Bibliotheca Arnamagnæana - 01.06.2003, Blaðsíða 69

Liturgy of St Knud Lavard - Introduction
55
Gertz’s further assumption that both the Passion and the Translation
Offices were recited one after the other at Ringsted in 1170 (VSD loc.
cit.) is a manifest liturgical impossibility. No doubt the Translation was
the fxrst feast to be formalised in accordance with the provisions of the
papal buil, while the Passion feast followed as an expression of the un-
canonical martyr cult promoted by the royal family. Other active suppor-
ters of this development must have been the monks of Ringsted, who
watched over the saint’s relics and were the frequent recipients of royal
bounty.85 As early as 1135 King Erik Emune had issued a charter in
favour of the Ringsted house, and at approximately the same time Robert
of Ely would appear to have written of the ‘martyrdom’ of the king’s half-
brother.86 In the decade following the canonisation the title of martyr al-
ready recurs in the political rhetoric of King Valdemar, while the charters
of Absalon in his role as bishop of Roskilde discreetly avoid it when re-
ferring to Knud Lavard. It would be unreasonable, however, to suppose
that Absalon, who was deeply committed to Valdemar’s political project
and himself a member of the saint’s dynasty, did not in due course (and
particularly after his promotion to the archbishopric of Lund in 1177)
confer his blessing on the cult. He or Peder Sunesen, his successor in
Roskilde from 1192, are in faet very likely sponsors of the Vita altera,
which Gertz attributed to a foreign author on account of its stylistic virtuo-
sity. Irrespective of whether the author was a foreigner - and if so, as
Gertz argued, an English monk who had found his way to Ringsted (VSD
173-74) - his perspective on the events described is that of an outsider
with no personal engagement in the issues involved; he gives the impres-
sion of being a mere literary mouthpiece for facts and opinions provided
by others. His distance from the centre of events is illustrated by the error
of ascribing custody of the monastic church in Ringsted at a former time
to two secular priests (cf. K 722 duo prefuerunt prebendarij), while the
appointment of a certain John from Odense as abbot is reported with all
the vagueness of an informant87 who did not care to tell the whole story
85 In the following 1 depend on the exposition by Lauritz Weibull, “Ringstedklostrets privi-
legier 1135-1225,” in: Scandia. Tidskrift for historisk forskning 14, 1941, 57-73.
86 See VSD 239 (Robert of Ely, Fragmenta Arnamagnæana, Lib. 11,7 ff.).
87 Surely not the writer himself, as Ellen Jørgensen supposed (cf. Historieforskning og Histo-
rieskrivning [n. 50 above], 23 n. 1: “Ordene er sat paa Skruer; det betyder, at der er noget, som
Forfatteren er vidende om, som han ikke kan sige”). - The election of John as abbot is docu-
mented historically in a charter of King Sven Grathe from 1148, DD 1:2,186-88, no. 101.