ALCUIN OF YORK

                   LECTURES DELIVERED IN THE CATHEDRAL
                    CHURCH OF BRISTOL IN 1907 AND 1908

                                  BY THE
                         RIGHT REV. G. F. BROWNE
                           D.D., D.C.L., F.S.A.
                            BISHOP OF BRISTOL
             FORMERLY DISNEY PROFESSOR OF ART AND ARCHAEOLOGY
                      IN THE UNIVERSITY OF CAMBRIDGE

                            WITH ILLUSTRATIONS

          PUBLISHED UNDER THE DIRECTION OF THE TRACT COMMITTEE.

                                 LONDON:
                SOCIETY FOR PROMOTING CHRISTIAN KNOWLEDGE.
       NORTHUMBERLAND AVENUE, W.C.; 43, QUEEN VICTORIA STREET, E.C.
                       BRIGHTON: 129, NORTH STREET.
                         NEW YORK: E. S. GORHAM.
                                   1908




PREFACE


No attempt has been made to correct the various forms of many of the
proper names so as to make the spelling uniform. It is true to the period
to leave the curious variations as Alcuin and others wrote them. In
the case of Pope Hadrian, the name has been written Hadrian and Adrian
indiscriminately in the text.

While Alcuin’s style is lucid, his habit of dictating letters hurriedly,
and sending them off without revision if he had a headache, has left its
mark on the letters as we have them. It has seemed better to leave the
difficulties in the English as he left them in the Latin.

The edition used, and the numbering of the Epistles adopted, is that of
Wattenbach and Dümmler, _Monumenta Alcuiniana_, Berlin 1873, being the
sixth volume of the _Bibliotheca Rerum Germanicarum_.




CONTENTS


                                                                      PAGE

                                CHAPTER I

    The authorship of the anonymous Life of Alcuin.—Alcuin’s Life
    of his relative Willibrord.—Willibrord at Ripon.—Alchfrith and
    Wilfrith.—Alcuin’s conversion.—His studies under Ecgbert and
    Albert at the Cathedral School of York.—Ecgbert’s method of
    teaching.—Alcuin becomes assistant master of the School.—Is
    ordained deacon.—Becomes head master.—Joins Karl                     1

                               CHAPTER II

    Alcuin finally leaves England.—The Adoptionist heresy.—Alcuin’s
    retirement to Tours.—His knowledge of secrets.—Karl and the
    three kings his sons.—Fire at St. Martin’s, Tours.—References
    to the life of St. Martin.—Alcuin’s writings.—His interview
    with the devil.—His last days                                       23

                               CHAPTER III

    The large bulk of Alcuin’s letters and other writings.—The
    main dates of his life.—Bede’s advice to Ecgbert.—Careless
    lives of bishops.—No parochial system.—Inadequacy of the
    bishops’ oversight.—Great monasteries to be used as sees for
    new bishoprics, and evil monasteries to be suppressed.—Election
    of abbats and hereditary descent.—Evils of pilgrimages.—Daily
    Eucharists                                                          51

                               CHAPTER IV

    The school of York.—Alcuin’s poem on the Bishops and Saints
    of the Church of York.—The destruction of the Britons by
    the Saxons.—Description of Wilfrith II, Ecgbert, Albert, of
    York.—Balther and Eata.—Church building in York.—The Library of
    York                                                                68

                                CHAPTER V

    The affairs of Mercia.—Tripartite division of England.—The
    creation of a third archbishopric, at Lichfield.—Offa and
    Karl.—Alcuin’s letter to Athelhard of Canterbury; to Beornwin
    of Mercia.—Karl’s letter to Offa, a commercial treaty.—Alcuin’s
    letter to Offa.—Offa’s death                                        87

                               CHAPTER VI

    Grant to Malmesbury by Ecgfrith of Mercia.—Alcuin’s letters to
    Mercia.—Kenulf and Leo III restore Canterbury to its primatial
    position.—Gifts of money to the Pope.—Alcuin’s letters to the
    restored archbishop.—His letter to Karl on the archbishop’s
    proposed visit.—Letters of Karl to Offa (on a question of
    discipline) and Athelhard (in favour of Mercian exiles)            106

                               CHAPTER VII

    List of the ten kings of Northumbria of Alcuin’s
    time.—Destruction of Lindisfarne, Wearmouth, and Jarrow, by the
    Danes.—Letters of Alcuin on the subject to King Ethelred, the
    Bishop and monks of Lindisfarne, and the monks of Wearmouth and
    Jarrow.—His letter to the Bishop and monks of Hexham               122

                              CHAPTER VIII

    Alcuin’s letters to King Eardulf and the banished intruder
    Osbald.—His letters to King Ethelred and Ethelred’s mother.—The
    Irish claim that Alcuin studied at Clonmacnoise.—Mayo of the
    Saxons                                                             140

                               CHAPTER IX

    Alcuin’s letter to all the prelates of England.—To the Bishops
    of Elmham and Dunwich.—His letters on the election to the
    archbishopric of York.—To the new archbishop, and the monks
    whom he sent to advise him.—His urgency that bishops should
    read Pope Gregory’s Pastoral Care                                  157

                                CHAPTER X

    Summary of Alcuin’s work in France.—Adoptionism, Alcuin’s seven
    books against Felix and three against Elipandus.—Alcuin’s
    advice that a treatise of Felix be sent to the Pope and
    three others.—Alcuin’s name dragged into the controversy on
    Transubstantiation.—Image-worship.—The four _Libri Carolini_
    and the Council of Frankfurt.—The bearing of the _Libri
    Carolini_ on the doctrine of Transubstantiation                    172

                               CHAPTER XI

    Karl and Rome.—His visits to that city.—The offences and
    troubles of Leo III.—The coronation of Charlemagne.—The Pope’s
    adoration of the Emperor.—Alcuin’s famous letter to Karl prior
    to his coronation.—Two great Roman forgeries, the Donation of
    Constantine and the Letter of St. Peter to the Franks              186

                               CHAPTER XII

    Alcuin retires to the Abbey and School of Tours.—Sends
    to York for more advanced books.—Begs for old wine from
    Orleans.—Karl calls Tours a smoky place.—Fees charged to the
    students.—History and remains of the Abbey Church of St.
    Martin.—The tombs of St. Martin and six other Saints.—The
    Public Library of Tours.—A famous Book of the Gospels.—St.
    Martin’s secularised.—Martinensian bishops                         202

                              CHAPTER XIII

    Further details of the Public Library of Tours.—Marmoutier.—The
    Royal Abbey of Cormery.—Licence of Hadrian I to St. Martin’s to
    elect bishops.—Details of the Chapter of the Cathedral Church
    of Tours                                                           219

                               CHAPTER XIV

    Great dispute on right of sanctuary.—Letters of Alcuin on the
    subject to his representatives at court and to a bishop.—The
    emperor’s severe letter to St. Martin’s.—Alcuin’s reply.—Verses
    of the bishop of Orleans on Charlemagne, Luitgard, and Alcuin
                                                                       231

                               CHAPTER XV

    Alcuin’s letters to Charlemagne’s sons.—Recension of the
    Bible.—The “Alcuin Bible” at the British Museum.—Other supposed
    “Alcuin Bibles.”—Anglo-Saxon Forms of Coronation used at the
    coronations of French kings                                        246

                               CHAPTER XVI

    Examples of Alcuin’s style in his letters, allusive,
    jocose, playful.—The perils of the Alps.—The vision of
    Drithelme.—Letters to Arno.—Bacchus and Cupid                      264

                              CHAPTER XVII

    Grammatical questions submitted to Alcuin by Karl.—Alcuin and
    Eginhart.—Eginhart’s description of Charlemagne.—Alcuin’s
    interest in missions.—The premature exaction of
    tithes.—Charlemagne’s elephant Abulabaz.—Figures of
    elephants in silk stuffs.—Earliest examples of French and
    German.—Boniface’s _Abrenuntiatio Diaboli_.—Early Saxon.—The
    earliest examples of Anglo-Saxon prose and verse                   280

                              CHAPTER XVIII

    Alcuin’s latest days.—His letters mention his ill health.—His
    appeals for the prayers of friends, and of strangers.—An
    affectionate letter to Charlemagne.—The death scene                298

                               APPENDICES

    A. A letter of Alcuin to Fulda                                     305

    B. The report of the papal legates, George and Theophylact, on
       their mission to England                                        310

    C. The original Latin of Alcuin’s suggestion that a treatise by
       Felix should be sent to the Pope and three others               319

    D. The Donation of Constantine                                     320

    E. Harun Al Raschid and Charlemagne                                324

    INDEX                                                              325




LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS


                                                                      PAGE

    Plate I. St. Martin’s, Tours, before the pillage    _To face page_ 210

    Plate II. The Tour St. Martin                                      211

    Plate III. The Tour Charlemagne                                    212

    Plate IV. The Tomb of St. Martin                                   213

    Plate V. Some remains of Marmoutier                                222

    Plate VI. Early capital at Cormery                                 227

    Plate VII. Elephant from robes in the tomb of Charlemagne          290

    Plate VIII. Inscription worked into the above robe                 291

    Plate IX. Silk stuff of the seventh or eighth century              292

    Plate X. Archbishop Boniface’s form for renouncing the devil       295

    Plate XI. The earliest piece of English prose                      296

    Plate XII. The earliest piece of English verse                     297




ALCUIN OF YORK.




CHAPTER I

    The authorship of the anonymous Life of Alcuin.—Alcuin’s Life
    of his relative Willibrord.—Willibrord at Ripon.—Alchfrith and
    Wilfrith.—Alcuin’s conversion.—His studies under Ecgbert and
    Albert at the Cathedral School of York.—Ecgbert’s method of
    teaching.—Alcuin becomes assistant master of the School.—Is
    ordained deacon.—Becomes head master.—Joins Karl.


The only Life of Alcuin which we possess, coming from early times, was
written by a monk who does not give his name, at the command of an abbat
whose name, as also that of his abbey, is not mentioned by the writer.
We have, however, this clue, that the writer learned his facts from a
favourite disciple and priest of Alcuin himself, by name Sigulf. Sigulf
received from Alcuin the pet name of Vetulus, “little old fellow,” in
accordance with the custom of the literary and friendly circle of which
Alcuin was the centre. Alcuin himself was Flaccus; Karl the King of the
Franks, and afterwards Emperor, was David; and so on. We learn further
that the abbat who assigned to the anonymous monk the task of writing
the Life was himself a disciple of Sigulf. Sigulf succeeded Alcuin as
Abbat of Ferrières; and when he retired on account of old age, he was in
turn succeeded by two of his pupils whom he had brought up as his sons,
Adalbert and Aldric. The Life was written after the death of Benedict of
Aniane, that is, after the year 823. Adalbert had before that date been
succeeded by Aldric, and Aldric became Archbishop of Sens in the end
of 829. The Life was probably written between 823 and 829 by a monk of
Ferrières, by order of Aldric. Alcuin had died in 804. The writer of the
Life had never even seen Alcuin; he was in all probability not a monk of
Tours.

That is the view of the German editor Wattenbach as to the authorship and
dedication of the Life. That learned man appears to have given inadequate
weight to the writer’s manner of citing Aldric as a witness to the truth
of a quaint story told in the Life. This is the story, as nearly as
possible in the monk’s words:—

“The man of the Lord [Alcuin himself] had read in his youth the books
of the ancient philosophers and the romances[1] of Vergil,[2] but he
would not in his old age have them read to him or allow others to read
them. The divine poets, he was wont to say, were sufficient for them,
they did not need to be polluted with the luxurious flow of Vergil’s
verse. Against this precept the little old fellow Sigulf tried to act
secretly, and for this he was put to the blush publicly. Calling to him
two youths whom he was bringing up as sons, Adalbert and Aldric, he
bade them read Vergil with him in complete secrecy, ordering them by no
means to let any one know, lest it come to the ears of Father Albinus
[Alcuin]. But Albinus called him in an ordinary way to come to him, and
then said: ‘Where do you come from, you Vergilian? Why have you planned,
contrary to my wish and advice, to read Vergil?’ Sigulf threw himself
at his feet, confessed that he had acted most foolishly, and declared
himself penitent. The pious father administered a scolding to him, and
then accepted the amends he made, warning him never to do such a thing
again. Abbat Aldric, a man worthy of God, who still survives, testifies
that neither he nor Adalbert had told any one about it; they had been
absolutely silent, as Sigulf had enjoined.”

It seems practically impossible to suppose that the monk would have put
it in this way, if Aldric had been the abbat to whom he dedicated the
Life, or indeed the abbat of his own monastery. It is clear that the Life
was written while Aldric was still an abbat, that is between 823 and 829;
and it seems most probable that it was written by a monk of some other
monastery for his own abbat. Nothing of importance, however, turns upon
this discussion. It is a rather curious fact, considering the severity
of Alcuin’s objection to Vergil being read in his monastery, that the
beautiful copy of Vergil at Berne, of very early ninth-century date,
belonged to St. Martin of Tours from Carolingian times, and was written
there.[3]

Not unnaturally, the Life, written in and for a French monastery, does
not give details of the Northumbrian origin of Alcuin. It makes only the
statement usual in such biographies, that he sprang from a noble Anglian
family. Curiously enough, we get such further details as we have from
a Life of St. Willibrord written by Alcuin himself at the request of
Archbishop Beornrad of Sens, who was Abbat of Epternach, a monastery of
Willibrord’s, from 777 to 797.

“There was,” he writes, “in the province of Northumbria, a father of a
family, by race Saxon, by name Wilgils, who lived a religious life with
his wife and all his house. He had given up the secular life and entered
upon the life of a monk; and when spiritual fervour increased in him
he lived solitary on the promontory which is girt by the ocean and the
river Humber (Spurn Point)[4]. Here he lived long in fasting and prayer
in a little oratory dedicated to St. Andrew[5] the Apostle; he worked
miracles; his name became celebrated. Crowds of people consulted him;
he comforted them with the most sweet admonitions of the Word of God.
His fame became known to the king and great men of the realm, and they
conferred upon him some small neighbouring properties, so that he might
build a church. There he collected a congregation of servants of God,
moderate in size, but honourable. There, after long labours, he received
his crown from God; and there his body lies buried. His descendants to
this day hold the property by the title of his sanctity. Of them I am
the least in merit and the last in order. I, who write this book of
the history of the most holy father and greatest teacher Willibrord,
succeeded to the government of that small cell by legitimate degrees of
descent.”

Inasmuch as the book is dedicated to Beornrad by the humble Levite (that
is, deacon) Alcuin, we learn the very interesting fact that Alcuin, born
in 735, came by hereditary right into possession of the property got
together by Wilgils, whose son Willibrord was born in 657. The dates
make it practically almost certain that Wilgils was born a pagan. Alcuin
informs us that he only entered upon marriage because it was fated that
he should be the father of one who should be for the profit of many
peoples. If Willibrord was, as Alcuin’s words mean, the only child of
Wilgils, we must suppose that Alcuin was the great-great-great-nephew of
Wilgils, allowing twenty-five years for a generation in those short-lived
times.

Alcuin three times insists on the lawful hereditary descent of the
ownership and government of a monastery. A second case is in his preface
to this Life of Willibrord. The body of the saint, he says, “rests in
a certain small maritime cell, over which I, though unworthy, preside
by God’s gift in lawful succession.” A third case occurs also in this
Life. “There is,” he says, “in the city of Trèves a monastery[6] of nuns,
which in the times of the blessed Willibrord was visited by a very severe
plague. Many of the handmaids of the Lord were dying of it; others were
lying on their beds enfeebled by a long attack; the rest were in a state
of terror, as fearing the presence of death. Now there is near that same
city the monastery of that holy man, which is called Aefternac,[7] in
which up to this day the saint rests in the body, while his descendants
are known to hold the monastery by legitimate paternal descent, and
by the piety of most pious kings. When the women of the above-named
monastery heard that he was coming to this monastery of his, they sent
messengers begging him to hasten to them.” He went, as the blessed Peter
went to raise Tabitha; celebrated a mass for the sick; blessed water,
and had the houses sprinkled with it; and sent it to the sick sisters to
drink. Needless to say, they all recovered.

In two of these cases, the two in which Alcuin speaks of his own
property, he uses the word succession, “by legitimate succession” in the
one case, _legitima successione_, “through legitimate successions” in the
other case, _per legitimas successiones_, the former no doubt referring
to the succession from his immediate predecessor, the latter referring to
the four, or five, steps in the descent from Wilgils to Alcuin. In the
case of the monastery of Epternach he defines it from the other end,
“from the legitimate handing-down,” _traditione ex legitima_, the piety
of the most pious kings being called in to confirm the handing-down.

It is remarkable that Alcuin should thus go out of his way to insist
upon the lawfulness of the hereditary descent of monasteries, when he
knew well that his venerated predecessor Bede, following the positive
principle of the founder of Anglian monasticism in Northumbria, Benedict
Biscop, attributed great evils to such hereditary succession to the
property and governance of monasteries. We shall see something of this
when we come to the consideration of Bede’s famous letter to Ecgbert,
written in or about the year of Alcuin’s birth.

It is probably not necessary to suppose that Alcuin intends to draw a
distinction between the constitutional practice in Northumbria and that
in the lands ruled by Karl, though it is a marked fact that he mentions
the intervention of kings in the latter case and twice does not mention
it in the former. Bede says so much about the bribes—or fees—paid to
Northumbrian kings and bishops for ratification of first grants by their
signatures, that we can hardly suppose there were no fees to pay on
succession. We cannot press such a point as this in Alcuin’s Life of
Willibrord, for he tells Beornrad in his Preface that he has been busy
with other things all day long, and has only been able to dictate this
book in the retirement of the night; and he urges that the work should
be mercifully judged because he has not had leisure to polish it. The
grammar of this dictated work needs a certain amount of correction;
Alcuin did not always remember with what construction he had begun a
sentence. In these days of dictated letters he has the sympathy of many
in this respect.

Alcuin’s young relative Willibrord was sent away to Ripon, as soon as he
was weaned, to the charge of the brethren there. Alchfrith, the sub-King
of Deira under his father Oswy, had driven out the Irish monks whom he
had at one time patronised at Ripon, and had given their possessions to
Wilfrith. Under the influence of that remarkable man the little child
came, still, in Alcuin’s phrase, only an _infantulus_. His father’s
purpose in sending him to Ripon was twofold. He was to be educated in
religious study and sacred letters, in a place where his tender age might
be strengthened by vigorous discipline, where he would see nothing that
was not honourable, hear nothing that was not holy. At Ripon he remained
till he was twenty years of age, and then he passed across to Ireland, to
complete his studies under Ecgbert, the great creator of missionaries.
With Ecgbert he spent twelve years.

Now in the thirty-two years covered by that short narration, from 657
to 689, events of the utmost moment had occurred in Northumbria, and
had mainly centered round Ripon. At the most critical juncture of these
events Bede becomes suddenly silent. Alfred’s Anglo-Saxon version of
Bede goes further, and omits the bulk of what Bede does say. A few
words from Alcuin would have been of priceless value, and he, writing
in France to a Frank, could have no national or ecclesiastical reason
for silence on points which Bede and Alfred let alone. The whole of the
variance between Oswy and his son and sub-King Alchfrith, on which Bede
is determinedly silent, the only hint of which is preserved to us solely
by the noble runes on the Bewcastle Cross, erected in 670 and still
standing, which bid men pray for the “high sin” of Alchfrith’s soul[8];
the whole secret of the variance between Oswy and Wilfrith; of Oswy’s
refusal to recognize Wilfrith’s consecration at Paris—with unrivalled
magnificence of pomp—to the episcopal See of York; all this, and more,
is included in the first thirteen years of Willibrord’s life at Ripon,
and Ripon was the pivot of it all. Alcuin has no scintilla of a hint of
anything unusual, not even when he mentions Ecgbert, the Northumbrian
teacher, dwelling in Ireland, of whom we know from another source that he
fled from Northumbria to safety in Ireland when Alchfrith and Wilfrith
lost their power, and Alchfrith presumably lost his life. It is quite
possible that if the head of the Bewcastle Cross were ever found[9] the
runes on it might tell us just what we want to know. The illustration
of this portion of the Cross given in Gough’s edition of Camden’s
_Britannia_[10] was drawn in 1607, at which time English scholars could
not read runic letters, and naturally could not copy them with perfect
accuracy. Still, it is evident that the runes stand for RIKAES DRYHTNAES,
apparently meaning ‘of the kingdom’s lord’, the copyist having failed to
notice the mark of modification in the rune for _u_, which turned it into
_y_.

Turning now to Alcuin himself, a remarkable story is told in the Life,
evidently and avowedly on his authority. When he was still a small boy,
_parvulus_, he was regular in attendance at church at the canonical hours
of the day, but very seldom appeared there at night. What the monastery
was in which he passed his earliest years we are not told; but inasmuch
as no break or change is mentioned between the story to which we now
turn and the description of his more advanced studies, which certainly
indicates the Archiepiscopal School of York, we must understand that York
was the scene of this occurrence.

“When he was eleven years of age, it happened one night that he and a
tonsured rustic, one of the menial monks, that is, were sleeping on
separate pallets in one cell. The rustic did not like being alone in the
night, and as none of the rustics could accommodate him, he had begged
that one of the young students might be sent to sleep in the cell.
The boy Albinus was sent, who was fonder of Vergil than of Psalms. At
cock-crow the warden struck the bell for nocturns, and the brethren got
up for the appointed service. This rustic, however, only turned round
onto his other side, as careless of such matters, and went on snoring.
At the moment when the invitatory psalm was as usual being sung, with
the antiphon, the rustic’s cell was suddenly filled with horrid spirits,
who surrounded his bed, and said to him, ‘You sleep well, brother.’
That roused him, and they asked, ‘Why are you snoring here by yourself,
while the brethren are keeping watch in the church?’ He then received a
useful flogging, so that by his amendment a warning might be given to
all, and they might sing, ‘I will remember the years of the right hand
of the Most Highest,’[11] while their eyes prevented the night watches.
During the flogging of the rustic, the noble boy trembled lest the same
should happen to him; and, as he related afterwards, cried from the very
bottom of his heart, ‘O Lord Jesus, if Thou dost now deliver me from the
cruel hands of these evil spirits, and I do not hereafter prove to be
eager for the night watches of Thy Church and the ministry of praise,
and if I any longer love Vergil more than the chanting of psalms, may I
receive a flogging such as this. Only, I earnestly pray, deliver me, O
Lord, now.’ That the lesson might be the more deeply impressed upon his
mind, as soon as by the Lord’s command the flogging of the rustic ceased,
the evil spirits cast their eyes about here and there, and saw the body
and head of the boy most carefully wrapped up in the bedclothes, scarce
taking breath. The leader of the spirits asked, ‘Who is this other asleep
in the cell?’ ‘It is the boy Albinus,’ they told him, ‘hid away in his
bed.’ When the boy found that he was discovered, he burst into showers
of tears; and the more he had suppressed his cries before, the louder
he cried now. They had all the will to deal unmercifully with him, but
they had not the power. They discussed what they should do with him;
but the sentence of the Lord compelled them to help him to keep the vow
which he had made in his terror. Accordingly they said, imprudently for
their purpose, but prudently for the purpose of the Lord, ‘We will not
chastise this one with severe blows, because he is young; we will only
punish him by cutting with a knife the hard part of his feet.’ They took
the covering off his feet. Albinus instantly protected himself with
the sign of the Cross. Then he chanted with all intentness the twelfth
psalm, ‘In the Lord put I my trust’; and then the rustic, half dead,
the boy going before him with agile step, fled into the basilica to the
protection of the saints.”

A cynical reader might suggest that the disciplinary officers of the
School of York resorted in those early times to unusual methods of making
an impression on a careless boy.

The Life proceeds to inform us that Alcuin was trained under the prelate
Hechbert, whom we know as Ecgbert, Bishop and later Archbishop of York,
732 to 766. That learned man was a disciple of Bede. He had under his
tuition a flock of the sons of nobles, some of whom studied grammar,
others the liberal arts, others the divine scriptures.[12] They studied
the doctrine set forth by “the holy apostle of the English, Gregory;
by Augustine, his disciple; by holy Benedict[13]; also by Cuthbert and
Theodore, who followed in all things [a word is omitted here, presumably
the footsteps[14]] of their first father and apostle[15]; and by the man
most loved of the Lord, Bede the presbyter, Hechbert’s own preceptor.”

Then follows a very lifelike description of an ordinary day’s work, when
no inevitable expedition came in the way, nor any high solemnity or
great festival of the saints. “From dawn of day to the sixth hour, and
very often to the ninth hour, Ecgbert lay on his couch and opened to his
disciples such of the secrets of scripture as suited each. Then he rose,
and betook himself to most secret prayer, offering first to the Lord fat
burnt-offerings with the incense of rams, and afterward, following the
example of the blessed Job, lest by chance his sons should slip into the
pit of benediction,[16] offering the Body of Christ and the Blood for
all. By this time the vesper hour was coming near, and, except in Lent,
all through the year, winter and summer, he took with his disciples
a meal, slight but fittingly prepared, not sparing the tongue of the
reader, that both kinds of food might bring refreshment. Then you might
see the youths piercing one another with shafts prepared, discussing
in private what afterwards they are to shoot forth in proper order in
public. Does it not seem to you that of this too it might be said,[17]
“As an eagle provoketh her young ones to fly, fluttereth over them,
spreadeth abroad her wings, taketh them, beareth them on her wings”?

“Twice in the day did this father of the poor, this great lover and
helper of Christ, pour out most secret prayer, watered from the most pure
fountain of tears, both knees bent on the ground, hands long raised to
heaven in the form of the Cross; once, namely, before taking food, and
again before celebrating Compline with all his flock. Which ended, no
one of his disciples ever dared commit his limbs to his bed without the
master’s blessing laid upon his head.

“He loved all his disciples, but of all he loved Alcuin the most, for
Alcuin more closely than any of them followed his example in act and
deed. There were two special virtues in Alcuin—one, that he never did
anything which he was not quite clear that his master’s approval covered;
the other, that whatever devices and temptations the enemy brought to
his mind, he told them all straight out to his master without any sense
of shame. Thus it came to pass that any stimulus of lust which he ever
felt was most gloriously conquered by this wonderful method, dashing the
children of Babylon against the stones, bruising the head of the serpent
with the heel. He was careful that against him the words of Christ should
not be spoken—‘Every one that doeth evil hateth the light, neither cometh
to the light, lest his deeds should be reproved’; but rather that his lot
should be with them of whom it is added—‘But he that doeth truth cometh
to the light, that his deeds may be made manifest that they are wrought
in God.’ O true monk without the monk’s vow! how very seldom is thy
example followed by one whose vow binds him to it[18].”

In the chapter from which these details are taken the author three times
uses the name “Albinus” for his hero, in place of “Alchuinus” with which
he began the chapter. Throughout the Life he much more often calls him
Albin than Alcuin. We must probably understand that he was known from his
boyhood by both names; and it is evident that Albin would be more easy to
pronounce than Alcuin, and would not unnaturally be more generally used.
On the other hand, it is quite possible that he himself elected to call
himself Albin.

If Alcuin took the name Albinus from any English source, the source is
not far to seek. The English nation owes to the original Albinus the
first suggestion to Bede that he should write the Church History of the
English race. Bede tells us this in the Preface to his great work; and
we have it still more directly expressed in a letter from him to Albinus
in which he speaks of the History as _ad quam me scribendam iamdudum
instigaveras_, and of Albinus as _semper amantissimus in Christo pater
optimus_. He was Abbat of St. Peter and St. Paul, Canterbury, a pupil of
Theodore and Hadrian, the latter of whom he succeeded. He greatly helped
Bede by sending him full details of the conversion of Kent, “as he had
learned the same from written records and from the oral tradition of his
predecessors.” Bede sent to him the completed copy of the History, that
he might have it transcribed, and informs us that Albinus had no small
knowledge of Greek, and knew Latin as well as his native tongue, English.
Alcuin may well have taken his name of Albinus from one with whom he
had so much in common, who died only two or three years before Alcuin’s
birth.

If, on the other hand, Alcuin took the name from some foreign source,
again we have not far to seek. In Karl’s first year as King of the Franks
he gave a confirmatory charter to “the Monastery of St. Albinus, which
is built near to the walls of Angers”. The Tour St. Aubin and the Rue
St. Aubin are still to be found at Angers, at the extreme south-east
corner of the ancient city. Little is known of this martyr Albinus, and
in consequence the Acts of our St. Alban have been transferred to him. At
Angers, as at Alcuin’s own Tours, there are remains of a great church of
St. Martin; and, as was in early times the case at Tours, the Cathedral
is dedicated to St. Maurice. It is possible that Alcuin took his name of
Albinus from this local source, but it does not seem at all probable.

Alcuin’s supremacy in wisdom and other virtues caused jealousy among
his fellow disciples. This went so far that they could not look at him
with unclouded eye or address him with pleasant words. He consulted his
master, who by this time was Elcbert (Archbishop of York, 767-78), known
to Alcuin as Aelbert, and to us as Albert. The master advised him to try
the effect of heaping coals of fire on their heads. He followed this
advice, taking care that they should never hear from him a contrary word,
and very often yielding to them when their arguments were unsound. This
course of conduct he pursued until a complete change took place, and they
all rejoiced to acknowledge in him the second master of their studies,
next under Albert.

The Life relates at this point an interesting episode, in the description
of which we may seem to hear Alcuin himself speaking to us:—

“Alcuin was reading the Gospel of St. John before the master, in company
of his fellow disciples. He came to a part of the Gospel which only the
pure in heart can comprehend—that part, namely, from where John says that
he lay on the Lord’s breast, down to the point at which he relates that
Jesus went with His disciples across the brook Cedron.[19] Inebriated
with the mystical reading of the Gospel, suddenly, as he sat before the
master’s couch, his spirit was carried away in ecstasy, and by those same
who once in a ray of sunlight showed before the eyes of the most holy
father Benedict the whole world, collected as it were in an enclosure,
the whole world was now set before the eyes of Alcuin. And as he looked
intently at what he saw, he saw the whole of the enclosure surrounded
by a circle of blood. While he was held by this marvellous vision, his
fellow disciples gazed at him in wonder, for the blood seemed to have
left his face. They tried to rouse him, as one asleep; the noise they
made attracted the attention of Albert, who looked at him for some time
in silence, and then said, ‘Go on reading, my sons, do not disturb him;
if he rests awhile he will be able to follow me more effectively when I
expound the passage.’ When the reading was completed, and Albin came to
himself again, the father told them all to go except Alcuin. When they
were gone, he said, ‘What hast thou seen? I beg thee, do not hide it.’
Alcuin wished to keep secret what he had seen, fearing to fall into the
pitfall of elation; so he said, ‘Why, my lord father?’ The blessed man
said again, ‘Do not, my son, do not hide it from me. It is not from vain
curiosity that I require this of you, but for your own good.’ Alcuin saw
that he could not keep it secret, and he told, humbly, how he had seen
the whole world. Then the father said to him, ‘See, my son, see that
thou tellest not this vision to any but that one whom after my decease
thou shalt hold to be the most faithful to thy person. And charge him to
keep it secret up to the time of thy death.’ Acting on this counsel, he
told it only to Sigulf[20] during his lifetime. If any one desires to
know how the whole world could be seen in one enclosure, he may turn to
the book of Dialogues of the holy Gregory[21]; and in the meantime he
may know that it was not the heaven and the earth that were contracted
into a small space, but the mind of the seer that was dilated, so that
when rapt in the Lord he could without difficulty see everything that
was under God. Perhaps some one inquiring further may ask why under this
figure of an enclosure, or why surrounded by blood? He may know that the
Blood of Christ surrounds the fold of the holy Church, so that from the
rising of the sun to the setting thereof those who are redeemed by His
Passion can say the words which, without doubt, dominated the mind of
Albin when he read before the master: ‘O give thanks unto the Lord, for
He is gracious, and His mercy endureth for ever.’[22] The whole world,
then, is seen in one enclosure surrounded by the Blood of Christ; for all
that the holy fathers have done and have written figuratively since the
beginning of the world is unlocked by the Passion of Christ alone, who is
the lion of the tribe of Juda, the root of David. But if by the encircled
enclosure any should wish to be understood the life of his own carnal
crimes surrounded by blood, thus shown to him that it may be trodden
under foot by him, let that interpretation be left to his own judgement.”

Alcuin had been tonsured in early years. He was ordained deacon at York
on the day of the Purification of the holy Mary, in or about the year
768. Elcbert, who had been for some time in bad health, felt that his
death was drawing nigh, and he gave to Alcuin a sketch of the course of
life which he wished him to pursue. The writer gives us a report of his
actual words, stating that “they are now known”; this means, presumably,
that here also Alcuin had communicated them to Sigulf, to be made public
only after his death. They run thus:—“My will is that you go to Rome,
and on the way back visit France.[23] For I know that you will do much
good there. Christ will be the leader of your journey, guiding you
and controlling you on your arrival, that you may demolish that most
nefarious heresy which will attempt to set forth Christ as adoptive man,
and that you may be the firmest defender and the clearest preacher of the
faith in the Holy Trinity.[24] You will persevere in the land of your
peregrination, illumining the souls of many.”

The holy father, Bishop Elcbert, after blessing him with the benedictions
of his predecessor above named, migrated to God on the eighth day
of November, 780. “The pious Albinus mourned with tears, as for his
mother, and would not take comfort. Endowed in hereditary right with
the holy benedictions of the fathers,[25] he took pains to multiply
exceedingly the talent of his lord.[26] He taught many in Britain, and
not few later in France. It was now that he associated with him a man
dear to God, remarkable for the nobility of mind and of body, Sigulf,
the presbyter, Warden of the Church of the City of York, to remain with
him perpetually.[27] Sigulf had gone as a boy to France with his uncle
Autbert the presbyter, and by him had been taken to Rome to learn the
ecclesiastical order; he had then been sent to the city of Metz to learn
chanting. There he worked hard for some time, in great poverty, but with
much profit. After the holy man, his uncle, migrated to the Lord, he
came back to his own land.” We can almost see and hear Sigulf getting
these little facts about himself and his uncle incorporated in the Life
of Alcuin.

“When the Almighty God willed to glorify France with spiritual riches, as
already with earthly riches, granting to the land a King after His own
heart, a man of faith, fortitude, love of wisdom, and ineffable beauty
of body, namely Karl, most illustrious in these respects, He put it into
the mind of Albinus that he should fulfil the counsel and command of his
father Albert, by going to Rome and then visiting France.

“By the command of Eanbald I, the Archbishop of York, the successor of
Elcbert, he went to Rome to obtain the pallium for the archbishop from
the Apostolic—that is, Hadrian I. On his way back with the pallium he
met King Karl in the city of Parma.[28] The king addressed him with
great persuasiveness and many prayers, begging that after completing
his embassage he would come and join him in France. The king had become
acquainted with him some years before, for Alcuin had been sent on a
legation to him by the archbishop of the time.”

We may interrupt our author’s narrative at this point to state that the
fact and the date of this former visit to Karl are recorded in the Life
of Hadrian I, as also the further fact, not here hinted at, that Karl
on that occasion sent Alcuin on to Rome. “In the year 773 Karl sent to
Hadrian an embassy, consisting of the most holy bishop George,[29]
the religious abbat Uulfhard,[30] and the king’s favourite counsellor
Albinus.”

We may now return to the author of the Life. He tells us, to quote his
own words, that when Karl begged Alcuin to come to him, Alcuin desired to
do what would be useful, and therefore asked permission of his own king,
Alfwald, and of his archbishop, Eanbald I, to leave his mastership of the
School of York. He obtained permission, but on condition that he should
in time come back to them. Under Christ’s guidance he came to Karl. Karl
embraced him as his father,[31] by whom he had been introduced to the
liberal arts, in the study of which he could be somewhat cooled, but in
his fervour he could never be too completely saturated with them. After
Alcuin had spent some little time with him, he gave him two monasteries,
that of Bethlehem, otherwise called Ferrières,[32] and that of St.
Lupus[33] of Troyes.




CHAPTER II

    Alcuin finally leaves England.—The Adoptionist heresy.—Alcuin’s
    retirement to Tours.—His knowledge of secrets.—Karl and the
    three kings his sons.—Fire at St. Martin’s, Tours.—References
    to the life of St. Martin.—Alcuin’s writings.—His interview
    with the devil.—His last days.


At length Alcuin felt that he ought not, without the authority of his
own king and bishop, to desert the place in which he had been educated,
tonsured, and ordained deacon. He asked leave of the great king to return
to his fatherland. Karl received his request in a flattering manner. We
may suppose that Alcuin retained an accurate recollection of the pleasant
words and of his own answer, and reported them eventually to Sigulf,
probably with a feeling that he had made a Yorkshire rejoinder to the
king’s rather pointed balance-sheet. On a formal occasion such as this,
they probably addressed each other as scholars, in the Latin tongue, so
that in reading the Life we seem to hear them speaking the actual words
reported. The manner of address we may take to be correctly represented.

“_Karl._ Illustrious master,—of earthly riches we have enough, wherewith
it is our joy to honour thee. With thy riches, long desired by us and
scarce anywhere found, we pray thee illumine us in the wealth of thy
piety.

“_Alcuin._ My lord king,—I am not inclined to oppose thy will, when it
shall have been confirmed by the authority of the canons. Endowed in my
paternal country with no small heritage, I am delighted to fling it away
and stand here a pauper, so that I may be of use to thee. Thy part is
only this,—to obtain for me the permission of my own king and bishop.”

Karl was at last persuaded to let him go; but he was not satisfied until
it was settled that when Alcuin came back again he would stay with him
always.

Some years after he came back to Karl a second time, he was placed at
the head of the Monastery of St. Martin of Tours. In a godly manner he
ruled this with his other monasteries. He corrected the lives of those
under him as far as he could. Some were untamed when they came under his
rule, but he so bestirred himself that they became reasonable, of honest
morals, and seekers after truth. That is the author’s statement. We shall
hear more on the subject in the course of our study.

“Meantime the heresy hateful to God, which flourished in the parts of
Spain, asserting that the Son of God is adoptive according to the flesh,
is brought to the ears of Karl. The great king, in all things catholic,
looked into this, and strove with all his might that the seed of the
devil should be destroyed, and the tares completely eradicated from the
wheat of God. Summoning to him Albinus his instructor from Tours, and the
wretched Felix the constructor of this heresy from the parts of Spain,
he collected a great synod of bishops in the imperial palace of Aix.
Seated himself in the midst, he ordered Felix, who was most unwilling,
to dispute in argument with the most learned Albinus on the nature of
the Son of God according to the flesh. What silence reigned among the
bishops! How clear and unanswerable, with the authority of Karl, was
the master’s confession and defence of the faith! Felix tried to hide
himself in all sorts of obscurities; Albinus pierced him with more and
more darts, at such length that he ‘went through almost all the cities of
Israel[34] till the Son of Man should come’. Little else was done from
the second to the seventh day of the week. At length his stupidity was
laid bare to all. The heresy was confuted by the whole of the bishops
with apostolic authority. To himself alone his folly was foully hidden,
up to the point when he read with lamentable voice the words of Cyril the
martyr, turned against him by Albinus: That nature which was corrupted
by the devil is exalted above the angels by the triumph of Christ, and
is set down at the right hand of the Father. When he read this sentence,
he at last testified by voice and by excessive weeping that he had
found himself out, that he had acted impiously. Any one who thirsts to
know this more perfectly should read the master’s letters to Felix and
Elipantus, and theirs to him. He will then at once learn what he desires
to know.

“By permission of Christ,” the biographer continues, “I have up to this
point written a little about the early part of the Life of Albinus, facts
that I have supposed to be not known to all. I have not thought of
inserting in this little work facts about him which all know. From this
point I shall attempt to trace to his last days my shaken reed of a pen,
though it be with contemptible roughness.

“When he felt himself affected by old age, and increasingly by one
infirmity,[35] he informed King Karl that he wished to retire from the
world, as he had long had it in mind to do. He asked leave to live
the monastic life, in accordance with the Rule of St. Benedict, at
St. Boniface of Fulda,[36] and to distribute among his disciples the
monasteries which had been granted to him, if that might be done. But the
king, terrible and pious, with all regard for Alcuin’s request, denied
the one part, while he received the other gladly. He begged that he
would reside at Tours, in perfect quiet and in the greatest honour, and
would not refuse to continue the spiritual care of Karl himself and of
all the holy Church committed to him; the secular burdens which he had
borne, the king, at his request, most willingly portioned out among his
disciples. Albinus acted as the most wise king had asked, seeking what
would be useful, not to himself but to many; and at Tours he awaited his
last day. His manner of life was not inferior to the monastic life which
he had desired. He abounded in fastings, in prayers, in mortification of
the flesh, in almsgivings, in much celebration of psalms and masses,[37]
and in the other virtues with which it is possible for human nature to
be adorned. When he had fasted till evening, there very frequently was
sent from heaven to his mouth such sweetness as no human speech could
utter; whatever he then willed, he could dictate most rapidly without
any effort, so that he could say,—I have loved, Lord, Thy commandments
above gold and precious stone; how sweet are thy words unto my mouth,
yea, sweeter than honey and the honeycomb. In his youth he had not loved
the study of the Psalms so much as another kind of reading; in his old
age he could never have too much of them. As has been described in the
case of his master,[38] he poured forth most secret prayer during the
day, with long extension of his hands in the form of a cross, and with
much groaning, for he very rarely found tears. This practice he passed
on to his disciples, of whom the most noble was Sigulf, ‘the little old
fellow,’ and the magnanimous Withso[39]; after them, Fredegisus[40]
and his companions. In his latest days there clung to him assiduously
Raganard and Waldramn, who still survive; Adalbert of blessed memory,
who was with him as much as he could, being at that time the son of
Sigulf, afterwards a venerated father as Abbat of Ferrières; and many
others, the names of all of whom I trust that Christ knows. These with
all circumspection earnestly studied to do nothing in his presence with
which he could find fault, and very often in his absence too. For they
knew that he was in close communion with God, and was enlightened by His
Spirit; and though with his bodily eyes he could no longer see clearly,
from old age and infirmity, they feared that nothing which they did
escaped his knowledge.

“Filled as he was with the Spirit, he foretold to some their future, as
he did to Raganard about Osulf.[41] This Raganard had in his sleep a
horrible vision, which it is better not to describe. He told it the next
day to the father, in fear lest it referred to himself. The father knew
that it referred not to Raganard but to Osulf. With great grief he spoke
thus: ‘O Osulf, thou wretched one, how oft have I warned thee, how oft
corrected! Much labour did I devote to thine uncle, that he should reform
and begin to walk in the way of the commandments of God; and I told him
that if he did not he would be smitten with the plague of leprosy; which
thing happened to him. And to thee, my son, I predict of Osulf, of whom
is this vision, that neither in this land, nor in the land of his birth,
shall he die.’ The prediction was true; he died in Lombardy.

“This same Raganard, unknown to everybody, tried himself by vigils of
too long duration and by an excess of abstinence; by this intemperance
he fell into a most dangerous fever. Father Albinus came to visit him,
and sent out of the house all except Sigulf. Then he rebuked Raganard
thus: ‘Why hast thou tried to act so intemperately, without advice of
any? I knew that thou didst wish to act thus, and therefore it was that
I ordered thee to sleep in the dwelling in which I sleep. But thou didst
immediately, when all were asleep, secretly light a candle, conceal it
in a lantern, and going to that place didst watch through the whole
night.’ And then all that he did there secretly, known to God alone, he
told him of, and added:—‘When thou didst go with me to the refectory,
and I bade thee drink wine, in the most crafty way thou didst say—I have
drunk sufficiently, my lord father, with my uncle. But when thou didst
come to thy uncle, and he too bade thee drink wine, thou didst say thou
hadst drunk with me. Thy will was to delude us, and thou art deceived.
When thou hast risen up from the fever, take thou care never to attempt
anything of this kind again.’

“When Raganard heard this, he turned red, and was in great fear, knowing
that he was caught. In wonder that his secret deeds could not escape the
knowledge of Albinus, he asked how was this made known. To this day he
bears witness that no man knew it before it was revealed; God alone. He
repented, and for the rest of Alcuin’s life he never attempted anything
of the kind without his advice and command.

“It very often happened that when messengers were coming to Alcuin from
the king and other friends, while they were yet a long way off, he would
tell of their coming and of the cause of their coming, what they brought
with them, what they wished to take back. Certain disciples, when they
heard him speak thus, set it down to the folly of an old man, till it
was proved to be true. Benedict[42], the man of the Lord, who beyond
all monks was bound in intimacy with Alcuin, used often to come to him
from the parts of Gothia, to obtain advice for himself and his monks.
On one occasion Benedict wished to come secretly, unknown to any one at
Tours, so that Alcuin should not know till he stood in the doorway. When
he was by no means near Tours, Albinus summoned an attendant, and said
to him, ‘Hasten to meet Benedict in such and such a place, and tell him
to come to me quickly.’ The messenger did as he was told, and on the
third day arrived at the place, found Benedict there, and delivered his
message. Astonished that his plan was discovered, Benedict went with all
haste to Tours. When they had joyously kissed one another, Benedict,
the reverend father, began suppliantly, ‘Lord father, who foretold
to thee my arrival?’ He answered, ‘No man told me by word of mouth.’
Benedict asked again, ‘Who then, my lord? Perhaps thou hast heard in a
letter from some one?’ He replied, ‘Of a truth, not in a letter.’ Again
Benedict asked, ‘If neither from the words of any man, nor from any man’s
letter, thou knewest this beforehand, pray, my father, in what way didst
thou know it?—tell me.’ Albinus said, ‘Do not interrogate me further
on this.’ There the matter ended. When the venerable man Benedict was
minded to return, he asked Albinus to tell him in what special words
he prayed, when he prayed for himself. Albinus said, ‘This is what I
ask of Christ:—Lord, grant me to understand my sins, and to make true
confession, and to do fitting penance; and grant unto me remission of
my sins.’ The godly man Benedict said, ‘Let us add, my father, to this
thy prayer, one word, namely this, after remission, save me.’ Albinus
rejoiced, and said, ‘Let it be so, most reverent son, let it be so.’
Benedict then asked another question, would he tell him what were the
words that silently moved his lips when he saw the Cross and bent before
it? Albinus answered, ‘Thy Cross we adore, O Lord; Thy glorious Passion
we recall. Have mercy on us, Thou Who didst die for us.’ Albinus then saw
him on his way for a short distance, and sent him back rejoicing to his
own place and people.”

The biographer next sets before us a remarkable picture of the four most
important personages of the time.

“The great king and powerful emperor Karl, wishing to offer prayer and
to have some mutually desired conversation with Alcuin, paid a visit to
the tomb of the holy Martin at Tours, with his sons Charles, Pepin, and
Louis. The emperor took Alcuin by the hand, and said to him privately,
‘My lord master, which of these sons of mine does it seem to thee that
I shall have as my successor in this honour to which God has raised me,
all unworthy?’ Alcuin turned his face towards Louis, the youngest of the
three, and the most remarkable for his humility, on account of which he
was regarded by many as of little account, and said, ‘In the humble Louis
thou shalt have an illustrious successor.’ The emperor alone heard what
he said. But when, later on, sitting on the spot where he wished to be
buried, Alcuin saw these same three kings[43] enter the Church of St.
Stephen for prayer, with head erect, and Louis with head bent, he said
to those who stood by—‘Do you see that Louis is more humble than his
brothers? You will most certainly see him the most exalted successor of
his father.’ When with his own hand he administered to them the Communion
of the Body of Christ and the Blood, the same Louis, most noted above
all for humility, bent before the holy father and kissed his hand.[44]
The man of the Lord said to Sigulf who stood by, ‘Whosoever exalteth
himself shall be abased, and he that humbleth himself shall be exalted.
Certainly the Frankish land shall rejoice to have this man emperor after
his father.’ That this has taken place, the biographer adds, we both see
and rejoice.[45] They who seemed to be cedars are cast down, and the
fruitful olive tree in the house of God is exalted.[46]

“The father Alcuin had with great care instructed Karl in liberal arts
and in divine scripture, so that he became the most learned of all kings
of the Franks who have been since the coming of Christ. He taught him,
also, which of the Psalms he should sing throughout his whole life for
various occasions; for times of penitence, with litany and entreaties
and prayers; for times of special prayer; of praising God; of any
tribulation; and for his being moved to exercise himself in divine
praise. Any one who wishes to know all this may read it in the little
book which he wrote to Karl on the principles of prayer.”[47]

At this point in his narrative the biographer relates the scrape into
which “the little old fellow” got in connexion with his secret study of
Vergil, already described on page 2. As a further instance of Alcuin’s
remarkable knowledge of what was going on, he adds the interesting
little story about a present of wine to Cormery which will be found on
p. 223. Then comes the following amusing account, with its revelation of
a dislike of Karl’s favourites the foreigners, a dislike which Eginhard
thus frankly reports in his vivid picture of the great King,[48] “He
loved foreigners, and took great pains to attract them to him and to
maintain them, so much so that the multitude of them not unreasonably
seemed a heavy burden, not to the palace only but to the kingdom. His
greatness of mind, however, was such, that he was not troubled by a
burden of this kind; indeed even great inconveniences he regarded as
compensated by the praise won by liberality and by the reward of good
report.”

This is the story. The presbyter Aigulf[49], an Anglo-Saxon[50] himself
too, came to Tours to visit the father. When he was standing at the
door of Alcuin’s dwelling, there happened to be four of the brethren of
Tours talking together. When they saw him, they said one to another, not
imagining that he knew anything of their language, “Here’s a Briton, or
a Scot[51], come to see that other Briton inside. O God, deliver this
monastery from these Britons! Like bees coming back to the mother-bee,
these all come to this man of ours!” What would we not give to have this
in the words in which they spoke it, instead of in the author’s Latin.
The presbyter went into Alcuin’s dwelling, and, after other matters,
told him what he had heard. “Do you know which they are?” Alcuin asked.
“Indeed I do not. I could not for shame look at them when they said
that.” Alcuin said, “I am sure I know who they are.” He called in some
of the brethren by name, and said, “These are they.” Greatly grieved by
their folly, Alcuin yet spared them, saying, “May Christ, the Son of God,
spare them.” Then he gave them each a cup of wine to drink, and without
severity sent them away. Aigulf afterwards made diligent inquiry, and
found that they were the right men. We of to-day may remark that Alcuin
evidently knew the characters of his pupils; but his ideas of discipline
differed from ours. We should not have let them know that we had heard
personal remarks of that kind; and we should not have given them glasses
of wine. We may remember the words of Archbishop Temple to Bishop
Creighton, when the Bishop had received the late Mr. John Kensit for an
interview at Fulham, and had given him tea. “It was all right to receive
the man; but you shouldn’t ha’ given him tea.”

As we have seen, the biographer on the whole confines himself to those
parts of Alcuin’s Life which were not of common knowledge. But there
was one story of sufficient importance in his judgement to be related
at length, although it was well known. We may well take the same view,
and be grateful to our author for having departed from his self-imposed
limitations.

“I ought not”, he writes, “to pass over in silence one fact which many
know. The Keeper of the Sepulchre of St. Martin, who provided the wax
and all the vestments which pertained to the basilica itself, entering
with a lighted candle the sacristy where they were kept, fixed the candle
on a spike, and when he left he forgot to take it with him. He locked
the door and went away. The burning candle fell upon some wax and sent a
great flame which set fire to the vestments hanging on the pegs; and the
vestments sent the flame up to the roof.[52] When the warden saw this,
he fled with the key to another monastery.[53] People rushed from all
sides; they beat at the door, but all their efforts failed to burst it
open. The clerks threw out of the windows any valuables they had in their
abode. The Church of St. Martin was denuded of some vestments, and no one
expected anything but the burning of the whole monastery. The roof was
all stripped of lead. Albinus came; he was now blind. He asked what was
being done. One of his disciples, his ‘little old fellow’, said, ‘Come
away, father, or you will be killed by the lead they are throwing down or
burned to death.’ When Albinus was willing to go, Vetulus said to him,
‘My lord father, go to the sepulchre of the lord Martin, and intercede
for us.’ Albinus did as was suggested, and when he got to the place,
he stretched himself on the ground in the form of a cross, and uttered
groans heavenward. As soon as Albinus cast himself on the ground, in some
wonderful and incredible way the whole fire was put out, as completely as
if extinguished by a great river. When the clerks saw this, they rushed
in joyous stupefaction to the spot where Albinus lay prostrate before the
sepulchre of St. Martin, in the form of a cross, praying to God for them.
They raised him from the ground, blessing God who through the prayers of
Albinus had saved the whole monastery of Saint Martin from being consumed
by fire. These be thy worthy examples, holy Martin, who once when thou
wouldest escape the fire couldest not; turned to God in prayer thou hast
extinguished this fire that threatened us. Lofty of a truth is the faith
that by its ardour can extinguish globes of fire. Nor is it a matter of
wonder that the elements leave their proper force at the prayers and
commands of Albinus, since he rests in the heart of Him who loves them
that love Him, and permits them not to be singed by the flame when they
walk in fire. Thee in these we adore, Thee we glorify, Thee we laud,
who, as Thou hast deigned to make promises to Thy servants who keep Thy
commandments, hast shown them forth most clearly by Thy works in Thine
own Albinus. Thou hast said, O Christ Jesus, whatsoever ye shall ask of
Me in My name, that will I do, that the Father may be glorified in the
Son.”

It will have been noticed that this passage from the Life attributes to
St. Martin a failure to prevent the progress of a fire. The reference
appears at first sight to be to the eleventh chapter of the _Life of St.
Martin_ by Sulpicius Severus[54], written some four hundred years before
the fire here described, and published in the lifetime of St. Martin,
whom Severus had visited at Tours for the special purpose of learning the
facts of his life.

“In a certain town, Martin set fire to a very ancient and famous pagan
shrine. A house was attached to the walls of the temple, and the wind
blew the globes of fire on to this house. When Martin saw this, he
climbed rapidly to the roof of the house, and faced the flames. Then you
would see the flame turn back in a marvellous manner against the force of
the wind, the two elements fighting the one against the other. Thus by
the virtue of Martin the fire operated only where it was bidden.”

This is the only account in the _Life of St. Martin_ to which the remark
in the text could apply. But, as a matter of fact, the occasion referred
to was quite different from this. The little story is an interesting
example of the keenness of criticism in those very early times, and of
the need of immediate corrections.

The contemporary readers of the Life were well aware of the fact that
Martin himself was once half-burned. Knowing this, they fastened on the
passage quoted, and spoke in a depreciatory way of Martin. They asked how
could he be so great as to prevent houses being burned, if he was not
great enough to prevent himself from being set on fire and nearly burned
to death. These depreciatory remarks came to the ears of Sulpicius, and
the very next day[55], he sat down and wrote a letter to the presbyter
Eusebius, to tell the actual facts of the other story with which
unfavourable comparison has been made. The facts were as follows:—

The saint was visiting his diocese in midwinter. A bed had been prepared
for him in a vestry, which was warmed by a fire below the floor. The
pavement was rough and dilapidated. They had made for the saint a
specially soft and comfortable bed of straw, but his practice was to
sleep on the bare ground. Not being able to endure the blandient comfort
of the straw, he threw it away and slept on the ground. By midnight the
fire below had got at the straw through the crevices in the pavement,
and Martin awoke to find the vestry full of fire. Then came, as he told
Sulpicius, the temptation of the devil. Martin tried to escape, instead
of turning to prayer. He rushed to the door and struggled with the bolt,
in vain. The flames caught his dress and set it on fire. He fell down,
and then remembered to pray. The flames felt the change and spared him.
The monks, who had heard the fire crackling and roaring, burst open the
door and looked for his dead body; they found him safe and sound. He
confessed to Sulpicius, not without groaning, that the devil had for the
time overcome him. In these modern times, to lie down on the floor is a
common precaution against being smothered by the smoke in a burning room.

This _Life of St. Martin_ is very interesting reading. It is too tempting
to give the substance of the chapter previous to the one given above.
The saint was at his usual work of destroying a very ancient temple.
When he had accomplished this, he set to work to fell a pine-tree which
stood near. The chief priest and the pagan crowd drew the line at that,
and would not allow it. Martin told them there was nothing worthy of
worship in a piece of wood; it was dedicated to a demon and it must come
down. Thereupon a crafty pagan, seeing his way to getting rid of this
objectionable destroyer of temples, and regarding the sacred tree as
well lost for such a gain, proposed a bargain. “If you have sufficient
confidence in your God whom you say you serve, we will ourselves cut
down the tree, and it shall fall upon you; if your Lord is with you, as
you say, you will escape with your life.” The bargain was struck on both
sides. The tree leaned in a certain direction, so that there was no doubt
where it would fall. Martin was tied by the rustics in the right place,
and they began to cut with their axes. The tree began to nod, leaned more
and more to the precise spot they had selected. At last they had cut deep
enough; the crash of the rending trunk was heard; the monks turned pale;
the saint raised his hand and made the sign of the cross; at the moment
a whirlwind came and blew the tree far to one side.

We must now return to the life of St. Martin’s faithful follower, Alcuin.

“This also must be mentioned to the praise of the Lord, that very
frequently many infirm people, when they came to Albinus and received his
benediction with faith, recovered bodily health. On a certain occasion,
as is reported by some of the chief authorities, a poor man came, having
his eyesight obstructed by a grievous dimness. He reached the door of the
outer dwelling of Albinus, and begged that water be given him with which
his eyes might be bathed; for he said it had been revealed to him that if
he could wash his eyes with some of it he would recover his sight.[56]
Unknown to Albinus, some of the water in which he had washed his own
face and eyes was secretly given to the poor man who begged for water.
The poor man bathed his eyes with the water, in full faith; the dimness
disappeared, and he recovered his clearness of sight. We, too, are
enlightened by thy sweat, father, and the sins of our souls are washed by
thy pious doctrine. Thou, too, didst scarce see anything with thy bodily
sight, but wast always engaged in lightening the eyes of others; and
those whom thou couldest not enlighten in bodily presence thou didst in
absence instruct by letters, writing many things profitable to the whole
church.

“For at the request of Karl he wrote a most useful book on the Holy
Trinity; also on rhetoric, dialectic, and music. He wrote to Gundrad on
the nature of the soul. At the most honourable request of the ladies
Gisla and Rotruda, he composed a remarkable book on the Gospel of St.
John, partly his own and partly taken from the holy Augustine. He
wrote also on four Epistles of Paul, to the Ephesians, to Titus, to
Philemon, and to the Hebrews;[57] to Fredegisus on the Psalms;[58] to
Count Wido[59] homilies on the principal vices and virtues; to his own
Sigulf very useful notes on Genesis; on the Proverbs of Solomon, on
Ecclesiastes, on the Song of Songs clearly, briefly, indescribably. Under
the names Frank and Saxon[60] he wrote a most able book on grammar in the
form of question and answer. He collected two volumes of homilies from
many works of the Fathers. He wrote on orthography. On the 118th Psalm
(our 119th) he wrote with a pen of gold. There are many other writings in
which any one who reads and studies them attentively will find no small
edification, as in the letters which he wrote to many persons. In these
and like works he spent the remainder of his days, living on earth the
life of heaven. Preparing himself in his latest days for the coming of
the Son of Man, that he might go in with Him to the wedding, he washed
every night his couch with tears,[61] always fortifying himself with the
intercessions of the saints, whose solemnities he regularly celebrated,
lest he should be pierced by any darts of the ancient enemy, who never
could steal into his dwelling so secretly as not to be at once detected
by him and driven out by the sign of the Cross.

