Seriously - my warmest thanks to everyone who looked up in their
dictionaries and / or directed my attention to mediaeval Latin web-sites. It
is kindness and enthusiasm such as this that makes me glad to be on this
<From: "Christopher Crockett"
<still leaves open the question of whether Brenda's texts deal with an
<of the abbey or of the Abbot.
I should perhaps have put my first citation into context. [DM/P I 474]
It appears that Bernard, Abbot of Marmoutier was returning home from the
Synod of Nantes in 1096 and broke his journey at the fortified town of
Champtoceaux, which is on the south bank of the river Loire, at this date at
the frontier between the Comte's of Nantes and Anjou. It is possible that
the Abbot and his entourage were riding along the river bank, but I believe
that the old Roman road was on the north bank of the Loire so it is more
likely (especially in view of what followed) that he was travelling in his
barge. [His next port of call was to be St-Florent-le-Veil which is also on
the Loire.] Over supper he encountered Lord Daniel du Pallet (whom I believe
to have been Peter Abelard's maternal grandfather) who had the right to levy
river tolls from all comers at both Nantes and Champtoceaux. Abbot Bernard
(whom I suspect had just paid up and was in the mood to resent this
imposition) persuaded Lord Daniel "for the good of his soul" (what else ?)
to remit these tolls henceforth as far as Marmoutier was concerned. Roger
of Montrevault who was also present and also had the right to levy river
tolls at Champtoceaux was invited to do the same. The donation was witnessed
thus "Donationis hujus testes sunt Dominus Abbas Bernardus & bajulus
It is clear that the Bajulus had accompanied the Abbot on his journey. This
would lead me to suspect that he was a senior member of the Abbot's
household rather than a monastic official if it is possible to make the
distinction. Additionally, since I doubt that the Lord Abbot actually
carried any money on his own person, I would also suggest that the Bajulus
was responsible for the financial and other arrangements for the journey and
indeed it had been he personally who had actually paid the river tolls to
the agents of Daniel and Roger. Thus his role as witness to the donation
would have been doubly important because he would have seen the implementing
This is one of those charters where it is possible to piece together a bit
of the background to make a nice little vignette.
The second quotation ( La Broderie, Recueil, no. 36) provides less useful
background, but the Bajulus is listed "de monachis"
"De monachis, Garnerius abbas majoris Monasterii, Reginaldus abbatis
bajulus, Bartholomeus prior Nannetensis [= prior of Ste Croix, a priory of
Marmoutier in Nantes], Guillelmus notitiarius[sic]. De laicis .... [&c &c.]
so in 1143x47 he was a monk and therefore by implication his predecessor
would have been one in 1096 as well.
It also seems clear that he was the Abbot's bajulus and not the abbey's.
Brenda M. C.
Hope this isn't too long ....
Happy New Year: Joyful New Millennium!