Spanish and Portuguese Monastic History

Charles Julian Bishko


Liturgical Intercession at Cluny For the King-Emperors of Leon

(Published originally in Studia Monastica 7 (1961); reprinted with permission.)

[53] Among the neglected factors in the still very imperfectly understood relations between Cluny and Christian Spain during the eleventh and twelfth centuries is the great Benedictine community's immense repute as a center of intercessory prayer(1) . In an insufficiently appreciated study W. Jorden has claimed that from the time of her foundation Cluny's intercessions for the living, and above all her devotion to the commemoration of the dead, attracted so many pious -- and generous -- benefactors that at any given moment the abbey's success and significance (Hauptblüte, Hauptbedeutung ) could be measured by the number of her anniversary observances (2) . Somewhat exaggerated as it is, this thesis possesses much merit and urgently requires to be carried beyond the mid-tenth century, where Jorden left it, and to be further investigated along with its inseparable corollary, Cluny's admission to her prized confraternity or societas of those numerous princes, nobles, churchmen [54] and other donors who came to enjoy remembrance both in life and death through the abbey's intercessory prayers and the regular commemoration of their obit(3) .

Of the medieval rulers who became socii and benefactores of the Burgundian congregation, none appear more important, or more influential for the abbey's own material development, than the Leonese king-emperors Fernando, or Ferdinand, I (1038-1065) and his son Alfonso VI (1066-1109). Much has been written in recent decades concerning the imperial traditions of the medieval kingdom of Leon; and we now know that both Fernando and Alfonso were strong champions of the Leonese doctrine of the regnum Hispaniae or regnum Hispaniarum, which envisaged an Iberia freed from all Muslim domination and united under the hegemony of the kings of Leon as imperatores transcending in authority all merely regional kings or counts from Barcelona to Galicia (4) . It has however not yet been appreciated how closely Cluny became associated with Leonese imperialism. Too much attention has been paid to the introduction of Cluniac Benedictinism into Navarre, Aragon and Castile by the celebrated Navarrese monarch Sancho el Mayor ca. 1025 (5) , too little to the fact that within three decades after his death Cluny's really significant connections with the Iberian Peninsula shifted westward to center almost exclusively in the imperial state of Leon, with far-reaching implications for the character and (no less) the limits of Cluniac activity below the Pyrennes.

Cluny's bond with Leon, and with its rulers Fernando I and Alfonso VI, can readily be shown to have been far more intercessory than reformist(6) . Furthermore, this has left important but neglected liturgical [55] traces in the Cluniac custumals and other documents, both Burgundian and Hispanic; and these this paper proposes to examine with a twofold aim: (i) to reconstruct as fully as possible the actual stages by which Cluny, as from ca. 1060 on her Leonese alignment tightened, came to bestow upon the imperial sovereigns of the Bernesga intercessory privileges surpassing even those granted her cherished benefactors in the ruling dynasties of the Holy Roman Empire; and (ii) to apply the results thus achieved to the more accurate dating and interpretation of the monastic and diplomatic texts that constitute our chief sources of liturgical information. 

I. The Evidence of Bernard of Cluny's Consuetudines

The offering of intercessory prayers at Cluny for Spanish monarchs commences in the abbatiate of Odilo (d. 1048). From the latter's two well-known epistles, one directed to King Garcia III of Navarre, the other to the ex-abbot Paterno of the Aragonese house of San Juan de la Peña, with its cordial references to King Ramiro I of Aragon, it seems certain that as a socius of Cluny King Sancho el Mayor, the fervent promoter of Cluniac reformism in his domains, must have shared in the monks' general prayers for their benefactors, although in fact we cannot document the commemoration of his obit as we can the anniversaries of his chief monastic collaborators, Bishop Sancho of Pamplona and Abbots Paterno and Garcia, by means of the Necrologium of Villers(7) . It is evident also from these letters that on specific occasions of great moment -- for King Garcia, a time of victory; for King Ramiro, a time of acute distress -- special prayers were recited at Cluny, either privately by the abbot or formally by the monks. Thus for a time, in behalf of the harassed Ramiro, the psalm Domine, quid multiplicati sunt was said after Matins (i. e., modern Lauds) and the psalm Levavi oculos meos at the other hours(8) .

But such prayers -- the possible Sanchan commemoration apart -- were strictly occasional, not permanent additions to the abbey's liturgical customs. To find the earliest testimony to continuous, regular intercession for, and commemoration of, peninsular rulers we must turn to the Hispanic passages in the Consuetudines cenobii Cluniacensis of Bernard of Cluny, the earliest of the three great Cluniac custumals of the second half of the eleventh century. This work contains, as the older custumals [56] of the abbey do not, a detailed description of the procedures followed at Cluny in the intercessory remembrance of all socii and benefactores; and it will be useful to summarize this material before considering in detail the data relating solely to the Leonese king-emperors (9) .

Bernard's Consuetudines treat (i) the general prayers said for the abbey's lay donors in their lifetime and after death; and (ii) those commemorating a specific individual obit. The chapter entitled De societate nostra danda extraneis informs us that in life the benefactors were remembered in all prayers, alms and good works, and particularly in each hour of the daily Office through the responsory Deus, in adiutorium meum intende and the collect Praetende, Domine; and also in the intention of both the Morrow and the High Mass (10) . As for deceased benefactors, in their general behalf the collect Omnipotens sempiterne Deus, in cuius humana canditio was recited as the first collect of any Mass or Office to which it was not already assigned, as well as in the Matins of the Dead from Septuagesima to November 1st, after days of twelve lessons, and at Vespers and Matins on the feasts in Lent and on the Rogation Days(11) . In addition, three times a year -- at the commencement of Lent, on the feast of SS Peter and Paul (a day of great solemnity at Cluny) and after All Saints -- the Office and Morrow Mass were said for dead benefactors and followed by seven days of Masses and Offices for them. Finally, immediately after the death of an individual donor, it was the practice to serve a portion of food (prebenda) to the poor for thirty days, just as for a monk of Cluny who died away from the abbey, although the singing of private Masses, as done for such a brother, was expressly denied benefactors (12) .

In the matter of obit commemorations Bernard elsewhere carefully distinguishes the magnum anniuersarium, reserved to the abbots of Cluny and kings, from the anniuersarium mediocre, of which there were three classes, differing from the magnum and each other in the liturgical content of Office and Mass, and in the number of bells rung, candlesticks placed before the altar, and poor fed by the sacristan (13) . Assignment to each [57] class was made by the abbot. The magnum anniuersarium was limited to emperors, empresses and kings qui magnum quid contulerunt ecclesiae, a list which in Bernard's time seems to have included only five persons: the German emperors Henry II and Henry III; the empresses Adelaide and Agnes; and King Fernando "of the Spains" (14) . On these great occasions (i) all bells, including the two great ones, were pealed for a considerable time at the Vespers, Office and Mass of the Dead; (ii) the Tract was sung in the Mass in copes, and the responsory in tunics; (iii) antiphons and psalms were added to the Vespers; (iv) the entire Office, and the responsory, were intoned; (v) five candlesticks were set before the altar; (vi) twelve poor were fed with a hearty meal of bread, wine and meat; and (vii) a full refection was served the monks (15) .

In addition to such general intercessory provisions for benefactors as such, and for the solemn commemoration of the magna anniuersaria, Bernard also records in five widely scattered passages the existence of special liturgical or eleemosynary practices devoted to King Fernando I, his consort (Doña Sancha) and "the kings of the Spains". These are as follows: 

(1) of the three daily alms portions of food (prebendae) served the poor by the almoner from the high table in the refectory, two of which were dedicated to Abbot Odilo and Emperor Henry II, the third commemorated Fernando, his wife and the reges Hispaniarum (16) ;

(2) in the High Mass on ferial days between the octave of Easter and Michaelmas the fifth collect was said pro regibus Hispaniarum aliisque principibus(17);

(3) in the Morrow Mass pro defunctis the collect Omnipotens sempiterne Deus, in cuius humana conditio was said for an unnamed [58] monk of Cluny, the reges Hispaniarum, and Abbot Hugh's father (Count Dalmace de Semur)(18) ; 

(4) of the five anniversaries on which the sacristan served a full refection of fish and spiced honeyed wine, four were obits of the German emperors Henry II and III and the empresses Adelaide and Agnes; but the fifth commemorated the death of King Fernando of Spain (rex Hispaniae); and on such occasions, if ornamenta given by these rulers were among the treasures of the house, these were to be displayed in their memory upon the altar(19) ; 

 (5) to the practice of celebrating no Office at night throughout the entire octave of the Nativity, there was a unique exception: by Abbot Hugh's express command, the Office was celebrated on the morrow of the feast of the Holy Innocents for King Fernando, the abbey's generous benefactor, and in the same fashion as for Cluny's own abbots; and that day all qualified priests sang their private Masses for his repose (20) . 

