Stefan de Jong (Emmanuel College, University of Cambridge)

The Involvement of Adelman of Lige (d. 1061) in the Berengarian Controversy and its
Resonance in Lige.
I. Introduction
In 1049, Berengar (d. 1088), a cleric from Tours, wrote a letter about his views on the Eucharist to
Lanfranc (c.1005-1089), at the time prior of the Norman monastery of Le Bec and a renowned
teacher.1 Berengar denied the real presence of Christ in the Eucharist and instead argued that the
Eucharist was a figure of the body of Christ, a mere symbol, which meant that Christ was not
corporally present when a believer consummated the Eucharist. 2 This position was at odds with
Church doctrine and the particular letter to Lanfranc would be the beginning of a lengthy controversy
which would keep many minds in western Europe occupied until Berengars death in 1088. 3 The
conflict stands out because of a number of reasons: the large cast of characters involved which
included several popes, the Holy Roman Emperor, the king of France, several leading intellectuals of
the time, the duke of Normandy, the count of Anjou, and several bishops; the questions the
controversy raised about heresy; ecclesiastical jurisdiction versus that of earthly authority; the usage of
dialectics as opposed to a reliance on authority; and what interest me here is proper scholarly mores
and methodology.
Although much scholarly attention has been devoted to the Eucharistic controversy itself and
in particular to Lanfrancs role in the controversy, this has come at the expense of the role of the Lige
clergy in the medieval debate.4 This is surprising given that one of Berengars first critics was his
former fellow student later teacher at Liges cathedral school: Adelman of Lige (d. 1061). 5 As for
1 M. Gibson, Lanfranc of Bec (Oxford, 1978), p.66; H.E.C. Cowdrey, Lanfranc: Scholar, Monk, and
Archbishop (Oxford, 2003); T.J. Holopainen, Lanfranc of Bec and Berengar of Tours, AngloNorman Studies 34 (2012), pp.105-122; Berengar of Tours, Epistola ad Berengarium, ed. R.B.C.
Huygens, Serta mediaevalia. Textus varii saeculorum X-XIII, Corpus Christianorum Continuatio
Mediaevalis 171 (Turnhout, 2000) pp.182-201.
2 See for instance, G. Macy, The Theologies of the Eucharist in the Early Scholastic Period (Oxford,
1984).
3 On the controversy see J. de Montclos, Lanfranc et Brengar. La controverse eucharistique du XIe
sicle (Louvain, 1971); Gibson, Lanfranc, pp.63-97.
4 See amongst others, A.J. MacDonald, Berengar and the Reform of Sacramental Doctrine (London,
1930); Montclos, Lanfranc et Brenger; Gibson, Lanfranc of Bec; P. Ganz, R.B.C. Huygens, and F.
Niewhner, eds., Auctoritas und Ratio, Studien zu Berengar von Tours (Wiesbaden, 1990);C. Radding
and F. Newton, Theology, Rhetoric, and Politics in the Eucharistic Controversy, 1078-1079 (New
York, 2003).
5 The essential study on Adelman remains he essential study remains H. Silvestre, Notice sur
Adelman de Lige, vque de Brescia (1061), Revue dhistoire ecclsiastique 56 (1961), pp.855871.

Stefan de Jong (Emmanuel College, University of Cambridge)

