LOYALTY, FRIENDSHIP AND LOVE IN THE LETTERS OF FULBERT OF

Date of reception: 251h of April, 2007 Final date of acceptance: lFhoi Decemher, 2007

In letter 51 of his correspondence, Fulbert of Chartres oIfers a definition oIfdeli- tus which has long been nsed by historians to describe feudal-vassalic relations. 1n al1 of his correspondence, Fulhert expreses this social bond by using an elaborate vocabulary of friendship and emotions. He thus qualifies social relations descrihed as an elernent of vassalage and loyalty and gives them a moral content. He defines amicitia, particularly for the attention of William of Aquitaine, by emphasising its "usefnl" aspect and stressing its ohjective, honestum or the common good, terms that have already been found in his 51" letter to definefdelitas. Friendship is therefore a natural corollary of the relationships of loyalty within the clergy or in the secu- lar world. In the same way relationships of loyalty are coupled with the use of the vocahnlary of affecíus, which conveys the ideals of peace and the common good, heralded by the of Chartres in feudal society at the beginning of the 11th century.

Fulhert de Chartres, Faithfulness, Friendship, Peace, Love.

Fulbertus Carnutinus, Fideliias, Amicitia, Pax, Cantas. The letters of Fulbert, bishop of Charires between ahout 1006 and 1028, are a fundamental source of knowledge about the organisation of feudal society. Indeed, this bishop, appointed by l

1. This airicle has beeii deveioped oilt of a commuiiicalion prrsentcd on 21" May 2005 in Aix-eii-

~ ~ Médiévalessur la Médiierranée Occidentale) of rhc University ol Montpelliei 111-Paul Valery. It nrakes up par1 of a rhesis ut the University of Provence under the supervision of Mrs. H. Taviani-Carozri. 1 ani grateful to those who parricipared in thc Doctoral Meetings for their advice and support. 1 am grateful ta Mis. 13. Taviani-Caioízi for rereading it. 2. Thc numbering aiid the test of thc letlen iised in this articie refer to The ierlen andpoems ofFulbert of Chnrtres, ed. Frcdeiik Behrrnds. Oxford: Oxford University Prcss, 1976. The translation of the lerrers is peisonal. 3. This letler is paiticiilarly usrd in tlle following reierince works: Bioch. Mari. 1.a sociéféféodaie. Paris: Albin-Michel, 1994 (first cdirion. Paris: Albin Michel, 1940): Canshof. Franqois-Louis. Qu'ni-ce que ia féodalité?Paris: Tallandier. 1982 (firsl cdirion, Briiselles: impr. dc I'Office de Publicité, 1944); Boutriiche, Roberr. Seigneurie et Féodaliré. i Le premier &e des iienr d'homme a homme. Paiis: Aubier, 1968: Boixrnazel, Eric: Poiy. Jeun-Pierie. La mufalionfiod01eX~-Xllesi$cles. Paris: Presses univeisituiies de , 1991 4. The Latin text of tliis ierlei, following the edition The lellenandpoems ofFulber1ofChartiei ...: 90-92: Glorioso duci Aquilanorum W(ili?lmqi F(u1berlusJ episcopopus oracionis supqium. Deformafideiilalis aiiquid scribere monirus. haec vobis quae secunlur brevirer ex librorum aucloritale no- iavi. Qui domino ruofldeiirarem iuraf, isfa sen ir? menioria remper haber? deber: incolume, fulum, honesrum. utile. facile, possibiie. incolume videlicef. ve sñ in dampnum domino de corpore suo. Tulum. ne sil e¡ iiz dampnurn de rrcrelo suo ve1 de niunicionibus per quas rutus pise porest. Honeslum, ne sil ti in dampnum de sva iusliria ve1 de aliis causis quae ad honeslalem eiur peninerr videnlur Ulile, ne sil ei in dampnurn de suis possessionibus. Faale ve1 possibiie. ne id bonum quod dominus sut*r leviter facere poterat facial ei difficile. neve id quod possibiie eral. reddar ti inzpossibiic. Urfldeli.~haec nncunienla caveal iidrfum est. sed non ideo casamenlzlm merelur Non eninz sufficilabsrinere a malo, nisi fiel auod bonurn <:l. Resta1 erqo u1 in eisdem aims at achieving bonum, utile and honestum, in other words the common good and tIie sovereign good oí feudal societyi. For the Bishop of Chartres, this relationship is essential to society in his time: it enables the moralisation and hierarchisation of the secular world as well as the clerical, in arder to prornote peace and justice. In the 131 letters that make up his correspondence, this notion offidelitas and the lexical field associated with it frequently recur and are often connecied to two other lexical fields, those of friendship and of love. How then is this association between the two vocabularies, one nf social relatinnships and one oi emotinns, understood? And what are the words and the concepts that can prove the connection between the two? Does Fulbert of Chartres atternpt to apply another cultural and moral model to the relationship of loyalty and if so, with what aim? It is sensible to con- sider in which contexts, in which circumstances and according to what needs the specific vocabulary of fidelitas is enriched wiih oilier notions like those of "friend- ship" and "love".

1. Loyalty and friendship in the letters of Fulbert of Chartres

In the letters of Fulbert that contain the lexical field of loyalty, another lexi- cal field is sometimes found, namely that of amicitia. This concept was inherited from Greek and Roman Antiquity6. Cicero, in his treatise De Amicitia, passed no the conceptions of Antiquity of this social relationship to the men of the Middle Ages. In Ronie, amicitia was embodied by two types of relationships: a noble relation- ship between highborn political men who shared the sarne education and values, in particular the quest for virtue, and another, more common relationship, which subordinates the client to his superior. The term amicitia was employed to represent ihis relationship, despiie the ineqiiality betwcen the two partriers. From the earliest centuries of this era, the Christian authors revisited this Greek and Roman herit- age and adapted it to their beliefs and their communal way of life. The theme of caritas, Christian love which is a gift frorn God and which rnusi nourish the clergy, subsequently appeared and was preferred to the Roman notion of amicitia within monastic communities from the end of Antiquity and the early Middle Ages7. The Grecn-Roman heritage however survived, revisited and adapted by the Church Fa- thers, such as Augusiine or Ambrose of Milan, who passed it oii to the literate

5. For a thorough analysis of this letter and iii particrilar its rhetorical aspcct and nioral contcrii, see the following srudirs: Becker. Alfons. "Fornl und Materir. Bemerkungen zu Fuibens von Chartres Befonna fideiitaiis im Lehnrcchr des Mirtelalters und der frühen Neiireit". Hisiorisches Jahrbuch. 102 (1982): 325- 361: Adalbéron de Laoii. PoPmeau roiRohert, ed. and tians. Claude Carozzi. Parir: 1.cs Belles Lcttier, 1979. Se? rhe introdiiction for clarification o1 lcttcr 51 by Fulbcrt o! Chartres. 6. Thc following work offrrs a detailed panorama of the notion of friendship in Antlqulty and its evolri- tion: Iconstan, . Friendrhip in fhe claaicai world. Cambiidgc: Cambridge University Piess, 1997. 7. Brian P. McGuire ofiers an analysis of this evolution: MrGuire, Brian P. Priendship and conimuniiy: the monasricexperirncr.350-1250. Kalamazoo: Cistercian Piiblications. 1988. men of the Middle Ages. Gerbert of Rheims and Fulbert of Charires in particular turned amicitia into a lofty ideal of virtue and affection shared between two men, as well as a social relationship that was useful to both parties. They thereby returned io the notion of utile, from utilitar developed by Cicero in many of his worksP8which Fulbert employs to define fidelitas in his letter 51. It seems therefore that these two social relations, amicitia and fidelitas, are adorned with the same moral connotations by the Bishop of Chartres. Taking as a starting point the study of vocabulary of amici- tia associated with words and expressions which convey loyalty, this discussion in- tends to analyse the particular relation that linked Fulbert to William of Aquitaine, because it gives rise to the use of two lexical fields.