To appreciate the full meaning of these five intercessory customs, it is necessary to recognize, first of all, that they relate solely to the king-emperors of Leon and not to medieval Spanish reges in general. In this period the abbey no longer had close ties with Aragon, whose king, [59] from 1068, was a vassal of the pope, or with Navarre, as in Sancho el Mayor's era, but only with the reges of the united states of Leon and Castile. It is to them that Bernard's passages unquestionably apply. Cluniac and papal documents alike avoid calling any ruler below the Pyrenees imperator, the term which in Burgundy and Italy, as elsewhere outside the Peninsula, normally designated the Holy Roman emperor. So too the Spanish chanceries, even that of Leon, frequently employ in their official diplomas the term rex, with or without qualifying attributes, for the Leonese-Castilian sovereign. But the majestic phrases rex Hispaniae, rex Hispaniarum, circulating in Spain alongside their equivalent imperator Hispaniae, imperator Hispaniarum, unmistakably meant only one of the various Iberian rulers, the Leonese king-emperor of the regnum Hispaniae or Hispaniarum (21) . There are moreover two clear signs that Cluny, conscious of its imperial connotations, accepted this peninsular usage: the restriction of rex Hispaniae , rex Hispaniarum, to the Leonese monarch in Cluniac texts such as the Spanish correspondence of Abbot Hugh, the Vitae of this abbot, and the Liber de miraculis of Abbot Peter the Venerable; and in the consistent bracketing by the Cluniac custumals and the Statuta s. Hugonis abbatis of the Leonese sovereigns and their consorts with the imperatores and imperatrices of the Holy Roman Empire(22) .

Secondly, it is to be noted that on Bernard's showing the abbey paid substantially greater intercessory honor to the Leonese king-emperors than to the imperial Germans(23) . Fernando's obit, like theirs, was not only an imperial magnum anniuersarium but was marked by the only Matins recited in the whole Nativity octave, elevated to the supreme level of the anniversaries of Cluny's own abbots, and assigned that singing of private Masses which was prohibited to other benefactors. In comparison, the plenum officium and feeding of twelve poor on July 13th, and the seven-day alms serving of food and drink (justitia) for the Emperor Henry II ("nostrae societatis et fraternitatis karissimi") represent a distinctly less solemn commemoration (24) . Furthermore, while special collects had long been recited on the obits of imperial and royal benefactors, there appears neither in the earlier custumals nor in Bernard any parallel -- other than the nondescript pro ...aliisque principibus that the latter attaches to ferial High Masses between the Easter octave and Michaelmas -- to the offering of frequent, regular prayers for specific national rulers such as are here prescribed for the reges Hispaniarum, living and dead.

[60] Lastly, of the three Leonesc parties for whom intercession is being made -- Fernando I, his wife Doña Sancha, and the reges Hispaniarum -- each possesses great interest. The attention given Fernando himself is no great problem: whatever other multa bono, he may have given Cluny -- and the phrase recalls Bernard's mention of the magnum anniuersarium for rulers qui magnum quid contulerunt ecclesiae -- by far the richest was the famous census of an annual thousand gold metcales or dinars for clothing the monks of Cluny, an extremely large sum as such by extrapeninsular monetary standards in the eleventh century, and made enormously more so by the promise of its annual repetition. Abbot Hugh's gratitude for this substantial charity would alone explain his institution of the exceptional obit observances. But what of the Queen-Empress Sancha and the reges? Are we to suppose their intercession was begun at the same time as Fernando's, perhaps by previous arrangement with abbot Hugh? or are we dealing in the Leonese passages with customs combining several stages of post-Fernandine liturgical evolution? The answer depends in large part on the date we assign the Consuetudines cenobii Cluniacensis. 

2. Bernard of Cluny and the Alfonsine Diploma of 1077

While there has not been any agreement on the date of the Bernardine Consuetudines, other than that they belong in the second half of the eleventh century, the prevailing belief is that they were completed by the years 1067 or 1068(25). If true, this would compel us to place all the five Hispanic references within the period of not over three years following Fernando I's death on 27/29 December 1065. But this date for the custumal cannot be accepted. It rests upon two assumptions now several centuries old: Duchesne's view of 1614 that Bernard's work preceded the Consuetudines of Udalric or Ulric (ca. 1085), which is sound enough although still in need of careful demonstration(26); and the assertion by the Maurist author of the two-page account published in 1746 in Tome VII (pp. 595-597) of the Histoire littéraire de la France that "Bernard l'avoit fait dès 1067, ou l'année suivante", a claim for which no proof is offered and which reflects superficial examination of the text. For the very fact that in the list of imperial anniversaries Cluny celebrated in his time Bernard includes that of the Empress Agnes, the widow of the Franconian emperor Henry III, who did not die until December 14, 1077, indicates [61] that the Consuetudines appeared at least a decade later than now commonly supposed(27) . And that the Agnes obit is no later interpolation finds confirmation in three, possibly four, of the Hispanic passages, which also point to 1077 as the terminus post quem.

The principal clue to dating Bernard's Leonese texts is their revelation of Cluniac intercessory customs affecting not only Fernando I but his wife and the reges Hispaniarum. Several possibilities suggest themselves. First, prayers and the daily prebenda might conceivably have been organized immediately after news of Fernando's death reached Cluny, presumably in 1066. Indubitably this is what happened as regards the anniversary commemoration which Abbot Hugh ordered; but it does not explain the prebenda , unless we imagine that this was originally for Fernando alone, and, even less, the intercession for Doña Sancha and the reges. It was on 7 November 1067 that the queen-empress died, two years after her husband (28); again it is difficult to believe that at that time she was included in a hypothetically existent Fernandine prebenda, because Cluny did not automatically include their consorts, male or female, in the high liturgical honors rendered her imperial benefactors, as the German cases prove; and there are no grounds for assuming any special Cluniac gratitude to Sancha, a point confirmed by the lack of an obit observance comparable to her husband's. Furthermore, this leaves the reges still unaccounted for. There remains, then, the strong probability that the appearance of Doña Sancha and the reges Hispaniarum in Bernard's custumal reflects liturgical and eleemosynary practices established at Cluny after 1067, in the reign of Fernando I's son and successor on the imperial Leonese throne, the fervently Cluniaphile Alfonso VI.

In the entire history of Hispano-Cluniac relations Alfonso VI (1066-1109) stands as the peninsular sovereign with whom the great Burgundian abbey developed the closest bonds of friendship and societas, and from whom she received more splendid gifts than from any other medieval European monarch. Filial loyalty to Fernando's pro-Cluniac orientation only partially explains this Alfonsine policy. More important is the fact that at various points in the reign, e. g., the early struggle against Sancho II of Castile, the conflict with Gregory VII over abolition of the Hispanic Rite, the crises over the imperial sucession, Alfonso depended heavily upon Cluny's counsel and powerful support(29). Particularly significant for the present inquiry is the abbey's intervention in the fratricidal wars among Fernando's three sons after the old emperor's partitioning of his realms and his death in 1065(30) . For when, after the battle of [62] Golpejera in January 1072, Sancho II deposed Alfonso, assumed for himself -- after annexing Leon -- the imperial title, and imprisoned his defeated brother in the castillo of Burgos, it was Abbot Hugh and his monks who came to Alfonso's rescue with their prayers and influence. These prayers, as earlier with Kings Garcia and Ramiro, were purely occasional, being designed to save the life and liberty of the enchained ruler; but it is to be noted that they were offered in behalf of that son of Fernando who was the legitimate king-emperor of Leon, and that they were successful. The reluctant Sancho was coerced into allowing his brother to go into safe exile at Moorish Toledo; and a few months later, in October 1072, after Sancho's assassination before the walls of Zamora, Alfonso triumphantly returned from the banks of the Tagus to rule over all his father's old dominions(31) .

