Appendix 1
THE ABBEY AND THE HAMLET OF SANTA MARIA IN ELCE
IN THE TERRITORY OF CALITRI
This work was published in «Rivista Storica Benedettina»
Rome, 1921, volume 52, pages 88 – 118.
Origin and early development
on the left bank of the Orato – a stream that forms the south west boundary of Calitri, about a kilometer from its confluence with the Ofanto – there rises, isolated and secluded, a hill, covered by the ruins of broken walls, by large boulders spread out on the ground and by piles of stones among bramble and thorn bushes. Today, on that solitary hill, there is no sign of life; there is no human footprint. All is quiet. The very narrow horizon and the dark precipices – which are shelter for reptiles and owls – almost inspire fear today and cause, in the naïve imagination of the people, the concept, which is very widespread, that that is a site of wretched desolation and fear, the asylum of evil spirits, wizards, and witches.
Those ruins also bring back thoughts of the great Abbey, and of the smiling hamlet, brought down in one blow by a sudden and violent force! These ruins are sad but not quiet. In the peace and silence of nature, one voice seems to whisper to the passerby: «linger here: these walls that no one inhabits anymore have many pages of history, many facts to be recounted!»
The solitary and almost isolated place, which would seem tailor made for whomever wanted to hide themselves or cause the world to forget them, was chosen – during the struggle with the iconoclasti (726-824)[1] – by the devoted people of Calitri to hide the statue of the Madonna from the anger of the heretic persecutors. The storm having passed, they, who came after, found – not without great emotion – the celestial Madonna an erected a little church, in order to practice with decency their devotion to the Mother of God. The imagination of that great poet, which is the people, transformed and beautified the distant historic event by installing there « il meraviglioso», creating, that is, a pious legend, according to which the Virgin appeared, in a sweet vision, to some farm workers in that solitary and wooded locality among the leafy branches of an ancient elce [evergreen oak, Figure 1]. It was from this that the name of S. Maria in Elce originated.
Whatever one thinks of its miraculous origin, it is certain that the construction of the primitive church dates back to the remote ages, after which, the persecution of the Iconoclasts having ceased, the devotees were free to demonstrate, with external worship, their devotion to the Madonna. The pilgrimages that the Calitrani, through a long and interrupted tradition, make, even today, in the midst of May, to the Madonna della Foresta – commonly called della Festa – that rises not too far from the old little church of Santa Maria in Elce are proof of this.
And, when, toward the tenth century, the sons of St. Benedict spread out in the Irpinia and in Basilicata, end the reign of Byzantinism and to the Basilian Monks, they built in the high valleys of the Ofanto the coenobium [monastery] of San Lorenzo in Tufara outside of Pescopagano, San Tommaso del Cerrutolo, on the right bank of the Ofanto in the village of Rapone, Santo Stefano in Giuncarico at the old Santa Venere bridge, and finally Sant’ Ippolito of Monticchio. The Benedictines, following the dictates of their holy founder of building, that is, cloisters in the most impassable places in order to give to the wretched people a dignified form of civil life in the light of faith, penetrated – perhaps invited by some pious person – into the narrow valley of the Orato. Here, – where the Madonna under the title of S. Maria in Elce is venerated – they found it opportune to erect the church, and beside the little church, a coenoeby [monastery] that was able to accommodate the Sons of S. Benedetto, so that they could spread, mostly, the devotion to the Madonna.
This writer has been unable to ascertain, with historical exactness, neither the year of the founding nor the names of the first religious people. Not one document remains. One may believe, with absolute certainty, that the primitive monastery emerged toward the end of the tenth century. This is supported by some gothic – roman style niches found in the old temple, by that statue of the Virgin «by a very mediocre sculptor» not being – in the judgment of Amato[2] – influenced by Byzantine art, and by the fact that the construction of the little church was done with disordered stones and crude cement.
The documented history of the abbey began to be delineated at the beginning of 1017, when Guaimaro IV, son of Giovanni II, Longobard prince of Salerno, with a Diploma [3][certificate] dated in February 1017, gave Sauferio, Abbott of Santa Maria in Elce, the possession of the Monastery that he had constructed: « Concessimus vobis sanctissimo abbati monasterii sancta Marie ubi dicitur ad Ilicem Monasterium quod vos a nobo[a novo] construxistis fundamine in propria rebus vestra»[4] From the context of the Diploma, it appears clear that an older monastery was already in place, which monastery had perhaps become too small for the growing religious community. The Diploma of Guaimaro can be considered as an aggregate of concessions, of immunities, and of provisions of public and private rights, that confer on the Benedictine Abbey a very distinct social-economic position. And the munificence of the prince of Salerno lavished other lesser privileges and benefits: among others, he conceded to that Abbott and to each religious person of the Abbey who went to Salerno free food and lodging and whatever else was necessary for them and for their retinue during their stay in the city.
In addition, this same document also reveals that already, in 1017, an agglomeration of houses and huts for peasants and artisans had arisen around the monastery. The Benedictines had known how to attract these people with concessions of land, with allowances, and with other concessions in order to impress on them a form of civil life, under the beneficial effect of the religion. Afterwards, in order to place themselves in the favor and under the protection of the Benedictines, even the lords and freemen competed in the giving of gifts and bequests. Even the most humble donated their little field, their difficult manual labor and their persons themselves was well as that of their children. In such a way, over the years, around the primitive monastery – which had become in the meantime a true abbey – the Benedictines came to possess a vast tract of land, of woods, of pastures and of «tenute» [holdings], that will form – through the centuries – an extensive and substantial patrimony, that is, a rich territory.
The abbey saw its social importance grow and the breadth of its jurisdiction expand, especially during the incursions of the Saracens. These people, who were settled in along the coasts of the Adriatic, with their continual raids along the upper valley of the Ofanto, pushed many citizens to establish themselves in the immediate vicinity of the Abbey, in order to receive protection and help. There were years of apprehension and great uncertainty because of the unrelenting threat of the Saracens. In August of 1002, a strong nucleus of Muslims, after a raid completed under the walls of Benevento, advanced over the mountains of the Irpinia and sacked San Angelo dei Lombardi.[5] Triumphant and loaded with booty, the hordes descended in the lower valley of the Ofanto, headed for Conza – which was a large city, and the end of a vast gastaldato, – and debaccantes – as they are described by the historians – placed it under siege (1003). However, they did not succeed in expunging it.[6] Afterwards, other and more bitter incursions took place, not only by the Saracens of Puglia, but also by bands of criminals and raiders; and it was during that cycle of raids that the villages and the hamlets changed themselves into fortresses and small forts, in order to defend themselves better and to resist those assaults. From here, the Benedictines of Santa Maria felt the necessity – in order to protect what was placed under their protection – to erect, in the circles of the abbey walls, a well-equipped castle. The castle of the Abbey of Santa Maria in Elce arose in that manner. And it was given the name of Castrum Santa Mariae in Ilice in the official documents, as one reads in Ughilli, who included it precisely, among the ruined castles of the archdiocese of Conza.[7] Also, the people, in the long tradition, call it now, Castello dell’Abbazia.
