iii. A comet and all it portended¹
9. In the days of this same king a star of the sort called a comet appeared in the western sky; it was first seen at the start of a September night, and it lasted for almost three months. It shone with such a brilliant light that it fit up the greater part of the sky until it vanished at cock-crow. Whether this was a new star sent by God, or whether it was an existing star whose light He had increased as an omen, is known only to Him whose ineffable wisdom arranges all things. What is very certain is that whenever such a prodigy appears to men it clearly portends some wondrous and awe-inspiring event in the world shortly after.
¹ In the preceding chapters Glaber has reported events which occurred as late as 1024, but he now turns back sharply in order to prepare us for the coming of the millennium of the Nativity. He refers here to the appearance of Halley's comet in Aug.-Sept. 989 (P. Moore and J. Mason, The Return of Halley's Comet (Cambridge, 1984), p. 46), and to the destruction of the Mont-Saint-Michel by fire in 992 J. Laporte, 'L'abbaye du Mont-Saint-Michel aux x^e et xi^e siècles' in Millénaire monastique du Mont-Saint-Michel (Paris, 1966-71), i. 64).

10. Soon after, the church of St Michael the Archangel was destroyed by fire; this church is built on a headland at the edge of the ocean, and it is universally venerated, even down to our own days.¹ In that place there is most certainly something to see, for as the moon waxes and wanes the tides of the Ocean ebb and flow with strange motion about the headland. When the tides are in full flow they call them malinae, but when they are ebbing, ledones.² Because of this spectacle the place is much visited by people from all over the world. Not far away is the little river Ardre, which after the fire flooded somewhat, making it impossible to cross. Those wishing to visit the church found their way barred, and so for a while this route was closed. Afterwards the river returned to its bed, leaving the bank deeply scored by its passage.
¹ Mont Saint-Michel: see previous n.
² See Du Cange s.vv.

11. Then the venerable Abbo, father of the monastery of Saint-Benoît-de-Fleury, went down to the land of the Gascons in the far south in order to propagate the monastic observance. Once there, he stayed in a monastery, where, in his usual way, he busied himself in God's work and so came to be venerated by all. One day, in the courtyard of the monastery, a bitter tumult arose in some dispute in which tempers were raging. Then that reverend man Abbo, becoming aware of the matter, rushed out, bearing his writing-tablets and pen, to calm the tempest, but, possessed by an evil spirit, one low fellow rushed upon him and by driving a lance through his side made of him a martyr of Christ. It is said that the fellow was shortly afterwards seized by a demon and ended his life in misery. The body of the holy father was honourably buried there by his followers and the other faithful of that land; there, for His name's sake, God has since granted many benefits to men.^1
1 Abbo, abbot of Saint-Benoît-sur-Loire (988-1004), ODS, p. 1. He was a notable scholar and one of the founders of the greatness of his abbey, which, although originally reformed by St Odo of Cluny, was independent and itself the centre of a monastic family. It was on a visit to one of these dependencies, La Réole in Gascony, that Abbo was killed on 13 Nov. 1004. After 1031 he was revered as a martyr, his feast-day being 13 Nov. His life is recorded in Aimo's Vita Sancti Abbonis, which is written in the form of a letter to Hervé, treasurer of Tours (on whom see below, iv. 14-15), PL cxxxix. 375-414. For Abbo's works see ibid., cols. 463-582. He was a great champion of monastic liberties and of the power of the Roman See; it was at Fleury under his rule that the notion of monastic exemption flowered, on which see above, pp. Ix-Ixi. Glaber's account of his death resembles Aimo's only in general terms: see above, p. li. For a biography see P. Cousin, Saint Abbon de Fleury: Un savant, un pasteur, un martyr à la fin du X^e siècle (Paris, 1954).