In the years that followed the restoration of 1072 there are four major occasions on which the king-emperor publicly exhibited his profound thankfulness to his Burgundian liberators and his earnest desire for Cluniac intercessory remembrance. These are: (i) his transfer to Cluny between 1073 and 1081 of various Leonese and Castilian monasteries; (ii) the concession in 1077 of a census double that of his father's, the additional thousand dinars to be used for feeding the monks; (iii) the contribution, from ca. 1088 on, of vast sums for the construction of Abbot Hugh's new abbey church; and (iv) the re-grant in 1090 of the doubled census. Given the natural sequence of extraordinary gift and liturgical recognition, any one of these generosities might lie back of the post-Fernandine elements in Bernard of Cluny; but in fact the last two can safely be ruled out, as too late in time for the Consuetudines and also as linked with still other liturgical intercessions, to be discussed below.

Moreover, the first possibility mentioned, that Alfonso's monastic cessions motivated the intercessory practices for Doña Sancha and the reges Hispaniarum, can likewise be dismissed. Inspection of the pro remedio clauses of the donation charters, in which Alfonso designates the spiritual beneficiaries of his gifts, yields no counterpart to the liturgical trio of Fernando, Sancha and the reges , or to the last two alone. To cite the major cessions: that in 1073 of San Isidro de Dueñas, was made "pro remedio anime mee et pro anima patris mei et matris mee et omnium parentum meorum"(32) ; that of San Juan de Hérmedes de Cerrato (May 22, 1077), "pro remedium anime mee"(33); that of Santa María de [63] Nájera (1079), "propter remedium anime mee uel parentum meorum"(34) ; that of Santa Coloma de Burgos (1081), "pro remedium anime mee uel parentum meorum"(35) . In each case where these pergaminos mention parentes, the context -- for example, omnium, in the Dueñas text -- shows that the parentes in question are not merely Fernando and Sancha, but Alfonso's parientes, i. e., in the Romance sense of the word still current in Spanish, all his kinsmen or relatives; and in no case can these be taken as the counterpart of Bernard's reges Hispaniarum who are, as we have said, the Leonese king-emperors.

If, on the other hand, we turn to a more munificent benefaction than any or all of the monastic cessions, to Alfonso's doubling of the Fernandine census to Cluny, we discover at once an exact parallel with the three subjects of intercession recorded in Bernard's Consuetudmes . Two imperial documents, sent to Cluny at the time the doubled subsidy was given, and long preserved there, are extant. Alfonso's personal letter announcing the gift to Abbot Hugh displays no manifestly liturgical symptoms (36) . But the actual donation charter of July 10, 1077 is more illuminating, for it carefully lists the spiritual beneficiaries of the imperial generosity: "pro remedio anime mee et pro anima patris mei regis Fridenandi et pro anima matris mee Sanctie regine et pro animabus parentum meorum qui post me uenturi sunt ut habeant uitam et requiem sine fine"(37) . This list is remarkably interesting in several respects. It commences with Fernando I, thus ignoring that initial royal Iberian benefactor of Cluny in the Navarro-Basque dynasty, Sancho el Mayor. It disregards no less the old line of Leonese emperors ending at the battle of Tamarón (1037), when Fernando I overthrew his brother-in-law, Vermudo III. It includes Doña Sancha, Alfonso's mother, but omits (perhaps somewhat ungraciously) his then still living first wife, Agnes of Aquitaine(38) . Not unexpectedly, spiritual benefits are sought for the king-emperor himself. But the most striking thing of all is the concern here manifested for the repose of Alfonso VI's own future successors as king-emperors, for there can be little question that the phrase parentes post me uenturi , which occurs in none of the monastic charters alluding to his parentes in general, means not all descendants, but precisely those who are to come after him on the imperial throne. The same language recurs a little later in the diploma of 1077, where Alfonso binds his successors to faithful discharge of the doubled census: "Et si quis ex meo genere qui post me uenturus sit... hunc uotum mei testamenti infringere uoluerit et qualiscumque fuerit qui hoc regimen post me gubernauerit [64] et si hunc censum ita duplicatum persoluere non quesierit, etc.". Here then is the hope of intercession for Fernando, Sancha and the reges.

If this reasoning is sound, as we believe it to be, then it seems possible to reconstruct the chronology of liturgical and eleemosynary innovation that underlies the five Leonese texts in Bernard of Cluny. In 1066, as we have said, the anniversary commemoration of Fernando I must have been begun by abbatial order. Perhaps in 1068, after Doña Sancha's death, observation of her anniversary commenced but without the exceptional solemnity of her imperial husband's. Then in 1077, perhaps in the late summer or early autumn, the diploma of July 10, 1077 reached Cluny; and in its light Abbot Hugh instituted probably three new intercessory measures. At this time, doubtless, the third daily prebenda was established, supplementing the older ones for Abbot Odilo and Emperor Henry II; as a commemoration of the dead, this gave immediate intercession to Fernando and Sancha; after their deaths, it would include Alfonso VI and his successors, the reges Hispaniarum. Secondly, the fifth collect in all ferial Masses between the octave of Easter and Michaelmas was now prescribed to be said pro regibus Hispaniarum; since this was a prayer for the living, it would be said for Alfonso VI and, in the future, for each of his reigning successors in his lifetime. Thirdly, the collect Omnipotens sempiterne Deus, in cuius humana conditio, which was being used for benefactors in general in all Masses and Offices of the Dead when not among the regularly assigned collects, and which had previously been recited in all Morrow Masses for the special benefit of the anonymous Cluniac monk and Dalmace de Semur, was to be offered in such Masses for the reges Hispaniarum, i. e., Fernando I immediately, Alfonso VI and his successors after death.

The extraordinary nature of these intercessory customs of 1077 should be marked. The new Leonese prebenda placed Fernando, Sancha and the reges Hispaniarum alongside Cluny's most revered abbot of the past and her hitherto greatest imperial benefactor. Specific commemoration of the reges in Morrow Masses of the Dead represented an intercessory frequency never accorded the German emperors and empresses. The introduction of regular prayers for the reigning Leonese king-emperor in ferial Masses of the long summer season gave Alfonso VI a privilege that Cluny had never yet bestowed on any ruler. And the implicit promise of continuing prayer for the Leonese king-emperors yet to come, which corresponds exactly to the hereditary character of the doubled census, means that in Burgundy as in Spain the bonds of societas and intercession were envisaged as henceforth perpetual.

The bearing of all this also upon the dating of the Consuetudines cenobii Cluniacensis should now be patent. Its mention of the anniversary of the Empress Agnes has already been cited as pointing to post-1077. Now it can be seen that this was no interpolation. The Hispanic materials show that Bernard is describing intercessory customs that were not in [65] existence prior to Alfonso VI's promulgation of the diploma of July 10, 1077 which led the abbot of Cluny to create the new liturgical and prebendary elements which the Consuetudines combine with those going back to 1066. Bernard's work cannot have been completed before 1078; if we are to allow for its use, possibly as early as 1083, by Udalric, we may tentatively place it between 1078 and 1082 or, in short, ca. 1080. 

3. The Dies Liberationis of Alfonso VI

In still another quarter we encounter further neglected evidence of intercessory observance for Alfonso VI. Among the extant medieval biographies of Abbot Hugh I four make mention of an anniversary feast at Cluny celebrating Alfonso's release from imprisonment in 1072 through the intervention of Cluny and her patron St. Peter(39) . The Vita s. Hugonis of Gilo, written -- according to Schieffer -- in 1120 and at most points the best informed of the abbot's Lives, describes Alfonso VI as rewarding the abbey by doubling the Fernandine census and leaving to Cluny the observance of the day of his liberation: "diemque liberationis celebrem nostris relinqueret"(40) . This same passage re-appears in the later Epitome based on Gilo's work, the so-called Anonymous I (41) . Another early and well-informed Vita, that of Hildebert of Lavardin, which probably appeared very shortly after Gilo's in 1121 or so, declares that in gratitude for Cluny's aid in securing his release Alfonso doubled his father's census while also "diem utriusque exitus et de carcere scilicet et de corpore celebrem habere desiderans"(42) . So too the so-called Alia miraculorum quorundam s. Hugonis abbatis relatio (Anonymous II) preserves the tradition that following his escape the king thanked his intercessors by doubling the annual tribute and "diem suae ereptionis festiuum apud nos reddidit(43) .

