Professional Documents
Culture Documents
J. MCCULLOH
(Kansas State University)
J.
418
McCULLOH
(2)
Martyrology, the author's method of dealing with his sources, and the relationship of this method to that used in his
other writings.
I. THE DAILY ENTRIES
Hrabanus' entry for each day consists of one or more notices for individual saints or groups of saints. The organization of these daily entries is generally determined by the
sources employed. When an entry contains notices drawn
from more than one source, all the notices from a single source
normally appear together as a unit. Furthermore these units
usually follow one another according to an establishedorder:
1) notices from Bede; 2) notices from Cambr.; 3) notices
from MH ; 4) historical notices from other sources; 5) brief
notices from other sources. Relatively few of the entries in
Hrabanus' Martyrology contain notices from all of these
sources,and the order of the notices is by no meansinvariable.
For example, sometimesnotices taken from MH precedeones
taken from Cambr., 8 and brief notices from other sources
occasionally appear at the beginning or in the middle of an
entry rather than at the end 7, but in general Hrabanus composed the individual entries by stringing together sources in
the order given above.
The entry for 15 September offers one example of this
linking of materials of disparate origins. In this entry Hrabanus began with several notices from Bede (Nicomedes,Aper,
Leobinus). He then added material from Cambr., including
all of the Cambr. entry from the beginning down to the notice
for Nicomedes. Since he already had a notice for this saint
from Bede, he skipped Nicomedes in Cambr. and went on to
the notice for Constans. This saint appears in both Cambr.
and MH, but Hrabanus' notice seemsmore closely related to
MH, and he probably changed sources at this point. In any
case, he then proceded to copy from MH all of the notices
6 E.g. 18 Sep., 4 Nov., and 5 Dec.
7 E.g. at the beginning: Faltonius et al., 10 May; Onesimus,13
May; Dalmatius, 5 Dec. ; in the middle: Agricius, 13 Jan. ; Mederasma, 22 Nov.
(3)
419
420
J. McCULLOH
(4)
(5)
421
the text as it now stands with the MH material first and the
Bede notice second.
This simple reversal of the sources at the time they were
copied may well explain the other cases in which non-Bede
materials are placed at the beginning of the entry. This would
certainly seemto be true of Barnabas (11 June) who, as an
apostle whose notice comes from Bede, would normally appear in first position, but, in fact, he follows a notice for Pope
Anacletus. These two notices form the entire entry for the
day, and they are probably simply reversed. The same could
be true of Bede's historical notice for Anastasius (22 Jan.),
which follows a historical notice for Valerius and Vincentius
in Hrabanus' text, and of Bede's historical notice for Calepodius (10 May), which Hrabanus gives after the brief notice
notice for Faltonius et al.
In the entries we have consideredso far Hrabanus deviated
from his normal order of compilation, but he maintained the
integrity of his units of composition. All of the material taken
from Bede appears together in a block. In somecases,however, Bede notices are separated from one another by notices
drawn from other sources. In that portion of Bede's text
contained in Sangall. 451 there are only four days on which
Hrabanus broke up the Bede material in this way. On 1
January he placed the circumcisio between octabasdominicae
natalis and the notice for Almachius. On 25 March he inserted
the crucifixio and a notice for Jacobusfrater Domini between
the adnuntiatio and the notice for Dula. In both instances
the interpolated notices are related to the ones which precede
them, and they conform to Hrabanus' common practice of
placing more important commemorations before less important ones. Another entry seemsto have acquired its unusual
form as a result of confusion in copying from several sources.
On 17 January Bede has two notices, a brief one for the monk
Antonius and a historical notice for Speusippus et al. Hrabanus gives a historical notice for Antonius and a brief nonotice for Sulpitius Severusfollowed by the Speusippusnotice
at the end, Besidesthe historical addition, Hrabanus' notice
for Antonius also contains the geographical notation Thebaida
which does not appear in Bede but is included in MH. Presumably Hrabanus began with the notice for Antonius be-
422
J. McCULLOH
(6)
causeit was the first notice in Bede, but he also employed the
text of MH which provided additional information. He then
added the historical portion of the notice from other sources14.
At this point he would normally have returned to the text
of Bede to add the notice for Speusippus, but instead he or his copyist -went back to MH and copied the Sulpitius
notice, relegating Speusippus et al. to the end of the entry.