12. At the same time, in Italy and Gaul, many of the bishops held synods to settle various problems. The matter of the fast which the greater part of the faithful observe between Ascension and Pentecost arose, and it was decided that it should not be enforced by sacerdotal authority except on the Saturday of Pentecost, but that those who wished to continue the observance should not be prohibited from doing so. Then there was the question why monks sang the Te Deum on the three or four Sundays before Christmas and during Lent, contrary to the custom of the Roman church. When taxed with this the abbots and monks replied that they only did so because of the precept of the renowned and excellent father, St Benedict, whose life and pronouncements were recorded and given force by the most eminent Gregory, bishop of the Romans.¹ When the bishops heard this, the usage of the monks was allowed to flourish as before. Then what was certainly not a minor matter was debated by the prelates. The feast of the Annunciation is celebrated on 25 March: might it not be more appropriately celebrated at some other time, outside Lent? Some maintained that the feast of the Annunciation could be celebrated quite licitly, according to Spanish custom, on 18 December. Some time after this when I was sharing the life of the brethren of the monastery of Cluny, a number of worthy monks came from Spain where they had long lived according to the usages of that region. When Christmas approached these monks begged the venerable Odilo, abbot of that house, to permit them to celebrate the Annunciation according to their custom. When they had celebrated this, segregated from the rest of the community, two of the eldest monks of the house that night dreamt they saw one of the Spaniards, armed with a cooking-fork, seize a young boy from upon the altar and put him in a frying-pan full of hot coals. The young boy cried out: 'Father, Father, they are taking away what you have given.' There is no more to be said: amongst us the ancient custom was very properly confirmed.^2
1Pope Gregory I 'the Great' (590-604); whose life of St Benedict forms Book 2 of his Dialogues, ed. A. de Vogüé (Sources Chrétiennes, 3 vols., Paris, 1978-80).
² In 1032 Sancho III, 'El Mayor' (1000-35), king of Navarre, dispatched the monk Paternus to Cluny. It was from this date that Cluniac penetration into the Spanish church began: Defourneaux, p. 79. Glaber later refers to Spanish monks who had taken the habit at Cluny and who spread love of the house in their own land, below, 4. vii. 22. He has already referred to Spanish monks fighting against Islam, above, 2. ix. 18. It seems likely that Glaber was at Cluny when Paternus was there, and that he and his followers provided information about events in Spain. The Spanish date of the Annunciation is put in its context by H. Chadwick, Pricillian of Avila: The Occult and the Charismatic in the Early Church (Oxford, 1976), pp. 14-17.

iv. Reconstruction of churches throughout the whole world
13. Just before the third year after the millennium, throughout the whole world, but most especially in Italy and Gaul, men began to reconstruct churches, although for the most part the existing ones were properly built and not in the least unworthy. But it seemed as though each Christian community were aiming to surpass all others in the splendour of construction. It was as if the whole world were shaking itself free, shrugging off the burden of the past, and cladding itself everywhere in a white mantle of churches.¹ Almost all the episcopal churches and those of monasteries dedicated to various saints, and little village chapels, were rebuilt better than before by the faithful.
¹ Glaber mentions the building or rebuilding of a number of major churches about this time: Loches (2. iv .5), Orléans cathedral (2. v. 9), Paray-le-Monial (3. ii. 6), Saint-Martin-de-Tours (3. iv. 15), Saint-Bénigne (3. v. 16 and Life, cc.viii, xii), the Holy Sepulchre at Jerusalem (3. vii. 25), S. Giusto di Susa (4. iii. 7). For a survey of the enormous church-building activity around the year 1000, see Conant.

14.¹ Amongst others at that time the church of Saint-Martin-de-Tours was prominent. That venerable man Hervé, treasurer of the house, first demolished then rebuilt it with great labour, all within his own lifetime.² If anybody had been able to record them, the life and manners of that man, his conduct from infancy to the end of this earthly life, would provide an incomparable example to the men of this age. He was born of a noble French family, though he was yet nobler in mind, and like a rose or a lily amongst thorns he was related by blood to some of the most ferocious men of this country. As is the custom amongst those of high birth he was educated as a noble and then sent to the schools of the liberal arts. But understanding that most learnt from such studies only pride, not obedience to the Divine Will, he thought it enough for him if he brought home the salvation of his soul. He abandoned the study of such showy knowledge and secretly entered a monastery, asking fervently to become a monk. But because his family (as we have said) was distinguished, the brethren of that monastery would in no way agree to what he asked, fearing the anger of his parents. To please him they promised that if his parents made no obstacle by force, they would freely grant him what he asked. For a time he tarried in that place, giving ample proof of his future sanctity and providing for all who lived there a worthy example. When his father heard what he had done he was transported with rage, came to the monastery, and dragged his son thence, pouring reproaches upon this child who only sought the higher good. He seized him and took him to the royal court, where he begged the king to deflect him from this course by offering great honours. King Robert was a pious and religious man, and gently exhorted Hervé that he should preserve this good intention untouched in his mind; for the moment he had him made treasurer of the church of Saint-Martin, hoping later to make of him an exemplary bishop. The attempt was often made thereafter, but was always thwarted by Hervé's refusal. Although charged against his will with the care of a church, and sometimes dressed in white according to the canon, in spirit and way of life he was a monk through and through: he habitually wore a hair shirt next to his skin, he mortified his body by relentless fasting, was miserly to himself and generous to the poor, and devoted himself to constant vigils and prayers.
¹ The Vita Herivei, published by Martène and Durand, Thesaurus novus, iii. 1689-92,is based upon this passage, with only one minor addition, the name of Hervé's father.
² Hervé, son of Landri of Buzençais (between Loches and Châteauroux in Berry) became treasurer of Saint-Martin-de-Tours and died in 1022. He is known chiefly from the Dialogus ad Fulbertum in Mabillon, Vetera Analecta (1675-6), i. 349-74, (1723), pp. 213-17. This work is a dialogue between its author, Hugh, archdeacon of Tours, and one Fulbertus, who may be the famous bishop of Chartres or 'Fulbertus Exiguus'–if he was a different man, as Behrends argues in Fulbert, p.lxiii. On Hervé of Tours see G. Oury, L’idéal monastique dans la vie canoniale: Le bienheureux Hervé de Tours (†1022)', Revue Mabillon, lii (1962), 1-31, esp. pp. 4, 15. For a full description of the great church that Hervé built see C. K. Hersey, 'The Church of Saint-Martin at Tours', The Art Bulletin, xxv (1943), 1-39.

