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
Peter as Student
A Career of Service
Peter as Educator
Ecclesiastic and Royal Patronage
Archdeacon and Chancellor
5
8
13
14
15
17
Chapter 3: The Songs
Monophonic Conductus in Florence, BL Pluteus 29.1
Group One: The Love Songs
Group Two: Criticism and Religious Texts
Group Three: Moral Duality
The Songs as Reflections of the Clerical Dilemma
25
25
26
46
63
72
Chapter 4: Musical Characteristics
Two-Part Conductus and Other Sources
Influences and Characteristics
74
74
84
Appendix A: Sources for the Songs in this Study
Appendix B: Summary of Musical Characteristics
Appendix C: Topos Concordance
86
87
88
Selected Bibliography
89
Biographical Sketch
92
iv
LIST OF MUSIC EXAMPLES
1.
Repeated melisma
29
2. Initial figure
29
3.
30
Initial figure with melisma
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.
1
Peter 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-selfconscious 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
manuscript 6 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 Valley 18
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 GrecoRoman 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 mid1170s, 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,
Dum stricto iudicio
Prelatos circumfero,
Dum virtutes pondero
Patrum modernorum;
Tanta subit raritas,
Quod vix unum veritas
Probat meritorum.
I know not whither I should turn,
When with judgment drawn tight
I move among the prelates,
When I weigh the virtues
Of modern Church Fathers;
Such rarity appears
That Truth can scarcely
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 selfestimation, 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 selfcontradiction 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
<http://galenet.galegroup.com.proxy.lib.fsu.edu/servlet/ECCO>.
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 manuscript 63 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
Ia
Ib
A globo veteri
Cum rerum faciem
Traxissent superi
Mundique seriem,
Prudens explicuit
Et texuit Natura;
Iam preconceperat,
Quod fuerat
Factura.
[Que causas machine
Mundane suscitans,
De nostra virgine
Iam dudum cogitans
Plus hanc excoluit,
Plus prebuit Honoris,
5
When from the old globe
the gods had traced
the face of things,
and the order of the world,
wise Nature unfolded
and knit it together;
for she had already planned
what she would do.
[She, raising up the causes
10 of the earthly machine,
of our maiden
already then thinking,
cultivated her the more,
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
Et pretium Laboris.]
15 granting privilege
and the value of labor.]
II a
In hac pre ceteris
Totius operis
Nature lucent opera.
Tot munera
Nulli favoris contulit,
Sed extulit
Hanc ultra cetera.
In her above all others
of the whole creation
the works of Nature shine forth.
20 so many gifts of favour
on no one else has she given,
but held her up
above all others.
II b
[Et, que puellulis
Avara singulis
Solet partiri singula;
Huic sedula
Impendit copiosius
Et plenius
Forme munuscula.]
[And she is accustomed to have
25 coveted attributes normally given
singly to girls in turn;
for her Wise Nature
has weighed more copiously
and more plentifully
30 all the gifts of form.]
III a
Nature studio
Longe venustata,
Contendit lilio
Rugis non crispata
Frons nivea.
Simplices siderea
Luce micant ocelli.
By Nature’s work
much beautified,
her snowy-white forehead
unfurrowed by wrinkles
35 vies with the lily.
Her innocent eyes shine
with the light of stars.
III b [Omnes amantium
Trahit in se visus,
Spondens remedium
Verecunda risus
Lascivia.
Arcus supercilia
Discriminant gemelli.]
[All the glances of lovers
she draws on herself,
40 promising remedy
by the modest playfulness
of her smile.
Twinned curves
divide her haughty eyebrows.]
IV a Ab utriusque luminis
Confinio
Moderati libraminis
Iudicio
Naris eminentia
Producitur venuste
Quadam temperantia:
Nec nimis ergitur
Nec premitur
Iniuste.
45 From the closeness
of each eye,
in a judgment
of a proportionate balance,
the eminence of her nose
50 protrudes gracefully,
with a certain moderation:
it is not turned up too much,
nor is it flattened
unduly.
27
IV b [Allicit verbis dulcibus
Et osculis,
Castigate tumentibus
Labellulis,
Roseo nectareus
Odor infusus ori.
