The epic adaptations of the Life of Saint Martin of Tours,
Sulpicius Severus, Paulinus of Périgueux and Venantius FortunatusTiffany van der Meer Student number 10223339 Master Classics and Ancient Civilizations: Classics
University of Amsterdam, July 2016 Piet Gerbrandy & Nienke Vos
Words: 17.249 18 ECTS
2
Contents
Introduction 3
Chapter 1: Questions of genre, from biblical to hagiographical epic 6
Chapter 2: The epic adaptations 12
Chapter 3: Scholarship 17
Chapter 4: Case studies 26
Conclusions: 59
3
Introduction
Saint Martin is one of the most famous saints in the West. A favourite among Christian and non-religious children alike, this late Roman ascetic is known for giving away his own
possessions to those in need in the iconic story of the cloak. On a cold winter’s day in fourth-century France, a soldier comes across a pauper nudus, and while others pass him by, Martin understands this person is there especially for him to help. Of course he has already given away his other things for similar causes and at this point has only his cloak to spare. The fierce cold demands him to keep a part for himself, but he cuts his double coated cloak in half and clothes the beggar. This extraordinary deed of benevolence demonstrated by Martin, early in the story, shows him to have a biblical lifestyle even before his baptism. Dressing the poor is one of the cardinal tasks put forth in Mathew 25.35-36.1
There is more to the figure of Saint Martin than this much depicted episode. We know about his life through the hagiographical prose life written by Sulpicius Severus. Sulpicius wrote the Vita Sancti Martini at the end of the fourth century, when Martin was still alive, probably around 396.2 Later he added Dialogues and Letters with information of a
later date, like Martin’s death. Martin was one of the first Christians who was revered for his way of life, instead of his manner of dying. The martyrs had largely ceased to exist after the edict of Milan in 313 and Christianity became the state religion under Theodosius I in 381. A new identity for ‘the holy man’ had to be debated. A new sort of Christian hero came to the fore, and a new kind of literature that upheld the ideal of asceticism. In this respect the slightly earlier fourth-century hagiographical text by Athanasius of Alexandria is important: his Greek Life of Antony together with Sulpicius’ Latin Life of Martin are two pillars of this new literature and way of life. Antony was an austere ascetic monk in the Egyptian deserts, said to stand at the birth of eastern monasticism, whereas this is said of Martin in the West.
Martin comes from a pagan family with a military father, and has to serve in the army from the age of fifteen.3 At a certain point, he renounces military service in front of the
1 Mathew 25.35-36. ‘For I was hungry and you gave me food, I was thirsty and you gave me drink, I was a
stranger and you welcomed me,I was naked and you clothed me, I was sick and you visited me, I was in prison and you came to me.’ Transl. from Revised Standard Version, 1951. This translation was used for all Bible quotes.
2 Stancliffe 1983, 133. 3 Sulpicius VSM 2.5.
4
emperor.4 This action is accompanied by a miracle: the enraged emperor Julian orders
Martin to serve in the frontline at dawn because he wants to quit the army. Martin complies, but says he will face the enemy unarmed. The next morning the enemy comes to seek peace. In Venantius Fortunatus we see the absence of combat become an epic victory of the forces of good over evil, and of the one over many: Atque, orante uno, cecidit furor omnibus
armis / innumerasque acies solus sine sanguine vicit – ‘and, because of the praying of one
man, fury resided from all weapons and he alone conquered innumerable battle lines without bloodshed.’5
Martin’s life is strewn with adventures and miracles. The saint is banished to an island where he cures himself of poisonous hellebore, is captured by a robber –who, of course, he gets to convert to Christianity-, meets the devil on the way and is able to defy him, resuscitates two dead people and can bend the direction of the falling of trees and of the scorching of fire.
Sulpicius’ Vita became a bestseller right away, and was transposed into hexameters two times thereafter. First in the late fifth century, by Paulinus of Périgueux, and once more by Venantius Fortunatus in the late sixth. This raises some questions. Why was another version of the prose text made at all? And when Paulinus’ epic was in place, why was another desirable by Fortunatus? How does one go about transposing hagiographical material into epic? What can we say about the aims and audiences of the texts?
Until about thirty years ago research into hagiographical texts focused on the texts as historical sources.6 The literary aspects of the works, however, have not been discussed very
often.
In this thesis, I will explore the character and aims of the two epic adaptations from a literary rather than a historical perspective. To search for the answers to the questions posed above I will first devote a chapter to questions of genre, in particular biblical epic. In the second chapter I will present and discuss the two epics by Paulinus and Fortunatus. In chapter three, I will discuss the scholarship on this matter so far. In the fourth and longest
4 A discussion exists over Martin’s age at that point. The information given in Sulpicius points to 356 for the
event. See Chapter 4.
5 Fortunatus VSM 1.76-77. Translations are my own, unless otherwise indicated. The translations in this thesis
are intended as a tool for the reader to read the Latin more quickly, not as literary translations.
6 See for instance Fabre, P., 1961, Saint Martin et son temps. Mémorial du XVIe centenaire des débuts du
monachisme en Gaule, Rome, 361-1961; Donaldson, C., 1980, Martin of Tours: parish priest, mystic and exorcist, London.
5
chapter I will discuss passages from the epics following a method of close reading. Finally, I will try to answer the questions asked above.
6
Chapter 1: Questions of genre: from biblical to hagiographical epic
What genre are we dealing with in the case of the Lives of Martin? Should they be seen in the tradition of late antique biography? Do the two epic adaptations by Paulinus of
Périgueux and Venantius Fortunatus form epics like those of Homer and Virgil? A term that has come to be used broadly is ‘hagiography’. As a genre, however, it is problematic.7 With
this term a complex and diverse corpus is designated: in effect; hagiography is a piece of writing about the life or deeds of a ‘holy man’ (or woman).8 Of this broad corpus some
general characteristics have been pronounced. For instance, the hagiographic life starts with the birth of the saint and runs in a more or less chronological fashion to his or her death.9 On
this ‘rule’ many exceptions can be found, the Life of Saint Martin being one of them. A focus on miracles has been put forward as another characteristic, but on this point the texts differ as well.10 Influences on hagiography can be traced from biography and romance, and of
course the bible, apocryphal Acts, and the martyr stories called passiones. For this thesis it will suffice to understand the Martinian works as hagiographical texts. Because the complex issue of the genre of hagiography falls outside the scope of this thesis, we will move on to the genre of epic.
What constitutes an epic? Since the time of Homer, the epic genre in Greek or Latin has been bound by the hexametric verse meter. The subject matter is that of Gods, kings and special and extraordinary people at the very least. A high language register is suitable and the text deserves on a subjective basis the adjective ‘long’.11 Furthermore great value is
attached to structure, and the unity of the narrative as a whole. Each episode participates as an important link in a story chain.
Regarding Fortunatus’ Life of Saint Martin, Roberts (2001) states the following: “In meter, scope, and mode of representation the VSM [Vita Sancti Martini]conforms to the expectations of epic.”12 However, the work does not read the same way as the Aeneid by
Virgil. Roberts formulates this about Fortunatus: “An epic, then, to all appearances, but not
7 For an article about the problems of the genre, see Uytfanghe 1988.
8 For the term ‘holy man’, see the influential paper by Brown 1971,‘The Rise and Function of the Holy Man in
Late Antiquity’.
9 Miller 1983, 57: “A formal structure is practically nonexistent, apart from concessions to the convention of a
birth-to-death envelope.” See also Uytfanghe 1988.
