Vera Peternek (Ruprecht-Karls-Universität Heidelberg)
| Oxford, Bodleian Library, Ms Selden supra 72, Collectaea, fol. 20r–40r. Cited in: Medieval Carmelite Heritage. Early Reflections on the Nature of the Order, ed. Adrian Staring (Textus et Studia Carmelitana 16), Rome 1989, pp. 218–253; here: p. 230f. | English Translation (Vera Peternek) |
| Et alibi [inquit]: ‘Abiit Iesus trans mare Galileae, quod est Tiberiadis, et sequebatur eum multitudo magna. Subiit ergo in montem Iesus et ibi sedebat cum discipulis suis.’ Capharnaum autem non in superiori parte est Galileae iuxta montem Thabor, ubi transfiguratus est Dominus, sed in alia parte versus occidentem iuxta mare est posita Galileae et propre montem Carmeli, quia alius mons iuxta locum illum non est. Quamvis ergo quidam aliter sapiant, secundum rectam tamen seriem evangelistarum et locorum positionem in huius monte Carmeli Christus duodecim, quasi conventum faciens religionis, prout dictum est, specialiter stabilivit. Patet ergo ex praedictis, quod in novo Testamento in hoc monte Carmeli religio sumpsit exordium. | And [he said] also: ‘Jesus departed across the Sea of Galilee, which is that of Tiberias, and a large crowd followed him. Then, Jesus climbed a mountain and there sat down with his disciples.’ Capharnaum, however, is not in the upper part of Galilee near Mount Tabor, where the Lord was transfigured, but situated in another part of Galilee towards the East near the sea and near Mount Carmel, because there is no other mountain near that place. Albeit some may think differently, [it still appears] from the correct order of the Evangelists and from the location of the places that Christ specifically established the Twelve, as if creating a religious order, on this Mount Carmel, as it has been said. It is clear, therefore, from the aforesaid, that in the New Testament on that Mount Carmel our religion began. |
Among the Palestinian orders of the Middle Ages the Carmelites assume a special place. Originating on Mount Carmel near Acre in the late 12th century, they found their birthplace and source of identity not in Jerusalem but further to the north in the wilderness of their eponymous mountain range.[1] In their foundational legend, they maintained that the prophet Elijah had founded their order on this very mountain and that an uninterrupted line of successors had dwelt there ever since. They also claimed a special relationship with the Virgin Mary. This myth had been developed in the late 13th and further evolved over the course of the 14th century to prove their antiquity in the aftermath of the Second Council of Lyon. The existential threat of the council’s decrees was paired with a series of profound changes. In what had been not even one-hundred years, they had seen their migration towards the West, their evolution into a mendicant order, and the irrevocable loss of their home. In this situation, the legendary founder also served as an integrational figure.[2] Notwithstanding the fact that the medieval Carmelites had never had a dwelling in Jerusalem, some of their historiographers, like the anonymous author of the chronicle Univsersis Christifidelibus or Jean de Cheminot, integrated a house in Jerusalem into the myth.[3] According to slightly varying versions of the narrative, Carmelite hermits had left their mountain when Jesus started preaching to receive baptism, to follow him and his disciples, and even to join the Apostles’ mission after Pentecost.
By the end of the 14th century, this had become an accepted truth, but until then not all Carmelite historians shared this view. Among the sceptics was John Baconthorpe, scholar, theologian, and English prior provincial from 1326 to 1333. In his four works on Carmelite history and spirituality, he supported the mythical foundation by Elijah but mainly elaborated the order’s Marian devotion. Around 1324, he wrote his Laus religionis Carmelitanae.[4] In the six books of this treatise, which has come down to us in only one 16th-century-manuscript, he seeks to demonstrate the superior dignity of his order.[5] It is an encomium of the order’s geographic origins, its supposed antiquity, its devotion to the Virgin, its rule, way of life, and its habit. For those interested in the Carmelites’ memory of their home the Laus religionis is very intriguing; yet it has undeservedly been rather neglected by scholars studying the order’s historiography.