Pariter eburneus
Sedet ordo dentium,
Par nivium
Candori.]
Va
55 [She entices with sweet words
and kisses,
closely with her pouted
Lips,
while a sweet scent
60 surrounds her rosy mouth.
Each one equally ivory-white
sits her row of teeth,
equal to snow
in their purity.]
[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.]
Vb
[Rapit mihi me Coronis
Privilegiata donis
Et Gratiarum flosculis.
Nam Natura, dulcioris
Alimenta dans erroris,
Dum in stuporem populis
Hanc omnibus ostendit,
In risu blando retia
Veneria
Tetendit.]
75 [Coronis snatched me from myself,
she made privileged with gifts
and flowers of the Graces.
for while Nature, giving elements
of sweetest sin,
80 in wonder to all people
she is displayed,
in her mild smiles,
snares of love
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
Ib
Ref
IIa
73
Olim sudor Herculis
Monstra late conterens
Pestis orbis auferens
Claris longetitulis
Enituit
Sed tamen defloruit
Fama prius celebris
Cecis clausa latebris
Yoles illecebris
Alcide
Captivato.
Ydra dampno capitum
Facta locupletior
Omni peste sevior
Reddere sollicitum
Non potuit
Quem puella domuit
Iugo cessit Veneris
Vir qui maior superis
Celum tulit humeris
Athlante
Fatigato.
Amor fame meritum
Deflorat.
Amans tempus perditum
Non plorat,
Sed temere
Diffluere
Sub Venere laborat.
Cacho tristis alitus
Et flammarum vomitus
Vel fuga Nesso duplici
Non frofuit.
Gerion Esperius
Ianitorque Stigius
Uterque forma triplici
Non teruit.
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
Once Hercules’ labors,
vanquishing monsters far and wide,
removing the world’s plagues,
far flung with famous titles
shone.
But at length that erstwhile
glorious fame withered,
enclosed in blind darkness
of enticing Iole,
and Alcides
was captive made. 73
The Hydra, made richer
by the loss of her heads
being more savage than any plague,
was not able
to cause him alarm.
Him whom a mere girl subdued;
he yielded to Venus’ yoke,
the man who was greater than the Gods
and who bore on his shoulders the heavens
when Atlas
tired.
Love Fame’s merit
withers;
lost time a lover
never laments,
but rashly
in dissipation
labors with Venus.
Useless to Cacus were poisoned breath
and the vomiting of flames;
to deceitful Nessus flight
gave no aid;
Spanish Geryon
and the Stygian gatekeeper,
each with triple form,
terrified him not.
Alcides is another name for Hercules or Heracles.
33
Quem captivum tenuit
Risu puella simplici.
IIb
Iugo cessit tenero
Sompno qui letifero
Orti custodem divitis
Implicuit.
Frontis Acheloye
Cornu dedit Copie
Apro leone domitis
Enituit.
Traces equos imbuit
Cruenti cede hospitis.
Ref
Amor fame...
IIIa
Anthei Libici
Luctam sustinuit
Casus sophistici
Fraudes cohibuit
Cadere non vetuit
Sed que sic explicuit
Lucte nodosos nexus
Vincitur et vincitur,
Dum labitur
Magna Iovis soboles
ad Ioles amplexus.
But a girl held him captive
with a simple smile.
40
45
He yielded to the gentle yoke,
he who with deadly sleep
trapped the guardian
of the rich garden,
he who from Achelous’ forehead
the horn to Copia gave,
he who, with wild boar and lion subdued,
brightly shone,
he who splattered the Thracean horses
with the bloody slaughter of his host.
Love Fame’s...
50
55
In the combat of Lybian Antheus
he stood firm,
and checked the fraud
of a cunning fall
when he kept him from falling;
but he who thus unbound
the tight bonds of combat
is conquered and bound,
when he falls,
Jove’s mighty offspring,
into Iole’s embrace.
60
IIIb Tantis floruerat
Laborum titulis,
Quem blandis carcerat
Puella vinculis.
