Version classiqueVersion mobile
OpenEdition Books

Écritures de l’espace social

 | 
Didier Boisseuil
, 
Pierre Chastang
, 
Laurent Feller
, 
et al.

2e section. Ordonner choses et mots

Circles of Affection in Cluniac Charters

Barbara H. Rosenwein

Texte intégral

  • 1 Recueil des chartes de l’abbaye de Cluny, ed. A. Bernard and A. Bruel, 6 vols, Paris, 1876-1903 [h (...)

1When François Bange began a discussion of the meaning of ager and villa in the Maconnais, he gave an example from a typical charter in the archives of Cluny: “Domino fratribus Eurolt et uxore sua Doddano, entores, ego Tetboldus et uxor sua Ermengardis, Teotrada, Franna, venditores, vendidissimus nos vobis vinealo cum vinea in pago Matisconense, in agro Galuniacense, in uilla Castello, ubi in Belucia vocant. Terminat de uno latus et uno fronte terra Sancto Vincenti, de alio latus terra Sancto Petro et ad ipso emtore, in alio front terra Rannolt.”1

  • 2 F. Bange, “L’ager et la villa: structures du paysage et du peuplement dans la région mâconnaise à (...)

2This charter, Bange pointed out, could stand for all: “Quelle que soit la nature de la mutation foncière, vente, échange ou don, entre laïcs ou avec des clercs, ce sont toujours les mêmes éléments qui reviennent à travers plusieurs milliers d’actes: désignation de la nature du bien foncier en question, sa localisation, la description de ses confines. [...] C’est de cet ensemble de données sèches et répétitives que nous allons extraire la matière de notre étude.”2

  • 3 CLU 75: “To my beloved wife Doddana. I indeed in the name of God Euraldus [=Eurolt of CLU 76], out (...)

3For his purposes, Bange was quite right to emphasize the “stereotypical” nature of the charter formulae. Nevertheless, this dry and banal charter, drawn up in March 902, had been preceded by another in February of the same year that concerned two of the same principals and the same ager and villa. It too described property, location, and boundaries. But it was not dry. It was, in fact, quite full of feeling: “Dilectta uxore mea nomen Doddano, ego quidem, in Dei nomen Euraldus, in pro hamore et bona volencia tua mihi bene servisti, propterea dono tibi res qui sunt sitas in pago Matisconense, in hagro Galuniacense, in villa Castello; in primis dono tibi manso indominicato, cum omni superposito uel acienciis suis; qui ipse curtilus cum supraposito terminat de uno latus et uno front via poblica, de alio latus terra Sancto Petro et Petrono cum heris, de superiore front terra Sancto Vencenti et terra Bernois.”3

  • 4 By my count, there are a total of 1825 charters for this period, eliminating privileges from kings (...)
  • 5 E.g. benevolentia, as in CLU 1323: “ammore et benevolenciad.”
  • 6 I draw here upon a methodology I used in Emotional Communities in the Early Middle Ages, Ithaca, N (...)
  • 7 See, for example, W. M. Reddy, “Against Constructionism: The Historical Ethnography of Emotions,” (...)

4A “beloved” wife; a gift given “out of love and good will”: these are small matters, perhaps. But perhaps not. About a fifth of the charters in the documents of Cluny drawn up between 833 and 994 (the death of Majolus, Cluny’s fourth abbot) use terms of love and affection.4 The words range from nouns like amor to adjectives like dulcis and dilectus. Bona voluntas and its cognates,5 which, when used, were almost invariably paired with amor, evidently had a more sentimental meaning than most of its vernacular equivalents have today.6 Words of affection are always tiny, but that does not make them insignficant. Words like hate and envy are also small, but their impact, when used in an appropriate context, is enormous. William Reddy has coined the term “emotives” to describe their effects.7 They change both the object and the subject. “I love you,” is anodyne enough on paper, but the phrase is capable of creating engagements and marriages in the United States. Why would words like “beloved” and “love” be included in charters if they signified nothing ? They would be just more words for the scribe to write, certainly an inefficient use of his time.

  • 8 Throughout I use the term sponsalitium because the term sponsa is used in these charters. The word(...)

5The purpose of this paper is to explore the significance of words of affection in the charters of Cluny during the period 833–994, which I call the “long tenth century.” We shall see that affectionate words were almost invariably used in charters of sponsalitium–where men transferred property to their brides8–as well as in many gifts to family members: to wives (as in the case above), husbands, sons, daughters, and godchildren. The practice sometimes touched relations between lords and their men as well as between laity and clergy. It entered proceedings between the monks of Cluny and their benefactors and spilled into the religious realm with love of God. And while affection was most often invoked in the case of gifts, it was sometimes used in sales and other transactions.

6It may be objected that charters are poor sources in which to trace affection. This is true. Drawn up by scribes according to formulae, often recopied by scribes with no connection to the original parties, charters are not spontaneous documents. Nevertheless, they reveal, if not “true feelings” (whatever those are !), social expectations about which feelings were appropriate at certain times among certain parties. Nor were they as formulaic as has been claimed: about 20% of the charters used words of affection and the rest did not. There must have been reasons, however ritualized, for putting in such words or leaving them out.

  • 9 Bernardus was the scribe for CLU 63 (898), 66 (899), 67 (900), 68 (900), 75, 76, and 77 (902).
  • 10 See n.91 below. There was only one affectionate charter of sale prior to 943, for reasons explaine (...)

7Both of the charters for the properties at Château cited above were drawn up by the same scribe, Bernardus. In February he used words of affection; in March he did not. Clearly he was following different formulae. But precisely by following those formulae, he was making important statements about the relationship between Euraldus and his wife as distinct from their relationship with sellers at the same place. Bernardus never drew up an affectionate charter of sale,9 but others did.10 Thus a sale might shade into a gift, a gift into a sign of affection. The formulae were malleable. Scribes used them to express what they (and their clients) wanted them to write.

Affection for brides and wives

  • 11 CLU 7 (833?), 86 (904?), 105 (909), 189 (912), 190 (912), 229 (922), 439 (935), 496 (939), 516 (c. (...)
  • 12 However, note that CLU 705 (947) does not mention names or locations of properties.
  • 13 CLU 496 (939): “Dum Deus omnipotens creavit onnia, masculum et feminam, fecit eos sicut dicsit in (...)
  • 14 The location is just north of the border between the pagi of Chalon and Mâcon. For the identificat (...)
  • 15 CLU 9 (863) and CLU 1351 (974) at Outry itself, as well as CLU 86 (904) and CLU 784 (950) from the(...)
  • 16 CLU 9 (863?): “Dilectissimo atque in Christo multum amabilissimo filiolo meo Ariaudo [=Ariot]. Igi (...)
  • 17 CLU 516 (c. 940). Although the charter was redacted in the villa of Outry, it concerned property i (...)
  • 18 CLU 808 (951) (property in the villa of Ozenay) and CLU 885 (954) (property in the villa of Outry) (...)

8During the course of the long tenth century, Cluny’s archives accumulated 25 charters in which husbands gave gifts to their sponsae, their brides.11 (Such charters presumably entered the Cluniac corpus when the properties in question were given to the monastery.12) Of these charters, only one did not use a term of affection: “As it says in the book of Genesis, ‘What God has joined, let no man sunder,’ and so I, Ariot, have affianced [you], Aret; and if God is willing, I want to associate with [you] as my legitimate wife. Thus I give to you...”13 The charter concerns property in the pagus of Chalon, the finis of Ozenay, the villa of Outry.14 There are enough affectionate charters from this same villa to suggest that the affectionless charter of 939 was not due to a lack of formulae but rather was a choice on the part of the scribe, Gitsulfus, or his client, Ariot.15 Indeed, in one of the affectionate charters of an earlier generation at the villa of Outry, Airsenda gave a vineyard and field to her godson Ariot, “most beloved and extremely well loved in Christ... for the love and goodwill [I have for you].”16 Moreover, only a year after Ariot’s affectionless charter of sponsalitium, another was drawn up at Outry by Costabulus for his “dulcissima adque amatisima” bride, Raginbor.17 Ariot was present as a witness. Yet for his own transactions, Ariot (or his scribe, Gitsulfus, who drew up all his charters) preferred a drier style, as are clear in sales from 951 and 954 to him and his wife.18 Clearly the couple constituted a solid institution, but it did not sponsor public words of affection.

