John of Thielrode, a monk of that monastery, composed his Chronicle. This work, from John's own autograph codex Cf. ibid. , now of the public library of Ghent 200 bis [In Jul. de Saint-Genois (Catalogue des manuscrits de la bibliothèque de la ville et de l'université de Gand) n. 439.] , yet not entire (as Saint-Genois indicates in error), but, as the editor himself has noted in his preface P. XI. , only those parts that relate to the history of Ghent and Flanders, the distinguished Aug. Van Lokeren has committed to print Chronique de S. Bavon a Gand, par Jean de Thielrode, d'apres le ms. original. . We however present here from the codex itself those chapters in which Florbert is spoken of, namely chapters IX and X Below, Docum., II, and no. 68 of this Commentary. . Nor did John himself, in composing his Chronicle, have in his hands older monuments of the same kind of his monastery, as is gathered from his prologue, where he complains that that same monastery is almost totally empty of chronicles, and that he has written about the things which are now joined together in the present compendium, finding little in our codices Chronique de S. Bavon, ed. Van Lokeren, p. 2. ; then at the end of chapter III, enumerating more distinctly what aids he used in composing his book Ibid., p. 7. , he cites no other proper to his monastery apart from the Liber floridus On which cf. Saint-Genois, Catal. cit., p. 14 ff. : in which, whether in the notes added to the martyrology of Usuard Cf. ibid., p. 22 (n° 20). , or in the brief Chronicle from the Nativity of Christ to the year 1119 Cf. ibid., p. 23 (n° 26). , both of which little works the distinguished Van Lokeren edited together with the Chronicle of John Chronique de S. Bavon, etc., pp. 201, 202. , or in the other treatises contained in the same codex, nothing is read that touches the history of St. Florbert. And so John seems to have used no other writings in weaving this part of his Chronicle than the Lives of SS. Amandus and Bavo, and perhaps also certain Blandinian monuments, yet so as to correct or supply the computation of the years in which the several deeds were done according to the traditions of the Bavonian monastery.

[4] 2. The Annals of St. Bavo; These traditions, more distinctly set down in writing, are presented by the Annals of St. Bavo of Ghent, likewise from a codex of the library of Ghent, 10 In Saint-Genois no. 62 (Catal. cit., p. 326). , written in a hand of the fourteenth century (which brought the Annals down to the year 1340, and then different hands continued them to the year 1350), first edited by G. H. Pertz Monum. Germ., Scr. vol. II, p. 185. and a little later by the venerable man J. J. De Smet Corp. Chron. Flandr., vol. I, p. 439. . For the rest, it is also easily evident to one reading through these Annals, as Pertz too noted Loc. cit., in prolegom. , that as regards the first times of the monastery no other witnesses of events lit the way for their writer than the Lives of SS. Amandus, Bavo, Livinus and Landoald, if, that is, you except the tradition of the castle of Ghent founded by C. Julius Caesar, and the definite designation of the years to which the several things are attached. As for that chronological reckoning, we pass over discussing it at present, intending to treat of it expressly where there will be discussion of the chronology of the deeds of St. Florbert Below, § II. .

[5] 3. The Chronicle of the castle and monastery of St. Bavo; In the third place among the chief monuments of the history of the Bavonian monastery comes the Cronica castri et cœnobii sancti Bavonis Gandensis, from a codex formerly of the abbey of St. Bavo, and now of the royal library of Brussels 14525 (of which also a copy is held in the library of Ghent Cf. Saint-Genois, Catal. cit., p. 93. ), brought into public light by J. J. De Smet Corp. Chron. Fland., vol. I, p. 455. , after the distinguished Van Lokeren had a little before subjoined a few excerpts from it, according to the Hulthem copy, to his edition of the Chronicle of John of Thielrode Chronique de S. Bavon, p. 193. . This Chronicle, because, as one may conjecture, it terminates in the year 1152, many learned men had hitherto judged to have been composed in the middle of the 12th century Cf. Van Lokeren, Chronique de S. Bavon, p. VIII. ; but when the codex was better inspected it easily appeared that the same is not older than the very end of the 15th century, since in it appeal is made to the authority of Adrian But At the year 557 (in De Smet, Corp. Chron. Fland., vol. I, p. 458). and in another place At the year 826 (ibid., p. 480). of John Trithemius, of whom the former died in the year 1488, the latter in the year 1516. Moreover, the distinguished Van Lokeren observes Chronique de Saint-Bavon, p. IX. that that age of our Chronicle was not hidden from Antonius Sanderus, who in his books Gandavensium rerum Ed. Brussels 1627, p. 146. and thence in his Flandria illustrata Vol. I (Cologne 1631), p. 102. , citing it, says: That chronographer lived under the Emperor Maximilian I: for he makes mention of Abbot Trithemius. As to its authority, how slight that is of itself as regards the things which happened at the beginnings of the founded monastery is gathered of itself from the age just defined.

[6] 4. Some others. Further, from those three documents already mentioned or from some one of them, whether directly or by other intermediaries, or certainly from the same sources from which those were drawn, have been drawn, and report the same traditions, certain other monuments of this kind, by which the history of the Bavonian monastery is presented. To this kind belongs that undigested mass which from a codex formerly of Blandin, and now of the royal library of Brussels 16531–16540, the venerable man F. Van de Putte brought forward among the Blandinian monuments, inscribed De exordio civitatis Gandensis Annales abbatiæ sancti Patri Blandiniensis, p. 161 ff. . Likewise the Chronicle composed around the year 1450 by Oliver Longus (De Langhe), Prior of the monastery of St. Bavo, and subjoined by the distinguished Van Lokeren from the Ghent codex 211 (St-Genois n. 487) to the Chronicle of John of Thielrode Chronique de Saint-Bavon, p. 197. . To which must be added certain other Bavonian chronicles still unpublished, which are now found placed in the cartulary of the cathedral chapter of St. Bavo at Ghent [Cf. A. Van Lokeren, Histoire de l'abbaye de Saint-Bavon, Prolegom., p. XV. See also below, no. 25.] .

[7] [Blandinian monuments: 1. A notice on the first abbots, written in the 9th century.] Now for the Blandinian monuments. Among these the principal place, if you regard the order of antiquity, is held (apart from the Life of St. Amandus, written by Baudemund his disciple, whom the saint himself established as third abbot of Blandin Act. SS., vol. I Feb., p. 848. , but in which no mention of Florbert occurs) by that notice on the first abbots of the monastery of Blandin, in a hand of the ninth, or at most of the tenth, century, placed after the Life of St. Amandus in the codex of the public library of Ghent 224 In Saint-Genois 149 (Catal. cit., p. 159). . Since this is very brief and hitherto unpublished and, as it seems, the principal source of later writers on the same matter, we have thought it should be presented in this place, transcribed by us from the codex itself. It runs thus: The most blessed Bishop Amandus, at the time at which King Dagobert governed the sceptre of the kingdom of the Franks, for the sake of preaching went to the territories of the castle of Ghent. Whose inhabitants, having deserted their maker and redeemer, deceived by the cunning of the devil, worshipped idols * more suited to the fire than to veneration. When, sorrowing for their miseries, he had arrived there under the auspices of Christ, and had begun vehemently to refute their madness, reduced by the malign spirit, they did not blush to afflict the holy man with many injuries and kinds of punishments. At length, the devil with his worshippers being triumphed over, by the Lord's help, he built a monastery there for the love of the Lord, to which he gave the name Blandinium, in which also he gathered a band of monks. Over which also he set a father named Florbert, a man of sagacious wit. The aforesaid Florbert having died, he established as abbot a certain John, very familiar to him.

And when John had departed to the realms of the heavens, one by name Baudemund took up the governance of the aforesaid monastery. He too being dead, Celestinus, a Scot by race, ruled the abbacy of the aforesaid monastery for many days, until that time when the dissension of the kingdom of the Franks arose between Charles and Ragenfrid.

[8] 2. From a codex of the 11th century, Next after this notice follow the things concerning the origins of Blandin which are contained in the codex of the venerable and learned man F. Van de Putte, recently deceased at Courtrai, which the same venerable man most kindly shared with us. The codex is of parchment, in quarto form (0m,29 × 0,21), containing 110 leaves, to which is added a paper quire in which are contained certain notices concerning the temporal affairs of the monastery after the middle of the 13th century. The rest of the codex, besides many acts of the same kind, namely of donations, purchases or exchanges, the indication of revenues or rents, and some things relating to the provisions of the monks and the officials appointed for supplying those provisions, presents also certain things which pertain chiefly to the primitive history of the monastery and thus to some extent to the history of our saint. Of this kind these are found in our codex.

[9] Annals of Blandin, 1° (From fol. 19 v°) Annals of Blandin, written down to the year 1060 in the same hand of the 11th century, but interpolated and continued by other different hands down to the year 1292: which, after the venerable man F. Van de Putte Annales abbatiæ sancti Petri Blandiniensis, p. 1 ff. , the distinguished L. Bethmann edited from the same codex Mon. Germ., Scr. vol. V, p. 21. . In those Annals there are read only these things that pertain to the history of St. Florbert:

DCX. The monastery of Blandin is built at Ghent.

DCXVIII. St. Amandus departing to Elnone, Florbert is ordained abbot.

DCXXXVIIII. (In another hand) St. Florbert the abbot died: whom St. John the abbot succeeded.

MXLVIIII. In this year the elevation of St. Florbert was made (then in another hand) by Baldwin, bishop of Noyon, on the 12th day before the kalends of May.

MLXXVII. (In another hand) Translation of St. Florbert, abbot of Blandin, by Bishop Ratbod on the 12th day before the kalends of May.

[10] Privilege of Martin I, Roman Pontiff, 2° (Fol. 43 v°) Copy of a privilege of Pope Martin given in the times of King Dagobert and Bishop St. Amandus, in the same hand which wrote out the older part of the Annals. This privilege we shall copy out from our codex below in § V, where its authenticity must be discussed. There follow other privileges of this kind given for the monastery of Blandin by the Roman Pontiffs Nicholas I, Benedict VII, John XV and Leo IX, and by Transmar, bishop of Noyon (a. 941).

[11] Book of rents, 3° (From fol. 52 v°) The Book of rents of St. Peter of Blandin, or a review of the donations and of the things also acquired by purchase for the monastery from its origin to the year 1200. This book as far as the year 1037 was written in that same hand of the 11th century to which is owed the first part of the Chronicle just mentioned, and then was continued by other hands. It lacks a title, nor did the writer arrange what he gathered into it in a sufficiently certain or clear order. The entire book was edited from his 11th-century codex by the venerable man F. Van de Putte among the Annales abbatiæ sancti Petri Blandiniensis P. 65. , inscribed thus: Historia et privilegia sancti Petri Blandiniensis, which inscription perhaps does not so suit it. We present here from the codex itself among the Acts of St. Florbert Below among the documents. both those things which pertain to the history of the foundation of the monastery of Blandin, excerpted and somewhat amplified from the ninth-century notice which we reported a little above No. 7. , and the review of the donations and purchases by which the possessions of the monastery were increased in the time of St. Amandus and St. Florbert.

[12] proclamations concerning the body of St. Florbert. 4° (Fol. 101 v°) An encyclical letter or proclamation Cf. below, no. 78. of the monks of Blandin against the monks of St. Bavo, who asserted that the body of St. Florbert was preserved with them, and not in the church of Blandin. And besides (fol. 99 r°) a certain expostulation in the same controversy offered to a certain bishop by the Blandinians Cf. below, no. 79 ff. . Each little writing also is written in a hand of the 11th or 12th century, yet neither in the same hand to which we owe the twofold document indicated in the preceding numbers. Of both also, or at least of the former and besides of another document, in which the second is copied nearly word for word Cf. below, no. 84 ff. , a copy is held both in the Ghent codex of the 14th century, of which in the next following number, and in the Brussels 16531–16540, of which there will be discussion a little below No. 14 ff. . From that threefold codex these monuments will be brought forward below in § VI, where the controversy over the body of St. Florbert must be more accurately discussed. The venerable man F. Van de Putte edited them from his 11th-century codex Annales abbatiæ Blandiniensis, pp. 26 and 28. .

[13] 3. In a Ghent codex of the 14th century, the same. In the third place among the codices chiefly reporting the history of the monastery of Blandin comes a codex written in a hand of the 14th century (some things however being subjoined in the 15th century), which, recently brought into the public library of Ghent, the prefect of this library, the distinguished Ferd. Van der Haeghen, shared with us with the greatest courtesy. In which, besides other things, are found written out those things which in the preceding numbers we have indicated are contained in the codex of the 9th century Nos. 9–12. .

[14] 4. From a Brussels codex, for the greater part of the 15th century, Related to the Ghent codex of the 14th century which we have just described is a parchment codex, formerly Hulthem 504, now of the royal library of Brussels 16531–16540, likewise in quarto form (0m,27 × 0,195), with 204 leaves or 408 pages, written in different hands in the 14th, 15th and 16th centuries. In which are found nearly all the documents which are read in the Ghent one. Whence, especially since the documents common to both codices are arranged in the same order in both, it is an easy step to gather that the Brussels codex was copied from the Ghent exemplar: which can also be confirmed by other indications besides Cf. below, no. 63 and var. lect. at no. 72. . But in the Brussels one certain things are subjoined that are lacking in the Ghent.

[15] The Chronology of Blandin, Among these the principal place, if only the author had completed it, would be held by the Chronicle or rather History of the monastery of Blandin, by far the most prolix of all that had been written up to then on this monastery. At what time it was begun and how meagre were the sources from which he could draw it, the author indicates in these words in his prologue Cod. p. 49. : To wish to reduce to writing the foundation of the monastery of Blandin, the situation of the place itself, the institution of religion and its continuation and intermission, the names and deeds of the abbots and prelates from its first foundation DOWN TO THE YEAR ONE THOUSAND FOUR HUNDRED AND NINETY-SEVEN, and to insert in this work some contemporary events, I judge that I can accomplish the more difficultly the less I am found suited and fit for so great a business, as one who has no faculty of speech and the smallest experience in weaving chronicles of this kind; it brings it about * also that I find little handed down to memory and writing about a business of this kind: for I can scarcely find the beginning, middle or end of this our purpose… These and many other things persuade me, then, to desist from this work; but overcome by the excessive charity of the venerable and religious man Dom James van den Driessche, prior of the house of the Williamites at Bruges, and in a certain way driven and compelled by his importunate goading, I have preferred to gnash out something unlearned and barbarous and arranged without order here and there, seizing the pen in my hand to write, than in any way irrefragably to go against the will of so great a man. From that point, therefore, our writer, otherwise unknown, set about collecting all the traditions concerning the history of the monastery of Blandin, certainly not without some praise for erudition, for his time, and diligence. But, whether overtaken by death or compelled by some other chance to halt his step, he did not proceed in his labour beyond the first years of the rule of Abbot Einhard (a. 811–844) [Cf. Van Lokeren, Chartes et documents de l'abbaye de Saint-Pierre au mont Blandin, vol. I, p. XLVIII.] . And so that history or, as it is commonly customarily called, Chronology of Blandin must not be judged to advance beyond the beginning of the ninth century.

[16] which also in other We have found two more recent copies of the same Chronology at Ghent in the public archive of East Flanders. One is presented by the codex which J. de Saint-Genois formerly described under n° 57 [Notice sur les manuscrits historiques, qui appartiennent au dépôt d'archives de la Flandre Orientale, à Gand, in the Periodical Messager des sciences et des arts de la Belgique, vol. V (1837), p. 329.] , vol. II, pp. 27–57. The other, a little less complete (for it stops at the year 772), is contained in the codex which the same Saint-Genois in his notice on the archive of East Flanders [Notice sur les archives de la province de la Flandre Orientale, in the same Periodical, vol. IX (1841), p. 137.] placed among the Inventories of the monastery of St. Peter of Blandin under n° 6° Vol. cit., p. 192. . According to this latter codex the venerable man F. Van de Putte prepared his edition of the Chronology of Blandin Annales abbatiæ Sancti Petri Blandiniensis, p. 31. . We edit here Below among the documents. those parts which pertain to the beginnings of the monastery of Blandin and to the rule of Florbert from the Brussels codex, with variant readings added from the two Ghent ones.

[17] De exordio civitatis Gandensis. Besides that Chronology and some things of less moment for our matter, there is presented in the Brussels codex P. 275 ff. that Bavonian Chronicle inscribed De exordio civitatis Gandensis, which we have noted above No. 6. was subjoined to the Blandinian monuments by the venerable man F. Van de Putte, and certain other documents relating chiefly to Belgian history, which you may see reviewed in the index of that codex composed by Van Hulthem In Van de Putte, Annales abbatiæ Blandiniensis, Proleg., p. XIII. .

[18] More recent unpublished writings The series of manuscript codices reporting the history of the monastery of Blandin is closed by a commentary written in the Flemish language a little before the end of the 17th century by Cornelius van der Meere [Den spieghel van de eerweirdighe heeren prelaeten van de aude wyt vermaerde ende exempte abdye van Sinte Pieters nevens Ghendt, etc.] , of which five copies are held in the public archive of East Flanders and a sixth in the library

public of Ghent [Cf. J. de Saint-Genois, Notice sur les mss. historiques, etc., in Messager des sciences, year 1837, p. 346, n° 49.] : but nothing is found in it that can help us in elucidating the Acts of St. Florbert beyond the aids already cited. And the same must be said of the Chronicle or catalogue of the abbots of Blandin composed by the work of Siger de Visschere, prior of Blandin Cf. ibid., p. 338, n° 14; Act. SS. Belgii, vol. III, p. 342. , as also of the history of Blandin to the very end of the 16th century, which is read in the codex of the royal library of Brussels 7750, from fol. 426 to fol. 515: which is preceded also by certain other things excerpted from the older Bavonian and Blandinian chronicles.

[19] and printed. Among more recent writers, however, there stands out especially the distinguished A. Van Lokeren, who, as for illustrating the history of the monastery of St. Bavo, both by notes to the Chronicle of John of Thielrode edited by him Cf. above, no. 3. and by a work of his own Histoire de l'abbaye de Saint-Bavon et de la crypte de Saint-Jean a Gand. , so also for that of Blandin has given excellent labour by his diplomatic collection Chartes et documents de l'abbaye de Saint-Pierre a Gand. , of which two volumes have come into public light, in which the series of charters is brought down to the year 1599. Before him some things about both monasteries were touched on, either more or less distinctly or in passing, by Meyer, Sanderus and other writers on the affairs of Flanders, and also writers of Benedictine history, whose names for the most part you will find cited a little below No. 32. . A particular Commentary on St. Florbert was published at the very end of the last century by our Cornelius De Smet Act. SS. Belgii, vol. III, p. 339. .

