This essay investigates the theme of authority and resistance in the microcosm of the late twelfth- and early thirteenth-century Cistercian monastery. Beginning with an examination of Cistercian statutes, this study explores evidence for tensions concerning hierarchy, communal life and ‘individuality’, or perhaps more accurately ‘selfhood’, in the Cistercian Order. It then turns to literary sources to examine how these tensions were expressed, and to an extent resolved, in some of the short narrative accounts that remain from British houses. The evidence shows that despite being highly prescribed, the power relationships within the monastery were, to an extent, flexible and negotiable – and that these didactic narratives, exempla, offer particularly interesting insights into the dynamics of power in this setting.

At first glance, the study of power relations within a monastic community might appear underwhelming compared with the studies of civil and political strife discussed by other essays in this collection. After all, Cistercian life was heavily regulated. The order was founded on a more rigorous interpretation of the Benedictine Rule, the basic premise of which was unquestioning obedience: obedience to the daily routine of offices and labours, obedience to the abbot and, through these, obedience to God. In addition, the detailed rules mapped out by the order's customaries, as well as the statutes promulgated at the annual meeting of the order's abbots, the General Chapter, show how highly regulated power relations within the community actually were. Yet it is the very prescriptive nature of the order that makes it such an interesting case study for the theme of authority and resistance. The amount of written evidence left by the Cistercians not only makes such power relationships particularly visible to the historian, but also allows us to see when these relationships were challenged or subverted, and the strategies that were employed to deal with such behaviour.

Areas of tension

The growing number of statutes issued at the annual General Chapter from the late twelfth century onwards provides clear evidence that the boundaries of authority within the order were repeatedly being tested. While some statutes tackled new problems as they arose, others were re-issued with amendments to cover their application in a variety of circumstances, while yet others reversed previous decisions or granted exceptions. Indeed, while the statutes produced by the General Chapter certainly show the strongly regulated nature of the order, they also reveal that it could be relatively flexible in practice.

Jocelin's second commission in Scotland brought the Furness monk to the Cistercian house of Melrose to write the Vita of a near-contemporary, Abbot Waltheof (d. 1159). As a text commemorating the life of a man who had died only fifty years or so previously, the composition of the Vita Waldevi posed several new challenges. In contrast to Jocelin's other works, which were built on the foundation of various earlier written accounts, the Vita Waldevi appears to have been the first hagiographical text to document Waltheof's cult. Consequently, the work was based largely on the abbey's oral traditions, stories that had been recounted to Jocelin by ‘the trustworthy elders of the house of Melrose’. The text was also supplemented by the testimony of eyewitnesses drawn mainly from within the monastery, men who were able to testify personally to the authenticity of Waltheof's posthumous powers.

Jocelin's use of these oral sources conformed to common historical and hagiographical practice. In a period where the written word was valued as a record of the distant past, but where recent events could be more than adequately recalled through memory, the testimony of these ‘trustworthy elders’ was accorded a very high value. Indeed, such was the authority of oral tradition that Jocelin seems to have been reluctant openly to acknowledge the presence of any written material behind the Vita. From the outset the text is styled as a product of oral history. The statement in the prologue, where we are informed that he has written ‘nothing herein opposed to truth but what I have accepted from the trustworthy elders of the house of Melrose’, implies that the work is based solely upon oral sources. Similarly, the introduction to Waltheof's posthumous miracula is also suggestive of oral communication: ‘for inclusion in the previous book on the blessed Waltheof, we have diligently sought from those who knew material which might be worthy of remembrance’. Yet close analysis of the Vita reveals a number of textual sources underlying the work, written materials which both supported and interacted with the oral components of the cult. As will be shown below, it seems probable that when Jocelin arrived at Melrose, the community not only made themselves available for discussion and advice, but also provided him with access to an assortment of written material concerning Waltheof's life and miracles.