15.¹ This God-inspired man conceived the idea that the whole fabric of the church entrusted to his care should be enlarged and made more lofty. Guided by the Holy Spirit, he indicated to the masons where to lay the foundations of the incomparable work which he himself brought to an end just as he had wished. When the work was finished the bishops of many cities were invited, and he busied himself with the consecration of this monument to God. On that day, as was only proper, the body of the holy confessor of God, Martin, was placed within. The dedication-feast of the former church fell on that same day, 4 July. It is said that some days before this translation Hervé, that man of God, begged the Lord to deign to show His affection for this church, His spouse, as He had done before, by performing some miracle through the agency of St Martin. While he was prostrate in prayer the Confessor appeared and in gentle tones addressed him thus: 'My dear son, you should know you could get much more from the Lord than that which you ask, but for the moment miracles already performed must suffice, because the most urgent thing is to collect the harvest from the seed already sown. Only that which heals and uplifts souls may be prayed for by all men. I do not forget to intercede with the Lord for these. You can be assured that I intercede specially with the Lord for those who serve him zealously in this church. Certain of these have become more involved than is proper in the business of this world, and while serving the arms of war they have fallen victim to them in battle.² I do not wish to conceal from you that it was only with difficulty that I won from the clemency of Christ that, snatched from the servants of the shadows, they should dwell in places of refreshment and light. For the rest, fulfil this pleasing vow which you made to the Lord.' On the appointed day bishops and abbots and a great multitude of the faithful of both sexes and orders gathered, but before they began the consecration the holy Hervé took care to tell all the holier priests who had gathered there what had been revealed to him. When the consecration had been carried out according to custom, and all that was necessary duly completed, this man began to mortify the flesh in a life yet more ascetic than before, passing his years in psalms and prayer, alone in a mean cell close to the church. When, after four years, he realized that he was about to die and his health became weaker and weaker, many came to visit him, hoping to witness a miracle at his death, inasmuch as they perceived him to be a man of great merit. But he wisely forewarned them, admonishing them to occupy themselves on other matters and not to expect a sign that they would certainly not see. Rather, he begged, they should earnestly pray for him to the good Lord. When the moment of death was close, he raised his hands and eyes to the heavens and cried out repeatedly; 'Lord have mercy! Lord have mercy!' With these words he breathed his last. He was buried in that church in the very place where the body of St Martin first rested.
¹ The rebuilding of the church of Tours seems to have been begun after a disastrous fire in the city in 1001: Annal. Turonenses in Mabillon, Vetera Analecta (1675-6), i. 372, 1723), p. 217. Glaber here tells us that Hervé lived for four years after its consecration, but in fact this seems to have occurred in 1014, and he died in 1022 (Oury, Revue Mabillon, lii (1952), 4, 15).
² This is not the first reference to clergy going to war: see above, 2. ix. 18.

