1

Reading Raymond: The Bible of Le Puy, the Cathedral Library and the Literary Background of

the Liber of Raymond d’Aguilers

[in The Use of the Bible in Crusading Sources, eds Elizabeth Lapina and Nicholas Morton

(Leiden: Brill, forthcoming)—draft version]

Thomas Lecaque

Rising above the modern city from its vantage point on the central rocky hill, the

cathedral of Notre Dame du Puy was the heart of the medieval bishopric-county of the Velay. It

was the home cathedral of two of the most important participants of the First Crusade—Adhémar

de Monteil, bishop of Le Puy and papal legate, and Raymond d’Aguilers, canon of the cathedral

of Le Puy and author of the most spiritually dynamic eyewitness account of the First Crusade.1

The Liber of Raymond d’Aguilers is a particularly important chronicle for the First Crusade

because of its specific eschatological focus, typological framework, and extremely early date.2

As multiple articles in the recent volume Writing the Early Crusades show, the background of

the authors of crusade chronicles, both in terms of physical place and regional identity, has

become a major area of analysis.3 In the eleventh century Le Puy was home to a rich cathedral

library, which housed a complete, non-standardized Carolingian Bible, now Paris, BNF lat. 4 (1-

2). In constructing his Liber, Raymond was relying not only on his deep knowledge of the Bible

but on the apocalyptic texts contained in the cathedral library. Reading the Liber of Raymond

My thanks to Guy Lobrichon, Jay Rubenstein, and Katherine Allen Smith for their commentary and advice

throughout the development of this article, and to Elizabeth Lapina and Nicholas Morton for giving me the

opportunity. Research for this article was conducted with the support of the Etienne Gilson Dissertation Grant from

the Medieval Academy of America and the W.K. McClure Scholarship for the Study of World Affairs from the

University of Tennessee-Knoxville. 1 Raymond d’Aguilers is identified in the prologue-letter of his chronicle as “Raimundus canonicus Podiensis,” both

in the St. Victor Codex and the alternative manuscript tradition. Paris, BNF lat. 14378 f. 160r and Paris, BNF lat.

5511A f. 3r. 2 I would argue that it was written before 1101, an argument that will be fleshed out in my dissertation, “The Count

of Saint-Gilles and the Saints of the Apocalypse: Occitanian Piety and Culture in the Time of the First Crusade,”

PhD diss., University of Tennessee-Knoxville, to be defended summer 2015. 3 Marcus Bull and Damien Kempf, eds, Writing the Early Crusades: Text, Transmission and Memory (Woodbridge:

The Boydell Press, 2014), especially the articles by Steven Biddlecombe, Luigi Russo and James Naus.

2

d’Aguilers in the context of the texts held in the cathedral leads to the realization that Raymond

was a much better educated narrator than previous scholarship has led us to believe.

In their introduction to the translation of the Liber of Raymond d’Aguilers, John Hugh

Hill and Laurita L. Hill comment that “the chaplain was, as he honestly confesses, a simple

churchman who knew little more than his service books and religious matters pertaining to his

office. Whatever classical allusions appear in his work are usually derived from church ritual.”4

This dismissive assessment of Raymond’s education has become the standard view of him and

his chronicle. The Liber is usually studied with an eye toward the Holy Lance of Antioch, whose

discovery he witnessed and whose validity he championed, though there have been studies of

other aspects of his work.5 Alphandéry mentioned his extensive use of biblical quotation in the

1920s,6 and in recent years aspects of his exploration of vengeance,7 martyrdom,8 sacred

4 Raymond d’Aguilers, Historia Francorum Qui Ceperunt Iherusalem, tr. with intro. and notes by John Hugh Hill

and Laurita L. Hill (Philadelphia: The American Philosophical Society, 1968), 11. 5 See among others: Steven Runciman, “The Holy Lance found at Antioch,” Analecta bollandiana, revue critique de

hagiographie 68 (1950): 190-207; Colin Morris, “Policy and Visions—The case of the Holy Lance at Antioch,” in

War and government in the Middle Ages: essays in honour of J.O. Prestwich, ed. John Gillingham and James Clarke

Holt (Woodbridge: The Boydell Press, 1984): 33-45; Wolfgang Giese, “Die lancea Domini von Antiochia

(1098/99),” in Fälschungen im Mittelalter: Internationaler Kongress der Monumenta Germaniae Historica , 5 vols.

(Hanover, 1988): 5: 485-504; Luigi Russo, “Il Liber di Raimondo d’Aguilers e la Sacra Lancia d’Antiochia,” Studi

medievali XLVII, fasc. II (2006) : 785-837 ; and Thomas Asbridge, “The Holy Lance of Antioch: Power, Devotion

and Memory on the First Crusade,” Reading medieval studies 33 (2007): 3-36. 6 Paul Alphandéry, “Les citations bibliques chez les historiens de la première Croisade,” Revue de l’histoire des

religions 99 (1929) : 139-157. 7 Philippe Buc, “La Vengeance de Dieu. De l’exégèse patristique à la Réforme ecclésiastique et à la première

croisade,” in La vengeance, 400-1200, eds Dominique Barthélemy, François Bougard, and Régine Le Jan (Rome:

École française de Rome, 2006): 451-486; and Susanna Throop, Crusading as an Act of Vengeance, 1095-1216

(Farnham, UK: Ashgate, 2011), chapter 2, “Early Years: Crusading as Vengeance, 1095-1137,” 43-72. 8 Philippe Buc, “Martyrdom in the West: vengeance, purge, salvation and history,” Resonances (2011): 21-56; Jean

Flori, “Mort et martyre des guerriers vers 1100. L’exemple de la première croisade,” Cahiers de civilisation

médiévale 34e année, no. 134 (Avril-juin 1991) : 121-139.

3

violence,9 visions,10 and eschatology11 have received attention in articles. However his

ecclesiastical vision has yet to receive a comprehensive study and the book is treated only in

passing as part of more general surveys of crusading literature.12 This leaves a number of

questions regarding his chronicle, such as the chronicle’s historical program, its relationship to

other accounts, and the role of Raymond’s regionality in the composition of the work. This

article will begin the discussion on the last of these questions. The contents of the cathedral

library of Le Puy are known through a surviving catalogue at the end of Paris, BNF lat. 7581.

Many of the manuscripts from the catalogue survive in the BNF today. One of them, a unique

9 Philippe Buc, “Some Thoughts on the Christian Theology of Violence, Medieval and Modern, from the Middle

Ages to the French Revolution,” Rivista die storia del cristianesimo 5 (January 2008): 9-28; and ibid., “Exégèse et

violence dans la tradition occidentale,” Annali di Storia moderna e contemporanea 16 (2010): 131-144. 10 Kristen Skottki, “Vom ‘Schrecken Gottes’ zur Bluttaufe. Gewalt und Visionen auf dem Ersten Kreuzzug nach

dem Zeugnis des Raimund d’Aguilers,” in Gewalterfahrung und Prophetie, eds Peter Burschel and Christoph Marx

(Vienna: Böhlau, 2013): 445-490; and John France, “Two types of vision on the First Crusade: Stephen of Valence

and Peter Bartholemew,” Crusades 5 (2006): 1-20. 11 Philippe Buc, “Religion, violence, pouvoir, vers 1050-vers 1500: doute et contrainte,” in Formes de convivència a

la baixa edat mitjana, ed. Flocel Sabaté Curull (Lleida : forthcoming); Jay Rubenstein, “Godfrey of Bouillon vs.

Raymond of Saint-Gilles: How Carolingian Kingship Trumped Millenarianism at the End of the First Crusade,” in

The Legend of Charlemagne in the Middle Ages: Power, Faith, and Crusade, eds Matthew Gabriel and Jace Stuckey

(Palgrave: New York, 2008): 59-75; ibid., Armies of Heaven: The First Crusade and the Quest for Apocalypse

(New York: Basic Books, 2011); and Kristen Skottki, “Der Antichrist im Heiligen Land. Apokalyptische

Feindidentifizierungen in den Chroniken des Ersten Kreuzzugs,” in Antichrist. Konstruktionen von Feindbildern, eds

Wolfram Brandes and Felicitas Schmieder (Berlin: Akademie Verlag, 2010): 69-98. 12Jean Flori, Chroniqueurs et propagandistes. Introduction critique aux sources de la Première Croisade (Geneva :

Droz, 2010), chapters 9 and 10, 173-217; Barbara Packard, “Remembering the First Crusade: Latin Narrative

Histories 1099-c. 1300,” PhD Royal Holloway University of London (2011), chapter 1, 23-77; and Conor Kostick,

The Social Structure of the First Crusade (Leiden and Boston: Brill, 2008), 27-39, which focuses on the social

history aspects of the text. There are older introductions to the sources, which are indicative of the historical neglect

of the Liber. See N. Iorga, Les Narrateurs de la Première Croisade (Paris: J. Gamber, 1928), 1-16, who describes

Raymond as “le narrateur le plus naif et le plus pittoresque de la première croisade, est lui-même un Provençal, pour

lequel tout pays d’Infidèles est une Espagne,” ; Oliver Thatcher, “Critical Work on the Latin Sources of the First

Crusade,” in Annual Report of the American Historical Association for 1900 (Washington : Government Printing

Office, 1901), I : 499-509, who ends his discussion by writing “The priest, Raymond of Aguilers, was at the head of

a band of swindlers who made gain by playing on the credulity, superstitions, and religious simplicity of the

crusaders. It was he who, with the aid of a few accomplices, planned and executed the fraud of discovering the holy

lance in Antioch. Having been charged with this, he wrote his account of the crusade as his defense, but while

trying to clear himself he has unwittingly betrayed his guilt”; l’Abbé Fillet, Un Chevalier du Vivarais à la Première

Croisade: Ponce de Balazuc (Privas: Imprimerie Centrale de l’Ardeche, 1895), the only full study on Raymond

d’Aguilers’ co-author, which manages by that virtue to marginalize the importance of Raymond himself; Klemens

Klein, Raimund von Aguilers: Quellenstudie zur Geschichte des ersten Kreuzzuges (Berlin: Ernst Siegfried Mittler

und Sohn, 1892); and the introduction to John France’s dissertation, “A Critical Edition of the Historia Francorum of

Raymond of Aguilers,” PhD, University of Nottingham (1967): I-C.