“On a certain night, when he desired to pour forth prayer in secret after
his wont, with chanting of Psalms, he was oppressed by very heavy sleep.
But he rose from his couch, and put on his cape; and when again he was
oppressed with sleep, he took off all his clothes except his shirt and
drawers. The sleepiness continuing, he took a censer, and going to the
place where fire was kept burning, he filled it with live coal and put
incense on it, and a sweet odour filled the chamber. In that hour the
devil presented himself to him in bodily form, as it were a large man,
very black and misshapen and bearded, hurling at him darts of blasphemy.
‘Why dost thou act the hypocrite, Alcuin?’[62] he asked. ‘Why dost thou
attempt to appear just before men, when thou art a deceiver and a great
dissimulator? Dost thou suppose that for these feignings of thine Christ
can hold thee to be acceptable?’ But the soldier of Christ, invincible,
standing with David in the tower[63] builded for an armoury, wherein
there hang a thousand bucklers, all shields of mighty men, said with a
heavenly voice, ‘The Lord is my light and my salvation; whom then shall
I fear? He is the strength of my life; of whom then shall I be afraid?
Hear my crying, O Lord; incline thine ear to my calling, my King and my
God, for unto Thee do I make my prayer.’ With these and other verses of
the Psalms the enemy was at length put to flight; Albinus completed his
prayer and went to rest.[64] At that time only one of his disciples,
Waltdramn by name, who is still alive, was watching with him; he saw
all this from a place of concealment, a witness of this thing that took
place.”

St. Martin himself once had a meeting with the devil[65]. There came
into his cell a purple light, and one stood in the midst thereof clad in
a royal robe, having on his head a diadem of gold and precious stones,
his shoes overlaid with gold, his countenance serene, his face full of
joy, looking like anything but the devil. The devil spoke first. “Know,
Martin, whom you behold. I am Christ. I am about to descend from heaven
to the world. I willed first to manifest myself to thee.” Martin held his
tongue. “Why dost thou doubt, Martin, whom thou seest? I am Christ.” Then
the Spirit revealed that this was the devil, not God, and he answered,
“The Lord Jesus did not predict that He would come again resplendent with
purple and diadem. I will not believe that Christ has come, except in the
form in which He suffered, bearing the stigmata of the Cross.” Thereupon
the apparition vanished like smoke, leaving so very bad a smell that
there was no doubt it was the devil. “This account I had from the mouth
of Martin himself,” Sulpicius adds.

“The father used a little wine, in accordance with the apostle’s
precept, not for the pleasure of the palate, but by reason of his bodily
weakness.[66] In every kind of way he avoided idleness; either he read,
or he wrote, or he taught his disciples, or he gave himself to prayer
and the chanting of Psalms, yielding only to unavoidable necessities of
the body. He was a father to the poor, more humble than the humble, an
inviter to piety of the rich, lofty to the proud, a discerner of all,
and a marvellous comforter. He celebrated every day many solemnities of
masses[67] with honourable diligence, having proper masses deputed for
each day of the week. Moreover, on the Lord’s day, never at any time
after the light of dawn began to appear did he allow himself to slumber,
but swiftly preparing himself as deacon with his own priest Sigulf he
performed the solemnities of special masses till the third hour, and then
with very great reverence he went to the public mass. His disciples, when
they were in other places, especially when they assisted _ad opus Dei_,
carefully studied that no cause of blame be seen in them by him.

“The time had come when Albinus had a desire to depart and be with
Christ. He prayed with all his will that if it might be, he should pass
from the world on the day on which the Holy Spirit was seen to come
upon the apostles in tongues of fire, and filled their hearts. Saying
for himself the vesper office, in the place which he had chosen as his
resting-place after death, namely, near the Church of St. Martin, he sang
through the evangelic hymn of the holy Mary with this antiphon[68], ‘O
Key of David, and sceptre of the house of Israel, who openest and none
shutteth, shuttest and none openeth, come and lead forth from the house
of his prison this fettered one, sitting in darkness and the shadow of
death.’ Then he said the Lord’s Prayer. Then several Psalms—Like as the
hart desireth the water-brooks. O how amiable are Thy dwellings, Thou
Lord of hosts. Blessed are they that dwell in Thy house. Unto Thee lift
I up mine eyes. One thing I have desired of the Lord. Unto Thee, O Lord,
will I lift up my soul.

“He spent the season of Lent, according to his custom, in the most worthy
manner, with all contrition of flesh and spirit and purifying of habit.
Every night he visited the basilicas of the saints which are within the
monastery of St. Martin,[69] washing himself clean of his sins with
heavy groans. When the solemnity of the Resurrection of the Lord was
accomplished, on the night of the Ascension he fell on his bed, oppressed
with languor even unto death, and could not speak. On the third day
before his departure he sang with exultant voice his favourite antiphon,
‘O key of David,’ and recited the verses mentioned above. On the day of
Pentecost, the matin office having been performed, at the very hour at
which he had been accustomed to attend masses, at opening dawn, the holy
soul of Albinus is[70] released from the body, and by the ministry of
the celestial deacons, having with them the first martyr Stephen and the
archdeacon Laurence, with an army of angels, he is led to Christ, whom
he loved, whom he sought; and in the bliss of heaven he has for ever the
fruition of the glory of Him whom in this world he so faithfully served.”

The Annals of Pettau enable us to fill in some details of Alcuin’s death.
Pettau was not far from Salzburg, and therefore the monastery was likely
to be well informed. Arno of Salzburg, Alcuin’s great admiration and
his devoted personal friend, would see to it that in his neighbourhood
all ecclesiastics knew the details. The seizure on the occasion of his
falling on his bed was a paralytic stroke. It occurred, according to the
Annals from which we are quoting, on the fifth day of the week on the
eighth of the Ides of May, that is, on May 8; but in that year, 804,
Ascension Day fell on May 9, so that for the eighth of the Ides we must
read the seventh of the Ides. The seizure took place at vesper tide,
after sunset. He lived on till May 19, Whitsunday, on which day he died,
just as the day broke.

“On that night,” to return to the Life, “above the church of the holy
Martin there was seen an inestimable clearness of splendour, so that to
persons at a distance it seemed that the whole was on fire. By some,
that splendour was seen through the whole night, to others it appeared
three times in the night. Joseph the Archbishop of Tours testified that
he and his companions saw this throughout the night. Many that are still
sound in body testify the same. To more persons, however, this brightness
appeared in the same manner, not on that but on a former night, namely,
on the night of the first Sunday after the Ascension.

“At that same hour there was displayed to a certain hermit in Italy the
army of the heavenly deacons, sounding forth the ineffable praises of
Christ in the air; in the midst of whom Alchuin[71] stood, clothed with a
most splendid dalmatic, entering with them into heaven to minister with
perennial joy to the Eternal Pontiff. This hermit on that same day of
Pentecost told what he had seen to one of the brethren of Tours, who was
making his accustomed way to visit the thresholds of the Apostles.[72]
The hermit asked him these questions,—‘Who is that Abbat that lives at
Tours, in the monastery of the holy Martin? By what name is he called?
And was he well in body when you left?’ The brother replied, ‘He is
called Alchuin, and he is the best teacher in all France. When I started
on my way hither, I left him well.’ The solitary made rejoinder, with
tears, that he was indeed enjoying the very happiest health; and he told
him what he had seen at day-break that day. When the brother got back to
Tours, he related what he had heard.

“Father Sigulf, with certain others, washed the body of the father with
all honour, and placed it on a bier. Now Sigulf had at the time a great
pain in the head, but being by faith sound in mind, he found a ready
cure for his head. Raising his eyes above the couch of the master, he
saw the comb[73] with which he was wont to comb his head. Taking it in
his hands he said, ‘I believe, Lord Jesus, that if I combed my head with
this my master’s comb, my head would at once be cured by his merits.’ The
moment he drew the comb across his head, that part of the head which it
touched was immediately cured, and thus by combing his head all round he
lost the pain completely. Another of his disciples, Eangist by name, was
grievously afflicted with immense pain in his teeth. By Sigulf’s advice
he touched his teeth with the comb, and forthwith, because he did it in
faith, he received a cure by the merits of Alchuin.

“When Joseph, the bishop of the city of Tours, a man good and beloved
of God, heard that the blessed Alchuin was dead, he came to the spot
immediately with his clerks, and washing Alchuin’s eyes with his tears,
he kissed him frequently. He advised, moreover, using wise counsel, that
he should not be buried outside, in the place where the father himself
had willed, but with all possible honour within the basilica of the
holy Martin, that the bodies of those whose souls are united in heaven
should on earth lie in one home. And thus it was done. Above his tomb
was placed, as he had directed, a title which he had dictated in his
lifetime, engraved on a plate of bronze let into the wall.”[74]

The simple epitaph, apart from the title, ran thus:—

“Here doth rest the lord Alchuuin the Abbat, who died in peace on the
fourteenth of the Kalends of June. When you read, O all ye who pass by,
pray for him and say, The Lord grant unto him eternal rest.”




CHAPTER III

    The large bulk of Alcuin’s letters and other writings.—The
    main dates of his life.—Bede’s advice to Ecgbert.—Careless
    lives of bishops.—No parochial system.—Inadequacy of the
    bishops’ oversight.—Great monasteries to be used as sees for
    new bishoprics, and evil monasteries to be suppressed.—Election
    of abbats and hereditary descent.—Evils of pilgrimages.—Daily
    Eucharists.


We in the diocese of Bristol have a special right to study and to make
much of the letters of Alcuin. Our own great historian, William of
Malmesbury, had in the library of Malmesbury from the year 1100 and
onwards an important collection of these letters, from which he quotes
frequently in support of the historical statements which he makes.
More than that, we know of some of the letters of Alcuin only from the
quotations from them thus made by William in this diocese some 800 years
ago. This is specially stated by Abbat Froben, of Ratisbon, who edited
the letters of Alcuin 140 years ago.

The letters of Alcuin are addressed to an emperor, to kings, queens,
popes, patriarchs, archbishops, dukes, and others; so that of Alcuin’s
political importance there can be no question. As to his learning,
William of Malmesbury pays him the great compliment of naming him along
with our own Aldhelm and with Bede. “Of all the Angles,” he says,[75]
“of whom I have read, Alcuin was, next to the holy Aldhelm and Bede,
certainly the most learned.”

Alcuin was born in Northumbria in or about the year 735. He left England
to live in France in 782, returned for a time in 792, and left finally in
793. He died in 804. We can thus see how he stands in regard of date to
those with whom we have dealt in former lectures. Aldhelm and Wilfrith
died in 709, only about a quarter of a century before Alcuin’s birth.
Bede died, according to the usual statement[76], in 735, the year of
Alcuin’s birth. Boniface was martyred in Holland in 755, when Alcuin was
twenty years old.

As in the case of Gregory and of Boniface, who have been the subjects
of the last two courses of lectures, the letters of Alcuin are the most
important—or among the most important—sources of information for the
history of the times. The letters are 236 in number, and they fill 373
columns of close small print in the large volumes of Migne’s series.
The letters of Boniface are not half so numerous, and they occupy
considerably less than one-third of the space in the same print.

The letters of Alcuin, great as is their number and reach, form but a
small part of his writings. His collected works are six times as large as
his letters. His commentaries and treatises on the Holy Scriptures are
much more lengthy than his collected letters, more than two-thirds as
long again. His dogmatic writings are not far from half as long again
as his letters. His book on Sacraments and kindred subjects is about
two-thirds as long as his letters. His biographies of saints, his poems,
his treatises on teaching and learning, are all together nearly as long
as the letters; and there is almost the same bulk of works which are
attributed to him on evidence of a less conclusive character.

Put briefly, this was his life. He was a boy at my own school, the
Cathedral School of York, a school which had the credit of educating,
800 years later, another boy who made a mark on history, Guy Fawkes.
The head master in Alcuin’s time was Ecgbert, Archbishop of York and
brother of the reigning king of Northumbria; and the second master was
Albert, Ecgbert’s cousin, and eventually his successor in the chief
mastership and in the archbishopric. Alcuin succeeded to the practical
part of the mastership on Ecgbert’s death in 766, the new archbishop,
Albert, retaining the government of the school and the chief part of the
religious teaching. In 778 Alcuin became in all respects the head master
of the school, and in the end of 780 Albert died, leaving to Alcuin the
great collection of books which formed the famous library of York.

Alcuin had for some years travelled much on the continent of Europe,
and he was well acquainted with its principal scholars. They were
relatively few in number, learning having sunk very low on the continent,
while in Northumbria it had been and still was at a very high level.
Alcuin had also made acquaintance with Karl, not yet known as Karl der
Grosse, Carolus Magnus, Charlemagne, the son of Pepin, king as yet of
the Franks, emperor in the year 800, a man about seven years younger
than Alcuin. On a visit to the continent in 781 he again met Karl, who
proposed to him that he should enter his service as master of the school
of his palace, and practically minister of education for all parts of
the vast empire over which Karl ruled. In 782 he joined Karl, having
obtained leave of absence from the Northumbrian king Alfweald, Archbishop
Ecgbert’s great-nephew, and from the new archbishop, Eanbald I. From that
time onwards he was Karl’s right-hand man, in matters theological as well
as educational; and in some matters of supreme political importance too.
The leave of absence lasted some nine or ten years; at the end of that
time Alcuin came back for a short time, but he soon after terminated
his official connexion with York, and spent the rest of his life in the
dominions of Karl.

Archbishop Ecgbert, Alcuin’s master, had been a friend of the venerable
Bede. The only occasion on which we know that Bede left his cloister
was that of a visit to Ecgbert at York, shortly before Bede’s death,
if he died in 735. We have it from Bede himself that he had promised
another visit to York in the following year, but was too ill to carry
out his promise. Failing the opportunity of long conversations on the
state of the Province of York, which corresponded to the bishoprics of
York, Lindisfarne, Hexham, and Whithern, Bede set down his thoughts on
parchment or tablets, and sent them to his friend. This Letter of Bede to
Ecgbert is by very far the most important document of those times which
has come down to us; both because of the remarkable mass of information
contained in it, which we get from no other source, and because of the
large and broad views of ecclesiastical policy which it sets forth. It
was no doubt the advice and warnings of Bede that led Ecgbert to create
the educational conditions which developed the intellect of the most
intellectual man of his times, the subject of these lectures. Inasmuch
as it seems probable—indeed, is practically certain—that the distressful
state of Northumbria was the final cause of Alcuin’s abandonment of his
native land, it will be well to summarize the main points of Bede’s
dirge. We should bear in mind the fact that we are reading a description
by an ecclesiastic, a man keenly devoted to the monastic life; and that
the date is that of the year of Alcuin’s birth. It tells us, therefore,
something of the setting in which Alcuin found himself in early boyhood.

Ecgbert had only become Bishop of York in the year of Bede’s visit to
him, 734. York was not as yet an Archbishopric; it was raised to that
dignity in Ecgbert’s time. Some writers call Paulinus Archbishop, because
a pall was sent to him by Gregory; but the pall did not reach England
till after Paulinus had run away from York.

Bede thinks it necessary to urge Ecgbert very earnestly to be careful in
his talk. He does not suppose that Ecgbert sins in this respect, but it
is matter of common report that some bishops do; that they have no men of
religion or continence with them, but rather such as indulge in laughter
and jests, in revellings, drunkenness, and other pleasures of loose life;
men who feast daily in rich banquets, and neglect to feed their minds on
the heavenly sacrifice.

There were in 735 sixteen bishops’ sees in England, held in the south by
Tatuin of Canterbury, Ingwald of London, Daniel of Winchester, Aldwin
of Lichfield, Alwig of Lindsey, Forthere of Sherborn, Ethelfrith of
Elmham[77], Wilfrid of Worcester, Wahlstod of Hereford, Sigga of Selsey,
Eadulf of Rochester; and in the north by Ecgbert of York, Ethelwold of
Lindisfarne, Frithobert of Hexham, and Frithwald of Whithern. We may,
probably, narrow Bede’s censure to Lindisfarne and Hexham, if he really
did, as some assume, refer to his own parts. As a Northumbrian myself,
I think that a long-headed man like Bede, a Northumbrian by birth, more
probably referred to bishops of the parts which we now know as the
Southern Province. Alcuin’s letters, however, show that in his time there
was much that needed improvement in the case of northern bishops as well
as southern.

A bishop in those days had to do the main part of the teaching, and
preaching, and ministering the Sacraments, throughout the diocese. Bede
points out that Ecgbert’s diocese was much too large for one man to cover
it properly with ministrations. He must, therefore, ordain priests, and
appoint teachers to preach the Word of God in each of the villages; to
celebrate the heavenly mysteries; and especially to attend to sacred
baptism[78]. The persons so appointed must make it their essential
business to root deep in the memory of the people that Catholic Faith
which is contained in the Apostles’ Creed, and in like manner the Lord’s
Prayer. Those of the people who do not know Latin are to say the Creed
and the Lord’s Prayer over and over again in their native tongue; and
this rule is not for the laity only, but also for clergy and monks
who do not know Latin. For this purpose, Bede says he has often given
translations of these two into English to uneducated priests; for St.
Ambrose declared that all the faithful should say the Creed every
morning, and the English practice was to chant the Lord’s Prayer very
often. How much we of to-day would give for just one copy of Bede’s Creed
and Lord’s Prayer in English![79]

Ecgbert’s position in the sight of God, Bede says, will be very serious
if he neglects to do as he advises, especially if he takes temporal gifts
or payments from those to whom he does not give heavenly gifts. This last
point Bede presses home with affectionate earnestness upon the “most
beloved Prelate”. “We have heard it reported,” he says, “that there are
many villages and dwellings, on inaccessible hills and in deep forests,
where for many years no bishop has been seen, no bishop has ministered;
and yet no single person has been free from the payment of tribute to the
bishop; and that although not only has he never come to confirm those
who have been baptized, but there has been no teacher to instruct them
in the faith or show them the difference between good and evil. And if
we believe and confess,” he continues, “that in the laying on of hands
the Holy Spirit is received, it is clear that that gift is absent from
those who have not been confirmed. When a bishop has, from love of money,
taken nominally under his government a larger part of the population than
he can by any means visit with his ministrations in one whole year, the
peril is great for himself, and great for those to whom he claims to be
overseer while he is unable to oversee them.”

Ecgbert has, Bede tells him, a most ready coadjutor in the King of
Northumbria, Ceolwulf, Ecgbert’s near relative, his first cousin, whom
Ecgbert’s brother succeeded. The [arch]bishop should advise the King
to place the ecclesiastical arrangements of the Northumbrian nation on
a better footing. This would best be done by the appointment of more
bishops. Pope Gregory had bidden Augustine to arrange for twelve bishops
in the Northern Province, the Bishop of York to receive the pall as
Metropolitan. Ecgbert should aim at that number. It may here be noted
that in this year of grace 1908 there are still only nine diocesan
bishops in the Northern Province, besides the archbishop, and five of
these nine have been created in the lifetime of some of us. Bristol knows
to its heavy cost that Ripon was the first of the five.

But Bede points out, and here we come to very interesting matter, that
the negligence of some former kings, and the foolish gifts of others,
had left it very difficult to find a suitable see for a new bishop. The
monasteries were in possession everywhere. It may be remarked in passing
that all over the Christian parts of the world monasteries existed, even
in those early times, in very large numbers. We know the names, and the
dates or periods of foundation, of no less than 1481 founded before the
year 814, in various parts of the world; and the actual number was very
much larger than that, from what we know of the facts, especially in
the East. In the time of Henry VIII, besides the monasteries which had
been suppressed by Wolsey, Fisher, and others, as also the large number
of alien priories suppressed at an earlier date, and besides all the
ecclesiastical foundations called hospitals and colleges, more than 600
monasteries remained in this land to be suppressed.

There being, then, no lands left to endow bishoprics, there was, in
Bede’s opinion, only one remedy; that was, the summoning of a Greater
Council, at which an edict should be issued, by pontifical and royal
consent, fixing upon some great monastery for a new episcopal seat.
To conciliate the abbat and monks, the election of the bishop-abbat
should be left to them. If it should prove necessary to provide more
property still for the bishop, Bede pointed out that there were many
establishments calling themselves monasteries which were not worthy of
the name. He would like to see some of these transferred by synodical
authority for the further maintenance of the newly-created see, so
that money which now went in luxury, vanity, and intemperance in meat
and drink, might be used to further the cause of chastity, temperance,
and piety. Here in Bristol, with Gloucester close at hand, we need no
reminder of the closeness of the parallel between Bede’s advice in 735
to King Ceolwulf and the actual course taken in 1535 by King Henry, and
carried to completion by him in 1540-2, in the foundation of six new
bishoprics on the spoils of as many great monasteries. Nor need it be
pointed out that Bede’s proposal to suppress small and ill-conditioned
monasteries was a forecast of the original proposal of Henry VIII.

Bede then proceeds to speak with extreme severity of false monasteries.
It appears that men bribed kings to make them grants of lands—professedly
for monasteries—in hereditary possession, and paid moneys to bishops,
abbats, and secular authorities, to ratify the grants by their
signatures; and then they made them the dwellings of licentiousness and
excess of all kinds. The men’s wives set up corresponding establishments.
Bede urged the annulment of all grants thus misused: again we seem to
hear a note prophetic of eight hundred years later. To so great a pitch
had this gone, that there were no lands left for grants to discharged
soldiers, sons of nobles, and others. Thus it came to pass that such men
either went beyond sea and abandoned their own country, for which they
ought to fight, or else they lived as they could at home, not able to
marry, and living unseemly lives. If this was allowed to go on, the land
would be unable to defend itself against the inroads of the barbarians.
Bede’s prophecy to that effect came crushingly true in Alcuin’s
time, not fifty years after it was written. And here again we have a
remarkable forecast of Henry VIII’s avowed purpose in the suppression of
monasteries, that he must have means to defend his land against invasion.
Thus the three arguments of Henry VIII, namely, that lands and money
were needed for more soldiers and sailors, that lands and money were
needed for more bishoprics, and that many of the religious houses did
not deserve that name, were carefully set out by one whom we may call a
High-Church ecclesiastic, eight hundred years before Henry.

On two of the points mentioned by Bede in connexion with monasteries, it
may be well to say a little more by way of illustration. The two points
are, the hereditary descent of monasteries, and the principle on which
the election of the abbat should proceed. To take the second first,—Bede
is very precise on this point. He says that when a monastery is to be
taken as the seat of a bishop, licence should be given to the monks to
elect one of themselves to fill the double office of abbat and bishop,
and to rule the monastery in the one character and the adjacent diocese
in the other. We should have thought it would have been better to leave
them free to elect some prominent churchman from the outside, than to
limit their choice to one of themselves. And the exception for which
arrangement was made points in the same direction of limitation. If they
have not the right man in their own monastery, at least they must choose
one from their own family, or order, to preside over them, in accordance
with the decrees of the Canons. This strictness was traditional in
Northumbria. The great founder of monastic institutions in the Northern
Church, Benedict Biscop, who founded Monk Wearmouth in 674 and Jarrow in
685, was very decided about it. He would not have an abbat brought in
from another monastery. The duty of the brethren, he said, when speaking
to his monks on his own imminent decease, was, in accordance with the
rule of Abbat Benedict the Great, and in accordance with the statutes
of their own monastery of Wearmouth—which he had himself drawn up after
consideration of the various rules on the Continent from the statutes of
the seventeen monasteries which he liked best of all that he had seen—to
inquire carefully who of themselves was best fitted for the post, and,
after due election, have him confirmed as abbat by the benediction of
the bishop. There is a great deal to be said in favour of this course,
and there is a great deal to be said for more freedom of election. The
case which comes nearest to it in our English life of to-day is that of
the election of the Master of a College in one of the two Universities.
In Cambridge the election—in two cases the appointment—is in every case
open, in the sense that it is not confined to the Fellows of the College,
and in very recent times there have been several cases of the election
of a prominent man from another College, to the great advantage of the
College thus electing.

The other point is of much wider importance, namely, the hereditary
descent of monasteries and of their headship. Our Northumbrian abbat
Benedict was very decided here also. The brethren must not elect his
successor on account of his birth. There must be no claim of next of kin.
He was specially anxious that his own brother after the flesh should
not be elected to succeed him. He would rather his monastery became a
wilderness than have this man as his successor, for they all knew that
he did not walk in the way of truth. Benedict evidently feared that a
practice of hereditary succession to ecclesiastical office might spring
up. No doubt he had seen at least the beginning of this in foreign parts.
It was no visionary fear, for in times rather later we have examples of
ecclesiastical benefices, and even bishoprics, going from father to son,
and that in days of supposed celibacy. We have plenty of examples of
monasteries descending from mother to daughter later on in England; and
in Bede’s own time he mentions without adverse remark that the Abbess
of Wetadun (Watton, in East Yorkshire) persuaded Bishop John of Hexham
to cure of an illness her daughter, whom she proposed to make abbess
in her stead. Alcuin himself, as we have seen,[80] tells us quite as
a matter of ordinary occurrence, not calling for any remark, that he
himself succeeded hereditarily to the first monastery which he ruled,
situated on Spurn Point, the southern promontory of Yorkshire. We cannot
doubt that the evils naturally arising, in some cases at least, from
hereditary succession to spiritual positions, had much to do with the
intemperate suppression of the secular clergy and the enforcement of
clerical celibacy. In considering the question as it concerned the times
of Alcuin, we must bear in mind that we are dealing with times very long
before the development of the idea of feudal succession.

It is interesting to note that the earliest manuscripts of the Rule of
St. Benedict which are known to exist do not definitely lay down the
precise rule that the person elected to an abbacy must be a member of
the abbey or at least of the same order. The Rule was first printed in
1659 by a monk of Monte Cassino; and this print was carefully collated
throughout with a manuscript of the thirteenth century at Fort Augustus
for the edition published by Burns and Oates in 1886. Chapter 64 is as
follows, taking the translation annexed to the Latin in that edition,
though it does not in all cases give quite the force of the original.

“In the appointing[81] of an abbot, let this principle always be
observed, that he be made abbot whom all the brethren with one consent
in the fear of God, or even a small part of the community with more
wholesome counsel, shall elect. Let him who is to be appointed be chosen
for the merit of his life and the wisdom of his doctrine, even though
he should be the last of the community. But if all the brethren with
one accord (which God forbid) should elect a man willing to acquiesce
in their evil habits, and these in some way come to the knowledge of
the bishop to whose diocese that place belongs, or of the abbots or
neighbouring Christians, let them not suffer the consent of these wicked
men to prevail, but appoint[82] a worthy steward over the house of God,
knowing that for this they shall receive a good reward, if they do it
with a pure intention and for the love of God, as, on the other hand,
they will sin if they neglect it.”

We hear a good deal in our early history of kings and great men
renouncing the world and entering the cloister. Bede shows us the darker
side of this practice. Ever since king Aldfrith died, he says, some
thirty years before, there has not been one chief minister of state who
has not provided himself while in office with a so-called monastery of
this false kind, and his wife with another. The layman then is tonsured,
and becomes not a monk but an abbat, knowing nothing of the monastic
rule. And the bishops, who ought to restrain them by regular discipline,
or else expel them from Holy Church, are eager to confirm the unrighteous
decrees for the sake of the fees they receive for their signatures.
Against this poison of covetousness Bede inveighs bitterly; and then
he declares that if he were to treat in like manner of drunkenness,
gluttony, sensuality, and like evils, his letter would extend to an
immense length.

It may be well to mention here another religious practice which had
two sides to it, the practice of going on pilgrimage. Anglo-Saxon men
and women had a passion for visiting the tombs of the two princes of
the Apostles, Peter, whose connexion with Rome is so shadowy up to the
time of his death there, and Paul, their own Apostle, the teacher of
the Gentiles, whose connexion with Rome is so solid a fact in the New
Testament and in Church history. Bede tells us that in his times many
of the English, noble and ignoble, laymen and clerics, men and women,
did this. As a result of the relaxed discipline of mixed travel, a
complaint came to England, soon after, that the promiscuous journeyings
on pilgrimage led to much immorality, so that there was scarcely a town
on the route in which there were not English women leading immoral lives.

There is one striking passage in Bede’s unique letter which shows us how
great were the demands of the early Church upon the religious observances
of the lay people; while it shows with equal clearness the inadequacy of
the response made by the English of the time. The passage will complete
our knowledge of the state of religion among our Anglian forefathers
towards the end of Bede’s life. It refers to the bishop’s work among the
people of the world, outside the monastic institutions. The bishop must
furnish them with competent teachers, who shall show them how to fortify
themselves and all they have against the continual plots of unclean
spirits, by the frequent use of the sign of the Cross, and by frequent
joining in Holy Communion. “It is salutary,” he says to Ecgbert, “for
all classes of Christians to participate daily in the Body and Blood of
the Lord, as you well know is done by the Church of Christ throughout
Italy, Gaul, Africa, Greece, and the whole of the East. This religious
exercise, this devoted sanctification, has, through the neglect of the
teachers, been so long abandoned by almost all the lay persons of the
province of Northumbria, that even the more religious among them only
communicate at Christmas, Epiphany, and Easter. And yet,” he continues,
“there are innumerable persons, innocent and of most chaste conversation,
boys and girls, young men and virgins, old men and old women, who without
any controversy could communicate on every Lord’s Day, and indeed on the
birthdays of the holy apostles and martyrs, as you have seen done in the
holy Roman and Apostolic Church.” The Church History of early times has a
great deal of practical teaching for the church people of to-day.

If the life of religious people in the monasteries and in the world was
thus tainted and slack, we can imagine what the ordinary secular life was
likely to be. There was terrible force in Bede’s suggestion that a nation
so rotten could never withstand a hostile attack of any importance.
Archbishop Ecgbert certainly did all that he could to bring things into
order; and he wisely determined that the very best thing he could do to
pull things round was to get hold of the youth of the nation, and train
them with the utmost care in the way that they should go. This leads us
on to the rise or revival of the Cathedral School of York.




CHAPTER IV

    The school of York.—Alcuin’s poem on the Bishops and Saints
    of the Church of York.—The destruction of the Britons by
    the Saxons.—Description of Wilfrith II, Ecgbert, Albert, of
    York.—Balther and Eata.—Church building in York.—The Library of
    York.


It is usual to reckon the year 735 as the beginning of the great School
of York, and Archbishop—or rather, as he then was, Bishop—Ecgbert as its
originator. But it seems clear that we must carry its beginnings further
back, and count as its originator a man who filled a much larger place
in the world than even Ecgbert, archbishop as he became, and brother of
the king as he was. When Wilfrith, the first Englishman to appeal to
Rome, was put into the see of York by Theodore of Canterbury in 669,
his chaplain and biographer, Stephen Eddi, tells of four principal
works which, between that year and 678, his chief accomplished. The
first was the restoration of the Cathedral Church of York, which had
fallen into decay during the time when Lindisfarne was the seat of the
Bishop of Northumbria. The second was the building of a noble church at
Ripon for the people of the kingdom of Elmete, which Edwin, the first
Christian king of Northumbria, had conquered from the Romano-Britons;
corresponding to the West Riding of Yorkshire and parts of Lancashire, a
portion of the great British kingdom of Rheged, at the court of which
the bard Taliessin had sung. The fourth was the building of a still more
noble church at Hexham, to be the ecclesiastical centre of the northern
part of Northumbria, replacing Lindisfarne in that character. And the
third in order was the establishment of a School, no doubt at York, as
that was his episcopal seat, and he himself was the chief teacher. The
world credits William of Wickham with the invention of the idea of a
public school in the modern sense of the word; but seven hundred[83]
years before him Wilfrith had grasped the idea and put it into practice
at York. This is what his chaplain tells us. The secular chiefs, the
noblemen, sent their sons to him to be so taught that when the time of
choice came they would be found fit to serve God in the ministry, if that
was their choice, or to serve the king in arms if they preferred that
career. We must certainly reckon the year 676, or thereabouts, as the
date of foundation of the school at York, Wilfrith as its founder, and
its principle that of the modern public school, which is supposed to give
an education so liberal that whatever career its alumnus prefers he will
be found fitted for it. The first scholars of the school of York entered,
some of them, the ministry, as learned clerks; others, the army, as fit
to be soldiers. It was still so when I went to that school sixty-four
years ago. The school is older than Winchester by seven hundred years,
and older than Eton by seven hundred and sixty-five.[84] Bede’s strong
appeal to Ecgbert led to the revival of the school after the natural
decay from which good institutions suffer in times of ecclesiastical
and civil disorder, and we date the continuous life of the school from
him. It was an interesting coincidence, that men saw in the year 735 the
revival of the school and the birth of its most famous pupil, assistant
master, and head master. We may now turn to that man, whose early lot was
cast in a state of society, lay and clerical, such as that described in
scathing terms by Bede; and who was the first-fruits of the remedy which
Bede had suggested. As a link between Bede and Alcuin we may have in mind
a pretty little story about Bede which we find in a letter of Alcuin’s
some fifty or sixty years after Bede’s death.

[Sidenote: Ep. 274. Before A.D. 793.]

Alcuin is writing to the monks of Wearmouth. He tells them how well
he remembers what he saw at Wearmouth long years ago, and how much he
was pleased with everything he saw. He encourages them to continue in
the right way by reminding them of the virtues of their founders. “It
is certain,” he writes, “that your founders very often visit the place
of your dwelling. They rejoice with all whom they find keeping their
statutes and living right lives; and they cease not to intercede for
such with the pious judge. Nor is it doubtful that visitations of angels
frequent holy places; for it is reported that our master and your patron
the blessed Bede said, ‘I know that angels visit the canonical hours and
the congregations of the brethren. What if they should not find me among
the brethren? Would they not have to say, Where is Bede? Why does he not
come with the brethren to the appointed prayers?’”

To us in England, and especially to those of us who are North-countrymen,
nothing that Alcuin wrote has a higher interest than his poem in Latin
hexameters on the Bishops and Saints of the Church of York. By the Church
of York Alcuin evidently meant the Church of Northumbria, although
his account of the prelates dwells chiefly on the archbishops of his
time. Considering his long sojourn in France, it was fitting that the
manuscript of this famous poem should be discovered at a monastery near
Reims, the monastery of St. Theodoric, or Thierry according to the later
spelling. A great part of the poem is in the main a versification of
Bede’s prose history of the conversion of the North to Christianity, and
an adaptation of Bede’s metrical life of St. Cuthbert. On this account
the French transcriber from the original omitted about 1100 of the
1657 lines of which the poem consists, and only about 550 lines were
originally printed by Mabillon in the Acta Sanctorum. When our own Gale
was preparing to publish it, he got the missing verses both from the
St. Theodoric MS. and also from a MS. at Reims itself. Both manuscripts
disappeared long ago, probably in the devastations of the French
Revolution[85].

The poem describes the importance of York in the time of the Roman
occupation of Britain, the residence, as Alcuin tells us, of the dukes
of Britain, and of sovereigns of Rome. York was, in fact, the imperial
city; it shared with Trèves the honour of being the only imperial cities
north of the Alps. He speaks eloquently of its beautiful surroundings,
its flowery fields, its noble edifices, its fertility, its charm as a
home. This part of the poem inclines the reader to settle in favour of
York the uncertainty as to the place of Alcuin’s birth. One graphic
touch, and the use of a special Latin name for the river Ouse which flows
through the middle of the city, goes to the heart of those who in their
youth have fished in that river—

    Hanc piscosa suis undis interluit Usa.

He goes on to speak of the persistent inroads of the Picts after the
withdrawal of the Roman troops. Inasmuch as the sixth legion was
quartered at York, and all of the other three legions in Britain were
withdrawn before the sixth, it may be claimed that York was the last
place effectively occupied by the Roman troops. This indeed is in itself
probable, since York was in the best position for checking the attempts
of the Picts to reach the central and southern parts of Britain. He
describes how the leaders of the Britons sent large bribes to a warlike
race, to bring them over to protect the land, a race, he says, called
from their hardness Saxi, as though Saxons meant stones.[86] The eventual
conquest of the Britons by the Saxons evidently had Alcuin’s full
sympathy. The Britons were lazy; worse than that, they were wicked; for
their sins they were rightly driven out, and a better race entered into
possession of their cities. We would give a great deal to have had from
Alcuin a few words of tradition about some details of the occupation of
York by the Angles, and of the fate of the British inhabitants. Alcuin’s
words would suggest that their fate was a cruel one, but we do not know
anything of it from any source whatsoever. One of his remarks strikes
us as curious, considering that the Britons were Christians and their
conquerors were pagan: the expulsion, he says, was the work of God,
that a race might enter into possession who should keep the precepts of
the Lord. Clearly Alcuin held a brief for his ancestors of some five
generations before his birth. He writes also in a rather lordly way of
the kingdom of Kent, as though Northumbria was the really important
province in the time of King Edwin, as indeed it unquestionably was.
Edwin was the most prominent personage in England, the Bretwalda, at the
time of the conversion of Northumbria. All that Alcuin says of Edwin’s
young wife Ethelburga, and of the kingdom of Kent whence she came, is
this: “He took from the southern parts a faithful wife, of excellent
disposition, of illustrious origin, endowed with all the virtues of the
holy faith.” We shall have, at a later stage, to remark upon the silence
with which Wessex also was treated by Alcuin.

It is quite true that the facts of the greater part of the poem are
taken from Bede. But it is of much interest to note the selection which
Alcuin made. Of the kings, he writes of Edwin, Oswald, Oswy, Ecgfrith,
and Aldfrith, omitting mention of the sub-kings, several of whom were
connected with constitutional difficulties. Of the bishops, he writes
of Paulinus, Wilfrith, Cuthbert, Bosa, and John, mentioning Aidan
only incidentally, but with the epithet “most holy”. He avoids all
controversial topics in writing of Wilfrith. There is just one word of
reference to Wilfrith’s many disturbances, in connexion with the only
mention Alcuin makes here of Rome: Wilfrith, he says, was journeying to
Rome, _compulsus_, being driven to go there. It is worthy of remark that
of the hundred and sixty-eight lines which Alcuin gives to his account of
Wilfrith, he devotes nine to Wilfrith’s vision, in which the name of the
Blessed Virgin played so large a part. It was Wilfrith’s chaplain, Eddi,
who recorded this, not Bede, who is very reticent about Wilfrith. Michael
appeared to Wilfrith at a crisis in a serious illness, and announced
that he was sent by the Almighty to inform him that he would recover.
The message went on to explain that this was due to the merits and
prayers of the holy mother Mary, who from the celestial throne had heard
with open ears the groans, the tears (_sic_)[87], and the vows of the
companions of Wilfrith, and had begged for him life and health. Stephen
Eddi gives a highly characteristic ending to the message, which Alcuin
omits. “Remember,” the archangel said, “that in honour of St. Peter and
St. Andrew thou hast built churches; but to the holy Mary, ever Virgin,
who intercedes for thee, thou hast reared none. This thou must amend, by
dedicating a church to her honour.” The church which he had built for
St. Peter was at Ripon, that for St. Andrew was at Hexham; we have still
in each case the confessio, or crypt for relics, which he built under
those churches. In obedience to the vision, Wilfrith now built a church
of St. Mary by the side of the church of St. Andrew at Hexham. This
present generation has seen a noble restoration and completion of the
abbey church of Hexham.[88]

It is scarcely necessary to remark upon this grouping together of
churches dedicated to various saints. At Malmesbury, under St. Aldhelm,
there were six churches on the hill in one group, St. Andrew, St.
Laurence, St. Mary, St. Michael, St. Peter and St. Paul, and the little
Irish basilica of Maildulf.

Alcuin mentions also the missionary zeal of the Northumbrian church,
beginning with the early Ecgbert, who on the expulsion of Wilfrith left
Ripon, and lived for the rest of his life in Ireland as a trainer of
missionaries. Besides him, Alcuin names as English missionaries Wibert,
Wilbrord, the two Hewalds, Suidbert, and Wira.

So far Alcuin copied Bede and Eddi. In the last 442 lines of his poem
he gives us information which we do not find elsewhere, dealing in
some detail with Bishop Wilfrith II and Archbishops Ecgbert, Albert,
and Eanbald, of York. Wilfrith II resigned the bishopric of York in
the year of Alcuin’s birth, after holding it for fourteen years. A
delightful account of him had been handed down to Alcuin’s time. He was
to all acceptable, venerable, honourable, lovable. He took great pains
in improving and beautifying the ornaments of his church, covering
altar and crosses with silver plates, gilded. Other churches in the
city he beautified in like manner. He was zealous in multiplying the
congregations; following the precepts of the Lord; careful in doctrine;
bright in example. Liberal with hand and mouth, he fed the minds of the
studious and the bodies of the needy. In the end he retired and spent his
latest years in contemplation.

Of Ecgbert, the succeeding bishop, Alcuin writes in terms of the highest
praise. He was evidently more of a ruler than the second Wilfrith had
been, and could be very severe with evil men. He had a love for beautiful
things, and added much to the treasures of the church, special mention
being made of silk hangings with foreign patterns woven in. It was to
him that Bede wrote the striking letter which we have analysed above. He
was of the royal house of Northumbria, and one of his brothers succeeded
to the throne while Ecgbert was archbishop. The bishop had taken Bede’s
advice, had sought and obtained from Rome the pallium, as the sign of
metropolitical position. Curiously enough, Alcuin makes no reference to
this, the most important ecclesiastical step of the time, another silence
on his part which may have hid feelings he did not wish to express. He
does mention the pall, but only as a matter of course, in comparing the
two brothers, the prelate and the king; the one, he says, bore on his
shoulder the palls sent by the Apostolic, the other on his head the
diadems of his ancestors. He draws a charming picture of the two brothers
working together for the country’s good, each in his own sphere,

    The times were happy then for this our race,
    When king and prelate in lawful concord wielded
    The one the church’s laws, the other the nation’s affairs.

We have seen how slight a reference Alcuin makes to the fact of the
pall from Rome. He appears to have held a very moderate view of its
importance to the end of his life. His letter to the Pope, Leo III,
in the year 797, conveying a request that the pall might be granted
to the newly-consecrated Archbishop of York, Eanbald II, is an
important document. After referring to his letter of the previous year,
congratulating Leo on his accession, he proceeds as follows, curiously
enough not mentioning by name the archbishop or his city or diocese. He
is writing from his home in France.

[Sidenote: Ep. 82.]

“And now as regards these messengers—who have come from my own fatherland
and my own city, to solicit the dignity of the sacred pall, in canonical
manner and in accordance with the apostolic precept of the blessed
Gregory who brought us to Christ—I humbly pray your pious excellency that
you receive benignantly the requests of ecclesiastical necessity. For in
those parts the authority of the sacred pall is very necessary, to keep
down the perversity of wicked men and to preserve the authority of holy
church.”

That is a remarkably limited statement of the need for the pall, when we
remember the tremendous claims made for it in later times. And it is the
more remarkable because Alcuin is evidently making the most persuasive
appeal he could construct; he would certainly state the case in its
strongest terms when addressing the one man with whom it finally rested
to say yes or no. He seems to say clearly that to have the pall was
_bonum et utile_ for the archbishop, for the purposes which he names; he
says nothing, because apparently he knows nothing, of its affecting, one
way or another, the archbishop’s plenary right, in virtue of his election
and consecration, to consecrate bishops, ordain priests, and rule his
province and his diocese.

Alcuin digresses from the series of archbishops to deal with the saints
of the Church of York, of times near to and coinciding with his own. Of
the former, he naturally takes Bede, and he takes no other. To Bede he
gives only thirty-one lines, but he does not stint his praise. Six of the
thirty-one lines are devoted to Bede’s abbat, Ceolfrith, who took from
Wearmouth as a present to the Pope the famous Codex Amiatinus, now at
Florence,[89] and died and was buried at Langres. From Alcuin’s poem we
learn that Ceolfrith’s body was eventually brought back to Northumbria,
and this enables us to accept William of Malmesbury’s statement that King
Edmund, on an expedition to the north, obtained the relics of Ceolfrith
among many others, and had them safely buried at Glastonbury.

Of the saints who lived on to the time of Alcuin’s own manhood he takes
two, and we are rather surprised at his selection. The one is Balther,
the occupant of the Bass Rock, known later as Baldred of the Bass; the
other is the anchorite Eata. Both, indeed, were anchorites, the one at
Tyningham and on the Bass, the other at Cric, which is said to be Crayke
in the East Riding of Yorkshire. Baldred died in 756, and Eata in 767.
At Thornhill, in the West Riding of Yorkshire, there is a sepulchral
monument, one of three with inscriptions in early Anglian runes, in
memory of one Eata, who is described as Inne, which some have guessed
to mean a hermit.[90] On the strength of this guess they have claimed
that Thornhill was the place of burial of Alcuin’s Eata. To Balther
Alcuin gives more than twice as many lines as to Bede; to us this seems
a remarkably disproportionate treatment. There is a considerable amount
of uncertainty about Balther, and Alcuin’s lines leave the uncertainty
without solution. The events which he connects with the anchorite
Balther, as one of the saints of the Northumbrian Church, are really
connected with an earlier Balther, of the time of St. Kentigern, a saint
of the ancient British Church of Cumbria. The death of this Balther is
placed in 608; and in any case he was before the first formation of the
Christian Church among the Northumbrian Angles. Simeon of Durham puts the
death of Balther in 756, and this fits in well with Alcuin’s statements;
but we may most probably suppose that there was an earlier Balther and a
later, and that the legendary events of the life of the earlier have been
transferred to the life of the later. Alcuin certainly understood that
his Balther was Balther of the Bass.

It is when Alcuin comes to Archbishop Albert that he really lets
himself go. Ecgbert had in fact established the eminence of the great
School of York, and had himself acted as its chief governor and its
religious teacher. But Alcuin does not even refer to that in his
account of Ecgbert. The praise of the school goes all to the credit of
Ecgbert’s cousin, his successor in the mastership and eventually in the
archbishopric, Albert. Eight lines of laudatory epithets Alcuin bestows
upon Albert, before proceeding to detail; his laudation fitly culminates
in what all ages have regarded as high praise, _non ore loquax sed
strenuus actu_—not a great talker, but a strenuous doer.

In 766 Albert became archbishop. Like his immediate predecessors, he
did much to beautify churches in the city. In this work Alcuin was one
of his two right-hand men; and yet each detail which Alcuin gives is
puzzling. He tells us that at the spot where the great warrior Edwin
the king received the water of baptism, the prelate constructed a grand
altar, which he covered with silver, precious stones, and gold, and
dedicated under the name of St. Paul, the teacher of the world, whom
the learned archbishop specially loved. There is a difficulty here.
While it is certain that the church of stone of larger dimensions which
Edwin and Paulinus began, to include the wooden oratory of St. Peter
the place of Edwin’s baptism, was the church which Oswald completed and
the first Wilfrith restored, as the Cathedral Church of York, there was
no altar of St. Paul in the Cathedral Church in the middle ages. We
should naturally have supposed that an altar so splendid as that which
Albert constructed, at a spot so uniquely remarkable in the Christian
history of Northumbria, would have been sedulously retained throughout
all changes. The explanation may well be that not the size only but the
level of the surface of the site has been greatly increased in the course
of 1200 years. The herring-bone work of the walls of the early Anglian
Church of York was found deep down below the surface when excavations
were made after the fire of 1829, and at a later period in connexion with
the hydraulic apparatus for the organ. Probably the altar of St. Paul,
and the place of baptism, were down at that level, and were buried in
the ruins of one fire after another, many feet below the present surface
of the Minster Yard. My old friend Canon Raine, who edited the three
volumes of the _Historians of the Church of York_, writing of the present
crypt in his introduction to the first volume,[91] says, “In another
peculiar place is the actual site, if I mistake not, of the font in which
Edwin became a Christian.” Canon Raine was secretive in connexion with
antiquarian discoveries, and from inquiries which I have made it is to
be feared that the secret of this site died with him. All we can say is,
that where that site was, there was this splendid altar[92] of St. Paul,
_mundi doctoris_.

A more doubtful point is raised by Alcuin’s description of the building
of a new and marvellous basilica, begun, completed, and consecrated, by
Albert. Two of his pupils, Eanbald and Alcuin, were his ministers in the
building, which was consecrated only ten days before his death. It was
very lofty, supported on solid columns, with curved arches; the roofs
and windows were fine; it was surrounded by many porches, porticoes,
which were in fact side chapels; it contained many chambers under various
roofs, in which were thirty altars with sundry kinds of ornament. Alcuin
describes this immediately after describing the construction of the
altar of St. Paul in what must have been the old Cathedral Church; but
he does not say that the new church was on the old site, or that it
replaced the Cathedral Church. Still, a church of that magnitude can only
have been the chief church of the city. Simeon of Durham throws light
upon the point by stating as the reason for building this new basilica,
that the monasterium of York—that is, the Minster, as it has always
been called[93]—was burned[94] on Monday, May 23, 741; and the Saxon
Chronicle has the entry[95], “This year York was burned.” The balance
of argument on this disputed point is that Albert did really build a new
Cathedral Church in place of one that was burned while Alcuin was a boy.
The investigations which have taken place show that in Anglo-Saxon times
a basilica of really important dimensions was in existence, much larger
than Edwin’s little oratory or Oswald’s stone building, and all points
to its being the “marvellous basilica” which Eanbald and Alcuin built by
order of Albert.

Alcuin makes several statements about church-building in York. In lines
195-198, he tells us that King Edwin caused a small building to be
hurriedly erected, in which he and his could receive the sacred water of
baptism. We should naturally suppose that it was by the side of water.
In lines 219-222 he tells us that Paulinus built ample churches in his
cities. Among them he names that of York, supported on solid columns; it
remains, he says, noble and beautiful, on the spot where Edwin was laved
in the sacred wave. In lines 1221-1228 he tells us first that Wilfrith
II greatly adorned “the church”, evidently meaning his cathedral church,
and then that he adorned with great gifts other churches in the city of
York. In lines 1487-1505 he tells us that Albert took great care in the
ornamentation of churches, and especially that at the spot of Edwin’s
baptism he made a grand altar, which he covered with silver and gems
and gold, and dedicated it under the name of Saint Paul whom he greatly
loved. He made also, still it would seem at the same spot, another altar,
covered with pure silver and precious stones, and dedicated it to the
Martyrs and the Cross. As we have seen, there was no altar dedicated to
St. Paul in the mediaeval Minster of York; but there was not an altar
only but a small church—which remained as a parish church till very
recent years—dedicated to Saint Crux. The parish of St. Crux is now
absorbed in All Saints. Lastly, in lines 1506-1519 he describes the
building of the great new basilica which Eanbald and himself built under
the orders of Archbishop Albert. The conclusion appears to be that the
new basilica—which probably became the cathedral church—did not stand on
the site of Paulinus’s church, but was erected close by that specially
sacred spot; and that both Paulinus’s stone oratory, beautified by
Wilfrith II, with its added altars to St. Paul and St. Crux, and also the
new and great basilica of Albert, are now absorbed in the vast area of
the Minster of York.

Eanbald succeeded Albert in the archbishopric, and Alcuin succeeded
Albert in the mastership of the School of York and in the ownership of
the great library which for three generations had been got together
at York. Alcuin tells us that it contained all Latin literature, all
that Greece had handed on to the Romans, all that the Hebrew people
had received from on high, all that Africa with clear-flowing light
had given. Passing from the general to the particular, Alcuin names
the authors whose works the library of York possessed. What we would
give for even five or six of those priceless manuscripts! Of the
Christian Fathers, he records a rather mixed list. They had Jerome,
Hilary, Ambrose, Augustine, Athanasius, Orosius, Gregory the Great,
Pope Leo, Basil, Fulgentius, Cassiodorus, and John Chrysostom. They had
the works of the learned men of the English Church, our own Aldhelm of
Malmesbury, and Bede; with them he names Victorinus and Boethius, and
the old historians, Pompeius and Pliny, the acute Aristotle and the
great rhetorician Tully. They had the poets, too, Sedulius, Juvencus,
Alcimus[96], Clemens, Prosper, Paulinus, Arator, Fortunatus, Lactantius.
They had also Virgil, Statius, and Lucan. They were rich in grammarians:
Probus, Focas, Donatus, Priscian, Servius, Euticius, Pompeius,
Comminianus. You will find, he says, in the library very many more
masters, famous in study, art, and language, who have written very many
volumes, but whose names it would be too long to recite in a poem. It may
perhaps be a fair guess that he had used up all the names which he could
conveniently get into dactyls and spondees for hexameter verse.

Two years after handing over to Alcuin the possession of this great
library, and to Eanbald the archbishopric itself, Albert died. We may
here remind ourselves of outstanding facts and dates. Alcuin, born in
735, had as a young man held the office of teacher in the School of York
for some years. In 766 he had been promoted to a position which so far
as teaching was concerned was practically that of Head Master. In 778 he
became in the fullest sense the master of the school. In 780 he inherited
the great collection of books which had been brought together by
successive archbishops. In 782 he was called away to become the teacher
of the School of the Palace of Karl, and director of the studies of the
empire, still continuing to hold the office of master in name. In 792
he left England for the last time, and his official connexion with the
school of York came to an end. He gave twenty years of his older life to
the service of the Franks, and died in 804.




CHAPTER V

    The affairs of Mercia.—Tripartite division of England.—The
    creation of a third archbishopric, at Lichfield.—Offa and
    Karl.—Alcuin’s letter to Athelhard of Canterbury; to Beornwin
    of Mercia.—Karl’s letter to Offa, a commercial treaty.—Alcuin’s
    letter to Offa.—Offa’s death.


Although Alcuin was a Northumbrian, and his interests were naturally with
that kingdom, he was at one time of his life more intimately concerned
with the affairs of Mercia. It seems, on the whole, best to deal first
with that part, as it can be to a certain extent isolated from his
correspondence with Northumbria, and from his life and work among the
Franks. The special events in Mercian history with which he was concerned
are in themselves of great interest. They are—(1) the personal and
official dealings between Karl and the Mercian king, and (2) the creation
and the extinction of a third metropolitical province in England, the
archbishopric of Lichfield.

We have to accustom ourselves to the fact that the Heptarchy, that is,
the division of England into seven independent kingdoms with seven
independent kings, no longer existed in Alcuin’s time. The land was
divided into three kingdoms, Northumbria, Mercia, and Wessex. The rivers
Thames and Humber were, roughly speaking, the lines dividing the whole
land into three. Kent, to which we probably attach too much importance by
reason of its being the first Christian kingdom, and of its having in
its Archbishop the chief ecclesiastic of the whole land, was a conquered
kingdom, the property at one time of Wessex, at another of Mercia. The
South Saxons, our Sussex, had kings and dukes fitfully, and the territory
was included in Wessex. The East Saxons, our Essex, had kings nominally,
but belonged usually to Mercia. East Anglia was in a somewhat similar
position, but held out for independence with much pertinacity and success
till long after Alcuin’s time. The year 828, a quarter of a century after
Alcuin’s death, saw the final defeat of Mercia by Ecgbert of Wessex, who
had spent fifteen years in exile at the Court of Charlemagne in Alcuin’s
time, from 787 to 802, when he succeeded to the vacant throne of Wessex
by a very remote claim, as great-great-grand-nephew of the famous king
Ina. No doubt he learned in those strenuous years, under the tutelage of
Karl, the lessons of war which brought him into dominance here, another
link between Karl and England which passes almost entirely unrecognized.
The year 829 saw the peaceful submission of the great men of Northumbria
to Ecgbert, at Dore, in Derbyshire, and their recognition of him as
their overlord. The mistake of supposing that Ecgbert thus became sole
king of England as a single kingdom is now exploded; but he was, roughly
speaking, master of the whole, and as time went on the petty kings and
kinglets disappeared. The time which this process occupied was not short.
The thirty-first king of Northumbria was reigning in Ecgbert’s time, when
his thegns made submission to Ecgbert; but fifteen more kings reigned
in Northumbria, till Eadred expelled the last of them in 954. In like
manner, we have the coins of some kings of East Anglia, and mention of
other kings, as late as 905.

That is a digression into times a hundred and a hundred and fifty years
after Alcuin. In his time, as has been said, the Heptarchy had for
practical purposes been consolidated into three main kingdoms, Wessex,
Mercia, and Northumbria.

This tri-partite arrangement of the seven kingdoms led to one of the most
curious episodes of Alcuin’s time, and, indeed, of English history.

Offa, the ambitious king of Mercia, who reigned from 757 to 796, saw
that there were two archbishoprics in England, one of which, Canterbury,
was centred in a conquered kingdom; while the other, York, had only been
created some twenty years before he began to reign. Bede had advised
that the bishopric of York should be raised to an archbishopric, with
Northumbria as its province, and on application made to the Pope the
thing had been done. Each of the two archbishops, as Offa saw, received
special recognition from the Pope in the grant of the _pallium_; a costly
luxury, no doubt, but a luxury of honour and dignity, worth a good deal
of money—which it certainly cost. There was no Emperor of the West in
those days, some fourteen years before the elevation of Karl to an
imperial throne; and the Pope was, by the mystery of his ecclesiastical
position, and in the glamour of pagan Rome, the greatest personage in the
then chaotic world of Western Europe.

Quite apart from the possession of the pallium, the constitutional
position of an English archbishop was very great. In our days it
is sometimes asked about a wealthy man, how much is he worth. In
Anglo-Saxon times that question had a direct meaning and a direct answer.
Men of all the higher grades at least had their money value, a very
considerable value, which any one who put an end to any of them must
pay. While the luxury of killing a bishop was as costly as killing an
ealdorman, that is, an earl, an archbishop was as dear as a prince of
the blood. The bishop or earl was worth 8000 thrimsas, the thrimsa being
probably threepence, say five shillings of our money, or £2000 in all;
that was what had to be paid for the luxury of killing a bishop; the
archbishop or royal prince rose to 15000 thrimsas, nearly twice as much,
say £3750 of our money; it does not sound quite enough to our modern
ears. The king was put at £7500. For drawing a weapon in the presence of
a bishop or an ealdorman, the fine was 100 shillings, say £100 of our
money; in the case of an archbishop it was 150 shillings, half as much
again. In the laws of Ina, for violence done to the dwelling and seat of
jurisdiction of a bishop, the fine was 80 shillings, in the case of an
archbishop 120, the same as in the case of the king. This was not the
only point in which the archbishop was on the same level as the king; his
mere word, without oath, was—as the king’s—incontrovertible. A bishop’s
oath was equivalent to the oaths of 240 ordinary tax payers. In the case
of the archbishop of Canterbury at the times of which we are speaking,
there was added the fact that the royal family of Kent had retired to
Reculver and left the archbishop supreme in the capital city, as the
bishops of Rome had been left in Rome by the departure of the emperors
to Constantinople. In Archbishop Jaenbert’s time the royal family of Kent
practically came to an end, as a regnant family, at the battle of Otford,
near Sevenoaks, in the year 774, when Mercia conquered Kent. Archbishop
Jaenbert of Canterbury is said to have proposed that he should become the
temporal sovereign of Kent, as well as its ecclesiastical ruler, after
the then recent fashion of the bishop of Rome, and to have offered to do
homage to Karl, king of the Franks, for the kingdom. If that was so, we
can well understand the determination of the conquering and powerful Offa
to abate the archbishop’s position and his pride.