v. Monasteries splendidly rebuilt or founded by Abbot William ¹
16. Amongst those who at that time distinguished themselves in the refurbishing of the churches of God was the venerable abbot William, who was formerly chosen by the blessed Mayol as father of the church of the holy martyr Benignus. He rebuilt this church to such a wonderful plan that it would be difficult to find another as beautiful. Nor was he any the less famous for the rigour of his rule, and in his time he was an incomparable propagator of the regular order. But although he was much loved for this amongst the pious and religious, he was equally criticized and plotted against by the deceitful and impious.² He was born in Italy of noble stock, but he gained a greater nobility by his distinguished attainment of learning. In that country he inherited from his parents an estate formerly called Volpiano, and there he built a monastery full of all grace, later changing the name to Fruttuaria. When he had enriched it with many gifts, he appointed as father of the monks one John, who was his worthy imitator in all things.³ William had an acute intelligence and outstanding prudence, and because of this he was given a high place in the courts of kings and other princes. Whenever a monastery was deprived of its pastor, he was compelled by its owner, whether king, count, or bishop, to take charge of it and reform its life, for all saw that monasteries under his authority flourished above all others in wealth and sanctity. He himself firmly promised that the monks of any house should want for nothing if they observed the Rule. This was manifestly obvious in the houses put into his care.
¹ Glaber here introduces us to St William, his great patron. Para. 16 reads like a summary of the Life of St William. We know that he interrupted the writing of the Histories in order to produce this biography, as he tells us in Life, c. xiii, and below, 4. iv. 9. There is other material in Books 3 and 4 related to material in the Life, on which see above, pp. lxx-lxxi.
² This appears to be an allusion to the accusations of political plotting made against St William and reported in Life, c. xi. These accusations gained force from the fact that St William was related to Otto-William, count of Mâcon, who contested Robert II of France's claim to the duchy of Burgundy (see above, ii. 6n.) and perhaps to Arduin of Ivrea, who fought Henry II for the crown of Italy (see Life, c. ixnn.; above, Preface. I n.).
³ In the Life of St William, c. ix, Glaber says that while on a journey to Italy the saint fell ill and was persuaded by his family to found a new abbey, later called Fruttuaria, on their patrimony at Volpiano. The chronicler of Saint-Bénigne reports that later William appointed as its abbot 'Ioannes vero HOMO DEI', a former hermit of Italian origins who had been drawn by the reputation of William to Dijon: Analecta Divioinesia, p. 154. Although William was in charge of the new abbey he never seems to have become its abbot, perhaps to safeguard its independence (A. Wilmart, Auteurs spirituels et textes dévots du Moyen Âge latin (Paris, 1932), pp. 68-76); Bulst, pp.129-33. Wilmart, relying on a grant of immunity by Conrad II (1024-39), dated early in 1027, argues that John was made abbot shortly before that date, probably in 1026, but Bulst, pp. 130-1, suggests convincingly that John was probably blessed in the presence of Henry II (1002-24) in 1023 at Brumath. The evidence about when his rule ended is even more difficult. Wilmart, p. 75, thinks that there is nothing dependable before a privilege of 1055 which mentions Suppo as abbot of Fruttuaria. Bulst, pp. 126-7, takes a rather different view of the evidence and suggests that John was succeeded by Andreas as abbot by 1041, but lived on until 1049. John, abbot of Fruttuaria, was the author of a short treatise for young monks, published by Wilmart, pp. 94-8. He should not be confused with John, abbot of Fécamp (1028-78), on whom see Bulst, pp. 158-61; J. Leclercq and J. P. Bonnes, Un maître de la vie spirituelle au XI^e siècle, Jean de Fécamp (Paris, 1946); Wilmart, pp. 101-37.

17. As for the institution and the observance of this custom, they are said to have taken rise from the monasteries founded by the holy father, Benedict, and from his Rule, and to have been brought to our land of Gaul by his disciple St Maurus.¹ There still exists a trust worthy account of how, some time after St Maurus' death, the monks were driven by enemy attack from the monastery of Glanfeuil, which, according to the Vita, he built in Anjou. They came to the monastery of the confessor St Sabinus in Poitou bearing with them all the possessions they could carry, and there for a time they gave their attention to those things which they had learnt. But when their ardour for the Rule began to wane it was taken up for a time in the monastery of Saint-Martin-d'Autun. Then, in what we may call its third migration, it passed into Upper Burgundy, to the monastery of Baume.^2
1 St Maurus (6th c.) was allegedly the assistant of St Benedict at Monte Cassino; later tradition asserted that he came to Gaul and founded the abbey of Glanfeuil near Angers. His Vita by Ps.-Faustus is in AASS Boll. Jan. i. 1039-50; AASS OSB, saec. 1, pp. 274-98; cf. ODS, p. 295.
² Glaber is here reporting a tradition also found in the Life of St Hugh of Autun (in AASS Boll., Apr. ii), according to which pious men petitioned St Benedict at Monte Cassino to send St Maurus to France, where he founded Glanfeuil; later the monks fled from there to Saint-Savin-sur-Gartempe near Poitiers. At the request of one Badillo this community later provided monks to reform the abbey of Saint-Martin at Autun, from where Berno (c. 850-927), the later founder of Cluny, was despatched to reform Baume: L. M. Smith, The Early History of the Monastery of Cluny (Oxford, 1920), pp. 9-11. This tradition established an immaculate pedigree for Cluny stretching right back to St Benedict. Our knowledge, however, of the early life of Berno and the origins of Cluny is highly unsatisfactory, but it does seem likely that Berno had been connected with Saint Martin-d'Autun. The importance of this was that Saint-Martin had been reformed by monks from Saint-Savin, which was one of the centres of the reform of St Benedict of Aniane; the Cluniacs were later at great pains to stress the derivation of their customs from this Carolingian reformer, e.g. John of Salerno in his life of St Odilo: 'Ipse autem pater Heuticius [St Benedict of Aniane] institutor fuit harum consuetudinum, quae hactenus in nostris monasteriis habentur'(PL cxxxiii. 533): G. de Valous, Le Monachisme clunisien des origines au XV^e siècle (Paris, 1935), i. 19n.

