The epic adaptations of the Life of Saint Martin of Tours, Sulpicius Severus, Paulinus of Périgueux and Venantius Fortunatus

Tiffany van der Meer Student number 10223339 Master Classics and Ancient Civilizations: Classics University of Amsterdam, July 2016 Piet Gerbrandy & Nienke Vos Words: 17.249 18 ECTS

Contents

Introduction 3

Chapter 1: Questions of genre, from biblical to hagiographical epic 6

Chapter 2: The epic adaptations 12

Chapter 3: Scholarship 17

Chapter 4: Case studies 26

Conclusions: 59

Bibliography 62

2

Introduction

Saint Martin is one of the most famous saints in the West. A favourite among Christian and non-religious children alike, this late Roman ascetic is known for giving away his own possessions to those in need in the iconic story of the cloak. On a cold winter’s day in fourth- century France, a soldier comes across a pauper nudus, and while others pass him by, Martin understands this person is there especially for him to help. Of course he has already given away his other things for similar causes and at this point has only his cloak to spare. The fierce cold demands him to keep a part for himself, but he cuts his double coated cloak in half and clothes the beggar. This extraordinary deed of benevolence demonstrated by Martin, early in the story, shows him to have a biblical lifestyle even before his baptism. Dressing the poor is one of the cardinal tasks put forth in Mathew 25.35-36.1 There is more to the figure of Saint Martin than this much depicted episode. We know about his life through the hagiographical prose life written by Sulpicius Severus. Sulpicius wrote the Vita Sancti Martini at the end of the fourth century, when Martin was still alive, probably around 396.2 Later he added Dialogues and Letters with information of a later date, like Martin’s death. Martin was one of the first Christians who was revered for his way of life, instead of his manner of dying. The martyrs had largely ceased to exist after the edict of Milan in 313 and Christianity became the state religion under Theodosius I in 381. A new identity for ‘the holy man’ had to be debated. A new sort of Christian hero came to the fore, and a new kind of literature that upheld the ideal of asceticism. In this respect the slightly earlier fourth-century hagiographical text by Athanasius of Alexandria is important: his Greek Life of Antony together with Sulpicius’ Latin Life of Martin are two pillars of this new literature and way of life. Antony was an austere ascetic monk in the Egyptian deserts, said to stand at the birth of eastern monasticism, whereas this is said of Martin in the West. Martin comes from a pagan family with a military father, and has to serve in the army from the age of fifteen.3 At a certain point, he renounces military service in front of the

1 Mathew 25.35-36. ‘For I was hungry and you gave me food, I was thirsty and you gave me drink, I was a stranger and you welcomed me, I was naked and you clothed me, I was sick and you visited me, I was in prison and you came to me.’ Transl. from Revised Standard Version, 1951. This translation was used for all Bible quotes. 2 Stancliffe 1983, 133. 3 Sulpicius VSM 2.5. 3 emperor.4 This action is accompanied by a miracle: the enraged emperor Julian orders Martin to serve in the frontline at dawn because he wants to quit the army. Martin complies, but says he will face the enemy unarmed. The next morning the enemy comes to seek peace. In Venantius Fortunatus we see the absence of combat become an epic victory of the forces of good over evil, and of the one over many: Atque, orante uno, cecidit furor omnibus armis / innumerasque acies solus sine sanguine vicit – ‘and, because of the praying of one man, fury resided from all weapons and he alone conquered innumerable battle lines without bloodshed.’5 Martin’s life is strewn with adventures and miracles. The saint is banished to an island where he cures himself of poisonous hellebore, is captured by a robber –who, of course, he gets to convert to Christianity-, meets the devil on the way and is able to defy him, resuscitates two dead people and can bend the direction of the falling of trees and of the scorching of fire. Sulpicius’ Vita became a bestseller right away, and was transposed into hexameters two times thereafter. First in the late fifth century, by Paulinus of Périgueux, and once more by Venantius Fortunatus in the late sixth. This raises some questions. Why was another version of the prose text made at all? And when Paulinus’ epic was in place, why was another desirable by Fortunatus? How does one go about transposing hagiographical material into epic? What can we say about the aims and audiences of the texts? Until about thirty years ago research into hagiographical texts focused on the texts as historical sources.6 The literary aspects of the works, however, have not been discussed very often. In this thesis, I will explore the character and aims of the two epic adaptations from a literary rather than a historical perspective. To search for the answers to the questions posed above I will first devote a chapter to questions of genre, in particular biblical epic. In the second chapter I will present and discuss the two epics by Paulinus and Fortunatus. In chapter three, I will discuss the scholarship on this matter so far. In the fourth and longest

4 A discussion exists over Martin’s age at that point. The information given in Sulpicius points to 356 for the event. See Chapter 4. 5 Fortunatus VSM 1.76-77. Translations are my own, unless otherwise indicated. The translations in this thesis are intended as a tool for the reader to read the Latin more quickly, not as literary translations. 6 See for instance Fabre, P., 1961, Saint Martin et son temps. Mémorial du XVIe centenaire des débuts du monachisme en Gaule, Rome, 361-1961; Donaldson, C., 1980, Martin of Tours: parish priest, mystic and exorcist, London. 4 chapter I will discuss passages from the epics following a method of close reading. Finally, I will try to answer the questions asked above.

5

Chapter 1: Questions of genre: from biblical to hagiographical epic

What genre are we dealing with in the case of the Lives of Martin? Should they be seen in the tradition of late antique biography? Do the two epic adaptations by Paulinus of Périgueux and Venantius Fortunatus form epics like those of Homer and Virgil? A term that has come to be used broadly is ‘hagiography’. As a genre, however, it is problematic.7 With this term a complex and diverse corpus is designated: in effect; hagiography is a piece of writing about the life or deeds of a ‘holy man’ (or woman).8 Of this broad corpus some general characteristics have been pronounced. For instance, the hagiographic life starts with the birth of the saint and runs in a more or less chronological fashion to his or her death.9 On this ‘rule’ many exceptions can be found, the Life of Saint Martin being one of them. A focus on miracles has been put forward as another characteristic, but on this point the texts differ as well.10 Influences on hagiography can be traced from biography and romance, and of course the bible, apocryphal Acts, and the martyr stories called passiones. For this thesis it will suffice to understand the Martinian works as hagiographical texts. Because the complex issue of the genre of hagiography falls outside the scope of this thesis, we will move on to the genre of epic. What constitutes an epic? Since the time of Homer, the epic genre in Greek or Latin has been bound by the hexametric verse meter. The subject matter is that of Gods, kings and special and extraordinary people at the very least. A high language register is suitable and the text deserves on a subjective basis the adjective ‘long’.11 Furthermore great value is attached to structure, and the unity of the narrative as a whole. Each episode participates as an important link in a story chain. Regarding Fortunatus’ Life of Saint Martin, Roberts (2001) states the following: “In meter, scope, and mode of representation the VSM [Vita Sancti Martini]conforms to the expectations of epic.”12 However, the work does not read the same way as the Aeneid by Virgil. Roberts formulates this about Fortunatus: “An epic, then, to all appearances, but not

7 For an article about the problems of the genre, see Uytfanghe 1988. 8 For the term ‘holy man’, see the influential paper by Brown 1971,‘The Rise and Function of the Holy Man in Late Antiquity’. 9 Miller 1983, 57: “A formal structure is practically nonexistent, apart from concessions to the convention of a birth-to-death envelope.” See also Uytfanghe 1988. 10 The life of Boniface by Willibald (eighth century) for example, barely contains miracles. 11 Aristotle discusses epic in Poetics 23-24. 12 Roberts 2001, 258. 6 one that reads at all like the more familiar texts from the Augustan, Neronian, or Flavian periods.”13 Let us therefore turn our gaze to another literary epic tradition, one which might be a better fit for Paulinus and Fortunatus: that of the biblical epic. A corpus of texts exists, from the fourth century onward, that commit biblical prose material to hexameters. Christianity became a religio licita with the edict of Milan in 313 and the preferred religion from 381. With this new situation came a new group of readers: educated nobleman, conversi, now formed a growing part of the audience of the Christian message.14 They were displeased with the unpolished Latin language of the Bible. To them, biblical Latin and Virgil were the lowest and the highest of literary forms. This could explain the rise of a new literary form, in which classical form and style were applied to a wholly different content and meaning. Roberts says that: “In the 320s the conditions were ripe for the creation of Christian epic according to the formal norms of classical poetry.”15 Was this compromise with classics not a problem? The attitude of Christians towards the love for classical style and authors has always been problematic and varies per period and per individual. There are generally two sides; on the one hand those who believed pagan literature and thought should be avoided and seen as dangerous and foolish,16 and, on the other, those who thought it right and smart to use (elements of) pagan literature for the Christian cause. A famous example of the issue is Jerome’s nightmare, where he is told ‘ciceronianus es, non christianus. Ubi thesaurus tuus, et cor tuum’ – ‘You are a Ciceronian, not a Christian. Where your treasure is, your heart is as well.’17 This story informs us of Jerome’s fear around 375 A.D. of betraying Christianity by reading or preferring classical texts over Scripture. A different sentiment is defended by Augustine around 397, who compared the use of good parts of classical philosophers to the ‘plundering’ of Egyptians by the Israelites in Exodus 12, 35-36.18 In the same fashion pagan literature or theory can be melted, recast and used to serve the spread of the Christian message. Something similar can

13 Roberts 2001, 258. 14 Roberts 2001, 262. 15 Roberts 2001, 262. 16 E.g. Tertullian De Spectaculis 17.6-7. 17 Jerome Epist. xxii, 30, Migne, PL, 22.394. 18 Augustine De Doctrina Christiana 2.40.60. The use of Egyptian objects is ordered and therefore authorized by God in Exodus 11.2-3. It is not a literal plundering. The Egyptians give their goods to the Israelites, because God makes them have a mild attitude towards the Israelites. 7 be read in Lactantius’ Divinae Institutiones, dated to the early fourth century. As a converted erudite he was ‘well aware that in order to appeal to cultivated citizens, rhetoric and style was crucial.’19

Quae [causam veritatis] licet possit sine eloquentia defendi, ut est a multis saepe defensa; tamen claritate ac nitore sermonis inlustranda et quodammodo adseranda est, ut potentius in animos influat et vi sua instructa et luce orationis ornata. 20

Truth can be defended, as many often have defended it, without eloquence, nevertheless it ought to be illuminated and indeed maintained with clarity and splendour of utterance, so that it floods into people’s minds more forcefully, with the equipment of its own power and religion and its own brilliance of rhetoric.

The plea that is heard is not a wish to continue using the pagan forms, or simply to adapt Christian truth to a higher classical standard, but rather a desire to appropriate good elements in order to form a Christian variant more powerful by the incorporation of those elements: to become vi sua instructa. The first biblical epic, that of Juvencus (c. 330), is believed to have emerged from an apologetic stance toward educated readers.21 The Christian material of the Gospel was polished up to hexameters ‘to enlist the prestige of epic idiom in the service of the Christian message’,22 forming his Evangeliorum Libri quattuor. This biblical epic was more worthy a form for conversi and pagans. Later poets writing for a largely Christian audience could use the verse form for its pleasantness (suavitas) and memnonic value.23 In Juvencus’ prologue we read his view on the role of poets and the aims of epic:24

Sed tamen innumeros homines sublimia facta et virtutis honos in tempora longa frequentant, adcumulant quorum famam laudesque poetae.

19 Sandnes 2011, 63. 20 Lactantius Divinarum Institutionum Libri VII, 1.10. Translation by Bowen & Garnsey 2003, 58. 21 Roberts 1985, 71. 22 Roberts 2001, 263. 23 Roberts 1985, 85-86. 24 See the discussion in Roberts 2001, 263. 8

Hos celsi cantus, Smyrnae de fonte fluentes, illos Miniciadae celebrat dulcedo Maronis.

Their lofty deeds and reputation for virtue win fame over many ages for countless men, whose glory and praise the poets celebrate. Some the lofty strains from the spring of Smyrna hymn, others the sweetness of Virgil the Mantuan.25

What is important here is the notion of epic in late antiquity.26 As we have learned from Jauss (1986), ‘the history of literary genres’ is ‘a temporal process of the continual founding and altering of horizons’ [of expectations].27 Juvencus emphasizes the praise and glory for sublimia facta of individuals. This is the role of poets and the aim of epic in late antiquity.28 What better to praise than the deeds of God and Jesus? Did this lead to an explosion of biblical epic? Not immediately:

Juvencus’ pioneering efforts did not find immediate imitation. […] for all the more liberal voices, echoing the sentiments of Lactantius, there yet lingered a suspicion in ascetic circles of any compromise with worldly literature.29

In the late fourth century the handshake of classical form or style and Christian material became ‘largely unproblematic’.30 In the first half of the fifth century, Sedulius took up the baton, describing the miracles of Christ in his Carmen Paschale. This work found much imitation. Roberts speculates that Asterius, consul in 494, who made recensions of both Sedulius and of Virgil, must have seen Sedulius as the Christian Virgil.31 Earlier in this chapter I briefly discussed the value assigned to the unity of the whole in classical epic. In this respect the biblical epics differ drastically from the classical norm:

25 Translation from Roberts 2001, 263. 26 The following does not exclude that other works are still produced according to more traditional classical norms. De Raptu Proserpinae by Claudian, for example. 27 Jauss 1968, 94, quoted by Roberts, 2001, 258. Roberts says: “In speaking of genre in the context of late antiquity I find Jauss’ approach, developed for medieval literature, most helpful.” 28 ‘Praising great men’ was always a part of epic. (Mind for instance the choice of Achilles to be either famous and sung about (in Homer’s epic), or live long and be unknown.) In late antiquity, however, epic gets a more panegyric function. See Roberts 2001, 263-264, n. 12. 29 Roberts 2001, 264. 30 Roberts 2001, 264. But in the tenth century Saint Odo of Cluny still had a dream that told him he should stop reading the works of Virgil. 31 Roberts 1985, 77-79; Roberts, 2001, 265. 9

From the point of view of classical epic, the most striking feature of the Carmen Paschale is the extreme fragmentation of the narrative: miracle stories in particular are treated as discrete episodes, with little attempt on the poet’s part to create a chronologically and topographically unified narrative.32

This agrees with a more general tendency in late antique poetry to attach greater importance to single episodes than the whole. Claudian for instance, was for a long time judged by critics for his lack of unity, loose structure, and ‘an overfondness for digressions’.33 Roberts (1989) formulated interesting theories on this trend, coining ‘the jeweled style’.34 This term refers to a style in which the poet elaborates richly on episodes, like in a mosaic, but regards the main story line and connections between episodes as less important. This results in ‘an emphasis on small-scale effects of parallelism and opposition, on enumerative sequences, and on lexical choice, all typical of the jeweled style.’35 Roberts (2001) lists two more considerations that may help explain the fragmented character of late antique texts: firstly, Christian allegorical reading encouraged seeing an episode of a miracle, for example, as a miniature drama of salvation. Secondly, in liturgical practice, Gospel was broken up into individual passages.36 Important Christian poets, among others, joining the ranks are Claudius Marius Victorius in the first half of the fifth century (Alethia, an epic about Genesis), Avitus in the

32 Roberts 2001, 265. In the case of Sulpicius’ Life of Martin this ‘little attempt on the poet’s part’ can be clearly detracted from his type of narrative transitions. Often vague temporal or spatial indications are used, like quodam tempore (3.1), insequenti tempore (12.1). Huber 1901, 26-27 points out that Paulinus in his last three books improves on those ‘von Sulpicius einfach und zusammenhangslose aneinandergereihten Erzählungen’ by connecting the episodes. In the first three books, however, pertaining to the VSM, Paulinus follows Sulpicius’ type of transitions using words like exinde, ergo, interea, hic, hinc. Fortunatus connects episodes with words like hinc, dum, accidit ut, inde, ergo, post. 33 Roberts 1989,1-3. 34 Roberts with his book The Jeweled Style (1989) argued that our judgement of late antique poetry should not be based on classical norms and aesthetics. 35 Roberts 1989, 152. 36 I am not entirely convinced by the importance of liturgical practice in the forming of new epic standards, because the epics were probably not read in Church. However a certain conceptualization of episodes as stories in their own right can derive from liturgical practice. I would like to add to these factors Roberts’ own point in Roberts, 2001, 266: “In the panegyrical epic of late antiquity, of which Claudian, Merobaudes, and Sidonius are the prime exponents in the West, the emphasis on the narration of gesta tends to blur the thematic structure of panegyric and assimilate the poems to epic. Conversely the view of epic as a poem of praise deemphasizes its narrative continuity and promotes a fragmenting view of its composition as a sequence of incidents that separately redound to the glory of the epic hero.” (My italics). 10 late fifth or early sixth century (De Spiritualis Historiae Gestis, about Genesis and Exodus), and Arator in the sixth century (De Actibus Apostolorum, about Acts).37 With the Christian material of the Gospel now committed to epic form in biblical epics, and with the view of epic as panegyric praise for the acts of individuals in the back of our minds, we can now leap to the epic adaptations of the prose hagiography concerning the life of Martin of Tours. In the new view, epic ‘becomes a form of encomiastic biography’.38 Roberts (2001) continues to conclude: “It is not difficult to see why Christian poets would view the life of a saint as highly appropriate material for epic treatment.”39 In late antiquity, newly formed epic subgenres, aside from biblical epic, include panegyric epic and hagiographical epic.40 In this chapter, I explored the ties of genre for the epic adaptations of the life of Martin. We came across a new panegyric function of epic. In the end, we should see the Lives as hagiographical epic, standing in the tradition of biblical epic in particular. With this knowledge as a background, we can now continue to a chapter about the epics and their poets Paulinus of Périgueux and Venantius Fortunatus.