  • 19 CLU 7 (833?): “ego... Eldebertus placuit atque convenit huic...carissime et amantissime sponse mee (...)
  • 20 CLU 105 (909). This generous donation, by the father of Abbot Majolus, Fulcherius, to his bride, R (...)
  • 21 CLU 1392 (974), 1426 (976).
  • 22 CLU 86 (904?), 496 (939), 516 (c. 940), 1390 (974).
  • 23 CLU 7 (833?).
  • 24 CLU 189 (912), 190 (912), 857 (953), 969 (955), 1211 (966), 1242 (968–69), 1331 (973), 1412 (975), (...)
  • 25 CLU 229 (922), 439 (935), 659 (944), 686 (946).
  • 26 CLU 725 (948).
  • 27 The calculation for donations of property is based on B. H. Rosenwein, To Be the Neighbor of Saint (...)

9Entirely different were the other couples in the corpus. “To my dearest and most beloved bride”; “my sweetest and very lovable bride, much beloved by me”; “my beloved and very lovable bride... I... Aimulfus, your fiancé, for the love and good will that I have towards you, for that very love, I give to you....”19 These sorts of formulae were widespread: we find them in the county of Apt20 and in the pagi of Autun,21 Chalon,22 Lyon,23 Mâcon,24 Vienne,25 and Viviers.26 The geographical distribution is more dispersed than we should expect. While 72% of the property donated to Cluny before the end of the tenth century came from the Mâconnais, only 46% of the charters of sponsalitium came from that region.27 This suggests nothing about affection; it is surely the result of the Cluniacs’desire to document more securely properties that came from far away. The charters of sponsalitium served as that documentation. Chronological distribution is even, with about half of the charters dating from before 950, the other half afterwards.

  • 28 Dots et douaires dans le haut moyen âge, ed. F. Bougard, L. Feller, and R. Le Jan, Rome, École fran (...)
  • 29 F. Bougard, “Dot et douaire en Italie centro-septentrionale, viiie-xie siècle. Un parcours documen (...)
  • 30 Ibid., 90, document 5: “Dulcissima mihi semper adque amantessima.... dabo tibi sponsa mea propter (...)
  • 31 Ibid., 91, document 7: “propterea dono... in honore pulchritudinis tue.” The document is also in L (...)
  • 32 F. Bougard, Dots et douaires..., op. cit., 92, document 9.

10The evidence of wide geographical and chronological distribution of affectionate charters of sponsalitium in Cluny’s dossier is supplemented by the work of a conference on dowry and inheritance held in 2000.28 Although no scholar at the conference explicitly took up the question of words of love, one of the editors, François Bougard, made sure that such words were at least partially indexed. Documents from Italy look very similar to Cluny’s charters. At Parma in 823, Adeburga was Autramnus’s dulcissima sponsa, to whom he gave property pro amoris tui.29 At Piacenza in 832, Alperga was Raginaldus’s “sweetest to me always and most loved,” to whom he gave a fourth of all of his property “out of affection and love for you.”30 In the Abruzzo, a somewhat later charter (872) spoke of Helegrina, dulcissima sponsa mea, to whom her future spouse gave property “in honor of your beauty.”31 Yet, as in Cluny’s dossier, occasionally a charter of sponsalitium would be dry: such was the case, for example, in 895 at Piacenza, when Eto gave a third of his property to Adelberga without a word of affection.32

  • 33 Formulae Andecavenses in Formulae Merowingici et Karolini aevi, ed. K. Zeumer, Hannover, 1886 (M.G (...)
  • 34 Formulae andecavenses in Formulae Merowingici, op cit, 16, No. 34. See also ibid., No. 35, which s (...)
  • 35 Ibid., 17, No. 40.
  • 36 Formulae Turonenses in Formulae Merowingici, op cit., 142, No. 14; 143, No. 15.
  • 37 Ibid., 163, No. 2; 164, No. 3.

11Formulary books from the late sixth to mid-eighth centuries broaden the chronology, suggesting that the use of words of affection in sponsalitia was not an innovation of the Carolingian period. In the formulary of Angers, the very first model document, a late sixth-century charter of sponsalitium, begins “Dulcissima et cum integra amore diligenda sponsa mea.”33 Another formula from the same set speaks of drawing up a dowry “od dulcissema sponsa.”34 And the final exemplar of a sponsolitium from this formulary begins “dulcissema et cum integra amore diligenda sponsa mea.35 Yet in the formulary of Tours, two model charters of dowry from the mid-eighth century say nothing of affection;36 only the two added in the ninth century speak of the dilecta sponsa.37 It seems, then, that formulae existed for both affectionate and dry charters of sponsalitium, with preference tending towards those mentioning love. This is precisely what we find among the Cluniac charters, suggesting a widespread and venerable practice.

  • 38 CLU 88 (905) (pagi of Lyon and Vienne), 96 (908) (pagus of Autun), 230 (922) (pagus of Vienne), 23 (...)
  • 39 CLU 88. Also of this type are CLU 230, 358, 687.
  • 40 CLU 96. Fiere the wife is termed emtores [sic]. The word emptor in this and the other charters in (...)
  • 41 CLU 233: “dulcissima congiuje mea Adalberga et filio nostro Umberto.”
  • 42 CLU 248 (924-925): “pro remedio animae meae vel parentum meorum, seu senioris mei, vel cunctorum a (...)

12In the Cluniac dossier, and perhaps more generally, charters to sponsae form a coherent genre: sponsalitia. Those to conjuges are less uniform. There are six such charters in the Cluniac corpus.38 The majority, to be sure, are charters of sponsalitium, like the one drawn up for Isaac for his “dulcissima adque amatissima mihi conguga;”39 these come from the pagus of Vienne and suggest that the word sponsa was in that particular locality interchangeable with conjux. Elsewhere, gifts to conjuges were not dowries: one was a gift from a husband to his present wife;40 another was from a husband to his wife and their child: to “my sweetest wife, Adalberga, and our son, Untbertus.”41 Although the series of charters of gifts to conjuges ends by the mid-tenth century, the pairing of an affectionate word with conjux seems to have become automatic enough that in various charters of donation to Cluny, wives were referred to that way: “I give a mansus to Cluny” says (for example) a charter for Leutbaldus “for the salvation of my soul and those of my family members, and my lord, and all my amici, and for Ava, and also for my sweetest wife, Garlinda, now deceased...”42

  • 43 Eleven such charters exist; all use terms ofaffection: CLU 75 (902) (pagus of Mâcon), 197 (914) (p (...)
  • 44 CLU 857 and 858. Another charter of sponsalitium is CLU 668, which expresses the hope that the cou (...)
  • 45 CLU 75. See above, n. 3.
  • 46 CLU 197: “Dilectissima uxore mea Adalacia, ego, in Dei nomen, Rodencus, in pro amore et bone volen (...)
  • 47 CLU 270. The earlier charter is CLU 254.

13Charters on behalf of uxores were similarly varied.43 In several instances, uxor was interchangeable with sponsa, as in the case of Engelardus, who calls his future wife amabile esponsa mea in one charter and dilecta uxor mea in another drawn up a day later. (The scribe is the same for both.)44 However, in other charters, uxor refers to a wife, as we have already seen in the case of Euraldus, who gave a gift to his wife Doddana “out of love and good will for you [who] have served me well.”45 The same was true in a charter drawn up on behalf of Rodencus on behalf of his “most beloved wife Adalacia... out of love and good will [for] you, and because you have served me well and have promised to serve me better henceforth.”46 Leotboldus in 925 or 926 gave his dilecta uxsore mea property in what was evidently a charter of sponsalitium, but in a charter of 928 he gave this same dilecta uxori mea and their son, Leotbaldus, yet more property.47

  • 48 CLU 400 (932). All four charters were drawn up for property in the Mâconnais.
  • 49 CLU 1090 (960). This could possibly be a charter of sponsalitium, were it not for the fact that fe (...)
  • 50 CLU 1601 (982).
  • 51 CLU 1602 (982).
  • 52 CLU 1599-1603, all dated April 982. CLU 1600, however, though probably recorded at the same place (...)
  • 53 CLU 1517 (980, March); CLU 1598 (982, March).
  • 54 CLU 1603.
  • 55 CLU 1599.
  • 56 CLU 1601.
  • 57 CLU 1602. In this charter, the only witness who does not appear to overlap with the witnesses for (...)