The last casein which Hrabanus' text presentsa notice interpolated into the block of Bede materials occurs on 21 July.
In this entry a notice for Praxedis appears betweenBede's notices for Daniel and Symphorosa, but Hrabanus may have
inserted the material on Praxedis after completing his original
text 15.
In general the daily entries in Hrabanus' Martyrology are
the product of a simple, mechanical stringing together of notices drawn from various sources. It is this process which
created the sort of entries in which Bede is followed by Cambr.,
which is followed by MH, and so on. Likewise, an understanding of the general pattern allows us to see how the
necessity of moving from one source to another could have
resulted in variations from the normal scheme. In looking
over a large number of Hrabanus' entries one receives the
impression that the author's personal contribution to this
aspect of his work consisted of determining in advance which
portions of the various sourcesshould be included and which
should be omitted. The actual writing was probably left to
a scribe who sat surrounded by books, copying from each one
in turn according to the instructions he had received. This
method of composition could easily account for both the
standardized quality of the entries and the occasionalvaria14 The construction of this notice is unusually complicated for
Hrabanus' work and may have contributed to the confusion in the
entry. The general statement about Antonius' life and miracles is
Hrabanus' own, the story of his burial recalls Athanasius' Vita Antonii, but without verbal parallels, and the account of his translation
comes from Bede's Chronica maiora.
15 The notices for Praxedis (21 Jul.) and Pudentiana (19 May) may
not have formed a part of the original Martyrology, but they appear in Cod. sangall. 457, which was copied in the author's circle at
Mainz, and are most likely Hrabanus' own additions.
(7)
HRABANUS
MAURUS'
MARTYROLOGY
423
J.
424
McCULLOH
(8)
(9)
425
J.
426
McCULLOH
(10)
(11)
427
p. XXXIII.
J.
428
McCULLOH
(12)
legislative activity and the place of his burial. He also rearranged these materials to present them in the order which
Bede had used in his Martyrology. Hrabanus rejected much
of the biographical information he found in the Liber pontifica lis as extraneous to his purpose, but the succinct nature
of the materials he retained permitted him to describe the
saintly popes briefly without forcing him to alter significantly
the wording of the source.
Hrabanus also transcribed verbatim passagesfrom other
works, but he copied from no other single source or group of
sources with anything like the consistency observable in the
case of the martyrologies and the Liber pontificalis. One
class of materials, however, did receive this treatment regardlessof the sourcefrom which it derived, namely quoted speech.
Direct quotations are relatively rare in Hrabanus' Martyrology, occurring in only seventeenof his 318 historical notices.
Three of these notices derive from Bede so Hrabanus' ad
verbum reproduction of their quotations is only natural 26.
Of the other fourteen quotations only one is not an essentially
word-for-word transcription of the author's source, and this
single exception could be the result of Hrabanus' having used
as his source a text different from that now extant 27. The
quoted speechesdo not normally stand alone: they usually
occur within larger verbatim excerpts from Hrabanus' sources.
These passages,and other extended textual transcriptions
which contain no quoted speech, convey a wide variety of
information to the reader. They relate all or part of the
saints' passions28,their miracles 29and burials 3, their vir26Almachius, 1 Jan. ; Sebastianus,20 Jan. ; and Marcus, 25 Apr.
27 Direct quotations: lulianus and Basilissa, 13 Jan.; VitaIis, 28
Apr.; Seruatius, 13 May; Petronilla, 31 May; Auitus, 17 Jun.;
Symphorosa,21 Jul.; Victor, 21 Jul.; Victor, 1 Sep.; Venantius,
23 Oct.; Crispinus and Crispinianus, 25 Oct.; Mennas, 11 Nov.;
Longinus, 22 Nov. ; and Nicolaus, 6 Dec. In the notice for Torpes
(29 Mar.), Hrabanus' quotation varies from that in his source. Twice
Hrabanus reproduced inscriptions quoted in his source: Eusebius,
14 Aug.; and Maurus, 21 Nov.
28 In this and the following notes I have identified the verbatim
passagesaccordingto the line numbers of the forthcoming edn. in the
CorpusChristianorum. Valerius and Vincentius, 22 Jan., 11.318-321;
Vitalis, 28 Apr., 11.198-211; Sisinnius,29 May, 11.292-293,294-296;
(13)
HRABANUS
MAURUS'
MARTYROLOGY
429
J.
