ABSTRACT
This chapter discusses the notion of 'feud' as analyzed by recent historians in the light of the evidence brought by Orderic Vitalis, and shows that this evidence cannot be treated as a whole. It focuses on the root causes of various occasions of vengeance. The chapter considers the discourse that Orderic promotes simply by the way he tells and explains events; and the overarching discourse that Orderic creates surrounding these 'discourses of rancor' by the way he uses them in his narrative. In Orderic's works, some instances of eleventh-century vengeance are reported briefly and, as they imply murder and retaliation, deserve the name blood-feud. Meanwhile, Orderic incorporates for the years c.1070-1140 several longer vengeance narratives, more accurate in their depiction of events and less likely to include a death. In Orderic's world, the criterion for telling negative from positive rancor is the relationship with his monastic community. Monks have feuds of their own, exemplified by the Bellme case.
