Arnfastus Monachus

Arnfastus Monachus, Arnfast the Monk, is known from a single poem on the miracles related to St Knud king and martyr. The poem survives only in excerpts (see Summary of contents below). The poem is followed by the line ‘Arnfastus monachus hec composuit’ (Arnfast the monk composed this). The dating of the poem is uncertain (see Date and place below), but it was possibly composed in the mid-thirteenth century. Its content and purpose both suggest that Arnfast was a monk at the Abbey of Saint Knud in Odense.

Biography      

Our only source to Arnfast’s historical existence is the line that attributes the poem to him. The title ‘monachus’ taken together with the subject of the poem – namely the veneration of St Knud – suggests that he was a Benedictine at the Church of Saint Knud. Given his use of several verse forms in the different sections of the poem, Arnfast was no doubt well educated in Latin poetry. As suggested by a reference in Annales Ripenses (see Annales Danici [LINK]) (GERTZ 1912, 58; KROMAN 1980, 261), there is likely to have been kept a register of miracles at the Church of Saint Knud, either at the shrine or in the cathedral treasury (see De miraculis Sancti Kanuti regis et martyris in Sanctus Kanutus Rex [link]). Arnfast’s poem appears to be a versification of some of the miracles recorded here. Since Arnfast most likely worked from a register of miracles and therefore had access to the cathedral’s written records, it is possible – but not certain – that he might have been the cantor and/or the treasurer.              

The question of when Arnfast lived and worked is inextricably linked to the discussion about the dating of the poem. Based on internal evidence, Gertz (1912, 59) suggests that the poem was written around 1250, while Hans Olrik (1893, 339-41) has used the same evidence to argue for a date in the mid-fifteenth century. For the details about this discussion, see Date and place below.

Work

Excerpta quædam ex Arnfasti Monachi Poemate de miraculis S. Kanuti regis et martyris.

Title

The current title is given by Gertz in his edition of the poem (GERTZ 1912, 58). Langebek (1774, 381) refers to the poem as ‘De miraculis S. Canuti Regis scripsisse quondam Arnfastum Monachum’ (On the miracles of Saint Knud the king, written by a certain Arnfast the monk). The manuscript Additamenta Nr. 90 Fol. – then at Copenhagen University Library, now at the Royal Library – does not provide a title or headline for the text. (Additionally, in the index of Gertz’ Vitae Sanctorum Danorum, Arnfast is described as ‘carmen de s. Canuti regis miraculis componit’, i.e. Arnfast who composed a song/poem on the miracles of Saint Knud the king. This description should not be understood as a title, however.)

These postmedieval titles are descriptive scholarly constructions aimed to facilitate an easy way to reference and discuss the poem in question. It is possible that Arnfast’s poem did not originally have a title.

Incipit

Fuit quidam puerulus.

Explicit

Cuius corpus tumulo illic condebatur.

Size

4 printed pages in Gertz’ edition. 6 handwritten pages in Additamenta Nr. 90 Fol.

Editions

• GERTZ, M. CL. 1908-1912: Vitæ Sanctorum Danorum, Copenhagen, 58-59 & 163-66.

Translations

• (Danish) OLRIK, H. 1893-94: Danske Helgeners Levned, Copenhagen. (Repr. Selskabet til Historiske Kildeskrifters Oversættelse, 1968), 339-47.

Commentaries

• GERTZ 1908-12 (see Editions above).
• OLRIK 1893-94 (see Translations above).

Date and place

Since the poem only survives in a late and most likely excerpted copy, there is no codicological or palaeographical evidence to provide a timeframe for either Arnfast or the poem itself. Consequently, any arguments about the date of the poem can only be done through internal evidence. The terminus post quem is 1186/87, since the stanza on the healing of the woman from Jutland, stanza III, contains a reference to Bishop Simon of Odense (d. between 1183 and 1187) (OLRIK 1894, 339). Given the reference to this miracle story in the Annales Ripenses, where it is said that the story is recorded in the ‘book of Saint Knud’, Arnfast no doubt based his stanza on a miracle collection kept at Odense Cathedral. Consequently, Arnfast might have composed his poem a long time after the death of Bishop Simon.      