18. In the end the Rule, by now almost defunct, with the aid of God found a refuge in wisdom where it might gather strength, bear fruit and branch forth; this was at the monastery called Cluny. The name of this place is derived from the fact that its site is low and inclined, or perhaps, and this would be more appropriate, from cluere, which means to grow.¹ Truly it has daily grown brilliantly in many gifts ever since its foundation. This monastery was originally built by Berno, father of the monks of Baume, at the order of the most pious Duke William of Aquitaine, in the county of Mâcon on the little river Grosne.² It is said that at first it received an endowment of only fifteen manses, and that monks to the number of twelve lived there. From this splendid seed sprang an innumerable lineage of the Lord of Hosts, which has filled a vast tract of the earth. Because they were always devoted to godly works such as justice and mercy, they deserved to receive many good things, and they set an example for imitation by future generations. After Berno, the very wise and holy abbot Odo took over the government of this house. He was formerly Provost of the church of Saint-Martin at Tours and was distinguished for the sanctity of his manners and conduct. He was the propagator of the Rule to such an extent that all the more important monasteries of Italy and Gaul, from Benevento to the Ocean, rejoiced to submit to his command. After his death Aymar succeeded him. He was a straightforward man who, although not so famous, was no less trusty a guardian of the observance of the Rule. After him the holy and venerable Mayol, whom we have already mentioned, was elected and he chose Odilo to lead the monks after him. He was the fourth abbot of Cluny after the founder Berno.³ From this house brethren were frequently called out into many provinces, where they were set in authority as abbots and won much profit for the Lord. Father William, with whom this present chapter was begun, turned out to be a more industrious labourer and a more fruitful sower of the Rule than anyone who had gone from that house before him.
¹ Glaber is trying to find an appropriate etymology for the name Cluny. He first suggests that it was so named because it was built on a sloping site ('adclino'), but this was evidently too prosaic. He therefore advances the idea that it was derived from cluere, which in Medieval Latin means 'to be brilliant' (Niermeyer, p. 192). Glaber's notion that it meant 'to grow' is unaccountable. A. Dusat and C. Rostaing, Dictionnaire étymologique des noms de lieux en France (Paris, 1963), p. 197, suggest that Cluny derives from the name of a Gaulish notable, Clunius, plus the Gallo-Latin possessive suffix -acum. Professor Ellis Evans, Professor of Celtic in the University of Oxford, tentatively suggests some connection with Welsh clun, upper part of the thigh, hip, haunch, buttock, leg (cognate with Latin clunis), but he stresses that 'we do not know the origin'.
² Cluny was founded by William 'the Pious', duke of Aquitaine (898-918), for a summary of whose career see J. Dunbabin, France in the Making (843-1180) (Oxford, 1985), pp. 59-60. The Life of St Hugh of Autun says that when the first abbot, St Berno, asked for the site of William's favourite hunting-lodge at Cluny, the duke was dismayed, but was swayed by the argument 'think what reward God will give thee for dogs, and what for monks' (tr. Smith, Early History, p. 12). Duke William founded Cluny in 909 or 910; the foundation-charter can be found in Bernard and Bruel, i. 112. For a modern discussion of the importance of this act see Cowdrey, The Cluniacs, pp. 4-8.
³ The abbots of Cluny down to Glaber's time were: Berno (909 or 910-27), Odo (927-42), Aymar (942-8-died 965), Mayol (948-94), and Odilo (994-1049), to whom this work is dedicated (see e.g. G. de Valous, art. 'Cluny' in Dict. d'histoire et de géographie ecclésiastiques, xiii (Paris, 1956), esp. cols. 39-49; bibliog. 169-74); Glaber has already talked about Mayol's captivity by the Saracens, above, i. iv. 9, and it is to this that he refers here. Odilo was the fifth abbot by the inclusive reckoning normal in Latin, but fourth after Berno according to the exclusive count regular in English.

vi. Holy relics found everywhere
19. When the whole world was, as we have said, clothed in a white mantle of new churches, a little later, in the eighth year after the millennium of the Saviour's Incarnation, the relics of many saints were revealed by various signs where¹ they had long lain hidden. It was as though they had been waiting for a brilliant resurrection and were now by God's permission revealed to the gaze of the faithful; certainly they brought much comfort to men's minds. This revelation is known to have begun in the city of Sens in Gaul in the church of the holy martyr Stephen. The archbishop of that place was Lierri.² Wonderful to relate, he discovered there many ancient and holy things which had long lain hidden, amongst them a fragment of the staff of Moses. News of this discovery brought numbers of the faithful, not just from the provinces of Gaul but from most of Italy and the lands beyond the sea; no small number of them were sick people who returned, cured by the intervention of the saints. But as so often happens when something occurs which at the start is good for men, the vice of greed flourishes and in the usual way disaster strikes. This city, to which such vast crowds resorted, as we have said, became immensely rich as a result of their piety, but its inhabitants conceived a terrible insolence because of this blessing.
¹ Niermeyer, p. 880, cites only this passage for quorsum meaning 'where'.
² Lierri, archbishop of Sens, who was probably elected in 999 (Odorannus, p. 9), died in 1032: so the Chronicon Sancti Petri Vivi, p. 116, which also records (p. 108) that in the lifetime of Abbot Raynard of Saint-Pierre-de-Sens, who died in 1015 (and the context suggests actually in that year), Lierri searched for and found the long-lost relics of SS Savinianus and Potentianus. Healings and other miracles followed at their tombs. The 'invention' of relics was a growth industry in this period. Glaber records in the Life, c. viii, that when William rebuilt the abbey of Saint-Bénigne he found the long-lost tomb of the patron saint. The forging of relics, as recorded by Glaber below, 4. iii. 6, was a natural consequence of the cult. On the importance of the cult of relics see above, pp. lxix-lxx.

