Studies in Medieval Spanish Frontier History
Charles Julian Bishko
SALVUS OF ALBELDA AND FRONTIER MONASTICISM IN TENTH-CENTURY NAVARRE (1)
(Note: This article appeared originally in Speculum 23 (1948),
559-90 and appears here with permission from the Medieval Academy of America)
 At the commencement of the tenth century, under Sancho Garcés I (905-925), the first Navarrese ruler more than magni nominis umbra , the kingdom of Navarre was extending its southern frontier below the mountainous sierras around Pamplona into the valley of the Ebro. (2) This expansion was primarily aimed downstream in the direction of Calahorra and Tudela, which guarded the approach to Saragossa, chef-lieu of the Muslim Upper Frontier Zone (at-tagr al-a'lâ, or al-aksâ ); (3) but it involved also movement up the river toward the eastern and southeastern borders of Leon, a state which had reached the Ebro long before Navarre and had initiated colonization of the whole region between the Upper Ebro and the Duero, the heartland of the County of Castile. Indeed, from the latter eighth century on, both Asturo-Leonese kings and Castilian counts were steadily pushing forward across their heavily castellated eastern  marchlands into the northern reaches of the despoblado of the Meseta Central. Alfonso II's establishment in 804 of the frontier cathedral town of Valpuesta was followed by the peopling farther south of Amaya in 860; of Burgos in 884; and, in 912, of Roa, Osma, Aza, Clunia and San Esteban de Gormaz, on or even across the Duero itself. (4)
In the first quarter of the tenth century a single Muslim salient below the Ebro separated the Leonese-Castilian and Navarrese Reconquistas from one another. This was the fertile plains country of the Rioja, roughly coterminous with modern Logroño province and traditionally renowned for its wines, olives and other agrarian products. Deriving its name from the Río Oja, one of its larger streams, the Rioja is divided by Spanish geographers into two parts, the Rioja Alta or Upper Rioja, from Belorado to the town of Logroño, and the Rioja Baja or Lower Rioja, from Logroño to Alfaro and Cervera del Río Alhama. (5) Between 910 and 925 this whole strategically and economically desirable district, from its western confines on the Castilian Bureba to Calahorra and Tudela in the east, was the scene of a bitter see-saw contest between the Navarrese, the Leonese-Castilians and the Muslims for control of its fortified towns and castillos. Navarre was eventually to win this struggle, at the expense not only of the Caliphate but of her Leonese-Castilian allies as well. In 918 Sancho Garcés I of Pamplona, as the Navarrese kingdom styled itself, reached the environs of the chief Upper Riojan stronghold of Nájera and drove down the Ebro as far as Tudela; (6) but in 920 he was thrown back by the great Umayyad caliph 'Abdarrahmân III, who defeated Sancho and Ordoño II of Leon at Valdejunquera, between Estella and Pamplona. (7) In 921, however, with the caliph en route back to Córdoba, Sancho attacked and unexpectedly captured the strongly fortified Muslim base at Viguera, commanding the line of the Iregua river. (8) Two years later Nájera with its formidable castillo fell to Ordoño II. (9) These successes were short-lived: in 924  'Abdarrahmân III counterattacked, swept both Navarrese and Leonese armies from the Rioja, and marched north to take and burn Sancho's capital of Pamplona, meeting little effective resistance from the Navarrese, who had evidently fallen back to the safety of the sierras. (10) Yet by the beginning of 925, after the caliph had once more withdrawn southwards, Sancho Garcés I resumed the offensive, apparently without Leonese aid; re-crossing the Ebro, he definitively annexed the Rioja Alta to his domains. (11) From this base, despite occasional Muslim razzias, Navarre was henceforth to mount her campaigns southeastward against Calahorra, although it was not until 1045 that King García Sánchez el de Nájera finally took that bastion of the Rioja Baja. (12)
The Navarrese colonization of the Rioja Alta following Sancho Garcés I's conquest has been little studied, although the annexation of the new frontier domain was an event of paramount importance in the rise of Navarre to the hegemony of Christian Spain less than a century later. (13) At Nájera, the name of which came to be used for the whole territory, a royal palace was constructed, (14) and the Navarrese kings organized the trans-Ebro lands as a dependent kingdom of the older realm of Pamplona, often styling themselves henceforth as ruling 'in Pampilona et Naiera.' (15) Political and military administration was originally entrusted to one Fortún Galíndez, whose title praefectus implies margravial or ducal rank. (16) By 941, if not earlier, at least two border counties had been created, one at Jubera under Mancio Arsénaz, the other under Count Flaíno Bermúdez in the Cameros piedmont around Viguera, where it defended the Iregua valley road to Albelda and the Ebro crossing. (17) The Muslim population, perhaps never  very numerous, seems to have been largely displaced, (18) but Riojan charter signatures suggest Mozarabic elements survived in some strength. (19) Land cessions to pobladores seeking to settle the newly opened country must have been numerous, although little is known of this except from ecclesiastical grants. Episcopal organization took shape early, the first Riojan bishop of the Reconquista, Tudemirus of Nájera, appearing by 928. (20) Monastic colonization dates at least from 923, the year in which Ordoño II of Leon during his brief occupation of Nájera founded southeast of that town, on the river Alesón, the monastery of Santa Coloma. (21) Navarrese foundations were at least as old, for the foundation charter of San Martín de Albelda (5 January 924), the first extant foundation act of a Navarrese Riojan house, is attested by at least three abbots of earlier Riojan abbeys, not to mention Sunna of Santa Coloma. (22) Seven Riojan abbeys other than Albelda are definitely known to have existed in the tenth century: San Millán de la Cogolla, San Prudencio de Laturce, Santos Cosme y Damián de Viguera, San Andrés de Cirueña, Santa Águeda de Nájera, and Santas Nunilo y Alodia near Nájera; but of these San Millán was originally Castilian, and only San Prudencio de Laturce and Santos Cosme y Damián de Viguera can possibly be assigned to the original plantation. (23) Doubtless other houses of which no record has survived originated in the same period, and it is evident that in occupying their new frontier districts the Navarrese pursued the policy of monastic colonization familiar to us from Asturo-Leonese border expansion farther west. (24)
Of all the royal monastic foundations of the tenth-century Rioja the most  important proved to be that of San Martín de Albelda, which Sancho Garcés I founded on 5 January 924 to commemorate his recent capture of Viguera. (25) Organized 'secundum Benedicti regulam uel id quod a sanctis patribus didicisti,' it was located in the Iregua valley, between Viguera and the Ebro, on or near the site of the former Muslim fortress of al-Bayadh, the White, from which it took its name, monasterium Albaidense or Albaildense , whence the Spanish Albelda. (26) What happened later that year to the new community and its first abbot,  Peter, when 'Abdarrahmân III invaded the Rioja on his way to raze Pamplona, is not recorded; but the appearance of a new abbot, Gabellus, in a real privilegio issued on the first anniversary of the founding, suggests trouble. (27) From 925, however, with Navarrese rule once more established and Riojan colonization in full swing, San Martín entered upon a century or more of marked influence and prosperity, due partly to royal favor but also, it may be conjectured, to flourishing frontier conditions and the abbey's fortunate position on routes linking the Rioja Alta with cis-Ebro Navarre, Álava and Castile. Half a century after its establishment the house is known to have possessed a community of some two hundred monks, (28) and extensive patrimonies, including the subject house of San Prudencio de Laturce. Its unusually rich library and active scriptorium made it in the tenth and early eleventh centuries one of the foremost centers of mediaeval Spanish culture, (29) as three outstanding Visigothic manuscripts bear witness: (1) Paris Bibl. Nat. Lat. 2855, the copy of St Ildephonsus of Toledo's De uirginitate beatae Mariae done at San Martín in 950-951 by the monk Gómez for that early French pilgrim to Santiago, Bishop Godescalcus of Le Puy ; (30) (2) Escorialensis d I 2, the massive Codex Albeldensis or Vigilanus, the most famous of all mediaeval Spanish manuscripts, which was completed at Albelda in 976 by Vigila, Sarracinus and García; (31) and (3) Santo Domingo de Silos Ms 4, the superb  Mozarabic Liber Ordinum copied in 1052 at the Albeldan dependency of San Prudencio de Laturce, a manuscript which was carried to Rome ca 1065 by three Spanish bishops, including Munio, bishop of Nájera-Calahorra and abbot of Albelda, (32) in the successful but ultimately fruitless effort to convince Alexander II of the orthodoxy of the Spanish rite. (33) At least two tenth-century Albeldan abbots are known to have engaged in original literary activity: Salvus (951/3-962), to whom we shall return below, wrote a Nuns' Rule, hymns and various liturgical texts; (34) Vigila (ca 976-983) composed verses, and almost certainly was the redactor of the latest section of the important Chronicon Albeldense . (35)
The Rioja Alta continued to be a frontier area well into the eleventh century and Albelda probably suffered heavily in the destructive invasions of al-Mansûr between 981 and 1002. (36) The reign of Sancho III el Mayor (1000-1035), when Navarre gained temporary control over the neighboring peripheral counties of Gascony, Castile, Aragon, Sobrarbe and Ribagorza, and appeared about to unite all the North-Spanish states in a single imperial commonwealth, (37) also had important although not altogether happy consequences for San Martín. It is well known that, as part of his key policy of Europeanization, Sancho introduced the French Cluniac reform into north-central Spain. (38) Apparently Albelda, like  certain other monasteries of the period, underwent some sort of Cluniac-inspired reform, although this is by no means certain; but it never became a Cluniac abbey in spite of the later strong Cluniac center at Nájera. (39) More significant than Cluny for the Albeldan future was the great king's still unstudied program of monasticizing the Navarrese church through abolition of the secular episcopate and conversion of the foremost monasteries of his realm into episcopal sees under abbot-bishops. In the original Sanchan scheme the Riojan abbey selected to play this role was not Albelda but San Millán de la Cogolla. (40) This flourishing abbey lay southwest of Nájera in a Riojan border district where political domination and consequently the monastery's external ties oscillated for centuries between Castile and Navarre. (41) From ca 971 the territory had been in Navarrese hands, and it must have been in part to insure its permanent orientation from Castile to Navarre that in 1028 Sancho transferred to Abbot Sancho of San Millán the combined bishoprics of Nájera and Pamplona. (42) When, in 1040, this union  terminated with the separation of the two bishoprics, Pamplona under Sancho minor and Nájera under Sancho maior, (43) San Millán, after a possible brief experimental attachment to Álava, (44) remained free of episcopal ties between 1042-1046. (45) Meanwhile, shortly after 1044, when Olite in the Rioja Baja was reconquered and annexed to the Nájeran diocese, (46) Bishop Sancho of Nájera assumed the title of abbot of San Martín de Albelda. (47) His successor in 1046 was Abbot Gómez of San Millán, who enlarged the combination by serving as abbot of both San Martín (48) and San Millán, (49) and as bishop of Nájera or Calahorra, as the Riojan diocese was also styled after García Sánchez of Nájera's 1045 capture of Calahorra. (50) After 1065 San Millán's Castilian links proved too strong, and the triple concatenation was dissolved; but the Nájeran-Calahorran bishopric remained in the hands of the abbots of Albelda, who made their abbey the episcopal see while assigning effective rule of the monastic community to priors, who now appear prominently  in the Albeldan charters. (51) At the same time the Castilian occupations of the Rioja in 1076-1109 and 1135-1162, and the definitive Castilian annexation of the Rioja in 1176, separated Albelda from Navarre, creating for her much less favorable conditions than in the past. (52) The decline that now set in may be accounted for in terms of this political shift, the doubtless adverse effects of episcopal entanglement, and the abbey's unfortunate isolation from the Santiago pilgrimage road which ran well to the north, between Logroño and Nájera, where the thriving Cluniac monastery of Santa María de Nájera inherited Albelda's old position of Riojan monastic primacy. Gradually, although the details escape us, San Martín sank to the status of a humble parroquia , until, near the middle of the fifteenth century, probably by a brief of Pope Eugene IV of 1435, it passed into the possession of the collegiate church of Santa María la Redonda of Logroño, where part of the Albeldan archive is still preserved. (53)
Thus the history of San Martín de Albelda is essentially that of an Old Spanish pre-Cluniac house which reached its apogee in the period when the Rioja Alta was still the Navarrese frontier and frontier monasticism a major colonizing agency. It is all the more striking that in establishing Albelda Sancho Garcés I placed it under the Benedictine Rule, making it one of the earliest known Navarrese abbeys to follow the Benedictine tradition, and this at a time when most Spanish monasteries in Christian and Muslim territory alike still faithfully continued the ancient cenobitism of the Visigothic period. It is in this connection, as a chapter in the intricate and still unwritten story of Benedictine origins in Spain, that there can now be adduced a hitherto unrecognized historical source which for the first time makes it possible to understand Albelda's activity as an early center of Benedictine propagation, and which reveals the important influence of the mediaeval frontier as a factor in the 'Europeanization' of Spanish monasticism. This source is the supposedly lost Nuns' Rule of the tenth-century abbot of San Martín, Salvus of Albelda.
In the rich store of Visigothic manuscripts which were once in the possession of the ancient Riojan abbey of San Millán de la Cogolla and are now among the chief treasures of the Academia de la Historia in Madrid, is a small, relatively neglected codex catalogued as Aemilianensis 62 (formerly F. 230 or 64) . (54) Its  modern archival description as Explicatio regulae sancti Benedicti is incorrect a well as unnecessary, for fol. l r preserves the authentic title: Libellus a regula sancti Benedicti subtractus . No author's name is given, and it would seem that the manuscript circulated anonymously from the start. (55) In its present form the codex contains 94 folia approximately 205 X 140 mm. wide, with a single-columned text, divided into 32 numbered and rubricked chapters and written in an excellent tenth-century Visigothic minuscule book hand. (56) On fol. 91 r, following the partially illegible explicit 'ueritas in operibus iustitie inbenitur,' stands a palpably forged date notice in red ink, the work of a much later hand than that of the original scribe: 'Joannes abbas in sancto emiliano sub era dccc.lxxxx.iiii.' (57) The copyist's colophon occurs on fol. 92V, framed within an oblong design:
Eneco garseani licet indignus pre(s)b(i)terii tamen ordine fun(c)tus in accisterio sancte nunilonis et olodie alitus diuino presidio fultus huius scriptionem libri regula nomen continente nagela simul sanctarum nunilonis et olodie. perfectum est hoc opus feliciter [sub] era millesima XIIIIa VII kalendas decembris. ob quod humiliter suplicans uos omnes ob oferto quicuumque hic legeritis ut christum dominum exoretis. (q)ualiter pregobus usis illis. (58) Among paleographers and others who have examined Aemilianensis 62 in recent years, there has been wide divergence of opinion as to the nature of its contents. Loewe-von Hartel, Férotin and Clark regard it as an adaptation of the Benedictine Rule for nuns; for Pérez Pastor and Domínguez Bordona it is a commentary on St Benedict; and in García Villada and Millares Carlo it is catalogued as a copy of the Benedictine Rule itself. (59) All these identifications, which rest on superficial inspection, must be discarded. The Libellus a regula sancti Benedicti subtractus is in fact a complete and carefully organized Spanish monastic Rule for the use of communities of women. Its recognition as such has been impeded by the general unoriginality of its component materials, which are drawn from two principal sources: (1) the Benedictine Rule, whole chapters of which have been incorporated without change except for conversion of all references to monks into the feminine gender; (60) and (2) the celebrated Carolingian commentary on the Benedictine Rule, Expositio in regulam beati Benedicti, written soon after 817 by the abbot Smaragdus of St Mihiel-sur-Meuse. (61) The Smaragdan borrowings are by far the more extensive and constitute the real basis of the Libellus; in addition to effeminization they have, unlike the Benedictine excerpts, undergone considerable abridgment, adaptation, and occasional supplementation from Spanish sources. Two highly interesting chapters are wholly of Spanish origin: c. xxvi, De disciplina suscipiendarum nouiciarum sororum, which is an unknown Mozarabic ordo for the reception of monastic converts; and c. xxx, Quid (d)ebeant in monasterio obserbare sorores, which is a monastic penitential very similar to that discovered by Pérez de Urbel at the terminus of the Santo Domingo de Silos codex of Smaragdus' Expositio.