The best starting point for suggesting a date for Arnfast’s poem is the devastating fire that ravaged Odense which is mentioned in stanza VI. Hans Olrik pointed out that since the stanza refers to this incident as ‘Nuper’, ‘recently’, it is likely that the poem is composed within a few years after the fire (OLRIK 1894, 340). Olrik noted that the surviving historical record provided two possible alternatives, namely the fire of 1247 when King Abel sacked Odense, and the fire of 1444 (OLRIK 1894, 340-41). Arguing that the poem would have specified that the fire was started by King Abel’s soldiers, Olrik favoured the second option and suggested that Arnfast composed the poem around 1450 (OLRIK 1894, 341).

Martin Clarentius Gertz, on the other hand, argued that the fire in question was that of 1247. The basis for this argument is that the fire did not touch the ‘sanctuario’ in the Church of Saint Alban, which Gertz interpreted as Knud’s shrine (GERTZ 1912, 59). From this, Gertz argued that the shrine of Saint Knud had been kept at the Church of Saint Alban until it was translated to the new cathedral at the end of the thirteenth century. Gertz also suggested that the memory of Bishop Simon would not have resonated as strongly in the fifteenth century as it might have done in the mid-thirteenth century (GERTZ 1912, 59).  

Neither scholar’s line of argumentation is particularly solid, and some important counterarguments must be mentioned here. The idea that Arnfast would have attributed the fire to King Abel is uncertain at best, as such an attribution might have been avoided for reasons of diplomacy and tact, seeing that Abel was, after all, a member of the royal family. Moreover, if the poem had been composed before the murder of King Erik Plovpenning in 1250, Abel might not have been as clear-cut an antagonist as modern commentators would expect.

Gertz’s dating relies mainly on the translation of ‘sanctuario’ or ‘sanctuarium’ as ‘shrine’. However, an alternative translation is simply ‘sanctuary’ or ‘holiest of holies’. In this case, the word might refer to the choir of the church, as is how Ailnothus employs this term in chapter 28 of Gesta Swenomagni where Knud’s martyrdom takes place ‘ad orientem sanctuarii’, in the eastern part of the sanctuary (GERTZ 1912, 120). Since the last line of the poem is formulated as ‘Cuius corpus tumulo illic condebatur’, ‘whose body was buried there in the grave’, it seems that Arnfast attributes Knud’s protection of the Church of Saint Alban to the fact that this was where he was first buried after his martyrdom. Since Knud’s body had rested in a grave in Saint Alban’s, Knud was also protective of this holy space. Arnfast’s use of the word ‘tumulo’, ‘grave’, might mean that it is not the shrine but the first burial place that is importance for explaining Knud’s patronage of the Church of Saint Alban. This usage is also suggested when comparing with the first antiphon for Laudes in the office for Saint Knud, the Historia Kanuti. This antiphon concludes with the verses ‘miranda sunt post obitum / ad eius gesta tumulum’ (‘after his death, wonders were performed at his grave’) (HOPE 2017, LXXIII. Curiously, this word is also written out in a marginal comment to this antiphon in a copy of Breviarium Othoniense, now Kongelige Bibliotek LN 29, f.262). Finally, we must also note that Arnfastus himself uses the word ‘sacraria’ in stanza V when referring to the shrine of Saint Knud, although this might be due to scansion. Consequently, Gertz’s argument about Knud’s shrine being placed in the Church of Saint Alban in the mid-thirteenth century is far from certain.     

Finally, Gertz’s suggestion that the memory of Bishop Simon would rather have been evoked in the thirteenth century than in the fifteenth century is possible. However, if Arnfast had used the now-lost miracle collection kept at the shrine of Saint Knud, the name of Simon might have been part of a familiar story often recounted to the monastic community at the feast of Saint Knud.           

While we can never be entirely sure about the date of Arnfast’s poem, it is interesting to see its catalogue of miracles in light of the second anonymous Passio Sancti Kanuti Regis et Martiris (now known as Passio II), which is an adaptation of Ailnoth of Canterbury’s Gesta Swenomagni of uncertain date (GERTZ 1912, 536). Both the anonymous author and Arnfast refer to two of the same miracles, namely the healing of the woman from Jutland and the healing of Esbern. The anonymous author claims to have witnessed the healing of Esbern personally, and the lack of such a claim on Arnfast’s part led Gertz to suggest that the anonymous author wrote earlier than Arnfast but that both were active in the first half of the thirteenth century (GERTZ 1912, 537). That both the anonymous author and Arnfast included these miracles suggests that they both wrote in a time when the stories in question circulated actively, at least within the monastic community at the Church of Saint Knud, and it is therefore reasonable to follow Gertz’s suggestion that the two authors were relatively close in time. Since I have elsewhere argued that the anonymous Passio II was composed in the second quarter of the thirteenth century, in agreement with Gertz, I believe a mid-thirteenth-century date for Arnfast’s poem is the most likely (HOPE 2025, 24, 40). (However, see also BJERREGAARD 2025 for arguments about a later date.)