Kent was but an outside annex of the Mercian kingdom proper. It had been
subject to other kingdoms; it might be so subject again. The Lichfield
bishopric was the real ecclesiastical centre of Offa’s kingdom, and he
determined to have an archbishop of Lichfield, and to have him duly
recognized by the Pope. A visit of two legates of the Pope, accompanied
by a representative of the King of the Franks, in the year 785, gave the
opportunity.[97] Offa had already punished Jaenbert by taking away all
manors belonging to the See of Canterbury in Mercian territories; and
he now proposed that the jurisdiction of Canterbury should be limited
to Kent, Sussex, and Wessex, and that all the land of England between
the Thames and the Humber should become a third metropolitical province,
under the archiepiscopal rule of the bishop of Lichfield. The synod
at which this proposal was made is described in the Saxon Chronicle
as geflitfullic, quarrelsome-like; but in the end, Offa’s proposal
was accepted. Pope Adrian gave his sanction and the pall. William of
Malmesbury, with his usual skill and his wide experience, gives the
explanation of this papal acquiescence in so violent a revolution in
ecclesiastical matters: Offa, he says, obtained the papal licence by the
gift of endless money, _pecunia infinita_, to the Apostolic See; which
See, he adds, never fails one who gives money. That was the judgement
of a historian after 250 years’ additional experience of the secret of
Roman sanction. The Pope of the time, it should be said, was a man of
much distinction, Adrian or Hadrian I, a friend of Offa and of Karl. We
shall have a good deal to say about the grants of Karl, and of Pepin his
father, to the papacy, in another lecture.

There is a letter extant[98] from Pope Adrian I to Karl, written before
the creation of the Mercian archbishopric, in which the Pope says he
has heard from Karl of a report that Offa had proposed to persuade him
to eject Adrian from the Papacy, and put in his place some one of the
Frankish race. The Pope professes to feel that this is absolutely false;
and yet he says so much about it that it is quite clear he was anxious.
Karl had told him that Offa had not made any such proposal to him, and
had not had any thought in his mind except that he hoped Adrian would
continue to govern the Church all through his time. The Pope adds that
neither had he until that time heard of anything of the kind; and he does
not believe that even a pagan would think of such a thing. Having said
all this, in Latin much more cumbrous than Alcuin’s charmingly clear
style, he enters upon a long declaration of his personal courage and
confidence whatever happened. “If God be with us, who shall be against
us.”

We must, I think, take it that there had been some hitch in negotiations
between Offa and Adrian, and that Offa, with the outspoken vigour of a
Mercian Angle, had in fact gone far beyond Henry VIII’s greatest threats,
and had declared to his counsellors that if Adrian was not more pliable,
he and Karl would make some one Pope who would have first regard to the
wishes of the Angles and the Franks.

[Sidenote: Ep. 43. 787-796.]

Now it was Alcuin who had brought together Karl and Offa in the
first instance, and had brought about their alliance. And on a later
occasion when they quarrelled he made them friends again. We do not
know what active part, if any, Alcuin took in the matter decided at the
quarrelsome-like synod. But we have plenty of evidence that he highly
approved of the reversal of Hadrian’s act by his successor Leo III,
with the assent, and indeed on the request, of Offa’s successor Kenulf.
He corresponded with Offa in a very friendly manner, as indeed Offa’s
general conduct well deserved. Here is a letter from him, in response
to a request from the king that he would send him a teacher. “Always
desirous faithfully to do what you wish, I have sent to you this my best
loved pupil, as you have requested. I pray you have him in honour until
if God will I come to you. Do not let him wander about idle, do not let
him take to drink. Provide him with pupils, and let your preceptors see
that he teaches diligently. I know that he has learned well. I hope he
will do well, for the success of my pupils is my reward with God.

“I am greatly pleased that you are so intent upon encouraging study,
that the light of wisdom, in many places now extinct, may shine in your
kingdom. You are the glory of Britain, the trumpet of defiance, the sword
against hostile forces, the shield against the enemies.”

It is only fair to Offa to say that this was not mere flattery. It is
clear that in the eyes of Karl and Alcuin, Offa was the one leading man
in the whole of England, the most powerful Englishman of his time, and of
all the kings and princes the most worthy.

To Athelhard, the archbishop of Canterbury,[99] who succeeded Jaenbert,
Lichfield still being the chief archbishopric, Alcuin wrote a remarkable
letter, considering the humiliation of the archbishopric:—

[Sidenote: Ep. 28. A.D. 793.]

“Be a preacher; not a flatterer. It is better to fear God than man, to
please God than to fawn upon men. What is a flatterer but a fawning
enemy? He destroys both,—himself and his hearer.

“You have received the pastoral rod and the staff of fraternal
consolation; the one to rule, the other to console; that those who mourn
may find in you consolation, those who resist may feel correction. The
judge’s power is to kill; thine, to make alive....

“Remember that the bishop[100] is the messenger of God most high, and
the holy law is to be sought at his mouth, as we read in the prophet
Malachi.[101] A watchman[102] is set at the highest place; whence the
name episcopus, he being the chief watchman,[103] who ought by prudent
counsel to foresee for the whole army of Christ what must be avoided and
what must be done. These, that is the bishops[104], are the lights of the
holy church of God, the leaders of the flock of Christ. It is their duty
actively to raise the standard of the holy cross in the front rank, and
to stand intrepid against every attack of the hostile force. These are
they who have received the talents, our King the God Christ having gone
with triumph of glory to His Father’s abode; and when He comes again in
the great day of judgement they shall render an account....

“Admonish most diligently your fellow-bishops[105] to labour instantly in
the word of life, that they may appear before the judge eternal, glorious
with multifold gain. Be of one mind in piety, constant in equity. Let no
terror of human dignity separate you, no blandishments of flattery divide
you; but join together in unity in firm ranks of the fortress of God.
Thus will your concord strike terror into those who seek to speak against
the Truth; as Solomon says,[106] ‘When brother is helped by brother, the
city is secure.’

“Ye are the light of all Britain, the salt of the earth, a city set on a
hill, a candle high on a candlestick....

“Our ancestors, though pagans, first as pagans possessed this land by
their valour in war, by the dispensation of God. How great, then, is the
reproach, if we, Christians, lose what they, pagans, acquired. I say this
on account of the blow which has lately fallen upon a part of our island,
a land which has for nearly 350 years been inhabited by our forefathers.
It is read in the book of Gildas[107], the wisest of the Britons, that
those same Britons, because of the rapine and avarice of the princes,
the iniquity and injustice of the judges, the sloth and laxity of the
bishops, and the wicked habits of the people, lost their fatherland.
Let us take care that those vices do not become the custom with us in
these times of ours.... Do you, who along with the Apostles have received
from Christ the key of the kingdom of heaven, the power of binding and
loosing, open with assiduous prayer the gates of heaven to the people of
God. Be not silent, lest the sins of the people be imputed to you: for of
you will God require the souls which you have received to rule. Let your
reward be multiplied by the salvation of those in your charge. Comfort
those who are cast down, strengthen the humble, bring back to the way
of truth those who wander, instruct the ignorant, exhort the learned,
and confirm all by the good examples of your own life. Chastise with the
pastoral rod those who are contumacious and resist the truth; support the
others with the staff of consolation. And, if you are unanimous, who will
be able to stand against you?”

[Sidenote: Ep. 14. A.D. 790.]

Alcuin could be exceedingly outspoken in his letters, as we have
seen. But he could also be very cautious, even—perhaps we should say
especially—in a matter on which he felt deeply. In a letter to the Irish
teacher Colcu he remarks that he did not know what he might have to
do next. The reason was that something of a dissension, diabolically
inflamed, had arisen between Karl and Offa, the Mercian king, and had
gone so far that each forbade entry to the other’s merchants. “Some tell
me,” he says, “that I am to be sent to those parts to make peace.”

The reason for the quarrel was a curious one. Karl had proposed that
his son Charles should marry one of Offa’s daughters. Offa had made a
supplementary proposal that his son Ecgfrith should marry Karl’s daughter
Bertha. This is said to have been considered presumptuous by Karl, and
he showed his annoyance by breaking off the friendly relations which had
existed between them.

It would appear that Alcuin’s attitude was suspected by the Mercian king
to be unfavourable to the English view of the quarrel, and the presbyter
Beornwin, to whom Alcuin had written a letter not known to have survived,
was set to write to him a fishing letter, in which it would seem that
he suggested unfriendliness on Alcuin’s part. Alcuin’s reply is a
non-committal document.

[Sidenote: Ep. 15. A.D. 790.]

“I have received the sweet letters of your love...

“Would that I were worthy to preach peace, not to sow discord; to carry
the standard of Christ, not the arms of the devil. I should never have
written to you if I had been unwilling to be at peace with you and to
remain firm as we began in Christ.

“Of a truth I have never been unfaithful to King Offa, or to the Anglian
nation. As to the utmost of my power I shall faithfully keep the friends
whom God has given me in France, so I shall those whom I have left in my
own country....

“As time or opportunity affords, my very dear brother, urge ever the will
of God upon all persons: on the king, persuasively; on the bishops, with
due honour; on the chief men, with confidence; on all, with truth. It is
ours to sow; it is God’s to fructify.

“And let no suspicion of any dissension between us remain. Let us not be
of those of whom it is said: I am not come to send peace but a sword. Let
us be of those to whom it is said: My peace I give unto you, My peace I
leave with you.

“I have written a very short letter, for a few words to a wise man
suffice.”

The dissension was rather one-sided, for it appears that Offa continued
to write friendly letters to Karl. In the end, Karl replied in a more
than friendly letter, which is on many accounts well worth reproducing
entire. It is the earliest extant commercial treaty with an English
kingdom. The date is 796, four years before he became emperor.

[Sidenote: Ep. 57. A.D. 796.]

“Charles, by the grace of God King of the Franks and Lombards and
Patricius of the Romans, to his dearest brother the venerated Offa, King
of the Mercians, wishes present prosperity and eternal beatitude in
Christ. To keep with inmost affection of heart the concord of holy love
and the laws of friendship and peace federated in unity, among royal
dignities and the great personages of the world, is wont to be profitable
to many. And if we are bidden by our Lord’s precept to loose the tangles
of enmity, how much more ought we to be careful to bind the chains of
love. We therefore, my most loved brother, mindful of the ancient pact
between us, have addressed to your reverence these letters, that our
treaty, fixed firm in the root of faith, may flourish in the fruit of
love. We have read over the epistles of your brotherliness, which at
various times have been brought to us by the hands of your messengers,
and we desire to answer adequately the several suggestions of your
authority.” It is clear that there were a good many of Offa’s letters
unanswered.

“First, we give thanks to Almighty God for the sincerity of catholic
faith which we find laudably expressed in your pages; recognizing that
you are not only very strong in protection of your fatherland, but also
most devoted in defence of the holy faith.

“With regard to pilgrims, who for the love of God and the health of their
souls desire to visit the thresholds of the blessed Apostles, as has been
customary”—here again we see the reason of the reputation of Rome—“we
give leave for them to go on their way peaceably without any disturbance,
carrying with them such things as are necessary. But we have ascertained
that traders seeking gain, not serving religion, have fraudulently joined
themselves to bands of pilgrims. If such are found among the pilgrims,
they must pay at the proper places the fixed toll; the rest will go in
peace, free from toll.

“You have written to us also about merchants. We will and command that
they have protection and patronage in our realm, lawfully, according
to the ancient custom of trading. And if in any place they suffer from
unjust oppression, they may appeal to us or our judges, and we will see
that pious justice is done. And so for our merchants; if they suffer any
injustice in your realm, let them appeal to the judgement of your equity.
Thus no disturbance can arise among our merchants.”

Karl evidently felt that the next point was the most difficult of all to
handle successfully. He had given shelter and countenance to Mercians
who had fled from Offa, and sought protection at his court. Ecgbert, who
afterwards conquered Mercia, was among the exiles from Wessex.

“With regard to the presbyter Odberht, who on his return from Rome
desires to live abroad for the love of God, not coming to us to accuse
you, we make known to your love that we have sent him to Rome along
with other exiles who in fear of death have fled to the wings of our
protection. We have done this in order that in the presence of the lord
apostolic and of your illustrious archbishop—in accordance, as your notes
make known to us, with their vow—their cause may be heard and judged, so
that equitable judgement may effect what pious intercession could not
do. What could be safer for us than that the investigation of apostolic
authority should discriminate in a case where the opinion of others
differs?”

This is a typical example of the use made of a pope when monarchs
disagreed.

“With regard to the black stones which your reverence earnestly solicited
to have sent to you, let a messenger come and point out what kind they
are that your mind desires. Wherever they may be found, we will gladly
order them to be given, and their conveyance to be aided.” [108]

Then comes in very skilfully a complaint that the Mercians have been
exporting to France cloaks of inadequate length.

“But, as you have intimated your desire as to the length of the stones,
our people make demand about the length of cloaks, that you will order
them to be made to the pattern of those which in former times used to
come to us.

“Further, we make known to your love that we have forwarded to each
of the episcopal sees in your kingdom, and that of king Æthelred [of
Northumbria, again no mention of Wessex], a gift from our collection of
dalmatics and palls, in alms for the lord apostolic Adrian[109], our
father, your loving friend, praying you to order intercession for his
soul, not in doubt that his blessed soul is at rest, but to show faith
and love towards a friend to us most dear. So the blessed Augustine has
taught that pious intercessions of the church should be made for all,
asserting that to intercede for a good man is profitable to him that
intercedes.” That is a remarkable way of putting it.

“From the treasure of secular things which the Lord Jesus of
gratuitous pity has granted to us, we have sent something to each of
the metropolitan cities. To thy love, for joy and giving of thanks
to Almighty God, we have sent a Hunnish belt and sword and two silk
palls, that everywhere among a Christian people the divine clemency
may be preached, and the name of our Lord Jesus Christ may be for ever
glorified.”

The Hunnish belt and sword and silk robes were part of the great spoil
which Karl took in the year 795 when he conquered the Huns, destroyed
their army, and put their prince to flight. The spoil included fifteen
wagons loaded with gold and silver, and palls of white silk, each wagon
drawn by four oxen. Karl divided the plunder between the churches and the
poor.[110]

The gifts of Karl to the king and bishops of Northumbria were withdrawn
under sad conditions, to which we must return in the next lecture.
This is what Alcuin wrote to Offa, immediately after Karl’s letter was
written:—

[Sidenote: Ep. 58. A.D. 796.]

“Your reverend love should know that the lord King Charles has often
spoken to me of you in a loving and trusting manner. You have in him an
entirely most faithful friend. Thus he sent messengers to Rome for the
judgement of the lord apostolic and Ethelhard the archbishop. To your
love he sent gifts worthy. To the several episcopal sees he sent gifts in
alms for himself and the lord apostolic, that you might order prayers to
be offered for them. Do you act faithfully, as you are wont to do with
all your friends.

“In like manner he sent gifts to King Æthelred and his episcopal sees.
But, alas for the grief! when the gifts and the letters were in the hands
of the messengers, the sad news came from those who had returned from
Scotia[111] by way of you, that the nation had revolted and the king
[Æthelred] was killed. King Charles withdrew his gifts, so greatly was
he enraged against the nation—‘that perfidious and perverse nation,’ as
he called them, ‘murderers of their own lords,’ holding them to be worse
than pagans. Indeed, if I had not interceded for them, whatever good
thing he could have taken away from them, whatever bad thing he could
have contrived for them, he would have done it.

“I was prepared to come to you with the king’s gifts, and to go back
to my fatherland.” This was from three to four years later than his
latest visit to our shores. “But it seemed to me better, for the sake
of peace for my nation, to remain abroad. I did not know what I could
do among them, where no one is safe, and no wholesome counsel is of any
avail. Look at the very holiest places devastated by pagans, the altars
fouled by perjuries, the monasteries violated by adulteries, the earth
stained with the blood of lords and princes. What else could I do but
groan with the prophet,[112] ‘Woe to the sinful nation, a people laden
with iniquity, a seed of evildoers; they have forsaken the Lord, and
blasphemed the holy Saviour of the world in their wickedness.’ And if it
be true, as we read in the letter of your dignity, that the iniquity had
its rise among the eldermen, where is safety and fidelity to be hoped for
if the turbid torrent of unfaithfulness flowed forth from the very place
where the purest fount of truth and faith was wont to spring?

“But do thou, O most wise ruler of the people of God, most diligently
bring thy nation away from perverse habits, and make them learned in the
precepts of God, lest by reason of the sins of the people the land which
God has given us be destroyed. Be to the Church of Christ as a father,
to the priests of God as a brother, to all the people pious and fair; in
conversation and in word moderate and peaceable; in the praise of God
always devout; that the divine clemency may keep thee in long prosperity,
and may of the grace of its goodness deign to exalt, dilate, and crown to
all eternity, with the benefaction of perpetual pity, thy kingdom—nay,
all the English.

“I pray you direct the several Churches of your reverence to intercede
for me. Into my unworthy hands the government of the Church of St. Martin
has come. I have taken it not voluntarily but under pressure, by the
advice of many.”

Offa died in the year in which this letter was written, and his death
brought great changes in Mercia. Excellent as Offa had in most ways
been, we have evidence that the Mercian people were by no means worthy
of the fine old Mercian king. In reading the letter which contains this
evidence, we shall see that Offa had a murderous side of his character.
In those rude days, chaos could not be dealt with under its worse
conditions by men who could not at a crisis strike with unmitigated
severity.




CHAPTER VI

    Grant to Malmesbury by Ecgfrith of Mercia.—Alcuin’s letters to
    Mercia.—Kenulf and Leo III restore Canterbury to its primatial
    position.—Gifts of money to the Pope.—Alcuin’s letters to the
    restored archbishop.—His letter to Karl on the archbishop’s
    proposed visit. Letters of Karl to Offa (on a question of
    discipline) and Athelhard (in favour of Mercian exiles).


Before proceeding to examine Alcuin’s letter to a Mercian nobleman on the
death of Offa and his son Ecgfrith, it should be remarked that we of the
diocese of Bristol must not allow the mention of this poor young king
Ecgfrith to pass without our acknowledgement for a deed of justice done.
When Offa defeated the West Saxon king at Bensington, he took possession
of a good deal of the border land, including two tracts of land which
King Cadwalla of Wessex had given to Malmesbury, namely Tetbury in
Gloucestershire and Purton in Wilts. William of Malmesbury naturally
reports the iniquity of Offa in thus pillaging the abbey which was the
home of William’s life and studies. Offa gave Tetbury to the Bishop
of Worcester. Purton was the subject of a deed by Ecgfrith during his
reign of a few months. The deed has remarkable interest for us in this
diocese, in that it is doubly dated; first as in the seven hundred and
ninety-sixth year from the Incarnation, and next, with a very interesting
recognition of our own Aldhelm, due to the fact that the theft had
been from Aldhelm’s own Malmesbury, “in the eighty-seventh year from
the passing of father Aldhelm.” The deed restores land of thirty-five
families at Piritune, on the east side of Braden Wood, to the abbat and
brethren of Malmesbury, for the repose of the soul of his father Offa
who had taken it from them, and in order that the memory of Ecgfrith
might always be preserved in their prayers. As a sort of unimportant
afterthought he adds that the abbat and brethren have given him two
thousand shillings of pure silver, probably as many pounds of our money.
The deed was signed by Athelhard of Canterbury, not by Lichfield. The
reason no doubt is that Tetbury and Purton are south of the Thames, and
so outside the Province of Lichfield and within the diminished Province
of Canterbury.

When the death of Offa’s son, the youthful Ecgfrith, king of Mercia,
occurred in this same year 796 in which year his father Offa had
died,[113] and a distant cousin Kenulf succeeded, Alcuin, as has been
said, wrote a very serious letter to one of the chief officers of Mercia.

[Sidenote: Ep. 79. A.D. 797.]

“These are times of tribulation everywhere in the land; faith is failing;
truth is dumb; malice increases; and arrogance adds to your miseries. Men
are not content to follow in the steps of our early fathers, in dress, or
food, or honest ways. Some most foolish man thinks out something unsuited
to human nature, and hateful to God; and straightway almost the whole of
the people set themselves busily to follow this above all.

“That most noble youth [Ecgfrith] is dead; not, as I think, because
of his own sins alone, but also because the vengeance of his father’s
bloodshedding has reached the son. For you know best of all how much
blood the father shed that the kingdom might be safe for the son. It
proved to be the destruction, not the confirmation, of his reign.

“Admonish the more diligently your new king [Kenulf], yes, and the
king of Northumbria [Ardwulf] too, that they keep in touch with the
divine piety, avoiding adulteries; that they do not neglect their early
wives[114] for the sake of adulteries with women of the nobility, but
under the fear of God have their own wives, or by consent live in
chastity. I fear that Ardwulf, the king of my part of the country, will
soon[115] have to lose the kingdom because of the insult which he has
offered to God in sending away his own wife, and, it is said, living
openly with a concubine. It seems that the prosperity of the English is
nearly at an end; unless indeed by assiduous prayers, and honest ways,
and humble life, and chaste conversation, and keeping the faith, they
win from God to keep the land which God of His free gift gave to our
forefathers.”

With this letter we may fitly compare the letter which Alcuin wrote
to the king himself, Kenulf, who had thus unexpectedly succeeded. It
begins in a complimentary manner, but it is a very faithful letter. It
carefully recognizes the inconsistencies of Offa’s life, inconsistencies
which appear to have characterized the best rulers in those times, very
rude and violent times, when one occasion and another seemed to demand
ruthless treatment.

[Sidenote: Ep. 80. A.D. 797.]

“To the most excellent Coenulf, King of the Mercians, the humble levite
Albinus wishes health.

“Your goodness, moderation, and nobility of conduct, are a great joy to
me. They are befitting to the royal dignity, which excels all others in
honour, and ought to excel also in perfectness of conduct, in fairness of
justice, in holiness of piety. The royal clemency should go beyond that
of ordinary men, as we read in ancient histories, and in holy Scripture
where it is said[116]—Mercy and truth exalt a throne; and in the Psalms
it is said[117] of Almighty God—All the paths of the Lord are mercy and
truth. The more a man shines forth in works of truth and mercy, the more
has he in him of the image of the divine.

“Have always in mind Him who raised thee from a poor position and set
thee as a ruler over the princes of His people. Know that thou art rather
a shepherd, and a dispenser of the gifts of God, than a lord and an
exactor.

“Have always in mind the very best features of the reign of your most
noble predecessor Offa; his modest conversation; his zeal in correcting
the life of a Christian people. Whatever good arrangements he made in
the kingdom to thee by God given, let your devotion most diligently
carry out; but if in any respect he acted with greed, or cruelty, know
that this you must by all means avoid. For it is not without cause that
that most noble son of his survived his father for so short a time. The
deserts of a father are often visited on a son.

“Have prudent counsellors who fear God; love justice; seek peace with
friends; show faith and holiness in pious manner of life.

“For the English race is vexed with tribulations by reason of its many
sins. The goodness of kings, the preaching of the priests of Christ, the
religious life of the people, can raise it to the height of its ancient
honour; so that a blessed progeny of our fathers may deserve to possess
perpetual happiness, stability of the kingdom, and fortitude against any
foe; that the Church of Christ, as ordained by holy fathers, may grow
and prosper. Always have in honour, most illustrious ruler, the priests
of Christ; for the more reverently you are disposed to the servants of
Christ, and the preachers of the word of God, the more will Christ, the
King pious and true, exalt and confirm your honour, on the intercession
of His saints.”

When Kenulf, this distant cousin of Ecgfrith, came to the throne, he
looked into the matter of the archbishopric of Lichfield, and he took a
view adverse to Offa’s action. He wrote to Pope Leo III a letter,[118]
in which he put the points very clearly. His bishops and learned men
had told him that the division of the Province of Canterbury into two
provinces was contrary to the canons and apostolical statutes of the most
blessed Gregory, who had ordered that there should be twelve bishops
under the archbishop of the southern province, seated at London. On the
death of Augustine of Canterbury, it had seemed good to all the wise men
of the race, the Witangemote, that not London but Canterbury should be
the seat of the Primacy, where Augustine’s body lay. King Offa, by reason
of his enmity with the venerable archbishop Jaenbert and the people of
Kent, set to work to divide the province into two. The most pious Adrian,
at the request of the said king, had done what no one before had presumed
to do, had raised the Mercian prelate to the dignity of the pallium.
Kenulf did not blame either of them; but he hoped that the Pope would
look into the matter and make a benign and just response. He had sent an
embassy on the part of himself and the bishops in the previous year by
Wada the Abbat; but Wada, after accepting the charge, had indolently—nay
foolishly—withdrawn. He now sent by the hands of a presbyter, Birine, and
two of his officers, Fildas and Cheolberth, a small present, out of his
love for the Pope, namely, 120 mancuses,[119] some forty to fifty pounds,
say not far off £1000 of our time.

Pope Leo addressed his reply to king Kenulf, his most loved bishops, and
most glorious dukes. It was a difficult letter to write, for Kenulf had
been very frank about the uncanonical action of Hadrian the Pope. Leo
answered this part of Kenulf’s letter by stating that his predecessor had
acted as he had done (1) because Offa had declared it to be the universal
wish, the petition of all, that the archbishopric should be divided
into two; (2) because of the great extension of the Mercian kingdom;
(3) for very many causes and advantages. He, Leo, now authorized the
departure from Pope Gregory’s order in so far as this, that he recognized
Canterbury, not London, as the chief seat of archiepiscopal authority.
He declared that Canterbury was the primatial see, and must continue and
be viewed as such. I cannot find in his letter a definite declaration
that he annuls the act of his predecessor, but that is the effect of the
letter; nor does he declare that Lichfield is no longer an archbishopric.
Kenulf, as we have seen, had sent him, out of his affection for him, a
gift of 120 mancuses. But he reminded the king that Offa had bound his
successors to maintain the gift to the Pope, in each year, of as many
mancuses as there are days in the year, namely, he says, 365, as alms
to the poor, and as an endowment for keeping in order the lamps [in the
churches]. This is much more likely than the shadowy gifts of Ina, king
of Wessex, to have been the origin of Peter’s Pence, a sum of money
collected in England, at first fitfully and eventually year by year, and
sent out to the Pope. The money was collected in the parishes of each
diocese down to the time of the Reformation. It is a regular item in the
churchwardens’ accounts of the earlier years of Henry VIII. Only a fixed
amount of the whole sum collected was sent to the Pope, the balance
being used for repairs in the several dioceses. We have a list prepared
by a representative of a late mediaeval Pope giving £190 6_s._ 8_d._
as the amount received by him for the year, corresponding roughly to a
normal 300 marks a year.

Offa’s money for the Pope went of course from Mercia. When Wessex became
predominant, Ethelwulf, the son of Ecgbert and father of Alfred, made
large gifts to Rome, and left by will 300 mancuses, 100 in honour of St.
Peter, specially for filling with oil all the lamps of his apostolic
church on Easter Eve and at cock crow, 100 in honour of St. Paul, in the
same terms and for the same purpose in respect of the basilica of St.
Paul, and 100 for the Pope himself. King Alfred also sent presents to
Rome. From 883 to 890 there are four records of gifts from Wessex. After
890 we have no such record in Alfred’s reign; and in Alfred’s will there
is no mention of the spiritual head of the Church of the West.

We learn from our own great historian, William of Malmesbury, that Kenulf
wrote two later letters to Leo on this subject, and he gives us Leo’s
reply.[120] Athelhard, the Pope says, has come to the holy churches of
the blessed apostles Peter and Paul, to fulfil his vow of prayer and
to inform the Pope of his ecclesiastical mission. He tells the king
that by the authority of St. Peter, the chief of the apostles, whose
office though unworthily he fills, he gives to Athelhard such prelatical
authority that if any in the province, whether kings, princes, or people,
transgress the commands of the Lord, he shall excommunicate them till
they repent. Concerning the jurisdiction which the archbishops of
Canterbury had held, as well over bishops as over monasteries, of which
they had been unjustly deprived, the Pope had made full inquiry, and now
placed all ordinations and confirmations on their ancient footing, and
restored them to him entire. Thus did Pope Leo III condemn the injustice
of Pope Hadrian I. We had better have managed our own affairs, instead of
paying to foreigners infinite sums of money to mismanage them.

Before we leave this strange episode of the creation of an archbishopric
of Lichfield, it is of special local interest to us in Bristol, and
to the deanery of Stapleton, that the chief Mercian prelate, Higbert
of Lichfield, signed deeds relating to Westbury upon Trym and Aust on
Severn, above the archbishop of Canterbury. This was in 794. Offa the
king signed first, Ecgferth, the king’s young son, second, and then
Hygeberht; Ethelhard of Canterbury coming fifth in one and fourth in
the other. The first deed gave from the king to his officer Ethelmund,
in 794, four cassates of land at the place called Westbury, in the
province of the Huiccians, near the river called Avon, free of all
public charges except the three which were common to all, namely, for
the king’s military expeditions, for the building of bridges, and for
the fortification of strongholds.[121] The other deed restores to the
see of Worcester (Wegrin) the land of five families at Aust, which the
duke Bynna had taken without right, it being the property of the see of
Worcester. To make all safe, six dukes made the sign of the cross at the
foot of this deed, which is, as we all know, the origin of the modern
phrase ‘signing’ a deed or a letter. The dukes included Bynna himself.

[Sidenote: Ep. 85. A.D. 797.]

Alcuin wrote a very wise letter to Athelhard of Canterbury on the
occasion of the restoration of the primacy. He advised that penance
should be done. Athelhard and all the people should keep a fast, he for
having left his see, they for having accepted error. There should be
diligent prayers, and alms, and solemn masses, everywhere, that God might
wipe out what any of them had done wrong. The archbishop was specially
urged to bring back study into the house of God, that is, the conventual
home of the monks and the archbishop, with its centre, the cathedral
church. There should be young men reading, and a chorus of singers, and
the study of books, in order that the dignity of that holy see might be
renewed, and they might deserve to have the privilege of electing to the
primacy.

“The unity of the Church, which has been in part cut asunder, not as it
seems for any reasonable cause but from grasping at power, should, if it
can be done, be restored in peaceful ways; the rent should be stitched
up again. You should take counsel with all your bishops, and with your
brother of York, on this principle, that the pious father Higbert of
Lichfield be not deprived of his pall during his lifetime, but the
consecration of bishops must come back to the holy and primal see. Let
your most holy wisdom see to it that loving concord exist among the chief
shepherds of the churches of Christ.”

[Sidenote: Ep. 171. A.D. 801.]

With regard to the remark of Alcuin that Athelhard should do penance
for having left his see, it may be explained that Alcuin had in vain
advised Athelhard not to leave England on the restoration of the primacy
to Canterbury. Athelhard persisted in visiting Rome, and informed Alcuin
that he had commenced the journey. Alcuin thereupon wrote this:—“Return,
return, holy father, as soon as your pious embassy is finished, to your
lost sheep. As there are two eyes in the body, so I believe and desire
that you two, Canterbury and York, give light throughout the breadth of
all Britain. Do not deprive your country of its right eye.”

Then Alcuin gives a very significant hint that the ways of the clergy
of England are not good enough for France, and they had better not let
Charlemagne see anything of that kind.

“If you come to the lord king, warn your companions, and especially the
clergy, that they acquit themselves in an honourable manner, in all holy
religion, in dress, and in ecclesiastical order; so that wherever you go
you leave always an example of all goodness. Forbid them to wear in the
presence of the lord king ornaments of gold or robes of silk; let them
go humbly clad, after the manner of servants of God. And through every
district you must pass with peace and honest conversation, for you know
the manner and custom of this Frankish race.”

Nothing could make more clear the commanding position held by Alcuin than
this exceedingly free counsel from a deacon to the Primate of England. We
may quote portions of yet another letter giving the same impression.

[Sidenote: Ep. 190. A.D. 802.]

In a letter to Athelhard after his safe return to England and
a favourable reception which he had reported to Alcuin, Alcuin
congratulated the archbishop on the restoration to its ancient dignity of
the most holy see of the first teacher of our race. By divine favour, the
members now once more cohered in unity with the proper head, and natural
peace shone forth between the two chief prelates of Britain, and one will
of piety and concord was vigorous under the two cities of metropolitans.
“And now,” he writes, “now that you have received the power to correct
and the liberty to preach, fear not, speak out! The silence of the bishop
is the ruin of the people.”

It is an interesting fact that we have a letter which Alcuin wrote to
Karl, introducing to him this same archbishop on the very journey of
which he so decidedly disapproved.

[Sidenote: Ep. 172. A.D. 801.]

“To the most greatly desired lord David the king, Flaccus his pensioner
wishes eternal health in Christ.

“The sweetness of your affection, and the assurance of your approved
piety, very often urge me to address letters to your authority, and by
the office of syllables to trace out that which bodily frailty prevents
my will from accomplishing. But novel circumstances compel me now to
write once more, that the paper may bring the affection of the heart, and
may pour into the ears of your piety the prayers which never have been
in vain in the presence of your pity. Nor do I believe that my prayers
for your stableness and safety are vain in the sight of God, for the
divine grace gladly receives the tears which flow forth from the fount of
love[122].

“I have been informed that certain of the friends of your Flaccus,
Edelard to wit, Metropolitan of the See of Dorobernia and Pontiff of
the primatial see in Britain, and Ceilmund[123] of the kingdom of the
Mercians, formerly minister of king Offa, and Torhcmund[124] the faithful
servant of king Edilred, a man approved in faith, strenuous in arms,
who has boldly avenged the blood of his lord, desire to approach your
piety[125]. All of these have been very faithful to me, and have aided
me on my journey; they have also aided my boys as they went about hither
and thither. I pray your best clemency to receive them with your wonted
kindness, for they have been close friends to me. I have often known
bishops religious and devoted in Christ’s service, and men strong and
faithful in secular dignity, to be laudable to your equity; for there is
no doubt that all the best men, approved by their own conscience, love
good men, being taught by the example of the omnipotent God who is the
highest good. And it is most certain that every creature that has reason
has by His goodness whatever of good it has, the Very Truth saying, ‘I am
the light of the world. He that followeth me walketh not in darkness but
shall have the light of life.’ John viii. 12.”

Before we leave Mercian affairs and the relations between Karl and
Offa, it may be of interest to give a letter[126] from Karl to Offa
which will serve to show the extreme care he took in order to maintain
ecclesiastical discipline, and the severity of that discipline. That a
man with all the affairs of immense dominions on his hands should have
made time to produce such a letter on such a point seems very worthy of
note. Karl’s statement of his titles shows that this is an early letter.

“Karl, by the grace of God king of the Franks and Defender of the Holy
Church of God, to his loved brother and friend Offa greeting.

“That priest who is a Scot[127] has been living among us for some
time, in the diocese of Hildebold, Bishop[128] of Cologne. He has now
been accused of eating meat in Lent. Our priests refuse to judge him,
because they have not received full evidence from the accusers. They
have, however, not allowed him to continue to reside there, on account
of this evil report, lest the honour in which the priesthood is held
should be diminished among ignorant folk, or others should be tempted by
this rumour to violate the holy fast. Our priests are of opinion that he
should be sent to the judgement of his own bishop, where his oath was
taken.

“We pray your providence to order that he transfer himself as soon as
conveniently may be to his own land, that he may be judged in the place
from which he came forth. For there also it must be that the purity in
manners and firmness in faith and honesty of conversation of the Holy
Church of God are diligently kept according to canonical sanction, like a
dove perfect and unspotted, whose wings are as of silver and the hinder
parts should shine as gold.

“Life, health, and prosperity be given to thee and thy faithful ones by
the God Christ for ever.”

A letter which Karl wrote to Athelhard of Canterbury begging him
to intercede for some exiles, sets forth his style and title very
differently[129], evidently at a later date.

It bears very directly upon one of the complaints which, as we have seen,
Offa had made in letters to Karl; namely, the shelter afforded at Karl’s
court to fugitives from Mercia.

“Karl, by the grace of God king of the Franks and Lombards and Patrician
of the Romans, to Athilhard the archbishop and Ceolwulf his brother
bishop, eternal beatitude.

“In reliance on that friendship which we formed in speech when we met,
we have sent to your piety these unhappy exiles from their fatherland;
praying that you would deign to intercede for them with my dearest
brother king Offa, that they may be allowed to live in their own land in
peace, without any unjust oppression. For their lord Umhrinsgstan[130]
is dead. It appeared to us that he would have been faithful to his own
lord if he had been allowed to remain in his own land; but, as he used to
say, he fled to us to escape the danger of death, always ready to purge
himself of any unfaithfulness. That reconciliation might ensue we kept
him with us for a while, not from any unfriendliness.

“If you are able to obtain peace for these his fellow tribesmen, let them
remain in their fatherland. But if my brother gives a hard reply about
them, send them back to me uninjured. It is better to live abroad than to
perish, to serve in a foreign land than to die at home. I have confidence
in the goodness of my brother, if you plead strenuously with him for
them, that he will receive them benignantly for the love that is between
us, or rather for the love of Christ, who said, Forgive and it shall be
forgiven you.

“May the divine piety keep thy holiness, interceding for us, safe for
ever.”

It was a skilful stroke of business on Karl’s part to send the men over
to the charge of the archbishop, which amounted to putting them in
sanctuary. If he had kept them in France and written to beg that they
might be allowed to return, it would have been much easier for Offa to
say no. And if he had sent them direct to Offa in the first instance,
they would probably never have got out of his clutches at all.




CHAPTER VII

    List of the ten kings of Northumbria of Alcuin’s
    time.—Destruction of Lindisfarne, Wearmouth, and Jarrow, by the
    Danes.—Letters of Alcuin on the subject to King Ethelred, the
    Bishop and monks of Lindisfarne, and the monks of Wearmouth and
    Jarrow.—His letter to the Bishop and monks of Hexham.


We must now turn to Alcuin’s native kingdom of Northumbria, over whose
evil fortunes he grieved so greatly in the home of his adoption.

I do not know how better some idea can be formed of the political chaos
to which Northumbria was reduced in the time of Alcuin than by reading a
list of the kings of that time. It is a most bewildering list.

All went well so long as Eadbert, the brother of Archbishop Ecgbert,
reigned. He was the king of Alcuin’s infancy and boyhood and earliest
manhood. His reign lasted from 737 to 758, when he retired into a
monastery. He was the 21st king, beginning with Ida who created the
kingdom in 547. He was succeeded by (22) Oswulf his son, who was within
a year slain by his household officers, July 24, 759, and was succeeded
on August 4 by (23) Ethelwald, of whose parentage we do not know
anything. In 765 he was deprived by a national assembly, and (24) Alchred
was placed on the throne, a fifth cousin of the murdered Oswulf, and
therefore of the royal line. In 774 he was banished, and went in exile to
the king of the Picts, being succeeded by (25) Ethelred, the son of his
deprived predecessor Ethelwald. Ethelred reigned from 774 to 779, when
in consequence of cruel murders ordered by him he was driven out, and
(26) Alfwold, son of (22) Oswulf, and therefore of the old royal line,
succeeded. Alfwold was murdered in 788, and was succeeded by (27) Osred,
the son of (24) Alchred, sixth cousin of his predecessor, and therefore
of the royal line. After a year he was deposed and tonsured, and was
eventually put to death in 792 by (25) Ethelred, who had recovered the
throne lost by his expulsion in 779. He was killed in 796 in a faction
fight, after he had put to death the last two males, so far as we know,
of the royal line of Eadbert, Ælf and Ælfwine, sons of (26) Alfwold.
Simeon of Durham tells us (A.D. 791) that they were persuaded by false
promises to leave sanctuary in the Cathedral Church of York; were taken
by violence out of the city; and miserably put to death by Ethelred in
Wonwaldrenute. He was succeeded by (28) Osbald, of unknown parentage,
but a patrician of Northumbria; he only reigned twenty-seven days, fled
to the king of the Picts, and died an abbat three years later, in 799.
He was succeeded by (29) Eardulf, a patrician of the blood royal,[131]
who had been left for dead by (25) Ethelred, but had recovered when laid
out for burial by the monks of Ripon. He had the fullest recognition as
king; was consecrated at the great altar of St. Paul in York Minster on
May 26, 796, by Archbishop Eanbald. In his reign Alcuin died. In 806 he
was driven out by (30) Elfwald, of unknown parentage, but by the help
of the Emperor Charlemagne he was restored in 808. He died in 810, and
was succeeded by his son (31) Eanred, who was the last king but one of
the royal house, and the last independent king of Northumbria, dying in
840, and being succeeded by his son (32) Ethelred II, expelled in 844,
restored in the same year, and killed _sine prole_ in 848.

This, as has been said, is a most bewildering list. It is, however,
convenient to have it stated at length, inasmuch as several of these
kings are named in a noteworthy manner in the letters of Alcuin. To
emphasize the view that Alcuin took of the state of Northumbria, the list
just given may be summarized thus, it being borne in mind that every king
who reigned in Alcuin’s time after Eadbert’s death in 758 is included
in the summary. Oswulf, murdered 759; Ethelwald, deprived 765; Alchred,
banished 774; Ethelred, expelled 779; Alfwold, murdered 788; Osred,
deposed 789; Ethelred, killed by his own people, 796; Osbald, expelled
797; Eardulf, expelled 806.

The Venerable Bede had said in his letter to Archbishop Ecgbert in 735
that unless some very great change for the better was made in all walks
of life in Northumbria, that country would find its men quite unable to
defend it successfully if an invasion took place. We have seen that so
far as the reigning persons were concerned, the change was for the worse;
we have now to see how bitterly true Bede’s prophecy, or rather his
calculation of the necessary consequences, proved to be. We are taken
in thought to the year 793, not quite sixty years after Bede’s letter.
One excellent reign had lasted twenty-one years, the next eight reigns
averaged four and a half years, and all ended in violence.

Higbald, the eleventh Bishop of Lindisfarne, 780-803, takes us back
nearly to the best times of that specially Holy Isle. Ethelwold, 724-40,
his next predecessor but one, was the bishop under whom King Ceolwulf,
to whom Bede dedicated his famous work the _Ecclesiastical History of
the English Race_, became a monk. It was this king-monk that taught the
monks of Lindisfarne to drink wine and ale instead of the milk and water
prescribed by their Scotic founder, Aidan. His head was preserved in
St. Cuthbert’s coffin. Ethelwold’s immediate predecessor was Eadfrith,
698-721, who wrote that glorious Evangeliarium which is a chief pride of
England, the _Lindisfarne Gospels_. To Bishop Eadfrith and his monks Bede
dedicated his _Life of St. Cuthbert_, between whom and Eadfrith only one
bishop had intervened. The entry at the end of the _Lindisfarne Gospels_
connects Ethelwold and Eadfrith with the production and binding of that
noble specimen of the earliest Anglian work. Put into modern English it
runs thus:—

“Eadfrith, bishop of the church of Lindisfarne, he wrote this book at
first, for God and St. Cuthbert and all the saints that are in the
island, and Ethelwald, the bishop of Lindisfarne island, he made it firm
outside and bound it as well as he could.”

The entry proceeds to tell that Billfrith, the anchorite, wrought in
smith’s work the ornaments that were on the outside with gold and
gems and silver overlaid, a treasure without deceit. And Aldred, the
presbyter, unworthy and most miserable, glossed it in English, and made
himself at home with the three parts, the Matthew part for God and St.
Cuthbert, the Mark part for the bishop—unfortunately it is not said for
which of the bishops, the Luke part for the brotherhood. Only one bishop
came between Ethelwold, who bound this priceless treasure, and Higbald,
to whom we now turn.

The Saxon Chronicle has under the year 787 this entry:—“In this year King
Beorhtric [of Wessex] took to wife Eadburg, daughter of King Offa. In his
days came three ships of the Northmen from Haurthaland [on the west coast
of Norway]. And the sheriff rode to meet them there, and would force them
to the king’s residence, for he knew not what they were. And there they
slew him. These were the first ships of Danish men that sought the land
of the English race.”

They soon came again, this time not to the coast of Wessex, but to the
coast easiest of access from their own land. In 793 this is the entry in
the Saxon Chronicle:—

“In this year dire forewarnings came over the land of Northumbria and
pitifully frightened the people, violent whirlwinds and lightnings, and
fiery dragons were seen flying in the air. These tokens mickle hunger
soon followed, and a little after that, in this same year, on the sixth
of the ides of January [January 8] the harrying of heathen men pitifully
destroyed God’s church in Lindisfarne through rapine and manslaughter.”

In the next year, 794, it is said:—

“The heathen ravaged among the Northumbrians, and plundered Ecgferth’s
minster at Donmouth [Wearmouth]; and there one of their leaders was
slain, and also some of their ships were wrecked by a tempest, and many
of them were there drowned, and some came to shore alive and men soon
slew them off at the river mouth.”

Wattenbach and Dümmler make the ruin of Lindisfarne take place not on
January 8 but on June 8. The Saxon Chronicle has Ianr. in both of the
MSS. which name the month. There is only one other entry in the year 793,
and it follows this,—“And Sicga [who had murdered King Alfuold] died[132]
on the 8th of the Kalends of March,” that is, February 22. It is clear
that these two events took place at the end of 793, the years at that
time ending with March, and January, not June, was the month of ruin.

The twin monasteries of Wearmouth and Jarrow are described as Ecgferth’s
minster, because King Ecgfrith of Northumbria, 670-85, gave land to Benet
Biscop to found a monastery at the mouth of the Don, now called the Wear,
and some years later another portion of land for the twin monastery of
St. Paul, Jarrow. Later in Biscop’s life he purchased two additional
pieces of land from the next king, Aldfrith, giving for the first two
royal robes, or palls, made all of silk, worked in an incomparable
manner, which he had bought in Rome. For the second, a much larger piece,
he gave to the king a manuscript collection of geographical writings,
of beautiful workmanship. We in the south-west must always remember
that Benedict Bishop first brought his vast ecclesiastical treasures to
the court of Wessex, but finding his royal patron dead went up north
with them. But for the death of the King of Wessex, we should have had
Wearmouth and Jarrow here as well as Malmesbury, Bede as well as Aldhelm,
and it may be Alcuin too.

We have letters of Alcuin to King Ethelred, to Higbald the Bishop of
Lindisfarne, and to the monks of the twin monastery of Monkwearmouth and
Jarrow, on this catastrophe. The letter to Ethelred comes first:—

[Sidenote: Ep. 22. A.D. 793.]

“To my most loved lord King Ethelred and all his chief men the humble
levite Alchuine sends greeting.

“Mindful of your most sweet affection, my brothers and fathers and
lords honourable in Christ; deeply desiring that the divine mercy may
preserve to us in long-lived prosperity the fatherland which that mercy
long ago gave to us with gratuitous freedom; I therefore, comrades most
dear, whether present, if God allow it, by my words, or absent by my
writings under the guidance of the divine spirit, do not cease from
admonishing you, and by frequent repetition to convey to your ears, you
who are citizens of the same fatherland, those things which are known to
pertain to the safety of this earthly realm and to the blessedness of the
heavenly home; so that things many times heard may grow into your minds
with good result. For what is love to a friend if it keeps silence on
matters useful to the friend? To what does a man owe fidelity if not to
his country? To whom does a man owe prosperity if not to its citizens? By
a double relationship we are fellow-citizens of one city in Christ, that
is as sons of Mother Church and of one native country. Let not therefore
your humanity shrink from accepting benignly what my devotion seeks to
offer for the safety of our land. Think not that I am charging faults
against you: take it that I aim at warding off penalties.”

We should here bear in mind that Ethelred had fourteen years before this
been expelled for cruel murders, and that he was now in the first year
of his restored reign and had already sent away his first wife and taken
another, a scandal so great in those days—bad as they were—that the Saxon
Chronicle with remarkable particularity gives the month and the day of
the gross offence, September 29. He afterwards murdered the two surviving
members of the royal house.

Alcuin’s letter to the king proceeds:—

“It is now nearly 350 years that we and our fathers have dwelt in this
most fair land, and never before has such a horror appeared in Britain
as we now have suffered at the hands of pagans. And it was not supposed
that such an attack from the sea was possible.[133] Behold, the church
of the holy Cuthbert is deluged with the blood of the priests of God, is
spoiled of all its ornaments; the place more venerable than any other in
Britain is given as a prey to pagan races. From the spot where, after the
departure of the holy Paulinus from York, the Christian religion took
its beginning amongst us, from that spot misery and calamity have begun.
Who does not fear? Who does not mourn this as if his fatherland itself
was captured?”

We should note Alcuin’s recognition of the fact that the restoration of
Christianity in Northumbria was due not to persons of the Anglo-Saxon
race and Church, but to Aidan and his monks of the Irish race and Church.

“My brethren, give your most attentive consideration, your most diligent
investigation, to this question,—is this most unaccustomed, most
unheard-of evil, brought upon us by some unheard-of evil custom? I do not
say that there was not among the people of old the sin of fornication.
But since the days of King Alfwold[134] fornications, adulteries,
incests, have inundated the land to such an extent that these sins are
unblushingly perpetrated even among the handmaids dedicated to God. What
shall I say of avarice, rapine, and judicial violence, when it is clearer
than the light how these crimes have increased, and a despoiled people
are the evidence of it. He who reads the Holy Scriptures, and revolves
ancient history, and considers the working of the world, will find that
for sins of this nature kings lose kingdoms, and peoples lose their
father-land. He will find that when men in power have unjustly seized the
property of others, they have justly lost their own....

“Consider the manner of dress, the manner of wearing the hair, the
luxurious habits of princes and of people. Look at the way in which the
pagan manner of trimming the beard and cutting the hair is imitated. Do
you not fear those whom you thus copy? Look at the immoderate use of
clothes, beyond any necessity of human nature. This superfluity of the
princes is the poverty of the people. Some are loaded with garments,
while others perish with cold. Some flow over with luxuries and feasts
like the rich man in purple, while Lazarus at the gate dies of hunger.
Where is brotherly love? Where is that pity which we are bidden have for
the wretched? The satiety of the rich man is the hunger of the poor. That
Scripture saying is to be dreaded, ‘He shall have judgement without mercy
that hath shewed no mercy’[135]; and we have the words of the blessed
Peter the Apostle[136], ‘The time is come that judgement must begin at
the house of God.’ Judgement has begun, and with terrible force, at the
house of God where rest so many lights of the whole of Britain. What is
to be expected for other places, if the divine judgement has not spared
this most holy place? It is not for the sins of only those who dwelled
there that this has been sent.

“Would that the penalty that has come upon them could bring others to
amend their lives. Would that the many would fear what the few have
suffered, and each would say in his heart, groaning and trembling, ‘if
such men, if fathers so holy, did not save their own habitation, the
place of their own repose, who shall save mine?’ Save your country by
assiduous prayers to God, by works of justice and of mercy. Be moderate
in dress and in food. There is no better defence of a country than the
equity and piety of princes, and the prayers of the servants of God.”

This is the letter which Alcuin wrote to the Bishop and monks of
Lindisfarne:—

[Sidenote: Ep. 24. A.D. 793.]

“To the best sons in Christ of the most blessed father the holy bishop
Cuthbert, Higbald the bishop and the whole body of the Church of
Lindisfarne, the deacon Alchuine sends greeting with heavenly benediction
in Christ.

“When I was with you, your friendly love was wont to give me much joy.
And now that I am absent the calamity of your affliction greatly saddens
me every day. The pagans have contaminated the sanctuaries of God, and
have poured out the blood of saints round about the altar; have laid
waste the house of our hope, have trampled upon the bodies of saints
in the temple of God like dung in the street. What can I say but groan
forth along with you before the altar of Christ, Spare, O Lord, spare
thy people; give not thine heritage to the Gentiles, lest the pagans say
‘Where is the God of the Christians?’

“What assurance is there for the churches of Britain if the holy
Cuthbert, with so great a number of saints, does not defend his own
Church? Either this is the beginning of greater affliction, or else the
sins of the dwellers there have called it upon them. It has not happened
by chance; it is the sign that calamity was greatly deserved.

“But now, ye that survive, stand like men, fight bravely, defend the
camp of God. Remember Judas Machabeus, how he purged the Temple of God,
and freed the people from a foreign yoke. If anything in your manner of
life needs correction, pray correct it speedily. Call back to you your
patrons, who have left you for a time. It was not that their influence
with God’s mercy failed; but, we know not why, they did not speak. Do not
boast yourselves in the vanity of raiment; that is matter not of boasting
but of disgrace for priests and servants of God. Do not blur the words
of your prayers with drunkenness. Do not go forth after pleasures of the
flesh and greediness of the world; but remain firmly in the service of
God and in the discipline of the life by rule; that the most holy fathers
whose sons you are may not cease to be your protectors. Go in their
footsteps, and abide secure in their prayers. Be not degenerate sons of
such ancestry. Never will they cease from your defence, if they see you
follow their example.

“Be not utterly cast down in mind by this calamity. God chastens every
son whom he receives; and He has chastened you the more because he
loves you more. Jerusalem, the city loved of God, and the Temple of
God, perished in the flames of the Chaldeans. Rome, with her coronal of
holy Apostles and innumerable martyrs, has been broken up by a pagan
visitation; but by God’s pity has quickly recovered. Nearly the whole
of Europe has been laid waste by the sword and the fire of Goths and
of Huns; but now, by God’s mercy, as the sky is adorned with stars, so
the land of Europe shines bright with churches, and in them the divine
offices of the religion of Christ flourish and increase.

“And thou, holy father, leader of the people of God, shepherd of the holy
flock, physician of souls, light set upon a candlestick, be the form
of all goodness to them that see you, the herald of salvation to all
that hear you. Let your company be honest in character, an example to
others unto life, not to destruction. Let thy banquets be with sobriety,
not with drunkenness. Let thy dress be suited to thy condition. Be not
conformed unto men of the world in any vain thing. The empty adornment of
dress, and the useless care for it, is for thee a reproach before men and
a sin before God. It is better to adorn with good habits the soul that
is to live for ever, than to dress up in delicate garments the body that
soon will decay in the dust. Let Christ be clothed and fed in the person
of the poor man, that so with Christ you may reign. The ransom of a man
is true riches. If we love gold, we should send it before us to heaven,
where it will be of service to us. What we love, we have; then let us
love that which is eternal, not that which is perishable. Let us aim at
the praise of God, not of men. Let us do what did the holy men whom we
laud. Let us follow their footsteps on earth, that we may be worthy to be
partakers in their glory in the heavens.

“May the protection of the divine pity keep you from all adversity, and
set you with your fathers in the glory of the kingdom of heaven. When
our lord, King Karl, comes home, his enemies by God’s mercy subdued, we
will arrange to go to him, God helping us. If we are able then to help
your holiness, either in the matter of the youths who have been carried
captive by the pagans, or in any other need of yours, we will take
diligent care to carry it through.”

Alcuin soon after wrote another letter to the bishop and monks of
Lindisfarne, and yet another to Cudrad, probably Cuthred, a presbyter of
Lindisfarne, who had been carried off by the Northmen and then rescued.
In these letters he urges them to bear in mind that prayers are more
valuable as a defence than collections of arrows and weapons, and heaps
of stones for hurling at an enemy. From this it would appear that the
monastery at Lindisfarne was being fortified.

To the monks of Wearmouth and Jarrow, whose geographical situation
rendered them very liable to a raid by the pirate northmen, he wrote a
very long and interesting letter, some extracts from which may here be
given.

[Sidenote: Ep. 27. A.D. 793.]

“Keep most diligently the regular life [the life by rule] which your most
holy fathers, [the abbats] Benedict[137] [Biscop] and Ceolfrid,[138]
decreed for you.

“Let the Rule of Saint Benedict [of Nursia, the abbat of Monte Cassino]
be very often read in the assembly of the brethren, and expounded in the
vulgar tongue that all may understand.

“Consider whom you have as your defence against the pagans who have
appeared in your maritime parts. Set not your hope on arms, but on God.
Trust not to carnal flight, but in the prayer of your forefathers. Who
does not fear the terrible fate which has befallen the church of the holy
Cuthbert? You, also, dwell on the sea, from which this pest first comes.

“Bear in mind the nobleness of your fathers, and be not degenerate sons.
Look at the treasures of your library, the beauty of your churches, the
fairness of your buildings. How happy the man who, from those most fair
dwellings, passes to the joys of the kingdom of heaven.

“Accustom the boys to the praise of the heavenly King, not to digging
out the earths of foxes, not to coursing the swift hare. How impious
it is to leave the worship of Christ and follow the trace of the fox.
Let them learn the sacred Scriptures, that when they are grown up they
may teach others. He who does not learn in youth does not teach in age.
Remember Bede the presbyter, the most noble teacher of our age, what a
love he had for learning as a boy; what honour he has now among men; what
glory of reward with God. Quicken slumbering minds with his example.
Attend lectures; open your books; study the text; understand its meaning;
that you may both feed yourselves and feed others with the food of the
spiritual life.

“Avoid private feasting and secret drinking as a pitfall of hell. Solomon
says that stolen waters are sweet, and bread eaten in secret is pleasant,
but the guests are in the depth of hell; he means that at such feasts
there are demons present. Do not lose eternal joys for sloth of mind or
fleshly delights.”

As we have seen, the same destruction that had come upon Lindisfarne
came very soon after upon Wearmouth and Jarrow. Bede little knew how
close home the blow which he forecast would strike.

We should have felt that something was wanting if no letter had been
preserved from Alcuin to the bishop and monks of Hexham. Hexham was the
see of one of Bede’s most highly valued correspondents, Acca. Of the
very small number of letters written by Bede which have come down to
us, only fourteen in all, eight are addressed to Acca. They are in the
main formal treatises on several parts of the Old and New Testaments,
including a treatise on the Temple of Solomon which was probably
suggested by the remarkable illustration of the Tabernacle in the _Codex
Amiatinus_. The Church of St. Andrew, Hexham, built by Wilfrith, and St.
Peter, Ripon, also built by him, were in Wilfrith’s time the two finest
churches north of the Alps. We have the description of them by Wilfrith’s
chaplain, Stephen Eddi.[139] Almost the whole of one of the two exquisite
sculptured crosses which were placed at the head and foot of Acca’s grave
is still in existence. The magnificent restoration of the Abbey Church of
Hexham in this year of grace, 1908, is one of the greatest ecclesiastical
works of the young twentieth century.

[Sidenote: Ep. 88. Before Oct. 16, 797.]

“To the shepherd of chief dignity Aedilberit[140] the bishop, and to
all the congregation of the servants of God in the Church of St. Andrew
[of Hexham], Alchuini, the humble client of your love in Christ, wishes
health.

“Earnestly desirous of spiritual friendship, I am at pains to address
to your sanctity the poor letters of my littleness, both that I may
renew the pact of our ancient intimacy and that I may commend myself to
your most sacred prayers. And if according to the Apostle the prayer of
one just man availeth much, how much more the prayers of a most holy
congregation in Christ, the intercessions of whose peaceful concord
daily at the canonical hours are believed to reach heaven, while the
secret prayer of each single one beyond doubt reaches to the ears of the
omnipotent God. Wherefore with all humility of entreaty, so far as my
request may avail with your piety, I commend myself both to the united
prayer of all and to the individual prayer of each; that by the prayers
of your sanctity, freed from the chain of my sins, I may with you, my
dearest friends, enter the gates of life.

“O most noble progeny of holy fathers, successors of their honour and
their venerable life, and inhabiters of their most beautiful places,
follow the footsteps of your fathers; that from these most beautiful
habitations you may attain by the gift of God to a portion in the eternal
blessedness of those that begat you, to the beauty of the kingdom of
heaven.

