Chapter XVIII: Appendix: C

ARNULF OF CHOCQUES, CHAPLAIN OF ROBERT CURTHOSE

Arnulf of Chocques, who went on the First Crusade with Robert Curthose and ended his dramatic career in 1118 as patriarch of Jerusalem, is a character of more than ordinary interest, and his provenance and early career are worthy of more careful investigation than they have yet received.[1] The foundation for such a study was laid in 1904, when, by the publication in a new and scholarly edition of a little-known text of the early twelfth century, entitled _Versus de Viris Illustribus Diocesis Tarvanensis_, the Belgian scholar Charles Moeller identified Arnulf’s birthplace as the village of Chocques in the diocese of Thérouanne on the river Clarence, an affluent of the Lys.[2] Thus Moeller returns to the view of the Flemish annalists Meyer and Malbrancq,[3] who manifestly knew and used this text; though modern writers upon the Crusades, overlooking it and relying mainly upon Albert of Aix,[4] have said that Arnulf was ‘of Rohes, a castle of Flanders,’ which no one has ever been able to identify.[5] If further evidence were needed to establish the correctness of Moeller’s conclusion, it is found in a charter of 15 August 1095 by Robert Curthose in favor of Rouen cathedral, among the witnesses to which appears “Ernulfo de Cioches capellano meo.”[6] This document is also important as confirming and supplementing the meagre notices of the chroniclers, on which one is compelled to rely almost entirely for all that is known about Arnulf of Chocques before he went on the Crusade and came into prominence and controversy.

As to Arnulf’s family, practically nothing is known; though one may safely infer that he was of lowly origin from the speech which his friend and former pupil, Ralph of Caen, puts into his mouth when he makes him say to the princely leaders of the Crusade, “You have promoted me from a humble station, and from one unknown you have made me famous, and, as it were, one of yourselves.”[7] His enemies openly charged that he was the son of a priest;[8] and that their accusations were not without foundation is evidenced by a letter of Pope Pascal II, replying in 1116 to complaints which had been made against Arnulf, and reinstating him in the patriarchal office from which he had been suspended by the papal legate. While clearing him entirely from two of the charges which had been brought against him, the pope announced that the third complaint, viz., the general belief as to a stain upon his birth, was to be overlooked, ‘by apostolic dispensation,’ in view of Arnulf’s great services and of the needs of the church.[9] The statement sometimes made that Arnulf had a niece named Emma, or Emelota,[10] who figures in the charters of the Latin Kingdom,[11] and who was the wife, first of Eustace Gamier, lord of Caesarea, and then of Hugh II, count of Jaffa, appears to rest upon the sole authority of William of Tyre.[12]

Considering the age in which he lived, Arnulf doubtless received an excellent education,[13] though where it is impossible to say; and while still a young man he appeared in Normandy as a teacher, presumably at Caen. Ralph of Caen, who later became the distinguished historian of the First Crusade, was among his pupils; and upon the completion of his great work, the _Gesta Tancredi_, dedicated it in grateful remembrance to his old master.[14]

Far more important for Arnulf’s future, however, was the connection which he early established with the Anglo-Norman ruling family when he was made tutor in grammar and dialectic to the oldest daughter of William the Conqueror, Cecilia, the pious nun of La Trinité at Caen, who later became the second abbess of her mother’s great foundation.[15] It was probably through the friendship thus established with the royal princess that the Flemish schoolmaster succeeded in rising to higher things; for Cecilia is said to have obtained from her indulgent brother, Duke Robert, the promise of episcopal honors for Arnulf, in case any of the Norman bishoprics should fall vacant;[16] and while he never gained that preferment, it can hardly be doubted that it was through her influence that he entered the service of the duke as chaplain. The charter to which attention has been called above furnishes proof that Arnulf already held that position in August 1096 (_supra_, n. 6). But his official connection with the ducal court undoubtedly began at least a year earlier, for the contemporary biographer of Abbot William of Bec states very specifically that on, or shortly after, 10 August 1094 he went on an important official errand for the duke in the capacity of ‘chancellor.’[17]

One other fact remains to be noticed as indicating Arnulf’s intimate relationship with another member of the Conqueror’s family. Although he was chaplain of the duke before and during the Crusade, he is said to have set out for the Holy War in the company of Robert’s uncle, Bishop Odo of Bayeux, who upon his death at Palermo, early in 1097, left him the greater part of his splendid outfit.[18]

FOOTNOTES

[1] New light has been thrown upon Arnulf’s career in Normandy by the publication of Professor Haskins’s _Norman Institutions_ (pp. 74-75) since this Appendix was originally written; but it seems worth while to let it stand with slight modifications, since it may still serve to bring together in convenient form all the known facts concerning Arnulf’s early history. For the fullest treatment of Arnulf’s career as a whole see Eduard Franz, _Das Patriarchat von Jerusalem im Jahre 1099_ (Sagen, 1885), pp. 8-16. See also the critical and bibliographical notes in Ekkehard, _Hierosolymita_, ed. Heinrich Hagenmeyer (Tübingen, 1877), p. 264, n. 8; _G. F._, p. 481, n. 14; _Kreuzzugsbriefe_, p. 409, n. 15; Fulcher of Chartres, _Historia Hierosolymitana (1095-1127)_, ed. Heinrich Hagenmeyer (Heidelberg, 1913), p. 590, n. 24.