10 The life of Boniface by Willibald (eighth century) for example, barely contains miracles. 11 Aristotle discusses epic in Poetics 23-24.
7
one that reads at all like the more familiar texts from the Augustan, Neronian, or Flavian periods.”13
Let us therefore turn our gaze to another literary epic tradition, one which might be a better fit for Paulinus and Fortunatus: that of the biblical epic. A corpus of texts exists, from the fourth century onward, that commit biblical prose material to hexameters.
Christianity became a religio licita with the edict of Milan in 313 and the preferred religion from 381. With this new situation came a new group of readers: educated nobleman,
conversi, now formed a growing part of the audience of the Christian message.14 They were
displeased with the unpolished Latin language of the Bible. To them, biblical Latin and Virgil were the lowest and the highest of literary forms. This could explain the rise of a new literary form, in which classical form and style were applied to a wholly different content and
meaning. Roberts says that: “In the 320s the conditions were ripe for the creation of Christian epic according to the formal norms of classical poetry.”15
Was this compromise with classics not a problem? The attitude of Christians towards the love for classical style and authors has always been problematic and varies per period and per individual. There are generally two sides; on the one hand those who believed pagan literature and thought should be avoided and seen as dangerous and foolish,16 and, on the
other, those who thought it right and smart to use (elements of) pagan literature for the Christian cause. A famous example of the issue is Jerome’s nightmare, where he is told ‘ciceronianus es, non christianus. Ubi thesaurus tuus, et cor tuum’ – ‘You are a Ciceronian, not a Christian. Where your treasure is, your heart is as well.’17 This story informs us of
Jerome’s fear around 375 A.D. of betraying Christianity by reading or preferring classical texts over Scripture. A different sentiment is defended by Augustine around 397, who compared the use of good parts of classical philosophers to the ‘plundering’ of Egyptians by the Israelites in Exodus 12, 35-36.18 In the same fashion pagan literature or theory can be
melted, recast and used to serve the spread of the Christian message. Something similar can
13 Roberts 2001, 258. 14 Roberts 2001, 262. 15 Roberts 2001, 262.
16 E.g. Tertullian De Spectaculis 17.6-7. 17 Jerome Epist. xxii, 30, Migne, PL, 22.394.
18 Augustine De Doctrina Christiana 2.40.60. The use of Egyptian objects is ordered and therefore authorized by
God in Exodus 11.2-3. It is not a literal plundering. The Egyptians give their goods to the Israelites, because God makes them have a mild attitude towards the Israelites.
8
be read in Lactantius’ Divinae Institutiones, dated to the early fourth century. As a converted erudite he was ‘well aware that in order to appeal to cultivated citizens, rhetoric and style was crucial.’19
Quae [causam veritatis] licet possit sine eloquentia defendi, ut est a multis saepe defensa; tamen claritate ac nitore sermonis inlustranda et quodammodo adseranda est, ut potentius in animos influat et vi sua instructa et luce orationis ornata. 20
Truth can be defended, as many often have defended it, without eloquence, nevertheless it ought to be illuminated and indeed maintained with clarity and
splendour of utterance, so that it floods into people’s minds more forcefully, with the equipment of its own power and religion and its own brilliance of rhetoric.
The plea that is heard is not a wish to continue using the pagan forms, or simply to adapt Christian truth to a higher classical standard, but rather a desire to appropriate good elements in order to form a Christian variant more powerful by the incorporation of those elements: to become vi sua instructa.
The first biblical epic, that of Juvencus (c. 330), is believed to have emerged from an apologetic stance toward educated readers.21 The Christian material of the Gospel was
polished up to hexameters ‘to enlist the prestige of epic idiom in the service of the Christian message’,22 forming his Evangeliorum Libri quattuor. This biblical epic was more worthy a
form for conversi and pagans. Later poets writing for a largely Christian audience could use the verse form for its pleasantness (suavitas) and memnonic value.23 In Juvencus’ prologue
we read his view on the role of poets and the aims of epic:24
Sed tamen innumeros homines sublimia facta et virtutis honos in tempora longa frequentant, adcumulant quorum famam laudesque poetae.
19 Sandnes 2011, 63.
20 Lactantius Divinarum Institutionum Libri VII, 1.10. Translation by Bowen & Garnsey 2003, 58. 21 Roberts 1985, 71.
22 Roberts 2001, 263. 23 Roberts 1985, 85-86.
9 Hos celsi cantus, Smyrnae de fonte fluentes,
illos Miniciadae celebrat dulcedo Maronis.
Their lofty deeds and reputation for virtue win fame over many ages for countless men, whose glory and praise the poets celebrate. Some the lofty strains from the spring of Smyrna hymn, others the sweetness of Virgil the Mantuan.25
What is important here is the notion of epic in late antiquity.26 As we have learned from
Jauss (1986), ‘the history of literary genres’ is ‘a temporal process of the continual founding and altering of horizons’ [of expectations].27 Juvencus emphasizes the praise and glory for
sublimia facta of individuals. This is the role of poets and the aim of epic in late antiquity.28
What better to praise than the deeds of God and Jesus? Did this lead to an explosion of biblical epic? Not immediately:
Juvencus’ pioneering efforts did not find immediate imitation. […] for all the more liberal voices, echoing the sentiments of Lactantius, there yet lingered a suspicion in ascetic circles of any compromise with worldly literature.29
In the late fourth century the handshake of classical form or style and Christian material became ‘largely unproblematic’.30 In the first half of the fifth century, Sedulius took up the
baton, describing the miracles of Christ in his Carmen Paschale. This work found much imitation. Roberts speculates that Asterius, consul in 494, who made recensions of both Sedulius and of Virgil, must have seen Sedulius as the Christian Virgil.31
Earlier in this chapter I briefly discussed the value assigned to the unity of the whole in classical epic. In this respect the biblical epics differ drastically from the classical norm:
25 Translation from Roberts 2001, 263.
26 The following does not exclude that other works are still produced according to more traditional classical
norms. De Raptu Proserpinae by Claudian, for example.
27 Jauss 1968, 94, quoted by Roberts, 2001, 258. Roberts says: “In speaking of genre in the context of late
antiquity I find Jauss’ approach, developed for medieval literature, most helpful.”
28 ‘Praising great men’ was always a part of epic. (Mind for instance the choice of Achilles to be either famous
and sung about (in Homer’s epic), or live long and be unknown.) In late antiquity, however, epic gets a more panegyric function. See Roberts 2001, 263-264, n. 12.
29 Roberts 2001, 264.
30 Roberts 2001, 264. But in the tenth century Saint Odo of Cluny still had a dream that told him he should stop
reading the works of Virgil.