Early publication of the entire Libellus is eminently desirable, but until an edition is undertaken, perhaps by a Spanish scholar, it will be useful to indicate the plan and general character of the work by presenting the complete list of chapter rubrics, together with reference to the specific chapter of Benedict or Smaragdus upon which that portion of the text draws. In addition cc. xxvi and xxx will be reproduced in full.
|fol. l r||IN NOMINE DOMINI IHESU CHRISTI
INCIPIT LIBELLUS A REGULA
SANCTI BENEDICTI SUBTRACTUS
QUE SUNT INSTRUMENTA BONORUM
|fol. 1v||Sicut sunt fabrorum (uel) aliorum artificum (apta) et plur(ima instru)menta
(ad illorum opera con)cinanda. ita sunt (et bonaram) monacarum apt (a) .
. / . . (re)gula est sequenda per quam (in) presenti pulcre et secundum deum
earum co(n)ponitur uita et post cum christo feliciter gaudentes ingrediantur
[Expos, c. iv]
i. Inprimis dominum deum diligere ex toto corde tota anima tota uirtute. (62)
[Expos, c. iv]
|fol. 52 r||ii. De obedientia.
[Expos, c. vii] (63)
|fol. 60 v||iii. De re(u)erentia.
[Expos, c. xx]
|fol. 62 r||iv. De his que sine iussione se iungunt excumunicatis.
[Expos, c. xxvi]
|fol. 63 r||v. De ordinatione uel electione abbatisse.
[Expos, c. lxiv]
|fol. 64 v||vi. De preposita monasterii.
[Expos, c. lxv]
|fol. 65 v||vii. De ostiaria monasterii.
[Expos, c. lxvi]
|fol. 68 r||viii. De cella(ra)ria cenobii.
[Expos, c. xxxi]
|fol. 69 v||ix. Quod non debent proprium aliquod habere sorores.
[Reg. Ben. c. xxxiii]
|fol. 70 v||x. Si omnes debent equaliter necessaria accipere.
[Reg. Ben. c. xxxiv]
xi. De septima(na)riis coquine.
[Expos, c. xxxv]
|[fol. 71 bis]||[xii. deest] (64)
[xiii. De infirmis.] (65)
|fol. 72 v||xiv. De senibus uel infantibus.
[Expos, c. xxxvii]
|fol. 73 v||xv. De mensura ciui et potus.
[Expos, c. xxxix]
|fol. 75 r||xvi. Quibus horis oportet reficere sorores.
[Reg. Ben. c. xli]
|fol. 76 r||xvii. Yt post completa nemo loquatur.
[Reg. Ben. c. xlii]
xviii. De his que ad opus dei uel ad mensam tarde occurrerint.
[Expos, c. xliii]
|fol. 77 v||xix. De (h)is que excumunicantur quomodo satisfaciant.
[Reg. Ben. c. xliv]
|fol. 78 v||xx. De (h)is que in oratorio fallunt.
[Reg. Ben. c. xlv]
xxi. De his que in quibuslibet rebus delinquunt.
[Reg. Ben. c. xlvi]
|fol. 79 v||xxii. De significanda hora operis dei.
[Reg. Ben. c. xlvii]
xxiii. De opere man(u)um quotidiano.
[Reg. Ben. c. xlviii]
|fol. 81 v||xxiv. De quadragesime obserbatione.
[Reg. Ben. c. xlix]
|fol. 82 v||xxv. De uestimento et calci(a)mento le(c)tique rationabilis stratamento.
[Reg. Ben. c. lv]
|fol. 83 v||xxvi. De disciplina suscipiendarum nouiciarum sororum.|
|fol. 84 r
fol. 84 v
|Nobiter uenienti sorori predicentur antequam ingrediatur dura et aspera per que itur ad deum. quod si perseuerauerit tunc ei tribuatur ingresus. quum autem ingressa fuerit in congregatione prosternat se ad pedes abbatisse. de inde omnium sororum ad dexteram et ad lebam. postque stabit ante conspectum abbatisse et interrogata ab ea coram / omnibus deuotionis sue profitebitur desiderium. deinde amonita ab abbatissa ut sollerter atque humiliter hanc regulam serbet. prouoluta osculabitur manus ac pedes abbatisse. postque per ordinem omnium sororum. sicque stabit ultimo in loco in ordine suo. demumque reboluto anni circulo, iam cum probata fuerit et regulariter erudita, ut prius prostrata ad  pedes abbatisse uel omnium sororum. ut nomen eius adnotetur cum nominibus earum. accepta igitur licentia si potuerit / ipsa scribere nomen suum scribet. si uero (non potuerit) alia subrogata persona eum adnotabit. sicque accipiens in oratorio ipsam cartam pacti de manu abbatisse post roborationem sui nominis uadet recitando hunc uersum contra altare, suscipe me domine secundum eloquium tuum ut uibam. et ne confundas me ab expectatione mea. et secundo item gloria, postque repetens caput uersi prosternet se ante aram. surgensque probolbet se pedibus abbatisse et osculentur earn omnes sorores, de inde stabit in ordine suo.|
|fol. 85 r||xxvii. De ordine congregationis.
[Expos, c. lxiii]
|fol. 86 r||xxviii. Si inposibilia sorori iniungantur.
[Reg. Ben. c. lxviii]
xxix. De zelo bono qu(em) debent habere sorores.
[Reg. Ben. c. lxxii]
|fol. 87 v
fol. 88 r
fol. 88 v
fol. 89 r
fol. 89 v
fol. 90 r
|xxx. Quid (d)ebeant in monasterio obserbare sorores.
Primum ut recte abrenuntient usque ad unum numum et nic(h)il proprium
uindicent. quod que non renuntiauerit recte non recipiatur in monasterio,
secundo ut non faciant uolumtates suas proprias sed quod imperatum acceperint
cum humilitate et karitate obediant. si qua uero super tertium sermonem
imperantis tardauerit obedire / xv flagellas suscipiat. si qua cum indignatione
animi manu propria aut de aliquo sororem suam percu(s)serit si maior etas
est xx diebus uel xxx aut si necesse fuerit xl excumunicetur secundum modum
culpe, iunior enim xl flagella suscipiat uel l. que filiam uel propinquam
defendere boluerit xxxv flagella suscipiat. que pro suo dorso murmurauerit
x flagella suscipiat. que sorori sue maledixerit xx flagella suscipiat. que
absconse uel leuiter de sorore detraxerit xii flagella suscipiat. que consilium
suum contra maioris sue instituia defendere / uoluerit xii flagella suscipiat.
que absque mensa sine iussu prioris aliquid gustauerit xx flagella suscipiat.
que seniori superbe respondent xv flagella suscipiat. que pro aliqua re incaute
iurauerit xv flagella susci(piat). que otiose fabulauerit x flagella suscipiat.
que sine imperio senioris sue cum seclaribus fabulauerit xv flagella suscipiat.
omnes culpas suas abbatisse manifestant. omni die dominico reconcilient se
pro negligentiis suis et petant sibi inuicem ueniam et sic ad refectionem
accedant. si qua soror alie sorori uerbum durum dixerit aut in corde duritiam
tenuerit non mandu/cet neque bibat neque dormiat neque cum ceteris oratorium
intret quousque ueniam humiliter petat cui iniuriam fecit, quia omnis soror
que iram serbat diabolo ad abitandum in corde suo (h)ospitium preparat. dum
requiescere ad lectum fuerint ueniam petant et benedictionem ne quod absit
in subitaneam mortem incidant. semper suspecte sint unaqueque de morte sua.
sic laborent die ac nocte sine murmuratione tamquam semper uiuiture. et sic
/ semper mortem ante occulos [suspectam] (66)
habeant quasi odie transiture. inter omnia precepta salutaria
karitatem teneant quia deus karitas est et qui manet in karitate in deo
manet et deus in eo. de morte inimici non gratulentur sed sicut per se ipsas
orent et diligant. cum omnibus monasteriis sororum tantam karitatem habeant
ut sit illis cor unum et anima una. si hec fecerint erunt filie dei coheredes
autem domini nostri ihesu christi. que habet discordiam et ante solis occasum
non petit ueniam in diabolo / est et non christi sed de regula diaboli est.
proinde o bos dilectissime ancille christi karitatem tenete quod est uinculum
perfectionis et deus pacis et dilectionis erit uobiscum hie et in eternum.
xxxi. De oratorio monasterii. [Reg. Ben. c. lii]
|fol. 90 v||xxxii. Queque ergo ad patriam celestem festinans ascendere hanc minimam inquoacionis regulam descriptam adiubante christo perfice. et tune demum ad maiora sanctorum patrum sacrarumque matrum uirtutum culmina deo protegente perbenies. [Expos, c. lxxiii]|
It should be plain from the foregoing analysis that the originality of the Libellus consists primarily in its rehandling of Smaragdan and Benedictine materials to produce a new Rule designed for nuns, and better adapted than either of its two chief sources to local Spanish conditions. While the Benedictine borrowings, as has been noted, are treated with greater respect, the Libellus is predominantly Smaragdan rather than Benedictine; and it seems safe to assume that in preparing it the author used only a single Spanish Smaragdus manuscript in which, as in all the surviving Spanish Smaragdi discussed below, differently colored inks were used to distinguish Benedictine text from Carolingian commentary, thus facilitating citation from either at will. Well over half the Libellus is contained in the first two chapters, which are based upon Smaragdus and treat of the Instrumenta bonorum operum and the XII gradus humilitatis ; thus its total content is as much homiletic as institutional. (67) The author exhibits a marked interest in Smaragdan extracts from Spanish Rules of the Visigothic period, deliberately taking over into the Libellus a number of texts from Isidore of Seville's Regula monachorum and the two Rules ascribed to Fructuosus of Braga. (68) Finally, it is significant to note the more important chapters of Benedict and Smaragdus from which nothing has been taken; these include the long treatment of the daily office (cc. viii-xix), which is silently discarded in favor of the Mozarabic system of canonical hours; almost all the disciplinary chapters (xxiii-xxv, xxvii-xxix, lxix-lxi), which the Spanish penitential of c. xxx replaces; the reception chapter (lviii), for which the Mozarabic ordo of Libellus c. xxvi has been substituted; and the chapters on journeys (l-li, lxvii), guests (liii, lxi), priests (lx, lxii), deans (xxi), oblates (lix), crafts (lvii) and studies (liv).
Determination of the provenance and authorship of the Libellus a regula sancti Benedicti subtractus logically begins with the Aemilianensis 62 colophon, reproduced above, where 25 November 976 (Era 1014) is given as the date of the manuscript's completion. Of the scribe Eneco Garseani, who makes no claim to authorship, nothing more is known than what he here tells us of his connection as priest with the monastery of SS Nunilo y Alodia. (69) That this obscure house was a nunnery is suggested both by its patronage and its association with a Nuns' Rule, but the possibility cannot altogether be ruled out that Aemilianensis was  produced in a scriptorium of monks. Dom Férotin, apparently reasoning from San Millán's later acquisition of the codex, located the house of SS Nunilo y Alodia in 'la basse Navarre,' a correct ascription but one capable of much more precise definition. Anguiano, (70) whom Risco followed closely in Volume XXXIII of España Sagrada , (71) proved the strongly Upper Riojan concentration of the cult of the two sisters Nunilo and Alodia, martyred at Huesca in 851, in the persecutions under the caliph 'Abdarrahmân II. (72) Eneco's description of this house as 'nomen continente nagelam simul sanctarum nunilonis et alodie' can only mean that it was entitled 'SS Nunilo y Alodia de Nagela,' i.e., of Nájera, the Latin name of which occurs in this form as well as in the commoner 'Naiera.' (73) Furthermore, in quite another connection than the Libellus , Argáiz, Anguiano and Risco agree in placing a mediaeval monastery of SS Nunilo y Alodia on the site of a modern ermita of similar patronage established at Horcajos, between Castroviejo and Bezares, only a few kilometers southeast of Nájera and well within the limits of its ancient suburbium . (74) That this was the approximate, if not the exact, locale from which Aemilianensis 62 emanated, can hardly be doubted, and this forcefully raises the question whether the Libellus may not be the Nuns' Rule known to have been written about the middle of the tenth century by Abbot Salvus of the nearby house of San Martín de Albelda.