Liges cathedral school, modern scholarship has focused either on Bishop Notger (971-1008) and the
early flourishing of the cathedral school of Lige or on Alger of Lige (c.1060-1131) and Rupert of
Deutz (c.1075-c.1129), two famous early twelfth-century theologians. 6 The fate of the school under
Masters Adelman, Goswin of Mainz (d.1075), and Franco of Lige (d. after 1083), roughly spanning
the period of the Eucharistic controversy, has received more limited attention. 7 There is little to no
mention of the Eucharistic debate in Stephen Jaegers otherwise thought provoking study, The Envy of
Angels, which has highlighted Liges crucial position within the dissemination of the educational
model based on littera and mores and as a training ground for imperial clergy.8 Equally, a modern
translator of Adelmans work, Hans Geybels, was concerned with the sacramentology of Adelman and
Alger and its importance for the Lige school of theology rather than with the career of Adelman and
his participation in the Eucharistic debate.9
In this essay I will remedy the lack of attention paid to Adelman because, as I hope to show,
his case study will illustrate the importance of horizontal and vertical bonds between master and pupil.
Therefore this essay will introduces some of the themes that feature prominently in my wider
dissertation entitled: a comparative study of masters and communities of learning in Normandy and
the southern Low Countries, c. 1050-c.1125. Combining a prosopographical approach with an
intellectual historical one, I will consider the works and ideas of scholars, as well as more practical
elements such as career progression and reimbursement methods. In the first part of the dissertation I
provide the socio-political, religious, and intellectual background to the regions under consideration,
Normandy, and the dioceses of Arras, Tournai, Cambrai, and Lige, defined as the southern Low
Countries. Thereafter I take a thematic approach discussing the following themes: institutional
frameworks, students, methods of learning and teaching, classroom practice, education of laity, career
paths, social mobility, roles outside the classroom, learning, reputation, and international networks. In
the third part, I aim to bring all strands together to comparatively draw conclusions about masters in
the regions under consideration. In the final chapter I will place the master in a north-western
European perspective so as to highlight his role in the development of education in the second half of
the eleventh century and to ponder why the schools of Normandy and the southern Low Countries
could not mirror the development of those in northern France. Stephen Jaeger has claimed that
6 See G. Kurth, Notger de Lige et la civilisation au Xe sicle, 2 vols. (Paris, 1905); J. van Engen,
Rupert of Deutz (Berkely, 1983); L. Brigu, Alger de Lige, un thologien de leucharistie au dbut du
XIIe sicle (Paris, 1936).
7 See for instance Silvestre, Un notice sur Adelman, pp.855-871.
8 S. Jaeger, The Envy of Angels, Cathedral Schools and Social Ideals in Medieval Europe, 950-1200
(Philadelphia, 1996), esp. pp.54-56.
9 H. Geybels, Adelmann of Lige and the Eucharistic Controversy, with a musicological study of the
Rhytmus alphabeticus by Peter Mannaerts (Louvain, 2013), pp.5-36.

Stefan de Jong (Emmanuel College, University of Cambridge)

education in the eleventh century relied on masters whose instruction was based on eloquence and
personality.10 The system relied on personal moral authority of the teacher which was endangered by
the increased use of reason especially dialectics- as it could undermine the masters authority if he
was proven wrong.11 Mia Mnster-Swendsen has further developed this notion and has argued that due
to a lack of institutionalization, pre-university education was organised by the close bond between
masters and student, a relationship that was hierarchical, but at the same time fundamentally
reciprocal.12 With masters as its focal point rather than institutions, my study fits into this tradition
and aims to build on from their work. It also aspires to study eleventh-century intellectual culture in its
own right so as to offer a reappraisal of the eleventh centurys achievements in relationship to those of
the twelfth century. Furthermore it questions the utility of the term renaissance of the twelfth
century, which seemingly undervalues eleventh-century intellectual and educational progress. 13 The
present essay illustrates my approach of combining prosopography with intellectual history. It will
focus on the question as to why Adelman of Lige was drawn into the Berengarian controversy and
will draw upon the theme of scholarly genealogy in order to provide a possible answer.
II. Adelman of Lige
Master Adelman of Lige is an shadowy figure whose life is difficult to reconstruct due to a scarcity of
sources.14 Born around the millennium, probably in the Walloon area of Lige, he most likely received
his initial education at the cathedral school there. 15 He was made sub-deacon and presumably a canon
on a fairly young age by Bishop Reginard (1025-1038) who sent him to Chartres to study under
Fulbert of Chartres (d. 1028).16 Together with Olbert of Gembloux (d.1048) and a certain Reginard,
Adelman was part of a select group of Ligeois students who had the opportunity to study with the
10 Jaeger, Envy, p.220.
11 Jaeger, Envy, p.220.
12 M. Mnster-Swendsen, Medieval Virtuosity, Classroom Practice and the Transfer of Charismatic
Power in European Scholarly Culture c. 1000-1230, Negotiating Heritage: Memories of the Middle
Age, eds. M. Birkedal-Bruun and S. Glaser (Turnhout, 2009), p.55.
13 For criticism and an evaluation of the term Renaissance of the Twelfth Century, see, C.S. Jaeger,
Pessimism in the Twelfth-Century Renaissance, Speculum 78 (2003), pp.1151-1183; M.L. Colish,
Haskinss Renaissance Seventy Years Later: Beyond Anti-Burckhardtianism, Haskins Society
Journal 11 (2003), pp.1-15.
14 Silvestre, Notice sur Adelman, pp.855-871.
15 H. Silvestre, Quelle tait la langue maternelle dAdelman de Lige, vque de Brescia (1061),
La vie wallonne 36 (1962), pp.43-49.
16 Silvestre, Notice sur Adelman, p.859.

