Elfleda or Ethelfleda

ON ST. ELFLEDA OR ETHELFLEDA, WIDOW, AT GLASTONBURY IN ENGLAND,

ABOUT THE MIDDLE OF THE X CENTURY.

PRELIMINARY COMMENTARY.

Elfleda, widow, at Glastonbury. (S.)

BY J. V. H.

§ Sole. Distinction from her namesakes; her memory among the hagiologists; royal lineage; age; St. Dunstan vindicated from calumny.

St. Elfleda, distinguished from her namesakes, Three Saints of this name are venerated in England [Compare the Index of Saints of England, at the end, vol. III, Ecclesiastical Annals of England of Alford]: Elfleda the Virgin, abbess of the monastery of Streaneshalch, whose Acts our men edited at the 8th day of February Acta SS., vol. II of Feb., p. 178: Elfleda the Virgin, daughter of Edward the Elder, of whom treatment will be made on the day on which she is venerated, the 29th of October; and the third, Elfleda the Widow, is recorded by Alford in the Index of the Saints of England under the 13th day of April Alford, Index of Saints, under Elfleda; but according to another English Martyrology her feast is commemorated at the following 14th day of April British Martyrology, p. 65. Although these things are so, yet our predecessors judged that she should be omitted at the 13th day of April

the Acts of the holy matron, or at least that they should be put off to the 19th day of May, on which St. Dunstan was to be treated Acta SS., vol. II of Apr., p. 103: on which day again they thought they should keep silent, because they had read that she was not yet inscribed in the more ancient Calendars Ibid., vol. IV of May, p. 350. Yet the calendars of the Church of Winchester were at hand. For our Du Sollier shows in his Preface prefixed to Usuard, num. 253, that the Altemps Auctarium of Usuard formerly belonged to the Church of Winchester: since at the 30th day of October there is recorded the ordination of the most holy prelate and OUR patron Swithin, bishop of Winchester [Martyrology of Usuard, Preface, p. LXIII. Compare Acta SS., vol. I of July, p. 321]. Further, the Auctarium has at the 23rd of October: On the same day, of Saint Ethelfleda, queen. And certainly Alford and the English Martyrologist did not proceed to such a degree of folly as to record among the Saints of England at their pleasure persons whom they did not find consigned in the more ancient Calendars. For the rest, those things which the biographers of St. Dunstan narrate about the deeds of the holy matron are of such a kind as to bring on a great opinion of holiness. Next, in the sixteenth century, the ancestral religion having been abolished through the greatest part of England, many documents must necessarily have perished, especially those concerning the cult of the Saints. Finally what we protest at the head of the several volumes, let it avail here: nor let anyone attribute more credit to our writings than is due to history written by men liable to error. For which reason we judge it opportune to close this gap, of whatever kind, on the present day, on which the memory of St. Elfleda is renewed in certain Auctaria of Usuard.

[2] was a widow of royal blood, For St. Elfleda is mentioned under this 23rd day of October by the Auctaria of Usuard of Greven and Altemps and by Castellanus. The name of the Saint is written in various ways: Greven indeed less rightly calls her Ethelfreda; the Altemps Codex and the English Martyrology Ethelfleda; Castellanus Edeldreda; and Alford Elfleda, Ethel namely being contracted into El; which is native to the Teutonic tongues. Thus in our Flemish idiom we contract Edel into Eel, Neder into Neer, etc. So that Ethelfleda and Elfleda are one and the same name, the one more contracted than the other. But from these forms of the name Osbern, biographer of St. Dunstan, departs altogether, when he calls our Saint Elgiva Ibid., p. 363: for that each biographer of St. Dunstan treats of one and the same person, the very sequence of the narrative and what is specifically narrated demonstrate. Arthur du Monstier in his Gynecaeum announces the Saint in these words at the 13th day of April: In England, of Saint Elflida, Virgin, who, both illustrated by the signs of divine power, completed a most holy life by a most happy death. In which elogium the quality of Virgin, attributed to St. Elfleda, is faulty; since in the contemporary Life of St. Dunstan it is clearly indicated that she was a Widow, as one who after the loss of her husband desired to lead a widow's life to the measure of her strength. Although this seems able to be excused to some extent, since in certain particular liturgies all female Saints are recorded under Virgins, the name being taken as from the more worthy. Thus in the Lenten Litanies of the Breviary of Aberdeen there are counted among the Virgins Fol. verso lxx. VIII: SS. Mary Magdalene, Mary of Egypt, Margaret, Queen of the Scots. Which likewise occurs in other Litanies of the same liturgy.

