The Plan of St. Gall :: :: University of Virginia Library

To the side of the Novitiate, the home of the incoming
monks, and in convenient proximity to the Infirmary and
the House of the Physicians, is the monastery's burial
ground. It is a large field 80 feet wide and 125 feet long,
enclosed by walls or hedges, with only a single entrance to
the west facing the monks' cloister (fig. 430).

The grounds of the Cemetery served, in addition, as an
orchard, and this dual role of giving rest to the dead under
the shadow of the Cross as well as furnishing the living
with delectable fruit is poetically expressed in a distich,
inscribed into a large square enclosure in the center of the
cemetery, which designates the location of a monumental
cross:

Inter ligna soli haec semp̶ s̄cissima crux ÷
In qua p̶p̶ & uae poma salutis olent

Among the trees of the soil, always the most
sacred is the Cross

On which the fruits of eternal health are fragrant

V.13.1

THE CEMETERY

There are fourteen burial plots, each 6¼ feet wide and 17½
feet long.[452] They are identified by the distich:

Hanc circum iaceant defunta cadauera fr̄m̄
Qua radiante Iterum. Regna poli accipant'

Around this [cross] let rest the dead bodies
of the brethren

And through its radiance they may attain again
the realm of heaven

The death and burial of a monk was a matter of intense
concern to the entire community, as may be inferred from
the moving descriptions of the last hours of the monks
Wolo, Ratpert and Gerald in Ekkehart's IV Casus sancti
Galli or the latter's poetic account of the death of his teacher
Notker Labeo in his Liber Benedictionum.[453] An English
consuetudinary of the end of the tenth century, the Regularis
concordia of St. Dunstan, describes the share which
the community had in the death of one of its brothers as
follows:

When the sick brother feels his strength ebbing, he makes this
known to the convent through the master of the infirmary. Whereupon
the priest who celebrates the morning mass, accompanied by
his attendants, will administer the holy eucharist. Preceded by
monks carrying candles and incense, the entire congregation visits
the sick, chanting the penitential psalms, the litanies of the saints,
and the prescribed orations. Then the sick receives his last unction,
yet only on the first day; thereafter he receives the communion.
If he recovers his strength the daily visits stop. If his condition does
not improve, the visits are continued to the end.

When the patient [begins] his death struggle, the sounding board is
rung so that all can come together to be at his side in this extreme
moment. Immediately the prayers of the commendation of the
soul are said, the Subvenite, sancti Domini and the sequence prescribed
by the Ordo commendationis.

Upon expiration those who are in charge of this task will wash
the body and wrap it into its proper clothing, i.e., his shirt, his
cowl, his gaiters, and his shoes, whatever is customary in the order
to which the deceased belongs. If he be a priest, in addition, the
stole will be placed upon his cowl, if this seems appropriate. This
being done, the body is carried into the Church to the chant of the
psalms and the ringing of the bells.

If death comes at night before dawn or matin and there is time
for all the preparations necessary for burial, he will be placed into
his grave that same day, after the celebration of mass and before the
brothers take their meal. Otherwise, brothers will be designated to
watch in groups over the body during this day and the night which
follows. Psalms will be sung without interruption until the body is
rendered to the earth. After the burial the brothers return to the
Church, chanting the seven penitential psalms for the deceased.
They complete the psalms lying prostrate before the holy altar.[454]

[452]

Some of the burial plots appear to be only 5 feet wide (two standard
units), others are decidedly wider, yet not quite as broad as to be interpreted
as 7½ feet (three standard units). This leads me to believe that
what the draftsman had in mind was a width of 6¼ feet (two standard
modules of 2½ feet and one submodule of 1¼ feet). For other uses of the
submodule see I, 59.

[453]

All brought to my attention by Johannes Duft. For Wolo, Ratpert
and Gerald see Ekkeharti (IV.) Casus sancti Galli, chaps. 43, 44, and 125;
ed. Meyer von Knonau, 1877, 152-55, 155-58, 405-8; ed. Helbling,
1958, 89-91, 91-93, 208-10. For Notker Labeo see Der Liber Benedictionum
Ekkeharts IV., chap. 44, ed. Egli, 1909, 231-34.

[454]

Sancti Dunstani Regularis Concordia, ed. Migne, Patr. Lat., CXXX-VII,
1879, cols. 500-1. The event is described in even greater detail in
the Monastic Constitutions of Lanfranc, see Decreta Lanfranci, ed.
Knowles, 1951, 121-31.

