Gauzlinus

ON ST. GAUZLINUS, BISHOP,

OF TOUL OF THE LEUCI IN LORRAINE

In the year CMLXII.

PREVIOUS COMMENTARY.

Gauzlinus, bishop and confessor of Toul of the Leuci in Lorraine (S.)

BY J. S.

§ I. The illustrious elogia of St. Gauzlinus: a revelation about his glory in heaven: his memory in the Calendars and his ancient cult.

The name of St. Gauzlinus I find written very variously. For sometimes we read it written Gauzelinus, more often Gauzlinus, sometimes again Gozlinus, nay and Gorlinus: others have changed the letter z into s, and have said Gauselinus, or Gauslinus and Goslinus. That this Man was distinguished by excellent virtues, and illustrious for sanctity of life, The Saint adorned with illustrious elogia is first gathered from the illustrious elogia with which contemporary writers, and those nearly contemporary and a little more removed, adorned him. Adso, abbot of Montier-en-Der, who while St. Gauzlinus was alive dwelt at Toul in the monastery of St. Apre, in the Life of St. Mansuetus, given among us in tome 1 of September, book 2, chapter 1, number 31, thus proclaims Gauzlinus: Meanwhile, a long series of times having also rolled by, after Drogo the renowned bishop of the city of the Leuci, the lord Goslinus, sprung of most noble Frankish birth, conspicuous for piety and religion, exceedingly learned in the studies of letters, being chosen by God's providence, was ordained pontiff in this see. Who, diligently instructing the clergy, gathering prudent men from every quarter, increased the city in goods, adorned it with wisdom, and fortified it with provident stewardship. The rest, to be given in its own place, I here pass over.

[2] The second contemporary author is John, abbot of St. Arnulf of Metz, by contemporary writers: when after his death certain men detracted from him, who wrote the Life of Bl. John abbot of Gorze, published among us in tome III of February. By him, in chapter 4, page 695, our Saint is called the venerable Man Gauzlinus, truly memorable in works of mercy. A third coeval writer, or rather nearly coeval, is Widric abbot of St. Apre, who wrote the Life of St. Gerard, bishop of Toul and successor of St. Gauzlinus, given among us in tome III of April, page 206 and following. He, being about to relate the election of St. Gerard, prefaces these words about Gauzlinus at number 4: Meanwhile, the lord Gauzelinus, pontiff of the see of Toul, being taken away from human affairs — who, illustrious in holiness of manners, has been received, as we believe, into the fellowship of the angels in heaven — the people of the Leuci grieved heavily, bereft of the solace of so great a Pastor. More elogia will be recited in the course of the work. Yet that there were not wanting certain rivals who detracted from the glory of St. Gauzlinus the same author observes, narrating a revelation made to St. Gerard on that occasion, in these words in the same place at number 23: The Almighty also often declared to him the hidden judgments of his counsels, and as to an inmost confidant most certainly revealed the secrets of his dispensation. For the whispering of evil-speakers detracted from his predecessor the lord bishop Gauzelinus (as very many of our time are ready with a nimble mouth to detract rather than to praise), saying that he had greatly strayed from the path of religion, and had by no means slightly gone astray through the erring courses of a secular life. Which hateful opinion advanced so far that it beat upon the ears of this holy prelate.

[3] his heavenly glory is said to have been revealed to St. Gerard the bishop: But he, that he might not hear the wicked word of detraction, hedged his ears with the thorns of divine reading. Then, being neither in the least credulous of such sayings, nor altogether doubtful, he determined to entreat for him the pious clemency of the Creator more attentively, that the Lord would deign to make known to him whether the Bishop, being dead, rejoiced in the beatitude of heavenly rest. In secret therefore he alone fulfils an unwearied three days' fast, with sobbing and groaning pours forth a fountain of tears, passes long spaces in vigils and prayers, and macerates his fainting stomach with continual fasting. At length, the abstinence of the three days' time being run out, he is visited from heaven with a gracious revelation, and by heavenly grace learns of what merit the Man was for whom he had asked. For it is intimated to him as undoubtedly shown beforehand by Christ that the aforenamed Pontiff was crowned with the perpetual felicity of heavenly fellowship, and made equal to the glory and merits of the venerable martyr Apollinaris. Nor indeed let this seem in any way incredible to anyone who weighs that he laboriously and not uselessly sweated in building the monastery of Bouxières : whose merit and crown is without hesitation believed to be whatever is there performed by those chastely and religiously serving Christ. Thus a contemporary writer on the testimony of St. Gerard himself, who calls Gauzlinus bishop of holy memory in the letter to be praised below at number 58.

[4] another elogium, in which the Saint's cult seems to be asserted by Adso; I add another elogium from Adso praised above, who in the Miracles of St. Mansuetus, number 41, so celebrates Gauzlinus that one might believe that he was already then venerated, if one should consider the words less attentively. But, he says, the oft-named lord Goslinus the bishop, of glorious and happy memory for ever, approved by pious and most holy works, full of days and of the marks of good virtues, completing the times of his life, with great grief and mourning of all, in the forty-fourth year of his ordination, being carried by clergy and people to the monastery of Bouxières, which he himself had long before built from the foundations, received a most worthy burial, as he had commanded while living, among the choirs of virgins, of whom he had gathered there a considerable number of a stricter life, to be honored through long ages in the praises of God. Whose day of deposition is kept on the VII Ides of September, under the patronage of the Mother of God and ever Virgin Mary, abiding for ever.

[5] but those words seem afterwards added, or to be expounded What is here said about the day of deposition was perhaps added afterwards to Adso's little work, or at least does not seem to be understood of an ecclesiastical Office in honor of St. Gauzlinus already then celebrated; but only of the anniversary memory of the dead Prelate; since neither Adso nor any other writer of those times honored Gauzlinus with the title of Blessed or Saint; and not a few other things persuade us that the Saint's cult by an ecclesiastical Office was not so quickly begun. Yet perhaps the Saint's memory and day of death were already then in some veneration. For it is certain that some sort of veneration of St. Gauzlinus is very ancient. We have an anonymous manuscript Breviary with a Calendar prefixed, which seems to be of Toul, because in the month of September alone it has four bishops of Toul, and of these two noted in red letters, namely SS. Mansuetus and Apre, whose offices are found in the Breviary.

[6] And in this Calendar on the VII day of September the memory of St. Gauzlinus is announced in these words: of a cult not strictly so called. Of Gauzlinus bishop of Toul. Yet there is no Office of Gauzlinus in the Breviary itself; perhaps because an office of him was not yet said throughout the whole diocese, but was celebrated only in some particular church; or also because no Office of Gauzlinus was said when that Calendar was composed. Whatever be the case, the Calendar appears very ancient, since in it I find few Saints younger than Gauzlinus: such are St. Gerard his successor, placed in the catalogue of the Saints in the eleventh century by St. Leo IX the Pope, and this same Leo IX. The Office of Gerard is not yet found in that Breviary, but was afterwards added to it by another hand. Wherefore the praised Calendar does not seem to have been composed after the twelfth century, or at least the thirteenth; and from that time, or even already before, St. Gauzlinus seems to have been venerated. Perhaps St. Gerard himself took care that the name of St. Gauzlinus should be added to the Calendar, after his heavenly glory had been revealed to him.

[7] But whatever be the case with the cult of St. Gauzlinus at the end of the tenth century, and in the centuries next following, yet the Saint's cult is sufficiently ancient: his memory in the Martyrologies: and of whatever sort it was in those times; the cult of today, and that sufficiently ancient, is established from the Breviary of Toul of the year 1535, which at the end for the VII day of September has an Office of nine lessons, which are all from the life of St. Gauzlinus, but very short. Greven at the same day announces Gauzlinus, with the name somewhat corrupted, thus: Likewise of Gorlinus, of holy memory, bishop of Toul and confessor, of whom it is said in the Deeds of Bl. Mansuetus that he was approved by pious and most holy works. Likewise at Toul Gauzlinus the bishop is recorded at this day by Ferrarius in the General Catalogue, by Saussay in the Supplement of the Gallican Martyrology, and by Castellanus in the Universal Martyrology; to whom is added the Parisian Martyrology, which has it thus: At Toul of the Leuci, of St. Gauzelinus the bishop. I cannot doubt that the same Saint is designated in the German Martyrology of Canisius, where he is called Gorlinus, although his episcopal city is written in German Doll. Ferrarius in his Annotations on Gauselinus rightly hints this very thing in these words: He is thought to be called Gorlinus in Canisius; but he wrongly adds: Who is said to have lived under king Dagobert, since Gauzlinus or Gorlinus is three centuries later than Dagobert.

[8] Moreover, notwithstanding the annotation given, the same Ferrarius made two holy bishops out of one: The Saint divided by some into two. for Gauselinus, as I said, he attributes to Toul, but Gorlinus he announces thus: In Brittany, of St. Gorlinus bishop of Dol. Saussay in the Supplement adopted this error of Ferrarius. An error I call it without hesitation, both because in the catalogue of the bishops of Dol no Gorlinus is found, and because it is plain enough from Ferrarius's Annotations that Gorlinus was received by him from the German Martyrology alone, and the city of Dol attributed to him from conjecture and from a German word badly understood. For he confesses that Gorlinus was set down from Canisius: of whom, he says, we read nothing in others. Then he subjoins those things about the twofold Dol, so as clearly to imply that he placed Gorlinus at Dol in Brittany because he could find no other episcopal city of that name. Wherefore that Gorlinus of Canisius is no other than St. Gauzlinus of Toul, whom after Greven he named Gorlinus, as I have noted today among the Prætermissi; nor is any Gorlinus to be sought at Dol.

otherwise nimium*

otherwise Buxeriensi*

§ II. Such Acts as there are of St. Gauzlinus in the Catalogue of the bishops of Toul, but not free from all error, yet to be published: various briefer elogia of him, of which two are recited.

[ ] Such Acts as there are of St. Gauzlinus, written in the eleventh century, A Life of St. Gauzlinus such as the deeds of that excellent Man deserve I do not find. Yet a lengthy elogium, which can in some fashion be held for a Life, is supplied by the Catalogue of the bishops of Toul, already published in two places in a somewhat different manner, namely in Edmond Martène, tome 3 of the Thesaurus Anecdotorum, col. 991 and

following, and then in Calmet, tome 1 of the History of Lorraine, among the instruments, col. 83 and following. The former published the praised Catalogue from the Cambron codex, carried down to the death of bishop Pibo, which the author binds to the year 1107: and hence he infers that this Catalogue, or these Acts of the bishops of Toul, were written at the beginning of the twelfth century. This consequence seems legitimate, at least so far that those Acts were not written earlier than that. But since the two later elogia seem to have been written after the rest of the catalogue, as has been proved in tome 1 of September, page 617, I suspect that the elogium of St. Gauzlinus was written earlier, namely in the time of bishop Udo before the year 1069.

[10] but not by Adso the contemporary abbot: Calmet gave like Acts under the title History of the bishops of Toul; but in him they are carried only down to St. Gerard, Gauzlinus's successor, whose Life is set at the end, just as the Life of St. Mansuetus and of St. Apre is inserted into them. He judges that the writer of those Acts is Adso, abbot of Montier-en-Der, which is true of the Life of St. Mansuetus, and perhaps of certain others. But certainly of all of them this cannot with sufficient probability be believed, as the writers of the Literary History of France have already shown, tome 6, page 484, where nevertheless they wrongly attribute the same opinion to Martène. Further, in the praised Catalogue there is found the same Life of St. Gauzlinus which is in Martène's Catalogue, and that Life too Calmet attributes to Adso. But I judge that the learned man did not sufficiently weigh the reasons which render this opinion utterly improbable. For since Adso was a man learned for his century, and lived with St. Gauzlinus, he could not easily have fallen into those chronological errors which we observe in that Life. Certainly it is utterly incredible that Adso wrote that the place for founding the monastery of Bouxières was granted to Gauzlinus by Theodoric bishop of Metz, since Theodoric was made bishop nearly two years after the death of Gauzlinus. The anonymous author himself in the Life to be published below, at number 4, by these words, Such therefore is the beginning which the monastery of Bouxières is reported to have had, sufficiently shows that he is not Adso. For Adso could have known the occasion of the founding of that monastery more certainly than to say hesitantly is reported, since he himself dwelt at Toul either at that time or a little after. Wherefore I hold it for certain that Adso is not the writer of that Life, but that it was written much later.

