Florida State University Libraries

Electronic Theses, Treatises and Dissertations The Graduate School

2007 Musical Characteristics of the Songs Attributed to Peter of Blois (c. 1135-1211) Lyndsey Thornton

Follow this and additional works at the FSU Digital Library. For more information, please contact [email protected]

THE FLORIDA STATE UNIVERSITY

COLLEGE OF MUSIC

MUSICAL CHARACTERISTICS OF THE SONGS ATTRIBUTED TO PETER OF BLOIS (c. 1135-1211)

By Lyndsey Thornton

A thesis submitted to the College of Music in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Music

Degree Awarded: Spring Semester, 2007 The members of the Committee approve the thesis of Lyndsey M. Thornton on March 28,

2007.

______

Charles E. Brewer Professor Directing Thesis

______

Paula Gerson Committee Member

______

Douglass Seaton Committee Member

The Office of Graduate Studies has verified and approved the above named committee members.

ii

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

As with any major undertaking, there are many individuals I would like to thank for their unwavering support. First of all, I must thank the members of my thesis committee, who have provided insight, tolerance, and wisdom from experience. This project owes much of its initial concept to Dr. Charles Brewer. I also want to thank other members of the musicology faculty who have inspired me and also made it possible for me to concentrate on my work. I want to thank my colleagues Anne Terry and John Spilker for their encouragement and emotional support. Thanks to my parents for showing pride in my accomplishments. Most of all, I thank Bret Woods and my daughters, Kathryn and Meredith, for their patience and inspiration and for providing me with the motivation to pursue higher education.

iii TABLE OF CONTENTS

List of Music Examples iv

List of Abbreviations and Manuscript Sigla v

Abstract vi

Chapter 1: Context and Method 1

Chapter 2: The Quandary of a Secular Cleric : Quo me vertam nescio 5 Peter as Student 8 A Career of Service 13 Peter as Educator 14 Ecclesiastic and Royal Patronage 15 Archdeacon and Chancellor 17

Chapter 3: The Songs 25 Monophonic Conductus in Florence, BL Pluteus 29.1 25 Group One: The Love Songs 26 Group Two: Criticism and Religious Texts 46 Group Three: Moral Duality 63 The Songs as Reflections of the Clerical Dilemma 72

Chapter 4: Musical Characteristics 74 Two-Part Conductus and Other Sources 74 Influences and Characteristics 84

Appendix A: Sources for the Songs in this Study 86 Appendix B: Summary of Musical Characteristics 87 Appendix C: Topos Concordance 88

Selected Bibliography 89

Biographical Sketch 92

iv LIST OF MUSIC EXAMPLES

1. Repeated melisma 29

2. Initial figure 29

3. Initial figure with melisma 30

4. Strophe IV with decorated three c’s 30

5. A globo veteri 31

6. Olim sudor Herculis refrain 38

7. Paroxytone and proparoxytone emphases 39

8. Olim sudor Herculis 40

9. Rhetorical motive in Vitam duxi 45

10. Vitam duxi iocundam 45

11. Qui seminant in loculis 49

12. Quo me vertam nescio 54

13. Line 1 initial cauda 60

14. Line 12 terminal cauda 60

15. Fons preclusus sub torpore 61

16. Melismas on lusisse and ludum 65

17. Turn figure on vertere 66

18. Ut dignus pontificio 66

19. Non te lusisse pudeat 67

20. In nova fert animus 70

21. Vacillantis trutine libramine 76

22. Veneris prosperis 80

23. Vite perdite 83

v ABBREVIATIONS AND MANUSCRIPT SIGLA

K# number assigned to each monophonic song in Gordon Anderson’s Notre Dame and Related Conductus

J# number assigned to each polyphonic song in the above collection

D# number assigned to each song text in Peter Dronke’s Peter of Blois and Poetry at the Court of Henry II

F# order in Florence Biblioteca Laurenziana Pluteus 29.1, s. XIII; followed by MS folio number

CB# number assigned by Hilka,Schumann, and Bischoff--editors of the facsimile edition of Carmina Burana; followed by MS folio number.

Ar. London, British Library Arundel 384, s. XIV.

O Oxford, Bodley Add. A. 44, s. XIII.

C Cambridge University Library Ff.i.17, s. XIII

VRL Vatican Reg. Lat. 317

vi ABSTRACT

Toward the end of the twelfth century, moral conflict was rampant in the Catholic Church regarding the conduct of all levels of the ecclesiastical hierarchy. There was acerbic criticism of the profligate bishops and archbishops who formed the upper echelon of clerical life, and much of this censure came from within the ranks of the clergy. One of the most interesting critics of the higher clergy is Peter of Blois, who had served such clerical posts as Archdeacon of Bath and London. He criticized the behavior of everyone from archbishop to altar boy in his letters and poetry, but the latter oeuvre also expresses his concessions to the inner conflict that he faced as a result of his choice to serve God. A double standard of morality is prevalent in both the prose and verse works of Peter of Blois and is often one of the identifying factors in support of attributions of his authorship. He condones vice in moderation during youth but advocates repentance in old age. While there is an increasing amount of scholarship that treats either Peter’s song texts or the music of the corpus of Notre Dame conductus, specific research into the music of Peter’s songs is not readily available. This study examines the musical characteristics of the songs of Peter of Blois and their relationship to the texts within the manuscript tradition of his works, placing them within the context of the Twelfth-Century Renaissance. Because of the cohesion of the group in the Florence MS and the clarity with which they can be transcribed, these songs will be the primary focus of musical discussion. Through analysis of the musical components of the songs from Florence fascicle X that can be attributed to Peter with a significant amount of certainty, and through comparison with those known to have been written by Peter’s contemporaries, such as Walter of Châtillon and Philip the Chancellor, I will define a musical style that is characteristic of Peter’s songs in addition to providing evidence for new attributions.

vii CHAPTER 1 CONTEXT AND METHOD

Toward the end of the twelfth century, moral conflict was rampant in the Catholic Church regarding the conduct (and misconduct) of all levels of the ecclesiastical hierarchy, though especially at the two extremes on the scale of power. Music and literature from the period have immortalized the mischievous and impious escapades of certain members of the lower orders of clergy, termed satirically the ordo vagorum. However, there was also acerbic criticism of the profligate bishops and archbishops who formed the upper echelon of clerical life. Much of this censure came from within the ranks of the clergy. One of the most interesting critics of the higher clergy is Peter of Blois, who had served such clerical posts as Archdeacon of Bath and London.1 His perspective on the problems within the Church is evidenced by the fact that while he criticizes the behavior of everyone from archbishop to altar boy in his letters and poetry, the latter oeuvre also expresses his concessions to the inner conflict that he faced as a result of his choice to serve God. Thus he treats not only the dilemmas within the Church but within the churchman, as well. He lashes out at the papal curia while conceding his own failure to adhere to the highest moral standards. Without careful scrutiny, this inconsistency might appear intrinsically hypocritical. After close consideration, however, it becomes clear that Peter distinguishes quite unambiguously between the sins of greed and simony, of which the higher clergy of his time were undeniably guilty, and his own failure to remain chaste. It seems that if one is to lapse in monotheism, faced with the choice between the service of Venus and Nummus, Love is the far lesser evil. This double standard of morality is prevalent in both the prose and verse works of Peter of Blois and is often one of the identifying factors in support of attributions of his authorship. Reading, editing, and reprinting of Peter’s self-published letter collection is a continuing tradition that stretches from current times back to the time at which he lived.

1Peter can unquestionably be connected with Eleanor of Aquitaine, as he wrote several letters for her at least in the nominal capacity of secretary. Musically, he was somewhat separate from the traditions of her troubadour court. His ethically discursive reproaches and satires are far from the topos of courtly love; however, his love poems are similar enough to conductus to warrant their inclusion in a collection of that genre. For discussion of Peter’s letters for Eleanor, see Beatrice A. Lees, “The Letters of Queen Eleanor of Aquitaine to Pope Celestine III,” The English Historical Review 21/81 (January 1906): 78-93.

1 He published his well-groomed and highly self-conscious opus epistolarum no fewer than three times before his death, which occurred sometime in the first few years of the thirteenth century; and since the sixteenth century, there has been an ongoing tradition of scholarly criticism of Peter’s letters.2 However, published criticism of his song texts did not appear until the early twentieth century.3 It is significant that while there is an increasing amount of scholarship that treats either Peter’s song texts or the music of the corpus of Notre Dame conductus, specific research into the music of Peter’s songs is not readily available. This study will begin with the necessary prerequisites of biographical background and identification of primary literary characteristics that will aid in the connection of the existing epistolary tradition to the examination of Peter’s songs. I will then examine the musical characteristics of the songs of Peter of Blois and their relationship to the texts within the manuscript tradition of his works, placing them within the context of the Twelfth-Century Renaissance. In additional to biography, before an interpretive and critical examination of his songs texts can be initiated, I will take a brief look into the manuscript tradition of Peter’s letters, the collection and publication of which was the self-determined pinnacle of his output and career. As can be gathered from his letters, the crux of Peter’s concept of himself lay in his identity as a writer, a man of letters. His self-conscious autobiography and his ontology could not have been unconnected, as they both evince his un-self- conscious persistent ambiguity.4 Although he existed and served in various capacities (as student, teacher, advisor, chastiser, courtier, and ambassador), his foremost role was that of correspondent. Peter Dronke compares this with the primary epistolary self-identity of Petrarch, describing both authors as displaying the literary personae of “the ardent spirit, longing for the heights of the spiritual life; the man of letters longing for fame and immortality; the passionate man longing for sensual fulfilment; the worldly man longing for high worldly recognition.”5 Peter seems to have depended on his assumption that his

2 J.A. Giles, ed., Petri blesensis bathionensis archidiaconi opera omnia: nunc primum in anglia ope codicum manuscriptorum editionumque optimarum (Oxford: J.H. Parker, 1847) x-xi.

3 F. J. E Raby, A History of Secular Latin Poetry in the Middle Ages (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1934).

4 “Self-conscious autobiography” designates the author’s practice of writing about himself in a manner through which he displays his consciousness of presenting himself in a certain light.

2 works would last and be studied in the future. This epistolary self-awareness can certainly inform critical analysis of his songs, just as it has done for the study of his letters. Any persuasive attribution must in part rest on the scholar’s ability to find similarities between the poetry and the letters. Of the song texts attributed to Peter of Blois for which corresponding music survives, those found in the Notre Dame conductus sources are most readily accessible. The monophonic conductus that are included in the tenth fascicle of the Florence manuscript6 are quite clearly copied and accompanied by non-rhythmic square notation.7 Of these, at least one is a parody of an existing conductus text (although with its own music) and is one of two songs in this group that criticize the simony of the curia; one is an admonition for proper ecclesiastical behavior; one is a strictly sacred text celebrating the Virgin and Child; one is nothing other than a love song; and five present Peter’s code of moral duality—amorous profligacy in youth and repentant piety in old age. Because of their cohesion as a group and the clarity with which they can be transcribed, these songs will be the primary focus of musical discussion. Before treating the musical structure of the songs, I will outline their poetic structures (rhythmic and syllabic), so that correlations between the two can be noted. Through analysis of the musical components of the songs from Florence fascicle X that can be attributed to Peter with a significant amount of certainty, and through comparison with those known to have been written by other poets, I will seek to define a musical style that is characteristic of Peter’s songs. It will be helpful to compare Peter’s songs with those of his contemporaries, specifically Walter of Châtillon, Nigel Longchamps, and Philip the Chancellor.8 Further application of this analysis may indicate that the

5 Peter Dronke, “Peter of Blois and Poetry at the Court of Henry II,” in Medieval Studies 28 (1976): 297.

6 MS Florence, Biblioteca Laurenziana, Pluteus 29.1. For a brief discussion of some of these songs (not necessarily those attributed to Peter), see Ruth Steiner, “Some Monophonic Latin Songs Composed Around 1200,” The Musical Quarterly 52/1 (January 1966), 56-70.

7 Gordon Anderson has transcribed these songs into rhythmic notation using rhythmic modality in his edition of Notre Dame and Related Conductus: Opera Omnia 6 (Henryville, Pennsylvania: Institute of Mediaeval Music, 1979).

8 For a discussion of these poets and their relationship to Peter, see Dronke, “Peter of Blois and Poetry at the Court of Henry II.” Many of the songs attributed to Peter of Blois have contradictory attributions elsewhere to Philip the Chancellor. This may have resulted in part from the fact that both Peter and Philip

3 music, in addition to the text, was written by the same person, and through the same conjecture, there would be the possibility of additional attributions. Finally, by viewing Peter of Blois through a new perspective, musicology may be able to better inform the historical and literary criticism that until this point has been the limit of his posthumous reception. A primary aspect of the existing scholarship on Peter of Blois, much of which is from the nineteenth century, is the issue of plagiarism.9 Scholars seem to have treated the issue in their own modern terms, not from the medieval perspective, in which there was no real concept of ownership of ideas or even text, and authorship was often defined in terms of “dwarves sitting on the shoulders of giants.” The medieval writer thought of himself as such and quoted the auctoritates in order to strengthen and legitimize his writing. Peter quotes classical authors, taken from his study of the trivium of grammar, rhetoric, and logic. He also uses quotations from scripture and from the church fathers in order to bolster the moral and religious sentiments he expresses. From a musicological point of view, especially when regarded in a medieval light, Peter’s borrowing is quite normal. Medieval composers often borrowed from one another and themselves, sometimes as a function of practicality and economy, and sometimes to evoke a specific effect, such as in a parody of a well-known chant melody or text. There is no compelling reason, when moving from the arena of music to that of the written word, that this should be treated differently. Through discussion of the allusive elements in Peter’s songs, especially those from Florence fascicle X, I will support the premise that his borrowing was not plagiarism but was in fact a brilliant use of connotative fragments of well-known authoritative sources.

were often indicated in documents of the time by the title cancellarius. Some scholars may have merely guessed the wrong chancellor.

9 C.L. Kingsford, “Peter of Blois,” in The Dictionary of National Biography 46 (London 1896), 49. William Stubbs, Seventeen Lectures on the Study of Medieval and Modern History (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1887), 146. R.W. Southern, “Peter of Blois: A Twelfth-Century Humanist?” In Medieval Humanism and Other Studies (Oxford: B. Blackwell, 1970), 105-34. John David Cotts, Peter of Blois and the Dilemmas of the Secular Clergy, (Ph. D. dissertation University of California at Berkeley, 2000), 6. Cotts defends Peter, writing that his work was still valuable, “despite the preponderance of borrowed phrases and stock allusions.” I propose that in Cotts’s defense of Peter, the word despite would be more appropriately replaced by because of, a proposition that I will support through explanations of the allusive references in a small subcategory of Peter’s songs.

4 CHAPTER 2 THE QUANDARY OF THE SECULAR CLERIC: QUO ME VERTAM NESCIO

Unfortunately, most of what is known about the life of Peter of Blois has been learned from his letters. On the one hand, the possible bias presented by autobiographical records can skew later perceptions of any historical figure. On the other hand, the biographical elements that Peter has deliberately preserved can inform the scholar through critical comparison with contemporary records. If there is a discrepancy between Peter’s records and those of contemporary persons and institutions, the researcher can gain valuable insight into Peter’s personality by examining the possible reasons for his selective misrepresentations. Thus, the issue of self-editorialization must be taken advantage of while at the same time being mitigated as much as possible by the scarce information found in the records of churches and patrons under which Peter served. The biographical information that is verifiable and pertinent to a discussion of Peter’s poetry and music is discussed below, under the headings of education, service, and relationships with his contemporaries. In order to understand the moral, ethical, and social position of a twelfth-century secular cleric such as Peter of Blois, he should be placed within a historical sketch of the cultural landscape of which he was a part.10 His music cannot be discussed fully without its proper context; likewise, neither can his biography. The key elements of social criticism and moral duality in Peter’s poetry were certainly influenced by the conflicts in both the secular and the ecclesiastical courts of his time. He also traveled through particularly volatile areas of Europe, in which provincial governments were becoming stronger than those of their nominal overlords. R.W. Southern describes the situation thus:

10 Although there are a few different ways of defining secular clergy, for this paper I have used the term to indicate a cleric who is not part of a monastic order. The division between the regular (i.e. the monastic) clergy and the secular clergy was a relatively new one in the twelfth century, and the primary difference for the clergy themselves was that instead of the regular cleric’s duty to pray for the souls of his parishioners, the secular cleric had the added responsibilities of religious instruction, coming face to face with the layman.

