pious foundation or political masterstroke? the chronicon mosamense and the reform of mouzon by...

RHE_2015_1-2_04-Huysmans 103 / 134 CULTURA • WETTEREN 28/01/2015 14:32:15

DOI : 10.1484/J.RHE.5.xxxxxx

PIOUS FOUNDATION OR STRATEGIC MASTERSTROKE?1

THE CHRONICON MOSOMENSE AND THE REFORM OF MOUZON

BY ARCHBISHOP ADALBERO OF REIMS (969-989)

Introduction

In 925 King Charles iii of France (r. 898-922) had to formally renounce his claims to Lotharingia.2 From that moment on, the former realm of King Lothar ii (r. 855-869) fell under the nomi-nal rule of the German sovereign.3 In the aftermath of Otto i’s victory over the rebellion led by Duke Gilbert of Lorraine, two separate duchies were created in 959, under the central authority of Duke Bruno (r. 954-965), brother of Otto and archbishop of Cologne.4 The actions described in this paper center around the

1 This contribution was effected as part of the OT-project Reform and the Bishop: Episcopal attitudes towards the administration and reform of re-ligious communities during the Central Middle Ages (ecclesiastical province of Rheims, c. 900-c. 1100), funded by the Research Council of the KU Leuven and supervised by Professor Brigitte Meijns. I would like to express my gratitude to Professor Laurent Morelle (École Pratique des Hautes Études), to Professor Brigitte Meijns, to the anonymous reviewer and to my father Paul Huysmans for their careful reading and their useful and enriching comments on earlier versions.

2 Léon Vanderkindere, La formation territoriale des principautés belges aux Moyen Age, Brussels, 1902, p. 14; Michel Parisse, Lotharingia, in Timo-thy Reuter and Rosamund McKitterick red., The New Cambridge Medi-eval History: Volume 3, c. 900-c.1024. Cambridge, 1999, p. 313-316.

3 Jean-Pol Evrard, Verdun, au temps de l’évêque Haymon (988-1024), in Dominique Iogna-Prat and Jean-Charles Picard, Religion et culture autour de l'an Mil. Royaume capétien et Lotharingie. Paris, 1990, p. 273-274.

4 Alain Dierkens and Michel Margue, Memoria ou damnatio memoriae? L'image de Gislebert, duc de Lotharingie († 939), in Sylvain Gouguenheim (ed.), Retour aux sources. Textes, études et documents d'histoire médiévale of-ferts à Michel Parisse, Paris, 2004, p. 869-890; Régine Le Jan, L'aristocratie lotharingienne au Xe siècle: structure interne et conscience politique, in Eadem (ed.), Femmes, pouvoir et société dans le haut Moyen Age (Les Médiévistes français, 1), Paris, 2001, p. 206-208; Michel Parisse, Histoire de la Lorraine,


o. huysmans104

southern part, commonly named Upper-Lotharingia and roughly coinciding with the ecclesiastical province of Trier. Here, Bruno installed Frederic (r. 959-978) as duke, son of Count Wigeric of the upcoming family of the Ardenne. Tightly allied to the impe-rial house of Saxony, the Ardenne clan quickly gained power in the ‘Middle Empire’ during the second half of the 10th century through the acquisition of crucial comital, episcopal and abbatial titles in the region. From Upper-Lotharingia, they reached out further for territories in Lower Lotharingia and northern Cham-pagne. In 969, Frederic’s paternal nephew Adalbero (d. 989) as-cended the archiepiscopal see of Reims.5 He will play the leading part in our story. Despite the assistance of his kinfolk, govern-ing Upper-Lotharingia remained a challenging task. The duchy consisted of amalgam of pagi or counties and episcopal princi-palities, not all of which were actually controlled by the duke’s vassals. Hence, the region was subject to the continuous rivalry and territorial competition of the leading families. In addition to these inner struggles, the West-Frankish kings’ ambitions to regain the lost territories in Media Francia posed a permanent threat to stability.6

Related to the aristocratic strife, 10th-century Lotharingia is characterized by an concentrated multiplicity of monastic re-forms.7 Adjacent to two kingdoms, the region’s spirit of religious renewal spread to both realms. In Lower Lotharingia, a noble-

Paris, 1977, p. 141-143 ; Jens Schneider and Tristan Martine, La produc-tion d'un espace : débuts lotharingiens et pratiques de la frontière (IXe-XIe siècle), in Géographie historique de la Lotharingie, 4 (2014), http://rgh.univ-lorraine.fr/articles/view/43.

5 Michel Parisse, Généalogie de la Maison d'Ardenne (Publications de la Section Historique de l'Institut G.-D. de Luxembourg, 95), Luxembourg, 1981, p. 9-40; Pierre Riché, Les Carolingiens, une famille qui fit l'Europe, Paris, 1983, p. 263-267.

6 Jean Dunbabin, France in the making (843-1180), Oxford, 1985, 22000, p. 30-36; Le Jan, L'aristocratie lotharingienne… [see n. 4], p. 210-211.

7 Anne Wagner, Gorze au XIe siècle, Nancy, 1996, p. 29-35; Michel Parisse, Noblesse et monastères en Lotharingie du IXe au XIe siècle, in Raymund Kottje and Helmut Maurer eds., Monastische Reformen im 9. und 10. Jahrhundert, Sigmaringen, 1989, p. 167-196; Emile Amann and Auguste Dumas, L’Église au pouvoir des laïques (888-1057) (Histoire de l’église de-puis les origines jusqu’au nos jours, vii), Paris, 1940, p. 343-336; Joachim Wollasch, Monasticism: the first wave of reform, in New Cambridge Medieval History… [see n. 2], p. 169-170.


pious foundation or strategic masterstroke? 105

man called Gerard (d. 959) reportedly renounced his aristocratic lifestyle and founded a monastery in Brogne in 919. As abbot, he assisted in the reform of the Flemish abbeys initiated by Count Arnulf i of Flanders in the 940’s and early 950’s. The region en-closed by the rivers Meuse and Moselle, including the episcopal sees of Verdun and Metz, formed another zone with a remarkable density of reformed houses. In 932, Bishop Adalbero i of Metz (r. 929-962), brother of Duke Frederic, invited John of Vandières to direct the reform of the dilapidated monastery of Gorze.8 As its monks were frequently delegated to manage reforms in other houses, the influence of Gorze spread fast in and beyond the dio-cese. Among the institutes involved were the abbeys of St-Maxi-min of Treves; Stavelot, St-Hubert and Gembloux in the diocese of Liège; St-Arnoul and St-Martin of Metz.9 Two years after Adal-bero’s assistance at Gorze, Gauzelin of Toul conducted reforms at St-Evre, using instructions from Fleury-sur-Loire.10 In addition, Gorze was put in charge of the spiritual training of the kinfolk of the Ardenne family destined for an ecclesiastical career.

The aforementioned cases mostly concern royal or episcopal monasteries. Here, noblemen or bishops generally promoted a strict application of the Benedictine Rule and introduced a re-gular abbacy. Nonetheless, they usually maintained temporal control over the communities through advocacy, claiming this of-fice themselves or appointing a kinsman. In the 10th and 11th cen-tury, the advocate was in charge of the abbey’s defense, but often also administered the temporal goods and juridical affairs on the monastery’s domains. Furthermore, the functionary received a beneficium, a considerable share of the monastery’s income, and usually had a say in the abbatial election.11 In practice, these

8 Michel Parisse, La Lorraine monastique, Nancy, 1981, p. 23-25; Idem, Histoire de la Lorraine… [see n. 4], p. 133-137; Egon Boshof, Kloster und Bischof in Lotharingien, in Raymund Kottje and Helmut Maurer eds., Monastische Reformen im 9. und 10. Jahrhundert (Vorträge und Forschungen, 38), Sigmaringen, 1989, p. 219-230.

9 F l o d o a r d o f R e i m s, The Annals of Flodoard of Reims 919-966, Steven Fanning and Bernard S. Bachrach ed. and trans., Toronto, 2004, p. 25; Wagner, Gorze… [see n. 7], p. 23-38.

10 John Nightingale, Monasteries and Patrons in the Gorze Reform, Oxford, 2001, p. 16-18, 115-119, 131-135.

11 John Howe, The Nobility's Reform of the Medieval Church, in The American Historical Review, 93/2 (1988), p. 335-337; Charles Pergameni,


o. huysmans106

charges and revenues turned the advocatus into a powerful local magnate.12 Additionally, secular and ecclesiastic lords endowed these newly reformed houses with property and income to secure their continued existence. As a result, many royal abbeys passed on to the noble families’ dominance.13

The Chronicle of Mouzon

One such monastery was located in Mouzon, a locality at the Meuse bank east from the episcopal city of Reims. In May 971, Archbishop Adalbero of Reims from the Ardenne family, cast out the local clerics and replaced them with Benedictine monks from a nearby priory in Thin. The history of this establishment is well documented. In addition to the relatively extensive diploma-tic evidence, the Chronicon Mosomense or foundation chronicle of the abbey of Mouzon, written by an anonymous monk, narrates the process in great detail. The date of composition is hitherto situated in the second quarter of the 11th century, around 1034, more than 60 years after the foundation. W. Wattenbach, D. Mi-sonne, M. Parisse and M. Bur have based their dating primarily on the third and last book, taking the last annalistic record as terminus post quem.14 M. Bur correctly argues that this source has long been neglected or dismissed as biased and untrustworthy.15

L’avouerie ecclésiastique en Lotharingie. Abus et remèdes, Brussels, 1906, p. 5-9; Egon Boshof, Untersuchungen zur Kirchenvogtei in Lothringen im 10. und 11. Jahrhundert, in Zeitschrift der Savigny-Stiftung für Rechtsgeschichte. Kanonistische Abteilung, 65 (1979), p. 55-119; Charles West, The Signi-ficance of the Carolingian Advocate, in Early Medieval Europe, 17/2 (2009), p. 186–206; Michel Parisse, Noblesse et monastères… [see n. 7], p. 189-191; Constance Brittain Bouchard, Sword, Miter, and Cloister. Nobility and the Church in Burgundy, 980–1198, Cornell, 1987, p. 125-129.