430
McCULLOH
(14)
(15)
HRABANUS
MAURUS'
MARTYROLOGY
431
J.
432
McCULLOH
(16)
(17)
HRABANUS
MAURUS'
MARTYROLOGY
433
J.
434
McCULLOH
(18)
(19)
435
J.
436
McCULLOH
(20)
the general and the specific, but they also relegate the more
detailed narration to a subordinate role. The addition of
these words implies that the individual torments are of less
significance than the totality of the saint's sufferings 5.
This verbal subordination of the specific to the general in
the caseof tortures intensifies an impression created by Hrabanus' summary and introductory statements as a group. He
seemsto have believed that a broad assertion of the saint's
holy qualities was at least as effective as the citation of
detailed evidence, and perhaps more so. The conclusion that
these statements were intended to have a function above and
beyond simple abbreviation is difficult to avoid. They convey
to the audiencethat the sanctity of the subject was not limited
to individual manifestations but that it was an all-pervading
quality of his life and passion.
Hrabanus' summary and introductory comments seemdesigned for effect as well as brevity, but there are other statements whose sole and obvious purpose is emphasis. Before
considering these, however, it is instructive to look again
at Bede's work. Bede normally began his notices for martyrs
with a brief statement of the saint's name and the place
and time of martyrdom. He then proceededimmediately to a
description of the tortures which culminate in the martyr's
death. The effect is powerful. Stripped of unnecessaryverbiage Bede's notices pull the reader along from torment to
torment inexorably toward the death, the climax of the
martyr's earthly existence.
Hrabanus' notices do not possessthe same dramatic focus.
His verbatim copying often lengthens his text, and his gen50Hrabanus uses introductory statements including the words hoc
est in his notices for Theodosia, 3 Apr. ; Victor, 8 May; Margarita,
13 Jul. ; Christina, 24 Jul. ; Mammes, 17 Aug. ; Genesius,25 Aug. ;
Philippus et al., 22 Oct. ; Maurus,21 Nov. ; Sauinus,7 Dec. ; and Gregorius, 23Dec. (cf. Goar,6 Jul.). Similar introductions without hoc est
occur in the following notices: Erasmus,2 Jun. ; Primus and Feliciannus, 9 Jun. ; Vitus, 15 Jun.; Marina, 18 Jun.; Marcellus, 4 Sep.;
Theodorus,9 Nov. ; Mennas,11 Nov. Bede occasionallyincluded such
statements: Anastasius, 22 Jan. ; Laurentius, 10 Aug. ; Cosmasand
Damianus, 27 Sep.; and Hrabanus borrowed one more from MH :
Ianuarius and Pelagia,11 Jul.
(21)
437
eralized statements lack the force of Bede's precise descriptions. But even if his desire to relate incidents from the lives
of the saints and his quest for brevity and totality of effect
make the form of his notices less powerful than Bede's, he was
not unconscious of the fact that his narratives had to have
some degree of dramatic impact in order to convey to his
audience the sanctity of the people described.
To achieve this effect Hrabanus added to his notices a
number of more or less standardized phrases which emphasize
various aspects of the martyrs' passions. One group of such
phrases stresses that the saints suffered for their faith. In
many casesinstead of stating a precise reasonfor the martyr's
persecution Hrabanus simply says that he was tortured or
killed propter fidem Christi or pro Christi nomine I). Two
outstanding examples of this practice occur in the notices
for Lucius (5 Mar.) and Sicius and Palatinus (30 May). Here
Hrabanus inserted phrases of this sort into passageswhich are
largely verbatim transcriptions from a source 51.