20. After the death of Fromond, who was both count of that city and a man of straightforward simplicity, power fell to his son, who was to administer the affairs of the city very badly.¹ Driven by vice, he despoiled the glory of the church as energetically as he could. So much did he admire the wicked customs of the Jews that he ordered his whole entourage to place before his name (which was Raynard) the title King of the Jews.² He was deceitful in all things and an underhand detractor of the faith; he conducted the trials of the poor without mercy, for he was completely devoid of humanity. The story I am going to tell has as many witnesses as there were men then living in that city.
¹ Fromond, count of Sens (997-1012) was married to a daughter of Alberada and Raynard de Roucy (on whom see above, ii. 6n), and was therefore a brother-in-law of 0tto-William count of Mâcon (on whom see above, ii. 6n.). Fromond's son and successor was Raynard II (1012-55): C. Larcher de Lavernade, Histoire de la ville de Sens (Sens, 1845), pp. 67-9; Pfister, p. 260; Bur, pp. 145-6, 136.
² The reason for this title is not clear, but by this time anti-Semitism was established in Western Europe: R. Chazan, '1007-1012: Initial Crisis for Northern European Jewry', Proceedings of the American Academy for Jewish Research, xxxviii-xxxix (1970-1), 101-17. It is possible that Raynard had come to recognize the economic advantages of helping and protecting a Jewish community, as Bishop Rudiger of Speyer was to do in 1084 (R. Chazan (ed.), Church, State and Jew in the Middle Ages (New York, 1980), pp. 58-63), but this can only be a guess based on Glaber's references to the greed of the Sénonais. The Chronicon Sancti Petri Vivi is also deeply hostile to Raynard, who continued his father Fromond's feud against Archbishop Lierri of Sens (on which see below, para. 23n.), but makes no suggestion of favour towards the Jews.

21. A criminal was once caught thieving and brought before the count so that his judgement should decide what was to be done with him. Immediately Raynard, with no pity at all, ordered that he be hung from a gibbet. The captive tearfully begged Raynard to spare his life on this occasion, promising that he would never rob again, but nothing came of this. Indeed it only made him the more cruel, and he swore that the miserable suppliant should not live any longer. He, seeing the sentence imposed upon him could not at all be changed, was only able to secure that he should be shriven of his wicked deeds by the bishop, who should kindly grant the forgiveness that was a power of his ministry. As soon as this was done the vile servants dragged him out to be hung. As he was led to the appointed place he kept repeating these words: 'Lord Jesus, thou who on this day was hung from the cross for the salvation of all men, have mercy upon me.' For this was the Friday which is for this reason revered amongst all the faithful.¹ Well, he was bound, raised up, and hung by his constricted throat. Then everyone left this sad scene of (as they thought) execution, and he was left for dead, hanging there till the next day. But, through the will of God, the rope then snapped, and so he who was compelled to submit himself to a violent death hoisted through the yielding air, fell to earth a free and living man. When he entered the city everyone found it a stupefying spectacle. Alas, he returned to his former ways and turned out wicked.
¹ i.e. Good Friday.

22. A similar thing is said to have happened not long before in the city of Troyes. Some thieves were driving oxen before them when they realized they were being pursued by the owners of the beasts. They therefore entrusted the animals to the care of an innocent old man; they pretended they were going off in search of food, but really they intended to take flight and escape. The old man was at once found with the oxen; he was dragged away, beaten and bound like a guilty man, then taken before Count Herbert, the ruler of that city.¹ He wished to plead his case but he was not heard, but rather, as if a criminal in his rough old age,² he was condemned to hang by the count. The sentence was carried out without any delay. But as soon as he was hung, strange to tell, a big strong heifer came, and, holding itself erect, placed its horns under the feet of the hanging man; in this way it held him up free from pain and alive for three days. After three days the unfortunate man heard wayfarers passing close by chattering amongst themselves. He shouted out as loudly as he could, begging them to hurry and cut him down, but they thought this was some demonic illusion. However, he shouted out more loudly, affirming that he was really alive, so the men came to him, freed him, and cut him down. He was brought to the city, and when he was asked how he had survived for so long hanging from a gibbet, he replied: 'When I was young and had taken a wife, we took a godchild to whom we vowed we would make some gift out of our limited resources; the only thing we had was a bull-calf, which my mother had had the generosity to give us. When I was left to hang from the high tree it seemed to me that a calf, bigger than any other, came, arched its body, held up its neck, and gently placed its horns under my feet so that it supported me all the time I was hanging.' Since this man who escaped from death told his story, the people of that area have followed his example and given to godsons as baptismal presents a great multitude of bull-calves.
¹ Herbert 'le Jeune', count of Meaux and Troyes, who died on 28 Jan. 994 or 995, was a grandson of Herbert II of Vermandois (on whom see above, 1. i. 5). He enjoyed a considerable part of the inheritance of the latter's eldest son, Herbert 'le Vieux', who died without heir between 980 and 984: Bur, Comté de Champagne, pp. 108-14. For his son and successor Stephen see above, ii. 5 n.; 8n.
² For 'cruda senectute' see Vergil, Aen. vi. 304; cf. Life, c. iiin.