“Learn to know God and to obey His precepts, Himself saying to you ‘If
thou wilt enter into life, keep the Commandments.’ Therefore the reading
of the Holy Scriptures is necessary, for in them each may learn what he
must follow and what avoid. Let the light of learning dwell among you,
and give light through you to other churches, that the praise of you
may sound forth in the mouth of all, and your reward may remain eternal
in the heavens. Each man shall receive the reward of his own work. Teach
diligently the boys and the young men the knowledge of books in the way
of the Lord, that they may become worthy to succeed to your honour, and
may be your intercessors. For the prayers of the living are profitable
to the dying, whether to the pardon of sin or to the increase of glory.
He who sows not does not reap; he who learns not does not teach. And
such a house as yours without teachers cannot be, or can scarcely be,
safe. Great is alms-doing, to feed the poor with food for the body; but
greater is it to satisfy the hungry soul with spiritual doctrine. As the
provident shepherd takes care to supply his flock with all that is best,
so the good teacher ought with all pains to procure for those under him
the pastures of eternal life. For the increase of the flock is the glory
of the shepherd, and the multitude of the wise is the safety of the
world. I am aware that you, most holy fathers, fully know all this, and
accomplish it; but the love of him that dictates this has dragged the
words from his mouth, believing that you are willing to read with pious
humility that which I dictate with devoted soberness in the love of God.
Again and again I beseech you that you deign to have my name in memory
among those of your friends.

“May the God Christ Himself hearken to your kindliness interceding for
the whole Church of God, and grant that we may attain unto the glory of
eternal beatitude, my dearest brothers.”




CHAPTER VIII

    Alcuin’s letters to King Eardulf and the banished intruder
    Osbald.—His letters to King Ethelred and Ethelred’s mother.—The
    Irish claim that Alcuin studied at Clonmacnoise.—Mayo of the
    Saxons.


Alcuin had grievous anxieties about the manner of life of the kings
of his native province, and the continual revolutions and disputed
successions. Things got worse as he grew into older age—old age as it was
then counted.

In the previous chapter we have seen a letter of his to Ethelred, the
King of Northumbria, under date 793. He wrote another letter to him
in that same year, which he addressed in the following affectionate
form:—“To my most excellent son Ethelred the king, to my most sweet
friends Osbald the patrician and Osbert the duke, to all the friends of
my brotherly love, Alchuin the levite desires eternal beatitude.”

In the year 796 Ethelred, as we have seen, was killed in a faction fight,
after putting to death the last two males of the royal line of Eadbert,
the brother of Archbishop Ecgbert, and was succeeded by “my most sweet
friend Osbald the patrician”, who, however, only reigned twenty-seven
days, and had not time to strike any coins with his name and effigy.
Eardulf, a man of considerable position, succeeded. He was in a very full
manner recognized as king, being consecrated, as Simeon of Durham tells
us (A.D. 796), “in the Church of St. Peter, at the altar of the blessed
apostle Paul, where the race of the Angles first received the grace of
baptism.” On this altar, see page 81.

It is an interesting fact that we have two letters of Alcuin, written,
the one to (28) Osbald on his banishment, the other to (29) Eardulf on
his succession to the throne from which Osbald had been banished. It can
very seldom have happened that a man has had to write two letters under
such conditions.

[Sidenote: Ep. 65. A.D. 796.]

“To the illustrious man Eardwulf the King, Alchuine[141] the deacon sends
greeting.

“Mindful of the old friendship to which we are pledged, and rejoicing
greatly in thy venerated salutation, I am at pains to address thy
laudable person with a letter on a few points touching the prosperity of
the kingdom conferred on thee by God, and the salvation of thy soul, and
the manner in which the honour put into thy hands by the gift of God may
remain stable.

“Thou knowest very well from what dangers the divine mercy has freed
thee,[142] and how easily, when it would, it has brought thee to the
kingdom. Be always grateful, and mindful of such very great gifts of
God to thee; that as far as thou canst the will of God thou wilt do with
thy whole heart; and be obedient to the servants of God who keep thee
warned of His Commandments. Know of a surety that none other can preserve
thy life than He who hath freed thee from present death; and none can
protect and keep thee in that honour of thine but He who of His free pity
hath granted that dignity to thee. Keep diligently in thy mind mercy and
justice, for, as Solomon says, and, more than that, God allows, in mercy
and justice shall the throne of a kingdom be established.

“Consider most intently for what sins thy predecessors have lost their
kingdom and their life, and take exceeding care that thou do not the
like, lest the same judgement fall on thee. The perjuries of some God
has condemned; the adulteries of others He has punished; the avarice and
deceits of others He has avenged; the injustice of others has displeased
Him. God is no respecter of persons, and those who do such things shall
not possess the kingdom of God. Instruct first thyself in all goodness
and soberness, and afterwards the people over whom thou art set, in all
modesty of life and of raiment, in all truth of faith and of judgements,
in keeping the Commandments of God and in probity of morals. So wilt thou
both stablish thy kingdom, and save thy people, and rescue them from the
wrath of God, which by sure signs has long been hanging over them.

“Never would so much blood of nobles and of rulers be poured forth in
your nation, never would the pagans lay waste holy places, never would
such injustice and arrogance prevail among the people, if it were not
that the manifest vengeance of God hangs over the inhabiters of the
land. Do thou, preserved as I believe for better times, kept to set thy
country right, do thou, by God’s grace aiding thee, work out with full
intent, in God’s will, the safety of thine own soul and the prosperity of
the country and the people committed to thy charge; so that out of the
setting-right of those subject to thy rule, thy kingdom here on earth may
be stablished, and the glory of the kingdom to come be granted to thee
and thy descendants.

“Let this letter, I pray you, be kept with you, and very often read, for
the sake of thy welfare and of my love, that the omnipotent God may deign
to preserve thee in the increase of His holy church for the welfare of
our race, flourishing long time in thy kingdom and advancing in all that
is good.”

That letter finished, Alcuin proceeded next to write to the expelled
usurper Osbald. He did not mince matters; he dealt, as people say, very
faithfully with him.

[Sidenote: Ep. 66. A.D. 796.]

“To my loved friend Osbald,[143] Alchuine the deacon sends greeting.

“I am displeased with thee, that thou didst not obey me when I urged thee
in my letter of more than two years ago to abandon the lay life and
serve God according to thy vow. And now a worse, a more disastrous fate
has come upon thy life. Turn again, turn again and fulfil thy vow. Seek
an opportunity for entering upon the service of God, lest thou perish
with those infamous men, if indeed thou art innocent of the blood of thy
lord.[144] But if thou art guilty, by consent or design, confess thy sin;
be reconciled with God, and leave the company of the murderers. The love
of God and of the saints is better for thee than that of evil-doers.

“Add not sin to sin by devastating thy country, by shedding blood. Think
how much blood of kings, princes, and people has been shed by thee and
thy kinsmen. Unhappy generation, from which so many evils have happened
to the land. Set thyself free, I beseech thee by God, that thou perish
not eternally. While there is time, run, hasten, hurry, to the mercy of
God, who is ready to receive the penitent and to comfort them that turn
to Him; lest a day come when thou wouldest and canst not. Do not incur
the shame of giving up what thou hast begun. There is more shame in your
soul perishing eternally than in deserting in the present impious men.
Better still if you can convert some of them from the wickedness they
have committed: do your best, that you may have the reward of your own
repentance and of other’s repentance too. This is the love that covereth
a multitude of sins; do this, and live happily and fare well in peace.

“I beg that you will have this letter frequently read in your presence,
that you may be mindful of yourself in God, and may know what care I
have, distant though I am, of your welfare.

“If you can at all influence for good the people[145] among whom you are
in exile, do not neglect the opportunity, that you may by God’s grace the
earlier reach your own recovery.”

The murder of Ethelred gave rise to this letter. Alcuin had been very
faithful in his advice to Ethelred, as the following letter well shows.
It is very carefully composed, and a great anxiety breathes in every
balanced phrase.

[Sidenote: Ep. 42. 790-795.]

“To the most beloved lord Aedelred the king Alchuine the deacon sends
greeting.

“The intimacy of love urges me to write an intimate letter to thee
alone.[146] Because I shall always love thee I shall never cease to
admonish thee, in order that, being subdued to the will of God thou
mayest be made worthy of His protection, and the nobility of the royal
dignity may be made honourable by nobility of conduct.

“No man is free or noble who is the slave of sin. The Lord says,[147]
‘Whosoever committeth sin is the slave of sin.’ It becometh not thee,
seated on the throne of the kingdom, to live like common men. Anger
should not be lord over thee, but reason. Pity should make thee
loveable, not cruelty hateful. Truth should proceed from thy mouth, not
falsehood. Be to thine own self conscious of chasteness, not of lust; of
self-control, not of riotous living; of sobriety, not of drunkenness.
Be not notable in any sin, but laudable in every good work. Be large in
giving, not greedy in taking. Let justice embellish all thine actions. Be
the type of honour to all that see thee. Do not, do not, take other men’s
goods by force lest thou lose thine own. Fear God who has said ‘with what
judgement ye judge ye shall be judged.’ Love the God Christ and obey His
commands, that His mercy may preserve in blessing to thee, and to thy
sons and followers, the kingdom which He has willed that thou shouldest
hold, and may deign to grant the glory of future beatitude.

“May the omnipotent God cause to flourish in felicity of reign, in
dignity of life, in length of prosperity, thee, my most beloved son.”

We have letters written by Alcuin to Etheldryth the mother of king
Ethelred, queen of Ethelwold Moll, king of Northumbria 759 to 765, who
married her at Catterick in 762. In her widowhood she became an abbess,
ruling over a mixed monastery of men and women, as is shown by the
following letter, written before Ethelred’s violent death:—

[Sidenote: Ep. 50. A.D. 793-796.]

“To the most loved sister in Christ the Mother Aedilthyde the humble
levite Alchuine sends greeting.

“When I gratefully received the gifts of your benignity, and gladly
heard the salutation of your love, I confess that I was made glad by a
great sweetness. For I knew that faithful love remained constant in your
breast, which neither distance by land nor the stormy wave of tidal sea
could stop from flying to me with beneficent munificence, even as it
is said, ‘Many waters cannot quench love, neither can the floods drown
it.’[148]

“That thou mayest be worthy to hear in the day of judgement the voice
of God saying, ‘Well done, thou good and faithful servant,’ instruct
with instant care those that are under thee, admonish them by word,
perfect them by example, for their safety is thy reward. Be not silent
for fear of man, but for love of God speak, convince, rebuke, beseech.
Them that sin openly chastise before all,[149] that the rest may fear.
Some admonish in the spirit of gentleness, others seize in the pastoral
staff, diligently thinking out the remedy which best suits each. Sweet
potions cure some; bitter, others. Honour the old women and the old men
as mothers and fathers; love the youthful as brothers and sisters; teach
the little ones as sons and daughters; have care for all in Christ, that
in Christ you may have reward for all.

“Let thy vigils and prayers be frequent; let psalms be in thy mouth,
not vain talk on thy tongue; the love of God in thy heart, not worldly
ambition in thy mind; for all that is loved in the world passes away,
all that is esteemed in Christ remains. Whether we will or no, we shall
be eternal. We should study with all intentness faithfully there to live
where we are always to remain.

“Honour frequently with divine praise and alms to the poor the festivals
of saints, that you may be worthy of their intercession and partakers
of their bliss. Let thy discourses be laudable for their truth; thy
conduct loveable for its sobriety and modesty; thy hands honourable for
their free giving. Let the whole round of your life be an example in all
goodness to others, that the dignity of your person be praised by all, be
loved by many, and the name of God through thee be praised; as the Truth
Itself saith, ‘Let your light so shine before men that they may see your
good works and glorify your Father which is in heaven.’”

The line which Alcuin takes in attempting to console Etheldryth after the
violent death of a son who had lived a violent life, was a remarkable one.

[Sidenote: Ep. 62.]

“I cannot in bodily presence address by word of mouth your most sweet
affection, because we live so far apart. I therefore do by the ministry
of a letter that which is denied to my tongue. With all the power of
my heart, I desire that you go forward in every good thing, most dear
mother, and be made worthy to be counted in the number of them of whom,
in the gospel, our Lord Jesus Christ made answer, ‘Whosoever shall do
the will of my Father which is in heaven, the same is my mother and my
brother.’[150] How ‘mother,’ unless He is daily generated by holy love
in the bowels of a perfect heart? See what a Son a pious mother can
have—that same God, King, Redeemer, in all tribulations Consoler.

“Many are the tribulations of the just, but more are the consolations
of Christ. By what event of secular misery should one be beaten who
possesses in his breast the source of all consolation, that is, Christ
indwelling. Nay, rather should such an one rejoice in tribulations,
because of the hope of eternal beatitude, as the Apostle says, ‘By much
tribulation we must enter into the kingdom of God,’ and, ‘The Lord
chasteneth every son whom He receiveth’; and of the Apostles He saith,
‘They departed from the presence of the council, rejoicing that they were
counted worthy to suffer shame for His name.’

“Let your love know that your spiritual Son the Lord Jesus is not mortal.
He lives, He lives, on the right hand of God He lives and reigns.

“Be not broken down by the death of your son after the flesh, the
departure of his body, but labour every hour, every moment, that his soul
may live in happiness with Christ. Let the hope of His goodness be your
consolation, for many are the mercies of God. He has left thee thy son’s
survivor that through thy intercessions and alms He may have mercy on him
too. It may be that he died in his sins, but in the divine pity it may be
wrought that he live; for the robber who in his wickedness hanged with
Christ was saved in the mercy of Christ. Mourn not for him whom you can
not recall. If he is with God, mourn him not as lost, but be glad that
he has gone before you into rest. If there are two friends, the death of
the first to die is happier than the death of the other, for he has one
to intercede for him daily with brotherly love, and to wash with tears
the errors of his earlier life. And doubt not that the care of pious
solicitude which you have for his soul is profitable. It profits thee and
him. Thee, that thou dost it in faith and love; him, that either his pain
is lightened or his bliss is increased. Great and inestimable is the
pity of our Lord Jesus Christ, who would have all men be saved and none
perish.”

Our next episode takes us back to York, where one of Alcuin’s own pupils
was elected to the archbishopric. It may be well to mention here, and to
dispose of, a curious question which has been raised in connexion with
Alcuin’s studies in the time of his youth, pursued as we believe only at
York.

[Sidenote: Ep. 14. A.D. 790.]

Alcuin is claimed by the Irish as one of the many English youths who
were brought up in Irish monasteries, and they name Clonmacnoise as the
place of study. Dr. John Healy, the learned Roman Bishop of Clonfert,
writes thus[151]:—“There is fortunately a letter of his still preserved,
which shows quite clearly that he was a student of Clonmacnoise, and a
pupil of Colgu, and which also exhibits the affectionate veneration that
he retained through life for his Alma Mater at Clonmacnoise.” But the
letter does not bear that interpretation, and, indeed, the learned bishop
has to read Hibernia instead of Britannia in the only place where the
island of Colgu’s home is named, or to understand an implied contrast
between Britain and Ireland which would be too obscure in a perfectly
simple matter. “I have sent to your love”, Alcuin says, “some oil, which
now scarcely exists in Britain, that you may supply it where the bishops
need it, for the furtherance of the honour of God.[152] I have sent also
to the brethren, of the alms of King Karl[153]—I beseech you, pray for
him—fifty sicles[154], and of my own alms fifty sicles; to the brethren
of Baldhuninga to the south, thirty sicles of the alms of the king and
thirty of my own alms, and twenty sicles of the alms of the father of the
family of Areida and twenty of my own alms; and to each of the anchorites
three sicles of pure gold, that they may pray for me and for the lord
King Charles.”

There is nothing here that points to Ireland except the name of the
person to whom the letter is addressed, Colcu, whom Alcuin speaks of
as “the blessed master and pious father”. The name Baldhuninga is
very Northumbrian, the home of the family of Baldhun. The mention of
anchorites has been supposed to look like Ireland, but we must remember
that Alcuin himself, in singing the praises of the saints of the Church
of York, tells of the life of only two persons of his own time other than
kings and archbishops, and they were anchorites.[155] The gift of money
from the father-of-the-family of Areida clearly comes from some one in
Gaul who is very closely associated with Alcuin himself. It so happens
that the Abbey of Tours had a small cell dedicated to St. Aredius, and
the suggestion may be hazarded that the little family of monks there
sent through their prior the twenty sicles which Alcuin doubled. It is
evident that Colcu had conferred benefits on those in whom Alcuin was
specially interested, and we may suppose that on some visit to Alcuin he
had delivered a course of lectures by which the monks of St. Aredius had
profited. He was probably a professor (his actual title was _lector_, a
name still kept up for a public lecturer at the University of Cambridge)
at the School of York. There was a famous Reader in Theology of the same
name, or as much the same as any one can expect in early Erse, Colgan
or Colgu, who lived and lectured at Clonmacnoise and died there in 794,
four years after Alcuin wrote this letter at the beginning of the year
790. It is of course tempting to suppose that this famous Irishman, the
first Ferlegind or Lector recorded in the Irish Annals, was the Colcu to
whom Alcuin wrote, the Colcu of whom Alcuin in a letter written at the
end of this same year 790 said that he was with him and was well. That
letter was addressed to one of Alcuin’s pupils, Joseph, whose master the
letter says Colcu had been. On the whole, we must take it that our Colcu
was too closely associated with Alcuin’s teaching and with Northumbria to
be the Colgu of whom Bishop Healy says that though he was a Munster-man
by birth he seems to have lived and died at Clonmacnoise. But it is
another puzzling coincidence that Simeon of Durham records the death of
Colcu, evidently as of one who had worked in the parts of which he was
commissioned to write, in the year of the death of Colgu of Clonmacnoise,
794: “Colcu, presbyter and lector, migrated from this light to the Lord.”

[Sidenote: Ep. 217. A.D. 792-804.]

We have a letter of Alcuin’s addressed to “the most noble sons of holy
church who throughout the breadth of the Hibernian island are seen to
serve Christ the God in the religious life and in the study of wisdom”.
In this letter Alcuin fully recognizes that in the old time most learned
masters used to come from Hibernia to Britain, Gaul, and Italy, and did
excellent work among the churches. But beyond that, the letter, which
is far from a short one, is so completely vague that it is impossible
to imagine that Alcuin had studied in Ireland, or had had the help, in
England or in France, of one of the most famous of Irish teachers from
one of the most famous of their seats of religion and learning.

[Sidenote: Ep. 276.]

The same impression is given by Alcuin’s letter to the monks of Mayo, of
whom he naturally knew more. When the Conference of Whitby went against
the Scotic practices, Bishop Colman retired, first to Iona, then to
Inisbofin, and then to the place in Ireland now called Mayo, where he
settled the thirty Anglo-Saxon monks who had accompanied him, leaving
the Scotic monks, formerly of Lindisfarne, in Inisbofin, “the island of
the white heifer.” Bede tells us that Mayo was kept supplied by English
monks, so that it was called Mayo of the Saxons. Curiously enough they
kept up the practice of having a bishop at their head in succession to
their first head, Bishop Colman of Lindisfarne. There were bishops of
Mayo down to 1559. In Alcuin’s time Mayo was still a Saxon monastery.
The Irish Annals of the Four Masters mention a Bishop Aedan of Mayo, in
768; but his real name was English, Edwin, not Irish, Aedan, as we learn
from Simeon of Durham. Alcuin must certainly have mentioned his own visit
to Ireland in his letter to the monks of Mayo, if such a visit had ever
taken place. The letter was written late in his life. He tells them that
when he lived in Northumbria he used to hear of them from brethren who
visited England. He reminds them that for the love of Christ they had
chosen to leave their own country, and live in a land foreign to them,
and be oppressed by nefarious men. He urged them to keep zealously the
regular life, as established by their holy predecessors; and to devote
themselves to study, for a great light of knowledge had come forth from
them, and had lighted many places in Northumbria. The lord bishop they
must hold as a father in all reverence and love, and he must rule them
and their life with all fear in the sight of God.

The story of the migration from Lindisfarne to Mayo, as told by Bede (_H.
E._ iv. 4), is so quaintly Irish in its main part, that it may fairly be
told here in Bede’s words. After stating that Colman took with him all
the Scotic monks of Lindisfarne, and thirty Saxons, and went first to
Iona, he proceeds thus:—

“Then he went away to a small island some distance off the west coast
of Hibernia, called in the Scotic tongue Inis-bofin, that is, the Isle
of the White Heifer. There he built a monastery, and in it he placed
the monks of both nations whom he had brought with him. They could not
agree among themselves; for the Scots left the monastery when the summer
came and harvest had to be gathered in, and roamed about through places
with which they were acquainted. When winter came they returned to the
monastery, and claimed to live on what the English had stored. Colman
felt that he must find some remedy. Looking about near and far he found
a place on the main land suitable for the construction of a monastery,
called in the Scots tongue Mageo. He bought a small portion of the land
from the earl to whom it belonged, on which to build, on condition
that the monks placed there should offer prayers to God for him who
had allowed it to be purchased. With the help of the earl and all the
neighbours he built the monastery and placed the English monks in it,
leaving the Scots on Inisbofin. The monastery is to this day held by
English monks. It has grown large from small beginnings, and is commonly
called Mageo[156]. All has been brought into good order, and it contains
an excellent body of monks, collected from the province of the Angles.
They live by the labour of their own hands in great continence and
simplicity, after the example of their venerable fathers, under the Rule
and under a canonical abbat.”

Bede appears to have not known anything of a bishop-abbat of Mayo.

It is clear that the bishop-abbat acted as a diocesan bishop in the
neighbourhood of Mayo. In the year 1209 the Irish Annals record the
death of Cele O’Duffy, Bishop of Magh Eo of the Saxons, the name Magh
Eo, or Mageo, meaning the Plain of Yews. In 1236 Mayo of the Saxons was
pillaged by a Burke, who “left neither rick nor basket of corn in the
church-enclosure of Mayo, or in the yard of the church of St. Michael
the Archangel; and he carried away eighty baskets out of the churches
themselves”. It was for protection in such raids that the round towers
were built adjoining the churches. In 1478 the death of Higgins, Bishop
of Mayo of the Saxons, is recorded. The see was about that time annexed
to Tuam so completely that the Canons of Mayo ceased to have the status
of Canons of a Cathedral Church. Alcuin used the form Mugeo, not Mageo,
and Simeon of Durham calls it “Migensis ecclesia”. This last form
explains the signature—or rather the “subscription”—of one of six bishops
present at a Council under King Alfwold of Northumbria in 786, “Ego
Aldulfus Myiensis ecclesiae episcopus devota voluntate subscripsi[157].”




CHAPTER IX

    Alcuin’s letter to all the prelates of England.—To the Bishops
    of Elmham and Dunwich.—His letters on the election to the
    archbishopric of York.—To the new archbishop, and the monks
    whom he sent to advise him.—His urgency that Bishops should
    read Pope Gregory’s Pastoral Care.


Alcuin, as we have seen, felt himself entitled to write frankly to
persons in the most exalted and important positions, though only an
abbat. To individual bishops and archbishops he wrote very frankly,
though only a deacon. In his correspondence with kings and bishops and
other persons in his native land, we get the impression that he felt
himself to be in a much larger sphere of operations, able to take a much
larger view of affairs, than from the nature of the case they could be or
do.

Here is a letter which may be taken as a good illustration of this
remark:—

[Sidenote: Ep. 61. A.D. 796.]

“To the most holy in Christ and in all honour to be by us beloved,
the pontiffs of Britain our most sweet native land, the humble levite
Alchuin, a son of the holy church of York, greeting in the love of Christ.

“Having great confidence in your goodness, my reverend fathers, and
in the acceptableness to God of your prayers, and having a convenient
opportunity for commending myself to your charity as a body, I do not
neglect the occasion of time and messenger. I offer myself to your
holiness, suppliantly praying each one of you to take me as his son
for the love and affection of God, and to intercede along with his
fellow-warriors for the safety of my soul. For I also, according to the
ability of my littleness, am a devoted interceder for your honour and
success.

“Let your affection know that the lord Charles the king greatly desires
the supplications of your holiness to the Lord, alike for himself and the
stability of his realm and for the spread of the Christian name, and for
the soul of the most reverend father Adrian the Pope, for faithfulness of
friendship towards a dead friend is most highly approved.

“One who intercedes for such a friend no doubt greatly enhances his own
merits with God. The aforesaid lord king for the furtherance of this his
petition has sent to your holiness some small gifts of blessing.[158] I
pray you to accept with gladness what he has sent and to do faithfully
what he asks of you; that the faith of your goodness may meet with a
great reward from God, and the religion of humbleness may be widely
praised among men.

“O my most holy fathers and shepherds, O most clear light of the whole
of Britain, feed the flock of Christ, which is with you, by assiduous
preaching of the Gospel and good example of holy life. Preach with truth,
correct with vigour, exhort with persuasion. Stand with your loins girt
in the army of Christ, and your lights burning, that your light may shine
before all who are in the house of God, that they may see your good
works and glorify our Father which is in Heaven. The time of labour here
is exceeding short, the time of reward is the longest eternity. What is
happier than to pass from this present misery to eternal bliss. See to
it diligently that the land which our ancestors received by the gift of
God may by celestial benediction be preserved to our descendants. The
increase of the flock is the reward of the shepherd, the safety of the
people the praise of the priest. Let all intemperance and injustice be
prohibited, all honesty and sobriety be taught, that in every walk of
life the God Christ be honoured, and His blessed grace keep you in every
part to the praise and glory of His name for ever.

“That you may be sure this comes from us, we have sub-sealed it with our
seal.

“The blessing of God the Father in the grace and love of Christ and in
the consolation of the Holy Spirit be with you and keep you in all good,
my lords most holy, my fathers most worthy of honour, mindful of us for
ever. Amen.”

That is a remarkable conclusion to a letter from a deacon in France to
the Archbishops and Bishops of all England.

The following letter is written in a slightly humbler style. It was
probably written towards the end of his life.

[Sidenote: Ep. 230. A.D. 798-804.]

“To the most holy and venerable fathers the Bishops Alchard [Elmham,
786-811] and Tifred [Dunwich, 798-816] Alchuin the levite sends greeting.

“I pray your most pious goodness that you take not this letter from so
small a man to be presumptuous. It is in reliance on your regard that I
have dared to write. Christian humility should despise none, but should
receive benignantly all in the pious bosom of love. This love I trust
will abundantly show itself forth in you by the Holy Spirit, that, as the
Truth saith in the Gospel, out of your belly may be seen to flow rivers
of living water, that is, of sacred doctrine.

“It is yours to preach to all the word of God, to all to shine clear in
the house of God, that all may recognize through you the light of truth
and may be led through the pastures of perpetual beatitude. Your mouth
must be the trumpet of the God Christ, for the tongues of your authority
are the keys of heaven, having power to open and to shut; to open to the
penitent, to shut against those that resist the truth. Wherefore make
yourselves by your good lives worthy of such excellence; knowing that
assiduity in preaching is the praise of bishops. The episcopal honour is
no secular play. The Christian bishop must exercise himself with great
diligence in the commands of God, that by example and word together he
may educate a Christian people.

“The venerable brother the abbat Lull[159] has spoken to me in praise
of your good conversation. It is on this account that I have cared to
commend myself as a suppliant to your sanctity, that you may order some
slight memorial of my name to be made throughout your churches. Not for
my own merits but for the love of Christ I have presumed to make this
earnest request. Pray grant it, as I trust in your good piety.

“May the Lord God increase you by the grace of merits, and make you to
advance in all holiness and in preaching the word of God, my most dear
and longed-for fathers.”

We saw in the previous chapter something of the anxiety which Alcuin felt
when he marked the misdeeds of Northumbrian kings. There was another
source of anxiety which troubled him in his thoughts of his native land,
in the year 795. The old Archbishop of York, Eanbald I (780-796) could
evidently not last much longer, and Alcuin feared that the general
decadence had reached the ecclesiastics of York, and that some improper
appointment might be secured by simoniacal methods.

To the old Archbishop himself he wrote an affectionate letter, as
follows:—

[Sidenote: Ep. 36. A.D. 795.]

“To my lord best loved of all health eternal in Christ.

“I confess myself greatly rejoiced to hear from Eanbald[160], of your
household, of the soundness of your prosperity, so greatly desired by me.
The love and faith which began long ago to dwell in my breast will never
be able to leave me. The nearer the time of heavenly reward comes, the
more careful should he be who is the first to leave the world that he has
left in the world a friend. The sharpness of fever, and the delay of the
king [Karl] in Saxony, has prevented my coming to you as I have desired
to do. May the divine clemency grant to me to see thy face in joy before
I die. If I come, I earnestly hope that I shall find you still in that
honourable place of dignity in which you were when I left. And if some
other dignity has been preferred by you,[161] I hope that you will not
by any means allow violence to be done to the Church of Christ, and that
the brethren may be left free to elect as your successor the best man,
in the fear and by the grace of God most high. For in the sacred canons
a terrible anathema is uttered against those who do any violence to the
Church of Christ. You have always loved our [ecclesiastical] family of
York and have done them very many kindnesses. We now need your help more
than ever; and when our time of eternal rest has come, you will have us
as perpetual intercessors in your behalf.

“May the divine clemency grant to thee prosperous and happy days in this
life, and glory eternal with His saints, my dearest lord and father.”

Eanbald contemplated abdication in the end of 795, and Alcuin wrote the
following anxious letter to the brethren of York, on whom the choice of a
new archbishop would fall:—

[Sidenote: Ep. 37. A.D. 795.]

“To my best-loved friends, greeting.

“I beg of you, by the faith of love, that you act faithfully and wisely
in the election of a pontiff, if the election must take place before I
come. Again and again I call upon you, in the name of our Lord Jesus
Christ, that you by no means allow any one to obtain the bishopric
by the heresy of simony; for if that takes place, it is the complete
perdition of the race. This simoniacal heresy is that worst of heresies
which the holy Peter condemned with an eternal anathema [Acts viii. 14,
20, seq.]. He who sells a bishopric gains gold and loses the kingdom of
God.

“Up to this time, the holy Church of York has remained untainted in its
elections. See that it be not tainted in your day. If, which be far
distant, it loses its ecclesiastical reputation, I fear that you will
lose the eternal kingdom. Judas sold the spouse, that is, Christ. And he
that sells Christ’s spouse, that is, the Church, is guilty of the same
crime; for Christ and the Church are one body, as saith the Apostle[162].
He who sells the Church must of necessity be outside the Church; and he
who is outside the Church, where will he be but with the devil in eternal
destruction. Fear not, hate not, him who speaks to you the truth; for to
this which I say, the books sent forth by the Holy Spirit testify. My
desire is that you be without stain in the sight of God; that you reign
felicitously in this present world, and rejoice for ever with Christ.
Live and be strong and happy in Christ.”

Eanbald I did not abdicate. He died on August 10, 796, and the electors
immediately proceeded to the election, their choice falling upon Eanbald
II. The election was so hasty that Eanbald II was consecrated five days
after the Archbishop’s death.

This is Alcuin’s letter to the new Archbishop:—

[Sidenote: Ep. 72. A.D. 796.]

“To his best-loved son in Christ, Eanbald the Archbishop, his in all
things devoted father Albinus sends greeting.

“Laud and honour to the Lord God omnipotent who hath preserved my days in
prosperity, so that I can rejoice in the exaltation of my dearest son;
and have been allowed, though the lowliest servant of the Church, to
train up one of my pupils to be regarded as worthy to become a dispenser
of the mysteries of Christ and to labour in my stead in the Church where
I was nourished and instructed; and to preside over those treasures of
wisdom of which my beloved master Helbrecht left me his heir. I must
pray with all intentness the divine clemency that he may be my survivor
in this life as he was my solace alway in the time of his obedience; not
that I wish for my own death but that I desire that his life should be
prolonged. For not sons to fathers but fathers to sons should leave an
heritage.[163]

“See, my dearest son, by God’s favour you have all that man could hope
for, and more than all that our small desert dared hope for. Now, then,
act as a man and a strong man. The work of God which is put into your
hands do to the full, for the profit of your own soul and the welfare
of many souls. Let not your tongue cease from preaching; nor your foot
from going about among the flock committed to you; nor your hand from
labouring that alms be given and the holy Church of God be everywhere
exalted. Be the outward expression of the well-being of all. In thee let
there be the example of most holy manner of life; in thee let there be
the solace of the miserable; in thee the strengthening of the doubting;
in thee the rigour of discipline; in thee the confidence of truth; in
thee the hope of every good. Let not the pomp of the world lift thee up;
nor luxury of food enervate thee; nor the vanity of vestures make thee
soft; nor the tongues of flatterers deceive thee; nor the gainsaying of
detractors disturb thee; nor troubles break thee; nor joys lift thee up.
Be not a reed shaken by the wind; be not a flower falling with the gale;
be not a tottering wall; be not a house built upon the sand; but be the
temple of the living God, built on the firm rock, whose indweller be the
very Spirit, the Paraclete.

“How many days do you suppose you have to live? Put it in your mind at
fifty years. Even that has its end; and you cannot expect to live so
long as that. Let the weakness of your body make you strong in soul; be
with the Apostle,—‘when I am weak, then am I strong.’ Let the affliction
of your body be the gain of your soul. Show yourself gentle and humble
to the better; hard and rigid to the proud; all things to all men that
you may gain all. Have in your hands honey and wormwood; let each man
eat which he chooses. Let him who would live on pious preaching have
the honey; let him who needs hard invective drink of the wormwood, but
so that he may hope for the honey of pardon to follow, if the blush and
confusion of penitence go before.”

Alcuin would have been an excellent man to have as preacher at the
consecration of a bishop.

In a letter which quickly followed, Alcuin begged Eanbald to read
frequently the above letter, and expressed the hope that if there was
anything in it which could be regarded as less than quite affectionate,
the Archbishop would feel sure that it was unintentional. One thing, and
only one, he wished to add:—

[Sidenote: Ep. 73. A.D. 796.]

“Do not allow the nobleness of mind which I so well know to be in you,
and the integrity of faithfulness which is your wont to all, by any
advice of friends, by any ambition of secular desires, to be corrupted
or changed. Not every friend is fit to be an adviser; the Scripture[164]
says, Let thy friends be many, thine adviser one only. Do not allow your
goodness to be clouded by the wickedness of others.”

In yet another letter he finds a good deal to add:—

[Sidenote: Ep. 74. A.D. 796.]

“If there is joy over a rise, there is fear for a fall: the loftier the
position, the more dangerous the fall. According to your appellation be
the chief overseer not only of the flock committed unto thee, but also
of thyself, that in a few days of labour you may earn a great reward of
bliss.

“These are dangerous times in Britain. The death of kings[165] is a
signal of misery. Discord is the road to prison. The things which you
have very often heard our master Archbishop Albert predict are hastening
to come true.

“Be not covetous of gold and of silver but of gain of souls. Me remember
daily in prayers and alms, thyself always in keeping of the commandments
of God. If storms threaten on every side, steer manfully the ship of
Christ, that in time you may arrive with your sailors at the port of
prosperity. Let your tongue never be silent from the word of holy
preaching, your hand never be benumbed from good work.

“Let not your mind become soft in adulation of princes or slow in
correction of those under you. Let not the flatteries of the world
deceive you, the transient honours uplift, the favour of the people
subvert you. Be a very firm pillar in the house of God, not a reed shaken
with the wind. Be a candle set on a candlestick, not hid under a bushel.
Be to all a way of salvation, not an artery of perdition, that by thee
very many may be corrected and saved, and with thee may attain unto
eternal life.

“Wherever you go, let the Pastoral treatise of the blessed Gregory go
with you. Read it, re-read it, very often, and see in it yourself and
your work, that you may always have before your eyes how you ought to
live, how you ought to teach. It is a mirror of a bishop’s life, and a
specific against all the wounds of the devil’s fraud.”

[Sidenote: Ep. 173. A.D. 801.]

Late in Alcuin’s life, he became very anxious about the conduct of this
favourite pupil, Archbishop Eanbald II. Five years after the election he
wrote two letters on the subject, one direct to the Archbishop, and one
to two monks whom he sent to visit and advise him. To Eanbald he writes
as to one in tribulation, the king Eardulf being set against him. “But”,
he says, “I think that a part of your tribulation arises from yourself.
It may be that you shelter the enemies of the king, or protect their
possessions. If you suffer justly, why be troubled? If unjustly, why not
call to mind the Saints? As the apostle James says[166]—‘Ye have heard of
the tribulations of Job, and have seen the end of the Lord.’”

In this letter he goes no further into detail, remarking at its close
that the Cuckoo will say more. The Cuckoo was one of his messengers,
Cuculus, whom he calls in his playful way the bird of spring, the name
being the Latin word for a cuckoo. To the Cuckoo, then, and the presbyter
Calvin, he sends a letter of instructions.

[Sidenote: Ep. 174. A.D. 801.]

“I have heard of the tribulations of my dearest son Simeon [that
is, Eanbald]. You are to exhort him to act faithfully and be not
pusillanimous in trials. His predecessors suffered such; and not they
only but all the Saints. John Baptist, we read, was slain for testifying
to the truth. Let the archbishop see to it that there is in him no cause
of trial other than his preaching the truth. I fear that he is suffering
for his acquisitions of lands, or his support of the enemies of the king.
Let what he has suffice him; let him not grasp at what belongs to others,
which often turns out to be very dangerous.

“And why is there in his following such a large number of soldiers? He
appears to keep them from pity for their condition. But it is harmful to
the inhabitants of the monasteries which receive him and his. He has, as
I hear, far more than his predecessors had. And his soldiers have under
them far more of a lower class than is necessary. My master [Archbishop
Albert] allowed none of his followers to have more than one such under
him, except the rulers of his household, and they were only allowed two.
It is imprudent charity to help a few, and they perhaps criminals, and to
harm many and they good men. Let him not blame me for suggesting this,
but amend his conduct.”

[Sidenote: Ep. 149.]

Alcuin had in the previous year, 800, written a letter to the Cuckoo’s
colleague, Calvinus, in which he was very urgent that Eanbald II should
have the best spiritual advice. He entreats Calvinus to warn him of
perils, and to strengthen him in all good ways. In giving advice to the
archbishop, he bids Calvinus “consider sagaciously time, place, and
person; at what time, in what place, to what person, what should be said
by the archbishop; all which can be best learned in the book of the
blessed Gregory on the Pastoral Care”.

Alcuin frequently presses upon his correspondents the value of a careful
study of Pope Gregory’s treatise on Pastoral Care. It was this book that
King Alfred selected to have translated into English for the benefit of
the clergy of England. Inasmuch as Alfred was born only fifty years after
the death of Alcuin, there is no great improbability in the idea that
Alcuin’s influence in regard of this book survived to Alfred’s time. The
fact that it is chiefly on English bishops that he urges its frequent
study may point in this direction. It was, however, not always the
English bishops who received this advice.

[Sidenote: Ep. 71. A.D. 796.]

To Arno, Bishop of Salzburg, Alcuin wrote a long and very valuable letter
of advice as to the manner in which the Huns whom Karl was conquering
should be brought to the faith. He speaks strongly of the necessity of
adapting the teaching and discipline to the character of each individual,
as also of each race.

“There be some infirmities which are better treated by sweet potions
than by bitter; others better by bitter than by sweet. Whence a teacher
of the people of God, while he ought to shine clear with all the lights
of virtues in the house of God, should specially excel in the utmost
sagacity of discretion. He should know what treatment best suits the
sex, the age, the aim, even the occasion, of each person. All which the
blessed Gregory, the most lucid doctor, in his book on the Pastoral Care
has most diligently investigated, has adapted to various persons, has
driven home by examples, has made sure by the authority of the divine
scriptures. To the study of which book I refer you, most holy prelate;
beseeching you to have it very frequently in your hands as a manual, to
keep it in your heart.”

To Higbald of Lindisfarne he writes:—

[Sidenote: Ep. 81. A.D. 797.]

“Read very often, I beseech you, the book of the blessed Gregory, who
brought the Gospel to us, on the Pastoral Care, that in it you may learn
the peril of the episcopal office and may not forget the reward of him
who serves the office well. Let that book be very often in your hands,
let its points be firmly fixed in your memory, that you may know how a
man should attain to the office of a bishop, and, having attained, with
what circumspection he should guide himself, how exemplary his life
should be, how earnest his preaching. The author of the book has also
given the most discreet advice as to the different ways of dealing with
persons of different characters.”




CHAPTER X

    Summary of Alcuin’s work in France.—Adoptionism, Alcuin’s seven
    books against Felix and three against Elipandus.—Alcuin’s
    advice that a treatise of Felix be sent to the Pope and
    three others.—Alcuin’s name dragged into the controversy on
    Transubstantiation.—Image-worship.—The four _Libri Carolini_
    and the Council of Frankfurt.—The bearing of the _Libri
    Carolini_ on the doctrine of Transubstantiation.


Having seen something in detail of the earnestness and faithfulness of
Alcuin’s exhortations to the kings and bishops of his native land of
England, and having learned from them to how sad a state things had
fallen, especially in Northumbria once the nursery of saints, we must now
turn to Alcuin’s work on the continent of Europe.

It may be well to state again the leading dates.

Ethelbert, or Albert, master of the School of York and afterwards
archbishop, took Alcuin with him as a tonsured youth on one of his visits
to France and Rome, and on that occasion he appears to have studied for
a short time in French monasteries. The first letter of his that has
come down to us is a letter to the abbat of St. Martin at Tours, where
he was destined to spend the latest years of his life, about a fugitive
monk whom he had rescued; it was written some eight years before he first
settled in France. On his return from this journey he was ordained deacon
by Albert, probably in 768, when he would be about thirty-five years of
age. He was sent again to Italy by Albert, on a mission to Karl, the
king of the Franks, and it would appear that Karl noticed him favourably.
All this time he was working hard as master of the School of York. In
780 the new archbishop of York sent him late in the year to Rome for the
pallium, and on his way back he again met Karl, at Parma, and Karl asked
him to settle in France. He obtained leave of absence from York, and
joined Karl in 782. His definite work was to govern the school at which
the youths at the court of Karl, including Karl’s own sons, were taught;
the king himself often being present as a learner. He then planned for
Karl a number of schools in various parts of the country, all based on
the model of the Palace school, which he had organized on the plan of the
School of York. Then he took in hand the correction of the service-books,
which had become seriously debased by ignorant copyists; his liturgical
work produced such an effect that the service-books of the Middle Ages
owed more to Gallican than to Roman influences. Tradition tells us that
Alcuin himself wrote the Office for Trinity Sunday, at that time not
fixed as now to a particular day. He found that the Holy Scriptures
themselves had become debased by the same process of ignorant copying of
manuscripts, and in his later years he was set by Karl to take seriously
in hand the revision of the Scriptures. From 790 to 792 he had lived in
Northumbria; but the aggression of heresy in Karl’s dominions had called
him away again, and he had never returned. He was about fifty-eight years
old when he finally left England, and he died in 804, at the age of
sixty-nine.

The tendency towards attempting to define and explain the method in
which Almighty power conducts its operations was a marked tendency of
Alcuin’s time. He combated it, on sound principles. The whole matter,
for example, of the union of the two natures in Christ, he reminded his
readers, was supernatural; therefore, it could not be fitly measured by
human analogies. To deny the perfect union of the two perfect natures in
one Person was to impugn the Divine omnipotence; to claim to understand
and to define the method and manner of the union was to impugn the
infiniteness of the mystery.

It was to this tendency to inquire into and seek to fathom divine
mysteries that the controversy about transubstantiation was due. That
controversy came into being a full generation after the death of
Alcuin; and one of the most prominent opponents of any approach to a
materialistic view of the manner of the Real Presence was a pupil of
Alcuin’s, Rabanus Maurus, Archbishop of Mainz.

The heresy which reached such dimensions as to call Alcuin back from
England to France was the heresy known as Adoptionism. It became
prominent in the same manner, from the same tendency to pry into the
divine secrets of operation, as did the theory of transubstantiation. The
point was, how exactly did the human nature of the Son come into union
with the divine nature? The answer given by Felix, Bishop of Urgel in
Catalonia, was this—by adoption. Hence he and his followers were called
Adoptionists.

The term Adoption had been applied to the Incarnation by some early
Fathers, and indeed in the Spanish Liturgy, which Felix naturally used.
It was used probably as equivalent to assumption—He took upon Him—that
is, assumed—our flesh. This use of the word Adoption in their liturgy
led Felix and his followers to take a large step beyond the equivalence
to assumption. They carried it to its full meaning in ordinary affairs,
and declared that the divine nature of the Second Person of the Trinity
adopted the human nature into sonship, as Son. The so-called Athanasian
Creed has in our English form, “by taking the manhood into God.” In the
original Latin the word “assumption” is used, _assumptione humanitatis in
Deum_.[167]

Catalonia was at that time a part of Karl’s dominions, and therefore he
could operate upon Felix. But Elipandus, who supported Felix, was bishop
of Toledo and primate of Spain under the Mohammedan dominion, and thus
was beyond the reach of Karl. He was a man who, in his letters at least,
used very abusive language.

The Adoptionists held that it was a confusion of the two natures in
Christ to say that Christ was proper and real Son of God not only in his
Godhead but in His whole Person. The highest that could befall humanity,
they maintained, was to be adopted into sonship with God; therefore
Christ’s humanity is adopted into sonship. This adoption had three stages
they said; the first at the moment of conception, the second at His
baptism, the final stage at His resurrection. The Adoptionists professed
to deny that they were Nestorians, that is, that they divided Christ into
two Persons; but it was urged against them that if they did not divide
Christ into two persons, their theory did, when it was pressed to its
necessary consequence. That is the history of the origin of many of the
heresies.

Various measures had been taken against the heresy of the Adoptionists,
both by Karl and by the Pope, Adrian. In course of time Karl sent the
treatise of Felix to Alcuin, who was at the time in England, and Alcuin
returned to France, never again to visit his native country. Simeon of
Durham tells us that the English bishops made him their representative
for the refutation of Felix. As such, probably, in part, but also by the
special wish of Karl, he attended the Council of Frankfort in 794, and
though only a deacon, argued against Felix. Felix was condemned. Alcuin’s
argument was at Karl’s request or command developed into a treatise
in seven books; and he wrote also a treatise in three books against
Elipandus.

We have these ten books. They fill 220 very closely printed columns in
Migne’s series. The books against Felix are among the best and most
independent of Alcuin’s dogmatic work.

This by no means ended the matter. In the year 798 Karl sent to Alcuin a
treatise by Felix, which he desired Alcuin to refute. Alcuin’s reply has
been the subject of so much controversy that it will be well to give it
as literally as possible. The point is, the place assigned to the Pope as
a judge of doctrine. I only quote that part of the very long letter.

[Sidenote: Ep. 100. July, 798.]

“I beseech you, if it please your piety, that a copy of the treatise be
sent to the apostolic lord [that is of course the Pope] and another to
Paulinus the patriarch [of Aquileia]; similarly to Richbon [of Trèves]
and Theodulf [of Orleans] bishops, doctors, and ministers; that they may
(_singuli_) severally answer for themselves.[168] Your Flaccus [Alcuin]
labours with you in giving account of the catholic faith. Allow him
sufficient time to consider with his pupils, quietly and carefully,
the opinions of the Fathers, what each has said on such views as this
subverter has set forth in his book. Then, at a time appointed by you,
let the answers of the above several persons (_singulorum_) be brought
to you. And whatever of opinion or of meaning in that book is found to
be contrary to the catholic faith, let it be overthrown by catholic
quotations. And if the writings of all [of the above] sound forth equally
and concordantly in profession or defence of the catholic faith, it will
be clear that one spirit speaks through the voice and heart of all; but
if anything diverse is found in the words or the writings (_dictis vel
scriptis_) of any one of them, let it be judged which is most in accord
with sacred scripture and the catholic fathers, and give the palm to him
who is most firm in the divine evidences.”

It seems to be perfectly clear that Alcuin’s plan was that he and his
students should draw up a chain of passages from the Fathers, such as
that which at an earlier stage he had himself sent to Felix;[169] that
in this way they should spend the time till Karl had got answers by
letter, or by the mouth of a messenger, or even at a personal interview,
from each of the four, Pope, patriarch, and two bishops; and then that
all the answers should be tested by the passages extracted from the
writings of the Fathers. There is not the slightest sign of Pope Hadrian
having a preponderant voice, or a voice on a doctrinal question more
authoritative than that of the learned Bishop of Orleans. But if, as
the Roman controversialist endeavours to maintain, the Pope was not
included in the curious competition, and only the three others were
to be counted, that is worse still for the position of the Pope; for
Alcuin and Karl were to settle the matter without paying any attention
to the Pope, indeed without considering anything that he might say. The
Roman controversialist has to play tricks with the punctuation and with
the Latin to separate off the Pope from the patriarch. There was no
punctuation[170] in the letter, we must suppose; those who wrote in Latin
as good as Alcuin’s could make a sentence clear in its meaning without
commas and semicolons; and if the passage is read without stops the Pope
is included, as he is also with any punctuation other than that of the
Roman controversialist. But, as I have said, if he was included with the
other three he was given a full chance of making his opinion felt on
equal terms with that of each of the others; if he was not included, the
verdict was to be final without him.

[Sidenote: Ep. 11. July, 786.]

Alcuin is drawn by the Romans into the controversy on Transubstantiation,
which, as we have seen, had not commenced in his time. In a letter to
Paulinus, the Patriarch of Aquileia, dated about 787, he requests his
correspondent not to forget him in his prayers. “Store up my name in
some treasure-house of your memory, and bring it out at that fitting
time when you have consecrated the bread and wine into the substance of
the body and blood of Christ.” If that expression had been used after
the long controversy on the subject, it would have been very much more
important than at most it is. But it comes nearly fifty years before
the controversy was raised by Paschasius Radbert of Corbie in his
treatise _De Corpore et Sanguine Domini_ (A.D. 831). Paschasius wrote
that after consecration “there is nothing but the Body and Blood of
the Lord”, a material statement which Ratramn at once controverted. It
was Ratramn’s treatise, denying the carnal presence and maintaining a
spiritual view, that had a dominant influence on Ridley and Cranmer. The
more subtle refinement of the schoolmen of later times, which we know
as transubstantiation, avoids the blunt materialism of Paschasius by
distinguishing between an essential and a non-essential element of an
existence such as that of bread; giving to the essence which cannot be
apprehended by the senses the name of substance, and to the non-essential
the name of accident. The change effected by consecration did not, in
their view, affect the non-essential, the accident, the part that can
be perceived by the senses; it affected only that which can not be so
perceived, the essential, the substance. But all this is very far beyond
any point which had been reached in Alcuin’s time, or was reached for
some long time after him. From him we do not hear anything of substance
and accident, of essential and non-essential. He presumably used the
expression quoted as a simple and strong statement of his belief in a
very real presence, which he and the men of his time unquestionably held,
but did not attempt to define.

We have an interesting opportunity of realizing the true feeling of
leading personages of Alcuin’s time in this matter of the Presence in the
Eucharist, just where we might not have expected to find it, namely, in
the controversy on the use of images, of which we must now see something.
The Holy Eucharist is used as an illustration in this controversy. The
Synod of Constantinople, which decided that the images of the Saviour
must be destroyed, declared that the Eucharist is the only true image of
the Saviour; meaning that the union of the divine grace with the earthly
elements represents that union of Godhead and manhood in His Person which
images failed to convey, inasmuch as images of the Lord could only set
forth His humanity. The objection was raised by the opposition Council
of Nicaea that none of the Fathers had applied the term _imago_ to
that which is His Body and His Blood; but otherwise they did not raise
objection to the force of the comparison. If the modern Roman doctrine
had been held by either side in the controversy, it must have shown
itself in a declaration that a comparison was impossible, on the ground
that the consecrated elements actually are, by a change of substance,
that which an image can never be, namely, the very Body and Blood of
Christ. The controversialists of the time would certainly have brought
out, in one form or another, this vital point, if they had held it or
even had only heard of it.

The controversy about images is so entirely a part of general Church
History, that our mention of it must be only in relation to the part
which Alcuin played in it. In the year 754 a Council at Constantinople
had decreed the abolition of images, and this decree was carried out
with terrible cruelty towards those who defended the images. In the year
787 a Council was held at Nicaea to re-establish the use of images of
the Saviour and the Blessed Virgin, of angels and of saints, whether in
painting or in mosaic or in any other suitable material, as objects of
reverence, not as objects of that worship which is due to God alone. This
decision restored peace between the East, which had previously condemned
images, and the West, which had retained their use. The Pope, Adrian,
sent the decrees to Karl, no doubt expecting that he would accept them.
It was never quite safe to expect that Karl would do what he was expected
to do.

The subject was not a new one among the Franks. They had held a mixed
assembly of clergy and laity under Karl’s father in 767. There were
present representatives of the then Pope, Paul I, and the iconoclast
Emperor Constantine; and it is supposed that the decision, which is not
recorded, was in accordance with the national feeling. That national
feeling was guided by abhorrence of the abominations of the idol-worship
of the pagans by whom they were surrounded. Karl himself strongly shared
this feeling. He sent the decrees, which the Pope had sent to him, to
Alcuin, who, as we have seen, was then in England. Alcuin made remarks
on them in a letter, out of which grew a treatise in four books called
the _Libri Carolini_, the chief author of which was Alcuin, who was no
doubt assisted by other ecclesiastics. Probably Karl himself kept his
hand upon the work up to the time of its publication. The general line
of the treatise is that images are useful for ornament and historical
remembrance, and therefore they must not be destroyed; but worship of
them must not be required. We must bear in mind that the word image
means any kind of representation, the Nicaean Council of 787, as we
have seen, specifying paintings and mosaics. One of the points on which
these Caroline Books condemn the iconoclasts is, that they do not
distinguish between images and idols; but this is a less grave mistake,
the Caroline Books declare, than that committed by the Nicaean Council,
in confusing the use of images with the worship of them. The former error
is attributed to ignorance; the latter—it was a severe remark considering
that the Pope had forwarded the decrees—is attributed to wickedness. It
may be well, in this connexion, to recall the fact that the _imago_, the
image of our Lord, which was carried in procession by Augustine and his
monks at their interview with Ethelbert of Kent, was not an idol, but a
painting on a tablet[171]. We of the Church of England keep this meaning
of _imago_, in the allowance of paintings and mosaics in our churches,
quite separate from the idea of an idol, which we disallow.

Adrian made a long but feeble reply to the Caroline Books. The great
Frankish Council of Frankfort, in 794, which had the double character of
an imperial diet and an ecclesiastical synod, and was presided over by
Karl in person, held in strong terms the views of the Caroline Books;
indeed, it appears to be far from certain that they were published before
the Council was held. Alcuin, though he had not proceeded beyond deacons’
orders, was admitted to the Council on account of his learning. The
Council spoke with contempt of the Greek synod; showed no regard to the
Roman view; refused both adoration and service of all kinds to images. It
was a tremendously independent blow to the Pope as an arbiter of faith
and morals. But Karl was much too important a person in the eyes of the
Pope to be quarrelled with, and Adrian remained on excellent terms with
him. Adrian died in 796, when his successor Leo sent the keys of the
Confessio of St. Peter and the standard of the City of Rome to Karl, and
begged him to send some of his chief men to Rome, to bind the people of
Rome by oath to subjection and fidelity to the Pope.

These Caroline Books are so important in their unexpected bearing on the
current belief on the nature of the real Presence in the Holy Eucharist,
that we must look into their phrases with some little care.

In the second book of the four _Libri Carolini_ Karl deals with the
question of the adoration of images. In the twenty-seventh chapter
he argues against the temerity and absurdity of those who presumed
to compare, as of equal importance, images and the Body and Blood of
the Lord. He quotes these absurd persons as saying that “as the Body
and Blood of the Lord passes across from the fruits of the earth to
a remarkable mystery, so images pass across to the veneration of the
persons whom they represent”. No one of Karl’s arguments against this
parallel or equivalence gives the slightest indication of a belief or
idea on his part that in consecration there is a change of substance.
He says, “The sacrament of the Body and Blood of the Lord is effected
by the hand of the priest and the invocation of the divine name to the
commemoration of His passion and to the grant to us of our salvation by
the same mediator between God and men”; whereas images are completely
made by skilled workmen, &c. For the consecration, the vested priest,
mingling the prayers of the people standing round with his own prayers,
with groaning of spirit makes memorial of the Lord’s Passion, of His
resurrection from the dead, and of His most glorious ascension into
Heaven, and entreats that these may be borne to the sublime altar of God
by the hands of an angel and into the sight of His Majesty; the painter
of images merely looks out a suitable place to execute his works, and
paints them that they may look beautiful. Thus any one who attempts to
compare on equal terms images and the Body and Blood of the Lord strays
very far from the path of truth, of reason, and of discrimination.
The commemoration of His most sacred Passion is not in the works of
artificers, but in consecration of His Body and Blood. That elect vessel
Paul the Apostle says that the Sacrament of the Lord’s Body and Blood is
not to be put on an equality with all sacraments, but is to be set before
almost all sacraments, when he says, He that eats and drinks unworthily
eats and drinks his own damnation. Nothing of that kind is said of
those who will not adore images. Karl sums up the discussion by stating
concisely ten points of vital difference between the Lord’s Supper and
images. For our present purpose we need only take the ten points as they
relate to the former. Our purpose is to consider how far the points
stated can indicate a belief in the doctrine of transubstantiation, and
how far they square better with that reticent doctrine of a Real Presence
which is consistent with the formularies and the services of our own most
truly Catholic Church of England. These are the ten points: The Sacrament
of the Lord’s Body and Blood (1) is effected by the invisible operation
of the Spirit of God; (2) is consecrated by the priest by the invocation
of the divine name; (3) is carried by angel hands to the sublime altar of
God: (4) by it sins are remitted; (5) it has no growth or diminution of
power; (6) it is confirmed by new antiquity and ancient newness; (7) it
is the life and the refreshment of souls; (8) it leads by eating thereof
to the entrance of the heavenly kingdom; (9) it cannot be abolished from
the Church by persecution: (10) without reception of it no one is saved.




CHAPTER XI

    Karl and Rome.—His visits to that city.—The offences and
    troubles of Leo III.—The coronation of Charlemagne.—The Pope’s
    adoration of the Emperor.—Alcuin’s famous letter to Karl prior
    to his coronation.—Two great Roman forgeries, the Donation of
    Constantine and the Letter of St. Peter to the Franks.


We must now turn to the connexion of Karl with Rome, and especially
to Alcuin’s advice to him in the matter of declaring himself or being
declared emperor. It is a highly noteworthy fact that the Englishman
Boniface was the most trusted counsellor of Charlemagne’s father Pepin at
the time when it was proposed to raise him from Mayor of the Palace to
King of the Franks, and that Alcuin the Englishman was the most trusted
counsellor of Charlemagne himself, when it was under consideration that
he should be raised or should raise himself from King of the Franks to
Emperor of the West.

In 773 Pope Adrian had invited Karl to come to Italy and rid him of the
oppressions of the Lombards. The Pope’s messenger could not get through
by land, by reason of the Lombard power, and he went by sea. Karl agreed
to do as the Pope asked. He went with all his force to Geneva. There he
divided his army into two parts, sending his uncle Bernard with one
portion by the Mons Jovis (the great St. Bernard, called the Mount of
Jove because of the statue of Jupiter Peninus placed at its summit) and
himself went by the Mont Cenis. The two parts joined at Clusae on the
south side, between Susa and Turin, and proceeded to the siege of Pavia,
the Lombard capital. Karl spent his Easter at Rome, and on his return to
Pavia took the city and captured the king with his family and treasure.