10
From the point of view of classical epic, the most striking feature of the Carmen
Paschale is the extreme fragmentation of the narrative: miracle stories in particular
are treated as discrete episodes, with little attempt on the poet’s part to create a chronologically and topographically unified narrative.32
This agrees with a more general tendency in late antique poetry to attach greater importance to single episodes than the whole. Claudian for instance, was for a long time judged by critics for his lack of unity, loose structure, and ‘an overfondness for digressions’.33
Roberts (1989) formulated interesting theories on this trend, coining ‘the jeweled style’.34
This term refers to a style in which the poet elaborates richly on episodes, like in a mosaic, but regards the main story line and connections between episodes as less important. This results in ‘an emphasis on small-scale effects of parallelism and opposition, on enumerative sequences, and on lexical choice, all typical of the jeweled style.’35 Roberts (2001) lists two
more considerations that may help explain the fragmented character of late antique texts: firstly, Christian allegorical reading encouraged seeing an episode of a miracle, for example, as a miniature drama of salvation. Secondly, in liturgical practice, Gospel was broken up into individual passages.36
Important Christian poets, among others, joining the ranks are Claudius Marius Victorius in the first half of the fifth century (Alethia, an epic about Genesis), Avitus in the
32 Roberts 2001, 265. In the case of Sulpicius’ Life of Martin this ‘little attempt on the poet’s part’ can be clearly
detracted from his type of narrative transitions. Often vague temporal or spatial indications are used, like
quodam tempore (3.1), insequenti tempore (12.1). Huber 1901, 26-27 points out that Paulinus in his last three
books improves on those ‘von Sulpicius einfach und zusammenhangslose aneinandergereihten Erzählungen’ by connecting the episodes. In the first three books, however, pertaining to the VSM, Paulinus follows Sulpicius’ type of transitions using words like exinde, ergo, interea, hic, hinc. Fortunatus connects episodes with words like hinc, dum, accidit ut, inde, ergo, post.
33 Roberts 1989,1-3.
34 Roberts with his book The Jeweled Style (1989) argued that our judgement of late antique poetry should not
be based on classical norms and aesthetics.
35 Roberts 1989, 152.
36 I am not entirely convinced by the importance of liturgical practice in the forming of new epic standards,
because the epics were probably not read in Church. However a certain conceptualization of episodes as stories in their own right can derive from liturgical practice. I would like to add to these factors Roberts’ own point in Roberts, 2001, 266: “In the panegyrical epic of late antiquity, of which Claudian, Merobaudes, and Sidonius are the prime exponents in the West, the emphasis on the narration of gesta tends to blur the thematic structure of panegyric and assimilate the poems to epic. Conversely the view of epic as a poem of
praise deemphasizes its narrative continuity and promotes a fragmenting view of its composition as a sequence
11
late fifth or early sixth century (De Spiritualis Historiae Gestis, about Genesis and Exodus), and Arator in the sixth century (De Actibus Apostolorum, about Acts).37
With the Christian material of the Gospel now committed to epic form in biblical epics, and with the view of epic as panegyric praise for the acts of individuals in the back of our minds, we can now leap to the epic adaptations of the prose hagiography concerning the life of Martin of Tours. In the new view, epic ‘becomes a form of encomiastic biography’.38
Roberts (2001) continues to conclude: “It is not difficult to see why Christian poets would view the life of a saint as highly appropriate material for epic treatment.”39 In late antiquity,
newly formed epic subgenres, aside from biblical epic, include panegyric epic and hagiographical epic.40
In this chapter, I explored the ties of genre for the epic adaptations of the life of Martin. We came across a new panegyric function of epic. In the end, we should see the
Lives as hagiographical epic, standing in the tradition of biblical epic in particular. With this
knowledge as a background, we can now continue to a chapter about the epics and their poets Paulinus of Périgueux and Venantius Fortunatus.
37 Roberts 1985, 1. 38 Roberts 2001, 267. 39 Roberts 2001, 267. 40 Roberts 2001, 259.
12
Chapter 2: The epic adaptations
The first Life of Martin of Tours was written by Sulpicius Severus. This prose text is dated around 396, published while Martin was still alive.41 Sulpicius was a Roman lawyer,42 who
took an interest in Martin and spent some three years by his side, collecting material for his intended work. It is generally agreed that, in this period, Martin was a great influence on Sulpicius’ personal life as a religious inspiration. His encounters with Martin together with the influences of Sulpicius’ friend Paulinus of Nola, stimulated his own choice to leave the world behind around 394/5.43 After martyrdom became less common, a new Christian hero
came to be venerated for his way of life, rather than death, and his ascetic ideals. Sulpicius writes with a deep respect for Martin.
In the light of the previous chapter we might wonder why Sulpicius uses a simple style of writing. His own comments may help us out here (Sulpicius asks Desiderius –to whom alone he sent his book and to whom he directs his prologue– to ask other readers):
[…] id a lectoribus postulabis, ut res potius quam verba perpendant et aequo animo ferant, si is aures eorum vitiosus forsitan sermo perculerit, quia regnum Dei non in eloquentia, sed in fide constat. (4) Meminerint etiam, salutem saeculo non ab oratoribus, cum utique, si utile fuisset, id quoque Dominus praestare potuisset, sed a piscatoribus praedicatam esse. 44
[…] that you ask this of the readers, that they adhere more weight to the content than to my wording and that they bear it with peace of mind if perhaps my faulty language upsets their ears, for the kingdom of God does not reside in eloquence, but in faith. Let them remember too, that salvation was not preached to the world by orators– although, if this had been profitable, God could have conducted this – but by fishermen.
41Stancliffe 133. Martin died c. 397, see Stancliffe 114, 117.
42 ‘The education which Sulpicius received was much as it would have been three centuries earlier. It was firmly
based upon the Greco-roman classics, and virtually unaffected by the rise of Christianity. The teaching of Christian beliefs and morals was the affair of the family, and of the church’, Stancliffe 1983, 57-58.
43 Course ‘Late Latin Literature: Saints’ Lives and Short Stories’, UvA, May, 2016; Stancliffe 1983, 17-19. 44 Sulpicius VSM, prologue, 3.
13
The first part is part of a humility topos, nonetheless he states explicitly that his emphasis is on content (res) rather than formulation or style (verba). Furthermore, we can see a
comment on a discussion on style and eloquence that was apparently going on in Sulpicius’ circles. Is it necessary or even appropriate to speak eloquently about matters of salvation? The conclusion here is no, not necessarily, because regnum Dei non in eloquentia, sed in fide
constat. God chose fishermen to spread the Gospel. Sulpicius, however, not being a
fisherman, produces a classical style and consciously quotes only very limitedly from the Bible.45 His structure reminds of Suetonius, and he engages with Sallust and Livy.46 Though
classical, it is still written in easy and straightforward basic Latin. Sulpicius aims to hold up Martin as an edifying exemplar for others and in writing about him to win himself the reward of eternal life rather than eternal fame (for which the ancients strived).47 In his time
Christians, and ascetics all the more, are still facing a hostile environment. Sulpicius writes for ascetic circles, but also for Christians and pagans not approving of asceticism. This work is the first about Martin, and Martin’s ‘type’ of saint. This gives his work an apologetic tone and a level of detail that is fitting for an audience unfamiliar with the subject matter.
Six to seven decades later, (c. 460-470), a new version in six books was made, this time in verse. We only know its poet – Paulinus of Périgueux the ‘Erfinder des
hagiographischen Epos’48 – from his own works.49 Fortunatus would later confuse this
Paulinus with Paulinus of Nola.50 That Paulinus of Périgueux was bishop of Périgueux is
inferred from his employment of a deacon, a privilege in this period only reserved for bishops.51 He addresses his work to bishop Perpetuus of Tours, who sent Paulinus a tam
splendidam historiam and asked him to write a new version, ut … ad totius orbis notitiam
45 Stancliffe 1983, 39.
46 Stancliffe 1983, 89-90; 59. Suetonian structure consists of a chronologically arranged first part up until the
hight of the person’s career, a second part per species, and a third part on the personality. Stancliffe 1983, 90: “[…] chapters 2-10 do contain a chronological account of Martin’s career up to his election as bishop and foundation of Marmoutier; the following fourteen chapters devoted to his miraculous deeds as bihop are strictly arranged according to subject-matter; and the final three chapters are about Martin’s personality and way of life, with a possibly Suetonian echo in the phrase ‘interiorem vitam illius et converssationem
cotidianum.” Cf. Suetonius Augustus, 61.1.