14In the charters of Cluny, femina sometimes meant “wife” and sometimes simply “woman.” In four charters it was joined by a word of affection: in a gift made by Albirus on behalf of his dilecta femina and their sons,48 in a gift from Aalborzi to his dilectissima femina mea,49 in a sale to the monastery of Cluny by the dilectisima femina Adaldru and her son Bernart,50 and in another sale to Cluny by the dilectissima femina Guiliriana.51 The latter two charters were drawn up by the same scribe, Girbaldus presbyter, at the same place (the castle of Lourdon), and no doubt on the same day of April 982.52 Why would the scribe refer to Adaldru and Guiliriana as dilectissima? There was no husband here. Girbaldus presbyter had recorded sales to Cluny before, but no one in those documents was “beloved.”53 If we consider the probable sequence of events at Lourdon on that day in April, we may guess at the purpose of the epithets. First, Gotaldus and his wife Rosembergia gave land “to God and his holy Apostles Peter and Paul at Cluny.”54 Then Bernart gave a vineyard “to God and the abovementioned apostles of his, Peter and Paul.”55 Only then did Adaldru and her son Bernart, the donor of the previous act, sell a vineyard “to God and the abovementioned apostles of his, Peter and Paul,”56 while Guiliriana sold an unspecified piece of property “to those same lords (senioribus),” i.e., Peter and Paul, in an act witnessed by Bernart as well as many men who had also given their signa for the charter for Bernart’s gift.57 Thus the affectionate dilectissima softened the meaning of the sales. The women were embraced, as it were, in a circle of charitable gift-giving at Lourdon on that festive April day, even as they were accepting money for their properties.

Family members

  • 58 CLU 505 (939–40): “Dilecta filia mea, nomen Vualtru, igitur ego, in Dei nomen, Beratdus et uxor su (...)
  • 59 CLU 1432 (976): “Dilecta filiola mea, nomine Avia. Ego, in Dei nomen, Doco et uxore sua Tetberga, (...)
  • 60 CLU 765: “Dilecta soro mea Deo sacrata Raimodis, ego Vualterius, pro amore et bona voluntate, dono (...)

15Brides and wives were frequent recipients of terms of affection, but, as we have seen, the words might characterize other relationships as well. Not just brides and wives but also other female family members-daughters, goddaughters, sisters–were mentioned in this way. “To my beloved daughter, named Waltrudis,” reads one such charter, “therefore I, in the name of God Beratdus, and my wife Teoza, your mother, we give to you out of love and good will some of our property in the pagus of Autun.”58 Similarly, Doco and his wife Tetberga gave a field to their “beloved goddaughter, Avia... out of love and because we received you from the font of St. John.”59 Finally, Vualterius was not the only brother who gave property to his “beloved sister... out of love and goodwill.”60

  • 61 I count 57 charters showing affection explicitly for women (as documented above); I count 72 for m (...)
  • 62 Fratri: CLU 407,1256; germani: CLU 26, 61, 37g; nepotes/consanguinei: CLU 12,114, 525, 803, 975, 1 (...)
  • 63 CLU 407: “Dilectisimo fratri meo Johanni, ego igitur Vulmarus, germanus supradicti Johannis, dono (...)
  • 64 CLU 975 (955): “Dilectissimo adque amabilissimo nepoti meo Girfredo. Igitur ego, in Dei nomine, Am (...)
  • 65 CLU 1741: “Dilecto seniore meo, nomine Andreo. Ego Anna, uxor tua, pro amore et voluntate dono tib (...)
  • 66 CLU 43: “Dilecto genero nostro Obtart et uxsore sua Gotestiva, ego quidem, in Dei nomen, Magbodus (...)

16However, affection towards male family members was expressed even more commonly than it was towards females.61 The names of brothers (fratri, germani) and nepotes (nephews, close cousins) were often accompanied by loving adjectives.62 “To my most beloved brother John,” reads a charter of this sort from 932-33, “therefore I, Vulmarus, brother of aforesaid John, give you a field out of love and good will...”63 Or “To my most beloved and most lovable nepos Girfredus. Therefore I, Amolus in the name of the Lord, give you some of my property out of love and good will.”64 Wives often spoke of their husbands as “beloved,” as Anna did in 987-88: “To my beloved husband, Andreus. I, Anna, your wife, give property to you out of love and [good] will.”65 Even sons-in-law were sometimes favored with an affectionate epithet. “To our beloved son-in-law Obtart and his wife Gotestiva. Indeed I in the name of God Magbodus and his wife Utda, out of the love and good will that we have for you, therefore we give you” some property.66

  • 67 CLU 9: “Dilectissimo atque in Christo multum amabilissimo filiolo meo Ariaudo. Igitur ego, in Dei (...)
  • 68 CLU 1278: “Domino frat[r]ibus Fredono, et uxore sua Aaltru, et filiotus Bernardi. Ego Tetelmus et (...)

17Ten charters express affection for godsons (filioli). Consider the one by Airsenda, both “a woman (femina) and a donor,” as the charter identifies her: “To my most beloved in Christ and very lovable godson, Ariaudus. Therefore I... give to you, out of love and good will toward you, a vineyard and a field.”67 Sometimes the relationship with the filiolus meant that others associated with him were also embraced by words of love. Fredonus and his wife and son all seem to have been included when Tetelmus and his wife gave them a field in the pagus of Mâcon “out of the love and good will that we have for [all of] you and because we received you from the font of Saint Mary.”68

  • 69 Charters for sons: CLU 47 (892) (pagus of Bourges), 185 (911–912) (pagus ofMâcon), 222 (920) (pagu (...)
  • 70 CLU 1151 (963): “Dilecto filio meo Girboleto, sacerdote, entores. Ego Dota, pro amore et bona volu (...)
  • 71 CLU 47 (892). (To my beloved son Bartolomeus, presbyter.)
  • 72 CLU 653: “Dilecto filio nostro, nomine Aymoni, nos igitur Ledgerius et uxor mea Berna, in pro amor (...)

18Nevertheless, it was sons who were particularly favored; twenty charters express affection towards them.69 Typical is one drawn up by Dota: “To my beloved son, Girboletus, priest and recipient. I, Dota, for the love and good will I have towards you and because you have served me well and promise [to serve me even] better henceforth, for that love and good will I give to you” property in the Mâconnais.70 But fathers were equally affectionate towards their male offspring; consider Hotarius, who sold some property to his “Dilecto filio meo Bartolomeo presbitero.”71 Couples might express love for their son together: “To our beloved son, Aymo. We, Ledgerius and my wife Berna, out of the love and good will that we have for you, give you some of our property in the pagus of Lyon.”72

19Like charters of sponsalitium, those for sons were widely distributed chronologically. But unlike charters of dowry, those for sons were more localized, the great majority coming from the Mâconnais. Did parents love their sons more in the Mâconnais than elsewhere ? It is unlikely. However, it might be the case that affectionate charters were encouraged there more than elsewhere. We shall soon see a clearer example in the case of sales.

Fideles and other Non-Family Members

  • 73 CLU 418: “Dilectisimo amico nostro Josfredo et uxor sua Josbergi et filiolo nostro Josbert, emtore (...)
  • 74 CLU 1160: “Dilectos atque amabiles amicos vel parentes nostros is nominibus, Girolt et filio suo, (...)
  • 75 CLU 637: “In Dei nomen. Amico nostro Setbalt sacerdote, ego Guilelmos amicus suus et ucsor sua Ger (...)
  • 76 CLU 66: “Dilecto nostro nomine Aymun et uxor sua Uttulgardis, ego Rifredus, Bernol, Teot Gunteldis (...)