Little as we know of Salvus of Albelda, it is certain that he was the outstanding figure in Navarrese monasticism on the Riojan frontier. (75) In comparison with the exasperating obscurity of other ecclesiastical and lay personages of the period the  sparse documentation of his career seems relatively abundant, including as it does:
1. Three charters referring to him as abbot of Albelda. These have been published by González from the Simancas registro of Albeldan charters with the erroneous dates 925, 926 and 943; they must be corrected to read 953, 955 and 956. (76)
2. The couplet inserted in the terminal victory ode of the Codex Albeldensis by its scribes Sarracinus and Vigila, which pays tribute to Salvus as their master and helper. (77)
3. The anonymous so-called Vita Salui abbatis contained in the Codex Albeldensis, where it stands without rubric immediately following Ildephonsus of Toledo's De uiris illustribus with its pendant life by Felix of Julian of Toledo. The Vita, was almost certainly written by the scribe and later Albeldan abbot Vigila, in or shortly before 976, when the codex was completed. (78) It has often been reprinted from García de Loaísa's first and only edition of 1593, which bears traces of minor editorial alterations; (79) it is here reproduced directly from the Codex Albeldensis text: (80)
Saluus abba albaildensis monasterii uir lingua nitidus et scientia eruditus elegans sententiis ornatus in uerbis scripsit sacris uirginibus regularem libellum et eloquio nitidum et rei ueritate prespicuum. cuius oratio nempe in ymnis orationibus uersibus ac missis quas  inlustri ipse sermone conposuit plurimam cordis conpunctionem et magnam suabiloquentiam legentibus audientibusque tribuet. fuit namque corpore tenuis paruus robore sed ualide ferbescens spiritus uirtute. o quanta illius ex ore dulciera super mella manabant uerba cor hominis quasi uina letificantia. obiit temporibus garseani christianissimi regis et tudemiri pontificis iiii idus februarias era millesima sana doctrina prestantior (81) cunctis et copiosior operibus karitatis. ac sic in predicto cenobio iuxta basilicam sancti martini epis-copi et confessoris christi est tumulatus sorte sepulcrali. ad cuius pedes eius discipulus belasco episcopus quiescit in pace.These sources permit only the barest outline of Salvus' life. Presumably he had been an Albeldan monk for some years prior to his abbacy, conceivably from San Martín's foundation in 924; but the first sure mention of him is in 953, when he appears as abbot. Since his predecessor Dulquitus is last mentioned in early 951, it is possible Salvus headed the Albeldan community as early as that year. His intimate connection with the scriptorium of Albelda in the period of its greatest glory is obvious. It was with his support that his superbly trained pupils, Vigila and Sarracinus, undertook the great Codex Albeldensis. He himself is credited by Vigila with the authorship of a Nuns' Rule and numerous liturgical pieces. (82) Another important Salvan protege was Belascus, prior of Albelda under Salvus and later bishop of Pamplona (ca 962-972), (83) whose tomb was symbolically placed at the foot of Salvus' own. On his death on 10 February 962, in the time of King García Sánchez I and Bishop Tudemirus of Nájera, Salvus was buried beside the abbey church. The vivid but tantalizing glimpse of the frail scholar-abbot of Albelda proffered by the Vita led Mabillon to exclaim feelingly: 'Utinam ampliora de eo resciret!' (84) But attempts to identify Salvus' contributions to the Mozarabic Rite have so far ended in failure, (85) while the Nuns' Rule has been universally regarded as lost ever since it became clear that Antonio's statement of its survival was based on Labbé's erroneous ascription to Salvus of a manuscript containing the Regula siue institutio inclusarum of the twelfth-century English Cistercian, Ailred of Rievaulx. (86)
 That the Libellus a regula sancti Benedicti subtractus might well be identical with the 'regularis libellus' of Salvus occurred as early as 1719 to one Spanish mediaevalist, R. P. Fray Francisco de Berganza. In the first volume of his famous Antigüedades de España Berganza notes Salvus' death for the year 962, and then describes a manuscript he has seen at San Millán de la Cogolla: 'En el Monasterio de San Millán se conserva otra Regla escrita para Religiosas, sacada del Commentario, que escrivió Esmaragdo sobre la Regla de San Benito, la qual comiença por el capitulo de los instrumentos de las buenas obras, y prosigue con treinta y un Capitulos, variando el Orden, y omitiendo los Capitulos pertenecientes a los Varones.' (87) There can be no doubt that Berganza here analyzes, with greater precision than any modern paleographer, our Aemilianensis 62; unfortunately he discarded its identification as Salvus' Rule because of the false date notice, according to which the manuscript belonged in 855 under a reputed Abbot Juan of San Millán; once this is set aside, however, the colophon, which Berganza entirely overlooked, removes his chronological objection. As we have seen, the manuscript was actually written near Nájera in 976, only fourteen years after the death of Salvus at neighboring Albelda. Paleographical similarities between Aemilianensis 62 and such Albelda codices as the Albeldensis strongly suggest the Albeldan scriptorium as the original school of Eneco Garseani. (88) The Vita Salui abbatis's terse 'regularem libellum' certainly sounds like a reference to the lengthy Libellus a regula sancti Benedicti subtractus, while its statement that Salvus wrote 'sacris uirginibus' recalls the Libellus' consistent preference for that phrase over the archaic, traditionally Spanish deo uotae. The Vita's stylistic praise ('eloquio nitidum') is understandable enough in an ambiente where original composition was dismayingly rare and skilful adaptation its laudable substitute. Nor can one be surprised, given the unoriginal content of most of the Libellus, that it was allowed to circulate anonymously. Finally, the appearance of a Nuns' Rule in tenth-century Spain is a sufficiently remarkable phenomenon to reduce to a minimum the likelihood of two such Rules having  been produced in the Rioja Alta within a quarter-century. Beside traditional Spanish devotion to eclectic use of such venerated Roman-Visigothic Nun's Rules as those of Augustine, Jerome and Leander, the Libellus , as a single code of observance, based upon Benedict and Smaragdus, was in its day a radical innovation; and one has only to compare it with the conservative Liber Regularum being copied in this same century by the nun Leodegundia for the Gallegan convent of Bobadilla, (89) to appreciate the daring of its author. Indeed, the Libellus stands out as the first native Rule composed in Spain since the seventh-century Regula sancta communis and the Regula sanctorum Pauli et Stephani , -- the only monastic Rule, so far as we know, to be written by a Spanish monk between 711 and the final Cluniac-Cistercian Benedictinization of peninsular cenobitism. (90) Salvus may have completed it while still an ordinary member of the Albeldan scriptorium, but it seems more likely that the work belongs in the period of his abbacy, i. e., between 951/3 and 962; possibly it was commissioned at that time by Tudemirus, bishop of Nájera and custodian of the diocesan nunneries. In any case, the weight of the evidence overwhelmingly favors the identification of the Libellus a regula sancti Benedicti subtractus as the Nuns' Rule of Salvus of Albelda.
If the foregoing argument is sound, then in the Libellus a regula sancti Benedicti subtractus of Salvus of Albelda we possess virtually the only surviving  literary product of early Navarrese monasticism, a historical source which, inspite of its general unoriginality of content, is of exceptional value for understanding tenth-century Spanish frontier monasticism, not only in the Rioja Alta but, as we shall see, in border Castile as well. Before exploring the Libellus' general importance, however, it will be useful to consider briefly its component materials, commencing with those of Spanish origin.
1. The Mozarabic reception ordo. A number of minor modifications of Benedictine-Smaragdan practice to conform with Spanish usage occur in the Libellus, e.g., in the substitution of the Mozarabic for the Benedictine-Smaragdan canonical hours, (91) but it is in dealing with the reception of converts, a subject intimately related to the structural organization of the monastic community, that Salvus reveals most emphatically his adherence to certain basic principles of Spanish monastic constitutionalism. (92) In the reception ordo printed above as c. xxvi, De disciplina suscipiendarum nouiciarum sororum, the convert appears before the abbess at the beginning of her novitial year, and makes a formal prostration which is in effect a traditio corporis, a legal surrender of her person into the abbess' hands. A year later, in the reception rite proper, the convert prostrates herself before the abbess and the assembled sisters, requesting formal admission to the community. This being granted, she signs her name (or, if illitterate, has another do this for her) in the 'carta pacti' held by the abbess. Only then does she approach the altar and make that submission to God which is the essence of Benedictine profession; and immediately afterwards she once more prostrates herself before the abbess and reaffirms her personal subordination to her as God's representative.
The appearance of the 'carta pacti' in the Salvan reception rite is decisive evidence that the Spanish background of the Libellus is not the main Spanish monastic tradition, but its Gallegan offshoot. The predominant Spanish, or, as we may call it, the Visigothic monastic tradition was established throughout the peninsula before 711, except in Galicia, and it survived into the early Reconquista period as the principal tradition of both Muslim and Christian Spain, being particularly well known to us from the Córdobese houses of Eulogius' Memorialis Sanctorum, and the numerous foundations grouped about Oviedo and Leon, the successive capitals of the Asturo-Leonese state. (93) It was a fairly typical pre-Benedictine Western cenobitism, accepting the normal monarchical abbatiate and episcopal supervision, but displaying a marked partiality for double  houses and for the use not of a single Rule but of codices regularum containing, inter alias , the Rules of Pachomius, Augustine, Basil, Isidore of Seville, Fructuosus of Braga, and, more rarely, Benedict. (94) On the other hand, from the mid-seventh century on, in Galicia, there arose a powerful rival monastic tradition, the Gallegan, which undertook to limit episcopal control by monasticization of the episcopate ('episcopi sub regula') and which replaced the monarchical abbatiate by a quasi-feudal system of contractual relations between abbot-patronus and monks-dependents. (95) This peculiarly Gallegan concept was embodied in the pactum , the formal written covenant between abbot and monks, by which the latter, in choosing their abbot and legally submitting their persons to him along with a pledge of obedience, compelled the abbot to accept considerable limitation of his powers, including recognition of the legal right of rebellion on the part of his subjects. Since the bond was personal, pacta had to be renewed at each abbatial election, but new converts, as in the Salvan ordo, simply subscribed to the current pactum. The by no means complete series of extant pacta collected and analyzed by Dom Herwegen in his able study of pactualism affords abundant testimony to the survival of the Gallegan tradition in the early Reconquista monasteries of Christian Spain. (96)
Beyond question it is to the Gallegan, and not to the main Visigothic, tradition of Spanish monasticism that the Libellus belongs. In structure the c. xxvi ordo approaches most closely Group II (the Eufrasia and Indulfus pacta) of Herwegen's classification of the pacta according to their variation from the archetypal pactum appended to the Regula monastica communis (97) As compared with the ordo conuersorum conuersarumque of the Mozarabic Liber Ordinum in the form published by Dom Férotin from the eleventh-century San Prudencio de Laturce codex, (98) the Salvan rite is demonstrably simpler, more primitive, less Benedictinized in phraseology; it permits the abbess to retain the 'carta pacti,' the legal witness of the convert's personal submission, rather than have the convert, as in the Liber Ordinum, place the 'pactionis libellum' or 'pactionis testamentum' on the altar as if it were a Benedictine profession petitio . The San Prudencio text, it should be noted, comes from the same pactualized ambiente as the Libellus, San Prudencio being indeed an Albeldan dependency; but a century of Riojan Benedictinization separates the two ordines, and the San Prudencio rite cannot be, as is often claimed, an ancient ordo, nor could it have been used outside the specific areas of Gallegan pactual monasticism -- in this  case, the Rioja Alta and Castile. (99) As for the ordo of the Libellus, its precise form and phraseology may owe something to Salvus' editorial pen; if so, it represents his sole liturgical composition thus far identifiable.
2 The monastic penitential . The second major non-Benedictine, non-Smaragdan section of the Libellus , c. xxx, Quid (d)ebeant in monasterio obserbare sorores, cannot have been composed by Salvus, for it is basically identical with two earlier Castilian texts, Item ex regula cuiusdam and Qui(d) debent fratres uel sorores in monasterio serbare , which Dom Pérez de Urbel discovered at the end of the 945 Silos Smaragdus (Santo Domingo de Silos, Ms 1, part 2);(100) but he certainly revised them freely by combining the two pieces in reverse order, by placing them somewhat before the close of the Libellus , by making certain additions and omissions in converting them to the use of nuns, and by increasing some of the penalities imposed. Evidently Salvus used a Smaragdus of the same group as Silos Ms 1, part 2, but whether the two texts were first appended to the Expositio at Silos is uncertain. Pérez de Urbel connects them with Fructuosan monastic circles in seventh-century Galicia, (101) although their ultimate origin may be Irish or Frankish, the flagellatory penalties linking them in general tenor, although not in specific provisions, with Columban's Regula coenobialis. There is no proof, however, that they were known in Spain much before 945 (the date of Silos Ms 1, part 2), and they have no visible ties with the two well known Spanish lay penitentials, the Silense and the Vigilanum (or Alveldense), which are thought to have circulated ca 800 in Castile and Navarre. (102) It should be noted, moreover, that in the late ninth-century Academia de la Historia Smaragdus (Aemilianensis 26), the only one of the three earliest Spanish Smaragdi to preserve the full text of Book III, the Expositio is followed not by the Silos-Salvus texts, but by a penitential homily of Chrysostom (De agenda paenitentia). (103)
 The inference would seem to be that the Item ex regula cuiusdam and the Qui(d) debent were attached to Castilian Smaragdus manuscripts some time between ca 900 and ca 945, when the Castilian Smaragdus was transmitted to the Rioja Alta. Until further work is done upon the origins of the two texts, it would be rash to dogmatize; but Libellus c. xxx, like the ordo of c. xxvi, does represent another major instance of Salvus' use of Spanish rather than Benedictine-Smaragdan material in an important field of monastic institutionalism.
3. The Benedictine and Smaragdan Excerpts. Aside from cc. xxvi and xxx, the Libellus is based upon Smaragdus' Expositio and, to a lesser extent, the Benedictine Rule. This fact emphasizes its connection with Carolingian Reform Benedictinism and with the still obscure problem of the origins of Benedictine monasticism in Spain. Following centuries of controversy among monastic historians, it is now generally agreed that, while the Benedictine Rule was often included in Spanish codices regularum from the late Visigothic period on, no true Benedictine monasticism, with abbeys following the Monte Cassino code to the exclusion of all others, can be found in the peninsula much before the beginning of the tenth century. (104) It is also becoming increasingly apparent that the establishment at that time of a genuine Benedictine monasticism was primarily due to the entrance into Spain of Carolingian Reform Benedictinism, a movement to which, through St Benedict of Aniane, Spain had herself made a significant contribution. Unlike their later successors, the Cluniacs, the Carolingian Benedictines do not themselves appear to have entered Spain; penetration operated chiefly through three literary agencies: the Benedictine Rule in its new Carolingian recension, Smaragdus' Expositio, and the Dialogi of Gregory I. (105) Surprisingly few texts of the Rule itself can be traced; what many Spanish abbeys received was not the Rule itself (although of course its text was included in the commentary and written in blue, red or green ink to distinguish it from the black ink of the latter), but the Smaragdan Expositio , or as the Spanish manuscripts style it, the Explanatio . Recognition of Salvus' dependence upon Smaragdus, with his special Carolingian interpretation of the Benedictine Rule, puts the Libellus in a new light, one obscured by current views of its immediate derivation from Benedict. It must now be realized that Salvan Benedictinism, and by implication that of Albelda and the Rioja as well, stems directly or indirectly from the Carolingian Empire; the Libellus is a by-product of the impact upon Spain of the Carolingian Monastic Reform.
Yet, largely Carolingian as the Libellus is, its Spanish elements are so striking as to make inescapable the conclusion that its prime objective is to produce a Nun's Rule synthesizing Gallegan and Carolingian monasticism. As abbot, or at  least as monk, of a Benedictine abbey, Salvus patently hoped to extend Carolingian to Riojan nunneries. At the same time, had not Gallegan pactualism been established in the Rioja, and had not Salvus strongly favored its continuation, he would not have discarded the Benedictine reception rite and assumed that his nunneries would be constitutionally organized along non-Benedictine lines. In short, he aimed to promote a composite monasticism in which spirituality and much of the daily regime were Benedictine-Smaragdan, but basic institutional forms remained Spanish.
Was this remarkable Carolingian-Spanish monastic synthesis the invention of Salvus, or does his Libellus merely transmit to Riojan nunneries a composite monasticism already established among communities of men? and, if so, what were its origins? Navarrese monasticism prior to the conquest of the Rioja Alta is, like so much in the formative period of Navarre, very imperfectly known, but it may be affirmed with confidence that, prior to the tenth century, pactualism and Benedictinism, whether separately or in combination, were unknown in cis-Ebro Navarre; and that their appearance in the Rioja marks a new, distinctly frontier phase of Navarrese monastic history. Throughout Muslim and Christian Navarre, as in most of Asturias-Leon, monastic usage conformed to the venerable Visigothic tradition, which held full sway in such Navarrese Mozarabic communities as those described under Muslim rule in Eulogius of Córdoba's epistle to Wiliesindus, bishop of Pamplona (851). (106) Benedictinism cannot be attested anywhere in Navarre before the reign of Sancho Garcés I (905-925), when it appeared roughly simultaneously on both sides of the Ebro, e.g., at Albelda (924), and at Santa María de Hirache (ca 928), near Estella, on the north bank. (107) San Salvador de Leire, which Eulogius mentions, and which survived the Reconquista wars to become the foremost royal abbey of the Pamplona kingdom, is commonly classified as Benedictine from an early date, but its substitution of that use for an original Visigothic devotion cannot be documented before the eleventh century. (108) As for pactualism, its very presence in the Rioja proves that region's discontinuity with pre-conquest Mozarabic monastic institutionalism, whatever the validity of the dubious traditional arguments, still pressed by Gómez-Moreno, Menéndez Pidal and Pérez de Urbel, that Albelda, Cogolla and other Riojan houses existed prior to the Sanchan colonization. (109) Pactualism also rules out derivation of Riojan monasticism from Navarrese abbeys above the Ebro. In short, although the majority of converts to Riojan houses presumably hailed, like the bulk of the border settlers, from the Pamplona region, the older Navarrese monastic tradition was not strong enough to take root on the colonial frontier.
