Appendix

Petrus Abaelardus (or Abailardus) was born in the year 1079 at Palets, a Breton town not far from Nantes. His father, Berengarius, was a nobleman of some local importance; his mother, Lucia, was likewise of noble family. The name "Abaelardus" is said to be a corruption of "Habelardus," which, in turn, was substituted by himself for the nickname "Bajolardus" given to him in his student days. However the name may have arisen, the famous scholar certainly adopted it very early in his career, and it went over into the vernacular as "Abélard" or "Abailard," though with a multiplicity of variations (in Villon's famous poem, for example, it appears as "Esbaillart").

Petrus Abaelardus (or Abailardus) was born in 1079 at Palets, a Breton town near Nantes. His father, Berengarius, was a nobleman of some local importance. His mother, Lucia, also came from a noble family. The name "Abaelardus" is said to be a changed form of "Habelardus." He had adopted "Habelardus" in place of the nickname "Bajolardus," given to him when he was a student. However the name arose, the famous scholar certainly adopted it very early in his career. In everyday language, it became "Abélard" or "Abailard," though it had many variations. For example, it appears as "Esbaillart" in Villon's famous poem.

For the main facts of Abélard's life his own writings remain the best authority, but through his frequent contact with many of the foremost figures in the intellectual and clerical life of the early twelfth century it has been possible to check his own account of his career with considerable accuracy. The story told in the "Historia Calamitatum" covers the events of his life from boyhood to about 1132 or 1133,—in other words, up to approximately his fifty-third or fifty-fourth year. That the account he gives of himself is substantially correct cannot be doubted; making all due allowance for the violence of his feelings, which certainly led him to colour many incidents in a manner unfavourable to his enemies, the main facts tally closely with all the external evidence now available.

Abélard's own writings remain the best source for the main facts of his life. But he had frequent contact with many leading intellectual and clerical figures of the early twelfth century. This has made it possible to check his account of his career with considerable accuracy. The "Historia Calamitatum" tells the story of his life from boyhood to about 1132 or 1133. In other words, it covers his life up to about age fifty-three or fifty-four. There can be no doubt that his account is substantially correct. His intense feelings certainly led him to portray many incidents in a way that was unfavorable to his enemies. Even allowing for this, the main facts closely match all the external evidence now available.

A very brief summary of the events of the final years of his life will serve to round out the story. The "Historia Calamitatum" was written while Abélard was still abbot of the monastery of St. Gildas, in Brittany. The terrors of his existence there are fully dwelt on in his autobiographical letter, and finally, in 1134 or 1135, he fled, living for a short time in retirement. In 1136, however, we find him once more lecturing, and apparently with much of his former success, on Mont Ste. Genevieve. His old enemies were still on his trail, and most of all Bernard of Clairvaux, to whose fiery adherence to the faith Abélard's rationalism seemed a sheer desecration. The unceasing activities of Bernard and others finally brought Abélard before an ecclesiastical council at Sens in 1140, where he was formally arraigned on charges of heresy. Had Abélard's courage held good, he might have won his case, for Bernard was frankly terrified at the prospect of meeting so formidable a dialectitian, but Abélard, broken in spirit by the prolonged persecution from which he had suffered, contented himself with appealing to the Pope. The indefatigable Bernard at once proceeded to secure a condemnation of Abélard from Rome, whither the accused man set out to plead his case. On the way, however, he collapsed, both physically and in spirit, and remained for a few months at the abbey of Cluny, whence his friends removed him, a dying man, to the priory of St. Marcel, near Châlons-sur-Saône. Here he died on April 21, 1142.

A brief summary of the final years of his life will complete the story. Abélard wrote the "Historia Calamitatum" while he was still abbot of the monastery of St. Gildas in Brittany. He describes the horrors of his life there at length in his autobiographical letter. Finally, in 1134 or 1135, he fled and lived in retirement for a short time. In 1136, however, he was lecturing again on Mont Ste. Genevieve, apparently with much of his former success. His old enemies were still pursuing him, especially Bernard of Clairvaux. Bernard’s passionate devotion to the faith made Abélard’s rationalism seem like a complete desecration to him. Bernard and others worked tirelessly against Abélard. Finally, their efforts brought him before an ecclesiastical council at Sens in 1140, where he was formally charged with heresy. If Abélard had kept his courage, he might have won his case. Bernard was openly terrified at the prospect of facing such a formidable debater. But the long persecution had broken Abélard’s spirit, and he chose only to appeal to the Pope. The tireless Bernard immediately set about securing Abélard’s condemnation from Rome. Abélard set out for Rome to plead his case. On the way, however, he collapsed, both physically and in spirit. He stayed for a few months at the abbey of Cluny. His friends then moved him, by now a dying man, to the priory of St. Marcel, near Châlons-sur-Saône. There he died on April 21, 1142.