Hrabanus also chose to emphasize the chronological sequence of the torments of the martyrs. He achieved this by
inserting into his notices series of temporal adverbs which
indicate the order and progression of the tortures. Two of
his longer sequencesappear in the notices for Iulianus and
51Hrabanus specifically notes that the following saints suffered for
Christianity (or orthodoxy) : Martina, 1 Jan. ; Hilarius, 13 Jan. (addition to Bede); Iulianus and Basilissa, 13 Jan. ; Babylas, 24 Jan. ;
Thecla, 22 Feb. ; Sebastenimart., 11 Mar. ; Marianus and Iacobus,
6 May; Victor, 8 May; Erasmus,2 Jun. ; Bonifatius, 2 Jun. ; Primus
and Felicianus, 9 Jun. ; Vitus, 15 Jun. ; Marina, 18 Jun. ; Petrus and
Paulus, 29 Jun. ; Victor, 21 Jul. ; Simplicius and Faustinus, 29 Jul. ;
Mammes, 17 Aug. ; Agapitus, 18 Aug. ; Protus and Hyacinthus, 11
Sep. ; Sergius and Bacchus,7 Oct. ; Domninus, 9 Oct.; IV Coronati,
8 Nov. ; Theodorus, 9 Nov.; Marculus, 25 Nov. ; Barbara, 4 Dec. ;
Sauinus,7 Dec. ; Eugenia,25 Dec. The parallel statementin the notice
for Marcus and Marcellianus (18 Jun.) comesword for word from the
Passio Sebastiani,and that referring to the Holy Innocents (28 Dec.)
from MH. Bede employed analogous expressionsin his notices for
Marcellinus, 26 Apr. ; Iohannes,28 May; Phocas,14 Jul. ; Euphemia,
16 Sep. ; and Felicitas, 23 Nov. The words pro fide Christi in Hrabanus' notice for Marcellinus (26 May) probably come dIrectly from
Bede's commemoration of the samepope a month earlier.
J.
438
MCCULLOH
(22)
(23)
HRABANUS
MAURUS'
MARTYROLOGY
439
440
J. McCULLOH
(24)
441
(25)
HRABANUS
MAURUS'
MARTYROLOGY
442
J. McCULLOH
(26)
(27)
443
444
J. McCULLOH
(28)
banus referred to source texts for a variety of reasons. Occasionally this reference is the only information the author
relates, beyond the name of the saint and the place of his
death or burial 68. The notice for Martin of Tours (11 Nov.) is
somewhat longer, but essentially Hrabanus protests that he
need say nothing thanks to the quality and quantity of the
accounts by Sulpicius and Gregory. Twice more he refers to
a source instead of recounting in detail some part of its
story 69. As in his notice for Martin, Hrabanus mentions these
texts for the benefit of those who seek further information
rather than to indicate the source of his data. In all of these
casesthe author refers to a source, or a part of it, as an alternative to recounting its contents. On other occasionsHrabanus relates a story and refers to a source without apparently having made direct use of it 7. This is not to say,
however, that his statements are intentionally misleading or
even untrue. Indeed, the information he includes always
appears in the text he names. Any doubts regarding Hrabanus' veracity arise not from his statements themselves but
rather from the modern assumption that an author's reference
Nov. ; Petrus, 25 Nov. ; Saturninus et al., 29 Nov. Two more references come from MH : Plato, 22 Jul. ; Regina, 7 Sep.
68 See the notices for Zeno, 21 Jul. ; Afra, 5 Aug. The two notices
from MH cited in the preceding note have a similar form as do two
from Bede : Saluius, 11 Jan. ; Hilarion, 21 Oct.
69 Furseus (16 Jan.) a vision, and Victorinus and Seuerinus (24
Jul.), a diabolical deception. In the latter instance the devil appeared to Victorinus in the guise of a young girl who attempted to
seduce the saint. Hrabanus may have considered such a story inappro-:
priate for public reading. In his notice for Goar (6 Jul.) he suppressed the sexual transgressions of a bishop, see below, pp. 450-451.
70 See his notices for Georgius (23 Apr.) and Marianus and Iacobus
(6 May). One of Hrabanus' notices for Longinus (22 Nov.) contains
verbatim excerpts from the saint's Passio (BHL 4965). His other
historical notice for the same saint (15 Mar.) includes a reference to
the ~libellus martyrii eius , but this notice appears to be a paraphrase of the first and, thus, only indirectly derived from the hagiography. On 4 Aug., in his notice for Iustinus, Hrabanus mentions
that his story appears in the Passio Xysti atque Laurentii. He could
have employed that source, but the information he relates was all
available in notices which Bede had excerpted from the Passio:
Irenaeus and Abundius, 26 Aug. ; Cyrilla, 28 Oct. ; Triphonia, 18 Oct.