4

two-volume Bible, now Paris, BNF lat. 4, was used in the cathedral through the twelfth century,

and has not, until now, been examined in conjunction with the First Crusade.

Raymond must have looked at these books. There is, of course, a degree of peril in

attempting to reconstruct the reading habits of a cleric for whom we have no autograph

manuscripts and who is known only from a single chronicle and letter.13 We can say that

Raymond held positions beyond those of a typical regular canon. He would become the personal

chaplain of Raymond of Saint-Gilles, the single wealthiest and most powerful individual to go on

the First Crusade. The previous person to hold that position was William, Bishop of Orange, who

was also a papal legate—this was a position of great responsibility, held by important clerical

figures.14 After the conquest of Jerusalem, he likely served as the scribe-author of the letter from

Daimbert, archbishop of Pisa, Godefrey of Bouillon, and Raymond of Saint-Gilles to the Pope in

1099, based on similarities of content and word choice.15 Most importantly, his chronicle was

made part of the history of the crusades and crusader states sent back to France from the

Kingdom of Jerusalem in the early twelfth century, passed on from Le Puy to Louis VII of

France by a knight who described himself as especially devoted to the Virgin of Le Puy.16 The

13 This is despite the assertion by G.J. d’Ademar-Laubaume, Ademar de Monteil, Légat du Pape sur la première

Croisade (Le Puy, 1910), 8, claiming a charter of Adhemar of Monteil dated in the eighteenth year of his reign and

signed “Raymond d’Aiguilhes, Chancelier de l’evêque du Puy.” He cites the Gallia Christiana, D. de St. Marthe,

vol. II, col. 700 and the HGL, vol. III, Lib. XV, p. 220 as his sources, neither of which mentions the existence of the

charter, and the Chronique del ‘abbaye d’Aiguebelles, p. 449, which does not seem to exist. See John France, “A

Critical Edition,” 9-10. There is a mention of “Raymond des Agiles, son chancelier,” in the Annales de l’Abbaye

d’Aiguebelle (Valence: Imprimerie Jules Céas & Fils, 1863), 1: 4, but it offers no sources, and the text is a

secondary account of the abbey’s history. The Gallia Christiana entry for Adhemar of Monteil is actually col. 701-

703, and has no such charter or description, nor does the HGL. 14 Raymond d’Aguilers, Liber, 46, for William of Orange acting as Raymond of Saint-Gilles’ confessor. 15 This was first argued by Hagenmeyer. See Die Kreuzzugsbriefe aus den Jahren 1088-1100, ed Heinrich

Hagenmeyer (Innsbruck: 1901): 167-74 and 371-403; ibid., “Der Brief der Kreuzfahrer an den Papst und die

abendländische Kirche, 1099 nach der Schlacht bei Askalon,” Forschungen zur deutschen Geschichte 13 (1873):

400-12; John France, “The Anonymous,” 42-3; and John France, “The Election,” 326-7. 16 For the original manuscript, see Jay Rubenstein, “Putting History to Use: Three Crusade Chronicles in Context,”

Viator: Medieval and Renaissance Studies 35 (2004):131-68.

5

Liber, moreover, was used by William of Tyre, read by Jacques de Vitry, and was copied as late

as the fourteenth century, in what is now Clermont-Ferrand, Bibliothèque Municipal MS 262.17

Thanks to the survival of a late tenth/early eleventh-century library catalogue of the

cathedral of Le Puy, found at the end of Paris, BNF lat. 7581, we can look at a wealth of

potential sources for Raymond’s world-view to supplement the Bible.18 The cathedral was

relatively rich in terms of classical texts, particularly those used to teach the Trivium and

Quadrivium: Donatus, Priscian, Fulgentius, Cato, Augustine, Bede, Isidore, Sedulius, Prudentius,

Juventius, Boethius, Virgil, and Cicero.19 The catalogue is divided by teaching areas, with

headings of “Dialectice libri,” “Rhetorice,” “Musice,” “Astronomie,” and “Schedule,” each with

a varying number of books. There are a total of forty-eight entries in the catalogue.20 This is

roughly twice the size of the tenth-century library of the abbot Adso of Montier-en-Der, known

for his letter on the apocalypse, and a third larger than the library of Raymond’s contemporary

abbot Geoffery of Vendôme at the abbey of La Trinité.21 The library was comparable to some of

the best libraries of the late tenth and early eleventh centuries, such as Reims, Echternach, and

the library of Gerbert of Aurillac.22 The cathedral of Le Puy contained a classical library during

Raymond’s time as a canon, arranged according to the needs of the cathedral school.23 Contrary

17 For William of Tyre, see Peter Edbury and John Gordon Rowe, William of Tyre: Historian of the Latin East

(Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 1991); Lydia Walker’s paper briefly discusses the use of Raymond d’Aguilers by

Jacques de Vitry. 18 The library catalogue is f. 59r-60r. 19 Riche, “Un catalogue,” 702-6 ; Delisle, “Recherches sur l’ancienne bibliothèque,” 2-5, 7-8. 20 Riche, “Un catalogue,” 708-713. 21 Henri Omont, “Catalogue de la Bibliothèque de l’abbé Adson de Montier-en-Der (992),” Bibliothèque de l’ecole

des chartes 42 (1881) :157-160 ; Geneviève Giordanengo, “La bibliothèque de Geoffroy de Vendôme (1093-1132),”

Cahiers de civilisation médiévale 41e année, no. 162 (Avril-juin 1998) : 105-125. 22 Riche, “Un catalogue,” 707. Cf. the Le Puy catalogue with Munich Clm 14436 for Reims and H. Lattin, “The

eleventh Century ms Munich 14436,” Isis (1948): 205-225; J. Schroeder, Bibliothek und Schule der Abtei

Echternach um die Jahrtausendwende (Luxembourg, 1977); P. Riché, “La bibliothèque de Gerbert d’Aurillac,” in

Mélanges de la bibliothèque de la Sorbonne offerts à André Tuilier (Paris, 1988) : 94-103. 23 Riche, “Un catalogue,” 701-2.

6

previous assertions about Raymond’s poor education, it is likely that he was educated and would

have had access to a very good library.

One of the greatest treasures in the modern cathedral of Le Puy is one of only two

surviving complete Theodulf Bibles.24 Unfortunately, it seems to have arrived in Le Puy only in

the early modern period, sometime in the early sixteenth century.25 The lack of any mention of

the Theodulf Bible by Etienne Medici, the early modern chronicler of Le Puy, is telling in this

regard, as is the first historical record of it in Le Puy being a 1511 marginal notation on f. 344 by

Petrus Rostaing, a canon of the cathedral.26 Instead, the Bible for the cathedral of Notre Dame de

Le Puy was Paris, BNF lat. 4 (1-2), a ninth century text that does not follow either the

Theodulfian or Alcuinian versions of the Bible. Having a surviving complete Bible from

southern France from before the later eleventh century is incredibly rare. While there are ten

surviving southern French Bibles from the period between 1050 and 1150, I only know of two

surviving complete Bibles from the region before that, the Bible of Puy and the First Bible of

Saint-Martial of Limoges.27 Much less illuminated than a Theodulf Bible, it was the Bible used

by the bishops and canons of the cathedral, and was, despite its ninth-century dating, in

continuous use through this period and at least into the twelfth-century, judging by marginalia

24 Le Puy-en-Velay, Trésor de la cathédrale, MS 1 and Paris, BNF lat. 9380. 25 Leopold Delisle, “Recherches sur l’ancienne bibliothèque de la Cathédrale du Puy,” Annales de la Société

académique du Puy XXVIII (1866-67) : 9. 26 Delisle, “Recherches,” 9-10; Pierre Cubizolles, Le Diocèse du Puy-en-Velay des origins à nos jours (Brioude :

Editions Créer, 2005), 92. 27 For southern French Bibles between 1050 and 1150, see Guy Lobrichon, “La parole des réformateurs du Midi:

l’apport des bibles méridionales (Aquitaine, Languedoc, Provence, XIe-XIIe siècles),” in La parole sacrée: Formes,

fonctions, sens (XIe-XVe siècle), Cahiers de Fanjeaux 47 (Toulouse: Éditions Privat, 2013), 49-66. We do not know

where the Bible of Puy was written, though we can ascertain that it was in Le Puy early. The First Bible of Saint-

Martial is Paris, BNF lat. 5 (I-II), from the second half of the ninth century, on which see D. Gaborit-Chopin, La

Décoration des manuscrits à Saint-Martial de Limoges et en Limousin du IXe au XIIe siècle (Paris: Droz, 1969),

part II, chapter II, 42-52. There were certainly other Bibles in the region; the Maurists made note of potential

Theodulfian Bibles in Narbonne and Carcassone, neither of which survive. Partial texts, such as the ninth century

Epistles from Aniane, now Montpellier, BM 6, also exist, but not complete texts.

7

and the twelfth-century addition of the book of Baruch. It would therefore have been one of the

Bibles, if not the Bible, that Raymond d’Aguilers would have known and read from.