2. Amicitia in the lexical field of loyalty

This notion of amicitia is evident in Fulbert's letters through words of the same family and words which are dosely linked. If we take the lexical field of amicitia in the letters which already contain the lexical field of fidelitas: we notice first of al1 the rarity and poverty of this lexical field in comparison with that of loyalty. The words are panicularly significant in relation to appearing in the text. The most com- mon word, amicus. onfy appears seven times in the correspondence, while the term fidelita~'~appears 16 times and the termfidelis", 22 times. In letter 26, the bishop of Chartres denies being a friend of Léothier, Archbishop of Sens. In letters 105, 114 and 117, Hildegar, Fulbert's secretary, brings him news of his "friend" William of Aquitaine12. Fulbert uses this term aminrs again in letter 119 referring directly to William. Similarly, the superlative amicissimus was used by Hildegar to qualify Wil- liam's attitude towards Fulbert in letter 109. The term amicitia is also rare: it ir found in letter 1 addressed by Fulbert to Abbo de Fleury and is above al1 used to charac- terize the relationship between the bishop of Chartres and William of Aquitaine. Certain terms are closely associated with the concept of amicitia: Hildegar wrote to

8. In particular, see his De Opciis (Cicero. Marco niiio. De Opccis. éd. Walter Milier Cambridge [Mass.] -London: Harvard University Press-William Heinemann. 1975) and his De Amicitia (Cicero. Marco nilio. De amicitia, ed. Valentin García Yebra. Madrid: Credos, 1987). 9. The lexical field of thefidelitas is very rich in the ietteis of Fuibert de Chartres. The following words and expressions can be pointed out: fideiiras. jdelis. jidus. fdelireq subdirus. sarelles. dominus, casatus, miles. auxilium, consiiium, securiras, casamenrum. benefinum, honor. digniras .. . 10. The word was picked out in the following letters: The Ierrers aandpoems of Fulbert of Chorhes... : 2 (letter 1. 2 twice). 10 (letter 2). 12 (letters 3. 4). 20 (letter9. 2 twice), 148 (letter 82). 164 (letter92). 172 (ietter 95). 178 (letter 99), 204 (letter 114). 208 (letter 115). 214 (letter 120). 218 (letter 122). 228 (lerter 127). 1l. The word was picked out in the following letters: The kttenandpoemsqfFulbertofCharnes... : 12 (letter 3). 14 (letter 5). 16 (letter 6).20 (letter Y). 50 (lerter 27, twice). 58 (letter 31 ), 74 (ietter 42). 98 (letter 56). 106 (letter 62). 108 (letter 64). 138 (ieiter 78). 150 (letter 83). 172 (letter 95). 182 (letter 100). 204 (letter 114). 206 (letter 115). 2121214 (letter 119. twice). 218 (letter 122). 224 (letter 125). 226 (letter 126). 12. Hildegar, previously chancellor and secretary to the Bishop of Chartres. was, from 1022. his reprr- sentative in . capital city of William of Aquitaine, where Fulbert was in charge of the treasurer of Saint-Hilaire. to require Fulbert's loyalty in return. Moreover, they appear along with two notions of other words from the same lexical field: friendship is conveyed by the benivolentia of Abbo and Fulbert owes him "a student's l~yalty"'~towards his master (dominus). Fulbert therefore introduced the word amicitia into the lexical field offidelitas. Wo interpretations of this letter are possible. Fulbert may have associated these two lexical fields with a simple rheiorical goal: it would mean convincing Ahbo of his friendship and loyalty with the exclusive aim of obtaining his help in a specific affair. However, Fulbert undoubtedly truly sought the friendship of Abbo, this man of letters whom he respected "as his student". In this case, the use of the lexical field of loyalty goes back to the master-disciple relationship that Fulbert knew well as he was the scolaster of Chartres, and not a relationship of vassalage. The flexibility of the relationship of loyalty is apparent here as it can include the relationship between a scolaster and his students, which was certainly the case in Chartres between Fulbert and his old followers, such as Hildegar. This relationship is thus accompanied by a friendship sometimes born out of living with each other within the school, often out of mutual respect among men of letters. The relationship between Fulbert and Hildegar therefore offers another exarnple of friendship, founded on fidelitas. Hildegar was first of al1 a studcnt of Fulbert, then scolaster of Chartres. He then became one of the clerks in his entourage, then his secretary and Cbancellor. He shared his daily life and becarne part of bis familiaritas. A double loyalty binds them, the one that binds Hildegar to his old master within the cathedral school of Chartres and the one that binds him to the bishop within the Chartrian clergy. The two rnen never used the vocabulary of amicitia in their letters except to characterise the relationship between Fulbert and William of Aquitaine. On the other hand, tbey used a lavish vocabulary taken from the lexical field of loyalty: Hildegar frequently described himself asfidelis in view of his dominus Fulbert, to whom he owedfidelitas'". Along with these words, there are numerous ernotional terms such as carissimus or dilectissimu?' and set phrases which are indeed the topoi of amicitia, inherited from Antiquity and the early Middle Ages. For example, Fiilbert writes to Hildegar, "your absence often reminds me of how much your presence was indispensable to me"22. This old platitude of friendship had already been used by the Christian Fathers or during the Carolingian renai~sance~~.It was therefore a relationship of friendship, charanerised by reciprocal affection and usefulness, since Fulbert granted Hildegar