* these two words are lacking in the codex.

* read officit?

§ II. The chronology of the history of St. Florbert.

[The chronology of the history of St. Amandus and St. Florbert, greatly disturbed,] It is known to all who have even hastily turned the pages of the Acta Sanctorum Belgii published by our Joseph Ghesquière and Cornelius De Smet how wretchedly there has been error, until about the middle of the 17th century, concerning the chronology of the deeds of St. Amandus and of the other holy men whose names occur in his history. For when in the 11th century certain monks passing their life in the monasteries founded by the illustrious apostle of Belgium undertook to describe these things more fully from older monuments or to insert them in their chronicles, and on the one side found the chief events in those ancient monuments noted only according to the years of the kings of the Franks [Cf. Henschen, Comment. præv. on St. Amandus, no. 72 (Act. SS., vol. I Feb., p. 829).] , and on the other had in their hands catalogues of the Roman Pontiffs or of certain other churches, and likewise of the Roman and Constantinopolitan Emperors, in which there was indeed indicated more or less accurately in what order the one succeeded the other and how many years each held the see or reigned, yet not with the several things distinguished by the years of the Christian era, as has long been the custom of more recent writers, it was easy for men sufficiently unskilled in chronological science, in striving to coordinate all these things, to strike on manifold rocks. On the same rocks stuck, following in the footsteps of those first ones, Sigebert of Gembloux and other chroniclers of the Middle Ages who touched on Belgian affairs, indeed in a more recent age also James Meyer, Ant. Sanderus, Baronius and others, how far these have turned aside from the right path in determining the age of Florbert we shall briefly indicate, after, having now obtained better guides, we have set out this whole chronology more accurately ordered.

[21] was restored chiefly by Henschen, Ghesquière and Corn. De Smet. To the rest in this matter the torch was chiefly carried by our Henschen, both in the Diatriba on the three Dagoberts, and in the Prefatory Commentary to the Acts of St. Amandus At the 6th day of Feb. , and especially in Exegesis præliminaris II to volume III of March, by which he renewed and emended the diatribe on the three Dagoberts, and which Jos. Ghesquière published again with his annotations added Act. SS., Belgii, vol. II, p. 223. ; to which must be added Cornelius De Smet's Disquisitio chronologica de anno emortuali et præcipuis gestis sancti Amandi Act. SS., Belgii, vol. II, p. 177. . Relying, then, on these aids and on the old monuments from which the Bavonian and Blandinian writers themselves drew their narratives, let us now undertake to unfold the series and chronology of Florbert's life.

[22] [Nothing is known of the history of St. Florbert before his undertaking the governance of both monasteries of Ghent.] We know nothing at all of what the blessed man did before that time at which he was set by St. Amandus over the monasteries of Ghent. For what is reported in the Gallican Martyrology At the 1st day of November. of a Roman journey undertaken by him previously together with his holy master, this seems a mere conjecture of the writer Saussay himself, by which he supposed that Florbert adhered as an inseparable companion to Amandus hastening to the conversion of the people of Ghent, at the same time admitting that Roman journey of St. Amandus preceding his sacred expedition, which is rejected by the better critics [Cf. De Smet, Disquisitio chronologica, etc., no. 16 (Act. SS., Belgii, vol. IV, p. 183).] . To the same kind of conjecture belong those things which Saussay transferred from the Life of St. Amandus to Florbert Loc. cit. , according to whom Florbert, being endowed with an apostolic spirit, in Gaul by holy preachings enticed the souls of many to the obedience of Christ and the observance of his immaculate law, overturned idols at Ghent, brought in and established Christian worship. In all of which, indeed, that Florbert was a companion and faithful helper to Amandus can in some way be judged probable (although Baudemund testifies that all who had accompanied St. Amandus to the district of Ghent, overcome by the difficulty of the work, departed from him) Cited below, no. 27. ; yet, since the old monuments are altogether silent about when and in what way he adhered to Amandus, it is not to be rashly affirmed.

[23] On the time at which he held that prefecture Let us, therefore, begin the history of Florbert from his undertaking the prefecture of both monasteries of Ghent. That a double monastery was founded by St. Amandus in the district of Ghent, at the place where the river Lys flows into the Scheldt and where afterwards arose the illustrious city of Ghent, is most certainly established from the old Annals and from the diplomas of princes given from the beginning of the 9th century [Cf. Henschen., Comment. præv. on St. Amandus, nos. 26–29 and no. 33 (Act. SS., vol. I Feb., pp. 821, 822).] . And both indeed were first consecrated under the patronage and title of St. Peter, prince of the apostles; but the one soon, made illustrious by the stay and burial of St. Bavo in it, took the name of the same saint and was also more properly called the Ghent monastery, while the other retained the name of St. Peter and from its site also came to be called Blandinian. It is also certain from the old monuments that Florbert was soon set by St. Amandus himself over both monasteries. But in what order and in what years he took up these prefectures is not so clear from the same monuments. Indeed there arose no moderate rivalry between the monks of St. Bavo and of Blandin: whence also the writers of each monastery have been generally accustomed either to be silent about the condition of the other or even to contradict one another.

[24] the Bavonian testimonies On the one side, namely, the Annals of St. Bavo Cf. above, no. 4. report that the church of Ghent was founded in the year 608, that Florbert in the year 618 was set by St. Amandus over the monks substituted there by him in the place of clerics, and finally that he closed his last day in the year 642 [Mon. Germ., Scr. vol. II, pp. 185, 186; De Smet, Corp. Chron. Flandr., vol. I, pp. 439, 440, 441.] . Similar things are narrated by John of Thielrode Chron. ch. 9. , the mention however of the year in which Florbert received the monastery to rule being omitted. Likewise also another Chronicle of St. Bavo written in the 15th century Cf. above, no. 5. .

[25] and the Blandinian. But the Annals of Blandin of the 11th century Cf. above, no. 9. , the Book of rents of Blandin Cf. above, no. 11. , the Chronicle of the 14th century In the Ghent cod. of the 14th century (of which above, no. 4). , the Fragment of a Chronicle Ibid.; ed. in Van de Putte. Annales S. Petri, p. 154. and the Chronology of Blandin written at the very end of the 15th century Cf. above, no. 15. record that the monastery of Blandin was founded in the year 610. That Florbert was set over the same monastery in the year 618 is noted by the Annals of the 11th century, the Chronicle of the 14th century and the Chronology of Blandin, the rest of the documents just cited being silent about this, yet not contradicting it. Among the same documents again the Annals of the 11th century and the Chronology of Blandin attach the death of Florbert to the year 639 Cf. below, p. 378, no. 12. , while the Chronicle of the 14th century and the Fragment of a Chronicle, with the Bavonian ones, to the year 624 Cf. below, p. 379, no. 5. .

[26] manifestly in conflict with one another. But, what must especially be observed, nearly all those chronologists, while they set the beginnings of the church or monastery of Ghent and of the monastery of Blandin between the years 608 and 618, at the same time narrate that these things were done in the time and by the authority of King Dagobert [Annal. S. Bavonis, at the year 613; Joann. de Thielrode, ch. 9; Liber censualis, opening; Fragm. Chronicæ; Chronologia Blandiniensis.] , of Aicharius, bishop of Noyon Ibid., except in Fragm. Chron. and of Martin the Roman Pontiff Joann. de Thielrode, ch. 9; Chron. of 14th cent.; Chronol. Blandin. , although it is established that Dagobert I first received from his father Clotaire II in the year 622 the eastern part of Austrasia to rule [Henschen, Exegesis diatribam Dagobertinam innov., no. 9; G. Richter, Annalen der Merovinger, p. 154.] , which certainly did not include the district of Ghent, and then from the year 628 to the year 638, in which he died, presided over the whole kingdom of the Franks Henschen, ibid., no. 10; Richter, pp. 157, 158. ; that Martin, Roman Pontiff, held the see from the year 649 to the year 655 Cf. Jaffé, Regest. RR. PP., p. 161 ff. ; while the times of Aicharius are more uncertain: he died before the year 646 Cf. Gallia Christiana, vol. IX, pp. 981–984. .

[27] From the Life of St. Amandus, by Baudemund, it is certain From these things, then, it is clearly established how disturbed is the reckoning of that chronology in our authors, and how necessary it is that it should be emended on a more solid foundation being laid. That foundation is furnished by Baudemund, disciple of St. Amandus and established by him as third abbot of Blandin, who in the Life of his beloved master, written shortly after his death, ch. 3, writing of the beginnings of his preaching among the people of Ghent, says: The holy man, more

pitying their error than fearing for the danger of his life, approached Bishop Aicharius, who then presided over the priestly see of the city of Noyon, and humbly asked him to go as quickly as possible to King Dagobert, and to receive letters by his order, that if anyone should not of his own accord wish to be regenerated by the bath of baptism, compelled by the king he should be washed with sacred baptism. Which was so done. For, having received power from the king and a blessing from the pontiff, the man of the Lord Amandus proceeded thither fearlessly. For scarcely will anyone suffice worthily to narrate how many injuries he endured there for the name of Christ, and how frequently he was beaten by the inhabitants of that place, and also repulsed not without injury by women and rustics, and also often thrown headlong into the river… His companions too, who had followed him with true charity, going back to their homes on account of want or the barrenness of the place, left him there alone. But he, remaining in the office of preaching… Act. SS., vol. I Feb., p. 850. .

[28] that St. Amandus, Dagobert being now king of Neustria around the year 630, From this, then, we have it that Amandus set out to the people of Ghent when Dagobert had already obtained the kingdom of Neustria, to which the diocese of Noyon was subject, which we have mentioned above first happened in the year 628. And since, even if we admit that the conversion of the people of Ghent was undertaken at the very first beginning of that Dagobertine reign, yet not at once, but only after many labours did Amandus obtain the desired success in that work, it follows that that was scarcely accomplished, and accordingly the monasteries in that tract founded, before the year 630. Nor yet may they be deferred long after this year 630, since we learn from the same Baudemund Ch. 4. that Amandus afterwards also set out to the Slavs beyond the Danube, that he might imbue them also with the faith of Christ (among whom however he does not seem to have stayed long), and that in the meantime, when a son was born to Dagobert, who was St. Sigebert I, he was diligently sought out and summoned by the king's order that he might wash the little one in baptism. For Sigebert was born in the year 629 or rather 630, by the testimony of Fredegar (or whoever lies hidden under this name), who in ch. 59 of his Chronicle says: In the 8th year of his reign, when (Dagobert) was going round Austrasia with royal state, he took to his bed a certain girl, named Ragnetruda, from whom in that year (that is, within a year from taking Ragnetruda) he had a son named Sigebert Bouquet, Script. Rer. Franc., vol. II, p. 437. .

[29] according to the more correct computation of Henschen, Nor does it escape me that by Henschen in his Prefatory Commentary on St. Sigebert No. 73 (Act. SS., vol. I Feb., p. 220). the latter's birth was put off to the year 635, as he judged that the years of Dagobert's reign in Fredegar should be numbered from the year 628, in which he obtained the whole kingdom of the Franks, neglecting the rule exercised earlier (from the year 622) among the Austrasians Ibid., no. 72. : whence consequently, since Fredegar computes sixteen years of the Dagobertine reign, Henschen was also led in the same Commentary No. 74. to establish the year 644 as the death year of Dagobert. But this error concerning the birth of Sigebert he afterwards explicitly corrected, when in his Exegesis renewing the Dagobertine diatribe No. 10. , the matter being better considered, he asserted that the eighth year of Dagobert was the year of the Christian era 629, and the sixteenth and last 638. Let it remain certain, then, that Sigebert was born in the year 629 or 630, and that in that year Amandus was recalled from the exile which he had so fruitfully spent in preaching the word of God to the nations Baudemund., Vit. Amandi, ch. 4. .

[30] [either before the birth of Sigebert or shortly after, gave his labour to the conversion of the people of Ghent;] Moreover, it can easily be admitted that not one but two journeys were undertaken by Amandus to accomplish the conversion of the people of Ghent, the one in the time of his exile before the birth of Sigebert, the other shortly after, and that in this latter the monasteries were founded. To which opinion we are led not only from the fact that the things Baudemund reports in chs. 3 and 4 seem scarcely able to be enclosed within so short a space of two years or even less, but also because the Annals of St. Bavo, which in this matter rather than in defining chronological notes it seems fair to judge rely on the tradition of their monastery, seem to report that twofold journey. They run thus, then: In the year of our Lord Jesus Christ six hundred and eighth after his nativity, St. Amandus… first preaching the word of the Lord in the said castle of Ghent, crushed the idol of Mercury and overturned its altar, and built a church there. — In the year of the Lord 611 the church of Ghent is destroyed by unbelievers. — In the year of the Lord 613 the church of Ghent is restored by Blessed Amandus by the authority of Aycharius, bishop of Noyon, and of Dagobert, king of the Franks… — In the year of the Lord 616 the church of Ghent is dedicated on the ides of November in honour of St. Peter the apostle by Bishop St. Amandus. Who first established there clerics serving God… — In the year of the Lord 618 Blessed Amandus, the clerics being removed from the church of Ghent, gathered a band of monks, over whom he set as abbot a venerable man named Florbert, adorned with virtues and holy religion [Monum. Germ., Scr. vol. II, p. 185; J.-J. De Smet, Corpus Chronicorum Flandriæ, vol. I, p. 439.] .

[31] whence it follows that Florbert, around the year We now hold that around the year 630 the people of Ghent were first converted to the faith of Christ by St. Amandus. 640 was created abbot, and died around the year 661. And since, according to the traditions of both monasteries, to which, as we have already noted Cf. above, no. 20. , if we except the chronological notes defined by the years of the Christian era, faith does not seem to be denied, Florbert was created abbot of Ghent and Blandin ten or eight years afterwards, it follows from this that the beginning of his prefecture must be attached to about the year 640. Then, according to the same traditions, he held the governance a little more than twenty years. Whence we are led to establish the year around 661 for that happy passing of his to those above. And this can also be confirmed to some extent from elsewhere. For according to the Blandinian monuments, John succeeded Florbert in the governance of the monastery, and he having died after about twenty years, third Baudemund. Those three abbots in order, moreover, are reported by the unanimous consent of the same monuments to have been established by St. Amandus or certainly while he was still living. Now to the testament of St. Amandus, written in the monastery of Elnone in the second year of King Theuderic, on the fifteenth day before the kalends of May, there are read to have subscribed in the last place, after Bertin of Elnone and Aldebert or Adalbert of Ghent, abbots, John and Baudemund Act. SS., vol. I Feb., p. 872. . From this, then, it may be concluded that in that year John, the successor of Florbert and predecessor of Baudemund, had not yet died: and this year, as Corn. De Smet rightly gathers in the Disquisitio chronologica de anno emortuali et præcipuis gestis S. Amandi, no. 12 Act. SS. Belgii, vol. IV, p. 181. , seems to have been 679. And since he does not seem to have survived long after this testament, which he made already in extreme old age, his body nearly dead beforehand Act. SS., vol. I Feb., p. 871. , neither may the ordination of Baudemund as abbot of Blandin be deferred much beyond the year 681: whence, if you subtract the twenty years of the prefecture of John, you will now be led to establish the year 661 as the first of the same prefecture and accordingly as the year of the death of Florbert.

[32] [Most of the more recent writers in ordering that chronology have strayed far from the truth.] From all these things, therefore, it is manifestly gathered that whatever was done by Florbert as abbot (nor do we know anything else at all of his history) must be enclosed between the years 640 and 661. Accordingly all those more recent writers must be said to have erred who, in assigning the chronological notes of the same history, have followed the authority of the Bavonian or Blandinian documents, as James Meyer Annal. Flandr., at the year 633. , Ant. Sanderus Flandr. illustr., vol. I, bk. III, which is on the affairs of Ghent. , Joan. Molanus Natal. SS. Belgii, at the day 1 Nov. , Arnold Raisse Hierogazophyl. Belg., p. 116. , Aubert Le Mire Fasti Belgici et Burgund., p. 644. , André Saussay Martyrolog. Gallican., day 1 Nov. , Adr. Van Loo De levens der Heylige van Nederlant, vol. II, p. 336. , and the Benedictine writers Ant. de Yepes Coronica general de la orden de S. Benito, at the year 630. , Gab. Bucelin Menolog. Benedict., p. 750. and Ant. de Heredia Vidas de Santos de la religion de San Benito, vol. IV, p. 173. .

§ III. Synopsis of the history of St. Florbert.

Florbert was a disciple of St. Amandus. After we have established in the preceding paragraph the chief chronological outlines of the history of St. Florbert, it will now be possible to set before the eyes of readers, as if in one view, whatever has come down to us of this history. Now nothing, as we noted above No. 22. , is known to us of him, apart from the fact that he was a disciple of St. Amandus, up to that time at which he was established by the same Amandus as abbot of both monasteries founded by him in the district of Ghent, which we have found happened Above, no. 31. around the year 640.

[34] [Notable for sagacious wit and holiness of life, he increased not a little the possessions of his monasteries.] The sagacious wit and exceptional sanctity of Florbert are praised in general words by the Bavonian and Blandinian monuments Cf. below, p. 379, n. 5; p. 377, n. 4. . Whence, under his rule, the monastery of Blandin (and the same must beyond doubt be said of the Bavonian) took great increases. For, by the testimony of the Chronology of Blandin V. below, p. 377, n. 5. , the fame of his good odour spreading far and wide, many illustrious men began to flock to him from every side and to offer their sons to serve God in the monastery. From the gifts of these same noblemen and other faithful, certainly, Florbert acquired those estates and possessions of diverse kinds which are reviewed in the Book of rents of St. Peter of Blandin V. below, p. 375. .

[35] he receives St. Bavo in the monastery of Ghent; Among those benefactors, especially as regards the monastery of Ghent, the principal place was assuredly held by Bavo, who so restored this church (or monastery), destroyed by unbelievers, as the Annals of St. Bavo speak at the year 611 Cited above, no. 30. , with the wealth he conferred [Joan. de Thielrode, ch. 9 (v. below, p. 379); Vit. I S. Bavonis, nn. 8, 9 (Act. SS., vol. I Oct., p. 230).] that shortly after his death he was called by St. Livinus

founder of the monastery Carm. ad Florbertum, verse 77 (below, p. 381). , which also has ever since been called by his name. There, after several pilgrimages by which he visited monasteries then especially renowned for the praise of the cenobitic life, Bavo returned, and asked and obtained from Abbot Florbert to be shut up in a very narrow cell Vit. I S. Bavonis, nn. 12–14 (Act. SS., vol. I Oct., pp. 231, 232). : where after three years and forty days spent among the exercises of prayer and penance, he most piously died Ibid., n. 27 ff. . That the year of his happy passing to those above was the year of our era 654 our John Perier most probably establishes in his Commentary on St. Bavo, § VII Act. SS., vol. cit., pp. 215–217. .