[11] From these things it is plain that the author of the Life of St. Gauzlinus wrote a hundred years and perhaps more after the Saint's death; [these things gathered from more ancient writings; and some things added from popular report.] so that he could neither learn his illustrious deeds of himself, nor easily through those who had known him alive. The writer had therefore to have recourse to written monuments, or to popular report, by which false things are generally mingled with true; nor can I doubt that he did both, and thence rightly gathered most things from written monuments, but corrupted some from popular traditions. The illustrious elogia with which he adorns the holy Prelate he could have found written in the Lives of other Saints, namely of Mansuetus, Apre, John of Gorze, and Gerard, all of which were more ancient, and written in Gauzlinus's time or a little after. Not a few other things he could have from charters and diplomas written while Gauzlinus was alive. And to these he seems to have added some things about the foundation of Bouxières from popular report, as he himself implies in reporting the building of that monastery by the word is reported. Hence this author does indeed deserve credit where no weightier authority stands in the way: but it is not necessary to swear by his words everywhere and without discrimination. And this Life is had in the praised Work in Martène from the Cambron codex, col. [ ] and following; in Calmet, col. 131 and following, from a codex of St. Mansuetus of Toul. I have also a manuscript copy of the same Life, torn away from the rest of the Catalogue. From these collated together I shall subjoin below the Life illustrated with annotations.

[12] Further, in the said Collection, to which Calmet gave the title History of the bishops of Toul, Another elogium of St. Gauzlinus in the same Collection in Calmet, and which without any doubt has divers authors, there is found also another elogium of St. Gauzlinus, incomplete indeed, and embracing few deeds, but otherwise to be preferred to the rest. If Calmet had attributed this to Adso, together with the Life and Miracles of St. Apre which precede, nay and with the finding and translation of the same Saint made in the year 978 by St. Gerard, which follows, he would by no means have had me opposed to his opinion, since all these things seem to have been written while St. Gerard was alive, and therefore could have been written by Adso, with whose style they agree. Yet I would not certainly attribute all these to Adso: for at least chapter 26 was written later, since in it mention is made of St. Leo IX, who was Pontiff long afterwards, so that it must necessarily be said that that collection is not even free from interpolation from chapter 23, where the Life of St. Apre begins, to chapter 30, in which there is treatment of St. Gerard living and translating the body of St. Apre. Nevertheless the writer of that translation shows himself a contemporary in chapter 30, where he says of two men healed at that translation: And they are still living witnesses of the miracle wrought in them. Of St. Gauzlinus too he treats in chapter 29 as of a prelate lately dead and formerly known to himself, so that that elogium altogether agrees with Adso. But whether it be his or another contemporary's, I subjoin the whole, that the signal virtues of St. Gauzlinus may be confirmed from it, and that it may bring some light also to what is to be disputed below.

[13] which is here given as of a contemporary writer. But the venerable Drogo, he says, … being stripped of human affairs, the shepherd and love of the flock, the lord Gauzlinus, succeeded, a man supremely Catholic and a most devoted cultivator of monastic religion. Who, sprung of noble Frankish blood, was brought up in the palace among the nobles of the realm, and, being soon to be Pontiff, shone above many of his own family and age by the gift of a twofold knowledge. Being therefore exalted by the wishes of all with the pontifical mitre, he diligently surpassed the sweetness of his own region and lineage by the benevolence of a most clement heart, by the serenity of a countenance so pleasant, and by the gentleness of his speech: wholly intent on vigils and on alms; and, that he might render the flock entrusted to him multiplied to Christ Jesus, who had bought it with the price of his blood, by the help of Apre the confessor of Christ, to whom he committed himself most attentively, he did not forsake the path of the right way, and, that he might show that he wished not to preside but to profit, he made himself all things to all, that he might gain all. For who came to him and did not enjoy his goodness? We speak nothing to win favor, nothing after the manner of flatterers, but the truth. For he needs not the paint of falsehood who, while he lived in the world, was zealous to be a good odor to God, a lover of the divine law, and a most eager restorer of sacred places. Who, to the crowning of his good works, in the fourteenth year of his ordination, by God's nod and through the merits of blessed Apre, established in this place the Rule of St. Benedict, unknown to all the inhabitants of this realm, long sought and found afar. But what helps he afterwards conferred, how great benefits he bestowed on those warring here under that same Rule, lest we be forsaken by time while we hasten to other things, we shrink from attempting. Yet this happy Man, in the purpose of good work once seized, continually extending to all a marvellous courage, after manifold labors in the warfare of Christ, in the fortieth year of his episcopate withdrew to the heavenly seats.*

[14] Another catalogue of the bishops of Toul published by Calmet, Another Catalogue of the bishops of Toul, carried down to Hector d'Ailly, who died in the year 1530, Calmet published among his instruments from col. 165 under the title: Notices of each bishop of Toul, or Epitaphs of the bishops of Toul. The praised author in the premonition to these Epitaphs, col. 83, judges that they were written successively by various men who were nearly contemporary with the bishops about whom they wrote. This I should readily believe of some of the later bishops, whose elogia Calmet found written in another hand. But it is certainly not true of the prelates of the earlier centuries; and it is not very probable of those who flourished in the middle centuries, among whom is St. Gauzlinus. Those elogia are too uniform for it to become likely that so many different writers wrote them in each century; and many of them are more meagre than befits contemporary writers. Wherefore I judge that all down to the year 1436, in which Henry de Ville is noted to have died, were collected by one writer from older monuments, since in the following elogium Calmet began to observe a more recent hand; and he brings forward no argument to show that the preceding elogia existed before the fifteenth century, that is, before the year 1436, in the form in which he himself published them from the manuscripts.

[15] Like elogia of the prelates of Toul I find also in manuscript in our repositories. [with which others are found like in manuscript: but all these seem by a more recent writer:] But one collection of them was printed in the year 1509 by Symphorien Champier in the book On the Austrasians and Lotharingians, as our Papebroch noted, who copied out the elogia of the Saints, since that book is lacking to us. And the elogium of St. Gauzlinus is the same in that collection as that which is found in Calmet, except for two most manifest faults which have crept into Calmet. In another manuscript catalogue of the bishops of Toul the elogium of St. Gauzlinus is again like, which does not differ from the other except in words now and then slightly changed. Each of our catalogues is carried down to Hugh de Hazards, sitting at the beginning of the sixteenth century: but nowhere do I find it noted that the earlier elogia are by ancient writers, so that I can scarcely believe that Calmet found this in his manuscript Catalogue, especially since he nowhere assigns those traces of antiquity, nor observes another hand before the fifteenth century. I have therefore no doubt that these brief elogia of St. Gauzlinus are far later than the Acts to be published below, and were chiefly composed from them. One from a manuscript Catalogue I subjoin, that the reader may have it for a summary of the life.

[16] St. Gauzlinus, who is also Goswinus, the thirty-first bishop of this see, from one of which an elogium of St. Gauzlinus is recited, was a man of the highest sanctity, and begotten of noble Frankish blood, an excellent cultivator also of monastic religion. Being therefore exalted by the wishes of all with the pontifical mitre, on the XVI Kalends of April he was, Christ favoring, consecrated bishop; and by the benevolence of a most clement heart, by the serenity of a pleasant countenance, and by the gentleness of his diligent speech he surpassed the sweetness of his own lineage, wholly intent on vigils and alms. Who, to the crowning of his good works, in the XIV year of his ordination, by God's nod, established in the sacred place the Rule of St. Benedict, unknown to all the inhabitants of this country, long sought, and found. He built from the foundations the monastery of the holy Mother of God Mary at Bouxières,

establishing there a choir of handmaids of God, and adorning it with goods, estates, and ornaments. For the merit of which deed it was shown beforehand by God to his most holy successor Gerald that he was associated with the martyr Apollinaris in heavenly glory. He gave also to the lord Theodoric, prelate of Metz, in exchange, the staff of blessed Peter the apostle, which blessed Mansuetus had carried with him. In the XXX year of his prelacy crosses appeared on men's garments. He acquired the allod of Bouch, and handed it over to the stipend of the canons. And at last, after a four years' languor, in the XLIV year of his episcopate, on the VII of September, he passed over to the heavenly seats, and was venerably buried in the monastery of Bouxières.

[17] The same things are read in another Catalogue of ours, without any change of any matter. compared with other catalogues. There are added, however, about Gauzlinus, what are also in Calmet, these words: He was brought up in the palace among the nobles of the realm. And his sickness and death and burial are there expressed in these words: This happy Man, being proved by the Lord with a four years' languor, like another Job, in the XLIV year of his episcopate, on the VII Ides of September, withdrew to the heavenly seats. Being therefore carried by clergy and people, he received a most worthy burial in the monastery of Bouxières among the choirs of virgins whom he had gathered there. In Calmet the same things also are read, except for two faults which perhaps must be imputed to the error of the printers, or rather to the negligence of those correcting their errors: for he is there said to have died in the nineteenth year of his episcopate, although the thirtieth year is mentioned before; and on the thirteenth Ides of September, which means nothing, since every month numbers only eight Ides. Other errors about the years of the episcopate and about the dealings with Theodoric of Metz, which are found in this elogium, were drawn from the Acts, and will be corrected below.

perhaps &*

§ III. The Saint's illustrious birth: the episcopate taken up: his earlier deeds in the episcopate: the regular discipline restored in the monastery of St. Apre.

[ ] The Saint's birth, who is made bishop of Toul About the country and parents of St. Gauzlinus I find nothing at all, except that he was born of an illustrious Frankish family. About the time also at which he was given to the world nothing is said. But since he was raised to the episcopate in the year 922, as we shall see, we cannot doubt that he first beheld the light as the ninth century verged to its end. He is said to have been brought up among the nobles of the realm in the palace, which Calmet in tome 1 of the History of Lorraine, col. 887, where he undertakes to set forth the deeds of St. Gauzlinus, explains of the court of Charles the Simple, king of the Franks. He asserts in the same place that Charles the Simple contributed not a little to the election of Gauzlinus to the bishopric of Toul, but for that conjecture, which is otherwise likely enough, he praises no author. His ordination in the Life and in the elogia is said to have been made on the XVI Kalends of April, that is, on the XVII day of March, which in the year 922 was a Sunday.

[19] in the year 922: And if we compare this day with the letter of king Charles, given in the year 922 in favor of the canons of the cathedral church of Toul, who are there said to be bereft of their own patron, that is, of bishop Drogo, we shall easily see that the election of Gauzlinus happened in that same year 922. For the epoch of the letter in Calmet among the instruments, col. 336, is such: Given on the IV Nones of March, Indiction X, in the reign of the most glorious king Charles, etc. Both the X Indiction and the thirtieth year of Charles the Simple designate the year 922, so that it does not seem to be doubted that the election of Gauzlinus happened in the same year, namely thirteen days after Charles's letter was given. Gauzlinus the notary, in the stead of Rotger archbishop (of Trier), subscribed to it. Whether this be St. Gauzlinus himself, elected bishop a little after, may be doubted. Flodoard the priest, a coeval writer, in the Chronicle of Reims at the year 922 confirms the assigned year of the election in these words: Drogo bishop of Toul dies, whom Goslinus succeeds.

[20] [he does not seem to have defended Toul against king Henry, with whose county he was endowed by him,] Now affairs at those times were much disturbed in Lorraine by the tumults of war, about which the History of Calmet may be consulted. He asserts, col. 887, that Gauzlinus in the year 925 was besieged in the city of Toul by Henry the Fowler, king of Germany. But this I find neither in the Chronicle of Flodoard nor in the Continuator of Regino, whom he praises. Nay, Calmet himself at col. 842, where he pursues the deeds of Henry in Lorraine, speaks indeed with the Continuator of Regino about the siege of the city of Metz, but not about a siege of Toul, which I would not dare so far to hold for certain, until it be shown from ancient monuments, as rather I can scarcely believe that Gauzlinus wished to oppose himself to king Henry. But whatever be the case with that siege, he himself with the other princes of Lorraine submitted himself to Henry, on the testimony of Flodoard, who at the year 925 has it thus: All the Lotharingians commit themselves to Henry. The praised Calmet adds that Henry king of Germany in the year 928 gave to Gauzlinus and his successors the city and county of Toul. This deed is asserted in the Life at number 6, and from it the defense of the city of Toul by Gauzlinus against Henry becomes little probable.

[21] The first deed of St. Gauzlinus which more deserves our attention The monastery of St. Apre, in which discipline had collapsed, is the restoration of regular discipline in the monastery of St. Apre. This ancient monastery is situated in the suburb of Toul. About its beginnings Mabillon records certain things in tome 1 of the Benedictine Annals, page 175, and perhaps more will be examined among us about it at St. Apre bishop of Toul, who is venerated on the XV of September. Here it will suffice to say that monastic discipline had there utterly collapsed when St. Gauzlinus took care to recall it from exile. It may be doubted whether the Rule of St. Benedict was ever observed in this monastery of Toul, since it is said to have been unknown to all: for the Rule of St. Columbanus, or some other, may have been observed there before, which I do not here examine. But it is certain from the letter of Gauzlinus to be given below that regular discipline had before flourished in the monastery of St. Apre, whatever the Rule was, and that the Rule of St. Benedict was given or restored to that monastery by St. Gauzlinus.