The first book, which will be of interest here, uses the sacred topography of the Holy Land to support the Carmelites’ claims of an elevated dignity among the monastic orders. At the outset of his endeavour, John describes the location of Mount Carmel and emphasises primarily its position within the Holy Land: Sciendum est quod mons Carmeli in Terra Sancta est.[6] Other than most Carmelite historiographers, he is not content with locating the Carmel with respect to Acre alone.[7] Instead, he draws a map of biblical Galilee by delineating, albeit sometimes inaccurately, the relative positions of Mount Carmel and other biblical sites to one another. According to him, Carmel was non longe a fluvio Iordanis positus[8], Carmel and Mount Tabor were to be found in two corners of Galilee, the Jordan River ran between Galilee and Judea.[9] Despite his focus on Galilee, he uses distances to Jerusalem for orientation.[10] He is eager to ensure the Carmel’s unequivocal identification and distinguishes between two homonymous places to prevent any possible confusion: Non est ille mons de quo Nabal Carmeli.[11] His insistence that it was different from Nabal’s dwelling place, where David hid and with whom he came into conflict during his flight from Saul, was later adopted by all Carmelite historiographers.[12] This negation, along with Carmel’s description among the sites which are prominent in the Gospels, prohibits possible negative connotations of their Carmel. By firmly placing it within the mental frame of the New Testament, John prepares the ground for his following argument.
In the subsequent chapter, John provides the reader with a synopsis of the Gospels’ account of how Christ chose the twelve Apostles on a mountain near Capharnaum.[13] The combination of Scripture and his version of geography, leads him to an astonishing conclusion, which is cited in the excerpt above: the said mountain was none other than Mount Carmel. He reasons: Capharnaum autem non in superiori parte est Galileae iuxta montem Thabor, ubi transfiguratus est Dominus, sed in alia parte versus occidentem iuxta mare est posita Galileae et prope montem Carmeli, quia alius mons iuxta locum illum non est.[14] John even goes so far as to claim that Christ had established the Apostles almost as a religious order and that in that moment the Christian religion itself had been founded on Mount Carmel!
The Gospels’ Capharnaum is, of course, on the shore of the Sea of Galilee and nowhere near Carmel. In fact, the two are about 50 kilometres apart with other mountains, among them Mount Tabor, much closer. In his introductory chapter, it remained unclear where exactly John situates the Sea of Galilee. He only mentioned that it bordered Galilee and that the Jordan River, which he supposed to be close to Carmel, emerged from it.[15] In the Latin East, however, the name Capharnaum was used for more than one place – at least two maritime fortresses south of Acre were known by this name.[16] Maritime Capharnaum appears on the itineraries of several pilgrim accounts of the 13th century and is mentioned in Jacques’ de Vitry Historia Orientalis.[17] Carmelite historians consistently used the Historia, together with the Speculum Historiale of Vincent of Beauvais, as a standard work of reference whenever they provided evidence for the Carmelites’ presence on Mount Carmel.[18] It is therefore plausible that John Baconthorpe knew of the existence of such a place near Carmel and it is not improbable that the recollection thereof has contributed to his misidentification. Nonetheless, it is also clear from his cautionary remark [q]uamvis ergo quidam aliter sapiant[19] that he was fully aware that his claim would be met with scepticism. After all, Jacques and the pilgrim accounts distinguished between the maritime and the lakeside city.[20]
After his extraordinary announcement, John continues to draw his map by listing the mountains of the Holy Land, which he understands to be places of revelation of divine grace. Thus, he reinforces the incorporation of Mount Carmel into the sacred topography of the Holy Land and, more specifically, into its sacral montane geography. He moves from the Sinai to Jerusalem, which stands in the centre of this chapter, providing a detailed description of the location and significance of the Golgotha, the Temple Mount, the Mount of Olives, and Zion. Compared to his sketchy idea of Galilee, his account of the topography of Jerusalem and its environs is surprisingly accurate.[21] On leaving the city, he moves southwards and describes mountains most of which are associated with Abraham.[22] Overall, the reader is left with the impression that every inch of soil is steeped in holiness. This sacred topography is made up of places of inherent sacrality. They receive this quality not from man-built churches, or moveable relics, but from the divine revelations or even the corporeal presence of Jesus. Just as this land, John finally argues, was reputed to be holier than any other, as it bore Jesus, Mary, and the patriarchs of the Old Testament, the Carmelite order, originating in this land on Mount Carmel, was chosen by God and therefore holier than any other.[23]
On John’s mental map, the places of the Carmelites’ legendary past remain limited to Mount Carmel itself. Rather than becoming proto-mendicants, his ancient Carmelites remain mountain-dwelling hermits. He refrains from weaving new places into the fabric of their historical narrative, which would divert the attention from Mount Carmel. Jerusalem repeatedly serves as a point of orientation and features prominently in the chapter on the mountains of the Holy Land. It draws its centrality, however, from its significance in Scripture and as the centre of Christianity, not from being a site of Carmelite history. Instead of bringing his order to Jerusalem, John makes the bold choice of tying their mountain to the Gospels. This was no easy task as Carmel does not appear in the Gospels and due to the immutable nature of Scripture. Therefore, only an innominate mountain, like the one on which Christ is said to have chosen the Twelve, could plausibly be identified with Carmel. At the same time, it allows the Carmelites to be present among Christ’s first disciples. Their birthplace even becomes a place that had been hallowed by Christ’s corporeal presence, conferring upon them a greater dignity than a brief settlement in Jerusalem could have done. John’s version of geography is symptomatic of the loss of firsthand knowledge of the actual geographic conditions, but this lack of personal experience of any Carmelite at the time, simultaneously allowed room for his imagination and was the prerequisite of his argument.