From these texts it is clear that (a) Cluny observed the anniversary of Alfonso's liberation from prison which she associated with her intervention in his behalf and the subsequent concession of the doubled census; (b) observance of the day was instituted, and coupled with the future commemoration [66] of the royal obit, at the king's own request. These points can be clarified somewhat further. First, it must have been with the doubling of 1077, not its later renewal in 1090, that the dies liberationis was inaugurated. Hildebert, to be sure, links his account with Abbot Hugh's visit to Spain, which took place probably in early 1090, and after which -- as we shall see -- Alfonso issued a real privilegio dated Easter 1090, again pledging himself and his successors to payment of the doubled subsidy. But the other Vitae avoid this obvious confusion of original grant and re-grant, and rightly connect the dies with the concession of 1077, which was made when the event was still fresh in men's minds and the imperial sense of gratitude strong. There is, however, no reason to doubt another piece of information Hildebert alone reports, that the king-emperor asked for observance of both his dies exitus de carcere and dies exitus de corpore. The obit request is at least implicit in the charter of 1077; but the dies liberationis must have been requested either in a lost letter to Abbot Hugh or orally through a Cluniac intermediary, very probably the notorious Robert, Alfonso's chief counsellor on ecclesiastical affairs at this time. The creation of such an anniversary, a curious kind of anticipation of the magnum anniuersarium awaiting the obit of this greatest of the abbey's donors, seems to have no parallel in Cluniac history. It is all the more regrettable, therefore, that the liturgical details of its celebration remain completely unknown. At least we know it was festiuum.

When was this day of liberation? The custumals and later statuta do not mention it at all. Since the doubling charter of 1077 was issued on July 10th, it is possible that this was the anniversary of the king's escape. Certainly this fits in with the events of 1072 when they are reconstructed as follows: the king-emperor's capture in January; some months of imprisonment while the Infanta Urraca, the Leonese nobles, and the abbot of Cluny labored to effect his release, which may well have occurred in early July; and then the sojourn at Toledo, until Sancho's death in October(44) . It appears furthermore from the Cluniac biographers quoted above that the observance of Alfonso's liberation continued even after his death. Hildebert's language seems to imply that both it and the obit were commemorated on one and the same day. In this case it might be conjectured that since Alfonso actually died on June 30th or July 1st 1109, and may have been liberated from prison on July 10th, as suggested above, the proximity of these two dates may have led to an amalgamation of obit and dies liberationis in the Cluniac calendar. But this is admittedly sheer surmise. 

[67] 4. The Hispanic References in Udalric's Consuetudines

A very few years after the completion, ca. 1080, of Bernard's Consuetudines, Udalric compiled the second of the great Cluniac or Cluniac-inspired custumals of the last quarter of the eleventh century(45) . This work, which like Bernard's still awaits careful study of its composition, is generally thought to have appeared by 1085, and perhaps as early as 1083, although Hauviller places Book III as late as 1087 (46) . It draws freely upon Bernard, with many changes in order and content, and with new material reflecting either the passage of the years or different sources of information. Between Bernard's and Udalric's notices of the Leonese intercessions there are certain differences. Udalric, writing for the German priories, is less detailed on customs peculiar to the mother abbey, omitting entirely Bernard's sections on anniversary commemorations. He is also less informative on matters Hispanic: he has only three such passages as against Bernard's five; he leaves out all mention of Fernando I's obit; and as for major anniversaries, he adduces only the example of Emperor Henry II, without any reference to the display of ornamenta(47) . He cites however in somewhat the same words as his predecessor the daily prebenda commemorating Fernando, Sancha and the reges (48) .

As we have seen, Bernard limits the Hispanic collect in ferial High Masses to the period between the Easter octave and Michaelmas, and has it offered pro regibus Hispaniarum aliisque principibus. But Udalric describes it as said throughout the year pro regibus Hispaniarum per uices(49) . For Bernard this is the fifth collect, for Udalric the seventh. While Bernard loosely includes among the collects of Morrow Masses of the Dead the Omnipotens sempiterne Deus and has it said pro cuidam fratri et regibus Hispaniarum et patri domni abbatis, Udalric provides a carefully drawn up ordo collectarum for these Masses, in which he assigns sixth place to the Omnipotens sempiterne Deus as recited solely pro regibus Hispaniarum; and seventh place to an unidentified collect [68] recited pro regina Hispaniarum et pro sororibus et aliis feminis familiaribus (50) .

Now certain of these variations between the two custumals can doubtless be accounted for satisfactorily as due either to Udalric's incompleteness -- which led his original patron, Abbot William of Hirsau, to produce his own Consuetudines Hirsaugienses (51) -- or his deliberate neglect of topics irrelevant to the needs of the monasteries his work addresses. This may explain the mention of Henry II's anniversary, which would interest German readers, as Fernando's would not; doubtless it also lies back of the entire silence regarding the Fernandine obit, which Bernard had emphasized and which was surely still being observed at Cluny, and the dropping of the quidam frater and Dalmace de Semur from the Morrow Masses pro defunctis. On the other hand, Udalric throws light on how the prayers for the reges Hispaniarum in the ferial Masses were expected to continue: per uices, i. e., for each succeeding monarch in his turn(52) . But his divergences from Bernard in extending the Hispanic collect in ferial High Masses to the whole year; his different order of the Hispanic collects in these and in the Morrow Masses of the Dead; and the insertion among the collects for the dead of one pro regina Hispaniarum et pro sororibus et aliis feminis familiaribus; must be attributed to a post-Bernardine revision of the Leonese provisions. When and why were these changes made?

If, as concluded above, the Consuetudines cenobii Cluniacensis date after 1077 and Udalric's Consuetudines appeared ca. 1083-85, we have a period of only a decade in which to place the new arrangements. One possible clue presents itself in the collect pro regina Hispaniarum, etc. Udalric's language here abridges several sentences in the parallel chapter of Bernard which assert "Quas dicet [deputata est] sororibus nostris et aliis feminis familiaribus nostris... similiter quoque officium facimus pro regina uel pro alia femina familiari nostra. Quod si anniuersarius sit pro regina uel comitissa, praemissa Quaesumus, Domine sequitur Praesta, Domine"(53) . Bernard's alternatives here of regina uel... alia [69] femina, regina uel comitissa effectively destroy any assumption that he or his copyists might have inadvertently suppressed Hispaniarum after regina. Thus the Udalric text represents a genuine change in the meaning of regina from a general to a specific application; and it is noteworthy that the use of the singular connotes a single individual, not as with the reges Hispaniarum, a succession.

Who was this deceased queen-empress of the Spains now newly assigned commemoration in Cluny's Masses of the Dead? Certainly not Constance of Burgundy, Alfonso VI's consort in these years, for she did not die until 1093 and was then granted much more solemn commemoration along with her husband, as the Statuta Hugonis attest (54) . She could be Alfonso's first wife, Agnes of Aquitaine, whose death on June 6, 1078 might have come too late for mention by Bernard (55) . Yet the king-emperor's failure in the diploma of 1077 to mention Agnes among the persons for whose repose he gave the doubled census, and his early re-marriage within less than a year, this time to Constance, make it unlikely that he would have pressed Cluny for so exceptional a memorial to his first consort, and under the title now borne by her successor. Nor did Cluny have reason herself to initiate extraordinary commemoration of a queen of no known special devotion to the abbey who was followed on the throne by Abbot Hugh's own niece. This leaves us with Alfonso VI's mother, the empress of Fernando I, Doña Sancha of Leon; and in my opinion there can be little doubt that she is the regina Hispaniarum of the Udalrician collect.