Stefan de Jong (Emmanuel College, University of Cambridge)

most eminent scholar of the time which in turn would have reflected well upon Lige. 17 Ostensibly,
Adelman was always destined to return to his fellow canons who then could profit from his esteemed
learning and connection to Fulbert. Around 1028 Adelman indeed returned after Bishop Reginard of
Lige had urged him to do so. In a letter to Bishop Reginard, Bishop Fulbert urges Reginard to stop
calling him [Adelman] a deserter, because he will come to you as quickly as he can.

18

Seemingly

Adelman had resisted his return to Lige provoking Bishop Reginard to call him a deserter, but
eventually had no other choice than to return. Adelmans education was seemingly not finished or
Fulbert did not want to lose his student as he implores Reginard to send him back to us with your
letter of commendation.19 The letter therefore reveals the close relationship between master and
student, and suggests that whilst studying at Chartres, Adelmans loyalties lay with his teacher rather
than with his native city. Reginard probably never sent Adelman back, because the latter took over the
position of scholasticus around 1030/1031 from Wazo of Lige who had gone into exile at the
monastery of Stavelot.20 About that time Adelman composed the first edition of his Rhytmus
alphabeticus, a rhythmical poem, in which he honoured and preserved the memory of the recently
deceased Fulbert and that of his classmates who died. 21 It is significant that this poem was written in a
style used by Fulbert, as three of his poems were called Rythmus.22 It was fitting that Adelman would
express his grief and honour the memory of Fulbert in a poem in the same style as that of his former
master. By imitating Fulbert, his legacy lived on in Adelman. At a later stage Adelman would revise
this poem in the light of the Berengarian controversy.23 About the rest of Adelmans tenure as
17 On Olbert see Sigebert of Gembloux, Gesta abbatum Gemblacensium, ed. G. Pertz, Monumenta
Germaniae Historia Scriptores 8 (Hannover, 1848), pp.536. On Reginard, see P. Tannery and A.
Clerval, Une correspondance dcoltres du onzime sicle, Notices et extraits des manuscrits de la
bibliothque nationale 36 (1901), pp.487-543.
18 Fulbert of Chartres, To Reginard of Lige, ed. and trans. F. Behrends, The Letters and Poems of
Fulbert of Chartres Oxford Medieval Texts (Oxford, 1976), pp. 228-229, no. 127. Nec appelletis eum
ultra militem fugitiuumveniet autem ad uos quantocius poterit.
19 Ibid. ut nobis illum remittere ac uestris litteris commendare dignemini
20 Balau, Les sources, p. 860; R. Huysmans, Wazo van Luik in den ideenstrijd zijner dagen
(Nijmegen and Utrecht, 1932), pp. 52-55; Jaeger, Envy, pp.205-208.
21 Adelman of Lige, Rhytmicus alpabeticus, ed and trans. H. Geybels, in his Adelmann, pp.105115; J. Havet, Pome rythmique dAdelman de Lige, Notices et documents pulis par la socit de
lhistoire de France loccasion du 50e anniversaire de sa fondation (Paris, 1884), pp.71-92;
Mnster-Swendsen, Medieval Virtuosity, pp.51-52.
22 Behrends, Fulbert of Chartres, pp.262-266, nos. 150, 151, and 152.
23 Geybels, Adelmann of Lige, p.51.