37 Roberts 1985, 1. 38 Roberts 2001, 267. 39 Roberts 2001, 267. 40 Roberts 2001, 259. 11

Chapter 2: The epic adaptations

The first Life of Martin of Tours was written by Sulpicius Severus. This prose text is dated around 396, published while Martin was still alive.41 Sulpicius was a Roman lawyer,42 who took an interest in Martin and spent some three years by his side, collecting material for his intended work. It is generally agreed that, in this period, Martin was a great influence on Sulpicius’ personal life as a religious inspiration. His encounters with Martin together with the influences of Sulpicius’ friend Paulinus of Nola, stimulated his own choice to leave the world behind around 394/5.43 After martyrdom became less common, a new Christian hero came to be venerated for his way of life, rather than death, and his ascetic ideals. Sulpicius writes with a deep respect for Martin. In the light of the previous chapter we might wonder why Sulpicius uses a simple style of writing. His own comments may help us out here (Sulpicius asks Desiderius –to whom alone he sent his book and to whom he directs his prologue– to ask other readers):

[…] id a lectoribus postulabis, ut res potius quam verba perpendant et aequo animo ferant, si is aures eorum vitiosus forsitan sermo perculerit, quia regnum Dei non in eloquentia, sed in fide constat. (4) Meminerint etiam, salutem saeculo non ab oratoribus, cum utique, si utile fuisset, id quoque Dominus praestare potuisset, sed a piscatoribus praedicatam esse. 44

[…] that you ask this of the readers, that they adhere more weight to the content than to my wording and that they bear it with peace of mind if perhaps my faulty language upsets their ears, for the kingdom of God does not reside in eloquence, but in faith. Let them remember too, that salvation was not preached to the world by orators– although, if this had been profitable, God could have conducted this – but by fishermen.

41Stancliffe 133. Martin died c. 397, see Stancliffe 114, 117. 42 ‘The education which Sulpicius received was much as it would have been three centuries earlier. It was firmly based upon the Greco-roman classics, and virtually unaffected by the rise of Christianity. The teaching of Christian beliefs and morals was the affair of the family, and of the church’, Stancliffe 1983, 57-58. 43 Course ‘Late Latin Literature: Saints’ Lives and Short Stories’, UvA, May, 2016; Stancliffe 1983, 17-19. 44 Sulpicius VSM, prologue, 3. 12

The first part is part of a humility topos, nonetheless he states explicitly that his emphasis is on content (res) rather than formulation or style (verba). Furthermore, we can see a comment on a discussion on style and eloquence that was apparently going on in Sulpicius’ circles. Is it necessary or even appropriate to speak eloquently about matters of salvation? The conclusion here is no, not necessarily, because regnum Dei non in eloquentia, sed in fide constat. God chose fishermen to spread the Gospel. Sulpicius, however, not being a fisherman, produces a classical style and consciously quotes only very limitedly from the Bible.45 His structure reminds of Suetonius, and he engages with Sallust and Livy.46 Though classical, it is still written in easy and straightforward basic Latin. Sulpicius aims to hold up Martin as an edifying exemplar for others and in writing about him to win himself the reward of eternal life rather than eternal fame (for which the ancients strived).47 In his time Christians, and ascetics all the more, are still facing a hostile environment. Sulpicius writes for ascetic circles, but also for Christians and pagans not approving of asceticism. This work is the first about Martin, and Martin’s ‘type’ of saint. This gives his work an apologetic tone and a level of detail that is fitting for an audience unfamiliar with the subject matter. Six to seven decades later, (c. 460-470), a new version in six books was made, this time in verse. We only know its poet – Paulinus of Périgueux the ‘Erfinder des hagiographischen Epos’48 – from his own works.49 Fortunatus would later confuse this Paulinus with Paulinus of Nola.50 That Paulinus of Périgueux was bishop of Périgueux is inferred from his employment of a deacon, a privilege in this period only reserved for bishops.51 He addresses his work to bishop Perpetuus of Tours, who sent Paulinus a tam splendidam historiam and asked him to write a new version, ut … ad totius orbis notitiam

45 Stancliffe 1983, 39. 46 Stancliffe 1983, 89-90; 59. Suetonian structure consists of a chronologically arranged first part up until the hight of the person’s career, a second part per species, and a third part on the personality. Stancliffe 1983, 90: “[…] chapters 2-10 do contain a chronological account of Martin’s career up to his election as bishop and foundation of Marmoutier; the following fourteen chapters devoted to his miraculous deeds as bihop are strictly arranged according to subject-matter; and the final three chapters are about Martin’s personality and way of life, with a possibly Suetonian echo in the phrase ‘interiorem vitam illius et converssationem cotidianum.” Cf. Suetonius Augustus, 61.1. 47 Sulpicius VSM 1.6. 48 Vielberg 2006, 75. 49 Chase 1932, 52. 50 Fortunatus VSM 20. Stemmate, corde, fide pollens Paulinus. 51 Huber 1901, 10; Schanz 1920, 377; Chase 1932, 52. 13 perveniret.52 Paulinus uses Sulpicius’ Vita for his first three books, bases his fourth and fifth book on the Dialogues and covers with his sixth book the wonders that Perpetuus had sent him.53 One motive for the emergence of this work is, then, a local one. The bishop of Tours desired an ‘elegant poetical version of the Vita Sulpicius produced’,54 and he wanted the material from the list of wonders at Martin’s shrine – written by himself – added. Martin’s shrine became very popular for pilgrims, and maybe a metrical version and renewed advertisement for Martin would add to the powerbase of any bishop of Tours.55 Paulinus’ audience must be inferred from his work as well. The fact that it is in hexameters shows it is not intended for any reader. I discussed already how, from the fourth century, new wealth and social classes joined the Christian audience. Paulinus, now writing for a mostly Christian audience of educated conversi, does not need the apologetic stance of Sulpicius. He states many matters with positive evaluations that Sulpicius might have felt the need to explain.56 There is, however, the need to provide the Christian message in a stylistically sophisticated way. Paulinus follows the narrative thread of Sulpicius quite closely, rather expanding than abbreviating episodes. The cult of Saint Martin is established by now, although primarily in Aquitania.57 The material of Martin’s life is no longer completely new information to be rendered for the first time. At the same time, however, if aiming for a bigger range than Aquitania, Paulinus must incorporate a comprehensive hagiographical account.58 Paulinus will typically explain and elaborate on the lesson and meaning to be taken out of an episode.

52 Paulinus of Périgueux VSM, prologue, 11-12. A discussion exists on the meaning of splendidam historiam, see chapter 3. I take Splendidam historiam as referring to a revised Tours version of Sulpicius’ VSM, see Chase 1932, 55-56. 53 Gärtner 2001, 71. 54 Chase 1932, 55: “Perpetuus was, indeed, at the time engaged upon a sort of campaign for the glorification of St. Martin. The great church at Tours was then building […]” 55 See Brown (1981) on the relation between a bishop’s power and the importance of the local shrine he is connected with. See Stancliffe 1983, 361 and Vielberg 2006, 62 for the popularity of Martin’s cult and Perpetuus’ role. 56 The apologetic stance towards Martin’s period in the army, for example, to be discussed later; On Sulpicius’ wish to explain asceticism to his environment see Stancliffe 1983, 79. The statement about positive evaluation will be discussed in Chapter 4. 57 Stancliffe 1983, 361; Vielberg 2006, 69. 58 Vielberg 2006, 69 “Der Hagiograph muss dagegen [i.e. in contrast with the author of biblical epic, who’s material is known] in der Regel einen logisch aufgebauten Volltext bieten, der auch den weniger gut orientierten Rezipienten ein Verstehen ermöglicht.” Vielberg names Fortunatus as an exception to this rule. The reason seems to me clearly the wider knowledge of St. Martin attributed to by Fortunatus’ forbearers. Paulinus does recount most of the narrative events of Sulpicius’ text, but I do not agree that his aim is primarily to tell Martin’s tale to an unfamiliar audience. If that was the goal, then all his personal commentary and praise 14

In the sixth century we encounter another Life of Martin in Latin literature. At the crossroads of late antiquity and the Middle Ages in Merovingian Gaul, Venantius Fortunatus is an interesting figure. Bernt once called him ‘the last poet of antiquity and the first of the Middle Ages.’59 He attended the traditional Roman literary education in Ravenna, and after that worked in service of royals, nobles and bishops in Gaul.60 “Er war Dichter von Begabung, Neigung und letzten Endes auch Profession.”61 His large corpus contains many short epigrammatic texts for his patrons.62 Very different from these is his epic Life of Martin, ‘it represents for Fortunatus a rare foray into hexameters’.63 It is dated around 575.64 In the case of Fortunatus, the question of why another epic was made is maybe the most poignant. Two texts were already in place. According to the preface, the text was mandated by Gregory of Tours and it is dedicated to his friends and patrons Radegund and Agnes by a letter accompanying the text. These two ladies are founder and abbess of the convent of the Holy Cross at Poitiers.65 The connection with Poitiers and Tours is amply present in the story of Martin (his teacher is Hilary of Poitiers, and eventually Martin is elected bishop of Tours). Quesnel suggested Radegund and Agnes might have proposed a work on Martin to ‘promote close ties between the convent and the new bishop of Tours’ (i.e. Gregory).66 Fortunatus’ Vita Sancti Martini consists of four books. Books 1-2 cover Sulpicius’ material, while the third book covers Dialogue 2.1-13, and in the fourth he treats Dialogue 3.1-17. Again a bishop of Tours gives the impetus for a work about Martin, stimulating his Tours cult. Martin’s holiness was firmly established now and his shrine was a popular stop for pilgrims.67 This may explain

would only impede the main message. To me, it seems more like Paulinus is engaging in an existing cult. Of course, this could also mean that Paulinus did not succeed in his conduct. 59 Bernt 1968, 118, quoted in Roberts 2001, 257. Bernt discusses shorter poems by Fortunatus, and their epigrammatic nature in 118-132. 60 Roberts 2001, 257. 61 Bernt 1968, 118. 62 Roberts 2001, 258. There are some other longer poems in Fortunatus’ oeuvre, but the longest (De Virginitate) is 400 lines. See Roberts 2001, 257, n. 1. 63 Roberts 2001, 258; poems 2.4, 2.5, 5.6, and 6.24-143 are also in hexameters. The first three are figure poems, the last is an epithalamium. However none of them are long nor could be called an epic. 64 Roberts 2001, 258. 65 Roberts 2001, 258. 66 Quesnel 1996, xiv-xvi; Roberts 2001, 258, n.1. 67 Stancliffe 1983, 361: “it was only with Clovis’conquest of this area in 507 that Martin’s cult achieved a wider dispersion through Gaul, thanks to his being adopted by the Merovingians as their patron saint.” 15

Fortunatus’ freedom to transform extensive parts of Sulpicius’ narrative, still followed quite closely by Paulinus, into a series of compact miracles.68 The desire for a new version might be explained by the very difference between Fortunatus’ treatment of the material and that of Paulinus. After having discussed the scholarship on these authors in , I will examine the texts and their peculiarities more closely in chapter 4.

68 In the case of Martin’s army period, for instance, which will be discussed in Chapter 4. Also Roberts 2001, 274: “Fortunatus typically prefers shorter units of composition.” 16

Chapter 3: Scholarship

In this chapter, I will discuss theories other scholars have formed about the epic lives, and other theories relevant to our interpretation of the texts.69 The epic by Paulinus of Périgueux, also known as Paulinus of Petricordia, was edited by Petschenig (1888). There is some discussion about Paulinus’ preface. In it, Paulinus states that Perpetuus who mandates his work, sent him splendida historia. Is it the preface to the whole work, as it is placed in Regensis 582 (from now on ‘R’), the most dominant manuscript according to Petschenig, with splendida historia referring to a version of Sulpicius’ Life of Martin? Or did Paulinus write the first five books, and then receive the splendida historia, in this case referring to the work Perpetuus wrote on the miracles at Martin’s shrine? This would suggest that the preface in R would then be misplaced and refers only to the sixth book. Huber (1901) has formulated arguments for the former position, but these have been convincingly refuted by Chase (1932). Another idea has been proposed by Van Dam (1986), who argues that Perpetuus sent Paulinus the Dialogues when the first three books were already finished.70 Some parts of the epic are discussed in a dissertation by Grünberg.71 There is also a chapter on Paulinus in Vielberg (2006), discussing the relation between Paulinus and Perpetuus, and his hagiographical epic as an innovation of genre. Vielberg also discusses Fortunatus, focusing on his many travels and his use of nautical metaphors.72 I do not know of any translation of Paulinus’ epic (in full). Chase (1932) has compared both epics, but with the main intent of researching what clues Paulinus’ and Fortunatus’ use of Sulpicius provides on the manuscript tradition of the prose text. The general evaluation of the three Lifes might be summarized as follows:

The story of his [i.e. Martin] kind and manly life was first told in the pleasant, not inelegant prose of Sulpicius Severus, […] and in the course of the next two hundred years was twice subjected to a metrical transformation, first at the hands of Paulinus

69 As Sulpicius’ prose life is my point of departure, scholarly discussion on that work is not treated here. For a good starting point, see Stancliffe (1989). 70 Van Dam 1986, 567. Vielberg follows Van Dam (but quotes him wrongly as Van Dam 1987, in Vielberg 2006, 62, n.111). I follow Chase. However, no theory yet explains all the problems. See for a more detailed discussion Vielberg 2006, 64-67. 71 Grünberg (1990). (Paulinus 1.54-139, 2.251-334, 2.480-538, 3.260-362). 72 Vielberg (2006). Of his book chapter 2.2 is dedicated to Paulinus, and chapter 2.3 to Fortunatus. 17

of Périgueux, who wished to be, and later at the hands of Fortunatus, who was, a poet.73

In the past, scholars have uttered disapproval about late antique poetry.74 Of late, new voices are being heard, not to judge later works from a classical viewpoint. A new aesthetic was developed in poetry, in which the unit of the episode is more important than the unity of the whole, resulting in a different style of writing. Roberts (1989) has dubbed this late- antique style ‘the jeweled style’.75 Insights like this have given rise to an upcoming flow of attention for late antique texts. More recently, Gärtner (2001) explored the ‘imitationstechnik’ of Paulinus. It is typical of Paulinus’ technique that he bends pagan elements to Christian and hagiographical motives.76 Sometimes, for instance, he alludes to a pagan passage, but inverts its meaning or outcome. This way he highlights, by contrast, the Christian values and Christian heroism of Martin. An interesting case in point is an episode in which Martin stops, by his command, a snake that was coming from a flood towards bystanders.77 Paulinus here alludes to Virgil’s Laocoön passage (Aeneis 2.203-211), in which a terrible snake comes from the water and strangles the priest Laocoön and both his sons. None of the Trojans on the beach come to their aid. Paulinus, from the climax of his episode (iam iamque accedere terrae, Paulinus 5.627) onwards, deviates from his model. Whereas in Virgil’s story the Trojans flee at the sight of the snake, Martin knows what to do. He rescues his endangered sheep ‘durch seine göttliche Autorität’ and is therefore superior to Virgil’s hero Aeneas, who stood idly in the crowd.78 Gärtner illustrates Paulinus’ ‘imitationstechnik’ with many more examples, and summarizes it as:

