Scriptorium

The scriptorium of the Sacramentary of Gellone

Carl.-R. Baldwin

Citer ce document / Cite this document :

Baldwin Carl.-R. The scriptorium of the Sacramentary of Gellone. In: Scriptorium, Tome 25 n°1, 1971. pp. 3-17;

doi : https://doi.org/10.3406/scrip.1971.3424

https://www.persee.fr/doc/scrip_0036-9772_1971_num_25_1_3424

Fichier pdf généré le 04/01/2019

 SCRIPTORIUM
Redaction j
INSTITUT DE RECHERCHE ET D'HISTOIRE DES TEXTES
40, av:mp.;~ df^.'a - paris (i6^)
THE SACRAMENTARY
THE SCRIPTORI JM
OF GELLONE

Scholars of paleography
Gellone' and liturgy are beginning to agree that
the Sacramentary oF (Paris, Bibl. nat., ms latin 12048) was.written
at the end of the 8th century, but no consensus has been cached on the
question of where the manuscript was written. In recent years, the
has narrowed to a choice between Meaux and Cambnu. Wewrtl
attempt to sift the evidence that has accumulated in favor of ^position,
and to decide which of the two is, if not most certain, at least most probable.

1. The Evidence for Meaux

Not long after the Sacramentary was brought to Paris from the
Midi D'Achery transcribed and published the martyrology located at the
Tnd of the manuscript (f. 264T-27*). He dated the Sacramentary U>
804 apparently reading the notation on f. 276' at Dec. 14 ™^
dedicatio
baselice Sancti Salvatoris in Gellone," as a first-hand inscription, and
therefore as an indication of place of origin (1) In his view the manuscript
had been written at Gellone, shortly after its founding in ^^»
Count of Aquitaine, who ended an illustrious career at the Court of
to enter the monastery himself in 806. The monastery well known
to students of Romanesque art as St. Guilhem-le-Désert, ,s located some
thirtv-five kilometers northwest of Montpelher.
y Du Sollier was the first to observe that the manuscript s single
martyrology entry pertaining to Gellone was counterbalanced by three
references to the monastery of Rebais, in the diocese of Meaux (2) :
June 25 (f. 270') : Rasbads monasterio dedicatio ecclesiae sancti Audoini episcopi
Ausust 26 f 272' : Rasbacis monasterio sancti Quutvalerdi martyns
Au|u1t 30 (t. 272') : Rasbacis monasterio depositio Algilli abbatis
The June 25 reference is to the dedication of the monastery church
by Audoenus (St. Ouen), bishop of Rouen: the event took F toce ^n 635,
while St. Ouen was still referendary to Dagobert (3). The Aug. 26 entry

L. , Spicilegium, Paris, 1677, XIII, n «■ "fftlfd

 CARL R. BALDWIN

commemorates a martyr, "Quutvalerdus," whose identity is unknown (4).

The Aug. 30 reference is to the death of Agilus (St. Aile), first abbot of
the monastery, circa 650 (5). Du Sollier concluded that the manuscript
was written at Rebais, and not at Gellone.
Mabillon had interpreted the March 4 martyrology entry on f. 266V,
"Andriani Romani episcopi ordinatio," as "the ordination of the bishop
of Rome, Hadrian" (6). He assumed that the scribe had been careless in
placing the event of 772 A.D. at March 4, instead of at Feb. 9. But Duchesne
observed that "Andrianus" must refer to Adrianus, a martyr of Nicomedia,
who is commemorated on March 4 in other martyrologies (7). Quentin
explored the implications of Duchesne's suggestion (8). The March 4 entry
must be read as "Adrianus (i.e., martyr of Nicomedia)... Romani episcopi
ordinatio." The scribe, in other words, intended to commemorate the
ordination of a bishop named Romanus, not the ordination of the bishop
of Rome. Using the three references to Rebais as a touchstone, Quentin
found that a letter from Pope Zacharias in 748 included among its recipients
"Romanus Meldensis episcopus," and he concluded that the manuscript
was either written at the monastery of Rebais circa 748 during the episcopate
of Romanus, or was copied later from a Rebais martyrology text of circa 748.
Lowe dated the manuscript to the end of the 8th century on
grounds (9). In studying the Reichenau Liber Confratemitatum,
he found that the name David appeared twice on the list for the monastery
of the Holy Cross at Meaux, under Wulfran (10). Lowe identified this
monk with
"david" in an
the initial
scribe Fwho
on wrote
f. 254V."David"
Noting inWilmart's
an initialdiscovery
B on f. that
99r, and
the
script of f. 6r-9v of a manuscript in Cambrai (Bibl. municipale ms. 300)
was identical to the script of the Sacramentary, Lowe suggested that the
Cambrai manuscript, signed with the feminine name "Madalberta" on

(4) "Quutvalerdus" cannot be a variant spelling of Chlodovaldus (St. Cloud), since that Saint
is to be found in the Gellone martyrology (f. 272V) at his accustomed date, Sept. 7, and spelled
as "Chlodoaldus" (see Ada SS., Sept. Ill, pp. 91 ff.). It also seems unlikely that "Quutvalerdus"
could be a misunderstanding of the name Quodvultdeus, because the scribe of the martyrology
is accurate in the use of genitive cases (as in "Audoini" and "Aigilli" for Audoenus and Agilus),
and would have written "Quodvultdei" rather than "Quutvaldi." Furthermore, Quodvultdeus,
a North African Saint of the 5th century, is normally commemorated on Oct. 26, not on Aug. 26
(Ada SS., Oct. XI, p. 845).
(5) Ada SS. at Aug. 30, Aug. VI, pp. 574 ff., and especially p. 584.
(6) J. Mabillon, Museum Italicum, Paris, 1689, I, part 2, p. 38, Note a.
(7) L. Duchesne, Liber Pontificalis, Paris, 1886, I, p. gclix, Note 1.
(8) H. Quentin, "Le martyrologe hiéronymien et les fêtes de Saint Benoît," Revue bénédidine,
20, 1903, pp. 351-374, especially p. 371.
(9) E. A. Lowe, C. L. A., Oxford, 1950, V, n° 618. In a conversation in May, 1966, Lowe
expressed the opinion that the script might point a bit later, to the turn of the century.
(10) Monumenta Germaniae Historica: Libri Confraternitalum, Berlin, 1884, p. 237. The name
David appears on line 6 of column three (col. 274b), and on line 28 of column four (col. 275a).
Of the approximately 280 names on the seven-column roster, only six are singled out by the
editors as later additions (col. 275a, lines 39-44). Bishop Wulfran's name is written " Wolframnus"
at the head of the list.
 THE SCRIPTORIUM OF THE SACRAMENTARY OF GELLONE