The precise point, however, between 1077 and ca. 1085 at which this commemoration commenced, it seems impossible to determine. If it resulted from Sancha's inclusion in the diploma of 1077, we should expect it to have been reported by Bernard. No undue interest in his mother can be found in Alfonso's donation charters of Santa María de Nájera (1079) or Santa Coloma de Burgos (1081), where, as we have seen, the parentes cited are in fact the parientes(56) . It might be contended that Bernard was mistaken and should have included the Sanchan collect; but against this is the fact of Udalric's two other significant innovations in the Hispanic intercessory customs, and one of these -- the extension to the entire year of the Hispanic collect in ferial Masses -- constitutes also, like the addition of the regina, an enlargement of the liturgical honors paid the Leonese imperial house. Nor can we dispose of any or all of his variations from Bernard in terms of Udalric's alleged carelessness; indeed, his ordines collectarum for ferial High Masses and Masses of the Dead are more carefully organized than Bernard's. Thus the only conclusion justifiable at the moment is tentative: presumably, [70] within a few years of his original intercessory measures of 1077, and in continuing appreciation of the multa dona from across the Pyrenees, the abbot of Cluny supplemented in several respects the liturgical honors already paid Alfonso VI and his mother. Whether this coincided in time with the foundation of the dies liberationis observance, we have, however, no means of determining.

5. The Imperial Diploma of Easter 1090

The next stage in the history of the Leonese intercessions is contemporary with two further instances of Alfonso VI's devotion to the Burgundian abbey in or about the years 1088-1090: his huge contributions to the construction of Cluny's new church, and his re-grant of the doubled census. The circumstances surrounding both these actions are by no means wholly understood, but are certainly connected with the Almoravid invasion of Spain in 1087 and the Leonese king-emperor's bloody defeat at Sagrajas (Zallaka). The rise of the powerful expansionist empire of the North African sultan Yusuf ibn Tashfin brought with it the abrupt collapse of the system of tributary parias under which enormous quantities of dinars had poured into the imperial Leonese fisc. That this immediately affected the Cluniac census is shown by the fact that Abbot Hugh, probably ca. 1088, sent to Spain his abbatial chamberlain Seguin to reproach the Leonese monarch for his non-payment of the annual subsidy upon which the abbey's economic welfare now so largely depended(57). What may have saved the situation both for Alfonso and Cluny was the unexpected windfall of 30,000 dinars which the Zirite ruler Abdallah of Granada paid the king-emperor in the vain hope of preserving his kingdom from Almoravid annexation and himself from deposition (58) . At any rate, Seguin returned to Cluny with 10,000 talenta, i. e., dinars, for the new abbey church, and with a letter in which Alfonso passionately avowed his boundless affection for Cluny, implored Hugh and his monks to offer prayers for him, and urged the abbot to come to Spain so that he might profit by his counsels(59). The result of this moving epistle was Hugh's one journey to Spain, the first but not the last time an abbot of Cluny pased the Pyrenees (60) . The two men met at Burgos, presumably in early [71] 1090; and from Alfonso's real privilegio, which was issued at Easter in the Castilian capital, after Hugh had left for Burgundy laden with still more Muslim gold for the building of Cluny III, it is evident that the future of the census had been the principal subject of discussion in their conference (61) . In this diploma Alfonso binds himself to faithful discharge of the census, once more pledging himself and his successors to its perpetual payment, but this time securing formal ratification of his promise by an assembly of Leonese-Castilian notables, including Queen Constance, Archbishop Bernard of Toledo, and the bishops and magnates of his realm. In return, as the same pergamino informs us, Abbot Hugh promised the king-emperor to impose by decree (preceptum) upon all his successors at Cluny the perpetual commemoratio uel obsequium of certain members of the dynasty: Alfonso's parents (Fernando and Sancha); his brothers (Sancho II of Castile, Garcia of Galicia); himself and his queen (Constance); and his children.

The roll of spiritual beneficiaries in this imperial proclamation offers thought-provoking comparison with that of the first census donation charter of 1077. Here we have in the persons for whom Alfonso aimed to secure Cluny's lasting commemoration a new tendency to include members of the Navarro-Basque line outside Doña Sancha and the reges of the strict imperial succession. Alfonso and his parents are common to both lists; but in 1090, aside from the fact that the heir presumptive, the Infanta Doña Urraca, would be included among the liberi, there is no reference to the successors post me uenturi. Patently they were thought of as provided for in the collects of 1077. On the other hand, Queen Constance appears as the second Leonese queen-empress for whom after death Cluny was to pray. She, we know, as Abbot Hugh's niece, was the zealous champion of Cluny's interests in Spain and a close collaborator with the monk Robert in the liturgical crisis of 1080; and her alleged responsibility for the cession of Santa María de Nájera in 1079 later gave rise to a controversy which Rome itself had to decide(62) . As for the royal children, in 1090 these would include at least three living daughters, the future queen-empress Urraca, and her illegitimate sisters, Elvira and Teresa(63) . Finally, there are the two brothers, and here we witness a touching final act in the civil wars of twenty years before. By this act Alfonso laid to rest the bitter memories of his defeat and imprisonment at Sancho II's hands, the suspicions of his complicity in his brother's assassination at Zamora, and the famous oath at Santa Gadea in the presence [72] of the Cid. Cluny on her part was engaging to pray for her old enemy, whom the abbey's tradition -- as the Gilo Vita Hugonis demonstrates -- continued to depict a tyrannus(64). Garcia, the youngest of the brothers, and so very briefly the king of Galicia, had lived out his sorry life in chains as Alfonso's prisoner for over a score of years until his death on March 22, 1090 (65), exactly a month before the promulgation of the Easter privilegio and very probably while Abbot Hugh was still in Burgos. Alfonso had directed earlier grants to Cluny to the repose of his parientes in general, but this appears the unique instance, on the morrow of Garcias's death, of his specific concern for Cluny's intercession in behalf of his two ill-fated brothers.

6. The Statuta s. Hugonis abbatis

It must have been not long after his return from the Burgos meeting of 1090 that the abbot of Cluny promulgated the short liturgical ordinance which has been published under the title of Statuta sancti Hugonis abbatis Cluniacensis pro Alphonso rege Hispaniarum tanquam insigni benefactore(66) . This text cannot be regarded as the fulfillment of the intercessory promises Hugh is said to have made Alfonso VI in their discussions on Castilian soil. The Statuta address themselves to all the monks of Cluny, present and future, and impose upon them faithful execution of their prescriptions; they salute Alfonso Hispaniarum rex as a fidelis amicus who has given, and continues to give, to the abbey and to her priories, tanta et talia bona as no other king or prince of former or present times has done; and they describe him as one who both in life and death merits special participation in the abbey's spiritual benefits.

Therefore, in his behalf, during his lifetime, the Statuta order that (i) the psalm Exaudiat te Dominus is to be sung without intermission at Terce; (ii) the collect Quaesumus, omnipotens Deus is similarly to be said at each daily High Mass; (iii) a maundy of thirty poor is to be provided on Maundy Thursday; (iv) on Easter the chamberlain is to feed at least 100 poor; (v) every day at the high table a prebenda of food such as the king himself would eat if dining with the monks is to be served one of the poor, and this is to continue after Alfonso's death; and (vi) in the new abbey church built through the king-emperor's gifts one of the principal altars is to be reserved, Masses said at which are to be for his salvation. After death, it is prescribed that in addition to the daily prebenda, and the Offices, Masses and alms for him, he is to be commemorated by [73] (i) the daily singing of Mass especially for his soul during an entire year at the aforesaid altar; and (ii) by the celebration of his anniuersarium as for the Emperor Henry II -- namely, all bells to be pealed at the Vespers, Office and Mass; the Tract to be sung in copes; the Mass to be celebrated at his own altar; twelve poor to be fed; a portion of food and drink (justitia) to be served the poor for seven days in addition to the daily prebenda at the high table; and the monks to be served a full refection by the sacristan.

The Statuta conclude by declaring that Alfonso's regina and coniunx deuotissima is to share in all these provisions, and is further granted her own maundy of twelve poor on Maundy Thursday and the observance of her anniversary in the same manner as for the Empress Agnes(67) .

The principal questions this document raises are those of its date, relationship to the Burgos conference, and place in the history of Cluniac intercession for the imperial Leonese dynasty. Since it distinguishes Constance's association in her husband's vitalicial intercessions, and her own maundy, from the commemoration of her obit, it follows that the queen-empress was alive at the time. This fixes the terminus ante quem at 1093, the year in which -- according to David, between 3 April and 25 October -- Constance died(68); and removes any temptation to infer from the use of the perfect infinitive in the passage on Alfonso's altar ("in ecclesia beatorum apostolorum Petri et Pauli noua quam ipse de propriis facultatibus construxisse uidetur") that this points to an advanced stage of construction, e. g., that signalized by Pope Urban II's dedication of the chevet in 1095(69) . As for the post quem, this is obviously later than 1088, when Alfonso was contributing to the building, and almost certainly after the 1090 meeting. Thus the date of composition would seem to fall in the period 1090-1093.