12 Dunbabin, France in the making… [see n. 6], p. 118-119.13 Michèle Gaillard, La place des abbayes dans la politique territoriale des

souverains francs et germaniques en Lotharingie, de 869 à 925, in Revue du Nord, 351 (2003), p. 655-666 (665).

14 Daniel Misonne, Gérard de Brogne à Saint-Rémy de Reims, in Gérard de Brogne et son œuvre réformatrice, Maredsous, 1960, p. 168-169; Historia Mo-nasterii Mosomensis (Monumenta Germaniæ Historica. Scriptores, 14), Wil-helm Wattenbach ed., Hannover, 1883, p. 600; Michel Parisse, La fonda-tion de l’abbaye de Mouzon en 971, in Revue historique ardennaise, 7 (1972), Charleville-Mézières, p. 15-17; Michel Bur, Chronique ou Livre de fondation du monastère de Mouzon, Paris, 1989, p. 27.

15 Bur, Chronique… [see n. 14], p. 16-17.



Eventually, on the occasion of its millennial in 1971, the Revue historique ardennaise dedicated an issue to the abbey of Mouzon. As first author to do so, M. Parisse has expounded the particular geo-political circumstances leading to the monastery’s foundation against the backdrop of the aristocratic competition in the region. His interpretation of the chronicle as an anti-imperial treatise however, fails to convince on several points.16 In the late ‘80s and the ‘90s, M. Bur has published several articles dealing with the Chronicon Mosomense, most of which were included in a new cri-tical edition and a French translation of the chronicle, published in 1989.17 Here, Bur investigates the formal structure in the three books of the chronicle, which he considers as one entity.

Today, lots of historians are still hesitant to rely on it due to its presumed post factum record, its puzzling textual tradition and its hybrid nature. Others have reproduced its records in a positivistic way.18 The enigmatic and incoherent mix of sermons, hagiography, miracle stories, military history, elaborate monastic historiography, episcopal gesta and succinct annalistic mentions makes the document hard to interpret. Nonetheless, the document

16 Parisse, La fondation… [see n. 14], p. 14-21. Presupposing that the chronicle must have been composed around 1040, Parisse argues that the mention of Otto of Warcq’s imperial ancestry fits in with the general anti-Ottonian tenor in the chronicle. This tendency was cranked up with the ascension of Ebles of Roucy on the archiepiscopal see of Reims. In Parisse’s view, the archbishops wanted to integrate the pagi at the Meuse in the French realm. However, as he admits, this assertion is at odds with the undisputable loyalty of the family of Ardenne towards the house of Saxony. Furthermore, the strong relations the Ottonian Emperors Otto iii and Hen-ry ii seemed to have maintained with the monastery in the first quarter of the 11th century, form another flaw in his these. Both of them confirmed the possessions of the abbey; the latter even ordered the fabrication of a golden cross, subsequently bestowed upon the community.

17 Michel Bur, À propos de la Chronique de Mouzon. I: Les trois ordres dans la Chronique de Mouzon, in Cahiers de civilisation médiévale, Xe-XIIe siècles, 26/104 (1983), p. 287-296; Idem, À propos de la chronique de Mouzon. Architecture et liturgie à Reims au temps d’Adalbéron (vers 976), in Cahiers de civilisation médiévale, 27 (1984), p. 297-302; Idem, À propos de la chronique de Mouzon: salut et libération dans la pensée religieuse vers l'an mil, in For-schungen zur westeuropäischen Geschichte, 14 (1986), p. 45-56; Idem, Chro-nique… [see n. 14].

18 For example: Misonne, Gérard de Brogne… [see n. 14], p. 167-168; Jason Glenn, Politics and History in the Tenth Century: The Work and World of Richer of Reims, Cambridge, 2004, p. 72-77.


o. huysmans108

allows us an invaluable insight into the fascinating yet highly complex political and religious situation of the late 10th-century Lotharingia, providing abundant data in the field of topography, monastic reform, episcopal authority and the aristocratic compe-tition in the region.

Monastic reforms undertaken by bishops or secular noblemen have long been regarded as mere acts of piety.19 More recent scho-larship however, has revealed that these initiators of reform often had a political agenda, beside pious or redemptive motives. In most cases, reform did not imply independence from lay influence. In fact, A. Dierkens, J. Dunbabin, J. Howe, C.B. Bouchard and S. Wood have emphasized that most of the 10th-century reforms relied upon the noble lord’s support.20 G. Koziol has demonstrated that reforms could integrate monasteries into political networks and that such measures often externalized political agreements on a spiritual base.21 In more recent publications, scholars as A-M. Helvetius, J. Wollasch, S. Vanderputten, J. Nightingale and M. Gaillard have observed how reform could be used effectively in the territorial calculations of lay rulers.22 In this contribu-tion, I want to demonstrate that the same is valid for ecclesiastic

19 Ferdinand Lot, Les derniers Carolingiens, Paris, 1891, p. 64-66; Lin Donnat, L’idée de réforme monastique aux VIIe-XIe siècles, in Annie Dufour-Malbezin ed., Abbon, un abbé de l'an mil, Turnhout, 2008, p. 69-78; Auguste Dumas, L’église de Reims entre Carolingiens et Robertiens, in Revue d’histoire de l’église de France, 30/177 (1944), p. 21-22; Milo Koyen, De prae-Gregoriaanse hervorming te Kamerijk (1012-1067), Tongerlo, 1953, p. 134-149; Amann and Dumas, L’église au pouvoir des laïques… [see n. 7], p. 317-340.

20 Alain Dierkens, Abbayes et chapitres entre Sambre et Meuse (VIIe-XIe siècles): contribution à l' histoire religieuse des campagnes du haut Moyen Age, Sigmaringen, 1985, p. 246; Dunbabin, France in the making… [see n. 6], p. 120; Susan Wood, The Proprietary Church in the Medieval West, Oxford, 2008, p. 830-839; Bouchard, Sword… [see n. 11], p. 87-88; Howe, The No-bility's Reform… [see n. 11], p. 317-339.

21 Geoffrey Koziol, The Politics of Memory and Identity in Carolingian Royal Diplomas. The West Frankish Kingdom (840-987), Turnhout, 2012, p. 263-279.

22 Gaillard, La place des abbayes… [see n. 13], p. 655-666 ; Anne-Marie Helvetius, Abbayes, évêques et laïques. Une politique du pouvoir en Hainaut au Moyen Âge (VIIe-XIe siècle), Brussels, 1994, p. 269; Steven Vanderputten, Monastic Reform as Process: Realities and Representations in Medieval Flan-ders, 900–1100, Ithaca-London, 2013, p. 45-47; Wollasch, Monasticism… [see n. 7], p. 169-174; Nightingale, Monasteries and Patrons… [see n. 10], p. 2-21.



leaders. More precisely, I will investigate the reform of Mouzon against the backdrop of the progressive expansion of the Ardenne family. In my view, the establishment of the monastery in 971 is to be regarded as a tactical step in a process of territorial acqui-sition at the strategically crucial Meuse border. I also propose an adjustment of our way of looking at the Chronicle of Mouzon. The document under discussion is, in my view, meant both to legiti-mize these tactical measures as a pious and divinely inspired ope-ration and to preserve the memoria of the abbey’s founders. This idea will help to understand the coherence between the many disparate genres and the rambling stories this source consists of. In addition to an in-depth study of the chronicle, I will adduce contemporary diplomatic, epistolary and narrative evidence to substantiate my point. In addition, I hope to instigate a revision of the generally accepted dating of the source, an argument to elaborate in a paper to follow.

I will start my survey with a short introduction to the content and the style of the main source, the Chronicon Mosomense. This will enable the reader to interpret the source. Secondly, I will discuss the family’s territorial strategics in the second half of the 10th century. Subsequently, I want to investigate the significance of Mouzon within this territorial complex. Doing so, I will try to inquire into the author’s intentions and representation of the tactical measures taken by Archbishop Adalbero and his brother, leading to the foundation of the new Benedictine community.

Content of the Chronicle

As mentioned, the foundation chronicle of Mouzon combines many different genres.23 The first book is preceded by a sermon, inspiring its readers to venerate and imitate the saints and intro-ducing the martyr Arnulf, patron saint of the author’s monastery. According to the source, this obscure ascetic wandered around in Gaul, until he was brutally slaughtered by brigands near Marcieul. After a prolonged agony, his body was repeatedly transported, ending up being sold to a wealthy aristocrat called Otto. Otto owned a castle in Warcq, in nowadays northern-French depart-ment Ardennes. This all happened around the time Adalbero suc-

23 These paragraphs draw a brief outline of the content of the Liber Fun-dationis, based on the edition of M. Bur.


o. huysmans110

ceeded Odalric (r. 962-969) on the archiepiscopal see of Reims, in Winter of 969.24 Otto however, so the chronicler reports, showed an aversion towards the newly appointed metropolitan and threa-tened to attack and raid his church and its dependents.

Therefore, in 971, Adalbero entered into combat with the ag-gressor and, aided by his brother Count Godfrey of Verdun, he laid siege on Warcq. At first the castle seemed uncapturable, en-closed by thick walls and natural barriers, the rivers Meuse and Sormonne. However, with help from above, the two brothers ma-naged to burn down the fortress. Although the adjacent wooden church containing the bones of Arnulf also went up in flames, the holy relic itself remained unharmed. Having witnessed these prodigies, Adalbero then gave orders, so the chronicler continues, to transport Arnulf’s body by boat on the Meuse to a place more fit for its veneration. He initially chose Braux (approximately 8 miles north from Mézières) as destination for the relic, but a new miracle decided otherwise: a prodigious eagle dragged the vessel all the way from Warcq to Mouzon, approximately 25 miles south-wards. The archbishop decided to comply with the saint’s wish and to establish a community of Benedictine monks on the spot.