5 Perhaps more simply than anywhere else in Europe, the shaping of a new political order may be seen in the valley of the river Loire. There was here so clean a sweep of ancient institutions, title deeds and boundaries, that the emergence of new forms of loyalty and authority was facilitated. Elsewhere the same processes are to be observed, men have the same objects in view, but they work towards them less directly and less swiftly.11

In twelfth-century Western Europe, the centralization of authority around the upper nobility, the resultant increasing need for secular clergy, and the widespread abuses of power within the church instigated new conflicts of doctrinal interpretation. Disputes over clerical responsibility and the deviations from canonical dogma eventually led to the Fourth Lateran Council of 1215 under Pope Innocent III.12 One ill-defined facet of canon law that was most influential in Peter’s life was the rule that ordained clergy could not take part in the administrative affairs of secular courts. Much of Peter’s occupational and personal frustration seems to have come from the fact that he never broke into the highest levels of clerical service, because he was never actually ordained as a priest. However, if Peter had become an ordained minister, according to the laws of the church, his service to the Angevin government would have come under questions of ethics and moral obligations. In fact, a law was enforced and clarified by Lateran IV, a few years after Peter’s death, that ordained clergy were not allowed to serve in the secular sphere (although many who were more politically adroit or less conscientious than Peter still did so). Had Peter been among those who sought and found a balance between sacred and secular, or if he had attained ordination, his vacillation between the relative duties to king and to church might have been obviated, thereby eliminating a certain defining element of anxious indecision from his poetry.13

11 R.W. Southern, The Making of the Middle Ages. (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1953), 81.

12 Information on Lateran IV from Catholic Encyclopedia online, searchable database available at http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/index.html, accessed 15 April 2006.

13 Peter’s conflict between service in ecclesiastical and temporal courts invites a comparison between himself and Thomas Becket; this will be discussed briefly below. Although both men served in sacred and secular curiae, Becket’s transformation from chancellor to archbishop formed a clearly delineated shift in personality and priorities. Peter, on the other hand, consistently rode the fence on every issue, including the choice to serve God or king. His failure to achieve a high degree of success in either arena may have been his motivation to refrain from choosing between them.

6 As mentioned above, most information regarding Peter’s family, early life, and education, is found in his own letters.14 The references in his correspondence usually serve the purpose of anecdotal support for some point that he is trying to communicate to his reader. For example, in Epistle 49, Peter protests that his financial poverty does not necessarily preclude him from the ranks of the minor nobility. The following is his defense against the alleged slanderers whose lies he believes prevented him from attaining a desired position at Chartres:15 Although he was always very poor, poverty does not exclude titles of nobility. As is publicly known, my father and my mother come from the aristocracy of Brittany. Nor do I say this as a boast, but in order to restrain the mouths of those who would speak untruths, who have the rudeness to detract from their own somewhat degenerate nobility. Truly, reputable and commendable nobility occurs with the virtue of a pure birth; this is unknown to those who object to the poverty of my father in his exile. Was not Brutus exiled? Was not Aeneas exiled?16

This commentary on the nature of nobility is one of few details in Peter’s letters about his origins. His birthplace is neither mentioned in his letters nor documented elsewhere, although his name of course suggests that it was the town of Blois in the Loire valley.17 The relatively rich educational opportunities of this area contributed greatly to

14 In addition to his impoverished but reputedly noble father, Peter’s letters also mention one known brother, two possible sisters, and uncles or cousins, all of whom were involved with the church at some point in their respective lives. Peter’s brother William accompanied him on a diplomatic mission to Sicily in the late 1160s and remained there for some time, serving as abbot of Mantina. The evidence for siblings of the female sex comes only from the salutations of Peter’s letters, some of which are addressed to an unnamed sister. However, as John Cotts proposes, at least one of these sisters may have been related in the ecclesiastical and not in the temporal sense, and such siblings may have been invented by scholars in order to explain tactfully the letters that Peter addressed to his “nephews.” Other relatives of Peter who served in the church were William, the prior of Canterbury, and Peter, the Bishop of Périgeux.

15 See Figure 1 below.

16 “Sane etsi pauperrimus exstitisset, nobilitatis tamen titulos paupertas non adimit. Sicut publice notum est, pater meus et mater mea de optimatibus minoris Britanniae traxerunt originem. Nec istud ad jactantiam dico, sed obstruatur os loquentium iniqua, qui de sua noilitate satis degenere detrahendi sumunt audaciam. Veram quidem et commendabilem reputo nobilitatem, cum generis claritate virtutem: cuius omnino exortes sunt, qui patri meo objiciunt sui exsilii paupertatem. Nonne exsulavit Brutus? Nonne exsulavit Aeneas?” Passage from epistle 49, found in Jacques-Paul Migne, Patrologia cursus completus seu bibliotheca universalis, integra, uniformis, commoda, economica, omnium SS. Patrum doctorum scriptorumque ecclesiasticorum. (Paris: various publishers, 1857-1866), 147. Unless otherwise noted, all translations in Chapter 2 are my own.

17 One of the most memorable natives of Blois was Stephen, King of England (1096-1154).

7 Peter’s growth as a scholar and as a rhetorician. Three of the most important early cathedral schools in France were at Tours, Orleans, and Chartres.

Figure 1. The Loire Valley18

Peter as Student

The schools at Tours and Orleans, geographically located on either side of the province of Blois (see Figure 1), were both garnering renown for their emphasis on legal and administrative rhetoric, and it is clear from Peter’s correspondence and from his literary works that he studied at Tours. In a letter to a nephew, Peter asks to be sent some “poems and playthings” that he had composed there.19 This request is valuable not only in placing Peter at Tours as a young man but also in dating at least some of his poetic activity back to the middle of the century. Additional evidence for Peter’s studies at

18 Map drawn by the author.

19 “Mitte mihi versus et ludicra quae feci Turonis.” From epistle 12, Patrologia 39. I have translated ludicra with its most common definition of trifle or plaything. However, it was sometimes used interchangeably with ludus and could have referred to a play or liturgical drama. This definition is quite possible, though there are no extant plays attributed to Peter of Blois.

8 Tours is the similarity of the distribution of topics and genres in Peter’s writing to that of the archbishop Hildebert of Lavardin, active at Tours in the generation immediately prior to Peter’s. Helen Waddell briefly describes Peter’s epistolary patrimony thus: Peter of Blois, Archdeacon of Bath, thinks it was very good for his style that he once had to learn by heart the letters of Hildebert; those letters had been written only a generation before but were already models of prose composition: and as for his own works, Peter modestly concludes that they will outlast ruin and flood and fire and the manifold procession of the centuries.20

Hildebert’s output included letters, sermons, poems, and miscellaneous opuscula.21 Interestingly, these are also the four categories into which J.A. Giles divided Peter’s works in his four-volume collection.22 Hildebert’s Liber de querimonia et conflictu carnis et spiritus seu anime was almost certainly an influence in Peter’s debate poem Cantilena de lucta carnis et spiritus on the same conflict between the flesh and the spirit.23 In a list of authors whom Peter read in his youth, Hildebert’s carries the distinction of being the only name not chosen from among the early church fathers or the classical auctoritates. He provided a model that Peter consciously emulated, not only in his writings but also in his choice to pursue poetic and rhetorical excellence while maintaining a theological and service-oriented political position. Although it is not clear whether Peter did in fact study at Chartres, or at what point he may have done so, he does write to John of Salisbury much later in his life that he wishes to return to Chartres in old age, remembering it as the site of his first religious training.24 Thus it is clear that Peter had spent some time at Chartres and had studied there. He expresses the same desire to spend his last days at that cathedral in several

20 Helen Waddell, Inroduction to The Wandering Scholars, (New York: Houghton Mifflin Company, 1927), p. x. Waddell also mentions Peter on pp. 105 and 131.

21 See Hildebert of Lavardin Opera Omnia in the Patrologia volume 171.

22 J. A.Giles, editor, Petri blesensis bathionensis archidiaconi opera omnia: nunc primum in anglia ope codicum manuscriptorum editionumque optimarum. (Oxford: J.H. Parker, 1847).

23 Patrologia OL, volume 171, beginning column 0989. The online version of the Latin Patrologia cursus completus is available from http://pld.chadwyck.com.

24 Epistle 218, Patrologia 506-08.

9 other letters, which suggests that he felt a special attachment to that particular community.25 From Chartres it was a short trip to the northeast to the burgeoning of scholarly activity at Paris, and it is here that Peter claims to have made most of his contacts and friendships. However, after his early training in religion and the arts, Peter’s letters indicate that he spent a very brief time studying law in Bologna before his further theological studies at Paris.26 His reflections on legal studies produce ambiguous advice to those of the clerical bent who would follow in his footsteps (and those of John of Salisbury and Arnuld of Lisieux as well) and study law. The two following passages illustrate his self-contradiction on this matter:

The practice of law among clerics is a matter full of danger. It claims the whole man for itself, taking over control of all his property, setting him against spiritual concerns, and removing him completely from the divine. It is perilous to subject oneself solely to human law, so that the mind refrains for a while from the contemplation of divine law. No one can simultaneously legate and pray, petition and prosecute, or exercise the ministries of Christ and the duties of an advocate, for while he hastens to do both quickly, he will do neither well.27

The civil law is holy and honorable and sanctioned by the holy constitutions of the orthodox fathers. Indeed, I spoke [specifically] to those trained in law in the aforementioned sermons regarding the terrible sentence of the strict and final judgment, and I said to them that neither the remedy of appeal, the intercession of supplicants, nor the making of a subsidiary action will make possible the benefit of any restitution.28

25 Other significant references to Chartres occur in epistles 20, 72, 130, and 218.

26 Epistle 48, Patrologia 143-44.

27 “Res plena discriminis est in clericis usus legum. Totum enim hominem adeo sibi vindicat, ut eum rei familiaris providentia fraudet, suspendat a spiritualibus, a divinis avellat. Periculosum est ita legibus humanis impendere, ut mens per horulam a divinae legis meditatione iejunet, Nemo simul potest precari et orare, petere et postulare, exercere Christi ministerium et officium advocati, ne dum in utroque festinat neutrum bene peragat.” From epistle 26, in Lena Wahlgren, The Letter Collections of Peter of Blois: Studies in the Manuscript Tradition, Studia Graeca et Latina Gothoburgensia 58 (Goteborg: Acta Universitatis Gothoburgensis, 1993), 77-78.

28 “Jus civile sanctum est et honestum, atque sacris orthodoxorum Patrum constitutionibus approbatum. Loquebar equidem legisperitis in illis praedictis exhortationibus de terribili sententia districti et extremi

10

In the first passage, Peter suggests that studying law and desiring to serve God are mutually exclusive, recalling the impossibility of serving two masters. However, in the second passage, Peter extols human law as an imitation of the divine and uses it as an allegorical explanation of the final judgment. Peter’s selective opinion on the morality of civil law is fairly representative of his tendency to bend his standards to fit the situation and to support his current argument. The fairest conclusion that can be made with regard to Peter’s opinion of legal education is that a basic understanding of civil law is useful as a tool to gain greater comprehension of divine law. Before Peter set out for Paris to delve into theology, John Cotts suggests that “perhaps at the end of his stay in Bologna that he traveled to Rome to visit the court of Alexander III.”29 During this ill-fated trip Peter was captured by Pope Alexander III’s rival, the antipope Octavian. The fact that Peter was connected closely enough to Alexander’s court to be worthy of capture suggests that he had some political importance as a cleric or an advisor. Peter recounts the story of his escape in a letter in support of Alexander’s papacy.30 This event may have attached itself to Peter’s memory of his legal studies and thus could have influenced his decision to remove to Paris. It is most likely in the schools of Paris that Peter met and possibly studied under John of Salisbury. Peter’s brief interlude in Bologna is usually described as coming either before or after his studies in Paris. However, the escape story could not have happened before 1159, since Alexander III reigned between this year and 1181. According to his letters, Peter can be placed in Paris both before and after that time. In a letter written late in life, Peter recounts a meeting in Paris with Geoffrey of Peronne, who

judicii, et dicebam quod nec appellationis remedio, nec supplicationis suffragio, ec actione in factum subsidiaria, nec aliquo restitutionis beneficio poterat attentari.” From epistle 8, Patrologia 23.

29 Cotts, 36.

30 Epistle 48, Patrologia 143-44. Peter alleges that he eluded his captors by lowering himself from his cell window in a wicker basket. It is interesting that in this account, which Peter most probably fabricated, emphasizes his own resourcefulness as his means of escape, rather than the intervention of God or a friend. The latter was a common basic narrative employed in the explanation of important personages’ escape stories when a more mundane release was the reality. Peter was probably inspired by the story in Acts 9:25, in which Saul’s friends lower him, in a basket, through a hole in the wall in order to escape his execution. Again, it is important that in Peter’s version, no help was enlisted.

11 taught there until his death in the 1140s.31 Therefore, Peter must have been in Paris before the antipope incident. This chronology allows him to have studied under John of Salisbury, who was in Paris in the 1140s as well.32 If John was in fact a mentor to Peter, it would explain the similarities in their educational programs. As mentioned above, after Bologna, Peter turned away from civil law to deeper theological studies.33 He also indirectly claims to have acquired the teaching status of master while there and mentions a student of his as having taught the future Parisian bishop, Odo of Sully (r. 1197-1208). Peter wrote the following to the abbot of Gloucester:

You inquire, whether I was familiar with this new bishop of Paris, and what I know of his life and his intentions, and what I have heard of his election, I write to you of what you seek to be explained. . . . Often he had reminded me of Peter who was his teacher in Verne, in addition to having been a student and friend of mine. . . 34

Peter does seem to have had some familiarity with the bishop, although this may have been in the capacity of fellow student rather than master. He addresses Odo with familiarity and expresses a strong desire to see him (again, one would assume) in person.

Among the most particularly desirable things in this world, by goodwill I have in mind to go and to see your face, which I so crave. For that reason, I believe that without compunction you can say with David, “Whosoever fears [God], they will see me, and they will rejoice.” 35

31 Epistle 5 in The Later Letters of Peter of Blois, ed. Elizabeth Revell, Auctores Britannici Medii Aevi 13 (London: Oxford University Press, 1993), 33.

32 R.W. Southern, Scholastic Humanism and the Unification of Europe, Vol. 1 (Oxford and Cambridge, MA: Blackwell, 1995) 214-26.

33 Epistles 20, 72, 130, and 218, Patrologia OL.

34 “Quaeritis, utrum novum hunc Parisiensem episcopum noverim, et quid de vita et moribus ejus sentiam, et quid de ipsius electione audiverim, vobis scripto petitis aperiri. . . . Saepe retulit [sic] mihi secretius Petrus quidam de Verno paedagogus ejus, discipulus autem et familiaris meus . . .” Epistle 126, Patrologia OL [Col.0376A].

35 “Inter desiderabilia hujus mundi quadam speciali affectione versatur in votis meis ire et videre desideratissimam mihi faciem vestram. Credo enim, quod conscientia secura Deo cantare possitis cum propheta David: Qui timent te, videbunt me, et laetabuntur.”

12 A Career of Service

Peter’s specific mixture of rhetorical, theological, and legal training must have given him substantial value as a clerical advisor, for in his thirties he began his career of service in the archiepiscopal See of Rouen. His letter to Henry II on the proper education of the young Henry (Richard I’s eldest brother) was written under the auspices of Archbishop Rotrou’s patronage.36 This marks the end of Peter’s formal education and places him firmly in the service of the church. Peter’s next major undertaking for the Archbishop was in the capacity of diplomat, and Peter’s brother William also participated in this mission to Sicily. The Sicilian Queen Margaret was Archbishop Rotrou’s niece, and it is possible that Peter was intended as a tutor for her son William. It is also possible that Rotrou’s nephew, Archbishop Stephen, was impressed by Peter’s skill and desired to employ him at Palermo. Regardless of the reason for Peter’s journey, there seems to have been a strong demand for his presence, and while in Sicily he became mentor to the young king, guardian of the royal seal, and one of the chief counselors to the queen. In fact, Peter seems to have enjoyed enough success in the Sicilian court to have engendered jealousy among other clerics and courtiers vying for positions there. He wrote of the temptations offered him in the way of monetary benefices and ecclesiastical positions, and eventually his consistent refusals contributed to the forced removal (or murder) of many of the non-Sicilians at court.37 Peter managed to escape (once again miraculously) the perils of the court due to the fact that he was recovering from a mysterious illness at the time, under the protection of Archbishop Stephen’s household. Like the near-disaster at the end of his studies in Bologna, this illness and narrow escape from the violence at court concluded Peter’s sojourn in Sicily. Far from being a mistake, though, the time spent in Salerno had been doubly productive; Peter had learned that the secular court

Epistle 127, Patrologia OL [Col.0378C]. Peter’s quotation of Ps. 118:74 could refer only to the joy he would feel at seeing Odo. However, as this excerpt is removed from its context, it is important to note that the quotation was more likely intended to suggest a sentiment that Peter believed would be appropriate for the new bishop to adopt, namely that Odo be a shining example of holiness and comfort to his flock. This reading is more in keeping with the remainder of the letter, which serves as instruction in episcopal behavior.