[1] Iconoclasts, who opposed the erection of statues, were excommunicated in 731 by the pope.
[2] S. Amato, Cronache feudali del vetusto castello badia di Santa Maria in Elce, in «Eco dell’Ofanto», newspaper, San Angelo Dei Lombardi, 1872, No. 15 and 16, Appendix.
[3] In the middle ages and in the Renaissance, a Diploma was a solemn document with which the sovereign conferred honors and privelages and the like.
[4] Regii Neapolitani Archivii Monumenta edita ac illustrata, Naples, 1854, volume IV, Page 109, Pergamena CCCV
[5] Di Meo, Annali, (already cited), volume VI, pages 339 –340.
[6] Ivi, volume VI, page 349.
[7] Italia Sacra (Edited by Coleti) volume VI, column 185.
Appendix 2
Prestige and Economic flowering
The secluded position of the Abbey, closed as it was in the solemn silence of the aged oaks and because of its proximity to the upper valley of the Ofanto – which constituted, then, the great and only artery of communication between the high Irpinia and Puglia – made the Abbey a peaceful oasis, a center of farming activity, and a center of cloister life. Because of its long decades of prayer and work, the prestige of the abbey increased with so much luster and decorum that, in 1139, it had in its dependency another Benedictine monastery, that of San Clemente, which was outside the walls of Salerno.[1] And this supremacy, which Santa Maria in Elce enjoyed over the monastery of St. Clemente, was confirmed in another Diploma dated April 8, 1159, where one reads that «being in Salerno, Giovanni, Abbott of Santa Maria in Elce, which is at the Conza border, said that the Monastery of San Clemente which is outside of Salerno, in front of the Porta Rotese, where Donato is provost, and which belongs to his monastery of Santa Maria, possesses a mill on the Picentino river….»[2]
After the Longobard principality of Salerno had fallen because of the attacks of Roberto il Guiscardo (1077), the goods and privileges of the Abbey increased even when the domination of the Normans was being established throughout the Mezzogiorno. And Ruggiero II (1097 – 1154), after having Sicily and the Mezzogiorno made into one kingdom and having assumed, in Palermo, the crown with the title of King of Sicily, convoked, in 1140, a parliament in Ariano (today Irpino). In that celebrated Parliament, it was decided to revise the ownership of the fiefs. And, along with the disposition of the fiefs, the King revised many of the goods belonging to the churches and monasteries. And, in 1149, Ruggiero II, recognized and confirmed to Mauro, Abbott of Santa Maria in Elce, what the abbey possessed in goods, rights and benefits.[3] And, as a consequence of such recognition, the Abbott Ursone of Santa Maria was able, in June of 1163, to claim, as the Cronica Conzana states, the vast «tenuta» [holding] of Luzzano, which Guglielmo of Angolfo, Lord of Bisaccia, had taken from the abbey in January of 1124.
The Benedictines of Santa Maria, in addition to possessing all the land around the Abbey and the «tenute» of Luzzano and Tufiello, had goods in Rapolla, near Melfi (in Basilicata.) as it appears at the Angevin Chancery: «Monasterium S. Mariae de Jlice tenet bona in Rapolla.»,[4] and in many other localities. The abbey enriched itself, above all, through endowments and bequests, which pious persons of the Terre near and far used to give to the well deserving Sons of San Benedetto. In this manner, these abbeys received – as one reads in the cited Cronica Conzana [Chronicle of Conza] – «very good income» in the lands of Cairano, Conza, Andretta, Teora, Laviano, Contursi, S. Fele, Nusco, Ascoli Satriano, Melfi, Rapone, Vallata, Carbonara (Aquilonia) and even in Venosa, Napoli, in Cilento and elsewhere: of which incomes, part they collected from it and part they gave away In times past – concludes the Cronica Conzana – this same abbey yielded more than 1500 scudi per year.»
The substantial economic prosperity of Santa Maria in Elce is summarized by Ughelli in the phrase «ditissima abbatial» very rich abbey.[5] And the value of the wealth one can, in a certain way, deduce from the censo [a payment], which the Benedictine abbey was held to pay, each year, to the Holy See, on which it depended, along with the other forty Benedictine abbeys of the Mezzogiorno: in 1192, then, such a payment for our abbey rose to one oncia d’oro [a gold coin of the medieval era worth the equivalent of one ounce of gold] per year. In those times, it was a very large sum of money. The abbey also remained very prosperous during the domination of the Swabian House, and Gualterio, abbot of Santa Maria in Elce, took the occasion of the presence of Frederic II in Brindisi – where the Emporor had gathered the Crociati [Crusaders]in order to set sail for the liberation of the Holy Sepulcher – in order to render him homage and to ask for recognition of the concessions on of the goods received before. And Frederick II, with the Diploma of August 24, 1227 – which took effect in Brindisi – recognized what the abbey possessed in goods and privileges. Indeed the benevolence of the emperor reached to the point that he put those Benedictines under his personal protection and defense.[6]
With the ascending of Carlo I of Anjou to the throne of Naples (1266) and during the long domination of the Angevins, the abbey of Santa Maria knew how to keep the favor of the new dynasty. When, in fact, some abbey farms, located in the territory of Salerno, were usurped by Tommaso Mansella, King Carlo I, with the Diploma of August 15, 1277, in recognition its possession by the Abbott Gugliemo of Santa Maria in Elce, obliged the usurper to restore the lands that he had unduly appropriated. But the usurpations must have taken place again, to judge from another Diploma of December 23, 1306, with which Carlo II of Anjou confirmed to the same Abbott the legitimacy of such landholdings.[7] Of the constant favor that King Carlo gave to the advantage of the Abbey of Santa Maria one has proof in the Diploma of December 21, 1306, with which not only did he recognize the possession, in Campagna, of a house, of a vineyard with a millstone, and of other arable lands, but he informed the Giustiziere[8] that because twenty pigs, two oxen, grain, and other things had been stolen from the property of the Abbey, he, the Giustiziere, was to recover such stolen items and restore them to the Abbey.[9]
In addition, these concessions and benevolences by the King constituted a recognition of the diligent hard work that the Benedictines had shown for the development of agriculture. The Benedictines, in fact, following the dictates of their founder, with love and competence, cared for the cultivation of the fields, improving seeding and plowing methods, and above all prevented the deforestation that was disfiguring the forests. And the timber of the spacious woods of Santa Maria had to be truly abundant, judging by an Ordinance of Robert of Anjou, who, having need of oars with which to equip his fleet, instructed the «appaltatori» [contractors] to requisition the proper timber in the forests of some localities of the Kingdom: among these was Santa Maria in Elce.