For several convincing reasons the Statuta cannot be identified as the preceptum embodying Abbot Hugh's liturgical regulations of which Alfonso [74] VI speaks in his Easter diploma, for the contrast in content and purpose of the two documents bars this conclusion. The 1090 real privilegio is wholly dedicated to the subject of the census and twice mentions the persons to whose spiritual repose the subsidy is directed: in addition to the king and queen, the former's parents and brothers, and the royal children. The Statuta, however, envisage only Alfonso and Constance; although surely subsuming the doubled census among the tanta et talia bona, they do not allude to it, but to the construction of the abbey church. Abbot Hugh's instructions, therefore, for the dynastic conmmemorations, if ever actually written down, have perished.

The true purpose of the Statuta is plain: they are the supreme expression of the gratitude of the abbot and monks of Cluny to their imperial Leonese socius whose lavish benefactions have no counterpart in Cluniac annals. It may be only chance that we possess no similar written ordinance for the commemorations of the German emperors and empresses, but the fact is Hugh's Statuta have only one known precedent, the Statutum by which Abbot Odilo commanded the commemoratio omnium fidelium defunctorum(70). It is to be noted further that the Statuta establish for Alfonso intercessory action over and above that already in existence since 1077; and while Hugh assigns him an anniversary similar to that of Henry II, it should be remembered that his daily commemoration in the Masses of the Dead and in the intention of Masses sung at his altar in the abbey church, assured him of more frequent intercessory prayer than ever offered for this greatest of the German benefactors. And finally, we may conclude that the primary inspiration of the Statuta was gratitude for the subsidizing of the new church within the walls of which Cluny was to offer the most elaborate and solemn of her intercessions for any medieval ruler. 

7. The Post-Alfonsine Evidence

With the death of Alfonso VI, on June 30 or July 1, 1109, we can assume that liturgical intercession for the monarch took the form prescribed in the Statuta Hugonis, with the year of Masses and Offices of the Dead and thenceforth solemn commemoration of the imperial anniversary. If we are right in thinking that, according to Hildebert of Lavardin, the latter was combined with the previous observance of the dies liberationis, this must have been ordered not by Abbot Hugh, who died two months before the monarch, but by the next abbot, Ponce de Melgueil. Peter the Venerable, writing soon after 1142 his Liber de miraculis , attests the lively gratitude Cluny still felt towards her greatest benefactor with evidence brought home from Spain of the efficacy of Cluny's prayers for [75] him. This is a story circulating in the Rioja of which Peter knew before crossing the Pyrenees, but now heard in person near Estella from the lips of Pedro Engelbertiz himself. This old soldier of Alfonso's, now a monk of Nájera, had had a vision a few years previously in which he was visited by several spirits of the dead; and one of these informed him that King Alfonso after his death had been suffering torments among the other sinners until he was rescued (once again!) by the intercessions of the monks of Cluny: "aliquandiu tormentis acribus inter reos excruciatus, postmodum a Cluniacensibus monachis inde sublatus est" (71) .

No doubt the monks of Burgundy long continued their daily prayers for the souls of Alfonso VI and the reges Hispaniarum in the great choir of SS Peter and Paul; but well before the mid-twelfth century the age of Cluniac-Leonese friendship can be looked upon as drawing to its close. The dearth of new custumals or other pertinent evidence may exaggerate this impression, and it is possible that thorough search of the surviving Cluniac liturgical manuscripts of the mother house and her dependencies, especially the Iberian ones, might be rewarding. But the collapse of the imperial tradition in later twelfth-century Spain, the virtual termination of the annual census, and the diversion of royal Leonese and Castilian interest from a declining Cluny to Cîteaux and other new monastic movements, usher in a different age. Alfonso VI's daughter Urraca (1109-1126) possessed her father's faith in the Burgundian abbey but her troubled reign, with its internal disorders, long wars against her husband, King Alfonso el Batallador of Aragon, and acute financial distress, drastically reduced the generosities to Cluny, even though Urraca did cede certain monasteries, churches and lands for the remedium anime of herself, her parents and her first husband, Count Raymond of Burgundy(72) . Doña Urraca's son, Alfonso VII (1126-1157), displayed no special affection at all for Cluny and in 1142 negotiated with Abbot Peter the Venerable the reduction of his grandfather's doubled census to a mere 200 maravedís a year(73) . Yet in 1149, when giving the priory of Santa María de Nájera a tenth of the portazgo of the town of Logroño, Alfonso VII showed himself not entirely unmindful of the ancient family bond with Cluny. For he dedicated this gift to the clothing of the Riojan monks in the expectation that they in turn "in suis orationibus cotidie mei et parentum meorum singulariter faciant mentionem"(74) . Nevertheless, as this very donation illustrates, royal gifts now tended to be relatively minor and offered to [76] Cluny's peninsular dependencies rather than to the mother house. Alfonso VII's successors to his divided kingdom, Fernando II of Leon (1157-1188) and Alfonso VIII of Castile (1158-1214), and for the rest of the Middle Ages the kings of the reunited Leon-Castile, continued to make petty grants of land or privileges to Nájera, San Zoil de Carrión and other Cluniac houses in their domains; but all these ranked far below the munificent benefactions that evoked the great intercessory concessions of the epoch of Abbot Hugh I. Perhaps it was with some sense of this fading of the old dynastic tie between Cluny and the King-Emperors of Leon that Alfonso VIII, granting in 1165 the heredad of Villagiga to the Cluniac priory of San Isidro de Dueñas, looked back across the years to a policy neither he nor his successors would emulate: "hoc facio pro remedio animarum omnium parentum meorum qui especiali deuotione Cluniacensem ecclesiam dilexerunt"(75) .

The full meaning of Cluniac intercessory ties with the Leonese king-emperors of the eleventh and twelfth centuries must of course be determined within the larger framework of medieval Hispano-Cluniac relations as a whole. We may, however, conclude with the hope that as pursued in these pages the subject has revealed its utility for at least four lines of historical investigation:

(i) the plotting of the actual course of the close personal, confraternal, liturgical and financial steps by which Cluny came to ally herself below the Pyrenees principally with imperial Leon, and above all with Alfonso VI, in the era of her most significant penetration into the Peninsula;

(ii) clarification of the predominantly intercessory rather then reformist character if this relationship, despite the cessions of Leonese-Castilian houses and the continuing leaven, since Sancho el Mayor's time, of the customs and ideals of Cluniac Benedictinism;

(iii) demonstration of the prominence of the imperial Leonese dynasty in Cluny's daily liturgical life and the swiftness with which the great donations found intercessory response, itself an index of the high degree of liturgical and customary fluidity existing under Abbot Hugh(76) ;

(iv) the provision of useful clues to the chronology and purpose of the pertinent passages in the custumals and other Cluniac and Hispanic texts.

University of Virginia
August, 1960 

Notes for Chapter 8

1. There is no satisfactory comprehensive treatment of Hispano-Cluniac history; for the general problems, and more recent bibliography, consult Pierre DAVID, Études historiques sur la Gálice et le Portugal du VIe au XIe siècle (Lisbon and Paris, 1947; Collection portugaise publiée sous le patronage de l'Institut Français au Portugal, vol. 7), pp. 341-439; J. PÉREZ DE URBEL, Los monjes españoles en la Edad Media (2nd ed., Madrid, 1954), 2, chap. 6; M. DEFOURNEAUX, Les français en Espagne aux XIe et XIIe siècles (Paris 1949), pp. 17-49; G. de VALOUS, Cluny in D.H.G.E., t. 13, 1956, cois. 144-149, 171-172.

[To the Research Committee of the University of Virginia I am indebted for financial aid in the preparation of this paper.]