 Just the opposite is true of the vigorous cenobitism of frontier Castile to the west and southwest. By the commencement of the tenth century Castile's powerful southern drive was approaching the Duero bank, and Leonese-Castilian interest in annexation of the Rioja is indicated by Ordoño II's alliances with Sancho Garcés I, his temporary occupation and colonization of Nájera, and the continuing Castilian influences in the upper reaches of the Rioja all through the tenth century. In Castilian frontier advance monastic colonization was an essential feature. (110) New monastic foundations, accompanying and possibly preceding secular settlement, can be traced from the ninth-century abbeys in and around Valpuesta after its colonization in 804 (including Santa María de Valpuesta, Santos Cosme y Damián de Val de Rama, and San Román de Merosa) (111) through those erected in the spreading Burgos suburbium after 884 (e.g., San Pedro de Cárdena and its early affiliates) ; (112) on down to such remote houses as San Andrés de Boada (937) near the Duero town of Roa. (113) This movement, particularly on its outermost eastern and southeastern flanks, surrounded the western Rioja Alta with a network of flourishing monastic centers, some of them possessing very active scriptoria to which many of our finest Visigothic manuscripts can be ascribed. Such houses were Valvanera in the Bureba; San Pedro de Arlanza and San Pedro de Berlangas in the Arlanza river valley; and San Sebastián (later Santo Domingo) de Silos, San Juan de Tabladillo and San Mamés de Ura in the valley of the Arlanza's tributary, the Ura (modern Mataviejas). (114)
In all these Castilian border houses monasticism differed sharply from the conservative Visigothic traditionalism of Asturias-Leon, cis-Ebro Navarre and Muslim Spania. In the first place, it was a pactual monasticism of Gallegan rather than Visigothic type; almost as many ninth- and tenth-century pacta survive from the Castilian communities between Valpuesta and the Duero as from Galicia itself. (115) This characteristic Castilian pactualism originated in the extreme eastern sector of the old Asturias kingdom, in the Montaña country of the Asturias de Santander, de Trasmiera and de Laredo, where it would seem to have been planted by refugee monks from Galicia soon after the Muslim invasion of their homeland. Secondly, by ca 900 Castilian monasticism was becoming strongly Benedictinized,  showing toward reception of the Benedictine Rule that same readiness to break with the past which Menéndez Pidal has shown to be typical of Castilian, as contrasted with Leonese, institutional history. (116) This is not true of the older monastic strata of Castile; around Valpuesta the monasteries of the tenth century continued to be purely pactual without showing any Benedictine traces whatsoever. But in the new early tenth-century abbeys of the Arlanza and Ura valleys, the charters refer again and again to observance 'secundum sancti Benedicti regulam.' (117) Clearly, somewhere about the turn of the century the Benedictine tradition invaded Castilian pactualism and successfully established itself in the new foundations along the advancing frontier. In this Benedictine penetration Smaragdus' Expositio played a central role, as a number of surviving manuscripts of the period testify; and the whole movement is certainly of Carolingian origin, dating doubtless from the philbenedictine efforts of Alfonso III of Asturias (866-910) and the counts of Castile, notably Fernán González. Finally, well before Salvus, frontier Castile had developed the synthesis of Carolingian and Gallegan elements which the Libellus reflects. It is certain that the Mozarabic breviary was not abandoned in Castile before the Cluniac-Gregorian reform of the eleventh century. The Castilian attachment of the Item ex regula cuiusdam and the Qui(d) debent to Smaragdus manuscripts illustrates the adaptation or supplementation of Carolingian Benedictinism in the light of Spanish usage. More significantly, at least one clear case can be cited of a Castilian pactual-Benedictine house contemporary with the foundation of Albelda itself. This is the Ura valley monastery of San Juan de Tabladillo; from at least 924 it was under the Benedictine Rule, yet in 931 its monks are found drawing up with their abbot Stefanus a typically Gallegan pactum. (118) Other such abbeys, probably Silos and San Millán, must have existed in the Ura-Arlanza district; but we need more pacta, more foundation charters and some Castilian libri ordinum properly to trace the history of the synthesis in Castile.
What all this means for Salvus' Libellus and the Riojan frontier is that, at the very time the Navarrese were conquering and monasticizing the upper Rioja, a strong expansionist Castilian monasticism, incorporating both Gallegan and Sruaragdan elements in combination, lay close at hand in excellent position to infiltrate its amalgamated institutions into the newly opened country down the Jibro. Under such circumstances it is not surprising to encounter strong evidence for the Castilian origin of Riojan cenobitism. In the first place, the Spanish Smaragdus manuscripts point to this conclusion when there are listed in chronological order all known Visigothic manuscripts or fragments of the Expositio, notices of lost manuscripts and other testimonies to its use in Spain prior to l050. (119)
 1. Late ninth century: Santo Domingo de Silos, Archivo del Monasterio, Ms 1 [formerly H], fols. 1-177 r, line 2; incomplete at beginning and end; Castilian, scribe and scriptorium unknown. (120)This catalogue makes it clear that the chief center of Smaragdan circulation in Spain was the contiguous frontier zones of Castile and the Rioja, Catalonia and Galicia appearing only as secondary marginal areas and Asturias-Leon not at all. As between Castile and the Rioja, the question of priority is easily settled: not only do the three oldest Smaragdi (Academia de la Historia, 26; Manchester, Lat. 104; Silos 1, part 1) come from ninth-century Castilian scriptoria, but before 923 the Rioja was unconquered, uncolonized by Navarre, and isolated from Castilian cultural influences. It follows, therefore, that Castile was the original area of Smaragdan penetration into Spain; it was from Castile that the Expositio passed into Navarre. Castilian priority was doubtless due to the fact that in the late ninth and tenth centuries the Santiago pilgrimage road did not run along the later familiar Navarrese route from Roncesvalles to Pamplona, Logroño and Nájera in the Rioja Alta, but (at least to the time of Sancho el Mayor [1000-1035]) crept 'per deuia Alaue', to quote the Historia Silense, i.e. through the Castilian-controlled mountain valleys of Álava and the Montaña, well to the northwest of Navarre. (134)
2. Late ninth century: Manchester, John Rylands Library, Ms Lat, 104; incomplete at beginning and end; Castilian, scribe and scriptorium unknown. (121)
3. Ninth century: Madrid, Academia de la Historia, Ms Aemilianensis 26 [formerly F 196; 18]; incomplete at beginning; Castilian, scribe and scriptorium unknown. (122)
4. Ca 909: Vich, Biblioteca y Archivo de la Santa Iglesia Catedral, Testamentum Idalcarii episcopi Ausonensis; bequest to Vich of 'Smaragdum codicem unum'; presumably Catalan, scribe and scriptorium unknown. (123)
5. Ca 936: Parroquia de Soaserra, province of La Coruna; twelfth-century copy of tenth-century carta de donación by the abbots Rodericus and Anagildus, and the bishops Rudesindus of Mondoñedo and Erus of Lugo, to the abbot Erus and monks of San Juan de Caabeiro: 'et omnes libros, quos ibi dedimus ... id sunt . . . explanatio zmaragdi . . . '; presumably Gallegan, scribe and scriptorium unknown. (124)
6. 945: Santo Domingo de Silos, Archivo del Monasterio, Ms 1 [formerly H], fols. 177 r, line 3-271 r; Castilian, copied by 'loannes presbiter,' scriptorium unknown. (125)
7. 954: San Millán de la Cogolla, Archivo del Monasterio, from Archivo de Santa María de Valvanera; Castilian, possibly done at Valvanera. (126)
8. Ca 951/3-962: Madrid, Academia de la Historia, Ms Aemilianensis 62 [formerly F. 230; 64]: Salui abbatis sancti Martini Albaildensis, Libellus a regula sancti Benedicti subtractus; Riojan, copied in 976 by Eneco Garseani at Santas Nunilo y Alodia, near Nájera. (127)
9. Tenth century: Santo Domingo de Silos, Archivo del Monasterio, Fragmentos, fols.  5--16; from lost manuscript; presumably Riojan, since brought to Silos in 18th century from Santa María de Nájera. (128)
10. Tenth century: London, British Museum, Addit. Ms 30055, fols 232 r-237 r; Castilian, from San Pedro de Cardeña or affiliate. (129)
11. Probably tenth century: Barcelona, Archivos de los Reales Monasterios de la Congregación Benedictina Tarraconense, up to at least 1772, when last described by D. Fr. Manuel de Abad y Lasierra, Colección de D. Manuel de Abad y Lasierra (Madrid, Academia de la Historia, Est. 21, gr. 2 a , no. 23), t. II, [fol. 98 r]: 'Uno [códice] del Contexto y Exposición de Smaragdo desde el capitulo de los instrumentos de las buenas obras hasta la conclusion de esta santa Regla en quanto es adaptable à mugeres; y es del mismo contexto con sola la diferencia de estar mudado siempre que ocurre en el texto el genero masculino en feminino; y las voces Monachi vel Fratres, en Moniales vel Sorores .' Presumably Castilian, scribe and scriptorium unknown. (130)
 12. Tenth-eleventh centuries(?): San Salvador de Oña; mentioned in library catalogue of Oña of twelfth century, Escorial Ms Lat. R II 7; Castilian, scribe and scriptorium unknown. (131)
13. Eleventh century: Madrid, Academia de la Historia, Ms Aemilianensis 53, fols. 24 v -31 v (the Leandrian Appendix ); Castilian-Riojan, scribe and scriptorium unknown. (132)
14. Eleventh century: Madrid, Biblioteca Nacional, Ms 18672. 99 , fols. 268-275; origin unknown. (133)
Again, it has already been noted that Salvus' own copy of the Expositio contained the Item ex regula cuiusdam and the Qui(d) debent; these had circulated earlier in Castile and confirm the Castilian provenance of the Riojan Smaragdus. Another possibility is suggested by Abad y Lasierra's lost effeminized Smaragdus manuscript (no. 11 in the preceding list), which forces us to consider whether it originated in Castile or the Rioja, and whether it preceded or followed the writing of the Libellus . All we can do here is to weigh probabilities. On the whole, it seems less likely that, after the Libellus appeared, it should be deemed desirable to effeminize the unabridged Expositio ; it seems more reasonable to suppose that, with the effeminized Expositio already in circulation, a digest in the form of a Rule was undertaken as more practicable for use in nunneries. If this is true, then Salvus may well have written the Libellus with an effeminized Smaragdus (terminating with the Item ex regula cuiusdam and the Qui(d) debent) before him. His task would then be primarily the condensation of the bulkier opus. That the  effeminized Expositio itself was produced in Castile by an earlier monastic adapter whose work subsequently passed into the Rioja, then becomes a tenable hypothesis, confirming Castilian monastic predominance in the Rioja.
Further evidence of the Castilian connections of Riojan monasticism comes from the charters, which prove continuing Castilian influence in the region all through the second quarter of the tenth century. Two of the earliest Riojan houses were actually of Leonese-Castilian establishment: Santa Coloma near Nájera, founded in 923 by Ordoño II of León; (135) and San Millán de la Cogolla, which, whatever the precise date of its endownment or restoration, was Castilian before passing under Navarrese protection in the 940's. (136) Abbot Sunna of Santa Coloma participated in the foundation of Albelda (924) and perhaps of other Riojan abbeys. (137) The abbots of San Millán maintained contact with those of Albelda. (138) Also closely connected with the Rioja was the leading Castilian Ura valley house of Silos: a 942 charter of Bishop Tudemirus of Nájera shows Didacus, abbot of Silos, meeting with Dulquitus of Albelda and other Riojan abbots; (139) and Didacus appears again in King García Sánchez' 947 grant of Barrera to Albelda and the 950 cession to Albelda of San Prudencio de Laturce. (140) Unquestionably, other Castilian links could be cited if it were possible to identify beyond dispute the abbatial signatures of Riojan charters. Another line of connection, which needs further investigation, is the recognized literary, artistic and paleographical dependence of the Albeldan scriptorium upon more western cultural centers in Castile; this reaches beyond San Millán, for the copying of the Codex Aemilianensis (Escorial Lat. d I 1) from the Albeldensis proves that the library and scribal resources of San Martín were superior to those of San Millán, and hints at Albelda 's ties with Silos and Berlangas. (141) Lastly, the difficulty of finding such affiliations, as those catalogued above, between the Rioja and cis-Ebro Navarre strengthens the general conclusion: Riojan monasticism was united with, and for its institutional and cultural patterns dependent upon, that of Castile throughout the middle quarters of the tenth century.
The significance of Salvus of Albelda's Libellus a regula sancti Benedicti subtractus may now be summarized with some assurance. In spite of relative unoriginality of content, it stands out as the first monastic Rule of Spanish authorship since the Visigothic period, and as an important milestone in the establishment of the Benedictine Rule in Spain. Confirming the already suspected Smaragdan basis of early Reconquista Benedictinism, it strengthens the case for the latter's Carolingian origins. As the only surviving literary product of the  Gallegan-Carolingian synthesis, it is our chief key to the monastic institutions of tenth-century frontier Navarre, and in clarifying their Castilian background, it illumines the whole Spanish effort to modify reception of the Benedictine Rule through a compromise permitting partial retention of peninsular cenobitic traditions. Finally, and of particular interest for the general history of Spain, the Libellus reveals the role of the frontier in the making of mediaeval Spanish civilization, for it shows that Carolingian Benedictinism, as one of the first great European agencies seeking to westernize a hitherto isolated Spanish culture, found its chief support not in the tradition-bound abbeys of Oviedo, Leon and Pamplona, but in the new frontier foundations of the Rioja and Castile. There on the frontier, where as on so many historical frontiers difficult and unstable conditions promoted the breakdown of established institutions, and favored flexibility and enterprise in meeting the challenge of new situations, Carolingian Benedictinism succeeded first. In the long run, the attempt which Salvus championed to create a compromise monasticism, in which peninsular elements could find survival, failed; but it should be remembered that when, after 1000, Sancho el Mayor introduced the Cluniac reformers into this very area of Castile and the Rioja, the pioneer efforts of the tenth-century frontier, not least those of Abbot Salvus of San Martín de Albelda, had already prepared the ground. Sancho was setting in motion not the first, but the second, of the great ultra-Pyrenean monastic invasions that were to affect so profoundly the history and the culture of the Spanish people.
UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA.
1. For a grant-in-aid of publication of this paper, the author in indebted to the Committee on Research, University of Virginia. For assistance in its preparation grateful acknowledgment is made to the following institutions and persons: The Frederick Sheldon Fund, Harvard University; the Institute for Research in the Social Sciences, University of Virginia; the Committee on Research, University of Virginia; His Eminence Federico Cardinal Tedeschini, former Nuncio Apostólico to Madrid; Hon. Claude G. Bowers, former U. S. Ambassador to Spain; the archival authorities of the Academia de la Historia and the Archivo Histórico Nacional, Madrid, of the Iglesia Colegiata de Santa María la Redonda, Logroño, and of the Escorial; and the writer's wife, Lucretia Ramsey Bishko (notably for aid on Navarrese episcopology).
2.On the Navarrese trans-Ebro Reconquista in the tenth century, cf. J. de Moret, Anales del Reino de Navarra (Pamplona, 1648-1704; here cited after third ed., Tolosa, 1890-92), I, 318-371 [despite errors of chronology still the best and most extensive account]; M. de Anguiano, Compendio Historial de la Provincia de la Rioja, de sus Santos, y Milagrosos Santuarios (2nd ed., Madrid, 1704); V. de La Fuente, Estudios Críticos sobre la Historia y el Derecho de Aragón (Madrid, 1884-1886), I, 83-96; R. Dozy, Histoire des Musulmana d'Espagne (2nd ed., rev. by É. Lévi-Provençal, Leiden, 1932), II, 136-152; A. Ballesteros y Beretta, Historia de España y su Influencia en la Historia Universal (2nd ed., Barcelona, 1943-44), II, 427-430; R. Menéndez Pidal, Orígenes de Español (Madrid, 1929), I, 494-497.
