Lindsay Rudge PhD Thesis - University of St Andrews

Columbanus’ visit to Chagneric, ‘conviva’ of Theudebert II, ‘possessing as much wisdom
as nobility’, who had offered to introduce Columbanus to the royal court, and pleaded
with him to stay at his home as long as possible. 220 It was on this occasion that
Columbanus vowed Burgundofara to God. The family’s commitment to the Columbanian
venture had been made even plainer by the presence of Chagnoald during Eustasius’ visit.
Neither could Chagneric’s opposition to Burgundofara’s vocation be due to his fear of
losing a marriageable daughter, who might otherwise be vital in making alliances with
other families. He had another daughter, Agnetrada, mentioned only in Burgundofara’s
testament, who could have served this purpose. 221
Chagneric’s support of Burgundofara’s religious impulse was given its most
concrete form by his provision of land on which to build the monastery in which she
would live. 222 This territorial (and probably financial) provision provided the essential
context for Eustasius’ arrangements for the new house: he organised monks to come
(probably from Luxeuil) to construct the new foundation, and two more, Waldebert and
Burgundofara’s brother, Chagnoald, to teach the rule to the new nuns. 223 While
Eustasius’ role has echoes of Caesarius in making their respective foundations, then, the
fact that wider family interests are involved in the provision of resources highlights the
differences. In the context of views of ‘Columbanian monasticism’ as a new more
regulated style of religious life, it is worth noting the suggestion that Burgundofara may
have withdrawn to Champeaux, one of the villae later mentioned in her testament, and
gathered a few women together there in an informal community before the monastery
was ready. 224 This seems highly likely. Where groups of women had begun to form a
religious community, it seems evident that some sort of informal community must have
existed in the interim, before the buildings of the actual monastery were ready. This must
220
VCD I:26.
221
J. Guérout, ‘Le Testament de sainte Fare’, Revue d’histoire ecclésiastique 60 (1965) 761-821; idem,
‘Fare’, DHGE col.525.
222
VCD II:7.
223
Ibid. There has been some suggestion that the rule taught was likely to have been that of Waldebert
himself, the Regula cuiusdam patris ad virgines, rather than that of Columbanus, which by this time was
likely to have been mixed with that of Benedict: C. Stancliffe, ‘Jonas’s Life of Columbanus and his
Disciples’, in M. Herbert, J. Carey and P. Ó Riain Studies in Irish Hagiography (Dublin, 2001) 214;
Guérout, ‘Fare’, DHGE 520-1.
224
Guérout, ‘Fare’, DHGE 518-9.
121