23. Meanwhile, in the matter of Raynard the Judaizer (or rather the Mad), it was suggested to the king, who had already often reproached him for his wild behaviour, that such a great city should be brought under royal control, to prevent any further increase in the scandal to the holy faith. With this motive the king sent an army to drive out Raynard and occupy the city in his name. The royal expedition seized the city and inflicted heavy losses, destroying quite a large part of it by fire.¹ And so it was that dire disaster out-shadowed former pleasures as a fitting punishment for sin.
¹ The seizure of the city of Sens was the outcome of a long feud between the counts and Archbishop Lierri (on whom see iv. 19). Count Fromond was determined to impose his younger son Bruno on the church as archbishop. This was foiled by papal intervention, but his son and successor, Raynard (on whom see para. 20n.) renewed the quarrel until Lierri appealed to King Robert in 1015. Robert seized the city and Raynard fled to Count Odo of Blois, returning to ravage the suburbs. A curious settlement was then reached: Raynard was to enjoy the county until his death, when it was to be divided between the archbishop and the king. In fact this was not implemented, for Fromond III (1055-9) succeeded his father: Chronicon Sancti Petri Vivi, pp. 110-12, 124. See also Bur, Comté de Champagne, pp. 145, 158.

40. About the year 1000 of the Incarnation of the Word, when King Robert took as his wife Queen Constance, a woman of Aquitaine,¹ for her sake a great flood of strange men from the Auvergne and Aquitaine began to flow into France and Burgundy; they were flippant and vain fellows with strange manners and clothes; their weapons and the equipment of their horses were curious, and they were close-shaven from half-way down their heads; they were beardless like actors, wore indecent hose and shoes, and were totally devoid of good faith and respect for agreed peace. Alas! their evil example was seized upon avidly by the whole people of France, formerly the most honourable of nations, and of Burgundy, who soon became the equals of these fellows in infamy and sin. If any religious or God-fearing man ventured to restrain their behaviour, they treated him like a mad man. But that man of true faith and constancy, Father William, of whom we have spoken, rejecting all human shame and taking upon himself spiritual invective, bitterly criticized the king and queen for allowing such things to happen in a realm which, amongst all others, had long shone forth by virtue of its honour and devotion.² He also took to task those of a lesser station, threatening them to such good purpose that many followed his advice, renounced their superstitious vanities, and reverted to their former ways. He added that these trappings were nothing more than the brand-marks³ of Satan, and that any man who died so branded would have the greatest difficulty in escaping from the chains of the devil. Amongst the greater part of them, however, the wicked behaviour flourished. Because of my hatred for it, I have stigmatized it with a few heroic verses:

A thousand years after the Lord was born on earth of a Virgin Men are become prey to the gravest errors. As we seek to discern the many forms of things And model our manners on ancient example, Novelty throws itself rashly into the teeth of danger. Behold, our people now mock past generations, Mix pleasure and debauchery and call them manners, Fear not scandal and scorn serious matters, Spurning honour, the guide of just men. This life now produces tyrants with strange bodies, Faithless and foolish men, with clothes too short for them. While the republic groans under soft petticoat rule, Fraud, theft, and all infamy reign supreme in the world, Saints are not honoured nor the sacred worshipped. The sword, plague, and famine rage all about, And the impiety of men uncorrected spares no one. If God's great pity did not delay his wrath Hell would engulf them in its frightful mouth. It is the sad quality of sin That the more one sins the less one fears to sin, And the less one sins the more terrifying sin appears.

¹ On Constance's origins see above, ii. 7n; also pp. 154-5n.
² In the Life, c, xii, Glaber describes the sermon delivered by St William on the occasion of the consecration of the new abbey of Saint-Bénigne at Dijon. Although there is no mention there of the presence of the king or queen, a strikingly similar diatribe against styles of dress and deportment was apparently delivered; on the possible importance of this see above, p. xxvii.
³ Niermeyer, p. 161, suggests cauteria, 'brands', for calteria, citing this passage.