This short article has merely scratched the surface of the unique manner in which John Baconthorpe ascribed Carmel and the Carmelites the highest dignity permitted within the confines of scripture. It would be worthwhile to bring the Laus religionis Carmelitanae out of obscurity and subject it to a more intensive study, taking into account the entire treatise, John’s writings on Carmelite Marian devotion, and the broader context of Carmelite historiography.
[1] Friedman, Elias, The Latin Hermits on Mount Carmel. A Study in Carmelite Origins (Institutum Historicum Teresianum Studia 1), Rome 1979.
[2] Boaga, Emanuele, La storiografia carmelitana nei secoli xiii e xiv, in: The Land of Carmel. Essays in honor of Joachim Smet O.Carm., ed. Paul Chandler –– Keith J. Egan, Rome 1991, pp. 125–154; Elm, Kaspar, Elias, Paulus von Theben und Augustinus als Ordensgründer. Ein Beitrag zur Geschichtsschreibung und Geschichtsdeutung der Eremiten- und Bettelorden des 13. Jahrhunderts, in: Geschichtsschreibung und Geschichtsbewusstsein im späten Mittelalter, ed. Hans Patze, Sigmaringen 1987, pp. 371–397; Smet, Joachim, The Carmelites. A History of the Brothers of Our Lady of Mount Carmel. vol. 1: ca. 1200 until the Council of Trent, Darien 1988. For an overview of the Carmelite’s history see: Jotischky, Andrew, Carmelites and Antiquity. Mendicants and their Past in the Middle Ages, Oxford 2002, pp. 8–44.
[3] Universis Christifidelibus, in: Medieval Carrmelite Heritage. Early Reflections on the Nature of the Order, ed. Adrian Staring (Textus et Studia Carmelitana 16), Rome 1989, pp. 71–90, esp. p. 82f.; Jean de Cheminot, Speculum Fratrum Ordinis Beatae Mariae de Monte Carmeli, in: Medieval Carrmelite Heritage. Early Reflections on the Nature of the Order, ed. Adrian Staring (Textus et Studia Carmelitana 16), Rome 1989, pp. 107–146, esp. p. 124f.
[4] Staring 1989, p. 176f.
[5] Staring 1989, p. 182f.
[6] John Baconthorpe Laus religionis, lib. I, c. XII, p. 228.
[7] For example, Jean de Cheminot, who quotes Jacques de Vitry: Situs est in maritimis, distans ab Accon quattuor miliaribus. (Jean de Cheminot Speculum, c. II, p. 123).
[8] John Baconthorpe Laus religionis, lib. I, c. XII, p. 228.
[9] Iordanis inter Galileam et Iudeam currit pro magna parte. Unde Galilea quasi inter duos montes a parte australi esse dinoscitur. Nam incipiens non longe a pede montis Thabor, in superiori parte extendit se versus occidentem fere usque ad pedem montis Carmeli. (ibid., p. 229). This notion might be founded on a misreading of Vincent’s of Beauvais Speculum Historiale, which was commonly used as a source by medieval Carmelite historiographers: Iordanis dividit Galilaeam et Idumeam terramque Bosrae. (SH lib. XXXI, c. LXI; Vincent of Beauvais, Speculum quadruplex sive Speculum Maius, vol.1: Speculum Historiale, 1624, ND Graz 1965, p. 1305).
[10] In superiori parte Galileae est mons Thabor, distans a Ierusalem itinere trium dierum. (John Baconthorpe Laus religionis, lib. I, c. XII, p. 229).
[11] Ibid.; 1 Sam 25.