[22] Calmet judges that St. Gauzlinus did this after the example of Adalbero bishop of Metz, after the example of certain others, who a little before restored discipline in various monasteries, especially in the abbey of Gorze, where Einold, a holy man, and formerly archdeacon of Toul, was appointed abbot in the year 933, as is read in the Life of Bl. John of Gorze among us in tome III of February, page 698. That conjecture is very likely, since Gauzlinus without doubt made much of Einold, who, being conspicuous in the church of Toul for riches, learning, and dignities, having despised all these that he might serve God more freely, had shut himself in a cell for a whole three years, where unless what the bishop of the place, the venerable man Gauzlinus, truly memorable in works of mercy, or any of the religious sent, he was sustained by nothing else: as the praised Life by a contemporary writer has it at number 29. The example of Adalbero, therefore, and the counsel of Einold and of others, could stir up Gauzlinus to reviving the monastic fervor at Toul also. But it is certain that he was animated also by the example of the men of Fleury.

[23] Wherefore, that he might bring this to effect, Gauzlinus spared neither labors nor expense. he recalls it to an exact observance of the Rule: He himself set out for the monastery of Fleury lying on the Loire, that he might inspect the regular discipline on the spot, and might introduce it with the Rule of St. Benedict into the monastery of St. Apre. About this matter, in book 2 of the Miracles of St. Bercharius in Mabillon, in the Acts of the 2nd century, page 848, an anonymous writer has it thus: Being stirred afterwards by the most famous fame of so great a matter (he is treating of the Rule of St. Benedict brought into the monastery of Fleury) the lord Gauslinus, most noble pontiff of the city of the Leuci, went to the aforesaid place, to inspect the order of religion whose report had been brought to him: and returning thence, solicitous for the flock committed to him by God, bringing with him a description of the whole monastic manner of life, which he had inspected there as most religious, and also the aforesaid Rule of the blessed Father, he first showed to the city of Toul the renewal of the monastic purpose. Relying therefore, that most wise Pontiff, upon manifold documents of divine institution, and gathering prudent men from every quarter, he rendered the monastery of St. Apre, situated in the suburb of Toul, most decently illustrious, strenuously imbued with the regular disciplines and about to profit the convenience of many. This journey of St. Gauzlinus to the monastery of Fleury happened about the year 934 or 935, in which the fourteenth year of his episcopate was beginning: for the reformation of the monastery of St. Apre is said in the Life and in the elogia to have been made in the fourteenth year of his episcopate.

[24] to which end, by the letter here given, The letter of St. Gauzlinus, by which he gives many things to the monastery of St. Apre and ordains many things which he desired to be kept there, Mabillon published in the Appendix to tome 3 of the Annals, page 705, from the original, as he says. I transfer the whole hither from him, because it clearly shows how great care the Saint applied to bringing back order into the monastery of St. Apre and then to preserving it. To all the governors of the holy Church of God, and to all of true religion and Catholic faith, present and to come, Gauzlinus, by the favor of divine clemency, humble bishop of the city of the Leuci. We believe without any ambiguity, and hold by certain right, that for all zeal of good action and for spiritual care of souls a crown and a heavenly recompense is prepared for us by the just Rewarder. Whence, as the good things begun by the just are daily to be strengthened and fostered by us, so also the things lost are diligently to be corrected and to be recalled to a state of rectitude with watchful solicitude: especially since the divine providence has conferred upon us the guardianship of souls and the government of churches, in which it has commanded us to feed his sheep with life-giving nourishment, seeking the lost, bringing back the cast out, and more diligently rearing those that thrive. Considering these things therefore, among the other zeals of our solicitude it occurred to our mind that in the little cell of our suburb which rejoices in the merits and burial of blessed Apre we had heard that monks anciently flourished in the regular disciplines, but that, through the sloth of certain abbots and the diminution of temporal goods, these exercises, gradually failing, had utterly lost the rite of their former uprightness.

[25] Which religion, and one yet more fervent, desiring to recover there in our own days with a view to the heavenly recompense, he gives, or rather restores, many goods to the monastery, by the authority of our predecessors, and also by the counsel of all the brethren, we have repudiated the aforesaid place from unlawful proprietorship and self-will, and have striven with all our strength to recall it to the norm of the right path, setting over them an abbot named Archimbald, effective in good purpose, that, their own judgment being altogether left aside, they might obey in all things according to the Rule of St. Benedict, and might with him be free for spiritual affairs, and might assiduously entreat the heavenly goodness for the profit of the realm and for the estate of the whole Church, and for the remedy of our soul. But lest that same regular observance should ever grow lukewarm through want of earthly goods, or through the taking away by our successors, as it happened before, we confirm to their uses these villas, that is, the village of St. Apre with all its integrity,

and in Briutriacum and in Saponariæ, and also whatever in Gavatangæ pertains to the aforesaid place; and also the mill at Naix: likewise the little villa which is called Vitiliagus, and Villenæ in their entirety: the villa of Stephen with its appurtenances and its basilica, excepting those who, on account of the lands which they use, serve that same monastery, but by reason of their persons render services for the uses of the bishopric: Alanum with all things pertaining to it, except the church: Silini-curtis with the church, and all things which pertain to it: from the villa of Crepiacum, Salsuriæ with the church and all its appurtenance: Martiniacum with its church, and also two farms in Medianus-vicus, where they may enjoy the use of salt-works: and also a farm at Baviacum entire: Mannoniscurtis with the church entire, and Stadonis, and in Bladenacum half the church, and Masellum; and also whatever in the territory of Orcadensis or Navensis looks to their part, and all things which are contained inserted in their privileges, excepting four villas, that is, Humberticurtis, Adalberticurtis, Siccum vidum, and Altrivilla. And not only do we grant the aforenamed goods, but also villas and estates and everything which shall be conferred upon them by God-fearing men we assign to their uses.

[26] But we appoint for these things that gifts be presented to us each year on the festivity of blessed Stephen, and ordains other things, that is, twelve loaves, which they call pounds, with as many sextaries of wine. On the Mass of the Purification of holy Mary also two tapers of the weight of five pounds, and also, in the time of the royal warfare, such carriage-service as we have appointed to be honored by our stipends. Moreover we decree that if for hospitality's sake we shall at any time send thither guests arriving, the servants of that village be not disquieted, nor let anyone be served from the resources of the place, but let our own allowance be furnished them, that the cenobites may live there more freely without murmuring. Meanwhile we appoint that an abbot be always set over that monastery by the consent of our donation and by the election of the monks, if such a one be found in that congregation through whom the rectitude of the Rule may stand unshaken: but if such be lacking, let it be in our judgment to seek and set over them one chosen for his morals from any other community , who may be able according to the Rule of the aforesaid father to preside and to profit the brethren usefully. We beseech therefore most humbly, and under the invocation of the divine name we adjure each of the prelates our successors, that he never presume to withdraw or diminish anything of this aforewritten property of the brethren, which we have granted them, nay rather have restored, or shall yet restore, so long as the abbots and the monks, present and following, shall keep the decrees of the holy norm: nor let him ever dare to disorder or unjustly disturb that congregation, but as often as it shall please him to come to you for the sake of charity and pious solicitude, let him come: and if there be any things among them to be ordered or corrected, let him strive clemently to order or correct them according to God.*

[27] If, however, any of the bishops — which be far from it — shall compel them to pay the former tax which is contained in their charters, which were useful for preserving discipline, let him restore to them the aforesaid four villas entire. But if he shall scorn to do this, let them have leave to go to the metropolitan of the diocese and to set forth the cause of their need. But if he shall neglect to bring help, let them go to the king's presence and lawfully demand their lands. And likewise we altogether forbid each of the abbots to be set over that congregation, and under the adjuration of the divine calling we prohibit, that he attempt by any device or machination, either by himself or by another person put forward, to withdraw the aforesaid cell from the power of the bishopric: but, the liberty of monastic religion being safe, let it always remain subject without any contradiction to the pontiff of the city of the Leuci. The cause of either condition we commit, after God, to be corrected by whatever king shall preside over this realm: that is, if either the prelate of the aforesaid city shall wish to withdraw any of these things, or the abbot of the aforesaid monastery shall attempt to machinate anything by plotting against the lordship of the prelate, let him lie under the sentence of the canons. If, however, any of them, persuaded by wicked greed, shall presume to infringe or violate this our ordinance, established by us for the love of God and for a heavenly recompense, let him incur the wrath of almighty God, and irremediably receive the punishment of everlasting damnation, and let him have no part with God in the recompense of the just: but let him have part with the prince of darkness, and bear the judgment of divine vengeance, transfixed with a perpetual anathema, unless he shall repent and duly amend.*

[28] confirming all at last after the custom. At the last, at the end of this testament we add further that, since it has pleased our serenity to make the security of this authority and to remit the tax due, desiring the more to increase the honorableness of that place, for the increase of divine service and for the observance of the pious institution we determine, asking the cenobites that with daily repetition in the days of our life and in the succession of our death they should chant for the absolution of our soul the psalm De profundis with the collect following, and should honorably celebrate the anniversary of our deposition, and on that day should appoint from the allowance granted a blessing to our memory with which they may be refreshed. And that the tenor of this our constitution may be held the firmer, and may deserve in God's name to obtain a stronger vigor of firmness, we have confirmed it below with our own hand, and have ordered it to be sealed below with the impression of our ring, and also we have asked the clerics and laymen assisting us to do the same. I Gauzlinus have consented and corroborated. The mark of Wido the count. The mark of Josbert. The mark of Walter. The mark of Fredenod. The mark of Grimbald. The mark of Amelard. The mark of Bertrann. The mark of Elpebod. The mark of Arengeld. The mark of Bertin. The mark of Grimald. The mark of Berengar the primicerius. The mark of Azzo priest. The mark of Gonbard priest. The mark of Ansulf deacon. The mark of Umbert. The mark of Orher. The mark of Berner deacon. The mark of Badin. The mark of Bernefrid. The mark of Gislebert. The mark of Remigius. The mark of Martin. The mark of Landineus. The mark of Teduicus. The mark of Odulric. The mark of Eldebald. The mark of Rainer. The mark of Ranuper. The mark of Berner. The mark of Siric. The mark of Barengir. The mark of Everard. The mark of Gifard subdeacon. The mark of Heldevald. I Humbert, unworthy levite, by the command of Gauzlinus the renowned pontiff have written and dictated this on the V Ides of October, in the XIII year of his episcopate, in the VIIII Indiction, in the year from the Lord's Incarnation DCCCCXXXVI, and in the XI year of the glorious king Henry. Thus far the letter of St. Gauzlinus, which Calmet reprinted in tome 1 among the instruments, col. 342.

[29] An observation about the chronological notes not agreeing, The other matters in this letter have no difficulty; but the chronological notes are entangled in a wondrous manner, nor consonant with one another. Mabillon in tome 3 of the Annals, page 428, reciting part of this letter with the same notes of time, subjoins these words: To the charter is affixed the seal of bishop Gozlinus: where it is strange that the years of king Henry are still reckoned, who had died on the second day of the month of July preceding (that is, of the year 936). This is indeed strange, if the letter belongs to the month of October and the year 936. But not only is that strange in the said epoch; but it is equally strange that in the year 936 the XIII year of Gauzlinus should be reckoned, when the XV was running: nay, neither does the IX Indiction agree with that year in the month of October, since the tenth had begun in Gaul and Germany from the XXIV of September. Wherefore I judge that various errors have crept into those chronological notes, whether this happened because the numerals could be read with difficulty in so ancient a letter, or by the mere carelessness of a transcriber or printer, or from any other cause whatsoever.

[30] Further, these errors seem able to be corrected by no other more likely reason several of which indicate the year 935, in which the reformation was made. than if we refer the letter to the year 935: for thus only two numerals must be corrected, and everything else will rightly cohere. And so for the year from the Lord's Incarnation DCCCCXXXVI there seems to be substituted the year DCCCCXXXV, and for the XIII year of the episcopate the XIV year: for in the year 935, in the month of October, the IX Indiction was running, it was the XIV year of St. Gauzlinus's episcopate, in which the Life with all the elogia testifies that discipline was restored in the monastery of St. Apre: and lastly in that year Henry king of Germany was alive, and was reigning in the XI year in Lorraine, of which he obtained possession in the year 925, as Calmet narrates in tome 1 of the History, col. 842. Wherefore I cannot doubt that the letter of Gauzlinus, and this new foundation or restoration of the monastery of St. Apre, must be fixed in the year 935. For the rest, besides abbot Archembald, set over this monastery for the restoration of discipline, Gauzlinus drew other distinguished men also thither. Among these are known Alberic and Adso, afterwards abbots and reformers of the monastery of Montier-en-Der in Champagne, just as we shall see that the reformation of another monastery was afterwards committed to Archembald himself.

[31] Then St. Gauzlinus performed more things in favor of the monastery of St. Apre. The number of monks having increased in the reformed monastery, For since the number of the monks notably increased, and therefore the possessions of the monastery did not seem to suffice for feeding so great a multitude, St. Gauzlinus wished to remedy this defect with pious munificence. And so he increased the revenue of the monastery by a new donation, which his letter expresses, published in Calmet, tome 1, among the instruments, col. 348, in this manner: In the name of the holy and undivided Trinity, Gauzelinus, humble bishop of the Leuci. Since the supreme shepherd our Lord Jesus Christ has for this appointed prelates in his holy Church, that in his stead they should order it and carry it forward to the eternal kingdom, it behooves each of the shepherds diligently to watch, that so far as their strength allows they may distribute what is necessary to the places over which they preside, lest perchance through want anyone should stray from his order; and therefore we wish it to be known to all our successors that, after we had by God's prevenient grace raised the place of St. Apre to a regular state, diligently inquiring we learned that under the venerable abbot Archembald, whom we had set over that place, both the Lord's flock was gradually growing, and the substance of the monastery was greatly slipping away, nor could it live from the goods of that same church.