[3] yet not a queen, Moreover the cited Auctaria of Usuard add to the name of St. Elfleda the quality of Queen. And indeed that she was sprung from royal blood we have from the biographers: but that she was a queen in the true sense of the name, whether by her own title or that of a husband, no monuments teach us. The chronological reckoning would sufficiently persuade that Ethelfleda, wife of Ethelred, earl of the Mercians, who after her husband's death ruled the Mercians, could come in here, and indeed since at her court, on the testimony of William of Malmesbury Savile, Writers, fol. 27, Athelstan was educated, whom our St. Elfleda received with a sumptuous banquet at Glastonbury, some weight seems to be added to this opinion. But Ethelfleda, wife of Ethelred, having died amid the cares of the realm, was buried at Gloucester in the year, as the Benedictine Chronologists have it L'art de vérifier les dates, 918, or as John Lingard History of England, vol. I, p. 128, Paris edition 1840, 920: and so a solid five years before St. Dunstan was born. From which it clearly follows that Ethelfleda of Mercia can in no way be confused with our St. Elfleda. But although we can assign to St. Elfleda no husband crowned with the royal diadem, yet there is no reason why we should adjudge the title of queen away from her. For in the time of the ancients all women begotten of royal blood were called queens: manifold examples of such a custom Du Cange brings forward in his Glossary under Regina; and among others there is recorded Matilda, queen by birth, wife of Guigues, count of Albon, who flourished in the eleventh century, who came from England Bourchenu, Histoire du Dauphiné, vol. II, p. 375, second edition. Rightly therefore, according to the custom of that age, the title of queen is attributed to St. Elfleda, whom a contemporary writer writes to have sprung from royal progeny.

[4] whose deeds the biographers of St. Dunstan report: What we know of St. Elfleda is to be derived from the Acts of St. Dunstan, first abbot of Glastonbury, then bishop of Worcester, and finally primate of Canterbury, given at the 19th day of May Acta SS., vol. IV of May, p. 344. Our men have edited and illustrated a double Life: the one contemporary, written by an eyewitness Ibid., loc. cit., the other put together by Osbern of Canterbury, a writer of the eleventh century Ibid., loc. cit.. From both Lives it is established that St. Elfleda, inasmuch as she employed St. Dunstan, while still abbot of Glastonbury, as arbiter of her conscience until her death, closed her last day before the year 957, in which he was consecrated bishop of Worcester. On the other hand, we know that the holy matron received at a banquet Athelstan, visiting the Relics of Glastonbury, who ended his life in the year 940. Indeed, as will be shown below, the holy matron received the king at Glastonbury in the year 929, Dunstan being scarcely five years old. For St. Dunstan, born during the rule of Athelstan, who began to reign in the year 925 Ibid., p. 347, was scarcely five years old when that king visited Glastonbury. For which reason the biographer Osbern spoke less accurately when he says at num. 1 that by the fame of St. Dunstan, then at the most five years old, St. Elfleda was roused to meet him. Who when she had heard a word from his mouth, was so delighted with the sweetness of eternal life that she chose neither to go back home nor to depart from the place any further, but to remain, live and die with blessed Dunstan. Accordingly setting up a dwelling for herself in the neighbourhood of the sacred temple, etc. And so the cause of her immigration to Glastonbury, in Osbern's judgement, was for St. Elfleda the holiness of Blessed Dunstan, five years old, as we have said: which indeed nobody will admit without a suitable witness. And indeed the earlier life, written by an eyewitness, has nothing similar: rather it insinuates that, before the very monastic profession of St. Dunstan, St. Elfleda already inhabited Glastonbury; which place in the time of St. Dunstan's adolescence was in no way deserted. For there is discourse in his earlier Life of a certain deacon of the church of Glastonbury, Wulfred, once a prelate and familiar lover of St. Dunstan, who was still limping between God and the world Ibid., p. 349.

[5] the age of St. Elfleda For that deacon, dying, appeared to Dunstan, who was still a secular, and gave a sign of his apparition, that burial at Glastonbury would be chosen by the master and priest of St. Elfleda, then, as the sequence of the discourse indicates, inhabiting the same place. Behold the words Ibid., loc. cit.: It happened that at the same times (St. Dunstan deliberating, namely, which of the two states he should take) a certain deacon of the church of Glastonbury, by name Wulfred, underwent temporal death: who, in the time while he lived, stood forth for Blessed Dunstan both as prelate and familiar lover. He then, not a very long time after his departure, appeared to him rejoicing, defining many unknown things concerning heavenly matters, and moreover also the whole sequence of his life, and of his future age, and the fates of good or evil events. And the blessed man, hearing such great lights of mysteries and such inevitable events of his life, said, placed in ecstasy of mind: If the things you affirm by sure report are true and to be believed, whence may I know? By what signs of open demonstration will these things be plain to me? And he led him into the court of the temple, where the bodies of the dead rest interred; and with his finger he pointed out in the southern part of the church an undisturbed place, and said: That these things which I have reported to you are true, know evidently, that in this place within three days a certain priest will be buried, and he is not yet ill: and his little body will be carried from the western part of the present temple to be entombed. At this voice of the vision Blessed Dunstan woke, and after the first hour of the day, mindful of the wonderful revelation, he came with certain persons to the place of the cemetery spiritually noted for him; and taking a single stone that could be thrown, he threw it at it, and added this: If the things I have seen in dreams are true, a certain priest must be interred here within three days. Further, as they were withdrawing, there came the master and priest of a certain Aethelfleda, a most noble and most religious matron, with another company of companions, and he obtained for himself, among some turns of speech, the same place for burial, saying: When I shall have died, here, I pray, bury me. He was indeed, on the testimony of many, still healthy in body. But when they had gone away from there after a little, he was laden with a grave disease of the end of life; then in the coming night he commended his last spirit to Christ the Lord, and within three days he was buried in the very place of his choice, which had first been assigned to Blessed Dunstan.