Other descriptions of deaths in the monastery, as Charles W. Jones
points out to me, are found in Bede's Historia Abbatum and Ecclesiastical
History, viz. the deaths of Benedict Biscop and Sigfrid (Historia Abbatum,
chaps. 11-13, ed. Plummer, Historia Ecclesiastica, I, 1896, 374-76); the
death of the poet Caedmon (Hist. Eccl., book IV, chap. 22, ed. cit., 26162;
ed. Colgrave and Mynors, 1969, 414-21); the death of St. Cuthbert
(Bede's Prose Life of St. Cuthbert, chap. 39, ed. Colgrave, 1940, 283-85).
Bede's own death is described in a letter by his pupil Cuthbert, who in
the second half of the eighth century was abbot of Jarrow and Monkwearmouth
(published in Plummer's introduction to Bede's Historia
Ecclesiastica, I, 1896, cix-clxiv; ed. Colgrave and Mynors, 1969, 577-87).

V.13.2

THE ORCHARD

The spaces between the burial plots are planted with fruit
trees. Their location is indicated by thirteen tree-symbols
which, save for the thickness of their stems, resemble tendrils
rather than trees. The fact that one of them is associated
with the names of two different species (sorbarius and
mispolarius) suggests that in each case there was meant to
be a group of plants rather than an individual specimen.
This is also suggested by the largeness of the space for
planting left between the burial plots, which in some cases
amounts to as much as 12½ feet by 40 feet. The names of
the trees have been tampered with by the same hand that
tried to revive the erased titles of the large anonymous
building in the northwest corner of the monastery.[455] As
there, the chemical substance used in this attempt has left
thick blue streaks in the parchment. This action damaged,
but did not destroy, the names of the trees. Listed in the
sequence in which they were written by the scribe, from
top to bottom, and in columns, moving from left to right,
they are:

212

1.	mal[arius]	apple (malus communis L.)
2.	perarius	pear (pirus communis L.)
3.	prunarius	plum (prunus domestica L.)
4.	sorbarius	service tree (sorbus domestica L.)
5.	mispolarius	medlar (mespilus germanica L.)
6.	laurus	laurel (laurus nobilis L.)
7.	castenarius	chestnut (fagus castanea L.)
8.	ficus	fig (ficus carica L.)
9.	guduniarius	quince (cydonia vulgaris L.)
10.	persicus	peach (prunus persica L.)
11.	auellenarius	hazelnut (corylus tubulosa L.)
12.	amendelarius	almond (amygdalis communis L.)
13.	murarius	mulberry (morus nigra L.)
14.	nugarius	walnut (juglans regia L.)[456]

Of the fourteen listed species the apple, the pear, the
plum, the quince, and the peach are fruit trees in the proper
sense of the term; the others—the medlar, the chestnut,
the hazelnut, the mulberry, the walnut, the almond, and
the service tree—in the broader sense. Two of the trees
listed, the fig and the laurel, are not suited to a northern
climate. All of these fourteen trees are also listed in the
repertory of plants which the Capitulare de villis prescribes
as mandatory for the gardens in the king's estates. The
inclusion in this manual for the management of crown estates
of a considerable number of plants and trees that require
a Mediterranean climate had formerly led to the belief that
it was issued for the kingdom of Aquitaine.[457] Recently this
attribution has been questioned,[458] and the entire problem of
the presence on the Plan of St. Gall, as well as in the
Capitulare de villis and other Carolingian sources, of plants
not suited for a northern climate is now being interpreted
as an expression of literary classicism.[459]

The yield of the fruit trees in the Cemetery could not
have met all the needs of a community of an estimated
250 to 270 mouths. The monastery has a special house for
the drying of fruit (locus ad torrendas annonas), where
staples were produced which enabled the Kitchener to
bridge the dietary shortages in the critical winter months
when the fields and gardens were barren. The bulk of the
fruit, however, that was needed for that purpose must have
come from outlying orchards, managed either by the abbey
itself or by tenants.

The business accounts of the monastery of St. Gall tell
us of the deliveries of nuts from Rorschach, of apples from
a place called Bachwille, and from an orchard maintained
at a place called Muolen.

The contribution made to European horticulture by
skills practiced by monks in the growth and propagation of
fruit trees cannot be overestimated. The number of indigenous
fruit trees north of the Alps was limited, and the
native fruit too small and too bitter to be eaten raw. They
could be used for the preparation of fermented beverages
(in Old and Middle High German sources we read of
epfildrac [cider] and slehendrac [an alcoholic beverage made
of sloe]),[460] but for fruit to be served at the table the indigenous
trees had to be improved through selective breeding
and grafting. The knowledge of this art was acquired
by the inhabitants of transalpine Europe from the Romans;
it spread from Gaul along the Moselle into the Rhine
valley.[461] The monasteries adopted this legacy and applied it
on a large scale. The orchards of the abbey became the
model for the orchards and gardens of their secular tenants;
and from them the knowledge spread to the tenants of the
secular lords.