19. Fideliias u1 alumni (The letferr andpoemsoJFulber1 oJChnrnes... : 2 [letter 11). 20. See for example the form of addrerí in lettei 114 and lctter 115: The leflers andpoems oJFulbert oJ Charlrcs ...: 204, 206-207. 21. The leners andpoems oJFulberl oJChartres ...: 188 (letter 105). 22. Absenna ma sepe commemoror quam necersorius eras pierens (The leflers and poems aJF~

important positions such as chancellor and scolaster at Chartre~,~~while Hildegar represented him in Poitiers and passed on crucial informatioli to him. The use of the vocabulary of loyalty bears witness to the fact that the friendship between these two educatcd men did not erase the ecclesiastical hierarchy between the clerk and the bishop, the social hierarchy between the master and the follower. We can however ask ourselves why the vocabulary of friendship that the two men master perfectly and use for other people, is not used in this relationship. This vocabulary was indeed replaced by the fraternal or paternal vocabulary generally used in the church: both men cal1 each other "brotlier" or "father". This lack of vocabulary of friendship should not necessarily be interpreted as an absence of friendship, but rather as the existente of another model of friendship, that of a spiritual friendship based on caritas, the Christian love that the clergy were supposed to disseminateii. The case of the letter written to Léothier of Sens is different:it is very possible that Fulbert swore an oath of loyalty to Léothier, his archbishop, during his consecration as Bishop of Chartres. Indeed, the Romano-Germanic Fontifical of the 10"' century, widely knowti and copied in the north of France, bears witness to the fact that the ordinationes of often contained an oath of obedience and loyalty to their archbi~hops~~.Thus, both men maintained within the church a relationship of loyalty, which excluded homage, but drew at length on the lexical field of fidelitas. Fulbert often used the notion of fidelitas, particularly in the forms of address of the letters. He therefore promises Léothier "the service of his loyalty"27or "the service and the feeling of his loyalty"28.The terms fidelis and dominus are also present in these letters. From letter 16 we learn that Léothier excommunicated an enemy of Fulbert who went on to thank him for it. It seems that Léothier provided help, auxilium, ecclesiastically speaking, to his suffragan bishop. Finally, in letter 26, Fulbert reproaches Léothier for having consecrated the new Bishop of Orleans "without his council"". Tlierefore, in the letters from Fulbert to his archbishop, we find a group of terms that belong to the lexical field of loyalty. The conflict between the two prelates on the subject of the Bishop of Orieans gave Fulbert the occasioii to deny any friendship with Léothier, "with pleasure 1 will accept, father, you calling me your friend, if you yourself act like a friend'". Prior to this letter, we

24. Scolarumfe~ulaniel ianiellarii labulas ribi servo (The lellers and poems ofFulber1 ofCharlres ...: 194 [lctler los]). 25. Caritas, o?Cliristian love. defines the idealisrd relationsliips between members o1 the regula1 or secu- lar clergy. Howevcr, wilh Fuibert of Chartres, the use oi cariras vocabiilary becomes systcmatic hetwecn clsrks. Tu conclude that a friendship between two corrcspondents ir real. the presente. along with chis vocabulary, of a whole emotional und iriendsliip lexical fiild rnilst therefoie he established. 26. LXlll Oidinatio episcopi: Vis invciae Mogoniiensi accclesiae, nlihi el successoribus meis fidem el subiecfionem exhibere? Volo (Vogei, Cyriile; Elre. Reinhard. Le PonrificaIRomano-GermaniqueduXe siekle. Cité du Vatican: Bibliuteca Apostolica Vaticana. 1963: T. 202). 27. Obrequiunzfdelirati.~(The leiters andpoems ofFulberrqfCharrres ...: 12 (lctter 3). 28. Fidelilu1i.r aflclum et obsequium (The letters andpoems ofFulbei1 ofCharlres ...: 12 [letter 41). 29. Sine meo consilio (Tkr lettenandpocmsofFulbertofCharIrc.~... : 48 [letter 261). 30. Quod me. paler. amicum appepeiiasgratanler annuerern. .si fe quoque exhiberes amicum (Tke lerrers arrd porms o/ Fulbert ofchartres ...: 48 jiettci 261). often find an emotional vocabulary in the missives from Fulbert to his archbishop, which proves that their relationship of loyalty was coupled, before this event, with a relationship of friendship. This rested on Fulbert's oath of loyaliy and involved "help" and "council" between the two prelates. It brought together affectusor dilectio, the feeling of love between them and utilitas, as much for the two prelates as ior the church as a whole. Lastly, this relationship did not abolish t2ie hierarchy that existed between the archbishop and the suffragan bishop. Moreover, it was this hierarchical bond that the fidelitas lexical field expresses. Fulbert of Chartres' correspondence offers some examples of different social re- lationships, bringing together iriendship and loyalty. The iise of these two lexical fields allows the relationships to be qualified differently each time and to value only certain relationships of loyalty. It is noticeable that there were several rnodels of friendship, amicitia, between men ol letters or caritas between clerks, but that, in al1 of these models, loyalty was an essential component. Similarly there were inany types of loyalty, be they between the follower and the master or between tlie bishop and his archbishop, which nourished different friendships. In addiiion, friendship did not erase the social hierarchies at the start of the 1 llhcentury: admittedly it made the two men equals in theory, by virtue of their culture and elevated position in society. However, within this "élite" there was of course a hierarchy which is ex- plained by the use of the words dominus,fidelis. This hierarchy of equality, within an élite, is of course to be compared with the system of vassalage, in which J. Le GofP' found the same phenomenon. Fulbert's specific relationship with William of Aqui- taine gave rise to a very liberal use uf the two lexical fields of friendship and loyalty and enables a more precise analysis of how this double social bond works.

3. Fulbert and William of Aquitaine

The relationship between the two men is complex and they themselves expressed this in a number of ways. In the correspondence of the Bishop of Chartres, the first image that we have of this relationship is that given in the letters that Hildegar sent to Fulbert from Poitiers and which systematically mentioned his "friend the Count William"32:Hildegar is Fulbert's representative in Poitiers, in the post of treasurer of

31. See Ihis analysis of the vassalic ritual iri the following work Le Goff. Jacqoes. "Porir un autre Moycn Age. tcmpr. travail et culrure en occident: 18 cssais », UnaumMoyen Age. Paris: Galliaiaid. 1999: 11-400. Jaiques Le Goff exjokes the procedure of tlic vassalic ritual and its syrnbolic sense: hornage und imnzixiio manuum mean the sribiliission ol the vuwal to his lord and therefoie the hicrarchy rhut exisfs in feudal- vassalic relationships. On the orher haid orfulum exchanged by the two nlcn a1 rhe end of the ritual shows that they are equals, that they bclong to one and thc rame élite. 32. Amicus vester comes G(uille1rnus) (The lelrers and poentr of Fulbert qf Chartres ..: 190 [letter 1051); G(uillrlmus). comes amimr iuus (Thr lelters and poems of Fuiberi of Charrres... : 204 (Ictter 114). There are comparable forniulas in letrers 109 and 117 (The letiersandpocrns of FiilbertofChnrtre\ ...: 194 [ietter 1091. 210 [letler 1171). Saint-Hilaire. Indeed William of Aquiiainei3 was, as Count of Poitiers. the secular father of Saint-Hilaire and could appoint to the very lucrative post of treasurer of Saint-Hilaire. In 1022, he appointed Fulbert of Chartres to this post, in the hope of attracting this famous man of letters to Poitiers. But Fulbert was occupied with his work in his diocese and sent Hildegar to represent him. The latter played the role of intermediary between the prince and the prelaie and bore witness to the attitude of William towards the man who had awarded him this honor", "you can observe goodness, familiarity, friendship and patience in your friend William towards yo^"'^. Again we find al1 the vocabulary of amicitia in the letters of Hildegar, and this man of letters seemed to take pleasure in defining this relationship between a prelate anda great layman with the help of a vocabiilary with Ciceronian overtones. The lexical lield of loyalty is barely used except for ihe word honor describing the post OS treas- urer of Saint-Hilaire. We therefore distinguish, in Hildegar's letters, the coexistence oí two types of loyalty between William of Aquitaine and Fulbert of Chartres: the honor that William entrusted to Fulbert incliides fidelitas, maybe sworn, and servitia. The plentiful vocabulary of Sriendship used by Hildegar indicates that both men also maintain fidelitas which rests in a relationship of amicitia. These two relationships, which we are examining separately in order to give a clear analysis, are not differ- eniiated in the three men's letters, who strcsscd one or anoiher of them according to their needs. Fulbert's correspondence conserved the letters exchanged by the two protagonists of this social relationship, as well as a letter from Fulbert to Hildegar in which the bishop defines his relationship with William. These missives bear witness to the relationship of amicitia which existed between the two men. Indeed, in them we find a plentifi~lvocabulary of amicitia and affectus: the adjectives carus-carissimus and dilectus-dilectissimus were olten usedi6. William sent Fulbert bis "kindest regards"" while Fulberi compared the count to bis besi friend~'~.The words bonitas, benevolentia define the relationships between the two men and in pariicular William's attitude to Fulbe~t'~.The bishop also rejoiced in the carita,?" and the affectus ibat William showed him. Thus he wrore to the count that he wished tu "revive the admirable