[36] then St. Livinus, whom also he helps in his apostolic labours: In the same year, or certainly not much later (as will be evident from the testimony soon to be cited), there came to the monastery of Ghent and stayed in it a whole month St. Livinus, an Irishman, then in the year 657, as it seems [Cf. J. Ghesquière, Comment. on St. Livinus, no. 30 (Act. SS. Belgii, vol. III, p. 112).] , afflicted with martyrdom in the Houthem district of the Alost tract Cf. ibid., no. 22 ff. . This coming and stay the ancient biographer of St. Livinus reports in these words Cited ibid., no. 18. : And when (St. Livinus) had gone through very many places, sowing the seeds of the divine germ, driving demons from possessed bodies, and healing the bodies of many sick, he came with his disciples to a certain monastery, called by the ancestral name of Ghent, which Blessed Amandus the pontiff caused to be founded, the shrines of the gentiles being rooted out, and which he himself dedicated to the honour of St. Peter the apostle and all the apostles, worshippers being gathered there, over whom he set an abbot named Florebert, a ruler of holy religion, composed in worthy morals and filled with the examples of all honesty: by whom also and by the other brothers he was kindly received with the office of monastic charity. There too he found the man of magnificent sanctity and excellent confessor of Christ Bavo, resting in the Lord BY A RECENT DEATH, and buried in the monastery of St. Peter and of the holy apostles by Blessed Amandus the pontiff and Abbot Florebert and the devout brothers with fitting honour, and flashing with glorious miracles. In the same place too he stayed for thirty days, and at the sepulchre of St. Bavo, keeping vigil, he offered his prayers and celebrations of Masses to the Lord God. Then when he was setting out into Brabant Florbert accompanied him with his kindness and also by sending him from the monastery the things necessary for food. These benefits and the virtues of Florbert Livinus celebrated in a not inelegant, especially for those times, elegiac poem, which we rejoice has come down to us Cf. below, p. 380. .

[37] which it is doubtful whether he himself undertook. The apostolic labours of Florbert himself are celebrated besides by the Chronology of Blandin See below, p. 377, nn. 4, 5. : but where it attributes to him as it were the conversion of the whole district of Ghent from infidelity to Christian piety, from the very Acts of Livinus it may not undeservedly be doubted whether Florbert accomplished this by himself by preaching and going abroad, or rather by fostering apostolic men, whether sent out from his monastery or coming from elsewhere, and sustaining them with every help.

[38] He seems to have died on the 8th day of October of the year 661. Our blessed man met his last day around the year 661 Cf. above, no. 31 end. , on the day, as it seems, of the 8th of October, which will be proved a little below, where his place of burial will have to be treated Below, § VI. .

§ IV. Whether in the monasteries of Ghent secular clerics were first established by St. Amandus, then monks; and whether those monks are to be called Benedictines.

[The opinion of Le Cointe that secular clerics were first placed in the monasteries of Ghent and Blandin.] Not alien, certainly, to the history of Florbert seems that question concerning the first inhabitants of both monasteries of Ghent, debated in different senses especially by Charles Le Cointe and John Mabillon. And Le Cointe indeed Annal. eccles. Franc., at the year 631, n. 5. brings forward no other argument for his opinion than the authority of Philip of Harvengt or of l'Aumône, who wrote the Life of St. Amandus around the year 1170 Cf. Act. SS., vol. I Feb., p. 842. , whereas he could have cited the words, older by nearly a whole century, of Theodoric of Saint-Trond in the Life of St. Bavo Cf. Act. SS., vol. I Oct., p. 201, nn. 14, 15. , from which Philip drew his assertion. By way of confirmation Le Cointe subjoins that secular clerics were certainly much more suitable than monks for promoting the work of evangelical preaching in the district of Ghent, which Amandus chiefly intended in founding his monasteries.

[40] [The contrary opinion of Mabillon: which testimonies from the Lives of the saints of the Irish and Welsh confirm.] Mabillon, however, Act. SS. O. S. B., Sec. II, Preface, nn. 27, 28. in order to refute the opinion of Le Cointe, first of all adduces some examples in which a monk is designated by the name of cleric, and could have heaped up, as he rightly says, many testimonies of that kind. Many of this kind are certainly furnished by the ancient Lives of St. Patrick and of other Irish saints; and it must be recalled that in the 7th and 8th centuries not a few Irish migrated into Gaul and Germany for the sake of propagating the faith, and that at that time the Irish flourished in the praise of letters: whence they can easily be judged in the monasteries to have discharged the function of hagiographers or to have been the instructors of those who at that time chiefly applied themselves to this kind of writing. Many testimonies of the same kind are read also in the Lives of the saints of the Britons or Welsh. Thus in the Life of St. Cadoc, ch. 32, the inhabitants of a certain monastery are twice called monks Lives of the Cambro-British saints, ed. W. J. Rees, p. 68 p. m. and end. and then it is narrated of the same: Lauds having been sung, the prior indicated to the CLERICS the revelation made known to him by God. Then as quickly as possible, for exceeding joy, the MONKS ran to behold what was promised Ibid., p. 69 a. m. . In the Life of St. Paternus: At that time the ecclesiastical choir of MONKS, deserting Letavia *, were planning to seek the shores of Britain… By a prosperous voyage, therefore, all the CLERICS reach the shores of the Britons. Eight hundred and forty-seven MONKS follow Paternus Ibid., p. 189 end–190. . And in the Life of St. Aidus the cook of the monastery is designated by the word cleric Ibid., p. 239 a. m. . Moreover, also from the Life of St. Vigor edited a little above in this volume of ours a not obscure place may be brought forward in which monks are designated by the name of clerics, the place, namely, No. 8 end (above, p. 302). in which it is read that a very great multitude of clerics, enticed by the fame of the virtues of St. Vigor, submitted themselves with him under the service of God, or took a stand in the service of God: for who would understand this of secular clerics, who both were already then forbidden by ecclesiastical laws to live outside their dioceses, and by the necessity of their ministry are compelled to live not in a very great multitude together, but rather dispersed?

[41] [whence it is established that in ancient documents monks are often designated by the name of clerics;] Rightly, therefore, does Mabillon conclude: These things, if I am not mistaken, will suffice to refute the opinion of those who, wherever they read the name of cleric expressed, hold that secular clerics, not monks, are to be understood. Into which error fell Theodoric, abbot of Saint-Trond, in the Life of St. Bavo written by him, and he drew others into the same fault: who from the words of the first writer of the Life of St. Bavo, badly understood, handed down that clerics were originally placed by St. Amandus in the monastery of Ghent, and that afterwards monks succeeded, over whom Abbot Florbert was set. This Molanus in his book De Natal. SS. Belgii admits of the monastery of Ghent: which Charles Le Cointe extends to the monastery of Blandin, because the work of clerics was far more useful (as he himself thinks) than that of monks to a bishop disseminating the word of God through the neighbouring region. And yet Gregory the Great sent monks, not clerics, on the British expedition: nor does Germany, as also a great part of the island of Britain and very many other provinces, report that they received the first-fruits of restored faith from any others than monks.

[42] which also He then cites the words of the ancient writer, which is manifest in the first Life of St. Bavo. Theodoric so wrongly interpreted. The first author, namely, of the Life of St. Bavo, whom he then first dug out from the darkness Act. SS. O. S. B., Sec. II, p. 396 ff. , after he had reported in no. 4 Act. SS., vol. I Oct., p. 231, no. 9. that a monastery of CLERICS was honourably built by Amandus in the very castle (of Ghent), then in no. 7 Ibid., no. 13. says of Alloinus or Bavo: Therefore Allowin, the man of God, returning to the aforesaid castle of Ghent to the venerable man Abbot Florbert, whom the kindly pontiff Amandus established there as ruler OVER THE FLOCK OF CLERICS, humbly asked him to bestow on him a little cell, in which he might familiarly entreat the mercy of the Lord for his crimes. When the pious father of the monastery heard his petition, he received it with joy, and, in accordance with the precept of the pious father Benedict, the whole congregation being called together, he made known his prayers to the brothers of the same monastery, so that, if perhaps it should be revealed to a younger one what was pleasing to the Almighty, he might with all eagerness receive and fulfil what is written: Do all things with counsel, and after the deed you will not repent. The petition of Allowin having been heard, therefore, the brothers, the abbot of the monastery narrating it, received it with grateful mind. In which place manifestly the assembly of brothers living under the governance of Abbot Florbert according to the rule of St. Benedict in the monastery of Ghent is called the flock of clerics.

[43] Yet it must not be said that there were no secular priests at that time, Beware however lest from the admission of Mabillon's opinion you should conclude vice versa that all priests at that time were monks. To which error of some perhaps occasion was furnished by the sufficiently ambiguous (if you do not read the context) manner of speaking of Theod. Ruinart in the Preface to the works of Gregory of Tours, no. 35. Where [P. L., vol LXXI, p. 34. Cf. Montalembert, Les Moines d'Occident (2nd edit., 1863), vol. II, pp. 179–180, 235 note, 481, 633.] he says: The monastic order already in the time of Gregory was so joined to the clerical state that it was the same thing to be a monk and a cleric: which Louis Thomassin proves at length and after his manner learnedly: and indeed, as we commonly observe, those whom Gregory calls clerics at the beginning of a chapter, the same he afterwards names monks. But that Ruinart spoke in the same sense as Mabillon is established even from this, both that in the number immediately

preceding he strives to prove that clerics in those times customarily used a peculiar dress: for which question there would certainly have been no room, if he had judged that all clerics were then monks; and that he refers to Thomassin, who, while saying that there were not a few clerics who aspired to the monks' way of life, so that quite frequently both professions were designated by the same name, at the same time signifies also that this was not common to all, and that the Council of Mainz in the year 813 noted under the name of abuses that those who were monks by profession seemed to think it lawful for themselves to live in the manner of clerics Ancienne et nourelle Discipline, part I, bk. III, ch. 9, n. 6. .

[44] [although it is reported that the church of Vercelli and some others were served only by a regular clergy.] Nor assuredly must there be extended to all the priests or clerics of the Western Church what is narrated of St. Eusebius, bishop of Vercelli, in sermon LVI among those which were relegated by the Benedictine editors of the works of St. Ambrose to the Appendix to these works. In which, namely, is read at no. 4 P. L., vol. XVII, p. 720. : How admirable it is that in this holy church he instituted that the same men should be monks as were clerics, and that the priestly offices should be held within the same inner chambers in which a singular chastity is also preserved: so that there should be in the same men contempt of things and the carefulness of levites. Which same thing Ambrose asserts, Epist. 63 (others: 82, others: 25), n. 66, in these words P. L., vol. XVI, p. 1207. : But if in other churches there is available so great a consideration in ordaining a priest, how great a care is sought in the church of Vercelli, where two things seem to be equally required of the bishop, the continence of the monastery and the discipline of the church. For these things, different from one another, Eusebius of holy memory first in the regions of the West joined together: so that, placed in the city, he should both hold to the institutes of the monks and rule the church with the sobriety of fasting. For much help is added to the grace of a priest, if he binds the youth to the pursuit of abstinence and to the norm of integrity, and, while they live within the city, makes them renounce the use and society of the city. For these things, either, according to Thomassin Bk. cit., ch. 4, n. 3. , relate only to the clergy or, as we now say, the chapter of the cathedral church of Vercelli (which can be confirmed from the fact that Ambrose in the praised Letter indicates priests living in the city or within the city) or certainly only to the clergy of the diocese of Vercelli. That some other bishops imitated this can indeed be gathered both from this very testimony, where Eusebius is said to have instituted it first, and it is established from other documents; but by no means is it had from this or from elsewhere that all priests everywhere in the West professed the monastic life.

[45] In what sense the monks of Ghent are to be called Benedictines, There follows another question also to be treated here briefly, namely whether the first monks of Ghent are to be reckoned to the Benedictine Order. The reply may be dispatched in a few words. For if you judge that all those are to be ascribed to the Benedictine Order who in any way followed the rule of St. Benedict, it is indubitable that the monks of Ghent subject to St. Florbert were Benedictines, both from the testimony of the ancient writer of the Life of St. Bavo cited a little above No. 42. , and from the bull of Martin I of which we shall have to discourse in the following paragraph. But if you call Benedictines only those who wished to be ruled by the rule of St. Benedict alone, other rules being excluded, and to constitute a peculiar Order distinct from other religious families, there is altogether no room for the question. For to the times of Dagobert certainly there must be applied first of all what Mabillon rightly notes, treating of the propagation of the rule of St. Benedict in the 7th and 8th centuries: It is no wonder, then, he says, if this rule was admitted in the new monasteries which were then being founded; nor was it difficult that in the older ones, which already had their rule, the Benedictine should be adopted besides. For it was familiar in those times that several rules at once should be received in each monastery, as Bishop Gregory of Tours testifies Hist. Franc., bk. X, ch. 29. of the monastery of Athanum among the Lemovices, in which not only the rules of Cassian, but also of Basil and of the other abbots who instituted the monastic life were celebrated Annal. O. S. B., vol. I, pref., n. 18. … Another notable and indubitable example of this conjunction of rules is presented to us by the privilege of Pope John IV for a certain monastery of St. Mary and St. Columba, in which the nuns lived according to the edicts of SS. Antony, Pachomius and Abbot Benedict, which privilege was reduced to a formula eight hundred years ago in a codex of the library formerly of de Thou, now of Colbert. Another notable example likewise is supplied by Aredius, by another name Petruinus, bishop of Vaison, in his diploma, given in the tenth year of King Theuderic, son of Clovis the younger, for the monastery of Groseau, which he himself built in his diocese according to the norm of the venerable man, the holy father Abbot Benedict or of St. Macarius or St. Columbanus, which diploma we shall report entire in the appendix of this volume Ibid., no. 24 end. .

[46] since there was then properly no distinction of religious Orders: These things, since they are remote from our customs (so Mabillon goes on) Ibid., n. 19. , seem to most alien from likelihood, who estimate the difference of religious Orders from the diversity of rules according to the state of our times. But in that age, when there was one monastic Order not yet divided into various classes, that diversity of rules, which were deemed uniform, introduced no diversity of Orders: just as neither do the diverse constitutions on the same rule, which the various Congregations of one and the same Order prescribe for themselves, now at all hinder the unity of the Order [See more on these things ibid., nn. 19–22, and in the Examen historicum et canonicum etc., written by V. De Buck and Ant. Tinnebroeck, pp. 93–94 and pp. 159–161.] .

[47] in which matter Mabillon is not sufficiently consistent with himself. Rightly indeed; but I do not see how there agree with these things those which (much earlier indeed) Mabillon wrote in the Preface to the Acta SS. O. S. B., sec. I No. 70. : Before we take leave of Gaul, some things should be said about the first-fruits of our Order in Belgium. For St. Amandus … founded various monasteries throughout Belgium… Blandin, Ghent,… and wished them to be directed by the prescription of the Benedictine rule. Nor again do I sufficiently understand why the most learned man so exerted himself, in this same Preface No. 65. and especially in the Preface to the second century Nos. 9–23. , to demonstrate against Henschen and Le Cointe that the rules of St. Columbanus and St. Benedict coalesced into one in the 6th and 7th centuries, namely with no other aim than to claim for the Benedictine Order many monasteries founded by the disciples of St. Columbanus and their successors, and bringing forward scarcely any arguments except that the monks of those monasteries are read to have ordered their life according to the rules of St. Columbanus and St. Benedict [See the arguments of Mabillon refuted by J. Ghesquière in the Commentary on St. Aurea, nos. 26–43 (Act. SS., vol. II Oct., p. 478 ff.).] . Moreover, he can be judged also tacitly to have retracted and mitigated that opinion, which he had so sharply defended in the Prefaces to the Acta Sanctorum, where in the Preface to volume I of the Annals he concludes his disputation, from which we have just excerpted some things, thus No. 26. : What I have said up to now proves the unity of the monastic Order through those times, to which the diversity of rules in no way raised an objection. For which reason, in separating the holy or illustrious men who followed the rule of St. Benedict, or in distinguishing the monasteries which were subject to the same rule from their origin, I shall by no means be overly scrupulous or fastidious, certain that the notice of both pertains to our history: both because, as I have said, there was one Order of all: and because, even if they had then been of a different Order, all those monasteries having been transferred to our Order, the honour pertains to those to whom the inheritance has come.

* that is, Lesser Britain.

§ V. Of the privilege of Martin I, Roman Pontiff, for the monastery of Blandin in the time of Abbot Florbert.

[The diploma of Martin I, already often edited, anew from a most ancient codex of the 11th century] This diploma was edited by Aub. Le Mire Oper. Diplom. (Ed. Foppens), vol. I, p. 333. , Ant. Sanderus Flandr. illustr., vol. I, p. 261. , Henschen Comment. præv. on St. Amandus, nos. 30, 31 (Act. SS., vol. I Feb., p. 822). , Le Cointe Annal. eccles. Franc., vol. III, p. 360. , Cocquelines Bullar. Roman., vol. I, p. 215. , Ghesquière Act. SS. Belgii, vol. IV, p. 209. , Bréquigny Diplomata, etc., vol. I, p. 205 Ed. II, p. 89). and Van Lokeren Chartes et documents de l'abbaye de Saint-Pierre, vol. I, p. 6. . We have found it in manuscript in a threefold old codex: namely in the codex of the 11th century of which the venerable man Fr. Van de Putte gave us the use Cf. above, nos. 8, 11. , in the Ghent codex of the 14th century Cf. above, no. 13. and in the Brussels 16531–16540 Cf. above, no. 14. , and besides in some more recent ones at Ghent in the public archive and in the archive of the cathedral church. Its tenor, according to the most ancient of these, of the 11th century, we have thought should be presented anew here. Nor have we added any variant readings, because we have met none of any moment in the different copies, except at the end in the word bibliothecarii, of which we shall have to discourse more distinctly Cf. below, no. 63. .

[49] is recited here. Copy of the privilege of Pope Martin given in the times of King Dagobert and Bishop St. Amandus.