Et dum lambit osculis,
Nectar huic labellulis
Venereum propinat;
Vir solutus otiis
Veneriis
Laborum memoriam
Et gloriam inclinat.
Ref
Amor fame...
IVa Sed Alcide fortior
Aggredior
Pugnam contra Venerem.
Ut superem
65
70
He had become famous by such
great titles of valor,
whom with soft chains
a young maid imprisons,
and while she showers him with kisses,
to him she offers with her little lips
the nectar of Venus.
A man dissolute with the pleasures
of Venus
devalues the memory
of great deeds and glory.
Love Fame’s...
But stronger than Alcides,
I wage
the battle against Venus;
to conquer her,
34
Hanc, fugio;
In hoc enim prelio
Fugiendo fortius
Et melius
Pugnatur,
Sicque Venus Vincitur:
Dum fugitur,
Fugatur.
IVb Dulces nodos Veneris
Et carceris
Blandi seras resero,
De cetero
Ad alia
Dum traducor studia.
O Lycori, valeas
Et voveas,
Quod vovi:
Ab amore spiritum
Sollicitum
Removi.
Ref
Amor fame...
75
80
85
90
I flee,
for in this battle,
by fleeing one fights
more bravely
and better,
and so Venus lies conquered:
when one flees,
she is angered.
The sweet knots of Venus
and the gentle prison’s
locks I unlock
when from this one pursuit
I am led
to others.
Lycoris, farewell.
and do you vow
what I vow:
I have removed
my troubled spirit
from love.
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:
Refrain:
Strophe III:
Strophe IV:
Strophe II (proparoxytone):
Example 7. Paroxytone and proparoxytone emphases
39
Example 8. Olim sudor Herculis 77
77
Gillingham Anthology 209-17.
40
Example 8--continued
41
Example 8—continued
Vitam duxi iocundam
I
Vitam duxi iocundam sub amore,
Plus libitum quam licitum
Attendens,
Sed a vita resipisco priore,
Plus studiis quam neniis
5
Contendens.
Ut que causa? Compellor unica:
Ne me Fama suo privet favore
Dum sub vita vivo filargica.
II
Impendisse libet tempus amori,
ne nesciam, cum cupiam
fugisse:
Malis namque medela certiori
Occurreris, Cum poteris
Novisse.
Ergo sciens, quid sit illicitum,
Redeunti non concedam furori,
Sed vitabo malum precognitum.
III Potest namque,
ne dampnemus amorem,
Vel veniam vel gratiam
mereri:
Reddit enim amantem minorem
Affabilem
Et docilem,
Vereri,
Quicquid turpe putat-et amplius,
Non nihil est:
ne forte preter morem
Dum carpitur fructus Venereus.
I have led a joyous life of love,
caring more for pleasure
than for propriety.
But now I am recovering from that life,
struggling more with studies
than with songs.
Why is this? Only one reason moves me:
that Fame should not deprive me of
her favor, while I live a life of ease.
10 I am glad I have devoted time to love,
lest I should not have known it
when I want to flee it:
you can surely face ills with
a better remedy if you can
15 recognize them.
So now, knowing what is forbidden,
I’ll not yield to the madness when it returns
but shun the evil by anticipation.
Yet love
20 (let us not condemn it)
can indeed indulgence or grace
deserve:
For it makes an impertect lover
courteous and gentle
25 it makes him fear whatever
he thinks is base,
and what is more, for an
important reason: lest perchance he
overstep gracious behavior
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).
open ending on d”
A
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.
closed ending on g’
A’
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.
closed ending on g’
B
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
II
Qui seminant in loculis
Per dandi frequens mutuum,
Reddituum
Gaudebunt de manipulis.
Nummus nunquam examinat
Quos ordinat:
Non enim servit numini,
Sed homini.
Nummus claudit et aperit,
Et quod non seminaverit
Metit in agro Domini.
Beati qui esuriunt
Et, arcessito Simone,
Per mammone
Questum prebendas rapiunt.
Qui dat est potens omnium
Per medium,
Et quia mundus eligit
Qui porrigit,
Cur exclamare dubitem:
“Super plenum et divitem
Beatus qui intelligit”?