I would argue that the Liber does not necessarily reflect all of the sources available in the

cathedral library. However, there is little doubt that Raymond’s knowledge of the Bible was

much better than is usually recognized, as he has often been regarded as a simple priest versed

only in the psalter.28 In his Liber he quotes from and alludes to most of the books of the Old and

New Testament.29 The most basic list of references, taken from the footnotes of the Hills edition,

contains a total of 108 distinct biblical citations.30 In attributing Raymond’s biblical knowledge

solely to the Psalter, however, the Hills have overlooked one of the crucial aspects of his

thought: his tendency to draw upon a wide variety of books from memory in his text to create a

typological reading of current events. Raymond is alone among the pre-1102 writers, which also

include the anonymous author of the Gesta Francorum, Peter Tudebode, and the German

chronicler Ekkehard of Aura, in his clear preference for the Old Testament as an exegetical

source, as Katherine Allen Smith’s ongoing research has shown.31 Of his 108 Biblical quotations,

72 come directly from the Old Testament and only 34 from the New, with two other ambiguous

allusions that could come from either.32 This is roughly a reversal of proportions of Old

28 Raymond d’Aguilers, Historia Francorum, 11; cf. to Paul Alphandéry, “Les citations bibliques,” 147, where he

writes that “A part un texte de I Petr. V, 6, un de I Cor. XIII et un de Matth. XXVI, toutes les autorités scripturaires

invoquées par Raimond d’Aguilers sont empruntées au Psautier.” 29 This includes: Genesis, Deuteronomy, III and IV Kings, I Chronicles, Judith, Esther, I and II Maccabees, Job,

Psalms, Ecclesiastes, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, Daniel, Joel, Jonah, Zachariah, all four Gospels, Acts, I and II

Corinthians, Philippians, Hebrews, I Peter, I John, and Revelation. 30 This is from Raymond d’Aguilers, Le ‘Liber’ de Raymond d’Aguilers, ed. John Hugh Hill and Laurita L. Hill

(Paris: Librairie Orientaliste Paul Geuthner, 1969), as tallied by Katherine Allen Smith. 31 This means, essentially, the eyewitness accounts: Raymond, the anonymous author of the Gesta, Peter Tudebode,

and Ekkehard of Aura. Katherine Allen Smith, email message to the author, 7/21/2014. See also Katherine Allen

Smith, “Glossing the Holy War: Exegetical Constructions of the First Crusade, c. 1095-c. 116,” Studies in medieval

and renaissance history 10, ser. 3 (2013): 1-39. 32 My thanks to Katherine Allen Smith for sharing her preliminary research on Raymond d’Aguilers from her

forthcoming project.

8

Testament and New Testament usage from his contemporary and fellow member of the

Provençal army the Poitevin priest Peter Tudebode.33

Raymond’s abilities were commensurate with those of other crusade chroniclers of the

second generation, who had access to more texts and time to produce deeply sophisticated,

typologically-driven work as they were writing from the relative comfort of their monasteries in

Europe. Jonathan Riley-Smith argued for a notion of “theological sophistication” in the second

generation of chroniclers, specifically the Benedictine revisers of the Gesta Francorum, an

account compiled by an anonymous participant of the First Crusade: Robert the Monk, Guibert

of Nogent, and Baldric of Bourgeuil.34 His argument relies on the idea that the earliest chronicles

were untrained, unpolished, and lacked coherent theology, often meaning a lack of typological

reading.35 But Raymond, I am suggesting, did read the crusade typologically. Unlike the

Benedictine reformers, or even someone like Fulcher, whose chronicle was completed in stages

and while residing in the cities of Edessa and Jerusalem, Raymond’s text seems to have been

written very early, shortly after the battle of Ascalon and certainly before Raymond of Saint-

33 Again, thanks to Katherine Allen Smith for her research. For Peter Tudebode, we are still forced to rely on the

diplomatic edition of the Hills, Petrus Tudebodus, Historia de Hierosolymitano Itinere, eds John Hugh Hill and

Laurita L. Hill, intro. by Philippe Wolff, rev. Jean Richard (Paris: Librairie Orientaliste Paul Geuthner, 1977).

Tudebode’s home church of Civray was a small institution, and his work is a gloss on the Gesta Francorum. Fulcher

of Chartres, also a priest, did not use a typological approach, and was likely a cantor-historian from the cathedral.

See Margot Fassler, The Virgin of Chartres: Making History through Liturgy and the Arts (New Haven: Yale

University Press, 2010), and the dissertation-in-progress of Cara Aspesi at Notre Dame. 34 Jonathan Riley-Smith, The first Crusade and the Idea of Crusading (London and New York: Continuum, 2003),

chapter 6: “Theological Refinement,” 135-152. See Katherine Allen Smith, “Glossing the Holy War: Exegetical

constructions of the First Crusade, c. 1099-c. 1146,” Studies in medieval and renaissance history 10, ser. 3 (2013):

5-7. 35 Riley-Smith, 152: “Nevertheless the picture they painted was still recognizably the crusade, even if it was the

crusade theologized. No idea put forward by them was entirely new, since all echoed notions that can be found

somewhere in the letters and narrative accounts of eyewitnesses; but they gave the often crude and inchoate ideas

they found a sophisticated and coherent expression, making them acceptable to an audience of churchmen. The

Church had proclaimed and publicized the crusade, but it had not yet explained what had become a truly popular

devotion in its own terms. Robert, Guibert and Baldric gave the corpus of ideas a form which made it capable of

theological, as well as popular, development.”

9

Gilles’ death in 1105.36 It was written while on the move, forcing Raymond to rely on his

memory and whatever small number of books crusaders would have brought with them. The

Bible played a major part in shaping his narrative, and the Bible of Le Puy gives us a direct

window onto his experience of Scripture.

Let us then consider this Bible. Its two volumes each weigh over twenty kilograms, and

are thus hefty books, meant to be read at a lectern rather than carried about for private devotion.

The first volume has 236 folia, the second, 195, each measuring over 500 millimetres by 360

millimetres and written in two columns. The first volume contains most of the Old Testament.37

This includes books Raymond incorporates—Genesis, Deuteronomy, III and IV Kings, Isaiah,

Jeremiah, Ezekiel, Daniel, the Minor Prophets, Job. The scribal hands date it to the ninth century.

It was clearly used by the canons, who have left marginalia throughout the text, though the first

volume has limited illustration. What ornamental imagery does exist is mainly the opening

initials of each book, and while a few books, such as Deuteronomy and Isaiah, have elaborate

initials, most books begin with capitals that have little colour. None of the images are

historiated.

The second volume would have once probably completed the Vulgate text of the Bible,

but now there are gaps due to damage to the manuscript.38 A number of books Raymond alludes

36 The bibliography on the dating of sources is too extensive to list. See, among others, John France, “The

Anonymous Gesta Francorum and the Historia Francorum qui ceperunt Iherusalem of Raymond of Aguilers and

the Historia de Hierosolymitano itinere of Peter Tudebode: An Analysis of the Textual Relationship between

Primary Sources for the First Crusade,” in The Crusades and Their Sources: Essays Presented to Bernard Hamilton,

ed. John France and William G. Zajac (Aldershot: Ashgate, 1998): 39-69. I will be arguing for a dating before the

failed crusade of 1101 in my dissertation; see fn 2 above. 37 The majority of the book of Genesis (1:2-50:25), Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy, Joshua, Judges,

Ruth, Kings I-IV, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Lamentations and the Oration of Jeremiah, Ezekiel, Daniel, the 12 Minor

Prophets, and Job. 38 Volume 2 contains Psalms, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, Songs of Solomon, Wisdom, Ecclesiasticus, the Prayer of

Manassas, Paralipomenon I and II, Esdras I and II, Tobias, Judith, Esther, Maccabees I and II, the Canon Tables for

the Gospels, then parts of Matthew (24:45-28:20) and Mark (1:1-9:28), Acts, the Seven Canonical Epistles, the

Apocalypse, and the Epistles of Paul up through the middle of the letter to the Hebrews (12:25) It is clear, given the

relative starting and ending points of Matthew and Mark mid-sentence at the top and bottom of folio, that there were

10

to—Psalms, Ecclesiastes, the Gospels of Mark and Matthew, Acts, Revelation, I and II

Corinthians, Philippians, Hebrews—appear in this volume. The manuscript has marginalia

throughout the text, and part of the Book of Baruch was added in the twelfth century (1:1-3:23),

therefore this volume shows most clearly the time range of the usage of the Bible of Le Puy.39 It

is also a much more attractive book than the first volume, with red letters throughout and more

decorated capitals at the beginning of texts. If it was copied in the scriptorium of the cathedral, it

is certainly the finest example of their craft, featuring yellows, blues, greens and purples in

addition to the typical blacks and reds of the other surviving Le Puy manuscripts at the

Bibliothèque Nationale.

John France, in his lamentably unpublished edition of the Liber, writes that “Raymond

presents the modern reader with a cosmological outlook and an eschatological expectation,

shared no doubt by these other writers, but found in the Historia Francorum in a quintessential

form.”40 The eschatological worldview of the chronicle goes beyond Biblical citations and

infuses the entire structure of the text. The Olivet prophecy in the Gospels, sometimes called “the

Little Apocalypse,” is referenced twice, both times through allusions to Mark 13. 41 The

prophecy appears in Mark 13, Matthew 24 and Luke 21 in the Gospels, and includes descriptions

from Jesus of the end times, especially the warnings of various tribulations before the coming of

more pages originally. I would argue, from the lack of any evidence of the loss in the actual crease between folios,

that a relatively small number of quarto were removed at some point before the Bible was acquired by Colbert. This

is not to make any argument for Raymond’s knowledge of the Gospel. While he uses Matthew more than any other

book in the New Testament, he does reference Luke and John, and there is at least one surviving full Gospel

manuscript from Le Puy still extant today, from the St. George of Le Puy, now Le Puy-en-Velay, Bibliothèque

Municipal MS 2. Where the Gospel of Matthew starts now is in the heart of the Synoptic Apocalypse, so it is a

shame that it was not part of the original design. 39 For the book of Baruch in the Le Puy Bible, see P.M Bogaert, “Le livre de Baruch dans les manuscrits de la bible

latine. Disparition et reintegration,” Revue bénédictine 115 (2005): 336-339. 40 France, “A Critical Edition,” XXVII. 41 Raymond d’Aguilers, Liber, 37, 78.