f. 155r, was written at a nunnery near Meaux (11). Bischoff adopted this
suggestion, and proposed that the monk David and the nun Madalberta
could have collaborated on the Cambrai manuscript at a double-cloister
near Meaux, perhaps at Faremoutiers or Jouarre (Faremoutiers is about
thirty kilometers southeast of Meaux; Jouarre is about twenty kilometers
east of Meaux, and about midway between Meaux and Rebais) (12).

2. Strengths and weaknesses of the evidence for Meaux

The references in the martyrology to the monastery of Rebais and
to bishop Romanus of Meaux are significant, because they are not paralleled
in any of the basic martyrology texts of the period, and therefore could
have been inserted by the scribe in order to harmonize the martyrology
with local traditions. Aside from these references, the roughly one hundred
and fifty names of French martyrs, abbots, bishops and kings in the Gellone
martyrology may all be found in one or more of the basic martyrology
exemplars of the 8th century (13).
A weakness of the evidence for Meaux lies in the fact that the
references to Rebais are remote in time, harking back to the reign of Dagobert
and the foundation of the monastery. There are no references to abbots
of Rebais in the 8th century, for example. Furthermore, the reference
to bishop Romanus of Meaux is not backed up by references to other bishops
of Meaux, either earlier or later in date. Considering the fact that bishop
Faro of Meaux was present at the miracle-marked dedication of the
monastery of Rebais in 635 (14), it is odd that he is not mentioned at any
place in the martyrology.
The presence of "Romani episcopi ordinatio" is useful, in spite of
its isolation, since it appears to be a solid reference to the diocese of Meaux
in the 8th century. A bishop Romanus of Meaux is listed as one of the
recipients of a letter from Zacharias to the bishops of France in 748, and
he is mentioned, along with his successor, Wulfran, in Pepin's Donation
to the monastery of Priim in 762 (15). These references, and the apparent

(11) Lowe, C. L. A., 1953, VI, n° 739.

(12) B. Bischoff, "Die Kolner Nonnenhandschriften und das Scriptorium von Chelles,"
Forschungen zur Kunstgeschichte und Christliche Archdologie, 3, 1957, pp. 410-411.
(13) For the texts of the three basic martyrologies of the period, the Bernensis, Epternacensis,
and Wissenburgensis, see L. Duchesne, G.-B. de Rossi, in Ada SS., Antwerp, 1894, Nov. II,
part 2, pp. 1-156. The manuscripts which convey these texts are Berne, Burgerbibl., MS. 289,
C. L. A., VII, n° 861, "Saec. VIII-IX"; Paris, Bibl. nat., MS. lat. 10837, C. L. A., V, n° 605,
n°
"Saec.
1393,VIII
"Saec.
in.";VIII
and (A.D.
Wolfenbiittel,
772, ut vid.)."
Herzog August-Bibl., Weissenb., MS. 81, C. L. A., IX,
(14) On bishop Faro's foundation of the monastery at Meaux, see Mabillon, Annales, I, p. 343.
The monastery became a popular way-station for pilgrims travelling from the British Isles to
Rome, and for monks sent from Rome to the British Isles. On Faro's presence at the dedication
at Rebais, and the miraculous mending of the broken marble altar top, ibid., p. 363.
(15) For the letter from Zacharias, see Patrologiae Latinae, CXXX, col. 1165. For Pepin's
Donation to Pram, see P. L., XCVI, cols. 1540-1451. For a summary of information on Romanus
and his successors, see Gallia Christiana, VIII, col. 1603. P. L. places the Donation in 762,
 CARL R. BALDWIN

mention of his ordination in the Gellone martyrology, are the only traces
of his existence that have filtered down to us. Could the "Romani episcopi
ordinatio" refer to another bishop Romanus? The Indices of Ada Sanctorum
list only four French bishops of this name : Romanus of Reims (f c. 553,
Feb. 28), Romanus of Metz (f 489, April 13), Romanus of Auxerre (f 575,
Oct. 6), and Romanus of Rouen (f 644, Oct. 23) (16). The March 4
cannot refer to Romanus of Auxerre, because his ordination is known
to have been Sept. 22, 564. The ordination dates of the other bishops are
not known, but I doubt that the March 4 "ordinatio" can refer to any one
of them, because the Gellone martyrology does not list any one of their
natales. Since it seems rather unlikely that a scribe inserting a reference
to the ordination of a local bishop would not also have inserted the more
important day of his natalis, we may agree with Quentin that "Romani
episcopi ordinatio" most probably applies to Romanus, bishop of Meaux.
The mention of Romanus suggests that the Gellone martyrology
was re-edited around the middle of the 8th century, in the diocese of Meaux.
The only references in the manuscript to an individual who lived later
in the century are the signatures of David on f. 99r and 254V. A monk
of this name, as Lowe has observed, is listed twice in the roll-book of the
monastery of the Holy Cross at Meaux under Wulfran. The roll for Meaux
has 7 columns, with about 40 names for each column, or a total of about
280 names. David is listed on line 6 of the third column, and on line 28
of the fourth. Deshusses took the location of the second of these names
to be "très bas dans la liste," and thought that this position indicated
that David was a young man under bishop Wulfran, whose dates are usually
given as 757-769 (17). This interpretation is debatable, since even the
second of the two names appears closer to the middle than to the end of
the list. However, it may be suggested that the relevance of David to
the end of the century can and should be retained by allowing an extension
of the episcopate of Wulfran, since we have no firm or even approximate
date for the end of his term of office. He is mentioned in documents of the
760's, and is followed by a bishop Brumerus for whom no firm dates exist.