And there is more. The religious of the Abbey, for their opere di civiltà [civil works] and more for their rigorous observance of the Rule of St. Benedict, acquired a great reputation not only among the people of the hamlet and of the bordering territories, but also among the Benedictines of the nearby abbeys. And when, between the close of 1316 and the beginning of 1317, Riccardo, the benedictine abbott of Sant’Ippolito di Monticchio (Basilicata) died, those religious, having met in the Capitolo [chapter house] and being unable to agree on a name of a religious of that place for abbott, proceeded to a less eccentric and more conciliatory appointment, and the choice fell on Don Gualtiero, of the abbey of Santa Marie in Elce.[10] A precious report of religious fervor and worship, practiced by the Benedictines of our abbey, has reached us: «There was the great Ecclesia of said hamlet and monastery in which there were many monks, [who] celebrated Masses and other divine offices and administered Sacraments…. Outsiders ran to said Ecclesia because it was a very devout Ecclesia at which many people of the neighboring territories gathered because of the devotion that they practiced there. They still brought offerings there, particularly on Sundays in May.»[11] One can, therefore, conclude that, throughout the Fourteenth Century, the abbey of Santa Maria was considered, because of its spiritual and temporal importance, and oasis of peace, faith, and of a very prosperous social life.
With the economic flowering of the abbey, the hamlet of the same name flourished, which, because of the considerable number of inhabitants, was in 1240 already an independent Amministrazione Comunale, or Università, according to the terminology of the time. This was clearly stated by an imperial Ordinanza [order] of that year, with which Frederick II of Swabia, for the repairs necessary to the castle of Calitri – administered in that time by the imperial property manager – distributed the burden of the expenses among the Università that were held in consorzio[in common]: among these is included the Università of Santa Maria in Elce. The hamlet, then, with all the persons that participated in it and with those experienced employees of the Abbey formed, administratively, an independent social organism which was separate from the abbey. Only the abbots, on the strength of their feudal rights, exercised civil and mixed jurisdiction on the hamlet.
During the domination of the Angevins, the hamlet of Santa Maria was left in the same legal personality and administrative independence that it enjoyed under the Normans and the Swabians. That is, it had a Sindaco and Eletti. When the Angevins instituted the office of Mastro – giurato, [master – judge], that is Provost, to the local administration of justice and to public safety, Leone Pezzarella was appointed to this position for the casale of Santa Maria on 20 December 1272. [12]
Judging from the «General subsidy» tax, or as it was called, subventio generalis, which the Università was held to pay each year to the royal treasurer, the population of the casale increased remarkably. From the Angevin Receipt Book it is revealed that the casale was taxed five once, six tareni and two grana: such a tax must be considered as a base, subject as it was to continuous increases for the multiple needs of the court. So, when Carlo I of Anjou laid siege to Lucera – where the last supporters of Corradion were holed up – he ordered, in September of 1268, each Universitá to send a number of soldiers proportional to number of hearths i.e., families. To the Università that did not want to nor could not send men, the King assigned the special de focularibus tax, which went up to one Augustale [a gold coin of the time associated with Frederick II] per month for each hearth. The Università of Santa Maria preferred to send money and not men; but the greed of the Court, not having found the number of claimed hearths exact, ordered them – for the five missing hearths – a surtax of one oncia e mezza [one and one half oncia] per month. The Università made the payments in two installments: the last, which was paid on May 15, 1272 to Gualtiero di Collepetro, was contested in court; so that the Università saw itself forced to send a fellow citizen – one Amato – to Naples in order to present the ricevuta [receipt] for the tax already paid; and the Maestri Razionali of the Sommaria validated (apodisca[a greek word meaning confirmed]) it on May 3, 1275.[13]
The royal tax burden did not stop here: there were other extraordinary collections. For the distribution of the new money to be substituted for the old, the Università of Santa Maria was taxed, for the fiscal year of 1275 –1276, 25 tareni and 18 grana; to support the provisioning of the army operating against the rebels in Sicily, Santa Maria was taxed, for the fiscal year of 1284 –1285, at 6 once and 26 tareni; it was forced to pay another extraordinary tax of 5 once, 6 tareni and 6 grana in 1284 for the defense of the kingdom [14]and still others, which I omit for reasons of brevity. In addition to these tax burdens, each family head was obliged to pay to the Abbott of Santa Maria an annual contribution in kind, consisting of an undecima parte [eleventh part] of the harvest. The feudal lord abbots – not being subject to military service in case of war – did not require of the inhabitants – as happened in other feuds –the military tax, the ordinary adoa [tax to exempt from military service] and not even the adiutorium: this was the most burdensome tax, which was paid on extraordinary occasions and whose amount was established, from time to time, by the royal assemblies. Despite such taxes, which cut deeply into the economy of the Università, the life of the casale was very prosperous, also because of the good relationship between the abbots and the inhabitants, which were based on principles of humanity and understanding. The population counted a doctor, a notary – which in 1332 named Pandolfo – a mastro-giurato, to see to their safety, a pharmacy, and various families distinguished by wealth and by «social differentiation.» as the sociologists say. The other inhabitants «were poor hard working laborers» and employees in charge of the flocks and herds.
[1]Archives of the Abbey of Cava, Arc 82, No. 144, Cfr. Di Meo, Annali, Volume X, page 258 – 259
[2] Di Meo, Annals, volume X, pages 258 -259
[3] Archives of the Archbishphric Curia of Conza, Cronica Conzana, tome II, book III, 4th discourse.
[4] State archives in Naples, Riportorium Fasciculorum, page 50.
[5] Italia Sacra (published by Coleti), volume VI, column 826
[6] Winckelmann, Acta imperii (already cited), volume I, page 267
[7] State archives in Naples, Angevin Register 27, page 71; Angevin Register 164, page 116
[8] In Campania, during the Kingdom of the Two Sicilies, the Giustiziere was a functionary at the head of one of the administrative subdivisions of the territory.
[9] Ibid, Angevin Register, 165, page 89.
[10] Cfr. G. Fortunato, La badia di Monticchio, Trani, 1904, pages 197-198.
[11] State Archives in Naples, Commissione feudale di Principato Ultra, volume 462, case 2703, page 105
[12] State Archives in Naples, Angevin Register 15, page 277
[13] State Archives in Naples, Angevin Register 21, page 248.