11

the Kingdom of God., one of the three Gospel versions.42 The first of these describes how

Raymond of Saint-Gilles “frequently arrived at his tent in the middle of the night, or at the

cock’s crow,” which is the same language as Mark 13:35, “for you know not when the lord of the

house cometh, at even or at midnight or at the cockcrowing or in the morning.”43 This is likely an

unintentional reference. The second time Mark is referenced is in a directly eschatological

context, within one of Peter Bartholomew’s visions of Saint Andrew, before the battle with

Kerbogha at Antioch. Saint Andrew tells Peter Bartholomew: “But rest assured that the days

have come which Christ foretold to the Blessed Mary and to His apostles, the days in which He

will hurl down and grind underfoot the kingdom of the pagans, and in which He will lift up the

Christian principality.”44 This is roughly a third of the way through the text, and given

Raymond’s championing of these visions, makes the reader view the rest of the chronicle

through the light of impending eschatology.45 While the reference is fairly oblique, the

foretelling to Mary and the apostles was the Olivet prophecy, found in Mark 13: 23-27 among

other Gospels:

Take you heed therefore; behold: I have foretold you all things. But in those days after

that tribulation, the sun shall be darkened, and the moon shall not give her light, and the

stars of heaven shall be falling down, and the powers that are in heaven shall be moved.

And then shall they see the Son of man coming in the clouds with great power and glory.

And then shall he send his angels and shall gather together his elect from the four winds,

from the uttermost part of the earth to the uttermost part of heaven.

42 For the Mark 13, see J. Lyle Story, “The Parable of the Budding Fig Tree (Mark 13:28-31),” American

Theological Inquiry (Online) 4 no. 1 (Jan. 15 2011), http://atijournal.org/Vol4No1.htm, accessed March 11, 2015; C.

Marvin Pate, “Revelation 6: an early interpretation of the Olivet Discourse,” Criswell Theological Review ns 8, no. 2

(Spring 2011): 45-55; Thomas B. Slater, “Apocalypticism and Eschatology: A Study of Mark 13:3-37,” Perspectives

in Religious Studies 40, no. 1 (Spring 2013): 7-18; and Joshua E. Leim, “In the Glory of His Father: Intertextuality

and the Apocalyptic Son of Man in the Gospel of Mark,” Journal of Theological Interpretation 7.2 (2013): 213-232,

among others. 43 Raymond d’Aguilers, Historia, 17; Raymond d’Aguilers, Liber, 37. Bible verses are from The Vulgate Bible:

Douay-Rheims Translation, ed. Angela M. Kinney, Dumbarton Oaks Medieval Library 21, 6 vols. (Washington,

DC: Dumbarton Oaks Research Library, 2013). 44 Raymond d’Aguilers, Historia, 60; Raymond, Liber, 78. 45 The chronicle begins on f. 160r of the original manuscript, Paris, BNF lat. 14378, and ends at f. 233v. This

particular section is on f. 184v.

12

The Gospel passage and the passage in Raymond do not line up closely, but the Olivet prophecy

is the only passage from the Gospels where Jesus has an eschatological discussion with Mary

and the Apostles, and, given the vast number of surviving Gospel texts from the pre-crusade

period, would have been quickly recognizable to a literate audience.46 Unusual natural

phenomena, such as meteor showers, had occurred before and during the First Crusade.47 During

the battle of Dorylaeum in 1097, en route to Antioch, Raymond reported the appearance of a pair

of angels or military saints participating in the battle:

some recounted a remarkable miracle in which two handsome knights in flashing armor,

riding before our soldiers and seemingly invulnerable to the thrusts of Turkish lances,

menaced the enemy so that they could not fight. Although we learned this from apostate

Turks now in our ranks, we can certify from evidence that for two days on the march we

saw dead riders and dead horses.48

Saint Andrew’s message to Peter Bartholomew, then, would have been a clear indication that the

Olivet prophecy was being fulfilled.

46 Among other sources, see Dorothy Shepard, “The Latin gospelbook, c. 600-1200,” in The New Cambridge

History of the Bible Volume 2: From 600 to 1450, eds Richard Marsden and E. Ann Matter (Cambridge: Cambridge

UP, 2012), 338-362. 47 John Ward, “The First Crusade as Disaster: Apocalypticism and the Genesis of the Crusading Movement,” in

Medieval studies in honour of Avrom Saltmann, eds Bat-Sheva Albert, Yvonne Friedman and Simon Schwarzfuchs,

Bar-Ilan studies in history 4 (Ramat-Gan: Bar-Ilan UP, 1995), 271-9. See the further discussion later in this article. 48 Raymond, Historia, 28. Latin:”Fertur quoddam insigne miraculum, sed nos non vidimus quod duo equites armis

coruscis et mirabili facie exercitum nostrum precedentes, sic hostibus imminebant ut nullo modo facultatem

pugnandi eis concederent. At vero cum Turci referire eos lanceis vellent, insauciabiles eis apparebant. Hec autem

que dicimus ab illis qui eorum consorcium spernentes, et nobis adheserunt, didicimus. Quod pro testimonio

adducimus tale est. Per primam et alteram diem iuxta viam equos eorum mortuos cum dominis ipsis reperimud. »

Raymond d’Aguilers, Liber, 45-6. This kind of eyewitness testimony being used to back up rumors of the divine is

problematic. See Yuval Noah Harari, “Eyewitnessing in Accounts of the First Crusade: the Gesta Francorum and

Other Contemporary Narratives,” Crusades 3 (2004): 77-99, especially 83, where he writes that “Thus, when

describing a miracle that occurred during the battle of Dorylaeum, Raymond admits that he did not see it himself,

specifies as his source some apostate Turks who joined the crusader ranks, and then hastens to add that he has some

first-hand supporting evidence for this, namely that for two days after the battle the crusaders saw dead riders and

dead horses on the way. That this supporting evidence has little to do with the miracle in question only goes to show

how important it was for Raymond to provide some first-hand evidence in support of the miracle’s veracity.” See

Elizabeth Lapina, “’Nec signis nec testis creditur...’: The Problem of Eyewitnesses in the Chronicles of the First

Crusade,” Viator 38 (2007): 117-139, a particularly excellent approach to the use of eyewitness testimony in the

First Crusade. .

13

Raymond uses the Gospel of Matthew more than any other part of the New Testament,

but neither Matthew 24 nor 25 appears, nor Luke 21, nor 2 Thessalonians, other well-known

apocalyptic parts of the New Testament. The actual Book of the Revelation is referenced, at

most, three times, but two of these references are crucial for understanding Raymond’s

worldview.49 The first of these is a possible structural use, attesting to the validity of the

miraculous victory over Kerbogha, with Raymond saying, “I was both a witness to these events

and bearer of the Holy Lance,” which could obliquely refer to Revelation 5:1, Daniel 8:1, or

other apocalyptic texts that use the eyewitness account of the authors to justify the unusual

nature of their writing.50 The other two uses of Revelation appear in the context of the capture of

Jerusalem. The first is one of the best-known quotations in the Liber, the infamous description of

the blood in the Temple of Solomon: “That in the Temple of Solomon and the portico crusaders

rode in blood to the knees and bridles of their horses,” a reference to Revelation 14:20, “And the

winepress was trodden without the city, and blood came out of the winepress, even up to the

horses’ bridles, for a thousand and six hundred furlongs.”51 The other is an oblique reference to

Revelation 21:5 and, at the same time, a direct quotation from Psalm 117:24, “‘This is the day

which the Lord has made; we shall rejoice and be glad in it,’ and deservedly because on this day

God shone upon us and blessed us.”52 The first part of the line is a word-for-word excerpt from

49 Raymond d’Aguilers, Liber, 82, 150, 151. 50 Raymond d’Aguilers, Historia, 63; Raymond d’Aguilers, Liber, 82. For the use of the eyewitness to justify

apocalyptic writings, see Adela Yarbro Collins, Crisis and Catharsis: The Power of the Apocalypse (Philadelphia:

The Westminster Press, 1984), 145-152 for narrative techniques in apocalyptic writing; Apocalypse: The

Morphology of a Genre, ed. John J. Collins, Semeia 14 (Missoula: Scholars Press, 1979), for the literary genre of

apocalypticism; David E. Aune, “The Apocalypse of John and the Problem of Genre,” in Early Chrisitan

Apocalypticism: Genre and Social Setting, ed Adela Tarbro Collins, SEMEIA 36 (Decatur: Scholars Press, 1986),

65-96. 51 Raymond d’Aguilers, Historia, 127-8; Raymond d’Aguiler, Liber, 150. This was first noted by the Hills. See

also Thomas F. Madden, “Rivers of Blood: An Analysis of One Aspect of the Crusader Conquest of Jerusalem in

1099,” Revista Chilena de Estudios Medievales 1 (2012): 33-4. 52 Raymond d’Aguilers, Historia, 128; Raymond d’Aguilers, Liber, 151.

14

Psalm 117: 24, “This is the day which the Lord hath made; let us be glad and rejoice therein." A

literate audience would immediately recognize it, given the prevalence of the Psalter as a

educational text in the early Middle Ages.53 Given the previously established typological

framework of the chronicle, however, it probably also draws upon Revelation 21:5, that “he that

sat on the throne said, ‘Behold: I make all things new,’” with the day of conquest, this capture of

Jerusalem, as the fulfilment of apocalyptic creation. The quotation from the Old Testament is

united with the apocalypse of the New, within the fulfilment of the First Crusade.