Martin, bishop, last of the servants of God, to all who love God, salvation. We ought to rejoice in the daily progress and multiplication of the holy mother Catholic and apostolic church, and we ought to bring help to those working in the vineyard of the Lord for the reward of their labour. Whence we wish it to be known to the sons of the holy universal church, both present and future, how Amandus, son of our holy love, with the consent and petition of our dearest son of divine memory Dagobert, king of the Franks, and of his son Sigebert, has sought a privilege of our authority concerning a certain monastery which, the filth of the gentiles having been removed, he is known to have built from the foundations, to which he gave the name Blandinium, and which also has been consecrated by him in honour of the most blessed prince of the apostles Peter and of the teacher of the gentiles Paul, situated between the course of the two rivers Scheldt and Lys. A privilege indeed of our holy authority, for our and future times, to the said place

we grant. We order and confirm concerning the stability of that place, concerning the estates and resources, concerning the churches and the tithes of the churches, or the household, and concerning whatever stipends especially of those serving God there, and of the ornaments of the church and of the lights and of the registered poor, of guests and the poor, in accordance with the petition of our dear most excellent kings Dagobert and his son Sigebert, we by our apostolic authority establish, strengthen and decree them unshaken. We decree therefore that it be permitted to the regular abbot Florbert, at present put in place there or established by our son Amandus, as to himself so to future abbots for the time to come, with divine solace, in all the interests of the place so to dispose and order all things without the contradiction or opposition of anyone, that they may freely watch over the commandments of the Lord according to the rule of St. Benedict. But if anyone, which we do not wish, with rash daring should presume to act against the public writings of this our apostolic privilege, let him know that he stands guilty by divine judgment of the iniquity committed, and let him become estranged from the most sacred body and blood of the Lord our Redeemer Jesus Christ and accordingly be subject in the eternal examination to strict vengeance. But to all who preserve the right of the same place and enrich the place from their goods be the peace of our Lord Jesus Christ, that they may both here receive the fruit of a good action and find before the strict judge the rewards of eternal peace. Written by the hand of Stephen, notary and regionary and of the sacred archive of the holy Roman church, in the month of January, indiction II. Given on the 14th day before the kalends of February by the hand of Amandus, bishop * and librarian of the holy apostolic see.

[50] Against the genuineness of this privilege and of another similar one, which is reported to have been given by the same pontiff for the monastery of Elnone, Arguments of Le Cointe against its authenticity: Charles Le Cointe first rose up Annal. eccles. Francorum, vol. III, p. 362 (at the year 653). , with whom Bréquigny Diplomata, etc., vol. I, p. LXX (Ed. II. Prolog. p. 78). and many others have sided, and Ph. Jaffé relegated it among the spurious Regest. Rom. Pont., p. 940. . And Le Cointe brings forward these reasons, very strong as it seems to him, by which those privileges are proved to be spurious and fabricated.

[51] 1. The times of Dagobert do not agree with the pontificate of Martin; First, in both diplomas Amandus requests the privilege from Pope Martin with the consent and petition of King Dagobert: whence we gather that both privileges are both supposititious and later than the year of Christ nine hundred and eight, in which Regino dedicated his Chronicle to Adalbero, bishop of Trier, who by a shameful blunder first joined the rule of King Dagobert with the pontificate of Pope Martin.

[52] 2. Sigebert I never ruled Neustria; Second, in both diplomas mention is made of King Sigebert. Sigebert reigned in Austrasia. But the king of Austrasia nowhere mixed himself in the affairs of the monasteries of Blandin and Elnone, which were situated in the diocese of Tournai, and pertained to Neustria or to the kingdom of Clovis, who ruled Neustria and Burgundy together.

[53] 3. The second indiction does not agree with the pontificate of Martin; Third, both diplomas are dated by the second indiction, which does not agree with the pontificate of Martin. For Martin entered on his prelacy in the year of Christ six hundred and forty-nine, indiction seven, and was sent into exile in this year of Christ six hundred and fifty-three, indiction eleven. That the privilege of Blandin is read as given on the 14th day before the kalends of February, and that of Elnone on the 14th of February, we put down to the fault of copyists, and we judge that the mind of the author was that both should be believed given in the month of January, on the 14th day before the kalends of February.

[54] 4. Amandus is nowhere read to have been librarian of the holy see, nor elsewhere Fourth, we have neither read elsewhere that Amandus was Librarian of the Apostolic See (as is read in the privilege of Elnone), nor that Theatrapus is the same as Librarian. Although there are not wanting those who suspect that the Librarian in the privilege of Blandin is called Theatrapus because it was committed to his care that the codices in the library be inspected, not however carried away: for among the Greeks θέα is sight or inspection, and ἄτραπος or ἀτράπελος immovable.

[55] 5. The first inhabitants of the monastery of Blandin were not monks; Fifth, these words show the privilege of Blandin to be fabricated, according to the rule of St. Benedict. For the monastery of Blandin had from the beginning clerics, not monks, as we have already proved at the year of Christ DCXXXI.

[56] 6. The clause of the privilege was not in use in those times. Sixth, the same privilege of Blandin is proved spurious by this clause: But if anyone… For this clause is later than the age of Hincmar, in whom it is read (Opusc. 46)… The text of Hincmar, cited by Le Cointe, we pass over.

[57] 7. The name of Blandin was not given to the monastery by St. Amandus; Seventh, in the same privilege of Blandin it is not acceptable that the monastery of Blandin is reported to have been so named by blessed Amandus. For Philip the Almoner makes this name more ancient in the Life of St. Amandus and so derives it from blandishments according to the opinion of the gentiles themselves: Another church is built for divine worship, in the place which ancient pagandom, follower of pleasures, had been accustomed to call Blandinium, because it seemed gentle with blandishments and outstanding in pleasantness.

[58] 8. The monastery of Elnone was built after the death of Dagobert. Eighth, the privilege of Elnone is proved spurious by the consent of King Dagobert: for by our calculation King Dagobert died before the monastery of Elnone was built.

[59] These arguments Cornelius De Smet strove to refute Act. SS. Belgii, vol. IV, p. 203. . The objection drawn from the mention of tithes is manifestly void. His chief replies, the name of the author being kept silent, M. J. De Bast brought forward and explained further [Premier supplément au Recueil d'antiquités romaines et gauloises (Gand, 1809), p. 41 ff.] , adding a refutation of another reason against the authenticity of the privilege which had recently been objected by Ch. Louis Diericx [La topographie de l'ancienne ville de Gand (Gand, 1808), p. 19. ; Mémoires sur la ville de Gand (1814–1815), p. 509.] , contending that the custom of paying tithes to churches arose only long afterwards, whereas in the alleged privilege mention is made of a right of this kind. How absurd this reason is De Bast easily demonstrated, showing that those tithes, namely which were to be paid to churches, are spoken of in the capitulary of Clotaire I issued around the year 560 [Capitul. Reg. Franc., vol. I (Paris 1780), p. 8; Monum. Germ., vol. I Leg., p. 3.] , in the Council of Tours of the year 567 Sirmond., Conc. Gall., vol. I, pp. 343, 344. , in the Council of Mâcon of the year 585 Ibid., p. 384. .

[60] [Replies to the arguments of Le Cointe: 1. Dagobert could have requested the privilege before the pontificate of Martin.] Neither do the arguments of Le Cointe press so hard. For, as regards the first, an easy reply is furnished by the very words of the privilege, where it is said to have been sought with the consent of Dagobert of divine memory, which certainly indicate that at the time when the privilege was written Dagobert was no longer among the living. It could therefore have happened that Dagobert a little before his death sought this privilege from the pontiff in favour of St. Amandus: which petition, his death soon intervening, did not then obtain its effect, until, Amandus himself urging the matter at the holy see, perhaps on the occasion of his Roman journey, he obtained it in accordance with the petition offered several years before.

[61] [and 2. Sigebert, his son and partner in the kingdom, could be named with his father in that petition.] And thus also the reason is given for the mention of Sigebert made in that petition, whom, namely, not yet three years old, Dagobert had made a partner in the kingdom, setting him over Austrasia [Henschen., Exegesis prælimin. II (to vol. III March) renewing the Dagobertine diatribe, no. 10; Richter, Annalen der Merovinger , p. 162.] , whence thenceforth, as was done in the Roman Empire in the 4th and 5th centuries, he joined his name to his own in letters and public acts.

[62] 3. Errors The third argument of Le Cointe, however, would then have full concerning notes of time are frequently detected in copies of diplomas. force, if errors of this kind regarding the notes of numbers through the drowsiness of copyists or even of notaries did not frequently occur, even in the most certain documents.

[63] As regards the fourth argument, it must be observed first of all that the name theatrapus, of which Le Cointe proposed so ludicrous an etymology, is read indeed in the more recent copies of our diploma and in the printed editions, [4. In what way the word theatrapus crept in here; that the name of Amandus the librarian does not occur elsewhere, in so great a scarcity of documents, is not to be wondered at.] but by no means in the older codices of the 11th and 14th centuries, from which we have brought it forward above. But also from a comparison of these codices with the more recent Brussels one it now appears without difficulty in what way it came about that a fault of this kind crept into the diploma. For in the codex of the 11th century the word bibliothecarii is so written that the first part of this word (biblio) ends the last line of the page (fol. 43 v°), and the other stands at the beginning of the following page (fol. 44 r°); but again of this latter part only the first four letters (thec) appear from the writing of the first hand, and of these the last two (ec) are so joined (which occurs very frequently in the codices of that age) that, inspected by itself, that latter part can be read no less easily thet than thec. What letter (or letters) followed, however, was diligently scraped away by some corrector and in its place the syllable rii substituted, but again in such a way that the letter r, of the older form, joined with the immediately following letter i, resembles the form of the letter p, and accordingly this syllable is easily read pi. Moreover, there was added by the corrector over the immediately preceding letter c an abbreviating mark by which a, ar or ra is customarily signified: and thus the whole word appears in about this form . And so from our codex itself, as may now be more certainly conjectured, the copyist to whom we owe the Ghent codex of the 14th century, copying out the diploma, separated the two parts of the word bibliothecarii, although they were contained with him on the same line, and, not sufficiently understanding the latter, wrote it in this way biblio thetpi, again placing over the letter t, in the middle of the latter word, the sign by which a, ar or ra is indicated as to be supplied. And finally the scribe who wrote the Brussels codex now passed over the first part biblio, and, employing no sign of abbreviation, but in full letters, wrote the latter in this form theatrapi. This error passed into most of the later copies, and from there it stands in all the printed editions. From what has been said, however, it is clear that in our diploma too there should be read, as in the Elnone one, by the hand of Amandus, bishop and librarian, and that the word Theatrapus, which now nowhere occurs in the documents of the Middle Ages, should be deleted from the Glossary of Middle and Low Latin Ed. Henschel, vol. VI, p. 575. , into which it was taken from the same diploma. But that

(for this was the head of Le Cointe's argument) the name of Amandus the librarian is not read in other documents apart from the two praised diplomas, in so great a scarcity of pontifical diplomas of that age, is assuredly not so much to be wondered at.

[64] 5. That clerics preceded monks in the monastery of Blandin is falsely supposed. That clerics preceded monks in the monastery of Blandin Le Cointe has not proved at the year 631 (no. 5), but by conjecturing, and relying on no ancient testimony, he judged it more probable, nor can it be confirmed by the authority of any old document Cf. above, § IV.

[65] I come now to the sixth argument, which was taken from the commination subjoined at the end of the privilege and which, 6. The clause of the privilege from the customs of that time as Le Cointe judges, the forger borrowed from a certain little work of Hincmar. But that a commination of this kind is not alien from the customs of that time Mabillon sufficiently shows De re diplomatica, bk. II, ch. 8. : is not alien. and again it is very credible that among the solemn formulas of those comminations this one too, which is read both in our privilege and in Hincmar, would occur quite frequently, if more diplomas of so great an antiquity survived.

[66] [7. and 8. The authority of Philip of Harvengt and the calculations of Le Cointe are light.] Quite light are the remaining arguments of Le Cointe, the seventh and eighth. For who on the authority of Philip of Harvengt, who wrote the Life of St. Amandus after the middle of the 12th century, would admit, or rather would not laugh at, that witty etymology of the name Blandinium which he devised? Especially since, by the testimony of Baudemund, a contemporary writer, that place was barren and very poor in the things necessary for life Cf. above, no. 27. , nor did the inhabitants certainly derive the names of their villages from the Latin language. Moreover, even if it be readily conceded that the name of Blandinium was not given to that place by Amandus, there is no reason why it should not also be readily granted that such an error could have been admitted by a Roman notary, without the genuineness of the privilege being made suspect on that account. And finally it would not be troublesome to refute the calculations of Le Cointe concerning the time of the founding of the monastery of Elnone, if that seemed worth while in this place.

[67] And so the privilege of Martin does not seem to be pronounced apocryphal. It does not appear, therefore, why we should pronounce the privilege of Martin I, in which the Blandinians gloried, apocryphal or gravely suspect, and I cannot refrain from judging that grave men, like Bréquigny and Jaffé, conceded to the arguments of Le Cointe too lightly and without the matter being sufficiently examined. Yet, the testimony of a codex older than the 11th century being lacking, I would not dare to pronounce it certainly authentic.

* there seems to be an erasure here

§ VI. Of the day of death of St. Florbert and the place of his burial.

[A marble stone found in the year 1258 in the sepulchre of Florbert by the monks of St. Bavo,] We undertake to treat this double question here together because the solution of both depends on the judgment to be pronounced concerning the same monument and its authenticity. Now this is a marble stone which the Bavonians say was found under the head of Florbert in their church, when the sepulchre of the holy abbot was first opened in the year 1258 and his body translated to a more fitting place; a sharp controversy being then at its height, for at least two centuries, between the monks of St. Bavo and of Blandin concerning the body of blessed Florbert, which both contended was resting with them. The controversy and the finding of the stone are reported by the Annals of St. Bavo of Ghent in these words at the year 1258: In the year 1258 the aforesaid Abbot Theoderic, grieving that the venerable man Florbert, first abbot of that monastery of Ghent, was there irreverently trodden under the feet of those passing by, having consulted the brothers, on a certain day, matins having been said, the abbot and brothers themselves clothed in albs and adorned with stoles, with reverence, as was fitting, caused the sepulchre of the same Florbert to be opened, the sarcophagus being lifted with his epitaph carved on it. And there they found the body of the same Florbert with a white marble stone placed under his head and carved with these words: HIC REQUIESCIT FLORBERTUS ABBAS GANDENSIS CENOBII. OBIIT OCTAVO YDUS OCTOBRIS. [Here rests Florbert, abbot of the monastery of Ghent. He died on the eighth day before the ides of October.] The place of his burial was formerly before the high altar of St. Peter consecrated by St. Amandus. Which place is now near the choir towards the convent under a stone arch, where now holy water is taken by the faithful passing by. The body of the same Florbert having been raised from the aforesaid place of his burial, and washed with water, they fittingly and honourably enclosed his bones in a lead chest, and venerably placed them in the wall before the chapel of St. Benedict with the aforesaid marble stone, as is still evident, the lord Hugh of Hoestborch, prior of St. Peter on Blandin, being then present there with three monks his brothers Mon. Germ., Scr. vol. II, p. 191; De Smet, Corp. Chron. Flandr., vol. I, p. 440. .

[69] which finding John of Thielrode also testifies, From these Annals manifestly is taken the report of John of Thielrode Chronic., ch. x. , thus framed: The religious men, the monks of St. Peter on Mount Blandin, say that they have Florbert, the first shepherd of the monastery of Ghent established by St. Amandus, with them, canonized in a shrine, and they celebrate him as befits a confessor. The religious men, the monks of St. Bavo of Ghent, say and affirm by such a token as will follow that they have Florbert, the first shepherd of the monastery of Ghent, buried in a pit, and they celebrate an office for Florbert as is done for the faithful departed. It happened around the years of the incarnation of the Lord one thousand two hundred and fifty-eight that Abbot Theoderic of St. Bavo, a religious man, well lettered and honest, feeling compassion that the often-mentioned Florbert was lying under the feet of all passing before the place where holy water is customarily taken (which place originally was before the great altar of St. Peter), matins having been said, caused the sepulchre of Florbert to be opened and under his head found a white marble stone having carved on it these words: Hic requiescit Florbertus abbas Gandensis cenobii: obiit VIII° ydus octobris. [Here rests Florbert, abbot of the monastery of Ghent: he died on the 8th day before the ides of October.] Which stone [is] placed in the wall where the bones of Florbert are laid beneath. There were present the convent of St. Bavo and Hugh of Hoestborch, then prior of St. Peter on Mount Blandin, with his three companions: which Hugh with his companions then had his stay and dwelling in the monastery of St. Bavo by reason of a dispersion.

[70] seems authentic from intrinsic indications. This stone, found again about fifty years ago among the ruins of the Bavonian monastery and preserved to our times, and today placed in the museum of the University of Ghent, we set before the eyes of readers here accurately drawn [From A. Van Lokeren, Histoire de l'abbaye de Saint-Bavon, pl. IV. The stone and letters are four times larger than they are shown in this image.] .

That the same is authentic, or truly carved in the 7th century, has been not unlearnedly proved by J. J. Raepsaet [Messager des sciences et des arts, vol. VI (year 1829–1830), p. 1. Thence among the works of Raepsaet published at Ghent in the year 1838, vol. I, p. 365.] , no learned man, as far as I know, objecting. Nor assuredly does it seem that we should object. For first of all the testimony of the Annals of St. Bavo and of John of Thielrode is not to be despised, who either himself was present when the sepulchre, which from ancient tradition was said to be Florbert's, was opened, or certainly received what happened there from eyewitnesses. That a stone of that kind was placed by fraud under the head of the corpse of some unknown person, so that afterwards, when the tomb should perhaps be opened, it might be thought to be the body of Florbert, can scarcely be imagined. There are added intrinsic marks too. Among which may rightly be reckoned both the very smallness of the stone and the simplicity of the inscription, and the form of the letters, which pertain to that kind of writing which they call mixed, and which no longer occurs in manuscript codices after the ninth century [(Toussaint and Tassin) Nouveau traite de diplomatique, vol. III, p. 245 ff.; Natalis de Wailly, Éléments de Paléographie, vol. I, p. 505.] . For it is by no means probable, if Abbot Theoderic after the middle of the 13th century had forged a monument of this kind (which, as we shall soon see, the Blandinians contended), that he would not have executed it in more magnificent work and style, and that either he himself or some one of his monks would have been so strong in the science and skill of antiquity that he could reproduce it with so happy a success. Finally, by way of confirmation for the Bavonians there may be brought forward the verses sent by St. Livinus to Florbert a little before his martyrdom, in which, namely, the monastery which Florbert inhabited is twice Verses 17 and 44 (below Docum. III). called Ganda, by which name it is indubitable that the Bavonian monastery is designated, not the Blandinian. Hence therefore it seems it must be gathered that Florbert resided in the Bavonian monastery, and accordingly more probably also died and was buried in it.