III O nummi privilegium!
Vix invocatur alius
Propitius
Deus in adiutorium.
O nummo tributoriam
Ecclesiam.
Non hec in nostra curia
Contagia:
Nam confidenter ambulant,
Qui Curios non simulant
Nec vivunt Bachanalia.
5
10
15
20
25
30
46
They who sow seeds in purses
through frequent giving of loans,
will rejoice
in the maniples of their returns.
Money never criticizes
those whom it ordains,
for it does not serve God,
but men.
Money closes and opens (doors),
and what it has not sown
it reaps in the field of the Lord.
Blessed are they who hunger
and, calling on Simon,
through their wealth
seize the prebends they desire!
Whoever gives is powerful
in the midst of all,
and because the world chooses
whomever gives,
why should I hesitate to cry:
“Blessed is he who considereth
the plentiful and the rich”?
O the privilege of money!
Scarcely is the cry
more favorable:
“God, make haste to deliver me!”
O to money we give tribute,
Church!
In our court these are not
contagions:
for they walk confidently
who do not mock the Curius
nor live in profligation.
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 foursyllable 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
Ia
Ib
II a
II b
III
Quo me vertam nescio,
Dum stricto iudicio
Prelatos circumfero,
Dum virtutes pondero
Patrum modernorum;
Tanta subit raritas,
Quod vix unum veritas
Probat meritorum
In prelatos refluit,
Quod a Roma defluit,
Romanis ascribitur,
Quod Rome connascitur
In eis natura;
Notum est de singulis,
Quod mens est in loculis
Et in questu cura.
O si Roma respiceret
Patrum suorum merita,
Salubrius disponeret
Talenta sibi credita:
Humilitatem coleret
Nube fastus deposita,
Nec spe lucri recederet
A veritatis semita.
En cedit in contrarium,
Nam sanguisuge filie
Visus cecant sublimium,
Mentes captivant hodie;
Sunt eorum supplicium
Cura, metus, vigilie
Preter laborum tedium
Et vermes conscientie.
Terre, maris, aeris
Cum metus evaseris,
Et re salva fueris
Ereptus angustiis,
Ex quo Romam veneris,
Nisi te nudaveris,
Vix absolvi poteris
Curie naufragiis.
I know not where to turn,
when in strict judgment
I move among the prelates,
while I weigh the virtues
of the modern Fathers,
duch rarity appears
that Truth can approve
scarcely one [prelate] of merit.
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
51
Into prelates flows back
what flows from Rome;
to the Romans is ascribed
what is born in Rome
in their own nature.
It is known of each of them
that his mind is on his money
and all he seeks is gain.
O if Rome might look back
on the merits of her forefathers!
She would more healthfully dispense
the talents given to her:
she would cultivate humility
with pride’s covering put aside,
nor by the hope of gain would she
turn away from the path of Truth.
Lo, she yields to the contrary,
for blood-sucking daughters
blind the vision of those on high
and today captivate their souls;
these are their punishments:
care, fears, sleeplessness
above the tedium of their labors
and the worms of conscience.
Land, Sea, and Sky,
when, fearful, you have escaped,
and you have been saved from this,
torn from tribulations,
since you worship Rome,
unless you denude yourself,
you will scarcely be absolved
from the shipwrecks of care.
IV
Si non cuvat ianuis,
Spem precidens vacuis,
Symon in assiduis
Laborat contractibus.
Argus circa loculos
Centum gyrat oculos,
Briareus sacculos
Centum tollit manibus.
45
If he is not lurking at the door,
cutting off hope from the empty-handed,
Symon labors relentlessly
striking deals.
Argus turns into [greedy] pockets
his hundred eyes,
Briareus with his hundred hands
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
II
III
IV
Fons preclusus sub torpore
Pagine legalis
Se fatetur in tepore
Gratie vitalis
Erupisse nove more,
Cuius specialis
Ortus fuit salvo flore
Claustri virginalis,
In puerperio,
Cuius probatio
Fides est non ratio
Cause naturalis.