20Before turning to sales, however, let us complete our survey of the subjects of affection. We have already looked at filioli, who, like generi, were family members by adoption. The same was true of amici (“friends”) and fideles (faithful dependents, rather badly translated as “vassals”). A charter from 934 makes the point clear with respect to amici: “To our most beloved ‘friend’Josfredus and his wife Josbergis and our godson Josbert, recipients. I, Josbert, and my wife Adeborc, out of the love and good will that we have for you, and because we raised you from the sacred font, and for the salvation of our souls, we therefore, for that very love, give to you some of our property.”73 In this case amicus expressed–or, alternatively, lay behind or reinforced–the relation ship between a married couple and the parents of their godchild. In a charter of 963, amici were numbered alongside family relations: “To our beloved and lovable friends and relations with these names: Giroldus and his son Amalfredus, presbyter, and his brother Sisfredus, recipients. I, Bernoardus, and my wife Constancia have given a piece of arable land to you out of the love and good will that we have for you.”74 In other instances the origins of friendships are more obscure. When, in 943, Guilelmus and his wife gave property to their amicus Setbaldus, it was that relationship alone that justified both their love and their gift: “To our friend Setbaldus, priest. I, Guilelmus his friend, and his [i.e. Guilelmus’] wife Gerberga, out of the love and good will that we have for you... give you some of my property in the pagus of Mâcon.”75 It seems as well that the word amicus might not be used explicitly yet be understood: “To our beloved Aymun and his wife Uttulgardis. I, Rifredus, [along with] Bernol, Teot Gunteldis, Ermna, [and] Blismodus give you a meadow.”76

  • 77 CLU 363: “Dilecto fideli nostro Alberico, ego Bernardus prepositus, pro amore et bona voluntate qu (...)
  • 78 CLU 1039: “Dilecto fidelem nostrum Girberto entore. Ego Berardus et ucsor mea Vuandalmodis, venera (...)
  • 79 CLU 784: “Dilectissimo atque multum amabile fidele nostro, nomine Rotberto, levita, entore, ego, i (...)
  • 80 CLU 1068: “Dilecto in Christo domino Amblardo archiepiscopo. Ego quidem Guilelmus, fidelisque tuus (...)

21Amici signified equals. Fideles did not; they were dependents of lords, rather more like filii, but chosen (at least theoretically). Nine charters in the Cluniac corpus were drawn up on behalf of a “beloved fidelis” (or the equivalent). Thus, in 928 Bernardus gave land to “our beloved fidelis Albericus.”77 In 957, Berardus and his wife acted similarly: “To our beloved jidelis Gerbertus, recipient. I Berardus and my wife Wandalmodis, your venerable lords, give to you some of our property out of our love and good will.”78 When Arsenda and her son sold land in 950, it was to their “most beloved and lovable fidelis, Rotbertus.”79 By contrast, only one charter shows a fidelis–a man named Guilelmus–addressing his lord, Archbishop Amblardus, with a term of affection. As we shall see, this was under very particular circumstances.80

Sales

  • 81 The process is discussed in some detail in B.H. Rosenwein, To Be the Neighbor of Saint Peter.· The (...)

22In 959, the fidelis Guilelmus turned over some of his property in the Auvergne to Amblardus, the archbishop of Lyon, who had just begun a major campaign to obtain, mainly through purchase, the monastery of Ris and many villae to support it. Later Amblardus gave the whole complex to Cluny.81

  • 82 Since, in these charters, emptor might mean simply “recipient,” while vendo might mean simply “han (...)
  • 83 CLU 1078 (960): “Dilecto in Christo fratri Amblardo, Lugdunensis ecclesia; archiepiscopo. Nos quid (...)
  • 84 CLU 1115: “Dilecto in Christo fratri Amblardo Lugdunensis aecclesiae archiepiscopo, nos quidem Rot (...)
  • 85 CLU 1156: “Dilecto in Christo fratri Amblardo Lugdunensis aecclesiae archiepiscopo, nos quidem Rot (...)

23We have seen that sales might be softened by words of affection.82 Amblardus seems to have preferred these sorts of sales, for in every such charter, he was referred to as “beloved.” When Durantius and his wife sold him land and even whole villae in the Auvergne, he was “beloved in Christ, brother Amblardus.”83 He was called the same thing when two couples sold him more land and more villae in 96184 and when still others sold him still more in 963.85

  • 86 The exception is CLU 47; it involves a father selling property to his son, a priest, the transfer (...)
  • 87 For a detailed account, see my forthcoming article, “The Political Uses of an Emotional Community: (...)
  • 88 CLU 113: “venerabilem domnum Bernonem,” CLU 348: “in monasterio Cluniacensi, cui domnus Oddo abba (...)
  • 89 CLU 626 (943), 615 (probably 943), 636 (943), 638 (943), 641 (943); for the dating of CLU 615, see (...)
  • 90 See the discussion of sales at La Chize in Rosenwein, To Be the Neighbor, op. cit., 103-108. Until (...)

24With one exception, sales were not occasions for expressing affection until 943.86 In that year, Cluny’s abbot Aymard orchestrated a series of sales in which–for the first time–the abbot and/or the monks were called “beloved.”87 Hitherto both had been addressed with deference rather than affection, with locutions such as “venerable lord”; “in the monastery of the Cluniacs over whom lord Abbot Odo is seen to preside”; “the church of Saint Peter, sacred to the Lord, where lord Abbot Odo holds rule.”88 Now, in 943, Aymard became dilectus abbatus and the monks of Cluny dilecti seniores in a series of sales of properties at La Chize, a villa near Cluny.89 This new way of addressing the Cluniacs took place at the start of what may be termed a “campagne” to consolidate the monastery’s land-holdings at that villa.90

  • 91 Sales in which love or affection are expressed towards the purchaser (* indicates a sale among fam (...)
  • 92 I arrive at this number by eliminating the two charters to family members and those from 943 perta (...)

25After that, the charter formulae, whether for Cluny or for lay persons, gained a new variant: loving sales, even to non-family members.91 There are a total of 17 affectionate charters of sale in the documents from Cluny.92 Almost all of them originated in the pagus of Mâcon. This suggests that at La Chize the Cluniacs created a new practice–admitting sellers into a circle of affection much like those that were normally confined to family members or to giftgivers and receivers–that remained quite localized

  • 93 See Rosenwein, To Be the Neighbor, op. cit., 190.

26True, there are exceptions; but they serve to prove the rule. The charters for Archbishop Amblardus, drawn up in the Auvergne about twenty years after the sales at La Chize, were written in the penumbra of Cluny. Amblardus came from a family that had been deeply involved with Cluny over a long period of time.93 The Auvergnat sales themselves were intended for eventual gifting to the Cluniacs.

  • 94 CLU 891.
  • 95 CLU 1275.
  • 96 CLU 1431.
  • 97 CLU 1728.
  • 98 H. Zimmermann, ed., Papsturkunden, 896-1046, 3 vols., Vienna, Österreichische Akademie der Wissens (...)

27The other affectionate sales outside of the Mâconnais all lead back to Cluny as well. A sale of property made c. 966–970, though concerning property in the pagus of Autun, was drawn up at Ecussolles, in the pagus of Mâcon. Thus, it, too, was a local gift.94 The one that really did pertain to groups from Autun, drawn up in 970, was a sale to the dilecti of Cluny.95 The one at Le Puy recorded a sale in 976 by Guigo, the prior of the monastery of Notre Dame at Le Puy, of houses (mansiones) within the cloister to his fideles Grimaldus and Anno.96 We know that in 987 Grimaldus gave Cluny his share of these houses–or rather rebuilt houses, since the original ones had burned down–with Guigo present as a witness.97 In 998 the houses were important enough to be listed in Gregory V’s 998 inventory of Cluny’s properties, where Grimaldus was explicitly named.98 It seems likely, then, that the terms of Guigo’s original sale were inspired by Cluny.

God and Church

  • 99 CLU 105. See above, n. 20.
  • 100 See above, n. 58-72.

28Prior to the sales at La Chize, the monastery already had had considerable experience with expressions of love. The monks must have known about the practices of sponsalitium, which were, as we have seen, quite widespread. We even have one such document relevant to the monks’own familial practices: in 909 Majolus’s own father drew up a charter for his bride replete with words like amantissima and dilettissima.99 The monks also doubtless knew about expressions of love to fratri, germani, nepotes, godchildren, and other important family–and artificial family–members.100 It was a matter of course that charters of donation to the monastery would use phrases like “love of God,” “love of Christ,” and “love of St. Peter.” Were these terms so banal, so routine, as to have no importance ? The answer is that all words, even banal ones, are signifiers of meaning. We have already seen that they were not used arbitrarily. If brides and sons were “beloved,” if gifts were given to them out of “love and good will,” then there was good reason to embrace God as well in a giftgiving circle.

29Love of God was not so different from love for a human being; the formulae and even the expectations were quite similar. Compare the following examples:

  1. “Dilectta uxore mea nomen Doddano, ego quidem, in Dei nomen Euraldus, in pro hamore et bona volencia tua mihi bene servisti, propterea dono tibi res qui sunt sitas in pago Matisconense, in hagro Galuniacense, in villa Castello”101
  2. “Domno sacrosanto Petri et Pauli... ego Johanno, presbitero, dono vobis curtilo supraposito, et vinea in uno tenente, qui est in pago Matisconense, in agro Galloniacense, in villa Castello, propter amorem Dei et remedium anime mee.”102
  • 103 As in CLU 197; see above, n. 45.