[71] The Blandinians object. Against these the Blandinians oppose their narratives, which seem to be so ordered in a chronological series according to the antiquity of the codices reporting them. In the first place occurs the Chronicle terminated in the year 1063 and annexed to it the letter or proclamation of the monks of Blandin. In the Chronicle this sole mention occurs relating to our matter: 1049. In this year the elevation of St. Florbert was made See above, no. 9. . The letter, however, which we copy out here from the 11th-century codex Cf. above, no. 12. , neglecting the very few and unimportant variant readings that can be noted in the Ghent of the 14th century Cf. above, no. 13. and the Brussels 16531–16540 Cf. above, no. 14. , is framed in these words:

[72] contending that Florbert rests with them. To all the sons of holy mother church, the holy church of Blandin at Ghent, once built by the blessed prelate Amandus and entitled to the prince of the apostles, salvation. We have, dearest ones, in the archives, in privileges strengthened by the authority of our elders, that blessed Amandus once founded the monastery of Blandin at Ghent, gathered there a band of monks and set over them as abbot Florbert, of sagacious wit. Which envying us, the brothers of the monastery of St. Bavo arrogate this to their own place, asserting that nothing is called Ghent except their place. How false this is gather from similar cases, that every suburb or territory is called by the same name as the city to which it is subject: although in no writings is it found that the monastery of St. Bavo is called by the special name of Ghent. There give faith to the things we have said both our privileges and the Life of St. Amandus completed by Milo, a monk of the same most holy father; in which it is contained in this manner: For he built the monastery which is called Blandinium, situated in the castle of Ghent, and so on. Which a certain monk of the monastery of St. Bavo, once living at Saint-Amand, reading, scraped away, changing it thus: For he built a monastery in the castle of Ghent upon the Scheldt and Lys. Which, so scraped away and changed, is still easily recognized in the same Life of St. Amandus. But that they assert that they have Abbot Florbert with an inscription as index, this is despised with the same facility with which it is asserted,

because we who say these things have recognized the writer of the same inscription betraying himself, and we have not been ignorant by what violators of the sepulchre certain bones were furtively translated from the atrium into the monastery, two persons who took part accusing themselves. Accordingly the translation of St. Florbert, first abbot of the monastery of Blandin, made in our house, an authority had strengthened together with the seals of the prelates of Noyon, a stone also had confirmed, inscribed in both Greek and Latin letters and, what is greater, the healing of a certain crippled woman at the relics of the same father. These things we say, not that by saying false things we may accuse the aforesaid brothers, and would that they were brothers in Christ, but that by saying true things we may excuse ourselves. For the rest let us be silent about the foundation of our place, since we have many writings in other monasteries that speak for us.

[73] On the 11th-century poem which is inscribed Title of St. Bavo, In the three codices, then, from which we have excerpted this letter, there is prefixed to it the following poem composed in leonine verses:

Title of St. Bavo, the most noble confessor, in the castle of Ghent (a history, not a fable) [These three words in the 11th-century codex are written not after in Gandavo castro, but above them in a smaller character, yet in the same hand. In the Ghent of the 14th century they are written, as is read here, after the word castro and in the same character. In the Brussels likewise, but the sole word historia remained, the other two being erased. The venerable man Fr. Van de Putte omitted them in his edition. In the Ghent of the 14th century there is besides inserted here the word versus, omitted in the 11th-century cod. and written in the margin in the Br.] .

Quo sacer Amandus virtute beatificandus

Idola destruxit et cœnobium sibi struxit,

Collectoque gregi servire Deo cupienti

Patrem Florbertum præfecit laude refertum,

Cujus adhuc tumulum Gand monstrat corpore onustum.

His breviter scriptis, Lantbertus pastor herilis

Vester In Gand. and Brux. Unde; in the edition of Van de Putte, Vir. , ut optamus, vivat super æthra locatus.

Quæ petitis vestris, eadem persolvite nostris,

Florberto præfato nostro pastori primo,

Wilfrido abbati, Eilfrido abbati, Einardo abbati [This last line is omitted in G. and Br.; in the edition of V. d. P. besides there is omitted also the one preceding it.] .

[Where holy Amandus, to be beatified for his virtue, destroyed the idols and built a monastery for himself, and to the gathered flock desiring to serve God set as head Father Florbert, filled with praise, whose tomb, laden with his body, Ghent still shows. These things being briefly written, may your lordly shepherd Lantbert, as we wish, live placed above the ether. What you ask for yours, the same pay to ours, to the aforesaid Florbert our first shepherd, to Abbot Wilfrid, Abbot Eilfrid, Abbot Einard.]

[74] the not sufficiently probable conjectures of the venerable man Fr. Van de Putte. The venerable man F. Van de Putte Annales abbatiæ S. Petri, pp. 26 and 27, notes. judges that in that title the name of Florbert should manifestly be substituted for Bavo, and that in the sixth verse there is indicated the name of the one who wrote the letter, namely of a certain Lambert, as he himself thinks, a presbyter. That former conjecture I judge neither necessary Cf. below, no. 78. nor to be admitted against the authority of the codices, especially since our poem seems in no way to report any epitaph of Florbert. But chiefly I am by no means able to perceive by what right it can be gathered from the same verses that the letter or proclamation was written by Lambert and that he is designated a presbyter where it is said pastor herilis. Moreover this hypothesis altogether collapses if, as does not seem doubtful, the first word of the seventh verse must be read vester, and not vir: which latter reading renders the sense difficult and intricate, or, as we should better say, altogether forced. But someone will perhaps ask in what sense, then, those verses are to be understood. To satisfy this question, especially since that slight monument of the eleventh century is the oldest of those which we have about Florbert, we have thought that it would not be beside the point if we should dwell somewhat on interpreting it.

[75] That poem seems composed by a Bavonian monk; First of all, then, it must be diligently observed that the poem was composed not by a Blandinian but by a Bavonian monk. This I judge to be sufficiently clearly manifest from its conclusion, as it is read in the 11th-century codex. For, if I grasp anything, in that conclusion the author demands that the honours which others wish to be attributed to their patrons they should not wish denied to the abbots Florbert, Wilfrid, Eilfrid and Einard, whom he himself calls ours. Now of these four, Florbert indeed and Einard held the governance of both monasteries, Blandin and St. Bavo, the former in the 7th century, the latter before the middle of the 11th century; but the two between them presided over the Bavonian alone, namely Wilfrid from the year 673 to 691 A. Van Lokeren, Histoire de l'abbaye de Saint-Bavon, p. 9. , and Eilfrid or Egilfrid from the year 754 to 762 Ibid., p. 12. . Since the author, then, calls these abbots also ours, it is not to be doubted that he was a Bavonian monk.

[76] but the Lambert who is named in it, This being posited, it will be helpful to recall that in the 11th century there arose, or certainly most grew hot, the controversy between the Bavonians and the Blandinians over the body of St. Florbert, as will be evident from the document soon to be cited No. 81 ff. ; moreover, that in the same century there flourished at Ghent a nobleman, by name Lambert, who in that region for the count of Flanders held sovereignty, the first adorned with the dignity of Castellan of Ghent [Joann. de Thielrode, Chronic. S. Bavonis, ch. VIII. Cf. Andr. Du Chesne, Histoire généalogique des maisons de Guines, de Gand et de Coucy (Paris 1631, fol.), p. 41.] . That this Lambert favoured the Blandinian monks rather than the Bavonian, and at the same time how great a rivalry there was between the two as to all things that could be to the praise and advantage of their own monastery, we are taught by the Life of St. Macarius of Antioch, written by a Bavonian monk at the order of Abbot Siger about sixty years after the saint's death, which our predecessors edited at the 10th day of April Act. SS., vol. I April, p. 878. . Where it is narrated that Macarius after many pilgrimages came to Ghent, and, repulsed by the Blandinians, being unknown, but most kindly received by the Bavonians and staying with them for some time, wished to return to his fatherland, but scarcely gone forth from the monastery was prevented by a disease from carrying out his plan: that then the Blandinians, using the services of Lambert the Castellan, strove with every effort that he should now turn aside to them, but that Macarius preferred to be brought back to his Bavonians and not long after closed his last day in their monastery Act. SS., vol. cit., p. 885, n. 35 ff. .

[77] was the Castellan of Ghent; This Lambert the Castellan of Ghent I judge to be designated in our poem. To whom, namely, having died a little before the middle of the 11th century Cf. Andr. Du Chesne, op. cit., pp. 42, 43. , or perhaps even later (for that his son Folcard is called Castellan in a document of the year 1046 Ibid. , does not certainly prove that his father was then no longer living, as is established from the similar example of Lambert II, who was the son of Folcard Ibid., p. 45. ), the Blandinians certainly had it at heart to pay funeral rites with the greatest apparatus, and that not only with solemn obsequies immediately after his death, but also with an anniversary office, especially if, as from that time the principal noble houses of that region and the Counts of Flanders themselves did, either he himself or his son Folcard who succeeded him in the dignity of Castellan had chosen the church of Blandin as the place of his burial. Assuredly also on this occasion the same Blandinian monks will not have omitted, both in order to show the sense of a grateful spirit towards so great a patron, and to adorn their monastery with that celebrity, to summon the people in as great numbers as they could to those funeral solemnities, and among them to extol with the highest praises the man lately prince of the region of Ghent, and perhaps to proclaim that he had been to them a shepherd rather than a lord or master.

[78] and that the poem was directed against the Blandinians It may easily be conjectured that these things were more or less unwelcome and troublesome to the Bavonian monks, and that from this one of them was led to compose that poem or epigram, by which he might both prick the Blandinians and claim its glories for his monastery, and to fix it in some open place, perhaps near the sepulchre of St. Bavo, where the concourse of many took place daily. And since it easily appears that in our poem some first verse is lacking, by which its first sentence would be completed, I would readily believe this to have been framed in these or like words: Nobilis hic Bavo requiescit in castro Gandavo The noble Bavo rests here in the castle of Ghent; which verse certainly sins no more against the laws of the hexameter than the second and ninth of those that have come down to us Cf. above, no. 73. . Hence, therefore, it could be called by the Blandinian monk who transferred that epigram into his codex a title or epitaph of St. Bavo, and it could seem to him of such insolent pride, indeed even of such great impiety, that he thought it should be noted in these words, a history not a fable, that it was not fabricated by him, but truly displayed among the Bavonians. By that poem, then, to conclude this disputation at last, according to our opinion, a certain Bavonian monk affirmed that his monastery had been founded by Amandus immediately after the conversion of the people of Ghent, and that Florbert had been set over it, and that his body was still preserved in it. These things being asserted, he does not indeed signify that he takes it ill that they should celebrate with as great a solemnity as they could the funeral and praises of their patron Lambert, whom not without some mockery of the Blandinians he calls their lordly shepherd, but he demands that the honours which they are eager to attribute to their patrons they should permit to be attributed also to those in whom the Bavonians gloried.

[79] and gave occasion to their proclamation. And hence perhaps it may be further concluded that that document which we cited a little above No. 72. was a certain proclamation by which the Blandinians tried to refute the assertion of the Bavonian poet about the body of Florbert. For that an encyclical letter on that matter was addressed to all the faithful or churches can scarcely seem probable; but it is very credible that the Blandinians judged that they should take care to oppose to that public assertion of the Bavonians a public response also, which they both read before the people in their church and fixed in a place open to all. Nor perhaps is it without allusion to the Bavonian poem that in that proclamation the Blandinians complain, namely that the Bavonians falsely contend that by the name of Ghent only their monastery is designated, the Blandinian being excluded. And from what they affirm in the same proclamation, namely that accordingly the translation of St. Florbert, first abbot of the monastery of Blandin, an authority had strengthened together with the seals of the Prelates of Noyon, it is gathered that the same was not issued before the year 1049, in which year, as will soon appear in their subsequent reports Cf. below, no. 85. , a diploma of this kind was first granted by Baldwin, bishop of Noyon. Indeed, if the mention in the plural number of the prelates of Noyon is altogether accurate, not before the year 1077 or 1097, in which they obtained another diploma of this kind from Ratbod II, the successor of Baldwin Cf. below, no. 87. .

[80] Moreover the Blandinians offered an expostulation to Baldric, bishop of Noyon, Not content with that proclamation, the Blandinians at the same time or a little later thought they should have recourse to episcopal authority, that by it the audacity of the Bavonians might be beaten back. That this letter or expostulation was addressed to Baldric, the successor of Ratbod II in the see of Noyon, is gathered from a report composed in the 13th century, which itself also will soon have to be mentioned Below, no. 85 ff. . In its own or original form (for it was taken nearly entire into the report of the 13th century) it is read only in the 11th-century codex, from which the venerable man F. Van de Putte edited it Annales abbatiæ S. Petri Blandin., p. 28. . It will not irk us to transcribe it here again from the codex itself.

[81] [by which the audacity of the Bavonians, against the authorities of Adalbero of Reims] Concerning the most certain translation of St. Florbert or the contrary report of the brothers of St. Bavo, we explain these things in a brief narrative according to the truth of what was done. That this venerable father was placed by St. Amandus over the monastery of Blandin, and buried in the same after his departure from this life, is manifest to all who read, as well from the archives of our monastery as of Saint-Amand Of Elnone. , and from privileges confirmed by the authority of our elders. In which monastery also he is proved to have rested for CCCXXXVIII years, until, the same monastery being repaired in a greater and more elegant building, by Adalbero, archbishop of Reims Year 975. Cf. below, no. 85. , the holy pledges of his body were translated and placed in the more secret part of the apse of the same basilica. That these things are held thus according to the most certain truth is testified by an inscription carved on a stone in both Greek and Latin letters, found beside the remains of his body, in this manner: Hic requiescit corpus Florberti abbatis, discipuli et ordinati Amandi episcopi: cuius depositio celebratur kalendis novembris. [Here rests the body of Florbert, abbot, disciple and ordained of Bishop Amandus: whose deposition is celebrated on the kalends of November.] There is added to this also the confirmation of the same archbishop, the impression of his seal, as is still evident.

[82] and of Baldwin of Noyon, by manifold fraud, But a space of time having passed, there was made by Baldwin, bishop of Noyon, a translation of the same holy father to a raised place Year 1049. Cf. above, no. 9 and below, no. 85. , the brothers of St. Bavo being present and standing by and contradicting nothing. Where one of them, while he was reading through the aforesaid inscription, let us not say by reason of envy, suddenly letting it spring from his hands to the pavement, broke it through the middle. Here first grew up their error, and, against episcopal authority and the most certain truth, a new and unheard-of presumption. In the same year a certain Stepelin, a fugitive monk of Saint-Trond, at their instigation composed contrary reports against the translation of this father. Afterwards, certain bones having been carried by night from the atrium of the church into the same basilica, they set beside them an inscription composed by the same man and carved on stone, and contended before everyone that the body of the same saint most certainly rested with them, and consigned to falsehood all that had been done among us by the tradition of the ancients and by episcopal authority. That this was so done, the same Stepelin afterwards confessing and two other persons who took part in these things revealing themselves by confession, we have known for certain. Thereafter they established with them as if a certain day of his death; they carried out his anniversary, as though he were a stranger to the honour of sanctity; then also in the charters for the obsequies of abbots sent through the regions, they wrote many contumelious things about the same man.

[83] whose abbot also sought pardon by a humble confession, Subverting by these and like things the simple hearts of the people into error for many years, at length at the elevation of St. Macarius [Year 1067. Annal. S. Bavonis at this year (in J. J. De Smet, Corp. Chron. Flandr., vol. I, p. 446).] or the dedication of that monastery they laid open the same sepulchre, opened it, displayed before the people the bones placed in it with the inscription, and made it certain to all flocking there that Florbert, first abbot of the monastery of Ghent, rested with them. Whence our brothers, moved by the long-continued incitement of injuries, approach the lord Bishop Baldwin, then present, and lay open all that had been done. Siger, abbot of the same monastery, is summoned, and is questioned concerning this offence with great indignation of the lord bishop. Prostrate on the ground before the lord bishop he begs pardon, complains that all these things have been done by ignorant men without his knowledge, and promises that no further complaint about these things will arise.

[84] [they demanded to be beaten back, who contended that the body of Florbert rested in their monastery.] In the following year, the lord Bishop Baldwin having died, they set on the often-mentioned superstitious tomb a superstitious inscription also, as is still seen; with all effort they rose up against the episcopal authority, both of the church of Reims and of Noyon, exercised among us; they defamed all that had been done as altogether false, in the ears of the people by public speeches, and among monasteries by writings. But the greater the injury of disparagement they did to the holy pledges, so much the more magnificent the glory they increased, though unwilling. For two years ago it pleased our brothers to translate the saint's relics into a little coffer adorned with gold and silver: which at the coming of the lord Bishop Radbod to us in Lent, by episcopal authority and the impression of his seal, they devoutly began, and at his elevation on the 12th day before the kalends of May more devoutly carried out. Against this, as if an injury had been done to themselves, they rose up. Two of them, namely Berner and Veger, went to the oratory of St. John the Baptist; before a throng of people they asserted that all that had been done among us was false. In the Greater Litany also, before a throng of people called together for this spectacle, without license and episcopal authority, they publicly displayed before the people the same bones dug out of the ground and, as we have often said, branded both us and the episcopal statute with falsehood. Concerning these things let your sanctity take notice of what is just, and let your clemency provide that error be turned away from the people and that the authority of the episcopal decree remain unshaken among us.