Gallia Christiana in 763. Pepin, in the Donation to Priim, gave the monks of Priim permission
to elect their future abbot from among the monks who had transferred "from the congregation
of the bishops Romanus and Wulfran," and Wulfran signed the Donation as bishop.
(16) Evidence (or lack of it) for ordination, episcopate, and natalis is discussed in Ada SS. :
Romanus of Reims at Feb. 28 (Feb. Ill, p. 748); Romanus of Metz at April 13 (April II, p. 134);
Romanus of Auxerre at Oct. 6 (Oct. Ill, p. 393); Romanus of Rouen at Oct. 26 (Oct. X, p. 74).
(17) J. Deshusses, "Le Sacramentaire de Gellone dans son contexte historique," Ephemerides
Liturgicae, 75, 1961, p. 199. The dates of 757-769 are given in M. G. H. Lib. Conf., p. 237,
without bibliographical references. According to Quentin, op. cit., p. 371, Wulfran signed a
Donation to the monastery at Gorze, in the diocese of Metz, in 757. I have not been able to locate
such a document. The Donations to Gorze published by P. L. (XCVI, cols. 1097-1098, XCVII,
col. 913) are dated 768 and 770, and contain no reference to Wulfran. Nor have I encountered
a document of 769 which contains his name. His name does appear in Pepin's Donation to
Priim in 762 (see Note 15, above), and again as a signatory to a Council in 765 (P. L., XCVI,
col. 1516).
 THE SCRIPTORIUM OF THE SAGRAMENTARY OF GELLONE

The successor of Brumerus was Hildricus, whose death in 823 is recorded,

but whose accession to the episcopate is not (18). Between circa 760 and
circa 820, then, lies a sixty year span to be divided in some way between
Wulfran, Brumerus, and Hildricus. If we suggest a twenty year period
of office for each bishop, we would be able to extend Wulfran's episcopate
to circa 780, which would increase the likelihood that the monk David
under Wulfran should be identified with the scribe who labored on the
Sacramentary at the end of the century.
Bischoff's suggestion that Madalberta, the scribe of Cambrai 300,
could have worked at one of the double-cloisters near Meaux is an attractive
solution to the problem of the co-existence of a monk and a nun in the
production of this manuscript. This co-existence, as we shall see, presents
some difficulties for the Cambrai thesis.

3. The evidence for Cambrai

Wilmart compared the script of Cambrai 300 with the script of the
Sacramentary (See PL 2, 3), and concluded that f. 6r-9v of the Cambrai
manuscript were written by the scribe of the Sacramentary. From f. 10r
on, the Cambrai manuscript was written in an undistinguished Carolingian
hand (19). Wilmart suggested that f. 6r-9v of the manuscript constituted
the last work of the scribe of the Sacramentary, created as Carolingian
script was beginning to replace earlier styles. Accepting the premise that
Cambrai 300 had been written in the diocese of Cambrai, Wilmart concluded
that the Sacramentary was not written in Meaux circa 748 — a conclusion
that some scholars had drawn from Quentin' s article— but in the diocese
of Cambrai, and possibly for the Cathedral, in the period 770-780.
Brou supported Wilmart' s theory of a Cambrai origin, and suggested
that the tall, narrow format of the Sacramentary' s pages might have been
echoed in the format of the liturgical books written at Cambrai under
bishop Hildoard circa 812 : Cambrai, Bibl. municipale, mss. 162-163 (a two-
volume Sacramentary), 164 (the oldest "Sacramentary of Hadrian" without

(18) For a chronological list of the bishops of Meaux, see Gallia Christiana, VIII, cols. 1597 ff.
(19) A. Wilmart, "Le copiste du Sacramentaire de Gellone au service du chapitre de Cambrai,"
Revue bénédictine, 42, 1930, pp. 210-222. Pp. 210-216 contain an excellent summary of the
literature on date and scriptorium up to this point. Pp. 218-222 discuss the relation of
Cambrai 300 to the Sacramentary. Wilmart mistakenly refers to martyrology references to
Rebais on July 25, Sept. 26, Sept. 30 (rather than June 25, Aug. 26, Aug. 30). In arguing that
the references to Rebais are not determining factors in locating the scriptorium, Wilmart notes
that a reference to St. Ouen's dedication of the monastery at Rebais occurs in the Senonensis
martyrology text (Ada SS., Nov. II, part 2, p. 113), which indicates that "une rédaction
et plus ancienne, qui nous échappe, a donc pu exister" (p. 217, Note 3). It should be
noted, however, that the Senonensis is a 10th century manuscript, and its June 25 reference
to the dedication of Rebais may be linked with its numerous references to Bayeux. The
manuscript's Norman orientation, in other words, could have summoned up a special reference
to St. Ouen. There are, in any event, no 8th or 9th century martyrology texts which contain
references to Rebais, and the Sacramentary' s three references must, therefore, continue to be
treated with a certain respect.
 CARL R. BALDWIN

a supplement), and 553 (the only "Lectionary of Alcuin" without a

(20).
Chavasse discovered that certain prayers in the Sacramentary derived
from the Hadrianum — the texts that Charlemagne had requested from
Pope Hadrian, and that were delivered between 784 and 791 — and concluded
that the date of the Sacramentary had to be set accordingly (21). Deshusses
proposed that 790-800 would be an accurate date for the manuscript,
its dependence upon the Hadrianum, and he tied it to the liturgical
activities of bishop Hildoard of Cambrai (790-816) (22). Deshusses presented
evidence that the Sacramentary constituted an up-to-date revision of
previous texts, and suggested that it, or a similar text, might have been
utilized by Alcuin in the composition of his supplement to the Hadrianum.
Deshusses identified the scribe of the Cambrai manuscript, Madalberta,
with the monk Madalbreto, who is listed at Rebais under abbot Godo-
bertus (23), and suggested that the bishop of Meaux, in the period 790-800,
could have given David of Meaux and Madalbreto of Rebais permission
to go to Cambrai to work for bishop Hildoard. The presence of references
to Rebais in the Gellone martyrology would be explained by the fact that
Madalbreto could have brought a martyrology text to Cambrai from Rebais.
Deshusses also noted that nine of the ten prayers borrowed from the
Hadrianum pertain to masses for the Virgin, which suggested that the
manuscript was destined for a church dedicated to the Virgin. The
of the image of "Sancta Maria" on f. lv of the Sacramentary (See
PI. 4) would also argue that the manuscript had been written for the Cathedral
of Notre-Dame at Cambrai, and argue against the monastery of the Holy
Cross at Meaux.
In his reconstruction of the events, Deshusses conjectures that
Hildoard might have given the Sacramentary to Alcuin, who, in turn,
might have presented it to Benedict, abbot of the monastery of St. Aniane,
with whom he had close contacts. Benedict would then have given it to
Gellone, a monastery located four miles from Aniane, and placed under
Benedict's supervision (24).