33. Richard, Alfred. Hisioire des conties de Poiiou, tome 1. 778-1204, Paris: Picard, 1903: Trefforr, Cécile. "Le cornte de Poitiers. duc d'Aquituinc el I'Eglirc aux aleririiurs de I'an mil 970-1030". Cahiers de civilisarion médiévaie, 43 (2000): 395-445. 34. Non amitres susceptum honoiem si ienere voiueris. (The letren and poems of Fulbert qlCharires. ..: 2 10 [letler 1171). 35. Amici iui GuilleImi deprehmdere potes erga te benigniraiem, familiaritatem, aniiiilianz, suriineniiam. (The lrr- ters and poenzs ofFulberf ofChaiires.. .: 2 1 0 [letter 1171) 36. The lelters andpoems ofFuIber1 ofcharlres ...: 164 (Ietter 92), 208 (letter 1 16). 37. Carasamiciciar. (The Ieiiers andpoemr qfFulbert ofCharties.. .: 208 [letlci i 161) 38. See note 13 above. 39. The lelrrrsandpoems ofFulbeilofCharhes ... : 212 (lelter 119). 216 (letter 120). 40. Vobis aurem me licet immercntem graluilis benejciis accumulare mira caritalis abundancia placer. (Thi. lciters andpoemsofFulbert ofCharrres ...: 212 [letrer 1191).

i~ucoT~MPORIS. MCDJVMACVOM. 11 (2008): 113-132. ISSN 1888-3931 O gentleness of his affectiori towards him"4'. Roth men therefore seem to have had a veritable affection for each other. Similarly, Fulhert presented himself as the faithful servant of his lord, William. Sometimes it was William who catled Fulbert dominus, thus showing his respect for the bishop and the reputed man of letters that he was. This vocabulary conveys the loyalty that they owed each other within their friendship. Both men gavc each other many presents. For example, Fulbert wrote to Willianl, "1 accepted your free doilations""; he is talking about the "free benefit~"~) that William gave to him. One could believe that Fulbert was talking about the post of treasurer of Saint-Hilaire, but that would contradict the use of the terms servilium, deservire associated with this position. It is therefore more likely that these "free donations" refer to tlie alms, the offerings made by William to the church of Chartres for its reconstruction alter a fire that destroyed it in 1020. Fulbert aliuded to these offerings in letter 92 and wrote in letter 119 that they were use in the "service" of Jesus and his mother Mary, in other words the service of the Cathedral, Notre-Dame de Chartre~~~.1x1 exchange Fulbert sent him a collection ol texts on King Salomon, a subject that interested the Duke". In addition, Fulbert constituted a point d'appui for William north of the Loire and a rneans of obtaining information about the king or the Counts of Anjoud6and Blois and Chartres. This amicitia was very useful in the practica1 sense of the term. We find, moreover, the notion of utile in the definition of this relationship between the two men: Fulbert thanked William for his benevolence which ro him was "more useful indeed than that of al1 his friends"". He also greeted the duke by wishing him "usefulness and h~nesty"~~. Finally, Hildegar advised Fulbert to keep the post of treasurer of Saint-Hilaire for as long as possible, even if he could not do so himseif, "if he thinks that it will be usef~ilto hi~n~'~.The notion of utilitas is therefore at the hcart of the relationship between Fulbert and the Duke of Aquitaine. In the letter from Hildegar, it is a

41. Rtievare cupio mirabilem afleclus veslri erga me dulcedinern.. (The krlers and poenn oJiiL

(i I~ncoTEMPOKIS. Mriliu~ Aivo~, 11 (2008): 113-132.ISSN 1888-3931 L~YALTY,FKIENDSHIP AND LOVE IN TtlE LEITERSOF FULBERTOF CHARTR~S 123

question of practical use: Fulben had to keep the post of treasurer of Saint-Hilaire as it offered him substantial financia1 revenue. In Fulbert's letters, the notion of utile had many uses: the benevolence of William was "useful" to him effectively through the services that his friend gave him in return, by his generous donations. Moreover, he compared the effeaivencss (eJfectu) of this friendship to that of his other relationships with oiher friends. Amicitia is therefore defined in part by its "uselulness". However Fulbert, when he used the terms utile, utilitas, also had in mind their Ciceronian sense of usefulness for the common good. The relationship of friendship with William of Aquitaine therefore takes on a moral connotation. This connotation is found in the expression utile et honestum that Fulbert used in the way he addressed William in his letter 107. Wishing the Duke of Aquitaine "usefulness and honcsry", Fulbert assumed the position first and foremost as his loyal suhject for the post of treasurer of Saint-Hilaire, since this expression defined the loyal duties in Iiis letter 51, hut he also alluded to their relationship of friendship which he liked to think of as "useful". The expression utile et honestum, inspired by Cicero, acts as a connectioli between the two types of relationship and was integrated henceforth into the model of friendship that Fulbert offered ihe Duke of Aquitaine. This privileged social relationship must not only aim at the practical use of each one, but above al1 the public use and the sovereign good as friendship and loyalty enable ihe expression of virtue and the quest for social peace. However, the fidelitas that the two men had in their relationship of friendship was less restrictive than the one that Fulbert owed William for his post as treasurer. In the name of this position, Fulberi asked Hildegar, in letter 92, to "pledge his perpetiial loyalty"50 to the Duke of Aquitaine. He "indeed acknowledges that be owes him perpetua1 loyalty, to his soul as to bis h~dy"~'.We find in this expression the noiion of safety, of guarantee that the loyal subject must safeguard his lord's body and his person, as defined in letter 51. This relaiionship ol loyalty rested on the position of treasurer of Saint-Hilaire that the Duke of Aquitaine entrusted to the Bishop of Chartres. This position was called beneficium or d

