 |
 |
medieval-religion: Scholarly discussions of medieval religion and culture "Ferzoco, G.P." <[log in to unmask]> wrote: >This discussion on Saint-Denis reminds me of a question well, sometimes that happens, no matter what you do to prevent it. >why, if Louis ordered goodlordGeorge, where did you get *That*? >and oversaw the construction of this basilica, and, above all, **THAT**??? some obscure Canadian primary source, no doubt. >did he not choose to be buried there? far as i know, Suger (in his so-called _de Administratione_, virtually our only source for his rebuilding of St-D.) doesn't mention the king --since we're in the 1140's, it's Louis [VII] The Kid we're talking about here-- as playing a big --or, indeed, any-- role in the building program (i could easily be wrong about that, however). what he *does* say (or strongly imply) is that the expensive construction was paid for by his (Suger's) own tireless efforts to reform and reconstruct the abbey's finances, esp. by rebuilding the estates belonging to the Saint in the Beauce (where Suger had been an important at Toury) and elsewhere South of Paris. (he also did more than a little arm twisting amongst the local "nobility," got them --more or less-- to behave and, above all, got them to *lean* on the peasants who belonged to the Saint and were, as usual, acting like lazy, shifless noacounts, trying to cheat the Saint out of his rightful due. (all this is in the *very* interesting chapters which were left out of Panofsky's edition/translation, but, through the miracle of the WWW, are available here, albeit in an undependable translation: http://www.ariadne.org/centrechartraine/sources/suger1.html ) i don't recall any record of Louis the Kid actually contributing money to the project, though it is quite probable that he did, of course. the choice of a Capetian's burial place seems to have been something of a personal matter, though Suger's new building and, with it, his "reconditioning" of the tombs of merovingian and carolingian kings buried there certainly enhanced the propaganda value of choosing St-D as a site. but, again, Suger is nearly the only source for our knowledge of this (in his _Vita_ of Fat Louis [VI]). VI's father, Philip I, choose to be buried at Fleury (St-Benoit-s-Loire), *even though he died at Melun*, just a few miles on the Seine from Paris/St-Denis (hauling a body all the way down to the Loire implies a *very* serious, deliberate intent, it seems to me). certainly having a bunch of monks around to sing your sins away, preferably without ceasing, was a consideration. esp. if you had recently been excommunicated by a straight-laced, saintly bishop of Chartres for repudiating your lawful wife and engaging in an "irregular union with the Angevin woman" (Vita, c. 13). Suger tells us that he "had expressed a strong desire to be buried" at Fleury, explaining that "Some people said they had heard him explain his decision to be seperated from the burial place of the kings, his forefathers, *who are buried as if by natural right* in the church of the blessed Dionysius. He felt that he had been less benevolent than his predecessors toward that church, **and that no one would consider his tomb important among so many noble kings** (ibid., emphasis mine). Suger is, of course, *not* an unbiased source, by a long chalk. among other things, he clearly had a bee or two up his bonnet about properly serving his Saint by sumptuously rebuilding the west facade and the choir of the church housing his Holy Relics and by banging any handy drum to "restore" that church to what he saw as its "rightful" places as the Royal Necropolis. (in a note to the recent english translation of the Vita which i am using, Cusimano and Moorhead cite the testimony of Orderic Vitalis (4:284) to the effect that it was "because of his sins" that Phil didn't want to be buried at St-D., and note that the Moriginy Chronicle (one of the few other contemporary narrative sources we have) tells us that the king was "benevolent and generous toward Fleury." they also suggest taking a look at: Alain Erland-Brandenburg, _Le Roi est mort: etudge sur les funerailles, les sepultures et les tombeaux des rois de France jusqu'a la fin du XIIIe siecle_ [Paris, 1975], pp. 75f, 87. which i have not seen.) so, in this case (and, by extension, others) it looks like the situation might have been rather complex, with several factors in play: --Philip's relationship to St-Denis (which is to say, his relationship to the community and its reigning abbot, Adam, i believe it was). these were the guys upon whom he was going to depend to Sing him Home, after all, and if they were still holding a grudge about that little Angevin Woman Thing, well, forget it. --his relationship to Fleury, for the same reasons; --innumerable other aspects of things, some of which we cannot even speculate. come now time for Phil's son, Fat Louis, to pass to his own reward, Suger tells us a story (cap. 33) about his falling very seriously ill in 1135 at Chateauneuf-sur-Loire --i.e., just a few miles of easy river transport from his father's plantation at Fleury-- and that he "wanted to be carried by any means possible into the presence of his protectors, the holy Martyrs Dionysius and his companions," where, "before their most holy bodies, he would lay down the crown and the kingdom, and profess the monastic way of life." the details of Suger's version i've not been able to verify, and it's not clear from his text whether or not the king actually went on the road north --a considerable undertaking, considering his state of health, and one not to be taken lightly-- but he recovered and did end up at St-D soon thereafter, giving thanks, passing out bounty, etc. while he was at Paris in the summer of 1138 he again fell seriously ill with dysentery and diarrhea, summoned Bishop Stephen and (significantly) Abbot Gilduin of St. Victor's (the very important "reforming" collegiate which he, Louis, had played a very critical role in founding --"building from its foundations" and encouraging in many ways), confessed expressed the wish to have himself brought to St-D., but died before he could make the trip and was brought there posthumously. obviously, de facto, Suger's scheme to have St-D "restored" as the Royal Necropolis was sucessfully in place --for one generation, at least-- by the summer of 1138 (*before* his building program got under way, notay benny), otherwise VI would have chosen to be planted at St-Victor's, one might think. Next Generation, i *believe* that Louis the Kid, though he died in 1180 at Paris (http://www.bautz.de/bbkl/l/ludwig_vii_k_f.shtml ), was actually burried at the (now destroyed) abbey of Barbizon, in the forest of Fontainbleau --i haven't been able to confirm that by press time, however. (he was moved to St-D. in the 19th c., apparently.) i believe that he founded the abbey in the forest, as he was particularly fond of hanging out in his hunting lodge at Fontainbleau itself, then popping over to visit the monks, for a little praying, painting, school founding (http://www.artlex.com/ArtLex/b/barbizon.html ), whatever. if any of that happens to be true, he would stand a better chance of getting personalized attention from the monks of that place --with specific endowments made for his obituary celebrations, of course-- than getting lost in the Royal shuffle up at St-D., as his grandfather feared might happen (according to Suger's account). maybe. that brilliant argument doesn't explain why later kings chose to be burried there, however. but that's another story. perhaps, as may have been the case with his grandfather, he just didn't get along with Suger's sucessor(s) for one reason or another or trust them to do right by his bones... in any event, it would appear that Suger's vision of a "rightful" Capetian Necropolis just wasn't nailed down the way he wanted it to be, by the time The Kid died, it would seem. >Enquiring minds need to know; did my best. christopher ********************************************************************** To join the list, send the message: join medieval-religion YOUR NAME to: [log in to unmask] To send a message to the list, address it to: [log in to unmask] To leave the list, send the message: leave medieval-religion to: [log in to unmask] In order to report problems or to contact the list's owners, write to: [log in to unmask] For further information, visit our web site: http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/medieval-religion.html