Summary of contents

In its surviving form, the poem consists of six stanzas.

Stanza 1 recounts the healing of the boy or young man (‘puerulus’) Hesbernulus at the shrine of Saint Knud Rex in Odense cathedral.

Stanza 2 is a general praise for the many miracles wrought at the shrine of the saint-king, and an exhortation that these miracles be recounted and not consigned to oblivion.

Stanza 3 recounts how a high-born woman from Jutland, whose body was contracted, was healed at the cathedral of Odense.

Stanza 4 tells of a dispute between two of the Abbey of Saint Knud’s tenant farmers concerning a stolen horse. The thief swears his innocence and is punished by madness for his false oath.

Stanza 5 concerns the healing of a mute girl who was possessed by a demon.

Stanza 6 reports how a fire ravaged the city of Odense, but the basilica of Saint Alban’s was saved due to Saint Knud’s intervention, since this church had been his original resting-place.      

As argued by Gertz (1912, 59), the surviving text-witness to the poem appears to be a transcription of a selection of excerpts from the original poem. The excerptor has also rendered some of the stanzas into prose (see Composition and style below). It is therefore likely that the original poem was longer, and that it contained several more stories.

Composition and style

As has been noted by GERTZ (1912, 59), the poem in its surviving form is most likely the result of a later excerptor (see Medieval reception and transmission below). The poem is not written in one single metre, and the form of each individual stanza must therefore be analysed separately.

Stanza 1 is rendered in prose, possibly – as per Gertz’ suggestion – by a later editor or excerptor of the poem.

Stanza 2 is composed in syllable-counting rhymed verse typical of liturgical poetry. The stanza consists of 33 lines with the rhyming pattern aab. The first two lines of each rhyming section both have nine syllables with a paroxytone stress, which means that the stress falls on the penultimate syllable. The third line has seven syllables with a proparoxytone stress, which means that the stress falls on the antepenultimate syllable. The scheme of the stanza can be summarised accordingly: 9p+9p+7pp. 

Stanza 3 is composed in syllable-counting rhymed verse, and consists of 10 lines. After the seventh and the tenth line is a line in prose. It is unclear whether these prose lines are part of the original poem. That the first prose line contains the spelling “Othensö” rather than, for example, “Othensia”, suggests that this line is written by a late-medieval editor. The rhyming pattern is: aaab + aab + aab. The syllable scheme is: 9p+9p+9p+7pp, 9p+9p+7pp.

Stanza 4 is composed in syllable-counting rhymed verse, and consists of 36 lines. The rhyming pattern is: aaab. The syllable scheme is: 8p+8p+8p+7pp.

Stanza 5 is composed in syllable-counting rhymed verse, and consists of 21 lines. The eighth and ninth lines are lost. The rhyming pattern is: aab. The syllable scheme is: 8p+8+7pp. 

Stanza 6: is composed in syllable-counting rhymed verse, and consists of 16 lines. The rhyming pattern is: aa. The syllable scheme is: 13p+13p.

Sources

The miracle stories in stanzas 1, 3, 4, and 5 appear to have been part of the institutional historical memory at the Abbey of Saint Knud by the time Arnfastus versified them. This memory would have been maintained through oral as well as written accounts. It is possible that these stories were based on the now-lost collection of miracles kept at Saint Knud’s shrine (see Liber de Miraculis Sancti Kanuti Regis et Martiris in Sanctus Kanutus Rex [LINK]). These stories might also have been informed by orally transmitted collective memory. For instance, the reference to Bishop Simon of Odense in stanza 3 was probably part of an institutional history that was transmitted orally by senior monks to the novices. The episcopacy of Simon had been a period of institutional expansion (JENSEN 2011), and we might imagine that Simon was a figure who served as an important reference point in the continuous maintenance of institutional identity at the Abbey of Saint Knud.

The story in stanza 6 appears to have been based on Arnfastus’ own recollection of the events.

The story of Hesbernulus, or Esbern, in stanza 1 is also recounted in the anonymous Passio Kanuti Regis et Martiris (see Sanctus Kanutus Rex), whose author claims to have been an eyewitness to the event. It is possible that Arnfastus knew of the anonymous Passio, but since this work was composed for an ecclesiastical community outside Odense (GERTZ 1912, 533-34; HOPE 2025, 28-30), it is more likely that Arnfastus drew on the now-lost miracle collection instead.