[85] [A third report of the Blandinians, where concerning the translation made in the year 1049 by Baldwin of Noyon,] A third report of the Blandinians on the same matter, hitherto unpublished, we have found in the Ghent codices of the 14th century Cf. above, no. 13. , as regards this part of the 15th century, in the Brussels 16531–16540 Cf. above, no. 14. , and in a codex, also of the 15th century, kept in the archive of the cathedral church of St. Bavo at Ghent. In which first there is written out in as many words the second report just cited, with very few things supplied or changed, of which it will suffice to have indicated here the chief. In the first sentence, namely, after the inscription, there is added to the name of Saint-Amand the designation of Elnone. Moreover the several things narrated are for the most part attached to a certain year. Thus the first elevation of the body of Florbert by Adalbero, archbishop of Reims Cf. above, no. 81. , is indicated to have been made in the year 975, and there are added in this place immediately after that indication these words: By which Adalbero also the same church of Blandin is known to have been dedicated. The narrative of the second elevation Cf. above, no. 82. so begins: But a space of time having passed, namely in the year of the incarnate Word one thousand and forty-ninth, there was made by Baldwin, bishop of Noyon or Tournai, an elevation or translation of the same holy father Florbert to a raised place. The rest that follows is similar to the former report, except that where in this it is said that a certain day of the death of Florbert was established by the Bavonians Above, no. 82 end. , this in the third report is a little amplified in these words: Thereafter they established with them as if a certain day of the death of the same holy father, namely the eighth day before the ides of October, in their calendars. Then the elevation of St. Macarius, and on this occasion the showing of the body which they asserted to be Florbert's Above, no. 83 beginning. , the older Ghent codex says was made in the year of the Lord MLXVIII, while the Brussels and the other Ghent in the year of the Lord one thousand and forty-seven: where it is established that a fault in copying was admitted by the earlier copyist from the fact that a little below Cf. above, no. 83 middle. both codices run thus: they approach Bishop Baldwin mentioned above, then present there on account of the aforesaid elevation of St. Macarius, who at an earlier time, namely, eighteen full years having passed, had fittingly and honourably carried out the elevation or translation of our often-mentioned holy father Florbert.

[86] concerning the other translation made in the year 1077 by Radbod, It will be helpful to copy out in the very words from the Ghent codex the end of the first part of this third report Cf. above, no. 84 a little after the beginning. (very few variant readings are furnished here by the two other codices, and none of any moment). But the greater the neglect of disparagement they did to the holy pledges, so much the more magnificent the glory they increased, though unwilling. For to these our brothers it pleased to translate the relics of the holy father Florbert into a little coffer adorned with gold and silver: which at the coming of the lord Radbod, bishop of the church of Noyon or Tournai, to us in Lent by episcopal authority and the impression of his seal, they devoutly began and at his elevation on the 12th day before the kalends of May more devoutly carried out, namely in the year of the Lord's incarnation MLXXVII, indiction XV. Against this, as if an injury had been done to themselves, the brothers of St. Bavo rose up, and two of them, Berner and Weger, went to the oratory of St. John , and before a throng of people asserted that all that had been done among us was false. In the Greater Litany also, before a throng of people called together for this spectacle, without license and episcopal authority, they publicly displayed before the people the same bones dug out of the ground and, as we have often said, branded both us and the episcopal statute with falsehood.

[87] [concerning the diploma given for the Blandinians by Baldric his successor in the year 1105,] After this that third report goes on: But our brothers, not unjustly moved and disturbed by so many and such great insults , approach the successor of the lord Radbod, namely the lord Baldric, bishop of the church of Noyon or Tournai, as if to complain about these things, and lay open to him all that had been done, and it is begged and requested that by him error may be led away from the people and that the authority of the episcopal decree may remain unshaken. The aforesaid lord Baldric, these things being heard, consented to the petition of our brothers and came quite quickly to Blandin * built at Ghent. And at the request of the lord Siger our abbot of Blandin and of our brothers, concerning our often-mentioned father called Florbert, a man of great sanctity, first ruler of this monastery of Ghent or Blandin, a pious inquiry into the body of St. Florbert was made by the same Baldric, bishop of the church of Noyon or Tournai. Which, because the same Bishop Baldric saw it confirmed with the seals of his predecessors, namely Adalbero, archbishop of Reims, and Baldwin, bishop of Tournai, and Radbod his successor, he added also the authority of his own seal and letters, not to confirm otherwise than they, but to root out from the foundations all the temerity of detractors. Which it is established was done by the aforesaid lord Bishop Baldric in the year of the incarnate Word MC and fifth, indiction XIII, epact III, concurrent

sixth, on the 5th day before the kalends of June.

[88] and concerning the translation carried out among the Bavonians in the year 1258. And although it is most certainly known that the body of blessed Florbert, our first abbot, so often mentioned, is and rests with us at Blandin by the attestation and authority of the aforesaid bishops, nevertheless the brothers of St. Bavo allowed those superstitious bones, brought in past days by Stepelin mentioned above with his supporters from the atrium of St. Bavo into the same church, once at night-time, to lie in the aforesaid superstitious sepulchre together with the inscription composed by the same Stepelin and carved on stone, to the disparagement of our St. Florbert, through many courses of years *. But in the year of the Lord MCCLVIII, Theoderic of Maldeghem, abbot of St. Bavo, his brothers persuading him and wishing to rouse up the partly slumbering superstition of their predecessors, by night-time carried the often-said superstitious bones, as being the bones of St. Florbert, together with the stone carved with the inscription, out of the superstitious sepulchre, which bones with the aforesaid stone he placed in the wall: whence they assert that they have Abbot Florbert with an inscription as index. These things we say, not that by saying false things we may accuse the aforesaid brothers of St. Bavo, and would that they were brothers in Christ, but that by saying true things we may excuse ourselves.

[89] The translation made by Radbod is perhaps to be attached to about the year 1097. From the last part of this third report it is certain that it was composed after the year 1258; but uncertain whether shortly or long after, since no mention of it is read anywhere and it first occurs written out in a hand of the 15th century. From the same it also appears that the second report, which we recited above Nos. 81–84. , or expostulation, was addressed to Baldric, bishop of Noyon, the successor of Radbod II. But here there arises no light difficulty. For in that second report it is signified that it was composed two years after the relics of Florbert were recognized by Radbod: for these things are said to have been done two years ago No. 84 about the middle. . But the third report attaches that same recognition to the year 1077 No. 84 middle. , whereas it is established from elsewhere that Radbod died and Baldric succeeded him only in the year 1098 Cf. Gallia Christiana, vol. IX, p. 998. , and in that same third report Baldric, although he is signified to have at once complied with the prayers of the Blandinians, is said to have issued his diploma, by which he again affirmed to them the body of Florbert, in the year 1105. We are led from this of ourselves to judge that, as in the Ghent codex there has been error in assigning the year in which the elevation of St. Macarius took place in the Bavonian monastery Cf. above, no. 85 end. , so in both codices there has been admitted a not dissimilar fault concerning the time of the recognition of the relics of St. Florbert by Radbod, which, namely, the scribe of the earlier exemplar, not rightly computing the years, made twenty years older than he ought. Nor does it stand in the way that that recognition is attached to the year 1077 in the Chronicle of the 11th century Cf. above, no. 9. : for that mention was added by a hand far more recent than that age.

[90] [The translation of the year 975 does not seem to have been of the kind that would imply a beatification: this took place in the year 1049] But let us now return to the principal head of the matter to be discussed here. According, then, to the two reports just cited, a threefold elevation of the body of Florbert was made in the monastery of Blandin: the first, in the year 975, by Adalbero, archbishop of Reims, whom the church of Noyon or Tournai, to which the district of Ghent pertained, acknowledged as metropolitan; the second, in the year 1049, by Baldwin, bishop of Noyon; the third, in the year 1077 (or rather around the year 1097), by Radbod II, the successor of Baldwin. It must be noted, however, that that first translation of the year 975 is recorded neither in the Chronicle of the 11th century nor in the Chronicle of the 13th century In the Ghent cod. of the 14th century (cf. above, no. 13). , but only the dedication of the church of Blandin is mentioned at that year. Whence, as also from the very narrative in the two later apologies cited above, it may easily be gathered that it was not a solemn elevation of that kind which, according to the rite of those times, implied a beatification or declaration of legitimate cult Cf. Benedict XIV, De servorum Dei beatificatione et canonizatione, bk. I, ch. 6. . Moreover, to use the words of our Cornelius De Smet in his Commentary on St. Florbert Act. SS. Belgii, vol. III, p. 343, no. 9. : that we should judge that Florbert was not held in the number of the saints before his bones were elevated by Baldwin in the year 1049, these arguments are added. While Erembold in a charter of donation given in the year 1026, in Le Mire, Diplom. Belgic., vol. 2, p. 947; while Arnulf, Count of Flanders, in the year 953, bestowing various benefits on Blandin (in Le Mire, ibid., p. 939), both reviewing the bodies of the saints resting in that monastery, are profoundly silent about Florbert. Erembold gives whatever he possesses in the estate of Baerle to the monastery of Blandin, a place of so great nobility, where at present rests the illustrious confessor Wandrille, with the venerable archbishops Ausbert and Wulfran, together with the most sacred virgin of Christ Amelberga. Arnulf had named the same. Add that one elevation, namely on the 19th day of April, on which day Baldwin in the year 1049 elevated the sacred bones (I have said that the earlier transportation was made on the day before the kalends of October), is celebrated in the manuscript offices of the monastery of Blandin, which I have before my eyes… This is announced besides (and that alone, as far as I know) in the martyrology which is attributed to Canisius, and also by Ferrari, Saussay and in the Benedictine martyrologies, as the Bollandists note in the Prætermissi at the 19th day of April.

[91] [Whence also the authenticity of the stone is made suspect which the Blandinians affirmed was placed in the year 975, nor are their other assertions sufficiently valid.] But if Florbert was first numbered among the blessed in the year 1049, no moderate wonder arises that from the year 975 there could be placed on his sepulchre an inscription in which it was said that his deposition was celebrated on the kalends of November Cf. above, nos. 81, 85. , which words surely show a solemn cult already being given. The wonder is increased by the fact that this inscription is said to have been carved in both Greek and Latin letters, a thing that at that time and in that region seems altogether incredible. I would not likewise wish to raise a scruple from the use of the word ordinatus, that is, successor or one holding the place, which in this sense is found used at least in documents of the 11th and 12th centuries [Cf. Du Cange, Glossarium mediæ et infimæ latinitatis, at this word (ed. Henschel, vol. IV, p. 727).] . But against the genuineness of this inscription claimed by the Blandinians it is also an argument that when, the controversy arising after the middle of the 11th century between them and the Bavonians about the place of burial of Florbert, the Bavonians brought forward an inscription or title placed on the sepulchre of Florbert in their church Cf. above, no. 68. , their adversaries, feeling that argument to be most valid, could yet bring forward nothing else to refute it apart from that twofold little narrative, each of which assuredly bears the appearance of a fabrication: the one concerning a similar stone, written in both Greek and Latin letters, which formerly existed with them, but was broken through the fault of some Bavonian monk at the elevation of the year 1049; the other concerning the confession of a certain Stepelin, a fugitive monk, who at the instigation of the Bavonians had asserted both that certain profane bones brought by him at night into their church were the body of Florbert, and had fabricated the inscription in which they gloried Cf. above, no. 82. . These things, I say, savour too much of a fable. And certainly that Stepelin, if he was such as they describe him, would be worthy of no faith in that very confession of his, nor would the confessions of two other ignoble and unknown men, whom they suppose were his accomplices in the impious crime, confer anything to increase that faith.

[92] And so it seems judgment must be pronounced for the Bavonians, If all these things are considered together, especially since we have the authority of the stone found not so long ago among the ruins of the Bavonian monastery Cf. above, no. 70. , it seems to me at least far more probable that in that lawsuit the cause should be adjudged to the Bavonians. Nor ought it to appear so wonderful that they seem to have been for so long so careless of the treasure placed with them, that in the year 1049 the elevation of Florbert could be celebrated without their objecting, although some of them (if in this matter at least faith is to be given to the Blandinians) took part in that same elevation Cf. above, nos. 82, 85. . For since they did not venerate Florbert as a saint Cf. Joan. de Thielrode, ch. X (cited above, no. 69). , but only by anniversaries, as their other deceased abbots, with prayers and sacrifice offered for him, his memory was not so celebrated with them. But when heavenly honours were decreed for him by the Blandinians, Bishop Baldwin concurring in this, they can be supposed then to have inquired more diligently into the matter, and, being made more certain from that that the sepulchre of Florbert existed in their church, to have tried to claim that glory for themselves. Nor does it seem a wonder either that Baldwin, who in good faith, according to the assertions of the Blandinians and without questioning the Bavonians, had celebrated the elevation of Florbert in the monastery of Blandin in the year 1049, took it ill afterwards, eighteen years later, that the Bavonians, no account being held of that elevation and of the instrument given by him on this occasion, should publicly proclaim that the body of Florbert was in their possession. Nor do Radbod and Baldric either, the successors of the same Baldwin, seem to have instituted any new and more attentive examination of the whole matter, but only, according to the allegations of the Blandinians and with the diplomas of their predecessors inspected, to have added to these their confirmation and seal.

[93] and it must be judged that Florbert died on the 8th day of October. Let the Bavonian stone retain, therefore, its credit, whence also it is now certain that the body of Florbert, either whole or at least in its greatest part, remained with the Bavonians, and finally that the day of death of the holy abbot should be assigned to the eighth day before the ides or, according to the more recent manner of computing, the 8th day of October. But perhaps it will be worth while to have observed that that stone cannot be supposed to be the same which the Bavonians brought forward from the 11th century. For although it is much older than that age, yet, by the testimony of John of Thielrode Ibid. , only after the middle of the 13th century was it found in the sepulchre of Florbert placed at his head. Nor is it manifest either that the inscription of the 11th century is presented by that inscription framed partly in metre and partly in prose which we have found in the Ghent codex of the 14th century Cf. above, no. 13. , written out in the hand that wrote the greatest part of the codex, although another much more recent hand has inscribed on it the title Epitaphium Stepelnis Florberti, noting at the same time that the things asserted in that epitaph are false. This inscription, however, after the translation of the body by Theoderic of Maldeghem,

of Florbert was composed, is established from its very tenor. We set the same here before the eyes of readers, those words or whole lines being omitted and noted by substituted points which are so erased that they can be read not at all or only very uncertainly.

[94] The inscription placed after the translation of the year 1258. Qui venerandi … hec culmina templi,

Huc flectat humiles visus discatque tuentem

Quis jacet inferius saxi sub pondere clausus.

Scilicet hic novi donatur honore sepulcri

Abbas Florbertus, quem Gande præses Amandus

Pastorem primum statuit meritis redimitum.

Istic canitiem * perducens laudis ad unguem

… clarum cunctis prebens monumentum.

Sed quia propositi gravis aspiratio fati

Omne quod est genitum mortis traducit ad hamum,

Qui legis hec dicas: Florberte, Deo quiescas.

ejus corporis ossa ob ejus reverentiam

… de

.. anno Domini m° .. mo

quinquagesimo octavo plurali [?]-bus

constat a Theodorico abbate

monolapide insculptum est

Hic requiescit Florbertus

abbas Gandensis cenobii ..

… is.

Esto legens certus quod erat lapis iste repertus

Ad caput abbatis Florberti, sed relevatis

Ossibus illius hic jacet ille pius.

[Whoever … these summits of the venerable temple, let him bend hither his humble gaze and learn from the beholder who lies below, shut under the weight of the stone. Here, namely, is gifted with the honour of a new sepulchre Abbot Florbert, whom Amandus, prelate of Ghent, established as first shepherd, wreathed with merits. There, bringing his white hair to the perfection of praise […] … furnishing a monument bright to all. But since the heavy breath of appointed fate draws all that is begotten to the hook of death, you who read these things may say: Florbert, may you rest in God. […] the bones of his body out of reverence for him … of […] .. in the year of the Lord m° .. mo fifty-eighth plurali [?]-bus it is established by Abbot Theoderic on a single stone it is carved Here rests Florbert, abbot of the monastery of Ghent .. … is. Be certain, reader, that this stone was found at the head of Abbot Florbert, but his bones being raised, that pious man lies here.]

[95] [A narrative on the origin and first abbots of the monastery of Blandin taken from John of Thielrode.] Perhaps it will also be helpful to have noted that these verses in the Ghent codex are set before the third report of the Blandinians Cf. above, no. 85. , as the older ones before the first report or proclamation Cf. above, nos. 72. 73. , so that thus to the twofold assertion of the Bavonians publicly set forth the Blandinians seem also to have opposed a twofold public objection or response; moreover also that in both codices, the Ghent and the Brussels Cf. above, nos. 13, 14. , there is found another notable monument of that rivalry of the two monasteries of St. Bavo and of Blandin, each claiming Florbert for itself: namely that narrative on the origin and first abbots of the monastery of Blandin, edited under the title Fragmentum Chronicæ by the venerable man F. Van de Putte Annales Abbatiæ S. Petri Blandiniensis, p. 153. . Which, if it is inspected a little more attentively, it is easily established presents nothing else (as regards Florbert) than chapter IX of the Chronicle of John of Thielrode Cited below, p. 379. , but so adulterated that whatever was said by him about the monastery of Ghent, afterwards of St. Bavo, there have been substituted for these in that narrative the traditions of the Blandinians about their monastery. In one matter, however, the otherwise accurate assiduity of the Blandinian writer has failed, namely as to the year of the death of Florbert, which according to the tradition of his Bavonian monastery John of Thielrode established as the year of our era 642 Cf. below, p. 379, no. 5. , and which according to the tradition of the Blandinians the writer of the Fragment should have assigned as the year 639 Cf. below, p. 378, no. 12 beginning and end. , but he omitted it: by which imprudence the same writer made manifest a certain fraud of his, which could also be proved by other arguments.

* cod. sis.

* cod. quadragesimam.

* cod. devotionis.

* cod. adire.

* cod. cunviciis

* cod. supliatur requiruntur.

* cod. Balduinum.

* cod. nostris.

* cod. uno.

* cod. promiserunt.

* cod. canitiam.

§ VII. Of the cult of St. Florbert.

St. Florbert, numbered among the blessed from the middle of the 11th century, We find no trace of the cult of St. Florbert older than the middle of the 11th century. At which time, namely in the year 1049, we have mentioned a little above Cf. above, nos. 81, 90. that, from contemporary or nearly contemporary monuments, his relics were solemnly elevated by Baldwin, bishop of Noyon, and thus he was, according to the rite of those times, inscribed on the roll of the Blessed. That thereafter he was honoured as a saint by the Blandinians, and that his memory was customarily celebrated on the second day of November, is testified by the Chronology of Blandin in these words: And we carry out his feast with great veneration on the day after All Saints Cf. below, p. 377, n. 7 end. . This is confirmed by John of Thielrode, who in his Chronicle Ch. X, cited above, no. 69. had said: The religious men, the monks of St. Peter on Mount Blandin, say that they have Florbert … with them, canonized in a shrine, and they celebrate him as befits a confessor. An indication of his cult is furnished also by the codex of the public library of Ghent 296 (Saint-Genois 487), which is inscribed Ceremoniale ecclesiæ Romanæ and seems to have belonged to the monastery of Blandin Cf. J. de Saint-Genois, Catalogue des mss. de la bibl. de Gand, n. 487. . In that codex, which was written in the 14th century, there are read (pp. 73–80) litanies of all the saints, in which the name of St. Florbert also is inserted.