3. E. Lévi-Provençal, L'Espagne Musulmane au Xème Siècle (Paris, 1932), p. 121.
4. R. Menéndez Pidal, Documentos Lingüísticos de España. I. Reino de Castilla (Madrid, 1919), pp. 1-5; idem, Orígenes del Español, I, 497-499; L. Serrano, El Obispado de Burgos y Castilla Primitiva desde el Siglo V al XIII (Madrid, 1935), I, 100-102; L. Barrau-Dihigo, 'Recherches sur l'histoire politique du royaume asturien (718-910),' Revue Hispanique, LII (1921), 206-308; Ballesteros, op. cit., II, 283-285.
5. Diccionario Geográfico-Histórico de España , por la Real Academia de la Historia (Madrid, 1802-1846), II; S. de Miñano y Bedoya, Diccionario Geográfico-Estadístico de España y Portugal (Madrid, 1826-1829), VII, 321-324; P. Madoz, Diccionario Geográfico-Estadístico-Histórico de España (2nd ed., Madrid, 1846), X, 325-448; A. Blázquez y Delgado-Aguilera, Península Ibérica (2nd ed., Barcelona, 1921; = P. Vidal de la Blache and P. Camena d'Almeida, Curso de Geografía Adaptado á las Necesidades de España y América, III), pp. 597-500; Enciclopedia Universal Ilustrada Europeo-Americana (Barcelona, 1905-1930), LI, 736-738.
6. Chronicon Albeldense, c. 87 (ed. by E. Flórez, in E. Flórez and M. Risco, España Sagrada [Madrid, 1747-1879], XIII, 463); Ballesteros, Historia de España, II, 428.
7. Historia Silense, ed. by P. Santos Coco (Madrid, 1921), p. 47; Moret, Anales de Navarra, I, 335-351; Dozy, Les Musulmana d'Espagne , II, 142-143; Ballesteros, II, 428-429. I have not seen J. M. Lacarra, 'Expediciones musulmanas contra Sancho Garcés (905-925),' Príncipe de Viana, I (1940), 41-72.
8. Moret, I, 362-365; Ballesteros, II, 429.
9. Historia Silense, pp. 48-49; Moret, I, 364; Dozy, II, 144; Ballesteros, II, 269.
10. Dozy, II, 144-145; Ballesteros, II, 429-430.
11. Ballesteros, II, 430.
12. Ibid., p. 436.
13. The principal sources are the charter collections of the Riojan monasteries of San Martín de Albelda (ed. by A. Tomás González, Colección de Cédulas, Cartas-Patentes, Provisiones, Reales Órdenes y Otros Documentos Concernientes á las Provincias Vascongadas [Madrid, 1829-1833; vols. V-VI bear the title Colección de Privilegios, Franquezas, Exenciones y Fueros Concedidos á Varios Pueblos y Corporaciones de la Corona de Castilla], VI, 5-84); and of San Millán de la Cogolla (ed. by L. Serrano, Cartulario de San Millán de la Cogolla [Madrid, 1930]). Note Serrano's criticism (op. cit ., p. xv) of the faulty dating of many of the Albeldan documents in González.
14. Serrano, Cartulario de San Millán, no. 22; but this charter is later than 927, mention of Bishop Benedictus of Nájera placing it ca 970 (cf. M. Risco, España Sagrada, XXXIII, 202-203).
15. E. g., Serrano, nos. 16, 17, 25. Under Sancho Garcés II (970-994) the king's brother Ramiro ruled the Rioja Alta from Viguera as a separate satellite kingdom (Madrid, Archivo Histórico Nacional, Clero, Ms 258, Archivo de Santa Maria de Naxara. Privilegios y cartas reales , t. I, fols.18 r-19r: 'et sanctione rex in nagela et in pampilona. et sub eius imperio parendo ranemirus rex in uekaria' [from privilegio real of 13 November 972, granted by Sancho Garcés II, Ramiro and Urraca to San Andrés de Cirueña; cf. also González, Colección, VI, nos. ccxv-ccxvi]; but under Garcia Sánchez II (994-1000) this experiment in a Riojan monarchy was abandoned.
16. Fortún Galíndez appears from 924 as senior in Naiera (Moret, Anales, I, 372-373), from 942 as praefectus in Naiera (González, VI, nos. ccvi, ccix, ccx), and from 950 as dux (Serrano, no. 16, redated from 920); he is last referred to in 972 (Serrano, no. 59).
17. González, VI, no. cxcv (redated from 891 to 941 by restoration of 'L' in Roman numeral). Count Flaíno appears in many Albeldan charters, the latest being of 22 November 947 (González, VI, no. ccxi).
18. Both Ordoño II in his 923 foundation document for the monastery of Santa Coloma, near Nájera (A. de Yépes, Corónica General de la Orden de San Benito [Irache, 1609-1621], IV, 443v ; Risco, E. S., xxxiii, 469-470) and Sancho Garcés I in his 924 foundation act for Albelda (Risco, op. cit., pp. 465-468; González, Colección, V, 1-3) speak in almost identical terms of their dispersion of the Muslims: 'diuersis eos fecimus habitare in locis non cognitis, teste nobis sancta scriptura, loquente domino per prophetam: dispersi eos per omnia regna mundi, quae nesciunt, et terra desolata est ab eis.'
19. Note the Arabic names in González, VI, nos. cxcviii-ccxlvii; of course some of these may conceivably belong to Mozarabic immigrants from Muslim Spania.
20. González, VI, nos. xii-xiii, cii; cf. Risco, E. S., XXXIII, 199-202.
21. Yépes, Corónica de San Benito, IV, 443v (esc. xx); Risco, op. cit., pp. 469-470. On the plantation period of Riojan monasticism, see Yépes, III, 365-372; IV, 386V -391; V, 82V-91V, 149V-150V ; Gregorio de Argáiz, La Soledad Laureada per San Benito y Sus Hijos en las Iglesias de España (Madrid, 1675), II, 314-399 V ; Risco, op. cit., pp. 185-193; J. Pérez de Urbel, Los Monjes Españoles en la Edad Media (Madrid, 1933-1934), II, 294-295 [ = 'Los monjes españoles en los tres primeros siglos de la Reconquista', Boletín de la Academia de la Historia , CI (1932), 44-45].
22. Risco, ibid., pp. 465-468; González, v, no. i. Abbots Vincentius, Falcon and Munio reappear in González, VI, no. cxcviii.
23. San Millán de la Cogolla (cf. n. 4, infra); San Prudencio de Laturce [ante 950] (Yépes, Coránica, V, 435 V-436; P. Kehr, Papsturkunden in Spanien. II. Navarra und Aragón [Abhandlungen der Gesellschaft der Wissenschaften zu Göttingen, phil.-hist. Klasse, N. F., XXII (1928), Heft 50], pp. 65-66); Santos Cosme y Damián de Viguera [ante 985] (González, Colección, VI, no. ccxvii); San Andrés de Cirueña [founded 972] (Madrid, Archivo Histórico Nacional, Clero, Legajo 677 and Ms 258, t. I, fols. 18-22; Kehr, op. cit., p. 62); Santa Águeda de Nájera [post-962] (Serrano, Cartulario de San Millán , no. 22, redated as of n. 14, supra); Santas Nunilo y Alodia [ ante 976] (cf. Section II following).
24. L. Barrau-Dihigo, 'Recherches sur l'histoire politíque du royaume asturien (718-910)', Revue Hispanique, LII (1921), 254-260.
25. The chief secondary accounts are Yépes, Coránica , IV, 386V-389V and V, 91-91V; Argáiz, Soledad Laureada, II, 314 sqq.; J. Mabillon, Annales Ordinis Sancti Benedicti (Lucca, 1739-1745), III, 340; Moret, Anales de Navarra , I, 366-368; Risco, E. S., XXXIII, 188-193; A. Casimiro de Govantes y Garrán, in Diccionario Geográfico-Historico de España , por la Real Academia de la Historia, II, 6-8; P. de Madrazo, Navarra y Logroño (Barcelona, 1886; = España, sus Monumentos y Artes, su Naturaleza e Historia, vols. 17-19), III, 579-587; Pérez de Urbel, Monjes Españoles, II, 294, 361-363. There is a good brief sketch in Kehr, Papsturkunden in Spanien. II. Navarra und Aragon, pp. 64-65, and a short inaccurate notice in L. H. Cottineau, Répertoire Topo-Bibliographique des Abbayes et Prieurés (Mâcon, 1935-1937), fasc. I, col. 47. No satisfactory study of Albelda has yet been undertaken, although for the history of the house and the reconstruction of its scattered diplomatic archive certain materials exist, listed here in reverse order of importance: (1) two small parchment registros now in Madrid, one of 1358 (9 fols.), the other of 1571 (23 fols.) [Archivo Histórico Nacional, Clero, Legajo 665; neither registro seems to contain anything not also found in (2) and (3) following]; (2) a registro at Simancas entitled Fundación del Monasterio de Albelda, with fifty-seven charters (published by González, Colección , VI, 5-84; in some cases the dates require radical correction); (3) some fifty pergaminos , many of them originals, now preserved in the archive of the Iglesia colegiata de Santa María la Redonda at Logroño. Virtually all of the latter are in González, loc. cit.; one important act not there edited can be found in L. Serrano, 'Tres documentos logroñeses de importancia,' Homenaje Ofrecido á Menéndez Pidal (Madrid, 1925), III, 171-179; while Kehr has edited from the same collection a bull of Celestine III of 1196 (Papsturkunden, II, 583-585). A personal inspection of the Logroño archive in May 1934 uncovered only one unknown document of pre-thirteenth-century date, a catalog of major land grants to Albelda between 924 and 1094, together with a brief geographical index of the monastery's patrimonies. This list proves the completeness of our present documentation, as it existed in 1094, and was drawn up in or soon after that year by the prior Miro (the Albeldan abbot at this time was bishop of Nájera-Calahorra and not effective head of the community). It begins with the following preface: 'Ego igitur Miro licet indignus diuine tamen permissionis nutu in monasterio sancti martini quod albelda nominatur sub manu domni petri episcopi prolationis officium gerens. considerata temporum et hominum mutabilitate eorumque circa res et possessiones ecclesiasticas auida rapacitate. fidelium oblationibus in futurum prouidentia et cautelara adhibere desiderans. ne forte quorumlibet successorum uel ignorantia uel torpore et negligentia que deo et beato martino diuersis in locis oblata sunt [in aliena iur . . . erasum] a supradicto monasterio extrahantur et in aliena transeant iura. quecumque iuris beati martini ease uel antiquorum uel modernorum testamentorum scriptis seu etiam testimoniis repperi. queque uel predecessorum uel meo tempere prefato beati martini loco hereditario iure collata sunt. omnia in unum breuiter colligere. et ad posterorum noticiam presentís scripture, testamenta commendare decreui.'
26. Foundation charter in Risco, E. S., XXXIII, 465-468, and González, Colección, V, no. i (from a Simancas copy also mentioned by García de Loaísa, Collectio Conciliorum Hispaniae (Madrid, 1593), as cited by Risco, p. 188. González wrongly rubrics '8 de Enero' but his text, like Risco's, reads 'nonas ianuarias.' Barrau-Dihigo erroneously assigns this charter to 925, apparently confusing it with González, VI, no. cxcviii ('Les origines du royaume de Navarre,' Revue Hispanique , VII , 173.) Misapprehension of its date (923 for 924) also explains the unjust suspicions raised by La Fuente, Estudios Críticos sobre la Historia y el Derecho de Aragón, I, 95; and by M. Serrano y Sanz, Noticias y Documentos Históricos del Condado de Ribagorsa hasta la Muerte de Sancho Garcés III (Madrid, 1912), pp. 156-157. On the name al-Bayadh, apparently suggested by the gleaming white gypsum of the rivercliffs, cf. J. Fernández Montana, 'El códice albeldense ó vigilano, que se conserva en El Escorial,' Museo Español de Antigüedades , III (1874), 509-511; Barrau-Dihigo, 'Royanme asturien,' Revue Hispanique , LII (1921), 178-181; R. Dozy and W. H. Engelmann, Glossaire des Mots Espagnols et Portugais Derives de I'Árabe (2nd ed., Leiden, 1869), p. 70. M. Asín Palacios rejects this traditional derivation of the abbey's name, but by completely ignoring the evidence of the Albeldan charters he seriously weakens his case; see his Contribución á la Toponimia Árabe de España (Madrid-Granada, 1940), pp. 47-48.
27. González, VI, no. cxcviii.
28.Gómez preface (951) to Paris, Bibl. Nat., Ms Lat. 2855: 'inter agmina Christi seruorum ducentorum fere monacorum' (L. Delisle, Le Cabinet des Manuscrita de la Bibliotheque Nationale [Paris, 1868-1881], I, 516; A. Millares Carlo, Nuevos Estudios de Paleografía Española [Mexico City, 1941], p. 155; V. Blanco García, San Ildefonso, De Virginitale Beatae Mariae [Madrid, 1937]); Vigila poem (976) at close of Escorial Ms Lat. d I 2 (Codex Albeldensis): 'turma centies bina cenouii albelda plurimum candida' (Risco, E. S., XXXIII, 472; G. Antolín, Catálogo de los Códices Latinos de la Real Biblioteca del Escorial [Madrid, 1910-23], I, 401).
29. J. Tailhan, 'Appendice sur les bibliothéques espagnoles du haut moyen-âge,' in Ch. Cahier, Nouveaux Melanges d'Archéologie, d'Histoire et de Littérature sur le Moyen Age (Paris, 1874-77), IV, 310 and passim; R. Beer, Handschriftenschätze Spaniens (Vienna, 1894), pp. 50-51; Z. García Villada, La Vida de los Escritorios Españoles Medievales (Madrid, 1926), pp. 15-18.
30. Delisle, Cabinet des Manuscrits, I, 514-517; Millares Carlo, Nuevos Estudios, pp. 155-157 (with bibliography).
31. Its contents include the Hispana canonical collection, the Chronicon Albeldense, various opuscula of Isidore, Jerome and Gregory, extracts from the Benedictine Rule, an index of Fuero Juzgo titles, and a number of minor pieces (but not the canons of the Carolingian monastic reform council of Aachen of 817, as J. Pérez de Urbel claims ['Los monjes españoles en los tres primeros siglos de la Reconquista,' Boletín de la Academia de la Historia, CI (1932), 90]). On the Albeldensis, see Antolín, Catálogo de los Códices Latinos del Escorial, I, 368-404; J. M. de Egurén, Memoria Descriptiva de los Códices Notables Conservados en los Archivos Eclesiásticos de España (Madrid, 1859), pp. 70-72; Fernández Montana, 'El códice albeldense,' Museo Español de Antigüedades, III (1874), 509-544; P. Ewald, 'Reise nach Spanien im Winter von 1878 auf 1879,' Neues Archiv , VI (1881), 238-241; Z. García Villada, Historia Eclesiástica de España (Madrid, 1929- ), III, 354-358.