Stefan de Jong (Emmanuel College, University of Cambridge)

schoolmaster and his students little is known. Among the latter the only ones about whom we have
information are Franco of Lige, eventual successor of Adelman as scholasticus and renown
mathematician, and Abbot Lambert of St Laurent to whom Adelman dedicated a small poem. 24
From Adelmans second version of his Rhytmicus, revised between 1040 and 1056 and from
his letter to Archbishop Herman of Cologne (1036-1056) it can be inferred that somewhere in the
1040s or 1050s, Adelman had left Lige and had settled in Speyer.25 Possibly this occurred after 1044
when Gozwin of Mainz, Adelmans possible successor at the cathedral school, was attested as a canon
of the college of St Bartholomew in an episcopal act. 26 A second letter from this time was the letter
written to Berengar of Tours which exposes Adelmans ideas about the Eucharist. 27 The dating of this
letter has been debated and scholars have assigned dates varying from about 1049 to 1053. 28 It has
been argued that this letter was sent alongside the Rhytmicus, and thus from Speyer. Yet, the
Rhytmicus and the letter were not necessarily connected, save that they both related to the Berengarian
controversy, and could therefore have been sent separately. Karl Hampe has argued that the letter itself
implies that it was written from Speyer, because Adelman wrote that false tongues were recounting
Berengars ideas regarding the Eucharist not just to the French ears (Latinas), but also to German
ones (Teutonicas) among whom I [Adelman] have peregrinated for already a long time. 29 Hampe
thought this meant that Adelman had left Lige and had gone to Speyer, which is identified as being
abroad.30 I would like to question this argument. Lige was part of the Holy Roman Empire, as it was
located in Lorraine and would be considered German and indeed Bishop Thoduin of Lige (1048-

24 For Franco see A.J.E.M. Smeur, De verhandeling over de cirkelkwadratuur van Franco van Luik
van omstreeks 1050 (Brusse, 1968), pp.8-11. For Abbot Lambert see Van Engen, Rupert, p.44.
25 Adelman of Lige, ad Hermannum, ed. and trans. Geybels, Adelmann, p.97; idem., Rhytmicum,
p. 109.
26 A. Miraeus and J. Foppens, eds., Opera diplomatica, vol. 3 (Paris, 1748, 2nd edn), p.303.
27 Adelman of Lige, Epistola ad Berengarium, ed. and trans. H. Geybels, in his Adelmann, pp.6285.
28 Havet, Pome rythmique, p.75 (1052/1053); Balau, Les sources, p. 158, n. 7 (1049); Silvestre, Une
notice sur Adelman, p.861 (1049); Van Sluis, Adelman van Luik. De eerste opponent van
Berengarius van Tours, Nederlandsch theologisch tijdschrift 47 (1993), p.93 (1050/1051), Montclos,
Lanfranc et Brengar, pp.125-131 (1052).
29 Adelman of Lige, Berengarium, pp.62-64. ut non solum Latinas, verum etiam Teutonicas
aures, inter quos iam diu peregrinor.
30 K. Hampe, Zur Geschichte des Bisthums Lttich im 11. Und 12. Jahrhundert, Neues Archiv der
Gesellschaft fr ltere deutsche Geschichtskunde 22 (1897), pp.121-123.

Stefan de Jong (Emmanuel College, University of Cambridge)

1075) referred to his city as being in Germania.31 Moreover, I believe that in a letter to Berengar in
which Adelman calls Berengar a foster brother (conlactaneo) recreating the image of a scholarly
family, the peregrination means that Adelman had left Chartres in France (Latinas), the scholarly
home of Berengar and Adelman, and had returned to Lige due to which Adelman was amongst
German ears (aures Teutonicas).32 This means that the letter to Berengar was not necessarily written
from Speyer and could have been produced at Lige. Therefore the only thing which we can say with
certainty is that at some stage between 1040 and 1056 Adelman left Lige and took up residence at
Speyer. In 1059 we pick up on Adelmans trail again when he became bishop of Brescia. Around 1061
he died from injuries which he had sustained after he had been molested by his own clerics. They were
married clergy angered by Adelmans support for the papal policy against nicolaitism and simony at
the council of Rome of 1060 33 Cleary Adelman by then was part of the reform group in western
Europe in favour of clerical celibacy.
III. Adelman, Berengar, and the legacy of Fulbert of Chartres
Let me now come back to the relationship between Berengar and Adelman and in particular their
correspondence. Both Adelman and Berengar had been students of Fulbert of Chartres in the 1020s
after which they returned to their respective home communities: Tours and Lige. Nonetheless the
bond they shared remained their former master Fulbert even after his death in 1028. Adelman
expressed this sentiment as follows: Like a deeper maelstrom that separates into several smaller
currents and like a great fire that sends out many rays, you [Fulbert] too multiplied your many marks
of distinction.34 These smaller currents and rays were Fulberts students in whom his legacy lived
on. As for the Eucharistic Controversy, Adelman wrote a letter to Berengar between 1049 and 1053. 35
To start off Adelman set out his purpose of writing. He had heard about Berengars teachings about
two years earlier and had sent him a letter to enquire about it which either never reached Berengar or
to which he did not reply. The present letter was a second attempt to clarify whether Berengar was
indeed teaching that the Christ is not corporally present in the Eucharist and, if so, to warn him for the
dangers.36 For this reason Adelman raised the issue as to what constitutes proper scholarly practice. At
the start he singled out the importance of the Church fathers and their authority, as scholars should be
31 Bishop Theoduin of Lige, ad Henricum, ed. J.-P. Migne, PL 146, col.1439B.
32 Adelman of Lige, Berengarium, pp.62-64.
33 Bishop Bonizo of Sutri, Liber ad amicum, ed. E. Duemmler, Libelli di lite, vol. 1, MGH
(Hannover, 1891), p. 593; Silvestre, Notice sur Adelman, pp.863-864.
34 Adelman of Lige, Rhytmicus, p.105. Gurges altus ut minores solvitur in alveos, utque magnus
ex se multos fundit ignis radios sic insignes propagasti.
35 See n.32.