(29)
445
probably or certainly used in his composition: Paulus, 10 Jan. ; Antonius, 17 Jan.; Zeno, 12 Apr.; Medardus,8 Jun.; Auitus, 17 Jun.;
Memmius, 5 Aug.; Tiburtius, 11 Aug.; Euortius, 7 Sep.; Saluius,
10 Sep.; Lucia and Geminianus,16 Sep.
72E.g. Eusebius, Hrabanus 31 Jul., Bede 1 Aug.; Felix et al.,
Hrabanus 29 Aug., Bede 30 Aug.
73E.g. Concordius,1 Jan. ; Sebastenimart., 11 Mar.; Florianus, 4
May; Erasmus, 2 Jun.; IV Coronati, 8 Nov. ; Barbara, 4 Dec.
74Apronianus, 2 Feb. (Passio Marcelli, BHL 5234/5); Euellius,
11 May (= V Id. Mai.; Passio Torpetis, BHL 8307, V Kal. Mai.).
446
J. McCULLOH
(30)
calis.
77Maria (13 May) and Leo (28 Jun.), seeJ. Deshusses,Le sacramentaire gregorien,sesprincipales formesd'apres les plus anciensmanuscrits (Fribourg, Sw., 1971),pp. 219, 640 and 243.
78V. Leroquais, Les sacramentaireset les missels manuscrits des
bibliothequespubliquesde France(Paris, 1924)lists servicesfor Saluius
on this date only. He notes nothing before the 11th century, but the
limited distribution of Hrabanus' text assuresthat thesecommemorations do not derive from his work. The dates of Hrabanus' notices
for Zeno descend from the Verona tradition, although both of his
(31)
447
448
J. McCULLOH
(32)
HRABANUS
(33)
MAURUS'
MARTYROLOGY
449
Hrabanus
1. Eleutherius converts Felix and Correuus
2. Correuusexecuted
3. Eleutheriustortured
4. E\eutherius exposed to
beasts.
5. Eleutherius executed
29
J.
450
McCULLOH
(34)
451
(35)
452
J. McCULLOH
(36)
governor, had been bribed to execute these men, he announces that he will report Eustachius' corruption to the emperor.
The magistri militum then proceed to Phrygia, put down the
revolt and return with honor to Constantinople. Their success,however, arouses jealousy at court. They are cast into
prison and condemned to die, but they regain their freedom
through the saint's miraculous intervention. Hrabanus tells
a different story. He either omits the uprising in Phrygia or
conflates it with the dispute betweenthe troops and the townspeople. In any case,he presentsthe conflict in which Nicholas
intervened as a persecution of orthodox Christians by pagans
and heretics. He also mentions Eustachius and his condemnation of men for money, but the specific incident is generalized.
The three innocents -whose religion is not mentioned in the
Vita -have become multos Christianorum 88. What was
merely administrative malfeasance in the source has been
changed to religious persecution. Hrabanus deals with the
events leading up to the imprisonment of the magistri militurn in a similar fashion. He omits the tale of their triumph
and implies that they were arrested for being Christians.
This reworking of the Nicholas legend finds a parallel in
the notice for Pantaleon (18 Feb.). According to the Martyrology he was arrested for performing miracles in Christ's
name, but the source of this notice tells a more detailed story.
In the Passio (BHL 6429) Pantaleon's miracles of healing
first arouse the envy of physicians who then denounce him
to the authorities. Hrabanus could have omitted this detail
simply to shorten his narrative, but by doing so he focused
specifically on the direct cause and effect relationship between the saint's Christianity and his persecution.
The overt emphasis on Christianity in these notices typifies
Hrabanus' Martyrology. Bede had been content to describe
the tortures and deaths of the saints. For Hrabanus this was
not enough. He endeavored to make explicit what Bede had
taken for granted. In his extremes of verbatim copying and
88 This change introduces an element of confusion into the notice,
for later, when the magistri militum pray for Nicholas to intercede
on their behalf, they refer to the three ~nnocents, and Hrabanusfollowing his normal procedure -quotes
their words verbatim.