References to apocalyptic prophecies from the Old Testament are similarly rare, though

important. Part of the apocalyptic prophecies of Joel and Zachariah do appear, but only once

each.54 There is a passage that could be referencing Ezekiel 38:20 or Isaiah 26:5-6, describing

the sack of Ma’arrat-an-Nu’man:

‘Let us put an end to further strife here, and for the sake of tranquillity among the leaders

and peace of mind for Raymond, who worries over its loss, come and let us tear down its

walls.’ Thereupon, even the sick and weak, arising from their beds and hobbling along on

sticks, came all the way to the walls. An emaciated person could roll back and forth and

push from the wall stones of such size that three or four yoke of oxen could scarcely

budge.55

The description could be reminiscent of Isaiah’s canticle of thanks for the deliverance of God’s

people: “For he shall bring down them that dwell high; the high city he shall lay low. He shall

bring it down even to the ground; he shall pull it down even to the dust. The foot shall tread it

down, the feet of the poor, the steps of the needy.”56 The reference to the poor being God’s

53 See among others Susan Boynton, “Training for the liturgy as a form of monastic education,” in Medieval

monastic education, eds George Ferzoco and Carolyn Muessig (London and New York: Leicester UP, 2000), 7-20;

and C. Stephen Jaeger, The Envy of Angels: Cathedral Schools and Social Ideals in Medieval Europe, 950-1200

(Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2000), 21-2. 54 Raymond d’Aguilers, Liber, 130 (Joel 3:3) and 73 (Zechariah 1:3) 55 Raymond d’Aguilers, Historia Francorum, 81. Latin: “Sed venite et diruamus muros eius, et fiet pax inter

principes, et comiti securitas, ne perdat eam. Surgentes itaque debiles et infirmi de cubilibus suis innixi baculis ad

muros usque perveniebant, et illos lapides quos vix .iii. vel. iiii. paria boum trahere possent facile circuibat civitatem

et pariter comitis familiares. » Raymond d’Aguilers, Liber, 100. 56 Isaiah 26:5-6.

15

instrument of victory over cities of his enemies certainly fits Raymond’s interests. The other

possibility is Ezekiel 38:20, specifically when God, speaking of Gog, says, “and the mountains

shall be thrown down, and the hedges shall fall, and every wall shall fall to the ground.”57 These

are the only potential examples of the apocalyptic sections of either book.58

The sections of Daniel that Raymond references, on the other hand, are both apocalyptic

and deeply eschatological in nature. He includes two references to Daniel 8 and one to Daniel 9,

spread throughout the Liber, chapters that make up Daniel’s vision of the ram and he-goat, his

confession and prayer, and the revelation by the angel Gabriel of the weeks of the coming of

Christ, the desolation, and the end.59 The vision of the ram and he-goat is particularly

eschatological in focus, once again constructing an order of kingdoms before the end of days,

like the better-known vision of the statue. In Daniel 8, the angel Gabriel explains to Daniel that

the ram represented the Medes and Persians, and the he-goat the Greeks.60 The horn of the he-

goat breaks into four, which stands for four weaker Greek kings, followed by a time of

“iniquities” in which the Antichrist will rise.61 The Antichrist will eventually rise up against “the

prince of princes and shall be broken without hand.”62 The first reference Raymond d’Aguilers

makes to Daniel 8 connects the visionary priest Peter Bartholomew and his vision of the Holy

Lance to Daniel’s encounter with Gabriel. After Peter fled from Antioch, in violation of the

orders given to him by Saint Andrew, he becomes very sick, reminiscent of Daniel, who after his

vision “languished and was sick for some days.”63

57 Ezekiel 38:20. 58 Raymond d’Aguilers, Liber, 100. 59 The second references to Daniel 8 is mentioned above, the structural reference to the validity of the miraculous

victory over Kerbogha. 60 Daniel 8:20-21. 61 Daniel 8:22-25. 62 Daniel 8:25. 63 Daniel 8:27, referenced Raymond d’Aguilers, Liber, 72.

16

The reference to Daniel 9 comes after the siege of Jerusalem, during the discussion of the

choosing of a new king. It appears as part of an objection raised by the bishops and clergy to the

concept of a secular king of the city.64 Their concern is that the elected would become

degenerate, like David, and bring down God’s wrath. They argued, “Moreover, the prophet cries

out, ‘When the Holy of Holies shall have come, unction will cease,’ because it was made clear to

all people that he had come.”65 The reference is to Daniel 9:24-27, the seventy weeks given to

the holy to reject sin and rebuild a holy Jerusalem on earth, before the crucifixion, the destruction

of Jerusalem, and the “abomination of desolation” that lasts until the end. In terms of an

eschatological timeline, this is Raymond’s most direct reference. His championing of an

advocate, rather than a king, is known, but in this context references not only Daniel 9 and its

eschatological timeline, but echoes the legend of the Last World Emperor.66 The Last World

Emperor legend was made popular in the west through Adso of Montier-en-Der’s letter, De

antichristo, and the Tiburtine Sibyls, which were then incorporated into legends of Charlemagne

and the Holy Roman Empire.67 The legend is the idea that a king of the Franks, as heir to the

Roman emperors, will reclaim the Christian world under his reign, and at the end of his life go to

Jerusalem to depose his sceptre and crown on the Mount of Olives.68 A king in Jerusalem would

violate this model; instead, the ruler who had the arrogance to crown himself in the city of Christ

64 Raymond d’Aguilers, Liber, 143. 65 Ibid. 66 Buc, “Religion, violence, pouvoir,”, 5 ; Rubenstein, “Godfrey of Bouillon versus Raymond of Saint-Gilles,”; Luc

Ferrier, “La couronne refusée de Godefroy de Bouillon: eschatologie et humiliation de la majesté aux premiers

temps du Royaume de Jérusalem”, in Le Concile de Clermont et l'appel à la croisade (Rome : École française de

Rome, 1997) : 245-265 ; John France, “The Election and Title of Godfrey de Bouillon,” Canadian Journal of

History/Annales Canadiennes d’Histoire XVIII (December 1983): 321-330. 67 Matthew Gabriele, An Empire of Memory: The Legend of Charlemagne, the Franks, and Jerusalem before the

First Crusade (Oxford: Oxford UP, 2011), 110-128; Anne E. Latowsky, Emperor of the World: Charlemagne and

the Construction of Imperial Authority, 800-1229 (Ithaca and London: Cornell UP, 2013), 69-74. In Paris, BNF lat.

5390, from Fecamp in the late eleventh century, Adso’s letter appears alongside the Tiburtine Sibyl and Rodolfus

Glaber’s Vita Wilhelmi, showing a clear interest in and link between the two texts in the time of the First Crusade. 68 Gabriele, An Empire of Memory, 111.

17

would be fulfilling the role of the Antichrist, regardless of his original intentions. It seemed at

first that the arguments laid out by the clergy would carry the day. As Raymond d’Aguilers

describes it, “Disdainful of our advice and protest, the princes encouraged Raymond of Saint-

Gilles to accept the kingship; but he confessed that he shuddered at the name of king in

Jerusalem.”69 As Philippe Buc has argued, it seems likely that this fear, of becoming the

Antichrist by taking the crown, is the reason why Raymond of Saint-Gilles refused the kingdom

when it was offered to him.70 Godfrey of Bouillon would then in all likelihood don the mantle of

king in full cognizance of the Last World Emperor, but the apocalyptic argument clearly deterred

the most powerful noble on the First Crusade away from the crown.71

The weaving of these Biblical references alone do not give the full sense of the

eschatological vision of Raymond, nor the source of his deep-seated belief in the fulfilment of

Revelation. One could argue that the actual experience of the crusade lent itself to such an

analysis, but of the eyewitness chroniclers, only Raymond’s text offers an eschatological

narrative. Of his 108 Biblical citations, only 11 are from the apocalyptic sections, about ten

percent. Given the deeply eschatological focus of the work, this is not a high percentage. What I

would argue, however, is that other sources, not directly quoted within his chronicle deeply

influenced the way Raymond viewed the world. These sources exist within the library of Le Puy,

which was rich in apocalyptic materials, creating a mentalité primed for eschatological narrative.

The second volume of the Bible of Le Puy contains a small but important addition, a

single column in between the normal books of Esdras and the book of Tobias: a passage from

Chapter 8, verses 20 through 36, of IV Esdras. The Fourth Book of Esdras is a rare addition to

69 Raymond d’Aguilers, Historia, 129. 70 Buc, “Religion, violence, pouvoir,” 5. 71 Rubenstein, Armies of Heaven, 296-301.

Formatted: French (France)

Formatted: French (France)

18

the Latin Bible. Only a handful of copies survive from Northern France and Spain.72 The text

was much more popular in the East, surviving in Syriac, Ethiopic, Arabic, Armenian, Georgian,

and Coptic. Based on internal evidence it was probably originally written in Greek.73 While the

text has many themes, the central focus is the question of theodicy, and it, “honestly and

incisively probes questions of theodicy, rejects easy explanations and rationalizations, and leads

the reader, along with Ezra, to a visionary encounter with God that somehow answers all the

questions (cf. the similar dynamic in the books of Job and Habakkuk).”74 The book of IV Esdras

is broken into three major sections: three episodes of Ezra’s dialogues with the angel Uriel,

covering IV Esdras 3:1-9:26; three episodes of Ezra’s receiving apocalyptic visions directly,

covering IV Esdras 9:26-13:58; and an episode where he rewrites the Hebrew Scriptures and

writes seventy secret apocalyptic books, covering IV Esdras 14:1-49.75 The entire text is

eschatological in its focus, discussing theodicy in the context of “the end.” In IV Esdras, this is

both in the sense of the Day of Judgment and in the sense of the destruction of the fourth empire

from Daniel and the beginning of the Kingdom of God.76

The lines in the Bible of Le Puy, known as the Confessio Esdrae, are slightly more

common, appearing as a separate entity in a number of manuscripts connected with southern

France and Spain, among them the Bible of Roda and Bibles from Lyon and Grenoble, mostly

72 Robert L. Bensly, The Fourth Book of Ezra. The Latin Version Edited from the MSS, intro. Montague Rhodes

James (Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 1895), xiii-xv. 73 Michael E. Stone, “Some Remarks on the Textual Criticism of IV Ezra,” The Harvard Theological Review 60:1

(Jan. 1967): 107-115, esp. 108, 111-112, and 115 for the argument for a Greek original. 74 Alexander E. Stewart, “Narrative World, Rhetorical Logic, and the Voice of the Author in 4 Ezra,” Journal of

Biblical Literature 132:2 (2013): 373. See also Michael P. Knowles, “Moses, the Law, and the Unity of 4 Ezra,”

Novum Testamentum 31:3 (July 1989): 258. 75 Stewart, 374, and Katell Berthelot, “Is God Unfair? The Fourth Book of Ezra as a Response to the Crisis of 70

C.E.,” in Judaism and Crisis. Crisis as a Catalyst in Jewish Cultural History, eds A. Lange, K. F. Diethard Römheld

and M. Weigold (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2011): 74. Cf. Earl Breech, “These Fragments I Have

Shored against My Ruins: The Form and Function of 4 Ezra,” Journal of Biblical Literature 92:2 (June 1973): 267-

274, for a discussion of the importance of the structure of the text for its meaning. 76 Michael E. Stone, “Coherence and Inconsistency in the Apocalypses: The Case of ‘The End’ in 4 Ezra,” Journal

of Biblical Literature 102:2 (June 1983): 229-243, esp. 230-232.