Stefan de Jong (Emmanuel College, University of Cambridge)

following the footsteps of the Holy Fathers so that we do not lose our way or embark on a new and
treacherous path, or stumble through snares and traps. 37 Elsewhere in the same letter he made the
same point even more clearly: It is good, my brother, for us who are so small, to shelter behind the
fame of those leaders whose authority, overwhelming in the brilliance of its holy virtues and the light
of its heavenly wisdom, is so potent and pleasing to ecclesiastical ears, that it would be extremely
foolish to challenge them in any way either with regard to the doctrines of faith or the right way of
life.38 Bearing this in mind, Adelman begged Berengar by the compassion of God and the sweet
memory of Fulbert to foster the catholic peace, and to not disturb the affairs of the Christian state, so
well established by our forefathers.39 Adelman clearly demarcated the field to which reason could be
applied. Criticising a group of people who imagine because of the philosophy of some hollow fallacy
that it is a great something to gather in the minutest detail the causes and reason for everything,
Adelman argued that we should not discuss the Christian sacraments with the arguments of human
reason, which cannot possibly comprehend them. 40 There was a place for reason within scholarship,
but this should never be used for a discussion of the sacraments or to undermine the authority of the
Church fathers. Thereafter, Adelman ventured into the realm of theology. His main question concerned
why the Eucharist did not transform visibly into meat and blood. While distinguishing between things
that can be registered by the mind or by the senses, Adelman stressed that the sacraments can only be
understood through faith.41 This led Adelman once and for all to profess his belief in the real presence,
and thus to distance himself from Berengar. Let us believe with our hearts and profess with our voices

36 Adelman of Lige, Berengarium, p.63.

37 Ibid. sanctorum patrum vestigiis observantissime inherentes, ut nullum prorsus [in]
diverticulum, nullam in novam et fallacem semitam desiliamus, ne forte in laqueos et scandala
incidamus.
38 Ibid, pp.65-67. Bonum est, frater, nobis parvulis sub istorum ducum titulis delitescere, quorum tam
valida tamque probablis est apud aecclesiasticas aures auctoritas, sanctarum virtutum fulgore et
caelestis sapientiae luce prepollens, ut extremae iam sit dementiae vel de ratione fidei vel de ordine
recte vivendi eis in aliquo refragari.
39 Ibid.,65. obsecrans per misericordiam dei, per suavissimam memoriam Folperti, ut pacem
catholicam diligas neque conturbes rem publicam christianae civitatis bene iam compositam a
maioribus nostris
40 Ibid.,75. qui per philosophiam et inanem quondam fallaciam magnum aliquid sibi esse videntur,
rerum omnium causas et rationes enucleatim decerpere, siquidem ut sacramenta christiana non sint
humana ratione, cui impossibile est ea conprehendere, discutienda, sed fide, hoc est divino illo
munere, immobiliter retinenda.
41 Ibid.