A discussion of Abélard's position among the scholastic philosophers would necessarily go far beyond the proper limits of a mere historical note. He stands out less commandingly as a constructive philosopher than as a master of dialectics. He was, as even his enemies admitted, a brilliant teacher and an unconquerable logician; he was, moreover, a voluminous writer. Works by him which have been preserved include letters, sermons, philosophical and religious treatises, commentaries on the Bible, on Aristotle and on various other books, and a number of poems.

A discussion of Abélard's place among the scholastic philosophers would go well beyond the proper limits of a brief historical note. He was less distinguished as a constructive philosopher than as a master of dialectics. Even his enemies admitted that he was a brilliant teacher and an unbeatable logician. He was also a prolific writer. His surviving works include letters, sermons, philosophical and religious treatises, and commentaries on the Bible, Aristotle, and various other books. They also include a number of poems.

Many of the misfortunes which the "Historia Calamitatum" relates were the direct outcome of Abélard's uncompromising position as a rationalist, and the document is above all interesting for the picture it gives of the man himself, against the background of early twelfth century France. A few dates will help the general reader to connect the life surrounding Abélard with other and more familiar facts. William the Conqueror had entered England thirteen years before Abélard's birth. The boy was eight years old when the Conqueror died near Rouen during his struggle with Philip of France. He was seventeen when the First Crusade began, and twenty when the crusaders captured Jerusalem.

Many of the misfortunes described in the "Historia Calamitatum" were a direct result of Abélard's uncompromising position as a rationalist. Above all, the document is interesting for its portrait of Abélard against the background of early twelfth-century France. A few dates will help readers connect the world around Abélard with other, more familiar events. William the Conqueror had entered England thirteen years before Abélard was born. Abélard was eight when the Conqueror died near Rouen during his struggle with Philip of France. He was seventeen when the First Crusade began, and twenty when the crusaders captured Jerusalem.

Two of the men who most profoundly influenced the times in which Abélard lived were Hildebrand, famous as Pope Gregory VII, and Louis VI (the Fat), king of France. It was to Hildebrand that the Church owed much of that regeneration of the spirit which gave it such vitality throughout the twelfth century. Hildebrand died, indeed, when Abélard was only six years old, but he left the Church such a force in the affairs of men as it had never been before. As for Louis the Fat, who reigned from 1108 to 1137, it was he who began to lift the royal power in France out of the shadow which the slothfulness and incompetence of his immediate predecessors, Henry I and Philip I, had cast over it. Discerning enough to see that the chief enemies of the crown were the great nobles, and constantly advised by a minister of exceptional wisdom, Suger, abbot of St. Denis, Louis did his utmost to protect the towns and the churches, and to bring that small part of France wherein his power was felt out of the anarchy and chaos of the eleventh century.

Two men had a profound influence on the times in which Abélard lived. They were Hildebrand, famous as Pope Gregory VII, and Louis VI (the Fat), king of France. The Church owed much of its renewed spirit to Hildebrand. That renewal gave the Church great vitality throughout the twelfth century. Hildebrand died when Abélard was only six years old. But he left the Church with an influence over human affairs greater than it had ever had before. Louis the Fat reigned from 1108 to 1137. He began to restore royal power in France, which had been weakened by the laziness and incompetence of his immediate predecessors, Henry I and Philip I. Louis saw clearly enough that the crown’s chief enemies were the great nobles. He also had the constant advice of an exceptionally wise minister, Suger, abbot of St. Denis. Louis did all he could to protect the towns and the churches. He also did his utmost to free the small part of France where his power was felt from the anarchy and chaos of the eleventh century.

It was the France of Louis VI and Sager which formed the background for the great battle between the realists and the nominalists, the battle in which Abélard played no small part. His life was divided between the towns wherein he taught and the Church which alternately welcomed and denounced him. His fellow-disputants have their places in the history of philosophy; the story of Abélard's love for Héloïse has set him apart, so that he has lived for eight centuries less as a fearless thinker and masterly logician than as one of the glowingly romantic figures of the Middle Ages.

The great battle between the realists and the nominalists took place in the France of Louis VI and Sager. Abélard played a significant part in that battle. He divided his life between the towns where he taught and the Church, which sometimes welcomed him and sometimes denounced him. His fellow debaters have their places in the history of philosophy. But the story of Abélard’s love for Héloïse has set him apart. For eight centuries, he has been remembered less as a fearless thinker and masterful logician than as a vividly romantic figure of the Middle Ages.

