Lindsay Rudge PhD Thesis - University of St Andrews

the bishop’s family. 36 Other possible candidates that have been suggested are monks of
the monasteries of Volvic or Amarin, who might equally be expected to have some
familiarity with the monastic rules listed here. 37 This type of ‘mixed rule’ in which
several separate rules were combined was common, as it provided communities with the
ability to devise a rule for themselves that would best suit their individual circumstances.
In this particular case, it is impossible to trace the means by which knowledge of
Caesarius’ rule came to Clermont. It may be likely that, as in the cases of Autun and
Auxerre, Teridius had sent a copy of the Regula virginum to a monastery in the city. A
more tenuous suggestion may be that of connections between Clermont and Autun.
Praejectus himself travelled to Autun, notwithstanding his less than cordial relationship
with its bishop, Leodegar (662-676): it was on his return from pursuing a court case in
the city that he was murdered. Leodegar, in turn, was the nephew of bishop Dido of
Poitiers (628-667) and grew up there, in what must have been one of the main nodes of
Caesarian influence; 38 it may be this very fragile web of personal connection that helped
to spread knowledge of religious texts. The geographical circulation of the Regula
virginum clearly extended well into the Auvergne region.
The remainder of the Passio Praeiecti cannot be passed over without one further
point, however tentatively made. As well as providing an interesting insight into the state
of female monasticism in seventh-century Clermont, an extract from Chapter 16 notes a
familiar name:
The God-filled man [Praejectus], seeing Christ’s following spring up all
around him, ordered another monastery to be built in a suburb of the town
on a piece of land which had once belonged to a woman named Caesaria
and he consecrated it by filling it with girls dedicated to God. Actually,
before that time it was difficult to find a convent of girls in those parts.
36 Fouracre and Gerberding (eds.), Late Merovingian France, 260-1.
37 These possibilities are discussed in Fouracre and Gerberding (eds.), Late Merovingian France, at 260.
38 Passio Leudegarii MGH SSRM 5 249-362, ed. and tr. P. Fouracre and R.A. Gerberding (eds.) Late
Merovingian France: History and Hagiography 640-720 (Manchester, 1996) 194-254.
138