The second book first describes the practical measures prece-ding the foundation. First, Adalbero convoked and consulted his vassals and clerics, announcing his intended reform. Subsequently, he obtained from Abbot Rodulf of St.-Remi the transfer of the impoverished priory of Thin to Mouzon. After ousting the canons unwilling to submit to monastic discipline, Adalbero merged the community of Thin in the newly established institution in No-vember 971. Only one month later, the prelate’s legates obtained papal confirmation from John xiii for the new establishment and the donations granted by Adalbero. This charter was, according to the anonymous author, corroborated on the provincial synod of Mont-Notre-Dame de Tardenois in May 972.25 The second book

24 Adalbero’s enthronization is the first dated record in the chronicle. The author does not specify when St. Arnulf lived, died or when his body was transferred. Bur, Chronique… [see n. 14], p. 152.

25 There is sufficient proof to contest the authenticity of the confirma-tion charter allegedly drawn up at the synod of Notre Dame, included in the chronicle. Although this document is dated in 973, we can situate the reunion of bishops with certainty in May 972, based on the record of both Richer and the chronicle of Mouzon. Bur, Chronique… [see n. 14], p. 168-170.



concludes with extensive notices on the archbishop’s reforms in the cathedral chapter and the abbey of St.-Thierry, his own and his brother’s benefactions on behalf of the Mouzon abbey and, finally, the death of Adalbero.

The third book on the contrary, consists of succinct annalis-tic records, concisely listing the deeds of abbots and archbishops, their donations and accomplishments. It ends with the accession of Guy as archbishop of Reims in 1033. In contrast with the structural symmetry of the two previous books, both subdivid-ed in ten paragraphs, the third is structured in four sections of strongly varying length. It lacks the overall spiritual and eschato-logical tone of the first two books, as well as the frequent use of biblical quotations. The abrupt switch of style, from a very elabo-rate and complex Latin to a bare enumeration of detached facts, makes one authorship for the three books very improbable.26 If we assume the existence of two distinct authors writing at different times, the debate of the chronicle’s dating is reopened.

As no manuscript has been conserved, editors like W. Watten-bach (1888), J.-P. Migne and M. Bur (1989) have relied on the edition of Dom L. d’Achery (1609-1685), who in his turn com-bined a lost 15th- and a 17th-century manuscript.27 This hiatus en-hances the probability of the third book, in many respects wholly distinct from the first two, being composed by a continuator and interpolated afterwards. Moreover, despite the very composite nature of the historical information, the first two books actually make a coherent whole with one main coordinating objective: the legitimation and the memoria of the actions taken by the family of Ardenne in the early 970’s. Throughout the article, I will try to prove this. In my view, the author, a monk of the abbey, must have been allied to the house of Ardenne or at least showed a great affinity for its kinsmen. There is reason to believe that the Liber Fundationis has been commissioned by the family itself.

26 The third book seems to be composed by a less talented author. His simple phrases without conjunctives and hardly any subordinate clauses, contrast with the highly complex syntax and lengthy sentences in the first two books.

27 Historia monasterii Mosomensis, Luc D’Achery ed. in Spicilegium, viii, Paris, 1723, p. 623-664.


o. huysmans112

The Rise of the Ardenne Family

In the second half of the 10th century, the rise of the Ardenne family in Lotharingia seemed unstoppable. From 929 until 1072, they almost continually managed to install their own kindred on the episcopal siege of Metz. Their close relations with the impe-rial dynasty were capitalized as Otto I bequeathed the county of Verdun upon Godfrey ‘the Captive’ around 944.28 In 959, the same Godfrey, son of Frederic’s brother Gozlin (d. 942/3), inherited the counties of Methingau and Bidgau, including the cathedral city of Treves. At the same time, his family ruled the extensive counties of Ardenne, held by Godfrey’s brother Reginar; and Luxembourg, bestowed upon Frederic’s brother Sigefroid (d. 998) in 963. Duke Frederic also controlled the strategic county of Bar, an imperial fief adjoining Verdun in the north and heavily disputed by the West-Frankish king.29 In 973, Godfrey was invested the county of Hainaut, previously held by the comital family of Regnier iii (d. 973). In the same year, he was granted the margraviate of Antwerp and Eename.30 The family’s dominions spread further west when Adalbero, Godfrey’s brother, obtained the archdiocese of Reims in 969. Eight years later, Archbishop Adalbero would ordain his eponymous nephew to the see of Laon.31 In the 970’s and 980’s the family of Ardenne was master in Upper-Lotharin-gia, with a patrimony stretching out to Bastogne, Mons, Antwerp and Breda in Lower-Lotharingia.32

The fast-growing dominance of the Ardenne kinsmen in the region earned them the enmities of other powerful, competing families. In 949, Albert of Vermandois swore allegiance to the

28 Jean-Pol Evrard, Les comtes de Verdun aux Xe et XIe siècles, in Publi-cations de la section historique de l'Institut Grand-Ducal de Luxembourg, 95 (1981), p. 154-155.

29 George Poull, La Maison souveraine et ducale de Bar, Nancy, 1994, p. 11-12; Michel Parisse, Les hommes et le pouvoir dans la Lorraine de l’an Mil, in Idem and Xavier Barral eds., Le Roi de France et son royaume au-tour de l'an mil, Paris, 1992, p. 261-266.

30 Dirk Callebaut, Ename and the Ottonian west border policy in the middle Scheldt region, in Koen De Groote, Dries Tys and Marnix Pieters eds., Exchanging Medieval Material Culture. Studies on archaeology and his-tory presented to Frans Verhaeghe, Brussels, 2010, p. 217-243.

31 Michel Bur, Une étrange figure de l’an mil; l’évêque Adalbéron, in Idem ed., L’histoire de Laon et du Laonnais, Toulouse, 1987, p. 52-53.

32 Le Jan, L'aristocratie lotharingienne… [see n. 4], p. 218-219.



West-Frankish King Lothar and married his sister-in-law Ger-berga. Previously, Count Heribert ii of Vermandois had been the nemesis of the Carolingian dynasty.33 Feeling threatened perhaps by new advancing families, the house of Vermandois threw in their lot with the old royal lineage. As we will see shortly, they seemed to be the archenemies of the Ardenne lineage during the episcopate of Adalbero. In 976, they sided with another disgruntl-ed victim of the Wigericides’ success, Regnier iv of Hainaut. Eventually, from 983 on, King Lothar’s attack on Verdun further deteriorated the already tense relations between the Ardenne and the Carolingian families. Summoned for treason and seeking sta-bility in the Lotharingian homelands, Adalbero of Reims rallied behind another upcoming magnate from the illustrious family of the Robertians, with well-known outcome.34

Around 970, three adjacent pagi at the bifurcation of the rivers Meuse and Semois barred the way for the Ardenne family’s supre-macy in Upper-Lotharingia: Ivois, Mouzon and Castrice. Surroun-ded by the counties of Verdun in the south, Luxembourg, Methin-gau and Bidgau in the east and the county Ardenne in northeast, these strategically crucial fiefs clearly were a desirable addition to their patrimony. The appointment of Adalbero as archbishop of Reims surely posed an opportunity to expand their control over these domains or to subdue local lords. The archdiocese could serve as base for further expansion of the family in the Meuse region in the northeast of the episcopal city. The swift sequence of actions taken shortly after Adalbero’s enthronization seem to indicate that Godfrey of Verdun wanted to use the momentum of his episcopate for annexations in these regions. According to the chronicle, in less than two and a half year after his appointment (around November 969), the two brothers had eliminated a com-peting magnate at Warcq, moved a priory from Thin to Mouzon,

33 Dunbabin, France in the making… [see n. 6], p. 95-97; Parisse, Lotharingia… [see n. 2], p. 315.

34 Carlrichard Brühl, Lothar (954-986) und Ludwig V (986-987), in Die französischen Könige des Mittelalters von Odo bis Karl VIII (888-1498), München, 1996, p. 66-74; Dumas, L’église de Reims… [see n. 19], p. 24-30; Rosamund McKitterick, The Carolingian Kings and the See of Rheims, 883-987, in John Michael Wallace-Hadrill, Patrick Wormald, Donald A. Bullough and Roger Collins eds., Ideal and reality in Frankish and Anglo-Saxon Society, Studies Presented to J.M. Wallace-Hadrill, Oxford, 1983, p. 228-248.


o. huysmans114

established a new Benedictine community on the spot (May 971) and received papal confirmation (Winter 971-972) and synodal corroboration of this foundation (May 972). The counts of Ivois and Chiny would remain obstinate rivals to the Ardenne lineage up till the late 11th century.35 As to the counties of Castrice and Mouzon however, we have proof that the family successfully in-creased its grip. In the following section, I will investigate this expansion and how it is presented by the chronicler.

The Demolition of Warcq

The seventh and eighth chapter of the chronicle’s first book narrate in great detail the battle of Warcq, situated in the geo-politically interesting pagus Castricensis or Castricius.36 Very little is known about the 10th century history of this county. In Warcq, Count Otto had erected a fortress, only two and a half miles away from another castle, at Mézières (Maceriae). Both were located near the Meuse river, still within the territories of the archbishopric of Reims. Apparently, the control over Mézières was often contested, Flodoard mentioning twice the castle being seized by local ma-gnates and subsequently returned to the archbishops Heriveus (920) and Artald (960).37 According to the Chronicle of Mouzon, Adalbero’s brother Godfrey fortified the castle in 971.38 In 986, a letter sent by Gerbert of Aurillac urged Adalbero to reinforce Mézières and Mouzon ‘with a lot of men’.39 At that time, King Louis V was marching against the archbishop, accused of treason, while his brother Godfrey had been imprisoned during the seizure of Verdun.40 The castle, bequeathed on Adalbero through episco-pal inheritance, apparently also served his familial interests.