It is not known to whom Abélard's letter was addressed, but it may be guessed that the writer intended it to reach the hands of Héloïse. This actually happened, and the first and most famous letter from Héloise to Abélard was substantially an answer to the "Historia Calamitatum."

No one knows whom Abélard's letter was addressed to, but he may have intended it to reach Héloïse. The letter did reach her. Héloïse's first and most famous letter to Abélard was largely a response to the "Historia Calamitatum."

William of Champeaux (Gulielmus Campellensis) was born about 1070 at Champeaux, near Melun. He studied under Anselm of Laon and Roscellinus, his training in philosophy thereby being influenced by both realism and nominalism. His own inclination, however, was strongly towards the former, and it was as a determined proponent of realism that he began to teach in the school of the cathedral of Notre Dame, of which he was made canon in 1103. In 1108 he withdrew to the abbey of St. Victor, and subsequently became bishop of Châlons-sur-Marne. He died in 1121. As a teacher his influence was wide; he was a vigorous defender of orthodoxy and a passionate adversary of the heterodox philosophy of his former master, Roscellinus. That he and Abélard disagreed was only natural, but Abélard's statement that he argued William into abandoning the basic principles of his philosophy is certainly untrue.

William of Champeaux (Gulielmus Campellensis) was born around 1070 in Champeaux, near Melun. He studied under Anselm of Laon and Roscellinus. His philosophical training was therefore influenced by both realism and nominalism. William himself, however, strongly favored realism. As a committed supporter of realism, he began teaching at the school of the cathedral of Notre Dame. He was made a canon of the cathedral in 1103. In 1108 he withdrew to the abbey of St. Victor and later became bishop of Châlons-sur-Marne. He died in 1121. As a teacher, he had wide influence. He vigorously defended orthodoxy and passionately opposed the unorthodox philosophy of his former teacher, Roscellinus. It was only natural that he and Abélard disagreed. But Abélard’s claim that he persuaded William through argument to abandon the basic principles of his philosophy is certainly untrue.

It is not within the province of such a note as this to discuss in detail the great controversy between the realists and the nominalists which dominated the philosophical and, to some extent, the religious thought of France during the first half of the twelfth century. In brief, the realists maintained that the idea is a reality distinct from and independent of the individuals constituting it; their motto, Universalia sunt realia, was readily capable of extension far beyond the Church, and William of Champeaux himself carried it to the extent of arguing that nothing is real but the universal. The nominalists, on the other hand, argued that "universals" are mere notions of the mind, and that individuals alone are real; their motto was Universalia sunt nomina. Thus the central question in the long controversy concerned the reality of abstract or incorporate ideas, and it is to be observed that the realists held views diametrically opposite to those which the word "realism" today implies. In upholding the reality of the idea, they were what would now be called idealists, whereas their opponents, denying the reality of abstractions and insisting on that of the concrete individual or object, were realists in the modern sense.

This note cannot discuss in detail the great controversy between the realists and the nominalists. That controversy dominated philosophical thought in France during the first half of the twelfth century. It also dominated religious thought to some extent. In brief, the realists held that an idea is a reality distinct from and independent of the individuals that make it up. Their motto, Universalia sunt realia, could easily be applied far beyond the Church. William of Champeaux himself went so far as to argue that nothing is real except the universal. The nominalists, on the other hand, argued that "universals" are merely notions in the mind, and that only individuals are real. Their motto was Universalia sunt nomina. Thus, the central question in the long controversy concerned the reality of abstract or incorporeal ideas. The realists held views directly opposite to what the word "realism" implies today. By defending the reality of the idea, they were what we would now call idealists. Their opponents denied the reality of abstractions and insisted on the reality of concrete individuals or objects. They were realists in the modern sense.

The peculiar importance of this controversy lay in its effect on the status of the Church. If nominalism should prevail, then the Church would be shorn of much of its authority, for its greatest power lay in the conception of it as an enduring reality outside of and above all the individuals who shared in its work. It is not strange, then, that the ardent realism of William of Champeaux should have been outraged by the nominalistic logic of Abélard. Abélard, indeed, never went to such extreme lengths as the arch-nominalist, Roscellinus, who was duly condemned for heresy by the Council of Soissons in 1092, but he went quite far enough to win for himself the undying enmity of the leading realists, who were followed by the great majority of the clergy.

