How Elisabeth of Schönau’s Controversial Vision about the Assumption of the Virgin Mary Came to Medieval Iceland
An Icelandic translation of Elisabeth of Schönau’s Visio de resurrectione in Copenhagen, Den Arnamagnæanske Samling, AM 764 4to (1376-1386), 16r.
The Assumption of the Virgin Mary
The Bible says little of the Virgin Mary’s life after the crucifixion. In the absence of any information about her death and the fate of her soul and earthly remains, speculation developed quickly in the early days of the Church. Since at least the fourth century, exegetes and other Christian writers have postulated, imagined, and defended the likelihood of the Virgin Mary’s Assumption (or transit) to heaven in both soul and body. Some questioned whether Mary actually died or if she simply fell asleep. Some texts debated whether or not the mother of God felt pain in death or had to see demons and hell before being transmitted to heaven. Many also questioned whether Mary’s body went straight to heaven or at some later time. There were other associated questions as well. How old was the Virgin Mary when she departed this life? Where was she buried? Were her earthly remains still in the tomb? Did anyone witness her death, her funeral procession, or her transit to heaven? What did the earthly and celestial processions celebrating Mary’s Assumption look, smell, and sound like? How and why was the date August 15th established for the feast of the Assumption?
Determining the fate of Mary’s body carried significant implications for the Christian doctrine of the resurrection of the body. While Mary’s flesh was of course special, her own bodily Assumption confirmed the promise of the resurrection of the flesh for all the faithful. The doctrine of the Assumption and the associated feast were first introduced in the eastern Church in the fifth century and then spread to the West in the sixth and seventh centuries with Pope Leo IV affirming the feast of the Assumption in the eighth century.
Numerous apocryphal narratives in the Transitus Mariae tradition attesting to Mary’s Assumption were recorded in Ethiopic, Syriac, Greek, Coptic, Irish, Armenian, Arabic, and Latin and then translated into a variety of medieval European vernaculars. These apocryphal legends offered an account of Mary’s final days, her death, burial, and Assumption to heaven. Despite the wide transmission and popularity of the apocrypha and the fact that the feast of the Assumption was among the more important celebrations in the church calendar, some debate concerning the Virgin Mary’s bodily Assumption continued until the doctrine was finally confirmed as dogma by Pope Pius XII’s apostolic constitution Munificentissimus Deus in November of 1950.
Elisabeth’s Vision of the Virgin Mary’s Resurrection
When the twelfth-century German Benedictine nun and mystic Elisabeth of Schönau (1129-1165) received visions that confirmed the bodily Assumption of the Virgin Mary she answered, in the minds of many, a long-standing question about Mary’s death and the fate of her soul and body. Elisabeth’s vision is a significant contribution to contemporaneous renewed interest in the Virgin Mary’s Assumption to heaven. Not long before she recorded her vision a late eleventh- or early twelfth-century work — the Liber de assumptione beatae Mariae Virginis — circulated under the authority of Augustine (the text was actually written by someone in the circle of St. Anselm) and offered scholastic probationes (proofs), based on scripture, for a bodily Assumption.
Elisabeth came from a family with connections to several monastic institutions and to the local nobility. She entered the Benedictine monastery at Schönau at the age of twelve and, after many torturous periods of physical illness and demonic apparitions, began having visions eleven years later in 1152. Elisabeth felt deep anxiety about making her revelations public, but her brother Ekbert and abbot Hildelin encouraged her to record them; Hildelin even pushed her to allow them to be published in her lifetime, which she had hoped would not happen. Hildelin and Ekbert frequently posed difficult theological questions to Elisabeth, which she then directed to the angel she witnessed in her visions. Elisabeth was instructed to inquire about the “otherworldly fate of the deceased” and for “clarification of mysterious parts of scriptural and patristic writings” (Clark, The Complete Works, p. 10). “Most of these questions,” Anne L. Clark has observed, “had to do with ‘celestial’ matters, such as angelology, the bodily assumption of the Virgin Mary, and Paul’s references to his mystical experience, but occasionally the questions veered dramatically toward earthly affairs. The ‘heretical’ belief of the Greeks who denied the procession of the Holy Spirit from the Son, or the validity of the sacraments celebrated by simoniacal bishops were questions of current ecclesiastical and theological interest in Elisabeth’s day, and Elisabeth’s associates hoped for divine insight on these issues” (Clark, The Complete Works, p. 10).