Back around 970, the attack on the castle of Warcq was one of the first measures taken by the newly appointed Archbishop Adal-

35 Vanderkindere, La formation territoriale… [see n. 2], p. 345-346.36 Michel Sot, Un historien et son Église au Xe siècle : Flodoard de Reims,

Paris, 1993, p. 30-31; The tenth-century pagus Castricensis consisted of the today cantons of Mézières, Flize, Signy, Rumigny and Monthermé.

37 F l o d o a r d, The Annals… [see n. 9], p. 4, 64.38 Bur, Chronique… [see n. 14], p. 164.39 G e r b e r t o f A u r i l l a c, Correspondance. Volume 1: Lettres 1 à 129,

Pierre Riché and Jean Pierre Callu ed. (Les classiques de l’histoire de France au Moyen Âge, 45), Paris, 1993, p. 225; Bur, Chronique… [see n. 14], p. 164.

40 Dumas, L’église de Reims… [see n. 19], p. 24-30.



bero. The ancestry of Otto, its owner, is subject to debate. F. Lot, L. Vanderkindere and M. Bur have convincingly identified him with Otto, son of Albert of Vermandois and Gerberga, daughter of Duke Gislebert of Lotharingia and Gerberga of Saxony.41 The pre-sence of Vermandois at the Meuse border in the eastern periphery of the diocese of Reims can be explained by Archbishop Hugh’s possession of a fortress at Mouzon.42 Probably dispelled further eastwards after the loss of Warcq, Otto became the ancestor of the counts of Chiny.43 Otto of Vermandois’ defeat at Warcq pro-bably urged him in April 976 to march on Mons against Godfrey together with Regnier IV and Charles (the future duke of Lower-Lorraine), brother of King Lothar of France. With this coalition, Regnier and Lambert aimed to regain Hainaut, which had been taken from their father Regnier III by Bruno of Lotharingia and bestowed upon Godfrey in 973.44 Otto also appears in the Gesta Episcoporum Cameracensium, scourging the neighborhood of Cam-brai around March 980. Once more he had to face in battle his nemesis Godfrey of Verdun. The outcome of this confrontation was similar to their previous encounter at Warcq. Otto’s castle in Vinchy was demolished.45 Less than four years later, Godfrey would incur the revenge of Otto’s brother Heribert III of Troyes and his nephew Odo of Blois. Assisting in the siege of Verdun in 983, they captured Count Godfrey and imprisoned him, probably at Château-Thierry.46

41 Vanderkindere, La formation territoriale… [see n. 2], Vol. II, p. 344-345; Christian Settipani and Patrick Van Kerrebrouck, La préhistoire des Capétiens: 481-987, Paris, 1993, p. 241-242; Lot, Les derniers Carolin-giens… [see n. 19], p. 65-66 ; Bur, À propos de la Chronique… [see n. 17], p. 122-123; Le Jan, L'aristocratie lotharingienne… [see n. 4], p. 207.

42 Le Jan, L'aristocratie lotharingienne… [see n. 4], p. 208.43 Chiny, in Gerhard Köbler, Historisches Lexikon der Deutschen Län-

der. Die deutschen Territorien vom Mittelalter bis zur Gegenwart, Berlin, 2007, p. 117; Régine Le Jan, Continuity and Change in Tenth-Century Nobility, in Anne Duggan (ed.), Nobles and Nobility in Medieval Europe: Concepts, Ori-gins, Transformations, Rochester (NY), 2000, p. 60; Bur, Chronique… [see n. 14], p. 124-125.

44 Riché, Les Carolingiens… [see n. 5], p. 265.45 Gesta Episcoporum Cameracensium, L. Bethmann (ed.) (Monumenta

Germaniæ Historica. Scriptores, 7), Hannover, 1846, p. 443.46 R i c h e r o f R e i m s, Histories. 2 vol. Justin Lake ed. and trans.,

Cambridge (MA), 2011, vol. II, p. 174-191; G e r b e r t o f A u r i l l a c, Cor-respondance… [see n. 39], p. 222-223, 248-253.


o. huysmans116

The only flaw on this identification, is Otto’s remarkably young age when he erected the castle of Warcq. If we believe the chronicler, he was, at best, twenty-one years old.47 This is impro-bable yet not impossible. At the other hand, we cannot exclude the possibility that the chronicler, writing at least eighteen years post factum, mixed up the chronology of the events—consciously or out of ignorance. After all, there are several chronologic incon-sistencies in this story. When describing the siege of Warcq, he mentions Godfrey reassembling his troops from Ardennes but also from Hainaut, a county not his until 973.48 It is possible that the chronicler deliberately inverted the sequence of facts to present the siege of Warcq with the subsequent translation of Arnulf as a prelude to the foundation of Mouzon. Strategically and logically, it would have made sense to attack Warcq from Hainaut in the north and Ardenne in the east.

We have but few trace to identify the lay rulers of the pagus Castricensis in the 10th century. According to Flodoard, Count Erlebold of Castrice was excommunicated in 921 for invading the demesne of the archbishop of Reims, who subsequently be-sieged him at Mézières.49 After this record, there is a hiatus in the sources regarding the rest of the century. Finally, a charter issued by Emperor Henry II from 1005, in which the sovereign granted market rights to the abbey of St.-Medard of Soissons, mentions Frederik of Verdun (d. 1022) as count of Castrice.50 The same Frederic was the son and successor of Godfrey the Captive. This leaves us two possibilities. The defeat of a competing lord in Castrice was either a way to protect and save a possession

47 Detlev Schwennicke, Europäische Stammtafeln: Stammtafeln zur Ge-schichte der Europäischen Staaten, Neue Folge, Band III, Teilband 1, Star-gardt, 1984, Tafel 49. Albert of Vermandois married Gerberga of Saxony in 949. If we assume that the defeat of Otto preceded the foundation of Mouzon in the May 971, Otto must have barely reached the age of twenty when he built his fortress at Warcq.

48 Another chronologic problem is formed by the subscriptions and the date on the confirmative charter of the foundation of Mouzon, allegedly is-sued at the synod of Mont-Notre-Dame.

49 F l o d o a r d, The Annals… [see n. 9], p. 4.50 Die Urkunden Heinrichs II. und Arduins (Heinrici II. et Arduini Dip-

lomata), Harry Bresslau, Hermann Bloch and Robert Holtzmann eds. (Monumenta Germaniæ Historica. Diplomata iii/1, 96), Hannover, 1903, p. 120-121.



previously acquired—by inheritance, imperial investment or ear-lier conquest—or a step up for further expansion in the Meuse region, more particularly, the annexation of the pagi Mosomen-sis and Castricensis. Given the author’s inclination to vindicate the destruction of the fortress, I would rather go for the second option. Otto’s citadel nearby was probably impedimental to God-frey’s expansion in the region, who used the archiepiscopal castle of Mézières as base to fight his challenger.

In any case, this military action primarily served Adalbero’s and Godfrey’s family interests, more than the security in the outskirts of the archdiocese. The chronicler, however, emphasizes that the archbishop took the measure to tackle a serious threat for the inhabitants of his diocese. Before commenting the conflict between the archbishop and Otto of Vermandois, he elaborately deplores the abuse of power by the mighty lords, who oppress the weak and pillage the churches.51 Doing so, the author depicts the siege of Warcq as part of a battle led by Adalbero and his bro-ther, against the petty lords who were terrorizing and disrupting the region. Otto is also portrayed as an impudent and violent nobleman, who deeply hated the archbishop. Nonetheless, it is uncertain whether Otto eventually attacked the archbishopric, as the chronicle only mentions his threatening to ‘devastate Adal-bero’s church and its dependents’. His temerity, his insolence and his alleged intimidation all serve to justify a preemptive attack.

The author’s second argument to legitimize Adalbero’s role in the battle in Castrice, is a spiritual one. Besides the causae ius-titiae, his successful attack on Otto was also induced by divine intercession. The miraculous events during and after the siege of Warcq, the chronicler argues, showed Arnulf’s desire to have his remains transported to a place more worthy than ‘this quagmire of wickedness and negligence’.52 The spontaneous assent of the sacr-ed corpse to be displaced from Warcq demonstrates his longing to escape from Otto’s power and leaves the latter deprived of his holy protector. S. Wood has argued that a nobleman’s wrongful and sacrilegious acquisition of relics to control the saint’s power, and his subsequent punishment, are common stereotypes in 10th-century hagiographies.53 There is, however, no further trace of

51 Bur, Chronique… [see n. 14], p. 152.52 Bur, Chronique… [see n. 14], p. 156.53 Wood, The Proprietary Church… [see n. 20], p. 831.


o. huysmans118

Arnulf’s cult in the Lorraine region, nor elsewhere in the Middle Ages.54 Neither does any of the abbey’s diplomas mention him as subject of veneration, not even the papal, synodal and imperial documents. Furthermore, according to quotes of Adalbero, the prelate frequently demonstrated his insight in God’s will, exter-nalized by miraculous events.55 Moreover, Bur has already argued that, by means of numerous biblical references, the writer has tried to refer the archbishop’s acts to those of the Judges from the Old Testament.56

The Foundation of Mouzon

The Treaty of Meerssen in 870 confirmed Mouzon, chief place of a pagus, in the possession of King Louis II of East-Francia. The geopolitical importance of this locality is beyond dispute. Com-pletely encompassed with the Meuse, and thus easily defendable, Mouzon formed the perfect location for an almost uncapturable fortress.57 Located in the periphery of the diocese of Reims and on the western border of the German Empire, it frequently served as meeting place for the West- and East-Frankish monarchs and for ecclesiastic reunions.58 Flodoard’s and Richer’s various records on the numerous attempts of lay rulers to control the spot, testify its

54 Bur, Chronique… [see n. 14], p. 155. The author himself admits the obscurity of Arnulf’s life, and even mentions the inhabitants of Warcq ig-noring the Saint’s origins or deeds. It is not unthinkable that Adalbero and Godfrey used this unknown saint to legitimize their foundation on a spiri-tual base.