The particular importance of this controversy lay in its effect on the Church's status. If nominalism prevailed, the Church would lose much of its authority. Its greatest power came from the idea that the Church was an enduring reality, separate from and above all the individuals who shared in its work. It is therefore no surprise that William of Champeaux, a passionate realist, was outraged by Abélard's nominalist reasoning. Abélard never went as far as Roscellinus, the leading nominalist, who was duly condemned for heresy by the Council of Soissons in 1092. But Abélard went far enough to earn the lasting hostility of the leading realists, who had the support of the great majority of the clergy.

The Introduction ("Isagoge") to the Categories of Aristotle, Written by the Greek scholar and neoplatonist Porphyry in the third century A.D., was translated into Latin by Boetius, and in this form was extensively used throughout the Middle Ages as a compendium of Aristotelian logic. As a philosopher Porphyry was chiefly important as the immediate successor of Plotinus in the neoplatonic school at Rome, but his "Isagoge" had extraordinary weight among the medieval logicians.

The Greek scholar and Neoplatonist Porphyry wrote The Introduction ("Isagoge") to Aristotle’s Categories in the third century A.D. Boetius translated it into Latin. In that form, it was widely used throughout the Middle Ages as a summary of Aristotelian logic. As a philosopher, Porphyry was most important as Plotinus’s immediate successor in the Neoplatonic school at Rome. But his "Isagoge" was extraordinarily influential among medieval logicians.

The Institutiones grammaticae of Priscian (Priscianus Caesariensis) formed the standard grammatical and philological textbook of the Middle Ages, its importance being fairly indicated by the fact that today there exist about a thousand manuscript copies of it.

The Institutiones grammaticae of Priscian (Priscianus Caesariensis) was the standard textbook on grammar and language in the Middle Ages. Its importance can be seen in the roughly thousand manuscript copies that survive today.

Anselm of Laon was born somewhere about 1040, and is said to have studied under the famous St. Anselm, later archbishop of Canterbury, at the monastery of Bec. About 1070 he began to teach in Paris, where he was notably successful. Subsequently he returned to Laon, where his school of theology and exegetics became the most famous one in Europe. His most important work, an interlinear gloss on the Scriptures, was regarded as authoritative throughout the later Middle Ages. He died in 1117. That he was something of a pedant is probable, but Abélard's picture of him is certainly very far from doing him justice.

Anselm of Laon was born around 1040. He is said to have studied at the monastery of Bec under the famous St. Anselm, who later became archbishop of Canterbury. Around 1070, Anselm of Laon began teaching in Paris, where he was notably successful. He later returned to Laon, where his school of theology and biblical interpretation became the most famous in Europe. His most important work was a commentary written between the lines of the Scriptures. It was regarded as authoritative throughout the later Middle Ages. He died in 1117. He was probably something of a pedant, but Abélard's portrayal of him is certainly far from fair.

Of these two not much is known beyond what Abélard himself tells us. ALberic, indeed, won a considerable reputation, and was highly recommended to Pope Honorius II by St. Bernard. In 1139 Alberic seems to have become archbishop of Bourges, dying two years later. Lotulphe the Lombard is referred to by another authority as Leutaldus Novariensis.

Little is known about these two beyond what Abélard himself tells us. Alberic did gain a considerable reputation, and St. Bernard highly recommended him to Pope Honorius II. In 1139, Alberic seems to have become archbishop of Bourges. He died two years later. Another source refers to Lotulphe the Lombard as Leutaldus Novariensis.

The enormous scholarship of St. Jerome, born about 340 and dying September 30, 420, made him not only the foremost authority within the Church itself throughout the Middle Ages, but also one of the chief guides to secular scholarship. Abélard repeatedly quotes from him, particularly from his denunciation of the revival of Gnostic heresies by Jovinianus and from some of his voluminous epistles. He also refers extensively to the charges brought against Jerome by reason of his teaching of women at Rome in the house of Marcella. One of his pupils, Paula, a wealthy widow, followed him on his journey through Palestine, and built three nunneries at Bethlehem, of which she remained the head up to the time of her death in 404.

St. Jerome was born around 340 and died on September 30, 420. His vast learning made him the foremost authority within the Church throughout the Middle Ages. It also made him one of the chief guides to secular scholarship. Abélard repeatedly quotes Jerome, particularly his denunciation of Jovinianus for reviving Gnostic heresies and some of his many letters. Abélard also discusses at length the accusations brought against Jerome for teaching women in Rome at Marcella’s house. One of Jerome’s pupils, Paula, was a wealthy widow who followed him on his journey through Palestine. She built three nunneries in Bethlehem and remained in charge of them until her death in 404.