(20) L. Brou, "Le Volume VI des 'Codices Latini Antiquiores'," Ephemerides Liturgicae, 68,
1954, pp. 230-240, especially pp. 236 ff.
(21) A. Chavasse, Le Sacramentaire gélasien, Paris-Tournai, 1958, pp. 556, 588; ibid., "Le
Sacramentaire gélasien du VIIIe siècle," Ephemerides Liturgicae, 73, 1959, pp. 295-296.
(22) Deshusses, op. cit., pp. 193-209.
(23) M. G. H. Lib. Conf., p. 236. The name Madalbreto appears on line 9 of the seventh and
last column (col. 272). For a chronological list of abbots of Rebais, see Gallia Christiana, VIII,
cols. 1680 ff. Godobertus signed as an attendant of a Council in 765, along with bishop Wulfran
of Meaux (P. L., XCVI, col. 1516). The length of his term of office is not known, and further
documentary evidence on abbots of Rebais is lacking until the accession of Warinus in 835.
(24) On Alcuin's relations with Benedict, and on the ties between Gellone and the monastery
of Aniane, see Mabillon, Annales, II, pp. 346, 369.
8
 THE SCRIPTORIUM OF THE SACRAMENTARY OF GELLONE

4. Strengths and weaknesses of the evidence for Cambrai

The evidence for Cambrai, as presented by Deshusses, advantageously
binds a number of separate strands into a solid thread : the script of the
Sacramentary is identical to the script of a Cambrai manuscript; the
Sacramentary was not an obsolete document but an up-to-date liturgical
revision at the end of the 8th century; Hildoard of Cambrai is known to have
fostered Carolingian liturgical reforms; the format of the pages of the
Sacramentary recalls the format of Hildoard's other books. In this
of the particles of evidence lies the strength and attractiveness
of the Cambrai thesis. The Meaux thesis, by contrast, can only present
bishops named Wulfran, Brumerus, and Hildricus, about whom virtually
nothing is known, and with whose episcopates no manuscripts, liturgical or
otherwise, can be connected... with the single possible exception of the
Sacramentary of Gellone.
There are some weaknesses, however, to the evidence for Cambrai.
One of them is that scholars may presume, but cannot know, that
300 was written at Cambrai. There are no first-hand references in the
manuscript that point to Cambrai, nor do its pages contain marginal notations
that would connect it with early 9th century Cambrai. With this
in mind, it would be useful to investigate the question of whether
or not the "Madalberta" of f. 155r can be associated with any known figure
who was active in the Cambrai region. There is only one listing of this name
in the Indices of Ada Sanctorum (25), or in the study of Germanic names
by Fôrstemann (26) : Madalberta, abbess of Maubeuge (f 705, Sept. 7).
Maubeuge is located about forty kilometers northeast of Cambrai, and
was within the diocese of Arras/Cambrai. Madalberta' s aunt, Aldegundis,
had founded the double-cloister circa 665, and it was dedicated to "Sancta
Maria"
by Autbertus, bishop of Arras/CamBrai. Is it possible, then, that
the "Madalberta" of f. 155r of Cambrai 300 is not the signature of the nun
who wrote the book, but an allusion to a celebrated abbess of the beginning
of the century? If the name were to be construed as a reference to the
abbess of Maubeuge, certain other pieces of evidence would fall into place :
the dedication to "Sancta Maria" would harmonize with the prayers to
the Virgin noted by Deshusses, and with the image of "Sancta Maria"
on f. lv; the fact that Maubeuge was a double-cloister would explain the
co-existence of David and Madalberta in the writing of Cambrai 300.
The idea that both Cambrai 300 and the Sacramentary of Gellone
might have been written at the double-cloister of "Sancta Maria" at Mau-

(25) For Madalberta, see Ada SS. at Sept. 7, Sept. Ill, pp. 103 ff. For the abbesses of Maubeuge,
and for the founding and dedication of the double-cloister to the Virgin, see Gallia Christiana,
III, cols. 146 ff.
(26) E. Fôrstemann, Altdeutsches Namenbuch I : Personennamen, Nordhausen, 1856, see Index
and col. 921 for "Madalberta."
 CARL R. BALDWIN

beuge is an appealing one, and it is curious that it has not occurred to students
of the manuscript. Whether or not it is an acceptable hypothesis will
depend upon how much weight one wishes to place upon the Gellone mar-
tyrology. If the martyrology is to contain some indication of the place of
origin of the manuscript, then Maubeuge must be ruled out : there is no
mention in the martyrology of Aldegundis, the founder and first abbess
(f c. 684, Jan. 30), or of her niece and successor, Aldetrudis (f 696, Feb. 25),
or of Madalberta. Nor is there a reference to the dedication of the church
of the double-cloister by bishop Autbertus, or to the bishop himself. For
these reasons, I think it wise to set aside the suggestion that Maubeuge
could have been the place of origin of the manuscript, unless some
evidence can be discovered.
Our attitude to the Cambrai thesis, too, will depend somewhat upon
our estimation of the importance of the martyrology as an indicator of
place of origin. For here, as in the case of Maubeuge, we look in vain for
any references to bishops of Cambrai or abbots of monasteries in the diocese
of Cambrai, other than a lone reference to the first bishop of Arras/Cambrai,
Vedastus (f 540, Feb. 6), an entry derived from the Bernensis exemplar (27).
If the Sacramentary had been written in the diocese of Cambrai, and for
the Cathedral of Notre-Dame, it seems curious that the scribe of the
would not have inserted the names of any bishops of Cambrai
from circa 540 to the end of the 8th century.
Brou's observation on the format of the pages of the Sacramentary
and the books written under Hildoard should be considered. In his view,
the tall, narrow format of the Sacramentary could have inspired the later
generation of Cambrai scribes : "Si le Gellonensis a été écrit à Cambrai,
son format oblong aura servi plus ou moins de modèle, pendant un certain
temps, aux manuscrits liturgiques de même genre confectionnés à Cambrai
pour l'usage de la Curia » (28). One reservation about this suggestion is
that it does not reckon with the fact that the format of the Sacramentary
was cruelly altered by trimming in the 19th century (29). Although a
considerable buffer zone has been retained at the top and bottom of each
page, the sides have been drastically abbreviated, so that a great many
figures are partly trimmed away in the process : the man with a hoe on
f. 76V is missing his heel, and a duck on f. 100v is missing part of its tail.