55 Bur, Chronique… [see n. 14], p. 154, 156-157, 160-161.56 Bur, Adalbéron, archevêque de Reims reconsidéré, in Michel Parisse and

Xavier Barral eds., Le Roi de France et son royaume autour de l'an mil, Paris, 1992, p. 55-63; idem, Chronique… [see n. 14], p. 38-39.

57 Michel Parisse, La frontière de la Meuse au Xe siècle, in Michel Sot ed., Haut Moyen Âge: Culture, éducation et société. Études offertes à Pierre Riché, Paris, 1990, p. 427-437; Idem, Lotharingia… [see n. 2], p. 310-313.

58 Ingrid Voss, La Lotharingie, terre de rencontres. Xe-XIe siècles, in Domi-nique Iogna-Prat and Jean-Charles Picard (ed.), Religion et culture autour de l'an Mil. Royaume capétien et Lotharingie, Paris, 1990, p. 270-271; Eadem, La rencontre entre le roi Robert II et l'empereur Henri II à Mouzon et Ivois en 1023, in Annales de l'Est, 44/1 (1992), p. 3-14; Bernard Guenée, Des limites féodales aux frontières politiques, in Pierre Nora ed., Les lieux de mémoire. II. La nation, Paris, 1986, p. 19-20; F l o d o a r d, The Annals… [see n. 9], p. 9, 45-46, 48; Michel Sot, Flodoard de Reims. Un historien et son église, Paris, 1993, p. 296-297.



strategic interest.59 In addition, Mouzon’s economic position made the place even more alluring. Located on the Roman road connect-ing the civitates of Reims, Treves and Cologne, it was a junction in local commerce for centuries.60 Furthermore, the annual fairs and the tolls provided a steady flow of income.

In 943, King Louis iv attempted to capture the citadel of Mou-zon, held by the contested Archbishop Hugh of Reims (r. 925-931 and 940-946). After the latter’s eviction, the prelate withdrew to the castle, where he was besieged once more by the same monarch. Both efforts proved unsuccessful. Ultimately, a powerful coalition between the king, Duke Conrad of Lotharingia, Count Radulf of Laon, Archbishop Artald of Reims and the Lotharingian bishops forced Hugh to surrender and demolished the fortress in 948.61 It is unclear to whom the pagus of Mouzon was subsequently passed on. Probably the county ended up among the territories of the see of Reims.62 However, located in the outskirts of the diocese, it re-mained a place difficult to control as local magnates were readily attracted by its economic and geopolitical significance. According to the chronicler, the region had been disrupted and depopulated by raids and usurpations; its town, churches and mills pillaged or confiscated and its serfs and women driven away. After the departure of a community of nuns, Archbishop Heriveus (r. 900-922) installed canons in the church. The clerics’ moral conduct, however, soon lapsed. Just before the time of Adalbero’s reform, they were, according to the chronicler, hard to discern from lay-men, as they got married and kept families. The observance of the canonical rule was utterly neglected.63

59 F l o d o a r d, The Annals… [see n. 9], p. 9, 12, 19, 37, 45-46, 49-50; Idem, Historia Remensis Ecclesiae. Martina Stratmann ed. (Monumenta Germaniæ Historica. Scriptores, 36), Hannover, 1998, p. 131, 415, 422, 425-428, 432-34, 436; R i c h e r o f R e i m s, Histories. Vol. I, p. 299, 305-306, 309-313, 347.

60 Michel Parisse and Jacqueline Leuridan, Atlas de la France de l’an mil : état de nos connaissances, Paris, 1994.

61 F l o d o a r d, The Annals… [see n. 9], p. 50-51; Idem, Historia… [see n. 59], p. 432-436.

62 Françoise Poirier-Coutansais, Les abbayes bénédictines du diocèse de Reims, Paris, 1974, p. 8; Bur, La formation du comté de Champagne (v.950-v.1150)(Mémoires des Annales de l'Est, 54), Nancy, 1977, p. 126, 134.

63 Bur, Chronique… [see n. 14], p. 161.


o. huysmans120

By relocating Thin to Mouzon and claiming advocacy over the abbey, Adalbero and his brother weakened another territorial contender. Their strategy becomes clear when we put together the evidence of Adalbero’s reform in the ancient monastery of St.-Thierry in 972, located near to the episcopal city.64 The Chronicon Mosomense refers twice to this abbey. Before relating the actual establishment of Mouzon, he gives a preview of the very similar case of St.-Thierry, which followed shortly afterwards. The au-thor swiftly mentions that Adalbero had to retake the abbey from its ‘wrongful holder, Count Rotger’. Subsequently, he ousted the twelve prebendarii, who, according to the chronicler, ‘served them-selves and the count rather than God and the saints’. Adalbero then restored the monastic discipline in collaboration with Abbot Airard, recruited from St.-Remi.65 This testimony is confirmed by the Miracula Sancti Theodoricis, composed by a monk called Adalgisus, according to Huyghebaert after 976 but before 1000.66 The author also narrates that the archbishop wrenched off the abbey of St.-Thierry from the hands of the same Count Rotger, probably lay abbot of the house, expelled the clerics who lived there and replaced them with Benedictine monks. The count is said to have resisted strongly.67

Both authors fail to explain why the count’s ownership was illegitimate and neither of them specifies Rotger’s ancestry. The latter probably belonged to the comital family of Porcien, a county northeast of the city of Reims, but outside the area of

64 Patrick Demouy, Les réformes monastique dans le diocèse de Reims, in Histoire Médievale et Archéologie, 3. L’Église du IXe au XIe siècle, Paris, 1991, p. 95-101.

65 Bur, Chronique… [see n. 14], p. 157, 164: “Iam tunc episcopus inten-debat animum hunc locum decussare regulari institutione monachorum, sicut post fecit iniuste illum tenentis vi et sagacitate retraxit; et remotis duodecim praebendariis, non Deo et sanctis eius, sed sibi ipsis et comiti servientibus […]”.

66 Nicolas Huyghebaert, Les Miracula Sancti Theodorici et leurs au-teurs, in Michel Bur ed., Saint-Thierry, une abbaye du VIe au XXe siècle, Paris, 1979, p. 245-251.

67 Miracula Sancti Theodorici in Dom Martin Bouquet (ed.), Recueil des historiens des Gaules et de la France, IX, Paris, 1752 (reprint 1870), p. 129 : “Hic Abbatiam S. Theodorici de manu cujusdam Rogeri, qui tunc Comitatus dignitatem circa easdem regni partes administrabat, licet plurimum repugna, extorsit; eamque sanctae Remensi Ecclesiae secundum priorem statum subjectam faciens”; Bur, Chronique… [see n. 14], p. 170.



influence of the Ardenne family.68 F. Lot and M. Bur believe that the counts of Porcien descended from those of Laon. Thanks to their loyalty to the Carolingians, Rotger acquired the county of Porcien, between 956 and 971.69 If we accept this hypothesis, one of his predecessors, Count Stephan of Porcien, has founded the abbey of Thin, which he subsequently conferred to be a priory of St.-Remi on Gerard of Brogne’s advice. Stephan also erected the castle of Mirwart at Ivois, at the Semois, a tributary of the Meuse.70 Mouzon is less than five miles away from Ivois, which adds to the plausibility of his successor’s presence in territories around the Meuse region.

Assuming this, Adalbero’s removal of the community of Thin from the county of Porcien and its replacement to his newly ac-quired property Mouzon can be interpreted as a major blow deli-vered by the archbishop to weaken and isolate a territorial rival. Transferring the inhabitants of the priory, he snatched away a religious house from the county, an institute recently established by a predecessor and connected to the powerful and wealthy monastery of St.-Remi. Severing the bonds between Porcien and St.-Remi fits in with Adalbero’s later approach towards the pres-tigious abbey. In the tradition of his predecessors, Adalbero tried to uphold the archiepiscopal ties with St.-Remi (as I will discuss in the next section). In case of Mouzon, the archbishop applied the same technique to disconnect monastic communities from aristocratic contenders as he would do a year later in St.-Thierry. Escorted by a military guard, he invited the clerics of Mouzon

68 In the 11th century, the name Rotger or Roger appears twice among the counts of Porcien. Bur, La formation… [see n. 62], p. 132-133; F l o d o -a r d, The Annals… [see n. 9], p. 16; Bur, Chronique… [see n. 14], p. 157.

69 Count Stephen and his wife, founders of the abbey of Thin, probably died childless. The Miracula Sancti Hucberti suggest that his demise must be situated after 955. Bur, Chronique… [see n. 14], p. 161-162, 168; Ex mira-culis Sancti Hucberti, Lothar Von Heinemann (ed.) (Monumenta Germaniæ Historica. Scriptores, 15/2), Hannover, 1888, p. 912: “Anno incarnationis dominicae nongentesimo quinquagesimo quinto, imperii autem Ottonis primi vicesimo, comes Stephanus dedit Audaginensi ecclesiae legali dono, quicquid sui iuris erit in Calvenciaco […]”. Olivier Guyotjeannin, Episcopus et comes. Affirmation et déclin de la seigneurie épiscopale au nord du royaume de France (Beauvais-Noyon, Xe–début XIIIe siècle), Genève-Paris, 1989, p. 50-51.

