The monastic roots of affective piety

This chapter examines John’s legacy after his death, both at Fécamp and in the wider medieval spiritual landscape. The chapter first shows how John’s students and followers at Fécamp elaborated on the seeds of affective devotion that John’s Confessio theologica planted: a cult to the precious blood of Christ was established at Fécamp; John’s students Maurilius of Rouen and Gerbert of Saint-Wandrille wrote affective prayers to a crucified Christ; Guibert of Nogent, a Norman monk, wrote his own memoir in the style of Augustine’s Confessions thanks to John; and, most famously, Anselm of Bec wrote his prayers and meditations, following in the steps of the greatest Norman abbot of the generation before him. This chapter moves on to discuss how John’s Confessio theologic’s ideas changed in the hands of the Cistercians, and how they circulated in the later Middle Ages, often misattributed in manuscripts to Anselm or Bernard or Francis. This chapter concludes by making clear the parts of John’s Confessio theologica’s devotional method that served as the foundation for later medieval affective devotional practice, and the parts of John’s ideas that abandoned in later iterations of affective devotion practised by Cistercians, mendicants, mystics, and the laity.

in Emotional monasticism

de Fontenay-Mareuil, Mémoires du Messire Du Val, ed. Louis Monmerqué, 2 vols. (Paris, 1826), I, 458. 26 The 59 new knights were added to 28 existing ones, making 87 knights, the largest number possible under the statutes, and with the 9 clerics and 4 officers, a total of 100. 27 B.N., Ms. fr. 16802, fols.177–8; Fontenay-Mareuil, Mémoires, I, 459; McCorquodale, “The Court of Louis XIII,” p. 176. 28 Anselme, Histoire généalogique, IX, 13. 29 McCorquodale, “The Court of Louis XIII,” p. 177; B.N., Ms. fr. 16802, fols. 177–8; Mercure françois, VI (1620), 1–24. 30 B

in Power and reputation at the court of Louis XIII

’Arnauld d’Andilly 1614–1620 (Paris, 1857), pp. 399–400; Héroard, Journal, II, 2521. 3 Ibid., II, 2487; Joseph Bergin, The Making of the French Episcopate (New Haven, 1996), pp. 431, 606. 4 Louis Batiffol, Le Louvre sous Henri IV et Louis XIII (Paris, 1930), pp. 31–2. 5 Paul Phélypeaux de Pontchartrain, Mémoires concernant les affaires de France sous la régence de Marie de Médicis, eds. Michaud and Poujoulat, 2nd ser., vol. 5 (Paris, 1837), p. 395; Georges Poisson, La Duchesse de Chevreuse (Paris, 1999), pp. 9–57. 6 Mercure françois, V (1617), 97. THE REWARDS OF FAVOR

in Power and reputation at the court of Louis XIII
Abstract only

Lb 36, Les Cérémonies royales faictes en baillant par la maison du Roy l’espée du Connestable à Monseigneur le duc de Luynes le 2 avril (1621); Mercure françois, 25 vols. (Paris, 1605–44), VII (1621), 277; Jean Héroard, Journal, ed. Madeleine Foisil, 2 vols. (Paris, 1989), II, 2749–53; Eugène Halphen, ed., Journal inédit d’Arnauld d’Andilly 1621 (Paris, 1891), pp. 19–20; B.I.F., Collection Godefroy 519, fols. 137–9; Henri Griffet, Histoire du règne de Louis XIII, 3 vols. (Paris, 1758), I, 283. 2 Charles, comte Horric de Beaucaire, ed., Mémoires du Cardinal de

in Power and reputation at the court of Louis XIII
Alexei Kuropatkin, the Central Asian Revolt, and the long shadow of conquest

8 Violent acculturation: Alexei Kuropatkin, the Central Asian Revolt, and the long shadow of conquest Ian W. Campbell On 1 May 1868, Alexei Nikolaevich Kuropatkin was far in rank and in distance from the heights his military career would later reach. The twenty-​ year-​old son of Pskov province and recent military school graduate had got his first taste of real battle on campaign in the Central Asian emirate of Bukhara, en route to Samarkand. As he described the experience in his memoir fifty years later, he had not found it an edifying experience, still less a

in The Central Asian Revolt of 1916

together as a team to defeat the Queen Mother, and they would govern France together the same way. 162 POWER AND REPUTATION Notes 1 Guillaume Girard, The History of the Life of the Duke of Espernon, tr. Charles Cotton (London, 1670), pp. 347–50; J. Russell Major, “The Revolt of 1620,” Fr Hist Stud 14 (1986), 391; François Du Val, marquis de Fontenay-Mareuil, Mémoires du Messire Du Val, ed. Louis Monmerqué, 2 vols. (Paris, 1826), I, 431–6; Achille Halphen, ed., Journal d’Arnauld d’Andilly 1614–1620 (Paris, 1857), pp. 447–8; Paul Phélypeaux de Pontchartrain, Mémoires

in Power and reputation at the court of Louis XIII

des guerres de Louis XIII contre les religionnaires rebelles (Paris, 1633), pp. 205–30; Louis de Pontis, Mémoires du sieur de Pontis, ed. Petitot, 2nd ser., vol. 31 (Paris, 1824), 316; François Du Val, marquis de Fontenay-Mareuil, Mémoires du Messire Du Val, ed. Louis Monmerqué, 2 vols. (Paris, 1826), I, 516–8; Claude Malingre, Histoire de la rebellion excitée en France par les rebelles de la religion prétendue réformée (Paris, 1626), pp. 500–63, 611–20, 627–35; A.D. Lublinskaya, French Absolutism. The Crucial Phase 1620–1629 (Cambridge, 1968), pp. 189–94; Auguste

in Power and reputation at the court of Louis XIII
Abstract only

studies) producing fiction alongside their academic work, and teachers of creative writing, of course, also publish it, as well as doing their own critical scholarship.2 At the same time, there has been a long-standing attempt by academics to combine autobiographical with scholarly writing.3 Here we have no ambitions to combine fictional and academic writing, or to move from the latter into straightforwardly autobiographical or memoir essays. This would be a slightly different kind of book.4 Instead, all the contributors to Writing Otherwise are invested in exploring

in Writing otherwise

-evaluation of the Church’s absolutist doctrines concerning permissible and impermissible sexual acts, but has done so from the perspective of a generally friendly internal critic.1 To quote from his aptly titled memoir, Loyal Dissent, Curran believes himself to have ‘generally agreed strongly with the broad fundamental aspects of the Catholic theological tradition’ and to have worked ‘primarily out of that tradition’.2 He would ‘not feel comfortable in any other tradition’; his ‘problems are with particular church teachings, not with its core dogma or broad theological

in Religion and rights

over the course of the 1780s. La Blancherie grew jealous of his rivals’ success. At one point, when he had to shut down temporarily, he lost many members to the Musée de Monsieur. Despite the approbation he had received from the Académie Royale des Sciences, some of his enemies even suggested that the Musée de Monsieur should absorb the Salon de la Correspondance and take over all of its functions. The editors of the Mémoires secrets virulently attacked both La Blancherie and his club. They criticized the Académie Royale des Sciences for its actions and compared La

in Popular science and public opinion in eighteenth-century France