[…] ein Verfahren, welches den Leser, der diese Anspielungen zur Kenntnis nimmt und sich an die heidnischen Vorbilder des Paulinus erinnert, mit besonderem Nachdruck auf das Neue und Besondere in der Person und in den Taten Martins hinweist. Das Modell des Paulinus [i.e. the pagan passage alluded to] bildet

73 Chase 1932, 51. 74 See the first chapter and Roberts 1989, 1-5. 75 See my first chapter. 76 Chase 1932, 71. 77 Gärtner 2001, 81-83. 78 Gärtner 2001, 83. 18

gewissermassen eine Folie, vor der das vom Autor gezechnete Profil des Heiligen deutlicher hervortritt […]

Fortunatus’ Martinian poem was edited by Leo in 1881, and more recently by Quesnel (1996) in the bilingual Budé series. A German translation has been produced by Fels (2006). Fotunatus’ panegyrical ruler poems have reveiced more scholarly attention (as well as the historical and anthropological information to be gathered from his texts about Merovingian Gaul), than his epic on Martin.79 Roberts in 1999 characterized Fortunatus’ poem as a ‘somewhat unfamiliar text’.80 The two epic texts about Martin, handling the same material, form an interesting test case. They invite the scholarly mind to dwell on their differences and similarities, and on possible explanation of those differences. However, the epics were for long considered to be redundant rephrasings of the known work of Sulpicius Severus. Labarre (1998):

Elles ont [i.e. the Lifes of Martin by Paulinus and Fortunatus] été considérées comme des oeuvres rebutantes, parce que, comme l’épopée biblique qui paraphrase les Ecritures, ells traitent un sujet déjà connu. Les jugements littéraires portés sur ells ont été très négatifs.81

Some dissertations were written about the one or the other author, not reading the three lives side by side.82 Chase (1932), although he is primarily working on the stemma of Sulpicius’ manuscript tradition, does make some general remarks in a comparison of Paulinus and Fortunatus:

The material used by Fortunatus was very nearly identical with that employed by Paulinus. The former gives a somewhat freer and more imaginative treatment of the

79 For instance, the three works by George. George, J.W., 1989, ‘Poet as Politician: Venantius Fortunatus’ Panegyric to King Chilperic’ in Journal of Medieval History 15, 5-8, 1992, Venantius Fortunatus: a Latin Poet in Merovingian Gaul, Oxford, and 1998, ‘Venantius Fortunatus: Panegyric in Merovingian Gaul’ in ed. Whitby, M., The propaganda of Power: The Role of Panegyric in Late Antiquity, Mnemosyne suppl. 183, 225-246, Leiden. 80 Roberts 2001, 257 about his lecture at Yale University November 4, 1999. 81 Labarre 1998, 10. 82 Vermeulen (1966), Malsbary (1987) and Grünberg (1990) on Paulinus of Périgueux. Ammerbauer (1966) on Venantius Fortunatus. 19

facts afforded by Sulpicius. Yet, for all the attempted faithfulness of Paulinus, his taste for rhetorical ornament caused him in many cases so to expand the text by apostrophes, paradoxes, and literary commonplaces that his version seems further from the original than the more untrammeled and more poetic paraphrase of Fortunatus.83

The expansions of Sulpicius’ original account that we find in Paulinus, are reminiscent of the techniques of the rhetorical or literary ‘paraphrase’. In the first chapter I discussed the genre of the biblical epic, and how the hagiographical epics in question belong to the same tradition. An opinion commonly held about these biblical epic is that for their technique of composition they depend on the methods of a rheotorical exercise called ‘paraphrase’ or ‘retracatio’.84 Roberts (1985) has researched the relation between this exercise and the genre of the biblical epic. In classical Roman education, the exercise of ‘paraphrase’ was part of the ‘progymnasmata’: preliminary exercises for students. After these exercises, declamations would follow, resulting, altogether, in a rhetorical skill useful in public life.85 Two kinds of paraphrase can be distinguished: grammatical, and rhetorical. In the former, an unpretentious word-for-word reconfiguration of the text is made; in the latter stylistic aims play a large role. Ultimately, (rhetorical) ‘paraphrase’ is to express one idea in multiple ways (tropoi/modi) with respect to style, not content.86 These modi are the form the idea is cast in. For example, a direct statement could be paraphrased into the form of a question, a prayer or an advice. It can be said with less words, by elision, or with more by adding an antithesis or exclamation. A very popular rhetorical handbook was written by the rhetorician Quintilian in the first century AD. Quintilian’s modi consist of contrasting pairs, for example brevity vs. copious use of words, literal expression vs. use of tropes, direct expression vs. figured expression.87 The methods for paraphrasing an idea can be reduced to three modes:

83 Chase 1932, 58. 84 Roberts 1985, 1; The connection between biblical epic and paraphrase was first argued by Golega (1930), and adopted by Curtius (1953). Herzog (1975), downplays the role of paraphrase in favour of a more Christian tradition, xx-xxii, 60-68, 155-211. Roberts (1985) reacts to him. 85 Roberts 1985, 6. 86 Roberts 1985, 11. 87 Quintilian Institutio Oratoria 10.5.4: Sed et ipsis sententiis adicere licet oratorium robur, et omissa supplere, effusa substringere – ‘But to the thoughts themselves the power of eloquence may be added, and what is left out can be supplied, what is diffuse can be restrained.’ 20 abbreviation, transposition, and amplification.88 The paraphrase should not only be an interpretation, but should rival the original.89 These methods remained part of education for centuries, as is shown by discussions about them in Cicero’s De Oratore, Quintilian, Theon’s Greek treatise, and Priscian’s Latin translation of Hermogenes’ handbook about the progymnasmata (Praeexercitamina), produced around 500 AD. Paraphrases could be intended for reading without the original. Quintilian himself answers an imaginary opponent, who believes it is no use to paraphrase something, because it has already been said in the best way:

Nam neque semper est desperandum aliquid illis quae dicta sunt melius posse reperiri, neque adeo ieiunam ac pauperem natura eloquentiam fecit ut una de re bene dici nisi semel non possit. (6) Nisi forte histrionum multa circa voces easdem variare gestus potest, orandi minor vis, ut dicatur aliquid, post quod in eadem materia nihil dicendum sit. 90

For we must not despair that something better can be found for those things that have been said, and nature did not make eloquence so meager and poor that about one thing, one could not speak well except in one way. Unless perhaps, while of actors the gestures can variate in many ways the same words, the power of oratory is inferior, so that when something has been said, thereafter nothing can be said on the same material?

But even if the new text or utterance is not as good as the original, Quintilian emphasizes, it ‘must be allowed’ to speak about it anew:

10.5.11: llud virtutis indicium est, fundere quae natura contracta sunt, augere parva, varietatem similibus voluptatem expositis dare, et bene dicere multa de paucis – ‘This is a sign of virtue, to pour out what is naturally compact, to expand little things, to give variety to things that are similar and voluptuousness to things that are explained, and to say many things on a little in an effective way.’ 88 Quintilian Institutio Oratoria 1.9.2; 10.5.8; Roberts 1985, 108. Roberts does not give an explanation of the terms. 89 Quintilian Institutio Oratoria 10.5.4 Incidentally Quintilian speaks of a certain Sulpicius using paraphrase to form his prose, here. Of course, this is not our Sulpicius Severus, who was born centuries later. 90 Quintilian Institutio Oratoria 10.5.5-6. 21

An vero ipsi non bis ac saepius de eadem re dicimus et quidem continuas nonnumquam sententias? - nisi forte contendere nobiscum possumus, cum aliis non possumus. Nam si uno genere bene diceretur, fas erat existimari praeclusam nobis a prioribus viam: nunc vero innumerabiles sunt modi, plurimaeque eodem viae ducunt. (7) Sua brevitati gratia, sua copiae, alia tralatis virtus, alia propriis, hoc oratio recta, illud figura declinata commendat.91

Truly, do we ourselves not speak twice or more often about the same thing, and often even in a series of sentences? – unless, of course, we can compete with ourselves, but we cannot with others. Because if only in one way something can be said well, we must come to the conclustion that to us the way is shut by predecessors: but there are innumerable methods, and many ways that lead to the same destination. Brevity has its own charm, and so does copiousness, another virtue is of metafors, another of nonfigural expression, this recommends direct statement, this tropological utterance.

Because paraphrastic theory is part of the broader theory of literary imitation, techniques from paraphrase can also be found in ‘non-paraphrastic literature’.92 The aims of this kind of literature are no longer educational, but literary.

As an educational exercise the paraphrase may take two different forms: either multiple paraphrases of a single short passage […], or a single paraphrase of a longer passage, aiming to rival the original (aemulatio). The latter technique may also be employed outside the schools to produce what can be called ‘literary’ paraphrases. Two forms of literary paraphrase can be identified: the first interpretive and didactic in nature […], the second artistic compositions, intended for public dissemination as works of literature in their own right - the biblical epics fall into this last category, although they increasingly incorporate interpretative material.93

91 Quintilian Institutio Oratoria 10.5.7-8. 92 Roberts, 1985, 3. Note that rhetorical treatises only refer to prose paraphrases and writing poetry was ‘probably an out-of-school activity’, Roberts, 1985, 70. See also 70-73 for arguments opposing the view that it is problematic that these biblical paraphrases are metrical. 93 Roberts 1985, 39. (My italics). 22

The epics by Paulinus and Fortunatus must therefore be viewed in light of the theory of paraphrase. In the fourth chapter we will encounter some of the methods of paraphrase employed by both poets.94 Vielberg (2006) points out that we should not, at the same time, let these terms of translatio (or paraphrase) cloud the degree of innovation in the epic by Paulinus.95 Inspired by Roberts theory about the biblical epic, discussed above, Labarre (1998) compares the three Lifes of Martin. In her fifth chapter she discusses some passages in detail, and focuses on the division of the cloak as a case study.96 Another important aspect for the contextualization of the epics is the theory surrounding the reading experience of early Christianity and the Middle ages, based on the lectio divina. The lectio divina was a monastic strategy of reading Scripture.97 Hugo of St. Victor (twelfth century), standing in a long tradition of the lectio divina, formulated five stages of reading. First, there is lectio, reading the story itself, the historia. Then meditatio, which is to memorize and recite the text. “This is the phase in which spiritual interpretation mainly takes place, and the description of the activities associated with it occupies a large proportion of Didascalicon […] and of other associated writings.”98 Then follows oratio: praying. In the ‘operatio’, the reading experience will lead to doing good works. Finally, in the contemplatio, the knowledge now acquired is internalized by the reader, and helps and instructs him on his journey towards God.99 Sometimes Paulinus’ epic creates the feeling that his text represents his own reading experience of the Life of Martin by Sulpicius. It is a form of reception, of course, but I believe (parts of) the process of the lectio divina can be recognized in Paulinus’ poetical paraphrase. Paulinus ‘reads’ a part of the literal story by writing a few narrative lines, and then thinks about their meaning and implications. In the process of writing, he interprets and comments

94 This is also assumed by Vielberg 1987, 67-68. 95 Vielberg 1987, 69. “Transcriptio und translatio sind euphemistische Verhüllungen.” 96 Labarre 1998, especially 124-159. 97 See Robertson (2011). 98 Robertson 2011, 222. 99 Course ‘Late Latin Literature: Saints’ Lives and Short Stories’, by Piet Gerbrandy, UvA, May, 2016. See Robertson (2011). 23 on the material and even proceeds to prayer (Paulinus VSM, 1.298-316).100 Roberts (2001) writes about the difference between Paulinus and Fortunatus:

It It is certainly true […] that he [i.e. Paulinus] consistently introduces moral commentary into the Severan narrative, giving his work at times something of the quality of a verse sermon.101

An adjacent theory of the reading experience is the theory surrounding the interpretation of texts. Allegorical reading was a beloved method of Christians, from early Christianity throughout the Middle Ages. Origen, who lived in the third century, for instance in his twenty-seventh homily explained the journey of the Israelites in Numbers 33 as a spiritual journey, each stop having its own meaning. “To Origen, every phase of the Israelites’ exodus journey was pregnant with hidden meaning.”102 One model of interpretation assumes four steps.103 Historia is the reading of the literal story, coinciding with the ‘lectio’ of the lectio divina. Then comes allegoria, in this step the hidden meaning must be interpreted, the literal story actually exposes another theological truth. In the tropologia, the reader finds the ethical or moral implications. Allegoria and tropologia both belong the ‘meditatio’ part of the reading process discussed above. Lastly, there is the anagogia, ‘the prophetic sense,

100 Robertson 2011, xvi in a list of types of compilations: “In a further development of the compilation genre, John of Fécamp’s Confessio theologica (mid-eleventh century) and its various revisions offer what may be described as original ‘meditations’ on sacred writings, quoted at length and focused through extended first person prayers. In these works, reading flows into writing, the quotations into the quoting texts, in an unbroken continuum.” It may be interesting to compare Paulinus’ epic to this kind of ‘meditation’. Could the whole epic paraphrase be seen in the context of Paulinus’ personal meditation on the life of Martin? I think this goes too far. However, further research on the similarities between the activity of the meditation and Paulinus’ writing would be interesting. See also the remark of Roberts on Sedulius: “According to Reinhart Herzog (1984), in these narrations Sedulius creates a new poetic form, the rhetorical meditation, a form which he traces through the 17th century English metaphysical poets. But Sedulius most immediate influence is on the Martin poets, Paulinus of Périgueux and Fortunatus, both of whom, in their different ways, adopt the Sedulian model of discontinuous narrative structure with rhetorically elaborated commentary on individual episodes.” Roberts 2001, 265. 101 Roberts 2001, 262. 102 Franke 2003, 21. 103 Robertson 2011, 19-20. The model of interpretation had the generally accepted form, here described, from Cassian (beginning of the fifth century) onwards. Before that date, theories differed about the order and number of steps. “… a ‘philosophical’ order (history, tropology, allegory) and a ‘theological’ one (history, allegory, tropology). The ‘philosophical’ order, which is that of Origen, follows the Platonic model of the human person, comprised of body, soul and spirit. The ‘theological’ order, followed by Gregory …, gives precedence to the allegorical exposition of Christian doctrine and provides for moral instruction to follow from it logically as a third term.” See De Lubac 1959, 1.1, 171-207. 24 oriented toward the heavenly life to come.’104 We will encounter allegorical reading in the interpretation of Fortunatus’ recollection of the cloak story in the fourth chapter of this study. In this chapter we have seen theories about Paulinus’ ‘imitationstechnik’, some general remarks on the differences between the two authors, and the theory that biblical epic is to be seen in the light of the rhetorical paraphrase. Furthermore, I have discussed ideas about the reading experience from early Christianity throughout the Middle Ages, and late-antique ideas on interpretation. What is still missing, however, is a detailed discussion and comparison of Latin passages from the works. In the next chapter we will explore the texts themselves.

104 Robertson 2011, 18. 25

Chapter 4: Case studies

In this chapter I will discuss three episodes from the life of Martin, and one passage that is added by Paulinus. Following a method of close reading I will explore how the epics deal with the original material. First I give Sulpicius’ prose as the basis to start from, then I will discuss the story in parts, switching between Paulinus and Fortunatus.

The story of the Cloak The first passage I will examine is the cloak story. This episode, in which Martin as a soldier comes by a beggar in the freezing cold at the gate of Amiens is one of the best known images of this saint today.105 Maybe because this is the good deed that anyone of us could have done. It is a scene with great imaginative power. Somewhat like in the New Testament story about the good Samaritan,106 all others pass this poor cold man by. Martin, however, a roman soldier, wants to help the man and cuts his cloak in half to warm him. The young saint is mocked by bystanders, like Jesus was himself mocked in life. Our biblically framed protagonist then sees a vision of Christ clothed in his very cloak. Sulpicius’ version has Christ explaining the meaning of the vision(3.3).