70 Leon Vanderkindere, La formation territoriale des principautés belges au moyen-âge, Brussels, 1902, Vol. ii, p. 343. Ivois is connected to Mouzon by the Roman road from Reims to Trier.


o. huysmans122

to either comply to the Benedictine rule, or to leave the cloister. Subsequently, he ousted the unwilling majority for their alleged misconduct. Doing so, he cut the ties with local elites in the pagi of Mouzon and Ivois, perhaps loyal to the count of Porcien. The enmity between the Ardenne family and the abbey on one hand, and the count on the other, may also account for the criticism on the abuses of the advocates in the county of Porcien.71

The family’s take-over in Mouzon paid off quite. Halfway the 980’s, when Adalbero and Godrey were in dire straits, the local fortress, together with the one at Mézières in Castrice, proved to be an essential point in their defense. Answering a request of the archbishop of Trier to send back a monk with an exchange pro-gram at Reims, Adalbero proposed in a letter from 985 to dis-patch him temporarily to Mouzon, for safety reasons.72 One year later, Gerbert of Aurillac dissuaded the archbishop to negotiate with Odo of Blois and Heribert of Troyes, who had imprisoned Godfrey of Verdun. He also urged Adalbero to fortify the castles of Mouzon and Mézières.73 In a letter to Empress Theophanu, the prelate probably referred to the same fortresses ‘held under your authority’, reporting that King Louis V’s confidants had ordered their demolition.74 And if we believe Richer, in 995, Adalbero’s nephew of the same name, bishop of Laon, planned an ambush at the place to capture and depose King Hugh. This treachery was to take place at the occasion of a synod held in Mouzon, in which Godfrey of Verdun reportedly assisted.75 In 1015, Godfrey’s son Herman (d. 1029), who had inherited the margraviate of Eename, features in an imperial charter as count of Mouzon.76 The advo-cacy of Mouzon was also made an inheritable office, at least until Godfrey, son of Godfrey the Captive (r. 1023).77

71 Bur, Chronique… [see n. 14], p. 171. Perhaps it also triggered the Car-olingians’ estrangement from Adalbero’s kindred in the 980’s.

72 G e r b e r t o f A u r i l l a c, Correspondance… [see n. 39], p. 136-141.73 Bur, La formation… [see n. 62], p. 127; G e r b e r t o f A u r i l l a c,

Correspondance… [see n. 39], p. 225.74 G e r b e r t o f A u r i l l a c, Correspondance… [see n. 39], p. 225,

208-209.75 R i c h e r o f R e i m s, Histories… [see n. 46]. Vol. II, p. 405-415.76 Die Urkunden Heinrichs II. und Arduins… [see n. 50], p. 433-435.77 Godfrey is mentioned as advocatus in a charter issued by Archbishop

Arnulf of Reims in 1018. Bur, Chronique… [see n. 14], p. 194 ; Parisse, La fondation… [see n. 14], p. 18.



Although we have but little evidence on the 10th century coun-ty of Porcien, Adalbero’s actions seem to indicate that the local count was one of the main challengers of the Ardenne family wit-hin the archbishopric. Moreover, his presence at crucial places in the Meuse region hampered Godfrey’s expansion in Champagne and western Lotharingia. The political pregnancy of the new foundation, pushed the chronicler to legitimize the actions of Adalbero and his brother. First of all, in the cited speeches, Adal-bero described the reform as a divine mission he humbly accep-ted. The body of S. Arnulf acted as a heavenly intercessor, who instructed the prelate where to establish a new Benedictine com-munity. Secondly, claiming that the archbishop’s original plan was to translate Arnulf’s relics to the remote village of Braux, the chronicler tries to conceal the geopolitical schemes behind the reform of Mouzon.78 The author also argues that the prelate had first consulted his clergy and his vassals, who all expressed their consent. Furthermore, painting Mouzon as a deserted area in de-cay inhabited by unworthy canons and ruled by an illegitimate lord, he makes the interventions of the archbishop and his brother look like righteous measures.79 According to the author, Adal-bero rescued the region from an unjust lord, ousted these ignoble clerics, saved a priory of Thin from an intimidating castle and bankruptcy, transferred them to a locality within his power, and last but not least, he provided them with immovable wealth and extensive lands.

Adalbero endowed his new foundation with estates located in the area around Mouzon (Brévilly, Cesse, Remilly-Aillicourt and Yoncq) and further on in the region of Metz (28 domains). Like Nightingale has demonstrated, generosity towards abbeys was often linked with the precariousness of the benefactor’s power.80

78 Bur, Chronique… [see n. 14], p. 157. The chronicler mentions explic-itly that Adalbero would have chosen Braux to reform instead of Mouzon, had the miracle of Saint Arnulf not taken place.

79 Diplomatic evidence points out that Stephen died after 957. If we sup-pose that the founders took care of their own foundation, the abbey the priory must have decayed in less than fourteen years. There are, however, no records of pagan intrusions in this period and region. Its attachment to the wealthy monastery of Reims make this fast decline equally implausible. The priory’s alleged poverty perhaps served as pretext for the transfer of Thin and the seizure of Mouzon.

80 Nightingale, Monasteries and Patrons… [see n. 10], p. 9-11.


o. huysmans124

Though perceived as genuine benevolence by the chronicler of Mouzon, the donations of Adalbero were probably aimed to firm his kin’s grip on the community and the surrounding locali-ties. According to the author, the prelate wanted to make them ‘producers of the best wine’ and ‘rich possessors’ through many sorts of income. In order to stimulate the optimal cultivation of vineyards, he ceded lands with excellent soil from his familial pa-trimony and his episcopal possessions, and donated these to the abbey.81 But just like Arnulf I of Flanders had tightened his grip on monastic property through lay advocacy in the first half of the 10th century, Adalbero and Godfrey used this function to ex-tend their family’s geopolitical influence.82 After all, as advocatus of the abbey, Godfrey’s kin preserved their rights over the dona-ted goods from the family’s patrimony. But even more profitable to Adalbero’s kin were the endowments of lands lifted out of the episcopal possessions, and conferred to their own private monas-tery.83 Through the advocacy, Godfrey and his family came to ad-minister goods formerly belonging to the see of Reims. Moreover, the family of Ardenne did well by making the new established house an economically profitable institute. As temporal adminis-trators, they had a major interest in the increasing wealth of the community. Apparently, these donations too were accompanied by territorial expansion. Some of the properties bestowed upon the new community had yet to be restituted from their ‘unjust holders’, probably other rival lords in Upper-Lotharingia.84

81 Bur, Chronique… [see n. 14], p. 161 : “[…] ex patrimonio meo et ex mihi contingent antecessorum meorum jure debito […]”.

82 Vanderputten, Monastic Reform… [see n. 22], p. 48; Parisse, His-toire de la Lorraine… [see n. 4], p. 137, 141.

83 Die Urkunden Otto des III, Theodor Sickel (ed.) (Monumenta Germa-niæ Historica. Diplomata II/2), Hannover, 1893, p. 655-656; Bur, La for-mation… [see n. 62], p. 127.

84 Bur, Chronique… [see n. 14], p. 166; Nightingale, Monasteries and Patrons… [see n. 10], p. 5-8. This was the case with Brevilly, six miles north from Mouzon. Adalbero donated this territory with its belongings, to use it for the fattening of their swine. It, however, was held as a fief by Richard of Metz. Very little is known about Richard of Metz, but it is not unthinkable that he too was a territorial competitor for the family in Upper-Lotharingia. The estates Adalbero donated from his patrimony in Metz (according to the chronicle 28 mansi in Rettel, Brettnach, Marange-Silvange and Rozérieulles) were probably contested by the same count. As Nightingale argues, such transaction strengthened both parties hold on the



The Deal of Thin

Beside holy relics, a suitable location and estates to donate, Adalbero needed a skilled personnel of respectable monks to make the foundation a success. Therefore, he picked the paupe-rized community of Thin, a small priory under the authority of the illustrious St.-Remi abbey, to inhabit the new Benedic-tine monastery of Mouzon.85 This however was more than pas-toral care or practical concern. The archbishop’s measure proved to be beneficial for his own kinsmen in the first place. Adalbero hoped to detach one of St.-Remi’s subordinate houses, and to put it under secular authority of the advocatus of Mouzon, his own brother Godfrey. For the monks of Thin, the perspective of being promoted to an autonomous community free from spiritual subor-dination to St.-Remi and temporal dominance of the count, must have been tempting. The other parties involved however, were probably less favorable to this transfer. As mentioned above, this move weakened the count of Porcien, a territorial competitor in the archbishopric. But also for the community of St.-Remi, the cession of Thin implied the loss of a recently acquired possession to the growing power of the Ardenne family. Not surprisingly, the archbishop’s proposal to the monks of St.-Remi faced great opposition. But how did he eventually manage to push through? We may find an answer if we put together the accounts on the archbishop’s actions in 971-72 by Richer, monk of St.-Remi, and by the chronicler, monk of Mouzon.

Adalbero first approached Abbot Rodulf (r. 969-983), who is praised in both accounts. According to the Chronicon Mosomense, the archbishop ‘secretly’ persuaded the abbot to ask his brethren for their consent, with ‘numerous’ unspecified ‘sweet promises’.86 However, when asked for their approval, the monks vehemently

exchanged lands and could also serve to secure a continued grip of the fam-ily on certain dominions. The papal, synodal and imperial corroborated this ownership on a legal base and often pronounced an anathema against trans-gressors.

85 Daniel Misonne, Gérard de Brogne… [see n. 14], p. 167-176; Dierkens, Abbayes et chapitres… [see n. 20], p. 231; Michel Bur, Saint-Thierry et le renouveau monastique dans le diocèse de Reims au Xe siècle, in Saint-Thierry: une abbaye du VIe au XXe siècle, Reims, 1979, p. 39-49; Glenn, Politics… [see n. 18], p. 70-84.

86 Bur, Chronique… [see n. 14], p. 162-163.


o. huysmans126

opposed the archbishop’s plan. The chronicle of Mouzon mentions the resistance of the young monks ‘with unsteady minds’ and the elders’ renitence. One inmate rhetorically—and not unrightly—asks: “For what reason should we let another, rather than our-selves, administer a property we consider our own?” Moreover, the opponents denounced the idea that another house would bene-fit while their own community would suffer damage. Eventually, Rodulf suppressed the buzz with an vigorous speech, exhorting his flock to abandon their reserve and their rivalry. “No one must be audacious to resist the archbishop’s intention,” he reprimanded the monks, “for his advice is God’s design […] and his intentions stem from his fear and love for God.”87 Furthermore, the abbot pointed out the favores they would enjoy in recompensatione for the alienation.