[2] “Les Flamands du Ternois au royaume latin de Jérusalem,” in _Mélanges Paul Fredericq_ (Brussels, 1904), pp. 189-202. The decisive lines are (p. 191):

Primus Evremarus sedit patriarcha Sepulchri;
Post hunc Arnulfus: oriundus uterque Cyokes.

[3] Jacques de Meyer, _Commentarii sive Annales Rerum Flandricarum_ (Antwerp, 1561), _a._ 1099, fol. 34 v; Jacques Malbrancq, _De Morinis et Morinorum Rebus_ (Tournay, 1639-54), ii, p. 684.

[4] _H. C. Oc._, iv, p. 470: “Arnolfus de Zokes castello Flandriae.”

[5] E.g., Riant, Hagenmeyer, and Röhricht at various places in their well known works. Hagenmeyer in his recent edition (1913) of Fulcher of Chartres (p. 590, n. 24) accepts Moeller’s conclusion; but Bréhier, writing in 1907 (_L’église et l’Orient au moyen âge_, p. 83), still says “Arnoul de Rohez.”

[6] Haskins, p. 70, no. 31; p. 74, n. 28. It is true that the text as printed from an original now lost has “Emulpho de Croches,” but this is probably a misreading for Cyoches or Cioches. G. A. de La Roque, _Histoire généalogique de la maison de Harcourt_ (Paris, 1662), iii, preuves, p. 34.

[7] _H. C. Oc._, iii, p. 699.

[8] Raymond of Aguilers, _ibid._, iii, p. 302; Guibert of Nogent, _ibid._, iv, p. 233; William of Tyre, _ibid._, i, p. 365.

[9] _Cartulaire de l’église du Saint Sépulchre_, ed. Eugène de Rozière (Paris, 1849), no. 11.

[10] Du Cange, _Les familles d’outre-mer_, ed. E.-G. Rey (Paris, 1869), pp. 274-275, 339, 431; T. W. Archer and C. L. Kingsford, _The Crusades_ (London, 1894), pp. 118,193.

[11] Reinhold Röhricht, _Regesta Regni Hierosolymitani_, and _Additamentum_ (Innsbruck, 1893 and 1904), nos. 104, 112, 147, 102 a, 114 b.

[12] _H. C. Oc._, i, p. 628.

[13] Guibert of Nogent, _H. C. Oc._, iv, p. 232: “in dialecticae eruditione non hebes, quum minime haberetur ad grammaticae documenta rudis”; Ralph of Caen, _ibid._, iii, p. 604: “nullius etenim liberalis scientiae te cognovimus exsortem”; cf. the interesting passage (_ibid._, iii, p. 665) where Arnulf is represented while on the Crusade as learning astrology from a ‘didascalus.’ The other sources, while not particularizing, bear unanimous testimony to Arnulf’s learning. Cf. _G. F._, pp. 479-480; Raymond of Aguilers, in _H. C. Oc._, iii, p. 281; Ekkehard, _Hierosolymita_, p. 264.

[14] _H. C. Oc._, iii, p. 604: “Praesertim mellita mihi erit quaecumque erit correctio tua, si, quem sortitus sum praeceptorem puer iuvenem, nunc quoque correctorem te impetravero vir senem.”

[15] Guibert of Nogent, _ibid._, iv, p. 232: “regis Anglorum filiam monacham ea … diu disciplina docuerat.” Ordericus Vitalis (ii, p. 303), without mentioning any particular teacher, remarks upon Cecilia’s unusual education: “Quae cum grandi diligentia in coenobio Cadomensi educata est et multipliciter erudita.”

[16] Guibert of Nogent, in _H. C. Oc._, iv, p. 232.

[17] Milo Crispin, _Vita Venerabilis Willelmi Beccensis Tertii Abbatis_, in Migne, cl, col. 718.

[18] Guibert of Nogent, in _H. C. Oc._, iv, p. 233: “Cuius comitatui idem Arnulfus sese indidit; et quum huic ipsi episcopo citra, nisi fallor, Romaniae fines finis obtigisset, ex illo maximo censu quem post se reliquerat, hunc legatarium, pene ante omnes, suppellectilis suae preciosae effecit.”