47 Sulpicius VSM 1.6. 48 Vielberg 2006, 75. 49 Chase 1932, 52.
50 Fortunatus VSM 20. Stemmate, corde, fide pollens Paulinus. 51 Huber 1901, 10; Schanz 1920, 377; Chase 1932, 52.
14 perveniret.52 Paulinus uses Sulpicius’ Vita for his first three books, bases his fourth and fifth
book on the Dialogues and covers with his sixth book the wonders that Perpetuus had sent him.53
One motive for the emergence of this work is, then, a local one. The bishop of Tours desired an ‘elegant poetical version of the Vita Sulpicius produced’,54 and he wanted the
material from the list of wonders at Martin’s shrine – written by himself – added. Martin’s shrine became very popular for pilgrims, and maybe a metrical version and renewed advertisement for Martin would add to the powerbase of any bishop of Tours.55 Paulinus’
audience must be inferred from his work as well. The fact that it is in hexameters shows it is not intended for any reader. I discussed already how, from the fourth century, new wealth and social classes joined the Christian audience. Paulinus, now writing for a mostly Christian audience of educated conversi, does not need the apologetic stance of Sulpicius. He states many matters with positive evaluations that Sulpicius might have felt the need to explain.56
There is, however, the need to provide the Christian message in a stylistically sophisticated way. Paulinus follows the narrative thread of Sulpicius quite closely, rather expanding than abbreviating episodes. The cult of Saint Martin is established by now, although primarily in Aquitania.57 The material of Martin’s life is no longer completely new information to be
rendered for the first time. At the same time, however, if aiming for a bigger range than Aquitania, Paulinus must incorporate a comprehensive hagiographical account.58 Paulinus
will typically explain and elaborate on the lesson and meaning to be taken out of an episode.
52 Paulinus of Périgueux VSM, prologue, 11-12. A discussion exists on the meaning of splendidam historiam, see
chapter 3. I take Splendidam historiam as referring to a revised Tours version of Sulpicius’ VSM, see Chase 1932, 55-56.
53 Gärtner 2001, 71.
54 Chase 1932, 55: “Perpetuus was, indeed, at the time engaged upon a sort of campaign for the glorification of
St. Martin. The great church at Tours was then building […]”
55 See Brown (1981) on the relation between a bishop’s power and the importance of the local shrine he is
connected with. See Stancliffe 1983, 361 and Vielberg 2006, 62 for the popularity of Martin’s cult and Perpetuus’ role.
56 The apologetic stance towards Martin’s period in the army, for example, to be discussed later; On Sulpicius’
wish to explain asceticism to his environment see Stancliffe 1983, 79. The statement about positive evaluation will be discussed in Chapter 4.
57 Stancliffe 1983, 361; Vielberg 2006, 69.
58 Vielberg 2006, 69 “Der Hagiograph muss dagegen [i.e. in contrast with the author of biblical epic, who’s
material is known] in der Regel einen logisch aufgebauten Volltext bieten, der auch den weniger gut orientierten Rezipienten ein Verstehen ermöglicht.” Vielberg names Fortunatus as an exception to this rule. The reason seems to me clearly the wider knowledge of St. Martin attributed to by Fortunatus’ forbearers. Paulinus does recount most of the narrative events of Sulpicius’ text, but I do not agree that his aim is primarily to tell Martin’s tale to an unfamiliar audience. If that was the goal, then all his personal commentary and praise
15
In the sixth century we encounter another Life of Martin in Latin literature. At the crossroads of late antiquity and the Middle Ages in Merovingian Gaul, Venantius Fortunatus is an interesting figure. Bernt once called him ‘the last poet of antiquity and the first of the Middle Ages.’59 He attended the traditional Roman literary education in Ravenna, and after
that worked in service of royals, nobles and bishops in Gaul.60 “Er war Dichter von Begabung,
Neigung und letzten Endes auch Profession.”61 His large corpus contains many short
epigrammatic texts for his patrons.62 Very different from these is his epic Life of Martin, ‘it
represents for Fortunatus a rare foray into hexameters’.63 It is dated around 575.64 In the
case of Fortunatus, the question of why another epic was made is maybe the most poignant. Two texts were already in place. According to the preface, the text was mandated by
Gregory of Tours and it is dedicated to his friends and patrons Radegund and Agnes by a letter accompanying the text. These two ladies are founder and abbess of the convent of the Holy Cross at Poitiers.65 The connection with Poitiers and Tours is amply present in the story
of Martin (his teacher is Hilary of Poitiers, and eventually Martin is elected bishop of Tours). Quesnel suggested Radegund and Agnes might have proposed a work on Martin to ‘promote close ties between the convent and the new bishop of Tours’ (i.e. Gregory).66 Fortunatus’
Vita Sancti Martini consists of four books. Books 1-2 cover Sulpicius’ material, while the third
book covers Dialogue 2.1-13, and in the fourth he treats Dialogue 3.1-17. Again a bishop of Tours gives the impetus for a work about Martin, stimulating his Tours cult. Martin’s holiness was firmly established now and his shrine was a popular stop for pilgrims.67 This may explain
would only impede the main message. To me, it seems more like Paulinus is engaging in an existing cult. Of course, this could also mean that Paulinus did not succeed in his conduct.
59 Bernt 1968, 118, quoted in Roberts 2001, 257. Bernt discusses shorter poems by Fortunatus, and their
epigrammatic nature in 118-132.
60 Roberts 2001, 257. 61 Bernt 1968, 118.
62 Roberts 2001, 258. There are some other longer poems in Fortunatus’ oeuvre, but the longest (De
Virginitate) is 400 lines. See Roberts 2001, 257, n. 1.
63 Roberts 2001, 258; poems 2.4, 2.5, 5.6, and 6.24-143 are also in hexameters. The first three are figure
poems, the last is an epithalamium. However none of them are long nor could be called an epic.
64 Roberts 2001, 258. 65 Roberts 2001, 258.
66 Quesnel 1996, xiv-xvi; Roberts 2001, 258, n.1.
67 Stancliffe 1983, 361: “it was only with Clovis’conquest of this area in 507 that Martin’s cult achieved a wider
16
Fortunatus’ freedom to transform extensive parts of Sulpicius’ narrative, still followed quite closely by Paulinus, into a series of compact miracles.68
The desire for a new version might be explained by the very difference between Fortunatus’ treatment of the material and that of Paulinus. After having discussed the scholarship on these authors in , I will examine the texts and their peculiarities more closely in chapter 4.
68 In the case of Martin’s army period, for instance, which will be discussed in Chapter 4. Also Roberts 2001,
17
Chapter 3: Scholarship
In this chapter, I will discuss theories other scholars have formed about the epic lives, and other theories relevant to our interpretation of the texts.69
The epic by Paulinus of Périgueux, also known as Paulinus of Petricordia, was edited by Petschenig (1888). There is some discussion about Paulinus’ preface. In it, Paulinus states that Perpetuus who mandates his work, sent him splendida historia. Is it the preface to the whole work, as it is placed in Regensis 582 (from now on ‘R’), the most dominant manuscript according to Petschenig, with splendida historia referring to a version of Sulpicius’ Life of
Martin? Or did Paulinus write the first five books, and then receive the splendida historia, in
this case referring to the work Perpetuus wrote on the miracles at Martin’s shrine? This would suggest that the preface in R would then be misplaced and refers only to the sixth book. Huber (1901) has formulated arguments for the former position, but these have been convincingly refuted by Chase (1932). Another idea has been proposed by Van Dam (1986), who argues that Perpetuus sent Paulinus the Dialogues when the first three books were already finished.70
Some parts of the epic are discussed in a dissertation by Grünberg.71 There is also a
chapter on Paulinus in Vielberg (2006), discussing the relation between Paulinus and Perpetuus, and his hagiographical epic as an innovation of genre. Vielberg also discusses Fortunatus, focusing on his many travels and his use of nautical metaphors.72 I do not know
of any translation of Paulinus’ epic (in full).