Richer deliberately keeps silence about the intern discord in his abbey. However, he records that about that time, in the winter of 971, Adalbero traveled to Rome. There, he celebrated Christmas in the presence of Pope John XIII and requested him the confir-mation of the patrimony of St.-Remi. A privilege was drawn up, and after Adalbero had returned to Gaul, he handed the docu-ment to the monks. The events described by Richer partially cor-respond with those in the Chronicon Mosomense.88 According to the anonymous author, the archbishop sought contact with Rome, but did not travel to the papal court himself. Nonetheless, in this account, right after Christmas 971, Adalbero’s legates obtained

87 Bur, Chronique… [see n. 14], p. 163: “Unde, fratres mei, si in his quae Dei sunt moneat episcopus, nulli debet esse resistendi ausus; […] Ista vero sug-gestio nostri archiepiscopi, considerata intentione sui, videtur nobis prodire ex insito sibi timore et amore Dei.”

88 For further discussion on Adalbero’s journey to Rome, the papal privileges for Mouzon and St.-Remi and the subsequent synod of Mont-Notre-Dame, see Ferdinand Lot, Une charte fausse d'Adalbéron, archevêque de Reims, in Bibliothèque de l'École des Chartes, 52 (1891), p. 31-45; Glenn, Politics… [see n. 18], p. 70-84; Bur, Chronique… [see n. 14], p. 115-116, 177-189; Laurent Morelle, La mise en ‘œuvre’ des actes diplomatiques : l’aucto-ritas des chartes chez quelques historiographes monastiques des IXe-XIe siècles, in Michel Zimmermann ed., ‘Auctor’ et ‘auctoritas’ : invention et conformisme dans l’écriture médiévale, Actes du colloque tenu à l’Université de Versailles-Saint-Quentin-en-Yvelines (14-16 juin 1999), Paris, École des chartes, Mémoires et documents de l’Ecole des chartes, 59 (2001), p. 86-91; Isolde Schröder, Die westfränkischen Synoden von 888–987 und ihre Überlieferung (Monumenta Germaniæ Historica. Hilfsmittel, 3), München, 1980, p. 291-303.



a charter containing John XIII’s solemn confirmation for the re-form of Mouzon. Both authors thus fail to mention that Adalbero’s communication with Rome resulted in a charter for an institu-tion other than their own. However, there is sufficient reason to believe that the two papal charters the archbishop obtained from the pope are authentic.89

Given the conspicuously rapid sequence of events—all this must have happened around November and December 971—we can assume that the favores in recompensatione negotiated upon by Adalbero and Abbot Rodulf, actually refer to the papal confirma-tion, requested by the archbishop, of the possessions of St.-Remi. This privilege was subsequently corroborated on the provincial synod of Mont-Notre-Dame in May 972.90 The bull could have served either to gild the pill for the wronged monks of St.-Remi or to help Rodulf persuade his reluctant flock. The cession of the abbey of St.-Timothy from his episcopal jurisdiction to the admi-nistration of St.-Remi was another considerable compensation.91 Other favors promised to win over Rodulf and his brethren may have included the primacy of the abbey and its abbot (abbatum primas) over the regular clergy of the archdiocese.92

However, by travelling to Rome (or sending legates, as the chronicler of Mouzon believes), Adalbero killed no less than three birds with one stone. First of all, he obtained a powerful means to appease the discontent monks of St.-Remi and to force through the alienation of Thin. So he prevented getting estranged from St.-Remi, an ally worth keeping for its opulence and extensive jurisdictions. Secondly, he received the explicit papal approval

89 Harald Zimmerman, Papsturkunden, 896-1046, I: 896-996, Vienna, 1984. Adalbero possibly accompanied his confrater Theodoric, Bishop of Metz, who also petitioned a papal confirmation for his foundation of St.-Vincent, which is also dated in April 972.

90 R i c h e r o f R e i m s, Histories… [see n. 46]. Vol. II, p. 34-43.91 For an excellent and thorough study on the cession of St.-Thimothy

to St.-Remi, see: Josiane Barbier and Laurent Morelle, Aux pauvres ou aux hôtes? Note sur l’affectation de l’abbaye Saint-Timothée à Saint-Remi de Reims en 972, in Magali Coumert, Klaus Krönert, Marie-Céline Isaïa, Sumi Shimahara eds., Rerum gestarum scriptor. Histoire et historiographie au Moyen Age, Mélanges Michel Sot, Paris, 2012, p. 487-500.

92 R i c h e r o f R e i m s, Histories… [see n. 46]. Vol. II, p. 44-45. In 972, one of his brethren called Airard, was delegated to direct the restora-tion of the monastic order at the monastery of St.-Thierry.


o. huysmans128

for his new project at Mouzon, a gesture to be regarded as an undisputable legitimation. And thirdly, as mentioned in the pre-vious section, the prelate weakened a rival lord, the count of Por-cien, with a formal consent of the pope. The count lost a religious house on his demesne and his bonds with St.-Remi.

On the whole, the deal of Thin was a strategic masterstroke for Adalbero’s kin. His family’s influence over St.-Remi and its belongings—such as Thin—was only temporary, i.e. as long as Adalbero occupied the archiepiscopal siege. So was his episcopal jurisdiction over the abbey of St.-Timothy. But unlike clerical functions, the title of advocatus of an abbey could be made here-ditary. We know for instance that Godfrey’s son inherited this function over Mouzon. Hence, by relocating the priory of Thin to Mouzon, Adalbero and Godfrey ensured their family’s permanent grip on a newly founded Eigenkloster on a strategically crucial location. And while the archbishop gave up the monastery of St.-Timothy from his episcopal mensa to St.-Remi, his family won the enduring secular authority over Mouzon. The Ardenne family thus profited most from this complex exchange of goods.

The settlement between Adalbero and Rodulf, a deal involving territorial calculations and political bargaining, is deliberately covered up in both reports. Richer clearly sympathized both with his abbot and the archbishop, whom he frequently praises in his work.93 Therefore, it is not surprising that the author left out any trace of the political deal struck between these two churchmen. Richer does not mention a single word about the abbey of Mou-zon or its foundation. The papal audience is simply perceived as a favor to St.-Remi. Neither does he give any information on the cession of Thin and the preceding controversy. Instead, the favors on behalf of St.-Remi are explained by Adalbero’s ‘particular af-fection’ (precipua caritate) for the abbey. When expounding Adal-bero’s monastic policies in the archdiocese he keeps to general remarks, whereas he describes in detail how the metropolitan res-

93 Richer cites Rodulf’s speech at the synod of abbots and his fulmina-tion against the misdemeanors of the regular clergy in the diocese. Adal-bero too is praised as a righteous prelate, an energetic reformer, a generous patron of churches and a victim of the injustices inflicted by his rivals. See R i c h e r o f R e i m s, Histories… [see n. 46]. Vol. II, chapters 22-42, p. 28-60; Justin Lake, Richer of Saint-Rémi. The Methods and Mentality of a Tenth-Century Historian, Washington DC, 2013, p. 13-15, 108, 278-279.



tored the order and discipline in cathedral chapter.94 Analogously, the anonymous monk of Mouzon keeps the utmost silence as to the nature of the ‘favors’ granted by Adalbero on the behalf of St.-Remi, although he does elaborate on the benefits the abbey of St.-Thierry and the cathedral chapter enjoyed during his episco-pacy. Nor does he admit that Adalbero obtained a charter from Rome securing the properties of St.-Remi. Instead he justifies the cession, suggesting that Thin’s sustained existence was ensured by Adalbero, who saved the priory from financial trouble and the gangs of the castle of Chantereine nearby.95

Conclusion

Given the geopolitical significance of the locality and the simultaneous expansion of the family of Ardenne in the Meuse region of the diocese, we can conclude that the establishment of the Mouzon abbey is to be considered a strategic operation in the first place. Moreover, the remarkably rapid sequence of actions suggests that the demolition of Warcq and the founda-tion of a monastery in Mouzon were part of a thought-out fam-ily strategy designed before or shortly after Adalbero’s acces-sion. Furthermore, contemporary evidence attests that these taken territories became crucial in the family’s defense. In his capacity of archbishop, Adalbero ruled as ecclesiastical lord over the localities in the strategic Meuse border, as long as he lived. In collaboration with his brother Godfrey however, he used his episcopate to make his family’s dominance permanent in these regions. Through the conquest of the pagi Castricensis and Moso-mensis and the secular jurisdiction over a newly established and tactically positioned monastery, they succeeded to win these strategically crucial regions. The control over these domains was continued for at least one generation after Godfrey and Adal-bero. Furthermore, by bestowing episcopal or other’s lands upon the fresh community, the archbishop made the monastery more prosperous, and consequently, more lucrative for his family. Ob-viously, the foundation also carried redemptive favors for the

94 Lake, Richer of Saint-Rémi… [see n. 93], p. 1.95 Bur, Chronique… [see n. 14], p. 162. The frequent intrusions and loot-

ing of the castle’s cohorts allegedly hindered the monks of Thin in their divine services.


o. huysmans130

archbishop and his kinsmen and contributed to his image-buil-ding as reformer. But given the military conquests preceding and following the foundation, and their geopolitical pregnancy, I am inclined to think that territorial calculations rather than genuine devoutness drove Adalbero to undertake this ambitious operation. Here, the collaboration between him and Godfrey, two topnotch officials (ecclesiastical and temporal respectively), proved to be a golden formula.