[12] This distinction appears for the first time in John’s Compendium Historiarum et Iurium pro Defensione et Institutionis et Confirmationis Ordinis Beatae Mariae de Monte Carmeli (John Baconthorpe, Compendium Historiarum et Iurium pro Defensione et Institutionis et Confirmationis Ordinis Beatae Mariae de Monte Carmeli, in: Medieval Carrmelite Heritage. Early Reflections on the Nature of the Order, ed. Adrian Staring (Textus et Studia Carmelitana 16), Rome 1989, pp. 199–217, esp. c. I, p. 200f.). It is adopted, for example, by Jean de Cheminot, in Jean de Cheminot Speculum, c. II, p. 123.
[13] John Baconthorpe, Laus religionis, lib. I, c. XIII, p. 229f.
[14] Ibid. lib. I, c. XIV, p. 230f.
[15] Ibid., lib. I, c. XII, p. 228f.
[16] Friedman 1979, p. 134f.; Prawer, Joshua, The Latin Kingdom of Jerusalem. European Colonialism in the Middle Ages, London 1972, pp. 206; 294; Denys Pringle identifies maritime Capharnaum, which is mentioned in the pilgrim accounts as Khirbat al-Kanīsa, between Haifa and Athlit (Pilgrimage to Jerusalem and the Holy Land, ed. Denys Pringle, (Crusade Texts in Translation 23), Farnham – Burlington 2012, p. 85, fn. 146; p. 210, fn. 6; p. 244, fn. 10; p. 353, fn. 176).
[17] It is described by Wilbrand of Oldenburg, who travelled 1211/12 as a “small castle by the sea” (Wilbrand of Oldenburg, Journey in the Holy Land (1211–12), in: Pilgrimage to Jerusalem and the Holy Land, 1187–1291, ed. and transl. by Denys Pringle (Crusade Texts in Translation 23), Farnham – Burlington 2012, pp.61–94, esp. p. 85). Both versions of the Pilgrimages to Jerusalem and the Holy Land mention a settlement of the name at the foot of Mount Carmel: „At the bottom to the left is a village called Capernaum.”; “a town called Capernaum, where were made the pieces of silver for which the Lord was sold.” (The Ways and Pilgrimages of the Holy Land (1244–65), in: Pilgrimage to Jerusalem and the Holy Land, 1187–1291, ed. and transl. by Denys Pringle (Crusade Texts in Translation 23), Farnham – Burlington 2012, pp. 208–228, esp. p. 211). Burchard of Mount Sion mentions it among the cities of Phoenician Syria (Burchard of Mount Sion, Descriptio Terrae Sanctae, ed. and transl. by John R. Bartlett, Oxford 2019, p. 10) and Philip of Savona also has it (Philip of Savona, Description of the Holy Land (1285–89), in: Pilgrimage to Jerusalem and the Holy Land, 1187–1291, ed. and transl. by Denys Pringle (Crusade Texts in Translation 23), Farnham – Burlington 2012, pp. 321–359, p. 353). For the Historia Orientalis see: HO XLII (Jacques de Vitry, Historia Orientalis, ed. and transl. by Jean Donnadieu (Sous la règle de Saint Augustin 12), Turnhout 2008, p. 198f).
[18] see for example: Universis Christifidelibus, pp. 81–83; Jean de Cheminot Speculum, c. II, pp. 121–123; John Baconthorpe, Speculum de Institutione Ordinis pro Veneratione Beatae Mariae, in: Medieval Carrmelite Heritage. Early Reflections on the Nature of the Order, ed. Adrian Staring (Textus et Studia Carmelitana 16), Rome 1989, pp. 184–193, esp. c. III, p. 189.
[19] John Baconthorpe, Laus religionis, lib. I, c. XIV, p. 231.
[20] HO XLII. While most accounts simply mention both places separately, Wilbrand of Oldenburg explicitly stresses the difference: “And it should be known that some people say that this is Capernaum, where the Lord cured the ruler’s son and performed many other miracles. But these people are ensnared in error, for that Capernaum is located in Galilee” (Wilbrand of Oldenburg, p. 85).
[21] John Baconthorpe, Laus religionis, lib. I, c. XV, p. 231.
[22] Ibid., lib. I, c. XV, p. 232.
[23] Sicut igitur particula mundi, quae Christum cum Matre et tot sanctis patribus specialiter meruit procreare et nutrire, Terra Sancta dicitur, et dignior ceteris locis reputatur, ita et ordo Carmelitarum a Carmelo trahens originem, quasi ceteris specialius electus a Deo, dignior a loco patenter comprobatur. (ibid., lib. I, c. XVI, p. 233). John Baconthorpe advanced the idea that Mary had taken the vow of chastity and virginity on Mount Carmel. (ibid. lib. I, c. IV, p. 220f.); see also Jean de Cheminot, Speculum, c. IV, pp. 126–128.