Regarding the position of St. Augustine (354-430) throughout the Middle Ages, it is here sufficient to quote a few words of Gustav Krüger: "The theological position and influence of Augustine may be said to be unrivalled. No single name has ever exercised such power over the Christian Church, and no one mind ever made so deep an impression on Christian thought. In him scholastics and mystics, popes and opponents of the papal supremacy, have seen their champion. He was the fulcrum on which Luther rested the thoughts by which be sought to lift the past of the Church out of the rut; yet the judgment of Catholics still proclaims the ideals of Augustine as the only sound basis of pbilosopby."

To describe St. Augustine's (354-430) position throughout the Middle Ages, a few words from Gustav Krüger are enough: "Augustine's theological standing and influence may be said to be unrivaled. No other person's name has ever held such power over the Christian Church. No other person's mind has made such a deep impression on Christian thought. Scholastics and mystics, popes and opponents of papal supremacy have all seen him as their champion. Luther used Augustine's ideas as a lever to lift the Church's past out of its rut. Yet Catholics still regard Augustine's ideals as the only sound basis for philosophy."

The abbey of St. Denis was founded about 625 by Dagobert, son of Lothair II, at some distance from the basilica which the clergy of Paris had erected in the fifth century over the saint's tomb. Long renowned as the place of burial for most of the kings of France, the abbey of St. Denis had a particular importance in Abélard's day by reason of its close association with the reigning monarch. The abbot to whom Abélard refers so bitterly was Adam of St. Denis, who began his rule of the monastery about 1094. In 1106 this same Adam chose as his secretary one of the inmates of the monastery, Suger, destined shortly to become the most influential man in France through his position as advisor to Louis VI, and also the foremost historian of his time. Adam died in 1123, and his successor, referred to by Abélard in Chapter X, was none other than Suger himself. From 1127 to 1137 Suger devoted most of his time to the reorganization and reform of the monastery of St. Denis. If we are to believe Abélard, such reform was sorely needed, but other contemporary evidence by no means fully sustains Abélard in his condemnation of Adam and his fellow monks.

Dagobert, son of Lothair II, founded the abbey of St. Denis around 625. It stood some distance from the basilica that the clergy of Paris had built over the saint's tomb in the fifth century. The abbey of St. Denis had long been famous as the burial place of most French kings. In Abélard's day, it was especially important because of its close ties to the reigning monarch. The abbot whom Abélard speaks of so bitterly was Adam of St. Denis. Adam began his rule of the monastery around 1094. In 1106, Adam chose Suger, a monk at the monastery, as his secretary. Suger would soon become the most influential man in France as advisor to Louis VI. He would also become the leading historian of his time. Adam died in 1123, and his successor, whom Abélard mentions in Chapter X, was Suger himself. From 1127 to 1137, Suger devoted most of his time to reorganizing and reforming the monastery of St. Denis. If we are to believe Abélard, reform was badly needed. But other evidence from the time does not fully support Abélard's condemnation of Adam and his fellow monks.

The ALexandrian theological writer Origen, who lived from about 185 to 254, was the most distinguished and the most influential of all the theologians of the ancient Church, with the single exception of Augustine. His incredible industry resulted in such a mass of Writings that Jerome himself asked in despair, "Which of us can read all that he has written?" Origen's self-mutilation, referred to by Abélard, was subsequently used by his enemies as an argument for deposing him from his presbyterial status.

Origen was a theological writer from Alexandria who lived from about 185 to 254. He was the most distinguished and influential theologian of the ancient Church, except for Augustine. His incredible hard work produced a vast number of writings. Jerome himself asked in despair, "Which of us can read all that he has written?" Abélard refers to Origen's self-mutilation. Later, Origen's enemies used it as an argument for removing him from the priesthood.

Abélard's tract regarding the power of God to create Himself was one of the many distant echoes of the great Arian-Athanasian controversy of the fourth century. St. Athanasius, bishop of Alexandria, well deserved the title conferred on him by the Church as "the father of orthodoxy," and it was by his name that the doctrine of identity of substance ("the Son is of the same substance with the Father") became known. Much of the life of Athanasius was passed amid persecutions at the hands of his enemies, and on several occasions he was driven into exile.

Abélard's tract on God's power to create himself was one of many distant echoes of the great Arian-Athanasian controversy of the fourth century. St. Athanasius, bishop of Alexandria, fully deserved the title the Church gave him: "the father of orthodoxy." The doctrine of identity of substance ("the Son is of the same substance with the Father") became known by his name. Athanasius spent much of his life facing persecution by his enemies. They forced him into exile several times.