Ubi sensus non procedit,
Ratio frustratur;
Rationem quod excedit,
Fides amplectatur;
Verbi parens verbo credit,
Fide fecundatur,
Ex quo fides antecedit,
Ratio sequatur;
Naturam decipit,
Que Verbo concipit,
Dum, quod auris recipit,
Intus incarnatur.
Quod obumbret virtus Dei,
Sue castitati
Credit, sperat; placet ei
Novitas mandati.
Dat profectum fides spei
Spesque caritati,
Caritas effectum rei;
Nihil passa pati
Matrem a seculo
Paratam parvulo,
Cuius oris osculo
Sumus osculati.
Hic promissus per prophetas,
Per quos est locutus,
Post scripturas adimpletas
De triumpho tutus,
Victos morte tot athletas
Victor est secutus,
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
A fount hidden beneath the torpid
page of the Law
tells that in the gentle warmth
of a new grace
it has flowed forth in a new way,
whose special
origin was through an untouched flower
of a virgin chamber,
in a birth
whose proof
rests on faith, not on the logic
of a natural cause.
When sense does not proceed,
logic is frustrated;
because it goes beyond reason,
faith is embraced;
the Parent of the Word believed the Word
and was by faith made fertile,
from which it follows that faith went before
and reason followed;
she deceived Nature,
she who by the Word conceived,
when, what the ear received,
was made flesh within.
Because God’s virtue o’ershadowed her,
she believed in her own chastity,
and hoped; the novelty
of the command pleased her.
Faith gives growth to hope,
and hope to love,
and charity to the sinner;
no ill afflicted her, for it was allowed
from all ages that a mother
would be prepared for a child,
and by the kiss of her mouth
we are kissed.
He was promised by the prophets,
through whom he was foretold,
and when the Scripture was fulfilled,
he was safe in his triumph;
the victor followed
so many competitors conquered by death,
58
Et prefixit morti metas
Vite restitus.
Ecce Iob alium,
Qui sordes omnium
Supra sterquilinium
Rasit, constitutus.
V
Predo vetus a tyrone
Domitus defecit,
Versa vice de predone
Preda predam fecit,
Qui leonis in Sampsone
Sibi vim subiecit,
Quem extorsit a leone,
Fave now refecit;
Amictus tegmine,
Quod uva sanguine
Iacob sub imagine
Premissus infecit.
45
50
55
and he set a limit for death,
when he was restored to life.
Behold again Job,
who rakes the filth of all
on the dung-heap,
is established.
An old plunderer by a new warrior
conquered, departs, or in restrophe,
from the plunderer
plunder makes plunder,
who, in Samson, subjected
the lion’s force to himself,
and he restores us with honey
which he took from the lion’s carcass;
covered in a robe which Jacob
dipped in the blood of the grape,
Iacob, in a prophecy,
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
Sed ludum non incidere,
Et que lusisti temere,
Ad vite frugem vertere.
Magistra morum doceat
Te ratio,
Ut dignus pontificio;
Divini dono numinis,
Ad laudem Christi nominis
Fungaris sacerdotio.
Do not be ashamed of having played,
but of not ceasing to play,
and what you have rashly done,
5 turn to a fruit of life;
and let Reason, the mistress of conduct,
teach you,
so that you be worthy of your bishop’s throne;
10 by the fight of divine will,
to the praise of Christ’s name
may you carry out your sacred duties.
II
Sis pius, iustus, sobrius,
Prudens, pudicus, humilis,
In lege docilis, 86
Et ne sis arbor sterilis;
Tuo te regas aptius
Officio,
Expulso procul vitio
Munderis labe criminis,
Ut mundus munde virginis
Ministres in altario. 87
Be holy, just, sober,
prudent, chaste, humble,
15 and learned in the Law of God,
and be not a fruitless tree;
rule yourself rightly
in your office,
20 and when you have expelled all vice afar,
be cleansed from the fall of sin,
so that cleansed you might minister
in the altar of the virgin.