Purpose and audience

Since stanza 2 emphasises the importance of commemoration, we can infer that the main purpose of Arnfastus’ poem was to commit the miracles of Saint Knud to institutional memory. Some of these stories were probably already recorded in the now-lost miracle collection, while the story of the fire appears to be a new addition to the saint-king’s catalogue of interventions on behalf of the living. In addition to the institutional context, we should also understand Arnfastus’ decision to versify these miracle accounts as an expression of his personal veneration of Saint Knud.

The two main purposes of Arnfastus’ poem point to two main sets of audiences. From the institutional perspective, the intended audience was the rest of the Benedictine community at the Abbey of Saint Knud, and the poem served to remind the ministrants at Saint Knud’s shrine that their patron saint intervened on their behalf and deserved their praise and veneration. We should probably also expect that the poem was intended for the ears of other ecclesiastical communities in Odense. In particular, Arnfastus might have had in mind the clerics at the Church of Saint Alban, as the miracle in stanza 6 pertained to their house and served as a reminder that Saint Knud was also their patron on account of the historical connection between the church and Knud’s martyrdom. From an institutional perspective, we should perhaps also expect that the inclusion of a miracle that protected another institution could serve to remind the clerics of the Church of Saint Alban that they ranked below the cathedral in the ecclesiastical hierarchy in the diocese of Odense. The first set of audiences was, therefore, the wider ecclesiastical echelon of both the city and the diocese of Odense.

The second set of audiences was Saint Knud himself, and also God. Since the poem served as an expression of personal devotion towards the patron saint of Odense cathedral, Arnfastus expected that the saint would recognise the veneration offered by the monk. The inclusion of God in the overview of intended audiences stems from the theological belief that by divine omnipotence, God would hear whatever was directed at the saints, as the saints were the ambassadors of the living in the court of God.

Medieval reception and transmission

The only surviving record of Arnfastus’ poem is the manuscript Additamenta Nr. 90 Fol. at the Royal Library in Copenhagen (ff.38r-40v). This is a transcription from the late seventeenth or the early eighteenth century (GERTZ 1912, 58). As argued by Gertz (1912, 59), the version of the poem transmitted in this manuscript is likely recorded by an excerptor who has also rendered some of the stanzas into prose. The work of the excerptor suggests that Arnfastus’ poem was part of a living institutional memory at the cathedral of Odense, as it would have been preserved long enough for the excerptor to record his rendition of the poem. Even though the poem is likely to have been known and read at the cathedral of Odense – and possibly also at the Church of Saint Alban (see Purpose and audience above) – the transmission of the poem was most probably limited to the ecclesiastical milieux in Odense.

It is possible that the miracle story concerning the fire in Odense might have been recorded in the now-lost miracle collection at the shrine of Saint Knud in Odense cathedral (see Liber de Miraculis Sancti Kanuti Regis et Martiris in Sanctus Kanutus Rex).

Bibliography

• BJERREGAARD, M. M. 2025: “The younger passio of Cnut the Holy – Hagiography and Archaeology,” in Royal Blood - The Passion of St Cnut, King and Martyr, Translation and perspectives, ed. M. M. Bjerregaard, K. Haase, and S. Hope, Odense, 35-52.
• GERTZ, M. CL. 1908-1912: Vitæ Sanctorum Danorum, Copenhagen.
• HOPE, 2. 2017: Constructing institutional identity through the cult of royal saints, c.1050-c.1200, Odense.
• HOPE, S. 2025: “The Younger Passio Kanuti – a reassessment of its historical context, its author, and its purpose,” in Royal Blood - The Passion of St Cnut, King and Martyr, Translation and perspectives, ed. M. M. Bjerregaard, K. Haase, and S. Hope, Odense, 19-33.
• JENSEN, E. L. 2011: “Simon - biskop”, in Dansk Biografisk Leksikon.
• Kongelige Bibliotek, Additamenta Nr. 90 Fol.
• Kongelige Bibliotek LN 29.
• LANGEBEK, J. 1772: Scriptores rerum danicarum medii aevi. 3, Copenhagen.
• OLRIK, H. 1893-94: Danske Helgeners Levned, Copenhagen. (Repr. Selskabet til Historiske Kildeskrifters Oversættelse, 1968).