36 Epistle 67, Patrologia 210-13.

37 Epistle 131, Patrologia 390.

13 presented danger and intrigue to match that which had supposedly prevented his advancement at Chartres. He also acquired basic medical knowledge through contact with the renowned medical school at Salerno.38 This addition to Peter’s educational experiences lends credence to the cynical statement made by a twelfth-century monk from Froidmont:

The scholars are wont to roam around the world and visit all its cities, till much learning makes them mad; for in Paris they seek liberal arts, in Orleans authors, at Salerno gallipots [medicine], at Toledo demons [magic], and in no place decent manners.39

The exact location to which Peter traveled from Sicily is unknown, though there is evidence to suggest that it was either Paris or Rouen. The latter is more likely, as there are six letters from this period that were written for Archbishop Rotrou. Peter’s correspondence during this period includes his remarks to John of Salisbury on Thomas Becket’s exile in France.40 Although this letter does not provide an address of origination for Peter, it does suggest the intriguing possibility that Peter came into contact with the exiled Archbishop, whose career bears interesting resemblances and contrasts to Peter’s.41 During this period of uncertain whereabouts in the 1170s, Peter’s letters provide information as to his preferred mode of instruction and program of study, which is discussed in Chapter 3, below.

Peter as Educator

Education in the twelfth century featured a shift toward a centralized body of knowledge and the codification of educational practices reminiscent of Classical Greco- Roman models. Peter’s educational philosophy did not deviate much from the classical

38 Epistle 43, Patrologia 126.

39 John Addington Symonds, Wine, Women and Song; Mediaeval Latin Students' Songs Now First Translated into English Strophe with an Essay (London: Chatto & Windus, 1925) 20, 21.

40 Epistle 22, Patrologia OL.

41 The parallels between the careers of Peter of Blois and Thomas Becket are discussed further at the end of this chapter.

14 trivium of grammar, rhetoric and logic, all of which would have been prerequisite for the more important study of theology. Peter had been intended as a tutor to the nephews of Jocelin, bishop of Salisbury as well as serving as educational advisor to similar relatives of the Archdeacon of Nantes.42 Peter complained that when he had no students to teach, he had no money with which to live, clearly demonstrating his dependence upon the patronage of others for his livelihood and the dissemination of his teachings. Neither the Salisbury nor the Nantes position was to meet with a great measure of success, and Peter’s professional striving characterized the rest of his life. R.W. Southern and Stephen Ferruolo have suggested that Peter’s change in career from teacher to ecclesiastical servant resulted from his disappointment and failure as an educator.43 However, in none of his extant correspondence does Peter mention frustration or bitterness on the subject or suggest an inability to maintain a teaching position. It is more likely that teaching provided the financial means for survival until a better employment situation materialized.

Ecclesiastic and Royal Patronage

Peter’s most successful relationship with a patron in the 1170s seems to have been with Reginald Fitzjocelin of Salisbury, who was probably once a student of Peter’s. Peter certainly treats him as both benefactor and pupil, directing him as to the appropriate behavior and duties of a bishop.44 Peter also served Reginald in an epistolary sense by defending his character and his actions during the Becket controversy in a letter addressed Ad familiares Thomae Archiepiscopi Cantuariensis.45 The tone and purpose of

42 Epistle 70, Patrologia OL.

43 R.W. Southern, “Peter of Blois: A Twelfth-Century Humanist?” in Medieval Humanism and Other Studies (Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1970), 112. Stephen C. Ferruolo, The Rise of the Universities: the Schools of Paris and their Critics 1100-1215 (Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 1985), 166.

44 Peter’s treatment of episcopal conduct is discussed below in Chapter 3.

45 Epistle 24, Patrologia 86-88.

15 these letters suggest a sense of responsibility and a desire to serve that indicate Reginald’s dual position in Peter’s mind. In addition to Peter’s correspondence with Fitzjocelin, he also seems to have been still in the employ of Archbishop Rotrou of Rouen, for whom he wrote in the capacity of secretary to several members of the Plantagenet family.46 Peter seems to refer to this group of letters to indicate that he was in the service not only of Rotrou but of Henry II as well, though the latter is unverifiable. In a letter to the bishop of Syracuse, he writes that King Henry had insisted on Peter’s presence in England, and at this time Peter begins his service to Richard of Dover, Becket’s replacement as the Primate of England. The documentary evidence surrounding the reasons for Peter’s move to England is masked by the abundance of material recounting the aftermath of the Becket affair. In the mid- 1170s, Peter was in contact with several of his erstwhile patrons, who likewise were surely in communication with one another. Rotrou had been helpful to Henry II during the past few years of conflict and may have suggested his loyal secretary to the king for service under the new archiepiscopal court. It is also possible that Peter’s connections with Reginald, who was given the bishopric of Bath, earned him a recommendation from the newly created episcopus Bathiensis. For whatever reason, Peter was firmly ensconced in his position under the new Archbishop Richard by late 1174, when he served as witness to several charters in Canterbury.47 A crucial event during Peter’s service to Richard was his attendance at the Third Lateran Council in 1179. He represented Richard in absentia, along with seven English bishops. This eleventh ecumenical council was presided over by Alexander III, who retained the papal throne despite two attempts in 1178 to install Callistus III (John de Struma) and Innocent III (Lando Sitino) respectively in his place. The laws of Lateran III that were most relevant to Peter of Blois were Canons 5 and 18. Canon 5 prevented the ordination of a cleric without sufficient financial support from a church benefice. Since Peter often complained of his financial woes, it can be assumed that this law was a factor in his lack of elevation to the priesthood. Canon 18 was potentially more helpful to Peter,

46 Epistles 28, 33, 67, 153, 154, and 155.

47 C.R. Cheney and B.E.A. Jones, eds. English Episcopal Acta II: Canterbury 1162-1190 (London, 1986), charters 56, 68, 75, 82, 93, 120, 131, 174, 198, 199, 220.

16 as it mandated the provision of a school for clerics at each cathedral church, thereby creating a need for scholars and teachers such as Peter. Aside from the personal impact of the canon laws of Lateran III, Peter’s exposure to the vagaries of the papal curia was to provide substantial material for his moral-satirical poems. The first strophe of the conductus lyric Quo me vertam nescio demonstrates Peter’s scorn at the difficulty of finding a virtuous prelate.48

Quo me vertam nescio, I know not whither I should turn, Dum stricto iudicio When with judgment drawn tight Prelatos circumfero, I move among the prelates, Dum virtutes pondero When I weigh the virtues Patrum modernorum; Of modern Church Fathers; Tanta subit raritas, Such rarity appears Quod vix unum veritas That Truth can scarcely Probat meritorum. Approve one of merit.

Archdeacon and Chancellor

Two further advances in Peter’s career occurred during Richard’s occupation of the archiepiscopal seat. In the early 1180s Peter was granted both the archdeaconry of Bath and the title of chancellor. Peter’s importance to the archbishop’s court is evidenced not only by his newly invested titles but also by the fact that he is the primary witness to the majority of documents produced during Richard’s administration. Richard described Peter as his “beloved son and master clerk” in a letter to the dean of Lichfield and seems to have entrusted Peter, as chancellor, with bookkeeping, letter-writing, and management of the archiepiscopal seal. Peter’s duties as cancellarius may also have included scholarly instruction of other members of the archbishop’s court. There is evidence that during Peter’s service to archbishop Richard he had direct contact with and occasional assignments from the king. Peter wrote the following to Richard and to King Henry, respectively:

48 Text and translation of this poem are from Gordon Anderson, Notre Dame and Related Conductus: Opera Omnia, vol. 5 (Henryville, Pennsylvania: Institute of Mediaeval Music, 1981), p.XLV. Peter Dronke attributes this song to Peter of Blois in his article “Peter of Blois and Poetry at the Court of Henry II” in Mediaeval Studies 28 (Toronto: Pontifical Institute of Mediaeval Studies, 1976).

17 The lord king continues to Gascony, while I follow in his footsteps with a diplomatic missive. If only I were able to run like he does, that I could catch up with him. Pray verily, father, to the Highest that finding grace in His eyes, that having favorably and properly carried out your tasks, I might return to you with rejoicing.49

Therefore instruct me as to where and on what day you may be found, kindest Prince, that I might run in the path of your mandates and that your word might be a lamp unto my feet.50

These are the only two instances in Peter’s letters that include specific references to contact with Henry II, and he witnessed a meager pair of the king’s charters. However, Peter’s lack of connections to the royal court may have been partly intentional; he may have associated the jealousy and intrigue of the Sicilian episode with secular courts in general and certainly would have wished to avoid another such incident. Also, as a French-born member of the English court, he would have been in the very midst of tensions between those two political powers. Peter may have experienced both aversion and attraction to the secular administration, feelings that would have been especially meaningful against the background of the reformative currents that would lead to the Lateran IV canon prohibiting clerics from holding secular office. Whatever the manner and degree of Peter’s relationship with the king, it continued into the next archiepiscopal administration, as did Peter’s position as clerk. Surviving documents from Peter’s service under Baldwin of Ford, the new archbishop of Canterbury, include four letters written and sixteen charters that he witnessed on Baldwin’s behalf and several treatises dedicated to Henry II.51 Peter also made an unsuccessful attempt at supporting Baldwin’s cause in a dispute with the monks of Christ

49 “Dominus rex in Gasconiam tendit, ego autem diplomate utens eum evestigio sequor: utinam sic possim currere, ut comprehendam. Vos vero, Pater, oretis Altissimum ut gratiam in oculis eius inveniens negotiis vestris prospere et propere consummatis, ad vos cum exsultatione regrediar.” From Epistle 52, Patrologia 159.

50 “Mandetis igitur, ubi et qua die inveniri possitis, benignissime princeps, ut curram in via mandatorum vestrorum, et sit lucerna pedibus meiis verbum tuum.” from Epistle 41, Patrologia 121. This excerpt includes one of Peter’s typical references to scripture. In this case it is Psalm 119:105, Thy word is a lamp unto my feet and a light unto my path.

51 One such tract, De praestigiis fortunae, has since been lost.

18 Church. The archbishop reinitiated previous plans (possibly conceived by Peter) to build a collegiate church near Canterbury that would serve as an educational facility controlled by the archbishop and therefore a mouthpiece for royal and ecclesiastical direction to the surrounding area. The dispute took place over the fact that the new church would effectually nullify any authority of the nearby monastery, the residents of which had in practice been the electors of the archbishop and the guardians of Thomas Becket’s remains.52 The major figures at the beginning of the argument were Archbishop Baldwin and Pope Urban III, both of whom Peter claims as friends from his youth.53 Peter wrote that Urban III (né Uberto) had been a friend and student with him in scholis.54 Peter’s loyalties to the English archbishop were clear, though, and he went so far as to apprehend and falsify documents, as well as purposely misleading the pope. He later felt demonstrable remorse over his misconduct and interpreted a subsequent illness as an act of punishment at the hand of God. Peter was quick to seek redemption, both in the eyes of God and in his own self- estimation, by channeling his literary energies into the call to arms for the Third Crusade. The tragic defeat of Christian armies in the Holy Land was fortuitous for Peter, providing him with a distraction from his recent shame. It cannot be proved that Peter accompanied his master Baldwin and the new king Richard to Jerusalem, but he did at least begin the

52 For a detailed account of this conflict, see the Introduction to William Stubbs, ed, Epistolae Cantuarenses vol. 2 of Chronicles and Memorials of the Reign of Richard I, 2 vols. Rolls Series 38 (London: Longman, Green, Longman, Roberts, and Green, 1865), 554-57.

53 EC, 556. It can be assumed that if the three had in fact been acquainted previously, it was at school in Paris. The conflict with the monks of Christ Church lasted into the administrations of Archbishop Hubert Walter and Pope Innocent III and was resolved in favor of the monks during the reign of Richard I.

54 “. . . nam in scholis Urbani socius et discipulus fueram maldyebyrig” from Epistle 211, Patrologia online, [Col. 0494D]. The term maldyebyrig is not defined in any sources and does not correspond closely to any known place names, althoug it could be a variant spelling or corruption of Magdeburg. However, in the version of this letter printed in the appendix to EC, it is transcribed as Baldwyni and is annotated by Stubbs as having been valdywyny in his source, the Oxford MS Coll. Nov. Ep. 152. Stubbs’s reading makes much more sense but changes the meaining slightly. Instead of placing Urban and Peter as schoolmates in some “Maldyeburg” location, the transcription of valdywyny as Baldwyni indicates that Peter was a student and friend of Baldwin while in the schola of or with Urban. Although some sources interpret in scholis to mean literally “in school,” it is equally plausible that the word be translated as a debate, lecture, or learned conversation. The fact that scholis is plural further suggests the connotation of erudite conversations. Thus the image, popular with scholars of the past two centuries, of Peter, Urban, and Baldwin together as boys at school might not be entirely accurate.

19 journey from England with them. If he did not physically complete the journey, he certainly supported the cause via sermons, tracts, and songs. Peter continued to serve in the ecclesiastical and, in rare instances, the secular spheres, into the thirteenth century, but his involvement in the crusade precedes a gradual decline in his activity. His involvement at the royal court was limited to a few letters concerning the release of Richard Coeur de Lion written on behalf of Eleanor of Aquitaine in the early 1190s.55 Although these letters have been at times attributed to the queen herself, it is generally agreed today that the rhetorical style and level of skill displayed in their verbiage point to Peter of Blois as the author. His tendency to self- contradiction is evident in two excerpts from the first of these letters to the effete and timid Celestine III. First, Eleanor addresses Richard and the Virgin Mary in successive apostrophe, wishing that the former not be punished for his mother’s (Eleanor’s) sins.

[to Richard] Who would allow me to die for you, my son? [to Mary] Mother of mercy, look upon a mother so wretched, or else if your Son, an unexhausted source of mercy, requires from my son the sins of the mother, then let Him exact complete vengeance on me, for I am the only one to offend, and let Him punish me, for I am the irreverent one. Do not let Him smile over the punishment of an innocent person.56

55 Beatrice Lees argues that the letters were not intended for actual receipt by the pope and that they may not even have been written by Peter of Blois. She bases her argument that Peter did not serve as secretary to Eleanor or Henry on the fact that he sometimes styled himself as chancellor of the Archbishop of Canterbury but never as such to the monarchs. Lees does not take into account that by naming himself chancellor to king or queen in his own letter collection, Peter would have cast an air of insincerity on his frequent criticism of clerics in the service of the secular court. See Beatrice A. Lees, “The Letters of Eleanor of Aquitaine to Pope Celestine II,” English Historical Review 21/81 (January 1906), 78-93.

56“Quis det mihi ut pro te moriar fili mi? Matrem tantae miseriae respice misericordiae mater, aut si filius tuus, fons misericordiae inexhaustus, peccata matris requirit a filio, ab ca, quae sola deliquit, totum exigat, puniat impiam, et de poenis innocentis non rideat.” Found in Thomas Rymer, Foedera, conventiones, literæ, et cujuscunque generis acta publica, inter reges Angliæ, et alios quosvis imperatores, reges, ... ab anno 1101, ad nostra usque tempora, habita aut tractata; . . . In lucem missa de mandato nuperæ Reginæ. Accurante Thoma Rymer, Editio secunda, ad originales chartas in Turri Londinensi denuo summa fide collata & emendata, studio Georgii Holmes. Vol. 1. (Londini, 1726-35), 74. 20 vols. Eighteenth Century Collections Online. Gale Group. Available online at .

20 In the same letter, Eleanor addresses Pope Celestine directly:

Three times you have promised us to send legates [to free Richard], yet they have not been sent. . . . Is this the promise you made to me . . . with such protestations of love and good faith? What benefit did you gain from giving my simple nature mere words, from mocking the faith of the innocent with a hollow trust? Alas, I know now that your cardinals’ promises are but empty words. . . . Cursed be he who trusts in man!57

As was Peter’s typical modus operandi, he portrays Eleanor, or helps her to portray herself, as worthy of punishment, in order to complement and enhance her assertion of Richard’s innocence. However, in comparing the anguished mother with the negligent pope, Eleanor is cast in a light of virtue. Two subsequent letters were addressed to Celestine on the same subject, each more urgent and berating than the last. There is an indication in the second letter that Eleanor had received some message in response from Celestine, though this is the only evidence in support of the theory that the letters were not merely written by Peter as an exercise in rhetorical persuasion.58 Regardless of the nature of the letters, their purpose for this research is to bolster the evidence for Peter’s presence at Eleanor’s court. This allows the possibility of musical and poetic influence of the Languedoc troubadour culture on Peter’s creative endeavors. Thus, a brief period spent in the secular court carries greater artistic significance than the return to clerical duties that followed Peter’s service to Eleanor. Peter’s connection with the archbishopric of Canterbury continued into the administration of Hubert Walter (r. 1193-1205). After the turn of the century, however,

57 “Legati nobis iam tertio promissi sunt, nec sunt missi; ut verum fatear, ligati potius, quam legati....Haeccine promissio illa est, quam nobis, apud Castrum Radulphi, cum tanta dilectionis et fidei potestatione, fecistis? Quid profuit vobis simplicibus dare verba, et illudere vota innocentium inani fiducia?” Ibid., 75.