III
Pius protector pauperum
Omni petenti tribue, 88
Malos potenter argue 89
Mausque sacras ablue
A sordidorum munerum
Contagio, 90
Nullus te palpet premio,
Quesita gratis gratia
Largire beneficia,
A holy protector of the poor,
25 give to every seeker,
powerfully argue against evil,
and wash sacred hands
from sordid gifts’
contagion.
30 Let no man flatter you with reward,
And freely, when grace is sought,
Bestow benefits,
86
Psalm 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
Non tua, sed ecclesie
Sub pietatis specie; 91
Non abutaris impie
Commisso tibi pauperum
Suffragio.
Nil a te ferat histrio,
Et tibi non allicias
Infames amicitias
De Christi patrimonio.
Give not to the ministers of wickedness
35 what is not your own, but the Church’s
beneath an aspect of holiness.
Use not impiously
the vote of the poor commissioned
for you.
40 Do not carry yourself as an actor,
and do not draw to yourself
disreputable friendships
by using Christ’s patrimony.
V
Ministros immunditie
A te repellas longius:
Bonorum vitam fortius
Pravus depravat socius
Et afficit infamie
Dispendio;
Sic trahitur presumptio
A convictu similium,
Prelati vita vilium
Vilescit contuburnio.
Repel afar from you
45 ministers of sordidness;
for most strongly does a depraved
companion deprave the good
and afflict them with infamy’s
payment.
50 Thus presumption emanates
from the society of similar people,
and the life of a prelate grows vile
by his association with evil ones.
VI
Caute dispone domui, 92
Pauca, sed vera loquere, 93
Verba confirmes opere,
Quia non decet temere
Os sacerdotis pollui
Mendacio;
Prudentium consilio
Te frui non dispiceat,
Nec te sinistre moveat
Salubris exhortatio.
Carefully set your house in order,
55 speak little and then truthfully,
and confirm your words by deeds,
for it is not seemly that the mouth
of a priest should rashly be polluted
by falsehood;
60 do not despise
the counsel of the wise,
and do not wickedly move
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
Ab omni mala specie, 94
Sub freno temperantie
Magistra pudicitie,
Sobrietate, floreas,
Ne vario
Vagoque desiderio
Declines ad illecebras
Sed cece mentis tenebras
Purga virtutis radio.
See that you abstain
65 from all appearance of Evil,
under a rein of temperance
and a rule of modesty,
and flourish in sobriety
70 lest in various
wanderings and desires
you decline to allurements of the flesh,
but purge the darkness of a blind
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 selfproclaimed 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
Via gressus dirigere,
Non pudet, quia lusimus,
Sed ludum non incidere;
Si temere de cetero
Distulero,
Non currens ad remedia
Canitie, cotidie
Citante peremptorie,
Liquet de contumacia.
5
10
Onto new roads, the mind
directs one’s path,
not ashamed because we have been foolish,
but because we have not put an end to foolishness;
if by chance from my former self
I differ,
I am not running to a remedy
in old age as daily
death presses on,
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 trutine 100
Ia
Ref
1b
Vacillantis trutine
Libramine
Mens suspensa fluctuat
Et estuat
In tumultius anxios
Dum se vertit
Et bipertit
Motus in contrarios.
O langueo!
Causam languoris video
Nec caveo,
Vivens et prudens pereo.
Me vacare studio
Vult Ratio,
Sed dum Amor alteram
Vult operam,
In diversa rapior,
Ratione
Cum Dione
Dimicante crucior.
5
10
15
20
100
With a balance
of swaying scales,
the unsettled mind surges
and fluctuates
in anxious confusions,
while it spins
and divides
with motions in opposite directions.
O, I languish!
I see the cause of languishing
but I take no heed,
living and knowing, I die.
Reason desires
that I have leisure to study,
but in the meantime Love
desires a different effort,
I am impelled in different directions,
while reason
with Venus
is struggling, I am tormented.
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,
Quid melius,
Et dubius
Mecum delibero.
Nunc menti refero
Delicias
Venerias,
Que mea michi Florula
Det oscula,
Qui risus, que labellula,
Que facies,
Frons, naris aut cesaries.
On the scales I ponder
what is better,
and I, doubting,
debate with myself.