Elisabeth’s visions were eventually collected and published, with her brother Ekbert as scribe and editor, under the titles Libri visionum primus, secundus, and tertius, Liber viarum Dei (the Book of the Ways to God), Revelatio de sacro exercitu virginum Coloniensium (a revelation on St. Ursula and the virgin martyrs of Cologne), and Visio de resurrectione beate virginis Marie.
The Visio de resurrectione beate virginis Marie is actually the record of a series of visions of the Virgin which the nun experienced over the period of three years (August 22 1156 to 25 March 1159); each of the visions occurred near the feast of the Assumption. During the octave of the feast of the Assumption, in the same year that the angel of God had announced the Viarum dei to her, Elisabeth fell in a trance and was visited by the Virgin. Elisabeth does what one of her “elders” has asked of her and inquires if Mary will relate whether she was taken up into heaven in spirit alone or also in the flesh. Elisabeth repeats the complaint voiced by so many predecessors: “I asked this, because, as they say, what is written about this in the books of the fathers is found to be ambiguous” (Clark, The Complete Works, p. 209). Mary denies this knowledge to Elisabeth for the moment. In the next year Elisabeth has another vision; this time she sees in a distant place a tomb surrounded by great light, with what looks like a woman inside, and angels surrounding it. After some time the woman rises with the multitude and is met by a glorious man descending from the heavens. Elisabeth is then made aware that this is Mary. When she asks the angel she is acquainted with what this vision has meant, he relates that this vision has revealed to her how Mary was assumed into heaven in both body and soul. The angel also informs her that the current feast of the Assumption celebrates the day she departed from earth, but that her body rose forty days later on September 23rd. Due to her awareness of the controversy surrounding the details of the Virgin’s Assumption, Elisabeth is afraid of being accused as an “inventor of novelties” (invetrix novitatum) and is hesitant to make the vision public (Clark, Elisabeth of Schönau: A Twelfth-Century Visionary, p. 382). Elisabeth asks Mary two years later whether she should inform others of what she has seen. Mary encourages Elisabeth to record the visions but to share them only with those who truly love her. While there may have been some concern over the validity of Elisabeth’s experiences and her vision was not accepted officially by the Church, the text of the vision of the Assumption was welcomed and used as further proof by those who already believed in the bodily resurrection of Mary.
Elisabeth’s works were among the most widely read of the medieval mystics; whole texts or parts were well-known in her native Germany, in France, and in England and were translated into French, Anglo-Norman, various dialects of German, and Old Norse-Icelandic. Whole works and individual texts of Elisabeth’s survive in more than 145 manuscripts. Elisabeth’s visions about the Cologne virgins and the Virgin Mary’s Assumption were her most popular and circulated both with her collected visions and independently. Elisabeth’s vision of the Assumption spread rapidly in part because it was incorporated into popular collections such as the Speculum historiale of Vincent of Beauvais and the Legenda Aurea of Jacobus de Voragine and also because of its brevity; it took little more than two folios to copy (see Clark’s introduction to The Complete Works).
Elisabeth’s Vision in Medieval Iceland
The path of transmission of Elisabeth’s vision to Iceland can be unraveled through an examination of the various copies and other documentary sources. According to Bergr Sokkason (d. approximately 1350) and Arngrímr Brandsson (d. 1361), who were appointed abbots over the northern Icelandic Benedictine monasteries of Munkaþverá and Þingeyrar respectively, Elisabeth’s vision of the Assumption came to Iceland during the tenure of Bishop Guðmundr Arason (1161-1237). Guðmundr was Bishop of Hólar from 1203 until his death in 1237 and Bergr and Arngrímr were actively engaged in soliciting canonization for Guðmundr’s cult in the early fourteenth century. Bergr and Arngrímr both incorporate an abridged translation of Elisabeth’s Visio de resurrectione Beate Virginis Marie into their sagas of Guðmundr (Guðmundar saga C and Guðmundar saga D). Their commentaries on the transmission of Elisabeth’s Visio suggests that the short text was used to supplement the readings for the feast of the Assumption and was circulated among the Virgin Mary’s devotees in Iceland.