30Both of these opening formulae come from charters concerned with properties at the same place–Château–and not far apart in time. Both are gifts. Pieces of land in both of these transactions bordered on land of the same man, Bernois, who was present as a witness in the first charter. That charter, which we already saw at the beginning of this study, records a transaction between lay people: Euraldus gives his wife Doddana some of his property “out of love and good will” because of her good service. Sometimes in similar charters, as we have also seen, the affirmation of good service is followed by hope of even “better henceforth.”103

  • 104 CLU 970 (955?): “venit at nos divina conpunccio et amor vel caritas, vel bona voluntas nostra que (...)
  • 105 CLU 1112 (961): “Sacrosancta Dei eclesia locum Cluniaco, qui est in onore Dei et sancti Petri, et (...)
  • 106 CLU 662.

31The second charter concerns non-laity, though the status of the donor does not matter much: John, presbyter, gave Cluny some of his property “out of love of God” and the hope of “the salvation of my soul.” Sometimes in similar documents the “love of God” was supplemented by “good will.” In a few instances, this was explicit, as when Madalbertus and his wife gave Cluny half of their share in a church, moved by “divine compunction and love and charity and the good will that we have toward God and Saint Peter.”104 More frequently love and good will were stated generally, their objects unspecified. Typical is this formula written on behalf of Anno: “To the sacrosanct church of God at Cluny, which exists in honor of God and Saint Peter, and lord Abbot Majolus and the other monks who serve at that place. I, Anno, out of love and good will and for the salvation of my soul and those of my relatives, give to that very house of God some of my property in the pagus of Lyon.”105 This sort of phrase–suggesting that love and good will were general motives for giftgiving–was characteristic as well of transactions among lay people. Thus in 944 Andefredus and his wife gave property in the pagus of Autun to Rotgerius and his wife “out of love and good will”–towards no one in particular.106

Conclusion

  • 107 Most famously announced in L. Stone, The Family, Sex and Marriage in England, 1500–1800, New York, (...)

32Charters recorded not only transfers of property but also how people felt–or were supposed to feel–toward one another. Since about a fifth of the charters of Cluny used words of affection, the fact that such words are lacking in the rest must have significance–the silence must have been deliberate. Certainly such silences were almost never in evidence in charters of sponsalitium. They give the lie-if such still needs to be done–to the notion of the pre-modern loveless family.107 Loveless it may have been in fact, as are many modern families; but love was the expectation and the norm. Love and affection were expressed for husbands and children. They spilled into the charters for godchildren, fideles, God, and Christ.

33Gifts were the moment for most such expressions of love, but sometimes family members made an exception and included words of affection in sales. The monks of Cluny, already involved, as representatives of Saint Peter, in circles of affection that reached out towards the heavenly realm, borrowed from the occasional practices of families to create affectionate sales to the monastery of Cluny. This new “style” was then adopted by others who were involved–or wished to be involved–with Cluny.

  • 108 Discussed in Rosenwein, Emotional Communities, op. cit., 13–15.

34Expressions of affection help tie communities together. It is true that communities are largely constituted by marriages and children, communal feasting, sacramental rites, transfers of property that remind people of one another even after the event is over, and libri vitae that invoke the dearly departed. These are well-known institutions of sociability, working at the level of practical advantage, That is the level at which historians normally remain. But emotions, as cognitivist psychologists tell us, are themselves judgments about advantages.108 They are commitments to the things that we understand to be relevant to our “weal or woe.” They thus give energy and conviction to social life. The affectionate terms in the charters are not “filler,” meaningless claptrap that the historian must filter out. Rather, they are precious indications of certain kinds of affiliations among the members of communities which, at one time or another–either themselves or by association–came in touch with the monastery of Cluny.

  • 109 CLU 373 (929): “Speciale Christi preceptum dilectionem esse nemo qui dubitet.” See also 484 (938).

35The monks knew about the importance of love and good will from numerous charters of donation. Under Abbot Aymard they began to imbricate themselves into the Mâconnais as if they were family members or, at least, amici. At La Chize in 943, at Lourdon in 982, and in other places as well, they–or rather their scribes–found new ways to frame ordinary sales by including affectionate epithets for buyers and sellers. Earthly love was not separate from its heavenly counterpart: dilectus was part of an affective vocabulary that could extend from brides to the abbot of Cluny himself. As a number of the charters explained, dilectio is the “special precept of Christ.”109

Notes

1 Recueil des chartes de l’abbaye de Cluny, ed. A. Bernard and A. Bruel, 6 vols, Paris, 1876-1903 [henceforth cited as CLU followed by the charter number followed (if needed) by the date and pagus in parentheses], No. 76: “To the brethren in the Lord Eurolt and his wife Doddana, buyers, 1, Tetboldus and his wife Eremengardis, Teotradea, [and] Franna, sellers, we sold to you a vineyard [planted] with vines in the pagus of Mâcon, in the ager of Jalogny, in the villa Château, in the lieu-dit Belucia. It borders on one side and on one flank on the land of Saint Vincent [de Mâcon?], on another side [it borders on] the land of Saint Peter [not Cluny, as Cluny was not yet founded] and of the buyer, and on the other flank, land of Rannolt.” I thank Eliana Magnani and her colleagues for sending me the digitized charters of Cluny. For the identification of the place names, see M. Chaume, Les origines du duché de Bourgogne, Dijon, 1925-1937, part 2, fascicule 3,1097.1 dedicate this study to Monique Bourin, pioneer in the topic of rural sociability.

2 F. Bange, “L’ager et la villa: structures du paysage et du peuplement dans la région mâconnaise à la fin du haut Moyen Âge (ixe-xie siècles),” Annales ESC 39 (1984), 530.

3 CLU 75: “To my beloved wife Doddana. I indeed in the name of God Euraldus [=Eurolt of CLU 76], out of love and good will for you [who] have served me well, for this reason I give to you properties that are situated in the pagus of Mâcon, in the ager of Jalogny, in the villa of Château. In the first place I give you a large estate [literally, a lord’s manse] with all upon and connected to it. This estate with all upon it borders on one side and one flank a public road, on the other side the land of Saint Peter and of Petronus and his heirs, while the upper flank [borders on] the land of Saint Vincent and of Bernois. ” The charter goes on to describe another piece of property in the same place which the donor is also giving to his wife, and it concludes with the names of tenants who are also part of the gift.

4 By my count, there are a total of 1825 charters for this period, eliminating privileges from kings and popes, and eliminating as well charters that have been ascribed to a later date by Maurice Chaume, Maria Hillebrandt, myself, and others. Of these, 380 use words of affection, or 21%.

5 E.g. benevolentia, as in CLU 1323: “ammore et benevolenciad.”

6 I draw here upon a methodology I used in Emotional Communities in the Early Middle Ages, Ithaca, N.Y., Cornell University Press, 2006, 43, where I identify words that are paired with emotion words as emotion words in their own right. Note that in contemporary Italian, “ti voglio bene” can mean “I love you”.

7 See, for example, W. M. Reddy, “Against Constructionism: The Historical Ethnography of Emotions,” Current Anthropology 38 (1997), 327.

8 Throughout I use the term sponsalitium because the term sponsa is used in these charters. The word dotalitium is a synonym, deriving from the fact that these documents record a dos, or dowry.

9 Bernardus was the scribe for CLU 63 (898), 66 (899), 67 (900), 68 (900), 75, 76, and 77 (902).

10 See n.91 below. There was only one affectionate charter of sale prior to 943, for reasons explained below.

11 CLU 7 (833?), 86 (904?), 105 (909), 189 (912), 190 (912), 229 (922), 439 (935), 496 (939), 516 (c.940), 659 (944), 686 (946), 705 (947), 725 (948), 857 (989), 969, 1211, 1242, 1331, 1390, 1392, 1412, 1415, 1426, 1427, 1777. CLU 857 is dated 953 by the editors of CLU, but redated to 989 by M. Chaume, “Observations sur la chronologie des chartes de l’abbaye de Cluny,” Revue Mabillon 29 (1939), 81–89, 133–42, here 88. Other gifts to wives not using the word sponsa or its variants will be discussed below.