19

from the ninth and tenth centuries.77 In this Bible, they take up the right column of folio 97

verso. In contrast to many pages in this Bible, they have some colour (reds and yellows) and

filled in letters, so that the beginning of the section stands out to the reader. The Confessio takes

a specific moment out of what Katell Bertholet has described as “a Jewish apocalypse,” one of

the many vision-disputations Ezra has with the angel Uriel and God himself.78 The section is a

plea for mercy, with Ezra imploring God “to forgive his people’s sins because of those who have

kept the covenant and walked in his commandments,” verses 8:26-30, followed by his appeal to

God that “God will be called merciful insofar as he will forgive those who have no right to

salvation,” verses 8:31-36.79 More broadly, the prayer concerns “the issue of the punishment of

the most part of mankind and the salvation of only very few,” a call for divine mercy, because all

mankind are sinners: “please, God, be merciful to the wicked.”80 The text is relatively short but

packed with ideas. It begins with a description of the overwhelming power of God and the power

of his hosts:

The beginning of the word of Ezra’s prayer before he was taken up. He said: “O Lord

who dwellest forever, whose heavens are exalted and whose upper chambers are in the

air, whose throne is beyond measure, and whose glory is beyond comprehension, before

whom the hosts of angels stand trembling and at whose command they are changed to

wind and fire, whose word is sure and whose utterances are certain, whose ordinance is

strong and whose command is terrible, whose look dries up the depths and whose threat

makes the mountains melt away and whose truth is established forever—hear, O Lord,

the voice of thy servant, and give ear to the petition of thy creature, And attend to my

words.81

77 Bensly, The Fourth Book of Ezra, xx-xxii. 78 Berthelot, “Is God Unfair,” 79-80. See also Matthias Henze, “4 Ezra and 2 Baruch: Literary Composition and

Oral Performance in First-Century Apocalyptic Literature,” Journal of Biblical Literature 131:1 (2012): 181-200 for

a discussion of the context of 4 Esdras, and David Frankfurter, “The Legacy of Jewish Apocalypses in Early

Christianity: Regional Trajectories,” in The Jewish Apocalyptic Heritage in Early Christianity, eds James C.

VanderKam and William Adler (Assen: Van Goreum, 1996): 129-200. 79 Berthelot, “Is God Unfair,” 80. 80 Michael E. Stone, Fourth Ezra. A Commentary on the Book of Fourth Ezra, ed. Frank Moore Cross (Minneapolis:

Fortress Press, 1990), 271. 81 Stone, Fourth Ezra, 269. Latin: “Initium verbi orationis Esdrae priusquam adsumeretur, et dixit: Domine qui

inhabitas saeculum, cuius oculi elati et superna in aerem, et cuius thronus inextimabilis et gloria inconprehensibilis,

cui adstat exercitus angelorum cum tremore, quorum servatio in vento et igni convertuntur, cuius verbum firmum et

dicta perseverentia, cuius iussio fortis et dispositio terribilis, cuius aspectus arefacti abyssos et indignatio tabescere

20

The alien, omnipotent might of God is certainly not only found in this prayer—the rest of the

Bible provides enough material for Raymond d’Aguilers to draw upon for his own areas of

heavenly intervention in the First Crusade. The omnipresent power and deep alien nature of God

the Father, however, bleeds through into the text, where it is only the lesser hosts, from the

Virgin Mary through the apostles, saints and angels, who aid the crusaders. God the Father never

appears, and Jesus appears in the role of an angry presence to be pleaded with by those figures

trying to save the crusaders. The Confessio then moves on to the prayer portion, Ezra’s plea for

mercy on his people. While Ezra’s prayer is a more proactive approach to intercession than

appears in Raymond’s chronicle, the first vision of Peter Bartholomew and of Stephen of

Valence both took place in the context of a need for God’s mercy, when both were trapped,

terrified, and preparing for death. Stephen of Valence’s conversation with Christ, in particular, is

laced with the sinfulness of the crusading army and the need for repentance, but also the

compassion of Christ on crusaders who may or may not deserve it.

For as long as I live I will speak, and as long as I have understanding I will answer. O

look not upon the sins of thy people, but at those who have served thee in truth. Regard

not those who act wickedly, but those who have kept thy covenants amid afflictions.

Think not on those who have lived wickedly in thy sight; but remember those who have

willingly acknowledged that thou art to be feared. Let it not be thy will to destroy those

who have had the ways of cattle; but regard those who have gloriously taught thy law.

Be not angry with those who are deemed worse than beast; but love those who have

always put their trust in thy glory. For we and those who were before us have done deeds

in ways that bring death, but thou, because of us sinners, art called merciful. For if thou

hast desired to have pity on us, who have no good works, then thou wilt be called

merciful. For the righteous, who have many works laid up with thee, shall receive their

reward in consequence of their own deeds. But what is man, that thou art angry with

him; or what is a corruptible race, that thou art so bitter against it? For in truth there is no

one among those who have been born who has not acted wickedly, and among those who

montes et veritas testificatur. Exaudi, Domine, orationem servi tui et auribus percipe precationem figmenti tui,

intende verba mea.” Der Lateinische Text der Apokalypse des Esra, ed. A. Frederik J. Klijn (Berlin: Akademie-

Verlag, 1983), 57-9.

21

have existed there is no one who has not transgressed. For in this, O Lord, thy goodness

will be declared, when thou art merciful to those who have no store of good works.82

What we have is prayer to God to live up to his quality of mercy. Even though there are bad men,

there are good ones as well, and by that virtue all should be spared. These same elements appear

in most of the prophets, particularly Isaiah and Jeremiah, but Ezra makes the most forceful, and

one might even say angry, appeal. It is a plea that mercy be granted for its own sake, that God is

merciful because he spares even the wicked, and without such behaviour he is not God. But it is

built on an apocalyptic foundation. Admittedly, Raymond does not directly quote from the

Confessio, but visions comparable to the conversation between Ezra and Uriel are typical of his

work. One thinks of Raymond’s belief in the visions of Peter Bartholomew, whose cause he

championed, and the wide range of other visionaries he describes within the Liber. In particular,

Peter Bartholomew’s vision on June 15th, the day after the discovery of the Holy Lance, echoes

the plea for mercy: “When Peter Bartholomew sought mercy for the Christians, the Blessed

Andrew answered, ‘Indeed the Lord will have pity on His people’.”83 Unlike Stephen of

Valence’s visions, which emphasize the need for repentance before they will be granted aid,

Peter Bartholomew makes no apology for the sins of the crusaders, asking for mercy regardless.

The other major non-Biblical source for Scripture, the liturgy, is the major gap in the

library catalogue and in the surviving manuscripts of Le Puy. While the list of Trivium and

82 Stone, Fourth Ezra, 269-270. Latin: “Dum enim vivo loquar et dum sapio repsondeam. Ne aspicias populi tui

delicta, sed qui tibi in veritate servierunt. Nec adtendas impie agentium studia, sed qui tua testamenta cum doloribus

custodierunt. Neque cogites qui in conspectu tuo false conversati sunt, sed memorare qui ex voluntate tuum timorem

cognoverunt. Neque volueris perdere qui pecorum mores habuerunt, sed respicias eos qui legem tuam splendide

docuerunt. Neque indigneris eis, qui bestiis peius sunt iudicati, sed diligas eos qui semper in tua gloria confiderunt.

Quoniam nos et patres nostri mortalibus moribus egimyus, tu autem propter nos peccatores misericors vocatus es. Si

enim desideraveris ut nostri miserearis, tunc misericors vocaberis, nobis enim non habentibus opera iusticiae. Iusti

enim, quibus sunt operae multae repositae apud te, ex propriis operibus recipient mercedem. Quid est enim homo,

ut ei indigneris, aut genus corruptible, ut ita amariceris de ipso ? In veritate enim nemo de genitis est qui non imple

gessit, et de confirentibus qui non deliquit. In hoc enim adnuntibitur iusticia tua et bonitas tua, Domine, cum

misertus fueris eis qui non habent substantiam operum bonorum.” Klijn, Der Apokalypse des Esra, 59-61. 83 Raymond d’Aguilers, Historia, 58 ; Raymond d’Aguilers, Liber, 75 : “Cumque ab eo misericordiam pro populo

postularet iuvenis, respondit ei Sanctus Andreas : Quod revera Dominus miseretur sui populi.”