58 “Silere decreveram, ne insolentiae et praesumptionis argue[rit], si sorte adversus Principem sacerdotum verbum aliquod minus cautum abundantia cordis, et vehementia doloris eliceret.” “I had decided to remain quiet in case a fullness of heart and a passionate grief might have elicited some word against the chief prelate that was certainly less than cautious, and I was therefore accused of insolence and arrogance.” [emphasis mine] Translation found in Alison Weir, Eleanor of Aquitaine: a Life (New York: Ballantine, 1999), 289.

21 his focus seems to shift onto his new position of Archdeacon of London, bestowed in the 1190s. A new source of frustration, or rather a fresh incarnation of an old source, was the fact that the revenue from the London benefice barely sustained Peter. One of his last surviving letters was a complaint to Innocent III concerning his poverty; in this letter he also expressed his longing to spend his last days in the French countryside of his boyhood.

I was called to England by Henry, and by himself and his sons generously blessed, praised with utmost veneration by archbishops, bishops, and by all magnates of the land. Now I am separated from all the honors of my archdeaconry and criminally defamed. I am surrendered to contempt and slander by the intrigue of an evil man.59

Although Giles asserts that Peter died “in England in or soon after the year 1200,” it is not impossible that he died in France.60 He was certainly alive and in London in 1209, at which time he was still writing letters for St Paul’s. He had visited Chartres at some time either before or after that, but he is mentioned in the obituaries of Rouen in late 1211 and those of Chartres in early 1212. The element of Peter’s biography that provides the most useful insight into his songs is his struggle for recognition, for advancement, and for internal resolution of the many conflicts with which he was faced. Peter had acquired sufficient skill as a writer of letters to impart great value to his service, which was sought by those in secular and ecclesiastical authority. However, for reasons that are currently indiscernible, he never achieved a status concomitant with his abilities. While many men who had served in facilities similar to his own were eventually granted archbishoprics and other high levels of authority, Peter never advanced past the level of archdeacon and was perpetually

59 “A rege Henrico vocatus in Angliam, et ab eo, atque filiis eius ditatus largitionibus effusis, nec non ab archiepiscopis, et episcopis, et universis magnatibus terrae omni veneratione. Turpi crimine diffamatus ab omni honore archidiaconatus mei violneter expellor. Datus sum per astutiam malignantis in opprobrium et contemptum.” From Epistle 149, Patrologia 439. Peter implies in this letter that his position as Archdeacon of Bath was taken from him by means of slander and dishonesty, an accusation reminiscent of his earliest complaints about not receiving a position at Chartres.

60 Introduction to J. A. Giles, ed. Petri blesensis bathionensis archidiaconi opera omnia: nunc primum in anglia ope codicum manuscriptorum editionumque optimarum. (Oxford: J.H. Parker, 1847), x.

22 dependent upon the good graces of those whom he served. A clear illustration of the discrepancy between Peter’s fortunes and those of his contemporaries is the comparison of his life and career with that of the most controversial English churchman of the twelfth century, Thomas Becket. Both men were from families who had made their home in northern France, although Becket was born in London.61 He had the advantage of a moderately wealthy family, whose connections may have had something to do with his rapid career advancement. This provides the most salient difference between Thomas and Peter, since both were educated in Paris and began their careers soon afterward as secretarial advisors to wealthier men. Thomas’s initial service was in the courts of Norman nobility, where he may have learned to negotiate the intricacies of secular court life. He later entered the service of Theobald of Bec (a town near Rouen in Normandy), who was Archbishop of Canterbury from 1139 to 1161. Theobald valued Thomas’s perspicacity and sent him to study law in Bologna, granting him the position of Canterbury’s archdeacon upon his return to England. Thus, to this point the major events in the careers of Thomas Becket and Peter of Blois were almost identical.62 The immense difference in their relative positions resulted for the most part from Thomas’s friendship with young Henry Plantagenet, who would soon become king. When Henry ascended the throne in 1154, he ensured that his beloved friend Thomas would remain close by granting him the title of chancellor. Although Peter also served in this capacity, it was in the chancery of a church, not a kingdom. Thomas Becket became the second most powerful man in England’s secular administration at the same age at which Peter was just beginning his clerical career. Moreover, within eight years Thomas’s power rivaled King Henry’s due to the addition of ecclesiastical primacy as archbishop over the entire kingdom. The ensuing conflict between king and archbishop is relevant only in that it places Peter’s relative unimportance into context, as

61 Thomas Becket’s date of birth is usually estimated as having been sometime between 1115 and 1118. His biography, as discussed in this paper, can be found in the Catholic Encyclopedia online (http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/index.html) and Omer Englebert The Lives of the Saints, transl. Christopher and Anne Fremantle (New York: Barnes and Noble, 1994).

62 The most significant difference is, of course, that Peter studied law before entering service, while Thomas’s studies were part of his employer’s patronage.

23 he was only a minor participant in this dispute between political titans and served only as eyewitness and commentator. Most importantly, the disappointment and anxiety that Peter must have felt at his lack of recognition is clearly illustrated in the points at which his and Thomas Becket’s careers connect and diverge. Both men were from Anglo-French backgrounds; both studied theology in Paris and law in Bologna; both were raised to the level of archdeacon for their service as clerics; both felt the pull between worldly favor and piety, although Peter’s conflict between secular and sacred seems to have been contemporaneous and constant whereas Becket underwent a distinct chronological shift between service to king and service to God. Despite the differences in the two men’s careers, the similarities are much more evident and may very well have been just as apparent to Peter himself. The story of Peter’s life was played out under the shadow of greater and more fortunate men. The personal conflicts he faced reflect greater cultural currents in the twelfth century, and his writings demonstrate the difficulty of maintaining and promoting morality in the ranks of the secular clergy while simultaneously pursuing a successful professional career.

24 CHAPTER 3 THE SONGS

Monophonic Conductus in Florence, BL Pluteus 29.1

Of the song texts attributed to Peter of Blois for which corresponding music survives, those found in the Notre Dame conductus sources are most readily accessible. The monophonic conductus in the tenth fascicle of the Florence manuscript63 are quite clearly copied and accompanied by non-rhythmic square notation.64 Of these, four are love songs, at least one is a parody of an existing conductus text (although with its own music) and is one of two songs in this group that criticize the simony of the curia, one is an admonition for proper ecclesiastical behavior, one is a strictly sacred text celebrating the Virgin and Child, and two focus mainly on Peter’s code of moral duality—amorous profligacy in youth and repentant piety in old age. Because of their cohesion as a group and the clarity with which they can be transcribed, the Florence MS songs, along with one from Cambridge UL Ff.i.17, will be the primary focus of musical discussion.65 The songs from F10 have been transcribed in a manner that I believe best fits the punctuation and flow of the lyrics. Each system represents a poetic phrase or thought. In the manuscript, there are short lines of division on the staff between brief textual phrases, which Gordon Anderson has interpreted as rests in order to facilitate a rhythmic interpretation. Although Anderson’s rhythmic transcription corresponds to the rhythmic stresses of the poetry, I have transcribed the square notation as non-metric in order to focus better on melodic patterns. The use of the rhythmic modes, while functional and appropriate, is somewhat conjectural and therefore cannot be considered as an element of the music’s style. The lines interpreted by Anderson as rests I have treated rather as

63 MS Florence, Biblioteca Laurenziana, Pluteus 29.1. For a brief discussion of some of these songs (not necessarily those attributed to Peter), see Ruth Steiner, “Some Monophonic Latin Songs Composed Around 1200,” The Musical Quarterly 52/1 (January 1966), 56-70.

64 Gordon Anderson has transcribed these songs into rhythmic notation using rhythmic modality in his edition of Notre Dame and Related Conductus: Opera Omnia 6 (Henryville, Pennsylvania: Institute of Mediaeval Music, 1979).

65 Cambridge University Library, MS Ff.i.17, thirteenth-century.

25 marks of textual division; they are notated in my transcription as mensurstriche. Original ligations are notated by open brackets or slurs.66 I have divided the songs by topos into three groups. Group 1 is made up of love songs, which were most likely written during Peter’s early years as a student in Tours or Paris. Group2, the songs expressing criticism of the church, most logically belong to the period after Peter’s bureaucratic trips to Rome and his stint in Sicily, both places in which he encountered the political abuses practiced by those in power. The third and last group of songs all evidence Peter’s construction of a dual moral code and use the topoi of repentance and age. These very well may have been written near or after the turn of the thirteenth century, when Peter looked back with both fondness and bitterness at his youth and middle age. While these chronological groupings cannot be empirically proven, they are useful for purposes of analysis and discussion.

Group 1: The love songs

A globo veteri 67

I a A globo veteri When from the old globe Cum rerum faciem the gods had traced Traxissent superi the face of things, Mundique seriem, and the order of the world, Prudens explicuit 5 wise Nature unfolded Et texuit Natura; and knit it together; Iam preconceperat, for she had already planned Quod fuerat Factura. what she would do.

I b [Que causas machine [She, raising up the causes Mundane suscitans, 10 of the earthly machine, De nostra virgine of our maiden Iam dudum cogitans already then thinking, Plus hanc excoluit, cultivated her the more, Plus prebuit Honoris, and offered her more honour,

66 Where noted, some transcriptions are adapted from other sources, hence the inconsistency in the editorial policies with regards to notation.

67 Unless otherwise noted, all song text translations are from Gordon Anderson’s edition of the songs in Florence Fascicle X, Notre Dame and Related Conductus, vol. VI. Some alterations have been made by the author.

26 Dans privilegium 15 granting privilege Et pretium Laboris.] and the value of labor.]

II a In hac pre ceteris In her above all others Totius operis of the whole creation Nature lucent opera. the works of Nature shine forth. Tot munera 20 so many gifts of favour Nulli favoris contulit, on no one else has she given, Sed extulit but held her up Hanc ultra cetera. above all others.

II b [Et, que puellulis [And she is accustomed to have Avara singulis 25 coveted attributes normally given Solet partiri singula; singly to girls in turn; Huic sedula for her Wise Nature Impendit copiosius has weighed more copiously Et plenius and more plentifully Forme munuscula.] 30 all the gifts of form.]

III a Nature studio By Nature’s work Longe venustata, much beautified, Contendit lilio her snowy-white forehead Rugis non crispata unfurrowed by wrinkles Frons nivea. 35 vies with the lily. Simplices siderea Her innocent eyes shine Luce micant ocelli. with the light of stars.

III b [Omnes amantium [All the glances of lovers Trahit in se visus, she draws on herself, Spondens remedium 40 promising remedy Verecunda risus by the modest playfulness Lascivia. of her smile. Arcus supercilia Twinned curves Discriminant gemelli.] divide her haughty eyebrows.]

IV a Ab utriusque luminis 45 From the closeness Confinio of each eye, Moderati libraminis in a judgment Iudicio of a proportionate balance, Naris eminentia the eminence of her nose Producitur venuste 50 protrudes gracefully, Quadam temperantia: with a certain moderation: Nec nimis ergitur it is not turned up too much, Nec premitur nor is it flattened Iniuste. unduly.

27 IV b [Allicit verbis dulcibus 55 [She entices with sweet words Et osculis, and kisses, Castigate tumentibus closely with her pouted Labellulis, Lips, Roseo nectareus while a sweet scent Odor infusus ori. 60 surrounds her rosy mouth. Pariter eburneus Each one equally ivory-white Sedet ordo dentium, sits her row of teeth, Par nivium equal to snow Candori.] in their purity.]

V a [Certant nivi, micant lene, 65 [They vie with snow, they quiver lightly, Pectus, mentum, colla, gene; her breast, chin, neck, cheeks; Sed, ne candore nimio but, lest by too much whiteness Evanescant in pallorem, they vanish in pallor, Precastigat hunc candorem most prudent Nature Rosam maritans lilio 70 has pre-corrected this whiteness Prudentior Natura, by marrying the rose with the lily, Ut ex his fiat aptior so that out of these would arise Et gratior a better and more graceful Mixtura.] mixture.] V b [Rapit mihi me Coronis 75 [Coronis snatched me from myself, Privilegiata donis she made privileged with gifts Et Gratiarum flosculis. and flowers of the Graces. Nam Natura, dulcioris for while Nature, giving elements Alimenta dans erroris, of sweetest sin, Dum in stuporem populis 80 in wonder to all people Hanc omnibus ostendit, she is displayed, In risu blando retia in her mild smiles, Veneria snares of love Tetendit.] she proffers.]

This song, comprising five paired versicles, describes the graces of a beloved, referred to as Coronis.68 It is likely to have been among the light poetry that Peter had composed during his studies at Tours and expresses no elements of guilt or judgment in its treatment of the subject of desire. The probability that it comes from an early period is reinforced by the fact that it is set syllabically and has far fewer occurrences of liquescents than later musical settings of Peter’s attributed songs. The attribution to Peter

68 The text for the second strophe of each pair is found in CB and Ar384. Only the first strophe of each is given in F. The text transcribed here within brackets is not present in F. This includes the entire last paired versicle, for which no music is given.

28 is based on the use of the name Coronis (used in songs numbers 1 and 10 in Ar384, also attributed to Peter), as well as stylistic parallels with others of the sixteen love songs grouped together at the beginning of Ar384.69 Although not identifiable as a sequence by the version in F, the fact that this song was known to be in the paired versicle form in the thirteenth century is evidenced by its inclusion in CB under the group heading Incipiunt iubili, or “Here begin the jubili [i.e. sequences].” The fact that the text for the second half-strophe of each paired versicle is not included in F is not completely atypical for sequence notation, especially since there is no indication that this song deviates textually or musically from the standard paired versicle form, as does Quo me vertam nescio.70 The most noticeable musical characteristic of this song is the repeated melismatic figure with which each strophe ends (see Example 1).

Example 1. Repeated melisma

Strophes II and III differ only slightly from I and IV. In II, the figure is set syllabically, and the antepenultimate note is actually a ligature with a g filling in the interval between a and f. In III, the four-note ligature with which the figure begins includes an initial b. The figure, as reproduced above, also appears in the melisma that begins line 20 of the poem. Another unifying factor in this song is the following figure:

Example 2.

Set syllabically each time it occurs, this figure begins strophes I through III, with the addition of a melisma at the beginning of strophe I (Example 3).

69 Dronke, “Peter of Blois and Poetry at the Court...” 319-20. The “Coronis” connection is mentioned in Gordon Anderson, Notre Dame and Related Conductus, x/6, K74, xcvii-xcxix, 105-106. 70 For a discussion of text underlay and notation of sequences, see Lori Kruckenberg, “Neumatizing the Sequence,” JAMS 59/2 (Summer 2006), 243-317.

29

Example 3. Initial figure with melisma

The three c’s (Examples 2 and 3) begin strophe IV but are interrupted by a decorative four-note figure and followed by five notes that are drawn from the song’s opening melisma (Example 4).

Example 4. Strophe IV with decorated three c’s

The poetic organization of the Florence version of the song is as follows:71

I ababccdeed 6pp6pp6pp6pp6pp4pp3p6pp4pp3p II aabbccb 6pp6pp8pp4pp8pp4pp6pp III ababccd 6pp6pp6pp6pp4pp6pp6pp IV ababcdceed 8pp4pp8pp4pp7pp7p7pp7pp4pp3p V aabccbdeed 8p8p8pp8p8p8pp7p8p4pp3p

Strophes II and III, musically the most similar, are also the most similar with regard to rhyme scheme and metric structure. The words to these two strophes provide an emotional outpouring that is set between the historical introduction of strophe I and the almost pedantic litany of attributes in strophe IV. Strophe V and the second halves of I through IV are not considered here, because of their exclusion from F. However, they fit topically and structurally with the rest of the song as discussed here. Neither in F nor in the more textually complete versions is this song steeped in allusion. In fact, the only references to the metaphysical are superi in line 3 and

71 For the discussion of word stress at the ends of the lines, “pp” indicates a proparoxytone line, with stress on the antepenultimate syllable. The notation “p” indicates a paroxytone line, with stress on the penultimate syllable. There are no cases of oxytone lines, or final syllable stresses, in this body of poetry.

30 Gratiarum in line 76. However, the general metric composition and the presence of 4pp and 3p lines interjected between longer groupings provide a structural connection to Peter’s other songs. The absence of the allusions that so pervade Peter’s songs of satire and moral commentary helps to place this song at a different period in the author’s development. The amorous topos of the poem suggests that this period was earlier rather than later in the poet’s life. There are textual and topical similarities to works by Bernardus Silvestris, Mattheus Vindocinensis, Philip the Chancellor, and Walter of Châtillon.72

Example 5. A globo veteri

72 Wollin, Petri Blesensis Carmina, 407-15.

31

Example 5—continued.