32. On the abbot-bishops of Albelda, cf. n. 51, infra.
33. M. Férotin, Le Liber Ordinum en Usage dans l'Église Wisigothique et Mozárabe d'Espagne (Paris, 1904; Monumenta Ecclesiae Liturgica, V), pp. xvii-xxiv; W. M. Whitehill, Jr and J. Pérez de Urbel, 'Los manuscritos del real monasterio de Santo Domingo de Silos', Boletín de la Academia de la Historia, XCV (1929), 535-539; P. Kehr, 'Wie und wann wurde das Reich Aragón ein Lehen der romischen Kirche?', Sitzungsberichte der preussischen Akademie der Wissenschaften , phil.-hist. Klasse, 1928, pp. 196-223; idem, Das Papsttum und die Konigreiche Navarra und Aragón bis zur Mitte des XII. Jahrhunderts (Berlin, 1928; Abhandlungen der preussischen Akademie der Wissenschaften , phil.-hist. Kl., nr. 4), pp. 10-12. For a rather effective attack, however, upon the accepted account of Alexander II's inspection of the Spanish liturgical books, see P. David, Études Historiques sur la Galice et le Portual (Lisbon-Paris, 1947), pp. 391-395.
34. See further Section II, infra.
35. E. Florez, E.S., XIII, 417-432 (where the sixteenth-century historian Mariana is cited as suggesting Vigila's redaction of the Chronicon ); Risco, E. S., XXXIII, 192-193; Fernández Montana, op. cit., pp. 517-519; Antolín, Catálogo, I, 370-372, 400-403; D. De Bruyne, 'Manuscrits wisigothiques,' Revue Bénédictine , XXXVI (1924), 15-18; Serrano, 'Tres documentos logroñeses,' pp. 172-176; García Villada, Escritorios, pp. 15-18; idem , Historia Eclesiástica, III, 354-358; Fr. Vera, La Cultura Española Medieval (Madrid, 1933-1934), II, 211-212. On the Chronicon Albeldense, see also M. Gómez Moreno, 'Las primeras crónicas de la Reconquista: el ciclo de Alfonso III,' Bol. Acad. Hist., c (1932), 562-623 (including best critical edition of text, pp. 600-609); Flórez, op. cit., pp. 433-464; Th. Mommsen, Chronica Minora Saec. IV. V. VI. VII, t. II (Berlin, 1894; M. G. H., Auctores Antiquissimi, XI, 1), pp. 370-375; R. Ballester y Castell, Las Fuentes Narrativas de la Historia de España durante la Edad Media (Palma de Mallorca, 1912), pp. 29-31; Barrau-Dihigo, 'Royaume asturien,' Revue Hispanique, LII (1921), 13-18; A. Cotarelo y Valledor, Historia Crítica y Documentada de la Vida y Acciones de Alfonso III el Magno (Madrid, 1933), pp. 16-17.
36. The complete absence of Albeldan charters or abbatial mention in other charters between 983 (Serrano, 'Tres documentos logroñeses,' pp. 177-178) and 1033 (González, VI, no. ccxxi), and the possible restoration of San Martín mentioned in Sancho el Mayor's somewhat suspect 1027 privilegio to the see of Pamplona (Moret, Anales, I, 616-622; J. de Jaurgain, La Vasconie [Pau, 1898-1902], I, 417-423) point in this direction.
37. Moret, II, 129-240; Ballesteros, Historia de España, II, 433-435.
38. Moret, II, 176-188; P. B. Gams. Die Kirchengeschichte von Spanien (Regensburg, 1862-1879), II, 2, 412-416; E. Sackur, Die Cluniacenser in ihrer kirchlichen und algemeingeschichtlichen Wirksamkeit bis zur Mitte des elften Jahrhunderts (Halle, 1892-1894), II, 101-109; Pérez de Urbel, Monjes Españoles, II, 420-424.
39. Kehr, Das Papsttum u. die Konigreiche Navarra u. Aragon, p. 9, finds Cluniac influence at Albelda as early as 1027, but Sancho el Mayor 's Pamplona privilegio of that year does not mention Cluny; there are no Cluniac 'symptoms' in Albeldan charters and no mention of Albelda in the Cluniac materials at Madrid, Pamplona, Paris or elsewhere, so far as I can discover. The real monasterio of Santa María de Nájera was founded and richly endowed by García Sánchez el de Nájera in 1052 (foundation act in Yépes, Coránica, VI, 463-464 V; González, VI, no. ccxxviii; A. Bernard and A. Bruel, Recueil des Chartes de l'Abbaye de Cluny [Paris, 1876-1903], IV, 431-440; F. Fita, 'Santa María la Real de Nájera. Estudio crítico', Bol. Acad. Hist.,XXVI , 155-198); but it was not until 1079 that it passed into Cluniac hands (cf. Sackur, Cluniacenser, II, 109; Kehr, op. cit., 9-10; Guy de Valous, Le Monachisme Clunisien des Origines au XV e Siècle [Ligugé-Paris, 1935; = Archives de la France Monastique, XXXIX-XL (1935)], II, 264).
40. Prudencio de Sandóval, Las Fundaciones de los Monesterios del Glorioso Padre San Benito, que los Reyes de España Fundaron y Dotaron (Madrid, 1601), Primera Parte, fols 1-96; Yépes, Coránica , I, 273-277; V, 4-6; Kehr, Papsturkunden, II, pp. 68-73; Serrano, Cartulario de San Millán de la Cogolla, pp. vii-cxii.
41. San Millán history prior to the year 1000 has been vitiated by erroneous dating of many extant charters, even in Serrano's otherwise admirable Cartulario. Analysis of regnal, episcopal and secular signatures, too extensive to reproduce here, has revealed that many tenth-century San Millán documents now fall 10-30 years too early, e.g. those between 952 and 961 are erroneously ascribed to 922-931 due to scribal ignorance of the x aspada. On this Visigothic ligature for XL, so often ignored by later copyists, cf. J. Vives, Inscripciones Cristianas de la España Romana y Visigoda (Barcelona, 1942), pp. 186-190; A. Millares Cario, Tratado de Paleografía Española (2nd. ed., Madrid, 1932), I, 388-389; A. Giry, Manuel de Diplomatique (2nd. ed., París, 1925), I, 92-3. For the present it may be conjectured that between 932 (Serrano, Cartulario, no. 26) and 952 (no. 48; cf. nos. 32 , 38 , and 16 [920, redated to 950]), San Millán political ties were both Castilian and Navarrese; the García Sánchez I grants (no. 17 [924, redated to 954], 18 [926, redated to 956], 19-21 [927, redated to 957], 23-25 [929, redated to 959], and 27 [933, redated to 963]) prove the predominance of Navarrese connections 956-963. In 964-968 Castilian influence recurs (nos. 30 [938, redated to 968], 33 [944, re-dated to 964], 42 [945, redated to 965], 43 [947, redated to 967] and 44 [944, redated to 964]. From 971 (no. 56) on through most of the eleventh century a long series of reales reflects Navarrese rule of this sector of the Rioja.
42. The royal subordination of Pamplona-Nájera to San Millán preceded the famous St Aemilianus translation of April 1030, which the king promoted. From 996 (Serrano, no. 67) to 1027 (no. 92), the San Millán abbot was Ferrucius; prior to Sancho the last known bishops, in 1024, were Ximenus of Pamplona and Froila of Nájera (González, VI, no. ccxviii; E. S., XXXIII, 210). Sancho appears at San Millán as episcopus et abbas 1028-1038 (Serrano, nos. 93, 96, 99, 100, 102-104, 110, 114), and signs as bishop of Pamplona-Nájera in 1028 and 1031 (E.S., XXXIII, 211). The baffling complexities of eleventh-century Navarrese episcopology originate partly in the erroneous dating of many extant San Millán, Albelda and San Salvador de Leire charters, but also in the instability of diocesan organization arising from Sancho III's monasticizing experiments, varying diocesan nomenclature, the limited number of personal names (e.g., at least three contemporaneous bishops Sancho occur), and the exasperating omission of the see in most episcopal signatures. It is hoped to present elsewhere in extenso the data from which are derived the tentative conclusions summarized in this paragraph of the text. J. Gavira Martín, Estudios sobre la Iglesia Española Medieval. Episcopologios de Sedes Navarro-Aragonesas durante los Siglos XI y XII (Madrid, 1929) is useful on Pamplona, but unfortunately does not cover the Riojan bishoprics at all.
43. The earliest certain proof of separation is the 1040 San Salvador de Leire charter in the Becerro Antiguo (Madrid, Arch. Hist. Nac., Clero, San Salvador de Leire, Ms 73) fols. 5V-6V: 'Sanctius episcopus mayor ... in Nagera confirmans. Sanctius minor episcopus in Pampilona confirmans.' After the break with Nájera and San Millán in 1040, Pamplona was linked with Leire; on Sancho minor as abbot-bishop of Leire-Pamplona, cf. Becerro Antiguo, fols. 146 r-147 r, 149 v-150 r, 156 r-157 r , 159 r; and also Vecerro mayor del mono. de Leyre (Arch. Hist. Nac., ibid., Ms 93), fols. 69-71.
44. Serrano, no. 116 (1040): 'abbate domino Garsea episcopus in s. Emiliani'; and no. 109 (1036, redated to 1041). On García, bishop of Álava 1037-1053, cf. E. S., XXXIII, 242-246.
45. Under the abbot Gómez (Serrano, nos. 118,121,123,124-127; nos. 1ll, 113,115 also belong here).
46. Confirmation in 1044 of Sancho III's 1032 privilegio to San Fructuoso de Pampaneto (González, VI, no. ccxx): 'dominus Sancius Vagalensis (sic: read Nagalensis) et Olitensis episcopus confirmat.'
47. This important fact is established by a list of unpaid murder fines (González, VI, no. ccxxiv); the first item, dated 1047, and referring to a homicide that occurred before 1046, the year of Sancho's death, calls the latter 'episcopus dominator Albailda' and names García Royo prior. The last pre-Sanchan, non-episcopal abbot was Enneco in 1044 (González, VI, no. ccxx).
48. González, VI, no. ccxxv (1048) refers textually to 'Gomesano episcopo coeterisque fratribus in monasterio Albaldense commorantibus', while he signs as 'Gomesanus supradictus episcopus Nara-bensis'; cf. also ibid ., nos. ccxxvi-ccxxvii, ccxxix, ccxix (redated from 1029 to 1059 by restoration of x aspada), ccxxxii, ccxxxiv-ccxxxv; Yépes, Coránica , v, esc. xi-xii.
49. Serrano, nos. 129-131,156-159,162-164, 165, 168, 170,173, 175, 177; from 1047 a co-abbot Gonzalo appears at San Millán (nos. 132-135, 144, 145, 147, 149, 150, 152, 154). Note both García and Gómez occur as abbot-bishops in San Millán in 1049 (nos. 138,139).
50. E. S., XXXIII, 215-222. Serrano, nos. 128-129 (1046) prove Gómez, bishop of Nájera-Calahorra, the same as the abbot Gómez of San Millán, while n. 48, supra, confirms his identity with the abbot Gómez of Albelda.
51. González, VI, nos. ccxxiv, ccxxix; ccxl, ccxli, ccxlii, ccxlv, ccxlviii, ccxlix, cclii; and Miro's preface, n. 25, supra.
52. Menéndez Pidal, Orígenes del Español, I, 495.
53. Kehr, Papsturkunden, II, p. 65. Sometime in the twelfth century the episcopal see was moved to Calahorra, from which in 1227 Honorius III transferred it to Santo Domingo de la Calzada (F. Fita, 'Santa Maria la Real de Nájera. Estudio crítico,' Bol. Acad. Hist., XXVI (1895), 381; Kehr, op. cit., pp. 51, 66-67).
54. G. Loewe and W. von Hartel, 'Bibliotheca patrum latinorum hispaniensis', Sitzungsberichte der kaiserlichen Akademie der Wissenschaft zu Wien , phil.-hist. Classe, CXIII (1886), 557-558; C. Pérez Pastor, 'Indice por títulos de los códices procedentes de los monasterios de San Millán de la Cogolla y San Pedro de Cárdena, existentes en la Biblioteca de la Real Academia de la Historia," Bol. Acad. Hist ., LIII (1908), 506-507; C. U. Clark, 'Collectanea Hispánica,' Transactions of the Connecticut Academy of Arts and Sciences, XXIV (1920), 40 (no. 577); Z. García Villada, Paleografía Española (Madrid, 1923), I,110 (no. 1C3); A. Millares Carlo, Tratado de Paleografía Española (2nd ed., Madrid, 1932), I, 464 (no. 165). My examination of Aemilianensis 62 was made in October 1933, at which time efforts to secure permission to photograph selected folia were unsuccessful.
55. Fol. 1, which serves as front cover, is badly torn, its lower half being almost entirely destroyed; but the incipit is intact and shows no trace of fading or erasure of the name of the author or editor; nor is there any space where this might have originally been inserted.
56. The modern foliation runs only to 92, but includes 5 bis and 90 bis. After fol. 71 one folio is lacking (despite the modern annotation [fol. 71v] 'Aquí faltan dos ojas'; comparison with the Benedictine Rule, cc. xxxv-xxxvi, and the corresponding chapters of Smaragdus, Expositio in regulam beati Benedicti, indicates that c. xi is almost terminated on fol. 71v, while on fol. 72 r c. xiii lacks only the rubric). This means the textual lacuna includes hardly more than the missing c. xii, almost certainly a short chapter (for its probable subject, cf. n. 64, infra). A scrap of another folio remains following fol. 92. Thus the original foliation was 96. Black ink is used for the text; red for the chapter titles, Instrumenta bonorum operum (c. i; fols. l v-52 r), and XII gradus humilitatis (c. ii; fols. 52 r-60v); and yellow, red and blue for the geometrical or conventionalized bird and flower designs of the initial letters of most chapters. Several later mediaeval hands have attempted minor revisions of the original text; the chief one, probably of the thirteenth century, has partially masculinized the feminine references by e.g., inserting 'fratres' above 'sórores,' and has occasionally corrected orthographic errors.
57. This is the same hand which disfigures other San Millán Mss; cf. Loewe-von Hartel, op. cit., pp. 520-557. Fols. 91v and 92 r, originally blank, now contain, respectively, a seventeenth-century note ( Traslade este libro en cinco de febrero año de mil seiecientos y trece. Fr. Iuán de el Saz Monso. de S n Millán'), and a short, virtually indecipherable modern text beginning 'Hoc monasterium . . . sancti benedicti sub. ..."
58. Loewe-von Hartel, op. cit., p. 558, read 'obsecro' for 'ob oferto,' and in the last line 'qualiter pregobs usisillis'; the incoherence and lack of final punctuation at the end hint at haste and incompleteness. For a very similar Riojan colophon, which clarifies certain difficulties of the above text, cf. Archivo de Santo Domingo de Silos, Ms 4 (the San Prudencio de Laturce Liber Ordinum), fols. 331v-332 r : '... ego bartolomeus licet indignus presbiterii tamen ordine functus hunc ordinum exaraui brebi formula compactum sed ualde ordinibus eclesiasticis abtum feliciter currente era TLXLa XV kalendas iunias unde humiliter precamur presentium et futurorum piam in Christo dilectionem qui in hoc libello sacrificium deo obtuleritis predictos nos flagitiorum mole grabatos memorare non desistatis qualiter adiuti precibus uestris erui mereamur ab ardore auerni et uiuere cum Christo in seculis sempiternis amen' (Férotin, Liber Ordinum , p. xviii; W. M. Whitehill and J. Pérez de Urbel, 'Los manuscritos del real monasterio de Santo Domingo de Silos,' Bol. Acad. Hist., XCV , 536).