[6] from the words of the biographers Moreover, although St. Dunstan restored to the monastery of Glastonbury its former splendour, obscured by the calamity of the times, yet the memory of the place had remained celebrated. Of which thing we have as witness King Athelstan, from the year 925 to 940 [Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, after Bede, History of the English, p. 374 and 377, London edition 1849]: for he, as the earlier Life says at num. 2, came to Glastonbury for the sake of prayers, and after the celebrations of prayers and Masses he was received with a sumptuous banquet by St. Elfleda. Let us suppose, if you please, that Athelstan visited Glastonbury in the last year of his reign, or 940: St. Dunstan would still have reached the age of fifteen years, and so he was not then one to entice a most religious matron to conversation with him. For the rest, we have more certain things from Matthew of Westminster, whom I cite from Alford at the year 929, §2: In the year, he says, of grace nine hundred and twenty-nine Aethelstan, resolving to seek the Relics of the Saints of his realm for the sake of prayer, devoutly sought first of all the monastery of Glastonbury. And indeed then St. Dunstan was scarcely five years old. Opportunely, then, Alford, loc. cit., describing the state of the monastery of Glastonbury: That place, he says, was nearly abandoned by the monks who had lived there for many centuries: some Irishmen, giving their work to the instruction of boys, of the monastery

inhabited the rubble. Yet the ancient sanctity of the monastery could not be obliterated. Whence those who were zealous to live more secretly and to prepare themselves for heaven had chosen that place for their silence and quiet Compare Lanigan, Ecclesiastical History of Ireland, vol. I, p. 329. Among those who procured for themselves the quiet of solitude at Glastonbury St. Elfleda comes to be recalled: without our being able to define by any indication at what time she began that holier kind of life. Certainly if the Saint's husband and his death were indicated by any monument, there would be an argument by which the chronotaxis of St. Elfleda could be ordered more accurately. This however should remain unshaken, that the holy matron inhabited Glastonbury long before the monastic profession of St. Dunstan.

[7] is defined after a fashion: That St. Elfleda died in a good old age is sufficiently indicated by the words of the biographer Osbern saying at num. 1: Leaning on the hands of her people she approached the man of God (Dunstan), desiring to enjoy his most holy conversation. But the year of the Saint's death can scarcely be defined closely. This we know, that St. Dunstan was established as abbot at Glastonbury in the year 944, as is plain from a diploma of St. Edmund I, king and Martyr, edited by Alford at the year 944, § IV, and that he presided over the monastery until the year 955, on the testimony of Alford at the said year, § XI: so that the year of St. Elfleda's death must be established between these limits. Accordingly the opinion of the English Martyrology, determining that the Saint died in the year 936 (Alford at this year, § V), must altogether be rejected: for then St. Dunstan would have scarcely reached the age of eleven years, which can in no way be reconciled with the deeds of the holy matron. For which reason Alford prolongs the Saint's life to the year 947, as is had in the same place, § XVI. If the learned writer had confirmed his opinion by some document, we would gladly embrace it: but it must be held as a prodigy that a religious woman, advanced in age, who had not hitherto lacked arbiters of her conscience, immediately attributed so much confidence to a youth, however most holy, but twenty-two years old, that she placed all her goods and herself at his discretion. On that account I would believe that the death of St. Elfleda occurred more truly after than before the fiftieth year of the tenth century. Accordingly, since the limit of opining is free, I have preferred at the head of this Commentary to ascribe the Saint's death to about the middle of the tenth century.