12 However, note that CLU 705 (947) does not mention names or locations of properties.

13 CLU 496 (939): “Dum Deus omnipotens creavit onnia, masculum et feminam, fecit eos sicut dicsit in libri Genisis: ‘Cot Deus jusit, omo non separet.’Proterea ego Ariot Aret esponsavi, et si Deo placuerit, at legitimum cumjugium sociare volo, proterea dono tibi curtilo et vinea com casa insimul tenente, qui est in paco Capilonense, in fine Osoniacense, in villa Altriaco sedit.” Compare this with the standard formulation, as in CLU 7 (833?): “Cum Dominus omnipotens masculum et feminam ad propagandam multitudinem filiorum copulasset, dicens: ‘Crescite et multiplicamini, et replete terrant,’ipse idem per infinitam bonitatis sue clementiam nuptias adiit, a quas in unum convertit sponsos, atque convivas miraculo divine potentie exilaravit, atque per auctoritatem Evangelii confirmavit, dicens: ‘Quod Deus conjonxit, homo non separen’His et aliis auctoritatibus munitus, ego, in Dei nomine, Eldebertus placuit atque convenit huic carissime et amantissime sponse mee Gontare me ipsum conjungere...” (emphasis mine). Note that CLU 1211 (966) speaks of love, but this sentiment possibly does not apply to the bride: “in pro amore Dei et parentorum nostrorum et amicorum, et secundum legem meam salicam, te sponsavi, sponsa mea, nomen Vandalmunt, et, si Deo placuerit, ad legitimum conjugium sociare volui. In pro ipsa amore, dono tibi de res meas proprias” (I have affianced you, my bride, for love of God and our families and friends and according to my law–the Salic–and, if it is pleasing to God, I wanted to join in legal wedlock. And for this very love I give to you some of my property).

14 The location is just north of the border between the pagi of Chalon and Mâcon. For the identification of the place names in the charter, see Chaume, op. cit., 1002, nn. 14 and 15.

15 CLU 9 (863) and CLU 1351 (974) at Outry itself, as well as CLU 86 (904) and CLU 784 (950) from the finis of Ozenay.

16 CLU 9 (863?): “Dilectissimo atque in Christo multum amabilissimo filiolo meo Ariaudo [=Ariot]. Igitur ego, in Dei nomine, Airsenda femina, donatrix, pro amore et benevolentia tua, dono tibi vinea et campum...” It seems likely that this Ariot was an ancestor of the Ariot of the sponsalitium of CLU 496.

17 CLU 516 (c. 940). Although the charter was redacted in the villa of Outry, it concerned property in Rogiacus, which has not been identified.

18 CLU 808 (951) (property in the villa of Ozenay) and CLU 885 (954) (property in the villa of Outry). The scribe in both these charters was Gislutfus= Gitsulfus. CLU 979 (955) records a court case in which Ariot’s right to a field was challenged and vindicated. Here the scribe was Volfardus.

19 CLU 7 (833?): “ego... Eldebertus placuit atque convenit huic...carissime et amantissime sponse mee Gontare me ipsum conjungere”; CLU 190 (912): “dulcisima adque multum amabile, ad me plurimum diligendum, sponsa mea”; CLU 659 (944): “Dilecta atque multum amabilis sponsa mea, nomine Ermengardis, ego igitur, in Dei nomine, Aimulfus, sponsus tuus, in pro amore et bona voluntate mea que contra te abeo, in pro ipsa amore, dono tibi...”

20 CLU 105 (909). This generous donation, by the father of Abbot Majolus, Fulcherius, to his bride, Raimodis, also involved properties in Aix, Sisteron, and Riez.

21 CLU 1392 (974), 1426 (976).

22 CLU 86 (904?), 496 (939), 516 (c. 940), 1390 (974).

23 CLU 7 (833?).

24 CLU 189 (912), 190 (912), 857 (953), 969 (955), 1211 (966), 1242 (968–69), 1331 (973), 1412 (975), 1415 (975), 1427 (976), 1777 (988).

25 CLU 229 (922), 439 (935), 659 (944), 686 (946).

26 CLU 725 (948).

27 The calculation for donations of property is based on B. H. Rosenwein, To Be the Neighbor of Saint Peter: The Social Meaning of Cluny’s Property, 909-1049, Ithaca, N.Y., Cornell University Press, 1989,199, Table 12.

28 Dots et douaires dans le haut moyen âge, ed. F. Bougard, L. Feller, and R. Le Jan, Rome, École française de Rome, 2002.

29 F. Bougard, “Dot et douaire en Italie centro-septentrionale, viiie-xie siècle. Un parcours documentaire,” in Dots et douaires, op. cit., 90, document 4.

30 Ibid., 90, document 5: “Dulcissima mihi semper adque amantessima.... dabo tibi sponsa mea propter amore dilectionis tue adfectum...”

31 Ibid., 91, document 7: “propterea dono... in honore pulchritudinis tue.” The document is also in L. Feller, A. Gramain, and Florence Weber, La fortune de Karol: Marché de la terre et liens personnels dans les Abruzzes au haut moyen âge, Rome, École française de Rome, 2005,193, document 99.

32 F. Bougard, Dots et douaires..., op. cit., 92, document 9.

33 Formulae Andecavenses in Formulae Merowingici et Karolini aevi, ed. K. Zeumer, Hannover, 1886 (M.G.H. Legum sectio 5-1, Formulae), 5, No. 1. These and the Tours formulae discussed below are treated in some detail, though not for their affective content, in E. Santinelli, “Ni ‘morgengabe’ni tertia mais dos et dispositions en faveur du dernier vivant. Les échanges patrimoneaux entre époux dans la Loire moyenne (viie-viisiècle),” in Dots et douaires....op.cit., 245-75 and in J. Barbier, “Dotes, donations après rapt et donations mutuelles. Les transferts patrimoneaux entre époux dans le royaume franc d’après les formules (vie-xie siècle),” ibid., 353-88. In general, for these formularies see P. Depreux, “La tradition manuscrite des ‘Formules de Tours’ et la diffusion des modèles d’actes aux viiie et ixe siècles,” Annales de Bretagne et des Pays de l’Ouest 111, No. 3 (2004), 55-71 and W. Bergmann, “Die Formulae Andecavenses, eine Formelsammlung auf der Grenze zwischen Antike und Mittlelalter,” Archiv für Diplomatik 24 (1978), 1-53.

34 Formulae andecavenses in Formulae Merowingici, op cit, 16, No. 34. See also ibid., No. 35, which speaks of the cession to a wife “propter amore dulcitudinem suam et servicium.”

35 Ibid., 17, No. 40.

36 Formulae Turonenses in Formulae Merowingici, op cit., 142, No. 14; 143, No. 15.

37 Ibid., 163, No. 2; 164, No. 3.

38 CLU 88 (905) (pagi of Lyon and Vienne), 96 (908) (pagus of Autun), 230 (922) (pagus of Vienne), 233 (922) (pagus of Mâcon), 358 (928) (pagus of Vienne), 687 (946) (pagus of Vienne).

39 CLU 88. Also of this type are CLU 230, 358, 687.

40 CLU 96. Fiere the wife is termed emtores [sic]. The word emptor in this and the other charters in this Cluniac dossier might or might not mean “buyer”; it could signify simply “recipient.”

41 CLU 233: “dulcissima congiuje mea Adalberga et filio nostro Umberto.”

42 CLU 248 (924-925): “pro remedio animae meae vel parentum meorum, seu senioris mei, vel cunctorum amicorum meorum, nec non pro Avanae, sed et pro dulcissimae quondam conjugis meae Garlindae, dono unum mansum.” For other examples of this type, see CLU 408 (932-33) and CLU 1525 (980).

43 Eleven such charters exist; all use terms ofaffection: CLU 75 (902) (pagus of Mâcon), 197 (914) (pagus of Mâcon), 254 (925-926) (pagus of Mâcon), 370 (928) (pagus of Mâcon), 380 (930) (pagus of Mâcon), 668 (945) (pagus of Lyon), 858 (989) (pagi of Mâcon and Lyon), 1137 (962) (pagus ofMâcon), 1161 (963) (pagus of Mâcon), 1413 (975) (pagus ofMâcon), 1425 (976) (pagus of Mâcon). CLU 858 is dated 953 by the editors of CLU, but redated to 989 by Chaume, “Observations sur la chronologie” op. cit., 88. It is odd that all but one charter using the term uxor were connected to the pagus of Mâcon.

44 CLU 857 and 858. Another charter of sponsalitium is CLU 668, which expresses the hope that the couple be joined in matrimony. The other charters that may well be sponsalitia, although they use the term uxor for the fiancee and say nothing explicit about marriage, are CLU 254, 380, 1161, and 1413.