Bibliography
Sources
Burchard of Mount Sion, Descriptio Terrae Sanctae, ed. and transl. by John R. Bartlett, Oxford 2019.
Jacques de Vitry, Historia Orientalis, ed. and transl. by Jean Donnadieu (Sous la règle de Saint Augustin 12), Turnhout 2008.
Jean de Cheminot, Speculum Fratrum Ordinis Beatae Mariae de Monte Carmeli, in: Medieval Carrmelite Heritage. Early Reflections on the Nature of the Order, ed. Adrian Staring (Textus et Studia Carmelitana 16), Rome 1989, pp. 107–146.
John Baconthorpe, Compendium Historiarum et Iurium pro Defensione et Institutionis et Confirmationis Ordinis Beatae Mariae de Monte Carmeli, in: Medieval Carrmelite Heritage. Early Reflections on the Nature of the Order, ed. Adrian Staring (Textus et Studia Carmelitana 16), Rome 1989, pp. 199–217.
John Baconthorpe, Laus religionis Carmelitanae, in: Medieval Carrmelite Heritage. Early Reflections on the Nature of the Order, ed. Adrian Staring (Textus et Studia Carmelitana 16), Rome 1989, pp. 218–253.
John Baconthorpe, Speculum de Institutione Ordinis pro Veneratione Beatae Mariae, in: Medieval Carrmelite Heritage. Early Reflections on the Nature of the Order, ed. Adrian Staring (Textus et Studia Carmelitana 16), Rome 1989, pp. 184–193.
Philip of Savona, Description of the Holy Land (1285–89), in: Pilgrimage to Jerusalem and the Holy Land, 1187–1291, ed. and transl. by Denys Pringle (Crusade Texts in Translation 23), Farnham – Burlington 2012, pp. 321–359.
The Ways and Pilgrimages of the Holy Land (1244–65), in: Pilgrimage to Jerusalem and the Holy Land, 1187–1291, ed. and transl. by Denys Pringle (Crusade Texts in Translation 23), Farnham – Burlington 2012, pp. 208–228.
Universis Christifidelibus, in: Medieval Carrmelite Heritage. Early Reflections on the Nature of the Order, ed. Adrian Staring (Textus et Studia Carmelitana 16), Rome 1989, pp. 71–90.
Vincent of Beauvais, Speculum quadruplex sive Speculum Maius, vol.1: Speculum Historiale, 1624, ND Graz 1965.
Wilbrand of Oldenburg, Journey in the Holy Land (1211–12), in: Pilgrimage to Jerusalem and the Holy Land, 1187–1291, ed. and transl. by Denys Pringle (Crusade Texts in Translation 23), Farnham – Burlington 2012, pp.61–94.
Literature
Boaga, Emanuele, La storiografia carmelitana nei secoli xiii e xiv, in: The Land of Carmel. Essays in honor of Joachim Smet O.Carm., ed. Paul Chandler –– Keith J. Egan, Rome 1991, pp. 125–154.
Elm, Kaspar, Elias, Paulus von Theben und Augustinus als Ordensgründer. Ein Beitrag zur Geschichtsschreibung und Geschichtsdeutung der Eremiten- und Bettelorden des 13. Jahrhunderts, in: Geschichtsschreibung und Geschichtsbewusstsein im späten Mittelalter, ed. Hans Patze, Sigmaringen 1987, pp. 371–397.
Friedman, Elias, The Latin Hermits on Mount Carmel. A Study in Carmelite Origins (Institutum Historicum Teresianum Studia 1), Rome 1979.
Jotischky, Andrew, Carmelites and Antiquity. Mendicants and their Past in the Middle Ages, Oxford 2002, pp. 8–44.
Prawer, Joshua, The Latin Kingdom of Jerusalem. European Colonialism in the Middle Ages, London 1972.
Smet, Joachim, The Carmelites. A History of the Brothers of Our Lady of Mount Carmel. vol. 1: ca. 1200 until the Council of Trent, Darien 1988.
Pilgrimage to Jerusalem and the Holy Land, ed. Denys Pringle, (Crusade Texts in Translation 23), Farnham – Burlington 2012.
Image: Olfert Dapper, De Bergh Carmeli (1677).
OpenEdition suggests that you cite this post as follows:
Vera Peternek (April 13, 2026). Carmel, Capharnaum, and the Sacred Topography of the Holy Land in John Baconthorpe’s Laus religionis Carmelitanae. Patria Hierosolymitana. Retrieved June 7, 2026 from https://patria.hypotheses.org/1225