22

Quadrivium books is lengthy, the liturgical books, glosses, and commentaries are not well

labelled, and, in terms of liturgy at least, today almost non-existent. The work done by Wulf Arlt

has helped to restore some knowledge of the library’s liturgical holdings in the early modern

period, based on two surviving sixteenth-century manuscripts. For the medieval period, however,

our only surviving contemporary liturgical text is a handful of folia attached to a tenth century

sacramentary of Paris, now BNF lat. 2294.84 Consequently, the kind of work Margot Fassler and

Susan Boynton have done with liturgy and history is, for Le Puy, nearly impossible.85 This

observation is also important when considering the commentary on Raymond’s use of liturgical

texts. Previous scholarship cites, by and large, standardized, modern liturgical texts, which may

or may not have resembled liturgy as practiced at Le Puy. Liturgy was one of the places where

regional religious identity was the most visible. The distinctive liturgical character of places like

Saint Martial has been well-studied, and we should probably assume that Le Puy also had

distinctive elements.86 The assumption that Le Puy, with its own particular identity and

influences, used the same liturgical documents as other places seems presumptuous.87

84 Wulf Arlt, “Einstimmige Lieder des 12. Jahrhunderts und Mehrstimmiges in französischen Handschriften des 16.

Jahrhunderts aus Le Puy,” Schweizer Beiträge zur Musikwissenschaft 3 (1978): 7-47. See also H. Montrouzier,

“Étude sur l’Antique Liturgie de l’Église du Puy,” Revue des Sciences Ecclésiastiques (May 1870) : 437-446 ; Jean-

Baptiste Payrard, “Le Prosolaire de Notre-Dame du Puy,” L’Écho du Velay 1 (1885) : 147-55 ; Auguste Chassaing,

Calendrier de l’Église du Puy-en-Velay au Moyen-Age (Paris : H. Champion, 1882) ; Ulysse Chevalier, Prosolarium

Ecclesiae Aniciensis. Office en vers de la Circoncision en usade dans l’église du Puy (Paris : Alphonse Picard,

Librairie, 1894). The municipal library in Le Puy has two of the late medieval/early modern liturgical texts that

most reconstructive work is based on: Le Puy, BM MS 4 and Fonds Cortial 152. 85 Fassler, The Virgin of Chartres; Susan Boynton, Shaping a Monastic Identity: Liturgy and History at the Imperial

Abbey of Farfa, 1000-1125 (Ithaca and London: Cornell University Press, 2006), among many others for both

authors. Reconstructing the liturgy of the Auvergne at all is difficult, with a general lack of surviving manuscripts in

the early and high Middle Ages. See Michel Huglo, “Trois Anciens Manuscrits Liturgiques d’Auvergne,” Bulletin

historique et scientifique de l’Auvergne 77 (1957) : 81-104 ; ibid., “Les livres liturgiques de La Chaise-Dieu,” Revue

bénédictine 87 (1977) : 289-349 ; and Abbé Etaix, “Le Lectionnaire Liturgique de la Cathédrale de Clermont au Xe

siècle,” Bulletin Historique et Scientifique de l’Auvergne 88 (1977) : 239-253. 86 For a brief introduction to the liturgy of Saint-Martial, see James Grier, The Musical World of a Medieval Monk:

Adémar de Chabannes in Eleventh-century Aquitaine (Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 2009). 87 For regional variations in liturgical performance, see among many others Richard W. Pfaff, The Liturgy in

Medieval England: A History (Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 2009); Charles T. Downey, “Ad imaginem suam:

Regional Chant Variants and the Origins of the Jeu d’Adam,” Comparative Drama 36.3-4 (Fall/Winter 2002-03):

359-90; Susan Boynton, “Glossed Hymns in Eleventh-Century Continental Hymnaries,” PhD, Brandeis University,

23

While almost no liturgical books survive from Le Puy and the Auvergne, it can be

assumed that the performance of the liturgy on the feast of the Assumption is strongly related to

tenth-century Spanish practices. This is a result of the manuscript transmission of St. Ildefonsus’

De virginitate sanctae Mariae from Spain to Le Puy by Bishop Godescalc, now Paris, BNF lat.

2855.88 This is the earliest French copy of the Ildefonsus, De Virginitate perpetua sanctae

Mariae, originally made in the tenth century for Godesdalc of Le Puy. The bishop was the first

recorded pilgrim to Santiago de Compostella, and he had the manuscript copied for the cathedral

library before he returned.89 It would remain the major Marian text in the cathedral library, and

presumably it had the same effect on liturgy in Le Puy as it did in Spain, providing the basis of

the celebration of the feast of the Annunciation.90 Le Puy was remembered by at least one

chronicler as being the city of the Virgin—Albert of Aachen refers to it as “the city of St Mary,”

“apud Podium ciuitatem sancte Marie,” and the chronicle of Saint Peter of Le Puy describes the

city as “castella Beatae Mariae et res ecclesiarum.”91 Adhemar of Monteil, bishop of Le Puy, was

also known for his personal Marian devotion, and has traditionally been considered the author of

1997; Knud Ottosen, The Responsories and Versicles of the Latin Office of the Dead (Aarhus: Aarhus UP, 1993);

Louis Hamilton, “The Power of Liturgy and the Liturgy of Power in Eleventh- and Twelfth-Century Italy,” PhD,

Fordham University, 2000; and Leo Treitler, “The Aquitanian Repertories of Sacred monody in the Eleventh and

Twelfth Centuries,” PhD, Princeton University, 1967. 88 For the De virginitate, the critical edition is Ildefonsi Toletani Episcopi Opera, eds Valeriano Yarza Urkiola and

Carmen Codoñer Merino (Turnhout: Brepols, 2007). The English translation is A translation from Latin into

English of De virginitate perpetua Sanctae Mariae = The perpetual virginity of Holy Mary, tr. Malcolm Drew

Donalson (Lewiston, NY: Edwin Mellen Press, 2011). The preface to the manuscript from the priest Gomes to the

bishop Godescalc is in Gallia Christiana, vol. II, Instrumenta, 222. 89 Godescalc is also known for consecrating the chapel of Saint-Michel d’Aiguilhe, which overlooks the north-

western part of Le Puy. See L. Bourbon, “Gotescalc, Evêque consécrateur 962 et pèlerin de Saint-Jacques en 950,”

in Saint-Michel d’Aiguilhe. Commémoration du Millénaire de l’Érection de la Chapelle de Saint-Michel d’Aiguilhe

(Le Puy-en-Velay : Éditions de la Société Académique du Puy et de la Haute-Loire, 1962), 56-73. 90 Raizman, David. “A Rediscovered Illuminated Manuscript of St. Ildefonsus's De Virginitate Beatae Mariae in the

Biblioteca Nacional in Madrid,” Gesta 26.1 (1987): 38, and Elizabeth Valdez Del Alamo, “Triumphal Visions and

Monastic Devotion: The Annunciation Relief of Santo Domingo de Silos,” Gesta 29.2 (1990): 174-177. 91 Albert of Aachen, Albert of Aachen’s History of the Journey to Jerusalem, Vol. i: Books 1-6. The First Crusade,

1095-1099, tr. Susan Edgington, Crusade Texts in Translation (Farnham, UK: Ashgate, 2013), 18; Albert of Aachen,

The Historia Ierosolimitana of Albert of Aachen, A Critical Edition, tr. Susan Edgington, PhD Thesis, University of

London, 1991, 89-90. Cartulaire de l’Abbaye de St-Chaffre du Monastier et Chronique de St-Pierre du Puy, ed.

Ulysse Chevalier (Montbéliard: Imprimerie P. Hoffmann, 1891), 152.

24

the Salve Regina.92 There is another surviving Biblical manuscript from Le Puy from the period

before the First Crusade, from the collegial chapel of St. George of Le Puy, part way down the

side of the hill from the Baptistery of St. John in what is today the Grand Seminary.93 It is a

ninth-century Gospel manuscript, now in the municipal library of Le Puy.94 This is a standard

Gospel text, with exquisitely decorated canon tables covered with flowers and birds introducing

the four Gospels.95 At the end of the Gospel is a partial liturgical calendar, as well as a section

concerning “In Natale Domini ad Sanctam Mariam Majorem.”96 These are distinctly liturgical

texts, some of the very few surviving texts from the period. This handful of Marian hymns

suggest a richer legacy at the cathedral, not unlike many other regions of southern France, again

giving some insight into the kinds of texts that shaped Raymond’s spiritual worldview.97

Marian theology, in the specific form of the De Virginitate, was also linked to the

Apocalypse in at least one manuscript from southern France. This is the Saint-Sever Beatus,

where it appears after the Commentary on the Apocalypse and Jerome’s Commentary on Daniel.

92 One Hundred Latin Hymns: Ambrose to Aquinas, ed. and tr. Peter G. Walsh with Christopher Husch, Dumbarton

Oaks Medieval Library 18, ed. Jan M. Ziolkowski (Cambridge, MA and Lodon: Harvard UP, 2012), xvii, 272-73,

475. See also the discussion in F.J.E. Raby, A history of Christian-Latin poetry from the beginnings to the close of

the Middle Ages (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1997), 226-7, who argues in favor of Adhemar of Le Puy over

Herimannus Contractus, E, Vacandard, “Les origines littéraires, musicales et liturgiques, du Salve Regina,” Revue

du clergé français, t. 71 ( 1912): 137-151, and Jean de Valois, En marge d’une antienne, le ‘Salve Regina’ (Paris: au

bureau d’édition de la Schola, 1912), for the 11 th century dating of the Salve Regina. The chronicler Alberic of

Trois-Fontaines also makes the claim that it was written by Ademar of Le Puy, Chronica Albrici Monachi Trium

Fontium, ed. Paul Scheffer-Boichorst, MGH SS 23, 804: “E quibus fuit Aimarus insignia potentie, Podiensis

episcopus, qui postea christianum exercitum prudentia rexit et eloquentia sua. Auctor: Quod iste episcopus

antiphonam Salve Regina fecerit, audiisse me recolo. Qualiter autem beatus Bernardus eam ab angelis audierit

decantari, ubi oportunum invenero, assignabo.” 93 Pierre Cubizolles, Le Diocèse du Puy-en-Velay des Origines à Nos Jours (Saint-Just-prés-Brioude, France :

Éditions Créer, 2005), 143-4. 94 Le Puy-en-Velay, BM MS 2 95 The canon tables are f. 7r-12v. There is an ink drawing of Mark on f. 55v, Luke on f. 79v, and a faint pencil

outline of John on f. 134v, never finished. 96 The calendar begins on f. 171r and goes until the end of the manuscript on f. 183v. The section on the Natale

Domini begins on f. 165r and goes to the beginning of the liturgical calendar. 97 See, for example, Rachel Golden, “Striking Ornaments: Complexities of Sense and Song in Aquitanian ‘Versus’,”

Music & Letters 84.4 (Nov. 2003): 527-556 and “Devotion to the Virgin Mary in Twelfth-Century Aquitanian

Versus,” PhD, University of North Carolina-Chapel Hill, 2000.