(27) For
part
cols. 2,
2 ff.
p.the
17. Bernensis
For a chronological
reference at list
Feb.of 6theto bishops
"Vedastus
of Cambrai,
episcopus,"
see see
Gallia
ActaChristiana,
SS., Nov. III,
II,
(28) Brou, op. cit., p. 240.
(29) Delisle, op. cit., p. 222, remarked that the pages were numbered in the 17th or early
18th century, and that the manuscript was placed in its present binding in 1835. The pages
must have been trimmed at the time of binding. We may also point out that at that time the
last three folios of the manuscript were shuffled, creating some confusion for the reader of the
martyrology, since the page ending with Oct. 16 (f. 272V) faces the page beginning with Nov. 14
(f. 275r), the Dec. 11 page (f. 275V) faces Oct. 17 (f. 274r), and Nov. 13 (f. 274V) faces Dec. 12
(f. 276r).
10
 THE SCRIPTORIUM OF THE SACRAMENTARY OF GELLONE

It would be necessary to reconstruct the original format of the pages of

the Sacramentary before attempting to connect them with the books made
for Hildoard. It is possible that the edges of the pages were trimmed by
about three-quarters of an inch, or about 20 mm. The original dimensions
of the pages, then, would have been 300x200 mm., rather than the
300x180 mm. given by Brou. How can this format be securely connected
with the formats of the Cambrai manuscripts, which are themselves
quite variable? Brou gives the following measurements : Cambrai 162-
163, 355x122 mm.; Cambrai 164, 300x107 mm.; Cambrai 553, 320 x
190 mm. The Lectionary (Cambrai 553) seems to closely approach the
format of the Sacramentary, but what should one make of the discrepancy
between the formats of the Sacramentary of Gellone and the Cambrai
Sacramentaries, which were supposedly inspired by the former?
A second reservation is that the format of pages may not be so
important an indication of a certain school as the script-format —the
field set aside by the scribe as the writing area. The script-formats
of the Sacramentary and Cambrai 300 are very much alike, and a common
school may be inferred from this similarity. But the script-formats of the
Cambrai manuscripts would have to be studied, in relation to one another
and to the Sacramentary, before the influence of the Sacramentary upon
the Cambrai manuscripts of circa 812 could be maintained. The number
of lines per page is another factor to be considered in associating one
with another. According to Wilmart, the Lectionary (Cambrai 553)
contains 22 lines per page, a number which hardly seems to betray an
association with the Sacramentary of Gellone, which usually has 30-33 lines
per page, or with Cambrai 300, which has 32-33 lines per page (30).
An additional reservation concerns the manner in which Deshusses
utilizes Brou's interesting suggestions on page format. Brou's theory
depends on the presumption that the Sacramentary of Gellone remained
at Cambrai long enough to serve as a model for scribes in the years 811-812,
during which time the Cambrai manuscripts were written (31). Deshusses,
however, suggests that the Sacramentary was presented by Hildoard to
Alcuin, who then gave it to Benedict of Aniane. Since Alcuin died in 804
at Tours, this gift must have taken place at least seven years before Hildoard' s
new generation of scribes set to work. Of course, they still might have
consulted the format of Cambrai 300 (assuming that it had been written
at Cambrai), but the theory that there was a format-to-format influence
from the Sacramentary of Gellone to the Cambrai books of circa 812 must
be abandoned.

(30) A. Wilmart, "Le Lectionnaire d' Alcuin," Ephemerides Liturgicae, 51, 1937, p. 148.
(31) Ibid., p. 149, Note 53, on the relation of Cambrai 553 to Cambrai 164, and the date of
811-812 for both manuscripts.

11
 CARL R. BALDWIN

The observation by Deshusses that prayers drawn from the Hadria-

num are directed to the Virgin would appear to be a valuable piece of
evidence for Cambrai, or at least against the monastery of the Holy Cross,
or, for that matter, against any monastery not dedicated to "Sancta Maria."
It assumes, however, that the scribe or his adviser was extremely careful
about inserting textual references to the church for which the manuscript
was destined. If this were the case, we may wonder why his concern for
Cambrai was shown only in his selection of prayers from the Hadrianum,
and not in his revision or modification of the martyrology, which makes
reference only to Rebais and Meaux.
Deshusses' suggestion that the figure of Mary on f. lv indicates that
the manuscript was destined for a church dedicated to the Virgin should be
examined. The large figure is labelled "Sancta Maria" by the scribe, and
is apparently robed as an abbess, holding a Cross in her left hand, and a
censer in her right (32). The figure is intimately involved in the text, as
if the scribe wished to convey the idea that the Virgin provides a generative
power to the beginning of the book : the figure frames three giant lines
of text (in nomine / domini nostri / iesu christi incipit) and forms the I
of the first word.
Whether or not this remarkable figure should be read as a signature
for the church for which the manuscript was made depends, however,
upon whether or not it is counterbalanced by visual evidence for another
dedication. Two images must be considered : the Crucifixion of f. 143V,
and the initial D of the Inventio Sandae Crucis of f. 76V (See PI. 5, 6). As
the figure of Mary forms the I of in nomine, so the great Cross on f. 143V
forms the T of te igitur. In addition to presenting the oldest extant
example of a Christ figure with the short tunic or perizonium (33), the