[8] and of her later master, And these are about the things we have to say about St. Elfleda. Yet we judge it opportune, since we have had such frequent discourse of St. Dunstan, to wash away an accusation not excused by our men in the Acts at the 19th of May, and objected to St. Dunstan by certain non-Catholics, as if by a perfidious machination he had thrown his adversaries headlong into ruin. The matter is narrated by William of Malmesbury, On the Deeds of the Kings of the English, book II, chap. 9 In Savile, Rerum Anglicarum Scriptores, fol. verso 33, from which it can be judged of how much credit the accusation is: Edgar having died, the clerics, once expelled from the churches, raised up battles revived, saying that it was a huge and miserable disgrace that a new stranger should compel the old settlers to migrate; that this was not thought pleasing to God, who had granted the old dwelling, nor to any upright man, who might fear for himself what he saw happen to others instead of judgement. On this matter there was a rising in clamours and anger, and there was a going on to Dunstan, the nobles especially, as is the way of laymen, shouting that the prejudice which the clerics had unjustly suffered ought to be cut down by a more lenient council. For one of them too, Elfer, overturned, using great insolence, nearly all the monasteries which the most reverend Aethelwold, monk and bishop of Winchester, had constructed in the province of the Mercians. And so, a crowded synod being assembled, they came first to Winchester. What the end of the contest was there, other writings teach, that an image of the Lord, speaking expressly, confounded the clerics and their supporters: but the spirits being not yet quieted, a council was proclaimed at Calne: where when, in the upper room, the king being absent on account of his age, the senators of all England sitting together, the matter was being transacted with great conflict and controversy, and the javelins of many insults assailed that most powerful wall of the Church, Dunstan I mean, and did not shake him, men of each order protecting their side with the highest zeal, the whole upper floor with its planks and beams suddenly flew apart and collapsed, all being crushed to the ground; Dunstan alone, standing on one beam which survived, escaped well. The rest were either killed or held in the fetter of perpetual languor. This miracle showed the archbishop peace concerning the clerics, all the English then and thereafter yielding to his opinion.

[9] as if by the fraud and deceit of St. Dunstan Behold the history: now let us consider the interpretations of the non-Catholics. William Parker, father of the present Anglican Church, first, as it seems, said that the ruin of Calne could not have lacked human fraud and diabolical help In Lingard, Antiquités de l'Eglise Anglo-Saxonne, p. 517, Paris edition 1828. David Hume in his History of England, chap. II, interprets the matter in the following way: More terrible was the miracle done in the third synod. For the floor of the place in which they had assembled suddenly fell headlong, and most of those present were either wounded or killed. It was observed that Dunstan had taken care that the king should be absent from the assembly on that day, and that the archiepiscopal seat had been placed on the only beam which remained unmoved. But without any suspicion of fraud arising, they interpreted the circumstances of the deed as a manifest intercession of divine power, wishing to favour its friends. Thus the writer, who then subjoins an observation at the foot of the page: As often, he says, as similar narratives occur in ancient writers, one of two things is to be judged: either that later monks invented such portents, or, if they are contemporary, that they deceitfully prepared them, so as to impose upon the vile common people. To these accusations Sharon Turner adds his vote in his History of the Anglo-Saxons, and to make the accusation firm he alleges the following from the biographer Osbern Acta SS., vol. IV of May, p. 372: And while these adversaries lived, there was a cessation from contentions, until by the succession of sons the former discord was renewed. Who going off, and taking up as defender of their iniquity Heornelmus, a pontiff of the Scots, a man namely unconquerable both in talent and in loquacity, made for the man of God at the estate which is called Calne; with swelling spirit they propose the scandal. Dunstan however, broken indeed by long old age and by great labours for the Church, had now put everything behind his back except prayer. Yet the wicked party, once conquered by a divine miracle, lest it should now glory about obtaining victory, he hurled this javelin of response against the enemies: Since, he said, so much time having elapsed, you did not put forward a handle for calumny, and now strive to serve the old complaints while I am growing old and giving my work to silence: I confess, I do not wish you to win: I commit the cause of his Church to Christ the judge. He spoke, and what he spoke the censure of the angry God confirmed. For straightway the house was shaken, the upper room loosed under their feet, the enemies thrown headlong to the ground and crushed by the weight of the falling beams. But where the Saint lay with his followers, there no sinking of ruin took place.

[10] had destroyed his adversaries, Thus far Osbern: to whom, reporting the speech of St. Dunstan, the cited Turner contends that all credit is to be given, the authority of other biographers being also compared History of the Anglo-Saxons, vol. II, p. 175, Paris edition 1840. Further, from the narrative of Osbern he constructs the following argument at the end of book VI, chap. 7 Ibid., p. 176. The speech of Dunstan insinuates that he was in expectation of some extraordinary event which would favour his opinion: his own preservation and that of his followers is such that Dunstan must have foreknown what was going to happen; and so the sudden calamity cannot be ascribed to a chance event. And such foreknowledge must be ascribed either to miracle or to fraud: for the ruin of the upper floor on which the adversaries were standing, the part occupied by Dunstan and his followers remaining unmoved, prevents the ruin from being attributed to a natural accident: but his very speech attributes a foreknowledge which gives the writer authority to expose Dunstan as guilty of a crime prepared and perpetrated. Personal foresight, which warrants an historian for connecting him with the planning and with the perpetration of the crime. And why, in Turner's judgement, chance being set aside, the crime is to be thrust on St. Dunstan, is this: because no credit is to be given to monks narrating miracles: which he then confirms by adducing examples of Catholic hagiographers, even of St. Gregory the Great. It remains, then, that the ruin of Calne, which crushed nearly all the nobles of England, should be imputed to the crime of Dunstan alone. And hence it follows that non-Catholics hold the Catholic Church more and more hateful, as ordering the veneration of most criminal men.