At this visit he was received at Rome with the highest honours. In
return, he confirmed and enlarged the donation of Pepin his father,
adding, it is said, large parts of Italy—indeed, almost the whole
peninsula. He laid the deed of gift on the tomb of the Apostle Peter.

Karl visited Rome again in 781, and it is this visit that from one point
of view most concerns us, for it most concerned the course of Alcuin’s
life.

Karl had been to Rome again in the year 787, to visit Pope Adrian and
settle terms with the Duchy of Beneventum. He had purposed to devastate
the duchy, its bishoprics, and its monasteries; but in council with his
bishops and chief men he determined to accept hostages, including the two
sons of the hostile Duke, who did not himself dare to see the angry face
of Karl. Karl completed his visit by adoring the tombs of the blessed
Apostles, and paying there his vows; another sign that the great object
of visits to Rome was to visit the tombs of the twin princes of the
Apostles, Peter and Paul. He then returned to France and rejoined his
wife Fastrada, his sons and daughters, and his court, at Worms.

The all-important visit to Rome came at the end of the year 800. Pope
Leo III, elected in 795, had been seized in the spring of 799 by his
opponents, among whom two nephews of the late Pope, Adrian, played a
leading part, and an attempt had been made to put out his eyes and cut
out his tongue. He recovered[172] and escaped, and was called—or fled—to
Karl at Paderborn. Leo had on his consecration sent to Karl, as the
Patrician, the standard of Rome, the keys of Rome, and even the keys
of the tomb of St. Peter, in recognition of his supremacy, the Eastern
Emperor Constantine VI being disregarded. Karl was therefore doubly bound
to take cognisance of the Pope’s case. There were very grave charges
against Leo. Alcuin names[173] adultery and perjury; but he writes very
strongly against subjecting Leo to trial on these charges. He has read,
he says, that by a canon of the blessed Silvester there must be not less
than seventy-two adverse witnesses of blameless life if a pontiff was to
be brought to trial. He has read in other canons that the Apostolic See
judges, is not judged. What pastor, he asks, in the Church of Christ can
be immune, if he who is the head of all the churches is overthrown by
malefactors?

We may compare with this the reasons which another member of the trilogy
of Anglo-Saxon ecclesiastics and scholars, St. Aldhelm, gave at Rome
against condemning the Pope of his time, Sergius, for alleged immoral
practices. The reasons were three. First, it was a wretchedly base thing
to suspect their own pontiff of crimes. Next, what influence could the
Roman pontiff have with the Britons and other nations across the seas,
if he was attacked by his own citizens? Lastly, it did not seem likely,
it could not be true, that one who remembered that he was set over the
whole world would entangle himself in such a sin as this. Unhappily, for
long periods in the history of the Papacy, it not only was likely, it was
undoubtedly and overtly true.

Leo was received by Karl with great honour, and was sent back to Rome to
resume his high office. Karl followed him[174] towards the end of the
next year, 800, and was received by him at the twelfth milestone from
Rome “with the greatest humility and the greatest honour”. This was on
November 23. The next day Leo with great pomp received Karl on the steps
of the basilica of St. Peter, made an oration to him, and led him into
the church. Seven days later, on December 1, Karl convoked an assembly,
and expounded to them his reasons for coming to Rome, the first and
most difficult being the need of a judicial inquiry into the charges
against the Pope. It turned out that no witness appeared to substantiate
the charges; but that seems to have been regarded as insufficient, and
a formal abjuration was made by Leo. The Pope, Eginhart[175] says, in
the presence of all the people, in the basilica of the blessed Peter
the Apostle, carrying in his hands the Gospel, ascended the ambo, and
invoking the name of the Holy Trinity, purged himself by oath from the
crimes laid against him[176].

On the most sacred day of the Nativity of the Lord, Karl attended Mass
at St. Peter’s. As he rose from prayer before the Confessio[177] of
the Apostle, Leo placed on his head a crown, the whole Roman people
acclaiming—“To Charles Augustus, crowned by God the great and pacific
Emperor of the Romans, life and victory!” After which the Pope adored
him, that is, prostrated himself before the emperor and kissed his feet,
as had been the custom with the former emperors. The title of Patrician
was abandoned, and Charlemagne became Imperator and Augustus.

This is not the occasion for discussing the debated question whether
the Pope acted on an impulse of gratitude, or was guided by a desire
to interpose the most powerful personage in the West between Rome and
the Emperor of the East; or the equally debated question whether Karl
was an active and understanding receiver of the new burden of honour
and responsibility; or the question what sort of right the Pope had to
take such a step. To my mind the most pointed question is whether the
Pope skilfully forestalled Charles by suddenly crowning him, in order to
prevent his making himself emperor and crowning himself. But we cannot
pass by without a word of comment the remarkable fact that the Pope
performed the barbaric, Byzantine, humiliating, ceremony of prostration
before the emperor and kissing his feet in adoration, as earlier Popes
had had to do to earlier emperors. It is this same barbaric custom of
what is technically called adoration, that the Popes, who used to perform
it to their imperial superiors, have now for some centuries expected
others to perform to them—the kissing of the Pope’s toe as it is called
by some, of the Pope’s foot by others. The state of the foot of the great
bronze figure of St. Peter in his church at Rome certainly renders the
former the more accurate phrase.

It is clear that Karl had for many months been carefully considering the
question of assuming the imperial crown in asserted succession to the
Emperors of the West, who had come to an end three centuries and a half
before.

[Sidenote: Ep. 114.]

This is the letter which Alcuin wrote to Karl at this most critical point
in the history of Europe, a letter which has been described as the most
important of all which Alcuin is known to have written. His remark that
Karl’s position was higher and his power for good greater than that of
the Emperor of the East and that of the Pope, has been understood to mean
that Karl would do well to restore in his own person the Empire of the
West, so as to be supreme in title as well as in fact. The date is May
799.

“To the peace-making Lord David the king, Flaccus Albinus greeting.

“We give thanks to thy goodness, most clement, most sweet David, that
thou hast deigned to have in mind our littleness, and to note down for
us that which thy faithful servant hath told us by word of mouth. And
not for this only do we give continual thanks to thy piety, but for all
the boons which thou hast conferred upon me from the day on which my
littleness became known to thee. Thou didst begin with the very best for
me, thou hast gone on to better still. Wherefore with continual prayers
I pray the mercy of our Lord Jesus Christ, that having granted thee all
that is best in earthly felicity, He may deign to grant to thee eternally
the far realms of everlasting beatitude.

“If I were present with thee I would urge very many things on thy
venerable dignity, if opportunity were afforded for thee to hear and for
me to speak. For the pen of love is often wont to stir the deep things
of my heart, to treat of the prosperity of thy excellency, the stability
of the kingdom to thee by God given, and the profit of the holy Church
of Christ. The Church is perturbed by the multiform wickedness of evil
men, and stained by the nefarious attempts of the vilest, not of ignoble
persons only, but of some also among the greatest and highest. This is
matter for deep fear.

“Up to this time, there have been three loftiest persons in the world.
One, the apostolical sublimity, which is wont to rule by vicarial office
the see of the blessed Peter, chief of the Apostles. What has been done
against him who has been the ruler of that see, thy venerated goodness
has taken care to make known to me. Another, the imperial dignity and
secular power of the second Rome. How impiously the governor of that
empire has been deposed, not by those of another race, but by his own
people and fellow citizens, is becoming known everywhere. [This was
Constantine VI, Emperor of the East, who had been affianced to Karl’s
daughter Rotrudis some eighteen years before, but had been forced by his
mother Irene to break the contract. In 797, two years before Alcuin’s
letter, Irene had deposed him and put out his eyes; she was now reigning
alone.] The third is the royal dignity, in which the dispensation of our
Lord Jesus Christ has placed thee, more excelling in power than the other
dignities named, more clear in wisdom, more sublime in dignity of reign.
Lo, on thee alone the whole safety of the churches of Christ has fallen
and rests. Thou art the punisher of crimes, thou the guide of the erring,
thou the consoler of them that mourn, thou the exalter of good men.

“Is it not the case that in the see of Rome, where the greatest piety
of religion once shone clear, the very worst examples of impiety have
burst forth into view? They themselves, blinded in their own hearts, have
blinded their own Head. There is not seen there fear of God, or wisdom,
or love: what good thing can be there if nothing of these three is found
there? If there had been fear of God they would not have dared, if there
had been wisdom they would never have wished, if there had been love they
would by no means have done, what they have done. These are the perilous
times, foretold of old by the very Truth, because the love of many grows
cold.

“The care of the head must never be neglected; it is a less evil that the
feet suffer than the head.

“Let peace be made with those wicked Saxons, if that can be done. Let
threats be to some extent relaxed, so that men may not be hardened and
driven away, but may be kept in hope until by wholesome counsel they be
brought back to peace. Hold on to what has been won from them, lest if
they are allowed to gain a little, the larger part be lost. Keep safe
your own sheep-fold, that the ravening wolf devour not it. Let such
labour be spent on outside affairs that no loss be suffered in your
own affairs. Some time ago I spoke to your piety about the exaction of
tithes: that it is decidedly better to abstain from the exaction, even
for a considerable time, until the faith has got its roots fixed in the
hearts, if indeed that Saxon land be held worthy of the choice of God.
Those who have gone away were the best Christians, as is well known; and
those who remained have continued in the dregs of wickedness. For by
reason of the sins of the people, Babylon has become the habitation of
devils, as it is said in the prophets.

“None of these things can have been overlooked by thy wisdom; for we
know how well learned thou art in the sacred scriptures and in secular
histories. From all of these full knowledge has been given to thee by
God, that by thee the holy Church of God among a Christian people may be
ruled, exalted, and preserved. What reward may be given by God to thy
best devotion, who is able to say? For eye hath not seen, nor ear heard,
neither have entered into the heart of man, the things which God hath
prepared for them that love him.”

Alcuin ends his letter with a pair of hexameters and some elegiacs,
both because Karl was interested in his versification, and—we may
suppose—because high-flown compliments, from which Karl was not averse,
come better in so-called poetry than in prose.

      “From lofty heaven may Christ in mercy mild
      Thee rule, exalt, defend, adorn, and love.

  The holy stars of the sky, the grasses of the green earth,
    All things together cry, May David prosper alway.
  The earth and the sky and the sea, the men and the birds and the beasts,
    Cry with concordant voice, Father be it well with thee.”

As we are dealing with the relations of the Papacy with the Franks, it
may be well to say here something that ought to be said about the demands
of the Popes for money and territories. The two demands which may on the
whole be called the most monstrous of all the long series, were made, the
one probably, the other certainly, in Alcuin’s time: one by Hadrian, to
influence Karl, the other by one of his predecessors to influence Karl’s
father, Pepin.

A ridiculous document was produced by the Popes, probably about the
middle of this eighth century, with which we are dealing. It was called
the Imperial Edict of Donation. Its alleged author was Constantine
the Great. It professed to give to Silvester, the Bishop of Rome in
Constantine’s time, and to his successors, the Imperial Palace (that is,
the Lateran) and the City of Rome; all the provinces, districts, and
cities of the whole of Italy; and, in the Latin copy of the forgery,
all islands. The islands are absent from the Greek copy of the forgery.
It was on the strength of this forged donation of islands that a later
Hadrian, the one English Pope, Hadrian IV, professed to be the owner
of Ireland, and gave it to our king Henry II just four centuries after
the time with which we are dealing. Muratori was of opinion that this
audacious forgery was concocted between 755 and 766, that is, when Alcuin
was from twenty to thirty years of age, and while Offa was king of
Mercia. In 774, when Karl had conquered the Lombards, he went to Rome,
as we have seen; ratified the donation of his father Pepin, of which we
must next speak, and laid the deed of donation on the altar or on the
tomb of St. Peter in the ancient basilica of St. Peter. The original deed
of Karl’s donation has, so far as is known, long since perished; its
terms are at best only vaguely known. It is said to have comprehended the
whole of Italy, the exarchate of Ravenna, from Istria to the frontiers
of Naples, and the island of Corsica. Karl, then, ratified the forged
Donation of Constantine, at that time a quite recent forgery. The whole
story, however, is very vague, and historians differ considerably in
the deductions which they draw from the inadequate records. They differ
almost more widely as to the date at which the document was first brought
forward, the dates ranging from 760 to 1105. Of the fact of the forgery
there is no question; it cannot be denied, and so far as I know no one of
the Romans now is bold enough to deny that it is a forgery. There is one
point in the forgery which has an important bearing on a very important
question, namely, the true basis of the reputation of the city of Rome as
the chief ecclesiastical centre of the Church of the West. Constantine is
made to declare, in this forged donation, that it was by the merits of
St. Peter and St. Paul that he emerged from the font at baptism cleansed
of his sins. More than that, he is made to declare that he makes this
enormous donation to the blessed chiefs of the Apostles, Peter and Paul,
and through them to Silvester, the Bishop of Rome. Either, then, at the
time of the forgery it was completely recognized as a fact that the Popes
claimed their sovereignty on the twin authority, in the twin name, by the
twin princeship, of Peter and Paul; or it was completely recognized at
the time of the forgery that in the earliest times, and notably in the
time of Constantine the Great, whose baptism took place in the year 337,
Rome did base its claims to pre-eminence on its possession of the relics
of St. Peter and St. Paul, and on the twin supremacy of those two princes
of the Apostles, and, therefore, that it might stand the test of the
touchstone of history, it was essential to use the twin names of Peter
and Paul; if it had been Peter alone, it would have been detected as a
forgery. See Appendix D.

When we come to the document which was produced for the purpose of
influencing Pepin, Karl’s father, we pass out of the atmosphere of
vagueness, and find ourselves face to face with a scandalous, an impious,
fact. Pope Stephen II[178], who held the Papacy from 752 to 757, was
reduced to extremities by the arms of the Lombard kings of North
Italy. He went in person to Pepin, king of the Franks, to entreat him
to come over and succour the city of Rome and the domain of St. Peter.
To show how difficult it is to be sure about facts of history when the
chroniclers have a partisan bias, it may be mentioned that the Italian
chronicler states that Pepin went to meet Stephen, and on meeting him
dismounted from his horse, prostrated himself on the ground before the
Pope, and then walked to the royal residence by the side of the Pope’s
palfrey. The Frankish chroniclers say that the Pope and his clergy, with
ashes on their heads and sackcloth on their bodies, prostrated themselves
as suppliants at the feet of Pepin, and would not rise till he had
promised his aid against the Lombards.

The king lodged Stephen in the monastery of St. Denys for the winter, and
well on into the next summer. There Stephen was attacked by an illness
so dangerous that his recovery was regarded as a miracle, due to the
intercessions of St. Dionys, St. Peter, and St. Paul; where again we
notice the twinship of St. Peter and St. Paul as regards the protection
of the Pope, with the local saint added. After the return of the Pope to
Rome, he was besieged by the Lombard king, who vowed not to leave him
a scrap of territory the size of the palm of his hand. The Pope sent
to Pepin a letter of entreaty and threat. The king, he said, hazarded
eternal condemnation. He had vowed to secure to St. Peter the vast
donation to which reference has been made, and St. Peter had promised to
him eternal life. If the king was not faithful to his word, the Saint
kept firmly the donation, as it were the sign manual of the king, and
this he would produce against him at the day of judgement.[179] The
envoys came late in the year, and the king could not conduct an army into
Italy in the winter. In February, 755, or a little earlier, Stephen wrote
another letter, with a literally awe-full account of the horrors of the
siege, which had then lasted fifty-five days. He conjured Pepin to come
and help, “by God and his holy Mother, by the powers of the heavens,
by the apostles Peter and Paul, and by the last day.” The collocation
and the order of these adjurations is significant. Still Pepin did not
come. The Pope then resorted to the blasphemous proceeding which it has
seemed necessary to describe. We may suppose that the Pope’s metaphorical
statement—that St. Peter had Pepin’s sign manual to a document which
would be produced against him at the day of judgement—had suggested to
the harassed mind of the Pope the idea that an immediate letter from
St. Peter himself would be more effective than the threat to produce
signatures at the day of judgement; and that if the letter was addressed
to the Franks at large, and not as the former letter to Pepin and his
sons, the whole nation would be terrified into prompt action. However
that may have been, a letter[180] was written with the heading: “Peter,
called to be an Apostle by Jesus Christ the Son of the living God ...
and [after a long paragraph] Stephen the prelate of the catholic and
apostolic Roman Church, ... to the most excellent kings Pepin, Charles,
and Carloman, with all the bishops, abbats, priests, and all monks; all
judges, dukes, counts, military officers, and the whole people of the
Franks.” The letter begins with the words “Ego Petrus Apostolus”, I,
Peter the Apostle. In it St. Peter adjures those whom he addresses to
rescue Rome from the Lombards, making a special appeal that his own body,
which suffered torture for the Lord Jesus Christ, may be preserved from
desecration. “With me,” he proceeds, “the Mother of God likewise adjures
you, and admonishes and commands you, she as well as the thrones and
dominions and all the host of heaven, to save the beloved city of Rome
from the detested Lombards. If ye hasten, I, Peter the Apostle, promise
you my protection in this life and the next; I will prepare for you the
most glorious mansions in heaven; I will bestow upon you the everlasting
joys of paradise. Make common cause with my people of Rome, and I will
grant whatsoever ye may pray for. I conjure you not to yield up this
city to be lacerated and tormented by the Lombards, lest your own souls
be lacerated and tormented in hell with the devil and his pestilential
angels. Of all nations under heaven, the Franks are highest in the esteem
of St. Peter; to me you owe all your victories. Obey, and obey speedily,
and, by my suffrage, our Lord Jesus Christ will give you in this life
length of days, security, victory; in the life to come, will multiply His
blessings upon you, among His saints and angels.” That little summary is
only about a twelfth part of the length of the letter itself.

The letter brought Pepin with a great host; he overcame the Lombard king;
and he bestowed on the Pope as a donation, by right—it would appear—of
conquest, not only what are called the States of the Church, but also—and
that in the teeth of the ambassador of Constantine Copronymus, the
Emperor of Constantinople, who demanded its restoration to the Eastern
Empire—the whole exarchate of Ravenna. Thus it was that the Pope became
a temporal sovereign over vast portions of Italy. St. Peter’s letter was
probably the most important letter never written.




CHAPTER XII

    Alcuin retires to the Abbey and School of Tours.—Sends
    to York for more advanced books.—Begs for old wine from
    Orleans.—Karl calls Tours a smoky place.—Fees charged to the
    students.—History and remains of the Abbey Church of St.
    Martin.—The tombs of St. Martin and six other Saints.—The
    Public Library of Tours.—A famous Book of the Gospels.—St.
    Martin’s secularised.—Martinensian bishops.


As time went on, Alcuin felt that he must withdraw from the varied and
heavy work which he was accustomed to do at the court, whether at Aachen
or elsewhere, and must retire to work quietly at one of his abbeys. He
obtained the king’s leave[181]. In 796 he wrote to inform Karl that he
had, in accordance with the king’s wish, opened the school at Tours; that
he must send to York for books; and that he hoped the king would order
the palace youths to continue to attend the palace school which he had
now left.

[Sidenote: Ep. 78. A.D. 796.]

“I, your Flaccus, in accordance with your desire and good pleasure, am
busy with ministering, under the roof of the holy Martin, to some the
honey[182] of the holy Scriptures; others I seek to inebriate with the
old wine of ancient disciplines; others I shall begin to nourish with the
apples of grammatical subtlety; some I purpose to illumine with the order
of the stars, as the painter nobly adorns the roof of the house of God. I
become very many things to very many men, that I may educate very many
to the profit of the holy Church of God and the honour of your imperial
realm, that no grace of Almighty God in me be unemployed, and no part of
thy bounty be without fruit.

“But I, your poor servant, need some of the more abstruse books of
scholastic learning which I had in my own land by the devoted labour
of my master[183], and to some extent of myself. I say this to your
excellency that you may be pleased to allow me to send some of our young
men to pick out what I need, and bring to France the flowers of Britain;
that not in York only there may be a garden enclosed[184], but in Tours
also the scions of paradise may bear fruit; that the south wind may
come and blow through the gardens by the river Loire, and the spices
thereof may flow out. I take as a parable of the acquisition of wisdom
the exhortation of Isaiah[185], ‘Ho, every one that thirsteth, come ye
to the waters, and he that hath no money; come ye, buy and eat; yea,
come, buy wine and milk without money[186] and without price.’ Your most
noble mind knows well that there is nothing loftier that can be acquired
for a happy life, nothing more joyous as an exercise, nothing stronger
against vices, nothing more laudable in all dignity. As the philosophers
have told us, there is nothing more necessary for the ruling of a people,
no better guide of the life to the very best principles, than the glory
of wisdom, the praise of discipline, the efficacy of learning. To the
earnest study and daily exercise of wisdom, exhort, O king, the youths of
your excellency’s palace, that they may so advance while in the bloom of
youth that they may be held worthy to bring to honour their grey hairs,
and by wisdom may attain to perpetual happiness. To sow the seeds of
wisdom in these parts, I, so far as my poor intellect enables me, shall
not be found slack. In the morning of life, in the vigour of study, I
sowed in Britain; now, my blood running cold, as in the evening of life,
I cease not to sow in France. To me, shattered in body, an expression of
the holy Jerome, in his letter to Nepotianus, is a solace: ‘Almost all
the powers of the body are changed in old men. Wisdom alone continues to
increase; all the rest decrease.’ And a little further on he says, ‘The
old age of those that have trained their youth in honourable arts, and
have meditated in the law of God day and night, grows more learned with
age, more expert with use, more wise with the process of time; it gathers
the very sweetest fruits of former studies.’”

The brethren of St. Martin of Tours had not a high character for
propriety of conduct. There are many evidences of this. It is interesting
to know that the earliest letter of Alcuin to which we can reasonably
assign a date is a letter appealing for a lapsed brother of this same
abbey of St. Martin of Tours, over which Alcuin was now called to
preside as an old man. The abbat to whom Alcuin addressed this letter
was Wulfhard, of whom the life of Hadrian I, as printed by Muratori
(iii. 1, 184, _Rer. Ital. Script._), states that he was sent along with
Albinus, that is, Alcuin, to Hadrian, by Karl in 773.[187] The letter
was probably written in 774.

[Sidenote: Ep. 1. A.D. 774.]

“To the pious father Uulfhard the abbat Albinus the humble levite wishes
health.

“I found this poor lamb wandering through the rough places of neglect.
Moved by pity, I brought him by sedulous admonition to the home of our
discipline, binding up his wounds, pouring in wine and oil. To your
piety, gentlest of fathers, I send him back, beseeching you to receive
him for the love of Him who, amid the joy of the angels, has brought
back on His own shoulders into the home of His delights all of us, who
were wandering among the precipices of sins. Do not in austerity repel
from thee one whom Christ has for pity gathered back to Himself, nay,
has met penitent, has run to and embraced, has brought back to the house
of feasting. And if any envious man advise you to reject him, let such
an one fear lest he himself be rejected by Him who has said, ‘With what
measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again.’... And though he
have sinned ten times, have not we sinned an hundred times; and though he
owe an hundred pence, do we not owe ten thousand talents?...”

Alcuin had a high regard for the wines of the Loire, and he particularly
liked them old. The best wine of that time would appear to have been
grown about the city of Orleans, and to have been kept under the charge
of the Bishop of Orleans as the chief owner of the terraced lands on
which the vines grew.[188] Here is a frolicsome letter about a present
of wine from Orleans. It is full of quotations from the Song of Songs
applied to local conditions, for the most part rather obscure. When he
comes to his concluding words, there is no obscurity in his request that
if wine is coming, good old wine may be sent.

[Sidenote: Ep. 153. A.D. 796-800.]

                     “To Theodulf, bishop of Orleans.

“To the great pontiff and father of vineyards, Teodulf[189], Albinus
sends greeting.

“We read in the Chronicles[190] that in the time of David, the king most
loved of God, Zabdi was over the wine-cellars of the vineyards. Now,
by the mercy of God, a second David [Karl] rules over a better people,
and under him a nobler Zabdi [Theodulf] is over the wine-cellars of the
vineyards. The king has brought him into the house of wine and set over
him the banner of love, that students may stay him with flowers and fill
him full of the apples of them that languish with love,[191] that is,
love of that which maketh glad the heart of man.

“Now even though there be a lack of that which strengthens, namely bread,
there is perhaps no lack of that which maketh glad, namely wine, in the
cellars of Orleans; for our hope is set on a thriving vineyard and not
on a fig-tree dried up. Wherefore Jonathan, the counsellor of David, a
man of letters,[192] sends unto Zabdi, saying: Let us get up early: let
us see how well the vineyard of Sorech thrives: to them that chant the
treaders’ cry therein the streams of the cellarer are dispersed abroad.
But now that the storehouse is opened with the key of love, let this
verse be sung by the ruler of the vineyard in the towers of Orleans:[193]
Eat with me, my friends; drink, and drink abundantly: come ye and take
wine and milk without price. My throat is as the best wine meet for the
drinking of my beloved, to be tasted by his lips. I am my beloved’s and
my beloved is mine.

“It must not be replied—I have put off my coat, how shall I put it on? I
have washed my feet, how shall I defile them?[194] I cannot rise and give
to thee.[195] If by chance the three loaves are not at hand, which were
lacking in the store-houses of Gibeon,[196] by the blessing of Christ
the seven water-pots are full of the best wine, which has been kept till
now. Who does not know that some of this wine, according to the command
of the Virgin’s Son,[197] is to be borne to the ruler of the feast of
the city of Tours? But remember this: You must not put new wine into old
skins. No one, having drunk old wine, straightway desireth new; for he
saith—The old is better.

“Blessed is he that speaks to an attentive ear.”

Tours was not in Alcuin’s time the bright place which it is now. When
Karl endeavoured to persuade Alcuin to accompany him to Rome in 779,
Alcuin begged that he might be excused. The journey was long, and he
wished to remain at Tours. It is evident that Karl in his reply spoke of
the splendours of Rome and contrasted them with “the smoky dwellings” of
Tours.

This is what Alcuin had said to the king:—

[Sidenote: Ep. 118. A.D. 799.]

“Now about that long and laborious undertaking of going to Rome. I
cannot in any way think that this poor little body of my frailty—weak
and shattered with daily pains—could accomplish the journey. I should
have earnestly desired to do it, if I had had the strength. I therefore
entreat the most clement benevolence of your paternity that you leave me
to aid your journey by the faithful and earnest prayers of myself and of
those who with me serve God at St. Martin’s.”

Karl’s answer we have not got. Alcuin’s rejoinder to it contains this
passage:—

[Sidenote: Ep. 119. A.D. 799.]

“With regard to that with which it is your will to upbraid me, that I
prefer the houses of Tours, sordid with smoke, to the gilded citadels of
the Romans, I know that your prudence has read that elogium of Solomon’s,
‘it is better to dwell in a corner of the house-top, than with a brawling
woman in a wide house’.[198]

“And, if I may be pardoned for saying it, the sword hurts the eyes more
than smoke does. For Tours, content in its smoky houses, by the gift of
God through the providence of your goodness dwells in peace. But Rome,
which is given up to fraternal strife, ceases not to hold the implanted
venom of dissension, and now compels the power of your venerated dignity
to hasten from the sweet dwellings of Germany to restrain this pernicious
plague.”

From the foundation of the School of Tours, the students paid fees. The
great endowments of the abbey, much enlarged by Karl in 774 when he
granted to Abbat Wulfhard a large amount of property in the neighbourhood
of Pavia, do not appear to have been applied to the maintenance of the
School. A change was made about forty years after Alcuin, and then the
education of the school was given free. We learn that after Alcuin’s
death the school continued to flourish under Abbats Wulfhard II,
Fridugisus, and Adalard, the masters of the school receiving stipends
from the fees of the students. This “mercantile” arrangement was hateful
to Abbat Adalard, and the change came in his time, and by his order; but
it was not financed from the regular income of the abbey. The master at
the time was Amalric, who afterwards became Archbishop of Tours, dying
in 855. He gave to the abbey from his own private property certain funds
for the payment of the teachers, and in August, 841, it was decreed that
the schooling should be free. Amalric had many students under his tuition
who rose to important positions, of whom Paul the Archbishop of Rouen,
and Joseph the Chancellor of Aquitaine, are specially mentioned. He was
a good example of the “school master bishops” with whom the Church of
England was well stocked a generation ago.

[Illustration: PLATE I

The Abbey Church of St. Martin of Tours, before the pillage.

_To face p. 210._]

[Illustration: PLATE II

St. Martin’s, Tours; the Horloge.

_To face p. 211._]

The church of St. Martin, so magnificent in the times of the historian
Archbishop Gregory of Tours (573-94), became more and more magnificent
after several destructions by fire. It had reached its greatest splendour
when it was pillaged by the Huguenots. Tours claims to have originated
the name of those destructive people, who in the beginning used to steal
out for secret meetings at night beyond the walls of the city, flitting
about like the local bogey _le roi Hugon_.[199] And Tours possesses to
this day in the name of one of its streets a reminiscence of the early
hunting down of the Huguenots as a highly enjoyable form of the _chasse
aux renards_. When their time came, they wreaked a savage revenge, and
practically destroyed the noble Abbey Church. A reproduction of its
appearance in the perfection of symmetry has been prepared from plans
and drawings, and is shown in Plate I. The only remains left by the
Revolution and by the necessity for new streets are the south-west
tower, called of St. Martin,[200] or of the Horloge, and a tower of the
north transept, called of Charlemagne.[201] They are of 12th-century
foundation, but the latter has a capital of earlier date still clinging
to it. Louis XI had surrounded the shrine of St. Martin with a rich and
very massive gallery of solid silver, but his needy successor Francis was
beforehand with the Huguenots and coined it into crown pieces.

The tombs of St. Martin and the Saints who lay near him were destroyed by
the Huguenots, and their relics were burned. Portions were saved, and in
the new basilica of St. Martin, close to the site of the old basilica,
there is a noble crypt with a reproduction of the massive tomb of St.
Martin.[202] On the wall is an inscription to the following effect:

    Nomina corporum sanctorum quæ hic sepulta erant circa tumulum
    Beati Martini.

    SS. Briccius, Spanus, Perpetuus, Gregorius Tur., Eustochius,
    Eufronius, quorum venerabiles reliquiæ in capsis existentes ab
    hæreticis impiissime in dicta ecclesia fuerunt combustæ anno
    1562.

            EUSTOCHIUS                         BRICCIUS
            PERPETUUS        MARTINUS          SPANUS MARTYR
            GREGORIUS                          EUFRONIUS

    Sic erant corpora horum in ecclesia B. Martini Tur. ordinata.

The Rue des Halles runs right through the site of the old basilica. The
new basilica lies at right angles to the old one, its axis lying north
and south, an arrangement which places the modern _confessio_, with
its reproduction of the old tomb, practically on the site of the old
_confessio_.

The connexion of St. Martin with Tours came about in this way. He was
born about 316, a native of Lower Hungary; had a taste for the monastic
life; was compelled by edict to become a soldier; served for three years
up to the age of eighteen; went to visit Hilary at Poitiers; after some
years came again to Hilary, and founded the monastery of Lugugé, near
Poitiers, said to have been the first monastic institution in Gaul. His
reputation stood so high that in 371 he was elected by the populace to
the bishopric of Tours, much against his will. He built the monastery of
Marmoutier, _Maius Monasterium_, about two miles to the north-east of the
walls of Tours, where a large number of students received an education in
such learning as then was known. His time was mostly spent in conversion
of the pagans in his diocese. At the age of eighty, in 396, he was called
to Condate to settle an ecclesiastical dispute, was seized with fever,
and died. It was just at that time that his great admirer, Ninian, was
finishing his stone church at Whithern, in Galloway, and to Martin he
dedicated it. From that time, and owing to the connexion between Britain
and Gaul, dedications to St. Martin were frequent, as is instanced by the
old British church of St. Martin at Canterbury.

[Illustration: PLATE III

St. Martin’s, Tours; the Tour Charlemagne, with the dome of the new St.
Martin’s on the left.

_To face p. 212._]

[Illustration: PLATE IV

The modern reproduction of the Tomb of St. Martin.

_To face p. 213._]

When Martin died, the people of Poitiers flocked to Condate to claim the
body of their former abbat. But the people of Tours asserted their better
claim, and carried him off in a ship to Tours. The body of the saint
was landed from the ship on the south bank of the Loire, and deposited
in a small oratory; the spot was called the Station of the Body of St.
Martin. It was moved thence to a more central spot, and miracles began to
be wrought at its new abode. Briccius, his successor in the bishopric,
built a church over it in the eleventh year after the Saint’s death.
Perpetuus removed this church and built a more magnificent structure.
The rich gifts of kings and others made the church of Perpetuus very
beautiful. St. Odo, in a sermon on its destruction by fire, described it
as lined with various coloured marbles; in one place the walls were red
with Protonis marble, in another white with Parian, in another green with
Prasine. This church was burned by Willicharius. Chlotaire I rebuilt it.
The Normans burned it again in 853 and 903, and soon after the year 1000
it was rebuilt by Hervey the Treasurer in the form in which it existed to
the time of the Revolution. The Calvinists pillaged it, as has been said
above. At the destruction in the time of the Revolution the various parts
of the church were sold to speculators, and under the First Empire all
disappeared except the two towers which now remain. The Cathedral church
in the old Roman city, the eastern part of the present city, was burned
in the wars between Louis VII of France and our Henry II, who was Lord of
Tours and Count of Anjou.

In 1861 a rock-hewn tomb was found under a house which was known to stand
on the site of the high altar of the Abbey church. A subterranean chapel
was built over the tomb, and adorned with red granite. This is now the
Confessio of the new basilica of St. Martin.

There had only been two bishops of Tours before Martin. The first,
Gatian, died in 301. He had officiated secretly[203] in the remarkable
cave, across the front of which the ancient church of St. Radegonde now
stands, with its inscriptions.

    Sca Radegundis Gemma Galliæ Pretiosissima, Ora pro nobis. S.
    R. Regina Galliæ. Scus Gatianus Turonum Primus Episcopus huius
    Parochiæ Fundator Primo Sæculo.

Lidorius succeeded Gatian after a lapse of thirty-seven years, and built
a small basilica for his bishop’s stool.

Martin had, during his bishopric, brought from St. Maurice, in the valley
of the Rhone, some relics of that saint, which he deposited in a chapel
built by Lidorius, to which also he removed from the cemetery the remains
of Gatian. This was the origin of the Cathedral church of Tours, and we
are thus enabled to see why its primary dedication was to St. Maurice,
and its second and permanent dedication is to St. Gatian.

The public library at Tours, which is now on the quay facing the Loire,
and not at the place, as indicated by the guide-books, where the Mairie
stands, has a remarkably interesting collection of manuscripts. Two of
the finest of them are undoubtedly of Charlemagne’s time. One of these,
Tours No. 22 (St. Martin No. 247) is a beautiful Book of the Gospels,
written all in gold on very white parchment, in remarkably perfect
condition. The gold employed must have been singularly pure. There are
277 leaves each with double columns of 25 lines, and in all 289 leaves;
the size is 12⅖ by 9⅕ inches. The initial letters are quite simple, and
in exceedingly good taste. The other, Tours No. 23 (St. Martin No. 174),
is also a Book of the Gospels, with 193 leaves, 11⅗ by 9⅕ inches. It
has so-called Hibernian initial letters, purple, with interlacements,
and birds’ heads with the characteristic eyes and beaks. It is much
more probably Anglian than Hibernian, and we may attribute it to the
scriptorium of the school of York, or to that of St. Martin of Tours as
a copy from a York manuscript. The present librarian assigns it to the
writing school of Marmoutier, across the Loire, which he thinks was the
chief writing school of Tours in Alcuin’s time. That opinion is founded
on a remark in connexion with the first establishment of Marmoutier, to
which reference will be made below;[204] the English student may well
attribute the MS. to St. Martin’s itself, produced, as a copy, under
Alcuin’s own eye, especially as it has always appeared in the catalogue
of St. Martin’s and not in that of Marmoutier, and is now classed as a
St. Martin’s MS.

The _Evangeliarium_ first mentioned, in gold letters on white parchment,
is a book of historic fame. It is the book on which the kings of France
down to Louis XIV, in 1650, took their oath of fidelity and protection
to St. Martin of Tours, when admitted as abbat and first canon of the
collegiate church. The book was bound with great magnificence of gold
and gems; and when the Huguenots, under the Prince of Condé, sacked
the place, they carried off the rich binding, but fortunately left the
manuscript itself quite uninjured. The oath of the kings is written on
the reverse of folio 277, in a style closely copied from the manuscript
itself, probably in the eleventh or twelfth century, all in small gold
capital letters, with a point after every word. The entry runs as
follows;—

    Hoc est iuramentum regis Francie quod facere tenetur dum primo
    recipitur in abbatem et canonicum huius ecclesie beati Martini
    Turonensis.

    Ego N. annuente Domino Francorum rex Abbas et canonicus huius
    ecclesie Beati Martini Turonensis iuro Deo et Beato Martino
    me de cetero protectorem et defensorem fore huius Ecclesie in
    omnibus necessitatibus et utilitatibus suis custodiendo et
    conservando possessiones honores iura privilegia libertates
    franchisias et immunitates eiusdem Ecclesie quantum divino
    fultus adiutorio secundum posse meum recta et pura fide sic me
    Deus adiuvet et hec sancta verba.

The first king who held the secular abbacy of St. Martin of Tours was
Charles the Bald, Charlemagne’s grandson, who became king of France
(Neustria) in 843, about thirty years after Charlemagne’s death. There
were ecclesiastical abbats till the year 845, when the Count Vivian
became the first lay abbat. After Charles the Bald it is probable that
the kings held the abbacy. Hugh Capet (987-996) united the title of Abbat
of St. Martin to that of King of France. The fifteen kings from Louis VII
in 1137 to Louis XIV in 1630 took the oath on this book on admission to
the abbacy.

The status of the abbat and of the brethren of St. Martin was long in
uncertainty. Charlemagne refers to the vague status of the brethren in
his letter of rebuke to them, which is given on p. 237; they called
themselves canons, or monks, as best suited the necessities of an
occasion. Probably there had been a time when the monastery included both
secular and regular inmates. It is uncertain also whether the brethren
elected the bishop (or archbishop) of Tours, and, indeed, whether they
had not a bishop of their own. Hadrian I, addressing the abbat Itherius,
who was the first founder of Cormery as a place of residence for regular
monks of St. Benedict, writes thus[205] of St. Martin’s—“we decree that
it be lawful to have a bishop there as has been from ancient times up
to now, by whose preaching the people who come from various parts with
devoted mind to the holy thresholds of the said confessor of Christ may
receive remedial help from the Creator of souls.” Urban II, in 1096,
at the Council of Tours, recognized this, and “united the Martinensian
bishopric to the Apostolic See”, a very honourable extinction. We
have the names of eight abbats before Itherius. The seventh of them,
Wicterbus, was bishop and abbat; the eighth, the immediate predecessor of
Itherius, Wulfhard I, was abbat only. It is supposed that the appointment
of Alcuin, one of the secular clergy and in deacon’s orders, was a
decided step in the secularization of the Abbey, and that his policy
was in the same direction. It may be suggested that already in the time
of Itherius that abbat was conscious of a secularizing tendency, and on
that account founded Cormery; and that Alcuin found the existence of the
regular abbey at Cormery a convenient outlet for the remnant of regular
brethren at St. Martin’s, and handed St. Martin’s over to his successor,
Wulfhard II, as a purely secular foundation. The step to a lay abbacy was
then not a long one.




CHAPTER XIII

    Further details of the Public Library of Tours.—Marmoutier.—The
    Royal Abbey of Cormery.—Licence of Hadrian I to St. Martin’s to
    elect bishops.—Details of the Chapter of the Cathedral Church
    of Tours.


The Public Library of Tours, as we have seen, has a very large and
interesting collection of manuscripts, which have come mainly from three
sources, the libraries, namely, of (1) the Cathedral church of Tours, (2)
the Monastery known as Marmoutier, and (3) the Collegiate church of St.
Martin. Twenty-one other churches and foundations in the neighbourhood
contributed manuscripts, besides such collections as the expelled nobles
possessed. In 1791 the libraries of the old churches were collected into
one depot, the French Church having been organized as a civil institution
in that year and monastic vows made illegal. In 1793 the Conseil Général
of the Indre-et-Loire ordered that “les livres et manuscrits provenant
des maisons religieuses et des émigrés seront placés au ci-devant Évêché,
à l’effet de quoi le citoyen Suzor sera averti de l’évacuer au plus
tard le 15 mars prochain”. The third floor of the Évêché was used for
housing the manuscripts, &c., and by a most fortunate appointment a true
lover of the old things was made librarian. This was Dom Jean Joseph
Abrassart, ex-religious of Marmoutier. He succeeded in saving a very
large proportion of the ancient manuscripts known to be in existence in
the neighbourhood, especially those at Marmoutier.

The library of the Cathedral church at Tours dated from the time of St.
Perpetuus, the sixth bishop, who left to his Cathedral church all his
manuscripts except the copy of the Gospels written by the hand of St.
Hilary of Poitiers (353-68) whom St. Martin had visited.[206] Perpetuus
was Bishop of Tours from 460 to 494. Ruinart, whose edition of Gregory
of Tours Migne took as the original of his edition, notes that he had
seen in the Cathedral library at Tours a book in Saxon characters which
had been supposed to be the work of Hilary’s own hand; but he found that
it contained matter much later than Hilary’s time, and that the author
had appended an inscription stating himself to be Holaindus by name.
A catalogue of the Cathedral library was made in 1706 by the Chanoine
Victor d’Avanne, at which time the library contained 461 manuscripts.
The Chanoine complained that many other manuscripts had been borrowed
by savants and not returned; he names as culprits Auguste de Thou,
André Duchesne, Maan, and Michel de Marolls. Of the 461 manuscripts
catalogued, the Public Library now has 309.

The library of Marmoutier was founded by St. Martin himself with the
abbey: so at least the phrase is understood to mean, “except writing
(or scripture) no art was exercised there.” Dom Gérou, librarian of
Marmoutier, made a catalogue of the manuscripts in his charge, and
Chalmel’s copy of that catalogue is now in the library of Tours. There
were, in 1754, 360 manuscripts, and there are now 263 of them in the
library. Many of these are of value. Marmoutier was always rich in Latin
manuscripts. In 1716 a great collection made by the Lesdiguières family
was bought at Toulouse; these were chiefly French, and thus it comes
about that the library of Tours now possesses some of the very first rank
of the most ancient monuments of French literature.

Sulpicius Severus, who made a special visit to St. Martin at Tours,
gives us an exact description of the site of this monastery, founded by
Martin in or about 372, at a distance of two miles from the city, on
its north-east side. He describes it as bounded on the north by a range
of precipitous rock, and on the south by a portion of the stream of the
river Loire, here divided. In those times it was only accessible by
one narrow way. Martin’s own cell was of wood, but many of the eighty
brethren excavated cells for themselves in the rock, the nature of which
lends itself to such excavation. The range of cliff is honeycombed to
this day for stables, wagon-sheds, &c.; indeed, excavations of this
character are a feature of the district, observable from Poitiers to many
miles on the Orleans side of Tours. This abbey, like that of St. Martin,
gradually became secularized, and it, like St. Martin’s, was ruled by
Count Vivian forty years after Alcuin’s death. The names of many of its
abbats before Alcuin’s time are known, but it is only from the year 814
that a continuous series is recorded. A photograph of some remains of the
abbey is given in Plate V.

The library of the Collegiate church of St. Martin was founded by Alcuin,
who borrowed books from England, mainly from York, and had them copied;
probably some of the borrowed books remained at Tours, for Northumbria
was in too disturbed a state to look after manuscripts lent to France.
In 1739 Bernard de Montfaucon published an inventory of this library,
which then contained 272 manuscripts. Of these the library of Tours
now possesses 140. The twenty-one other sources referred to above have
provided 96 manuscripts, and the library has, besides, 159 which cannot
be traced to their source. This makes nearly 1,000 manuscripts in all
from these sources. The twenty-one sources referred to, and the number of
manuscripts each has provided, are as follows: The Augustins of Tours 16;
les Carmes 11; les Capucins 1; les Dames du Calvaire 3: l’Oratoire 19;
les Récollets 1; le Grand Séminaire St. Julien 3; St. Pierre le Puellier
2; l’Union Chrétienne 3; la Visitation 2; Aigues Vives 1; Amboise 3; St.
Florentin d’Amboise 1; l’Abbaye de Beaumont 4; Bois-Rayer 1; Cormery
5; Notre-Dame de Loches 2; la Chartreuse du Liget 5; les Augustines de
Beaulieu-lès-Loches 1; les Religieuses Hospitalières de Loches 1; les
Minimes du Plessis-lès-Tours 11. What endless treasures England would
now have possessed if municipal authorities had taken such care as this
of the monastic libraries in the time of Henry VIII.

[Illustration: PLATE V

Some remains of Marmoutier.

_To face p. 222._]

In translating the life of Alcuin, we omitted one of the examples of
Alcuin’s insight into the ways of men which the anonymous author gives.
It relates to Cormery, some miles up the river Indre, one of the places
from which manuscripts were brought into the library of Tours. The trick
played was as clever in itself as the detection of it was. It got over
the difficulty of the vessels being found to be partly empty, and the
difficulty that, if they were filled up with water, the taster of the
monastery would detect the fraud at once.

This is the passage in the _Life_:—

“To the brothers of Cormery, whom he greatly loved, the father had
ordered a hundred measures of wine to be given. When the wine was to
be taken to the monastery, he ordered the stewards of the monastery,
through Sigulf, a monk of Abbat Benedict, that they should detain the
conveyors of the wine, until in their presence the wine should be poured
from the vessels in which they had brought it into others; because some
of them had stealthily taken out some of the wine, and, in order that
the vessels might be full when they reached the monastery, had put
into them river-sand. That this had been done, the fathers proved most
conclusively.”

The monastery of St. Paul at Cormery has a special interest for students
of Alcuin. William of Malmesbury makes mention of it in the famous
passage in which he so highly praises Alcuin.[207] After quoting
Alcuin’s request[208] to Karl that he may have sent over from his library
of York some of the manuscripts which he describes as the flowers of
Britain, “that the garden of paradise may not be confined to York, but
some of its scions may be transplanted to Tours,” William proceeds thus:
“This is that same Alcuin who, as I have said, was sent into France to
treat of peace, and during his abode with Charles, captivated either by
the pleasantness of the country or the kindness of the king, settled
there; and being held in high estimation, he taught the king, during his
leisure from the cares of state, a thorough knowledge of logic, rhetoric,
and astronomy. Alcuin was, of all the Angles of whom I have read, next to
St. Aldhelm and Bede, certainly the most learned, and has given proof of
his talents in a variety of compositions. He lies buried in France, at
the church of St. Paul of Cormery[209], which monastery Charles the Great
built at his suggestion; on which account, even at the present day (about
1130 A.D.), the subsistence of four monks is distributed in alms for the
soul of our Alcuin in that church.”

We have the documents which relate to the foundation of St. Paul of
Cormery, and they do not quite carry out William’s statement. Itherius,
the predecessor of Alcuin at St. Martin’s of Tours, had acquired land
at Cormery for the residence of monks, and in 791 had issued a precept
for the construction of a monastery. Much discussion has centred round
this fact, to which further reference is made in another part of this
book.[210] In the year 800, Karl issued two interesting documents[211],
both dated from St. Martin’s at Tours, one signed by the king himself,
the other certified by Genesius, acting as deputy for the chancellor
Hercambold. The first of these documents has interesting features, and in
it we find the reason for the abbey being called, down to the Revolution,
_l’Abbaye Royale de Cormery_, and having as its armorial bearings the
crowned eagle of the empire impaling the lilies of France ancient. It is
addressed to “all the faithful men of St. Martin at that time serving
in the holy place where that precious confessor of Christ rests in the
body, and to all who shall follow them. Our beloved master Albinus has
with pious devotion begged of us that he may be allowed to settle monks
in the cell of St. Paul, which in rustic speech is called Cormery, there
to live the regular life according to the statutes of the holy Benedict.
This place his predecessor Abbat Itherius had acquired; he had built it,
and handed it over to St. Martin. We have thought it right to give our
assent to his pious devotion, and have caused it to be confirmed by our
letters under the seal of our authority, in order that no severance may
ever take place. For if divine piety has given to our parents and to us
the power over the whole monastery of St. Martin, and the right to give
it to whom we will, how much more have we the power of assigning to God
the aforesaid place. It is not lawful for any one to contemn the donation
or confirmation of royal benignity, especially in an order so pious and
wholesome as this. Therefore we entirely order that this our donation
stand to all time fixed and inviolate, and that this place be never taken
away from the possession of St. Martin, but that there monks shall live
under the full rule of St. Benedict and have protection and help from
the abbats of the monastery of St. Martin. If any abbat in time to come
should disregard this our precept, let him know that he shall render an
account of his presumption to our Lord Jesus Christ in the day of His
great advent. So also shall any who diminishes aught of the things which
Abbat Itherius of blessed memory acquired, of the property of St. Martin
which he gave to the church of St. Paul, or of the things which the said
Abbat Albinus has given, at whose request we have caused write these
letters, or anything which any one may have given in alms for his soul.
That this may stand the more firm, we have determined to subscribe it
with our own hand and have caused it to be sealed with our ring.”

The other document, addressed to all bishops, counts, officers, &c.,
grants licence to the monks, “at the request of our most beloved and
faithful the venerable Abbat Albinus”, to have two ships coming and going
with necessary things on the rivers Loire, Sarthe, and Vienne, free from
toll. This was ordered to be sealed with Karl’s ring. The navigation
of the Indre, being their own river, was no doubt free to them without
grant.

[Illustration: PLATE VI

Capital found at Cormery.

_To face p. 227._]

Ithier governed St. Martin’s at Tours from 770 to 791. Soon after 791
he died, and was buried in a grave at the entrance of the nave of the
abbatial church of Cormery, on the north side. The place can still be
pointed out. Fridugisus, the Nathanael of Alcuin’s letters, who was
designated by Alcuin as his immediate successor, became abbat of St.
Martin’s after Wulfhard II. He built a stone church, the west front
of which still stands in considerable part, with the eleventh-century
Romanesque tower, most of which still stands, applied to it, the east
wall of the tower being the west front of Fridugisus. Plate VI shows
a capital which has recently been found, evidently of the time of
Fridugisus. Considerable parts of the later Gothic walls still stand.
They are carefully tended by M. Octave Bobeau, the local correspondent of
the Minister of Public Education, whose apartments are in the refectory
of the abbey. The curé of Cormery, M. l’abbé Jaillet, is a most obliging
guide to the ruins, as also to his own very fine cruciform parish church.
In these most recent days “his own” is a misdescription. The inventories
have been taken, and Monsieur le Maire is the master of the parish church
and its services. The large house of the abbats of Cormery is now a
dwelling-house in connexion with the communal school. An early engraving
in a French account of Touraine shows that the western tower was crowned
with a gallery and spire, not unlike that shown in the illustration of
Marmoutier, Plate V.

Some commentators suppose that the “other monastery”, which Alcuin
informs Arno he has built some eight miles from the city, was this
monastery of Cormery. But the distance named is not easily reconciled
with the geographical facts, and Alcuin could not properly have stated
that he was the founder of Cormery.

Cormery provided a home for the severer side of the monastic life, St.
Martin’s and Marmoutier remaining secular. Cormery being a considerable
distance away, a Benedictine abbey, of St. Julien, was established in the
eastern part of Tours, in the tenth century, by Archbishop Théotolon,
and a Romanesque abbey-church was built, the square tower of which still
remains; the church in its present state has some ancient paintings, and
deserves a visit. Being within the limits of the ancient Roman town, it
would naturally be under the jurisdiction of the archbishop.

This will be a convenient point at which to give further details[212]
of the remarkable licence of Hadrian for a permanent bishopric of the
western part of the present city, at that time a district separate from
the ancient city, in which latter was the stool of the archbishop of
Tours.

The licence of Hadrian I, allowing the abbat and brethren of St. Martin’s
to elect and to have their own bishop, is printed (from Baluz) in _Gallia
Christiana_, vol. xiv, p. 7 of the _Instrumenta_ relating to Tours.
The date is 786. The licence is addressed to Abbat Autherius, that is,
Itherius. It sets forth that by royal and papal privileges the Abbey of
St. Martin of Tours was in all respects independent of the episcopal
authority of the bishop of Tours;[213] whatsoever in the flock of St.
Martin needed arranging, ruling, or correcting, was a matter for the
abbat, provost, dean, and other most approved men. Hadrian declares that
they may have a bishop of their own, as had been the custom from ancient
times until most recent times, because of the great numbers of persons
who flocked from all parts to visit the shrine and needed instruction
in the faith. The person elected by the abbat and the flock shall be
ordained by the neighbouring bishops. The metropolitan bishop—that is,
the archbishop of Tours—shall not enter the church for any exercise of
his episcopal office, such as ordinations, or making the chrism, nor
shall he have power to summon any of the priests of the monastery to
appear before him. The abbey bishop must not be impleaded without the
assent of the abbat. He is to have the pastoral care of the neighbouring
districts held by the abbey, and is to amend and correct in canonical
manner and due order with the consent of his abbat. If the abbat does not
choose to settle any matter of dispute which may arise between the St.
Martin’s bishop and the bishops of the neighbourhood, the matter must
come direct to the apostolic see.

That is a very remarkable document. We are not without indications of
other unusual customs in the province of Tours.

The Archbishop of Tours had eventually eleven suffragans, Le Mans,
Angers, Rennes, Nantes, Vannes, Cornouaille, Léon, Tréquier, St. Brieuc,
St. Malo, Dol. Some of these bishoprics trace their origin to refugees
from Britain in the middle of the sixth century. A marked feature of
the Archbishopric was the existence and permanence of the office of
Archpresbyter. The Chapter of Tours itself, in its most complete
form, consisted of Dean, Archdeacon of Tours, Treasurer, Praecentor,
Chancellor, two other Archdeacons, the Archpresbyter of Tours, and fifty
or more Canons. The Princeps Archipresbyter preached on the greater
Sundays, as the Ecclesiastes Theologus did on other Sundays. At Le
Mans, before Alcuin’s time at Tours, there were two Archpresbyters,
each in management of half of the diocese; in the eleventh century
there were three; in 1200, eight. In 1230 Maurice replaced them by
seven Archdeacons, who had under them a number of rural deans, _decani
rusticanis negotiis_, an office into which the Archpresbyters, once so
important, subsided. Archdeacons of Le Mans are first named in the will
of St. Bertramn, in 623. At Angers the chief Archdeacon had under him
four Archpresbyters; the second Archdeacon had one Archpresbyter and two
Rural Deans; the third Archdeacon had three Rural Deans. At Angers the
Archbishop of Tours acted in 1334 much as the Archbishop acted at St.
Martin’s at Tours in or before Alcuin’s time; he freed the Chapter from
episcopal control and himself confirmed the Deans[214].




CHAPTER XIV

    Great dispute on right of sanctuary.—Letters of Alcuin on the
    subject to his representatives at court and to a bishop.—The
    emperor’s severe letter to St. Martin’s.—Alcuin’s reply.—Verses
    of the bishop of Orleans on Charlemagne, Luitgard, and Alcuin.


In the year 801, or early in 802, a question of sanctuary arose on which
Alcuin and Charlemagne took opposite views. The Emperor was imperious in
his dealing with the matter.

[Sidenote: Ep. 179.]

Two of Alcuin’s pupils, Candidus and Nathanael, held offices in the
court of the Emperor at Aachen. Nathanael was the pupil to whom Alcuin
wrote a well-known letter about the temptations and occupations of the
court, his warnings against the temptations being conveyed under cover
of figurative language. “Let not the crowned doves come to thy windows,
that flit about in the chambers of the palace; let not wild horses break
in at the door of thy chamber; do not occupy thyself with dancing bears.”
To Candidus and Nathanael he wrote, in evident anxiety, to tell them what
had happened, and to bid them put it before the Emperor in a favourable
light. This is what he says.

[Sidenote: Ep. 180. A.D. 801-2.]

“The venerable father Theudulfus the Bishop [of Orleans] has a dispute
with some of your brethren of St. Martin’s about a certain fugitive
culprit. This culprit, after suffering very many kinds of punishment,
suddenly escaped from confinement, fled to the church of St. Martin a
chief confessor of Christ, confessed his sins, begged for reconciliation,
appealed to Caesar, and demanded to go to his most holy presence. We
gave him up to the messengers of the said bishop. They knew, it is said,
that preparations had been made to waylay them; they dismissed him as
he stood before the doors of the church, and went their way. Thereupon
there came a large number of the men of the said venerated bishop, in a
hostile manner as we have ascertained. Eight principal men entered the
church on the Lord’s day with our own bishop [Joseph, the Archbishop of
Tours]. These were not the ‘eight principal men’ who are read of in the
prophet[215] as wasting the land of Nimrod with swords and lances; they
came to carry off the culprit, to profane the sanctity of the house of
God, to belittle the honour of the holy confessor of Christ, Martin;
indeed they rushed into the sanctuary within the gates of the altar. The
brethren drove them out before the front of the altar. If they deny this,
they say what is absolutely false. No one of them at that time bowed the
head before the altar of God.

“The report spread that a hostile force had come from Orleans [a distance
of seventy miles] to violate the rights of St. Martin, for they were
known to be Orleans men. The pensioners rushed together from every part
of the city to the defence of their own defender. Tumult and fear grew
rapidly all over. Our brethren rescued the men of the aforesaid bishop
from the hands of the crowd, lest they should be evil intreated, and
drove the people out of the church.

“Now I know that the above-named pontiff will bring many accusations
against our brethren; will exaggerate what was done; will say that things
were done which were not done; for we have it in his letters.

“I therefore charge you, my dearest sons, that you cast yourselves at
the feet of my lord David the most just and serene emperor. Beg of him
that when the bishop comes to complain, an opportunity of defence may be
afforded, and of disputing with him whether it is just that an accused
person should be taken by force from a church and subjected to the very
punishments from which he has fled; whether it is right that one who has
appealed to Caesar should not be brought to Caesar; whether it is lawful
to spoil of all his goods, even to a boot-lace, one who is penitent and
has confessed his sins; whether that saying of the Scripture[216] is well
observed, Mercy rejoiceth against judgment.”

Alcuin then criticises the letter of the Bishop of Orleans, which has not
been preserved. In the course of the criticism he says two rather clever
things.

“The venerable father says that an accused sinner ought not to be
received in the church. But if sinners are not to enter the church, how
are you to have a priest to say mass in the church, or who will there be
to respond except some quite newly baptised person? For does not St. John
say, If we say that we have no sin we deceive ourselves, and the truth
is not in us. Again, we find that in the venerable bishop’s letter the
accused man is called a devil, not a man. Think what the Apostle says,
Judge not before the time.”

Alcuin then proceeds to quote the canons on fugitives, and to describe
the arrangements made in all parts for men to take sanctuary. He ends
with a powerful appeal to the Emperor to bear in mind the danger of
allowing any supreme dignity to be made light of.

[Sidenote: Ep. 181. A fragment.]