3 (1) Quodam itaque tempore, cum iam nihil praeter arma et simplicem militiae vestem haberet, media hieme, quae solito asperior inhorruerat, adeo ut plerosque vis algoris exstingueret, obvium habet in porta Ambianensium civitatis pauperem nudum: qui cum praetereuntes ut sui misererentur oraret omnesque miserum praeterirent, intellegit vir Deo plenus sibi illum, aliis misericordiam non praestantibus, reservari. (2) Quid tamen ageret? Nihil praeter chlamydem, qua indutus erat, habebat: iam enim reliqua in opus simile consumpserat. arrepto itaque ferro, quo accinctus erat, mediam dividit partemque eius pauperi tribuit, reliqua rursus induitur. Interea de circumstantibus ridere nonnulli, quia deformis esse truncatus habitu videretur: multi tamen, quibus erat mens sanior, altius gemere, quod nihil simile

105 This is not the first literary episode concerning the sharing of clothes or even specifically the division of a cloak. Dionysios Chysostomos (first or second century AD) writes of a commoner who gives his daughters dress to a poor person. The actual division of a cloak is found in the romance Historia Apolonii Regis Tyri (commonly thought to be a Greek romance from the third century). Grünberg calls the story as such part of a ‘Wandermotiv, das ursprünglich zum Repertoire des antiken Erlebnis- und Reiseromans zählte.’ Grünberg 1990, 16. 106 Luke 10.25-37. 26

fecissent, cum utique plus habentes vestire pauperem sine sui nuditate potuissent. (3) Nocte igitur insecuta, cum se sopori dedisset, vidit Christum chlamydis suae, qua pauperem texerat, parte vestitum. Intueri diligentissime Dominum vestemque, quam dederat, iubetur agnoscere. Mox ad angelorum circumstantium multitudinem audit Iesum clara voce dicentem: Martinus adhuc catechumenus hic me veste contexit. (4) Vere memor Dominus dictorum suorum, qui ante praedixerat: quamdiu fecistis uni ex minimis istis, mihi fecistis, se in paupere professus est fuisse vestitum: et ad confirmandum tam boni operis testimonium in eodem se habitu, quem pauper acceperat, est dignatus ostendere. (5) Quo viso vir beatissimus non in gloriam est elatus humanam, sed bonitatem Dei in suo opere cognoscens, cum esset annorum duodeviginti, ad baptismum convolavit.107

And so, on a certain moment, when already he possessed nothing apart from his weapons and plain soldier’s garment, in the midst of a winter, that shivered more fierce than usual –so much that the power of the cold had extinguished many –, [Martin] came across an unclothed poor man at the gate of the city Amiens, who begged bypassers to have compassion with him, and all passed the unhappy fellow by. The man filled with God understood that for him the man was reserved, to whom others did not lend their pity. But what should he do? He had nothing, except for the cloak, in which he was wrapped: for his other things he had used in similar work. Thus after he had grabbed his sword, with which he was clad, he divided it in half and gave his part to the poor man, the other he put back on. Meanwhile no few people laughed at the matter, because he seemed mutilated with the appearance of a deformed person. There were many, however, that had a more sound intellect. Some sighed, because they had done nothing similar, while they – possessing more – certainly could have clothed the poor man without [the need for/result of] their own nudity. When night had followed, and he surrendered himself to sleep, he saw Christ, dressed in the part of his cloak, with which he had covered the beggar. He was urged to inspect, with the utmost care, the Lord and to recognize the garment, which he had given. Soon he heard Jesus tell with clear voice to the host of angels standing around him: “Martin, still a catechumen, covered me with a garment.” Truly the Lord

107 Sulpicius VSM 3.1-5. 27

thought of his own words, which he had said before: As long as you have acted for one of the least, you have done it to me. He said, that it was he that was clothed in the poor man: and to confirm the testimony of so great a deed, he showed himself in the same robe, that the pauper had received. When he had seen this, the blessed man was not carried away in human glory, but, recognizing the benevolence of God in his act, hasted for baptism.

This story in Sulpicius functions as the ‘conversion story’. It narrates the event in Martin’s life that made him choose baptism. The passage reminds of the conversion story found in the influential and slightly earlier Life of Antony, by Athanasius. Antony experiences his ‘call’ when he is ‘eighteen or twenty years old’, corresponding to Martin’s own conversion (Martin is baptized at eighteen, and leaves the world at twenty.108 Antony’s conversion (to asceticism) is realized in two steps.109 First, he hears in church service the story of the rich young man asking Jesus how he will inherit eternal life. Jesus tells him to sell all his possessions and follow him, (for ‘it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God’).110 Antony feels the text is directed to him personally and cuts loose most of his possessions, keeping a little for his sister and his pension. At another moment he hears the biblical passage that encourages not to worry for tomorrow.111 This prompts Antony to hand his sister over to a women’s convent and give his last possessions away. Thereafter he moves further and further into the desert, in rigid eastern asceticism. It is this second bible passage, that is called forward in Sulpicius 2.8, just before the cloak-passage quoted above starts:

108 Athanasius Vita Antonii 2.3. Labarre, in the case of this passage in Paulinus, makes a strange comparison to Martial 5.34.5-6, because he says a little girl missed six days to become six years old (Impletura fuit sextae modo frigora brumae / vixisset totidem ni minus illa dies), and Paulinus says Martin was four lustra minus a double year old when he was baptized: “Il [i.e. Paulinus] indique le nombre d’années qui manquent pour faire un total de vingt ans, comme Martial, dans son épitaphe pour Erotion, indiquait qu’il ne manquait que six jours à la petite fille pour atteindre les six ans. Il insiste, par cette expression, sur la jeunesse et respecte la symbolique des nombres à laquelle Sulpice Sévère s’était attaché.” Labarre 1998, 131. I think, however, a comparison with the Vita Antonii is pertinent. Paulinus likes to play out numbers in other cases as well, for instance bis senis in annis, 1.24 and geminis annis, 1.134 in combination with geminata vota duorum 1.139. 109 Harmless 2004, 60 gives too simple a view of Antony’s ‘call’ and does not note its two phases. 110 Mathew, 19.21-25. Athanasius Vita Antonii, 2.3. 111 Athanasius Vita Antonii 3.1; Mathew, 6.25-34. 28

[…] nihil sibi ex militiae stipendiis praeter cotidianum victum reservare: iam tum evangelii non surdus auditor de crastino non cogitabat.

[…] he kept nothing from his military salary, except his daily livelihood: then already he did not think about tomorrow, no deaf listener to the Gospel.

Sulpicius refers to the story of Antony in a subtle way. This time it is not the bible being read in a church, but being practiced, outside any church doors at the gate of Amiens. In fact, Martin is not even baptized at this point and the two phases of Antony’s conversion are now compressed into one, by which Martin surpasses Antony as an ideal saint. The cloak episode illustrates Martin’s aforementioned freedom from worrying, hence Quodam itaque tempore in 3.1. Now that we are familiar with the original prose version of the story, let us examine Paulinus’ and Fortunatus’ account. Where Sulpicius uses 224 words for the story, Paulinus expands it to 405 words (1.59-124).112 Fortunatus abbreviates it to a modest 119 words (1.50-67). Obvium habet Pauperem nudum, qui … oraret praetereuntes in Sulpicius 3.1, becomes in Paulinus 1.63-66:

Cum subito horrentis glaciali frigore brumae nudus in occursum properat, vix verba frementi dimidians praefracta sono: sed causa loquellam 65 expedit et linguae partes proclamat erumna.

When suddenly in the icy cold of a shivering winter a naked man hurried in his direction, barely cutting in half broken words with a mumbling sound: but the cause set free his speech and distress claims parts of his tongue.

112 For a table concerning which passage corresponds to which passage in the three Lifes, see Labarre 1998, 90- 110. 29

With cum subito we fall into a new and inherently wondrous story.113 The detail of a place name is left out.114 The poor man, who is nowhere named pauper, only nudus, is said to be dimidians (halving) his words.115 This prepares for the cutting in half of the cloak.116 The expedit loquellam is picked up with expediit factum – ‘he carried out the act’ (1.85). In Fortunatus, the whole narrative is passed over, reduced to:

Occurrente igitur portae ambianensis egeno, qui sibi restiterat clamidis partitur amictum117

Thus when a poor man ran towards him at the gate of Amiens, who had remained for him, he divided the covering of his cloak

This relatively small narrative kernel of the story in Fortunatus is possible because the content of Martin’s life is already known. Abbreviation is one of the techniques of paraphrase. He expands different themes, in my opinion showcasing his new way of treating the material. The cold of that winter’s day in Sulpicius is rendered by media hieme, quae solito asperior inhorruerat, adeo ut plerosque vis algoris exstingueret (Sulpicius, 3.1), and in Paulinus by horrentis glaciali frigore brumae – ‘in the icy cold of shivering winter’ (Paulinus,

113 Grünberg points out that cum subito is often used in the context of epiphanies, and that it is also used later in 1.104, where Christ appears to Martin, dressed in his cloak. This links the beggar to Christ. Grünberg 1990, 20-21. 114 Huber 1901, 24 notes that Paulinus took names of places or persons into his account when they were convenient in the meter, but more often left them out. While Sulpicius wanted to make his story more credible by these facts, Huber states that a historically proven account is not the aim of Paulinus: “Er will nicht durch historische Beweise überzeugen, sondern er will vielmehr durch die Vita Martini erbauen und den Lesern einen Spiegel vorhalten.” See also Labarre 1998, 129: “Il ne lui [i.e. Paulinus] est plus necessaire d’apporter au lecteur des preuves historiques, mais il pourra l’édifier en lui présentant un modèle, facile à transposer dans son univers. La presence des noms propres risquerait d’écarter le lecteur, qui pourrait se sentir étranger à l’univers de Martin.” Labarre also has a more detailed explanation of the times that Paulinus does use a name or placename: “si donc il s’en tient au nom propre, c’est qu’il a une intention particulière: ou il établit le lien qu’on attend entre Martin et la ville de Tours, ou il reticent un nom parce qu’il est ancient.” Labarre does not agree with Huber on the point of the metrical difficulty of the names, because Fortunatus uses some names that Paulinus leaves out, Labarre 1998, 130. 115 Labarre 1998, 153 notes that "Les allitérations reproduisent les difficultés du malheureux à s’exprimer en raison du froid et de l’emotion.” 116 I do not agree with Grünberg, who says “dimidians kann hier natürlich nicht ‘halbieren’ heissen, sondern es soll angedeutet werden, dass der Bettler vor Kälte nur mehr stammelt und keine ganzen Wörter herausbringt. Der Ausdruck praefracta (verba) verdeutlicht ebenfalls das Stottern des Bettlers.” The image is, of course, of a shivering and stuttering man, but dimidians and praefracta are in my opinion chosen for the wordplay with the division of the cloak that is to follow. 117 Fortunatus VSM 1. 56-57. 30

1.61).118 In both these cases the winter is a circumstance modifying when Martin comes across the beggar. Of course, against this background the act of Martin, exposing himself to the cold now as well, is strengthened. I believe in Fortunatus’ account, however, the cold is no longer just the background, but gets a new function.119

Frigore sub gelido terras crispante pruina, cum undas tristis hiems freno glaciale ligasset et vaga libertas fluviorum inclusa lateret, asperiore gelu de se sibi vincula nectens plus aqua frigidior, tunica vestita rigoris.120 55

When white frost crisped the lands under icy cold, when a grim winter had bound the waves with frozen rein and when the wandering freedom of rivers stayed hidden, locked up, weaving ties for herself, from her own substance, with cruder ice water more cold, was dressed in a tunic of frost.

Immediately hereafter comes the sentence in which Martin divides the cloak, quoted above (1.56-57). In this vivid passage the reader almost gets cold himself. The narrative world turns into a freezing wasteland where nothing moves forward, because it is tied by rigid frost. The cold is omnipresent. Is this merely a descriptive digression, distracting from the narrative continuity?121 Some remarkable words are used by Fortunatus. The word tunica stands out, reminding of the garment Martin will share.122 Nature is now wearing a tunic of frost, a parallel to the warm tunic lying ahead for the beggar.123 The literal cold of the beggar is

118 Paulinus combines in a chiastic order reminiscences to Ovid and Virgil: Virgil Georgica 3.442 (horrida bruma) and Ovid Metamorphoses 9.583 (glaciali frigore), Labarre 1998, 155. 119 This discussion arose from the fruitful treatment of this passage in the course ‘Late Latin Literature: Saints’ Lives and Short Stories’, by Piet Gerbrandy, UvA, May, 2016. 120 Fortunatus VSM, 1.51-55. 121 Cameron 1970, 264 on late antique style says, “some of these descriptions are very beautiful of their kind […], but their frequency and length cannot but hold up the flow of the narrative”. This is also quoted by Roberts, 1989, 2. 122 See also Labbarre 1998, 155: “Il recherche des images visuelles et introduit une correspondance subtile entre le geste de Martin et le paysage.” 123 Elements of nature seen as clothed, (Vestita tunica rigoris, 1.55), remind of the biblical passage refered to before the cloak-passage started. It teaches how one should not store possesions for the future, for God will give what is needed. Following this texst Saint Antony gave his possesions away to the poor, and Saint Martin 31 contrasted as well, with Martin’s arduous faith and the warmth of his act. Fortunatus maintains the cold vs. warmth vocabulary during the whole episode:

Et fervente fide membris algentibus offert. Frigoris iste capit partem, capit ille teporis. Inter utrosque inopes partitur fervor et algor 60 et nova mercandi fit nundina frigus et aestus unaque paupertas satis est divisa duobus.124

And with burning faith he offers it (i.e. amictum clamidis) to the coldening limbs. The one took a part of the cold, the other took of the warmth. Between both poor men heat and cold was divided and frost and heat became a new market of trade and one poverty was satisfactorily divided over two.