Bergr and Arngrímr credit the bishop with actively seeking out confirmation of the Virgin’s bodily Assumption and asking his clerical colleagues to write to him if they ever found a definitive statement on the matter. He received Elisabeth’s vision in a letter from a fellow ecclesiastic and friend in Norway who had remembered the bishop’s request. If this attribution is true, and there is no sufficient evidence to suggest it is not, then Elisabeth’s vision, which survives only in Icelandic manuscripts (none before the middle of the fourteenth century), may have first been translated in Norway (it is also possible that Guðmundr received the letter in Latin and it was later translated). We do not know for certain the name of the Norwegian cleric who sent this letter to Bishop Guðmundr, nor do we know absolutely where in Norway he was writing from. Guðmundr was in Bergen and Trondheim in the 1220s and this is presumably when he and the Norwegian cleric discussed the Virgin’s Assumption. The letter to Guðmundr arrived in Iceland sometime between 1227-1236. The letter is printed in Diplomatarium Islandicum vol. 1 (p. 507-511), where it is dated to 1234.
Elisabeth’s Visio is also incorporated into AM 764 4to (1376-1386), a manuscript containing universal history, exempla, saints’ lives, and other learned literature. AM 764 4to was written either by or for the Benedictine nuns at Reynistaður í Skagafirði. A different version is found in a few manuscripts of Maríu saga in the collections of Marian miracles that follow the life of Mary. The Visio is preserved partially in the Maríu saga fragments AM 240 IV fol. (c. 1325-75) and AM 240 IX fol. (c. 1350-99) and wholly in the Maríu saga manuscripts AM 634/635 4to (c. 1700-25) and Stock. Perg. 4to no. 1 (c. 1450-1500).
The statements of Bergr Sokkason and Arngrímr Brandsson and the extant material evidence (the manuscript copies) suggest that the transmission of the Visio to Iceland and belief in the bodily Assumption of the Virgin Mary can be localized to the northern diocese of the medieval Icelandic church in Hólar and to the monasteries along Eyjafjörður and Skagafjörður in particular.
The Old Norse-Icelandic Versions
Bergr Sokkason, Guðmundar saga C (1320-1350)
Kungliga biblioteket (Stockholm). Stock. Papp. 4 4to (c. 1600-50, defective)
Arngrímr Brandsson, Guðmundar saga D (written after 1343 before 1361, based on Bergr’s saga and expanded with supplemental sources). Jón Sígurðsson and Guðbrandur Vigfússon, eds. Biskupa Sögur. Kaupmannahöfn: Í Prentsmiðju S.L. Möllers, 1858, pp. 150-155.
AM 220 fol. IV (c. 1475-1525)
AM 397 4to (c. 1700, defective)
AM 398 4to (c. 1600-1700, defective)
AM dipl. Isl. Fasc. LXX 7 (c. 1400, defective)
Stock. Perg. 5 Fol. (c. 1350-65)
Maríu saga. Unger, C.R., ed. Maríu saga: Legender om Jomfru Maria og Hendes Jartegn. Christiania: Trykt Hos Brögger & Christie, 1871, miracle CL, pp. 915-917.
AM 240 fol. IV (c. 1350): 1ra-1rb
AM 240 fol. IX (1350-1400): 11rb-11va
AM 635 4to (c. 1700-25): 105-109
Stock. Perg. 1 4to (c. 1450-1500): 153ra-153va
Reynistaðarbók. AM 764 4to (c. 1376-1386): 16r-16v
Translations of the Old Norse-Icelandic Texts
In 1961, Ole Widding and Hans Bekker-Nielsen edited Elisabeth’s vision in AM 764 4to to “facilitate a future and much needed investigation of the textual relationship between the Latin original and its derivatives, and the Icelandic versions” (93). This investigation has never been undertaken fully. I hope that my preceding observations and the modern English translations below will help further facilitate research into the connections between the medieval Icelandic translations, the Latin original, and abbreviated and excerpted versions of Elisabeth’s vision of the Assumption.