Now I bring to mind
the amorous
delights,
which my Florula would give to me
by her kisses,
what laughter, what lips,
what a face,
forehead, nose, and flowing hair.
R
O langueo...
2b
Sicut in arbore
Frons tremula,
Navicula
Levis in equore,
Dum caret ancore
Subsidio,
Contrario
Flatu concussa fluitat:
Sic agitat,
Sic turbine sollicitat
Me dubio
Hinc Amor, inde Ratio.
25
30
O, I languish...
35
40
45
Just as the trembling foliage
in a tree,
the little boat
on the sea,
while it lacks an anchor’s
support,
wobbles shaken
by a contrary wind:
thus it moves,
thus, in a whirlwind, now Love,
then Reason, molests
me with uncertainty.
R
O langueo...
O, I languish...
3a
His invitat
Et irritat
Amor me blandiciis.
Sed aliis
Ratio sollicitat
Et excitat
Me studiis.
By these charms
Love invites
and excites me.
but by other things
Reason stirs
and rouses
me to my studies.
R
O langueo!
3b
Nam solari
Me scolari
Cogitat exilio.
50
55
O, I languish...
For to be alone,
to be a student,
exile prepares me.
75
Set, Ratio,
Procul ahbil vinceris
Sub Veneris
Imperio.
R
60
O langueo...
But, Reason,
go far away! You are conquered
under the rule
of Venus.
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 prosperis 101
I
II
Veneris prosperis
Usa successibus,
Turba, nascentibus
Floribus teneris
Exequaris priscum morem,
Ad amorem
Accingaris,
Sceleris pretermissis ceteris.
Solitum debitum
Reddite Veneri,
Iuvenes teneri,
Laudes et meritum
Is enervat iuventutis,
Qui virtutis
Formam servat,
Libitum pueris est licitum.
III Iupiter arbiter
Rerum instituit,
Nihil dum libuit
101
5
10
15
Enjoying the happy
arrival of Venus,
O crowd, when budding tender flowers
bloom,
follow the ancient custom:
for love
be girt,
forgoing all other forms of vice.
The accustomed debts,
remit to Venus,
O tender youths;
the praise and merit
of youth he diminishes,
who serves
the idol of Virtue,
pleasure is the young man’s law.
Jupiter, the ruler
of all things has stated
that nothing pleasurable
Sources: D 46, J 28 , F f. 352v, Oxford Rawlinson C 510.
79
Fieri turpiter;
Sic edixit sicque votis
Usus totis,
Suo vixit
Iugiter edicto conformiter.
IV Vivere tenere
Satagam igitur:
Quid Iovem sequitur,
Non degit temere.
Voluptatis fixus telo
Utar velo
Voluntatis,
Sedere navigans sub Venere.
20
is done in sin;
thus has he spoken
and thus his vows
all fulfilled,
he has lived conforming with his own law.
25
To live youthfully
therefore fulfils me:
whoever follows Jupiter,
does not waste his time.
transfixed by Love’s beams
I will use the sail
of Freedom,
to stay on course under [the light of] Venus.
30
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 perdite 102
I
Vite perdite
Me legi
Subdideram,
Minus licite
Dum fregi,
Quod voveram,
Sed ad vite vesperam
Corrigendum legi,
Quicquid ante
perperam
Puerilis egi.
II
Rerum exitus
Dum quero,
Discutere,
Falsum penitus
A vero
Discernere,
Falso fallor opere,
Bravium si spero
Me virtutum metere,
Vitia dum sero.
III
Non sum duplici
Perplexus
Itinere,
Nec addidici
Reflexus
A venere,
Nec fraudavi temere
Coniugis amplexus;
Dalidam persequere,
Ne fraudetur sexus!
IV
102
Famem siliqua
Porcorum
Non abstulit,
Que ad lubrica
Errorum
Me contulit,
Sed scriptura consulit,
Viam intrem morum,
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
I had abandoned myself
to the rule
of a profligate life,
and unlawfully
I had broken
my solemn vows;
but at the eventide of life
I have chosen to make amends.
what before
I had wrongly done,
I did as a youth.