The explicit emphases on the warmth vs. cold in this second part of the episode -the antitheses are abundant (fervente fide vs. membris algentibus, frigoris iste, ille teporis, fervor et algor, frigus et aestus, uni duobus) – make us look anew to the first part: the description of the cold (F. 1.51-55). No details of the surroundings are given with these lines. Amiens, for instance, is not named at all. On another level of truth, it tells the same story of Martin’s deed, and with it, the story of salvation, and of good against evil.125 The world has grown cold, libertas is bound and nothing can move forward. Caritas and faith are needed to break these icy bonds. The warmth of Martin’s act and the fire of his faith break the ties of self- interest and sin that hold the world in its grip. An act like this has physical effect on the world: it can warm cold faithless hearts, and set the world on the fire of faith.

gave away his cloak, not worrying for himself. Mathew 6.28-32:“And why do you worry about clothing? Consider the lilies of the field, how they grow; they neither toil nor spin, yet I tell you, even Solomon in all his glory was not clothed like one of these. But if God so clothes the grass of the field, which is alive today and tomorrow is thrown into the oven, will he not much more clothe you—you of little faith? Therefore do not worry, saying, ‘What will we eat?’ or ‘What will we drink?’ or ‘What will we wear?’ For it is the Gentiles who strive for all these things; and indeed your heavenly Father knows that you need all these things.” The magnificently clothed lilies stand in contrast with the frosty tunics in the world, where everyone walks the beggar by, until Martin warms the world up. 124 Fortunatus VSM 1.58-62. 125 See the paragraph on allegorical reading in Chapter 3. 32

Another image that we find in Fortunatus 1.58-62 is that of a sort of magical trade transaction. With a dazzling rhetorical tour de force the reader is taken through the paradoxes, to end with the result of both men profiting, having both received poverty, (Unique paupertas satis est divisa duobus). This reminds of a Christian topos, the sum of the parts can be more than the whole.126 What is more, by the very division of poverty, paupertas becomes its own counterpart, because both men now have enough. These lines contain many figures of speech that must have provided spectacular sound effects: for instance, alliteration (fervente fide … offert; nova … nundina; fit frigus; divisa duobus), assonance (utrosque inopes), chiasm (Frigoris iste capit partem, capit ille teporis), parallelism (fervor et algor, frigus et aestus), and many different synonyms and figura etymologica (algentibus, frigoris, algor, and frigus for cold; fervente, teporis, fervor and aestus for heat). Along these lines, the meaning of fervor as the literal warmth provided by the cloak and the abstract or allegorical heat of the faith and Martin’s deed start to blend over to each other. This makes all the more probable the interpretation of the first part of the episode, where on a literal level nature is described, but the cold is carrying at the same time another meaning as well. Paulinus adds elements of Martin’s inner dialogue, not found in Sulpicius or Fortunatus. For instance, Martin now doubts (Substitit incertus confuso pectore sanctus Quid faceret: nam votum aderat, substantia derat- ‘With disheveled mind, unsure, he stood still, the holy man. What could he do: because the wish was there, but the material absent’, 1.69) and condemns his own delay (cordis dispendia damnat, 1.80). The pondering of things in/with their chest or heart is a trait of the Homeric heroes.127 The inner dialogue also fits well in the paraphrase technique of expansion.128 Grünberg (1990) describes Paulinus’ expansion as follows:

126 For instance, Henri d’Avranches (twelfth century) describes how when St. Franciscus is on a boat where there is not enough food, one portion is wondrously enough for them all, Vita Francisci 8.50-63. In the same line of thought Martin’s single cloak provides warmth enough for both, and the cloak can be worth more than the most precious royal robe. (O vere pretiosa clamis!, paulinus 1.107). Labarre points out that nundina (Fortunatus 1.61) is used four times in Ezekiel, and may be reminiscent of Noah’s pact. “Dans la nouveauté de ce partage résonne l'harmonie de l'alliance noachique qui concilie des termes antithétiques.” Labarre 1998, 157. 127 See Grünberg 1990, 27. “Durch sein Zögern […] verhält Martin sich wie ein epischer Held, der vor eine schwere Entscheidung gestellt wird.” Grünberg 1990, 27.n.12 gives as ancient examples Homerus Odyssey, 5.354 ff, Iliad 17.79 and Virgil Aeneis 4.279. 128 See chapter 3. 33

Er erweitert diese [i.e. the Prose Life] hingegen durch zahlreiche Apostrophen, ‘exclamationes’ und andere Überschüsse, die zu einer ‘Psychologisierung’ des Epos fuhren. Dazu kommen noch Umgestaltungen durch Zusätze, die der Wertung der Ereignisse oder der Poetisierung des Prosatextes dienen.129

The last part of this episode is about Christ himself wearing the cloak. In Sulpicius Christ comes to Martin in a dream vision and tells his angels that it was him that Martin had dressed (hic me veste contexit). The primary narrator then explains Jesus’ utterance, giving even the relevant biblical reference away (quamdiu fecistis uni ex minimis istis, mihi fecistis). In Paulinus, the primary narrator first breaks out in laudation, commenting on the climax of the cutting in half of the cloak,130 before the vision of Christ is narrated:

O felix, virtute tua miracula vincens omnia et excedens domini praecepta iubentis. Ille etenim modico contentos nos iubet esse nec servare duas vestes: tu dividis unam.131

O happy man, surpassing in virtue all of your miracles and fulfilling the precepts of the command of the Lord. For He commands that we are satisfied with little and not to withhold two garments: you divide one.

This kind of narrative commentary on the story is typical for Paulinus’ approach. The story of the cloak alone contains three exclamations by the primary narrator (O felix 1.91; O vere

129 Grünberg 1990, 4. 130 In the iconography of this story, we often find a cloak cut halfway through, vertically. But is this correct? Sulpicius calls it a chlamydem (military cloak) and thereafter says mediam dividit partemque eius pauperi tribuit, reliqua rursus induitur (Sulpicius 3.2). Paulinus talks about a duplicata clamis, that with its twin covering (geminato amictu) wards of rain and cold (1.74-75). Fortunatus does not say Martin split he cloak, but the covering of the cloak (partitur amictum clamidis, 1.57, cf. Martinique clamis texit velamine Christum 1.64). The cloak in question is a functional military cloak, used in the North at the Rhine front. Paulinus’ text, especially suggests it was a lined cloak. Martin may have cut out the lining with his sword and given this to the beggar. In this way it also makes more sense that he can ‘induitur’ the remainder (reliqua rursus induitur, Sulpicius 3.2) and that Paulinus imagines him taking the worse part (for what is the worst part of a cloak cut halfway?), (Peiorem sibi credo legens, Paulinus 1.88). Credits for this idea go to Piet Gerbrandy in the course ‘Late Latin Literature: Saints’ Lives and Short Stories’, UvA, May, 2016. 131 Paulinus VSM 1.91-94. 34 pretiosa clamis! 1.107; O virtus vicina deo 1.117), at the head of the same number of passages (1.91-99; 1.107-114; 1.117-119), that give a high-flown reflection on the events of the narrative. These passages remind of the function of the chorus in classical plays, but now have a panegyric (O felix, virtute tua miracula vincens / omnia), mixed with an exegetical function (Ille etenim modico contentos nos iubet esse / nec servare duas vestes: tu dividis unam) in the language of prayer (for instance, second person verbs and see 1.111-114).132 These passages, with their use of apostrophe and narrative commentary, also fit in the paraphrastic technique of expansion. They explain the meaning of a passage with an eye on the edification of their reader. After Martin’s generous act he goes to sleep. Sulpicius writes: nocte igitur insecuta, cum se sopori dedisset, vidit Christum chlamydis suae, qua pauperem texerat, parte vestitum. In Paulinus we find an interesting description of Martin’s evening (1.101-103):

Nam vix defessos stratis reiecerat artus admittens tenuem, vigili sed corde, soporem (nec sopor illud erat, quia mens adtenta vigebat):

For he had barely laid his tired limbs on his stretcher allowing himself a scanty sleep, but keeping his heart awake (nor was this sleep, because his attentive mind kept watch):

Grünberg (1990) points out that this description makes use of ‘Vergilianischer Wendungen’.133 Among them are, for instance, Aeneis 2.253 (sopor fessos conlectitur artus), Aeneis 3.511 (fessos sopor inrigat artus) and Georgica 4.190 (fessosque sopor suus occupant artus).134 In Aeneis 3.173, a passage in which the Penates appear to Aeneas to tell him to leave Krete, it is said that ‘this was not sleep’ (Aeneis 3.173-174), because Aeneas could see the Penates were really there:

132 Norden 1913, 144 states that apostrophes starting with ‘o’ are typical of prayers. See also Grünberg 1990, 30. 133 Grünberg 1990, 33. 134 Grünberg 1990, 33. 35

(nec sopor illud erat, sed coram agnoscere vultus velatasque comas praesentiaque ora videbar;

And this was not sleep, but openly I recognized their countenance and I saw their veiled hair and their present faces;

Paulinus quoted nec sopor illud erat directly from the Aeneid, with regard for the original context of his quote, since there the passage is also a matter of divine appearance with a message for the sleeper. What is more sublime than a message from Christ himself? Once again Martin outstrips Aeneas. The dream is a relatively long part of Sulpicius’ narration, containing direct speech. The direct speech is skipped in Paulinus, and the narrative proper is abbreviated to 1.104- 106:

Cum subito ante oculos larga mercede benignus adstitit inque suo vestitus pauper Christus 105 aptavit propriis felicia tegmina membris.

When suddenly before his eyes with a generous reward stood the benign Christ, and dressed as a beggar in hís [garment] he had put the blessed covering on his own limbs.

This meager narrative account of such a grand miracle focuses the attention on Paulinus’ approach: the meaning of events is not in the story proper, but in his exultant commentary (1.107-114). Fortunatus treats the event in a significantly different way (1. 63-67):

Hac se veste tamen tectum obtulit ipse creator Martinique clamis texit velamine Christum. Nulla augustorum meruit hunc vestis honorem: 65 militis alba clamis plus est quam purpura regis. Prima haec virtutum fuit arra et pignus amoris.

36

The creator himself showed himself covered by this garment And the cloak of Martin covered with its robe Christ. No garment of emperors deserved this honor: A white soldier’s cloak is more than a royal’s purper garment. This was the first pledge of his virtues and guaranty of love.

Fortunatus focuses on the kernel: the meaning is inside the deed itself. The primary narrator states the outcome, not as part of the narrative (there is no description of the vision), but as a miracle in a series of miracles (prima haec virtutum). His love for paradox can clearly be seen, the greater the paradox the greater the miracle (militis clamis plus est quam purpura regis). I would say Fortunatus’ account too is exegetical, but in a different way than that of Paulinus. Fortunatus’ allegorizing method interprets the story of the cloak, and explains its value and meaning, for instance in the image of nature, discussed above, or in the paradox of simple soldiers’ cloak that exceeds in worth a royal robe. Some scholars point out Fortunatus’ love for paradox, some that of Paulinus.135 Perhaps this fondness can be seen in the light of the bigger frame of Christianity.136 The Christian worldview is a paradoxical one. The life we see is not the real life, the invisible eternal life is the real life. Life is death and death is life. The poor are important and the rich cannot win. The last will be the first and the sum of the parts can be bigger than the whole. Poets like Paulinus and Fortunatus play with these concepts, but Sulpicius does so as well in the start of his narrative, contrasting different meanings of fame and eternity.137 Roberts (2001) says in a brief discussion of Sedulius: “Antithesis and paradox figure largely as a means of teasing out the spiritual content of each passage.”138 Formulated in this way, the function of paradox reminds me of the principle of the ‘testing of the truth’ by pulling things into the absurd and inverting relations and values in Menippean satire and prosimetra.139 There, the effect is to question norms and values by breaking them down in a carnavalesque story. Here too, worldly values and worldly authorities are broken down and inverted, albeit in a more serious, non-carnavalesque fashion.

135 For Fortunatus, for instance Roberts 2001, 280. For Paulinus, for instance Huber 1901, 11. 136 For a similar argument see Labarre 1998, 141-142. 137 Sulpicius VSM 1.1-6. 138 Roberts 2001, 265. 139 See Dronke (1994), especially the first chapter. 37

Martin quits the army

The second case I will investigate, is the story about Martin leaving the army. Sulpicius, vague about chronology elsewhere, is meticulous in the first section of his narrative.140 When Martin was fifteen, we read, he was enrolled in the army by his father (Sulpicius, 2.5). Sulpicius makes it clear that this was not his choice: it was demanded by law (edictum esset a regibus, ut veteranorum filii ad militiam scriberentur – ‘it was decreed by the emperors, that sons of veterans must enroll for military service’), his father pushed him (prodente patre), and he was forced (captus et catenatus sacramentis militaribus implicatus est – ‘captured and shackled by military oaths, he enrolled). He does not however, so informs us his biographer, act like a soldier, but he washes the feet of his fellows and serves others at dinner: (2.7 ut iam illo tempore non miles, sed monachus putaretur – ‘so that already in that time you would not believe him to be a soldier, but a monk’). Three years later (Integer tamen ab iis vitiis, quibus illud hominum genus implicari solet. – ‘Yet, unharmed by those sins, in which that type of people is used to be entwined), at eighteen, he was baptized (Sulpicius, 2.6, at the end of the cloak story, quoted above). Nevertheless, he did not immediately leave the army, because a befriended tribune pleaded that he should wait for him, so that they could leave the world behind together at the end of the tribuneship. Martin waited two years for that promise (Qua Martinus exspectatione suspensus per biennium fere posteaquam est baptismum consecutus, solo licet nomine militavit – In suspense of that moment Martin stayed for almost two years after baptism, being a soldier albeit only in name.) In the prose Life this adds up to a military period of five years on the one hand, and an apologetic tone in Sulpicius on the other.141 There are some problems with the chronology of this period of Martin’s life. We know that emperor Julian’s gathering at Worms must have been in the year 356.142 Sulpicius’ text claims that Martin was then twenty years of age, placing his date of birth in 336.

140 Note that a chronological first section is part of the Suetonian structure. However, only in the case of Martin’s military period Sulpicius uses the age of Martin. His further chronological section consists of indications like ‘sub idem fere tempus’ (9.1). Note also the similarity of the age of conversion between Martin and Antony, discussed in the previous paragraph. 141 A normal period in the army was 20-25 years, but there are other examples of man leaving the army after a shorter period. See Stancliffe 1983, 125. 142 Stancliffe 1983, 126 n.59. 38

However, Gregory of Tours gives his year of birth as 315/6.143 The latter date would imply that Martin served a full twenty-five years in the military. Babut (1912) claimed that Sulpicius was twisting the truth in order to shape Martin to propagate his own ascetic ideals. Stancliffe (1983), however, argues that Gregory had access to local archival records of Tours on the death and succession of bishops, but not on their birth date. Gregory cites out of nineteen bishops only the birth dates of Martin and his own predecessor.144 Stancliffe suggests that it was actually Sulpicius’ Dialogi, 2.7.4 that was his source. Sulpicius, there, names Martin a septuagenarius (someone who is seventy/in his seventies), in a passage about dinner with emperor Maximus and his wife. This dinner we can date to 384/5, placing Martin’s birthdate around 315. Stancliffe, having shown the word septuagenarius is used in a very rhetorical passage, suggests the word here could be taken as ‘old man’.145 I am convinced by the ‘short chronology’ of Stancliffe. However, long or short, there is friction in the image of a Saint in the army.

They [i.e. Babut and Fontaine] point to the revulsion, widely felt in the fourth century, against ordaining anyone who had served in the militia (which included the civil service and army) – especially if he had continued to serve after baptism. This is particularly pertinent for Martin’s case, as Brice explicitly accused Martin of being defiled by his army career.146

Killing and other activities a soldier was prone to come in contact with, made the military controversial for Christians in the fourth century.147 This is why Sulpicius puts great effort in illustrating he is only a soldier in name in caput 2-3. Martin does not go quietly, but tells the emperor Julian in person (direct speech) at a donativum at Worms that he wants to be a soldier of God (Christi ego miles sum: pugnare

143 Gregorius of Tours Historia Francorum 1.48. 144 Stancliffe 1983, 118. 145 Stancliffe 1983, 129-132. 131: “[…] we can at least say that gross exaggeration was perfectly acceptable in what was clearly a rhetorical passage.” 146 Stancliffe 1983, 127. Brice (i.e. Brixius in Latin) was Martin’s successor, for his accusation see Dialogi, 3.15.4; Babut 1912, 71-71, 167-170, 121-122; Fontaine 1961, 205-222. 147 The general attitude of Christians towards warfare changed over time. For the conflict between sanctity and warfare in later periods (sixth to eleventh century), see Damon (2003). For a discussion of the differing interpretations of the miles Christi in the Middle Ages and Renaissance (eleventh to sixteenth century), see Bolgar (1976). 39 mihi non licet. – ‘I am a soldier of Christ: I am not allowed to fight.’)148 The emperor ascribes Martin’s request to cowardice rather than religion. The Saint offers to go unarmed into the frontline, to prove his intent, and is imprisoned to ensure he lives up to his word. The next morning the enemy surrenders. Sulpicius’ explanation of the victory is not very epic:

Unde quis dubitet hanc vere beati viri fuisse victoriam, cui praestitum sit, ne inermis ad proelium mitteretur. (8) Et quamvis pius Dominus servare militem suum licet inter hostium gladios et tela potuisset, tamen ne vel aliorum mortibus sancti violarentur obtutus, exemit pugnae necessitatem. (9) Neque enim aliam pro milite suo Christus debuit praestare victoriam, quam ut subactis sine sanguine hostibus nemo moreretur.149

Who could thereafter doubt that this victory had truly been of the blessed man, to whom it was given that he was not sent unarmed into battle. And, although the pius Lord could have kept his soldier safe in the midst of the swords and arrows of the enemy, to prevent that the gaze of the holy man was violated by the deaths of others, he took away the need of battle. And Christ did not need to give a different victory to his soldier, than that, when the enemies were subordinated without bloodshed, nobody would die.