32

Olim sudor Herculis

Ia Olim sudor Herculis Once Hercules’ labors, Monstra late conterens vanquishing monsters far and wide, Pestis orbis auferens removing the world’s plagues, Claris longetitulis far flung with famous titles Enituit 5 shone. Sed tamen defloruit But at length that erstwhile Fama prius celebris glorious fame withered, Cecis clausa latebris enclosed in blind darkness Yoles illecebris of enticing Iole, Alcide 10 and Alcides Captivato. was captive made.73

Ib Ydra dampno capitum The Hydra, made richer Facta locupletior by the loss of her heads Omni peste sevior being more savage than any plague, Reddere sollicitum 15 was not able Non potuit to cause him alarm. Quem puella domuit Him whom a mere girl subdued; Iugo cessit Veneris he yielded to Venus’ yoke, Vir qui maior superis the man who was greater than the Gods Celum tulit humeris 20 and who bore on his shoulders the heavens Athlante when Atlas Fatigato. tired.

Ref Amor fame meritum Love Fame’s merit Deflorat. withers; Amans tempus perditum 25 lost time a lover Non plorat, never laments, Sed temere but rashly Diffluere in dissipation Sub Venere laborat. labors with Venus.

IIa Cacho tristis alitus 30 Useless to Cacus were poisoned breath Et flammarum vomitus and the vomiting of flames; Vel fuga Nesso duplici to deceitful Nessus flight Non frofuit. gave no aid; Gerion Esperius Spanish Geryon Ianitorque Stigius 35 and the Stygian gatekeeper, Uterque forma triplici each with triple form, Non teruit. terrified him not.

73 Alcides is another name for Hercules or Heracles.

33 Quem captivum tenuit But a girl held him captive Risu puella simplici. with a simple smile.

IIb Iugo cessit tenero 40 He yielded to the gentle yoke, Sompno qui letifero he who with deadly sleep Orti custodem divitis trapped the guardian Implicuit. of the rich garden, Frontis Acheloye he who from Achelous’ forehead Cornu dedit Copie 45 the horn to Copia gave, Apro leone domitis he who, with wild boar and lion subdued, Enituit. brightly shone, Traces equos imbuit he who splattered the Thracean horses Cruenti cede hospitis. with the bloody slaughter of his host.

Ref Amor fame... Love Fame’s...

IIIa Anthei Libici 50 In the combat of Lybian Antheus Luctam sustinuit he stood firm, Casus sophistici and checked the fraud Fraudes cohibuit of a cunning fall Cadere non vetuit when he kept him from falling; Sed que sic explicuit 55 but he who thus unbound Lucte nodosos nexus the tight bonds of combat Vincitur et vincitur, is conquered and bound, Dum labitur when he falls, Magna Iovis soboles Jove’s mighty offspring, ad Ioles amplexus. into Iole’s embrace. 60 IIIb Tantis floruerat He had become famous by such Laborum titulis, great titles of valor, Quem blandis carcerat whom with soft chains Puella vinculis. a young maid imprisons, Et dum lambit osculis, 65 and while she showers him with kisses, Nectar huic labellulis to him she offers with her little lips Venereum propinat; the nectar of Venus. Vir solutus otiis A man dissolute with the pleasures Veneriis of Venus Laborum memoriam devalues the memory Et gloriam inclinat. of great deeds and glory.

Ref Amor fame... 70 Love Fame’s...

IVa Sed Alcide fortior But stronger than Alcides, Aggredior I wage Pugnam contra Venerem. the battle against Venus; Ut superem to conquer her,

34 Hanc, fugio; 75 I flee, In hoc enim prelio for in this battle, Fugiendo fortius by fleeing one fights Et melius more bravely Pugnatur, and better, Sicque Venus Vincitur: 80 and so Venus lies conquered: Dum fugitur, when one flees, Fugatur. she is angered.

IVb Dulces nodos Veneris The sweet knots of Venus Et carceris and the gentle prison’s Blandi seras resero, 85 locks I unlock De cetero when from this one pursuit Ad alia I am led Dum traducor studia. to others. O Lycori, valeas Lycoris, farewell. Et voveas, 90 and do you vow Quod vovi: what I vow: Ab amore spiritum I have removed Sollicitum my troubled spirit Removi. from love.

Ref Amor fame... Love Fame’s...

Olim sudor Herculis is the best-known of the songs attributed to Peter of Blois. It is in the form of a sequence with refrain; the refrain is repeated after every half-strophe, as indicated by textual and musical incipit. Its poetic topoi include love and loss of fama, both of which allow a chronological assignment to Peter’s student years. This lyric stands out as being longer and more complex than his other songs, and thus it is quite likely that it was composed as a poetic exercise. It certainly displays none of the social commentary or moral wisdom of the later songs. The theme of the poem is mainly that even the strongest man can be conquered by love for a woman. The refrain neatly distills and summarizes the poet’s message: Amor fame meritum deflorat. Amans tempus perditum non plorat, Sed temere diffluere sub Venere laborat.

Love withers Fame’s merit. A lover never mourns lost time, But shamelessly works under Venus in dissipation.

35 Topically, the dangers of love entwine with the loss of fame and glory, for which the poet blames both the lover and love itself, personified as Venus. In each of the first six half-strophes, the poet describes a specific feat accomplished by Hercules and sets that success in contrast against his failure to escape the bonds of romantic attachment. Strophe Ia gives a general background to the song and introduces Iole, with whom Hercules fell in love after his own marriage to another woman. Throughout the next five versicles, Hercules is pictured as unmanned by his love for Iole, although he had conquered strong and terrifying enemies. In the last two versicles, the poet compares himself to Hercules in that he has been faced with the same battle against love. However, he is Alcide fortior, stronger than Hercules, and as he is able to win by not engaging in battle in the first place. Rather than fight the wiles of Venus, he flees from love and thereby conquers it. In lines 87-92 the poet beseeches his beloved, referred to as Lycoris, to promise flight as well. The use of the name Lycoris is one of the factors in the attribution of this poem to Peter of Blois, as he is known to have used that name, as well as Coronis and Florula, in several of his poems. Additional evidence supporting both the attribution of this song to Peter and the placement of its origin early in Peter’s chronology is found in Letter LXXVI. Curiously, this letter is one of two written by Peter of Blois to Peter of Blois. It is not necessary for this study to enter the controversy of whether this was a letter written in admonition to himself or an actual correspondence meant for another with the same name. If there were two contemporary Peters of Blois, both of them were poets with similar if not identical style and topoi, and therefore works by either of them are relevant to this study.74 The following excerpts from Letter LXXVI are applicable to this song:

Quid tibi ad vanitates et insanias falsas? quid tibi ad deorum gentilium fabulosos amores, qui debueras esse organum veritatis? O bone Jesu, o vera veritas, quomodo diminutae sunt veritates a filiis hominum! . . . quae insania est de Hercule et Jove canere fabulosa; et a Deo, qui est via,

74 There are two reasons beyond those presented by others why the author of this study believes in the plausibility of these letters as self-criticism. First, Peter of Blois demonstrated a great deal of reflexive thought and criticism in his poetry and his letters; writing a letter to himself is a logical extension of this practice. Second, a man who published a collection of his own letters is clearly cognizant of his presence as a literary-historical persona. He may have included the letters addressed to himself, alternately criticizing and praising his writing, as an apologetic commentary on his own work.

36 veritas et vita, recedere! . . . Insani capitis est, amores illicitos canere, et se corruptorem virginum jactitare . . . Quid tibi ad Herculem?

What are they to you, these vanities and false insanities? What are they to you, the fabled loves of pagan gods, you who should have been an organ of truth? Oh kind Jesu, oh truth of truths, how diminished are your truths by the sons of man! . . . What madness to sing fabled songs of Hercules and Jupiter, and to recede from the God who is way, truth, and life!...It’s a madcap thing to sing of illicit loves, and vaunt yourself as a seducer of young girls . . .What’s Hercules to you?

Peter thus reproaches Peter (whether himself or another) for using his literary talents to recount deorum fabulosos amores instead of writing to glorify God. Although the letter does not refer specifically to this song, it clearly mentions some of Peter’s poetry as having been written about Hercules and his amours.75 The respective structure of each strophe is:

Ia,b abbaccdddef 7pp7pp7pp7pp4pp7pp7pp7pp7pp3pp4p IIa,b aabcddbccb 7pp7pp8pp4pp7pp7pp8pp4pp7pp8pp IIa,b ababbbcddec 6pp6pp6pp6pp7pp7pp7pp7pp4pp7pp7p IVa,b aabbccddeffe 7pp4pp7pp4pp4pp7pp7pp4pp3p7pp4pp3p Ref. ababcccb 7pp3p7pp3p4pp4pp4pp3p

As evidenced above, the rhyme scheme is highly irregular, and this characteristic gives this otherwise lengthy and non-virtuosic piece interest, while the constantly changing rhyme pattern lends unity through variety. Strophe I is divided into two rhythmic sections and three rhyme sections, respectively 7-7-7-7-4/7-7-7-7-3-4 and abba/ccddd/ef. This is typical for this song of the discrepancy between metric structure and rhyme scheme. The two are not clearly related (i.e. “a” rhyme endings do not correspond only to 7pp lines). However, there is a rhyme, albeit possibly coincidental, between the last words of the two half-strophes of I (captivato/fatigato). In strophe II’s aabcddbccb rhyme scheme, the “c” rhymes of each half-strophe have the same ending

75 The attribution of this song is based strongly on its poetic meter and style and is discussed further in Dronke’s “Peter of Blois and Poetry at the Court of Henry II.”

37 (-uit). Strophe III has no real unifying aspect, but in Strophe IV each rhymed couplet contains a seven- and a four-syllable line. In this song these details combine to create unity without monotony. The lack of metric similarity between the strophes is typical of the sequence form and also ties this song to the Provençal descort. Although Peter could have encountered trouvère culture during his time in Paris, it would have been nearly impossible for him not to have come into contact with the troubadours in the court of Eleanor of Aquitaine in the 1190s. The addition of a refrain to the sequence form is evidence of this type of secular influence on Peter’s songs. The paired versicle form, with its manifestations both in the sacred sequence and the secular descort, lai, and other related forms, offered a particularly appropriate vehicle for Peter of Blois, a man torn between service to earthly and heavenly kings. The music of this song has almost no repetition of melodic material other than that required for the paired versicle form. In this it differs from A globo veteri, discussed above, which has a repeated cadential figure, along with other recurring melodic fragments. Although it is in the tetrardus plagalis mode, Olim sudor Herculis does not employ the mode’s typical triadic figures, and the final is approached variously from above or below in each strophe. Only in the refrain does the melody clearly include Peter’s signature contrary rhetorical gesture on the word sed (but). This gesture consists of musically setting apart a phrase or section of text that explains or contradicts that which comes before it.76 In this case, the melody for the first phrase of the refrain ends on d’ (non plorat) then leaps to begin the next phrase a sixth higher.

Example 6. Olim sudor refrain

76 For a more thorough explanation of this gesture, see the discussion of Vitam duxi sub iocundam below.

38 The text is set primarily syllabically, and the range of most of the phrases does not extend beyond a fifth. Stylistically, these characteristics combine to place the style of Olim sudor Herculis somewhere between that of the liturgical sequence and of the more repetitive lai. The primary connection between music and text in this song is that neither the melody nor the poetic meter is similar in any of the strophes. Except for the second, each strophe ends in a paroxytone line, which is reflected in the music by setting more notes to the emphasized syllable. This is also true of the refrain. The second strophe’s proparoxytone ending is emphasized also, with two notes placed on the emphasized syllable compared to one note for each syllable surrounding it.

Strophe I: Strophe III: Strophe IV:

Refrain: Strophe II (proparoxytone):

Example 7. Paroxytone and proparoxytone emphases

39

Example 8. Olim sudor Herculis77

77 Gillingham Anthology 209-17.

40

Example 8--continued

41

Example 8—continued Vitam duxi iocundam

I Vitam duxi iocundam sub amore, I have led a joyous life of love, Plus libitum quam licitum caring more for pleasure Attendens, than for propriety. Sed a vita resipisco priore, But now I am recovering from that life, Plus studiis quam neniis 5 struggling more with studies Contendens. than with songs. Ut que causa? Compellor unica: Why is this? Only one reason moves me: Ne me Fama suo privet favore that Fame should not deprive me of Dum sub vita vivo filargica. her favor, while I live a life of ease.

II Impendisse libet tempus amori, 10 I am glad I have devoted time to love, ne nesciam, cum cupiam lest I should not have known it fugisse: when I want to flee it: Malis namque medela certiori you can surely face ills with Occurreris, Cum poteris a better remedy if you can Novisse. 15 recognize them. Ergo sciens, quid sit illicitum, So now, knowing what is forbidden, Redeunti non concedam furori, I’ll not yield to the madness when it returns Sed vitabo malum precognitum. but shun the evil by anticipation.

III Potest namque, Yet love ne dampnemus amorem, 20 (let us not condemn it) Vel veniam vel gratiam can indeed indulgence or grace mereri: deserve: Reddit enim amantem minorem For it makes an impertect lover Affabilem courteous and gentle Et docilem, 25 it makes him fear whatever Vereri, he thinks is base, Quicquid turpe putat-et amplius, and what is more, for an Non nihil est: important reason: lest perchance he ne forte preter morem overstep gracious behavior Dum carpitur fructus Venereus. 30 in plucking the fruit of love.

42 This song can quite appropriately be placed at the end of Peter’s love songs, as it includes not only the love topos but also the topoi of the loss of fama and the dual moral code, as well. The speaker in the poem appears to have just enjoyed the last vestige of adolescence and is now at least pretending at a more sober outlook. Peter Dronke summarizes each strophe thus:78

Stanza 1 “The poet reflects: I enjoyed a life of love, but now I think of reputation.” Stanza 2 “It is good to know love well, the better to avoid its evils.” Stanza 3 “But let us not disparage Love itself.”

The poet is old enough to have experienced love and to recognize its folly. However, he is not too old to be tempted by it and therefore must remind himself that his career is his priority. The third stanza concedes the edifying qualities of love while remaining academic and detached from it. This song, if considered a part of Peter’s opera omnia, certainly belongs before the period of criticism and before the formation of Peter’s dual moral code. However, it demonstrates at least a semblance of wisdom and therefore can be placed after the other love songs (with the exception of Olim sudor Herculis), which are devoted to praise of love and sensuality. Topically, it has much in common with Olim sudor Herculis. In the last stanza of Olim sudor Herculis the poet vows that he has turned against love as a pastime.79 Taken in conjunction with the preceding stanzas and refrain, the poet has chosen to avoid love because it results in dissipation and the loss of a man’s mental and physical strength.

78 Dronke, Medieval Latin and the Rise of the European Love Lyric (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1968) 294.

79 “Ab amore spiritum sollicitum removi.” Olim sudor Herculis ll. 142-44. See discussion of this song above.

43 The song is in a modified bar form (A A’ B) with B longer than A. Melodically, the first pair of phrases (A section) has an open ending, while the second pair (A’ section) ends on the final, g. The B section features an internal closed cadence and also ends on the final. The open and closed endings with which the first two lines end respectively, are melodically parallel ( f’ f’ e’ liq d’ and b b a liq g ). The parallelism reflects a rhyme in the text in each of the three stanzas (ll. 3/6: attendens/contendens, ll. 12/15: fugisse/novisse, ll. 22/26: mereri/vereri).

A open ending on d” Vitam duxi iocundam sub amore, plus libitum quam licitum attendens, I have led a joyous life of love, caring more for pleasure than for propriety.

A’ closed ending on g’ Sed a vita resipisco priore, plus studiis quam neniis contendens. But now I am recovering from that life, struggling more with studies than with songs.

B closed ending on g’ Ut que causa? Compellor unica: ne me Fama suo privet favore, Why is this? Only one reason moves me: that Fame should not deprive me of her favor, closed ending on g’ dum sub vita vivo filargica. while I live a life of ease.

Another important musical characteristic of this song is the musical gesture used to indicate a reflective or contrary statement in the text. This element is found in several other songs that are attributed to Peter of Blois and can quite accurately be described as a musical-rhetorical device. This device clearly serves to set apart a conclusive statement, highlight a contrast, or deliver a moral instruction. In this song, it serves as conclusion; in the first and third stanzas it explains the poet’s viewpoint. In the second stanza, it brings the reader into the present, while reflecting on the past. The shift in mood or time

44 is depicted in the music by a descending sequential figure that covers the fifth from c’ to f.

Example 9. Rhetorical motive in Vitam duxi

The descending figure is followed by a leap to d’, which is not uncommon in monophonic melodies of this time, but still provides a moment of aural interest.

Example 10. Vitam duxi

45 Group 2: Criticism and religious texts

Qui seminant in loculis and Qui seminant in lacrimis

I Qui seminant in loculis They who sow seeds in purses Per dandi frequens mutuum, through frequent giving of loans, Reddituum will rejoice Gaudebunt de manipulis. in the maniples of their returns. Nummus nunquam examinat 5 Money never criticizes Quos ordinat: those whom it ordains, Non enim servit numini, for it does not serve God, Sed homini. but men. Nummus claudit et aperit, Money closes and opens (doors), Et quod non seminaverit 10 and what it has not sown Metit in agro Domini. it reaps in the field of the Lord.