2. Willibald JORDEN, Das cluniazensische Totengedächtniswesen (Münster in Westf., 1930; Münsterische Beiträge zur Theologie, Hit. 15), esp. pp. 112-113. See also G. SCHREIBER, Kluny und die Eigenkirche. Zur Würdigung der Traditionsnotizen des hochmittelalterlichen Frankreich in Archiv für Unkundenforschung, t. 17, 1941-2, pp. 370-405.

3. Rich materials for the study of Cluniac societas in its intercessory no less than reformist implications exist in the charters, narrative sources, custumals, and other texts. That this confraternity was not only with laymen but also numerous churches and monasteries is proved by the rotulus entitled Hae sunt societates ecclesiarum et monasteriorum ecclesiae siue abbatiae Cluniacensi conjunctarum in Bullarium sacri ordinis Cluniacensis (ed. P. SIMON, Lyons 1680), pp. 225 (erroneously, 215) to 230 (erroneously, 220). This appears to contradict C. H. TALBOT, Odo of Saint-Remy, a Friend of Peter the Venerable in G. CONSTABLE and J. KRITZECK, ed., Petrus Venerabilis, 1156-1956 (Studia Anselmiana, fasc. 40), 1956, p. 22, who regards such ties as rare.

4. Hermann HÜFFER, Die leonesischen Hegemoniebestrebungen und Kaisertitel in Bd. 3 of Gesammelte Aufsätse zur Kulturgeschichte Spaniens (ed. H. FINKE, Münster in Westf., 1931), pp. 337-384; R. MENÉNDEZ PIDAL, El imperio hispánico y los cinco reinos (Madrid, 1950); J. A. MARAVALL, El concepto de España en la Edad Media (Madrid, 1954); Cl. SÁNCHEZ ALBORNOZ, España, un enigma histórico (Buenos Aires, 1956),. 2, pp. 373-386.

5. Good accounts in E. SACKUR, Die Cluntacenser in ihrer kirchlichen und allgemeingeschichtlichen Wirksamkeit bis sur Mitte des elften Jahrhunderts (Halle a. S., 1892-94), 2, pp. 101-113 (now somewhat dated); J. PÉREZ DE URBEL, Sancho el Mayor de Navarra (Madrid, 1950), pp. 297-321; idem, Monjes españoles, loc. cit.

6. In forthcoming papers I propose to examine at length the ecclesiastico-political factors determining Cluny's Leonese alignment and the major consequences for the geographical distribution of its peninsular holdings.

7. Text of Necrologium in SACKUR, I, pp. 383-386. Sancho's name is also lacking among the royal and imperial amici of Cluny in the so-called Consuetudines Farfenses in Br. ALBERS, ed., Consuetudines monasticae (Stuttgart-Vienna, 1900), I, p. 205.

8. Odilo, Epp. 2-3 in P. L. 142, 941-943; PÉREZ DE URBEL, Sancho el Mayor, pp. 453-454.

9. Citation of Bernard of Cluny's Consuetudines is by part, chapter, and page, to the edition of Marquard HERRGOTT, Vetus disciplina monastica (Paris, 1726), pp. 134-364, which badly needs replacing by a modern annotated text. The commonly used title found in Herrgott of Ordo Chmiacensis does not occur in the chief MS (Paris, B, N. 13875) which has Consuetudines cenobii Cluniacensis; cf. Rose GRAHAM, English Ecclesiastical Studies (London, 1929), pp. 5-7, 25-29; A. WILMART, Cluny (MSS liturgiques de) in D.A.C.L., t. 3, pt. 2 (1948), col. 2084.

10. Bernard, Consuet., I, 26 (200).

11. Ibid. The full title of the collect, not given by Bernard, is supplied by the slightly later Consuetudines of Udalric, I, 7 in P. L. 149, 652B.

12. Ibid.; cf. also I, 13 (158).

13. I, 74, sect. 27 (272); sect. 63 (278). See also E. MARTÈNE, De antiquis ecclesiae ritibus (2nd ed., Antwerp, 1736-38), t. 4, pp. 470-477; G. de VALOUS, Le monachisme clunisien des origines au XVe siècle (Ligugé, 1935), I, pp. 326-372.

14. I, 51 (246); not, as commonly, Henry I (e.g., GRAHAM, p. 38) but Henry II primus Henricus imperator. On Cluny's relations with the Emperors Henry II and Henry III, see SACKUR, 2, pp. 155-290; VALOUS, D.H.G.E., t. 13, cols. 44-49),

15. For the full refection (plena refectio) of fish and spiced honeyed wine (pigmentum) see I, 51 (246). Cf. D. KNOWLES, The Reforming Decrees of Peter the Venerable in Petrus Venerabilis , p. 7.

16. I, 13 (158): "Praeterea tres fratrum praebendae dantur quotidie ad eleemosynam quae et in refectorio super mensam principalem apponuntur; scilicet pro beatissimo patre d. Odilone, pro Henrico primo imperatore, pro Fredelano et eius uxore et regibus Hispaniarum."

17. I, 41 (232): "Et ab octauis Paschae usque ad festum s. Michaelis. A domo tua, quaesumus, Domine. Quarum quinta et pro regibus Hispaniarum aliisque principibus..."

18. I, 42 (233): " Quod si nullum praecessit officium per omne iam dicti temporis spatium, post duodecim lectiones, Deus, qui inter apostolicos prima dicitur, et similiter illae duae adimuntur, et caeterae in ordine supradicto sequuntur. Haec missa, Deus, qui inter, proprie deputata est sanctis patribus nostris pontificibus Romanis: Omnipotens sempiterne Deus, in cuius, cuidam fratri nostro et regibus Hispaniarum et patri domni abbatis..." For Cluny's celebration of the anniversary of Count Dalmace de Semur, father of Abbot Hugh I, cf. A. BERNARD and A. BRUEL, eds., Recueil des chartes de l'abbaye de Cluny (Paris, 1876-1903), 4, nos. 2940, 3346; 5, no. 3742 (esp. p. 94),

19. I, 51 (246): "Ad eumdem apocrisiarium pertinet in quibusdam anniuersariis plenam refectionem fratribus exhibere de piscibus uidelicet atque pigmento; in anniuersario scilicet primi Henrici imperatoris et alterius Henrici, domni quoque Fredelani regís Hispaniae, et domnae Adelaidis augustae, domnae quoque Agnetis imperatricis, in quorum quoque memoriis, si qua in thesauris ecclesiae de ipsorum donariis habentur ornamenta, pro illorum memoria commendanda superponuntur."

20. 2, 32 (355-356): "Sciendum tamen quia in octauis Dominicae Natiuitatis usque post octauum diem, nullum sit in nocte officium, excepto uno solo in crastino festiuitatis Innocentium, quod d. Hugo abbas fieri instituit pro Fredelano Hispaniarum rege qui multa bona loco Cluniacensi contulit, pro quo etiam sicuti pro abbatibus nostris sit; praecepit ut singuli sacerdotes qui ad hoc idonei uidentur missas ipsa die pro eo cantent." On the basis of the Historia Silense, ed. Fr. SANTOS COCO (Madrid, 1921), pp. 89-91, and in complete neglect of this passage of Bernard, the death of Fernando I has universally been placed on December 27th; I expect to demonstrate shortly that the author of the Silense was confused, and that the true obit was the 29th, as observed at Cluny.

21. R. MENÉNDEZ PIDAL, Imperio hispánico, pp. 86-89, 99-113; idem, La España del Cid (4th. ed., Madrid. 1947), 2, pp. 725-731.

22. Cf. Bernard, Consuet. I, 51 (246), quoted supra, n. 19; references to the other sources listed will be found below.

23. See the details of imperial commemorations in the Consuetudines Farfenses, ed. ALBERS, pp. 201-202; of those of abbots, pp. 201-202, 204.

24. Ibid., p. 204.

25. GRAHAM, p. 29; VALOUS, Monachisme Clunisien , i, 20 suggests 1063-1087; but in D.H.G.E., t. 13, col. 135, says ca. 1063.

26. M. MARRIER, Bibliotheca Cluniacensis (Paris, 1614), Notae, p. 23, as cited by GRAHAM, p. 26, n. 3.

27. Bernard, Consuet., I, 51 (246); F. L. BAUMANN, ed., Necrologia Germaniae, I (M.G.H. Berlin, 1888), t. I, pp. 128, 659.