What can we say about the different presentations of this story in Paulinus and Fortunatus? Paulinus follows Sulpicius’ storyboard in his 1.131-178. I will discuss it in parts, starting with 1.131-153:

148 A donativum is the paying out of extra salary by the emperor, before an impending battle. The concept of a miles Christi is already found in Ephesians 6.10-17. In the last part of this letter of advice from Paul to the congregation of Ephesos, he tells the believers to put on the armour of Christ: “Finally, be strong in the Lord and in the strength of his power. Put on the whole armor of God, so that you may be able to stand against the wiles of the devil. For our struggle is not against enemies of blood and flesh, but against the rulers, against the authorities, against the cosmic powers of this present darkness, against the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly places. Therefore take up the whole armor of God, so that you may be able to withstand on that evil day, and having done everything, to stand firm. Stand therefore, and fasten the belt of truth around your waist, and put on the breastplate of righteousness. As shoes for your feet put on whatever will make you ready to proclaim the gospel of peace. With all of these, take the shield of faith, with which you will be able to quench all the flaming arrows of the evil one. Take the helmet of salvation, and the sword of the Spirit, which is the word of God.” No real armor is meant, but spiritual or allegorical armor. No literal fight is recommended. 149 Sulpicius VSM 4.7-9. 40

Quisnam, quaeso, bonus sic consummare valebit, ut coepit teneris felix Martinus in annis? Et tamen ista gerens se nec coepisse putabat, quod vixdum geminis paulum tardaverat annis, iam meritis monachus, sed solo nomine miles, 135 rumpere calcati iam vana vocabula mundi, spondentis spectans consortia sancta tribuni, ut parvam iustamque moram mox iudici Christo pensaret geminata salus per vota duorum. Interea effractis inrupto limite claustris 140 Gallica rura ferus populari coeperat hostis. Obvius ire parat princeps cunctosque maniplos imperio, hortatu, prece, largitione vocatos in bellum cogit. Nam quos formido retentat, munera solicitant et vincunt dona timorem. 145 Sed mens plena deo metuit nihil, omnia temnit, terrorem inridet, terrena et munera calcat. Ergo ubi praegressi donum sumpsere priores, ordine transcurso sanctus de more citatur. Respuit instantis praesentia munera regis, 150 talibus et dictis it contra dicta tyranni ‘Trade alii, princeps, terrena haec munera nummos: me maiora manent maioris praemia regis.

For which good man, I wonder, will be able to finish in such a way, as happy Martin started in his younger years? And yet doing those things he thought he had not started! Because he had delayed with barely a small two years, already a monk in his deeds, but only in name a soldier, to break with the vain appellations of the trampled world. Observing the holy fellowship of the vowing tribune so that a double salvation would soon compensate the small and just delay

41

with Christ as her judge through the double vow of two. Meanwhile, after the border had been invaded and the stronghold broken open the beastly foe had started to lay waste to the Gallic countryside. The emperor prepared to meet [the threat] and with authority, incitement, prayer and generosity he urged all his summoned troops into war. For donations excited those held by fear, and gifts conquered fright. But his mind, full of God, feared nothing, scorned everything, laughed at terror, trampled on earthly presents. Thus when the first who stepped forward received their gift, after the queue had been passed the saint following custom was called for. He rejected the present donations of the insisting king, and with such words he went against the dictions of a tyrant: “Consign to another, emperor, these earthly gifts of money: greater rewards await me from a greater king.

Paulinus is not just telling this story, he is praising it. The two years after baptism are downplayed to a little (paulum) delay, of barely a double year (vixdum geminis paulum tardaverat annis). The apologetic stance of the Sulpician narrator has here made room for a positive commentator. We find many positive evaluative words, for instance spectans, sancta (1.137), and parvam iustamque moram, mox (1.138). The love for paradoxes shines through in Respuit instantis praesentia munera regis / talibus et dictis it contra dicta tyranni (150-151). The long-term king and the eternal presents are shining in their absence (although named later in 1.153). The contempt for worldly riches and authority is palpable in these two verses, that must have been suspenseful for the audience. Socalled military or warrior saints under Diocletian were martyred after they spoke up for their faith in the army.150 The soundplay of ‘r’ and ‘s’ and the chiasm in 1.150, and the sounds of ‘c’ and ‘r’ and the figura etymologica (dictis, dicta) in 1.151 contribute to the overall effect of intensity. After Julian accuses Martin of cowardice, Martin’s direct speech continues (1.160-165):

150 For the conflict between sanctity and warfare, see Damon (2003). 42

‘Denique, quod verba expediunt, et facta probabunt.151 160 Primus ego abiectis praecedens agmina telis, non arma arripiens hominis, sed signa salutis, tegmine nec fidens clipei, sed nomine Christi, atque crucem fronti auxilium pro casside ponens, intrepido cunctis occurram corde periclis.’ 165

‘Then, what words declare, deeds will also prove. As the first I, going before the flock, my weapons tossed away, not grabbing the weapons of men, but the tokens of salvation, not trusting in the cover of a shield, but in the name of Christ, and placing the cross to save my face instead of a helmet, I will face all dangers with steady heart.’

Paulinus keeps Martin’s direct speech, but expands what was in Sulpicius crastina die ante aciem inermis adstabo et in nomine Domini Iesu, signo crucis, non clipeo protectus aut galea, hostium cuneos penetrabo secures – ‘Tomorrow I will stand before the lines unarmed and in the name of the Lord Jesus, in the sign of the cross, not protected by shield or helmet, I will penetrate the fearless formations of the enemy.’ Paulinus uses for his paraphrase various methods of expansion, here we see for instance a literary commonplace (verba expediunt, et facta probabunt 1.160),152 and participial clauses (praecedens, arripiens, fidens, ponens). We also see the use of epic diction (the opposition of verba vs. facta is an epic theme, and the use of casside instead of galea). Paulinus also does not miss the opportunity to give the simple background of the donativum in Sulpicius 4.1 (Interea irruentibus intra Gallias barbaris) its own sentence, uprating the absence of battle in Sulpicius to the (epic) image of an impending battle and a raging foe:

151 Petschenig (1888) prints a full stop, but the sentence goes on. 152Another example of literary commonplace can be found in 1.144-145 (nam quos formido retentat, / munera solicitant et vincunt dona timorem. – ‘For donations excited those held by fear, and gifts conquered fright.’ Directly thereafter in 1.446-147 we find expansion by exhaustiveness: metuit nihil, omnia temnit, / terrorem inridet, terrena et munera calcat. – ‘feared nothing, scorned everything, / laughed at terror, trampled on earthly presents.’ The latter is found as well in 1.143 cunctos maniplos / imperio, hortatu, prece, largitione vocatus / in bellum cogit – ‘with authority, / incitement, prayer and generosity / he urged all his summoned troops into war.’ 43

Interea effractis inrupto limite claustris Gallica rura ferus populari coeperat hostis.

Meanwhile, after the border had been invaded and the stronghold broken open the beastly foe had started to lay waste to the Gallic countryside.153

Paulinus also transforms Sulpicius’ postero die (4.7) into a more epic description of dawn: et iam prima novo spargebat lampade terras / orta dies – ‘Already the first dawn of the day sprinkled with new light the lands’ (1.168-169).154 At the end of this episode Paulinus covers Sulpicius’ 4.7-9, quoted above. One dependent question in Sulpicius (unde quis dubitet hanc vere beati viri fuisse victoriam, 4.7) becomes in Paulinus six times as many emphatic direct questions (1.171-173):

Quidnam hic, quaeso, viris, quid gestum cernimus armis? Quid ferrata acies valuit, quid terror et ensis? Quis pilis cecidit cuneus, quae turma sagittis? Unus homo et sola aeterni fiducia regis innumeras vicit sine caedis vulnere gentes. 175

For what here, I ask, with men, what do we see accomplished with weapons? What does an iron-clad battle line amount to, what terror and the sword? What wedge fell by mortars, what tower with arrows? One man and the trust alone in his eternal king conquered incalculable men without the harm of a massacre.

153 The fact that it is seen as very positive that Martin leaves the army at a moment when his country is in peril, in all three Lives, shows that the later patriotic or otherwise positive view of the miles Christi in the sense of a an active soldier is not yet in place. 154 Lampas could here be wrongly used as a masculine word with novo. This might have to do with the fact that lampas is a Greek loanword, and profound knowledge of Greek was scarce. However, Christian writers throughout the patristic period (200-500) use this word often and in the feminine. Ambrose, for instance, among many other authors does use it as a feminine word in CPL 0141, Littera 14, 7.7. This means it could also be an error in our text, that should be emendated to nova; Roberts 2001, 267 points to the fact that ‘poetic periphrases for sunrise and sunset occur even in a historian like Ammianus Marcellinus’. On itself it is thus not enough to define a text as epic, but here we can see it against the foil of the postero die of Sulpicius. 44

Paulinus’ emphatic unus homo (1.174) usually reminds the classical scholar of the description of Fabius Maximus Cunctator, who saved the republic of Rome in the second punic war, by tarrying. In Ennius’ Annales, 12.370 we read Unus homo nobis cunctando restuit rem – ‘one man by tarrying recovered the state.’ However, in the fifth century AD copies of Ennius were rare.155 It is still possible that Paulinus alludes to Ennius directly, because Fabius Cunctator was a famous figure, but a more plausible place to look might be the epic of Virgil.156 In Aeneis 9.783 we find Unus homo et vestris, o cives, undique saeptus / aggeribus tantas strages impune per urbem ediderit? – ‘Will one man, o civilians, even enclosed from every side in your walls, have raised such carnage in the city unpunished?’ The unus homo in Virgil refers to Turnus, who has thrust into the camp of the Trojans and comits a massacre among his enemy. Line 9.783 is part of the speech from the Trojan camp leaders, that want their man to fight back against the Rutulian. A reference to Turnus, who does bring forth carnage, would fit in Paulinus’ Imitationstechnik, as discussed by Gärtner (2001).157 Paulinus would then deviate from his model by saying his protagonist conquered innumerable men sine caedis vulnere. This at the same time highlights the Christian values of Martin, and answers the question posed in Aeneis 9.783. Martin’s way of life [in this case i.e. not fighting] is the way to heaven, and in contrast to Turnus, he will remain impunis, in the Christian sense. Fortunatus’ account of this same story (1.68-77) says nothing of the baptism and the following two years in the army, but focuses on the heroic rejection of worldly goods and the miraculous victory of one unarmed man against many:

Post, fera barbaries peteret cum gallica claustra ac prope Vangionum premeret loca fervidus hostis, militiae sanctus cuncta emolumenta recusat. 70 Hinc sibi caesareas fremuit Iulianus in iras:

155 Entry of ‘Quintus Ennius’ in Encyclopaedia Britannica, consulted on July 4, 2016. 156 Labarre 1998, 161: “La primauté de Virgile, et plus particulièrement de l’Enéide, dans la culture des poètes du Ve et du Vie siècle, est manifeste, lorqu’on consulte les indices des éditions de Paulin de Périgueux et de Fortunat.” For a discussion of classical reminiscences in Paulinus and Fortunatus, including tables with numerical information, see Labarre 1998, 161-201. She does not mention Ennius in this chapter. 157 See my third chapter. 45

imperat ut clausum teneat custodia iustum ac, veniente die, primus properaret in agmen. Quo tamen ante aciem sacer ire fatetur inermis. Venerat ergo dies belli: pacem expetit hostis 75 atque, orante uno, cecidit furor omnibus armis innumerasque acies solus sine sanguine vicit.

Later, when untamed barbarianism sought the Gallic stronghold and when the burning foe pressed upon the territories near Vangionum, the holy man denounced all the profits of the military. Therefore Julian raged in imperial wrath: he ordered the guard to hold the just man captive and, at dawn, that he must haste himself as the first in line. Whereupon, however, the saint answered he would precede the frontline unarmed. Thus the day of battle had arrived: the enemy seeks peace and, because of one praying man, fury resided from all weapons and alone he conquered innumerable battle lines without bloodshed.

We can see clearly in this passage how Fortunatus’ used both his sources, but abbreviated the story to almost a summary. The first two lines (1.68-69) give us an even fiercer enemy (fera barbaries, fervidus hostis) than Fortunatus’ two predecessors do. Against this background, Martin’s offer to go unarmed becomes more heroic and miraculous. It also enlarges the miracle of the peace made the next day. A peculiar change is that here it is not Martin’s proposal, but Julian’s command that sends the saint to the frontline. Chase (1932), in a list of changes in content between Sulpicius and the epics, and his theory about the motivation for those mutations, notes baptism and the military period after baptism is ‘omitted by Fortunatus alone, presumably arbitrarily.’158 I would suggest that Fortunatus does not leave it out arbitrarily but focuses on different parts of the littera historia with different aims. What we see here, is not an attempt to narrate a historical event – apologetically or positively commentating on it – but an impressive miracle in a series of

158 Chase 1932, 58. 46 miracles. Of course, the material was better known to the public of Fortunatus than to that of Paulinus, so he could afford to abbreviate. But a different matter is the question whether he deliberately wants to avoid the trouble of Martin staying in the military after baptism. Acquaintances of Martin were no longer alive, so he could afford to skip troublesome parts. However, at this time, the cult of Martin was thriving, a lot of posthumous miracles were added to his reputation and he became the patron of influential people, kings and cities.159 In a series of miraculous anecdotes, like we find in Fortunatus, other parts of the story also become less relevant.

The robber

When Martin wants to travel to his parents to convert them, trouble meets him on the way.160 He leaves his spiritual teacher Hilary of Poitiers (Sulpicius, 5.3), but promises to come back to him later. He then encounters robbers (Sulpicius, 5.4-6), meets the devil (Sulpicius, 6.1-2), is punished and banished by Arian authorities (Sulpicius, 6.4), is exiled to an Italian island, where he is accidentally poisoned by a plant (Sulpicius, 6.5-6), misses Hilary in Rome (Sulpicius 7.1), and follows him to Poitiers, where they are finally reunited (Sulpicius, 7.1). This reminds of a characteristic feature of the novel. When the journey starts, adventures begin. In the genre of the novel the journey will bring plot elements like kidnapping, robbers, pirates, separation of a couple or family, and reunion.161 The third passage I will discuss is a story about Martin being taken by robbers. In the end, it is the robber who is ‘saved’. Our starting point is again Sulpicius (5.4-6):

Ac primum inter Alpes devia secutus incidit in latrones. cumque unus securi elevata in caput eius librasset ictum, ferientis dexteram sustinuit alter: vinctis tamen post tergum manibus uni asservandus et spoliandus traditur. Qui cum eum ad remotiora

159 Martin was patron of the Frankish kings from Clovis in the early sixth century. For a discussion of the cult of Saint Martin See Nissen 1997, 14-23. 160Sulpicius VSM 5.4-6. Sulpicius actually announces the following episodes as being a series of troubles, since when Martin leaves Hilary he says: maestus, ut ferunt, peregrinationem illam ingressus est, contestatus fratribus, multa se adversa passurum: quod postea probavit eventus. – ‘sorrowful, so they say, he started his journey, after having told his brothers, that much hardship would befall him.’ Apparently Sulpicius refers here to Martin’s prophetic ability. 161 For Christian attitudes and adaptations of the novel in the late fifth century, see Robins (2000), and for the use of novelistic elements in Byzantine hagiography, see Messis (2014). 47

duxisset, percontari ab eo coepit, quisnam esset. (5) Respondit Christianum se esse. Quaerebat etiam ab eo an timeret. Tum vero constantissime profitetur, numquam se tam fuisse securum, quia sciret misericordiam Domini maxime in temptationibus adfuturam: se magis illi dolere, qui Christi misericordia utpote latrocinia exercens esset indignus. (6) Ingressusque evangelicam disputationem verbum Dei latroni praedicabat. quid longius morer? Latro credidit prosecutusque Martinum viae reddidit, orans ut pro se Dominum precaretur. Idemque postea religiosam agens vitam visus est, adeo ut haec, quae supra rettulimus, ex ipso audita dicantur.

And first in the Alps, having gone of the path, he happened upon robbers. And when one thrust to hit his head with raised axe, the other blocked the hand of the thruster: but his hands were tied behind his back, and he was handed over to one [of them] to be guarded and plundered, who, when he had led him to a more quiet place, started to question him, who he was. He answered that he was a Christian. He asked also whether he was feared by him. Then truly most steadfastly he admitted, that he had never been so safe, because he knew that the mercy of the Lord would be most present in an attack: that he felt more sad for him, who is unworthy of the mercy of Christ as long as he involves himself in plundering. And engaging in evangelical discussions he preached the word of God to the robber. Why do I tarry longer? The robber believed and having escorted him, gave Martin back to the road, begging that he would pray for him with the Lord. Thereafter he was seen leading the same religious life, so much that this story, which we told above, they say was heard from the very man.