(32) F. Cabrol, Dictionnaire d'Archéologie chrétienne et de Liturgie, "Encensoir," cols. 21 fï.,

especially col. 23, fig. 4065, for the censer held by the Virgin in the Sacramentary.
(33) The perizonium, a garment fastened at the waist and failing to a point just above the knees,
is not to be confused with the subligaculum, an abbreviated loin cloth. For both types, see
Cabrol, Dictionnaire, "Croix et Crucifix," cols. 3045-3131, especially col. 3089 for the perizonium
of the Sacramentary of Gellone. The Christ with subligaculum occurs in 5th century Italian
works such as the Santa Sabina wooden doors in Rome, and the ivory casket from North Italy
in the British Museum (W. F. Volbagh, Early Christian Art, London, 1961, PI. 98, 103, and
Notes on Plates), but the Sacramentary of Gellone is the first extant example of Christ with
the perizonium. The perizonium does not occur in Eastern Mediterranean works, where the
colobium, the long, sleeveless robe which falls to the feet, is the rule (see, for example, M. Salmi,
The Rabbula Gospels, Lausanne, 1959, f. 13, G. and M. Sotiriou, Icônes du Mont Sinai, Athens,
1956-1958, I, PI. 25, II, pp. 39, 40). In the fragmentary Crucifixion fresco of 705-707 in Santa
Maria Antiqua, the bare shoulders and chest of Christ permit us to infer the presence of the
subligaculum or perizonium, and, judging from Middle Byzantine examples which closely
resemble this fresco in other respects, the perizonium seems most likely (see W. De Grûneisen,
Sainte Marie Antique, Rome, 1911, PI. 51 for the fragment showing bare shoulders and chest,
and PI. 50 for an incorrect reconstruction showing Christ with the colobium). The Utrecht
Psalter contains four images of the Crucifixion, two with the colobium and two with the
perizonium (E. T. De Wald, The Illustrations of the Utrecht Psalter, Princeton, 1932, PL 82,
105, 135, 142). According to Tselos, the greater number of images in the Psalter were dervied
from 6th-8th century Greek sources (D. Tselos, The Sources of the Utrecht Psalter, Minneapolis,
1955, pp. 69 ff.). The model for the Christ with perizonium in the Sacramentary, then, could
12
 THE SCRIPTORIUM OF THE SACRAMENTARY OF GELLONE

page is remarkable for its treatment of the Cross itself. In contrast to other
early examples of the Crucifixion that have come down to us, the Sacra-
mentary image renders the Cross as a precious object, beautifully decorated
with white and red rosettes on a dark blue ground (34). The scattering
of small units of bright color on a deep blue surface recalls the mosaics of
Galla Placidia in Ravenna, or perhaps the textiles which served to provide
motifs for such mosaics (35). It is also possible, however, that the setting
of tiny units of bright color on a dark ground could have been inspired by a
metal Cross set with precious stones enclosed in mounts (36). In such a
medium, a large stone may be surrounded by a ring of small stones, creating
a "rosette" that sparkles against the metal or enamel ground, as the painted
rosettes sparkle against the dark blue of the Cross on f. 143V. If the
Cross had been inspired by a gemmed Cross, perhaps containing
a relic of the True Cross, then our thoughts must turn from a church
dedicated to the Virgin to a monastery dedicated to the Holy Cross —in
other words, from Cambrai back to Meaux.
On f. 76V, a man with a hoe vigorously digs to unearth the True
Cross, which is emblematically displayed within the circular body of the
letter D. Taken alone, it would be difficult to say whether or not this image
has a special significance for the place of origin of the manuscript. But seen
in relationship to the Crucifixion page and the unusual representation of
the Cross on that page, it may buttress the evidence for Meaux.
The image of the Cross even intrudes itself on f. lv in a way which
makes it serve as a sort of alternate initial to the figure of Mary : the Cross
held in the figure's left hand could be read as the initial i of in nomine,

have been supplied by a Byzantine or Italian work, or a work from some other Mediterranean
center with Hellenistic traditions, but the date of such a model must be left rather open. The
association of the perizonium with the rigidly frontal head of Christ seems to indicate an Italian
or Byzantine source, since images of a rigidly frontal Christ with either the subligaculum or
perizonium occur in the 5th century North Italian ivory, and in the early 8th century fresco
at Santa Maria Antiqua — a work commissioned by John VII, a Greek Pope, and considered
to be a reflection of a Byzantine type.
(34) The most important early examples of the Crucifixion listed by the Princeton Index of
Christian Art, in addition to the Sacramentary, are the following : the British Museum ivory
casket from North Italy or Ravenna, c. 420-430; the panel from the Santa Sabina doors, Rome,
c. 430; the Rabbula Gospels, Mesopotamia, 586; the Monza phial, Palestine, end of 6th century;
the Santa Maria Antiqua frescoes, Rome, 705-707 (under John VII), and 741-752 (under
Zacharias); Wurzburg MS. 69, Wurzburg region, second half of the 8th century; St. Gall MS. 51,
Ireland, 8th-9th centuries; the Mt. Sinai icon, Palestine, which has been dated either mid-8th
century or 9th century; the reliquary cover from the Sancta Sanctorum, Palestine, 8th-9th
centuries. In the Santa Sabina panel, the Cross is reduced to wooden plaques behind the figure's
hands; in the Monza phial, it is obscured by the figure. In the Wurzburg manuscript the Cross
is decorated with a checkerboard pattern; in the St. Gall manuscript it is plain, although the
cross-bar is bordered by tiny dots. In all the other examples, the Cross is a simple structure,
utterly devoid of decoration.
(35) For a recent observation on the influence of textiles on mosaic decoration, see P. du
Bourguet,
nouvelles," "Datation
Ars Orientalis,
des Tissus
3, 1959,
coptes
pp. en189-192.
fonction des mosaïques méditerranéennes : précisions
(36) I am indebted to Professor Meyer Schapiro for this suggestion.
13
 CARL R. BALDWIN