II Beati qui esuriunt Blessed are they who hunger Et, arcessito Simone, and, calling on Simon, Per mammone through their wealth Questum prebendas rapiunt. 15 seize the prebends they desire! Qui dat est potens omnium Whoever gives is powerful Per medium, in the midst of all, Et quia mundus eligit and because the world chooses Qui porrigit, whomever gives, Cur exclamare dubitem: 20 why should I hesitate to cry: “Super plenum et divitem “Blessed is he who considereth Beatus qui intelligit”? the plentiful and the rich”?

III O nummi privilegium! O the privilege of money! Vix invocatur alius Scarcely is the cry Propitius 25 more favorable: Deus in adiutorium. “God, make haste to deliver me!” O nummo tributoriam O to money we give tribute, Ecclesiam. Church! Non hec in nostra curia In our court these are not Contagia: 30 contagions: Nam confidenter ambulant, for they walk confidently Qui Curios non simulant who do not mock the Curius Nec vivunt Bachanalia. nor live in profligation.

46 Qui seminant in loculis is loosely connected with a sacred conductus similarly titled Qui seminant in lacrimis, although at first reading the extent of the parody does not appear to extend much deeper than the incipit. In fact, although these two monophonic conductus were placed consecutively in F10, it is possible that the irony in the song attributed to Peter is based solely on the first phrase of the two pieces, which is derived from Psalm 116. Their consecutive placement supports the attribution of the second song to Peter, since in the same manuscript two other songs with parody titles are placed consecutively as well. Vanitas vanitatum and Veritas veritatum are both ascribed in the manuscript to Philip the Chancellor.80 It seems reasonable to conclude that the other pair of consecutive parodied titles are also by the same poet. If only the texts of the two Qui seminant conductus are examined, it can be surmised that the author of Qui seminant in loculis, although obviously familiar with the Psalm that both songs reference, may not have been familiar with the sacred conductus text. The similarities in the poetic meter are easily explained by the fact that the remainder of the text would necessarily have been metrically similar to the incipit. However, the musical characteristics reveal a closer connection. The in lacrimis text ends with a cauda that is very similar in contour and melodic content to the cauda at the end of the in loculis. Even without the melodic similarities, the presence of the cauda along with the poem’s metric structure suggests that it shares authorship with Qui seminant in loculis. If Peter of Blois is credited with authorship of that text, it is quite possible then to attribute the in lacrimis to him, as well. Another strong connection between the two conductus is the recurrence of four- syllable proparoxytone lines in both texts. However, these do not occur on corresponding lines; nor are they treated the same way musically. In the secular text, each 4pp line is separated by two eight-syllable lines, creating a regular metric structure. Also, each 4pp line is set neumatically in the music. In the sacred text, the 4pp lines are dispersed erratically and are set variously as neumatic and melismatic. The dissimilarities between the two texts and their respective musical settings point away from the idea of the secular text as direct parody of the sacred.

80 Vanitas vanitatum and Veritas veritatum are items K18 and K19 in Gordon Anderson’s anthology and can be found on f. 423r/v of the Florence manuscript.

47 Musically, the F10 setting of Qui seminant in loculis does not feature structure or repetition. The setting is primarily neumatic, with melismas on both occurrences of the word “Nummus” and on the final syllable of “domini.” Since the latter is on the final word of the stanza, the melisma is expected. However, the musical emphasis on Nummus is clearly an expression of textual highlighting. The composer recognized that the focal point of the text is the idolization of money, personified in the imaginary deity Nummus. It is interesting to note that when the second and third strophes of text are applied to the music, the melismas fall on the words qui, cur, O, and nam. With the exception of the exclamation O in line 27, these words do not necessarily call for particular emphasis. Thus, the musical setting could have been written primarily with the first stanza in mind and applied as an afterthought to the existing poem. Had the text been originally intended for a preexistent or concomitantly invented strophic melody, it could be argued that the words correspondent to the melismas in the second and third stanzas would probably have been more carefully chosen. Another significant difference between the first and the subsequent stanzas occurs in lines 4 and 8 (see text and translation above). In the second and third stanzas, the metric structure is 8pp 8pp 4pp 8pp 8pp 4pp 8pp 4pp 8pp 8pp 8pp, and each line is made up of iambs. However, in the first stanza, lines 4 and 8, which begin with Nummus, are trochaic, thus causing their endings to be paroxytone instead of proparoxytone. This is further evidence that the musical setting was intended mostly for the first stanza. In all three stanzas, the eight- and four-syllable lines alternate regularly (8-8-4 8-8-4) in the first six lines, and then are rearranged (8-4-8-8-8) for the remaining five. This sets apart the final three lines of each stanza as a thetical conclusion to the strophe, which is amplified by the rhyme scheme (a a b b a) of the final five lines. The music reflects this especially in lines 9 and 10. These two lines of music are almost identical in melodic contour and are offset by only a tone. The last three pitches in lines 9 and 10 ascend and descend respectively, creating an open-closed pair that ends a tone above the final, which is resolved at the end of line 11, before the final melisma. The only other melodic repetition found in this song also occurs in the final melisma and features an exact repetition of ten pitches. The melodic formal pattern of the melisma (a a b) may have

48 been intended to echo that of the last three texted lines (also a a b), thus providing a sense of closure to the stanza.

Example 11. Qui seminant in lacrimis

49

Example 11—continued

50 Quo me vertam nescio I a Quo me vertam nescio, I know not where to turn, Dum stricto iudicio when in strict judgment Prelatos circumfero, I move among the prelates, Dum virtutes pondero while I weigh the virtues Patrum modernorum; 5 of the modern Fathers, Tanta subit raritas, duch rarity appears Quod vix unum veritas that Truth can approve Probat meritorum scarcely one [prelate] of merit.

I b In prelatos refluit, Into prelates flows back Quod a Roma defluit, 10 what flows from Rome; Romanis ascribitur, to the Romans is ascribed Quod Rome connascitur what is born in Rome In eis natura; in their own nature. Notum est de singulis, It is known of each of them Quod mens est in loculis 15 that his mind is on his money Et in questu cura. and all he seeks is gain.

II a O si Roma respiceret O if Rome might look back Patrum suorum merita, on the merits of her forefathers! Salubrius disponeret She would more healthfully dispense Talenta sibi credita: 20 the talents given to her: Humilitatem coleret she would cultivate humility Nube fastus deposita, with pride’s covering put aside, Nec spe lucri recederet nor by the hope of gain would she A veritatis semita. turn away from the path of Truth.

II b En cedit in contrarium, 25 Lo, she yields to the contrary, Nam sanguisuge filie for blood-sucking daughters Visus cecant sublimium, blind the vision of those on high Mentes captivant hodie; and today captivate their souls; Sunt eorum supplicium these are their punishments: Cura, metus, vigilie 30 care, fears, sleeplessness Preter laborum tedium above the tedium of their labors Et vermes conscientie. and the worms of conscience.

III Terre, maris, aeris Land, Sea, and Sky, Cum metus evaseris, when, fearful, you have escaped, Et re salva fueris 35 and you have been saved from this, Ereptus angustiis, torn from tribulations, Ex quo Romam veneris, since you worship Rome, Nisi te nudaveris, unless you denude yourself, Vix absolvi poteris you will scarcely be absolved Curie naufragiis. 40 from the shipwrecks of care.

51 IV Si non cuvat ianuis, If he is not lurking at the door, Spem precidens vacuis, cutting off hope from the empty-handed, Symon in assiduis Symon labors relentlessly Laborat contractibus. striking deals. Argus circa loculos 45 Argus turns into [greedy] pockets Centum gyrat oculos, his hundred eyes, Briareus sacculos Briareus with his hundred hands Centum tollit manibus. holds up moneybags.

This song is in a modified sequence form without refrain. Dronke gives it a probable attribution to Peter of Blois on the basis of topic and style, despite its attribution in one manuscript as belonging to Philip the Chancellor.81 Dronke explains his argument thus: In the Darmstadt MS. 2777 (s. XIII ex.) this song is one of 26[sic] explicitly attributed to Philip the Chancellor; yet this is not decisive, as the Darmstadt group includes at least one song that cannot be Philip’s: Dum medium silentium tenerent legis apices: this song forms the climax of Walter of Châtillon’s prose and strophe discourse to the University of Bologna.82

Compared to the other songs attributed to Peter, the number of syllables in each line is very consistent, and the rhyme scheme is quite simple. If Quo me vertam employed a refrain, or if there were 4pp lines interspersed between its predominantly 7pp lines, this piece could be more convincingly identified as a text of Peter’s, but in any case the song is worth inclusion here in the effort to form a more complete comparison of musical style. The melodic composition of the song strengthens the attribution to Peter, due to the initial melismas in the first two strophes and the cauda in the last strophe.83 The rhyme scheme of each paired versicle is consistent within itself but is not related to that of the other pairs. Strophes IIa and IIb are distinct from the rest of the song both textually and musically. The text stands out due to its irregular metric structure. While each line of the remainder of the song is set with two trochaic feet and one dactyl, in that order, the structure of this versicle does not follow a pattern. Another

81 Dronke “Peter of Blois and Poetry at the Court of Henry II,” 319.

82 Dronke “Peter and Poetry,” 330.

83 The pitch level of this cauda seems to be a mistake, as it would change the mode of the entire song, transposing it up a fourth.

52 characteristic that distinguishes these strophes from the others is that each of their lines contains eight syllables. Musically, this versicle is also set apart by the melisma on the first syllable of each of its two strophes. It is possible that it was originally conceived separately from this song and was inserted at a later time. This is further supported by the fact that the only two biblical references in this song occur in these two strophes; the other allusions are to classical mythology. However, due to the lack of musical coherence other than the paired versicle structure, there is no way to prove musically that these strophes were originally unrelated. Strophes III and IV are musically dissimilar, but their rhyme structures are analogous, as shown below. In fact, the difference between the rhyme schemes of strophes III and IV can be explained by the sounds of the words themselves. Strophe IV utilizes a third rhyming unit (c) not present in strophe III to highlight the contrast between the two halves of the strophe. Lines 41-43, which use rhyme unit (a) on a closed vowel sound –uis, describe the contracting and closure of hope by Symon. Lines 45-47 rhyme the open sound of –oculos/-aculos in description of eyes, pockets, and open hands. Strophe III poses a hypothetical situation in which the reader is “torn from [the] tribulations” of “land, sea, and sky,” which seems to imply admission to heaven. The poem proceeds to explain that a person will not be “absolved from the shipwrecks of care” (read: not be granted salvation) if he worships Rome (Ex quo Romam veneris). According to this line, the intention of this strophe’s text is admonsish for Romans to leave off their earthly acquisitions in order to gain salvation.

Ia, Ib aabbcddc 7pp 7pp 7pp 7pp 6p 7pp 7pp 6p IIa, IIb abababab 8pp 8pp 8pp 8pp 8pp 8pp 8pp 8pp III aaabaaab 7pp 7pp 7pp 7pp 7pp 7pp 7pp 7pp IV aaabcccb 7pp 7pp 7pp 7pp 7pp 7pp 7pp 7pp

53

Example 12. Quo me vertam nescio

54

Example 12—continued

55

Example 12—continued

56

Example 12—continued

57 Fons preclusus I Fons preclusus sub torpore A fount hidden beneath the torpid Pagine legalis page of the Law Se fatetur in tepore tells that in the gentle warmth Gratie vitalis of a new grace Erupisse nove more, 5 it has flowed forth in a new way, Cuius specialis whose special Ortus fuit salvo flore origin was through an untouched flower Claustri virginalis, of a virgin chamber, In puerperio, in a birth Cuius probatio 10 whose proof Fides est non ratio rests on faith, not on the logic Cause naturalis. of a natural cause.

II Ubi sensus non procedit, When sense does not proceed, Ratio frustratur; logic is frustrated; Rationem quod excedit, 15 because it goes beyond reason, Fides amplectatur; faith is embraced; Verbi parens verbo credit, the Parent of the Word believed the Word Fide fecundatur, and was by faith made fertile, Ex quo fides antecedit, from which it follows that faith went before Ratio sequatur; 20 and reason followed; Naturam decipit, she deceived Nature, Que Verbo concipit, she who by the Word conceived, Dum, quod auris recipit, when, what the ear received, Intus incarnatur. was made flesh within.

III Quod obumbret virtus Dei, 25 Because God’s virtue o’ershadowed her, Sue castitati she believed in her own chastity, Credit, sperat; placet ei and hoped; the novelty Novitas mandati. of the command pleased her. Dat profectum fides spei Faith gives growth to hope, Spesque caritati, 30 and hope to love, Caritas effectum rei; and charity to the sinner; Nihil passa pati no ill afflicted her, for it was allowed Matrem a seculo from all ages that a mother Paratam parvulo, would be prepared for a child, Cuius oris osculo 35 and by the kiss of her mouth Sumus osculati. we are kissed.

IV Hic promissus per prophetas, He was promised by the prophets, Per quos est locutus, through whom he was foretold, Post scripturas adimpletas and when the Scripture was fulfilled, De triumpho tutus, 40 he was safe in his triumph; Victos morte tot athletas the victor followed Victor est secutus, so many competitors conquered by death,

58 Et prefixit morti metas and he set a limit for death, Vite restitus. when he was restored to life. Ecce Iob alium, 45 Behold again Job, Qui sordes omnium who rakes the filth of all Supra sterquilinium on the dung-heap, Rasit, constitutus. is established.

V Predo vetus a tyrone An old plunderer by a new warrior Domitus defecit, 50 conquered, departs, or in restrophe, Versa vice de predone from the plunderer Preda predam fecit, plunder makes plunder, Qui leonis in Sampsone who, in Samson, subjected Sibi vim subiecit, the lion’s force to himself, Quem extorsit a leone, 55 and he restores us with honey Fave now refecit; which he took from the lion’s carcass; Amictus tegmine, covered in a robe which Jacob Quod uva sanguine dipped in the blood of the grape, Iacob sub imagine Iacob, in a prophecy, Premissus infecit. is sent forth.

This song is attributed to Peter due to metric similarities to Dionei sideris, which in turn is authenticated by Epistle 76.84 Its verbiage is also similar to another of Dronke’s attributions to Peter, Preclusi viam floris.85 The meter of this strophic poem,

8p6p 8p6p 8p6p 8p6p 6pp6pp 7pp6p

is unusual among the songs in this study, as are its subject and its mode. Every two lines can be grouped into a pair, both grammatically and metrically. The predominant pattern is an eight-syllable line followed by a six-syllable line. This pattern is disrupted by the fifth pair, which consists of two six-syllable proparoxytone lines. These lines serve to conclude each strophe and are broken by the rhyme scheme, which connects the second half of the pair to the first line of the final couplet, as follows:

ab ab ab ab cd db

84 Dionei sideris is D5 and is found in Arundel 384.

85 Dronke, “Peter and Poetry,” 322.

59 The subject of this poem is more completely sacred than any of the others treated in this study; therefore it has been grouped with the songs that pertain to ecclesiastical topics. In a very allusive and historical (indeed sometimes bombastic) manner, this poem tells the story of the birth of Christ. The mode is tritus authenticus, which is another factor that distinguishes it from the others in this study. Nine of the fourteen musical lines end within the interval of a third from the final or on the final itself. Lines 1 and 3 of the poetry end a fifth and a sixth above the final, respectively. This reinforces musically the rhyme in the poetry and creates an aurally memorable opening to the song. The other three lines that end much higher than the final are metrically different from the rest of the poem and end in proparoxytone rather than paroxytone feet. In the first strophe, these three lines of music coincide with an important concept in the poem (in puerperio/cuius probatio/fides est non ratio). These three lines state one of the primary tenets of Christianity, the fact that belief in the virgin birth of Christ is based on faith, not logic. This idea is undoubtedly of enough importance to warrant musical emphasis. Thus, Fons preclusus contains a version of the rhetorical emphasis gesture that is a trait of many of Peter’s songs. Another characteristic that indicates common authorship is the use of the initial and final caudae, on fons in the first line and naturalis in the last. The two melismatic lines have a similar melodic contour but are not otherwise related.

Example 13. Line 1 initial cauda

Example 14. Line 12 final cauda

60

Example 15. Fons preclusus sub torpore

61

Example 15--continued

62 Group 3: Moral duality Non te lusisse pudeat

I Non te lusisse pudeat Do not be ashamed of having played, Sed ludum non incidere, but of not ceasing to play, Et que lusisti temere, and what you have rashly done, Ad vite frugem vertere. 5 turn to a fruit of life; Magistra morum doceat and let Reason, the mistress of conduct, Te ratio, teach you, Ut dignus pontificio; so that you be worthy of your bishop’s throne; Divini dono numinis, 10 by the fight of divine will, Ad laudem Christi nominis to the praise of Christ’s name Fungaris sacerdotio. may you carry out your sacred duties.

II Sis pius, iustus, sobrius, Be holy, just, sober, Prudens, pudicus, humilis, prudent, chaste, humble, In lege docilis, 86 15 and learned in the Law of God, Et ne sis arbor sterilis; and be not a fruitless tree; Tuo te regas aptius rule yourself rightly Officio, in your office, Expulso procul vitio 20 and when you have expelled all vice afar, Munderis labe criminis, be cleansed from the fall of sin, Ut mundus munde virginis so that cleansed you might minister Ministres in altario.87 in the altar of the virgin.

