Return to my Societe Pages index
Return to Index on this section.
What can we make of these narratives, which are more or less contradictory, confused and imprecise? It is easy to set that Nantus is not Saint-Marcouf, the island Agna is not Jersey, and Childebert could not have signed the charter at Compiegne.
The only dates which have come to us are of Sigebert de Gembloux and, after him, Vincent de Beauvais, which are 586 and 596, and maybe some 30 years after the death of the first King Childebert. All the others have been made up to fit in with the few historical facts: mention of Possessor, of whom one knows nothing, and St Laut, who we know was bishop in 530 and wasn't in 556.
I will try, however, to build a system of hypotheses which can be considered probable or reasonable in that they take account of the points and problems which I have tried to set out.
At a time corresponding to the end of the reign of Cloris, or the start of that of Childebert, the descendant of a family of Roman auxiliaries came from Bayeux to Coutances. His aim was to bring back his countrymen from their Arian tradition. He is given the approval to start this work by the bishop of Coutances, Possessor. But his success seems to threaten the established church practices. So, probably with the agreement of a bishop called Leoncien and the civil authorities (hence a representative of Childebert if not the king himself), his work is diverted from its original direction and transformed to the foundation of a monastic community (on lands belonging to the royal treasury), in a place called Nantus. This abbey was build not far from Veys, perhaps close to Hiegatte where a memorial chapel has existed since the 13th century to the present day.
Marcouf did not appear to be satisfied with this solution: he wished to live as a hermit on nearby islands, and perhaps also on islands in the. neighbourhood of the Breton coast; he only returned to Nantus to die there.
The abbey revered his memory as their founder, and possessed a "testament" which it obtained by the mediation of Leoncien from the civil authorities (who conceded the territory to the community for construction of a monastery). There can be no question that, at the time of the gift of this land, the abbey did not depend on the bishop of the region.
A first life of Marcouf could have been written about this time. We will call this hypothetical construct the oldest life - "vita antiquissima". It dates from the last years of the 6th century and would use oral memories of the monks who had known Marcouf, as well as the foundation charter.
It is this life which gives us the anti-Arian crusade, the sermons of Marcouf, and his habitual manner of prayer (prayer while prostrated on the ground), which his contemporaries found striking and sometimes exaggeratedly long. Here, too, is the source of the healing of the son of Genardus.
The author was inspired by the Life of Antony and. the Life of Martin, and also amplifies the miracles such as the storm driving off the Saxon fleet.
The author of the-Life of Helier knew only this text, and added to it the name of the island of
Jersey, which had not been given in the original text.
In time, the abbey renewed the first charter; it obtained from Childebert a second document (if this tale is not a fiction). It is this which could have been known or heard of by Sigebert de Gembloux, dating it to the last years of the reign, towards 586.
Towards the middle of the 7th century, the head of the monastic community, perhaps Abbot Bernouin, thought of making a greater occasion of the cult of St Marcouf.
Two things were necessary to this end: (i) the veneration of the body - here he took advantage of the passing through of Bishop Ouen to promote his case; (ii) a new edition of the life of the saint (Vita Antiqua) which was intended for readings in the refectory to the monks, or readings to pilgrims coming to venerate the body.
The author uses the Vita Antiquissima and adds to it the second Charter: he attributes to Marcouf a journey to Childebert and invents (or adapts from other stories) the miracle of the huntsman, which is placed along the way. We may note that by this time after the death of Marcouf, the Life of St Paternus of Avranches and the Life of St Samson of Dol were written and widely known.
From the start of this life of Marcouf,' the author takes the visit to Childebert as an occasion for the healing of those possessed; to exalt Marcouf further, he does not hesitate to make Bishop Laut come to his deathbed. Finally, he attempt to convince his readers that it was Marcouf and not Samson who converted the whole of Brittany, and did all this by a single miracle! He will also invent or discover, in old traditions, the name of the island where Marcouf stopped the Saxon pirates.
This is the Life which is taken by the monks when they are driven out by the invasion of the Normans. Altered it form, it becanes Life A, which is read at Reims and Corbeny. From the 12th century, it has added to it a collection of miracles and. a sermon "on the light".
As an aside, it may be noted that it is very curious that the relics of Marcouf heal almost all illnesses, but apart from one allusion to royal privilege (13th century text), they do not speak of the "King's Evil". If there is a special healing property, it would not be that but rabies (cures of possessed people who bite one another and the son of Genardus ill after a dog bite).
The inhabitants of Bayeaux emphasised the regional characteristic of the saint venerated at Nantus (as distinct from the more universal saint of Life A). That is why the author of Life B makes it particularly clear that the relics are still at the abbey, which is a dependancy of Rouen. Here, Marcouf, a son of Bayeux, is seen to follow the rules of the established church, and has given his monks the rule of St Benedict.
This is the life which has been widely circulated in Normandy: it has come to us from the libraries of Jumieges, Saint-Wandrille and Mont Saint-Michel, and it is surely later than the collection of miracles.