In Paulinus (1.202-212) the story is treated in the following way:

Ac dum nubiferas propere162 transcenderet Alpes,

162 A peculiar addition to Sulpicius, made in several places by Paulinus and to a lesser extent by Fortunatus, are traits of swiftness and haste in the figure of Martin. Some examples in Paulinus are 1.180 (festinat), 1.193 (festino voto), 1.202 (propere), 1.218 (properatio), 1.290 (propere), 1.291 (velox pietas), 1.292 (inpatiens), and in Fortunatus 1.155-156 (excurrit properus), 1.179 (celerans), 1.235 (iter arripiens). One explanation could be that this was felt to be epic (Achilles is the swiftfooted prototypic epic hero), another could be that Martin had no time to lose in preparation of the next life. He wasted no time, running from good work to good work. Once Paulinus even says that the next miracle hurried in shortly after the previous one (1.367, adcelerat clarum nova 48

saevorum insidiis exceptus forte latronum instantes gladios manibus post terga revinctis risit et inmoto tempsit discrimina vultu. 205 Quin etiam, ut tanti recolam miracula acti, custodem fertur monitis servasse salutis, verior hic custos animi, quam corporis ille. Alter enim nec membra suae dicionis habebat, alter et aversae vinxit penetralia mentis. 210 Sed tamen ambo viam scite docuere sequendam: aggeris hic monstravit iter didicitque salutis.

And while he transcended hastily the cloud baring Alps he was incidentally taken by an ambush of cruel robbers he laughed at drawn swords with his hands bound behind his back and with unmoved countenance, he scorned the dangers. what more, in order that I tell the miracles of such an act, it is said, that he saved his guard with incentives of salvation, he was a truer guardian of his soul, than the other of his body. The one, after all, had not his limbs under his control, and the other fettered the depths of a mind that was turned away. But still you must know that both taught the way that ought to be followed: he [i.e. the robber] showed the way of earth, and learned the road of salvation.

Paulinus, who usually expands, in this case shortens what is already extensively narrated by his predecessor. The content of the direct conversation in Sulpicius is now shown through Martin’s actions or attitude. He is not afraid, as the robber asked in Sulpicius, but even laughs at the swords pointed at him: risit is the main verb of the first sentence (1.202-204). This show of trust in the Lord in a perilous situation is followed by evangelization, by means of monitis salutis (1.207), that converts his captor. Lines 1.208-212 bring us the commentary

gloria factum). Labarre, on the passage in Fortunatus that contains 1.179 (celerans), wrongly believes this is typical of Fortunatus: “Cette hâte n’était pas aperçu dans les versions précédentes de Paulin de Périgueux et de Sulpice Sévère. Fortunat traduit à sa manière l’efficacité du saint que rien n’arrête.” Labarre 1998, 139. 49 that is typical of Paulinus. With a love for paradox, he presents the guardian as the one held captive, and the captive as the true guardian. Verse 1.212 creates the opposition of aggeris vs. salutis. Aggeris, a word that usually designates an earthen wall, should here be interpreted as metonym for earth. The robber learned the path to salvation as a result of his own understanding of his sinful life on earth. However, if we keep Sulpicius in mind, another play might be going on at the same time. In Sulpicius’ account of the story the robber had led Martin to a remote place, away from the main road. The robber, who changes from enemy to friend of Martin with his conversion, shows the saint the way back to the main road (quid longius morer? Latro credidit prosecutusque Martinum viae reddidit, orans ut pro se Dominum precaretur. 5.6). Already in Sulpicius’ text prosecutus and viae reddidit are iuxtaposed suggestively. I think Paulinus exploits and elaborates on this pun, by saying the robber monstravit the way on earth, because in the story he shows Martin back to the path. This might explain the odd use of iter aggeris (instead of, for instance, mundis), as apposed to iter salutis. Fortunatus still wins the contest of brevity on this passage. In his 1.78-87 we read:

Hinc loca latronum incedens, ratus ire per Alpes, vinctis post tergum manibus deductus ab uno, tempore sub mortis hostis compendia tractans, 80 credit latro, deum dum praedicat iste colendum et dare qui voluit mortem capit ore salutem. Ducitur ille ferox a religione ligatus atque suus praedo Martini praeda fit ultro. Quam bonus ille isti, sed plus pius hic fuit illi. 85 Servantur simul, ille fide, hic corpore vivens. Ambo valent, dum nemo cadit. Sic vicit uterque.

Then, entering the places of robbers, meaning to travel through the Alps, when his hands were tied behind his back he was led away by one [of them], concerned about the profits of his enemy in his very moment of death, the villain believed, when he preached that God was to be revered and the one that wanted to give him death, took salvation with his mouth [instead].

50

the thug was overpowered, bound by religion and, in the end, his looter became Martin’s loot. How good he was to him, but more righteous was he to him. They were saved in the same moment, he by faith, the other living with his body. Both thrived, while no one fell. In this way both were victorious.

The simple hinc, linking this episode with the previous one, shows well the structure of Fortunatus. He passes over the meeting with Hilary, prior to this passage in Sulpicius and Paulinus, and moves on from miracle to miracle, focusing on gesta.163 Like Paulinus, Fortunatus recounts the story in the subordinate clauses, focusing with his main verb already on the kernel: credit latro (1.81).164 1.82-7 meditate on the paradoxes of the story, expressing them in different ways. However, a difference with Paulinus is the pervasiveness of the non-literal level of reading. In Fortunatus, it is no longer the historia that takes the foreground like in Sulpicius. Rather, in Fortunatus the foreground is reserved for the meaning of the act, or the wonder that is the act. Fortunatus slides these layers of meaning (literal story and its meaning on a different level) over and into each other. For instance, the plain incidit (happen upon) of Sulpicius 5.4 and the insidiis exceptus (taken by an ambush) of Paulinus 1.203 in Fortunatus 1.78, is changed into loca latronum incedens (entering the places of robbers/villains). Incedo can mean simply ‘entering’, but it can also have a more military meaning of ‘marching upon’, ‘overpower’, or a meaning befitting a robber: ‘raid’, ‘take by surprise’. This presents Martin not as a victim, but already in some ways as the actual attacker or looter, anticipating on the later explicit line 1.84. A similar thing can be said about deductus in 1.79. First this passive form of ducere is used for Martin, but later, in 1.83, playing with the paradoxical role reversals, it is the robber himself who is led away (Ducitur ille ferox a religione ligatus). Further, this passage bares the mark of Fortunatus’ far-reaching love for wordplay and figura etymologica. In 1.84 he uses two different words that have the same root, but a

163 Labarre says “Fortunat ne fait précéder son récit d’aucune indicaton sur un sens qu’il donnerait à l’épisode. Martin semble emporté dans un série de péripéties.” Labarre 1998, 127. 164 This holds true for other short passages as well in Fortunatus: the main verb represents the miracle in a nutshell, though this is the clearest example. Others examples are for instance, 1.57 (partitur et offert), 1.70 (recusat), 1.105 (generavit), 1.153 (fugavit). 51 slightly different meaning: praedo (robber), and praeda (loot). We can see this trait throughout his epic.165

The prayer in Paulinus of Périgueux

Now I want to look at a passage inserted by Paulinus alone. In 1.298-316, he writes a prayer to Martin. This is remarkable, because everywhere else he follows Sulpicius rather closely and does not add new episodes. Of course, when Sulpicius’ wrote his Life, Martin himself was still alive. A prayer would therefore be out of place. Nevertheless, I think our understanding of Paulinus would benefit from a discussion of this passage. First, let us see in what kind of context it is embedded. It occurs at the end of the reunion of Martin and Hilary after a period of travel, exile and missing out on each other only just.166 Martin, after his miraculous healing from the poisonous hellebore during his exile on Gallinaria, had gone to Rome when he heard Hilary was permitted to return from exile, hoping to meet him there. Paulinus there too uses evaluative words – as we have seen is typical for his approach – for instance, he says Hilary returned from iniusto exilio – ‘injust exile’ (1.285-286). He learns, however, that Hilary has already moved on to the untamed coasts of Poitiers (Pictavorum in oris indomitis, 1.288-289) and a swift piety (velox pietas, 1.291) grabbed the saint, to hurry himself from the steep walls of high Rome (celsae liquerat ardua Romae moenia, 1.292-293) to the Pictonian coasts (Pictonicas oras, 1.293). I think these word choices (poetic descriptions of regions, and the occurrence of pietas/pius) are preparing a significantly epic atmosphere, absent in the episode directly preceding it (where Martin was poisoned and miraculously healed through prayer on the island of Gallinaria, 1.260-284). This theory is supported by a reference to the epic mission of Virgil’s Aeneas, in Paulinus 1.294-6:

Ergo legens praegressa pio vestigia cursu167

165 Some other examples are 1.157 (excpit hic cupidum cupiens et amator amantem), 1.325-327 ([…] templum avellere vellet, / obstant inculti cultores ruricolares / ne colerent melius sua si cultura periret), 1.347 (dum rapit, eripitur rapienda rapina rapaci), 1.506 (foedere fida fides formosat foeda fidelis). On 1.506 Roberts 2001, 281 says: “the formulation of line 506 privileges verbal play over referential content, with a disorienting effect on the reader, who has difficulty following the sequence of syntax because of the distractions of the self- advertising verbal surface that demands his or her attention.” 166 Martin misses Hilary in Rome (1.285-295). 167 Keep in mind the route covered by Martin: he went from Gallinaria to Rome, but in Rome had to turn back the way he came to Poitiers, hence praegressa vestigia. 52

promeruit votum cordis finemque laboris. 295 Construit hic cellam fessis solacia membris:

So, collecting with pious course the footsteps that he had set before he achieved his heart’s wish and the end of his toil. Here he built a monastery as a shelter to his tired limbs:

We have here, thus, an epic mission of sorts, involving sea voyage, poetic coasts and piety, and when Martin reaches his destination he founds his own cella.168 At this point we read in 1.295 finemque laboris. These words, and their combination with this context, remind of Aeneis 7.116-118, where the prophecy is fulfilled that tells Aeneas that he has now, after long wanderings and hardships, arrived on the location where he should found a city:

‘Heus, etiam mensas consumimus?' inquit Iulus, nec plura, adludens. Ea vox audita laborum prima tulit finem, […]

“Ah, do we eat the tables as well?”, said Iulus, no more, just playing. The sound of that voice first brought the end of toils, […]

This too adds to the epic atmosphere. But like Gärtner (2001) concluded about the ‘Imitationstechnik’ of Paulinus, he does give the plot a Christian twist. By contrast, Martin does not found a city at this point, but a cella. His piety lies not with the Gods of Virgil, but mens plena deo (1.297) he goes wherever his Christian God wants him to go.169 Having set this atmosphere, Paulinus proceeds to a prayer to Martin (1.298-316):

Hic modo si veterum recolamus carmina vatum, cum subito adtonitos quaterent miracula sensus,

168 Cellam refers here to the monastery of Ligugé. It was larger than a hermitage for Martin alone, but rather was a collection of cells. See Nissen 2003, 35, n.24. 169 This Martin answered to the Devil, in 1.218-220. 53

Clamaret miserum vecors insania Foebum 300 nec sineret falsas saltim requiescere Musas, Delfica mentito quaterentur Apolline templa cunctaque surdarum raperetur turba sororum, excita vel totum conplerent monstra furorem: nos, quibus a Christo sensus vel verba petuntur, 305 christicola inspires paulum Martine, precamur. Tu, qui defunctis potuisti reddere vitam auxilio domini fultus, mihi redde salutem: primus ego indultae faciam miracula vitae, primus faetentis disrumpam claustra sepulchri. 310 Iusta precor toto defunctus corde patronum, ut tantae laudis titulus mens viva loquatur. Ergo, licet fandi vires sublimia vincant gesta nec orandi modulus se laudibus aequet, adgrediar. Tu, quisque legens tam vilia temnis 315 Carmina, dum verba inrides, mirabere facta.

Here now, when we recollect the songs of ancient poets, when suddenly wonders hit the thundered senses, when the mad witch called for wretched Phoebus and she did not permit the false Muses to finally rest, when Delphic temples were shook by a feigned Apollo and the entire multitude of deaf sisters went into ecstacies, frightened portents complete the whole madness: that us, who seek our understanding or words from Christ, we pray you inspire a little, Christ revering Martin. You, who were able to restore life to dead men leaning on the help of the Lord, give me salvation: may I first work the miracles of a granted life may I first break loose the confines of a stinking grave. I, imperfect, pray my patron with whole my heart righteous things,

54

in order that a living mind may speak the praise of so much glory. Thus, albeit that the highest deeds overpower my virtues of speech and not is my little measure of orating a match for the praise, I will try. You whoever reading these vile songs despise them, while you laugh at the words, you will be perplexed about the deeds.

The hic of the first line of this passage is not local, but refers to the point in the story. Ancient poets in their epic ‘at this point’ (hic) told of an insania vecors, temples and oracles. The vecors (1.300) that calls for Phoebus, of course, refers to the Virgilian Sybil of the sixth book of the Aeneid. It seems that we move in these verses (Paulinus, 1.298-304) virtually through the literary conventions observed in ancient Italy, with its myths of deceitful oracles, Muses, and ecstatic priestesses. What ‘point in the story’ does Paulinus mean? The context of his allusion to the sixth book of the Aeneid brings with it the katabasis that Aeneas made under the guidance of the Sibyl. Paulinus refers to all these mythical beings, only to leave them behind and by contrast pray to Martin (adversative nos in line 1.305).170 This reminds of the classical epic tradition of the invocation of the Muse. A basic function of invocations of a muse was asking divine inspiration. Divine muses had knowledge the author could not have had access to, and were therefore an authorization and authentication of the story to follow.171 Perhaps this can help explain the place and function of the prayer in Paulinus’ text. In this light, I suggest that Saint Martin takes the place of the divine messenger that was a Muse in Homer and Virgil, in this case in order to tell of what he cannot know. The main request in this prayer is nos inspires paulum precamur – ‘We/I pray that you inspire us/me a little bit. Significant here is the story that follows the prayer (1.317-365). A catechumen has died while Martin was away, and Martin resuscitates him on his return. Before doing so, Martin sends everyone away and locks the doors. Paulinus uses the words teste remoto (1.327).172 Furthermore, Martin is called in the capacity of someone who can bring people back to life (tu, qui defunctis potuisti reddere vitam, 1.307), and Paulinus says that he will break the confines of the grave (i.e. by recounting the story). This brings us back

170 Juvencus too had invocated inspiration in a Christian way, addressing the holy spirit. Pollman 2013, 318. 171 For a discussion on authority in poetry, and Christian approaches to it, see Pollman (2013). 172 In the resuscitation of a child in 1 Kings 17.19-23 Elia takes the child to an empty room, and in Sulpicius 7.3 Martin sends other people out of the room, but nowhere is there emphasis on the fact that there now remain no witnesses. 55 to what Paulinus means with ‘this point in the story’ (hic, 1.298), and the reason that he brings into memory the Sibyl of the Aeneid. The catechumen of Paulinus’ passage, who had not been baptized yet and thus went to hell, made a journey to the underwold, and by his resuscitation came back to the world of the living. The catechumen also tells others what he saw in the ‘underworld’ (1.359-363). In the story of the resuscitation itself (1.317-365) there is another reminiscence to the sixth book of the Aeneid. In Aeneis 6.149-150 the Sibyl tells Aeneas that one of his friends has died while he was away and that he needs to go and burry him: Praeterea iacet exanimum tibi corpus amici (heu nescis) totamque incestat funere classem,

Furthermore, the deceased body of your friend (ah, you don’t know it) defiles with death your whole fleet

In Paulinus 1.328—329, Martin can still save the deceased ‘friend’:

Inrupit maestam tam tristi funere cellam tum super exanimum sese proiecit amicum

He burst into the room, that was sad because of such a grievous death then he stretched himself over his deceased friend

Sulpicius does not use the word amicus, but corpus and frater (in 7.2-3). By this reminiscence of Aeneas and his deceased friend Misenus, we have yet again a plot twist in Paulinus. Martin, in contrast to Aeneas, can bring the catechumen, that died in his absence, back from the dead. On a modern reader this prayer passage might have the effect of breaking the illusion of the epic’s narrative. That is, if Paulinus is not always breaking that illusion with his commentary-like meditations on the stories. However, this prayer or invocation is a metapoetical level higher. What is its effect? The Saint is apostrophized in an extensive way.