213

[ILLUSTRATION]

430.X ROME. CHURCH OF ST. JOHN LATERAN, SANCTA SANCTORUM CHAPEL

ENAMELLED RELIQUARY CROSS, 817-824

[courtesy of the Museo Sacro Vaticano]

The arms of the reliquary cross taper toward their intersection and show the concave extremities typical of Carolingian crosses. The arms of the
large cross in the Monks' Cemetery are drawn to show concave extremities. Given the evidence in coins and architectural carving, one cannot
conclude that the arms of the Cemetery cross owe their shape only to drafting mannerisms.

The registers of the St. John Lateran reliquary cross are, top to bottom: Annunciation, Visitation, Navity, Presentation, Baptism; on the
horizontal arms: Adoration and Transfiguration (?)

Drawn from silver coins: I, II, IV, V, struck 794-805; III, 768-72; VI: Cross
carved in stone closure slab (Musée Centrale, Metz, late 8th cent.)

Vertical and horizontal arms of the typical Carolingian cross taper slightly from
the outer ends to their intersection. The thick, stocky design of IV, less usual,
has a pronounced concavity at the extremities.

The stone cross, VI, of pronounced taper, has flat extremities. A common type
in architectural carving, it was much in vogue in Visigothic Spain. The
sculptured stone prevails over the cross with parallel sides.

214

[ILLUSTRATION]

PLAN OF ST. GALL. GRANARY

431. FOR AUTHORS' RECONSTRUCTION SEE PP. 220, 221

In this barn, with its floor area of almost 4,300 square feet, the drafters of the Plan allowed for the storage and threshing of the entire annual
harvest of grain from the monastery's local fields (but not including any grain threshed elsewhere on outlying estates and then delivered sacked
directly to the miller). The needs of the community for grain for both men and beasts would have been prodigious. The Granary was not
intented as a multiple-use building; the size of the harvest and the need to store its by-product—straw for animal stalls and for mulching—
would preclude any combined utility.

All the sheaved grain would have to be stored indoors before the onset of the first autumn rains. The work of threshing would no doubt have
continued long into the winter. Threshing, in most medieval barns, was performed in the center or wagon bay at one end of which was the
entrance to the barn, as here. The lateral extension of the threshing floor of the Granary of the Plan into its cruciform shape would have
allowed as many as six men to thresh simultaneously—four in the wagon bay and one in each segment of the lateral arms, allowing a space
approximately 12 feet square for each man and his flail. (If the Luttrell Psalter illustrates typical practice, fig. 437, the number of threshers
could have been twelve, two per area.) The task was among the most arduous and labor-intensive that the largely nonmechanized society could
require to be done.

Except for its great cruciform threshing floor and the single entrance designated in the western long wall, structural details of the Granary are
entirely lacking. To have drawn them in would have been redundant, and possibly confusing. The drafters of the Plan, concerned with
providing enough space for the tasks of the harvest and the needs of the community, and locating the facility appropriately on the site, would
have left the details of the barn's posting and internal division to be planned and executed under the direction of a master carpenter. Every
able-bodied man in the empire would have known that such a barn must be an aisled and timbered structure with its roof supported by two inner
rows of freestanding posts: so barns had been from time out of mind.

215

[ILLUSTRATION]

431.X

The smaller of the two granaries, serving only the Brewery, has little floor space
beyond that required for transitory storage of sheaved or sacked grain. Any
straw from threshing could be taken immediately to the animal barns at the
west; threshed grain could be moved directly to the Mortar and thence to the
brewing ranges. There is no direct path internal to the Plan between animal
barns, Mills and Mortars, and the great threshing barn to the east. One must
assume that on an actual site, a gate giving direct access from the fields without
to the Granary would have been provided.

[455]

Cf. above, p. 166.

[456]

The Latin titles given in parenthesis are the modern botanical
names after Sörrensen, in Studien 1962, 244-53.

[457]

Capitulare de Villis, chap. 70, ed. Gareis, 1895, 60ff.

[458]

Dopsch, 2nd ed., I, 1921, 93ff; and von Wartburg, 1940, 87-91.

[459]

Metz, 1960, 41 and 36ff., where the reader will find a systematic
tabulation of plants and trees listed in the above-mentioned Carolingian
documents, including the Plan of St. Gall as well as a number of Old
High German and Greco-Roman glossaries.

[460]

For the sources, see Bikel, 1914, 98 note 2.

[461]

Cf. Heyne, II, 1901, 353-54.