Chase (1932) has compared both epics, but with the main intent of researching what clues Paulinus’ and Fortunatus’ use of Sulpicius provides on the manuscript tradition of the prose text. The general evaluation of the three Lifes might be summarized as follows:
The story of his [i.e. Martin] kind and manly life was first told in the pleasant, not inelegant prose of Sulpicius Severus, […] and in the course of the next two hundred years was twice subjected to a metrical transformation, first at the hands of Paulinus
69 As Sulpicius’ prose life is my point of departure, scholarly discussion on that work is not treated here. For a
good starting point, see Stancliffe (1989).
70 Van Dam 1986, 567. Vielberg follows Van Dam (but quotes him wrongly as Van Dam 1987, in Vielberg 2006,
62, n.111). I follow Chase. However, no theory yet explains all the problems. See for a more detailed discussion Vielberg 2006, 64-67.
71 Grünberg (1990). (Paulinus 1.54-139, 2.251-334, 2.480-538, 3.260-362).
18
of Périgueux, who wished to be, and later at the hands of Fortunatus, who was, a poet.73
In the past, scholars have uttered disapproval about late antique poetry.74 Of late, new
voices are being heard, not to judge later works from a classical viewpoint. A new aesthetic was developed in poetry, in which the unit of the episode is more important than the unity of the whole, resulting in a different style of writing. Roberts (1989) has dubbed this late-antique style ‘the jeweled style’.75 Insights like this have given rise to an upcoming flow of
attention for late antique texts. More recently, Gärtner (2001) explored the
‘imitationstechnik’ of Paulinus. It is typical of Paulinus’ technique that he bends pagan elements to Christian and hagiographical motives.76 Sometimes, for instance, he alludes to a
pagan passage, but inverts its meaning or outcome. This way he highlights, by contrast, the Christian values and Christian heroism of Martin. An interesting case in point is an episode in which Martin stops, by his command, a snake that was coming from a flood towards
bystanders.77 Paulinus here alludes to Virgil’s Laocoön passage (Aeneis 2.203-211), in which
a terrible snake comes from the water and strangles the priest Laocoön and both his sons. None of the Trojans on the beach come to their aid. Paulinus, from the climax of his episode (iam iamque accedere terrae, Paulinus 5.627) onwards, deviates from his model. Whereas in Virgil’s story the Trojans flee at the sight of the snake, Martin knows what to do. He rescues his endangered sheep ‘durch seine göttliche Autorität’ and is therefore superior to Virgil’s hero Aeneas, who stood idly in the crowd.78 Gärtner illustrates Paulinus’ ‘imitationstechnik’
with many more examples, and summarizes it as:
[…] ein Verfahren, welches den Leser, der diese Anspielungen zur Kenntnis nimmt und sich an die heidnischen Vorbilder des Paulinus erinnert, mit besonderem Nachdruck auf das Neue und Besondere in der Person und in den Taten Martins hinweist. Das Modell des Paulinus [i.e. the pagan passage alluded to] bildet
73 Chase 1932, 51.
74 See the first chapter and Roberts 1989, 1-5. 75 See my first chapter.
76 Chase 1932, 71. 77 Gärtner 2001, 81-83. 78 Gärtner 2001, 83.
19
gewissermassen eine Folie, vor der das vom Autor gezechnete Profil des Heiligen deutlicher hervortritt […]
Fortunatus’ Martinian poem was edited by Leo in 1881, and more recently by Quesnel (1996) in the bilingual Budé series. A German translation has been produced by Fels (2006). Fotunatus’ panegyrical ruler poems have reveiced more scholarly attention (as well as the historical and anthropological information to be gathered from his texts about Merovingian Gaul), than his epic on Martin.79 Roberts in 1999 characterized Fortunatus’ poem as a
‘somewhat unfamiliar text’.80 The two epic texts about Martin, handling the same material,
form an interesting test case. They invite the scholarly mind to dwell on their differences and similarities, and on possible explanation of those differences. However, the epics were for long considered to be redundant rephrasings of the known work of Sulpicius Severus. Labarre (1998):
Elles ont [i.e. the Lifes of Martin by Paulinus and Fortunatus] été considérées comme des oeuvres rebutantes, parce que, comme l’épopée biblique qui paraphrase les Ecritures, ells traitent un sujet déjà connu. Les jugements littéraires portés sur ells ont été très négatifs.81
Some dissertations were written about the one or the other author, not reading the three lives side by side.82 Chase (1932), although he is primarily working on the stemma of
Sulpicius’ manuscript tradition, does make some general remarks in a comparison of Paulinus and Fortunatus:
The material used by Fortunatus was very nearly identical with that employed by Paulinus. The former gives a somewhat freer and more imaginative treatment of the
79 For instance, the three works by George. George, J.W., 1989, ‘Poet as Politician: Venantius Fortunatus’
Panegyric to King Chilperic’ in Journal of Medieval History 15, 5-8, 1992, Venantius Fortunatus: a Latin Poet in Merovingian Gaul, Oxford, and 1998, ‘Venantius Fortunatus: Panegyric in Merovingian Gaul’ in ed. Whitby, M.,
The propaganda of Power: The Role of Panegyric in Late Antiquity, Mnemosyne suppl. 183, 225-246, Leiden.
80 Roberts 2001, 257 about his lecture at Yale University November 4, 1999. 81 Labarre 1998, 10.
82 Vermeulen (1966), Malsbary (1987) and Grünberg (1990) on Paulinus of Périgueux. Ammerbauer (1966) on
20
facts afforded by Sulpicius. Yet, for all the attempted faithfulness of Paulinus, his taste for rhetorical ornament caused him in many cases so to expand the text by apostrophes, paradoxes, and literary commonplaces that his version seems further from the original than the more untrammeled and more poetic paraphrase of Fortunatus.83
The expansions of Sulpicius’ original account that we find in Paulinus, are reminiscent of the techniques of the rhetorical or literary ‘paraphrase’. In the first chapter I discussed the genre of the biblical epic, and how the hagiographical epics in question belong to the same
tradition. An opinion commonly held about these biblical epic is that for their technique of composition they depend on the methods of a rheotorical exercise called ‘paraphrase’ or ‘retracatio’.84 Roberts (1985) has researched the relation between this exercise and the
genre of the biblical epic.