Stefan de Jong (Emmanuel College, University of Cambridge)

that the invisible ministration of the priest, creates from earthly bread the real body of Christ
himself.42 Thus for Adelman the sacrament of the Eucharist is performed by the priest and the true
believer would need to have faith in this. In the remainder of the letter Adelman returned to his theme
of sound scholarship and this time involved Berengars teaching in the discussion, so as to formulate a
warning. Adelman wrote that you [Berengar] in hot pursuit of the new, are impeaching our old writers
in the arts and showing the door to the best of them. You now despise Priscianus, Donatus, and
Boethius and try to refute by your authority many of their statements which have come down to us,
and which all scholars enthusiastically adopt. 43 Berengar not only had challenged the authority of the
Church fathers, against which Adelman had warned him at the beginning of the letter, but taken on the
secular authorities as well setting himself apart from the scholarly community and once more breaking
the rules of expected conduct. Nevertheless, this could be forgiven, but Berengar was truly wrong if he
pursued a similar disrespect for authority in the field of theology. Adelman wrote: whatever it is that
puts faith at riskit should be most warily pushed away, most bitterly opposed, and most severely
punished.44 What do we make of Adelmans letter? I believe that his letter has as much do with setting
out what sound scholarship should be as it has to do with Adelmans own position on the Eucharist and
with urging Berengar to repent.
This brings me back to my main question as to why Adelman was so involved in the
Berengarian controversy and why the stakes seemed so high to him. First of all, Adelman could have
decided to participate in the Eucharistic controversy to defend the organisational system of education
of which he was part. In Adelmans opinion Berengar was breaking the codes of proper conduct and of
sound scholarship. The cultivation of personal bonds, love for ones teacher, friendship for ones
fellow students, and the authority of the master was the very essence of the educational system.
Therefore, adhering to proper rules of conduct and proper scholarly methods assured that the system
did not fall apart.45 What mattered most to Adelman was that by his reliance on reason in opposition to
authority, his rude behaviour and disregard for scholarly mores, as well as his disdain for the authority
42 Ibid., pp.76-77. Credamus, corde et ore confiteamur, verum corpus Christi esse quod invisibili
virtute Christi per visibile ministerium sacerdotis de pane materiali creatur.
43 Adelman of Lige, Berengarium, pp.82-83. te, novitatum captatorem, veteres accusare atque
probatissimos scriptores atrium exauctorare, adeo ut Priscianum, Donatum, Boetium prorsus
contemnas multaque eorum dicta, quae eruditorum omnium usu comprobante ad nos usque
demanarunt, opposite auctoritate tua evertere coneris.
44 Adelman of Lige, Berengarium, pp.82-83. Quicquid autem est in quo fides periclitatur
cautissime est a se repellendumquantumvis conunctissimo, acerrime inpugnandum severissimeque
vindicandum,.
45 Mnster-Swendsen, The Model of Scholastic Mastery in Northern Europe, c. 970-1200, in
Teaching and Learning in Northern Europe, ed. S. Vaughn and J. Rubenstein (Turnhout, 2006), p.309,
p.333.

Stefan de Jong (Emmanuel College, University of Cambridge)