[14] Ibid, Angevin Register 29, page 255, Angevin Register 272, page 285; Angevin Register 273, page 204
Appendix 3
The abbey and the Casale under the Gesualdo family
The prosperity of the casale and, above all, the extensive lands possessed by the Abbey did not hinder the rapaciousness of the Gesualdo feudal lords. These people, who considered the casale of Santa Maria as a subfeud of Calitri, began to claim feudal rights over that casale; whereby they usurped some bordering lands because of the still uncertain locations of the border. Thus the Benedictines felt it necessary to request sanctions from King Carlo II of Anjou, specifically, the borders and the nature of their feud. The King, with the Diploma of March 15, 1295, ordered the Giustiziere of Principato Ultra to separate the Feud of Santa Maria from that of Calitri, marking said borders using termini lapidei [stone boundary markers.][1] In such a way, the jurisdiction of the abbey was distinctly and well-defined within its particular territory.
But the usurpations and the abuses of power by the Gesualdo family did not cease even then, and above all the ambition of Nicolò Gesualdo caused more bitter disputes and protests. The Abbott again turned to Carlo II of Anjou, asking – also in the name of the people of the casale – Nicolò Gesualdo no longer hinder them from possession and operation of the mill, which ground with the waters of the Ofanto. The mill was in the «Tufarella » district, almost on the border of the feud of Calitri. The cause or the pretext of the fight was a «road placed along the course of the Ofanto river and the Tufarella land» which it was necessary to cross to access the mill. The king, with the Letter of July 7,1308, ordered the Giustiziere of Principato Ultra to safeguard the rights of the Abbey and of the citizens of the Casale, putting an end to the unpleasant dispute, which also delayed the repairs necessary to the mill.[2] The disputes and the tensions between the abbots of Santa Maria and the Gesualdo family lasted throughout the XIV century. The Gesualdo were powerful feudal lords of many lands in the Valley of the Ofanto. The Gesualdo family, who did not tolerate the government of the «clerics» in the midst of their feuds, continually came up with pretexts and claims on the goods of the abbey, because of their rapacious hunger for domination. The Benedictines vainly turned to the authorities: the Gesualdo family was too powerful at court and they found a way to cheat to escape the rigors of the law.
Consequently, the abbots saw their prestige continually diminished and their feudal authority shaken, until, with the Privilegio[3] of March 20, 1416, their feudal rights over the Casale were taken away: Antonello Gesualdo had managed to tear away from Queen Giovanna II the feudal investiture of the casale, which was considered as a subfief of Calitri. After such concessions given to Antonello Gesualdo, who was called her Consigliere by the queen – the Benedictines thought it proper to abandon the Abbey, leaving there a single religious person with the title of Abbott, in order that the worship practices continue and to collect the little income remaining. Thus the religious life in the Benedictine Abbey ceased forever. Every greatness, every work of the past many centuries, which was glorious for its civility and for its religious assistance, was extinguished forever and was replaced by the horrible greed of new feudal lords.
The Benedictines managed make certain that the Abbey, being of religious origin, was placed in Commenda [trust] and assigned to the Benedictine Order. But soon afterwards,
«that monastery was abandoned and suppressed about 1447 because of the Count of Conza, Francesco Gesualdo, and immediately then said church was occupied by an individual from the Gesualdo family with the character of Abbott of Santa Maria in Elce, without any title, outside that of despotism and of his own authority.»[4] The protests that, before such spoliation was started by Don Andrea di Lione, who was the last Benedictine abbott invested by the Commenda, was also suppressed: «The abbey of S. Maria in Elce appears to have been of the Benedectine religion – states the Conzan Chronicles – and one sees a notification of it in the Conzan archives in the Registro antico dei benefici, where one Abbott, Andrea of Lioni, of the city of Conza, the benedictine abbott of said abbey, asserts in a new establishment of his beneficio[5] under the title of Santa Maria della Scala of having lost the old establishment of that beneficio in the time that he was banished from said abbey by Francesco Gesualdo and he made this assertion in the year 1447.»[6]
And so, 1447 signaled the beginning of a rapid decay for the Abbey of Santa Maria, of which each act is an insult to right, and an offense to religious freedom. The Commenda passed from the meritorious Benedectine order to a greedy feudal lord, who was Francesco Gesualdo. And when, Luigi I Gesualdo succeeded him in possession of the fief, he knew very well how to contrive, on the strength of the power that he had from the many fiefs he possessed, to make certain that the Commenda was declared feudal and destined for the level of the cadetti [the non-primogeniture males who went into military service], according to the feudal law then in force. On April 19, 1462, he acquired recognition of it from king Ferrante II of Aragon: «We at the supplication of the magnificent Loysi de Gisualdo our faithful, beloved counselor, have conceded to him the abbey of Sancta Maria de Elice.»[7]
Upon the death of Luigi I Gesualdo, which happened in the early part of 1471, the Abbey and the other fiefs that he possessed where inherited by his grandson Nicolò III Gesualdo. He lived a few years, having died in the early months of 1480. It is not known who, in those years, who was Abate Comendatario of Santa Maria. It was known only that, «there was an canonical vacancy, that months passed and that there were fights» so that Pope Innocent VIII – in plenitudinem potestatis – on November 11, 1489, appointed Don Massenzio Gesualdo Commendatario, who was a member of the family of the feudal lord. With this pontifical appointment, there was a decisive turn in the history of the Abbey: there was extinguished, forever, with the light and heat of the faith – which had made the pride of the monastic life shine – all the hopes for a return of the Benedictines to the cloister life, sweet as the April of the fortunate years, when loving and blessed souls placed, among those sacred walls, a harmony of songs and yearnings for the afterlife. Despite, however, this elicited recognition – who knows how – to the supreme ecclesiastical authority, the Gesualdos were not satisfied with legitimately possessing the abbey. And when, in 1513, Leo X was elected pope, Carlo Gesualdo, with a petition, went be to the new pope asking that the legal possession of the abbey be recognized as belonging to the Gesualdo Family and it be accorded the jus patronato[8] for the naming of the abbot. From his point of view, he was obligated – as provided by cannon law –to rebuild the church and the abbey, which was largely in ruins or unstable.