50. Dic karii.~intonobis principi G(uillelmo/ perpelzam $delNa~m(./ ex parfe norfra. (The leiiers and poents o/ Frtlbert ofCkartres.. .: 164 lletter 921). 5 1. Agnosco enim me perpetuunz debiiorcm esse$dciitatis aniniae iuae er corpon. (The leiiers and poemr oJFu1beri ofCharrres ...: 220 [letter 122)). 52. Theleiiersandpornzso~FulberiofCkartre,~...: 212-214 (leriei 119). 214-216 (Irtfrr 120). 53. However the cxpression quicquidxunz efposs~mlutlm ?si is found oncr, i~sedby Fulbert in lerter 120 (Tke leiteis andpnems ofFuibrrfofChartre.~... : 214). He thcrefore oiferi his help. in every way he can as a Bishop. to William of Aquitaine. 54. Ad cofli~endacfruges.(The leriers andpoems qlFuiberr qfCharrres. ..: 164 (Iciier 921). 55. Quod sanciissinio ac sapit~tirrimopatii nosrro Ifylario iibique debita servicia non rependo (Tke leiiers and po- emroftirlberiofCharires... : 212). Sce also {he vrrb deservire in letter 119 (The lellers andpocmrqfFu1beriof Chartres, ed. Frederick Hehrends ...: 212). terms, which belong at the heart of the fidelitas lexical field, define the relationship that existed between the treasurer of Saint-Hilaire and the Duke of Aquitaine. In the case of Fulbert and William, this relationship was coupled, as observed, with a relationship of amicitia that involved another, more personal, loyalty. This double relationship explains certain contradictions or ambiguities in the bond between the two men: William never reproached Fulbert for not fulfillii~ghis servitium towards him and Saint-Hilaire. Convenely in letter 116, he asked him to spend three days in Poitiers to see himi6. Fdbert wrote to William that his loyalty did not depend on the position as treasurer of Saint-Hilaire, "1 beg you, do not think me so base as to be less loyal because of that (the renunciation of his po~ition)"~'.Effectively the Bishop of Chartres, who could not fulfil bis post correctly because of his distante from it, thought seriously about giving it up, though maintaining a relationship oí friendship and loyalty with William. The letters exchanged between William of Aquitaine and Fulbert of Chartres therefore bear witness to a particularly close combination of vocabularies of affectus, amicitia andfidplitas. It is possible to try and retrace the evolution of their relationsliip: in 1020-1021, William of Aquitaine consulted Fulben, a renowned lawyer, on the suhject of his quarrel with a vassal. Impressed by the literary and legal quality of his answeri8, he sought to lure him to Poitiers and establish hiin there by means of the post of treasurer of Saint-Hilaire and an oath of loyalty. However, the bishop had little time to devore to this post given that the church of Chartres was in the middle of being rebuili. He therefore sent his secretary and friend Hildegar to represent hiin: he maintained rhe excellent relationship with William, whom he probably served as a secretary. Through his intermediary, Fulbert and William exchanged information, presents and entered into a double relationship of loyalty, one linked to the post of treasurer, the other to their mutual affection, their friendship. Tliis double fdeiitas was defined by the same term utile and by the expression utile el honestum. Friendly loyalty or legal loyalty, it was to the common good of both men and the sovereign good of society as a whole. Thus Fulbert offered William a model of friendship adapied to his situation as a layman. This model, different from that experienced among clerks, is expressed in two essential references: the fdelitas and thc antique amicitia. Loyalty, certainly prior to friendship in this case, oflered the Bishop of Chartres a social setting and quite a flexible lexical field to fue1 a relationship of friendship, putting both men on an equal footing. In addition, William, Fulbert and Hildegar were men of letters who were aware of the antique concept of Ciceronian ami~itia~~.For Cicero, friendship was a social elitist relationship

56. Si non manxerk nobiscum plus quam triduo ... (The krters and poems of Fulberl of Charrres... : 208 jleller 116)). 57. Nec me pules. obsecro. ira pravum. ut propter hoc uidcur ribi minus essejdelis. (Thc ieiters andpoems of Fulberl ofcharcres ...: 218 [lctter 1221). 58. This is rhe famous lclter 51 (The letlers andpoems qiFuibert ofchartres ..: 90, 92) 59. See DeAmic¡tin by Cicero (Cicero. Marco Tulio. Deamicitia, ed. Valentin Garcia Yebra. ,Madrid: Gredos, 1987) and the lollowing study: Hellegouarc'h, Jorcpli. Le vowbuiaiie Ialin des relations et despartk politiques sous la Républiquc. Paiis: Les Relles Lettres, 1972.

O IMACOTEMPORIS. MFII~VM AEVUM, 11 (2008): 113-132. ISSN 1888-3931 which only concerned politicians or educated mcn. Thc vocabulary of fricndship used by these threc men, in particular by Hildegar in his own letters and those he wrote on behalf of William, drew on this concept. Finally amicitia was inserted, in this case, quite easily into a pre-existing relationship of loyalty that it strengthened and qualified. The coexistence of lexical fields of friendship and loyalty in certain letters by Fulbert of Chartres allowcd him to qualify the expression of their social relationship and to íind for each one a subtle equilibrium between the hierarchy inherent in feudal society and expressed by the vocabulary offidelitas and equality, mutual aid and affection which characterised the relationships between these men of letters and symbolised amicitia. Lastly, it was possibly a means of hierarchising and pacifying the relationships of loyalty and one of the most restrictive forms of fidelitas.

4. From amicitia to affectus: a peaceful ideal

A third lexical field that is closely connected with that of arnicitia appears in the letters of Fulbert of Chartres: that of amor, of affectus. The "emotion". we have pointed out, was fully part of the relationship of friendship. But it was also present in the relationships of loyalty froln which arnicifia was absent. For the Hishop of Chartres, affectus constituted one of the founding principies of the relationship of loyalty, in tbe sarne capacity as seruriias, ulile honestum. Thc study of this vocabulary of "love" shows the richness of this lexical ficld, which enabled Fulbert to offer an original model offidelitas.