III Pius protector pauperum A holy protector of the poor, Omni petenti tribue,88 25 give to every seeker, Malos potenter argue89 powerfully argue against evil, Mausque sacras ablue and wash sacred hands A sordidorum munerum from sordid gifts’ Contagio,90 contagion. Nullus te palpet premio, 30 Let no man flatter you with reward, Quesita gratis gratia And freely, when grace is sought, Largire beneficia, Bestow benefits,

86Psalm 93:12 Beatus homo quem tu erudieris, Domine, et de lege tua docueris eum

87 Joel 1:13 Accingite vos, et plangite, sacerdotes : ululate, ministri altaris ; ingredimini, cubate in sacco, ministri Dei mei, quoniam interiit de domo Dei vestri sacrificium et libatio.

88 Luke 6: 30 Omni autem petenti te, tribue

89 I Timothy 5:20 Peccantes coram omnibus argue

90 Ezekiel 20:26, 39 Et pollui eos in muneribus suis . . . nomen meum sanctum pollueritis ultra in muneribus vestris et in idolis vestris

63 Sed dignis beneficio. but as a benefit to the worthy.

IV Non des ministres scelerum Give not to the ministers of wickedness Non tua, sed ecclesie 35 what is not your own, but the Church’s Sub pietatis specie;91 beneath an aspect of holiness. Non abutaris impie Use not impiously Commisso tibi pauperum the vote of the poor commissioned Suffragio. for you. Nil a te ferat histrio, 40 Do not carry yourself as an actor, Et tibi non allicias and do not draw to yourself Infames amicitias disreputable friendships De Christi patrimonio. by using Christ’s patrimony.

V Ministros immunditie Repel afar from you A te repellas longius: 45 ministers of sordidness; Bonorum vitam fortius for most strongly does a depraved Pravus depravat socius companion deprave the good Et afficit infamie and afflict them with infamy’s Dispendio; payment. Sic trahitur presumptio 50 Thus presumption emanates A convictu similium, from the society of similar people, Prelati vita vilium and the life of a prelate grows vile Vilescit contuburnio. by his association with evil ones.

VI Caute dispone domui,92 Carefully set your house in order, Pauca, sed vera loquere,93 55 speak little and then truthfully, Verba confirmes opere, and confirm your words by deeds, Quia non decet temere for it is not seemly that the mouth Os sacerdotis pollui of a priest should rashly be polluted Mendacio; by falsehood; Prudentium consilio 60 do not despise Te frui non dispiceat, the counsel of the wise, Nec te sinistre moveat and do not wickedly move Salubris exhortatio. toward greedy exhortation.

91 II Timothy 2:5 ...habentes speciem pietatis

92 Isaiah 38:1 Dispone domui tuae.

93 Ecclesiastes 5:1 Ne temere quid loquaris, neque cor tuum sit velox ad proferendum sermonem coram Deo. Deus enim in cælo, et tu super terram ; idcirco sint pauci sermones tui.; Ephesians IV:25 Propter quod deponentes mendacium, loquimini veritatem unusquisque cum proximo suo : quoniam sumus invicem membra.

94 I Thessalonians 5:22 Ab omni specie mala abstinete vos.

64 VII Teneris, ut abstineas See that you abstain Ab omni mala specie,94 65 from all appearance of Evil, Sub freno temperantie under a rein of temperance Magistra pudicitie, and a rule of modesty, Sobrietate, floreas, and flourish in sobriety Ne vario 70 lest in various Vagoque desiderio wanderings and desires Declines ad illecebras you decline to allurements of the flesh, Sed cece mentis tenebras but purge the darkness of a blind Purga virtutis radio. spirit by the ray of virtue.

This song was written as advice to a new bishop and is preceded in the Bavarian manuscript with the heading, “De ammonitione prelatos.” It is filled with references to scripture and also contains one allusion to the writings of Horace. The first two lines of the piece are drawn almost verbatim from Horace’s Epistle I: nec lusisse pudet, sed non incidere ludum. This reference is treated more thoroughly below, in the discussion of In nova fert animus and is one of the major reasons for the song’s attribution to Peter of Blois. The remaining allusions in this song are biblical and provide a scriptural basis for Peter’s prescription for episcopal propriety. For example, Peter references Titus 2: 12, sobrie, et juste, et pie vivamus in hoc sæculo, in his list of adjectives in lines 13 and 14.95 Other biblical references are footnoted at their places in the text below. Peter’s use of primarily scriptural references in this song make it especially appropriate for its self- proclaimed purpose of admonishing prelates. The opening statement, consisting of the first two lines of the poetry, is clearly marked by the respective open and closed endings of the first two lines of music. The first line ends on the final, although it is in the higher register. The range of this opening line is narrow, encompassing only a fourth, and is reminiscent of a psalm tone recitation. This formulaic beginning marks the song as sacred in content and intention. In contrast to the sense of incantation are the playful melismas on lusisse and ludum.

Example 16. Melismas on lusisse and ludum

95 Clementine Vulgate Epistola B. Pauli Apostoli ad Titum, 2:12.

65

Another interesting, though possibly coincidental, melodic figure is on the word vertere (to turn). The pitches on this word approach, leave, then return to d’.

Example 17. Turn figure on vertere

Similarly illustrative of the text is the rising line on ut dignus pontificio, quite possibly a musical-literal symbol of the ascent to ecclesiastical primacy.

Example 18. Ut dignus pontificio

Aside from these occasional rhetorical flourishes in the music, the song is in a straightforward strophic form and features none of the salient musical characteristics common among the songs in this study except the rhetorical device in the first two lines. However, the poetry contains the four-syllable proparoxytone line, which is almost ubiquitous in Peter’s poetry. The form of each strophe is as follows:

8pp 8pp 8pp 8pp 8pp 4pp 8pp 8pp 8pp 8pp

There is one deviation to the metric scheme; in line 15 of the poem there are only six syllables. There is no practical explanation for this, and it is likely that it was either intended to highlight that particular phrase or was a corruption of the text. The second strophe begins with a pair of triplicate adjectives. Peter advises the prelate to be “holy, just, sober, prudent, chaste, [and] humble.” These triplicate pairs are found in many of Peter’s other songs and are a hallmark of his poetic style.96

96 See Dronke nos. 5, 6, 8, 9, 10, 13, 18, 23, 26, 40, and 45.

66

Example 19. Non te lusisse pudeat

67

Example 19—continued

In nova fert animus

In nova fert animus Onto new roads, the mind Via gressus dirigere, directs one’s path, Non pudet, quia lusimus, not ashamed because we have been foolish, Sed ludum non incidere; but because we have not put an end to foolishness; Si temere de cetero 5 if by chance from my former self Distulero, I differ, Non currens ad remedia I am not running to a remedy Canitie, cotidie in old age as daily Citante peremptorie, death presses on, Liquet de contumacia. 10 but it is clear [I run] from arrogance.

It is the opinion of Gordon Anderson that this one extant strophe is all that remains of a longer poem.97 Although most of the conductus in F are strophic, there is no source that contains further text for this song.

97 Anderson, Notre Dame and Related Conductus, vol. 6.

68 The first line is taken from Ovid’s Metamorphoses, which begins, “In nova fert animus mutatas dicere formas corporeas” (My mind leads me to speak of bodies changed into new forms).98 The adaptation of this line is not only appropriate for the repentance topos of this lyric; it also adds a sense of auctoritas to the poet and brings to the reader’s mind the literary giant Ovid, on whose shoulders the twelfth-century poet was standing. Ovid shares the load with Horace, from whose Epistles lines 3 and 4 are adapted.99 These lines also parallel the first two lines of Non te lusisse pudeat, which are even more closely related to those of Horace.

In nova fert animus, ll. 3-4: Non pudet, quia lusimus, sed ludum non incidere. Non te lusisse pudeat, ll. 1-2: Non te lusisse pudeat, sed ludum non incidere. Horace Epp. I, xiv, 36: Nec lusisse pudet, sed non incidere ludum.

This song is an appropriate text with which to end a study of songs attributed to Peter of Blois, since it explains his most characteristic moral viewpoint. This one strophe presents a compact summary of the moral duality topos, with its backward glance at the foibles of youth. The poet is not exactly repentant; rather he embraces his colorful past but clearly identifies it as having ended. In lines 3 and 4, he looks to the future as an opportunity to mature and change. However, he stresses that he is not merely modifying his behavior due to impending death; the “new paths” onto which his mind is directed lead him away from arrogance, not in denial but in wisdom gained from experience. The arrogance in question could be the arrogance and feeling of invincibility that characterize youth. It also could refer to the hypocrisy of those who are ashamed of and deny their sinful past. Either way, the image of one’s fleeing from sinful pride is presented in opposition to the image of running toward an easy salvation. The poet makes it clear that he changes his ways not as “fire insurance” to escape an eternity in hell, but as a genuine desire for honor and integrity.

98 Ovid, 43 B.C.E. to c. 17 C.E. The Student’s Ovid : selections from the Metamorphoses [electronic resource], introduction and commentary by Margaret Musgrove. Accessed July 2006.

99 Horace, Epistles I, xiv, 36.

69

Example 20. In nova fert animus

70

Example 20—continued

71 The songs as reflections of the clerical dilemma

The songs in the Florence manuscript attributed to Peter of Blois can quite appropriately be viewed as a representative sample of his total poetic oeuvre. In this collection are examples from the variety of topoi on which Peter composed lyrics. The texts are clearly a product of a twelfth-century ecclesiastical education, with their classical and biblical allusions and highly organized metric structures. Taken as a whole, they represent a poet who was educated, clever, and somewhat embittered by his experience with the Church. The love songs (Olim sudor Herculis and A globo veteri), as the most unequivocally secular, are the most closely derived from classical sources. The particular allusive imagery and their subject matter provide two levels of meaning that connect these songs to the pre-Christian worldview. This view was more likely to be assimilated by a man who felt that he was not treated favorably by the Roman Catholic establishment. As a secular cleric who never was ordained as a priest, Peter faced many difficulties in his social life and his career. The difference between monastic clergy and secular clergy was more pronounced in England than in Continental Europe, because monasticism and Christianity were coeval there. Monasteries were representative of Christianity to the English and had not been preceded by church and cathedral as on the Continent, because Christianity was brought to England much more recently, in the sixth and seventh centuries, and it was brought there by monks from Ireland and Rome (though primarily Ireland). Therefore, the dilemmas of the secular clergy may have been slightly more pronounced and would have elicited less sympathy in England than elsewhere. The ideal outlets for an educated and creative twelfth-century man faced with disappointment in his career as well as moral uncertainty were poetry and song. Music and art have always provided a means of ideological expression and subversion without outright treason or dissent. Thus, the critical songs, Quo me vertam and Qui seminant, place Peter in the context of twelfth-century politics. Peter was witness to events that resulted from many of the pressures and conflicts faced by society today. There is the constant decision between church and state, the worship of Nummus (“the god Money”), anguish and disease resulting from sensual

72 pleasure of the body, and, most poignantly, conflict between the Christian West and the Muslim East. While not all these topics are visited in the songs in this study, the general themes of indecision, unresolved conflict, and political malaise are certainly apparent in almost all of Peter’s texts. They are most strongly expressed in the songs listed above under the classification moral duality. Peter’s songs, like his letters, rely on borrowing the authority of respected sources to bolster his reputation and expressive powers. Further research into the music of his contemporaries may provide evidence for musical borrowing as well.

73 CHAPTER 4 MUSICAL CHARACTERISTICS

Two-part Conductus and Other Sources

The three songs below are included as reference points. Vacillantis trutine is discussed above, but was not included in the main study, because it is from a source other than the Florence MS. The other two songs, Veneris prosperis and Vite perdite are in F but were not included in the main study due to their two-voice texture. However, they do fit within the three topical divisions of Peter’s songs and are therefore worthy of inclusion for reference in the discussions of text and topos.

Vacillantis trutine100

Ia Vacillantis trutine With a balance Libramine of swaying scales, Mens suspensa fluctuat the unsettled mind surges Et estuat and fluctuates In tumultius anxios 5 in anxious confusions, Dum se vertit while it spins Et bipertit and divides Motus in contrarios. with motions in opposite directions.

Ref O langueo! O, I languish! Causam languoris video 10 I see the cause of languishing Nec caveo, but I take no heed, Vivens et prudens pereo. living and knowing, I die.

1b Me vacare studio Reason desires Vult Ratio, that I have leisure to study, Sed dum Amor alteram 15 but in the meantime Love Vult operam, desires a different effort, In diversa rapior, I am impelled in different directions, Ratione while reason Cum Dione with Venus Dimicante crucior. 20 is struggling, I am tormented.

100 This song is discussed briefly above. For more information on this song, see Dronke “Peter and Poetry,” 298 and Brewer “Vacillantis trutine libramine: The Problem of Tetrardus Melodies in Latin Cantilene.” The latter is the source of the musical transcription below.

74

R O langueo... O, I languish...

2a Sub libra pondero, On the scales I ponder Quid melius, what is better, Et dubius and I, doubting, Mecum delibero. 25 debate with myself. Nunc menti refero Now I bring to mind Delicias the amorous Venerias, delights, Que mea michi Florula which my Florula would give to me Det oscula, 30 by her kisses, Qui risus, que labellula, what laughter, what lips, Que facies, what a face, Frons, naris aut cesaries. forehead, nose, and flowing hair.

R O langueo... O, I languish...

2b Sicut in arbore 35 Just as the trembling foliage Frons tremula, in a tree, Navicula the little boat Levis in equore, on the sea, Dum caret ancore while it lacks an anchor’s Subsidio, 40 support, Contrario wobbles shaken Flatu concussa fluitat: by a contrary wind: Sic agitat, thus it moves, Sic turbine sollicitat thus, in a whirlwind, now Love, Me dubio 45 then Reason, molests Hinc Amor, inde Ratio. me with uncertainty.

R O langueo... O, I languish...

3a His invitat By these charms Et irritat Love invites Amor me blandiciis. 50 and excites me. Sed aliis but by other things Ratio sollicitat Reason stirs Et excitat and rouses Me studiis. me to my studies.

R O langueo! 55 O, I languish...

3b Nam solari For to be alone, Me scolari to be a student, Cogitat exilio. exile prepares me.

75 Set, Ratio, But, Reason, Procul ahbil vinceris 60 go far away! You are conquered Sub Veneris under the rule Imperio. of Venus.

R O langueo... O, I languish...

The text of this song forms a rhymed rhythmic sequence with refrain after each half-strophe, exactly like Olim sudor Herculis. Other song texts in this form attributed to Peter are Non carnis est sed spiritus (D22), Nec mari flumini (D21), Ridere solitus (D41), and Invehar in Venerem (D50). Vacillantis trutine is found in the Arundel, Bavarian, and Cambridge manuscripts, with musical notation only in the latter two. Unfortunately, the Bavarian version is in non-diastematic neumes, and the heighted neumes in the Cambridge version are partially obscured by damage to the source. Walter Lipphardt, René Clemencic, Bryan Gillingham, and Charles Brewer have each worked to restore the melody of this song, and it is the last whose transcription is used as a basis for the one below.

Example 21. Vacillantis trutine libramine

76

Example 21—continued

77

Example 21—continued

78

Example 21—continued

Veneris prosperis101

I Veneris prosperis Enjoying the happy Usa successibus, arrival of Venus, Turba, nascentibus O crowd, when budding tender flowers Floribus teneris bloom, Exequaris priscum morem, 5 follow the ancient custom: Ad amorem for love Accingaris, be girt, Sceleris pretermissis ceteris. forgoing all other forms of vice.

II Solitum debitum The accustomed debts, Reddite Veneri, 10 remit to Venus, Iuvenes teneri, O tender youths; Laudes et meritum the praise and merit Is enervat iuventutis, of youth he diminishes, Qui virtutis who serves Formam servat, 15 the idol of Virtue, Libitum pueris est licitum. pleasure is the young man’s law.

III Iupiter arbiter Jupiter, the ruler Rerum instituit, of all things has stated Nihil dum libuit that nothing pleasurable

101 Sources: D 46, J 28 , F f. 352v, Oxford Rawlinson C 510.

79 Fieri turpiter; 20 is done in sin; Sic edixit sicque votis thus has he spoken Usus totis, and thus his vows Suo vixit all fulfilled, Iugiter edicto conformiter. he has lived conforming with his own law.

IV Vivere tenere 25 To live youthfully Satagam igitur: therefore fulfils me: Quid Iovem sequitur, whoever follows Jupiter, Non degit temere. does not waste his time. Voluptatis fixus telo transfixed by Love’s beams Utar velo 30 I will use the sail Voluntatis, of Freedom, Sedere navigans sub Venere. to stay on course under [the light of] Venus.