[11] [from the accusations But in the first place Turner dismisses chance with too light a hand, as if the address of St. Dunstan insinuated the contrary, namely that he foresaw the ruin of the upper floor and the calamity of his adversaries. But to one examining the speech of St. Dunstan no foresight of the future occurs. An old man, broken by labours, pursuing the quiet of solitude, refuses to renew battles of words; I confess, he says, I do not wish you to win: I commit the cause of his Church to Christ the judge. By these words it is in no way indicated that St. Dunstan foreknew the future ruin, so that it could not be ascribed to chance. St. Dunstan could even appeal to Christ the judge, as is often done by those ignorant of the future: and so, since it remains uncertain whether he brought forth these words foreknowing or unknowing, Turner's argumentation, setting aside chance, in no way binds. And as for the king not being present, as if St. Dunstan had deliberately taken care that he should be absent, this again is gratuitously affirmed, no suitable witness being adduced. Certainly Malmesbury, cited at num. 8, says that the king was absent on account of his age. Next, even granting a fraud prepared by Dunstan, there was no cause why the king should not attend the assembly with the magnates: since Dunstan with his followers exempted himself from the prepared snares, he could also have kept the king present safe; indeed, since by the author Dunstan everything had been prepared for the crime against the adversaries, and sure safety for himself, the king must necessarily have escaped the calamity: nothing certainly stood in the way, indeed everything persuaded that the king should be placed beside Dunstan, certainly safe. There can therefore be nothing of suspicion in the absence of the king, which Turner yet attempts to expose as invidious.

[12] of non-Catholics, Finally Malmesbury and Osbern do not agree between themselves. For the former says that Dunstan alone, standing on one beam which survived, escaped well: but Osbern affirms that Dunstan with his followers escaped the calamity, and so not one, but several beams remained unmoved. Which reading should be preferred could be inquired. Turner prefers Osbern's; nor shall I deny it. The complaints were brought forward in the public assemblies of the realm, which, on the testimony of Turner, book VIII, chap. 6 History of the Anglo-Saxons, vol. III, p. 130, consisted of clergy and free men, among whom there were certainly some friends of Dunstan. If then Dunstan, not alone, but with his followers escaped the danger; they must necessarily have been warned beforehand not to occupy the ruinous part of the upper floor, and so to have been aware of the contrived deed

and accomplices. Let Turner further see how this conspiracy can stand with true, I do not say religion, but natural probity, and how black a brand of infamy he burns upon his Anglo-Saxon forefathers, of whom no moderate part set their hands to so great a crime and so great a ruin. But if for discussing such difficulties the reading of Malmesbury be accepted, teaching that Dunstan alone, standing on one beam, was safe, we run upon difficulties by no means lesser; namely that Dunstan destroyed friends too together with enemies, and placed his own safety in doubt, inasmuch as it depended on a single beam, all the rest falling. Certainly nobody would dare to accuse a common man with such subtleties. By what right, then, may a brand of infamy be burned upon a man whom through six continuous centuries all who have treated of him have venerated? Or because as bishop he spread the monastic institute through England, can the ruin of Calne be attributed neither to chance nor to miracle? Certainly deceit or criminal machines were unknown to the Centuriators of Magdeburg, who say that Dunstan effected this by magical sleights and diabolical clemency Vol. X, col. 455, Basel edition 1567: a slaughter prepared by human help seemed absurd; and to avoid God, they applied the demon. For the rest, the same argument has been treated by John Lingard in the Antiquities of the Anglo-Saxon Church Antiquités de l'Eglise Anglo-Saxonne, p. 515, Paris edition 1828 and Charles Butler in his apologetic letters Migne, Démonstrations évangéliques, vol. XII, col. 230, who may be approached, if you please.

[13] changing the state of the question. The cause, further, of the enmity and discord which blazed up between St. Dunstan and his adversaries was that the secular clergy, expelled from their seats, which monks occupied, were of most corrupt morals, and were driving the faithful to destruction and ruin. To meet so great an evil, Dunstan and other bishops, fortified by pontifical and royal authority, the evil clerics being rejected, brought monks into the churches. But non-Catholic writers put another face on the controversy. They say, namely, that the question was whether clerics placed in sacred orders could enjoy lawful marriage; or whether they ought to lead a celibate life perpetually. But by no ancient, suitable testimony are we taught that such a question was proposed and brought back to the balance, and thus decided in either direction. On the contrary there are many documents among the ancients which show that there was then in the secular clergy the greatest both corruption of morals and ignorance of discipline Lingard, Antiquités, p. 464. Of which thing we have a witness greater than all exception, Pope John XIII, who writes to King Edgar Migne, Patrology, vol. CXXXV, col. 985: Wherefore, renowned king and dearest son, what your excellency through our brother and fellow bishop Dunstan requests from this apostolic see, over which we, though unworthy, preside, we grant in every way: sanctioning by apostolic authority that from the monastery in the city of Winchester, constructed in honour of the Holy Trinity and of the most blessed Apostles Peter and Paul, which is surnamed old, to differentiate it from that monastery which is near, the canons, hateful to the lord bishop and all worshippers of the Catholic faith from the open foulnesses of their faults, and unashamedly persisting in the same according to their impenitent heart, with their provost, as vessels of the devil, be cast out. And as your sublimity desires, let our most beloved brother and fellow bishop Ethelwold, thoroughly imbued with regular disciplines, nourish a flock of monks living according to the precepts of the rule, and establish for them a perpetual dwelling there. And let him so adorn their life with morals of sanctity that, when the shepherd is called to the reward of labour, another may succeed to the place of rule from nowhere other than from that congregation. About the same time, or at the end of the ninth century, Fulk, archbishop of Reims, as Flodoard has it, History of the Church of Reims, book IV, chap. 5 Ibid., col. 278, congratulates Alfred, king of the English, whom he calls Albradus, that he was busying himself to cut off with the sword of the word a most perverse sect, risen from pagan errors and left until then in that people. Which sect seemed to suggest that bishops and presbyters should have women brought in; and that whoever wished should approach his female relatives also; moreover should defile women consecrated to God; and, having a wife, should have a concubine at the same time. These corruptions of doctrine and morals had namely grown up in the long-continued time of the Danish devastation, and had left no hope of amendment, unless regular should succeed secular clergy. Which St. Dunstan accomplished with great benefit to all England: hence the angers: because he kept sacred celibacy intact, and rooted out the adulterous marriages of clerics.