(37)
HRABANUS
MAURUS'
MARTYROLOGY
453
generalized statements he stressed sometimesthe minute details and sometimes the overwhelming totality of his subjects' sufferings, miracles and pious lives -the
manifestations of their sanctity. He continually reminded his audience
that the martyrs suffered for the faith, and he focused attention on their deaths with direct verbal emphasis. He declared, in addition, that they achieved their goal and passed
to a heavenly reward.
Hrabanus could occasionally compose notices similar to
Bede's 89,but the tenor of his Martyrology as a whole is different. He was basically a writer of handbooks. In his
works he tried to convey to both clergy and laity the elements
of knowledge and belief essential for the functioning of the
church and the salvation of souls 90. He also attempted to
elucidate the significance of whatever seemedto require or
lend itself to explanation: Scripture, the clergy with their
equipment and functions, and things in general 91.
Unlike Bede, Hrabanus was neither a hagiographer nor a
historian 92. This lack of experience in narrative composition
is evident in his Martyrology. He approached this work with
a mentality better suited to his other writings. Bede describes
events: Hrabanus explains them. He seems almost to fear
that his reader will miss the significance of what is happening.
All of the variations of Hrabanus' method are directed to
this end: to emphasize to his audience that the people described are indeed saints. The result is not particulary appealing in a literary sense. The author's means of achieving
this emphais are too unsophisticated and show too little
variety. On a more practical level, however, his approach is
effective. It is precisely the blunt samenessof so many of the
89E.g. Theogenes,4 Jan. ; Thecla, 22 Feb. : and Sebastenimart.,
11 Mar.
90Seethe prefacesto his Computus(ep. 4; MGH Epp., V, 387),
De institutione clericorum(ep. 3, pp. 285-286),Homiliae (ep. 6, p. 391)
and Libellum de poenitentia(ep. 32, p. 462).
91Hrabanns dealt with these respectively in his biblical commentaries, De institutione clericorumand De rerumnaturis.
92On the false attribution of the Vita Mariae Magdalenaeto Hrabanus, seeBHL 5508.
454
J. McCULLOH
(38)
(39)
455
III.
Relatively few of Hrabanus' works have been closely
studied with regard to the author's methods of compilation
and of dealing with his sources94. Nevertheless,a comparison
94 Paul Lehmann emphasized the significance of this deficiency in
Zu Hrabans geistiger Bedeutung , Erforschung des Mittelalters, III
(Stuttgart, 1960), 198-212. The problem still exists, but the dates of
the works cited below reveal the progress of recent years. In addition
to Ernst Diimmler's editions of Hrabanus' letters, MGH Epistolae,
V, 379-533, and poetic works, MGH Poetae latini, II, 154-258, the
following studies include more or less detailed investigations of the
sources and occasionally the method of individual works. J. B. Hablitzel, Hrabanus Maurus: Ein Beitrag zur Geschichte der mittelalterlichen Exegese,Biblische Studien, XI, 3 (Freiburg i. Br., 1906), discusses the sources of a number of Hrabanus' commentaries: Matthew,
pp. 32-70; Pentateuch, pp. 71-78; Joshua, pp. 78-79; Judges, pp. 7982 ; Hebrews, pp. 83-87 ; Philemon, pp. 87-90 ; and Ruth, pp. 93-95.