Superficially, Jocelin's commission to write the Vita Helenae presented a similar project to the Vita Patricii. The central figures of each work were saints of international renown and both were already the subjects of a significant amount of literature. However, although an earlier hagiographical account of Helena seems to have been available for use as a primary base text, Jocelin chose to construct his work largely from other sources – the ‘diverse ecclesiastical histories and universal chronicles’ acknowledged by the prologue. In contrast to the composition of the Vita Patricii, Jocelin formed the Vita Helenae episode by episode, using the most detailed account he could find as a base text for each section and inserting, where possible, additional material from other sources. Yet this was no mere ‘cut-and-paste’ job. As seen previously, Jocelin shows a reluctance to paraphrase, let alone quote, long extracts from other works. Instead he condensed the information into his own prose, layering tradition upon tradition without distinction between the author or age of the source material. As in the previous chapter, these underlying texts are largely identified by content. However, the dense interweaving of source material found in the Vita Helenae means that many of these sources only become visible when anomalous information is provided or the Vita follows a unique narrative structure. Although such analysis has its limitations, it provides clear evidence of the extensive research conducted by Jocelin and the sheer amount of information that he was able to assemble and then reorder (a table listing Jocelin's apparent sources for this work can be found at the end of the chapter). To present as simply as possible what must have been an extremely complex process, this chapter is structured according to the broad chronology of the material, which is then assessed in order of Jocelin's dependence upon that source. However, considering the intricate layering of traditions found in the text, brief digressions concerning the material used to supplement the main sources are unavoidable.

The early sources

Although leaning heavily on Rufinus of Aquileia's expanded Latin translation of Eusebius's Ecclesiastical History and the Inventio crucis legend, Jocelin also had at hand a variety of other early sources that provided information on the life of Helena. The Liber pontificalis supplied details for Jocelin's references to church furnishings and there are also explicit references to Ambrose's De obitu Theodosii.

In terms of patronage, the Vita Helenae provides a significant contrast with Jocelin's other works. Although the prologue states that the text was written at the request of others, the specific identity of Jocelin's patrons remains unstated – we are told only that the work was commissioned by a monastic community dedicated to St Helena. The Vita also differs from Jocelin's other texts in terms of purpose. Whereas the Vitae Patricii, Kentegerni and Waldevi were written for communities based at the foci of their respective cults, the Vita Helenae carries no suggestion that the commissioning house held a shrine of this type or, indeed, that it possessed any relics of the saint at all. While the text must still be considered as a promotional document with the basic function of reviving interest in Helena and her cult, it seems clear that other motivations were also at work. The absence of contemporary accounts among the Vita's posthumous miracula suggests that if the text was written in response to recent developments, then these were factors not directly connected to the saint's cult.

The anonymity of Jocelin's patrons poses considerable problems for the analysis of the work. We lack an immediate understanding of the local context of the Vita as well as any indicators for a potential date of composition. The first part of this chapter, therefore, reverses the analytical processes found in the preceding chapters and attempts to identify the commissioning community through an examination of the themes and interests that dominate the text. The range of sources used in the composition of the Vita also offers an opportunity to contextualize the work and the investigation into Jocelin's possible patrons is therefore followed by an analysis of the distribution of his source material. However, it is also important to recognize that the anonymity of the Vita's patrons carries significant meaning in itself. In Jocelin's other works, the open acknowledgment of the patrons provides the reader with a key to unlocking the underlying meaning of the text, whether this was obvious – such as the formal promotion of Waltheof's cult in the Vita Waldevi – or more subtle – such as the ecclesio-political agendas present in the Vita Patricii and Vita Kentegerni. In the case of the Vita Helenae, the absence of this information suggests that our understanding of the text should be governed by parameters wider than local interests or affiliations.

By analysing Jocelin's hagiographical works in the contexts in which they were written, this study has presented a more sympathetic appraisal of the author and his achievements than has previously been offered. Through an investigation into Jocelin's working methods and the treatment of his sources, the first part of this book showed how the author integrated and adapted this material into his texts. Jocelin structured his Vita Patricii largely according to the framework provided by an earlier account of the legend, to which he added narratives taken from other written and oral sources. The Vita Kentegerni was compiled in a similar fashion but this time the work was based on two main texts. The method used to create the Vita Helenae was slightly different. Apparently dissatisfied with the legend presented in an earlier version of the vita, Jocelin based different episodes of his work upon different sources, choosing those accounts that provided the most detailed record of events. Jocelin then harmonized these accounts with the narratives found in his other source material by inserting, where possible, the statements that were absent from his chosen base texts. The fourth of Jocelin's works presented other challenges. As both the first official hagiographical text to commemorate Waltheof and a work that documented the life and afterlife of a near contemporary, the contents of the Vita Waldevi were drawn largely from oral traditions at Melrose Abbey.