[14] his acts are vindicated. So far of St. Dunstan. From whose Acts we extract those things which are reported of St. Elfleda. Further, we have two Lives of St. Dunstan: one by an anonymous man, a presbyter and monk, a witness not only contemporary but ocular; the other by Osbern, monk of Canterbury, a writer of the eleventh century. But the anonymous man whom our men have called an eyewitness Acta SS., vol. IV of May, p. 544, Mabillon in his Annals, book L, num. 1, calls Bridferth, and indeed he asserts that he was a monk of Ramsey, to whom Rémi Ceillier has assented Histoire générale des auteurs ecclésiastiques, vol. XX, p. 94. It is true indeed that the name of this biographer has the initial letter B: but what is beyond is conjecture, as Henry Wharton notes in Anglia Sacra Vol. II, Preface, p. IX: That the author of the Life of St. Dunstan was Bridferth, monk of Ramsey, disciple of Abbo, Mabillon conjectures. Bridferth indeed Bale praises, and reports that he was contemporary with Dunstan: but he by no means mentions a Life of Dunstan written by him. Indeed I consider that Mabillon relied on conjecture alone, because he confirms his opinion by no argument, and would not have omitted it if he had had any. For the rest, for our matter the question is not of great moment, since it suffices to know that the biographer was a witness of the things narrated, as one who unfolds what he himself saw or heard Acta SS., vol. IV of May, p. 344. Equal is the credit of Osbern, who closely follows the eyewitness in what he reports of St. Elfleda.

EARLIER LIFE OF ST. ELFLEDA, WIDOW, BY AN ANONYMOUS MONK,

Extracted from the Life of St. Dunstan in the Acta Sanctorum, vol. IV of May.

Elfleda, widow, at Glastonbury. (S.)

BY A CONTEMPORARY MONK.

St. Elfleda, a royal matron. There was a certain very rich matron, sprung from royal progeny, but bound with the tight knots of divine religion ^a, whose name we have recently touched on in a brief touch of mention ^b. She, after the loss of her husband, desiring to lead a widow's life to the measure of her strength, set up for herself little houses for dwelling in the neighbourhood of the sacred temple on the western side, so that for desire of the heavenly kingdom she should not cease to serve the Lord Jesus Christ there day and night. And to her blessed Dunstan always adhered, who loved her in wonderful ways above others, and, for the cause of religion and at the same time of kinship, relieved her want ^c. It is not within our possibility to narrate in individual turns of words of what sort or how great she prepared herself in the divine services. Yet the Lord, the inspector of all secrets, both in the last times of her goal and while she lived in this world, declared of what merit she was.

[2] receives King Athelstan at a banquet; She then loved with inmost burning of charity all the royal seed from which she drew the origin of her nobility: and therefore, for the sake of sweetness, she often ministered to the kings from her goods. From this pious custom, then, she prepared a meal such as she could, coming to meet the glorious King Aethelstan ^d; because she knew beforehand that he had come for the sake of prayers to Glastonbury ^e, ^f. And the providers of the royal service, knowing that the king had given to his niece ^g the promise of turning aside to her, came on the preceding day to see whether all the services of preparations were fit or suitable. And having looked at everything they said to her: You have the whole sufficiency of the service, if the liquor of mead ^h does not fail you. And she said: May my Lady, the Holy Mother of my Lord Jesus Christ, Mary, not permit that it or anything should fail me for the royal dignity. And saying this, she entered as quickly as possible the ancient church of the Mother of God ⁱ, and prostrated herself to entreat, long begging that the most opulent supply of the supernal King should be at hand for her, for increasing the king's service. What then? The king came, surrounded by a great company, at the time fixed; and after the celebrations of prayers and Masses, glad he entered the meal to which he was invited. And then indeed at the first drinking they drained that vessel of mead down to the measure of one palm: and thus afterwards, God increasing it and the Blessed matron meriting it, it stood lessening nothing, the cupbearers, as is customary at royal banquets, with cut horns ^k and other vessels of indiscreet quantity drinking the whole day. When the king himself heard this wonderful deed by report of those serving, changed in mind he said to his followers: We have sinned, weighing down this handmaid of God too greatly with the superfluity of our multitude. And rising, his niece being saluted, he went on his way.