of personal relationships Berengar not only shamed his former master Fulbert, but he threatened the
fundamentals of the educational system.
A second reason has to do with Adelmans concern for Fulbert of Chartres legacy, a recurrent
theme in his letter to Berenger. The cleric from Tours had committed two crimes. First of all, he had
not adhered to the authority of the Church fathers, but instead had tried to use reason to discuss the
sacraments. This constituted a break with the scholarly mores and resulted in heretical claims about the
Eucharist. Secondly, with his behaviour Berengar ran the risk of blemishing the reputation of Fulbert
of Chartres. It is my belief that Adelmans main consideration to participate in the Eucharistic
controversy seems to have been his desire to defend his former master. His strategy to do so was
twofold. First of all, by setting out his own position as a former student of Fulbert, Adelman showed
that Berengars view on the Eucharist did not derive from Fulberts teaching. Adelman for instance
pointed out that he and Berengar had been exposed to the holy life ad salubrious doctrine of a catholic
and Christian man [Fulbert].46 In the process, Adelman distanced himself from Berengars heresy, as
he put it, lest I am thought to share in that same error. 47 The second part of the strategy was to
attempt to persuade Berengar to atone for his sins and to get him on the right track again to ensure that
he could no longer damage Fulberts legacy. It is here that the memory of Fulbert was used in two
different ways. Firstly, the memory of Fulbert was recalled as a warning and as threat. The memory of
Fulbert invoked his charismatic presence of the departed teacher which was used as a deterrent and a
correction.48 Rhetorically, by reminding him of Fulberts authority as master Adelman turned Berengar
into a student again who was in need of correcting as he opposed his teachers position. Secondly,
Adelman attempted to recall certain memories that would rekindle Berengars reverence, and more
importantly, love for his former master, which stood at the basis of the student-master relationship
according to Mia Mnster-Swendsen.49 It is significant that Adelman not only deployed this strategy in
his letter, but also in his Rhytmicus. Although initially composed as an expression of Adelmans grief
for the deceased, the poem was revised in the light of the Eucharistic controversy and sent to Berengar.
Such poems, especially ones written in the same tradition as the masters own poems, were not out of
the ordinary as they served to keep the teachers memory and legacy alive and enabled the author to
once more align himself closely with the fame and learning of the departed. 50 The Rhytmicus was
46 Adelman of Lige, Berengarium, p.63. Nos enim sanctiorem vitam salubrioremque doctrinam
catholici et christianissimi viri una experti sumus.
47 Ibid., p.83. deinde neego errori illi affinis esse ipso silentio existimarer.
48 Mnster-Swendsen, Scholastic Mastery, pp.334-338.
49 Mnster-Swendsen, Medieval Virtuosity, p.308.
50 Mnster-Swendsen, Medieval Virtuosity, p.52; idem., Scholastic Mastery, pp.334-337.

Stefan de Jong (Emmanuel College, University of Cambridge)

10

meant to recall the memory of Fulbert and of their former classmates who are mentioned by name.
Moreover, the language of the song, especially in its description of Fulbert, was deliberately aimed at
conjuring up emotions. Let me give an example, Adelman wrote: as I try to recall you [Fulbert], my
voice breaks, my heart melts, and my tears well up. 51 With a similar goal in mind, he reminisces by
describing specific touching scenes. I often hung by your [Fulberts] side and caught with my ears the
honey-sweet stream of knowledge that welled up from the golden spring of your mouth. 52 Drawing
upon the memory of Fulbert by reminiscing, both in the letter and the Rhytmicus, Adelman appealed to
their shared intellectual heritage in an attempt to persuade Berengar to stop his heretical ideas.
Why was it so important for Adelman to defend Fulberts memory? Love and reverence for
ones teacher go a long way to explain Adelmans actions, but do not suffice. Adelmans own
reputation could have been hurt badly as a result of Berengars disrespect of the memory of their
shared master, In order to protect his own reputation he had felt the need to rise to Fulberts defence. 53
In both the Rhytmicus and the letter, Adelman emphasised the honour and magnanimity of Fulbert so
as to remind his contemporaries not to be misled by Berengar. To give an example from the
Rhytmicus, Adelman wrote: it is your [Fulberts] doing that studying flourished in Gaul; you refined
human and divine dogmas.54 Yet, there was a more selfish reason as well. In a world in which
personal relationships were the driving force of the educational system and where scholars shared the
same practices and rules of conduct, they formed a closed elite circle which was difficult to enter. The
only way in which one could achieve membership was through association with a master who would
teach you both the liberal arts and how to conduct yourself. The moral education took the form of
mimicking the master, almost striving to turn oneself into his mirror image. 55 This ensured that the
rules of conduct that underlay the educational system were conveyed to the next generation and that
the student could participate in this elite culture, as his education formed his entrance ticket. 56 As a
result, the good fortunes of students were closely tied in with those of the master. Mnster-Swendsen
has argued that the honour of the master, had to be upheld often at high cost because the
51 Adelman of Lige, Rhytmicus, p.105. dum te conor dicerre, fugit sermo, cor liquescit,
recrudescunt lacrimae.
52 Adelman of Lige, Rhytmicus, p.105. herens sepe lateri, aure bibens oris fontem aureum
melliflui.
53 For the role of love see Mnster-Swendsen, Scholastic Mastery, p.317; C.S. Jaeger, Ennobling
Love: In Search of a Lost Sensibility (Philadelphia, 1999), p.59.
54 Adelman of Lige, Rhytmicus, p.105.
55 Jaeger, Envy, p.76.
56 Mnster-Swendsen, Medieval Virtuosity, pp.55-56.

