Bernard of Clairvaux: Between Cult and History

Top Highlights

“In spite of the stubborn prejudice of classical scholars against Christian and medieval Latin, Bernard has maintained his fame as author through the centuries. Even today Bernard is read because of the religious-mystical content of his works as well as for his creative and literary use of language.” (Page 2)

“Historians tend to confirm their own culture because their views tend to fit within that culture and are in fact part of it. For that reason, modern historiography cannot conform to a medieval understanding of reality, in spite of its awareness of that particular worldview. A modern historian cannot adopt the medieval approach to reality and then present it as still valid in our time. Any attempt to do so leads to an anachronistic approach that ignores the fact that cult and history, which were intertwined at the time, are separate concepts in our day. This is a very essential difference between medieval and modern historiography. Mixing cult and history results in a portrayal that many fail to understand and cannot accept as credible.” (Pages 18–19)

“Bernard of Clairvaux with the rapid growth of the Cistercians, who were founding monasteries almost everywhere at the time. I was permitted to spend a year (1962/63) in France and Italy visiting universities, libraries, and archives for this research. This enabled me to meet others who were studying Bernard. My research did not bear too many tangible results, but it did provide me with a clearer picture of Bernard as a historic individual. It also led to a lecture, published as a small book in 1966: Bernard von Clairvaux im Widerstreit der Historie (translated as ‘Saint Bernard and the Historians,’ in Saint Bernard of Clairvaux [1977], 27–62).” (Page xi)