[4] advances in virtues under Dunstan, This handmaid of God, the course of the blessed contest being finished, the end now drawing near, began to be gravely ill by human right: to whom Blessed Dunstan showed skilled care of providing, and guarded her uniquely as his own mother. It happened that, these cares hindering him, he was absent at the evening hours, and was not with the singing bands according to custom: yet at the very twilight of the finished day, with the scholars following him, he went to the church, already locked, to complete the delayed Office. And while he stood outside before the door of the church for the sake of psalm-singing, he saw far off, breaking forth from the regions of the eastern sky, a snow-white dove, shining with wonderful beauty and new appearance. And the extremities of its wings were like sparkling fire, from which lightning-like flights, the feathers striking, were poured scattered through the air; and it flew in swift course to the courts of the blessed matron. And Blessed Dunstan, not unmindful of his sick friend, immediately, the psalmody being completed, returned; and coming he heard her, within the enclosure of her veils ^l, discoursing in serious speech, as if with some familiar friend, with alternation of words. He approached, then, courteously the handmaids sitting by, watchers of their lady; and wondering with whom she was speaking, he asked. And they said that they did not know. But before you came, they said, a beam of immense splendour, shining, filled this whole chamber: and afterwards, the light ceasing, she herself, as you yourself now hear, has not ceased to speak with one speaking.

[5] and dies holily. Then indeed he also gradually sat down watching, until she in some manner rested from speaking. And when she had also rested from speech, straightway, the folds of the veils being thrown back, he went in to her, and familiarly asked her with whom she was speaking. And she said to him: You too saw him coming, before you came here, and now do you ask with whom I have spoken? For he was speaking with me who appeared to you singing psalms, while you were standing before the door of the church, who also to me just now

announced in order the whole account of my departure. Yet for you my friends there is no great need to be saddened about me, since the mercy of my God has come to meet me as I die, and will mercifully grant me to enter the joys of paradise. And on you, as the minister of a singular friend, I lay this work, that you too in good time in the morning have baths ^m hurried for me, and prepare the funeral garments which I shall have with me, and after the washing of the body celebrate Masses, and soon at the time of participation of the sacred Blood and Body of Our Lord Jesus Christ receive communion, that thus at the same moment, the Lord leading, I may walk the way of all nations. Which he most urgently fulfilled, obeying in all things the precepts of the blessed matron, lest he should commit to torpid care the last custody of her foresight, submitted also to the tedium of delay. And she too, what had been shown her about herself in the night as going to be on this day, fulfilled in the order in which she had foretold, most certainly: so, I say, that after the mystery of the Mass, after the most saving taste of the Eucharist, she herself, likewise with the finished Mass, ended a happy life in the Lord Jesus Christ.

Then the exulting provider committed the soul with its neighbouring lot To the Lord, entombing the corpse in honour, And gives her goods to the Saints, as she herself had previously wished While she lived in the body. And the free follower also departed, Hoping this, that she may rest in the sweetness of the Lord.

ANNOTATIONS.

SECOND LIFE OF ST. ELFLEDA, WIDOW, BY OSBERN, MONK OF CANTERBURY,

Extracted from the Life of St. Dunstan in the Acta Sanctorum, vol. IV of May, collated with the editions of Mabillon and Wharton.

Elfleda, widow, at Glastonbury. (S.)

BY OSBERN.

St. Elfleda has St. Dunstan as master; The fame of his name (Dunstan's) ran through the whole region, which kindled the hearts of all to visit the man of God. Every age, both sexes, the renowned and the ignoble, the poor and the moneyed, the private citizen and the man in power, all altogether spoke of Dunstan, proclaimed his wisdom, magnified his virtue. A certain woman, by name Elgive ^b *, sprung from royal progeny, of great riches, who had always loved, cherished and nourished the whole royal seed with maternal affection, leaning on the hands of her people approached the man of God, desiring to enjoy his most holy conversation ^c. Who when she had heard a word from his mouth, was so delighted with the sweetness of eternal life that she chose neither to go back home nor to depart from the place any further, but to remain, live and die with Blessed Dunstan. Accordingly setting up a dwelling for herself in the neighbourhood of the sacred temple, she assiduously attended to hearing the word of God, gave a stipend to the hungry, clothing to the cold, gave her work herself to much continence, and stood forth altogether most prompt for every work of justice. In the veneration of the Blessed Virgin Mary she was so fervent that in her temple she placed very many men of sacred Order, to whom she herself by her liberality furnished whatever things were necessary. In which matter so far did her merits avail with the same Virgin that if at any time, compelled by necessity, she asked for anything, scarcely any little delay intervening, she received it from her.