4.1 "Love"and loyalty

In the letters of the Bishop of Chartres, emotional vocabulary is very rich, ap- pearing much more than the lexical íield of frielidship. There are two direct asso- ciations, that is, within the same phrase or expression, of the two lexical fields of affectus andlidelitas. The expression dominus et dilectissirnus was employed by Fulbert to greet certain people in the address of the letters: out of ten instances60the expres- sion was used to greet the king aiid Fulbcrt's dominus, Robert the Pious6'. The other expressions that bring afectus andfidelitas together have a more varied use. Fulbert wrote to Léothier, Archbishop of Sens, in letter 2, that he owed him "a lot of love

60. There insiances appear ir1 Ietierr The lerters andpoemsofFu1bertqiChartrer..: 32 (letter 17). 38 (letter 21). 46 (lerrcr25). 74 (lettcr41).94 (Ietter 53). 102 (letter 59). 176 (lelter97). 178 (letter99). 182 (lettei 101). 218 (ietter 122). 61. The two othei instaliccs allow Fulbert oí Chartrcs ro grcct Willivm o1 Aquitaine arrd H (?) sub-dean of Toiirs. and loyalty"622. ln letter 120, the Bishop of Chartres declared that he owed William of Aquitaine "a loyalty from the bottom of his heart"63. Out of six expressions of this type, four refer to a relationship of amicitia, which explains the associatioii of the two lexical fields. Only one expression is used in a purely vassalic context. It al- lowed Fulbert to declare "his loyal l~ve"~'to Eudes of Blois and Chartres. The word amor is therefore directly associated with a relationship of loyalty and conveys the feeling that tlie loyal subject must express to his lord. As well as these expressions, some adjectives and nouns enable emotion to be expressed in the letters which contain the vocabulary offidelitas. It is noticeable that the ernotional adjectives, such as dilectissimus, benignissimus, are very Trequently used in the form of address of the letters or to invoke a person in the body of the letters. These adjectives were not only reserved for Fulbert's lords or vassals; thcy were also used between clerks, or between Pulbert and Hiidegar. This vocabulary of affechis was therefore used in al1 the relationships of loyalty, from feudal-vassalic relationships to the bond of loyalty within the clergy. However, certain words were more frequently used to convey Fulbert's reiations with laymen. The adjective dilectissimus is used in this way thirteen times", of which seven refer to I

62. Mulrum amoris aiquejdelilaiis ribi pnler mcdeberecenseo (Tke lcrrvrs andpoemsof iuibertqiChanres ...: 10 [letter 21). 63. Fideiilaltm encorde (The leirers andpoems of Fwlberr ojChartres ...: 214 [letter 1201). 64. Nosni adhuc suijdelis nmorem. (Tke lellers and poems of1:uIbert ofChanies ..: 182 [leaer 1001). 65. This adjective can be found in the following letlers: Thc lellcis and poems ofFulber1 oJChartres ..: 32 (lettcr 17). 74 (letter 41). 94 (lelter 53). 102 (letter 59). 148 (letrer 82), 176 (letrer 97). 178 (letter 99). 184 (leaer 101). 188 (letter 105). 190 (Ierrer 107). 206 (leltei 115). 214 (letter 120). 218 (letrer 122). 66. The word appears in the foilowing letters: Tke lerrersandpoems ofFu1berr ofChanres,... : 32 (lerter 17). 52 (lclter 28). 146 (lerter 81). 150 (letter 83). 182 (letter 101). 214 (lerrer IZO). 220 (lerrer 122). 67. Sec lerrer 109: The lelters andpoems ofFulbrir ofCiiarlrer ...: 194. 68. Non solum enim nulium exle conrilium velauxiliirm tapio wrum insuper odium pro dilecrionr reddis. 11 is pos- sible thar iliis clcrk was wealthy al rhc hands of the Bishop o1 Chartres. (Tke letren andpoems ofFulber1 o/ Chartres ..: 32 [letter 161). having a more clearly Christian and clerical connotation". The use of the word dilectio and rhe expression consilium ve1 auxilium, strongly linked to a relationship oí loyaity, shows that the Bishop wanted to emphasise ihefidelitas that this clerk owed him. He went on to reproach him for leading a secular life and iiot deserving his position as a priest. The word diiectio, ~thelove ihat Fulbert held for this clerk, was the opposite of the word odium. the hate ihat this clerk held in exchange. Fulbert tried, in this letter, to show thai any relationship of loyalty should be accompanied by mutual love between the two parties. Among the nouns that convey feelings, two in particular, the words pietas and affectio, were reserved in Fulbert's letters for Robert the Pious. The term pietas conveys affection between two people, butalso the act of i'ulfiliing their duties to God or others. It was particularly suitahle for the king as ir showed his ability to govern well, Lo treat his loyal suhjects well and therefore serve God well. The only insrance of the term affectio was linked to the word pietas since Fulbert thanked the IZing "for such greai affection (pietatis afectione) towards him"70. The two nouns amor arid affectus were more widcly iised7'. Fulbert used them as mucli for his relationship with bis lord, Count Eudes of Blois and Chartres, as for his "friends" Léothier of Sens, Hildegar or William of Aquitaine. Another category of riouns expresses not feeliiigs. hut a certain type of conduct hetweeli ~wo people. This behaviour was characteriscd by goodriess, benevolence. familiarity. We have already seen ihat this behaviour characterised thr douhle relationship of amicitia andPdelitas between Fulberi aiid William of Aquitaine. Some of these terms were also used io define Fulberr's attitude towards Hildegar. But these words were not only iised as part of amicitia; the terms bonitas and benignitas define, in this way, the behaviour of Roheri the Pious towards the Bishop of Chartres. Lastly, the two words cor and anima allowed the expression of feeling to be heightened beiween two people with such formulas as "with al1 my heart" or "with al1 my soul". They are quite widely u~ed'~and concerned relationships of amicifia as well as loyaliy. So this plentiful emotional vocabulary, which appears in Fulbert's letters along with the lexical fieId offidelitas, referred in part to the relationships of amicitia, which we have already studied. However, out of 84 instances of the words in this ernotional lexical field, 36 were devoted to simple relationships of loyalty, and 33 instances only concerned the relationship between Fuibert and Rohert tlie Pious. Indeed Fulbert was a vassal to the king for the diocese of Chartres and owed him loyatty

69. It is noriceable rnorcover that the word caritas is coniplerely ahsent from therr association herween emotional vocabulary alid tlie lcxical firld of loyalry. This word ir however quite frequenr in the letters of Fulbcrt as tlreir are 22 instances, but in nne or rwo exceplions. it is only "sed between nicmben of the clergy 10 coiivey the Christiaii love that connects thrm. The absence of this term in the case of clerk C. is even niore astonishing. 70. Pm tanta erga nzepieiaris nffectione. (The letleis andpuemi nfFulb~rlqfCharrres... : 146 [lerter 811). 71. The ward amoriris found in ierrcn: ThelertersandpoemsofFuiberlqfChartres... : 18 (letrer 7). 148 (Iettrr 82). 172 (lelter 95, twice), 182 (lettei 100); thc word affeciur in ierters: The leittrs andpoemr ofi;ulbert of Charrres... : 12 (letter 4). 212-214 (Iettei 119. twice). 72. The word cor appears in Iettris: The ierrersandpoem,~ofFulbenufChartrps... : 38 (letter 21). 148 (letlri 82). 172 (letfer 95). 214 (lerter 120). 218 (Iettrr 120); and the word anima, in chis sense. in ictreis: The lelter.~andpoernsofFulberrofChortres ...: 74 (letler 41). 218 (letrer 122). in this role. It therefore seems that Fulbert of Chartres tried to introduce a strong emotional and moral connotation to the definition offidelitas and in particular to the expression of the feudal-vassalic relationship.