Guðmundar saga C, Bergr Sokkason
Guðmundar saga D, Arngrímr Brandsson
“Vitran af Uppnumning,” Maríu saga
Reynistaðarbók, AM 764 4to
Further Reading:
Elisabeth of Schönau and her vision on the Assumption of the Virgin
Clark, Anne L. Elisabeth of Schönau: A Twelfth-Century Visionary. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1992.
——. ed. and trans. Elisabeth of Schönau: The Complete Works. New York: Paulist Press, 2000.
——. “Elisabeth of Schönau,” in Medieval Holy Women in the Christian Tradition c.1100-c.1500, ed. by Alastair Minnis and Rosalynn Voaden, pp. 371-391. Turnhout: Brepols, 2010.
Dean, Ruth J. “Elizabeth, Abbess of Schönau, and Roger of Ford.” Modern Philology 41.4 (May, 1944), pp. 209-220.
Mayr-Harting, “The Idea of the Assumption in the West,” in The Church and Mary: Papers Read at the 2001 Summer Meeting and the 2002 Winter Meeting of the Ecclesiastical History Society, ed. by R.N. Swanson, pp. 86-111. Woodbridge: Published for the Ecclesiastical History Society by the Boydell Press, 2004.
Reynolds, Brian K. Gateway to Heaven. Marian Doctrine and Devotion: Image and Typology in the Patristic and Medieval Periods. Vol. 1. Hyde Park, NY: New City Press, 2012, 293-329.
Roth, F.W.E., ed. Die Visionen der Hl. Elisabeth und die Schriften der Äbte Ekbert und Emecho von Schönau. Brünn: Verlag der Studien aus dem Benedictiner – und Cistercienser – Orden, 1884.
Widding, Ole and Hans Bekker-Nielsen. “Elisabeth of Schönau's Visions in an Old Icelandic Manuscript, AM 764, 4o.” Opuscula 2.1. Bibliotheca Arnamagnæana 25.1. Copenhagen: Munksgaard, 1961, pp. 93-6.
Maríu saga
Fairise, Christelle R. “Relating Mary’s Life in Medieval Iceland: Maríu saga. Similarities and Differences with the Continental Lives of the Virgin,” Arkiv för nordisk filologi 129 (2014): 165-196.
Heizmann, Wilhelm, ed. Das Altisändische Marienleben. Teil I: Historisch-philologische Studien. Teil II: Edition der drei Redaktionen nach den Handschriften AM 234 fol., Holm 11 4to, und Holm 1 4to. Habilitationshcrift-Facbbereich Historisch-philologishce Wissensschaften der Georg-August-Unviversität Göttingen, 1993.
——. “Maríu saga,” in Medieval Scandinavia: An Encyclopedia, ed. by Philip Pusliano, Kirsten Wolf, et al, pp. 407-8. New York: Garland, 1993.
Najork, Daniel C. Reading the Old Norse-Icelandic Maríu saga in its Manuscript Contexts. Medieval Institute (The Northern Medieval World/De Grutyer. 2021.
——. Translating Marian Doctrine into the Vernacular: The Bodily Assumption in Middle English and Old Norse-Icelandic Literature. Ph.D Dissertation. Arizona State University, 2014.
——. “The Virgin Mary and the Last Judgment in the Old Norse-Icelandic Maríu saga,” in Catastrophes and the Apocalyptic in the Middle Ages and Renaissance. Arizona Studies in the Middle Ages and the Renaissance, ed. by Robert Bjork, pp. 15-28. Turnhout: Brepols, 2019.
Tomassini, Laura. An Analysis of the Three Redactions of Maríu saga, with Particular Reference to Their Style and Relation to Their Latin Sources. Ph.D. Dissertation. Københavns Universitet, 1997.