Stefan de Jong (Emmanuel College, University of Cambridge)

11

legitimacy of ones education, and the whole nexus of knowledge and power depended on this heritage
remaining unbroken and undisputed.57 The relationship between master and student was reciprocal
and as a result both honour and dishonour were shared. 58 If, therefore, the memory and legacy of
Fulbert would be tarnished, this could have fatal consequences for Adelmans career. It is finally worth
mentioning that not only Adelman took up the cause of defending Fulbert of Chartres. The Chartrian
clergy did so as well and posed challenges to Berengar.59 Eventually they were able to influence the
French King Henry I (1031-1060) and to convince him to take Berengar prisoner.60 Undoubtedly
Fulberts memory was in danger of being tarnished and his former students, whether they had
remained in Chartres or had ventured to Lige, immediately came to his defence, even though their
master had died more than twenty years ago. Clearly his legacy and charismatic presence lingered on.
IV. Conclusion
To conclude, the way in which the Eucharistic controversy resonated in the city of Lige is revealing
for the organisation of its intellectual milieu around 1050. The concept of scholarly genealogy helps us
to explain as to why Adelman of Lige was so involved in the Berengarian controversy. Yet, Adelman
was not the only Ligeois participant in the controversy. Bishop Theoduin wrote a letter to King Henry
I of France urging him to not grant a hearing to Berengar of Tours and to leave him an outcast. 61
Additionally, after 1051, the Berengarian controversy lost papal interest until in the late 1050s the
charge against Berengar would gain new momentum under the guidance of two popes who had both
been educated in Lige and had been members of the cathedral chapter: Pope Stephen IX (1057-1058)
and Pope Nicholas II (1059-1061).62 Gozwin of Mainz, who was as we have seen the likely successor
of Adelman as scholasticus, ascribed the failings and the moral bankruptcy of his time to the teaching
of the likes of Berenar of Tours.63 Finally the resonance of the Eucharistic controversy in Lige
lingered well into the 1110s when Alger of Lige and Rupert of Deutz were involved in their own

57 Mnster-Swendsen, Medieval Virtuosity, p.56.

58 Mnster-Swendsen, Medieval Virtuosity, p.57.
59 Gibson, Lanfranc, p.66.
60 Macdonald, Berengar and the Eucharistic Controversy, p.86.
61 Thoduin of Lige, ad Henricum, col. 1140B.
62 On papal involvement see H.E.J. Cowdrey, The Papacy and the Berengarian Controversy,
Auctoritas und Ratio, pp.109-138.
63 Gozwin of Mainz, Letter to Valcherus, trans. C.S. Jaeger, Envy, p.366.

Stefan de Jong (Emmanuel College, University of Cambridge)

12

Eucharistic controversy.64 It seems to me that what we witness in Liege is a continuous struggle of the
Ligeois clergy to defend their own (former) master. Alger and Rupert defended Adelman, but via him
they could trace back their scholarly lineage to Fulbert. We should not underestimate the extent to
which the Berengarian controversy posed a threat to the reputation of Lige as a city of learning.
It is worth mentioning that there was a second scholarly genealogy echoing in Lige as well,
namely that of Archbishop Bruno of Cologne (953-965), whom Stephen Jaeger has credited with
devising the system of education of both mores and littera.65 This tradition integrated in Lige through
Bishop Notger, a pupil of Bruno, and through Bishop Wazo, Notgers student. Lige combined these
different traditions and transformed it into a tradition of its own personified through masters like
Franco of Lige. Liges connection to the learned tradition of Fulbert of Chartres and the French
connections of individuals like Adelman could explain why Lige could become such an attractive
place of study for French clerics, to the extent that Bishop Odo of Bayeux (1048/49-1097) sent student
to Lige.66 To put it differently, Lige appealed both to students from imperial Germany making it a
training ground for the imperial clergy and to those from France. Lige was not only geographically in
between the Holy Roman Empire and France, but also intellectually by drawing on German and
French scholarly traditions and genealogies.

64 Van Engen, Rupert, pp.135-180.

65 Jaeger, Envy, pp.36-43.
66 D. Bates, Normandy before 1066 (London, 1982), p.216.