Leo X, under the promise of rebuilding and equipping the sacred place, with two pontifical Brevi[9], one of 1515 and the other of 1516, gave him possession of the Abbey and the Jus Patronato. Afterwards, because of other doubts raised about the legitimacy of the of the concession, Fabrizio Gesualdo provoked another document – more solemn and more explicit – from Paul III, who with the Bolla [Papal Bull] of August 27, 1540 – while confirming the preceding Brevi – renewed the recognition of the possession with the motivation «to have prince Gesualdo repair and decorate the church and to have it endowed with over fifty scudi.» Thus, the fate of the abbey was decided: because of his substantial income and because of the position of being in the middle of the other feuds of theirs. The Gesusaldos wanted to be assured of the appearance of legitimate possession of it, and were favored in that by the archbishop of Conza, Camillo Gesualdo (1517 – 1535) and Troiano Gesualdo (1537 – 1539) of their family. But it was not worth it to every foreign interest to keep the glorious Abbey alive, even in the coldest and dullest of lights; the greedy and egotistical administration of the abati commendatari – intent on achieving the greatest economic gain – quickly showed how much damage was done by the abandonment of the monastic vitality. It was as if the achievements of the past were buried in the ground, beaten by the hurricane of feudal voraciousness. In addition, a more fatal ruin, which was already obvious, would be added to this desolation.
[1] State Archives in Naples, Feudal Commission of Principato Ultra, volume 60, case 2700, page 5 and following.
[2] Ibid, Angevin register 249, page 231
[3] History of law, an advantageous legal position that is attributed by law or by the act of a sovereign to a subject or the a category of subjects, in derogation of the commone legislative or customary position. It is also the document attesting to such a position.
[4] State Archives in Naples, Feudal Commission of Principato Ultra, volume 463, case 2709, pages 3-4.
[5] In the middle ages, the concession of land from the feudal lord to the subordinate that institutes the relationship of vassal.
[6] Archives of the Archbishopric Curia of Conza, cronica conzana, tome II, book III, discussion 4
[7]State Archives in Naples, Collaterale Comune, volume 2, sheet 52.
[8] Right of patronage (jus patronatus), one of the principal prerogatives of which is the right of presenting to the bishop a titular for a vacant beneficio.
[9] A Breve is a papal letter that is less solemn than a bull and is used for affairs of minor importance.
Appendix 4
Destruction of the Casale
When Alfonso Gesualdo, son of Luigi III, was appointed cardinal on February 23, 1561 – at the age of twenty one – he was quickly invested with the Commenda of Santa Maria, and held it throughout the time the he governed the archdiocese of Conza from March 1,1563 to the early part of 1572. Also when the Porporato [cardinal] was called to Rome by Pius V, he kept the Commenda, delegating, for its spiritual care, a Vicar – Curate in the person of Don Angelo Panico of Laviano, and for coadjutor he chose Don Giovanni Tirabosa. By mandate of the Porporato, on November 30, 1580, the archbishop of Conza, Marcantonio Pescara (1574 – 1587) went to the abbey on a Santissima. Visita[ An ecclesiastical inspection tour] and having been received with great honor by the Sindaco, by the Eletti, and by the inhabitants, baptized sixteen children. That confirmed that the Casale of Santa Maria had an independent Amminstrazione Comunale and a remarkably high population. Consequently, Cardinal Gesualdo, with his authority as cardinal and with the prestige that came to him from his powerful feudal family, would have been able to impress on the Casale a florid address of economic and social life with the consequent demographic increase; but, because of his high and multiple responsibilities, and, because he always lived far away, he was not interested in the life of the Casale. There is more. Deceived by the evil arts of an evil and ruthless agent that he trusted, he entrusted to him the administration of the goods constituting the Commenda. The agent, whose name was Prospero Crudele – who was called, usually, dell’aquila, from his native city, lead the Commenda to excesses of unheard of cruelty. The inhuman Prospero had, before, administered the «tentuta» of Palorotondo – belonging to the archbishopric Mensa [income] of Conza. [1]– with every excess of torture and extortion, all the way to the point of punishing the delinquent taxpayers by «condemning them to be living fuel in hot ovens.» With his indeed wicked past – which was an indication of his insensitive soul – he was transferred to the secluded and peaceful castello of Santa Maria: and here with violence and injustice he embittered not only the inhabitants of the Casale but also the citizens of Calitri, who exercised usi civici in some «tenute» of that casale: «Prospero of Aquila, who was landlord of the incomes of the abbey because he had the arm and the power of Cardinal Gesualdo, was then master of the abbey. Not only was he stopping the animals of the men of Calitri, sequestering calves and cows by force, but he publicly butchered them and sold them in the in the Casale of Santo Andrea a rotolo and then took the money for himself. He did the same with pigs, sheep, and goats…. In this manner, he had ruined the poor citizens of the village.»[2]
Having attracted to himself, in this way, the hate of the people and foreseeing that the indignation of the inhabitants, pushed to exasperation, could have, at any moment, rained down on him to his detriment, Prospero dell’Aquila, trembling with anger and apprehension, took refuge «first at Conza, under the immediate protection of his lord, and then in San Andrea, where thought about otherwise avenging the threats reported by the inhabitants of the Castello.» And he described to Cardinal Gesualdo, in very dark colors, the misdeeds and crimes of his vassals. He said that «there are many thieves on the public road who did not stop from robbing the travelers. There are also rebellious persons… the I feel are against your interests.» And he concluded, planting the seed in the mind of the cardinal that «it would have been a better expedient to destroy said Terra and reduce it to a country fief than to keep it inhabited.»[3] The Cardinal, although a man of proved sagacity and deep piety, received from such a report – which came to him from his trusted agent – such a painful impression that he allowed that the casale be destroyed and reduced to a rustic fief. And Prospero dell’Aquila «having had the consent of the Cardinal – continues the Cronica Conzana – and using his usual cruelty, had notices put out that the citizens of said abbey within twenty four hours get out of the abbey under penalty of death.»
It was in the late summer of 1597. One evening, a little before sunset, when the laborers returned home for their daily rest, a voice echoed in the quiet streets of the casale: it was the voice of the banditore [town crier], who informed the wretched inhabitants to «vacate completely the Castello within the absolute deadline of 24 hours by order of the Very Eminent Cardinal Commedatario, under penalty of death, leaving their habitation and farms…» The banditore stopped at the cross-roads, and the corners of the wretched little alleys and shouted the judgment of condemnation; he again began walking through the outlying streets, through the last smoky cottages on the periphery: then he returned to the corner of the central square, where he launched the dry and cruel order to evacuate «within the absolute deadline of 24 hours.» This preemptory end was more hated and inhuman than the same notice that the implacable Frederick Barbarossa issued, in March of 1162 against the Comune of Milan:
— «Leave, o sad people,
with your women, with your children and with your goods:
eight days the emperor gives you» —
as sound the lines of Carducci, in the «Canzone di Legnano.» [Song of Legnano]
The herald had just finished launching in the air the fatal announcement when he heard a whispering, a din, an opening and shutting of doors, and the appearing and disappearing of people, a questioning of women from the windows, an answering from the street. The roads and the little square were filled with people: it is a swarm of ashen and disheveled women, of men glaring and trembling with anger who spoke, who asked for explanations, who are swearing. Over the shouting multitude flies – once again – the bando, with which the herald repeats the order to vacate the houses. A cry is raised by hundreds of breasts and reverberates in the air. The old women get on their knees in the dust with their arms extended to heaven imploring divine aid, the young women, seeing the agony of their men, were sobbing… It is a scene that torments one’s heart!