In classical Roman education, the exercise of ‘paraphrase’ was part of the
‘progymnasmata’: preliminary exercises for students. After these exercises, declamations would follow, resulting, altogether, in a rhetorical skill useful in public life.85 Two kinds of
paraphrase can be distinguished: grammatical, and rhetorical. In the former, an
unpretentious word-for-word reconfiguration of the text is made; in the latter stylistic aims play a large role. Ultimately, (rhetorical) ‘paraphrase’ is to express one idea in multiple ways (tropoi/modi) with respect to style, not content.86 These modi are the form the idea is cast
in. For example, a direct statement could be paraphrased into the form of a question, a prayer or an advice. It can be said with less words, by elision, or with more by adding an antithesis or exclamation. A very popular rhetorical handbook was written by the rhetorician Quintilian in the first century AD. Quintilian’s modi consist of contrasting pairs, for example brevity vs. copious use of words, literal expression vs. use of tropes, direct expression vs. figured expression.87 The methods for paraphrasing an idea can be reduced to three modes:
83 Chase 1932, 58.
84 Roberts 1985, 1; The connection between biblical epic and paraphrase was first argued by Golega (1930), and
adopted by Curtius (1953). Herzog (1975), downplays the role of paraphrase in favour of a more Christian tradition, xx-xxii, 60-68, 155-211. Roberts (1985) reacts to him.
85 Roberts 1985, 6. 86 Roberts 1985, 11.
87 Quintilian Institutio Oratoria 10.5.4: Sed et ipsis sententiis adicere licet oratorium robur, et omissa supplere,
effusa substringere – ‘But to the thoughts themselves the power of eloquence may be added, and what is left out
21 abbreviation, transposition, and amplification.88 The paraphrase should not only be an
interpretation, but should rival the original.89
These methods remained part of education for centuries, as is shown by discussions about them in Cicero’s De Oratore, Quintilian, Theon’s Greek treatise, and Priscian’s Latin translation of Hermogenes’ handbook about the progymnasmata (Praeexercitamina), produced around 500 AD. Paraphrases could be intended for reading without the original.
Quintilian himself answers an imaginary opponent, who believes it is no use to paraphrase something, because it has already been said in the best way:
Nam neque semper est desperandum aliquid illis quae dicta sunt melius posse reperiri, neque adeo ieiunam ac pauperem natura eloquentiam fecit ut una de re bene dici nisi semel non possit. (6) Nisi forte histrionum multa circa voces easdem variare gestus potest, orandi minor vis, ut dicatur aliquid, post quod in eadem materia nihil dicendum sit. 90
For we must not despair that something better can be found for those things that have been said, and nature did not make eloquence so meager and poor that about one thing, one could not speak well except in one way. Unless perhaps, while of actors the gestures can variate in many ways the same words, the power of oratory is inferior, so that when something has been said, thereafter nothing can be said on the same material?
But even if the new text or utterance is not as good as the original, Quintilian emphasizes, it ‘must be allowed’ to speak about it anew:
10.5.11: llud virtutis indicium est, fundere quae natura contracta sunt, augere parva, varietatem similibus
voluptatem expositis dare, et bene dicere multa de paucis – ‘This is a sign of virtue, to pour out what is naturally
compact, to expand little things, to give variety to things that are similar and voluptuousness to things that are explained, and to say many things on a little in an effective way.’
88 Quintilian Institutio Oratoria 1.9.2; 10.5.8; Roberts 1985, 108. Roberts does not give an explanation of the
terms.
89 Quintilian Institutio Oratoria 10.5.4 Incidentally Quintilian speaks of a certain Sulpicius using paraphrase to
form his prose, here. Of course, this is not our Sulpicius Severus, who was born centuries later.
22 An vero ipsi non bis ac saepius de eadem re dicimus et quidem continuas
nonnumquam sententias? - nisi forte contendere nobiscum possumus, cum aliis non possumus. Nam si uno genere bene diceretur, fas erat existimari praeclusam nobis a prioribus viam: nunc vero innumerabiles sunt modi, plurimaeque eodem viae ducunt. (7) Sua brevitati gratia, sua copiae, alia tralatis virtus, alia propriis, hoc oratio recta, illud figura declinata commendat.91
Truly, do we ourselves not speak twice or more often about the same thing, and often even in a series of sentences? – unless, of course, we can compete with ourselves, but we cannot with others. Because if only in one way something can be said well, we must come to the conclustion that to us the way is shut by
predecessors: but there are innumerable methods, and many ways that lead to the same destination. Brevity has its own charm, and so does copiousness, another virtue is of metafors, another of nonfigural expression, this recommends direct statement, this tropological utterance.
Because paraphrastic theory is part of the broader theory of literary imitation, techniques from paraphrase can also be found in ‘non-paraphrastic literature’.92 The aims of this kind of
literature are no longer educational, but literary.
As an educational exercise the paraphrase may take two different forms: either multiple paraphrases of a single short passage […], or a single paraphrase of a longer passage, aiming to rival the original (aemulatio). The latter technique may also be employed outside the schools to produce what can be called ‘literary’ paraphrases. Two forms of literary paraphrase can be identified: the first interpretive and didactic in nature […], the second artistic compositions, intended for public dissemination as works of literature in their own right - the biblical epics fall into this last category, although they increasingly incorporate interpretative material.93
91 Quintilian Institutio Oratoria 10.5.7-8.
92 Roberts, 1985, 3. Note that rhetorical treatises only refer to prose paraphrases and writing poetry was
‘probably an out-of-school activity’, Roberts, 1985, 70. See also 70-73 for arguments opposing the view that it is problematic that these biblical paraphrases are metrical.
23
The epics by Paulinus and Fortunatus must therefore be viewed in light of the theory of paraphrase. In the fourth chapter we will encounter some of the methods of paraphrase employed by both poets.94 Vielberg (2006) points out that we should not, at the same time,
let these terms of translatio (or paraphrase) cloud the degree of innovation in the epic by Paulinus.95
Inspired by Roberts theory about the biblical epic, discussed above, Labarre (1998) compares the three Lifes of Martin. In her fifth chapter she discusses some passages in detail, and focuses on the division of the cloak as a case study.96
Another important aspect for the contextualization of the epics is the theory
surrounding the reading experience of early Christianity and the Middle ages, based on the
lectio divina. The lectio divina was a monastic strategy of reading Scripture.97 Hugo of St.
Victor (twelfth century), standing in a long tradition of the lectio divina, formulated five stages of reading. First, there is lectio, reading the story itself, the historia. Then meditatio, which is to memorize and recite the text. “This is the phase in which spiritual interpretation mainly takes place, and the description of the activities associated with it occupies a large proportion of Didascalicon […] and of other associated writings.”98 Then follows oratio:
praying. In the ‘operatio’, the reading experience will lead to doing good works. Finally, in the contemplatio, the knowledge now acquired is internalized by the reader, and helps and instructs him on his journey towards God.99
Sometimes Paulinus’ epic creates the feeling that his text represents his own reading experience of the Life of Martin by Sulpicius. It is a form of reception, of course, but I believe (parts of) the process of the lectio divina can be recognized in Paulinus’ poetical paraphrase. Paulinus ‘reads’ a part of the literal story by writing a few narrative lines, and then thinks about their meaning and implications. In the process of writing, he interprets and comments
94 This is also assumed by Vielberg 1987, 67-68.
95 Vielberg 1987, 69. “Transcriptio und translatio sind euphemistische Verhüllungen.” 96 Labarre 1998, especially 124-159.