59. Loewe-von Hartel, Clark, Pérez Pastor, García Villada, Millares Carlo, loca citata, n. 54, supra; Férotin, Liber Ordinum, col. 68, n. 1; J. Domínguez Bordona, Manuscritos con Pinturas (Madrid, 1933), I, 214 (no. 370), but not in his Spanish Illumination (Florence, 1930).
60. C. Butler, Sancti Benedicti regula monasteriorum (2nd ed., Freiburg i. B., 1927); henceforth cited as Reg. Ben.
61. Migne, Patrologia Latina, CII, cols. 689-932; henceforth cited as Expos.
62. This inordinately long chapter includes virtually the complete Benedictine Instrumenta bonorum operum; each instrumentum is separately rubricked, and succeeded by excerpts from Smaragdus, c. iv, m adapted form, which average about a half to a full folio of the manuscript.
63. The rubric is from Expos., c. v., but the chapter depends almost wholly upon Expos., c. vii, and contains a list of the XII grains humilitatis somewhat altered from the Benedictine archetype. In the Libellus the first degree is obedience (from Expos., c. v); the second (on contemplation of future reward and punishment) from the latter part of Smaragdus' first degree (c. vii); and the third degree (on restraint of will) is Smaragdus' second. From the fourth degree on, the two lists agree.
64. This chapter is lost, having been contained in the missing folio between present fols. 71-72. Since tails between chapters drawn from Expos ., c. xxxv and Reg. Ben., c. xxxvi, it is hard to be sure of its subject, but probably it was rubricked either De ebdomadaria lectore (Reg. Ben. -- Expos, c. xxxviii) or De ferramentis uel rebus monasterii (Reg. Ben. -- Expos, c. xxxii); the former is the more likely.
65. The rubric of this chapter, which stood on the lost folio between 71 and 72, is easily restorable, since the text, commencing on fol. 72 r , reproduces Reg. Ben., c. xxxvi.
66. Inserted by later hand.
67. Fols. l r-60 v.
68. For example, the passage in c. v on the qualifications of the abbess, which Férotin thought 'inédit' and printed in his Liber Ordinum , col. 68, n. 1, as dating back 'd'aprés toute apparence, au déla du huitième siecle, peut-être même du neuvième,' actually comes, via Expos., c. lxiv, from Fructuosus' Regula monachorum , c. xx (Migne, P. L. LXXXVII, cols. 1108-1109).
69. Férotin, Liber Ordinum, col. 68, n. 1, takes Eneco to be 'père spirituel (nous dirions aujourd'hui aumônier) d'un monastère de religieuses', but the term 'alitus' in the colophon could conceivably imply oblature and residence in a community of men. The copying of Aemilianensis 62 might then be explicable as due to the desire of Benedict, bishop of Nájera in 976, to promote use of the Libellus in the diocesan convents.
70. Historia Compendial de la Provincia de la Rioja (2nd ed., Madrid, 1704), pp. 255-277.
71. Pp. 415-420.
72. Eulogius, Memorialis Sanctorum, II, 7 (P. L., CXV, cols. 744-776); Bibliotheca Hagiographica Latina (Brussels, 1898-1901), II, 904; Acta Sanctorum, Octobris, IX (Paris-Rome, 1869), pp. 642-644; Férotin, Liber Ordinum, p. 483, n. 21; Gams, Kirchengeschichte van Spanien, II, 2, 324; Ballesteros, Historia de España , II, 191-192. Cf. also, on the Leire affiliations of this cult, Acta SS, loc. cit., pp. 645-647; Yépes, Corónica , IV, 82.
73. E. g.: 950 San Prudencio de Laturce cession to Albelda (Yépes, Coránica, V, 435 v -436 r): 'Tudemirus Nagelensis episcopus'; 13 November 972 San Andrés de Cirueña real privilegio (Arch. Hist. Nac., Clero, Cirueña, Legajo 677, two unnumbered copies; also, Clero, Nájera, Ms 258, Archivo de S ta Maria de Naxara. Privilegios y Cartas Reales, I, fols. 18 r-19 r); 'sauctione rex in nagela et in pampilona'; 1044 confirmation of 1032 San Fructuoso de Pampaneto charter (González, Colección, VI, no. ccxx): Sancius Vagalensis (sic : read 'Nagalensis') et Olitensis'; 1046 Isinarius grant to San Salvador de Leire (Arch. Hist. Nac., Clero, Leire, Legajo 949 no. 1-P [the date 1006 is incorrect, as regnal formulae and episcopal signatures prove; read MLXXXIIII for MXXXXIIII]): 'garsiauo rege in pampilona et nagela et castella belia . . . eps. dms. gomiz + kalagorra et nagela.' This identification has also been made by Pérez de Urbel, Monjes Españoles, II, 362-363.
74. Anguiano, Historia Compendial de la Rioja, pp. 275-277; Risco, E. S., XXXIII, 417-419. Despite Yépes (as cited by Risco, p. 419), there is no reason to conclude that the 'hereditas sanctarum nunilonis et elodie,' included in García Sánchez' 1052 endowment of Santa María la Real de Nájera (cf. n. 39, supra), refers to Eneco's, or indeed any, monastic establishment, although it does confirm the Nájeran locale of the Nunilo and Alodia cult.
75. Brief modern accounts of Salvus, derived almost exclusively from the Vita printed below, may be found in most of the works cited above (n. 25) on San Martín and, in succeeding footnotes of this section. The writer found no Salvan material whatosever, either old or new, in his search of the Santa María la Redonda archive at Logroño.
76. González, Colección, VI, nos. cxcix, cc, ccv (the last contained in a confirmation of 973). In all three charters the dates are too early; the Albeldan abbot in 925 was Gabellus (no. cxcviii), and from 928-933 Gómez (nos. cci, ccv). From November 942 (no. ccvii) to at least early 951 Dulquitus was abbot (cf. Gómez' preface to the Albeldan Ms of Ildephonsus, De uirginitate beatae Mariae, dated January 951 [Delisle, Cabinet des Manuscrits, I, 516; Millares Carlo, Nuevos Estudios de Paleografía Española, pp. 155-157. It may be noted in passing that the January 951 reference here to Ramiro II of León tends to confirm Dozy's arguments for January 951 rather than 950 as the date of this monarch's death; see his Recherches sur l'Histoire et la Littérature de l'Espagne pendant le Moyen Age (3rd ed., Paris-Leiden, 1881), I, 170-173; and his Histoire des Musulmans de I'Espagne, II, 162]. Nos. cxix and cc, with printed dates DCCCCLXIII and DCCCCLXIV, properly belong three decades later, as the regnal formulae prove: cxix in the reign of Ordoño III of León (950/1-956), and cc in that of Sancho the Fat (956-958; 960-966). This thirty-year error is due to misreading of an x aspada , so that the true dates are 955 and 956. As for no. ccxv, the real privilegio of García Sánchez I, now dated Era DCCCCLXXXI, the restoration of an 'X' to the long numeral gives us 953; 963 is, of course, ruled out by the fact that Salvus died in 962.
77. Fol. 248 v: 'Sarracinus Salbi ipseque Vigila magistri obtimi adiubati prece / Quorum digessimus clara nunc nomina s(c)ribtores gemini que tenet liber hiq'; Risco, E. S., XXXIII, 472; Antolín, Catálogo de los Códices Latinos del Escorial, I, 401.
78. Serrano, 'Tres documentos logroñeses,' p. 172. The latest discoverable reference to Belascus, bishop of Pamplona, is of 13 November 972, which furnishes a terminus post quem for the composition of the Vita (Madrid, Arch. Hist. Nac., Clero, Nájera, Ms 258, Privilegios de Naxara , I, fols. 18 r-19 r).
79. García de Loaísa, Collectio Conciliorum Hispaniae (Madrid, 1593), p. 774. See also J. A. Fabricuis, Bibliotheca Ecclesiastica (Hamburg, 1718), p. 68 [from A. Le Mire (Miraeus), Bibliotheca Ecclesiastica (Antwerp, 1639-1649), I, 102, who reprints Loaísa's text]; J. Mabillon, Acta Sanctorum Ordinis Sancti Benedicti (Paris, 1668-1701), VII, 296 [from Miraeus, loc. cit.]; José Saenz de Aguirre, Collectio Maxima Conciliorum Omnium Hispaniae et Novi Orbis (Rome, 1693-1694), III, 83 [from Mabillon, loc. cit.}.
80. Fol. 343 r, col. 2. The Vita is also found in the later and dependent Codex Aemilianensis (Escorial Lat. a I 13, fol. 347 v, col. 1; cf. Antolín, op. cit., I, 361). The Aemilianensis text differs slightly: 'libellum,' 'ore,' and 'episcopi.' have the 'e' with cedilla, and the closing phrase is expanded to 'in pace xpi.'
81. Ms: 'prestantio [punctis rasum] prestantior.'
82. In consequence, Salvus receives passing mention in such histories of Spanish literature as Nicolás Antonio, Bibliotheca Hispana Vetus (2nd ed., Madrid, 1788), I, 518-519; José Rodríguez de Castro, Biblioteca Española (Madrid, 1781-1786), u, 477-478; José Amador de los Ríos, Historia Crítica de la Literatura Española (Madrid, 1861-1865), n, 198.
83. González, Colección, VI, no. ccxv (redated to 953, as above, n. 76): 'Velasco presbiter et praepositus testis'; the earliest reference to Belascus' episcopacy at Pamplona seems to be of 27 October 962: 'Belascus episcopus in Irunia' (Arch. Hist. Nac., Clero, Leire, Ms 93, Vecerro mayor del Man o, de Leyre, fols. 533-536.)
84. Acta Sanctorum Ordinis Sancti Benedicti, VII, 297.
85. Férotin, Liber Ordinum, pp. xii, n. 1; xix, n. 1; J. Pérez de Urbel's attribution to Salvus of a hymn in the Mozarabic office of St Martín (Orígen de los Himnos Mozárabes [Bordeaux, 1926], pp. 55, 66) has been proved untenable by A. Lambert, 'La fete de 1' "Ordinatio Sancti Martini",' Revue Mabillon, xxvi (1936), 4, n. 2. See also C. Rojo and G. Prado, El Canto Mozárabe (Barcelona, 1929), p. 15; F. Cabrol, 'Mozárabe (la Liturgie)' Dictionnaire d'Archéologie et de Liturgie Chrétienne, xii, 1 (Pans> 1935), col. 400.
86. N. Antonio, Bibliotheca Hispana Vetus, I, 519, cites Philippe Labbé, Nova Bibliotheca Manuscripiorum (Paris, 1567), I, 35, as having seen a Nuns' Rule entitled Sancti Salui abbatis Albeldensis regularis libellus uirginibus indusis, capitibus LXXVIII, cum praefatione ad sororem . I have been unable to locate this passage in Labbé, but in any case, as the references to 'uirgines inclusae" and praefatio ad sororem,' and the division into seventy-eight chapters, show, this was Ailred of Rievaulx's Nuns' Rule (P. L., XXXII, cols. 1451-1474). Although Ailredian authorship was pointed out by Carlo Moroni, praefectus of the Barberini library, in the margin of the very copy of Labbé that Antonio was using, the latter rejected the correction on the untenable ground that Ailred was not known to have written a Nuns' Rule. Schoettgenius, the continuator of Fabricius, rashly inferred from all this that Antonio, as well as Labbé, had seen a copy of the Salvan Rule (Fabricius, Bibliotheca Ecclesiastica , VI, 413-414), an error corrected by José Rodríguez de Castro, Biblioteca Española, II, 478. The latter, however, sided with Antonio against Moroni on the Salvan authorship of Labbé's Rule. Fuller knowledge of Ailred has silently refuted Antonio's contention, and since Rodríguez de Castro no one has ventured to assert the survival of the 'regularis libellus.'
87. Antigüedades de España Propugnadas en las Noticias de sus Reyes y Condes de Castilla la Vieja (Madrid, 1719-1721), I, 243, col. 2-244, col. 1.
88. In this connection the possible Albeldan provenance of the so-called Nájeran fragments of Smaragdus' Expositio now at Silos ( Fragmentos de Nájera, fols. 5-16) merits investigation, particularly in view of the close similarity in script between Aemilianensis 62 and the Silos pieces; cf. Whitehill and Perez de Urbel, 'Los manuscritos del real monasterio de Santo Domingo de Silos', Bol. Acad. Hist., XCV (1929), 592-598, and Lámina IX.
89. Escorial Lat. a I 13; Antolín, Catálogo, I, 21-25; idem, 'Historia y descripción de un "Codex Regularam" del siglo IX,' Ciudad de Dios, LXXV (1908), 23-33, 304-316, 460-471, 637-649; LXXVII (1908), 48-56,131-136; Millares Cario, Tratado de Paleografía Española, I, 454 (no. 25); idem, Nuevos Estudios , pp. 106-107.
90. An apparent exception to this statement, another interesting experiment in Spanish-Carolingian monastic synthesis, appears in an eleventh-century Visigothic manuscript of the Academia de la Historia, Aemilianensis 53 (formerly F. 221 or 51), fols. 24V-31V; cf. Loewe-von Hartel, 'Bibliotheca patrum latinorum hispaniensis,' Sitzungsberichte d. kaiserl. Akad. d. Wissenschaft z. Wien, phil.-hist. Cl., CXI (1885), 553-554; Clark, 'Collectanea Hispánica,' Transactions of the Connecticut Academy of Arts and Sciences, XXIV (1920), 40 (no. 575); García Villada, Paleografía Española, I, 109 (no. 100); Millares Carlo, op. cit., p. 464 (no. 162). This codex contains the Prognosticon futuri saeculi of Julian of Toledo, the Vita of St John the Almoner, and St Leander of Seville's Regula siue liber de institutions uirginum et contemptu mundi; at the end of the last work (the chapters of which are differently arranged from the Migne edition, P. L., LXXII, cols. 871-894), there follows without interruption of any kind the chapters of an unnoticed work which is largely composed of material drawn from Smaragdus' Expositio, cc. iv and vii, dealing with the Instrumenta bonorum operum and the XII gradus humilitatis. The Smaragdan excerpts have been abridged and adapted to the use of nuns by effeminization of all references to monks. It is clear that, whatever the origin of this anonymous text, it is not a genuine Rule, like the Libellus, but a mere appendix of homiletic content to the Leandrian Rule. Although the text is conceivably pre-eleventh-century and occasionally parallels certain Libellus passages of cc. i-ii quite closely, this is due to common use of Smaragdus, and no interdependence of the two works is discoverable, with one possibly significant exception: both Libellus and Leandrian Appendix put the rubric De obedientia at the head of the degrees of humility and make obedience the first degree, transferring to it the material from Expos., c. v (De obedientia ). The Appendix omits the second degree, however, and thereafter follows the Smaragdan order, which the Libellus does not do until the fourth degree. Thus indebtedness is in any case slight. Since the Appendix is a mere coda of ascetic spirituality attached to an accepted Bule, its identification as the Salvan 'regularis libellus' is impossible.
91. For other instances, cf. Lib., c. xxv: 'suficiat sorori unicuique duas tunicas laneas duas peludas pallia duo et calciamenta pedules et caligas duplices,' and c. xxvii: 'iuniores usque ad etatem sedecim annorum in finem ubique stent uel ad mensam sedeant,' with Reg. Ben.--Expos., cc. lv, lxiii.
92. Benedictine reception, see D. Ildefons Herwegen, Studien zur benediktinischen Professformel (Münster i. W., 1912; Beiträge zur Geschichte des alten Mönchtums und des Benediktinerordens, Bd. 3), P. 41-46 (with special reference to Smaragdus); M. Rothenhäusler, Zur Aufnahmeordnung der Regula s. Benedicti (Münster i. W., 1912; Beiträge, loc. cit.), pp. 83-96. On the Mozarabic system, cf. Férotin, Liber Ordinum, cols. 82-86, and notes; F. Cabrol, 'Mozárabe (la Liturgie)', Dictionnaire d'Archéologie Chrétienne et de Liturgie , XII, 1, (Paris, 1935), cols. 454-455; Pérez de Urbel, Los Monjes Españoles en la Edad Media, II, 80-93.