In another letter, written at the same time, and in great part in the
same words, to a bishop not named, Alcuin adds something to what he
has said in the letter to his pupils. The man, he says, had certainly
committed many sins and done very impious wickedness. But he had the
evidence of two priests, Christian of St. Benedict of Tours and Adalbert
of St. Martin, that he had made confession to them before he was seized
and bound and tortured. Probably Alcuin thought that would not appeal
very forcibly to the mind of the Emperor, and that the impiousness of the
man would do more harm to his cause than the fact of confession would
do good. The man was given up by the brethren of St. Martin not that he
might be taken off to Orleans, but that he might be taken before the
Archbishop of Tours by the messengers of the Bishop of Orleans, a matter
very different from what it appeared to be in Alcuin’s letter to his
representatives at Court. The attempt to carry off the fugitive was very
unscrupulous, for the man was within the altar rails and was actually
lying prostrate in supplication and appeal before the sepulchre of St.
Martin.

Alcuin thought it best to send the fugitive far out of the way. We do not
know what he had done, or who he was; but we may gather that his name was
something like Kalb from the words which Alcuin applies to him in sending
him to Salzburg, to the safe keeping of Arno the Archbishop.

[Sidenote: Ep. 183. A.D. 801-2.]

“I have sent to you this animal, the calf of my hand, that you may help
him and keep him out of the hands of his enemies. Help him as much as you
can, for the venerable bishop, that is Theodulfus, is greatly enraged
against us. I have put into the mouth of this youth, the calf being
an animal unnaturally rational, what he must moo in the ears of your
holiness.”

Now let us hear the voice of the emperor, by no means the moo of a calf.
We learn from his letter what on other grounds we should have imagined,
namely, that the culprit was a cleric. Well might the bishop of Orleans
rage against the Abbat of St. Martin.

[Sidenote: Ep. 182.]

“In the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost. Charles
&c.[217] to the Venerable Master Albinus and the whole congregation of
the monastery of St. Martin.

“The day before your letter reached our presence, a letter was
brought to us from Bishop Theodulf [of Orleans], containing complaint
of dishonour done to his men, or rather to the bishop of the city [of
Tours], and in contempt of the order of our empire. Which order we caused
write under the authority of our name for the rendering up of a certain
cleric, escaped from the bishop’s custody, and in hiding in the basilica
of St. Martin, a copy of which you have sent to us. In it we think that
we did not decree anything unjustly, as you have thought we did.

“We have had both letters read to us again, yours [that is, Alcuin’s] and
Theodulf’s. Your letter appears to us to be much harsher than Theodulf’s,
and to have been written in anger, without any seasoning of charity
towards him; in defence of the fugitive, and in accusation against the
bishop. Under cover of a concealed name it maintains that the accused
person could and should be allowed to bring an accusation, whereas both
divine and human law forbids to allow a criminous person to accuse
another. For this he was defended and protected by you, under pretext
of the authority of our name; as though one who had been accused and
judged in sight of the people of his own city of Orleans should have an
opportunity of bringing an accusation by appeal to the emperor, after the
example of the blessed Paul the Apostle. But Paul, when accused by his
own nation before the princes of Judaea, but not as yet judged, appealed
to Caesar, and by the princes he was sent to Caesar to be judged. That
does not at all coincide with the present case. For this cleric of evil
repute was accused, and judged, and sent to prison, and thence escaped,
and contrary to law entered the basilica, which he ought not to have
entered till after he had done penance, and still—it is said—ceases not
to live perversely; this man you say has appealed to Caesar in the same
manner as Paul. But he certainly is not coming to Caesar as Paul did.

“We have given orders to Bishop Theodulf, by whom he was judged and sent
to prison, and from whose custody he escaped, that he be brought back;
and the bishop must bring him to our audience, whether he speaks truth or
falsehood; for it consists not with our dignity that for such a man as
this there should be any change of our original order.

“We greatly wonder that to you alone it should seem fit to go against
our authoritative sanction and decree, when it is quite clear, both from
ancient custom and from the constitution, that the decrees of enactments
ought to be unalterable, and that to no one is it permitted to disregard
their edicts and statutes. And herein we can not sufficiently marvel that
you have preferred to yield to the entreaties of that wretch, rather than
to our authoritative commands.

“Now you yourselves, who are called the congregation of this monastery
and the servants of God, yea the true God, know how your life is now
frequently evil spoken of by many, and not without cause. You declare
yourselves sometimes to be monks, sometimes canons, sometimes neither.
And we, acting for your good and to remove your evil repute, looked out
a suitable master and rector for you and invited him to come from a
distant province. He by his words and admonitions, and—for that he is a
religious man—by his example of good conversation, could have amended the
manner of your life. But—ah, the grief of it—all has turned out the other
way. The devil has found you as his ministers for sowing discord exactly
in the wrong place, namely, between wise men and doctors of the church.
And those who ought to correct and chastise sinners you drive into the
sin of envy and wrath. But they, by God’s mercy, will not lend an ear to
your evil suggestions.

“And you, who stand out as contemners of our command, whether you be
called canons or monks,[218] know that at our pleasure, as our present
messenger will indicate to you, you must appear before us; and although a
letter sent to us here excuses you of actual sedition, you must come and
wipe out your unjust crime by condign amends.”

Alcuin’s reply was more than twice as long.

[Sidenote: Ep. 184.]

“To the lord most excellent, and of all honour most worthy, Charles,
king, emperor, and most victorious most great most good and most serene
Augustus, Albinus his servitor wishes the welfare of present prosperity,
and of future beatitude, eternal in Christ the Lord God.

“On the first face of this letter I see that thanks from my whole heart
must be given by me to our Lord God for your safety and welfare, not to
me only but to all Christians most necessary. Next, with prostrate body,
contrite heart, tearful voice, mercy must be begged of the piety of your
goodness for the brethren of St. Martin, to whose service your goodness
delegated me however little worthy. I call God as the witness of my
conscience that never have I understood the brethren to be such as I hear
that they are called by some who are more ready to accuse than to save.
As far as can be seen and known, they worthily perform the office in the
churches of Christ, and I most truly bear witness that never any where
have I seen other men celebrating more perfectly or more diligently,
in daily course interceding for your safety and the stability of the
Christian empire. Of their life and conversation you can learn from a
perfect man, an incorrupt judge, and a faithful messenger, Wido [Count
of the shore of Britany]. He has looked into all their affairs and knows
what they have done and how they have lived.

“I have not been slow to admonish them concerning the strictness of the
monastic life, as they themselves will testify, if any one will accept
their testimony. And I do not know what faults they have committed
against their accusers, that they should pursue them with such hatred.

“It is a matter of wonder why they[219] wish to push themselves, contrary
to the edict of the law, into another’s harvest. The illustrious doctor
forbids this where he says[220] Who art thou that judgest another man’s
servant? To his own master he standeth or falleth. Yea he shall stand,
for God is able to make him stand. For the city of Tours has a pastor
[Joseph, the Archbishop], in his life elect, in preaching devout, who
knows how best to give to the family of Christ their portion of meat. Let
each shepherd watch over his own flock, that no member of it lack the
grace of God; that when the shepherd of all shall come He may find them
worthy of eternal reward.

“With regard to the concourse and tumult which arose in the church of
St. Martin, or without in the atrium, I testify in the sight of Him that
knows the heart of each that it took place without any incitement or
foreknowledge or even wish of mine. And I confess that never was I in
greater trouble for other men’s offences than then. Nor, as far as I have
been able to understand or to hear, was any thing done by design of the
brethren. I have not even been able to learn that they wished it; and
there can be no doubt that no one who fears God and cares for his own
salvation, should—I will not say do such a thing but—even think of it.

“Did not the venerable man Teotbert, sent by your authority, spend
nineteen days among them for the purpose of this enquiry? Whom he would,
he flogged; whom he would, he put in chains; whom he would, he put on
oath; whom he pleased, he summoned to your presence.

“In vain have I so long time served my Lord Jesus Christ if His mercy
and providence have so forsaken me that I should fall into this impious
wickedness in the days of my old age....

“The true cause of this tumult, as far as I have been able to understand,
I am not ashamed to lay before your excellency, sparing no one, so that I
may produce testimony to the truth.

“It appears to me that in the doing of this impious deed no one has
offended more gravely than the guard of this wretch, from whose
negligence so many evils came. If I may say so to those who hear this
letter read, I think it would be more just that he by whose negligence
the accused man escaped from his bonds should suffer the same bonds, than
that the fugitive to the protection of Christ our God and of His saints,
should be sent back from the church into the same bonds. I will not put
this on my own opinion, I am supported by the word of God who bade[221]
the prophet say to the king of Israel who had let go out of his hand the
king of Syria, Thus saith the Lord, Because thou hast let go a man worthy
of death, thy life shall be for his life.

“In the second place, I take it that the men were the cause of the tumult
who came armed in larger number than was necessary from Orleans to Tours;
especially because the report ran through the populace that they had
come to carry off with violence a man who had fled to the protection of
the Church of Christ and St. Martin. For all men everywhere take it ill
that their holy ones are dishonoured. Perhaps, too, the miserable man had
called upon the rustics who came to his dwelling in their cups to defend
the church of St. Martin and not allow him to be snatched from it.

“There was a third cause of the tumult. Our holy father and pontiff
[Archbishop Joseph] inopportunely, the people being present, entered
the church along with the men who were supposed to have come to drag
away the man. He may have done this in the simplicity of his heart, not
imagining that any harm could come.[222] When the ignorant people, always
doing thoughtlessly inconvenient things, saw this, they cried out, they
took to their clubs; some energetic men ran out when they heard the bells
sound. They were rung by unskilled hands; your own judges ascertained
that, and our accusers themselves allowed that it was so, for in their
presence the holy Gospel was brought; there was laid upon it the wood
of the holy Cross; they made such of the brethren as they chose, swear
by that. When the brethren heard the bells, they rushed out of the
refectory to learn why they were being rung. As I am informed, they did
what they could to allay the tumult; only some youths, who were found and
sent to your presence, were the offenders in the concourse. From them
it can be learned what they did; they have sworn that they acted on the
prompting of no man, only on the impulse of their own folly. Not one of
the servants of St. Martin was there, except a man called Amalgarius, who
was with me at the moment. Him I sent at once with the other brethren
to appease the tumult, and to extricate the men of the venerable bishop
from the hands of the people, so that no harm should be done them. As
soon as the tumult was appeased, they were brought into the monastery,
where they were safe. These men were so burning with wrath against me
that they turned a kindness I had ordered to be done to them into evil,
saying that it was in insult that I had sent them some food.[223] This
was absolutely false. They did not know that I was imbued with the Lord’s
command, Do good unto them that hate you.

“Let your holy piety, most pious lord, consider these facts and recognize
the truth. Be favourable to thy servants in the love of God omnipotent
and in the honour of the holy Martin your intercessor, who always has
been honoured in the kingdom and by the kings of the Franks.

“We are wont to say in confessing our sins, If thou, Lord, wilt be
extreme to mark what is done amiss, O Lord, who may abide it? And to
thee we may say, forasmuch as we know thee to be a member of that same
Head, if thou wilt be extreme to mark what is done amiss, who, lord, may
abide it? Above all, because the special virtue, goodness, and praise
of emperors has always been their clemency towards their subjects; in
so much that the most noble emperor Titus said that no one should leave
the presence of the emperor sad. Rejoice the minds of thy servants by
the highest gift of thy mercy; let mercy rejoice against judgement. Men
who have been guilty of the greatest crimes of perfidy against your
authority you have been able to pardon with laudable piety; overlook
our infelicity, in accordance with the most pious nobility of your most
holy disposition, which I have always known to abound in a marvellous
degree in the mind of your wisdom. We read how David, the ancestor of
Christ, was praised in the greatness of his mercy and the justness of his
judgements. In like manner we know that your blessedness is, by the gift
of Christ, always worthy of all laudation and praise for these two great
merits.

“May the omnipotent God the Father, by His only Son our Lord Jesus
Christ, illumine, fill, and rejoice the heart of your blessedness with
all blessing and wisdom in the Spirit the Comforter, and deign to grant
to your most noble offspring, for the welfare of a Christian people,
perpetual prosperity, most dearly loved lord, best and most august father
of the fatherland.”

We know no more than this. There appears to be no possibility of carrying
the investigation further. Reading between the lines we seem to see signs
of ecclesiastical tension between the archbishop, seated at his cathedral
church of St. Gatian, and Abbat Alcuin of St. Martin’s. Until the time of
Alcuin’s penultimate predecessor, the abbat of St. Martin’s had been the
archbishop of Tours, and, as we have seen, there are curious references
to a claim of St. Martin’s to have bishops of its own. This may have
caused tension, beyond that which was not very improbable under the
ordinary conditions.

Theodulf of Orleans was an old friend of Alcuin, and an admirer. He gives
to Alcuin a large place in his description of the court of Charlemagne.
Theodulf was a laudatory poet, and his poem was very properly meant to
please those whom he described. Of the king himself he says—

    O face, face more shining than gold thrice refined,
      Happy he who always is with thee.
    The head illustrious, the chin, the neck so beautiful,
      The hands of gold, that banish poverty.
    The breast, the legs, the feet, all laudable,[224]
      All shining forth in beauty and in strength.

The latest wife of the king, Luitgard, has eight pretty lines devoted
to her, after an inauspicious opening address to “the fair virago,
Luitgard”. This dates the poem before 801, in which year Luitgard died at
Tours. The tower of St. Martin’s, now called the tower of Charlemagne,
was raised over her tomb.[225]

Alcuin was evidently a very prominent figure at court, keeping things
alive by his knowledge and wit and subtleties.

    And Flaccus too is there, the glory of our poets,
      Who pours forth many things in lyric foot.
    An able sophist, a poet, too, melodious,
      Able in mind and able in practice alike.
    He brings forth pious lessons from Holy Writ,
      And solves the puzzles of numbers with favouring jest.
    He puts an easy question now, and then a hard;
      Of this world now, then of the world above.
    The king alone, of many that fain would,
      Can solve the skilful puzzles Flaccus sets.

There was evidently no standing ill-feeling against the Abbat of St.
Martin’s on the part of the Bishop of Orleans.




CHAPTER XV

    Alcuin’s letters to Charlemagne’s sons.—Recension of the
    Bible.—The “Alcuin Bible” at the British Museum.—Other supposed
    “Alcuin Bibles”.—Anglo-Saxon Forms of Coronation used at the
    coronations of French kings.


There is in the Bibliothèque Nationale in Paris a letter headed
“In nomine Dei summi incipit scriptum Albini magistri ad Karolum
imperatorem”. It is, however, held to be uncertain whether the letter is
addressed to the emperor or to his son Charles, who died some three years
before his father. The internal evidence appears to be decidedly against
its having been addressed to the emperor. Alcuin could not have denied
himself the pleasure of referring to the emperor when he mentions king
David as the authority for his advice, and we have no letter of Alcuin to
the emperor so completely free from honorific titles and phrases, with
nothing but the simple _vos_ throughout. It is to be said on the other
hand that the author of the _Life of the blessed Alchuin the Abbat_, with
which we dealt fully in Chapters I and II, refers[226] to a _libellus_
which Alcuin wrote for Charlemagne, setting forth the psalms which he was
to use according as penitence, tribulation, or joy, was his theme.

The interest of the letter in question fortunately lies in its advice,
not in the person to whom the advice is given. This is the letter, with
its ordinary heading:—

[Sidenote: Ep. 244.]

“Alcuin dedicates to Charles the Emperor a breviary[227] of prayer to God.

“The blessed David, the great king and servant of God most high, gave us
the rule of singing, how man should pour forth prayers to God at certain
stated hours. ‘Seven times a day,’ he says, ‘do I praise Thee,’—that
is, at the first hour of the day, the second, third, sixth, ninth, the
evening hour, and the twelfth. David the king, then, gave praise to God
at these seven hours. The holy Daniel, the prophet, at the third, sixth,
and ninth hour of the day, went into his chamber to pray to the Lord,
and with hands stretched upward to Heaven entreated God for himself and
for the people of Israel. The same David said[228] further, ‘I will make
mention of Thy righteousness only.’ And again, ‘At midnight I will rise
to give thanks unto thee,’ that is, at the hour of night. And again he
says, ‘I have thought upon Thy name in the night season,’ that is, at
cock-crow. And, ‘Have I not remembered Thee in my bed, and thought upon
Thee when I was waking?’ Here are three courses of the office during the
night, and seven by day, making the ten courses which we sing, following
the number of the ten laws of Moses. But you have asked me to write to
you in a net form the order in which a layman in active life should pray
to God at the stated hours. You live after a Christian fashion, and you
desire to do Christian deeds; you are not ignorant how prayer should be
made to the Lord; but at your request I will briefly state my opinion.
When you have risen from your bed, say first ‘O Lord Jesu Christ, son
of the living God, in Thy name will I lift up my hands, make haste to
deliver me.’ Say this thrice, with the psalm ‘Ponder my words, O Lord,
consider my meditation. O hearken thou unto the voice of my calling, my
king and my God, for unto Thee will I make my prayer. My voice shalt thou
hear betimes, O Lord, early in the morning will I direct my prayer unto
Thee.’ Then, ‘Our Father,’ and the prayers, ‘Vouchsafe O Lord to keep us
this day,’ ‘Perfect my steps,’ ‘Praised be the Lord daily,’ ‘Direct and
sanctify,’ ‘O Lord let Thy mercy lighten upon us.’ Then, rising, begin
the verse ‘Thou shalt open my lips, O Lord’. When that is ended, with
the Gloria, begin the psalm ‘Lord how are they increased’. Then follows
‘God be merciful unto me’. Then ‘O come, let us sing unto the Lord’. Then
psalms, as many as you will.”

We have two letters of Alcuin which were certainly written to Charles
the king, the eldest son of Charlemagne. The first was written in 801 to
congratulate Charles on his anointment as king by Leo III on the same day
(Christmas Day, 800) that saw his father crowned as emperor.

[Sidenote: Ep. 162.]

“I have heard from the lord apostolic [Leo III] that with the consent of
the most excellent Lord David [Charlemagne] the title of king and the
crown of kingly dignity have been conferred upon you. I greatly rejoice
in the honour both of the title and of the power. I pray that your
dignity and nobleness may be for the safety of many peoples, nations,
and churches of Christ; may be glorious in the world and terrible to the
adversaries of the Christian religion; may be vigorous and strong through
a long season of prosperity; and with the blessing of God may always
follow after better things, ascend to higher, and grow even unto the
perfect day of eternal blessedness.

“Do justice, my best-loved son, and mercy, among Christian people, for it
is these, as Solomon testifies, that exalt the throne of a kingdom and
render the kingly power laudable and pleasing to God. Have as counsellors
men good, pious, prudent, and god-fearing; men in whom truth reigns, not
covetousness, for the gift blindeth the wise and perverteth the words
of the righteous.[229] Never allow the dishonesty of others to sully
the name of your dignity, nor permit others to do with wicked mind in
covetousness that which you would not yourself do; the fault of the
subject is often imputed to the ruler. Let not the impious will of some,
under the name of thy beatitude, fill their money-bags with the mammon of
unrighteousness.

“Good examples are not far to seek. In the home in which you were brought
up you have the best examples of all goodness. You may have perfect
confidence that you will by the gift of God attain to the blessing of
that most excellent and in all honour most noble father of thine, ruler
and emperor of a Christian people, if you strive to imitate the manner
of his nobility and piety and complete discretion; and will most fully
obtain the mercy of God, which is better than all the glory of the world.

“Wheresoever your way may lead, may the footsteps of piety ever follow
thee, that you may have praise of men and eternal reward with God.”

Alcuin must needs end a congratulatory letter to a royalty with hexameter
and pentameter:—

    Prosperous even for ever be thou great hope of the nations.
    Be to thee Christ as love, light, way, and safety, and life.

The next letter to King Charles was probably later. It seems to indicate
some anxiety on the part of Alcuin, and, indeed, Charles was not as fine
a character as his brother Louis, who is mentioned in this letter. Alcuin
would appear to have kept a copy of the former letter, and to have made a
good deal of it do service a second time.

[Sidenote: Ep. 245.]

“I rejoice, my dearest son, in the devotion of your good will which Osulf
your attendant has narrated to me, whether as regards the largeness of
your alms-giving, or as regards the gentleness of your rule. Know of a
surety that all this is greatly pleasing to God, and deserves at the hand
of His mercy perpetual blessing. Do thou, my son, my dearest son, always
to the utmost of your power work for the honour of God Almighty in all
goodness and piety; following the example of your most excellent father
in all honesty and sobriety, that the divine clemency of Christ the God
may grant to thee to possess his blessing by right of inheritance.

“Be a pious hearer of the wretched, and judge their cause with the
utmost justness. Do not permit the judges who are under you to judge for
presents and gifts; for gifts, it is said in Holy Scripture, blind the
hearts of the wise, and subvert the words of the just. Hold in honour the
servants of Christ, those who are true servants of God, for some come in
sheeps’ clothing but inwardly are ravening wolves. The Truth says, By
their fruits ye shall know them. Have as counsellors wise men, who fear
God; not flatterers, for a flatterer, as it is said, is a bland enemy
and often seduces those who consent unto him. Be prudent in thought and
cautious in speech; always setting your hope on God, for He never faileth
them whose hope is set on Him.

“Would that it were allowed me more frequently to address a letter of
advice to thy benignity, as the most noble youth Louis your brother has
asked me to do frequently for him. This I have done, and, if God will, I
shall continue to do; he reads my letters with great humility.

“My greatest joy is when I hear—as, indeed, it is right that I should
hear—of a good manner of life on your part. For this is the gift of
God, the prosperity of a kingdom, that the rulers of a Christian people
live most strict lives, and have their conversation among men in a way
pleasing to God. Thus a blessing from heaven is certain to come on the
nation and kingdom, which may God vouchsafe to grant eternally to your
nobility.

“May you flourish, grow, and be strong, advancing in all that is good and
prosperous, to the exaltation of His Holy Church, my dearest son.”

We have only one of Alcuin’s letters to King Pepin, who died young,
leaving a son Bernard who became king on his father’s death.

[Sidenote: Ep. 77.]

“To the most noble and beloved son Pippin Albinus sends greeting in the
love of Christ.

“We give thanks to thy benevolence and to the piety of the lord King
who has piously consented to our petition concerning the redemption of
captives. I know that in such works of piety you earn blessing and a long
and prosperous reign.

“And do thou, most excellent youth, study to adorn nobility of birth by
nobility of conduct. Strive with all thy power to fulfil the will and
the honour of the omnipotent God, that His ineffable piety may exalt the
throne of thy kingdom and extend its bounds, and subject the nations to
thy power. Be liberal to the wretched, good to foreigners, devout in the
service of Christ, treating honourably His servants and His churches that
their sedulous prayer may aid thee. Be clean in conversation, chaste in
body. Rejoice with the wife of thy youth and let not other women have
any part in thee, that the blessing granted unto thee may lead to a long
posterity of descendants.

“Be strong against adversaries, faithful to friends, humble to
Christians, terrible to pagans, affable to the wretched, provident in
council. Use the advice of the old men, the service of the young. Let
equity be the judgement in thy kingdom. Let the praise of God everywhere
resound at the fitting hours, and especially in the presence of thy
piety. This kind of devotion to the offices of the church will render
thee loveable to God and honoured among men. Let thoughts of sobriety be
in your heart, words of truth in your mouth, examples of honour in your
conduct, that the divine clemency may in all ways exalt and preserve thee.

“I pray you let this letter go with you as a testimony of my love. Though
it be not worthy to be hung at the girdle of thy veneration, yet let its
admonition be worthy to be stored in the mind of thy wisdom.”

We must now say something on the part which Alcuin played in connexion
with the revision of the manuscripts of the Bible.

Alcuin is credited with a revision of the whole of the Latin Bible,
both the Old Testament and the New. We have a letter of his in which
he states in precise terms that he had been commissioned by Karl to
correct the corrupted text. The letter is addressed to Gisla, Abbess of
Chelles, Karl’s sister, and Rotruda, Karl’s daughter, whom he addresses
as Columba, the Dove.

[Sidenote: Ep. 136. A.D. 800.]

“I have sent for the solace of your sanctity a small book, written in
short sections, that you may use it during these days[230] for your
holy devotion. In such study you best spend these most holy days, and
especially in the Gospel of the blessed John, wherein are the deeper
mysteries of divinity, and the most holy words of our Lord Jesus Christ
which He spoke on that night when He willed to be betrayed for the
salvation of the world.

“I might have sent you an exposition of the whole Gospel, if I had not
been occupied, by the command of the lord king, in the emendation of the
Old and the New Testament. But if life last and God help, I will, when
occasion serves, finish the task now begun, and dedicate the completed
work to your name.”

[Sidenote: Ep. 137.]

Gisla and Rotruda sent him a delightfully affectionate and bright letter
in reply. They liken Alcuin to Jerome sending the Scriptures from his
cave in Bethlehem to Rome; and in begging him to send the rest of the
commentary on St. John they remind him that the shallow Loire is crossed
with less danger than the Tuscan Sea, and that a messenger gets more
easily from Tours to Paris than from Bethlehem to Rome.

It is certain from the dedicatory verses of Alcuin’s which have been
preserved, that at least four complete copies of the whole Bible had been
corrected by him or under his direction, and sent to the emperor. Of
these, not one is known to be still in existence. Of one of them Alcuin
makes definite mention in the following letter:—

[Sidenote: Ep. 205. A.D. 801-3.]

“To the most desired and entirely loveable David the king Albinus wishes
present prosperity and eternal beatitude in Christ.

“I have long deliberated upon the question what could the devotion of
my mind think of as worthy to be given towards the splendour of your
imperial power and the increase of your most rich treasury. I feared lest
the poor intelligence of my mind should remain torpid in empty idleness,
while others were offering various rich gifts, and the messenger of my
littleness should come before the presence of your beatitude with empty
hands. I have at length, by the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, found
something which it is fitting that I should send and it may be agreeable
to your prudence to receive.

“In the most sacred solicitude of your piety it is clear beyond doubt
what the Holy Spirit works through you for the safety of the whole
Church, and how earnestly all faithful people should pray that your
empire be extended to full glory, and be loved at home by all God’s
people, and terrible abroad to all the enemies of His Son. To my
questioning and desiring mind, nothing seemed more worthy of your most
peace-giving honour than a present of the divine books, which by the
dictation of the Holy Spirit and the ministration of Christ God have been
written by the pen of divine grace for the salvation of the whole race of
man. These, brought together into the sanctity of one most clear body,
and diligently emended, I have sent to your most lofty authority by this
dearest son of ours and faithful servant of yours, that with full hands
he may with most joyous service stand before your dignity. He has been
ill for a long time, but now that by God’s mercy he has to some extent
recovered, he has with the greatest satisfaction hastened to approach
your piety.

“The small gifts of my tears I send by faithful promise in prayer to
St. Martin for the ardently desired prosperity of your authority. Let
my messenger serve the most pious lord as is fitting; I will pray for
the most loved lord as the visitation of the Holy Spirit shall deign to
illumine my heart. If the devotion of my mind could have found anything
better, I would with ready will offer it towards the increase of your
honour.”

The messenger was Nathanael, that is, Fredegisus. We learn this from
Letter 206, which commences “Albinus greets Nathanael”, and after
addressing him as though he were the real Nathanael who was seen under
the fig-tree by Jesus, proceeds thus:—

[Sidenote: Ep. 206.]

“Salute Lucia my sister and Columba our daughter.[231] Pray them to
be mindful of my old age in sacred prayers and of their own salvation
in good works. And hide not from them the beauty of your wisdom, but
irrigate the flower-beds of good will in them. What is more beautiful
than the flowers of wisdom, which never fade? What is richer than the
wealth of knowledge, which is never exhausted? To this exhort them. Let
them live day and night in meditation on the law of God, that they may
find Him of whom Moses in the law wrote, and the prophets. Bid them hold
Him and not let Him go till they are led into the chambers of the Kings
glory to be supported by flowers of eternal blessedness, the Bridegroom’s
left hand of present prosperity under their head, and the right hand of
eternal bliss embracing them.[232]

“Convey the letter of my littleness, with the most holy gift of divine
Scripture and peaceful words of salutation, to my lord David. To him we
owe as many thanks and praises for all his goodness to me and to my sons
as this Book has syllables; to him may God give as many blessings as in
this Book there are letters.”

The natural supposition is that Alcuin brought—or had sent—from York
accurate copies of the Scriptures, from which he corrected the faulty
manuscripts of France and Germany, to use modern names. Errors were
due, probably, at least as much to mispronunciation on the part of the
person who dictated to the writers, or to mis-hearing on their part, as
to carelessness in transcribing. We have to remember that the practice
was for one monk to read out word by word the sentence which the writers
in the scriptorium were to take down, so that in this way twenty or
thirty—it is said as many as two hundred—copies of a poem or a book could
be written at the same time. This practice gave many opportunities for
error.

We have at the British Museum a magnificent Bible, one of the largest
manuscripts in existence, called Alcuin’s Bible. It contains 449 sheets
of very fine parchment, 20 by 14½ inches. It was purchased for the
Museum in 1836 for £750, the price asked at first being £12,000, reduced
to £6,500 as “an immense sacrifice”. The story of its acquisition, and
the question of its date and its connexion with Alcuin, were stated and
discussed by Sir F. Madden in the _Gentleman’s Magazine_ for 1836, pages
358 to 363, 468 to 477, 580 to 587. That able archaeologist believed it
to be of Alcuin’s own time, and, indeed, to be the very copy which Alcuin
presented to Charlemagne in 801, on the completion of the recension which
Karl had entrusted to him. The evidence in favour of this view is found
on the last page of the MS., in some elegiac verses composed by Alcuin.
The verses begin with an appeal from the book itself to its readers that
it may be called a Pandect, and not a Bibliotheca,[233] and after eight
more verses, in which it is called a Codex, they end as follows:—

    Mercedes habeat, Christo donante, per aevum
      Is Carolus qui iam scribere iussit eum.
    Haec dator aeternus cunctorum, Christe, bonorum
      Munera de donis accipe sancta tuis,
    Quae Pater Albinus, devoto pectore supplex,
      Nominis ad laudes obtulit ecce tui;
    Quem tua perpetuis conservet dextra diebus,
      Ut felix tecum vivat in arce poli.
    Pro me quisque legas versus orare memento,
      Alchuine dicor ego. Tu sine fine vale.

“May Charles, who bade this book be written, receive eternal rewards. May
the giver of all good accept this offering of His own gifts, which Father
Albinus has made, whom may Thy hand preserve to live with Thee. Thou
who readest these verses, remember to pray for me; my name is Alchuine;
mayest thou for ever fare well.”

That these verses were written in the great Pandect of Alcuin’s
recension, which Alcuin presented to Charlemagne, we may take to be
certain. But we may also take it as certain that they would be written
also in copies made from that special Pandect; and it has been decided
by the most competent modern critics that the Bible in the Museum was not
written till a generation had passed away after Alcuin’s death.

That the verses were entered in other copies also is certain. The Fathers
of the Oratory della Vallicella at Rome had a copy of this recension,
which was believed to be written by Alcuin’s own hand and presented to
Charlemagne. In it there is a long copy of verses, including those in
the Museum Bible, but with curious alterations and additions, which make
it probable that the Vallicella Bible was written for Charlemagne’s
grandson, Charles le Chauve. _Quae Pater Albinus devoto pectore supplex_
is altered into _Quae tibi devoto Carolus rex pectore supplex_, and
verses are added, stating that the Bible was written for a new church
which Charles had just built. The alteration cuts out the personal note
of Alcuin, and the addition cuts out Charlemagne and points to another
Charles. This is far from being the only case in which confusion is
caused by the fact that Charlemagne was himself for many years Charles
the king; that his oldest son was Charles the king; that his grandson was
Charles the king; as also two great grandsons, a great great grandson,
and even two generations further still.

Others besides Alcuin and the royal family were interested in the various
versions of Scripture. For example, his contemporary Theodulf, the
learned bishop of Orleans, sent to his own daughter Gisla a psalter,
radiant with silver and gold, with both the earlier and the later
versions of Jerome.

Our use of the word _Graduale_ for the book containing the words and
the music sung by the choir at the service of the Mass is an evidence
of the large part played by the Gallican Church in the arrangement and
improvement of the early mediaeval service books. Rome spoke of the
Antiphonale Missarum and Antiphonale Horarum, while Gaul spoke of the
Graduale for Mass Music and Antiphonale for the Music of the Hours. Under
Alcuin’s guiding hand, the influence of Charlemagne and his times upon
the services was wide and deep. In the document described as Ep. 31, A.D.
794, Karl has a good deal to say about the success of his own efforts to
put down irregular methods of singing the services, and to bring all into
general accord with the Roman method.[234] Alcuin’s work re-acted upon
the Roman use itself, and is understood to have been the operating cause
of the mark left upon it.

[Sidenote: Ep. 72. A.D. 796.]

Alcuin had strong opinions as to the best manner of singing the services.
In a letter to Eanbald II, he writes thus, for the benefit of the Church
of York:—“Let the clergy chant with moderated voice, striving to please
God rather than men. An immoderate exaltation of voice is a sign of
boastfulness. And let them not be above learning the Roman Orders of
Service, that they may have eternal benediction from the blessed Peter,
chief of the Apostles, whom Our Lord Jesus Christ made the head of His
elect flock.”

Alcuin was versed in secular music also. We learn from Ep. 100 that Karl
had asked him to write peaceful and soothing songs, both words and
music, for soldiers to sing when engaged in the horrors of war, and that
he complied with the request.

We have some very interesting evidences of the borrowing of Anglo-Saxon
manuscripts for use in France, and of the influence of Anglo-Saxon forms
on French services. There are two Anglo-Saxon forms for the coronation
of a king. One of these is found in the Pontifical of Ecgbert, the
Bishop and later the Archbishop of York, to which a date of about 745
may be given. It is merely the supplement to the Mass on the occasion
of a coronation, and accordingly it does not give the details of the
ceremony. The other is a later form, and it gives at length the details
of the ceremony, one of the longest prayers describing the king as raised
to the royal throne of the Angles and Saxons. But, curiously enough,
we learn the most interesting parts of the ceremony of crowning an
Anglo-Saxon king, not from this manuscript, but from three manuscripts
of the form for the coronation of a king of the French. The first of
these to be mentioned is a manuscript form of an Abbat of Corbie. In it
we find the prayer for “This thy servant whom with suppliant devotion we
elect equally to the kingdom of the whole of Albion, that is to say, of
the Franks ... That he may nourish and teach the Church of the whole of
Albion, with the peoples committed to his charge”. Here it would appear
that a marginal note had been added to the Anglo-Saxon form at the first
mention of “Albion”, “that is to say, of the Franks,” and has afterwards
been incorporated in one place and not in the other. The “elect equally”
indicates that the form was used for an Anglo-Saxon king who claimed to
be king of the whole land, while yet the old division into three main
nations was fresh in mind.[235] It is a further evidence in favour of
this being an Anglo-Saxon form, that the only saint mentioned besides the
Blessed Virgin and St. Peter is “Holy Gregory, Apostolic of the Angles”.
In the preparation of the Sens Order, to be mentioned later, this flaw
had been discovered, and St. Denys and St. Remy put in the place of St.
Gregory.

In a manuscript in the National Library of Paris, we have a second Order
for the Coronation of a King of the Franks, which is indubitably an
Anglo-Saxon Order. The following phrases occur: “This thy servant whom
with suppliant devotion we elect equally ... That the sceptre desert
not the royal throne, that is to say, of the Saxons, Mercians, and
Northumbrians (Nordanchimbrorum) ... That supported by the due subjection
of both of these peoples...”

In a third Order for the Coronation of French Kings, from the Pontifical
of the illustrious Church of Sens, we find the prayer “that the sceptre
desert not the royal throne, that is to say, of the Saxons, Mercians, and
Northumbrians (Nordan Cymbrorum)”, and “that the king, supported by the
due subjection of both these peoples....”

It may be added that the French Benedictional of Archbishop Robert, now
at Rouen, has the form “Angles and Saxons”. So late as 1364 Charles V
of France was crowned with a form which named the throne as that of the
Saxons, Mercians, and Northchimbrians; while at the same time the peers
of Guienne swore to protect him against the king of England, his people,
and allies.[236]




CHAPTER XVI

    Examples of Alcuin’s style in his letters, allusive,
    jocose, playful.—The perils of the Alps.—The vision of
    Drithelme.—Letters to Arno.—Bacchus and Cupid.


A letter written by Alcuin in September, 799, may be taken as an extreme
example of his allusive style. A good deal of interpretation is needed
before the letter can be understood; it is a collection of riddles.

[Sidenote: Ep. 121. A.D. 799.]

The opening sentence runs thus: “The first letter to the first, and the
fifteenth to the sixth. The number consecrated in steps to the number
perfect in the works of God.”

The first letter is A, and thus the first words mean A(lcuin) to
A(dalhard), Abbat of Corbie, or Arno, Archbishop of Salzburg; but
inasmuch as A is described in the letter as _gallus monasticus_, and Arno
was Aquila, we must understand that the Abbat of Corbie is meant. No
other known A satisfies the conditions. The fifteenth letter is P, the
sixth is F, and therefore we have P(ater) F(ilio), the father to the son.
The Psalms of Degrees are fifteen, the day of completion of the works of
God in creation was the sixth, and therefore the concluding words are
only a repetition of “father to son”.

“Why does that brother come with empty hands? In his tongue he brought a
_Hail!_ to my ears; in his hands he brought nothing to my eyes. Thou who
art seated at a dividing of the ways [Corbie], why hast thou demanded
nothing certain of him who dwelleth in Maresa? The crows fly about the
roofs of the houses and cry out; and the dove, nourished on the pavements
of the church, is silent. I should have trusted that dove had he said
anything about the eagle [Leo III] which lately deserted the roofs of the
citadel of Rome to drink at the fountains of the Saxon land [the Pope had
come to Paderborn] to see the lion [Karl]; or if our blackbird, flying
between them, had demanded of the monastic cock [Adalhard] who rouses the
brethren to their matin watch, that by means of him the sparrow [Alcuin]
sitting alone upon the house top might know what is the convention
between the lion and the eagle; and if the youth of the eagle, as the
psalmist prophesies, is renewed[237] to pristine gladness; and if new
dwellings grow up in the marshes of perfidy that were cleansed[238]; and
if the lion, in pursuit of the ibex, meditates crossing the heights of
the Alps.

“The sparrow hath his ears open. But I see that the proverbial wolf [this
is said to mean the devil] in the fable[239] has taken away the cock’s
voice; lest it happen that if he crowed, the apostolic denial[240]
should be renewed in the city of his former power, and the last error be
worse than the first.

“Why has love sinned, which has not seen _Vale_ [fare thee well] written,
while I hear that the partridges [messengers], running across the fields,
have come to the dwelling [Corbie] of the cock. Perfect love driveth away
fear. Perfect love with the sparkling pupils of the eyes sees everything,
and with the clear intuition of piety will always find a fixed rule of
wholesome counsel. It would seem that the cock is turned into a cuckoo,
which is silent when the sun ascends into the summer constellation of the
crab, while the nest-making sparrow at every season alike twitters on the
smoky roofs.[241]

“That sparrow now in this September month flies to revisit his beloved
nest[242], that he may feed his young[243], gaping with hungry beaks,
with little grains of piety: desiring that some time on the banks of this
river Loire, rich in fish, he may hear the voice of the cock sounding
forth the _Vale_, and that he who with flapping of his wings rouses
himself to matutinal melodies may come and exhort the sparrow in the
midst of his young.”

At this point the letter changes its character, and we need not follow it
further.

[Sidenote: Ep. 16. A.D. 790.]

Thus Alcuin could write a jocose letter, even quoting Scripture in that
vein. Let us see another. He was detained in Britain at the end of the
year 790 by an unexpected event, of which mention has already more than
once been made. Ethelred, the king of Northumbria, had been deposed and
kept in prison till the end of 790. Alcuin wrote to his pupil Joseph, in
Gaul, to tell him that Ethelred had passed from prison to throne, from
misery to majesty; and things were so unsettled that he did not like to
leave for France. He was evidently not well supplied with money, food,
or clothing. He begged Joseph to send him what was necessary for the
sea voyage; also five pounds weight of silver which he had sent to his
charge, and another five from his possessions in France; three garments,
of goat-skin and of wool for the use of his attendants, lay and clerical,
and of linen for his own use; also black and red cloaks of goat skin,
if he could find such, and many pigments of sulphur and colours for
pictures. Then he turns to the question of meat and drink. Quoting 2
Kings iv. 40, he exclaims, “‘O, thou man of God, there is death in the
pot’, for [again quoting, from 1 Sam. ix. 7, and putting wine in place of
bread] the wine ‘is spent in our vessels’: and [he adds] the acid beer of
these parts makes havoc in our stomachs.”

Here is another example of his playfulness and lightness of touch.

[Sidenote: Ep. 9. A.D. 783-6.]

“To the most illustrious man Flavius Damoeta Albinus sends abundant
greeting of perpetual peace.”

[Sidenote: Ep. 12.]

[Sidenote: Ep. 101.]

This was Riculfus, Archbishop of Mainz, whom in another letter he
addresses as the great fisherman, probably because of piscatorial rights
which he naturally had as a riparian proprietor. Alcuin himself—we may
note—was a fisherman. He writes to Arno in 798, from Tours, that he does
not know in which of two places he will be the next month, but whichever
it was it would find him fishing. “I know not whether I shall play the
diver on the banks of the Meuse and catch fish, or float on the waters
of the Loire and catch salmon.” There are salmon now both in the Meuse
and in the Loire; but the phrases in Alcuin’s letter seem to point to
bottom-fishing on the Meuse and surface-fishing on the Loire. Alcuin
learned to fish on the Ouse at York, of which he writes, as we have seen
above[244], “Hanc piscosa suis undis interluit Usa.” We must return to
Letter 9.

“I greatly rejoice in your welfare, and am much delighted with your
loving present, sending you as many thanks as I have counted teeth in
your gift. It is a wonderful animal, with two heads, and with sixty
teeth, not of elephantine size but of the beauty of ivory. I am not
terrified by the horror of this beast, but delighted by its appearance; I
have no fear of its biting me with gnashing teeth. I am pleased with its
fawning caresses, which smooth the hair of my head. I see not ferocity in
its teeth; I see only the love of the sender.”

[Sidenote: Carmen ccxix, ed. Quercet.]

Alcuin afterwards made this ivory comb the subject of a poetic riddle:—

    A beast has sudden come to this my house,
    A beast of wonder, who two heads has got,
    And yet the beast has only one jaw-bone.
    Twice three times ten of horrid teeth it has.
    Its food grows always on this body of mine,
    Not flesh, not fruit. It eats not with its teeth,
    Drinks not. Its open mouth shows no decay.
    Tell me, Damoeta dear, what beast is this?

We can imagine the beauty of this ivory comb, with one row of sixty
teeth,[245] the solid piece at the top being ornamented with a lion’s
head at each end looking outwards. A hundred years later, the comb, if
made in Northumbria, might have had a ridged top, with two bears’ heads,
the muzzles looking inwards. It was, no doubt, this beautiful comb that
played a large part in the miracles wrought by Alcuin after his death, as
described at page 49.

Considering the frequent passings to and fro across the Alps in Alcuin’s
time by Karl, and, indeed, by Alcuin himself, and the coming and going
between Salzburg, Arno’s see, and Gaul, we should have expected more
reference to the hardships of the way than we find in the letters of
Alcuin.

In writing to Remedius or Remigius, the Bishop of Chur, or Coire, a place
very well known now, he makes no reference to any difficulty in reaching
the city. It was, as we know, a place of considerable importance, and it
possesses to this day some very interesting Carolingian charters. The
only local allusion which Alcuin makes in his various letters to Remedius
informs us of the heavy tolls charged by those who held the passes, a
matter about which our King Canute spoke so strongly to the Pope.

[Sidenote: Ep. 213.]

“By this letter I commend to your fatherly protection this merchant of
ours, who is conveying merchandise to Italy. Let him have safe passage
over the roads of your land in going and in returning. And in the defiles
of the mountains let him not be troubled by your officers of custom, but
by the freedom of your charity let him have free passage.”

The inconsiderable references which we do find to the difficulties of the
way come chiefly in the addresses of his letters. Thus he addresses a
letter to Arno, Archbishop of Salzburg, in these words:—

[Sidenote: Ep. 91.]

“To the eagle that flies across the Alps; goes swiftly over the plains;
stalks through the cities; a humble inhabitant of the earth sends
greeting.”

[Sidenote: Ep. 129.]

“To Paulinus, Patriarch of Aquileia.

“Four friends send greeting across the waters of the Alps in a ship laden
with love.”

[Sidenote: Ep. 200.]

“To Peter, Archbishop of Milan.

“O that I had the wings of an eagle, that I might fly across the heights
of the Alps swifter than the winds.”

In his _Life of Willibrord_,[246] cap. xxxii, he says:—

“The Alps of St. Maurice are exalted more felicitously by the blood of
the Theban saints than by the height of their snows.”

[Sidenote: Ep. 151.]

To Arno.

“To my father, of most sweet love, the eagle prelate, a swan from across
the sea sends wishes for perpetual health with the pen-feathers of holy
affection.”

[Sidenote: Ep. 134.]

To Arno.

“To the eagle, of all the birds of the Alpine heights most dear, Albinus
sends greeting.”

[Sidenote: Ep. 126.]

To Arno.

“A love which neither the cold of the Alps nor the heat of Italy can
overthrow.”

[Sidenote: Ep. 101.]

To Arno.

“I long to hear when the eagle, flying high, transcends the summits of
the Alps, and, wearied with flight, composes its wings in the parts of
Rhetia.”

It will have been noticed that most of these are addressed to the Tyrol.
It may be remarked that there are traditions of the presence of Karl in
the far east of the Alps, especially in a valley about twenty miles due
west of the city of Trent. Mr. D. W. Freshfield has printed[247] the long
Latin inscription which gives an explanation of frescoes in the Church of
San Stefano in Val Rendena, showing Karl and a Pope baptizing heathen.
The inscription credits the district with having been full, in Karl’s
time, of castles held by pagan lords or by Jews, who were converted or
slain.

We have an interesting evidence of the sufferings endured in crossing the
Alps in the later Anglo-Saxon times. It is well known that persons who
granted charters of lands, under conditions, invoked desperate penalties
on the heads of any who should attempt to alienate the lands or trifle
with the conditions. In the reigns of Athelstane and Eadmund, under
dates ranging from A.D. 938 to 946, a West Saxon scribe produced and
employed frequently a new form and idea of curse. He made the royal and
archiepiscopal signatories indulge in the pious and fervent wish that any
one who endeavoured to violate the gift set forth in the charter might
suffer from the cold blasts of the ice-fields and the pennine host of
malignant spirits[248].

William of Malmesbury relates[249] the death of an Archbishop of
Canterbury from cold in the passage of the Alps. When Odo died in 959,
Aelfsin, the Bishop of Winchester, bought the archbishopric and behaved
with mad violence. He stamped on the grave of Odo, addressing him as
“worst of old men”, taunting him that he had got his desire (which Odo
had always opposed), namely, the succession to the archbishopric. That
night the departed Odo appeared to him in a dream and warned him of a
speedy end. Aelfsin disregarded the warning, and set off to Rome for the
pallium. On the way across the Alps he was overcome with cold. His feet
were frost-bitten, and there was no remedy but to put them into the warm
carcasses of disembowelled horses, these feet with which he had done
violence to the grave of Odo. Even so he could not get warm, and he was
frozen to death. His death made way for Dunstan, and he is not reckoned
among the archbishops.

The misery of extreme cold was a familiar fact to the Northumbrians
after the experiences of Benedict Biscop and others in crossing the Alps.
It is brought out in a very graphic way in the description which Bede
gives of the trance of one Drithelme[250], who had appeared to be dead
for six hours. Among other remarkable visions of the other world, he came
in his trance to a valley, on one side of which was piercing cold, and on
the other unquenchable fire. The unhappy souls, tortured in the biting
cold, leaped madly across for warmth into the flames. Then, scorched in
the fearful heat, they sprang back again for coolness into the torturing
cold. In that continual alternation of tortures their time was spent.
Drithelme was wont ever after, in beating down his animal passions, to
stand up to his neck in the river, even in winter with broken masses of
ice dashing against him. And when one called to him from the bank, “I
wonder, brother Drithelme, that you endure such cold,” he would reply,
“I, at least, have seen worse cold than this.”

Here is a peep behind the scenes in connexion with the morals of a Pope,
and an example of wisdom in burning letters that ought not to see the
light. Alcuin is writing to Arno.

[Sidenote: Ep. 127. A.D. 799.]

“You were the third cause of my [proposed] journey. The first was that
of the churches of Christ. The second was that of the lord king, because
mourning in tears I left him; my desire being to inscribe on my soul a
perpetual memory of the joy of his presence. The third was the longing
to see the most sweet face of your dearness. But I am prevented from
accomplishing that which I have strongly wished to accomplish. It will
come to pass through your holy prayers, if it do but please Him without
whom nothing good can be done.

“Your former letter[251], which reached us under your name, contained
some complaints about the manner of life of the apostolic[252] and about
the danger you were in when with him by reason of the Romans. Your clerk
Baldric, as I suppose, brought it, bringing also a cope stitched together
in the Roman fashion, a vestment of linen and wool. As I did not wish
that your letter should fall into other hands, Candidus alone read it
with me; and then I put it in the fire, lest any scandal should arise
through carelessness on the part of the keeper of my papers....

“I would gladly write more, but the runner has your orders to get back
quickly.”

Nothing could exceed the affectionateness of Alcuin’s letters to Arno,
the Archbishop of Salzburg, to whose care in preserving the letters
addressed to him we owe so much. Arno’s name recalled to Alcuin’s mind
the early days when he saw hovering in the Yorkshire skies the great
eagles that gave their Anglian name of _earn_ (_arn_) to Arncliffe and
other places. He always thought of him as the Arn, addressed him as the
Aquila, the eagle.

[Sidenote: Ep. 108. A.D. 798.]

“To the Eagle, most noble of birds, the Goose, with strident voice, sends
greeting.

“When I heard of you as winging your way from transalpine hills to your
nest of sweetest quiet, a great repose shone suddenly forth upon my mind
anxious on your account. My mind flew back, as from crashing storms, to
a haven of placid peace. For love is wont to be joyful in prosperity
and oppressed in adversity. Thus it is that the voice of the bride,
bewailing the absence of the longed-for spouse, cries ‘I am wounded with
love’.[253] For both are true: your love wounds, and it heals. One part
of the wound inflicted by love remains an open sore, your longed-for
face has not yet beamed upon the eyes of your lover. The anxiety of not
knowing that you were well has been removed from my mind, but the hunger
of the eyes is not yet appeased by the sight of your countenance. This
Sorrow we trust may very soon be taken away, by the ministry of that
grace which has deigned to remove the anxiety of mind by the arrival of
your letters; and then he who desires both health and vision will be full
of joy in the arrival of yourself.

“You have written to me of the religious life and justness of the lord
apostolic[254], what great and unjust trials he suffers at the hands
of the children of discord. I confess that I glow with great joy that
the father of the churches sets himself about the service of God with
pious and faithful mind, without guile. No wonder that justice suffers
persecution in his person at the hands of evil men, when in our Chief,
the fount of all goodness and justice, the God Christ, justice suffered
persecution even unto death.”

After referring sympathetically to Arno’s complaints that his life has
been a very unquiet one of late, by reason of much travelling, Alcuin
continues:—

“There is one journey upon which I wish that you would enter. Would that
I could see you praying in the venerable temple of blessed Martin our
protector, that thy supplication and ours might restore my strength, that
by Christ’s mercy the pious consolation of love might advance us both
on the way of perpetual beatitude. How this may come about, let your
providence consider. If the opportunity of the present year does not
grant to us our will, by reason of the hindrance of affairs, may we meet
in quiet times and at a quiet season, after Easter of next year, at St.
Amand[255]. The frequent infirmity of my poor little body would make a
long journey very fatiguing to me in the storms of winter.”

Arno could himself write a genial and affectionate letter. One of his
letters to the Cuckoo[256] has been preserved:—

[Sidenote: Ep. 287.]

“_Kartula dic: Cuculus valeat per saecula nostra._ To the very dear bird
the Cuckoo the Eagle sends greeting.

“Be mindful of thyself and of me. Do what I have enjoined, accomplish
what you have promised. Be gentle and true to our father [Alcuin],
obedient and devoted to God. Love Him who has raised thee from the mire
and set thee to stand before princes. Stand like a man against your
adversary; go higher, never lower; advance, never fall back....

“I have dipped my pen in love to write this letter. Rise, rise, most
pleasing bird. The winter is passing away; the rains have gone; the
flowers are showing on the earth; the time of song has come. Let your
friends—that is, the angelic dignities—hear your voice. Your voice is
sweet to them, may your appearance be fair in the eyes of the Lord thy
God, who desires your presence.”

The Cuckoo’s enemy, against whom he was to fight manfully, was drink.
He was evidently a very sweet and sympathetic singer at the frequent
feasts,[257] and was not sufficiently careful in respect of strong drink.
Alcuin’s Carmen 277 mourns in forty-eight lines the absence of the
Cuckoo, gone they did not know where. Some of the lines are significant:
“Ah me! if Bacchus has sunk him in that pestiferous vortex!” And again:
“Alas! that impious Bacchus, I suppose, is entertaining him, Bacchus who
desires to subvert all hearts. Weep for the Cuckoo, weep all for the
Cuckoo. He left us in triumph, in tears he will return. Would that we had
the Cuckoo, even in tears; for then with the Cuckoo we could weep.”

Though himself a judge of wine, with a decided preference for good and
ripe wine, Alcuin was a determined advocate for strict temperance.
Total abstinence was not his idea of temperance. Of another temptation
of the physical senses he says surprisingly little; indeed, he hardly
ever refers to it. In Carmen 260, _To his brothers of York_, a poem
with a charming description of spring in its opening verses, he gives
to the younger brethren a very direct warning on both of these physical
temptations[258]:—

“Let not the tipsy Bacchus cast his fetters upon you, nor, noxious, wipe
out the lessons engraved on your minds. Nor let that wicked Cretan boy,
armed with piercing darts, drive you from the citadel of safety.”

The conversion of Arno into Aquila was very natural to a Yorkshireman.
In several cases we can only guess at the Teutonic names which Alcuin
translated into Latin; for example, Gallicellulus (Ep. 260). In two
cases, at least, he translates into Greek. Cambridge men who remember
with much affection their private tutor in Mathematics, William Walton,
will remember his skill in thus rendering names; his Prosgennades still
survives, known to the world as Atkinson. With Alcuin, Hechstan becomes
Altapetra. The abbess Adaula evidently had a Teutonic name. Anthropos was
his friend Monna. Stratocles had some such name as Heribercht. Epistle
282 is addressed, very near the end of his life, “to my best-loved
friends in Christ, brother and son, Anthropos and Stratocles, the humble
levite Alchuine sends greeting.” Epistle 283, of the same late date,
is addressed “to my dearest son Altapetra, the levite Albinus sends
greeting”. In the course of this letter to Hechstan, Alcuin sends
greetings and requests for prayers to two friends whose names would not
fall very easily into Latin, Scaest and Baegnod, the latter a common
Anglo-Saxon name, usually in the form Beagnoth, with the final _d_
aspirated. It occurs in runes on a knife in the British Museum, and is
found in Kent and Wessex.




CHAPTER XVII

    Grammatical questions submitted to Alcuin by Karl.—Alcuin and
    Eginhart.—Eginhart’s description of Charlemagne.—Alcuin’s
    interest in missions.—The premature exaction of
    tithes.—Charlemagne’s elephant Abulabaz.—Figures of
    elephants in silk stuffs.—Earliest examples of French and
    German.—Boniface’s _Abrenuntiatio Diaboli_.—Early Saxon.—The
    earliest examples of Anglo-Saxon prose and verse.


In many of Alcuin’s letters we find answers or allusions to questions
addressed to him by Karl. In Epistle 253 Alcuin writes twelve paragraphs
to the emperor in answer to twelve questions. In Epistle 252 he writes
to Homer (Angilbert), who has been commanded by the emperor to consult
him on the gender of the word _rubus_ and on the difference in meaning
of _despicere_ and _dispicere_. In regard to _rubus_, he sums up a long
list of authorities on both sides by the correct remark that a bramble
must not be counted as a tree, and therefore _rubus_ follows the ordinary
rule of words ending in _us_ and is masculine. On the difference between
_despicere_ and _dispicere_ he has much to write, and in the course of
his letter he makes free use of quotations from the Greek. From Epistle
254 we find that Charlemagne had inquired, through Candidus, as to
the distinction between _aeternum_ and _sempiternum_; _perpetuum_ and
_inmortale_; _saeculum_, _aevum_, and _tempus_. In Epistle 240, a very
long letter, he writes to the emperor in reply to his inquiry as to the
force of a question put by the Greek master—an Athenian sophist—about the
price of human salvation.

Considering the large part which the annalist Eginhart played in the
administrative work of Charlemagne’s reign, as secretary to the king
and emperor, it is remarkable that we find only one reference to him in
Alcuin’s letters. This one reference is affectionate in tone, and gives
no reason at all for supposing that Alcuin was jealous of the quick and
skilful secretary. The reference occurs in Ep. 112, A.D. 799, a letter
addressed to Karl by Alcuin. The letter itself is of so interesting a
character that the opportunity of giving it in its entirety should not be
lost. From its contents we gather that Alcuin had sent to Karl a treatise
which he had hastily dictated and had not read over and corrected. Karl
had noted errors in the writing and punctuation, and had sent it back to
be corrected, a charming piece of discipline which raises Karl higher
than ever in our appreciative regard.

[Sidenote: Ep. 112. A.D. 799.]

“To the most pious and excellent lord king David, Flaccus wounded[259]
with the pen of love sends greeting.

“We give thanks to your venerable piety that you have caused to be read
to the ears of your wisdom the booklet sent to you in accordance with the
injunction of your command; and that you have had errors in it noted, and
have sent it back for correction. It would, however, have been better
corrected by yourself, because in any work the judgement of another is
most frequently of more value than that of the actual author.

“You have done somewhat less than the full office of love demanded, in
that you have not in like manner noted opinions not learnedly set forth
or catholically worked out. I have a suspicion that your letter indicates
that not all which is written in my booklet has your approval. For you
have directed a defence of the work to be sent to your excellency,
whereas my poor words could have no defender or emender better than
yourself. The authority of him who commands should defend the work of him
who obeys.

“That the booklet does not run so scholarly in letter and punctuation as
the order and rule of the art of grammar demands is no unusual effect of
rapidity of thought, while the mind of the reader forestalls the action
of the eyes. Wearied with a bad headache I cannot examine the words which
flow by a sudden rush from my mouth as I dictate; and one who is not
willing to impute to himself the negligence of another should not impute
negligence to another.

“The account of the disputation of Felix with a Saracen I have not seen,
nor can we find it here; indeed I never heard of it before. But in the
course of very diligent inquiry whether any of our people have heard of
its existence, I have been told that it might be found with Laidrad the
Bishop of Lyon. I have at once sent a messenger to the said bishop in
order that if it can be found there it may be sent as quickly as possible
to your presence.

“When I went as a young man to Rome, and spent some days in the royal
city of Pavia, a certain Jew, Lullus by name, had a disputation with
Master Peter, and I heard in the same city that there was a written
record of the controversy. This was the same Peter who with such
clearness taught grammar in your palace[260]. Perhaps our Homer[261] has
heard something about it from him.