97 See Robertson (2011). 98 Robertson 2011, 222.
99 Course ‘Late Latin Literature: Saints’ Lives and Short Stories’, by Piet Gerbrandy, UvA, May, 2016. See
24
on the material and even proceeds to prayer (Paulinus VSM, 1.298-316).100 Roberts (2001)
writes about the difference between Paulinus and Fortunatus:
It It is certainly true […] that he [i.e. Paulinus] consistently introduces moral commentary into the Severan narrative, giving his work at times something of the quality of a verse sermon.101
An adjacent theory of the reading experience is the theory surrounding the interpretation of texts. Allegorical reading was a beloved method of Christians, from early Christianity
throughout the Middle Ages. Origen, who lived in the third century, for instance in his twenty-seventh homily explained the journey of the Israelites in Numbers 33 as a spiritual journey, each stop having its own meaning. “To Origen, every phase of the Israelites’ exodus journey was pregnant with hidden meaning.”102 One model of interpretation assumes four
steps.103 Historia is the reading of the literal story, coinciding with the ‘lectio’ of the lectio
divina. Then comes allegoria, in this step the hidden meaning must be interpreted, the literal story actually exposes another theological truth. In the tropologia, the reader finds the ethical or moral implications. Allegoria and tropologia both belong the ‘meditatio’ part of the reading process discussed above. Lastly, there is the anagogia, ‘the prophetic sense,
100 Robertson 2011, xvi in a list of types of compilations: “In a further development of the compilation genre,
John of Fécamp’s Confessio theologica (mid-eleventh century) and its various revisions offer what may be described as original ‘meditations’ on sacred writings, quoted at length and focused through extended first person prayers. In these works, reading flows into writing, the quotations into the quoting texts, in an unbroken continuum.” It may be interesting to compare Paulinus’ epic to this kind of ‘meditation’. Could the whole epic paraphrase be seen in the context of Paulinus’ personal meditation on the life of Martin? I think this goes too far. However, further research on the similarities between the activity of the meditation and Paulinus’ writing would be interesting. See also the remark of Roberts on Sedulius: “According to Reinhart Herzog (1984), in these narrations Sedulius creates a new poetic form, the rhetorical meditation, a form which he traces through the 17th century English metaphysical poets. But Sedulius most immediate influence is on the Martin
poets, Paulinus of Périgueux and Fortunatus, both of whom, in their different ways, adopt the Sedulian model of discontinuous narrative structure with rhetorically elaborated commentary on individual episodes.” Roberts 2001, 265.
101 Roberts 2001, 262. 102 Franke 2003, 21.
103 Robertson 2011, 19-20. The model of interpretation had the generally accepted form, here described, from
Cassian (beginning of the fifth century) onwards. Before that date, theories differed about the order and number of steps. “… a ‘philosophical’ order (history, tropology, allegory) and a ‘theological’ one (history, allegory, tropology). The ‘philosophical’ order, which is that of Origen, follows the Platonic model of the human person, comprised of body, soul and spirit. The ‘theological’ order, followed by Gregory …, gives precedence to the allegorical exposition of Christian doctrine and provides for moral instruction to follow from it logically as a third term.” See De Lubac 1959, 1.1, 171-207.
25
oriented toward the heavenly life to come.’104 We will encounter allegorical reading in the
interpretation of Fortunatus’ recollection of the cloak story in the fourth chapter of this study.
In this chapter we have seen theories about Paulinus’ ‘imitationstechnik’, some general remarks on the differences between the two authors, and the theory that biblical epic is to be seen in the light of the rhetorical paraphrase. Furthermore, I have discussed ideas about the reading experience from early Christianity throughout the Middle Ages, and late-antique ideas on interpretation. What is still missing, however, is a detailed discussion and comparison of Latin passages from the works. In the next chapter we will explore the texts themselves.
26
Chapter 4: Case studies
In this chapter I will discuss three episodes from the life of Martin, and one passage that is added by Paulinus. Following a method of close reading I will explore how the epics deal with the original material. First I give Sulpicius’ prose as the basis to start from, then I will discuss the story in parts, switching between Paulinus and Fortunatus.
The story of the Cloak
The first passage I will examine is the cloak story. This episode, in which Martin as a soldier comes by a beggar in the freezing cold at the gate of Amiens is one of the best known images of this saint today.105 Maybe because this is the good deed that anyone of us could
have done. It is a scene with great imaginative power. Somewhat like in the New Testament story about the good Samaritan,106 all others pass this poor cold man by. Martin, however, a
roman soldier, wants to help the man and cuts his cloak in half to warm him. The young saint is mocked by bystanders, like Jesus was himself mocked in life. Our biblically framed
protagonist then sees a vision of Christ clothed in his very cloak. Sulpicius’ version has Christ explaining the meaning of the vision(3.3).
3 (1) Quodam itaque tempore, cum iam nihil praeter arma et simplicem militiae vestem haberet, media hieme, quae solito asperior inhorruerat, adeo ut plerosque vis algoris exstingueret, obvium habet in porta Ambianensium civitatis pauperem
nudum: qui cum praetereuntes ut sui misererentur oraret omnesque miserum
praeterirent, intellegit vir Deo plenus sibi illum, aliis misericordiam non praestantibus, reservari. (2) Quid tamen ageret? Nihil praeter chlamydem, qua indutus erat,
habebat: iam enim reliqua in opus simile consumpserat. arrepto itaque ferro, quo accinctus erat, mediam dividit partemque eius pauperi tribuit, reliqua rursus induitur. Interea de circumstantibus ridere nonnulli, quia deformis esse truncatus habitu videretur: multi tamen, quibus erat mens sanior, altius gemere, quod nihil simile
105 This is not the first literary episode concerning the sharing of clothes or even specifically the division of a
cloak. Dionysios Chysostomos (first or second century AD) writes of a commoner who gives his daughters dress to a poor person. The actual division of a cloak is found in the romance Historia Apolonii Regis Tyri (commonly thought to be a Greek romance from the third century). Grünberg calls the story as such part of a
‘Wandermotiv, das ursprünglich zum Repertoire des antiken Erlebnis- und Reiseromans zählte.’ Grünberg 1990, 16.
27 fecissent, cum utique plus habentes vestire pauperem sine sui nuditate potuissent. (3) Nocte igitur insecuta, cum se sopori dedisset, vidit Christum chlamydis suae, qua pauperem texerat, parte vestitum. Intueri diligentissime Dominum vestemque, quam dederat, iubetur agnoscere. Mox ad angelorum circumstantium multitudinem audit Iesum clara voce dicentem: Martinus adhuc catechumenus hic me veste contexit. (4) Vere memor Dominus dictorum suorum, qui ante praedixerat: quamdiu fecistis uni ex minimis istis, mihi fecistis, se in paupere professus est fuisse vestitum: et ad
confirmandum tam boni operis testimonium in eodem se habitu, quem pauper acceperat, est dignatus ostendere. (5) Quo viso vir beatissimus non in gloriam est elatus humanam, sed bonitatem Dei in suo opere cognoscens, cum esset annorum duodeviginti, ad baptismum convolavit.107
And so, on a certain moment, when already he possessed nothing apart from his weapons and plain soldier’s garment, in the midst of a winter, that shivered more fierce than usual –so much that the power of the cold had extinguished many –, [Martin] came across an unclothed poor man at the gate of the city Amiens, who begged bypassers to have compassion with him, and all passed the unhappy fellow by. The man filled with God understood that for him the man was reserved, to whom others did not lend their pity. But what should he do? He had nothing, except for the cloak, in which he was wrapped: for his other things he had used in similar work. Thus after he had grabbed his sword, with which he was clad, he divided it in half and gave his part to the poor man, the other he put back on. Meanwhile no few people laughed at the matter, because he seemed mutilated with the appearance of a deformed person. There were many, however, that had a more sound intellect. Some sighed, because they had done nothing similar, while they – possessing more – certainly could have clothed the poor man without [the need for/result of] their own nudity. When night had followed, and he surrendered himself to sleep, he saw Christ, dressed in the part of his cloak, with which he had covered the beggar. He was urged to inspect, with the utmost care, the Lord and to recognize the garment, which he had given. Soon he heard Jesus tell with clear voice to the host of angels standing around him: “Martin, still a catechumen, covered me with a garment.” Truly the Lord
28
thought of his own words, which he had said before: As long as you have acted for one of the least, you have done it to me. He said, that it was he that was clothed in the poor man: and to confirm the testimony of so great a deed, he showed himself in the same robe, that the pauper had received. When he had seen this, the blessed man was not carried away in human glory, but, recognizing the benevolence of God in his act, hasted for baptism.