since it touches the letter n and is an even more intimate part of the text
than the figure of "Sancta Maria."
The image and inscription of "Sancta Maria" on f. lv need not,
in our view, be tied to a dedication to Notre-Dame of Cambrai. Considering
the fact that the monk David collaborated with a nun in the writing of
Cambrai 300, and that the double-cloisters of both Faremoutiers and Jouarre
were dedicated, at least in part, to the Virgin, the "Sancta Maria" image
could easily be construed as an allusion to a neighboring double-cloister.
This possibility looms larger when we recall the familial associations of
Faremoutiers and Meaux — they were founded by a sister and brother who
became first abbess and first bishop — and the close relations, from their
founding, of Jouarre and Rebais (37).
Perhaps the greatest difficulty for the evidence for Cambrai comes
in the need to explain the co-existence of David and Madalberta in the
production of Cambrai 300. In order to fit both individuals into a monastery
at Cambrai, Deshusses makes the suggestion that Madalberta is none other
than the monk Madalbreto of Rebais. This suggestion had been made
earlier by Teyssèdre, but in order to suggest that Cambrai 300 had been
written at the monastery of Rebais (38). In my opinion, this conversion
of Madalberta to Madalbreto is unwise, either in support of the Cambrai
thesis or the Meaux thesis. The name is clearly feminine, and there is
nothing casual or accidental in the careful writing of the large capital letters
"ma-dal-ber-ta,"
extending nearly the height of the page on f. 155r of
Cambrai 300. Writing this name is like writing
"Robert," or "Joan" instead of "John." Fôrstemann "Roberta"
is clear on this
instead
pointof:
the -a ending is feminine, with specific exceptions, and the -o ending is
invariably masculine (39). This rule is illustrated frequently in Fôrste-
mann's pages. In his list of names related to mathal, for example, names
designated as feminine include Madala, Madalberta, Mathalgarda; masculine
names include Madalo, Madalbert, Madalbret, Madelgard (40). It is possible,
of course, for certain masculine names to end in the letter a, and in the list
of monks at Rebais we encounter Adala, Adalwara, Ewsa, Hatta, Hitta,

SainteForFare
(37) information
et Faremoutiers,
on the double-cloisters
Paris, 1956, pp.of 5 Faremoutiers
ff.; Gallia Christiana,
and Jouarre,
VIII,
see cols.
G. Le1700
Bras,
ft.;
Mabillon, Annales, I, pp. 305, 364. Faremoutiers was dedicated to the Virgin and St. Peter;
the abbey church at Jouarre was dedicated to the Virgin, the parish church to St. Peter.
Faremoutiers was founded in 614 by Burgundofara; Faro, her brother, founded Meaux in 628.
Both Rebais and Jouarre were founded in 634 (although the church at Rebais was not dedicated
until 635). According to Mabillon, the dedication of an oratory at Jouarre to St. Paul, the first
hermit, was an imitation of the dedication of the Rebais monastery to St. Anthony —the
of the monastic life —along with Sts. Peter and Paul.
(38) B. Teyssèdre, Le Sacramentaire de Gellone, Toulouse, 1959, p. 14.
(39) Fôrstemann, op. cit., col. 1 for "-a, endung" : "Sie hat ihre hauptsâchlichste verwendung
in den femininen und trifft hierin mit dem gleichlautenden lateinischen suffix zusammen;"
col. 969 for "-o, suffix" : "Es ist erstens das hauflgste suffix der schwachen masculina, wie jede
seite das worterbuchs zeigt..."
(40) Ibid., cols. 920 ft for names related to Mathal.
14
 THE SCRIPTORIUM OF THE SAGRAMENTARY OF GELLONE

Ita, Mota, and Ruoca (41). However, a study of the Reichenau Liber
Confraternitatum will fail to turn up a single monk whose name ends in
-berta. The Index lists five names ending in -berta or -breta, and eighteen
names ending in -berto or -breto. Reference to the pages upon which the
names appear makes it clear that all of the -berta or -breta names belong
to nuns, and the -berto or -breto names belong to monks (42). It is
not correct to refer to "Madalberta ou Madalbreto," as Deshusses does,
or to write that "Le modèle que l'évêque Hildoard fit copier venait peut-être,
grâce au scribe Madalberta, de l'abbaye de Rebais" (43).
In my opinion, neither Madalbreto, the monk of Rebais, nor any
other Madalbreto (or Madalbert, -berto, or -bertus) had anything to do
with the writing of Cambrai 300. For that, we must thank David, a scribe
of Meaux, and Madalberta, a nun. The evidence for Cambrai, in order
to be convincing, must reconstruct a situation in which this collaboration
of a monk and a nun would have been feasible.

Conclusion
David, the scribe of the Sacramentary, can be identified with a
monk enrolled at the monastery of the Holy Cross at Meaux, whereas there
is no textual evidence for his presence at Cambrai. The Gellone martyrology
contains three unusual references to Rebais and one unusual reference to
Meaux, but no unusual references to the diocese of Cambrai. The treatment
of the Cross on f. 143V of the Sacramentary suggests a monastery which
possessed a jeweled Cross, perhaps a reliquary. The idea that a Rebais
martyrology text was copied at Cambrai is feasible only if Madalberta,
the scribe of Cambrai 300, can be identified with Madalbreto, a monk of
Rebais, but this identification is not justified. Since it is evident that
Madalberta was a nun, it is more logical to suppose that she worked at one
of the several double-cloisters near Meaux than to associate her with
Cambrai under bishop Hildoard. Since the Meaux thesis provides a better
explanation for David, for the Gellone martyrology references to Rebais
and Meaux, for the treatment of the Cross on f. 143V, and for Madalberta,
it would appear to be preferable to the Cambrai thesis.
We cannot know precisely how the Sacramentary found its way
from Meaux to Gellone in the first decade of the 9th century. However,
it is unnecessary to invoke Alcuin's role as a liturgical reformer in order

(41) M. G. H. Lib. Conf., p. 236.