[32] Whence, treating of it a long while, at last by the common consent of our faithful, he increases its revenue by a new donation, both clerics and laymen, we have added to the prebend of the monks the church situated in the villa of Columbarium, in that integrity in which Wido and his brother Niczo had held it as a benefice: to whom also we have most humbly enjoined that, most devoutly keeping the anniversary of our death, they should take for themselves a refection from this our gift. We ask therefore, out of the charity of God, all our successors that they sustain the aforesaid place with their largesses so long as it shall remain in regular observance, and that they keep this our grant so inviolable as they shall wish their own charters to be held uncorrupted after them. To whom also, trusting in the equity of the great Judge, we promise that if they fulfil with solicitude what we ask, as we have pledged, they will receive from him an everlasting reward, as if they had by their own labor wholly advanced that monastery to this religion. But if at the persuasion of greed, or on any occasion, they shall diminish or violate it, let them know that they will without doubt be damned by the same to eternal hell, for whose love these things have been done. But

if they shall not repent, let those who serve God themselves seek the royal seat by proclamation. And that this our donation which we have made concerning the church at Columbarium, which had long been taken away from the church of St. Apre, may obtain an abiding vigor, we have confirmed it with our own hand, and it has pleased the hands of our clerics and noble laymen to do the same.

[33] which must be bound to the year 940: Done at Toul on the X Kalends of January, in the reign of king Otto, in the XVIIII year of our ordination. The mark of Gauzelinus the bishop. Of Odelric the archbishop. Of Berhard the primicerius, of Marenger the archdeacon, of Varner the archdeacon and Varner the priest. Of Guntard priest. Of Valherus priest. Of Remigius priest. Of Albric priest. Of Herlard archdeacon. Of Everard archdeacon, of Girard archdeacon. Of Gifard archdeacon. Of Theodoric, Benefrid, Brierus, Grimald archdeacon, Germarus, Hubert archdeacon, Ragener, Ramier, Wido the vidame, Rotger the advocate, Nizo, Evernin, Benzo, Angelbert, Angelbold, Gampbert, Bernefrid the elder, Varner, Anstheus, Valter, and Warner. Sixtus, lowest of levites, wrote and subscribed. Thus far the letter of the holy Prelate, whose epoch, if it be rightly printed, designates the XXIII day of December of the year 940, not 941, as the editor noted in the margin. For since he was made bishop in the year 922 in the month of March, in this month too of the year 941 the XIX year of his episcopate would be completed, which is noted in the letter, and consequently that year was running in the month of December of the year 940.

[34] and at last he sees to it that all be confirmed by king Otto, Lastly Gauzlinus took care that all which he had done and given in favor of the aforesaid monastery should be confirmed by Otto I, king of Germany and afterwards emperor. Otto's letter Calmet published at col. 352, and noted in the margin the year 948, but the III Indiction concurring with the XI year of Otto on the III Nones of August designates rather the year 945, so that the year of the Incarnation, perhaps added afterwards or corrupted, seems to be rejected. Whatever be the case, the notes marked in the letter do not agree with the year 948, nor are they consonant with one another. Wherefore, the year being omitted, which from so faulty an edition I cannot certainly assign, I transfer hither that part of the letter which chiefly regards Gauzlinus: We wish it to be made known to all our faithful of the holy Church of God, present namely and to come, that Gauzlinus, venerable bishop of the city of the Leuci, has suggested to our mildness that a certain monastery built in the suburb of that same his city, where St. Apre confessor of Christ is known to be buried, given over to the regular and monastic order, but thereafter utterly depraved and destroyed, at last, by Christ's help, by the sweats of his pious devotion and by his own labors distinguished with a worthy state of the regular life and fitted with a most seemly order for monastic uses, he has liberally endowed with certain goods lately withdrawn by his predecessors and restored by himself.

[35] But lest the monks whom he had gathered in the said monastery should at any time be forced to suffer any opposition or disquiet from the prelates succeeding him in that see through the passing times, another donation made to the same monastery at Gauzlinus's persuasion. he professed himself to have made for them an ecclesiastical privilege by his authority, in which he had most serenely enacted that none of the pontiffs succeeding him should diminish anything of the goods which those same monks had before possessed, nay which he himself had restored, or of any they might thereafter obtain from him, or should impose greater services upon them than he had appointed.* To these are subjoined very many possessions, which had partly been restored to the monastery by Gauzlinus, partly given, and all are confirmed. Another donation made to the same abbey at St. Gauzlinus's persuasion may be seen in Calmet, col. 364; but the letter concerning the same abbey which is there at col. 363 attributed to Lothar king of the Franks and to the year 957 is Lothar king of Lorraine's and of the year 858, which I judge must be pointed out, lest the reader believe it contrary to the preceding. The learned reader will easily see this, if only he read the letter attentively and consult the chronological notes.

i.e. congregation*

read monachi*

§ IV. The foundation of the monastery of Bouxières, and its confirmation by Pope Stephen.

[ ] Mabillon fixes the foundation of Bouxières in the year 962, Although St. Gauzlinus deserves the highest praise for the monastic discipline recalled into the suburban monastery of St. Apre, from which we shall see it afterwards communicated to others also, yet he is worthy of no less honor for the monastery of maidens of Bouxières founded from the foundations and liberally endowed. About the time of this signal foundation writers disagree, not only the moderns but also the more ancient, if they have been rightly expounded by the moderns. Mabillon in tome 3 of the Annals at the year 962 narrates the foundation, and alleges the reasons of his opinion in these words, page 559: Richer, monk of Senones, is authority that a monastery of nuns in the territory of Toul at Boxeriæ or Buxeriæ was in the year of Christ nine hundred and sixty-two first built from the foundations by Gozlinus, venerable bishop of Toul. To this reckoning there is opposed the book on the deeds of the bishops of Toul, not yet published (afterwards published by Martène), in which Gauslinus or Goslinus is said to have procured by exchange the ground for founding the monastery from Theoderic bishop of Metz, the successor of Adalbero, whom it is established to have died two years later. But Goslinus did not reach that time, whose successor St. Gerard … was elected in the year DCCCCLXIII according to his Life, and indeed ordained on the IV Kalends of April: and so Gauslinus died in the present year (962), whose death happened on the VII Ides of September. And so he must be said to have received the ground of Bouxières, on which he founded the monastery, from Adalbero bishop of Metz, not from Theoderic his successor: unless Goslinus acquired the aforesaid ground from Theoderic, called bishop of Metz by anticipation. Thus far Mabillon, who by these reasons binds the foundation to the year 962; and he rightly observes that the ground could not have been given by bishop Theoderic, since Gauzlinus died before his episcopate.

[37] [but perhaps the words of Richer of Senones are not to be understood in that sense; or he must be abandoned;] And so the Life must be corrected in what is said about bishop Theoderic; or if the place was Theoderic's before his episcopate, even so the Life must be corrected, since it has it that that hill belonged to the bishop of Metz. That this is more probably false and must altogether be corrected I shall show in the annotations to the Life. No less must Richer of Senones be corrected, a writer three centuries later than the foundation of Bouxières, if he must necessarily be understood as Mabillon explains his words. But I do not see that it is altogether necessary that we so explain them. Take the words: In the nine hundred and sixty-second year of the Lord there was a certain venerable man, Gozelinus by name, bishop of Toul, a sagacious and provident man, who first built from the foundations the monastery of nuns which is called Posseriæ. After some things about the deeds of Gauzlinus to be adduced in their own place, in chapter 13 he speaks thus about his successor: At length, that same bishop Gozelinus being dead, as I have said above, Bl. Gerard succeeded in the episcopate. Hence it may be doubted whether he did not assign the death of Gauzlinus to the year 962, since he says afterwards that he had spoken of his death, and yet no word about the death of Gauzlinus is found in what is reported about him. Whatever be the case, whether Richer said that Gauzlinus died in the year 962 and some of his words have dropped out, or whether he meant that he flourished in that year, or even then founded the monastery of Bouxières; the authority of a writer of the thirteenth century for the deeds of Gauzlinus is not to be made so much of that I could doubt about the true epoch of the foundation, which I shall assign a whole twenty years before Mabillon's reckoning.

[38] Calmet wrongly carries the foundation back to the year 935 or 936; Calmet in tome 1, col. 891, disputes about the time of the founding of the monastery of Bouxières, and, rejecting the reckoning of Richer of Senones, or at least of Mabillon, declines into the opposite extreme, saying that the foundation probably happened about the year 935 or 936, that is, at the same time in which the monastery of St. Apre was reformed. Calmet has for his opinion the very letter of foundation of St. Gauzlinus, which would settle the whole controversy, if it were established that the chronological notes were not corrupt. For that letter, presently to be given, as it has been printed, has this epoch: Done at Toul on the Ides of January, in the reign of king Otto, in the thirteenth year of our ordination. The thirteenth year in the month of January designates the year 935, which in Calmet is also noted in the margin. But there is no doubt that that year has been faultily written, or rather printed, since Otto was not yet king in the month of January of the year 935, Henry I being still alive. Wherefore, since that year is faulty, and the year of Otto is not expressed, this letter cannot avail for assigning a certain year; but only conduces to refuting Calmet's reckoning. For in that letter Gauzlinus himself says that everything in the monastery of St. Apre had been duly ordered before he began to think of the foundation of Bouxières: this foundation therefore was begun some years after that reformation, which above I bound to the year 935: for the words of Gauzlinus, to be read at numbers 40 and 41 in the letter, altogether imply this.

[39] But the year itself of the foundation is more nearly implied by the letter of Pope Stephen IX, which likewise we shall reprint below from Calmet. [whereas it seems to have been begun in the year 940, and was certainly completed in the year 941.] This was addressed to Rothild or Rothilda the abbess to confirm the foundation, and is marked in the month of December, in the fifteenth Indiction. And this Indiction, since the present Pontifical one, which begins from the Kalends of January, was not yet in use, had begun to run from the month of September, and consequently does not designate the year 942, as Calmet wrongly noted, but the year 941, when, as it verged to its end, the monastery had been built, the church already dedicated, and an abbess appointed, so that it is likely that the building of the edifices was begun from the year 940. Nevertheless I can scarcely doubt that the nuns began to inhabit the monastery in the aforesaid year 941, and therefore I judge that the foundation must be bound to that year. These things about the time of the foundation suffice. Further, Calmet doubts whether the occasion of founding the monastery, such as is reported in the Life at numbers 3 and 4, be certain enough, because nothing is said about that story in the letter of foundation. That doubt is not without foundation, as I shall note at the Life. Meanwhile I transfer hither the letter of St. Gauzlinus from Calmet, where it is had in tome 1 among the instruments from col. 340.