25

The apocalyptic link in that manuscript, between the Virgin and the end of days in both its New

and Old Testament accounts, is particular to the Saint-Sever Beatus among the Beatus corpus.98

The link between the Virgin and the Apocalypse appears elsewhere, but the connection between

the Virgin and the Apocalypse in a southern French manuscripts derived from Spanish texts is

directly relevant to the library of Le Puy.99 The Saint-Sever Beatus contains a highly apocalyptic

liturgy, in the form of a long trope in the responsory Libera me, on fol. 108v, and in the Audi

tellus, originally from the monastery of Aniane, and now Montpellier, Bibliothèque

interuniversitaire, Faculté de Médécine MS 6.100 One must consider the possibility that these

same kinds of apocalyptic liturgies ended up in Le Puy. The Virgin Mary famously appears in

several of the visions Raymond records as occurring after the fall of Antioch, suggesting some

direct connection between this text and the Liber.101 Raymond may simply have been recounting

visions described to him, but the apparitions of the Virgin in the Liber are usually in conjunction

with apocalyptic themes. In the first vision of Stephen of Valence, her appearance is shortly after

a reference to of Zachariah 1:3.102 The next two appearances are part of visionary defences of

Peter Bartholomew’s deeply eschatological vision of the Five Wounds of Christ. The vision of

the Five Wounds was Bartholomew’s attempt to re-shape the crusade, with the five wounds of

98 For the Saint-Sever Beatus, see “Le " Beatus " de Saint-Sever (BnF, ms lat. 8878),” Jean Cabanot and Georges

Pon, accessed December 18, 2014, http://www.cehag.fr/beatus/beatus.html For the discussion of the Ildefonsus in

the manuscript, ibid., http://www.cehag.fr/beatus/introduction/5.Introduction.Vierge.pdf 99 See Guy Lobrichon, “Les Maîtres Francs et l’Histoire de la Femme (Apocalypse 12). Tentations et Résistance

Mariologiques (VIIIe-XIIe siècles),” in Maria, l’Apocalisse e il Medioevo. Atti del III Convegno Mariologico della

Fonsazione Ezio Franceschini con la collaborazione della Biblioteca Palatina di Parma (Firenze: Edizioni del

Galluzzo per la Fondazione Ezio Franceschini, 2006): 43-57. 100 Michel Huglo, “Les chants liturgiques tirés de l’Apocalypse dans les liturgies hispaniques et romano-franques,”

in El canto mozárabe y su entorno. Estudios sobre la música de la liturgia viejo hispánica, eds Rosario Álvarez

Martinez, Ismael Fernández de la Cuesta, and Ana Llorens Martin (Madrid: Sociedad Española de Musicología,

2013): 214-5. The Audi tellus is edited in the Analecta hymnica 49 (1906): 369-378; the Libera me, in ibid., 390. 101 The Virgin Mary appears in first vision of Stephen of Valence, Raymond d’Aguilers, Liber, 73-4; the vision of

priest Ebrard, Raymond d’Aguilers, Liber, 117-8; the second vision of Stephen of Valence, Raymond d’Aguilers,

Liber, 118; Peter Bartholomew’s revelation of Raymond of Saint-Gilles’ doubts, Raymond d’Aguilers, Liber, 123-4;

and Stephen of Valence’s third vision, Raymond d’Aguilers, Liber, 127-8. 102 Raymond d’Aguilers, Liber, 73.

26

Christ acting as metaphors for the army—the poor, then the valiant knights, then the servants,

and then deserters and cowards. The vision then argued for a violent purge of the latter two

groups to restore the purity of the army.103 The final appearance is in the final vision of Peter

Bartholomew’s, again concerning the truth of his visions. Only the final appearance of the Virgin

could be seen outside an eschatological light, appearing with Adhemar of Monteil and Saint

Agatha to Stephen of Valence to tell the crusaders to carry on to Jerusalem.104 She also places the

authenticity of the Holy Lance on par with the True Cross, saying to Stephen, “has [the Cross]

not guided you to the Holy Lance,” and that “Our Mother Mary orders that henceforth the Holy

Lance shall not be shown unless carried by a priest clad in sacred vestments and that the Cross

precede it in this manner.”105 The Virgin in this vision turns the Cross into a messenger for the

Holy Lance, and in this manner provides for the carrying on of Peter Bartholomew’s

eschatological framework.

Outside of IV Esdras and the Spanish Marian texts, there is a third apocalyptic text in the

library of Le Puy, Bede’s poem on the end times De die iudicii, in the same manuscript as the

library catalogue, Paris, BNF lat. 7581. The poem was one of the most read Anglo-Latin poems,

surviving in forty-one manuscripts from both England and the Continent, and by the mid-tenth

century had been translated into the Old English poem Judgment Day II.106 The poem describes

the nine signs that will precede the return of Christ to judge the world, events that involve

dramatic changes in the natural world:

Remember what signs will precede Him: suddenly the earth will tremble and the

mountains crumble down; the hills will melt and the sea confound men’s minds with its

103 Raymond d’Aguilers, Historia, 93-96; Raymond d’Aguilers, Liber, 112-116; Rubenstein, Armies of Heaven, 252-

256. 104 Raymond d’Aguilers, Historia, 106-8; Raymond d’Aguilers, Liber, 127-8. 105 Ibid. 106 Janie Steen, Verse and Virtuosity: The Adaptation of Latin Rhwtoric in Old English Poetry (Toronto, Buffalo and

London: University of Toronto Press, 2008), 71-2.

27

terrible roar; the sky will be covered sorrowfully with black shadows; the stars will fall

and the sun grow dark in the crimson east; the pale moon will not uncover her nightly

lamp, and signs threatening death will come from the sky.107

These images are taken directly from the book of Isaiah and the Synoptic Gospels, but the poem

provides more than a learned backing for the coming of the end.108 It provides a list of the

torments of hell and the delights of heaven, two reminders that all need to repent, and a

framework that relies not on a vision or dream but a fierce wind intruding on Bede’s garden,

directly recalling the great wind before doomsday.109 Unlike many others, Raymond’s chronicle

does not dwell on the variety of natural disasters and signs recorded by First Crusade chroniclers,

which may or may not have actually occurred, such as meteor showers, eclipses, auroras, and a

December 1097 earthquake.110 Although Raymond records fewer unusual phenomena that some

of the other chronicles, he writes of the earthquake in the context of God giving signs for the

need to repent: “In the meantime there was an earth tremor on the Kalends of January and we

also saw a very miraculous sign in the sky. On the night’s first watch a red sky in the north made

it appear as if the sun rose on a new day.”111 The date of the earthquake, and the miraculous sign

in the sky, was the date of the first vision of Peter Bartholomew. There may not be direct

borrowings from Bede’s poem in the text, but the theme of the signs of the end was clearly in the

text of Raymond d’Aguilers.

107 J.B. Allen and D. G. Calder, Sources and Analogues of Old English Poetry: the Major Latin Texts in Translation

(Cambridge: Brewer, 1976), 210. Latin: “Praecurrunt illum uel qualia signa: repente / Terra tremet montesque ruent

collesque liquescent, / Et mare terribili confundit murmure mentes, / Tristius et caelum tenebris obducitur atris, /

Astra cadunt rutilo ey Tytan tenebrescet in ortu, / Pallida nocturnam nec praestat luna lucernam, / De caelo uenient

et signa minantia mortem.” Lines50-56. Graham D. Caie, The Old English Poem Judgment Day II: a Critical

Edition with Editions of De Die Iudicii and the Hatton 113 Homily Be Dome Daege (Woodbridge: D.S. Brewer,

2000), 130. 108 Peter Darby, Bede and the End of Time (Farnham: Ashgate Publishing Ltd., 2012),103. 109 L. Whitbread, “The Sources and Literary Qualities of Bede’s Doomsday Verses,” Zeitschrift für deutsches

Altertum und deutsche Literatur 95.4 (Oct. 1966): 260-2. 110 Jonathan Riley-Smith, The First Crusade and the Idea of Crusading (London and New York: Continuum, 2003),

33-4, 92. 111 Raymond d’Aguilers, Historia, 36; Raymond d’Aguilers, Liber, 54.

28

The Hills wrote that they “prefer to think of [Raymond] in connection with the

picturesque Church of the Needle of Le Puy, but the evidence in lacking.”112 While the image of

a canon looking up daily at the beautiful tenth-century murals of the Last Judgment on the

ceiling of Saint-Michel d’Aiguilhe may be an appealing answer to the Raymond’s eschatology, a

better answer lies in the archives.113 The Liber of Raymond d’Aguilers is a complex text,

weaving typological exegesis and imminent eschatology into an eyewitness account heavily

biased towards the “Provençal” perspective. Raymond d’Aguilers was a product of his region of

origin, the cathedral of Le Puy, its Bible, its school, and its library, but that specific regionality

also had broader reverberations among those interested in the First Crusade. That a specific

world-view could have such longevity and importance should force us to re-evaluate where the

centre of crusade studies lies. We focus on the northern Europeans, such as Normans and the

French, with the Provençals remaining a marginal group. Raymond d’Aguilers’ regional identity

and exegetical framework calls for a reorientation, moving the pole of the crusades further south

and elevating the importance of the Auvergne within the conception and performance of the First

Crusade.

112 Raymond d’Aguilers, Historia, 7. 113 Arguments have, apparently, been laid out for an understanding of Aguilers as an Occitan form of Aiguilhe.

Until these appear in published form, however, they remain speculation at best. Private communication from

Bernard Sanial to author.