28. MENÉNDEZ PIDAL, España del Cid, I, p. 165.

29. DAVID, Études, pp. 399-430; idem, Le pacte successoral entre Raymond de Galice et Henri de Portugal in Bulletin hispanique, t. 50, 1948, pp. 275-290.

30. Cf. MENÉNDEZ PIDAL, España del Cid, I, pp. 165-192.

31. Ibid.; but n. 4, p. 175 wrongly rejects the account of Cluniac aid as anachronistic. L. G. de VALDEAVELLANO, Historia de España, t. I, pt. 2 (2nd ed., Madrid, 1955), pp. 317-320, curiously ignores Cluny's important role in the crisis of 1072. On Cluny's prayers for the fettered emperor, see P. L. 159, 866B, 912C; Bibl. Clun., 443, 452; A. L'HUILLIER, Vie de Saint Hugues (Paris, 1880), p. 584; G. CIROT, Une Chronique Léonaise inédite in Bulletin hispanique, t. II , 1909, p. 273.

32. Charles de Cluny, t. 4, no. 3452. 33

33. Ibid., no. 3508.

34. Ibid., no. 3540.

35. Ibid., no. 3582.

36. Ibid., no. 3441 (wrongly dated); P. L., t. 159, cols. 938-939.

37. Ibid., no. 3509, esp. pp. 627-628.

38. DAVID, Études, p. 387, following Sandoval, places her death on June 6, 1078.

39. On the chronology of the Vitae of Abbot Hugh, I have followed T. SCHIEFFER, Notice sur les vies de Saint Hugues, abbé de Cluny in Le Moyen Age, t. 46, 1936, pp. 81-103, but my collation of the Alfonsine passages has both strengthened doubts of his prematurely precise datings and suggested the desirability of meticulous analysis of the component materials and complex interrelationships of the Hugonic biographies.

40. Text in A. L'HUILLIER, Vie de Saint Hugues , pp. 574-618; the words quoted are on p. 584.

41. P. L. 159, 912C.

42. P. L. 159, 867A.

43. Bibl. Clun., cols. 452-453.

44. In my opinion, MENÉNDEZ PIDAL, España del Cid, I, pp. 175-176 and VALDEAVELLANO, I, pt. 2, pp. 317-3l8, fail to allow sufficient time for the length of Alfonso's stay in prison and to the period during which his supporters in Spain and Cluny labored for his release; I hope to discuss this at an early date.

45. Text in P. L. 149, 635-778; cf. GRAHAM, pp. 25-28, and on the MSS, WILMART, D.A.C.L., 3, pt. 2, col. 2089.

46. GRAHAM, loc. cit.

47. The three passages are: I, 6 (P. L. 149, 651D); I, 7 (652B); 3, 24 (767A). For Henry II, 3, 12 (756D).

48. 3, 24 (767A): "praeterea trium fratrum praebendae dantur ad eleemosynam, scilicet pro beatissimo patre dom. Odilone, pro Henrico primo imperatore, pro Fredelando et eius uxore et regibus Hispaniarum".

49. I, 6 (651D): "Quarta [collecta] est pro regibus aliisque principibus; quinta pro episcopis et abbatibus nostris; sexta pro familiaribus nostris; septima pro regibus Hispaniarum per uices, et aliae collectae."

50. I, 7 (652B): "...quarta [collecta] pro familiaribus nostris; quinta pro fratribus; sexta pro regibus Hispaniarum, Omnipotens sempiterne Deus in cuius humana conditio; septima pro regina Hispaniarum et pro sororibus et aliis feminis familiaribus..."

51. P. L. 150, 929C-D.

52. On the meaning of per uices, cf. also Madrid, Archivo Histórico Nacional, MS 258: Archivo de Sta. Maria de Naxera. Privilegios y cartas reales, t. I, fols. 166r-166v; this real privilegio of Alfonso VII of January 30, 1149 (era 1180 is incorrect) records the gift of a tenth of the portazgo of Logroño "...deo et ecclesie sancti Petri de Cluniaco et domno Petro ejusdem ecclesie abbati ecclesie quoque sancte marie de Naiara qui deo ibi seruiunt et in perpetuum seruient. singulis annis uestiendis. ut in suis orationibus cotidie mei et parentum meorum singulariter faciant mentionem..."

53. Bernard, Consuet., I, 42 (233).

54. See infra, sect. 6.

55. DAVID, Études, p. 387.

56. See nn. 34-35, supra.

57. See Alfonso's letter to Hugh in Chartes de Cluny, 4, no. 3562, with wrong date.

58. MENÉNDEZ PIDAL, España del Cid, I, pp. 392-396; the date 1090 here assigned seems to me somewhat dubious.

59. See n. 57.

60. See my articles The Spanish Journey of Abbot Ponce of Cluny in Studi in onore di Giorgio La Piaña, Ricerche di storia religiosa, t. i, Rome, 1957, pp. 311-319; and Peter the Venerable's Journey to Spain in Petrus Venerabilis, pp. 163-175.

61. Chartes de Cluny, 4, no. 3638; P. L. 159, 973-974.

62. DAVID, Études, pp. 388-423; P. KEHR, Papsturkunden in Spanien. II. Navarra und Aragon, 2. Urkunden und Regesten, pp. 51-52, in Abhandlungen der Gesellschaft der Wissenschaften zu Göttingen, philolog.-hist. Kl., N. F., t. 22, I (Berlin, 1928).

63. L. VÁZQUEZ de PARCA, Alfonso VI in Diccionario de Historia de España (Madrid, 1952), I, p. 110, col. I lists the more important of the children.

64. L'HUILLIER, Vie de Saint Hugues, p. 584; also, Epitome, P. L. 159, 912C.

65. MENÉNDEZ PIDAL, España del Cid, I, 203-204.

66. P. L. 159, 945-946; incorrectly listed ca. 1070 by Chartes de Cluny, 4, no. 3442.

67. P. L. loc. cit., 946C.

68. DAVID, Études, p. 389.

69. Kenneth J. CONANT, Carolingian and Romanesque Architecture, 800 to 1200 (Harmondsworth, Middlesex , 1959; The Pelican History of Art, vol. 13), p. 116. In the abbatial preceptum of 1155-56 (Chartes de Cluny, 5, no. 4183) establishing certain liturgical intercessions for Henry II of England after his death, Peter the Venerable speaks of the king's grandfather, Henry I, as "Donis autem multiplicibus et magnis omnes jam dictos (latinos reges) exsuperans, etiam majorem ecclesiam a rege Hispanorum Aldefonso inchoatara singulari opere inter universas pene tocius orbis ecclesias consummavit". But this is not to be taken seriously: Henry I's census of 1130 or 1131 (Chartes de Cluny, nos. 4015-4016), giving the abbey an annual census of 100 marks of silver, cannot compare with the 2000 gold dinars of Alfonso VI; and, as for the building of the church, Henry I's doubtless substantial contributions are placed in more accurate proportion by the unknown Cluniac who wrote on the back of this charter (4183) the words: "De rege Henrico primo Anglie, basilice nove nostre precipuo constructore post regem Hispanie."

70. P. L. 142, 1037-1038.

71. Bibl. Clun., 1293-1296; P. L. 189, 903-908.

72. Anselm G. BIGGS, Diego Gelmirez, First Archbishop of Compostela, pp. 65-139 in The Catholic University of America, Studies in Mediaeval History, New Series, vol. 12 (Washington, 1949). For Urraca's Cluniac charters, see, e. g., A. de YEPES, Corónica general de la Orden de San Benito (Irache, 1609-1621), t. 6, Apénd., pp. 462r-v, escr. xviii; F. Fita, Primer siglo de Santa María de Nájera in Boletín de la R. Academia de la Historia , t. 26, 1895, pp. 264-266.

73. BISHKO, Peter the Venerable's Journey to Spain, pp. 169-170.

74. Cf. n. 52.

75. Antonio SUÁREZ de ALARCÓN, Relaciones genealógicas de la casa de los marqueses de Trocifal (Madrid, 1656), Apénd., p. 10, escr. xvii.

76. For other instances of Hugh I's liturgical or customary innovations, see Bernard, Consuet., I, 23 (188-189); I, 24 (195, 198); 2, 9 (297); 2, 24 (332); 2, 25 (334); 2, 30 (347): 2, 31 (351).