[40] In the name of the Lord God and our Saviour Jesus Christ, Gauzlinus, by the help of divine clemency bishop of the Leuci. The letter, in which the occasion of the foundation, Believing the divine promises, we do not doubt at all that this pertains to our passing the present life more happily and to obtaining the life to come, if with most devout solicitude and pastoral providence we provide those things which pertain to the quiet of the servants or handmaids of God. Therefore we wish it to be made known to the faithful of the holy Church of God, present namely and to come, how, having traversed the parishes of our diocese, we found a certain ancient basilica dedicated to the honor of Mary the Mother of God, but greatly neglected through carelessness, and situated on the slope of a certain hill, at whose foot is set a villa which is called Buxeria; where, because of that same

Mother of God, sick men detained by divers languors were healed by her prayers, and the vows of the common people flowed together there very often, by the inspiration of divine clemency we have thought it worthy to determine this, that it should no longer lack divine worship. And because we had already, by heavenly help, brought back to its former state the monastery of blessed Apre, situated in the suburb of our city, which had fallen from the regular path, an abbot of most religious life having been placed under us, namely the lord Archiebald , through whom we rejoiced that all things there were duly ordered according to the Rule of the holy father Benedict; at length we began to consider how in that same oratory (if by God's gift it might be found) there might be a society of nuns, which should serve under the Rule of St. Benedict in the service of Mary the perpetual Virgin. Which deed indeed deserved to have effect by divine power.*

[41] For, by the Lord's fore-ordaining, we found certain nuns like wandering sheep, but yet seeking the pastures of eternal life, fervent in the love of God, and desiring a remote place for serving him. the Saint's donations made to the new monastery, Moved with pity for them, by the counsel of the aforesaid abbot and of the other God-fearing men and of our faithful, we assigned to them the said little cell to inhabit, setting over them one of them, namely Rothild, as abbess, who should rule their life: and that they might there more freely be free for spiritual things, we provided them something in temporal things. We assigned lastly to their uses out of the goods of the bishopric (as was worthy) the church in that same villa of Buxeria, which is entitled in honor of St. Martin, with the tithes, vineyards, and all things pertaining to it, and whatever was contained in that villa from the power of our see, as much in servants of both sexes as in lands and vineyards, or meadows, and all dues of the land: a certain allod also, which a certain noble woman Herisendis had given upon the river Meurthe in the villa of Campiniola, and Porchereia, to the part of our church, we have in like manner granted, and have assigned entire to that place: that also which Gundelindis, the wife of Teutmar, after the departure of her husband now at rest, gave us of her free will in the district of Calmotense and in the villa named Anthetviller, we have likewise handed over entire to that place, namely all that the same Teutmar had claimed for himself in that villa, or had possessed by hereditary right. We decree likewise that whosoever of the servants of any power of ours, that is, either of our lordship or of beneficiary right, shall have joined women to themselves as wives, they should have them granted to them with those same husbands.*

[42] prayers to be said for the Founder, Since therefore we do not doubt that this pertains to the salvation of our whole life, we ask, and by the name of God also we adjure, that none of the bishops succeeding us presume to diminish anything of these goods which by pious largess and with the consent of our church we have granted to these spouses of Christ, and still desire to give, or to disorder or unjustly disturb that little congregation joined by our zeal; but let it be lawful for them to possess those goods in quiet order, and let no more burden or greater services be imposed on them than that each year at the Mass of the Purification of holy Mary they pay a taper of two pounds: that likewise which we have received from those same sacred virgins in promise we ask to be kept perpetually, namely that, besides their particular and private prayers, of which we in no way doubt, they should chant daily in common for our present and eternal salvation two psalms, of which the beginning is: De profundis clamavi ad te Domine, and Domine, exaudi orationem meam, auribus percipe obsecrationem meam; and at the end of the prayer let them always set the Lord's Prayer, and this prayer: "Grant, we beseech thee, almighty and merciful God, through the power of thy Only-begotten and of the Holy Spirit, to thy servant Gauzlinus pardon of all his offenses, and, by the intercession and invocation also of the Mother of that same our Lord, and of all the Saints, men and women, propitiously to enjoy the glory of eternal beatitude, through all the ages of ages. Amen".*

[43] and the confirmation of all are contained For the rest, the liberty of monastic religion being safe, let them have the power of electing for themselves a regular abbess, and let them thereafter remain subject without any contradiction to the pontiffs of that same see, and let none of them presume to dissolve or to judge void this work of our humility, but let him permit it so to remain ratified for the love of the name of the Lord and of his holy Mother, even as he desires his own decrees to be kept by those succeeding him, that he may be able thence to receive with us a perpetual reward. If lastly anyone shall attempt to violate this authority strengthened by us with the sign of the holy Cross, or to set any stumbling-block to it, unless by repenting he come to his senses from his deliberate depravity, let him be bound with the chains of anathema and be assigned to eternal torments. And that it may be the more truly believed, we have confirmed this charter with our own hand, and have caused it to be corroborated by the hands of our faithful canons and of noble laymen. Done at Toul on the Ides of January, in the reign of king Otto, in the thirteenth year of our ordination. Gauzlinus. The mark of Beringar the first. Of Arnulf the second. Of Geroard. Of Guntard. Of Warner. Of Jonas. Of Valherus. Of Erchard. Of Berner. Of Gerard. Of Humbert archdeacon. Of Grimbald. Of Baringer. Of Orher. Of Amelard. Of Benedict. Of Theodinsus. Of Buerfrid. Of Giffard. Of Jonas. Of Grimald. Of Ranier. Of Ragener. Of Berrinus. Of Gospert. Of Frampert. Of Everelin. Of Baltramnus. Of Beidso . Of Hugh. Of Wido the vidame. Likewise of Hugh. Of Rotger. Of Mengald. Of Drogo. Of Eugebald. Of Nitzo. Of Humbert the standard-bearer. Of Stephen. Of Gosbert. Of Fredigisus. Sericius, lowest of levites, wrote and subscribed. On the back is read: The names of the men who confirmed this testament: Cozibert, Frambert, Evrelin, Baltramnus, Benso, Hugh, likewise Hugh, Rotger, Mengaud, Drogo, Ingelbold, Rotger, Nitza, Galter, Humbert the standard-bearer, Stephen, likewise Gosbert, Fredegis.* Thus far the letter of St. Gauzlinus, in which for the thirteenth year of the ordination there seems to be substituted the nineteenth or twentieth year.

[44] About the first abbess of this monastery, Rothild, some things are read in the Life, praised before, of Bl. John abbot of Gorze, tome III of February, page 699. Rothild the abbess had been instructed at Verdun by Humbert: There is treatment there of Humbert, a recluse at Verdun, who afterwards became a monk of Gorze, and at last abbot in the reformed monastery of St. Apre. And when Humbert was leading a pious and austere life in a cell at Verdun, there at that same time two religious women of that town, in a cell apart, were being instructed by him, and only from the window of the cell received the word of doctrine or of other instruction. Two others likewise in that same city were kindled by his exhortation, of whom the one (Rothild, namely) afterwards became the mother of very many handmaids of Christ in the territory of Toul, in the place which is called Bouxières, where a monastery was built anew by the bishop of good memory Gozlinus; after these two were first brought in, a manifold swarm of holy fervor from divers quarters of the world poured itself in there, so that to this day it seems to shine among the rest with a certain new grace. Thus a writer of the same century, whose words, uttered in praise of the monastery, and so of the Founder and of the first abbess, agree with the testimonies of others who wondrously praised St. Gauzlinus for this foundation.

[45] Among these is Pope Stephen VIII, who, being informed of this foundation by abbot Archembald, [the letter of Pope Stephen addressed to her, in which Gauzlinus is wondrously praised,] confirmed it by a letter which I transfer hither from Calmet, col. 350: Stephen the bishop, servant of the servants of God, to his most beloved daughter Rothilda the abbess of the monastery of the holy Mother of God Mary, which is situated in the bishopric of the Leuci, on the hill which is above the villa which is called Bouxières. Since almighty God has peculiarly decreed to gather and unite and order his Church through the most glorious princes of the Apostles, Peter and Paul, it behooves that all their successors, upon whom the same solicitude has been laid, wherever the opportunity requires, should bestow the safeguard of Apostolic authority: which we, though unworthy of so great an office, yet solicitous for the salvation of all the faithful, desire to fulfil according to our strength, that when we come to render an account we may see the Judge in security. Learning therefore through the venerable abbot Archembald with how great zeal our sweetest brother Gauzlinus, bishop of the Leuci, labors to found and exalt his church in every order of religion, we rejoice with maternal bowels, and beseech the Lord's clemency that he may prosperously advance.

[46] and the abbess Rothild is confirmed, Whence, as he himself has asked, we have most gladly decreed from the authority of St. Peter the apostle and from our own that whatever he himself has judged to be observed after him about his monasteries should be corroborated. Wherefore we commit to thee, daughter Rothild, and to thy successors, the place of maidens which that aforesaid most dear brother of ours the Bishop wholly built, with fitting workshops, on the slope of the hill above the villa which is called Bouxières, dedicated in honor of the holy Mother of God Mary, and the alms of all Christians, to be protected and ruled and governed according to the Rule of St. Benedict and the institutions of the holy Fathers, that by living religiously you may there acquire for God the gain of souls, and may pay the due hours by day and by night. And that you may accomplish this with a cheerful mind, we grant you, with the consent of all the faithful of the holy Roman See, whatever that same Bishop has given, that is, the church of St. Martin in its entirety, and whatever in that villa St. Stephen is known to have: also the church of Sasiriacum, with all its appurtenances, and the allod of Hersendis. We grant you also the church which Berherd the primicerius conferred upon the aforesaid place in the villa of Girunum in the county of Bedense upon the river Meuse, and whatever pertains to it, and a certain vineyard which the same gave on Mount Barisnus, in the county of Toul; and also whatever has been given by that Bishop in other places, or shall be given in any manner by others to that same place, may you possess perpetually without any contradiction. We beseech lastly the glorious goodness of the aforesaid Pontiff that, since he knows not what shall be after him, he grow not cold from compassion for that place.*

[47] and the whole foundation. We adjure also, by ineffable charity, all … counts, abbots, and all citizens of that country, both present and to come, that they sustain that same place for the love of God, and increase it with their donations, and always keep this our institution unimpaired. But all, of whatever order or degree, of whatever person, who shall attempt to come against this privilege of Apostolic institution, or shall oppress the monastery by his presence, or shall injure their goods, or shall not permit them to be at rest, we excommunicate until the day of judgment. And whosoever shall stand forth as their helpers, these, so far as the Apostolic power has granted, we decree to be absolved. And each year let a taper of two pounds be paid to the pontiff of the Leuci at the Mass of the Purification of holy Mary. And that meanwhile the things which are written in this privilege may be inviolably kept, we have ordered it to be confirmed below with our seal. Fare ye well. Written by the hand of Stephen the Scriniarius of the holy Roman Church, in the Month of December, in the fifteenth Indiction. Given by the hand of Nicholas the primicerius of the Apostolic See, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, in the year, God favoring, of the pontificate of our lord Stephen, supreme Pontiff and universal

Pope, in the most sacred See of blessed Peter first of the Apostles, in the Month of December, in the fifteenth Indiction.

otherwise Archembaldo*

* Meurthe

perhaps orationem*

perhaps Beidsoni*

* i.e. the cathedral church of St. Stephen

§ V. The reformation of the monastery of Montier-en-Der: some councils at which the Saint was present: the diocese of Toul laid waste by the Hungarians; many things obtained by the Saint for relieving the poverty of that church; the reformation of the monastery of St. Mansuetus begun.

[ ] [The time of the reformation of the abbey of Montier-en-Der wrongly assigned by some,] The regular discipline which, at the action of St. Gauzlinus, had been happily brought back into the monastery of St. Apre near Toul was thence, by the same author, propagated to the monastery of Montier-en-Der, situated in the diocese of Châlons in Champagne. About the fact Calmet and Mabillon agree, but they do not rightly assign the time of the reformation of the monastery of Der. Calmet indeed, at col. 884, by a palpable error places this reformation about the year 934, when the monastery of St. Apre had not yet been reformed, although he himself observes that from this monastery an abbot and monks were sent to restore discipline in that of Der. But Mabillon in tome 3 of the Annals, page 429, judges that the reformation was communicated to the men of Der about the year 936. This error is less manifest; nor yet do I doubt that this reckoning too is far from the truth; and that this can easily be shown. Nevertheless the very year of the order restored cannot so easily be assigned, because I find neither the year itself in any ancient monuments, nor neighboring traces of that year. Wherefore I shall first narrate the reformation itself, that from it at least some light may shine for the chronology.

[49] The abbey of Der had long before been given to the bishop of Toul, which Louis d'Outremer is said to have given to Gauzlinus: but had afterwards been taken from him, as Calmet observes at col. 889, alleging to prove this a diploma of Otto II, in which the said abbey is said to have been restored to Gauzlinus by king Louis. Here must necessarily be understood Louis IV, surnamed d'Outremer, who had the first years of his reign most disturbed, and afterwards waged war against Otto king of Germany, so that it is not likely that the abbey of Der was given to Gauzlinus before the peace entered into between Otto and Louis, which Calmet at col. 903 binds to the year 942. Nay rather, if we wish to follow conjectures, nothing more probable can be brought forward than that the abbey was restored to Gauzlinus about the middle of the tenth century, whether on the occasion of the councils which were held in the year 947 at Verdun and in the year 948 at Ingelheim, or on any other occasion whatever. Certainly another argument, which I shall pursue below, will altogether persuade us that the reformation of Der must be fixed not long before the middle of the tenth century: nor is it to be doubted that Gauzlinus thought as soon as possible about the reformation of the monastery restored to his church.

[50] The anonymous author of the Miracles of St. Bercharius in Mabillon, in the Acts of the 2nd Benedictine century, page 847, sets forth how utterly all regular discipline had perished in the monastery of Der, when the corrupt monks had been driven out thence by secular princes; and, being about to show whence discipline was brought back into that monastery, narrates the reformation of Fleury made by St. Odo of Cluny in the time of Rudolf king of the Franks, and then the reformation of the monastery of St. Apre by Gauzlinus. These things being premised, he teaches that abbot Benzo, who presided over the men of Der, was cast out of the abbey of Der by secular princes, and subjoins: But his monks fleeing in divers directions for fear of the hated Rule, there succeeded Brethren brought from the monastery of St. Apre: who show to our age even to this day the memory of their prudence by the sagacious arrangement even of the ecclesiastical volumes. But by what authors they were brought in, and the former expelled, I have forborne to write; lest I should seem sometime to have furnished fuel for an inept controversy. But who and of what sort they were, by whose excellent zeal that same place, after the harshness of so great a winter, flourished as it were by growing green again, I have determined to bring forth in writing, that posterity may know how great was their goodness. Who the princes were by whom abbot Benzo was expelled with the monks adhering to him the author would not declare. Yet above he had said that he was expelled while tyrannical princes also blazed out: from which we can conjecture that the expulsion was made in the time of the civil wars in which Louis d'Outremer was involved almost continually until the year 950.