Commentary on Kings: Hablitzel, Hrabanus Maurus und Claudius
von Turin , Historisches Jahrbuch, XXVII (1906), 76-80; on a particular aspect of the same work and one other, see A. Saltman,
Rabanus Maurus and the Pseudo-Hieronymian .Quaestiones hebraicae in libros Regum et Paralipomenon' &, Harvard Theological
Review, LXVI (1973), 43-75. Commentary on Jeremiah: Hablitzel,
Der Jeremias-Kommentar des Hrabanus Maurus &,Studien und Mitteilungen zur Geschichte des Benediktiner-Ordens, XL (1919-1920),
243-251. De institutione clericorum: Alois Knoepfler, ed., Rabani
Mauri de institutione clericorum libri ires (Munich, 1900); Maria
Rissel, Rezeption antiker und patristischer Wissenschaft bei Hrabanus
Maurus; Studien zur karolingischen Geistesgeschichte,Lateinische
Sprache und Literatur des Mittelalters, VII (Bern/Frankfurt, 1976),
177-293. Grammar: Max Manitius, Geschichteder lateinischen Literatur des Mittelalters, I (Munich, 1911), 291f. ; Lehmann, pp. 205-207 ;
Rissel, pp. 93-162. De rerum naturis: Elizabeth Heyse, Hrabanus
Maurus' Enzyklopiidie De rerum naturis &; Untersuchungen zu den
Quellen und zur Methode der Kompilation (Munich, 1969). Penitentials: Raymund Kottje, Die Bussbiicher Halitgars van Cambrai und
des Hrabanus Maurus, Ihre Oberlieferung und ihre Quellen; Ein
Beitrag zur Entwicklung der Bussdisziplin im 9. Jh. (Habilitationsschrift Bonn, 1965), pp. 213-269. This work is scheduled for publication as vol. 7 of Beitriige zur Geschichte und Quellenkunde des Mittelalters, see Kottje in Bulletin of Medieval Canon Law, N. S. VI
(1976),66, n.ll. Computus : Wesley M. Stevens, Hrabanus Maurus on
Reckoning & (Diss. Emory Univ., 1968); Rissel, pp. 30-75. Prof.
Stevens' edn. will appear in Corpus Christianorum, Continuatio me-
EVALUATION
456
J. McCULLOH
(40)
(41)
HRABANUS
MAURUS'
MARTYROLOGY
457
99 Ibid., p. 55.
100P L CXI, 13. Heyse, pp. 63f, argues that Hrabanus' organization
is based on a passage in Isidore.
101Knoepfler, pp. XXVII If.
102See especially Hablitzel, Hrabanus Maurus, pp. 32-70, 73, 89 ;
id., Der Jeremias-Kommentar, pp. 243-249; Heyse, pp. 52, 54,
65-155: and Rissel. passim.
458
J. McCULLOH
(42)
other aspect of his work. The author himself is partly responsible for this situation. He embellishedthe prologues of
his books with expressionsof humility before the authority of
the Fathers, thus emphasizing the derivative quality of his
own literary efforts 103. Even in his own time this characteristic was criticized by detractors who found his writings
superfluous since he only repeated what others had already
said 104.Ernst Diimmler, whose editions of Hrabanus epistolae
and poetic works for the Monumenta Germaniae Historica
laid the foundation for modern critical scholarship, found it
appropriate that Hrabanus twice refers to the fact that he is
living in the degenerate sixth and last age of the world and
that in both cases he copied the statement verbatim from
Bede 105. Knoepfler narrowly avoided calling Hrabanus a
plagarist 106,
and Hablitzel argued that he not only copied but
that he passed off other people's work as his own 107.
Recent years have witnessed attempts at a more balanced
interpretation of the author and his writings. General works
have emphasized that Hrabanus was a man of his time, and
that his age was one in which standards of originality of
thought and respect for the intellectual property of
others were very different from our own 106.Scholarshave
refuted the charge of plagarism arguing that this is a consequencenot only of misapplied modern conceptionsof schol103Examples in Muller, pp. 158-160.
104Ibid. and Hablitzel, Hrabanus Maurus, p. 96
105 Hrabanstudien t, Sitzungsberichte der koniglich preussischen
Akademie der Wissenschaften, LIV (1898), 3, p. 24.
106De inst. cler., p. XXVIII.
107Hrabanus Maurus, pp. 24f. Other writers have judged Hrabanus
guilty of plagarism: Manitius, p. 290; J. de Ghellinck, Litterature
latine au moyen dye (Paris, 1939), I, 103. Negative judgments of
Hrabanus' personal contribution in his writings are common; see the
examples cited by F.-J. Holtkemper, Kompilation und Originalitat bei Hrabanus Maurus, t in Plidagogische Blutter. Heinrich DoppVorwald zum 65. Geburtstag, ed. F.-J. Holtkemper (Ratingen, 1967),
pp. 58f.
108H. de Lubac, Exegesemedievale, I, 1 (n. p., 1959), pp. 160-163;
M. L. W. Laistner, Some Early Medieval Commentaries on the
Old Testament t, Harvard Theological Review, XLVI
(1953), 27;
Lehmann, Zu Hrabans geistiger Bedeutung I).
(43)
459
460
J. MCCULLOH
(44)
(45)
461