BOOK FOUR
iv. Raging Famine throughout the world
9. As 1033, the year of the millennium of the Passion of Christ approached, many men famous in the Roman world, veritable standard-bearers of the holy faith, ended their lives. Amongst them were Benedict,¹ the universal pope, Robert king of the Franks (to whose death we have already referred)² and that incomparable bishop and wisest of men, Fulbert of Chartres.³ The distinguished William, whom I have so often mentioned, father of monks and founder of the monasteries, also died: a great deal could be told of him which would be very edifying, but this, as is well known, has already been done in the little book on his life and virtues that I issued.⁴ There is one story which I know is not told there. The holy father left this material world for the realms of the blessed in Neustria, at the monastery of Fécamp, which is set close to the ocean some forty miles from Rouen. As was only appropriate for so great a man, he was buried in the foremost place in that church. A few days later a little boy, about ten years of age, fell gravely ill and was brought to his tomb in the hope that he might therebye recover his health; he was left by his parents to sleep there alone. Looking around, he suddenly saw sitting upon the tomb a small bird which looked like a dove, and while watching it for some time he fell asleep. Awakening from that gentle slumber, he found himself in perfect health, feeling as though he had never been ill. His parents welcomed him back with joy, and all rejoiced.
¹ Benedict VIII, on whom see above, 3. Preface. 1n. He died in 1024.
² Robert's death at Melun in 1031 has already been reported; 3. ix. 36.
³ Fulbert, bishop of Chartres (1006-28), one of the most learned men of the age, on whom see Behrends, Fulbert, especially the Introduction, pp. xiii-xlii (for dates see pp. xvii-xviii, xxi).
⁴ The Life of St William, printed below.

10.¹ Some time later a famine began to ravage the whole earth, and death threatened almost all the human race. The weather was so unseasonable that no season was suitable for the sowing of any crop, and floods prevented the gathering in of the harvest. It seemed as though the elements were warring amongst themselves, but for certain they were wreaking vengeance upon human presumption. Rain fell so continuously everywhere that for three years furrows for seed could not be properly driven, At harvest time weeds and 'infertile tares’² had covered the surface of the ground. A muid of seed rendered at best only a setier, and a setier only a handful.³ This avenging famine began in the Orient, and after devastating Greece passed to Italy and thence to Gaul and the whole English people.⁴ This dearth pressed hard upon all the people; rich men and those of middling estate grew pallid with hunger like the poor, and the brigandage of the mighty ceased in the face of universal want. If food for sale could be found, the seller was free to raise his price at will. In many places a muid (of grain) cost sixty sous, and in others a setier sold for fifteen. After men had eaten beasts and birds, under the pressure of rampant famine they began to eat carrion and things too horrible to mention. Some tried to escape death by eating the roots of the forest and the herbs of the stream, but in vain, for there is no escape from the wrath of the vengeance of God except to God himself. It is terrible to relate the evils which then befell mankind. Alas, a thing formerly little heard of happened: ravening hunger drove men to devour human flesh! Travellers were set upon by men stronger than themselves, and their dismembered flesh was cooked over fires and eaten. Many who had fled from place to place from the famine, when they found shelter at last, were slaughtered in the night as food for those who had welcomed them. Many showed an apple or an egg to children, then dragged them to out-of-the-way places and killed and ate them. In many places the bodies of the dead were dragged from the earth, also to appease hunger. This raging madness rose to such proportions that solitary beasts were less likely to be attacked by brigands than men. The custom of eating human flesh had grown so common that one fellow sold it ready cooked in the market-place of Tourmis like that of some beast. When he was arrested he did not deny the shameful charge. He was bound and burned to death. The meat was buried in the ground; but another fellow dug it up and ate it,⁵ and he too was put to death by fire.
¹ Hugh of Flavigny, p. 399, adopts this account of the famine, using the same opening words, mentioning grain sold at 60 sous a muid and 15 sous a setier, cannibalism, the selling of human flesh at Tournus, the monster near Mâcon with his 48 human heads, and the eating of white earth.
²A phrase from Vergil, Georgics, i. 154.
³Professor Philip Grierson has kindly furnished this note: 'The modius (Fr. muid) was a Roman measure of capacity (dry and liquid) reckoned as 16 sextarii and as a dry measure supposed to have been about 8.75l. Charlemagne had tried to standardize it, for a clause in the acts of the council of Frankfurt am Main of 794 refers to the modius publicus et noviter statutus, but in medieval France the word was applied to such a variety of measures (Ronald E. Zupko, French Weights and Measures before the Revolution. A Dictionary of Provincial and Local Units (Bloomington, Ind., and London, 1978), pp. 116-20) that only where cross-checking is possible can we infer what it was. The sextarius (Fr. setier) was a Roman measure of capacity defined as a sixth of a bucketful (congius) and treated as the equivalent of 1 2/3 Roman pounds (0.55 kg) of water or wine. As a liquid measure it remained at about this figure, a little less than one imperial pint, but in medieval France the word mainly represented a dry measure of one-twelfth of a muid, consequently varying with the size of the latter.'
⁴Cf. the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, E text s.a. 1032 (trans. D. Whitelock, D. C. Douglas, and S. I Tucker (London, 1961), p. 102): 'In this year appeared the wild fire, such as no man remembered before, and also it did damage all over in many places.'
⁵The meat that had been cooked.