The second part of the study explored how Jocelin's texts were tailored to reflect the interests of his patrons. By synthesizing the different traditions concerning Patrick's death, Jocelin was able to set out the full case for Down's possession of the saint's body and provide the evidence to support or preempt the inventio of 1185. The Vita Patricii also acted in the interests of Jocelin's second ecclesiastical patron, the archbishop of Armagh, by including narratives that undermined Dublin's potential claims for primacy in the Irish church. The Vita Kentegerni communicated similar religio-political anxieties. The text includes a strong discourse of independence that supported the see of Glasgow's claims to be a special daughter of Rome. It was a discourse firmly rooted in the contemporary needs of the diocese and drew on the significant – and clearly recognized – parallels provided by the Constitutum Constantini and the growing cult of Thomas Becket. The Vita Waldevi too responded to the needs of the community behind the cult.

The commissioning of the Vita Patricii formed part of a wider project that involved the establishment of a new monastic community, the rededication and rebuilding of Down cathedral and the discovery of Patrick's relics in the Cathedral cemetery. It was also a text that publicly attested to the strong alliance formed between its three patrons, Archbishop Tomaltach of Armagh, Bishop Malachy of Down and the new ruler of Ulaid, John de Courcy. However, although the Vita is a product closely associated with the Anglo-Norman conquest of Ireland, analysis of the text indicates that it was conceived as a vehicle to represent the interests of its two ecclesiastical patrons rather than its secular sponsor. This chapter will first investigate the historical context of the work before examining how the Vita reflects contemporary ecclesiastical and political concerns. It will then discuss the more specific question of Jocelin's patronage and the author's relationship to John de Courcy.

Jocelin's patrons

The 1177 invasion of Down established John de Courcy as the ruler of the kingdom of Ulaid, a province that corresponds to the modern-day counties of Down and Antrim. Despite sporadic bouts of local resistance, by the early 1180s de Courcy had consolidated his hold on the area. However, this was not simply a story of Anglo-Norman invasion and oppression. As Seán Duffy points out, it seems that Irishmen were to be found among de Courcy's forces, while the relatively frequent appearance of the archbishop of Armagh, the bishops of Down and Connor, and the heads of the churches of Bangor and Saul in de Courcy's charters suggests that he quickly gained Irish clerical support. The joint commissioning of the Vita Patricii attests to the close relationship that developed between the new Anglo-Norman ruler of Ulaid and the two principal churchmen of the region, Tomaltach, archbishop of Armagh (1181–1201), and Malachy, bishop of Down (c.1176–1202). It was an alliance that benefited all parties. For de Courcy, it provided official and influential local acceptance, bolstering his political position. For the two churchmen, it provided necessary and welcome secular support.

Apart from the desired local acceptance of the new ruling order, there were a number of other political advantages to be gained by de Courcy through his prominent support of ecclesiastical interests. Scholars have stressed the colonization aspect of de Courcy's six religious foundations in Ireland.

As an explicitly didactic genre, hagiographical texts presented the reader with clear models of moral and religious behaviour. While much of this instruction was grounded in centuries-old traditions of Christian piety, as has been shown, vitae also reflected the particular religious interests and circumstances of those writing or commissioning the texts. It is, therefore, unsurprising that a number of contemporary religious concerns are articulated in Jocelin's works. Explanatory additions and first-person asides not only direct the reader to a particular understanding of the narrative but clearly situate the Vitae in the ecclesiastical environment of the late twelfth and early thirteenth centuries. The following discussion will analyse the presence and significance of these strands in Jocelin's texts and will provide a synoptic overview of all four Vitae as a close to this study.

Discourses of orthodoxy

Although the extent to which the issues mark each text varies significantly, all four of Jocelin's Vitae engage with the concerns relating to orthodox belief and practice that dominated late twelfth and early thirteenth century ecclesiastical thought. The root of these concerns lay in the growing religious awareness and enthusiasm in Western Christendom that had accompanied the increasing urbanization and economic prosperity of Europe from the 1050s onwards. This religious zeal found expression in the creation of new orders and popular religious movements, many of which were absorbed into the body of the wider Church. However, other groups, such as the Cathars and Waldensians, continued to challenge the structure and practices of traditional ecclesiastical authority. The desire to see uniformity in belief and ritual throughout Christian Europe, combined with anxieties over these heretical groups, resulted in the introduction of new doctrines and practices in the medieval Church. It was a response that sought to elevate the status both of the faith and of those who practised it. Yet although these doctrines had been widely accepted among the ecclesiastical hierarchy by the time that Jocelin was writing, the drawn-out process of implementation on the ground still had a long way to go.