Rodolphe, or, as some authorities call him, Rudolph or Radulph, became archbishop of Rheims in 1114, after having served as treasurer of the cathedral. His importance among the French clergy is attested by the many references to him in contemporary documents.

Rodolphe became archbishop of Rheims in 1114, after serving as treasurer of the cathedral. Some sources call him Rudolph or Radulph. Many references to him in documents from the time show his importance among the French clergy.

Conon, bishop of Praeneste, whose real name may have been Conrad, came to France as papal legate on at least two occasions. He represented Paschal II in 1115 at ecclesiastical councils held in Beauvais, Rheims and Châlons; in 1120 he represented Calixtus II at Soissons on the occasion of Abélard's trial.

Conon, bishop of Praeneste, came to France as a papal legate at least twice. His real name may have been Conrad. In 1115, he represented Paschal II at church councils in Beauvais, Rheims and Châlons. In 1120, he represented Calixtus II at Soissons during Abélard's trial.

Geoffroi, bishop of Chartres, the second of the name to hold that post, was subsequently a warm friend of St. Bernard. Abélard's high estimate of him is fully confirmed by other contemporary authorities.

Geoffroi was the second bishop of Chartres to bear that name. He later became a close friend of St. Bernard. Other contemporary sources fully confirm Abélard's high opinion of him.

This abbot was probably, though not certainly, Anselm of Soissons, who became a bishop in 1145. The chronology, however, is confusing.

This abbot was probably Anselm of Soissons, though this is not certain. Anselm became a bishop in 1145. However, the chronology is confusing.

The confusion regarding the identity of Dionysius the Areopagite persists to this day, at least to the extent that we do not know the real name of the fourth or fifth century writer who, under this pseudonym, exercised so profound an influence on medieval thought. That he was not the bishop of either Athens or Corinth, nor yet the Dionysius who became the patron saint of France, is clear enough. Of the actual Dionysius the Areopagite we know practically nothing. He is mentioned in Acts, xvii, 34, as one of those Athenians who believed when they had heard Paul preach on Mars Hill. A century or more later we learn from another Dionysius, bishop of Corinth, that Dionysius the Areopagite was the first bishop of Athens, a statement of doubtful value. In the fourth or fifth century a Greek theological writer of extraordinary erudition assumed the name of Dionysius the Areopagite, and as his works exerted an enormous influence on later scholarship, it was quite natural that the personal legend of the real Dionysius should have been extended correspondingly.

Confusion about the identity of Dionysius the Areopagite continues to this day. We still do not know the real name of the fourth or fifth century writer who used that pseudonym. His work had a profound influence on medieval thought. It is clear enough that he was not the bishop of Athens or Corinth, or the Dionysius who became the patron saint of France. We know almost nothing about the real Dionysius the Areopagite. Acts 17:34 mentions him as one of the Athenians who believed after hearing Paul preach on Mars Hill. A century or more later, another Dionysius, the bishop of Corinth, tells us that Dionysius the Areopagite was the first bishop of Athens. That claim is of doubtful value. In the fourth or fifth century, a Greek theological writer of extraordinary learning took the name Dionysius the Areopagite. His works had an enormous influence on later scholarship. It was therefore natural that the legend surrounding the real Dionysius should have grown accordingly.

The Hilduin referred to by Abélard, who was abbot of St. Denis from 814 to 840, was directly responsible for the extreme phase of this extension. Accepting, as most of his contemporaries unquestioningly did, the identity of the theological writer with the Dionysius mentioned in Acts and spoken of as bishop of Athens, Hilduin went one step further, and demonstrated that this Dionysius was likewise the Dionysius (Denis) who had been sent into Gaul and martyred at Catulliacus, the modern St. Denis. There is no evidence to support Hilduin's contention, and the chronology of Gregory of Tours is quite sufficient to disprove it, but none the less it was enthusiastically accepted in France, and above all by the monks of St. Denis.

The Hilduin Abélard mentions was abbot of St. Denis from 814 to 840. He was directly responsible for taking this extension to its extreme. Like most of his contemporaries, Hilduin accepted without question that the theological writer was the Dionysius mentioned in Acts as bishop of Athens. Hilduin went one step further. He demonstrated that this Dionysius was also the Dionysius (Denis) who was sent into Gaul and martyred at Catulliacus, now St. Denis. No evidence supports Hilduin's claim, and Gregory of Tours's chronology is enough to disprove it. Nevertheless, the claim was enthusiastically accepted in France, especially by the monks of St. Denis.