[51] an abbot and monks sent from the abbey of St. Apre, at Gauzlinus's instance, But whoever expelled abbot Benzo, king Louis is said to have handed over the abbey to the church of Toul, and St. Gauzlinus was the author of the new colony to be led thither from the monastery of St. Apre. The praised anonymous writer, after the words just given about those sent for the reformation, has it thus: The first of them therefore who was famous was the lord Alberic, sprung of most noble birth, a native of Reims and a monk of St. Apre of Toul, who after the aforesaid Benzo, together with the pastoral rule, received the name of abbot befitting his goodness, having adopted for himself, for the supplying of every help, the lord Adso, already named and to be mentioned more often, remarkable in philosophic learning and in uprightness of life. He, born of most wealthy and noble parents in the land of the Jura, most fully imbued at Luxeuil with the divers studies of the art of letters, whom the Pontiff and clergy of Toul, clearly perceiving in the first flower of his youth to be abounding in the word of holy erudition together with purity of an innocent life, having drawn him with many entreaties from the Vosges, set over the city of Toul for the mastership of the sacred Order, like the light of a lamp above the stand of a candlestick. There, sweating for some rolls of time in the various exercises of divine teaching, after the very great instruction of many, again a brightness of divine splendor, namely Adso, is set to put to flight the mists of Der, to plant the nurseries of heavenly service. Presently he adds that Adso, Alberic being dead, was substituted as abbot, and pursues more matters about his virtues and writings.

[52] restored discipline: this reformation But those things pertain to my purpose only so far that the studious reader may thence gather what distinguished men Gauzlinus first drew to the monastery of St. Apre; and thence, when it already abounded, sent them out again to produce a greater fruit of souls in the monastery of Der. And that the fruits were most abundant the praised writer testifies at page 850 in these words: From his (Adso's) entry into this place with the lord Alberic, this church lacked all the aforesaid unhappiness, nor shall I say lacked only: but — which would that I might utter with a favorable omen — I testify that it was increased with the honor of every comeliness until the death of the lord Bruno, the seventh abbot from the venerable Alberic, who governed it honorably for seven lustres of years. But now, for fixing the epoch of this reformation about the middle of the tenth century, I subjoin another argument. Adso taught for some years at Toul before he was sent to Der with Alberic. And he taught in the reformed monastery of St. Apre. The reformation of Der therefore is at least some years later than that of St. Apre of Toul, accomplished in the year 935.

[53] Then Adso died on the journey which he undertook in the year 992 to visit Jerusalem, must be fixed about the middle of the 10th century. on the testimony of the same writer, page 849. And so if he came with abbot Alberic to the monastery of Der in the year 950, and was then thirty-eight years old, he would have been an octogenarian when he undertook the journey to Jerusalem. Now it is not credible that Adso was more than an octogenarian when he undertook so great a journey, but rather that he was younger, especially since the writer, narrating these things, made no mention of his decrepit age. And so the age of Adso persuades us not to fix the reformation of Der at the beginning of the reign of Louis d'Outremer, but rather toward its end; and since that king died in the year 954, we shall not stray far from the true reckoning if we fix that reformation about the middle of the tenth century. The writers of the Literary History of France, tome 6, page 473, considered the age of Adso more than Calmet or Mabillon did, and therefore placed his coming to St. Gauzlinus about the middle of the tenth century, and doubted whether Gauzlinus was alive when Adso departed from Toul. These things do not differ much from our conjecture: nevertheless I judge that Adso was at Toul some years earlier, and departed thence at least before the death of Louis d'Outremer, and without any doubt before the death of Gauzlinus. It is not equally necessary that we should say that he was then nearly thirty-eight years old, since knowledge and virtue supplied the defect of age. Hence he could consequently have been some years less than an octogenarian, even if he had certainly come to the abbey of Der in the very year 950, or even one or two years earlier.

[54] In the years 947 and 948 some councils of bishops were held in the case of Artald and Hugh, He is present at the Synod of Verdun, of Mouzon, contending about the archbishopric of Reims, at which St. Gauzlinus was present with other bishops of Germany and Gaul. Labbe treats of them in tome 9 of the Councils, col. 622 and following: and thence I shall briefly transfer hither what pertains to our purpose. There preceded an assembly of the kings Otto and Louis with some bishops, who did not pass judgment on the case of the contending parties, because a synod had not been proclaimed. That assembly was held at the beginning of the month of August of the year 947, and there a synod was decreed, to be held about the middle of the month of November in the same year. The names of the prelates of this assembly are not expressed. But the synod there proclaimed, Robert bishop of Trier presiding, and Gauzlinus being present with others, was held at the appointed time at Verdun. There were sent by this synod Adalbero of Metz and Gauzlinus of Toul, to bring Hugh, one of the contending parties, to the synod. But since he would not come, the see of Reims was adjudged by the synod to Artald, and a new synod proclaimed, to be held on the Ides of January of the year 948. This was celebrated at Mouzon, in the presence of the bishops of the province of Trier, among whom is St. Gauzlinus of Toul, and the sentence against Hugh, again refusing to be present, was confirmed, and communion forbidden him until he should clear himself in a general synod, which is at the same time proclaimed.

[55] At this synod, which was held on the VII day of June of the year 948 at Engilenheim, that is, at Ingelheim in the Palatinate near the territory of Mainz, there were present not only Otto king of Germany and Louis of France, and of Ingelheim. but also Marinus, legate of the Apostolic See, with most of the bishops of Germany, Lorraine, and certain others belonging to the empire; and for that reason it is called general. Artald was there declared archbishop of Reims, and Hugh his rival excommunicated. Likewise excommunication was decreed against prince Hugh, surnamed the Great, unless he should make satisfaction in the council: and certain other things were enacted, as may be seen in the praised Labbe, col. 623 and following. At these councils St. Gauzlinus was certainly present: there were also certain others celebrated in his time; but I do not find that he was present at others. Wherefore I proceed to the Saint's later deeds, omitting certain other matters of less moment, which I shall afterwards briefly recall to their order.

[56] The city and diocese of Toul laid waste by the Hungarians, If full credit must be given to Richer of Senones, a very great calamity afflicted the church of Toul in the time of St. Gauzlinus. For that writer in the Chronicle of Senones, chapter 12, has it thus: While the said Gozelinus was still living, a certain foreign people

so laid waste, by God's forbearance, the bishopric of Toul and the city itself, that in the chief church only three clerics remained, who could scarcely be sustained there. But the venerable bishop Gozelinus, seeing the bishopric come to so great misery, grieved. He went indeed to the magnates, dukes, barons, and other faithful of Christ, that by their help the poverty of the church might be relieved. And so Otto, then Roman emperor, when he had learned that the said bishopric of Toul had come to so great poverty, being moved with pity, by the industry and sagacity of the said Bishop repaired that bishopric, so that it seemed to have been built anew. About so great a disaster of the city and diocese of Toul nothing is said in the Life of St. Gauzlinus. It is established, however, from Flodoard at the year 954, and from other writers, that Lorraine was laid waste in the year 954 by the Hungarians, whom duke Conrad had called in. About them the praised Flodoard records these words: In the year DCCCCLIV the aforementioned Conrad, a pact having been entered into with the Hungarians, leads them through the kingdom of Lothar as far as the land of Ragenar (duke of Hainault), namely his rival, and of Bruno bishop of Cologne, whom Otto had created duke of Lorraine in the place of the deposed Conrad.

[57] and the church reduced to poverty, is relieved by the Saint: About the inroad of the Hungarians into Lorraine and Gaul, accomplished in the year 954, I bring forward nothing more, since the city of Toul is not treated of by name, so that it is likely that the loss of the people of Toul was not so great as Richer, three centuries later, asserted in the words alleged. Yet I should readily believe that the people of Toul were afflicted with grievous loss, since Conrad himself laid waste the city of Metz in the year 953, on Flodoard's testimony: who again at the year 954 has it thus: The Lotharingians are torn as much by the harassings of duke Conrad as by mutual plunderings among themselves. Wherefore I readily believe that the disaster of the city and territory of Toul was great, and I altogether judge that it must be bound to the year 954. Nor can it be doubted that the poverty of the church of Toul was great, not only on account of the disaster inflicted by the Hungarians, but chiefly on account of the almost perpetual wars by which Lorraine had been laid waste for twenty and more years. Hence first it is understood for what cause St. Gauzlinus obtained so many abbeys and other revenues. Secondly, from the same observation it is probably inferred that most of the donations both of Otto and of certain others must be placed between the year 954 and the year 962, that of St. Gauzlinus's death.

[58] Further, the pious liberality of Otto I and of others seems to have given courage to St. Gauzlinus for undertaking the foundation of the abbey of St. Mansuetus. the reformation of the monastery of St. Mansuetus begun. The church of St. Mansuetus, nearly fallen into ruin, he had before given to the abbey of St. Apre, as Adso the contemporary writes in the Miracles of St. Mansuetus among us, tome 1 of September, page 645: He (Gauzlinus, whom he had adorned with the elogium given before) therefore, considering the aforesaid place (he is treating of the church of St. Mansuetus) falling, as we have said, by divers mischances, having summoned to him from the place of St. Apre, the excellent confessor of Christ, the venerable father the lord Herchembold , whom he himself also had before appointed abbot there, commits this place to him to be repaired into the order of religion. Which venerable man indeed, being most religious, assigned some monks under the hand of provosts: and, because at that time stipends were lacking there, he had appointed that they should be fed at the expense of his own monastery. That some things also were given by Gauzlinus for founding an abbey there, but that he could not accomplish what he had begun, is plain from the letter of the emperor Otto, and from the letter of St. Gerard, who happily brought the begun foundation of the monastery to its end. In the letter of Otto, given in the year 965, by which the donations made to the monastery are confirmed, the place is said to have been begun to be repaired by Gauzilinus of good memory, the predecessor (of St. Gerard), but left with the work unfinished, as may be seen in that letter in Calmet, col. 373. And Gerard in a letter in the same place, col. 389, says that the monastery was begun by my predecessor for religion's sake, but left unfinished. The same then confirms also that which we had learned to have been formerly granted there, he says, by our predecessor Gauzlinus the bishop, of holy memory.* By the same letter St. Gerard appointed Adam abbot of St. Mansuetus: for St. Gauzlinus had carried the restoration of the deserted place only so far that it should be a provostship under the abbot of St. Apre.

otherwise Archembaldo*

§ VI. The order of his deeds in the episcopate briefly assigned: his blessed death: the years of his episcopate: his burial and the relics preserved to this day.

[ ] The chronological order Since the chief deeds of St. Gauzlinus had to be set forth at greater length, and thence it came about that certain other things could not conveniently be inserted among them, it pleases me to transfer them all briefly hither, and to repeat them examined summarily, that the order of all may appear. In the year 922, on the XVII day of March, St. Gauzlinus was ordained bishop of Toul, while Charles the Simple was still reigning in Gaul, who was with difficulty defending himself against rebellious subjects; and in Germany Henry the Fowler, who joined Lorraine to the kingdom of Germany about the end of the year 925, on Flodoard's testimony in the Chronicle. But now that St. Gauzlinus bore himself prudently in that change of king is plain even from this, that king Henry granted the county of Toul to him and to his successors. That donation Calmet binds to the year 928: to nearly the same time may be referred another donation of Henry, reported in the Life at number 7. Further, Gauzlinus seems to have spent the first ten or twelve years of his episcopate solely on diligently instructing his clergy, not yet solicitous about the monastic discipline which had utterly collapsed in the diocese of Toul. Meanwhile by St. Odo of Cluny in the year 930 the famous abbey of Fleury in the diocese of Orléans on the Loire had been reformed. There had also been reformed in the year 933 the abbey of Gorze in the territory of Metz, and there Einold, very well known to Gauzlinus and formerly archdeacon of Toul, had been appointed abbot.

[60] of his deeds Stirred by these things, the holy Man, that he might bring back regular discipline into his own diocese also, in the year 934 or 935 set out for Fleury; and, the monastic discipline being inspected there, he brought with him the Rule of St. Benedict copied out, gathered fit men, and at last in the year 935 endowed the monastery of St. Apre with regular discipline and a suitable revenue. He increased the revenue of the same monastery by a new donation by a letter given in the month of December in the year 940. The discipline of the monks produced greater fruits than that the Saint should believe he must stop there, knowing that the care of women also was committed to him. Hence, a place having been found which, having formerly been dedicated to the most holy Mother of God, was held fit for founding a monastery, about the year 940 he takes care that the foundations of a new monastery of maidens should be laid. The abbey seems to have been completed and Rothild appointed abbess in the year 941, in which Pope Stephen confirmed all things by his letter in the month of December. In the following year 942, in the month of March, St. Gauzlinus subscribed to a letter of Adalbero bishop of Metz, by which the monks brought into the church of St. Arnulf in place of the canons are confirmed. This letter, marked with the XV Indiction, Calmet recites at col. 349, and rightly notes in the margin the year 942.