“I have sent to your excellency some modes of expression, supported by
examples or verses from venerable fathers, and also some figures of
arithmetical subtlety for your amusement, on the blank part of the paper
which you have sent to us; in order that what offered itself to our eye
naked may come back to you clothed. It seemed right that paper which
came to us ennobled by your seal should receive honour from our letters.
And if any of the said forms of expression are inadequately supported by
examples, Beselel[262] your familiar—yea and ours too—will be able to add
others. He can also make out the arithmetical puzzles.

“The major and minor distinctions of punctuation add greatly to the
beauty of sentences; but the use of them has been almost lost by the
rusticity of our scribes. Now that the beauty of all wisdom and the
ornament of salutary learning is beginning to be renewed by the exertions
of your nobility, so there is good hope that the use of punctuation is to
be restored in the hands of scribes.

“I for my part, though little proficient, fight daily against rusticity
at Tours. Let your authority teach the palace youths to produce in the
most elegant manner whatsoever your most lucid eloquence shall have
dictated, that documents which circulate in the name of the king may bear
on their face the nobility of the royal wisdom.”

That appears to be the only case in which Eginhart is spoken of by
Alcuin. Curiously enough, it appears that Alcuin is only once spoken of
by Eginhart. We might have expected some mention of Alcuin in Eginhart’s
statement of Karl’s fondness for foreigners[263]. The remarkable passage
in which Eginhart mentions Alcuin forms chapter 25 of the _Vita Caroli
Magni_, coming in the course of this fine description of a man clearly
worthy to be called Great:—

“In eloquence he was copious and exuberant; whatever he wished to express
he could express in the clearest manner. Nor was he content to speak only
in his native tongue; he worked hard at learning foreign tongues. Latin
he had learned so well that he was wont to pray in that tongue equally
with his own. Greek he understood better than he spoke. He was so able
in speech that he appeared as a teacher. He cultivated most studiously
the liberal arts, and exceedingly respected and greatly honoured those
who taught them. In learning grammar he heard the aged Peter of Pisa,
a deacon. In other studies he had as his preceptor Albinus, whose
cognomen was Alcuin, also a deacon, of the Saxon race, from Britain, a
man most learned. With him he spent much time and labour on rhetoric
and dialectic, and especially on the study of astronomy. He learned the
art of computation, and with much sagacity he scrutinized most closely
the courses of the stars. He made efforts, too, to become a scribe, for
which purpose he used to have tablets and specimens carried about under
the pillows of his bed, that he might practise his hand in writing when
he had any spare time; but he did not make much way with a task begun so
late in his life.”

[Sidenote: Ep. 13. A.D. 789.]

It would have been strange if Alcuin had not taken special interest in
the spread of Christianity among the pagan races on the eastern borders
of the kingdom of Karl. Our West-Saxon Boniface had made such a mark,
by himself and by his Malmesbury monks Lull and Burchardt and others,
and his Wimborne nuns and _magistrae_, that Alcuin found familiar names
in many parts of the eastern and north-eastern fringe, and made many
inquiries about the progress of the work. In one of the earliest of his
letters which have been preserved, he addresses an abbat who had gone
to visit the Bishop of Bremen. “Salute a thousand times my best loved
bishop Uilhaed. It sorely grieves me that I have parted from him. Would
that I could see him.” This was our own Northumbrian Angle Willehad,
born in 730, five years before Alcuin, and no doubt his school-fellow.
He had narrowly escaped martyrdom, and had bent before the storm; but he
returned to the scene of his dangerous labours, and Karl caused him to
be consecrated at Worms first bishop of Bremen on July 13, 787. He built
his cathedral church at Bremen, and consecrated it on November 1, 789;
on November 8 he died of fever at Blexen, close by. In this letter Alcuin
charges the abbat—

“Inform me by letter how far the Saxons fall in with your preaching, and
if there is any hope of the conversion of the Danes, and if the Wilts and
Vionuds[264], whom the king has recently[265] acquired, accept the faith
of Christ, and what is going on in those parts, and what the lord king
intends to do about the Huns[266].”

In a letter to Colcu[267], in the beginning of the next year, he says:—

[Sidenote: Ep. 14. A.D. 790.]

“Let your dilection know that by the mercy of God the holy Church in
the parts of Europe has peace, advances, grows. The Old Saxons and the
Frisians have been converted to the faith of Christ at the instance of
Karl, some by rewards, some by threats. Last year the said king with a
great host attacked the Sclaves, whom we called Vionuds, and brought them
into subjection.

“Further, the dukes and tribunes of the same most Christian king have
taken from the Saracens a large part of Spain, with a coast line three
hundred miles in length. But—ah the grief!—those same accursed Saracens
are dominant over the whole of Africa and the greatest part of Asia.”

To Higbald of Lindisfarne, in the letter given at page 132, he writes:—

[Sidenote: Ep. 24. A.D. 793.]

“Almost the whole of Europe was destroyed by the fire and the sword of
the Goths or the Huns. But now, by the mercy of God, as the sky shines
bright with stars so Europe shines with the ornament of churches, and in
them the offices of the Christian religion flourish and increase.”

Writing to his most intimate friend Arno, Archbishop of Salzburg, who was
about to accompany an army against the Avars, Alcuin warns him against
the premature imposition of tithes:—

[Sidenote: Ep. 64. post Mai. 796.]

“Be a preacher of piety, not an exactor of tithes; for the freshly
converted soul is to be fed with the milk of apostolical piety until it
grows, strengthens, and becomes strong enough to receive solid food.
Tithes, it is said, have subverted the faith of the Saxons. Why should
we place on the neck of the ignorant a yoke which neither we nor our
brethren have been able to bear?”

Again, writing to Karl after the subjugation of the Huns, Alcuin says
this:—

[Sidenote: Ep. 67. post Aug. 796.]

“Now let your most wise and God-pleasing piety provide for the new people
pious preachers, of honest life, learned in sacred science, imbued with
evangelical precepts, intent in their preaching on the examples of the
holy Apostles, who were wont to minister milk—that is, gentle precepts—to
their hearers who were beginners in the faith....

“These things being thus considered, let your most holy piety take into
wise consideration whether it is well to impose upon an ignorant race,
at the beginning of the faith, the yoke of tithes, so that they shall
be fully exacted from house to house. It is worth considering whether
the Apostles, taught by the God Christ Himself, and sent to preach to
the world, required the exaction of tithes or anywhere demanded them. We
know that the tithing of our substance is a very good thing; but it is
better to sacrifice the tithe than to lose the faith. And indeed we, born
and brought up and taught in the Catholic faith, scarce consent to tithe
to the full our substance; how much does feeble faith not consent to the
gift of tithe, and the infant will, and the covetous mind. But when faith
has become strong, and the practice of Christianity is confirmed, then,
as to perfect men, may stronger precepts be given, from which the mind,
become solid in the Christian religion, may not recoil.”

He then proceeds to urge that the adults of the conquered Huns shall
not be baptized until they have first been carefully taught, “lest the
ablution of sacred baptism of the body profit nothing.” On this subject
of the baptism of the Huns a long report is found in a tenth-century
collection of Alcuin’s letters, written by Paulinus the Patriarch of
Aquileia, describing a discussion which took place at a meeting of
bishops, or in the College of Bishops, summoned by King Pippin in the
summer of this year 796.

[Sidenote: Ep. 69.]

In the autumn of 796, Alcuin again writes on the subject of tithes, this
time addressing his friend[268] Megenfrid, the treasurer of the palace,
and dealing not with the Huns, but with the Saxons. Alcuin writes to him
as to one of the principal advisers of Karl, enters fully into the oft
repeated argument about milk and strong meat, and arrives thus at his
point.

“If the yoke easy and the burden light of Christ had been preached to
this most hard race, the Saxons, as carefully as the rendering of tithes
was required, and the legal penalties for the very smallest faults, it
may be that they would not have abhorred the sacraments of baptism. As to
those who are sent to teach them, _sint praedicatores non praedatores_,
let them preach, not prey.”

[Sidenote: Ep. 71.]

In another letter of that autumn, he sends full advice to Arno, the
bishop of Salzburg, as to the manner of teaching the faith to the Huns.
In the course of this letter he reminds Arno that the wretched race of
the Saxons has repeatedly lost the sacrament of baptism, because it never
had in heart the foundation of the faith.

In the year 801 the news reached Charlemagne that one Isaac the Jew,
whom he had sent four years before to the King of Persia, was returning,
bringing with him an elephant and many other presents. He had got as far
as Fez. Special arrangements were made for bringing the elephant across
the sea, and he arrived at Spezzia in October, wintering at Vercelli
because the Alps were already covered with snow. Eginhart thought the
arrival of the elephant at Aix-la-Chapelle to be of sufficient importance
to have the precise day named, the only event thus honoured in a year
rather full of events. It was the twentieth of July; and the elephant’s
name was Abulabaz. Under the year 810, another year full of important
events, Eginhart records that Charlemagne heard of a sudden and
successful raid of Northmen upon the Frisians; he set off in great haste,
summoned all his forces from all parts, crossed the Rhine at Lippenheim,
and waited there a few days for the troops to assemble. He had taken
his favourite animal with him. While he was waiting, the elephant died
suddenly. See Appendix E.

The strange form of an elephant made it a frequent subject for the
ornamentation of silk and woollen robes. We hear of silk pallia thus
adorned in Charlemagne’s lifetime, and it is probable that in a stuff of
this kind his body was clothed in the grave at Aachen. Alcuin’s great
predecessor in learning, Aldhelm, had a chasuble of scarlet silk, wrought
with black scrolls containing the representations of peacocks,[269] and
this chasuble was preserved at Malmesbury in the time of William of
Malmesbury, about 1140. The silk robes in which the body of St. Cuthbert
was wrapped were ornamented with large circular spaces containing men
on horseback with hawk and hound, and an island with trees, fishes, and
eider ducks.

[Illustration: PLATE VII

Elephant from the tomb of Charlemagne.

_To face p. 290_]

[Illustration: PLATE VIII

The fringe of the robe from the Tomb of Charlemagne.

_To face p. 291._]

Plate VII shows one medallion of a piece of silk found on the body of
Charlemagne when the grave was opened in the time of the present German
Emperor. It is certainly not of Charlemagne’s time. But it seems a fairly
safe guess to suppose that his well-known regard for his favourite beast
Abulabaz, who died only four years before him, caused his son to have
the body wrapped in one of the robes decorated with elephants which we
know that he possessed; and that either in the year 1000, when Otho
III opened the tomb, or in 1166, under Barbarossa, when Charlemagne
was canonized, this piece of silk replaced the decayed robe originally
buried there. We know of the two elephant-robes referred to from
Anastasius[270], who gives an enormous list of the art works in gold
and silver and silk and cloth of gold which were wrought for Leo III,
Charlemagne’s contemporary. One item is “two robes of Syrian purple, with
borders of cloth of gold wrought with elephants”. These robes Leo gave to
Charlemagne.

We can all but give the exact date of this remarkable Byzantine beast.
The inscription breaks off exactly where the date came. The Greek
inscription worked in the stuff (Plate VIII) sets forth that it was
made “under Michael the great chamberlain and controller of the privy
purse of the emperor, when Peter was the manager of Zeuxippos”, i. e.
the Byzantine court factory in Negropont. Then comes the tantalizing
_Indictionos_ (? B), and the date is lost.

Dreger, in his _Europäische Weberei und Stickerei_,[271] gives some early
examples of elephants in art. His Figure 37_b_ shows an archaic silver
relief of an elephant with a castle containing armed men. His Figure
37_a_ shows a silk stuff of the seventh or eighth century, of Asiatic
manufacture, with circular medallions containing elephants, griffins and
winged horses, hippogryffs; and he remarks that “the elephant is one of
the most holy beasts of Buddhism”. This silk stuff is shown in our Plate
IX from a photograph of the original. A comparison of these elephants
with the elephant shown in Plate VIII makes it fairly clear that the
Charlemagne stuff is later than the other, while in all of the details
of the beast itself, ears, three toes, eye, trunk, they are exactly the
same. Each has a tree behind the elephant; but while the Charlemagne tree
is a piece of stiff conventional work, the other is a natural tree with
leaves and fruit, much resembling the vegetable ornamentation of some
early Egyptian stuffs. Another feature pointing in the same direction is
the thirty-two conventional patterns on the circular enclosing border.
These in the earlier piece are twenty-eight plain disks.

There is an example of sculptured elephants something like this one, but
much more like the real beast, especially about the feet. The elephants
are the legs of the ivory chair[272] of Urso, at Canossa; he was Bishop
of Bari and Canossa 1078-89.

Something should be said about the language spoken by the people of
France and Germany in the times with which we are dealing, the reference
to a rustic tongue being not infrequent.

In the Council convened by Charlemagne at Tours in the year 813, equally
representing Eastern France and Western France, Austrasia and Neustria,
Germany and the Galliae, the bishops in the Transalpine Empire were
enjoined to be diligent in preaching, and to take care that their
discourses should be rendered either into Romana Rustica or into
Theotisc or Deutsch, that all might understand. It may be of interest
to give the earliest specimens we have of these native languages.
Philologically, these examples are of the very highest importance.

[Illustration: PLATE IX

Silk stuff of the seventh or eighth century.

_To face p. 292._]

In 841, after the dreadful battle of Fontenai near Vézelay in Burgundy,
where Charles-le-Chauve and Louis-le-Germanique combined against their
brother Lothar and their nephew Pepin and defeated them, they held a
Congress at Strassburg to confirm their alliance.

Louis and Charles each made announcement in Latin of the purpose of
their agreement, and of their intention to take in public an oath each
to other. That done, Louis, as the elder, first took the oath. Being
the ruler of the German portion of the empire, he took the oath in the
language of the Franks, the Romance tongue, Rustica Romana, in order that
the adherents of Charles might hear and understand his undertaking. These
were the words of his oath, probably read by a chancellor, for the Latin
account[273] says _haec se servaturum testatus est_:—

“Pro Deo amur et pro christian poblo et nostro commun salvament, dist
di[274] in avant, in quant Deus savir et podir me dunat[275], si salvarai
eo cist meon fradre Karlo, et in aiudha et in cadhuna[276] cosa, si cum
om[277] per dreit[278] son fradra salvar dist, in o quid il mi altresi
fazet[279]; et ab Ludher nul plaid numquam prindrai, qui meon vol[280]
cist meon fradre Karle in damno sit.”

Then Charles said the same in the language of the Germans, the Teudisc or
Deutsch tongue. The Latin account uses a different phrase here, _haec
eadem verba testatus est_.

“In Godes minna ind in thes christianes folches ind unser bedhero
gehaltnissi, fon thesemo dage frammordes, so fram so mir Got geuuizci
indi mahd furgibit, so haldi thesan minan bruodher, soso man mit rehtu
sinan bruodher scal, in thiu, thaz er mig so sama duo; indi mit Ludheren
in nohheiniu thing ne gegango, the minan uuillon imo ce scadhen uuerdhen.”

The peoples then swore an oath, each in their own, not the other’s,
tongue. The Frank people swore in the Romance language:—

“Si Lodhuvigs sagrament, que son fradre Karlo iurat, conservat, et Karlus
meos sendra de suo part non los tanit, si io returnar non l’int pois: ne
io ne neuls, cui eo returnar int pois, in nulla aiudha contra Lodhuuuig
nun li iv er.”

The others then swore in the Teudisc language:—

“Oba Karl then eid, then er sinemo bruodher Ludhuuuige gesuor, geleistit,
indi Ludhuuuige min herro then er imo gesuor forbrihchit, ob ih inan es
iruuenden ne mag: noh ih no thero nohhein, then ih es iruuenden mag,
uuidhar Karle imo ce follusti ne uuirdhit.”

[Illustration: PLATE X

The _abrenuntiatio diaboli_ of Archbishop Boniface.

_To face p. 295._]

An example of language nearly a hundred years earlier than this is found
in the renunciation of the devil and the declaration of belief in God
which our own Boniface required of his converts from paganism. The form
is found attached to the decrees of a Council[281] held by Boniface,
probably in the year 743. It exists in a Vatican manuscript (Vat. Palat,
nro. 577, fol. 6, 7), which Pertz and other scholars believe to be of
contemporary date. The form is of such extreme interest that I have had
that part of it which is at the foot of folio 6 photographed, by the kind
help of a friend in the Vatican Library; see figure 10, the four lowest
lines.

This is the form:—

“Forsachistu diobolae? Ec forsacho diabolae.

End allum diobolgelde? End ec forsacho allum diobolgeldae.

End allum dioboles uuercum? End ec forsacho allum dioboles uuercum and
uuordum thunaer ende uuoden ende saxnote ende allum them unholdum the
hira genotas sint.

Gelobistu in Got alamehtigen fadaer? Ec gelobo in Got alamechtigen fadaer.

Gelobistu in Crist Godes suno? Ec gelobo in Crist Godes suno.

Gelobistu in halogen Gast? Ec gelobo in halogen Gast.”

An isolated piece of early “Saxon” is found in one of the letters
contained in vol. iii of the _Epistolae_ of the _Monumenta Germaniae
Historica_, the volume containing _Epistolae Meròwingici et Karolini
Aevi_ (Berlin, 1892). The letter is No. 146 of the “letters of Boniface
and Lull”. It is written by a poor and humble monk to a personage
described as _reverentissimus atque sanctissimus_, who would appear to
have had the reputation of not carrying out his purposes. The proverb
looks like the eighth century; Brandl thinks that it is pre-Christian.
The dialect is probably Northumbrian, varied by a West-Saxon or a German
scribe.

“I hear of thee that thou proposest to make a journey: I exhort thee not
to fail. Do what thou hast begun. Remember the Saxon saying

    Oft daedlata dôme foreldit
    Sigisitha gahuem suuyltit thi âna”.

That is, Often the tardy man (deed-late) loses glory, some victory; thus
he dies solitary.

The suggested date of the letter is A.D. 757-786.

Mention was made on page 57 of the inscriptions which exist on the great
shaft of a cross in the churchyard of Bewcastle in Cumberland. These
inscriptions are the earliest extant pieces of English prose. They give
the names of the King of Mercia, Wulfhere, his queen and her sister, with
the date “first year of Ecgfrith King of this realm”, that is, A.D. 670.
We have another inscription dated in Ecgfrith’s reign, that, namely, on
the dedication stone of the basilica of St. Paul at Jarrow, “in the 15th
year of King Ecgfrith and the fourth year of Abbat Ceolfrid”, so that
the manner of dating the Bewcastle cross was that usual at the time;
the Jarrow inscription is in Latin[282]. Plate XI shows a facsimile of
all except the two top lines (which were beyond my reach) of the main
inscription on the Bewcastle cross, a copy of which is given in a note
on page 57. The runes on Plate XI begin with the _gar_ of _Wothgar_, the
second of the three persons who “set up this slender token of victory in
memory of Alchfrith once King and son of Oswy”, the half-brother of King
Ecgfrith; mention has been made of him on page 9.

[Illustration: PLATE XI

Runes incised on the Bewcastle Cross.

_To face p. 296._]

[Illustration: PLATE XII

Runes incised on the Ruthwell Cross.

_To face p. 297._]

The earliest pieces of English verse in existence in their original
form are found on the Cross at Ruthwell in Dumfriesshire, a monument of
equal magnificence with the Bewcastle Cross, and probably about fourteen
years later. King Ecgfrith was slain by the Picts in 685, and the Angles
were never dominant in the south-west of Scotland after his death. Plate
XII shows a portion of the many runes on this great monument, which is
described at pages 235-254 of my little book on _Theodore and Wilfrith_.
Reading across the top and down the right side the runes are as follows:—

_Krist wæs on rodi hwethræ ther fusæ fearran kwomu æththilæ til anum ic
thæt al bih[eald]._ Christ was on the cross, and there hastening from far
came they to the noble prince. I that all beh[eld].

Beginning at the top again and reading down the left side, we have:—

_Mith strelum giwundad alegdun hiæ hinæ limwoerignæ gistoddun him (æt his
licæs heafdum)._ With missiles wounded, they laid Him down limb-weary,
they stood at His body’s head.




CHAPTER XVIII

    Alcuin’s latest days.—His letters mention his ill health.—His
    appeals for the prayers of friends, and of strangers.—An
    affectionate letter to Charlemagne.—The death scene.


[Sidenote: Ep. 147. June 26, 800.]

Alcuin’s health began to break in the later part of the year 800, or
early in 801. In June, 800, he wrote a letter to Arno of Salzburg which
shows that he had in the first days of the month travelled with Karl
from Tours to Aix by way of Orleans and Paris, and after a debate with
Felix the Adoptionist had returned to Tours. We do not find in this
long letter any mention of failing health. Indeed, he overflows with
affectionateness, a feeling always displayed in his letters to Arno. “I
am sending to your dearness three little gifts; a tent to protect your
venerated head from the rain[283], a bed-cover to keep warm your sacred
breast, and a glass in which your bread may be dipped at table, that
whenever they are used they may bring to your sanctity a recollection of
my name.”

In this letter he describes his debate with Felix.

“I have had a great dispute with the heretic Felix in presence of
the lord king and holy fathers. He was obdurate; would recognize the
authority of no one who took an opposite view; held himself to be wiser
than all in this, that he was more foolish than all. But the divine
clemency touched his heart; he confessed that he had of late been carried
away by a false opinion; he professed that he held firmly the Catholic
faith. We could not see into his mind, and we left the cause to the Judge
of secret things. We handed him over to Laidrad [the Bishop of Lyon
(798-814)] our dearest son, who is to keep him and see whether it is true
that he believes, and whether he will write letters condemning the heresy
which he has preached. The king had intended to send him to Archbishop
Riculf [of Maintz] to be kept and chastised; and his presbyter, who is
worse than his master, was to be sent to you and your providence. But now
that they say they are converted to the Catholic faith, they have been
handed over to Laidrad, who is to test their sincerity.”

[Sidenote: Ep. 189. May, 802.]

On May 24, 801, Alcuin received a letter from Arno, Archbishop of
Salzburg, at nine o’clock in the morning, and the messenger told him he
must leave again at three in the afternoon. In the course of the six
hours he dictated fourteen paragraphs in reply. One of these concerned
his health. “My Candidus has been able to tell you all about my weakness.
It is therefore superfluous to write on the subject, except to say that
all bodily fitness has left me, and pleasures of the world have fled far
away.”

The interesting remark in this letter that the messenger from Salzburg to
Tours, a distance of some six hundred miles, must go back in six hours is
not the only interesting detail. We learn, also, that many letters were
lost in the difficulties of the journey. The eyes of the Sassenach of
to-day, who rides some forty miles in a Scottish mail-cart in Sutherland,
and sees the letters shied out into kailyards and steadings, are opened
to the possibilities of loss in primitive methods of letter-carrying. The
admirable arrangements of the early Roman empire, for conveyance of men
and things, had been thrown into chaos long before Alcuin’s time, and
special messengers, or “runners”, were used by important people for the
transmission of letters.

[Sidenote: Ep. 189. May, 802.]

“To Arno. My devotedness is greatly grieved by the unfaithfulness of
those whom I have trusted with letters to you. Last year I sent to you on
your return from Italy two letters, and I also sent to you other two to
meet you on your arrival at the palace [Aachen]. I do not know that any
of them reached your presence.”

[Sidenote: Ep. 193.]

Alcuin wrote to the Emperor Charles in 802, or possibly in 803, begging
that he might be allowed to stay quietly at St. Martin’s, Tours. “I am so
very weak in body that I am unequal to any more travelling or labour. To
speak truth, all the fitness and strength of my body has left me; it has
gone, and day by day will be further away; I fear it will never come back
to me in this world.”

[Sidenote: Ep. 194.]

Again, writing to Arno in 802 or 803, he tells him how he longs to see
him at St. Martin’s, “not for the sake of your black hair, but for your
most sweet eyes and lovable talk.” Though bidden to the palace, where he
would have met him, his poor little body was too weak for the journey: he
could not go.

[Sidenote: Ep. 196. A.D. 802-3.]

[Sidenote: Ep. 198. A.D. 802-3.]

In another letter to Arno he writes: “I have been summoned to my lord
David [Charlemagne], but my bodily weakness prevented my going: the will
of God detained me.” We have his letter of excuse to the emperor. He
begins with the simile of the aged soldier, unable not only to bear the
weight of armour, but even to support his own body. Then he proceeds: “To
speak simply, let not the mind of my lord be inflamed against me for my
delay; I am not strong enough to come. A more favourable opportunity may
occur.”

[Sidenote: Ep. 230.]

He became more than ever pressing in his entreaties that his friends
would pray for him. In seeking for the prayers of others we find him
turning to a part of England of which we do not appear to have any other
mention in his letters, namely, Norfolk and Suffolk, called then the
dioceses of Elmham and Dunwich (see page 159). In like manner, and for a
like purpose, he wrote to the brethren of Candida Casa, i. e. Whithorn in
Galloway, the following letter:—

[Sidenote: Ep. 271. A.D. 804.]

“I pray the unanimity of your piety to have my name in memory. Deign to
intercede for my littleness in the church of your most holy father Nynia
the bishop.

“He shone bright with many virtues, as has recently been related to me by
a skilful poem which our faithful disciples the scholars of the church of
York have sent. In that poem I have discerned in that which I have read
there both the skill of the writer and the holiness of him who wrought
the miracles. Wherefore, I pray you, by your holy intercessions to
commend me to his prayers, that by the most holy prayers of the same your
father, and by the assiduous intercessions of your love, I may receive
pardon for my sins, by the mercy of the God Christ, and may come to the
communion of saints who have bravely conquered the labours of the world,
and have received the crown of perpetual praise.

“I send to the body of our holy father Nyniga (_sic_) a robe of whole
silk, that my name may be remembered, and that I may merit to have always
the pious intercession both of him and of you.

“May Christ’s right hand protect and rule you, brothers.”

Here is a very touching letter, which sets clearly before our eyes the
dear affectionate old man—old as men then counted age—beaten at last by
bodily weakness, while his heart was as loving as ever. It is addressed
to “the most longed for lord David, most worthy of all honour.”

[Sidenote: Ep. 170. A.D. 801, early autumn.]

“Day by day, with hungry intentness of heart, my ears hanging on the
words of messengers, I wondered anxiously what they could tell me of my
most sweet lord David: when he would come home; when he would return to
his own land. At last, though late, the wished-for voice sounded in the
ears of my desire: ‘He will soon come. He has already crossed the Alps,
he whose presence thou hast desired, O Albinus, with such fervour of
mind.’ And then I cried over and over again with tearful voice: ‘O Lord
Jesu, why dost thou not give me the wings of an eagle? Why dost thou not
grant me the translation of the prophet Abacuc[284] for one day, or even
one hour, that I might embrace and kiss the steps of him my dearest one,
and—above all that can be loved in this world—see the most clear eyes of
my sweetest one, and hear his most joyous words. And why dost thou, mine
enemy of fever, oppress me at this inopportune time, and not permit me to
have my wonted alacrity of body, so that, though tardily, that might be
accomplished which promptly it cannot do.’”

The dates and the story of his final illness and his death are found, as
we have seen (Ch. II), in the life written about twenty years later by
a pupil of Alcuin’s favourite priest Sigulf, and more concisely in the
Annals of Pettau, a monastery not far from Salzburg, and therefore likely
to be well-informed. Some of the touching facts should be repeated here.

Early in 804 he was evidently failing. He prayed earnestly that he might
die on the day on which the Holy Spirit came upon the Apostles in tongues
of fire. All through Lent he was able to move about, night after night,
to the several basilicas of saints which were included in the monastery
of St. Martin, cleansing himself from his sins with much groaning. He
kept the solemnity of the Lord’s Resurrection; but on the night of
the Ascension he fell upon his couch, oppressed by languor even unto
death, and unable to speak. The Annals of Pettau tell us that this was a
paralytic stroke, and that it fell on Thursday, May 8, in the evening,
after sunset. On the third day before his death he recovered the power
of speech, and with a voice of exultation sang through his favourite
antiphon, _O clavis David_, based upon Isaiah xxii. 22: “The key of
the house of David I will lay upon his shoulder; so he shall open and
none shall shut, he shall shut and none shall open.” Then he repeated
a number of verses from several psalms: “Like as the hart desireth the
waterbrooks.” “O how amiable are Thy dwellings, Thou Lord of hosts;
blessed are they that dwell in Thy house.” “Unto Thee do I lift up mine
eyes.” “One thing I have desired of the Lord.” “Unto Thee, O Lord, will
I lift up my soul.” And others of like kind. On the day of Pentecost,
matins having been said, at full dawn, just at the hour at which he was
wont to enter the church for Mass, the holy soul of Alcuin was released
from the flesh. He had prayed months before that he might die on Whit
Sunday; on Whit Sunday he died.




APPENDIX A

(Page 26)


It would appear that when Alcuin was not allowed by Charlemagne to
retire to Fulda, as he had wished to do, an impulse of affectionate
responsibility brought him to pour himself out in advice and help to
those with whom he had hoped to spend his last days. This is his letter
to the monks of Fulda.

[Sidenote: Ep. 186. A.D. 801-2.]

“To the most holy, and by us with all love to be cherished, the brethren
of the holy Boniface[285], our father and protector, the humble levite
Alchuin wishes eternal beatitude in Christ.

“I am mindful of your most sweet love, with which you most benignantly
received me long ago with all joy. Greatly as I then was glad in your
presence, so greatly is my mind now tortured in your absence, desiring to
see you whom it loves, to have present you whom it esteems. Since this is
denied to the eyes of the flesh, let love be made perpetual by spiritual
presence; love which can come to an end has never been true love.

“Let us therefore aim at that which is never to have an end, where is
blessed eternity and eternal blessedness. That ye may deserve to attain
to this, let no labour affright you, no blandishments of this life keep
you back. Let there always burn in your hearts the love of Him that
appeared as their companion on the way to the two apostles, who, when He
was removed from their carnal eyes, said ‘Did not our hearts burn within
us, while He talked with us by the way, and while He opened to us the
Scriptures?’ In the writings of the holy fathers let us seek Him whom
they, not yet learned in the Scriptures, understood. Now all is open;
now He has opened the meaning of Whom it was said ‘Then opened He their
understanding, that they might understand the Scriptures.’ Now the gospel
truth shines forth in all the world; now the enigmas of the prophets
are clearer than the sun in the churches of Christ. This light of truth
follow ye with your whole soul and understand Christ; in it love Christ,
follow Christ; that cleaving to His most sacred footsteps ye may merit to
have in His most holy presence life eternal.

“Be mindful of the apostolic mandate,[286] ‘My brethren, be ye stedfast,
unmovable; always in the work of the Lord; forasmuch as ye know that
your labour is not in vain in the Lord.’ Be stedfast in your own place
and in the devotion of your purpose. Leave not your most holy father.
Stand about his sepulchre, that he may offer your prayers to Almighty
God. Desire not the vanities of the world, but love celestial blessings.
‘And,’ as the teacher of the Gentiles says,[287] ‘be not conformed to
this world, but be ye transformed by the renewing of your mind.’ It is
a base thing for a monk to lose the spiritual warfare and to immerse
himself in the affairs of the world.

“Let there be no murmurings among you, no hatreds, no envyings, no evil
speakings.[288] Judge not one another. Let everything be done in humility
and concord, in obedience to those set over you, not to the eye only but
from the heart, as in the presence of God. Let your obedience, your love,
your humility be known to all, that very many may be taught by your good
examples and may advance in the salvation of their souls.

“If the venerable father Bouulf,[289] my most loved friend, is unable by
reason of his weakness to observe the full hardness of the life by rule,
judge ye not him, but obey him from your heart and love him as a father,
for he will have to give account of your souls. He labours for you in
wanderings and journeyings, that you may live quiet and keep the life by
rule and have what is necessary for your bodies. Do you act as very dear
sons. Fear God, love God, and have care of your most holy father in your
prayers, that he may live in long prosperity with you, and that he with
you and you with him may merit to have everlasting life.

“Warn, instruct, teach your young men in all holy discipline and Catholic
doctrine; that they may be held worthy to stand in the place of you and
to send up prayers for you wherever you may remain. Warn them about
chastity of body, about confession of their sins, about study and manual
labour without murmur, and about all things which seem necessary at their
age. And let them become subject to their elders and masters in good
humility, in most pious religion. And do you who are older afford to them
good examples, so that they may learn not from your words only but by the
religion of your life. Let them not be given to luxury, not slaves to
drink, not despisers, not following empty games; but let them learn to
be good servants in the house of God, that by the intercession of holy
Boniface their father they may deserve to receive from the God Christ
blessing and favour.

“And as to myself, I pray you have me in perpetual recollection with
yourselves in your holy prayers. For the time is at hand which no man can
escape. Let each one prepare himself, that he may appear in the presence
of his God not naked but clothed with good practices.

“I have sent a pall for the body of the holy Boniface our father, on
whose holy intercession for my sins I place great reliance; that I, a
sinner, may even merit pardon in that day, when your holiness shall
receive the crown of eternal blessedness.

“To you, O most holy presbyters, I have sent a little collection of words
for the Mass, for use on various days on which any one desires to offer
prayers to God, whether in honour of the Holy Trinity[290], or in love
of wisdom, or in tears of penitence, or in perfect love, or asking for
angelic support, or in address to any one of all the saints; or if any
one wish to offer prayers for his own sins, or for any living friend, or
for many friends, or for brothers departing this life; or, especially,
when one wishes to invoke the intercessions of blessed Mary, mother of
God, ever virgin; or when any desires to chant and invoke by his prayers
the most pious presence of the most holy Boniface your father. All these
things we have been at the pains to send to you by the intuition of love,
praying your humility to receive benignantly that which with the fullest
love we send you. Let each make of it such use as each pleases; and
blame me not in this office of love. Let each be fully persuaded in his
own mind[291] and do always such things as are pleasing to God and all
saints, that with them they may be found worthy to enjoy the perpetual
vision of our Lord Jesus Christ.

“May the Lord God hearken to your holy blessedness mindful of me in all
holy supplication, and deign to grant unto you present felicity and
future beatitude, my most loved brothers.

“I beg that you make known to me by letter from your blessedness, if this
letter reaches you, and what it pleases your prudence to do. What it is
mine to do I have done, fulfilling the office of affection in the love
and honour of our Lord Jesus Christ.”




APPENDIX B

(Page 91)


We have the report which the legates George and Theophylact sent to Pope
Hadrian on their mission. No reference is made in it to the matter of
the Archbishopric of Lichfield. Iaenbricht is still the sole southern
archbishop, and Higbert of Lichfield is only bishop.

[Sidenote: Ep. 10. A.D. 786.]

“Your holy prayers favouring us, we set sail with joyous countenance
obeying your commands. But the tempter hindered us with a contrary wind.
He who stills the waves hearkened unto your deprecatory entreaty, calmed
the blue strait, led us across to a safe haven, and brought us to the
shore of the English unharmed, but afflicted with many dangers.

“We were received first by Iaenberht, Archbishop of the holy church of
Dorovernia,[292] whose other name is Cantia, where the holy Augustine
rests in the body; dwelling there we gave him the necessary information.

“Going on thence, we arrived at the dwelling of Offa, King of the
Mercians. With great joy, for reverence of the blessed Peter and honour
of your apostolate, he received both us and the messages sent from the
highest see. Then Offa the King of the Mercians, and Cynewulf the King
of the West Saxons, came together in a council to which we delivered your
holy writings; and they forthwith promised that they would correct the
vices named.[293] Then, after counsel held with the said kings, pontiffs,
and elders of the land, considering that that corner of the world
stretches far and wide, we gave permission to Theophylact, the venerable
bishop, to go to the King of the Mercians[294] and the parts of Britain.

“I for my part, taking with me the companion whom your most excellent
King Karl sent with us out of reverence to your apostolate, Wighod,
abbat and presbyter, went on to the country of the Northanymbrians, to
Aelfuald the King, and the Archbishop of the holy church of the city of
York, Eanbald. The King was living far off in the north, and the said
Archbishop sent his messengers to the King, who at once with all joy
fixed a day for a council,[295] to which the chief men of the district
came, ecclesiastical and secular. It was related in our hearing that
other vices,[296] and by no means the least, needed correction. For,
as you know, from the time of the holy pontiff Augustine no Roman
priest[297] [or bishop] has been sent there except ourselves. We wrote
a Capitular of the several matters, and brought them to their hearing,
discussing each in order. They, with all humility of subjection and
with clear will, honoured both your admonition and our insignificance,
and pledged themselves to obey in all things. Then we handed to them
your letters to be read, charging them to keep the sacred decrees in
themselves and in those dependent on them.

“These are the chapters which we delivered to them to be kept.[298]

“1. Of keeping the faith of the Nicene Council.

“2. Of Baptism, the Creed, the Lord’s Prayer.

“3. Of two Councils to be held every year.

“4. Of the service and vesture of Canons and Monks.

“5. Of the elections of Abbats and Abbesses.

“6. Of ordaining Priests and Deacons.

“7. Of the Canonical Hours.

“8. Of the rights of churches granted by the See of Rome.

“9. That ecclesiastics do not take food secretly.

“10. That priests do not perform sacred rites with bare legs[299]; of the
offerings of the faithful; that chalice and paten for sacrificing to God
be not made from ox-horn, because they are bloody; that bishops in their
councils judge not secular matters.

“11. Let kings and princes study justice, obey bishops, venerate the
church, employ prudent counsellors.

“12. That in the ordination of kings no one permit the assent of evil
men to prevail; kings must be lawfully elected by the priesthood and the
elders of the people, and be not born of adultery or incest; let honour
be paid by all to kings; let no one be a detractor of a king; let no one
dare to conspire for the death of a king, because he is the anointed of
the Lord; if any one have part in such wickedness, if he be a bishop
or of priestly order let him be thrust out from it, and every one who
has assented to such sacrilege shall perish in the eternal fetters of
anathema. For by examples among yourselves it has frequently been proved
that those who have been the cause of the death of sovereigns have soon
lost their life, being outside the protection of divine and human law.

“13. That powerful and rich men decree just judgements.

“14. Of the forbidding of fraud, violence, rapine; that unjust tribute be
not imposed on churches; of keeping peace.

“15. Unlawful and incestuous unions are forbidden to all, alike with the
handmaids of God and other illicit persons and with those in affinity and
kindred and with other men’s wives.

“16. Lawful heirship is by decree refused to the children of harlots.

“17. Of tithes to be given; of usury to be forbidden; of just measures
and equal weights to be established.

“18. Of vows to be fulfilled.

“19. We have added that each faithful Christian must take example from
Catholic men; and if anything has remained of the rites of pagans it must
be plucked out, contemned, cast away.

“For God made man fair in form and appearance; but the pagans with
diabolical instinct have inflicted most horrible scars,[300] as
Prudentius says:

    He tainted the innocent ground[301] with sordid spots,

for he evidently does injury to God, who fouls and defiles His creature.
Without doubt a man would receive a rich reward who underwent for God
this injury of staining. But to one who does it from gentile superstition
it profiteth nothing, as circumcision to the Jews without belief of heart.

“Further, you wear your clothes after the manner of the gentiles whom by
God’s help your fathers drove out of the land by arms. It is a wonderful
and astonishing thing that you imitate the fashion of those whose life
you always hate.

“You have the evil habit of maiming your horses: you slit their nostrils,
you fasten their ears together and make them deaf, you cut off their
tails; and though you could have them entirely unblemished, you will not
have that, but make them odious to every one.

“We have heard also that when you go to law with one another you cast
lots after the fashion of the gentiles. This is counted as completely
sacrilegious in these days.

“Further, many of you eat horses, which no Christian in eastern lands
does. This you must give up. Strive earnestly that all your things be
done decently and in order.

“20. Of sins to be confessed and penance to be done.

“These decrees, most blessed Pope Hadrian, we propounded in a public
council in presence of King Aelfuuald, Archbishop Eanbald, and all the
bishops and abbats of that region, also of the ealdormen, dukes, and
people of the land. And they, as we said above, with all devotion of mind
vowed that they would in all things keep them according to the utmost of
their power, the divine clemency aiding them. And they confirmed them in
our hand (in your stead) with the sign of the holy cross. And afterwards
they wrote on the paper of this page with careful pen, affixing the mark
of the holy cross.

“I Aelfuualdus king of the Transhumbrane race, consenting, have
subscribed with the sign of the holy cross.

“I Dilberch[302] prelate[303] of the church of Hexham joyfully have
subscribed with the sign of the holy cross.

“I Eanbald by the grace of God archbishop of the holy church of York have
subscribed to the pious and catholic force of this document with the sign
of the holy cross.

“I Hyguuald bishop of the church of Lindisfarne obediently have
subscribed with the sign of the holy cross.

“I Aedilberch bishop of Whithern[304] suppliant have subscribed with the
sign of the holy cross.

“I Aldulf bishop of the church of Mayo[305] have subscribed with devoted
will.

“I Aetheluuin[306] bishop have subscribed by delegates.

“I Sigha the patrician with placid mind have subscribed with the sign of
the holy cross.[307]

“To these most salutary admonitions we too, presbyters and deacons of
churches and abbats of monasteries, judges, chief men, and nobles,
unanimously consent and have subscribed.

“I duke Alrich have subscribed with the sign of the holy cross.

“I duke Siguulf have subscribed with the sign of the holy cross.

“I abbat Aldberich[308] have subscribed with the sign of the holy cross.

“I abbat Erhart have subscribed with the sign of the holy cross.

“All this having been accomplished, and the benediction pronounced,
we set out again, taking with us illustrious representatives of the
king and the archbishop, the readers Maluin[309] to wit and Pyttel.
We travelled together, and they brought the above decrees to a council
of the Mercians, at which the glorious King Offa was present, with
the senators of the kingdom, the Archbishop Iaenbercht[2] of the holy
Dorovernian Church, and the other bishops of those parts. In presence
of the council the several chapters were read out in a clear voice,
and lucidly expounded both in Latin and in Teuton so that all could
understand. Then all with one voice and with eager mind, grateful for the
admonitions of your apostolate, promised, that they would according to
their ability with most ready will keep in all respects these statutes,
the divine favour supporting them. Moreover, as at the northern council,
the king and his chief men, the archbishop and his colleagues, confirmed
them in our hand (in the stead of your lordship) with the sign of the
holy cross, and again ratified this present document with the sacred sign.

“I Ieanbrecht[310], archbishop of the holy church of Dorovernum,
suppliant have subscribed with the sign of the holy cross.

“I Offa king of the Mercians, consenting to these statutes, with ready
will have subscribed with the sign of the holy cross.

“I Hugibrecht[311] bishop of the church of Lichtenfelse have subscribed
with the sign of the holy cross.

“I Ceoluulf bishop of the Lindisfaras[312] have subscribed.

“I Unuuona bishop of the Legorenses[313] have subscribed.

“I Alchard[314] bishop have subscribed.

“I Eadberht[315] bishop have subscribed.

“I Chumbrech[316] bishop have subscribed.

“I Harchel[317] bishop have subscribed.

“I Acine[318] bishop have subscribed.

“I Tora[319] bishop have subscribed.

“I Uuaremund[320] bishop have subscribed.

“I Adalmund[321] bishop have subscribed.

“I Adored[322] bishop have subscribed.

“Edrabord abbat. Alemund abbat. Boduuin abbat. Uttel abbat.

“I duke Brorda have subscribed with the sign of the holy cross.

“I duke Eadbald have subscribed.

“I duke Bercoald have subscribed.

“I count Othbald have subscribed.”




APPENDIX C

(Page 177)


Sed obsecro si vestrae placeat pietati ut exemplarium illius libelli
domno dirigatur apostolico aliud quoque Paulino patriarchae similiter
Richobono et Teudolfo episcopis doctoribus et magistris ut singuli pro
se respondeant Flaccus vero tuus tecum laborat in reddenda ratione
catholicae fidei tantum detur ei spatium ut quiete et diligenter liceat
illi cum pueris suis considerare sensus quid unusquisque diceret de
sententiis quas posuit prefatus subversor in suo libello et tempore
praefinito a vobis ferantur vestrae auctoritati singulorum responsa et
quidquid in isto libello vel sententiarum vel sensuum contra catholicam
fidem inveniatur omnia catholicis exemplis destruantur et si aequaliter
et concorditer cunctorum in professione vel defensione catholicae
fidei resonant scripta intelligi potest quod per omnium ora et corda
unus loquitur spiritus sin autem diversum aliquid inveniatur in dictis
vel scriptis cuiuslibet videatur quis maiore auctoritate sanctarum
scripturarum vel catholicorum patrum innitatur et huic laudis palma
tribuatur qui divinis magis inhaereat testimoniis.




APPENDIX D

(Page 197)


The following are the passages of the Donation which touch the question
of the joint patronage of St. Peter and St. Paul in the Church of
Rome. The edition from which they are taken is thus described on the
title-page:—

    Constantini M. Imp. Donatio Sylvestro Papae Rom. inscripta:
    non ut a Gratiano truncatim, sed integre edita: cum versione
    Graeca duplici, Theodori Balsamonis, Patriarchae Antiocheni, et
    Matthaei Blastaris, I(uris) C(anonici) Graeci.

                       Typis Gotthardi Voegelini
                                (1610).

The first page of the Latin Edict is not represented in the Greek
Thespisma. It ends with the words: “Postquam docente beato Silvestro
trina me mersione verbi salutis purificatum et ab omni leprae squalore
mundatum beneficiis beati Petri et Pauli Apostolorum cognovi.”

    Iustum quippe est, ut ibi lex sancta caput teneat principatus,
    ubi sanctarum legum institutor salvator noster beatum Petrum
    Apostolatus obtinere praecepit cathedram, ubi et crucis
    patibulum sustinens beatae mortis poculum sumpsit suique
    magistri et domini imitator apparuit: et ibi gentes pro Christi
    nominis confessione colla flectant, ubi eorum doctor beatus
    Paulus Apostolus pro Christo extenso collo martyris coronatus
    est: illic usque in finem quaerant _doctorem, ubi sancti
    doctoris corpus quiescit_; the Greek has τὂν διδάσκαλον ὅπου τὰ
    τῶν ἁγίων λείψανα ἀναπαύονται.

       *       *       *       *       *

    Construximus itaque ecclesias beatorum Petri et Pauli
    Apostolorum, quas argento et auro locupletavimus: ubi
    sacratissima eorum corpora cum magno honore recondentes, et
    thecas ipsorum ex electro (cui nulla fortitudo praevalet
    elementorum) construximus, et crucem ex auro purissimo et
    gemmis pretiosis per singulas eorum thecas posuimus et clavis
    aureis confiximus.

       *       *       *       *       *

    Pro quo concedimus ipsis sanctis Apostolis dominis meis,
    beatissimo Petro et Paulo, et per eos etiam beato Silvestro
    patri nostro summo Pontifici et universali urbis Romae Papae
    et omnibus eius successoribus Pontificibus, qui usque in finem
    mundi in sede beati Petri erunt sessuri, atque de praesenti
    concedimus palatium imperii nostri Lateranense, quod omnibus
    praefertur atque praecellit palatiis.

       *       *       *       *       *

    Si quis autem (quod non credimus) temerator aut contemptor
    extiterit, aeternis condemnationibus subiaceat innodatus,
    et sanctos Dei principes Apostolorum Petrum et Paulum, sibi
    in praesenti et in futura vita sentiat contrarios, atque in
    inferno inferiori concrematus cum diabolo et omnibus deficiat
    impiis.

The learned editor makes an interesting comment on the recognition by
Constantine of the _par utriusque meritum_, the equal merit of the two
apostles Peter and Paul. The fate of Paul, he says, resembles that of
Pollux. The two brothers, Castor and Pollux, had a Temple in common in
the Forum, but it came to be called the Temple of Castor alone.

In using such a document as this, the temptation to alter words must have
been very great. As an example of such change, the words which follow
on our first quotation may be cited—“utile iudicavimus una cum omnibus
satrapis et universo senatu, optimatibus etiam et cuncto populo Romani
gloriae imperii subiacente.” For _gloriae_ Gratian reads _ecclesiae_. The
Greek version has τῆς ῥωμαικῆς δόξης.

On a phrase of the Donation—“eligentes nobis ipsum principem Apostolorum
vel eius vicarios firmos apud Deum esse patronos”—the editor quotes a
remarkable passage from Aimoin[323] v. 2, which it is specially fitting
to reproduce here, since it relates to Charlemagne and his sons: “Post
non multum tempus incidit ei desiderium dominam quondam orbis videre
Romam, principis Apostolorum atque doctoris gentium adire limina, seque
suamque prolem eis commendare; ut talibus nitens suffragatoribus, quibus
coeli terraeque potestas attributa est, ipse quoque subiectis consulere,
perduellionumque [si emersissent[324]] proterviam proterere posset. Ratus
etiam non mediocre sibi subsidium conferri, si _a Vicario eorum_ cum
benedictione sacerdotali tam ipse quam et filii eius regalia sumerent
insignia.”

[Sidenote: Ep. 33. A.D. 794.]

In a letter to Karl of the highest importance, Hadrian I uses a
remarkable phrase in describing Karl’s regard for the Church of Rome.
He speaks of his faith and love towards the church of the blessed
chiefs of the apostles Peter and Paul,—_quantum erga beatorum principum
apostolorum Petri et Pauli ecclesiam fidem geritis et amorem_. In the
same letter he employs an argument which—while it would naturally have
force with Karl—appears to assign to national churches other than that of
Rome a remarkable position of independence. “If,” he says, “everywhere
canonical churches possess their dioceses intact, how much more should
the holy catholic and apostolic Roman church, which is the head of all
the churches of God,—Si enim ubique Christianorum ecclesiae canonicae
intactas suas possident dioeceses, quanto amplius sancta catholica et
apostolica Romana ecclesia, quae est caput omnium Dei ecclesiarum....”




APPENDIX E

(Page 290)


Eginhart gives the name of Charlemagne’s elephant as Abulabaz. This
probably represents _AbuʾlʿAbbás_, the elephant being in that case
named after his royal donor, the first Abbasid Caliph, who was none
other than our old friend of many tales of adventure, Harun al Raschid.
His caliphate lasted from 786 to 809, and thus coincided with the most
brilliant period of Charlemagne’s reign as king and emperor. His policy
was to remain on most friendly terms with Charlemagne, while sending to
Irene’s supplanter at Constantinople, Nicephorus, communications of the
following character:—

“Harun al Raschid, Commander of the Faithful, to Nicephorus, the Roman
dog.

“I have read thy letter, O thou son of an unbelieving mother. Thou shalt
not hear, but behold my reply!”

Eginhart tells us under the year 807 of noble presents sent by the
Saracen king of the Persians to Charlemagne. They included a pavilion
and court tents, all, including the ropes, of linen of divers colours;
palls of silk many and precious; scents, unguents, and balsam; two great
candelabra of brass (orichalc) of marvellous size and height; and above
all a wonderful clock made of brass (orichalc). The principle of this
remarkable machine was that of the water clock. At each complete hour
little balls of brass were set free, which fell on to a cymbal below with
a tinkling sound, while at the same time twelve knights on horseback
opened windows and pushed out, closing windows which had been open.




FOOTNOTES


[1] _Mendacia._

[2] See the story of his conversion, p. 11.

[3] The following inscription is found in this book:—“Hunc Vergilii
codicem obtulit Berno gregis beati Martini levita devota mente Deo et
eidem beato Martino perpetualiter habendum ea quidem ratione ut perlegat
ipsum Albertus consobrinus ipsius et diebus vitae suae sub pretextu
sancti Martini habeat et post suum obitum iterum sancto reddatur Martino.”

[4] It appears to be impossible to identify the site of the cell of
Wilgils. The local idea is that Kilnsea may be the place. But then the
local idea is that Kilnsea means “the cell by the sea”.

[5] The church of St. Andrew in Rome was the first church which Wilfrith
in his youth visited on his first appearance in that city. It was on the
altar of that church that he first saw a magnificent copy of the Gospels,
which so fired his enthusiasm that he had a similar copy made, written
in letters of gold on purple parchment and adorned with gems, for his
church at Ripon. His great church at Hexham, the finest church north of
the Alps, he dedicated to St. Andrew, and the dedication thus became a
favourite one in Northumbria. See my _Theodore and Wilfrith_, p. 17.

[6] Horreense, the Germans think; now Oeren.

[7] Epternach.

[8] See my _Conversion of the Heptarchy_, pp. 202-4.

[9] See my _Conversion of the Heptarchy_, p. 190.

[10] iii. 20, plate xiii.

[11] Ps. lxxvii. 11.

[12] The relative numbers of these three “sides” of the School of York
may possibly be indicated by the _quidam_, _alii_, _nonnulli_, of the
author.

[13] Biscop.

[14] After a parenthetical paragraph the writer continues, “Cuius iam, ut
dictum est, sequens Hechbertus vestigia.”

[15] Gregory, it must be supposed. If one of the Apostles of the Lord had
been meant, much more honorific words would have been used.

[16] Used antiphrastically for malediction: see Job i. 5.

[17] Deut. xxxii. 11.

[18] Chapter viii of the Rule of St. Benedict directs that a monk shall
not conceal from his abbat evil thoughts which come into his heart.

[19] John xiii. 25 to xviii. 1 inclusive.

[20] Sigulf, as we have seen, told the writer the facts of Alcuin’s life
which he recorded.

[21] Dial. ii. 85. Benedict there narrates that he saw the whole world
collected into one ray of the sun, in which the soul of Germanus, bishop
of Capua, ascended to the heavens.

[22] Ps. cvi. 1.

[23] _Francia_, both here and in Alcuin’s Letter 35, where he writes as
if with these words in his mind: “I came to France, under pressure of
ecclesiastical need, and to confirm the reason of the Catholic Faith.”

[24] There is a tradition that Alcuin wrote the Office for the Mass on
Trinity Sunday. See Appendix A.

[25] The “hereditary right” seems to indicate that by these
“benedictions” the library of York is meant, of which more will be said
later on.

[26] “Talentum sui domini”, sc. Elcberti?

[27] The perpetual presence of Sigulf was needed for the celebration of
masses, Alcuin remaining a deacon. There is a curious mention of Alcuin’s
part in the administration of Holy Communion, and of the action of the
young King Louis when receiving at his hand; see p. 32.

[28] We can date this meeting fairly closely by the fact that Karl
granted a privilegium to Parma on March 15, 781.

[29] The bishop George whom we know as intimately concerned with the
affairs of Hadrian I and with British interests was Bishop of Ostia.
If this is he, we shall hear of him again in connexion with the
Archbishopric of Lichfield.

[30] Abbat of St. Martin of Tours, a curiously early connexion of Alcuin
with his future home. To him Alcuin addressed the earliest letter of his
which is extant; see p. 205.

[31] Alcuin was about seven years older than Karl. They were at this time
about forty-six and thirty-nine years of age.

[32] St. Peter of Ferrières, dio. Sens.

[33] Alcuin makes mention of his residence here during the autumn of 798
in his correspondence with Gisla, Karl’s sister; see p. 253. The Museum
of Troyes is housed in the old buildings of the Abbey of St. Loup.

[34] Matt. x. 23.

[35] He was subject to febrile attacks.

[36] For Alcuin’s letter to Fulda, written after Karl’s refusal of
permission, see Appendix A.

[37] “In psalmorum et missarum multa celebratione.”

[38] See p. 13.

[39] Called Witto by Alcuin (ep. 107), and Candidus (106) as the Latin
rendering of the Teutonic name.

[40] To Fredegisus Alcuin wrote letters on the three kinds of visions
(257) and on the Trinity (258). He is understood to be the “Nathanael” of
other letters. Of Fredegisus, Theodulfus, the Bishop of Orleans, wrote to
Karl:

    Stet levita decus Fredegis sociatus Osulfo,
    Gnarus uterque artis, doctus uterque bene.

He was a master in the school of the Palace and afterwards Archdeacon. He
became Abbat of Cormery, and eventually of Tours.

[41] See the mention of him in previous note. Osulf was a household
officer of the young King Charles, see p. 250. The last words of Alcuin’s
interpretation of the vision suggest that he was an Englishman, one of
the youths whom Alcuin brought from York as his assistant masters.

[42] This was Benedict, the Abbat of Aniane in Languedoc. That region is
here spoken of as Gothia, because the Goths had settled about Toulouse in
the fifth century. The fact that Benedict used often to come to consult
Alcuin is an interesting illustration of the disregard of distance in
those days. As the crows fly, Toulouse is some 270 miles from Tours, and
the journey was a long and arduous one.

[43] The three sons of Karl were all of them kings (practically
sub-kings) of one part or another of his vast domains. The great
partition of the empire was not arranged by Charlemagne till after
Alcuin’s death.

[44] It will be borne in mind that Alcuin was only in deacon’s orders.

[45] This is one of the various indications of date which enable us to
calculate the time at which the biography was written.

[46] Charles and Pepin died before their father, and Louis became sole
emperor and ruler of all that Charlemagne had held.

[47] With regard to some possible confusion here between Karl and his
eldest son Charles, see p. 246.

[48] Vita, c. 21.

[49] It is frequently impossible to calculate a man’s nationality from
his name in the century with which we are dealing, and it is unsafe to
guess at it. Aigulf, for instance, was the name of the Gothic Count of
Maguelone, the cup-bearer of Karl’s son, Pepin of Aquitaine, and father
of Benedict of Aniane.

[50] Engelsaxo.

[51] “Venit iste Britto vel Scotto.” The Scot in those days was the
Irishman. We may imagine that “Scotto” was formed derisively to match
“Britto”. But it should be remembered that in Alcuin’s dialogue on
grammar the disputants are Saxo and Franco, a very similar formation.

[52] It is of at least local interest to remark that the latest of many
burnings of York Minster, Alcuin’s old abode, was caused very much in
the same way. Carpenters had been at work, in the bell-chamber of the
south-west tower, and left a candle burning on the table where they
had been planing wood. The candle burned low and fell over on to some
shavings, to which it set fire, and thence the flame grew and grew till
it burst out, and the great fire of May 20, 1840, was the result. This
present writer was a boy of six at the time, and from his bedroom window
saw it all, from the beginning, through the sounding boards of the
chamber. He was eventually carried off in a blanket, as the tower would
have fallen into his father’s house if it had come down. The house, it
may be added, was the house in which Guy Fawkes was born. See also p. 82.

[53] The word _monasterium_ has so many meanings that we cannot be
sure what precisely is here meant. It may possibly mean the _maius
monasterium_, Marmoutier, see p. 221.

[54] The historian here quoted, a contemporary of St. Martin, must not
be confused with Sulpicius, Archbishop of Bourges, A.D. 584, surnamed
Severus to distinguish him from a second Sulpicius Archbishop of Bourges,
surnamed Pius, who died A.D. 644.

[55] “Hesterna die indicatur mihi,” &c. We fortunately have the letter.
It is Epistle I of the collected works of Sulpicius.

[56] It may be that we have here an early hint of a practice of which we
have record in later times. The water which had been used for washing
the tomb of St. Martin was held to have healing properties in the later
middle ages.

[57] Believed at that time to have been written by St. Paul.

[58] In our editions, Arno and not Fredegisus was the recipient of this
treatise.

[59] Presumably the same as Withso and Witto.

[60] “Franci et Saxonis,” the author says. But in the disputatious
dialogue they are called Saxo and Franco. Saxo addresses Franco as _O
Franco!_ but on one occasion he slips into the vocative _France_: “En
habes, France, de adverbio satis.” _Fr._ “Non satis; pausemus tamen ad
horam.” _Saxo._ “Pausemus.” The dialogue is much of the same kind as that
found in Aldhelm’s works a hundred years earlier between Magister and
Discipulus. See my _St. Aldhelm_, ch. xii.