4.2 A new expression of loyalty

This use of the afectus lexical field to characterise relationships of Ioyalty and, in particular, vassalic relationships, led Fulbert Lo complete his definition of jidelitar, which, in letter 51, essentially restedon legalandconcrete clauses. Al1 the vocabulary of "love", indeed, conveyed a model of a11 interpersonal relationship which would not only be founded on fiefdom and loyalty: another o[ its cornerstones was the relationship of mutual love between the lord and his loyal subject. Moreover, Fulbert of Chartres developed a comparison between the relationship of loyalty and relationships within the family, based on reciprocal love and a father's authority. Thus, in letter 27, he sent, "Count Gualeran, Count Gautier andall his other sons and loyal subjects his greetings and his hlessings"73.These men were his direct vassals and he named thein "sons" or -brothersr' in the letter. These expressions referred to bis position as lord as much as to his role as bishop. father of the Christian community. Similarly, the blessings he sent them from the bishop as the lord, were compared to a father. Fulhert went even further, asking his vassals to "defend him as their spiritual father"74. He showed them his love and trust and considered himself responsible for them, materially and spiritually speaking7'. The bonds between Fulbert and bis vassals exceeded the practica1 ohligations described in letter 51; Fulbert, as bishop, added the notions of love and moral responsibility to these bonds. The relationship between Fulbert of Chartres and his principal master Robert the Pious, although more complex, in part went back to this rhetoric of responsibility. Fulbert ofren called for tlie king's pietas, with regard to his duties of affection towards his loyal subjects. Thus, towards 1008, Fulbert did not go to meet the king, perhaps because of a dispute about the appointment of the Bishop of Orleans; he asked for his "pardon" with "roya1 affe~tion"'~.Fulbert expected the help he was owed from his lord by virtue of their bond of loyalty. He therefore used the father referente to request this help with more conviction, even if auxilium was part of the reciprocal duties between lord and loyal subject, "support me, good

73. Fulbertus (, ..) comiti Gunleronno et comitl Guaiterio ceteiisyuefiiiisjid~lib~sq~~esui~salutem et benedictionem. (The letters and poems oJFulhert ofCkartres ...: 50 [lener 271). 74. Rojo ut me sict~tpnlrem vcrtrum spiriluniem delendalis (Tke lettcrs and poems oJFulbert oJCharfres... : 50 [letter 271). 75. Fulbert rhows them this affeciion whin ihrir relationships are normal and very obviously iiol in a state oi conflict: in tiiis case, he can appear very cold and authoritarian. as ir1 ieuers 9 and 10: The ietierr andpoemr ofFulb~rtof<:hartres ... : 20-22. 76. Facilir lamen debe1 esse rrmissio apud regiam pirlatenf. (The ietters and poems oJFulbert oJCkartres ...: 38 [Ictter 211). L~YALTY,FRIENDSH~P AND LOVE 1N THE LETTERSOF FULBERT OF CHAKTRES 129

father, support us in out weakness"". This connection of loyalty between Fulbert and Robert the Pious is the most extensively reseasched aspect, thanks to the letters that Fulbert sent to the king and of which he kept copies in his collection. These letters show that Fulbert souglit to behave like a good and loyal subject of the king and to follow the rules that he himself put in writing in letter 51. Thus, he very frequently gave his consiiium to the king, even when his opinion mighi offeiid the laiter. He possessed thc lofty concept of consilium, a concept passed dowii from the Carolingian bishops who wanted advice, of divine origins, to be passed on to the king through his bishops: he hoped that Robert the Pious might ohtain "advice and courage from GO~'~.Fulbert did not hesitate moreover, to oppose the king if his decisions went against bis own interests, os against the health of his soul. Similarly, Fulbert helped his lord. in particular by passing on information to him about the Count of Chartres or by supporting his decision to corisecrate bis son Henry in 1027. If Fulbert fulfitled his duties as a loyal subject so well, it was because a niorai and emotional relationship bound him Lo his lord. Fulbert often showed his affection for the king by calling him dominus dilectissimus and he said that in his view, the king was "always showered by a fountain of go~dness"'~.Moreover, the Bishop of Chartres ihanked him for inquiring after so regularlyS0.This relationship oE jidelitas and affectus between the two men sometimes took on a moral and religious connotation in Fulbert's letters. The latter hoped that his relationship of loyalty wiih the king would contrihute to "ihe heightening of his sacred viri~e"~'and allow him to obtain "what is honest and u~eful"~'.There we 6nd al1 the Ciceronian vocahulary of virtue. of utile et honestum, which already appeared in letter 5 t defining jidelitas and in the Fulhertian concept of amicitia. Por Fulbert,fidelitas had to allow, thanks to the affection exisiing between the lord and the loyal suhject, the achievement of the sovereign good, honestum. This was even more true Eor the king who held a particular religious ministry, due to his coronation. The king was responsihle for ihr moral and spiritual state of his kingdom. The relationship of loyalty, as defined by Fulbert, was therefore a tool of governance enahling him to keep the peace and to do good in the kingdom. Furthermore, Fulbert did not hesitate to express this religious aspect of fdeiitas by wishing Robert that "God comfort his dear soul by granting him al1 that is g~od"'~.The notion of bonum already appeared in letter 51:fidelitas enabled the lord and loyal subject alike to achieve the sovereign good, witli the help oE God, ihanks to the duties and mutual love that ir estahlished in society. It was therefore in perfect