Meanwhile, the important people and the oldest people in the casale crossed the little square, followed by a long line of people, headed for the castello, the home of the agent Prospero dell’Aquila. They closed in against the door, which under that thrust threatened to break down. No one answered. They only heard the barking of the guard dog. The tyrant had disappeared; he was certainly already in San Andrea di Conza. The crowd, discouraged, returned at their own pace and receded to the streets, over which night had already descended. Everyone went back home and, between angry trembling and loud swearing, busied themselves with collecting the best of their furniture and preparing bundles. Everything was done without a pause. What a tragic night! What rending of the hearts of every inhabitant, who, all of a sudden, saw themselves forced to leave their homes, their work, their possessions, and everything dear to them forever! Not one escape, not one delay to the oppressive and inhuman feudal imposition! «In one single night, well over five hundred people – wrote Amato –bought their lives with flight, taking refuge, as best they could, in the bordering villages of Cairano, Calitri, Andretta, and San Andrea di Conza.»[4]
The following day, the exodus was complete. The inhabitants went away in household groups. The men, leading their animals, walked under the weight of their poor goods, leading behind them the children, who also carried what they could; the women carrying those who could not walk; the old men leaning on knobby sticks or holding onto the arms of a young man. It seemed to be one of those biblical scenes, in which are described the Hebrews being lead into slavery! In silence, they took the country paths, heading for the neighboring small villages to find, at the homes of friends or acquaintances, a welcoming roof. They are all out of breath because of the difficulty of the escape, but more because of the apprehension of an uncertain or obscure tomorrow.
They turned their eyes, which were tearful and swollen with anger, to search the horizon and saw, once again, their beloved fatherland. The first flames started to appear, like a scene out of the Apocaplypse. These flames devoured their houses, their goods, and perhaps the tombs of their dear ones.
….the houses appeared
smashed, crumbled, shattered to us:
they seemed rows of skeletons in a cemetery.
Below, the bones of our dead were burning,
To help myself to powerful lines of the already cited «canzone di Legnano.» [Song of Legnano.]
Of the casale of Santa Maria in Elce there did not remain one stone upon another: everything was destroyed and razed to the ground.
In what year was such vandal-like destruction consummated? The contemporary documents of the Archbishopric Curia of Conza do not specify it. They only state that it happened during the years that Cardinal Gesualdo was Archbishop of Naples[5] (February 1596 – February 1603). Nothing else. The only documented source, from which one can gather with greater precision the date of the destruction, is from an istruttoria [inquest] compiled on July 31, 1604, on that sad event. Some refugees from the Casale were invited to testify. Let us listen, in their authentic depositions – still full of anguish and nostalgia – to the heartsick voices of those who were both witnesses and victims of this inhuman scourge.
The first to testify is Nicola De Ruberto, who came from Cairano, where he had found refuge: «Prospero dell’Aquila because of his great mutilation of the men of said badia [abbey] through which one saw that he did not want that casale to be inhabited. The people were forced to abandon their homes and their lands and depart with their families. Just as he did seven years ago when he abandoned what he had and went away to live in Cayrano and everybody followed so that said Casale is completely uninhabited, and it is uninhabited according to the new Numerazione [census] in here.»
Another refugee gave more detail: «Said Prospero with the backing that he found [that is with the support of the Cardinal], not only had done the aforementioned violence to the men of Calitri, but he caused the casale of Santa Maria in Elce to be uninhabited. Because of the evil treatment, everybody was made to flee from it, leaving behind their personal possessions, houses, lands, cellars and whatever else they had, against their will. They also left their farms and were continually crying for justice. In this manner, the casale became unhabited, and this was after the last Numerazione.» And still another person testified: «Prospero dell’Aquila not only had persecuted the men of Calitri and their animals, but he also ruined and exhausted the poor citizens of the casale, who, against their will, had been cast out and everybody had to leave with their wives and families, leaving their houses, farms, vineyards… Some went here and some went there while continually crying, and this was after the last Numarazione done by the Royal Court, when [the casale] was enumerated as the other Terre.»[6]
From the deposition of De Ruberto one gets the particular detail that «seven years ago, he departed there as a witness, abandoning what he had…» And so, the sad fate of the casale was completed seven years before July 1604; consequently, in the summer of 1597. Another detail of great importance confirms this, a detail that all the refugees stated. That detail is «that the casale had been uninhabited after the last Numerazione [census] done by the Royal Court.» It turns out from the archive documents that the «last enumeration» – to which the witnesses are referring – is that of 1595, when the casale of Santa Maria was «enumerated»;[7]instead, in the next census, which was conducted in 1599, the casale no longer was included, rather it was declared specifically «uninhabited.» Therefore, one can believe, with complete certainty, that the casale of Santa Maria in Elce suffered its vandal-like destruction in the summer of 1597. The whole casale, then, was destroyed. Only the abbey, the residence of the feudal tyranny, was saved; but, no longer being inhabited, it began little by little to deteriorate for lack of repairs, until it was in total ruin. Only the church – which constituted the religious property of the Commenda – was kept, because «it was very devout and many people of the nearby Terre congregated there because of their devotion; but forasmuch as said casale is uninhabited, sometimes some masses are said and sometimes without the gathering of people.» Of the entire tenement that was expropriated from the wretched inhabitants, who were forced to emigrate, there was constituted the vast «tenuta» of a new rustic fief, which was added to the already rich patrimony of Cardinal Gesualdo, and taken by him – and which still retains – the name of Tenimento del Cardinal. The name brings to mind, in the course of the centuries, a dark page of feudal history. Very properly, therefore, the cited Amato observes, at the conclusion of the events on which he expounded: «And that may be sufficient to illustrate this remarkable remains of antiquity because of the excesses of the most barbarous feudal despotism. The deferential aristocracy would intend to justify the vandal-like destruction by stating that it was the willful agitation of some inhabitants. However, this certainly cannot justify the ruin of the life and of the property of all of them. Arbitrary activity has never been the right of public guardianship.»
[1] Archives of the archbishopric Curia of Conza, Documents of the Holy Visit of Monsignor M. Pescora of 1580, page 423
[2] Archives of the State of Naples, Feudal Commission of Principato Ultra, vol, 462, case 2703, page 105
[3] Archives of the Archbishopric Curia of Conza, Cronica Conzana, Tome II, Book III, discourse 4.