[61] of them all, In the same year, if the VIII year of the kings Otto and Louis be rightly noted, St. Gauzlinus ended a long-standing suit with Adalbero bishop of Metz. A certain chapel had been built by count Widric in the time of Ludelm bishop of Toul, who had presently opposed it, because the chapel had been founded for taking away part of the tithes of the church of Aciacum. Drogo, Ludelm's successor, likewise did not wish that chapel there. Nevertheless it had remained until the times of Gauzlinus and Adalbero. But these in the year 942 met in the villa of Aciacum with their archdeacons and other clerics, and heard seven priests from each side. And these being heard, they did not hesitate with unanimous consent utterly to destroy the chapel as unjustly built, and to end the long-standing suit amicably. The letter about this judgment, subscribed by both bishops, Baluze published in tome 4 of the Miscellanea, page 423; but he wrongly noted in the margin about the year DCCCXCIV. In his errata he substituted the year 948: but not even so did he rightly express the time. For since the matter is noted as accomplished on the VIII Kalends of August, in the VIII year of the kings Louis and Otto, Rotbert being archbishop, Otto duke, the year 942 is designated, in which in the month of July the eighth year both of Otto king of Germany and of Louis of Gaul was running, and in which Rotbert was archbishop of Trier and Otto duke of Lorraine, who died in the year 944, as we have in Flodoard. None of these notes agrees with the year 948, except archbishop Robert, whose episcopate equally concurs with either year.

[62] which have become known, At that time St. Gauzlinus was continuing to draw pious and learned men to Toul, as is gathered from Adso, drawn with many entreaties from the abbey of Luxeuil to Toul, to teach in the reformed monastery of St. Apre: for Adso's coming is fixed by probable conjecture between the years 940 and 950. Then the Saint was present at councils, namely at that of Verdun in the month of November of the year 947, at that of Mouzon in the month of January of the year 948, and in the same year at that of Ingelheim in the month of June. Peace between Louis d'Outremer and prince Hugh being at last entered into in the year 950, Louis could in the same or the following year hand over the abbey of Der to the church of Toul or to St. Gauzlinus: and he takes care that it be zealously recalled to regular discipline by the monks of St. Apre. In the year 954 the Hungarians, having several times laid waste Lorraine, entered it again at duke Conrad's calling; and reduced the bishopric of Toul to great poverty. But Gauzlinus, compassionating the poverty of his subjects, asked king Otto and various counts to succor the afflicted church liberally, and not in vain.

[63] Hence to the year 955 or 956 seem to be recalled the donations of count Rotger, given in summary. of countess Eva, of Angelbert, Fulmar, Angelram, and Hanno, which the Life at number 6 enumerates, where I shall observe some things about them. The donations also of king Otto can very probably be bound to the year 956, in which Otto first treated with his Lotharingian subjects at Ingelheim, then again at Cologne, on Flodoard's testimony at that year. In the same year perhaps he claimed Bodonis-monasterium for his church before Otto against the abbess of Andlau in Alsace, as is reported in the Life at number 7. The contract of exchange entered into with Archadus or Achardus bishop of Langres, as the Life reports at number 6, agrees with the same times, but can be bound to no year certainly enough, since Achardus possessed the bishopric before the middle of the tenth century, and lived after Gauzlinus, as may be seen in the reprinted Gallia Christiana, tome 4, cols. 547 and 548.

[64] Further, the revenue of the church of Toul being in some fashion restored by these donations, given. the holy Prelate began to think about restoring the church of St. Mansuetus and promoting it to abbatial dignity. About the year 957 therefore may be placed the begun foundation of that monastery, which, sickness first hindering and death afterwards intervening, he did not complete. It is likely that the Saint wished to recall to regular discipline other churches also which he possessed, and to set regular abbots over each, but that he could not effect this on account of the poverty of his church, by which he was hindered from attributing to them sufficient revenues for maintaining an abbot and monks. Certainly in the elogium of the coeval author, given at number 13,

he is said in the purpose of good work once seized continually to have shown a marvellous courage. But four years before his death he fell into a grievous languor of body, by which at last he was brought to the end. And so he was seized by this sickness in the year 958, as is plain from the year of his death.

[65] For writers agree that the holy Prelate died in the year 962, on the VII day of September. St. Gauzlinus died in the year 962, as is clearly drawn from the year and day The year of St. Gauzlinus's death is not indeed read in his Life, but it is clearly drawn from the Life of St. Gerard his successor, published among us in tome III of April: for in it on page 207 Gerard is narrated to have been ordained bishop while the nine hundred and sixty-third year of the Lord's Incarnation was running. The same year of Gerard's ordination is assigned by Adso in the Miracles of St. Mansuetus, tome 1 of September, page 648. And so, since the day of St. Gerard's ordination was the IV Kalends of April, as Mabillon in tome 3 of the Annals, page 560, testifies that he found in his own charter, the death of St. Gauzlinus, generally bound to the VII day of the month of September, must necessarily be referred to the year 962, as Mabillon rightly gathered. For it is clear from the Life of St. Gerard that between the death of St. Gauzlinus and the ordination of his successor only some months intervened.

[66] of the ordination of St. Gerard, which are assigned: Further, it pleases me to assign more accurately the day of Gerard's ordination, because in St. Gerard I see it wrongly designated as the IV Kalends of May and of March, which I judge came about from the drowsiness of those correcting the types, since from Henschen's own words the day already assigned by me is clearly gathered. For St. Gerard died on the XXIII day of April, and besides the years for which he is said to have presided, there are added in the Life at number 30 three weeks with three days, that is, twenty-four days. But Henschen in the Commentary at number 2 observes that three weeks and five days ought to have been written, that is, twenty-six days. For from the IV Kalends of April, that is, the XXIX day of March, to the XXIII of April there are found twenty-six days, if the first and last be counted in; but only twenty-four, if the first, that is, the day itself of the ordination, and the last, that is, the day of death, be omitted: and in this way the biographer counted, whom in this part I do not think must be corrected. Wherefore it appears on all sides most certain that Gerard was ordained on the XXIX day of March, which was also a Sunday, in the year 963; and so that St. Gauzlinus died in the year 962.

[67] he presided over his church forty complete years, and some months: From this certain epoch of his death, and from the day and year of his ordination given before, it can not with difficulty be gathered how many years Gauzlinus presided over the see of Toul. For the years from the year 922, in which he is said to have been ordained on the XVII of March, to the year 962, in which he died on the VII day of September, are reckoned forty complete, and the sixth month besides was running, so that he must be said to have died in the forty-first year of his episcopate. The Life therefore must be corrected, as it has been published in Martène, in which he is said to have died in the XLIV year of his episcopate, which likewise is found in our copy, as also in most of the elogia. Calmet from the codex of St. Mansuetus published, In the fortieth year of his episcopate; and the same is found in the elogium which I have already given from Calmet's Collection at number 13, where I observed that it is Adso's or another contemporary writer's. Some contemporary writer could indeed have spoken thus, who wished to count only the completed years. But whether it was so written from the beginning, or whether the numerals were afterwards corrupted, there is no doubt at all about the number of years already assigned.

[68] [buried in the monastery of Bouxières: most of his relics there, others in the church of Toul:] About the Saint's burial in the monastery of Bouxières the Life to be published agrees with the elogia given at numbers 4 and 16. Calmet in tome 1 of the History, col. 894, testifies that the body is preserved to this day in the same monastery, enclosed in a precious casket: but that the head was set upon a half-length statue of silver: that the jaw was inserted into another half-length statue of very great price, and is now preserved in the cathedral church of Toul. These things clearly imply that an elevation of the body was at some time made; but about it I have no monument at hand. Calmet adds that in the church of Bouxières, which for some centuries has been of noble canonesses, there are also shown the chalice, paten, and veil which the Saint used on the day of the dedication of that church; and the same Saint's ivory comb. Certain other things he had narrated before at cols. 891 and 892, which, if they be certain enough, also illustrate the memory of St. Gauzlinus; but they seem to be reported rather from a certain popular report than from ancient monuments, although he praises the monuments of the abbey, or the book of the choir, printed for the use of the canonesses of Bouxières.

[69] Since, however, something true may underlie them, I transfer Calmet's account hither in summary. certain other less certain matters, When in a time of huge want Gauzlinus had prayed God to comfort the afflicted people, the queen of France, God inspiring it, sent three camels laden with provisions. The camels come to the bank of the river Meurthe, which washes the foot of the hill on which the abbey is situated, Gauzlinus being then at prayer there. A dumb man, wont to ferry people across the river, seeing the camels, ran with the greatest speed to Gauzlinus to announce the coming of the camels, and at the same time receives speech. And in memory of this miracle, some dumb man was always fed in the abbey of Bouxières, and even now a dumb man is fed in the abbess's house, says Calmet. But what is said about the camels smacks of fable, since the use of camels was never ordinary in Gaul for carrying burdens. The praised author subjoins that there is still shown the pulpit from which St. Gauzlinus is believed to have preached to the assembly, on a raised plain between the abbey and the wood, because the church could not hold the flowing multitude of the people. St. Gauzlinus could at some time have preached there to the people, and in memory of that deed that stone and solid tower which he describes could have been built: but it is hardly credible that it was built for the Saint for preaching.

[70] More credible is a third thing, which Calmet says is read in the manuscript Miracles of St. Chlodulf, the people's devotion toward the Saint. namely that in a time of excessive drought or of too continuous rain the bodies of SS. Mansuetus and Apre were wont to be carried to the abbey of Bouxières, that by the merits of the most holy Virgin and of St. Gauzlinus an end of the evil might be obtained. Lastly the same writer testifies at col. 894 that there is a huge concourse of people to the church of Bouxières on the Sunday on which the festivity of the most holy Trinity is celebrated. More about the Saint's posthumous glory has already been given before. Wherefore I subjoin the Acts elucidated with due annotations.

ACTS

by an anonymous author,

From the editions of Martène and Calmet, and a manuscript copy, collated with one another.

Gauzlinus, bishop and confessor of Toul of the Leuci in Lorraine (S.)

BHL Number: 0000

By an Anonymous author.

Illustrious birth, the episcopate, the reformation of the monastery of St. Apre. Whom the shepherd and love of the flock, the lord Gauzlinus ^a, succeeded, a man supremely Catholic and a most devoted cultivator of monastic religion: who, sprung of noble Frankish blood, was brought up in the palace among the nobles of the realm; and, being soon to be pontiff, shone above many of his own family and age by the gift of a twofold knowledge. Being therefore exalted by the wishes of all with the pontifical mitre, he was, Christ favoring, ordained on the XVI Kalends of April ^b: and by the benevolence of a most clement heart, by the serenity of a countenance so pleasant, and by the gentleness of his speech he diligently surpassed the sweetness of his own lineage, wholly intent on vigils and on alms; who, to the crowning of his good works, in the XIV ^c year of his ordination, by God's nod established in the place of St. Apre the Rule of St. Benedict, unknown to all the inhabitants of this realm, long sought and found afar.

[2] The monastery of Bouxières founded: the occasion of this foundation He built from the foundations the monastery of the holy Mother of God Mary at Bouxières ^d, established there a choir of handmaids of God, and adorned it with goods and estates and ornaments. For the merit of which deed it was shown beforehand by God to his successor the prelate Gerard that he was associated with the martyr Apollinaris ^e in heavenly glory ^f. And I think it worth while to deliver to posterity the occasion of which glorious deed for remembrance. Now Hardrad, own brother of the aforesaid Gauzlinus, a man exceedingly strenuous in military pursuit, and most dear to all in the goodness of his manners, on a certain occasion was engaged * in the exercise of hunting upon the river Meurthe ^g. And so it happened that his dogs pursued a fierce boar, which, compelled by their barkings, strove to escape the death close at hand; which ran a long time through all trackless places, and at length in flight came to a hill situated above the villa of Bouxières ^h, and reaching which, it set its steps beneath a certain thorn tree, and presently the pack of dogs following with barking, by divine power checked its swift step. The beast stood undaunted beneath the tree, the force of the barking dogs stood still at a distance, mute and stupefied, nor dared in any way to draw near to the neighborhood of the thicket ⁱ. The aforesaid soldier follows on horseback, and wonders that an unwonted thing has befallen him: leaping from his horse, he enters the brushwood, and beholds a ruined altar with the buildings round about. Therefore, venerating the divine thing, and suffering the beast to go away in safety, he hastens quickly back to his own, and announces to his brother the Pontiff what had been done and found.

[3] is set forth, But the lord Prelate, sending sure messengers thither, and inquiring from the elders of greater age how the matter had stood, learned that from of old a church of the holy Mother of God had been built there, but that it had been made desolate, age consuming it and carelessness neglecting it. They asserted also that very often by night divine lights ^k shone there, and flooded the neighboring places with their brightness: which the venerable Prelate learning, he rejoices exceedingly, and by taking counsel meditates rebuilding the church. And because the aforesaid hill belonged to the bishop of Metz, he asked of the prelate Theoderic ^l, who was also called Sixtus *, that it should be given him by exchange, conferring upon him the venerable staff of St. Peter the apostle, which blessed Mansuetus ^m had carried with him from the city of Rome. And so, the hill being obtained, he rebuilt the church, and established an altar in honor of blessed Mary above the stock of the aforesaid tree. Since by the prayers of that same Mother of God sick men detained by divers languors were healed there, and the vows of the common people flowed together there, he judged it worthy, by the frequent inspiration of divine clemency, that it should no longer lack divine worship.