45 CLU 75. See above, n. 3.

46 CLU 197: “Dilectissima uxore mea Adalacia, ego, in Dei nomen, Rodencus, in pro amore et bone volencia tua, et pro bene servisti, et inantea melius deservire promisisti.” There is a variant on this in CLU 1425: “pro amore et bene voluntate que contra te abeo, et pro bona servisti que mihi servisti et in alia promisisti.” (For the love and good will that I have for you and because of the good service you have done for me and have promised to do in other matters.)

47 CLU 270. The earlier charter is CLU 254.

48 CLU 400 (932). All four charters were drawn up for property in the Mâconnais.

49 CLU 1090 (960). This could possibly be a charter of sponsalitium, were it not for the fact that femina was apparently not used in such charters.

50 CLU 1601 (982).

51 CLU 1602 (982).

52 CLU 1599-1603, all dated April 982. CLU 1600, however, though probably recorded at the same place at the same time, belongs to another group. It was drawn up by Eldradus, not Girbaldus, and it concerned a sale to David and his wife Dominica. After a gift by Dominica to her husband in 974 (CLU 1398), which included three vineyards in the villa Varengo (Varanges) in the Mâconnais, the couple commenced to buy up land in that villa, as is clear from CLU 1730 (987), 1737 (987), 1738 (987). Thus CLU 1600 seems to be an early example of this practice.

53 CLU 1517 (980, March); CLU 1598 (982, March).

54 CLU 1603.

55 CLU 1599.

56 CLU 1601.

57 CLU 1602. In this charter, the only witness who does not appear to overlap with the witnesses for the donations at Lourdon is Odo.

58 CLU 505 (939–40): “Dilecta filia mea, nomen Vualtru, igitur ego, in Dei nomen, Beratdus et uxor sua Teoza, genitrice tua, in pro amore et bone voluntate donamus tibi de res nostras que sunt sitas in pago Ostuunens...” See also CLU 44, 536, 658, and possibly 265: “Domno fratribus Alsuis, ego Arloldus, dum pro amore et bona voluntate que contra te abeo, propterea dono...” (To my brethren in the Lord Alsuis. I, Arlodus, out of the love and good will I have for you therefore give to you...” where, on the back of the charter, was written: “carta quam Arloldus, post obitum filiae suae, Sancto Petro fecit” (charter that Arlodus drew up for Saint Peter after the death of his daughter [presumably Alsuis]).

59 CLU 1432 (976): “Dilecta filiola mea, nomine Avia. Ego, in Dei nomen, Doco et uxore sua Tetberga, donamus tibi canpo pro at amore et pro eo quot de foncte Sancte Joanne te suscepimus.” For other affectionate charters on behalf of filiolae, see CLU 87 and 463.

60 CLU 765: “Dilecta soro mea Deo sacrata Raimodis, ego Vualterius, pro amore et bona voluntate, dono tibi curtilum.” For other charters that express affection towards sisters, see CLU 541 and 674.

61 I count 57 charters showing affection explicitly for women (as documented above); I count 72 for men, but these do not include 34 for male members of the church, such as the monks and abbots of Cluny and various clerics not identified as family members. Nor do I include the many amici or emptores referred to affectionately, as these often involved married couples with no clear relationship to the other principals, nor charters which express love generally (see below) without directly naming the aim of that love.

62 Fratri: CLU 407,1256; germani: CLU 26, 61, 37g; nepotes/consanguinei: CLU 12,114, 525, 803, 975, 1095, 1185, 1296.

63 CLU 407: “Dilectisimo fratri meo Johanni, ego igitur Vulmarus, germanus supradicti Johannis, dono tibi campum unum pro amore et benivolentia.”

64 CLU 975 (955): “Dilectissimo adque amabilissimo nepoti meo Girfredo. Igitur ego, in Dei nomine, Amolus, pro amore et benevolentia, dono tibi de res meas proprietatis mee.” Compare Formulae andecavenses in Formulae Merowingici, op cit., 16, No. 36, a gift “ad dulcissima nepote meo.” The ubiquity and nature of terms of endearment in this and other formulary books warrant a separate study.

65 CLU 1741: “Dilecto seniore meo, nomine Andreo. Ego Anna, uxor tua, pro amore et voluntate dono tibi res.” For other charters for dilecti seniores and the like (where senior means “husband”), see CLU 406, 437, 454, 476, 740, 1011, 1101, 1163, 1293, 1398. See also CLU 822 bis, where a wife gives her husband (vir) property “pro amore et plenisima bona voluntate mea quod ego in vos abeo, pro anc ipsa amore dono” (out of the love and fullest good will that I have for you; out of this very love I give...).

66 CLU 43: “Dilecto genero nostro Obtart et uxsore sua Gotestiva, ego quidem, in Dei nomen, Magbodus et uxsor sua Utda, pro amore et bona volencia nostra que contra vos habemus, propter hec donamus vobis...” Other charters expressing affection for sons-in-law: CLU 83, 99.1354·

67 CLU 9: “Dilectissimo atque in Christo multum amabilissimo filiolo meo Ariaudo. Igitur ego, in Dei nomine, Airsenda femina, donatrix, pro amore et benevolentia tua, dono tibi vinea et campum.” Other charters to filioli: CLU 418, 426, 441, 530, 549, 1278, 1353, 1362, and 1416.

68 CLU 1278: “Domino frat[r]ibus Fredono, et uxore sua Aaltru, et filiotus Bernardi. Ego Tetelmus et uxore sua Asselina, in amore et benevolencia que contra vos abeo, et pro eo quot de fonte Sancti Marie te suscepimus, proterea pro ipsa amore donamus vobis campo in pago Matisconense...” The “font of St. Mary” either means that St. Mary’s was a baptismal church or that the name Mary was wrongly substituted for St. John.

69 Charters for sons: CLU 47 (892) (pagus of Bourges), 185 (911–912) (pagus ofMâcon), 222 (920) (pagus ofMâcon), 389 (930) (pagus ofMâcon), 430 (935) (pagus of Mâcon), 522 (940–942) (pagus ofMâcon), 623 (943) (pagus ofMâcon), 653 (964) (pagus of Lyon), 666 (944–89) (pagus of Lyon), 755 (949–50) (pagus of Mâcon), 675 (945–946) (pagus ofMâcon), 827 (952) (pagus of Mâcon), 893 (before 983) (pagus ofMâcon), 1082 (960) (pagus ofMâcon), 1103 (961) (pagus of Chalon), 1148 (963) (pagus ofMâcon), 1151 (963) (pagus ofMâcon), 1166 (963–64) (pagus of Mâcon), 1403 (974) (pagus ofMâcon), 1491 (979) (pagus ofMâcon). CLU 893 is dated 954–86 by its editors, but Chaume, “Observations sur la chronologie,” op. cit, 133 makes it more precise. CLU 755 is addressed to “Dilecto filio vel filia mea.”

70 CLU 1151 (963): “Dilecto filio meo Girboleto, sacerdote, entores. Ego Dota, pro amore et bona voluntate que contra vobis abeo et pro eo quot mihi servisti et inante melius promesisti, pro ipsa amore et bone voluntate, dono tibi curtilo et maso indominicato et vinea insimul tenentur, qui est situs in pago Matisconense...”

71 CLU 47 (892). (To my beloved son Bartolomeus, presbyter.)

72 CLU 653: “Dilecto filio nostro, nomine Aymoni, nos igitur Ledgerius et uxor mea Berna, in pro amore et bona voluntate quam circa te habemus, donamus tibi aliquid ex rebus nostris quae sunt sitae in pago Lucdunense.”

73 CLU 418: “Dilectisimo amico nostro Josfredo et uxor sua Josbergi et filiolo nostro Josbert, emtores, ego is nominibus Josbert et uxor sua Adeborc, pro amore et bona volencia que contra vos abeamus, et pro eo quod de sacro fontis tibi levavimus, et pro remedium animas nostras, propterea pro ipsa amore donamus vobis aliquid de redibus nostris.”

74 CLU 1160: “Dilectos atque amabiles amicos vel parentes nostros is nominibus, Girolt et filio suo, nomine Amalfredo, presbitero, et germano suo Sisfredo, emitores, ego Bernoardus et uxor mea, nomine Constancia, in pro amore et bona voluntate quod nos in vos abemus, donavimus nos vobis una peciola de terra arabile.”