93. Pérez de Urbel, II, 277-394.
94. Ibid., I, 487-496; C. J. Bishko, Spanish Monasticism in the Visigothic Period (unpublished dissertation, 1937, Harvard University; revision for publication in progress; meanwhile, cf. Harvard University, Summaries of Theses Accepted in Partial Fulfilment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy, 1937 [Cambridge, Mass., 1938], pp. 126-129), pp. 88-93.
95. D. Ildefons Herwegen, Das Pactum des heiligen Fruktuosus non Braga (Stuttgart, 1907; Kirchenrechtliche Abhandlungen, ed. U. Stutz, Bd. 40), pp. 24-35; Bishko, op. cit., pp. 299-370; Pérez de Urbel, ii, 90-93; 368-375.
96. Herwegen, pp. 5-23.
97. Ibid., pp. 33-34.
98. Liber Ordinum, cols. 82-86; cf. Herwegen, pp. 39-49.
99. The Libellus thus confirms, as against Herwegen's argument ( op. cit., p. 45, n. 1; also, Pérez de Urbel, II, 80-93) for regarding this section of the Liber Ordinum as pre-711 and non-Benedictinized, Férotin's correct view (Liber Ordinum, p. xxi) of the relatively late date of the monastic ordines of the Liber. Since efforts to date the entire Mozarabic Rite before 711 have seriously hampered its proper evolutionary study, this evidence of its textual fluidity in the Reconquista period should prove useful.
100. Monjes Españoles, II, 609-611; also, Bol. Acad. Hist. , CI (1932), 111-113. In this connection the terminus of the 954 Smaragdus still at San Millán de la Cogolla should be checked.
101. Monjes Españoles, II, 392-394; W. M. Whitehill and J. Pérez de Urbel, 'Los manuscritos del real monasterio de Santo Domingo de Silos,' Bol. Acad. Hist., XCV (1929), 525-526.
102. Cf. G. Le Bras, 'Notes pour servir á l'histoire des collections canoniques. VI, Pénitentiels espagnols,' Nouvelle Revue Historique de Droit Français e Étranger, 4e série, X (1931), 115-131; P. Fournier and G. Le Bras, Histoire des Collections Canoniques en Occident (Paris, 1931-1932), I, 87; J. T. McNeill and H. M. Gamer, Medieval Handbooks of Penance (New York, 1938), pp. 285-291. Consult also E. Göller, 'Das spanisch-westgotische Busswesen vom 6. bis 8. Jahrhundert,' Römische Quartalschrift für christliche Altertumskunde und für Kirchengeschichte, XXXVII (1929), 245-313.
103. Fols. 144V-146V.The illuminated fol. 147 r, preceding the text of Paulus Alvarus' Liber Scintilarum, shows the scribe regarded the De agenda paenitentia as going with the Expositio. The attachment of this penitential homily was almost beyond question done in Spain, where its use in Galician monastic circles of the later seventh century is attested by its inclusion in the collection of saints' lives made by the abbot Valerius; see D. DeBruyne, 'L'héritage littéraire de l'abbé saint Valère,' Revue Bénédictine , XXXII (1920), pp. 1-10.
104. A. de Siles, 'Investigaciones históricas sobre el orígen y progresos del monacato español, hasta la irrupción sarracena á principios del siglo VIII,' Memorias de la Real Academia de la Historia, VII (1832), 471-578 [esp. pp. 527-547, an excellent review of Spanish controversial literature prior to 1832]; D. Beda Plaine, La Regla de San Benito y su Introducción en España (Valencia, 1900; reprinted from Soluciones Católicas  by far the best study to date); Pérez de Urbel, Monjes Españoles , I, 496-508; P. Schmitz, 'Bénédictin (Ordre)', Dictionnaire d'Histoire et de Géographie Ecdesiastique (Paris, 1912-), VII, 1070-1072; T. P. McLaughlin, Le Très Anden Droit Monastique de l'Occident (Poitiers, 1935; also Archives de la France Monastique , XXXVIII), pp. 27-29.
105. Pérez de Urbel, II, 384-392.
106. P. L., CXV, 846; Pérez de Urbel, II, 271-274.
107. Yépes, Corónica de San Benito, III, 365V -368 r; Javier Ibarra, Historia del Monasterio y de la Universidad Literaria de Irache (Pamplona, 1938), pp. 12-38.
108. For the traditional view, see Yépes, IV, 76-85; and cf. Kehr, Papsturkunden in Spanien, II. Navarra and Aragon, pp. 33-34 on the Leire forgeries.
109. Gómez-Moreno, Iglesias Mozárabes (Madrid, 1919), I, 290-293; Menéndez Pidal, Orígenes del Español , I, 495-496; Pérez de Urbel, Monjes Españoles, II, 294-295.
110. L. Barrau-Dihigo, 'Recherches sur l'histoire politique du royaume asturien,' Revue Hispanique, LII (1921), 257-258; L. Serrano, El Obispado de Burgos y Castilla Primitiva (Madrid, 1935), I, 134-143; 161-168.
111. L. Barrau-Dihigo, 'Charles de l'église de Valpuesta du IXe au XIe siècle,' Revue Hispanique, VII (1900), 282-304 [nos. 1-7].
112. L. Serrano, El Becerro Gótico de Cardena (Silos-Valladolid, 1910; = Fuentes para la Historia de Castilla, III), esp. nos. 105, 322, 69,197; Yépes, Corónica, I, 88-93; Berganza, Antigüedades de España, I, 175-178; E. Flórez, E. S., XXVI, 209-234; A. Cotarelo y Valledor, Historia Crítica y Documentada de la Vida y Acciones de Alfonso III el Magno (Madrid, 1933), pp. 411-416.
113. L. Serrano, Cartulario de San Pedro de Arlanza (Madrid, 1925), p. 40.
114. Serrano, Cartulario de San Pedro de Arlanza, pp. 5-30; M. Férotin, Histoire de l'Abbaye de Silos (Paris, 1897), pp. 1-12.
115. Cf. the pacta and pactual references in Barrau-Dihigo, 'Chartes de l'église de Valpuesta,' nos. 5, 8, 9, 13; Berganza, Antigüedades , I, 240-241; Herwegen, Das Pactum des hl. Fruktuosus von Braga , pp. 11-22; Serrano, Cartulario de San Pedro de Arlanza, nos. 8-9.
116. R. Menéndez Pidal, La España del Cid (Madrid, 1929), I, 101 (= Eng. Trans. by H. Sunderland, The Cid and His Spain [London, 1934], pp. 43-44).
117. E. g., Arlanza (912); Silos (919); Tabladillo (924).
118. Serrano, Cartulario de San Pedro de Arlanza, nos. iv and ix.
119. See Pérez de Urbel, Monjes Españoles, II, 384; A. Millares Carlo, Contribución al "Corpus" de codices Visigóticos (Madrid, 1931), pp. 169-170. Of the Valeránica (San Pedro de Berlangas) and Valvanera manuscripts erroneously listed by Pérez de Urbel, loc. cit., the first is really Florentius' copy of Smaragdus' Liber Homiliarum, not the Expositio at all (Córdoba, Biblioteca Capitular, Ms 1; cf. Clark, 'Collectanea hispánica,' p. 31 [no. 512]; Millares Carlo, Tratado de Paleografía Española, p. 453 [no. 22]); and the second is the present San Millán Smaragdus of 954, which Férotin originally discovered at Santa María de Valvanera (Histoire de l'Abbaye de Silos, p. 260, n. 1).
120. Férotin, Histoire de Silos, pp. 259-260; Clark, 'Collectanea hispánica,' p. 58 (no. 685); García Villada, Paleografía Española, p. 122 (no. 184); Millares Carlo, Tratado de Paleografía Española, p. 469 (no. 234); Whitehill and Pérez de Urbel, 'Los manuscritos del real monasterio de Santo Domingo de Silos,' Bol. Acad. Hist., CXV (1929), 524-528.
121. E. A. Loew, Studia Paleographica (Munich, 1910; Sitzungsberichte der königlichen bayerischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, philos.-philol.-hist. Kl., 12. Abhandlung), pp. 62-63 (no. 29); Clark, p. 49 (no. 639); M. R. James, A Descriptive Catalogue of the Latin Manuscripts in the John Rylands Library at Manchester (London and New York, 1921), I, 185-187 (no. 104); García Villada, p. 116 (no. 140); Millares Carlo, p. 464 (no. 179); M. Tyson, 'The Spanish Manuscripts in the John Rylands Library,' Bulletin of the John Rylands Library, XVI (1932), 188-189.
122. Loewe-von Hartel, 'Bibliotheca patrum latinorum hispaniensis,' Sitzungsberichte der kaiserlichen Akademie der Wissenschaft zu Wien, phil.-hist. Cl., CXIII (1886), 533 (no. 13); C. Pérez Pastor, 'Indice por títulos de los códices procedentes de los monasterios de San Millán de la Cogolla y San Pedro de Cardeña, existentes en la Biblioteca de la Real Academia de la Historia,' Bol. Acad. Hist., LIII (1908), 488-489 (no. xxvi); Clark, p. 41 (no. 589); García Villada, p. 107 (no. 86); Millares Cario, p. 462 (no. 148).
123. Jaime Villanueva, Viaje Literario á las Iglesias de España (Madrid, 1803-1852), VI, 267; R. Beer, Handschriftenschätze Spaniens (Vienna, 1894), p. 543.
124. Antonio López-Ferreiro, Historia de la Santa A. M. Iglesia de Santiago de Compostela (Santiago de Compostela, 1898-1909), II, Apéndice, pp. 122-125 (no. lvi).
125. Same references as for n. 120, supra.
126. Férotin, Histoire de l'Abbaye de Silos, p. 259, n. 1; Clark, p. 57 (no. 683); García Villada, p. 121 (no. 182); Serrano, Cartulario de San Millán de la Cogolla, p. xxxii; Millares Cario, p. 465 (no. 180).
127. Section II, supra.
128. Whitehill and Pérez de Urbel, 'Los manuscritos ... de Silos,' Bol. Acad. Hist., XCV (1929), 592-598, and Lámina IX; Millares Cario, Tratado, p. 470 (no. 243); idem, Contribución al "Corpus" de Códices Visigóticos, p. 242 (with date 'siglo xi').
129. W. M. Whitehill, 'Un códice visigótico de San Pedro de Cárdena (British Museum, Additional Ms 30055),' Bol. Acad. Hist. , CVII (1935), 514; Millares Carlo, Nuevos Estudios de Paleografía Española (Mexico City, 1941), p. 138.
130. The Colección de D. Abad y Lasierra, t. II, contains [fols. 76 r-100 r, my foliation] an important catalog of Visigothic manuscripts entitled Indice de los Archivos de los Reales Monasterios de la Congregacion Benedictina Tarraconense que con permiso de S. M. (que Dios guarde) há examinado en este año de 1772 D. Fr. Manuel de Abad y Lasierra Benedictino Claustrál de la misma Congregacion . This consists of a number of brief descriptive notes on Visigothic manuscripts, most of which are identifiable with extant codices. Abad y Lasierra saw at Barcelona a copy of the Libellus a regula sancti Benedicti subtractus , for after describing a codex regularum for nuns, he says: 'Esta Colección puede aumentarse con toda propiedad y perfeccion con otros dos Códices ò Extractos de la Regla de S. Benito'; he then goes on to mention the completely unknown and apparently now lost effeminized Smaragdus in the words cited above, and continues thus [fol. 98 r ]: 'El otro [códice] está apropriado tambien para Monjas siguiendo en todo lo substancial el texto de la Regla de S. Benito. Por manera que este parece una Regla compuesta por S. Benito para Monjas; y aquel, una exposición de Smaragdo sobre esta Regla. Y asi al símil del Concordia Regularum que hay para hombres se lograria otra Concordia Regularum para Mugeres.' The reference here must be to the Libellus, which so many casual observers (including Abad y Lasierra himself: 'Esto es quanto la rapidez del tiempo ha permitido notar' [fol. 100 r]) have taken to be merely an adaptation of the Benedictine Rule, and which because of its small size and title has naturally been so regarded. This Libellus manuscript was almost certainly our Aemilianensis 62, for it is clear from the Indice that a number of the manuscripts of the Tarraconense archive later passed to San Millán (e.g., the 954 San Millán Smaragdus, which Abad y Lasierra notes [fol. 93 r]) whence many of them were later transferred to Madrid. Since we have Berganza's testimony (Antigüedades de España , I, 243-244) to the presence of Aemilianensis 62 at San Millán in 1719, it appears that some time after that date, and before 1772, the precious Aemilianenses were shifted to Barcelona; and that subsequently, perhaps after the Peninsular War, they were returned to San Millán, possibly in 1835, at the time of the dissolution of the San Pablo del Campo archive. In the process of repeated transfer the effemiuized Smaragdus, and possibly other codices, must have been lost. It is somewhat uncertain just why the San Millán manuscripts should ever have been taken to Barcelona, TOere the archive of the Congregación Benedictina Terraconense was located, since as a Castiliau obey San Millán is supposed to have belonged from the sixteenth century to the Congregación de San Benito de Valladolid (Enciclopedia Universal Ilustrada Europeo-Americana , LIII, 950; LXVI, 937). G. de Argáiz, however, puts the Rioja in the ecclesiastical province of Tarragona (La Soledad Laureada, por San Benito y sus Hijos, en las Iglesias de España [Madrid, 1675], t. II), so that apparently San Millán may have been a Tarraconensian affiliate during certain periods of the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries. P. Kehr, Papsturkunden in Spanien. I. Katalanien. I. Archivberichte über die eigenen und die Forschungen von J. Rius und P. Rassow [ Abhandlungen der Gesellschaft der Wissenschaften zu Göttingen, phil.-hist. Kl., N. F., XVIII (1925-1926)], pp. 94-99, discusses the San Pablo archive, but throws no light on the subject of its San Millán manuscripts. On the Congregación Tarraconense, cf. Enciclopedia Ilustrada , LIX, 685-687.
131. Beer, Handschriftenschätze Spaniens, p. 370 (no. 49); Millares Carlo, Contribución, p. 169.
132. N. 90, supra.
133. Millares Carlo, Tratado, p. 459 (no. 106); idem, Contribución , pp. 168-169.
134. Historia Silense, ed. F. Santos Coco (Madrid, 1921), pp. 63-64; cf. G. Cirot, ' "Per deuia Alauae",' Bulletin Hispanique, XXXVI (1934), 88-93; Ángel de Apráiz, 'Notas hispánicas sobre la cultura de las peregrinaciones,' ibid., XL (1938), 424^432,
135. Supra, n. 21.
136. Supra, nn. 41-42.
137. Risco, E. S., XXXIII, 465-468; González, Colección de Privilegios, V, no. i. Sunna also appears in the 925 privilegio of Sancho Garcés I and Queen Toda granting Alberite to San Martín de Albelda González, Vi, no. cxcviii).
138. Yépes, Corónica, V, 435 v-436 .
139. González, VI, no. ccvii .
140. Ibid., no. ccxi  ; Yépes, loc. cit.
141. Gómez-Moreno, Iglesias Mozárabes, pp. 361-362; Millares Cario, Tratado de Paleografía Española, pp. 160-161.