Concerns over orthodoxy find particularly vocal expression in the Vita Waldevi, where they are combined with comments that explicitly acknowledge the threat posed by contemporary heretical movements. This reflects not only the near-contemporary setting of the Vita itself, but also the Cistercian context of the commission and the ongoing involvement of the Order in the campaign against heresy during this period.

Although the Vita Patricii seems to be the earliest of Jocelin's extant works, it is unlikely to have been the first text written by the author. The length and scope of the Vita, combined with the high-profile status of the Anglo-Norman ruler and Irish ecclesiastics who sponsored it, indicate that Jocelin must already have enjoyed the literary renown necessary to qualify him for this commission. The task of rewriting and updating the life of St Patrick was certainly not a job for an amateur. By the late twelfth century, a large amount of Patrician hagiographial material was already in circulation. Jocelin was therefore faced with the challenge of selecting material from this extensive corpus and creating a text that adequately represented all the narratives considered essential to the contemporary legend.

Jocelin's approach to the Vita Patricii was governed by a number of factors. Firstly, the political circumstances behind the work meant that it represented far more than a simple restyling of what was perceived to be archaic prose. It reflected the unity of religious intent shared by its three patrons, men who stood on either side of the secular/ecclesiastical and Anglo-Norman/Irish divides. The contemporary context of the work shaped not only specific narratives in the text (which will be discussed in detail in chapter five) but also the scale and weight of the project. The Vita provided the literary reinforcement for the cult of St Patrick at Down and for the wider reforms being implemented in the Irish church. As such, the work represents a textual foundation stone, a comprehensive account upon which the new ecclesiastical regime could be both built and consolidated. This chapter will analyse the way in which Jocelin approached this important text and how he constructed a new Patrician vita based largely on earlier source material.

The basic construction of the text

Jocelin's Vita Patricii belongs to a subgroup of texts derived from the largely vernacular Bethu Phátraic, a work more widely known by the name given to John Colgan's Latin translation of the text, the Vita tripartita (and this will be the name used to refer to the work thoughout this study). Scholarly opinion remains divided over the age of the Vita tripartita. Once thought to date to the early tenth century, recent studies now suggest the text could have been written as late as the twelfth.

Although acknowledged as the author of four extant hagiographical texts, Jocelin of Furness remains a shadowy figure in modern historiography. Much of this obscurity reflects our limited knowledge about the author himself. His Vitae are largely impersonal works and outside sources provide little further information to complete the picture. In addition, the fact that three of Jocelin's four texts are reworkings of much earlier material means they have found few admirers in modern scholarship. Of those historians who choose to comment on Jocelin, only the minority do so with an interest in the author himself or the context in which he was writing. Instead, his works are frequently treated as imperfect secondary sources for the historical figures they describe and Jocelin himself as a credulous barrier to an elusive historical truth. However, the basis of much of this modern criticism rests on a profound difference between the original intentions of the texts and the way in which they have been read since. The comment by Silas Harris that Jocelin's Vita Kentegerni ‘is romance rather than history’ – as a hagiographical text it is, strictly speaking, neither – is representative of a wider attitude in the scholarly literature that has failed to appreciate the texts on their own terms. This book offers a much more sympathetic approach to Jocelin's works. By closely analysing the texts of the Vitae themselves and the wider environment in which they were written, this study places the author and his works firmly in the hagiographical, religious, cultural and political context of Angevin Britain. It is a methodology that reflects a wider movement in the current field of hagiographical studies. Whereas earlier scholars cited vitae as evidence for the periods described by the texts, greater attention is now being directed to the function and meaning of the works in the time in which they were written. The increasing appreciation of hagiographical texts as sources for the particular circumstances of their authors and patrons means that the rich historical material to be found in many medieval vitae is now being more fully recognized.

As an explicitly didactic genre, hagiography presents models of saintly behaviour for its audience to imitate. These models are rooted in centuries of Christian literary tradition and reinforce the individual saint's claim to sanctity by placing him or her within a recognized framework of holy mimesis.