-bertus
(42) Ibid.,
names
see Index.
in the Index
Some :-berto
Madalbreto
or -breto
of Rebais,
names that
for example,
appear inappears
the rollsasare
"Madalbertus"
absorbed by
in the Index. The names of nuns are Adalberta, Alibreta, Framberta, Sigiberta, Vulberta;
the names of monks are Adalberto, Agaberto, Agilberto, Aldaberto, Crimberto, Geleberto,
Gisalberto, Godalberto, Gundbreto, Gundibreto, Mootberto, Pederberto, Rangaberto, Sundar-
berto, Trafberto, Tuunberto, Villiberto, Vinberto.
(43) Deshusses, op. cit., pp. 199, 203.
15
 CARL R. BALDWIN

to explain the migration of the manuscript to the south of France. Since

William was a prominent member of the Carolingian Court, any gifts of
liturgical furnishings to the monastery could have been obtained directly
from highly placed friends at the Court. A 12th century biography of
William relates that Charlemagne himself offered the Count of Aquitaine
anything he desired from the Court's treasures upon William's resignation :
"William refused earthly treasures, but he asked for and obtained a certain
reliquary containing the wood of the Holy Cross." Upon his withdrawal
from the Court in 806 and his entrance to the monastery, William presented
"the reliquary all of precious gold, along with silver and gold chalices, and
many other ornaments of various kinds" (44). A ninth century account
of William's activities on behalf of the monastery runs as follows : "He
acquired a great many possessions. Upon his petition, the Most Serene
King Louis expanded the monastery's domains, giving territory from his
fiscs so that the monastery could work the land. He (William) gave a great
many sacral vestments; he prepared silver and gold chalices and offerings;
he brought a great many books with him, and he clothed the altars with
gold and silver" (45).
In his Donation to Gellone in 807, Louis, King of Aquitaine,
admiration for the former Count. He is pleased to make the
Donation, he writes, because it answers "the petition of Lord William,
a monk, who distinguished himself most splendidly at the Court of our sire
Carolus Augustus, but who for the love of God, striving after a better life,
sought to be poor, and rejected exalted things" (46). The Donation lists
territories to be given to the monastery, but says nothing of books and
liturgical objects. On the other hand, William's 9th century biographer
states that "he brought a great many books with him" ("libros secum
perplures attulit"). Whether or not we place complete confidence in this
source, it seems very likely that William would have brought some of the

(44) P. L., CLXXXVIII, cols. 452-453. The biography of William is part of an Historica
Ecclesiastica by Ordericus. Our excerpts read : "Guillelmus autem omnes terrenas opes respuit,
sed phylacterium quoddam, sanctae Crucis lignum continens, requisivit et obtinuit... offert
phylacterium omni auro pretiosius, cum calicibus aureis et argenteis, et aliis multis ornamentis
multimodis..." The word "phylacterium," although narrowly translated as "amulet," was
normally used interchangeably with "reliquary" in Medieval Latin (see D. Du Cange,
Glossarium Mediae et Infimae Latinitatis, V, p. 239 : "Phylacteria, appellant veteres Amuleta,
ad arcendos vel pellendos morbos... Phylacteria etiam appellabant Thecas, in quibus reconduntur
Sanctorum reliquiae, quae in aedibus sacris servantur"). According to Mabillon, Annales,
II, p. 375, Charlemagne had had the wood of the Cross, recently received from Jerusalem, housed
in a metalwork reliquary of the finest workmanship.
(45) Ada SS. at May 28, May V, p. 810. The biography of William was inserted as a
"Digression" in a biography of Benedict of Aniane, by Ardonus. Our excerpt reads : "Posses-
siones acquisivit plurimas : petenti siquidem eo Serennissimus Rex Ludovicus spatioso hoc
dilatavit termino, de fiscis suis ad laborandum concedens loca : vestes sacras perplurimas dédit,
calices argenteos aureosque et offertoria praeparavit, libros secum perplures attulit, altaria
auro argentoque vestivit."
(46) P. L., CIV, col. 982 for the Donation of Louis. Our excerpt reads : "... petente domno
Guillelmo monacho, qui in aula genitoris nostri Caroli Augusti comes exstitit clarissimus, sed
pro Dei amore meliorem exercens vitam studit esse pauper recusando sublimia."
16
 THE SCRIPTORIUM OF THE SACRAMENTARY OF GELLONE

necessary books and liturgical furnishings with him to the monastery in 806
upon his resignation from the Court, or would have made provision for
their acquisition soon thereafter (47).
According to Amiet, the Sacramentary must have been at Gellone
by 812, since it was used as a model for a Missal which contains a
reference to 807 and a second-hand reference to the death of William
in 812 (48). This evidence confirms Lowe's judgment that the manuscript
was at Gellone "in the early ninth century, as suggested by the dedication
on f. 276 (which is written) in a different and slightly later Caroline
hand" (49).
It is our conjecture that the Sacramentary of Gellone was brought
to the monastery by William himself, upon his departure from the Court
of Charlemagne in 806 A.D. It should be associated with the acquisition
of the reliquary with the wood of the Cross from the Court at the same
time, and the gifts of other liturgical furnishings. Its acquisition was
evidently part of William's plan to outfit the new monastery royally,
as it were, the "sublimia" of the world with objects that would
induce admiration and instill piety. The Sacramentary, with its magnificent
Crucifixion page showing a jeweled Cross, would have been a perfect
to the reliquary obtained from Charlemagne, as well as being the
most essential book for church services. The fact that the book was
associated not merely with the monastery of Gellone but also with the
activity of its founder is attested to by the marginal inscription at the top
of f. 123v-124r : "Gellonis Willelmi liber," "The Book of William of Gellone."
For this inscription we would now propose the paraphrase : "The Book
brought to Gellone by William."

New York Carl R. Baldwin

Herbert H. Lehman College
of the City University

(47) Mabillon, Annales, p. 375, favored this interpretation of the acquisition of books by the
monastery. In his summary of William's arrival at Gellone, he wrote : "In the oratory... he
presented to God the precious gifts of golden and silver chalices, various ornaments for church
use, and the necessary books, almost all of which are still used by our brothers at Gellone."
The "almost" would refer to the fact that the Sacramentary had been brought to Paris a short
time before Mabillon penned these lines.
(48) R. Amiet, "Le plus ancien témoin du supplément d'Alcuin : le missel 'Excarpsus' composé
à Gellone vers 810," Ephemerides Liturgicae, 72, 1958, p. 98.
(49) Lowe, C. L. A., V, n° 618.
17