[4] and the foundation itself. And he began to consider how in that same oratory, if by God's gift they could be found, there might be a society of consecrated virgins, which should serve under the Rule of St. Benedict in the service of the perpetual Virgin. Which deed indeed deserved to be advanced by divine clemency: for, God fore-ordaining it, he found certain nuns like wandering sheep ⁿ, but yet seeking the way ^o of eternal life, fervent in the love of God, and desiring a remote place for serving him: moved with pity for whom, by the counsel of the lord abbot Archembold, who presided over the monastery of St. Apre, and of the other faithful, he assigned to them the said little cell to inhabit, setting over them Rothild [p] as abbess, who should rule their

life; and that they might there more freely be free for spiritual things, he provided them whence they might live from the possessions of the bishopric: namely the church in that same villa of Buxeria, with the tithes and all things pertaining to it; and also the chapel of Porchera-curtis * with all its tithing. Such therefore is the beginning which the monastery of Bouxières is reported to have had, which by God's help takes increase from day to day.

[5] And in the times of this venerable pontiff ancient prodigies are so far renewed that in the thirtieth year of his prelacy crosses [q] appeared on garments, which the Almighty, as we read in the Ecclesiastical History, allows to appear to mortals for the confuting of the unbelief of the faithless. Crosses seen on garments in his time: many goods He acquired for the church over which he was pontiff an allod at Bojacum from Angelbert [r], and from Fulmar a wood in Brieri-vallis, and he obtained from king Otto the abbey of Moyenmoutier [s], on this condition, that duke Frederick, while he lived, should retain the advocacy, and the Pontiff should order the prebend of the place; and after the duke's end the whole abbey should pertain to the bishop [t]. He obtained also the toll of the city [u] and the county by the precept of king Henry: and he solidly possessed the abbey of Poulangy [x], and that of Der [y], and that of Ossonis-villa [z].

[6] The same by exchange gave to Archadus bishop of Langres the abbey of Varennes [aa], acquired for the church of Toul by the Saint and on the other hand Archadus gave to the bishop of Toul whatever he seemed to have in Bosonis-mons, and Ursacii-villa, and Seionz . He obtained also from count Rotger Amboldi-villa in the district of Odornense [bb], and from countess Eva [cc] the villa of Angeriaca, with a chapel, and Molisiaca, and the villa which is called Girinvicinus, and Nordalli-vadum [dd], and a part in Buchuliacum, and Rodaldi-villa, and Syonni-villa, and the church which is called in the villa of Blasevis , and part of the church in Rameii-villa, which pays five shillings; and from Angelram two farms in the villa which is called Portus, and from Hanno the church of Villa-Bladini.

[7] He in the time of the emperor Otto [ee] proved with twelve free men against the abbess of Andlau [ff] that Bodonis-monasterium was subject to the church of St. Stephen [gg], his sickness, death, and burial. and from the same emperor he obtained half the toll of the hill of St. Eliphius. The same obtained from king Henry, by the help of count Ebahard, whatever the king himself possessed in Gundulfi-villa. Which happy man, in the purpose of good work once seized continually extending to all a marvellous courage, after manifold labors in the warfare of Christ, being proved by the Lord with a four years' languor like another Job, in the XLIV [hh] year of his episcopate, on the VII Ides of September, withdrew to the heavenly seats. Being therefore carried by clergy and people, he received in the monastery of Bouxières a most worthy burial, as he had commanded while living, among the choirs of virgins, of whom he had gathered there a considerable number of a stricter life, to be honored through long ages in the praises of God.

ANNOTATIONS.

p Elsewhere it is read Rothildim. About her consult the Commentary, number 44, and there the letter of foundation at number 41, where the foundation is also more fully set forth.

q Of those crosses Brower treats in the Annals of Trier at the year 958, and from him Calmet in tome 1 of the History, col. 959. And the matter happened in the year 958, in which not the thirtieth year of St. Gauzlinus was running, but the thirty-seventh, or at least the thirty-sixth, if those crosses were seen at the beginning of the year before the 17th of March. Thietmar in the Chronicle, book 2, has this about those crosses: Thereafter in the fourth year of that same reckoning (that is, in the fourth year after the year 954, or 958) the sign of the saving cross, shining marvellously and more pitiably upon the garments of men, profited those who received it worthily and harmed those who mocked. Lambert of Hersfeld at the same year, and other Chronicles also, have the same prodigy, some however a little earlier or later. But all doubt about the time is removed by the cross set up at Trier with the inscription which Brower recites, since it was erected at that same time by Henry archbishop of Trier. I transfer the whole inscription hither: In memory of the signs of the cross which had come from heaven upon men, in the year of the Lord's incarnation DCCCCLVIII, and in the second year of his episcopate, Henry archbishop of Trier erected me. Calmet narrates that a certain liquid fell, out of which those crosses were formed, and thinks that they can be explained in some physical way. But neither in those writers whom he praises nor in other ancients have I found anything about that liquid, so that I judge it was merely devised that a physical explanation might be made easier. If the studious reader would hear my opinion about the physical explanation both of this prodigy and of many others which I have read in various authors, I shall candidly say that most of the physical explanations by which some men, easily flattering themselves and wont to laugh at others as too credulous, endeavor to recall prodigious facts to the natural order seem to me so inept that they are far more worthy of laughter than those very simpler folk whom they laugh at because they now and then hold natural facts for miracles. If sacred scripture asserted that all things are accomplished in the world in a natural manner; or at least were silent about miracles to be wrought on earth by divine power; the effort of those who labored to explain everything by the natural order would be praiseworthy; and it would easily be pardoned if they now and then brought forward something less probable. But since the sacred Letters relate many miracles, and foretell that more will be in the new or Christian Law also, it is not the part of a prudent Christian to wish to expound everything in a natural manner, and so to lay upon himself a burden far heavier than feeble shoulders can bear.

r In Martène there is read in Boiaco-Angeberto, but faultily, since Angelbert is the giver or seller. Of Angelbert, however, I find nothing more, nor of Fulmar, who follows. Neither is it clearly expressed whether they gave or sold those possessions to St. Gauzlinus. But it is more likely that all the things which are enumerated were given, on account of the poverty of the church of Toul, after the year 954, unless the contrary be explained. Consult the Commentary, number 63.

s Medium-Monasterium, otherwise Medianum monasterium, in French Moyenmoutier, is situated in the Vosges. It was in a most miserable state in the time of St. Gauzlinus, because it had before been handed over to a secular count, as Richer narrates in the Chronicle of Senones, book 2, chapter 10, and from him Mabillon in tome 3 of the Annals, pages 464 and 465. They add that a reformation was attempted by Frederick duke of Lorraine, but that it lacked a happy issue, so that clerics were restored in place of the monks brought in for the reformation. But that reformation is wrongly attached by them to the year 942, since Frederick was made duke of Lorraine in the year 959, on Flodoard's testimony. Wherefore the reformation must rather be fixed about the year 960, in which the abbey could be so handed over by Otto to Gauzlinus and duke Frederick as it is here said to have been handed over. It is likely that the reformation was begun at Gauzlinus's counsel, but that he was hindered first by the sickness with which he was then detained, then by death.

t Calmet has perveniret. But St. Gauzlinus never obtained it, because duke Frederick survived him. Gerard, however, his successor, is said to have obtained the abbey in the Life in Martène, tome 3 of the Anecdota, col. [ ].

u Of the county of Toul obtained there was treatment in the Commentary, number 20, where I said that Calmet binds it to the year 928. But hence I gather that the writer reports all these things without any order.

x In the Catalogue of the prelates of Toul, both in Calmet and in Martène, in the elogium of Drogo, who immediately preceded St. Gauzlinus, these things are read: By the precept of king Louis he held the abbey of Poulangy. This Mabillon adopted in tome 3 of the Annals, page 322, and again page 343: but he did not explain who that king Louis is from whom Drogo obtained that abbey. Certainly no Louis reigned in Gaul in the time of Drogo bishop of Toul, so that Louis king of Germany, son of the emperor Arnulf, seems to be understood. However it be, St. Gauzlinus is not said to have first obtained this abbey, but to have possessed it. He seems also to have transmitted it to his successor, St. Gerard: but from him the abbey of Poulangy was taken away by Bruno bishop of Langres, as Calmet narrates from the Life of St. Gerard, tome 1, col. [ ]. He names it in French Poulange or Poulangy, and at col. [ ] observes that there is even now an abbess in it with fourteen daughters, who nevertheless are not compelled to keep themselves within the cloister. Denis de Sainte-Marthe enumerates the abbesses down to the year 1715 in tome 4 of Gallia Christiana, col. 745 and following; where also more about this abbey, which he calls Polongeyum, may be seen.

y Of the abbey of Der received by St. Gauzlinus and recalled to discipline I treated in the Commentary, §5. It was held after Gauzlinus by St. Gerard; but it was taken from him also by count Heribert, as is read in the Life of St. Gerard in Martène, chapter 19: in French it is called Montier-en-Der.

z Whether Ossonis-villa was always possessed by St. Gauzlinus seems doubtful. Mabillon in tome 3 of the Annals, page 436, says that this monastery, dedicated to St. Leodegar the martyr, was given by Louis d'Outremer, at prince Hugh's request, to a secular and married man, whom he names Adelard. Then on page 678 he places Ossonis-villa in the diocese of Besançon, and says that it is called in French Vellefaux. But Calmet at cols. 454 and 455 narrates the foundation of Ossonis-villa, which he attributes to St. Bodo bishop of Toul: and believes that that monastery, which no longer subsists, as the praised writer notes at col. [ ], was situated in the Vosges and in the diocese of Toul. If it be the same monastery which king Louis about the year 937 gave to Adelard, the same afterwards, on his death, or for some other cause, will have been given to St. Gauzlinus. Certainly in the praised Life of St. Gerard, chapter 19, it is had thus: He by the imperial precept of Otto the Great possessed the abbey of Moyenmoutier, and of Ossonis-villa, and also of Poulangy and of Der. All these we have already enumerated as given to St. Gauzlinus.

aa In Calmet it is written de Varennis. It is situated in a village of the same name in the territory of Langres, as Calmet writes in the History, tome 1, col. [ ], where he asserts that it was dedicated to St. Gangulf, and narrates the controversy which by reason of this exchange arose between St. Gerard, Gauzlinus's successor, and Archadus bishop of Langres and his successors. He adds at col. [ ] that from the abbey of St. Gangulf of Varennes there was afterwards made a priory, subject to the abbey of Molesme.

bb Who that count Rotger is I do not certainly find. Amboldi-villa Calmet calls in French Ambleville. Of the district of Odornense — in Martène Ordonense — Valesius treats in the Notitia Galliarum, page 389.

cc Countess Eva enriched various churches with her donations. Two letters of hers, given in favor of the monastery of St. Arnulf, may be seen in Calmet among the instruments, col. 356 and following. Hence I judge that all the possessions which are here enumerated were not sold but given by her.

dd Martène has Hordalli-vadum, but faultily, I suppose.

ee Otto was crowned emperor at Rome in the year 962; but the things which are here narrated were done earlier.

ff Andlavium or Andlavia, commonly Andlau, is a town of lower Alsace, on a little river of the same name, about six miles above Strasbourg. There the empress Richardis founded an abbey, after she had been separated from the emperor Charles the Fat, as is set forth at greater length in the new Gallia Christiana, tome 5, col. 880, where also a series of the abbesses is given down to our own century. There is treatment of the abbess of that monastery: but no abbess occurs in the said catalogue of whom it can be said for certain that she stirred up this suit against St. Gauzlinus, because in the earlier centuries the times of the several abbesses are not everywhere assigned.

gg That is, to the cathedral church of Toul, dedicated to St. Stephen. Bodonis-monasterium, in French Bon-moutier, had been founded by St. Bodo bishop of Toul; but it had been taken from the church of Toul by king Lothar, and restored to it in the time of bishop Drogo by Charles the Simple. Mabillon in tome 3 of the Annals, page 678, observes that Bodonis monasterium, situated in the forest of the Vosges, was also of women; but that afterwards it was translated to the neighboring place which is called St. Sauveur, of the Order of regular canons.

hh Nay, in the forty-first year of his episcopate, and in the year of the Christian era 962, as has been proved in the Commentary, number 67. In Calmet there is read, the fortieth.

Ms. alitus*

Calm. dulcedineque*

otherwise existebat*

otherwise restituere*

otherwise dicebatur*

* Picherecourt

otherwise ecclesiæ*

otherwise Seions*

otherwise Blafeius*

otherwise Hunone*