When I seek
diligently to examine
the outcome of my actions
and deep within the false
from the true
discern,
by false hopes am I deluded
if I hope the reward
of virtue to reap
while I sow vices.
I am not beguiled
by an unequivocal
path,
nor have I learned
back-slidings,
beguiled by charms;
I have not wantonly deceived
a wife’s embraces.
Take vengeance on Delilah,
lest your sex be deceived!
The husks
that the swine ate
did not assuage my hunger,
which to the slippery
paths of error
led me;
but I studied the scriptures
and now I may enter the paths of duty,
Sources: D49, J 35, F f. 356r, CB31.
81
Que prelarga protulit
Pabula donorum.
V
VI
VII
Dum considero,
Quid Dine
Contigerit,
Finem confero
Rapine,
Quis fuerit,
Scio: vix evaserit
Mens corrupta fine,
Diu quam contraxerit,
Maculum sentine.
Preter meritum
Me neci
Non dedero,
Si ad vomitum,
Quem ieci,
Rediero,
Nec a verbo aspero
Liberum me feci,
Servus si serviero
Vitiorum feci.
Viae vetris
Immuto
Vestigia,
Ire Veneris
Refuto
Per de via;
Via namque regia
Curritur in tuto,
Si quis cedit alia,
Semper est in luto.
VIII Beli solium,
Sinonis
Astutiam,
Confer Tullium,
Zenonis
Prudentiam:
Nil conferre sentiam,
His abutens bonis,
Ni fugando fugiam
Dalidam Samsonis.
40
45
50
55
60
65
70
75
80
which have brought forth nourishing
food as a boon.
When I consider
Dinah’s
defilement,
I put an end
to my debauchery;
who she was,
I know: scarcely
has my corrupt soul finally
escaped the filthy dregs,
in which for so long it has been steeped.
Not without good reason
will I have given myself
over to death,
if to the vomit
which I have cast out
I return;
nor from harsh reproach
do I free myself,
if a slave, I continue to serve
the lowest dregs of vice.
Therefore, I shall change
the steps
of my former life,
and along
the devious paths of love
refuse to go;
for the Royal Road
is travelled in safety,
and whoever falls from it,
is always in the mire.
The throne of Belus (the Babylonian king),
the cunning
of the Trojan horse,
bring in Tullius (the orator),
and Zeno’s
wisdom:
it should avail notihing, I feel,
using to the full all these benefits,
if I flee not, putting to flight
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
A globo
veteri
Olim sudor
Herculis
Vitam duxi
Qui seminant
in loculis
Quo me
vertam
nescio
Non te
lusisse
pudeat
Fons
preclusus
In nova fert
animus
Vacillantis
trutine
Qui seminant
in lacrimis
form
sequence
caudae
initial
ambitus
d to e’
final mode
g
tetrardus plagalis
other characteristics
repeated cadential figure
sequence with
refrain
AA’B strophic
strophic
initial in Florence MS
d to d’
g
tetrardus plagalis
none
terminal
g to a’
f to a’
g
g
tetrardus authenticus
tetrardus authenticus
sequence
initial and medial
f to g’
g
tetrardus authenticus
reflective gesture in refrain, some Bflats
reflective gesture
B-flats, beginning in line ten; melodic
highlighting of text
very regular text
strophic
none
d to g’
g
tetrardus plagalis
some F-sharps; possible text-painting
strophic
initial and terminal
e to f’
f
tritus authenticus
some B-flats
strophic
initial, medial, and terminal
(jubilus)
initial melisma in refrain
d to e’
g
tetrardus plagalis
some B-flats
d to e’
g
tetrardus plagalis
not in Florence MS
terminal cauda in strophe
and refrain
d to f’
g
mixed: transposed
tritus plagalis and
tetrardus authenticus
B-flats, some E-flats; not attributed
elsewhere to Peter of Blois; between
Qui seminant in loculis and Quo me
vertam in Florence MS
sequence with
refrain
ABBCCDD
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 <http://galenet.galegroup.com.proxy.lib.fsu.edu/servlet/ECCO>.
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, seventeenthcentury Italian monody and English polyphony, and the history and languages of the
British Isles.
92