75 CLU 637: “In Dei nomen. Amico nostro Setbalt sacerdote, ego Guilelmos amicus suus et ucsor sua Gerberga, in pro amore et bone voluntate que contra te abeamus, et pro remedium animas nostras vel parentibus, Guilelmo genitore meo vel genitrice mea, vel fratres ac sorores, vel parentibus meis, donamus tibi aliquit de res meas in pago Matisconense.” For similar invocations of amicitia, see CLU 1330, 1351, and 1527.

76 CLU 66: “Dilecto nostro nomine Aymun et uxor sua Uttulgardis, ego Rifredus, Bernol, Teot Gunteldis, Ermna, Blismodo, donamus vobis prato.” See also CLU 23, 451, 716, 1085, 1875. These seem quite clearly to involve expressions of affection towards non-family members, but not necessarily amici in the technical sense of the term, for which see Régine Le Jan, Famille et pouvoir dans le monde franc (viie-xsiècle). Essai d’anthropolotjie sociale, Paris, Publications de la Sorbonne, 1995, 83-85.

77 CLU 363: “Dilecto fideli nostro Alberico, ego Bernardus prepositus, pro amore et bona voluntate que circa te abeo.”

78 CLU 1039: “Dilecto fidelem nostrum Girberto entore. Ego Berardus et ucsor mea Vuandalmodis, venerabiles seniores tui, pro amore et bona voluntate nostra, dono tibi de res nostras.” Others along this line: CLU 1144 (963), 1326 (972), 1451 (978). CLU 643 (943) has Eldolf, lord of Girbaldus, calling the latter “beloved cleric,” though not explicitly terming him his fidelis: “Domino fratribus Girbalt, clerico dilecto, senior vester, nomen Eldolf, presbiter, in amore et bonevoliencia mea que contra te abeo, proterea pro ipsa amore dono tibi...” CLU 72 (901) speaks of “Domino magnifico fidele meo,” to whom the donor gives “pro amore et bone voluntate.”

79 CLU 784: “Dilectissimo atque multum amabile fidele nostro, nomine Rotberto, levita, entore, ego, in Dei nomine, Arsenda et filius suus Nivo, in pro amore et bona voluntate quam circa vos abeamus.” For another sale to fideles out oflove (ob amorem dilectionis), see CLU 1431.

80 CLU 1068: “Dilecto in Christo domino Amblardo archiepiscopo. Ego quidem Guilelmus, fidelisque tuus...”

81 The process is discussed in some detail in B.H. Rosenwein, To Be the Neighbor of Saint Peter.· The Social Meaning of Cluny’s Property, 909-1049, Ithaca, N.Y., Cornell University Press, 1989, 189-90.

82 Since, in these charters, emptor might mean simply “recipient,” while vendo might mean simply “hand over,” I count as a sale only those charters that record money changing hands.

83 CLU 1078 (960): “Dilecto in Christo fratri Amblardo, Lugdunensis ecclesia; archiepiscopo. Nos quidem, ego, in Dei nomine, Durantius et uxor mea, nomine Waltburga, pariter venditores, vendimus tibi aliquid de rebus nostris quae sunt sitae in pago Alvernico.”

84 CLU 1115: “Dilecto in Christo fratri Amblardo Lugdunensis aecclesiae archiepiscopo, nos quidem Rotbertus et uxor mea Aaleldis et Bernardus et uxor mea Eldegardis pariter venditores, cum infantibus nostris his nominibus: Stephano et Ermengardis, vendimus vobis aliquid ex rebus nostris.”

85 CLU 1156: “Dilecto in Christo fratri Amblardo Lugdunensis aecclesiae archiepiscopo, nos quidem Rotbertus et uxor mea Aaleldis et Bernardus et uxor mea Eldegardis pariter venditores, cum infantibus nostris his nominibus: Stephano et Ermengardis, vendimus vobis aliquid ex rebus nostris.”

86 The exception is CLU 47; it involves a father selling property to his son, a priest, the transfer of ownership to take place after his death. The property is in the pagus of Bourges, well beyond Cluny’s neighborhood, and the norms of expression may have been rather different there than in the Mâconnais. It is significant that this “affectionate sale” was to a close family member. See below at n. 91.

87 For a detailed account, see my forthcoming article, “The Political Uses of an Emotional Community: Cluny and Its Neighbors, 833-965,” in Politiques des emotions au Moyen Âge, ed. D. Boquet and P. Nagy, Florence, Edizioni del Galluzzo, SISMEL, Micrologus Library, 2010, 205-21.

88 CLU 113: “venerabilem domnum Bernonem,” CLU 348: “in monasterio Cluniacensi, cui domnus Oddo abba preesse videtur,” CLU 507: “Domno sacrosancta eclesia Sancti Petri in Cluniaco, que domnus Odo abba ad regendum tenet.”

89 CLU 626 (943), 615 (probably 943), 636 (943), 638 (943), 641 (943); for the dating of CLU 615, see Rosenwein, “The Political Uses,” op. cit.

90 See the discussion of sales at La Chize in Rosenwein, To Be the Neighbor, op. cit., 103-108. Until 943, Cluny was purchaser in only ten transactions out of hundreds; it was thus very different from the monastery of Casauria, which amassed its initial patrimony through purchases rather than donations. See Feller, Gramain, and Weber, op. cit., 19.

91 Sales in which love or affection are expressed towards the purchaser (* indicates a sale among family members): CLU *47 (892) (pagus of Bourges), 626 (943) (pagus of Mâcon), 615 (probably 943) (pagus of Mâcon), 636 (943) (pagus of Mâcon), 638 (943) (pagus of Mâcon), 641 (943) (pagus ofMâcon), 698 (947) (pagus ofMâcon), 716 (948) (pagus ofMâcon), 891 (c. 966–970) (pagus of Autun, though described as in Mâcon), 965 (c.974-c.985) (pagus of Mâcon), 1078 (960) (pagus of Auvergne), *1082 (960) (pagus of Mâcon), 1085 (960) (pagus of Mâcon), 1108 (961) (pagus of Mâcon), 1109 (961) (pagus ofMâcon), 1115 (961) (pagus ofAuvergne), 1156 (963) (pagus of Auvergne), 1275 (970) (pagus of Autun), 1431 (976) (Le Puy-en-Velay), 1527 (980) (pagus ofMâcon), 1614 (982) (pagus ofMâcon), 1720 (986) (pagus ofMâcon), 1875 (991) (pagus of Mâcon). CLU 965 is dated 954-94 by its editors, but M. Hillebrandt, “Studien zu den Datierungen der Urkunden der Abtei Cluny unter Verwendung des Gruppensuchprogramms, Teil 1” in “Quellenkristische Studien zur Geschichte des cluniacensischen Mönchtums,” ed. J. Wollasch (unpublished paper), dates it more precisely; CLU 891 is dated 954–86 by its editors, but Chaume, “Observations,” op. cit., 133, dates it more precisely.

92 I arrive at this number by eliminating the two charters to family members and those from 943 pertaining to La Chize.

93 See Rosenwein, To Be the Neighbor, op. cit., 190.

94 CLU 891.

95 CLU 1275.

96 CLU 1431.

97 CLU 1728.

98 H. Zimmermann, ed., Papsturkunden, 896-1046, 3 vols., Vienna, Österreichische Akademie der Wissenschaften, 1984,1989, 684.

99 CLU 105. See above, n. 20.

100 See above, n. 58-72.

101 CLU 75 (902). See above, n. 3.

102 CLU 362 (928).

103 As in CLU 197; see above, n. 45.

104 CLU 970 (955?): “venit at nos divina conpunccio et amor vel caritas, vel bona voluntas nostra que contra Deum et Sanctum Petrum...”

105 CLU 1112 (961): “Sacrosancta Dei eclesia locum Cluniaco, qui est in onore Dei et sancti Petri, et domno abati Maioli et aliis monachis qui at ipsum locum deserviunt. Ego Anno, pro amore et bona volencia et pro remedium anime mee vel parentibus meis, dono ad ipsa casa Dei, de rebus meis qui sunt in pagu Ludunense.”

106 CLU 662.

107 Most famously announced in L. Stone, The Family, Sex and Marriage in England, 1500–1800, New York, Harper, 1977, 93–119.

108 Discussed in Rosenwein, Emotional Communities, op. cit., 13–15.

109 CLU 373 (929): “Speciale Christi preceptum dilectionem esse nemo qui dubitet.” See also 484 (938).

Auteur

Loyola University-Chicago

© Éditions de la Sorbonne, 2010

Conditions d’utilisation : http://www.openedition.org/6540