There was, however, a persistent doubt as to the identity of the Dionysius whose writings had become so famous. Bede, the authority quoted by Abélard, was, of course, wrong in saying that he was the bishop of Corinth, but anything which tended to shake the triple identity, established by Hilduin, of the Dionysius of Athens who listened to St. Paul, of the pseudo-Areopagite whose works were known to every medieval scholar, and of the St. Denis who had become the patron saint of France, was naturally anathematized by the monks who bore the saint's name. Bede and Abélard were by no means accurate, but Bede's inkling of the truth was quite enough to get Abélard into serious trouble.

There was, however, persistent doubt about the identity of the Dionysius whose writings had become so famous. Bede, the authority cited by Abélard, was of course wrong to say that Dionysius was the bishop of Corinth. But Hilduin had established that three figures were one and the same person. They were Dionysius of Athens, who listened to St. Paul, the pseudo-Areopagite, whose works were known to every medieval scholar, and St. Denis, who had become the patron saint of France. The monks who bore St. Denis's name naturally condemned anything that might cast doubt on this threefold identity. Neither Bede nor Abélard was entirely accurate, but Bede's glimpse of the truth was enough to get Abélard into serious trouble.

Theobald II, Count of Blois, Meaux and Champagne, was one of the most powerful nobles in France, and by the extent of his influence fully deserved the title of "the Great" by which he was subsequently known. His domain included the modern departments of Ardennes, Marne, Aube and Haute-Marne, with part of Aisne, Seine-et-Marne, Yonne and Meuse. Furthermore, his mother Adela, was the daughter of William I of England, and his younger brother, Stephen, was King of England from 1135 to 1154. Theobald became Count of Blois in 1102, Count of Champagne in 1125, and Count of Troyes in 1128. Had he so chosen, he might likewise have become Duke of Normandy after the death of his uncle, Henry I of England, in 1135. He died in 1152.

Theobald II, Count of Blois, Meaux and Champagne, was one of the most powerful nobles in France. His influence fully justified the title "the Great", by which he later became known. His lands included the modern departments of Ardennes, Marne, Aube and Haute-Marne, as well as parts of Aisne, Seine-et-Marne, Yonne and Meuse. His mother, Adela, was the daughter of William I of England. His younger brother, Stephen, was King of England from 1135 to 1154. Theobald became Count of Blois in 1102, Count of Champagne in 1125, and Count of Troyes in 1128. If he had chosen to, he could also have become Duke of Normandy after his uncle, Henry I of England, died in 1135. Theobald died in 1152.

There is much doubt as to whether this Stephen was Stephen de Garland, dapifer, or another Stephen, who was royal chancellor under Louis the Fat. A charter of the year 1124 is signed by both Stephen dapifer and Stephen cancellarius. Probably, however, the authority identifying Stephen dapifer as Stephen de Garland, seneschal of France, is trustworthy.

There is much doubt about whether this Stephen was Stephen de Garland, dapifer, or another Stephen. The other Stephen was royal chancellor under Louis the Fat. A charter from 1124 is signed by both Stephen dapifer and Stephen cancellarius. However, the source identifying Stephen dapifer as Stephen de Garland, seneschal of France, is probably trustworthy.

Among the terms which are characteristic of, or even peculiar to, the Gospel of St. John is that of "the Paraclete," rendered in the King games version "the Comforter." The Greek word of which "Paraclete" is a reproduction literally means "advocate," one called to aid; hence "intercessor." The doctrine of the Paraclete appears chiefly in John, xiv and xv. For example: (xiv, 16-17) "And I will pray the Father, and he shall give you another Comforter (Paraclete) that be may abide with you for ever; even the spirit of truth." Again: (xiv, 26) "But the Comforter (Paraclete), which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things." With John's words as a basis, the Paraclete came to be regarded as identical with the Third Person of the Trinity, but always with the special attributes of consolation and intercession.

One term characteristic of the Gospel of St. John, and perhaps unique to it, is "the Paraclete." The King James Version translates it as "the Comforter." The Greek word reproduced as "Paraclete" literally means "advocate," someone called to help. It therefore also means "intercessor." The teaching about the Paraclete appears chiefly in John, chapters xiv and xv. For example, John xiv, 16-17 says: "And I will pray the Father, and he shall give you another Comforter (Paraclete) that he may abide with you for ever; even the spirit of truth." Again, John xiv, 26 says: "But the Comforter (Paraclete), which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things." Based on John's words, the Paraclete came to be regarded as identical with the Third Person of the Trinity. But the Paraclete was always associated especially with consolation and intercession.