[61] We have seen from the author that he could very seldom shed tears,
p. 27.

[62] There is a delicate touch in putting into the devil’s mouth the
literal name and not the intimate name.

[63] Cant. iv. 4.

[64] A cynic might remark that Alcuin did not answer the clever question
of the enemy. He could not deny that he was elaborately deceiving his
attendants.

[65] Sulpicius Severus, Life, c. 25.

[66] Theodulf of Orleans makes a little apology to Karl for Alcuin’s use
of wine and beer (not English beer! see p. 267):

    Aut si, Bacche, tui aut Cerealis pocla liquoris
      Porgere praecipiat, fors et utrumque volet;
    Quo melius doceat, melius sua fistula cantet,
      Si doctrinalis pectoris antra riget.

If he bids bring forth cups of thy liquor, O Bacchus, or cups of the
liquor of corn, and perhaps takes both; it is that he may teach the
better, the better may sing his stave, if he moistens the recesses of his
instructive breast.

[67] “Celebrabat omni die missarum solemnia multa.”

[68] Based on Isa. xxii. 22.

[69] See p. 211.

[70] The biographer here passes in a telling manner to the present tense.

[71] Again the use of Alcuin’s baptismal name at a critical point.

[72] This is one of the endless number of cases in which it is made quite
clear that the original attraction to Rome was not the asserted bishopric
of Peter, but the fact of the tombs of Peter and Paul. The cult of these
two chiefs, princes of the Apostles, was the source of the reputation of
Rome. See Appendix D.

[73] See p. 268.

[74] The title consists of twenty-four elegiacs, with only ordinary
thoughts.

[75] _Gesta Regum_, i. 3.

[76] The mention of Ascension Day in the account of Bede’s death is in
the judgement of some scholars more easily reconciled with the incidence
of Ascension Day in the year 742.

[77] The see of Dunwich appears to have been vacant then.

[78] All this tells against the now exploded belief that Theodore
established the parochial system. His _paroichia_ was the diocese.

[79] The earliest pieces of English now extant in the original form are
the inscriptions in Anglian runes on the cross erected in 670 in the
churchyard of Bewcastle, in memory of the sub-king Alchfrith (see p.
9). The main inscription runs thus: + This sigbecn thun setton hwaetred
wothgar olwfwolthu aft alkfrithu ean küning eac oswiung + gebid heo sinna
sowhula. + This token of victory Hwaetred Wothgar Olwfwolthu caused make
in memory of Alcfrith once king and son of Oswy. + Pray for the high sin
of his soul. See also p. 296.

[80] See p. 5.

[81] _In ordinatione._

[82] _Constituant._

[83] He was Bishop of Winchester A.D. 1367 to 1398; Wilfrith was Bishop
of York A.D. 669 to 678.

[84] Eton was founded, in a very small way, in 1440.

[85] As to the treatment of ancient ecclesiastical MSS. in one part of
France at the time of the Revolution, see pages 219, &c.

[86] It is now maintained that ‘Saxon’ is formed from _saxa_, stones,
but for a different reason, being taken as describing ‘armed men’ in the
stone age.

[87] It is so, also, in Eddi’s prose account, “pro lachrymis ad aures Dei
pervenientibus.”

[88] See also p. 137.

[89] See my _Lessons from Early English Church History_, pp. 74, 75.

[90] Our word “inn” means a place enclosed, or a place comprising an
enclosure.

[91] p. xxiii.

[92] See also p. 141.

[93] “Monasterium” is used in the middle ages for a parish church in
the country. “Minster” has always been a special Yorkshire word, “York
Minster,” “Ripon Minster,” “Beverley Minster.” The unique inscription
at the side of the sun-dial at Kirkdale Church, dated as in the days of
Tostig the Earl, sets forth that “Orm Gamal-suna bohte Sanctus Gregorius
minster”.

[94] The writer of this cannot refrain from mentioning a curious
coincidence of dates and experience between himself and his schoolfellow
and head master Alcuin. York Minster was burned on May 23, 741, when
Alcuin was six years old. The cathedral school being within the
precincts, Alcuin would have to be removed to a place of safety.
York Minster was burned on May 20, 1840, curiously near to being the
eleven-hundredth anniversary of the burning on May 23, 741, and the
present writer, then aged six, was carried from his bed in the minster
precincts to a place of safety in Castlegate.

[95] An. DCC.XLI. Her forbarn Eoferwic. This entry is found in the two
MSS. of the Chronicle known as Cotton. Tib. B. 1 and Bodl. Laud. 636.
These two MSS. have special information about Northumbrian affairs.
They differ in the spelling of proper names, but in this case they take
the same spelling of the Anglian name of York, which appears in five
different forms in the Chronicle.

[96] Before Froben this was read Alcuinus, clearly an impossible reading
in a list drawn up by Alcuin himself, and at a time when his chief effort
of versification could not be in the library.

[97] See Appendix B, p. 310.

[98] Haddan and Stubbs, iii. 440.

[99] A.D. 790-805.

[100] “Sacerdos.” It appears clear that Alcuin is using the word as
equivalent to “episcopus”, as it frequently was.

[101] Mal. ii. 7.

[102] “Speculator.”

[103] “Super-speculator.” Isidore explains in his Etymologies that
bishops are called “episcopi” by the Greeks and “speculatores” by the
Latins, because they are set on high in the church.

[104] “Sacerdotes.” That Alcuin is speaking of bishops, not of priests
in general, is clear from his verses at the end of the letter, where he
repeats his phrases “terrae sal”, “lumina inundi”, and adds “Bis sex
signa poli”, the twelve stars of the sky, namely the bishops of the
Southern Province. These were, not counting Athelhard himself, Higbert of
Lichfield, Kenwalch or Eadbald of London, Kinbert of Winchester, Unwona
of Leicester, Ceolwulf of Lindsey, Denefrith of Sherborne, Aelhun of
Dunwich, Alheard of Elmham, Heathred of Worcester, Ceolmund of Hereford,
Wiothun of Selsey, Weremund of Rochester.

[105] “Consacerdotes.”

[106] Prov. xviii. 19. The Vulgate and the Septuagint versions give the
force of the passage in Alcuin’s sense. The Authorised Version gives, “A
brother offended _is harder to be won_ than a strong city.” The Revised
Version agrees exactly with the A.V.

[107] Gildus, in Alcuin.

[108] It may be supposed that Offa was engaged in building an abbey
church at St. Albans. William of Malmesbury says of the church built by
Offa in honour of St Alban (_Gesta Regum_, i. 4): “The relics of St.
Alban, at that time buried in obscurity, he had reverently taken up and
placed in a shrine decorated to the fullest extent of royal munificence
with gold and jewels; a church of most beautiful workmanship was there
erected, and a society of monks assembled.” The black stones may have
been wanted for pavements.

[109] Pope Hadrian I. He died December 27, 795, having held the Papacy
for twenty-three years, with great distinction, at a most important time
in its history.

[110] Simeon of Durham, under the year 795.

[111] This would naturally mean Ireland at that time, but it is far from
clear that Ireland is meant.

[112] Isa. i. 4.

[113] Offa died July 26, 796, and Ecgfrith died in the middle of December
in the same year, after a reign of 141 days.

[114] In each of these two cases the new king was, in this year 796, most
unexpectedly raised to the throne from a comparatively poor position, in
which he had married a wife of his own position. Alcuin fears that they
will be tempted to cast off the early wife and take some lady more fitted
for a throne.

[115] This prophecy was not fulfilled. It was not till nine years after
the date of this letter that Eardwulf was expelled from the kingdom.

[116] Prov. xx. 28.

[117] Ps. xxiv. 10, Vulgate; xxv. 10, A. V.; xxv. 10, Psalter.

[118] Haddan and Stubbs, iii. 521, from _William of Malmesbury_, G. R. i.
4.

[119] A mancus was more than one-third of a pound, but that conveys no
real idea to the modern mind of its actual value.

[120] _Gesta Regum_, i. 4.

[121] Haddan and Stubbs, _Councils_, iii. 483. The names stand as
follows: “+ Ego Offa Rex Dei dono propriam donationis libertatem signo
sanctæ crucis confirmo. + Ego Ecgferth, filius Regis, consensi. +
Signum Hygeberhti Archiepiscopi. + Signum Ceolulfi Episcopi. + Signum
Æthelheardi Archiepiscopi.” Followed by eight bishops and three abbats.

[122] It has already been noted that Alcuin found it very difficult to
shed tears.

[123] “Ceolmund the duke,” “Ceolmund the minister,” often appears in the
Mercian documents of the time.

[124] Simeon of Durham, under the year 779, has the entry, Duke Aldred,
the slayer of King Ethelred, was slain by Duke Thorhtmund in revenge for
his lord.

[125] This amounts to an official representation of the three great
powers, the West Saxons, the Mercians, and the Northumbrians.

[126] Haddan and Stubbs, iii. 486.

[127] An Irishman.

[128] From 784 to 819.

[129] Haddan and Stubbs, iii. 487.

[130] We know nothing certain of this person.

[131] We cannot trace his pedigree.

[132] Simeon of Durham says that he committed suicide.

[133] In theory, at least, we know better now.

[134] A.D. 779 to 788.

[135] James ii. 13.

[136] Pet. iv. 17.

[137] He died in 703.

[138] He resigned in 716, and took from the library of Wearmouth the
Codex Amiatinus as a present to the Pope. This huge and noble codex is
now in the Laurenziana, in Florence. See my _Lessons from Early English
Church History_, pp. 72-75.

[139] See my _Theodore and Wilfrith_, pp. 106, 124, and for Acca’s Cross,
pp. 257-61.

[140] Bishop of Whithern (Candentis-Casae, Ep. 20, usually Candidae
Casae), 777-789; of Hexham, 789-797.

[141] Writing to an Englishman, Alcuin gives his Anglian name in its
Anglian spelling and without a Latin termination.

[142] See p. 123. The full story is given by Simeon of Durham under the
year 790, meaning 791: “In the second year of Ethelred (i. e. of his
restored sovereignty) Duke Eardulf was captured and taken to Ripon, and
was ordered by the said king to be put to death outside the gate of the
monastery. The brethren carried the body to the church with Gregorian
chants, and placed it in a shed outside the door. He was found after
midnight in the church, alive.”

[143] In April, 796, the Patrician Osbald was made king by certain
leading men of the nation. But after twenty-seven days he was deserted by
the whole of the royal family and the chief men, and was put to flight
and banished from the kingdom. He escaped with a few followers to the
Isle of Lindisfarne, and thence went by sea with some of the brethren to
the king of the Picts. Sim. Dur. 795.

[144] Slain at Cobre (Corbridge has been suggested), April 18, 796.

[145] The Picts of the east of Scotland.

[146] Matt. xviii. 15, “Go and tell him his fault between thee and him
alone.”

[147] John viii. 34.

[148] Cant. viii. 7.

[149] 1 Tim. v. 20.

[150] Matt. xii. 50. It will be seen that Alcuin does not quote exactly.
The Vulgate has _frater et soror et mater_.

[151] _Insula Sanctorum et Doctorum_, p. 272.

[152] No doubt oil specially pure, and vegetable; we may safely say olive
oil, for purposes of chrism. Theodore of Canterbury informs us (_Theodore
and Wilfrith_, S.P.C.K. p. 180) that “according to the Greeks a presbyter
can ... make the oil for exorcism and the chrism for the sick, if
necessary; but according to the Romans only a bishop can do so”. Hence
the mention of bishops in the letter of Alcuin. See also page 245, note 2.

[153] In this case Alcuin writes _Karli regis_; in other cases he uses
the full form Carolus, which comes from rolling the r in Karlus.

[154] Shekels. On the argument that the didrachma was the shekel in the
New Testament the sicle may be put at 1_s._ 7½_d._, but that gives no
idea of its purchasing power then, which was probably nearer £1. It will
be seen that in a later sentence sicles of pure gold are specified.

[155] See p. 79.

[156] As in _year_ the Anglo-Saxon _g_ was pronounced as _y_, hence the
name Mayo. In east Yorkshire a gate is still called a _yet_.

[157] See Appendix B.

[158] The passage is incomplete, but this is the sense of it.

[159] This is not Lull of Malmesbury, who was so great a help to
Boniface; he died an archbishop in 787.

[160] A presbyter, who succeeded his namesake in the archbishopric.

[161] We cannot imagine another dignity open to an aged Archbishop of
York to be preferred to that which he already held. But it is evident
that Alcuin referred to his retirement upon an abbacy, which would set
him comparatively free from calls for exertion.

[162] Eph. v. 23.

[163] It has been supposed that Alcuin refers to some purpose of
bequeathing the library of York to Eanbald II.

[164] Ecclus. vi. 6.

[165] Ethelred of Northumbria was killed and Offa of Mercia died in this
year 796.

[166] James v. 11. Our version would have suited the occasion better than
the Vulgate, “Ye have heard of the patience of Job.”

[167] In the older MSS. _in Deo_, which has a subtle unintentional
bearing on the controversy with which we are dealing; unintentional if,
as seems certain, we possess MSS. of the Athanasian symbol of a date
earlier than the beginning of the heresy of Felix.

[168] The punctuation is that of Wattenbach and Dümmler. Migne puts a
full stop after the Pope and another after the Patriarch: this would seem
to make _singuli_ refer to two persons only, the two bishops. The Roman
controversialist makes a different punctuation, putting a full stop after
the Pope and running the three others together. The whole passage ought
to be read in the Latin without any punctuation. See Appendix C, p. 319.

[169] Ep. 30, A.D. 793.

[170] But see p. 283.

[171] Bede i. 25, “Imaginem Domini salvatoris in tabula depictam.”

[172] The historian-monk of St. Gallen says that his new eyes were better
than his old ones, both for use and to look at.

[173] Ep. 120, to Arno.

[174] The account which follows is taken from the contemporary annals of
Eginhart.

[175] Under the year 800.

[176] The actual words are given by Baronius, but with a vague reference
to his authority. They are given at length by Milman, _Hist. of Lat.
Christianity_, ii. 205.

[177] The ordinary word for the crypt or other receptacle of the body of
a saint.

[178] Stephen I was Pope 252 to 257. Another Stephen was elected on March
14, 752, but died before his consecration. On March 26, 752, the Stephen
here spoken of was elected. He is thus more properly called Stephen II
than Stephen III; and Stephen IV, who appears in Karl’s time, should be
called Stephen III. Many writers, however, call them Stephen III and
Stephen IV.

[179] Labbe, _Concil._ xii. 539.

[180] Labbe, _Concil._ xii. 543.

[181] See p. 26.

[182] The district was rich in wine, fruit, flowers, and honey.

[183] Archbishop Albert of York; see p. 84.

[184] Solomon’s Song, iv. 12—v. 2.

[185] Isaiah, lv. 1.

[186] But see p. 209.

[187] There are great difficulties in the way of accepting this statement
of a mission by Karl in 773. The passage calls Albinus _deliciosus ipsius
regis_, and is quoted by Ducange as an evidence of the use of the word.
It appears to imply a more intimate acquaintance than at that early date
there can have been.

[188] In modern times, better wine is grown near Tours than near Orleans.
The wines of Vouvray, for example, beyond Marmoutier, are much esteemed.
A waiter at Tours concedes that wine is still grown at Orleans, _mais pas
de spécialité comme ici_.

[189] The spellings of ordinary names are varied in those times almost at
will, and it is interesting to note how often the letter _h_ plays a part
in the variation.

[190] 1 Chron. xxvii. 27.

[191] Song of Songs, ii. 4. Alcuin takes on the whole the Vulgate
version. It will be seen by reference to the text and margin of the
Authorised and the Revised Versions that there is much variety in the
rendering of the Hebrew, especially as regards the word here rendered
“flowers”. The Septuagint gives a sixth meaning, “perfumes” or “unguents”.

[192] 1 Chron. xxvii. 32. Alcuin makes here an unusually bold use of
Scripture, first in taking to himself the description of David’s uncle,
Jonathan, and then in putting into his mouth a cento of phrases from
Judges xvi. 4, Jer. xlviii. 33, Prov. v. 16.

[193] This song is built up from Song of Solomon vii. 12, v. 1, 2, vii.
9, vi. 3, and Isa lv. 1.

[194] Song of Songs v. 3.

[195] Luke xi. 5, 7.

[196] 2 Sam. xxi. 1, 2.

[197] This appears to be going beyond a joke.

[198] Prov. xxv. 24.

[199] This is of course not the usually assigned derivation; but it
sounds the more reasonable of the two.

[200] Plate II.

[201] Plate III.

[202] Plate IV.

[203] Multitudo paganorum idolatriis dedita. Per cryptas et latibula cum
paucis Christianis per eumdem conversis, mysterium solemnitatis diei
Dominici clanculo celebrabat.

[204] See p. 221.

[205] For further extracts from Hadrian’s decree, see p. 228.

[206] His last testament is printed by Migne in the Appendix to the works
of Gregory of Tours, columns 1148-51. “Simul et omnes libros meos praeter
Evangeliorum librum quem scripsit Hilarius quondam Pictavensis sacerdos
quem tibi Eufronio fratri et consacerdoti dilectissimo cum prefata theca
do lego volo statuo.” This theca was one of silver, containing relics of
saints, which he used to carry about with him. Another theca, gilt, was
in his chest, with two chalices of gold and a gold cross made by Mabuin;
these he left to his church.

[207] _Gesta Regum_, i. 3.

[208] See p. 203.

[209] But see p. 50.

[210] See p. 217.

[211] Printed in _Gallia Christiana_ under Tours. See p. 228.

[212] See p. 217.

[213] It may be helpful to remember that the abbey was originally outside
the ancient Roman city, and its district was called Martinopolis. The
ancient Gallican bishoprics were bishoprics of cities rather than of
dioceses in our wide sense of the word. This may conceivably have a
bearing on the curious question raised by Hadrian.

[214] See my _Constitution of French Chapters_, Proceedings of St. Paul’s
Ecclesiological Society, Vol. III, 1895.

[215] Micah v. 5, 6.

[216] James ii. 13.

[217] We know from other sources that this “&c.” meant Most Serene
Augustus, crowned by God, great peace-making Emperor, Governor of the
Roman Empire, by the mercy of God King of the Franks and of the Lombards.

[218] The emperor irresistibly reminds us of the Eton master and the boy
who complained that his name was not that called for punishment:—

    Sive tu mavis Bōsănquet vocari
                  Sive Bōsănquet,
    Te vapulabo.

[219] That is, Theodulfus, the Bishop of Orleans.

[220] Romans xiv. 4.

[221] 1 Kings xx. 42.

[222] This refers, no doubt, to the immunity of St. Martin’s from the
intervention of the Archbishop.

[223] _Eulogias._ Wattenbach and Dümmler gloss this _cibos_. From its
original meaning of the consecrated wafer it came to mean the _pain
benit_, then any present, and then a salutation. There is no clue to its
special meaning here.

[224] The character of the Latin verse may be gathered from the closing
words of this hexameter, _est non laudabile cui nil_.

[225] In another poem Theodulf begs Queen Luitgard to send him some oil
of balsam, to enable him to compose and consecrate cream for chrism. We
must suppose that Luitgard had some special connexion with ports to which
balsams were brought.

    Balsameum regina mihi transmitte liquorem,
      Quo bene per populos chrismatis unguen eat.
    Inde seges crescet tibimet mercedis opimae
      Christicolum nomen cum dabit unguen idem.

[226] See p. 33.

[227] That is, a summary, epitome; not as yet a service-book.

[228] Ps. lxx. 14. The Vulgate, which Alcuin quotes, has more point for
his present purpose, _adiiciam super omnem laudem tuam_, “I will add Thy
praise above all praise.”

[229] Exod. xxiii. 8. Alcuin reads _corda sapientium_ where the Vulgate
has _prudentes_.

[230] The letter was written in Lent. Easter day in 800 was April 19.

[231] These were Gisla, Charlemagne’s sister, and Rodtruda, his daughter;
see also p. 253.

[232] Adapted from chapters i and ii of Solomon’s Song.

[233]

    Nomine pandecten proprio vocitare memento
      Hoc corpus sacrum, lector, in ore tuo.
    Quid nunc a multis constat bibliotheca dictum
      Nomine non proprio, ut lingua pelasga probat.

A _pandect_ was the whole Bible, Old and New Testament, as its name,
“containing everything,” implies. A _bibliotheca_, like our word
“library,” meant both a room or case where books were stored, and also
the collection of books in the place; hence it might be used for the
pandect, on the ground that it was a collection of all the books of the
Bible.

[234] Wattenbach and Dümmler, 223-4.

[235] See on this point pp. 86-9.

[236] See my _Anglo-Saxon Coronation Forms, and the use of the word
Protestant in the Coronation Oath_, S. P. C. K.

[237] That is, if the Pope has recovered from the attempt to blind him
and cut out his tongue.

[238] Presumably, if new charges are made against the Pope.

[239] A reference to Pliny’s Natural History, where wolves are credited
with this power; see also Virgil, _Ecl._ ix. 53, 54.

[240] A reference to Leo’s denial of the charges against him at
Paderborn, and also to St. Peter’s denial. We must credit Alcuin with
having seen that he would be taken to mean that one was as true as the
other. The denial was renewed at Rome, see p. 189.

[241] See p. 208.

[242] St. Martin’s at Tours.

[243] His pupils.

[244] See p. 72.

[245] It is a curious coincidence that the ivory comb found in St.
Cuthbert’s coffin, provided by Westone after the Norman Conquest, had—as
nearly as we can count—sixty teeth, sixteen large and forty-four small.
Alcuin’s comb may have had the same double row of teeth, with a knob in
the shape of a lion’s head projecting from the ends of the central ivory.

[246] _Monumenta Alcuiniana_, Wattenbach and Dümmler, p. 63.

[247] _Italian Alps_, Longmans, 1875, Appendix D, pp. 371-3.

[248] Kemble, _Cod. Dipl._ ii. 208-62. Coolidge, _Swiss Travel_, 160.
“Perpessus sit gelidis glacierum (and _glaciarum_) flatibus, et pennino
exercitu malignorum spirituum.”

[249] _Gesta Pontificum_, Rolls series, pp. 25, 26, 265.

[250] See my _Lessons from Early English Church History_, pp. 45, 46.

[251] Written from Rome; not preserved.

[252] Leo III.

[253] See p. 281 note.

[254] Leo III, see p. 188.

[255] There were two monasteries with this dedication. One of these,
_Iuvavense_, was at Salzburg, and probably it is the one to which
reference is made.

[256] See p. 168.

[257] It is probable that he was called Cuckoo from the refrain of some
favourite song of his. The Teutonic name for the “bird of spring” was not
a likely personal name, any more than cuckoo is with us.

[258] See also Epistle 186 in Appendix A.

[259] Here, and in Ep. 108, to Arno, Alcuin combines two phrases from the
Song of Solomon, v. 7 and 8: “The watchmen have wounded me,” “I am sick
of love.” In the letter to Arno he appears to quote the actual words of
a text in his possession: _vulnerata karitate ego sum_; in the present
letter he writes _caritatis calamo vulneratus sum_. The Vulgate has
_vulneraverunt me_—_amore langueo_. See p. 275.

[260] Eginhart in his life of Karl (ch. 25) states that the king studied
grammar under Peter of Pisa, an aged deacon.

[261] This was Angilbertus.

[262] That is, Eginhart, the man skilled in many arts, as was Bezaleel,
the chief architect of the Tabernacle.

[263] See p. 33.

[264] The Wends.

[265] Eginhard tells us under this year 789 that Karl crossed the Rhine
at Cologne with a great army, pushed through Saxony as far as the Elbe,
and brought the Wiltzi to terms. That, he says, is their name in the
Frank tongue. In their own tongue they are Welatabi.

[266] The Huns, or Avars, had in the previous year invaded Italy and
Bavaria.

[267] See p. 151.

[268] “Amice carissime.”

[269] See my _Aldhelm_, S.P.C.K., p. 129.

[270] Mansi, _Concilia_, xiii. 937.

[271] Vienna, 1904.

[272] Cummings, _History of Architecture in Italy_, ii. 71.

[273] Pertz, _Monumenta_ (_Scriptores_), ii. 665, 6.

[274] de ista die.

[275] savoir et pouvoir me donne.

[276] chacune.

[277] comme homme.

[278] droit.

[279] faciet.

[280] secundum meum velle.

[281] _Concilium Liptinense._

[282] A photograph of this inscription is reproduced at p. 209 of my
_Conversion of the Heptarchy_.

[283] This must have come very near to being an umbrella.

[284] Dan. xiv. 35, Vulgate.

[285] _Bonefatii._ This was, of course, the great English missionary
Archbishop of Maintz, martyred at Dorkum in 755.

[286] 1 Cor. xv. 58.

[287] Rom. xii. 2.

[288] Based on 1 Pet. ii. 1.

[289] He was Abbat of Fulda from 780 to 802, when he resigned the office.

[290] This, no doubt, is the origin of the tradition that Alcuin wrote
the Office for Trinity Sunday. See pp. 20, 173.

[291] Rom. xiv. 5.

[292] It will be observed that no mention is made of a king of Kent. See
p. 91.

[293] See the list on the next pages.

[294] This would indicate that the _aula_ at which they had met the king
and held the council was one of Offa’s outlying manors, and not his
central royal residence.

[295] Supposed, on slight reasoning, to have been held at Corbridge, see
p. 216.

[296] Besides those in the Pope’s list.

[297] _Sacerdos._ It is uncertain to how late a date _sacerdos_ is to be
rendered bishop.

[298] Wattenbach and Dümmler give only the headings of the chapters, as
here. The chapters themselves will be found in Haddan and Stubbs, iii.
448-58.

[299] There are many injunctions that priests and others serving at the
altar must wear drawers. There is quite a large literature on the subject
of these garments (_femoralia_), in which such of the early fathers as
are given to symbolism find symbolic meanings. They were an essential
part of the dress of the Levitical priesthood (Exod. xxviii. 42, 43).

[300] Probably referring to the practice of tattooing.

[301] Prudentius (_Dipt._ i. 3) has “Adam” not “humum”.

[302] This was Tilbert, Bishop of Hexham (Augustald) 781-789. There is
no reason of seniority or priority that should make him sign above the
Archbishop. If, as is probable, the Council was held at Corbridge, in his
diocese, he might sign first as bishop of the place.

[303] _Praesul._ In the other signatures _episcopus_ is used.

[304] _Candens-casa_, usually _Candida-casa_, so named from its being the
first church built of white stone in that region.

[305] _Myensis._ See p. 156. Aldulf was consecrated in 786, the year of
this Council, by Eanbald, Tilberht, and Hygbald, at Corbridge. It is on
this account that the Germans think the Council was held at Corbridge.
Hexham would equally meet the case, and better meets the suggestion of a
previous note.

[306] Not as yet identified.

[307] It is rather quaint that Sigha should have chosen _placido mente_
as the phrase to describe his manner of assent to No. 12 above, for two
years later he killed King Aelfwald, and he eventually died by his own
hand.

[308] Of Ripon, 786-787.

[309] Some read Alquinum here, and make Alcuin one of the two lectores.

[310] The text has two forms of this variously spelled name.

[311] Higbert of Lichfield 779-802.

[312] Lindsey 767-796. The Lindisfaras had nothing to do with Lindisfarne.

[313] Leicester 781-802.

[314] Elmham 786-811, see p. 159.

[315] London 794-801.

[316] Kinbert of Winchester 785-801.

[317] Hendred of Dunwich, 781-789.

[318] Esne of Hereford 781-789.

[319] Tolta of Selsey 781-789.

[320] Rochester 785-803.

[321] Sherborn 766-793.

[322] Worcester 781-798.

[323] “Aimoini monachi, qui antea Annonii nomine editus est, Historiae
Francorum” Lib. V. _Parisiis._ 1567.

[324] Omitted in the quotation.




INDEX


  A

  Abrenuntiatio diaboli, 295.

  Abulabaz, 289, 324.

  Acca, 137.

  Adalbert, 2, 27.

  Adoptionism, 24, 174.

  Adoration of Charlemagne, 190, 191.

  Aigulf, 32.

  Aimoin, 322.

  Albert (York), 16, 53, 80.

  Albinus (Alcuin), 15.

  Alchfrith, 8.

  Alchred, 122.

  Alcuin, called Flaccus, 1;
    Albinus, 15;
    studies Virgil, 2, 11;
    conversion, 11;
    trained by Ecgbert, 12,
    by Albert, 16;
    a vision, 18;
    ordained deacon, 19;
    master of the School of York, 20;
    joins Karl, 22;
    revisits England, 24;
    returns to France, 24;
    refutes Felix, 25, 176, 299;
    wishes to retire to Fulda, 26;
    manner of life, 26;
    knowledge of secrets, 2, 29, 30, 33, 34, 223;
    extinguishes fire, 37;
    writings, 42, 51-3,
    poem on York, ch. iv,
    lesser poems, 268, 277, 298,
    a riddle, 268;
    drinks wine, 45,
    beer (not English, 267), 45 _n._;
    interview with the devil, 43;
    death, 46, 303;
    miracles, 49;
    alms for his soul, 224;
    his chief dates, 52, 85, 172;
    the pallium, 77;
    inherits the library of York, 84;
    a fisherman, 268;
    liturgical work, 260, 308;
    singing, 260;
    interest in missions, 285-9;
    Bibles, 257;
    advises reference to Hadrian, 177-9;
    settles at Tours, 202;
    his styles, 264-9;
    mentions Eginhart, 283;
    is mentioned by Eginhart, 284;
    praised by William of Malmesbury, 52;
    described by Theodulf, 45 _n._, 245.

  Alcuin’s letters to:—
    Abbat, an, 285.
    Adalhard, 264.
    Arno, 170, 235, 268, 270, 271, 273-6, 287, 289, 298, 299, 300.
    Athilhard, 94, 115, 116, 117.
    Beornwin, 98.
    Bishop, a, (sanctuary), 234.
    Britain, the pontiffs of, 157.
    Candida Casa, 301.
    Candidus and Nathanael, 231.
    Charles (Karl’s son), 248, 250.
    Colcu, 150, 286.
    Cuckoo, the, 168, 169.
    Dunwich and Elmham, 159, 301.
    Eanbald I, 161.
    Eanbald II, 164, 166, 167.
    Eardulf, 141.
    Elmham and Dunwich, 159, 301.
    Etheldryth, 146, 148.
    Fulda, 305.
    Gisla and Rotruda, 253.
    Hexham, 137.
    Hibernia, 153.
    Higbald, 132, 170, 287.
    Jarrow, 135.
    Joseph, 267.
    Karl, 117, 191, 202, 208, 238, 247 (?), 254, 287, 300, 301, 302.
    Kenulf, 109.
    Leo III, 77.
    Lindisfarne, 132, 135.
    Mayo, 154.
    Megenfrid, 288.
    Mercian, a, 107.
    Offa, 93, 103.
    Osbald, 143.
    Paulinus, 270.
    Pepin, 252.
    Peter of Milan, 270.
    Pontiffs of Britain, 157.
    Remedius, 270.
    Rotruda, 253.
    Theodulf, 206.
    Uulfhard, 205.
    Wearmouth, 135.
    York, 162.

  Aldhelm, 52, 107.

  Aldric, 2.

  Alfwold, 123.

  Alps, 269-72.

  Amalgarius, 242.

  Anglo-Saxon, Coronation Forms, 261-3.

  Anglo-Saxon, Earliest Examples of, 296, 297.

  Archpresbyters, 230.

  Areida, 151.

  Arno, 47, 276.

  Aust, 114.


  B

  Baldhuninga, 151.

  Balther, 79.

  Bede, letter to Ecgbert, ch. iii.

  Bede, Story of, 70.

  Beer, 45 _n._

  Beer, acid in Northumbria, 267.

  Benedict of Aniane, 30.

  Beornrad, 7.

  Bewcastle Cross, 9, 57, 296.

  Bibles, Alcuin’s, 257.

  Billfrith, 125.

  Biscop, 127.

  Bishops, their conduct, 55.

  Bishops, dioceses too large, 57.

  Bishops, election of, 163.

  Boniface, 26, 285, 305.

  Boniface, his abrenuntiatio diaboli, 295.

  Bouulf, 307.

  Bremen, 285.

  British Museum, Alcuin’s Bible, 257.


  C

  Ceolfrith, 78.

  Charlemagne, _see_ Karl.

  Chur, 269.

  Coire, 269.

  Colcu, 150-3.

  Cold in the Alps, 271-3.

  Columba, _see_ Rotruda.

  Comb, riddle of, 269.

  Constantine Copronymus, 201.

  Constantine the Great, Donation by, 195, 320.

  Constantine VI, 193.

  Cormery, 31, 223-8.

  Coronation Forms, Anglo-Saxon, 261-3.

  Cuckoo, the (Cuculus), Arno’s letter to, 276.

  Cuckoo, Alcuin’s lament on, 277.


  D

  Danes, 126.

  Devil, interview of Alcuin with, 43;
    of St. Martin, 44.

  Dictated letters, &c., 7.

  Donation of Constantine, 195, 320, 321.

  Drithelme, vision of, 273.

  Dunwich, 159, 301.


  E

  Eadbert, 76, 122.

  Eadfrith, 125.

  Eanbald I (York), 21, 161.

  Eanbald II, 163-9.

  Eanred, 124.

  Eardulf, 123.

  Eata, 79.

  Ecgbert (Ireland), 8.

  Ecgbert (York), 12, 13, 53, 54, 76.

  Ecgfrith, 106.

  Eginhard (Bezaleel), 33, 283, 284.

  Elephants, 289-92.

  Elfwald, 124.

  Elmham, 159, 301.

  Epternach, 6.

  Ethelred I, 123.

  Ethelred II, 124.

  Ethelwald, 122, 125.


  F

  Felix, 174-9, 298.

  Ferrières, 1, 28.

  Frankfort, Council of, 183.

  Fredegisus (Fridugisus), 27, 226, 227, 256.

  Fulda, 26, Appendix A.


  G

  George, legate, 310.

  Gisla (Lucia), 253;
    letter to Alcuin, 254, 256.

  Graduale, 260.

  Gregory, Pope, the Pastoral Care, 169-71.


  H

  Hadrian I, 21;
    raises Lichfield to an Archbishopric, ch. v;
    fears Offa, 92;
    to be consulted on a treatise of Felix, 177;
    letter to Karl, 323.

  Harun al Raschid, 324.

  Hereditary descent, 5-7.

  Hexham, 137.

  Higbald, 132.

  Huguenots, 210.


  I

  Image-worship, 181-3.

  Irene, 193.

  Itherius, 217, 224-6.


  J

  Jaenbert of Canterbury, despoiled, ch. v.

  Jarrow, 127, 135.

  Joseph, Archbishop of Tours, ch. xiv.


  K

  Karl, 21, 22;
    visits Alcuin at Tours, 31;
    loved foreigners, 33;
    invites Alcuin, 54;
    quarrels with Offa, 98;
    letters to Offa, 99, 119;
    letter to Athelhard, 120;
    his visits to Rome, 186-91;
    grants to Cormery, 225;
    blames the brethren of St. Martin’s, ch. xiv;
    letter to Alcuin (sanctuary), 235;
    described by Theodulf, 245;
    questions to Alcuin, 280-4;
    described by Eginhart, 284.

  Kenulf, 93, 111.


  L

  Languages of Carolingian times, 292-6.

  Lectores, 317.

  Legates, papal, 91, 310.

  Leo III deprives Lichfield, ch. vi;
    charges against, 188-90;
    crowns Charlemagne as Emperor, 190.

  Libraries, at the Cathedral Church of Tours, 220;
    Marmoutier, 221;
    St. Martin’s, 222;
    Tours and the neighbourhood, 219, 222;
    York, 84, 85.

  Libri Carolini, 183.

  Lichfield, made an Archbishopric, ch. v.

  Lindisfarne, 125-7, 132.

  Liturgies, 260.

  Louis, son of Karl, 31.

  Lucia, _see_ Gisla.

  Luitgard, 245.


  M

  Malmesbury, William of, 51, 92, 113, 224, 272;
    property restored, 106.

  Maluin, 317.

  Manuscripts, Alcuin sends to York for, 203;
    of Coronation Forms, 261-3.

  Marmoutier, 212.

  Martin, _see_ St.

  Martinensian Bishops, 217, 228.

  Mayo of the Saxons, 153-6.

  Mercia, Archbishopric of, ch. v.

  Missions, 285.

  Monasteries, suppression of, 59-61;
    hereditary descent, 62;
    bad state of, 65.


  N

  Nathanael, _see_ Fredegisus.

  Nicephorus, 323.

  Ninian, 301.

  Northumbria, list of kings, 122-4.


  O

  Oeren, 6.

  Offa, ch. v; Appendix B.

  Orleans, 206, 232.

  Osbald, 141.

  Osred, 123.

  Osulf, 23, 25.

  Oswulf, 122.


  P

  Pallium, for York, 76, 77;
    for Lichfield, ch. v.

  Pandect, 258.

  Pastoral Care, the, 169-71.

  Paul, _see_ Peter and.

  Pepin, son of Karl, 31, 252.

  Peter and Paul, Saints, 187, 197, 320-3.

  Peter, St., his long letter to the Franks, 199.

  Pettau, 303.

  Pilgrimages, evils of, 65.

  Popes, gifts to, 92, 111;
    charges against, 188-190;
    adoration by, 191.

  Purton, 106.

  Pyttel, 317.


  R

  Raganard, 27-9.

  Remedius (Remigius), 269.

  Ripon, 8.

  Rotruda (Columba), 193, 253, 256;
    letter to Alcuin, 254.

  Runes, 9, 296, 297.

  Rustica, Romana, 293.


  S

  Sanctuary, right of, ch. xiv.

  Saxon, early, 295.

  Scriptures, revision of, 253-9.

  Sigha, 16.

  Sigulf, 1, 20, 27, 49.

  Silk robes, 290, 302.

  Singing, 260.

  Spurn Point, 4.

  St. Martin, scenes in his life, 38-41, 44;
    at Tours, 212, 214, 221.

  St. Martin’s, Tours, fire at, 36;
    status of, 216;
    bishops of, 217, 228.

  Sulpicius Severus, 38, 44, 221.

  Synod, Mercian, 92, 317;
    Northumbrian, 311.


  T

  Tetbury, 106.

  Theodulf of Orleans, 206, ch. xiv, 245;
    describes Karl, 245;
    describes Alcuin, 45 _n._, 235.

  Theophylact, legate, 310.

  Theotisc (Deutsch), 294.

  Tithes, 287.

  Tours, Alcuin settles at, 202;
    character of the brethren, 204, ch. xiv;
    its amenity defended by Alcuin, 209;
    fees at the School, 209;
    the Church of St. Martin, 210-13;
    the Cathedral Church, 213, 214;
    Public Library, 214-16, 219-23;
    Secularisation of St. Martin’s, 216-18;
    two sets of bishops, 217, 228.

  Transubstantiation, 179, 184.

  Trèves, 6.


  U

  Uulfhard, 22, 205.

  Uilhaed (Willehad), 285.


  V

  Vetulus, 1.

  Violence in Northumbria, 123.


  W

  Waldramn, 27, 44.

  Wearmouth, 127, 135.

  Westbury on Trym, 114.

  Whithorn, 301.

  Wido, 239.

  Wighod, 311.

  Wilgils, 4, 5.

  Willibrord, 2-9.

  Wine, 45 _n._, 205-8, 267, 277.

  Withso (variously spelled), 27.


  Y

  York, Bishops and Saints of, ch. iv;
    Cathedral Church of, 80-4;
    Library of, 84, 85;
    School of, 53, 68-70.

                           OXFORD: HORACE HART
                        PRINTER TO THE UNIVERSITY




BOOKS BY THE RIGHT REV. G. F. BROWNE, D.D.


=AUGUSTINE AND HIS COMPANIONS.= Small post 8vo, cloth boards, 2_s._

=THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH IN THESE ISLANDS BEFORE THE COMING OF AUGUSTINE.=
Small post 8vo, cloth boards, 1_s._ 6_d._

=THE CONVERSION OF THE HEPTARCHY.= Small post 8vo, cloth boards, 2_s._
6_d._

=THE VENERABLE BEDE.= Fcap. 8vo, cloth boards, 2_s._

=LESSONS FROM EARLY ENGLISH CHURCH HISTORY.= Small post 8vo, cloth
boards, 1_s._ 6_d._

=ANGLICAN ORDERS.= Paper cover, 3_d._

=ON WHAT ARE MODERN PAPAL CLAIMS FOUNDED?= Paper cover, 3_d._

=THE CONTINUITY OF THE HOLY CATHOLIC CHURCH IN ENGLAND.= Paper cover,
4_d._

=ANGLO-SAXON CORONATION FORMS AND THE WORD PROTESTANT IN THE CORONATION
OATH.= Paper cover, 3_d._

=THE CONTINUITY OF POSSESSION at the REFORMATION.= Paper cover, 3_d._

=THE ELECTION, CONFIRMATION, AND HOMAGE OF BISHOPS OF THE CHURCH OF
ENGLAND.= Paper cover, 3_d._

=GLASTONBURY.= An Address given on August 3, 1897, in the Ruined Choir of
the Abbey. Paper cover, 3_d._

=ST. ALDHELM.= His Life and Times. Small post 8vo, cloth boards, 5_s._

=THE ST. AUGUSTINE COMMEMORATION.= Paper cover, 3_d._

=THEODORE AND WILFRITH.= Small post 8vo, cloth boards, 3_s._ 6_d._

=WHAT IS THE CATHOLIC CHURCH IN ENGLAND?= Paper cover, 3_d._

=WHAT IS MAN?= 1_d._

                SOCIETY FOR PROMOTING CHRISTIAN KNOWLEDGE.
                   LONDON: NORTHUMBERLAND AVENUE, W.C.




PUBLICATIONS

OF THE

Society for Promoting Christian Knowledge.


CHURCH HYMNS.

NEW EDITION. Containing 658 Hymns.

WORDS ONLY.

_Edition A._ Long Primer, demy 18mo.

In various bindings from 1_s._ to 4_s._ 6_d._

_Edition B._ Small Pica, small post 8vo.

In various bindings from 1_s._ 6_d._ to 4_s._ 6_d._

_Edition C._ Pearl, medium 32mo.

Paper cover, 1_d._; limp cloth, cut flush, 2_d._

_Edition D._ Diamond, medium 32mo.

Limp cloth, cut flush, 4_d._

WORDS AND MUSIC.

_Edition E._ Nonpareil 8vo.

In various bindings from 2_s._ 4_d._ to 5_s._ 6_d._

_Edition F._ Long Primer, Imperial 16mo.

In various bindings from 4_s._ 6_d._ to 9_s._


_CONVERSION OF THE WEST._

_Fcap. 8vo, cloth boards, 2s. each._

=THE ENGLISH.= By the late Rev. G. F. MACLEAR, D.D. With Two Maps.

=THE NORTHMEN.= By the above author. With Map.

=THE SLAVS.= By the above author. With Map.

=THE CONTINENTAL TEUTONS.= By the late Very Rev. CHARLES MERIVALE, D.D.,
D.C.L., Dean of Ely. With Map.


_DIOCESAN HISTORIES._

This Series furnishes a library of English Ecclesiastical History.

_Fcap. 8vo, with Map, cloth boards._

=BATH AND WELLS.= By the Rev. W. HUNT. 2_s._ 6_d._

=CANTERBURY.= By the late Rev. R. C. JENKINS. 3_s._ 6_d._

=CARLISLE.= By the late RICHARD S. FERGUSON. 2_s._ 6_d._

=CHESTER.= By the Rev. Canon MORRIS, D.D. 3_s._

=CHICHESTER.= By the Rev. W. R. W. STEPHENS, M.A. 2_s._ 6_d._

=DURHAM.= By the Rev. J. L. LOW. 2_s._ 6_d._

=HEREFORD.= By the late Rev. Canon PHILLOTT. 3_s._

=LICHFIELD.= By the Rev. W. BERESFORD. 2_s._ 6_d._

=LINCOLN.= By the late Rev. Canon E. VENABLES, and the late Venerable
Archdeacon PERRY. 4_s._

=LLANDAFF.= By the Rev. E. J. NEWELL, M.A. 3_s._ 6_d._

=NORWICH.= By the Rev. A. JESSOPP, D.D. 2_s._ 6_d._

=OXFORD.= By the Rev. E. MARSHALL, M.A. 2_s._ 6_d._

=PETERBOROUGH.= By the Rev. G. A. POOLE, M.A. 2_s._ 6_d._

=ROCHESTER.= By the Rev. A. J. PEARMAN, M.A. 4_s._

=SALISBURY.= By the Rev. W. H. JONES. 2_s._ 6_d._

=SODOR AND MAN.= By A. W. MOORE, M.A. 3_s._

=ST. ASAPH.= By the Venerable Archdeacon THOMAS. 2_s._

=ST. DAVID’S.= By the Rev. Canon BEVAN. 2_s._ 6_d._

=WINCHESTER.= By the Rev. W. BENHAM, B.D. 3_s._

=WORCESTER.= By the Rev. I. GREGORY SMITH, M.A., and the Rev. PHIPPS
ONSLOW, M.A. 3_s._ 6_d._

=YORK.= By the Rev. Canon ORNSBY, M.A. 3_s._ 6_d._


_THE HOME LIBRARY._

_Crown 8vo, cloth boards, 2s. 6d. each._

=BLACK AND WHITE.= Mission Stories. By the late H. A. FORDE.

=CHARLEMAGNE.= By the late Rev. E. L. CUTTS, D.D. With Map.

=CONSTANTINE THE GREAT.= The Union of the Church and State. By the late
Rev. E. L. CUTTS, D.D.

=JOHN HUS.= The Commencement of Resistance to Papal Authority on the part
of the Inferior Clergy. By the Rev. A. H. WRATISLAW.

=JUDÆA AND HER RULERS=, from Nebuchadnezzar to Vespasian. By M. BRAMSTON.
With Map.

=MAZARIN.= By the late GUSTAVE MASSON.

=MITSLAV=; or, the Conversion of Pomerania. By the late Right Rev. R.
MILMAN, D.D. With Map.

=NARCISSUS=: a Tale of Early Christian Times. By the Right Rev. W. BOYD
CARPENTER, Bishop of Ripon.

=RICHELIEU.= By the late GUSTAVE MASSON.

=SKETCHES OF THE WOMEN OF CHRISTENDOM.= Dedicated to the Women of India.
By the late Mrs. RUNDLE CHARLES.

=THE CHURCH IN ROMAN GAUL.= By the Rev. R. TRAVERS SMITH. With Map.

=THE CHURCHMAN’S LIFE OF WESLEY.= By R. DENNY URLIN, Esq., F.S.S.

=THE INNER LIFE=, as Revealed in the Correspondence of Celebrated
Christians. Edited by the late Rev. T. ERSKINE.

=THE LIFE OF THE SOUL IN THE WORLD=: its Nature, Needs, Dangers, Sorrows,
Aids, and Joys. By the Rev. F. C. WOODHOUSE, M.A.

=THE NORTH-AFRICAN CHURCH.= By the late Rev. JULIUS LLOYD, M.A. With Map.


_EARLY CHRONICLERS OF EUROPE._

_Crown 8vo, cloth boards. 4s. each._

=ENGLAND.= By JAMES GAIRDNER.

=FRANCE.= By the late GUSTAVE MASSON, B.A., Univ. Gallic.

=ITALY.= By UGO BALZANI.


_THE FATHERS FOR ENGLISH READERS._

_Fcap. 8vo, cloth boards, 2s. each._

=BONIFACE.= By the Rev. Canon GREGORY SMITH, M.A. (1_s._ 6_d._)

=CLEMENT OF ALEXANDRIA.= By the Rev. F. R. MONTGOMERY HITCHCOCK, B.D.
(3_s._)

=LEO THE GREAT.= By the Right Rev. CHARLES GORE, D.D.

=GREGORY THE GREAT.= By the late Rev. J. BARMBY, B.D.

=SAINT AMBROSE=: his Life, Times, and Teaching. By the Rev. R. THORNTON,
D.D.

=SAINT ATHANASIUS=: his Life and Times, By the Rev. R. WHELER BUSH.
(2_s._ 6_d._)

=SAINT AUGUSTINE.= By the late Rev. E. L. CUTTS, D.D.

=SAINT BASIL THE GREAT.= By the Rev. R. T. SMITH, B.D.

=SAINT BERNARD, ABBOT OF CLAIRVAUX, A.D. 1091-1153.= By the Rev. S. J.
EALES, M.A., D.C.L. (2_s._ 6_d._)

=SAINT HILARY OF POITIERS AND SAINT MARTIN OF TOURS.= By the Rev. GIBSON
CAZENOVE, D.D.

=SAINT JEROME.= By the late Rev. E. L. CUTTS, D.D.

=SAINT JOHN OF DAMASCUS.= By the Rev. J. H. LUPTON, M.A.

=SAINT PATRICK=: his Life and Teaching. By the Rev. E. J. NEWELL, M.A.
(2_s._ 6_d._)

=SYNESIUS OF CYRENE=, Philosopher and Bishop. By ALICE GARDNER.

=THE APOSTOLIC FATHERS.= By the Rev. Canon SCOTT HOLLAND.

=THE DEFENDERS OF THE FAITH=; or, the Christian Apologists of the Second
and Third Centuries. By the Rev. F. WATSON, D.D.

=THE VENERABLE BEDE.= By the Right Rev. G. F. BROWNE.


_CHIEF ANCIENT PHILOSOPHIES._

_Fcap. 8vo, cloth boards, 2s. 6d. each._

=PLATONISM.= By the Rev. THOMAS B. STRONG, M.A. (3_s._)

=NEOPLATONISM.= By the Rev. C. BIGG, D.D. (3_s._)

=EPICUREANISM.= By the late WILLIAM WALLACE, M.A.

=STOICISM.= By the Rev. W. W. CAPES, Fellow of Hertford College.

=ARISTOTELIANISM.= =The Ethics of Aristotle.= By the Rev. I. GREGORY
SMITH, M.A., Hon. LL.D. =The Logical Treatises, the Metaphysics, the
Psychology, the Politics.= By the Rev. W. GRUNDY, M.A.


_NON-CHRISTIAN RELIGIOUS SYSTEMS._

These Manuals furnish in a brief and popular form an accurate account of
the great Non-Christian Religious Systems of the World.

_Fcap. 8vo, cloth boards, 2s. 6d. each._

=BUDDHISM=: being a Sketch of the Life and Teachings of Gautama, the
Buddha. By T. W. RHYS DAVIDS, M.A., Ph.D. A new and revised edition. With
Map.

=BUDDHISM IN CHINA.= By the late Rev. S. BEAL. With Map.

=CONFUCIANISM AND TAOUISM.= By Professor ROBERT K. DOUGLAS, of the
British Museum. With Map.

=HINDUISM.= By the late Sir M. MONIER WILLIAMS, M.A., D.C.L. A new and
revised edition. With Map.

=ISLAM AND ITS FOUNDER.= By J. W. H. STOBART. With Map.

=ISLAM AS A MISSIONARY RELIGION.= By C. R. HAINES. (2_s._)

=STUDIES OF NON-CHRISTIAN RELIGIONS.= By ELIOT HOWARD.

=THE CORÂN=: its Composition and Teaching, and the Testimony it bears to
the Holy Scriptures. By Sir WILLIAM MUIR, K.C.S.I., LL.D., D.C.L., Ph. D.
A new and revised edition.

=THE HISTORICAL DEVELOPMENT OF THE QURÁN.= By the Rev. EDWARD SELL, D.D.,
M.R.A.S.

=THE RELIGION OF THE CRESCENT=; or, Islam: its Strength, its Weakness,
its Origin, its Influence. By the Rev. W. ST. CLAIR-TISDALL, M.A.,
C.M.S. (4_s._)


_MISCELLANEOUS PUBLICATIONS._

=AIDS TO PRAYER.= By the Rev. DANIEL MOORE. Printed in red and black.
Post 8vo, cloth boards, 1_s._ 6_d._

=ALONE WITH GOD=; or, Helps to Thought and Prayer, for the use of the
Sick. By the Rev. F. BOURDILLON. Series I. and II., 12mo, cloth boards,
each 1_s._

=BEING OF GOD, SIX ADDRESSES ON THE.= By the late Right Rev. C. J.
ELLICOTT, D.D. Small post 8vo, cloth boards, 1_s._ 6_d._

=BIBLE PLACES=; or, The Topography of the Holy Land. By H. B. TRISTRAM.
New Edition, brought up to date. With Map and numerous Woodcuts. Crown
8vo, half bound, 5_s._

=CALLED TO BE SAINTS.= The Minor Festivals Devotionally Studied. By the
late CHRISTINA G. ROSSETTI, Author of “Seek and Find.” Post 8vo, cloth
boards, 3_s._ 6_d._

=CHRISTIANS UNDER THE CRESCENT IN ASIA.= By the late Rev. E. L. CUTTS,
D.D., Author of “Turning-Points of Church History,” etc. With numerous
Illustrations. Crown 8vo, cloth boards, 5_s._

=COMMUNICANT’S DAILY HELP, THE.= Being Thoughts for Daily Prayer and
Hints for Daily Life. By the late Rev. W. ABBOTT. 18mo, limp cloth, 6_d._

=DAILY READINGS FOR A YEAR.= By ELIZABETH SPOONER. Crown 8vo, cloth
boards, 2_s._

=DEVOTIONAL (A) LIFE OF OUR LORD.= By the late Rev. E. L. CUTTS, D.D.,
Author of “Pastoral Counsels,” etc. Post 8vo, cloth boards, 5_s._

=GOSPELS, THE FOUR.= Arranged in the Form of an English Harmony, from the
Text of the Authorized Version. By the late Rev. J. M. FULLER, M.A. With
Analytical Table of Contents and Four Maps. Cloth boards, 1_s._

=GREAT TRUTHS AND HOLY LIVES.= By Lady HAMMICK. Post 8vo, cloth boards,
1_s._ 6_d._

=HOLY COMMUNION: PREPARATION AND COMPANION.= By the late Bishop W. W.
HOW. 18mo. Cloth boards, 6_d._; limp roan, 1_s._ 6_d._; and in various
other bindings.

=DITTO=, with COLLECTS, EPISTLES, and GOSPELS, in one vol. 18mo. Cloth
boards, red edges, 1_s._; limp roan, 1_s._ 10_d._; and in various other
bindings.

=HOLY COMMUNION FOR ENGLISH CHURCHMEN, A PLAIN MANUAL OF.= By the late
Rev. E. BURBIDGE. 18mo. Limp cloth, 6_d._; limp roan, 1_s._ 2_d._

=DITTO=, with _Collects_, EPISTLES, GOSPELS, and HYMNS, in one vol. 18mo.
Cloth boards, 8_d._; paste grain roan, 1_s._ 6_d._

=LAND OF ISRAEL, THE.= A Journal of Travel in Palestine, undertaken with
special reference to its Physical Character. By the Rev. Canon TRISTRAM.
With two Maps and numerous Illustrations. Large post 8vo, cloth boards,
10_s._ 6_d._

=LECTURES ON THE HISTORICAL AND DOGMATICAL POSITION OF THE CHURCH OF
ENGLAND.= By the Rev. W. BAKER, D.D. Post 8vo, cloth boards, 1_s._ 6_d._

=LESSER LIGHTS=: or, Some of the Minor Characters of Scripture traced.
Series I. and II. By the Rev. F. BOURDILLON. Post 8vo, cloth boards,
2_s._ 6_d._ each. Series III. 2_s._

=OUR OWN BOOK.= Very Plain Reading for People in Humble Life. By the Rev.
F. BOURDILLON, M.A. Post 8vo, cloth boards, 1_s._

=PALEY’S EVIDENCES.= A New Edition, with Notes, Appendix, and Preface by
Rev. E. A. LITTON. Post 8vo, cloth, 4_s._

=PALEY’S HORÆ PAULINÆ.= A New Edition, with Notes, Appendix, and Preface.
By the Rev. J. S. HOWSON, D.D., Dean of Chester. Post 8vo, cloth boards,
3_s._

=PARABLES OF THE OLD TESTAMENT (THE).= By the Right Rev. A. BARRY, D.D.
Demy 8vo, cloth boards, 4_s._

=PEACE WITH GOD.= A Manual for the Sick. By the late Rev. E. BURBIDGE,
M.A. Post 8vo, cloth boards, 1_s._ 6_d._

=PLAIN WORDS ON CHRISTIAN LIVING.= By the late Dean VAUGHAN. Small post
8vo. Cloth boards, 2_s._

=PLAIN WORDS FOR CHRIST.= Being a Series of Readings for Working Men. By
the late Rev. R. G. DUTTON. Post 8vo, cloth boards, 1_s._

=PRAYER OF CHRISTENDOM (THE GREAT).= By the late Mrs. RUNDLE CHARLES.
Post 8vo, cloth boards, 1_s._

=READINGS ON THE FIRST LESSONS FOR SUNDAYS AND CHIEF HOLY DAYS.=
According to the New Table. By the late Rev. PETER YOUNG. Crown 8vo, in
two volumes, 5_s._

=RELIGION FOR EVERY DAY.= Lectures for Men. By the Right Rev. A. BARRY,
D.D., Fcap. 8vo, cloth boards, 1_s._

=SEEK AND FIND.= A Double Series of Short Studies of the Benedicite. By
the late CHRISTINA G. ROSSETTI. Post 8vo, cloth boards, 2_s._ 6_d._

=SERVANTS OF SCRIPTURE (THE).= By the late Rev. JOHN W. BURGON, B.D. Post
8vo, cloth boards, 1_s._

=SOME CHIEF TRUTHS OF RELIGION.= By the late Rev. E. L. CUTTS, D.D. Crown
8vo, cloth boards, 2_s._ 6_d._

=SPIRITUAL COUNSELS=; or, Helps and Hindrances to Holy Living. By the
late Rev. R. G. DUTTON. Post 8vo, cloth boards, 1_s._

=THOUGHTS FOR MEN AND WOMEN.= THE LORD’S PRAYER. By EMILY C. ORR. Post
8vo, limp cloth, 1_s._

=THOUGHTS FOR WORKING DAYS.= Original and Selected. By EMILY C. ORR. Post
8vo, limp cloth, 1_s._

=TIME FLIES: A READING DIARY.= By the late CHRISTINA G. ROSSETTI. Post
8vo, cloth boards, 3_s._ 6_d._

=TRUE VINE (THE).= By the late Mrs. RUNDLE CHARLES. Printed in red and
black. Post 8vo, cloth boards, 1_s._

=TURNING-POINTS OF ENGLISH CHURCH HISTORY.= By the late Rev. E. L. CUTTS,
D.D. Crown 8vo, cloth boards, 3_s._ 6_d._

=TURNING-POINTS OF GENERAL CHURCH HISTORY.= By the late Rev. E. L. CUTTS,
D.D., Author of “Pastoral Counsels,” etc. Crown 8vo, cloth boards, 3_s._
6_d._

=WITHIN THE VEIL.= STUDIES IN THE EPISTLE TO THE HEBREWS. By the late
Mrs. RUNDLE CHARLES. Post 8vo, cloth boards, 1_s._

[Illustration]

                   LONDON: NORTHUMBERLAND AVENUE, W.C.
                     43, QUEEN VICTORIA STREET, E.C.
                       BRIGHTON: 109, NORTH STREET.