56

Apostrophe has a dramatic function. It enhances an audience’s sense of the ‘presence’ of those addressed. […] Modern readers often view apostrophe as an obstacle to realism, although rhapsodes and recitatores could use apostrophe to heighten an audience’s sense of the ‘presence’ of Muses and characters alike.173

This emphasis on ‘presence’ is interesting in the case of a saint. I also discussed some apostrophes in the paragraph on the episode of the cloak. Paulinus seems really to engage with the figure of Saint Martin in his capacity as the active and present patron saint of a cult.174 A much later, but striking example is an invocation of Saint Mary in Sannazaro’s sixteenth-century De Partu Virginis 1.31-32. About this passage Fowler (2002) writes:

This invocation is a prayer to the virgin Mary, who also [like a Muse] has an important intradiegetic role in the poem’s narrative. Sannazaro and his audience would have believed in her existence and in her responsiveness to petitionary prayer, and in the efficacy of potential responses to prayer would have had – and indeed still may have – many implications for how one is to interpret the narrative to follow.175

We should realize that the second part of the above quote very much holds true for Paulinus too. Paulinus treats the narrative material from Sulpicius, comments on it, and engages in dialogue with the ‘present’ Saint Martin. An invocation is not the only way for a poet to give his text validity. Pollman (2013) says in that context the following about intertextuality, which can be applied to the allusion to Virgil, discussed earlier in this paragraph:

A further means to enhance poetic authority is the indirect appeal to the intellectual background of the audience or readership through the use of literary allusion or rhetorical intertextuality. One could categorize this technique under traditional

173 Fowler 2002, 128. 174 On the ‘presence’ of Saints and its implications for the rise of the cult of Saints, see Brown (1981). 175 Fowler 2002, 132. 57

authority, i.e. authority constructed by recourse to already well-known and accepted customs, roles, or, as in our case, canonical authors.176

In the last lines of the prayer, Paulinus even addresses the reader (1.315-316), and talks about his own inferior way of writing (for instance, vilia carmina and verba inrides). The passage is alltogether very metapoetical. In this light we could interpret lines 1.309-310 (Primus ego indultae faciam miracula vitae, / primus faetentis disrumpam claustra sepulchri.) as referring to Paulinus himself making a kind of katabasis by writing about the resuscitation that is to follow.177 Note also the opposition in 1.311-312 between defunctus and mens viva. In this chapter I have explored the different ways in which Paulinus and Fortunatus handle their common source, Sulpicius. By tracing the individual treatment in the epics of three episodes and the passage of the prayer in Paulinus, we have now a good insight into the separate characteristics and aims of the two epic Lives of Martin.

176 Pollman 2013, 313. 177 Note also the opposition in 1.311-312 between defunctus and mens viva.

58

Conclusions In this thesis, I explored how the prose original of the Life of Martin by Sulpicius was handled by two poets who made epic versions of that Life, Paulinus of Périgueux in the fifth and Venantius Fortunatus in the sixth century. I set out to discuss the texts from a literary perspective. Why were new versions of the Life desired? And what can we say of the (literary) nature of these epics? Their difference might answer why a new epic was made by Fortunatus, when Paulinus’s was already in place. In the first chapter I discussed questions of genre. Hagiographical texts recount the lives or deeds of saints. The hexametric versions of the Life of Martin are not epics like those of Homer and Virgil. From Juvencus, in the fourth century, onwards epic versions were made of biblical material. That group of texts form the genre of the biblical epic. Biblical epic reacted to the desire for a higher form of style than the simple style in which the Bible was written. It is in this tradition that Paulinus and Fortunatus should be read. The hagiographical epic is a subgenre of the biblical epic. Furthermore we found that epic got a more panegyric function in late antiquity. Praise for an individual and his gesta become the main aims of epic. Another change we encountered in late antiquity is the greater importance adhered to the unit that is the episode. Where the unity of the whole was held in the highest regard in classical epic, in late antiquity poets focus on episodes – to the extent that they put very little effort in transitions between episodes, and the relation of the episode to the whole, but work on one episode like a goldsmith. In the second chapter I presented and discussed the authors this thesis is concerned with. Paulinus and Fortunatus each have their own approach to the original text, with their own context and audiences. In the third chapter we familiarized ourselves with the scholarship existing around the epics. Scholars have formulated some general comments on the differences between the authors. Where Paulinus’ epic is felt to be like a sermon, the work of Fortunatus is seen as genuine poetry. Paulinus imitates pagan models, but deviates from them to show by contrast Christian values. Furthermore, we found that these hagiographical epics of Paulinus and Fortunatus should be seen in the light of the rhetorical exercise, called the paraphrase or retractatio. The product of a literary paraphrase could be a new text that was intended to be read without the original. We also discussed the experience of reading in light of the

59 monastic reading method of the lectio divina and late-antique ideas on the levels of interpretation of texts. To answer the questions posed in this thesis (why more versions of the Life of Martin, and what are the literary nature and the aims of the epic adaptations), I followed a method of close reading to study several case studies. In the fourth chapter, starting from the prose basis, I traced the treatment of the episodes of the cloak story, Martin’s quitting the army and the converted robber in Paulinus and Fortunatus. I also discussed the prayer passage, inserted by Paulinus alone. In this final chapter we explored the different way in which Paulinus and Fortunatus handle their common source. Paulinus expands on Sulpicius, using techniques of the paraphrase. This does not mean, however, that he extends the narrative parts themselves. Rather he recounts the narrative elements and then comments on them panegyrically, illuminating the value of that specific narrative by emphasizing certain aspects of acts of Martin with paradox and antithese. This commenting on the story proper may be felt as hindrance to the continuity of the story. Paulinus tells the story, extracts the meaning of the story and makes that meaning explicit in verses with panegyrical exegesis, serving to give moral commentary and to edify the reader. Fortunatus generally abbreviates the original. He focuses on the kernel and leaves out details. Meaning is in the act or wonder itself. Fortunatus makes the different levels of meaning flow over and into each other in his text. In this way, a description of the literal and physical cold in nature can signify another ‘true story’ at the same time. Elements from this hidden story of theological truth leap over from literal to tropological world and vice versa. The explanation for new versions of the Life of Martin must be twofold. On the one hand the desire for a new version might be explained by the very difference between Fortunatus’ treatment of the material and that of Paulinus. A difference between the texts inevitably means that they fulfil a different demand from a different group of audience. Where educated conversi wanted to read hexameters rather than Sulpicius’ simple prose, the readers of Fortunatus wanted maybe in addition a less exegetical epic than that of Paulinus. Paulinus gives his audience a religious panegyrical discussion of – and moral commentary on Martin’s gesta, that Roberts (2001) rightly characterizes as having ‘at times something of the quality of a verse sermon’.178 Fortunatus on the other hand, gives his

178 Roberts 2001, 262. 60 audience a poetic adaptation of the legendary deeds of Martin. By Fortunatus’ day the cult is established and Martin is the patron saint of Frankish kings. Fortunatus needs to explain none of the troublesome parts of Martin’s life. Working very selectively, Fortunatus focuses on the deeds of Martin presented as a series of miracles. He lets the deeds speak for themselves, and defines their meaning as well with paradoxes and antitheses. This is not to say that Fortunatus’ epic cannot be called exegetical. Rather, it is exegetical in another, more implicit way than the work by Paulinus. In Paulinus we have labeled passages narrative parts, praise, prayer, interpretative and edifying commentary. In Fortunatus, however, the universal value of Martin’s gesta is interpreted, explained and applied, for instance in the allegorical description of nature in the passage of the cloak. This second epic complies with the demand of the group of educated readers. It is possible, that Paulinus’ text was simply less well received by that same audience. On the other hand the three existent Lives of Martin played a large part in the rise of the cult of Saint Martin. Local motives gave rise to the mandates from the bishops of Tours, Perpetuus and Gregory of Tours. I would like to emphasize that the use of the techniques of paraphrase of an existing text do not preclude that the new text thus created can be, and in the case of these two epics are, a whole new product, with its own character. Each new text has its own aims, function and methods. As Quintilian emphasized, saying something that has already been said sometime before, ‘must be allowed’ and there are many paths that lead to the same destination. I hope to have shed some light on the way late-antique Christian authors treat their material. Late antiquity is still a period lesser known to classical scholars, and it merits more research on its hidden treasures of Latin Literature. An interesting follow-up research could explore further the similarities between reading in the tradition of the lectio divina, and the work of Paulinus of Périgueux and Venantius Fortunatus, or the consequenties of the lectio divina on the process of writing about Christian material in general.

61

Bibliography

Primary

Bastiaensen, A.A.R. & Smit, J.W., 1975, Vita di Martino, Vita di Ilarione, In Memoria di Paola (Vite dei Santi IV), Milaan

Bowen, A. & Garnsey, P., 2003, Divine Institutes, Lactantius, Liverpool

Fels, W., 2006, Venantius Fortunatus, Gelegentliche Gedichte, Das lyrische Werk, Die Vita des hl. Martin, Stuttgart

Fontaine, J., 1967-1969, Sulpice Sévère, Vie de Saint Martin, Vol 1-3, Paris

Kennedy, G.A., 2003, Progymnasmata, Greek Textbooks of Prose Composition and Rhetoric, Leiden/Boston

Leo, F., 1881, Venanti Honori Clementiani Fortunati presbyteri Italici opera poetica , recensuit et emendavit Fridericus Leo, Berlin

Nissen, P. & Rose, E., 1997, Het Leven van de Heilige Martinus, door Sulpicius Severus, Kampen

Petschenig, M., 1888, Paulinus of Périgueux, De vita Martini, CSEL 16, Milaan

Quesnel, S., 1996, Venance Fortunat, Oeuvres Tome IV, Vie de Saint Martin, Paris

Secondary

Ammerbauer, H., 1966, Studien zur Vita Sancti Martini des Venantius Fortunatus, dissertation, Vienna

Babut, E.C., 1912, Saint Martin de Tours, Paris

Bernt, G., 1968, Das lateinische Epigramm im Übergang von der Spätantike zum frühen Mittelalter, Munich

62

Bolgar, R.R., 1976, ‘Hero or Anti-Hero? The Genesis and Development of the Miles Christianus’ in Burns, N.T. & Raegan, C., Concepts of the Hero in the Middle Ages and the Renaissance, London/Sydney/Auckland/Toronto, pp. 120-156

Brown, P., 1971, ‘The Rise and Function of the Holy Man in Late Antiquity’ in Journal of Roman Studies 61, pp. 80 – 101

Brown, P., 1981, The Cult of the Saints : its Rise and Function in Latin Christianity, London

Cameron, A., 1970, Claudian: Poetry and Propaganda at the Court of Honorius, Oxford

Chase, A.H., 1932, ‘The Metrical Lives of Saint Martin of Tours by Paulinus and Fortunatus and the Prose Life by Sulpicius Severus’ in Harvard Studies in Classical Philology T. 43, pp. 51 – 76

Curtius, E.R., 1953, European Literature and the Latin Middle Ages, New York

Van Dam, R., 1986, ‘Paulinus of Périgueux and Perpetuus of Tours’ in Francia 14, 567 – 573

Damon, E.J., 2003, Soldier Saints and Holy Warriors: Warfare and Sanctity in the Literature of Early England, Burlington

Dronke, P., 1994, Verse with Prose from Petronius to Dante: The Art and Scope of the Mixed Form, Cambridge/London

Fontaine, J., 1961, ‘Vérité et Fiction dans la Chronologie de la Vita Martini’, Studia Anselmiana (Saint Martin et son Temps), T.46, Rome, pp. 189 – 236.

Fontaine, J., 1981, Naissance de la Poésie dans l’Occident Chrétien: Esquisse d’une Histoire de la Poésie latine Chrétienne du iiie au ive Siècle, (Études Augustiniennes), Paris

Fowler, D. & Spentzou, E., 2002, Cultivating the Muse: Struggles for Power and Inspiration in Classical Literature, Oxford

Franke, J.R., 2003, ‘Allegory at Work’ in Christian History Nov 1, p. 21

Gärtner, T., 2001, ‘Zur Christlichen Imitationstechnik in der ‘Vita Sancti Martini’ des Paulinus von Petricordia’ in Vigiliae Christianae 54, pp. 71 – 85

63

Green, R.P.H., 2008, Latin Epics of the New Testament: Juvencus, Sedulius, Arator, Oxford

Griffe, E., 1962, ‘La Chronologie des Années de Jeunesse de Saint Martin’ in BLE 62, pp. 114 – 118

Golega, J., 1930, Studien uber die Evangeliendichtung des Nonnos von Panopolis: ein Beitrag zur Geschichte der Bibeldichtung im Altertum, (Breslauer Studien zur historischen Theologie 15), Breslau

Grünberg, E., 1990, Studien zur Vita s. Martini des Paulinus von Petricordia, Wenen

Harmless, W., 2004, Desert Christians: an Introduction to the Literature of Early Monasticism, Oxford University Press

Herzog, R., 1975, Die Bibelepik der lateinischen Spätantike, Formgeschichte einer erbaulichen Gattung, Vol 1, Munich

Huber, A., 1901, Die poetische Bearbeitung der Vita S. Martini des Sulpicius Severus durch Paulinus von Périgueux, Kempten

Jauss, H.R., 1982, Toward an Aesthetic of Reception. Transl. Bahti, T., Theory and History of Literature 2), Minneapolis

Labarre, S., 1998, Le Manteau Partagé, Deux Métamorphoses poétques de la Vie de Saint Martin chez Paulin de Périgueux (Ve s.) et Venance Fortunat (Vie s.), Paris

De Lubac, H., 1959, Exégèse médiévale: Les quatre sens de l’écriture, Vol 1, Paris

Malsbary, G.H., 1987, The Epic Hagiography of Paulinus of Périgueux, dissertation, Toronto

Messis, C., 2014, 'Fiction and/or Novelization in Byzantine Hagiography’ in Efthymiadis, S., The Ashgate Research Companion to Byzantine Hagiography: Volume II: Genres and Contexts, Ashgate, pp. 313 – 342

Miller, P.C., 1983, Biography in Late Antiquity: A Quest for the Holy Man, Berkeley/Los Angeles

Norden, E., 1913, Agnostos Theos: Untersuchungen zur Formengeschichte religiöser Rede, Leipzig/Berlin

64

Pollman, K., 2013, ‘Establishing Authority in Christian Poetry of Latin Late Antiquity’ in Hermes 141.3, Stuttgart, pp. 309 – 330

Roberts, M.J., 1985, ‘Biblical Epic and Rhetorical Paraphrase in Late Antiquity’ in ARCA Classical and Medieval Texts, Papers, and Monographs 16, Liverpool, pp. x – 253

Roberts, M.J., 1989, The Jeweled Style: Poetry and Poetics in Late Antiquity, Cornell

Roberts, M.J., 2001, ‘The Last Epic of Antiquity: Generic Continuity and Innovation in the Vita Sancti Martini of Venantius Fortunatus’ in Transactions of the American Philological Association 131, pp. 257 – 285

Robertson, D., 2011, Lectio Divina: the Medieval Experience of Reading, Minnesota

Robins, W., 2000, 'Romance and Renunciation at the Turn of the Fifth Century', in JECS 8.4, pp. 531 – 557

Sandnes, K.O., 2011, The Gospel ‘According to Homer and Virgil’: Cento and Canon, Leiden

Stancliffe, C., 1983, St. Martin and his Hagiographer, History and Miracle in Sulpicius Severus, Oxford

Uytfanghe, M., 1988, ‘Het Genre Hagiografie: Christelijke Specificiteit Versus Laat-Antieke Context’, in De Heiligenverering in de eerste Eeuwen van het Christendom. Ed. A. Hilhorst, Nijmegen, pp. 63 – 81

Vielberg, M., 2006, Der Möchbischof von Tours im ‘Martinellus’: Zur Form des hagiographischen Dossiers und seinies spätantiken Leitbilds, De Gruyter, Berlin/New York

Vermeulen, E., 1966 Aspecten van de poetische techniek van Paulinus van Périgueux, bestudeerd in zijn de Vita S. Martini, libri I-III, disseration, Louvain

65