77. Suslinvle pn1iu.r. sancce paier suslinele inbeciliilaiem noslram. (The iellers and poemr ofFuibcr1 of Chorrrci.. .: 74 [ietler41]). 78. Corisiiium etforiifwdinem n Deo (The i~tfersand poems of Fuih~rt~IChan~ex ...: 102 [Icttci 59)). 79. Fonle bonitalis u1 semper irriyuus (The ieiiers andpoems of Fuiberiofchaitrrs ...: 106 [letfer 611). SO. Placuil bnnilati vestrae consukre nos super habihi nosfro (The ielfers and poans of Fiiiberi oJCharlrrr. ..: 178 Iielrer 991). 81. Sanrtae virlulis aufmentum (The iellris and poems ofFuiber1 ofChartre.;...: 74 [lctier 41 1) 82. Quod decet el prodessi (Thr irilers andpoem ofFuiberi ofChar1res...: 106 [lelter 611). 83. U1 Deus ornni bono r~~iefcoram animam vestrnm (The lellerr andpoemsof Fuiberlof Chariref... : 74 jictter 411). harmony with divine designs. Here, it was, of colirse, the question of a bishop's visioii of loyalty, both pious and erudite, which tried to integrate a dominant social relationship into his spiritual conception of society and roya1 power. The relationship betweeii the loyal subjects and the master can thcrefore also be compared to the relationship between the loyai subject and Godn4,particularly in the case of Fulbert and Robert the Pious, since the king had a signifcant spiritual role, as did the Bishop of Chartres. Robert's religious charisma tbus explains his loyal suhjects' obedience. That is why Fulbert sometimes addressed himself to the king by quotiiig the Psalms: "With al1 my heart 1 seek you; do not ler me stray from your ~ommandmei~ts"~~. This way, Robert was considered tantamotint to God and Fulbert the prophet, or the loyal subject who wished to obey him as best he could. In this particular relationship which linked the king to his bishop, it is possible to distinguisli, behiiid the use of a plentiful emotional vocabulary, Fulbert's will to impose diiectio, reciprocai love, as one of the cornerstones of tlie moral and religious content of loyalty. Lastly, the association of the vocabuiaries ofjdelitas and afrcclus was for Fulbert a means of keeping the peacc with his lord. It is noticeable, in the letters of the Bishop of Chartres, that most of the disputes between Fulbert and the king were settled or lessened by the use of this double rhetoric. Thus, around 1008. a serious dis- pute arase between the two meii on the subject of the Bishop of Orleans. The king chose and appointed Thierry who was a relative of thc queen, while Fulbert aiid his supporters wanted to insta11 their candidate. Oudri. This dispute degenerated into arranged battle between the supporters of the two candidates and Fulbert was man- handled. It was thus a serious dispute between the king and his loyal subject and FuIberr refused to go to Thierry's consecration. He fliereforc wrote a letter of apology to the king, explaining his absence with various excuses and asking for his remissio, his forgiveness, in the name of the affection he owed bis loyal subject8'. Similarly, in 1020-1021, Fulbert refused ro organise the usiial procession of the Chartrian clergy to Orleans as he still disagreed witli the rown's bishop. So as not to liurt tlie kiiig, who liked this procession, he used the fire that had ravaged his church a short while before as an excuse and above all, he showed hiin bis affection and coillidence in his wisdoin iii letter 41. The Fulberiian definition of loyalty, resting as much on le- gal clauses as il did on a moral and emotional conception, enabled Fulbert lo relax this relationship, to deny the king his heip or advice in the name of superior moral principals or in the name of bis affectioii for hirn. This action rnade avaiiable to him a conlplete rlietoric of affectus, which enabled him to diffuse the conflicts with the king. However, this model of relationship of loyalty was also meant to be "useful"

84. 111 this case. the Christiai, fides towards Gud can bc considered taiiramount tu tliejdelifas oi thr loyai subject towards his lord. This therne was irsearched by Claudc Carorzi in the following article lrom tlie letterr of Yvcs de Cllaities at the start oi thc l2:h ccntury: Carozzi, Claudi. "Lcs évCqiics vassailx du roi de Francc d'apres Yves de Charties". Chiera e mondo Jeudale nei recoli X-XII: affi della dodicesima Seffiniana infernazionalr disrudio. Passo della Mendola, 24-28 agosto 1992. Milan: Vira e pensirro. 1995: 225-243. 85. ln foto mrde meo dilip le: ne >-ellas nze a fuis rnandaris (The lerfeis nnd poems of Fulberf oJClfarfres ...: 38 (lettri 211) The second par1 of :he phrase referi io Psalms. 118, 10. 86. See note 75 above. L~YALTY,FRIENDSHIP AND LOYE IN THF LE~~.ERSOF FULBERT OF CHARTRES 131

to the social order: the loyal subject was encouraged to show obedience and love in order to obtain favonrs from his lord"'. In exchange, this latter had to show him fainiliarity (familiarifas)and benevolente (benevolentia), made concrete by favonrs (gratiae).The reiationship of loyalty, thus defined by mutual fove, was less rigid and therefore guaranteed peace and social order. It qualified tlie hierarchic relations that existed within the feudal elite and united the great and good among them. This re- lationsbip was "useful" for the common good. as Futbert demonstrates in his letter 51. It was, in particular, necessary for the king who was responsible for peace in the kingdom. Fulbert therefore offered a more complex definition of Bdelitas than letter 51 shows us, often used by historians of the period. Admitredly, sworn loyalty and privileges were the cornerstones of this social relationship. But Fulbert, by using the plentiful emotional vocabulary, also offered a model of conduct, a morality based on reciprocal love between the loyal subject and his lord. In this way it responded to a real need in society at thc beginning of the 11'" century, marked by treachery and shori-lived loyaltics.

5. Conclusions

The study of the association between the lexical fieids of loyalty, friendship, arid love in Fulbert of Chartres' letters allow the conceptions that we have of these social relationships to be qualiíied. In letter 5l. Fulbert offered a theoretical definition of loyalty based on safety, heip, and advice in exchange for privileges. However, he used the lexical field of fidelitas to characterise other types of social relations. like amicitia. Indeed, Fulbert offered William of Aquitaine, the great Iayman prince of letters, a relationship model that mixed loyafty, affection and Ciceronian amicifia. His starting point was certainly an oath of loyalty, sworn by Fulbert to William for the position of treasurer of Saint-Hilaire. Fulbert and Hildegar, his representative ir1 Poitiers, thus associated the vocabulary of antique amicitia with this relationship. They believed, therefore, in a new social bond where loyalty held an important place and did not abolish the social hierarcliy between Fulbert and William. Under Cicero's influence, Fulbert made friendship a social bond reserved Sor an elite, and "useiui" for the common good. for harmony. However, unlike the feudal-vassalic relationship. this relationship was freely chosen, perhaps frrely aba~idonedaccord- ing to each one's interests and donations, presents did not oblige those who received them to carry out a particular service: these donations fueled amicifia, riothing more. Fulbert's skilfulness was to offer a cultivated layman a social relationship based on the two principal references of his ow~iculture: Cicero, who William knew through bis thorough educati«n and the vocabulary of fdelitas that was inserted into the

87. The same typc i>f relationship o1 loyalty ir later found in the court of the Counr of Toulouse, scr followinl: srudy: Macé. Lauient. "Amour ct fidélitC: ic comte de T«iilousc er scs hommes (Xilc-XIIle sic- cles)". Les soriéfés méridionaler 1'd.v jéodal (Espayne, lraiie et sud de /a France, Xe-Xilleri~cies).Hélene Debax. dir. Toulousr: Universire Touiouse le Mirail. 1999: 259-304. practice of human, man-to-rnan relations. Similarly Fulbert proposed. through al1 of his correspondence, a more refined model of a relationship of loyalty than that presented in letter 51. In that model, he emphasised reciprocal love between lord and loyal subject and defined a morafity and a code of conduct for their relation- ship. Because of this, he introduced a wide-ranging emotional vocabulary to the relationships of loyalty which conveyed the ideal of a society in which the feudal hierarchy would be tempered by shared Christian love. In addition he thus gave a religious and moral connotation to fdelitas, responsible from then on for social harmony. We discover there the Ciceronian idea of utik et honesrum which makes the connections between friendship and loyalty. For Fulbert of Chartres, these two interpersonal relationships commited the people concerned in diIferent ways, hut they possessed the same moral code based on mutual love, safety, and social use- fulness: Both of them conveyed, in Fulbert's own hand, the Christian and antique ideal of harmony and the common good.

O l~coT~~ronrr. MFD~UMAEVVM, il (2008): 113-132. ISSN 1888.3931