——. “Attempts at Biblical Exegesis in Old Norse: Some Examples from Maríu saga.” Opuscula 10. Bibliotheca Arnamagæana 40. Copenhagen: Reitzel 1996: 129-35.
Unger, C.R. Maríu saga: Legender om Jomfru Maria og Hendes Jartegn. Christiania: Trykt Hos Brögger & Christie, 1871.
The Miracles of the Virgin Mary in Old Norse-Icelandic Translation
Kupferschmied, Irene Ruth. Die altisländischen und altnorwegischen Marienmirakel. 2 vols. München: Herbert Utz Verlag, 2017.
Widding, Ole. “Norrøne Marialegender på europæisk baggrund.” Opuscula 10. Bibliotheca Arnamagnæana 40. Copenhagen: Reitzel, 1996, pp. 1-128.
Guðmundar saga biskups
Ciklamini, Marlene. “Hidden and Revealed: The Manifest Presence of the Virgin Mary in Bishop Guðmundr’s Life.” Frühmittelalterliche Studien 40.1 (2006): 223-62.
Heizmann, Wilhelm. “Arngríms Guðmundar saga, Maríu saga und Gregors Moralia in Iob.” Opuscula 8. Bibliotheca Arnamagnæana 38. Copenhagen: Reitzel, 1985, pp. 189-98.
Jón Sígurðsson and Guðbrandur Vigfússon, eds. Biskupa Sögur. Kaupmannahöfn: Í Prentsmiðju S.L. Möllers, 1858.
Jónas Kristjánsson, ed. Biskupa Sögur I, 2 vols. Reykjavík: Hið Íslenzka Fornritafélag, 2003.
——, ed. Biskupa Sögur II. Reykjavík: Hið Íslenzka Fornritafélag, 2002.
Skórzewska, Joanna. Constructing a Cult: The Life and Veneration of Guðmundr Arason (1161-1237) in the Icelandic Written Sources. Leiden: Brill, 2011.
Stefán Karlsson. Guðmundar sögur biskups I: Ævi Guðmundar biskups, Guðmundar saga A. Editiones Arnamagnæanæ, 1983.
——. Guðmundar sögur Biskups II, Guðmundar saga B, ed. by Magnús Hauksson. Editiones Arnamagnæanæ, 2018.
AM 764 4to
Digital images of the manuscript
Svanhildur Óskarsdóttir. “Arctic Garden of Delights: The Purpose of the Book of Reynistaður,” in Romance and Love in Late Medieval and Early Modern Iceland: Essays in Honor of Marianne Kalinke, ed. by Kirsten Wolf and Johanna Denzin, pp. 279-301. Cornell: Cornell University Press, 2008.
——. “Dómsdagslýsing í AM 764 4to.” Opuscula X. Bibliotheca Arnamagnæana XL. Copenhagen: C.A. Reitzels Forlag, 1996: 186–93.
——. “Reading Fit for Nuns? The Convent of Reynistaður and Icelandic Literary Milieu in the Fourteenth Century,” in Nuns’ Literacies in Medieval Europe: The Kansas City Dialogue, ed. by Virginia Blanton, Veronica O’Mara, and Patricia Stoop, pp. 229-48. Turnhout: Brepols, 2015.
——. “The Resourceful Scribe: Some Aspects of the Development of Reynistaðarbók (AM 764 4to),” in Tradition and the individual talent: Modes of authorship in the Middle Ages, ed. by Slavica Rankovic, et al., pp. 325-42. Toronto: Pontifical Institute for Medieval Studies, 2012.
——. Universal History in Fourteenth-Century Iceland: Studies in AM 764 4to. Ph.D. Dissertation. University of London, 2000.
——. “The World and its Ages: The Organisation of an ‘Encyclopaedic’ Narrative in MS AM 764 4to,” in Sagas, Saints and Settlements, ed. by Gareth Williams and Paul Bibire, pp. 1-12. Leiden: Brill, 2004.
——. “Writing Universal History in Ultima Thule: The case of AM 764 4°.” Mediaeval Scandinavia 14 (2004): 185–94.