[4] From here, the surnames Dell’Abbadia, Della Badia, Badia, were very widespread in those Comuni. Also the Amato, D’amato, Ruberto, De Ruberto and other families derive their last names from the destroyed Casale of Santa Maria in Elce.
[5] Vito Acocella was also Archbishop of Naples.
[6] State archives in Naples, Feudal commission of Principato Ultra, volume 462, case 2703, pages 102-137.
[7] State archives in Naples, Fires of Principato Ultra, volume 612.
Appendix 5
Between the sixteenth and the seventeenth century
After the casale of Santa Maria had been destroyed in the summer of 1597, the Abbey with the church continued to constitute the religious property because of the Commenda. This belonged to the Gesualdo family up until 1613, when, with the death of Carlo Gesualdo, the noble family – after three centuries of feudal domination – was extinguished in the masculine line. The only heir, Isabella Gesualdo (1613 – 1629), who was married to Nicolò Ludovisi – nephew of Pope Gregory XIII – got the Pontiff on May 6, 1622 to give Commenda of Santa Maria to Cardinal Ludovico Ludovisi (1575 – 1632), archbishop of Bologna, and relative of the feudal lord. After his death, the count Don Ugo Albergati was appointed per resignationem [because of the resignation] of the Cardinal himself.
Meanwhile, the rustic feud of Santa Maria with the Abbey was bought, in 1676, by Francesco Maria Mirelli, who purchased, with the same instrument, Calitri and other fiefs. As soon as he took possession, Mirelli started legal proceedings against the Albergati, to claim for himself, as a new feudal lord, the appointment as Abbott Commendatario. There were long legal debates first in the archbishopric curia of Conza, and then at the court of the Sacred Ruota, in Rome; until, in 1698, the Sacred Ruota decided that «the investiture was consistorial» and, that is, that the name of the commendatario no longer rested «in the Benedictine Order which was already expelled nor in the Feudal House, but in an extraneous person»; and the choice fell on Monsignor Giovanni Rimbaldesi, referendario [referendary][1] of the Apolostic Segnatura in Rome.
The new commendatario, on November 16, 1699 renewed, for a three-year period, the lease to the widow and to the children of the late Giuseppe De Rogatis, who for many years had, with rectitude, rented the goods of the Commenda. And since the abbey had fallen into ruin, without either doors or windows and the roof and floor was shattered, the new Abbott felt the need to include, in the contract, the expenses for repair «of the buildings, both the church and the habitations that were still standing.» From this detail of the contract – which was drawn up in Naples, in the Mirelli home – it is gathered that, in 1699, the whole abbey – although it was still standing – was already in ruins to such an extent that it required urgent and solid repairs. But, because of the estimated heavy expense, the project was abandoned for the moment, and it was not revisited even when Cardinal Francesco Barberino was invested with the Commenda. He paid only to donate a new bell, in 1714, to the abbey church.[2]
As a consequence of the complete abandonment because of the lack of repairs, the abbey along with the church was rendered even more unstable, to the point that Francesco Maria Mirelli, Lord of Calitri – after his son Don Giovanni Battista was invested with the Commenda – in order not to be deprived of it without religious title, was solicited to build, in 1734, a new abbey or – even better – a simulacrum of the abbey. A great stone revivifies its memory Here are the more salient parts of it:[3]
DEI GENITRICI MARIAE IN ILICIE
TEMPLUM HOC ABBATIALE
FRANCISCUS MARIA MERELLUS EQUES S. IACOBI
MARCHIO CALETRI COMES COMPSANUS
INANNE BAPTISTA FILIO IN ABBATEM NOMINATO
A FUNDAMENTIS AERE SUO EXCITAVIT
ANNO DOMINI MDCCXXXIV
The new abbey «having been set up as a rustic residence,» was built in a higher and more salubrious place, a little more than a kilometer, by air, from the falling down abbey. The floor was finished the following year, as was stated in a marble epigraph located, precisely, in the floor.
In the religiousness of the new temple, the old and rough statue of the virgin – surviving heritage of the old abbey – was still admired. The statue was located in a niche on the highest part of the wall, which constituted an integral part of the main altar; but, in an elevated setting for completely temporal and not for religious reasons, the statue no longer inspired any devotion, as it once did. A cold and dark night fell over the church. Every abbey-like shape also disappeared: the new construction did leave any trace of the house of the cloistered ones it the thoughts of those who, among half images, content themselves with memories and worthy of memory and past visions.
We are aided in the tracing of the structure of the new abbey by the minute examination of same that was made by Don Sabino Amato, a native of Cairano, who lived shortly after the abbey was built: «The ample and pleasing edifice was eighteen meters square for breezes with Bassi [basements] and a single floor. In the old division, the left side from the south was all one church with a single altar of well-cut old statuary marble, and with decorations made of breccia [kind of greenish stone], and green marble of Calabria, which the abbot Giovan Battista Mirelli had built in 1741, and is pointed out in the epigraph.[4] In a niche on the altar is the old statue of the Blessed Virgin, which was done by a very poor sculptor. This statue came from the old abbey, as did the lustral fountain, which was made of the best marble – ex marmore pario [from Parian Marble] – and then was intended for a small Baptistry; as also were the two bells then reformed in the rebuilding.»
The Abbott, Don Giovanni Battista Mirelli, was living in Rome. The leaseholders of the goods of the Commenda took advantage of this absence to hinder the Calitrani in the exercise of the uso civico of the «difese» of Luzzano, Difesetta, and Pascone dell’Abbazia, which belonged to the Commenda. Our fellow citizens did not hesitate to go to court. There opened, thus, a long period of legal disputes, which ended in 1779, with a «convenzione»[agreement].[5]
When, then, on July 3, 1780, the Commendatario Don Giovanni Battista died, the leaseholders – supported by the new Abbott, Don Michele Mirelli – opposed with every means at hand to keep the Calitrani from continuing to exercise the usi civici on the above mentioned «difese.» After having appealed to the Abbott, who did not respond, our fathers went to the S. Real Consiglio in Naples. And this supreme magistratura [judiciary] fully recognized the rights due our people and sanctioned such right with the sentenza [ruling, judgement] of April 5, 1797 – as is amply described on pages 111 – 114 of this volume. It was a sign of the new times. The dark feudal night was about to set; and already the dawn of a better age was peeking over the horizon, and it would not take much time, because the surviving wrapper [involucro] of the feudal structure was being demolished.
