In this well-written and valuable book, Alison Hudson raises important questions about the intersection of church reform and the cult of saints; notably, she probes “why reformers were so interested in (some) saints and how the mechanics of saintly power worked in practice at reforming centres” (1). Hudson focuses on Bishop Aethelwold of Winchester (d. 984) as a representative example of what she calls “the most radical reformers.” Hudson argues that even those clerics most committed to removing worldly influence from monastic life were ineluctably drawn into collaboration with groups outside the monastery to shape their saints’ cults and achieve their desired goals (religious, economic, and political).

Hudson's introduction is laudably thorough. She outlines the career of Aethelwold, the seven key houses he refounded in strict observance of the Benedictine Rule, and the creation of his circle of followers, which was defined by remarkable uniformity of practice, from their overarching principles down to the vocabulary used in their texts and the script used to write them. She also situates Aethelwold within a broader European context of reform movements; invoking the work of Steven Vanderputten, Julia Barrow, and others, she argues that while the rhetoric of reform was often uncompromising, realities on the ground were more fluid. She closes her introduction by defining terms, describing different types of veneration—intercommunal, intracommunal, and supracommunal—and assessing her evidence base. The substantial nature of her introduction makes her work accessible to readers unfamiliar with the early medieval English context.

In the introduction, Hudson also raises a key issue in the existing historiography: did Aethelwold's circle prefer to venerate universal saints, such as Mary, or local saints (particularly those celebrated by Bede)? Hudson finds this dichotomy limiting, asserting that the circle was flexible in choosing saints to venerate, depending on the particular context. Hudson's first chapter—unlike the rest of the book—focuses on inter- and intracommunal practices, in which, Hudson argues, Aethelwold's circle mostly venerated universal saints. While some local saints were celebrated, Bede's legacy did not dominate; rather, Carolingian scholars were deeply influential, indicating that the circle thought in terms of a broader European context.

Thereafter, Hudson turns outward, investigating the nexus of saintly veneration at these houses and the concerns of outside groups (what she calls “supra-communal veneration”). In chapter two, she focuses on the ways in which saints were used to attract (and subsequently protect) property donations to the circle's communities. A house might choose which saint to invoke, and what role the saint played, depending on the audience and the circumstances. For example, a local saint might be highlighted when soliciting gifts from his or her existing devotees; meanwhile, if a gift was likely to be contested, the charter might be written to grant the land directly to the saint, rather than to an abbot or the house. The overarching observation that Hudson makes in this chapter will hold true throughout the book: despite their reputation for pious intransigence, Aethelwold and his circle were, in fact, quite flexible in their strategies regarding saintly veneration, depending on circumstances.

Each of the next three chapters addresses the circle's approach to particular groups of outsiders: unreformed clerics, noble laity, and non-noble laity. Again, these interactions were more subtle than the rhetoric of the reformers might lead us to believe. For example, so-called “unreformed clerics” (often those expelled from houses during reform) earned the antipathy of the circle, and some reform texts simply ignored them after expulsion. Other sources make clear, however, that such clerics remained influential in the surrounding communities, and that the monks of Aethelwold's circle sought to combat their influence by appropriating cults previously supervised by such clerics. The saints thus appropriated often did not have biographies that fit naturally into the reform ethos—but, combating the influence of “secular” clergy took priority in such cases.

In chapter four, Hudson turns to interactions with the laity, refuting the argument that Aethelwold's circle worked only with kings, to the exclusion of other laypeople. Rather, Aethelwold and his followers both acknowledged the need for the support of the nobility and sought to limit their influence at reformed communities. The exact balance struck at a given house depended on the regional context; again, we see reform houses strategically highlighting their veneration of local saints in order to win noble support. In chapter six, Hudson also rejects the idea that these reformed houses withdrew from contact with non-noble laity, as she charts their participation in the religious education of the laity, their welcoming of pilgrims, and (again) their choice to patronize certain saints in order to win over certain local populations. The final chapter of the book considers the further development of these phenomena in the generation after Aethelwold's death. Hudson focuses particularly on the way in which houses in the circle used the shared veneration of saints to cement links between themselves. The conclusion ably revisits the chapters’ recurring themes.

As a historian of Aquitaine, this reviewer cannot comment on the details of the English context and historiography covered here, but Hudson does take care to make the book accessible to all readers. The book is a very valuable contribution to wider scholarship on tenth-century reform movements and the complex ways in which they did their work. Particularly meaningful are Hudson's considerations of the distance between rhetoric and reality in reform circles, using detailed case studies; her discussions of the multilayered ways in which houses that were supposedly divorced from the world savvily used saints to engage with the world; and her thoughtful assessments of the limits of her sources.