[97] [Greven first inserted him in the Martyrology of Usuard: he was venerated in the monastery of Blandin alone.] Yet no mention of him occurs in the manuscript codices from which Du Sollier edited the auctaria of Usuard, nor in any ancient manuscript martyrology that I know. And so in the year 1515 Greven first inserted the name of Florbert in the Martyrology of Usuard at the 2nd day of November; then, at the 1st day of the same month, Molanus both in the martyrology edited by him and among the Natales SS. Belgii, Adam Walasser in the martyrology commonly said to be of Canisius, Saussay in the Gallican martyrology, Chastelain in his general martyrology, Ferrari in the General Catalogue of the saints who are not in the Roman martyrology, and in the Benedictine martyrologies or menologies Wion, Ménard, Bucelin, Cherle and Lechner. All of whom rightly assign as the place where Florbert is venerated only the monastery of Blandin. For outside it nowhere, indeed not even, by the testimony of the Chronology of Blandin and also of John of Thielrode Places cited n. 96. Cf. however below, no. 99. , in the Bavonian monastery, were the honours of the saints given to Florbert: whence also from the time when the monastery of Blandin was suppressed there is no longer any solemn memory of the holy abbot celebrated. And why all the aforesaid authors, except Greven, assigned the first day of November to the memory of St. Florbert, although the Chronology of Blandin indicates that in the monastery itself his feast was celebrated on the second day, I find no other reason except that, ignorant of that indication, they found in other Blandinian monuments that Florbert died on the day of the kalends of November Cf. place cited above, notes 4 and 5. and from this judged that his anniversary commemoration took place on the same day.

[98] The relics of St. Florbert in the monastery of Blandin That the sacred body of Florbert, which the Blandinians gloried was entire in their possession, was burned and scattered with seven other bodies of saints by the Calvinist heretics in the year 1578, is thus noted in the excerpts from the Tablet of the dead or necrology of Blandin which, collected by our predecessors, exist in a codex now of the royal library of Brussels 8920: Gislenus de Temmerman, 59th abbot… The Gueux (whose religion it is to profane and destroy all sacred things) were not afraid to tear down nearly all the altars and the temple itself, to scatter and trample the sacred bones: among which were eight whole bodies of saints, of St. Gudwal, Bertulf, the virgin Amelberga, Ansbert, Florbert, Wulfram, Wandrille and Winwaloe [Cf. Van Lokeren, Chartes et documents de l'abbaye de Saint-Pierre au mont Blandin, vol. II, p. LXXIII.] . Wrongly, therefore, does Arnold Raisse in his Hierogazophylacium Belgicum, published at Douai in the year 1628, mention those bodies as still preserved in that monastery Op. cit., pp. 115–116. .

[99] and in the Bavonian. That in the Bavonian monastery too some cult of St. Florbert persevered at least until the very end of the 16th century may be gathered from the Inventories of the relics and ornaments of the church and treasury of St. Bavo written in Flemish, which, still preserved at Ghent in the archive of the cathedral church, the venerable and most learned man John Baptist Lavaut, canon of the aforesaid church and prefect of the archive, with the greatest courtesy showed me for inspection. In the oldest of these indeed, composed on the 5th day of January of the year 1394, I found no mention of St. Florbert, although relics and certain little images are recorded of SS. Amandus, Livinus and other saints who were chiefly venerated there. But in the Inventory which was composed around the year 1473 there is distinctly indicated the shrine of St. Florbert; and the same mention occurs in the Inventory of the year 1547, and besides of the abbatial staff of St. Florbert placed in a certain wooden chest. In the latter, in a contemporary hand, there is added to the things narrated this little note: All the aforesaid precious things and holy relics and ornaments, Ghislain Temmerman being abbot, in the year 1598, on the feast of St. Bartholomew, were violated, plundered and scattered by John Van Hembyze and Francis van de Cathulle, otherwise Ryhoven, and their Calvinist or atheist followers, so that not even those things remained which were necessary for celebrating Mass. Nor do we know of any relics of St. Florbert displayed or preserved anywhere from that time.

DOCUMENTS CONCERNING ST. FLORBERT.

Florbert, abbot at Ghent in Flanders. (S.)

FROM MANUSCRIPTS AND PRINTED BOOKS.

I. FROM THE MONUMENTS OF BLANDIN.

1. OF THE FOUNDATION OF THE MONASTERY OF BLANDIN. ^a

St. Amandus, Account of the foundation or building of the monastery of Blandin, which is situated in the territory of Ghent, in the place called Blandinium. Therefore from our father of kindly memory, to be named with all honour, the excellent priest and pontiff of Christ the Lord, Amandus, not moderately to be equalled to the titles of the ancient fathers, I shall begin the beginning of my speech, as what has been commanded requires, namely that from whom the beginning of our monastery took its start, from him also the word of our speech may take its beginning.

[2] after the conversion of the ferocious people of Ghent The most blessed Amandus, at the time at which the most valiant King Dagobert most honourably governed the sceptre of the kingdom of the Franks, for the sake of preaching went to the territories of the castle of Ghent ^b. Whose inhabitants, having deserted their maker and redeemer, deceived by the cunning of the devil, worshipped idols more suited to the fire than to veneration. When, sorrowing for their miseries, he had arrived there under the auspices of Christ, and had begun vehemently to refute their madness, reduced by the malign spirit, they did not blush to afflict the holy man with many injuries and kinds of punishments: and very often, too, having long tormented him, they plunged him into the watery depths. All of which the holy man received with great alacrity as if they had been conferred on him from heaven, patiently bearing the adversities of the world for the rewards of the future life, having that saying of the apostle before his eyes: The sufferings of this time are not worthy to be compared with the future glory that will be revealed in us.

[3] to the faith of Christ, At length, the devil with his worshippers being triumphed over, by the Lord's help, he built a monastery there for the love of the Lord on the side of a high hill. Now the hill is situated between the rivers Scheldt and Lys, where there was a most ancient shrine, in which from

the custom of the ancient gentiles Mercury was worshipped by the foolish people of the rustics. He crushed the idol, therefore, overturned the altar, cut down the groves, and dedicated that very place in honour of Peter, prince of the apostles: to which he gave the name Blandinium, because he soothed there the spirits of the ferocious people with blandishments ^c and consecrated them with the water of sacred baptism.

[4] he built a monastery on Mount Blandin, over which he set Florbert. He also gathered there a band of monks, whom he taught to serve Christ according to the rule of the most holy Benedict ^d. The estates also and lands, which kings and queens and many illustrious men had been very eager to bestow on him for the sake of veneration, he ordered to be given to Peter, prince of the apostles ^e, and he left there the pledges of the saints which he had obtained from Pope Martin. Over which also he set a father named Florbert, a man of sagacious wit.

[5] [The monastery was built in the year 610. Florbert died on the 1st day of November.] This work was begun from the year of the Lord's incarnation DCX, on the day of the kalends of October, in the first indiction: which was the XIIII year of the aforesaid King Dagobert, in the V year of the most blessed Pope Martin holding the pontificate of the see of the Roman church ^f, in the VII year of Aicarius, bishop of Noyon. The aforesaid Abbot Florbert, therefore, strong in honesty of morals and all goodness, now mature in years and morals, on the head of the kalends of November ^g, taken from human affairs, was carried, as we believe, to those above.

ANNOTATED.

2. ACCOUNT OF THE GOODS OF THE MONASTERY OF BLANDIN UNDER ABBOT FLORBERT.

From the same Book of rents, but note that these things are not read in their own place, that is, immediately after the narrative of the foundation of the monastery, but far below, namely after the writer has brought the history of the monastery down to the times of Louis the Pious and has subjoined diplomas and charters of donations reaching to the end of the reign of Charles the Bald. Then at last, as if he wished to supply what had been omitted, he inserted the following record of those things which were first acquired for the monastery. The same was found in a fragment of a certain codex of the 10th century and thence edited by the venerable man Fr. van de Putte [Annales de la Société d'Émulation de la Flandre Occidentale, 1st series, vol. III, pp. 215–216.] .

Record of those men who handed over or sold their property to St. Peter in the monastery of Blandin in the times of the prelate St. Amandus and of Abbot Florbert: which sale the aforesaid lord bishop himself first ordered there.

Morbert gave Fliteritsale. Berewelipo of Sclotis sold all his property, both in lands and woods and small holdings, or whatever he had in that waste, both within and without, to Abbot Florbert for the value in gold of VI pounds. Emelfrid sold III small holdings, by these names: Fiessalis, Firentsamma, Rintsalis: Abbot Florbert gave as price XV solidi. Albinus, Gerric, Aldric, Florad, Hisnold, Everund, Winethar, Lidwald, Bereu: these sold all their property with the woods, which Abbot Florbert acquired for the value in gold of M solidi, from the treasures of the monastery of St. Peter of Blandin.

Rucho of Sclotis sold all his property in houses, lands, woods, small holdings, and whatever he had in that waste, both within and without: which the lord prelate Amandus bought for CC solidi of gold, and ordered to be handed over to St. Peter in the aforesaid monastery of Blandin; whose handing over the lord King Clovis confirmed in the year from the incarnation of the Lord DCLVIIII and in the I year of his reign.

Vulfgrim and Ermina his wife handed over in that wood all their part, where Grimwara, consecrated to God, held an inheritance and gave it to St. Peter.

There follows the mention of a donation made in the times of King Pippin The cod. of the 10th century more rightly has Pippini principis. and of Abbot John, which, since it no longer pertains to the times of Florbert, we have thought should be omitted here. But in the 10th-century codex containing a fragment of the same Book of rents, before the donation of Vulfgrim and Ermina, which comes last above, and after that before the donation made in the times of Abbot John, certain others are mentioned that are passed over in the 11th-century codex. This latter part of our document, therefore, we have thought should be supplied here from the 10th-century codex according to the edition of the venerable man F. Van de Putte.

Radbert handed over VII small holdings for the table of the brothers to the aforesaid monastery by these names, Friessale, Wetersale, Hrintsale, Firentfammo [A little below this place-name occurs again. In the 11th-century codex, cited a little above, Firentsamma is read.] , Ruodungo, Buroclar, Faltselt. Likewise we have from the part of Hildelana, consecrated to God, in that waste, fields, woods, meadows, clearings.

We have likewise from the part of Thiedard and from the part of Amalric and of Flovera his sister in the aforesaid place such a part as Godewald and Usebert held with the other heirs. Vulfgrim and Ermina his wife handed over in that wood over all where Grimuara, consecrated to God, held an inheritance and gave it to St. Peter.

Folcuin gave four holdings by these names: Wetersale, Basingasele, Hrintsele, Firentfamma, and besides this for cutting wood and gathering over all that wood as far as the place which is called Hramaidug, and in the fields of Athenneria common rights for pasturing over all.

Notice of that matter, that Gerwin handed over for the table of the brothers some arable land, where one can sow I modius, in Manurodgarda, in the place which is called Helsaccra.

3. FROM THE CHRONOLOGY OF BLANDIN.

The territory of the castle of Ghent, built by Gaius J. Caesar, In the forty-seventh year before the nativity of our Lord Jesus Christ, the illustrious Gaius Julius Caesar, perpetual dictator of the Romans, when by a decree of the senate he had subjugated Gaul to the Romans and had long fought with doubtful fortune the Nervii, the most powerful of Belgic Gaul, and at last conquered them, built in their territory a noble castle, afterwards known to many nations and peoples, on the rivers Scheldt and Lys, where the river Scheldt receives the river Lys, on which from his noble name of Gaius he imposed the name Ganda. When he had subjugated Cassibilianus, king of Britain, and his whole kingdom, before his return towards the city of Rome he left certain soldiers and his noble barons, Roman citizens, to guard his castle of Ganda. Whence the citizens of Ghent glory that they took their origin and afterwards their name ^b.

[2] [St. Amandus won for Christ in the year 608, and he ruled the double monastery founded by him there until the year 618:] To the territories of this castle, then, for the sake of preaching there came the most blessed Amandus, sprung from the borders of Aquitaine, in the year six hundred and eighth after the nativity of our Lord Jesus Christ ^c, at the time at which the most valiant King Dagobert most honourably governed the sceptre of the kingdom of the Franks… ^d. There is in the aforesaid district of Ghent a hill situated between the rivers Scheldt and Lys, whose length stretches from north to south, and its breadth from the east to the western quarter, where there was a most ancient shrine, in which from the custom of the ancient gentiles Mercury was worshipped by the foolish people of the rustics. He crushed the idol, therefore… ^e. This most blessed Amandus ruled this monastery from the time of its foundation until the year annos 1. DCXVIII, together with the monastery of St. Peter of Ghent, which is now called of St. Bavo.

[3] in which year he set Florbert over both For in the year of our Lord Jesus Christ six hundred and eighth after his nativity, blessed Amandus, lovable to God as to men, first preaching the word of the Lord in the said castle of Ghent, built a church there. In the year of the Lord VIcXI the church of Ghent is destroyed by unbelievers. In the year of the Lord VIcXIII the church of Ghent is repaired by blessed Amandus by the authority of Aicharius, bishop of Noyon, and of Dagobert, king of the Franks. In the year of the Lord VIcXVI° the church of Ghent is dedicated on the ides of November in honour of St. Peter the apostle by Bishop St. Amandus, who first established there clerics serving God ^f. And in the same year St. Bavo, who is also Alloynus, sprung from the race of the Franks, count of Hesbaye and heir of the dukes of the Austrasians, was converted by Bishop St. Amandus: whom also, all his goods having first been given away for God, marked with the sacred blessing, he tonsured. In the year of the Lord VIcXVIII°, blessed Amandus, the clerics being removed from the church of Ghent, gathered a band of monks; to whom he also associated Bavo, long since converted by him; and he set over them preficiens 2, 3. as abbot a venerable man named Florbert, adorned with virtues and holy religion. And thus it is evident through the aforesaid supradictam 1. that the institution of monks in our monastery of Blandin preceded by eight years the establishment of the monks of St. Peter of Ghent. And some report that this is the cause why we claim to have priority and superiority in processions and other lawful assemblies. King Dagobert gave to St. Amandus the estate of Hadeghem and other lands which lie around the monastery of Blandin. Which estate and lands the aforesaid St. Amandus gave to the aforesaid monastery to be possessed in perpetuity. The aforesaid St. Amandus ruled this monastery from its foundation for eight years.

[4] a man notable for sanctity: Of St. Florbert, first abbot and shepherd of this monastery of Blandin, after blessed Amandus who was first in the governance of this monastery whole title omits 2; (post-cœnobii) omits 3. . After the most blessed pontiff Amandus had ruled this monastery of Blandin for eight years from its beginning, he set over there, for those contending on the path of the cenobitic life viæ 1. , a father named Florbert, an exemplar of sanctity and mirror of all religion and a man of sagacious wit, and a priest worthy of God, whom he formed to his own footsteps both by examples and instructed fully by admonition. Deservedly, therefore, it is fitting in all respects to believe of how great praise or sanctity this most blessed father our abbot flourished in the sight of the Lord, whom also the kindly pontiff of Christ Amandus put in place as his vicar, and set over as father or ruler of the whole territory of Ghent, and marked with his apostolate.

[5] under whose governance the monastery of Blandin greatly flourished Meanwhile, the fame of his good odour spreading far and wide, many illustrious men began to flock to him from every side, and their sons for serving

God in the monastery to offer. And so mother Sion enlarged her tents, and made long her cords. And having undertaken the governance of souls and the burden of burdens, with how great vigilance he stood guard over the house omits 1, 2, 3. of the Lord by days and nights is proved by the experience of his exercise and the force of his labour. For the whole nation of Ghent, which before knew nothing but to gnash barbarously, then began to resound the words of Christ, and, by the institution of so great a father and the prayer of the most blessed pontiff Amandus, the flock of the apostolic sheepfold and of the monastery of Blandin fructified more and more in the Lord. And since at that time a worshipper of God and priest of God was held very rare in those places, therefore he himself began more and more to be held known and dear. And so it came about that in a brief space of time there arose there so 1, 2, 3; perhaps ibi Dei should be read. an honourable congregation of servants: yet that, with reverence for the saints, we may say to the praise of the Lord, this can now be attested as much by the eyes as by words, when you see the same place so or a Deo. honoured and illustrated by the pledges of many saints. Blessed in all things be God, who is ever wonderful in his saints.

[6] and it was gifted with the privilege of Martin I. In the time of this our father Florbert sancti Fl. 2, 3. , at the petition of the most excellent kings Dagobert and his son Sigebert, blessed Martin, pontiff of the Roman see, interposed the authority of his confirmation ^h, concerning the stability of the monastery of Blandin, concerning estates and resources, and concerning churches, and the tithes of churches, or the household, and other things pertaining to the aforesaid monastery: all of which he established in the free disposition of Abbot Florbert, so that he and his successors should dispose and order disponeret et ordinaret 2, 3. all things without the contradiction or opposition of anyone, that the brothers might more freely watch over invigilarent 2, 3. the commandments of the Lord according to the rule of St. Benedict; which charter arca 1. of privilege begins thus: Martin, bishop, last servant of the servants of God, to all who love God, salvation. We ought to rejoice in the daily progress and multiplication of the holy mother Catholic and apostolic church, etc. Written by the hand of Stephen, notary and regionary and of the sacred archive of the holy Roman church, in the month of January, indiction II. Given on the 14th day before the kalends of February, by the hand of Amandus, bishop and omits 3. librarian of the holy apostolic see.

[7] The body of St. Florbert in the Blandinian In the year as above VIcXVIII, blessed Amandus, the clerics being removed from the church of Ghent, which quod 2, 3. is now called of St. Bavo, instituted a band of monks ⁱ, over whom he also set as abbot a venerable man named Florbert, [preserved in the monastery, and his feast customarily celebrated there on the 2nd day of November.] adorned with virtues and holy religion. This our father, therefore, presided over both those monasteries, and a great dispute arose between the religious of St. Bavo and ourselves concerning the burial and body of this our father Florbert. For they themselves episcopi 2. say that they have him; but we assert the contrary ^k. Which was afterwards terminated by … ^l bishop of Reims in the year . . . . as will be said in its places. For they do not venerate him as a saint, but we carry out his feast with great veneration on the day after All Saints ^m, of which more fully below.