In my view, the Chronicon Mosomense aims to justify these ac-tions. The overall though implicit apologetic tone in the chronicle, reveals the author’s compulsive need to justify the reform of Mou-zon. With a spiritual and eschatological discourse, the chronicler represents the archbishop as a God-sent, exemplary church leader and a tireless reformer, merely executing a divinely inspired plan. In the second book, the author reports about the archbishop’s re-form policies with regard to the cathedral chapter of Reims and the abbey of St.-Thierry. In the latter case, Adalbero cast out the unworthy clerics and replaced them by monks from St-Remi, just like he had done at Mouzon. Through the references to these re-forms, the establishment of Mouzon seems to fit in perfectly with Adalbero’s general monastic policy.96 St Arnulf’s unexpected jour-ney from Warcq to Mouzon also vindicates the conquests of both localities, and the monastic foundation. Furthermore, by painting a picture of a disrupted and unstable region plagued by tyranni-cal chatelains and murderous knights, the author implicitly legi-timizes the military actions Godfrey and Adalbero undertook in these territories.97 At the same time, the chronicle serves to pres-erve the memoria of its protagonists. The author repeatedly urges its readers to pray for its benefactors.98

These conclusions may lead to new ideas about the episcopate of Adalbero and the 10th century episcopacy in general. Past scho-lars often tended to drawn a stark contrast between the ‘pastoral’ (ca. 969-982) and the ‘political’ years (983-989) of Adalbero’s in-

96 Bur, Chronique… [see n. 14], p. 160, 170-171.97 This image is already perceptible at the start of the first book, when

the author narrates the martyrdom of Arnulf and the replacements of his body. Bur, Chronique… [see n. 14], p. 147-153.

98 Bur, Chronique… [see n. 14], p. 165-166, 171; Annales Mosomagensis, Georg Heinrich Pertz (ed.) (Monumenta Germaniae Historica. Scriptores, 3), Hannover, 1874, p. 160-161.



cumbency.99 The reforms of 971-972 are often described as acts of mere piety.100 However, the evident gains of these operations for his kinsmen, show in fact that familial interests were his prime concern from the very start of his episcopate.101 Obviously, Adal-bero’s eager to reform can be attributed to his training at the abbey of Gorze and the cathedral chapter of Metz, two bastions of strictly regular observance, and there is no reason to exclude a genuine sense of dutifulness towards the pastoral responsibilities invested upon him. But considering the prelate’s monastic poli-cies in the early 970’s as solely inspired by pastoral concerns, is too one-sided. Neither should we perceive Godfrey and Adalbero as mere agents of the Ottonian emperors, as Parisse argued.102 Adalbero’s later affiliation with Gerbert of Aurillac, who descri-bed himself as an ‘imperial reserve soldier’, and their assistance to Empress Theophanu during the minority of Otto III, have contributed to this perception.103 Although Godfrey and Adal-bero always remained loyal to the house of Saxony and profited from this alliance, the outcome of the foundation, indisputably advantageous for the Ardenne family, makes it unlikely that they merely executed the directives of Otto I.

Moreover, the archbishop’s familial interests can help explain the dissident voices in the diocese, even early in his episcopate. Almost all contemporary evidence available on Adalbero’s episco-pacy, praise and defend his actions. Nonetheless, one testimony, written by the anonymous continuator of Flodoard’s Annales, severely denounces the archbishop, branded as ‘unworthy of his name’, and his familial self-service. Commenting on the events that happened between 976 and 979, this author implicitly taunts

99 Dumas, L’église de Reims… [see n. 19], p. 21-22. Dumas argues that Adalbero has not sought to intervene in political affairs until about 984. Bur, Adalbéron, archevêque… [see n. 56], p. 58-63.

100 Parisse, Généalogie… [see n. 5], p. 12.101 In his record about Adalbero’s appointment in 969, Richer announces

that the archbishop’s deeds show how much he benefited his own men dur-ing his incumbency. R i c h e r o f R e i m s, Histories… [see n. 46]. Vol. II, p. 28-29: “Qui quanto suis profuerit et quanta ab aemulis plus iusto passus sit, opere sequenti declarabitur.”

102 Riché, Les Carolingiens… [see n. 5], p. 265; Parisse, La fondation… [see n. 14], p. 17.

103 G e r b e r t o f A u r i l l a c, Correspondance… [see n. 72]. Vol. 1, letter 37: “miles succenturiatus pro castris Caesaris”.


o. huysmans132

Godfrey’s bellicosity, Adalbero’s architectural renovations and the dubious appointment of his eponymous nephew to the see of Laon, whom he hastily ordained priest before his episcopal ordi-nation.104 Apparently, a faction in the bishopric grew discontent with the family’s growing influence, at the expense of the diocese. These thoughts raise another, more general question. Did the 10th century bishops favor their familial rather than their episcopal interests? In other words, did their measures chiefly benefit their successors in the episcopal office, or their kinsmen? Did prelates from illustrious lineages tend to use their episcopacy to pursue the ambitions of their kindred, similar to Adalbero?

The conclusions on the chronicler’s aims also contribute to the debate of dating of the Chronicon Mosomense. The lack of concern for the memoria of the Ardenne family and of any spiritual legiti-mation of the monastery’s foundation in the third book, makes it distinct from the first two. Furthermore, given the unequivocal stylistic, conceptual and thematic discrepancy between the first two books on one hand and the third on the other, I think there is sufficient reason to cast doubts on a single authorship. Rather, I am convinced that a less talented continuator has interpolated his annalistic records years after the two first books had been composed. The dating of these earlier writings remains an open question. The last terminus post quem is Adalbero’s death in 969; a terminus ante quem remains hard to determine. However, the absence of a record on the death of Godfrey, one of the main protagonists, is conspicuous. Therefore, I am inclined to situate the composition shortly before or shortly after the death of God-frey of Verdun in 1002. In 997 the latter obtained a charter from Emperor Otto III, confirming the rights of the monastery and the endowments ‘by Godfrey and his wife, fidelis of the emperor, for the sake of his brother Adalbero’s soul’.105 The author fails to mention this diploma. Around that time, Godfrey also may have commissioned the redaction of a chronicle, confirming his family’s rights, providing the continued memoria of his brother and him-self, and legitimizing the reform and the military actions that ac-

104 F l o d o a r d o f R e i m s (continuator), Annales. Georg Heinrich Pertz ed.(Monumenta Germaniae Historica. Scriptores, 3), Hannover, 1839 p. 407.

105 Paul Fridolin Kehr, Die Urkunden Otto III, Innsbruck, 1890, p. 1; Die Urkunden Otto des III… [see n. 83], p. 665-667.



companied it.106 Similar to the request of an imperial charter, the redaction of an abbey chronicle may have been one of the mea-sures the already aged Godfrey took before his death to secure his foundation and the family’s hold on its vast estates. Hence, the chronicle was perhaps the final piece in Godfrey’s strategy of expansion at the Meuse region.

Institution Ortwin HuysmansDépartementAdresse

Summary. — Within the three first years of his episcopate, Arch-bishop Adalbero of Reims (r. 969-989) reformed his cathedral chapter and two monastic houses in his diocese. My paper investigates the case of Notre-Dame of Mouzon, an Benedictine community reestablished in 971, and how this process is recounted by the abbey’s anonymous chron-icler. Hereby, I focus on the geo-political moves and military actions that accompanied the foundation of the abbey, which I aim to link to the territorial strategies of the archbishop’s family, the powerful, up-coming house of Ardennes. Subsequently, I will attempt to interpret the chronicle as a legitimizing document for the lineage’s hold on the tac-tically significant counties in the border region near the river Meuse, and the family’s tenure of the advocacy over the abbey of Mouzon. Fi-nally, building further on my conclusions on the document’s objectives, I want to question the date of composition of the source, hitherto situated around 1025-1030.

Résumé — Au cours des trois premières années de son épiscopat, l’archevêque Adalbéron de Reims (r. 969-989) a réformé son chapitre cathédral et deux maisons monastiques dans son diocèse. Mon article étudie le cas de Notre-Dame de Mouzon, une communauté bénédictine rétablie en 971, et comment ce processus est raconté par le chroniqueur anonyme de l'abbaye. Tout d’abord, je me concentre sur les mouvements géo-politiques et les actions militaires qui ont accompagné la fondation

106 The foundation of the monastery was perhaps contested, presumably because of its political implications in the region. Moreover, Godfrey had experienced a lot of opposition against his family’s territorial expansion, resulting in the capture of Verdun in 984 and his two-year imprisonment. In 997, after fifty years of being count of Verdun, he must have had an advanced age, which could have induced him to secure his foundation, its possessions and his family’s rights on the community.


o. huysmans134

de l'abbaye, que je cherche à relier aux stratégies territoriales de la fa-mille de l'archevêque, la puissante maison naissante des Ardennes. Par la suite, je vais tenter d'interpréter la chronique comme un document de légitimation pour le maintien de la lignée sur les comtés tactiquement importants dans la région de la frontière près de la Meuse, et la tenure par la famille de l’avouerie sur l’abbaye de Mouzon. Enfin, m’appuyant sur mes conclusions au sujet des objectifs du document, je veux remettre en question la date de composition de la source, jusque-là située autour de 1025-1030.

Zusammenfassung. — Innerhalb der ersten drei Jahre seines Epis-kopats reformierte Erzbischop Adalbero von Reims (ca. 969-989) sein Domkapitel und zwei Monasterien in seiner Diözese. Mein Artikel un-tersucht den Fall von Notre-Dame von Mouzon, einer im Jahre 971 ge-gründeten Benediktinergemeinschaft, und wie dieser Prozess vom ano-nymen Chronisten der Abtei aufgezeichnet wurde. Dabei konzentriere ich mich auf die geopolitischen Züge und militärische Aktionen, die die Gründung der Abtei begleiteten. Mein Ziel ist es, diese mit den territo-rialen Strategien der Familie des Erzbischofs, der mächtigen, aufstre-benden Dynastie der Ardenner Grafen in Verbindung zu bringen. Zu diesem Zweck werde ich den Versuch unternehmen, die Chronik als ein Dokument zu interpretieren, dass den Griff der Dynastie auf taktisch wichtige Landkreise in der Grenzregion in der Nähe der Maas und ihre Anwaltschaft über die Abtei von Mouzon legitimiert. Schließlich möchte ich, basierend auf meinen Schlussfolgerungen bezüglich der Zwecke des Dokuments, das Datum der Aufstellung dieser Quelle hinterfragen, das bislang um 1025-1030 situiert wurde.

pious foundation or political masterstroke? the chronicon mosamense and the reform of mouzon by...

Documents