The Destruction and Recovery of Monte Cassino, 529–1964 by Kriston R. Rennie
Graham A. Loud
Reviewed by: The Destruction and Recovery of Monte Cassino, 529–1964 by Kriston R. Rennie Graham A. Loud 529–1964. By Rennie. (Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press. 2021. pp. 246. €99. ISBN: 9789463729130.) monks Cassino have always, both in the Middle Ages more recently, seen their monastery as fons et origo western monasticism. If it was not first monastic house to be founded west, then abbey St. Benedict source Rule which became almost universal Christendom from Carolingian era onwards model for all other monasteries. This stance validated, eyes, a long unbroken tradition observance sixth century custody relics Benedict, symbol pre-eminent role. Yet, points out, Cassinese rests on shaky foundations, is some extent anyway myth, or at least “constructed identity.” He demonstrates this examining one key aspects tradition, theme destruction renewal, fully enunciated author abbey’s chronicle, Leo Marsicanus, end eleventh century, but repeated developed its later historians, into our own times. Thus original had been destroyed Lombards c. 580, rebuilt 717, sacked Muslim raiders 883, restored once after 950, entirely Desiderius 1066. Subsequently laid low earthquake 1349, finally Allied bombers February 1944. Its rebuilding war viewed restoration, just even cultural monument, restoration peace civilization. And when church reconsecrated 1964, Pope Paul VI declared “patron protector” Europe. [End Page 602] particularly good problems with story early Ages. Even assuming that we can rely account Gregory Great—which written fifty years saint’s death who no personal knowledge him—the 580 community continued exile, having guide inspiration autograph manuscript Rule, unproven improbable. Deacon’s refoundation eighth made mention exiled Rome, implied actually new beginning. It Paul, too, referred alleged transfer Benedict’s French Fleury, suggests considerably better authenticated than they remained situ, rediscovered during 1066–and again several occasions, last 1950. But dogged recovery, while maintained guarded saint site, central self-perception, only reinforced pre-war 1945. intelligently developed, book should surely required reading those interested history great historic monastery, monasticism generally. There are, however, flaws account. most serious concerns authorship begun concluded Peter Deacon 1138. Contrary what suggested here, wrote small part continuation Leo’s work (even though he claimed mendaciously it), times ascribes comments were himself. Here author’s generally sure touch wide seem failed him. also perhaps devotes too much space symbolic rhetoric accompanied modern compared earlier...
Catholic Historical Review