[2] receives Athelstan; For that without tedium to readers I may make a slight digression from what was begun (for it does not deviate much from the matter we hold), when at a certain time the aforesaid king (Athelstan) had come to Glastonbury on account of the religion of the place, she, wishing to preserve the old custom by which she was accustomed to minister to kings, begged him to turn aside to her, and graciously to receive the meal which she had prepared for him. Which the king granting, not without shame (for he was not ignorant of what she spent on the poor of Christ), ordered the providers of the royal service to find out whether everything had been fitly and moderately prepared. And they, having looked around at everything, reported that everything was in abundance, if only they had sufficiency of that drink which is made with a sprinkling of honey and myrtle. To whom she said: May my Lady, the Mother of my Lord Jesus Christ, Mary, not permit that in all the things which befit royal magnificence anything should be able to be lacking. And running into the temple of the most blessed Virgin, she begged that through her bounteous goodness there might be increased what seemed to be held too little in the royal service. So the king sat, surrounded by a great escort; the servants drew that moderate amount of made liquor; the little vessel remained so undiminished that you would have thought it the Sareptan woman's jar of flour or cruse of oil. Finally the whole day they drew from the little vessel, and nevertheless the whole day they found it inexhaustible ^d. At which deed the king, changed in mind, said: We have sinned too greatly against the handmaid of God, weighing her down by the superfluity of our multitude. So he said: after speaking he turned away his face: he departed by the way by which he had begun.

[3] near to death, her goods But now, to attain what we have undertaken, the glorious contest of her labours being finished, this same woman began to labour under a grave infirmity of body. And when the grieving father Dunstan went in to her, after most abundant floods of mutual tears, after the most humble devotion of a pious confession, after the sweetest consolation about the blessed hope and the coming of the Lord Saviour, he exhorted her to make herself naked of every worldly appearance, lest the prince of the world should find anything of his own in her as she passed. To whom she said: I have nobody in the world so dear as you; for that reason, because I know you to be the principal author of my salvation, saving that Almighty God of all goodness

I believe to hold the primacy. Him therefore I make the heir of my goods, and you I appoint the guardian of the inheritance, so that whatever you know him to wish, it may be of your decision to bring to effect. Hearing which Blessed Dunstan, and wishing, though unwilling, to comply with her will, immediately paid out to the poor all her treasures which could remain in movable goods; and the rest he reserved for the relief of churches.

[4] leaves them to pious causes, and dies holily. Then the sun was verging to its setting, and Dunstan, fleeing the darkness of night, returned to his cell. And behold, as he passed the door of the church singing psalms, his eyes raised to heaven, he saw the coeternal Spirit of Almighty God the Father and of the Son descending in the appearance of a dove, whose body was brighter than all whiteness, and the oarage of whose wings scattered through the air the splendour of sparkling fire. Which that then truly blessed man, contemplating with the pious eagerness of his mind, saw entering that inner room of the dying matron. Quickly then returning whence he had come, he saw the house shining with the brightness of divine splendour, and heard the woman, within the enclosure of the spread veil, giving thanks; he wondered at the conversation, and as a patient hearer awaited the end of speaking. Then, the (veil) being raised, he entered the inner room; he sought the name of that star-bearing one, asked about the messenger. She, bathed with a certain excellent grace of countenance, modestly smiling, said: You saw the star-bearing one before you came here, and now do you ask to whom I have spoken? It is he who appeared to you singing psalms at the door of the church, who also deigned to console me, terrified by the dread of imminent death, by the grace of his visitation: I announce therefore to all my friends that there is no need to be sad about my death, since the brightness of eternal life will receive me dying. And to you, a dearest and singular friend, I render abundant thanks, because, always instructed by your admonitions and helped by your prayers, behold I go to God. One thing, and the last, if I may dare to say so, I give you as a command, that at earliest dawn you make me a sharer of the sacred Blood and of the Lord's Body, so that, fortified by the life-giving mysteries ^e, I may not be confounded in the gate, when I shall have spoken there to my enemies. Granting whose command the venerable father Dunstan went away: in the morning he returned according to the agreement, and so performed everything, that when the Mass was nearly finished, when she had received the Body and Blood of Christ, she at the same time handed over her soul to Christ. She being honourably buried in the church of Blessed Mary, Dunstan, anxious both about her patrimony and about his own (for both parents had died, nor had they left any other heir than him), first indeed endowed the same church with the nearer lands which were in the whole patrimony; and the others he reserved for founding five monasteries, separated from one another according to the site of the lands. Which monasteries in the times of the following kings were so increased by his industry that in each there were crowds of very many monks, who all lived according to the Rule instituted by the same father.

ANNOTATIONS.

* Elgifa M, Ettellgifu W

* W

* of unction M. W.