This story in Sulpicius functions as the ‘conversion story’. It narrates the event in Martin’s life that made him choose baptism. The passage reminds of the conversion story found in the influential and slightly earlier Life of Antony, by Athanasius. Antony experiences his ‘call’ when he is ‘eighteen or twenty years old’, corresponding to Martin’s own conversion (Martin is baptized at eighteen, and leaves the world at twenty.108 Antony’s conversion (to
asceticism) is realized in two steps.109 First, he hears in church service the story of the rich
young man asking Jesus how he will inherit eternal life. Jesus tells him to sell all his possessions and follow him, (for ‘it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God’).110 Antony feels the text is directed to him
personally and cuts loose most of his possessions, keeping a little for his sister and his pension. At another moment he hears the biblical passage that encourages not to worry for tomorrow.111 This prompts Antony to hand his sister over to a women’s convent and give his
last possessions away. Thereafter he moves further and further into the desert, in rigid eastern asceticism.
It is this second bible passage, that is called forward in Sulpicius 2.8, just before the cloak-passage quoted above starts:
108 Athanasius Vita Antonii 2.3. Labarre, in the case of this passage in Paulinus, makes a strange comparison to
Martial 5.34.5-6, because he says a little girl missed six days to become six years old (Impletura fuit sextae
modo frigora brumae / vixisset totidem ni minus illa dies), and Paulinus says Martin was four lustra minus a
double year old when he was baptized: “Il [i.e. Paulinus] indique le nombre d’années qui manquent pour faire un total de vingt ans, comme Martial, dans son épitaphe pour Erotion, indiquait qu’il ne manquait que six jours à la petite fille pour atteindre les six ans. Il insiste, par cette expression, sur la jeunesse et respecte la
symbolique des nombres à laquelle Sulpice Sévère s’était attaché.” Labarre 1998, 131. I think, however, a comparison with the Vita Antonii is pertinent. Paulinus likes to play out numbers in other cases as well, for instance bis senis in annis, 1.24 and geminis annis, 1.134 in combination with geminata vota duorum 1.139.
109 Harmless 2004, 60 gives too simple a view of Antony’s ‘call’ and does not note its two phases. 110 Mathew, 19.21-25. Athanasius Vita Antonii, 2.3.
29 […] nihil sibi ex militiae stipendiis praeter cotidianum victum reservare: iam tum evangelii non surdus auditor de crastino non cogitabat.
[…] he kept nothing from his military salary, except his daily livelihood: then already he did not think about tomorrow, no deaf listener to the Gospel.
Sulpicius refers to the story of Antony in a subtle way. This time it is not the bible being read in a church, but being practiced, outside any church doors at the gate of Amiens. In fact, Martin is not even baptized at this point and the two phases of Antony’s conversion are now compressed into one, by which Martin surpasses Antony as an ideal saint. The cloak episode illustrates Martin’s aforementioned freedom from worrying, hence Quodam itaque tempore in 3.1.
Now that we are familiar with the original prose version of the story, let us examine Paulinus’ and Fortunatus’ account. Where Sulpicius uses 224 words for the story, Paulinus expands it to 405 words (1.59-124).112 Fortunatus abbreviates it to a modest 119 words
(1.50-67). Obvium habet Pauperem nudum, qui … oraret praetereuntes in Sulpicius 3.1, becomes in Paulinus 1.63-66:
Cum subito horrentis glaciali frigore brumae nudus in occursum properat, vix verba frementi
dimidians praefracta sono: sed causa loquellam 65 expedit et linguae partes proclamat erumna.
When suddenly in the icy cold of a shivering winter a naked man hurried in his direction, barely cutting in half broken words with a mumbling sound: but the cause set free his speech and distress claims parts of his tongue.
112 For a table concerning which passage corresponds to which passage in the three Lifes, see Labarre 1998,
30
With cum subito we fall into a new and inherently wondrous story.113 The detail of a place
name is left out.114 The poor man, who is nowhere named pauper, only nudus, is said to be
dimidians (halving) his words.115 This prepares for the cutting in half of the cloak.116 The
expedit loquellam is picked up with expediit factum – ‘he carried out the act’ (1.85). In
Fortunatus, the whole narrative is passed over, reduced to:
Occurrente igitur portae ambianensis egeno, qui sibi restiterat clamidis partitur amictum117
Thus when a poor man ran towards him at the gate of Amiens, who had remained for him, he divided the covering of his cloak
This relatively small narrative kernel of the story in Fortunatus is possible because the content of Martin’s life is already known. Abbreviation is one of the techniques of
paraphrase. He expands different themes, in my opinion showcasing his new way of treating the material. The cold of that winter’s day in Sulpicius is rendered by media hieme, quae
solito asperior inhorruerat, adeo ut plerosque vis algoris exstingueret (Sulpicius, 3.1), and in
Paulinus by horrentis glaciali frigore brumae – ‘in the icy cold of shivering winter’ (Paulinus,
113 Grünberg points out that cum subito is often used in the context of epiphanies, and that it is also used later
in 1.104, where Christ appears to Martin, dressed in his cloak. This links the beggar to Christ. Grünberg 1990, 20-21.
114 Huber 1901, 24 notes that Paulinus took names of places or persons into his account when they were
convenient in the meter, but more often left them out. While Sulpicius wanted to make his story more credible by these facts, Huber states that a historically proven account is not the aim of Paulinus: “Er will nicht durch historische Beweise überzeugen, sondern er will vielmehr durch die Vita Martini erbauen und den Lesern einen Spiegel vorhalten.” See also Labarre 1998, 129: “Il ne lui [i.e. Paulinus] est plus necessaire d’apporter au lecteur des preuves historiques, mais il pourra l’édifier en lui présentant un modèle, facile à transposer dans son univers. La presence des noms propres risquerait d’écarter le lecteur, qui pourrait se sentir étranger à l’univers de Martin.” Labarre also has a more detailed explanation of the times that Paulinus does use a name or placename: “si donc il s’en tient au nom propre, c’est qu’il a une intention particulière: ou il établit le lien qu’on attend entre Martin et la ville de Tours, ou il reticent un nom parce qu’il est ancient.” Labarre does not agree with Huber on the point of the metrical difficulty of the names, because Fortunatus uses some names that Paulinus leaves out, Labarre 1998, 130.
115 Labarre 1998, 153 notes that "Les allitérations reproduisent les difficultés du malheureux à s’exprimer en
raison du froid et de l’emotion.”
116 I do not agree with Grünberg, who says “dimidians kann hier natürlich nicht ‘halbieren’ heissen, sondern es
soll angedeutet werden, dass der Bettler vor Kälte nur mehr stammelt und keine ganzen Wörter herausbringt. Der Ausdruck praefracta (verba) verdeutlicht ebenfalls das Stottern des Bettlers.” The image is, of course, of a shivering and stuttering man, but dimidians and praefracta are in my opinion chosen for the wordplay with the division of the cloak that is to follow.