In 1120 there was established at Prémontré, a desert place in the diocese of Laon, a monastery of canons regular who followed the so-called Rule of St. Augustine, but with supplementary statutes which made the life one of exceptional severity. The head of this monastery was Norbert, subsequently canonized. His order received papal approbation in 1126, and thereafter it spread rapidly throughout Europe; two hundred years later there were no less than seventeen hundred Norbertine or Premonstratensian monasteries. Norbert himself became archbishop of Magdeburg, and it was in Germany that the most notable work of his order was accomplished.

In 1120, a monastery was established at Prémontré, a remote place in the diocese of Laon. Its canons regular followed the so-called Rule of St. Augustine. But they also followed additional rules that made their way of life exceptionally strict. The monastery was headed by Norbert, who was later canonized. His order received papal approval in 1126 and then spread rapidly throughout Europe. Two hundred years later, there were no fewer than seventeen hundred Norbertine or Premonstratensian monasteries. Norbert himself became archbishop of Magdeburg. It was in Germany that his order did its most notable work.

Regarding the illustrious St. Bernard, abbot of Clairvaux, it is needless here to say more than that his own age recognized in him the embodiment of the highest ideal of medieval monasticism. Intellectually inferior to Abélard and to some others of those over whom he triumphed, he was their superior in moral strength, in zeal, and above all in the power of making others share his own enthusiasms. Born in 1090, he was renowned as one of the foremost of French churchmen before he was thirty years old; his share in the contest which followed the death of Pope Honorius II in 1130 made him one of the most commanding figures in all Europe. It was to him that the Cistercian order owed its extraordinary expansion in the twelfth century. That Abélard should have fallen before so redoubtable an adversary (see the note on Pierre Abélard) is in no way surprising, but there can be no doubt that St. Bernard's "persecution" of Abélard was inspired solely by high ideals and an intense zeal for the truth as Bernard perceived it.

There is little need to say more here about the illustrious St. Bernard, abbot of Clairvaux. His own age saw him as the embodiment of the highest ideal of medieval monasticism. He was intellectually inferior to Abélard and some others he defeated. But he surpassed them in moral strength, in zeal, and above all in his ability to inspire others with his own enthusiasms. Born in 1090, he was renowned as one of the leading French churchmen before he turned thirty. His role in the contest that followed Pope Honorius II’s death in 1130 made him one of Europe’s most commanding figures. The Cistercian order owed its extraordinary expansion in the twelfth century to him. It is no surprise that Abélard fell before such a formidable opponent (see the note on Pierre Abélard). But there can be no doubt that St. Bernard’s "persecution" of Abélard was inspired solely by high ideals and an intense zeal for truth as Bernard understood it.

Traditionally, at least, this abbey was the oldest one in Brittany. According to the anonymous author of the Life and Deeds of St. Gildas, it was founded during the reign of Childeric, the second of the Merovingian kings, in the fifth century. Be that as it may, its authentic history had been extensive before Abélard assumed the direction of its affairs. His gruesome picture of the conditions which prevailed there cannot, of course, be accepted as wholly accurate, but even allowing for gross exaggeration, the life of the monks must have been quite sufficiently scandalous. It was apparently in the closing period of Abélard's sojourn at the abbey of St. Gildas that he wrote the "Historia Calamitatum." He endured the life there for nearly ten years; the date of his flight is not certain, but it cannot have been far from 1134 or 1135.

Tradition held that this abbey was the oldest in Brittany, at least. According to the anonymous author of the Life and Deeds of St. Gildas, it was founded in the fifth century. This was during the reign of Childeric, the second of the Merovingian kings. Whether or not that is true, the abbey had a long documented history before Abélard took charge of it. His gruesome account of conditions there cannot, of course, be accepted as entirely accurate. But even allowing for gross exaggeration, the monks' lives must have been scandalous enough. Abélard apparently wrote the "Historia Calamitatum" near the end of his stay at the abbey of St. Gildas. He endured life there for nearly ten years. The date of his flight is uncertain, but it cannot have been far from 1134 or 1135.

Leo IX, pope from 1049 to 1054, was a native of Upper Alsace. It was at the Easter synod of 1049 that he enjoined anew the celibacy of the clergy, in connection with which the letter quoted by Abélard was written.

Leo IX, pope from 1049 to 1054, was born in Upper Alsace. At the Easter synod of 1049, he renewed the requirement that clergy remain celibate. The letter quoted by Abélard was written in connection with this requirement.