Which happened – as is well known – during the French decade (1805 – 1815), when, with the renewal of every branch of the social, financial, and administrative life, feudalism was abolished, in 1806. Even the commende and the jus patronato on eccliastical goods ceased, the disasterous operations of the Decime and the other odorous personal and predial servitude [serfdom] etc. The last commendatario was Don Michele Mirelli, with whom closed the sad history of the Commenda of Santa Maria. He, authoritarian and mean as he was, was not able to resign himself to the loss of privileges of caste and of the goods of the commenda, and he endured with the supreme Commissione feudale – which was instituted to eliminate the fights with the former Barons – long legal contests, managing to save part of the vast «tenute» and the building of the Abbey of Santa Maria in Elce.
In such a way, the short and inglorious life of the new abbey, which wanted to represent, in a pallid memory, the celebrated and ancient Benedictine abbey was closed. When Giuseppe Mirelli inherited, in May of 1857, all the goods of his family, he contributed the final disgrace to the abbey, transforming it into a small villa. This is what Amato said: «He introduced into the church and into the building interesting innovations. He reduced the church premises and lowered its ceiling in order to construct above it some rooms for living. He modified the old stairway, with very comfortable and proper design; finally, he furnished the rooms with comfortable furniture sufficient for country living. He always resided there in the summer and fall.» But just judgment from the stars … fell on him, who, forced by need, in order to satisfy many creditors, saw himself forced, in 1868, to sell the abbey and the few surviving farms to Giuseppe Tozzoli of Calitri. One concludes, in this manner the most obscure oblivion, the final act of that which one would call the feudal tragedy of the abbey. Even the people, who are acute observers, with sharp sarcasm, named it and still continue to call it abbazia di fabbrica, [factory abbey], that is it looks like an abbey from the outside, but not in the living and working spirit of the cloisters. And now, whoever passes in front of the abbazia di fabbrica which has become – because of the irony of fate – a farm, taken by the memory of the past, does not giving it an inquiring glance, while from the inside of the solid construction echoes the mooing of oxen and the bleating of sheep, to which the angry barking of the mastiffs respond!
[1] In the Roman Curia, a prelate who is a member of the Supreme Apostolic Court.
[2] On reads on the bell: FRANC. S. R. E. CARD BARBERINUS ABBADIAE COMMENDATOR – MICHAEL NATALIS ARCH. [idiaconus]COMP. [sanus] AGGENS ET VICARIUS GENERALIS F. A. D. 1714. This bell was offered by the owner of the abbey, Giuseppe Tozzoli the the collection of the metallic wreckage, during the Ethiopian war (1935 – 1936). Recovered in time by Dotter Michele Di Milia, it was given in 1937, to the Church of the Immaculate Conception, where one still hears it ring.
[3] The inscription enumerated also the basic title given by the popes. It, removed from its place, –after which the abbey was sold in 1868 to Giuseppe Tozzoli – and is still kept in the Sachitella –DiMilio, in the Pittole disrict , together with a few other reminders and relics of the last Mirellis.
[4] The epigraph states: IOANNES BAPTISTA MIRELLIUS ABAS EXTRUCTO A FUNDAMENTIS TEMPLO ARAM E MARMORE OPERIS CORONIDEM MAGNAI DEI MATRI DICAVIT ANNO ERAI VULGARIS MDCCXLI.
[5] State Archives in Naples, Feudal Commission of Principato Ultra, volume 462, case 2705: «Processus conventionis initiae inter Universitatem terrae Caletri ex una, et Abbatem S. Mariae in Elice D. Ionannem Baptistam Mirelli ex altera part.»
Appendix 6
In the present
And what of the old abbey? Someone asks. Amato himself gives the answer – which has been cited many times. Amato had a chance to observe, about 1850, how ruined the ancient abbey was: «The solitary hill rose between crags and cliffs, with run down ruins of walls and rocks that were uprooted and rolled among the thorns and bushes, subterranean cavities, ceilings hidden under precarious piles that shake the step, caves covered by the ivy and moss, sharp rocks of fallen buildings, boulders dug up from the top and spread over the sterile land. There one seldom sees the ox slowly drag the ploughshare over the disinterred frames which unnatural farmers disperse and trample on. From what ancient buildings came those ruins, which are indications of the existence of Temples and of altars, of cloisters and rule, of roads, of bridges, of wells and fountains?» Amato answers this question with a minute description of what remained: «On the slope of the hill from which the torrent ferries toward the east, one encounters a somewhat spacious road; advancing from which toward the incline one meets the old ruins of the abbey a few feet from the ground. Continuing the climb, the road ends in a land where it is in part seeded and in part sterile, over which, between fragments, piles, and jumbles of ruins and half-buried walls, one continues to the top. There are the ruins of the old coenoby that from the north west to the east and to the south surrounds the destroyed abbey church. There was first a defense wall that supported a paved entrance through the old atrium. In the area of the destroyed premises, I saw two enclosures in the courtyard, some walls with two fireplaces and drainage pipes and intermediate walls that were completely crushed. Between these ruins and the rest of the old church, whose walls, which were only one meter thick, were sometimes still about ten meters high. The church had an area of 18 by 9 meters at its greatest span, where there is the semicircular rostrum with a radius of about 3 meters. In the walls are still the openings for the narrow windows, in the style of the time with brick gables. There are also the little stucco gothic niches for the images of the ancient little altars. The building, in poor cement and in disordered stones, demonstrated a completely medieval taste. One saw human bones disinterred in mockery of the elements. On the southwest side are the ancient atrium, the opening for the main entrance and the smaller doors of the church. Everything else is only ruins, which is certainly remarkable.»
A dark solitude enveloped the few and shapeless remnants of the Benedictine abbey of Santa Maria, which has vanished, as have already vanished, in the valley of the Ofanto, the renowned Benedictine abbeys of Goleto in the territory of San Angelo dei Lombardi, of San Lorenzo in Tufara outside of Pescopagano, of San Tomasso del Cerrutolo, on the right bank of the Ofanto between the Atella river and the deep, narrow Silla valley, of Santo Stefano in Giuncarico at the old bridge of Santa Venere and finally of Sant’Ippolito between two craters of the Vulture. When then, in May of 1907, I went, with some friends, to Santa Maria in Elce, to attempt a further archaeological investigation and above all to trace, along general lines, an ideal reconstruction of the Abbey, everything was submerged and disappeared. Even that bit of «remarkable» ruin, which protruded up to a little time before, was reduced to a shapeless and inseparable tangle of remnants, which enveloped the whole hill. Even some excavations, which were limited to a more important area, did not bear better fruit, so that, the soul, already grown melancholy by historical memories and by the dark silence of this present ruin, was taken by a strange torpor, but a supreme peace, « that used to, like a kind of contagion, come over some dead things – wrote Fortunato, speaking of Goleto – then the images of the past, more sweetly and more peacefully returned to mind.»