[8] St. Bavo received by Florbert in the monastery of Ghent; In the year of the Lord VIcXIX, St. Bavo ⁿ through St. beatum. 3. Amandus and the venerable man Abbot Florbert, after he had recalled a man named Adunus, dead in the labour of his cell, after a space of three hours from the jaws of hell and had openly restored him to life, in the same very narrow cell founded and built in the monastery of Ghent, leaving examples of sanctity to all, not without the wonderful lamentation of many, on the fifth day before the ides of November is shut up in solitude. In the year of the Lord VIcXXXI, the end of blessed Bavo's life approaching, an angel of the Lord (a. D. e.) a. e. D. 3. visited him in a vision in the form of a dove, filling his whole little cell with a wonderful fragrance of odour. And after this, the sign of the holy cross, to whose service he had wholly devoted his mind, appearing to him from heaven, he desired to be loosed from the chains of the body and to be with Christ. He, after the manifold labours of this world and the maceration of the body and diverse visitations of the Holy Spirit, in the monastery of Ghent on the first day of the kalends of October breathed out his soul, stripped of the body, into the hands of his creator, the choirs of angels rejoicing. There were present at his sacred passing the most holy Bishop Amandus and our venerable abbot St. Florbert with the venerable college of his brothers of the monastery of Ghent, and also Domlin, presbyter of the church of Thourout, brought to the aforesaid St. beatum. 3. Bavo with an angel accompanying him. His happy soul appeared at its saving departure to the most blessed virgin Gertrude, abbess of the monastery of Nivelles, ordering garments to be sent to her for burying his body, which also was miraculously done. The body, flashing with miracles, was with reverence and fitting honour committed to ecclesiastical burial by blessed Bishop Amandus and the venerable Abbot Florbert, and also by Domlin the presbyter, with the vast grief of both sexes, in the cell of his reclusion, situated in the monastery of Ghent.

[9] then St. Livinus. In the year VIcXXXIII, blessed Livinus ^o, a Scot by race and archbishop of Ireland, with three disciples dear to him et 2, 3. and beloved by God, visited as a pilgrim the monastery of Ghent on the seventeenth day before the kalends of August, and there was charitably and kindly received in hospitality by our abbot Florbert and the devout brothers dwelling there. He, on the day before the ides of November, in the estate which is called Escha, was martyred for the faith of Christ and beheaded. With whom also a noble matron, named Craphaildis, with Brictius the infant slaughtered in pieces, has her head cut off. And the blessed martyr Livinus in a new sepulchre, prepared by angelic hands at the estate of Holthem, was by his disciples with Brictius the infant fittingly and honourably committed to burial. Blessed Craphaildis also, martyr of Christ, they placed separately beside the sepulchre of the holy martyr Livinus.

[10] Of St. Landoald. In the year VIc XXXVI°, blessed Landoald [p], archpresbyter and cardinal in the Roman church, was substituted by blessed Bishop Amandus in the church of Tongres or Maastricht, where for nine years he fittingly discharged the office of pontiff until the time of St. Remaclus. And since we have wandered somewhat from our purpose, I have thought it worthy that we should return to where I digressed from.

[11] Florbert presided over the monastery of Blandin for 22 years; Our venerable father Florbert assuredly completed with all honour and sanctity the course of his life in the agony of the heavenly warfare in the monastery of Blandin for four lustra and two years, in a good old age; and awaiting from the Lord the crown of his labours, he said to him unweariedly with constant vows and sighs: As the hart longs for the fountains of waters, so my soul longs for you, O God. And likewise: When shall I come and appear before the face of my God? And thus, fortified by the sign of the holy cross, and having received the viaticum of the Lord's body and blood, he commended his soul to the angels, and the pearl of his body to the earth.

[12] [he died on the 1st day of November of the year 639, and was buried in the church of the same monastery.] Our most blessed father Abbot Florbert died, therefore, in the year of the Lord's incarnation six hundred and thirty-ninth [q], in the sixth year of Louis, on the day of the kalends of November [r], on which is venerated in general the triumphal victory of the whole heavenly warfare, and, as we truly believe, going forth to feast with the friends of God, in order, namely, that he might adorn the celebrity of so great a day with his own passing also, joining himself to the thousands of saints as a worthy companion and veteran recruit. The brothers, sons of his love, took care of him, and clothed in priestly stoles they buried him with their last tears. And lest any lapse of time should abolish his memorial, they left to the notice of posterity this hoc 1. inscription of his monument carved on stone in Greek and Latin letters: HIC EST LOCUS UBI REQUIESCIT CORPUS FLORBERTI ABBATIS, DISCIPULI ET ORDINATI AMANDI EPISCOPI, CUJUS DEPOSITIO CELEBRATUR CALENDIS NOVEMBRIS [s]. [This is the place where rests the body of Florbert, abbot, disciple and ordained of Bishop Amandus, whose deposition is celebrated on the kalends of November.] He was buried in the church of blessed Peter, prince of the apostles, which he received to rule from our most blessed father Amandus, where for about three hundred and thirty-eight years [t] he rested in peace.

[13] he comes to meet St. Amandus as he departs this life. Whom the venerable man Amandus sent ahead, polished by the manifold art of the virtues, to the service of the angels, as a father a son, whom afterwards at his glorious passing he went to meet with that illa 1. noble retinue of fellow disciples, as was shown by divine power in a vision to blessed Aldegund, a virgin dedicated to God. For at the same time at which the veteran old man departed from the body, the same virgin, serving the Lord from the very years of infancy and striving to live an angelic life on earth, among the other visions more frequently shown to her from above, while on the night of the Lord's day she was applying herself to vigils and hymns in the church of the monastery of Maubeuge before the altar of St. Mary, raised in ecstasy of mind and led by an angel through the pleasant places of a joyful dwelling, saw an old man, venerable with a swan-white head, clothed in priestly and splendid garments, holding a staff in his hand, passing as it were to the heights, and a plentiful crowd of men in white making their way before and behind him. And when, on being asked who he was, she said that she did not know, it was thus answered her by the holy angel: The man of God Amandus, he said, has departed from the world. And the crowd of men in white whom you see, these are they who through the urgency of his preaching are judged worthy by God to be enrolled in the brightness of the saints in the heavens [u]. Of which so blessed band a certain and honourable part was St. Florbert, and the excellent man John, shepherds and abbots of the monastery of Blandin.

ANNOTATED.

p. These things seem to be taken from the Life of St. Bavo written by Abbot Theoderic Act. SS., vol. I Oct., p. 244, no. 11 end. . The author of the Chronology of Blandin, as may be conjectured, brings in the mention of Landoald here because his body, translated to Ghent, was honoured there (in the Bavonian monastery) with a celebrated cult Cf. Act. SS., vol. III March, p. 34. .

q. Cf. Comment. præv., § II.

r. Cf. Comment. præv., § VI.

s. Cf. ibid., no. 91.

t. Until the year 975, namely, in which the Blandinians reported that the body of Florbert was translated by Adalbero, archbishop of Reims, from the place of first burial to a more fitting one (Cf. Comment. præv., nos. 81, 85).

u. This vision is reported in the Life of St. Amandus by Philip of Harvengt, at the end Act. SS., vol. I Feb., p. 872, no. 74. : from which beyond doubt our writer drew that narrative.

II. FROM THE CHRONICLE OF ST. BAVO, BY JOHN OF THIELRODE, CH. IX.

[Amandus converts to the faith of Christ the inhabitants of the castle of Ghent, and built a monastery there] There is a place established by the author of the world in the western parts, past which run two excellent rivers ever filled with a scaly host, and from antiquity it stands nobly called the castle of Ghent. And on this side, from the eastern quarter, a river by name Scheldt, on that, from the western, another called Lys, direct in winding meander the noble course of their flow … ^b. To this place, then, the prelate Amandus, beloved of God and men, once coming, at the time at which the glorious King Dagobert honourably held the sceptre, built a monastery there in the valley of the Lys, where there was a most ancient shrine, in which from the custom of the ancient gentiles Mercury was worshipped by the foolish people of the rustics. He crushed the idol, therefore, overturned the altar, cut down the groves and, as we have touched on before, where he destroyed the shrine, there he built a monastery, which according to the name of the place he called Ghent: where also by his salutary admonitions he overcame the spirit of the ferocious people ^c.

[2] [in the year 608, and set Florbert over it, to whom the Roman pontiff granted a privilege of immunity.] This work was begun from the year of the Lord's incarnation six hundred and eighth, in the eleventh indiction, in the fifth year of Phocas, emperor of the Romans [These words octavo–anno quinto are written in the codex over earlier erased ones.] , and in the twelfth year of the aforesaid King Dagobert, Pope Martin holding the pontificate of the see of the Roman church, in the fifth year of Aicharius, bishop of Noyon ^d. Which being completed he dedicated in honour of St. Peter, prince of the apostles, on the ides of the month of November likewise the words ydibus mensis novembris. , there being placed there relics of the same prince of the apostles and of the teacher of the gentiles Paul, and of the holy apostles Philip and James and pledges of other saints, which he had obtained from Pope Martin. In which he first gathered a band of clerics, then after some time, by God's favour, of monks ^e: over whom he set Abbot Florbert, flowering with the ornaments of the virtues, and renowned for the honesty of all goodness. For by the apostolic authority of the pope himself it was forbidden not only to bishops and counts, but also likewise the word etiam. to all the nobles of the whole kingdom, that, as if using free power, they should presume to put in place from outside likewise the words ab externis. any person over the band of that place, except one whom those serving God there and agreeing in one should of their spontaneous will elect from their own brothers according to God ^f.

[3] St. Bavo received by Florbert in the monastery of Ghent. Hearing these things, the illustrious cod. indolis. confessor of Christ Bavo, who then under the lay habit desired with all efforts to serve the Lord, animated by the supernal regard, went fearlessly to the monastery: which Amandus, prelate for the lambs of Christ, then restored after the dire harassment of the Huns ^g. Whose heart the kindly pontiff of the Lord, seeing visited by the Lord's condescension, tonsured him, marked with the sacred blessing, and associated him to the flock of monks. The same St. Bavo, happily inflamed with pious desire, asked St. Amandus to grant him to go round the places of the saints, so that, strengthened in the service of Christ by the example of religious men, he might more ardently and attentively serve the Lord. Having gone round, then, the monasteries of many saints, under the leadership of Christ he came back to Ghent, namely to the monastery in which the venerable pontiff Amandus had established as abbot, as we have touched on before, Florbert, a most vigorous man. He then, at the request, namely, of St. Bavo, the confessor of Christ, taking with him the brothers whom he ruled, reverently built there a cell, which to this day may be seen by those desiring to do so (renewed after very many overthrows it is clearly evident near the choir of those serving God). In which the sacred recruit of Christ remained for the space of three years and forty days, shut away for the love of Christ, in order to fight manfully against the bloody enemy.

[4] This monastery is the first of all that St. Amandus founded. For we hold most certainly that this is the first and chief of all the monasteries founded anywhere by the same our holy father Amandus. But lest anyone perhaps, seduced by the spirit of error, should judge that our discourse deviates from the truth, let him know that we rely on the testimonies of orthodox fathers reigning in the heavens with Christ, whom it is lawful for none of Christians to disparage: which also could now be opportunely and competently inserted, unless the discourse avoided being drawn from its order. There correspond here also, strengthened by great authority, both ancient and modern testaments of Roman pontiffs and decrees of Christian emperors. The conclusion concerning the aforesaid place being fixed, therefore, by so suitable a testimony of such great persons, and nearly the whole world agreeing to this very thing, let the things that yet remain be unfolded.

[5] [St. Florbert died on the 8th day of October of the year 642 and was buried in the monastery of Ghent.] Blessed Amandus, then, all things being duly ordered, burning with divine love and about to depart elsewhere, set the servant of God, the most vigorous man Florbert, as was said above, as shepherd and abbot over the flock of monks. He, vigorously advancing on the norm of the holy purpose, first himself showed by example what he taught his subjects by word. He, in the six hundred and forty-second year of the Lord's incarnation, on the eighth day before the ides of October ^h, taken from human affairs, was carried, as we believe, to those above and was entombed in the same monastery before the altar of St. Peter, prince of the apostles (which can still be shown by the brothers to those desiring to know, as the inscription of carved marble testifies).

ANNOTATED.

III. POEM OF ST. LIVINUS TO ST. FLORBERT.

This poem, which from a copy of the Corsendonck codex transmitted to him by Rosweyde Jas. Ussher edited Veterum epistolarum Hibernicarum sylloge, p. 17. and according to Ussher Mabillon Act. SS. O. S. B., sec. II, p. 404. , then from the same Corsendonck codex our predecessors brought forward Act. SS., vol. I Oct., p. 227; Act. SS. Belgii, vol. III, p. 114. , and more recently from the codex of the royal library of Brussels 14524–14525 J. J. De Smet Corp. Chron. Flandriæ, vol. I, p. 462. , we have thought should be presented here anew from a copy which the same men wrote out from the ancient codex of Maximilian de Vrient, secretary to the senate of Ghent at the very end of the 16th century Biographie Nationale, publiee par l'Academie royale de Belgique, vol. V, p. 870. , and which we still preserve in our museum. This we have marked with the number 1. Variant readings we have written in: — 2. from the Brussels codex 14525 On which Comment. præv., no. 14. and — 3. from the Corsendonck codex according to the edition of the Bollandists; noting also what has been differently edited — 4. in Ussher and — 5. in Mabillon.

VERSES OF ST. LIVINUS, ARCHBISHOP AND GLORIOUS MARTYR, TO FLORBERT, ABBOT OF ST. BAVO OF GHENT, SENT FROM THE ESTATE OF HOLTEM [title omits 3; Versus (Epistola 4) S. Livini episcopi et martyris ad Florbertum abbatem monasterii S. Bavonis 2.] .

I dare to speak wonders: I have seen a sun without light,

Here sic 4. day is without light, rest without peace.

After I beheld these peoples, in clear light

The sun did not shine for me, there was for me one night.

An impious race, driven by barbaric tumult,

Rages here in Brabant, and, bloody, seeks ferit 2, 3. me.

In what have I sinned against you, who bring the merits of peace?

It is peace that quod 2, 3. I bring: why do you stir up wars against me?

But where quia 1. you breathe, ferocity, a glad lot will give triumph triumphi 2, 3.

And the glory of martyrdom will give the palm.

I know whom I shall trust, nor shall I be cheated by vain hope;

He who promises is God: who can doubt?

Yet there is something, which gives solace to my sad mind,

Lest nec 2, 3. the black day should utterly press premit 2, 3. me down.

Ghent prepares her bosom, which quo 2, 3. fosters me with glad breast,

Invites, soothes, nourishes, loves, refreshes.

Here is Florbert, whom virtue adorns with flower,

For whom probity flowers, and flower thrives with probity.

Pattern of the flock, ornament of the church, concord of the brothers,

Himself physician to his own and medicine to himself.

Why should I tell the work of piety, that quo 5. while he fosters me,

A stranger, with glad addresses, he adds a burden.

It would suffice to have called Livinus a brother of brothers,

The name of pontiff and lord overburdens.

Having left my fatherland, the honour of mortal pomp

I spurned, I renounced: God is my one hope.

Yet I have found inveniet 3. : what he assiduously offers to Christ,

That I am thus a pauper, this hoc 3. will lessen nothing for him.

He furnishes something more to me absent by generous gift,

Present he fosters me with continual services.

And while I write these things, the hurrying driver of a little ass

Comes up to us, wearied, with the usual gift and weight.

He brings the delights of the country, butter with milk,

And eggs, and full baskets press upon little cheeses.

Hostess, why do you stay? Bustle forth your step now;

Gather riches, you who just now were poor.

The dry vegetable boils, but now it may be seasoned;

The little pot, hard before, greased will be sweet.

Holtham Holtem 2; Holtam 3. , heavy estate, you who know not how to yield fruit,

Why, though well tilled, do you return nettles, burrs?

This is what refreshes me, what alone the poor little hostess has,

Or what of good Ghent sends me.

And that pious father with his gifts sends soft words,

And solicits me with prayers to the pursuit:

And bids me mark great Bavo with an inscription,

And that light elegies be an ornament to the tomb.

Nor does he reckon, when the pipe shrills with split wood,

That a shaken one is accustomed to give back a hoarse sound;

The wave of a slight brook, which quem 2. a poor vein supplies,

Scarcely supplies thin waters opem vel aquas 2; opem 4. to the weary Casso 1. .

So I, who once, when my pursuit was in flower, seemed

To be a poet, now run on foot upon my horse;

And I who was said to be able, with Dictæan Dictriceo 2. verse,

To move the lyre wet from the Castalian fount,

Now the Camenæ dictate words to me in torn song,

And my grieving mind is not fit for glad measures.

I am not who I was, glad in festive song:

How could I be so, seeing bloody weapons?

Nor do I know what to do: this swelling timor 4. of an impudent mind,

Whom, I ask, would it not hurt, to be unwilling to give like for like?

For if I refuse to contend in equal office,

I sin, in that I delay to return small things for great.

For he grants great things mihi 2, 3. , who as a suppliant asks little things.

And yet I am found slow to the office.

I will gird myself to the pursuit, though not with equal strength:

Not to be able is light; not to have refused, good.

Therefore, writing an inscription for you, most holy Bavo,

I who wish what I cannot, do what I can.

Epitaph of St. Bavo, composed by the glorious martyr Blessed Livinus, sent for Florbert, abbot of the monastery of Ghent of this title 2 has only the first word; 3 omits the whole. .

You who were ruler of your fatherland, hope of the nation, glory of the kingdom,

First of the great, who just now were great:

Not because you were great does great glory make you blessed,

But glory despised makes you a great ornament.

For Christ poor, despised, worthless and needy,

You are et 4. now head and ornament to the servants famulus 1. of Christ.

You who, recalling a dead man, took away the rights of death morti 2, 3. ,

Showing indeed that the laws of heaven obey you.

The church which you founded, which holds you, illustrious Bavo,

Protect, holy one, by your merits.

These songs, father Florbert, I, Livinus, sending,

Have given a gift to have inscribed suscriptum 2. on the side:

That when that place shall be laid waste by ruin,

The overwhelmed stone may preserve those songs. [b]

ANNOTATED.

In our codex there is subjoined this annotation: This poem is not closed by this end, which that holy man unfolded in a hundred verses. The rest about the state of the Church, as it had been revealed to him, he wove together by prophesying: which lie hidden with his letter (B. letters); I do not know whether they will ever be able to be found. And in the Brux. in the margin there is noted besides in the same hand: These things from a certain old little book.

There will perhaps not be wanting those for whom these last verses make the authenticity of the whole poem suspect: who will also observe that in no codex certainly older than the 15th century has its text been preserved, but only in more recent copies.