An apologia for youthful pleasures, this song and Vite perdite stand out from the others in F attributed to Peter for their short metric lines and the inclusion of two voice parts in the music. Veneris prosperis is quite possibly one of the “vanities and false insanities” alluded to in Letter 76. The allusions to Venus and Jupiter in the song are criticized in the letter, since the song venerates the law of Jupiter. The text shows evidence of the initial half of the moral duality topos, with its theme that youth is the time appropriate for love. However, the second half, with its removal from youthful pleasure, has not yet developed or is at least not reached in this poem.

Example 22. Veneris prosperis

80 Vite perdite102

I Vite perdite I had abandoned myself Me legi to the rule Subdideram, of a profligate life, Minus licite and unlawfully Dum fregi, 5 I had broken Quod voveram, my solemn vows; Sed ad vite vesperam but at the eventide of life Corrigendum legi, I have chosen to make amends. Quicquid ante what before perperam 10 I had wrongly done, Puerilis egi. I did as a youth.

II Rerum exitus When I seek Dum quero, diligently to examine Discutere, the outcome of my actions Falsum penitus 15 and deep within the false A vero from the true Discernere, discern, Falso fallor opere, by false hopes am I deluded Bravium si spero if I hope the reward Me virtutum metere, 20 of virtue to reap Vitia dum sero. while I sow vices.

III Non sum duplici I am not beguiled Perplexus by an unequivocal Itinere, path, Nec addidici 25 nor have I learned Reflexus back-slidings, A venere, beguiled by charms; Nec fraudavi temere I have not wantonly deceived Coniugis amplexus; a wife’s embraces. Dalidam persequere, 30 Take vengeance on Delilah, Ne fraudetur sexus! lest your sex be deceived!

IV Famem siliqua The husks Porcorum that the swine ate Non abstulit, did not assuage my hunger, Que ad lubrica 35 which to the slippery Errorum paths of error Me contulit, led me; Sed scriptura consulit, but I studied the scriptures Viam intrem morum, and now I may enter the paths of duty,

102 Sources: D49, J 35, F f. 356r, CB31.

81 Que prelarga protulit 40 which have brought forth nourishing Pabula donorum. food as a boon.

V Dum considero, When I consider Quid Dine Dinah’s Contigerit, defilement, Finem confero 45 I put an end Rapine, to my debauchery; Quis fuerit, who she was, Scio: vix evaserit I know: scarcely Mens corrupta fine, has my corrupt soul finally Diu quam contraxerit, 50 escaped the filthy dregs, Maculum sentine. in which for so long it has been steeped.

VI Preter meritum Not without good reason Me neci will I have given myself Non dedero, over to death, Si ad vomitum, 55 if to the vomit Quem ieci, which I have cast out Rediero, I return; Nec a verbo aspero nor from harsh reproach Liberum me feci, do I free myself, Servus si serviero 60 if a slave, I continue to serve Vitiorum feci. the lowest dregs of vice.

VII Viae vetris Therefore, I shall change Immuto the steps Vestigia, of my former life, Ire Veneris 65 and along Refuto the devious paths of love Per de via; refuse to go; Via namque regia for the Royal Road Curritur in tuto, is travelled in safety, Si quis cedit alia, 70 and whoever falls from it, Semper est in luto. is always in the mire.

VIII Beli solium, The throne of Belus (the Babylonian king), Sinonis the cunning Astutiam, of the Trojan horse, Confer Tullium, 75 bring in Tullius (the orator), Zenonis and Zeno’s Prudentiam: wisdom: Nil conferre sentiam, it should avail notihing, I feel, His abutens bonis, using to the full all these benefits, Ni fugando fugiam 80 if I flee not, putting to flight Dalidam Samsonis. Samson’s Delilah.

82 Poetically, this song is interesting because it manifests a stylistic return to the structure of Veneris prosperis, the other two-part conductus in F attributed to Peter. The lines are brief, variously of one to three metric feet, much like the aforementioned love song. However, in topos it is most similar to those songs that have been assigned in this study to the last part of Peter’s life, according to their treatment of morality.103 In fact, the first stanza of this poem, taken alone, could serve as a perfect summary of Peter’s attitude in mature life: condoning bad habits and the pursuit of pleasure in youth while vowing in old age to live out more assiduously a higher moral code. The return of the poetic structure to that of the early love songs provides a piquant contrast to the staunch refusal of the poet to return to the vices of his past.

Example 23. Vite perdite

103 Other songs with this topos that have been attributed to Peter but are not in the Florence MS are Dum iuventus floruit (D7), In lacu miserie (D18), Quid hic agis, anima (D37), and Quod amicus suggerit (D40).

83 Influences and characteristics

Analysis and discussion of the above songs draws attention to three distinct musical characteristics that can be identified as common in the songs attributed to Peter of Blois. These are the refrain with strophic or sequence forms, the initial or medial melisma and/or final cauda, and the contrary or reflective rhetorical gesture. As regards the poetry, classification of topoi of the lyrics allows the songs to be placed in a conjectural chronological order and to be assigned to corresponding stages in the life of Peter of Blois. Of the eight songs discussed in detail in the above study, four are in simple strophic form, three are in paired versicles (one of these with refrain), and one is in bar form. Six of the eight songs have melismas (five initial, two medial, and four final). All of the songs except one are in the tetrardus mode (three plagal and four authentic); the exception is in tritus authenticus.104 Many of the songs show evidence of influence from the tradition of both troubadour and trouvère culture, which is explained easily by Peter’s years in France.105 This influence is most evident in the form of the songs. The form with the clearest connection to courtly musical culture is that of the paired versicle, with or without refrain. Since this form originated as the sacred sequence, Peter’s secular-themed paired versicle songs are more closely related to the descort.106 Although Olim sudor Herculis is the only example in F that is in sequence-with-refrain form, another well-known example of this structure that is attributed to Peter is Vacillantis trutine libramine.107 The contents of the songs in this study provide evidence to defend Peter of Blois against the accusation of plagiarism. It is clear from analysis of the allusions in the poems that reference to existing literature serves to strengthen the imagery of the poem and provide legitimacy based on accepted literary authorities. In this case, the authorities referenced are classical writers and scripture. Peter’s use of quotations and adaptations is

104 This information is tabulated in Appendix B, below.

105 See Chapter 1, page 1 and also the discussion of Olim sudor Herculis.

106 See Chapter 3, discussion of Olim sudor.

107 See Dronke Medieval Poet and His World, p. 300 for attribution. This song is discussed on p. 76, above.

84 not meant to present ideas as his own original thought but mark his poetry as giving both referential and reverential nods to tradition. Likewise, the use of established forms and modes in the music associated with these songs fits within the existing tradition of monophonic song while making use of the specific characteristics noted above. The presence of some or all of these characteristics in the body of songs attributed to Peter of Blois suggests that at least most of them were composed by the same person. His education and occupation gave him the ability and opportunity to compose. If the attribution of the poetry to Peter is accepted, it is not implausible that he is also the composer of the music.

85 APPENDIX A: SOURCES FOR THE SONGS IN THIS STUDY

A globo veteri K74, D1, F, CB, Ar384 Olim sudor Herculis D27, F f. 417r/v, CB63: ff. 23v-24v, O f. 70r/v, C Ff.i.17 f. 7, VRL 344 f. 36r/v Vitam duxi iocundam D48, F ff. 429v-430r, K36 Qui seminant in loculis D 36, K22, Oxford Bodley Add. A. 44, sXIII in., F f. 424v. [Qui seminant in lacrimis K23, unicum F f. 425r.] Quo me vertam nescio K28, D39, F, P146, D2777 Fons preclusus D 13 (Flos ...), K72, F f. 446r, Arundel 384 Non te lusisse pudeat D23, K 47, F f. 435r/v, CB33 f. 5r/v, Oxford Bodley A44 f. 63v-64 In nova fert animus D19, F , Oxford Bodley Add A. 44

86 APPENDIX B: SUMMARY OF MUSICAL CHARACTERISTICS OF THE MONOPHONIC SONGS DISCUSSED IN THIS THESIS song title form caudae ambitus final mode other characteristics A globo sequence initial d to e’ g tetrardus plagalis repeated cadential figure veteri Olim sudor sequence with initial in Florence MS d to d’ g tetrardus plagalis reflective gesture in refrain, some B- Herculis refrain flats Vitam duxi AA’B strophic none g to a’ g tetrardus authenticus reflective gesture Qui seminant strophic terminal f to a’ g tetrardus authenticus B-flats, beginning in line ten; melodic in loculis highlighting of text Quo me sequence initial and medial f to g’ g tetrardus authenticus very regular text vertam nescio Non te strophic none d to g’ g tetrardus plagalis some F-sharps; possible text-painting lusisse pudeat Fons strophic initial and terminal e to f’ f tritus authenticus some B-flats preclusus In nova fert strophic initial, medial, and terminal d to e’ g tetrardus plagalis some B-flats animus (jubilus) Vacillantis sequence with initial melisma in refrain d to e’ g tetrardus plagalis not in Florence MS trutine refrain Qui seminant ABBCCDD terminal cauda in strophe d to f’ g mixed: transposed B-flats, some E-flats; not attributed in lacrimis and refrain tritus plagalis and elsewhere to Peter of Blois; between tetrardus authenticus Qui seminant in loculis and Quo me vertam in Florence MS

87 APPENDIX C: TOPOS CONCORDANCE

Below are listed the topoi of the songs discussed in this study, followed by a selction of other songs attributed to Peter of Blois that concern the same topos. Songs in the present study are marked with * and are followed by their number designation in Peter Dronke’s study.108

Love: Times of Life/Moral Duality: A globo veteri* D1 Blandus aure spiritus D2 Olim sudor Herculis* D27 Dum iuventus floruit D7 Veneris prosperis* D46 Hyemale tempus, vale D15 Blandus aure spiritus D2 In nova fert animus* D19 Grates ago Veneri D14 Non carnis est sed spiritus D22 Non te lusisse pudeat* D23 Loss of fama: Olim militaveram D26 Dum rutilans Pegasei D8 Veneris prosperis* D46 In laborem sponte labor D17 Vitam duxi* D48 Olim sudor Herculis* D27 Vite perdite* D49 Plaudit humus oree D30 Ver prope florigerum D47 Repentance: Blandus aure spiritus D2 Criticism/Satire: Dum iuventus floruit D7 Qui seminant in loculis* D36 In lacu miserie D18 Quo me vertam nescio* D39 Quid hic agis, anima D37 Vacillantis trutine libramine* D45 Quod amicus suggerit D40 Quod amicus suggerit D40

108 Dronke, “Peter of Blois and Poetry at the Court of Henry II.”

88 SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY

Anderson, Gordon. Notre Dame and Related Conductus: Opera Omnia 6. Henryville, Pennsylvania: Institute of Mediaeval Music, 1979.

Brewer, Charles E. “Vacillantis trutine libramine: the Problem of Tetrardus Melodies in Latin Cantilene.” in International Musicological Society Study Group Cantus Planus. Papers Read at the 6th Meeting, Eger, Hungary, 1993, ed. László Dobszay (2 vols., Budapest 1995) 799-817.

Cheney, C.R. and B.E.A. Jones, eds. English Episcopal Acta II: Canterbury 1162-1190. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1991.

Cotts, John David. Peter of Blois (c. 1130-1211) and the Dilemmas of the Secular Clergy. Ph.D. dissertation, Berkeley: University of California, 2000.

Giles, J. A., editor. Petri blesensis bathionensis archidiaconi opera omnia: nunc primum in anglia ope codicum manuscriptorum editionumque optimarum. Oxford: J.H. Parker, 1847.

Gillingham, Brian. A Critical Study of Secular Medieval Song. Musicological Studies 60/1. Ottawa: Institute of Medieval Music, 1995.

______. Secular Medieval Latin Songs: an Anthology. Musicological Studies 60/2. Ottawa: Institute of Medieval Music, 1993.

______. The Social Background to Secular Medieval Latin Song. Musicological Studies 60/3. Ottawa: The Institute of Mediaeval Music, 1998.

Dronke, Peter. Latin and Vernacular Poets of the Middle Ages. Brookfield, VT: Gower Publishing Company, 1991.

______. The Medieval Poet and his World. Rome: Edizioni di storia e letteratura, 1984.

______. “Peter of Blois and Poetry in the Court of Henry II.” Mediaeval Studies 38 (1976) 185-235.

Englebert, Omer. The Lives of the Saints, transl. Christopher and Anne Fremantle. New York: Barnes and Noble, 1994.

Ferruolo, Stephen C. The Rise of the Universities: the Schools of Paris and their Critics 1100-1215. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 1985.

Haskins, Charles Homer. The Renaissance of the Twelfth Century. New York: Meridian Books, 1957.

89

Kingsford, C.L. “Peter of Blois,” in The Dictionary of National Biography 46, London: 1896.

Kruckenberg, Lori. “Neumatizing the Sequence,” Journal of the American Musicological Society 59/2 (2006) 243-317.

Lees, Beatrice A. “The Letters of Queen Eleanor of Aquitaine to Pope Celestine III” The English Historical Review 21/81 (January 1906) 78-93.

Migne, Jacques-Paul. Patrologia cursus completus seu bibliotheca universalis, integra, uniformis, commoda, economica, omnium SS. Patrum doctorum scriptorumque ecclesiasticorum. Paris: various publishers, 1857-1866.

Norberg, Dag. An Introduction to the Study of Medieval Latin Versification. Translated by Grant C. Roti and Jacqueline de La Chapelle Skubly. Washington, D.C.: The Catholic University of America Press, 2004.

Raby, F. J. E. A History of Secular Latin Poetry in the Middle Ages. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1934.

Revell, Elizabeth, ed. The Later Letters of Peter of Blois. Auctores Britannici Medii Aevi 13. London: Oxford University Press, 1993.

Rymer, Thomas. Foedera, conventiones, literæ, et cujuscunque generis acta publica, inter reges Angliæ, et alios quosvis imperatores, reges, ... ab anno 1101, ad nostra usque tempora, habita aut tractata; . . . In lucem missa de mandato nuperæ Reginæ. Accurante Thoma Rymer, Editio secunda, ad originales chartas in Turri Londinensi denuo summa fide collata & emendata, studio Georgii Holmes. Vol. 1. (Londini, 1726-35), 74. 20 vols. Eighteenth Century Collections Online. Gale Group .

Southern, R.W. “Peter of Blois: A Twelfth-Century Humanist?” In Medieval Humanism and Other Studies. Oxford: B. Blackwell, 1970, 105-32.

______. Scholastic Humanism and the Unificaton of Europe. Oxford and Cambridge, MA: Blackwell, 1995.

Steiner, Ruth. “Some Monophonic Latin Songs Composed around 1200.” The Musical Quarterly 52/1 (January 1966): 56-70.

Stubbs, William, ed. Chronicles and Memorials of the Reign of Richard I. Rolls Series 38. London: Longman, Green, Longman, Roberts, and Green, 1865.

______. Seventeen Lectures on the Study of Medieval and Modern History, 3rd edition. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1900.

90

Symonds, John Addington. Wine, Women, and Song: Mediaeval Latin Students’ Songs Now First Translated into English Verse with an Essay. London: Chatto & Windus, 1925.

Szövérffy, Joseph. Secular Latin Lyrics and Minor Poetic Forms of the Middle Ages, Volume 2. Concord, NH: Classical Folia Editions, 1993.

______. Secular Latin Lyrics and Minor Poetic Forms of the Middle Ages, Volume 3. Concord, NH: Classical Folia Editions, 1994.

Waddell, Helen. Introduction to to The Wandering Scholars. New Tork: Houghton Mifflin Company, 1927.

Wahlgren, Lena. The Letter Collections of Peter of Blois: Studies in the Manuscript Tradition. Studia Graeca et Latina Gothoburgensia 58. Goteburg: Acta Universitatis Gothoburgensis, 1993.

Weir, Alison. Eleanor of Aquitaine: a Life. New York: Ballantine, 1999.

Wollin, C. Petri Blesensis: Carmina, Corpus Christianorum, Continuatio Medievalis 128. Turnholt: Brepols, 1998.

91 BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH

Lyndsey M. Thornton was born in Shreveport, Louisiana, and received her primary education in Central Florida, where she graduated from Oviedo High School. She holds a bachelor’s degree in music from the University of Central Florida, with a double major in clarinet and vocal performance. She has performed as a clarinetist with the University of Central Florida Symphony Orchestra and Wind Ensemble, as well as various chamber ensembles, and as a clarinetist and pianist with the Florida Symphony Youth Orchestra. Her vocal experience includes performances with several University of Central Florida ensembles, performances in England and Switzerland, and two years with the Orlando Opera Company. Her current musical activities include the performance of viola da gamba and early vocal music with Florida State Unversity’s Early Music Ensembles and Cantores Musicae Antiquae under Dr. Jeffery Kite-Powell. Her academic interests include classical and medieval Latin, twelfth-century Latin song, seventeenth- century Italian monody and English polyphony, and the history and languages of the British Isles.

92